HomeMy WebLinkAbout04132021 CAC PacketIf
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Tuesday, April 13, 2021 - 6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers @ Central Point City Hall
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALLANTRODUCTIONS
David Painter (chair) Cinda Harmes, Robin Stroh, Carrie Reed, Mike House, John Eaton
III. MINUTES
Review and approval of October 13, 2020 minutes
IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
V. BUSINESS
VI. DISCUSSION
A. Residential Zoning Code Amendments. Discuss text amendments to residential
zoning districts to increase density consistent with the minimum average density,
allow duplexes in single family zones, and eliminate barriers to housing.
B. Floodplain Regulations Code Amendments. Discuss text amendments to the flood
damage prevention regulations to comply with National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) standards and the Community Rating System (CRS) program
requirements.
C. Discussion regarding standards and regulations for Mobile Food Vendors and
other vending units, such as food trucks, trailers and carts within the City of
Central Point.
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Community Development Update
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
1
City of Central Point
Citizens Advisory Committee Minutes
October 13, 2020
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Present were: David Painter (chair), Cameron Noble, Carrie Reed, Cinda Harmes
and Mike House.
Also in attendance were: "Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director,
Stephanie Holtey, Principal Planner, Justin Gindlesperger, Community Planner and Karin
Skelton, Planning Secretary.
III. MINUTES Cinda Harmes made a motion to approve the minutes of the August 11,
2020 Citizen's Advisory Committee meeting. Mike House seconded the motion. All
members said "aye". Motion passed.
IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
No public appearances
V. BUSINESS
A. Consideration of City of Central Point Hazard Mitigation Plan. Applicant:
City of Central Point.
Chair David Painter asked if anyone objected to reversing the order of the Business items.
There were no objections.
Mr. Painter read a statement outlining the duties and responsibilities of the Citizens Advisory
Committee along with the procedures for the public meeting.
Principal Planner Stephanie Holtey gave an overview of the Urban Growth Boundary
Amendment (UGBA) saying the purpose was to set aside a 20 year supply of land that can
be brought into the City to provide for housing, non -industrial employment parks and open
space and associated public facility uses. She reviewed the process and requirements that
have gone into the preparation of the UGB Amendment. She added this is the first meeting
since the IJGB Amendment was submitted to the County.
2
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 2
Ms. Holtey explained some terminology and common misconceptions regarding the UGB
Amendment, stating it does not automatically bring land into the City limits. Rather, the
land will retain the county zoning until such time as a landowner annexes into the City. She
added the City does not force annexation.
She explained general land use designations stating it has been a long and involved processes
to identify the Urban Reserve Areas and the current conceptual plans for each. There will
be a transfer of jurisdiction of 4 streets from the County to the City. She said there had been
extensive public involvement in each step of the process. Specific park locations will be
identified as a function of the development process.
Ms. Holtey said that through discussions with the County there has been a policy proposed
to limit the minimum lot size of land divisions to no less than 40 acres. This will insure there
will be larger parcels available for future development.
She briefly outlined the approval criteria for the state, the county and the city. She said the
details are in the findings of fact and conclusions of law and can be viewed on the City's
website. She explained the considerations given to the impacts of development and the
extensive process which will be required to annex and develop lands, adding there will be
plenty of opportunities for public input.
She referenced the letters received and included in the packet. She stated staff has received
a petition in opposition to the construction of a park in the Boes Subdivision on City owned
open space lands. The Public Works Director has indicated the land is City owned and there
are advantages to bringing that in and developing there.
Mr. Painter asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this
application.
Mr. Humphrey said there were a number of statements from people online, stating he would
read them and respond.
Comment: As a resident of the Boes subdivision I am opposed to a city park in our
neighborhood. A park in this neighborhood will only promote transient activity in this area
worse than it already is.
Mr. Humphrey: There are a couple of people agreeing online.
Comment: We have a group of neighbors at our house and would like to make sure you
acknowledge that you have received our petition. Everyone disapproves of the park.
Mr. Humphrey acknowledged the receipt of the petition and stated the City is not advocating
the creation of a park with the UGB Amendment. This application is simply expanding the
area the City can grow into in the future.
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 3
Comment: I did not see that the TIA included the Pine/Haskell intersection which is already
backed up at times and especially when school is in session. What will be the assurance that
the housing that is being built will be affordable to Rogue Valley Residents rather than
wealthy people from other areas?
Mr. Humphrey responded that to his knowledge, the TIA did include the Pine/Haskell
intersection. There have been some traffic improvements with the construction of the
railroad crossing in Twin Creeks. Ms. Holtey agreed the Pine/Haskell intersection was
evaluated and was not found to be problematic with the opening of the railroad crossing and
the planned extension of South Haskell to Beall.
Comment: Will any traffic issues and potential mitigation be considered at the time of
rezoning specific properties. Mr. Humphrey stated when any property annexed into the city
the traffic impact would be evaluated.
Comment: If Boes Park is not built does that add open space acres that can be used
somewhere else. Mr. Humphrey gave an overview of the development of Twin Creeks and
the open space development. He said it is likely that if the City does not pursue construction
of a park it may simply remain open space.
Ms. Holley said the Parks Element identifies Boes Park as private core parkland. If the City
does not develop Boes Park in response to the question, the City might be able to add that
amount of land to be developed as a park somewhere else. The UGB application is based on
the information in the Parks Element which identifies Boes Park as core parkland. Also due
to the recent fire there may well be discussions regarding how we manage lands along the
Greenway. According to the Public Work Director there are no plans at this time to develop
the park.
Mr. Humphrey said Matt Samitore has just texted him to say Boes Park has to be open space.
It was purchased with specific money for the Bear Creek Greenway and has to always be
open space or a park.
This was the end of the online comments.
Lar Martin 2673Ta lvr [td,
Mr. Martin said he is one member of four property owners who have been attending meetings
regarding the UGB amendment since 2007. They are pleased with the work the City has
done. He stated all the lands included in the UGB Amendment were from Urban Reserve
Areas. There had been lot of public input both in the creation of the URA's and also in the
creation of the Concept Plans. He said he was in favor of the UGB amendment and looked
forward to the growth of Central Point.
Mussell Kockx 4149 Grant Rd.
Mr. Kockx said he also was in favor of the UGB Amendment.
11
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 4
Public portion of the meeting was closed
Mike House made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation of the UGB Amendment
to the Planning Commission, Cinda Harm seconded the motion. All members said "aye".
Motion passed.
B. Consideration of a proposal to amend the Central point Comprehensive Plan
adding roughly 444 gross acres needed to absorb growth in housing,
employment and parks and open space during the 2019 — 2039 planning
period. Applicant City of Central Point. File No. CPA —19001
Community Planner Justin Gindlesperger said the City is subject a variety of natural hazards
such as winter storms, floods and increasing incidence of wildfires. Hazard mitigation
planning is important in order to understand the characteristics of potential hazards, risks to
people, buildings, infrastructure and property and to identify what actions can be taken to
lessen exposure to these risks before an event occurs, creating a resilient and resistant
community.
He explained the Hazard Mitigation Plan is updated every 5 years in order to be eligible for
FEMA non -emergency disaster funding. The last update was 2011. Additionally the City
participates in the Community Rating System which allows it to obtain discounts for flood
insurance for our citizens.
He reviewed the updates in the plan and how they met FEMA's requirements
He said the process of identifying hazards and rating them as high, medium and low risk is
an ongoing process as the City continues to grow. Additionally there has been an increase
in urban wildfires and changes in stakeholders which affect the planning process and risk
assessment. Mr. Gindlesperger explained the mitigation strategies for fire, winter storms
floods and earthquakes. He said the next steps included this Public hearing with the Citizen's
Advisory Committee, and public hearings with the Planning Committee and the City Council
for final adoption.
The Committee discussed the recent fire along the Greenway and possible mitigation
strategies. They discussed the Fire District preparedness and keeping residents informed and
aware of potential hazards. They discussed evacuation routes, water supply, and smoke as a
secondary hazard.
Mr. Gindlesperger stated there were multiple avenues for public information such as the
City's newsletter, the website and public hearings. He said the Parks Department would be
getting involved in helping restore the Greenway in a way that would mitigate damages from
fires in the future.
Ms. Holtey said she had received a message from the Public Works director. He said our City
has a different water set up than Phoenix. We have three master meters rather than one, and
5
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page S
three reservoirs. Additionally there is a main shut off valve for utilities installed when new
subdivisions are developed.
Russell Kockx 4401 Grant Rd.
Mr. Kockx stated the air quality in the valley has historically had problems due to the mills
and the smudge pots in the orchards. He also asked how often the Fire Department checks
the hydrants.
Ms. Holtey responded the public works director messaged her saying they check them 4
times per year.
Mike Parsons 555 Freeman Rd
Mr. Parsons stated he is a member of the City Council but was speaking as a private citizen.
He said the mobile home park where he lives has had three evacuations in the past 3 years.
All 3 were fires on the other side of the freeway. Their biggest fear was fires crossing the
freeway to their community. On Sept 9h there was a great response to the fire. There were
3 helicopters dropping water, and police response, fire department response and public works
response were commendable. That response was credited with keeping the fire from jumping
the freeway to their community. He felt addressing the brush, trees and fuel along the
Greenway was a most important element to help mitigate fire threat to the residents along
the freeway.
Cinda Harmes made a motion to make a favorable recommendation of the NHMP to the
Planning Commission. Mike House seconded the motion. All members said "aye". Motion
passed.
VI. DISCUSSION
Planning Update
• Providence is putting 14 RV's on a lot on South 99 for impacted employees.
r Tom is working with the County to facilitate transitional housing for those
impacted by the fire
• The Reed Building is progressing
• Dominos on Freeman Ct. is continuing construction
• The Nelson Building on Freeman and Bigham will be obtaining permits soon
• There will be a car wash and oil change on Table Rack and Pine St.
• There will be a new retail/office building on Biddle by the Vet Clinic
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 6
• Les Schwab will be constructing their building on Biddle also
• There is a chiropractic office being built behind the Umpqua Bank on Biddle
• There is new interest in the White hawk development
■ The City is in negotiations to purchase property to put Haskell Street through to
Beall
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Carrie Reed made a motion to adjourn. Mike House seconded the motion. All
members said "aye". The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
The foregoing minutes of the October 13, 2020 Citizens Advisory Committee were
approved by the Citizens Advisory Committee at its meeting of April 13, 2021.
Chairman
RESIDENTIAL CODE AMENDMENTS
MEMORANDUM
CENTRAL
POINT
To: Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC)
From: Stephanie Holtey, Planning Director
Re: Residential Code Amendments Discussion
Planning Department
Tom Humphrey, AICP,
Community Development Director
April 13, 2021
In December 2021, the City Council approved the City's first Housing Implementation Plan (HIP)
(Enclosed). The HIP sets forth the City's 5 -year strategy for increasing housing supply and
affordability. It includes short-term and long-term projects that address a variety of issues that
affect the housing situation in Central Point. Since adoption of the HIP, the City has completed
an update to its Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations and is in the process of amending
its Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to increase its residential land supply. At this time, the City is
starting the process of amending its residential zoning districts to add new housing types,
increase residential densities and eliminate identified barriers to housing construction.
New Housing Types
The City is required to allow duplexes in zoning districts that allow construction of single-family
detached housing. This requirement was enacted by the State with passage of House Bill (HB)
2001 in 2019 to increase housing supply in already developed neighborhoods. Although the City
may have clear and objective standards for siting and design for duplexes and single family
dwellings, the City may not increasing off-street parking. Additionally HB 2001 limits maximum
setbacks and specifies that a duplex may be created on a lot even if doing so would exceed the
City's existing maximum density standard. The critical question for discussion at this time is
what design and development standards may be appropriate to promote neighborhood
compatibility.
Cottage cluster housing is not a required housing type for Central Point per HB 2001, but the
HIP directs the staff to prepare code amendments to allow cottage clusters in low and medium
density zoning districts. At the meeting, staff will present an overview of cottage cluster housing
and request feedback from the CAC regarding any specific considerations the City staff should
take into consideration when preparing code amendments.
Minimum Average Density
Before lands in the newly UGB expansion areas can be annexed, the City is required to
increase its minimum density requirements provide a minimum average density of 7.04 units per
acre from now until 2040. The result of this change will be smaller lot sizes and more housing
required throughout the City. As we make these changes, it would be beneficial to start
exploring design and development standards that can foster creation of neighborhoods that are
attractive and reflect the community's preferred vision for its future.
Regulatory Barriers to Housing
There are some standards in the current residential zoning districts that limit feasibility of high
density residential development projects. For example, in the Residential Multifamily (R-3) zone,
the maximum lot coverage for structures is limited to 50% of the lot area. At the same time,
building height is limited to 35 -ft effectively limiting construction to no more than three (3)
stories. During a code audit, it was recommended that the City increase lot coverage to 60%-
75% and allow for four (4) story construction by limiting building height to 45 -ft. One objective of
the code amendments is to address these standards to increase feasibility of housing projects in
the city that align with the intent and purpose of the zoning district its located in.
There are several factors that are influencing the current housing situation. The proposed code
amendments will not resolve all of the issues that affect supply and affordability, but they do aim
to address outdated standards needed to help improve the housing situation.
At the April 131h CAC meeting, City staff will present an overview of the code standards
contemplated for changes and request feedback from CAC members and the community. At the
conclusion of the meeting, staff is looking for a recommendation to proceed with preparing the
amendments for consideration by the Planning Commission.
Enclosure:
Housing Implementation Plan
10
1•
CENTRAL
POINT
Housing Implementation
Plan
Housing Strategy 2019-2024
1' iii al Draft
City Council Resolution No. 1560
12/13/2018
11
[This page intentionally left blank]
12
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary......................................................................................................................................4
1 Introduction...........................................................................................................................................
6
1.1 Regional Housing Strategy........................................................................................................... 6
1.1.1 Regional Housing Principles.............. ....................... .................... .................... ................... 6
1.1.2 Housing Affordability, Defined............................................................................................ 7
1.2 Housing Element...........................................................................................................................7
2 Current Housing Programs..................................................................................................................10
3 Central Point Housing Strategy ............ ..:............................................................... .............................
l l
3.1 Planning Process.........................................................................................................................11
3.2 Short Term Actions.....................................................................................................................12
3.2.1 Prepare and Adopt Residential Code Amendments..... ..................... . ..... __ ............... ...
12
3.2.2 Evaluate Residential Infill Barriers in High and Medium Density Zones in the Central
Business District ....................................................13
.............................................................................
3.2.3 Regulate and Enforce Transient Lodging Tax for Short-term Rentals . ..............................
13
3.2.4 Amend the UGB and Designate Land Use and Zoning based on Adopted Concept Plans as
aGeneral Land Use Guide.........................................................................•.....................................14
3.2.5 Continue Supporting Low-Income and Homeless Populations through Partner
Organizations.......................::..:..........................................................................................................14
3.2.6 Evaluate the City's Vertical Housing Program...................................................................15
3.2.7 Monitor Buildable Lands.......................................................... ............. .............. .
..... ..... ....
15
3.2.8 Monitor Regional Plan Compliance....................................................................................
l6
3.3 Long-Term Actions..................................................................................................................16
3.3.1 Evaluate Feasibility of a Multiple Unit Limited Tax Exemption Program .........................16
3.3.2 Consider a Tiny House/Micro Housing Ordinance.............................................................17
3.3.3 Evaluate Flood Risk/Insurance Requirements on Housing Affordability ...........................17
3.3.4 Evaluate Single -Family Housing Rehabilitation Grant/Loan Program ...............................
18
3.3.5 Promote Affordable Housing Services and Support Offered by the City and Other
Organizations......................................................................................................................................18
3.3.6 Develop a SDC Discount/Waiver Program as a Gap Financing Tool to Support Qualified
AffordableHousing Projects...............................................................................................................18
4 Reporting and Cycle Updates ................................................ ..,........................ ..................................
19
2
13
[This page intentionally left blank]
14
Executive Summary
Since the Great Recession, lack of suitable housing and affordability has been a major concern affecting
Central Point and the region. Although housing affordability is expected to improve and decline as a
function of the economy, it is a significant issue that needs to be monitored and addressed. To that end,
the Regional Plan and Housing Elements establish a framework for accomplishing this in the form of a
Housing Implementation Plan (HIP). The HIP sets forth the City's preferred housing program with
actions to be evaluated, developed, implemented, and monitored on a 5 -year cycle. It doesn't attempt to
solve any housing affordability concerns in and of itself but provides qualitative and quantitative success
indicators for actions included in the HIP.
The HIP was prepared in collaboration with regional partners and based on input from the public and
decision makers. A summary of the City's short- action plan is provided in Table 1 below. Performance
measures are detailed in Sections 3.2.
Table
1. Central
-. -.y (2i i
No.
Priori
Action Description
Prepare and adopt residential code amendments to streamline code requirements and
3.2.1
High
improve accessibility, increase minimum densities consistent with the Housing
Element, eliminate barriers to multifamily housing and add new housing types.
3.2.2
High
Evaluate barriers and challenges to residential infill projects in the High Mix
Residential (HMR) zone in the Central Business District and identify possible solution
to minimize or eliminate those barriers.
3.2.3
High
Consider amendments to the transient lodging tax regulations to track and enforce
requirements for short-term rentals, such as VRBO, AirBnB, etc.
3.2.4
High
Amend the UGB and designate land use consistent with the adopted Concept Plans as
a general land use guide.
3.2.5
High
Continue supporting low- and moderate -income households through direct
contributions to partner agencies that provide services and financial support, such as
ACCESS, Habitat for Humanity, St. Vincent de Paul, Meals on Wheels, etc.
3.3.6
High
Evaluate the City's Vertical Housing Tax Exemption Program to identify barriers to
its use and explore changes to promote its success in the City, including expanding the
area of applicability.
Continue Monitoring Buildable Lands using the City's Buildable Lands Inventory
3.2.7
High
(BLI) database and update every 5 years.
3.2.8
High
Monitor Regional Plan Compliance using the BLI to show that average residential
density in areas newly added to the UGB average 6.9 units per acre (gross), and that
the percentage of dwelling units within or near activity centers complies with
benchmarks for mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas.
15
Long-term actions are not intended for immediate implementation and have been selected to provide a
reference for future amendments to the HIP. Long-term actions are listed in Table 2 and performance
measures are set forth in Section 3.3.
TablePoint's
No.
Priority
Action Descri don
3.3.1
Moderate
Explore the feasibility of establishing a Multiple Unit Tax Exemption program in
Central Point to incentivize multifamily housing. Based on findings and direction
from the Planning Commission and/or City Council, design a program that will
maximize the scale of impact and produce positive results for Central Point.
3.3.2
Moderate
Consider a tiny house/micro housing ordinance to allow `tiny homes' and/or micro
housing outside cottage housing developments.
3.3.3
Moderate
Evaluate flood risk/insurance requirements on housing affordability in the City's High
Risk Floodplains. Identify possible mitigation measures and incorporate into the
City's Hazard Mitigation Plan and Comprehensive Plan.
Low
i3.3.4 Fvaltiate the feasibility of establishing a single-fkmily housing rehabilitation
loan/grant program outside the Urban Renewal Area based on the observed success of
Urban Renewal's Single Family Rehabilitation Program.
3.3.5
Low
Develop a list of agencies and programs that offer financial support and services to
low- and middle-income households and promote online, in the City's newsletter
and/or other outreach platforms.
3.3.6
Low l
Develop a SDC Discount/Waiver Program that can be used to provide gap funding for
affordable housing projects funded and managed by federal and/or non-profit agencies
that guarantee affordability for low- income families over the life a project.
Given the cyclical nature of housing needs and affordability issues, adjustments to the City's 5 -year
action plan is expected. Adjustments will reflect Central Point's housing needs, community conditions
and lessons learned through implementation and monitoring.
16
I Introduction
Housing supply and affordability have been a major concern for the City particularly since the Great
Recession. The Housing Element identifies this concern and acknowledges that it is an issue that needs
further analysis and consistent targeted action. For that reason, it establishes goals and policies that direct
the City to develop a Housing Implementation Plan (HIP), a formal program to address housing concerns
in the community over the short- and long-term.
The Housing Element recognizes the importance of regional collaboration to address growth management
and housing affordability by establishing goals and policies to comply with the Greater Bear Creek Valley
Regional Plan ("Regional Plan"). The Regional Plan was prepared in collaboration with Jackson County
and the cities of Medford, Eagle Point, Phoenix, Talent, and Ashland, and adopted by the City as the
Regional Plan Element. It establishes a 50 -year land supply in urban reserves and requires compliance
with performance indicators relative to minimum residential densities, land use, transportation planning,
and regional housing strategy development.
The HIP is intended to be a living document that implements the goals and policies in the Housing and
Regional Plan Elements relative to housing.
1.1 Regional Housing Strategy
The Regional Plan requires that RPS communities adopt a regional housing strategy that provides
opportunities for a diverse range of housing types. DLCD facilitated collaboration among the
RPS communities by hiring ECOINW to develop regional housing strategy principles and an
affordable housing toolkit to guide development of local plans. The objective at the outset was to
provide a regional framework for addressing local housing concerns while allowing communities
flexibility to adopt action plans that are appropriate to local housing needs, community values and
capabilities.
1.1.1 Regional Housing Principles
The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) hired ECOINW in
partnership with the RPS communities to facilitate development of a regional housing
strategy for each city based on regional housing principles. The regional housing principles
describe the desired outcome of the regional housing strategy without prescribing specific
programs that each community should adopt. The objective is to provide flexibility for each
city to craft a program that best suits its needs and aligns with its values within the
parameters of the regional principles. The regional housing principles are:
• Plan for residential growth in urban reserve areas (URAs) consistent with the
committed residential density requirements in the Regional Plan.
• Identify opportunities for increasing land use efficiency within the existing urban
growth boundary (UGB).
■ Provide opportunities for development of a range of housing types with special
attention to missing middle housing types and other multifamily housing types.
' RI'S Regional Housing Strategy Principles. Beth Goodman, ECONorthwest. (2018).
17
■ Accommodate medium and high density housing within the existing UGB and
close to transit to the extent feasible.
• Work with a common definition of affordable housing based on income and
affordable housing costs.
• Evaluate and identify opportunities and policy tools to support development of
low-income housing.
• Evaluate and identify opportunities and policy tools to support development of
middle-income affordable housing.
1.1.2 Housing Affordability, Defined
According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), families paying
more than 30% of their income for housing are cost burdened and may have difficulty
affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.Z In Central
Point, 54% of renters and 37% of owners are paying more than 30% of family income on
housing costs underscoring the importance of this HIP to guide actions that help provide
more stable, affordable housing in Central Point.
For the purpose of this HIP, affordable housing is divided into two (2) subcategories based
on income: 1) low-income affordable housing for households earning less than 60% of the
area Median Family Income; and 2) middle-income affordable housing for households
earning between 60% and 120% of the area Median Family Income'.
In 2018 the Jackson County Median Family Income was $58,900, which is an average
income of $4,908 per month. Table 3 provides a breakdown of median family income
relative to affordable housing cost for the low and middle income categories.
Low-income
Affordable Housing
Middle-income
Affordable Housing
Percent of Median
Family Income
Very Low Income
0%-30%
Low Income 30% -
60%
Lower Middle
Income: 60% - 80%
Upper Middle
Income: 80% - 120%
Monthly Median Affordable Monthly
Family llncome I Housing Costs
Up to $1,473 Up to $442
$1,472 to $2,945 $442 to $884
$2,945 to $3927 ! $884 to $1,178
$3,927 to $5890 l+ $1,178 to $1,767
1.2 Housing Element
The Housing Element establishes goals and policies that provide the framework for housing
programs in the City based on an analysis of housing needs over a 20 -year period ¢. The most
'Department of Housing and Urban Development. Affordable Housing (2018).
' RPS Regional Housing Strategy Principles. Beth Goodman, ECONorthwest. (2018).
'Central Point Comprehensive Plan: Housing Element. City of Central Point (2017).
7
18
significant are goals and polices that direct creation of the HIP and describe how it will be used to
address housing needs through planning, implementation and monitoring activities.
Success of the HIP will be evident in how well actions implemented achieve the goals and
policies in the Housing Element, which are provided below for reference. In the event the
Housing Element goals and policies are amended resulting in a conflict with those listed below,
those listed in the Housing Element shall apply.
Goal 1. To provide an adequate supply of housing to meet the diverse needs of the City's current
and projected households.
Policy 1.1 Continue to support new residential development at minimum residential
densities.
Policy 1.2 Develop and maintain a Housing Implementation Plan (HIP) that is
regularly updated based on current demographic and housing market
conditions.
Policy 1.3 Provide and maintain an efficient and consistent development review
process,
Policy 1.4 Work with regional partners to develop and implement measure that
reduce upfront housing development costs.
Policy 1.5 Support UGB expansions and annexations that can be efficiently
provided with urban services and that will, in a timely manner, meet the
City's housing needs.
Policy 1.6 When properly mitigated support higher density residential development
within the Downtown and older surrounding residential areas,
capitalizing on availability of existing infrastructure and supporting
revitalization of the City's core area.
Goal 2_ To encourage the development and preservation of fair and affordable housing.
Policy 2.1
As part of the HIP research and obtain local, state, and federal financial
resources and incentives that support the development and preservation
of affordable housing.
Policy 2.2
Through the HIP explore and promote programs and incentives that
support new affordable housing.
Policy 2.3
Support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan's
program addressing regional housing strategies, particularly as they
apply to affordable housing
Policy 2.4
As part of the HIP support regional efforts addressing homelessness and
housing, medical and social services to special need households.
Goal 3. To maintain a timely supply of vacant residential acres sufficient to accommodate
19
development of new housing to serve the City's projected population.
Policy 3.1
Provide a sufficient inventory of residential planned and zoned vacant
land to meet projected demand in terms of density, tenure, unit size,
accessibility, and cost.
Policy 3.2
Throughout the 2017-2036 planning period the City's new vacant
residential land use mix shall support an average density of not less than
6.9 dwelling units per gross acre.
Policy 3.3
Update the Housing Element's vacant acreage needs every four -years
consistent with the PSU Population Research Centers population update.
Policy 3.4
To avoid speculation the City shall, when expanding the UGB establish
procedures that give priority to lands that will be developed in a timely
manner.
Goal 4. To ensure that a variety of housing will be provided in the City in terms of location, type,
price and tenure, according to the projected needs of the population.
Policy 4.1 Residential land use designations on the General Land Use Plan and the
Zoning Map shall be compliant with the residential land use needs
identified in the Housing Element.
Policy 4.2 Based on the findings of the HIP incentivize housing types that are
needed but not being provided in adequate numbers by the market forces.
Policy 4.3 In larger residential developments encourage a mix of densities and
housing types to accommodate a variety of households based on age and
income levels.
Policy 4.4 Support programs that encourage the ability of older residents to age in
place by making existing housing more age friendly and accessible.
Goal 5. To ensure that municipal development procedures and standards are not unreasonable
impediments to the provision of affordable housing.
Policy 5.1 As part of a HIP periodically evaluate development procedures and
standards for compliance with the goals of this Housing Element and
modify as appropriate.
Goal 6. To develop and maintain a HIP that includes programs that monitor and address the
housing affordability needs of the City's low- and moderate -income households.
Policy 6.1 Support collaborative partnerships with non-profit organizations,
affordable housing builders, and for-profit developers to gain greater
access to various sources of affordable housing funds.
Policy 6.2 Support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan's
program addressing regional housing strategies.
20
Policy 6.3 Address the special housing needs of seniors through the provision of
affordable housing and housing related services.
Goal 7. To assure that residential development standards encourage and support attractive and
healthy neighborhoods.
Policy 7.1 Encourage quality site and architectural design throughout the City that
2 Current Housing Programs
Prior to 2018 the City did not have a formal housing program; however, through the City Council and
Community Development Department the City has either directly or indirectly supported housing goals or
needs. The following summarizes prior housing initiatives, but is not intended to be exhaustive:
• Zoning standards:
o Allow a variety of housing types, especially in the Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
District and Corridor;
o Performance zoning in conventional medium and high density zones allows applicants to
apply more flexible TOD land use and site dimension standards (i.e. setbacks, lot
coverage, parking ratios) in exchange for TOD building designs.
o The City is responsive to feedback regarding development constraints and regularly
reviews and updates its zoning code requirements to eliminate barriers to good residential
and economic development. Examples of this include allowing performance zoning,
establishing minimum densities in 2006, and adjusting design standards to provide for
functional and attractive developments desired by the community.
• Central Point Planning Approach. Efficient land use application review process and proactive,
solution -oriented approach to identifying and resolving issues can reduce time cost associated
10
21
acknowledges neighborhood character, provides balanced connectivity
(multi -modal), and integrates recreational and open space opportunities.
Policy 7.2
Provide flexible development standards for projects that exceed
minimum standards for natural resource protection, open space, public
gathering places, and energy efficiency.
Policy 7.3
Where appropriate encourage mixed uses at the neighborhood level that
enhance the character and function of the neighborhood and reduce
impacts on the City's transportation system.
Policy 7.4
Support minimum parking standards for multiple family development
served by public transit.
Policy 7.5
Maintain and enforce Chapter 17.71 Agricultural Mitigation ensuring
that all new residential development along the periphery of the Urban
Growth Boundary includes an adequate buffer between the urban uses
and abutting agricultural uses on lands zoned Exclusive Farm Use
(EFU).
2 Current Housing Programs
Prior to 2018 the City did not have a formal housing program; however, through the City Council and
Community Development Department the City has either directly or indirectly supported housing goals or
needs. The following summarizes prior housing initiatives, but is not intended to be exhaustive:
• Zoning standards:
o Allow a variety of housing types, especially in the Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
District and Corridor;
o Performance zoning in conventional medium and high density zones allows applicants to
apply more flexible TOD land use and site dimension standards (i.e. setbacks, lot
coverage, parking ratios) in exchange for TOD building designs.
o The City is responsive to feedback regarding development constraints and regularly
reviews and updates its zoning code requirements to eliminate barriers to good residential
and economic development. Examples of this include allowing performance zoning,
establishing minimum densities in 2006, and adjusting design standards to provide for
functional and attractive developments desired by the community.
• Central Point Planning Approach. Efficient land use application review process and proactive,
solution -oriented approach to identifying and resolving issues can reduce time cost associated
10
21
with entitlements and produce better results for the community.
Partnerships. The City maintains communication with partners in affordable housing, such as the
Jackson County Housing Authority. Although funds are not directly budgeted for direct
contribution to offset project costs, the City has historically collaborated to assure land is planned
and zoned to support needed affordable housing projects near schools and transit areas.
• Direct Contributions.
The City Council provides direct contributions to partners that provide housing assistance
and services to homeless and low-income residents in the community, including:
ACCESS, Habitat for Humanity, St. Vincent de Paul, and Meals on Wheels.
The City offers discounts on water bills for qualified low-income households.
The City has provided transitional housing assistance to keep at least one family off the
street until stable income and housing could be secured.
3 Central Point Housing Strategy
The Central Point IIIP prioritizes actions or programs designed to eliminate barriers to housing
development, reduce upfront development costs, and support development of affordable housing units in
the city. The strategy includes actions that fall into one of four categories: 1) regulatory reforms, 2)
affordable housing incentives, 3) affordable housing funding, and 3) monitoring. These are further
divided into short- and long-term actions.
3.1 Planning Process
Based on recommendations from
ECOINW, the City presented a wide
array of housing options to the
Citizen's Advisory Committee,
Planning Commission and City
Council for consideration in the
Spring, Summer, and Fall 20185.
These were evaluated based on
community values and perceived
effectiveness and importance of each
action to improve housing supply
and affordability. Figure 1 illustrates
Adopt the HIP
& 5- Year
strategy
t
t'
ISI
the HIP planning process. As shown,
Figure 1 Housing Implementation Cycle
actions are identified, evaluated,
prioritized, developed and implemented to improve housing in the city as part of a continuous
planning process. Monitoring programs will build on the Buildable Lands Inventory system
already in place to track residential land supply, land use efficiency, and housing characteristics
fundamental to advancing the goals and policies of the Housing and Regional Plan Elements.
5 Central Point T -Lousing Strategy: Draft Strategy, Beth Goodman, ECONorthwest. (2017).
11
22
3.2 Short Term Actions
Based on input and direction from citizens and decision makers, the City has established a short-
term housing strategy (Table 2). These actions are considered a high priority and foundational to
establishing a successful housing program. Consequently the short-term projects are planned for
completion within the first 5 -year reporting cycle.
3.2.1 Prepare and Adopt Residential Code Amendments.
Priority High
Background The City's Zoning Code is in Title 17 of the Central Point Municipal
Code (CPMC). Residential land use and zoning standards are provided
in multiple chapters for conventional and TOD zones and includes
separate chapters for parking, design, and development. This makes it
difficult to find all relevant approval criteria for a project, which can
discourage and add planning cost to projects.
Some code standards are out of date and pose barriers to residential
development. A recent code audit by ECOJNW found barriers to
multifamily development in the R-3, Multifamily Zone (i.e. building height
and lot coverage limits). Additionally Missing Middle Housing is not
clearly addressed and in some cases not permitted.
Action Consolidate the City's residential standards into 1-2 chapters. Consider
the following changes:
• Increase minimum residential densities consistent with the
Housing and Regional Plan Elements;
• Adjust dimensional standards in the R-3 zone to eliminate barriers
to maximizing density:
1) Increase building height from 35 -ft to 45 -ft to allow 4 stories;
2) increase maximum lot coverage from 50% to 60-75% to
increase building area allowed on a site while stilt providing
adequate land for off-street parking and landscaping; and,
3) Consider adding a buffer between buildings on R-3 lots and
those in the R-1, R-2 and LMR zones.
Amend ADU standards to comply with SB 1051, increase size of
ADU from 35% to 50% or 800 s.f., whichever is less.
• Add Cottage Housing as a permitted housing type in the R-1. R-2,
and LMR zones with a density bonus of 1.5.
■ Consider allowing Missing Middle Housing types within the R-1
zone, such as corner duplexes, interior divisions that increase
density but look like single family dwellings.
Goals & Housing Element: 1.1, 1.3, 4.1, 5.1,7.1-, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4
Policies Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5, 4.1.6
Performance • Adopt residential code amendments.
Measures • Increase gross density in the current UGB.
a Achieve gross density of 6.9 units per acre in areas newly
added to the UGB for the period 2019-2024.
• Increase multifamily construction in the R-3 zone.
• Increase the number of ADUs in the City.
12
23
3.2.2 Evaluate Residential Infill Barriers in High and Medium Density Zones in
the Central Business District.
Priority
High
Background
In the Central Business District, lands zoned HMR, High Mix Residential
require a minimum density of 25 units per acre. Many lots in this zone
are developed with legally -nonconforming single-family detached
homes. Lot sizes range in size from 0.03 to 0.6 acres but are 0.18 acres
on average. The minimum density required for a 0.18 acre lot is 4 units
and depending on the housing type, minimum off-street parking ranges
between 6-8 spaces. Finding space on small lots to accommodate
buildings, parking and landscape improvements may pose a barrier to
infill and redevelopment in the downtown.
Action
Complete a study of residential infill barriers in the CBD and explore
possible solutions such as density transfer options, lot consolidation,
Goals &
parking options, and the possible role of Urban Renewal.
Goals &
Housing Element: 1.6, 5.1.7.3
Policies
Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5, 4.1.6
Performance
■ Complete infill and Redevetopment Barriers Study.
Measures
■ Present the study and recommended solutions to the Planning
Commission and/or City Council.
3.2.3 Regulate and Enforce Transient Lodging Tax for Short-term Rentals.
Priority
High
Background
The City collects a 9% tax for transient lodging that allow occupancy for
30 days or less. Regulations for the transient lodging tax are in CPMC
3.24 and currently include short-term rentals such as those rented
through AirBnB, VRBO, etc. However enforcement poses a challenge
because there Is no mechanism to track short-term rentals in the City.
This discrepancy in tax collection creates a competitive advantage For
short-term rentals, which often include ADUs, single family dwellings or
a portion thereof that would normally be available for full-time
occupancy (owner or renter occupied)
Action
Consider code amendments to regulate short-term rentals including
establishing a registration requirement,
Goals &
Housing Element: Goals 1, 4;
Policies
Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5,
Performance
■ Consider amendments to CPMC 3.24 to establish standards for
Measures
short-term rental use and location and requires registration
through the business license program.
13
24
3.2.4 Amend the UGB and Designate Land Use based on Adopted Concept Plans
as a General Land Use Guide.
Priority High
Background Based on population projections and the Buildable Lands Inventory
(BLI), the City has a demonstrated need to add new residential lands to
the UGB. As part of the UGB Amendment it is necessary to show how
the proposed land use designations will comply with the Comprehensive
Plan. The Regional Plan Element requires specific land use allocations
and average gross density commitments of 6.9 units per acre until 2035
and 7.9 units per acre from 2035-2060. The UGB amendments will use
adopted Concept Plans for land use and transportation as a general
guide to designate land use for the purposes of the UGB Amendment. At
the time of annexation a Zoning Map Amendment application will be
needed to designate zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Designation and the Regional Plan Performance Indicators as
addressed in the Concept Plan.
Action Add new land to the UGB per the Housing Element and amend the Land
Use Element in the Comprehensive Plan to assign Land Use
designations. Per the Regional Plan Element, land use designations
shall demonstrate compliance with the land use distribution, committed
residential density and transportation performance measures, which are
illustrated in adopted Concept Plans.
Goals & Housing Element Goals: 1, 3, 4
Policies Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5, 4.1.6, 4.1.7, 4.1.8
Performance . Add residential land to the UGB per the Housing Element.
Measures . Prepare findings as part of the UGB Amendment package
demonstrating Regional Plan compliance using the Concept
Plan as a general land use guide.
• Amend the General Land Use Map to designate future land use.
3.2.5 Continue Supporting Low -Income and Homeless Populations through
Partner Organizations.
Priority High
Background
As funds are available, the City has provided financial support to
organizations including: ACCESS, Habitat for Humanity, St. Vincent de
Paul, and Meals on Wheels. These funds are to support homeless
populations and low-income families in Central Point.
Action
Continue to provide support to organizations that provide services and
financial support to homeless and low-income families in Central Point.
Goals &
Housing Element: 2.3, 6.3
Policies
Performance
Report on contributions during the 5 -year reporting period (2019-2024).
Measures
14
25
3.2.6 Evaluate the City's Vertical Housing Program.
Priority High
Background The City established a Vertical
Housing Tax Credit program in
2003 that has been used once for
the construction of the Four Oaks
Centre.
Mixed-use projects in the City's
Vertical Housing zone can obtain
up to an 80% exemption on
structural improvements over a 10 -
year period based on the number
of floors and whether affordable
units are included.
A
Vxdvel Nvnwing Porro
Legend IN.- Wp
CJcm x xc:ao,.
r emv ram i� i�zi
Action Evaluate barriers to using the vertical housing tax credit through
discussions with developers, financiers, or other stakeholders who have
used it or might consider it. Make changes to improve the program if
Possible, including expanding the zone, and promote the program. .
Goals & Housing Element: 1.6, 2.1, 7.3
Policies Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5, 4.1.6
Performance . Complete the evaluation and possible amendments.
Measures . Increase the number of mixed-use projects that use the credit.
3.2.7 Monitor Buildable Lands.
Priority High
Background The City maintains a BLI that tracks vacant, infill, and redevelopment
lands as new building permits are issued and non -conforming structures
are demolished. This information is needed to evaluate land needs
relative to population forecasts, which are now updated on a 4 -year cycle
by Portland State University.
Action Continue maintaining the BLI as needed to complete an updated report
for residential lands every 5 -years concurrent with the HIP cycle update.
Goals & Housing Element: 3.1, 3.3, 3.5
Policies
Performance Produce a BLI Update every 5 -years.
Measures
15
26
3.2.8 Monitor Regional Plan Compliance.
Priority High
Background Per the Regional Plan and Housing Elements, the City has established
policies to monitor compliance with the Regional Plan Performance
Indicators, including but not limited to average gross density
commitments, land use allocations, and mixed-use/pedestrian friendly
areas. The intent of this action item is to utilize the existing BLI as a tool
to track and report on the City's compliance with the Regional Plan.
Action Add fields necessary to track lands newly added to the UGB for Regional
Plan compliance.
Goals & Housing Element 3.1, 3.2
Policies Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5, 4.1.6,4.1.7, 4.1.8, 4.3.1
Performance Report on Regional Plan compliance every 5 -years.
Measures
3.3 Long -Term Actions
The City's long-term strategy consists of actions rated as having a moderate- or low -priority.
Long-term actions are those that the City can consider during future updates of the HIP and are
not intended for immediate implementation. They are included here for reference and to
demonstrate compliance with the Regional Plan.
3.3.1 Evaluate Feasibility of a Multiple Unit Limited Tax Exemption Program.
Priority Moderate
Background
Through the Multiple Unit Limited Tax Exemption (MULTE) Program, the
City can incentivize diverse housing options in the downtown or other high
density zones around employment centers. The state enables and the city
would have to develop and adopt a program that establishes a competitive
process to offer a full tax exemption on structural improvements over a 10 -
year period. The process can require that certain percentage of the units
be set aside as affordable, as well as other items deemed to be in the
public interest (i.e. design elements, transit stops, etc.).
To implement a MULTE program the City would need to set the program
criteria, length of the tax abatement, and where it would apply, and
negotiate approval with other taxing districts (i.e. Urban Renewal, FD3,
SD6, etc ).
Action
Evaluate feasibility of developing MULTE program for Central Point to
encourage multifamily housing development projects in the City's high
density zones. Explore regional development and implementation options
through the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG).
Goals &
Housing Element: 1.4, 2.1, 4.2, 4.3
Policies
Performance
Complete a feasibility study for a MULTE program in Central Point.
Measures
16
27
3.3.2 Consider a Tiny House/Micro Housing Ordinance.
Priority Moderate
Background Micro housing, including tiny houses, are small format homes typically 500
square feet or less. Micro housing can be provided as a stand-alone unit or
small multifamily units. Stand-alone tiny homes on wheels have gained
Popularity for a simple, mobile lifestyle. Current regulations in Oregon limit
the viability of Uny homes on wheels; however units built on permanent
foundations are allowed subject to building code standards.
The benefit of permitting micro housing is that smaller homes allow for
smaller lots and more efficient use of land. Due to smaller size and land
needs, they can provide the opportunity for more affordable housing,
especially for homeowners. The scale of impact will depend on the market
for smaller homes and the nature of regulations enacted_
Action Consider an ordinance allowing micro housing, including tiny homes
Goals &
Housing Element 6.1
Policies
Regional Plan Element: 4.1.5
Performance
Develop a draft ordinance for consideration by the CAC, Planning
Measures
Commission and City Council.
3.3.3 Evaluate Flood Risklinsurance Requirements on Housing Affordability.
Priority Moderate
Background Flood insurance is mandatory for all structures that are financed through a
federally affiliated lender, There are over 275 structures in the high risk
floodplain and 73% of which were built before 1982 and are "Pre -FIRM."
Consequently many of these homes were built too low, without sufficient
flood openings, with HVAC and/or utilities located below the flood
elevation, etc. These risk factors can increase the cost of insurance
premiums and total housing cost
The extent of the problem for homeowners and renters is not known. As
the City prepares to update its Hazard Mitigation Plan, exploring the impact
of flood insurance and risk on housing cost should be looked at and
addressed.
Action Conduct a study to evaluate the impacts of flood risk and insurance on
total housing cost. Address findings in the Hazard Mitigation Plan update
and the Comprehensive Plan as appropriate.
Goals & Housing Element: Goal 1 and 2.
Policies
Performance . Address flood risk/insurance impacts on housing cost, including
Measures mitigation options in the Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Incorporate findings into the Comprehensive Plan.
17
28
3.3.4 Evaluate Single -Family Housing Rehabilitation Grant/Loan Program.
Priority Low
Background Rehabilitating single family homes that are in poor condition improves
living conditions in these dwellings and can be more affordable that
redeveloping the site. Through Urban Renewal a program has been
authorized to provide low interest loans or grants for this purpose. The
CAC and Planning Commission recommend observing the performance of
Urban Renewal's program before considering expanding it to other areas
in the City.
Action Based on observations of the Urban Renewal Program, evaluate
development of a low interest loan or grant program to support
rehabilitation of older single-family homes in poor condition outside of the
Urban Renewal area.
Goals & Housing Element: 4.2, 4.4, 6.3
Policies
Performance Report on the Urban Renewal's program at the next HIP update and
Measures consider feasibility of expanding it to other areas of town via another
funding mechanism.,
3.3.5 Promote Affordable Housing Services and Support Offered by the City and
Other Organizations.
Priority Low
Background There are several organizations in the region that offer services and
support to low-income households. Instead of reinventing the wheel, the
City should consider assembling a list of resources and make these
available to those in need.
Action Develop a list of housing services and support and make available through
the City's website, in print (as needed) and/or in the City's newsletter.
Goals & Housing Element: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4
Policies Regional Plan: 4.1.12
Performance Create a resource for affordable housing as a webpage, handout, and/or
Measures newsletter publication.
3.3.6 Develop a SDC DiscountlWaiver Program as a Gap Financing Tool to
Support Qualified Affordable Housing Projects.
Priority Low
Background SDCs are a prepaid impact fee for public infrastructure (i.e. water, streets,
storm drainage, and parks). The cost varies depending on the use and its
impact on the City's infrastructure. In some cases, the cost of SDCs may
decrease financial viability of affordable housing projects. To address this,
18
29
the City can consider developing a program to pay the SDCs for qualified
affordable housing projects. Both the CAC and Planning Commission
recommended that any assistance be limited to federal and non-profit
entities that assure the project will remain affordable for low-income
households over the life of the project.
Although SOC discounts/waivers have not been needed in the past,
developing a program to assist affordable housing partners assures timely
response in the event the need arises.
Action Consider a code amendments and Funding sources to offer SDC
discountstwaivers to federal and non-profit affordable housing partners.
Goals & Housing C=lement: Policy 1.A, 2.1, 2.2, 4.2
Policies
Performance Prepare draft code amendments for consideration by the CAC, Planning
Measures Commission and City Council.
4 Reporting and Cycle Updates
The Central Point HIP involves a range of actions, some ongoing and others with a discreet beginning and
end. To remain current within housing needs in the City it is necessary to track progress and periodically
adjust the City's housing strategy. For this reason, the HIP will be updated on a 5 -year cycle. The updates
provide the opportunity to evaluate progress and scale the housing strategy to adapt to both housing needs
and staff and resource capabilities. At the conclusion of the 5 -year cycle, staff will present a brief report
to the Citizen's Advisory Committee and Planning Commission summarizing activities implemented,
observed changes in housing characteristics, if any, and recommend changes for the next 5 -year HIP.
Based on input and direction from the Citizen's Advisory Committee and Planning Commission, a
revised HIP will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration and approval by Council Resolution.
19
30
FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION CODE AMENDMENTS
31
Planning Department
STAFF REPORT Tom Humphrey, AI(fP.
Aik— Community Development Director
CENTRAL
POINT
April 13, 2021
Agenda Item: VI -B
Discussion regarding amendments to CPMC 8.24, Flood Damage Prevention.
Applicant: City of Central Point. File No. 7,C-21002.
Staff Source
Justin Gindlesperger, Community Planner II
Background
The City's floodplain management program supports community resiliency through preventive and
corrective measures. These measures include requirements for zoning, subdivisions, buildings and
building codes and the overall floodplain environment. The City participates in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP), which has minimum management standards for communities, but the City
implements higher standards to promote a stronger community.
Floodplain Program
Participation in the NFIP provides base floodplain management standards and makes federal flood
insurance available for all residents and business owners in the community. This is important because 1)
flood insurance provides financial protection for at -risk structures; and 2) federal law requires flood
insurance as a condition of financing for properties in high risk flood hazard areas.
The City also participates in the Community Rating System (CRS), which is a voluntary incentive
program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain management practices that exceed the
minimum requirements of the NFIP. In CRS communities, flood insurance premium rates are discounted
to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from the community's efforts that address the three goals of the
program:
1. Reduce and avoid flood damage to insurable property
2. Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the National Flood Insurance Program
3. Foster comprehensive floodplain management
Participation in the CRS requires documentation, certification and adhering floodplain management
standards. In anticipation of the City's upcoming verification visit for the 2020-2021 cycle this fall, the
Planning Department is amending the floodplain development regulations for consistency with Federal
and State guidance. During this meeting, staff will review the updates to the floodplain development
regulations. Attached is a copy of the draft amendments to the floodplain development regulations.
32
ISSUES:
The primary issue in considering the amendments to the floodplain development regulations is to provide
consistency with Federal and State requirements and to identify local policies and actions that can be
implemented to reduce flood losses and protect City residents from the dangers of flooding
ACTION:
Consideration of the draft amendments to the floodplain development regulations.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A" —Draft Amendments to CPMC 8.24 (Mark-up)
33
Attachment "A"
CPMC 8.24 Flood Damage Prevention
8.24.010 Statutory Authorization
The has in URS 197.175 delegated the responsibility to local
governmental units to adopt floodplain management regulations designed to promote the public health,
safety, and general welfare of its citizenry. Therefore, the city ordains and sets out the provisions of this
chapter.
8.24.030 Statement of Purpose
1. Particle in and maintain eilgihility for flood insurance and disaster relief
8.24.050 Definitions
"Area of shallow flooding" means a designated AO or AH zone on the flood insurance rate map (FIRM)
with base flood depths ranging frorn one to three feet, and/or where a clearly defined channel does not
exist, where the path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterminate, and where velocity flow may be
evident. AO zones are characterized as having sheet flow, and AH zones indicate ponding. For both AO
and AF#;c nes,aclequate drainage paths are required arqund structwvs an sloes r( guide floodwaters
rand grid awa from Proposed structures.
"Area of special flood hazard" means the land in the floodplain within a community subject to a one
percent or greater chance of flooding In any given year. a�,, �„=.s}.f�;�,4rfS
OR flGUE1 Pattc-e-rate-aap5-always 4; 'k�let E Nw- Fit is shown on the Flood Insurance Rate
Maw{FIRM] as colla A�0 AHS Al 30�AE, A99, AR_ Also known as the special flood hazard area (SFHA).
"Base flood elevation (BFE)" means the water surface elevation to which Floodwater is anticipated to
rise during the base flood4r,*elatim:l-te-44OL-c -datwm. The BFE is depicted on the flood insurance
rate map (FIRM) to the nearest foot and in the flood insurance study (FIS) to the nearest tenth of a foot,
"Development" means any manmade change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not
limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation, or drilling
operations; or storage of equipment and materials located within the area of special flood hazard.
Exemptions to the definition of development, for the purpose of administering this chapter, include:
1. Signs, markets markers, aids, etc., placed by a public agency to serve the public—Pr the
encroachment in the special Flood hazard area is no larger than a standard ale• and
2. Residential gardens; provided, that they do not result in unauthorized, substantial alteration of
topography; and provided, that gardening methods do not include the use or application of
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers or other toxic materials.
"Floodway" or "regulatory floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the
adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively
increasing the water surface elevation more than one-foota desig aced hei�h[.
34
"Fund€onailY flependent se" means a use which cannut erform its intended purpUse utt€ess it is
located or carrier out in rl❑se proximi i to water. The term includes no-ly dockin facilities Qort faculties
that aree ne_for the 1padingand unloadi
Lag of car ❑ or assen ers and ship building and ship
reair facilities and doesnot include fon term story a or rely ed manulfiacLuring facilities.
"Hi hest Ad acent Grade" means t chi hest natural elevation of [hr ground surface prior to
construction next to the ro ❑sed walls of a structure.
"Reasonably safe from flooding" meansPfeploose Flee�1.'wf►s�datae land of rla�
sFr��rces-a+,tt-fkraf-ar��-sr�l:�s ...t�athe-i�se_fwsll�rt-da�ag�+sti�g-er
GSe4baildirtgsdevelo ament is desi9-1LtW ad built to be safe from fldodin based on consideration of
current flood elevation studies, historical_ data, hi water marks and other reliable data known to the
comrnuni_�;_3n_unnumbe e A zones where Roo [! elev tion in rmation s rot available and cannot b
obtained b racticai means, reasonably safe_frorrr flooding means that the lowest floor is at least two
feet_above Highest Adjacent Grade.
" earns a f rifity t�aa ' ti+31esS s Weated
r3r-�arx-felt"in-eiese�ity-to•w.:s•Eer:-T€3e-Eer,�r+��es-raot�te lersg-i:e, �-,�in��; r��fa�te�e;
4P,; gr service ac-'Irr•+R-re.r.
8.24.060 Lands to which this chapter applies
A. This chapter shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the city. All
deo__ eloprnent within s a�eeia€ flood haiard areas is subiect to the terms of this cha to and they
a22LIcable re ufakgn$. Nothing in this chapter is intended to allow uses or structures that are otherwise
prohibited by the zoning regulations or specialty codes.
B. Con'rnuni[y Bound_ L gjterations. The Flop -d - Adr�rinistratvr shall nntiy the Federal irrsurante
Administrator in rrvritln wtnagyer the boundaries oft acv munit have been modified by annexation
pr the community has otherwise assumed authority or na Ion er has auth❑ri t❑ adopt and enforce
floorlpiain management regulations for a_particular area to ensure that all Flood Hazard Boundary Maps
LFHeM andFoad Insurance Rate MasF€RMJaccurately TPres9nt the corrlmunity's �vundaries.
Include Within sue h not€ficatill n a co of a map of the nrur►_ity suitable for re rodurtiory clear!
delineating the new coy orate Ilm€ts or new area for which the the community has assumed or
rere€i�ished flood lairr rnanagerneyrt,reulatory autlrvr€t, -
8.24.200 Development in Regulatory Floodways
E. Temporary encroachments in the regulatory floodway for the purposes of capital improvement
projects, including bridges and culverts, sha4l--IIMI-Aowed eYer:imgry b_e permitted if the encroachment
results in an increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge, i
Qt-RM-. i ed that a Conditional Letter of Ma1a_Reyisions f CLOMRJ is applied for and approved by
the F Ideral.Insuidtice Administrator arid die, 11al iirement for such revision as established under
Volum 44 of the Code of federal Re ulatiorr sect ori Fi5.12 are f +lfilled. Tem vrar shed kc d eats
shall com ! with all other a usable flood hazard reductionprovisions of this cha ter and mAv be
kerrrritted when;
35
1. The project is limited as to duration with the days and dates that the structure or other
development will be in the regulatory floodway, as specified in the floodplain development
permit;
2, Accessory structures (i.e., construction trailers) are restricted from the regulatory floodway;
3. The project limits placement of equipment and material in the regulatory floodway to that
which is absolutely necessary for the purposes of the project. Justification that demonstrates
compliance with this requirement will be documented by the applicant in the required floodplain
development permit application submittal documentation; and
4: Fl�-ap�r�-fd�rat+iies arm-1r�s�rrat��t�cE{+r-�##e�-ted lay-t�el�as#��Jae•-ar�a-af
si3ee t ffac azar a� Qc, d-neW,- Aef► s- a+�w�scKees r rastc aF
dP_+r+enKAFa4ag-.EgFRp�+�'.ai s-prr�v�sio�+ilaa6l..
€IoeFJplai+,.�ie►rel� a �rravid�i-�o.ilaewc+ty-a�par-�-�.t€�e
t �[31J,fii�
-5 4. The project applicant is provided with written notification that they may be liable for any
flood damages resulting from the temporary encroachment.
F. Projects for stream habitat restoration may be permitted in the floodway, provided:
1. The project qualifies for a Department of the Army, Portland District Regional General Permit
for Stream Habitat Restoration (NWP-2007-1023);
2. me ro'ect does not result in a�ntential rise In the flood elevation;
23.. A fn-��,- ,{al a reOi4[�ecl
�� •re5e�r� �...��se+s�ec�;-�#erac��+ded-��-�ibiifty-a�t,af•+Esi:��r�r3
�te-keep! onditional Letter of Map Liendment
AC MR is a lied for and a roved b the I-ederal Insur rtice Admi�tistrator For any rise in the
base flood levels, as e�^-$}µpb„ the
re uirements for such rcvlsiun asst
ealish
bed under Volume 44 0! Che Cade_of Federal
R_gulations� section SS.l2 are fulfilfed; and
�: iW�str�+Et�+rBt ;g.�+ya�C£ci-�ewt+��l:-wise-i�l-tf{t?-€3F79d-e{EPv2��d
4. An agreement to monitor the project, correct problems and ensure that flood carrying capacity
remains unchanged is included as part of the local floodplain development approval
8.24.250 Floodplain Development Standards for Construction
B. Construction Materials and Methods
I. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and
utility equipment resistant to flood damage.
2. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using methods and
practices that minimize flood damage.
3. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, arid -air-conditioning lumbiit duct s stems and
equipment and other service facilities shall be elevated at leas one foot above the BFE and/or
36
designed or located to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components and
to resist hydrostatic and h drod namic loads and stresses, i nCl U d i ng the effects of buoyant
during conditions of flooding. to addition.,, electrical, heatin& ventilation, air conditioning,
plumbing, ucts sty ems, and other equipment and services that are replaces _as Dartof_a
substantial improvement shaII meet all requirements of this section.
C. Structures located in Multiple or partial Flood Zones.
In coordination with the State of Oregon Specialty Codes:
1.Whena structure is located in multiple flood zones on the commUnitv's Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRM) the provisions for the mare restrictive_ flood zone shall_ apples
2. When a structure is partially located in a special flood hazard area tile entire structure shall
meet the requirements for new consta;uction and substantial imarovements.
G. Manufactured Dwellings. In addition to subsections A and B of this section, new, replacement and
substantially improved manufactured dwellings are subject to the following standards:
1. Manufactured dwellings shall be elevated on a permanent foundation, such that the lowest
floor of the manufactured home is elevated a minimum of eighteen inches above the BFE; or if no
hale depth is specifiedin ars area of shpll_ow fllQo�iingflood zones AQ and AH), shall be elevated at
least two feet above the highest adLrtt gra —r
2. Manufactured dwellings supported on solid foundation walls with enclosed areas below the BFE
are prohibited unless the foundation walls are designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic
forces by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. Designs for meeting this requirement
must be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect, or meet or exceed the
minimum criteria set forth in subsections (E)(2)(a)(i) through (iii) of this section;
3. The bottom of the longitudinal chassis frame beam in A zones shall be at least twelve inches
above the BFE;
4. The manufactured dwelling shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse and lateral
movement during the base flood. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of
over -the -top or frame ties to ground anchors; and
5. Electrical crossover connections shall be a minimum of twelve inches above the BFE.
Refer to FEMA's Manufactured Home Installation in Flood Hazard Areas guidebook for additional
information
Wt Recreational Vehicles. In all areas of Special Flood Hazard, Recreational Vehicles that are an allowed
use or structure under the zoning ordinance must either:
1. Be placed on the site for fewer than one hundred eighty consecutive days;
2. Be fully licensed and ready for highway use; be on its wheels or jacking system; be attached to
the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and have no permanently
attached additions; or
37
3. Meet the requirements of subsection G -H of this section, Manufactured Dwellings, and
including the elevation and anchoring requirements.
161 Accessory Structures. Relief from the elevation or dry flood proofing 140nd&Fds-re uirements ff t
residenti,�tl and rtv:i-res1dential,structures in RiverineNon-coasts! flan$ zones may be granted for an
accessory structure }t r�ipg rx� p4oFe t�,►un �r 40�
4 """
tete following standards: ��`�rttnat meets
1. In cornpiiance with Stet of pre ons ecialt cods c essoi structures on rr� erties
21___ _tura are
zoned residential r li itcd to nn stvr srructrrres less than 200 $ uare feet, or 400 sentare Feet
if the ro ert is reater than tw_ o [2Z acresjn area and tl�e ra o'ed cessar structure will f e
lotat�c! mvr� hart 20 Feet fror� all ry ert lines. �Iccessor s ruc uresg�tpraperties that are
aned as nun -residential are limited in size to 12t] ware feet.
-1 2, Be located and constructed to minimize flood damage;
-�' 3. Be designed so as to not impede flow of flood waters under base flood conditions;
3 l. Be prohibited in the regulatory floodway;
4 5. It shall not be used for human habitation and may be used solely for parking of vehicles or
storage of items having low damage potential when submerged;
& 6... Toxic material, oil or gasoline, or any priority persistent pollutant identified by the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality shall not be stored be#vw AFFiuiiNrr�c3 �iyilag4��
tGweF4har+ kfee4ee4-arade•in an access. Lry structure unless confined in a tank installed in
compliance with this chapter;
67. Be constructed of flood resistant materials;
8. Be firmly anchored to prevent flotation collanse�arrcl lateral ri�ovement of the structure
res itin from h roc# narn c nd lit drostatic !oa s incl in a effects of buoyanS
_y, riurinA
renditions of the base floes
8, Have electrical service and/or mechanical equipment elevated or flood -proofed to era
minintum of orae Foot above tate BFE as sedfirsrth irz s sectien f3 3 pf tfns section; and
9. Be designed to equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the automatic
entry and exit of floodwater. Designs for complying with this requirement must be certified by a
licensed professional engineer or architect or meet the minimum design criteria set forth in
subsections (E)(2)(a)(i) through NO of this section.
8.24.270 Interpretations and Variances
B. Variances. Exception$ to the standards and criteria of this chapter shall be made in writing to the
floodplain administrator on the farm provided by the city and include, at a minimum, the same
information required for a Floodplain development permit, a written explanation for the basis of the
variance request and any necessary documentation to show the variance is warranted and meets the
criteria established in subsection (B)(2) of this section.
WR
1. Procedural Requirements. Variances shall be subject to the procedural requirements set forth in
Section 17.05.400 for a Type III (quasi-judicial) review procedure.
2. Variance Criteria. The city shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a
variance based on the following criteria;
e. Variances may be issued for a wa*rf_unctiflnal_ly_dependent use; provided, that the structure or
other development is protected by methods that minimize flood damages during the base flood
and create no additional threats to public safety.
3. Variance Notification. Any apj2licani, Lo whoma variance is granted a'hjll be1,ivon written native
that the issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the Base Floor! Elevation will result
in increased oremium rates fur Flood insurance and that such construction below the Base Flood
Flevation increases risks to fife and pro ert - Such n9fificatlon and a record of all variance actions
including justification shall be maintained in accordance with Section
39
MOBILE FOOL] CART REGULATIONS
40
STAFF REPORT
CENTRAL
POINT
April 13, 2021
Agenda Item: VI -B
Planning Department
Tom Humphrey, AICP,
Community Development Director
Discussion regarding standards and regulations for Mobile Food Vendors and other vending
units, such as food trucks, trailers and carts within the City of Central Point.
Staff Source
Justin Gindlesperger, Community Planner II
Background
The Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC) permits the placement and operation of mobile
vending units on private property within the Tourist and Office Professional (C-4) commercial
zoning district, as a permitted use, and within the Thoroughfare (C-5) commercial district, as a
conditional use. The CPMC does not permit the operation of mobile vending units within the
right-of-way of streets or alleys.
Discussion:
The popularity of food trucks, food carts, and mobile vending units has increased in the Rogue
Valley throughout the past few years. In the past few months, the Planning Department has
received several requests to increase the areas within the City that are available to mobile
vending. There is interest in specific properties within the Artisan Corridor along Front Street
that are for sale (the Yellow Basket property), properties with large parking areas (Poblano's and
CraterWorks), or currently vacant/undeveloped properties (Creamery property at Pine Street &
S. Haskell Street).
While `mobile vending units' is not defined in CPMC 17.08 - Definitions, it is generally
accepted that the term includes food trucks, trailers, and carts that are moveable vehicle(s)
operating as a temporary use for the purpose of offering ready -to -eat food for sale. The use of
mobile vending units is typically divided into two (2) categories: as temporary uses on private
property, either individually or as a group or `pod', and mobile vending in the right-of-way,
usually in an on -street parking zone.
Central Point does not permit mobile vending units within the right-of-way and applications for
units on private property would follow the site plan review process to ensure the site is
compatible with the placement of the unit and there are no safety concerns. In the C-5 zone,
applications for mobile vending would follow the conditional use permit process and require a
public hearing before the Planning Commission. All mobile vending units are required to obtain
41
a business license to operate within City limits and must be licensed by the Jackson County
Health Department. The City does not have additional permits or inspections of mobile vending
units.
There are currently two (2) mobile vendors operating within city limits, with one (1) located
along E Pine Street and one (1) unit located along S. Front Street. The zoning along Front Street
does not include mobile vending as permitted uses, units have been permitted along Front Street
as temporary uses. In reviewing these requests, the Planning Department has considered the
locations in regard to proximity to other brick -&-mortar businesses, access and circulation,
business hours, and number of days operating.
The purpose of this discussion is to identify advantages and concerns from expanding the use of
mobile vending units in Central Point and discuss additional regulations, standards and
permitting processes necessary to ensure safe and appropriate location and operation of these
units.
Issues
Despite their popularity, the use of food trucks and other mobile vending units has been limited
due to either a lack of specific regulations permitting their use or restrictions on their placement,
The American Planning Association has published guidance for communities interested in
expanding the use of mobile vending (Attachment "A"). As this publication points out, there are
many benefits to expanding the use of mobile vending units in Central Point. But there are
questions and concerns that remain, including:
■ Location — where should food trucks and other mobile vendors be permitted to set up?
• Hours — how long can a food truck be open?
• Duration — how long can a food truck operate from a single location?
■ Safety — can the use of food trucks be expanded without creating safety issues due to fire
hazards or sanitation concerns?
Attachments
Attachment "A" — Zoning Practice — Food Truck Feeding Frenzy
Action
Discuss mobile vending in Central Point.
42
Attachment "A"
Food Truck Feeding Frenzy:
Making Sense of Mobile Food Vending
By Rodney Arroyo, AICP, and /ill Bahm, AICP
Recent economic and cultural trends show an explosion in the popularity of food
trucks, or mobile vendors, over the past several years.
According to research done by Emergent for the
National Restaurant Association, the growth
of mobile food trucks will soar in the next five
years, generating up to $2.7 billion in revenue
nationally by 2017—up from $650 million in
2012 (Emergent Research zoiz). All across the
country, cities, small towns, and suburbs are
seeing food trucks popping up, some in unex-
pected places like office and industrial parks,
where zoning ordinances typically preclude res-
taurants. Amplifying the push for food trucks
are the twin trends of "buying local" and "food
as entertainment" that are enhanced by pro-
grams such as the Great Food Truck Race on the
Food Network. While ice cream trucks and job -
site lunch wagons haven't disappeared, they
are increasingly being joined by gourmet trucks
and trucks specializing in ethnic offerings.
All across the United States, people are
exploring how mobile food vending might
43
make a difference in their lives and their cam-
munities. More resources are starting to be-
come available for potential business owners.
Networks for mobile food vendors are grow-
ing; the Southern California Mobile Food Ven-
dors Association was formed in zoio as one
of the first associations dedicated to helping
vendors break down barriers to business
(www.socalmfva.com). And this fall, Roam—a
first-ever industry conference for mobile food
ZONINGPRACTICE 9.13
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I Paye
suppliers and owners—will take place in Port-
land, Oregon.
On the worldwide stage, the World Street
Food Congress is the first of its kind to connect
and open up fresh ideas and thought leadership
in the massive and growing street -Food culture
and industry throughout the world. This 10 -day
street -food Festival was hosted in Singapore in
January 2013 and featured well-known leaders
in the food industry (www.wsfcongress.com).
Faced with inquiries from food vendors,
many communities turn to theirzoning codes,
only to discoverthat mobile food vending isn't
really defined and may not be permitted in the
wayvendors might like. With the approach to
regulating mobile vending varying widely in
communities, it can be hard to know where to
begin when considering if and how to accom-
modate food trucks.
WHAT 15 MOBILE FOOD VENDING?
Regulatory codes for many communities rec-
ognize transient merchants—those goods and
services provided by a traveling vendor. The
typical ice cream truck would be a good example
of a transient merchant who is mobile most of
the time, stopping only when requested for a
Few short minutes. Many operators of today's
food trucks or carts, however, are seeking more
than a few minutes on the street, sidewalk, or
parking lot, staying in place fora few hours to
serve breakfast, lunch, or dinner. In fact, when
they are located on private property, some food
trucks may be in one location for days, weeks,
or even months. It is important to make a dis-
tinction between the food vendors that are more
transient in nature, like an ice cream truck, and
those that seek to move about less Frequently.
Both types of uses can offer benefits to the com-
munity, and they will each have different poten-
tial issues to regulate.
Many mobile food vendors utilize
self -driven vehicles that permit easy reloca-
tion throughout the community, However,
mobile food vending also includes trailers,
Food kiosks, and food carts. Food kiosks are
temporary stands or booths that are typically
intended to sell prepared foods, including ice
cream, pretzels, and the like. Food kiosks may
be found inside a large office building or shop-
ping mall, but may also be secured for outside
use. Some communities, like Maui County,
Hawaii, allow a variety of products to be sold
at a kiosk, provided certain standards are met
030.08.030). While temporary in structure,
Food kiosks are often stationary with a defined
location. Food carts allow the vendor to sell
from outside the moveable unit and are often
used to sell Fresh fruits and vegetables. Typi-
cally, the food in kiosks and carts is prepared
elsewhere and kept cold or hot in the unit,
The city of New York encourages "green carts"
that offer fresh produce in certain areas of the
city and has special regulations for these uses
(www.nyc.gov/greencarts).
In communities across the U,S., mobile
food vendors are seeking permits to start these
innovative businesses. They often run into road-
blocks at city hall, because while many zoning
ordinances include provisions for temporary
uses, most do not contain current definitions
for mobile Food vending nor do they include any
standards that specifically relate to vending and
the issues that may arise. The net result in many
communities, intentional or unintentional, is a
prohibition an mobile food vending.
THE PROS AND CONS OF MOBILE
FOOD VENDING
Over the past few years, most of the economy
has been struggling and the workforce has been
challenged to adapt. With laid -off workers try-
ing to reinvent themselves and new immigrants
looking for opportunities, the number of people
starting new businesses is rising. Mobile food
vending seems, forsome, like a low-cost way to
wade into the pool of business ownership. There
are a number of reasons why communities may
elect to sanction mobile food vending:
• It provides an opportunity to increase Jobs
and businesses. The cost of starting a Food truck
business can start at $25,000, where a tradition-
al bricks -and -mortar establishment may start at
$3oo,000, accordingto the National Restaurant
Association (Emergent Research 2012).
• It offers opportunities to provide food choic-
es where zoning precludes restaurants. Track
tional zoning codes tend to restrict the uses
permitted in office and industrial districts, only
allowing uses that narrowly meet the intent or
those districts. Office and industrial parks, in
particular, are often isolated from the rest of
the community, requiring employees to drive to
retail and restaurant areas. In addition, some
communities may not have access to variety of
ZONINGPRACTICE 9-13
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSCCIATIUNIpage 7
44
healthy, fresh Foods, and therefore decide to
encourage such food vendors in certain neigh-
borhoods by relaxing requirements. New York's
green carts initiative allows additional permits
to be issued over the city's defined limit to
mobile Food vendors that offer fresh produce in
underserved neighborhoods, and Kansas City,
Missouri, offers reduced permit fees for mobile
food vendors in city parks that meet certain
nutritional standards (Parks and Recreation
Vending Policy 4.7.08).
• /t can increase activity in struggling busi-
ness districts by creating a dynamic environ-
ment where people gather around the avail-
ability of new and fresh Food, The economy has
taken a toll on businesses overthe past several
years. Those that are hanging on in some
areas find that their neighboring buildings or
businesses are vacant. Food trucks can be a
way to enliven an area, generating traffic for
existing businesses and possibly spinning off
new business activity, The restaurant industry
is evolving to meet the demands cf patrons
who are looking for locally grown, sustainable,
healthy, and fast options for dining. When food
trucks use social media to communicate about
their location schedules, it can build up a cer-
tain level of excitement and anticipation that
can make a positive social impact, In addition,
the rising trend of "cart pods" and "food truck
rallies" brings multiple mobile Food vendors to
one location, creating a festive atmosphere in
in area for a short time,
They signal to other potential businesses
that the community is adapting to the evolving
economy and supporting entrepreneurship.
Mobile food trucks are a new way of doing
business; in these early years, communities
that anticipate the demand From businesses
and consumers may also find that this flexibil-
ty signals receptivity to new business models,
They areaway for restaurateurs to test the
local market for future bricks -and -mortar facili-
ties. Mobile food trucks offer opportunities to
interact with a potential market, to test recipes
and pricing, and see if the restaurant fits with
the community- All across the United States
there are examples of Food truck businesses
evolving into permanent establishments, includ-
ing El Camion ("the truck") in northwest Seattle
that has recently opened a restaurant and bar in
the Ballard neighborhood after several years of
experience with its two mobile food units-Ter-
chy's Tacos in Austin, Texas, started with a food
truck and now has eight bricks -and mortar res-
taurants in Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, and Hous-
ton—and two more opening this year. The Lunch
Room in Ann Arbor, Michigan, plans to open its
bricks -and -mortar location soon, using social
media to solicit fans of its existing "Mark's
Carts" to become investors in the restaurant.
Along with these potential benefits can
come community impacts and possible con-
flicts. Some of the challenges associated with
event through an extensive research and public
Input process, surveying their local chamber
of commerce and meeting with prospective
mobile food vendors, residents groups, and
restaurant owners. Their resulting ordinance
language responds to the needs and concerns
ofthe community (Longmont 2011).
,MOTOR CITY STREET EATS
A6hE11E01N11 OEMFfH00E1R01f8 FIHESi ft)QH 1NHCMS
4�u -
i..�ix' r w --� Us wrr vn�x•nR�:xCt•-Sr rrr�a�:rnr/
Q Food truck gatherings are increasingly common in
communities with extensive food truckofrerings-
mobile food trucks might include prohlems
with maintenance, trash, parking, noise, and
vehicular and pedestrian circulation. In addi-
tion, some restaurateurs may be threatened
by this new competition and try to prevent
mobile food vending. Food trucks also have
their own operational challenges, includ-
ing dealing with unpredictable weather and
maintaining an appropriate inventory despite
limited storage,
Thebest way to understand and manage
the pros and cons of food trucks in individual
communities is to solicit public input and
dialogue about the needs and wants of the
community. For example, Longmont, Colorado,
ADDRESSING AREAS OF
CONCERN THROUGH ZONING
Many communities are up-
dating their codes to accom-
modate or regulate mobile
vending. In lune 2012 Grand
Rapids, Michigan, included the
following statement of intent in
a new set of mobile food vend-
ing provisions:
Employment and small busi-
ness growth in the city can
occur while providing a broad
range of food choices to the
public through careful allow-
ances for temporary conces-
sion sales. The provisions of
this section are intended to
prevent predatory practices on
bricks -and -mortar restaurants
white allowing for new food
vending opportunities that can
add vitality to vacant parking
lots and underutilized sites...
(§ S.9.3 z.'q.
Other cities, including
Phoenix, Arizona (§624.D,87);
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
(§g"10-66-74); and Fort Worth,
Texas (§5.06)—just to name
a Few --adopted regulations in
2012 to allow mobile vending
or food trucks, Chapel Hill's
provisions note that allowing food trucks will
"promote diversification of the town's economy
and employment opportunities and support
the incubation and growth of entrepreneurial/
start-up businesses" but also that food trucks
pose "unique regulation challenges."
While specific approaches vary from place
to place, communities interested in adding or
updating regulations for mobile food vending
should start by defining the uses and then
consider each of the following questions:
• Where in the community should such uses
be permitted?
• How long should a food truck be permitted
to stay in one location?
ZONINGPRACTICE 4.13
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION;page y
45
• Are these mobile units just for food sales, or
can other goods be sold as well?
• Does the community want to increase activity?
• How can the zoning ordinance address up-
keep and maintenance?
• When can food trucks operate?
• How are visitor parking and circulation ac-
commodated?
• How are these uses reviewed and permitted?
• What do vendors and their customers want
or need?
• How is signage for the mobile unit regulated?
• How is the site lit to ensure safety?
Location
It is common to allow mobile food vending in
commercial districts, but some communities
add industrial districts or specify mixed use
districts -Start with the community's comprehen-
sive plan—is there a need or desire to increase
activities in specific parts of the community? Are
there concerns about the impact of single -pur-
pose districts (especially office and industrial)
on connectivity, traffic congestion, and business
In consideration for existing facilities,
some communities decide that there should be
a minimum distance between mobile units and
bricks-and-martar restaurants. Some communi-
ties try to limit the impact on adjacent residen-
tial uses through a distance requirement or by
restrictions on hours of operation. Planners
should test these locational restrictions to
ensure that realistic business opportunities
exist. EI Paso, Texas, repealed its locational
requirement of 1,000 feet from bricks -and -mor-
tar establishments following a 2011 lawsuit to
provide sufficient opportunities for mobile food
vendors (Berk and Leib 2012). Attorneys Robert
Frommer and Bert Gall argue that separation
from other establishments is not necessary and
that food truck regulations should be narrowly
tailored to legitimate health, safety, and wel-
fare concerns, not regulate competition (2012)_
The American Heart Association has also
looked at location issues related to mobile
food vending. They report that several commu-
nities across the country prohibit mobile food
vending within a certain distance of schools (or
nity and often is related to where mobile food
vending is permitted. Some communities allow
food trucks on public property but prohibit
overnight parking. Where on -street parking is at
a premium, communities may consider allow-
ing food trucks to utilize public parking spaces
for the same duration as other parked vehicles.
Chicago requires food trucks to follow posted
meter time restrictions, with no more than two
hours in one location. In addition, the city also
limits mobile food vending to two hours on
private property 64-8).
In contrast, some communities allow food
trucks on private property for up to 3o days or
more at one location. For example, Grand Rapids
allows concession sales for up to zoo consecu-
tive days over 12 calendar months (§5.932.K.6).
Regulations like this may impact vendors
in terms of the types of food that can be sold
and the manner in which they are prepared,
especially when preparation is done on-site.
Communities may wish to consider whether the
allowed duration is reasonable for food ven-
dors as welt as adjacent property owners.
retention and recruitment? Are there any areas
in the communitywhere the population is un-
derserved by food choices? Planners can take
these concerns to the community and invite
residents and business owners to share their
thoughts on where mobile food vending might
be appropriate and desirable.
Some communities make a distinction
between vending on public property, which
often requires a license but is not regulated by
zoning, and private property, which often re-
quires a temporary use permit and is regulated
by the zoning ordinance, When permitted on
private property, zoning standards should re-
quire evidence of property owner approval.
at school release times) to limit the sometimes
nutritionally challenged food choices avail.
able (2012). Woodland, California, prohibits
mobile food vending within 300 feet of a
public or private school, outwit[ allow them on
school property when approved by the school
(§14.15). It a different twist, the Minneapolis
Public School System introduced a food truck
program this year to offer free nutritious meals
to students during the summer months at four
different sites in Minneapolis (Martinson 2013).
Duration
The length of time food trucks are permitted
to stay in one place varies widely by commu-
46
Goods Available for Sale
Some communities, like College Station, Texas,
are very specific that the goods sold from mo-
bile vending to be food related (§4-20). This
is often borne of a desire to start with mobile
vending on a limited basis to gauge its impact.
As mobile food trucks become more prevalent,
surely people will explore the ideas of start-
ing other types of businesses in this format.
Communities may wish to consider the ques-
tions raised earlier about location and assess
whether or not it makes sense to allow other
goods in addition to food to be sold in desig-
nated areas. For example, Ferndale, Michigan,
allows a variety of wares to be sold by a mobile
ZONINGPRACTICE 9-13
AMERICAN PLANNING A550CIATION I puyeS
vendor, including apparel, jewelry, household
goods, and furnishings 6§7-73-82). That
might be just the place for book publisher
Penguin Group (USA) to take its recently intro-
duced first mobile bookstore, which aims to
make books accessible where big box retailers
aren't located (Edsall 2013).
Number of Units in One Location
Some communities that are getting on board
with mobile food vending have started allow.
Ing them to congregate for certain events and
activities. For example, Royal Oak, Michigan,
started a food truck "rally" at their indoor farm-
ers market during colder months. It is a good
way to utilize the facility as well as provide
entertaining food options for city residents.
It has now become a great family event every
month year-round, with musical entertainment,
bouncy houses, and face painting. The city lim-
its the rally to no more than 10 different trucks
with a variety of cuisine forthe whole family.
units to function on private property as a
single business. To address potential negative
impacts, each mobile food court must have its
own on-site manager, who is responsible for
the maintenance ofthe area (§5.406).
Trash
The type of standards for trash removal and
upkeep will vary depending on the location and
duration of the vending. Most communities
require waste receptacles for every mobile food
vending unit and some further require waste to
be removed from a site daily. Keep in mind that
where communities allow seating along with
the mobile food unit, people will generate more
trash on-site than in situations where there is
no seating provided and people take their food
(and trash) to go.
Hours of Operation
Some communities limit hours ofoperation to
around lunchtime (e.g., 10:30 a.m. until 3.30
trucks on private property, communities typi-
cally require the vendor to ensure that there
is sufficient parking available for Its use and
any other uses on the site, including the space
taken up by the unit itself. Some cities allow
public parking areas to be utilized for food
trucks, and may even allow metered parking
spaces to be used provided the related meter
fees are paid. For example, Minneapolis al-
lows a mobile vendor to park at no more than
two metered spaces, as long as they are not
short-term spaces and are not located within
too feet of an existing restaurant or sidewalk
cafe—unless the restaurant owner gives con-
sent (§188.485,c.7)_
Licenses and Permits
Most communities require permits or licenses
regardless of whether the trucks operate on
public or private property. It is also common
for the community to reference compliance
with other codes, particularly state or local
health codes. These other codes can impact
trate. For example, California's
Health and Safety Code re-
quires trucks to have hand -
washing stations if food is
According to Market Master Shelly Mazur, "It's
nice to be able to offer a family -friendly event
in a climate -controlled building with renovated
bathrooms and seating."
On the other hand, in its 2010 ordinance,
the city of Zillah, Washington, banned mobile
food vending altogether, declaring it a "nui-
sance," and finding that "when mobile ven-
dors congregate in the same area, the height-
ened intensity of use negatively impacts the
surrounding area, particularly by increased
trash" (§8.32). Fort Worth tackled this issue
head-on, defining a group of food trucks as a
"mobile food court" when two or more mobile
vending units congregate. They allow these
p.m.), and others allow sales from early in the
morning to late in the evening (e.g„ 7 a.m, until
to p.m.). Some communities place no time
limits on these operations in the zoning regula-
tions. Again, considerwhere these units will
be permitted and the potential conflicts with
adjacent uses,
Parking and Circulation
Given the mobility ofthese vendors, they by
necessity are typically located in parking areas.
Whether in public spaces or a private parking
lot, it is important to ensure sufficient parking
for existing uses to prevent an undue burden
on bricks -and -mortar establishments. For food
47
prepared in the truck, but
does not require them on
trucks selling only prepack-
aged foods like frozen des-
serts 0114311).
Some communities
cap the number of licenses
available for food trucks to
limit their impact, but many
others do not. Grand Rapids
porary use permit, subject to
Mission approval, and gives
;onsideration 65.9.32.K.18),
including an assessment asking " [wjill the
proposed stand, trailer, wagon or vehicle
contribute
to the general aesthetic of the business dis•
trict and include high quality materials and
finishes?"
Site Amenities
Some communities specify that no tables
or chairs are permitted, or if they are, then
sanitary facilities are also required. There
may be flexibility in the permitted arrange-
ments for such facilities (for example, hav-
ing permission to use such facilities within
a reasonable distance of the mobile unit).
Frisco, Texas, prohibits connections to po-
ZONINGPRACTICE 9.13
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I page 6
REFERENCES
• American Heart Association. 2012. "Mobile Food Vending near Schools
Policy Statement." Available atwww.heart.org/idc/groups/heart-
public/@wrm/@adv/documents/downloadable/ucm-446658.pdf.
• Berk, Keith, and Alan Leib. 2012. "Keeping Current: UCC—Food Truck Regu-
lations Drive Controversy." Business Law Today, May. Available at http://
apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/bit/content/2012/o5/1(eepingcurrent.pdf.
• Edsall, Larry. 2013, "Food Trucks Inspire Mobile Bookstore," Detroit News,
July 11. Available at www.detroltnew5.com/attide/20130711/AUTOo-,
/307110040 /1121/au too 6/Food-trucks-i nspire-m obi le -boo ksto re,
• Frommer, Robert, and Bert Gall. 2012. Food Truck Freedom, Washing-
ton, D,C.: Institute forJustice. Available atwwwJj.org/images
/pdf. folder/economic-liherty/vending/foodtruckfreedom.pdf.
table water, requiring mobile food vendors to
store their water in an internal tank. The city
also requires vendors to be located within 5o
feet ofan entrance ora primary building, and
drive-through service is expressly prohibited
(§3.o2.o1.A(2o)). King County, Washington,
requires that all mobile food vending in the
county be located within zoo feet of a usable
restroom (§5.34).
Signage
Some communities use their existing sign regula-
tions, but others tailor standards for mobile units,
In Michigan, both Grand Blanc Township (§7.4.9,F)
and Kalamazoo (§§25-63-69) allow one sign on
the mobile vending unit itself, but do not allow
any other signage. This is fairly common. In many
cases, the truck itself essentially functions as one
big sign with colorful graphics. Additionally, many
mobile food vendors now use social media to get
out the word regardingthe time and place they will
set up shop, potentially reducing the need for ad-
ditional signage beyond that on the unit itself.
• Emergent Research. 2012. "Food Trucks Motor into the Mainstream."
Intuit, December. Available at http://network.intuit.com/wp.content
/upload s/2012/12 /In tuit-Food-Trucks-Report-pdf.
• Longmont (Colorado), City of. 2011- Mobile Food Vendors Longmont
Municipal Code Amendment. Planning & Zoning Commission Com-
munication, lune 20, 2o11. Available at www,cklongmont.co-us
/planning/pz/agendas/2or1/documents/final.-mobilefoodvendors
.pdf.
• Martinson, Gabrielle, 2013. "In its First Summer, District's Food
Truck is a Success." The Journal, July 16. Available at www
-journalmpls,coin/news-feed/in-its-first-summer-districts-food-
truck-is-a-success,
Lighting
Lighting is not as commonly addressed as other
issues, especially if a mobile food vending unit
is located in an existing developed area, but it
is likely presumed that other applicable lighting
requirements appropriate to the location are
to be followed. Consider adjacent uses and the
impact of light trespass and glare. For example,
Grand Blanc Township requires mobile food
vending units to be lit with available site light-
ing. No additional exterior lighting is allowed
unless permitted by the zoning board of appeals
upon finding that proposed exterior lighting
mounted to the mobile vending unit will not spill
over on to adjacent residential uses as mea-
sured at the property line 67.4.9.F.10).
TESTING, FOLLOW-UP, AND ENFORCEMENT
One of the nice things about mobile food vending
is that it is really easy Fora community to put a toe
in the water and test the impact of regulations on
mobile food vendors, other community business-
es, and the public, and to adjust the regulations
des.,n concent by Lisa Baric
as appropriate. The Metropolitan Government of
Nashville -Davidson County, Tennessee, initiated a
test phase beginning April 2o12 that will provide
evaluative data for a successful mobile food ven-
dor program- The program will initially be operated
under a temporary permit issued by the Metro
Public Works Permit Office fortwo specified zones,
the downtown core and outside of it. Oakland,
California, has a pilot program for"Food Vending
Group Sites," defined as "the stationary operation
ofthree (3) or more 'mobile food vendors' clus.
tered together on a single private property site,
public property site, or within a specific section of
public right-of-way" 05.51)•
Before embarking on extensive zoning re-
writes, review the suggested considerations with
the communityto anticipate and plan for appropri-
ate ways to incorporate this use in a reasonable
way. Mobile food vending is on the rise all overthe
country, from urban sites to the suburbs, When
regulated appropriately, mobile Food vending can
bring real benefits to a community, including jobs,
new businesses, fresh food, and vitality-
VOL. 3o, N0, 9
Zoning Practice is a manth ly publication of the American Plan nfngAssocialion. SubscfiptIon s are available fur S95 (U.S.) and $120 (foreign).
W. Paul Farmer, rAICP. Ch let Executive Officer; David Rouse, Are P. Managing Director of Research and AdvisoryServlres.
Zoning Practice (ISSN 1548-0135) is produced at APA. Jim Schwab, AICP, and David Morley, AICP, Editors; Julie Von Bergen, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design
and Production.
Missing and damaged print issues: Contact Customer Service, American Planning Association, 205 N, Michigan Ave., Suite 1200, Chicago, IL Go6o1(312-431-
g2o0 or customerserviceoplanning.org) within go days of the publf"VoR date. Include the name of the publication, year, volume and issue number or month,
and your name, maIIlog address, and membership number if app IIcabte.
Copyright 02o 13 by the American Planning Association, 205 N. Michigan Ave., Suite tzoo. (Iricago, IL 6o6a2-5921, T11eAmedcan Planning Association also
has offices m 2030 15th St., NW, Sul le 75o West. Wesltfngtan. DC 2One 5-1so3; www. plan nIrtg.ofg,
Alt rights reserved. NO Part of this publication may be reproduced orutillzed in any form n by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
retarding, or by any information storage and retrieval system. without permission in writing from the American Pia nningAssocistIon.
Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber and 10 % postconsumer waste.
ZONINGPRACTICE 9.13
AMERICAN PLANNING A550CIATI ON I page
48
City of Central Point
Citizens Advisory Committee Minutes
October 13, 2020
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Present were: David Painter (chair), Cameron Noble, Carrie Reed, Cinda Harmes
and Mike House.
Also in attendance were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director,
Stephanie Holtey, Principal Planner, Justin Gindlesperger, Community Planner and Karin
Skelton, Planning Secretary.
III. MINUTES Cinda Harmes made a motion to approve the minutes of the August 11,
2020 Citizen's Advisory Committee meeting. Mike House seconded the motion. All
members said "aye". Motion passed.
IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
No public appearances
V. BUSINESS
A. Consideration of a proposal to amend the Central point Comprehensive Plan
adding roughly 444 gross acres needed to absorb growth in housing,
employment and parks and open space during the 2019 — 2039 planning
period. Applicant City of Central Point. File No. CPA —19001
Chair David Painter asked if anyone objected to reversing the order of the Business items.
There were no objections.
Mr. Painter read a statement outlining the duties and responsibilities of the Citizens Advisory
Committee along with the procedures for the public meeting.
Principal Planner Stephanie Holtey gave an overview of the Urban Growth Boundary
Amendment (UGBA) saying the purpose was to set aside a 20 year supply of land that can
be brought into the City to provide for housing, non -industrial employment parks and open
space and associated public facility uses. She reviewed the process and requirements that
have gone into the preparation of the UGB Amendment. She added this is the first meeting
since the UGB Amendment was submitted to the County.
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 2
Ms. Holtey explained some terminology and common misconceptions regarding the UGB
Amendment, stating it does not automatically bring land into the City limits. Rather, the
land will retain the county zoning until such time as a landowner annexes into the City. She
added the City does not force annexation.
She explained general land use designations stating it has been a long and involved processes
to identify the Urban Reserve Areas and the current conceptual plans for each. There will
be a transfer of jurisdiction of 4 streets from the County to the City. She said there had been
extensive public involvement in each step of the process. Specific park locations will be
identified as a function of the development process.
Ms. Holtey said that through discussions with the County there has been a policy proposed
to limit the minimum lot size of land divisions to no less than 40 acres. This will insure there
will be larger parcels available for future development.
She briefly outlined the approval criteria for the state, the county and the city. She said the
details are in the findings of fact and conclusions of law and can be viewed on the City's
website. She explained the considerations given to the impacts of development and the
extensive process which will be required to annex and develop lands, adding there will be
plenty of opportunities for public input.
She referenced the letters received and included in the packet. She stated staff has received
a petition in opposition to the construction of a park in the Boes Subdivision on City owned
open space lands. The Public Works Director has indicated the land is City owned and there
are advantages to bringing that in and developing there.
Mr. Painter asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this
application.
Mr. Humphrey said there were a number of statements from people online, stating he would
read them and respond.
Comment: As a resident of the Boes subdivision I am opposed to a city park in our
neighborhood. A park in this neighborhood will only promote transient activity in this area
worse than it already is.
Mr. Humphrey: There are a couple of people agreeing online.
Comment: We have a group of neighbors at our house and would like to make sure you
acknowledge that you have received our petition. Everyone disapproves of the park.
Mr. Humphrey acknowledged the receipt of the petition and stated the City is not advocating
the creation of a park with the UGB Amendment. This application is simply expanding the
area the City can grow into in the future.
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 3
Comment: I did not see that the TIA included the Pine/Haskell intersection which is already
backed up at times and especially when school is in session. What will be the assurance that
the housing that is being built will be affordable to Rogue Valley Residents rather than
wealthy people from other areas?
Mr. Humphrey responded that to his knowledge, the TIA did include the Pine/Haskell
intersection. There have been some traffic improvements with the construction of the
railroad crossing in Twin Creeks. Ms. Holtey agreed the Pine/Haskell intersection was
evaluated and was not found to be problematic with the opening of the railroad crossing and
the planned extension of South Haskell to Beall.
Comment: Will any traffic issues and potential mitigation be considered at the time of
rezoning specific properties. Mr. Humphrey stated when any property annexed into the city
the traffic impact would be evaluated.
Comment: If Boes Park is not built does that add open space acres that can be used
somewhere else. Mr. Humphrey gave an overview of the development of Twin Creeks and
the open space development. He said it is likely that if the City does not pursue construction
of a park it may simply remain open space.
Ms. Holtey said the Parks Element identifies Boes Park as private core parkland. If the City
does not develop Boes Park in response to the question, the City might be able to add that
amount of land to be developed as a park somewhere else. The UGB application is based on
the information in the Parks Element which identifies Boes Park as core parkland. Also due
to the recent fire there may well be discussions regarding how we manage lands along the
Greenway. According to the Public Work Director there are no plans at this time to develop
the park.
Mr. Humphrey said Matt Samitore has just texted him to say Boes Park has to be open space.
It was purchased with specific money for the Bear Creek Greenway and has to always be
open space or a park.
This was the end of the online comments.
LarEy Martin 2673Ta for Rd.
Mr. Martin said he is one member of four property owners who have been attending meetings
regarding the UGB amendment since 2007. They are pleased with the work the City has
done. He stated all the lands included in the UGB Amendment were from Urban Reserve
Areas. There had been lot of public input both in the creation of the URA's and also in the
creation of the Concept Plans. He said he was in favor of the UGB amendment and looked
forward to the growth of Central Point.
Russell Kockx 4149 Grant Rd.
Mr. Kockx said he also was in favor of the UGB Amendment.
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 4
Public portion of the meeting was closed
Mike House made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation of the UGB Amendment
to the Planning Commission. Cinda Harm seconded the motion. All members said "aye".
Motion passed.
B. Consideration of City of Central Point Hazard Mitigation Plan. Applicant:
City of Central Point.
Community Planner Justin Gindlesperger said the City is subject a variety of natural hazards
such as winter storms, floods and increasing incidence of wildfires. Hazard mitigation
planning is important in order to understand the characteristics of potential hazards, risks to
people, buildings, infrastructure and property and to identify what actions can be taken to
lessen exposure to these risks before an event occurs, creating a resilient and resistant
community.
He explained the Hazard Mitigation Plan is updated every 5 years in order to be eligible for
FEMA non -emergency disaster funding. The last update was 2011. Additionally the City
participates in the Community Rating System which allows it to obtain discounts for flood
insurance for our citizens.
He reviewed the updates in the plan and how they met FEMA's requirements.
He said the process of identifying hazards and rating them as high, medium and low risk is
an ongoing process as the City continues to grow. Additionally there has been an increase
in urban wildfires and changes in stakeholders which affect the planning process and risk
assessment. Mr. Gindlesperger explained the mitigation strategies for fire, winter storms
floods and earthquakes. He said the next steps included this Public hearing with the Citizen's
Advisory Committee, and public hearings with the Planning Committee and the City Council
for final adoption.
The Committee discussed the recent fire along the Greenway and possible mitigation
strategies. They discussed the Fire District preparedness and keeping residents informed and
aware of potential hazards. They discussed evacuation routes, water supply, and smoke as a
secondary hazard.
Mr. Gindlesperger stated there were multiple avenues for public information such as the
City's newsletter, the website and public hearings. He said the Parks Department would be
getting involved in helping restore the Greenway in a way that would mitigate damages from
fires in the future.
Ms. Holtey said she had received a message from the Public Works director. He said our City
has a different water set up than Phoenix. We have three master meters rather than one, and
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 5
three reservoirs. Additionally there is a main shut off valve for utilities installed when new
subdivisions are developed.
Russell Kockx 4401 Grant Rd.
Mr. Kockx stated the air quality in the valley has historically had problems due to the mills
and the smudge pots in the orchards. He also asked how often the Fire Department checks
the hydrants.
Ms. Holtey responded the public works director messaged her saying they check them 4
times per year.
Mike Parsons, 555 Freeman Rd
Mr. Parsons stated he is a member of the City Council but was speaking as a private citizen.
He said the mobile home park where he lives has had three evacuations in the past 3 years.
All 3 were fires on the other side of the freeway. Their biggest fear was fires crossing the
freeway to their community. On Sept 9t' there was a great response to the fire. There were
3 helicopters dropping water, and police response, fire department response and public works
response were commendable. That response was credited with keeping the fire from jumping
the freeway to their community. He felt addressing the brush, trees and fuel along the
Greenway was a most important element to help mitigate fire threat to the residents along
the freeway.
Cinda Harmes made a motion to make a favorable recommendation of the NHMP to the
Planning Commission. Mike House seconded the motion. All members said "aye". Motion
passed.
VI. DISCUSSION
Planning Update
• Providence is putting 14 RV's on a lot on South 99 for impacted employees.
• Tom is working with the County to facilitate transitional housing for those
impacted by the fire
• The Reed Building is progressing
■ Dominos on Freeman Ct. is continuing construction
• The Nelson Building on Freeman and Bigham will be obtaining permits soon
■ There will be a car wash and oil change on Table Rack and Pine St.
• There will be a new retail/office building on Biddle by the Vet Clinic
CAC Minutes
October 13, 2020
Page 6
■ Les Schwab will be constructing their building on Biddle also
There is a chiropractic office being built behind the Umpqua Bank on Biddle
• There is new interest in the White hawk development
+ The City is in negotiations to purchase property to put Haskell Street through to
Beall
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Carrie Reed made a motion to adjourn. Mike House seconded the motion. All
members said "aye". The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
The foregoing minutes of the October 13, 2020 Citizens Advisory Committee were
approved by the Citizens Advisory Committee at its meeting of April 13, 2021.
Chairman
JACKSON COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
TYPE 1 LAND USE PERMIT
JACKSON
COUNTY SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW
D r r g o ?1 STAFF REPORT
OWNER: School District 4
P.O. Box 698
Phoenix, OR 97535
APPLICANT: Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)
DR -4562 -OR/ Direct Housing
MAP DESCRIPTION:
TWP: 38 RANGE: 1W SECTION: 22D
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
5handell Clark
Planning Manager
10 South Oakdale Ave
Medford, OR 97501
Phone: (541) 774-6519
Fax: (541) 774-6791
clarksp@jacksoncounty org
FILE: 439 -21 -00019 -SIT
TAX LOT: 1000
LOCATION: The property is located at 6100 Colver Road.
NATURE OF APPLICATION: To allow the provision of Interim -Housing for FEMA eligible
survivors impacted by the September 81h, 2020 regional wildfires.
STAFF DECISION: Approval with conditions.
I. KEY ISSUES
1. Compliance with Chapter 6.
II. APPLICABLE CRITERIA
To approve this application, the County must determine that the application is in conformance
with Sections 3.2, 6.5.1, 6.5.2 and 6.5.3 (B) of the Jackson County Land Development
Ordinance.
III. FINDINGS OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
1. Section 3.2.1 Purpose:
The purpose of the site development plan review process is to ensure compliance with
the standards of this Ordinance, while encouraging quality development in the County
reflective of the goals and policies found in the Comprehensive Plan. The process is
implemented through zoning permit review and thus does not address every building,
fire, or life safety requirement.
Jackson County Planning Staff Report
File 439 -21 -00019 -SIT
2
FINDING/DISCUSSION: An application for a Type 1 Site Plan review was received by
Jackson County Development Services on March 26, 2021. The application materials
include a narrative of the proposed use and illustrative Site Plan (See Applicant's
Exhibits B through G located in file no. 439 -21 -00019 -SIT). Approval of the application
will allow the installation of 50 Modular Housing Units on property located at 6100 Colver
Road, Talent, OR. The application is in direct response to catastrophic wildfires that
began in the region on September 8, 2020. The proposed housing is considered Interim -
Housing for those survivors directly impacted by the wildfires. Oregon Administrative
Rule 660-004-0040 (1) (d) defines Interim housing as "the intermediate period of housing
assistance that covers the gap between sheltering and the return of disaster survivors to
permanent housing." Interim -Housing is by definition temporary. In accordance with
Section 6.5.3 (B) of the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance, temporary uses
and structures needed as a result of an emergency declared by the Board of County
Commissioners, State of Oregon, or Federal Government are allowed for the duration of
the emergency. No site plan review or other review as would ordinarily be required by
this Ordinance will be necessary during the emergency.
2. Section 3.2.2 Applicability:
New uses, substantial expansions or significant changes to multi -family, commercial,
industrial or public/quasi-public uses or development require a site plan review to verify
compliance with the applicable development standards of this Ordinance except as
provided by Section 3.2.2 (A).
FINDING/DISCUSSION: The applicant is requesting to utilize a portion,of the 43 -acre
property for the provision of interim -Housing for those directly impacted by the
September 8, 2020, regional wildfires. Section 6.5.3 (B) of the Jackson County Land
Development Ordinance allows temporary uses and structures needed as a result of an
emergency declared by the Board of County Commissioners, State of Oregon, or
Federal Government for the duration of the emergency. No site plan review or other
review as would ordinarily be required by this Ordinance will be necessary during the
emergency. Therefore, Section 3.2.2 is not applicable.
3. Section 6.5 Temporary Uses and Structures
6.5.1 Purpose:
This Secti0l7 allows for the establishment of certain temporary uses of limited duration in
all zoning district, provided that such uses are discontinued upon the expiration of a set
time period. This Section does not apply to an area that is the subject of a destination
resort preliminary development plan approved under Sec. 6.3.8, Temporary uses usually
do not involve the construction or alteration of any permanent building or structure.
FINDINGIDISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing the installation of 50 Interim -
Housing units for those individuals and families directly impacted by the September 8,
2020. regional wildfires. The proposed units are prefabricated and will be approximately
Jackson County Planning Staff Report
File 439 -21 -00019 -SIT
Paqe 3
840 square feet in size. The perimeter of the development will be fenced and there will
be a security trailer on site. The existing westerly Colver Road access will be extended
15 feet to improve vehicle access and circulation. As indicated in the application
materials, and in response to comments received at the virtual townhall meeting, the
units will be placed 360 feet from the east property line, 135 feet from the southern
property line, 60 feet from the Colver Road right-of-way All of the units and
corresponding infrastructure are considered temporary in nature, and design, and will be
removed from the location upon cessation of the emergency. It will be the applicant's
responsibility to return the site to pre -development standards. Removal of the structures,
infrastructure, and corresponding development will be required as a condition of
approval.
4. Section 6.5.2 General Regulations
The general regulations of this Section will apply to all allowed temporary uses unless
otherwise expressly stated.
A) Permanent Changes to the site are prohibited,
B) Permanent sings are prohibited. All temporary signs associated with the temporary
use will be removed when the activity ends,-
C)
nds;C) Temporary uses will not violate any applicable conditions of approval that apply to the
principal use on the site, -
D) The temporary use regulations of this Section do not exempt the applicant or operator
from any other required permits, such as when Health Department permits must be
obtained prior to the issuance of Development Services Department permits un this
Section; and
E) Unless otherwise expressly stated, temporary uses are permitted as a Type ? use.
FINDINGS /DISCUSSION: An application for a Type 1 Site Plan review was received by
Jackson County Development Services on March 26, 2021. The applicant proposes to
utilize a portion of the 43 -acre site to locate 50 Interim -Housing units for those
individuals and families directly impacted by the September 8, 2020, regional wildfires.
Site preparation will include minor grading, weed abatement and removal of rubble. The
Interim -Housing units and associated infrastructure are considered temporary in nature
and design and will be removed upon cessation of the emergency. There are no
permanent signs proposed or authorized. Any additional permits will be required as a
condition of approval.
5. Section 6.5.3 (B) Response to Natural Disasters and Emergencies
Temporary uses and structures needed as a result of an emergency declared by the
Board of County Commissioners, State of Oregon, or Federal Government are allowed
for the duration of the emergency. No site plan review or other review as would ordinarily
be required by this Ordinance will be necessary during the emergency. Land Use
activities that must occur for the purpose of alloviating the hardship resulting from the
emergency are expressly allowed. When the state of emergency has been terminated by
the body or agency that declared it, all temporary uses will cease and structures
associated with the emergency will be removed.
Jackson County Planning Staff Report
File 439 -21 -00019 -SIT
e4
FINDINGIDISCUSSION: On September 8, 2020, wildfires decimated numerous
properties located within Jackson County. The wildfires destroyed over 1,200 residential
units leaving a large number of individuals and families without shelter. As a result, the
Federal Government, the State of Oregon, and the Jackson County Board of
Commissioners declared a state of emergency. The proposed project will provide
temporary Interim -Housing to those eligible for FEMA direct housing assistance. Upon
cessation of the emergency, all of the units and corresponding infrastructure will be
removed from the property. It will be the applicant's responsibility to return the site to
pre -development standards. Removal of the structures, infrastructure, and associated
development will be required as a condition of approval.
IV. CONCLUSION
Due to the declared emergency, and the critical need for housing survivors, the project as
proposed is found consistent with Section 6.5.3 (B) of the Jackson County Land
Development Ordinance.
V. DECISION
File 439 -21 -00019 -SIT, to allow the installation of 50 Interim -Housing units and security
office on property described as Township 38 South, Range 1 West, Section 22D, Tax Lot
1000 is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
1 } Use. The installation of 50 emergency Interim -Housing units, a security office, and
necessary infrastructure.
2) Required Permits. The applicant shall apply for and receive all necessary permits
from affected agencies. Including, but not limited to, RVSS and Medford Water
Commission.
3) Cessation of Use. The use shall expire upon determination that a state of
emergency no longer exists.
4) Removal. Upon cessation of the use, all development shall be removed from the
property, and the property restored to pre -development standards.
This decision is limited to the County's review of applicable zoning rules and land use law, as
outlined in the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan, the Jackson County Land Development
Ordinance, and the Oregon Administrative Rules and Oregon Revised Statutes relating to land
use. Other County, State and Federal agencies may have regulatory review authority for
development projects. The decision rendered herein neither implies nor guarantees compliance
with the requirements of any other regulatory agency_ It is the property owner's responsibility to
ensure that the development complies with the requirements of any other regulatory agency or
provisions of law prior to initiating development.
JACKSON COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION
By: Shandell Clark
Planning Manager
Jackson County Planning Staff Report
File 439 -21 -00019 -SIT Paae 5
Date: A2C'6 13, Z02-1 _
A�
HOW
,zy
Z.2
try
O