Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 721 - Clark - Vilas Rd. - Tent. PlanPLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ~ Z) A RESOLUTION GRANTING TENTATIVE PLAN APPROVAL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION TO CREATE 53 ZERO LOT LINE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS Applicant. Heritage Development, Inc. (37 2W 01SA, Tax Lots 500 & 700} File No. 07025 WHEREAS, Applicant has submitted an application for a Tentative Plan in conjunction with a Planned Unit Development to create 53 zero lot line single family lots within an R-2, Residential Two Family zoning district on two parcels with a combined approximate gross acreage of 7.11 acres on properties identified on Jackson County Assessor's map as 37 2V1T 07.BA, Tax Lots 500 & 700, in the City of Central Point, Oregon; and WHEREAS, Qn March 6, 2007, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted adult'-noticed public hearing on the applications, at which time it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards and criteria applicable to Tentative Plans, section 16.10, R-2, Residential Two zoning districts section 17.24, Planned Unit Developments, section 17.6$, and Conditional Uses, section 17.76 of the Central Point Municipal Code; and SE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by this Resolution No. '"I ~.-~ does hereby approve the application based on the findings and conclusions of approval as set forth on Exhibit "A", the Planning Department staff report which includes attachments, which is attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein. PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 6th day of March, 2007. Planning Commission Resolution No. `? ~-~ (03062007} i,. a Y 1 ~.~ ~~~ ~l~~t11111lIZ~ ~{)1111! i f',`;IS~)~ I lw ~ I;clk~L~ ATTF~T: ~, a C~~~ l::~p, ~esenfi~ ~ ti ~.=e Approved by m~ tl~.is 6~~, ~~~ cif March, 2t~~7. T'1ar1nil~~ Ccm117'-is~ion Chair T'lar-rung Cornmisszon Resolution moo. $ ~Q306200 STAFF REPORT ---- .. . CENTRAL P41NT STAFF REPORT March 6, 2007 Planning Department tom Humphrey,AiCP, ComrxGUnity De~eiopment Director/ Assistant City Administrator APPLICATION ITEM: FILE NO. 07025 Tentative Plan Application Public hearing to consider a Tentative Plan application to create 53 zero lot line single family residential lots located within a R-2, Residential Two Family zoning district. The properties are identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37 2W 01 BA, Tax Lots 500 & 700. Applicant: Heritage Development, lnc~ STAFF SOUL Lisa Morgan, BACKGROUND; The subject parent parcel consists of approximately 7.11 acres. The applicant is proposing 53 lots that and range in size from 3,123 sq. feet to 6,720 sq. feet. These lot sizes are consistent with what would be required as a Padlot development. However, due to the long narrow configurations of the two tax lots, the applicant has determined that the most efficient use of the property is a Planned Unit Development. The associated applications (PUD & CUP} for the Tentative Plan application are conditioned for approval. As a Planned Unit Development, the applicant is able to vary from the typical minimum lot size requirements for the R-2 zoning district. Therefore, with approval of the PUD, the Tentative Plan is compliant with the requirements as outlined in CPMC 16.10 -Tentative Plans, CPMC 17.24 - R-2, Residential Two Family zoning and CPMC 17.68 -Planned Unit Developments. FINDINGS: Refer to Attachment "B" ISSUES: The issues associated with the successful implementation of this project were discussed in detail during the review of the PUD application. All of the conditions of the PUD application must be met prior to acceptance and approval of the Final Plat for the Tentative PIan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to submitting an application for Final Plat, alt necessary title clarif cations must be successfully resolved and approved by the City Council as necessary to complete right-of--way Clark Tentative Plan Page 1 of 3 requirements for Parkway/Sugar Pine Court per the approved Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plans. 2. No other exceptions, other than those addressed in the Plan Unit Development application (file 07032}, will be granted. 3. The public pedestrian access easement from the development to Don Jones Park shall be identified on the Final Plat. 4. Prior to submitting an application for Final Plat, the design of the intersection of Sugar Pine Court and North Mountain Avenue shall be approved by the City. The objective of this review is to assure that the design of the intersection is safe for both pedestrian and vehicular use. 5. Prior to submitting an application far Final Plat, the applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Plan Unit Development application (File No. 07032). 6. Prior to submitting an application for Final Plat, the applicant shall submit to the City the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions demonstrating maintenance of common areas and fencing requirements along Don Jones Park. 7. The applicant shall identify maintenance easements on the final plat for each lot on the side zero lot line side. Specificity regarding the use of the maintenance easement shall be clearly stated on the title/signature page of the final plat to be recorded with the County. $. The City of Central Point Public Works has identified West Vilas as a Minor Arterial; as such the developer will be responsible for constructing sidewalks and a landscape row, with street trees, for the West Vilas Road frontage. 9. Prior to submitting an application for Final Plat, the applicant must obtain a portion of Don Jones Park for legal access to the development to make the connection from Parkway Drive/Sugar Pine Court to North Mountain Avenue. 10. Conditions as listed by the Jackson County Roads (Attachment "G"), Fire District 3 (Attachment H} and Rogue Valley Sewer Services (Attachment J). ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS: Attachment "A" - Tentative Plan Attachment "B" -Planning Department Findings Attachment "C" -Applicant's Findings Attachment "D" -Public Works Staff Report Attachment "E" -Building Department Staff Report Attachment "F" - RRVID Correspondence Attachment "G" -Jackson County Roads Comments Attachment "H" -Fire District No. 3 Comments Attachment "I" -Jackson County Surveyor Comments Clark Tentative Plan Page 2 of 3 Attachment "J" - RVSS Correspondence Attachment "K" _ Proposed Resolution ACTION: _ _ Consider approval far a Tentative Plan application to create S3 zero lot line single family lots. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Tentative Plan application per Staff Report dated March 6, 2007 including all attachments and exhibits to create S3 zero lot line single family lots. Clark Tentative Plan Page 3 of 3 ATTACH~Ii~~T "~" relvrR rlve ru r - F~RKWt1 Y Sfl13DIVISlON _ ~ LoctTtad is !Le N.~Y. f/4 0l Sec 1, T3'/S, JL2iT, fY G1lp of Ccnlral Polnl larkmn Caanfj O~~oa N 6 y 3 rmrrr x.r r i R !f'FaP MGRS 1tOkU R ~^r -t s .~+~ s ~; ~ ~~o Taa ir .. ~r~ n c ~n I ~TV rz per., n«i _ N ~LEVF]b~.~ TT > 1 _ 1~ :R I a10T. e n ,.., r ;~ I Inr u 1 ae.Ln 1 ~ ~+ 1° T 1 ~ptt ~ 1 ~fon t ; ~ li _~~ ~ ~ u ua i n wr 1~ las n I ~mun I h a f aaST~ I I I rr ~~~ u~ -_ sc~u~-Y 1 ~ i wan L_~ ____ ...~.^~.~~ I ~ li I g ~~n j I wl f u r 1_~_._....`____'I r~nTm rt ~ ! I a 1 vr~c~i ~ I ~ ! c w m': ° ~ 1 1~ b~` ~ T F 1 . - ~:'a~' `b J>MiM 6trs -- ~ ~ S ~ safc ~_ €€r i i 1 ~ I F S ! au pn cavwn I .w~. m rt I I' ~ ~ i ; ~ Ta r ! -rtiua-~r--~i _ _ 1~ -yL~.~i~r7~~ I a~a i r f ~~''' u~lTd ~. I Q I ru 1 W m I I T ~` I u n~ I aw m rr l l i 1 a~ A 1 1 wsi I l>mtM cars I Jm m n 5'wac Mir \~ ixR ao rt i ~ I ~ 'arx I ~ ~ ~ .~~ ~ i i ~: ~^ .sec ~wcJ~~ 1 , i ~ F ~#~ x° >p R F I j sc T ~i ~ j ~v r k ~Tm I ~` I S.e I ~ ~ '°"° 1 !OT ° F i4loh k I _ ri. I C i 1 I m >a Inr 1 i zq v~ ,mn~r eaac d ~ w I rl i I ~~ rw r is ''~ ~ ~ s~, tl $' RI ~O' I n I r- ~r.-sar. - 1 _it ~ I srsra.t ~~ i L ~_~ ~~ ~j~ F. I i i ~=n 1 3 T ~ 1 ~ ~ 1 loan 1 a~ mis ~ ~II I T E i ~:en I F uws-yY u m 1 i i ~ ~ ; j F4 em aw n.y. I~ 1 ~ ~ I pTf I F F C I ~ ~ T I ~ I ~y ~P ~p 9 i I~ P ]z5 In °I au ~Tt ~an I rra° ~Ca~A!~ittt - em -___ ~ { ~ ! I I _.4~ 1 ~ + _+ I wq lon iFSFHJ. WIIY ~ ~p~ 1i 'f T ~P/ ~• 6 w-~ nse ~ ~ r Di ~ .o.n i L1T S ~t t K+`6sAwr [wPT a~ ww~w ti r , ~ °~~ ~ f~~u •. k IIRCS~ M[ q K MA[e G~r.V om --•--.~_~- c ar.....___-~...q• ~~ i~ ._ ._.__ _ ax~ r v~.a~ aern r ~.~~ ~nm .. __....._ _ 4 I O~XG4 Te EO•S OYKFY tZ 702 $M'!pY lMnd9id~Nl lYeafr iYllua+e ti ~ 14fn4 GafCT3 I ~ ~' 8 ~ ~ ~ .~ ry ~i[W W 2f LisF 1 IWe! ffi C; ~P f wame; .ate a;.~r ~~, IAVO SWE1rYA~2 Ja]W lai A SO] ! ]e7 ~, ~-f ~ f ICM~ FxRt~JM !%e 9aan' amt U•'~ ~~ r~~. TtlMi. ac wmt rae ee~-FSa f_1. rwr ~wssa~l~ r b 1 ~~~~~1~~ i6 ~ 99 Finding of Fact And Conclusions of Law City File No. D7D25 Applicants: Heritage Development, Inc. Introduction: The applicant has submitted an application for consideration of a Tentative Plan in association with City Fiie No. 07032 for a Planned Unit Development. The applicant is proposing 53 zero lot line single family residential lots located within an R-2, Residential Two Family zoning district. 16.10.410 Submission of application--Filing fee. The applicant shall submit an appIicatian and tentative plan together with improvement plans and other sacppletnentary material as maybe required to indicate the deveIoprztent plan and shall submit ten copies to fhe city together z~lith a~ling fee de, fined in the city's adopted planning application fee schedule. Tl~e diagrams submitted shall consist of ten copies at the scale specified in Section 1b,10.0.20 and one copy in an eiglit- and-ane-half-inch by eleven-inch format. (Ord. 178b ~4, 1998; Ord. 1684 ~6, 1993; Ord. 1650{part), 1990). Findings: The applicant submitted all of the required supplementary material and fees necessary to deem the application complete. ConCIuSIOn: The applicant has met this criterion. 16.10.07.5 Application and revie~r--Fees. Applicatia~zs and review thereof shall cotzfornT to the provisions of Chapter 17.05 and all applicable city ordinances and Laws of the state. All costs of adminlstYRtl7Je rind legal staff time costs, plans checks, construction inspection, preparation of agreemenfs, in excess of the filing fee, shall be borne by the applicant and paid upon billing by city. Failure to pay such costs as billed shall constitute grounds for denial of final plat approval or building permits. {Ord. 1650(part), 1990). Findings: Per Section CPMC 7.'7.05, this application is classified as a Type III process, which requires apre-application meeting. The applicant satisfied this requirement on November 9, 200b. Conclusion: The applicant has met Phis criterion. 16.10.020 Scale. The tentative plan shall be drawn on a sheet eighteen by fzvetzty four inches in size ar a multiple thereof at a scale of one inch equals ot~e hundred feet or, for areas over one \\Serverzilla\pl\2007 Land Use Files\07025 Clark - Vilas Tentative Plan\Finding of Fact.doc Page 1 of 6 hundred acres, one inch equals tzc~o hundred feet, and slraIl be clearly and legibly reproduced. (Qrd. T b50(part), 1990). Findings: The applicant has submitted tl~e required supplementary materials. Conclusion: The applicant has met this criterion. 16.10.030 General inforrnatinn. T'he following general information shall be slrozvn orr or included zcrith the tentative plan: A. I"'roposed name of the subdivision. This name roust not duplicate or resemble the name of another subdivision in t17e counta~; Findings: The proposed name of the subdivision (Parkway} will not be approved by Jackson County Surveyor's office. There is already a subdivision in Jackson County with that name. The applicant must come up with a new name and receive approval from the Jackson County Surveyors office prior to submitting a final development plan and final plat applications. Conclusion: The applicant will meet this requirement. B. Date, northpoint, and scale of drat{ring; C. Location of the subdivision by section, toznnship, and range, and a legal description sufficient to define the location and boundaries of the proposed tract or the tract designation or other description according to the records of the counh~ assessor; D. Names and addresses of the owner or owners, applicant and engineer ar sur Ueyor; E. A title report indicating all interests of record in the properhj which is the subject of the application. (Ord. T 650(part), T990). Findings: The applicant has provided all of the above listed information. Conclusion: These requirements have been met. 16.10.040 Existing conditions. T']ie following existing conditions shall be shown on the tentative plan: A. The location, zcridths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the tract, easements, railroad rights-of--way and such other important features within or adjacent to the tract as may be required by the city; S. Contour lines related to same established bench mark or other datum as approved by floe cihj when the city determines that the nature of the topography or size of the subdivisionz requires such data. Contour lines shall have the folIozving minimum intervals: 1. Tzcro foot contour intervals for ground slopes less fhar~ five percent; 2. Five foot contour intervals for ground slopes exceeding five percent; \\Serverzilla\pI\2407 Land Use Files\47x25 Clark - Vilas Tentative Plan\Finding of Fact.doc Page 2 of b Conclusion: The applicaz-~t has met this criterion. 16.10.060 Partial develapznent. When the property to be subdivided contains oyily part of the tract azuned ar controlled by the applicant, the city lazay require a developrrrent plan of a layout for streets, numbered lots, blocks, phases of develapanent, and other impraver~ients in the undivided portion, indicating inter-relationship zc~ith the portion sought to be divided. The city shall have authority to require that any adjacent parcel or parcels ozl~ned or controlled by the applicant but not included in the proposed subdivision boundaries be included in the development whenever inclusion of such parcel or parcels would be an appropriate exfension of the development and in the best interests of the public, considering the development plan and the relationship between the surrounding area and the area of proposed development. (Ord. 1662 ~I, 1991; Ord. 1650(part), 1990). Findings: The applicant has identified that this project, if approved, would be developed in two (2) phases with the first phase closest to West Vilas Raad. The improvements required and at what time would be determined and approved by the Public Works Department. Conclusion: The applicant has met this criterion or will meet the required improvements to be made as determined by the Public Works Department during the completion of each phase. 16.10.070 Explanatory xnfarmation. Any of the fallowing information may be required by the cit€~ and if it cannot be shazvn practicabl y on the tentative plan, it shall be submitted in separate statements accompanying the tentative plan: A. A vicinity map showing all existing subdivisions, streets and unsubdivided land ownerships adjacent to the proposed subdivision and showing how proposed streets may be connected to existing streets; B. Proposed deed restrictions in outline form; C. Approximate centerline profiles showing the proposed finished grade of all streets, including the extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision; D. The approximate location and size of alI proposed and existing water and sewer lines and storm drainage systems. (ord. 1650(part), 1990). Findings: The applicant has provided the applicable items relevant to this pxoposal. The proposed conzlection via Sugar Pine Court shall be determined and approved by the Parks Commission and City Council. Conclusion: The applicant has met this criterion. 16.10.0$0 Tentative plan approval. \\Serverzilla\pl\2007 Land Use Files\07025 Clark - Vilas Tentative Plan\Finding of Fact.dac Page 4 of 6 Approval of the tentative plan shall not constif.ute final acceptance of the f nal plat of the proposed subdivision or partitiatt for recording; hozc~ever, approval of the tentative plan shall be binding upon city for the purpose of the approval of the f nal plat if the fctial plat is in substantial compliance zi~ith the tentative plan and any conditions of approval thereof. The action of the council in approving flee tentative plan shall be noted on tzi~o copies thereof, including reference to any attached docuttietits describing any cotiditians. one copy of the tentative plate shall be returned to the applicant and the oilier retained in the city files with a raiernorandum setting forth the action of the coutici2. (Ord. 1b50(part}, 1990}. Findings: The applicant shall meet all of the recommended conditions of approval associated with the CUP, PUD and Tentative Plan applications prior to acceptance of the final plat far recording. Conclusion: City staff shall ensure that the conditions of approval have been met prior to signing the final plat for recording. I6.~0.090 Candztions an tentative plan approval. The cityy tray attach to any tentative plan approval given icnder this chapter specific conditions deemed necessary in the interests of the public health, safety or welfare, including but not litaiited to the following: A. Construction and installation of any an-site or off site itaiprovements, including but not limited to sidewalks, curbs, gutters, streets, street signs and street lights, traffic control signs and signals, water, storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and park and recreation improvements. In requiring off site improvements, the city shall find that said improvements are reasonably related to the deveIapnient and would serve a public purpose such as mitigating negative impacts of the proposed develaptaient. All improvements required under this subsection shall be made at the expense of the applicant, and shall conform to the provisions of the Standard Specifications and I.l~niform Standard Details for Public Works Construction in the City of Central Point, Oregon, l~ozvever, the city, in its discretion, may modifi~ such standards and determine site-specific design, engineering and construction specifications when appropriate in the particular development; B. An agreement by the owner of the praperh~ to zc~aive, on his or her behalf, and on behalf of all future owners of the land, any abjection to the formation of a local improvement district which may be formed in the future to provide any of the improvements specified in subsection A of this section; C. An agreement by the owner of the property to enter into a written deferred improvement agreement, providing that one or mare of the improvements specified in subsection A of this section shaII be made by the owner at sotaie future fime to be determined by the city; \\Serverzilla\pI\2007 Land Use Files\07025 Clark - Vilas Tentative Plan\Finding of Fact.doc Page 5 of 6 D. Aaz~ agreement entered into pursuant to subsectiolzs B or C of this section shall be recorded in the coi~tzty recorder's office and slzaIl he intet7ded to thereafter run zcTitlt the land, so as to bind future ozc~ners of the lands affected. And acid rill recordirTg costs sl~all be borne by the applicant; E. Anp other conditions deemed b~ the citJ to be reasonable and necessary in the interests of the public health, safety or zvelfare. (Ord, 1G&4 §7, 1993; Ord. 16b2 §2, 1991). Findings: Deferred lmpravement Agreements are na longer accepted by the City. Conclusion: All improvements listed above, improvements specified by the City Public Works and improvements referenced by the February 15, 2007 Public Works Staff Report can be monitored in conjunction with the City Public Works. \\Serverzilla\pl\2007 Land Use Files\07025 Clark - Vilas Tentative Plan\Finding of Fact.dac Page b of 6 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION ~ FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ~ ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF ) WEST VILAS ROAD AND WEST OF TABLE ) ROCK ROAD; THE SUBJECT SITE IS ) FINDINGS OF FACT DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR'S MAP NO. ) AND T.37S-R.2W-SEC. 01 BA, TAX LOTS v00, ) CONCLUSIONS & 70tf; DALE CLARK, HERITAGE DEVELOP- ) MENT CORPORATION, THE APPLICANT, ) PARKWAY SUBDIVISION, A PLANNED } UNIT DEVELOPMENT~_,._,PROJECT.,.,_ ) RECITALS: Owners- Dale Clark Dennis Patterson Heritage Development PO BQx 14~ 0 3365 Snowy Butte Lane Eagle Point, OR 97524 Central Point, OR 97502 Consultants- Richard Stevens & Associates, lnc. PO Box 4368 Medford, OR 9750'1 Property Description- ~ 37-2W-O~BA, Tax Lots 500 & 700 Acreage- 7.1 ~ gross acres Zoning- R-2, Residential Two-Family District Land Use- Detached Single Family Residential NARRATIVE: The purpose of this Planned Unit Development application for Parkway Subdivision is to establish a detached single family dwelling project. The project includes requests to deviate or take an exception from the Code for side yard setbacks and exceptions to the lot area and lot width standards for the land use designation present, R-~ Residential Two- Family District via fhe Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. The purpose of this PUD application is to identify the residential lotswith the requested exceptionswithin the subject property. The intent of Parkway Subdivision is to provide for entry level housing on narrow lots for the future residents of Central Point. This process affords both the City and the Developer assurances that the land use modifications are agreed upon and established by a review process. The attached site plans adequately defines the proposed residential uses for the property. The proposed development for detached single family homes on narrow lots, with the requested exceptions, is to provide forzero lot line dwellings. These dwellings will have a zero side yard setback on one side of the lot with a minimum of 5 feet to the other side yard setback. This style of development still provides usable private backyard outdoor living area, to assure that the livability of the neighborhood is maintained. The differing styles of homes proposed on the lots have considered the placement or design of windows on the house to support privacy for the occupants. The applicants have submitted a landscape plan, in conjunction with this PUD application. The applicant will provide landscaping in accordance with the Centro! Paint Parks Department far the street scope along West Vilas Road, Parkway Drive and Sugar Pine Court. The nature and planned use of the proposed Parkway Subdivision PUD is to provide for a detached single family residential development within an R-2 zoning district. The ownership of Parkway Subdivision a PUD is held by Dale Clark with Heritage Development Gorp and Dennis Patterson. The proposed development schedule is to construct the project with two separate phases, starting in 2007. The engineering and design will include the entire area, while the improvements and construction will be conducted per respective phase, as soon as fhe infrastructure is in place for the development. The total net acreage for the Parkway Subdivision PUD site consists of 7.~ 1 acres. There will be maintenance ofthe common areas (private minimum access} that will be the responsibility by owners of property that are served by these access ways, and the costs will be accrued with the mutual access and maintenance agreements that will run with the PUD. A copy of the Homeowners Association and CC&R's are attached for review and will be submitted with the Final PUD Plan for compliance. 2 GHAPT_E_R 1,7.24,_CPMC: 17.24.010: The purpose ofi the R-2 district is #o promote and encourage a suitable environment forfamily life at a slightly higher density than that permitted in the R-1 district, and also to provide opportune#ies for the development ofi lower cost duplex and attached dwellings. Where this district is applied to areas of existing single-family homes, the intent is to preserve the low density neighborhood character, promote continued home maintenance and rehabilitation, and allow replacement housing at slightly higher densities tha# is compatible with the overall character. of the neighborhood. 5ubsectian 17.24.030(G) identifies that Planned Unit Developments are a Conditional Use within the R-2 district. The demonstration of compliance with the CPMG are addressed below for this PUD application. APPROVAL CRITERIA: The applicafion procedures and applicable approval criteria fora Planned Unit Development within the R--2 districf are listed in Sections 17.68 and 17.75 Cen#ral Point Municipal Code {CPMG}. The criteria are: CHAPTER 17.76, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 17.76.0'30, Purpose: Irt certain districts, conditional uses are permitfed subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. Because of their unusual characteristics arthe special attributes of the area in which They are to be located, conditional uses require specia! consideration so that they maybe properly locafed wifh respect fo fhe objectives of the zoning title and their effect on surrounding properties. 17.76.040, REQUIRED FINDINGS: 17.76.040(A}: That the site for fhe proposed use is adequate in size and shape fo accommodate the use and to meet all other development and lot requirements of the subject zoning district and alI other provisions of this code. 3 Discussion: Parkway Subdivision area #otals 7.71 gross acres of land that is suitable in size for residential development. The proposed development is a zero lot line development for single family dwellings on narrow lots. This is similar to a duplex development with the addi#ion of a boundary line to separate the dwelling units. There are exceptions to the Code that are being requested and discussed below, alE other provisions of the Code can be met. The proposed development does meet the density requirements and is suitable far residential uses as outlined within the Comprehensive Plan. FINDING; The City of Central Point can find that the size of Parkway Subdivision area is suitable for the proposed development as zero lot line single family dwellings. With the requested exceptions the project meets all other standards of the Code. 17.76,040(6): That the site has adequate access fo a public street or highway and fhaf the street or highway is adequate in sizE and condition to effectively accommodate the traffic fhaf is expected to be generated by the proposed use. Discussion: The subject property has direct road frontage on West Vilas Road, along the northern boundary. The proposed Parkway Drive will eventually connect with North Mountain Avenue via. Sugar Pine Court, to enhance street circulation in the neighborhood. There is sufficient street capacity to accommodate the proposed 53 dwelling units on the subject site. FINDING: The City of Central Point can find that there is sufficientstreet capacity an ~lVest Vilas Road and North Mountain Avenue to provide adequate access for the project site and the development of 53 single famiily dwelling units. 17.76.040(C) Thaf the proposed use will have no significant adverse etfecf on abutting property or the permitted use (hereof. r-licri~ccinn• The proposed development of the site for residential purposes will not have a significant adverse impact on surrounding lands. The location ofthe site with the R-2 district is bound by R-1 zoning to the north (across West Vilas Road), south and west, excluding Tax Lot 600 James Clark property. Tax Lot 600 is also zoned R--2 and contains a single family dwelling. With the proposed Parkway Drive along the eastern boundary, Tax Lot 600 can feasible be redeveloped. The {and towards the west is planned to be a new City park "Don Jones Park". The proposed uses on the subject property are identical in character to the existing urban residential uses. With the similar uses proposed, no impacts on their permitted uses are anticipated. The property east of the project site, along West Vilas Road is zoned C-1 a commercial zone in the Gity. The other properties to the east and along a portion of the southern boundary are zoned M-1 an Industrial zone. Any future development of these lands will not be adversely impacted from the subject site and design of the project. In addition, Parkway Subdivision is proposing a 6 foot solid vinyl fence along the common boundary along with an evergreen vegetative screen. These commercial/industrial lands have frontage along Table Rack Road and West Vilas Road to create a commerciallindustrial street system. This will keep the commercial truck traffic separated from the residential neighborhoods. These commerciallindustrial lands can be developed consistent with the Central Point Municipal Code provisions. F1NDlNG: The City of Central Point can find that the proposed residential uses - wiil not have a significant adverse effect on the abutting properties ability to develop consistent with the Code provisions. 17.76.040(D) Thaf fhe esfablishmenf, mainfenance oroperafion of fhe use applied forwill comply with local, state and federal health and safety regulations and Therefore will not be defrimental to fhe health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in fhe surrounding neighborhoods and will not be defrimental or injurious to fhe property and improvemenfs in fhe neighborhood or fo fhe general welfare of the communify based an fhe review of those facfors Listed in subsection (C} of This section. Discussion: The proposed use of the site is for detached single family dwellings. The proposed Parkway Subdivision will comply with all safety and health regulations through the engineering standards and requirements for public water, sanitary sewer and street circulation. 5 Appropriate measures have been included in the site plan to ensure that the health, safe#y and general welfare of residents and businesseslemployees will not be significantly impacted, particularly to the east of the site. These include fencing and an evergreen vegetative screen. FINDING: The Gity of Central Point can find that Parkway Subdivision PUD will have the engineering and design cansistentwith Local, state and federal regulations. In addition the project does include buffering measures to ensure that the general health, safety and welfare are protected far the community as a whale. 17.7G.040{E) That any conditions required for approval of the permit are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare... Discussion: The applicant is agreeable to any reasonable conditions for approval of the PUD application, in the event that evidence is presented to warrant the condition to mitigate the concern. FINDING: The City of Central Point can find that the applicant is willing to accept reasonable conditions, consistentwith the Code provisions to mitigate any.warranted concerns for public health, safety and general welfare. CONCLUSIONS: The City of Central Point concludes that the size of Parkway Subdivision being 7.11 grass acres is suitable for the proposed development as zero lot tine single family dwellings. With the requested exceptions to the Code development standards, the project meets all otherstandards of the Code for the R-2 district. The City concludes that there is sufficient street capacity on West Vilas Road and Nor#h Mountain Avenue, with improved street connectivity, to provide adequate vehicular access for the project site and the development of 53 single family dwelling units. The City concludes that the proposed residential uses within Parkway Subdivision will not have a significant adverse effect on the abutting properties ability to develop consistent with the Code provisions. 6 SECTION 17.68, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS: Section '17.68.0'10 Purpose: The purpose of planned unit development (PUD) is to gars more effective use of open space, realize advantages of large scale site planning, mixing of building types or land uses, improved aesthetics and environmental preservafio~7 by allowing a variety of buildings, structures, open spaces, allowable heights and setbacks of buildings and structures. A PUD should have a harmonious variety of uses, utilize the economy of shared services and facilities, and reduce municipal cosfs of operafirrg and mainfaining services while insuring substantial compliance with the district regulations and other provisions of this code. Discussion: The purpose of this PUD application is to allow for zero lot line detached single family dwellings on narrow Iots within the R-2 district. The project will provide for several styles and sizes of single family dwellings. The square foofage of the dwellings will range from approximately 1550 to 2250 square feet. This provides fora varied residential neighborhood development that will not look like a typical tract home subdivision. The standard size lots fronting on the planned Don ,)ones Park will be accessed by minimum access easements (private drives). Additional offs#reet parking is also provided for each lotto accommodate visitors to the future residents. These common areas will be maintained by the individual owner of the property that ensures that the maintenance will be provided by the home owners thru the CC&R's. With the development of the site to provide detached single family dwellings on narrow lots, when considering the density requirements for the R-2 district, exceptions to the lot area, lot width and the side yard setback standards are being requested with this application. The density of this project and all other development standards for the R-2 district are in compliance with the zoning district and only the design of the project as a zero tot line detached single family residential development justifies the PUD review. The use of public street right of ways, Parkway Drive a,nd Sugar Pine Court, that will include landscaping, bicycle lanes and sidewalks will be constructed by the developer of the project. The minimum access way will be maintained by the owners of the properties being served. The provides an economy of shared facilities for the project, and no additional costs to the City for maintenance. 7 Finding: The City finds that the purpose of this PUD application for Parkway Subdivision, is consistent with this section of the Code, with the exception to the dwelling setbacks, lot area and lot width standards. The provision of private access ways, that will be maintained by the prvpert}+ owners, does not impose a financial responsibility onto the City and the shared facilities also provides for an economy of scale. Section 17.68.020 Size; A PUD shat! be on a tract of land five acres or larger. Discussion: The subject property within the project area contains approximately 7.11 acres, which does meet the minimum ~ acres requirement. Tha proposed PUD does satisfy 17.68.020. Finding: The City of Central Pointfinds that the subjectsite does contain greater than 5 acres to qualify for a Planned Unit Development. CONCLUSION: The Gity of Central Point concludes that the site consists of 7.11 acres and thatthe purpose ofthe application for detached zero lot line single family dwellings on narrow lots justifies this PUD application, in compliance with Section 17.68.010- 020 CPMC. Section 17.68.00, Criteria: A PUD shall be permifted, altered or denied in accordance wifh fhe standards and procedures of Phis chapter. In fhe case of a use exisfing prior to the effective dale of fhe ordinance codified in fhis chapter, and classified in this chapfer as a PUD, a change in the use or in lot area, or an alferafion of structure shall conform with the requirements for PUD use. To approve or deny a PUD, fhe planning commission shall find whefher or not the standards of fhis chapfer, including fhe following criteria are eifher mef, can be mef by observance of conditions, or are naf applicable. A.} That the development of a harmonious, integrafed plan jusfifies exceptions to the normal requirements of this title; Discussion: The site plan identifies the most efficient development of the land that integrates the available land for residential purposes with buffers toward east buffering the commercial and industrial lands. In addition the project is minimizing the wal! effect with a 4 foot fence toward the west adjacent to the park land, with the existing surrounding land uses. The proposed detached dwelling units are two story with up to ten differing styles of homes, to ensure that window placement and livability are preserved. The exceptions requested is to the lot width and lot area standards of the Code. Lots numbered as 1-25, 26-27, 30-33, 36-39, 42-45, 48-53 do not meet the minimum lot width being 60 feet, and the minimum lot area standards being 6,04U square feet for the R_2 zoning district. The R-2 zoning district typically allows for duplex development within the minimum 6,Q00 square foot lots. The narrow lots vary in size firom 3123 - 5179 square feet, each lot containing a single dwelling unit. if the development area was to a conventional duplex subdivision, this would allow for the same or similar number of dwelling units with the development of streets that would not need an exception to the lot width and lot area standards of the Code. All other standards of the Ordinance for development will be in compliance. Another exception being requested is the side yard setback standards of the Cade for the R-2 district. The R-2 standard prescribes that a minimum of 5 feet be provided per story. These lots are proposed to be developed with zero lot line detached single family dwellings on one side of the lot with a minimum of 5 feet side yard setback on the opposite side. Finding: The City finds that the development of Parkway Subdivision is not practical as a standard subdivision with the R-2 district providing for duplex lots. The applicants desire to provide entry level housing for the first time home buyer with detached two story single family dwellings. This proposal is consistent with the existing land use pattern towards the south and west while providing street connectivity. B.) The proposal will be consistent with the comprehensive plan, tl~e abjecfives of the zoning ordinance ar2d afher appficakle policies of fhe cify; ^ISCUS51on: The subject property is zoned far two family residential purposes {Low Density) consistent with Comprehensive Plan designation for the site. The Low Density designation allows for the R-2 zoning district. The purpose of the R-2 district is to provide fior a suitable environment for families at a slightly higher density than the R-1 district. This is typically expressed as duplex lot developments. The proposed zero lot line development of Parkway Subdivision is very similar to the duplex development. The difference is that an additional property line is included separating the two family homes onto individual lots. This will provide home ownership in an area that would other wise be rentals. This low density development will promote and encourage a suitable environment for new residents. Development of urban areas will provide additional housing opportunities for the future residents of the City. The policy of the City is to encourage well thought out developments within the boundaries of the City to accommodate the future residents without enhancing sprawl or need for expansion of the UGB. Finding; The City finds that development of Parkway Subdivision and the proposed uses is consistentwith the Comprehensive Plan designation for the site and that the uses are also consistent, including the requested exceptions, with the zoning ordinance and policies of the City of Central Point. C.) The location, size, design and operafing characteristics of the PUD will have minimal adverse impact on fhe livability, value or appropriate development of the surrounding area; ^1SCU5sian: The location of the site with the R-2 district is bound by R-1 zoning #o the north (across West Vilas Raad) excluding Tax Lot 600 James Clark property, south and west. The land towards the west is planned to be a new City park "Don Jones Park". The property along West Vilas Road is zoned C-1 a commercial zone in the City. The other properties to the east and along a portion of the southern boundary are zoned M-1 an Industrial zone. The size of the project consists of approximately 7.11 gross acres. The proposed use of the site is zero lot line two story single family residential dwellings. .l 0 Livability - Lands to the north and south are currently developed to urban low density residential standards, similar to the subject proposal. Land to the west is planned for a City park consistent with the R--1 district. The proposed uses on the subject property are identical in characterto the existing urban residential uses. Wi#h the similar uses proposed, no impacts on livability are anticipated. The lands to the east are zoned far commercial and industrial uses, there will be na impact on livability. Va1ue- The value of the surrounding properties may increase with the development of the site due to the improvements on the subject site along with the enhancement of the street circulation. Parkway Drive can provide alternative access to West Vilas Road from the residential development to the south. The proposed use is consistent with the planned surrounding area, thus, no impacts on value are contemplated. Appropriate Development- The properties to the north, south and west arelar can be developed appropriately to urban s#andards consistent with the zoning standards. Lands to the east are currently developed to Jackson County standards and are planned for City Commercial and Industrial uses to Table Rock Road. Any future development of these lands will not be adversely impacted from the subject site and design of the project. These lands have frontage along Table Rack Road and West Vilas Road to create a commerciallindustrial street system. This will keep the commercial truck traffic separated from the residential neighborhoods. These commerciallindustrial lands can be developed consistent with the Cade provisions. Finding: The City finds that [ands to the north and south are developed to urban residential standards, consistent with the Code; the (and to the west is planned as a City park consistent with the R-1 zoning and Code; the lands to the east and a partion of the southern boundary are currently developed to County standards, and are planned for commercial and industrial uses, The development of the subject property will not have a significant impact on Livability, Value or Appropriate ©evelopmentto the surrounding lands. 11 D.) That fhe propor~er~fs of the PUD have dernor~strafed that They are financially able fo carry out fhe proposed projecf, that they intend to start cor~sfrucfion within six months of the final approval of the project and any necessary district changes, and intend fo complete said consfrucfiora within a reasonable lime as deferrnined by fhe commission; Discussion: The developer for the project, Dale Clark, has received financing approval to construct the project in its entirety. It is anticipated to have final PUD plan and final plat by springlsummer of 2007. At which time construction for Phase 1 of Parkway Subdivision would occur during the summerlfall of 2007 with completion of the project by the end of 2009. Finding: The City finds that Dale Clark the developer for the project has approval for financing to start and complete the projectwithin a reasonable time frame. E.) That fraffic congestion will not likely be created by the proposed developmenf or wilt be obviated by demonstrable provisions in fhe plan for proper entrances, exits, internal fraffic circulation and parking; ^ISCUSSIOn: The development of the project will not have a significant impact on the transportation system in the area. Parkway Subdivision will construct 53 new dwellings that will generate approximately 508 ADT based on the lTE Manual 7`h Edition. It is anticipated that approximately 50% of the trips will travel west along West Vilas Road to Pine ,Street. The balance of the trips generated may ga east along West Vilas Road to Table Rock Road. There will be na significant impacts on the loco! transportation system in the vicinity. Finding: The City fiinds that the generation of approxima#ely v08 average daily trips will not have a significant impact on the focal street system and that there is sufficient capacity existing to accommodate the development. 1.2 F.} Thaf commercial development iii a PUD is needed of the proposed location to provide adequate commercial facilities of the type proposed: Discussion: Nat applicable. There are no uses proposed that deviate from the underlying R-2 two family residential zoning. The proposed uses are for residential purposes exclusively. Finding: The City finds that the proposed use for the project is strictly residential and that this standard is not applicable. G.} That proposed industrial development will he efficient and well-organized wiff~ adequate provisions for railroad and truck access and necessary storage; Discussion: Not applicable. There are no uses proposed that deviate from the underlying R-2 two family residential zoning. The proposed uses are for residential purposes exclusively. Finding: The City finds that the proposed use for the project is strictly residential and that this standard is not applicable. N.} The PUD preserves natural features such as streams and shorelines, wooded cover and rough terrain, if these are present: Discussion: There are no natural features present on the subject property. There are also.no wetlands present an site. The existing irrigation ditch will be realigned and piped underground consistent with the Irrigation District standards. Finding: The City finds that Parkway Subdivision does not include a natural feature within its boundaries. ~. 3 1.) The PUD will be compatible with the surrounding area; Discussion: This PUD application is not proposing any non-permitted uses. The only proposed use is single family residential, consistent with the surrounding Comprehensive Plan designation and the R-~ zoning to the north, south and west. The proposed uses are identical and compatible with these surrounding existing and planned uses. The lands to the east and a portion of the southern boundary wilt be separated from the residential development with a 6 foot solid vinyl fence with an evergreen Photinia hedge to screen and mitigate any potential conflicts. The proposed street circulation can also provide a separation of residential neighborhoods and traffic from the industrial uses and traffic. Find. ing.: The City finds that the proposed use is single family residential, consistentwith the R-2 zoning districtand surrounding residential uses to the north, south and west, The proposed landscaping and 6 foot solid fence will ensure that the residential uses are screened from the commercial and industrial uses to the east. J.) The PUD will reduce need for public facilities and services relative to other permitted uses for' the land. Discussion: The permitted uses far the R-2 district are: Single-family dwellings; Single-family manufactured home; Onetwo-family dwelling; Publicand private schools; Churches; Public parks and recreation facilities. This PUD is proposing zero lot line Single family dwellings. There will be na greater demand an the public facilities than the permitted uses listed. Finding: The City finds that the proposed use being single family residential is a permitted use and that there will be no greater demand to serve the site with public facilities. 14 CONCLUSIONS: The City of Central Point concludes that this PUD application for Parkway Subdivision is in compliance with Section 17.58,444 CPZO, in that this proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the site and that the uses are also consistent, including the requested exceptions, with the zoning ordinance and policies of the City of Central Point. The City concludes the project is consistent with the R-2 zoning district for density. The exceptions to the Code are the Lot area, Lot Width, and setbacks for the R~2 district. All other development standards of the Ordinance will be met. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding uses and zoning districts, thus, no adverse impacts on surrounding [ands are contemplated. 17.68.450, Preliminary Development Plan: A preliminary development plan shall contain a written statement and maps and other information an the area surrounding the proposed development to show the relationship of the planned unit developmentta adjacent uses, both existing and proposed. Discussion: Submitted with this application are the site plan maps and detail plans with the applicable standards for development. The standards found in Chapter 17.57, Fences, will be addressed during the review and permitting processes. All proposed uses and locations for the development of Parkway Subdivision are in compliance with the applicable Chapters. The site plans clearly reflects the proposed uses and locations fordevelopment consistent with the Central Point Municipal Code. The submitted Preliminary PUD plan along with these Findings of Fact have addressed the applicable standards of the Code and Section 17.68.050 CPMC. I~INDING: The City #inds that this application with the submitted site plans and maps for Parkway Subdivision a PUD has addressed the site plan standards of the Ordinance and has identified the applicable information required for review. 15 ONCLUSION: The City of Central Point concludes that the applicant for Parkway Subdivision PUD has identified the existing and proposed uses on the submitted site plans and has prepared findings to demonstrate compliance with the Code criteria for review, consistent with the standards of Section '17.68.050 CPMG. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: The City of Central Point can conclude that this application for a Planned Unit Development has addressed the applicable approval criteria as outlined in Chapters 17.24, 17.68 & 17.76 CPMC and that this application is in compliance with the Central Point Municipal Code, Central Point Comprehensive Plan, and state law. With the attached documents, site plans and information before the City of Central Point, the applicant respectfully requests approval of this application for a Planned Unit Development far Parkway Subdivision. Respectfully Submitted: Dale Clark Heritage Development Corporation 16 Public Works flepartmerr~ Ci.ye( CENTRAL PAINT C7i eg~an PUBLIC WDRKS STAFF REPORT February 15, 2007 Bob Pierce, Director Matf 5amitore, Dev. Services Coord. AGENDA ITEM: Fifty Three Lot Residential Subdivision for 37-2W-OlBA, Tax Lots 500 and 700 Applicant: Heritage Development Inc., 3365 Snowy Butte Road, Central Point, OR 97502 Zoning: R-2, Residential Two Family Zoning Traffic: Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, a 53 lot subdivision will generate approximately 53.53 peak hour trips (PHT). The City has recently updated the City's Transportation System Plan (TSP}. The recent analysis shows that the intersections of Beebe/Hamrick Roads and Meadowbrook/Biddle Roads to be failing in the PM Peak. A signalized intersection is scheduled to be installed at the intersection of Beebe/Hamrick Road as part of the North Valley Subdivision land-use application. The secondary access point onto North Mountain Avenue must be approved by City Council because the proposed street access proceeds through Don Janes Park. The access cannot be granted without City Council approval. The Council may impose financial or other obligations upon the developer for this access. Existing Infrastructure: Water: There is an existing 8-inch ductile iron waterline in North Mountain Avenue and a 12-inch ductile iron in West Vilas Road. Storm Drain: There is an existing 1 S" HDPE storm drain line in West Vilas Road and a 24" in North Mountain Avenue. Street Section: W. Vilas Road is improved with no sidewalks. North Mountain Avenue is an improved city street. Engineering and Development Plans and Permits: The Central Point Public Works Department is charged with management of the City's infrastructure, including streets, waterworks, and storm water drainage facilities. In general, the Department's "Standard Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction" shall govern how public facilities are to be constructed. The Developer is encouraged to obtain the latest version of tl3ese specifications from the Public Works Department. In general, the plan submittal shall include plan and profile far streets, water, storm drainage and sanitary sewers, storm drainage calculations, storm drainage basin map, erosion control plan, utility and outside agency notifications and approvals. The plan may also include applicable traffic studies, legal descriptions and a 140 South Third Sfreet ~ Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 ~ Fax 541.664.6384 traffic control plan. A Public Works Permit wi11 only be issued after the Department Directox approves the fir-al construction drawings. After approval, the fees associated with the development will be calculated and attached to the public works permit. All fees are required to be paid in full at the time the Public Works Permit is issued. Conditions of Approval: West Vilas Road Frontage Improvements: West Vilas is classified as a Minor Arterial. Developer will be responsible for constructing sidewalk and landscape row, with street trees, far the West Vilas Road frontage. 2. Ouiet Title and Access: The City and the applicants are currently working in collaboration to resolve a boundary and ownership issue regarding the twenty to thirty feet of area along the south boundary of Don Jones Park and the applicant's parcels. Until this is resolved the City cannot legally grant a road right-of way or sell a portion of Don Jones Park to the developer. Until this is legally resolved the connection onto North Mountain Avenue cannot occur. 3. Don Jones Park: The City Council has ultimate authority on selling a portion of Don Jones Park to the Developer far legal access to the development. Until the City Council has given approval for this sell the connection of the proposed Parkway Drive to North Mountain Avenue cannot occur. 4. Street Tree Plan: Tree plantings shall have at least a 1 ~/z" trunk diameter at the time of installation. A11 street trees shall be irrigated with an automatic underground irrigation system. Maintenance of the landscape row will be of the property owners who own the property directly adjacent to the landscape row. 140 South Third Sfreef ~~ Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 • Fax 541.664.6384 Ci>ry of Central Point, 4r~gon 140 So.Third 5€.,Centra€ Point, Or 97542 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 vvww.Ci.central-poi €li.ar,us :~.:;~: - CENTRAL POINT Building Department Lois Ue;3enedetti,8uiiding Offrcial BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE: 12127/06 TO: Planning Department Planning file: 07025 FROM: Building Department SUBJECT: Clark Tentative Plan Name: Heritage Dev. Co. Address :3365 Snowy Butte Ln. City: Central Point State: Oregon Zip Code: 97502 Property (Description: 37S-2W-Ol BA- TL 7001500 PURPOSE: The staff report is to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Applicant regarding City Building Department requirements and conditions to be included in the design and development of the proposed project. This is nat a plan review. This report is preliminary and compiled solely for use by the Central Point Planning Commission. 1 City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St.,Central Point,Or 97502 541.6643321 Fax 541.b64,b384 www.ci.centrai-poi ntor.us ~~.: . ~`~' ~~ CE~T~~,. pOI~fT Building Department Lois DeIIenedetti,iiuilc4ing Official BU~LD~NG DEFA~~TMLNT C4MMIJNTS: l . ~ Applicant, agent and contractors must comply with all current State of Oregon adopted codes, and apply for all permits through the Central Point Building Department. 2. rf a private storm drain system is proposed it must be reviewed and a permit iss~~ed by the Central Point Plumbing Department. 3. Any private street lighting must be reviewed and permitted by the Central Paint Electrical Department. 4. Provide the building department with a Oeotechnical report as required by OSSC Appendix J and chapter 18 of the OSSC. A written report of the investigation shall include, but need not be limited to, the following information: a. A plat plan showing the location of all test borings andlor excavations. b. Descriptions and classifications of the materials encountered. c. Elevations of the water table, if encountered. d. Recommendations for foundation type and design criteria, including bearing capacity, provisions to mitigate the effects of expansive soils, provisions to mitigate the effects of liquefaction and soil strength, and the effects of adjacent loads. e. When expansive soils are present, special provisions shall be provided in the foundation design and construction to safeguard against damage due to expansiveness. Said design shall be based on geotechnical recommendations. 5. Grading/excavationpcrmits are required in accordance with OSSC Appendix ~ and chapter 1 S and regarding any fill material placed on the site. Fills to be used to support the foundation of any building ar structure shall be placed in accordance with accepted engineering practices. All private storm drain work must be permitted and inspected by City Building Dept prior to backfill}. A soil investigation report, and a report of satisfactory placement of fill (including special inspections of placement of fill and compaction} acceptable to the Building Official, shall be submitted prior to final of the grading/excavation permit. Building permits will not be issued until grading/excavation permit is finaled. Exception: 1. The upper 1.5 foot of fill placed outside of public rights-of way. 2. The upper 1.5 foot of fill that does not underlie buildings, structures, or vehicular access ways or parking areas. City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St., Central i'ainf, Or 97502 541.6&4.3321 fax 541.b64.6384 www.e':.central-paint.or.u s ~v`~', CENTRAL poiNT 2 B~riiding Departrrlerlt Lois DeBenedetti,Buiiding pfficial 6. To move or demolish any existing structures located on the property, call the Building Department for permit requirements. 7. Notify the City Building Department of any existing wells, or septic systems located on the property. 8. Any development (any man-made change} to unproved or unimproved real estate located within the flood hazard area of the City of Central Point shall require a Development Permit as set forth in the Central Point Municipal Code 8.24.124. 9. Dust control, and track out elimination procedures must be implemented. 10. Application for building permits will require three sets of complete plans indicating compliance with Oregon Residential Specialty Code (2005}. 11. Fire District 3 will determine Elie hydrant location, as well as access to buildings. The International Fire Code (200}with Oregon Amendments (2004} will be implemented as part of the plan check code requirement for this proposed building. 12. Property lines must be established and pinned by Lic. Oregon Surveyor prior to any building inspections. Any changes proposed shall be submitted in writing by the Applicant, or Applicant's contractor to tl~e Building Department for approval prior to start of work. Feb Q6 Q7 08:53a Er'rin Sills rogue River Vall (541} 773-5420 p2 `~~° /~ A ~ Zrrigat~on Di.st~ie~ _. _. 3I39 Merriman Road Nicdford, ~R 9750I (541) 773-6127 ~'ax February 5, 2007 Cit}r of Central Point Planning Department 140 South Third St. Central Point, 4R 97542 Attn: X.isa Morgan 773-542fI Websitc: t~~{~w.rrLid.ar<~ Re: Paxlcway Subdivision, 37-2VV-O1 Tam lots, 700 and 500 -- a`-70 Z ~ Rogue River Valley Irrigation District has an. irrigation facility known as our Upton Lateral that traverses through dais proposed development. Asub-lateral branches af~af the main lateral part tray thru this property. Rogue River Valley has been assured by the developer That these facilities will be piped fo vur specification and that easements specific to the Rogue River Valley will be issueyd. As ofthis date we have not seen an engiiaeered set of irrigation pipeline plans, or any specifics to the easements. I Zzr~dersiand that due to the topography of this development location, a siphon will need to accoznrnodate this relocation and piping of the districts facilities. Rogue River valley Irrigation District requests that the developer must have an approved piping plan signed offby the irrigation district prior to eornmeneexnent ofthis project. This lateral in a very important conduit to travel irrigation yvaters to the north end of our irrigation boundaries. Easements for the irrigation f~.cilities zaeed to be specific to the Rogue River Valley Irrigation District. This will insure our future operations and maintenance of dais district facility. Please keep the district posted azi this approval from the City ofCentral Paint. Thaialc you, ~~~ .Ief~ Eicher 14~Iana.ger, RRVID ~~~~/1L%`%~07:~F1/;i 13:~'i J,~~~YSOI°~ i~OUi~IT'~' PO~~II~ ~~,1; idc~.~~~~1 `?iii 6`75 P, D~1/~~'~l f~ fi ~~~~F~f~~ 6 1~~9y =a JACKSON COUNTY ao~as January 12, 2007 ~.ZU F3{IS xric hicrncycr, P~ 77n/}Ic & DcvElapnrerst ~rgrlreer 200 MFnlvv© Road 1Nf~Etn Clly, OR Q7503 P~tOrtC: [541) 774~ti23a Fax: (541 } 774-$ZB6 ntemeyrol~f accsancnunty.vtp w,vw.ja cYSVncau~ty.nrg Atten#ion: ~.isa Morgan City of Central Point Planning 140 South Thlyd Street Central Point, OR 9'1502 RE: Subdivision off Weft Vitas Road - a cvunty~maintained road. Planning Fiie: 07025; A residential partition. Dear Lisa: Thank you far the opportunity to comment an this application for Parkway Subdivision. The residential subdivision will have fifty three lots and located on the saUth side of West Vitas road. Roads and Parks has the following comments: ~(. The applicant shall submit construction drawings to Jackson County Roads and Parks and obtain county permits if required. 2, The applicant 5ha~l obtain a road approach permit frorr~ Roads and Parks for any new or improved road approach tc West Vitas Road. We recommend no direct driveway approaches to West Vitas Road. 3. Please note that West Vitas Raad is'a county arterial road artd has a variable right-of-v~ray with an Av~:ra~e Daily Traffic count of 14,787 as of ,luly 2005, one-hundred-yards west of Table Rock Road. 4. Jackson County Roads and E'arks recommend thirty foot radiuses of We$t Vitas Road. The applicant shall provide a sight distance analysis forthe intersection of West.Vilas Road and Parkway brlve. 5. Jackson County Roads and Parks has concerns abou# the partial road at the intersection with West Vitas Road. The width 4f the road would cause safety can'cerns_ .6. Tho Clty of Centra€I point should provide far future eastlwest road connectivity. 7_ If county storm drainage facilities are utilized, the applicant's registered engineer shat[ verify that the drainage system has adequate capacity to acrep# additional runoff from this development. Jackson Gounty Roads and Parks shall review, carnmartifi and approve the hydraulic report including the calculations and drainage plan. C~pa.City improvements or on site detention, if necessary! shall be installed at the. expense of the applicant. Sincerely, Eric Niemeyer, Plr Tra'~ic & Development Engineer I;lEnglrreerfrrgl[JevelopAientIC171 ESICNT f2LE~T147025.vJpd ~TTA~HM~[~T "~~.gy Jackson County Fire District No. 3 p ..,~ 8333 Agate Road White City 4R 97503-1475 - is-~ (541) 826-7100 (voice) (541) 826-45fifi (fax) _ _ ~~~"~~''~~~~~'"`~~ InternationallyAccredited - 2005-2014 ~' ~~, January 4, 2007 Attn: Lisa Morgan Planner City of Central Point Project # 07025 Clark Tentative Plan • Connectivity of street access will be required for this development. Exception: All buildings are provided with approved NFPA automatic sprinkler systems. • Signage and Curb paint plan to designate No Parking zones will be approved by the Fire District and City. • Fire Hydrants shaft be provided every 300 feet, and have a Fire Flow capability of 1500 GPM @ 20psi minimum. • Vehicle impact protection will be utilized if a hydrant is located near a possible vehicle impact zone. • Maintain at least 3 feet clearance to all hydrants this will include landscape materials, • Hydrants setback will be within 10 feet of the curb face. • Street radius minimum R-28' • All other Fire Codes shall apply to this project. Mark Moran DFM Lisa Mor an From; Roger Roberts [RobertRR@jacksoncounty.org] Seek; Wednesday, December 27, 2046 5:19 PM To: Lisa Mnrgan Subject: Proposed Parkway Subdivision Your file na. 07025. 1 have reviewed the native of the planning action application for the above project. The proposed subdivision Warne is already in use. CARS 92.090 states: " (1) Subdivision plat names shall be subject to the approval of the county surveyor or, in the case where there is no county surveyor, the county assessor. No tentative subdivision plan or subdivision plat of a subdivision shall be approved which bears a name similar to or pronounced the same as the name of any other subdivision in the same county .... " The pro{ect will need a different name. The developer and/or surveyor should check with this office far the acceptability of a proposed name, and the name can be put into reserve for that development. Also, the Eproposed street name is the same as an existing street in Medford. The developer needs to use a street name that will not cause confusion in the event of an emergency situation. Again, this office will review the proposed street name and, if found acceptable, it will be placed on a reserve list for that development. Roger Roberts Jackson County Surveyor 10 50. Oakdale Rm 31 Sa Medford, Or 97501 Tel 541-774-6192 Fax 541-774-b 193 RobertREZ@jacksoncou nty.org Et1!~32i'2~0 [i9:3E ,,aaffkk.~ti44:l!~~~,. ~ .!iii~Sili~lu'.IlR. 5G1-E~f;Q i 1?1 ~'~u+~ -~°° flfl ~~ nn Pr;GE f}1 ~ t14 ...___.~_ ~a~u~ r~~~~~~ s~~v~~ s~RV~c~~ ~.ocation: l38 «lcat Vilas Read, Centrtaf Poin4 OR - Mailing Addr~Qs: P.4. Box 3130, CrnaaP Point, OR 7Sf?2~OflflS T~f. (541.) G&4.6300, rnx (Snf) GGq.717t wv~tiv.RV3S.us DcceY~abcr 29, 2006 Lisa Morgan. FAX 664-638 City o:f Cent~~al Point Piaz~tning Departnae~t 155 South. Sscond Street Central Point, Orego;tx 97502 R,e: Parkway Subd~vitsxo>~, Ti1c #07bZ5 Dear Lisa, Sewez~ service ~oz' the proposed developx~iez~t will require a main i.ir~e e~tcnsioz~ from the existi>~g sewer on Not~th Mountain A.vcnue. This sewer mairt~, must be designed and co:ttstxuetcd in a.ccordartce with RVS standards. Tlae pxopcrty is within the NPD~S Phase 2 Stoz7nwatcr Quaiity mariagettltez~t area and tx;tust comply with relcva~zt stbz.mwater quality ~,uideitnes. Feel. Ct-ee to call iiae if. you have atly questions regarding sewer service £or this project. Sinccrtrly, ~. ~~ at-I Ta}~p~ bistri.cf ~nginecr ~~..1U.A.'~'AIAGENCIESICENT~''~~'LANNGISUBDIVZSION120071~7025 PA.R~~WAY SL3BDZV,T,SION.IJOC VG ~ ~u~[~ c ~~o r~Ls ~Tr~cN~n~~v~ ~~.~~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING TENTATIVE PLAN APPROVAL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION TO CREATE 53 ZERO LOT LINE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS Applicant: Heritage Development, Inc. (37 2W O1BA, Tax Lats 500 & 700) File No. 07025 WHEREAS, Applicant has submitted an application for a Tentative Plan in conjunction with a Planned Unit Development to create 53 zero Iat line single family lots within an R-2, Residential Two Family zoning district on two parcels with a combined approximate gross acreage of 7.11 acres on properties identified on Jackson County Assessor's map as 37 2W 01BA, Tax Lots 500 & 700, in the City of Central Point, Oregon; and WHEREAS, On March 6, 2007, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted adult'-noticed public hearing on the applications, at which time it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards and criteria applicable to Tentative Plans, section 16.10, R-2, Residential Two zoning districts section 17.24, Planned Unit Developments, section 17.68, and Conditional Uses, section 17.76 of the Central Point Municipal Code; and BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by this Resolution No. does hereby approve the application based on the findings and conclusions of approval as set forth on Exhibit "A", the Planning Department staff report which includes attachments, which is attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein. PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 6~ day of March, 2007. Planning Commission Resolution No. (03062007) Planning Commissiozl Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by m.e this 6~ day of March, 2007. Planning Coirunission Chair Planning Commissipn Resolution No. (03062007}