Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - March 7, 2000CI"I'Y OF CENTI2AI, POIN"I' PLANNING CO11IA4ISSION AGF.ND;1 March 7, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. Q ~ ~? Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 477 I. MEETING CALLEll TO ORllER II. ROLL CALL City Planning Chuck Piland -Candy Fish, Don Foster, Karol~n~e Johnson, Johu LeGros, Paul Lunte and Wayne Riggs III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and approval of February 1, 2000, Planning Cwnmission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Page 1 - 14 A. Review and recommendation to the City Council on whether or not the house at 435 Manzanita Street should be included on the City's historical structure list. The subject property is zoned C-2, Commercial Professional and is identified in the records of the Jackson County Assessor as Map 37 2W 03DD, Tax Lot 8100. I S - 26 B. Review a request by the property owners at 2262 Saint James Way to vary from a maximum fence height of 42 inches in a side yard setback area. The parcel is zoned R-1-8, Residential Single Family. 27 - 44 C. Public Hearing to consider a conditional use permit that would allow a mobile home to be temporarily located behind a residence at 5366 Teresa Way. The subject property is located in the R-L, Residential Low Density Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Map 36 2W 34D, Tax Lot 214. 45 - 52 D. Review a site plan that would allow the installation of a drive through window at the Union 76 Station at 1065 East Pine Street. The subject parcel is located in a C-4 , "fourist and Office Professional Zoning DistricC. V[I. MISCELLANEOUS VI[I. AD.IOURNMEN"1' City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2000 MEETING CALLED 'I"O ORDER A"I' 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Candy Fish, John LeGros, Don Foster, and Wayne Riggs were present Karolyne Johnson was absent. Also in attendance were Jim Bennett, City Administrator, Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, Lee Bremran, Public Works Director, and Matt Samitore, Planning Technician. III CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV MINUTES Commissioner Fish made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Minutes from December 7, 1999. Commissioner Foster seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Fish, yes; LeGros, yes; Lunte, abstained; Foster, yes; and Riggs, yes. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES Mr. Can~oll Davis, of 435 Manzanita Street appeared before the Planning Commission to ask that his house be designated as an historic residence on the city registry. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner stated that the item would have to be publicly noticed then put on a future Planning Commission agenda in order for it to be considered for historic designation. VI. BUSINESS A. A Public hearing to consider a site plan for the construction of a 48-unit apartment complex at the east edee of Sunrise Wav on Map 37 2W 02BC Tax Lots 1506 1507 and 1508. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner presented the Planning Department staff report. The applicants have requested a site plan review for the construction of a 48-unit apartment complex at the end of Sunrise Way. "fhe apartments would resemble some apartments that are built in Phoenix, OR and all would be 2 bedroom 2-bath units. "the City has met with the applicants and has required [hat they build a playground in-between two of the units on the utility easement. Any playground structure on the easement would be ^loveable incase of emergency. A four foot high chain-link fence would surround the Cih~ of Central Point Planning Commission ivtinutcs February 1.2000 Page playground. "fhe applicants have provided 1 1 I parking spaces and are only required to have 108. Access will be provided from three (ocatimts, off ofSunrise, indirectly from Cherry, and from a private drive of f of 10°i Street. Additional signage should be added as a condition to the Planning Department Staff Report so that people can find the apartment numbers more easily. Lee Brennan, Public Works Director presented the Public Works staff report. The Public Works Department recommends that the applicants build sidewalks on Sunrise Way to complete the improvements in the Bluebird Heights Subdivision. Putting a playground in the Public Utility Easement is fine, but the Public Works Department would have to see any final plan and the equipment before giving a final ok on the playground. The driveway access from Sunrise Say will have to be improved to allow for a standard moving van to move in and out of it without having problems. The applicants must have a storm drainage system that can handle a 10-year event. New water meters will have to be installed for each building and four'/ water laterals will also have to be installed. The Co-Applicant, Tommy Malot, 624 Lynn Lane, Centra] Point. OR, stated that adding additional signage and a playground will not be a problem. The Co-Applicant, David Freel, stated that a lot consolidation would have to done on the lots and that the applicants would split the profit 50-50. Commissioner Fish made a motion to Hass Resolution 474 conditionally anprovine the Site Plan Annlication fora 48 unit Anartment located on tax lots 1506, 1507, and 1508 of Plat 372W02BC. Subiect to Planning and Public Works Staff Reports, and Sunrise Streets to meet the requirements for those subdivisions and the City of Central Point. Commissioner Riess seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: motion passed unanimously. B- A Public hearing to review and modify certain conditions of approval for New Haven Estates Subdivision as the pertain to a block wall on lots 9 and 53. The subject parcels are located on Map 362W36DD, Tax Lot 3400 and Map 372WOIBB, tax Lot 800. Ken Uersch(er, Community Planner presented the Planning Department staff report. The Planning Commission initially approved the tentative plan for the New Haven Estates Subdivision in November 1997. On January 20, 1998 the Commission approved an amendment to the subdivision that resulted in the conveyance of an additional 2.5 acres to Walnut Grove Village for use as a recreational vehicle storage area. That was changed and today is a park/recreation area. In May 1998, the Planning Commission allowed the Walnut Grove Mobile I-Tome Park to construct asight-obscurring fence instead of the masonry wall. At the April 6, 1999 meeting the applicants requested that the Cite ofCcnu'a( Point Planning Commission Minutes Fcbruar_r 1. X000 1'a~~c requirement for the block wall on lots 9 and ~3 of the New haven Istates Subdivision be c(tanged to allow a vinyl fence instead. "fhc request was denied. The tlpplicauts are requesting that the block wall be replaced with a photinia hedge. "I"he agent for the applicant, Herb Parber stated that the reason they arc requesting a change is because they originally were the applicants suggesting the wa(I, and now see no reason for it because a new wider road will be constructed this spring/summer and that sound is no longer a problem. The applicant John Schteing stated that he would like the block wall provision removed and stated that safety is no longer a reason to have the block wall and that he is now asking for it to be removed from the property. Jim Bennett, City Administrator stated in his personal opinion that he believes the block wall should be removed from the two properties because the owners no longer control a big section of land on Hamrick Road, and no one knows when the other properties will be annexed into the City and developed. Commissioner LeGros suggested that the applicants use achain-link fence with reinforced concrete posts and a fotinia hedge instead of the block wall. Commissioner Fish suggested the wall only be 42 inches high on the side yard to make the fences the same height. Co-Applicant Wayne Van-Wey stated he thought the idea is good and that he and the other co-applicants just want to clean up the opening to their subdivision. Commissioner Ri2~s made a motion to Hass Resolution 474 modifying resolution 412 removinE the block wall requirement and replacing it with a maximum 42 in high chain link fence with reinforced concrete posts and with a maximum 42 inch hieh photinia hedge in front of the chain link fence. Commissioner LeGros seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Fish, no; LeGros, ves; Lunte ves• Foster ves• Riggs ves. Motion passed. C. A Public hearing to review and modify certain conditions of approval as they relate to the placement of a 2,250 square foot office building at 348 Oak Street on Map 372W 1113B, Tax I,ot 400. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner presented the Planning Department Staff Report. On November 2, 1999, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan that would allow the construction of a new dental office on a vacant lot located at 348 Oak Street in the C-2, Commerical Professional District. A Revised Site Plan has been submitted moving the building all the way to the alley and moving all the parking into the front with driveway Cih~ of Central Point Planning Conunission Minutes February 1. ?000 ['age d access from 4'~' Strcct. "this has been done to save several large trees on the site, and to possibly reduce the extra costs of alley improvement. Lee Brennan. Public Works Director presented the Public Works staff report "llie Staff Report would not change except Q~at the applicants would not have to make the improvements to the alley if they were not going to use it for parking. The Ageut for the Applicant, Pat hlavird stated that the revised site plan will allow for the office to save the trees on the site, save costs for the alley improvements, and allow for a better storm drainage detention system, since there will only be one parking lot. Commissioner Fish made a motion to pass Resolution 475 amending Iesolution 467 tentatively approving the revised Site Plan fora 2250 square foot dental office located at 348 Oak Street in the C-2, Office Professional district subject to the Planning and Public Works Staff Reports. Commissioner Riggs seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. D. Re nest to extend the tentative lap a royal for the 21 lot Lindse Meadows Subdivision on Mao 372W 11D, Tax Lot 500. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner presented the Planning Department Staff Report. On November 7, 1997 the Planning Commission tentatively approved the 21 lots Lindsey Meadows Subdivision in the vicinity of Timothy Street and Chicory Lane. Por reasons related to infrastructure, the final plat was not filed prior to the one-year expiration date specified in the Central Point Municipal Code. The Planning Commission may extend the tentative plan one year. Under this extension the Planning Commission can impose the original conditions of approval or new conditions. New regulations in the City of Central Point Flood Ordinance now apply to this subdivision which states no building shall be built within 25 feet of the top of the stream bank. This would affect tots, 1, 15, 16, 17, 20 and 21. The Applicants are aware of this ordinance and have submitted a new plat showing the setbacks and how the buildings will still work on the lots. Lee Brennan, Public Works Director stated that the Public Works Department would like to have an access road to the back of the property and a new construction plan for the development submitted. Jim Bennett, City Administrator stated that since this is only an extension to the project the Planning Commission cannot require discretionary requirements to the extension, so the Commission cannot require an access road. The Applicant Richard Voitman, stated that he believes the extension should be granted so that he can sell the property to a local developer and not have to go into foreclosure and delay the project any longer. City of Central Point P(annim, Commission Minutes februarv 1.'_000 Page i The Co-Applicant Bob Fellows stated he would start construction plans as soon as the weather was good enough and that he would submit a final plat within one }car's time. .Iim Bennett stated that since the applicant knows of the flood regulations there should not be any requests from him or future landowners to vary from this requirement. Commissioner Fish made a motion to pass Resolution 476 annrovin~ an extension of a Tentative Plat for Lindsey Meadows. subject to the Planning and Pubtic Works Sta_ff_Report, the new City of Central Point Flood Ordinance, and that a final plat must be submitted within one year of it being accented by the City Council. Commissioner LeGros seconded the motion. I20LL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. VII Miscellaneous There were no miscellaneous items. VIII Adjournment Commissioner Fish made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner LeGros seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion Passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:02 P.M. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPOR"p 1 TEARING DA"f F?: March 7, 2000 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Ken Gerschler, Commwrity Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and review of request by property owner to have home located at 443 Manzanita Street listed on the City's historic inventory list. Owner/ Applicant: Agent: Pro e Description/ Zonine: Summary Carrol Davis purchasing under contract to Harvey Pitcher 435 Manzanita Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Same as above 372W03DD, Tax Lot 8100 - 0.18 acres C-2, Commercial-Professional Zoning District The applicant is requesting that the house at 435 Manzanita be listed on the historic inventory for the City of Central Point. Authority CPMC 17.70.030 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to act in the capacity of historic review board and render a recommendation to the Central Point City Council. Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 17.70.050 (B-1) (Attachment B). Applicable Law Comprehensive Plan Historic Inventory CPMC 17.36.010 et seq. C-2, Commercial-Professional District CPMC 17.70.010 et seq. Historic Preservation Overlay Zone i Discussion Last month, Carrol Davis approached the Planning Commission at the Pebraary 4"' meeting to request an immediate listing on the City's historic building inventory. The Commission could not take action at that time since the Central Point Municipal Code requires that neighbors be notified and given an opportunity to comment on the request. As of this date, City Staff has not received any comments from neighbors in response to the notice sent on February I5, 2000 (Attachment "A"). Mr. Davis is requesting that the house at 435 Manzanita be listed on the City's Historic inventory so that he may obtain conventional financing instead of the agreement currently in place with Harvey Pitcher. The house is classified as anon-conforming structure since it is a single family structure located in a C-2, Commercial-Professional Zoning District. Banks have typically been reluctant to loan money for nonconforming structures for a term longer than 15 years. This house is located next door to Council member Dr. Gilmour who listed his historic home at the local, state and federal levels. There is a possibility that some form of zone amendment could affect this and other properties in the area as the downtown revitalization takes shape. The applicant has provided documentation that the Commission could use to determine eligibility with the provisions of CPMC 17.70.010 (Attachment "B"). The house was built between the years of 1910 and 1913 and was occupied by R.H. Cornelius, a company agent for the Southern Pacific Railroad. The Davis's have performed interior modifications that have restored some ofthe original character and plan to paint the exterior of the structure soon. If the criteria can be met, the Planning Commission could present a recommendation to the City Council who would ultimately decide whether or not the structure would be included on the City's historical inventory. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Historic Preservation Purposes A. Provide for the preservation and protection of sites and improvements within the community of Central Point that reflect or represent elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history; The applicant has submitted historical records from the Jackson County Assessor for consideration by the Commission. B. Safeguard the city's historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage and reflected in such improvements and areas, Historic structures add flavor to a downtown area and can contribute to a sense of place for 2 residents. C. Complement the efforts of the Southern Oregon Hss7orical Society, Stcrte of Oregon cmd other organizations or individual efforts airned at historical preservation; The house at 435 Manzanita was not listed as being significantly historic when the Comprehensive Plan was completed in the 1980's. Citing a lack of funding, the Rogue Valley Council of Governments Fvas not able to list every structure, but the plan did ask that future research be conducted to document a historic inventory within the City of Central Point. This research is currently being done and this house falls within the Historic time frame being considered. D. Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of Central Point's past; There are currently 102 homes listed in the records of the Jackson County Assessor that were constructed between 1870 and 1940 in the City of Central Point. Records show that this residence was occupied by a prominent Central Point citizen who was involved with the railroad. E. Carry out the provisions of Statewide Planning Goal Number S. Planning Goal 5 is designed to protect areas of historic interest that often include neighborhoods in an urban core. If this home were to be listed, there would be a total of three homes on the City's inventory on Manzanita between 4th and 5th Streets. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions 1. Adopt Resolution No., recommending the listing of the house at 435 Manzanita Street on the City's historic inventory; or,. 2. Deny the proposed request to list the house at 435 Manzanita Street on the City's historic inventory; or, 3. Continue the review of the request to list the house at 435 Manzanita on the City's historic inventory. Attachments A. Notice of Public Hearing B. Applicant's request and documentation C. Digital Photograph taken by City Staff City of Central Point PLANNXNG DEPARTMENT "I'om Humphrey, AICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Matt Samitore Planning Technician Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: February 15, 2000 Meeting Date Time: Place: Mazch 7, 2000 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEETING City of Cetrtrai Point Eh:H~:~T ttAtt Planning Department Beginning at the above titne and place, the Central Point Historic Preservation Board will review a request to include the house at 435 Manzanita Street on the City's historic building inventory. This pazcel is located in a C-2, Commercial-Professional Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W03DD, Tax Lot 8100. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for listing a building on the City's historic list are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person interested in commenting on the possibility that this home could be listed as a historic home may submit written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, March 7, 2000. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hali, I55 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the expiration of the comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to be related to the proposal and should be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 • Fax: (541) 664-6384 Copies of all evidence relied upon by Uie applicant arc available for public review at City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Centra( 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 Historic Review Preservation Board will review documentation submitted by the applicant, hear testimony, and determine if the home can meet criteria listed in Chapter 17.70.050 (B.1-6). At the conclusion ofthe review, the Committee could recommend to the City Council that the home be listed on the City's historic registry. s ~'~ ~~~~ ~~~ s~ ~~ F .~.~~ . ~ / ~~~ ~\~ ~ t- Subject Property ~~~P ~P ~~~ 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 • Fax: (541) 664-6384 Carroll Davis 435 Manzanita St. Medford, OR 97502 Tom Humphrey Planning Department I55 So. 2nd Street Central Point, OR 97502 Mr. Humphrey, Pebn~ary I , 2000 CSity of Central Point E~iHT}~I3' *tB tt Planning Department Over the last five years, my wife and I have been in the process of purchasing the property at 435 Manzanita street directly from the previous owner, Mr. Harvey Pitcher. We have recently decided to pay the balance owed to Mr. Pitcher and finish the upgrades and restoration of the house. To do this we have applied for a mortgage but have been told that we cannot receive a loan for the property because it is commercially caned, C-2. I understand that it may be possible to put the property on the city historical registry and that this may alleviate our dilemma and help preserve a little more of Central Points history. In the last five years we have done a lot of work to restore this house to close to its original condition. We have replaced all the electrical wiring and plumbing bringing it up to code. We removed the dropped ceilings that were put in some time about the 1950's, restoring the interior to its original ten foot ceilings. Last year we finally replaced the roof. This yeaz, with the aid of the home loan we have applied for, the exterior will be refurbished with the proper treatment of primer and paint. I know our neighbors will be happy to have the eye sore that this property appears to be, finally being cleaned up. We know that Dr. Gilmour next door has restored his home and put it on the National historical registry, and that Deana Sims across the street also has had her home put on the city registry. This has motivated us to improve our home and get it looking as nice as the other historical homes around us. This house has personal history for me as well. I lived in the Faber House in the mid Sixties. This neighborhood is the first one that I remember as a child. Returning thirty yeazs later, being able to play a part in preserving this history, my history, means a great deal to me. My son and daughter have been able to grow up, not only in the same community, but on the same street that I spent time growing up. This is the kind of history that Central Point is all about. Records indicate that the home was built some time between t 910 and 1913. In those early years the home was occupied by a Mr. R. H. Cornelius. As indicated in the attached news paper article from October 1911 Mr. Cornelius was a Southern Pacific Company agent for Central Point and the surrounding area. In this position Mr. Cornelius had the opportunity to get to know most of the community members of that time. The tone set by the article indicates that he was very well respected in the community. This home has been standing for almost 100 years. Adding this property to the city registry will help solidify the preservation and the unique historic legacy of Central R Point. If this home was damaged by more than 50% it could not be rebuilt because of the current commercial zoning. And, according to the Central Point Downtown Revitalization Plan, public hearing draft, dated December 1999, the zoning for this property is planned to change to high density residential. Again, if the house were damaged most likely someone would want to build another apartment complex on it like the one next door. What a loss it would be to loose a piece of history that is very significant to the other surrounding historical properties and the City of Central Point. By our example we can encourage others to maintain and improve historical properties that will enhance the downtown azea, keeping a small town feel while providing a safe, clean and attractive historic neighborhood. I than~koyou~in advance for your consideration in this matter. Carroll Davis 435 Manzaruta St. Central Point IYi fanw IC ~OOa ~) <Yl 1ww~'M ~(\Y Jp I< ilrtited States Department of tha IrrteMoc *tatiorta! Park S©rviCo i ~iati€~r~~~ ~Rrrgist~r a~f ~i~:~tafi~ ~lac~s pant°s~r~at9c~~ Sh~~t Edward Charles Faber House Sertiot~ ialm~er i ~ Page 4 ~~_. Jackson County, Oregon ,~r"% _- ___~-_- /a4. -- ;ter. ~ ~io ~l j "r~ /~J ~~ ~ ~~ _ r: ;° vuLkzu...Lcevi r ~~ ~ ~ .~ ~ , N:rl ~r`~~ ~ ~ F ~~ Uf~ •. J^i ~ y r ~~ ~ ^ i ~ t\i y C~~ , i ` . ~ ~ a' ! J' "~, .~` Lam; ~r.;~ ~~ ti;~." '`'~' . . ~.<. rye 6 ," 1_ .~_ __ _-.-. ----.---- ___. __... 1 ''l ~ _ <" r I ~ ... i ~ ~\~ . L____._.. __...._. ;;~•" / ~~ ,~ - i.1, .oi' ,~' ~. i~ .~f ~' . ~;: -`~ ~..,,_~ ~.~:~i .. it _.._; .;. ~~~ _.__~ 1. Jaclaon Co Assessor's (lop of Bloci: 50, Central Point, Jackson Co ,Oregon, 191 ~. ~, n.b. land "aalue was $~00 and impro4~ements (E.C.FsGer house) was $1000. - ~iJ }~ ~; i~ ~'Gv, , '' --- < n ~ ~'' ~ '~, , ~ D __ , V~ a 5 xi5'' a .vr ~~~ t~r 3 ~ # ,,,a ..n^ f ,~ ;. t r , ~~ ~G 1 ,'. ~~ ~..- t 1 ~ ~ - ~.F. v ~,~~ytiYS .,.u, ~..ai' ~i S .. ~ y. .Y ~y 'L y\~j ~ V ~< v{1, ~ AL r 1~ , ' ~~ ~~ ~ . /5 ~~~ ~ •. ~~, );,., Y.Q. 9,,,-~ ' i ~L(,`. ~, ~ ~„ ~ ~ z. t ~(,0 yG ~ 33 I~ ! t. `< 1 i ''• art 3 S ~ ~ v 'r• .t~7'~'~~p'.?~. t/~ x ~ ' ~ } ; i GO ~o. t H J .1 i"a~~'akN` r, . ~. Y , / /~ ,4i~. <t{'' ~ ~ L ~ ~i ..~ 4 yYjj!~ ~ ~~1 M °~l' ~ L~L : 3.7 .,t ;y~ ~- ~ ~„~~../ K ~~~+ .'N'M q. kit '~. r ~~Y/x ~ ; , !/ .3 ,u ~ ~ ~~~f?Y rr ~.~''I x.', r"ri°~~~a'R a~ t~•- tg /,r n E~'~'' x :1 ~ .::ti - o ~ 2 i t < ~ ~ ~~ ' SS' .. 33~.a r,3t},.r' A ~ v y ~ r M~ r ~ ~ n 1 y t ~ J 3' i '.~ ~ V y `; suf. ~< Vif. ` V/ .;?: 'W. {y, Vi F~` Y /J `~ j ., 1j ~ .~: ~,.3 ~ ,~ ~ d~ ~ ~ ,_-- r / Y 1 ~~Y` ~ r ~~~ ! ~ J ~ ~ / r /t ' ,, i if f ~`~ ~} ,. ~ ~ ~'"` Q-4i~ TWA ~ V - / J 1, j ~ ', r - < 1 ~,a: '~ i 1 •~ ~ ~~ /n~ Q ~ ~ ~~ ASSESSMENT AND ornu D.°.. Nnd18 OP TAXPAYBR I DSSCQIPT20N OP LAA'D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ii 9 + S ~ ~ ~ M r°. ^I 2111~EY I LuQ hlu~ TIIYOk SMC x~Mp~ Nro YIIWDb LuE r.i~u Y111°DY UvG i o>~- Ika~1Aw huvud L J D•TO4N O¢CCITYeO to ~f"~ °' v.l~ ~ tl av4 ~ 1°t 1 Y iw ~ N LI lw r_n tl M= T... W. ~ ,< ~ ° ~e~ , . _ __ _...--- -- ----- _. --- -- __ . _ _ f .-. .. S 1 _..- ~~ ~ ~ a t t~I ~~ `rya t ~~~~f .__i~ ,, . D G -._.____- __-_ ___.._ : I ~ I .il ~~ ~. ,. . p i I i i --- -~_ -- ~ ~ j l _.... / - _.- ..._._._ i I I ... _ ---- -- -- ' I I' I - - ------ I I ' ~ I I , ~ _-.- I ) 1 i ---- - - l ----- I j j ~ j i i i _' j ~. ,I _-. -_- it ~j j i,, il' ;i --- ~ , ~ I Ij ;i I' -----. ..- --- --------------- ' ' 'I I I II I ~. ' _. - ~ , . . ,:~; - --- ; ~ . _.. ... _ 1 - ---- --_ _ _ - - - - . - `~ r• i a'; J ~Gfrrrfrfrfy r .,r. ,, , , r ~ ~ ,,....,.. . ..r,,, ra .r .r., ..... r, .. , „. ... ood .,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,, ,r ..,,., r,l..r r... ,.. ...r ..~ eunxnm.NFrO1M .r ~C eo.. .,.r rat ~ t 10.00 "' ' ... nn.tt x~..•rd.,. .. ~. ~arrol SUC l~i~ . rF.n.n ~~. _ l ~~ _QLQ[LL34Yaa mOhr.r. riAit .9ndenlure Q(/RneuelA/ Tba ____P.reA_3.._IileY S.ui. ,:l lcc .:. .i11a, .L;.: ::Sic 1 / i!2 .. StC.r ;. 1 i of the Covntl ol_ ...._...__.__.Jankaan._.._.ed 6l.l<of _..._._Or¢gon .for nvd in rvna;dcrvtlonolltrwvawr- ._. _. ....._ ._.... .Ten..ttnQ.._.no.lYDO..Lol2ara . ta...... _...t.4eq._... .. ~.id, b...__kb.rgtiwd tad wldr aed bl than prcwnts Jo grnvt, Gnrgnin, aril mid mvror am.. y.>__.. oltbe Covntl of....__..Jm:ceon...._..__.___. _._.~MSate oC_..DrOgOr, tlrc lollowfngdourJ,<vfpmui...., d<veted •ad bei.g to the Covell olJadwa sled Stet<ol Orcyoe, to-wio ~tg?z.i: s ..._ .: tits .o .: c ;^.crtral -a:nt: t o: .;.f: ': aar.'.. L X.u ir./I XN/the uid prtmla., witb l/uirep/wnenencrx, nnta lbe anid .... u. ~ornelluc.hlc ~~ ' dm/ rlrr .v,hl ire Z• 711ai ord L1 SOr~ ~:. a13on i.i., c11'a, f r mrn..rn rr. rrrcl witL nc~ caid ... ... .o ..c3..,...L:_ IrrirzwrFf wrrrµ~nw, rh.f..ct. r:: Jo- nx~rwr4 inks dmpk ofuirlpremiws: ehaulvrorr lr.vlrrrrrra0rrnvrm/•rn..rs, rrrn/eh.x ..v wAl wwnnnt n n.l drF~n.l rbr sruar tr.,nr .vlf /:nrhr/.d:.,nr. whntrr Y Kn. WJGIU lt/A.rv./, 'do h:o-r lo-n vam ~r ..., Inuu. ., Frnl vale. tlJs li, tt. ,aq ..! .... ....... _ li.rnrtrA is Pruanrc n/ ) v I ...,. .. : r~._..:.. .. .~ .. Gunn ~~v(/nrFxaa,1sa. On <hi. aLv 1Ltr. dur .rc .. _. 1 P .../'%•'^::,llr n,urr fm/vn rm,nA'uurry l'ulJir in unJ yr cold Crrun(r urJ Stn«.rha vni.m rrunuJ r rc. .,. .;llc: m:r. ., L'cc ... ., iley.n:_.. _.t .re. ' to no tr .r allytmun to Lr (hc rJrn<kN /rc no .. •faxrr~hal ire and., /r,., .., wrn rJr, b, /, me..,,., ,.,n„ n~LmAn•.u~la,ls'rJ i r on ~ r n •• r. •n , ru rnr lLnr :iroJ rxmrtrJ(Ac.nrucln.yl'lar NS rn.:•nnJ/iuryo.rs tl,urui r.urr.vl. 90~LU pbnnAand orlid:J Caul rlu., rh.~J:r. .. rrr!/'< rnr <,rnr~..,r, ., r.,..r ur~uru. ..O:l:'::1 .P:'.1 Of' .. 1. . +. 1'f Cl.t41i. !ry 11 4 e~/ ;e.r.. `_.: z r,..~:~y, .- ~p ~Xi"iny ~a,,r. I{~ `t)n :{'o'N~y'1')v. k7~ r~'I~>i~ ~ 1 w :i(Ib i 1 1 V /1 ~}~',~ , / ' )4...~ l.~ ~+-. a•; .+..reat7ak!dy~ ,.! nFelmHetlW>1~1Gfl.A~t. A ..... w _.. 232 Xind aJ /nrUUmm! 5'T.1Tf. O£ OR6CG.Y, ! r, COY R/y 0/ Jtl[t/OR AARRALTY~}EED_ /A(/<Ly nrli/ylAaflArennurdin~rnr- _B.~L17U$IGZIUS ^x_12_ - mrnl o/ rriliRO rar rarrir<d and plyd /or y'C rrrord s/ .lab'da4_.F/. on fhr _79" dsy. of.lfaroh -.... !F 1919. 1f0-fbf Con.ddzralron Chauac ey. Plozey _. .X•..e+:.Cl ork E. :. HILDRcTB, SR. 5...1000.00- // ' u-__ _._ nrnuly SH1S INDEI.TURE AITNES::EPB, T1idT As, A. H. Oornelinn and llnymie E. Cornelius, Lis wife, for and Sn ooneldsraf ion of the sum of 0¢e Thounead nffi no/100 Dollars to na paid, 4o Lereby Bargain, Sell, and Coneey unto E, d. Hildrath, Sr. and Sldsa 8114reth Lie wife, either or the eur~isor, the to3lowfag described premi nee, to-wi ti Lot nunbere6 Seton (7) Sa Blook Hambered fifty (60) Sn the Tom at Ce¢trai Point, Jackson County, Orogo¢, ne par the offioial sad reoordsd plat of Bald Tox¢. TO HdPE dND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appv.rte¢anoan, unto the sold E, d. Hil dratL, Sr., Ind Elise HSldretL their ha ire nn6 neeigns t<¢avar. dnd kho enid grantors do Lereby aoteaant to sad xith the said E. d. 8dldreth Br. end Slira Hil drath that they era the owners Sn toe simple of snid premises; Wnt they are iree from all Sncnnbrenoe e: dnd that they will xnnmt and defend the same from nll lnwfkl olalme xhateoeve r. IN ;7ITNESS PI>EREOF, xe hero hereunto eat onr hands end eeele Shia 10th day of Starch •. D. 1919. R. H. Cornelius........... ea Dono Sn the Preeame of Sfaymie E. Co rnel Sue....... and rr A.0. Aoahbuzao . I' I Plorenaa 1/. Ifoorhe ad. f; STdTE OF UREG017, ) ' ( SS, COUI7TY OF LdI;E. ) - BE IT Rc']a].ffiERED Slat on Shis 10th dny of Yatroh d. D. 1919 paroonally oeme before me, s Notary . ,~Jst ~ Public in and for erd d Connty, the xithln named R. H. Oorneline and Haymie E. Cornollue, hio wi fa, ,4' e to me Pa raonally known to bo the identical pore one described in, and who executed the xlthia r In atrument, and acY.noxle dged to mo Shot they nzec ut ed the enrn Ireelq and wolun tnri ly for tho y assn and purPOe ee Shereln named. Rf tneoe my han8 end sent this 10th dny of Hnrah, 1919. r H. C. AaaLDurne„ Notary Yublio Zor Orog m, Notarial 3en1 of liy ocmmi oeion expires Oat. 6, 19f0. ' A. C. AnohDarna.. ) A,/ Ibcumentary St mope $1.00 omael ed. i2 ~. amount,'- =532 20 ~ #ota2~, BesCasSte~ >Rl5 i,5o, - Assessment I4o: 206'-.~-'FSx E.~f''rice tots 1 and 3; block !A, origlnsttotrn- alte Clty of :Central Folnt, Oregon; rrnufago 710 fret on south elde of '3fanzanlta street; trunk s^"-war asaeae- ment, rite per:Cgrnt {oot, ~? cents: ammnrt, 6fi'L 70; Lateral sewer asscas- menL rate per fmnl. foot ,90 cants: s:unu nl .6n 2,00; total ass!esamenf, Assessment Ivo. 2E0-E. C. Faber. Lot ~8, biock 60, orfglnal townsltr Ctty..of Centres Point. Oregon; Iroab~ nge 65 feet on north aide oL Idanu- a(ta street: trek sewer assessment. rate per front foot, 64 cea ts: emoirn f., 631.35; lateral sewer asu:6ament., rate per trmit fodt, 011 cents; amount. 644. fi (1: tol at abaeaa torn{, 6H(I.S~. A66C66m Ptit n of other churches present. ~, ntur ya huainess meeting they had a pleaaeni. social of tcrnrwn and rrtre6hmmta.-The house was prcl tilp rfccoeated may, nnaturtiutn, jarqucminot and chrysan- Cheutuim. ._-_.n,K ter.. arrkrM a't~ at airh an :!slant. did } .but Bowe 3I taken a the mead- cha»ge n. 'l2t-Ben end Ann .y ~ e entered d oEd Rotr as a ease b~ 'hcnrt d6<rasP. F'or three w four 'dA,Ce Cn nd}~ke wns bewttdrrrd• 't1~a a- husluea+ trlwed of bog ataodtng damd to folk in hhn na 1ze had never been to lkrYt tr: IMCOrr. °<;rt n yrmuK mau for your book: kcrh+Yi ;,ud cat r c+un,a ~~-__ ~x:a.+ tags atYa ~ettglen present themaet7tet! and foa `fiu ~abaok+te .e9atem'of e4uare:. dealing with evbrY~Y ~ ~° busmeas with. ' A story is t;oing the rounds to the eReet that ones upon a time an official of the eompanq asked Mr. Cornelius what his policy was in dealing wtth the Central Point public as regards their business relatiom with the Southern Pacific company. "Well," replied Lil r• Corneliuv, so the story Sa'a. `I try to treat them atreokitaly honorably and lairir-just sa 7 wcwkl want them ~ j treat me if ewr poaitiata were re- ! versed.,, ' And it ie no breeds of confid:enae fm ~ the It eta{d to say that sash seems tc the ••C,ot,rk•s" everyday style of ioint j hUatneab. i ~ i~ Qty of Ceatrt[ Pofnt r ~ r~rz~~r~r «~„ Planning U~Pirtntent PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAF'r IZEPOIZT' HEARING DATE: March 7, 2000 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Ken Gerschler Community Planner SUBJECT: Public Hearing -Variance to fence height requirements at 2662 Saint James Way (A tax lot number has not yet been assigned by the County Assessor). Applicant/ Owner: Robert and Ruth Hadley 2662 Saint James Way Central Point, Oregon 97502 Agent: Same Summary: (Refer to Exhibits A&C) The subject parcel is zoned R-1-8, Residential Single-Family. Authority: CPMC 1.24.050 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to render a decision on any application for a fence variance. Notice of the Public Meeting was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. Analicable Law: CPMC 17.20.010 et seq. - R-1, Residential Single-Family District CPMC 15.20.050 et seq. -Fence Height on Corner Lots CPMC 15.20.080 et seq. -Fence Variances Discussion• The applicants' Mr. and Mrs. Hadley recently purchased the house located on a corner lot at 2262 Saint James Way in the New Haven Estates subdivision. Following the move they consulted a fence company who submitted a building permit application to the Central Point Building Department. When the Planning Department reviewed the application, it was determined that a portion of the proposed six foot wood fence would not comply with the municipal code. CPMC 15.20.050 requires that for all corner lots, no fence shall be higher that six feet; provided however that t:o fence shall be kigher than tkree and one-half feet where such fence is witlziz: the required setback area. 15 To meet code, a portion of the six foot fence located in the side vard would need to be reduced to a height of 42 inches in a t0 foot wide setback adjoining Naples Drive. A 42 inch high fence would trot block a direct view from passers by on Naples Drrve to the applicants' rear patio. If a six foot high fence were constricted o« tside oCthe side setback, it would comply with the code but would encroach onto the covered deck (Attachment "C" ). Through research in the area, the applicants have determined that their lot has the smallest rear lot line size of the many they checked (Attachment "D" ). Only phases 1, 2 and 3 of the tentatively approved New Haven Estates have been final platted. There may be other lots that will face the same fence dilemma as future phases are completed and a precedent could be set with the approval of this variance. The Hadleys' feel that if the builder/developer had disclosed the setback, they would have purchased another lot for privacy and security for a dog they would like to get. Mr. and Mrs. Hadley are requesting that the Planning Commission consider granting a variance from the 42 inch maximum fence height along Naples Drive. If granted, the variance would allow the construction of a six foot high fence along the property line adjoining Naples Drive (Attachment ..A..). If the proposed fence is located on the side yard, it would not conflict with the sight vision requirements of CPMC 17.60.110. No comments were received in response to the notice sent to neighbors on February 25, 2000. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law A variance maybe granted if findings are made as follows: 1. The strict application of the provisions would result in unnecessary hardship; or 2. The following considerations will either result from a granting of the variance or the following considerations do not apply to the requested application: a. The variance will provide advantages to the neighborhood or the city, The additional height of the proposed six foot fence would provide a more comfortable, private environment for the applicant's family. There appears to be neither an advantage or disadvantage to the neighborhood. b. The variance will provide beautification to the neighborhood or the city, The six foot wood fence would create a larger useable area for the applicants and would reduce the size of the landscape strip along Naples Avenue. F e. l~he vanancc will provide safety to the neighborhood or the cite, The fence would not necessarily provide any additional safety or security to the neighborhood or the city if it were constructed at 42 inches or 6 feet. d. The variance will provide protection to the neighborhood or the city, The fence would provide an additional degree of protection to the applicants by providing a safe place for a dog that they are planning to acquire in the future. e. The variance will not have any adverse impacts upon the neighborhood. The City has not received any correspondence in favor or opposed to t}re proposal. £ The variance will utilize property within the intent and purpose of the zone district. The height and construction material of the proposed fence is consistent with municipal regulations in the Residential Single- Family zoning district. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: Approve the fence variance application based on the findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the proposed fence variance application; or Continue the review of the fence variance application at the discretion of the Commission. Exhibits: A. Site Plan and Applicant's Findings B. Notice of Meeting C. Digital Photographs D. Applicant's information on surrounding lots E. Planning Department Recommended Conditions G:.Planning,Og00i WPD ,_ 1"7 ~' ~ __,t 8 Grcw~'wre~ .~,~ 3~~~ S~yu,n'°un~ ~'~ C i~-h~\\ ~ \ M t ~?..~ Y•.. C, ~._ In~,vif~tiwdn~ ~~ Sod -' z~ so ~ ~ '.~ U v'- - * _. ~" v ~` SG P~~pp5Ep 2evision ~ _„~r~ _~ ~-~-i 9~ l `~f t. ` tii (,~ _~ " ~ ~~ ~, o lr'= --~--~- . ~ /pl. ~z L -4 t 'D~,way ,~ t~ H i '~ s~ as ~ f~ i \ ~ ! i ~, ~ - _ I n.i- ~~8~ ~ ~~~ .. '~' .. p r rJ ~,. r Londsc°Pe pipQ' sale: 2662 St, lames ti~a~y~-~_-_____ ~" _ I6 ~~~ _--~- ~ Dana Wilde e 6es~an bv: tondsc°P ~* artier Patch Lam To justify your request for variance, provide clear facts and logical conclusions which satisfy each of the following criteria. Zf a standard does not apply to your variance request, so state along with an explanation of why you think the standard is not applicable. 1. 2. 3. 4. The variance will provide advantages to the neighborhood or the City; The variance will provide beautification to the neighborhood or the City; The variance will provide safety to the neighborhood or the City; The variance will provide protection to the neighborhood or the City; The variance will not have any adverse impacts upon the neighborhood; and The variance will utilize property within the intent and purpose of the zone district. E~~~ ~ P F~i~~~o ~ 5 9'~" ,Pam r'',~o ~~.~f~ Li~/~, F~~v~~ ~~o~ss ~ A~X ~~ ~ ~,o ~ ~~- ~~ ,,~~ ~ F~ y~,~~ ~.~~ f/~ds~i. ~/~o l°~,e~~/ /i,~l~, /,6 ~3" F,~~irr s ~~~U/,v~~ Fy ~Gi ti~~ ~~// ~~ l ~ ' ~2oe~ F,ea~ ~ ~,~ a~,~~ Gives ~ ~/~// 19 4. Copies of all evidence retied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City F{a(I, I55 South Second Street, Central Point, grcgon. Copies of the same arc available at 15 cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at (54 ]) 664- 3321 ext. 291. -1-_~ in z D r- m 0 rT, z D _~ } N l55 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 • Fax: (541) 664-6384 Utp of Central Point ~~;HIPIT ~tC" Planning Departmenrt 22 C L 24 REAR LOT LINE DIS"hANCF,S IN NEW I~IAVI~N ESTA"hF;S LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LOT 52 LO T 52 66' 76' 74' 82' 82' 84' 79' 76' 77 112' 83' City of Central Point E~;HIUIT 'tD" Planning Department ~ C ATTACHMENT E RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The approval of the fence variance shall expire in one year on March 7, 2001 unless an application for a building permit or an application for extension has been received by the City. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations . 3. Utilities must be located by the fence builder prior to construction of the fence. There may need to be a modification of the fence near the utility boxes on the Southeast property corner. The fence builder shall check with the service providers to determine that the fencing near the utility boxes meets maintenance requirements for Pacific Power and US West. G:\P lann f ng\00005. W P U a6 PLANNING DEPAR`I'MI?N'I' STAFF RGPOR'T HEARING DATE: March 7, 2000 TO: Central Point Planning Conunission FROM: Tom Humphrey AICP, Planning Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing-Conditional Use Application for362W34D`faxLot214-'T'emporary Mobile Home behind the residence at 5366 Teresa Way. Owner/ Applicant: Agent: Pro e Description/ Zonint• Summary Dazold Hutsell 5366 Teresa Way Central Point, Oregon 97502 Same as above 36 2W 34D, Tax Lot 214 - 1.01 acres R-L, Residential Low Density District The applicant has asked to temporarily position a mobile home on his property that would assist in the care of an elderly parent with medical needs. The property is located at 5366 Teresa Way in an R-L Residential Low Density District. Authority CPMC 1.24.020 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application for a Conditional Use Permit. Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 (Attachment B). Annlicable Law CPMC 17.16.010 et seq. R-L, Residential Low-Density District CPMC 17.60.055 et seq. Criteria for temporary mobile home placement for infirm citizens CPMC 17.76.010 et seq. Conditional Use Permit ~~ 27 Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law CPMC 17.60.055 requires that applications for temporary mobile home placement for infirm citizens meet the following criteria: The minimum lot size for the placement of temporary mobile homes shall be one acre. The parcel is 1.01 acres according to the records of the Jackson County Assessor. A medical doctor licensed by the state of Oregon has certified in writing the nature of the infirmity, that the infrm person is not physically or mentally capable of maintaining a residence on a separate property, and that the infirm person requires the assistance of another person who is nearby. The infirmity must be due to physical or mental impairment. • Dr. Stephen Nelson has submitted a letter to demonstrate why Lucile Foote should be allowed to reside in the temporary mobile home. Water and sewer systems for the mobile home must meet all city and state code requirements. • Water (City of C.P.) and sewer (BCVSA) are required to be connected to the mobile home. Plumbing permits will be required for water and sewer connections. The location for the mobile home must conform with setback requirements for primary buildings as established by the city zoning ordinance. • The setbacks for the R-L, Residential Low Density District are 20 feet for the front, l0 for side and ten for rear yards. That the site has adequate access to a public street or highway and that the street or highway is adequate in size to effectively accommodate the traffic that is to be expected to be generated by the proposed use. The parcel has direct access to Teresa Way. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof and that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the neighborhood. Several neighbors have submitted comments about the amount of junk that has accumulated on the property since the applicant purchased the property in 1998. This accumulation is a code enforcement matter unless it can be demonstrated that the "junk" blocks safe passage to the mobile home. ~4 Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: I. Adopt Resolution No. ,approving the Conditional Use Permit subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the proposed Conditional Use Permit; or 3. Continue the review of the Conditional Use Permit at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments A. Site Plan and Applicant's Findings B: Notice of Public Hearing C: Letter from Medical Doctor D: Correspondence E: Building Department Staff Report F: Planning Department Recommended Conditions :~ n acy o r cencr}1 FQint Eh'I-I~~~T' ttA « Planning Deparknent oE`K . i i .. ~ SNE° ~ P~yo Pa sFa /NxG~ i i N ~ 1 id : ,T y o ~ ~~" ~ T~A-~ d`"0 /~T /~E: ~H-~ /~ o ~P~vr. y ~/o8i~~ /~o err C' V P .4~ T~~ s~~ ~ Foy T/~F ~oe~~os.~~~ C.vP. /s 1, o/ A~R~. /S %/~ ' ~ 7s'~j'~ ~ u rR moo) %,~~ ~ s,9- ~,q y . C~ ~r~f~ J~'~c/'osra ~ls,~ w.i~~ /~/,~ V~ loo /~ ~ ~ E rPs ~ ,~ FF /c T ~,~ /~ ~ ~ r~r ~ ~~ ~~ Usl" o~ T~~s /~"Ol3/~F ~o~n~ ~~J J v(~ /au~ ~FF~--~-T o /~Fi~ r-fco~Noor City of Central Poznt PLANNXNG DEPARTMENT "I'om Humphrey, AICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Matt Samitore Planning Technician Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: February 15,2000 Meeting Date: Time: Place: March 7, 2000 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEETING City of Central Point E~H~~RI'I' t'B ~t Planning Department Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review a Conditional Use Permit application request by a properly owner to temporarily place a mobile home behind the existing residence at 5366 Teresa Way. The parcel is located in a R-L, Residential Low- Density Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Plat 362W34D, Tax Lot 214. The Central Point Municipal Code has a provision that will allow a resident to temporarily place a mobile home for an infum family member with a medical doctor's recommendation and approval by the Planning Commission. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for conditional use permit 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 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, March 7, 2000. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, I55 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 33 Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall ba raised prior to the expiration of the comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to be related to the proposal and should be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. 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 15 cents per page. 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 application. 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 request to place the temporary mobile home on the property. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. <- Subject Property ~J l ~~ ~- - ~~~ ~. 34 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 • Fax: (541) 664-6384 City of Centrsl I~oint ~chxlgr~r «~,~ Planning DeparimenY December 3, 1999 Mrs. Lucile Foote 5366 Teresa Way Central Point, OR 97502 Re: Lucile Foote To Whom It May Concern: SOUTHERN OREGON H EALTEi TRUST ...,.d.. ~/fl5dtl[Cbab rsruR STEPHEN [. NELSON. M.O. Phy+man and Su+gran Diplomat/ A. B. £P FMflL}' PRACTICE GROUP !! 2900 Doaorr Park Drirr M<dfard, Or<gors 97504 (541J G08d091 appoinrm<na (541) G08-4092 a!l arhrr barieru Lucile Foote is a rather new patient to my practice. She is 94 years old with significant back problems, as well as problems with hypertension and hypothyroidism. At this point in time, she is physically incapable of maintaining a residence on a separate property and is dependent on someone being close by to assist her. If you have any further questions regarding Mrs. Foote, please do not hesitate to let me know. Sincerely, ~l'X.I~JIJ~ " i ~' `1" Stephen L. Nelson, M.D. SLN: dj t SOUTHERN OREGON H E~LTti TRUST ....+~../ /tSdnlCa,.tie,r,i.. FAAU!-}' !'KAC"I'!CL GROUP I • FAMILY PRACTlCB GROUP /! Phlvriu~u nndSnrgn~m ,~l/,4 p.„tm~i Por4 Dnu • '7U(1 Duvnr Park Drier • Mrd~ind, brrgnn 'J75U4 t S¢ U (rOX-4491 ~l ~~ ~~~ ~~-- C~~~~ ~G~~ ~~~~ ~ g7~oz ~r~~~~~~ aa~Point to IT «q ~"~~~~ePa~~t pla'~n'n~ _..~"' ~~~~_'~~ ~~" „/ ~~~~a-cal`' ~ Z~'`~' tiU~~~u-~. ~ ~yr~ ~~ ~o~J Z~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ G~~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~-~ ~~ ~° ~/~ _~~-tom ~~~ ~- ~~ G~~`'~' ~ Z,~, ~~~~f~~w~.-~~~„Tam s~ ~~y~-~~ L~-~G~ ~ _._ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ u~~ ~~~ ~~~~~- ~~. ~~ ~~ ~9~ ~'-~ ~ ~7so ~ ~~~ t 6~`r~iao.~. cow 3'7 Richard and Jackie Nave 5395 Teresa Way Central Point Or 97502 February 20, 2000 Central Point Planning Commission Central Point City Hall I55 South Second St Central Point Or 97502 To Whom [t May Concern, We are writing in response to the conditional use permit application filed by the property owner at 5366 Teresa Way, Plat 362w34d, tax tot 214. We are strongly opposed to this permit. The current owner has not owned the property tong and already there is to much junk sitting around. We feel that due to the way things seem to accumulate at such a rapid pace and the state of decay that these things are already in before they arrive shows that the mobile would not be "temporary" nor would it be in a condition that represents our current sub-division. Added to that, remains the fact that there are three people living in a four bedroom home. We see no reason for an additional home. There is adequate room for att concerned in the existing home. The doctor's letter states that the patient is not able to reside alone and that the patient needs someone close by to assist her. Would it not be better to have the patient residing in the same residence where help is quickly available, instead of "out back"? We urge you to reject the applicants proposal, in fact , we urge you to request that the applicant clean up the current debris cluttering his property. Jackie Nave 1~~(c;~IJUC~ FEB 2 3 2000 38 Thank you, To: City of Central Point, OR Planning Department Re: Temporary placement of mobile home at 5366 Teresa Way Prom: Randy Linker 5351 Teresa Way Central Point, OR 97502 (541) 664-5266 ~8 O oooz ~ ~ a3~ ~p~~~~la I can sympathize with the situation faced by the residence at 5366 Teresa Way. When a family member becomes ill, it is a hardship and anything that can help ease the situation is obviously welcome. I ask one very simple request of the Planning Department. I ask you to please drive by this property and ask yourself, "Would I want this property in my neighborhood"? "Would I want to have another mobile home added to this already "shabby" property"? If you can look at this property and honest agree amongst yourselves, that it would not bother you to have this property as a neighbor, I only ask that you uphold a few conditions. The Mobile home cannot be set on blocks. Instead, it must have siding installed to try and lessen the appearance of a "Family Commune". • Set a time limit that requires the removal of the second trailer on a specific date. I can imagine all too often, once a home is in place, one family member to another occupies it. Please let me restate my position. I am sympathetic to the situation but I am very concerned with this appearance of the property in its current state. The addition of another trailer will surely add to the unpleasant appearance we all must face now. The neighborhood is one that is clean, neat, andwetl attended to, with the exception of 5366 Teresa Way. Do we really want to allow this resident to draw down the value of the properties and homes in this area? I have always hoped that the planning commission was here to protect the city we live in. Not to sound too sour, but if I wanted to live in White City, I would have bought a home there. I have always tried to be a good resident and neighbor. I work hard at keeping my home in excellent condition and appearance, as do most of the residents in the neighborhood. Unfortunately, this property directly affects other property values, other neighbors and me. As the responsible party, the Planning Commission for the City of Central Point, I hope you too would be sympathetic to the situation that my neighbors and I face with 5366 Teresa Way. I ask again, please drive by this property and make your decision based on your initial reaction. What would you do if this were your neighborhood? Sincerely ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ '~, FEB 2 2 2000 Randy Linker 3 9 sy ~ a , a I ~~o ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ I~ Iii FEB 2 2 2000 ,'LLB ~~'~ ~3 ~/rk-R vto~lcC~~ho~ t/~ ~. ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~-~ ~ ~ . ~~ ~~ ~1,rw ~ .I l~s i 5~~~7/rn ~ ~, ~ ~, ~ ~ ~~,~,~ w~ ~ ~- ~~~lu~~b~/~ze , ~~ ~' ~ ,E``~~ ~~~~- U1~ `~k ~8~ ~ ute- ,~ ~~ ,~' ~~-m" fi r-' . _ J, i ~~ /f~ vYV ~~--'. ~3~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ a ~ ~~ C CITY OF CENTRAL POIN`1' APPLICANT: BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT City of Central Paint E~:r~rlsr~r ttE tt Planning Department Name: Darold Hutsell (664-5318) Address: 5366 Teresa Way City: Central Point State: Or• Zip code: 97502 AGENT: city: OWNER OF RECORD: City: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zip code: Zip code: tempornrv LLIV Ul1C LLVmC - CVLLVIL1VLLGl use NCLmlI (hardship for infirmed relative) BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: 1. water/sewer 4.BuildinQ permit for Manufactured Dwelling set-up required. S.BllildinQ permit required for decks or awninQS. 6. Plumbing and or electrical permits may be required. CENTRAL POINT BUILDING DEPARTMENT By: ~ Dated: ~a"~7 _ STAFF REPORT.wpdC:\CorcflSuitcB\Tcmptatc\Custom WP TunplataUiusincss FomuISTAFF REPORT.wpd Standards. 43 ATTACIIMI;NT F RECOMMENDED PLANNING DIJPARTMGNT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The approval of the Conditional Use Permit shat(expire in one year on March 7, 2001 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 60 days of Planning Commission approval. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations . 3. The applicant shall keep safe access available to Lucile Foot at ali times. 44 PLANNING D>JPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: March 7, 2000 TO: FROM: SUBJ>JCT: Owner/ Annlicant: Pro er Description/ Zoning: Summary Central Point Planning Commission Tom Humphrey AICP, Plamring Director Site Plan Review of 37 2W 02CA, Tax Lot 700 -Installation of a drive through window at the Union 76 Station at 1065 East Pine Street Colvin Oil Company 2520 Foothill Boulevard Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 372W02CA, Tax Lot 700 - 0.90 acres C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review that would allow the construction of a drive through window at the Union 76 gas station. Applicable Law CPMC 17.46.010 et seq. - C-4, Tourist and Office-Professional District CPMC 17.64.010 et seq. -Off Street Parking and Loading CPMC 17.72.010 et seq.- Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Discussion Colvin Oil Company, has requested a review of a site plan that would allow a drive through window to be installed on the West side of the Union 76 gas station (formerly BP). The addition of the window would allow the business to sell products currently available within the mini-mart to drive through as well as walk in customers. The business already has a walk up window for fuel payments. The drive through window would alter the current access and traffic circulation on the site since vehicles would approach from Jewett School Road and wind around the North side of the building to the window. Egress would be accomplished to the South onto Pine Street or back to Jewett School Road. Due to the new complexity of driving through the Commercial Fueling facility and the gasoline pumps, staff recommends that the applicant provide a traffic circulation and striping plan to the Public Works Department for review prior to the building of the window. Parking requirements would experience no net loss since the three spaces adjacent to the building would be relocated near the west property line. .- 4 5 fhe window is proposed on the side of the building where the electricalservice is provided, however there would be no contict behveen the two. The concrete walk would remain intact and the window will be extended over the walk. Both the window and electrical service are protected by bumper poles. Notices to surrounding property owners were sent out by mail and no comments have been received by the Planning Department as of this date. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law In approving, conditionally approving or denying the plans submitted, the City bases it's decision 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 applicant has submitted a plan that shows no c}tange to the existing landscape scheme. B. Design, nutnber and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; Access to the site is gained from hvo curb cuts along East Pine Street and Jewett School Road. Sidewalks have been installed along Pine Street. No changes to access are being proposed at this time but a traffic circulation plan may be required by the Public Works Department. C. To provide off-street parking and loading facilities and pedestrian and vehicle flow facilities in such a manner as is compatible with the use for which the site is proposed to be used and capable of use, and in such a manner as to improve and avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; The project would relocate t}tree displaced parking spaces to the west property line. These should be striped by the applicant. 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; ^ No additional signagc has been proposed at this time however the applicant will be required to apply for a sign permit and submit plans to the City prior to any new sign J installation. Pavement striping (directional arrows, "drive through" lettering etc.) may be required to direct traffic through the project area. E. Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for the reasonable safety of life, limb and property, including, but not limited to, suitable gates, access roads and fire lanes so that al! 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 when constructed, will be 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 standazds as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area and it's environs. Drive through windows are permitted in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning 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 and Building Elevations B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Planning Department Recommended Conditions of Approval 4 "7 .~-- ary °~ C~trall~t ~e~ p}annan~ ~~' ~~ ~, ~~ ~~ Rg\~ z ~ ~2 A Union 76 Colvin Oil Central Point, Oregon Shawn Huddleston Construction 14'-0" addition FRONT ELEVATION 49 Bumper poles (Aj- ~Se3f-closing drive up window ,~ t _~~F~, _s~,... ~ ~~ ?J City of Cer~tf~al' Porrit ~JzJ PLANNINCG DEPARTMENT' ~4 e. "I'om Humphrey, AICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Matt Samitorc Planning Technician Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: February 22, 2000 Meeting Date: Time: Place: NATURE OF MEETING March 7, 2000 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Central Point City Hall I55 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon Ctty of Central Point E~sli~~ ~~T tig tr Planning Department Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review an application for a Site Plan Review that would allow the installation of a drive up window at the Union 76 (formerly BP) gas station. This parcel islocated in a C-4, Tourist and Office Professional Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W02CA, Tax Lot 700. 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 "I'he 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 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, March 7, 2000. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 50 155_ South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 • Fax: (541) 664-6384 Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the expiration of the comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to he related to the proposal and should be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant arc available for public review at City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the same are available at 15 cents per page. Por 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 application. 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. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. e'~ ~~~ y~~ ~~~ ~U'"~ I55 South Second Street • Central Point, OR 97502 O ( 664-3321 • Fax: (541) 664-6384 ATTACIIMEN"I' C RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The approval of the Site Plan shall expire in one year on March 7, 2001 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 60 days of Planning Commission approval. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations . The applicant/property owner shall submit final traffic circulation/striping, landscaping, lighting and sign plans as applicable to the Planning, Public Works and Building Departments for approval prior to obtaining any building permits. 52