Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning Commission Packet - January 5, 1988
;F _: ~ , Next Resolution No. 131 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 155 South Second Street January 5, 1988 - 7:00 p.m. AGENDA Page 1~ 1 8 10 12 15 I. Meeting Called to Order II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes IV. Correspondence and Public Appearances V. Business A. Consideration of a resolution to amend the Jackson Creek Neighborhood Development Plan. B. Consideration of a resolution to allow ATV parts sales in a C-4 zone as a conditional use. C. Consideration of amendments to be the off street park- ing standards for 17.64.040, G., 6. & 7. D. Assignment of nonconforming use/structure status to the Laurel Residential Care Facility located at 134 Laurel Street. E. Consideration of amendments to the home occupation standards - 17.60.190. VI. Miscellaneous VII. Adjournment ~~ ~i ~r ---STAFF REPORT--- Tb: Planning Commission Date: December 29, 1987 From: Randy Kugler, Administrative Assistant & Acting Building Official Re: Resolution to amend the Jackson Creek Neighborhood Development Plan As a result of increasing residential development in the Snowy Butte Lane area, property owners requested City staff to review the impact this might have in light of their desire to maintain their existing rural neighborhood setting. Two neighborhood meetings were held with the desires of the property owners formalized in the Snowy Butte Lane Master Plan. This entire process has been an attempt by the City to work with and address the special needs of this particular group. 'Copies of this Master Plan material were sent to the property owners with the request to contact City staff with comments or attend the January 5, 1988 Planning Commission meeting. Public Works Director Larry Blanchard will be in attendance should you have any questions on the implications of this proposed amendment. _ RK/mah PCWORK STRPT1.88 ' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SNOWY BUTTE LANE AREA OF A CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REFERRED TO AS THE JACKSON CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 95 WHEREAS, a conceptual development plan referred to as the Jackson Creek Neigh- borhood Development Plan was approved by the Planning Commission on April 2, 1985; and WHEREAS, the presence of increased urban `level development has a direct impact on Snowy Butte Lane and the adjoining properties; and WHEREAS, property owners adjoining Snowy Butte Lane attended the two neighbor- hood meetings on November 4 and 18, 1987 to discus s. with City staff their•concerns and desires for the future development of their respective property; and WHEREAS, City staff developed.a Master Plan regulating development along Snowy Butte Lane attached hereto as Exhibit A•, .and _ WHEREAS, the Master Plan will serve as a guide for City staff in reviewing future development plans involving the ,Jackson Creek Neighborhood Development Plan area; and WHEREAS, the Master Plan will continue to be the controlling influence for future development along Snowy Butte Lane until such time that the affected property owners request an amendment to the Master Plan; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION that the Jackson Creek Neighborhood Development Plan is hereby amended to include the Snowy Butte Lane Master Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A, pages 1, 2 and 3. Passed by the Planning Commission this day of 1988, and signed by`me in authentication of its passage this day of 1988. Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST: Planning Commission Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JACKSON CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SNOWY BUTTE MASTER PLAN SEGMENT EXHIBIT A Facilities Analysis Design Criteria: 1. During the discussions with the property owners along Snowy Butte Lane from. Beall Lane to the Elias property (tax lot north of 3902 - T37S R2W WM) on the west side of Snowy Butte Lane to the Decker property (tax lot 4000 - T37S R2W WM) on the east side of Snowy Butte Lane, the only properties who indicated they would like to someday subdivide their properties were the following: Name Tax Lot Acreage No. Lots Dan Patterson 3901 2.11 4 Stan & Gwen Snook 800 .78 3 Wagner 1300 1.87 As many as possible 2. The remaining property owners do not have any immediate plans to subdivide or partition their properties for development. Given these design factors, the following recommendations apply to the Snowy Butte Master Plan: 1. Sanitary Sewer: - Given the possibility of 10 to 12 lots being developed along Snowy Butte Lane, the 8" sanitary sewer line is adequately sized to handle these connections. 2. Water System: - Given the possibility of 10 to 12 lots being developed along Snowy Butte Lane, the 12" water line is adequately sized to handle these connections including fire flow requirements. 3. Storm Drainage:. - The properties abutting Griffin Creek can discharge storm runoff to Griffin Creek directly; however, the properties on the east side of Snowy Butte Lane (in this instance, tax lot 800 owned by Stan and Gwen Snook) would. require off-site storm drainage improvements to service their pro- perty. It may be possible'to obtain a storm drainage easement from a property owner to the west. - No additional impact on storm drainage would be present except those properties within the 100-year flood plain would have to adhere to the rules and regulations of the FEMA requirements. -1- JACKSON CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SNOWY BUTTE MASTER PLAN SEGMENT Page 2 4. Street Improvements: - Given the design criteria of only an additional 100 vehicle trips per day, the existing street is adequate to handle this traffic; however, no additional dwelling shall be constructed other than on the Pattersons' four lots without an approved amendment to this plan. The Snook proper- ty could take access from another street due to the inability to provide a 20' access to the back of their property. The Wagner property -could take .access directly from Beall Lane for one additional lot; however, future lots would require utilization of Snowy Butte Lane. - Any future minor partitions would require Snowy Butte Lane to be improved to a full street design as required by the City street standards. - Protection of Snowy Butte Lane from through traffic from other develop- ments, particularly Stonecreek, will be accomplished through the follow- - ing traffic reduction measures: -- Install standard signs with the statements "NO THROUGH. TRAFFIC," "LOCAL ACCESS ONLY" and "DEAD END STREET." Such signing may be in- stalled upon recommendation of the Public Works Directors. -- Create a dead end cul-de-sac either at the north or south end of Snowy Butte Lane. General Comments: This analysis takes into consideration the primary concern of access through the Snowy Butte Lane Master Plan area. Any additional lots or minor partitions will require not only an amendment to the Snowy Butte Master Plan, but also must meet all of the requirements of the City's Planning, Building, Fire, and Public Works Departments. LRB/mah cc: File - PW 87011 PUBWKS JksnCkNbadPln 12/16/87 0 ~~a¢ l~ r C~ ~< ~~aO~ ,I" ~-- Y ~.ra ~ Fr r ~ ~ t ~, w ~ z° C ,~ , . '~ =-~-. ., ~ ~ , Page 3 a W F H . N __ 5 P~ O z ~.- ~~~ ~i '~ i J l.J._~ i I -~ ~ i i ! i -! - - ~ , i, -; ;--- ; -- i i ~, ~~ ~~ ~ ~ _-~ 0 ~. SNOWY BUTTE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOVEMBER 4, 1987 6.:30 pm Staff in attendance included Public Works Director Larry Blanchard, Administrative Assistant Randy Kugler, and City Administrator Dave Kucera. Larry Blanchard opened the meeting and reviewed the issues before the City and property owners. Patty Byhre stated she likes Snowy Butte Lane as it is. Roseann Wagner stated she had requested development for 11 lots on her property when the sewer went in. This access would have-been off of Beal Patty Byhre felt additional Right of Way request on Snowy Butte Lane would ruin yards on-east side of Lane. Delaine Fuentes felt there should be no further development in the area. Dan Patterson stated that the potential future developers should pay for .all neede improvements on Snowy, Butte .Lane. Patty Byhre questioned the legality of enforcing a master plan once the affected property owners signed it. Staff advised that a master plan would, be in effect until such time that the property owners desired to change it. _ Dan Patterson pointed out that the city has already allowed the 10 lot maximum for a 400 foot street to be exceeded. Larry Blanchard stated that another meeting would be held on November 18 at 7:30 pm to allow for those property owners unable to attend tonight a chance to express their opinions. Dave Kucera felt the options available were: allow a limited number of houses to be built along Snowy Butte Lane, allow unlimited develop- ment, form a L.I.D'to pay for improvements, dead end Snowy Butte Lane, or rezone to 5 acre tracts. The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 pm. SNOWY BUTTE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOVEMBER 18, 1987 7:.30 pm Staff in attendance included Public Works Director Larry Blanchard and Administrative.Assistant Randy Kugler. Larry Blanchard opened the meeting and reviewed the progress to date. Kathy Wilder stated she did not want to see any further development on Snowy Butte Lane. Roseann Wagner felt Snowy Butte Lane should not be used for through traffic and no further improvements were desired on Snowy Butte.. Dan Patterson described his plans to partition four lots. Barbara Ellias was concerned with traffic from Stone Creek Subdivision and the impact it would have on their property. Delaine Fuentes desired to see the neighborhood remain as it is. Art Decker liked to see the area kept as rural residential and put speed bumps on Snowy Butte to deter traffic. '~ Grant Byhre wanted the area left alone, keep traffic down and avoid widening Snowy Butte Lane. Larry Blanchard advised the group that a Master Plan would be developed, sent to the property owners for review and then taken to the Planning Commission for approval. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 pm. ---STAFF RE PORT--- To: Planning Commission Date: December 29, 1987 From: Randy Kugler, Administrative Assistant & Acting Building Official Re: Resolution to allow ATV-parts sales as a conditional use in a C-4 zone At .the direction of the Planning Commission, I have prepared the appropri- ate resolution to allow for this activity. I would anticipate that sub- ject to the Commission's approval, this change could be incorporated into the zoning code amendments. scheduled to go before the City Council in January. RK/mah PCWORK STRPTATV O PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE (ATV) PARTS SALES AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN A C-4 ZONE WHEREAS, new products or activities become available that were not available on the effective date of the Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the City of Central Point Planning Director has requested an interpre- tation and determination for allowing all-terrain vehicle (ATV) parts sales in a C-4 zone as a conditional use; and WHEREAS, the City of Central Point Planning Commission determined all-terrain vehicle (ATV) parts sales to be similar in use to retail auto parts sales as a condi- tional use in Municipal Code Section 17.44.030; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: •Section 1. The Planning Commission finds that all-terrain vehicle (ATV) parts sales' are not specifically named in the examples of conditional uses in a C-4 zone, and finds further that all-terrain vehicle (ATV) parts sales are similar in use to retail auto parts sales as a conditional use in a C-4 zone. Section 2. All-terrain vehicle (ATV) parts sales are hereby ruled to be a conditional use in a C-4, Tourist/Office Professional zone, City of Central Point Municipal Code Section 17.44.030. Passed by the Planning Commission on December 1, 1987 and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of December, 1987. Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST: Planning Commission Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO O ---STAFF REPORT--- To: Planning Commission Date: December 29, 1987 From: Randy Kugler, Administrative Assistant & Acting Building Official Re: On-site parking requirements for certain general commercial uses During the two months that I have been involved with the planning responsibili- ties, I have had to advise two developers that their plans would involve vari- ances for on-site parking. Both instances involve food service establishments as described in CPMC 17.64.040, G., 6. & 7. I have reviewed our code standards in these two instances against the 1985 Highway Design Manual for similar uses to see if a lesser standard would be justified. My findings indicate that a lesser standard would still provide adequate parking based on the following changes.: 1. For both 17.64.040, G., 6. & 7., apply a net floor area standard instead of of gross floor area. This concept is already applied under 17.64.040, G., 1. 2. For 17.64.040, G., 7., amend "one space for each additional 50 square feet" to "one space for each additional 150 square feet.'! Both of these amendments would still provide more on-site parking than recommend- ed under the Highway Design Manual. Should the Commission feel these changes are warranted, they could be incorporated into the zoning text changes that the Council will be considering in January. RK/mah PCWORK STRPTPK V ' 0 ~' ~1 CJ's C~C C rr~ V' ^~^ Y" L w 3 C a m N 3 e ~. Y ."~ '~C r r a O O e 3,. ~. n o. - 31 n O ~ A `$ 4 ~ ~ 3 O ~ $ - d 3 m C~ b ° ,~ ~ 3i C Z Ol Cf ~ A ~ N r C O ~ tr A W N r ~ _ ~Q Cf Q 7 T S S 9 S 9 9 2 T 2 yOyT K ~~ o ~ o $ s °~v,~ o Ne m. ° v.ee O ~ 3 ~ v, a .v W .~ .'p C. m n: ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ q3 3 3 ~ 3 ~ ~~ x 0 . O iI~ * ~, m ~o W ~ O ~ W D. N t p . i < :~ gs 05 a Os ~ e ~ « ~ ~ ~' c M ^ ' c _ .. ~ r r ~ m a G w «. ~ ~ '^' =i '~' .~` P. O O '~ a Q. ~ '~` p x t~ T fmt r y ~ ~ ; . r N _ p O _ ~e ~. n m; R W ~ _ ~ N N N A M N ~ I ~P p w a O'y O y m~ N C o m L y s d S d ~{ 'r ~ F ~ ~~ $ 6 p ~ ~ ~ 6 ' 6 G ~ ~ l"/ ~ ' » ~ 1R ~ m :~, °~ ~ o • p a a^ o. F n e e F c m ~ c~ p c rn to o ~ c ° r't - A a - ~ 9 i O x x x ~ x x x x ~ x a a a s anvil c ~ O ~ $ $ $ 13 $ $ m ~ ~ $ 0 o O o a~ y.m 0 0 ~ o I O ~ ? T O) 4 OI O O~ O O~ O A tT W V; O O W V• m HI VI 4 W aT W itl .W N . _X G7 ; C O W "~ .~ ; W N • N O O I A y LT tp A ~ ~ S r ~ '~ O O O N y N Z ~ 2 ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ 6 ~~ a O « « O O tn O 0 O ~ O R~ 6C ~2 o b a a a a a a Cm n m N io .. r. ~ O r O p N m; m + m m 6 c r ti » « r c 3 f ~, o = za m a ° c s Z ~ ' W o o o' a A o o 0 Z. O n c o o ~ o i ~ 4 4 , ,~C. Vt _ ; A Z o 0 ~ 02 0 3 ~m oo gp ° , ~..~ Z 2. Z 2 Z Z Z Z o ~~ ~ e Z A co n OO ~ Jl C o e s + •• ~ ~ r .. ':'v.:7: --- S T A F F R E P O R T--- To: Planning Commission Date: December 29, 1987 From: Randy Kugler, Administrative Assistant & Acting Building Official Re: Assignment of nonconforming use classification to the Laurel Residential Care Facility - 134 Laurel Street This structure is not presently on the City inventory as either a class A or B nonconforming use. The structure is nonconforming as it occupies approximately 75~ of the building site whereas 50~ is the permitted maximum in an R-2 zone (see map). Also, there is not adequate on-site parking for this facility. As a result of a request by the present owner to obtain a building permit to do some interior remodeling, I find myself unable to issue a permit until a classi- fication is assigned. The use/structure would appear to meet all of the classification criteria of CPMC 17.56.030 with the possible exception of subsection A., 3. The best infor- mation available suggests that this use/structure has been in existence for at least 16 years. I have not been able to find in the City files record of ~ hearing before the Planning Commission for either a conditional use or variance. A class A designation would allow for limited periodic interior remodeling. Also, 17.56.060, 4., allows the Commission to impose conditions of approval. At a minimum, no further expansion of bed space is suggested so as not to contrib- ute to future parking problems. The Commission needs to recognize that classifi- cation as either an A or B nonconforming use structure takes into account the assumption that the use/structure was legally approved at some time in the past. RK/mah RK/mah PCWORK STRPTLAU /off `~~~~~'~ Z _ a (^, M a~ \\ ~ % N W i \ a "" PP f / "V P ("~ ~rN y~. \ ~I y xm y N ~~{ ~ C'~ u~ \\ m~ ~ PJ~O X b \ O In N 'J O Z ~ f m b U f '~' \ ~. / m O 2 d / ~ ~ J(VO C' O ~ Y QP ~F`a ` aja QPP /, d V + ~? 2 + aC~ 5~. \~ ~~ ~ p ~a~ ~/ o \~* C3Q ~ O ~ n O \~ b O \ O xN ~`~~ k (~ \\ ~ QPP O~ ~{J ~ \µ / O \\VVV//~a~y,~~G~ \ \ ~ P }~~~ ` C / /J\~ U \ \ V^ O~/a, .( O ~ Nk `% ~\ G ~ / V \ ~ / ~ m 'f a a / ~~ '. V\\ ~~b N (~ V © ~ /~ ~ x N u ~ O'L / \ ?P ~\~~ ~f / U Q , o ~ m / ~ + + ~ \ ~ O ~. e~ \) ~O N ~ ~ 1 ~~ / NN XtD ~ \ / O b m N 10 n ~ 1 /~ \ ~ ~ \N QPp~\~V _a Q x / G ~ Cr `.. ... .. .. ... . . ~ ~ 5' ! ~. .., ~'~ i 1~ • ~ i ~ 1 r tia t•• 2- ~ ' : (ha`' it '~ I . _ ~. ...,.:, 1 ., ~..~. j~ ~ 1; 1. I .1 ~ I ~..y. ..1 .,1 .... . ~~ ---5 TAFF REP ORT--- To: Planning Commission Date: December 31, 1987 From: Randy Kugler, Administrative Assistant & Acting Building Official Re: Amendments to the home occupation standards The following memorandum to Administrator Kucera outlines the nature of the problem. Wes Reynolds, Planner with Rogue Valley Council of Governments, has prepared a proposal to address issue which also follows. RK/mah Attachments /~S r MEMORANDUM T0: Dave Kucera, City Administrator PROM: Randy Kugler, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Home Occupations in Commercial Zones sad Mixed Commercial/Residential Uses DATE: 11 December .1987 As a result of a .recent citizen inquiry, I find a frustrating problem in the administration of the Home Occupation and Business License sections ~of the CPMC.relating to home occupation in .commercial zones. The. issuance of a Aome Occupation Permit is restricted to residential zones per 17.60.190. As a business .license is also to be issued per 17.60.190 (D), I am limited to reviewing the request for compliance against various zoning criteria (i. e. offstreei parking ..requirements, landscaping, buffers, etc). The present code structure penalizes zesidents from having home occupations if their. property is commercially zoned. By placing. their request to establish a home occupation under the more rigorous review criteria of a "business", a frustrating situation is created for both citizen .and staff. There is also no clear articulation in the Code as to whether mixed residential and commercial uses are permitted if a business license is indeed issued. I would like to pursue a revision to the home occupation requirements- whereby such a permit could also be issued for commercial zones. To insure that these home occupations do not evolve into regular businesses, a yearly zenewal review could be conducted. The existing review standards are sufficient to determine use compliance. I also believe a clear statement on mixed residential/commercial uses is needed. Both of these concerns could be incorporated into the present zoning text amendments that the Council will be hearing in January. /' %/ ., .. ~ '' „! io ~ G ~ ~`. o~ /~ Memol 12/11/87/ADMIN2 C~~ N ~ ; ~, 155 S. Second Street • P.O. Box 3275 Council of Governments Central Point, OR 97502 503-664-6674 December 31, 1987 T0: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Wes Reynolds, RVCOG Attached are proposed revisions for Chapter 1,20, Annexation Procedure, and Chapter 1.24, Public Hearing Procedure, of the Central Point Municipal Code. The revisions to 1.20 provide for concurrent review of land use actions at -the time of annexation and make other minor changes for consistency with recent changes in state law and the city code. The revisions to 1.24 reclassify several actions by whether they require staff approval, planning commission approval, or city council approval. 'The recent changes in the Zoning title. prompt some of these changes, however, it is also suggested that Central Point no longer require city council approval of partitioning. Also enclosed are some further revisions to the home occupation section of the Zoning Title. This was inadvertently left out of your .recent Resolution 130. The attached material also proposes some provision for home occupations in non-residential zones. As before deletions. from the text are in [brackets], and the proposed additions underlined. If we have time at the next planning commission meeting it would be good to discuss partitioning and lot line adjustments in the subdivision regulations and how these things affect the procedural sections of the code. /7 Chapter -1..20 ANNEXATION PROCEDURE Sections: 1.20..010 1.20.011 1.20.020 1.20.030 1.20.040 1.20.050 1.20.060 Generally. Application ahd review.. Preliminary plat requirements. Legal description.. Annexation proposal fee. Final plat. Waiver of fees. 1.20.010 Generally. All proposals for annexation of real property to the city under the provisions of Oregon Revised Statues 222.111 to 222.180, now in effect or as hereafter amended, shall be accompanied by a preliminary plat, an exterior boundary legal description-and the annexation fee as provided in this chapter [provided]. 1.20.011 Application and review. Applications and review thereof shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 1.24 of the Central Point Municipal Code. Processin& of the application shall follow ORS Chapter 222 and__ORS 308.225 and anv other (and all] applicable laws of the state. Applications for annexation may be accompanied by other, concurrent applications, for amendment to the comprehensive plan, amendments to the zoning maps or other land use actions, and requests for withdrawal from special districts, provided that such concurrent applications meet all requirements therefor. 1.20.020 Preliminary plat requirements. Plats submitted as part of proposals for annexation shall be made on paper that is eighteen inches by twenty-four inches in size. Plats shall be drawn to the following standards and provide information as follows: A. All plats shall be drawn in any of the following scales: one inch equals twenty feet; one inch equals fifty feet; one inch equals one hundred feet; one inch equals two hundred feet; B. A title block shall be shown in the lower right hand corner displaying the name of the engineer, surveyor or other person who prepared such plat, the date and the names of owners proposing such annexation. _ _, C. Plats shall clearly and legibly show existing boundary lines of the city adjacent to such annexation together with names of streets and such other information as will clearly identify the relationship of the area proposed to be annexed to the existing boundaries of the city. D. The exterior boundary of the area proposed to be annexed shall be clearly and legibly shown. E. The code number, account number and tax lot number as shown on the official records of the Jackson County tax assessor for each parcel of real property or portion thereof within the area proposed to be annexed shall be clearly shown together with the name of the owner of record and the name of any contract purchasers under any contract or-memorandum thereof filed in the official records of Jackson County. F. [If] Any public roads [are] included within the areas to be annexed [, they] shall be clearly shown. 1.20.030 Le&al description. A narrative legal description of the exterior boundary of the area. to be annexed shall be submitted with each proposal for annexation. 1.20.040 Annexation proposal fee. Each proposal for annexation shall be accompanied by a fee of three hundred twenty-five dollars. In the event the city is required to incur expenses in processing the proposed annexation, including the cost of payroll, materials and services incurred therein, which expenses shall exceed the sum of three hundred twenty-five dollars, payment to the city of such expenses in excess of the sum of three hundred twenty-five dollars shall be a condition of final acceptance of such annexation by the city. 1.20.050 Final plat. Annexations approved by the council will be conditioned upon filing a final plat with the city [recorder] administrator. Final plats shall be drawn with black Tndia ink upon Mylar film or other material approved by the city [Recorder] administrator that has similar characteristics of strength and permanency suitable for binding and copying purposes. Final plats shall be of the same size and contain the same information as required for preliminary plats in Section 1.20.020. 1.20.060 Waiver of fees. The council may waive payment of fees at its discretion. ~~ Chapter 1.24 PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES Sections• 1.24.010 Purpose. 1.24.020 [Planning commission and city council functions. 1.24.030] Applications and staff review. 1.24.030 Staff .approval. 1.24.040 [Staff review] Planning Commission approval. 1.24.050 Planning commission [review and] recommendation to city council. 1.24.060 Notice requirements. 1.24.070 Conduct of public hearing. 1.24.080 Request for review on appeal. 1.24.010 Purpose. It shall be the purpose of this chapter to establish a uniform procedure for processing, and for notice an d_ public hearings, if required, of planning, zoning and land use decisions, including amendments to the text comprehensive plan, annexations, amendments the zoning ordinance, subdivisions, planned home parks, major and minor land partitions, site plan reviews, conditional-use permits, requirements of the zoning, subdivision, and and map of the to the text and map of unit developments, mobile lot line adjustments, variances from the fence ordinances, withdrawal from special districts, street and alley vacations, [and] home occupations and historic review applications. 1.24.0[3]20 Applications. - A. All applications under this chapter shall be filed with the city administrator or his designee, upon forms established by the city administrator. B. The applications clerk shall require that all applications be accompanied by the appropriate fee as established by the city council and other supplemental information, including proposed findings, where appropriate. Findings, when required, shall include the criteria and standards applicable to the specific type of application, a comprehensive statement of factual information about the action that the applicant proposes, [intends to establish and upon which he intends to rely] and proposed conclusions setting forth the manner in which the applicant believes that the facts meet all criteria and support [an] allowing [ante of] the application. If the application and all supplemental information is [satisfactory] complete the applications clerk shall accept the same for filing upon receipt of the necessary fees. If the application is [unsatisfactory.] found to be incomplete at or after the time of filing, the .applications clerk or other city staff shall reject the same with a notation thereon or an accompanying letter indicating the reasons for rejection. [In the case of a subdivision or major partition,] The application will either be accepted as completed or rejected as incomplete with reasons, within thirty days of its filing [receipt]. 0 1.24.020 (cont.) C. Upon filing of a[n accepted] complete application, the applications clerk shall assign the same for review by the appropriate members of the city staff and with [all] affected city, county, state and federal agencies, and [all] affected special districts, [where] as appropriate. [B] D. The staff review shall be for conformance to the -.applicable ordinances of the city and engineering, planning and construction standards, where applicable. [D] E. A subdivision or major partition shall be reviewed and .either approved or denied by [both] the [planning commission and] city [council] within 180 days from the date of a[n accepted] complete application. [1.24.040 Staff review procedure. A. The application shall be reviewed by the appropriate member of the city staff. If additional time is necessary for an, adequate review of 'the application, and the city administrator believes that such additional time will result in a delay of more than sixty days between the time of the filing of the application and the public hearing, the city council may, after notice to the applicant, grant the city administrator a reasonable extension of time for review.] 1.24.0[2]40 Planning commission [and city council functions] approval. The planning commission shall review and decide, without public hearings, the following matters: 1. Fence variances; 2. [Outline development plans for planned unit developments]. Findings_on what uses are "similar uses"; Site plan reviews; C. The planning commission shall hold public hearings and decide the following matters: 1. Conditional use permits; 2. Zoning variances; 3. Maior and minor land partition's; and 4. Maior and minor land partition variances. 1`6. xx. xxx; 3. Lot line adiustments according to the procedure in Section 16.xx.xxx; 1.24.040 (cont.) (.030 C] D, For actions to be decided by the planning commission, upon completion of staff review, the appropriate members of the city staff map prepare a report. A staff report shall summarize the application and recommend approval, approval with conditions or modifications, or disapproval of the application. The staff report may also contain proposed findings, which may incorporate all or any part of the applicant's proposed findings. [.050 ] E. All planning commission [reviews, whether the planning commission is serving the review and`recommendation function or the] public hearings [function, shall be performed in a quasi-judicial manner .and] shall be in accordance with rules of conduct [of] for public hearings [and planning commission review] as required in this chapter. c [.020 D] A. The planning commission shall review and make recommendations to the city council on those matters specified in subsection [E] B of this section. [.020 E] B. The city council shall hold a public hearing and decide the following matters: 1. Amendments to the text and map of the comprehensive plan; '2. Amendments to the text and map of the zoning ordinance.; 3. Annexations. [4. Major and minor land partitions; 5. Major and minor land partition variances; 6.] 4. Mobile home parks; - [7] 5. Preliminary development plans of planned unit developments; [8] 6. Street and alley vacations; [9] 7. Subdivison preliminary plats; [lOJ 8. Subdivision variances; [llJ 9. Withdrawal from special districts. [D] C. For actions to be reviewed by the planning commission for recommendation to city council, [upon completion of the staff report] the application will be placed upon th'e agenda of the first regularly scheduled planning commission meeting that allows sufficient time for publication and posting of notices as required by this chapter. [B] D. [Review.] The planning commission may continue their review of [the] an application to its next regularly scheduled meeting, if necessary, to receive additional information. Upon completion of its review, the planning commission shall pass a resolution of recommendations and findings, which may incorporate all or any part of the appli'cant's proposed findings or the staff findings. Following passage of said resolution, the city administrator shall schedule a public hearing before the city council. ~~ 1.24.050 (cont.) E. [All] When the planning- planning commission] is serving function [or] the public hearing quasi-judicial manner and] shall conduct [of] for public hearings required in this chapter. commission [reviews, whether the the review and recommendation [function, shall be performed in a be in accordance with rules of [and planning commission review] as 1.24.060 Notice requirements. A. Notices of applications under this chapter before the planning commission [/]or city council for a decision shall be given as follows: 1. Public hearings before the city council: a. In cases of major changes to the zoning map or the comprehensive plan map, notice shall be given by publishing once at least thirty days prior to the date of the public hearing and once in the week prior to the week of the public hearing.: b. In the case of all public hearings, except item l.a. above, minimum notices of the public hearings is to be published once each week for two successive weeks. prior to the date of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation within the city, with the second publication to be no less than twenty-four hours prior to the hearing; c. In cases of minor amendment to the comprehensive plan map, in addition to item b, above, notice of the public hearing shall be sent by mail postmarked not less than [seven] ten days prior to the date of hearing to the owners of property situated within a two-hundred-foot radius of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of the application, as .shown on the current assessor's tax rolls; d. In cases of annexation, in addition to item b, above, the city administrator shall cause notices of the public hearing to be posted in four public places in the city for two successive weeks prior to the date of the hearing [and to cause notices of the public hearing to be published once each week for two successive weeks prior to the date of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation within the city, with the second publication to be no less than twenty-four hours prior to the hearing]; e. In cases of street or alley vacations, in addition to item b. above,. written notices of the petition and public hearing shall be posted not less than twenty-eight days before the hearing in three of the most public places in the city and at each end of the proposed vacation. 1.24.060 (cont.) 2. Public hearings before the planning commission: a. Notices of the public hearing to be published once each week for two successive weeks prior to the date of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation within the. city with the second publication to be no less than twenty-.four hours prior to the hearing. b. In the case of variances from the, requirements of the zoning ordinance, and applications for temporary mobile home placement for infirm citizens, in addition to item a. above, notice of the public hearing shall be sent by mail postmarked not less than [seven] ten days prior to the date of hearing to the owners of property situated within a two-hundred-foot radius of the boundaries of the property which is the subJect of the application, as shown on the current assessor's tax rolls. 3. Review and decide before the planning commission: In cases where the planning commission reviews and decides, notices shall be given by posting the meeting agenda in three public places in the city in the week prior to the date of review. 4. Review and recommendation before the planning commission: a. In the case of planning commission review which results in recommendations rather than decisions, notice shall be given by .posting meeting agenda in three public places in the city in the week prior to the date of review. B. Contents of Notice. All notices, whether published, posted or mailed, shall include: a brief description of the application, including the name of the applicant and property owners; set forth the street address or other easily understood QeoQraphical referent to the subiect [general location of the]property; describe in aener terms the aoolicable criteria from the municipal code and the comprehensive plan known to a,~ply to the application at issue; [and] the date, time and place of the public hearing; and state that_ failure to raise an issue in person or by letter precludes appeal and that failure to specifv to which criterion the comment is directed precludes appeal based on that criterion. Such notices shall also comply with the requirements of the city charter and other ordinances and state statutes. C. Mailed Notices. 1. In all cases in which a mailing of notices is required, such mailing shall be the responsibility of the city. Notices shall be mailed to the address of the owner of the property as shown on the assessor's tax rolls, and such mailing shall be considered sufficient notice. Failure of any owner to receive the mailed notices shall not be grounds to invalidate the [notice requirements] public hearing. 1.24.060 (cont.) 2. For minor comprehensive plan amendments: a. In determining the affected persons to receive notice by mail of proposed changes, renters should be considered-among those affected. b. In the event that all of the property within a single ownership is not included in the area to be changed, the boundary for those to receive notice by mail shall be measured from the closest line of the subiect property [line] and not from the boundary line of the area to be changed. 1.24.070 Conduct of public hearing. A. At the date and time set Eor public hearing, in accordance with the notices thereof, the planning commission or city council shall hold a public hearing on the application, acting as a quasi-judicial body and subject to all the procedural requirements in connection therewith. The format of the public hearing shall include the following: 1. A description of the application and applicable substantive criteria. All persons present shall be informed that testimony and evidence must be directed toward the applicable criteria and that failure rn address a criterion nrecludesaooeal based on that criterion; 2. A reading into the record of the notice provided of the hearing; 3. A declaration of any conflicts of interest by any member; 4. Receipt of the staff report including the proposed findings -and recommendations; 5. Receipt of the planning commission report, if applicable,- including proposed findings and recommendations; 6. A marking of and incorporation into the record of all exhibits; ' 7. An opportunity for presentation by the applicant, [which presentation should not exceed thirty minutes]; 8. An opportunity for presentation by other proponents of the application [with the presentation of each group's spokesman not to exceed ten minutes, and the presentation of each individual not to exceed ten minutes]; 9. An opportunity for presentation by opponents of the application [with the presentation of each group's spokesman not to exceed thirty minutes, and the presentation of each individual not to exceed ten minutes]; 10. An opportunity for rebuttal and for questions to be asked by all persons making presentations by both the planning commission or city council, and members of the public;. 11. Closure of the public portion of the hearing and deliberation. n 1.24.070 (cont.) B. The planning commission or the city council may allow the application, allow the same with conditions or modifications, or deny the same. In the-event of denial, an application shall not be refiled within one year of denial unless the planning commission or city council expressly grants the right to refile, for reasons which shall be stated in the record. C. The planning commission or city .council shall make findings of fact in connection with their decision on the application, with said findings to include the applicable criteria and standards, the facts they find to be supported by substantial evidence, and conclusions [describing how the] about whether the facts [either] support [or prevent allowance of] the application, based upon the applicable standards and criteria. Such findings may be read into the record as part of a motion made at the time of the meeting, in support of the action taken, or the planning commission or council may direct that such findings be prepared in written form by the applicant or staff, to be presented at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Such findings shall be in written form and shall be attached as an exhibit to any resolution or .ordinance passed relating to the application. D. The presiding officer [of the planning commission or city council] shall have authority to: 1. Regulate the course and decorum of the meetings; 2. Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters; 3. Rule on offers of proof and relevancy of evidence; 4. Impose reasonable limitations on the number of witnesses heard and set reasonable time limits for oral presentation, cross- examination, and rebuttal testimony; 5. Question any person appearing, and allow other members to question any other person; 6. Waive[, in his discretion,] the application of any rule in this chapter where the circumstances of the hearing indicated that would be expedient and proper to do so, provided that such waiver does not act to prejudice or deny any party his substantial rights provided in this chapter or otherwise by law; 7. Take such other action as authorized by the council or commission to appropriately conduct the hearing. it as E. A ruling of the presiding officer of of the nlanninQ commission or city council may be appealed by any member present. The appeal must be seconded. A ruling may be reversed by a majority of the members present and voting. A tie vote sustains the QresidinQ officer's [chair's] decision. 1.24.070 (cont.) F. Procedure for declaration of conflicts of interest shall be as follows: 1. Prior Disclosure. Members of the council or commission should disclose pre-hearing ex parte contacts with any interested party or any actual or potential conflict of interest prior to the public hearing. 2. Challenges to Impartiality. A party to a hearing or :member of a hearing body may challenge the qualifications of a member to participate in the hearing and decision regarding the matter. The challenge shall state by affidavit the facts relied upon by the challenger relating to a person's bias, prejudgment, personal interest, or other facts from which the challenger has concluded that the member of the hearing body cannot participate in an impartial manner. Except for good cause shown, a challenge shall be delivered by personal service to the city administrator not less than tw.enty- four hours preceding the time set for public hearing. The administrator shall attempt to notify the members whose qualifications are challenged prior to the meeting. The challenge shall be incorporated into the record of the hearing. 3. Disqualification. No member shall participate in discussion of the proposal or vote on the proposal or any procedural matter related thereto when any of the following conditions exist: a. Any of the following have a direct or substantial financial interest in the proposal: the member or the member's spouse, brother, sister, child, parent, father-in-law, mother-in-law, anp business in which the member is then serving or has served within the previous two years, or any business with which the member is negotiating for or has an arrangement or understanding concerning prospective partnership or employment; b. The member owns property within the area entitled to receive notice by mail of the public hearing; c. For any other reason, the member himself has determined that his own participation in the hearing and decision cannot be in an impartial manner. Disqualification for such reasons (other than the member's own judgment) may be ordered by a majority of the members of a hearing body present and voting if the member does not voluntarily abstain. The member who is the subject of the motion for disqualification may not vote on the motion. 4. Participation by Interested Officers or Employees. No officer or employee of the city who has financial or other private interest in a proposal shall participate in discussion with or give an official opinion to the hearing body on the proposal-without first declaring for the record the nature and extent of such interest. 1.,24.070 (cont.) 5. Rights of Disqualified Member of the Hearing Body. a. An abstaining or disqualified member of the hearing body may be counted for purposes of formulating a quorum if he is present. A member who represents personal interest at a hearing may do so only by abstaining from voting on the proposal, physically joining the audience and vacating the seat on the hearing body, and making full .disclosure of his or her status and position .at the time of addressing the hearing body. b. If the number of abstentions or disqualifications would make it impossible for the hearing body to make a decision, the members, after stating their reasons for abstention or disqualification, shall by so doing be requalified and proceed to resolve the issues. 1.24.080 Request for review on appeal. A. Any party aggrieved by the action of the planning commission or city council may request review.of such action by the council, or the council may on its own motion schedule any matter for review. In the case of the request for review, the same must be filed in writing with the city administrator no more than [five] seven days from the date of initial action, and in the case of own motion review, the council motion shall be made no later than the next regularly scheduled council meeting. Review shall be held at the earliest regularly scheduled council meeting that allows for compliance-with the notice requirements. B. The city administrator shall publish notice that a review hearing is to be held at least once during the week prior to the-date of the review hearing in a newspaper of general circulation within the city, with said notice to describe the action previously taken and the date, time and place of the review hearing. In all cases in which notice had initially been required in some manner other than publication, notice of the review hearing shall be given in the same fashion and under the same terms and conditions. C. At the time set for review, the applicant, proponents and opponents of the application shall be given an opportunity to make an oral presentation in support of their respective positions. The council-may, in its discretion, allow additional evidence, or limit review to the existing record, but shall in any event allow opportunities for argument to be made. D. At the conclusion of the review hearing, council may affirm, modify or reverse the prior determination, but in the event of a modification or reversal of the prior decision, it shall enter its findings in support thereof in writing into the record. 17.60.190 Home Occupations A. Purpose and Scope. The intention of the home occupation permit for residential zones is to provide for a limited service-oriented business activity which is conducted in such a manner that the residential character of the building and the neighborhood is preserved in residential zones. and a transition t fall commercial use is facilitated in commercial zones. B. No Permit Transfers. No permit for a home occupation shall be transferred or assigned, nor shall the permit authorize any person other than named therein to commence or carry on the occupation for which the permit was issued. C. Permit Required. The city administrator, or his designate, shall issue a home occupation permit in a residential zone if, and only if, he finds that all of the following criteria are, and will be, met by the individual applicant. The permit may include conditions setting an expiration date., requiring periodic review and renewal, requiring the applicant to sign an'acknowledgment of the conditions, or other conditions specifically dealing with the property use involved „ where such conditions are found to :be reasonably necessary to maintain the criteria herein mentioned. 1. The home occupation must be conducted solely within the confines of an accessory structure or the main dwelling and, if within the main dwelling, the home occupation shall not exceed ten percent of the total floor area; 2. Carports shall not be used for the home occupation. A portion of a garage may be used for the home occupation only if the applicant can show that there will be no resulting loss in the number of required off-street parking spaces; 3. No signs associated with such a use shall be permitted; 4: .The occupation shall be conducted by a member or members of the family residing on the property as an incidental use to the primary residential use. No additional person or persons shall be employed; 5. In conducting the home occupation, there shall be no mechanical noise so loud, unusual, or penetrating as to cause discomfort or annoyance to adjacent residents. 6. The home occupation shall not have utility services other than those required for normal residential use; 7. There shall be no entrance nor exit specifically provided in the dwelling or on the premises for the conduct of the home occupation, except to the extent necessarv to comply with state law; 8. The home occupation shall not encourage customer or client visits to the dwelling that would result in neighborhood vehicular traffic levels above those levels generated by the residential uses; 9. The electrical, plumbing; or structural elements of the dwelling shall not be significantly altered in order to accommodate the home occupation; 10. The yards, landscaping, and exterior of the structure shall not be altered from their residential character in order to make the site appear to be a commercial business. [D) E. Fee Required. At the time of application to the city administrator, or his designate, for a home occupation. permit, the applicant is required to pay, in addition to an annual business license fee on application twenty-five dollars. This application fee is nonrefundable. [E] F, Revocation, The permit may be revoked by the city administrator for violation of any conditions imposed or authorized, or when it has been found that the occupation is being conducted in violation of any state statute or city ordinance in a disorderly manner, to the detriment of the public, or when the occupation is being carried out by a person other than (that named] those authorized on the permit. The city administrator, before revoking a permit, shall give the permittee reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard. [F] G. Appeal. Any applicant or affected or concerned property owner has the right to appeal the decis-ion of the city administrator or his designate, to the planning commission, in the manner provided by Section 17.60.170 of this code. [G] H. Existing Uses. Persons engaged in home occupations. lawfully in existence [on residentially owned premises] on the effective date of the amendment codified in this section may continue to thus operate but shall be require to secure a permit hereunder.[, and] Any such activity, use, or accessory sign, device or structure, or part thereof, which does not conform to this section shall not be permitted to expand or enlarge and shall be removed or terminated upon (1) change of use or ownership of the premises; or (2) written complaint of adjacent property owners, after due notice and hearing, if the city administrator finds that the interference with the use and enjoyment of-the neighboring premises is such as to defeat -the purpose of the zoning ordinance. .3/