HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 6, 2016 PC PacketA
CENTRAL
POINT
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
December 6, 2016 - 6:00 p.m.
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE
III. ROLL CALL
Planning Commission members Chuck Piland (Chair), Mike Oliver, Tom Van Voorhees,
Rob Hernandez, Elizabeth Powell, Craig Nelson Sr., Kay Harrison
IV. CORRESPONDENCE
V. MINUTES
Review and approval of November 1, 2016 Minutes.
VI. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
VII. BUSINESS
A. Consideration of Resolution No. 836 Recommending Approval of a Type IV
Legislative Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update the Land Use Element and to
Modify the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Map from Tourist and Office Professional
to Thoroughfare Commercial on 4.87 acres at 4901 Biddle Road. The site is identified on
the Jackson County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W 01 C, Tax Lot 802. (File No. 16022).
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices/Tail Light Properties, LLC Agent: Jay Harland,
CSA Planning Ltd.
B. Consideration of Resolution No. 837 Recommending Approval of a Zone Change
from C-4, Tourist and Office Professional to C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial on 4.87
acres at 4901 Biddle Road. The site is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's Map
as 37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802. (File No. 16024). Applicant: Rogue Valley
Microdevices/Tail Light Properties, LLC Agent: Jay Harland, CSA Planning Ltd.
C. Consideration of Resolution No. 838 Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use
Permit Application for a Light Fabrication Use in the (Proposed) C-5, Thoroughfare
Commercial Zoning District on property located at 4901 Biddle Road. The site is
identified on the Jackson County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802. (File No.
16023). Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices/Tail Light Properties, LLC Agent: Jay
Harland, CSA Planning Ltd.
D. Consideration of Resolution No. 839 Recommending Approval of the Site Plan and
Architectural Review of a new 43,000 square foot building to house Rogue Valley
Microdevices, Inc. Corporate Headquarters and Light Fabrication Facility. The site is in
the (Proposed) C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial Zoning District on property located at
4901 Biddle Road and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W
01 C, Tax Lot 802. (File No. 16021). Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices/Tail Light
Properties, LLC Agent: Jay Harland, CSA Planning Ltd.
E. Consideration of Resolution No. 840 Recommending Approval of an Ordinance to
amend Chapter 17.05 — Applications and Development Review Procedures to clarify
procedures for appeal of Type II and Type III decisions. (File No. 16025) Applicant: City
of Central Point
VIII. DISCUSSION
IX. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
X. MISCELLANEOUS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
City of Central Point
Planning Commission Minute
November 1, 2016
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Chuck Piland, Craig Nelson, Tom Van Voorhees, Rob
Hernandez, Elizabeth Powell and Kay Harrison were present. Also in attendance
were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director, Don Burt, Planning
Manager, Stephanie Holtey, Community Planner, Molly Bradley, Community
Planner, and Karin Skelton, Planning Secretary.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE
III. CORRESPONDENCE
None
IV. MINUTES
Chuck Piland noted that there was a typographical error on page 3 of the
October 4, 2016 minutes. The word "motion" was misspelled. Kay Harrison made a
motion to approve the October 4, 2016 minutes with the noted correction. Craig Nelson
seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Tom Van Voorhees, yes; Elizabeth Powell, yes;
Craig Nelson, yes; Rob Hernanedz, abstain; Kay Harrison, yes. Motion passed.
V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
None
VI. BUSINESS
A. Continued Public Hearing from October 4, 2016 — Mobilitie, LLC.
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for the installation of a new
tower -mounted antenna in the public right-of-way, to be located on South 9th
Street between Pine St. & Oak St. The purpose of the antenna is to provide
increased coverage and capacity to data network users, and improve
communication services in Central Point. The project site is located in the tourist
and Office Professional (C-4) zoning district.
Molly Bradley stated that this was a continuation of the Public Hearing for
Mobilitie, LLC from the October 4, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. She reviewed
the Conditional Use Permit Application and stated that the hearing was continued in
order to allow the applicant to submit additional information which had been requested
by the Planning Commission. She said that as the application was subject to the 120
day rule, which would expire on November 15t", the options for the Planning
Commission tonight were to approve or deny the application, without the option for
another continuance. She stated that the original pole had been presented as a 75 foot
wooden pole with exterior antenna equipment. The applicant has reduced the height to
50 feet.
Colleen DeShazar explained to the commissioners that the engineers had been
able to reduce the height of the antenna to 50 feet. That would be a 47 foot pole with a
3 foot multi -directional antenna at the top. In response to questions from planning
commissioners, she said that the pole would be required to be located at the current
proposed location in order to work effectively. There was no co -locating option that
would work. She stressed that because Mobilitie is acting as a public utility, the Federal
Government prohibits discrimination against citing such facilities, however the
conditional use process would allow the City to have input as to how to mitigate any
visual impact.
Tom Humphrey stated that the antenna would be subject to both the CUP
process and the rules of the City's Public Utility Agreement.
Ms. DeShazar, reiterated the need for support of the current wireless data
transmission infrastructure in the area. She said that currently the demand for wireless
data transmission was increasing at a fairly fast pace, thus necessitating the support for
the antenna. She said that the antenna would take a total of 2 days to construct.
The base of the pole would be approximately 2 feet wide and would taper at the top.
The Public hearing was closed.
The commissioners discussed the options for mitigating the visual impact of the
antenna and the fact that this was now the only location which would work because of
the reduction in height. They concluded that they would approve the antenna with
conditions that it be metal, gray in color, and have the equipment located inside the pole.
Rob Hernandez made a motion to approve the antenna. Elizabeth Powell
seconded. ROLL CALL: Tom Van Voorhees, No; Elizabeth Powell, yes; Craig Nelson,
yes; Rob Hernandez, abstain; Kay Harrison, yes. Motion passed
B. Consideration of Resolution No. 835 Recommending Approval of the city
of Central Point Population & Demographics Element to the City Council.
Don Burt stated that basically the Population element will support the need for
land to be brought into the City for future housing development. He said that HB2253
standardized the population forecasting and that Portland State University is in charge of
the whole state of Oregon. The Population forecast will be updated every 4 years. He
noted that currently the population is not growing quickly. He explained how the
population forecast impacted the type of housing that would be needed. Mr. Burt
explained that since the recession hit the economy there has not been a complete
recovery yet.
He said that having the information from the population element will allow us to be
prepared for future expansion in the type of housing needed for the projected population
groups.
VII. DISCUSSION
A. Community Rating System update
Stephanie Holtey explained to the Commissioners that currently FEMA has a
Community Rating System (CRS) that allows cities to earn points which allow citizen
discounts on flood insurance. The City is evaluated every 5 years to validate the points
they have earned. She said that in 2011 we had achieved enough points to allow a 20%
discount for citizens on their flood insurance. This year, the rules have changed and we
are looking at a possible decrease to 15%. She informed them that we are doing
everything possible to keep the 20% discount.
B. Pine Street Streetscape Update
Tom Humphrey informed the Committee that the Development Commission has
identified the improvements to Pine Street and the City is proceeding to get cost
estimates on those improvements. He said that the cost will determine the time frame
and manner of funding for the project.
C. Costco Update
Mr. Humphrey said that Costco has been appealed to the State Court of Appeals.
We do not yet have the exact time frame for the proceedings yet. He stated that Costco
was hoping to begin building in the spring.
D. Planning Commission Update
Mr. Humphrey stated that Chuck Piland would be retiring from the Planning
Commission in December. He said that Mike Oliver would be the next Chair and that
Kay Harrison declined the position of vice -Chair. He asked the members to decide who
would like to be Vice -chair.
Tom Van Voorhees made a motion to adjourn. Kay Harrison seconded. All said "aye".
Meeting was adjourned at 7:51 p.m.
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
None
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
X. ADJOURNMENT
The foregoing minutes of the November 1, 2016 Planning Commission meeting were
approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting on the 6t" day of December, 2016.
Planning Commission Chair
City of Central Point, Oregon
140 S 3rd Street, Central Point, OR 97502
541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384
mmm.ce ntral poi ntorego n.gov
05W--
A#W&
CENTRAL
POINT
STAFF REPORT
December 6, 2016
AGENDA ITEM: File No. 16022
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AICP
Community Development Director
Consideration of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to affirm locations for Thoroughfare Commercial
land uses and to re -designate 4.87 acres from Tourist and Office Professional to Thoroughfare
Commercial south of Pine Street/Biddle Road, East of Hamrick Road and West of Table Rock Road. The
property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S2W 01 C, Tax Lot 802. Applicant:
Rogue Valley Microdevices/Tail Light Properties, LLC. Agent: Jay Harland, CSA Planning
STAFF SOURCE:
Tom Humphrey AICP, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND:
A Comprehensive Plan (Map) Amendment and Zone Change were initiated for the above referenced
property to facilitate the establishment of a Corporate Headquarters and Light Fabrication Facility
that is regionally supported by SOREDI. The combined uses are a better match for the Commercial
Thoroughfare designation than they are for Tourist and Office Professional. In the course of City
staff's review it also became apparent that while the City has promoted Thoroughfare Commercial
uses it has failed to clarify this in the Land Use Element. Consequently, this amendment includes an
update to the Commercial Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan to document actions taken in
the past to allow a wider range of employment uses and to facilitate greater job creation in Central
Point. The Land Use Element will be revised in a more comprehensive manner in the future during
the Department's next two year budget cycle.
Consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria, the City Council Approved a
Resolution of Intent (Resolution No. 1477) in October to initiate this land use amendment. The
applicant's agent has submitted a set of Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps (Attachment A) and
Findings of Fact (Attachment B) along with relevant approval criteria for the City's consideration.
The Commission may rely upon the applicant's findings and conclusions with regard to the map
amendment. Alternatively, staff is proposing a change to language used in the Land Use Element
(Attachment C) to affirm and clarify past City Council actions relative to commercial land use
designations and their locations. This also reinforces arguments made by the applicant in their
findings.
The Commission may recall its review and the ultimate adoption of the Economic Element of the
Comprehensive Plan in 2013. In that Element, Computer and electronic product manufacturing are
identified as a trending Oregon industry. The Thoroughfare Commercial land use designation will
accommodate the siting of Rogue Valley Microdevices on the Pine Street corridor which represents
an opportunity for Central Point to gain local share in a new local industry and new job creation.
ISSUES & NOTES:
There are 4 issues/Notes relative to this application as follows:
1. Comprehensive Plan Compliance. Approval of the proposed amendment must be found
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan. If the Land Use language is
2
revised as proposed in Attachment C and the Comprehensive Plan designation is changed to
Thoroughfare Commercial on the property in question, then the two would immediately be
consistent and compliant.
2. Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning. Two tax lots to the east of the
applicant's property comprise 7.5 acres that is currently designated Thoroughfare
Commercial and zoned C-5. The property to the south is designated General Industrial (20
acres). The properties to the west and north are designated Tourist and Office Professional
and are each 2 acres in size (refer to Attachment A). The applicant elaborates on the
compatible characteristics of the area in Attachment B, page 9.
3. Zoning Map and Zoning Code Text Amendments, CPMC Chapter 17.10. This municipal
code section provides standards and procedures for major and minor amendments to the
Central Point city zoning map. In this case, the zone change (map) proposal was
initiated by the applicant for one tax lot and the action is considered a `minor'
amendment and a Type III process. The amendment should be based on the following
criteria; 1) its consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan, 2) findings
demonstrating that adequate public services and transportation networks will serve
the property and 3) compliance with the State's Transportation Planning Rule. There
is a separate but related application for the zone change which follows this item.
4. Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) Compliance, OAR 660-012-0060. Criteria for TPR
compliance is addressed in both the Applicant's and the City findings (Attachments B & D)
demonstrating adequate public services and transportation networks. In this case, the re-
designation of the commercial land uses and the nature of the expanded list of permitted uses
will not have an appreciable difference on traffic generation or impact and may even improve
it (see Attachment B, Exhibit 10 — Traffic Findings). Public facilities master plans identify
various future public improvements including the reconfiguration of the traffic signal at
Hamrick and Biddle Roads.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Although a recommendation for a decision to approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
may include conditions, staff has not identified the need to impose any conditions at this
time.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A" — Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps
Attachment `B" — Applicant's Findings
Attachment "C" — Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Revision
Attachment "D" — Planning Department's Findings
Attachment "E" — Resolution No. 836
ACTION:
Open public hearing and consider the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning maps, close public hearing and 1) recommend approval to the City Council; 2)
recommend approval with revisions; or 3) deny the application.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval or Resolution No. 836. Per the Staff Report dated December 6, 2016
and supported by Findings of Fact.
3
F1
L
sJI&
�Subject_Property
Tax Lots
Central Point Comp
Medium Density
Land Use Plan
Res.
- General Indusdrial -
Thoroughfare
Commercial
Light Indusdrial �®
Tourist and Office
Low Density Res. �3
Professional
Print Date: 3-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
A M15TLET(
iL
=W,A.W A,
Medium be"e"n
oil" -W
ire 2:6 X.
zaWasr
4 ATTACHMENT "
Low Density
pTn'o our hfareommercial
a
u Light Indusdrial
lu
U
Existing Comprehensive
Plan Map
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices & N
Tail Lite Properties LLC WE
37 -2W -01C-802
5
WE 300 150 0 300 Feet
Subject—Property
Tax Lots
Central Point Comp
Land Use Plan
_ General Indusdrial
Light Indusdrial
Low Density Res.
Medium Density
Res.
-Thoroughfare
Commercial
Tourist and Office
Professional
Print Date: 3-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
Proposed Comprehensive
Plan Map
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices & N
Tail Lite Properties LLC W�E
37 -2W -01C-802 s
300 150 0 300 Feet
2012 Aerial
Subject—Property
Tax Lots
Zoning Outline
300 150 0 300 Feet
Existing Zoning Map
On Aerial Photo
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC N
37 -2W -01C-802
W+ E
s
Print Date: 03-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
2012 Aerial
Subject—Property
Tax Lots
Zoning Outline
300 150 0 300 Feet
Proposed Zoning Map
On Aerial Photo
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC
37 -2W -01C-802
W+
E
S
Print Date: 03-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
STATE OF OREGON
IN THE MATTER OF A REQUEST FOR A
MINOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP
AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR
4.87 ACRES. THE SUBJECT TRACT IS
LOCATED AT 4901 BIDDLE ROAD
WHICH IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
BIDDLE ROAD BETWEEN HAMRICK
AND TABLE ROCK ROAD IMMEDIATELY
EAST OF THE SUPER 8 MOTEL. THE
PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CITY
OF CENTRAL POINT AND IS MORE
SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED AS TAX LOT
802 IN TOWNSHIP 37 SOUTH, RANGE 2
WEST (WM), SECTION 01C.
Applicant/ Owners:
Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.
Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Agent: CSA Planning, Ltd.
ATTACHMENT " '07 "
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
Applicants' Exhibit 2
Applicants request a consolidated comprehensive plan amendment and zone change for three
lots totaling 4.87 acres fronting on the south side of Biddle Road, immediately east of the
Super 8 Motel that is located at the corner of Biddle Road and Hamrick Road. The subject
property has an approved tentative partition plan that will divide the entire 4.87 acres of land
into three parcels, see Planning File No. 16005. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
and Zoning Map Amendment apply to all 4.87 acres of land (plus adjacent right-of-way).
The infrastructure for the partition plat is under construction now. It is possible, if not likely,
that the final plat will be completed contemporaneous with the review of this subject
application. The partition plat includes a retail street running from Biddle Road to the
southern private access road. A new veterinary clinic was approved for Lot 1 at the
southeast corner of the property and is currently under construction. Veterinary clinics are
allowed in the C-5 zoning district and so the clinic under construction will be a permitted use
in the proposed zone and will continue to comply with all applicable standards. The lots
approved in the approved partition will remain conforming lots under the proposed C-5
zoning district. Tail Lite Properties, Inc. is constructing tentative plat alternative "A2" that
supports the proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices headquarters use.
Page 1
11
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
I I
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATIONS
Applicant herewith submits the following evidence with its land use application:
Exhibit 1. Completed application forms and Duly Executed Limited Powers of Attorney
from Applicants and Owners authorizing CSA Planning, Ltd. to act on their
behalf.
Exhibit 2. These proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, demonstrating how the
application complies with the applicable substantive criteria of Central Point' s
Land Development Ordinance
Exhibit 3. Applicants' Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development
Standards
Exhibit 4. Jackson County Assessor Plat Map 37 -2W -OIC
Exhibit 5. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map
Exhibit 6. Proposed Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map
Exhibit 7. Zoning Map on Aerial Photo
Exhibit 8. Proposed Zoning Map
Exhibit 9. Area Plan (depicting Approved In -Process Project and Proposed Development)
Exhibit 10. Letter Evaluating Transportation Impacts from Plan Amendment and Zone
Change, Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering.
Exhibit 11. Survey of Existing Conditions; Pariani Land Surveying, February 9, 2015.
Exhibit 12. Site Photos and Site Photo Key Map
Exhibit 13. Proposed Site Development Plans:
■ Exterior Building Elevations
■ Site Plan
■ Floor Plan
■ C-1 Civil Plan
■ L-1 Landscape Plan
Exhibit 14. Tentative Partition Plat Notice of Decision and Staff Report with Exhibit A-2
Exhibit 15. Development Transportation Impact Analysis, Southern Oregon Transportation
Engineering
Exhibit 16. Parking Demand Analysis, Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering
Page 2
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
RELEVANT SUBSTANTIVE APPROVAL CRITERIA
The relevant substantive criteria prerequisite to approving a minor Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and Zone Change under the City of Central Point Zoning Ordinance ("CPZO")
is recited verbatim below:
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ZONING ORDINANCE (CPZO)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA
17.96.200 Initiation of amendments.
A proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan or urban growth boundary may be initiated by either:
A. A resolution by the planning commission to the city council;
B. A resolution of intent by the city council; or
C. An application by one or more property owners, or their agents, of property affected by the proposed
amendment.
17.96.300 Major revisions and minor changes.
Proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan, including urban growth boundary amendments, are
categorized as either major or minor amendments as defined in Section 17.10.300. Proposals for major revisions
shall be processed as a Type IV procedure per Section 17.05.500. Proposals for minor changes shall be
processed as a Type III procedure per Section 17.05.400.
17.96.500 Approval criteria.
A recommendation or a decision to approve or to deny an application for an amendment to the comprehensive
plan, or urban growth boundary shall be based on written findings and conclusions that address the following
criteria:
A. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals;
B. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan;
C. For urban growth boundary amendments findings demonstrate that adequate public services and
transportation networks to serve the property are either available, or identified for construction in the city's
public facilities master plans (major and minor amendments); and
D. The amendment complies with OAR 660-012-0060 of the Transportation Planning Rule.
ZONE CHANGE CRITERIA
17.10.200 Initiation of amendments.
A proposed amendment to the code or zoning map may be initiated by either:
A. A resolution by the planning commission to the city council;
B. A resolution of intent by the city council; or for zoning map amendments;
C. An application by one or more property owners (zoning map amendments only), or their agents, of property
affected by the proposed amendment. The amendment shall be accompanied by a legal description of the
property or properties affected; proposed findings of facts supporting the proposed amendment, justifying
the same and addressing the substantive standards for such an amendment as required by this chapter and
by the Land Conservation and Development Commission of the state. (Ord. 1989 §1 (part), 2014).
17.10.300 Major and minor amendments.
There are two types of map and text amendments:
A. Major Amendments. Major amendments are legislative policy decisions that establish bylaw general
policies and regulations for future land use decisions, such as revisions to the zoning and land division
Page 3
W
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
ordinance that have widespread and significant impact beyond the immediate area. Major amendments are
reviewed using the Type IV procedure in Section 17.05.500.
B. Minor Amendments. Minor amendments are those that involve the application of adopted policy to a specific
development application, and not the adoption of new policy (i.e., major amendments). Minor amendments
shall follow the Type III procedure, as set forth in Section 17.05.400. The approval authority shall be the city
council after review and recommendation by the planning commission. (Ord. 1989 §1 (part), 2014; Ord. 1874
§3(part), 2006).
17.10.400 Approval criteria.
A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a text or map
amendment shall be based on written findings and conclusions that address the following criteria:
A. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals (major amendments only);
B. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan (major and minor
amendments);
C. If a zoning map amendment, findings demonstrating that adequate public services and transportation
networks to serve the property are either available, or identified for construction in the city's public facilities
master plans (major and minor amendments); and
D. The amendment complies with OAR 660-012-0060 of the Transportation Planning Rule. (Ord. 1989 §1 (part),
2014; Ord. 1874 §3(part), 2006. Formerly 17.10.300(B)).
OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE
Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 660, Division 12
SECTION 660-012-0060
(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation
would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place
measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified
function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility.
A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of
map errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system plan:
(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result in types or levels of travel or access that are
inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility;
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum acceptable
performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to
perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive
plan.
Page 4
11
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
IV
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following facts are established and found to be true with respect to this matter:
1. Ownership/Applicant: Tax Lot 802 is owned in fee simple by Tail Lite Properties, LLC.
Rogue Valley Microdevices is in contract to purchase Lot 3 of the subject property.
Agent CSA Planning, Ltd. is submitting this application on behalf of the property owner
and contract purchaser.
2. Location: The subject property is located on the south side of Biddle Road between
Hamrick Road and Table Rock Road. The property is identified as Tax Lot 802 in
Township 37 South, Range 02 West (W.M.), Section 01C. The site address is 4901
Biddle Road, Central Point, OR.
3. Parcel Size: Tax Lot 802 currently has 4.87 acres. See, Exhibit 4.
4. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation / Zoning: Designated Tourist and Office
Professional l Zoned C-4 Tourist and Office Professional. See, Exhibits 5 and 7.
5. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Designation / Zoning: Designation proposed to
be amended to Thoroughfare Commercial and to change the zone to C-5. See, Exhibits 6
and 8.
6. Existing Frontage and Access: The subject property has frontage along its northern
boundary on Biddle Road. Biddle Road is classified in the TSP as an arterial. Tax Lot
802 also has access easements on the access drives that run south from Biddle Road
along Tax Lot 803 and along the southern boundaries of Tax Lots 801, 802 and 803 and
intersecting with Hamrick Road. These private commercial accesses were reviewed and
approved by Central Point at the time of land division that created the parent parcel. A
private north -south Retail Street has been approved to intersect with Biddle Road
approximately mid -block between existing accesses. The Retail Street will have right-
in/right-out only access with a median in Biddle Road and is currently under constuction.
7. Lot Legality: Tax Lot 802 was created through two partitions. Tax Lot 800 was divided
through partition P-03-2004 into three parcels in 2004, and in 2005 the resulting Parcel 2
was subdivided into three lots, of which Tax Lot 802 was Lot 1. In 2007 a lot line
adjustment was made to the border between Tax Lots 802 and 803 creating its current
configuration. In April of 2016, the City of Central Point approved a tentative partition
plat to divide Tax Lot 802 into three separate parcels. The proposed conditional use
permit and site plan review are directed at Parcel 3 of the approved tentative land
division; it is possible, if not probably, that the final plat will be recorded prior to
completion of the subject land use review.
8. Previous Planning Permits:
File No. 16004 - Site Plan and Architectural Review which approved a veterinary clinic
on Parcel 1 of the land division and File No. 16005- Tentative Partition were approved
April 14, 2016.
Page 5
12
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
9. Existing Development: The property is currently vacant but construction of the Retail
Street and the veterinary clinic has begun.
10. Land Uses on Abutting Properties and Surrounding Area:
Overview of area: The stretch of Biddle Road/East Pine Street ("BR/EPS") that is east of
the Interstate -5 in Central Point is an employment area with a mix of commercial uses
right along BR/EPS on the south side with some industrial uses further to the south.
Except for a small portion of a larger residential area near Meadowbrook Drive and
Orchard View Avenue, the north side of BR/EPS is primarily undeveloped employment
designated property; further to the north is the Jackson County Expo (fairgrounds), the
Central Point East residential area, and some legacy County development patterns. There
are a mix of developed and undeveloped properties between the interstate and Table
Rock Road.
East: To the east of the subject property is vacant land owned by Les Schwab.
Further to the east is additional vacant employment land that is marketed for
sale. This land has a Comprehensive Plan Map of Thoroughfare Commercial
and is zoned C-5
North: Across Biddle Road is the Dulany property. This property has a single family
dwelling on it and is under developed in relation to its plan designation. The
property is planned Tourist and Professional Office and is zoned C-4. The
land to the northeast is planned and zoned for residential uses and has been
developed with single-family dwellings. Land to the northwest is a large
vacant 21 acre site planned Tourist and Office Professional and zoned C-4.
South: South of the subject property across the private commercial access drive is the
USF Reddaway warehouse logistics facility. This facility is planned General
Industrial and zoned M-2.
West: Immediately to the west is the Super 8 Motel. This site is planned Tourist and
Office Professional and is zoned C-4. Further to the west is some vacant
commercial land across Hamrick Road and a road maintenance yard further to
the southwest.
11. Topography: The subject property is essentially level, sloping very gently to the north.
12. Water Facilities and Services: Underground water utilities exist at the west property
line and along the utility and access easement along the southern portion of the property.
These water facilities are available for connection.
13. Sanitary Sewer Facilities and Services: Underground sanitary sewer utilities exists in
the utility easements along the south portion of the property and are available for
connection.
14. Power and Natural Gas: Underground power is available from Pacific Power and
underground gas is available from Avista Utilities and the same exist in the utility
easements along the south portion of the property and are available for connection.
15. Fire and Police Protection: The subject properties are located within and are served by
Fire District No. 3. Police service is provided by the City of Central Point Police
Department.
Page 6
W
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
16. Wetlands, Streams and floodplain: The subject property does not contain any
jurisdictional wetlands per Jackson County GIS Services. The subject property does not
contain any streams or floodplains per Jackson County GIS Services.
17. Storm Drainage Facilities and Services: Underground storm drainage lines are located
in Biddle Road and in the private access easement and utility area on the south portion of
the property. These storm drain lines are available for connection. The approval of the
prior land division necessitated construction of a stormwater detention factility on Lot 2
of the partition which is planned to handle a significant portion of the Rogue Valley
Microdevices' storm drainage needs, see Exhibit 13, Sheet C-1.
18. Transportation and Access:
A. Plan Amendment and Zone Change: Transportation impact analyses for Plan
Amendments and Zone Changes evaluate impacts to the transportation system based
upon the potential for the new zone to impact the system when compared to the
existing zone. This is typically evaluated based upon a reasonable worst case of
traffic generation based upon uses allowed in the proposed zone when compared to a
reasonable worst case of traffic generation based upon uses allowed in the existing
zone. Applicant's Traffic Engineer, Kim Parducci, compared the potential traffic
generation of the C-4 zone and the C-5 zone and the reasonable worst-case trip
generators that are allowed in both zones. Her expert professional opinion is that the
plan amendment and zone change aspects of the application do not require detailed
traffic analysis because the reasonable worst case trip generation is substantially
equivalent between the two zones.
Her professional opinion is explained in Exhibit 10 as well as a supplemental memo
dated October 4, 2016. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering has been in
coordination with Jackson County Roads, ODOT and the City's Public Works
Department and those agencies a did not indicate a detailed TIA for the Plan
Amendment and Zone Change was necessary based upon the analysis and opinion of
SOTE regarding the trip generation potential between the two zones.
B. Transportation Impacts from Proposed Development: The Applicant's traffic
engineer also prepared a traffic impacts analysis that analyzes the proposed Rogue
Valley Microdevices project, see Exhibit 15. That analysis was an update to the
Southern Oregon Veterinary Specialty Center analysis done for that project which is
now under construction. In the prior analysis, Parcel 3 was assumed to be a future
site for a 25,000 square foot specialty retail center, along with the veterinary clinic
and an assumed sit down restaurant on the remaining Parcel 2. The updated analysis
continues to assume the sit down restaurant on Parcel 2 and assumes the veterinary
clinic use on Parcel 1 but substitutes the Rogue Valley Microdevices use for Parcel 3.
This results in a reduced trip generation of the entire site of 53 P.M. peak hour trips.
The results of the analysis show that the transportation system can accommodate the
proposed use in conformance with all applicable performance standards.
C. Access and Circulation: Access to the site is via a private retail street that is under
construction and was approved under Planning File No. 16005. The retail street
intersects with Biddle Road and is a right -in -right -out intersection allowing in -
movement from the west and out -movement to the east onto Biddle Road. A
- Page 7
14
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
concrete median in Biddle Road will be constructed in conjunction with the new
retail street. Access coming from the east will be from a left turn onto the private
street connection opposite Meadowbrook and then right along the private access drive
to the south and then a right onto the private retail street. Access out of the site to the
west will involve a right turn onto the private retail street and then out the private
access drive along the south property line to a right turn on Hamrick then to the signal
where a left can be made onto East Pine Street.
The office driveway is located on the private retail street. It is somewhat close to the
intersection with Biddle Road but there is adequate room for at least two stacked
vehicles and it is a right into the site so no queuing at this location is expected. The
other access onto the site is via two large driveways to the south access drive; the
wide driveways are needed to get semi -trucks into the back parking lot area and then
out onto the private access drive. These south driveways will be truck vehicle access
points; smaller trucks that use the west service drive will exit via the front office
parking lot access point.
19. Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map Analysis:
A. Employment Land Supply and Demand Analysis: As part of the justification for
the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment, it
is appropriate to evaluate the land supply and demand implications for employment
land generally and commercial land specifically. Central Point has a relatively up-to-
date Economic Element in its Comprehensive Plan that was adopted by Ordinance
1973 approved on June 27, 2013. This Element provided the City with a review of
employment land supply and demand. Following its adoption, the City and County
amended the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to add approximately 49
gross acres of industrial land in the "Tolo Area" near Exit 35. Of the 49 acres added
to the UGB, approximately 9 acres of net -buildable industrial acreage was added.
Approximately 9 acres of right-of-way was added as part of that UGB amendment.
The remaining 31 acres included in the UGB was part of an existing trucking and
multi -modal freight handling facility that is not vacant but for which inclusion in the
UGB can support more intensive urban development.
With respect to development since the Economic Element was adopted, a one acre
site has been constructed for a new Jackson County Court building off of Hamrick
Road. The balance of the acreage in the inventory that was classified as vacant
remains vacant.
Thus, the City now has approximately 139.7 acres of vacant buildable employment
land in its UGB. This estimate is based upon Table 5.2-1 of the Economic Element
and adding 9 acres of buildable land from the UGB amendment and subtracting the
one acre of land built for the court use. There are two in -process projects that would
further reduce existing vacant land supplies, specifically the veterinary clinic on a
portion of the subject property that is currently under construction and the proposed
new Costco use that is approved but for which construction has not started.
Overall, the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment will not appreciably
change the supply of commercial land within the City's UGB. The site was
inventoried as a medium retail site and the change from Tourist and Office
Page 8
15
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Professional to Thoroughfare Commercial would have likely resulted in the same
inventory designation in the Economic Element for the subject property.
From an industry opportunity standpoint, the proposed comprehensive plan
amendment is expected to support the siting of the Rogue Valley Microdevices
computer electronics company. The Central Point Comprehensive Plan identifies the
computer electronics industry as a strong industry in Oregon, see Table 3.2-1 NAICS
334. The expansion of Rogue Valley Microdevices represents an opportunity to grow
a computer electronics company in Jackson County to gain local share in an
important in industry that is strong and important to Oregon's economy.
B. Qualitative and Spatial Analysis: The text description in the Land Use Plan
Element for Thoroughfare Commercial and Tourist Commercial/Professional Office
are very similar in quality from a use perspective, the main difference being
proximity to I-5 for the Tourist Commercial/Professional Office versus frontage on
an arterial street such as Highway 99 or Biddle Road. From the standpoint of zoning,
the main difference between the two corresponding zoning districts (from C-4 to C-5)
is that C-5 allows some light industrial uses and C-4 does not.
From a spatial standpoint, the Thoroughfare Commercial designation is already
located immediately east of the subject property and the proposed Comprehensive
Plan is simply a westward expansion of that designation. The Thoroughfare
Commercial designation was added as part of a legislative rearrangement of land uses
in Central Point's UGB in 1998. That amendment added the first thoroughfare
commercial east of Interstate 5. That amendment recognized the opportunity to take
advantage of Biddle Road as a high volume arterial street corridor in which the siting
of the Thoroughfare Commercial designation was deemed to be appropriate. The
proposed amendment is simply a small westward extension of the Thoroughfare
Commercial area created through that legislative amendment in 1998. There will
remain substantial vacant and available acreage zoned C-4 between the subject
property and Interstate 5.
The new western boundary of the Thoroughfare Commercial will be the Super 8
Motel parcel. This Comprehensive Plan Map amendment application has been filed
with a proposed light manufacturing development for the lot adjacent to the Super 8.
The common property line with Super 8 will include a landscape strip next to a
service drive aisle and then the building wall. Potential land use conflicts are
analyzed in the Conditional Use Permit findings herein below.
The proposed Thoroughfare Commercial will also add opportunities for light
manufacturing allowed in the C-5 that is not allowed in the C-4. This is beneficial
from a qualitative standpoint because most all of the C-5 zoning area the City once
had to support a mix of light manufacturing and commercial uses was located along
Highway 99. These lands have all now been changed to TOD designations. These
TOD designations do not preclude light manufacturing uses but the TOD policy
concept guides development of this area toward smaller scale shops with a mix of
light manufacturing facilities. This is an appropriate policy approach for the area
along Highway 99. The area is largely already developed with relatively small lots,
so future development will primarily be redevelopment of existing lots that will limit
the scale of future development. This presents limited opportunities for slightly
Page 9
ER
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
larger scale light manufacturing in the areas once designated C-5. The proposal to
expand C-5 along Biddle Road is intended to support for the proposed Rogue Valley
Microdevices use which is an example of the scale of light manufacturing that would
be challenging in the TOD areas along Highway 99.
20. Proposed Development Project:
The proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices corporate headquarters and light fabrication
facility has the following features:
A. Design Scheme: The approach to the building is to create a modern and attractive
high-tech light manufacturing building. The building is proposed to contain a 10,000
square foot clean room within a 24,000 square foot production area and the building
will have approximately 19,000 square feet of accessory office space on two levels.
Being a high-tech facility, the interior is a purpose built design that reflects workflow
needs and the demands of the clean room.
The nature of the interior layout dictates the location of certain outdoor connections
in terms of entrance location, delivery doors and access to the accessory office uses.
Overall, the exterior is a modern, but relatively simple flat -roofed commercial
building with several attractive architectural elements on the main facade and
attractive materials on all elevations. See, Exhibit 13.
B. Vehicle Parking and Loading: The project proposes 46 parking spaces. The
application is requesting an adjustment to the off-street parking standards as part of
the Conditional Use Permit approval (pursuant to special conditions of approval that
may be imposed under 17.76.040(E)(3)) because a strict application of the code
would require significantly more parking than is expected to be needed by the use.
There is a wide disparity between the two calculation methods for the parking
requirements. The employee calculation method for industrial uses yields a need for
approximately 18 spaces. The gross floor area method would require 84 spaces, one
for every 500 square feet of gross floor area, which is difference of over 60 parking
spaces. The proposed 46 spaces is between the two need calculation methods and is
projected to be adequate for the use. It is expected that this amount of parking will be
adequate to allow for nearly doubling of the size of the company within the new
space, which is the largest it can be within the new facility. A parking demand
analysis has been prepared by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering for this
submittal and is located in Exhibit 16.
Industrial uses of 37,501 square feet to 50,000 square feet are required to have four
loading berths; the actual fabrication area is 24,000 square feet which would require
four berths. The site plan and building elevations depict four overhead loading doors
for the facility. Two overhead doors are located on the west elevation along the
service drive. These will be accessed by forklift for semis from the main rear parking
lot and by smaller delivery vehicles such as FedEx and UPS. This entire circulation
area on the west side of the building could be considered a series of loading berths, in
which case the site has the equivalent of 8 loading berths just on this side. One
overhead door loading location on the east elevation, trucks could use this for
delivery from the private retail street although this would be expected to be a rare
occurrence; primarily this would be accessed by forklift on the occasion when
Page 10
17
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
equipment needed to loaded on the east side of the clean room. The fourth overhead
door is shown on the south elevation and this berth will generally be used by a forklift
off-loading from a semi -trailer truck parked in the rear lot.
C. Bike Parking: The code requires four bike parking spaces. The covered bike
parking spaces will be under a canopy area located at the outdoor break area.
D. Landscaping: This high-tech light manufacturing facility is proposed to be fully
landscaped at the time of development, see Exhibit 13, Sheet L-1. The proposed
landscaping is extensive for an industrial use and is proposed in a manner that will
allow it to blend well with commercial uses in the area. The 10 -foot sidewalk with
tree wells on the retail street will create an attractive streetscape for this private street.
The planting scheme includes a number of mass plantings that will create an
attractive landscape throughout the year.
V
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ZONING ORDINANCE (CPZO)
The following conclusions of law and ultimate conclusions are reached under each of the
relevant substantive criteria which are recited verbatim and addressed below. The
conclusions of law are supported by Applicants' evidentiary exhibits at Section II — including
Applicants' review of applicable development standards (Exhibit 3) and the findings of fact
as set forth in Section IV herein above.
APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
Chapter 17.96
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
17.96.500 Approval criteria.
A recommendation or a decision to approve or to deny an application for an amendment to the comprehensive
plan, or urban growth boundary shall be based on written findings and conclusions that address the following
criteria:
A. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals;
Conclusions of Law: The City of Central Point Planning Commission and City Council
(henceforth "the City") herewith incorporate and adopt the below findings with respect to
each applicable statewide planning goal, as follows:
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all
phases of the planning process ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Page 11
EK
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map
amendment is quasi-judicial in nature and therefore citizen involvement is assured by and
through application of the City's adopted and acknowledged procedures for the conduct and
noticing of quasi-judicial reviews, including noticing and public hearings.
Goal 2: Land Use Planning
PART/ -- PLANNING
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions
related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions ... [balance
omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the subject application is quasi-judicial in
nature and requires demonstration of compliance with predetermined criteria and approval of
the requested plan map amendment requires substantial evidence to demonstrate each of the
relevant criteria have been satisfied. The City herewith incorporates the balance of the
conclusions of law addressing all other criteria applicable to the plan amendment, and
concludes based thereupon, that adequate evidence exists in the application submittal and
associated record to conclude all applicable criteria are satisfied.
The City further concludes that the requested plan amendment is a narrow one from the
standpoint of map designations because the implementing zone for the Tourist Office
Professional allows very similar uses to the implementing zone for the Thoroughfare
Commercial designation. Thus, the overall implications for the implementation of the City's
employment land designation system are affected to a limited degree by an amendment
between these two designations.
Goal 3: Agricultural Lands
To preserve and maintain agricultural lands ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the subject property is within its Urban Growth
Boundary and is planned commercial and the proposed amendment is to a commercial
designation and is not, therefore, subject to Goal 3 protection.
Goal 4: Forest Lands
To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by
making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of
forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water,
and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture... (balance
omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the subject property is within its UGB and is
planned commercial and the proposed amendment is to commercial and is not subject to
Goal 4 protection.
Goal 5: Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces
To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces ... [balance omitted for
brevity]
Page 12
1A
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the subject property is not subject to any adopted
Goal 5 protections and therefore the amendment from one commercial designation to another
will have no effect on the City's plan to achieve Goal 5.
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.
All waste and process discharges from future development, when combined with such discharges from
existing developments shall not threaten to violate, or violate applicable state or federal environmental
quality statutes, rules and standards. With respect to the air, water and land resources of the applicable air
sheds and river basins described or included in state environmental quality statutes, rules, standards and
implementation plans, such discharges shall not (1) exceed the carrying capacity of such resources,
considering long range needs; (2) degrade such resources; or (3) threaten the availability of such resources.
Waste and Process Discharges -- refers to solid waste, thermal, noise, atmospheric or water pollutants,
contaminants, or products therefrom. Included here also are indirect sources of air pollution which result in
emissions of air contaminants for which the state has established standards ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the Findings of Fact in Section IV, the City concludes that
the proposed amendment will allow for certain light manufacturing uses in the Thoroughfare
Commercial designation that are not currently allowed in the Tourist and Office Professional
District. The City, nevertheless, concludes that any such uses are required to comply with all
environmental regulations applicable to the industry and the City specifically incorporates
and adopts the findings of fact regarding the environmental compliance of Rogue Valley
Microdevices which demonstrates that this firm has and can feasibly continue to comply with
all local, state and federal environmental regulations applicable to the enterprise.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards
To protect people and property from natural hazards ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the subject property is not subject to any
known specific natural hazards that require special planning or implementation measures
except the general earthquake risks that exist in all of western Oregon and are adequately
handled by applicable building codes.
Goal 8: Recreational Needs
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide
for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the subject property has not been adopted into any
local parks plans to achieve Goal 8. It is not known to contain any unique resources
necessary to attain Goal 8 and the proposed amendment from one commercial designation to
another will have no appreciable impact on the City's ability to achieve Goal 8.
Goal 9: Economic Development
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,
welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.
Comprehensive plans and policies shall contribute to a stable and healthy economy in all regions of the
state. Such plans shall be based on inventories of areas suitable for increased economic growth and activity
after taking into consideration the health of the current economic base; materials and energy availability and
Page 13
20
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
cost; labor market factors; educational and technical training programs; availability of key public facilities;
necessary support facilities; current market forces; location relative to markets; availability of renewable and
non-renewable resources; availability of land; and pollution control requirements.
Comprehensive plans for urban areas shall:
1. Include an analysis of the community's economic patterns, potentialities, strengths, and deficiencies as
they relate to state and national trends;
2. Contain policies concerning the economic development opportunities in the community;
3. Provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations, and service levels for
a variety of industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan policies;
4. Limit uses on or near sites zoned for specific industrial and commercial uses to those which are
compatible with proposed uses. In accordance with ORS 197.180 and Goal 2, state agencies that issue
permits affecting land use shall identify in their coordination programs how they will coordinate permit
issuance with other state agencies, cities and counties.
GUIDELINES
A. PLANNING
1. A principal determinant in planning for major industrial and commercial developments should be the
comparative advantage of the region within which the developments would be located. Comparative
advantage industries are those economic activities which represent the most efficient use of resources,
relative to other geographic areas.
2. The economic development projections and the comprehensive plan which is drawn from the
projections should take into account the availability of the necessary natural resources to support the
expanded industrial development and associated populations. The plan should also take into account
the social, environmental, energy, and economic impacts upon the resident population.
3. Plans should designate the type and level of public facilities and services appropriate to support the
degree of economic development being proposed.
4. Plans should strongly emphasize the expansion of and increased productivity from existing industries
and firms as a means to strengthen local and regional economic development.
5. Plans directed toward diversification and improvement of the economy of the planning area should
consider as a major determinant, the carrying capacity of the air, land and water resources of the
planning area. The land conservation and development actions provided for by such plans should not
exceed the carrying capacity of such resources.
B. IMPLEMENTATION
1. Plans should take into account methods and devices for overcoming certain regional conditions and
deficiencies for implementing this goal, including but not limited to
(1) tax incentives and disincentives;
(2) land use controls and ordinances;
(3) preferential assessments;
(4) capital improvement programming; and
(5) fee and less -than -fee acquisition techniques.
2. Plans should provide for a detailed management program to assign respective implementation roles
and responsibilities to those private and governmental bodies which operate in the planning area and
have interests in carrying out this goal and in supporting and coordinating regional and local economic
plans and programs.
Conclusions of Law: First and foremost, the City concludes that Goal 9 is implemented by
a detailed administrative rule found at OAR 660-009. However, the Council finds that rule
to be inapplicable to the subject application because the application of the rule to post -
acknowledgement plan amendments only occurs when lands are taken out of an industrial
designation or from an "other employment designation" to "any other use designation". In
the subject application the property is an "other employment designation" currently and will
remain so after the amendment and will not become any other use designation, so the
detailed rule is not implicated. As such, the City finds that only general findings of
compliance with the Goal are required.
In addition to this overarching conclusion of law, the County and City make the following
supplementary Goal 9 findings:
Page 14
21
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
1. Central Point's adopted and acknowledged Comprehensive Plan Regional Plan
Element recognizes the potential for a mix of industrial, office and commercial
employment in this general area. The area includes industrial, commercial, and office
development patterns and associated designations in the area. The City's policy
decision that the area is appropriate for Thoroughfare Commercial along Biddle Road
was made in 1998 when the land immediately to the east of the subject property was
designated Thoroughfare Commercial and the plan map amendment only represents a
modest extension of that area to the west.
2. Even after the proposed amendment there will still remain substantial inventory of
vacant and developable Tourist and Office Professional designated land in the
immediate area that is available as short terms supply of land and is currently zoned
C-4. These vacant parcels are located at the northwest corner of Hamrick and East
Pine and also at the southwest corner of Biddle Road and Table Rock Road.
3. The City also recognizes that the proposed plan amendment is expected to support the
relocation and expansion of a local computer electronics manufacturing company.
Computer Electronics Manufacturing (NAICS 334) is a strong and important industry
on statewide basis but its presence in Jackson County is limited; expansion of this
facility represents an opportunity to improve the local share in a strong and growing
sector in Oregon.
Goal 10: Housing
To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the evidence, the City concludes Goal 10 is not applicable
to this Plan Map amendment because the amendment concerns only a change from one
category of commercial land to another.
Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services
To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve
as a framework for urban and rural development ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the Evidence in Section Il and the Findings of Fact in
Section IV, the City concludes the proposed amendment is located in an area where water,
sewer, storm drainage, and streets are readily available to the property and the proposed
amendment between two similar commercial land use categories will not appreciably change
the demand for public facilities and services.
Goal 12: Transportation
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system ... [balance omitted
for bneWr y]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that OAR 660 Division 012 implements Goal 12
and OAR 660-012-0060 sets forth specific regulations for comprehensive plan map
1 Short term supply is employment land that is readily available to meet demand over the next five
years.
22
Page 15
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
amendments and zone changes. The City herewith incorporates and adopts its conclusions of
law addressing the same below and concludes there upon that the proposed amendment
between commercial designations will not appreciably change the trip generation potential of
the site.
Goal 13: Energy Conservation
To conserve energy ... [balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the change between similar commercial designations
is such that the City's land use planning for energy conservation will be little effected by the
proposed amendment.
Goal 14: Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban
population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and
to provide for livable communities...[balance omitted for brevity]
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the proposed amendment concerns a map
designation change between commercial categories with implementing zones that allow
similar uses all within a UGB, and based thereupon, the proposed amendment will continue
to provide an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use and urban
employment will continue to be accommodated inside Central Point's urban growth
boundary.
Summary Conclusions of Law: In sum, the City concludes the proposed amendment from
Tourist and Office Professional to Thoroughfare Commercial is consistent in all ways with
the Statewide Planning Goals.
B. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan;
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes criteria that require general compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan does not automatically transform all the Goals and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan into decisional criteria for a quasi-judicial land use application, see
Bennett vs. The City of Dallas. The City has reviewed its Comprehensive Plan and it finds
that the language and context of only the following goals and policies are intended to
function as approval criteria for the subject application:
Economic Element Policy 3.2:
The City shall maintain a supply of competitive short-term employment lands in the medium and
large site categories. The supply of short-term employment land shall be reviewed and updated
annually. When it is determined that the supply of land as measured in terms of number of site
and/or acreage in the medium and large site categories is inadequate to serve the twenty-year
needs then the City shall amend its UGB to include additional short-term (5 -year) employment
lands.
The City concludes this policy primarily functions to direct the City to amend its UGB where
necessary to assure an adequate employment land supply but does present a decisional
criteria issue for a plan map amendment that proposes to reduce the short-term supply below
the levels established in the policy and change the designation, especially where a proposal
Page 16
23
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
seeks to amend the plan to add land to another map designation category where a surplus
might exist - such as multi -family residential2. Based upon the Evidence in Section II and
the Finding of Fact in Section IV, the City concludes that is not the circumstance for this
amendment and the proposed amendment between similar categories of commercial will not
have any appreciable impact on the short-term supply of employment lands for the City
because future uses of the property under the two designations are so similar.
C. For urban growth boundary amendments findings demonstrate that adequate public services and
transportation networks to serve the property are either available, or identified for construction in the city's
public facilities master plans (major and minor amendments); and
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the proposed amendment does not concern a UGB
amendment.
D. The amendment complies with OAR 660-012-0060 of the Transportation Planning Rule.
Conclusions of Law: The City herewith incorporates and adopts the below conclusions of
law addressing the Transportation Planning Rule as follows:
OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE
Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 660, Division 12
SECTION 660-012-0060
(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation
would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place
measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the
identified function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.)
of the facility. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it
would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of
correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system plan:
(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result in types or levels of travel or access that
are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility;
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum
acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected
to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or
comprehensive plan.
Conclusions of Law (continued): The City concludes the proposed amendment from
Tourist and Professional Office to Thoroughfare Commercial will not significantly affect a
transportation facility based upon the evidence in Exhibit 10 which supports the following
conclusions:
z This is given as a circumstantial example and the conclusion should not be construed to mean the City has an
actual surplus of multi -family residential. No such multi -family land supply analysis exists in the application
submittal.
Page 17
24
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
• The proposed amendment will not change the functional classification of an existing
or planned transportation facility because all the streets used by the subject
application are functionally classified to serve commercial uses in the area and the
proposed amendment will not materially alter the commercial trip generation of the
site such that a functional classification would be altered.
■ The amendment is a minor map amendment and does not propose any changes to
standards implementing the City's functional classification system.
• From a trip generation potential standpoint, the proposed amendment does not allow
uses that generate materially more traffic than the existing designation so nothing
about the amendment will allow land uses or level of development that are
inconsistent with the functional classification of existing and planned transportation
facilities in the area that are already planned in the City's TSP to serve commercial
uses at the subject property.
• From a trip generation potential standpoint, the proposed amendment does not allow
uses that generate materially more traffic than the existing designation so nothing
about the amendment would reduce the performance of an existing or planned
transportation facility below the minimum acceptable performance standards for
facilities projected to meet adopted standards at the end of the planning period or
worsen the performance of any facilities otherwise projected to exceed performance
standards at the end of the planning period.
APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR ZONE CHANGE
Chapter 17.10
ZONE CHANGE
17.10.400 Approval criteria.
A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a text or map
amendment shall be based on written findings and conclusions that address the following criteria:
A. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals (major amendments only);
Conclusions of Law: The City herewith incorporates and adopts its conclusions of law
above regarding statewide planning goal compliance for the Plan amendment and the City
concludes the proposed zoning is consistent in all ways with those conclusions demonstrating
compliance with the statewide planning goals.
B. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan (major and minor
amendments);
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes criteria that require general compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan does not automatically transform all the Goals and Policies of the
Comprehensive Plan into decisional criteria for a quasi-judicial land use application, see
Bennett vs. The City of Dallas. The City has reviewed its Comprehensive Plan and finds it
did not identify any plan goals or policies that, by their language and context, are intended to
function as decisional criteria for the proposed zone change (where the application includes a
Page 18
25
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
concurrent application for plan amendment to Thoroughfare Commercial that is found to
comply with the City's comprehensive plan).
C. If a zoning map amendment, findings demonstrating that adequate public services and transportation
networks to serve the property are either available, or identified for construction in the city's public facilities
master plans (major and minor amendments); and
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the evidence in Section II and the findings of fact in
Section IV, the City concludes as follows with respect to public services and transportation
networks to serve the property:
• Water, Sewer and Storm Drainage facilities exist at the property and are adequate in
condition and capacity to serve the property.
• The proposed zone change will not materially change the trip generation potential of
the site, see Exhibitl0. The Applicant's traffic engineer also analyzed the operation
of transportation facilities in the area and that analysis shows that reasonable worst
case development of the remaining vacant lot, together with the proposed Rogue
Valley Microdevices project and the vet project under construction, can be
accommodated with the existing capacity of the transportation system that serves the
site, see Exhibit 15.
Police and Fire protection exist at the site currently and will continue at similar levels
following the zone change.
D. The amendment complies with OAR 660-012-0060 of the Transportation Planning Rule.
Conclusions of Law: The City herewith incorporates and adopts its conclusions of law
above regarding the Transportation Planning Rule hereinabove and concludes the City the
proposed zoning is consistent in all ways with those conclusions demonstrating compliance
with the Transportation Planning Rule.
VI
SUMMARY OF APPLICANTS' STIPULATIONS
Applicants herewith agree to stipulate to the following, which they agree to observe if the
same are attached as conditions to approval of the subject site plan review application:
Stipulation 1: [RESERVED- The applicant did not identify the need for specific stipulations
for the subject application but may supplement the initially submitted
findings with certain stipulations if the same are found to be necessary
during the course of the review process]
Page 19
PV
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
VII
ULTIMATE CONCLUSIONS; DECISION
Based upon the record and the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is
concluded that the applications for Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change are
consistent with the requirements of all of the relevant substantive approval criteria which
have been addressed hereinabove.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of Applicants and Property Owners.
CSA Planning, Ltd.
, �— 4
Jay Harland
Principal
October 17, 2016
27
Page 20
Memorandum
To: Matt Samitore, Central Point Public Works Director
Date: 05/16/2016
Subject: C4 to C5 Zone Change Traffic Findings and Conclusions
EXHIBIT 10
TUINISP0ATZIQM
4XINW11K ILK
S.O. Transportation
Engineering, LLC
112 Monterey Drive
Medford, OR 97504
Telephone 541.941.4148
Fax 541.535.6873
Kwkp1(QO_com
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC evaluated impacts for a proposed zone change from C-4 to C-
5 on Township 37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 in Central Point, Oregon. The parcel is located along the
south side of Biddle Road west of Hamrick Road adjacent to Super 8.
Existina Site
Tax lot 802 is currently vacant and has tentative plat approval to be split into three parcels. There's a planned
veterinary center on the southeast corner (Parcel 1) that has land use approval and is currently under review for
building permits. Access to the site is provided to Biddle Road and through an internal lane to Hamrick Road that
is expected to be constructed contemporaneously with the site work for the veterinary building.
Zone Change from C-4 and C-5
Biddle Road
MN—
The current C-4 zoning district is intended to provide for the development of concentrated tourist commercial and
entertainment facilities that will maximize ease of access and visibility from the Interstate 5 freeway and major
arterial streets, while the C-5 zoning district provides for commercial and business uses that are most
appropriately located along or near major highways or thoroughfares. Both zoning districts allow banks, offices,
convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores,
veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the higher traffic generating uses. The C-5 zoning
district allows light fabrication, assembly, packaging, and wholesale sales of consumer goods that are not
permitted in the C-4 zoning district. Other differences include art schools, pawnshops, gymnasiums, and
nurseries. The C-4 zoning district permits engineering services, legal services, art studios, and counselling
� Parcel2
0
Parcel3 �r
V
E
I I
I=
I ,
I ._ J I Parcel 1
�I
t I
Zone Change from C-4 and C-5
Biddle Road
MN—
The current C-4 zoning district is intended to provide for the development of concentrated tourist commercial and
entertainment facilities that will maximize ease of access and visibility from the Interstate 5 freeway and major
arterial streets, while the C-5 zoning district provides for commercial and business uses that are most
appropriately located along or near major highways or thoroughfares. Both zoning districts allow banks, offices,
convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores,
veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the higher traffic generating uses. The C-5 zoning
district allows light fabrication, assembly, packaging, and wholesale sales of consumer goods that are not
permitted in the C-4 zoning district. Other differences include art schools, pawnshops, gymnasiums, and
nurseries. The C-4 zoning district permits engineering services, legal services, art studios, and counselling
services, which are not permitted in the C-5 zone. As can be seen, non -permitted uses in both zones are the
lower traffic generating uses. A full list of permitted uses for each zoning district is attached.
Conclusions
Traffic generations for both C-4 and C-5 zoning districts were compared and determined to have comparable,
potential impacts to the transportation system. No change in the potential for additional traffic is estimated to
occur as a result of the proposed zone change from C-4 to C-5.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me
Respectfully,
Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE 63rrQJj'—
Firm Principal f
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Ca Michael Wang, PE (ODOT) G~
Mike Kuntz, PE (Jackson County)
LY PARV
Attachments: C4 and C5 permitted uses �r kid
Memorandum Page 2
29
TJtANSPOATATION
1I161NZallt6. ll<
Memorandum S.O. Transportation
Engineering, LLC
112 Monterey Drive
To: Matt Samitore, Central Point Public Works Director Medford, OR 97504
Telephone 541.941.4146
Date: 10/04/2016 Fax 541.535.6673
Subject: C4 to C5 Zone Change Additional Traffic Findings Kwkpi@Q.com
Additional information was requested by the City of Central Point regarding a proposed zone change
from C4 to C5 on Township 37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 in Central Point, Oregon. A
previous memorandum was prepared in May of 2016 that concluded the two zoning districts (C4 and
C5) had comparable, potential impacts to the transportation system. This memorandum explains this
in more detail and serves as an addendum to the first memorandum.
C4 and C5 Zoninp Districts
The C4 and C5 zoning districts both allow development of concentrated commercial uses, but differ in
how they are located. Where C4 typically provides for maximized ease of access and visibility from
the Interstate 5 freeway and major arterial streets, C5 provides for uses most appropriately located
along or near major highways or thoroughfares. As stated in the previous memorandum, both zoning
districts allow banks, offices, convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting
goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores, veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the
higher traffic generating uses. The highest permitted traffic generator in either zone is a convenience
market, which is shown in the ITE Trip Generation to generate 52.41 trips per 1000 square feet during
the p.m. peak hour. There are other uses that are outright permitted in one zone but a conditional use
in the other. However, both zones are built out with these types of uses in a manner that balances out
potential trip generations. Overall, the highest and best uses in C5 are not shown to generate any
more traffic than C4.
Traffic Impact Analysis Applicability
The City of Central Point Public Works Standards and Specifications require a traffic impact analysis
for a land use application that involves one or more of the following actions in 320.10.03 (3)(a -g).
These include:
a) A change in zoning or plan amendment designation that generates 300 average daily trips (ADT)
more than the current zoning;
The proposed zone change from C4 to C5 is shown to generate no additional traffic to the
transportation system.
b) Any proposed development or land use action that a road authority, including the city, Jackson
County or ODOT, states may have operational or safety concerns along its facilities;
There are no known operational or safety concerns as a result of the proposed zone change.
c) An increase in site traffic volume generation by 250 average daily trips (ADT) or more, or 25 peak
hour trips;
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application.
d) An increase in peak hour volume of a particular movement to and from the State highway by 20
percent or more;
An access analysis is not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the
proposed development application. However, the site does not take access from a State highway and
06
Conclusions
The proposed zone change and comprehensive plan map amendment from C4 to C5 on Township
37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 is concluded to generate no increase in traffic to the
transportation system. The proposed plan amendment and zone change will, therefore, not
significantly affect any existing or planned transportation facility nor will it result in types or levels of
travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of any existing or planned
transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standard identified in the City's
Transportation System Plan (TSP) or Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the plan/zoning amendment
does not meet the Public Works Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Applicability requirements as set forth in
section 320.10.03 (3)(a -g) of their Standards and Specifications, and does not warrant any further
traffic analysis.
In conclusion, the application for plan and zoning amendment are found to be in compliance with the
City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the Central Point Land Development Code, and
are shown to be consistent with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). No further analysis is shown
to be required.
Respectfully,
Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE
Firm Principal
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Attachments: C4 and C5 permitted use comparisons
OAR 660-012-0060
Memorandum Addendum Page 3
31
53 OPE
J (f F -W -
6REG0N
G�
r PAR��G
1
Permitted
Use
C4
C5
Highest and Best
Uses - ITE
Bicycle shop
Yes
Yes
Audio/Video sales
Yes
Yes
Printing and publishing
Yes
Yes
Mobile food vendors
Yes
CU
Potentially high - varies
Liquor store
Yes
Yes
Ice/Skating Rink
CU
Yes
Dance Hall
CU
Yes
Billiard/pool Hall
CU
Yes
Miniature Golf
CU
Yes
Business Schools
CU
Yes
Physical Fitness Center
CU
Yes
Carwash
CU
Yes
Taxicab Office
CU
Yes
Ambulance Services
CU
Yes
Drive-in Fast Food
CU
Yes
32.65 PM / 1000 SF
Contractors Office
No
Yes
Medical Clinic & Lab
No
Yes
Appliance Service
No
Yes
Locksmith
No
Yes
Art/Music/Business School
No
Yes
Upholstery Shop
No
Yes
Veterinary Clinic
Yes
Yes
Tire Sales
No
Yes
Glass/Mirror Sales
No
Yes
Large Retail Establishments
No
Yes
RV Storage
No
Yes
Light Fabrication
No
Yes
Hardware Sales
No
Yes
Monument Sales
No
Yes
Feed, seed, fuel
No
Yes
Electrical/Plumbing Supplies
No
Yes
Heating & Air Equipment
No
Yes
Stone/Tile Supplies
No
Yes
Nursery
No
Yes
Antique shop
No
Yes
Pawnshop
No
Yes
Public Utilities
No
Yes
Furniture Sales
No
Yes
32
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions
measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions,
the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment
includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not
limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant
effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the
performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet
the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
(2) If a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure
that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility
measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the
remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this
section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rule. A local government using subsection (2)(e),
section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic
congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor
vehicles in response to this congestion.
(a) Adopting measures that demonstrate allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and
performance standards of the transportation facility.
(b) Amending the TSP or comprehensive plan to provide transportation facilities, improvements or services adequate
to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; such amendments shall include a
funding plan or mechanism consistent with section (4) or include an amendment to the transportation finance plan so
that the facility, improvement, or service will be provided by the end of the planning period.
(c) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity or performance standards of the transportation facility.
(d) Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development agreement or similar funding
method, including, but not limited to, transportation system management measures or minor transportation
improvements. Local governments shall, as part of the amendment, specify when measures or improvements
provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided.
(e) Providing improvements that would benefit modes other than the significantly affected mode, improvements to
facilities other than the significantly affected facility, or improvements at other locations, if the provider of the
significantly affected facility provides a written statement that the system -wide benefits are sufficient to balance the
significant effect, even though the improvements would not result in consistency for all performance standards.
(3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government may approve an amendment that would
significantly affect an existing transportation facility without assuring that the allowed land uses are consistent with the
function, capacity and performance standards of the facility where:
(a) In the absence of the amendment, planned transportation facilities, improvements and services as set forth in
section (4) of this rule would not be adequate to achieve consistency with the identified function, capacity or
performance standard for that facility by the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP;
(b) Development resulting from the amendment will, at a minimum, mitigate the impacts of the amendment in a
manner that avoids further degradation to the performance of the facility by the time of the development through one
or a combination of transportation improvements or measures;
33
Excemt from Central Point Comprehensive Plan
COMMERCIAL LAND USE
Commercial Goal:
ATTACHMENT " G
To create an economically strong and balanced commercial sector of the community that is easily accessible,
attractive, and meets the commercial needs of the local market area.
Commercial Land Use Plan:
The Land Use Plan shows three basic commercial categories:
General Commercial
Tourist & Office -Professional
Convenience Center
The General Commercial designation is applied to the central business district and areas along the east side of Highway
99 from Beall Lane northward to the high school. In the late 1990's the City Council added General Commercial land use
designations along Pine Street/Biddle Road on the East side of Interstate -5. This general area is suitable for a wide range
of commercial uses that are suitable for the central portions of the community and along designated freight routes. The
Zoning Map for Central Point, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Map, further subdivides the General
Commercial category into three zoning districts. The Central Business District (C-3, TOD-EC) extends along Pine Street,
roughly between First Street and Seventh Street. This zone is designed to strengthen the commercial core area of the City.
somewhat less intensiye that the eemmaFeial rare area, but pr -o -vides a good tmnsitienal zene between the high _r
the dewy+„...n o and the low density r-esidefAial areas to the net4hand so*' , Also within the Central Business District
(CBD) are those properties The 04d zene twderthis eategei-yr is the G 5 (There tgl a Commer
along Highway 99 designated TOD-GC which -and provides for a mixture of most! automobile -related
commercial activities as well as fabrication to encourage `maker spaces', many e€ which will be related to the light
industrial areas aerass the highway to the west The third zone under this category is the C-5 (Thoroughfare Commercial)
district which is also compatible with light industry and located along major transportation corridors.
Tourist Commercial/Office Professional is the second of the commercial land use categories. This area is zoned R-4 C-4,
which is the City's corresponding zone. With the continued development of EXPO Park and the airport, the City sees a
significant opportunity to plan for expanded tourist facilities and compatible professional office development, primarily
along East Pine Street from Seventh Street to the vicinity of Hamrick Road.
The Convenience Center category would provide for small convenience shopping districts within the residential
neighborhoods or at major arterial intersections. The City's G4C-N zoning district provides for these types of uses and
will ensure that these commercial uses will be compatible with the adjacent residential areas.
RM,
ATTACHMENT " P it
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
File No.: 16022
Before the City of Central Point Planning Commission
Consideration of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Land Use Redesignation on a 4.87 acre
lot located at 4901 Biddle Road. The property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map
as 37S2W 01C, Tax Lot 802.
Applicant:
Rogue Valley Microdevices Inc./
Tail Light Properties, LLC
City of Central Point, Oregon
Findings of Fact
and
Conclusion of Law
PART 1
INTRODUCTION
It is requested that the above referenced tax lot be redesignated and rezoned to a Thoroughfare
Commercial use to allow a wider range of employment options to facilitate greater job creation in
Central Point. At the same time, it is the City's intent to clarify the location and characteristics for
commercial properties in the Land Use Element. These findings have been prepared with the
understanding that both the Comprehensive Plan (Map) and Zoning Map will be changed to become
consistent with one another.
The Comprehensive Plan Amendment involves legislative action on the City's part while the request
from the co -applicants involve a quasi-judicial map amendment, which is normally processed using
Type III application procedures. Consequently, the City is processing this plan amendment using the
broader Type IV procedures. These are set forth in Section 17.05.500 and provide the basis for decisions
upon standards and criteria in the development code and the comprehensive plan, when appropriate.
Applicable development code criteria for this Application include:
1. Statewide Planning Goals
2. Comprehensive Plan
3. State Transportation Planning Rule
4. CPMC, Chapter 17.96
Findings will be presented in four (4) parts addressing the requirements of Section 17.05.500 as follows:
1. Introduction
2. Statewide Planning Goals
3. Comprehensive Plan
4. Summary Conclusion
PART 2
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS
A finding of consistency with the applicable statewide planning goals is generally reserved for major
amendments which revisions to the Land Use Element dictate in this case (reference CPMC, Chapter
17.96.500 Approval criteria).
35
Goal 2: Land Use Planning
PART I — PLANNING
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions
related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions ...
Finding: The proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use revision and Map change constitute an
amendment to commercial land use in Central Point. They are compatible with the Commercial
Goal: To create an economically strong and balanced commercial sector of the Community that
is easily accessible, attractive, and meets the commercial needs of the local market area. The
proposed language reflects land use changes made by the City over time and identifies current
land uses and zones approved by the City and acknowledged by the state. The Oregon
Department of Land Conservation and Development was notified of this Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and has not yet commented.
Conclusion: Consistent with Statewide Planning Goal for Land Use Planning.
*The City will rely on the applicant's findings and Goal applicability for the comprehensive plan
amendment as they apply to items other than land use planning.
PART 3
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map currently designates the property in question as Tourist and
Office Professional and the proposal is to re -designate this land for Thoroughfare Commercial to match
the designation of an adjoining lot to the east. The Land Use Element (text) has not been updated to
reflect past Comprehensive Plan (Map) amendments approved by the City Council. Those changes
include Transit Oriented Development (TOD) designations in the Downtown and along the Highway 99
corridor as well as Thoroughfare Commercial designations along Biddle Road east of the interchange.
The Council made conscious decisions in 1998 and again in 2001 to redefine commercial land uses but
neglected to clarify this in the Comprehensive Plan text. The proposed revisions in Attachment "C" of
this staff report offer new language to support the City's past actions as well as its current and future
intentions. The Thoroughfare Commercial designation was created to provide for commercial and
business uses that are most appropriately located along or near major highways or thoroughfares, and
are largely dependent upon highway visibility and easy vehicular access. This is an appropriate
designation along Biddle and Table Rock Roads.
Finding: The property in question proposes a land use category that has been adopted by the
City and, given the coincident changes to Commercial Land Use language in the Comprehensive
Plan, are consistent with past City goals, policies and actions.
Conclusion: Consistent.
PART 4
STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION RULE
Section 660-012-0060(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive
plan, or a land use regulation would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility,
the local government shall put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that
36
allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g.
level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. A plan or land use regulation amendment
significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility;
b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system
plan:
(A) Allow types or levels of land uses that would result in levels of travel or access that are
inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation
facility;
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the
minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is
otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard
identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
Finding 660-012-0060(1)(a): The proposed plan amendment and zone change does not change
the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility. The proposed zone
change from C-4 to C-5 is shown to generate no additional traffic to the transportation system.
Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(a): No significant affect.
Finding 660-012-0060(1)(b): The highest and best uses in Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) anf
not shown to generate any more traffic than Tourist and Office Professional (C-4). Consequently,
the proposed amendments will not cause a change to standards implementing the City's
transportation system.
Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(b): No significant affect.
Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): The proposed plan amendment and zone change will not cause
an increase in land uses that would result in levels of travel or access that would be inconsistent
with the City's functional street classification system for existing and planned transportation
facilities.
Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): No significant affect.
Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B): There are no known operational of safety concerns as a result
of the proposed land use amendment and zone change. The proposed zone change will not
reduce the performance of any existing or planned transportation facilities below the minimum
acceptable performance standard identified in the Master Plan, or in the City's Transportation
System Plan.
Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B): No significant affect.
37
Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(C): The proposed plan amendment and zone change will not cause
the worsening of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to
perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the Master Plan or
Comprehensive Plan. Captital improvements are scheduled in the City's TSP that are anticipated
to mitigate the impacts of redevelopment in this sector of the community.
Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(C): No significant affect.
PART 5
ZONING ORDINANCE
17.10.300 Quasi-judicial amendments.
A. Applicability of Quasi -Judicial Amendments. Quasi-judicial amendments are those that involve
the application of adopted policy to a specific development application or code revision, and not the
adoption of new policy (i. e., through legislative decisions). Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments
shall follow the Type III procedure, as governed by Section 17.05.400, using standards of approval in
subsection B of this section. The approval authority shall be as follows:
1. The planning commission shall review and recommend land use district map changes that do
not involve comprehensive plan map amendments;
2. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the city council on an application
for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The city council shall decide such applications; and
3. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the city council on a land use
district change application that also involves a comprehensive plan map amendment
application. The city council shall decide both applications.
Finding 17.10.300(A): A plan amendment and zone change application has been submitted to
redesignate 4.87 acres from Tourist and Office Professional to Thoroughfare Commercial and to
rezone C-4 to C-5. The proposal will be considered by the planning commission and a
recommendation will be made to the City Council for final decision.
Conclusion 17.10.300(A): Consistent.
B. Criteria for Quasi -Judicial Amendments. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve
with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the
following criteria:
1. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals;
Finding 17.10.300(B)(1): See Part 2, Statewide Planning Goals findings and conclusions.
Conclusion 17.10.300(B)(1): Consistent
2. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan;
Finding 17.10.300(B)(2): See Part 3, Comprehensive Plan findings and conditions.
Conclusion 17.10.300(B)(2): Consistent.
38
3. The property and affected area is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and
transportation networks to support the use, or such facilities, services and transportation
networks are planned to be provided in the planning period; and
Finding 17.10.300(B)(3): Public facilities, services and transportation networks have been
established pursuant to the City's TSP and are sufficient to serve the allowable uses. The
proposal will not significantly increase the demand on public facilities over the current uses.
Conclusion 17.10.300(B)(3): Consistent.
4. The change is in the public interest with regard to neighborhood or community conditions, or
corrects a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or land use district map regarding
the property which is the subject of the application.
Finding 17.10.300(B)(4): The proposed plan amendment and zone change are consistent with
Strategic Planning goals, are in the interest of the community, are compatible with surrounding
land uses and correct inconsistencies in the Comprehensive Plan and zoning maps.
Conclusion 17.10.300(B)(4): Consistent.
17.10.600 Transportation planning rule compliance.
Section 660-012-0060(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive
plan, or a land use regulation would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility,
the local government shall put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that
allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g.
level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. A plan or land use regulation amendment
significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility;
b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system
plan:
(A) Allow types or levels of land uses that would result in levels of travel or access that are
inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation
facility;
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the
minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is
otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard
identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
Finding 17.10.600(1): See Part 4, Statewide Transportation Planning Rule findings and
conclusions.
39
Conclusion: Consistent.
Summary Conclusion: As evidenced in findings and conclusions, the proposed plan amendment and
zone change are consistent with applicable standards and criteria in the Central Point Municipal Code,
including the Statewide Planning Goals (where applicable), Comprehensive Plan, and Statewide
Transportation Planning Rule.
M
ATTACHMENT " f-- "
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 836
A RESOLUTION FORWARDING A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO THE
CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE COMPRHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND
LAND USE REDESIGNATION OF APROXIMATELY FIVE (5) ACRES SOUTH OF
BIDDLE ROAD BETWEEN HAMRICK AND TABLE ROCK ROADS FROM
TOURIST AND OFFIC PROFESSIONAL TO THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL
FILE NO. 16022
Applicants: Rogue Valley Microdevices; Tail Light Properties and the City of Central Point;
WHEREAS, the proposed Comprehensive Plan (Map) designation and text revision
constitute a legislative amendment; and
WHEREAS, Section 17.05.500 of the municipal code dictates that City Planning
Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council on an application for
a comprehensive plan amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Plan Amendment and Map Re -designation from Tourist and Office
Professional to Thoroughfare Commercial uses will clarify the City's intent for
commercial properties and allow a wider range of employment uses to facilitate
greater job creation in Central Point; and
WHEREAS, As evidenced in findings and conclusions, the proposed plan
amendment and zone change are consistent with applicable standards and criteria in
the Central Point Municipal Code, including the Statewide Planning Goals (where
applicable), the Comprehensive Plan, and Statewide Transportation Planning Rule.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning
Commission, by this Resolution No. 836, does recommend that the City Council
approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Map Re -designation from Tourist
and Office Professional to Thoroughfare Commercial. This decision is based on the
Staff Report dated December 6, 2016 attached hereto by reference and incorporated
herein.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its
passage this 6th day of December, 2016.
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this 6th day of January, 2016
Planning Commission Resolution No. 836 (12/06/2016)
41
42
City of Central Point, Oregon
140 S 3rd Street, Central Point, OR 97502
541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384
www.centralpointoregon.gov
CENTRAL
POINT
STAFF REPORT
December 6, 2016
AGENDA ITEM: File No. 16024
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AICP
Community Development Director
Consideration of a Zone (map) Change application from Tourist and Office Professional (C-4) to
Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) for a 4.87 acre parcel located at 4901 Biddle Road. The Project Site is
identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802. Applicant: Rogue Valley
Microdevices/Tail Light Properties, LLC. Agent: Jay Harland, CSA Planning.
STAFF SOURCE:
Tom Humphrey AICP, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND:
The applicant has requested a minor zone map amendment from C-4 to C-5 with the intent of
developing a new tax lot for a Corporate Headquarters and Light Fabrication Facility. As shown in
Table 1, the proposed zone change allows more permitted land uses and fewer conditional uses.
However, the nature of the expanded list of permitted uses will not have an appreciable difference on
traffic generation or impact and may even improve it (see Attachment B).
Fable 1. Pronosed Zone Chantre
Zoning District Permitted Land Uses Conditional/Not Permitted
CUP NP
Current C-4 50 10 22
Proposed C-5 69 2 11
ISSUES & NOTES:
There are 4 issues/Notes relative to this application as follows:
1. Zoning Map and Zoning Code Text Amendments, CPMC Chapter 17.10. This municipal
code section provides standards and procedures for major and minor amendments to the
Central Point zoning map. In this case the application was submitted with a Comprehensive
Plan Amendment and initiated jointly by the current and anticipated property owners (once it
is partitioned). The action is considered a `minor' amendment and is being processed using
Type III procedures. The amendment should be based on the following criteria; 1) its
consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan, 2) findings demonstrating that adequate
public services and transportation networks will serve the property and 3) compliance with
the State's Transportation Planning Rule.
2. Comprehensive Plan Compliance. Approval of the proposed zone change must be found
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map. The subject property has
a current Comprehensive Plan designation of Tourist and Office Professional but is proposed
for amendment to Thoroughfare Commercial concurrent with this zone change. If the Comp
Plan Amendment is approved, the zone change to C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial will be
consistent and compliant.
43
Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning. The subject property is
contiguous to lands zoned C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial to the east, and is compatible with
M-2, General Industrial to the south and C-4, Tourist and Office Professional to the west.
Although the proposed zone change allows for the increase of permitted land uses versus
conditional uses, the overall character will remain consistent with the surrounding
commercial uses per CPMC 17.20.
4. Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) Compliance, OAR 660-012-0060. Criteria for TPR
compliance is addressed in the traffic findings (Attachment B) demonstrating adequate public
services and transportation networks.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A recommendation to approve a minor amendment may include conditions and, in this case, staff
advises that approval of the zone change be contingent upon approval of the Comprehensive Plan
(map) amendment.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A" — Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps
Attachment `B" — Traffic Findings, S. O. Transportation Engineering, LLC.
Attachment "C" — Planning Department's Findings
Attachment "D" — Resolution No. 837
ACTION:
Open public hearing and consider the proposed amendment to the Zoning map, close public hearing and
1) recommend approval to the City Council; 2) recommend approval with revisions; or 3) deny the
application.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 837. Per the Staff Report dated December 6, 2016 and
supported by Findings of Fact.
ATTACHMENT
MISTLET0E'CT, rw
.�W_i
Medium Density,�1
Low Density
0
Tonal
a
Q
isawn■m
Ge
Q
L,
a
U
W
U
WSubject_Property
Tax Lots
Central Point Comp
Medium Density
Land Use Plan
Res
General Indusdrial -
Thoroughfare
Commercial
Light Indusdrial ®
Tourist and Office
Low Density Res.
Professional
Print Date: 3-15.2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point
GIS
Intlii
Light Indusdrial
Existing Comprehensive
Plan Map
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices & N
Tail Lite Properties LLC WE
37 -2W -01C-802 Ij
S
21 300 150 0 300 Feet
EmSubject—Property
Tax Lots
Central Point Comp Medium Density
Land Use Plan Res.
- General Indusdrial - Thoroughfare
Commercial
Light Indusdrial Tourist and Office
Low Density Res. Professional
Print Date: 3-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
Proposed Comprehensive
Plan Map
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices & N
Tail Lite Properties LLC WE
37 -2W -01C-802 s
300 150 0 300 Feet
2012 Aerial
Subject—Property
Tax Lots
Zoning Outline
300 150 0 300 Feet
Existing Zoning Map
On Aerial Photo
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC
37 -2W -01C-802
N
W+E
Im S
Print Date: 03-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
41
2012 Aerial
Subject—Property
Tax Lots
C Zoning Outline
300 150 0 300 Feet
Proposed Zoning Map
On Aerial Photo
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC N
37 -2W -01C-802
1N+E
s
Print Date: 03-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
Memorandum
To: Matt Samitore, Central Point Public Works Director
Date: 05/16/2016
Subject: C4 to C5 Zone Change Traffic Findings and Conclusions
TACHMENT
TRAMSpa-WrIOM
Mlh"PIK LK
S.O. Transportation
Engineering, LLC
112 Monterey Drive
Medford, OR 97504
Telephone 541.941 4148
Fax 541.535 6873
Kwkpl@Q.com
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC evaluated impacts for a proposed zone change from C-4 to C-
5 on Township 37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 in Central Point, Oregon. The parcel is located along the
south side of Biddle Road west of Hamrick Road adjacent to Super 8.
Existinct Site
Tax lot 802 is currently vacant and has tentative plat approval to be split into three parcels. There's a planned
veterinary center on the southeast corner (Parcel 1) that has land use approval and is currently under review for
building permits. Access to the site is provided to Biddle Road and through an internal lane to Hamrick Road that
is expected to be constructed contemporaneously with the site work for the veterinary building.
Zone Change from C-4 and C-5
I Parcell
1 '
� � F
I�
S
a1lMa v
Parcel l
i
.-. i.,.i.'�T2•i���s�,kr..�t',1`�..'it`"ate"r..�
Biddle Road
I
s+
The current C-4 zoning district is intended to provide for the development of concentrated tourist commercial and
entertainment facilities that will maximize ease of access and visibility from the Interstate 5 freeway and major
arterial streets, while the C-5 zoning district provides for commercial and business uses that are most
appropriately located along or near major highways or thoroughfares. Both zoning districts allow banks, offices,
convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores,
veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the higher traffic generating uses. The C-5 zoning
district allows light fabrication, assembly, packaging, and wholesale sales of consumer goods that are not
permitted in the C-4 zoning district. Other differences include art schools, pawnshops, gymnasiums, and
nurseries. The C-4 zoning district permits engineering services, legal services, art studios, and counselling
services, which are not permitted in the C-5 zone, As can be seen, non -permitted uses in both zones are the
lower traffic generating uses. A full list of permitted uses for each zoning district is attached.
Conclusions
Traffic generations for both C-4 and C-5 zoning districts were compared and determined to have comparable,
potential impacts to the transportation system. No change in the potential for additional traffic is estimated to
occur as a result of the proposed zone change from C-4 to C-5.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me
Respectfully,
Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE
Firm Principal
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Cc: Michael Wang, PE (ODOT)
Mike Kuntz, PE (Jackson County)
Attachments: C4 and C5 permitted uses
Memorandum Page 2
50
TWINSDOATRTI Ott
TKINZ AIM6. LLC
Memorandum
S.O. Transportation
Engineering, LLC
112 Monterey Ddve
To: Matt Samitore, Central Point Public Works Director
Medford, OR 97504
Date: 10/04/2016
Telephone aa5ai:ss 6873
Subject: C4 to C5 Zone Change Additional Traffic Findings
Kwkpt@Q,com
Additional information was requested by the City of Central Point regarding a proposed zone change
from C4 to C5 on Township 37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 in Central Point, Oregon. A
previous memorandum was prepared in May of 2016 that concluded the two zoning districts (C4 and
C5) had comparable, potential impacts to the transportation system. This memorandum explains this
in more detail and serves as an addendum to the first memorandum.
C4 and C5 Zonina Districts
The C4 and C5 zoning districts both allow development of concentrated commercial uses, but differ in
how they are located. Where C4 typically provides for maximized ease of access and visibility from
the Interstate 5 freeway and major arterial streets, C5 provides for uses most appropriately located
along or near major highways or thoroughfares. As stated in the previous memorandum, both zoning
districts allow banks, offices, convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting
goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores, veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the
higher traffic generating uses. The highest permitted traffic generator in either zone is a convenience
market, which is shown in the iTE Trip Generation to generate 52.41 trips per 1000 square feet during
the p.m. peak hour. There are other uses that are outright permitted in one zone but a conditional use
in the other. However, both zones are built out with these types of uses in a manner that balances out
potential trip generations. Overall, the highest and best uses in C5 are not shown to generate any
more traffic than C4.
Traffic Impact Analvsis ADDlicabili
The City of Central Point Public Works Standards and Specifications require a traffic impact analysis
for a land use application that involves one or more of the following actions in 320.10.03 (3)(a -g).
These include:
a) A change in zoning or plan amendment designation that generates 300 average daily trips (ADT)
more than the current zoning;
The proposed zone change from C4 to C5 is shown to generate no additional traffic to the
transportation system.
b) Any proposed development or land use action that a road authority, including the city, Jackson
County or ODOT, states may have operational or safety concerns along its facilities;
There are no known operational or safety concerns as a result of the proposed zone change.
c) An increase in site traffic volume generation by 250 average daily trips (ADT) or more, or 25 peak
hour trips;
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application.
d) An increase in peak hour volume of a particular movement to and from the State highway by 20
percent or more;
An access analysis is not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the
proposed development application. However, the site does not take access from a State highway and
51
the projected trip volumes for any movements at the 1-5 interchange would be less than 20% of the
total volume of any of those movements.
e) An increase in use of adjacent streets by vehicles exceeding twenty thousand pounds gross vehicle
weight by 10 vehicles or more per day;
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application.
f) The location of the access driveway does not meet minimum sight distance requirements, as
determined by the city engineer, or is located where vehicles entering or leaving the property are
restricted, or such vehicles queue or hesitate on the state highway, creating a safety hazard at the
discretion of the community development director; or
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed developmenl
application. No new direct access to the public street system is requested or required to serve the
development on the land subject to the zone change.
g) A change in internal traffic patterns that, at the discretion of the Public Works Director, may cause
safety problems, such as back-up onto a street or greater potential for traffic accidents.
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application. Nothing pertaining to the zone change application would be expected to allow
development that would cause changes to internal traffic patterns that would create or worsen any
safety problems on the public street system.
Transportation Planning Rule
The State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requires changes to land use plans and land use
regulations (i.e. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments) to be
consistent with the function and capacity of existing and planned transportation facilities. Oregon
Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060 subsection 1 states:
(1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use
regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation
facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this
rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use
regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive
of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on
projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP.
As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated
within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable,
ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited
to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate
the significant effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of
an existing or planned transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it
would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan;
or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise
projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive
plan.
Memorandum Addendum Page 2
52
Conclusions
The proposed zone change and comprehensive plan map amendment from C4 to C5 on Township
37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 is concluded to generate no increase in traffic to the
transportation system. The proposed plan amendment and zone change will, therefore, not
significantly affect any existing or planned transportation facility nor will it result in types or levels of
travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of any existing or planned
transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standard identified in the City's
Transportation System Plan (TSP) or Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the plan/zoning amendment
does not meet the Public Works Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Applicability requirements as set forth in
section 320.10.03 (3)(a -g) of their Standards and Specifications, and does not warrant any further
traffic analysis.
In conclusion, the application for plan and zoning amendment are found to be in compliance with the
City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the Central Point Land Development Code, and
are shown to be consistent with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). No further analysis is shown
to be required.
Respectfully,
Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE
Firm Principal
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Attachments: C4 and C5 permitted use comparisons
OAR 660-012-0060
Memorandum Addendum Page 3
53
't'0R1*0e1N1
Permitted
Use
C4
C5
Highest and Best
Uses - ITE
Banks
Yes
Yes
24.3 PM / 1000 SF
Accounting Offices
Yes
No
Real Estate Offices
Yes
Yes
Insurance Offices
Yes
Yes
Legal Services
Yes
No
Engineering Services
Yes
No
Photo and Art Studio
Yes
No
Counselling services
Yes
No
Govt Offices
Yes
No
Medical/Dental Offices
Yes
No
Convenience Market
Yes
Yes
52.41 PM / 1000 SF
Drugstore
Yes
Yes
13.87 PM / Fuel Sta.
Auto/Truck Service Station
Yes
Yes
Auto/Tire sales and repairs
Yes
Yes
Motel/Hotel
Yes
Yes
Walk-in Movie Theater
Yes
Yes
Bowling alley
Yes
Yes
Photo/Art Gallery
Yes
No
Photo Processing Station
Yes
Yes
Travel Agency
Yes
No
Barber/beauty shop
Yes
Yes
Sit-down restaurant
Yes
Yes
9.85 PM / 1000 SF
Cocktail Lounge
Yes
CU
11.34 PM / 1000 SF
Tavern
Yes
No
11.34 PM / 1000 SF
Commercial parking lot
Yes
Yes
Community Shopping Center
Yes
Yes
Supermarket
Yes
Yes
9.48 PM / 1000 SF
Department store
Yes
Yes
Sporting goods
Yes
Yes
Bookstore
Yes
Yes
Florist
Yes
Yes
Leather Goods
Ycs
No
Pet Sales
Yes
Yes
Photo supplies
Yes
Yes
Health food
Yes
Yes
Self-service Laundry
Yes
Yes
Antique shop
Yes
Yes
Delicatessen
Yes
Yes
Pastry
Yes
Yes
General Apparel
Yes
Yes
Shoes and Boots
Yes
Yes
Jewelry
Yes
Yes
Clock sales
Yes
Yes
Bakery
Yes
Yes
54
Permitted
Use
C4
CS
Highest and Best
Uses - ITE
Bicycle shop
Yes
Yes
Audio/Video i0s
Yes
Yes
. and publishing
Yes
Yes
Mobile food vendors
Yes
CU
Potentially high - varies
Liquor store
Yes
Yes
Ice/Skating Rink
CU
Yes
Dance Hall
CU
Yes
Billiard/pool Hall
CU
Yes
Miniature Golf
Cu
Yes
Business Schools
CU
Yes
Physical Fitness Center
CU
Yes
Carwash
CU
Yes
Taxicab Office
CU
Yes
Ambulance Services
CU
Yes
Drive-in Fast Food
Cu
Yes
32.65 PM / 1000 SF
Contractors office
No
Yes
Medical Clinic & Lab
No
Yes
Appliance Service
No
Yes
Locksmith
No
Yes
Art/Music/Business School
No
Yes
Upholstery Shop
No
Yes
Veterinary Clinic
Yes
Yes
Tire Sales
No
Yes
Glass/Mirror Sales
No
Yes
Large Retail Establishments
No
Yes
RV Storage
No
Yes
Light Fabrication
No
Yes
Hardware Sales
No
Yes
Monument Sales
No
Yes
Feed, seed, fuel
No
Yes
Electrical/Plumbing Supplies
No
Yes
Heating ll; Air Equipment
No
Yes
Stone/Tile Supplies
No
Yes
Nursery
No
Yes
Antique shop
No
Yes
Pawnshop
No
Yes
Public Utilities
No
Yes
Furniture Sales
No
Yes
55
(b) Affected cities and counties that do not have acknowledged plans and land use regulations as provided in
subsection (a) of this section, shall apply relevant sections of this rule to land use decisions and limited land use
decisions until land use regulations complying with this amended rule have been adopted.
(5) Cities and counties shall update their TSPs and implementing measures as necessary to comply with this division
at each periodic review subsequent to initial compliance with this division. Local governments within metropolitan
areas shall amend local transportation system plans to be consistent with an adopted regional transportation system
plan within one year of the adoption of an updated regional transportation system plan or by a date specified in the
adopted regional transportation system plan.
(6) The director may grant a whole or partial exemption from the requirements of this division to cities under 10,000
population and counties under 25,000 population, and for areas within a county within an urban growth boundary that
contains a population less than 10,000. Eligible jurisdictions may request that the director approve an exemption from
all or part of the requirements in this division. Exemptions shall be for a period determined by the director or until the
jurisdiction's next periodic review, whichever is shorter.
(a) The director's decision to approve an exemption shall be based upon the following factors:
(A) Whether the existing and committed transportation system is generally adequate to meet likely transportation
needs;
(B) Whether the new development or population growth is anticipated in the planning area over the next five years;
(C) Whether major new transportation facilities are proposed which would affect the planning areas;
(D) Whether deferral of planning requirements would conflict with accommodating state or regional transportation
needs; and
(E) Consultation with the Oregon Department of Transportation on the need for transportation planning in the area,
including measures needed to protect existing transportation facilities.
(b) The director's decision to grant an exemption under this section is appealable to the commission as provided in
OAR 660-002-0020 (Delegation of Authority Rule)
(7) Portions of TSPS and implementing measures adopted as part of comprehensive plans prior to the responsible
jurisdiction's periodic review shall be reviewed pursuant to OAR chapter 660, division 18, Post Acknowledgment
Procedures.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 183, 197.040 & 197.245
Stats. Implemented: ORS 195.025, 197.040, 197.230, 197.245, 197.610 - 197.625, 197.628 - 197.646, 197.712 &
197.717
Hist.: LCDC 1-1991, f. & cert. ef. 5-8-91; LCDC 1-1993, f. & cert. ef. 6-15-93; LCDC 4-1995, f. & cert. ef. 5-8-95;
LCDD 6-1998, f. & cert. ef. 10-30-98; LCUU 2-2000, t. & cert. ef. 2-4-UU; LCUU 3-2004, f. & cert. ef. 5-7-04; LCDD 6-
2006, f. 7-13-06, cert. ef. 7-14-06
660-012-0060
Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a
zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must
put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9)
or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map
errors in an adopted plan);
56
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions
measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions,
the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment
includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not
limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant
effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the
performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet
the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
(2) If a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure
that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility
measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the
remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this
section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rule. A local government using subsection (2)(e),
section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic
congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor
vehicles in response to this congestion.
(a) Adopting measures that demonstrate allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and
performance standards of the transportation facility.
(b) Amending the TSP or comprehensive plan to provide transportation facilities, improvements or services adequate
to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; such amendments shall include a
funding plan or mechanism consistent with section (4) or include an amendment to the transportation finance plan so
that the facility, improvement, or service will be provided by the end of the planning period.
(c) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity or performance standards of the transportation facility.
(d) Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development agreement or similar funding
method, including, but not limited to, transportation system management measures or minor transportation
improvements. Local governments shall, as part of the amendment, specify when measures or improvements
provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided.
(e) Providing improvements that would benefit modes other than the significantly affected mode, improvements to
facilities other than the significantly affected facility, or improvements at other locations, if the provider of the
significantly affected facility provides a written statement that the system -wide benefits are sufficient to balance the
significant effect, even though the improvements would not result in consistency for all performance standards.
(3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government may approve an amendment that would
significantly affect an existing transportation facility without assuring that the allowed land uses are consistent with the
function, capacity and performance standards of the facility where:
(a) In the absence of the amendment, planned transportation facilities, improvements and services as set forth in
section (4) of this rule would not be adequate to achieve consistency with the identified function, capacity or
performance standard for that facility by the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP;
(b) Development resulting from the amendment will, at a minimum, mitigate the impacts of the amendment in a
manner that avoids further degradation to the performance of the facility by the time of the development through one
or a combination of transportation improvements or measures;
57
ATTACHMENT it c "
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
File No.: 16024
Before the City of Central Point Planning Commission
Consideration of a Zone (Map) Change Application on a 4.87 acre lot located at 4901 Biddle Road.
The property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S2W 01C, Tax Lot 802.
Applicant:
Rogue Valley Microdevices Inc./
Tail Light Properties, LLC
Findings of Fact
and
Conclusion of Law
PART 1
INTRODUCTION
It is requested that the above referenced tax lot be rezoned from Tourist and Office Professional (C-4) to
Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5). The applicant has already obtained City approval to partition the
subject property into three (3) parcels.
The zone change request is a quasi-judicial map amendment, which is processed using Type III
application procedures. Type III procedures set forth in Section 17.05.400 provide the basis for
decisions upon standards and criteria in the development code and the comprehensive plan, when
appropriate.
Applicable development code criteria for this Application include:
1. Comprehensive Plan
2. State Transportation Planning Rule
3. CPMC, Chapter 17.10
PART 2
FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS
Staff has reviewed the Findings (Attachment's A through E, File No. 16022) and the Findings from Staff
Report File No. 16024 and found that they address all of the applicable development code criteria for the
proposed zone (map) amendment. The Findings provided in the Staff Reports for File No. 16022 and
File No. 16024, dated December 6, 2016 are incorporated herein.
PART 3
SUMMARY CONCLUSION
As evidenced in findings and conclusions provided in the Staff Reports (File Nos. 16022 & 16024), the
proposed zone change is consistent with applicable standards and criteria in the Central Point Municipal
Code, including the Statewide Planning Goals (where applicable), Comprehensive Plan, and Statewide
Transportation Planning Rule.
58
ATTACHMENT " 'D "
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 837
A RESOLUTION FORWARDING A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO THE
CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE REZONING OF 4901 BIDDLE ROAD FROM
TOURIST AND OFFICE PROFESSIONAL (C-4) TO THROUGHFARE
COMMERCIAL (C-5)
FILE NO. 16024
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Light Properties LLC;
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is proposed to re -designate 4901 Biddle
Road as Thoroughfare Commercial; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) zoning is an urban Thoroughfare
Commercial zoning district consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and surrounding land
uses; and
WHEREAS, adequate public services and transportation networks are available to the site;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed zone change from C-4 to C-5 has been determined to be consistent
with the State Transportation Planning Rule.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning
Commission, by this Resolution No. 837, does recommend that the City Council approve the
change of zone on 4901 Biddle Road, also identified by the Jackson County Assessor's Map
as 37S2W 01C Tax Lot 802. This decision is based on the Staff Report dated December 6,
2016 attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this
6th day of December, 2016.
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this 6th day of December, 2016.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 837 (12/06/2016)
59
m
CENTRAL
STAFF REPORT POINT
STAFF REPORT
December 6, 2016
AGENDA ITEM (File No. 16023)
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AlCP
Community Development Director
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow Rogue Valley Microdevices to operate a light
manufacturing facility which will serve as their corporate headquarters building. Rogue Valley
Microdevices proposes to operate in the Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) zoning district. The project site
is located at 4901 Biddle Rd., and is defined on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 01C, Tax
Lot 802 (Property).
Applicant/Owner: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. /Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Agent: CSA Planning, Ltd. (Jay Harland)
SOURCE
Molly Bradley, Community Planner I
BACKGROUND
Rogue Valley Microdevices ("Applicant") is a microelectronics manufacturing facility that proposes to
relocate its operations and corporate headquarters building from Medford to the Property. The proposed
building will serve as a light fabrication facility that custom designs and produces microelectronics. The
manufacturing process involves the use of chemicals and hazardous materials.
The Property is currently planned and zoned for Tourist and Office Professional (C-4) uses. Light
fabrication is not a permitted use in the C-4 district. The Property is in the process of both a land use and
zone change to Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5). Light fabrication is a permitted use in the C-5 zone per
CPMC 17.43.020(F), and subject only to Site Plan & Architectural Review (Type II Procedure).
However, because of the use of hazardous materials the Community Development Director has the
authority per CPMC 17.46.030 to require the proposed use to be processed as a conditional use. The
Conditional Use designation is necessary due to the chemical processes associated with the fabrication of
electronic wafer boards. The conditional use permit is also required to address reduction in the maximum
allowable parking, per CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3).
Project Description:
The proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices development is a 43,000 square foot manufacturing building,
including a production area and two levels of office space (Attachment "A-1"). The proposed offices are
positioned in the front of the building near Biddle Road, while the light fabrication operations are located
Page 1 of 5
61
in the rear (Attachment "A-2"). The main parking lot is located in the front of the building near Biddle
Road, while a second parking lot is located in the rear, to also be used as a loading area and for truck
circulation.
Access to the site will be from the private retail street that intersects with Biddle Road through a right -in/
right -out configuration and from another private access road to the south of the project site. The facility
will receive multiple ground deliveries daily as well as 1-2 semi -truck deliveries per week. The building
will be occupied by a maximum of 27 employees at one time, with shifts overlapping throughout the day
(Attachment `B"). There will be limited customer interface at this facility, except for regular bi-monthly
meetings.
The Property abuts C-4 property (Super 8) on the west, M-1 property (USF Reddaway) on the south,
proposed C-5 property (vacant land and a veterinary hospital) on the east and C-4 (vacant) lands to the
north (Attachment "C").
ISSUES
There are three (3) issues to address relative to this application, as described below:
1) Hazardous Materials: Rogue Valley Microdevices handles hazardous materials during their
fabrication process (electronic wafer boards). Because the use of hazardous materials could be construed
to have adverse or dangerous characteristics not normally associated with other uses allowed in the C-5
district, a potential safety concern may be posed to surrounding properties, including the Super 8 Motel
located on property immediately adjacent to the west.
Comment: In the Applicant's findings, it is noted that at their current facility in Medford,
Microdevices conducts weekly self -inspections to ensure compliance with applicable local, state
and federal health and safety requirements. Inspections are also regularly conducted by the
Medford Fire Department, Medford's Regional Water Reclamation plant, and the DEQ. Since
commencing operations in Medford, Microdevices has operated without violation of any local or
state hazardous materials regulations or health and safety requirements (Attachment "D'). The
Applicant indicates that they will continue with its current inspection process to assure the
continued compliance with local, state and federal health and safety requirements. The only
change will be compliance inspection from Fire District No. 3 instead of the Medford Fire
Department.
In accordance with procedure, this application was noticed to surrounding property owners within
100 feet of the project site to allow them an opportunity to comment. To date, no comments or
concerns have been received. Additionally, interviews with affected agencies regarding
hazardous material use have found no incidents or violations. Staff finds that the safety protocol
required by local, state, and federal law regarding the use of hazardous materials, as well as the
past compliance record of the applicant, are sufficient evidence to meet safety requirements that
protect the facility and surrounding properties.
Page 2 of 5
62
2) Parking Adjustment: Per Table 17.64.0213, the required amount of parking for a manufacturing
facility is determined based on either the number of employees per shift or the square footage of gross
floor area, whichever is greater. In this case, 86 parking spaces are required. This project proposes 46
parking spaces to serve the facility. The Applicant is requesting a reduction to the off-street parking
standards as part of the Conditional Use Permit approval, asserting that strict application of the code
would require significantly more parking spaces than are expected to be needed for the use (Attachment
«0,
CPN1C Fable 17.64.0213 j Off Street Parking Requirements AW
Manufacturing
Peak Period Demand
Required Parking Spaces
Building Area
43,000 ft z
1 space per 500ft2
86
Manufacturing I Land Use: 140
Period Demand
1 x (43,000/500) =
Period Demand
Employees
27 (largest shift)
2 spaces per 3 employees
18
(spaces)
2 x (27/3) _
43,000 ftz
Total Range:
86 spaces
Comment: Per CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3), adjustments to off-street parking requirements require
approval of a conditional use permit in accordance with any unique characteristics of the
proposed use. The Applicant proposes that 46 spaces will be sufficient for the use, maintaining
that the building will occupy a maximum of 35 people at any given time, including employees
and visitors. The Applicant provided information from the ITE manual which demonstrates that a
manufacturing use will generate 34-51 parking spaces (Attachment "F"). The 46 parking spaces
proposed are calculated based on number of employees and expected visitors. The Applicant's
proposal falls within the range generated by the ITE manual and the Central Point Municipal
Code, and is therefore considered acceptable.
ITE Parking Demand GenerationsTotal
Average Peak
to
85 Percent
Average Peak
,h
85 Percent
Manufacturing I Land Use: 140
Period Demand
Demand (spaces)
Period Demand
Demand (spaces)
(spaces)
(spaces)
Building Area
43,000 ftz
1.02 per 1000 ft2
1.18 per
44
51
1000 ft
Maximum Occupancy
35 occupants
0.97 per occupant
1.14 per
34
40
occupant
Total Range:
34 — 51 spaces
Page 3 of 5
63
3) Off -Street Loading Berths: The Applicant has indicated that the facility receives deliveries by van
multiple times per day at varying intervals, while semi -trailer truck deliveries occur once or twice per
week. Per CPMC 17.64.01 Off -Street Loading Requirements, a total of two (2) loading berths are
required based on the square footage of the facility. The Applicant proposes to construct two central
loading doors on the west side of the facility along the loading drive, as well as one berth on the south
end, which is fenced off from the parking lot. In addition, a fourth loading door is located on the east side
of the facility, to be accessed from the private retail street. This easterly door is intended for occasional
equipment deliveries. Access to these four (4) loading berths is a potential concern for traffic circulation.
Comment: Daily van deliveries will be accommodated through the one-way loading drive on the
facility's west side, so as to avoid obstructing surrounding roads or access drives. Semi -trailer
truck deliveries will be accommodated at the south loading berth, either by backing into the
loading drive or maneuvering within the south parking lot. The loading door located on the east
side of the building has the potential to obstruct vehicle and pedestrian traffic on the private retail
street when deliveries are made. As conditioned, the eastern loading berth shall be used only
during restricted hours.
FINDINGS
The Applicant has stated in their findings that all requirements outlined per the Conditional Use Permit
section 17.76.040 have been met (Attachment "D").
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The approval of this Conditional Use Permit is contingent upon the approval of the zone change of
37S 2W O1C, Tax Lot 802 from C-4 to C-5 (File No. 16024).
2. The eastern loading berth located on the retail street shall not be used for deliveries during the hours
of 7:30am — 5:30pm.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following conditions must be met:
a. Conditions as listed in the Rogue Valley Sewer Services memo, dated
November 4, 2016 (Attachment "G").
b. Conditions as listed in the letter from the Airport, dated November 4, 2016
(Attachment "H").
C. Conditions as set forth in the Fire District #3 memo, dated November 10,
2016 (Attachment "I").
d. Submittal of a Hazardous Materials List and floor plan indicating the type of
material, class, quantity, and storage as conditioned in the Building
Department memo dated November 4, 2016 (Attachment "J").
Page 4 of 5
64
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A-1"— Site Plan
Attachment "A-2" — Floor Plan detail
Attachment `B" — Memo — Employee Shifts
Attachment "C" — Vicinity Map
Attachment "D" — Applicant's Findings of Fact (Exhibit IV)
Attachment "E" — Parking Assessment — Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Attachment "F" — ITE Manual, Parking Generation, 4`h Edition
Attachment "G" — RVSS Comments
Attachment "H" — Airport Comments
Attachment "I" — Fire District #3 Comments
Attachment "J" — Building Official Comments
Attachment "K" — Resolution No. 838
ACTION
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow Rogue Valley Microdevices to operate in the
Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) zoning district: approve the CUP, approve the CUP with conditions, or
deny the CUP.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Conditional Use Permit with conditions as recommended in the Staff Report dated December
6, 2016, and contingent on the approvals of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (File No. 16025) and
the Zone Change Amendment (File No. 16024), or as otherwise amended by the Planning Commission.
Page 5 of 5
65
_ATTACHMMiENT
f
j f ly rn ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES
p V zn
-----------------
Iis MWAVA3 N I
awm ffAmy-Am
PDO@Ipp!@
41
as
'
g!ROGUE
q
VALLEY
- )
C/) cn
110�
MICRODEVICES
Ho
m
ai--I
4601 BIDDLE-TAX L(1;87
CENTRAL POINT, ORP"GbN
mac > 311
--A cn
Hi Kim,
Here is an overview of the information you requested -
Employees: 20 at main location
Shifts: 5:00 a, m. —
2:00 p.m.
6:00 a.m.
— 3:00 p.m.
7:00 a.m.
—4;00 p.m.
8:00 a.m.
— 5:00 p.m.
9:30 a.m.
— 6:30 p.m.
11:00 a.m.
— 8:00 P, M.
3;00 p.m.
— Midnight
�-, ATTACHMENT "it
2 Employees
1 Employee
6 Employees
4 Employees
3 Employees
2 Employee
2 Employees
Of the 20 employees, 13 of them spend most of their day in the fabrication/manufacturing area, but also
have desk space in the office. The remaining 7 work in the office area.
On average, half of the employees may leave the office on a daily basis for approximately 1 hour for
lunch, errands, etc. The time is dependent on the shift.
The daily deliveries are:
Ground
Weekly deliveries are:
10:00 —11:00 a.m.
2:30 p.m.
4:00 p.m.
3 Deliveries: FedEx, UPS, FedEx
2 Pick-ups; FedEx and UPS
1 Pick-up: FedEx Ground
Average of 2 semi -truck deliveries per week
Our public/customer interaction, in person, is very minimal. We have meetings at our facility on average
twice per month.
Let me know if you have any questions. I'm happy to elaborate further as needed.
Best regards,
JoAnn Martin
Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.
Hi Kim,
Laid out the probable increases by shift for Rogue V Micro, as follows:
Shifts: Ctraplg Pee
5am-2 pm
3
6 am — 3 pm
1
7am-4 pm
9
8 am —5 pm
6
9:30 am — 6:30 pm
5
11 am-8pm
3
3 pm — Midnight
3
TOTAL
Square footage:
Fabrication:
Ist Floor Office:
2nd Floor Office
Total:
CSA Planning, LTD,
Amoc;ete P/enner
30 Maximum number of people there at any one time is: 27
4497 Brownridge Terrace #101
Medford, OR 97504
Phone: 541/779-0569 Fax/I 541/779-0114
23,595 net sq ft
9,535 net sq ft
8,975 net sq ft
42,104 net sq ft
• 9
70
zo
LUC.
43
CL
��
a.
�Io�000�n�f.�Fa000a��0000
70
ATTACHMENT" "
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
IV
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following facts are established and found to be true with respect to this matter:
1. Ownership/Applicant: Tax Lot 802 is owned in fee simple by Tail Lite Properties, LLC.
Rogue Valley Microdevices is in contract to purchase Lot 3 of the subject property. Agent
CSA Planning, Ltd. is submitting this application on behalf of the property owner and
contract purchaser.
2. Location: The subject property is located on the south side of Biddle Road between
Hamrick Road and Table Rock Road. The property is identified as Tax Lot 802 in Township
37 South, Range 02 West (W.M.), Section 01C. The site address is 4901 Biddle Road,
Central Point, OR.
3. Parcel Size: Tax Lot 802 currently has 4.87 acres. See, Exhibit 4.
4. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation / Zoning: Designated Tourist and Office
Professional / Zoned C-4 Tourist and Office Professional. See, Exhibits 5 and 7.
5. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Designation / Zoning: Designation proposed to be
amended to Thoroughfare Commercial and to change the zone to C-5. See, Exhibits 6 and 8.
6. Existing Frontage and Access: The subject property has frontage along its northern
boundary on Biddle Road. Biddle Road is classified in the TSP as an arterial. Tax Lot 802
also has access easements on the access drives that run south from Biddle Road along Tax
Lot 803 and along the southern boundaries of Tax Lots 801, 802 and 803 and intersecting
with Hamrick Road. These private commercial accesses were reviewed and approved by
Central Point at the time of land division that created the parent parcel. A private north -
south Retail Street has been approved to intersect with Biddle Road approximately mid -block
between existing accesses. The Retail Street will have right-in/right-out only access with a
median in Biddle Road and is currently under constuction.
7. Lot Legality: Tax Lot 802 was created through two partitions. Tax Lot 800 was divided
through partition P-03-2004 into three parcels in 2004, and in 2005 the resulting Parcel 2 was
subdivided into three lots, of which Tax Lot 802 was Lot L In 2007 a lot line adjustment
was made to the border between Tax Lots 802 and 803 creating its current configuration. In
April of 2016, the City of Central Point approved a tentative partition plat to divide Tax Lot
802 into three separate parcels. The proposed conditional use permit and site plan review are
directed at Parcel 3 of the approved tentative land division; it is possible, if not probable, that
the final plat will be recorded prior to completion of the subject land use review.
8. Previous Planning Permits:
File No. 16004 - Site Plan and Architectural Review which approved a veterinary clinic on
Parcel 1 of the land division and File No. 16005- Tentative Partition were approved April 14,
2016.
9. Existing Development: The property is currently vacant but construction of the Retail Street
and the veterinary clinic has begun.
71
Page 7
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
10. Land Uses on Abutting Properties and Surrounding Area:
Overview of arca: The stretch of Biddle Road/East Pine Street ("BR/EPS") that is east of the
Interstate -5 in Central Point is an employment area with a mix of commercial uses right
along BR/EPS on the south side with some industrial uses further to the south. Except for a
small portion of a larger residential area near Meadowbrook Drive and Orchard View
Avenue, the north side of BR/EPS is primarily undeveloped employment designated
property; further to the north is the Jackson County Expo (fairgrounds), the Central Point
Fast residential area, and some legacy County development patterns. There are a mix of
developed and undeveloped properties between the interstate and Table Rock Road.
East: To the east of the subject property is vacant land owned by Les Schwab. Further
to the east is additional vacant employment land that is marketed for sale. This
land has a Comprehensive Plan Map of Thoroughfare Commercial and is zoned
C-5
North: Across Biddle Road is the Dulany property. This property has a single family
dwelling on it and is under developed in relation to its plan designation. The
property is planned Tourist and Professional Office and is zoned C-4. The land to
the northeast is planned and zoned for residential uses and has been developed
with single-family dwellings. Land to the northwest is a large vacant 21 acre site
planned Tourist and Office Professional and zoned C-4.
South: South of the subject property across the private commercial access drive is the
USF Reddaway warehouse logistics facility. This facility is planned General
Industrial and zoned M-2.
West: Immediately to the west is the Super 8 Motel. This site is planned Tourist and
Office Professional and is zoned C-4. Further to the west is some vacant
commercial land across Hamrick Road and a road maintenance yard further to the
southwest.
11. Topography: The subject property is essentially level, sloping very gently to the north.
12. Water Facilities and Services: Underground water utilities exist at the west property line
and along the utility and access easement along the southern portion of the property. These
water facilities are available for connection.
13. Sanitary Sewer Facilities and Services: Underground sanitary sewer utilities exists in the
utility easements along the south portion of the property and are available for connection.
14. Power and Natural Gas: Underground power is available from Pacific Power and
underground gas is available from Avista Utilities and the same exist in the utility easements
along the south portion of the property and are available for connection.
15. Fire and Police Protection: The subject properties are located within and are served by Fire
District No. 3. Police service is provided by the City of Central Point Police Department.
16. Wetlands, Streams and floodplain: The subject property does not contain any jurisdictional
wetlands per Jackson County GIS Services. The subject property does not contain any
streams or floodplains per Jackson County GIS Services.
17. Storm Drainage Facilities and Services: Underground storm drainage lines are located in
Biddle Road and in the private access easement and utility area on the south portion of the
property, These storm drain lines are available for connection, The approval of the prior
Page 8
72
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
land division necessitated construction of a stormwater detention facility on Lot 2 of the
partition which is planned to handle a significant portion of the Rogue Valley Microdevices'
storm drainage needs, see Exhibit 13, Sheet C- 1.
18. Transportation and Access:
A. Access and Circulation: Access to the site is via a private retail street that is under
construction and was approved under Planning File No. 16005. The retail street
intersects with Biddle Road and is a right -in -right -out intersection allowing in -movement
from the west and out -movement to the east onto Biddle Road. A concrete median in
Biddle Road will be constructed in conjunction with the new retail street. Access coming
from the east will be from a left turn onto the private street connection opposite
Meadowbrook and then right along the private access drive to the south and then a right
onto the private retail street. Access out of the site to the west will involve a right turn
onto the private retail street and then out the private access drive along the south property
line to a right turn on Hamrick then to the signal where a left can be made onto East Pine
Street.
The office driveway is located on the private retail street. It is somewhat close to the
intersection with Biddle Road but there is adequate room for at least two stacked vehicles
and it is a right into the site so no queuing at this location is expected. The other access
onto the site is via two large driveways to the south access drive; the wide driveways are
needed to get semi -trucks into the back parking lot area and then out onto the private
access drive. These south driveways will be truck vehicle access points; smaller trucks
that use the west service drive will exit via the front office parking lot access point.
B. Transportation Impacts from Proposed Development: The Applicant's traffic
engineer also prepared a traffic impacts analysis that analyzes the proposed Rogue Valley
Microdevices project, see Exhibit 15. That analysis was an update to the Southern
Oregon Veterinary Specialty Center analysis done for that project which is now under
construction. In the prior analysis, Parcel 3 was assumed to be a future site for a 25,000
square foot specialty retail center, along with the veterinary clinic and an assumed sit
down restaurant on the remaining Parcel 2. The updated analysis continues to assume the
sit down restaurant on Parcel 2 and assumes the veterinary clinic use on Parcel 1 but
substitutes the Rogue Valley Microdevices use for Parcel 3. This results in a reduced trip
generation of the entire site of 53 P.M. peak hour trips.
The results of the analysis show that the transportation system can accommodate the
proposed use in conformance with all applicable performance standards.
19. Proposed Development Project:
The proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices corporate headquarters and light fabrication
facility has the following features:
A. Design Scheme: The approach to the building is to create a modern and attractive high-
tech light manufacturing building. The building is proposed to contain a 10,000 square
foot clean room within a 24,000 square foot production area and the building will have
approximately 19,000 square feet of accessory office space on two levels. Being a high-
tech facility, the interior is a purpose built design that reflects workflow needs and the
demands of the clean room.
73
Page 9
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
The nature of the interior layout dictates the location of certain outdoor connections in
terms of entrance location, delivery doors and access to the accessory office uses.
Overall, the exterior is a modern, but relatively simple flat -roofed commercial building
with several attractive architectural elements on the main fagade and attractive materials
on all elevations. See, Exhibit 13.
B. Vehicle Parking and Loading: The project proposes 46 parking spaces. The
application is requesting an adjustment to the off-street parking standards as part of the
Conditional Use Permit approval (pursuant to special conditions of approval that may be
imposed under 17.76.040(E)(3)) because a strict application of the code would require
significantly more parking than is expected to be needed by the use. There is a wide
disparity between the two calculation methods for the parking requirements. The
employee calculation method for industrial uses yields a need for approximately 18
spaces. The gross floor area method would require 84 spaces, one for every 500 square
feet of gross floor area, which is difference of over 60 parking spaces. The proposed 46
spaces is between the two need calculation methods and is projected to be adequate for
the use. It is expected that this amount of parking will be adequate to allow for nearly
doubling of the size of the company within the new space, which is the largest it can be
within the new facility. A parking demand analysis has been prepared by Southern
Oregon Transportation Engineering for this submittal and is located in Exhibit 16.
Industrial uses of 37,501 square feet to 50,000 square feet are required to have four
loading berths; the actual fabrication area is 24,000 square feet which would require four
berths. The site plan and building elevations depict four overhead loading doors for the
facility. Two overhead doors are located on the west elevation along the service drive.
These will be accessed by forklift for semis from the main rear parking lot and by smaller
delivery vehicles such as FedEx and UPS. This entire circulation area on the west side of
the building could be considered a series of loading berths, in which case the site has the
equivalent of 8 loading berths just on this side. One overhead door loading location on
the east elevation, trucks could use this for delivery from the private retail street although
this would be expected to be a rare occurrence; primarily this would be accessed by
forklift on the occasion when equipment needed to loaded on the east side of the clean
room. The fourth overhead door is shown on the south elevation and this berth will
generally be used by a forklift off-loading from a semi -trailer truck parked in the rear lot.
C. Bike Parking: The code requires four bike parking spaces. The covered bike parking
spaces will be under a canopy area located at the outdoor break area.
D. Landscaping: This high-tech light manufacturing facility is proposed to be fully
landscaped at the time of development, see Exhibit 13, Sheet L-1, The proposed
landscaping is extensive for an industrial use and is proposed in a manner that will allow
it to blend well with commercial uses in the area. The 10 -foot sidewalk with tree wells
on the retail street will create an attractive streetscape for this private street. The planting
scheme includes a number of mass plantings that will create an attractive landscape
throughout the year.
20. Conditional Use Permit Findings: Even though the proposed use could properly be
approved as a permitted use under Use F — Light Fabrication. The planning staff has the
authority to refer uses to the Planning Commission as a Conditional Use Permit. The Pre -
Application indicated the Staff s intent to refer the application to the Planning Commission
Page 10
74
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
for Conditional Use Permit approval. The City of Central Point has conditional use permit
criteria that require specific findings. Applicant's agent provides the below testimony as
evidence to address such required findings and this testimony may be relied upon as
substantial evidence; CSA Planning are experts in Oregon Land Use Planning and have
experience as a professional planning firm for over 35 years.
A. Lot Size and Configuration: A site plan has been submitted concurrent with the
proposed use. The proposed design can be found to be in compliance with applicable
sections of the code and the site plan shows the use can be accommodated on the site.
The only aspects of the size of the lot and proposed development are relatively minor
issues relating to parking supply and the storm drainage, A portion of the storm drainage
detention for the building is being placed in the swale on the northeast lot; this swale was
designed to accommodate drainage from the Rogue Valley Microdevices building in
accordance with private agreements between the parties. The other minor issue is
parking supply. The parking supply issue is largely a function of the code's methods for
calculating parking demand. The two methods vary widely, but the code requires the
"higher" method to be used; applicant has requested the City approve an adjustment to
the off-street parking requirements based upon the unique characteristics of the proposed
use pursuant to CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3). With approval of this parking supply
adjustment, the proposed development will satisfy all applicable City development
requirements on the subject lot.
B. Traffic and Access: See transportation and access findings and related evidence
elsewhere in the application submittal.
C. Effects on Abutting Property: Analysis of abutting properties are analyzed by
direction:
i. North: Lands to the north are across Biddle Road, which is a major arterial
roadway. The north building elevation is where the accessory office uses are
located and the design and appearance of this portion of the buildings is similar to
two-story office buildings permitted in the zone and serves to further buffer uses to
the north. Given the intensity of the Biddle Road use and the low -intensity office
use of the northern third of the building, no adverse effects on properties to the
north are expected. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting will be similar on
the north elevation to uses permitted in the zone and effect on lands to the north
will not be adverse.
ii. Northeast: Land to the northeast is a vacant lot that will be created by recording
the final plat for Planning File No. 16005. The resulting lot will be across the
private retail street from Rogue Valley Microdevices. Also, there will be a
bioswale adjacent to the retail street that will further separate the uses as will the
large landscape area on the east side of the building. The northern two-thirds of
this lot will be adjacent to the office use of the building. The bioswale is required
to be a minimum length which moves the access to the vacant lot south in a location
where the driveways will be separated. Even though the driveways will be offset
they will be offset in the direction that still allows for smooth traffic flow because
the left -outs of each parking lot will not conflict with one another. The access
separation will be adequate for all movements to see one another in an appropriate
manner. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting will be similar when viewed
Page 11
75
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
from the northeast and compared to uses permitted in the zone and effect on the
parcel to the northeast will not be adverse.
iii. Southeast: Land to the southeast is under construction for a veterinary clinic. The
owner of the veterinary clinic is the owner of the subject development property.
The veterinary clinic's front entrance will face the east elevation where there are
high windows throughout and a single roll -up door; that particular roll -up door is
expected to be used on a limited basis but is necessary to provide forklift access to
the outside of the building on that side to the clean -room. There will be
approximately 115 feet of separation from the east wall to the veterinary clinic
entrance. The veterinary clinic provides emergency 24-hour animal care and the
lighting and development of the Rogue Valley Microdevices building is expected to
enhance lighting and safety in the area during night operations. The design of the
building includes a full height exterior wall on the back of the building to screen the
outdoor equipment area at the back of the building. Because Tail Lite LLC (a
limited liability company owned by the owners of Southem Oregon Veterinary
Specialty Center) is the seller of the property to Rogue Valley Microdevices, they
have coordinated the designs of their respective buildings to assure compatibility
between the respective uses and designs. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting
will be similar when viewed from the southeast and compared to uses permitted in
the zone and effect on the parcel to the southeast will not be adverse.
iv. South: Land to the south is a private access road and further to the south is the
USF Reddaway trucking facility. This is a warehousing, trucking and freight
handling facility. A 6 foot high block fence with landscaping runs the entire length
of the parcel's southern boundary. The Rogue Valley Microdevices project is
designed so that the outdoor equipment and primary loading areas face this
industrial trucking use to the south. Industrial trucking uses are not aesthetically
sensitive uses and are noisy themselves with a considerable area devoted to outdoor
storage. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting will be similar to other
commercial outdoor storage and loading areas when viewed from the south and are
similar and typical of industrial uses to the south.
V. West: Land to the west is occupied by the Super 8 Motel. This is a 3 -story hotel
with internal access halls to the individual room. Each room appears to have its
own Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner unit (PTAC) below windows on its east
elevation. The proposed design includes a full height wall extension in the back of
the building to shield noise sources from the hotel and to visually screen this
equipment, All other noise producing equipment is roof mounted behind parapet
walls on the roof and this HVAC equipment is similar from a noise and visual
perspective to other HVAC equipment that is typical of other commercial and light
manufacturing buildings in the area. The proposed building is 32 feet in height
which is tall enough to limit the number of rooms looking down on a roof structure
to only the top floor and even that floor will primarily be looking across and not
down on the roof structure. Virtually all of the second and third stories would look
down on a roof structure to the east if the site were developed with a single -story
retail use. There is considerable separation between the two buildings,
approximately 100 feet. The project will be adding landscaping along the west
property line that will serve to screen and separate the two uses. The proposed
Mi
Page 12
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
service drive aisle is expected to be used infrequently and almost exclusively during
the day which should minimize the potential for conflicts with patrons at the Super
8. Lighting on the west elevation will consist of shielded sconce lighting aimed
downward that will serve to create a safe space without any direct lighting impacts
to the Super 8 motel. The Rogue Valley Microdevices project design has
thoughtfully considered the abutting Super 8 motel use and has been designed in a
manner that will minimize potential adverse impacts to a level that is equal or less
than what would otherwise be expected from development of uses outright
permitted in the C-5 zone (or the C-4 zone for that matter if the site were not re-
designated).
D. Compliance with Local, State and Federal Health and Safety Regulations: Rogue
Valley Microdevices takes appropriate precautions to comply with applicable health and
safety requirements. DEQ conducts periodic unannounced inspections for regulation
compliance. In these inspections, no major corrections have been required. All gaseous
wastes are vented through a scrubber at their current site to remove particulate emissions
according to industry best practices design. All gas process inputs are within an enclosed
system and the storage tanks will be located within a storage cabinet that also vents to the
scrubber in the event of any leak. The design of the building is such that a closed
catchment system exists in the floor so that any liquid spill drains to the catchment
system where it can be containerized and picked up for off-site disposal. From a sewage
standpoint, Medford's Regional Wastewater Reclamation plant has an inspector on staff
and this person routinely conducts inspections to evaluate the quantity and type of
effluent released into the sanitary sewer to assure it is in compliance with applicable
discharge requirements. Rogue Valley Microdevices self -reports to DEQ annually and
transmits a hazardous waste reduction plan that identifies ways for operation to reduce
the use of hazardous waste for each unit of production.
Rogue Valley Microdevices has internal controls in place that involve weekly self -
inspections for items such as labelling, dates, seal connections, container conditions, etc.
From the standpoint of handling materials from the delivery trucks to the facility, this has
been taken into account with the design of the building with the external circulation and
roll -up doors to allow for direct forklift routes from delivery trucks to storage locations.
Roll -up door heights are specifically designed to assure adequate clearance when moving
materials. All materials are palletized and shipped in containers that are designed for the
particular material being handled. Rogue Valley Microdevices has an employee, Dan
Swanson, who is certified to provide forklift training so that all operators are properly
trained and he is also available in-house for ongoing supervision.
With respect to safety, the Medford Fire Department regularly conducts inspections at the
site. None of these Fire Department inspections have ever resulted in significant
corrections except in an instance where a new system was installed in accordance with
department directions and a later inspection determined that direction was incorrect. In
this circumstance, Rogue Valley Microdevices promptly implemented the correction at
their sole expense.
77
Page 13
ATTACHMENT " "
DUTwim OpioN TPwmm9-RT ITIDN �NGIN���tlNG, LLC
112 Monterey Drive -Medford, Or. 97504— Phone (541) 608-9923— Email: Kwkpl@Q.com
September 9, 2016
Jessica Gomez, Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.
943 Automation Way, Suite F
Medford, Oregon 97504
RE: Parking Demand for Rogue Valley Microdevices Headquarters
Dear Jessica,
Upon your request, Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC evaluated the parking demand
for the proposed Microdevices building located within the Hamrick Business Park southeast of Hamrick
Road and Biddle Road in Central Point, Oregon. Information from the City of Central Point,
Microdevices, and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, 4h edition
handbook was compared to determine the minimum number of parking spaces to meet the demand of
Microdevice's manufacturing use. The land use considered in the City of Central Point and ITE
requirements were 140 — Manufacturing.
Parking Requirements
City of Central Point need calculation methods:
Minimum number of required parking spaces for manufacturing land use in Table 17.64.02B:
Manufacturing - 1 space per 500 square feet = 1 x (42,100/500) = 84 spaces
Or 2 space per 3 employees (largest shift) = 2 x (27/3) = 18 spaces
Total range of spaces based on size and number of employees =18-84 spaces
Microdevices parking assessment:
Largest shift — 27 employees potentially overlapping between 5:00 am — Midnight
Deliveries estimated at 3 potentially overlapping during the day from Fed Ex and UPS
Normal trips from outside public is zero, but bi-monthly meetings are estimated to bring parking
demand up to 35 spaces with regular employees plus visitors.
Total estimated potential occupancy at one time = 35 spaces
ITE parking demand:
Weekday Peak Period
Average Demand = Observed peak period demand expressed as a rate
85"' % Demand = The point at which 85 percent of the values fall at or below
hK
Table I —ITE Parking Demand Generations
Note: SF=Square Feet
Parking Assessment
The information published by the ITE provides a guide to planners and designers regarding parking
demand. Average rates, 85"' percentile demands, and other measures are provided to help determine the
most reliable parking demand when local data is not available. In this case, local data is provided and
supports a parking demand within the range provided by the ITE. Rogue Valley Microdevice's local
data shows a potential need of 35 spaces when their facility is maximized.
The goal with parking is to strike a balance between an oversupply of parking and an undersupply of
parking. Providing enough parking for a maximized situation ensures that drivers will seldom be
unsuccessful in finding a parking space, but it also creates waste when a facility isn't operating at
maximum. As more parking is provided, more cars take advantage of it and fewer people use public
transportation. As the number of cars increase, 'so does road congestion. In response, local
governments then pay for increased wear and tear on the roads.
Failing to address the oversupply of parking creates many of the same problems that minimum parking
requirements were supposed to solve (e.g. sprawl, poor economic environment, loss of investment). A
balance is struck when there are enough parking spaces to accommodate recurrent peak -parking
demand, but additional spaces do not undercut current transit ridership, nor a city's financial ability to
meet other public needs and obligations.
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC I Microdevices Parking Demand I Sept. 9, 2016 1 2
79
Averagem
Average
851h %
Land Use Unit
size Peak Period
85 u /o
Peak Period
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
(spaces)
(spaces)
Total
Total
140 - Manufacturing 1,000 SF
42.1 1.02
1.18
43
50
140 - Manufacturing Employees
30 0.97
1.14
29
34
Total Range (spaces)
29-50
Note: SF=Square Feet
Parking Assessment
The information published by the ITE provides a guide to planners and designers regarding parking
demand. Average rates, 85"' percentile demands, and other measures are provided to help determine the
most reliable parking demand when local data is not available. In this case, local data is provided and
supports a parking demand within the range provided by the ITE. Rogue Valley Microdevice's local
data shows a potential need of 35 spaces when their facility is maximized.
The goal with parking is to strike a balance between an oversupply of parking and an undersupply of
parking. Providing enough parking for a maximized situation ensures that drivers will seldom be
unsuccessful in finding a parking space, but it also creates waste when a facility isn't operating at
maximum. As more parking is provided, more cars take advantage of it and fewer people use public
transportation. As the number of cars increase, 'so does road congestion. In response, local
governments then pay for increased wear and tear on the roads.
Failing to address the oversupply of parking creates many of the same problems that minimum parking
requirements were supposed to solve (e.g. sprawl, poor economic environment, loss of investment). A
balance is struck when there are enough parking spaces to accommodate recurrent peak -parking
demand, but additional spaces do not undercut current transit ridership, nor a city's financial ability to
meet other public needs and obligations.
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC I Microdevices Parking Demand I Sept. 9, 2016 1 2
79
Conclusion
The average parking demand in the ITE shows the need for 44 spaces for proposed development. The
85" percentile parking demand shows 50 spaces. Local data for Rogue Valley Microdevices shows a
potential need of 35 spaces when their facility is maximized. All of these parking demands are similar.
In contrast, the City's parking requirement of 84 spaces would likely serve more than the maximum
need of the proposed facility which would result in an excess of parking spaces the majority of time.
The proposed site plan for Rogue Valley Microdevices proposes 46 spaces, which provides 31% more
than what local data shows is necessary when maximized. It is our conclusion that the proposed number
of spaces (46) are adequate to meet the demand of the proposed development without creating an excess
number of under-utilized spaces.
Sincerely,
12,_\,U
Pt --
Kimberly Par ucci PE, PTOE
SiIUwtm Nizom TuliSpil. NTION
Qw-upiu, LK
Attachments: City of Central Point Municipal Code
Microdevices Local Data
ITE Parking Generation data sheets
C���G I NE���y
0Pi;
OREGON
��LY Pf+Rq�
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC I Microdevices Parking Demand I Sept. 9, 2016 1 3
80
Land Use: 140
Manufacturing
Description
�. ATTACHMENT
Manufacturing facilities are areas where the primary activity is the conversion of raw materials or parts
into finished products. Size and type of activity may vary substantially from one facility to another. In
addition to the actual production of goods, manufacturing facilities generally also have office, warehouse,
research and associated functions. General light industrial (Land Use 110) and industrial park (Land Use
130) are related uses.
Database Description
V Average parking supply ratios: 1.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet (sq. ft.) gross floor area (GFA) (three
study sites) and 13 spaces per employee (three study sites),
a Average site employment density: 1,0 employee per 1,000 sq, ft. GFA (three study sites),
Parking demand counts were only submitted between 10:00 and 11:00 a,m, and between 2:00 and
3:00 p,m,
Stiudy Sites/Years
Bellevue, WA (1991); Kent, WA (1991)
A
Institute of Transportation r_`nginoers Parking Generation, 4th Edition
(3r]
Land Use: 140
Manufacturing
Average Peak Period Parking ®errand vs. 1,000 sq. ff. GFA
On a: Weekday
Statistic _ Peak E'eriod Demand
Peak Period _ _ _ 2,00-3:00 D. m
Nurrtber of Study Sites _ 3
A_voracfe Size o_f Stuffs
165 000 Su- ft.
Avera( a Peak Period Parkin l]amand 1.02 vehiclesper 1,O0
Stand�ird deviation 0Z
Uoefficient of Variation 23%
"u" Q 0.82-1.27 vehick
85th Percentile 1,18 VON clas
33rd Percentile _��� 0.92 vehicles
Weekday Peak Period
Parking Demand
250
200
150
o 100
50
&l. Q - �....._._ -�---
0 50 100 150
x 1,000 Sq, ff. GFA
o Actual Data Points
In`�tl'LAO Of 11'ansportation Imnginnnr,
[37]
ft.
ft.
Parking Cinnoeation, 4th Edition
Land Use: 140
Manufacturing
Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Employees
On a: Weekday
statistic
Peak Period
Number of 5tt�dY 9ltes
A ache Size of Study
ALel"ca e Peak Period I
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation
Range
T5th Percentile
250
w I
200 -
150
Ze 100
L-
M M
(� 50 ..._
II
0
0
Peak Period Demand
2:00-,3:00p m,
_ 3
160 em to ees
0.97 vehicles oar emnlnv
0,24
24%
vehicles
Weekday Freak Period
Parking Demand
1 , 1.
50 100 150
X = Employees
a Actual Data Points
1381
w
0
200 250
I'MMITI Generation, 4th Edition
November 4, 2016
ATTACHMENT " 11
ROGUE VALLEY SEWER SERVICES
Location: 138 West Vilas Road, Central Point, OR - Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3130, Central Point, OR 7502-0005
Tel. (541) 664-6300, Fax (541) 664-7171 www.RVSS.us
Molly Bradley
City of Central Point Planning Department
155 South Second Street
Central Point, Oregon 97502
Re: File 16023 -CUP, Rogue Valley Microdevices — Tax Lot 802, Map 372W01C
Sewer service to the proposed development can be had by making a service connection to the
existing 8 inch sewer main which crosses the southerly portion of the subject property. The permit
for this connection will be issued by RVSS upon payment of related development fees.
The project is within the Phase 2 stormwater quality area and must comply with stormwater quality
requirements outlined in the Regional Stormwater Design Manual.
The proposed development appears to disturb more than 1 acre of land so will require an NPDES
1200 -CN permit prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities.
Rogue Valley Sewer Services requests that approval of this development be subject to the following
conditions:
Prior to the start of construction:
1. Applicant must obtain a sewer permit from RVSS for the new connections. Sewer permits
will be issued upon payment of related development fees.
2. Applicant must obtain an NPDES 1200 -CN erosion and sediment control permit from
RVSS.
3. Applicant must have all erosion and sediment control measures in place prior to any ground -
disturbing activities.
4. Applicant must submit a stormwater management plan demonstrating compliance with the
regional Stormwater Design Manual for review and approval by RVSS.
During Construction
1. Applicant must sequence construction so that the permanent stormwater quality features are
installed first and will be operational when stormwater enters them.
2. Applicant must fence off and protect stormwater quality features from equipment traffic.
3. Applicant must comply with conditions of 1200 -CN and sewer connection permits.
K:\DATA\AGENCIES\CENTPT\PLANNG\CUP\2016\16023—ROGUE MICRODEVICES.DOC
E- "
Prior to final acceptance of project:
1. Applicant must have new sewer laterals inspected and approved by RVSS.
2. Applicant must have all stormwater quality facilities, including vegetation when applicable,
inspected and approved by RVSS.
3. Applicant must record an operations and maintenance agreement for all new stormwater
quality features.
At the conclusion of construction RVSS will issue a final acceptance letter indicating that all sanitary
sewer and stormwater requirements have been met.
Feel free to call me if you have any questions.
r. -'a Grp_
Carl Tappert, PE
Manager
K:\DATA\AGENCIES\CENTPT\PLANNG\CUP\2016\16023-ROGUE MICRODEVICES.DOC
W
ATTACHMENT "_L-"
Molly Bradley
From: Marcy Black <BlackMA@jacksoncounty.org>
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:07 PM
To: Molly Bradley
Subject: RE: Action Needed: Agency Comments on Land Use Application
The Airport is requesting a Noise Easement be required as part of the process.
Based on the location of this project, the proposed structure is in proximity to a navigation facility and may impact the
assurance of navigation signal reception. The FAA, in accordance with 77.9, requests that they file a 7460-1— Notice of
Proposed Construction or Alteration.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Marcy Black
Deputy Director -Administration
From: Molly Bradley [mailto:Molly.Bradley@centralpointoregon.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:26 AM
To: Aaron Gratias <Aaron.Gratias@pacificorp.com>; Bobbie Pomeroy <Bobbie.Pomeroy@centralpointoregon.gov>; Carl
Tappert <ctappert@rvss.us>; Chad Pliler <Chad.Pliler@ECSO911.com>; David McFadden
<David.McFadden @avistacorp.com>; Derek Zwagerman <Derek.Zwagerman@centralpointoregon.gov>; Jason Elsy
<Jason@hajc.net>; Jeff Keyser <jeff.keyser@pacificorp.com>; Jeff Wedman <jeff.wedman@centurylink.com>; Marcy
Black <BlackMA@jacksoncounty.org>; Mark Kimmelshue <mark.kimmelshue@centurylink.com>; Mark Northrop
<MarkN@jcfd3.com>; Matt Samitore <Matt.Samitore@centralpointoregon.gov>; Mike Ono
<Mike.Ono@centralpointoregon.gov>; Rogue River Valley Irrigation District <rrvid@rrvid.org>; SURVEYOR
<Surveyor@jacksoncounty.org>; Stephanie Holtey <Stephanie.Holtey@centraIpoi ntoregon.gov>
Subject: Action Needed: Agency Comments on Land Use Application
Good Morning,
The City is considering a Conditional Use Permit request from Rogue Valley Microdevices to operate a light
manufacturing facility in the Tourist and Office -Professional (C-4) zoning district. The Conditional Use designation is
necessary due to some of the chemical processes associated with the fabrication of small electronic wafer boards inside
the facility, and for requesting adjustments to the required amount of parking. The project site is located at 4901 Biddle
Road, which is on the south side of Biddle Road between Hamrick and Table Rock Road, immediately east of the Super 8
Motel. The property is identified as 37S 2W 01C Tax Lot 802.
The site plan and specific details regarding the project are available on our website:
http://www.ce ntra 1poi nto regon.gov/cd/pro iect/rogue-va I ley -m icrod evices-co nd ition a I -use -permit
If you have any questions or would like additional information, please let me know.
Thank you,
Molly Bradley
Community Planner I
City of Central Point
140 South 3`d Street
�i
O
U
10
u
U
a
U
N
U
N
O
cU
G
A
UJ
N
7
w
0
z
M
N
O
LU
cc
ATTACHMENT
CU O V)i
W a1
4-1 M 4-J
M O
M N L
4-1
Q
� •� V1
N (Ij (2)
L d
aj Lf)
i� o c
*' ,n
� c v
O O +�
U — 4-J
c Q)
O Vf i
Vf aJ O
Y
U aJ
i1 C
U LL Vf
O aA 4
U �-
�
— O
co �
� � O
f0
i N
a -J M
L
0 4O m
= >- -0
L Q
O Q
: C
L M
Q d
U +J a-1
� � O
O -a
U a1
bo
f0
y/ CCM
� U G
0 M N
*J u co
cv
� � L
a)
> cr fC
C �
Q
'N
c,
cu
to
a
0
0 u X
Vw
7j°�o�
C) C:) 0
v
cis
t'O�I v
0000 0000
Q'
V
Ob
�i
O
U
10
u
U
a
U
N
U
N
O
cU
G
A
UJ
N
7
w
0
z
M
N
O
LU
cc
ATTACHMENT
CU O V)i
W a1
4-1 M 4-J
M O
M N L
4-1
Q
� •� V1
N (Ij (2)
L d
aj Lf)
i� o c
*' ,n
� c v
O O +�
U — 4-J
c Q)
O Vf i
Vf aJ O
Y
U aJ
i1 C
U LL Vf
O aA 4
U �-
�
— O
co �
� � O
f0
i N
a -J M
L
0 4O m
= >- -0
L Q
O Q
: C
L M
Q d
U +J a-1
� � O
O -a
U a1
bo
f0
y/ CCM
� U G
0 M N
*J u co
cv
� � L
a)
> cr fC
C �
Q
'N
c,
cu
to
a
City of Central Point, Oregon
140 S Third Street, Central Point, OR 97502
541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384
www.central poi ntoregon.gov
November 4, 2016
Molly Bradley
Community Planner I
City of Central Point
Ak
CENTRAL
POINT
RE: 16023/ Rogue Valley Microdevices CUP
ATTACHMENT
Building Department
Derek Zwagerman, P.E., Building Oficial
Prior to issuance of any building permits, a hazardous material list and floor plan indicating the type
of material, class, quantity, and storage location must be provided.
All other building code and permitting items will be analyzed when construction documents have
been submitted for review.
Derek Zwagerman, P.E.
Building Official
ATTACHMENT it "
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 838
A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices/Tail Lite Properties, LLC;
Agent: CSA Planning, Ltd.
(37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802)
File No. 16023
WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a light
manufacturing facility which will also serve as their corporate headquarters building in the
Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) zoning district (Application), identified on the Jackson County
Assessor's map as 37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802 (Property); and
WHEREAS, the Property is currently planned and zoned for Tourist and Office Professional (C-4)
uses, and light fabrication is not a permitted use in the C-4 zone; and
WHEREAS, the Property is in the process of both a land use and zone change to Thoroughfare
Commercial (C-5), where light fabrication is a permitted use; and
WHEREAS, the proposed use is designated a Conditional Use in the C-5 zone because the light
manufacturing process involves the use of chemicals and hazardous materials, and is potentially
dangerous for surrounding properties; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2016, the Central Point Planning Commission opened a duly -noticed
public hearing on the Application, at which time the Planning Commission heard testimony and
comments on the Application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, as part of the Conditional Use Permit application, has
considered and finds per the Staff Report dated December 6, 2016, that adequate findings have been
made demonstrating that approval of the conditional use permit is consistent with the intent of the
Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) zoning district, now, therefore;
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by this Resolution No.
838 does hereby approve the Application based on the findings and conclusions of approval as set
forth in Attachment "I" of the Staff Report dated December 6, 2016, which also includes
attachments, attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein; and
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 6`h day
of December, 2016.
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Planning Commission Resolution No. 838
City Representative
Approved this 6th day of December, 2016.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 838
Planning Commission Chair
.A
91
STAFF REPORT
December 6, 2016
AGENDA ITEM (File No. 16021)
Consideration of a Site Plan and Architectural Review application for the construction of a 43,000
square foot corporate headquarters and light fabrication facility for Rogue Valley Microdevices.
Rogue Valley Microdevices proposes to operate in the Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5) zoning
district. The project site is located at 4901 Biddle Rd., and is defined on the Jackson County
Assessor's map as 37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802.
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.; Agent: Jay Harland, CSA Planning.
Approval Criteria: CPMC 17.72, Site Plan & Architectural Review
SOURCE
Stephanie Holtey, Community Planner II
BACKGROUND
Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. ("Applicant") is a microelectronics manufacturing company that
intends to relocate its current operation in Medford to a 2.24 acre site on Biddle Road ("Property").
The proposed location is Lot 3 of a three (3) lot tentative partition (File No. 16005) approved in
April 2016 (Attachment "A").
The Property is currently planned and zoned for Tourist and Office Professional (C-4) uses; light
fabrication is not a permitted use in the C-4 district. The Property is in the process of both a land use
and zone change to Thoroughfare Commercial (C-5). Light fabrication is outright permitted in the
C-5 zone per CPMC 17.43.020(F). Due to the limited use of hazardous materials processes
associated with the fabrication of small electronic wafer boards, the Community Development
Director referred the application to the Planning Commission as a conditional use per CPMC
17.46.030 (File No. 16023). Pending approval of the above actions, the Applicant requests Site
Plan & Architectural Review approval for the site development.
Project Description:
The Applicant proposes to construct a 43,000 square foot light manufacturing building consisting of
24,000 square feet of production area on one level and 19,000 square feet of office area on two
levels (Attachment `B-1"). The offices are located in the front of the building nearest Biddle Road
and the light fabrication operations in the back nearest to USF Reddaway Trucking, an industrial
use (Attachment `B-3", and `134").
The Property has frontage on Biddle Road and adjoins a private retail street to the east and a private
access drive to the south. The primary facade and main pedestrian entry (North Elevation) front
Biddle Road and the main parking area (35 spaces). Access at this location is from the private retail
street, which has limited access to Biddle Road (right-in/right-out). Secondary parking (11 spaces)
is behind the building (South Elevation) with two points of access from the private retail street and
M
access drive. The southerly private drive provides full access (right-in/left-in, right-out/left out)
onto Hamrick Road. A one-way loading drive parallels the west building elevation and provides
access to two loading bays.
Architecturally the structure has a modern design that provides variation in building materials to
distinguish the manufacturing (i.e. painted tip -up concrete) and office (i.e. stucco) uses. Elements
such as recessed windows, sun shades/canopies and inset panels mitigate building mass on the
North, East and West elevations (Attachment `13-2"). The color palette is off-white, dark blue/black
and matte stainless steel.
ISSUES
There are three (3) issues relative to the application as follows:
Legal Lot Status. At the time of this review, the 2.24 acre project site has been tentatively
approved but not legally created. Since the Southern Oregon Specialty Veterinary Center
occupies the parent parcel (Tentative Lot 1), construction activities may not commence until
the final plat is recorded.
Comment: The Applicant's findings state that the tentative plan improvements are
underway with completion of the final plat anticipated within the next couple of months.
Staff recommends the lot legality issue be resolved with a condition of approval requiring
final plat completion prior to building permit issuance.
2. Parking Adjustment. Per Table 17.64.0213, the required amount of parking for a
manufacturing facility is determined based on either the number of employees per shift or
the square footage of gross floor area, whichever is greater. In this case, 86 parking spaces
are required. The Applicant's parking plan proposes 46 spaces. To meet the off-street
parking interior landscape requirements (See Issue 3a), the applicant may lose one (1) space
in the secondary parking lot south of the building resulting in 45 spaces. Provision of 45-46
spaces does not meet the minimum/maximum parking requirement.
Comment: As part of the Conditional Use Permit (File No. 16023), the Applicant requested
a parking reduction on the basis that strict application of the code requirement would
significantly increase the number of parking spaces needed for the proposed use. The
Applicant's Findings (Attachment "C") state that the a maximum of 35 people will occupy
the building at any time, including employees and visitors. Based on a Parking Demand
Analysis using the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Manual, the manufacturing use will
generate 34-51 parking spaces (Attachment "C ", Exhibit 16). The parking plan with 45-46
spaces falls within the range generated by the ITE manual and the Central Point Municipal
Code, and is therefore considered acceptable.
3. Off -Street Parking Landscape Requirements. Proposed off-street parking lot landscaping
improvements are not consistent with the requirements for interior islands and tree planting
per CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2):
a. Interior Islands. CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2) requires landscape islands a minimum of
8 -ft wide be placed within parking rows that contain ten (10) or more spaces. Four
W
(4) interior islands that are 4 -ft wide are dispersed throughout the front (North)
parking lot. The proposed islands do not meet the minimum width for interior
landscape islands. The south parking lot behind the building (South Elevation) has
an 11 space parking row and does not meet the interior landscaping requirement for
islands.
Comment: Based on staff's review, the interior landscape requirements can be met
with minor modifications to the parking lot configuration (i.e. adding and modifying
islands). The landscape islands within the north parking lot can be consolidated into
two (2) 8 ft islands without losing any parking spaces. However, the addition of an
interior island in the south parking lot appears to result in the loss of one (1) space.
As demonstrated in the Applicant's parking demand analysis (Attachment `D'), a
total of 45 parking spaces would remain within the acceptable range of parking
generated by the use.
Staff recommends a revised Site Plan be submitted at the time of building permit
application demonstrating compliance with the interior landscape requirements per
CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2).
b. Trees. CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2)(a-c) provides the tree planting requirements for off-
street parking lot interior landscape areas (i.e. terminals and islands). The number of
trees required is a function of the parking lot visibility from the public realm. Highly
visible parking lots require more trees than those that are located away from public
rights-of-way (i.e. behind buildings).
The north parking lot is between the primary building fagade and Biddle Road and
requires 1 tree for every four (4) spaces. There are 35 spaces requiring eight (8)
trees; however, only two (2) are shown on the landscape plan (Attachment `B-5).
The south parking lot is behind the building and requires one (1) tree for every eight
(8) spaces resulting in one (1) tree for the 10-11 space parking row. No trees are
shown on the landscape plan at this location. Table 1 shows the tree planting
requirements for each parking area.
Table 1. Tree ReM
Parking Lot No. Trees
Location Spaces Required
Trees
Proposed
Difference
(+/-)
North 35 8
2
(-6)
South 45-46 1
0
(-1)
Comment: Staff recommends that a revised Landscape Plan be submitted at the time
of building permit application demonstrating compliance with the interior landscape
requirements for trees per CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2)(a) and (c).
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Site Plan and Architectural Review application for the proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices
development has been evaluated for compliance with the Site Plan and Architectural Review criteria
M
set forth in Chapter 17.72 of the Central Point Municipal Code and found to comply, as evidenced
by the Applicant's Findings (Attachment "C").
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Site Plan and Architectural Review approval is subject to designation of the project site (37S
2W 01C, TL 802) as Commercial Thoroughfare and C-5; and approval of a Conditional Use
Permit (File No. 16023). Failure to obtain any of the required land use approvals shall result
in the denial of this site plan and architectural review application.
2. At the time of building permit application, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan and
landscape plan demonstrating compliance with the off-street parking lot landscape
requirements in CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2). Modifications that alter the site layout may be
subject to CPMC 17.09, Modifications to Approved Plans.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the final plat for the Tail Light Properties Minor Partition
(File No. 16005) shall be approved by the City of Central Point and recorded by the Jackson
County Assessor.
4. The Applicant shall comply with agency conditions as listed in the:
a. Rogue Valley Sewer Services letter dated November 16, 2016 (Attachment `B").
b. Jackson County Roads letter dated November 16, 2016 (Attachment "F").
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A" — Area Plan with Tentative Partition Plan
Attachment `B-1" — Site Plan
Attachment `B-2" — Architectural Elevations
Attachment `13-3" — 1St Floor Plan
Attachment `B-4" — 2nd Floor Plan
Attachment `B-5" — Landscape & Irrigation Plan
Attachment `B-6" — Civil Site Grading & Utility Plan
Attachment "C" — Applicant's Findings, with Exhibits 1-16.
Attachment "D" — Application Clarification Memo from CSA Planning dated November 29, 2016
Attachment `B" — Rogue Valley Sewer Services letter dated November 16, 2016
Attachment "F" — Jackson County Roads letter dated November 16, 2016
Attachment "G" — Resolution No. 839
ACTION
Consider the Site Plan and Architectural Review application and 1) approve; 2) approve with
conditions; or 3) deny the application.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Rogue Valley Microdevices Site Plan & Architectural Review with conditions as
recommended in the Staff Report dated December 6, 2016, and contingent on the approvals of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (File No. 16025), the Zone Change Amendment (File No. 16024),
and Conditional Use Permit (File No. 16023).
W1
ATTACHMENT ".."
MEADOWSROOK DRIVE
ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES
i
l
;m
N
n
za
ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES
PIDON @Ipp!fl
IIS
op
ROGUE VALLEY (nm (n
MICRODEVICES co
A 9-0
>
0
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 802 i m
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON IT
---i ( n
PIDON @Ipp!fl
97
op
ROGUE VALLEY (nm (n
MICRODEVICES co
A 9-0
>
0
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 802 i m
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON IT
---i ( n
97
O
C
r
r
M M
XM
z
Dc)
�0 - pp
COC�r1D
O 0=
n D m
=O G)" G
zom�
(n Z Cn zz
Ul
ATTACHMENT'IF4 ."
- -V
.3r _ .9..
I
n0
�m
LIN
i
z
o
MEIN
M
r
•_=i''
r
m
77)
nx
*c
}-
p
.--,i
i
� N
Z
l:E O
D
00
Ntn
w�
m
D
,ZDjD
omElm
mm
m�
�D
M
°o
Ce
r
r�
O
��c0
Ao
m
s
i
M
C
M
Elm
Elm
o
{
Z
v
Nx
f
i
I
Om
0
o
c`
D
MZ
�N m
i
zx
fm
Dr �--
f
KM
>
jVf
Mx
DC
mW 9
_ �
C
_ 3
- T
v
m_
D
N
3
— 4
f
c
-
y
:EC0
M
m
m
m
=
D
D
z
91 �
O
Ul
ATTACHMENT'IF4 ."
- -V
.3r _ .9..
I
n0
�m
ATTACHMENT =` A
L< x
DCCC ••••
ROGUE VALLEY2.
= m cn
�rCCss''IA
MICRODEVICES
-�' - W ;Q
9.0
' 4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 802
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
m D
I In
MIS
M
ATTACHMENT" "
FDA
0
»» Fs
I
c'O,j,'1'o�
ROGUE VALLEY
pa.€ cn
4=
s
sT9
MICRODEVICES
m
co
4601 RIDDLE -TAX LOT 802
aa`- m C M
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
(n
FDA
r#:iE!
rn
" o
i4 p
g
;
0
I
R • , . .
qy�" i�lt�yvJl■� •� w�
■ ■■■N ■
•..r. • ,..• .�: '' f' NUDE $ DiF 'f'^ �::•..;.$D
Lpp• • • • • ■ ■�
�''��s'ry 38 .7r �fl� ���•i-�.�!4�i� � il4Q 41 @ p Q
Biddle Road
r,N m bYo�l` Madara Design Inc
-� W,-aaQfP� a ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES 9
INm n� 3 s aels,��% 5 4801 BIDDLE ROAD TAX LOT 802 tan Design a C.—A,9-
2994 Wells Fargo Rd • i
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 Ce0lral%id Or 97502
a '• 591 F6h7!)<i5
101
0
NGucJ dINN!b
D9s9Zl=(V,0 31 dAD.-K
DL S9Zl=i3)uI I dW0,.9C
1 y6i` OZ ZLZI=w'
QiINWOW7
s, x
to
�`��•sP
ROGUE VALLEY
seg — seg sd�
ss
—svn —
ss [s
3n
Ir
1
I
/
MICRODEVICES
T
T�V•,
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 802
--
n
NGucJ dINN!b
D9s9Zl=(V,0 31 dAD.-K
DL S9Zl=i3)uI I dW0,.9C
1 y6i` OZ ZLZI=w'
QiINWOW7
UL
s, x
to
�`��•sP
ROGUE VALLEY
m
MICRODEVICES
W
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 802
y�
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
.� C/) ,. 1
UL
ATTACHMENT"2me ,_"
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
STATE OF OREGON
IN THE MATTER OF A REQUEST FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SITE PLAN
AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR A
LIGHT FABRICATION FACILITY. THE
SUBJECT TRACT IS LOCATED AT 4901
BIDDLE ROAD WHICH IS ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF BIDDLE ROAD
BETWEEN HAMRICK AND TABLE ROCK
ROAD IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE
SUPER 8 MOTEL. THE PROPERTY IS
LOCATED IN THE CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT AND IS MORE SPECIFICALLY
IDENTIFIED AS TAX LOT 802 IN
TOWNSHIP 37 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST
(WM), SECTION 01C.
Applicant/ Owners:
Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.
Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Agent: CSA Planning, Ltd.
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
Applicants' Exhibit 2
The Applicants request a Site Plan and Architectural Review for the building and site plan
for the proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices corporate headquarters building. In addition,
based upon information in the Pre -Application Conference Report, per staff's
recommendation the Applicant is also applying for a conditional use permit based on the
nature of the business and its parking needs.
Rogue Valley Microdevices corporate headquarters building is proposed to be located on Lot
3 of the tentative partition plan which is the western half of an approved land division. The
infrastructure for the partition plat is under construction now. It is possible, if not likely, that
the final plat will be completed contemporaneous with the review of this subject application.
The partition plat includes a retail street running from Biddle Road to the southern private
access road. A new veterinary clinic was approved for Lot 1 at the southeast corner of the
property and is currently under construction. The approved tentative plat actually included
two alternate lot layouts, "A-1" and "A-2". Tail Lite Properties, Inc. is constructing "A-2"
consistent with the approved alternative that supports the proposed Rogue Valley
Microdevices headquarters use.
103
Page 1
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
The request for the CUP is based on two things. First, the business uses small amounts of
hazardous materials for its fabrication of small electronic wafer boards. Second, the parking
calculations per the code are not aligned with the actual need for this building and use.
Therefore the Applicant requests a conditional use permit that allows for its small scale
handling of hazardous materials and for the proposed amount of parking.
Page 2
W
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATIONS
Applicant herewith submits the following evidence with its land use application:
Exhibit 1. Completed application forms and Duly Executed Limited Powers of Attorney
from Applicants and Owners authorizing CSA Planning, Ltd. to act on their
behalf.
Exhibit 2. These proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, demonstrating how the
application complies with the applicable substantive criteria of Central Point' s
Land Development Ordinance
Exhibit 3. Applicants' Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development
Standards
Exhibit 4. Jackson County Assessor Plat Map 37 -2W -OIC
Exhibit 5. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map
Exhibit 6. Proposed Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map
Exhibit 7. Zoning Map on Aerial Photo
Exhibit S. Proposed Zoning Map
Exhibit 9. Area Plan (depicting Approved In -Process Project and Proposed Development)
Exhibit 10. Letter Evaluating Transportation Impacts from Plan Amendment and Zone
Change, Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering.
Exhibit 11. Survey of Existing Conditions; Pariani Land Surveying, February 9, 2015.
Exhibit 12. Site Photos and Site Photo Key Map
Exhibit 13. Proposed Site Development Plans:
■ Exterior Building Elevations
■ Site Plan
■ Floor Plan
■ C-1 Civil Plan
■ L-1 Landscape Plan
Exhibit 14. Tentative Partition Plat Notice of Decision and Staff Report with Exhibit A-2
Exhibit 15. Development Transportation Impact Analysis, Southern Oregon Transportation
Engineering
Exhibit 16. Parking Demand Analysis, Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering
Page 3
r -d
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
RELEVANT SUBSTANTIVE APPROVAL CRITERIA
The relevant substantive Central Point Zoning Ordinance (CPZO) criteria prerequisite to
approving a Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan and Architectural Review are recited in
relation to the proposed development on Parcel 3:
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ZONING ORDINANCE (CPZO)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA
17.46.060 General requirements.
A. Uses that are normally permitted in the C-5 district but that are referred to the planning commission for
further review, per Section 17.46.030(26), will be processed according to application procedures for
conditional use permits. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used
which are found by the planning commission to be harmful to persons living or working in the vicinity by
reason of odor, fumes, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water -carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination
or glare, or are found to involve any hazard of fire or explosion.
B. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used unless in compliance with
all applicable state and federal environmental, health and safety regulations.
D. Whenever feasible, buildings shall be located toward the rear of the lot with parking toward the street in the
front yard area for easy access and to minimize traffic noise at the rear of the property, especially when the
rear property line abuts a residential (R) district. (Ord. 1684 §46, 1993; Ord. 1615 §44, 1989; Ord. 1436
§2(part), 1981).
17.46.010 Purpose.
The C-5 district is intended to provide for commercial and business uses that are most appropriately located
along or near major highways or thoroughfares, and are largely dependent upon highway visibility and easy
vehicular access. (Ord. 1883 (part), 2006; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.46.020 Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-5 district:
F. Light fabrication, such as:
1. Light fabrication, assembly, packaging, mail-order sales and wholesale sales of consumer goods, and
2. Light fabrication and repair shops such as blacksmith, cabinet, electric motor, heating, machine,
sheetmetal, signs, stone monuments, upholstery and welding;
17.46.030 Conditional uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-5 district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76:
26. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission by city staff because they were found to
exhibit potentially adverse or hazardous characteristics not normally found in uses of a similar type or
size;
17.76.040 Findings and conditions.
The planning commission in granting a conditional use permit shall find as follows:
A. 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 this code;
B. That the site has adequate access to a public street or highway and that the street or highway is adequate in
size and condition to effectively accommodate the traffic that is expected to be generated by the proposed
use;
C. 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
Page 4
106
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
on the site; vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; setbacks; height of buildings and structures;
walls and fences; landscaping; outdoor lighting; and signs;
D. 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 working in the surrounding neighborhoods and will not be detrimental or
injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community
based on the review of those factors listed in subsection C of this section;
E. That any conditions required for approval of the permit are deemed necessary to protect the public health,
safety and general welfare and may include:
1. Adjustments to lot size or yard areas as needed to best accommodate the proposed use; provided the
lots or yard areas conform to the stated minimum dimensions for the subject zoning district, unless a
variance is also granted as provided for in Chapter 17.13,
2. Increasing street widths, modifications in street designs or addition of street signs or traffic signals to
accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed use,
3. Adjustments to off-street parking requirements in accordance with any unique characteristics of the
proposed use,
4. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress,
5. Requiring landscaping, irrigation systems, lighting and a property maintenance program,
6. Regulation of signs and their locations,
7. Requiring fences, berms, walls, landscaping or other devices of organic or artificial composition to
eliminate or reduce the effects of noise, vibrations, odors, visual incompatibility or other undesirable
effects on surrounding properties,
8. Regulation of time of operations for certain types of uses if their operations may adversely affect privacy
of sleep of persons residing nearby or otherwise conflict with other community or neighborhood
functions,
9. Establish a time period within which the subject land use must be developed,
10. Requirement of a bond or other adequate assurance within a specified period of time,
11. Such other conditions that are found to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and general
welfare
SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CRITERIA
Chapter 17.72
SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
17.72.020 Applicability.
B. Major Projects. The following are "major projects" for the purposes of the site plan and
architectural review process and are subject to Type 2 procedural requirements as set forth in
Chapter J7.05, Applications and Types of Review Procedures:
1. New construction, including private and public projects, that:
a. Includes a new building or building addition of five thousand square feet or more;
b_ Includes the construction of a parking lot of ten or more parking spaces;
17.72.040 Site plan and architectural standards.
In approving, conditionally approving, or denying any site plan and architectural review application,
the approving authority shall base its decision on compliance with the following standards:
A. Applicable site plan, landscaping, and architectural design standards as set forth in Chapter 17.75,
Design and Development Standards;
Page 5
107
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
B. City of Central Point Department of Public Works Department Standard Specifications and Uniform
Standard Details for Public Works Construction;
C. Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for 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.
Page 6
FM
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
IV
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following facts are established and found to be true with respect to this matter:
1. Ownership/Applicant: Tax Lot 802 is owned in fee simple by Tail Lite Properties, LLC.
Rogue Valley Microdevices is in contract to purchase Lot 3 of the subject property. Agent
CSA Planning, Ltd. is submitting this application on behalf of the property owner and
contract purchaser.
2. Location: The subject property is located on the south side of Biddle Road between
Hamrick Road and Table Rock Road. The property is identified as Tax Lot 802 in Township
37 South, Range 02 West (W.M.), Section 01C. The site address is 4901 Biddle Road,
Central Point, OR.
3. Parcel Size: Tax Lot 802 currently has 4.87 acres. See, Exhibit 4.
4. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation / Zoning: Designated Tourist and Office
Professional / Zoned C-4 Tourist and Office Professional. See, Exhibits 5 and 7.
5. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Designation / Zoning: Designation proposed to be
amended to Thoroughfare Commercial and to change the zone to C-5. See, Exhibits 6 and 8.
6. Existing Frontage and Access: The subject property has frontage along its northern
boundary on Biddle Road. Biddle Road is classified in the TSP as an arterial. Tax Lot 802
also has access easements on the access drives that run south from Biddle Road along Tax
Lot 803 and along the southern boundaries of Tax Lots 801, 802 and 803 and intersecting
with Hamrick Road. These private commercial accesses were reviewed and approved by
Central Point at the time of land division that created the parent parcel. A private north -
south Retail Street has been approved to intersect with Biddle Road approximately mid -block
between existing accesses. The Retail Street will have right-in/right-out only access with a
median in Biddle Road and is currently under constuction.
7. Lot Legality: Tax Lot 802 was created through two partitions. Tax Lot 800 was divided
through partition P-03-2004 into three parcels in 2004, and in 2005 the resulting Parcel l was
subdivided into three lots, of which Tax Lot 802 was Lot 1. In 2007 a lot line adjustment
was made to the border between Tax Lots 802 and 803 creating its current configuration. In
April of 2016, the City of Central Point approved a tentative partition plat to divide Tax Lot
802 into three separate parcels. The proposed conditional use permit and site plan review are
directed at Parcel 3 of the approved tentative land division; it is possible, if not probable, that
the final plat will be recorded prior to completion of the subject land use review.
8. Previous Planning Permits:
File No. 16004 - Site Plan and Architectural Review which approved a veterinary clinic on
Parcel 1 of the land division and File No. 16005- Tentative Partition were approved April 14,
2016.
9. Existing Development: The property is currently vacant but construction of the Retail Street
and the veterinary clinic has begun.
Page 7
MA
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
10. Land Uses on Abutting Properties and Surrounding Area:
Overview of arca: The stretch of Biddle Road/East Pine Street ("BR/EPS") that is east of the
Interstate -5 in Central Point is an employment area with a mix of commercial uses right
along BR/EPS on the south side with some industrial uses further to the south. Except for a
small portion of a larger residential area near Meadowbrook Drive and Orchard View
Avenue, the north side of BR/EPS is primarily undeveloped employment designated
property; further to the north is the Jackson County Expo (fairgrounds), the Central Point
Fast residential area, and some legacy County development patterns. There are a mix of
developed and undeveloped properties between the interstate and Table Rock Road.
East: To the east of the subject property is vacant land owned by Les Schwab. Further
to the east is additional vacant employment land that is marketed for sale. This
land has a Comprehensive Plan Map of Thoroughfare Commercial and is zoned
C-5
North: Across Biddle Road is the Dulany property. This property has a single family
dwelling on it and is under developed in relation to its plan designation. The
property is planned Tourist and Professional Office and is zoned C-4. The land to
the northeast is planned and zoned for residential uses and has been developed
with single-family dwellings. Land to the northwest is a large vacant 21 acre site
planned Tourist and Office Professional and zoned C-4.
South: South of the subject property across the private commercial access drive is the
USF Reddaway warehouse logistics facility. This facility is planned General
Industrial and zoned M-2.
West: Immediately to the west is the Super 8 Motel. This site is planned Tourist and
Office Professional and is zoned C-4. Further to the west is some vacant
commercial land across Hamrick Road and a road maintenance yard further to the
southwest.
11. Topography: The subject property is essentially level, sloping very gently to the north.
12. Water Facilities and Services: Underground water utilities exist at the west property line
and along the utility and access easement along the southern portion of the property. These
water facilities are available for connection.
13. Sanitary Sewer Facilities and Services: Underground sanitary sewer utilities exists in the
utility easements along the south portion of the property and are available for connection.
14. Power and Natural Gas: Underground power is available from Pacific Power and
underground gas is available from Avista Utilities and the same exist in the utility easements
along the south portion of the property and are available for connection.
15. Fire and Police Protection: The subject properties are located within and are served by Fire
District No. 3. Police service is provided by the City of Central Point Police Department.
16. Wetlands, Streams and floodplain: The subject property does not contain any jurisdictional
wetlands per Jackson County GIS Services. The subject property does not contain any
streams or floodplains per Jackson County GIS Services.
17. Storm Drainage Facilities and Services: Underground storm drainage lines are located in
Biddle Road and in the private access easement and utility area on the south portion of the
property. These storm drain lines are available for connection. The approval of the prior
0
W6
Page 8
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
land division necessitated construction of a stormwater detention facility on Lot 2 of the
partition which is planned to handle a significant portion of the Rogue Valley Microdevices'
storm drainage needs, see Exhibit 13, Sheet C-1.
18. Transportation and Access:
A. Access and Circulation: Access to the site is via a private retail street that is under
construction and was approved under Planning File No. 16005. The retail street
intersects with Biddle Road and is a right -in -right -out intersection allowing in -movement
from the west and out -movement to the east onto Biddle Road. A concrete median in
Biddle Road will be constructed in conjunction with the new retail street. Access coming
from the east will be from a left turn onto the private street connection opposite
Meadowbrook and then right along the private access drive to the south and then a right
onto the private retail street. Access out of the site to the west will involve a right turn
onto the private retail street and then out the private access drive along the south property
line to a right turn on Hamrick then to the signal where a left can be made onto East Pine
Street.
The office driveway is located on the private retail street. It is somewhat close to the
intersection with Biddle Road but there is adequate room for at least two stacked vehicles
and it is a right into the site so no queuing at this location is expected. The other access
onto the site is via two large driveways to the south access drive; the wide driveways are
needed to get semi -trucks into the back parking lot area and then out onto the private
access drive. These south driveways will be truck vehicle access points; smaller trucks
that use the west service drive will exit via the front office parking lot access point.
B. Transportation Impacts from Proposed Development: The Applicant's traffic
engineer also prepared a traffic impacts analysis that analyzes the proposed Rogue Valley
Microdevices project, see Exhibit 15. That analysis was an update to the Southern
Oregon Veterinary Specialty Center analysis done for that project which is now under
construction. In the prior analysis, Parcel 3 was assumed to be a future site for a 25,000
square foot specialty retail center, along with the veterinary clinic and an assumed sit
down restaurant on the remaining Parcel 2. The updated analysis continues to assume the
sit down restaurant on Parcel 2 and assumes the veterinary clinic use on Parcel 1 but
substitutes the Rogue Valley Microdevices use for Parcel 3. This results in a reduced trip
generation of the entire site of 53 P.M. peak hour trips.
The results of the analysis show that the transportation system can accommodate the
proposed use in conformance with all applicable performance standards.
19. Proposed Development Project:
The proposed Rogue Valley Microdevices corporate headquarters and light fabrication
facility has the following features:
A. Design Scheme: The approach to the building is to create a modern and attractive high-
tech light manufacturing building. The building is proposed to contain a 10,000 square
foot clean room within a 24,000 square foot production area and the building will have
approximately 19,000 square feet of accessory office space on two levels. Being a high-
tech facility, the interior is a purpose built design that reflects workflow needs and the
demands of the clean room.
Page 9
111
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
The nature of the interior layout dictates the location of certain outdoor connections in
terms of entrance location, delivery doors and access to the accessory office uses.
Overall, the exterior is a modern, but relatively simple flat -roofed commercial building
with several attractive architectural elements on the main fagade and attractive materials
on all elevations. See, Exhibit 13.
B. Vehicle Parking and Loading: The project proposes 46 parking spaces. The
application is requesting an adjustment to the off-street parking standards as part of the
Conditional Use Permit approval (pursuant to special conditions of approval that may be
imposed under 17.76.040(E)(3)) because a strict application of the code would require
significantly more parking than is expected to be needed by the use. There is a wide
disparity between the two calculation methods for the parking requirements. The
employee calculation method for industrial uses yields a need for approximately 18
spaces. The gross floor area method would require 84 spaces, one for every 500 square
feet of gross floor area, which is difference of over 60 parking spaces. The proposed 46
spaces is between the two need calculation methods and is projected to be adequate for
the use. It is expected that this amount of parking will be adequate to allow for nearly
doubling of the size of the company within the new space, which is the largest it can be
within the new facility. A parking demand analysis has been prepared by Southern
Oregon Transportation Engineering for this submittal and is located in Exhibit 16.
Industrial uses of 37,501 square feet to 50,000 square feet are required to have four
loading berths; the actual fabrication area is 24,000 square feet which would require four
berths. The site plan and building elevations depict four overhead loading doors for the
facility. Two overhead doors are located on the west elevation along the service drive.
These will be accessed by forklift for semis from the main rear parking lot and by smaller
delivery vehicles such as FedEx and UPS. This entire circulation area on the west side of
the building could be considered a series of loading berths, in which case the site has the
equivalent of 8 loading berths just on this side. One overhead door loading location on
the east elevation, trucks could use this for delivery from the private retail street although
this would be expected to be a rare occurrence; primarily this would be accessed by
forklift on the occasion when equipment needed to loaded on the east side of the clean
room. The fourth overhead door is shown on the south elevation and this berth will
generally be used by a forklift off-loading from a semi -trailer truck parked in the rear lot.
C. Bike Parking: The code requires four bike parking spaces. The covered bike parking
spaces will be under a canopy area located at the outdoor break area.
D. Landscaping: This high-tech light manufacturing facility is proposed to be fully
landscaped at the time of development, see Exhibit 13, Sheet L-1. The proposed
landscaping is extensive for an industrial use and is proposed in a manner that will allow
it to blend well with commercial uses in the area. The 10 -foot sidewalk with tree wells
on the retail street will create an attractive streetscape for this private street. The planting
scheme includes a number of mass plantings that will create an attractive landscape
throughout the year.
20. Conditional Use Permit Findings: Even though the proposed use could properly be
approved as a permitted use under Use F — Light Fabrication. The planning staff has the
authority to refer uses to the Planning Commission as a Conditional Use Permit. The Pre -
Application indicated the Staff's intent to refer the application to the Planning Commission
Page 10
112
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
for Conditional Use Permit approval. The City of Central Point has conditional use permit
criteria that require specific findings. Applicant's agent provides the below testimony as
evidence to address such required findings and this testimony may be relied upon as
substantial evidence; CSA Planning are experts in Oregon Land Use Planning and have
experience as a professional planning firm for over 35 years.
A. Lot Size and Configuration: A site plan has been submitted concurrent with the
proposed use. The proposed design can be found to be in compliance with applicable
sections of the code and the site plan shows the use can be accommodated on the site.
The only aspects of the size of the lot and proposed development are relatively minor
issues relating to parking supply and the storm drainage, A portion of the storm drainage
detention for the building is being placed in the swale on the northeast lot; this swale was
designed to accommodate drainage from the Rogue Valley Microdevices building in
accordance with private agreements between the parties. The other minor issue is
parking supply. The parking supply issue is largely a function of the code's methods for
calculating parking demand. The two methods vary widely, but the code requires the
"higher" method to be used; applicant has requested the City approve an adjustment to
the off-street parking requirements based upon the unique characteristics of the proposed
use pursuant to CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3). With approval of this parking supply
adjustment, the proposed development will satisfy all applicable City development
requirements on the subject lot.
B. Traffic and Access: See transportation and access findings and related evidence
elsewhere in the application submittal.
C. Effects on Abutting Property: Analysis of abutting properties are analyzed by
direction:
i. North: Lands to the north are across Biddle Road, which is a major arterial
roadway. The north building elevation is where the accessory office uses are
located and the design and appearance of this portion of the buildings is similar to
two-story office buildings permitted in the zone and serves to further buffer uses to
the north. Given the intensity of the Biddle Road use and the low -intensity office
use of the northern third of the building, no adverse effects on properties to the
north are expected. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting will be similar on
the north elevation to uses permitted in the zone and effect on lands to the north
will not be adverse.
ii. Northeast: Land to the northeast is a vacant lot that will be created by recording
the final plat for Planning File No. 16005. The resulting lot will be across the
private retail street from Rogue Valley Microdevices. Also, there will be a
bioswale adjacent to the retail street that will further separate the uses as will the
large landscape area on the east side of the building. The northern two-thirds of
this lot will be adjacent to the office use of the building. The bioswale is required
to be a minimum length which moves the access to the vacant lot south in a location
where the driveways will be separated. Even though the driveways will be offset
they will be offset in the direction that still allows for smooth traffic flow because
the left -outs of each parking lot will not conflict with one another. The access
separation will be adequate for all movements to see one another in an appropriate
manner. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting will be similar when viewed
Page 11
113
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
from the northeast and compared to uses permitted in the zone and effect on the
parcel to the northeast will not be adverse.
iii. Southeast: Land to the southeast is under construction for a veterinary clinic. The
owner of the veterinary clinic is the owner of the subject development property.
The veterinary clinic's front entrance will face the east elevation where there are
high windows throughout and a single roll -up door; that particular roll -up door is
expected to be used on a limited basis but is necessary to provide forklift access to
the outside of the building on that side to the clean -room. There will be
approximately 115 feet of separation from the east wall to the veterinary clinic
entrance. The veterinary clinic provides emergency 24-hour animal care and the
lighting and development of the Rogue Valley Microdevices building is expected to
enhance lighting and safety in the area during night operations. The design of the
building includes a full height exterior wall on the back of the building to screen the
outdoor equipment area at the back of the building. Because Tail Lite LLC (a
limited liability company owned by the owners of Southern Oregon Veterinary
Specialty Center) is the seller of the property to Rogue Valley Microdevices, they
have coordinated the designs of their respective buildings to assure compatibility
between the respective uses and designs. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting
will be similar when viewed from the southeast and compared to uses permitted in
the zone and effect on the parcel to the southeast will not be adverse.
iv. South: Land to the south is a private access road and further to the south is the
USF Reddaway trucking facility. This is a warehousing, trucking and freight
handling facility. A 6 foot high block fence with landscaping runs the entire length
of the parcel's southern boundary. The Rogue Valley Microdevices project is
designed so that the outdoor equipment and primary loading areas face this
industrial trucking use to the south. Industrial trucking uses are not aesthetically
sensitive uses and are noisy themselves with a considerable area devoted to outdoor
storage. Signage, landscaping and outdoor lighting will be similar to other
commercial outdoor storage and loading areas when viewed from the south and are
similar and typical of industrial uses to the south.
V. West: Land to the west is occupied by the Super 8 Motel. This is a 3 -story hotel
with internal access halls to the individual room. Each room appears to have its
own Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner unit (PTAC) below windows on its east
elevation. The proposed design includes a full height wall extension in the back of
the building to shield noise sources from the hotel and to visually screen this
equipment. All other noise producing equipment is roof mounted behind parapet
walls on the roof and this HVAC equipment is similar from a noise and visual
perspective to other HVAC equipment that is typical of other commercial and light
manufacturing buildings in the area. The proposed building is 32 feet in height
which is tall enough to limit the number of rooms looking down on a roof structure
to only the top floor and even that floor will primarily be looking across and not
down on the roof structure. Virtually all of the second and third stories would look
down on a roof structure to the east if the site were developed with a single -story
retail use. There is considerable separation between the two buildings,
approximately 100 feet. The project will be adding landscaping along the west
property line that will serve to screen and separate the two uses. The proposed
Page 12
114
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
service drive aisle is expected to be used infrequently and almost exclusively during
the day which should minimize the potential for conflicts with patrons at the Super
8. Lighting on the west elevation will consist of shielded sconce lighting aimed
downward that will serve to create a safe space without any direct lighting impacts
to the Super 8 motel, The Rogue Valley Microdevices project design has
thoughtfully considered the abutting Super 8 motel use and has been designed in a
manner that will minimize potential adverse impacts to a level that is equal or less
than what would otherwise be expected from development of uses outright
permitted in the C-5 zone (or the C-4 zone for that matter if the site were not re-
designated).
D. Compliance with Local, State and Federal Health and Safety Regulations: Rogue
Valley Microdevices takes appropriate precautions to comply with applicable health and
safety requirements. DEQ conducts periodic unannounced inspections for regulation
compliance. In these inspections, no major corrections have been required. All gaseous
wastes are vented through a scrubber at their current site to remove particulate emissions
according to industry best practices design. All gas process inputs are within an enclosed
system and the storage tanks will be located within a storage cabinet that also vents to the
scrubber in the event of any leak. The design of the building is such that a closed
catchment system exists in the floor so that any liquid spill drains to the catchment
system where it can be containerized and picked up for off-site disposal. From a sewage
standpoint, Medford's Regional Wastewater Reclamation plant has an inspector on staff
and this person routinely conducts inspections to evaluate the quantity and type of
effluent released into the sanitary sewer to assure it is in compliance with applicable
discharge requirements. Rogue Valley Microdevices self -reports to DEQ annually and
transmits a hazardous waste reduction plan that identifies ways for operation to reduce
the use of hazardous waste for each unit of production.
Rogue Valley Microdevices has internal controls in place that involve weekly self -
inspections for items such as labelling, dates, seal connections, container conditions, etc.
From the standpoint of handling materials from the delivery trucks to the facility, this has
been taken into account with the design of the building with the external circulation and
roll -up doors to allow for direct forklift routes from delivery trucks to storage locations.
Roll -up door heights are specifically designed to assure adequate clearance when moving
materials. All materials are palletized and shipped in containers that are designed for the
particular material being handled. Rogue Valley Microdevices has an employee, Dan
Swanson, who is certified to provide forklift training so that all operators are properly
trained and he is also available in-house for ongoing supervision.
With respect to safety, the Medford Fire Department regularly conducts inspections at the
site. None of these Fire Department inspections have ever resulted in significant
corrections except in an instance where a new system was installed in accordance with
department directions and a later inspection determined that direction was incorrect. In
this circumstance, Rogue Valley Microdevices promptly implemented the correction at
their sole expense.
Page 13
115
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Kcrodevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
V
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ZONING ORDINANCE (CPZO)
The following conclusions of law and ultimate conclusions are reached under each of the
relevant substantive criteria which are recited verbatim and addressed below. The
conclusions of law are supported by Applicants' evidentiary exhibits at Section II — including
Applicants' review of applicable development standards (Exhibit 3) and the findings of fact
as set forth in Section IV herein above.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA
17.46.060 General requirements.
A. Uses that are normally permitted in the C-5 district but that are referred to the planning commission for
further review, per Section 17.46.030(26), will be processed according to application procedures for
conditional use permits. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be
used which are found by the planning commission to be harmful to persons living or working in the
vicinity by reason of odor, fumes, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water -carried waste, noise,
vibration, illumination or glare, or are found to involve any hazard of fire or explosion.
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the proposed use has been referred to the
planning commission for further review per section 17.46.030(26). The City herewith
incorporates and adopts the below conclusions of law where compliance with each of the
relevant conditional use permit criteria is demonstrated. Furthermore and based upon the
evidence in Section II and the findings of fact in Section IV, the City concludes all processes,
equipment and materials will operate in a manner that will not be harmful to persons living
or working in the vicinity and specifically concludes as follows:
• With respect to odors and fumes, the release of any gasses from systems and
processes are vented through a scrubber that removes contaminants to levels
acceptable to DEQ and DEQ conducts periodic unannounced visits to verify proper
operation and compliance.
• With respect to dust, smoke, cinders and dirt, such matters are the bane of the
microelectronics industry and not only are there no such discharges the industry goes
to great lengths to remove any presence of such things in the air.
• With respect to refuse, solid waste is similar to waste from most any office or
commercial use and is simply placed in the dumpster for proper disposal by Rogue
Disposal and Recycling.
• With respect to liquid wastes, the processes are designed with great care to be a
closed system for hazardous wastes so that spend liquids end up in sealed drums and
are transported off-site for specialty processing and disposal. The closed system is
further designed with a liquid catchment system so that any spill that might occur
Page 14
L 7
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
drains to the catchment system where it can be collected into sealed drums for
disposal. For water wastes that are allowed to go into the sanitary sewer system,
these wastes are carefully monitored and inspected by staff of the regional water
reclamation facility on a regular basis.
With respect to noise, most all of the noise generating machinery is located inside of
the building with exception of the standard HVAC to serve the office on the roof and
the chillers that are located in the back of the building. The full height wall
extensions on the back of the building are specifically designed to trap and direct any
chiller noise away from the potentially noise sensitive use of the Super 8 motel and
direct it toward the USF Reddaway site which is a trucking and warehousing facility
that is not especially noise sensitive and is a source of noise itself.
Like dust, vibration is a major concern of the industry and not only will vibration not
be produced, every effort is made by the industry to eliminate any source of vibration
whatsoever.
• With respect to illumination and glare, the proposed use does not represent any
significant source of illumination or glare that is different from any number of other
commercial uses that are outright permitted in the zone and compliance with the
City's design requirements for lighting will assure no such impact will occur.
With respect to fire and explosion hazards, the City concludes this is not an absolute
standard because most all commercial and light industrial uses involve some degree
of fire hazard. Rather, the City interprets this provision to require acceptable levels
of risk based upon the fire code requirements and any additional requirements of the
Fire District 3. The City concludes the use has operated in compliance with all such
requirements at its present location in the City of Medford and it can feasibly and will
comply with such requirements in Fire District 3 to assure the risk of fire or explosion
is minimized and is not substantially greater than is typically experienced for other
commercial and industrial uses in the area.
B. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used unless in compliance
with all applicable state and federal environmental, health and safety regulations.
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the findings of fact in Section IV demonstrating Rogue
Valley Microdevices has a track record of compliance and performs due diligence to assure
future and ongoing compliance, the City concludes the proposed use can feasibly and will
operate in compliance with all applicable state and federal environmental, health and safety
regulations.
D. Whenever feasible, buildings shall be located toward the rear of the lot with parking toward the street in
the front yard area for easy access and to minimize traffic noise at the rear of the property, especially
when the rear property line abuts a residential (R) district. (Ord. 1684 §46, 1993; Ord. 1615 §44, 1989;
Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
Page 15
117
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the building is sited toward the rear of the lot to
allow for the main parking lot to be located in the front of the building, however the parking
and loading area near the rear of the building is also necessary for truck circulation.
Moreover, the City observes at this location that the rear of the lot is not the most noise
sensitive because the rear of the lot abuts an industrial zone and a lot developed with a
trucking and warehousing use.
17.46.010 Purpose.
The C-5 district is intended to provide for commercial and business uses that are most appropriately located
along or near major highways or thoroughfares, and are largely dependent upon highway visibility and easy
vehicular access. (Ord. 1883 (part), 2006; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the Rogue Valley Microdevices use is consistent
with this purpose in significant part because the use is a highly specialized use that requires
easy vehicular access to the entire labor market in the region which the C-5 in this location
will provide.
17.46.020 Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-5 district:
F. Light fabrication, such as:
1. Light fabrication, assembly, packaging, mail-order sales and wholesale sales of consumer goods,
and
2. Light fabrication and repair shops such as blacksmith, cabinet, electric motor, heating, machine,
sheetmetal, signs, stone monuments, upholstery and welding;
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the Rogue Valley Microdevices use is a light
fabrication use that involves low volumes of total materials and precision manufacturing to
produce custom microelectronics and such use can be a considered a permitted use in the C-5
zone, but due to some of the chemical processes associated with the fabrication activities the
staff referred the use a conditional use in the Pre -Application Conference summary.
17.46.030 Conditional uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-5 district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76:
26. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission by city staff because they were found
to exhibit potentially adverse or hazardous characteristics not normally found in uses of a similar
type or size;
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the staff referred the use as a conditional use
in the Pre -Application Conference summary based upon the chemical processes associated
with the use.
17.76.040 Findings and conditions.
The planning commission in granting a conditional use permit shall find as follows:
A. 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 this
code;
Page 16
118
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the findings of fact in Section IV, the City concludes the
site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. The City further concludes the
site size and shape is adequate because an adjustment to the off-street parking requirements
is warranted as may be conditioned under CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3) based on the analysis of
parking demand in Exhibit 16 prepared by Southern Oregon Traffic Engineering that
estimates parking demand for the proposed use to be between 29 and 50 spaces and the
proposed 46 spaces is adequate to handle the need.
B. That the site has adequate access to a public street or highway and that the street or highway is
adequate in size and condition to effectively accommodate the traffic that is expected to be generated
by the proposed use;
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the traffic analysis in Exhibit 15, the City concludes the
site has adequate access to the public street system and the street is adequate in size and
condition to handle the traffic expected to be generated by the use.
C. 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 and structures; walls and fences; landscaping; outdoor lighting; and signs;
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the analysis of potential impacts on abutting properties
prepared by Applicant's professional land use planning consultant in Section IV Finding
21(C) herewith incorporated and adopted, the City concludes that the proposed use will have
no significant adverse effect on abutting property or permitted uses thereof.
D. 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 working in the surrounding neighborhoods and will not be
detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare
of the community based on the review of those factors listed in subsection C of this section;
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the summary of permitting and compliance with
applicable local, state, and federal health and safety regulations and the analysis of effects on
abutting properties prepared by Applicant's professional land use planning consultant in
Section IV Finding 21(C)&(D) both herewith incorporated and adopted, the City concludes
that the proposed use can feasibly and will comply with all applicable regulations and that
compliance with such will regulations, together with the design of the building and layout of
the proposed use, will assure that the proposed microelectronics use will not be detrimental
or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of
the community will have no significant adverse effect on abutting property or permitted uses
thereof.
E. That any conditions required for approval of the permit are deemed necessary to protect the public
health, safety and general welfare and may include:
1. Adjustments to lot size or yard areas as needed to best accommodate the proposed use; provided
the lots or yard areas conform to the stated minimum dimensions for the subject zoning district,
unless a variance is also granted as provided for in Chapter 17.13,
2. Increasing street widths, modifications in street designs or addition of street signs or traffic signals
to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed use,
Page 17
119
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
3. Adjustments to off-street parking requirements in accordance with any unique characteristics of the
proposed use,
4. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress,
5. Requiring landscaping, irrigation systems, lighting and a property maintenance program,
6. Regulation of signs and their locations,
7. Requiring fences, berms, walls, landscaping or other devices of organic or artificial composition to
eliminate or reduce the effects of noise, vibrations, odors, visual incompatibility or other undesirable
effects on surrounding properties,
8. Regulation of time of operations for certain types of uses if their operations may adversely affect
privacy of sleep of persons residing nearby or otherwise conflict with other community or
neighborhood functions,
9. Establish a time period within which the subject land use must be developed,
10. Requirement of a bond or other adequate assurance within a specified period of time,
11. Such other conditions that are found to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare
Conclusions of Law: With respect to off-street parking, the City concludes that it has the
authority under CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3) to adjust the parking requirements based upon the
unique requirements of the use. The City concludes the Applicant has provided a specific
parking demand analysis prepared by an Oregon Registered Professional Engineer with
expertise in transportation that demonstrates the base code requirement of 84 spaces would
fax exceed the number of spaces required to serve the 85th percentile demand estimated to be
50 parking spaces. Based upon this analysis in Exhibit 16, the City concludes the proposed
46 spaces is an adequate number of parking spaces that will appropriately serve the requested
conditional use.
With the exception of the adjustment to the parking requirements for the unique
characteristics of the proposed use, the Applicant believes the City can and should apply its
standard and customary conditions of approval for similar developments and that such
standard and customary conditions of approval will be adequate to protect the public health,
safety and general welfare.
APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Chapter 17.72
SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
17.72.020 Applicability.
B. Major Projects. The following are "major projects" for the purposes of the site plan and
architectural review process and are subject to Type 2 procedural requirements as set forth in
Chapter 17.05, Applications and Types of Review Procedures:
1. New construction, including private and public projects, that:
a. Includes a new building or building addition of five thousand square feet or more;
b. Includes the construction of a parking lot of ten or more parking spaces;
Page 18
120
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc. and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes the proposed building is new and is approximately
43,000 square feet and therefore requires a site plan review.
17.72.040 Site plan and architectural standards.
In approving, conditionally approving, or denying any site plan and architectural review application,
the approving authority shall base its decision on compliance with the following standards:
A Applicable site plan, landscaping, and architectural design standards as set forth in Chapter 17.75,
Design and Development Standards;
Conclusions of Law: The City herewith incorporates and adopts Applicant's Exhibit 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development standards, and based thereupon,
concludes the application is in compliance with all applicable site plan, landscaping and
architectural design standards in Chapter 17.75, except for the adjustment to the off-street
parking requirements imposed through a condition of approval under the Conditional Use
Permit standards at CPMC 17.76.040(E)(3).
B, City of Central Point Department of Public Works Department Standard Specifications and Uniform
Standard Details for Public Works Construction;
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the proposed project is located on a discreet
parcel that is newly created with most all public improvements necessary for the
development already in place but that any additional new public improvements, such as
additional storm drainage facilities, can feasibly and will be constructed in accordance with
the Central Point Department of Public Works Standard and Specifications and the Uniform
Standard Details for Public Works Construction.
C. Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for 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.
Conclusions of Law: The City concludes that the design of the project provides for
adequate fire access. Most all of the entire building is within 150 feet of the private retail
street travel surface with the exception of the northwest corner of the building. The parking
drive aisle in the north parking lot is more than 20 -feet wide and provides 20 -feet of clear
space for access within 150 feet of the northwest corner of the building. Additional access is
available at the back of the building in the semi -truck loading area. And while less than 20 -
feet in width, the drive aisle along the west boundary is also adequate width for one-way fire
apparatus access.
************
Page 19
121
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc, and Tail Lite Properties, LLC
11%
SUMMARY OF APPLICANTS' STIPULATIONS
Applicants herewith agree to stipulate to the following, which they agree to observe if the
same are attached as conditions to approval of the subject site plan review application:
Stipulation 1: [RESERVED- The applicant did not idents the need for specific stipulations
for the subject application but may supplement the initially submitted
findings with certain stipulations if the same are found to be necessary
during the course of the review process]
VII
ULTIMATE CONCLUSIONS; DECISION
Based upon the record and the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is
concluded that the applications for Site Development Plan approval and Conditional Use
Permit approval are consistent with the requirements of all of the relevant substantive
approval criteria which have been addressed hereinabove.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of Applicant and Property Owner,
CSA Planning, Ltd.
�e, A- 4
Jay Harland
Principal
October 17, 2016
122
Page 20
APPLICANT'S EXHIBIT 3
DEMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH
APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The relevant approval standards applicable to the site development plan review are recited
verbatim below followed by findings to establish compliance with the same:
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ZONING ORDINANCE (CPZO)
Title 17 Zoning
17.60.015 Paving of open areas.
In all commercial and industrial zones, all open areas utilized by vehicles, or used as sales or storage
areas, shall be surfaced with pavement or otherwise treated so that no dust is created by the uses. This
requirement shall be applicable to all development whenever a site plan is required or a change in use
occurs.
Compliance Discussion: Parking areas are proposed to be paved.
17.60.090 Special setback requirements.
To permit or afford better light, air and vision on more heavily traveled streets, to protect arterial streets and
to permit the eventual widening of streets, to preserve the natural beauty and distinctive character of creeks
and other water drainage channels (hereinafter referred to as "creeks") and to protect both public and
private property adjacent to creeks from flood damage, the following special setback lines are established
along all secondary and major arterial streets and highways, as identified in the comprehensive plan, and
along all creeks. No building, structure, or parking area shall be erected or maintained within such setback
areas, with the exception that fences may be erected and maintained within street setback areas in
accordance with Chapter 17.57.
D. In any C-4, C-5 and M-2 district the street setback line shall be:
1. Fifty feet distant from the centerline of any secondary arterial or highway;
2. Sixty feet distant from the centerline of any major arterial street or highway.
Compliance Discussion: The proposed parking lot is located approximately 72 feet from the
centerline of Biddle Road, a major arterial street. This exceeds the required street setback line for
a major arterial street.
17.60.100 Projections from buildings.
Bay windows, cornices, eaves, canopies, sunshades, gutters, chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills,
pilasters, lintels, ornamental features and other similar architectural features may project not more than
twenty-four inches into a required yard or into a required open space as established by coverage standards.
(Ord. 1981 §3 (Exh. C) (part), 2014; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
Compliance Discussion: The proposed building is adequately setback such that no intrusions into
the required yards will occur that might be more than 24 inches.
17.60.110 Clear -vision areas --Establishment.
A clear -vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property at the intersection of two streets or a
street and a railroad. A clear -vision area shall contain no planting, fence, wall, structure or temporary or
permanent obstruction exceeding three and one-half feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or
123
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
where no curb exists, from the established street centerline grade, except that trees exceeding this height
may be located in this area, provided all branches and foliage are removed to a height of eight feet above
the grade.
Compliance Discussion: The proposed building is not within a clear vision area and no
landscaping is proposed that would affect a clear vision area.
17.60.130 Access.
Each lot shall abut a minimum frontage of forty feet upon a public street, other than an alley, with the
exception of padlots and lots fronting on a cul-de-sac, which may be permitted a reduced frontage of not
less than thirty feet, provided all driveway and off-street parking requirements of Chapter 17.64 can be met.
This section is not intended to prohibit the creation or development of flag lots. (Ord. 1746 §1, 1996; Ord.
1684 §58, 1993; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
Compliance Discussion: Parcel has 134 feet of frontage on Biddle Road.
17.60.135 Landscaping requirements.
For all land use applications that require site plan approval, the Community Development Director may, in
its discretion, attach as a condition of approval, reasonable landscaping requirements designed to beautify
the development. (Ord. 1684 §59, 1993).
Compliance Discussion: Applicant's plans depict proposed landscaping which will create an
attractive and desirable project.
ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES LOADING/ PARKING REQUIREMENTS
17.64.030 Off-street loading.
A. In all districts for each use for which a building is to be erected or structurally altered to the extent of
increasing the floor area to equal the minimum floor area required to provide loading space and which will
require the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise by truck or similar vehicle, there shall be
provided off-street loading space in accordance with the standards set forth in Table 17.64.01, Off -Street
Loading Requirements.
TABLE 17.64.01 OFF-STREET LOADING REQUIREMENTS
Off -Street Loading Berth Requirement (fractions rounded up
Use Categories to the closest whole number)
INDUSTRIAL, WAREHOUSING AND WHOLESALING
Sq. Ft. of Floor Area
No. of Loading Berths Required
12,501-25,000
2
B. A loading berth shall not be less than ten feet wide, thirty-five feet long and have a height clearance of
twelve feet. Where the vehicles generally used for loading and unloading exceed these dimensions, the
required length of these berths shall be increased.
Compliance Discussion: The proposed use has no need for standard loading berths, as the goods
produced are shipped out by delivery truck at irregular intervals rather than primarily semi -trailer
trucks. The business typically has delivery vans coming three times daily. To accommodate van
deliveries, the design includes a 350 foot long loading drive with two central loading doors on the
Page 2
124
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
west side, so that delivery trucks can be staged and unloaded without blocking the surrounding
roads or access drives. This drive is 15 feet wide and is the length of eight of the standard loading
berths.
Occasional semi -trailer truck delivery unloading will be accommodated on the north side of the
south parking lot. Semis are unloaded by forklift. A gate in the fence provides access to a loading
door is located in the south wall of the building. This approach to loading will function well for the
business and meets the basic intention of the code, to ensure that unloading trucks are
accommodated on-site and will not block roadways. A fourth loading door is located on the east
side for occasional equipment deliveries. Forklifts will be used to bring materials from the south
parking lot to this door.
17.64.040 Off-street parking requirements.
All uses shall comply with the number of off-street parking requirements identified in Table 17.64.02A,
Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, and Table 17.64.0213, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking
Requirements. For residential uses the off-street parking requirements are stated in terms of the minimum
off-street parking required. For non-residential uses the off-street parking requirements are presented in
terms of both minimum and maximum off-street parking required. The number of off-street parking spaces
in Table 17.64.0213, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking, may be reduced in accordance with subsection B
of this section, Adjustments to Off -Street Vehicle Parking.
The requirement for any use not specifically listed shall be determined by the community development
director on the basis of requirements for similar uses, and on the basis of evidence of actual demand
created by similar uses in the city and elsewhere, and such other traffic engineering or planning data as
may be available and appropriate to the establishment of a minimum requirement.
TABLE 17.64.02B
NON-RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Minimum and Maximum Vehicle Parking Requirement (fractions rounded down to
Use Categories the closest whole number)
INDUSTRIAL and MANUFACTURING
2 spaces per each 3 employees on the 2 largest shifts, or 1 space per each 500 square
Assembly and
Manufacturing feet of gross floor area, whichever is greatest.
('1 space per employee if the business has only one shift).
Compliance Discussion: This use has two approaches for calculating the number of required
parking spaces. The company has multiple overlapping shifts with a projected future maximum of
30 employees. This being the case, the 2 spaces per each 3 employees on the 2 largest shifts
applies. The maximum number of employees that would be present on a shift is projected to be
27, therefore this approach with two spaces per three employees would require 18 parking spaces.
Approach 2 -The proposed building is 43,000 gross floor area. At 1 space per each 500 square feet
of gross floor area, 86 spaces would be required.
Table 17.64.0213 requires the greatest number of parking spaces for the two options be used, which
would be 86 spaces. 46 spaces are proposed, therefore the minimum requirement is not met. See
Section B for request for reduction of from the maximum requirement.
Page 3
125
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
B. Adjustments to Non -Residential Off -Street Vehicle Parking. The off-street parking requirements in Table
17.64.028, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, may be reduced, or increased in any
commercial (C) or industrial (M) district as follows:
1. Reductions. The maximum off-street parking requirements may be reduced by no more than twenty
percent.
2. Increases. The off-street parking requirements may be increased based on a parking demand
analysis prepared by the applicant as part of the site plan and architectural review process. The parking
demand analysis shall demonstrate and documents justification for the proposed increase.
Compliance Discussion: The Applicant is requesting an adjustment in the number of parking
spaces required through the conditional use permit process, pursuant to CPMC 17.76-.040(E)(3).
See Exhibit 16. The project proposes 46 spaces, which is between the two extremes identified by
code, 18 and 86. It is a number that is more than one and a half times the number of employees
that would be present at any one time. The Applicant requests that this alternative number of
spaces be approved as part of the CUP approval, see the main findings document where detailed
findings and conclusions of law addressing the requested adjustment are provided.
C. Accessible Parking Requirements. Where parking is provided accessory to a building, accessible parking
shall be provided, constructed, striped, signed and maintained as required by ORS 447.233, and Section
1104 of the latest Oregon Structural Specialty Code as set forth in this section.
1. The minimum number of accessible parking spaces shall be provided for all uses in accordance with
the standards in Table 17.64.03, Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces. Parking spaces used
to meet the standards in Table 17.64.03, Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces, shall be
counted toward meeting off-street parking requirements in Tables 17.64.02A and 17.64.0213,
Residential and Non -Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements. The accessible parking
requirements set forth in Table 17.64.03, Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces, are
minimum requirements and are not subject to reductions per subsection (B)(1) of this section;
2. Accessible parking shall be located in close proximity to building entrances and shall be designed to
permit occupants of vehicles to reach the entrance on an unobstructed path or walkway; and
3. Accessible spaces shall be grouped in pairs where possible.
Required accessible parking spaces shall be identified with signs and pavement markings identifying them
as reserved for persons with disabilities; signs shall be posted directly in front of the parking space at a
height of no less than forty-two inches and no more than seventy-two inches above pavement level. Van
spaces shall be specifically identified as such.
TABLE 17.64.03
MINIMUM NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES
Compliance Discussion: The project proposes the required two accessible spaces and one of
which is van accessible with a 96" wide aisle. Accessible parking is provided in the front parking
lot only, as it provides primary access to the building for staff and visitors.
Page 4
126
Total Minimum Number
of Accessible Parking
ORS 447.233Total
Spaces (with 60" access
Van Accessible Parking
Accessible Parking
Number of Parking
aisle, or 96" aisle for
Spaces with min. 96"
Spaces with min. 60"
Spaces Provided (per lot)
vans*)
wide access aisle
wide access aisle
26 to 50
2
1
1
Compliance Discussion: The project proposes the required two accessible spaces and one of
which is van accessible with a 96" wide aisle. Accessible parking is provided in the front parking
lot only, as it provides primary access to the building for staff and visitors.
Page 4
126
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
G. Compact Car Adjustment.
1. Any parking lot or otherwise required public parking area containing ten or more parking spaces
shall be eligible for a compact car adjustment, provided all requirements of this chapter are
adequately met.
2. Up to, but not exceeding, twenty-five percent of the total number of required parking spaces may
be designed and provided for the parking of compact cars.
3. All compact parking spaces must be identified for compact parking only. Compact parking spaces
shall be designed in accordance with the minimum standards set forth in Section 17.75.039(B),
Parking Stall Minimum Dimensions.
Compliance Discussion: No compact spaces are proposed.
I. Bicycle Parking. Bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 17.64.04, Bicycle Parking
Requirements.
Land Use
[Minimum Required
Minimum Covered
Manufacturing
2 spaces, or 0.15 space per 1,000 sq. ft., whichever is greater
100%
Compliance Discussion: 6 bike parking spaces are provided of which all are covered.
Chapter 17.75
DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
C. Driveway and Property Access Standards. Vehicular access to properties shall be located and
constructed in accordance with the standards set forth in the City of Central Point Department of Public
Works Standard Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction, Section
320.10.30, Driveway and Property Access.
Compliance Discussion: The property proposes taking access from the abutting retail street to the
east and access drive to the south rather than taking access from its frontage on Biddle Road.
Driveway will be constructed to meet the City of Central Point Public Works specifications for
driveways.
D. Pedestrian Circulation. Attractive access routes for pedestrian travel shall be provided through the public
sidewalk system, and where necessary supplemented through the use of pedestrian accessways as
required to accomplish the following:
1. Reducing distances between destinations or activity areas such as public sidewalks and building
entrances;
2. Bridging across barriers and obstacles such as fragmented pathway systems, wide streets, heavy
vehicular traffic, and changes in level by connecting pedestrian pathways with clearly marked
crossings and inviting sidewalk design;
3. Integrating signage and lighting system which offers interest and safety for pedestrians;
4. Connecting parking areas and destinations with retail streets or pedestrian accessways identified
through use of distinctive paving materials, pavement striping, grade separation, or landscaping.
Compliance Discussion: The parcel is on the west side of the Retail Street. A new ten foot wide
concrete sidewalk with tree grates per figure 17.75.02 will be installed, running from Biddle Road
to the southern access drive. Direct walkways connect from this sidewalk to the entrances of the
building and parking lots.
Page 5
127
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
17.75.039 Off-street parking design and development standards.
All off-street vehicular parking spaces shall be improved to the following standards:
A. Connectivity. Parking lots for new development shall be designed to provide vehicular and pedestrian
connections to adjacent sites unless as a result of any of the following such connections are not
possible:
1. Topographic constraints;
2. Existing development patterns on abutting property which preclude a logical connection;
3. Traffic safety concerns; or
4. Protection of significant natural resources.
Compliance Discussion: All parking lots are connected by way of the retail street and southern
the private access road. Ultimately, the purpose of this criterion is to assure that higher order City
Streets are not used for access between adjacent commercial sites and nothing about the proposed
layout requires travel on higher order roads to access adjacent lots and the only adjacent lot is the
Super 8 Motel and there is not anticipated to be any interaction between that use and the
microelectronics use at the subject site.
B. Parking Stall Minimum Dimensions. Standard parking spaces shall conform to the following standards
and the dimensions in Figure 17.75.03 and Table 17.75.02; provided, that compact parking spaces
permitted in accordance with Section 17.64.040(G) shall have the following minimum dimensions:
1. Width --Shall be as provided in column B in Table 17.75.02;
2. Length --Shall reduce column C in Table 17.75.02 by no more than three feet.
Compliance Discussion: Proposed spaces meet the minimum dimensions.
C. Access. There shall be adequate provision for ingress and egress to all parking spaces.
Compliance Discussion: The design includes 24 -foot drive aisles in both parking lots. Both lots
have direct access to access drives that connect to the local streets. In addition, a one-way drive
provides circulation from the rear lot to the front on the west side of the building.
D. Driveways. Driveway width shall be measured at the driveway's narrowest point, including the curb cut.
The design and construction of driveways shall be as set forth in the Standard Specifications and Public
Works Department Standards and Specifications.
Compliance Discussion: Appropriate driveway widths are proposed. Proposed driveways can
and will meet Central Point's standard specifications.
E. Improvement of Parking Spaces.
1. When a concrete curb is used as a wheel stop, it may be placed within the parking space up to two
feet from the front of a space. In such cases, the area between the wheel stop and landscaping need
not be paved, provided it is maintained with appropriate ground cover, or walkway. In no event shall
the placement of wheel stops reduce the minimum landscape or walkway width requirements.
Compliance Discussion: Wheelstops are proposed and the area between the wheelstop and curb
will be paved; this area is not being counted toward the landscaping requirements nor is it reducing
the 5 -foot sidewalk requirement.
Page 6
W1
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
F. Limitation on Use of Parking Areas. Required parking areas shall be used exclusively for vehicle parking
in conjunction with a permitted use and shall not be reduced or encroached upon in any manner. The
parking facilities shall be so designed and maintained as not to constitute a nuisance at any time, and
shall be used in such a manner that no hazard to persons or property, or unreasonable impediment to
traffic, will result.
Compliance Discussion: Parking space use will be used only for vehicle parking related to the
building's use.
G. Parking/Loading Facility Landscaping and Screening. Parking lot landscaping shall be used to reinforce
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, including parking lot entries, pedestrian accessways, and parking
aisles. To achieve this objective the following minimum standards shall apply; however, additional
landscaping may be recommended during the site plan and architectural review process (Chapter
17.72). All parking lots shall be landscaped in accordance with the following standards:
1. Perimeter and Street Frontage Landscaping Requirements. The perimeter and street frontage for all
parking facilities shall be landscaped according to the standards set forth in Table 17.75.03.
2. Terminal and Interior Islands. For parking lots in excess of ten spaces all rows of parking spaces must
provide terminal a minimum of six feet in width to protect parked vehicles, provide visibility, confine
traffic to aisles and driveways, and provide a minimum of five feet of space for landscaping. In
addition, when ten or more vehicles would be parked side-by-side in an abutting configuration, interior
landscaped islands a minimum of eight feet wide must be located within the parking row. For parking
lots greater than fifty parking spaces, the location of interior landscape island shall be allowed to be
consolidated for planting of large stands of trees to break up the scale of the parking lot.
The number of trees required in the interior landscape area shall be dependent upon the location of
the parking lot in relation to the building and public right-of-way:
a. Where the parking lot is located between the building and the public right-of-way, one tree for
every four spaces;
b. Where the parking lot is located to the side of the building and partially abuts the public right-of-
way, one tree for every six spaces;
c. Where the parking lot is located behind the building and is not visible from the public right-of-way,
one tree for every eight spaces.
3. Bioswales. The use of bioswales within parking lots is encouraged and may be located within
landscape areas subject to site plan and architectural review. The tree planting standards may be
reduced in areas dedicated to bioswales subject to site plan and architectural review.
Compliance Discussion: Perimeter landscaping can and will meet standards. Required plantings
where the parking lots abut the Retail Street will be provided. The project proposes to use the bio-
swales on the adjacent parcel for a significant portion of the stormwater detention and management
and this has been agree to between the owners.
H. Bicycle Parking. The amount of bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 17.64.040
and constructed in accordance with the following standards:
1. Location of Bicycle Parking. Required bicycle parking facilities shall be located on-site in well lighted,
secure locations within fifty feet of well -used entrances and not farther from the entrance than the
closest automobile parking space. Bicycle parking shall have direct access to both the public right-of-
way and to a main entrance of the principal use. Bicycle parking may also be provided inside a
building in suitable, secure and accessible locations. Bicycle parking for multiple uses (such as in a
commercial center) may be clustered in one or several locations.
2. Bicycle Parking Design Standards. All bicycle parking and maneuvering areas shall be constructed to
the following minimum design standards:
]M1
129
Page 7
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
a. Surfacing. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced in the same manner as a motor
vehicle parking area or with a minimum of a three-inch thickness of hard surfacing (i.e., asphalt,
concrete, pavers or similar material). This surface will be maintained in a smooth, durable and
well -drained condition.
b. Parking Space Dimension Standard. Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least six feet long and two
feet wide with minimum overhead clearance of seven feet.
Lighting. Lighting shall be provided in a bicycle parking area so that all facilities are thoroughly
illuminated and visible from adjacent sidewalks or motor vehicle parking lots during all hours of
use.
d. Aisles. A five-foot aisle for bicycle maneuvering shall be provided and maintained beside or
between each row of bicycle parking.
e. Signs. Where bicycle parking facilities are not directly visible from the public rights-of-way, entry
and directional signs shall be provided to direct bicycles from the public rights-of-way to the bicycle
parking facility.
3. Exceptions to Bicycle Parking. The community development director may allow exceptions to the
bicycle parking standards in connection with temporary uses or uses that do not generate the need
for bicyclists parking such as Christmas tree sales and mini -storage units.
Compliance Discussion: The project proposes 6 bike parking spaces. All spaces will be covered
and located immediately adjacent to the building entrance. Adequate aisles are provided and the
outdoor lighting will make all bike parking areas adequately lit.
17.75.042 Commercial building design standards.
The following design standards are applicable to development in all commercial zoning districts, and are intended to
assure pedestrian scale commercial development that supports and enhances the small town character of the
community. All publicly visible buildings shall comply with the standards set forth in this section.
A. Massing, Articulation, Transparency, and Entrances.
1. Building Massing. The top of the building shall emphasize a
distinct profile or outline with elements such as a projecting
parapet, cornice, upper level setback, or pitched roofline. --
2. Facade Articulation. Facades longer than forty feet and fronts I
on a street, sidewalk, accessway or residential area shall be -
divided into small units through the use of articulation, which may
include offsets, recesses, staggered walls, stepped walls, pitched
or stepped rooflines, overhangs, or other elements of the
building's mass.
For purposes of complying with the requirements in this subsection "facade articulation" shall consist of a
combination of two of the following design features:
a. Changes in plane with a depth of at least twenty-four inches, either horizontally or vertically, at intervals
of not less than twenty feet and not more than forty feet; or
b. Changes of color, texture, or material, either horizontally or vertically, at intervals of not less than twenty
feet and not more than one hundred feet; or
c. A repeating pattern of wall recesses and projections, such as bays, offsets, reveals or projecting ribs,
that has a relief of at least eight inches.
Compliance Discussion: The proposed building incorporates a number of elements to provide for
fagade articulation. The front office portion on the north side of the building has several window
bays on each side, which are then divided further through mullion patterns and projecting solar
shades. The long southern portion of the building includes several window bays at the ground
level and more at the ul)pi;r level to bring daylight into the 2 -story fabrication area. These window
' Page 8
130
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
bays are also further articulated through mullion patterns and projecting solar shades. The final
bay at the south end is more of a vertically articulated bay, distinguishing it from the others
3. Pedestrian Entrances. For buildings facing a street, a primary pedestrian entrance shall be provided that is
easily visible, or easily accessible, from the street right-of-way, or a pedestrian accessway. To ensure that
building entrances are clearly visible and identifiable to pedestrians the principal entry to the building shall be
made prominent with canopies or overhangs.
To achieve the objectives of this subsection the design of a primary entrance should incorporate at least three of
the following design criteria:
a. For building facades over two hundred feet in length facing a street or accessway provide two or more
public building entrances off the street;
b. Architectural details such as arches, friezes, tile work, murals, or moldings;
c. Integral planters or wing walls that incorporate landscape or seating;
d. Enhanced exterior light fixtures such as wall sconces, light coves with concealed light sources, ground -
mounted accent lights, or decorative pedestal lights;
e. Prominent three-dimensional features, such as belfries, chimneys, clock towers, domes, spires,
steeples, towers, or turrets; and
f. A repeating pattern of pilasters projecting from the facade wall by a minimum of eight inches or
architectural or decorative columns.
Compliance Discussion: The main pedestrian entry is located in the northeast corner in a distinct
tall building element that is composed mainly of glass. A flat canopy projects out near the top of
the element distinguishing it from the other building elements. Secondary building entrances are
located on the east and west facades. Each has a steel and glass door, will have a wall sconce
adjacent, and is entered from the abutting sidewalk or path.
4. Transparency. Transparency (glazing) provides interest for the pedestrian, connects the building exterior and
interior, puts eyes on the street/parking, promotes reusability, and provides a human -scale element on building
facades. The transparency standard applies to a building's principal facade. Projects subject to this section shall
meet the following glazing requirements:
a. A minimum of forty percent of a facade wall face area, the area from finished ground floor elevation to
twelve feet above finished floor elevation, shall be comprised of transparent glazing from windows or
doors. Reflective or tinted glass or film is not permitted on ground floor facade windows. The forty percent
minimum transparency requirement may be reduced through the site plan and architectural review process
upon demonstration that a proposed alternative design achieves the transparency objectives. See
subsection (A)(4)(e) of this section for alternative design solutions.
,.Y
a
0000
L11
F-1
11
1
b. The second floor must provide a minimum of twenty-five percent glazing between three and eight feet,
as measured from that story's finished floor level. The twenty-five percent minimum transparency
requirement may be reduced through the site plan and architectural review process upon demonstration
that the proposed alternative design achieves the transparency objectives. See subsection (A)(4)(e) of this
section for alternative design solutions.
Page 9
131
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
c. If a single -story building has a facade taller than twenty feet, the facade area above fifteen feet is
subject to the same window requirement as the second floor requirement in subsection (A)(4)(b) of this
section.
d. Any building wall facade that is built up to an interior mid -block property line is not required to have
glazing on that facade if no prohibitions and no contractual or legal impediments exist that would prevent a
building being constructed on the adjacent property up to the wall of the facade.
e. Where transparent windows are not provided on at least forty percent of a building wall facade (or
portions thereof) to meet the intent of this section, at least three of the following elements shall be
incorporated:
i. Masonry (but not flat concrete block);
ii. Concrete or masonry plinth at wall base;
iii. Belt courses of a different texture and color;
iv. Projecting cornice;
v. Projecting awning/canopy (minimum four -foot overhang);
vi. Decorative tile work;
vii. Trellis containing planting;
viii. Artwork of a scale clearly visible from the associated right-of-way;
ix. Vertical articulation;
x. Lighting fixtures;
xi. Recesses or bays;
xii. Use of other architectural elements not listed that is demonstrated to meet the intent of this
section.
Compliance Discussion: The north -facing Biddle Road front fagade complies with the
transparency requirements. Its 840 square feet of glazing in a 1440 wall area provides 58.3%
transparency on the first floor. At the second floor within the band between 3 feet and 6 feet above
the finished floor there is 428 square feet of glazing in a 600 foot wall area, which provides 71.3%
transparency. The fagade meets and exceeds the standard.
5. Wall Faces. As used in this section there are three types of wall faces. To ensure that buildings do not display
unembellished walls visible from a public street or residential area the following standards are imposed:
a. Facade Wall Face. Facade wall faces greater than forty feet in length shall be divided into small units
through the use of articulation, which may include offsets, recesses, staggered walls, stepped walls,
pitched or stepped rooflines, overhangs, or other elements of the building's mass.
For purposes of complying with the requirements in this subsection facade wall faces shall consist of a
combination of two of the following design features:
i. Changes in plane with a depth of at least twenty-four inches, either horizontally or vertically, at
intervals of not less than twenty feet and not more than forty feet; or
ii. Changes of color, texture, or material, either
horizontally or vertically, at intervals of not less
than twenty feet and not more than one fir*
hundred feet; or 4• ;i.
iii. A repeating pattern of wall recesses and
projections, such as bays, offsets, reveals or i • ' ? r -i --
projecting ribs, that has a relief of at least eight
inches at intervals of not less than twenty feet �r r
and not more than forty feet.
Page 10
132
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
Compliance Discussion: The fagade wall face is the north elevation facing Biddle Road; this
fagade is extensively articulated and includes all of the required elements.
b. Building Wall Face. As applicable each building wall face shall be given architectural treatment to meet
the intent of this section by using three or more of the following:
i. Varying rooflines with one foot or greater changes of height at least every forty feet;
ii. Transparent windows that comprise at least forty percent of the visible facade;
iii. Secondary entrances that include glazing and landscape treatment;
iv. Balconies;
v. Awnings/canopies;
vi. Planted trellises;
vii. Projecting cornices at least twelve inches in height;
viii. Variation in building form and materials demonstrated to meet the intent of this section.
c. Other Wall Faces. Other wall faces abutting residential areas shall comply with the requirements for
building wall faces. Other wall faces not abutting residential areas are exempt from this section.
Compliance Discussion: The design of these faces provides a variety of architectural treatments
that enliven the long sidewalls of the building. Glass comprises 23.5% of the east building wall
face and 14.5% of the west building face is transparent. Louvered solar shades project out over
each window. Both walls have variation in building form and height along the length of the wall,
as well as secondary entrances that include glazing.
6. Screening of Service Areas and Rooftop Equipment. Publicly visible service areas, loading zones, waste
disposal, storage areas, and rooftop equipment (mechanical and communications) shall be fully screened from
the ground level of nearby streets and residential areas within two hundred feet; the following standards apply:
a. Service Areas.
i. A six-foot masonry enclosure, decorative metal fence enclosure, a wood enclosure, or other
approved materials complementary to adjacent buildings; or
ii. A six-foot solid hedge or other plant material screening as approved.
Compliance Discussion: The south wall is actually an open equipment bay that runs the full
width to accommodate equipment supporting the fabrication work. It faces the access road and
abutting truck freight terminal, and does not face any public road or residential area. A six-foot
tall fence with aluminum slats is planned across the entire face to close off access to the equipment
from the parking area and screen any outdoor storage. Gates and a roll -up door are located on this
face to accommodate loading of equipment. Walls at the east and west ends of the equipment area
are full height to shield the view of the equipment from the public road. The proposed waste
disposal area is located adjacent to the southwest corner and will be screened with an enclosure
pursuant to "i" above.
Page 11
133
APPLICANTS' EXHIBIT 3
Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Development Standards
Applicant: Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc and Tail Lite Properties LLC
"M Wy+rdl Nk
b. Rooftop Equipment.
i. Mechanical equipment shall be screened by extending parapet walls or other roof forms that are
integrated with the architecture of the building. Painting of rooftop equipment or erecting fences are
not acceptable methods of screening.
ii. Rooftop -mounted voice/data transmission equipment shall be integrated with the design of the
roof, rather than being simply attached to the roof -deck.
Compliance Discussion:
The roof top HVAC equipment is set back from the roof edge to prevent visibility from the
ground. A full height mechanical equipment shield is also being provided around the units. The
site plan shows the location of the of the mechanical rooftop equipment screen.
Page 12
134
m
2
W
<z
0
'2
aP
0
V
3 s
0 0
a
F- y
OW
d f MZ LE dtllV ]3S
I
WON ?I�02I —__
I 3'i$d:L
00
I r
I.
LO
.ye I I
T� E
V
nVr•.Nue
U ui o x m
I
N �
W" M OHCHARnvIF, ; f�
I
5
� >f002IHMOQY9W } -
l/)�i) s
�/ I
.V�
U
V
z
o
a g$ v mR
�-•c�do�-- r �v>-x��Hwd�[
gig, - - -- ox �.q- _•� €LLs _ 0o
ni. co
W ym '
[ 7 L '0
w,Qo00
ii
4Z MZLf dtlW 97S � � _ f�
lilt
HMosuyor : W V 9S:LZ=LI SLOZ29/90
vivo 910
% 0 WSubject_Property
Tax Lots
Central Point Comp
Medium Density
Land Use Plan
Res.
Generallndusdrial
Thoroughfare
- Commercial
Light Indusdrial
Tourist and Office
F Low Density Res.
Professional
Print Date: 3-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
Existing Comprehensive
Plan Map
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices & N
Tail Lite Properties LLC WE
37 -2W -01C-802 s
300 150 0 300 Feet
136
Subject—Property
I�
Tax Lots
Central Point Comp
Medium Density
Land Use Plan
Res.
Generallndusdrial
Thoroughfare
Commercial
Light Indusdrial
Tourist and Office
Low Density Res.
Professional
Print Date: 3.15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
2012 Aerial
Subject Property
1 _
Tax Lots
Zoning Outline
300 150 0 300 Feet
Existing Zoning Map
On Aerial Photo
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC
37 -2W -01C-802
wM N
W+E
S
Print Date: 03-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
EXHIBIT 8
2012 Aerial
Subject Property
Tax Lots
Zoning Outline
300 150 0 300 Feet
Proposed Zoning Map
On Aerial Photo
Comprehensive Plan Amendment / Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC IN
37 -2W -01C-802
Im W+E
s
Print Date: 03-15-2016; Source: CSA Planning, Ltd;
Jackson County GIS; City of Central Point GIS
m
o
�.y , sa3inaaoa3iw Aalldn anoom � j W r.
S \ 7 a IL
Memorandum
To: Matt Samitore. Central Point Public Works Director
Date: 05/16/2016
Subject: C4 to C5 Zone Change Traffic Findings and Conclusions
EXHIBIT 10
9 T -RA M S PRIT-ATI011
MIN -ERIK ll(
S.O. Transportation
Engineering, LLC
112 Monterey Drive
Medford, OR 97504
Telephone 541 941 4148
Fax 541 535 6873
Kwkp1 @Q corn
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC evaluated impacts for a proposed zone change from C-4 to C-
5 on Township 37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 in Central Point, Oregon. The parcel is located along the
south side of Biddle Road west of Hamrick Road adjacent to Super 8.
Existing Site
Tax lot 802 is currently vacant and has tentative plat approval to be split into three parcels. There's a planned
veterinary center on the southeast corner (Parcel 1) that has land use approval and is currently under review for
building permits. Access to the site is provided to Biddle Road and through an internal lane to Hamrick Road that
is expected to be constructed contemporaneously with the site work for the veterinary building.
7" = Biddle Road
P Parcell
oJ.
,� Parcel3
�_— -- —
A Parcell
i
Zone Change from CA and C-5
The current C-4 zoning district is intended to provide for the development of concentrated tourist commercial and
entertainment facilities that will maximize ease of access and visibility from the Interstate 5 freeway and major
arterial streets, while the C-5 zoning district provides for commercial and business uses that are most
appropriately located along or near major highways or thoroughfares. Both zoning districts allow banks, offices,
convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores,
veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the higher traffic generating uses. The C-5 zoning
district allows light fabrication, assembly, packaging, and wholesale sales of consumer goods that are not
permitted in the C-4 zoning district. Other differences include art schools, pawnshops, gymnasiums, and
nurseries. The C-4 zoning district permits engineering services, legal services, art studios, and counselling
141
services, which are not permitted in the C-5 zone As can be seen, non -permitted uses in both zones are the
lower traffic generating uses. A full list of permitted uses for each zoning district is attached.
Conclusions
Traffic generations for both C-4 and C-5 zoning districts were compared and determined to have comparable,
potential impacts to the transportation system. No change in the potential for additional traffic is estimated to
occur as a result of the proposed zone change from C-4 to C-5.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me
Respectfully,
PL -
Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE
Firm Principal
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Cc Michael Wang, PE (ODOT)
Mike Kuntz, PE (Jackson County)
Attachments: C4 and C5 permitted uses
Memorandum
Page 2
142
Chapter 17.44
C-4, TOURIST AND OFFICE -PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT
17.44.010 Purpose.
The C-4 district is intended to provide for the development of concentrated tourist commercial and
entertainment facilities to serve both local residents and traveling public, and also for the development of
compatible professional office facilities. C-4 development should occur at locations that will maximize ease of
access and visibility from the Interstate 5 freeway and major arterial streets and to be convenient to the users
of Expo Park, the airport, and downtown. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1882 (part), 2006; Ord. 1436 §2(part),
1981).
17.44.020 Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-4 district:
A. General professional and financial offices, including, but not limited to:
1. Banks and similar financial institutions;
2. Accounting and bookkeeping offices;
3. Real estate offices;
4. Insurance company offices;
5. Legal services;
6. Architectural and engineering services;
7. Professional photo or art studios;
8. Counseling services;
9. Corporate or government offices;
10. Medical/dental offices;
B. Tourist and entertainment -related facilities, including:
143
1. Convenience market, meat, poultry, fish and seafood sales; fruit and beverage stands;
2. Drugstores;
3. Automobile service station, automobile and recreational vehicle parts sales and repairs, and truck
rentals;
4. Motel and hotel;
5. Walk-in movie theater;
6. Bowling alley;
7. Photo and art galleries;
8. Photo processing pickup station;
9. Travel agencies;
10. Barber and beauty shops;
11. Sit-down restaurants or dinner houses (including alcohol);
12. Cocktail lounges and clubs serving alcoholic beverages;
13. Tavern with beer only;
14. Commercial parking lot;
15. Community shopping centers which may include any of the permitted uses in this section and may
also include the following uses:
a. Supermarkets;
b. Department stores;
c. Sporting goods;
d. Books and stationery;
144
e. Gifts, notions and variety;
f. Florists;
g. Leather goods and luggage;
h. Pet sales and related supplies;
i. Photographic supplies;
j. Health food;
k. Self-service laundry;
I. 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, electronic sales and service;
w. Printing, lithography and publishing;
16. Mobile food vendors;
17. State -regulated package liquor stores;
145
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 and compatible with other permitted uses and with the intent of the C-4
district as provided in Section 17.60.140, Authorization for similar uses;
19. Large retail establishments. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1900 §2(part), 2007; Ord. 1882 (part),
2006; Ord. 1835 §1, 2003; Ord. 1823 §4(part), 2001; Ord. 1736 §2, 1996; Ord. 1727 §2, 1995; Ord. 1720
§1, 1995; Ord. 1684 §44, 1993; Ord. 1615 §37, 1989; Ord. 1511 §6, 1984; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.44.030 Conditional uses.
A. The following uses are permitted in the C-4 district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76,
Conditional Use Permits:
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. Nonindustrial business/vocational schools;
10. Physical fitness/conditioning center; martial arts schools;
11. Carwash;
12. Taxicab dispatch office;
13. Ambulance/emergency services;
14. Day care center;
146
15. Drive-in fast food outlets;
16. Other specialty food outlets;
17. Television and radio broadcasting studio;
18. 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;
19. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission by 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, or office -professional planned unit development that consists predominantly of uses
permitted in the zone and is planned and developed in accordance with Chapter 17.68, Planned Unit
Development (PUD). These uses shall include the following:
1. Department stores;
2. Sporting goods;
3. Books and stationery;
4. Gifts, notions and variety;
5. Florists;
6. Leather goods and luggage;
7. Pet sales and related supplies;
8. Photographic supplies;
9. Health food;
10. Self-service laundry;
147
11. Antique shop;
12. Delicatessen;
13. Pastry and confectionery;
14. General apparel;
15. Shoes and boots;
16. Specialty apparel;
17. Jewelry;
18. Clocks and watches, sales and service;
19. Bakery, retail only;
20. Bicycle shop;
21. Audio, video, electronic sales and service; and
22. Printing, lithography and publishing. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1900 §2(part), 2007; Ord. 1835 §2,
2003; Ord. 1823 §4(part), 2001; Ord. 1511 §7, 1984; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.44.040 Site Ilan and architectural development standards.
Development within the C-4 district shall be subject to the site and architectural standards set forth in
Chapter 17.75, Design and Development Standards. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1823 §4(part), 2001; Ord.
1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.44.050 General use requirements.
A. Uses that are normally permitted in the C-4 district but that are referred to the planning commission for
further review, per Section 17.44.030(A)(19), Conditional uses, will be processed according to application
procedures for conditional use permits. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall
be used which are found by the planning commission to be harmful to persons living or working in the vicinity
by reason of odor, fumes, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water -carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination
or glare, or are found to involve any hazard of fire or explosion.
B. All businesses, services and processes shall be conducted entirely within a completely enclosed structure,
with the exception of off-street parking and loading areas, outdoor eating areas, service stations, outdoor
recreational facilities, recreational vehicle overnight facilities, and other compatible activities, as approved by
the planning commission.
C. Open storage of materials related to a permitted use shall be permitted only within an area surrounded or
screened by a solid wall or fence having a height of six feet; provided that no materials or equipment shall be
stored to a height greater than that of the wall. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981. Formerly
17.44.060).
17.44.060 Signage standards
Signs in the C-4 district shall be permitted and designed according to provisions of Section 17.75.050, Signage
standards, and Chapter 15.24, Sign Code. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1615 §16, 1989; Ord. 1436 §2(part),
1981. Formerly 17.44.070).
17.44.070 Off-street parking.
Off-street parking and loading spaces shall be provided as required in Chapter 17.64, Off -Street Parking and
Loading, and developed to the standards set forth in Section 17.75.039, Off-street parking design and
development standards. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981. Formerly 17.44.080).
149
Chapter 17.46
C-5, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
Sections:
17.46.010
Purpose.
17.46.020
Permitted uses.
17.46.030
Conditional uses.
17.46.040
Height regulations.
17.46.050
Area, width and yard requirements.
17.46.060
General requirements.
17.46.070
Signs and lighting of premises.
17.46.080
Off-street parking.
17.46.010 Purpose.
The C-5 district is intended to provide for commercial and business uses that are most appropriately located
along or near major highways or thoroughfares, and are largely dependent upon highway visibility and easy
vehicular access. (Ord. 1883 (part), 2006; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.46.020 Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-5 district
A. Professional and financial, including:
1. Banks and similar financial institutions,
2. Real estate, insurance, and similar offices,
3. Contractor's offices,
4. Medical services, clinics and laboratories;
B. Personal services, including.
1. Self-service laundry and laundry pickup stations,
2. Photo processing pickup stations,
3. Photo processing laboratories,
150
4. Small appliance service,
5. Printing, lithography and publishing,
6. Locksmith,
7. Taxicab dispatch office,
8. Ambulance/emergency services,
9. Art and music schools,
10. Business/vocational schools,
11. Physical fitness/conditioning center, martial arts schools,
12. Carwash,
13. Automobile and truck service stations and repair shops,
14. Auto and furniture upholstery shops,
15. Veterinary clinics (within enclosed structure),
16. Barber shops,
17. Beauty salons,
18. Manicure salons;
C. Retail outlets, including -
1. Auto and truck sales (new and used),
2. Tire sales and service,
3. Glass and mirror sales and service,
4. Wallcovering, floorcovering, curtains, etc.,
5. Major appliances sales and service,
151
6. Hardware sales,
7. Monument sales,
8. Supermarket,
9. Convenience market,
10. Drugstore,
11. Feed, seed and fuel (within enclosed structure),
12. Electrical and plumbing supplies,
13. Heating and air-conditioning equipment,
14. Stone, tile and masonry supplies,
15. Nursery and gardening materials and supplies,
16. Antique shop,
17. Art and engineering supplies,
18. Pawnshop,
19. Sit-down restaurants, including service of beer, wine and liquor,
20. Drive-in fast food establishments,
21. Tavern, beer sales only,
22. Public/quasi-public utilities and services,
23. Florist sales,
24. Pet sales,
25. General apparel,
26. Furniture sales, including used furniture,
152
27. Sporting goods sales, including firearms,
28. State -regulated package liquor stores,
29. Community shopping centers, which may include any of the permitted uses in this section and the C-
4 district,
30. Large retail establishment eighty thousand square feet or less as defined in Section 17.08.010,
Retail establishment, large;
D. Tourist/recreational-oriented uses, including:
1. Hotel and motel,
2. Walk-in theater (fully enclosed),
3. Bowling alley,
4. Ice and roller skating rinks,
5. Dancehalls (nonalcoholic),
6. Billiard/pool hall,
7. Miniature golf,
8. Club and organizational meeting facilities;
E. Commercial parking lots:
1. Recreational vehicle storage lots;
F. Light fabrication, including
1. Light fabrication, assembly, packaging, mail-order sales and wholesale sales of consumer goods, and
2. Light fabrication and repair shops such as blacksmith, cabinet, electric motor, heating, machine,
sheetmetal, signs, stone monuments, upholstery and welding;
153
G. Other uses not specified in this or any other district, if the planning commission finds them to be similar to
the uses listed above and compatible with other permitted uses and within the intent of the C-5 district. (Ord.
1883 (part), 2006; Ord. 1736 §3, 1996; Ord. 1727 §3, 1995; Ord. 1721 §1, 1995; Ord. 1701 §1, 1994; Ord.
1698 §1, 1994; Ord. 1697 §1, 1994; Ord. 1695 §1, 1993; Ord. 1687 §1, 1993; Ord. 1684 §45, 1993; Ord. 1511
§8, 1984; Ord. 1452 §1, 1982; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.46.030 Conditional uses.
The following uses are permitted in the C-5 district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76:
1. Automobile and truck paint shops;
2. Recreational vehicle overnight facilities;
3. Drive-in movie theater;
4. Heavy equipment sales and service;
5. Mobile home and recreational vehicle sales;
6. Boats and marine equipment sales and service;
7. Motorcycle and snowmobile sales and service;
8. Dinner houses and restaurants serving alcoholic beverages;
9. Cocktail lounges and clubs;
10. Other specialty food outlets, mobile food vendors;
11. Meat, fish, poultry and seafood, light processing and sales;
12. Dairy products sales;
13. Paint and related equipment and supplies;
14. Cleaning and janitorial supplies;
15. Secondhand store or thrift shop;
154
16. Mortuary;
17. Amusement center (pinball, games, etc.);
18. Manufacturing for on -premises sales;
19. Taxidermist;
20. Auction house (excluding livestock);
21. Wholesaling of permitted use products;
22. Adult businesses, as defined in Chapter 5.24;
23. Small engine sales and service;
24. Vocational, technical and trade schools, including facilities related to industrial trades;
25. Accessory uses and buildings 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;
26. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission by city staff because they were found to exhibit
potentially adverse or hazardous characteristics not normally found in uses of a similar type or size;
27. Large retail establishments greater than eighty thousand square feet as defined in Section 17.08.010,
Retail establishment, large;
28. Regional shopping centers. (Ord. 1883 (part), 2006; Ord. 1701 §2, 1994; Ord. 1695 §2, 1993; Ord. 1511
§9, 1984; Ord. 1450 §1, 1982; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.46.040 Height regulations.
No building or structure shall exceed thirty-five feet in height in the C-5 district. (Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.46.050 Area, width and yard requirements.
A. Lot Area. No requirements except as necessary to comply with applicable yard and parking and loading
requirements.
B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be fifty feet.
155
C. Lot Depth. The minimum lot depth shall be one hundred feet.
D. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of ten feet and shall be maintained as landscaped open
space. When off-street parking is located in the front yard area, the landscaped strip may be reduced to not
less than six feet with planning commission approval of the site plan.
E. Side Yard. The side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except when abutting structures are proposed with
a common wall that complies with the Uniform Building Code
F. Rear Yard. No rear yard shall be required in the C-5 district except when the rear lot line abuts property in a
residential (R) district and then the rear yard shall be a minimum of twenty feet. Where property in the C-5
district is separated from property in a residential (R) district by a public alley or street, no rear yard setback
shall be required.
G. Lot Coverage. No requirements except as necessary to comply with applicable yard, parking and loading
requirements. (Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981)
17.46.060 Generalrequirements.
A. Uses that are normally permitted in the C-5 district but that are referred to the planning commission for
further review, per Section 17.46.030(26), will be processed according to application procedures for conditional
use permits. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used which are found
by the planning commission to be harmful to persons living or working in the vicinity by reason of odor, fumes,
dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water -carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination or glare, or are found to
involve any hazard of fire or explosion.
B. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used unless in compliance with
all applicable state and federal environmental, health and safety regulations
C. Wherever the side or rear property lines of a parcel in the C-5 district abut parcels in a residential (R) district,
a solid wall or fence, vine -covered open fence or compact evergreen hedge six feet in height shall be located
on that property line and continuously maintained to ensure effective buffering and visual screening between
the two land uses. Where a public alley or street separates the two properties, the barrier or screen shall be
placed on the C-5 property at the time of construction and may include driveway and pedestrian openings to
the alley or street, as approved by the planning commission.
156
D. Whenever feasible, buildings shall be located toward the rear of the lot with parking toward the street in the
front yard area for easy access and to minimize traffic noise at the rear of the property, especially when the
rear property line abuts a residential (R) district. (Ord. 1684 §46, 1993; Ord. 1615 §44, 1989; Ord. 1436
§2(part), 1981).
17.46.070 Signs and lighting of premises.
A. No illuminated sign or lighting standard used for the illumination of premises shall be so designed and
installed that its direct rays are toward or parallel to a public street or highway or directed toward any property
that lies within a residential (R) district.
B. No red, green or amber lights or illuminated signs may be placed in such a location or position that they
could be confused with, or may interfere with, any official traffic control device, traffic signal or directional guide
signs.
C. Signs in the C-5 district shall be permitted and designed in accordance with Chapter 15.24 and with
Section 17.60.110. (Ord. 1615 §17, 1989; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.46.080 Off-street parking.
Off-street parking and loading space shall be provided as required in Chapter 17.64. (Ord. 1436 §2(part),
1981).
157
T-UNIPOAl nTION
4KIl Lala. LLC
Memorandum S.O. Transportation
Engineering, LLC
112 Monterey Drive
To: Matt Samitore, Central Point Public Works Director Medford, OR 97504
Telephone 541 941.4148
Date: 10/04/2016 Fax 541 535.6873
Subject: C4 to C5 Zone Change Additional Traffic Findings Kwkp1 @O.com
Additional information was requested by the City of Central Point regarding a proposed zone change
from C4 to C5 on Township 37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 in Central Point, Oregon. A
previous memorandum was prepared in May of 2016 that concluded the two zoning districts (C4 and
C5) had comparable, potential impacts to the transportation system. This memorandum explains this
in more detail and serves as an addendum to the first memorandum.
C4 and C5 Zoning Districts
The C4 and C5 zoning districts both allow development of concentrated commercial uses, but differ in
how they are located. Where C4 typically provides for maximized ease of access and visibility from
the Interstate 5 freeway and major arterial streets, C5 provides for uses most appropriately located
along or near major highways or thoroughfares. As stated in the previous memorandum, both zoning
districts allow banks, offices, convenience markets, drugstores, restaurants, supermarkets, sporting
goods stores, retail stores, liquor stores, veterinary clinics, and shopping centers to name some of the
higher traffic generating uses. The highest permitted traffic generator in either zone is a convenience
market, which is shown in the ITE Trip Generation to generate 52.41 trips per 1000 square feet during
the p.m. peak hour. There are other uses that are outright permitted in one zone but a conditional use
in the other. However, both zones are built out with these types of uses in a manner that balances out
potential trip generations. Overall, the highest and best uses in C5 are not shown to generate any
more traffic than C4.
Traffic Impact Analysis Applicability
The City of Central Point Public Works Standards and Specifications require a traffic impact analysis
for a land use application that involves one or more of the following actions in 320.10.03 (3)(a -g).
These include:
a) A change in zoning or plan amendment designation that generates 300 average daily trips (ADT)
more than the current zoning;
The proposed zone change from C4 to C5 is shown to generate no additional traffic to the
transportation system.
b) Any proposed development or land use action that a road authority, including the city, Jackson
County or ODOT, states may have operational or safety concerns along its facilities;
There are no known operational or safety concerns as a result of the proposed zone change.
c) An increase in site traffic volume generation by 250 average daily trips (ADT) or more, or 25 peak
hour trips;
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application.
d) An increase in peak hour volume of a particular movement to and from the State highway by 20
percent or more;
An access analysis is not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the
proposed development application. However; the site does not take access from a State highway and
W1
the projected trip voltm'res for any movements at the 1•-6 interchange woi,ld be less than 20% of the
total volume of any of those movements.
e) An increase in use of adjacent streets by vehicles exceeding twenty thousand pounds gross vehicle
weight by 10 vehicles or more per day;
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application,
f) The location of the access driveway does not meet minimum sight distance requirements, as
determined by the city engineer, or is located where vehicles entering or leaving the property are
restricted, or such vehicles queue or hesitate on the state highway, creating a safety hazard at the
discretion of the community development director; or
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application. No new direct access to the public street system is requested or required to serve the
development on the land subject to the zone change.
g) A change in internal traffic patterns that, at the discretion of the Public Works Director, may cause
safety problems, such as back-up onto a street or greater potential for traffic accidents.
Not applicable at the time of zone change, but is being addressed with the proposed development
application. Nothing pertaining to the zone change application would be expected to allow
development that would cause changes to internal traffic patterns that would create or worsen any
safety problems on the public street system.
Transportation Planning Rule
The State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requires changes to land use plans and land use
regulations (i.e. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments) to be
consistent with the function and capacity of existing and planned transportation facilities. Oregon
Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060 subsection 1 states:
(1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use
regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation
facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this
rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use
regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive
of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on
projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP.
As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated
within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable,
ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited
to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate
the significant effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of
an existing or planned transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it
would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan;
or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise
projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive
plan.
Memorandum Addendum Page 2
159
Conclusions
The proposed zone change and comprehensive plan map amendment from C4 to C5 on Township
37S Range 2W Section 02, tax lot 802 is concluded to generate no increase in traffic to the
transportation system. The proposed plan amendment and zone change will, therefore, not
significantly affect any existing or planned transportation facility nor will it result in types or levels of
travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of any existing or planned
transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standard identified in the City's
Transportation System Plan (TSP) or Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the plan/zoning amendment
does not meet the Public Works Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Applicability requirements as set forth in
section 320.10.03 (3)(a -g) of their Standards and Specifications, and does not warrant any further
traffic analysis.
In conclusion, the application for plan and zoning amendment are found to be in compliance with the
City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the Central Point Land Development Code, and
are shown to be consistent with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). No further analysis is shown
to be required.
Respectfully,
��t P't-,
Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE
Firm Principal
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC
Attachments: C4 and C5 permitted use comparisons
OAR 660-012-0060
Memorandum Addendum Page 3
160
Permitted
Use
C4
C5
Highest and Best
Uses - ITE
Banks
Yes
Yes
24.3 PM / 1000 SF
Accounting Offices
Yes
No
Real Estate Offices
Yes
Yes
Insurance Offices
Yes
Yes
Legal Services
Yes
No
Engineering Services
Yes
No
Photo and Art Studio
Yes
No
Counselling services
Yes
No
Govt Offices
Yes
No
Medical/Dental Offices
Yes
No
Convenience Market
Yes
Yes
52.41 PM / 1000 SF
Drugstore
Yes
Yes
13.87 PM / Fuel Sta.
Auto/Truck Service Station
Yes
Yes
Auto/Tire sales and repairs
Yes
Yes
Motel/Hotel
Yes
Yes
Walk-in Movie Theater
Yes
Yes
Bowling alley
Yes
Yes
Photo/Art Gallery
Yes
No
Photo Processing Station
Yes
Yes
Travel Agency
Yes
No
Barber/beauty shop
Yes
Yes
Sit-down restaurant
Yes
Yes
9.85 PM / 1000 SF
Cocktail Lounge
Yes
CU
11.34 PM / 1000 SF
Tavern
Yes
No
11.34 PM / 1000 SF
Commercial parking lot
Yes
Yes
Community Shopping Center
Yes
Yes
Supermarket
Yes
Yes
9.48 PM / 1000 SF
Department store
Yes
Yes
Sporting goods
Yes
Yes
Bookstore
Yes
Yes
Florist
Yes
Yes
Leather Goods
Yes
No
Pet Sales
Yes
Yes
Photo supplies
Yes
Yes
Health food
Yes
Yes
Self-service Laundry
Yes
Yes
Antique shop
Yes
Yes
Delicatessen
Yes
Yes
Pastry
Yes
Yes
General Apparel
Yes
Yes
Shoes and Boots
Yes
Yes
Jewelry
Yes
Yes
Clock sales
Yes
Yes
Bakery
Yes
Yes
161
Permitted
Use
C4
CS
Highest and Best
Uses - ITE
Bicycle shop
Yes
Yes
Audio/Video sales
Yes
Yes
Printing and publishing
Yes
Yes
Mobile food vendors
Yes
CU
Potentially high - varies
Liquor store
Yes
Yes
Ice/Skating Rink
CU
Yes
Dance Hall
CU
Yes
Billiard/pool Hall
CU
Yes
Miniature Golf
CU
Yes
Business Schools
CU
Yes
Physical Fitness Center
CU
Yes
Carwash
CU
Yes
Taxicab Office
CU
Yes
Ambulance Services
CU
Yes
Drive-in Fast Food
CU
Yes
32.65 PM / 1000 SF
Contractors Office
No
Yes
Medical Clinic & Lab
No
Yes
Appliance Service
No
Yes
Locksmith
No
Yes
Art/Music/Business School
No
Yes
Upholstery Shop
No
Yes
Veterinary Clinic
Yes
Yes
Tire Sales
No
Yes
Glass/Mirror Sales
No
Yes
Large Retail Establishments
No
Yes
RV Storage
No
Yes
Light Fabrication
No
Yes
Hardware Sales
No
Yes
Monument Sales
No
Yes
Feed, seed, fuel
No
Yes
Electrical/Plumbing Supplies
No
Yes
Heating & Air Equipment
No
Yes
Stone/Tile Supplies
No
Yes
Nursery
No
Yes
Antique shop
No
Yes
Pawnshop
No
Yes
Public Utilities
No
Yes
Furniture Sales
No
Yes
162
(b) Affected cities and counties that do not have acknowledged plans and land use regulations as provided in
subsection (a) of this section, shall apply relevant sections of this rule to land use decisions and limited land use
decisions until land use regulations complying with this amended rule have been adopted.
(5) Cities and counties shall update their TSPs and implementing measures as necessary to comply with this division
at each periodic review subsequent to initial compliance with this division. Local governments within metropolitan
areas shall amend local transportation system plans to be consistent with an adopted regional transportation system
plan within one year of the adoption of an updated regional transportation system plan or by a date specified in the
adopted regional transportation system plan.
(6) The director may grant a whole or partial exemption from the requirements of this division to cities under 10,000
population and counties under 25,000 population, and for areas within a county within an urban growth boundary that
contains a population less than 10,000. Eligible jurisdictions may request that the director approve an exemption from
all or part of the requirements in this division. Exemptions shall be for a period determined by the director or until the
jurisdiction's next periodic review, whichever is shorter.
(a) The director's decision to approve an exemption shall be based upon the following factors:
(A) Whether the existing and committed transportation system is generally adequate to meet likely transportation
needs;
(B) Whether the new development or population growth is anticipated in the planning area over the next five years;
(C) Whether major new transportation facilities are proposed which would affect the planning areas;
(D) Whether deferral of planning requirements would conflict with accommodating state or regional transportation
needs; and
(E) Consultation with the Oregon Department of Transportation on the need for transportation planning in the area,
including measures needed to protect existing transportation facilities.
(b) The director's decision to grant an exemption under this section is appealable to the commission as provided in
OAR 660-002-0020 (Delegation of Authority Rule)
(7) Portions of TSPs and implementing measures adopted as part of comprehensive plans prior to the responsible
jurisdiction's periodic review shall be reviewed pursuant to OAR chapter 660, division 18, Post Acknowledgment
Procedures.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 183, 197.040 & 197.245
Stats. Implemented: ORS 195.025, 197.040, 197.230, 197.245, 197.610 -197.625, 197.628 - 197.646, 197.712 &
197.717
Hist.: LCDC 1-1991, f. & cert. ef. 5-8-91; LCDC 1-1993, f. & cert. ef. 6-15-93; LCDC 4-1995, f. & cert. ef. 5-8-95;
LCDD 6-1998, f. & cert. ef. 10-30-98; LCDD 2-2000, f. & cert. ef. 2-4-00; LCDD 3-2004, f. & cert. ef. 5-7-04; LCDD 6-
2006, f. 7-13-06, cert. ef. 7-14-06
660-012-0060
Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a
zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must
put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9)
or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map
errors in an adopted plan);
163
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions
measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions,
the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment
includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not
limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant
effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the
performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet
the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
(2) If a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure
that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility
measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the
remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this
section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rule. A local government using subsection (2)(e),
section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic
congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor
vehicles in response to this congestion.
(a) Adopting measures that demonstrate allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and
performance standards of the transportation facility.
(b) Amending the TSP or comprehensive plan to provide transportation facilities, improvements or services adequate
to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; such amendments shall include a
funding plan or mechanism consistent with section (4) or include an amendment to the transportation finance plan so
that the facility, improvement, or service will be provided by the end of the planning period.
(c) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity or performance standards of the transportation facility
(d) Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development agreement or similar funding
method, including, but not limited to, transportation system management measures or minor transportation
improvements. Local governments shall, as part of the amendment, specify when measures or improvements
provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided.
(e) Providing improvements that would benefit modes other than the significantly affected mode, improvements to
facilities other than the significantly affected facility, or improvements at other locations, if the provider of the
significantly affected facility provides a written statement that the system -wide benefits are sufficient to balance the
significant effect, even though the improvements would not result in consistency for all performance standards.
(3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government may approve an amendment that would
significantly affect an existing transportation facility without assuring that the allowed land uses are consistent with the
function, capacity and performance standards of the facility where:
(a) In the absence of the amendment, planned transportation facilities, improvements and services as set forth in
section (4) of this rule would not be adequate to achieve consistency with the identified function, capacity or
performance standard for that facility by the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP;
(b) Development resulting from the amendment will, at a minimum, mitigate the impacts of the amendment in a
manner that avoids further degradation to the performance of the facility by the time of the development through one
or a combination of transportation improvements or measures;
164
Ov
IV � � �� �� � '�g�ggE9�•��o ' � mon 1
�7/� e F 9�yts2 o Cin
VJ p aTl ., iR `R•S� :5£Wov`g eE g IIO nom
J mao: 9 6� td � e��^EE.F,q .y. f0 jLm
as
C)-.�5� a $ eTH
$ '
as f Il�llll t
I'- -
---- - - - -- - -
a
0
0
y
0
m
m
+ tf
165
Ir
r
Lo
x
W
I
I
I
+
f
t
r
IE
I
W.
Ike
1
I
Ir
r
Lo
x
W
�fyli� —r •'.may �IfN �. �., r 'I•
V r—•r�� r. ' ..
EXHIBIT 12
IT. T7
14
1"
• '� i � Re
Y
w •n � ,
! r.
+e . _IL
60
MidlIll
WF
ic
NNX
_ kT
P1 �.
,i: --�' _ - •post. +.: �, �. —11!11 r• tlt l�'�-11—i1--'----p .d
.f! Sf .- - • - _ .fir
ti
I (:�) Looking South along Biddle Rd. across subject
property
Looking Northeast along Biddle Rd. at area across
Biddle Rd.
C3C3
) Looking Southwest along Biddle Rd. across adjoining C4) Looking Northeast along southern property line across
lot and subject property subject property
Legend
Photo ID
Number
167
Site Photos
Comprehensive Plan Amendment /
Zone Change
Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC
37 -2W -01C-802
W CSA Planning, Ltd.
Page 1 of 2
I
I (:�) Looking Northwest across adjoining lot and subject
property
Looking Southwest across adjoining lot and
subject property
()Looking Southeast along Biddle Rd. across adjoining Looking Southwest along Biddle Rd. across adjoining
property and subject property property and subject property
Site Photos
Comprehensive Plan Amendment /
Legend Zone Change
g Rogue Valley Microdevices &
Tail Lite Properties LLC
Photo ID 37 -2W -01C-802
Number CSA Planning, Ltd
Page 2 of 2
N
O
C
m
D
r
Cr
m z m
90 m
C/) D
�rn
m p
;u oll
F, p
>M- - �
>x<
n
coU)zCn
z
D
x
m
r
n
0
z
169
�r
v
m
A
D
z
m
W
w
------------- 4---
ppO�j 91pp!8
170
°
>> °
I
Co 'Lo
2`r
ROGUE VALLEY
cn cn
�
iG `Op
MICRODEVICESz
a W a
4601 RIDDLE -TAX LOT 802
il'I��
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
�
170
0
Y
C
m
D
r
r
XZ
—I
XDc-)
o
p O
m r Z
mX<omm
D / m
n m m
o n
amzom //J�
�n cn z VZ
�-;0
oT
D
A
x mWm
cN
m�
'O
.m
30
D
mti
t.
r
C
m+f
'
•i
r
� 0
�.
At
AD
zz
��
m
v?
-
<
A
D
I
0
w
-:
m m
-
m
r
_
r
k m
a
�
n
O
-.94-�
O
Z
Z
171
---LpvC ..q.
-. .i .§.1
172
z' s
o
DC>> nq.
�I�
ap24'p�
OO
ROGUE VALLEY
�; m cn
si90 p
:
a`a MICRODEVICES
wa
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 602
4;• T C
2 Y �
Loll
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
cn
172
173
s�
tiT�}M'�4
co,L'1'o�ROGUE
VALLEY
Rig m cn
g
s �O
'P
MICRODEVICES
�� m
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 602
CENTRAL POINT,
o
7� ,b
,
OREGON
cf)
a
�ztj
173
s�
tiT�}M'�4
co,L'1'o�ROGUE
VALLEY
Rig m cn
g
s �O
'P
MICRODEVICES
�� m
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT 602
CENTRAL POINT,
m m
'� I
OREGON
cf)
173
Z�`ppr 4�SS3 �3 Vin. m.. • z. ®�sss �z e.,=�
p 3e
NII
-'=;'d'n''36a �; ta-�e S }. �'-➢e� 22
s$3dI�yy�o�a..zoay�gr ea�jeee �y n�a�','.ozg�- �S� G3
5 i , ae-5"ob
`��i �a4ega
HY
,€ Asn.£ § �{€ �} #�H „�o, �3eee op.•i.��s�?�,3p O
ug' -£
�
5 a r 'J �F�3 gg 6v 8'eo xS44u 5'Ha _na A B (/1
e'�'
3a� MIN
gq9
a 3 =x�g ssl_a o H n -
s
s
....a..c..rw.w R
}pyS W
O
Q1tQ r��
o���� ■rnngpee:• ... � �
fig g
•Y�
JJv((ni p F s
3=B��i��_' m
fill S ° RF°sem R
� a z dz
� it �s ,IN ! d� lit f g.
g
aY!r � ��i � _ camas raaLruslyr __ -
'� H o a
fr 5
i
�'ti.4h4'
z '.
It
€� !�j j fl _ • i
' a i:•[� #ig; 4 :1 Biddle Road
f14 I
rl ;�lr
fill
r W'IE#3a39 ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES Madara Design Inc r1i l
iii N PY 9 p33;�51 4601 RIDDLE ROAD TAX LOT 802 landscape Design&CmsWlalian
s 2399 W.H. Fargo Rd
7
CENTRAL
CERAL POINT, OREGON 47502 OeNrel- Or 47502 f
+ - 541aTrF]p55
174
095921=(h1))1np 31 d -.K
04 5921=i3)-.. 31 d1`0,.9C F
—..—. .. "6n 08 Ce.Is.luy
- c� �p os = Y��-�. as — qs � o � as = is 1S as Twos• — — —i Iu.,.x °
Via" Y+.'Gd a — .:^� it M 1—° �s M — _ • _— • —_ �7 71 N
'.�.
sv�srs—svo---. pr.1-5o 9i�.3
=—
IF
* 1
------- ----- - -- - ---------- - N j
-
�31 ,
D
r
all
I / J
p
g
G � �
a
DDDD o^'�'
o
IJ
S•8EC
rya a
�sT�
ROGUE VALLEY
e1 m c/)
o>
�_ d
MICRODEVICES
is W
4601 BIDDLE-TAX LOT B02
9.0
G'QN,
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
I / J
City of Central Point, Oregon
140 So. Third St., Central Point, Or 97502
541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384
www.ci.central-point.or.us
April 14, 2016
Jay Harland
CSA Planning, Ltd.
4497 Brownridge Ste. 101
Medford, OR 97504
AlOW&
CENTRAL
POINT
EXHIBIT 14
Planning Department
Tom Humphrey, AICP,
Community Development Director/
Assistant City Administrator
RE: Tail Lite Properties Site Plan & Architectural Review (File No. 16004)
Dear Mr. Harland:
This correspondence serves as a Notice of Decision that on April 14, 2016 the Central Point
Community Development Director approved:
The Site Plan and Architectural Review application for construction of an 11,605 s.f.
veterinary clinic and site improvements subject to conditions of approval set forth in
the staff report dated April 11, 2016.
A complete copy of the of the Community Development Director's decision can be obtained
at the City of Central Point Planning Department located at 140 South Third Street, Central
Point, OR 97502.
The final date for filing an appeal is ten (10) days from the date this letter was mailed. All
appeals must be in written form consistent with the procedures set forth in Section
17.05.300(G) of the Central Point Municipal Code.
r
Sin ,
Ton Humphrey, AICP
Community Development Director
Enclosure
176
7��CR -15
AP2016
BY':
05;
w
STAFF REPORT POINT
STAFF REPORT
April 11, 2016
AGENDA ITEM (File No. 16004)
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AICD
Community Development Director
Consideration of a Site Plan and Architectural Review application for the construction of a 11,605 square
foot veterinary clinic, including 55 parking spaces and site landscape improvements. The 1.42 acre site is
Lot 1 of a proposed Tentative Partition application (File No. 16005) within the Tourist and Office
Commercial (C-4) zoning district. The project site is located on property identified on the Jackson
County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W 01C, Tax Lot 802. Applicant: Tail Lite Properties, LLC; Agent: Jay
Harland, CSA Planning, Ltd.
SOURCE
Stephanie Holtey, Community Planner II
BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes to construct an 11,605 s.f. veterinary clinic on Biddle Road, just east of the Super
8 Motel (Attachment "A-1"). It is a single -story structure and includes a dog run (Attachment "A-2").
The proposed structure is to be the new location for Southern Oregon Specialty Veterinary Center, an
advanced care and emergency services clinic serving southern Oregon and northern California.
The project is located at the southeast corner of 4901 Riddle Road. The applicant is requesting approval
of a three (3) lot partition, including construction of a new private retail street, (File No. 16005)
concurrent with this application. The proposed veterinary clinic will occupy proposed Lot 1 pending final
plat approval, which will take access from Hamrick Road via an existing private street and Biddle Road
by way of the proposed retail street.
The primary fagade frontage and main pedestrian entry (West Elevation) is along the proposed retail
street (Attachment "A-5"). The dog run is on the North Elevation, and parking is on the West and South
Elevations. Architecturally the building consists of painted stucco, ground level and stepped wall metal
panels with canopy overhangs. The colors will be red, off-white, bronze and metallic silver.
ISSUES
Four (4) issues were identified relative to this application as follows:
Parking Adjustment. The proposed parking plan provides for 55 parking spaces, which exceeds
the maximum 46 spaces allowed per CPMC 17.64.040. The applicant is requesting an increase to
the parking allowance per Section 17.64.040(B)(2).
Comment. The applicant's findings (Attachment "B') provide qualitative justification for the
proposed parking adjustment based on lack of nearby on -street parking availability and the
nature of the use (i. e. 24/7 emergency and specialized care services). The applicant's findings
177
are further supported by the ITE Parking Generation 3rd Edition, which includes a study with an
observed parking demand ratio of 1.6 spaces per 1, 000 sf. of Gross Floor Area (GFA) and 1.4
spaces per employee. Based on the proposed building size and the typical number of employees
on any given shift, (i.e. 25-32 employees) the parking demand is expected to range between 48-58
parking spaces. Since the proposed parking plan is within the range for expected parking, staff
recommends that the parking adjustment is justified.
2. Landscaping. The proposed landscape plan has been evaluated against the minimum landscape
requirements of Section 17.75.039(G). Identified discrepancies are noted below:
a. Perimeter. The perimeter planting area adjacent to the north property line is 3 -ft in width,
which does not meet the minimum 10 -ft planting area required for commercial land uses.
Resolution: As conditioned, the proposal shall either demonstrate compliance with the
minimum planting area standard, or the applicant may record a cross access easement to
provide future vehicular and pedestrian access with the adjoining lot to the north.
Although the applicant's findings state that cross access is not deemed necessary,
providing for a connection at this location would be consistent with vehicular and
pedestrian connectivity requirement per CPMC 17.75.039(A), and provide for a
temporary non -conformity until such time development occurs north of the project site.
Interior. The parking plan proposes a parking row with eleven (11) contiguous spaces,
inconsistent with CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2). This section requires an interior landscaped
island within a parking row when ten (10) or more vehicles would be placed in an
abutting configuration.
Resolution: As conditioned, the parking layout shall be revised to comply with the
interior landscaping requirements. This can be achieved by relocating the interior island
west of the proposed location.
Outdoor Dog Run. The site plan illustrates an outdoor dog run and play area ("Dog Run") north
of the proposed structure (Attachment "A-2"). The code provides for limited outdoor activities in
the C-4 zoning district, and does not specifically include dog runs. The applicant requested a
code interpretation to determine the proposed Dog Run as a compatible use in the C-4 zone. As
proposed, the Dog Run is for limited use (i.e. one dog at a time, tethered and supervised) to
provide for the safety of personnel and animals.
Comment. The Community Development Director considered the code interpretation request
and determined that the "Dog Run " is a compatible activity as proposed. The favorable
interpretation was presented to the Planning Commission at the April 5, 2016 Planning
Commission meeting and no issues were raised. Due to the location of the proposed outdoor
activities in relation to other commercial properties, staff recommends visual screening of the
dog run and play area with a continuous evergreen hedge or other similar plantings.
178
4. Block Standard. The existing private street and block configuration permitted as Partition P-03-
2004 is legally non -conforming.
Comment. To meet the current block standards per CPMC 17.75.031(B), the existing private
street must be developed as a retail street per CPMC 17.75.031(B)(3) and ]7.75.031(F). The
tentative plat approval (File No. 16005), per Condition No. 1, requires that the private street be
improved to retail street standards at the time of development for Lots I and 3. The proposed site
plan complies with the block standard and tentative plat as conditioned.
FINDINGS
The proposed veterinary clinic has been reviewed for compliance with the applicable standards and
criteria in Chapter 17.64, 17.72, and 17.75 and found to comply per the applicant's findings (Attachment
"B").
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall:
a. Demonstrate compliance with the parking lot perimeter landscape standards set forth in
CPMC 17.75.039(G)(1) by either:
i. Providing a copy of a recorded -cross access easement with Lot 2; or,
ii. Submitting a revised site plan and landscape plan illustrating a minimum 10 -foot
planter width planted with at least 3 trees and 15 shrubs per 100 -feet.
b. Submit a revised site plan and landscape plan demonstrating compliance with:
i. The interior parking lot landscaping standard set forth in CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2);
ii. Tentative Partition (File No. 16005) Condition No. 1 requiring that the existing
private street be developed as a retail street per CPMC 17.75.031(F).
c. Submit a revised landscape plan to provide a landscape screen around the proposed dog
run and dog play area. The landscape screen shall be a continuous evergreen hedge or
other similar landscape materials.
d. Coordinate with the Rogue Valley International -Medford Airport for compliance with the
requested noise easement (Attachment "G").
2. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall receive final plat approval for File No. 16005
and provide a copy of the recorded final plat to the Community Development Department.
3. Signage shall be subject to a separate review.
4. The applicant shall comply with conditions as listed in the Public Works Department Staff Report
dated March 29, 2016 (Attachment "C").
179
5. The applicant shall comply with condition as listed in the Jackson County Staff Report dated
April 5, 2016 (Attachment "D").
6. The applicant shall comply with conditions as listed in the Rogue Valley Sewer Services Staff
Report dated March 29, 2016 (Attachment `B").
7. The applicant shall comply with conditions as listed in the Building Department Comments dated
April 5, 2016 (Attachment "F").
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A-1" — Overall Site Plan
Attachment "A-2" — Site Plan
Attachment "A-3" — Proposed Floor Plan
Attachment "A-4" — Roof Plan
Attachment "A-5" — Exterior Building Elevations
Attachment "A-6" — Site Grading and Utility Plan
Attachment "A-7" — Landscape Plan
Attachment `B" — Applicant's Findings
Attachment "C" — Public Works Staff Report
Attachment "D" — Jackson County Roads Staff Report
Attachment `B" — Rogue Valley Sewer Services Staff Report
Attachment "F" — Building Department Comments
Attachment "G" — Rogue Valley International -Medford Airport Comments
ACTION
Consider the proposed Site Plan & Architectural Review application and 1) approve; 2) approve with
revisions; or 3) deny the application.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Site Plan & Architectural Review application for the Southern Oregon Specialty Veterinary
Center per the Staff Report dated April 11, 2016.
2
O
m
NAM
iD
�o
ATTAC H M E NT
Lm LINE
i
LES SCHWAB
i
1
W 9�
m
lit
` —
soil
•_
�
� 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0(7�000��0 �� Q QDOnQQ
�
8
o
41,�@Gaf
®® ppg
y
a g9 p 9 BQ a[
p3q ¢4 ii
!
I
G7
J
G
SITE PLAN 8L
i
R
ARCHITECTURAL
1 �•
t
•••
�
`�«_ -, ,•
�
� EXIliMG
LOf LME
'
w
REVIEW
1 1X"IN]lA1•LMl -•�
1
i
LES SCHWAB
E
1
W 9�
m
` —
soil
•_
�
� 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0(7�000��0 �� Q QDOnQQ
�
8
o
41,�@Gaf
®® ppg
y
a g9 p 9 BQ a[
p3q ¢4 ii
€
G7
SITE PLAN 8L
i
R
ARCHITECTURAL
w
REVIEW
81
�'
PI,' -'8 HOLDER
EXHIBIT 15
Rogue Valley Microdevices
Site Development
Traffic Impact Analysis
September 9, 2016
Prepared By: T unNsvo,PTaTlaN
�NGlN��RI NG, L L C
)OUT -I -C -PH O-R-GON TRqNSPoxUTIOII-CNon-c-c ,%, LLC
182
Chapter 17.64
OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING''
Sections:
17.64.010 Purpose.
17.64.020 Applicability.
17.64.030 Off-street loading.
17.64.040 Off-street parking requirements.
17.64.010 Purpose. SHARE
It is the purpose of this chapter, through the management of off-street parking, loading and
bicycle spaces, to manage auto dependence and encourage the use of alternative
transportation modes in accordance with the policies and strategies of the city's
transportation system plan.
The following regulations are established, in accordance with the transportation system
plan, to provide for the number of off-street parking, loading and bicycle spaces for new
uses and enlargement of existing uses in connection with the use of land permitted by this
zoning ordinance. The requirements and standards set forth in this chapter are intended to
ensure the usefulness of parking, loading and bicycle facilities, protect the public safety, and
to mitigate potential adverse impacts on adjacent land uses. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord.
1436 §2(part), 1981).
17.64.020 Applicability. 01 SHARE
In all districts, in connection with any use whatsoever, there shall be provided at the time
any building or structure is erected, enlarged or increased in capacity, or the use is changed
or increased in intensity, off-street parking spaces for automobiles, off-street loading, and
bicycle parking facilities for the enlarged or increased portion in the case of an addition or
for the building, structure or use in other cases, in accordance with the requirements herein.
All parking shall be developed and maintained to the standards set forth in
Section 17.75.039, Off-street parking design and development standards. (Ord. 1946 (part),
2011).
17.64.030 Off-street loading. 0 SHARE
A. In all districts for each use for which a building is to be erected or structurally altered to
the extent of increasing the floor area to equal the minimum floor area required to provide
loading space and which will require the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise
183
by truck or similar vehicle, there shall be provided off-street loading space in accordance
with the standards set forth in Table 17.64.01, Off -Street Loading Requirements.
TABLE 17.64.01 OFF-STREET LOADING REQUIREMENTS
Use Categories
Off -Street Loading Berth Requirement (fractions rounded up to the
closest whole number)
INDUSTRIAL, WAREHOUSING AND WHOLESALING
Sq. Ft. of Floor Area No. of Loading Berths Required
Less than 12,500
1
12,501--25,000
2
25,001--37,500
3
37,501--50,000
4
Over 50,000
5 plus I for each additional 50,000 sq. ft.
RETAIL, RESTAURANTS, HOSPITALS. AND OTHER GOODS HANDLING
Sq. Ft. of Floor Area
No. of Loading Berths Required
Less than 12,500
0
12,501--60,000
1
60,001--100,000
2
Over 100,000
3 plus 1 for each additional 80,000 sq. ft.
TABLE 17.64.01 OFF-STREET LOADING REQUIREMENTS (Continued)
1Use Categories
Off -Street Loading Berth Requirement (fractions rounded up to the
closest whole number)
OFFICES. HOTELS AND OTHER NONGOODS HANDLING USES
Sq. Ft. of Floor Area
No. of Loading Berths Required
0--50,000
0
W
TABLE 17.64.01 OFF-STREET LOADING REQUIREMENTS (Continued)
Off -Street Loading Berth Requirement (fractions rounded up to the
closest whole num
50,001--200,000 1
Over 200,000
2 plus 1 for each 100,000 sq. ft.
B. A loading berth shall not be less than ten feet wide, thirty-five feet long and have a height
clearance of twelve feet. Where the vehicles generally used for loading and unloading
exceed these dimensions, the required length of these berths shall be increased.
C. If loading space has been provided in connection with an existing use or is added to an
existing use, the loading space shall not be eliminated if elimination would result in less
space than is required to adequately meet the needs of the use.
D. Off-street parking areas used to fulfill the requirements of this title shall not be counted
as required loading spaces and shall not be used for loading and unloading operations,
except during periods of the day when not required to meet parking needs.
E. In no case shall any portion of a street or alley be counted as a part of the required
parking or loading space, and such spaces shall be designed and located as to avoid undue
interference with the public use of streets or alleys. (Ord. 1946 (part), 2011; Ord. 1436
§2(part), 1981. Formerly 17.64.020).
17.64.040 Off-street parking requirements. 0 SHRRE
All uses shall comply with the number of off-street parking requirements identified in Table
17.64.02A, Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, and Table 17.64.02B, Non -
Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements. For residential uses the off-street parking
requirements are stated in terms of the minimum off-street parking required. For non-
residential uses the off-street parking requirements are presented in terms of both minimum
and maximum off-street parking required. The number of off-street parking spaces in Table
17.64.02B, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking, may be reduced in accordance with
subsection B of this section, Adjustments to Off -Street Vehicle Parking.
The requirement for any use not specifically listed shall be determined by the community
development director on the basis of requirements for similar uses, and on the basis of
evidence of actual demand created by similar uses in the city and elsewhere, and such
185
other traffic engineering or planning data as may be available and appropriate to the
establishment of a minimum requirement.
TABLE 17.64.02A
RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Use Categories
Minimum Vehicle Parking Requirement (fractions rounded down to the closest
whole number)
RESIDENTIAL
Single -Family Residential
2 spaces per dwelling unit, both of which must be covered.
Accessory Dwelling Unit
1 space per accessory dwelling unit.
Two -Family
2 spaces per dwelling unit, both of which must be covered.
Multiple -Family
1 space per studio or 1 -bedroom unit;
1.5 spaces per 2 -bedroom unit; and
2 spaces per 3+ -bedroom unit.
plus 1 guest parking space for each 4 dwelling units or fraction thereof.
Mobile Home Parks
2 spaces per dwelling unit on the same lot or pad as the mobile home (may be tandem);
plus 1 guest space for each 4 mobile homes.
Residential Home
2 spaces per dwelling unit, both of which must be covered.
Residential Facility
75 spaces per bedroom.
Congregate (Senior) Housing
_5 spaces per dwelling unit.
Boarding Houses, Bed and
Breakfast
1 space per guest unit; plus 1 space per each 2 employees.
TABLE 17.64.02B
NON-RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Minimum and Maximum Vehicle Parking Requirement (fractions rounded
Use Categories down to the closest whole number)
TABLE 17.64.02B
NON-RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Em
Minimum and Maximum Vehicle Parking Requirement (fractions rounded
Use Categories
down to the closest whole number)
COMMERCIAL LODGING
Hotel or Motel
1 space per guest unit; plus 1 space per each 2 employees. Units having kitchen
facilities shall provide 2 spaces per unit with kitchen.
INSTITUTIONS "
Welfare or Correctional Institutions
1 space per 5 beds for patients or inmates.
Group Living such as Convalescent
Hospitals, Nursing Home
I space per each 2 beds for patients or residents bedrooms.
3 spaces per each 2 beds, determined by the maximum design capacity of the
Hospital
facility.
PLACES OF P.CIBLIC ASSEMBLY
1 space per 75 sq. ft. of main assembly area; or per Chapter 17.72, Site Plan and
Churches, Chapels, Mortuaries
Architectural Review
Libraries, Museum, Art Gallery
1 space per 400 sq. ft. of net floor area; plus 1 space per each 2 employees
SCHOOLS
1 space per employee; plus 1 space per 5 children the facility is designed or
Day Care Center, Preschool
intended to accommodate. No requirements for facilities caring for 5 or fewer
children simultaneously.
Elementary and Junior High Schools
3 spaces per classroom, or I space per 4 seats in the main auditorium, gymnasium,
(public and private/parochial)
or other place available for public assembly, whichever is greater.
1 space per each 5 students, based on the design capacity of the facility, or I space
High Schools, Colleges, and Trade
per 4 seats in the main auditorium, gymnasium, or other place available for public
Schools (public and private/parochial)
assembly, whichever is greater.
COMMERCLkL. AMUSEMENT and ENTERTAINMENT
Theaters, Amphitheaters, Stadiums
1 space per each 4 fixed seats or 8 feet of bench length.
Em
TABLE 17.64.02B
NON-RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Effl
Minimum and Maximum Vehicle Parking Requirement (fractions rounded
Use Categories
down to the closest whole number)
5 spaces per lane; plus 1 space per each 2 employees. Other uses in the building
Bowling Alley
shall be calculated separately per Section I 7.64.040(F), Mixed Uses.
1 space per each 100 square feet of net floor (or ice) area or fraction thereof, plus 1
Dancehall, Skating Rink
space per each 2 employees.
Swimming Pool
1 space per each 100 square feet of pool surface area.
GFNFRAL COMMERCIAL
1 space per each 200 square feet of net floor area (excluding storage and other non -
Retail Stores, Personal Services
sales or non -display areas).
Furniture, Appliances
1 space per each 500 square feet of gross floor area.
Automobile, Boat, Manufactured
1 space for each employee on the major shift; plus 2 spaces for each service bay;
Home and Recreational Vehicle Sales,
plus 1 space per each 300 square feet of showroom area; plus 1 space per each
Service, and Rental
2,000 square feet of used or new vehicle sales area, or other outdoor sales area.
1 space for each employee on the major shift; plus 2 spaces for each service bay;
Nurseries, Gardening and Building
plus 1 space per each 300 square feet of showroom area; plus 1 space per each
Materials
2,000 square feet of used or new vehicle sales area, or other outdoor sales area.
Service and Repair Shops
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross floor area.
Eating and Drinking Establishments
10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
1 space per 100 feet of gross floor area, plus 3 stacking spaces for drive-through
Restaurants, Fast Food
window.
OFFICE - PROFES'SIONAL
1 space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. In no case shall there be fewer than
Banks and other Financial Institutions
3 spaces provided.
General and Professional Offices
1 space per 250 square feet of gross floor area.
Medical/Dental Offices-
1 space per 250 square feet of gross floor area.
Effl
TABLE 17.64.02B
NON-RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
A. Calculation of Required Off -Street Parking. Off-street parking facility requirements set
forth in Table 17.64.02A, Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, and Table
17.64.02013, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, shall be applied as follows:
1. Where the application of the schedule results in a fractional requirement it shall
be rounded down to the lowest whole number.
2. For purposes of this chapter, gross floor area shall not include enclosed or
covered areas used for off-street parking or loading, or bicycle facilities.
3. Where uses or activities subject to differing requirements are located in the
same structure or on the same site, or are intended to be served by a common
facility, the total parking requirement shall be the sum of the requirements for
each use or activity computed separately, except as adjusted through the site
plan and architectural review process under the provisions of subsection (B) of
this section. The community development director, when issuing a permit(s) for
multiple uses on a site, may restrict the hours of operation or place other
conditions on the multiple uses so that parking needs do not overlap and may
then modify the total parking requirement to be based on the most intense
combination of uses at any one time.
Minimum and Maximum Vehicle Parking Requirement (fractions rounded
Use Categories
down to the closest whole number)
IN DUSTR IAL, and MANUFAC rURING.
2 spaces per each 3 employees on the 2 largest shifts*, or 1 space per each 500
Assembly and Manufacturing
square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greatest.
(* 1 space per employee if the business has only one shift).
2 spaces per each 3 employees on the 2 largest adjacent shifts*, or 1 space per each
Warehousing and Storage
1,000 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. (* 1 space per employee
if the business has only one shift).
Industrial Vehicles
1 space for each vehicle kept or operated in connection with the use.
A. Calculation of Required Off -Street Parking. Off-street parking facility requirements set
forth in Table 17.64.02A, Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, and Table
17.64.02013, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, shall be applied as follows:
1. Where the application of the schedule results in a fractional requirement it shall
be rounded down to the lowest whole number.
2. For purposes of this chapter, gross floor area shall not include enclosed or
covered areas used for off-street parking or loading, or bicycle facilities.
3. Where uses or activities subject to differing requirements are located in the
same structure or on the same site, or are intended to be served by a common
facility, the total parking requirement shall be the sum of the requirements for
each use or activity computed separately, except as adjusted through the site
plan and architectural review process under the provisions of subsection (B) of
this section. The community development director, when issuing a permit(s) for
multiple uses on a site, may restrict the hours of operation or place other
conditions on the multiple uses so that parking needs do not overlap and may
then modify the total parking requirement to be based on the most intense
combination of uses at any one time.
4. Where requirements are established on the basis of seats or person capacity,
the building regulations provisions applicable at the time of determination shall be
used to define capacity.
5. Where residential use is conducted together with or accessory to other
permitted uses, applicable residential requirements shall apply in addition to other
nonresidential requirements.
6. The parking requirements outlined in Table 17.64.02A, Residential Off -Street
Parking Standards, and Table 17.64.020B, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking
Requirements, include parking for handicapped persons shall be provided
pursuant to the requirements of subsection C of this section, Accessible Parking
Requirements.
B. Adjustments to Non -Residential Off -Street Vehicle Parking. The off-street parking
requirements in Table 17.64.02B, Non -Residential Off -Street Parking Requirements, may
be reduced, or increased in any commercial (C) or industrial (M) district as follows:
1. Reductions. The maximum off-street parking requirements may be reduced by
no more than twenty percent.
2. Increases. The off-street parking requirements may be increased based on a
parking demand analysis prepared by the applicant as part of the site plan and
architectural review process. The parking demand analysis shall demonstrate and
documents justification for the proposed increase.
C. Accessible Parking Requirements. Where parking is provided accessory to a building,
accessible parking shall be provided, constructed, striped, signed and maintained as
required by ORS 447233, and Section 1106 of the latest Oregon Structural Specialty Code
as set forth in this section.
1. The minimum number of accessible parking spaces shall be provided for all
uses in accordance with the standards in Oregon Structural Specialty Code,
Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces. Accessible parking spaces shall
be counted toward meeting off-street parking requirements in Tables 17.64.02A
and 17.64.02B, Residential and Non -Residential Off -Street Parking
Requirements. The accessible parking requirements are minimum requirements
and are not subject to reductions per subsection (13)(1) of this section.
190
D. Shared Parking. Required parking facilities for two or more uses, structures, or parcels of
land in any commercial (C) or industrial (M) district may be satisfied by the same parking
facilities used jointly, to the extent that the owners or operators show that the need for
parking facilities does not materially overlap (e.g., uses primarily of a daytime versus
nighttime nature; weekday uses versus weekend uses); and provided, that prior to the
issuance of any building permit for the property that the right of joint use is evidenced by a
recorded deed, lease, contract, or similar written instrument establishing the joint use. The
city may approve owner requests for shared parking through the site plan and architectural
review process.
E. Off -Site Parking. Except for single-family dwellings, the vehicle parking spaces required
by this chapter may be located on another parcel of land, provided the parcel is within three
hundred feet of the use it serves and the city has approved the off-site parking through the
site plan and architectural review process. The distance from the parking area to the use
shall be measured from the nearest parking space to a building entrance, following a
sidewalk or other pedestrian route. The right to use the off-site parking must be evidenced
by a recorded deed, lease, easement, or similar written instrument in the same manner as
set forth in subsection (A)(3) of this section.
F. Mixed Uses. If more than one type of land use occupies a single structure or parcel of
land, the total requirements for off-street automobile parking shall be the sum of the
requirements for all uses, unless it can be shown that the peak parking demands are
actually less (see subsection D of this section, Shared Parking).
G. Compact Car Adjustment.
1. Any parking lot or otherwise required public parking area containing ten or
more parking spaces shall be eligible for a compact car adjustment, provided all
requirements of this chapter are adequately met.
2. Up to, but not exceeding, twenty-five percent of the total number of required
parking spaces may be designed and provided for the parking of compact cars
3. All compact parking spaces must be identified for compact parking only.
Compact parking spaces shall be designed in accordance with the minimum
standards set forth in Section 17.75.03.9(6), Parking Stall Minimum Dimensions.
191
H. Change of Use. Prior to the change of use of a building or structure the applicant shall
demonstrate that adequate parking spaces are available to accommodate the new use(s)
as required in this chapter.
I. Bicycle Parking. Bicycle parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 17.64.04,
Bicycle Parking Requirements.
TABLE 17.64.04 BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Use
Residential
Single -Family Residential
Multi -Family Residential, General
Multi -Family Residential, Congregate Housing, or with
Physical Disabilities
Institutional
Schools, Elementary
Schools, Junior High/Middle School
Schools, Senior High
College/Trade School
Transit Centers/Park and Ride Lots
Religious Institutions
Hospitals
Medical/Dental Offices
Libraries/Museums, etc.
Commercial
inimum Required
inimum
NA NA
1 space per unit 100%
1 space per 5 units _ 100%
4 spaces per classroom
100%
4 spaces per classroom
100%
8 spaces per classroom
100%
1 space per 4 students
(plus 1 space per student housing room/unit)
100%
5% of automobile parking spaces
100%
1 space per 40 seat capacity
25%
1 space per 5 beds
75%
2 spaces, or 1 space per 1,000 sq. ft., whichever is
greater
25%
2 spaces, or 1 space per 1,000 sq. ft., whichever is
greater
25%
192
TABLE 17.64.04 BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Land Use
:Minimum Required
;Minimum
Covered
Retail Sales
0.33 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.
50%
Auto -Oriented Sales
2 spaces, or 0.33 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.,
whichever is greater
10%
Groceries/Supermarkets
0.33 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.
10%
Office
2 spaces, or 1 space per 1,000 sq. ft., whichever is
greater
10%
Restaurant
1 space per 1,000 sq. ft.
25%
Drive -In Restaurant
1 space per 1,000 sq. ft.
25%
Shopping Center
0.33 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.
50%
Financial Institutions
2 spaces, or 0.33 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.,
whichever is greater
10%
Theaters/Auditoriums, etc.
1 space per 30 seats
10%
Indusi�ti�1
Industrial Park
2 spaces, or 0.1 space per 1,000 sq. ft., whichever
is greater
100%
Warehouse
2 spaces, or 0.1 space per 1,000 sq. ft., whichever
is greater
100%
Manufacturing, etc.
2 spaces, or 0.15 space per 1,000 sq. ft.,
whichever is greater
100%
(Ord. 2028 §3, 2016; Ord. 2002 §2 (Exh. A) (part), 2015; Ord. 1946 (part), 2011).
Prior legislation: Ords. 1512, 1684 and 1912-
193
F,
The Central Point Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 2028, passed July 28, 2016.
Disclaimer: The City Recorder's Office has the official version of the Central Point Municipal Code. Users should
contact the City Recorder's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
Pursuant to the charter and Ordinance 1969, all references throughout the code to "city administrator" have been
changed to "city manager."
City Website: httt ://www.centraloointoregon.gov/
City Telephone: (541) 664-3321
194
Hi Kim,
Here is an overview of the information you requested:
Employees: 20 at main location
Shifts: 5:00 a.m. —
2:00 p.m.
6:00 a.m. —
3:00 p.m.
7:00 a.m. —4:00
p.m.
8:00 a.m. —
5:00 p.m.
9:30 a.m. —
6:30 p.m.
11:00 a.m.
— 8:00 p.m
3:00 p.m.
— Midnight
2 Employees
1 Employee
6 Employees
4 Employees
3 Employees
2 Employee
2 Employees
Of the 20 employees, 13 of them spend most of their day in the fabrication/manufacturing area, but also
have desk space in the office. The remaining 7 work in the office area.
On average, half of the employees may leave the office on a daily basis for approximately 1 hour for
lunch, errands, etc. The time is dependent on the shift.
The daily deliveries are:
Ground
Weekly deliveries are:
10:00 — 11:00 a.m. 3 Deliveries: FedEx, UPS, FedEx
2:30 p.m. 2 Pick-ups: FedEx and UPS
4:00 p.m. 1 Pick-up: FedEx Ground
Average of 2 semi -truck deliveries per week
Our public/customer interaction, in person, is very minimal. We have meetings at our facility on average
twice per month.
Let me know if you have any questions. I'm happy to elaborate further as needed.
Best regards,
JoAnn Martin
Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.
EM
Hi Kim,
Laid out the probable increases by shift for Rogue V Micro, as follows:
Shifts: E=mployees
5 am — 2 pm
3
6am-3pm
1
7am-4 pm
9
8 am —5 pm
6
9:30 am — 6:30 pm
5
11 am -8 pm
3
3 pm — Midnight
3
TOTAL 30 Maximum number of people there at any one time is: 27
Square footage:
Fabrication:
1St Floor Office:
2nd Floor Office:
Total:
CSA Planning, LTD,
5—dy TAmston, AIA
Associate Planner
4497 Brownridge Terrace #101
Medford, OR 97504
Phone: 541/779-0569 Fax/I 541/779-0114
23,595 net sq ft
9,535 net sq ft
8.975 net sq ft
42,104 net sq ft
196
Land
140
J
Description
Manufacturing facilities are areas where the primary activity is the conversion of raw materials or parts
into finished products. Size and type of activity may vary substantially from one facility to another. In
addition to the actual production of goods, manufacturing facilities generally also have office, warehouse,
research and associated functions. General light industrial (Land Use 110) and industrial park (Land Use
130) are related uses.
Database Description
O Average parking supply ratios: 1.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet (sq, ft.) gross floor area (GFA) (three
study sites) and 1.3 spaces per employee (three study sites),
o Average site employment density: 1.0 employee per 1,000 sq, ft, GFA (three study sites).
Parking demand counts were only submitted between 10:00 and 11:00 a.m. and between 2:00 and
3:00 p,m.
Shady Sites/Years
Bellevue, WA (1991); Kent, WA (1991)
institute of Transportation Engineers 361 Parking Generation, 4th Edition
197
Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. 1,000 sq, ft. GFA
On a: INookday
Statistic - -- --
Peak Period peak Period Demand
�- - 2:00--3:00
Number of Study -
Sites �� � 3 �-- -
Averac)a Size of Study Sites 165,000 sq. ft, GFA
Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1.02 vehicles per 1,000 s . ft, GFA
Standard Deviation 0.23
Coefficient of Variation 23%
Range 0.82-1.27 vehicles per 1,000 s , ft, GFA
85th Percentile__ __ 1,15 vehicles or 1 000 s , ft, GFA
33rd Percentile i 0.92 vehicles per 1,000 s . ft. GFA
Weekday Peak Period
Parking Demand
250
200
150
-
„�
100
R
50
9�I9
h� 0
0
50
hISMIAO (WI-ransportation Imnrgincons,
n
i
100 150
x = 11000 sq, ft. GFA
® Actual Data Points
[ 37 1
EUTI
Partdtng Gonwation, 4th Edition
I
Land Use: 140
Manufacturing
Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Employees
On a: Weekday
Statistic—k
_
Pea Period Demand
_Peak I'erfod
2:00-3;00
iVumber of Study Sites
,m,
3
Average Size of Study Sites
160 employees
Average Peak Period Parkin Demand
0.97 vehicles er employ
Standard Deviation
0.24
Coefficient of Variation "--_
24%
_
Rane
0.75-1.22 vehicles I
85th Percentile
er em
1,14 vehicles er ernpl�
_ _
33rd Percentile
_
0.88 vehicles per emolovi
RITMTPIOM,I�
r
tw-ml,
Parking Demand
250
Z 200 - - -0 --
150
s�
100 -- - o
50 -- - ---
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
x = Employees
® Actual Data Points
InWiRRO, of Tran spartation 6angineor„ [38] Rlddnn Generation, 01 Edilion
199
EXHIBIT 16
Samwcvi Uu4oN Tu �NGIN��R/NG, L L C
319 Eastwood Drive - Medford, Or. 97504 — Phone (541) 608-9923 — Email: Kwkp1 @Q.com
November 22, 2016
Jessica Gomez, Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.
943 Automation Way, Suite F
Medford, Oregon 97504
RE: Parking Demand for Rogue Valley Microdevices Headquarters
Dear Jessica,
Upon your request, Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC evaluated the parking demand
for the proposed Microdevices building located within the Hamrick Business Park southeast of Hamrick
Road and Biddle Road in Central Point, Oregon. Information from the City of Central Point,
Microdevices, and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, Ott' edition
handbook was compared to determine the minimum number of parking spaces to meet the demand of
Microdevice's manufacturing use. The land use considered in the City of Central Point and ITE
requirements were 140 — Manufacturing.
Parking Requirements
Citv of Central Point need calculation methods:
Minimum number of required parking spaces for manufacturing land use in Table 17.64.02B:
Manufacturing - 1 space per 500 square feet = 1 x (43,000/500) = 86 spaces
Or 2 space per 3 employees (largest shift) = 2 x (27/3) = 18 spaces
Total range of spaces based on size and number of employees =18-84 spaces
Microdevices parking assessment:
Largest shift — 27 employees potentially overlapping between 5:00 am — Midnight
Deliveries estimated at 3 potentially overlapping during the day from Fed Ex and UPS
Normal trips from outside public is zero, but bi-monthly meetings are estimated to bring parking
demand up to 35 spaces with regular employees plus visitors.
Total estimated potential occupancy at one time = 35 spaces
ITE parking demand:
Weekday Peak Period
Average Demand = Observed peak period demand expressed as a rate
85th % Demand = The point at which 85 percent of the values fall at or below
200
Tabb I - �'ri E Parift Demand E` r%ttw
Average
851" %
Peak eraPeriod
85,11%
Land U* Unit size
)Peiik Period
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
(spo-lees)
(spaces)
Total
Total
140 - Manufacturing 1,000 SF 43
1.02
1.18
44
51
140 - Manufacturing Employees 30
0.97
1.14
29
34
Total Range (spaces) I 29-51
Note: SF=Square Feet
Parking Assessment
The information published by the ITE provides a guide to planners and designers regarding parking
demand. Average rates, 85`t' percentile demands, and other measures are provided to help determine the
most reliable parking demand when local data is not available. In this case, local data is provided and
supports a parking demand within the range provided by the ITE. Rogue Valley Microdevice's local
data shows a potential need of 35 spaces when their facility is maximized.
The goal with parking is to strike a balance between an oversupply of parking and an undersupply of
parking. Providing enough parking for a maximized situation ensures that drivers will seldom be
unsuccessful in finding a parking space, but it also creates waste when a facility isn't operating at
maximum. As more parking is provided, more cars take advantage of it and fewer people use public
transportation. As the number of cars increase, so does road congestion. In response, local
governments then pay for increased wear and tear on the roads.
Failing to address the oversupply of parking creates many of the same problems that minimum parking
requirements were supposed to solve (e.g. sprawl, poor economic environment, loss of investment). A
balance is struck when there are enough parking spaces to accommodate recurrent peak -parking
demand, but additional spaces do not undercut current transit ridership, nor a city's financial ability to
meet other public needs and obligations.
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC I Microdevices Parking Demand I Nov. 22, 2016 1 2
201
Conclusion
The average parking demand in the ITE shows the need for 44 spaces for proposed development. The
85`h percentile parking demand shows 51 spaces. Local data for Rogue Valley Microdevices shows a
potential need of 35 spaces when their facility is maximized. All of these parking demands are similar.
In contrast, the City's parking requirement of 86 spaces would likely serve more than the maximum
need of the proposed facility which would result in an excess of parking spaces the majority of time.
The proposed site plan for Rogue Valley Microdevices proposes 46 spaces, which provides 31% more
than what local data shows is necessary when maximized. It is our conclusion that the proposed number
of spaces (46) is adequate to meet the demand of the proposed development without creating an excess
number of under-utilized spaces.
Sincerely,
Kimberly Parducci PE, PTOE
SoumaH N -c on TuNSPUTTITION -1min am, LL(
Attachments: City of Central Point Municipal Code to GGA
Microdevices Local Data � Y PN+RSP
ITE Parking Generation data sheets 1
b
Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC I Microdevices Parking Demand I Nov. 22, 2016 1 3
RTIYJ
Memorandum
To: Stephanie Holtey/ Molly Bradley
City of Central Point
Community Development Department
Date: November 29, 2016
Subject: Request for Clarification
Rogue Valley Microdevices
File Nos. 16022-16024
ATTACHMENT
CSA Planning, Ltd
4497 Brownridge, Suite 101
Medford, OR 97504
Telephone 541 .779.0569
Fax 541 .779.0114
Bev@CSAplanning.net
This memo is in response to your request for clarification on several items in our
submittal for Rogue Valley Microdevices.
1. Square Footage: Two different square footage numbers were unintentionally
included in our initial submittal due to a last minute change which did not get
reflected all the way through. The correct total is 43,000 square feet. This total is
divided as follows:
• Fabrication/Production area: 24,000 sf (includes the clean room)
• Related office space: 19,000 sf
43,000 sf total
The first and second floor plans are attached as requested.
2. Parking Analysis: The parking analysis and Exhibit 3 have been updated to show
the revised square footage. See attached.
3. Loading Requirements: Per the calculations sent to CSA on this matter, the City
applies loading based on the number of square feet in the Fabrication area.
Off -Street Loading Berth Requirement (fractions
Use Categories rounded up to the closest whole number)
INDUSTRIAL, WAREHOUSING AND WHOLESALING
Sq. Ft. of Floor Area
No. of Loading Berths Required
12,501-25,000
2
Based on this, with a 24,000 square foot Fabrication area only 2 loading berths are
required. Two berths are located on the loading access drive and serve the
Shipping/Receiving area and the Fabrication area. All loading activities are coordinated
by the Shipping staff. Both meet the 10 foot by 35 foot dimension standards.
4. Architectural Elevations: Attached are revised elevations with additional notes
and dimensions as requested. As none of the light shelves over the loading doors
project out into the loading berth areas, therefore clearance is not issue.
5. Building Materials: Building materials are noted on the updated elevations. To
further expand the description of materials:
• The Office portion of the building is of standard construction with a stucco
finish, painted off-white.
• The Fabrication portion of the building will have tilt -up concrete walls with a
skim coat painted off-white to match the Office portion.
Memorandum Page 1 November 29, 2016
Rogue Valley Microdevices
203
M��'
• The accent trim color where shown on the drawings will be a very dark blue.
This includes the parapet coping and the inset panels where shown above and
below the windows.
• The base around the building is comprised of a concrete curb with a charcoal
gray band above it.
• Window and door frames are to be clear anodized aluminum.
• Exterior light shelves/shades are to be metal, powder -coated to look like matte
stainless steel.
6. Parking Lot revisions: The parking lot layouts have been revised to match the
standard requirements for parking islands. The parking lot to the south had 11
spaces, but due to the island requirements has been reduced by one space so that
no more than 10 spaces are contiguous. This removal reduces the total spaces to
45. The Applicant feels that the original layout for each lot is preferable to that
which is being submitted now to meet this code section.
Please let us know if you have any further questions on the project. Thank you for
your review.
Regards,
CSA Planning, Ltd.
Beverly Thruston, AIA
Associate
CSA/bt M-Clarifications-112216.do—
cc. File
Memorandum Page 2 November 29, 2013
Rogue Valley Microdevices
204
November 16, 2016
ATTACHMENT
ROGUE VALLEY SEWER SERVICES
Location: 138 West Vilas Road, Central Point, OR - Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3130, Central Point, OR 7502-0005
Tel. (541) 664-6300, Fax (541) 664-7171 www.RVSS.us
Stephanie Holtey
City of Central Point Planning Department
155 South Second Street
Central Point, Oregon 97502
Re: File 16021 -SPR, Rogue Valley Microdevices — Tax Lot 802, Map 372W01C (REF: 16023 -
CUP)
Sewer service to the proposed development can be had by making a service connection to the
existing 8 inch sewer main which crosses the southerly portion of the subject property. The permit
for this connection will be issued by RVSS upon payment of related development fees.
The project is within the Phase 2 stormwater quality area and must comply with stormwater quality
requirements outlined in the Regional Stormwater Design Manual.
The proposed development appears to disturb more than 1 acre of land so will require an NPDES
1200 -CN permit prior to the start of any ground disturbing activities.
Rogue Valley Sewer Services requests that approval of this development be subject to the following
conditions:
Prior to the start of construction:
1. Applicant must obtain a sewer permit from RVSS for the new connections. Sewer permits
will be issued upon payment of related development fees.
2. Applicant must obtain an NPDES 1200 -CN erosion and sediment control permit from
RVSS.
3. Applicant must have all erosion and sediment control measures in place prior to any ground -
disturbing activities.
4. Applicant must submit a stormwater management plan demonstrating compliance with the
regional Stormwater Design Manual for review and approval by RVSS.
During Construction
1. Applicant must sequence construction so that the permanent stormwater quality features are
installed first and will be operational when stormwater enters them.
2. Applicant must fence off and protect stormwater quality features from equipment traffic.
3. Applicant must comply with conditions of 1200 -CN and sewer connection permits.
K:\DATA\AGENCIES\CENTPT\PLANNG\SITEPLANREVIEW\2016\16021—ROGUE
MICRODEVICES.DOC
MOF
Prior to final acceptance of project:
1. Applicant must have new sewer laterals inspected and approved by RVSS.
2. Applicant must have all stormwater quality facilities, including vegetation when applicable,
inspected and approved by RVSS.
3. Applicant must record an operations and maintenance agreement for all new stormwater
quality features.
At the conclusion of construction RVSS will issue a final acceptance letter indicating that all sanitary
sewer and stormwater requirements have been met.
Feel free to call me if you have any questions.
Carl Tappert, PE
Manager
K:\DATA\AGENCIES\CENTPT\PLANNG\SITEPLANREVIEW\2016\16021 _ROGUE
MICRODEVICES.DOC
206
ATTACHMENT ".F,"
JACKSON COUNTY
Roads
November 16, 2016
Attention: Stephanie Holtey
City of Central Point Planning
140 south Third Street
Central Point, OR 97502
RE: Site Plan and Architectural Review on Biddle Road — a county -maintained road.
Planning File: 16021; 37 -2W -01C Tax Lot 802.
Dear Stephanie:
Roads
Engineering
Kevin Christiansen
Conshvclion Manager
200 Antelope Road
White Clty, OR 97503
Phone: (541) 774-6255
Fax (541) 774-6295
chdsike@jacksoncounty.org
www.jacksoncounly, org
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Site Plan and Architectural Review on a 4,87 acres site
in the C-4 — Tourist and Office Professional zoning district for a proposed 33,490 square foot light manufacturing
facility. The property is located at 4601 Biddle Road. Jackson County Roads offers the following comments:
1. Jackson County will allow a new private road with right-in/right-out access to Biddle Road as shown In the
applicant's submittal. Jackson County will require the right-in/right-out access be controlled by installation
of a median island in Biddle Road.
2. Utility Permits are required from Roads for any utility work within the county road right-of-way.
3. Biddle Road is a County Minor Arterial and is maintained by the County. The Average Daily Traffic count
was 7,528 for eastbound lanes 450 east of Hamrick Road on August 20, 2012 and 7,430 on August 25,
2014 450 feet east of Hamrick Road. As a comparison of capacity for Biddle Road, the capacity of a two
lane suburban road with ten foot lanes and no shoulders is 8,832 ADT.
4. If county storm drain facilities are to be utilized, the applicant's registered Engineer shall provide a
hydraulic report and plans for review and approval by Jackson County Roads. Storm drainage runoff is
limited to that area currently draining to the County storm drainage system. Upon completion of the
project the developer's Engineer shall certify that the construction of the drainage system was
constructed per the approved plan. A copy of the certification shall be sent to Kevin Christiansen at
Jackson County Roads.
5. The applicant shall submit construction drawings to Jackson County Roads and obtain county permits if
required.
6. We would like to be notified of future development proposals, as county permits may be required.
7. We concur with any right-of-way dedicated.
8. Roads recommend the removal of any existing driveways not being used on Biddle Road and replacing
them with new curb, gutter and sidewalk.
9. Jackson County Roads requests a TIS that addresses impacts at the site access. If mitigations are
recommended they shall be required.
10. Jackson County's General Administration Policy ##1-45 sets forth the County's position as it relates to the
management of County roads located within existing or proposed city limits or Urban Growth Boundaries
(UGB). The County has no current plans for improvements to Biddle Road. Jackson County Roads
recommends that the city request road jurisdiction.
Sincerely,
• r
r
Kevin Christiansen
Construction Manager
1:\Engineering\Development\CITIES\CNTRLPT\I602 Ldoe
207
ATTACHMENT "�..."
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 839
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
APPLICATION FOR ROGUE VALLEY MICRODEVICES, INC.
(FILE NO. 1602 1)
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a site plan and architectural review application to develop an
2.24 acre site within the C-5, Commercial Thoroughfare zone with a 43,000 square foot Rogue Valley
Microdevices corporate headquarters and light fabrication facility; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2016, the City of Central Point Planning Commission conducted a duly -
noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the Staff Report and heard
testimony and comments on the application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards
and criteria applicable to Site Plan and Architectural Review in accordance with Section 17.72, Design
and Development Standards in accordance with Section 17.75, and Off -Street Parking and Loading in
accordance with Section 17.64 of the Central Point Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, after duly considering the proposed use, it is the Planning Commission's determination
that, subject to compliance with conditions as set forth in the Revised Staff Report (Exhibit "A") dated
December 6, 2016, the application does comply with applicable standards and criteria for approval of
the site plan and architecture; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by
this Resolution No. 839, does hereby approve the Site Plan and Architectural Review application for
Rogue Valley Microdevices, Inc.. This approval is based on the findings and conditions of approval as
set forth on Exhibit "A", the Planning Department Staff Report dated December 6, 2016 and the
Applicant's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as set forth in Exhibit `B, " including
attachments incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 6`h day
of December, 2016.
ATTEST:
City Representative
Planning Commission Chair
Planning Commission Resolution No. 839 (12/6/2016)
208
209
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: File No. 16025
Pr
AO%k
CENTRAL
POINT
STAFF REPORT
December 6, 2016
Planning Department
Tom Humphrey,AICP,
Community Development Director
Consideration of Resolution No. 840 forwarding a favorable recommendation to the City Council to approve amendments
to Chapter 17.05 Applications and Development Permit Review Procedures, adding 17.05.550 Appeal Procedure. Type II
and Type III Decisions; Applicant: City of Central Point.
STAFF SOURCE:
Tom Humphrey AICP, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND:
In the wake of a recent appeal of a City decision to LUBA, the City Attorney noticed some unclear processes in Chapter
17.05 and recommended the City make changes to the appeal procedure for Type II and Type III land use decisions. Type
II decisions are those made by the Community Development Director and appealable to the Planning Commission. Type
III decisions are those made by the Commission and appealable to the City Council. Among other things the revisions
offered in Attachment A; 1) provide clarity for public noticing; 2) define processing deadlines and 3) delineate the basis
for which appeals may be made.
ISSUES:
Confusion that may be caused by a lack of specificity or clarity results in public frustration, unnecessary processing delays
and costly legal fees. The proposed amendments are intended to reduce if not eliminate the issues cited above.
EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A — Resolution No. 840 with Proposed Amendments"
ACTION:
Consider resolution forwarding a recommendation to the City Council to approve the amendments as proposed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 840.
W6
ATTACHMENT', -L2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 840
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR AMENDMENT TO TITLE 17 ZONING
FILE NO. 16025
Applicant: City of Central Point
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2016 the Planning Commission, at a duly scheduled public hearing,
considered minor amendments to Chapter 17 Zoning of the Central Point Municipal Code ("CPMC")
as follows, and as specifically identified in Attachment "A — Staff Report dated December 6, 2016):
1. Section 17.05 Applications and Development Permit Review Procedures,
2. Section 17.05.550 Appeal Procedure — Type II and Type III Decisions; and
WHEREAS, it is the finding of the Planning Commission that the above referenced code amendments
only serve to clarify administration of Chapter 17 and as such are considered minor amendments and
as such do not alter current land use policy or modify standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by
this Resolution No. 840, does hereby forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to
approve the amendments as set forth in the Staff Report dated December 6, 2016 attached hereto by
reference as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 6t' day
of December 2016.
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this 6r'' day of December 2016.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 840 (12-06-2016)
211
Chapter 17.05
APPLICATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW PROCEDURES
Sections:
17.05.100 Purpose and applicability of review procedures.
17.05.200 Type I procedure.
17.05.300 Type II procedure.
17.05.400 Type III procedure.
17.05.500 Type IV rocedure.
17.05.550 Appeal Procedure.
17.05.600 General procedural provisions.
17.05.700 Expedited land divisions.
17.05.800 Reserved.
17.05.900 Traffic impact analysis.
17.05.100 Purpose and applicability of review procedures.
A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard decision-making procedures that
will enable the city, the applicant, and the public to review development permit applications and
participate in the local decision-making process in a timely and effective way consistent with the
citizen's involvement element of the comprehensive plan. Table 17.05.1 provides a key to
identify the review procedures, applicable regulations, and the approving authority for
development permit applications.
B. Applicability of Review Procedures. All development permit applications identified in Table
17.05.1 shall be decided by using the appropriate procedures contained in this chapter. The
procedural "type" assigned to each development permit application governs the decision-making
process for that permit. There are four "types" of procedures: Type I, II, III, and IV, which are
described as follows:
212
1. Type I. Type I procedures apply to administrative decisions made by the community
development director or designee without public notice and without a public hearing. Type I
procedures are used only when there are clear and objective approval standards and criteria, the
application of which does not require the use of discretion.
A Type I decision is the city's final decision. There are no appeals to a Type I procedural
decision.
2. Type II. Type II procedures apply to administrative decisions that involve clear and objective
approval standards and criteria the application of which requires the use of limited discretion.
Type II decisions are made by the community development director or designee with public
notice, and an opportunity for a public hearing if appealed. The appeal of a Type II decision is
treated as a Type III procedure, except that the seepe ofthe i ear -i g is limited as pmvided
„ seetio «)«) of this seetion and ; eensidefed the eity's final deeisio . appeal is to the
Planning Commission, which is the final decision of the city.
3. Type III. Type III procedures are quasi-judicial decisions that involve the application of
existing policies. Type III decisions generally use discretionary approval criteria, and do not
have a significant effect beyond the immediate area of the application. Type III decisions are
based on special studies or other information which will serve as the factual basis to support the
decision. Type III decisions, when made by the planning commission, may be appealed to the
city council.
4. Type IV Procedure. Type IV decisions are legislative decisions that establish by law general
policies and regulations for future land use decisions, such as the adoption or revision of the
comprehensive plan, and revisions to the zoning and the land division ordinance that have
widespread and significant impact beyond the immediate area, i.e., quantitative changes
producing large volumes of traffic, or a qualitative change in the character of the land use itself,
such as conversion of residential to industrial use; or a spatial change that affects large areas or
many different ownerships. Unless otherwise noted, all Type IV decisions are considered
initially by the citizens advisory committee and the planning commission, with final decisions
made by the city council.
Table 17.05.1 provides a key to identify the review procedure for each land development permit.
213
TABLE 17.05.1
PROCEDURAL
APPLICABLE
APPROVING
120 -
LAND DEVELOPMENT
TYPE
REGULATIONS
AUTHORITY
DAY
PERMIT*
RULE
Annexation
Quasi -Judicial
Type III
Chapter 1.20
No
City Council
Legislative
Type IV
Chapter 1.20
City Council
No
Comprehensive Plan & UGB
Amendments
Major
Type IV
Chapter 17.96
City Council
No
Minor
Type III
Chapter 17.96
City Council
No
Type III
Chapter 17.76
Planning
Yes
Conditional Use Permit
Commission
Conversion Plan
Type II
Chapter 16.32
Director
Yes
Extensions
Type I Procedures
Type I
Section
Director
Yes
17.05.200(G}
Type II
Section
Director
Yes
Type II Procedures
17.05.300(H)
Home Occupation
Type I
Section 17.60.190
Director
Yes
Land Division
Tentative Plan, Partition
Type II
Chapter 16.36
Director
Yes
Type III
Chapter 16.10
Planning
Yes
Tentative Plan, Subdivision
Commission
Final Plat
Type I
Chapter 16.12
Director
No
Property Line
Type I
Chapter 16.10
Director
Yes
Adjustment/Consolidation
Modification of Approval
Major
Type III
Section 17.09.300
Planning
Yes
Commission
Minor
Type Il
Section 17.09.400
Director
Yes
Nonconforming Use Designation
Type III
Section 17.56.040
Planning
No
Commission
214
TABLE 17.05.1
LAND DEVELOPMENT
PROCEDURAL
APPLICABLE
APPROVING
120-
PERMIT*
TYPE
REGULATIONS
AUTHORITY
DAY
RULE
Planned Unit Development
Type III
Chapter 17.68
Planning
Yes
Commission
Right-of-Way Vacation
Type 1441V
Chapter 12.28
City Council
No
Site Plan and Architectural
Review
Minor
Type I
Chapter 17.72
Director
Yes
Major
Type II
Chapter 17.72
Director
Yes
TOD District/Corridor Master
Type III
Chapter 17.66
Planning
Yes
Plan
Commission
Tree Removal
Type II
Chapter 12.36
Director
Yes
Variance
Class A
Type II
Section 17.13.300
Director
Yes
Class B
Type III
Section 17.13.400
Planning
Yes
Commission
Class C
Type III
Section 17.13.500
Planning
Yes
Commission
Zoning Map and Zoning and
Land Division Code Text
Amendments
Minor
Type III
Chapter 17.10
City Council
Yes
Major
Type IV
Chapter 17.10
City Council
No
* An applicant may be required to obtain approvals from other agencies, such as the Oregon
Department of Transportation, or Rogue Valley Sewer. The city may notify other agencies of
applications that may affect their facilities or services.
(Ord. 1989 § 1(part), 2014; Ord. 1941 § § 1, 2, 3, 2010; Ord. 1874 § 1(part), 2006).
215
17.05.300 Type II procedure.
A. Pre -Application Conference. A pre -application conference is optional for a Type II permit
application. The requirements and procedures for a pre -application conference are described in
Section 17.05.600(C).
B. Application Requirements.
1. Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the planning
department for the land development permit requested.
2. Submittal Requirements. A Type II permit application shall include:
a. The information requested on the application form;
b. Findings addressing the applicable regulations per Table 17.05.1. Note: At the discretion of
the community development director, additional information may be required during the
application process;
c. One set of pre -addressed mailing labels for all real property owners of record who will receive
a notice of the application as required in subsection C of this section. The records of the Jackson
County assessor's office are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall
produce the notice list using the most current Jackson County assessor's real property assessment
records to produce the notice list. The city shall mail the notice of application; and
d. The required fee.
3. Notice of Acceptance. Within fourteen days of submittal, the community development director
or designee shall notify the applicant in writing of-
a.
£
a. The procedural type used for the application. In some circumstances, a Type II application
may be referred to a Type III procedure. When such a referral is made, it shall be made at the
time of notice of acceptance, after which the application shall be processed as a Type III
application. When a Type II application is referred to a Type III application, no new application
is required; and
b. Acceptance of the application; or
c. Non acceptance of the application with an itemization of the deficiencies and deadline for
correction of the deficiencies.
C. Notice of Application for Type II Decision.
216
c per -son who sub2IZtC' a wTILLerequest to reeeive is notiee; and
4, 1. No less than 20 days before the community development director makes a decision, written
notice of the application shall be mailed to all of the following:
a. Applicant;
b. Owners of record of the subject property;
c. Owners of record within a minimum of one hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the site;
d. All city -recognized neighborhood groups or associations whose boundaries include the site;
e. Any person who submits a written request to receive a notice; and
f. Any governmental agency that is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement
entered into with the city. The city may notify other affected agencies. The city shall notify the
county or ODOT, and the rail authority, when there is a proposed development abutting or within
one hundred feet of an affected transportation facility and allow the agency to review, comment
on, and suggest conditions of approval for the application.
2. The notice of n pending Type 11 administrative deeisie application shall include:
a. The street address or other easily understood reference to the site;
b. List -1 tie relevant approval criteria by name and number of code sections;
c. e -The place, date and time the comments are due, and the person to whom the comments
should be addressed;
217
Mr.m. !�* r rrs
d. A description of the proposal and identifyi cation the specific permits or approvals requested;
e. A statement of the -issues that may provide the basis for an appeal to the Land Use Board of
Appeals must be raised in writing and with sufficient specificity to enable the decision maker to
respond to the issue;
f. The name and phone number of a city contact person;
g. A brief summary of the local decision making process for the decision being made;
h. State A statement that all evidence relied upon by the community development director or
designee to make this decision is in the public record, available for public review. Copies of this
evidence may be obtained at a reasonable cost from the city;
i. State A statement that, after the comment period closes, the community development director
or designee shall issue a Type II administrative decision, and that the decision shall be mailed to
the applicant and to anyone else who submitted written comments or who is otherwise legally
entitled to notice; and
j. Contain the following notice:
Notice to mortgagee, lien holder, vendor, or seller: The City of Central Point Land Development
Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the purchaser.
3. The notice shall allow a 14 -day period for the submission of written comments, starting from
the date of mailing. All comments must be received by the city by 5:00p.m. on that 14th -day.
D. Administrative Decision Requirements. The community development director or designee
shall make a Type Il written decision addressing all of the relevant approval criteria and
standards. Based upon the criteria and standards, and the facts contained within the record, the
community development director or designee shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
requested permit or action.
E. Notice of Decision.
218
1. Within five days after the community development director or designee signs the decision, a
notice of decision shall be sent by mail to:
a. The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site that is the subject of
the application;
b. Any person who submitted a written request to receive notice, or provides comments during
the application review period;
c. Any city -recognized neighborhood group or association whose boundaries include the site;
and
d. Any governmental agency that is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement
entered into with the city, and other agencies that were notified or provided comments during the
application review period.; and
e. Property owners located within 100 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property.
2. The community development director or designee shall cause an affidavit of mailing the notice
to be prepared and made a part of the file. The affidavit shall show the date the notice was mailed
and shall demonstrate that the notice was mailed to the parties above and was mailed within the
time required by law.
3. The Type II notice of decision shall contain:
a. A description of the applicant's proposal and the city's decision on the proposal (i.e., may be a
summary);
b. The address or other geographic description of the property proposed for development,
including a map of the property in relation to the surrounding area, where applicable;
c. A statement of where a copy of the city's decision, and the complete planning file may be
reviewed and the name and contact number of the city staff to contact about reviewing the file;
d. The date the decision shall become final, unless appealed;
e. A statement that all persons entitled to no only the applicant and persons who submitted
comments prior to the comment deadline may appeal the decision; and
f. A statement briefly explaining how to file an appeal, the deadline for filing an appeal, and
where to obtain further information concerning the appeal process.
219
F. Effective Date. A Type II decision is final for purposes of appeal when the notice of decision
per subsection E of this section is mailed by the city and becomes effective ten days from the
date of mailing of the notice of decision. If an appeal is filed within the ten-day period, the
decision does not become effective until the appeal is decided. Appeal process is governed by
Section 17.05.550.
MoM
220
WT V
I IVF
.AA -
14G. Extensions. The community development director shall, upon written request by the
applicant and payment of the required fee, grant a written one-year extension of the original or
last extension approval period, provided:
1. The land development permit authorizes extensions;
2. No changes are made to the original application as approved by the city;
3. There have been no changes in the zoning, land division code, or applicable comprehensive
plan provisions on which the approval was based. In the case where the plan conflicts with a
code or comprehensive plan change, the extension shall be either:
a. Denied; or
b. At the discretion of the community development director, the request for extension may be re-
reviewed as a modification per Section 17.09.300;
4. The extension request is filed on or before the expiration of the original or latest extension
approval per subsection F of this section;
5. If the time limit expired and no extension request has been filed, the application shall be void.
(Ord. 1989 § 1(part), 2014; Ord. 1874 § 1(part), 2006).
17.05.400 Type III procedure.
A. Pre -Application Conference. A pre -application conference is required for all Type III
applications. The requirements and procedures for a pre -application conference are described in
Section 17.05.600(C).
B. Application Requirements.
1. Application Forms. Type III applications shall be made on forms provided by the community
development director or designee for the land development permit requested.
221
2. Submittal Requirements. When a Type III application is required, it shall include:
a. A completed application form with required attachments;
b. One copy of a narrative statement (findings and conclusions) that explains how the application
satisfies each and all of the relevant criteria and standards in sufficient detail for review and
decision-making. Note: Additional information may be required under the specific applicable
regulations for each approval as referenced in Table 17.05.1;
c. The required fee; and
d. One set of pre -addressed mailing labels for all real property owners of record who will receive
a notice of the application as required in subsection C of this section. The records of the Jackson
County assessor's office are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall
produce the notice list using the most current Jackson County assessor's real property assessment
records to produce the notice list. The city shall mail the notice of application. The failure of a
property owner to receive notice as provided in subsection C of this section shall not invalidate
such proceedings provided the city can demonstrate by affidavit that such notice was given.
C. Notification Requirements.
1. Mailed Notice. The city shall mail the notice of the Type III hearing. Notice of a Type III
hearing shall be given by the community development director or designee in the following
manner:
a. At least twenty days before the hearing date, or if two or more hearings are allowed, ten days
before the first hearing, notice shall be mailed to:
i. The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the property on the most
recent property tax assessment roll that is the subject of the application;
ii. All property owners of record on the most recent property tax assessment roll within one
hundred feet of the site, including tenants of a mobile home or manufactured dwelling park;
iii. Any governmental agency that is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement
entered into with the city. The city may notify other affected agencies. The city shall notify the
county road authority, or ODOT, and rail authority for applications that are abutting or affecting
their transportation facility and allow the agency to review, comment on, and suggest conditions
of approval for the application;
iv. Owners of airports in the vicinity shall be notified of a proposed zone change in accordance
with ORS 227.175;
222
v. Any neighborhood or community organization recognized by the city council and whose
boundaries include the property proposed for development;
vi. Any person who submits a written request to receive notice;
At the applicant's discretion, notice may also be provided to the Department of Land
Conservation and Development.
b. The community development director or designee shall prepare an affidavit of notice and the
affidavit shall be made a part of the file. The affidavit shall state the date that the notice was
mailed to the persons who were sent notice.
2. Content of Notice. Notice of a Type III hearing shall be mailed per subsection C of this section
and shall contain the following information:
a. An explanation of the nature of the application and the proposed land use or uses that could be
authorized for the property;
b. The applicable criteria and standards from the zoning and subdivision code and
comprehensive plan that apply to the application;
c. The street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property;
d. The date, time, and location of the public hearing;
e. A statement that the failure to raise an issue in person, or in writing at the hearing, or failure to
provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision -maker an opportunity to respond
to the issue prior to the close of the final hearing means that an appeal based on that issue cannot
be raised at the State Land Use Board of Appeals;
f. The name of a city representative to contact and the telephone number and email address
where additional information on the application may be obtained;
g. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence submitted by or for the
applicant, and the applicable criteria and standards can be reviewed at the city of Central Point
City Hall at no cost and that copies shall be provided at a reasonable cost;
223
h. A statement that a copy of the city's staff report and recommendation to the hearings body
shall be available for review at no cost at least seven days before the hearing, and that a copy
shall be provided on request at a reasonable cost;
i. A general explanation of the requirements to submit testimony, and the procedure for
conducting public hearings; and
j. The following notice:
Notice to mortgagee, lien holder, vendor, or seller: The City of Central Point Land Development
Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the purchaser.
D. Conduct of the Public Hearing.
1. At the commencement of the hearing, the hearings body shall state to those in attendance:
a. The applicable approval criteria and standards that apply to the application or appeal;
b. A statement that testimony and evidence shall be directed at the approval criteria described in
the staff report, or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or land use regulations that the person
testifying believes to apply to the decision;
c. A statement that failure to raise an issue with sufficient detail to give the hearings body and
the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue means that no appeal may be made to the State
Land Use Board of Appeals on that issue;
d. Before the conclusion of the first evidentiary hearing, any participant may ask the hearings
body for an opportunity to present additional relevant evidence or testimony that is within the
scope of the hearing. The hearings body shall grant the request by scheduling a date to finish the
hearing (a "continuance") per subsection (D)(2) of this section, or by leaving the record open for
additional written evidence or testimony per subsection (D)(3) of this section.
2. If the hearings body grants a continuance, the hearing shall be continued to a date, time, and
place at least seven days after the date of the first evidentiary hearing. An opportunity shall be
provided at the second hearing for persons to present and respond to new written evidence and
oral testimony. If new written evidence is submitted at the second hearing, any person may
request, before the conclusion of the second hearing, that the record be left open for at least
seven additional days, so that they can submit additional written evidence or testimony in
response to the new written evidence.
3. If the hearings body leaves the record open for additional written evidence or testimony, the
record shall be left open for at least seven days after the hearing. Any participant may ask the
224
city in writing for an opportunity to respond to new evidence submitted during the period that the
record was left open. If such a request is filed, the hearings body shall reopen the record to allow
rebuttal evidence.
a. If the hearings body reopens the record to admit new evidence or testimony, any person may
raise new issues that relate to that new evidence or testimony;
b. An extension of the hearing or record for a limited land use ,..aftte Type III Application
pursuant to this subsection D is subject to the limitations of ORS 227.178 ("one -hundred -twenty -
day rule"), unless the continuance or extension is requested or agreed to by the applicant;
c. If requested by the applicant, the hearings body shall allow the applicant at least seven days
after the record is closed to all other parties to submit final written arguments in support of the
application, unless the applicant expressly waives this right. The applicant's final submittal shall
be part of the record but shall not include any new evidence. For limited land use decisions, the
seven-day period shall not be subject to the limitations of ORS 227.178 and 227.179;
d. The record shall contain all testimony and evidence that is submitted to the city and that the
hearings body has not rejected;
e. In making its decision, the hearings body may take official notice of facts not in the hearing
record (e.g., local, state, or federal regulations; previous city decisions; case law; staff reports).
The review authority must announce its intention to take notice of such facts in its deliberations,
and allow persons who previously participated in the hearing to request the hearing record be
reopened, if necessary, to present evidence concerning the noticed facts;
f. The city shall retain custody of the record until the city issues a final decision and all appeal
deadlines have passed.
4. Participants in a Type 11 quasi-judicial hearing are entitled to an impartial review authority as
free from potential conflicts of interest and prehearing ex parte contacts (see subsection (D)(5) of
this section) as reasonably possible. However, the public has a countervailing right of free access
to public officials. Therefore:
a. At the beginning of the public hearing, hearings body members shall disclose the substance of
any prehearing ex parte contacts (as defined in subsection (13)(5) of this section) concerning the
application or appeal. He or she shall also state whether the contact has impaired their
impartiality or their ability to vote on the matter and shall participate or abstain accordingly.
Hearing participants shall be entitled to question hearing body members as to ex parte contacts
and to object to their participation as provided in subsection (D)(5)(b) of this section;
225
b. A member of the hearings body shall not participate in any proceeding in which they, or any
of the following, has a direct or substantial financial interest: their spouse, brother, sister, child,
parent, father-in-law, mother-in-law, partner, any business in which they are then serving or have
served within the previous two years, or any business with which they are negotiating for or have
an arrangement or understanding concerning prospective partnership or employment. Any actual
or potential interest shall be disclosed at the hearing where the action is being taken;
c. Disqualification of a member of the hearings body due to contacts or conflict may be ordered
by a majority of the members present and voting. The person who is the subject of the motion
may not vote on the motion to disqualify;
d. If all members of the hearings body abstain or are disqualified, the city council shall be the
hearing body. If all members of the city council abstain or are disqualified, a quorum of those
members present who declare their reasons for abstention or disqualification shall be requalified
to make a decision;
e. Any member of the public may raise conflict of interest issues prior to or during the hearing, to
which the member of the hearings body shall reply in accordance with this section.
5. Ex Parte Communications.
a. Members of the hearings body shall not:
i. Communicate directly or indirectly with any applicant, appellant, other party to the
proceedings, or representative of a party about any issue involved in a hearing without giving
notice per subsection (C) of this section;
ii. Take official notice of any communication, report, or other materials outside the record
prepared by the proponents or opponents in connection with the particular case, unless all
participants are given the opportunity to respond to the noticed materials.
b. No decision or action of the hearings body shall be invalid due to ex parte contacts or bias
resulting from ex parte contacts, if the person receiving contact:
i. Places in the record the substance of any written or oral ex parte communications concerning
the decision or action; and
ii. Makes a public announcement of the content of the communication and of all participants'
right to dispute the substance of the communication made. This announcement shall be made at
the first hearing following the communication during which action shall be considered or taken
on the subject of the communication.
226
c. A communication between city staff and the hearings body is not considered an ex parte
contact.
6. Presenting and Receiving Evidence.
a. The hearings body may set reasonable time limits for oral presentations and may limit or
exclude cumulative, repetitious, irrelevant or personally derogatory testimony or evidence;
b. No oral testimony shall be accepted after the close of the public hearing. Written testimony
may be received after the close of the public hearing only as provided in subsection (D)(3) of this
section;
c. Members of the hearings body may visit the property and the surrounding area, and may use
information obtained during the site visit to support their decision, if the information relied upon
is disclosed at the beginning of the hearing and an opportunity is provided to dispute the
evidence under subsection (D)(5)(b) of this section.
E. The Decision Process.
1. Basis for Decision. Approval or denial of a Type III application shall be based on standards
and criteria in the development code. The standards and criteria shall relate approval or denial of
a discretionary development permit application to the development regulations and, when
appropriate, to the comprehensive plan for the area in which the development would occur and to
the development regulations and comprehensive plan for the city as a whole;
2. Findings and Conclusions. Approval or denial shall be based upon the criteria and standards
considered relevant to the decision. The written decision shall explain the relevant criteria and
standards, state the facts relied upon in rendering the decision, and justify the decision according
to the criteria, standards, and facts;
3. Form of Decision. The hearings body shall issue a fin4 written ender decision containing the
findings and conclusions stated in subsection (E)(2) of this section, which either approves,
denies, or approves with specific conditions. The hearings body may also issue appropriate
intermediate rulings when more than one permit or decision is required;
4. Decision -Making Time Limits. " final written erde The written decision for any Type III
action (including an appeal from a Type Il decision) shall be filed with the community
development director or designee within ten days after the close of the deliberation;
5. Notice of Decision. Written notice of a Type III decision shall be mailed to the applicant and
to all participants of record within ten days after the hearings body decision. Failure of any
227
person to receive mailed notice shall not invalidate the decision; provided, that a good faith
attempt was made to mail the notice.
6. Final Decision and Effective Date. The decision of the hearings body on any Type III
application is final for purposes of appeal on the date it is mailed by the city. The decision is
effective on the day after the local appeal period expires. If an appeal of a Type III decision is
filed, the decision becomes effective on the day after the local appeal is decided by the e y
eeuneil hearings body. Appeal process is governed by Section 17.05.550. An appeal of a land
use decision to the State Land Use Board of Appeals must be filed within twenty-one days after
the city council's written decision is mailed by the city.
228
, 7010`10 M
I
-
228
MAMM!�!�!!!!7!f f
C.F Extensions. The community development director shall, upon written request by the
applicant and payment of the required fee, grant a written one-year extension of the original or
last extension approval period, provided:
1. The land development permit authorizes extensions;
2. No changes are made to the original application as approved by the city;
3. There have been no changes in the zoning, land division code, or applicable comprehensive
plan provisions on which the approval was based. In the case where the plan conflicts with a
code or comprehensive plan change, the extension shall be either:
a. Denied; or
b. At the discretion of the community development director, the request for extension may be re-
reviewed as a modification per Section 17.09.400;
4. The extension request is filed on or before the expiration of the original or latest extension
approval per subsection (E)(6) of this section;
5. If the time limit expired and no extension request has been filed, the application shall be void.
(Ord. 1989 § 1(part), 2014; Ord. 1874 § 1(part), 2006).
17.05.550 Appeal procedure — Type II and Type III decisions.
A. Appeal. Type II decisions may be appealed to the planning commission. Type III decisions
may be appealed to the City Council. All such appeals are subject to the following:
229
1. Who May Appeal. The following people have legal standing to appeal a Type II and/or Type
III decision:
a. The applicant or owner of the subject property;
b. Any person who participated in the proceeding by submitting timely written and/or oral
comments on the record prior to the decision.
2. Appeal Filing Procedure.
a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in 17.05.550(A)(1), may
appeal a decision by filing a notice of appeal according to the procedures in subections 2(b) and
2(c) below:
b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the community development director or
designee within ten (10) days from the date the notice of decision was mailed;
c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice of appeal shall contain:
i. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision;
ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal;
iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal. If the appellant contends
that the findings of fact made by the approving authority are incorrect or incomplete, the notice
shall specify the factual matters omitted or disputed. If the appellant contends that the decision is
contrary to ordinance, statute or other law, such errors shall be specifically identified in the
notice along with the specific grounds relied upon for review;
iv. If the appellant is not the applicant, a statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were
raised in the record; and
v. The applicable filing fee.
B. Scope of Appeal. Type II and Type III appeals shall be on the record, which means the appeal
is limited to the application materials, evidence, documentation, and specific issues raised in the
initial proceeding. The decision maker shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its
review to determining whether there is substantial evidence in the record to support the findings
of the initial decision maker who heard the matter, or to determining whether errors of law were
committed by such decision maker. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues set forth
in the notice of appeal. The appellant is precluded from raising an issue on appeal if he or she
could have raised the issue before the initial decision maker but failed to do so. Only the
We
appellant and other parties who appeared in the initial proceedings may participate in the appeal
hearing. Appellant shall make the initial presentation and shall be allowed rebuttal. Each
participant in the appeal hearing shall present to the planning commission or city council,
respectively, those portions of the record which the participant deems relevant to the appeal. If a
party wishes the planning commission or city council, respectively, to review recorded
testimony, the party shall present a written summary or transcript of such testimony to be
reviewed.
C. Notice of Hearing and Staff Report
1. Upon timely receipt of the notice of appeal and filing fee, the community development
director or his designee shall set the appeal for hearing before the planning commission for Type
II appeals and city council for Type III appeals. The community development director or his
designee shall notify the appellant and all parties who appeared in the initial proceedings of the
time and place of the hearing by first class mail, enclosing a copy of the notice of appeal at least
20 -calendar days before the date of the appeal hearing.
2. Not less than seven (7) calendar days before the date of the appeal hearing, the director or his
designee shall prepare and make available to the public, for review and inspection, a copy of the
staff report and shall provide a copy of the staff report to the planning commission or city
council and to the appellant. The director shall provide a copy of the staff report to all other
parties and members of the public at reasonable cost upon request.
C. Final Decision. The reviewing body shall make a written decision which either affirms,
reverses, or modifies in whole or in part the decision or any conditions of such decision, that is
under review. When the hearings body modifies or renders a decision that reverses a decision of
the approving authority, said hearings body shall, in its written decision, set forth its findings and
state its reasons for taking the action encompassed by such decision. The decision of the
planning commission regarding an appeal of a Type II decision is the final decision of the city.
The decision of the city council regarding an appeal of a Type III decision is the final decision of
the city.
D. Withdrawal of an Appeal.
1. Before the close of an appeal hearing in front of any appellate decision making authority, any
appellant may withdraw his appeal.
2. Withdrawal of an appeal is subject to the following:
a. The party may withdraw the appeal on its own motion, which may be submitted to the
appellate decision making authority orally or in writing.
231
b. No part of the appeal fee will be refunded.
c. No one may re -file a withdrawn appeal.
d. Where multiple people or parties sign and file a single appeal document, all must consent to
the withdrawal of the appeal.
3. In addition to all the requirements of this section, if all appeals in a matter are withdrawn, the
appellate decision making authority loses jurisdiction over the action. The underlying decision is
automatically re -instated under its original date of final decision.
17.05.500 Type IV procedure.
A. Pre -Application Conference. A pre -application conference is required for all Type IV
applications initiated by a party other than the city of Central Point. The requirements and
procedures for a pre -application conference are described in Section 17.05.600(C).
B. Timing of Requests. Acceptance timing varies for Type IV applications (see Table 17.05.1 for
applicable section reference).
C. Application Requirements.
1. Application Forms. Type IV applications shall be made on forms provided by the community
development director or designee.
2. Submittal Information. The application shall contain:
a. The information requested on the application form;
b. A map and/or plan addressing the appropriate criteria and standards in sufficient detail for
review and decision (as applicable);
c. The required fee; and
d. One copy of a letter or narrative statement (findings and conclusions) that explains how the
application satisfies each and all of the relevant approval criteria and standards applicable to the
specific Type IV application.
D. Notice of Hearing.
1. Required Hearings. A minimum of two hearings, one before the planning commission and one
before the city council, are required for all Type IV applications.
232
2. Notification Requirements. Notice of public hearings shall be given by the community
development director or designee in the following manner:
a. At least ten days, but not more than forty days, before the date of the first hearing, a notice
shall be mailed to:
i. Any affected governmental agency;
ii. Any person who requests notice in writing;
b. At least ten days before the first public hearing date, and fourteen days before the city council
hearing date, public notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the city.
c. The community development director or designee shall:
i. For each mailing of notice, file an affidavit of mailing in the record as provided by subsection
(D)(2)(a) of this section; and
ii. For each published notice, file in the record the affidavit of publication in a newspaper that is
required in subsection (D)(2)(b) of this section.
d. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) shall be notified in
writing of proposed comprehensive plan and development code amendments within the time
period prescribed by DLCD. The notice to DLCD shall include a DLCD certificate of mailing.
3. Content of Notices. The mailed and published notices shall include the following information:
a. The number and title of the file containing the application, and the address and telephone
number of the community development director or designee's office where additional
information about the application can be obtained;
b. The proposed site location, if applicable;
c. A description of the proposal in enough detail for people to determine what change is
proposed, and the place where all relevant materials and information may be obtained or
reviewed;
d. The time(s), place(s), and date(s) of the public hearing(s); a statement that public oral or
written testimony is invited; and a statement that the hearing will be held under this title and
rules of procedure adopted by the council and available at City Hall (see subsection E of this
section).
233
E. Hearing Process and Procedure --Conduct of Public Hearing.
1. Unless otherwise provided in the rules of procedure adopted by the city council:
a. The presiding officer of the planning commission and of the city council shall have the
authority to:
i. Regulate the course, sequence, and decorum of the hearing;
ii. Direct procedural requirements or similar matters;
iii. Impose reasonable time limits for oral presentations; and
iv. Waive the provisions of this chapter so long as they do not prejudice the substantial rights of
any party.
b. No person shall address the commission or the council without:
i. Receiving recognition from the presiding officer; and
ii. Stating his or her full name and address.
c. Disruptive conduct such as applause, cheering, or display of signs shall be cause for expulsion
of a person or persons from the hearing, termination or continuation of the hearing, or other
appropriate action determined by the presiding officer.
2. Unless otherwise provided in the rules of procedures adopted by the council, the presiding
officer of the commission and of the council shall conduct the hearing as follows:
a. The presiding officer shall begin the hearing with a statement of the nature of the matter before
the body, a general summary of the procedures, a summary of the standards for decision-making,
and whether the decision which will be made is a preliminary decision, such as a
recommendation to the city council, or the final decision of the city;
b. The community development director or designee's report and other applicable staff reports
shall be presented;
c. The public shall be invited to testify;
d. The public hearing may be continued to allow additional testimony or it may be closed; and
234
e. The body's deliberation may include questions to the staff, comments from the staff, and
inquiries directed to any person present.
F. Continuation of the Public Hearing. The planning commission or the city council may
continue any hearing, and no additional notice of hearing shall be required if the matter is
continued to a specified place, date, and time.
G. Decision -Making Criteria Decision Process. The recommendations by the citizens advisory
committee, the planning commission and the decision by the city council shall be based on the
applicable criteria as referenced it 'fable 17.05. ,
H. Approval Process and Authority.
1. The citizens advisory committee and planning commission shall:
a. The citizens advisory committee: after notice and discussion at a public meeting, vote on and
prepare a recommendation to the city council to approve, approve with modifications, approve
with conditions, deny the proposed change, or adopt an alternative; and
b. The planning commission: after notice and a public hearing, vote on and prepare a
recommendation to the city council to approve, approve with modifications, approve with
conditions, deny the proposed change, or adopt an alternative; and
c. Within ten days of adopting a recommendation, the presiding officer shall sign the written
recommendation, and it shall be filed with the community development director or designee.
2. Any member of the citizens advisory committee or planning commission who votes in
opposition to the majority recommendation may file a written statement of opposition with the
community development director or designee before the council public hearing on the proposal.
The community development director or designee shall send a copy to each council member and
place a copy in the record;
3. If the citizens advisory committee or planning commission does not adopt a recommendation
to approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny the proposed change, or
adopt an alternative proposal within sixty days of its first public hearing on the proposed change,
the community development director or designee shall:
a. Prepare a report to the city council on the proposal, including noting the citizens advisory
committee's or planning commission's actions on the matter, if any; and
235
b. Provide notice and put the matter on the city council's agenda for the city council to hold a
public hearing and make a decision. No further action shall be taken by the citizens advisory
committee or planning commission.
4. The city council shall:
a. Consider the recommendation of the citizens advisory committee and planning commission;
however, the city council is not bound by the committee's or the commission's recommendation;
b. Approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny, or adopt an alternative
to an application for legislative change, or remand the application to the planning commission
for rehearing and reconsideration on all or part of the application; and
c. If the application is approved, the council shall act by ordinance, which shall be signed by the
mayor after the council's adoption of the ordinance.
I. Vote Required for a Legislative Change.
1. A vote by a majority of the qualified voting members of the citizens advisory committee
present is required for a recommendation for approval, approval with modifications, approval
with conditions, denial or adoption of an alternative.
2. A vote by a majority of the qualified voting members of the planning commission present is
required for a recommendation for approval, approval with modifications, approval with
conditions, denial or adoption of an alternative.
3. A vote by a majority of the qualified members of the city council present is required to decide
any motion made on the proposal.
J. Notice of Decision. Notice of a Type IV decision shall be mailed to the applicant, all
participants of record, and the Department of Land Conservation and Development, within five
days after the city council decision is filed with the community development director or
designee.
K. Final Decision and Effective Date. A Type IV decision, if approved, shall take effect and shall
become final as specified in the enacting ordinance, or if not approved, upon the date of mailing
of the notice of decision to the applicant.
L. Record of the Public Hearing.
236
1. A verbatim record of the proceeding shall be made by stenographic, mechanical, or electronic
means. It is not necessary to transcribe an electronic record. The minutes and other evidence
presented as a part of the hearing shall be part of the record;
2. All exhibits received and displayed shall be marked to provide identification and shall be part
of the record;
3. The official record shall include:
a. All materials considered and not rejected by the hearings body;
b. All materials submitted by the community development director or designee to the hearings
body regarding the application;
c. The verbatim record made by the stenographic, mechanical, or electronic means; the minutes
of the hearing; and other documents considered;
d. The final decision;
e. All correspondence; and
f. A copy of the notices that were given as required by this chapter. (Ord. 1989 § 1(part), 2014;
Ord. 1874 § I (part), 2006).
17.05.600 General procedural provisions.
A. One -Hundred -Twenty -Day Rule. In accordance with ORS 227.178, the city shall take final
action on all land use decisions as identified in Table 17.05.1, including resolution of all appeals,
within one hundred twenty days from the date the application is deemed as complete, unless the
applicant requests an extension in writing. The total of all extensions may not exceed two
hundred forty-five days. Any exceptions to this rule shall conform to the provisions of ORS
227.178.
B. Time Computation. In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by this chapter, the
day of the act or event from which the designated period of time begins to run shall not be
included. The last day of the period so computed shall be included, unless it is a Saturday or
legal holiday, including Sunday, in which event the period runs until the end of the next day
which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday.
C. Pre -Application Conferences.
237
1. Participants. When a pre -application conference is required, the applicant shall meet with the
community development director or his/her designee(s) and such other parties as the community
development director deems appropriate;
2. Information Provided. At such conference, the community development director or designee
shall:
a. Cite the comprehensive plan policies and map designations that appear to be applicable to the
proposal;
b. Cite the ordinance provisions, including substantive and procedural requirements that appear
to be applicable to the proposal;
c. Provide available technical data and assistance that will aid the applicant;
d. Identify other governmental policies and regulations that relate to the application; and
e. Reasonably identify other opportunities or constraints concerning the application.
3. Disclaimer. Failure of the community development director or designee to provide any of the
information required in this subsection C shall not constitute a waiver of any of the standards,
criteria or requirements for the application;
4. Changes in the Law. Due to possible changes in federal, state, regional, and local law, the
applicant is responsible for ensuring that the application complies with all applicable laws.
D. Acceptance and Review of Applications.
1. Initiation of Applications.
a. Applications for approval under this chapter may be initiated by:
i. Order of city council;
ii. Resolution of the planning commission;
iii. The community development director or designee;
iv. A record owner of property (person(s) whose name is on the most recently recorded deed), or
contract purchaser with written permission from the record owner.
238
b. Any person authorized to submit an application for approval may be represented by an agent
authorized in writing to make the application on their behalf.
2. Consolidation of Proceedings. When an applicant applies for more than one type of land use or
development permit (e.g., Type II and III) for the same one or more parcels of land, the
proceedings may, at the option of the applicant, be consolidated for review and decision.
a. If more than one approval authority would be required to decide on the applications if
submitted separately, then the decision shall be made by the respective approval authority having
jurisdiction over each type procedure.
b. When proceedings are consolidated:
i. The notice shall identify each application to be consolidated;
ii. The decision on a plan map amendment shall precede the decision on a proposed land use
district change and other decisions on a proposed development. Similarly, the decision on a zone
map amendment shall precede the decision on a proposed development and other actions; and
iii. Separate findings shall be made for each consolidated application.
3. Check for Acceptance and Completeness. In reviewing an application for completeness, the
following procedure shall be used:
a. Acceptance. When an application is received by the city, the community development director
or designee shall immediately determine whether the following essential items are present. If the
following items are not present, the application shall not be accepted and shall be immediately
returned to the applicant:
i. The required form;
ii. The required fee;
iii. The signature of the applicant on the required form and signed written authorization of the
property owner of record if the applicant is not the owner.
b. Completeness.
i. Review and Notification. After the application is accepted, the community development
director or designee shall review the application for completeness. If the application is
incomplete, the community development director or designee shall notify the applicant in writing
239
of exactly what information is missing within thirty days of receipt of the application and allow
the applicant one hundred eighty days to submit the missing information.
ii. Application Deemed Complete for Review. In accordance with the application submittal
requirements of this chapter, the application shall be deemed complete upon the receipt by the
community development director or designee of all required information. The applicant shall
have the option of withdrawing the application, or refusing to submit further information and
requesting that the application be processed notwithstanding any identified incompleteness. For
the refusal to be valid, the refusal shall be made in writing and received by the community
development director or designee.
iii. If the applicant does not submit all of the missing information or provide written notice that
no further information will be provided (whether some of the additional information has been
provided or not) within one hundred eighty days of the date the initial submittal was accepted per
subsection (D)(3)(a) of this section, the application is void.
iv. Standards and Criteria That Apply to the Application. Approval or denial of the application
shall be based upon the standards and criteria that were applicable at the time it was first
accepted, unless the application is for a change to the comprehensive plan or land use
regulations.
v. Coordinated Review. The city shall also submit the application for review and comment to the
city engineer, road authority, and other applicable county, state, and federal review agencies.
4. Changes or Additions to the Application. Once an application is deemed complete per
subsection (D)(3)(b) of this section:
a. All documents and other evidence relied upon by the applicant shall be submitted to the
community development director or designee at least seven days before the notice of action or
hearing is mailed. Documents or other evidence submitted after that date shall be received by the
community development director or designee, and transmitted to the hearings body, but may be
too late to include with the staff report and evaluation;
b. When documents or other evidence are submitted by the applicant during the review period
but after the notice of action or hearing is mailed, the assigned review person or body shall
determine whether or not the new documents or other evidence submitted by the applicant
significantly change the application;
c. If the assigned reviewer determines that the new documents or other evidence significantly
change the application, the reviewer shall include a written determination to the approving
authority that a significant change in the application has occurred as part of the decision. In the
240
alterate alternative, the reviewer may inform the applicant either in writing, or orally at a public
hearing, that such changes may constitute a significant change, and allow the applicant to
withdraw the new materials submitted, in order to avoid a determination of significant change;
d. If the applicant's new materials are determined to constitute a significant change in an
application that was previously deemed complete, the city shall take one of the following actions,
at the choice of the applicant:
i. Suspend the existing application and allow the applicant to submit a revised application with
the proposed significant changes. Before the existing application can be suspended, the applicant
must consent in writing to waive the one -hundred -twenty -day rule (subsection A of this section)
on the existing application for a minimum of thirty (30) days from the date of the went
significant change to allow the City to reprocess the revised application. If the applicant does not
consent, the eity-applicant may shaU-not select this option
ii. Declare the application, based on the significant change, a new application and reprocess as
having been refiled as a new application as of the date the significant change was submitted
a^^^,y; or
iii. Decide the application on the basis of the applicant's materials without the significant change.
e. If a new application is submitted by the applicant, that applicant shall pay the applicable
application fee and shall be subject to a separate check for acceptance and completeness and will
be subject to the standards and criteria in effect at the time the new application is accepted.
E. Community Development Director's Duties. The community development director or
designee shall:
1. Prepare application forms based on the criteria and standards in applicable state law, the city's
comprehensive plan, and implementing ordinance provisions;
2. Accept all development applications that comply with this section;
3. Prepare a staff report that summarizes the application(s) and applicable decision criteria, and
provides findings of conformance and/or nonconformance with the criteria. The staff report may
also provide a recommended decision of approval; denial; or approval with specific conditions
that ensure conformance with the approval criteria;
4. Prepare a notice of the proposal proposed decision:
241
a. In the case of an application subject to a Type I or II review process, the community
development director or designee shall make the staff report and all case file materials available
at the time that the notice of the decision is issued;
b. In the case of an application subject to a public hearing (Type III or IV process or a Type II
review on appeal), the community development director or designee shall make the staff report
available to the public at least seven days prior to the scheduled hearing date, and make the case
file materials available when notice of the hearing is mailed, as provided by Sections
17.05.300(C) (Type II), 17.05.400(C) (Type III), or 17.05.500(D) (Type IV);
5. Administer the application and hearings process;
6. File notice of the final decision in the city's records and mail a copy of the notice of the final
decision to the applicant, all persons who provided comments or testimony, persons who
requested copies of the notice, and any other persons entitled to notice by law;
7. Maintain and preserve the file for each application for the time period required by law. The
file shall include, as applicable, a list of persons required to be given notice and a copy of the
notice given; the affidavits of notice, the application and all supporting information, the staff
report, the final decision (including the findings, conclusions and conditions, if any), all
correspondence, minutes of any meeting at which the application was considered, and any other
exhibit, information or documentation which was eensider-ed by the deeis o maker(s) on
mien made part of the record; and
8. Administer the appeals and review process.
F. Amended Decision Process.
1. The purpose of an amended decision process is to allow the community development director
or designee to correct typographical errors, rectify inadvertent omissions and/or make other
minor changes that do not materially alter the decision.
2. The community development director or designee may issue an amended decision after the
notice of final decision has been issued but before the appeal period has expired. If such a
decision is amended, the decision shall be issued within fourteen business days after the original
decision would have become final, but in no event beyond the one -hundred -twenty -day period
required by state law. A new ten-day appeal period shall begin on the day the amended decision
is issued.
3. Notice of an amended decision shall be given using the same mailing and distribution list as
for the original decision notice.
242
4. Modifications to approved plans or conditions of approval requested by the applicant shall
follow the procedures in Chapter 17.09. All other changes to decisions that are not modifications
under Chapter 17.09 shall follow the appeal process.
G. Resubmittal of Application Following Denial. An application or proposal that has been
denied, or that was denied and on appeal or review has not been reversed by a higher authority,
including the Land Use Board of Appeals, the Land Conservation and Development Commission
or the courts, may not be resubmitted as the same or a substantially similar proposal for the same
land for a period of at least twelve months from the date the final city action is made denying the
same, unless there is substantial change in the facts or a change in city policy that would change
the outcome, as determined by the community development director or designee.
H. City Council Review. The city council shall have the authority to call up any Type II or Type
III application for review. The decision to call up an application may occur at any time after the
application is filed until the decision is otherwise final. When the city council calls up an
application, the council shall, in its order of call-up, determine the procedure to be followed,
including the extent of preliminary processing and the rights of the parties. At a minimum, the
council shall follow the procedures in Section 17.05.550 47-.05-400(F), regarding appeals from
Type III decisions. (Ord. 1989 § I (part), 2014; Ord. 1874 § 1(part), 2006).
243