The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Commission Packet- June 6, 2000r p yy `` +~.' 1 ~[~ t)1/' yC~,y" 4~'.g1'~ y1 qI{~, .~",~. I(.'yI'~){1 ~i 1 M~, y'y { ~~1 s."l:,\~~r'Mg ~,A +C `~sY 111~1~~()d~+ :'A~l~~,~G, "V!P{1 ~ ~•~ ~cxt ]'Irrnnrr~~, C`or7~tlr~ss,r>~7 ]Zcsc~lt~tic,t~ i`~i~c>, ~~Ci 1» [~, C}I,L C~-1..,[~ City Plannir7,~ Chuck Pila~~d - Car~cly l~isl~, lion l°ostcr, l~<ra°olyr~~a~ ,lol~t~sor~, 3oS1r~ l.eCir-os, l~a~tl 1~.~.rnte ar~d ~Vt~yt~e 1Zis rr~, ca R~,rc~l~ l~: ~,., Review and approval ol"May 2, Q0 lannir~ C`or~r~rrt3ission Minutes. V, PLJSIG,,IC AT'pEA, lwr'~`>?S '~I. S>~TSII'~I~SS ]?ale 1- ~ 9 Contiz7ued public hearing re~;ardin~; a tentative subdivision fleet would create six parcels near tl~e house at 74 Pittview Avenue. The subject property is located in an R-]-$, Residential Single-p"amily Zoning District on Map 7 ~W 11A.D, Tax Lot 630}, ~0 - 38 Review ol"a site plan and conditional use permit application that would allotiv the construction off` a eonveaaience mar°l~et, gas statiorx and carwasll in the Mountain View Plaza Dvelop~xreaxt near the ir~te~°section of~'laza Botrlcvar°d and 'recman Road in the C-4, Tourist axed Pt°ofessioa~al District, VIt. MICE;<~~Ai~1~~.,U~i V1tE. r~E)J~1.1EtI~MFi~1T City of Central Poznt Punning Commission Minutes May 2, 200 1. MEETING CALLED T© ©RDER AT 7:00 P.M, ll. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Karolyne Johnson, Candy Fish, John LeGros, Paul Lunte, and Wayne Riggs were present. Don Foster was absent. Also in attendance were Tom Humphrey, Planning Director; lien Gerschler, Community Planner; Matt Samitore, Planning Technician; and Lee Brennan, Public Works Director. Ill. CC}RRESPQNDENCE The Planning Department received one letter from Elden Smith, requesting that the Commission continue Item D of the agenda to the next regular meeting. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Lunte stated that the minutes for March 21, April 4, and April ~ 8, show that he was not present. He stated that he was present at those three meetings. Commissioner Lunte made a motion to approve the Punning Commission Minutes from March 21, 2000 as corrected. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. R~7LL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Lunte made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Minutes from April 4, 2000 as corrected. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Lunte made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Minutes from April '18, 2000 as corrected. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. RC}LL CALL: Fish, abstained; Johnson, yes; LeCras, yes; Lunte, yes; and Foster, yes. V. BUSINESS A. Continued the public Dearing fo consider a request submitted by Larry and Georgians Dodd to vary from the minimum front, side and special setback requirements for the R-'t .g zoning district. The subject property is located at 482 Freeman Road. C.~r; n~~Ca'T'urr„~ P{rtrtt 1'I(tRt)tFt~ ~~p)tJtttttjt{)tt I~1tY1ttlCs li7 {rL' J Tom Humphrey, Planning Director stated the Dodd's have not come to a decision regarding their property, and would like to ask for a continuation of thls item. Georgians Dodd stated that she would like this item tabled until she has more time to talk with her husband and their contractor, Commissioner LeGros made a motion to table this item to a further date, so that the applicants have plenty of time to submit new plans to City of Central Point Staff. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. R~JLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. B. Review of the Final Development Plan far Phase 1451 Lots} of the Miller Estates Planned Unit Development. The subject property is located on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W03B, Tax Lots 500 and 600. Tom Humphrey, Planning Director, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. Mr. Humphrey explained that the purpose of bringing this back before the Planning Commission is to insure the guidelines that were setup as part of the Planned ivJnit Development are followed through. The developer is planning on doing the development in two phases. This first phase is 51 units. The reason for doing the development in phases is so that the flood study that would affect the lots closer to Griffin Creek can be conducted after the City of Central Point has completed the culvert improvements on Scenic Avenue. The developer still has not submitted a landscape plan to the City of Central Point. The Plan will be similar to the one submitted for North Valley Estates with street trees and meandering sidewalks. Lee Brennan, Public Works Director, presented the Public Works Staff Report. All of the lots in this development are considered to be in the 10C}- yearflood plain, The City will need a Landscape Plan before Final Plat will be granted. All of the streets and streetlights are considered private. The developer will have to put in temporary cul-de-sacs so that vehicles can turn around. ff there are any on the property, they will have to be properly abandoned. Commissioner Lunte asked about the open space and tot lot. Mr. Humphrey stated these would be part of Phase II of the project. Commissioner Fish made a motion to pass Resolution 484 approving the final development plan for Phase [ of the Miller Estates Planned Unit {::rt~~ of Ci°utrrrl T'oirtt I'1 rxxirr~,= C.`nrrurri+cion riJirrxk's ,ll,r~, ?. ?t1C1(i I',ri5r' _) Development, Approval is subject to the Planning and Public Works Staff reports and the construction of temporary cul-de~sac bulbs be put in for vehicle turn around movements. Commissioner Riggs seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. C. Review of a site plan that would allow an additional 9{}0 square feet to be constructed at the US West phone building located at 336 Manzanita Street in a C-2, Commercial Professional District. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staff Report. US West is requesting an additional 900 square feet so that they can upgrade their facility to meet new demand in the Central Point area and to add neW facilities as needed. The main problems here are that there is not very much parking. The city Would like the applicants to either enter into a shared parking agreement With a neighboring property or help in the cost of obtaining a public parking area in the downtown area. The applicants would like to add a driveway off of Manzanita Street and add a gate to that access, It appears as if a tree Would have to be removed in order to do this. If removing the tree were necessary the City of Central Point Staff would like #o work with the applicants to replace the tree With one on the new list of recommended trees. New addressing also needs #o be applied to the building on the Manzanita Street side for the Fire District. The City of Central Point would also like the applicants to agree to participate in a Local Improvement District (LID} to improve the alley. Lee Brennan, Public Works Director, presented the Public Works Staff Report. The Public Works Department would like the LID done by next October 2000, before the winter rain begins. The developer needs #o design and implement a site drainage/storm drain plan that corrects and enhances existing site drainage. A 10-foot PUE is being requested along Manzanita Street for when the City of Central Point eventually puts the utilities underground. An area lighting plan is also recommended. ,lulie Coe, the agent for the applicant, stated that for the next few months it will be busy at the site until all the improvements and upgrades are done. Also, they agree to participate in the LID, and either come up with a shared parking agreement With a neighboring property or help in obtaining a city parking lot. She can talk to the managers about keeping only three vehicles there overnight. Commissioner Johnson made a motion to pass Resolution 485, approving the Site Plan subject to the recommended conditions of approval in the Planning and Public Works Department Staff reports, coming up with a shared parking agreement with a neighboring tarr7, cr% C~~rrrr.rl Patixr I'Gttrrriri~7 C:nrrrrrri~srrur ;lfiaurrc~s r1 frrk~ ?. >t1C?{? property or helping t© obtain a city parking lot, and participating in a LID. Commissioner Riggs seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. D. A public hearing regarding a tentative subdivision that would create six parcels near the house at 764 Pittview Avenue. The subject property is located in an R-1-8, Residential Single-Family Zoning District on Map 372W11AD, Tax Lot 6366. Tom Humphrey, Planning Director, stated that the applicant, Llden Smith, has requested that the Commission con#inue this item to next months Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Riggs made a motion to continue the tentative subdivision request until the June 6, 20(30 meeting, Commissioner Lunte seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously, VII, MISCELLANEC)US Mr. Humphrey informed the Commission #ha# the Growers Market is up and running again for the year 2008, each Wednesday from 9 #01 on Oak Street in-between 2n~ and 3`~. Also tha# there is an upcoming TOD meeting on Wednesday May 10~~ a# 7 to 9 a# Scenic Middle School Vlll. ADJC7URNMENT Commissioner Johnson made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Lunte seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Meeting Adjourned at 8:30 P.M. PLANNII\'t; i)r1'AR`I'MF,NT Ml{fMC)12AN1)I.II~'1 1-1LA1Z11~1G DA`1,1. June 6, 2000 Td: Central Point Planning Con~n~ission PRCJM: `1}om I-iuznphro~, AICP, Piaz~~~iz~g Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing- Tentative Subdivision of 37 2W 11 AD `l'ax l.,ot 6300 - Elden S~~~ith. O`vnerl Elden Smith A~nlicant: 9171 Sterling Creek Road Jacksonville, {~R 97530 A~,ent:. L.J. Friar and Associates 816 West Eighth Street Medford, QR 97501 Pro er Description/ 37 2W 1 lAD Tax Lot 6300, 1.14 acres Zoning: R-1-8, Residential Single~Family District Discussion 4n May 6~', the applicant Elden Smith requested that the Planning Commission continue a review of the Cody Subdivision to June 6, as to allow adequate time for a review of the Planning and Public Works Department's stuff reports. Planning and Public Works met with Eldon on May 30~'to resolve some ofthe concerns with the development; particularly easements, rights of way width, garage access and waterline locations. Lee Brennan will address each of the changes with the presentation of his report. u ~. u ~ 1)isc•tz~ii~?II 1_ast yc~7r, I/ldcn SI??itll purcliascd the I)aI'ccl tit 7t~~ I'ittvie~v t~vcl7tlc <7i?d rt;c.civcti t~:I7tativc al)I~I'ov~7f to 1~~Irtitiol7 the existil7t; hon7c frol77 a larstcr €Intlevclt~l7cd I7ol~tiol7 t~f tl7c: I~rol)crty. I?C ~ Ity 1S I?eaf'II?f,~ COt??I?1C;tIC)I? of <€gre4:I?7CI?t5 and a StOI'n? flralIl plan on t1lL' {sisal I)lat al)pllCatlOl? In hol)CS ofGOn?pletlll4~ the Carpel' paI"tlt7oI7 soon. F;Iden ~~=oultl now like to ftlrtl?eI' s€II)divitic t17c zlntlevclopccl portiol? il7to <~ six parcef residential s€Ilxlivision with lot sizes ral7gin~; from $(7()(} to 87t~4 stlu<7rc feet (~lttacl?r??eI?t "1~")- 1~acl7 lot ujo€Ild I)e accessed vi<t a 3Cl foot ~~tidc resitlel?tial I~u7e (SI?i€}rla 1.,~?nc) ti~ritl7 connection into I'ittview L~rivc. Tl?e Planning Departlt-zent I?as reviewed the tentative plan for coI??pliance witl? the Comprehensive Plan and tl?e City's zoning code. TI?e area is designated For low density residential developn?ent and is zoned R_1-~, which is an 8,00 square font residential lot minin?uI?~, This infill development will result in a trlore efficient use of residentially zoned land and improve the overall appearance and value of this neighborhood. Setbacks for each lot would be 20 feet for the front, S feet per story on the sides and l 5 feet for the rear lot lines. Since mast of the lots are shallow in depth, any rights of way or easement dedications could directly affect the building envelope. fln street parking, traffic circulation and sidewalk installation will be limited in tl?is subdivision due to the residential lane standards. The layout is similar to the previously approved Seall Estates, Phase IV subdivision. This general area contains some of the last large acreage Lots that should be considered for park land and this development should be tied into an open space plan. The City has been in contact with neighboring property owners to discuss a future park. Staff would like to work with the .applicant to establish a future pedestrian connection to the surrounding potential park areas, The Public Works Department has reviewed the tentative plan with the City's water, sewer, storm drail? and transportation standards. Unfortunately, the submitted tentative plan Iaclcs certain specificity pertaining to existing infrastructure and tl7e Public Works staff I?ave sumr??arized dcpartl7?eI?t recluiren?el7ts in tl7e staff report included as t~ttachlnent C. Jackson Co€Inty Fire District Nc>, 3 {tlttachtx?cI?t l~} rccolnn~Fel?ds tl?at I)arking l)e lirnitcd to oI?e side of'thc street with I7o parking in the "I?aI??mcrhead". "1'l7e agency furtl~cr reeluests that cash resiclcnce display an address sign visible from the street. .., ]~iltcliltS°~; ~~I'f~-.t~'[ ,~Itci C.~t~ttc']tisit~~t:, c)1'E ;I~ti Staf`f` stlggcsis the fol]o~~lilrg findings of filet <tlrci concltlsic)ns flf la«~ s?s a])l)lic~Ihfc to t]~c l)rolect allci ncccss~Il-y for its al)I)rava]. #. Tire project site is (ocatetl irr the l~-#-l3, #~<esic#etttial 5iri~le-I<arrti]j' Ictrrirt District aril increases resit#crrtial larrt# trse cf#icie€rcy irr this area. ~ ~?~ pI'opflsed telltatlVe plan foI' srngle faIlllly I"eSld~Ilt]<rl deVE;IC}l)II1G[It 1S a f)('I'I11ItteCl 1rsG III t]le R-I-S zonil)g district. `I'lle zoning in ttI[-II is cor?sistellt with the Lo~v l:?cnsity Iiesiclelltial Colllprehensive Plan Illap designatifln. The Collll) I'lall ellcouragcs innovative residcllti<?l I)Ialrlaing alld develcapnlellt techlliq€Ies that would I?el#~ to illcreasc land use cfhciellcy anti reduce costs of utilities and services (Comp Plan, page XII-l2}. #nfill projects of this sort are consistent with this city policy. 2. Tire project consists of a tentative plan application for the strbdivisrorr of approximately 1.I4 acres far the purpose of developing asinle-farrrily residential subdivision, Cody 5ubdivisio€r. The total ntrrrrber of lots proposed for the srrlldivision is 6. The proposed single-family subdivision meets the density requirement for the R-I-$ residential zone which is a maximum of4.5 units per acre. Each lot within the subdivision could meet the requirements of the City's subdivision and zoning codes for residential lots as well as the specific requirements flfthe R-I-B zone. The tentative plan includes most of the information required by CPMC #.6.IO.~IO et. seq. 3, Tire Planning and Public Works Departments have reviewed the tentative plan for the proposed subdivision and the findings of fact and determined that the project meets all City standards and requirements subject to the recommended conditions of the Planning Department (Attachment ~) and the Public Works Department {Attachment C}. 1'~,t'€'t'I)['I7C"~.3'I~~Etr~i~~u'~t){}t)ft~J ih~1'f) ,,. ~ .,- IZcc~c}€~az~acnciati{~z~: Sf<tf"f` z~ceozttz~~ez~ds that tl~e ~'lanning {V:oz~ttt~issiotx t<~kc tt~c fc~llo~viz~g action: 1. ~,{ic>pt ~Zesollztiozl I1Io._~, approving tllc tez~t~~tive s~zi}c9ivisic~z~ sil~~jec;t tc~ tl~c rc{:c~i~~z~~czxci~.ci conditiozts of approval ~~ttachn~ent I?}; or 2. Dez~}= the tentative sul~e~ivision, or 3. Contiz~rze tl~e review of the tentative su~~c~ivisioz~ at tl~e eliscretioz~ c~i tl~c C't~€xit~~issiot~. Attacl~znez~ts: A. Tentative Plan B. Notice of Meeting C. Pubic Works Staff Repoz-t ~. Correspe>ndence ~. Planning Department Recommended Conditions r- Zr lp?~ F/ 1 ii O~ j! C ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ a~'~ ~ .~~~ ~ i~ ~ ~ }r ~~ ~~ -~. a"~< ~a s ~~~ }r ~d7 Ib4'S.}YSY t ~__... !'.. it~.1. i... ~~~wYYYn~J41_ ~w~ i. ,~ t~ty o f G"ccc ~ ~ ~ t t'fan~tizt~ ~e~~xrime~~ f }~~{F ...., r. !_ its "k?rs~rQ~?S ~ _ ~ Y k~~'a C~ n ~~ ~ 6r ~f~~ ~ ~ tp7 ~ ~ ~i Iti t4 ~ nh~Y.x rs,~~.t~ i3..S,_._____._..~ __1_____.__.......»_...._ . ................_.__.,.,....1 .. ~~p ~ ~ ~: ~R b~ n ~~ a 9 iL.K k50.gw I ~- *[ ( taut <5'i~ ~ f -4t ~ ~ Iz ~ j ~ E ~~ \ c' o~ I .....+ ~ - - J ~ r ~~ ly f I! - y~ ~ ~~ a n c P Is "I I ~ a ~ ~ ~` I I ~b.b< ~~ ! ~ _ 589'5}'24'[ 75, 7 z{ww ~~ ~ iy S44'S3 £ `: ~ J S ~ Pe ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ a ~ ~i ~ ~ ~` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y`y ~ ~ 5 N II ~ kt0'33'22"r I !! [ EE _ °3 I ~, 1 ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ I I I i - J ~t I E ___ - ~ ._... ._._. ._.~.. ..._. f....-3 ._...».. LktS'!M !t ~ !I( Y O2Y'tAG ti' /t[ V. ____ 5'.:b'....,_.. 404[ ^ tP'F: ""' t4'4iI -° ~~ PE~~"7ltSEYt Al~]dt1E 4 ~~ ~~ a i . ~N ~kx ~ o E ~ Y O ~~] ~.7 ~~~ ~~Sd4'SG"Sb'S y-•f ~~~,`Sr.... n,~ r t ~ ~~ o~` ~~~~ ~~*~z ~~~C'o ~ ~~ ~ x~.~ ~~r.~~Y z~,~~z~~z~ z ~~~~ z~ 'I'c~czi t (uzttttltrcy, AIC;1' t'IanzYiz~~ t7zrector Ken Gerscitler Cozt~ztzuzzicy ~'lazxzlcr Dcanz~a Grcgozy Adcuiziistrati~~rJl'Iazzztirtg Secrctazy oaf lice of ~Vlce~il~~~ Dalfc of N©ticc: A~~z•~i ~~, 2t~4(l Meeting Date Time: Place: May 2, 2444 7:40 p.m. t<Approximate} Central Point City Full 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATUF2.E CAF MEETFNG Cit`ry~~ f CenLr:ad Poiu~ ~~~~~~~~ tt~ tt F'l~nnin~- Dep~€rtmc~tt `° Beginning at the above tune and place, the Central Point .Manning Coznn~issiozz will review an application for a ~ lot Tentative Subdivision (Cody Subdivision) to be located north of Pittview Avenue in the vicinity of Bursell road. The sub,~ect parcel to be divided is located in an R-I-8, Residential Single Family Zoning District on .Iackson County Assessment Plat 372~V1 IAD, Tax Lot 634f3. The Central Point Punning Commission will review the application of Tentative Subdivision to determine if all of the requirements of the Central Point Municipal Code can. be met. If the Commission determines that the subdivision can be created, a tentative approval could be issued . Once a tentative approval has been issued, the applicant must file for a final plat of the subdivision within one year ofthe Commission's decision. CRFTERFA F£?R DECFSION The requirements for "I~entative Subdivisions are set forth in Chapter 1 d of the Central I'oiz~t Municipal Code, relating to General Information, tentative plan approval and conditions on tentative plan approval. Tl3e proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PUBLIC COMMI~NTS Any person interested irz cot7~rncntint; on tllc above-mentioned land use decision may submit written cornrt~ents up ur7til the close of the mectint; scheduled for "I~ucsday, May 2, 20C}(~. ~. -' ~~'rittc€t cc}ntrttcnts rtt,t~~ (}~ wrttt in ;tdti~.trt~c c~i'thr rtttcti€t:>` f~c~ {-r€t[r,t] 1't~t~rt {"it~~ l call, l S; `~t}z~t]t:~cccsrui `~tr~ct, (."4rttra! l'c}int, (alp ~~i"~{):?. f~;;z~~5 t~lrt~'h ~rr~t}' ]~tt~~ ~~3c- €Ir~• l~,t~€;; E~zE ~;rr ,31}I~~.~,tf ~}~t tlr~~ rttat[~~E~ :.1~,~11 ]}~~ i.~~:,~~ti I~riF~r ics tlt~.~ expiration o€-tltc corz~ntc€~t i}rric>d ncatcd al~o~~c. ~L-t} testir~tc7rt}' tzttcl «~ritt~ €t ~:c~nirttcuts aboz€t tllc decisions described al}«vc: ujdl rtcctl to 17c reltttctl ic7 tltc ]~rc~p{,~;al ~t€tcl sltc}uld lie st~ttccl clearly tca tltc l'lannir~g C~'ontrttissic~n. ~. Col~ics of all cvidcr~cc relied upon hy~ the <tl~plicartt <zre ~tvailab]c l~~r }xrl~lic revictiv at City 1-lal], I55 South Second Street, C.'c.ntraf Point, C~rc~;ort. C~opics c>f`thc s~tntc arc ~tt~zti]<tblc Ott l ~ cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public nta}~ co€~tact the Planrtin~, l)c l~artmcnt at (S~l 1 } 6~>4- 3321 ext. 231. SUl'1~IYIARY QF I'R4CEI7I1R11 .fit tllc meeting, tl~e Plazuting Con~rnission will review the applications, technical staff reports, bear testimony frorxz the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the application. ta.ny testimony or wr-iften comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. tit the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve or deny the Tentative Subdivision. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Plaruling Commission decisions. c~~ t=~1..1_.Is~~ `~ b B x ~~ t3 (' " ._ _ ~" ~. <- Svt~~ccs Fropcrsy _ ._l_._ __ ~{~ _ f . .. 3 _~~ a . [ r - ~ - f .. 7€ }- r _i t . ~F_...._, g r ~ i ~~} ~ t __. s ~ . i ~~ t lU _~~ I~ #} ,I f r i; . ~ ~ ~ t ~~ J #-C}(2~t.~ 4 `f'f€i~-l`~ 1321 ~ ~-~ { _ ~~ . t~. ~r f ~ r j r [ii fr `13 . r 44 €i ~ ~ ~~sn.n.c v~rr~ ; ~~ ~ ~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~ , ~~ ~ ~~2E~t~E;C~tif's ~~'r ~ r E 3 ~ ~ cr. ,, ct}. 't f 1 uF ~'f ~ j ~ f} J r lli~r3~3(~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~7 `-~ ~ i~ ~ taa r ilJ ~ qc _~ .r VJ,t}47t~,t ~d~ ~ !s Q' rr rtr'r.> > s u 1 55 St~utlt `~ccr~t~cl `~trc;ct • C.;cntra] t't>int, C)f' c''c"`' •• „ ~y , , ~-3321 • fax. (541) C~6~-Ca3f~~ G7 5 .~_ CITY QF Cf=NTRAL PC71NT ©~'PA£~'7-MEN7' C7F f'Uf3C.IC Wt~F,'KS STAFF RFPdRT for C{~DY SUBDIVISlQN TENTATIVE PLAN REVIEW PW#00009 City ~ f Ccx~ try 1~~~ k'#attztLti~ i~c~~z ixx2c~zf Date: April 24, 2000 Applicant: Elden Smith, 9171 Sterling Creek Road, Jacksonville, C.~regon 97530 899-1720 Agent: L.J. Friar and Associates,. P.C, 816 W. 8~ Street, Medford, Oregon 97501 Property CJwner: Same as Applicant Project: Cody Subdivision. Location: East of Burrell Road and Sydney Cour#, an the Northern Side of Pitfview Avenue Legal: . T37S, R2W, Section 011AD, tax lot 63001 Zoning: R-1-8 Area: 1.1~ Acres {approximately}. Units: 7 lots {6 new lots and one remainder lot with an existing house and garage. Plans: 1 page entitled Tentative Subdivision Plat Cady Subdivision, dated March 27, 20010, prepared by L.J. Friar and Associates. Report By: Lee N. Brennan, Public Works Director Purpose Provide information fo fhe Planning Commission and Applicant (hereinafter referred to as "Developer"} regarding Cify Public Works Department {PWD} standards, requirements, and conditions to be included in the design and development of the praposed planned unit development. Gather information from the DeveloperlEngineerregardiHg the proposed development. it should be Hated that #his plan was absent of any designation or delineafian of existing "rnfrastructure, which is required to be p{aced an a tentative plan,far ar~y development. As such, the plan is incomplete. ~ ~tn worwng with fhe Developer, it is believed that infrastructure seNices {i.e wafer, sanitary sewer, stormdrainage, power. telephone f4able,aetc.}rangy, provided.ta the praposed subdivision. Our staff report ts''fiase~ oii a cursory irev~ew of fiie~~i~ix`'~uii~ing connei:tiing infrastructure. if during design, changes to the conditions may need to be made to make sure that the subdivision is adequately seNed without Overtaxing fhe existing infrastructure and to provide adequate levels of seNice to the praposed development. The proposed intersection connection of Shayla Lane to Pittview Avenue provides for an intersection separation of approximately 210 feet from the intersection of Sydney Court with Pittview Avenue. This exceeds the minimum intersection requirement of 150 feet for a local street to local street connection. Special Requirements Exisfinq Infrastructure: The Developer shall demonstrate that all connections to existing infrastructure {i.e. streets, water, sanitary sewer, storm drain systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,} will not interfere with or provide for the degradation of the existing effective level of service or operation of the infrastructure facil'€ties, and that the existing infrastructure facilities have either adequate capacities to accommodate the flows andtor demands imposed on the existing infrastructure as the result of fhe connection of the proposed development's infrastructure, or will be improved by and at the expense of the Developer to accommodate the additional flows andJor demands; while maintaining or improving the existing level of service of B~nll Estates I1' 7'entc~th~e Plan Reidcu~. P 13'L) Sta,Q h'cI~{>rt Fehrxtar~~ 22, 1944 f'a~>e 1 the affected facility, as approved by {as applicable}, the regulatory agency, utility awner, andlor property awner involved. 2, Residential Lane: The Developer is proposing the use of public streets with a residential lane with a `hammefiead" {Shayla Lane}. The PWD has approved development of this residential lane concept an Shelterwoad, griffin Greek Estates, Lindsey Meadows, Beall Estates IV, and Parkwaod Terrace subdivisions. Typically residential lanes have been designed fa serve a maximum of 12 lots. The proposed layout will serve 7 lots. The residential lane has the following standards: a A 2~-foot-wide traveled section {curb-ta-curb width}, with a 2 percent crown O Standard curb and gutters [~ A 2-faof-wide strip located behind the curb for installation of water meter service boxes, fire hydrants, street lights etc. Cl Requires a 3C}-foot-wide right-of-way. ^ Street parking na# allowed an residential lanes. Another concern regarding the use of a residential Lane for this development is the lack of visitor parking within the development and on the closest street to the development (Pittview Avenue. We would suggest the possibility of inclusion of an off-street visitor parking area within the development. The "T" shaped "hammerhead" turnaround shall be designed and implemented, as approved by the City PWD and Fire District No. 3. The connection to Pittview Ave will be a standard driveway connection with a 2-fact concrete `landing' behind the driveway apron; the driveway apron shall have a 30-faof throat. A temporary asphalt connection could be made and the final concrete driveway connection completed when Pittview Avenue is developed #o urban standards. 3. Removaloft)nivewayCo»nectiorrs~fo Piitvfew~tvenue;.it.ahou[d be requ[red.#o.#rave.#he ,. existing driveway connections of the remainder of #ax lot fi30fJ removed and require contraction to Shayla Lane. This driveway connection would Dave to start a minimum of 2g feet behind the right-of way of Pittview Avenue, tv provide for proper sight distances and allow #urning movements onto these lots from Shayla Lane that are not made on Pittview Avenue. 4. Street Parkin : As we are proposing in the revised PWD standards, the use of residential lanes require that street parking not be allowed. We would recommend that street parking not be allowed on Shayla Lane. 5. connection to Pittview Avenue: Need 30-foot radii an right-of-way as it connects to Pittview Avenue right-of-way. ~. Sidewalks and Sidewalk Easement: The residential lane does not provide for sidewalks. The City PWD is recommending that a 5-foot wide public sidewalk section {with a suitable public ingress aril egress easement requirement} be provided adjoining the right-af-way on the east and west sides of Shayla Lame. This will also require That the structure setback be increased to 2~ feet to afford driveway parking that does not interfere with pedestrian traffic an the sidewalk. The 10-faof-wide public utilities easement would be moved to the outside of the sidewalk easement to mitigate interference with public utility insta[[atian and facility placement {i.e transformers, risers, pedestals, etc.}. The 5 foo# sidewalk easement would not be a P.U.E., as . _.-. ltis'J;! f~.rktt{t r ~ le`+Ii~Nt~'s` f'(,3+: ~itt:i t< 1'1i~j7 S(„r7 ,: his ~~, art t'.1L~~ t si~own or7 the ter7tative plat. As required a~~ recent developrz~ents ufil~zing fire res~dent~al fa~1e street standard, fhe sidewalk would be insfalled at the Developer's expense as part of tl~e developrrient and will be rnainfained by tl~e property owner, similar fo the City's current sidewalk ordinance requirements. If is further recorl~mended that sidewalk also be required along fhe remainder parcel to the connection with Pittview Avenue. 7. Ufr/rty Easements: A 10-foot wide public utility easer~~ent (PUE} will be required outside tl~e City's right-of-way of Shayla Lane, on both sides of the large. To facilitate placer~~ent of the sidewalk section, the PUE would be located adjacent fo tl7e sidewalk easement, and extend 15- feet behind the right-of-way. Easement to fhe City of Central Point shalt be dedicated across a selected lot fo the north for connection of a new water line fo fhe existing 8-inch waterline in Juanita Way. The minimum easement width steal( be 15-feet wide. Addifional easements on lots fo the north may be required fo facilitate connection to fhe existing storm drain and sanitary sewer collection and conveyance systems. 8. Pittview Avenue Righf-of-Way Pittview Avenue is identified as local street and currently has a right-of-way width of ~0 fee#. No additional right-af-way dedications is warranted. 9. Sight-Trianctles: Field review of this property's access to Pittview Avenue indicates that the proper sight triangles for a loca! street that connects to a another local street can be afforded at the proposed intersection of Shayia Lane with Pit#view Avenue, with removal of fhe interfering #rees and vegetation. This type of street intersection requires a 25-foot sight triangle. 10. improvements fo Pittview Avenge; Improvements fo Pittview Avenue including, but not limited to, street section widening (to 3g feet Pram centerline to curb-[ine~, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, bikeways, stree# lights, storm drainage, and traffic con#roI and delineation, shall be coordinated and approved by the JC Roads and the City PWD. The improvements shou[d be constructed at the expense of the Developer and as part of the development of the proposed subdivision. These improvements extend for the entire fron#age of the tentative plat: from the southeast comer of lo# '[ to the sou#hwes# comer o€ the remainder of tax [ot 63f~f1; a distance of approxirna#ely 127 €eet. As approved by the City Administrator, the Developer may request or be required to defer any or al! of the required improvements along Pittview Avenue until a later date. If any or all of the improvements are to be deferred fo a later date, then the Developer wil! be required fo enter into a suitable deferred improvement agreement with the City/County for the devefopmenflimprovemenf of the street section and appurtenances ~i.e. sidewalks, curb, gutter, street lights, storm drainage, etc. along the development's frontages with Pittview Avenue, as required and approved by the JC Roads and City PWD '11 Reinforced Water Connecfiorr: The Developer should be required to constructed an 8-inch diameter wafer fine which connects fo the existing 8-inch diameter wafer line in Piffview Avenue, and which "loops" info fhe 8-inch-wafer line in Juanita Way. This would prevent Phis line from being a "dead-end" line, which would require significantly more maintenance and "fleshings". Waterline stub-oafs and suitable easements shall be provided fo extend fhe 8-inch wafer service fo fhe large parcels to fhe West {tax lot 140 and Easf {fax lot 640Q} of fhe subject Development, with fhe stub-oafs possibly being located of fhe "hammerhead" tax €ofs fo li F3ca1! hstatrs 1!' 7`entati4~ Plan h'e~~ies+~, Pi~'I) Strsfj'I;clxx-r Fehrarart~ 2', t 444 1'ac,~c d ~,7en8ra( All construction of public improvements shall conform to the City's PWD Standards, the conditions approved and stipulated by the Planning Commission, and other special specifications, details, standards, andtor upgrades as may be approved by the City Administrator ar his designee prior to the approval of the construction plans far tl~e proposed development. During construction, changes proposed by the Developer shalt be submitted in writing by the Developer's engineer to the City PWD for approval prior to implementation. 2, Developer shall provide copies of any permits, variances, approvals, and conditions as may be required by other agencies, including, but not limited fa, the Uregon Department of l=fish and Wildlife {DFW}, flregan Department of Environmental Quality {DEQ}, Oregon Division of State Lands {DSL}, U,S. Army Corps of Engineers {AC4E}, affected irrigation districts, and JC Roads, as applicable. 3. Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or surveyor shall provide the Public Works Depar#ment with "as-built" drawings. if feasible, the Developer's engineer ar surveyor should provide the drawings in bath a "hard copy" form {produced on Mylar'~} and in a "digital" format compatible with AutoCAD~, or other form as approved by the City PWD. As-built drawings are to be provided to the City which provide "red-line" changes fo 1'Enal approved construction plans that identify the locations and or elevations {as appropriate) of actual installed items, including, but not limited fo, invert, inlet, and rim ar lip elevations; spot elevations idenfi~ed on drawings; road a#ignmen#; water [fines, valves, and fre 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 My[at~'}, or an approved a[temative format, of construction drawings, and if feasible, an acceptable AutoCAD° compatible drawing electronic file to the City at completion of construction and prior to acceptance of public infrastructure facilities completed.as~part of:~he proposed devetoprner~t,.or~as:ofherwlse:approved by ~e C~.YAdministrator.-:or~his:deslgnee..._ 4. 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. 5. If applicable, all existing concrete, pipe, building materials, structures, dear and grub materials, and other deleterious materials shall be removed from the site and either recycled or properly disposed of In accordance with the requirements of the DEQ. B_ Easements far City infrastructure {i.e. sanitary sewer, water, and storm drain [if applicable]} should be a minimum of ~ 5-feet wide, and shauid not split lot lines. Easements for public storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water lines shauid 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. if two or mare City awned utilities are located within an easement, then a minimum of 2(~-fact width should be required. Easement dedications in final deeds or CC&Rs need a statement which should clearly Indicate that easements must be maintained with suitable, driveable vehicular access to City public infrastructure facilities, as determined by the City PWD. ~~ fierrll ~s&atcs 1 ~' Tentatii~e P1ara Review. PR'17 Strz• jJ•Rcf~art Fehrwnr}~ 12, 1944 f'r~Rc 5 7. Prior to tl~e City PWD final approval of the cons#ructior~ plans for the proposed improvements, the following should be submitted: C~ A copy of written approvaE from Fire District 3 of the final street and driveway layout, site access, fare hydrant placement, and water system improvement plans for the proposed development. C.i The plans relating to the sanitary sewers should be approved in writing by BCVSA, and the appropriate signature blocks should be completed on the plans. ~ A copy of written approval from JC Roads regarding Pittview Avenue improvements {as applicable} and street connections to Pittview Avenue. 8. Field verify all existing infrastructure elevations and locations {i.e. pipe inverts, curb elevations, #op of banks, ditchJchannel inverts, s#reet elevations, etc.}, to which the proposed development's infrastructure will connect into existing improvements, error to final construction plan design and submittal for final approval. 9. Overhead power lines. if applicable, coordinate efforts with Pacific Power and Light, US West, and TCI Cable, to convert any overhead electrical power, telephone, or cable facilities within or adjoining the proposed development to undergrour:d facilities, prior to the acceptance by the City PWD of the public improvements associated with the proposed development. All agreements and costs associated with the conversion of these facilities from overhead to underground facilities, shall be by and between the utility owners and the Developer. 1(l. The accurate locations of any existing underground and above ground public infrastruc#ure, and the location of the associated easements with these facilities, shall be accurately portrayed {both horizontally and vertically} on the construction plans and as-built drawings. '[ 9. The Developer's engineer or surveyor shall provide to the Public Works Department a drawing of the recorded Final. Plat trap reproduced on My[ar~° and In an acceptable electronic form In AutoCAD~ format. The Flnal Plat shall be tied to a legal Government comer and the State Plane Coordinate System. The Flnal Plat shall either reflect or be later modified to reflect any applicable "red-line" changes noted in the construction "as-bunts", at the discretion of the City Administrator or his designee. StreetstT-~affic Existing Improvements - Pittview Avenue -Local Street. Current Rf,)W 60` wide, varying street width. Right-of Way required: 60 foot width. Jurisdiction - Jackson County. Construction drawings for this Tentative Plan shall include a Street Lighting Plan and Traffic Delineation Plan in accordance with the requirements of the City PWD. Street fights shall be placed in a "zig-zag~ pattern along the streets and at maximum 200-foot spacing {as measured from Eight post to light post} to afford better lighting of the public rights-of-way. The Street Lighting Plan shall include two street lights along the residential Zane, The street lights on the residential lane will be of a design and at locations as approved by the City PWD and Pacific Power. Street lights will also need to be installed or possibly modified along Pittview Avenue to afford proper lighting of the street intersection. ~~ F+,•.,.. !at<tt,~s Ij 1, ~....;ti~ i',.,.. Ii~•trrt:, 1`tt t7 ~;,r''!i,•1~, ,. ,i'.ii-I 2. Tl~e C€ty FIND, at tl~e cost of tf~e Developer, sh~ali evalr~ate tf~e sfrengtf7 of tf~e native so€Is and determine the street section designs for Sf7ayla Lane and E'ittview Avenge in accordance with tf~e City PWD Standards. The City's engineering staff ar selected er~gir~eering consulfant {at Developer's expense}, shall evaluate the strengtf~ of tf~e native soils and determine fhe street section designs in accordance with tf~e Cdty I'WD Standards. Minir~~ur~~ street section for Shayla Lane shalt be as follows: - 3-inches Class "B" A.C. - 6-inches of 1 "-p=' crushed rock - 8-inches of 4"-0" crushed rock {City of Medford specifications}, - Woven geofexti#e fabric aver compacted subgrade. Minir-num street section far F'iftview Avenue shalt be as fal#ows: - 3-inches Class ~B" A.C. - 6-inches of 1 "-C}" crushed rock - 8-inches of 4"-fl" crushed rock {City of Medford specifications}, - Woven geatextile fabric aver compacted subgrade. Street section {excluding the asphalt concrete portion} steal! be extended underneath and a minimum of two fee# beyond the curb and gutter section, and underneath the driveway apron connection with Pittview Avenue. 3. As applicable, stop signs and Traffic delineation {i.e. "stag bars"} shall be required and installed by the City PWD {at the Developer's expense} at the proposed development's intersection with Pitfview Avenue. No parking signs and yellow curbing {as needed} will also be placed along Shayla Lane, by the City PWD at the Developer's expense. Storm Dra[nage, Irrigation [mprovements Existing Improvements - Various Sized storm drainage pipes along the southern sides of lots 17 and 'l8 of Tyler Park Subdivision. During fhe design of fhe storm drain collection and conveyance system {SD System}, which shaft provide for and Canvey storm water run-off from and run-an onto the proposed development {either surface run-on ar culvert or creeklditch conveyance}, the Developer shal# demonstrate thaf the storm water flows from the completion of the proposed development {and at any time prior to completion of development} do not exceed predevelapment flows; ar that existing capacity, allowances, or provisions have been made {and approval of the applicable properties owners and regulatory agencies has been obtained}, which accommodate any additional flaw which exceed predevelapmenf flaws. The Developer and the City PWD shall agree on fhe applicable run-off coefficients, curve numbers, retardance, etc., to be used in the engineering calcula#ions. Developer's engineer shall provide a site drainage p#an with the facilities being designed, of a minimum, to accommodate a 'f t} year storm event. The SD system must be designed to adequately drain the 10-year storm event without surcharging downstream facilities, and polling water on Cify streets, or must be provided witf~ adequate storage to prevent surcharging, and Eye des€gned to not €rnpact exrstrng public storm drainage facil€tres Any private storm dra€€~ system exceeding 3~inches in diameter st7ali be designed to directly connect to the public storm drain system (at a manhole ar curb inlet only}, and shall n©t be des€gned to discharge to the i4 Ifc«11 Fstc~tcs l r' 7'eru~rtiti~e 7'ln,r h'es~teu~, PIf'() Sts7,j~'fi'cl,ar-t F'ebruar}~ 21, 1949 7'crt*e 7 street surfaces. 3. Roof drains and underdrains shall not be dirertfy connected to public storm drain lines, and shall drain either to an on-site private storm drain system or discharge at the curb faro. 4. Prior to City PWD construction plan review, the developer shall provide tl~e City PWD with a complete set of hydrologic and hydraulic calculations and profile plots for sizing the SD system, which shaft incorporate the use of the Ci#y PWD's rainfalliintensity curve, and City approved run-off coefficients, curve numbers, retardance, pipe roughness coefficients, etc., that are used in the engineering calculations. 5. Storm drain pipe materials shall be PVC, HDPI, or reinforced concrete, with water-tight joints meeting the requirements ofASTM D32~2, E=477, and C-4~3M, as applicable. Provide concre#e rin areas within the rights-of-way} orsand-cement slurry {in areas outside the rights-of-way} encasemen# where required in areas of minimum cover. ~. If inlets/catch basins are to exceed 4.5 feet in depth from the lip of the inlet, then the inlets and catch basins shall be designed to afford suitable "man" entry into the Inlets/catch basin for maintenance/cleaning purposes. 7. Developer's engineer shall provide hydrology and hydraulic calculations and flow line plots for private and public storm drains. Plot HG!^ on profile or provide a separate profile drawing that indicates the NGL on the pra~le. Pipes should maintain cleansing velocity {minimum 2.0 feet per second} and have adequate capacities without surcharging during the design storm. 8. The Developer may wish to incorporate the use of a perforated ~D system. If so, then the perforated storm drain system shall be designed to have adequate capacities to: ~ Convey the collected groundwater and storm water with the minimum cleaning velocities and without surcharging the collection and conveyance piping; and ~ Minimize silts, sands, gravels, and fines migration from the native soils into the 5D system. The plotted HGI.. shall include both the groundwater infiltration, and the storm water run-off and run-on inflows into the SD system. 9. Maintain a minimum 0.2-foot drop between inle# and outlet pipe inverts in manholes and curb inlets, unless flow-through velocities during the design storm event exceed 3.{~ feet per second {fps}. if flow velocities exceed 3.0 fps and the inlet pipe is in relatively direct {i.e. '1801 ~ ~ degree} horizontal alignment with the outlet pipe, then as a minimum, the pipe slope shall be main#ained through the base of the manhole or curb role#. if flow velocities exceed 3.0 fps, and there is other than relatively direct horizontal alignment between the in[e# and outlet pipes, then a minimum of a 4.1-foot drop between inlef and outlet pipe inverts in manholes or curb inlet must be main#ained. A bo#tom channel shall be formed in the manhole or curb inlet base to mitigate transitional fosses and enhance flow through the manhole or curb infe#. 10. Sheet flow surface drainage from the property onto the public rights-of-way or on#o neighboring properties is unacceptable. Sanitary Sewer 1~ f3ectJ1 l~..st<tt<•s f!' 7trtt~7ttt~c !'f<ut Jieti~u'+i'. P)f'I~,St~~l, fie/>c7rt F ebr-tu7rt~ ,'.'. 1994 f'cts~c' ~`+ All sanitary sewer collec#ion and conveyance system (SS System} design, constr~}coon and testing shall confornl to the standards and guidelines of the aregon DI=Q, 1890 AP1NA Standards, Qregfln Chap#er, Sear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority SCVSA}, and the Cify PWD S#andards, where applicable. 2. The construction plans and the as-built drawings shall identify €ateral sfatioriing for construction of sewer laterals. 3. The City upon completion of initial construction plan review and preliminary approval, will forward the p€ans to SCVSA for completion of the review process. Upon completion of the review by SCVSA, completion of final revisions to the plans by the Developer's engineer, and following the final approval and s€gnature on the construction plans by SCVSA, the Public Works Director will approve the plans in final form. 4. All test€ng and video inspection of lines and manholes shall be done in accordance with SCVSA requirements, at Doveloper's expense. The Developer shal€ provide SCVSA and the City with test reports, TV reports and cert€fica#ion of the sewer system construe#ion prior to final acceptance. Water System Existing 8-inch-diameter water lines installed in Pittview Avenue and Juani#a Way, The water system shall be designed to provide the required fire flow demand capacities for the proposed facility, which meet Fire District 3 requirements, with fire hydrant placement as approved by the CI#y PWD and Fire District 3. Maximum spacing of fire hydrants shall be 3{}0 feet. Water service lateral connection stationing and size shall be provided on construction plans and as-built drawings. 2. Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division rflHD} and City requirements for backfiow prevention. . 3, Water service meter boxes shall be City PWD specified "Christy" brand meter boxes, that accommodate the Sensus touch-read equipmen#. City PWD will perform afl "hot" connections to active water lines, including service lateral taps, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director. Site work, Gradirtt~, and Utility Plans Grading plans should have original/existing grades and final grades platted an the plan. Typically, existing grade contour lines are dashed and screened back., and final grade contour lines are overlaid on top of the existing grades and are in a heavier line width and solid. Contour lines should be labeled with elevations. 2. All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, and/or crawl spaces with positive drainage away frorrr the building. 3 Provide City witi7 a uttlify plan approved by eael7 utii~ty eornpany which reflects all utility line locations, crossings, transformer locations, valves, etc. ~~ f3ecx11 E:'sta[ts !~' 7"ent<xri.~e f'lcxn h'crtcu~. (rt{'l~,SrczjJ tticj>cart F"etrruary 22, t A49 Pns;c 9 4. Ufi#ity locations must be accurately inc#uded on the as-buiif drawings, or as a separate set of drawings attached fo the as-trim#f drawings. 5. All fi## placed in development sha## be engineered fi## that is suitably placed and compacted in accordance with City PWD and 1994 U8C standards, except for the upper ~ .5-foot of fill placed outside of public righfs-of-way and that does not underlie build'sngs, sfructures, or vehicular access ways or parking areas. Rights of WayslEasemenfs If app#icab#e, Daveloper shall provide a Stafament of ~/Vater righfs {on a City approved form}, for any a€fecfed properties. For propertias determined to gave avatar righfs, fhe developer will coordinate with fhe Sfafe Vtlafermaster fhe re-allocation of any waters atfached to lands no longer irrigable as a result of the proposed development. ~~ 04/2512fl00~.-~`"87:45 5254566 .,?c~t73 BLtS C~F"C i1 ~~c~cso~ ~c~u~r~ 8333 A~R~ #~t}AD, wt~I~t`~ CtT"t`, C}F~LGCJ~'~2 97503-It775 ~s~x) sz~-7zoo pax (s~-~.) sz~-~s~~ _ ~--~-~--~--- .ic~~3~cc~rr~ (~t~F of Ce~t~~.i £'o~itt ~~~~~~ rte tt ~,prii 2 ~, 2t~C?0 ~'ian~i.~~ f~eg~z~.me.~~ City of Ce»~ral poi»~ Ken ~ersch~er RE; Cody ,~ul~division f=ire f~isfvrict 3 has reviewed the ~~»ta~:ive plan for the Cody Subdivision wi-~h the following requireme»-ts. 1. The fire, hydra»-f< on f'i~tvi2w shall be wi-frhi» S~Jt~~~ of the. mos-fr remote part of Shayla Lane. 2. Parking on Shayla Lane will be res~ric~ed -fwo one C~~ side only, 3. too parking shalt be permitted in the hammertxead turnaround at the end cxF Shayta Lane, ~-, Approved "t~Jt~ PARKING" signage shalt be provided in att areas where parking is res~.riol:ed. Cc~ntacfY fiire Dis~~ 3 for re~uiremen~.s, ~. All fi•,few home shall have an address sign visible from the street. ~~~~~~ Pfeil Shaw Depu~.y f=ire t~tarshal i~ LXHIB~T E PLANhrI1~G DLPAI2TMt~,NT RECQMMENDLD C4Nl~'`TIt)NS ~.?T Af'I'ROVAL The approval of the Tentative Ilan shad expire in oc~e year cart May 2, 2{~O I ttnless an application for final plat or extension has been received by tl~e City. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federa] regttlations. 3. The tentative and final plats shad depict utility easements requested by the City, BCVSA and WP Natural Gas. Any changes to utility layout including fire hydrants shall require subsequent approval by the respective service provider. :':C`I'I'1)!'!)t .('E>~s,~,i„~,,(ltattt~{) WI'3} ~g E A~Ai\T ~~~i\l7r ~~~iI.~A.F~ L=~~~1t ~E ~r 7 I t~.l{I,; ~i li F~\7 ~1 A -1L;ARlh~'G I)A 1 1:::.111I1e ~}, ~~~}{~ Tt): Central Paint Planning Camrnissiolz FR©M: Tazxz Idun~phrey A1CP, Planning Directaz' SUBJECT: Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Pcrn7it of 37 ~~~ 10I~, `lax I.,at 1300 - Albertsans fuel station and eaz'wash in the Mt. View Plaza. Clwneri Albertsons Inc Anr~licant; 250 Parkcenter Boulevard Boise, Idaho 83706 Agent; Abeloe and Associates 827 Alder Creek Drive Medford, C}ragon 97504 Pro~rt~ I}escrip>~ion/ 372WIOD, Tax Lot 1300 - 7.25 acres Zoning: C-4, Tourist and C3ffzce-Professional District Sutnmarv The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit that would allow a fuel station and a carwash to be constructed near the intersection of Plaza Boulevard and Freeman Road as a part of the Mountain View Plaza. I~evelapment. Applicable Law CPMC 17.44,010 et seq. - C-4, Tourist and Office-Professional District CPMC 17.64.010 et seq. - C}ff Street Parking and Loading CPMC 17.72.010 et seq.- Site Plan, Landscaping and CanstrUCtian Plan Approval Discussion The applicant Albertsan's Inc. is requesting approval to construct a 1989 square fact convenience znarketlfuel station and 1165 square foot automated caz-wash in the Mountain View Plaza. The convenience market and fuel station are a permitted use in the C-4 district. Carwash facilities require that the applicant obtain a conditional use permit. It is not uncommon far stares like Albertsans, Costco and ~'aod far Less to co-locate vehicle oriented services near grocery stares since customers typically drive rather than walk to shop for groceries. C7ftentizxzes there is a conflict with these canglan-zerate activities when the vehicle- oriented service is located near private residences. "Phis was evident when Albertsons worked with the City of ~~ Medford tCl ColastrLict Slialilar CC)I1vC'nICnCC Iiiiil'kt;t~g~is 4tiitt(lla la(:llltle5 sit IaCI~' Stol"C;S Ilt_'iil' ~,ii3'SOn Creek and l~IghWay ~ )~. ~{:Ig~a~?ol's at t~aC: I..arSOn CI'ee sltG ~e'_~f t~lat t}lf', ~?4iS stiltlon 44'~iS n{it appropriate with the neighborhood envirolilnclat iIa tlac are~i. "l~lae. highway 23~ project vas constructed as punned. The Central Point project site is located across 1{rceman Road from a residentially zoned district. 1-lowever, tl~e entire shopping center has beeza planzaed for con~imel'cial developla~lent for tlae past 2(} years. Prevailing northwest witads will generally keep the sla~ell of fuel downwind from the homes but will not aid in the reduction ofsound as it travels in all directions. "l"lac Cireenbriar Mobile llonae Park is located to the south and is separated by several commercially zoned properties. The prcaject meets all of the minimum lot and setback requirements for the C-4 zotaing district. The new construction should be consistent with the style and color scheme of the Albertsons grocery store. The Ross Lane Albertsons store in Medford has an entirely different construction style between the grocery store and gas station; this should be avoided i1a Central Point. Traffic circulation on site is confusing and the City is recommending that a traffic circulation plan and striping plan be provided to staff for review prior to the issuance of building permits. CPMC 17.64.010 {G-1}requires that general commercial activities provide not less than one space per 204 square feet ofnet floor area (excluding storage and other nonsale or nondisplay areas) .The proposed use will have 1,520 square feet of net floor area which would require 8 parking spaces . The applicant has provided 9 standard 9 by 20 foot parking spaces which include a handicap space. CPMC 17.44.470 stipulates that no illuminated sign or lighting standards used for the illumination of premises shall be designed and installed that their direct rays are toward or parallel to a public street or directed toward any property that lies within a residential district. There are currently 4 street lights located along Plaza Boulevard, one which is scheduled for relocation to make way for vehicle access. The building and canopy are expected to have exterior lighting. Any signs that are proposed with this project would need to meet the requirements described in CPMC Chapters 15.24 and 17.64.114. Each sign wi11 need a separate building perzxzit application to be filed with the Central Point Buildzng Department. Signs within sight vision areas will have a maximum height requirement of 42 inches. Mingus Creek flows in an area located Bast of the proposed building site and has been mapped with a 104 year floodplain lay FBMA. Construction in these areas will need to meet the Base Flood Requirements if the project falls within the 100 year floodplain. A landscaping plan has been submitted by the applicant and enclosed as a portion of Attachrnent A. The plan appears to be insufficient for the portion of the project adjaeelat to the residentially zoned property near freeman Road. Staff would like to work with the applicant in providing an alternative landscape theme that would minimize conflict between the residential and commercial properties. l~'reen-ian Road is classified as a secondary arterial and tlae building exceeds the special setback of ~~ CEO Icet ~rlc~tsurecl #i~o~~~ the cc~lztcrliz3c~. Mr. azzd Mrs. Tess~~lan reside at 1~2 l~reen~ar~ l~o~rcl and arc eor~cez•~~e:cl with the dcveloptnct~t cif a~~othcr service statiozl..t"Ire}r har1e: sub~~titted a letter tc~ the 1'lanni~rg C'omi~xission { r~ttacl~z~ter~t (`}. Jackson County 1`ir~e District Number ~l'liree { ~l.ttacllra~czat l~ } a~~d tl~e Public Works I)epartn~e€~t { t~.ttacl~r`nent IT } 17ave provided con~n~ents for ccrnsidcr~ation by tlxe Coz7~mission. "1.11c #~ ire District is rec~tresting a set ofbuiltling blueprints prior to the issrrat~ce ofl~t;c-rnits. Findin,~s of 1{act & Co~iclusions of Law Site Pl~rn Rer~ic~a~1 In approving, conditionally approving or denying the plans submitted, the City bases it°s decisio~x on tl~c following standards frorxr Scetion 17.72.44(}: ~. Landscaping and fencing and the construction. of walls on tl~e site ire such a manner as to cause the sarrre 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's have submitted a landscaping plan for consideration by the Commission. Staff is concerned that the proposed landscaping plan fails to provide an adequate transition between the proposed structures and residentially zoned single family homes located across Freeman Road. Staff would recommend the installation of plants and trees that retain foliage on a year round basis. 8. Design, number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow an public streets; ^ Access to the project site is proposed from two private streets in fhe Mountain Vier Plaza development to Freeman Road. )[# is not clear Izow traffic is expected to circulate vyithin the gas station/carwaslt complex. A striping and circulation plan should. be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits, C:. TQ 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 ors public streets: ^ The municipal code requires a ruininx~zzn of 8 spaces far the fuel station and car-wash. The applicant has proposed ~ p~~rkin#; spaces r~~hicli includes 1 handicap space. ~~ I). :~i;~Its alxd otl~cr ~~utdoor acive€`tisi€1~.~ stI•€Ictu€'es tt) c€€surc~ that tl~rv clc) trot ec)n{lint tvitll vI` doer {'rom t€'aff€c co€~trol sig€ZS or devices and t1~L€t they arc conlpatil)lc rvitl~ tl7e clcsis~I~ o{~tllei€` buildings or uses and W€{{ €lot II1ft;i"{eI'e WIf{i C1€' dCir4iCt {I`C7I11 t{le ~l~)()~~€rclilC{: ClC' 1'l~it{)I~IfV {){ ll~tir{)y si~tls; ~ All signage will regzlzre a sepaz`afe builtlzng pernzif. No slglt sh`szlt C\CCC{I ~IZ iI1CIICS I€€ Izeigh# zvlzen sllelz sign is in a sight vision trialzgle de#erizzizzecl Icy #I€e Pcllzlic Works Ueparfznenf. Building addresses ~viIl need to lac located in ;z Izzszlzzzcr flzaf ~z•iII allo~~~ thezzz fo be visible fI'om flzc sf reef. The sigzzage slzollId be cozzsistezzf Zvi#Iz fhc I•ezzzaizzcle€' of Mounfailz View 1'Iaza. E. ~ecessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to sI.€ch a sta€~dard as to ~~T•ovide for the reasonable safety oflife, 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; ~ Any approval of fhc sifie plan alld conditional Ilse permi# would be subjecf fo the recommendations of Jackson County Fire Disfricf Nzlmber Three. TIIe disfricf has requested a sef of projecf blueprinfs prior to consfrucfion, F. Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations; ^ The project is in compliance wifh cifiy ordinances and I~egulafions subjec# fo fhc recommended conditions of approval. C. Colnplianee with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area anal it's environs. • This building is similar in appearance to others in the C-4 zoning district buff may need minor architectural modifications to blend into fhc surrounding neighborhood activities. Staff has contacted Abeloe and Associates to see if fhc building motif and color scheme will match the existing Alberfsons grocery store. Bruce Abeloe has indicated. that it can if required as a condition of approval. The orientation of the building and pumps is good since fhc building is positioned away from Freeman Road which results in a ~~ more open" afmosplzere. Cvndrtional LTse 1'~rtnit `I'he Planning Commission in granting a conditional use permit shall find as follows: That tl~e site for fhc proposed use is adequate in size and shape to acco€n€nodate the use and to meet all other development and lot requirements ofthe subject coning district and all other provisions of the code; ^ While gas sfafions are a permi#fed use in fhc C-4 zonilzg disfricf, the earFvhsh requires flze issuance of a condi#ional use permif. ~~ 't'hat il~c site izas adequate: access to a public stre:~t ~~r lligl~Gray {zr~cl ilzat ilic strcct or' I~ig1x«~tty is adegtztzte i~l size acid conditions to elfectivc]}l accoc~~c~~oclate the. tral`lic that is expected tta lac <~cnez-ated by the l~rol~osed use; ~ The project site takes access to Fx'eeiliai~ IZoacl, a seconclaty arterial, via t~vo l~riv;~fe roadways that are a part of the Mo~zntairr Vierv Plaza developmc~rt. Scixecirrled improvements along Freeman 12oad ~F=ilI alleviate increases iri traffic that are eal~ected ~~~he~~ this and other businesses arc ol~enecl. '1"hat the proposed use will have no significant adverse effect on abtziting property oz' the perzz~itted use tl~ereo£ in making this determination, the con~znission shall consider the proposed location of improvements on the site; vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; setbacks; height of buildings; walls and fences; landscaping; outdoor lighting; and signs; ^ The applicant has not indicated the hours ofoperation for the gas station and canvash, Albertson's usually opens the station an hour before the grocery store opens in order to serve commuter customers. Automated carcvaslz facilities are known #o be noisy; particularly during the "drying" phase ~cvlxen a large fan is activated. Coin activated vacuum cleaners are also proposed. Staff would recommend that the Commission determine suitable hours of operation for this activity. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will comply with local, state and federal health and safety regulations and therefore will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of parsons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community. ^ The project must comply with all applicable federal, state and local regulations. That any conditions required for approval oftize permit are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare. ^ The Planning Commission may at it's discretion, assign reasonable conditions of approval to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the community. ~ ~ ~~ h ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ £ ~ ~ ~ ~z ~~ ~~ ~~ ,~ xs~ls9d~ ~~~ ~ r r ~ /~ /~ r ~,. / ~,. / ` / ~ e ~Y. / ~ ~ f / / / , ./ r' ~~rrrrrrrriTr. ~rxsYtzr.Y~ ``t ,~F ~: r ~~ i ,~ ~~ ~ r ~ ~" ~~ ~~' ~J = L __.-- r r .~ r r t .- r .~ r r i r r ~ .,.w." i~ i C:~.t~, oSCe~ttr~.I ~.''t~iz~.t ~~.~~-~~~:`~~` ct~sc EI ; It i~ 3 ~: r~~.- .~ Reconintendatign Staff recommends teat the Planning Commission tape one of the following actions: 1. Adopt Resolution No. , approving tl~e Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny tl~e proposed Site Plan and Conditional [1se Permit; or 3. Continue floe review of the Site Plan and Conditional Use PerFxtit at the discretion of the CommiSSion. At~achmexrts A. Site Plan, Building Elevations and Landscape Plan B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Correspondence D. Fire District Three Requirements E. Planning Department Recommended Conditions F. Public Worl£s Staff Report ~~ sit' t7EVEtAPAREti'1' CFtii'~RSk ..+++w.n+.e~,~.wr~..p,w»..,y~..,.w.w~.r+. rs~1.oE ,,,c, a.u. n-x•w-e+seeo xa,.. ATES,,uA C~~M ..,~...v. wc..~.~w,...,..~...cw ~.....,. c.,,., ~~ .~ ~..~,~. ~4,r.,..~r.-..,~. ~~f~ .~.,~ ~.~......~«1....,.,.«.,~.~.... ~..a...,.,., ~*••.......K.#a K£YEI? NOTE& rrc o ~.~,~ (1} MK rnO-M+Ik O'eM 1Rrlw~fywn yr~ytyq Q~ Rs~rm { 1~ 11Cb1~lY SWSRo 4 ~[ ~-7 'Q_. [7d11'1R AFl44,71"14 t'I'[G.M~~l7klif~ C[ 0 l~S7'1APq RMlrll'bRR ~ ~ d}ry~,IrTM~GM+IRtM.FT'pM('2l~IgR9 MAAryac'M ] f~ ( ' ~S R'~11S /1t F94rrFK~lrlMl~iAe ~ J j [''` QQ de~'+wr*ta.~++rrc+r.rwtixrrcaoer~.+csar~.~s~e V ~ S ~ Q eenwa.crrroxrxrrcam~mhsr«.r~ """"~"~""""""" Q e~wr-rs~.~ree.rruerc~+~r+~y~w+we Q xaenw~+a~e~rw.rruxaae.emm~ka.*•,.rr ~i eM...+r+xro~e~t Q exxr~rw+,ncRwar~»+Tenrukws.~e Q c+xw sa.*+. ae~tK .+ae~,. nronrreuMw oSAwtM~kwib raa. •••••••••••,••~~ ~ '~ M. ~ .eactim ~ ».. '~.. C ~ Mew rMatdra arre rx+r~owMrrt . ,,,, ,_ •> ^» •. { y VJ ~~+r^1~S~CMG'~IM~ fZ} ^1lMl,iM4f Ml M.IOMRTIf {~} Mllfp~MlCMp}fq 4R NS[TNIti (~ S}'I/r}r}~[{~~TV~.MT.'Ri TMw~#IIIS py~TT^~~ ~ `yy~ 'SJK55: rWl (~ MlYI.!'grw M.d'M~S ~') +IXIL.MRfJl C~+F1R (~ K~SHMwYR+RR (~ IMGR M4.Srt ya ~411r~IrG[d.Y F~4Sa'.ITCtN'fAlCOyflt llf/d lJIOMSM 1E'~7l.IG~+I"lllA~R7! (~ MSChane }~+rt wn..r r.~.w 1~ 1K}SISrMN7DCt buMOt tp mer~w+nssrenn.+«rma GJ ~r.~++r~waerta~sae~wror..~swa «.x~~~ ----~ ~7 'nan+e crx,n nar.~rc,u~.u.ccc.*~Y+o.... me ~I Mzauri t+rfw.lnl est ~e+co+w.rmhuzx e~+~dr cw.e X93 ~ ~ >f V~ FREEMAN R©At3 0 k ~~~ ~ ~~ : ~ ~ ~ ~~jzy~yyyy ~~~ ~~ k~ y~Y ~~ }~~; ~ ~~ ~ ~J y~i ~14~~~ ~ ~~~ T}7~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ~u~~~ ~~ ~~ City of CentNal Poznt .~z~~~vr.~r~ ~~n~~M~~~ Tozn F-iun~plrrey, AIC;I' P(anz~ing Dzrector TCen Gersclzter Coznmunzty Planner Matt Saznztorc 1'laztnin~ Technician ~Ioticc of ~~Iecting and I'~~blic ~~earing Dade o~ ~otzce: May I G, ZQ44 Meeting Date: June ~, 2004 Time: 7:04 p.m. {Approximate Piave: Central Point City Hall I55 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon City afCetttra~ Point ~~~~~~'~ tt~ tt Planning 13eparttxtent i t NATURE OF MEETING Beginning at the above time anal place, the Central Paint Planning Commission will review Site Plan and Canditianal Use Permit applications that would allow the construction of a carwash, gas station and mini-market near the intersection afPlaza Boulevard and Freeman Road in the Mountain View Plaza commercial development. This parcel is located in a C-4, Tourist and (office Professional Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W42D Tax Lot 120(1. The Central Point Planning Commission will review the Site Plan and Conditional Use Pernut applications to detertniue that all applicable provisions of the Centrat _i`'oint IVlunicipal Code can be met~ As pernutted uses in the C~ zoning district, the gas station and mini-market will be reviewed by the Commission without public testimony. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements far Site flan Review are set Earth in Chapter 17 ofthe Central Point Municipal Cade, 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 commentit~.g an the above-mentioned land use decision tray subnxit written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled far Tuesday, June 6, 2044. 2. Written comments may be seat in advance of tlic meeting to Central Point City I-Iall, 155 South Secand Street, Central Point, OR 97502. .`•~ fl 3. Issues rvhickt Izzay provide the basis far an ap1)caI on tlzc Iz)attcrs sh<z1I I)c raisccl k)riar tc> tlzc explratlOll aftlle tlaiIlIlleilt perzad hated abaVe. 11.I1y teStllllany and wI'Ittell canllllel2tS abattt tl)e decisions described above will Deed to be related to the proposal and shoclld be stated clearly to the Planning Calnn)ission. ~. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the apI)Iicant are available far public review at City I•-IaII, I5~ Sautlz ~ecand Street, Celitral Poiltt, flre~;on. Codes of the same are avaikable at 1 ~ cents per page. 5. Por additional u~formatian, the public may contact the Plannizz.g Depaz-tment at (54I) 664- 3321 ext. 291. SUMMARY Qr PRt}CEI~URE At fihe meeting, the Planning Comzxlissian will review the applications, tecl~I)ical staffreports, hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, appanents, and hear arguments an the application. Any testimony ar written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Camrnission may approve ar deny the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan applicafiians. City regulations provide that the Central Paint City Council be informed about all Planning Camrnission decisions. The City Council at it's discretion may approve, review, modify or deny any decision of the Planning Commission. ~~~~~ ~~ ~~ - _-_ 4- Subject Praperty ;,; 155 South Second Street ~ Central faint, QIL 975(}2 ! 541 664-3321 +~ Itax: 541 664-6384 ~~ 1 City a f Cent fry ~!d~riri~C ~ ~.~:.~~I~Z`~` ~~~a~ r . Ptannin~ L~e~u t~pr,m~ ._ ~____ ____.._ ____._____...__m_ .___ __ ._______. _____ _ ~,~~~.~.1.p.__.C • 1~~ ~~~.,~ ___ _----_-._____~.-_-__w .._~ ~ -- _ -__.... - __..___...____.____.___.....___._._____ --_-_-_-_.....-- - ...._.~_____._-__-_---_- ._____...~...W..._._------__...._______.__~__ _..._mV...__._ _..__»~. ~f ,` ~ jJ - "~ ~~~ ~. ___ __._.._.._..__......_...._...__............<..~~~...,..a„J-'j!Zl..:.4.4..._ __1'........._..~r!vkt.~__..~!"tR..~~-'f r.__._•,-r'~~~~__._.y,/-._..~:S.L..~~.~.GL/.:L-~...i.c'}.~.-.r~.~____ { ~ ~ _-- - - ~ r~.4 ~,lr' .I' ~.rf . ,t J.c,r J .-s , ..1~._..~r_1.1~..~..sT " rat .d ,!} 1 r,~ ,~vt .~^ .I. I~~~ ~ _ _ " d, ~~~~ ~~ ~~f ~~:~~ f .j s/ f.+."~'L~7..f!~~'V`../.. I/~"~'zec ~rnL'~~.'~'" J1... ../~rt'~^'_ I ' . w ~ .. .. .....,...._.... ~~ ..-- !-- _. S ~~ ~t5/24l2006 I4; 04 B264S66 JCFi~3 $LtS C1FC PA~.,~ 02/02 FIRE DISTRICT No. 3 ~ncKSOU couNn s~~~ Aca-~-~ Joao, wxr~ cam, oR~cor~ g7~~3-.ors ~s~x~ sz~-7zc~ ~~ ~~~-~} sz~-~-ss~ w~vw jcfd~.com May 2~, ~C~C~C7 City of Central Point Planning ©epar~men~ ATTh~; Ken Gerschler Ken, C:~ty t~f ~en~ ~I ~oiztt .~~~~,~~~ std, cr ~annin~- Uepartrn~~ Fire [district 3 has reviewed the side plan for Albertsan's A-express Fuel Cen,'~er. Please submit a bluepr=~n~ for review prior ~o c©ns~:ruc~ioM. 'Don Hickman ,JCFD3 ~5~~~ 82b-?la0 ~~ AT'TACI-~MEN`T I? RECOMMENDED PLANN~NC DEPARTMENT CONDITI4N~ 4F AI'PRC}VAL The approval of the Site Plan and Conditional Llse Permit shall expire in one year on June 6, 2fl(?1 unless an application for a building permit or an applicationz for extension has been received by the City. Tl~e applicant shall submit a revised site }alan depietizzg any changes discussed and approved at the public hearing within 6~ days of Planning Comzz~zission approval. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations . 3. The applicant shall work with the City to revise the landscape plan so that the plan will adequately buffer the comrrzercial activity from the adjacent residentially zoned properties. ~~ C`it~ of Cextf~al Point €'Iannin~ ~}~}~I"~IttCll~ ~~.~.y of ~~z~:ra1 ~oizzt ~ ,~ T E R MEMO ~# ~ ~ I C E To: Tom Numphrey, Planning Director From: Lee Brennan, Public Works Director/City Engineer Subject: Memorandum of Public Works DepartmentlCity Engineer Recornmendatians far the Site Pian Review and Conditional Use Permit for an Aibertsons Fuel Station and Carwash to be located in the Mountain View Plaza Shopping Center, east of Freeman Road. Date: May 3'I, 20(30 The following is the Public Works Department'sJCity Engineer's recommendations regarding the subject project that we feel should be included as conditions of approval, should the Planning Commission approve the development plan and canditianal use permit for the subject project. Traffic Circulation Plan. SianinalStriaina Plan. and Entrance/Exifs Revisions: The Developer should prepare and submit for City PWD approval a suitable site traffic circulation plan for the proposed development. The traffic circulation plan shall illustrate that all driveways and connections to s#reets shat{ accommodate the turning and access movements of all expected truck, recreational vehicle, emergency vehicle (i.e fire frock} and all other applicable vehicles including but not limited to a single unit truck; fuel delivery truck and trailer; a motor home in combination with a boat trailer; and fire-fighting equipment. All vehicular movements shall be designed to avoid Infringing into opposing or adjoining travel lanes when the traffic movements are made by the sfudsed vehicle. A striping and signing plan will also need to be prepared and subml##ed far review and approval so a clear pattern for traffic circulation and movement can be obtained. The plans note that the entrance off of the main entrance to the shopping center is an "entrance only" type driveway. We would recommend that this entrance be maned as far as possible to the east away from the main shopping center entrance connection with Freeman Road. We would also request that this entrance be narrowed and made smoother: narrowed to prevent two-way access, and smoother or rounder to make access to the islands and car wash easier for larger vehicles. The access driveway to the northwest of the proposed development is stated as a "controlled access bypass drive". We interpret this driveway to be used only as an exit for vehicles who decide they don't want a car wash, ar when the car wash is not operating. Haw will this access be "cortralled" (i.e gated, anti-back-up device, etc.} 2. Clear Vision RreaslTriangles. All driveway approaches of the proposed Development connecting to the private roads need to maintain a minimum of 25-fact clear vision triangle to the center of the driveway to the edge of the private road. This requirement may be adjusted by the City FW©, depending an final orientation and lane/driveway layout of the adjoining roadsldrives, in accordance with AASNT4 clear sight-vision requirements. Adequate clear visor t7 7orrt ffurrtphre~~, f'lanrrirr~; I~irectcrr ttl6ertsorrs Frrelirrg Cexter acrd C`ar• rf''crslr Site Plan Idcti=ic>ts~ A~ay 3I, 2(1(JQ ,~a~;e 2 arealtriangles sha€€ also be maintained at all internal driveway intersections. The landscape plans will need to be adjusted to remove sight-restrictive vegetation from these sight-tr€angles. Storm Drainage System: The storm drain system shall be designed to have a petroleum product separation system {not just petroleum traps in the catch basins}, included in the system that is connected fo all the catch basins that can possibly be impacted by inadvertent sp€lled fuel from the filling of the underground storage tanks, or dispensing of fuel from the is€ands and which connect to the City's storm drain system or which discharged€rect€y into Mingus Creek. This system shall be designed to rrteet a€I the requirements of the City, DFQ, and the State Fire Marshal. 4. Flood Study of Mingus Creek: The proposed development places improvements and sfruc#ures within the 10(}-year f€oodzone associated with Mingus Creek. The shopping center's developer {Cris Galein} retained a consu€fant {Marquess and Associates} who prepared and subm€tted a flood study that was accepted by the City. However a (effer of reap amendment or revision was not obtained from FI=MA. So the FEMA mapped floodplain is still applicable. A€€ structures and other improvements wi€€ have to be bu€It to meet the requirements of CPMC 8.24, as the structures are within the area of special f€ood hazard. The information from the flood study w€If be used to determine min€mum finished floor e€evations for any structures that wi€€ be p€aced within the area of special flood hazard. General Public Jmprovements: A€€ oonsfruction of public improvements shall conform to the City's PWD Standards, fhe conditions approved and stipulated by the Planning Commission, and other special specifications, detai€s, standards, and/or upgrades as may be approved by the Cify Administrator or his designee prior to the approval of the construction p€ans for the proposed development. During construction, changes proposed by the Developer shall be submit#ed in writing by the Developer's engineer to the City PWD for approval prior to implementation. 2. Permits and A royals: C}eveloper shall provide copies of any permits, variances, approvals, and conditions as may be required by other agencies, Including, but not limited :#o~a t3regort~.~5tate , Fire Marshal, Oregon ©epartment of Environmental Quality {DEQ}, Fire District No, 3, and Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority {BCVSA}. The Developer shall submit written approvals of the final construction plans front these agencies prior to final construction plan review and approval by Cify PWD. As-Bunts: Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or surveyor shall prov€de the Public Works Department with "as-boil#" drawings. If feasib€e, the Developer's engineer or surveyor should provide the drawings in both a "hard copy" form {produced on My€ar~} and in a "digifa€" format compatible with AutoCAD~', or other form as approved by the City PWD. As-bui€f drawings are to be provided to the City which provide "red-line" changes to final approved construct€on plans which identify the locations and or elevations {as appropriate} of actual installed items, including, but not limited to, invert, inlet, and rim or lip elevations; spot elevations identified on drawings; water lines, valves, and fire hydrae#s; water and sewer lateral; r~rodifications to street secfion; manhole and curb inlet; street light loco#ions; other below grade u#i€ity lines; etc. Provide a "red-line" hard copy {on Mylarf°}, or an approved alternative format, of construction drawings, and if feasible, an acceptable AutoCAD~ compatible drawing electronic file fo the City at completion of construction and prior to acceptance of public infrastructure e7 V Tam Ilumplrre~~, Ptannirrg 1?irector ~4lfiertsorrs Fueling Center arrct Car• 1{'aslr Site 1'Irrn Rei~ietir r~fay 31, 2QOt1 Page 3 facilities completed as part of the proposed development, or as otherwise approved by the City Administrator or his designee. 4. Elevations: All elevations used on the construction plans, on temporary benchmarks, and on any permanent benchmark shall be tied into an esfablished City approved benchmark and be so noted on the plans. E'xrsting lnfrasfructure: As applicable, field verity all existing infrastructure elevations and locations {i.e, pipe inverts, curb elevations, stree# elevations, etc.}, to which the proposed development will connect Into existing improvements, prior to final construction plan design and submittal for final approval. The accurate locations of any existing underground and above ground public infrastructure, and the location of the associated easements with these facilities, shall be accurately portrayed {both horizontally and vertically} on the construction plans. 6, Fitl Placement. All fcll placed in the development shall be engineered fill tha# is suitably placed and compacted in accordance with City PWD and Building Department standards, except for the upper 1.5-feet of fill placed outside of public rights-of-way and that does not underlie building, structures, or traveled vehicular access ways or parking areas. 7. Road/flriyeway/Parkirt4 Areas: The ©eveloper shalt evaluate the strength of the native soils and determine the access road, parking, and driveway section designs to handle the expected loads (including fire equipment} to be traveled on these private driveways, access roads, and parking areas. bleed to provide designed road section for review. 8. Utility Plans: The utility plans shall be drawn to scale with accurate horizontal and vertical depiction of utility tines and appurtenances {transformers, valves, etc.}. Utility infrastructure location must be accurately included on the as-built drawings, or as a separate set of drawings attached to the as-built drawings. 9. Area Lighting Ptan: Need to provide and implement an adequate area lighting plan for parking and public access areas, Including all of the driveway entrances, and the parking area to the south. Clghts within or attached to the underside of the canopy need to be shielded •or otherwise constructed so that the side-projected light is kept to a minimum. '10. Water S stem Crass Connection Control: Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division (4N~} and City requirements for cross connection control. The proposed development will require that all water services be equipped with an approved backflow prevention assemblies which shall be located directly behind the City's water meters. 11. Water System: Construction drawings shall include the size, type, and location of all wafer mains, hydrants, valves, service connection, meter, service laterals, and other appurtenance details in accordance with City PvttD Standards and as required by the City PW~. 12. RooflArea Drains: All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, andlor crawl spaces with positive drainage away from the building. Roof drains shall not be directly connected to the public storm drain system. 33. Grading Plans: Grading plans shall 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 lines are overlaid on top of the existing grades and are in a heavier line width and solid. Contour lines should be labeled with elevations. i 7wrr Izrrtnzfrfzrey. Pfarzurrzg f~7frectnr ,~1ber7sorrs F'uefirrg Center arxt' Cnr- tf'aslz Site f'tarz f~erietis• May 37, 2t10Q Page 4 14. Sanr`fary Sewer: Al! sanitary sewer collection and conveyance syste-n {SS System}} design, construction and testing shall conforrr~ to the standards and guidelines of the Oregon DEQ, 199(1 APWA Standards, C3regan Chapter, Bear Creek Valley Sanifary Authority {BCVSA), and the City PWD Standards, where applicable. Ttte construction plans and the as-built drawings shall identify lateral stationing for construction of sewer laterals. ~Q PisANMNC~ l~lwPAl~"I~MI:N"l" S`l'A1~1= l~l:;l'C}12`l' MEETING DATE: June G, 2000 TD: Central Point Planning Coz~~mission FRC}M: Tom Humphrey A1CP, Planning Director SUBJECT: Withdrawal ofAr~nexation Territory from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District ~3 Busby/Malot Annexation}. Summary C}n May i 1, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. X74 ordering the annexation of 3.00 acres located between I-Hanley Road and Jacl£son Creek. The arears designated in the Comprehensive Plan for residential uses and is adjacent to the second phase ofRosewood Estates subdivision on the west side ofJackson Creek. The applicant would like to expand the subdivision into the annexation area to provide better access and land utilization. Authority The Central Point Municipal Code (Section 1.24.020} vests the Planning Commission with the authorityto review and make recommendations tothe City Council on withdrawals from special districts. Discussion Upon the recommendation of the Pla~aning Commission,the City Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed withdrawal and consider adopting an ordinance declaring that the territory within the annexation area be withdrawn from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District No. 3. Coincidentally, Fire DistrictNo. 3 is now providing ire protection to the annexed territory under its current contract for services with the City. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council withdraw the subject annexation area from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District No. 3. #-. ~- *~ 1~.tt riC ~it3`lE;il# S ~. City Cot~~1~iI ~2esolutic~n Nc~. X74, Zonirl~ ~icicl f1r~~lexatit~tl l~~'ca Ma~~s ~. ~~ <1tfr~C]l~~~c€~i A RP.SOLll`I'(ON NO, ~~ A RESOLUTION DECLARING TI-lE ANNEXATION OF 3.0 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED QETWEEN I-IANI..EY ROAD ANI~ JACKSON CREEK INTO THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON {Applicant{s}: Dallas Page/I'arthenon Const. & Design} {37 2W l OCA, TL ~a004 &. 37 2W 1 E)C 'I'L 29a~, 3001 } BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TfIE CITY OF CENTRAI.~ POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section l . Application has been made by the owners of certain real property for annexation into the City of Central Point, Oregon. The property consists of three tax lots consisting of a total of 3.0 acres. The property to be annexed is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Lot 9 of Rosewood Estates Subdivision, i?hase Qne, now of record in Jac3cson County, Oregon; thence North 89°5E}"10" West, along the South lane of said subdivision, a distance of 380.06 feet to centerline of that County Road named Hanley Road: thence South 03°49'10"' West, along said centerline, a distance of 345.14 feet to a point on a westerly projection of the South lane of that tract described in Document Number 76-06021, lJfficial Records far said County and States thence South 89°49'01" East, along said South lane, a distance of 380.05 feet; thence North 03°49'10" East, a distance of 345.2? feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 3.006 Acres, more or less. The above-described property is not within the City of Central Point's current corporate boundaries, but is contiguous to the City's existing corporate boundary and is within the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary {UGB}. Section 2. The owners of the property proposed for annexation are Jack and Bonita Busby and there is mutual consent to the annexation. Such written consent is on ale at Central Point City HaII, I55 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Section 3. ORS 322.125 provides that when all of the Owners of land in the territory proposed for annexation and not less that 50°la ofthe electors residing in such territory have consented in writing to the annexation of the Land in the territory and file such written consent with the City Council, the property may be annexed without the requirement for an election or a public hearing. ' ... Section 4. A-~nexation o#`the c#escribed prt~perty is consistctat uTitl~ tl7c City's ability to proviclc #acilities and services to the real property, as rec#uireci by the City's C`otnprehci3sivc8an. Section 5. Pursuant to dRS 222.125, the property described its Section 1 above, shall be and hereby is, annexed to and made a part ofthe City ofCentral Point, dregot~. Section G. The City Administrator, or his designee, shall transmit a copy ofthis resolution to the dregon Secretary of State, and this annexation shall be effective ~vl~en filed with the dregon Secretary of State pursuant to dRS 222. ! 80. ....._~..~ ~._ > 2040. ATTEST: City Representative ~Y Mayor Bill Walton Approved by zne this ~~~`day of ~ , 24{1(}. f~ . RESdLCFT I ON NQ . ~. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this ~~ day of c.. mo=t:.: .. ~=-~~~ -- Mayor Bill Walton ~~ in the SW ~ ~4 of Section l 0, T. 37 ~~., R. 2 W., NJ.M. ` in the City of Central Point, Jackson County, Oregon. ~ ei ~ March 10, X000 ~ ~~ ...... '~' V ' ' ` : • ~~ 23 Narth Ivy Stroet _ ~ . ~ f . '~i ~~ ~ -'~~ra~tT ~4'fifaf(~. ~~ g7.~~ {541) 776-2313 R'iitir z"i`' ~~ ~'rx~t ~..>r I• . dcr >~+AE5 i~ifA! J a bO 12a Ida t ~'" ' i " f f *~" I (~ ~" ~r I S ' t / /~ c-~ r~ /'~ /~ o .--_-.-~R ~ p f f .. I ! ~ t r f tG~ fj ~' t ~ (t,,: /1 ~ t i I ~ c L,~ C~ ~^! { e~ r.r ~ tJ C I [.~ .J .. `` ' ~ t p ~ i ~ t ~ ,,C .J ~ f ~ fi I ~ ~ ~ i ~ C t°~ .~' j ! ~ ~ / i tJ ~ ~ J / ~ ! Y~ C~ ~ ` ~1 t ` ! ~ t ! y I ~ j ~ ,' ~ I Iit p t 4 w 0~ ~' * L~trr d La~ !t ~ r ~ Lp~ .G~~' ~ ~ " - '-' '- > r I ~~%n ~ i Q i ~ s4 ~,,+ ,. "" *5 •:~. '~ ~ of ~ i'¢ j `* -.. o r r f `~`' i / r •S. ____~ -~' .~ .• ~'} f-1'Oj)RSF.tf IYL'W City Limit Line ~ ----__ .Q N ---~-__ _; ____-- R y~~ - ~~ ~ ~`7j~ Current L:'ity Limr't--~-s ``~ .503'49'>L7"iY 34.5: 1~f' ° -~---- - ,~- Lme .-__ Gity of ~ Jackson Centro! f'oinf ~ County r/ ,~. ~a~ ~. <-^^~ ~ ~ PI~AI~;NII~Ci Dll'Alt`1"MIN'I' S'l'Al;l~' RI;PUIt"(' MEETING DATE: Ju~ae 6, 20(}f7 Tt~: Ce~atral Point Planning C~:o~a~rnissio€z FRUM: Tona Hunapl~rey AICP, Planning; Director SUBJECT: Withdrawal of Annexation Territory from Jackson County Rural hire Protection District #3 (I-lull Annexation}- Su-- mmarX C?n May 2S, 2fI(}fl, the City Council adopted Resolution No. $7S ordering the annexation of2.3 acres surrounded by the Centz'al Point city limits and located between I-Hanley Road and Mendolia Way. The area is designated in the Comprehensive Plan for residential uses and is adjacent to the Country Meadows subdivision. The applicant would like to expand the subdivision into the annexation area to provide better access and land utilization. Access will actually be gained from Mendolia Way rather than from Hanley Raad. Authority The Central Point Municipal Code {Section I.24,4~0} vests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make recommendations tothe City Council on withdrawals from special distracts. Discussion TJponthe recorzamendation ofthe Planning Commission, the City Council will hold apublic hearing on the proposed withdrawal and consider adopting an ordinance declaring that the territory within the annexation area be withdrawn from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District ~Fo. 3. Coincidentally, Fire DistrictNo. 3 is now providing fre protection to the annexed territory under its current contract for services with the City. Recommendation Staffrecomta-tendschat the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council withdraw the subject annexation area from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District No. 3. 45 Attac~ut~e~ats A. City Cou~~cil IZesc~lt~tioi~ Nc~. ~~5, ;l'c~ni~1~ a~~c~ Ar~nc~atic~z~ A~~ea Ma~~s 4~ Section 4. Annexation of the described property is consistent with the City's ability to provide facilities and services to the real property, as required by the City's Camprelzensive Plan. Section 5. Pursuant to CARS 222. t25, the property described in Section 1 above, shall be and hereby is, annexed to and made a part of the City of Central Paint, Oregon. Section 6. The City Administrator, ar his designee, shall transmit a copy afthis resolution to the Qregan Secretary of State, and this annexation shall be effective when filed with the Oregon Secretary of State pursuant to ~}RS 222.180. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this ~~.~._'~day of ~~~ > 2000. ,-- t Mayor Bill Walton ATTEST: City Representative ~tk Approved by me this s~ day of ~~ 2000. ~~~~ } ,' Mayor Gilt Walton 4~ t~,~b.,r a ta. a~ sis .~ a~,i~,;, ;eQ r.~ xd-rr~.'.'~aw*~Rx tky .tract _i I ~ t l 3 rrt l 1 i 4 1 r ~ ' ~~ jr ~, `, € ~ x ~~ i 1 r.. ,-~.. _ ...._ T j /r ~~v 1 / ~,~` ~ ,~ ~ s 'r+ i ~ f Jf 1 ~ °1 <~ 1 1 ~ ~ j -- -.. I ~ i ~ t ~ ~ I t ~ C ~ i i tt ~ ~ C ~ ~ € I~ ~ I 1# # ~ ~. ~ ~ t°- t j ~ ''l/~/% C _I __ +~o iSuw~ +~.w+raRt~r .~ f'' rr At ~~~ IMIIVIM~ d „r •1N11411tb]I WC7tAM p,. .r..+.~n« V' aAU~ <--~ 1 I~. ~/~~