HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 857 Approvingh amendments to CPMC 17.65 and 17.67PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 857
A RESOLUTION APPROVING MAJOR AMENDMENTS TO CPMC 17.65 AND CPMC 17.67
FILE NO. ZC-18005
Applicant: City of Central Point
WHEREAS, on August 7, 2018 the Planning Commission, at a duly scheduled public hearing,
considered major amendments to Chapter 17 Zoning of the Central Point Municipal Code ("CPMC")
as follows, and as specifically identified in Exhibit "1" — Staff Report dated August 7, 2018:
1. CPMC 17.65.050, Table 1
2. CPMC 17.67.070(D)(3)(a)(i)
WHEREAS, it is the finding of the Planning Commission that the above referenced code amendments
comply with the approval criteria set forth in CPMC 17. 10, including the Statewide Planning Goals,
Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Planning Rule as evidenced by the Planning Department
Findings identified as Attachment `B" in the Staff Report dated August 7, 2018 (Exhibit 1)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by
this Resolution No. 857, does hereby forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to
approve the amendments as set forth in the Staff Report dated August 7, 2018 attached hereto by
reference as Exhibit "1" including Attachments "A" and "B" therein, which are herein incorporated by
reference.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 7th day
of August 2018.
Plafining Commission Chair
ATTEST:
9( 'J'o �
Ci Represents ' e
Approved by me this 7th day of August 2018.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 857 (08-07-2018)
STAFF REPORT CENTRAL
POINT
STAFF REPORT
August 7, 2018
AGENDA ITEM. File No. ZC-18005
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AICP
Community Development Director
Consideration of amendments to Chapter 17.65.050, Table 2 Zoning Regulations—TOD District, and
17.67.070(13)(3)(a)(i)---Single Family Attached and Detached Residential Building Fayades, Applicant; City of Central
Point: File No.: ZC-18003: Approval Criteria- CPMC 17. 10, Zoning Map and Text Amendments.
STAFF SOURCE;
Stephanie Honey, Principal Planner
BACKGROUND
Staff has identified minor changes to the zoning requirements in the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District that
address conflicting development standards, conflicts between utility easements and structural setbacks in residential
zones, and building design standards far attached garages in the TOS. The proposed amendments do not affect current
policy and are consistent with the purpose of the TDD. Proposed text amendments are provided in Attachment 'W' and
include the following:
Secdon 1. CPMC 17 65.054, Table 2
o Corner Side Yard Setback. Change the minimum corner lot setback from 541 to 10 -ft and eliminate the
maximum setback to avoid conflicts with utilities in the following zones:
Low Mix Residential (LMR) zone
Medium Mix Residential (MMR) zone
o Front Yard Setback -Amend the minimum setback from 15 -ft to 0-14 as necessary to comply with the
building design standard in CPMC 17.67.070(S)(2)(a). This section requires 75% of nonresidential and
mixed use projects in the following zones to be built to the sidewalk edge.
■ General Comrnercial (GC) zone
■ Civic (C) zone
Secden 2. CPMC 1767,070(D)(3){u}(1) -- Building Facades, Residential. Attached garages facing a public street are
Limited to no more than 40 percent of the horizontal width of the front fagade. Staff has received feedback from
developers that the existing standard reduces the ability to park and access standard and large size vehicles. Although
the existing design requirement can be met with minimum accepted garage width (i.e. i0 -ft per space), developers
have reported that it is difficult to open doors of standard and full size vehicles when the width is less than 12 -ft wide
per space. In consideration of these challenges and the need to provide viable parking for residents, the proposed
amendment increases the garage width to 45 percent of the front facade. The proposed change would allow greater
flexibility to accommodate single- and two -car garages depending on lot dimensions, particularly in the LMR zone
(Table l). In the MMR and HMR zones, lots that are designed to the minimum lot width require alley loaded garages.
However, it should be noted that there are several lots in the MMR zone, particularly in Old Town, that do not have
alley access and are big enough to support front loaded garages in compliance with the proposed change (Example 2).
However, attached homes in the HMR zone require alley loaded garages comply with minimum density.
184
Table 1. of CunwiL
and
AftmoN ea
. WkM
Minimum Lot Typical Building
I Req'd
Reci'd
Garage Facade
Fagade
Width Envelope Width
LMR
MMR
HM[R
LMR . MMR
HMR
Width, Width
Garage
Width
Horizontal
Single (Single
Width,
(Two
Standard Width %
Car Car)
Two Car
Car)
I
L
Current 40%
12 30
24
60
50
22
18
40
13Pro
osed 45%
12 27
24
53
50
22.0
18
40 7
j:j7
13
Example 1. In the North Village at Twin Creeks, Phase V there are fifteen (15) lots that do not have alley access and
would be affected by this standard. Each is within the LMR zone and is planned for single family detached housing.
The lot width per the tentative plan range from 70.0 to 80.0 feet. Based on the table above and minimum sPthack
requirements, the narrowest lot would have a building footprint that is 60 -feet wide. This would accommodate both
the single- and two -car garage options on the smallest lot.
Example 2. In the MMR zone single family detached housing is not permitted. Attached row houses (i.e. single
family attached housing) are permitted with a minimum 22 -ft lot width. A recent plan was received for a lot in the
MMR zone with two (2) 26 -ft wide attached row houses. The current standard limits the garage width to 10 -ft. If the
proposed amendment is approved to increase the horizontal width of the garage to 45% of the total front facade
width, the garage width may be increased to 12 -ft.
At this time, staff is requesting the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to
approve the proposed text amendments.
ISSUES
None.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The proposed zoning text amendments have been reviewed for compliance with CPMC 17.30, Toning Map and Text
Amendments and found to comply per the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Attachment "B".
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A" - Ordinance No. An Ordinance Amending Central Point Municipal Code Chapter 17.65.050,
Table 2 Zoning Regulations—TOD District; and 17.67.070(13)(3)(#i} -Single Family Attached and Detached
Residential Building Fagades to eliminate code conflicts, address utility easement concerns and increase allowed garage
width.
Attachment "B" - Planning Department Findings
Attachment "C" - Resolution No. 857
ACTION:
Consider proposed zoning amendments and t) forward the ordinance to the Council for approval, 2) make revisions and
forward the ordinance to the Council or 3) deny the ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 857 forwarding a favorable recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed zoning
code amendments.
185
ATTACHMENT "A"
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CENTRAL POINT MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 17.65.050, TABLE
2 ZONING REGULATIONS—TOD DISTRICT; AND 17.67.070(D)(3)(A)(I)—SINGLE FAMILY
ATTACHED AND DETACHED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING FACPADES.TO ADDRESS UTLITY
CONCERNS, ELIMNATE CODE CONFLICTS AND INCREASE ATTACHED GARAGE WIDTH FOR
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FACING A PUBLIC STREET.
RECITALS:
A. Words !iRed thFough are to be deleted and words in bold are added.
B. Pursuant to CPMC, Chapter 1.01.040, the City Council, may from time to time make revisions
to its municipal code which shall become part of the overall document and citation.
C. On August 7, 2018 the Central Point Planning Commission recommended approval of code
amendments to Chapter 17.65 TOD Districts and Corridors and Chapter 17.67 Design
Standard—TOD Districts and Corridors making changes to clarify the administration of current
policies and standards.
D. On August 23, 2018, the City of Central Point City Council held a properly advertised public
hearing; reviewed the Staff Report and findings; heard testimony and comments, and
deliberated on approval of the Municipal Code Amendment.
THE PEOPLE OF CENTRAL POINT DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Amendments to Section 17.65.050, Table 2 TOD District Zoning Standards revise
comer setback standards in the Low Mix Residential (LMR) and Medium Mix Residential (MMR)
zones to avoid building conflicts with utility easements; and reduce the minimum front yard setback in
the General Commercial (GC) and Civic (C) zones as needed to comply with the building design
standard in CPMC 17.67.070(Bx2xa).
Table 2
TOD District Zoning Standards
Zoning Districts
LMR MMR I HMR I EC I GC I C f OS
Building Setbacks (k)
Front (min./max.)
10715'
10'/15'
0'/15'
0'
0'115' 1
0'/5'
15'
Side (between bldgs.)
5' detached
5' detached
5' detached
0'
0'
0'
5'
(detached/attached)
0'
0'
0'
10' (b)
15' (b)
20' (b)
attached
attached
attached
(a)(c)
(a)(c)
(a)
Corner (min./max.)
541 07N
10'
5' 1 07N
01/10'
5710'
15'/30'
5710'
157NA
Rear
10'
10'
0'
15' (b)
0'
5'
(d)
(d)
10'(b)
1 0'
20' (b)
Garage Entrance
(d)
(e)
I (e)
I (e)
NA
Notes:
NA --Not applicable.
186
(a) The five-foot minimum also applies to the perimeter of the attached unit development.
(b) Setback required when adjacent to a residential zone.
(c) Setback required is ten Feet minimum between units when using zero lot line configurations.
(d) Garage entrance shall be at least ten feet behind front building facade facing street.
(e) Garage entrance shall not protrude beyond the face of the building.
(f) Net acre equals the area remaining after deducting environmental lands, exclusive employment areas, exclusive civic areas and
right-of-way.
(g) Lot coverage refers to all impervious surfaces including buildings and paved surfacing.
(h) Parking lot landscaping and screening requirements still apply.
(i) Landscaped area shall include living ground cover, shrubs, trees, and decorative landscaping material such as bark, mulch or
gravel. No pavement or other impervious surfaces are permitted except for pedestrian pathways and seating areas.
(j) Rooftop gardens can be used to help meet this requirement.
(k) where a building setback abuts a Public Utility Easement (PUE), the building setback shall be measured from the furthest
protrusion or overhang for the structure to avoid utility conflicts.
SECTION 2. Amendments to Section 17.87.070(D)(3Ka)(i) increase the horizontal width of attached
garages for single family attached and detached dwellings facing a street from 40% to 45% of the
horizontal width of the front building elevation.
3. Residential.
a. The facades of single-family attached and detached residences (including duplexes,
triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, and row houses) shall comply with the following standards:
i. No more than forty-five percent of the horizontal length of the ground floor front elevation
of a single-family detached or attached dwelling with frontage on a public street, except
alleys, shall be an attached garage.
SECTION 3. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the
word Ordinance may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter", or other word, and the
sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re -lettered, provided however that any Whereas
clauses and boilerplate provisions need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct
any cross references and any typographical errors.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. The Central Point City Charter states that an ordinance enacted by the
council shall take effect on the thirtieth day after its enactment. The effective date of this ordinance
will be the thirtieth day after the second reading.
Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of
2018.
ATTEST:
City Recorder
Mayor Hank Williams
187
ATTACHMENT "B"
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
File No.: ZC-18005
Before the City of Central Point Planning Commission
Consideration of a Zone Text Amendments to Central Point Municipal Code Chapter 17.65.050,
Table 2 Zoning Regulations—TOD District; and 17.67.070(D)(3)(a)(i)—Single Family Attached and
Detached Residential Building FaSades to eliminate code conflicts, address utility easement
concerns and increase allowed garage width.
Applicant:
City of Central Point
140 South 3`d Street
Central Point, OR 97502
PART 1
INTRODUCTION
Findings of Fact
and
Conclusion of Law
The proposed text amendment aims to increase the maximum allowed garage width to provide viable
covered parking and clarify the following minimum/maximum setbacks:
+ LMR and MMR zones to avoid conflicts with utility easements;
■ GC and C zones to eliminate a conflict with a design standard in CPMC 17.67.070(8)(2).
The zone text amendment request is a legislative amendment, which is processed using Type IV
application procedures. Type IV procedures set forth in Section 17.05.500 provides the basis for
decisions upon standards and criteria in the development code and the comprehensive plan, when
appropriate.
Applicable development code criteria for this Application include CPMC 17. i0, which includes
compliance with the statewide planning goals, comprehensive plan and Transportation Planning Rule.
The amendment's compliance with applicable criteria are presented in Part 2 and summarized in Part 3.
PART 2 - ZONING CODE COMPLIANCE
17.10.200 Initiation of amendments.
A proposed amendment to the code or zoning map may be initiated by either:
A. A resolution by the planning commission to the city council;
B. A resolution of intent by the city council; or for zoning map amendments;
C. An application by one or more property owners (zoning map amendments only), or their agents, of
property affected by the proposed amendment. The amendment shall be accompanied by a legal
description of the property or properties affected; proposed findings of facts supporting the proposed
amendment, justifying the same and addressing the substantive standards for such an amendment as
required by this chapter and by the Land Conservation and Development Commission of the state. (Ord.
1989 § 1(part), 2014).
Finding CPMC 17.10.200: The Planning Commission is being asked to consider Resolution No. 857
to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council regarding proposed changes to Central
Planning Department Findings Page 1 of 6
188
Point Municipal Code (CPMC) Chapter 17.65, TOD Districts and Corridors; and Chapter 17.67,
Design Standards—TOD Districts and Corridors.
Conclusion 17.10.200: Consistent.
17.10.300 Major and minor amendments.
There are two types of map and text amendments:
A. Major Amendments. Major amendments are legislative policy decisions that establish by law general
policies and regulations for future land use decisions, such as revisions to the zoning and land division
ord.ina%c that have widespread. and sipfficant impact beyond .the. immediate area. Major amendments are
reviewed using the Type IV procedure in Section 17.05.500.
B. Minor Amendments. Minor amendments are those that involve the application of adopted policy to a
specific development application, and not the adoption of new policy (i.e., major amendments). Minor
amendments shall follow the Type III procedure, as set forth in Section 1', .05.400. The approval authority
shall be the city council after review and recommendation by the planning commission. (Ord. 1989
§ 1(part), 2014; Ord. 1874 §3 (part), 2006).
Finding CPMC 17.10.300.' The proposed amendments are legislative changes to land use regulations
in CPMC 17.65.050 and CPAIC 17.61.070. Although the changes consist ofcorrections and mirror
adjustments to land use regulations, they qualify as a Major Amendment and have been processed in
accordance with Type 1Y procedures in CPMC 17, 05.5000.
Conclusion CPMC 17.10.300: Consistent.
17.10.400 Approval criteria.
A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a text
or map amendment shall be based on written findings and conclusions that address the following criteria:
A. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals (major amendments
only);
Finding CPMC 17.10.400 (A): The proposed amendments have been reviewed against the Statewide
Planning Goals andfound to comply as follows:
Goal 1- Citizen Involvement. This goal requires that all citizens be given the opportunity to be
involved in all phases of the planning process. As evidenced by the land use notifications in the
newspaper on 7-24-2018, notice to DLCD on July 2, 2018 and advertisement on the City's
website (www.ceneralpninL egon.gov/prajeetsl, the City has duly noticed the application as
necessary to allow the opportunityfor citizen participation in the public hearings scheduled with
the Planning Commission (8-7-2018) and City Council (8-23-2018) for the proposed text
changes consistent with Goal 1.
Goal 2 – Land Use Planning. Goal 2 addresses the land use planning procedures in Oregon,
including the need to adopt comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances based on factual
information. The proposed amendments are consistent with existing policy in the comprehensive
plan and are aimed at correcting conflicts between standards in implementing ordinances,
providing flexibility for structures to avoid conflicts with utility easements, and addressing
parking needs in the city. The proposed changes are based on factual information from the
Planning Department Findings Page 2 of 6
189
municipal code, industry standards for garage widths, and utility easement language that
prohibits structures from being placed within a utility easement.
Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands. Goal 3 addresses agricultural land within rural areas. The
proposed text amendments do not afject agricultural lands or agricultural buffers that would be
required adjacent to agricultural lands outside the urban growth boundary. On this basis, Goal
3 does not apply to the proposed text amendments.
Goal 4 - Forest Lands. Goal 4 addresses forest lands within rural areas. The proposed text
amendments do not affect forest lands or lands adjacent to forest lands; therefore. Goal 4 does
not
apply-
S - QLyn 5 a•cis S e is an Historic A►'e�as an l Natt ra Resou Goal 3 establishes a
process for each natural and cultural resource to be inventoried and evaluated. If deemed to be
significant, local governments may preserve, allow uses that conflict with the resource, or allow a
combination of the two. In Central Point, floodplains and historic structures have been
inventoried, and ordinances lune been adopted to minimize impacts to each. Tire proposed text
amendments would not affect any implementing ordinances that require or protect open spaces,
natural resources, or scenic or historic areas associated with significant Goal 5 resources in the
City.
Goal 6 - Air Water and Land Resources Qualit . Goal 6 requires local comprehensive plans
and implementing ordinances to comply with state and federal regulations on air, water and land
quality° resource requirements. Because the proposed amendments are focused primarily on
eliminating conflicts between setbacks and design standards and utility easements, the
amendments will not impact the ability of development projects to comply with any applicable
state or federal air, water or land quality requirements.
Goal 7 - Areas Sub ect to No gral Hazards_ Goa 1 7 requires approprirtle. safeguards when
planning far development in floodplains or other areas subject to natural hazards. In Central
Point,floodplain development is regulated in accordance with CPMC 8.24, Flood Damage
Prevention. Carthqualce and fire safety rs a function of building and fire codes. The proposed
amendments! would not impede or otherwise conflict with the standards set forth in CPMC 8.24,
the building code or fwe code as necessary to protect against flood earthquake, or f re damages.
Goal 8- Recreational Needs. This goal requires communities to inventory existing parks and
recreational facilities, and to project the needed facilities to serve all populations within the
community. Correcting setback conflicts with utility easements and design standards, and
increasing the allowed garage width by .5% will not generate any additional need for parks and
recreation services -
Goa t
ervices_Goal 9 - Economy oLthe State. Goal 9 addresses diversification and improvement of the
economy and specifically addresses commercial and industrial land. The proposed amendments
would affect development on residential land, which is not the subject oj'Goal 9. It should be
noted however that the proposed amendment to the garage width standard in CPMC"
17.67.070(D)(3)(a)(i), according to the local development community, negatively impacts the
construction sector in terms of its ability to market and sell homes without adequate parking. The
proposed amendment corrects the deficiency to serve residential needs, which supports the
viability of the construction and real estate industries in Central Point consistent with Goal 9,
Planning Department Findings Page 3 of 6
190
Goal 10 -- Housi . Goal 10 requires local communities to plan for and accommodate housing
needs in the City. The proposed amendment supports housing with viable parking and eliminates
conflicts between setbacks and utility easements to avoid potential damages and assure continued
provision ofpublic services placed in those easements.
Goal 11 — Public Facilities and Services. Goal I I calls for efficient planning of public services
such as, sewer, water, law enforcement and fire protection to assure that public services are
planned in accordance with a community's needs and capacities rather than to be forced to
respond to development as it occurs. Public facilities and services are planned in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan Public Facilities Element and updated master plans for water,
storrnwalei, elc_ The PYOposed amenclrnertls will nul uffecl the pruv3zoR-qfserw'ces or -generate -
additional need for services not already planned for.
Goal 12 — Transportation. Goal 12 aims to provide a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system. To minimize parking congestion in TOD Districts, the proposed
amendment affected garage width would address a standard that reduces frrnctionality of garages
for usable parking space. Other amendments correcting code conflicts and utility
easementAtrueture conflicts have no imperet on transportation facilities.
Goal 13 — Ener2y_ Goal 13 has to do with conserving all forms of energy. The proposed
amendments constitute minor adjustments and clarifications to avoid conflicts with easements
and other sections of the code. As such, the proposed text amendments are not expected to
increase energy utilization.
Goal 14 — Urbanization. Goal 14 has to do with managing the City's growth in cot#unction with
project need based on population and land use. The proposed amendments will trot affect
population growth or land need; therefore, Goal 14 does not apply.
Goals 15 Applies to the Willamette Valley and does not apply to the City of Central Point.
Goals 16-19 - Applies to coastal areas and does not affect the City of Central Point.
Conclusion CPMC 1710.400(A): Based on the nature of the proposed amendments and the findings
above. the proposed changes to CPMC 17.65 and CPMCf7.67 are consistent with all applicable
Statewide Planning Goals.
B, Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan (major and minor
amendments);
Finding CPMC 17.10.400 (B): A review of the Central Point Comprehensive Plan identiliied the
following relevant policies:
Citizen involvement.
Policy 3 — Citizen Influence. Whenever possible, citizens shall be given the opportunity to be
involved in all phases of the planning process, including (1) data collection, (2) plan
preparation, (3) adoption, (4) implementation, (5) evaluation, and (6) revision.
Finding Citizen Inyolvrnnt Policy 3 —Citizen Influence: The proposed text amendments are
being initiated by the City based on feedback and recommendations received by developers
regarding code conflicts, design standard challenges, and issues with utility easements. To
promote awareness of the proposed amendments, the City published notice of two (2) duly
Planning Department Findings Page 4 of B
191
public hearings that have been scheduled with the Planning Commission (8/712018) and City
Council (812 312 0 1 8) to receive testimony. In addition to publishing notice in the newspaper
on July 24, 2018, notice was provided to DLCD and information was posted on the City's
website (www,eentralaoingMWon.govlprajects .
Conclugion Citizen Involvement Policy 3 — Citi7xn In uence: As evidenced by the City's
collaboration with the development community and efforts to promote awareness of the
proposed amendments and public involvement process, the proposed amendment was
processed in accordance with Policy 3 for Citizen Involvement.
Poli12y4 - Technical In rmation. The City will assure that all information used in the
preparation of'the Plan or related reports is made available in an easy to understand form
and is available for review at the community library, City Hall, or other location.
Findke Citizen Involvement P lic . 4 -- Technical !n o►7nation. The City has based the proposed
text amendments on identified code conflicts and best practices for transit oriented design.
For example, a report on Transit Oriented Development Best Practices Handbook
(hy.t/wssnv. recon ►recerrtga►nericr{.orgjussersZVpLQg_�fpraclicelJ Lodi) provides a
summary of best practices including parking management. The report states that parking
should be encouraged to the side or rear of buildings to promote pedach ian oriented
development along street frontages.
By implementing current design standards that minimize the width of'attached garages
relative to front faVade width, the City is encouraging such design while providing flexibility
in instances where side or rear access is not possible. The proposed increase in garage width
from 40 to 45 percent of the overall front favade width recognizes the need for viable parking
based on accepted industry standard (i.e. 10 -to 12 ft width per space). This assures that
covered parking provided in situations that cannot feasibly accommodate side or rear loaded
parking will be usable for a range of vehicle types and sizes. The remaining code
amendments are corrections necessary to avoid conflicts with other code standardx,
including provision of utility easements and design.
Conclusion Citizen Involvement Policy 4 — Technical Informadon. The proposed amendment is
based on technical information related to industry standards in construction and transit
oriented design best practices.
Transportation Element:
Policy 3.1.2 The City shall continuously monitor and update the Land Development Code to
maintain best practices in transient oriented design consistent with the overall land use
objectives of the City.
R
nding Transtnwrtation Polls 3. 1.2: The ame imed amendment 1.s evidence that tire_ C1t
monitors its land use code to maintain best nr'aciices in transit oriented design consistgn
with the owjga landuse " •t v oj'drg it y. Fit i Citizen Involvement Policy 4 -
Techrticul Infortnution praYirlex fitrilter ever&ince of ft n�nit yft gnd uprfaling based on
actual information.
C t;clu ion Transportation Policv 3.1.2. Consistent_
Policy 6.2.1 The City shall prepare, adopt and maintain parking standards that reflect best
parking practices that further the parking goals of the City.
Planning Department Findings Page 5 of 6
192
Finding Transpgriation Policy 6.2.1: See Finding Citizen Involvement Pe
licy 4.
Conclusion rransportation Policy 6.2.1.: Consistent.
Conclusion CPMC 17.10.400(B):Based on the evaluation of applicable Comprehensive Plan
policies, the proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with the Central Point Comprehensive
Plan,
C. If a zoning map amendment, findings demonstrating that adequate public services and transportation
networks to serve the property are either available, or identified for construction in the city's public
facilities master plans (major and minor amendments); and
Finding CPMC 17.10.400 (C): The proposed zoning text amendment does not include changes to the
zoning map.
Conclusion CPMC 17.10 400(Q: Not applicable.
D. The amendment complies with OAR 660-012-0060 of the Transportation Planning Rule. (Ord. 1989
§ l (part), 2414; Ord. 1874 §3(part), 2046. Formerly 17-10.300(B)) -
Finding CPMC 17.10.4 00 (D): The proposed text amendment does not involve any changes than
would affect trip generation or public transportation facilities, such as an Increase in density or
parking standards. The proposed amendment provides corrections that correct code conflicts
between setbacks and design standards and utility easements. The proposed increase to attached
garage width is a minor adjustment to provide usable covered parking where rear or side loaded
parking is not possible
Conclusion CPMC 17.10.400(D): Given the nature of the proposed amendments and lack of impact
to traffii c. existing or planned transportation facilities, the proposed amendment complies with the
TPR
PART 3 — CONCLUSION
As evidenced in findings and conclusions provided in Part 2, the proposed zone text amendment is
consistent with applicable standards and criteria in the Central Point Municipal Code, including the
Statewide Planning Goals (where applicable), Comprehensive Plan, and Statewide Transportation
Planning Rule.
Planning Department Findings Page 6 of 6
193
ATTACHMENT "C"
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 857
A RESOLUTION APPROVING MAJOR AMENDMENTS TO CPMC 17.65 AND CPMC 17.67
FILE NO. ZC-18005
Applicant: City of Central Point
WHEREAS, on August 7, 2018 the Planning Commission, at a duly scheduled public hearing,
considered major amendments to Chapter 17 Zoning of the Central Point Municipal Code ("CPMC")
as follows, and as specifically identified in Exhibit " l" - Staff Report dated August 7, 2018:
1. CPMC 17.65.050, Table 1
2. CPMC 17.67.070(D)(3)(a)(i)
WHEREAS, it is the finding of the Planning Commission that the above referenced code amendments
comply with the approval criteria set forth in CPMC 17. 10, including the Statewide Planning Goals,
Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Planning Rule as evidenced by the Planning Department
Findings identified as Attachment "B" in the Staff Report dated August 7, 2018 (Exhibit 1)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by
this Resolution No. 857, does hereby forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to
approve the amendments as set forth in the Staff Report dated August 7, 2018 attached hereto by
reference as Exhibit "1" including Attachments "A" and "B" therein, which are herein incorporated by
reference.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 7th day
of August 2018.
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this 7'" day of August 2018.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 857 (08-07-2018)
194