HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 4, 2020 Planning Commission PacketCENTRAL
POINT
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
August 4, 2020 - 6:00 p.m.
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
Planning Commission members, Tom Van Voorhees (acting chair), Amy Moore, Jim
Mock, Pat Smith, Kay Harrison, Chris Richey
IV. CORRESPONDENCE
V. MINUTES
Review and approval of the July 7, 2020 Planning Commission meeting minutes.
VI. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
VII. BUSINESS
A. Public hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit application to allow Rogue Valley Pet to
operate a commercial retail use at 400 Federal Way. The 0.72 acre site is within the M-1
Industrial zoning district and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W 12B
Tax Lot 200. File No. CUP -20001. Owner/Applicant: Legacy Enterprises, LLC.
B. Public hearing to consider a Site Plan and Architectural Review application for the construction
of a 6,424 square foot warehouse and retail store, including parking and landscape areas, at
400 Federal Way. The 0.72 acre site is within the M-1 Industrial zoning district and is identified
on the Jackson County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W 12B Tax Lot 200. File No. SPAR -20006.
Owner/Applicant: Legacy Enterprises, LLC.
C. Public Hearing to consider a Site -Plan and Architectural Review application to construct
a mixed-use development on 2.19 acres in the Twin Creeks TOD. The project includes
6,132 square feet of commercial first floor space, 10 furnished first floor VRBO spaces
and 56 residential units consisting of a mixture of apartments and townhouses. The site is
Individuals needing special accommodations such as sign language, foreign language interpreters or equipment for the hearing impaired
must request such services at least 72 hours prior to the City Council meeting. To make your request, please contact the City Recorder at
541-423-1026 (voice), or by e-mail at: deanna.casey a centraipointoreaon.gov .
Si necesita traductor en espanol o servicios de discapacidades (ADA) para asistir a una junta publica de la ciudad por favor Mame con
72 horas de anticipaci6n al 541-664-3321 ext. 201.
within the High Mix Residential (HMR) zone and is identified on the Jackson County
Assessor's Map as 37 2W 03CA, Tax Lot 1100. Applicant: Smith Crossing LLC;
Agent: Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc.
VIII. DISCUSSION
IX. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
X. MISCELLANEOUS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Individuals needing special accommodations such as sign language, foreign language interpreters or equipment for the hearing impaired
must request such services at least 72 hours prior to the City Council meeting. To make your request, please contact the City Recorder at
541-423-1026 (voice), or by e-mail at: d_e_anna,cage centralpointoregon.�ov .
Si necesita traductor en espanol o servicios de discapacidades (ADA) para asistir a una junta publica de la ciudad por favor llame con
72 horas de anticipaci6n al 541-664-3321 ext. 201.
City of Central Point
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7, 2020
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:04 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Tom Van Voorhees (acting chair), Kay Harrison, Pat Smith and Jim
Mock were present; Amy Moore and Chris Richey attended via zoom. Also in attendance
were: Stephanie Holtey, Principal Planner, Chris Clayton, City Manager, and Karin Skelton,
Planning Secretary.
III. CORESPONDENCE
There was no correspondence
IV. MINUTES
Kay Harrison made a motion to approve the May 5, 2020 minutes. Pat Smith seconded
the motion. All members said aye. Motion passed.
V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
There were no public appearances.
VI. BUSINESS
A. Review and Feedback on the city of Central Point Strategic Plan 2040
City Manager Chris Clayton said the last strategic plan was created in 2007 and ends December
2020. He said the goals of the plan had been accomplished except for the planned Community
Center which was the last item. The City will be building on the successes of the previous plan in
going forward. He added because of the current Covid 19 situation, there has not been an
opportunity to involve the public as much as the Council would like. He explained how the plan is
organized, and said it contains revisions to the mission, vision and values of the previous plan.
Additionally it identifies five new strategic priorities: community investment, community
engagement, community culture, responsible governance, and economic vibrancy. The goal of
the plan is to allow the City to achieve its best future. He stated it is a living document and will be
updated and/or revised as necessary with regard to the needs of the City.
Mr. Clayton explained the Council used the input from the 2019 citizen survey, City Executive
Team workshops and a series of public meetings to identify and set priorities. The previous plan
was reviewed and current conditions in the city were analyzed. Two issues were identified as
primarily important, the small town feel and safety.
Mr. Clayton reviewed the vision, mission and values of the strategic plan. He reviewed the
strategic priorities and goals.
The Commissioners expressed appreciation of the procedures utilized in the creation of the new
Planning Commission Meeting
July 7, 2020
Page 2
plan. They discussed the importance of a good land use code to allow growth and continue to
preserve the small town feel. Additionally they discussed the importance of a welcoming
environment and how to support diversity in the growth of the city. They noted the term
"inclusive" referred to all manner of economic, social, educational and ethnic backgrounds.
They agreed the design of areas such as parks and public spaces to allow utilization by people of
varied ages and abilities was important.
The Commissioners discussed property taxes and expressed appreciation of the City's fiscal
responsibility. Mr. Clayton said the City provided residents with information annually in the
newsletter regarding how tax monies were spent. He said he appreciated the input from the
Commissioners and would provide the information to the City Council.
VII. DISCUSSION
A. Discussion of the City's Regional Plan Progress Report and City Council's
Resolution to Ratify, Applicant: City of Central Point.
Principal Planner Stephanie Holtey said it was important not only to create plans for the City but to
make sure to implement and monitor them to see what works and what does not. She said this is the
first progress report of all the cities who participated in the Regional Planning Process.
She explained the City of Central Point took the initiative and created this format to address the three
local monitoring requirements, including a description of Central Point's activities pertinent to the
Regional Plan for the preceding five-year period, an analysis as to whether and how well those activities
meet each of the performance indicators, and a projection of activities for the next five-year period.
The adoption of the Regional Plan Element in 2012 included subsequent adoption of the City's
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance and an Urban Reserve Management Agreement with Jackson County.
The City has also completed preparation and approval of Conceptual Plans for six of City's eight URAs,
participated in the Jackson County Agricultural Task Force and Adoption of a revised Urban Growth
Management Agreement with Jackson County; expanded the Central Point UGB into portions of CP -4
and CP -1B; and approved the Central Point Housing Implementation Plan, the City's Housing Strategy
for 2019-2024.
During the next five years the City of Central Point will expand its Urban Growth Boundary
and bring in sufficient amounts of residential, employment and open space lands to serve a
growing population through the year 2040. The new UGB lands will reflect and implement the
conceptual planning that was done for the URAs into which the UGB is expanded. The City
also expects to participate with the Regional Problem Solving signatories in conducting a 10 -
year mandated review beginning in 2022. Other activities that the City expects to be involved
with include updating the Central Point Transportation Systems Plan, updating the Public
Facilities and Services Element, Updating the Environmental Management Element,
maintaining the Buildable Land Inventory, monitoring the Housing Implementation Plan and
updating the Land Use and Development codes to implement new state law and rule making.
A draft of the Self -Assessment was submitted to Jackson County, the Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development and 1000 Friends of Oregon all of whom have responded
positively to the document. Planning staff intend to submit the document to Jackson County in final
4
Planning Commission Meeting
July 7, 2020
Page 3
form as part of the UGB Amendment now that it is approved by theCouncil.
Ms. Holtey asked the commissioners if they had any questions or comments. They expressed
appreciation of the update and the processes the City had gone through. They directed that it be
presented to the City Council.
Planning Update
• Dominos is still under construction
• The Chiropractic building by the Post Office is under construction
0 There is a 6 lot residential subdivision on Hwy. 99 near the Skyrman Arboretum
6 We have an application from the Smith brothers for Central Point Station on the North side
of Twin Creeks. It will be mixed use, both commercial and residential
■ We have an application for a site plan review and a conditional use permit for Rogue Valley
Pet on Federal Way
• We have a master plan modification for White Hawk. They will be changing housing types,
increasing single family homes and minimizing the number of apartments
• The Premier Car Wash has not yet obtained permits.
• The Pittview subdivision is putting in improvements needed for final plat.
• Lindsey Court has permits for several new homes
• There has been an increase in interest and building permits issued for ADUs throughout the
City
The commercial building on Freeman and Bigham has been approved for site plan &
architectural review
• We have an application for Les Schwab on Biddle Road that is scheduled for decision on
July 7t`.
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
X. ADJOURNMENT
Kay Harrison moved to adjourn the meeting. Pat Smith seconded the motion. All members said "aye".
Meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Planning Commission Chair
ROGUE VALLEY PET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
STAFF REPORT
Ak
CENTRAL
POINT
Oregon
STAFF REPORT
July 28, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: VII -A (File No. CUP -20001)
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AICP
Community Development Director
Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit application to allow a commercial retail use at 400 Federal
Way. The 0.72 acre site is within the M-1 Industrial zoning district and is identified on the Jackson
County Assessor's Map as 37S 2W 12B Tax Lot 200. Owner/Applicant: Legacy Enterprises, LLC.
SOURCE
Justin Gindlesperger, Community Planner II
BACKGROUND
The Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the construction and operation of a commercial
retail use associated with a warehouse at 400 Federal Way, near the intersection of Hamrick Road and
Federal Way. The application for Conditional Use Permit is being reviewed concurrently with an
application for Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR -20006). Specific site development
considerations are detailed in that application.
A commercial use is designated a conditional use in the M-1 zoning district in accordance with section
17.48.040 of the Central Point Municipal Code. The M -I zone standards in CPMC 17.48.040 allow
business offices and commercial uses that are compatible with and closely related in their nature of
business to permitted uses in the M-1 district, or that would be established to serve primarily the uses,
employees or customers of the M-1 zone.
Meriam Webster's New College Dictionary Third Edition defines compatible as 1) Capable of living or
performing in harmonious, agreeable, or friendly association with another or others; and 2) Capable of
orderly, efficient integration and operation with other elements in a systems.
The Applicant's Findings in Section 1.0 outline the nature of the application/proposed use as follows:
Rogue Valley Pet Warehouse will primarily be used for the warehousing, storage and wholesale
of prepackaged pet food and supplies... a portion of the business is sales.
The request for the CUP is based on the fact that this business is compatible with and closely
related in their nature of business to permitted uses in the M-1 district, and would be established
to serve primarily the uses, employees or customers of this district. ..... the portion of the
business to be sales [is] based on a Membership Warehouse model.
The City authorized Membership Warehouse Clubs as a conditional use in the M-1 zoning district per
Planning Commission Resolution No.764 (Attachment "C"). Membership Warehouse Club is defined as a
"free standing large retail establishment, selling a wide variety of merchandise in which customers pay
annual membership fees for purchasing privileges. The clubs are able to keep prices low due to the no-
frills (warehouse) format of the stores. In addition, customers are required to buy large quantities of the
store's products." The Applicant's Findings and submittal documents do not provide evidence with
sufficient specificity to determine whether the proposed use is a Membership Warehouse Club as
authorized by PC Resolution No. 764, or a commercial retail use.
The Applicant's Findings identify 3,998 square feet (62%) to be used as showroom space for sales. Based
on the evidence in the record at this time, there is insufficient information to determine whether the
showroom is for retail or membership wholesale sales. The sales showroom can be either wholesale or
retail. Retail is distinct from wholesale sales and is not consistent with the purpose of the M-1 zoning
district (CPMC 17.48.0 10) to provide areas suitable for the location of light industrial uses involved in
service, manufacturing, or assembly activities..."
Wholesale trade involves the sale of goods or merchandise to retailers, industrial commercial or other
professional business users or other wholesales and subordinate services, retail sales and is sold in bulk or
quantity usually at a lower cost. Retail uses are more broad in definition and per OAR 660-009-0005(3)
are classified as Other Employment, which includes all non -industrial employment activities. Although
the M-1 zone allows some retail trade uses, they are for
Staff does not recommend authorization of a retail pet feed and supply sales use in the M-1 zoning district
because pet sales and supply stores are non -industrial commercial uses that are identified as permitted
uses in four (4) commercial zoning districts in the City (i.e. C-4, C-5, EC, and GC). According to CPMC
17.60.140 only uses not specifically named in any zoning district may be deemed to be similar to other
general uses. Given the specific listing of pet feed and supply stores in the C-4 (CPMC 17.44.020) and C-
5 zone (CPMC 17.46.020), EC and GC zones (CPMC 17.65.050, Table 1; CPMC 17.08.410(D)(3)(a)).
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A" — Site Plan
Attachment `B" — Building Elevations
Attachment "C" — Resolution No. 764
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission either:
1. Direct staff to prepare findings to approve the CUP to authorize the retail pet supply sales on the
basis that the proposed retail component is consistent with the purpose of the M-1 zone; or,
2. Direct staff to prepare findings to deny the CUP to authorize the retail pet supply sales on the
basis that retail sales are permitted elsewhere in the City and the proposed retail component is not
consistent with the purpose of the M-1 zone per CPMC 17.48.0 10 and does not provide evidence
that the use is compatible with other permitted uses in zone per CPMC 17.48.040; or,
3. Continue the public hearing to a date and time specific if requested by the Applicant to allow time
necessary to provide evidence that the proposed use is a Membership Wholesale sales use in
accordance with PC Resolution No. 764, or findings that describe how the proposed use is
compatible with and closely related in their nature of business to permitted uses in the M-1
district, or which uses employees or customers of the M-1 zone are served by the proposed use.
Attachment "A"
J
He— R—
b
i
10
0
Attachment "B"
Attachment "C"
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. n t�o `'4
A RESOLUTION APPROVING MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS AS A
SIMILAR USE TO PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE M-1 ZONING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2409; after conducting a duly noticed public hearing, the City of Central Point
Planning Commission, in accordance with Section 17.48.020(W), considered the question of Membership
Warehouse Clubs (the "Proposal") as a use similar to permitted uses within the M-1 zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs was based on
the criteria set forth in Section 17.60.140(A) of the City of Central Point Municipal Code, and written and
oral testimony received by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission by
Resolution No. --I b does hereby find as set forth in Exhibit "A — Findings' that Membership
Warehouse Clubs are similar to other uses permitted within the M-1 zoning district and hereby approves
Membership Warehouse Clubs as a conditional use within the M-1 District.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 3r° day of
March, 2009
O
101
WMA
r
1.7
ATTEST:
C dk _
City Representative
Approved by me this 3 t4 day of �, 2009.
Planning Commission Resolution No. -76
11
STAFF REPORT
Ak
CENTRAL
POINT
STAFF REPORT
March 3, 2009
Planning Department
Four Humphrey, AICP,'
Community Development Director/
Assistant City Administrator
AGENDA TFEM: Fite No. 09004(1)
Consideration of Membership Warehouse Club as a use similar to allowed uses within the M-1
District and allowing as a Conditional Use, Applicant: City of Central Point
STAFF SOURCE:
Don Burt, AICP, EDFP Planning Manager
BACKGROUND:
The City has received a request to make a similar use determination on Membership Warehouse
Clubs (the "Proposed Use") as an allowed use within the M-1 zoning district. The question
revolves around the similarities between uses permitted in the M-1 district and the Proposed Use.
Section 17.48.020(W) allows the planning commission to consider expanding the list of
permitted uses to include other similar and compatible uses', This authority is restated in Section
17.60.140 Authorization for Similar Uses. It is possible to consider the Proposed Use as a
permitted use; however, it is recommended that the Proposed Use be given status as a conditional
use. As a conditional use the City has more discretion in determining the compatibility of the
use with other permitted uses.
There are five (S) basic tests that must be applied when considering similar use per Section
17.60.140. Those tests and a summary of the findings are:
1. Must be closely related to, and compatible with listed uses. The Proposed Use has been
found to be closely related to other uses listed in the Section 17.48.020, particularly retail,
wholesale, and warehouse uses. Membership Warehouse Clubs are a hybrid use that
combines many of the characteristics of retail, warehouse and wholesale uses.
2. The proposed use must not have been anticipated or known to exist on the effective date
of the ordinance. It was not until 1997 that Membership Warehouse Clubs were
officially acknowledged. The M-1 ordinance was adopted in 1981.
3. The proposed use must be treated under local, state, and federal law the same as listed
uses. This test applies to environmental and trade laws. The Proposed Use does not have
any restrictions on its operation that do not apply to other listed uses.
' CPMC Section 17.48.020(W)
`A
4. The proposed use is consistent with the purpose of the zoning district The purpose of the
M-1 district is to provide lands for light industrial services and manufacturing/assembly.
The list of permitted uses defines the scope of the term light industrial as used in the M-1
district. In the context of the listed uses Membership Warehouse Clubs are consistent
with the intent of the M-1 district.
5. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and policies. There are
three (3) Comprehensive Plan elements that apply to consideration of the Proposed Use;
Land Use, gnomic, and Transportation. A review of the policies of each concludes that
the Proposed Use is consistent (see Findings, Parts 5 — 6 for further detail). It is found
that Membership Warehouse Clubs are consistent with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Presently, the M-1 district permits a number of retail type uses, as well as warehouse and
wholesale uses. Operationally, Membership Warehouse Clubs are a hybrid of retail, warehouse,
and wholesale operations. Physically, Membership Warehouse Clubs have the characteristics of
a wholesaWwarehouse operation. It should be noted that Membership Warehouse Clubs
typically generated a greater amount of traffic than most uses permitted within the M-1 district.
Because of this potential it is proposed that Membership Warehouse Clubs be classified as a
conditional use. As a conditional use the City has additional authority to assure that any site and
traffic planning issues are mitigated as a condition of development.
Based on the findings presented in Attachment "B" Membership Warehouse Clubs can be
considered as a use consistent with the purpose of the M-1 district and is similar to, and
compatible with the list of permitted use as set forth in Section 17.48.420.
FINDINGS:
See Attachment "B — Findings"
ISSUES:
As discussed in the findings, a Membership Warehouse Club is a unique use. Although retail in
classification, it has some of the characteristics of warehousing and wholesale uses. Because of
this uniqueness, both functionally and physically, it can be argued that Membership Warehouse
Clubs are acceptable uses within the M-1 district. More importantly, the frequency of
occurrence of a Membership Warehouse Club within the limits of the City's urban area needs to
be kept in perspective. If a Membership Warehouse Club locates within the City, for market
reasons it will be the only Membership Warehouse Club to locate within the City.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A — Resolution No.
Attachment "B— Findings"
ACTION:
Consider Resolution No.
13
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. allowing Membership Warehouse Clubs as a conditional use
within the M-1 zoning district.
14
ATTACH M ENT "
PLANNING COMMSSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING MEMBERSKW WAREHOUSE CLUBS AS A
SIMILAR USE TO PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE M-1 ZONING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2009; after conducting a duly noticed public hearing, the City of Central Point
Planning Commission, in accordance with Section 17.48.020(%% considered the question of Membership
Warehouse Clubs (the "Proposal") as a use similar to permitted uses within the M-1 zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's considmWon of Membership Warehouse Clubs was based on
the criteria set forth in Section 17.60.140(A) of the City of Central Point Municipal Code; and written and
oral testimony received by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission by
Resolution No. does hereby find as set forth in Exhibit "A — Findings" that Membership
Warehouse Clubs are similar to other uses permitted within the M-1 zoning district and hereby approves
Membership Warehouse Clubs as a conditional use within the M -I District.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 3`d day of
March, 2009
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this day of___ . _ .2009.
Planning Commission Resolution No.
15
Planning Commission Chair
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
FINDINGS OF FACT
FOR
MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS SUMLARFrY FINDINGS
Before the City of Central Point Planning Commission
Consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a use similar to allowed uses within the
M-1 District
Applicant: City of Central Point ) Findings of Fact
140 S. Third Street ) and
Central Point, OR 97502 ) Conclusion of Law
PART l — INTRODUCTION
These findings have been prepared as authorized by Section 17.48.020(W) and in accordance
with the criteria set forth in Section 17.60.140 addressing the question of Membership
Warehouse Clubs as a use "similar" to uses allowed within the M-1 district. Section
17.48.020(') allows as a permitted use other uses not listed in Section 17.48.020, or any other
zoning district, provided findings can be made that the proposed use is similar to, and compatible
with other permitted uses and the intent of the M-1 district. Further, Section l 7.60.140 sets forth
specific criteria to be addressed by the planning commission when considering "similar use".
The findings presented herein address all the criteria for determining "similar use" as required of
Section 17.48,020(W) and 17.60.140(A).
Presently, the City has approximately 152 acres of M-1 lands, of which 78 acres are classified as
net buildable. Figure XX illustrates the location of the City's M-1 lands.
1 City of Central Point Buildable lands Inventory
`r;
Page 1 of 31
� � rI-U
ry rima,! � L�
on
Sm
IN il,
gilt L'
IMF==jjj
;;::�.r •7�`\�'
,ni..,
�,i - .Iw:�t' •:fir' .�'';i� •'�;.`•-..
�. . !� ��' �;�'�;�� '��` :'t. •ti �'�1Y''•.•' may'.`- ,.,.��, :ii I;:.' `4 . ,,,, �� 1►:.
Lo
�_ ■a *.• =�'�'• :-.;;.... -: ;;;gig'`•
Ik
y '�= •`=.''4''•. - • � i� �I:- \ /��'� �^��� -.. ..• �u....-•{, Oji.=i. :' :.►L-. 5
•i:r1 iir �ii'ra." fir:, �,' - i, i,�ili- .ems � ..r . n � , rIR��'u ili �IL�i ��ir G. � •�fa. t:':IL'•'_�:�i�„ ?�. . c l,i
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Including this introduction these findings will be presented in ten (10) parts as follows:
1. Introduction
2. Definitions
3. Section 17.48.020(W) Permitted Use Findings
4. Section 17.60.140 Authorization for Similar Use Findings
5. Section 17.48.440(A) Conditional Uses Findings
6. Section 17.10.600 Transportation Planning Rule Compliance Findings
7. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element Findings
8. Comprehensive Plan, Economic Element Findings
9. Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element Findings
10, Summary Conclusion
PART 2 — DEFINITIONS
Throughout these findings certain key terms will be used. For reference purposes the key terms
used in these findings are presented in Part 2. The following definitions (italic) and discussion
have been prepared, and are incorporated herein, as part of these findings.
1. Economic Sectors — Industries are classified based on the stage in the production
chain, there are three major broad sectors in modern economies:
• Primary sector: Generally involves changing natural resources into primary
products. Mostproducts from this sector are considered raw materials for other
industries. Major businesses in this sector include agriculture, agribusiness,
fishing, forestry and all mining and quarrying industries.
■ Secondary sector: Includes those economic sectors that create a finished, usable
product, manufacturing and construction. This sector generally takes the output
of the primary sector and manufactures finished goods or where they are suitable
for use by other businesses, for export, or sale to domestic consumers. This sector
is often divided into light industry and heavy industry.
Tertiary sector: Involves the provision of services to consumers and businesses.
Services are defined in conventional economic literature as "intangible goods ".
The tertiary sector of economy involves the provision of services to businesses as
well as final consumers. Services may involve the transport, distribution and sale
of goods from producer to a consumer as may happen in wholesaling and
retailing, or may involve the provision of a service, such as in pest control or
entertainment. Goods may be transformed in the process of providing a service,
as happens in the restaurant industry or in equipment repair. However, the focus
is on people interacting with people and serving the customer rather than
transforming physical goods.
Page 3 of 31
18
ATTACIidI'iENT "B - FINDINGS"
Z. Industry —the commercial production and sale of goods.1 By definition the term
"industry" includes all sectors of the economy as defined above.
3. Industrial — Of, relating to, or derived from industry. 3
4. Industrial Use — Employment activities generating income from the production,
handling or distribution of goods. Industrial uses include, but arS not limited to:
manufacturing; assembly; fabrication; processing; storage; logistics; warehousing;
importation, distribution and transshipment; and research and development'
5. Light Industrial — Light industry is usually less capital intensive than heavy
industry, and is more consumer -oriented than business -oriented (i.e. most light
industry products are produced for end users rather than intermediates for use by
other industries). 5
6. Other Employment Use All non -industrial employment activities including the
widest range of retail, wholesale, service, non-profit, business headquarters,
administrative and governmental employment activities that are accommodated in
retail, office andflexible building types. Other employment uses also include
employment activities ofan entity or organization that serves the medical,
educational, social service, recreation and security needs of the community apically
in large buildings or multi -building campuses. 6
7. Wholesale Trade — Wholesaling, historically called jobbing, is the sale ofgoods
or merchandise to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional, or other
professional business users, or to other wholesalers and related subordinated
services.'
8. Warehousing — A warehouse is a commercial buildingfor storage of goods.
Warehouses are used by manufacturers, importers, exporters, wholesalers, transport
businesses, customs, etc. They, are usually large plain buildings in industrial areas of
cities and towns.8
9. North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) — The NAICS is the
standard used by Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments
for the purpose of collecting, analyzing, and publishing statistical data related to the
x Webster's 11 New College Dictionory
3 Webster's 11 New College Dictionary
`DAR 660-409-0005(3)
} Wikipedia, Light industry
'OAR 660-4094=5(3),
W'iiGipedia
s Wilcipedia
`u
Page 4 of 31
I 9 Wikipedia
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
U.S. business economy. The NAICS was developed under the auspices of the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), and adopted in 1997 to replace the Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) system. It was developed jointly by the U.S. Economic
Classification Policy Committee (ECPC), Statistics Canada, and Mexico's Instituto
Nacional de Estadistica, Geografia a Informatica, to allow for a high level of
comparability in business statistics among the North American countries.
10. Membership Warehouse Clubs
A free-standing large retail establishment, selling a wide variety of merchandise in
which customers pay annual membership fees for purchasing privileges. The clubs
are able to keep prices low due to the no-frills (warehouse) format of the stores. In
addition, customers are required to buy large quantities of the store's products.9
As its name implies Membership Warehouse Clubs require paid membership to
participate in the use of their services. Members include both businesses and
individuals. Business members often purchase from Membership Warehouse Clubs
and resell at retail to their customers. Membership Warehouse Clubs are a unique
hybrid retail use that crosses the boundary between typical retail establishments and
wholesale/warehouse uses. Unlike most large retail establishments Membership
Warehouse Clubs stock a limited selection of products (4,000 — 5,000 SKUs vs.
30,000 — 60,000 SKUs) in a wide range of merchandise categories. Merchandise is
typically purchased directly from manufactures or importers in full truck loads and
sold in institutional sizes, bulk packaging, cases, or multiple packs. To further offer
deep discounts Membership Warehouse Clubs are based on a no-frills, self-service
operation where customer experience is secondary to operational efficiency.
Membership Warehouse Clubs do not advertise to the general public. The exterior
architecture and typical floor plan of a Membership Warehouse Club is much like that
of a warehouse with no external display windows and merchandise is stacked on
pallets, with extra inventory stored on overhead racks. Aisle widths are designed to
accommodate fork -lifts and/or similar equipment for stocking.
20
Page 5 of 31
ATTACHMENT "B - FfNDINGS"
PART 3 -- MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS
SIMILAR USE AUTHORIZATION, SECTION 17.48.020(W)
Section 17.48.020(W) recognizes that the Zoning Ordinance does not list all uses permitted
within the M -I district, and that under certain conditions there may be uses appropriate to the
district that have not been specifically identified, or previously not defined, as an allowed use.
Section 17.48A20(W) reads:
"Other uses not listed in this or any other district, if the planning commission
finds them to be similar to those listed above and compatible with other permitted
uses and with the intent of the M -I district"
To qualify per Section 17.48.020(W) it is first necessary that a finding be made that the use in
question is not already listed in the M -i district, or any other zoning district. If such a finding
can be made it is then necessary that additional findings be made relative to similarity,
compatibility, and compliance with the intent of the M -I district. The purpose of Part 3 is to
address the question of "similar use" as set forth in Section 17.48.020(W).
Finding Section 17.48.020(W). In applying Section 17.48.020(W) there are three basic
tests to determine whether a use is considered "similar" to permitted uses. Those tests
and their applicable findings are:
1. Is The proposed use currently listed in the M-1 district, or any other district? Section
17.48.020 was last modified in 199340. At that time, and to this day, there are no
listings for Membership Warehouse Clubs in the M- I or any other zoning district. It
wasn't until 1997 that the term Membership Warehouse Club was defined and
classified in the NAICS as a specific industry (452910).
Conclusion, Section 17.48.020(VV), 1: Membership Warehouse Clubs are currently not
listed in the M-1 or any other zoning district as an allowed use and therefore qualify for
consideration under the criteria of Section 17.48.020(W) as a "similar use".
2. Is the proposed use similar to the list ofpermitted uses? The term "similar" is
defiled as "resembling though not completely identical." 1 1 The question to be
answered is whether or not Membership Warehouse Clubs resemble, or are similar, to
other uses allowed in the M-1 district. In addressing the term "similar" it is necessary
to turn to those uses currently allowed within the M-1 district. This listing of uses is
presented in Table I and includes references to their economic characteristics.
The economic characteristics of each use as presented in Table 1 provides an
objective basis from which to make a determination of similarity. All industrial uses
14 City of Central Point Ordinance 1684 §47
'Webster's 11 New College Dictionary, Third Edition
`I
Page 6 of 31
ATTACIDMNr "B - FINDINGS"
are grouped into one of three economic sectors (primary, secondary, and tertiary)
based on their role in the production cycle. As illustrated in Table 1, the list of
permitted uses within the M-1 district covers a very broad spectrum, representing the
secondary and tertiary economic sectors. The strongest representation is in the
tertiary sector's Retail Trade, Wholesale Trade, and Warehousing. In considering
similar use the M-1 district offers three use classifications, or a combination thereof,
on which to base a determination of similarity. Are Membership Warehouse Clubs
similar to retail trade, wholesale trade, warehousing, or a combination thereof?
As noted in Part 2, Membership Warehouse Clubs have many characteristics similar
to those of Retail Trade, Wholesale Trade and Warehousing, which are allowed uses
within the M-1 district (see Table 1). The following discusses in further detail the
characteristics/similarities between Membership Warehouse Clubs and Retail Trade,
Wholesale Trade, and the Warehousing sectors.
Retail Trade: Of all the sectors retail trade is the broadest in terms of use
representation. The NAICS defines the Retail Trade sector as consisting of ".. .
establishments engaged in retailing merchandise, generally without
transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise." By
definition, and classification, Membership Warehouse Clubs are classified in the
NAICS as a Retail Trade establishment. As iliustcated in Table 1 numerous retail
uses are already permitted in the M-1 district. These uses range from vehicular
sales (autos, motorcycles, etc.) to retail building supplies, all of which are
classified by the NAICS as being in the Retail Trade sector.
DAR 660-049-4005(3) considers retail uses as Other Employment Uses, which
include all non -industrial employment activities. As illustrated in Table 1, the
M-[ distract currently allows some retail 12 uses as permitted uses.
Wholesale: As defined in Part 2 the term "wholesale trade" means the sale of
goods or merchandise to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional, or other
professional business users, or to other wholesalers and related subordinated
services. On a more specific basis the term "wholesale is defined as "The sale of
goods in large quantities, as for resale by a retailer", and "Sold in large bulk or
quantity, usu. at a lower cost."13 Wholesalers frequently assemble, sort and grade
goods in large lots, break bulk, repack and redistribute in smaller lots. Wholesale
operations are not dissimilar to the operations of a Membership Warehouse Club).
A percentage of Membership Warehouse Customers are businesses buying bulk
merchandize for retail sales. Most Membership Warehouse Clubs have a specific
membership classification for businesses. In the M-1 district wholesale operations
are identified as a permitted use.
"CPMC Section 17.48.020(G,H, & M)
13 Webster's 11 New College Dictionary
22
Page 7 of 31
into VX00:1 il__ uhf r !�
Wholesale uses are defined in OAR 664-009-0005(3) as Other Employment Uses,
which includes all non -industrial employment activities.
Warehousing; As defined in Part 2 warehousing is the storage of merchandise in
a large building for distribution at a later date. The physical characteristics of a
warehouse and a Membership Warehouse Club are very similar, i.e. large
buildings for storage with loading facilities. "Recent developments in marketing
have also led to the development of warehouse -style retail stores with extremely
high ceilings where decorative shelving is replaced by tall heavy duty industrial
racks, with the items ready for sale being placed in the bottom parts of the racks
and the crated or palletized and wrapped inventory items being usually placed in
the top parts. In this way the same building is used both as a retail store and a
warehouse." 14 In the M -I district warehousing is identified as a permitted use.
Warehousing uses are defined in OAR 660-009-005(3) as an Industrial Use.
Conclusion, Section 17.48.020(W), 2: The function and operations of Membership
Warehouse Clubs are similar to, and resemble those of retail, wholesale, and
warehousing uses already permitted within the M- l district.
Table 1. M-1 Permitted Uses and Classification
" Wikipedia, Wholesale
23
Page S of 31
ATTACHMENT "D - FINDINGS"
3. Is the use compatible with other permitted uses? The determination of compatibility
is based on the physical and functional relationship between uses.
Physical Compatibility - The physical relationship between uses within the M-1
district, and abutting districts, is regulated by the development standards
(architecture, setbacks, building height, parking, etc.). Section 17.48 sets forth the
standards for all development within the M-1 district, regardless of use. Membership
Warehouse Clubs would be subject to the same M-1 development standards imposed
on all other allowed uses. The development requirements typically associated with
Membership Warehouse Clubs do not present any unusual needs that do not fit within
the limits imposed by the M-1 district, and as such would be physically compatible
with other permitted uses.
Functional Compatibility — The functional relationship between Membership
Warehouse Clubs and other permitted uses within the M-1 district involves site
design considerations such as vehicular ingresslegress, freight delivery, hours of
operation, noise/lighting, and infrastructure requirements.
Site Design: The site design process will determine how well one use interfaces
with adjacent uses. All uses within the M -i district are subject to the City's Site
Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval process as set forth in Section
17.72 of the Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of Section 17.72 is to assure that
proper attention is given to the site planning of a project in relation to neighboring
properties.
Freight, Considering the warehouse format and high merchandise turn-
over of Membership Warehouse Clubs they are reliant on frequent freight
deliveries and are designed to accommodate freight needs. As such the
freight needs of a Membership Warehouse Club are very similar to such
other allowed uses as warehousing, bottling plants, truck terminals, or any
other allowed use within the M-1 district.
Page 9 of 31
24
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Flours of Operation: The hours of operation for a Membership
Warehouse Club vs. other allowed uses are very similar and would not be
cause for conflict.
Noise&ighting: The noise and lighting for a Membership Warehouse
Club are typical of other allowed uses within the M-1 district, i.e.
warehouses, auto dealerships, wholesaling, etc.
Infrastructure. When considering infrastructure needs, particularly water, storm,
sewer, and safety, the inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs does not result
in infiwtructure needs greater than other allowed uses. The only potential
acture consideration is the capacity of the local street system to
accommodate Membership Warehouse Clubs.
Transportation. When considering transportation it is important to
acknowledge the retail aspect of Membership Warehouse Clubs, and that
all traffic considerations related to Membership Warehouse Clubs should
be calculated on that basis. Membership Warehouse Clubs are identified in
the ITE Trip Generation manual as Discount Clubs (861).
In addressing transportation compatibility there are two basic
considerations; site design and system capacity.
Site Design. Aside from setbacks and building height restrictions, which
are regulated by specific City development standards, ingress/egress and
traffic volume are the most significant variable to be addressed to assure
that adjacent developments are compatible. Section 17.72 requires all
commercial/industrial developments to go through the City's site plan
process, the purpose of which is to assure that adjacent uses are
compatible.
System Capacity. The primary consideration in determining the
functional compatibility of a use on traffic is the local street system's
ability to accommodate traffic at any level. Section 17.05.900 Traffic
Impact Analysis gives the City the authority to require a traffic impact
analysis, and to impose mitigation measures. This authority applies to all
applications for development within the City.
Table 2 provides a comparison between the traffic generation's of other
M-1 allowed uses vs. a Membership Warehouse Club (Discount Club).
The amount of traffic generated by a use can be counted in a variety of
ways as illustrated in Table 2. Because of its gross floor area the average
Membership Warehouse Club will generate more traffic than other
allowed uses. Whether the traffic generation of a Membership Warehouse
li Trip Generation, 70' Edition, Volume 3, ITE
25
Page 10 of 31
ATTAGH?MiENT "B - l~ INDTNGS"
Club is compatible with other allowed uses is a function of site design, and
the local street system's capacity and ability to accommodate the added
traffic.
Table 2 illustrates the trip generation by Average Daily Trips (ADT) per
1,000 square feet of building and the ADT based on the median size
facility within each use category as provided in the ITE Trip Generation
manual. Using the median facility size the three highest trip generators
are Warehousing (1,999 Weekday ADT), Industrial Parks (2,610 Weekday
ADT), and Home Improvement Centers (3,844 weekday ADT).
Ref. Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Average Average Average
ADT/1,000 ADT/1,000 ALT/1,000 Weekday Saturday Sunday
SF SF 5F APT/Facility ADT/Facility ADTIFacill
4
6
General Light 6.97 1.32 0.68 1,415 268 138
Industrial
!1101
Manufacturing 3.82 1.49 0.62 1.333 $20 216
(140)
Car/Truck 33.34 21.03 10.48 567 358 178
8 Building 45.16 51.60 24.5 406 464 221
Materials
As illustrated in the following table Membership Warehouse Clubs
generate approximately 20% more trips compared to the next highest trip
generator. The same can be said when comparing an Industrial Park
against a Warehouse use. The relevance of traffic generation is not the
number of trips generated, but the intent of the zoning district and
compatibility of the uses with permitted uses. Trips generated by a
Membership Warehouse Club are similar in character as trips to the auto
dealership or the home improvement center, or the wholesaler, they are
primarily shopping trips. Any question regarding the transportation
system's ability to accommodate traffic will be addressed in accordance
with Section 17.05.900 Traffic Impact Analysis and appropriately
mitigated at the time of a development proposal, regardless of the use.
Page 11 of 31
W,
ATTACHMENT "B - F NDWGS"
Conclusion, Section 17.48.02", 3: Membership Warehouse Clubs are both
physically and functionally compatible with permitted uses within the M-1
district. On the question of transportation the traffic generation of Membership
Warehouse Clubs is similar in character to trips generated by other retail uses
permitted in the M-1 district.
4. Is the proposed use consistent with the intent of the M-1 district? The purpose of the M-1
district is:
". - . to provide areas suitable for the location of light industrial uses
involved in service, mangfacturing or assembly activities and having high
standards of operation of such character as to permit their location and
operation in close proximity to nonindustrial areas of the community. "
The City's Zoning Ordinance does not define the term "light industrial". The most
descriptive explanation of the purpose of the M-1 district is by reference to the uses
allowed within, and the required development standards for, the M-1 district. The hybrid
nature of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a cross between retail, wholesale, and
warehousing is consistent with the uses allowed and the light industrial intent of the M-1
district.
As noted in Section 17A8.02O the listing of uses permitted within the M-1 district
includes a wide variety of use categories ranging from manufacturing to warehousing to
retail.
Conclusion, Section 17.48.020(W), 4: Membership Warehouse Clubs are consistent
with the intent of the M-1 district as represented by similarity with uses currently
permitted in the M-1 district.
Page U of 31
27
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 4 -- MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS
SIMILAR USE AUTHORIZATION, SECTION 17.60.140(A)
Section 17.60.140 Authorization for Similar Use. In addition to Section 17.48.020(W) any
consideration of listing a use as an allowed use must also comply with the provisions of Section
17.60.140. As provided in Section 17.60.140 the planning commission has the authority to
determine whether a use not listed can be considered as a similar use and therefore listed as an
allowed use. The term "allowed use" refers to consideration of both permitted uses (Section
167.45.020) and conditional uses (Section 17.48.040). To guide the planning commission's
determination Section 17.60.140 sets forth criteria that must be favorably addressed before a use
can be considered similar. Section 17.60.140, and related findings and conclusions read as
follows:
"Section 17.60 1 40 Authorization for Similar Use: The planning commission may
rule that a use, not specifically named in the examples of allowed uses of a district
shall be included among the allowed uses, if the use is of the same general type
and is similar to the permitted uses.
Finding, Section 17.60.140: Under Section 17.60.140 General Regulations, authority is
given to the planning commission to determine whether a use shall be included among
the allowed uses within a zoning district. This section is an extension of Section
17.48.020(W), and sets forth specific criteria for consideration of similar use. In making
a determination on similar use the planning commission is required to prepare findings as
prescribed in Section 17.60.140(A). In Part 3 it was found that Membership Warehouse
Clubs qualified for consideration as a "use not listed" per Section 17.48.020(W) and
therefore can be considered for a "similar use" determination subject to compliance with
the criteria set forth in Section 17.60.140.
Conclusion, Section 17.60.140: The criteria set forth in Section 17.60.140 are applicable
to the consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs.
Section 17.60.140(A). The planning commission in ruling upon similar uses shall
find as follows:
1. That the use is closely related to listed uses and can be found to exist
compatibly with those uses;
Finding, Section 17.60.140(A)(1): See Finding, Section 17.48.020(W) 2
and 3.
Conclusion, Section 17.60.140(A)(1): See Conclusion, Section
17.48,020(W) 2 and 3,
2. That the use was not anticipated or known to exist on the effective date of
the ordinance codified in this title, either because it involves products,
services or activities not available in the community at the time of the use.
Page 13 of 31
28
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Finding, Section 17.60.140(A)(2): The City's zoning code was initially
adopted in 1981. The first membership warehouse club was opened in
1976 (Price Club), and limited to the San Diego area It was not until
1983 with the opening of Costco Wholesale and Sam's Club that
membership warehouse clubs became a familiar commercial use. As a use
membership warehouse clubs were not formally defined by NAICS until
1997. The Standard Industrial Classification system, which preceded the
NAICS prior to 1997, did not identify membership warehouse clubs as a
specific commercial use.
Conclusion, Section 17.60.140(A)(2): Membership Warehouse Clubs
meet the requirements of Section 17.60.140(A)(2).
3. That the use is treated under local, state, or national codes or rules in the
same manner as permitted uses. Except that these codes or rules shall not
include land use or zoning regulations,
Finding, Section 17.60.140(A)(3): Membership Warehouse Clubs are
treated under local, state, and national codes in a manner similar to other
permitted uses with regard to issue of health, safety, and general welfare
laws and regulations.
Conclusion, Section 17.60.140(A)(3): Membership Warehouse Clubs
meet the requirements of Section 17.60.140(A)(3).
4. That the use is consistent with the purpose of the district and the
comprehensive plan map and policies. "
Finding, Section 17.60.140(A)(4): This criteria not only requires consistency
with the intent of the M-1 district, but also consistency with the comprehensive
plan map and policies. The findings presented in Section 17.48.020(W), 4
addresses consistency with the intent of the M-1 district. In this section
consistency with the comprehensive plan and policies will be addressed. There are
three elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan that apply to the consideration
of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a "similar use". Those three elements are;
Land Use Element, Economic Element, and the Transportation Element. The
findings pertaining to each of these elements is presented in Parts S through 7.
Conclusion, Section 17.60.140(A)(4): See Parts 5, 6 and 7 of these Findings.
Page 14 of 31
29
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 5 — MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS, LAND USE ELEMENT
"The Land Use Element contains the goals and policies for the physical use of the land. It
combines the land use aspects of all other elements into an overall configuration of compatible
land uses that is in balance with statewide goals as well as in balance with local goals,
community needs, and the environment."
The City's Land Use Plan designates two types of industrial lands; Light Industrial (M-1) and
General Industrial (M-2). The question of"similarity" applies to the Light Industrial lands,
which are designated on the Zoning Map as M-1, Industrial District.
The following Land Use Element goals and policies apply to the City's industrial land use
designations:
Goal 1: To establish a strong and diversified industrial sector of the community.
Finding, Goal 1: As stated in Goal 1 it is the City's objective to provide an
industrial land base that both strengthens and diversifies the City's industrial
sector. Although the Land Use Element does not define what constitutes the
City's industrial sector the M -I district and M-2 district listing of permitted uses
does provide a clear understanding of the types of uses that, by reference, define
the City's industrial sector. As defined in Part 2 the term "industrial use"
describes a very broad, and open ("not limited to"),1 isting of uses that are
considered industrial. Similarly, Part 2 also defines non -industrial uses, an
example of which includes wholesale operations. As illustrated in Part 3, Table 1,
the City's M-1 district contains a combination of both industrial uses and non-
industrial uses, establishing that the intent of the M-1 district is to accommodate a
diversity of industrial and non -industrial uses. The combination of industrial and
non -industrial uses (heavy commercial) in the M-1 district supports the City's
goal in diversifying its industrial sector.
The question is whether Membership Warehouse Clubs further reinforce the
City's goal to diversify uses in the M -I district. . As a use Membership
Warehouse Clubs are characterized as a hybrid of retail, wholesale, and
warehousing uses. As a hybrid Membership Warehouse Clubs offer a unique
opportunity to further diversify the City's industrial sector, particularly in
reference to the creation of family wage jobs.
Conclusion, Goal 1: Consistent.
Goal 2: To maximize industrial expansion and new development opportunities in
locations that utilize existing highways, rail facilities and other infrastructure, are in close
proximity to employee housing areas, and will minimize conflicts with all non -industrial
land uses.
Page 15 of 31
30
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Finding, Goal 2: Membership Warehouse Clubs offer a new development and
employment opportunity appropriate for the M-1 district. All M-1 lands within
the City are served by existing infrastructure and are in close proximity to the
City's residential areas.
Conclusion, Goal 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an
allowed use within the M-1 district is consistent with the intent of Goal 2.
Policy 1: Maximize the industrial development potential of the Highway 99/Southem
Pacific railroad corridor through the City by providing site for industrial development
along the corridor to meet the needs to the year 2000.
Finding, Policy 1: The lands along the Highway 99/railroad corridor are
primarily zoned TQD/GC with an underlying zoning of M-1. The largest single
parcel is less than one acre. Membership Warehouse Clubs typically require a
minimum of 8-10 acres. As proposed the modifications to the M-1 district do not
affect the highway 99/Southern Pacific railroad corridor.
Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable.
Policy 2: Provide locations for "General Industrial" (M-2 zone) in the northwest portion
of the community where such development can take advantage of the rail, highway and
freeway facilities while having a minimal impact on other non -industrial land uses within
the community.
Finding, Policy 2: Inclusion of Membership Warehduse Clubs as a conditional
use does affect the M-2 zoning district.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable.
Policy 3: Work toward the development of requirements and guidelines for the
establishment of industrial parks or other forms of master planning in the larger industrial
districts that could be adversely affected by individual industries being developed without
proper coordination with adjacent properties,
Finding, Policy 3: The majority of the City's M-1 zoned lands are currently
located within a planned, or developed, industrial park. Additionally, the City's
land development regulations and Transportation System Plan regulate street
circulation to assure that all development contributes to improvement of the
City's street connectivity. The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs does
not affect the City's continued ability to master plan industrial parks.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable.
Policy 4: Require that all industrial land use proposals for lands adjacent to the urban
Growth Boundary and agricultural land uses include provisions for buffering the facilities
Page 16 of 31
31
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
from agricultural land uses outside the UGB, if there is any potential for conflict between
the uses.
Funding, Policy No. 4: At this time the City's planned industrial lands do not abut
agricultural lands. Further, the pending Regional Problem Solving agreement
requires the City to adopt and implement the agricultural buffering standards set
forth in the Regional Plan.
Conclusion, Policy 4: Not Applicable.
Policy 5: Ensure through the plan review process that all industrial development
proposals adequately address the importance of maintaining environmental quality,
particularly air and water quality, and include a plan for the protection of the Jackson
Creek and Griffin Creek corridors, as shown on the Plan map and discussed in the
Environmental Management Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Finding, Policy 5: The City's plan review process as set forth in Section 17.72
Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval regulates the
development review process. Based on the City's current land use plan and
zoning there are no industrially zoned or planned lands that abut either Jackson
Creek, or Griffin Creek.
Conclusion, Policy 5: Not Applicable.
Policy 6: Consider the need to require a "Beautification" or "Frontage
Landscape" plan to be included in industrial proposals to help create an industrial
environment that is attractive to community residents and prospective industries.
Findings, Policy 6: Section 17.48 contains provisions for the landscaping
of industrial frontage. This requirement is further enforced through the
provisions set forth in Section 17.72 Site Plan, Landscaping and
Construction Plan Approval. The inclusion of Membership Warehouse
Clubs will not alter, or otherwise affect the application of the City's
"Beautification" or "Frontage Landscape" requirements.
Conclusion, Policy 6: Not Applicable.
Page 17 of 31
32
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 6 — MIEMBERStUP WAREHOUSE CLUBS, ECONONUC ELEMENT
The City's Economic Element addresses the requirements of Goal 9 (Economy of the State). It
is the ultimate goal of both the City and the state to provide for a local economy that positively
contributes to the local and state economy. The term "industry" as used in the Economic
Element refers to all sectors of the economy; however, the primary emphasis is on the provision
of suitable sites for the location of the basic sector industries, but not to the disadvantage of the
non -basic sector.
With regard to Statewide Planning Goal 9 (Economy of the State) it is the state's primary
objective to provide an adequate land supply for economic development and employment
growth. Each community is provided the opportunity to address economic development as it
deems appropriate to their individual needs as specified in their comprehensive plans' goals and
policies.
The framework for the City's economic development program is presented in eight (8) elements
and related policies. The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within
the M-1 district has been compared against each of these elements and their related policies as
follows:
1. Information, Research and Technical Assistance
Policy 1, Information, Research and Technical Assistance. Utilize the results of the
1980 Census, when available, to provide the detailed data necessary to complete the
profile of the community and region.
Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district does not alter or otherwise affect the source of data
Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable.
Policy 2, Information, Research and Technical Assistance. Request assistance from
the Department of Economic Development in the development of the economic
development program, and remain aware of the ongoing plans and activities of the
County and other area communities.
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district does not alter or otherwise affect the City's economic
development programming.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable.
Page 18 of 31
33
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Policy 3, Information, Research and Technical Assistance. Encourage the local
Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development Committee and other interested persons
and organizations to become involved in the City's plans and programs.
Finding, Policy 3: Through the public involvement process the City has
specifically contacted the Chamber of Commerce to discuss the inclusion of
Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district.
Conclusion, Policy 3: This policy is not directly applicable to Membership
Warehouse Clubs other than the procedural notification, which the City has
complied with per the requirements of Section 17.60.140.
2. Planning and Regulation
Policy 1, Planning and Regulation. Continue to refine City regulations pertaining to
economic development to ensure that the program can be carried out and that such
development will be an asset to the Community and region.
Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use represents the City's conscience effort to effort to refine its zoning regulations
as it deems necessary to encourage the continued development of a diversified
industrial base.
Conclusion, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs is
consistent with the City's economic development policies as set forth in the
Economic Element.
Policy 2, Planning and Regulation . Continue to emphasize the need to maximize the
potential of major existing facilities that represent major public investments, but are
presently underutilized (Emphasis on railroad, Highway 99, the I-5 Freeway and the
airport related to industrial development, and Pine Street/Head Road for commercial,
office -professional and tourist development).
Findings, Policy 2:
Policy 3, Planning and Regulation. Implement policies of the Housing and Land Use
Elements pertaining to the orientation and buffering of non -industrial and non-
commercial land uses by modifying existing codes to require these actions.
Findings, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an
allowed use within the M-1 district does not affect the City's development
standards for the M-1 district.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable.
3. Assembly and Disposal of Land
34
Page 19 of 31
ATTACHMENT "D - FINDINGS"
Policy 1, Assembly and Disposal of Land. Work with developers to ensure that
proposed plans are consistent with the overall development concept of the area and will
not create obstacles to the future development of neighboring sites.
Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to manage
development within the M -I district.
Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable.
Policy 2, Assembly and Disposal of Land. Study the benefits of developing "concept
plans" for the coordinated development of critical areas. such as the Seven Oaks
Interchange Area and other industrial sites along the railroad.
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to study the benefits,
or otherwise pursue concept plans for industrial development within the M-1
district.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable.
Policy 3, Assembly and Disposal of Land. Consider initiating the planning for an
industrial park along the railroad that would provide for a greater degree of development
coordination and might qualify for state or federal financial assistance.
Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to initiate plans for an
industrial park within industrially zoned lands along the railroad.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable.
4. Provision of Physical Facilities
Policy 1, Provision of Physical Facilities. Ensure that the City's pians for public
facilities and utilities are phased according to the most desirable progression of
development.
Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to plan for public
facilities.
Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable.
Page 20 of 31
35
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Policy 2, Provision of Physical Facilities. Strive to provide all necessary public
facilities to the industrial (and commercial) sites prior to inquiries to avoid losing
potential firms because of inadequate facilities.
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to provide necessary
public facilities to industrial/commercial sites prior to inquiries.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable.
Policy 3, Provision of Physical Facilities. Utilize the plans for public facilities and
services as a guidance instrument to implement the Plan in accordance with community
needs and planned growth.
Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to utilize plans for
public facilities and services.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable.
Policy 4, Provision of Physical Facilities. Include the development of public facilities in
a capital improvements program to ensure coordinated and adequately financed
development of the facilities.
Finding, Policy 4: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's capital improvement
planning.
Conclusion, Policy 4: Not Applicable.
5. Site Development
Policy 1, Site Development. Ensure that all new development is in conformance with
City codes, as well as applicable state and federal requirements.
Finding, Policy 1: All development proposals within the City are subject to
compliance with the land division and zoning regulations set forth in the City of
Central Point Municipal Code. The proposed inclusion of Membership
Warehouse clubs as an allowed use will not affect the City's land development
and use standards.
Conclusion Policy, 1: Not Applicable,
Policy 2, Site Development. Seek ways to improve codes and repair deficiencies that
may be identified as development occurs.
Page 21 of 31
12
ATTACHMENT "H - FINDINGS"
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district is in accordance with Section 17.48 and Section
17.60.140 relative to addressing uses not previously recognized, or otherwise
identified as an allowed use in any zoning district.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Consistent.
Policy 3, Site Development. Consider the development of an "industrial park", as
recommended in the Land Use Element and discussed in other elements of this Plan.
Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to consider the
development of industrial parks. A majority of the City's M-1 lands are currently
within a developed or planned industrial park.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable.
Policy 4, Site Development. Ensure through the plan review process that all proposed
developments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and are of the highest possible
quality.
Finding, Policy 4: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will be subject to all development requirements
imposed within the M-1 district. As per these findings it has been determined that
Membership Warehouse Clubs are similar to other uses allowed in the M-1
district. Further, by these findings it has also been determined that the inclusion
of Membership Ware house clubs is consistent with the City's Comprehensive
Plan.
Conclusion, Policy 4: Consistent.
Policy 5, Site Development. Ensure that proposed development plans will not create
obstacles to the future development of adjacent parcels.
Finding, Policy 5: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district is relegated to the status of a conditional use. The
purpose of this allowed use classification is to assure that any proposed
Membership Warehouse Club does not create any adverse impacts on existing and
future adjacent uses within the area relative to traffic circulation.
Conclusion, Policy 5: Consistent.
6. Non -Financial Incentives to Development
Policy I, Non -Financial Incentives to Development. Strive toward implementation of
the Comprehensive Plan to ensure the overall development of the community that will be
Page 22 of 31
37
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
attractive to prospective industries and will provide a high quality community in which to
live.
Finding, Policy 1: As a use the inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs
within the M-1 district will not adversely affect the overall development of the
City in such a mariner that it would negatively affect the attractiveness of Central
Point as a place to live and do business.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Consistent,
Policy 2, Non -Financial Incentives to Development. Undertake promotional
opportunities that will emphasize the location and quality of the community and will
demonstrate the long-range plans of the City.
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to undertake
promotional opportunities.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable.
Policy 3, Non -Financial Incentives to Development. Ensure that all future activities of
the City are consistent with the goals directed toward continued improvement of the
community.
Finding, Policy 3: The process employed in the determination of Membership
Warehouse Clubs as a "similar use" has included a comprehensive evaluation of
such a decision with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the M-1
district. Membership Warehouse Clubs have been found to be similar to other
uses allowed within the M-1 district, while at the same time contributing to the
economic base of the City.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Consistent.
7. Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development
Policy 1, Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development. The City will consider legal
tax concessions only as a last resort as an inducement to development.
Finding, Policy l: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to propose, or
otherwise address tax concessions as an inducement to development.
Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable.
Policy 2, Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development. Actions that could produce
a short-term economic gain should be passed over if it could also detract from the quality
Page 23 of 31
38
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
of the environment and become a serious detriment to the long-range plans of the
Community.
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district is not considered as a short-term economic gain.
Membership Warehouse Clubs are considered to be a valid use within the M-1
district providing benefits similar to warehousing and other similar uses allowed
in the M-1 district, and as such will not be a detriment to the long-range plans of
the City.
Conclusion, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an
allowed use in the M-1 district is consistent with this policy.
Policy 3, Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development. investigate alternative
financial incentives such as offering loan guarantees or direct loans financed through the
issue of tax-free general obligation bonds floated by a local development corporation.
Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to develop financial
incentives to encourage economic development.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable.
8. Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance
Policy 1, Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance. Work with state agencies,
including D.E.D. and the Department of Transportation to gain contact with firms
seeking to relocate.
Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to work with state
agencies to facilitate recruitment of firms.
Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable.
Policy 2, Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance. Encourage the City's
Economic Development Committee to take a leading role in advertising, promotion and
prospect assistance.
Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to advertise, promote,
or otherwise seek means of soliciting industrial development.
Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable.
Page 24 of 31
39
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Policy 3, Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance. Consider the preparation
of a brochure or other types of advertising materials that can be mass produced and
appropriately distributed.
Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed
use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to advertise, promote,
or otherwise seek means of soliciting industrial development.
Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable,
Page 23 a€31
40
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 7 -- MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
The proposed determination of "similarity" of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use
within the M-1 district has been evaluated against the applicable goals and policies of the City's
Transportation Element.
Goal 3.1, Land Use: To effectively manage the use of land within the Centmi Point urban area
in a maturer that is consistent with, and that supports, the successful implementation of this
Transportation System Plan.
Finding, Goal 3.1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs within the M-1
district as an allowed use (conditional use) enables the City to effectively distribute
traffic to areas of lesser trip generation, as opposed to concentrating uses with high trip
generation characteristics. This is done with the understanding that Membership
Warehouse Clubs are unique uses found to be similar to and compatible with other uses
allowed in the M-1 district. Any actual proposed Membership Warehouse Development
proposal will be subject to the City's development standards, including the ability to
require a traffic impact analysis (17.05.900).
Conclusion, Goal 3.1: Complies.
Policy 3.3.1, The City shall manage the land use element of the Comprehensive Plan in a manner
that enhances livability for the citizens of Central Point as set forth in the Transportation System
Plan.
Finding, Palicy 3.3.1, Land Use: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an
allowed use (conditional use) within the M-1 district has been found to be consistent with
the City's Land Use Element (See Part 5).
Conclusion, Policy 3.3.1, Land Use: Consistent.
Policy 3.1.2, Land Use: The City shall continuously monitor and update the Land Development
Code to maintain best practices in transit oriented design consistent with the overall land use
objectives of the City.
Finding, Policy 3.1.2, Land Use: The proposed inclusion of Membership Warehouse
Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district does not affect the City's planning for
transit oriented development, or the City's transit orient development standards.
Conclusion, Policy 3.1.2, Land Use: Not Applicable.
Page 26 of 31
41
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 8 — MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS
SECTION 17.10.600 AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE, 664-0124060
In a letter from John Renz, Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) dated
December 18, 2008, the issue of compliance with OAR 660-12-0060 questioning "significant
effect" was raised. This Part 8 of the Findings has been prepared in response to DLCD's
question regarding "significant effect" of the similar use determination.
Section 17.10.600 of the City's zoning ordinance sets forth provisions addressing the question of
"significant effect" when considering Comprehensive Plan or zoning district changes that may
have an effect on the City's transportation facilities. Section 17.10.600 is based on the
provisions set forth on OAR 660-12-0060. Both Section 17.10.600 and OAR 660-12-0060
require that certain considerations be addressed relative to an amendment's affect on a
transportation facility.
The consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs is an interpretive question regarding similar
use, it does not amend the Comprehensive Plan, nor does it change any zoning districts, or
amend zoning regulations. It is not an amendment to the M-1 zoning district, and as such the
above cited sections do not apply. However, to assure that the consideration of Membership
Warehouse Clubs is complete these finding address Section 17.10,600 and OAR 660-12-0060.
Background
The primary transportation facilities that service M-1 lands are Table Rock Road (principal
arterial) and Hamrick Road (collector). Pine Street (principal arterial), and Vilas Road (minor
arterial) also serve the M-1 area. All M-1 zoned Iands are in excess of/z mile from 1-5
Interchange 33.
660-012-0060
Platt and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land
use regulation would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local
government shall put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that
allowed land uses are consistent with the ident fled function, capacity, and performance
standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility, A plan or land use
regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility
(exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
Finding, 660-012-4060(1)(a): The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a
conditional use within the M-1 district will not cause a change in the functional
classification of transportation facilities serving the M-1 district. All transportation
facilities as defined in the City's TSP will be retained as currently defined.
Page 27 of 31
42
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
Conclusion, 660-0124060(1)(m): Not a significant affect.
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
Finding, 660-012-0060(1)(b): The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a
conditional use within the M-1 will not cause a change in the standards implementing the
City's functional classification system as set forth in the TSI'.
Conclusion, 660-012-0060(1)(b): Not a significant affect.
(c) As measured at the end of the planning period identi, f ted in the adopted transportation system
plan:
(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result In tvpes or levels of travel
or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
Finding, 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): As a conditional use Membership Warehouse Clubs,
within the M-1 district, will not result in types or levels of travel or access that are
inconsistent with the functional classification of the City's existing or planned
transportation facilities. All M-1 lands are currently served by the City's primary arterial
and collector street system.
Conclusion, 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as
an allowed use within the M-1 district will not cause a change in the type or level of
travel or access inconsistent with the City's functional classification system of an existing
or planned transportation facility.
(R) Reduce the performance ofan existing or planned transportation facility below the
minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan;
or
Finding, 660-012-0060(1)(c)(18): A determination that Membership Warehouse Clubs as
a conditional use are similar to other allowed uses in the M-1 district will not cause the
performance of an existing or planned transportation facility to fall below acceptable
performance standards. Only at such time as a Membership Warehouse Club is actually
developed would there be a demand on the City's transportation facilities that may, or
may not, affect the transportations minimum level of performance. As proposed the
Membership Warehouse Clubs would be allowed as a conditional use and subject to
compliance with all development standards of the City, including the Transportation
System Plan.
It is possible that the development of any use permitted in the M-1 district, Membership
Warehouse Clubs included, could cause a reduction in the minimum level of service, in
which case the development proposal would be responsible for the mitigation of traffic
impacts to acceptable levels. Section 17.05.900 Traffic Impact Analysis contains
Page 28 of 31
43
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
provisions for the evaluation of a development's traffic impacts and mitigation of those
impacts to acceptable minimum levels.
Conclusion, 660-0124060(1)(c)(B): A determination that Membership Warehouse
Clubs are a similar use will not cause a reduction of performance standards to existing or
planned transportation facilities below minimum acceptable standards.
(C) Worsen the performance ofan existing or planned transportation facility that is
otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard
identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan,
Finding, 660-412-0%0(1)(c)(C): See Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B).
Conclusion, 660-012-0060(1)(c)(C): See Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B).
(2) Where a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, compliance
with section (1) shall be accomplished through one or a combination of the following:
(e) Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development
agreement or similar funding method, including transportation system management
measures, demand management or minor transportation improvements. Local
governments shall as part of the amendment specify when measures or improvements
provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided
Finding, 660-012-0060(2)(e): A determination that Membership Warehouse Clubs area
similar use to uses permitted within the M-1 district will not result in a significant effect
on the City's transportation facilities, however it does provide an opportumity that such an
effect may occur. As an accommodation to this possibility Membership Warehouse
Clubs are proposed as a conditional use. The purpose of the conditional use classification
is to provide further assurances that Membership Warehouse Clubs are compatible with,
and complimentary to adjacent uses, including mitigation of traffic impacts. Section
17.05.900 Traffic Impact Analysis requires that developments meeting certain criteria are
required to complete and submit a traffic impact analysis.
Conclusion, 660-012-0060(2)(e): As a conditional use, and using Section 17.05.900 the
City has in place methods and means to evaluate and impose mitigation to potential
project generated transportation impacts resulting from the development of Membership
Warehouse Clubs, or any other use within the M-1 district.
Page 29 of 31
44
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 9 — MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS
CONDITIONAL USE A[JTHORIZATION, SECTION 17.48.040(A)
Section 17.48.040 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses may be
permitted in an M-1 district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76 (Conditional
Use Permits).
A. Business offices and commercial uses that are compatible with and closely related in
their nature of business to permitted uses in the M-1 district, or that would he established
to serve primarily the uses, employees, or customers of the M-1 district.
Finding Section 17.48.040. This section serves as further acknowledgement that uses within
the M-1 district are not strictly limited to primary and/or secondary sector industrial uses.
Provided that a determination can be made that the use is compatible with and closely related
to business permitted in the M-1 district, office and commercial uses can be allowed as
conditional uses. Section 17.60.140 sets forth the criteria used to determine "similarity" for
allowed uses within a district. Part 4 of these findings address the criteria for "similar" use.
As a safeguard to compatibility with other permitted uses it is proposed that Membership
Warehouse Clubs be classified as a conditional use. As a conditional use Membership
Warehouse Clubs will have to, on a case-by-case basis, address and mitigate traffic and site
planning conflicts as a condition of approval.
Conclusion, Section 17.48.040. See Part 4 for conclusions.
Page 30 of 31
45
ATTACHMENT "B - FINDINGS"
PART 10 — SUMMARY CONCLUSION
With regard to the question of similarity it has been demonstrated in these findings that
Membership Warehouse Clubs are similar and closely related to, and can exist compatibly with
uses permitted in the M- l district. The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a
conditional use will serve to diversify the City's industrial base and allow additional
opportunities for employment generating development.
The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a conditional use within the M-1 district is
found to comply with all applicable criteria set forth in Section 17.48.020M and Section
17.60.140(A) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Page 31 of 31
46
ROGUE VALLEY PET
SITE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
47
STAFF REPORT
Ak
CENTRAL
POINT
Oregon
STAFF REPORT
July 28, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: VII -A (File No. SPAR -20006)
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, A1CP
Community Development Director
Consideration of a Site Plan and Architectural Review application for the development of a 6,424 square
foot warehouse and storage facility with commercial retail area, including parking and landscape areas.
The 0.72 acre project site is located at 400 Federal Way within the M-1, Industrial zoning district and is
identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 12B Tax Lot 200.
Owner/Applicant: Legacy Enterprises, LLC.
SOURCE
Justin Gindlesperger, Community Planner II
BACKGROUND
The current application is a Site Plan and Architectural Review for the construction of a 6,424 square foot
structure that includes 2,426 square feet of storage/warehouse area and 3,998 square feet of retail sales
area. The site plan for the proposed development includes parking, landscaping, and street frontage
improvements along Federal Way and Hamrick Road (Attachment "A").
The project site is within the M-1, Industrial zone and the use of the property for a commercial use in the
M-1, Industrial zoning district is subject to Conditional Use Permit review and approval. The application
for Site Plan and Architectural Review is being reviewed concurrently with an application for Conditional
Use Permit (CUP -20001). At this time, staff is not recommending authorization of the retail sales use in
the M-1 zoning district.
Project Description:
The Applicant proposes to construct an approximately 6,424 square foot building with approximately
2,426 square feet of storage/warehouse and 3,998 square feet of commercial retail area, near the
intersection of Hamrick Road and Federal Way.
Building Design:
The M-1 Industrial zoning district does not require specific building design standards, and the proposed
building reflects the nature of the zoning district and proposed uses. The building is a single story
building, with the peak of the roof line approximately 24 -feet above grade. The main fagade of the
building will be oriented towards Federal Way, to the east. A covered entrance feature extends from the
main building wall with a dormer -style roof that extends horizontally from the main roof line.
Access:
The site plan depicts an access approach to the site from Hamrick Road and Federal Way. As noted in the
Public Works Staff Report, dated July 17, 2020, access to the project site from Hamrick Road, a Collector
street, is not consistent with City Street Standards, Section 320.10.14, and is not permitted.
48
Landscape Design:
The perimeter and street frontage landscape for all parking facilities shall be landscaped according to the
standards set forth in Table 17.75.03, including a minimum 15 -foot planting area along Collectors and 5 -
foot planting areas between a parking/circulation area and an adjacent industrial property. The width of
the planting area is measured from the property line and must be provided on the subject property. The
proposed perimeter and frontage landscape areas do not meet the minimum required width along Hamrick
Road and the abutting property to the south.
The terminal and interior landscape islands for parking facilities shall be provided according to the
standards in CPMC 17.75.039(G)(2), including terminal islands at the end of each parking row and
interior islands where 10 or more spaces are provided side-by-side. The proposed landscape plan lacks
terminal landscape areas at the end of the parking row at the south of the building and the end of the
parking row at the northwest corner of the building, between the parking row and the loading berth. The
landscape plan also lacks an interior island along the east side of the building to separate the 10
consecutive parking spaces.
To assure compliance with all applicable criteria and to prevent additional reviews for modifications to
the site pian or conditions of approval, staff recommends that the public hearing be opened to allow
public testimony, if any, and continue to a later public meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A" — Site Plan/Landscape Plan
Attachment "B" — Building Elevations
ACTION
Consideration the Site Plan & Architectural Review application for the warehouse and commercial retail
facility and open the public hearing, receive public testimony and continue the hearing to September 1,
2020.
RECOMMENDATION
Continue the public hearing for the Site Plan and Architectural Review application to September 1, 2020,
49
3
f
Attachment "A"
50
Hemmnd R.d
0
51
Attachment "B"
m
coo
4x
CENTRAL POINT STATION
52
STAFF REPORT
CENTRAL
POINT
STAFF REPORT
August 4, 2020
Community Development
-o—m Hump i�A1CP
Community Development Director
AGENDA ITEM: File No. SPAR -20008
Consideration of a Site -Plan and Architectural Review application to construct a mixed-use development on
2.19 acres in the Twin Creeks TOD. The project includes 6,132 square feet of commercial first floor space,
10 furnished first floor VRBO spaces and 56 residential units consisting of a mixture of apartments and
townhouses. Ten townhouses are proposed along Golden Peak Drive to transition to the single family
residences to the north. There is a plaza associated with commercial use and parking is provided internal to
the development. The site is within the High Mix Residential (HMR) zone and is identified on the Jackson
County Assessor's Map as 37 2W 03 CA, Tax Lot 1100. Applicant: Smith Crossing LLC; Agent: Scott
Sinner Consulting, Inc. (Scott Sinner)
STAFF SOURCE:
Tom Humphrey AICP, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND:
The Twin Creeks Master Plan (TCMP) was approved in 2001 to provide guidance and instruction for land
use and development on 230 acres of land within the city. The Master Plan provides a mix of commercial,
residential and civic land use types throughout the Twin Creeks community. Per the Master Plan, high -mix
residential/commercial is planned for the tract of land at the northeast corner of Twin Creeks Crossing Loop
and North Haskell Street for an entire block (Attachment "A"). At this time Smith Crossing LLC
("Applicant") is requesting Site Plan and Architectural Review approval to construct the following.
• Building 1 — Four -Story (Flat Roofed) Mixed Use Building, 6,132 sq. ft. Commercial space, 2
VRBO units on the first floor and 24 dwelling units on floors 2-4 with an elevator.
• Building 2 — Three -Story (Flat Roofed) Mixed Use Building, 4 furnished VRBOs and 3 1 -bedroom
apartments on the first floor and 8 townhouses above.
• Building 3 — Three -Story (Flat Roofed) Mixed Use Building similar to Building 2
• Building 4 — Two -Story 5 Plex (Pitched Roof) Townhouses more compatible with nearby housing
• Building 5 — Two -Story 5 Plex (Pitched Roof) Townhouses similar to Building 4
The project site is served by all planned infrastructure identified in the Master Plan, including but not limited
to streets and stormwater treatment facilities. All utilities are available to the site.
Project Description:
The Applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use residential/commercial development with commercial
spaces and a total of 66 residential units, some used for commercial purposes. The structures vary in size and
unit count; however, each building includes 1 and 2 bedroom apartment flats and 2 and 3 bedroom
townhouse style units (Attachment "B"). The parking plan consists of off-street parking spaces. As illustrated
in Table 1, the proposal is within the minimum/maximum range for density and complies with the minimum
parking requirements for multifamily housing and commercial square footage.
Table 1. Densitv and Par ing Anal sis
Site
Minimum
Minimum
Maximum;
Maximum
Proposed
Minimum
Minimum
No.
ProposedSurplus/
Acres
tsq.ft
Density
No. Units
Density
No. Units
No. Units
Parking
Parking
Parking
Def[cit
Ratio
spaces
Spaces
W-)
Res
2.19
25
55
n/a
n/a
66
1.5
99
117
18
Com
6,132
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a 1
1/500
13
13
TOTALS:
2.19
25
55
n/a
n/a
66
1.5
112
130
18
The open space amenity being proposed with this application is the outdoor plaza associated with the
commercial uses. The entire block and parking area show landscape improvements, as well as a network of
pedestrian pathways (Attachments "C").
Architecturally, the first of five buildings will be the most prominent in this development; a four-story, flat -
roofed structure with parapets, awnings and other unique features (Attachment "D"). Buildings 2 and 3 are
three-story structures of similar appearance to Building 1 with scaled massing (three-dimensional form)
appropriate for their location along North Haskell Street in the vicinity of the TOD core area. All the
building elevations demonstrate a visually interesting and pedestrian friendly scaling with large
windows and entries from the sidewalks. Per the Applicant's Findings, the proposed development was
designed to be compatible with itself and with existing surrounding architecture and was presented to the
neighborhood for comment at a voluntary meeting on January 29, 2020 (Attachment "F").
ISSUES:
There are four (4) issues relative to the proposed development as follows:
1. Master Plan. The Twin Creeks Master Plan (TCMP) governs land use and circulation. A review of
the proposed site development in the context of the Master Plan requires clarification of shared
access and traffic impacts as follows:
a. Access. The TCMP envisioned mid -block access to the development site from North
Haskell Street however the applicant is proposing the single North Haskell access be moved
further north and closer to Golden Peak Drive. There are two other points of parking lot
access on Boulder Ridge Street and these are consistent with the TCMP illustrations.
Comment: The Agent for the applicant states, the North Haskell frontage proposes a
driveway access between buildings 3 and 4. The location of the access is as far from the
Twin Creeks Loop as possible and provides a transition area between the 3 -story buildings 2
and 3 and the 2 -story buildings 4 and 5 (Attachment "F"). The original alignment is not
critical to the access and staff recommends the Planning Commission grant the request to
improve the overall design for both access and architectural consideration.
b. Traffic. The Master Plan included a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) that evaluated the
impacts of land uses planned throughout Twin Creeks. Per the analysis and public agency
feedback, a trip cap was imposed to assure traffic generated by new development is
completed in sync with specified street capacity enhancement projects. The Twin Creeks
Rail Crossing was the last project to be completed before the trip cap was removed.
Comment: The construction and successful opening of the Twin Creeks Rail Crossing
removed a self-imposed trip cap and now allows the TCMP to build out consistent with the
adopted zoning. Changes to the TCMP may necessitate a review of traffic impacts but the
applicant is not proposing changes to the land use or zoning that was approved by the City.
2. Architecture and Scale. The principal building (Building 1) will be the tallest and most prominent
building to date in the TCMP. The building will make a statement that is consistent with the mixed-
use concept described in the TCMP (Attachment "G"). Per the Applicant's Findings, placement of
the structure in this location is necessary to provide a visual reference to the TOD core area.
Comment: The TCMP encourages street frontages to be pedestrian friendly with active public space.
Buildings are detailed to provide a strong emphasis to a corner, with continuity of architectural
detailing and materials on the front and side facades (Attachment "G").
54
3. Use of VRBO to Establish Commercial Mixed Use. The City has relied upon classifications in the
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to occasionally clarify uses within zoning
districts in Central Point. Vacation Rentals by Owner (VRBO) are classified as Other Traveler
Accommodation providing short-term lodging and a use that is decidedly more commercial than it
is residential (reference NAICS, Sector 72119).
Comment: The TCMP describes mixed uses that are both vertically and horizontally mixed and says
that the simplest forms of mixed-use building types are the live/work units, with a flexible ground
floor space complemented by a 2 -story townhouse above. This describes Buildings 2 and 3 of this
proposal exactly. The TCMP envisioned motel -like accommodations as part of its make-up and
before Twin Creeks Retirement filled to capacity, they often offered furnished rooms to people
visiting family members in their facility. The development of other care facilities in Twin Creeks
suggested a need for short-term lodging in the context of the mixed-use model. The Planning
Commission by resolution can establish a nexus between VRBO and a preferred compatibility with
the HMR zoning district rather than with the single-family LMR zoning district.
4. On-site Lighting. The proposed site plan does not address the on-site lighting standards necessary
to illuminate building entrances, the parking lot and pedestrian walkways per CPMC 17.67.050(L).
Although this is a minor issue, it will be necessary to provide a revised site plan with the details for
proposed building and parking lot lighting to comply with the on-site lighting standards.
Comment: The applicant has stated in their findings that lighting is a design -build contract and was
not included in the development proposal in case there were changes to the parking lot. A condition
has been added to address on-site lighting.
FINDINGS:
The Site Plan and Architectural Review application for Central Point Station has been evaluated for
compliance with the Central Point Municipal Code requirements set forth in the applicable sections of
Chapters 17.65, 17.66, 17.67, 17.72 and 17.75 and found to comply as evidenced by the Planning
Department Supplemental Findings (Attachment "K").
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The use of VRBO for buildings 2 and 3 establishes the primary proposed commercial use for these
buildings as a `mixed-use' in the HMR zoning district. If the property owners wish to make changes
to this commercial use, the changes shall be determined through the Modification to Approved Plans
process in accordance with CPMC, Section 17.09.
2. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall submit a revised site plan to the Planning
Department indicating all proposed on-site lighting, including the illumination of building
entrances, the parking lot and pedestrian walkways, in conformance with Section 17.67.050(L).
3. The applicant shall comply with agency conditions as per the Fire District #3 and the Public Works
Department (Attachment "H") staff reports.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A" — Project Location Map
Attachment "B" — Central Point Station Plot Plan
Attachment "C" — Central Point Station Landscape Plan
Attachment "D-1" — Building 1 — Mixed Use, 4 -Story Elevation
Attachment "D-2" — Buildings 2/3 - 15-Plex Elevations
55
Attachment "D-3" — Buildings 4/5 - 5-Plex Elevations
Attachment "E" — Conceptual Utility and Drainage Plan
Attachment "F" — Applicant's Findings
Attachment "G" — Twin Creeks Master Plan Housing and Mixed -Use Exhibits, Pages 48, 66, 68, and 70.
Attachment "H" — Fire District #3 and Public Works Plan Review Comments
Attachment "K" — Planning Department Supplemental Findings
Attachment "L" — Resolution No. 881
ACTION:
Consider the site plan and architectural review application 1) approve; 2) approve with conditions; or 3) deny
the application:
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution 881 approving the site plan and architectural review application for Central Point
Station per the Staff Report dated August 4, 2020
56
ATTACHMENT "A"
`• -
H µl 11� • 111 ■ ill l l � dRh.
rR sl: • 6 .te / I)RR - lan .Is » K7 :•Js
ll• .. IJI .�
Y f '.l fYf ■
M1 .•fR � ` 444 I}II
1 i I1y] 1{L 11} I
NM
1H 1 1
) rir
CMY
. IM 115��� n f • x 11R .1 :. '•,� fit` •.0 w•
nn •c �
rn t i nr. isy� � r � ,� � � •�
rf,f
. i . • 71 .1 =, nu x1 � '•� ��
r1,10
i
sl r � ff r
—i5t,
� 1,,� - \�
LT
Ir11 l)If E� 1H a f t
tiJ,e., ,d��lfl 1 � � 1.•} ,
Figure 1 Subject property within the Twin Creeks TOD
57
Golden Peak
S
7lS
SL
i
ATTACHMENT Is
is
Iii
1
00 1 Op
1'
N
� pNj
O
C p m pm
O N O
O OZl
p
O
W
D 0 O
p O
O zi r
m
A A A
� Z
G,
O
m m N N
r0
y 0
Ul N UI
m
N
S S
�
D
m
m
D
i
N
Z Z
IS
o 0
m�
J
D D
I S
m
O
Z
�
ol
ol
A
{
O
Z
s
O
m
Golden leak
am
ntli 71�,
11Fl ll� I11
01.1 Lill I ew
71
I f�
,9
=rw+n Creeks Crosslrq i, o
ATTACHMENT "�.n
@ Ed
M ®. Oeoc)
*•ode
it
e-
_
n
o
a
3
-
n
I
l buippe oaoo,o.�
ash paxiw uoi}ea5;uiod leAu97
.�n►:uou wnuvw o. u�i u=i
60
n
m
ATT
a9
LY
}i'lo"ll"Au
pWF
X91.1SL ea'D F Q
13
61
I
�_ n
if
1: it,
F
i
a
E
g y
E
- � A W
j
Ta
n_tF
E n
`u u
]t
E f°
13
61
I
�_ n
if
E bulppng
XPIASL uol}e}SIU! oddei}ua7 �I a�3o°oba o cri
K
VL
r
■
�ff
r
In
.
Eli
K
VL
r
■
�ff
W
r
In
.
W
•r��t ��Qr:�rrf:l itzl�-c~i
�L'17IE+p P�
u H E
m U
I . I la
I
N
E�
63
ATTACHMENT " t
5 F b ebuippng
xald5uoge]5
]uiod �e��ua7
n s raa'�d lu
v+�wuu.�.�nwna
lallE
u H E
m U
I . I la
I
N
E�
63
ATTACHMENT " t
o i z u
Z o z w
x z
o
a u _�
J s u u
m❑❑o
W F w 0❑❑ a: F
u 0 u 3 3 0 0 o a o 0 0 0
11
z 7 l) z z 2 l7 V t) V t) w w w w W W w w
z z z z z z z z z z z i z o 0- 0 0 0 0 0
1- F F F F F F F F F r LL
Q � f
I I '
I I '
1 _ '
I + ONISSON7 S)13RO NIML I ;
I
!
I
.I
IWI -;1
I
I
I I
_.�----------------- _o_s.er a___________
._ ss_ex3 -i_____ss^BX3 ________
-------_---_ 3/allO'V3d N30109
64
k
000ao
ATTACHMENT
J
®
vw.��i.rc•
�
yy
_.�----------------- _o_s.er a___________
._ ss_ex3 -i_____ss^BX3 ________
-------_---_ 3/allO'V3d N30109
64
k
000ao
ATTACHMENT
ATTACHMENT
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT OREGON:
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR A )
SITTE PLAN REVIEW OF PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS ) FINDINGS OF FACT
T37-112W-03CA TL 1100 ) AND
SMITH CROSSING LLC APPLICANT ) CONCLUSIONS
SCOTT SINNER CONSULTING, INC. ,AGENT ) OF LAW
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicant:
Agent:
Smith Crossing LLC
353 Dalton St
Medford, OR 97501
Milo Smith milosmith@gmial.com
Philip Smith Philips.pmci@yahoo.com
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc.
4401 San Juan Dr. Suite G
Medford, OR 97504
541-601-0917
scottsinner@vahoo.com
Propertyl:
37 2W 03CA TL 1100
Smith Crossing LLC
Twin Creeks Crossing and N. Haskell
Central Point OR 97502
2.19 Acres
Zoning HMR High Mix Residential Commercial (TOD)
Project Summary:
This Site Plan Review application proposes the development of Central Point Station a
mixed use development within the Twin Creeks TOD. The property is 2.19 acres within
the HMR High mix residential commercial zone.
The Twin Creeks Crossing frontage is proposed to be developed with a 4 story building
with a flat roof and parapets. There is a total of 6,132 square feet of ground floor
commercial space with a total of 26 dwelling unit on floors 2-4.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 1 of 13
65
The North Haskell frontage is proposed to be developed with two 15 unit buildings of
similar architectural style as the Twin Creeks building stepping down to 3 stories. The
ground floor North Haskell street frontage of these buildings will be extended stay short
term rental units (VRBO) to meet the commercial use requirements of the HMR zoning
district.
The buildings fronting Golden Peak Drive are 2 story townhouse style buildings with
pitched roofs to be more compatible in scale and architectural style with the existing
lower density development on the north side of the road.
The concept of the development is to meet the density and use requirements of the HMR
zone with a mixture of complementary building types with the highest density on the
south side of the property and transition to lower density on the north with an
architectural style complementary with the existing development on adjacent properties.
The development proposes a total of 66 multifamily dwelling units and 6,132 square feet
of commercial lease space. The applicant intends to own and manage the development.
The applicant is also the owner/ developer of Smith Crossing Phases 1 and 2 south of the
subject property.
The proposed development is consistent with the adopted Twin Creeks Master Plan and
this application does not include any request for revisions to the plan.
Review Procedure
The applicant has been in communication with the City since the property was acquired
in 2019. Discussions with the staff indicated this development would be considered a
Major Site Plan review and of significant interest and impact to the City so the application
would be treated as a Type III procedure with the Planning Commission as the approving
authority. Type III applications require a pre application conference.
The applicant submitted a pre application request on January 21, 2020 and the pre app
conference was held on February 5, 2020.
The applicant conducted a voluntary neighborhood meeting on January 29th, 2020 to
introduce the proposed development to the community and to obtain feedback on the
preliminary site plan and architectural designs.
As stated above, this application is a major site plan review, typically classified as a Type
II review. The director has the discretion to process a major site plan application as a Type
III procedure when a development is of substantial size, and of significant public interest.
This application is subject to the procedures of Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC)
17.05.400.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 2 of 13
...
CPMC 17.05.400 provides the required submittals, noticing requirements, and review and
decision procedure for the Planning Commission.
Approval Criteria
The project is subject to the standards of Chapters 17.65 TOD Districts and Corridors,
17.66 Application Review Process for the TOD District and Corridor, and 17.67 Design
Standards —TOD District and TOD Corridor.
Chanter 17.65 TOD Districts and Corridors
Central Point Station is a mixed use development located at the 900 block of North Haskell
Street in the Twin Creeks Community. The project encompasses the block bounded by
North Haskell on the west, Golden Peak on the north, Boulder Ridge on the east and Twin
Creeks Crossing Loop on the south.
The property is a single tax lot 2.19 acre tax lot, 37 2W 03CA Tax Lot 1100. The site is
within the TOD district and the Twin Creeks Master Plan (TCMP) area and the High Mix
Residential / commercial (HMR) zoning district.
Figure 1 Subject property within the Twin Creeks TOD
M
W I
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 3 of 13
67
Per chapter 17.65.040 Land Use –TOD District the HMR zine is described in location and
purpose.
HMR—High Mix Residential/Commercial. This is the highest density residential
zone intended to be near the center of the TOD district. High density forms of
multifamily housing are encouraged along with complementary ground floor
commercial uses. Low impact commercial activities may also be allowed. Low
density residential uses are not permitted.
Table 1
TOD District Land Uses
Use Categories
Zoning Districts
LMR MMR HMR EC GEC71 C _I OS
Residential
Dwelling, Single -Family
Tourist Accommodations
Large and standard lot
Zero lot line, detached
P
P
L5
P
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Attached row houses
Dwelling, Multifamily
P
P
P
C
N
N
N
P
P
N
N
Multiplex, apartment
Senior housing
P
L6
P
P
P
P
L1
L1
L1
L1
N
N
N
N
Commercial
Tourist Accommodations
Motel/hotel
N
N
C
P
P
N
N
Bed and breakfast inn
C
C
P
P
P
N
N
Table 1 identifies the proposed residential uses are permitted within the HMR Zone. The
primary proposed commercial use for Buildings 2 and 3 will be Vacation Rental by Owner
(VRBO). The VRBO use is proposed to fill a need within the Twin Creeks community for
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 4 of 13
68
short and intermediate stay lodging for visitors to the community as there are limited
facilities in the area for friends and relatives visiting residents in the vicinity.
The current plans indicate five buildings with a total of 66 dwelling units and
approximately 6,132 square feet of commercial space.
.....G. ...........................:,�
N. Haskell
Figure 2 Site Plan
r
Building 1, facing the Twin Creeks Loop frontage, is proposed as a 4 story mixed use
building. The ground floor will provide flex space for retail and commercial lease space
and 2 VRBO units. The upper three residential floors will contain a total of 24 dwelling
units. The building will include awnings / overhang structures extending over the public
sidewalk.
Buildings 2 and 3 will each have 4 furnished VRBO ground floor units facing N. Haskell, 3
one bedroom dwelling units facing the parking lot and 8 two story townhouse units above
the ground floor unit for a total of 15 units per building.
Buildings 1, 2 and 3 have scaled massing as appropriate for their location on the site and
the Code requirements for the TCMP. The buildings are intended to be sited forward to
their respective rights of way and feature the ground floor commercial appearance for
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review
69
Page 5 of 13
the Twin Creeks Loop and North Haskell street frontages. A common architectural theme
is carried through for these buildings.
The corner of Twins Creek Crossing Loop and North Haskell features an outdoor plaza with
pavers and seating area for residents and patrons of the commercial establishments in
Building 1.
The Golden Peak frontage of this development will face existing attached and detached
single family dwellings. The conceptual development on this frontage will be two 2 story
townhouse style buildings, each containing 5 dwelling units. These buildings conceptually
designed with a gable roof to be more compatible with the residential buildings on the
north side of Golden Peak.
The space between the buildings will allow for a pedestrian path between the right of way
and the parking area. On street parking would be available for visitors, but all access and
parking for the residents will be assigned in the internal parking area. There will be no
direct vehicle access from the townhouses to Golden Peak Drive to promote a pedestrian
scale frontage and compatibility with the dwellings on the facing street frontage.
The TCMP indicates the site is bisected with two neighborhoods, The North Commons
Neighborhood, generally facing Golden Peak Drive and The Commons Neighborhood,
generally on the North Haskell and Twin Crossings Loop frontages.
The North Haskell frontage proposes a driveway access between Buildings 3 and 4. The
location of this access is as far from the Twin Creeks Loop as possible and provides a
transition area between the 3 story buildings 2 and 4 and the 2 story buildings of buildings
4 and 5.
The access also provides a transition in term of massing, scale, and architectural style for
the two Neighborhoods identified above.
17.65.050 Zoning Regulations TOD District
CPMC 17.65.050 Table 2 provides density and lot standards. This application does not
propose a land division and all development is proposed on an existing parcel; therefore,
the minimum lot size, dimensions and area requirements are not applicable. The
townhouse units of building 4 and 5 are not intended to be sold individually.
The term townhouse, as it is used in this application, is a multifamily dwelling unit
consisting of 2 floors with an internal staircase and is not a unit proposed for individual
unit ownership. The applicant intends to maintain ownership of all dwelling units in the
development.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 6 of 13
70
Table 2 indicates the HMR zone requires a minimum density of 25 dwelling units per acre
with no maximum density. The parcel is 2.19 net acres. This application proposes 66
dwelling units which is a density of 30 units per acre and above the minimum required
density.
Table 2 indicates the setbacks for the HMR zone is 0'- 15'. This application proposes a 2'
setback on Twin Creeks Loop for building 1, 7-1/2' street side setback on North Haskell
for buildings 2 and 3, and 9' on Golden Peak. All buildings comply with the Code street
frontage setback requirement. All other setbacks are met with the proposed site plan
including space between buildings.
The maximum building height for the HMR zone is 60'. Building 1 is the tallest building at
48', Buildings 2 and 3 are 33' and buildings 4 and 5 are 30' to the top of the ridge. All
buildings comply with the maximum building height standard and the setback standards.
Table 2 indicates that residential development in the HMR zone with more than 40
dwelling units must incorporate 3 or more housing types. Building 1 is comprised of
commercial space on the ground floor, two VRBO units, with 24 single floor dwelling units
on floors 2-4.
Buildings 2 and 3 have a total of 8 VRBO units on the N Haskell frontage and 71 bedroom
flats on the parking lot side of the buildings. The second and third floors are townhouse
units. Building 4 and 5 are 2 story and ground floor townhouse units. The development
has more than 4 housing types and complies with the standard.
Table 3 of the 17.65 provides the parking standards for the HMR zone. All dwelling units
in the proposal would require 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. The VRBO units have
a parking requirement of 1 space per unit, and the commercial spaces would have a 1
space per 500 square feet of floor area.
Using the Table 3 parking requirements, the required parking is 84 spaces for rental
dwelling units, 10 spaces for 10 VRBO units, and 13 spaces for 6,132 square feet of
commercial lease space for a total of 107 required spaces. The site plan provides 129
parking spaces of which 6 are ADA compliant spaces.
The TCMP Exhibit 32 parking plan indicates the entire block of the subject property is
proposed for on street parking. On street parking will allow for approximately 40
regulation parking spaces.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 7 of 13
71
Chapter 17.67 DESIGN STANDARDS--TOD DISTRICT AND TOD CORRIDOR
17.67.010 Purpose.
The purpose of the Central Point TOD district and TOD corridor design standards
is to complement and support efficient and sustainable land development, to
reduce auto reliance and to increase transit use as required by the Oregon
Transportation Planning Rule. (Ord. 1815 §1(part), Exh. C(part), 2000)
Central Point Zoning
uty„mR.
9traauu
TDD H-nery
Too Corimr
• • t TOD DWkL
Gurmnl Tnxtat
CP Zoning
■ BGG
c-zont
C -d
C -s
CN
\ Cm.
■ ETGD GlW
EC
GC
HMR
LMR
ETOU LMR
M.1
.I A tea::• r• ;
0 .
„ ••;�' :�. E •dam;..
w 1. �• V- \
aaYYiY�
Subject ” ,
Properly
-•� +• .tri :'i t4.
r
4 r
Figure 3 Twin Creeks TOO Boundary
Figure 3 identifies the subject property within the Twin Creeks TOD. The Twin Creeks TOD
has an adopted Master Plan. This site is over 2 acres and is required to comply with a
Master Plan and the TCMP standards are applicable and this application does not request
any master plan revisions.
Circulation and Access Standards
This application does not include a land division orthe creation of public streets and some
of the design standards within 17.67 are not applicable as the site already has some
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 8 of 13
72
improvements that would have been reviewed and approved as consistent with the
master plan.
The existing block perimeter and length at the site are consistent with the standards. All
utilities are required to be located underground and the development will comply with
the standards.
The TCMP does not indicate any specific accessways on or adjacent to the subject
property.
Parking Lot Standards
There are no parking lot driveways proposed with the application. The plan proposes
three two-way accesses to the parking lot, one from North Haskell and two from Boulder
Ridge. The proposed plan is designed to limit the view of the parking area from the Twin
Creeks Loop, North Haskell, and the Golden Peak street frontages. The parking area is
open to the Boulder Ridge frontage and the two parking lot accesses will allow improved
access to the existing transportation system.
The parking area provides connected sidewalks throughout the site to provide safe, direct
and convenient pedestrian movement throughout the site. The internal sidewalks provide
multiple connections to the public sidewalks in the rights of way.
The public and private sidewalks provide convenient access to the plaza area adjacent to
the commercial spaces of Building 1 and the proposed plaza area.
Site Design Standards 17.67.050
A. Adiacent Off Site Structures and Uses.
This application is infill development with virtually all offsite infrastructure currently in
place. All connections to these facilities will be designed and submitted to the city for
technical review and approval.
B. Natural Features
The site is flat with no significant natural features.
The Golden Peak street frontage has existing street trees, however some of these street
trees appear to show signs of stress and the applicant intended to inspect each tree and
will replace as necessary.
There are no wetlands on the site.
C. Topography
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 9 of 13
73
The site is flat with no significant topography, all adjacent parcels are similarly flat. The
proposed plan will match, exactly, the topography and the manner other buildings have
developed on this flat ground.
D. Solar Orientation
The priority of the Code to meet minimum density requirements and site structures close
to street frontages dictate building orientations with respect to solar orientation.
E. Existing buildings on the Site
The site is vacant.
F. New Prominent Structures
The development does not propose and key public or Civic structures.
G. Views,
The buildings have been designed to reduce massing and allow for view corridors.
A plaza area is proposed on the corner of Twin Creeks Crossing and North Haskell. This
plaza provides a view corridor. Buildings 2 and 3 were split to allow for another view
corridor and the drives access off North Haskell provides another view corridor.
Building 4 and 5 are also proposed as two building to reduce massing and provide another
view corridor.
H. Adjoining Uses, Adjacent Services
The proposed site plan is within the HMR—High Mix Residential/Commercial. This is the
highest density residential zone intended to be near the center of the TOD district. High
density forms of multifamily housing are encouraged along with complementary ground
floor commercial uses.
The architecture, materials, and massing are intended to transition from the lower
intensity development of The North Commons Neighborhood fronting Golden Peak Drive
to the higher intensity of the Commons Neighborhood toward the Twin Creeks Crossing
Loop.
Both the Twin Creeks Crossing Loop and the North Haskell frontages are required to have
ground floor commercial street frontages with the mixed use residential above. The HMR
Zone has minimum density standards and the site plan proposed is within the allowable
density for the Zone.
Buildings 4 and 5 are the 2 story townhouse style buildings facing Golden Peak. These two
buildings are designed to be compatible to the existing architectural style of the existing
1 and 2 story dwellings across the street with a pitched roof, gables and covered porches.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 10 of 13
74
The units are also grouped in two buildings to further reduce mass with a walkway
between the buildings.
Buildings 2 and 3 have frontage on North Haskell and step down to 3 story to reduce
massing. These two buildings we developed with a 17 foot gap between the building to
again break up mass and allow for views between the buildings.
The 4 story, Building 1, is the tallest building on in the proposed development. This
building faces Twin Creeks Crossing Loop and is opposite the existing Memory care
facility. The highest density of the development is across the street from the highest
intensity of adjacent properties.
I. Transitions in Densit
This section of the Code is intended to minimize and mitigate conflicts in uses within the
master plan area. The proposed development has incorporated the techniques identified
in the Code.
The property is a single block and a within a single zone, HMR. The Boulder Ridge and
Golden Peak Rights of way are 60 feet wide. North Haskell is 76' right of way and the
property on the south side of Twin Creeks Crossing Loop is the same HMR Zone. The
distances of the rights of way are larger than 50 feet that the Code would require buffer
yards or screening.
The project does integrate height and massing techniques identified in the Code. Building
1 is the tallest of the project at 4 stories. Buildings 2 and 3 front North Haskell are 3 stories
and articulated and utilize a 17 foot separation between the two building to reduce mass.
Buildings 4 and 5 are two story and a transition in architecture to increase compatibility
with the existing building on the opposite side of Golden Peak Drive.
I. Parkin
The off street parking is midblock screened from the public rights of way for Twin Creeks
Crossing Loop, North Haskell and Golden Peak by the buildings and landscaping. All
buildings are facing the right of way and no parking is provided between the buildings and
the right of way as required in the Code.
Protective curbs are provided on all landscaped areas. Tree islands are utilized to provide
protection to the trees from adjacent parked cars. The site plan specifies a 17' by 9'
parking space with a 7' sidewalk to allow full depth parking, landscape protection and
ample pedestrian width. All parking and maneuvering area are paved.
Table 3 of the 17.65 provides the parking standards for the HMR zone. All dwelling units
in the proposal would require 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. The VRBO units have
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 11 of 13
75
a parking requirement of 1 space per unit, and the commercial spaces would have a 1
space per 500 square feet of floor area.
Using the Table 3 parking requirements, the required parking is 84 spaces for rental
dwelling units, 10 spaces for 10 VRBO units, and 13 spaces for 6,132 square feet of
commercial lease space for a total of 107 required spaces. The site plan provides 129
parking spaces of which 6 are ADA compliant spaces.
The TCMP Exhibit 32 parking plan indicates the entire block of the subject property is
proposed for on street parking. On street parking will allow for approximately 40
regulation parking spaces.
Parking is proposed to be behind the buildings and to the interior of the parcel.
K. Landscaping
The Landscape plan provides 15,042 square feet of landscaped area representing 15.7%
landscape coverage on the 2.19 acre site.
The proposed landscape plan was prepared to the standards in this code section. The
landscaping is designed to complement the architecture and plaza areas and conform to
the TCMP standards.
Street Tree and shrub species are per the TCMP approved lists.
The site plan provides the location of the fully screened trash and recycling area. There is
no chain link fencing or screening proposed.
The site plan does not propose parking between the buildings and rights of way. The
buildings do not have large unbroken massive sections and landscaping is proposed to be
in harmony with the architecture.
The plaza area provide an attracting hardscape paver adjacent to a commercial area. The
desire is to attract a coffee house or other eatery that will be able to use the plaza for
attractive outdoor seating.
L. Lightine
Pedestrian scale street lighting are currently installed on the public rights of way.
The proposed elevations includes building mounted lighting for safety and interest.
The parking lot lighting is a design build contract and has not been designed at the time
of submittal in case there are changers to the parking lot. The applicant will comply with
the lighting densities described in the Code.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 12 of 13
W,
M. Signs
The only signs proposed at this time are conceptual building face signs on Building 1 on the
Twin Creeks Crossing Loop frontage.
The applicant is not proposing any monument signage at this time and if a monument sign is
desired, the design will be submitted under a separate application.
Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc. 541-601-0917 Central Point Station Site Plan Review Page 13 of 13
77
'\,TTACHMENT 6 G o
f 12 A N 5 1 'I' - 0 R I G N 7 li 1) 1) V V E, L 0 P 11 1": N 'C
SYMBOL GVIC ANO COMMERCIAL USE OPPORTUNITIES
gilifirml
711-115-11
_
NEIGHBORHOOD GROCERY/CONVENIENCE STORE, DRY CLEANER,
WE
0
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, HOME BASED OCCUPATION (LNE/NORK)
_
RESTAURANTS, ENTERTAINMENT, PROFESSIONAL OFFICE,
RETAIL SALES AND SERVICE. HEALTH CARE
DESTINATION RETAIL, PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
CONMUNNY SERVICES, RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY,
PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
C
NOTES:
�w
't7i�Q
(1) SEE TOO DISTRICT ZONING MOE FOR MORE INFORMATION ON
ALL USE CATECORES
ti
gilifirml
711-115-11
�w
't7i�Q
�Gl�t
Am A
lam I
Q
&I iba 37, Civic and Cornmerrird Plnn
Masler Plan Application
70
78
Evhibi135, Homing Plan
Master Plan Application
79
TWIN CREEKS
TRANSIT -ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
Plan
Gmind fle
Plan
Second floor townhouses and conrnrerrialwift Mared lobby
cfr t
Section
Commercial above retail with parking court behind
roll<nu;
3 T 11 EEEMLVEftmjjj
Section
Townhouses above retail with court parking behind
Ground floor retail with offices mixed Breezeway leading from parking to
with roof -deck above. main street.
Master Plan Application
(6
80
MIXED-USE
Ground floor retail with housing
above.
Awnings and shading devices help to
articulate the building facade.
T'H'IN CREL RS
I'lkANSIT- 0RIENTE 1) 1)hVC1,0PbIENT
EleotWon
Hot is abocy!street level retail
t
Street Ireesandarouings-
Housing wale relines to street lerrel
retail.
Breezmmis to parking court behind.
r a
Pedestrian friendlystreetscape.
M:ulcr Plan nppliculion
81
MIXED-USE
Street frontages are to be pedestrian -
friendly — e.g, awnings are provided
over entrances and display windows,
large ground floor windows with tran-
som windows provide visual connectiv-
ity, entrances off the sidewalk are clearly
defined and articulated to provick
interest and orientation.
All main entrances are off the primary
street frontage, and are complemented
by suitable signage that is integrated into
the overall building design -
Sidewalks are active pedestrian spaces,
With outdoor display of goads, cafe
seating, street furniture, lighting and
trees combining together to create a
pleasant and comfortable atmosphere.
All building facades, notable over 40' in
length, have variation in the architectural
forms, elements and materials, to en-
hance the visual quality of the street
edge.
A range of quality, durable materials is
used to augment and highlight the
building forms, while conveying a sense
of permanence and distinction.
Corner buildings are detailed to provide
a strong emphasis to a corner, with
continuity of architectural detailing and
materials on the front and side facades -
Extensive windows, relites and skylights
allow for natural light and ventilation for
the lower and upper floors. Sun shading
deViCeS such as awnings, canopies, large
overhangs, building projections and
street trees provide protection from the
summer sun,
For the residential units, the plan layout,
orientation and window treatment of the
building are to be located to minimize
infringing upon the privacy of other
adjacent units.
Balconies and decks create private out-
door space,for the upper level residen-
tial units- Roof gardens allow for shared
or private outdoor spaces.
ATTACHMENT
Karin Skelton
From: Mark Northrop <MarkN@jcfd3.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2020 3:10 PM
To: Tom Humphrey
Subject: Re: Central Point Station - Site Plan and Architectural Review
Tom
The following is Fire District 3's concerns and comments.
1. Aerial apparatus access is required for the 4 story south building.
2. Fire hydrant spacing is provided to the perimeter of the development however 1 or 2 internal hydrants
mat be required based upon fire flow requirements which are unknown at this time.
3. A single FDC for the complex would be desirable in a location agreeable to the Fire District.
If you have any questions or concerns please let me know.
DrM Mark Northrop, IAAI, CF]
JacLson bounty Tire District 3
8383 Agate Rd, White City, OR 97503
Mar69jcfd3.com
Office: 541.831.2776
Cell 541.660.7689
www.icfd3.com
Together We're Better
one 000
1
82
ATTACHMENT ;s Vl
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
File No.: SPAR -20008
Consideration of a Site Plan & Architectural Review
to construct the development referred to as Central Point Station
Applicant: )
Smith Crossing, LLC ) Finding s of Fact
353 Dalton Street ) and
Medford, OR 97501 ) Conclusions of Law
PART 1
INTRODUCTION
The applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use development on 2.19 acres in the Twin Creeks TOD. The project
includes 6,132 square feet of commercial space and 10 VRBO spaces below 56 residential units. Ten townhouses
are proposed along Golden Peak Drive to transition to the single family residences to the north. There is a plaza
associated with commercial use and parking is provided internal to the development.
The site plan and architectural review request involves the application of existing policies and is processed using
Type III application procedures. Type III procedures set forth in Section 17.05.400 provides the basis for
decisions upon standards and criteria in the development code and the comprehensive plan, when appropriate.
The project site is located in the HMR, High Mix Residential/Commercial zoning district within the Transit
Oriented Development (TOD). The applicant is using the standards and criteria for TOD Districts and Corridor
set forth in CPMC 17.65, Application Review Process for the TOD District and CPMC 17.67, Design Standards
for TOD District and Corridor.
The following findings address each of the standards and criteria as applies to the proposed application for the
development referred to as Central Point Station.
PART 2
ZONING ORDINANCE
17.65.050 Zoning Regulations—TOD District
A. Permitted Uses. Permitted uses in Table 1 are shown with a "P." These uses are allowed if they comply
with the applicable provisions of this title. They are subject to the same application and review process as
other permitted uses identified in this title.
B. Limited Uses. Limited uses in Table 1 are shown with an "L." These uses are allowed if they comply
with the specific limitations described in this chapter and the applicable provisions of this title. They are
subject to the same application and review process as other permitted uses identified in this title.
C. Conditional Uses. Conditional uses in Table 1 are shown with a "C." These uses are allowed if they
comply with the applicable provisions of this title. They are subject to the same application and review
process as other conditional uses identified in this title.
Finding I7.65.050(A-C): The proposed project site is located in the High -Mix Residential/ Commercial
zone within the TOD District. Attached Row Houses, Multiplex, and B & B are listed in Table 1 as "P ".
Retail Sales and Services are listed as "13 "-Permitted in existing commercial buildings or new
construction with ground floor businesses with multifamily dwellings above ground floor.
Conclusion 17.65.050(A -C): The land use is consistent with the permitted uses in the GC/General
Commercial Zone within the TOD Corridor.
83
D. Density. The allowable residential density and employment building floor area are specified in Table 2.
Finding I7.65.050(D): A minimum density of 25 units per net acre has been met by the applicant who is
proposing 66 units (30 units per net acre). A maximum density is not specified for development in the
HMR-TOD zone.
Conclusion 17.65.050(D): Complies.
E. Dimensional Standards. The dimensional standards for lot size, lot dimensions, building setbacks, and
building height are specified in Table 2.
Finding 17.65.050(E): The proposed development will comply with the minimum setbacks and provides
landscaping on 16% of the lot area, where a minimum 15% is required.
Conclusion 17.65.050(E): Consistent.
F. Development Standards.
1. Housing Mix. The required housing mix for the TOD district is shown in Table 2.
Finding 17.65.050(F): The proposal includes 10 VRBO units, I bedroom flats, multiplex units, overstory
townhouse units and townhouse row house units. The development has more than the 3 required housing
types.
Conclusion 17.65.050(F): Complies.
CPMC 17.65.050(F)(3) Parking Standards.
2. The off-street parking and loading requirements in Chapter 17.64 shall apply to the TOD district
and TOD corridor.
a. Except for multifamily housing, fifty percent of all residential off-street parking areas
shall be covered. Accessory unit parking spaces are not required to be covered.
b. Vehicle parking standards may be reduced when transit service is provided in the TOD
district and TOD corridor and meets the following conditions:
Parking standards may be reduced when transit service is provided in the TOD
district and TOD corridor.
ii. Parking standards may be reduced up to fifty percent when transit service is
provided in the TOD district and TOD corridor and when bus service includes
15 -minute headways during the hours of seven to nine a.m. and four to six p.m.
c. Bicycle parking standards in Chapter 17.64 shall not be reduced at any time.
d. Shared parking easements or agreements with adjacent property owners are encouraged
to satisfy a portion of the parking requirements for a particular use where compatibility is
shown. Parking requirements may be reduced by the city when reciprocal agreements of
shared parking are recorded by adjacent users.
Finding I 7.65.050(F) (3): The minimum parking requirement for a retail sales and service is 1 space per
500 square feet of floor area or 13 spaces for the proposed 6,132 square feet . VRBO units will require 1
space per unit for a total of 10 spaces. Rowhouse townhouses will require 2 spaces per unit for a total of
20 spaces and the remaining 46 plexs require 1.5 spaces for a total of 69 spaces. One hundred and twelve
84
(112) parking spaces are the minimum required. The proposed Central Point Station development
provides a total of 130 parking spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirement for off-street parking.
The minimum bicycle parking standards for proposed commercial uses is 1 space per 1, 000 square feet,
or 7 total bicycle parking spaces. The proposed site plan illustrates a bicycle rack location. Conclusion
17.65.050(F): Complies.
17.66.030 Application and Review
A. Application Types. There are four types of applications which are subject to review within the Central
Point TOD district and corridor. This proposal comes under Site Plan and Architectural Review.
Finding 17.66.030(A): The proposed mixed-use development consists of permitted uses on 2.19 acres
and has been submitted for a Site Plan and Architectural Review and processed using Type III
application procedures per Section 17.66.030(A) (2). The requirement for a Master Plan was satisfied
with the original approval of Twin Creeks. Conclusion I7.66.030(A): Consistent.
17.66.040 Parks and Open Spaces
Common park and open space shall be provided for all residential development within a TOD district or corridor
as per Section 17.67.060.
Finding 17.66.040: The proposed development is part of an approved master plan in which parks have
been previously planned and developed.
Conclusion 17.66.040: Not applicable.
17.66.050 Application Approval Criteria
A. TOD District or Corridor Master Plan.
Finding 17.66.050(A): The current application is a Site Plan and Architectural Review. Per Finding
17.66.030(A), a Master Plan is not required.
Conclusion 17.66.050(A): Not applicable.
B. Site Plan and Architectural Review. A site plan and architectural review application shall be approved
when the approval authority finds that the following criteria are satisfied or can be shown to be
inapplicable:
1. The provisions of Chapter 17.72, Site Plan and Architectural Review, shall be satisfied; and
2. The proposed improvements comply with the approved TOD district or corridor master plan for
the property, if required; and
3. Chapter 17.67, Design Standards--TOD District and TOD Corridor.
Finding 17.66.050(B): As evidenced by the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the proposed
mixed-use development satisfies the approval criteria for site plan and architectural review.
Conclusion 17.66.050(B): Complies.
85
17.67.040 Circulation and Access Standards
A. Public Street Standards.
Except for specific transportation facilities identified in a TOD district or corridor master plan,
the street dimensional standards set forth in the City of Central Point Department of Public Works
Standard Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction, Section
300, Street Construction shall apply for all development located within the TOD district and for
development within the TOD corridor which is approved according to the provisions in
Section 17.65.020 and Chapter 17.66.
Finding 17.67.040(A)(1-7): The proposal does not include the creation of new streets and will not alter
the block length or perimeter block length. No new utilities lines are proposed and service lines to the
structures will be located underground. Sidewalks with tree wells and/or landscape rows will be installed
along North Haskell Street, Golden Peak Drive, Boulder Ridge Street and Twin Creeks Crossing Loop
and the access points will comply with the City of Central Point Department of Public Works Standard
Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction, Section 300.
Conclusion 17.66.040(A)(1-7): Complies.
2. Pedestrian/Bike Accessways Within Public Street Right -of -Way.
a. Except for specific accessway facilities identified in a TOD district or corridor master
plan, the following accessway dimensional standards set forth in the City of Central Point
Department of Public Works Standard Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for
Public Works Construction, Section 300, Street Construction shall apply for any
development located within the TOD district and for development within the TOD
corridor which is approved according to the provisions in Section 17.65.020 and
Chapter 17.66.
b. In transit station areas, one or more pedestrian -scaled amenities shall be required with
every one hundred square feet of the sidewalk area, including but not limited to:
Street furniture;
ii. Plantings;
iii. Distinctive Paving;
iv. Drinking fountains; and
V. Sculpture.
c. Sidewalks adjacent to undeveloped parcels may be temporary.
d. Public street, driveway, loading area, and surface parking lot crossings shall be clearly
marked with textured accent paving or painted stripes.
e. The different zones of a sidewalk should be articulated using special paving or concrete
scoring.
Finding 17.67.040(A)(8): The proposal does not include the creation of new pedestrian and bicycle
accessways within the public right-of-way.
Conclusion 17.66.040(A)(8): Not applicable.
86
B. Parking Lot Driveways.
1. Parking lot driveways that link public streets and/or private streets with parking stalls shall be
designed as private streets, unless one of the following is met:
a. The parking lot driveway is less than one hundred feet long;
b. The parking lot driveway serves one or two residential units; or
c. The parking lot driveway provides direct access to angled parking stalls.
2. The number and width of driveways and curb cuts should be minimized and consolidated when
possible.
3. Where possible, parking lots for new development shall be designed to provide vehicular and
pedestrian connections to adjacent sites.
4. Large driveways should use distinctive paving patterns.
Finding I7.67.040(B): As shown on the Site Plan, the proposed parking lot driveways access North
Haskell Street and Boulder Ridge of the subject property. The proposed parking lot driveways and
connecting drive aislsfacilitate good traffic flow and building access.
Conclusion I7.67.040(B): The proposal is consistent with the standards and guidelines for parking lot
driveways.
C. On -Site Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation. Attractive access routes for pedestrian travel should be
provided by:
1. Reducing distances between destinations or activity areas such as public sidewalks and building
entrances. Where appropriate, develop pedestrian routes through sites and buildings to
supplement the public right-of-way;
2. Providing an attractive, convenient pedestrian accessway to building entrances;
3. Bridging across barriers and obstacles such as fragmented pathway systems, wide streets, heavy
vehicular traffic, and changes in level by connecting pedestrian pathways with clearly marked
crossings and inviting sidewalk design;
4. Integrating signage and lighting system which offers interest and safety for pedestrians;
5. Connecting parking areas and destinations with pedestrian paths identified through use of
distinctive paving materials, pavement striping, grade separations, or landscaping.
Finding 17.67.040(C): On-site pedestrian circulation is provided by a pedestrian accessway that
connects the building entrances with the parking area.
Conclusion 17.67.040(C): Consistent.
17.67.050 Site Design Standards.
The following standards and criteria shall be addressed in the master plan, land division, and/or site plan review
process:
A. Adjacent Off -Site Structures and Uses.
87
Finding ]7.67.050(A): There are no off-site structures servicing the subject property. All proposed utility
infrastructure has been reviewed by the Public Works Department and determined to comply with all
applicable sections of the City of Central Point Department Public Works Standard Specification and
Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction.
Conclusion 17.67.050(A): Consistent.
B. Natural Features.
1. Buildings should be sited to preserve significant trees.
2. Buildings should be sited to avoid or lessen the impact of development on environmentally
critical areas such as steep slopes, wetlands, and stream corridors.
3. Whenever possible, wetlands, groves and natural areas should be maintained as public preserves
and as open space opportunities in neighborhoods.
Finding 17.67.050(B): The Project Site is a flat, vacant lot. There are no trees or mapped wetland areas
or stream corridors on the site.
Conclusion 17.66.050(B): Not applicable.
C. Topography.
1. Buildings and other site improvements should reflect, rather than obscure, natural topography.
2. Buildings and parking lots should be designed to fit into hillsides, for instance, reducing the need
for grading and filling.
3. Where neighboring buildings have -responded to similar topographic conditions on their sites in a
consistent and positive way, similar treatment for the new structure should be considered.
Finding 17.67.050(C): Topography on the project is relatively flat with minor grade changes across the
subject property.
Conclusion 17.67.050(C): Not applicable.
D. Solar Orientation.
1. The building design, massing and orientation should enhance solar exposure for the project,
taking advantage of the climate of Central Point for sun -tempered design.
Finding 17.67.050(D): The proposal maximizes solar orientation to the greatest extent possible within
the context of the existing street network.
Conclusion 17.67.050(D): Consistent.
E. Existing Buildings on the Site.
1. Where a new building shares the site with an admirable existing building or is a major addition to
such a building, the design of the new building should be compatible with the original.
2. New buildings proposed for existing neighborhoods with a well-defined and desirable character
should be compatible with or complement the architectural character and siting pattern of
neighboring buildings.
88
Finding 17.67.050(E): The existing property is currently undeveloped. As noted in the Findings for
CPMC 17.67.070 — Building Design, the proposed buildings are consistent with the building design
standards in the TOD Corridor.
Conclusion 17.67.050(E): Consistent.
F. New Prominent Structures. Key public or civic buildings, such as community centers, churches, schools,
libraries, post offices, and museums, should be placed in prominent locations, such as fronting on public
squares or where pedestrian street vistas terminate, in order to serve as landmarks and to symbolically
reinforce their importance.
Finding 17.67.050(F): The proposed mixed-use buildings are not key public or civic buildings but they
have been placed in prominent locations within the TCMP.
Conclusion 17.67.050(F): Not applicable.
G. Views. The massing of individual buildings should be adjusted to preserve important views while
benefiting new and existing occupants and surrounding neighborhoods.
Finding 17.67.050(G): The proposed mixed-use buildings are proposed at the new Twin Creeks
Crossing and draw attention to the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) as intended.. The heights of
subordinant buildings on North Haskell and Golden Peak are reduced as the development transitions to
the north. The development will hinder some views from various angles; however, the clustering of the
structures and separation of massing will have the least impact on surrounding views as possible.
Conclusion 17.67.050(G): Consistent.
H. Adjoining Uses and Adjacent Services.
1. When more intensive uses, such as neighborhood commercial or multifamily dwellings, are
within or adjacent to existing single-family neighborhoods, care should be taken to minimize the
impact of noise, lighting, and traffic on adjacent dwellings.
2. Activity or equipment areas should be strategically located to avoid disturbing adjacent residents.
3. All on-site service areas, loading zones and outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal
facilities, transformer and utility vaults, and similar activities shall be located in an area not
visible from a street or urban space.
4. Screening shall be provided for activities, areas and equipment that will create noise, such as
loading and vehicle areas, air conditioning units, heat pumps, exhaust fans, and garbage
compactors, to avoid disturbing adjacent residents.
Group mailboxes are limited to the number of houses on any given block of development. Only
those boxes serving the units may be located on the block. Multiple units of mailboxes may be
combined within a centrally located building of four walls that meets the design guidelines for
materials, entrance, roof form, windows, etc. The structure must have lighting both inside and
out.
Finding 17.67.050(H): The site and landscape plans show all vehicle parking and loading areas are
centrally located within the site and therefore screened by buildings and site landscaping. Proposed
utilities are located underground and waste storage will be screened by an enclosure and site
landscaping.
Conclusion 17.67.050(H): Consistent.
89
I. Transitions in Density.
I . Higher density, attached dwelling developments shall minimize impact on adjacent existing lower
density, single-family dwelling neighborhoods by adjusting height, massing and materials and/or
by providing adequate buffer strips with vegetative screens.
2. Adequate buffer strips with vegetative screens shall be placed to mitigate the impact of higher
density development on adjacent lower density development.
3. New residential buildings within fifty feet of existing low density residential development shall
be no higher than thirty-five feet and shall be limited to single-family detached or attached units,
duplexes, triplexes or fourplexes.
4. New commercial buildings within fifty feet of existing low density residential development shall
be no higher than forty-five feet.
5. Dwelling types in a TOD district or corridor shall be mixed to encourage interaction among
people of varying backgrounds and income levels.
6. Zoning changes should occur midblock, not at the street centerline, to ensure that compatible
building types face along streets and within neighborhoods. When dissimilar building types face
each other across the street because the zoning change is at the street centerline or more infill
housing is desired (for instance, duplexes across the street from single dwellings), design shall
ensure similarity in massing, setback, and character.
7. Density should be increased incrementally, to buffer existing neighborhoods from incompatible
building types or densities. Sequence density, generally, as follows: large lot single dwelling,
small lot single dwelling, duplex, townhomes, courtyard multifamily apartments, large
multifamily apartments, and mixed use buildings.
Finding 17.67.050(1): Although located more than fifty feet from neighboring residential development,
the applicant proposes a maximum height of 48 feet for building 1, 33 feet for buildings 2 and 3 and 30 -
feet for buildings 4 and 5 consistent with standard CPMC 17.67.050(1) (4). Site landscaping proposed on
the Landscape Plan will further screen on-site development from the existing residential development.
The proposed development does not include changes in zoning.
Conclusion 17.67.050(1): As demonstrated by the proposed building location, height and landscape
design, the proposal is consistent with the standards and guidelines relative to transitions in density.
J. Parking.
1. Parking Lot Location.
a. Off-street surface parking lots shall be located to the side or rear of buildings. Parking at
midblock or behind buildings is preferred.
Finding 17.67.050(.1)(1): The front facades of the buildings face Twin Creeks Crossing Loop, North
Haskell Street and Golden Peak Drive . Per the Site Plan, the proposed parking area is located to the
rear of the buildings and is not located between a front fagade and the public street or accessway.
Conclusion 17.67.050(J)(1): Consistent.
90
2. Design.
Finding 17.67.050(J)(2): The paved off-street parking areas are centrally located on the site to limit
visibility and further screened with perimeter and interior landscaped areas. Trees are provided behind
the curb in the landscaped areas as shown on the Site and Landscape Plans.
Conclusion 17.67.050(J)(2): Consistent.
3. Additional Standards for LMR, MMR and HMR Zones.
a. When parking must be located to the side of buildings, parking frontage should be limited
to approximately fifty percent of total site frontage.
b. Where possible, alleys should be used to bring the vehicle access to the back of the site.
c. For parking structures, see Section 17.67.070(H).
Finding 17.67.050(J)(3): The proposed mixed-use development has designed all of its parking so as to
avoid using additional standards.
Conclusion 17.67.050(J)(2): Complies.
K. Landscaping.
1. Perimeter Screening and Planting.
a. Landscaped buffers should be used to achieve sufficient screening while still preserving
views to allow areas to be watched and guarded by neighbors.
b. Landscaping should be used to screen and buffer unsightly uses and to separate such
incompatible uses as parking areas and waste storage pickup areas.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(1): Landscaping is provided throughout the site consistent with the standards of
this section. Parking areas are centrally located on the site and further screened with perimeter and
interior landscaped areas. The waste storage pickup area is located in the center of the parking area
and screened by a 6 -foot high enclosure.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(1): Consistent.
2. Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening.
a. Parking areas shall be screened with landscaping, fences, walls or a combination thereof.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(2)(a): Proposed landscaping is provided for the mixed-use development consistent
with the standards of this section as illustrated on the Landscape Plan.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(2)(a): Consistent.
b. Surface parking areas shall provide perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent to a street
that meets one of the following standards:
A five -foot -wide planting strip between the right-of-way and the parking area.
The planting strip may be interrupted by pedestrian -accessible and vehicular
accessways. Planting strips shall be planted with an evergreen hedge. Hedges
shall be no less than thirty-six inches and no more than forty-eight inches in
91
height at maturity. Hedges and other landscaping shall be planted and maintained
to afford adequate sight distance for vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot;
ii. A solid decorative wall or fence a minimum of thirty-six inches and a maximum
of forty-eight inches in height parallel to and not closer than two feet from the
edge of right-of-way. The area between the wall or fence and the pedestrian
accessway shall be landscaped. The required wall or screening shall be designed
to allow for access to the site and sidewalk by pedestrians and shall be
constructed and maintained to afford adequate sight distance as described above
for vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot;
iii. A transparent screen or grille forty-eight inches in height parallel to the edge of
right-of-way. A two -foot minimum planting strip shall be located either inside
the screen or between the screen and the edge of right-of-way. The planting strip
shall be planted with a hedge or other landscaping. Hedges shall be a minimum
thirty-six inches and a maximum of forty inches in height at maturity.
c. Gaps in a building's frontage on a pedestrian street that are adjacent to off-street parking
areas and which exceed sixty-five feet in length shall be reduced to no more than sixty-
five feet in length through use of a minimum eight -foot -high screen wall. The screen wall
shall be solid, grille, mesh or lattice that obscures at least thirty percent of the interior
view (e.g., at least thirty percent solid material to seventy percent transparency).
Finding 17.67.050(K)(2)(b-c): Surface parking areas adjacent to Boulder Ridge Street use street trees
and shrubs to address this requirement.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(2)(b-c): Complies..
d. Parking Area Interior Landscaping.
L Amount of Landscaping. All surface parking areas with more than ten spaces
must provide interior landscaping complying with one or both of the standards
stated below.
(A) Standard 1. Interior landscaping must be provided at the rate of twenty
square feet per stall. At least one tree must be planted for every two
hundred square feet of landscaped area. Ground cover plants must
completely cover the remainder of the landscaped area.
(B) Standard 2. One tree must be provided for every four parking spaces. If
surrounded by cement, the tree planting area must have a minimum
dimension of four feet. If surrounded by asphalt, the tree planting area
must have a minimum dimension of three feet.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(2)(d)(i): The proposed interior landscaping plan includes over 51,000 square feet
of landscape area and the required number of trees for the 130 proposed parking spaces, exceeding the
minimum required in standard 1.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(2)(d)(i): Consistent.
ii. Development Standards for Parking Area Interior Landscaping.
(A) All landscaping must comply with applicable standards. Trees and
shrubs must be fully protected from potential damage by vehicles.
92
(B) Interior parking area landscaping must be dispersed throughout the
parking area. Some trees may be grouped, but the groups must be
dispersed.
(C) Perimeter landscaping may not substitute for interior landscaping.
However, interior landscaping may join perimeter landscaping as long as
it extends four feet or more into the parking area from the perimeter
landscape line.
(D) Parking areas that are thirty feet or less in width may locate their interior
landscaping around the edges of the parking area. Interior landscaping
placed along an edge is in addition to any required perimeter
landscaping.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(2)(d)(ii): The proposed landscaping plan provides for approximately 15, 000
square feet of landscape area andtrees dispersed throughout the parking area and complies with the
applicable standards of this section.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(2)(d)(ii): Consistent.
3. Landscaping Near Buildings. Landscaping shall serve as a screen or buffer to soften the
appearance of structures or uses such as parking lots or large blank walls, or to increase the
attractiveness of common open spaces.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(3): The proposed landscaping plan provides a mix of trees, shrubs and ground
cover along the frontage, sides and rear of the proposed buildings and parking areas consistent with this
requirement.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(3): Consistent.
4. Service Areas. Service areas, loading zones, waste disposal or storage areas must be fully
screened from public view.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(4): The applicant proposes to screen the waste disposal area with a 6 -foot tall
enclosure. As a condition of approval, the enclosure shall be consistent with the standards of this section.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(4): Complies as conditioned.
Street Trees. Street trees shall be required along both sides of all public streets with a spacing of
twenty feet to forty feet on center depending on the mature width of the tree crown, and planted a
minimum of two feet from the back of curb. Trees in the right-of-way or sidewalk easements
shall be approved according to size, quality, and tree well design, if applicable, and irrigation
shall be required. Tree species shall be chosen from the city of Central Point approved street tree
list.
Finding 17.67.050(K)(5): Per the landscape plan provided with the application, street trees are provided
along Twin Creeks Crossing Loop, North Haskell Street, Golden Peak Drive and Boulder Ridge Street.
Trees are planted with a spacing of approximately 30 feet, with a larger space where there are points of
vehicle access to the parking lot.
Conclusion 17.67.050(K)(5): Consistent.
93
L. Lighting.
1. Minimum Lighting Levels. Minimum lighting levels shall be provided for public safety in all
urban spaces open to public circulation.
a. A minimum average light level of one and two-tenths foot candles is required for urban
spaces and sidewalks.
b.Metal-halide or lamps with similar color, temperature and efficiency ratings shall be used
for general lighting at building exteriors, parking areas, and urban spaces. Sodium -based
lamp elements are not allowed.
c. Maximum lighting levels should not exceed six foot candles at intersections or one and
one-half foot candles in parking areas.
2. Fixture Design in Public Rights -of -Way.
a. Pedestrian -scale street lighting shall be provided including all pedestrian streets along
arterials, major collectors, minor collectors and local streets.
b. Pedestrian street lights shall be no taller than twenty feet along arterials and collectors,
and sixteen feet along local streets.
On -Site Lighting. Lighting shall be incorporated into the design of a project so that it reinforces
the pedestrian environment, provides continuity to an area, and enhances the drama and presence
of architectural features. Street lighting should be provided along sidewalks and in medians.
Selected street light standards should be appropriately scaled to the pedestrian environment.
Adequate illumination should be provided for building entries, corners of buildings, courtyards,
plazas and walkways.
a. Accessways through surface parking lots shall be well lighted with fixtures no taller than
twenty feet.
b. Locate and design exterior lighting of buildings, signs, walkways, parking lots, and other
areas to avoid casting light on nearby properties.
c. Fixture height and lighting levels shall be commensurate with their intended use and
function and shall assure compatibility with neighboring land uses. Baffles shall be
incorporated to minimize glare and to focus lighting on its intended area.
d.Additional pedestrian -oriented site lighting including step lights, well lights and bollards
shall be provided along all courtyard lanes, alleys and off-street bike and pedestrian
pathways.
e. In addition to lighting streets, sidewalks, and public spaces, additional project lighting is
encouraged to highlight and illuminate building entrances, landscaping, parks, and
special features.
Finding 17.67.050(L)(1-3): There is pedestrian scale street lighting within the public right-of-way.
However, a lighting plan for the building entrances, parking lot and internal pedestrian walkways was
not submitted with the application. The applicant intended to submit a lighting plan once the specifics of
the site plan (parking lot, buildings, etc) were finalized. As a condition of approval, the applicant is
required to submit a revised site plan that depicts the location of all proposed on-site lighting.
Conclusion 17.67.050(L)(1-3): Complies as conditioned.
94
M. Signs.
Finding I Z 67.050(M): Signage is not included in the proposa but the applicant understands that should
signage be desired, it will be the subject of a separate application and/or building permit.
Conclusion 17.67.050(111): Not applicable.
17.67.060 Public Parks and Open Space Design Standards.
A. General. Parks and open spaces shall be provided in the TOD districts and TOD corridors and shall be
designed to accommodate a variety of activities ranging from active play to passive contemplation for all
ages and accessibility.
B. Parks and Open Space Location.
C. Parks and Open Space Amount and Size.
D. Parks and Open Space Design.
Finding 17.67.060(A -D): The current project is for the proposed development of a single parcelin an
area that has been master plans and in which parks have already been developed. No additional parks or
open space are proposed.
Conclusion 17.67.060(A -D): Not applicable.
17.67.070 Building Design Standards.
A. General Design Requirements.
1. In recognition of the need to use natural resources carefully and with maximum benefit, the use of
"sustainable design" practices is strongly encouraged. In consideration of the climate and ecology
of the Central Point area, a variety of strategies can be used to effectively conserve energy and
resources:
a. Natural ventilation;
b. Passive heating and cooling;
c. Daylighting;
d. Sun -shading devices for solar control;
e. Water conservation;
f. Appropriate use of building mass and materials; and,
g. Careful integration of landscape and buildings. It is recommended that an accepted
industry standard such as the U.S. Green Building Council's LEEDTMprogram be used
to identify the most effective strategies. (Information on the LEEDTM program can be
obtained from the U.S. Green Building Council's website,www.usgbc.org.)
2. All development along pedestrian routes shall be designed to encourage use by pedestrians by
providing a safe, comfortable, and interesting walking environment.
3. Convenient, direct and identifiable building access shall be provided to guide pedestrians between
pedestrian streets, accessways, transit facilities and adjacent buildings.
95
4. Adequate operable windows or roof -lights should be provided for ventilation and summer heat
dissipation.
Finding 17.67.070(A): Building access is provided by a series of pedestrian walkways that guide
pedestrians between buildings on three street frontages and through the associated parking lot.
Conclusion 17.67.070(A): Consistent.
B. Architectural Character.
1. General.
a. The architectural characteristics of surrounding buildings, including historic buildings,
should be considered, especially if a consistent pattern is already established by similar
or complementary building articulation, building scale and proportions, setbacks,
architectural style, roof forms, building details and fenestration patterns, or materials.
In some cases, the existing context is not well defined, or may be undesirable. In such
cases, a well-designed new project can establish a pattern or identity from which future
development can take its cues.
b.Certain buildings, because of their size, purpose or location, should be given
prominence and distinct architectural character, reflective of their special function or
position. Examples of these special buildings include theaters, hotels, cultural centers,
and civic buildings.
c. Attention should be paid to the following architectural elements:
Building forms and massing;
ii. Building height;
iii. Rooflines and parapet features;
iv. Special building features (e.g. towers, arcades, entries, canopies, signs and
artwork);
V. Window size, orientation and detailing;
vi. Materials and color; and
vii. The building's relationship to the site, climate topography and surrounding
buildings.
2. Commercial and High Mix Residential.
a. Buildings should be built to the sidewalk edge for a minimum of seventy-five percent
of their site's primary street frontage along collector and arterial streets in C, EC, GC,
and HMR zones unless the use is primarily residential or the activity that constitutes the
request for increased setback is intended to increase pedestrian activity, i.e. pedestrian
plaza or outdoor seating area.
b. Commercial structures and multi -dwellings should be sited and designed to provide a
sensitive transition to adjacent lower density residential structures, with consideration
for the scale, bulk, height, setback, and architectural character of adjacent single-family
dwellings.
96
c. In multi -dwelling structures, the plan layout, orientation and window treatment of the
building design should not infringe upon the privacy of other adjacent dwellings.
Finding 17.67.070(8)(2): The building entries are oriented towards pedestrian accesswas with the
exception of the townhouses on Golden Peak Drive with entries from the parking lot. Building 1 proposes
a 2 foot setback from Twin Creeks Crossing Loop and buildings 2 and 3 propose 7.5 street side setbacks
which may be intended to increase architectural appeal. .
Conclusion 17.67.070(B)(2): Consistent.
C. Building Entries.
1. General.
a. The orientation of building entries shall:
i. Orient the primary entrance toward the street rather than the parking lot;
ii. Connect the building's main entrance to the sidewalk with a well-defined
pedestrian walkway.
b. Building facades over two hundred feet in length facing a street shall provide two or
more public building entrances off the street.
c. All entries fronting a pedestrian accessway shall be sheltered with a minimum four -foot
overhang or shelter.
d. An exception to any part of the requirements of this section shall be allowed upon
finding that:
The slope of the land between the building and the pedestrian street is greater
than 1:12 for more than twenty feet and that a more accessible pedestrian route to
the building is available from a different side of the building; or
ii. The access is to a courtyard or clustered development and identified pedestrian
accessways are provided through a parking lot to directly connect the building
complex to the most appropriate major pedestrian route(s).
Finding 17.67.070(C)(1): The building entries are oriented towards pedestrian accesswas with the
exception of the townhouses on Golden Peak Drive with entries from the parking lot.
Conclusion 17.67.070(C)(1): Consistent.
2. Commercial and High Mix Residential.
a. For nonresidential buildings, or nonresidential portions of mixed-use buildings, main
building entrances fronting on pedestrian streets shall remain open during normal
business hours for that building.
b. Nonresidential and mixed-use buildings fronting a pedestrian street shall have at least
one main building entrance oriented to the pedestrian street.
Finding 17.67.070(C)(2): The proposed mixed-use development have at least one main building entrance
oriented to the pedestrian street pursuant to Section 17.67.070(C) (1) above.
Conclusion 17.67.070(C)(2): Consistent.
97
3. Residential.
a. The main entrance of each primary structure should face the street the site fronts on,
corner. For attached dwellings, duplexes, and multi -dwellings that have more than one
main entrance, only one main entrance needs to meet this guideline. Entrances that face a
shared landscaped courtyard are exempt.
b. Residential buildings fronting on a street shall have an entrance to the building opening
on to the street.
i. Single-family detached, attached and row house/townhouse residential units
fronting on a pedestrian street shall have separate entries to each dwelling unit
directly from the street.
ii. Ground floor and upper story dwelling units in a multifamily building fronting
a street may share one or more building entries accessible directly from the street,
and shall not be accessed through a side yard except for an accessory unit to a
single-family detached dwelling.
c. The main entrances to houses and buildings should be prominent, interesting, and
pedestrian -accessible. A porch should be provided to shelter the main entrance and create
a transition from outdoor to indoor space.
d. Generally, single -dwelling porches should be at least eight feet wide and five feet deep
and covered by a roof supported by columns or brackets. If the main entrance is to more
than one dwelling unit, the covered area provided by the porch should be at least twelve
feet wide and five feet deep.
e. If the front porch projects out from the building, it should have a roof pitch which
matches the roof pitch of the house. If the porch roof is a deck or balcony, it may be flat.
f. Building elevation changes are encouraged to make a more prominent entrance. The
maximum elevation for the entrance should not be more than one-half story in height, or
six feet from grade, whichever is less.
g. The front entrance of a multi -dwelling complex should get architectural emphasis, to
create both interest and ease for visual identification.
Finding 17.67.070(C)(3): The proposed mixed-use development generally meets the residential design
criteria with the exception of the rowhous/townhouse units fronting on Golden Peak Drive. The applicant
should provide clarificationfor this proposal.
Conclusion 17.67.070(C)(3): Compliance is in question.
98
D. Building Facades.
1. General.
a. All building frontages greater than forty feet in length shall break any flat, monolithic
facade by including discernible architectural elements such as, but not limited to: bay
windows, recessed entrances and windows, display windows, cornices, bases, pilasters,
columns or other architectural details or articulation combined with changes in
materials, so as to provide visual interest and a sense of division, in addition to creating
community character and pedestrian scale. The overall design shall recognize that the
simple relief provided by window cutouts or sills on an otherwise flat facade, in and of
itself, does not meet the requirements of this subsection.
b.Building designs that result in a street frontage with a uniform and monotonous design
style, roofline or facade treatment should be avoided.
c. Architectural detailing, such as but not limited to, trellis, long overhangs, deep inset
windows, should be incorporated to provide sun -shading from the summer sun.
d. To balance horizontal features on longer facades, vertical building elements shall be
emphasized.
e. The dominant feature of any building frontage that is visible from a pedestrian street or
public open space shall be the habitable area with its accompanying windows and
doors. Parking lots, garages, and solid wall facades (e.g., warehouses) shall not
dominate a pedestrian street frontage.
f. Developments shall be designed to encourage informal surveillance of streets and other
public spaces by maximizing sight lines between the buildings and the street.
g. All buildings, of any type, constructed within any TOD district or corridor shall be
constructed with exterior building materials and finishes that are of high quality to
convey permanence and durability.
h.The exterior walls of all building facades along pedestrian routes, including side or
return facades, shall be of suitable durable building materials including the following:
stucco, stone, brick, terra cotta, tile, cedar shakes and shingles, beveled or ship -lap or
other narrow -course horizontal boards or siding, vertical board -and -batten siding,
articulated architectural concrete or concrete masonry units (CMU), or similar materials
which are low maintenance, weather -resistant, abrasion -resistant, and easy to clean.
Prohibited building materials include the following: plain concrete, plain concrete
block, corrugated metal, unarticulated board siding (e.g., T1-11 siding, plain plywood,
sheet pressboard), Exterior Insulated Finish Systems (EIFS), and similar quality,
nondurable materials.
i. All visible building facades along or off a pedestrian route, including side or return
facades, are to be treated as part of the main building elevation and articulated in the
same manner. Continuity of use of the selected approved materials must be used on
these facades.
j. Ground -floor openings in parking structures, except at points of access, must be
covered with grilles, mesh or lattice that obscures at least thirty percent of the interior
view (e.g., at least thirty percent solid material to seventy percent transparency).
99
k. Appropriately scaled architectural detailing, such as but not limited to moldings or
cornices, is encouraged at the roofline of commercial building facades, and where such
detailing is present, should be a minimum of at least eight inches wide.
1. Compatible building designs along a street should be provided through similar massing
(building facade, height and width as well as the space between buildings) and frontage
setbacks.
Finding 17.67.070(D)(1): The fagades for the mixed-use buildings provide architectural detailing and
massing consistent with the requirements of this section. Architectural elements include articulation
along the fagade to break massing, use of faux stone panels at the base of walls and the wall insets and
generous glazing through installation of ample windows and doors. Proposed building materials include
Hardi or allura fiber cement, stained hardi vertical and lap siding and faux stone panels.
Conclusion 17.67.070(D)(1): Consistent.
2. Commercial and High Mix Residential/Commercial.
a. In areas adjacent to the transit station, sidewalks in front of buildings shall be covered
to at least eight feet from building face to provide protection from sun and rain by use
of elements such as: canopies, arcades, or pergolas. Supports for these features shall not
impede pedestrian traffic.
b. Canopies, overhangs, or awnings shall be provided over entrances. Awnings at the
ground level of buildings are encouraged.
c. Awnings within the window bays (either above the main glass or the transom light)
should not obscure or distract from the appearance of significant architectural features.
The color of the awning shall be compatible with its attached building.
d. Ground floor windows shall meet the following criteria:
L Darkly tinted windows and mirrored windows that block two-way visibility are
prohibited as ground floor windows.
ii. On the ground floor, buildings shall incorporate large windows, with multi -pane
windows and transom lights above encouraged.
iii. Ground floor building facades must contain unobscured windows for at least fifty
percent of the wall area and seventy-five percent of the wall length within the
first ten to twelve feet of wall height.
iv. Lower windowsills shall not be more than three feet above grade except where
interior floor levels prohibit such placement, in which case the lower windowsill
shall not be more than a maximum of four feet above the finished exterior grade.
V. Windows shall have vertical emphasis in proportion. Horizontal windows may be
created when a combination of vertical windows are grouped together or when a
horizontal window is divided by mullions.
Finding 17.67.070(D)(2): The proposed mixed-use buildings provide a front fagade to the pedestrian
walkways with a metal awnings, balconies and/or overhangs. The ground floor incorporates large,
unobscured windows with windowsills less than 3 feet from grade..
Conclusion 17.67.070(D)(2): Consistent.
100
I 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.
ii. Residential building elevations facing a pedestrian route shall not consist of
undifferentiated blank walls, but shall be articulated with architectural details such
as windows, dormers, porch details, balconies or bays.
iii. For any exterior wall which is within twenty feet of and facing onto a street or
public open space and which has an unobstructed view of that pedestrian street or
public open space, at least twenty percent of the ground floor wall area shall be
comprised of either display area, windows, or doorways.
iv. Architectural detailing is encouraged to provide variation among attached
units. Architectural detailing includes but is not limited to the following: the use
of different exterior siding materials or trim, shutters, different window types or
sizes, varying roof lines, balconies or porches, and dormers. The overall design
shall recognize that color variation, in and of itself, does not meet the
requirements of this subsection.
v. Fences or hedges in a front yard shall not exceed three feet in height. Side yard
fencing shall not exceed three feet in height between the front building facade and
the street. Fences beyond the front facade of the building in a sideyard or back
yard and along a street, alley, property line, or bike/pedestrian pathway shall not
exceed four feet in height. Fences over four feet in height are not permitted and
hedges or vegetative screens in no case shall exceed six feet in height.
Finding 17.67.070(D)(3): The proposed mixed-use development introduces residential building design
on Golden Peak Drive where it better integrates with adjoining detached single family homes.
Conclusion 17.67.070(D)(3): Consistent.
101
E. Roofs.
1. Commercial and High Mix Residential/Commercial.
a. Roof shapes, surface materials, colors, mechanical equipment and other penthouse
functions should be integrated into the total building design. Roof terraces and gardens
are encouraged.
b. When the commercial structure has a flat parapet roof adjacent to pitched roof
residential structures, stepped parapets are encouraged so the appearance is a gradual
transition of rooflines.
Finding 17.67.070(E)(1): The proposed mixed-use development includes a flat roof design, with a 4'
parapet wall with deck over hang, that is integrated into the building design and follows the articulation
of the building fagade.
Conclusion 17.67.070(E)(1): Consistent.
2. Residential.
a. Flat roofs with a parapet and cornice are allowed for multifamily residences in all
TOD, LMR, MMR and HMR districts, in which the minimum for sloped roofs is 5:12.
b. Flat roofs with a parapet and cornice are allowed for single-family attached and
detached residences (including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, and row
houses) in all TOD residential districts, except the LMR zone.
c. For all residences with sloped roofs, the roof slope shall be at least 5:12, and no more
than 12:12. Eaves shall overhang building walls at a minimum twelve inches deep on all
sides (front, back, sides) of a residential structure.
d. Roof shapes, surface materials, colors, mechanical equipment and other penthouse
functions should be integrated into the total building design. Roof terraces and gardens
are encouraged.
Finding 17.67.070(E)(2): The proposed mixed-use capitalizes on flat roofs with a parapet design.
Conclusion 17.67.070(E)(2): Consistent.
F. Exterior Building Lighting.
1. Commercial and High Mix Residential/Commercial.
a. Lighting of a building fagade shall be designed to complement the architectural design.
Lighting shall not draw inordinate attention to the building.
Primary lights shall address public sidewalks and/or pedestrian plazas adjacent to
the building.
102
b.No exterior lighting shall be permitted above the second floor of buildings for the
purpose of highlighting the presence of the building if doing so would impact adjacent
residential uses.
Finding 17.67.070(F)(1): The location of some on-sitebuilding lighting is shown on the building
elevations but not on the site plan. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to submit a
lighting plan that depicts the location of all proposed on-site lighting that complies with the standards of
this section.
Conclusion 17.67.070(F)(1): Complies as conditioned.
2. Residential.
a, Lighting shall not draw inordinate attention to the building facade.
b. Porch and entry lights are encouraged on all dwellings to create a safe and inviting
pedestrian environment at night.
c. No exterior lighting exceeding one hundred watts per fixture is permitted in any
residential area.
Finding 17.67.070(F)(2): P The proposed development is required to submit a lighting plan that depicts
the location of all proposed on-site lighting that complies with the standards of this section.
does not include residential development.
Conclusion 17.67.070(F)(2): Complies as conditioned.
G. Service Zones.
1. Buildings and sites shall be organized to group the utilitarian functions away from the public
view.
2. Delivery and loading operations, mechanical equipment (HVAC), trash compacting/collection,
and other utility and service functions shall be incorporated into the overall design of the
building(s) and the landscaping.
3. The visual and acoustic impacts of these functions, along with all wall- or ground -mounted
mechanical, electrical and communications equipment, shall be out of view from adjacent
properties and public pedestrian streets.
4. Screening materials and landscape screens shall be architecturally compatible with and not
inferior to the principal materials of the building.
Finding 17.67.070(F)(2): Electrical equipment servicing the buildings will be located along the sides of
the buildings, will be incorporated into the building design and screened from view by the site
landscaping. The trash collection area is screened from view by a 6 -foot tall enclosure and on site
landscaping.
Conclusion 17.67.070(F)(2): Consistent.
103
17.72.020 Applicability
No permit required under Title 15, Buildings and Construction, shall be issued for a major or minor project, as
defined in this section, unless an application for site plan and architectural review is submitted and approved, or
approved with conditions, as set forth in this chapter.
A. Exempt Projects. Except as provided in subsection (13)(3) of this section the following projects do not
require site plan and architectural review:
1. Single-family detached residential structures;
2. Any multiple -family residential project containing three or less units;
3. Landscape plans, fences, when not part of a major project;
4. Storage sheds, patio covers, garages and carports, decks, gazebos, and similar non -occupied
structures used in conjunction with residential uses; and
5. Signs that conform to a previously approved master sign program for the project site.
Exempt projects are required to comply with all applicable development standards of this chapter.
B. Major Projects. The following are "major projects" for the purposes of the site plan and architectural review
process and are subject to Type 2 procedural requirements as set forth in Chapter 17.05, Applications and Types
of Review Procedures:
1. New construction, including private and public projects, that:
a. Includes a new building or building addition of five thousand square feet or more;
b. Includes the construction of a parking lot of ten or more parking spaces; or
c. Requires one or more variances or conditional use permits and, in the judgment of the director,
will have a significant effect upon the aesthetic character of the city or the surrounding area;
2. Any attached residential project that contains four or more units;
3. Any minor project, as defined in subsection C of this section, that the director determines will
significantly alter the character, appearance, or use of a building or site.
C. Minor Projects. Except when determined to be an exempt project or a major project pursuant to subsections A
and B of this section respectively, the following are defined as "minor projects" for the purposes of site plan and
architectural review, and are subject to the Type I procedural requirements of Chapter 17.05, Applications and
Types of Review Procedures:
1. New construction, including private and public projects, that involves a new building or building addition
of less than five thousand square feet;
2. Signs that meet all applicable standards as set forth in Section 17.75.050, Signage standards;
3. Exterior remodeling within the commercial or industrial zoning districts when not part of a major project;
4. Parking lots less than ten parking spaces;
5. Any project relating to the installation of cabinets containing communications service equipment or
facilities owned and operated by a public utility and not subject to Section 17.60.040, Antenna standards;
104
6. Minor changes to the following:
a. Plans that have previously received site plan and architectural review approval;
b. Previously approved planned unit developments;
7. At the discretion of the director any changes to previously approved plans requiring site plan and
architectural review.
As used in this subsection, the term "minor" means a change that is of little visual significance, does not
materially alter the appearance of previously approved improvements, is not proposed for the use of the land in
question, and does not alter the character of the structure involved. At the discretion of the director if it is
determined that the cumulative effect of multiple minor changes would result in a major change, a new
application for site plan and architectural review is required. All minor changes must comply with the
development standards of this chapter.
Finding 17.72.020: The proposed Central Point Station project includes new construction greater than
S, 000 sf, is of significant interest and impact to the City and qualifies as a Major Project. It is being
processed using Type III procedures.
Conclusion 17.72.020. Consistent.
17.72.030 Information Required
Application for site plan and architectural review shall be made to the community development department and
shall be accompanied by the application fee prescribed in the city of Central Point planning department fee
schedule. The application shall be completed, including all information and submittals listed on the official site
plan and architectural review application form.
Finding 17.72.030: The Central Point Station Mixed-use application was reviewed for completeness and
accepted as complete per the notice of completion dated July 2, 2020.
Conclusion 17.72.030: Consistent.
17.72.040 Site Plan and Architectural Standards
In approving, conditionally approving or denying any site plan and architectural review application, the approving
authority shall base its decision on compliance with the following standards:
A. Applicable site plan, landscaping and architectural design standards as set forth in Chapter 17.75,
Design and Development Standards.
Finding I7.72.040(A): The project is located within the TOD District. Design and development
standards for projects in the TOD District and Corridor are in Chapter 17.67 of the CPMC. The proposal
has been reviewed against applicable criteria and found to comply.
Conclusion 17.72.040(A): Consistent.
B. City of Central Point Department of Public Works Department Standard Specifications and Uniform
Standard Details for Public Works Construction.
Finding 17.72.040(B): The Parks & Public Works Department reviewed the application for compliance
with the Standard Specifications and Uniform Standards Details for Public Works Construction. The
Public Works Department has not recommended any conditions of approval.
Conclusion 17.72.040(B): Complies.
105
C. Accessibility and sufficiency of firefighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for the
reasonable safety of life, limb and property, including, but not limited to suitable gates, access roads
and fire lanes so that all buildings on the premises are accessible to fire apparatus.
Finding I7.72.040(B): Fire District 43 evaluated the proposal and determined that adequate water
supply and access are sufficient, provided that additional review will occur at the buildingplan submittal.
Aerial apparatus access is required for the 4 story building but road right of way is sufficient. The
applicant may be required to provide I or 2 internal hydrants based upon file flow requirements. A
single FDC (Fire Department Connection) for the complex would be desirable in a mutually agreed to
location.
Conclusion 17.72.040(B): Complies as conditioned.
PART 3
SUMMARY CONCLUSION
As evidenced in findings and conclusions, the proposed Central Point Station mixed-use site plan and
architectural plan is consistent with applicable standards and criteria in the Central Point Municipal
Code as conditioned.
106
ATTACHMENT,, L "
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 881
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
APPLICATION FOR CENTRAL POINT STATION, A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THE TWIN CREEKS TOD MASTER PLAN AREA AND HIGH MIX
RESIDENTIAL ZONE
(FILE NO. SPAR -20008)
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a site plan and architectural review application to develop a
2.19 acre site within the HMR, High Mix Residential zone with 5 buildings consisting of 6,132 square
feet of commercial space, 10 VRBO spaces and 56 residential units, site landscaping and parking lot
improvements; and,
WHEREAS, on August 4, 2020, the City of Central Point Planning Commission conducted a duly -
noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the Staff Report and heard
testimony and comments on the application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards
and criteria applicable to the TOD-HMR, High Mix Residential section 17.65, Application Review
Process section 17.66 and Design Standards — TOD District section 17.67, Site Plan and Architectural
Review section 17.72 of the Central Point Municipal code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that VRBOs are classified as Other Traveler
Accommodation per NAICS, Sector 72119 providing short-term lodging and a use that is more
commercial and appropriate to the HMR zoning district; and
WHEREAS, after duly considering the proposed use, it is the Planning Commission's determination
that, subject to compliance with conditions as set forth in the Staff Report (Exhibit "A") dated August
4, 2020, the application does comply with applicable standards and criteria for approval of the site
plan and architecture.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by
this Resolution No. 881, does hereby approve the Site Plan and Architectural Review application for
Central Point Station at Twin Creeks as per conditions in the Staff Report dated August 4, 2020
(Exhibit "A").
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 4"' day
of August, 2020.
ATTEST:
City Representative
Planning Commission Chair
Planning Commission Resolution No. 881 (8/4/2020)
107