Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning Commission Packet - June 4, 2002
CI'~"t' OF CIt1NTRAL YO~NT 1'LANN[NG Ct)YTMiSSION AGF.,NllA .Tine ~, 2002 - 'T.00 p.~1~. ~ ~ ~ Next Planning Coznznissiczzl Resohxtion No. 5~~ I. NETTING CALLED TO OI2DEI2 II. ROLL CALL Cluck Pilax~d - Caxady Fish, Don Foster, John LcGros, Paul l.unte, Rick Perxy and ~Vayx~e Rugs III. CORRIt~SPONDENCE IV. ~YIINUTES A. Review axed approval of May 7, 20(}2, Planx~ix~ ; Coznxnissiox~ l~linutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Page 1- 20 A. Public Hearing regarding a tentative subdivision that would create l 2 parcels in an area north ofTulane Avenue in the recently approved Transit Oriented Development (TOD} on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W03CC, Tax Lot 10{7, and 372W03C, Tax Lot 206. Tl1e project area is located in a TOD Low Mix Residential zoning district. 2- 40 B. Public Meeting to review a Site Plan Review application for the construction of 6 office buildings on East Pine Street near the Uzxua Bank. The subject property is zoned C-4, Tourist and Office Professional and is identified on Jackson County Assessment Plat 37 2W 02D, Tax Lot 2100. 41 - S2 C. Public meeting to review an application for a fence variance at 653 Meadowbrook Drive. The applicant is requesting if portions of proposed fence can be constructed at a height ol" six feet in a side yard setback where the code allows a maximum height of 42 inches. The subject property is located in the R-1-8, Residential Single Family zoning district on Map 37 2~ O1BC, Tax Lot 93{}0. VII. MISCI<JLLANEOUS VIII. ADJOURNMENT City of CCntral Point Punning ~ominission May ~~, 2~~2 I. MEETING CALLED TO t3RDER AT 7.00 P.M. Il. R4LL CALL.: Chuck Piland, Rick Perry, Candy Fish, Don Foster and Wayne Riggs were present. John LeGros and Paul IAunte were absent. Also in attendance were Ken Gerschler, Community Planner; Matt Sami#ore, Community Planner, and Dave Arkens, Planning Technician. II1. C4RRESPON©ENCE There was correspondence for item B. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Fish made a motion to approve the minutes from the April 2, 2002 meeting as presented. Commissioner Foster seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Perry; yes, Fish, yes; Faster, yes and Riggs, yes. Motion passed unanimously. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES Torn Humphrey, Planning Direr#or, stated that we have entered in#o a contract With the Sta#e of Oregon for a study to be done from Penninger Road to Table Rock Road including Hamrick Road. Mr. Humphrey invited the Planning Commission members to attend a seminar being held at City Hall on May 9, 2002 presented by Jon Schallert, a Marketing Expert and Small Business Strategist. VI. BUSINESS A. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, introduced Nicole Miles, a Grater High School student who has been Interning with the Planning Department. Ms. Mlles gave a presentation on the legal issue of "Public Need Verses Private Right." B, Public Nearing to review a conditional use application far the Central Paint Christian Fellowship to use office space at 419 East Pint Street far limited church activities. The subject property is zoned TC}D-EC, Employment Commercial District and is identified on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W 02CC, Tax Lot 5700. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. Mr. Gerschler reported #hat this Conditional Use Permit is subject to an agreement with adjacent property owners for the use of parking facilities during church services and other meeting times. Washington Mutual, at the corner of East Pine and North 5th Street, will allow overflow parking in their lot. The City has not received a shared parking agreement from Washington Mutual. Arty signs associated with this use must meet the Tai-1=C standards. l"ee Korner, 13711 Perry Road, pastor of the Central Point Christian Fellowship, stated that the use of this facility will enhance the ministry at Central Point Christian Fellowship and that meetings will be held Tuesday and Wednesday evenings. Commissioner Fish made a motion to adapt Resolution 543 approving the Conditional Use Permitfor the Central Point Christian Fellowship to use office space at 419 East Pine Street far limited church activities subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Commissioner foster seconded the motion. RaLL CALI~: The motion passed unanimously. C, Public hearing to review a conditional use application for Storm Physical Therapy to use office space within the Mountain View Plaza commercial development, The subject property is zoned C-4, Tourist and C3ffice Professional and is identified on Jackson CauntyAssessment Plat 37 2W 02©, Tax Lot '1200, Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. Mr. Gerschler reported that the C-4, Tourist and office Professional zoning district does not specifically list this type of business, but it does fit into the overall description of the district. Strom Physical Therapy business hours will be between 9 AM and 7 PM. The staff believes there will be no negative impact an surrounding businesses. The Conditional Use Permit is sub;ect to compliance with all applicable Oregon State health codes. Commissioner Riggs made a motion to adopt Resolution 544 approving the Conditional Use Permit far Storm Physical Therapy to use of#ice space within the Mountain View Plaza commercial development subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Commissioner Fish seconded the motion. RC}LC. CAI,t_: The motion passed unanimously. d. Public Hearing to review a request to modify the previously approved conditions of the Cedar Shadows Planned Unit Development, The subject property is zoned R-3, Residential Multiple Family and is identified on Jackson County Assessment Plat 37 2W 11 BA, Tax Lat 301. Matt Samitore, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. Mr. Samitore reported that Dallas Page, the developer of Gedar Shadows, has covered the front porch area on a few of the units m this development and building codes have been met. The Fire Department had na comment on the changes. Dallas Page, 900 Wmdermeer Dr., stated that the covered porches have enhanced the look of the subdivision and there is a gate for fire personnel and equipment to access the back of the units. Commissioner Faster made a motion to adopt Resolution 545 approving the modifications to Cedar 5hadaws Planned Unit Development subject to the recommended conditions afi appraual. Gommissioner Riggs seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Matt Samitore, Community Planner, reported that a tree in the Public Right-of-Way was removed at 240 2"a Street. The staff approved the removal of the tree due to the core of the tree being hallow and the threat of the tree falling an the home. The home owner has indicated that he will replace the tree. Commissioner Fish made a motion to allow the removal of a tree at 240 South 2"a Street. Commissioner Perry seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Samitore also reported thaf he received an e-mail from Kathy Helmer of the Rogue Valley Cauncii of Governments about a framing class titled "Making Quasi-Judicial Land Use Decisions" and will take place at the Smullen Center, May 18~~' from 1 PM - 4:30 PM. The cost is $45.00. Commission members are invited to attend. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Fish made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Riggs seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 8:04 P.M. PLANNING DEl'AIZTMENT S'i'AI+F REPCrT2T MEETING DATE: June 4, 2002 Ti3: Central Point Planzaizag Conazaxission FR-f.}M: Ken Gerschler, Cozxxzxazznity Plazzzxcr SUBJECT: Public Hearing - To consider a Tentative Plaza far a 12 lot subdivision known as Jacksozx Oaks Subclivisioza, Uzait Number 1 located zaortla of Tulane Avezaue in tlae TC}D-LMR zoning district {372W03CC Tax Lot 100 and 3'~2W03C Tax Lot 206}. Applicaza#1 t~wzaer: Twin Creeks Developznezat L.L.C. 1461 McAndrews Toad Medford, Gregon 97501 A~e_z~f: Kerb FarberlFarber Suz~veying 120 Mistletoe Street Medford, C)regon 97501 Sumanary: The applicant has submitted a developznezxt proposal to subdivide 3.3 acres of land into 12 residential lots. This tentative plaza is located within the recently approved Transit Oriented Development {Tf7D} master plan. Aaztharity: CPMC 1.24.050 vests the Planning Cozzxznission with the authority to hold a public hearing azxd rezader a decision on any application for a Tentative Plan. Notice of tlxe Public Hearing vas given in accordance with CPMC l .24.060. Applicable Law: CPMC 16.10.010 et seq. -`T'entative Plans T.C}.D. Design Tequirezxxents and Standards Book Uiscussioaa• Jackson {yaks, Unit Number- 1 is a portion of a multiple phased commercial and residential development proposed north of Tulane Avenue in the Transit ~}riezated Developnxezat {TC}D}. The Planning Department has reviewed the tentative plan for compliance with tlae TOD Design Requirements, Guidelines azxd Comprehezasive Plan. The area is desigzaated for Tow mix residential development and is zoned TC}D-LMR. The mix of housing types anticipated have numerous lot sizes and configurations, The 12 lots that comprise the Unit lof the Jackson C}aks Subdivision range in size froze 8,394 to 13,753 square feet with the average lot size being approximately 10,500 square feet {Attachment A}. ~~~ This proposed subdivision is one of seven distinct neighborhoods located ~vitlzi~t the Twin Creeks Development ~.vhich has been master planned with stringent statxlards designed to ensure project quality with a creative form of community that targets less reliance upo~~ tine automobile by emphasizing public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian activities. Jackson CJaks, Unit I~Iumber 1 has been presented in compliance with tl~e Twin Creeks Transit- C)riented Master Plan which includes components relating to pedestrian and bicycle paths, traffic calming rneastzres, parking, landscaping and street light standards. Park and open space has been accommodated along the northerly boundary of the proposed neighborhood where a pedestrian path is sl3own to meander north and east of lot 6 to a pocket park immediately east of the subdivision boundary. The Rogue River Valley Irrigation District, Jackson County Roads and Parks and the Bear Creek Valley Sanitazy Authority have been notified of the this tentative subdivision. Bear Creek Valley unitary .Authority has identified that there is a public sewer main located along Tulane Avenue. The proposed sanitary sewer easement shown between lots 1 and 2 will be used to eliminate tl~e existing pump station at the intersection of Tulane and Carlton Avenues. Jackson County Roads and Parks Dcpartzxaent has submitted comments for consideration by the Commission. The Public W orks Department has provided their comments, recommendations asld requirez~ents for this application which. can be found in Attachment D. F'indizz gs of Fact and Goncl~zsions afLavv staff suggests the fallowing findings offact and conclusions oflaw as applicable to the project and necessary for its approval. 1. The project site is located in the T4D-LMR (Low IYIix Residential} Zoning bistrict and increases residential and mixed use land use efficiency in this area. The proposed tentative plan for low mix residential development is a permitted use in the TCJD zoning district. The zoning in tuz~} is consistent with the TC}D Comprehensive Plan map designation. The Comprehensive Plan encourages innovative residential planning and development techniques that would help to increase land use efficiency and reduce casts of utilities and services tComprehensive Plan, page XlI-1~}. 2. The project consists of a tentative plan application for the subdivision cif approximately 3.3 acres for tl~e purpose of developing a mixed use development, C~nit 1 of the Jackson teaks subdivision. T'l~e total number of lots proposed for what the applicants have identified as the second phase of their subdivision is 12. The proposed mixed use subdivision meets the density requirement for the TC3D-LMR {Low Mix Residential} .honing District which is a maximum of 12 units per acre in the TQ1~-LMR. Each Iot within the subdivision meets the requirements of the TC~D Desigtr Requirements and Cruidelines. The tentative plan includes all infon~~ation required by C1'MC 16.10.41C} et. seq. J `~ V ~/ 3. The Plazxzzing azzd Pztbiic ~'~orks ~)epartzzzezzts lzarTe revietivecl butlz the tezztative platz for the proposed szzbdivisiazz azzd flze finciizzgs of fact azzd deterznizzed that the project nxeets a1i City standards and regzzireznezzfs szzhjeet to the recoztzzzzezzded conclitiozzs found izc ~,ttachznezzts D and E. 12.ecomzzzendation. Staffrecomn~zends that the Planning Comzxzission take the following action: 1. Adopt Resolution Itito. ,approving the tentative subdivision subject to tlxe recommended conditions of approval ~Attacl3ment E~; or 2. Deny tl~e tentative subdivision; or 3. Continue the review of the tentative subdivision at tl3e discretiozt of the Commission. AttactZmerzts: A. Copy of Tentative Plat B. notice of Public Hearing C. Cozrespondence Received froze Affected Agencies D. Public Works Staff Report E. Planning Department Recommended Conditions of Approval I z:11'1ar~ning102021.wpd L/ Y ~~ t"'XNtt;3tr MAP at 11ACffSC?N OAKS Dining a port aC rwrr~ CREEKS loantaa In sourNS~,~sr oNE-~u,aRrER OF s~cnaN .~, ro}vt~,sra,P ~~ .^odU'rt~7, RANdE a wESr. w!l.iA~fErrE ns~t~r1~lAN, crrY dF cE»rRA~ Polnlr, aACxsoN c~uNr~; aFlECOx for TYYttt CREEKS DEYEi.t.~PMEAt7' Ci7., LLC fast eASr MaANaR£WS ftC}ALT 1.tEbf'aRO. ORECQN 8T51}a uw ~..._..~ .... .~ f' .~ ~ -. ~} ~ ~ i ~i%~il ~ 1 ~ 1 t ~ ~ JALYfSQ+t C1AKS, PNAS 3 ~~ ~ GRIFFIN dAifS UN7T No. 2, AHAS£ 7 i -.-, I 11-- 1~ti 1 ~~~ 7 ~ I I ~~ti ~Aftxu~vr sua~7ustd~! ~~ I ~, ,~. ~.....,._ ~.........._ _ ._ .~ \ ~'- I~ ~ GRlFF7N dA7fS UNtr I ~`~~~ I I Na. 2, PHASE JJ I I( ~ \ I I I I GRiFFlN OAKS I ~ ~L`'ti. ICI I } f I I ~ I ~ `- ~ ~ ~ j ~ GRlFF7N OAKS uNrr s~- -- - -~ ! ~~ ~ ~ I NA. 2, PHASE tU ~ J I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 I w ~ ,_.. TAYLOR ROAD (~ nsssssaRS uAP FaG r1A. 3T aw a3G T ~ ~ _.... ~ ~ __.. __._ ..-. ~ ~.._. ~ _._. S7T+xet 1 of 1 ~ ! ..... ___. ~... ~... u ^ SurYayca oy: FhR6ER & 50145; ItYC, dbo FAR$ER SURVEYING (5'i~F) 776-d8+B OF£!CE LOCA7IQN: MAiLlNG AA.ORESS: t2Q httS7LE70E P.fl. 8L7X 52&$ M£D£flRp, OREGON 8?50t C£"N7RAL PptNT, OREGON 975172 SGALG i^ .+ .R00' aATt: AARiL $'~, 20A2 Jab NG.: Q5~4-48 1GCNFR.v. ParH7lTVdr1 CFCCdS LLGt,7AGKSart OAKS\CXx!$tT JACxSGN OAKSftX .~.. ~~ U -~~ ~~ 1° ~1 ~~ o~ ~~1~ ~ .~~~~ .T _1-~~.~`.~ -~(~i~rr~~ F~ ~w~n ~~~±F Plannia:i~°~e~arfiz~ii~n~ ~" .. .. ~ `T'orn I-tutxzfi>filz-cy, ~IICP I'iazlnin~ Director Ken C~es•sclzler Community Manner Matt. ~amitore Communif.y Planner Dave Arkens Plannizxg TcclYnician ~4t~Ce 0~ ~~~tz~i~ , Date o~ Notice: may 14, 2002 1Vleeting Date: Tune: Place: NATURE OF MEETING June 4, 2002 ']:00 p.m. {Approxiznatej Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Coznznission will review a tentative subdivision application that would create 12 lots on a 3.34 acre parcel North ofTulane Avenue. The parcel is located in the TOD-LMR, Low Mix Residential zoning district and is identified in therecords ofthe Jackson CountyAssessor as Map 37 2W 03CC, Tax Lot 144 and Map 37 2W I}3C, Tax Lot 246. CRITERIA FOR DECISION `I'l~e rcquiretnents for Tentative Partitions are set forth in Chapter 1 {~ of tl~e Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off street parking, Site flan., Landscaping and Construction flans. The proposed plan is also reviewed iz~ accordance to tl~e City's Public Works Standards. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision nay submit written comments up until the close of tl-fe meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 3une 4, 24I}2. 2. Written comments nay be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City IJall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97542. 3. Issues which n~.ay provide the basis for an appeal on tl~e matters shall be raised prior to the expiration of tlae comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to be relat~l to flee proposal and should lie stated ~ ,~ ~ ~i --- 1.55 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 +~ {541j 664-3321 ~ Fax: {541`} 664-63$4 clearly to the Plarznizzg Comtnissioza. ~€. Copies ofali evidence relied upon iry the applicant arc available fox public review at City Hall, 155 Soufh Second Street, cenfral Point, Qrcgon. conies of the saczte are available of 15 cents per page. 5. For additzazal inforzn.atiozi, the public;zuay caiit~ct tlzc Planning Ucparfmcnt at (5~ 1'} ~G~l- 3321 ext.; 292. i sUMI~~~.~~o~ r~z©c~nU~T ~. .. _ At the zzzeeting, the Planning Cozrzzuissian will review the applications, teclu~ical staff reports, hear testimony fronx the applicant,.proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the aplalicatian. Any testimony or written carnznents zrzust be related fo tlae criteria set fartlz abavc, tit the conclusion of tlxe review tlxe Planning Cozxzn~issian zzxay approve ar tezxtafive partition application. Cityregtzlatians provide that the cezzfral Point City Cauzzcil be informed about all 1'Iatzniczg Coznissioz~ dccisians. C_3 C1' d ~' J v •i 155 Satzflz Secozzd Street 4 Cezltral 1'oiiz.t, (~R 975(12 ~ {5~ 1} ~6~-3321 ~ Fax: {541} 66~-634 .x~c •r,` 3915 sourH pAGtFtC -swir. • MEpFORt3} Ot2~GON s7sa1-saag • 4341} 335-5593 • 4341} TTY-4144 FAX {541} 33,5-s2Tts * vrvrw.bcvsa.org } ,~: 'City o f Ce~~t~r~~i ~`iiizt lvtay 21, 2442 . piannin~ ~3epaz~tznen`t lien Cerschler FAQ 664-6384 City of Central Point Planning ~epartznent 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97542 Re: Jackson Oaks S~zbdzvisivn Dear men, There is a pnbiic sewer main located along Tulare Avenue as shown on the tentative plat. This nxain line will provide direct connection to lots 1 through 6. Lots 7 through 12 will require a mainline extension in artier to provide sewer service. The proposed sanitary sewer easement between fats 1 and 2 will be -used for a future project to eliminate the pump station at the intersection of Tulare and Carlton. All new construction must be done in accordance with 13CVSA standards. If you need additional infarsxxatian, please call me at 779-41:44. Sincerely, arl Tappert, P.E. f?istrict Engineer.- 4: '. .. .. i r. J s ... 1:1I~ATAIAGLNCIESICENTPTIPLAN~NGISUBOIVrSIC~I~II.IA.C~SC~NC}A~.S 1.1~4C ' ri~z~ ~ 1 ! iJ J. RU:it~S uric Nicmcvcr, ~'~ T'rtrfjtc ~f-,Acvctoj~rr+ent ~'ngirtccr 240 Ahfe[o~~cs F2aad Wl~tte Clry, OR a75~3 E'hbnr~: 541-~7~#-234 f'ax. 54 T-77.4-G2~5 nFOsneyot~jacksona7urrr/.org vrtvw.jec!tsoc~connE~.ktg IVlay 28, 2082 A#tentiC~n: Tom Flurnphrey City of Central Point Planning 'f ~ 5 South Second Street Central Point, C:~R 9~~0~ RE: Jackson Oa~CS Subdivision, Phase I off Tulane Ave. ~ a county-maintained road. ~ ~-lot residential subdivision. Dear Mr. Nurnphrey: Tl~anl~ yoz~ for the opportunity to comrnet~k pn the application for Jackson 4alts, phase 1, a 'l2-lot residential subdivision located on the north side of Tulare Avenue. Roads and Parks Services have the follov~ring corrrrnents: "I . The applicant will submit construction drawings to Jackson County Roads and Parks Services and obtain county permits if required. ~. Half-street frontage imp~'over~e~fs to Tt~lane Avenge are required ar~d trey mil( be to urban standards_ Improvemen#s will include curlJ, gut#er, drainage #'acilities, and sidewalk, 3. City of Central Point Standards r-nay be utilized for road improverr~ent if the City agrees, in writing, to future maintenance cif the url;~an improvements. 4. The applicant will obtain road approach permits from Roads and Parks Services for the new road approaches to Tulare Avenue. li' you have any questions or need further information feel free to call me at 7~"4-G230. Sincer~e--l}y, Eric N'terr~eyer, PE Traffic & Deueloprr-,ent Engineer 1:1ErrginceringlL~eve{oprt-sdntlCITS~StGFJTRL~'T1J~c~t~on Oaks SuS.~.~pd .,a v u { ~iCV i)( ~„C'Rt1~;17 !'('131: }~};3t111!llt~ })t~~)I1i(,iii'ltt /~ g ~ ,.~_~.~ g''.~ ~y ~ fig; ~/p~,~ ly.~`~~ ~ ~ ~/ t~7 ;: ~ ~ ~~Y~~`~ ~ ~. ~ p J7A'i9.~~~~~~k.~~~". L~~~ll. ~i~~~/,SAY rx 0,S9fY kp1~..1 ~Y~tl.~(~Y 3'"~~~~k ;., :.,_~ a~.'~1~1~'~~~r r TQ Data ~' I'O~ {'i' }:: ~.~lCc`3l~lUI1: ~t~?7I11;~. ~nt~s: h~'I:;;)l~l ~~y; ~~Ig~~~tie CC',I1~T"al ~'(_>If1I }'lailI1111~~ (~i)i'11]ill~'S:IC)11 cli1C~:S<)I1 {)ail; ; ;il;};lily"1~1UI1? ~~1a~tx '1'a~'i(?:r }~C?~iCl, ~'c:',I1~I`%i~ ~U1T1"~, ~}I'C';~3I1 l~tli~lic; ~Voi~~t~ It;.~J~Ir~l1l~:ilf - . ~ ,~r- ,~ I ,~ _. I~Oti~]CC', 17~1~C~1"I~1<;tIGL2~Q l~i~', ~'~~i~]llla? (~01}l1TlISS10i1.I311C, <1I?j?11CI11I~?'t _cli~Cjlfl~~ 1 13c)~iC ~~Z~I'iiS 3t:..i:l} ~l:i ',i?C1. I?I(?I?t?.>C'~} Ill; 1'J lii3i?(:lal~ti5 s(? ~?_ Ifllllli4i} is [1]L C}i ti,4.>_I1.' {Ift1,}ll'1' lii}Di1i7i;It1(.ia ~I'C?iil 't11C t~I)I~ill'<311i~1 I1 >iili'it" ]'i'{°ll'111I1<; }?~i>I>i>SC. C«~'~.}t..)}lilll`llt. lull?}1C ~~ ~,l'i~,' ~(<:i11 lZl'~ti~~`."t :'ill 1>C' Sl;~~)~:i:t 1 tl) C.I1~lI1~-'..C', l'Alt[~ ~:C1~; ~~I'C1C,tIC1;'1 I.~I'i114'I11:_>> lll~lr' 1Cti'l~l~ii.~. <1I1Ci ~[}?~~YE)~'l'Cl, ;~I)c~i~t~ C"c>t~~IiYi.t~n~ ~. 1'C!j'Ir.~' 12tJ~rr~il}OIl~_', i}1':' Irc)I1Ilt~~e. C~~ii.; SttlJji:.Ct~1IC?~'.)~::Ii} i~ C3 ;'uili~ Tot1C~ ~hfli (C?,()~s aIUI:t1J~~'t . (~'l"l~ Chi' ~,`C111A11`'i` !11'~?lla S~c79ltid1`ll~. ~ 11 1"OaCI ~Y111 IICCCI i0 I)~ Jlil})i'C?l'CII, u;S a I1:131;I11?i1I13 iCl 17]eci {~ltti' ~lallciarcl~. l_lle llC~°~~iot~cr ,'ill he ICs}~(~Iisib9~', 1)1~, t~5 ~, Inir,il.luill. all "h.l(f `ill"e:;l" l.Ii1z'1'()~'t:I711 iliti 1(> .I aVIC)I' IZ.C?<'~3 it}Orl(? ~11C })i'OAIOS('C~ Cll:\'('t()I7tI1C,ilt.'S ;~1'OJ)CI'i~' lI"Oi1~41~ x.1'(1}1 i al1i:,I' Ili)al. 1111C{ ally aI)1)iJCFiI?}~' 1;iI711' OI' i::,ii tiC,C11UllS. I Ill' lII7I)I"C?~'L'I?1LI11S IC1C;}.illl',a I~1i1 G?1'C ai)i. illlll;:~CI t(1, S1iCC:t s'1.C11E,11, C-'tli'I?S, i'll(1l'Iti, sICIC~v'a}I:S, ,Iii lI'I1<,rC11i:C1 lailtilCill)lr i C?LIIIi,I ~~icit; lallc~/Z~'a}'ti, slI~ce.1 I14'}111'x` , j(~Iill C11111I1a`,?ti', a11iI 1i~.ilrlG Ci)titl'O1 aI1CI cl~lincltii)tI, u;Iicil s;1<i11 l)~ coc)rdin~ll~:c} anci a}?I~I~I» ecI I,ti' 1?lc J~' Loads ar,d t}le City 1'~~'D. '} I1G })'aIlI1~lI 5iI'l I J'~t;11oI1 f>l' I alt lt)I' I~li<iil 1G'I}i Il~lti'G it CIlI'i)-1{)-t;iil'l) ti'~'111111 I~z.l,W7,i1~ ~I'O1], GO 1c) 7< lc(?. r['ilf' C'itti' }'~t'l) I5 xecc1111n11:IldinY t}<11 tI1C~;c iinl)rc)vl'c11cI11~ b~. ci>taSlz~~tct~ci ~1 palt c)i~11,` d~~,°CIc,I~rI~CI,t ~uhjcc-t to tllc "iil~~ tr-4~c1.s~ aI~1)lical)le ~c~ all TC~D d~~°elol)I1:~111~, It is ti,c t~C;>I1i111C11~~~tzol~ Cfitl.:; City o~"Cetr<i! P~)111+,. ta~.I,~rt~nt af?~tlt,li; ~,Vc~rkS that the W .i<:i~ ct:?11_r~ectioz~ ~,v}~icla ~~-ill supply 3~aclcson t)<lt;s, l'll,?<~c I ~e rtlr:~lc ~t the z~ter~ectic~n of Taylor Road and Sz.zz~land Avenzze. A connection with the zzewly placed l2" Dzzctile Iron waterline on Taylor Road wozzld present nutx~zerous Cez~#ral Point Residence with the opportunity #o be provided with City of Central Point Wa#er. 2. Tulrrrte~4verrrre along the frontage ofthe subject property is a rural road that does not meet City or County urban standards. The road will need to be improved, to a degree accepted both by t1-ze City of Central Point PWD and the Jackson Couzaty Road Department. The Developer will be responsible for, as a zrzinimunx, all "half-street„ improvements #o Tulare Avenue along tl~e proposed development's property frontage with Tulane Avenue, and any applicable taper or end sections. The izxzprovezncnts may include, but are not limited #o, street section, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, bikeways, street lighting, storm drainage, and traffic control and delineation, which shall be coordinated and approved by the JC Roads and the City PWD, and designed anti constnzcted at the expense of the Developer as part of the development of the proposed subdzvision. Furthermore, 3ackson County currently has azi "open" drainage ditch that drains along Tulane Avenue. It is the recommendation of the PWD that is drainage facility be retrofitted and maintained to provide an adequate level of service until such. a time the above-descxibed improvezxzents are completed. As may be requested by the Developer, and as approved by the City Administrator andlor JC Roads, the Developer may defer any or all of tl~e required improvements along Tulazze Avenue until a later date. If any or all of the improvements are to be deferred to a later date, then the Developer will be required to enter into a suitable deferred improvement agreement with the City andlor Jackson County for the "half street" improvements. General 1. Applicant shall submit to the City's Public Works Depaz~ment {City's PWD) for review and approval, plans and specifzeations for all improvements proposed for construction or modifcations within the City or public righ#s-of-ways and easements. 2. Public improvements include, but are not limited to, streets {including sidewalks, curbs and gutters); storm drainage and sanitary sewer collection and conveyance systems; water distribution system {up to the service meter and including fire protection); street lighting; and traffic control devices, street signs and delineation. 3. AlI construction ofpublic improvements shall conform to the City's Public Works standard ~pacifzcations and Details {City PWD S#andards) and other special specifications, details, standards, and/or upgrades as maybe approved by tlxe City's Public Works Director. ~~ 1dIrFI4/illdkl, P11diPl 4, I3uring constructionz, changes proposed by the Developer shall be submitted iza vvritiazg by the Developer's engineer to the City PWl.7 for approval prior to installation. S. No construction shall commence until the City PWD has reviewed, approved, aazd issued a Public Works permit for the proposed improvements. 6. The Applicant shall pay for all costs associated with the desigzz and installation of the improvements specified on the, approved plans. 7. Applicant shall provide copies of any permits, variances, approvals, and conditions as maybe required by other agencies, including, but not 1united to Oregon Department of i~'ish and `Wildlife {DF"W}, C.~regon Department of Environmental Quality {DEQ}, C`tregon Division of Mate Lands {DSL},1.7.5. Anzzy Corps of Engineers {AC4E), affected irrigation districts, and Jacl~son County Road and Park Services Department {JC Roads}. 8, Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or surveyor shall provide the Public Worlcs Department with a digital drawing of the construction "as- builts" in an AutoCAD compatible format. As-built drawings are to be provided to the City which provide "red-line" changes to final approved construction plans which identify the locations and or elevations {as appropriate} of actual installed items, including, but not limited to, invert, inlet, and rim elevations; spot elevations identified on drawings; road alignment; water Lines, valves, and fre hydrants; water and sewer Lateral statiozzing; modifications to street section; manhole grad curb inlet locations; street Tight locations; other below grade utility Tine Locations and depths; etc. Provide a "red-fine" hard copy {on Mylar} of construction drawings, and an acceptable AutoCAD compatible drawing electronic file to the City at completion of construction. 9. The Applicant's engineer or surveyor shall provide to the Public Works Department a drawing of the recorded Final Plat rnap reproduced on 1VIy1ar and in an acceptable electronic form in AutoCAD format. The Final Plat shall be tied to a legal Government corner and the State Plane Coordinate System. 10. All elevations used on the construction plans, on temporary benchmarks, and on the pea-manent Ienchmakk shall fre tied into an established City approved benchmark and be ~~ Jarkrprrt~akr, Pfiar~! so noted on the plans. At least one perzrzanent Benchzuark shall be provided for the proposed development, the location of which shall be as jointly determined by the City PWD and the Developer's surveyor. 11. All fill placed in the development shall be "engineered fill", and compacted to City standards. All existing concrete, pipe, building materials, structures, clear and grub materials, and other deleterious materials shall be removed from tlxe site and either recycled or properly disposed of iz~. accordance with the requireznez~ts of tl~e ©regon Department of Environmental Quality. 12. Identify easement dedications and widths on the Plot Plan. 13. Easements for City infrastructure (i.e. sanitary sower, water, and storm drain} must be a minimum of 1 S-feet wide, and should not split lot lines. Easements for storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water lines should be dedicated to the City and not just a P.U.E. Centerline of buried infrastructure shall be aligned a minimum of f ve {S} feet from the edge of the easement. 14. All design, construction. plans and specifications, and as-built drawings must be prepared to acceptable professional standards. 1 S. All street and water improvement plans must be approved in writing by Fire District 3 prior to review by the City's P~WD. 16. If the proposed development places structures within the l0(l-year flood zone, how does the placement of these structures modify the flood zone`? What affect will it have on the flood plain elevation and flood zone boundary, and what affects will the modification of the flood plain elevation and flood zone boundary have on the existing facilities and properties surrounding the proposed development, 1 ~. Prior to the City PWD final approval of the construction plans for the proposed improvements, the following must be submitted: © A copy of written approval from Fire District 3 ofthe final street and water system improvement plans for the proposed development, 0 The plans relating to the sanitary sewers must be approved in writing by ~~ ,tarkronQaXr, PharPl BCVSA, anti the appropriate signature blocks nxust be conxpleted on tlic plans. D Copies of written approvals andlor permits from the various agencies involved: DSL, Dl~ W, DEQ, andlor AC4E. 18. field verify all existing infrastrizctizre elevatiozxs and locations {i.e. pipe inverts, curb elevations, street elevatiozxs, etc.}, to which the proposed subdivision will connect into existing improvements, prior to final construction plan design. 19. The Applicant's engineer shall provide suitable engineering certification and justificatiozx {i.e. calculations, analyses, plots, etc.,} that all cozxzxections to existing infrastructure {i.e. street; water, sanitary sewer, storm drain systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,} will not interfere with the effective level of service or operation of the infrastr~.zcture facilities, and that the existing infrastnicture facilities have adequate capacities to accommodate the flotivs and/or demands unposed on the existing infrastructure as the result of the connection of the proposed development's infrastructure. 24. The accurate locations of all water lines anti the natural gas mains (and any associated appurtenances}, and the location of the associated easements with these facilities, shall be accurately portrayed {both horizontally and vertically} on the construction plans and t~zial plat. ~ l . CJverhead power lines. Coordinate efforts with Pacific Power and Light to convert overhead electrical power facilities to underground facilities, prior to the acceptance by the City PWD of the public improvements associated with the proposed development, All agreements and costs associated with the conversion of the electrical power facilities from overhead to underground facilities shall be lay and between Pacific Power azxd Light anal the Developer. StreetslTraffre Constzuction drawings for this Tentative Plan shall include a Street Lighting Plan and Traff c Control Plan in accordance with the requirements of the City PWD. The construction drawings shall include clear vision areas designed to meet the City's PWg Standards. 25-foot unobstructed sight triangle areas shall he required at all uncontrolled intersections. SS feet shall be required at arterial intersections. ~~ Jarkion4aki Plrarel ~. The City PWI~ shall, at the coast ofthe l7cveloper, oval{late the strength oftl~ze zlative soils and determine the street section designs in accordance with the City PWD Standards. The City's engineering staff or selected engineering consultant (at Developer's expense), shall evaluate the strength of the native soils and deterzxzine the street scctiozz. designs in accordance 3. The applicant shall construct ail necessary street improvements to ~i.e. curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street construction and paving, storm drains or shall enter into a suitable deferred improvement agreement with. the City for their fzzture construction. Storm Draiz~zaae 1. Applicant's engineer shall determine how SD system will work during a l0-year event. System. must be designed to adequately drain 1 a-year storm. wifihout surcharging or must be provided with adequate storage to pre vent surcharging. 2. Prior to construction plan approval of the improvements for this Site Pian, the Applicant' engineer shall provide the City PWD with a complete set of hydrologic and hydraulic calculations anal profile plots for sizing for SD system. The engineer shall use the rainfall/intensity curve obtained froze tine City PWI=} for hydrologic calculations, and the negotiated run-off parameters. ~. The SD system, shall be designed to carry runoff from a l 0 year storm event if Q~l00efs. Use runoff for 50 year storm ift~>l(}{~ or ~;20~cgs. Use 1~0 storm runoff if Q is >20(}cfs. 4. I?eed restriction or CC&Rs shall include a covenant or restriction that prohibits the introduction of substances other that stoma water, irrigation water, or fresh water into any private or public storm drain system. 5. Roof drains and under drains shall not be directly connected to public storm drain lines, and shall drain to the street at the curb line, whenever possible. Lots should be raised if necessary. Building foundation under drains (and these type of facilities only) may drain to private storm drain lines that discharge onto the streets, or into a storm drain curb inlet or manhole only; must be approved before eanstruction by the City PWD; and must be identified and accurately portrayed on as-built drawings. ~J Ja&frdrt(laft, pltalel 6. Storm water run-off from the proposed development into any public SD system shall be minimized and be as approved by the City PWD. Sanitary Sewer 1, All sanitary sewer collection and conveyance systez~~ {SS System} design, constnzctiozx and testing shall conform to the standards and ,guidelines of the Oregon DEQ, 1 ~~~ APWA Standards, Oregon Chapter, Bear Creek "Walley Sanitary Authority {ECVSA}, and the City PWI~ Standards, where applicable. © Applicant shall make application for sewer service azid construction with 13CVSA, A Public Works Permit s~rill be required to construct sewer within the street RpW. © The construction plans and the as-built drawings shall identify lateral stationing for construction of sewer laterals, Water System Existing Infrastructure D 12" Ductile Iron Waterline {Taylor Road) l . Applicant shall provide properly sized service lines to the buildings in accordance with tl~e Oregon State Plumbing Specialty Code. Applicant shall pay any associated casts with up sizing the meter or tap required to serve the buildings. 2. Each building shall be served by a separate water znefer, 3. Provide construction drawings for the relocation ofthe fire hydrants. Steamer ports at hydrants located in the complex shall face the buildings. Fire hydrants shall be protected frozxz vehicle damage and encroachment. 4. Specifications for the design and construction of the water system shall be in accordance with City PWD Standards. ~~ " .r, oharrl ~« ~..cxi T`11 ~ t OI)Iic': llO1 Si;ttit)lilt] ? ~lii<1 ; :;i.e 5~]~i1! 1?i, ~)~ (?t'1(1CCl t)tl ('ullSli l',C11(?Il 1)l, i I ;iS-17illlf C~l`Ll~,~~ll]~?5. .t _ ~ _ ~?. T?ev~1o,~c1~~11a1C t'oI??1?tv~,'~ii~] C?~c<>;(7n Iic<llt,? ~~(V1Slt)l.l ~C)111~)},ln~t C'lty rcc,tlu'i.~lllellt5 i)r ~`;l~ivI~Ci~'ti'1?;e,Vei?1ti111. fill ~~~)) ,11)1',I~UVC"Cl l~,?(:~<iit?Z'v` t?It'1't'il(lt?I] 1155t'll)~l)1V ~1Pli! l ._ fi~51~1=1eC1 1111i11C(lllifC%1}' iJG1l,i511'l L'il k>1~i11C \~ii~l(.t~ ll;t_1C I~ SC! \ I,1( L:~1i'}) (11tiS7i111,;? ;111'ti, ~. ~C'xl'`li"111;,t1CJTl CIS ~z'1111_,'i ~Il:lil ll]C1tiile lilt; .`~l:'t', 1\ `,<;, £lI7Cl 7()t'~lll()Ii U1 '~l~f \vriteT #1ti"tlilti. ~l'i~.ll c.i;,;,, ~1tI' V'i.l ~ ~ .. l s .~. `:t[\;CC COiilli'C11t:'i1, ~ L~. ;iia;el- il~)~?tlif~il<lli:'i (li:l,i1151i2ciCL~)i~i~ilt'~'~ \'dlt~~ ~,IL~' 1)`)r"~ `til.li"a.l' t i11~:1 :15 t'~'t~IIiCC:~i ,)V t)l~. ~ 11,~~' ~~~~~'1~, • r « 'q r`~;~ C('1'ti1(1 i1()i75 1.1I if?e. \V<l~t'I' S111:)~)!~ til ~it.'ll] i]]ll:;t C(?I?ll?~V '1 t'!`t11 ~)1 ~1~ i'C,'(111i1 t. 1]il lli5. Y1r'vi1 tS'i' \`y7J~ ;;C?C ~le "j11I"Ih;(~ C7I1 1?`,' ;Cl~, {_~1Tti 1t1711~ SIICI] iC'i~llll'C.ITIi;,tilS }~<t~'C 1)i'C17 IilCi 1i) 1.11 C; tilt , }~; 31 ( `' ~ ;tlrT?iLit'~ ((:.TIILI]liy _ ~.5. 1C11C?. >1 i~1e Clay"s tic'Ss 11t1(,t ;lie »~,1C1~:,i:)31 {, i)t.tlt`r i?11I1'll)?[lI'; ~» ~~~L~IeI'tiV5tel11 51]1111 ~e 1e51eC'~. 11] :1 R:-CC'?Cyii)C~; ~ii~ll ~~11t' ~~~~'~ ~!illlli~;itc~.`;',~,TI(i T`f'(1111T'C'I':1~'I1~S~~ 1)ev'cl(~}xa-'S e`<a~t.it~~ <:n(1 ~11tltit he a~~>>rt~~.'~t~ ~>~' Ii(~ ('~t,,. .`~afc ~~ark, ~e~'~tc.lirtl; ~ttlcl l~cai„~tt9 atltcl [tifii~, ['l;ttt. ~. A~lji~le-1'.1i~ti 5111'1 ~~IC!~'llii: `: f'i`'<~1I14%;«~1<1\Il'li:? ~"1i;.i11`:i~ l'4',tll 1`~i~. CC)11S1i°tiCL1C>tl (li<i\1'7I:'.:_' `~U~?lllI~;?1 f1~1 `i,11i ~_~it\' ~.~. 1~11'.1'i(5~ 511111 11!115(:"<lii; li?~' lc?l:;lili711 <itil e.1e\'ili:(?1?S Ol^ life l~,l.;c' ilt.?:.1 C'.'v'll~ fll1{).1 Zt)ae 1'tliC1 ~i<~i?C \1;?~' Of~511:111i1S !11 i?IO\lillil~' IO [1], uC\'71O11111e111 (11`nj`I?11C111ju~; Cl1I ~i+:.V£lil0il5; 11111511 `~Cc(:ll~; 1111=', 1)U11C11~ i? l~lll illlCl it)1G't.;Si jl()C)I' e1e1'i?11~~t,~, ~. Al~ 5t111C~1'I'C5 511111I 1]a~Fe 1'?(7~('ll'ii]t,` , <'tl-L'Ll tji :1.115, ~l(]Cl/()~" Ct`i'~W'1 S1)~ Ct i \i;tl7 1>C°?51.f11'e tll-lit ~~e 11\'~<ly ~~~)n? the builctitln. T)r~lftl I111~ : 51.<l11 t?e c.~nllectc c) tlle: t,11-b 1]Ild {~uticr l'z1t1 Cli>Cl]11t'i!L', ~I'()lzl 111e CUl'l~ ~c~Ce« v T ,,, ~7~?f1t:l11i5 51t~~~ 1ZI't"1~; 1C1t' tll~ ?1LCt5511;.r« °`I'Oll~ll'' 7C7~ Tc`iC1'i]fr tip `1SSlli'i' 111:ii 1111 1~>I5 t','111 t~7"~111 prctperl}~ to the c~rh ~lrld ~;ltt?cr, ar t(, a (11-air?<l~e systet]} t1l:~t. r; x]1,15 i~` thL c:ur~ lilli~ s~tter« 1at~~artl7akt, f~arrJ 4. Provide the City with copies of any required permits and approvals {izacludizag any mitigating requirements or conditions} froze UAL, DIQ, azad ACU~ {izacltzding any mitigating requixements~, for any required wetland or flood hazard mitigation work to be performed as part of the proposed development. S. Grading plans must have originaUexisting grades azad final grades plotted on the plan. Typically, existing grade contour lines are dashed and screened back, and heal ,grade contour lines are overlaid on top oftlae existing grades and are in a lacavier line width azad solid. Contour lines must lac labeled with elevations. 6. Need to place streetlights on plazas, with table indicating stationing and offsefis. 7. Provide City with a utility plan approved by each utility company, which reflects all utility crossings, transformer locations, valves, etc. 8. utility locations must be accurately depicted on the as-built drawings, or as a separate set of drawings attached to the as-built drawings. ~zgl~ts oI' WaysCEasements 1. All easements for improvements dedicated to the City shall have a minimum 1 S font width and shall be located (whenever possible) contiguously along the exterior boundaries ofproperties and shall not split lot lines. Publzc utility easements shall have a nainizaaum width of 10 feet. 2. The City will require a 5(}-foot RC}ViT width on local streets and 6~ foot RC}"W on collector streets. 3. Applicants shall comply with all existing easement owner requirements regarding any proposed development that may overlap any existing easement. Any development proposed which overlaps or alters an existing easement must lac approved by the easement's owner in writing, and a copy ofthat written approval zuust be submitted to the City P.U. prior to submission of construction plans for City P.U. review and approval. 4. All existing easement locations and those proposed for this development shall be shown ~~ .1d1~14ii/Td~f, flldlP/ an the f nal plat with reference to tlxe recardatiazz zzzzznt~er azzcl Gra~xtee. ~~ ATTACJ-IMEN'J' E P~.ANNING bEPARTMENT J2.ECCJMMENDED CC7NDI`l`If}N ©~' APPRC)VA~.~ 1. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit to the City a copy of tlxe proposed covenants, conditions anal restrictions {CC~Rs~ for Unit l of the Jackson C.~aks Subdivision. 2, The applicant shall eorzzply with all requireznezxts of affected public agencies and utilities as fihey pertain to the development of the Unit l oftlxe Jacksozx Qaks Subdivision. Evidence of such compliance shall be subnxitted to the City prior to final plat approval. 3. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state and local regtzlatiozxs, standards and requirements applicable to the developzxzent and cozxstruction of the l.Jnit 1 of the Jackson C7aks Subdivision. H:ti'taztn'r ng1D2o21.wpd ~~ rrJAivl~rl~Tc nrPARrlsNlri~~~~ s ~~Arr 12I{aPC3[2'1" ~-lE~R1NG 1~AT13: Tulle ~, zo0~ T'U: Cen#ral Paint Planning Colx~In~issian ~'RQItir~: Matt Salrlitare, CoII~Imunity Planner SCT13.l~ECT: P;Iblic hearing- Si#c Plan Review of 37 2W OZD, Tax Lat 2100 alxl X200 - Layton Calnlxicrcial Propel•ty. Q~svller/ Layton Prager#y {Greg ~-Iarnecker} ~.~plica~It: 1060 Crater Lake Ave., Suite C Medford, OR 97504 A~e~tt: Abeloe and Associates 827 Alder Creep Drive Medford, ~regaIl 97504 X't'Oj3~t`t'Y Descrip#zon/ 37 2W 02D, Tax Lat 2100 - 3.48 acres Zoxlin~: C-4, Taurlst and £)ffice Professional District S~zmmary Tlie applicant is reques#ing a Site Plan Review for the construe#ion of six new office buildings. Four aftl~e buildings are to be built in tl~e first phase with the relxlail~ing t~va #o built at a filture date. The total square footage for all the buildings is 43,05{}. The applicant's property is located south afEas# Pine Street with the eas#erly portion aligning with a new traffic signal that has been. recommended far the Naumes Pear 131ossom Center. This develaplnent proposal aligns with the signalized intersection and provides for internal circulation an the south side ofEast Pine Street with Umpqua Bank. A livable La~v CPMC 17.36.010 et seq. - C-4, Tourist and Offlce Professional District CPMC 17.&4.010 et seq. - off Street Parking and Loading CPMC 17.72.010 et seq.- Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Disc~ISSio~~ The introduction of the new commercial offices will add to Central Point's developed commercial land inventory and bring new family wages jobs into the City and the region. The primary use of#lae buildings will be used for professional offices with the passibility of adding drive-up facili#ies for the two buildings that will be built in tl~e future. This area of Central Paint has seen a lot of development in the last few years with the developnien# of the Pilot Travel Center, USF Reddaway, ~ ., ~ ~ ~. antl Umpqua Bank. Development has caused sor~tc traffic prablents slang l~. Pizze Street antl the Interstate S interchange. i3ecause of the problezrzs the City of Cczatral Paint, izt partnership with the C}regazt Department afTransportatian, have agreed to clo a faster Plan for infrastructure iz1 the area. This development will be within the area studied, but because tlac tlevelopznerat will share a joint access tvi#h the Pear Blossozu Center and the Uzzzpqua Bank, it will not adversely impact the ~}z~-razzzit ofpeak hour traffic to the area. Anew traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of the Layton Carrzmercial Property, Umpqua Bank, anti the fear Blossozu Center. The developer will share the equitable cos#s of the signal. tlflzrt~iezpal Cade crzacl ~lffeetecl ~gerzcy 1iequit-ettz~zits The proposed use is permitted in the C_q zoning district anti meets tl~e area, ~vicltlt and yard requirements of the municipal code. The Pcablic Works Departnzezzt has prepared a recan~n~ezadation far on and off site iz~tl~roveznents which are believed to be reasonably related to the proposed clevelopznent. These include, but are not liz~xitctl to; driveway aprons, sitlcwalk improvements; site grading and drainage; on-site lighting; paving and utility {water, sewer and stone drain }connections. The Public Works Departz~tent is also requesting seven feet of additional right-af ~vay in order to zueet the dezuands for asix-lane major arterial which is #lte designation of East Pine Street izz the Transportation System flan There were no responses Pram affected agencies. The development- will be subject to the requiremen#s from 13CVSA anti Jackson County Fire District No. 3. ~7aod .t'Iairz Requirerztents A portion of the property iseffected bythe I fl0-year flood plain of Bear Creek. The flood plain will affect buildings A, B, and. C. The constructiozz of the buildings ~rzust zxteet all of the building code provisions far structures built in a special flood hazard area. Fiztdin~s of Fact & Coaclrssions of Law In approving, conditionally approving or denying the plans subzrzitted, the City bases it's decision an the fallowing standards from Section 17.72.00: A. Landscaping and fencing and the construction of walls on the site in such a manner as to cause the same to not substantially interfere with the landscaping scheme of the neighborhood, and in such a manner to Use the same to screen Such actzvztzes and szghts as mzght be heterogeneous to exzstzng neighborltaad uses. The Cozumission may require the maintenance of existing plants or the installation of new apes far purposes of screening adjoining property. ^ The applicant has submitted a lsxidscape plan far consideratio~r by the C©xttmissian. The plan will change if the site plant is amended to reflect transports#ian relsted impt•avernents (signalized entrance, sidewalks, landscape batter, etc.}. The Planning Department is recammendittg that plaits for signage, liglitixtg and landscaping be J .. ~ szzbxzxitted by the applicant for z~cviexv .zzztl appz•oval by staff izz-iaz• to inst.zfiafiazz. These plans wozzlcl be expected to reflect azzy clzazz;es zxz:zcle to the sift plsuz. B. Design, number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow on pulalic s#rcets; ~ f~.ccess is recozxxzzxezzcled fz•anx txva clz-ivew:zys azz last Pizzo Sfreet. As a zxexv sigzxal is installed ozx Pizzo laetweczx Tiazxxriclt azxcl Pezzizzger Boacls, this xvazzlzl becazxxe ilzc pz-izxxary access to fire applicazzfs praperty. A z-i;lxt izxJriglzt ozzt drive }vay ~vozzlcl be perzxxittecl as to be zletex-zzxizxecl by the Developer's Traffic I:zzgizxeer azxd the Pzzblic ~S'Varks Departnxezxt. C. 1'o provide of€street parking azaci loaclzzzg facilities and pedestrian azzcl vehicle flaw facilities izx such a zz~anner as is compatible with the tzse for ~vhiclx tlxe site is proposed #o be used anti capable ofzzse, azzd in suclx a zx~anzxer as to inxprove and avoid interference ~vitlx the traffic flaw ozx publzc streets; ~ Sizzce CPMC 1'7.G~.fl~0 {~~-1.) reclzzires that bazzlcs azzcl atlzer fizxazzcial izxstitzztiazzs, gezxeral axxd professiozzal offices, azxcl govez-zzzlxexxtal offices praviclc zzot less thazz azze space per each tlxree Ixzzzxdred sclzzaz•e feet of grass floaz• area, flzis project wazzlcl zxeed to dezxzozxstrate the availability of 14~ spaces. The Conxzzxercial clevelopzxxezxt lzas pz•oposecl a fatal of l 5~ parkizxg spaces {'d Ixandicapped, If)`7 stazxdarcl azxcl37 cozrzpact}, D. Signs and other outdoor advertising structures to ensure that they do not conflict tivith or deter from traffic control signs or devices anti that they are compatible witlx the design of their buildings or uses and will not interfere with or detract froze #Ize appearance or visibility of nearby signs; ~ Il~o signage has beezx proposed at this time however the applicant xvill be reclzziz•ecl to apply for a sigzx perzzxit azxd szzbznit his plans fa tlxe City prior to azxy sigzx izzstallatiozz. l1. 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 lizxzited to, suitable gates, access road s and fire lanes so that all buildings an the premises are accessible to fire apparatus; ~ The project, if approved, xvould zxeed to meet any reclzzix•ezzxezxts ofJackson County Fire District 3. F. Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations; ~ The proposed cazxstrzzctiazz rviIl meet the mizxizxxzzm setback regxziremezxts for the C-~, Tourist azxd f~ffice Professional District. The special setback ordinazxce is izz effect for Bear Creek and the applicazxts have nzet tlxe zninimzzzxx z°eclzzirezxzents for 2~' from the top of the s#reazxz bazxk. .~~~ ~~ G. Cozxapliazxce ~vitlx suclx architectczz'c atx{I {Icsit;n standards as to provi{le aestllctic acceptability in relation to tlxe nei~hbarlxood and tlxe Cezxtral Poizxt area azxd it's ezxvirans. ~ The pro~ZOSe{t strtxctxzre is sixxxilar izx arc]xztectxzre to otlxcr strzzc#xzz~es loc~Ite{1 ~vitlxizz the C-4, Tourzst axx{I Office Professioxxal District. ~3tiil{3ixx ; elevations have bcezx ~xrovicle{~ for the Planzxing Comnxissiozx's eozxsi{leratioxx. RE'COI11xI2eIx CI ~ ~ i{}xx Staff recoznzrzezx{ls that the Planzxin~ Conxzxxissiozx take azle aftlxc follawizx~ actions: l .Adapt Resalutiazx No. , appravizxg tlxe Site Plaza szzbject to tlxe recazxxzxaez'zdecl can{litiazxs of approval; ar 2.1r3eny the pralaased Site Plaza; or 3. Continue tlac review of the Site Plaza at tlxe discretion of tlxe Comznissiazx. Attaclxnzezxts A. Applieatian and lxlZibits ~3. Notice afPublic Heaz-ixxg C. Public Warks Staff Report D. Planning Department Canditions of Approval ~ w ~~ CHAR.L.ES A, BECK, AIA 2366 A Jacksonville Nighway #171 Nfedford, C)R 97541 {541 } 857-9433 Offrce {541) 773-6523 Fax PROJECT DESCRIPTI{3N This 3.48 acre parcel is well located in the easterly portion of the City of Central Point on the south side of East Pine Street. Bear Creek forms the westerly boundary of the site and this natural setting will be utilized for excellent landscaped view sheds from the proposed buildings. The site plan proposes four single story buildings wfth building pads for two additional future buildings. The future buildings may require drive-up facilities. Access to the site will be via aright-in right-out driveway from East Pine Street near Bear Creek. The primary site access wilf be at the easterly property line, Thfs access will involve an access road that will be shared with the bank to the east and other properties to the south and east. This access is designed to align with the future signalized access road to the proposed shopping center to the north. The buildings are designed to present a pleasant blend of commercial and residential character. This blend will harmonize with the architecture of fhe existing bank building to the east. Nearly 32°ln of the site will be landscaped and in natural manicured vegetation along Bear Creek. A major portion of the buildings are placed adjacent Bear Creek to enhance the view and environment for the occupants. Buifding "D" is placed at the northwest corner of the site with a substantial amount of landscaping between the buildings and East Pine Street. This careful arrangement of building and pfanting will present a handsome view of the site for east bound traffic on East Pine Street, This project will be a most attractive addition to the successful community of Central Point. Project DescriptipnllaC „J ,; 4 FINI SkiEb RCSfSFimr ~arRReei yl V ~.d`ri AS.UM, & GC.. 5T{3REFRQNT~ ON EPT ELEVATION STUfIY ° -~ o ° g ~ ~ ~ p ~ A Planned Of~celCommercia! Park Far •r•^•~~M~~~~~~~^.~~~.1.^....~-.~~~I ~,` ~ T ~ CHARLES A. B~GK~~~` ~~" ~ sr) m " ni - ~A~T~N PR~PERT~~~ . . ~ ~~~r~H . ~~.~~~a~~~ P.4.8ax 4464/190 N. Rpss nano r ~ ~~ ~~' P 4 6ox 44601990 N H S ~ T m ~ q o 1116£1 Crater Lake Ave. Sprite C . . . ass ane 3 x ~xa3 Medford C}regon 97501 Medford, Oregon 97501 ~~~~~~ar~ N Medford, OR. 975114 541 773-7553 1541} 857-9fl33 ~' ~~~ J }I ~INITY MAR SITE P~,A~S ~~ EAST PINE STREET .:>, ~~r '.r;^ ar.'. ~. ~ {fit ..._. .. -____...,.. ~.. +n-waa+t[r~ownx++gewvr~vwYmr4ram~natuYw4 - rYrrM.inrn +sor~ geTYr 4suxxi»a °ptl~'atxi mp1m~iairw • rrxaYMawWfiMti-mi lYt~rM Mwrat*M Mrrr+ewxwrnrUm rrx+'M Ylxr.a x4Ywii4K4 q}0 . ;;t+iYrgaxi SYxg04 k+sti'icu ',~# Tmao )4T°Tl+.yti.#ari'o'eatl4-t ~ms0.rtax9:~'~'yy[P4TatbianxicNOan.~AOU :p +nki#rxu+aT['iafnt:euagtortxot[rssYttxrxic+; r»:Y4 Y~dlY7nU'SSRYRWkORgg~ 4a#~d 4IIdYis~~~:4dAP.tixitN9itYnirut~'1'fV''~t't ::.bS[}%Ir[k2',r97SilniYS4+Y11, 'AY#'Lir9'trx0Y7dY 91ECYlJPaGTRYgYtSYCNWnWM}:i'.TgR'IYA ~ra~~~9~[~Yl1lY,t[Y.iL11N -'.`Lf.[65i9yi CRA9TUt;r[943xp}6xNt'#Y9ttYk,39Y iLR9tE9Y4x0~fNi}Y[nd-iT' tl#W'[5Qti4 %fi{YJRg15N0.Y5T! {Y .yY1rx6YliYt,tiytx AiY4i a xy Ng~ttt-vj{#,yyrx..ySrl. '~S`~3} +stl ~a,+Al YY['MJ'Yq'!.}v+xT}}grit tOSA ~T,ro A~N~>ti+gttTp pJrerrttAYTM rRYtyq tiIXW~ !6 TaaYa xe4 [riA-t YA1 }i ALM-hrM N41SYGtrn faN TOf,Yy4ixgx ZJ~itll~y~ AYN Y1xT1 waYx} >Yb OAtl#ixx4 hMRYtt OA tars rY[2F01lt ~ i1f YY]m xxi4tiA ?hJ {T ' :!}.qy;iTM10;YpT;arvnp»pNq~1PyLbfglrb %OS[T#RSM YKNSY[tai;1UM;Tte1bYY tltl[1EfpY Y~xThl9flp~b.MWNA NM YR9:1Y idY MYNS{It I.PaJ4W Y PYW4M'1 Y90xY4 gitAit;Yb[~aMt9iNgx it'#T+a~ T[Y IIWxrltM4ryY;;aYry}q lx461riari Axr +~m' u °"at Aw"° I Y' ° 4yY x; Y x.4 i rrt Y q+ s m s rn S~ wxYY m~Y Ii~•t1 m~rrAYWTYtipY Nfitl tiheMl.%PiaR4xvttTYll tf ' ar lr+litlrY xaq it<LU4r[irliial a iY'M AYiITT 140 [-[ 141xU¢w t iilAa+x Tlti~tMO~LI ATaI .x m.xai;xl.iX4Y *1Lrr; vili`v[ ax rni°i..un a r~q[`:i io w4oix~x oa rYimt 't.VTGn TriTq to»;axW qxt }TRtrY» Au}gSiA g4YM A4 f aYU i y y aka Yx~r~ 1°Iw~rg1° ~e1''aua uya6YgrYa(4!Y st>T4. mxax lxrisgh++6lan'ttrgaialiyra YTSeax4VidnlµvM It TT'%rl~x[T1.tbh4xTm~yt;~y ti xrvY;m ~awc..csnrnur.1°sirer6i~ ~~ n°~y,~'~~aoo'~4m»1AYU'tlr,.µr ~ . ai 4u+u as mn nosYax 2xuMNxrY gas x.,4 amr m aAron YYYt:wu min-ra'YYY Ce.nasntw<auxoou;enYmwriYmexwnYxixaxrn.i~,~,[ h ' S3'zZiir2;EP3`s'Q'.~'I r[tiR716C13i'.T ~?vcu.T4n+YyrTa# 'trv^1 - ~%~ . C~ >~ Yi4xY}iiitt{iTii Y61 .oaadu^rx ;I • .'w. 't ~.~.~~ . ~~' . ~hfi~~31#'~~ : '`~ .~; ~, . .. `~' '~ '"~ .. 7 4 1 Y U . .~ I133 . yyl' { ~ r YY L~} JIY~4 !If fA I ~._._..~.._....... ,.~.....v._..,-_..._.....-.._ T'9 t xotllrk tMllAa.vt4[TYinxx'J .••••~_..... IS Ix1i99ggllaYM4A'Yi)x91.d.Intt sixu 1Yli h1 Y;YAnke9T%(S. YRCT Yfx9kYx '~; tt f i9xYt9.i,RPr.9r[MiH r4%(SxgYnp; 734 fat 9rn C aT[;YriktA.9%t~%i9Y '91td t#I "{Y9 t ~`~~"4 x4iWit404e#4 'L _Cit '[Y9 # x91Mt;i9HIn. YTIY4T "tY 'TYO; ~%~'r'n ~'#t%1ti1xbt4kia4tt9#% ilt% fi+t "IYnt 4iWAC34S+Yt#Y3U'Yt[xtT `1tY ftf ^7Yrra ii%nYR.xiR4iaG[a°wnrtxnxn%f roan at 'T4Y -4M9;46'firY+'Y3q,iri919iM1~i ":T;! ':!`.H # 470n4'S44:.imEJ.sox ~!Y#T 'S1YitxTtltatkoit3l#Y:'W1Aiim~AAk ~' ..~9 :fio YYY ('M ' ~'TlYSSt ,FIUIYYRMRtonfitYi rlti~ S4ttd -YrAd :: y ~ iA%iAii%Y;R.'62l,YPjQq 7[tit## 3'IdY#'t;t#'d7 OtlNOb3YW~9dtTttYS1Y ^.iY; :hrt Iri'kT9ri~#aJS'asr# 1'%912Y'iTY;fk[ ElS;Y99I[Y T~'fiflT7t1;~}M4%xz1J8#%YQrx# `-T'J:3 -YR .tRU134[A[2N !7tQ .:Qt :E73AT,~ri}iiMt93 NIdT.lft'AMS1187 M9 M' Nt?N117C:SSY'.5R[A9lLbz.II]#Nn 'OA'ini)1 '#Y3.[ YftT#Y AYAVCbM.llYxN910.'S. 27Ti YiDY i'tA 'ft "Rikt;t{It#'4xTtq it QLibbi diJl[yYp;i b7.tY ~AAy ~R-~ :ASOR3sAl OL 3031d #AYn {U UP~3 M~•i ..AYOI ~#x4iy;.i6.iN;rnr lYJY lYLt {T ' 7#MttiX 7#9S63nR#SW AYt4Al~Y<1Ut#k YYi CIYWJiDMN IXYR 2pQCtt[9~YY'SIa4MJi r~,ty2Vt '1'47.t A4 9 49 Y4.';xQ S4xfltY%Y ',1:)4 h YYgtl 11 aaa'vTY'S It Y'ix[yii%y Yx#n 4;;Y49AYPt kql ftx-f l Yt O'rTYYi[! of xAf'Lfx4 "SSrgS YYR SYi d%Qtatrrzk94'lt4i i6Yix9R; t3t41t iYbt gf}gMYt9Y/]ttpptiW SWrtxxiLY k6 tl+Yrir '~~~li't;i""SgS Y:1[6#yj4'K'tt3~1R 1i i;dt YM b9T af6Y#ix kYiiY SY. 4ltY6tY xt'YtYxl 9laaTiC634A4'1Yr T{~'}~1'f~+e~'r~'Q~'.~.~ #T[t'JnrBNfixM92t.mataiA.1[Ixxff29YSSxYTlrinrrev:l+ls+t Atxv~ -_ ~ 3i4pyIYTtIn aY 4Yaax1 ].4Y1MxxxTi;AtMtiRRTr4i a443Y Y{uW4 :rsr9#dx~id4#9x{i ~RYia4i~1! ~troalui.%~ '~yo Rrmxi aTtsYt#w d'hm#>rtumu^m#tueta~lmw .n4'4Rtt 3.O~At#3dtlEi_.~d_...-.._...~ eM 3[men 9rasiwnM r4YU titvrsxrr'm sY~rxt.«n+.aar ijYt6 Tfkx6 ltr SY,Ix[fi;TN SxYtt;RRYM'YYat mtV TrxNii t44lgfrtvy I;a14r rY>46x Ti41a T9Yif[tR#~ TSYYTVaitw roar ira44x W rr%iu as xnxixrx.T ISSSM 4rmnv;a sr aunt xiros.>'crnYwl ~~ A'.431Mi}06Vr TtOY4.[TSMgtq ~QSYV iR04tiTJ07 Mi0lat J'}clril+r Lt'Iti'TStCtiMP x k ;.YY1{ xrz/. IN xtl[Srx6Ma Trn fl6 TYa[» MSSY~i~ ~ mU ixi"4'TFY ¢vamY'f+Tgilm ;Mrl 6wM6bn ttYYt~TY YTirlM »f R 3itYa6 Qxr x6ttYTYYtc4 TY amt TC(;PIUR4M rkxIIISYY n~na~x a; w bmntrt t» eY4xsY,t iooY Yr%a c •axirtYi mu rat rro4.nm.w tirYUn; Y°.~SYntMGP;rp;i.'Im grntllAb%sTnT4n.r.R1T1YlFVkk'[„Nta4atl lAmUwartrvlb ~ r 6r"ai,.#or""r'°..9a;.;~i~'~ °{1rn[irit.vw Tuou m4wMY~a Yxi +a.t ixnun.m .w rix,w t9Y :„Ll,xr+MA RThl4Trr~ ~ ~~r~YhT~~~X T~~'ICT*,Mru iO~tT ~e[t YTniiR tlXr 'it`m.w+':;x°aiA1 q+atiruuxci"i,Ynx P%11jpjT"osxnw u..rwrwR~r.w..=+c+++ri.l.s srs . xxsvros qaa Y:rnm -mYU.+r ,txYii ~n:d'sm~av~ a :r .n is tl '; .°!1 {1 t...+ ::~ .~ d0 dtit, arm. ;;nom. •f ~~: ::1 ji{ 4 C~ i[ k L ti~ ~ YJxr4 x161 SYY4m .e strt Ta xxa 'nYim»1»i#YL1xiYtaWYa» _. ``~- y`~--'f ~.,,_: ~"` n ASt'"7TFFfyf~Yi~ --~>~l nva xx[irn6m YYxrurYlxi»t ~iit arOa'xk°~nJ'r'SSrMiYtin'~or°s~`sn°Y xr4r .An~~ir%r t i~Jl~r },~tJ ~'s{.t'~} S1Y1x SV'rnr tyl RT+tt q~;ri {~Mt4Ytt ilxf rl"[rlgYlYr~'TIY;NYit '[LtkFt e4 At[a77f4 ~`~~4;-t~t3 ~{YiGi ~.3Yr~ 1 VN M riI4g4 i#Ta4»o-9xY r1LM ATtq'!»I44IXY 31i; W r1Y1 il»(aYr xxY'4'hTJ#Vf.1 iY ' ~ 1161';%fiumta 4[4#[tYt 3#i' b Y9tt};7M SKS# tMitt YH # ST iltS.Rt i~Ya~111~41~ii 7xa t~T ~'~ n+tnalp:4a.+[d»wwenAwmown'e+nbrr TJY~y rnrT~gYit'SV;a~ir4 nrr[acaxran9R+taiwri#Y»;m xmiM6a6 #wM~nrouexzint[L to igTis i'SY AixO W[W ~ YW iT11YWS~02AtMYYi4rt4YtllW6 tirixtT4[TSY'SYM YS'YIKd1Yli[fY,e axMYx t4fY r44ga"SHiITAYM trYY{M'ttAh . -bYU[TiT%TYYIYSYAtrxaY.lYi lPili't]I(6)Ie tlA 6i4YY?ST[}giOiY[;Nt Yl#M61fM1YM.ft 4tx rgarir~i~~~t'%°2iT.fr[rrimYantitexcssMYUgan i ~xi%+*141 ~ 4. ~.+a,m x+~~Y x,iYO..,.r, wn+KS xunawi:.ryy 4 ~t++u 'a.s0 t~y..1t ~Y~o2+MiY M N J M+ aaYY...enss xi l xr awxrM+xYnY tIIpr rr.[.Yc xaltlYlYArM Ya9of46 F j . 1` < i ~...~~.. YLL4 rumxY» raxorai#4>'maia w.ro awa[aY'+c•{aw^SxY. "~-`-"~„^.---_--^y _.~^'''~"~" oratgrirx4 xMai#ngaM'i; Yaitrara YUln'au lri Ytr».twana~riiuwmrw't'm fi / •^•~-•• MYATYYYx)T[4A6Yt4[YYYxirtl l6iYT;ixMMTYHIa Aq Oµi~YO,rati ~rS ~~yevYygMm6x it Y'm4; xatxY;yiMyO Y» VMxrp rMr m 4'Y+Yra4R Tr[Ml Y4l+6Yq 0; ruavx w imaic,m YrStYTx'4a kb[L4"at1Q Y6I ilrii%y O x46 rR'IYtlia4 [pY rtY1V A t7pT1 LAYtj ]1VIiTAYtT •}J[ 19 ibAR #S iLibpG{Y'xiYMl42f ib 1tYRi kYRt Yt9bp[.SL 4[xM4YJ TY 9AM YxixYY; l6Ytk6%i YrYC'i6[YYg4aY 101iy1i M41Tt.Yq; NM4q».ryim.'Y %tlircYdp»-tinT 4,ygY}alyq YewxY iei9t%[itq}t nrtxri;T3Y TTYiMtMR#-TIT ai'Sleip; 44Y0.1N N.>Y41 Y{ASWp1Y Hi'tiM AYr a1t1»M r~[Cti1~~gU6N tit 4~6i1LiTJgpT"!Ot %iM9W.ili[kJ lOlroilJfpY[AWV ~~ Xqy tii4YMAYG'44YblY4tlArnil6lY MlIhl6Nl6'fY~6YSf h[f~FJ.011Y~Sib37Yf[I~40n Ysrzou~utzrtrraaravosaxv7 -'~ :; ~ V z P.LAN.11T.~.1~~ I).La~'.I~~.R~'~I~`NT ~ --~-r ~ ...- :~~~~~~~ Notice of ~1~eet~ng l~a~e off' Notice: may :~4, 242 Meeting Date: June 4, 2002 Time: 7:00 p.zxa, {Approximate) Place: Central Paint City Ka11 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEE'T'ING Taz~rz 1-izzzn~l~rey, t~ICP Planning Diract.ar Kan Gersc;hler Caznrnunity Plannez- Matt Sarrzitare Caznrnunity Planner Dave Arkens Planning Technician Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Paint Planning Commission will review a site plan application for the construction of four commercial buildings on the South. Side of East Pine Street in the vicinity of Bear Creek. The parcel islocated inthe C-4, Tourist and OfIzce Prafessioz~al zoning district and is identif ed in the records of the Jackson County Assessor as Map 37 2W 02C, Tax Lots 2100 and 2200. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Paint Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street parking, Site Plan, Landscaping and CQnstructian Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PUBIaIC COMMENTS Any person. interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written canlzrzents up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, June 4, 2002. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Paint, OR 97502. 3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prier to the expiration of tlxe comment period Hated above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to be rel~~ate~d to the proposal and should be stated 155 South Second Street • Central Point, OR 97502 ~! {541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 clearly to the Plaz~rzing Coznznission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City I4all, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, (Jregon. Copies of the same arc available at 1 ~ cents per page. 5. For additional infoz-znation, the public n~zay contact the Plaz~zzizig Acpartzz~czzt at {54l} 6G4- 3321 ext. 292. SUMMARY OF PR{7CEDURF At the meeting, the Planning Corrzmission will review the applications, technical staff repaz-ts, bear testimony from the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the applications. Any testimony or written comments must be related to tl~e criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Commissiozx znay approve or deny the Site Plan appl`zcation. City regulations provide that tl~e Central Point City Council be informed-about all Planning Coznznission decisions. 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OT;. 97502 d~ {541) 664-3321 E~ Fax: X541) 664-6384 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ~.~~~.~xr~~~~~ c~~ ~r~.~~~rcY ~c~~~s STAFF REPOIZ"~' Date: June 4`h, 2042 Applzcantl Owner: Layton Property {Greg lIornecker} 1060 Crater Lake Ave., Suite C Medford, Or 97504 Agent: Abeloe and Associates 827 Alder Creep Drive Medford, Oregon 97504 Location: East Pine Street, Central Point, Oregon Legal: 37 2W 02D, Tax Lot 2100 - 3.48 Acres Zoning: C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District Report By: Public Works Department Purpose Provide information to the Planning Commission and Applicant {hereinafter referred to as "Developer"} regarding City Public Works Department {PWD} standards, requirements, and conditions to be included in the design and development of the proposed commercial/professional office facility. Gather information froze the Developer/Engineer regarding the proposed development. It is the public works department's recommendation that only limited ingress and egress access be allowed to the southern side of E. Pine Street, similar to what is being considered for the Pear Blossom Center, which is located across E. Pine Street from the proposed Development. This would include a "main driveway" entrance {affording westbound, northbound, and eastbound traffic movements} aligned across from the "central driveway>' of the Pear Blossom Center {signali2ed intersection}. Other riglzt- inlright-out driveway connections could also be afforded along the south E. Pine Street frontage at minimum spacing to be deterrrlined by the Public Works Department and the Developers Traffic Engineer. 1t is further recommended that prior to construction plan and final plat approval {and possibly before tentative approval} of the proposed development, that approved master plans of connections to Pine Street, internal streetldriveway layout, water, storm drain, and sanitary sewer, and other utilities be prepared far the subject tax lots and all the parcels between Bear Creek and Hamrick Road that adjoin to Pine Street. Special Requirements Existin~rrzstructure: The Developer shall demonstrate that all connections to existing infrastructure {i.e. streets; water, sanitary sewer, stone drain systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,) will not interfere with or provide for the degradation ofthe existing effective level of service or operation. of the infrastructure facilities, and that the existing infrastructure facilities ,~ K have either adequate capacities to accommodate tlzc flows an<Ilor clcmands unposed ozx the existing infrastructure as the result of the connection of the proposed development's infrastructure, or will be improved by and at the expense of tl7e Developer to accoznn~odate the additional flows and/or demands; while maintaining or improving the existing level of service of the affected facilzty, as approved by {as applicable) the regulatory agency, utility o~vncr, and/or property owner involved. 2. Master Plans: Currently the City of Central Point in cooperation with tine C3regon Departzxaent of Transportation is developing a master plan based on the traffzc studies on this portion ofEast Pine Street. After the completion of this traffic sfiudy a Master Plan will be developed and recommendations will be issued. 3. .~'rxsetrretrts: The Developer shall provide suitable and acceptable l 5-foot-wide minimum easements for any City public works infrastnzcture Located outside the public rights-of--way. These easements shall be dedicated for sale use by the City, azzd shall not overlap crossings are acceptable, as long as required infrastructure separation is maintained} other utility or infrastructure easements. A separate l0-foot minimum width public utilities easement (P.U.I .} should also Lae required for utility installation outside the E. Pine Street right-of way along the property's exterior frontage with E. Pine Street. A 15-foot wide maintenance easement will be required froze the top of the East bank of Bear Creek continuing IS-feet east on the subject property, Vehicular and Pedestrian Access to All Proposed Development: Access agreements or similar documents will need to be granted on the proposed Development's property to allow fox public and private vehicular and pedestrian access {ingress and egress} on and/or across the proposed Development's property to afford access to the various adjoining parcels {crass-access easement agreements}. All construction plazas and as-built drawings shall accurately portray {both horizontally and vertically} utility line and appurtenance locations and the locations cif any existing and new easerrzents on the proposed development. All final plats shall accurately portray the horizontal location of all easements and right-of ways dedicated as part of the development of this project. All right-of way and easement dedication shall he completed prior to final construction plan approval. 4. Site LayouttTraf~c Crrculrctic~n Plan: The developer shall prepare and submit for City P'WD approval a suitable site traffic circulation plan for the proposed development.The traffic circulation plan shall illustrate that all driveways and connections to streets shall accommodate the turning and access movements of all expected truck, bus, emergency vehicle (i.e. fire truck} and all other applicable vehicles. 5. Clear llr`siora flreasl~''rircngles. All driveway approaches of the proposed Development corzz~ecting to public roads shall maintain a mizzimum 55-foot sight vision triangle as measured from. the edge of the right-of=way to the center of the driveway. This requirement naay be adjusted by the City PWD, depending on final orientation and lane layout of the adjoining roads, in accordance with AASHTtJ clear sight-vision requirements. Adequate clear vision arealtriangles shall also be maintained at all internal driveway intersections. ~~ 6. Trrr ae Stud : Ini rnvenienfs fc- .~.~rrrnrick Rt~rcrf crncC.t1..Pirxe .Sfreef• artd RinJrt-c~ wTl'rr ~ectr'ctrtitxn. A traffic impact study for the Pear Blossozz~. Center development, prepared by Kittelson & Associates, Inc., dated .lone 1 X94, has been submitted to the City. The traffic study analyzed the year 20U3 {anticipated year of build-out of the center} projected traffic flows and intersection levels of service at the major street intersections most likely to be impacted from the Bear Blossom Center development. The traffic study included the residential developnent already approved to the north and east ofthe site {Walnut Grove, New Haven, Central Paint East, and Parkwood Terrace}; the USF Reddaway site, and the potential retail/professional off ce facilities on land owned by L1SF Reddaway on the southeast corner of the intersection of Hamrick Road and. East Pine Street. However, the traffic iz~~pact study, does not include any new development along the southern frontage of E. fine Street or "build-out" {i.c. fizll developzrzent within the current UCB} traffic flow conditions for the northeast portion of the City which greatly influences the "build-out" design az~d right-of way requirements and needs for two of the City's main arterial roads: I-Iamrick Road and East Pine Street. Another issue not addressed by the traffic impact study, is hoGV access to East Pine Street will be afforded/limited for the properties located to the south of East Pine Street in the area immediately to the South of the proposed Development? and what affects will development of the parcels to the south ofE. Pine Street have on the identified streets and intersections in the Pear Blossom Center Traffic Impact Study. To allow for development of the proposed. project prior fo the completion ofthe traffic master planning needed for the area; the City PV~D recommends the following: The Developer be required to pay an equitable share of the signal development and installation costs {arid associated improvements} to the signal at the intersection of the Pear Blossom Center's Central Driveway and East Pine Street, 2. The Developer be required to construct street widening, bike lane, curb and gutter, storm drainage, sidewalk {including driveway aprons and wheel chair ramps}, planting strip with landscaping, traffic delineation {including median traff c islands on E. Pine Street), and street lighting {with maximum 2(}0 foot spacing) improvements for the portion of E. Pine Street that adjoin the proposed development. The portion ofE. Pine Street that adjoin the subject development is developed as a "rural" road that does not meet current City or County urban standards. The road will need to be improved, as a minimum, to meet City standards, as reviewed and approved by Jackson County Roads, and the City PWD. This could be deferred {as executed in a deferred improvement agreement by and between the Developer and the City/County} until other development is implemented on the adjoining parcels south of E. Pine Street. 3. t~nly one access would be afforded either temporarily or permanently. Additional right-inlright-out accesses to E. Pine Street could be afforded, that are located at a minimum spacing to be determined by the Public Works Department and the Developer's Traffic Engineer. 4. Regarding the road right-of way adjoining the proposed Development: the ~~ contain approvals for the implementation of such conzzection andlor izx~provez~~cnts and which describe; © ~tVho is responsible for the operation, maintenance, and repair of the infrastrzacturc facilities to maintain the original design parameters associated with the infrastructure`? If the City is to operate and n~zaintain the izzfrastructurc, the applicable funding mechanism that will be created {i.e. local improvement district} for the associated City expenditures; ^ How will all-weather drivable access be afforded and maintained indefinitely to maintain and repair the infrastructure facilities; © That an easement or other suitable conveyance docu~nez~t has been granted, as necessazy, to provide suitable access ozi private property for the inspection, maintenance, and repair work to be performed on the infrastructure facilities. The easement shall include a statement, wlxich allows access by City personnel for inspection, maintenance, and repair purposes. l 1. Water .13istribrrtiorr Syste~rr rrrzrl ,Fire Prr~teeticarr: The water distributiozz system for the proposed Development shall be of "reinforced loop" design; a minimum of two connections will need to be made to the City's distrib~ztion system. lz. Abaye~rorrrrrl Utilities: If applicable, coordinate efforts with Pacific Power, QWest, and Falcon {TCI) Cable, to convert any overhead electrical power, telephone, or cable facilities within the proposed development to underground facilities, prior to the acceptance by the City PWD of the public improvements associated with the proposed development. All agreements and costs associated with the conversion of these facilities frozrz overhead to underground facilities shall be by and between the utility owners and the Developer. General Pu~lrc Irarprc~verrrents; All construction of public improvements shall conform to the City's PWD Standards, the conditions approved and stipulated by the Planning Commission, and other special specifications, details, standards, andlor upgrades as may be approved by the City Administrator or his designee prior to the approval ofthe construction plans for the proposed development. During construction, changes proposed by the Developer shall be submitted in writing by the Developer's engineer to the City PWD for approval prior to implementation. 2. Perr~rits arrrl A~pravals: Developer shall provide copies oar' any permits, variances, approvals, and conditions as rrzay be required by other agencies, including, but not limited to, the C}regon Department of Fish and Wildlife {DFW}, C}regon Department of Environmental Quality {DEQ}, C?regon Division of State Lands {DSL}, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers {AC(~E}, affected irrigation districts, and 3ackson County Roads and Parks Services {J"C Roads}, Fire District No. 3, and Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority (BCVSA}, as applicable. The Developer shall submit written approvals of the final construction plans from Fire District No. 3 {fire hydrant placement, waterline sizing, and emergency vehicle access}, Bear Creek Valley Sanitazy Authority {BCVSA, for sanitary sewers}, and .lC Roads, (E. Piz~.e Street improvements and driveway/access road connections} prior to final construction plan review and approval by City PWD. ~~ 3. As-l3rrilts: Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or s~zrveyor shall provide the Public Works Depaz~tn~ent with "as-guilt" drawings. if feasible, the l.~cveloper's engineer or surveyor should provide the drawings iza both a "hard copy" form. {prodzzced on Mylar~'} and in a "digital" format compatible with AutaCAl~~', or other form as approved by the City PWD. As-built drawings are to be provided to the City which provide "red-line" changes to final approved construction plans which identify the locations and or elevations (as appropriate} of actual installed items, including, but not limited to, invert, inlet, and rinx or lip elevations; spot elevations identified on drawings; water lines, valves, and fire hydrants; water and sewer lateral; modifications to street section; manhole and curb inlet; street light locations; other below grade utility lines; etc. Provide a "red-line" hard copy (on Mylar~'}, or an approved alternative format, of construction drawings, and if feasible, an acceptable AutoCAD~' compatible drawing electronic f"zle to tl3e City at cc~znpletion of construction and prior to aeceptaz~ce cif pzzblic infrastructure facilities completed as part ofthe proposed development, or as otherwise approved by the City Administrator or his designee. 4. If'levtrtiarrs: All elevations used on the construction. plans, on ten~zporary benchmarks, and on the permanent benchmark shall be tied into an established City approved benchmark and be so noted on the plans. At least one permanent benchmark shall be provided for the proposed development, the location of the benchmark shad be as jointly determined by the City PVirD and the Developer's surveyor. S. .~xistirr~ Xrrfrastrrrctrrre: As applicable, field verify all existing infrastructure elevations and locations {i.e. pipe invez-ts, curb elevations, street elevations, etc.}, to which the proposed development will connect into existing improvements, prier to final construction. plan design and submittal for f nal approval. The accurate locations of any existing underground and above ground public infrastzucture, and the location of tl~e associated eascmen#s with these facilities, shall be accurately portrayed both horizontally and vertically} on the construction plans. 6. .Fill Placement: All fill placed in the development shall be engineered fill that is suitably placed and compacted in accordance with City PWD and Building l~epartznent standards, except for the upper 1.S~feet of fill placed outside of public rights-of--way and that does riot underlie building, structures, or traveled vehicular access ways or parking areas. ~. RarrrU.L~rivewcryll'crrXrirr.~,~rens: The Developer shall evaluate the strength ofthc native soils and determine the access road, parking, and driveway section designs to handle the expected loads (including fire equipment} to be traveled on these private driveways, access roads, az~d parking areas. Need to provide designed road section for review. The roadfstreetldriveway sections within the public rights-of--way shall be constructed per the design of the City PWI~. S. ~tilr'ty Plans: The utility plans shall be drawn to scale with accurate horizontal and vertical depiction ofutility lines and appurtenances {transformers, valves, etc.). Utility infrastructure location must be accurately included on the as-built drawings, or as a separate set of drawings attached to the as-built drawings. ~; 9. Area Lr'_;Iitir~Plcxra: Need to provide anti implement an adequate area lighting plan for parkizzg and public access areas, including the driveway entrances. 1C}. .~'crserrterrts: Easements for City irzfrastnzcture {i,e, sanitary sewer, water, anti storm draizt jif applicablej} should be a minimum of 1 S-feet wide, and sl~oulti not split lot lines. Easements for public storm drainage, sanitary sewer, anti water lines shall be dedicated to sloe City and not just a P.U.E. Centerline of buried infrastructure shall be aligned a miniznuz~~. of five {5} feet from. the edge of the easement. If two or more City owned utilities are located within an easement, then a minimum of ~0-foot width should be required. Easement dedications in f nal deeds ar CC&Rs need a statement, which should clearly indicate that easements must be maintained with suitable, drivable vehicular access to City public infrastructure facilities, as detezxxzined by the City PWD. 11. ,S'treet ~i~Itts: Canstructian drawings for this Tentative Plan shall include a Street I,ightirzg Plaza in accordance with the requirements afthe City PWD or as otherwise approved by tl~e City ~dzninistrator or his designee {with maxizntzzx~ 20t? foot spacing). The construction drawings shall include clear vision areas designed to meet the City's PWD Standards. 12. Storrrr I)rrrirta~-e ~ysterrt: Developer's engineer shall develop a facility plan far the storm drain. collection, retention, and conveyance system {SD System} which provides far storm water run- aff from and run-an onto the proposed development {either surface run-on ar culvert or creeklditch conveyance), any existing or .future development an adjacent properties, conveyed storm drainage, or surface water flow, and az~y areas deemed by the City that will need to connect-rota the praposed development's SD System. As applicable, Developer's engineer shall determine how the SD system will work during 14- year and 1 {}Ct-year flood events associated with Bear Creels. Identify the HGL in Bear Creek during 1 fl-and 1 ~4-year storm event, and what affect it will have on the praposed outlets and stoz7n drain system and building elevations. System should be designed to adequately drain a 10- year storm event without surcharging or shall provide adequate storage to prevent surcharging; and be designed to prevent backflow of water from Bear Creek up rota SD system during storm events, The design of the storm drain collection and conveyance system {SD System) should provide for storm water run-off from and nzn-on onto the praposed development {either surface ruz~-an ar culvert or creeklditch conveyance}; the Developer shall demonstrate that the storm water flaws from the completion of the praposed development {and at any tune prior to completion of development} do not exceed predevelapment flows into Bear Creek; ar that allowances ar provisions have been made {and approval of the applicable properties owners and regulatory agencies'has been obtained}, which accamnaodate any additional flaw which exceed predevelopment flaws. The Developer and the City PWD shall agree on the applicable run-off coefficients, curve numbers, etc., to be used in the engineering calculations. Developer's engineer shall provide a site drainage plan designed, at a minimum, to accommodate a 1 t}-year stann event. The SD system must be designed to adequately drain the 10-year storm event without surcharging or must be provided with adequate storage to prevent surcharging; and be designed to not impact existing public storm drainage facilities. Catch basins and area drains shall be designed for on-site sediment and petroleum hydrocarbon retention. The private storm drain system shall be designed to directly connect to the public storm drain system, and shall not •. ~ t be designed to discharge to the street surfaces. Public stozxzx drainpipe materials shall be PVC, H17P1/, or reinforced cazxcrete, with tvatcrtight joints. Provide concrete or sand-cement slurry ezxcasczxxent where required in areas of nxinir~xuz~x cover. Raafdrains and under drains shall zxot be directly connected to public storm draizx lines and shall .drain to the on-site privy#e starzn draizx system. As applicable, any discharge points afthe starnx water facilities slxall be designed to provide an aesthetically pleasing, useful, and lo~v maintenance facility, that are designed to mitigate erasion, damage, or loss during a 1 flf?-year storm event; and that nitigate the "attractive nuisance" hazards associated with these types of facilities. Friar to City PWD canstructiozx plan review, the Developer shall provide the City PWD with a complete set ofhydrolagic and hydraulic calculations and profile plats far sizing the 517 systenx, which shall incorporate the use of tlxe City PWI=I's rainfalllintensity curve, and City approved run-off coeffzciezxts, curve nuzxxbers, pipe roughness coefficients, etc., that are used in the engineering calculations, Sheet flow surface drainage from tlxe property onto the public rights-of way ar onto neighboring properties is unacceptable. Plans which propose to include the discharge to Bear Creek and any construction or zxzodifzcation witlxin the floodway of Bear Creek or in tlxe road ditches, shall be in compliance with DSL, ACc7E, C)17FW, DEQ, JC 1`~oads, andlar City PWD has applicable) guidelines and requirements and any applicable conditions and or approvals, of these regulatory agencies. 13. Frre .F~~c~'rcxrtts: Provide locations of existing and any new required fire hydrants. Fire Flydrants need to be connected to S-inch-dianxeter and larger lines, with the supply lines being "looped" as feasible. if applicable, steamer parts at hydrants located near the building shall face the buildings. Fire hydrants shall be suitably protected from potential vehicle damage and encroachment. 1 ~. N'ater.Syste~rz ~rQSe eonrsecfior~ t~'o~tfr~al: Developer shad comply with t7regon I-lealth Division (t7HD) and City requirements for cross connection control. If a pressurized irrigation system and~or donxestic water wells exist ozx the property, the Developer will be required to install the required backflow prevention assemblies directly behind the City's water meters. 15. mater S~ster~z: Construction drawings shall include the size, type, and location of all water mains, hydrants, valves, service connection, meter, service laterals, and other appuzfienance details in accordance with City PWD Standards and as required by the City FWD. 16, .IZc-oflArea Drar'ns: All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, andlor crawl spaces with posifiive drainage away frazn the building. 1'7. Gradrz~.~ Plans: Cxrading plans shall have ariginallexisting grades and final grades plotted on the plan. Typically, existing grade contour lines are dashed and screened back, and final grade contour lines are overlaid on top ofthe existing grades and are in a heavier line width and solid. ~~ Contour lines should be labeled with elevations. ~ 8. Srtnt`trrry ~`ess~er: All sanitazy sewer cal lcetian and conveyance system {SS Systen7) design, construction and testing shall confarzx`z to the standards and guidelines of the {Jregora DEQ, 199Q APWA Standards, Oregon Chapter, Bear Creele Valley Sanitary Acrthority {BCVSA), and the City PWD Standards, where applicable. The construction plans anal the as-built drawings shall identify lateral stationing far construction of sewer laterals. 19. Water Ri.~ltts: If applicable, l~evelaper shall provide a Statement of Water Rights {oza a City approved farm}, for any affected properties. 1~or properties determined to lave water rights, the developer will coordinate with the State Water master the re-allocation of any waters attached to lands na longer irrigable as a result of tl~e proposed develapnxent. ~~ ~2EC()il~MENDEU PLAN~IIt~''G Z7E~'~.RTIV~z<,~IT CC~NDZT~t~N~ ©X+ f1.PPI2(~~'~~,~, The approval ofthe Site Plan shah expire in one year on June ~l, 2003 unless an application for a building perzxzit or an application for extension has been received by tlae City. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan depicting any changes discussed and approved at the public hearing ~vitl~in ~0 days ofPlazzning Cozxzmissioz~ approval. 2. The pro}ect natrst coz~~ply ~vitlt alI a~rplical~Ie local, state atzd federal regulations . 3. The project must meet the off street parking recitzirezuents for professional offices, azlcl the parking, access and naanezzvering areas shall be paved ~vitlz durable zt~aterials for all-weather use and approved by the Public -Y'Yorks I~epartn~ent. d. The applicaz~t/praperty owner shall submit final parking, landscaping, lighting and. signplazzs to the Planning, Public works and 13uilclizag I~epartznents far approval prior to obtai~~izzg any building permits. 5. All buildings located within the Special Flood. Hazard Area ofthe 100-yeas flood plain must be built the standards set by the City of Central Point ~3uilding T~epartznent. ~~ PLANNING DE~'ARTMEN'.i" S~"AFF Ris~P{~it'i' MEETING DATE: Sane 4, 2002 '~'G: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Ken Gerschler, Community Plaaxtxer SUI3.IECT: Variance from fence requirements at 653 Meadowbrook Drive {372V~01BC Tax Lot 9300}. Applicant: Dan and Kay Berryman 387"7 Arrowhead Drive Medford, C}regon 97504 Surnrnat-y: The applicant wishes to vary fx~onx fence requirements izx order to construct a 6 foot high fezxce in a sick yard setback. The subject parcel is zoned R-1, Residential Single-Family. Au#hority: CPMC 1.24,{}20 vests the Planning Conunission with the authority to review and decide , without a public hearing, any application. for a fence variance. Review is being performed in accordance with CPMC 1.24.050. Applicable Law: CPMC 15.20.{}40 et seq. -Fence Height on Lots CPMC 15.20.080 et seq. -Fence Variances CPMC 17.20.010 et seq. - Rw1, Residential Single-Family District Discussion• The Applicants decided to request this fence variance and has provided their rationale as part of the attached application and exhibits. ~`PN.TCSeetic~rts ZS.~f?,454 states tTsat rrv fence shall be higher tlaari three acrd vrre 7~tclf feet xvr`tTtin the required setback area. Requests fvr fence variances shall be made by application . . . and shall be revieis~ed irs accorda~ice }vitli Chapter .1..24 ~':vTxiclx ifivt~lves Plar~rring C`r~rnrrtissir~xr cattsiderativrz ~vithacrt a public Ttearirag}, Dan. and Kay Ben-yman are requesting that the Planning Commission grant a variance from the 3 /z foot height requirement for a portion of a proposed fence located within a side yard setback. The portion of the fence that would exceed the three and one half foot height is located along the westerly property lz'ne {refer to Attachment D} of the 9,806 square foot lot. Five neighbors surrounding the parcel have signed a petition requesting that the fence be constructed as proposed by the applicants. {Attachment E}. ~~ The applicants Dave provided findings of fact for consideration by the Caznzxzissiozz {Attacl~z~~ent "C"). Staff has read the findings ~svhiclx appear to have extensive research of fence height regulations in neighboring cazxzzrzunities. While modifications to the existing code n-zay be required to adjust the fence ordinance ,this is not the appropriate tune to address tlae issue since these changes would require extensive review by the City Council at publicly noticed meetings coznbincd with a possible pubic vote, Par this application, the Planning Cornznissian is tasked with applying the acknowledged fence height regulations and all of the required £"zndings listed in the code must be n~.ct far a variance to be granted. If findings could he zrzade for approval, tl~e applicants cozzlcl be allowed to constz~ct the fence at six feet in tl~.e side yard area. if findings could not be naadc, the applicant would need to construct the fence to code. The applicants have can~zpiled the enclosed inforn~zation to assist the Planning Cozxzznission in determining that their parcel is tznigtze and needs a variance fron~z the existing code. They perceive that tlxe City has established a precedence in approving t~vo variance requests during tl~e past 2 years an similar fats. A.t 222 St. dames Way, a variance was granted by the City Council when a denial decision by tl~ze Planning Commissiaz~ was overturzzed and approved by Council. Although the City Council agreed in principle to the Planning Coznmissian findings, they also found that the applicants had not received adequate notice of their appeal rights as described in the code and granted tl~e variance. City Council concurred with a Planning Commission denial for another fence variance at X799 Qakview Avenue. LTpan subsequent review, the Council reversed their position and approved a modified site plan, which granted the variance to construct a six foot high fence within 4 Ill feet of the property line in a side yard setback. Not all fence variance requests are approved. The owners of property at S43 Mitchell Way were denied a variance far a previously constructed six foot high fence which was located in a side yard setback. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law A variance may be granted if Endings are made as follows: l .The strict application of the provisions would result in unnecessary hardship; or The strict application of the C}rdin.ance for ibis application would not appear fv create au unnecessary hardship on the applicant. 2. The following considerations will either result frozxz a granting of the variance or the following considerations da not apply to the requested application: a. The variance will provide advantages to the neighborhood ar the city, ~~ Five neighbors Izave signed a petitiozz irr srrizport of corrstrrretirtg the fence as it is proposed since they believe that the strrrctrrre looks nicer at a fi foot height as opposed to 3 Iz feet. b. The variance will provide beautificatiazz to the rreighbarhaad ar the city, The location of the fence may not necessarily provide tizzy additional beautification to the neighborizoocl or city, izowever neighbors have signed a petitiozr to demonstrate that they are accepting of the proposal fence height and location. c. The variance will provide safety to the r~eighbarhaod ar the city, '4'4'hile the increased fence height worrlcl not necessarily provide additional safety to the neighborhood, it ~vorrld allow the applicant a greater sense of security i~ keepiszg a proposed swiznrrring pool frorrz becozzzing azz attractive n;risarzce. d. The variance wilt pravida protection to tl~e neighborhood ar the city, A~ increased fence height will likely to provide additional protection to flze neiglzborhoad since a 6 foot high fence as opposed to a 3 'lz foot fence provides a better barrier. e. The variance will not have any adverse impacts upon the zzeighbarhaad. Neighboring property owners have submitted a petition i~ favor of allowing ttze fence to be constructed at 6 feet in height, The proposed fence is zzot located within the vision clearance area near tire intersection of Meadowbrook Drive and 11'lountain Avenue. f The variance will utilize property within the intent anti purpose of the zone district. Wood fezzces Tike the one constructed by the applicant are commonly constructed in residential neighborhoods but usually comply with the required setbacks. The applicant has submitted findings fox consideration by the C'ammissian (Attachment C}. H:1F~ Ianni n~t02~28.~vpd ~~ ~2eeommettc3atio~~: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the fence variance application based on tl~e findings of fact contained in the record and sub,~ect to the recon~znended conditions of ap}~roval; or 2. Deny the proposed Variance application; or 3. Continue the review for the Variance application at the discretion of tlae Commission. Attachments A. Application for Fence Variance B. Notice ofMeeting C. Applicant's Findings of Fact D. Applicant's Site Plan. showing fence height E. Correspondence from neighbors Fi:tF'lanning142{}28.tivpd ~~ ~~-~~--~ A`PPI`~CAT~C7~ FOR ~`~~~~ ~"A~~A,NC~ C..tt 1 t/.t' C~.{Y.t tll3l X11 T1i T7+ riT A_l rn rs xr.!rt t"x r,.n t sirrei x~c krrr* a r'~+o..rw~evrwi~iurr erxsr,rit~ ("""~ 1. APPLICANT I~'tIFOI~.MATIQN Name: ~~~ $-- Address: "~ `~ City; ~~"l.P c:~.~~~`~'!, Telephone: Bnsir~~ss: City 4~''Cex:~r~I~F.~~"tt.. ~ . ~~~:~~~ tt~lt lea Sttl 111 ~ Cj) 3t1`~ITI P~I.~ r ..__-.... .__ '' 3 State: CI i Y C~~ CAN i F2til. Pflix"~T DATE STA ET} ~1~~4?~~ ~~1 ~~---- Zip Code: ``~ I~U~ Residence: _ 2~--~- Sr ~- f-/ ~, ~. AGENT I~~FC?R.MATIQN ~~~' - ~' ~ ~ _ `~ ~~~ ~Narne: Address: City: State: - Zip Cade: Telephone: Business: Residence: 3.O~TNEI2 t7F I~;.EC4I~D ~Attaeh Separate Sheet I~More Than Cane} Name: ~ ~' ~ ~-Cr.~`'~~ Address: City: State: Zip Code• Telephone: Business: Residence: 4. PRC~JEC"~` I~ESCI~.IPTIC?N Township: ~ i Range: K Section: { lw?(,__~,__ Tax Logs}: ` ~ ~~ Address: ~ u} v`n ~ ~- sus ~ 2.._'Z..,. Zoning District: j -- Total Acreage: ~ ~ `1t~ ~ ~~ ~-- ~ ~ 5. RE(~U~~~~D SUBMITTALS This Application Form. ~ Application Fee (See Cutxent Fee Schedule}. ~~ ~~ Plot Plan & Elevations Drawn to Scale (1 £1 sets}. ,~a~ One Copy cif a Reduced Plat Plan & Elevations (8 l" x l 1 "}. ,tai Written authority from Property Owner if Agent in application process. //""Findings Addressing Criteria in Section 15.2fl.C180 of the Central Point Municipal Code) Legal Description of the Property. ~. I HEREBY STATE Tl~IAT T~~E FACTS RELATED ZN Z'HE A~30VE APPLTCATZON AND TIIE PLANS AND DOCUMENTS SU131l~ITTED HEtr~:EWt;TH ARE TR~.TE, COT:REC'T AND ACCTJRATE `TO 'THE BEST OT M~' I~NO"4VLED GE. _ I certify that 1 am the: ~Propcrty Owner or C~~~thorized Agent of the Owner of the proposed project site. 4~ ~r '"4 ='~~ 1<-`"---~ ...t .f- .,L..r~ d Y 1 Y ~1 Y t.T 1.~.L:r.[ ~~ 1 Y11'.t .t.:J 1 Y 1 1 ~s°~ /{72x2 Httmpl~a'ey> AICP Planning Director Ken Gersclxler Co2n2r2t2nity Planner Matt. Samii,ore CorrznauniCy Planner l7avc Arltens Planning Teclxnician ~i O~~.Ce 0~ ~~E~lll~ Date of Nonce: may ~4, 2002 Meeting Date: Tir2ze: Place: NATURE C?F MEETING dune 4, 2002 7:00 p.zn. {Appraxinxate) Central Paint City ball 155 Soutlx Second Street Central Point, Oregon City `o f ~~#a `Foizi:t . Plarzxiixi~~I3e,~,artrnen~ 13egi2xning at the above time anal place, the Central Paint Planning Canxnxissian will review an request to vary from the fence requirements of the ~ Central Point Municipal Cade at G53 Meadawbraak Drive. This parcel is located in a R-1-8, Residential Single-Family Zoning District on Jackson County Assessmezzt Plat 37 2W OIBC, Tax Lat 9300. The Central Paint Planning Cammissian is being asked if portions of a proposed fence can be constructed at a heiglxt of six feet in a side yard setback where the code alla~vs a zxzaxiznunx heigl2t of 42 inches. At the meetizxg, the Cammissian tivill review the dacunxentatiozx subnxitted by the applicant and will decide whether or not to grant the `Variance. Any party aggrieved by the decision ofthe Planning Comzr2ission nxay request review of such action by the City Council. Such a request must be filed in writing to the City Administrator na zxxore than seven {~) days after a notification of the decision is given to thaw parties whom provided co2xxsr2ents to tlxe Planning Commission. A decision by the Planning Cammissian could be affirmed by the City Council at the zxext regularly scheduled meeting if a request far review is not received within the seven (7) day request period. The Central Point City Council reserves the right to approve, deixy or ixxadify a request far a feixcc variance. ~3 CE.ITERIA FoR I~ECISIC?N Tl~e recluirenaenfs for fences are sef forth in Chapter 15 oftlze Central Poinf Municipal Cock, relafizzg to fence variances. - PUF3LIC C(7MMENTS 1. Any person interesfed in cornrzzenfing ozz the above-nxenfioned land use decision zz~ay subnzif wriffen eoznmenfs up until fhe close of the zz~eeting scheduled far Tuesday, June 4, 2002. 2. Writfen comments may be serf in advance of the ztzeefizzg fo Central Point Cify Fall, 155 South Second Street, Central Poinf, C?R. 97502. 3. Issues which may provide the basis fox an appeal an the matfers shall be raised prior fo flze expiration ofthe comment period nofed above. Any fesfiznony and wriften comments about the decisions described above will zxeed to be related to the proposal and shoczld be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. ~#. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicanf are available for public review of City I-Iall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, C)regon. Copies of tl~e sane are available at 15 cents per page, 5. For additional informafion, tl~e public znay confact fhe Planning T.}eparfinenf of {541} 664- 3321 exf, 292, 3.55 South Second Street A Central Point, {~R 97502 ~ (541} 664-3321 ~ Fax: {541} 664-6384 p`irst, we will address the City's issues and cozzcerns: ~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ t~~t~ 1. T3~'auld the variance ravide ndvanta~es to the nei~*hharlianrl ar Cit ; Yes. The City already allows a 42" fence oza the side property Iizze. t~.ftcr tlae pool is installed, this shorter fcaacc would zrzeet city cads, but could present a greater potential hazard becazase of c~~zwsy access to tlae pool froze claildreza in tlac neiglzborhoad. Should the fence be allowed to be placed on tlzc property Iinc at the six foot Iaciglat, this would provide a safer barrier, in addition to providing more privacy for our family. Those claw neighbors wiaosc front parches ar side windo~Ts that ct~zza sea into our back yard would appreciate not Being able to sec in, bcncfittizag from a taller fezacc, versus a shorter feud. k'rivacy would be appreciated by alI, both we as property owners, and our neighbors. A six foot fezxce on the property Tine, versus a shorter fence oza the property line allowable by City ordizaazacc, would also provide a better sound barrier, What would be better for floe neighborlaoa? l} a pool near a short fence allowed by code that would . enable adults and children to see over into floe pool area, 2) a taller fence l ~ feet iza, wlaz;re floe property owner is zoo longer able to enjoy the aflernooza's sunniest part oftlaeir lot far tlacir pool, or 3} a tall fence on floe property Lino? ##3 is a win-wiza, 2. N~artld the variance ravide hearrti zczrtiarz to the rrei lzharliaad rrr C'it Yes. It would alloav zas to zatilize our own private propert~morc usefully wlaerc we, as owners, having access to that space, would beautify it to a much Iai~Iaer standard than. what would be chosen outside floe fence to znizaimally meet city standards. Why invest in quality shrubs and trees that you can't enjoy, where floc main benefactors are those pets auho defecate on them and then the vegetation eventzaally have to be replaccxl. We believe tlzesc strips of land do not serve one oftlae prizaaary purposes they were icztended-to beautify the z~cighborhoad. In haviz~p; driven through other neighborhoods float have restricted fencing variances, we have noticccl that when not incorporated within the enclosed fencing of their private property, since floe honacowner was unable to use that property for their personal use, they tended to let that part of their yard deteriorate more; it was not Kept up as orderly as floc rest of tine yard area, nor avas tlzc vegettation chosen. to landscape those strips of land as quality as the other Iaxadscaping within the personal use areas... perfect example of dais is in a newer subdivision. off of Coker Butte in Medford. We believe these strips of land are tomorrows' city nuisance. Those areas outside the fence are definitely zaot more beautiful Haan the landscaping that caxx be enjoyed on floe inside of the fence by the property owner. To allow the fence to be built on floc ro Iinc would cnlaazace the beaut of the nei laborhood b crcatin a lar er usable area for floe laoaneowzaer tvha ~cvould a reciate that stri of land tho zazost. 3. T3~'auld the variance~zravide sum Ytat#ze nei~hbarizaad ar C'rt~ Yes. ~.s state prior in ## 1, because a pool will be coast, azcted tea the tivcsterly side of the property, a six fact fence on the property line r~vauid provide much more safety and security to floe neighborlaaod and City Haan if it tivere only 42" irz height, which could be climbed over by claiidrezi, avho would be most at risk. d: alt the variance~ravide,pratectian to the rzei,~hharhaad rrr arty; Yes, because ifi extends the backyard fenced area where people, including children, will be gathering, iia addition to providing additional enclose space, allowing a separate space for floe family dog. Providing a protected space for floe dog indirectly provides an additional degree ofprotection to both adults azad children in the neighborhood. 5. loll the variance have [rn#} adverse r'nrPacts ulaan the nei~htharhaarl? No, to the contrary. esthetically, better quality vegetation will be cased if dais variance is approved. The neighbors avill be protected from having to see into the backyard area when tvaiking by. lia the future, neighbors won't have to look at run down vegetation that could occur over time from inferior up~Ceep. It will encpurage neighbors to eat allow their pets to defecate on the hidden side of floe fence where they think na one can see, azadlor Icave the feces without picking it up to dispose of, because it is on a strip of vegetation hidden from the laoaneowzaer. Having the fence on the property lizae eliminates the vegetation for pets to be attracted ta. ~, ill the variance utili e ra ert auithin the intent and u ase a the one district. Yes. The fence that would be placed on the property Iizze would adhere to floe construction material required by floe CC~;R's of dais neighborhood and that of residential zoning in the city of Gentrat Point. Wage 2 ~~ l~l'exts~ we wilt address our concerns and issues as private 13roperfy o~vrzers anu cifixens of Cc-ztral Point: Applying for a variance, or seeking any change in city govemmcnt, is an uphill bathe, because nobody tikes change. Even if it's to the carruxzunity's benefit, there are always those who will oppose it, just because they Izavc the pa~c~,=er to da so. The City of Central Paint has increased the fee of fezzes variance apl}ligation from $200 to al~zzost double that to $350, Why? Is the purpose to discourage people from filing azz application in the fast place? C}zzc has to feel very strongly to gamble so much n~zoney. We do, and that's why we are applying for this variance, because we believe this ordinance is a veiled taking of_private oranertv. What is the 'ustification of this ordinance? If the justification for ~e restrictions to the property owner ofuse offhcir own land is because of n~ded acooss for the city to perform repairs or inspections, we ask the question: I-las any one ever done a study in the City of Central Point since the fence ordinances were put into effect to show ho~v many tithes repairs within the IO' easement Izavc bean performed, arzd if so, do they strongly justify tlz'zs ordinance? Iftl~e reasoning is that it will beautify the city, our question is: cornparecl to what? Will it make the city mare bcaufiful Haan if the property owner landscaped that area. within their own fence? Why should. the hozxzeowner be forced to give up their property for the "beautification of the city"? This issue was addressed previously and, we believe, cannot be proven. Taking of Private Property: If the city is going to require that we, as private homeowzzcrs give up the use ofa IO' strip of our o~vn land for public use, yet still Izold us responsible for maizztenance and taxation, then shouldn't there be fair and just carzzperzsation awarded to that homeowner, and taxes credited back for that percentage ofproperty the homeownzer is hat allowed to enjoy? 'Ilzere is legal precedent that flze homeowner can. succcssfizlly challenge this in a coazrtroom. (fee 7"akin~s...Private PraP~rty crud the .Power ~I'nrirtent Domain, by R. Epstein, and ~Io~v Smart Growth I=Yill.~~crrm Elmerican Cities by R. O'Toole far more information regarding this issue.} Precedence: Because tl3o City of Central Point has set a precedent in making exceptions in the fence placement, as shown at 2~b2 St. James Way, and 2799 Oakview Avenues, both new subdivisions and where both addresses have much busier foot and car traffic area than ours, it would seem justifiable that another exception be allowed for our fence to be moved also, and hopefully, the City of Central Point will be willing to change permanently a bad ordinance that harms, and doesn't benefit flae commuzrity, as this particular ordinance does. Privacy Ri;hts. and Private nrolaert_y own~rshiP: We believe tall fences should be allowed on the owner's back yard property lines. The purpose of residential zoning in any community is to allo~,v ifs citizens to enjoy home ownership, which includes outdoor living in a privafe setting. The reason living in a home within a residential area is mare expensive than livizzg in apartments, condozniniurrzs, or rrzobile home parks, is because the owner is charged, by way of purchasing; price and ongoing taxes, and is 'willing to pay a larger percentage of their carvings towards housing, in exchange for having access to larger, mare private, living spaces, bofh in the home, and in outside living areas. Ilorz~e ov~=nership and private property ownership reiterates the freedoms we enjoy in our nation that make us di£#'erezat fxozn mast other tzations. Irrational Rational: It's been said by some citizens of Cenfrat Point that some leaders in city gavernnzent deny variances because of envy, using the rationale: "If we can't have our fence moved, then wlxy should others be allaived." Isn't this childish tlzinlczirzg? Instead, don't we want to follow the Golden Rule - Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."? Ifthe Plazning Commission or City Council members could have the choice over hour they would individually use their own private property, wouldn't they want full access to enjoy their own property? If so, and if it had no adverse impact on„ofh~rs, why hat wish this for other homeowners? I3ecaxr~inf~ a better City: Can we learn from how other cities write their ordinances? Yes, ifwe are a ihinkini7 tacorrle anal not just following suit, isz lock-stop fashion. Just because one city's fence ordinance is such & such, doesn't make it necessarily sensible or good far the camza~unity. We will use three southern Oregon towzzs to prove this paint -Eagle Point, Ashland, and Plroczux: We (I~ay} recently spoken with a representative in each Planning pept. to gather their ordinance sp~ificatians on fencing. Even though fence ordinances n~iglzt seem Tike small issues in the cornznunity, ordinances are representative of how "smart" the local governing body is, or it reveals to the caznznzznity how their leaders view the ri~lzts of it's citizens. Page 3 4~ Irz the City of Eagle Point, their side fence ordinance on a corner lot allows a fence of only 42", wtaetlrer it be oar tl:~; property line or set back further. I~Tow flocs that make lagie~l sense? Wllat good is a 42" backyard side fence that `people can see over when they walk by? But when you look at the City ofEaglc Point's long-term piannzc~g irz housing., you see the same lack o£logic in their hod~e-pod~c community that, with the exception o£ilre gol£col~rse, is not tlzc most desirable place to Live in the valley. . l~ext, look at the City of Ashland, tl~e town known as one of tl~e nxost liberal, taxexl cities in C?regon, with. greater xestrictions on private property owners. With a more "sociatistic'° nizndset, ~slxland's city leaders have come up witlx il~c fottowznt; side fence ordinance on a cozxicr lot: 2~o fence is allowed. 2~lot a big surprise. Lastly, the City o£Phoenix's fence ordinance makes good, common sense. 'T`here is a 20' e<asen~cnt for city utilities. You can put a 6 foot fence on th~roperty line, but yon, as a property owner, are Fully responsible for replacing the fence or landscaping at your own expense, should the city need to gaze access to that easement to maintain or fix problczus with the utilities. 'f'ire homeowner can choose to just put the fence It3' inside the property line to avoid tlsis hassle downroad, should Ibis type of incident occur, but the homeowner has the choice of how anal tvhcre the fence their own rzvate proe ,This zs a win-win situation. It gives ~e City what they Diced-access, ~vitlzout il~c cost to tl~e Cit~r; ar~d the homeowner can utilize fully their private property by placing the fence on the property line, should they wish to do so. Please excuse the length o£this discourse, but wc: ask that you, as leaders, to give deep thought to #lie co~~tinuzng support of arty ordinance within fhc City o£ Central Point that toys with the private ownership rights of its citizens. Central Point has long been known throughout tlzc state as chard-working community made up of'reasonably minded, salt-of=the- carth, wholesome citizens. l)o eve want to go the way of Ashland city government, where co~unron sense is overruled time and again for small special interest groups? We hope not, which is why many cbaose this conrznunity to live in. Axe you making decisions that are truly for ilae good oftlre commiruity, or are you r~zaking the easiest and most expedien , or politically correct decision.? Thank you foe your corrsideratzoix of our application. .77ie ,t3errymrrns P, S. Please note two additional attachmezzts: a pxior list of racigltbors in Central Paint :E..ast, who gave earlier endorsement o£ another fence variance on Meadowbrook, and a zxlore recent list ofr~eighbors closer tc~ our property, ~vho are hr favor of this variance. Page ~ 5 ~ . ~~~~~~~ .y'1-~ r, t ~ fan ~~'~~-~~'~ ~ 1 ~~ _..~_ . ---_... v«~, ~' ~l ~ ~ 1 pig `------_+'r---~---.._~ ! .~ ~ ~ i., _, --.. ° ; : c' : rwwra : '..:.:..:: ~ . ~ r :.: ~an~iui~ ~epart~~i~n~ - :. .~:. . ~ .. ~ ,3 : ~ ~ f vim.-; ~ ri ~ ~. ~~ ~ ~ 2~. 74 ~:.:::; : , ~ :.<. ..:.. . _ i~` ___ , .~..,:~~C , « ii .art- ~ ~ ~ .^1T . L • J.F -~ .~~~~ - _ ~ dG~. e _.- L.J J i -~/ J t lit ~1'v "L .~ ~ ~ `.~~ . ~ r. . !~ . • ~ ~ ~f,~5~ -~ 'f`.Q~i" f2'~ ~f=t~"~AL f~~f f~ET fvA~T ~StJ~sf43 ANASE 4 ~65 f Mfr,ADC~1'~lf~f~tU~3}{ DR fllf~ . ~f - Applicafion for Fence Variance i~erryman ' The following neighbors of X53 Meadowbrook Drive comer of Meadowbrook and Mountain Avenue} agree that a 6' fence variance should be allowed. They agree fhat fhis varlance.will not have ar~y adverse impact on the neighborhood, and in fact, could enhance Central Point Fast. ~---_ _ ~}~''~9;' ~ x''"l G w _.. ~t ~' J ~ ~r t~ /' 4 Lff /fl./'P/,/ ~ l.r i > ~ I /~ .J, note: Much of Phase 4 is stiff i~1 construction oz ~zrz~uitt ~,'~} ~l,~=Fyrit,.crf~t.Yt'l'~ ~iS~1 C`~t,vl. t'~.t.~.t.. cxY~u3`~~ ~~~r?~c~ ~~S City ~c~.i-Ceritr~i P:oirit~: . ~~~=I~~~' .~.~~~~~ . Pf~nnizi~ ~epaz-fm~r~'t 1 1.