Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - February 6, 2001CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA February 6, 2001 - 7:00 p.m. Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 51( I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL City Planning Chuck Piland -Candy Fish, Don Foster, Karolyne Johnson, John LeGros, Paul Luute and Wayne Riggs III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and approval of January 16, 2001 Planning Commission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Page 1 - 26 A. Continued public hearing to consider a site plan application that would allow the constructiori of a four unit apartment complex (four-plex) on the northwest corner of Hiatt Lane and Haskell Street. The subject property is located in the R-3, Residential Multiple Family Zoning District and the TOD Corridor-MMR (Medium Mix Residential) overlay zone on Map 37 2W l OAA, Tax Lot 7200. 27 - 32 B. Continued public hearing to modify a condition and to consider a new location for apedestrian and bike path for Brookfield Estates Subdivision. 33 - 52 C. Public Meeting to review a request by George Gardner to modify the original conditions of approval for .the Parkwood Terrace Estates Planned Unit Development. The subdivision is located in the R-2, Residential Two-Family zone district on Map 37 2W O1B, Tax Lot 2500. VII. MISCELLANEOUS VIII. ADJOURNMENT Plamring Commission 01/16/2001 Page 1 City of Central Point Planning Commission 1 / 16/2001 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Candy Fish, John LeGros, Karolyne Jolurson, Paul Lunte and Don Foster were present. Wayne Riggs was absent. Also in attendance were Tom Humphrey, Planning Director; Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, and Matt Samitore, Plannine Technician. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Johnson made a motion to approve the minutes from the October, 3, 2000 meeting as presented. Commissioner Lunte seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Fish, yes; LeGros, yes; Lunte, yes; and Poster, yes. Conunissioner Johnson, abstained. Motion passed. IV PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. IV BUSINESS A. Public Hearine to consider a site plan application that would allow the construction of a four unit apartment complex (four-plex) near the intersection of Hiatt Lane and Haskell Street. The subject pro>l em' is located in the R-3 Residential Multiple Family Zoning District and the TOD Corridor-MMR (Medium Mix Residential) overlayone on Map 372W36CD Tax Lot 3500. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. The applicants have been working with the City on getting a site plan worked out for the site. The applicants plan on demolishing two older buildings and putting in a four-plex. There is a mature sequoia tree on the westerly side of the property, that the Planning and Public Works Department would like to save. The applicants have been informed of this and are able to reconstruct the site with less parking demands to save the tree. The parking can be reduced because of the new zoning from 8 to 6 required parking lots. The Planning Department recommended to continue this item until the February Planning Commission to work out design issues. Planning Commission 01/16/2001 Page 2 The applicants, 'I"had Feetham, Bruce McKinnon, and Don Miles all stated it would be ok to continue the meeting until February. The tree is definitely a red wood Sequoia. George Freeman, of 249 Hiatt Lane, asked about parking on Hiatt Lane and if cutting down the tree is illegal or not. Commissioner Fish made a motion to continue the review of the Site Plan at the discretion of the Commission. Commissioner Lunte seconded the motion. 120LL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. B. Public Hearing to consider a tentative land petition to create two tax lots of I 1 094 and 28 349 square feet from an existing 0 90 acre parcel The subject property is located in and R-1-8. Residential Single-Family Zonine District on M1p 372W36CD Tax Lot 3500 Ken Gerschler, Commurity Planner, presented the Plamring Department Staff Report. The applicant, Ms. LaFon, has requested partition her lot into two tax lots, one of .25 acres and 0.65 acres. Mr. LaFon would like to retain the existing dwelling on the larger of the two lots and can meet the setback requirements with the lot configuration being proposed. The Planning Department would like to ask that no buildings occur inbetween Ms. LaFon's current house and the proposed second lot. This could possibly be used as a 30' wide access lane for the property to the West that would allow future development potential since it would be unlikely that Jackson County who controls access to IIamrick Road, would allow any additional vehicle access. Mr. Gerschler noted that this application was similar to another near the corner of West Pine Street and Hanley Road where subdivision development engulfed a large parcel with exclusive access to a County Road. Property owners at that time questioned why the City had not assisted in "planning" that would maintain development potential. The Public Works Department is asking for an additional 2' of Right of Way, and a 10' Public Utility Easement along Ms. LaFon's property boardings Naples Drive. Sidewalks will also be required for both parcels. The Agent for the Applicant, Herb Farber, stated he would Like the sidewalks tied to a building permit on the newly created Parcel 1. Also, it is impossible to know if the property owners to the West will ever want to develop their property. Commissioner Fish made adopt Resolution Number 508, approving the Tentative Minor Land Partition of 372W36CD, Tax Lot 3500 subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Exhibits C and D). Commissioner Foster seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion Passed unanimously. C. Public hearine toe clarify the flood plain boundary for Miller Estates PUD and corresponding subdivision phases on property located south of Scenic Drive and east of State Highwa} 99. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. Last year, Plamring Commission 01/16/2001 Page 3 the Commission approved Phase 1 of the Miller Estates Final Development Plan which has subsequently been final platted. One of the conditions of approval by the Public Works Department and approved by the Commission was to place all of the lots in Phase I within the 100-year flood plain. Upton further investigation it has been detei7nined that the City cannot expand the boundary shown of the FEMA, FIRM maps without appropriate justification. In fact, City staff believe that further study of Griffin Creek will actually result in a narrower map boundary. Commissioner Johnson made a motion to adopt Resolution 509, amending the previously approved Final PUD plan, moving the 100-year floodplain to depict what is shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's FIRM maps. Commissioner Fish seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. D. Public hearine to modify a condition and consider a new location for a nedesh-ian and bike path for Brookfield Estates Subdivision Tom Humphrey, Plamring Director, made a oral presentation of the proposed changes. The applicants would like to move the pedestrian walking path from the southerly border of the Brookfield Estates subdivision. Instead of building three new bridges the applicants would like to use the bridge that will be constructed as part of the street. Some issues still need to be worked out with the applicants and it was the Planning Department recommendation to continue this item until next February's Planning Commission. Amr Baskin, of 928 Mendolia Way, asked about where the walking path would be in the Mitchell's landing subdivision. She was informed it is depicted on the Northerly side of the detention pond located to the North of her property. James Henney, of 498 Strait Way, had concerns about the various easements along the Southerly side of the Brookfield Estates subdivision and who will be maintaining them. Commissioner Fish made a motion to continue the item until the February Planning Commission. Commissioner LeGros seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. VII MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Humphrey discussed various items regarding the TOD and the downtown. VIII ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lunte made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Foster seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 P.M. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF RF,PORT HEARING DATE: February 6, 2001 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Ken Gerschler, Community Planner SUBJECT: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review for 37 2W IOAA, Tax Lot 7200 -Greenland Apartments. Owners Greenland L.L.C. 711 Medford Center #421 Medford, Oregon 97504 Agent American Eagle Construction Don Miles, President 711 Medford Center #421 Medford, Oregon 97504 Pro er Description/ 37 2W l OAA, Tax Lot 7200 - 0.27 acres. Zonine: R-3, Residential Multiple Family District Summary The applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for the construction of afour-plex on the northwest corner of Hiatt Lane (private) and Haskell Street. This application was continued from the January 16"' meeting so that modifications to the site plan could save an existing tree from removal and comply with the new T.O.D. standards could be implemented. The subject property is located in the TOD Corridor-Medium Mix Residential (TOD-MMR) overlay district. Authority CPMC 1.24.050 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application for a Site Plan. Notice of the Public Hearing for the January 16"' meeting was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 (Attachment "B"). Since the public meeting was opened and continued by the Commission, no additional notices were required to be mailed. ALrplicable Law• CPMC 17.28.010 et seq. - R-3, Residential Multiple Family District CPMC 17.64.010 et seq. -Off Street Parking and Loading CPMC 17.65.060 et seq. -Land Use - TOD Corridor CPMC 17.72.010 et seq. -Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Discussion: The applicant, Greenland L.L.C. is requesting site plan approval to construct a two story four-plex on a pazcel of property which currently has two dilapidated residences that will be removed. The letter of project description states that the size and configuration will allow four 3 bedroom units each having 2 '/z bathrooms. The exterior of the structures will have lap siding, porches and composition roofs. Driveway access will now be taken directly from Haskell Street. Sidewalks will be constructed along both streets and Hiatt Lane will be chip sealed. The Planning Department has evaluated the project density and building distance requirements for the zoning district and detennined that the development is compliant with the zoning ordinance. The landscape plan depicts grass azeas but will need additional specificity as to the type and location of shrubs and trees. Since there is a mature cedar tree on the property worth saving, City Staff and the applicant have met and revised the site plan to shift the structure towards Haskell Street. The revised site plan (Attachment "A")shows that the trash enclosure has been moved near Haskell Street while two off-street parking spaces have been relocated near the westerly property line accessing Hiatt Lane. The Municipal Code for the TOD District requires one and a half parking spaces for each dwelling unit, at least one of which shall be a garage or carport. The minimum number of pazking spaces required for this development would be 6. The applicant has met the off street pazking requirement by providing 4 covered spaces(single car garages) and 2 uncovered spaces. The Public Works Department has prepazed recommendations (Attachment "D") for on-and off-site .improvements which are believed to be reasonably related to the proposed development. These include, but are not limited to; driveway aprons, sidewalk improvements; site grading and drainage; on-site lighting; paving and utility (water, sewer and storm drain) connections. Hiatt Lane (private) is currently unpaved adjoining the project site and the PWD may concur with the applicant's proposal to chip seal this driveway. The Central Point Building Department has provided a staff report for consideration by the Commission which addresses plan review guidelines (Attachment "E"). Jackson County Fire District Number 3 would like to review a set of blueprints and plot plan from the applicant that shows general information, on-site water storage andlor hydrant location. Beaz Creek Valley Sanitary Authority has indicated that the property can be served with sewer service from Haskell Street (Attachment "F"). Avista Utilities does not request any special conditions at this time. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law: Site Plan Review In approving, conditionally approving or denying the plans submitted, the City bases it's decision H:\Planning\00049.wpd J on the following standards from Section 17.72.040: 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 ofthe neighborhood, and in such a manner to use the same to screen such activities and sights as might be heterogeneous to existing neighborhood uses. The Commission may require the maintenance of existing plants or the installation of new ones for purposes of screening adjoining property. The site plan shows landscaped areas distributed throughout the project area but a landscape and irrigation plan was not submitted. The revised site plan has resulted in the retention of the mature tree and planters along Haskell Street. The Planning Department is recommending the submission of landscape and irrigation plans as a condition of approval (Attachment "C"). B. Design, number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ^ Access is shown to be taken from both Hiatt Lane (private) and Haskell Street. The Public Works Department may require that improvements be installed on portions of Haskell Street to address the increased vehicular demand. The applicant has chosen to chip seal Hiatt Lane. C. To provide off-street parking and loading facilities and pedestrian and vehicle flow facilities in such a manner as is compatible wit$ the use for which the site is proposed to be used and capable of use, and in such a manner as to improve and avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ^ Table 3 of the TOD District and Corridor Parking standards require that 6 parking spaces be provided (4 covered and 2 uncovered). Guidelines in the new TOD Corridor MMR zoning district permit 1.5 parking spaces per unit for a total of six in this case. Staff has asked the applicant about on-street parking on Hiatt lane and been advised that it is anticipated. This may be permitted as logg as it doesn't become a problem to neighboring properties and public safety. D. Signs and other outdoor advertising structures to ensure that they do not conflict with or deter from traffic control signs or devices and that they are compatible with the design of their buildings or uses and will not interfere with or detract from the appearance or visibility of nearby signs; ^ Any signage proposed for the project would require a building permit. Directional signs and building address identification should be installed in a manner that satisfies emergency service agencies. Signs located in sight vision areas determined by the Public Works Standards shall not exceed 42 inches in height. E. Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for the H:\Plann ing\00049.wpd reasonable safety of life, limb and property, including, but not limited to, suitable gates, access roads and fire lanes so that all buildings on the premises are accessible to fire apparatus; ^ The project, if approved,would need to meet any requirements of Jackson County Fire District 3. F. Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations; ^ The project as presented by the applicant is in compliance with the requirements of the Central Point Municipal Code subject to the recommended conditions of approval. G. Compliance with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area and it's environs. ^ The apartment complex is designed to be aesthetically compatible with the higher density development located in the surrounding area and meets the intention of the recently approved TOD standards.. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Plamiing Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Adopt Resolution No._, approving the Site Plan subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the proposed Site Plan; or 3. Continue the review of the Site Plan at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments A. Site Plan, Elevations B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Planning Department Conditions D. Public Works Staff Report E. Building Department Staff Report F. Correspondence Ii:\Ptanning\00049.wpd __..----"mar ---~_____---_-_- t..AN~ _ _.------ ~" " ur~~~ -__ `" ~ lam' VIVA A`-T ~R "" #QO_2g0JD ~~ ~_.1 •m uee ~ ~ , n 8~• W P y~ P (~ (b~ V~. ~ P ~ ~ '~ ts) ~ /~,, 4 ~ $~x~' utJrT ~~ 1fj~ y V ° ~~ ~1tT ~ UK1T U(G) ~, 20'".D„ ~ '~s ~'? ~, W 6AR~p,6>^ ~ f~ _- y „ b2`'b.. d y~ V V., b v PAT, o L r ~ Y a v a y r v y~ W y e ~ L v 'v y v .~~W ~„ W ~~ 1 1 ~A4-~ t3~D F2.-3 ZDKtN6 ~~~~ 20D US~trn~ ~DM ~.~A {4} >~ ~ DOT PRt~' 304 c~ ' 2 BUILT~t116 ~~~ At~A-`':ibD `-~~ ~ GDV~~p v ~ ~ 4~-- P= GD~~ PORC+ ~ PAT•° PATtO - [~p,t. W w w W ~,~ Y W ~ ~ b w ~ ~ t~' ~ ~~ GDS PARK ~ {~rA~GD 46 5C,2 P,t , I,Sa6 5Q PA~tt~ t ~ ~, 2 g~pPT ~tn~rta~- , 2~D ~~' ,~,~ PATiD At~A ~pylrNt~NT, l~bD `.'QP"f p.C,GE55 ~" y a ^ o V w W µ L+ ~ .y 4 ~ W y y 6• q.{,4M ~~, gyp„ 11~~' ~' w rnt y « .~ , b'^~ N J P""y ~ 4 sI 4', b" ~ ~.. 6 _..1' ~, fl- ~ ~a ~S1 ~,, ~v~ ~~ r~ V~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~N m W ~ ~ ~a~ o ~ ~~~ a ~ r~. (~i1U~ ~~ ~~ ~~ _..~eiciz ~~~ i ._ i . ... ® _ _ ,- i -~'~ f t ii e 1 -.. ~a as ---~~ i i i" ~ ! ! i ~i •` ~ , I i ~ ~ ~~ i ~' ~ 3 S f S s ~ r ft / /~cyngf`lf 7- '~~ is Cz Vy o.f Cen tral-. .Po.z~ t PLANNING DEPARTMENT Tom Humphrey, A1CP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Matt Sam}tore Planning Technician Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: December 26, 2000 Meeting Date: Time: Place: NATURE OF MEETING 3anuary 16, 2001 7:00 p.m. (Approximate} Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Stree[ Central Point, Oregon Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review an application for a Site Plan for afoot-plex. This parcel is located in a R-3, Residential Multiple Family Zoning District on 3ackson County Assessment Plat 372W10AA Tax Lot 7200. The Central Point Planning Commission will review the Site Plan application to determine that all applicable provisions of the Central Point Municipal Code can be met. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street parking, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed• in accordance to the City's Public Works Standazds. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, January 9, 2001. Z. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City ]-Tall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. , , 3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the I_55 South Second Street O Central Point OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 • Pax: (541) 664-6384 J ATTACHMENT C RECOMMENDED PLANNING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The approval of the Site Plan shall expire in one year on February 6, 2002 unless an application for a building permit or an application for extension has been received by the City. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan depicting any changes discussed and approved at the public hearing within 30 days of Planning Commission approval. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations . The project must meet the off-street parking requirements for high density residential development, and the parking, access and maneuvering areas shall be paved with durable materials for all-weather use and approved by the Public Works Department. 4. The applicant shall prepare, submit and obtain approval from City Staff for a landscaping plan including an acceptable selection of shrubs and trees and an irrigation plan. Any structures removed or demolished will require a separate permit from the Central Point Building Department. H:\Plann ing\00049.wpd -t rl 1. ti' expiration of the comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to be related to the proposal and should be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the s~une aze available at I S cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at (541) 664- 3321 ext. 291. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staffreports, hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the applications. Any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve or deny the and Site Plan and Variance. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission .decisions. o~~~ ~~o ~.~~ ~~~~ 155 South Second Street O Central Point, OR_9.750.2 O (541) 664-3321 ®Pax: (541) 664-bssv .,. ~ 11 ~~~~~4~N'~ ~ CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DEPARTMENT OF PUBL/C WORKS STAFF REPORT To: Date: Applicant: Agent: Project: Location: Lega{: Zoning: Units: Plans: Report By: Purpose Cental Point Planning Commission January 12, 2001 Greenland L.L.C. American Eagle Construction Four-Plex Intersection of Hiatt Lane (private) & Haskell Street Tax lot 7200 Plat 37 2w 1 OAA (0.27 acres) R-3, Residential Multiple Family District 4 4 pages i10-26-2000) "Proposed Four Plex Apartment Units" Christopher S. Clayton Provide information to the Planning Commission and Applicant regarding Public Works standards and proposed new standards to be included in the design. Gather information from the Applicant%Engineer regarding proposed development. Special Conditions 1. Requirement of 10' Public Utility Easement along Haskell Street (measured from boarding property line) 2. Recommendation of Paving all Driveway Entrances, Exits, Parking areas. 3. Recommendation of Non-Removal in regards to the Cedar Tree which currently exists on property. General 1. Applicant shall submit to the City's Public Works Department (City's PWD) for review and approval, plans and specifications for all improvements proposed for construction or modifications within the City or public rights-of- ways and easements. l " ~~ Green/and L. L C. January 72, 2001 Page 2 2. Public improvements include, but are not limited to, streets (including sidewa{ks, 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 of public improvements shall conform to the City's Public Works Standard Specifications and Details (City PWD Standards) and other special specifications, details, standards, and/or upgrades as may be approved by the City's Public Works Director. 4. 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 installation. 5. No construction shall commence until the City PWD has reviewed, approved, and issued a Public Works, permit for the proposed improvements. 6. The Applicant shall pay for ail costs associated with the design and installation of the improvements specified on the approved plans. 7. Applicant shall provide copies of any permits, variances, approvals, and conditions as may be required by other agencies, including, but not limited to Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), affected irrigation districts, and Jackson County Road and Park Services Department (JC Roads). 8. Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or surveyor shalt provide the Public Works 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 l ~ ~ 1 Greenland L.L.C. January 12, 2001 Page 3 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 {roes, valves, and fire hydrants; water and sewer lateral stationing; modifications to street section; manhole and curb inlet locations; street light locations; other below grade utility line locations and depths; etc. Provide a "red-line" hard copy (on Myiar) 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 map reproduced on Mylar and in an acceptable electronic form in AutoCAD format. The Final Plat shaft 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 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 which shall be as jointly determined by the City PWD and the Developer's surveyor. 1 1. All fill placed in the development shall be "engineered fit{", and compacted to City standards. All existing concrete, pipe, building materials, structures, clear and grub materials, and other deleterious materials shall be removed from the site and either recycled or property disposed of in accordance with the requirements of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 12. Identify easement dedications and widths on the Plot Plan. 13. Easements for City infrastructure (i.e. sanitary sewer, water, and storm drain) must be a minimum of 15-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 five (5) feet from the edge of the easement. - ~~ Green/and L.L.C. January 12, 2001 Page 4 14. All design, construction plans and specifications, and as-built drawings must be prepared to acceptable professional standards. 15. All street and water improvement plans must be approved in writing by Fire District 3 prior to review by the City's PWD. 16. If the proposed development places structures within the 100-year floodzone, how does the placement of these structures modify the floodzone. What affect will it have on the flood plain elevation and floodzone boundary, and what affects will the modification of the flood plain elevation and floodzone boundary have on the existing facilities and properties surrounding the proposed development. 17. 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 of the final street and water system improvement plans for the proposed development. Q The plans relating to the sanitary sewers must be approved in writing by ECVSA, and the appropriate signature blocks must be completed on the plans. Q Copies of written approvals and/or permits from the various agencies involved: DSL, DFW, DEQ, and/or ACOE'.~ 18. Field verify all existing infrastructure elevations and locations (i.e. pipe inverts, curb elevations, street elevations, 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 justification (i.e. calculations, analyses, plots, etc.,) that all connections to existing infrastructure (i.e. street; water, sanitary sewer, storm drain systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,) will not interfere with the effective ~~ Greenland L.L.C. January 72, 2001 Paqe 5 level of service or operation of the infrastructure facilities, and that the existing infrastructure facilities have adequate capacities to accommodate the flows and/or demands imposed on the existing infrastructure as the result of the connection of the proposed development's infrastructure. 20. The accurate locations of the MWC water line and the natural gas main (and any associated appurtenances), and the location of the associated easements with these tacilities, shall be accurately portrayed (both horizontally and vertically) on the construction plans and final plat. 21. Overhead 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 by and between Pacific Power and Light and the Developer. Streets/Traffic Existing Improvements - Haskell Street 60ROW Partially Improved - Hiatt Lane (Vacated) 1. Construction drawings for this Tentative Plan shall include a Street Lighting Plan and Traffic 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 PWD Standards. 25-foot unobstructed sight triangle areas shall be required at all uncontrolled intersections. 55 feet shall be required at arterial intersections. 2. The City PWD shall, at the cost of the Developer, evaluate the strength of the native 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 ~. Green/and L.L.C. January 72, 2001 Page 6 of the native soils and determine the street section designs in accordance • Recommended minimum curb to curb width of private driveways is 12 feet • The applicant shall construct all necessary street improvements to Haskell Street Si.e. curbs{rolled}, gutters, sidewalks, street construction and paving, storm drains) or shall enter into a suitable deferred improvement agreement with the City for their future construction. Storm Drainage Existing Structure ^ 30" Storm Drain on Haskell Street 1. Applicant's engineer shall determine how SD system will work during a 10 year event. System must be designed to adequately drain 10-year storm without surcharging or must be provided with adequate storage to pre vent surcharging. 2. Prior to construction plan approval of the improvements for this Site Plan, the Applicant' engineer shall, provide the City PWD with a complete set of hydrologic and hydrau{ic calculations and profile plots for sizing for SD system. The engineer shall use the rainfall/intensity curve obtained from the Gity PWD for hydrologic calculations, and the negotiated run-off parameters. 2. The SD system shall be designed to carry runoff from a 10 year storm event if Q< 100cfs. use runoff for 50 year storm if 0> 100 or <200cgs. Use 100 storm runoff if Q is > 200cfs. 4. Deed restriction or CC&Rs shall include a covenant or restriction that prohibits the introduction of substances other that storm 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 Tines, and shall drain to the street at the curbline, whenever possible. ~~ Greenland L.L.C. January 12, 2001 Page 7 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 construction by the City PWD; and must be identified and accurately portrayed on as-built drawings. 6. Storm water run-off from the proposed development into any public SD system shalt be minimized and be as approved by the city PWD. Sanitary Sewer 1. All sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system (SS System} design, construction and testing'shali conform to the standards and guidelines of the Oregon DEO, 1990 APWA Standards, Oregon Chapter, Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority (BCVSA), and the City PWD Standards, where applicable. ^ Applicant shall make application for sewer service and construction with BCVSA. A Public Works Permit will be required to construct sewer within the street ROW. ^ The construction plans and the as-built drawirgs shaft identifiy lateral stationing for construction of sewer laterals. Water System ^ 8inch Transit waterline on Haskell Street 1. Applicant shall provide properly sized service lines to the buildings in accordance with the Oregon State Plumbing Specialty Code. Applicant shah pay any associated costs with up sizing the meter or tap required to serve the buildings. ~. Greenland L.L.C. January 12, 200f Page 8 2. Each building shall be served by a separate water meter. 3. Provide construction drawings for the relocation of the fire hydrants. Steamer ports at hydrants located in the complex shall face the buildings. Fire hydrants shall be protected from vehicle damage and encroachment. 4. Specifications for the design and construction of the water system shall be in accordance with City PWD Standards. 5. Lateral /connection stationing and size shall be provided on construction plans and as-built drawings.. 6. Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division (OHD) and City requirements for backflow prevention. An OHD approved backflow prevention assembly shall be installed immediately downstream of the water meter serving each dwelling unit. 7. Construction drawings shall include the size, type, and location of alt water mains, hydrants, air valves, service connection, and other appurtenance details in accordance with City PWD Standards and as required by the City PWD. 8. All connections to the water supply system must comply with OHD requirements. Water will not be "turned on" by the City until such requirements have been met 'to the satisfaction' of the City's designated inspector (currently the Jackson County plumbing inspector). 9. Water system shall be tested in accordance with City PWD Standards and requirements at Developer's expense and must be approved by the City. Site work, Grading and Design, and Utility Plans 1. Applicants shall provide agrading/paving plan(s) with the construction drawing submittal to the City P.D. Plan(s) shall illustrate the location and ~Q Green/and L.L.C. January l2, 2001 Page 9 elevations of the base flood event flood zone and flood way of streams in proximity to the development lif applicable); curb elevations; finish grades; and building pad and lowest f{oor elevations. 2. All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, and/or crawl spaces with positive drainage away from the building. Drain lines shall be connected to the curb and gutter and discharge from the curb face. 3. Applicants shall provide the necessary "rough" lot grading to assure that all lots will drain properly to the curb and gutter, or to a drainage system that drains to the curb and gutter. 4. Provide the City with copies of any required permits and approvals (including any mitigating requirements or conditions) from DSL, DEO, and ACOE (including any mitigating requirements), for any required wetland or flood hazard mitigation work to be performed as part of the proposed development. 5. Grading plans must have original/existing grades and final grades plotted on the plan. Typically, existing grade contour lines are dashed and screened back, and final grade contour fines are overlaid on top of the existing grades and are in a heavier line width and solid. Contour lines must be labeled with elevations. 6. Need to place street lights on plans, with table indicating stationing and offsets. 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. Greenland L.L.C. January 72, 2001 Page 10 Rights of Ways/Easements 1. All easements for improvements dedicated to the City shall have a minimum 15 foot width and shall be located (whenever possible) contiguously along the exterior boundaries of properties and shall not split lot lines. Public utility easements shat{ have a minimum width of 10 feet. 2. The City wiH require a 50 foot ROW width on local streets and 60 foot ROW 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 be approved by the easement's owner in writing, and a copy of that written approval must be submitted to the City P.D. prior to submission of construction plans for City P.D. review and approval. 4. All existing easement locations and those proposed for this development shall be shown on the Tina{ plat with reference to the recordation number and Grantee. ~~ CITY OF CENTRAL POINT BUILDING DEPARTMENT sTAlar REroxT APPLICANT: Name: GREEN LAND L.L.C. Address: 7111 MEDFORD CENTER li421 City: MEDFORD State: OR Zip code: 97594 AGENT: Address: City:_ OWNER OF RECORD: Address: City: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zip cafe: Zip code: 4 PLEX APARTMENT UNIT 148 HASKELL STREET, CENTRAL PDINT> OR 97502 BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMME23'TS: SEE ATTACHED CI:231RAL POINT B~TiLDING DEPARTMENT By;J Dated: jZ ZJ~~O STAFF REPORT.wpdC:VCorel~SuiteB\Template\Custom WP TanplatesUtusiucss Fwnu~STAFF REPORT.vrpd w STAFF REPORT GREENLAND LLC APARTMENTS 148 HASKELL STREET CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 PRELIA~IARY PLAN CHECK REQIJIIZEMENTS 1. Building is an Rl Occupancy and type VN Construction. 2. A geotechnical report is required. A written report of the investigation shall include, but not be limited to the following information: A. A Plot Plan showing the location of all test borings andlor excavations. B. Descriptions and classifications of the materials encountered. C. Elevation of 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. Expected total and differential settlement. 3. Fill used to support the foundation of any building or structure shall be placed in accordance with accepted engineering practice and compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. A soil investigation report and a report of satisfactory placement of fill (including special inspectidns of placement of fill and compaction) acceptable to the ~. Building Official shall be submitted before building permits will be issued. 4. Group R, Division 1 occupancies having more than 3,000 square feet of floor azea above the first story shall not be of less than one-hour fire resistive construction throughout (see OSSC 310.2.2 and 601.5.2.2). S. 1 hour sepazation required between garage section and dwelling section. (UBC Table 3B) 6. 1 hour separation between dwelling units. (tIBC310.2.2) 7. Indicate compliance with draft stops and fire blocking on submitted plans as per UBC 708 required. 8. Guazdrails as per IIBC 509..stairs as per UBC 103.3.3. 9. Egress windows to comply with UBC 310.4. 10. Energy conservation per UBC chapter 13 (Rec Path 1). 11. See Chapter 11 UBC for pazking. 12. Lighting and venting to UBC Chapter 13 Spec. 13. Fire District 3 will have additional requirements that will be noted at plan check. 14. Property line set backs to be in compliance with UBC Table 5A. 15. Plans must be submitted by a licensed architect or engineer (State of Oregon), unless exempt (i1BC 106.3.2). 16. Submit 4 complete sets of plans for Plan Review. ' w ~t ~Acf/rviEN% "~ ,~ BEAR CREEK VALLEY SANfTARY AUTHORIgY 0913 SOUTH PACIFIC NVYIf. • MEDFORD, OREGON 97301-9099 • (541) 503-519) • (Sdtj 779-did4 FAX (341j 6053379 • www.bcvu.ory RECEIVED CITY OF CENTRAL POINT December 28, 2000 Ken Gerschler City of Central Point Planning DeparknenE 155 South Second Street JAN - 2 2001 ~.~. PLANNING BUILDING ^ PUBLIC W ORKS DEPT. Central Point, Oregon 97502 Re: Greenland LLC Mplea, File # 00049 Dear Ken, There is an 8 inch diameter sewer main located in Haskell Street and another located in the access easement along the NoLthwest boundary of the subject property. Either of these main lines maybe used to serve the project. Connection to this line will require a sewer permit and payment of connection fees. We request that the City withhold building pemuts on this building until all sewer connection fees have been paid. If you need additional information, please call me at 779-4144. Sincerely, -~_ Carl Tappert, P.E. District Engineer LIDATA\Agencies\CENTPT\PLANNG100049-Greeland LLC 4-plex.wpd w~ ArKp 11tiGiiK 590 Busitw Ss Parktlrtve eoeo~»os Modford,Orsyan9750t Tskpirona 511d72~528! ToAhee 100~41CS7 Date: X000- /j03f o/ Number of Pages incfudirtg cover: 2 'i'o: Kcn Gerschler "City of Central Poiut P.taraning Department" Fax:.S4f-664-6384 Utilities ~~'AX" RECEIVED CITY OF CENTRAL P01NT JAN -./~ 200i PLANNING tl BUIlD1NG ^ PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. rl Nom: Mike Smith Fax: 541-858-4791 Office: 541-858.4728 800-659-4427 Cell: 541-941-0065 E-mail: mike.smith @ avistacorp.com 7) File # 00049 Avista Y3tilities does not require any special conditions far the Greenland 4-flex. 2) File # OOOSb Avista CJtilities does not require any speciaYeonditions far the LaFon Partition. Thanks, Mike Smith Marketing Design Tech r' N v M atfi601e of Aria Corp. PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM MEETING DATE: February 6, 2001 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey AICP, Planning Director SUBJECT: Public Meeting - To consider a request to modify the pedestriazi path location within the tentatively approved Brookfield Subdivision in the vicinity of the intersection of Taylor Road and Sunland Avenue in the R- 1-8 zoning district (372W10BA Tax Lots G401 and 6501; 372WIOBB Tax Lot 100). Applicant! Owner: Louis F. Mahar/Pacific Trend Building Company 1014 North Riverside Avenue Medford, Oregon 97501 Agent: Douglas McMahan/Hoffbuhr and Associates, Inc 1062 East Jackson Street Medford, Oregon 97504 Discussion• This item was continued from the January 16`h Planning Commission to allow City Staff and the applicant to gather additional information concerning.a modification of the approved Tentative Plat for the Brookfield Estates Subdivision. Since this item was continued at a public meeting, no additional notice was required fo be mailed or posted (Attachment "C"). On May 4, 1999, the Planning Commission approved the tentative plan for the 47 lot Brookfield Estates Subdivision. One of the features approved by the Commission that evening was the establishment of a 10 foot wide pedestrian pathway that would begin near Horn Creek, then extend easterly along the southerly boundary of the project to the Rustic Mobile Home Park.(Attachment "A")The path is intended to give pedestrians an alternative means of reaching the Mae Richardson Elementary School. Eventually a pedestrian path would extend Brad Way and then to Palo Verde Way where an existing path crosses Griffin Creek to the school grounds. Currently, pedestrians must use unimproved right of wayalong Taylor Road or East Pine Street to reach Mae Richardson. Since the approval, the applicant has experienced some difficulty in positioning the approved route due to an established 15 foot wide easement with the Rogue River V alley Irrigation District. The agency has a main irrigation line with two above ground control bores that require routine maintenance during irrigation months. A second issue of concern for the applicant is the additional cost that can be expected with the installation of a bridge located over the 3ackson Creek channel. c~ r`i N ~ The applicant is requesting that the Commission approve an alternative route for the pedestrian path that would meet the intent for safe passage of pedestrians (Attachment "B"). The modified route would travel from Horn Creek to Donna Way between lots 39 and 40, then north on Donna Way to Summerlin Drive. From Summerlin Drive, pedestrians would walk east across 3ackson Creek and then south on Silver Creek Drive to a ten foot wide path between lots 12 anti 13 where the path would terminate at the project's southeasterly boundary. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: 1. Adopt Resolution No._, approving the modification of tentative subdivision with Public Works Conditions. 2. Deny the modification of the tentative subdivision; or 3. Continue the review of the modification of the tentative subdivision at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments• A. Reduced Copy of Original Tentative Plat B. Proposed Pathway Modifications C. Notice of Public Hearing u8 ~ $ROOKFIELD ESTATES TENTATIVE PLAT Located In: The N.W. 1/4 of Section 10, T. 37 S., R. 2 W., W. M. 1 City of Central Potnt, Jackson County, Oregon tt,,,,. £~ w Scale: 1"=100' Date: January 4, 1999 v~.~ i raX Ltlts s4oi & ssol (37 2W tOBA) tt lwe ~ tt,oo ~ &TtlX Lot 100 (37 2W 1088) IMNaow OAepetli 10 ~ ~ ]f6 ~ n k4 ~C JA x pror Rosa" ~ tt m: ' Jm f ~W `~~~ ~ n1 I fw ( orte ruiw I n ae w p~Q twl \ I ono ,arm r."u M y ~ ~w"rO"""' _ ~ 8eneh Mork sea note T~ - - -~ w.YOrrr a ~ ,r wrws~ a/ - •. Ld~+77 n xo - .'7 ~' p nn~w mex i arnonwu ~ R ~ • I r 1 % I n I1M W~ ]r 3e~10Y 'a ~ *+ Ime C 1 I ~ s' I ~ I e.~nw.a ' ueor a r.mw I ' i+~ ~: Ypn ~ k:+ns"i+'ma '3x3 ~~v •I ' yb.~-vs~ iF 1~ wrs.wr I wwuer t t f_~il CQS' `a nVro.a ca P` rYw 1 ~ r S~~rwrJa ~I'aL.nwr I ~ ~ ~. Tit »w 4~ l QU f A ThIf Side of -. r 1 I 1 I U y,~~ ~C~+ Thls Side o! 32 \ ~~ ~ 23 I I a I ,~ I ZONE UNE ~ ~ .q 20NE UNE ~\ \\ py,r/.L ~ ti MW^yr -m ~ { ~~E--Ji R-'1-8 .L7,+ l` ~ R~t~fO ~\v'i~3°3~ R wv 221 IQaI ~ I rV! ~] wwl S)e I I n rm 44 C \ g. \ ~ e, ~~ ~~ aann Yraxtr t ZONE UNE ~ "~ , ~ ~ I ems ( a~-YRke.J Eaetetly top o! honk ~ }T11r~ eYa~. ~ R j, Bench Uoh N f Of 1 r. i yiw. la Bron dies of eenlvdina of HORN CREEK 13$~~wl w~~~~ 'lA al °~ ~k PHASE 1 ~,, Taylor Rood. N.W. Comer "'1! wla»~ a Ir . .•R ~ I ~ 1 , , Opwlwn lmd pain No. 53 pHASE 2 ~` ~ . ""' ..''' Elowtkn~1263.ea ' .3 br . I ~ s.l ~ I ' e3o,8v w , e l 1 . . 25' Salbaek Iina from !ap o! honk 1} r 100 year ~ " 1 ~~ _' FLOOD AREA ~ 1, • 1 `..~,,. n ~ - -~ ~. ~",~ ,~ 'N I ~~e ~ (Scaled from FlRM mop) m r-ia RynA1n0 FOW c Ih yr rw YYOr mm. /_ 38 t 1 ~ n li lei~a+ I Front Yard - 20' 8g$ / t 1 "r' L ( .,C g-~ _ / ~;V wn~ Riser Yordd - 5' ~ ~ ~ ~.IIt ' ' 9 . r~ R . \L.r~ . Geek Side Cr ~ 1 - 26' a IY L' St. s._J (From Top of Ban4) ~ >uw'r~ ,~ _, edS.r ~~n; L.Y r i 12 ~ ~~ - T „ ..... Y.e L ! i 401 1 ! w ~ l r--~`C .w,.r j `7 / 1( ,ou Y. ui w~Rlwl -j ~r.Y~ }i rbL ' 'y ,n,4i i i g .~ v ~w u vi r00o°w n elro n emo nM 4LLm mm,Iln ' YRL n Iw Iw,ln Sr .04 u r•la~aw s. p.,nd,d kkg.e aye,.. ~ 1.ronm1 ~ It<t ZS' Setback IIna4"1QO«n""'1 wm ' ~~~~~aw~eei~'"" -J Oon a Wa >ns+00ioo4~~l top of bank \ t L CeMeYe w~ T wv,Y tt ,00 ~77n1r i~ ~ T~ eexuo a R ~~ ~ a.l n Ree U9 , 1101 ~aeYwe r. a.vwv,.rer nnr leq ourknvwt\ / x~ p~ \ pNt\ bv'~, 1 ' eeJYO. IYrs. es I wimn ya net TSUeayS (nl \xrt \ .. Ezt t~ ~``z~ nisr I»t \ ~ n Se IaK n Ner k n arr \V1 m. RGIRC a MMWIIY lr ie IM, 4 100 ('4 W[4 OWNER/APPLICANT LOU18 P. MANAR/PACIPIG TR1.7JD BUILDIhKs CO. 1014 N. RlVERBIDE AVEr0.JE: MEDFOI~, O 9'1501' l541)r13-4389 SURVEYOR NGI~FDUMR end AB50CIATE89NC. 1062 E. JACKBGN STREET MEDFORD, OR 9'Ibm{ l841) T79-4641 eC{i?OI. DIitRKT• i IRR,IATKN DIkiRICr. RAVID. euurarlcal Dlenaer. ncvea ARCM use Aar ZGNN1 R•I•NIe•1•b IXb1Nl see, vKJNr r'R91'tJeGD UeG ReelpeMlAL Y>r ro e..•. GRAPHIC SCALE (urcr) ( W Y - IOJ It R/W S' 0.3' ~S~ J' CW, 8~e~ ~3~ Nyn.na Y /•-O' CwAad Rao1 ~J ~`cr RECEI'1lED CITY OP CENTRAL POINT FEB 0 1 2001 K.6 PLANNING I~ BUILDING q PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. d G I° I j 8,059sf R=50' 15 10,959sf ~ ~ F 13 3~ sf (ORIGINAL NORTH - -\-_ ----( - -= -'('40:06` - --- `~ ~I ~ o M O a ~~C~~~try~~o--SSf 77C}~e~ntsli P~iint .1'rlll'11~A:t~~~ tB~ t~f Planning Depaz-gnen't 46.17' ~\p~ ~0 •2S 3s 0yov \ •2) A c4- Fa Fs T BACK PAN '~\ 9 888sf 103.14' 12 8,759sf ~ql~f\ \'9Y 1 00 I o I W~ 1 N 1 I w I !I a i I o i I O I ~ to I IM I" I I I I t I I I I I i ~ EXISTING. PROPERTY LINE PINE VILL~ E OF WES ----- =~ ---763.61 ----------~------- r s box ---~`- - 306.81 ______ ~ --------3- ~-------~ - ---- ---------- v o ` ~- - . -- ----~ ----------- -~\~ ~~ S s .T IRRIGATION EASEMEN~ 15' PUE AND\ . ~ ~~o ~\o.\~J , 25' PUE AND `~~~.\ \ . , /~ \ 2 y ~ `~ ~`~ ~ IRRIGATION EASEMENT `.6~ko`~ ` o~` ~ \ (LOT 16) LOT 15 ( ) ~ \'`~ \ ~. \ ~ (LOT 14) \ \~ \ ~ n ~ ~ \ F ~ ' . \ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - Q ~ _. ty o.f e'en trG ~ .Yo.z.~z t PLANNING DEPARTMENT City of Central FdittiE ~xxz~r~r «C„• Planning Department Tom Humphrey, E1ICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Matt Samitore Planning Technician Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: December 26, 2000 Meeting Date: Time: Place: NATURE OF MEETING January 16, 2001 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review an application for modifications, to an already approved, Tentative Plan application for Brookfield Estates. Located South of Taylor and East of Grant Roads The subject parcel is located in a R-1-8, Residential Single Family Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Plats 372W l OBB, Tax Lot 100 and 372 W I OBA, Tax Lot 6401 CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for the Tentative Plan are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street pazking, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, January 9, 2001. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the expiration of the comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 O (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 the decisions described above will need to be related to the proposal and should be stated eleazly to the Planning Commission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the same are available at I S cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at (541) 664- 3321 ext. 291. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staff reports, hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the applications. Any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve or deny the and Site Plan and Variance. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. h' 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: February 6, 2001 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director SUBJECT: Final Development Plan Modification -Parkwood Terrace Estates P.U.D. Owner: Parkwood Terrace Estates, L.L.C. P.O. Box 8060 Medford, Oregon 97504 Agent: Neathamer Surveying 145 South Grape Street Medford Oregon 97501 Property Description/ 37 2WO1B Tax Lot 2500 Zoning: R-2, Residential Two-Family District Summary The applicants are requesting that the Commission consider modifications to their earlier approval of the Final Development Plan for the Parkwood Terrace Estates Planned Unit Development. They are trying to respond to a market that appears more interested in one- story single family detached homes rather than two-story single family attached homes. Their requested modifications are aimed at accommodating this market demand. The site is zoned R-2, Residential Two-Family and is located in the vicinity ofBeebe Lane and Vilas Road. Authority CPMC 1.24.020 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to review Final Development Plans for P.U.D.'s. No public notice is required in this situation. Applicable Law CPMC 17.68.010 et seq. Planned Unit Development CPMC 17.24.010 et seq. R-2, Residential Two Family District 3~ Discussion CPMC Chapter 16.68 describes the requirement and application processes for Plamied Unit Developments. The applicants received final Development Plan approval in June 1999 and the property was subsequently improved and platted. Three single family attached homes have been constructed on-site and one single family detached home has been built (as planned) on the northwest corner of Parkwood Terrace Lane and Meadowbrook Drive. The developer and his realtors have found that the people interested in the homes and corresponding prices being offered prefer the separated or detached homes like the one on the comer mentioned above (refer to attachments A & B). They are requesting that the Commission modify their previous approval to allow the construction of single family detached homes on a zero lot line (a portion of which is depicted in Attachment C). This modification would not reduce the housing density or number of lots previously approved by the Commission, only the location of each dwelling. To further complicate matters, the applicant has stated that a single story is preferred over the two story. Unfortunately, the lot area and associated setbacks will not allow the construction of a single story home without losing a room(s) and that is why changes to some building setbacks is being requested. In similar circumstances the Commission has elected to allow a deviation in the front setback provided the distance to the garage remained far enough from the sidewalk to avoid obstructing foot traffic. It does not appear that the house designs being used will permit an 18 foot setback to the garage. Given the width of some lots, the applicant has also asked if he can eliminate lots to gain width and build some of his homes. These are both chahges that the Commission will need to decide whether they are willing to permit or not. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Planned Unit Development CPMC 17.68.080 permits the Planning Commission to allow exceptions within a P.U.D. for dimensions, site coverage, yard spaces, structure heights,'distances between structures and street widths if an applicant can demonstrate that the objectives of the zoning and subdivision code can be met. • The Plan modification depicts a side yard minimum setback for all of the two story units. Other requests have been made to reduce the front yard setbacks on several lots and eliminate others in the subdivision in order to build more one story single family attached homes. This would reduce the overall zoning density but may preserve the quality and value of the remaining dwellings in this neighborhood. Two pocket parks have been developed to compensate for the increased building mass that has been created by the second story portion ~~ 34 of each unit within five feet of the side yard setback. CPMC 17.68.060 requires that applications for Final Development Plans contain in final form the information required in the preliminary plan (maps, measurements, construction plans, agreements and updated development plan. • A request for modification and attachments have been received by the Planning Department. The submitted documentation appears to be in substantial compliance with the approved tentative development plan however changes are being proposed that would change the Zoning density and setbacks from those previously approved. Plannin~Commission Action The Planning Commission may take one of the following actions in regard to modifications to the final development plan for the Parkwood Terrace Estates Planned Unit Development. 1. Approve the final development plan, based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval as set forth; or 2. Deny the changes to the final development plan based on findings of fact articulated by the Commission. 3. Continue the review of the modifications to the final development plan at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments A. Letter from George Gardner & Attachments dated January 18, 2001 B. Letter from George Gardner & Attachments dated January 25, 2001 C: Final Development Plan modifications- Parkwood Terrace Estates r 3 ;-, Page 2 {Tom Humphrey) It is my understanding that :ve have your support; for this reeuestecl Minor Change, and that the issue has been placed on the Planning Commission hearing far Februar}° 6, 2441. if there is additiotral information you need gteasv da not hesitate to eontr^aet me immediately so 1 can respond to your needs. Thank Yvu_ 3i cere , -~~. George H. G deer. Managing Member Parkxvood Village Park~~°ood Terrace Estates, LLC Cc: Bab Neathamer, 23eathamer Surve}°ing, Inc. Gary Peterson, Attorney .ferry Burns, People's Bank ofCommerce Larry Prank, ~Vndemere Van Vleef a;xl Associates, Inc. Dixie Hackstede; Winden~ere Van V feet and Assaciates; Fnc. ., ., J m Windermere Van Vleet a,~d Associates, Inc. January 18, 2001 Mr. Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director City of Central Point 155 South Second Central Point, Oregon 97520 Re: Minor Change to the Parkwood Village (Parkwood Terrace Estates) Approved PtJD Dear Mr. Humphrey: After spending a considerable amount of time representing the upscale quality project of Parkwood Village located in Central Point, we have determined the attached "Zero Lot Line" concept may be premature for Southern Oregon's market at this time. The issue brought to our attention by the general public is the concern over the coninron wall. Although we have received positive comments and reactions concerning the floor plans as designed, the public has indicated great concern over exterior maintenance, roof repair, as well as other issues that would require cooperation between attached neighbors. It is our request that the City of Central Paint permit a minor exterior change eliminating the common wall, whereby creating detached single family homes. Although the attached "Zero Lot Line" home has received acceptance in other metropolitan markets, the buying public here in Southern Oregon still prefers the independence of individual residences. As a licensed Real Estate Associate Broker it is my opinion that the small change would enhance future marketability, comply with LCDC Csoals for smart growth concepts, as well as improve continuity within the upscale Central Point East neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration Respectfully Submitted, ~~ Tarry Frank Assoc e Broker Windermere Van Vleet & Associates 3~ Leo Zupan, Broker John Zupan, Broker 375 Lithia Way • Ashland, Oregon 97520 ~' ® 1117 East Jackson Street • Medford, Oregon 97504 (541) 482-3786 • Fax (541) 482-4273 ~ ••~ ~~ (541) 779-6520 • Fax (541) 779-2268 ~1~~~~ Parkavood Tenrtce Estates, LL-C. Parkcrtxxl wiltaQe P.t~, Tiox 8{It~t? Medford_ Ore~~on 975tW ~s~11) s2s-~at~> Fax ~5~t1} sus-2~sb, ce11 ~~~Ij s=w-~3a=~ January 25, 2t7D1 Mr. Tom Humphrey, AICP Planninv Direcior Ci#y of Central Paint 155 So. Second Central Poirrt, Oregon s?5t}2 (5a1 } 6b4-3321 Ext. 23Q Re: Amended Ivlinor Changes to the Parka=ood grillage {Parkaa~ood Terrace Estates) Approved PUd} Dear Tom. Pursuant to our conversation of Januat}r 23, 2(}Q 1, please accept this defter as an an~endn~eni to n~ty original letter bated January } 8, 2ft01, requesting a singly. ASinor Change to the referenced PIJi Plan. This amended request addresses three Nlinor Changes. The .three changes are itemized below; I) Per the January 18, 2t7(FS letter l am requesting authorization arty} appacxt=al to allavu both:fit~acleerl rued -etac7aed "Zero Lot Line" Aomes_ This change itz illustrated an the attached Devised Final PUD plan. 2) Reduction affront and rear set hacks on lots ~#3-~l4 as follows; {.See E :hibi€ F? 2} a. Rear setbacks reduced from is feet to 8 feet b. Garage front setbacks reduced from 18 feet io 12 feet c. Living area front setbacks reduced front t8 feet to 1.i} feet 3) Reduction of front setbacks on lots 36-4D as fol2aavs; 4,Soo Exhibit ## ~) a. Garage front setback reduced from 18 feet is lfl feet b. living area front setback reduced from 1&feei to 1D feet 3~ Page 2 in our opinion the requested sethaclcs ~srill have no negative impact an the development and its safety and li4~biliiy standartiis. Park4vnod Willage is blessed. ~vitla. standard.,3~idth city slicers and side~al~ out both sides flfthe stmt. Given the relativet~° straight alignment, of the roadway,. vehicle acrd peclestc•"can traffic ha*;e exeellecit vi~v shy rritlrin:the conrrarutrity. 1'he Par-1,-wood Willage CC&iZ's have very.strong.ianguage prohibiting parking irx fare driveways. `fire a-ssoeiation alstr has a very strong enfvrcemenl program as mandated lsy #lre'L`Cc'~iZ's. 4} Pennssian to allow staff to work lvrth the developer to eliminate up to {5} six lots fratn the. PUff~, by use, of the. "let line adjustrrrent" praceclure, iris requested cirnnge uoulil potentially re~la#ce 1?ark+voad Willab 's lot couatt from ~#51ots to '~9 Xats. Although this poses an extractrdinarr financial lrardsirip err tyre deo=elaper, it may be the single most important step w~e can ~z3~z to provide housing drat the market place is -dictating. in general Lire six (fi3 lots would be eliminated from the folloti~~ng areas; a. Between Lots i 3 and 2(1-Eliminate up to two (2} hots b. Between Lots 2l and 2'I -Eliminate at least one { i). Lat c. Between Lats 2i; and 33 - Eliminate aY least one { 1 }Lot d. Between Lots 5 and 12 - Eliminate up to two {2}Lots We strongly request liexibility on the specific-rots tta be eiicrri€4ated andthe firr~i netmiser to be reduced so brat ~~e earr rnore accurately address the brryer's Heads acrd desires. ; the attached Exhibit # 3. Ati three of these changes are necessary to reenergize the project and maintain the high quality homes we are currently delivering. With over 5Q°fo of Darr population lily years o£ age ar older, single story homes have become the mainstag~ of the housing rnarket. Absent these Minor Changes, our remainint; altertmttve is to significantly reduce the amenitses, features, and gtniity fmisires, of the lrorrres, and afiempt to sell lower quality and lower priced au~its. , Our sales and marketing efforts have encountered a significantly high degree of resistance fmm the buying public fnr high quality attached itetcsitrs~ ?sdditirercally; the market has shown a Strang demand for single story detached Names like our "Sierra" model. Changes in setbacks andtor lot line adjustments are the only alternatives available to create more single scary homes. We fees these changes are minor in scope and.irave no negative impact on existing homeowners, in our community, and certainly no negative impact on surrQUnding properties. Please review the attached letter from Parkivood Village's marketing professionals. - - ., ~ 4 0 Page 3 A#tacdred ~i~i#h #his amended reques# shah be the fnlla3v~ng dacumenLs; I) Letter Iiarre Windemere Van Vteet Beatty snpparting the regnes€ed ehanges 2} Site plan sha~~ing the patt:ratial revised lacatian of "Detaclrexl° l3ames an the Fats. ~) Colon:d readerinbs sho~vitttr the front eteu:rtions, Ufthe ho4nes, being ofI'es~;d for sate 4} Exhibit # 2 showing set back alternatives 5} Exhibit tI 3 shoaa~ng reduced number of .lots in tlae developrnent i# is my~ understandir•~ that issues Ira~~e been placed an the Planning Commission heariri, for Febnrary 6, Zf3t) I. If There is additional irrfarnration yoar need please da noT hesiiate to contract me immediately. Thank 'You. Georges FI. ~clner, Mana~n~ Member Terrace Estates, LLC Cc: Bob Neaihamer, Neathamer Surveying, Inc. Gars: Peterson. Attorney Jerry Burns, People's Bank of Commerce Larry Frank, l~rindemere Van Vleet and 4ssociates, Inc. Dixie Hackstedde, Windenrere Van Meet and Assaaiates, Inc. .~ 41 s Windermere Van Vleet and Associates, Inc. January 1$, 2001 Mr. Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning I?irector City of Central Point 155 South Second Central Point, Oregon 97520 Re: Minor Change to the Parkwood Village (Parkwood Terrace Estates} Approved PUD Dear Mr. Humphrey: After spending a considerable amount of time representing the upscale quality project of Parkwood Village located in Central Point, we have determined the attached "Zero Lot Line" concept may be premature for Southern Oregon's market at this time. One of the issues brought to our attention by the general public is the concern over the common wall. Although we have received positive comments and reactions concerning the floor plans as designed, the public has indicated great concern over exterior maintenance, roof repair, as well as other issues that would require cooperation between attached neighbors. The other issue has to do with the limited number of lots that will accommodate the Sierra model. Since the Subdivision is targeted for single professionals and retirees, the lack of lots that will allow single level homes is of great concern. Retired residents do not, and in many cases can not, navigate stairs leading to upstans bedrooms. We feel minor lot line adjustments and flexible front or rear set backs could accommodate this change. We also agree that these changes would inhance~the value to the entire subdivision It is our request that the City of Central Point permit a minor exterior change eliminating the common wall, whereby creating detached single family homes. The other request would be to allow a reduction in the front set back. By permitting the front set back reduction, we could accommodate more single story homes. The CC&R's currently require residents to park in their garages already, so this request would have minimal effect to the project or subdivision. Clearly the public has requested more single story homes since our project is attracting mostly retired citizens. - - w 4 `' Leo Zupan, Broker ^ John Zupan, Broker 375 Lithia Way • Ashland, Oregon 97520 L ® 1117 Fast 3ackson Street • Medford, Oregon 97504 (541) 482-3786 • Fax (541) 482-4273 ~ rrtuxxr (541) 779-6520 • Fax (541) 779-2268 Page 2 Although the attached "Zero Lot Line" home has received acceptance in other metrogolitan markets, the buying public here in Southern Oregon still prefers the independence of individual residences. By allowing for additional single level homes, the community would benefit by supplying affordable housing to seniors. As licensed Real Estate Associate Brokers it is our opinion that the small changes would enhance future marketability, comply with LCDC Goals for smart growth concegts, as well as improve continuity within the upscale Central Point East neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Respectful)/y~ Submitted, ~a~~~-- Larry Frank Assoc to Broker Windermere Van Vleet & Associates ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~ Dixie Hackstedde Associate Broker Windermere Van Meet & Associates ~~ Lots 43 and 44 (proposed front & rear setbacks) /, - Proposed 8-foot ~~' rear setback Ilne / -' 10' W/DE PRIVATE STORM ~~ ~' DRA/N EASEMENT /.'~ 25' ~ ~ . _ _ r - --------- Orignal 10-foot) rear setback line s 45 m 44 ~ . 42 ~ 43 w Proposed 12-foo Ilvlnq area front se-tback Itne Orignal 18-foot garage 8 livingq area front setbacf~ line -r_-.-- Proposed 12-foot garage front setback Ilne - ~ ---',. - -!~ ~ a ~~ ~_~~" ~Ht i L=48~ f i.~-~ ~ar~Kwoo~ v~~+-A~~ 37 2W O/BD, lax Lots ~ 560/, 5602 RE018'fERED PROFESSlONAi. lANfJ SURVEYOR ~L~~u~! yl~e~h°ar~ R>9rtewa/Date 9~1N2 EXHIBIT #2-b SGALE I" = 20' ~ 20 `}O 60 33, ~fi PREPARED BY: Neathamer Surveying, Inc. L~ 304 South Central Medford, Oregon 97501 Phone (541) 732-2889 FAX (541) 732-1382 PROJECT NUMBER: 01003 DATE: January 2b, 2001 Exhlblt #2, page 2 of 2 ©a~r+ `,,..ip Wlp~ 35'~? rP J t~~ ccap S~;tb PRI~/AT~ 36 ~`~ C3r}gnal 1~-f oot arage g Irving g area {rout Setback line 37 yTORM ~ 38 PropaSedlQ"faot __-- I ~--- '. 34. EXHIBIT #2~~ 3~~ ~ASEM~NT 41 ~, 4Q v~ 4ront 5etaack Ilne -~ _.- --~' _.-- -~- 3~+' :~ ~ ~flF~ t~ptyp 5UR~OR ~RLE 1„ , 2O~ 60 40 2~ _n pR,AiN ~ 39 garage ~ Ilving are.. __-- ~~, ~.3~1i ~~~~'fi ray ~u~ ., ,. ~" ~~ 34' :ti e ing> Ino. Nea~amer Su~trel PR~P~'ED gY. ~~ f rat or 8732 2889 pgonQ 542),732_1382 SAX r PATE: January 25. 200i ~xhlbtt ~ of 3 d PROJECT ~MgER: Oi003 ' a Packwood Viiiage vW ;'~'n'~ae E Jackson A Planned COmmUnity Medford, Oregon 97504 Craftsman Style Sierra A Two Bedroom, Two Full Bath Home Offering 1265 Sq. Ft. Of Living Space on One Level Open FloorPlan with Vaulted Ceiling Base Price $132,000.00 = r Subdivision Telephone 1-541-665-4899 Dixie Hackstedde 1-541-944-3338 Larry Frank 1-541-944-2873 DIAMOND KEY Q Atl dimensions, specificatinns and prices aresuLject to change without prior --$UILDERS, LLC~- ROCtC& °~^° "Where Trust is Buiir" 0 y t~ Packwood Viiiage A Planned Community Winde mere Van Vleet & Associates 1117 E. Jackson Medford, Oregon 97504 Sierra PAr1D _ i .; ~:~. a~,af~' 'A_~,^4 3 .., MASTER M. ggTH >.. .,M.,z,,,.~ t ~T ~ 1 F.~ .~. BORM ~ D..gA~ •AH J 9 OPTKMILL FIREMAGE KIT. n l LIVING _ DttJING M .>i ~n ^~ ~~.nr.A r..en '.iy ~-etA~.i ... .. ... .. ... . PORCH GgFtAGE ~se Subdivisina Telephone 1 547-hf~5-4899 Larry Prank t-.541-944-2R7.3 Dixie llackstedde 1-.541-944-3338 nR dimernions, apccificarions and pries are auhject to change. svithant priar notice Main Level Floor Plan 7265 S. F. hiving / 420 S. F- Garage ~~;. - DIAMOND KEY --BUILDERS, LLC- "Where Trust !s Built" s J -~ ~ I Winde mere Packwood 1/1I[age Van Meet & Associates 1117 E. Jackson A Planned Community Medford, Oregon 97504 Country Style Pacifica 3 Bedrooms 2 r/2 Bath Home Offertng 1585 Sq. Ft of Living Space, 972 Main Levei, 614 Upper Level I8' Ceiling in Living Room, Many Extras to Choose From Base Price $I55,000.00 - ~. Subdivision Telephone i-54i-665-4899 DIAMOND KEY Q DixieHackstedde 1-54 7-944 3338 lorry Frank 1-54Z-944-2!373 ---$UILDERS,ra.c--- ~~ At[ dunensions, specifications and prices are subject to change "Where TrtlSt Is Suilt° a m ~~ A Planned Community Ranch Shasta A 3 Bedroom 2 1/z Bath Home Offering 1604 Sq. Ft. Of Living Space,679 Main Level, 925 Upper Level Open Floor Plan With Man Extras To Choose From Base Price $156,000.00 Winde mere ~~ °~ ~ , Van Vleet & Associates _ Subdivision Telephone Number 7-541-664-4899 DIAM~I1~TTlll ~Y, Q Dixie Hackstedde ]-541-944-33381arry Praak l-541-770-0019 AIi dimensions, specifications and prices are subject to change. "BUILDERS, LLCM ,~„ "LYhere Trust is wilt' 0 M i3 - Winde mere Parkwood Village Van Vlee[ & Associates A Planned Communi 1117 E. Jackson Medford, Oregon 97504 Ranch Style Greerispriags 3 Bedroom 2 %z Bath Home 1525 Square Feet Up-Scale Quality Construction. Many Upgrades Available. Base Price $150,000.00 Subdivision Telephone 1-541-665-4899 Dixie Hackstedde 541-944-3338 Larry Frank 541-9442873 Q Al! dimensians, speciffcatiorrs aad prices are sufiject to change withnat prior ~.,, ao[ice o~iRw~ ,• DI.A,>1~IOND KEY -BiJILDERS, LLC- "Where Trusc Is SuiU" O .. 5Q h Windermere t Packwood Viiiage Van Vleet & Associates ~ A Planned Community 1117 E. Jackson Medford, Oregon 97504 i .>U Gw Contemporary Style Touveile Z Bedroom with Upstairs Loft/Hobby Room, 2 r/a Bath 915 Sq. Ft. On Main Floor, 528 Sq. Ft. On Upper Level 1445 Total Sq. Ft. =`~ q Up-Scale Quality Construction, Many Upgrades AvaiZablel ~~ - ~~ Windermere Base Price $146,000.00 - Van Vleet & Associates fi~ ~~`-': 1117 E. Jackson ~~~ ,, ~~ ~s Medford, Oregon 97504 >° Subdivision Telephone i-541-665-4899 Dixie Hackstedde 1-541-9443338 Larry Frank 1-541-944-2873 DIAMOND KEY 'BUILDERS, LLC-' mr~ A!( dimensions, specifications and prices are sa6fett to change "Where 7ru5[ Is Built" r ,_ J~ ~AR~~~~1 'TRACE ~ ~~fiA~ .. Looted ~in ~~`t~ fdvrthrve~t ~~'rie-diicarter• :of Section -1, Tor~un~h~ • ,: . 37 South, . ~a~ge ..~ yYest; /~1!l~fr.~rnette: MericY/an, G/ty oF. Ger~~crf I~oint; -Jcrcksr~ri County, : ~e~or~ - - i gayer ,~,-.;., , ,,~, . - w- _ •:. /' /~!~~..n~ . 1 ' - ~J{ rte' i '~ + ' '~ '! y .Y^ i ' . + + .. t. • L ~. r:~~ ~ •". AREA' ~}3 y .'tip .` ,~ ,. 4 \ ~ . ~ 4 r . - ' ~ L, . _ y,~, t f .) ~ REA` FABLE ~,"~ L', ~ .~5~; P.S~S~ ,2 r . 1 ~ ~ f: + ~ o f , , ~" , t _ •, + I ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ f ~. -~~~ zl .Z 3,2r4 t i ' ~ ~ i I ,.. f0' igiP t?K1S/~'7~ ~ - ~ ii ' t ,. 4 •_.,.~,3r~'. ~ } ~ i r f FIST T1.. 13A').- ~ 3~ i F ~ , k ' 1st, i .~ . L •. ' I .'=,.t - ~ 3`7 , ( ~ .} , i . ~; l ~ .2. i ', ~ + i 7?ht~ nldk~ a`' +.:~~G- ~ ~ ; f 1 ', , :~