HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 291 - Roxy Ann Vet Site Plan/ `:r v
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 291
A RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING A
SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR
ROXY ANN VETERINARY CLINIC AT FIRST AND OAK STREETS
(Applicant: Kevin Starnes)
Recitals
1. This matter came before the Planning Commission for
hearing on June 7, 1994, on applicant's site plan application for
a 2,310-square foot building in a C-5 district of the City. The
Planning Commission reviewed the application and the City staff
report, and received comments from all persons washing to be
heard in favor of and opposed to the application.
Nnw, therefore;
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Criteria Applicable to Decision. The following
chapters of the Central Point Municipal Code apply to this
application:
A. Chapter 17.46, C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial District
B. Chapter 17.60, General Regulations
C. Chapter 17.64, Off-Street Parking and Loading
D. Chapter 17.72, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction
Plan Approval
Section 2. Findings and Conclusions. The Planning
Commission hereby adopts by reference all findings of fact set
forth in the City staff reports, and concludes that the
applications and proposals comply with the requirements of the
following chapters of the Central Point Municipal Cade:
A. Chapter 17.46 relating to uses, lot size, lot coverage,
setback, building height and screening in the C-5 district.
B. Chapter 17.60 relating to paving and landscaping
requirements.
C. Chapter 17.64 relating to off-street parking and loading
facilities, with the approval of a minor variance to the off-
street parking requirement, from the required 12 spaces down to
an approved 10 spaces. Such variance is approved, based upon the
facts and findings submitted by the applicant, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and by this reference
incorporated herein.
D. Chapter 17.72 relating to site plan requirements,
1 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 291 (061494)
Section 3. Conditional Approval. The within application
for site plan approval is hereby conditionally approved, so long
as the following conditions are met:
Conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy,
Developer shall construct new sidewalks adjacent to Oak Street
and adjacent to First Street according to the City's Standard
Details for Public Works Construction.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Developer shall
provide City with the number and size of water meters for this
development. City will provide and install the water meters, at
developer's expense.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Developer shall
provide a set of drawings for the sanitary sewer system for
review and approval by City prior to issuance of a building
permit.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Developer shall
provide City with a complete set of construction drawings for the
storm drainage system to serve this property. All roof drains,
area drains, crawl spaces, and parking lot drains shall have
positive drainage away from the structures, and shall connect to
a storm drainage system approved by the Public Works Department.
5. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy, a "No
Parking" zone shall be delineated along the curb with yellow
paint and signing for the property included in this site plan.
Developer shall include a no parking plan along said curb with
the construction drawings for this development. Developer shall
assume all casts associated with this condition.
Passed by the Council an
its passage this /7 day of
ATTEST:
City Re ese tative
Approved by me this ~
d si ned by me in authentication of
1994.
Planning Commission Chairman
'` day of , 1994.
~' ~~~~
Planning Commission Chairman
2 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 291 (061494)
Rox~ 1~nn
~ete~-~ioa~ ~Iospita~
.--,
-. 3
620 South i=ront
P.O. Box 3995
Centro] Point, OR 97502
{503) 664-1521
May 8, 1994
Project: Roxy Ann Veterinary Hospital .~
Subjects Request for minor variance fro~r~ parkinghstandard.
Off-Street Parking
CPMC currently does not have a parking standard far
veterinary hospital use. The Planning Administrator and
the City Attorney has concluded that the closest and most
appropriate standard is CPMC 17.64.040 H2 which is Office
Professional, medical and dental offices; clinics. A copy
of the standard is attached. Based upon the standard the
proposed 2310 square foot building would require 11.55 spaces
rounded to I2 spaces.
The applicant will have difficulty providing 12 spaces
with the proposed plan. The options are to reduce the proposed
building to 2000 square feet or apply far a formal ar adminisrative
variance from the standard applied to human clinics. The specific
exception would be as fallaw~.s
A 10 percent reduction in the standard which requires
I2 parking spaces for a 2310 square foot medical or
dental clinic. A 10 percent reduction would be 1.2
spaces rounded up to 2 spaces. This would result in
a 10 space requirement which is being met in the
proposed plan.
There are two basic arguments for the exception.
A veterinary clinic does not behave like a human clinic and
the interior square footage of a veterinary hospital is not
utilized in the same way as a human medical or dental clinic.
Dogs and cats are typically dropped off at the clinic and
picked up later after treatment. People however are not dropped
off but usually wait and require parking spaces. The three
spaces per practitioner standard is based upon one patient in
the treatment room, one in the waiting room and one entering the
parking lot. Coincidentally this part of the standard can be
easily met. Tt is the 1 space for every 200 square feet which
is the greater and the problem.
-The practice that will utilize
1 practitioner and 2 employees.
( 1 practitioner = 3 spaces ) ~-
this equals 4 spaces.
-Or 1 space for every 200 square
-Whichever is greater applies.
this building has
With the standard
( 2 employees = 1 space }
feet... this equals I2 spaces.
One requirement is 3 times greater than the other
within a szngle standard. One might expect. the numbers
to be Glaser if the square footage of the building in
question were utilized in the manner described by the standard.
In reality 25 percent of the building is utilized as kennel
space where animals stay before and after treatment. Another
10--12 percent is utilized as pet food and retail product storage.
This square footage is not present in a human medical or dental
off ice . '
Other Criteria (CPMC 17.$0) is also addressed in this proposal.
Considerations for the variance:
1. The proposed structure is going to replace and old,
boarded up, useless eyesore with a quality, attractive,
professionally landscaped facility which will provide an
essential service to the community. The current structure
an the property has been vacant for a long period and is a risk
for unauthorized habitation and potential injury to trespassers
from ratting structure. The current landscaping consists of
2 foot high grass, leaning weed trees and overgrown bushes.
The current Roxy Ann Veterinary Hospital has served the Central
Point area for the past 30 years. Central Point is a community
that lends itself to having pets. Many are family oriented
residents that have a house with a yard a dog and a cat. Others
are alder retired residents where pets are considered their
children or are their only companions. People often worry mare
about a condition in their pet than they would in themselves and
need a veterinarian close to their residence not only for
conveniance but in case of emergency. Also the Central Point
Police Department has many times used Roxy Ann Veterinary
Hospital for emergency "hit by car" pets of unknown ownership.
This new clinic will not only update an essential service
facility but will continue to modernize the commercial care
area as Sentry Market has,
2. The parking variance will not have any adverse impacts
upon the neighborhood. Street parking will not be overloaded
because there is already a history on the parking acti'v'ity with
the existing clinic. This history demonstrates the nature of
the drop off pick up activity. Currently the practice has five
parking spaces which grooves to be functioning well and there----~~
is no street parking available. The minor parking exception
proposed in the new facility will not compromise Battey in an~r
way. Due to the nature of the use, the only parking standard
which has been applied is not accurate and is overstated for the use.
~,
i
3. A minor reduction of the required parking spaces will
facilitate the development of the clinic which is of adequate
size to handle the use. The property is utilized with the intent
of the zone district. The use is outright permitted and therefore
meets the intent of the C-5 zone. The varience does nod effect the
basic utilization of the property for the allowed purpose in this
zone.
4. The fourth consideration states "Circumstances affect the
property that generally da not apply to other property in the
same zoning district." Other than there being no specific parking
standard for the building proposed on the property this consideration
is not applicable.
5. The conditions far which the variance is requested were
not self imposed. The applicant is not asking for a variance from
a set standard described for this project. With all due respect
for the Zoning Regulations of Central Point, the city does not at
this time have a precise standard for veterinary hospitals. The
standard which is applied by C.P. Planning Department was established
for human medical offices which treat and serve humans who drive
themselves to the facility, wait for their appointment and drive
home. This pattern requires people to utilize parking as they
wait. Animal clinics do not rely on as many spaces because of the
drop off and pick up pattern. People do oat have the time or the
patience to wait hours for their pets' appointment, which is the
norm for appointments in a human medical clinic. Out of sheer
conveniance this drop off pattern is the accepted business practice
of veterinary hospitals. The applicant did not self impose this
characteristic pattern nor did the applicant self impose the
particular parking standard which is applied to the project and
which is overstated for the pattern of use.
To Conclude:
I wish to continue serving the Central Paint area with a
reliable, established veterinary practice that has a history of
excellence. The current facilities are beyond updating and need
to be replaced to be sucessful in the competative field of
veterinary medicine. To allow the practice to continue as a
state of the art animal medical facility a new and larger building
is required. This project will benefit everybody. The applicant
gets a new larger building. Central Point residents get a more
conveniently located, safer to access, updated veterinary facility.
The city of Central Point gets an attractive addition to the
downtown area replacing a hazardous eyesore.
This project currently hinges an the approval of the site plan
which requires this small variance. Section 17.80.Q20 states that
the city staff may approve a minor variance in cases where it is
/"`;
3
10 percent or less of code requirement and the variance requested
is the minimum necissary to resolve any hardship which is the-,--
basis of the request. Because it is a minor adjustment and in
the interest of expediency I respectfully request this to be an
administrative or staff approved variance.
Dr, ~evin•N. Starnes