HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - January 13, 1987Next Resolution No. 122
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
155 South Second Street
January 13, 1987 - 7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
I. Meeting called to order
II. Roll call
III. Approval of minutes
IV. Correspondence and Public Appearances
V. Business
A. Final plat review for Stonecreek III Subdivision submitted by
Gary Whittle, developer.
VI. Miscellaneous
VII. Adjournment
---STAFF REPORT---
Toe Planning Commission Dhute: January 9, 1987
From: David Kucera, City Administrator
Ree Final Plat Review - Stonecreek III Subdivision
The developer of Stonecreek III, Gary Whittle, has requestsenid final plat appro-
val at a special Planning Commission meeting scheduled fos .Fanuary 13, 1987.
Since Don Paul is absent for medical reasons, we have askedi.Ron Hough with
Rogue Valley Council of Governments, Public-Works Superinrtamdent Vern Capps and
Finance Director George Jacobs to review the subdivision a~seement for compli-
ance with City requirements. Their reports are attached $wx' your review.
In general, Ron Hough found that.the street. lights which heiw.e not been
installed to be the only-major-remaining concern with the ~ibdivision. Mr.
Whittle is asking that he be allowed to amend the existing;aiubdivision agree-
ment, provide a cash deposit-for future street light improx,~ements, and proceed
with final plat approval. A copy of his proposed addendumatto the subdivision
agreement is also attached for~our review.-
Mr. Capps also expressed concern about the street lights., arced concern about
water meters and curb stops. As of the date this report wets prepared, Mr.
Whittle has assured us that the water meters and curb stop*as will be installed
according to City specifications by noon Monday, January lid?„ 1987.
The City Council is scheduled to adopt a reduced park fee srchedule at their
January 15, 1987 meeting. The. ordinance currently has an.eymergency clause
which, if adopted, would allow the developer of Stonecreelt.3=II to receive final
plat approval from the Council-on that date and upon paymermt of a $200 per
dwelling unit park fee.
In addition to the $100.00. fee for final plat review and. X71..600.00 total park
fee, Finance Director Jacobs reports that the amount of $••"ll.„988.54 is also due
which includes inspections by City staff and engineer, testting by Pittsburgh
Lab, and water meter installations. As of this writing, tgl~ese amounts totaling
$4,688.54 have not been paid.
With the addendum to the subdivision agreement, if the P'Laffining Commission
determines conformance with the approved preliminary pla-t[ and with City regula-
tions and requirements, it shall deliver the same to the C91ty Council for final
approval. Also, if the Planning Commission makes this dett~rmination, it should
authorize the Planning Commission Chairman's signature on tthe final plat sub--
ject to Council approval.
DK/mat
Staff Report
FINAL PLAT
UNIT III - __ ~ ~_
STONECREEK SUBDIVISION
Applicants Whittle Construction Co.-_
Gary Whittle, developer
Staff: Ron W. Hough, RVCOG
January 2, 1987
INTRODUCTION
Stonecreek Subdivision Unit III includes 13 new residential lots
located along Joseph Street, southwest of Glenn Way.
The Preliminary Plat was approved by the Planning Commission:~and
City Council, a Subdivision Agreement was prepared and signed, and
now the developer is returning for approval of the Final Plat,
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL
The procedures for processing the Preliminary Plat of a new sub
division are included in Chapter 16.29 of the Subdivision Ordinancs.
The Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's Preliminary Plat
on May-6, 1986, which included the-staff report and the following
exhibits:
Exhibit "A" - Preliminary Plat_
Exhibit "B" - Notice_of Public Hearing
Exhibit "C" - Certificate of Posting of Notice of Hearing
Exhibit "D" - Conditions & Requirements (Recommended by staff)
Exhibit "E" - Staff memorandums
Following the discussion, the Planning Commission passed Resolution
#112 recommending approval of the subdivision to the City Council.
On May 15, 1986, staff and the applicant presented the plan to the
City Council, which. also approved the Preliminary Plat, .along with
the recommended conditions and requirements.
OVERVIEW OF THE SUBDIVISION PLAN
As stated above, this unit or phase includes thirteen lots, being
developed under the City's R-1, Single-family Residential zoning
district requirements, contained in Chapter 17.20 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Prior to approval of the Preliminary Plat, the staff
and Planning Commission reviewed the plans for consistency with
City development codes and the Preliminary Plat was approved by
both Planning Commission and City Council.
0
~ _~-
Section 16.24.080 states in part, "Approval of the preliminary
plat shall indicate the approval of the final plat provided
there is no change and there is full compliance with all require-
ments of this title." Therefore, the details of lot sizes and
shapes, street widths, .etc., should have been formalized by the
time of preliminary approval. if any changes were necessary, they
would have been-made conditions of Final Plat approval: -
The following is a summary of the thirteen lots and their approximate
areas, as measured from the plat map. Minimum lot size in this
zoning district is 6,000 sq.ft. and 7,000 sq.ft. for a corner lot.
Block 9, Lot 6 --- 8,038 s.f. I ~~
" 9, 7 - _.6,877 s.f: I I ,
" 9, 8 - 6,864 s:f: _ - o
'! 9, 9 ~- 6,681 s.f. ~
~~ y~ ~. 10 - 7.450 s.f. I~ ~ ~ ~
I~ s ~ _ l ,°
" 10~.-.~ _ 1 - 8,676 s.f. p .: ro _ -
.. 10~ ar 2 - 13,930 s.f. .5 I .. /. ~
~~
10, " 3 - 10,000 s.f. I eI + f~~. ro
" 10, 4 - 7,340 s.f. , ~ ~
" 10, 5 - 6,600 s.f. °~ ° °
.. 10, .~ 6 -_.6.600 s.f. ~~I... a I~ I ~~ ® i
" 10, 7 - 6,600 s.f. I~ _
11 10, 11 8. ~_ 7/700 s.f. _ I gl 6®CI~_.I ^I O~®-.
All of thLe_ above lots are consistent 1 9I ' CIP ~ eY9~ - y
with lot size requirements and the I I I ~
plan for Joseph Street is consistent ~I,
with the City's standards for right- ~~ , I ~~ s v,
of-way and street width, and curve ~_a~ ~ ° ~_y ~
nQ Yadlus. ~______~ snes4
),` The minimum lot width is 60 ft. in this
district, and 70 ft. for corner lots.
ere are only two corner lots and both have a street frontage width
of 0 feet. Eight other lots have widths of 60 feet or greater.
However, lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Block 10 front on the outer curve :of
Joseph Street and each have a frontage width of 45.13 feet. Because
of the greater depth of these lots-and larger .areas, the reduced
widths appear to be justifiable. The Planning Commission granted
variances_for these four lots at the time of Preliminary Plat approval
and it is understood that those variances were for the reduced lot
widths, at least in part. The variance may also cover a.depth-to-
width ratio problem with lot #2. This is the largest lot and it
appears that its depth exceeds 2~t times its width by a small amount.
Subdivision Ordinance section 16.16.050 states, "rn no case shall
the average depth b'e more than two and one-half times the width."
This does not appear to be a problem and is not a concern of staff.
~/
- 2 -
SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT '& REQI7IREMENTS_
in order to establish the specific requirements and time limits for
completion of the subdivision improvements, a Subdivision Agreement
was signed on Ouly 22, 1986, pertaining to the thirteen lots of this
phase of Stonecreek III. Construction plans were included as Exhibit
"A" and other city conditions were Exhibit "8". Time deadlines
extended to November 15, 1986 and the agreement stated that the final
certificate of acceptance would not be issued until completion of the
improvements.
The following is a summary of the Conditions and Requirements that
were included in this Subdivision Agreement, along with a summary of
their current status, as of this dates
1. Developer to provide a 100-year storm water drainage basin report
and to design all facilities and housing to comply with the require-
. ments of the Federal. Flood Insurance Program and the City Engineer.
• Zt appears that this requirement has been met. A drainage
system was approved., drains have been installed, and minimum
elevations for dwellings have been determined.
2. Provide curb heights at or above the 100-year flood elevation
for each lot.
• The minimum elevation for curb heights has been determined
and curbs have been installed accordingly.
3. All dwellings shall have elevations or lowest floor at least 12
ihches above the 100-year flood elevation.
• The I00-year flood elevation has been determined and compliance
with this requirement will be ensured through the Site Plan
Review process when each lot is developed.
4. Sewer depth shall be sufficient to allow future extensions.
• The sewer lines to serve this phase of the subdivision have been
designed, approved by the City, and installed..
5. Public facilities shall be built to City standards and at the
developer's expense.
• This is occurring and the City has the authority to refuse
occupancy permits "until full and final inspection, approval
and acceptance of the entire. subdivision and all improvements
therein...", as stated in Section 16.28.070(8)(5) of the Sub-
division Ordinance...
6. Signs to be installed by City at developer's expense.
• Again refer to #5 above.
- 3 -
_ p)YI 9 WR'r ... ~ -w ~ ~ _
7. Street lights to be in accordance with Pacific Power and Light
Company's recommendations at developer's expense.
• To date, street lights have not been installed in this phase
along Joseph Street. PP&L .was contacted and they were not
aware of any request from Gary Whittle pertaining to lights.
In faet,~PP&b-indicated that-they=were having trouble getting
lights, didn't like the role of consulting service, and preferred
that th~~devel~p~i+~afld~Eitg wvPR=oti~ the Sighting arrangements.
Whittle could not be reached and the lighting standards of the
City are-not-dear. '-Subdivision Grdinarice Sedtion 16.32.090
states simply, "Street lights shall be installed on metal poles
according to'City standards." Therefore, it appears that the
street lighting issue is unresolved at this time.
B. .Final .location, design and sizing of public facilities to be
determined by City, Engineer at time of approving_construction
.. drawings: :a ----`^_-- _' _ _-=--- -- .,.._- _`_ -----z. ~:._=:_a
- - - -_- -
- • With~the~exgeption~of the stree£ lights, it appears that this
- reg6izemeat has been met.
9. Approval .snot transferable. Any ownership change will require
Planning'Commissiori~approval and possible new conditions.
o IDoaworls;td_beadoner.tn meet this condi~t-ion. -
10. Fees_€orcparks_shaYll~:$650 per unit,~a~able prior to filing
the Final Plat.
• The City of Central Point has discussed its parkland dedication
"in-lieu" fees and has decided to Zvmex-these fees to $200 per
dwelling unit. _ Those fees would total_ -$2,600_ for. Z[~e~ 13- lots;
- of-this phase; payable prior Eo final Plat approval. However,
`' siade'fhe-City has not officially adopted the £ee change, the
applicant has also not yet paid, the fees.____ ,_ J, _,- __
11. Storm :drainage plan s1iaT1 be submitted-with a revised Preliminary
Plat. (ELIMINATES)
12. Utilities shall be in relation to street centerline per City standards.
• Constructed as approved on Preliminary Plat.
SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS:
= -- Curbs and gutters (installed) .
- Sidewalks (to be installed later with building permits).
Water, sewer and storm drains (installed).
- Street excavation, base rock and paving (completed).
- Street lights & underground utilities (no lights installed).
- Engineering, staking, and centerline monumentation (completed).
- Water meter boxes (not installed -- can be included later).
- Park in-lieu and other fees (to be paid).
S~
- 4 -
NEPfORANDIIPf
TOo Dave Kucera~ City Administrator ~,////~~
F'ROMs Vern Capps, Public Works' Supt. ///~
SIIBJECTs Stone Creek Subdivision IInit 3 "
- - - _ .o
DA3'Es== =-- ~ B January.~.998~==~__._- =- __ ___. _..~ ..-=---
Stone Creek is complete as far as my part ie concerned All comgeuetion test have pasedd9
the paving has been inspected and passed. I would like to note' hmwever that the meter
boxes have not been set and curb stops-need te-fie brought up t~s made. 91so there-are
no street lights on this projects and my p3.ans did not show that there was to be lights
installed. ff mite also point.out_that you may want._to have a bemaicade.a~ the South
end of Joseph St;~ -
a
M E M O R A N D U M
- T0:
_ FROM:
SUBJECT:
- DATE:
Dave Kucera,^:City Administrator- __
George Jacobs, Finance Director ~~~ ;__ ^
Past Due Account, Whittle Construction Co.
9 January 1987,
As of this date"the following is a detail of~what Gary Whittle, Whittle
Construction Co.., owes.. the City of_ Central Point in unpaid charges for
___ _
StoneCreek`Subdivisiorie ~ -
_:. ~_~~ --- -Inspectiorisby~Cit'y`_ _- -~----- =_--__ ----._~
- _ . _ . _ _Staff ~ Engineex_ .. _ _ _ _ _ .672.06 _ . .. .
_ , , _ _ _ ,.Testing; Pii_tshurgh. Lab.._ _ _ ._ .: _ _ ..1.,241JO_
_ ._ Water meter installation __. __-_...74.7.8.-.
_.__.. _ _ Total - ._ _. _ . X1,988.54
y As of this-date our .efforts to-get Mi. -Whittle to pay the above charges
have been unauccess.ful.__ ___ __. -
_ _ _ _ Not."included _-ia- the above detail -is the Par_ k -fae_s that will. be due at
-the time the final plat is approved by the City. In addition, there is
a final plat filing fee of $100.00.
George.
-- GJ:rip
.
O
BBDENB~NI
THiS IS AN ADDENDUM to~`the agreement-:ente.red-.into by and
between the City of Central_ Pointl_ Oregon,_ a_ munigip~t~_~______
corporation, hereafter referred to as "City" and Whittle
Construction, hereaftee referred to. as:°subdivider". The original
agreement between City anal §ubdivider_is_ dated the 22nd d~y_.4f
July, 1986.
WITNESSETHe
WHEREASo subdivider has complied with all the :terms and
conditions in the above agreement with the exception of the
installation of the street lights which is set forth as condition
No. 7 on Exhibit "A" to the agreement, and
WHEREAS, subdivider desires to record his final plat, convey
lots and receive a certificate of occupancy prior to complying
with condition No. 7, and
WHEREAS, City has agreed to allow subdivider to record the
final plat, convey lots and receive certificates of occupancy
prior to the satisfaction of condition No. 7, and
WHEREAS, subdivider has agreed to deposit with the City cash
in the estimated amount of the street lights, and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this addendum in
order to set forth their agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows ~-•, -
1. Upon compliance with all the remaining terms and
conditions in the above referenced agreement,. subdivider shall be
1 Addendum ~~
~./
,_ entitled to record the final plat for Stonecreek No. 3 subdivision
T- in the city of Central Point, Jackson County, Oregon. In
addition, upon filing the final plat, subdivider shall be entitled
--t~seir~and--canoe with the applicable
ordinances, statutes, rules and regulations, to obtain
certificates of occupancy--fed-ar-y--improvements constructed on the
lots. _
2. Upon execution of this addendum, subdivider agrees to
__ deposit with. the City__cash in the approximate amount of.$1400.OD,
_ _
--t~~secnre- 11 streetlights
pursuant to condition No. 7 contained on Exhibit "A" to the above
referenced agreement. The parties estimate that the cost will be
in the amount of $1400.00. However, the parties acknowledge and
agree that the cash shall be in the actual amount of the cost. of
construction for complying with condition No. 7.
3. At such time as the street lights have been installed, in
_. _ ..
compliance_with_ condition No. 7, the City agrees to mme late y
release and pay the money to the order of Whittle Construction.
4. The purpose of the cash deposit in the approximate amount
__ of $1400.00 is solely for the purpose of insuring subdivider's
compliance with condition No. 7.
5. Except as amended or'clarified herein, all of the
remaining terms and conditions in the above referenced agreement
are hereby approved and ratified.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this addendum
2 - Addendum
this day .of January, 1986.
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON
By_
Its authorized representative
=- -
WHITTLE CONSTRUCTION
By m®
Gary T; Whittle, President
3 Addendum
~~
~ Mounting Height 25'-40'
Small-Diameter- Short Radius
Tapered Luminaire Arm
Pole Ordering Information
li
~tJ: /Sv„z er; /Le.. ~ d~
o~ 9070
_-
~--
Desigpa Information
Arm Length
6'•0" 8'•0"
Shaft Length
(mounting height)
Pole Order Number
25;x0" JSL256 -° C"' JSL258
30'•0" JSL306 JSL308
35'-0" JSL356 JSL358
40'•0" JSL406 JSL408
Select shaft-length and arm length td the luminaire arm. Order-by using
achieve desired mounting height. appropriate pole order number shown
.Mounting heights are nominal 1± 6") on table above.
from base plate to the center line of
Note: Arm rise is 5 degrees. For other rise degrees,please inquire
Pole Data.
Shaft Size Bolt
Length End Bottom Circle
25,0,. 23ie" 65ie" 11tis"
30'•0" 23/8" Tans" 11tiz"
35'•0" 23/s" 8" 11 trz"
40'0" 2a~e• gnus„ 11tiz„
Double Arms
To order double arms, add the letter
"D" at the end of the~pole order number,
Example: JSL256-D. For more arms per
pole, please inquire.
~6 ZS, 00 ,
Applications
• Arterial lighting
• Highways
• Residential
Parking lots
• Rest stops
~.-~o
X50 i1~
Mast ammo and pole for Arneron Series JSL
is a one>priiace unit.
Base plies are provided with slotted
holestsaaiDlow easy anchor bolt
install'attiasn.
Base envy provided with each pole
give~~a~pfl~ing, smooth transition from
shaft tos~se. They are supplied in two
-fiatves~amrll clamp securely to the pole.
Trensfoawser bases can be supplied if
requiredL
Anchom6~lts furnished with each pole -
are foua~lvanized steel bolts meeting
theappasppriate ASTM specifications.
There aaeuwo nuts and two washers
per boltr.. Dolt setting details are
provid'e~ tdo the customer with each
shipmeni¢
Finishesl{ooles can be provided with
colors hm carrosion•resistant coatings,
prime•paamted inside and outside, or hot-
dipped!g~vanized, in conformance with
ASTNti.dRrll'23specifkations.
Wall'ttYe¢Ikmess for this series is 10 gage.
Also avat'i~ble in 7 gage.
Notes::
1. Lumfasaire shown not included.
2. Forfmwndation and footing design
critemi®, consult state and local codes.
3. Formmodificationssoch as additional
arms,, transformer bases, festoon
outl'a•&s arid embedment (direct burial)
conversion, consult "Modifications &
Acces~ ies" ~r detailed information.
- bad.
3.
~~ ~~
t
r.,®_.~~
19
-Arm Length
Sized 23/e" OD x 6" Long -~
~- 26t/a''.Radius
~~ I
gth
g height)
',
_?`''
u
r.'.. °.1at..1,... .... .. ,
4" x 6t/z" Handhole
with Removable
Cover
Removable Base
.Cover (2•Piece)
~-J1" x 36" x 4" Anchor Bolts (4)
/~ ,
I
RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING COST BREAKDOWN
100 or 150 Watt, N.P.S.
Effective July 1, 1985, per unit cost = $944.00
Material:
Steel Pole
Lumininaire and Lamp
P.E. Cell
Circuit Breaker/cabinet
Cable, 180 ft. @ .42 (incl. pole wiring)
Ground Rod
Concrete, .8 c.y. @ 64.00
Pole Tag
Paint, bronze
Total Material
Labor: Hours
Install & pour foundation 5
Haul and set pole 1.5
Lay wire 1
Paint and tag pole 1
Wire pole, breaker & 2.5
luminaire
11
858.15
85.81
11 hours @ 14.70 = 161.70 Total Labor: $161.70
Equipment Rental
Auger, ~ hour @ 50.00
Boom truck, 2 hours @ 18.50
Total Equipment Rental
--------------------------
Material 634.45
Labor 161.70
Equipment Rental 62.00
Sub-total
10~ Overhead &
Engineering
Total
371.00
99.80
5.90
16.80
75.60
8.40
51.20
3.25
2.50
634.45
25.00
z~ nn
62.00
943.96 = $944.00
NOTE: Above costs do not include trench and backfill.
Trench and backfill to be furnished by the developer.
~3