Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes - March 18, 2004City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes March 18, 2004 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chairman Chuck Piland, Christopher Brown, Candy Fish, Paul Lunte, Connie Moczygemba, Wayne Riggs were present. Don Foster was absent. Also in attendance were Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director; David Alvord, Community Planner; Ken Gerschler, Community Planner; Bob Pierce, Public Works Director; Chris Clayton, Deputy Public Works Director; Dave Arkens, GIS Technician; and Lisa Morgan, Planning Secretary. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was correspondence which consisted of citizen letters and the Citizen's Advisory Committee recommendation distributed at the meeting. IV. MINUTF,S There were no minutes included in this agenda to approve. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. The first of two Quasi-Judicial public hearings to review an application for a Site Plan application for the proposed Retail Pear Blossom Plaza (Wal-Mart Supercenter). The subject parcel is identified in the records of the Jackson County Assessor as Map 37 2W 02D, Tax Lot 100 in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district and is located at the northwest corner of East Pine Street and Hamrick Road. Chairman Piland called the meeting to order and asked if any of the commissioners had any ex-parte communications or conflicts of interest to declare. Vice-Chairperson, Candy Fish states that she spoke publically in opposition to the big box ordinance. Chairman Piland, stated that due to the significance of this application, there are some differences in the way the public hearing would happen. Chairman Piland added that the changes would be noted as he comes across them. Chairman Piland then read the hearings procedure script to be entered into the record. Chairman Piland explained the time Plunning Commission Minutes March 18, 2004 Page 2 allotment for staff report presentation, the applicant's presentation and for individuals wishing to speak or ask questions regarding the application. The meeting was turned over to Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director. Mr. Humphrey, presented the staff report, beginning with a power point presentation which included information regarding the history of the Naumes property, a drawing of the previously approved master plan of the same, history of communications prior to the Pac Land application being submitted, outcome of LUBA decision regarding the passing of a big box ordinance, background information on East Pine Street'fransportation Master Plan, Wal-Mart Superstore Landscape Plan, Wal-Mart building elevations, elevation drawings of the additional proposed 10,000 square foot building, illustrations of the site plan, digital photographs in the vicinity of the proposed development from all directions, an overlay of the plan on the tax lot, Citizen's Advisory Committee recommendation, along with recommendations to mitigate concerns of citizens. Mr. Humphrey, discussed the applicant's narrative of uses proposed and asked commissioners to consider whether or not all uses are permitted, or a conditional use within the C-4 zoning district, and brought attention to page 3, 17.44, subsection 020, defining "Community Shopping Centers". Mr. Humphrey explained that the commissioner's need to arrive at two decisions tonight as follows: Whether or not this proposal meets the definition of a "Community Shopping Center" and whether the proposed uses are permitted or would require a Conditional Use Permit to proceed with the application. There are 4 categories to consider. (1) Traffic concerns, which have been confirmed by the Public Works Department, JRH Traffic & Engineer Consultants, and Oregon Department of Transportation. (2) Storm Water Quality, confirmed by Public Works, Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, and Department of Environmental Quality. (3) Adverse effect on downtown area. (4) Characteristics that will impact surrounding residential neighborhoods. In conclusion, Mr. Humphrey stated that staff feels that the uses proposed are more appropriate within a C-5 zoning district. Chairman Piland gave the applicants an opportunity to present their proposal. Ureg Hathaway, Attorney for the applicant addressed the commissioners, reaffirming that there are two items to come to a decision on. Is the application a permitted use in the C-4 district or not. If not then a conditional use application would be necessary and the Planning Commission Minutes March I8, 2004 Page 3 application would be incomplete. Mr. Hathaway stated that they had found out that a conditional use application may be necessary two weeks ago. Scott Franklin, representative for Pac Land, explained that there will be a number of other establishments within the Wal-Mart building. Some examples given of other businesses possible within were: banks, accounting or bookkeeping agencies, beauty salons, insurance agents, and bicycle shops. With this in mind, the applicant feels having a variety of shops, even though it is under one roof, meets the definition of a "Community Shopping Center ". Greg Hathaway, Attorney, addressed the commission and outlined that Central Point Staff provides two reasons that this proposal would be more appropriate within a C-5 zoning district. 1. The proposed uses is not tourist related; and 2. Based on the Strategic Plan it is just too big. Mr. Hathaway argued that Wal-Mart cant be a permitted use based on not being a tourist related attraction. Wal-Mart is nationally known and people traveling see a Wal-Mart and stop. He will however, go on record and make a no `R.V. overnight parking' provision. In response to Wal-Mart being too big, Mr. Hathaway, states that staff relied upon the Central Point Strategic Plan for smaller industrial and commercial. Pear Blossom Master Plan was similar in scale. Mr. Hathaway encouraged commissioners to look expressly at language in the CPMC itself. The Strategic Plan was never included in the Comprehensive Plan, and was never relied upon for making a decision before, therefore it can not be legally used. Mr. Hathaway, then referred to the definition found under CPMC 17.44.020, Paragraph 15. He asked if what Wal-Mart is proposing gives a variety of shopping. It is a larger building with discrete tenants within the building. He asked if it is planned and managed together as a unit? He responded: yes. Mr. Hathaway then stated that Wal-Mart's proposed uses are all permitted uses within this building. Mr. Hathaway said that past conduct must be used in determining past interpretations, giving Mr. Flumphrey's letters to Home Depot, and Steve Hunnicut at J.L. Scott Real Estate as examples. Scott Franklin, PacLand representative, said that there will be a %z dozen individual stores, being separate tenants. The building would be oriented to accommodate several businesses, not one. Mr. Hathaway, stated that a Conditional Use Permit application should have been Planning Commission Minutes March 18, 200A Page d deternlined within the 30 days review period. There was no prior mention of it being a ('I iP. Chairman Piland invited proponents to speak on behalf of the application. Robert Boggess, representative for the Naumes property, said that the Naumes Family has owned the property for 50 years. He referenced prior correspondence from Mr. Humphry, encouraging stores such as Home Depot to build on the same property. Mr. Boggess feels that the direction of the City was clear, and had changed with the applicant. Home Depot was 160,000 square feet. Citizen # 1: Lives in the Meadows Subdivision and stated that approximately 200 people who reside there and are in favor of Wal-Mart coming in. (Central Point) Citizen # 2: Thanked Mr. Hathaway and agrees with everything. It is a tourist attraction, look at the license plates from California. They have good paying wages, with opportunities for younger people as well as seniors. (Central Point) Citizen # 3: If Wal-Mart was divided into three buildings, they would be here. (Medford) Citizen # 4: Was a McMinnville store manager. He feels that Wal-Mart is a part of the community there, they are on the board of directors and helped the community. He said that 97% of the retailers were not effected. (Phoenix) Citizen # 5: Lives in the Meadows Subdivision. He stated that he got disturbed about the proposal and feels it would be better for Wal-Mart to build on Highway 99, near exit 35. It wouldn't ruin Pine Street, and goes right out to I-5, in addition to having the railroad available for deliveries. (Central Point) Citizen # 6: Concerned about traffic. He received one of Wal-Mart's questionnaires. He feels that Wal-Mart only reported favorable comments. (Central Point) Citizen # 7: Asked about Wal-Mart being able to contribute to a Community Center and giving back locally. He stated that Wal-Mart is the best company for giving back to communities. They gave 150 million to support local companies. He proceeded to go over a list of contributions made by Wal-Mart to various organizations. (Medford) Citizen # 8: Has lived here since 1968, and would like to see Wal-Mazt. (Central Point) Citizen # 9: Wanted to thank Herb Farber, Chairman of the Citizen's Advisory Committee. She wanted to point out that the lighting was also an issue with the Albertson's store. She would like to see Wal-Mart in Central Point. (Central Point) Planning C'onmzission Minutes March 18. 2004 Page J Citizen # 10: Loves Wal-Mart. She does traveling in an R.V. and has stayed at Wal-Mart in her travels. Most of the people she meets are older like herself, and if anything, they kind of look out for each other. (Central Point) Citizen # 11: Loves Wal-Mart and feels it is a Community Shopping Center. With gas prices going up, she would like to be able to walk there. (Central Point) Citizen # 12: Feels that Mr. Hathaway made a good presentation. Wal-Mart does benefit the local community. In his travels he has stopped there and then came into town to do other shopping because of it. Feels it is a good thing for a growing Central Point. (Central Point) Citizen #13: Said Central Point has a number of senior citizens that don't drive. Having a Wal-Mart close by will be beneficial. Good opportunity to grow in a place that is respected. (Central Point) Citizen # 14: Feels that Central Point needs the competition to reduce prices. (Central Point) Citizen # 15: People of Central Point are just going to have to adjust to it If there is more traffic, leave a little earlier. Traffic concerns can be worked out. (Central Point) Citizen # 16: Provided a verbal list of land use projects he has worked on in Central Point. Wants an un-biased review of application based solely on the law only. (Medford) Chaiirnan Piland invited the opponents to speak. Citizen # 1: Opposed to Super Center. She played a role in the development of Central Point's Strategic Plan. She read an article from the NY Times regarding Wal-Mart coming in and ravaging the existing businesses. Wal-Mart doesn't meet Central Point's goals. (Central Point) Citizen # 2: Doesn't want Wal-Mart. Feels it will undercut the other businesses. (Central Point) Citizen # 3: Opposed to Wal-Mart. Doesn't meet Central Point's Vision Statement. Loves the small town feel. Central Point needs economic stimulation, and Wal-Mart doesn't follow the vision. (Central Point) Citizen # 4: Wal-Mart is a regional shopping center not Community shopping center. There are plates from California and people from Ashland, Phoenix, Shady Cove, etc. will be coming to the Wal-Mart. He did check on the subject property before buying his Planning Cornmissio~2 Minutes March 18, 2004 Page 6 home, and Wal-Mart isn't what was communicated to him. (Central Point) Citizen # 5: He also, checked into the subject property before buying his home to see what was going in there. Wal-Mart wasn't the plan. He feels it has to do with whether Wal- Mart fits there, not wages, or if they are a good employer, etc. He expressed his thanks to Tom Humphrey for his efforts in looking out for Central Point residents. (Central Point) Citizen # 6: Doesn't feel that the applicants ignorance for a Conditional Use Permit is a valid reason. He is a citizen with limited resources and could determine it required a CLIP. Becca Croft, representative for Central Point First, read her findings into the record. (Central Point) Citizen # 7: Said that traffic is a concern. He can't imagine the traffic if Wal-Mart goes in. ODOT said the interchange would fail It would cost 100 million to improve that interchange. (Central Point) Citi-ren # 8: a former planner, referred to correspondence he submitted to the City. He addressed the environmental impacts it would have on Central Point. (Central Point) Chairman Piland gave opportunity to the applicant for rebuttal. Mr. Hathaway, Attorney, stated that they related specifically to the zoning code, and that Central Point needs to amend the Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with the vision. He added that they were under the impression that part of the process this evening was whether or not a Conditional Use permit would be required. The potential hazards existed with other similar types and uses. The Naumes' Master Plan, had all the same environmental concern that were presented, however it was approved under a Site Plan review only. The applicants are prepared to work with the City to be a part of the solution. Chairman Piland closed the public portion of the meeting. Chairman Piland asked for clarification on what the staff wanted to accomplish at the first hearing, and asked if a decision was needed or just seeking direction. Commissioner Riggs responded that he wanted to do more research regarding the statements made by the applicants attorney. However, he doesn't feel like the application requires a Conditional Use. Plnnnn~ gCommiss'ion Minutes Mnrch~ 2004 Page 7 Commissioner Lunte, said the Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Plan are not part of the code. Legally, he can't find where it wouldn't meet zoning code in that area. Commissioner Brown, feels that the applicant should be unnecessarily penalized for mixed use and service under one roof. It does meet a Community Shopping center. A Conditional Use may be necessary for the sale of firearms. Commissioner Moczygemba, stated that she agrees with Commissioner Lunte. Commissioner Fish, said she feels it does not need a conditional use. Chairman Piland, feels that staff missed the mark. It should have all been matched with the Code, the Strategic Plan and Comprehensive Plan. There were questions about if it is determined that a conditional use isn't necessary, how would that effect the discrete tenants mentioned earlier as far as needing a conditional use either. As the applicant sublets stores, the tenants must apply for a business license. During the business licensing process, it would be reviewed and determined if a conditional use would be needed. VII. MISCELLANEOUS There were no miscellaneous items discussed. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjounred at 9:50 P.M.