Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - May 7, 1991 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA May 7, 1991 - 7:00 p.m. 3CALLED TO ORDER Next Resolution No. 218 2olI Ca11 - Garth Ellard - Rick Bettenburg, Dick Halley, Karolyne Hugo, Bob Matthews, Candace Rayburn and Chuck Piland PPROVAL OF MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 2, 1991 A. Public Hearing - Review and determination of a Conditional Use Permit Application for Automotive Repair Service at 27 Bush.Street (2W 11BC TL 3900) (Applicant: Sharon Wilder) B. Public Meeting - Review and approval of Master/Development Plan for Green Park Village Subdivision (Applicant: Pacific Trend Development Company) (37 2W 12C Tax Lots 800, 507, 3100 and 3400) (formerly 'Meadow Creek Subdivision in the southeast quadrant of the City) C: Public Meeting - Review and Recommendation to City Council for a Preliminary Subdivision Plat for Phase I of Green Park Village `~: (Applicant: Pacific Trend Development Company) D." Public Meeting - Review and recommendation of a Vacation of alleyways located within a subdivision known as Amy Harbaugh's Addition '..generally located north of W. Pine and east of Haskell Street r(Applicant: Steve Rietmann) $. Status Report on Final Development Plan - Master Street Plan for Meadow Creek area in southeast quadrant of the City. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes April 2, 1991 Page One I. MEETING CALLED OF ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Those present were Garth Ellard, Rick Bettenburg, Dick Halley, Karolyne Hugo, and Chuck Piland. Commissioner Bob Matthevvs vvas absent. Also present were George Rubaloff, City Administrative Assistant, Larry R. Blanchard, Public Works Director, and Cecelia Gordon, Secretary. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A: Commissioner Bettenburg moved to approve the March 5, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes as written and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Piland. Roll Call Vote: Bettenburg, yes; Halley, yes; Hugo, (abstained, not present at March 5, 1991 Meeting) and Piland, yes. The motion carried unanimously. IV. CORRESPONDENCE George Rubaloff, City Administrative Assistant, informed the Commission that Jack Crumm had formally submitted his resignation in a letter to the City dated 3/1.2/91.. Secondly, Rubaloff read to the Commission, the March 5, 1991 letter from Maple Grove Partners (Ed Dautzenburg -Meadow Creek) requesting 120 day extension on their Land Use Application, and by reference entered these two letters into the record. V. BUSINESS A. Public Hearing -Resolution #217 -Conditional Use Permit for placement of Mobile Home for Infirm at 707 Pittview, {37 2W 11 D Tax Lot 400)(Applicant - Bernice Boring) ., V .. 01 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes April 2, 1991 Page Two There were no conflicts of interest on the part of the Commission. Chairman Ellard opened the Public Meeting. George Rubaloff, City Administrative Assistant described the application, the review process,. the alternatives available. to the Planning Commission and entered into record by reference Vicinity Map, Copy of the Notice of Hearing, Mailing List (to property owners within 100 foot radius) Tax Assessor's .Map, Aerial Map, Application Materials, February 21, 1991 City letter to Bernice Boring, March 20, 1991 Public Works Staff Revievv, and March 13, 1991 Planning Department Staff Review. Rubaloff also entered into the record as Item M., the March 21, 1991 letter to Dave Kucera and Larry. R. Blanchard from Robert S. Blanton, P.E. which discussed. the capacity of the storm drain through the Meadows PUD. Larry R. Blanchard, Public Works Director discussed the stages of the Meadow Creek Storm Drain LID. He explained that the Petition format was now under legal review and would be mailed to the LID sponsor within the next two weeks. It would then be up to the LID sponsorto contact the property owners for signatures on the Petition. Bernice Boring, Applicant, 707 Pittview Avenue, Central Point, Oregon came forward in support of the proposed Conditional Use Permit. The Commission asked Mrs. Boring if she understood the conditions in the Staff Reports, and she assured them that she did, and that she had met with City Staff on April 1, 1991, and that they had discussed the conditions in detail. She also agreed to enter into the Deferred Improvement Agreement in which she would participate financially for a share of total cost of future storm drain facility (second by-pass) and that such obligation would run with the land. No else came forward in support of or in opposition to the Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Ellard closed the Public Meeting. ~~ 02 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes April 2, 1991 Page Three Since there was no written Resolution prepared, George Rubaloff informed the Commission that they could enter a Motion on an oral Resolution, and Staff would prepare the written Resolution for the Chairman's signature. Commissioner Bettenburg moved that the Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit for the placement of a Mobile Home for Infirm at 707 Pittview, Central Point, Oregon subject to applicant entering into a Deferred Improvement Agreement, and meeting all the conditions as set forth in the Staff Review and the applicant's signed statements. Commissioner Hugo Seconded the Motion. Roll Call Vote: Bettenburg, yes; Halley, yes; Hugo, yes; and Piland, yes. The Motion passed unanimously. VI. Miscellaneous Public Works Director, Larry R. Blanchard announced that the Meadow Creek Street Master Plan would be discussed at a Public Meeting on May 7, 1991 at the regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting. Also that a mailing had gone out April 2, 1991 to all property owners containing information and a questionnaire and notifying them of the May 7, 1991 Meeting. VII. Adjournment - A Motion to adjourn was entered by Commissioner Bettenburg and Commissioner Piland seconded the Motion and the Motion carried unanimously. The Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. J J O STAFF REPORT T0: Planning Commission FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant DATE: April 29, 1991 SUBJECT: Automotive Repair Service Conditional Use Permit Request 27 Bush Street (37 2W 11BC TL 3900) SUMMARY /off Applicant Sharon Wilder has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to operate an automotive repair service at an existing structure within the C-5 zone (Commercial Thoroughfare) at 27 Bush Street. The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct a public hearing at its May 7, 1991 meeting, after which the commission can make a determination regarding the request. RACKhRl1i7N11 The Planning Commission may remember the 27 Bush site as Freedom Tire, which was the subject of zoning violations in 1988, and 1989 when the property was zoned residential-multiple family (R-3). On March 3, 1989, the City Council approved global zone map amendments which included a rezoning of this property from R-3 to C-5. The current application proposes an automotive repair service which includes general auto repair, brake repair, front-end/rear-end repair, transmission work and tune-up. The operation will utilize one employee and the expectation is to maintain a volume of 10-15 cars per week. The site .includes a 1500 square foot building and approximately 2600 square feet of paved parking area. Public Notices have been distributed to property owners within 100 feet of the proposed automotive repair service site. As of this date, the City has not received any written coirrtnents regarding the Conditional Use Permit application. STAFF.AUT/PCWORK ~~ 04 An auto repair .service is classified as a conditional use in the C-5 zone (17.76.030(a)) and must be authorized in accordance with Central Point Municipal Code 17.76 and other applicable City regulations. Planning, Building and Public Works Departments have reviewed the proposed conditional use in accordance with standards outlined in Chapters 17.46, 17.60, 17.64 and 17.76 of the Central Point Municipal Code, applicable Building Codes and applicable Public Works standards. Certain findings (criteria, statement of fact and conclusions), shall be made in granting Conditional Use Permits. CPMC 17.76.040 lists criteria which must be reviewed by staff, discussed during the Planning Commission meeting and resolved prior to, making a determination on the Conditional Use Permit application. Said findings have also been incorporated into the proposed Planning Commission Resolution. ATTACHMENTS The following items are attached for the commission's review and for entry into the record by reference during the Public Hearing: Item A - Vicinity Map, Zoning Map Item B - Notice of Public Hearing, Certificate of Posting, Mailing List and Tax Assessor Map Item C - Aerial Map Item D - Application Materials Item E - Public Works Staff Review dated April 25, 1991 Item F - Planning Department Staff Review dated April 29, 1991 Item G - Building Department Staff Review dated April 29, 1991 Item H - Proposed Resolution, making findings, exhibiting specific conditions and approving conditional use permit STAFF.AUT/PCWORK ~~~ 05 ITEM ,~'~ I _...I ~ +,~ .A,Y. ... i __~_ .. >I ~~ I i ... a ~,` i` ~ O I € \ a \ . I riw ..,. 1 \\ n~.wo .• fA5 A3T6 a -~~ $ o ~~ s ~ yr ~~ ~ Y O ~ I Four sax I. ~'`~ g 5 'QO •..JCOrlIDfO I \ '~ ~' 1 ~~ a. ~^~~ ,W. ,.. s Opp` ~~.. WI r DP Dooooo~, y~~ ~ . E ~ xa KUf ; s ~g~ Do~O~O~~~pO? o ~' ~ . ~~ ~r00 __\ CD r.n~ - I ~-- ~ O~~ODO~~D~c~~ ao ~,~ „~. ~njn4~ \ $! r,~ ~ • y ~O ~O O ~~ L`ENTRAL POINT -~ .n\\ \ I PD : r~ ~~.6.T40 ~ 'kt . ~,. ~O ~ ~~ ~ ~Y] ~ c s a ~ ` .1 I ~ la IILJ : l /~ I 1. SMM. NIIIE Y ` ~- 11 III ~~o~~ r • is - eC ~ ~~ ..cl ~~[ CENTRAL .POINT o IIr JACKSON COUNTYA OREGON % ~ ~ e I PoPUlatlon 6,740 T. 37 S. R. 2 W. W.AI. z. I ~ ~ ~ LEGEND mvwu er roc ' ~: ~ u N' g1ECg1 OEN ARiUENI Of 1RANSPQiIAipN /U/// MiEfl9AiC MNBERED RWIE EPo [MPEaR,W nw X[ U.$.OfPAflINENi Ci 1RAN$PoRi.iMY U.$. MX18ERE011WiE ffCERAI WWWPY ADMM$1RS1XH $laiE 1u.PENFO RWIf M.y $I LL O IERUw•rEW w fA srsrfY ~ JANUARY 1987 ~: t I ~ wvofo wcrnxr $cAUE 3 // ~i C= sIRELr O°Ex fOi IR•vEL (fir 1`N A py ml i FOSI afEE ~ RLYEC euEOlxc ~ 1 I I ~ 1 scxooE ~ cowl xousE I I I 100 ~ • LfiR•PY i CIIT M•LL COP[$ p iNi MAP ME ,VAEADLE Ai ,gMIX•L CO$I fRON -- GIY EWIi Y APNOPY WELD4 DEPT. K 1RANSPoRIAIpx, SaLEU. 0.gEGOH 9]JIO. CWNIER GEI.ERAIEO ITEM ._~ >y ~ ~. Cam' m C „ ., ~ 0'7 ITEM ~. 155 S0. SECOND ST. CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 THE HEART OF THE C=TY OF CENTRAL PO2NT ROGUE RIVER VALLEY NOT 2 CE OF' PUB L'= C HEAR= N G Notice is hereby given that the Central Point Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to review a Conditional Use Permit application submitted by Sharon Wilder. Said application proposes to operate an automotive repair service at 27 Bush Street. The site is located within the thoroughfare Commercial District {C-S zone) and is further 'described-as Jackson County Tax Assessor Map 37 2W 11BC Tax Lot 3900. The proposed automotive repair service would be operated within the existing building at 27 Bush Street. The proposed automotive service use includes brake repair, tune-up, transmission repair and front and rear-end repair.' The proposed land use` is a'-cohditional use within the C-5 zone, and the application will be reviewed in accordance with conditional use standards outlined in Chapter 17.76, and applicable zoning regulations of Title. l7 of the Central Point Municipal Code. The Public Hearing is scheduled as follows: Date: Tuesday, May 7, 1991 Time: 7:00 p.m. (approximate) Place: Central Point City Council Chambers 155 South Second Street Said hearing will provide for an opportunity for testimony and,for questions to be answered. Individuals may submit written comment no later than Thursday, April 25, 1991. Testimony and written comment must be directed toward the criteria which is applicable to the proposed land use. Pursuant to CPMC 1.24.070(5)(C) and ORS 197.763(3)(e), failure to raise an issue during this hearing, in person or in writing, or failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the decision-maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue will preclude appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue. The application, applicable criteria and staff report will be available for inspection at Central Point City Hall on Tuesday, April 30, 1991 at approximately 4:00 p.m. or for copies of same at 15 cents per page. .Fore more information regarding this matter, contact George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant, City of Central Point at 664-3321. NOTICE DATES: Mailing (Property owners within 100 ft radius) - April 16, 1991 NPHBOSH.91/ADMIN v v ~ 0 O ITEM 155 S0. SECOND,ST. CENTRAL ROINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 CERTIFICATE OF POSTING,. Sandy Berryhill :.,CERTIFY THAT ON THE I FOLLOWING DATE OF Wednesday, May 1,:1991 ; I POSTED A NOTICE FOR A'PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULED ON May 7 > 1941> DURING WHICH THE CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION WILL REVIEW A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SERVICE AT 27 BUSH STREET (37 2W 11BC Tax Lot 3900) AT OR NEAR 1. CENTRAL POINT POST OFFICE 2. CENTRAL POINT BRANCH LIBRARY 3. CENTRAL POINT CITY EIRE STATION 4.'CITY HALL BULLETIN BOARD. , I ATURB ~-,~99 / DATE ., . p g ,. THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY ITEM ~._,_ MAILING LIST FOR J.00 FOOT MAILING RADIUS Conditional Use Permit Application Automotive Service 27 Bush Street 37 2W 11BB TL 7300 Bernadine Smyth P.O. Box 3665 Central Point, OR 97502 TL 7400 Grange Co-Op P.0. Box 3637 Central Point, OR 97502 37 2W 11BC TL 2700 Paul'Weber 457 South First Central Point, OR 97502 TL 2800 Raleigh Greene 5070 Del Mar Central Point, OR 97502 TL 3300 Janet Miller 431 South First Central Point, OR 97502 TL 3400 Donald Kegeler 413 South First Central Point, OR 97502 TL 3500 Edward Koch P.0. Box 1017 Eagle Point, OR 97524 TL 3600 Howard Misner 414 South First Central Point, OR 97502 TL 3700 Ruth Rupp 448 South First Central Point, OR 97502 TL 3800 Alexander Bryce P.O. Box 135 Jacksonville, OR 97530 TL 3900 Sharon Wilder 1245 Mt. View Dri ve Eagle Point, OR 97524 v v 1 V ~, ITEM TL 4100 Cornett Lumber Company 431 South Front , Central Point, OR 97502 TL 4200 Cornett Lumber Company 431 South Front Central Point, OR 97502 TL 4400 Cornett Lumber Company 431 South Front Central Point, OR 97502 TL 4401 Timothy Debo 441 South Front Central Point, OR 97502 TL 4700 W. Thomas Hamlin P.O. Box 43 Medford, OR 97501 TL 4300 Cornett Lumber Company 431 South Front Central Point, OR 97502 ~~ 11 'r7.t„~, ~~,... " ITEM ._---~-'-- ~, S.W.~/4 N.W. I/4' SAC II T 37 2W 11BC Tax Lot 3900 SCALE I ° ' 372W11 .i: ~l i a? / e V " N. E.COR. ,' \ !~ l OT 2 ,' . (1 ~~V .s ,.~ \3100 ' ~~ J YFti'.~~ \ li~-l0e ~{~ N.W.COR.. o~ \ ~ O ^/ LDT 4 _ 6 -2 j !; 3200\ \ \ N.C.COR. .y ~ 5 ~ ~~ 13 Db ~y \ \ \ \ \I 5t LoT I \3 OA 5 13 \ 2 yy s+ ! P 7 ~".' VO s ,\ ~y, e \ .^. U'~~ '" 3 ,,., 5 ,, \ 3000 ,e ' G y~'.r^ ~,~ ; 3504, \3300. 55 ,y ~ I(.?J ,< ~.`Q N. E.COR >`y q. > 4 %~ a yy '~ ~'1 ,yo se LOT a ":\ 3~ \ \ ~~ µ.1 .i, \ \ / j ' 2900 ~ ~ `•~ 9093900' \ 3600 \ y "~ 280os LK2 `y S.E.COR. x st yy~sc / /5 A(D \~FO~. _\ ~ .at e\ tl }G~j 7 say ~ l0T I. T ~ ,/ 1 4100e ~/~9! ~\ s, > \ ~ e, ~ ,S ,~Il'J Sys ~ ~o ie 3 y ,.)` ~rr° \FL 2 ~ _. /5{'c„\ ° +r„1 . \y2700~ /~6' yt ~ c N.W.CDR. l(~I L~~ y' ~/ ~ \3700 ,t \ l.(',rj i yt°' ~~, LoT a 4200 y°• / ~/ :\ S , / ' 1900 A zs.~~ INTERSECTION 0 i \'4 %i f~ ~-\ ~\' "y lpV~ r •'' tyt-.o j , ) y' ELY. R/W OFTHE 't ~t.q'y/ . ' 430 ~'~ - ~.\ 3800 ,, e t+' °+` _ 1 RELOCATED PAC. e ~ ~ ¢ \\ \ y5 y 2400 HWY. a THE S. y.y\440 °, ~ _ ',° `, ,l ,Y RDN. OF C.P, r440~ ~.; - LK 19 3~3 \s \\59 ''' ryL0T 9/~ ~ ' yy a (P-1608) ',0; ~°• ,. ,, 2000 ._ ~ cP~\3'75) e, .. ,.' ,k 2500 ~3'~ .> LK21 ~"` \ ~~ ~.w ' 6.tts+ ia..~ ~ j `ti-n,N .0 y5 x\'' .\e~ •~"(. ^ / ,.yy°`,;;' .BUSH ` ~' ° _ • 4500 ~ 'c~rv ~ 2600 ~"" ~ y''~ 2300 e' 480( w r * s ~ r.,'. T ~ y 4600 s '~ ~` l P-3106) _ LK2 (P-1465) r J~ 0 ~ ' y y 4700 ~.^' `' ° 525 ' s •° ?oR. ~ ~ cY V~ ~ n5~~22001 ~j ~ LOT "D 9 l.: '2, ;~ v SNOWY BUTTE FF. ,~ L3f ~ 49 ~~w~• 4 t \ , Z t ~ 6-~ 8 °-° ` y ,5100 ~O ,{``\ '- <'' . ": 1 ~> °~ '~ ' ~ ~ {: ~ __,. Y ~s ~O ITE e-' % % /O + % ~ ~.. U m m a %0 ~ ¢ a ~/ N O U U U U \ + N -/ ~/ \ ~1 m eZ \ ~ f 0 m > o o ~ o O ti w m a z ~ba ~~~ cr > N J ~ Q a o a a f o i (~ ~~ e~ a a \ deb o ~ ~J N s~ OU ~ ~ O o ~{ _ `//) ~X O ~J + Q N.. ~ 0 ~ f6 o p O N ~. + Q + ..r m \ U r N O %n~ O z ~ ~~ ~ ~ o ~KV + a } N m ~ /~ ~ N +~ OO^ ~ ~ ti % \ ~ N }~ ~ ~ _ ,~s _a ~: ~__ \~ O ~O f \ ~ ~~P ti o. m m % ~ V N O I _~ n _N U y O U ~ 9yn~ Qt "~ x O ~6 ~ v 0~ a vi ~ ~ Q .' m % J a ~ _ N O ~ ~ y N R K • NN as ~ NN ITEM ~,~,:,:>.:„. "Application Filing Deadline CITY OF CENTRAL POINT. , Application for Conditional Use Permit Name Sharon Wilder - Address 12Q5 Pdt View Drive~_~f~e Pointy Off 97524 Phone Number 826-72d~ Proposed Site Location Address 27 Bush Street Assessor's Map Page Location Penc3ose~e legal descript Lot(s) Required Information: A legal description as it appears on the deed (metes and bounds or subdivision lot and block number) Deed copies may be obtained at the Jackson County Assessor's Office , Accurate scale drawing of the site and improvements proposed. The drawing of the site must be adequate to enable the Planning Commission to determine the compli- ance of the proposal with the requirements of the attached Central Point Municipal Code Section, 17.76.020. A statement as to how the request will meet each of the following objectives: A. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to acconmto- date said use and to meet all other development and lot requirements of the sub- ject,zoning district; B. That the site has adequate access to a public street or highway and that the street or highway is adequate in size and condition to effectively accommodate the traffic that is expected to be generated by the proposed use; C. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof. In making this determination, the Commission shall consid- er the proposed location of improvements on the site; vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; setbacks, height of building; walls and fences; landscap- ing; outdoor lighting; and signs; ~~~ 14 LUAP/ADMINI 10 0 D. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhood and will not be detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the communit//y based on the/review of those facts listed in subsection C above; I, ,~G/Jl~,PI~~L ~~~`/ certify that I am the owner or authorized agent of the owner of the proposed site (If authorized agent, attach written auth,¢rity) i'f~~~t~iz. (~f/~~(_-e!,t~~ Date ~ ~~ "-/i (Signature of owner or authorized agent of owner, please indicate which) Application Fee: $100 * A filing fee for recording a Deferred Improvement Agreement with the County Clerk may also be required. LUAP/ADMINI J v ~ ~ 11 Sharon Wilder 1245 idt. View Drive liagle Pointy OR 97524 City Council City of Central Point Dear Sirs This is an application for a conditional use permit to allow an auto repair shop at 27 Bush St. This site is uniquely suited for such a purpose because of its strategic location to Hiway 99 and adjacent businesses namely a radiator repair shop to the north and Central Point Glassy-Auto and Homey to the south. Both of these businesses will undoubtedly be augmented by an adjacent car repair shop. As we all knows small owners operated businesses are the life- blood of any oommunity but their failure rate is highs due to owner inexperience, inadequate planning or poor location. However this certainly is not the case in this situation. Mr Tackson~ as owner- operator of Advantage Autos (propose name of this businesss~ has multiple years in. both hands-on auto repair and management of other auto service centers, namely 8 years as body shop manager for Butler Ford and 3~ years as Lithia's service manager. He has attended many service schools: Toyotas r'ord~ V.W. and Datsun~ and has extensive experience vrith desiel engines. His starting his own business i.s only a natural outgrotiath of his experience and ability. The building proposed for this use is itself undergoing extensive updating to comply vrith all city nodes and regulations. New wiring by Advanced Electrical Contractors has been completed and G'u~i~•e'fi~t~Yf water and plumbing for a lavatory are under construction. Thank you for your consideration of this application Sincerely ~l ~ hafv~~ requ~_.__ ~d_.~ -7 Sharon Wilder ., ~ 16 e Supplemental Sheet for Conditional Use Permit Application: 27 Bush Street Proposed use= General auto repairs including brakes front end tuneup~ transmission and rear end repair.. Anticipated employees; one (otianer). volume of work per caeek: 10-15 cars. Total cars on-site at any one times 2 in bays 2-3 in parking lot. Adequate size exists in current parking lot to accomadate current .: and future volume of business. Both north and south edges of property are bounded by low concrete walls. 2~ Bush street has 55 feet of street frontage. A :".STgP sigh already exists at the south end of Bush fronting onto Ilitaay 99. Since little appreciable voliune of traffic is anticipated, current traffic control seems adequate. 'On building' name sigzi is proposed and the ohly anticipated sign. Adequate apace exists between: buildings on all sides to effectively buffer any excessive noise or fumes from shop. Building currently has heaver bay doors for additional noise eontral~ if necessary. Auto shop will maintain normal busihess hours in accordahce wii~h other businesses in general area. .~;~~r~. ~ his= ,Applicant Date V ~ ~~ ~~ `V f ~~ 6 \1 ,. h n s ~c, `.~~5~ s- ~~a~ ~ w ~ ~ ~b ~ ITEM E C/TY OF CENTRAL PO/NT PURL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT ~~A~IF G~~P®G~~ DATE Apri/ 25, 1991 PROJECT.• Conditional Use Permit LOCAT/ON.• T37S R2W MAP 116C Tax Lot 3900 27 Bush Street App/icant/ Owner: Sharon Wider 1225 Mt. View Drive Eag/e Point, OR 97524 Phone (503J 826-7241 TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.• Automotive Repair Facility COND/T/ONS: 1. Provide restroom facilities in the building. 2. Provide a detailed plumbing plan and complete the Sewer Use Application Permit to determine if pre-treatment is required prior to discharging to the Sanitary Sewer System. 3. Include with the detailed plumbing plan, information which prevents grease, oil; or other like materials from entering the Sanitary Sewer System. 4. Storage of materials, areas for cleaning of parts, etc. needs to be approved by City of Central Point Fire Chief prior to approving these areas for said uses. 5. The detailed plumbing plan shall also include any connection to the water system in order to determine the type of backflow device to be placed on the meter. V J y V WILDER-CONDITIONS STAFF REPORT -PAGE 2 APRIL 25, 1991 6. The applicant shall be required to install a 5 ft. sidewalk on Bush street the full length of the property. 7. The review for the Conditional Use Permit by Sharon Wilder was done in accordance with the rules, regulations and ordinances in effect as of the date of this review. Any modifications by the applicant/owner after City Planning Commission and/or City Council approvals could require resubmittal of an application and approval by the City planning commission and/or City Council 8. All costs associated with this project shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant or owner. 9. No construction will occur until all applicable permits have been obtained from the City of Central Point and other necessary jurisdictions. cc: 02=014 WILDRCUP. STF .. ~ 20 ITEM ~ C'='Z'Y ''OF CENTRAL.. POSNT ' Plailrllia.g Dc=partIYfeiit STAFF REVS EW ' DATE: April 29, 1991 APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit Automotive Repair Service 27 Bush Street (37 2W 11BC TL 3900) ;.~ CONDITIONS 1. Applicant shall obtain a sign permit prior to installing any signs on the site. Signs shall be permitted and designed in accordance with the City's sign ordinance and shall conform with the City`s clear vision standards. 2. In accordance with CPMC 17.64.040(G)(3) and (5), applicant shall provide five (5) 9 foot by 20 foot parking spaces. Said parking shall comply with all applicable parking design requirements outlined in CPMC 17.64.100 and City Ordinance 1512, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated within this document. Said off- street parking requirements shall include but not be limited to the following: a. Minimum driveway width shall be 20 feet b. Required parking spaces shall be designated with painted striping c. Off-street parking shall be designed so that no backward movements or maneuvering within a street or other public right- of-way is necessary d. Parking spaces along the outer boundary of the parking lot shall be contained by curb or bumper rail so placed to prevent motor vehicles from extending over public street, public sidewalk, adjacent property line or required landscaping area e. Parking, loading and maneuvering areas shall not be located within the 10 foot front yard area which is required to be landscaped .... f. Area used for off-street parking, access and maneuvering of vehicles shall be paved with durable materials for all-weather use and shall be adequately drained to prevent flow of runoff water across sidewalks or other pedestrian areas. 3. In accordance with CPMC 17.46.050, applicant shall maintain a minimum of ten (10) front yard as landscaped open space. (Note: Since off- street parking is located in the front of the property, the required landscape strip-may be reduced to not less than six (6) feet if approved by the Planning Commission) 4. Applicant has stated that the proposed auto repair service will maintain normal business hours in accordance with other businesses in the general area. In any case, applicant shall not conduct its operations in such a manner ahd at such a time which would adversely affect the privacy of sleep of persons residing nearby or otherwise conflict with other community or neighborhood functions. ~~ 22 ORDINANCE iv0. .1512 AN.ORDINANC^c Ah1E:v'DING THE TEXT OF THE CITY OF CENTRe1L POINT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION i7.64 PARKING STANDARDS [dkiEP.F.AS, the City Council of the City of Central Point deems it necessary to recommend certain amendments relating to the parking standards found in the Zoning ordinance; and WHEREAS, Notice of Public Hearing held April 19, 1984 was published in the Medford Mail Tribune on April 9 and elpril 1.5, 19S!; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing testimony from proponents and opponents was heard or given opportunity to be heard, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 17.64.100 of the Central Point Municioai Code is hereby amended as follows: 17.64.100 Parking Desigr. Requirements. A. Size of Parking Spaces. The standard size for automobile parking spaces shall be nine feet in width by twenty feet in length. -A compact car parking space shat. 7. r,. eight feet in width by fifteen feet ir. length, as .gxowided in-Sect.icn..1;54.070. ',_ - B. "Parking-Lot--Aisles{_`~.-The width cf parking lot a'_sles .'shall be as illustrated in the fblloc•;ing diagram; ...~: .:, /' .. - ". <:~ ,. ., ., 2 3 C. :,ccess. There shall be adequ>te provision for ingress ahd egress to all parking spaces. Where parking areas do not abut a public street or_alley, access driveways shall be provided that are not less than ten feet in width for one-way traffic or eighteen feet ir. width for two-way traffic. D. Driveways. 1. In any R-l or R-2 district any lot developed with a'single-family dwelling, two detached single-family dwellings, or an attached duplex may have one driveway with a minimum width of ten feet and maximum. width of thirty-six feet, provided the driveway width does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the lot's total width, as measured at the front property line. 2. A driveway hat serves as required access to a garage or carport that is not perpendicular to the front property line, or side property line in the case of a corner lot ,. shall not exceed twenty feet in width if a turn-around area is provided to permit two-way ingress and egress. 3; On'properties having two driveway openings, such as a circular driveway, both openings. must serve the same driveway; off-street parking shall not be provided for within the front yard area, and the combined width of the driveways shall not e:cceed fifty percent (50%) of the lot's total width as measured at the front property line. 4. In .the R-1 2nd R-2 districts not more than one driveway opening ,onto a public street shall be permitted for lots having a street frontage of less than eighty feet. 5. Driveways from a public street to a required offstreet parking area that serves any R-3 district development, with the exception of single and two-family dwellings, shall be a'minimum ofeighteen feet in width. and designed for two-way traffic. 6. The. minimum driveway .width in any nonresidential district shall be twenty feet. An exception may be made for drive- ways that are not intended for public use and are blocked or gated to!prevent such use. 7. The maximum driveway width in any nonresidential district shall be thirty feet. An exception ay be made by the City Planning Commission for drive-in type businesses having multiple lanes or service locations. E. Improvements of Parking Spaces. 1. All areas utilized for off-street parking, access andmariuevering of vehicles shall be paved with durable materials For all-weather use and shall be adequately drained to prevent the flow of run-off water across'sidew9lks or other pedestrian areas. 2. Required parking areas shall be designed caith painted striping or other approved method of delineating the individ- ual spaces with the exception of lots containing single or two-family dwellings. 3. Parking spaces for uses ether than one and two- family dwellings shall be designed so that ne backing movements or other maneuvering i:ithin a street or other pudic righC-of-way siiaii be necessary. ~~rdinarce Ho. 1912 - ~ ., ~ 2 ~ PAKKING STANDARDS Orci^ance i~12 N _ P- S A C ANGLE. OF WIDTH OF CURB PARKING PARKINr DEPTH WIDTH LENGTH, SPACE SECTION OF STALL OF P..ISLE PER CAR (DeSrees) (Feet) (.Feet) (Feet) (Feet') 0 32'-0" 9'-0" 14' 22'-0" 30 99'-7" 17'-10" 14' 18'-2" 35 51'-B" 18'-10" 14' 15'.-8" 40 53'-4" 19'-8" 14' 14'-?° 45 55'2" 20'-7" 14' 12'-8" 50 60'-2" '21'_1" 18'.* 11'-8" 55 `61'-2" 21'-7" 1B' * 10'-11" 60 ,61'-8" 21'-10" 18', * 10'-5" 65 66'-0" 22'-0"' 22' * 9'-11" 70 65'-10" 21'-11" 22'„* _9'-7" 75 65'=9"' 21'-8" 22' * 9'-4" 80 68'-8" 21~_4,~ 26' * 9~_?~~ 85 67'-10" 20'-11" 26'.* 9'-0" 90 66i:_pn 20'-0" 26' ok 9'-0.. *-Width of aisle permits two-way circulation' 'only when aturn-around is provided. T Width of aisle permits two-way circulation. EXAMPLES I~ i S'1 IC i P Urc'^.c~ ...,. ~ 512 - 2 i .,~- 25 A :e'-. '"C ' ~~~~ .. _ c a c ~F ,. 4. ;,ny lighting used to illuminate off-street parking or loading areas shall be sc arranged as to reflect the light away from adjacent streets or properties. 5. Service drives shall have~a minimum vision clear- ance area formed by the intersection of the driveway centerline, the street right-of-way line, and a straight, line joining said lines through points twenty feet from their intersection. 6. Parking spaces located along the outer boundaries of a parking lot shall be contained by a curb or a bumper rail so placed to prevent a c!etor vehicle from extending over an adjacent property line, a public street, public sidewalk, or a required landscaping area. 7. Parking, loading or vehicle maneuvering areas shall not be located iaithin the front yard area or side yard area of a corner lot abutting a street in any residential (R) district, nor within any portion of a street setback area that is required to be landscaped in any commercial (C) or industrial (TI) district. F. Limitation on Use of Parking Areas. Required parking areas shall be used exclusively for vehicle parking in conjunction with a permitted use and'shall not be reduced or en- croached upon in any manner. The parking facilities shall be so designed and maintained as not to constitute a nuisance at any time, and shall be used in such a manner that no hazard to persons or property or reasonable impediment to traffic will result. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication rof its passage this 17th day of May 1984. ~. ~~ ~,_ __ .:., .\ ~. P?ayor~ ,~ ATTEST: C c ~~ J -_ - ,~~_._ '; ,\ ..,. City Representative Approved by me this 18th da;: of ;•fav 1984. ~' --l _. / r'. /_ :fayor Orc_na^c~ 4c. 151? - :. ~~_ 26 ITEM TO: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant FROM: Mark Servatius, Fire Chief/Building Official~~~~ DATE: April 29, 1991. TOPIC: Recommended Condition for Conditional Use Permit Automotive Repair Sergice at 27 Bush Street In accordance with Oregon Structural Specialty-Code, Section 307(a) (use and occupancy), Applicant, future applicant, owner or assignee shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the Automotive repair service prior to occupying structure and obtaining a City business license. The Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued until the building is made to comply with requirements of Oregon Structure Specialty, pursuant to Section 502 (change in use). ., ., ~ 27 STEM /y PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. " A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SHARON WILDER FOR AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SERVICE AT` 27 BUSH STREET (37 2W 11BC Tax Lot 3900) WHEREAS, Sharon Wilder submitted an application for a conditional use permit for an automotive repair service located at 27 Bush Street in the City of Central Point, Oregon, further described as Jackson Couhty Tax Assessor's Map Page 37 2W 11BC Tax'Lot 3900, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Central Point Municipal Code 1.24.060 and ORS 197.763(2), a public hearing was scheduled and a notice of said public hearing was prepared and sent to property owners of record within 100 feet of location __ of subject conditiohal use, and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Central Point held a public hearing upon said application for conditional use permit on May 7, 1991 pursuant to Central Point Municipal Cade Section 1.24.020B, and having at said public meeting received and reviewed the City staff report, testimony and the applicant's statements, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" of this document and which was included in Item D of said staff report (application materials), and being fully advised now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON AS FOLLOWS: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. AUTO.REPAIR/RESO „~_ 28 a. Based upon the Ci~y!s C -5 (thoroughfare .commercial) zoning standards, the applicant has shown that space is available to provide for the minimum number of off-street parking spaces (five) and the minimum landscape strip. Based upon the applicant's anticipated work volume of 10-15 repair jobs per week, the 1500 square foot shop, equipped with two service bays is adequate in ,size and .shape to accommodate said use and meet all .other development and lot requirements of the C-5 zone.: b. The proposed use is located on Bush Street which is paved and classified as a local street in fair to poor condition. It is anticipated. that the proposed auto repair. service will generate approximately 15 trips per day. Bush Street has a traffic volume of less than 1500 vehicle. trips per day„and the capacity of the street will not be exceeded by the proposed use. Therefore, the existing, street facility ,(Bush Street) is adequate in size and condition to effectively accommodate the expected.traffic of the proposed use. The site accesses directly onto Bush. via an 18 foot driveway. City standards require commercial driveways to be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Therefore, the site will have adequate access to Bush Street subject to the applicant upgrading the approach to the: minimum required 20 feet. c. Given the applicant's compliance with all the the permit requirements and conditions, the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property or permitted use thereof, and will not be detrimental to the health, safety or .general welfare of persons or property and improvements in the surrounding neighborhood. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby approves the conditional use permit application for an automotive repair service submitted by Sharon Wilder, subject to the applicant, or her assignees or future property owners or assignees meeting all the conditions and requirements set forth in Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" attachedhereto, and by reference expressly made a part of the within resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. AUTO.REPAIR/RESO v .. .. Passed by the Planning Commission this day of , 1991, and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of . 1991. Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this day of 1991. Planning Con¢nission Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. AUTO.REPAIR/RESO ..~~ 30 M E M O R A N D U M T0: Planning Conunission FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant ~/_ DATE: April 25, 1991 SUBJECT: Master Development Plan Green Park Village Subdivision ACTION Staff has scheduled a Public Meeting for May 7th so that the ConQnission can review and adopt a master development plan to guide future growth and development in this area. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Chapter 15.16 of the Central Point Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is granted the authority to adopt development plans for guidance of growth and improvement of the City. It is under this authority that staff submits the attached development plan for the Green Park Village Subdivision to the Commission for consideration. Item A - Vicinity Map Item B - Certificate of Posting for Public Meeting Item C - Public Works Staff Report dated April 23, 1991 ~- 31 I Meadows Creek Subdivision' ., _ 32 ::~ 1 .4,.!~rii , 3(',~: 1 , I~ ,1 i i i ~. ~ r ~?t a~ ~~~ ~$ t 3~ ,` ~ e-~ J j / ~J'V/ ~/~ 1 if ~. YI .3~I 'gl , aI n ~\4 ' pig ' ..~ x\ •YJ `.~ / xl\~+~~ ~ A~ 01 mud. ?~ , s ]."~.~t ~ t 5~1. r qi l its ~~ r 3~ d x .,s. I~ '~~ ~ ~ 5 a 11~~w„ r r~~~ di1 ~ ~ r w .~Ix1 aye .r .t r ,; --;~,~ '~1 /,~ 1 s ~',~s'~ ~ • , s:, r Fib ~ ; i }j ~ i ~t ~'. ,~ij~g a~ r :•i~s ?~,~ts r~i- t ,! ~ g,^`t~ ~;, ,,/ ~ ~ \~ y'.'II stir sil> ~r~c; _~yy ~ ;_~..5~ i~ i 1'•.\~3'y~ l :,y'%, 1 i~11 •.. klyi .3I'~ ~ ~ `s . , f Sn 1 .,,,F' t .~ r _ ~r r y 1 a 5 3 1 t a a9.~ t ie yl t ~ ~^ ~. i u ^a of jj n-, d n e. ~ Ytl `~ ill °\_fl~IR~ ~ ~~a~ °^ bl -1~'~`~. ~. ~. ~ 4 l_ m 7 ) 6 Y 1 P nib ~'"~ ~ al 3as~~ 3~ ~~-5R~ j:~.' .~~: ~.1 v VJY ZI ~ `ry 1> V '0? ~:~ 33 r S '. Y' ..i1-..: - 1'1 j ! I 9` ~I° /1 J ?I~ $ ~ :i - y ~^ ~ :~ ,.>, ,., ~ ~ ;; ;9~ i ! ~ AJr~ '\ ~ ,1 =~~~ ~ a •1 LI '~~ I gl ICI J ~ v s ~~ gr ~~ "I ,,I 4 7g1 ~~:' j d j~\ MS y ~ 3 Y / tl / `\ ] g !'\ '~i~ r ~~~~ 1 \ %~\ 31 V~/. 3a` ~ +. d ~6~~~ ~ It'~F ' EI 5. \~, ,i ~ ii, ;~, s } Yl' _G• ~~Y~ ~ ~ . -s ~~o3 del e3 L >. 1T>•.r~l _ ~___._ 155 SO. SECOND ST. CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I SANDY BERRYHILL CERTIFY THAT ON THE FOLLOWING DATE OF WEDNESDAY, May 1, 1991 , I POSTED A NOTICE FOR A PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULED ON May 7, , 1991> DURING WHICH THE CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION WILL REVIEW A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR GREEN PARK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION (37 2W.12C TL 800, 807, 3100 and 3400) _ ____ AT OR NEAR 1. CENTRAL POINT POST OFFICE 2. CENTRAL POINT BRANCH LIBRARY 3. CENTRAL POINT CITY FIRE STATION 4. CITY HALL BULLETIN BOARD C~/®~rr O a.s.t.~i~i«~> -~ SI TURE ,5=/-9/ DATE 664-3321 ~~~ 34 THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY ~~ c~oT~ ®~ ~r~~~~~ ~®ol~T PURL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT ~?G,IEG~ Gil ° oL~p DATE: PROJECT.- LOCAT/ON.• ZONE.• No. of Acres: No. of Lots: No. of Dwe//ings: SUBD/V/DER/ Apri123, 1991 DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Green Park Village Subdivision) T37S R2W WM Section 12, TL 3100, 3400 800-N, 808-N, 809-N R-1-6 45 acres 167 167 (One (11 per Lotl OWNER: Pacific Trend Bui/ding Company 1014 N. Riverside Medford, OR 97501 (5031 773-4385 Representative- Mike Mahar SURVEYOR: Hoffbuhr and Associates 219 N. Oakda/e Medford, OR 97504 (5031 779-4641 Representative -Dennis Hoffbuhr ENG/NEER: Jensen & Associates 1237 N. Riverside Suite 28 Medford, OR 97501 (503) 779-4352 Representative -John E. Jensen TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.- Residential Subdivision NAME OF DEVELOPMENT.- Green Park Vi//age Subdivision (formerly Meadow Creek Subdivision) arEr~----~ ...._ .. ~~~ 35 Green Park Dev. -Staff Report Apri/ 23, 1991 -Page Two 1. Street lmprovements A. Existing Conditions: 1. Street No. SA 15-Street Name-Beall Lane, Jurisdiction- Jackson County. Existing ROW - 60 Ft., Future R.O.W. - 80 Ft., Existing Street Width-24 ft., Future Street Width-60 ft. Existing Curb/Gutter-None, Future Curb/Gutter- Required. Existing Sidewalks-none, Future Sidewalks-required, Existing Traffic Volume-3590 vt/d. Projected Traffic Volume this development-1670 vt/d. Projected Traffic Volume, including this development-4170 vt/d. Existing Street Lights-None, Future Street Lights-Required. Existing Traffic Control- minimal, Future Traffic Control-Design Master Plan required. Distance to nearest intersection-650 ft., Circlewood Drive. Condition-Poor. 2. Street No, SA 17, Street name-Merriman Road; Jurisdiction-Jackson County. Existing R.O.W.-60 ft., Future R.O.W.-80 ft. Existing Street Width-24 Ft. Future Street Width-60 ft. Existing Curb/Gutter-none. Future Curb/Gutter- required. Existing Sidewalks-None. Future Sidewalks-required, Existing Traffic Volume-no date available. Traffic Volume that street can carry-no data available. Existing street Lights-none, Future Street Lights-Required. Existing Traffic Control-Minimal, Future Traffic Control-Design Master Plan Required. Distance to nearest intersection 650 ft., Circlewood Drive. Condition-Poor. 3. Glen Grove Avenue -This is a City of Medford Street @ City Limits. 4. Far West Avenue -This is a City of Medford Street @ City Limits. B. Proposed Improvements: 1. Street No. LS Street Name-Farwest Avenue Classification: Local Street Stationing: From To Merriman Road Silverwood Court O+OON 3+30N Silverwood Court Woodridge Court 0+30N 5+40N Woodridge Court Southgate Court 5+40N 10+90E ~- 36 Green Park Dev. -Staff Report Apri/ 23, 9991 -Page 3 Stationing- Cont. From To Southgate Court Castlewood Court 10+90E 13+80E Castlewood Court Glen Grove Avenue 13+80E 16+50E Glen Grove Ave. Medford City Limits.. 16+50E 35+90S Street R.O.W.-60 Ft., 100' N. of Merriman, 50' remainder Street Width-40 Ft, 100' N. of Merriman, 36' remainder 2. Street No;' Street Name-Silverwood Court Classification: Stationing: From To Silverwood court End (Cul-de-Sac) 00+OOE 1 +25E Street R.O.W. - 50 ft. Street Width - 36 ft. 3. Street No. LS Street Name-Woodridge Drive Classification-Local Street Stationing: From To Farwest Avenue End O+OOW 2+40W Street R.O.W.- 50 ft. Street Width - 36 ft. .. ~ 37 "Green Park Dev. -Staff Report April 23, 1991 -Page 4 4. Street No. LS Street Name Southgate Court Classification-Local Street Cul-de-Sac Stationing: From To Farwest Avenue End O+OOS 1 +80S Street R.O.W.-50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. 5. Street No. LS Street Name-Castlewood Court Classification-Local Street Stationing: From To Farwest Avenue End ICul-de-Sac) O+OOS 1 +80S Street R.O.W. - 50 ft. Street Width-36 Ft. 6. Street No. LS Street Name-Arnwood Street Classification -Local' Street Stationing: From To Medford City Limits End O+OOW o+40W Street R.O.W.-50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. 7. Street No. LS Street Name-Glen Grove Avenue Classification-Local Street Stationing: From Medford City Limits O+OON To Keystone Court 1 +60N ~- 38 Green Park Dev. -Staff Report April 23, 1991 -Page 5 Stationing- Cont. From To Keystone Court Woodbury Court 1 +60N 4+20N Woodbury Court Farwest Avenue 4+20N 7+40N Farwest Avenue Gatepark Dr./Ct. Collector Street 7+40N 13+75N Queens Gate Ct. End Collector Street 13+75N 17+95N Local Street R.O.W.-50ft . Collector Street R.O.W. - 60 Ft. Local Street Width-36 ft. Collector Street Width - 40 Ft. 8. Street No. LS Street Name-Keystone Court Classification-Local Street Stationing: From To Glen Grove Ave. End (Cul=de-Sac) O+OOE 0+80E Street R.O.W. - 50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. 9. Street No. LS Street Name-Woodbury Ct. Classification-Local Street Stationing: From To Glen Grove Ave. End (Cul-de-Sac) O+OOE 0+80E Street R.O.W.-50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. 10. Street No. LS Street Name-Shadow Wood Ct. Classification-Local Street ~~~ 39 ~' Green Park Dev. -Staff Report Apri/ 23, 9991 -Page 6 ,, Stationing: From To Farwest Avenue End (Cul-de-Sac) O+OOW 3+70W Street R.O.W.-50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. 11. Street No. LS Street Name-Glen Grove Ct. Classification-Local Street Stationing: . From To Glen Grove Ave. .End (Cui-de-Sac) O+OOE 0+50,E Street R.O.W.-50 ft. , Street Width-36 ft.- , 12. Street No. LS Street Name-Gate Park Drive Classification-Local Street Stationing:. From To Glen Grove Ave. End O+OOW 4+80W Street R.O.W. -50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. 13. Street N. LS Street name-Queens Gate Court Classification-Local Street Stationing: From To Glen Grove Ave:, End O+OOW 1 +60W Street R.O.W.-50 ft. Street Width-36 ft. COND/T/ONS; See Exhibit ':4 " ~ V 4 Grnprk.dev Exhibit "A" ~~~w~~op~~~~ p~~ ~®~oo~oo~~ GREEN PARK V/LLAGE SUBD/V/S/ON 1. The review for the Green Park Village Subdivision Master Development Plan submitted hereby Pacific Trends Building Company-Mike Mahar representative, was done in accordance with all applicable rules, regulations, and ordinances in effect as of the date of this review. Any modifications by the developer of this Master Plan after Planning Commission approval, which would intensify the use of the property by the addition of lots, increase discharge of wastewater- storm water, increase the demand for water or fire protection, increase the traffic volumes, or other transportation issue will require re-submittal of the Master Development Plan for Planning Commission Approval: 2. To provide a base for determination of intensification of use of the property, an estimate of consumption, discharge and transportation requirements is listed below. a) Wastewater/Sanitary Sewer: -Daily discharge 167 lots x 2.3 persons/Lot x 100 gpcd = 39,000 g/d -Peak Demand 3.5 x DD = 136,500 g/d 6,000 g/hr. b) Water Consumption-Fire Protection: -1000 Cubic ft/Month/Unit x 167 = 167,000 cubic ft./month -1000 gpm Fire Flow/Hydrant c) Storm Drainage Discharge: Q=CIA - = 27 CFS d) Traffic From This Development: 1670 VT/D 3. The approval of the Development does not constitute an approval of any subdivision phase of Green Park Village Subdivision. Each phase of Green park Village Subdivision shall require separate tehtative and finaF Plat Approval as required by C.P.M.C. Title 16. ~~~ ~i Green Park Conditions April 23, 1991 -Page 2 4. All costs associated with the construction of this Development Plan shall be the sole responsibility of the owners/applicant, unless otherwise stipulated. 5. No construction will occur for any phase of this Development Plan until all applicable permits have been obtained from the City of Central Point and other jurisdictions requiring permits. The conditions listed above are a part of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1991, as Exhibit "A". cc: 02-014 cc: 02-040 -Development Plans GRPKDEV.CND ~~ 42 STAFF REPORT T0: Planning Commission FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant /{//`~ DATE: April 25, 1991 /. SUBJECT: Public Meeting - Review and make recommendation to the City Council for Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval for Green Park Village Phase I ' SUMMARY The Commission is scheduled to conduct a public meeting, receive and review the staff report and receive testimony regarding subject preliminary subdivision plat application. At the conclusion of the public meeting, the Commissioners can formulate and forward a recommendation to the City Council for the Council's May 15th meeting. BACKGROUND Pacific Trend Building Company applied for and received preliminary subdivision approval for Meadow Creek Subdivision in March, 1990. The time period for obtaining final plat approval expired and the developer has reapplied for preliminary plat approval for Phase I of Green Park Village; essentially the same subdivision as illustrated on the Meadow Creek Subdivision Plat. The proposed subdivision is located on approximately 45 acres in the far southeast quadrant of the City, bordered by I-5 on the east and the City limits on the south. The property is zoned (R-1-6) single family residential. The total development consists of 167 lots which range in size between 6,825 square feet and 20,800 square feet. Average lot size is 9,211 square feet. Phase I of the four-phase development consists of 44 lots and is located in the southwesterly corner of the proposed subdivision where the subdivision entrance connects to Merriman Road. ~~ 43 The developer has submitted a preliminary plat which also serves as a master plan. Staff has reviewed the plat in accordance with the following standards: 1. Chapter 16 of Central Point Municipal Code relating to subdivision development. 2. City of Central Point Public Works Standards. 3. Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code The Public Works Department has analyzed the plat and prepared a staff report containing proposed conditions of approval. The following items are included in the Agenda packet for the Planning Commissions review: Item A - Vicinity Map Item B - Certificate of Posting Item C - Preliminary Plat Application Item D - Map: Assessors Map (Note: Aerial map will be available at the r meeting since it is too large to include in the agenda packet - Map 2834) Item E - Public Works Staff Report Item F - Proposed Resolution recommending approval of Preliminary Plat subject to conditions of approval ~- 44 R2 M2 A M-1 i R• I-8 R 2~ M-1 ,' g ~~ r of ,-~ 9M G _ -._ ' j ~ J ~ -'~ _ ~ _,... - __ _ ~~ .. _ e.}__ _ _ _-_:~- ~'~, rR-1-8 ~ ~~ i r x - `' - ~ i '~ a _- _ R-1c6 R-1-& ' ~ ~"~ cti - V - !~ ~ ' ~ C-4 R-3 I . n C' _ ~ ~ ~•~' , - . .~. ~, ~ ~ jK-1 i Meadows Creek ~~ : _ .1 _ . .,~-. Subdivision _ ~ =~~~~~ ~ R-1 8 1 _ - ~ '~ ~~~ 45 ITEM ~ ~~ 155 SO. SECOND ST. CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I SANDY BERRYHILL CERTIFY THAT ON THE FOLLOWING DATE OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 1991 I POSTED A NOTICE FOR A PUBLIC -MEETING SCHEDULED'ON May 7 >..1991. DURING WHICH THE CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION:WILL REVIEW A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT APPLICATION FOR GREEN PARK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION ( 37 2W 12C TL 800, 807, 3100 and 3400) AT OR NEAR 1. CENTRAL POINT POST OFFICE 2. CENTRAL POINT BRANCH LIBRARY 3. CENTRAL POINT CITY FIRE STATION 4. CITY HALL BULLETIN BOARD... SIG URE .~ -/ -9/ DATE ~~ 46 THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY ITF~M C" Application Filing Deadline CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Application for Preliminary Subdivision Plat Name 1~+~~1V 1P-~~aP ~Utl-A~/.-ll~ ~' Address ~~ 1 /k t~ . (Z-IJ~2SID~ ~~. 1'~fX~pp~, CC~Cl~ aS"l`JO~ Phone Number ~1 ~' q~~~ Proposed Site Location ~Op~ $p7, Assessor's Map Page Location ~J7 2-~ 5£~OrJ ~ Tax Lot(s) 31~J } 3~QO Required Information A legal description as it appears on the deed. Deed copies may be obtained at the Jackson County Assessor's Office Requested information as contained in the attached Central Point Municipal Code Sections 16.24.020 to 16.24.070 and completion of a Statement of Water Rights (form attached) ,~cf~~y ~~~ c~~Er,,~ ie~.uo.~s~ '~Jt3MiYT~o. ~121'aU(JI UJbt3~"P 1`h'~T~ 6 I,u I,ur authorized owner or Application Fee: $ `~ ~~ LUAP/ADMINI $LIIS t~• r1A.ala-n,2_ certify that I am the owner or owner of the proposed site (If authorized agent, attach Date mthorized agent of owner, please indicate which) ~~ 47 CQ'. -. -; ,:u y ,~, "~ ~~ %I ~. (o / ~~~ 3~~ ~~~~ ~ r i3 1 A t, _ ~y ~. ~ :... 1~i,. ': B~\ r,> ~ ~.I a~~~y J. a r Q ~ :~ y v . J Y ?d.~'i 3'~ ~ i ~ o - J .r~ .^ J ~ F W ~ c h ~ • g F ~ ~ ~x ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ J 0.. ~f _ > ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ o ~ ~ya A _ .y- . , ~ ~~ ds r .:~ ~ f r ~~v ~ ~• 4~ a''~ F~ n.1x o3.l ~i I ~~ I ~ r ~..:'; ~ '; I~ i1• F~I (:~ r'}I'f 4 ~ ~ :y~ c ~Iyn .; .~ ~,~.-'I ~ r to .r ~~~ ~.,,~,.~'y1~~'I ~ ~; ,jl ~:u- ~~Y S+~ ~. o T'~~r. '~ r s•'-I ~ F M` =~ s L~ is 9 ~ y . ~~ `~ 3RJ ~~V ~ ~ ~~J._f:.. g \-~ \- 9 ~ ~~ i m ~~ y~ SS 7 ~ ~ ~ ~4 :6 ~ P°O-Sew ~ t~Z6 F.. li^.o Soi~ . ~~: . (1 1 ~~~ a'~ ~F Vi~~ Oo ~fi ~ • ~ •i t pps(i Y$S~" PFD ~`~~~ ~lg a `t: • 4 ~ ITEM _.~~ P ~,,. :tai' ~ •• Z f a ~.. ~ ~; . I Mr•' ;";. ~fy'' R:~°~~ I ` $ '- n h ; .. ~ I ~J, A ~: i' ..h h ~:•'. ~ I V ^~ A . M ~ i. ~ ~ F..~ p ~v P +~ (!/G/iii LlJ-L .J. ~~i ~~ ~~ ~<.r< ,~ ~, ~...' , ,I ' r ~ ~d'.' ,.. ..: '" ~ o I-; I J ~ (r' N ~ \ .1 ~ ° 2 .~. ~ a° w ~ ;.. z~ o. °' ~ M ,c ..~ .~ 1 ~ srLS cz[rg 3' `s ~ +~ D a ~ ~ ~~ e ~ ..---~~.... ~. •:•: ~ ^\ . .~ ~' ~ ~ . .r.::~~ ~~ j,: ,~ '. o~ P ~o ' ^ iµ 6 ~ •• ~:: pt.l ZY'Opff xa Lp'ff JT -- ~ T.r'GBSa r ~ ~~; s .; _ 49 _.,, , ~~ ': r: ': 37 2W' 128 ., :' ' .: _ .. ~: . SW~-SEC 12 TWP3TS. R 2W -W M~. s~oi• ,: ~ ~~ .. .~,.. ~w Mi [~~! L. . ... 301 e-.~ s.'~ 4 ' \ .~~ ~. h. ' /~\/~/~ :i:~ 1/IVW~~. O ~~. .. ~: ~ ~ 2~ :. , . ._ o~ _.. _. :~ ~B ~ 3400 ~'_ ! ~ ;,,~ ~„ ! ~::. ,q~ ,x tt ~~,.. o Y I ~ 2 ,•. 6 ,:. ! i ":y.1 I - '~• ~ , 9 ; ~ ~~ ~. . r. l' f Q \~~ - D~4 ~ ..''..b N Iv ~ 1+1 • ~u~ ' y a i ~ ~ ,! - 800-N 21.63 AC v; ~.: Lo'f ~ ~9. . .: '.S~l7012 sa ~ 0.02AC ~, 1 _ /I ~~ . I~ ? ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ ~, ~ 1 I ~` - r i ' f J ./ ;. a " `L o'8 EncehWalker Sub. Lot 7 • ) y \~. ~ h ~ ~+ •' a ~ 809-N 7 C.14Ac 54 _. , . ~ ITEM E - - Q;OTY ®P C[~INT(~~L ~®ON1f PURL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT ~5~G1G~G~ Gs'G ° oG~p DATE: Apr// 25, 1991 PROJECT.- SUBDIV/S/ON TENTAT/VEPLAT (Green Park Village Subdivision) LOCAT/ON: T37S R2W WM Section 12, TL 3100, 3400 800-N, 808-N, 809-N ZONE: R-1-6 No. of Acres: 45 AC. No. of Lots: 167 No. of Dwe//ings: 167 (One (11 per Lotl SUBD/V/DER/ OWNER: Pacific Trend Bui/ding Company 1014 N. Riverside Medford, OR 97501 (5031 773-4385 Representative -Mike Mahar SURVEYOR: Hoffbuhr and Associates 219 N. Oakdale Medford, OR 97504 (5031 779-4641 Representative -Dennis Hoffbuhr ENG/NEER: Jensen & Associates 1237 N. Riverside Suite 28 Medford, OR 97501 (5031 779-4352 Representative -John E. Jensen TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.- Residential Subdivision NAME OF DEVELOPMENT.- Green Park Vi//age Subdivision -Phase / (formerly Meadow Creek Subdivision) ~- 51 Staff Report-Tentative P/at Green Park-Apri/25, 1997 Page Two /. Tentative P/at Requirements /Tit/e 16.24) (Check Onel Meets Not Does Not Title Descrindon Sfendard Applicable Meet Standard Condtiore 16.24.010 Filing Fee X 16.24.020 Scale X 18.24.030 General Conditions a. Name of Subdivision X b. Date North Arrow Scale X o. Legal location of Subdivision X d. Names/Addresses of Owner Engineers X 16.24.040 Existing Conditions a. Looation of street widths and easements, etc. X (1) b. Topogrephio Info X .. o. Benchmark established X d. Location end direction of ell water courses X e. Natural features rock outcroppings, marshes, wooded areas. X f. Exleting uses of the lend X g. Location of ell existing streets and utilities X 12) h. Zoning on and adjacent to tract is compatible X 16.24.050 Proposed Plan a. Sweet LoceUOn, and the lanes, grades, radius of curves, relationship to other existing or proposed - streets, and other utilities X b. Easements-WidthalPurposes X (1) c. Lot Dimension X (3) 16.24.060 Partial Development Is other property adjacent to this property being considered in the design? This property can be owned by the subdivider. See Master Plen 14) 18.24.070 Explanatory Information a. Vicinity maps to explain relationship to existing streets, can require correction to existing streets. X b. Proposed Deed Restrictions Need a list c. Center Lane profile of streets to show grade (100' beyond street) Provide information on final oonst ruction drawings d. Approximate location and proposed size of utilities. - X 16.32.020 Requirements Generally X .• V W 'Staff Report -Tentative P/at Green Park -April 25, 1991 Page Three //. Subdivision Layout /Check One1 Meets Not Doea Not Title DeseripUon Standard Applicable Meet Standard _. Condiric~ 16.18.010 Blocks Length Width R-7-8 X (3) Shape Not greater 1200' X 16.16.020 Blocks Sizes X 16.16.030 Blocks Easements a. Utilities X lU b. Water Courses X c. Pedeatdan Ways X 18.16.OA0 Lots -Shapes and Size X l31 16.16.050 Lota-Size & Determination (Lot length greater than 214 times width prohibited. X 16.18.060 Through Lota x 76.16.070 Lot sidelines X 16.78.080 Large Lot Subdivislona x III. Street Improvements A. Exisdng Conditions t. Street No. - SA 15, Street Name -Beall Lane, Jurisdiction-Jackson County, Existing R.O.W.-60 ft., Future R.O.W.-80 ft., Existing Street Width-24 ft., Future Street Width-60 ft., Existing Curb/Gutter-None, Future Curb/Gutter-Required, Existing Sidewalks-None, Future Sidewalks-Required, Existing Traffic Volume-3500 VT/D, Projected Traffic Volume this Development - 1670 VT/D, Projected Traffic Volume including this development - 4,100 VT/D. Traffic Volume street can carry - No information available. Street Lights-None, Future Street Lights-Required. Existing Traffic Control-minimal, Future Traffic Control-Design Master Plan required. Distance to nearest intersection-650 Ft., Circlewood Drive. Condition Poor. 2. Street No.-SA 17, Street Name -Merriman Road, Jurisdiction-Jackson County. Existing R.O.W.-60 ft., Future R.O.W.-80 ft., Existing Curb/Gutter-None,. Future Curb/Gutter-Required. Existing sidewalks-None, Future Sidewalks-Required, Existing Traffic Volume-No Data Available. Traffic Volume street can carry - no data available. Existing Street Lights-None, Future Street Lights-Required. Existing Traffic Control- Minimal. Future Traffic Control-Design Master Plan required. Distance to nearest intersection-650 ft. Circlewood Drive. Condition Poor. 3. Glen Grove Avenue -This is a City of Medford Street @ City Limits 4. Far. West Avenue -This is a City of Medford Street @ City Limits. ~~ 53 Staff Report-Tentative P/at Green Park - Apri/ 25, 1991 Page Four B. Street Standards - 16.12.010 Meets Not Title Description Standards Aocliceble 16.12.040 Street Generally a. Location X b. Width c. Grads X d. Relationship to existing atreet X e. Topography as it relates to drainage. X drain to atreet f. Provide for street construction X g. Follows a Master Plan X h. Traffic Volume X i. Safety Features 16.72.050 Street R.O.W. & Widths Local ROW 50' Street Width 38' X Secondary Arterial 80' ROW Width 80' Street Width 40' 16.12.080 Street Reserve Strip 16.72.070 Street Alignment X 18.72.080 Street EMenaion X 16.12.090 Street lnteraection - ..Angles 90° X 18.12.100 Existing Streets Additlonel Width 18.12.110 Half Street 16.12.120 Cul-da-Sao and/or dead-end streets a. Shall not serve more then 12 lots X b. Shall not be greater .then 400' X 18.12.130 Street Names 18.72.140 Stteet Grades end Curves -MA SACS not greater then 8°.6 X -Not greater than 72°h on LS X -Cannot be less then 1 °h X Curve Radius -LS-100' X -CS-100' -sc-2oo' -MS-300' Stationing X X Does Not Meat Standard X X X X X X X x X ~- 54 Conditions 151 16) 15) (7) (8) (5) (9) - <\ Staff Report -Tentative P/at ,• Green Park - Apri/ 25, 7991 Page Five /V. Water System A. Existing Conditions 1. An 8" ductile iron pipe is located at the intersection of Circlewood Drive and Beall Lane. A 12" line extends east from this location approximately 20 ft. Meets Not Doea Not ~- Title Description Standards Aoalicable Meet Standard Conditions 18.21.060 Water System Provided Mains X (10) Service Laterals 1 ea. lot X (101 Fre Hydrants not greater then 500'apart X (11) Flre Plow 1000 gpm provide minimum pressure, 40 psl X V. Sanitary Sewers A. Existing Conditions An 18" Sanitary Sewer Main located adjacent to the west, ROW line to I-5 is available for connections. For as-built information, contact Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority. 8. Sanitary Sewer Standards Meeta Not Does Not Tlde Deaedatlon Standard Aco/icsb/e Meet Standards Cand2bra 16.32.050 Adequate Sizing X (13) Mainline Services V/. Storm Drainage A. Existing Conditions 1. An 84" CPM Storm Drainage Pipe is located approximately 100' north of the northeast corner of this development. 2. A 48" and 60" Storm Drainage pipe is located in the southeast segment of the property. 3. Two seasonal streams traverse the southwest and southeast portions of this property. ~- 5a Staff Report-Tentative P/at Green Park-April 25, 1991 Page Six B. Storm Drainage Standards T!t/e Desedptlon 18.32.040 Surface Drainage and storm sewer system -Provide dralnege through the subdivision -Are there adverse effects planed on downstream structures? •No catchbasin located greater than 350 ft. for any curb and gutter section. Meets Standard SEE COND/T/ONS ATTACHED AS EXH/B!T "B" GRPKTNT.PLT Not Does Not ADalicab/e Meet Standards Conddiorx X (14) X (15) X (161 ~~~ 56 <•. EXH/B/T "A" C~~f~~~~DOof~~ GREEN PARK V/LLAGE SUBD/V/S/ON -PHASE / 1. Easements for the Sanitary Sewer relocation, Storm Sewer relocation, and 12" Waterline installation shall be shown on the Tentative Plat. 2. The Tentative Plat shall identify the nearest location to connect utilities (i.e. Water, sewer, storm drainage. 3. Lot dimensions must comply with Section 16.24.050C of the CPMC which requires minimum lot width of 60 ft. 4. Attached with this Report is the proposed Green Park Village Subdivision Street Master Plan. 5. Beall Lane, Merriman Road shall be constructed to a 48' curb to curb width 100 ft. south of the subdivision's ingress/egress and north to the southwest property corner with tapers to match pavement widths. The widening shall include curbs/gutters, sidewalks, street lights, storm drainage, street improvements for a southbound left turn pocket on Merriman Road, and a northbound right turn pocket, minimum width 48', curb to curb. Farwest Avenue shall be widened to a 60' right of way at Merriman Road to provide two 12' lanes and one 18' lane at 40' curb to curb, at the entrance. This will provide right and left turn lanes at the main ingress/egress to the subdivision. 6. A Master Traffic Delineation Plan shall be developed to provide adequate sight distance, stopping distance, clear vision at intersections for Beall Lane and Merriman Road. 7. A one (1) foot reserve strip shall be placed at the end of Farwest Avenue in the Phase I @ Station 12+65E. 8. Meadow Creek Drive is now Farwest Avenue. 9. Follow the stationing requirements outlined in the Development Plan Staff Report. Green Paik Tentative Plat - Ex. A" - ~ 57 Exhibit ':4" -Tentative P/at Green Park -Conditions Apri/ 25, 9991 -Page 2 10. The water system shall be designed from the 12" on Beall and continue to Merriman and Farwest Avenue. From this point, the Subdivision shall be fed by an 8" service. All through streets shall be stubbed with an 8" DIP and a valve for future connection 11. Fire hydrants shall not be spaced greater than 500' final spacing plan to be approved by the Central Point Fire Department. Fire hydrants shall be connected from an 8" water main. 12. Services shall be spaced as much as possible to locate one on each side of a front property line, one foot on' either side of the property corner. 13. Sanitary sewer system shall be designed to provide 4" services per lot, and stubbed to provide for future connections on through streets. 14. Two seasonal streams traverse the southwest and southeast portions of this development. The developer shall design a storm drainage system which collects the flow from these seasonal streams and this subdivision, and carries the flow through the subdivision irr such a manner that would not flood any lot ih this subdivision based on the design standards required in the Public Works Standards. 15. Developer shall provide engineered drainage calculations to determine proper sizing of the storm drainage system as if relates to the drainage area in which this development is located. 16. Developer shall design the storm drainage system to meet the design requirements in accordance with the City of Central Point Public Work Standards. 17. Street name signs including posts, labor and equipment for street sign installation shall be paid for by the developer of this Subdivision, and the installation shall be completed by the City. 18. A Traffic Control Signing Plan shall be included as a part of the final construction plans, and will be installed by the City and all costs associated with traffic control sign installation shall be paid for by the Developer. Green Park Tentative Plat -Exhibit A" ~- 58 Exhibit "A" -Tentative P/at Green Park -Conditions Apri/ 25, 1997 -Page 3 19. A soils engineer must evaluate the strength of the soil (R-value) to determine the street section design. The City's engineer shall be used, and the developer shall pay for the costs of these services. A design life for Merriman and Beall Lane shall be a minimum 20 year life, given a daily traffic volume of 10,000 vehicle trips per day, and 10% truck traffic. A design life for Farwest Avenue shall be a minimum 20 year life, given a daily traffic volume of 2000 vehicle trips per day and 2% truck traffic. The remaining streets shall be designed for a 20 year life, 1000 vehicle trips per day and 2% truck traffic. 20. A street lighting plan shall be included in the construction documents according to the requirements of the Public Works Department. All intersections shall be illuminated and all local streets shall have a minimum street light spacing of 200'. Developer is to install all pads and conduits for streetlights as a part of the construction of the subdivision. The developer shall also pay for street lights and for the installation of all street lights in the subdivision. 21. Ladder rungs shall be installed in each sanitary sewer manhole of a depth greater than 3.0 feet to the flow line of the manhole. Developer shall use ladder rungs approved by the Central Point Public Works Department. 22. Developer shall install or cause to install conduits for utilities at intersections, or locations determined by utility companies. Developer shall also provide conduit crossings for utility companies who will not install their services until after the subdivision is constructed. Developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the installation of these conduit crossings. 23. The water system shall be designed to provide a minimum flow at each fire hydrant in the Subdivision of 1000 gpm. 24. The final plat for this subdivision shall not be approved by the City Council until all conditions as herein stipulated and approved for this Subdivision have been met. 25. The Tentative Plat Review for the Tentative Plat submitted herein by Pacific Trend Building Company was done in accordance with the rules, regulations and ordinances in effect as of the date of this review. Any modifications by Green Park Tentative Plat -Exhibit A" ~- 59 M1 Exhibit "A" -Green Park Tentative P/at -Conditions Apri/ 25, 1997 -Page 4 the developer which would allow this Subdivision NOT to meet standards set forth in the Central. Point Municipal Code, or would intensify the use of the property greater than the standards set forth herein shall require resubmittal of the Tentative Plat to the Planning Commission. 26. No driveway accesses shall be allowed from lots that abut Merriman Road or Beall lane. All accesses shall be designed in accordance with the City of Central Point Public Work Standards. 27. No construction will begin on this .project until such time as plans and specifications have been reviewed and approved, and a Public Works Permit is issued. GREEN PARK TENTATNEMAT • IXR/B?'A' GPTNTPLT.CND 60 ITEM _~~„ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PHASE I OF GREEN PARK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, Mike Mahar, on behalf of Pacific Trend Building Company, has submitted a preliminary plat for Phase I of Green Park Village Subdivision, a subdivision located north of Beall Lane and west of Interstate 5 Freeway in the southeast quadrant of the City, further described as Jackson County Assessors Map 37 2W 12C Tax Lots 800, 807, 3100 and 3400 and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Central Point held a public meeting upon said application for approval of the preliminary plat on May 7, 1991, pursuant to Central Point Municipal Code Section 1.24.020C, and having at said public meeting received and reviewed the City staff report and testimony, and being fully advised, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Based upon the staff report evidence, and record relating to said application, the Planning Commission hereby finds that said application meets the requirements for preliminary plat applications, that said preliminary plat as proposed is in compliance with the City's comprehensive plan and zoning code, and if the conditions set forth hereinafter are met, said application meets the City's requirements for subdivision layout, park dedication, street standards, water system standards, sanitary sewer standards, lot size and storm drainage standards. Section 2. The Planning commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat submitted by Mike Mahar, for Phase I of Green Park Village Subdivision subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto, and by this reference expressly made a part of the within resolution. RESOLUTION NO. /r~kS PREPLAT.GRN/RESO e ~ " V M. Passed by the Planning Commission on by me in authentication of its passage this ATTEST: day of 1991 and signed . 1991. Planning Commission Chairman Planning Commission Secretary .Approved by me this day of 1991. Planning Commission Chairman RESOLUTION N0: PREPLAT.GRN/RESO ~~. 62 STAFF REPORT T0: Planning Commission FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant /G//I~ DATE: April 26, 1991 TOPIC: Public Meeting - Review and make recommendation concerning vacation of alleyways located in the Amy Harbaugh Addition Ci1MMARV Steve Rietmann, owner and developer of the Quality Fence Project, has submitted a request for vacation proceedings on the Council's own motion for alleys located within the Amy Harbaugh Addition Subdivision. (Item A illustrates the proposed alley vacations) Pursuant to Chapter 1.24 of the Central Point Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is required to review and make recommendations to the City Council regarding all street and alley vacations. Staff has discovered that the Quality Fence Company building, currently under construction, is atop a 20 foot wide portion of alleyway which was established within the Amy Harbaugh's Addition in 1889. The alley is not visible and, to the best of staff knowledge, has not been used as a right-of-way for a number of years. The property owner and developer, Steve Rietmann, desires to vacate this particular alleyway along with other alleys which were. originally platted in this subdivision during the late 1800's. Mr. Rietmann is requesting a vacation "on the Council's own motion" as provided under Section 271.130 of the Oregon Revised Statute. ANAT.VCTG Staff has addressed two primary issues relating to the proposed vacations: 1. Will the alley or street be needed now or in the future to serve the motoring public? 2. Do utilities exist in the alley or street and will vacation impact the agencies responsible for maintaining such facilities? Are future utilities planned for the street or alley? If utilities do conflict 63 with the proposed vacation, can they be physically relocated and is the developer willing and able to pay for the relocation? If there is a utility vacation conflict, will a public utility easement satisfy the needs of the responsible utility agency? Incorporated within this report is a Public Works review (Item G), which discusses the .transportation issue and the utility issue from the City's standpoint. Staff's conclusion is that the alleys in question are not needed to serve the motoring public and do not contain any municipal utilities. On April 16, 1991, other utility agencies were notified and given an opportunity to submit a written report setting forth any necessary conditions which would be necessary for approval of the vacation request. As of the date of this report, the City has not received any such reports which indicate that there are conflicting utilities or that special conditions need to be included with a vacation approval. ATTACHMENTS The following attachments are provided for the commissions review and for entering into the meeting record by reference: Item A - Map illustrating general area Item B - Certificate of Posting Item C - April 5, 1991 letter to Rietmann ` Item D - April 11, 1991 letter to Rietmann Item E - Vacation Application materials Item F - April 16, 1991 Notification to Utilities Item G - Public Works Staff Review dated April 25, 1991 Item H - Proposed Resolution recommending approval of alley vacations 64 ~ P • ~~~ • ~ lI/TS - CENTRAL PO/NT TAYLOR STREET .+• 100 •s. s.- ~' \~ r ~ ~ ~ - 200 ~~ + ~ ~# c O ~ ' \ \ ,Q9 \6~1 ~~ \ 400 \\ ~, 300 ,, ~ ~ 'CKS /,3,4,5, 8 6 NBAUCH3 ADO. w7 P.~e4 P~oR > Y~\ ~~0 -~ ~ ~ ~~` /~'~ cC` ~ 00.~~~ _ NS~~ ` / J ~ / . ~~~fr C~~29) ,~~ ~T00 a~ ~ e" Q. A ... o_ . (~ `.. m / ~~ J~ a o L ~ t ~~ ` e R~SG. (~R~ p,. ~~ ~' ~ ,, ~~ ,o i'6~ y~~ ~4 e~'~ Proposed' Alley vacations TEM 37 2W IOA~ \ 37 2W 3DD \ ~ _ `~~~~ , T ...: ~j,'in '. .;.ryq~~ Y ~ ~/:' F'.. ..~n 1 ~ .. ~. {. ff ~~~F w., ..; ., ..,o _n 1 \ V~y ~~IjJ F ~ :. ~ u rr` T c _ Quality qs ° ; Fence Bldg. (05 _ '~_ ~ s~, F~ \~ W A' ~ ~` ITEM -JfL~ 155 SO. SECOND ST CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I Sandy Berryhill CERTIFY THAT ON THE FOLLOWING DATE OF Wednesday May 1 L991 , I POSTED A NOTICE FOR A PUBLIC MEETING' SCHEDULED ON May 7, ,. 194 L DURING WHICH THE CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION WILL REVIEW A REQUEST FROM STEVE. REITMANN FOR VACATION OF AN ALLEY WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS AMY HARBAUGH ADDITION GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF WEST-PINE AND EAST OF HASKELL. SAID NOTICES WERE POSTED AT-0R NEAR 1. CENTRAL POINT POST OFFICE 2. CENTRAL POINT BRANCH LIBRARY 3. CENTRAL POINT CITY FIRE STATION 4. CITY HALL BULLETIN BOARD SIG \URE ~' /-9,~ DATE THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY April S, 1991 155 SO. SECOND ST. CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 Mr. Steve Rietmann Quality Fence Company P.O. Box 3985 Central Point, OR 97502 Dear Mr. Rietmann: ITEM ~_, 664-3321 It has come to the City's attention that the northern portion of the building you are constructing on West Pine Street actually sits on a City alley. The alley was not shown on the site plan application materials you submitted to the City, the City was unaware'of the alley, and the site plan was approved. While the City has the-power 'to i$sue a stop work order on the project, we have decided against that for the time being. However, you, should be on notice that there is-a problem. The approbed'site plan also provides for parking on the east side of the building in the vicinity of Amy Street. At his point, we are. not convinced that Amy Street (alley) is correctly located on your site plan. The City may require that the site plan be modified since no off-street parking activities can occur within City alleys. Please be on notice of this problem as well. As you probably know, neither the City staff nor the Planning Commission can effect vacations of alleys. Only the City Council, after, proper notices have been given and a public hearing has been held, has. the power to vacate land_ You should not assume that either or both of .the. alleys in question will be vacated, although that is certainly possible. We recommend that youjoinwith'us in taking a look at the possibleresolutions to the above-mentioned problems': Because of the importance of these issues, we urge you to contact either me or Larry Blanchard at City Hall to .set up an appointment to discuss the situation. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter, and we look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, ~~ ~ .. ~ LC/'~ ` George Rubaloff ~ ~ Administrative Assistant City of Central Point _ ~ 6'7 THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY rt ITEM !~ 155 SO. SECOND ST: CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 P,pril il, 1991 P1r. Steve Rietmann Quality Fence Company P.0. Box 3895 Central Point, OR 97502 s Dear Steve: During our April 8, 1991 meeting, you, Public Works Director Larry Blanchard and I'discussed the concerns outlined in the City's April 5, 1991 letter, generally regarding the Quality Fence Project and.right-of-way., vacations. The following points were made during the meeting: 1. At the minimum, you should submit a vacation request for that portion of alley which runs east and .west between Tax, Lot 1,000 and 1,100 of Jackson County Assessor Map 37 2W 10AB, currently. beneath the new Quality Fence Company building. The City will consider the other alleys in the northwesterly section of the. subdivision. 2. The City's'postion at this time is to keep Amy Street a right-of- way primarily because .the City requires an unclouded right to maintain its sewer and water utilities. Therefore, ,you will need to resubmit'a revised site plan which addresses a modified off-street parking scheme for the required 19 ;spaces .since. the current arrangement would cause vehicular maneuvering in the right-of-way. In 'order for the City to have an opportunity, o review your revised plan and process it for the May 7, 1991 Planning Commission meeting, you will need to submit the completed plan by Wednesday,. April 17, 1991. 3. 'A's a means by which to facilitate our review of any future vacation requests on your property, the City encourages you to submit a master plan/development plan of the entire property. This plan would, at a minimum, include precise locations of streets, alleys, tax lots, proposed buildings, existing buildings, etc. The Planning commission has the authority to approve master plans to serve as a guide to future development and to assist the City in reviewing .'future development applications. .. ~' THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY r Steve Rietmann Quality Fence Company April 11, 1991 Page Two 4. Additional information will be required to review a request to vacate the entire subdivision known as Amy Harbaugh Addition, particularly as it would relate to vacating Manzanita Street. It is unknown if that portion of Manzanita adjoining the properties will serve the public at some future time. The City would need to rely upon a traffic engineer opinion to address that concern. As a condition of vacation approval, applicants are required to pay for all costs reasonably related to processing the vacation petition. A traffic engineering study would need to be done, at your expense, if you pursue a vacation request for Manzanita Street. Steve, I appreciate your cooperative efforts. Let's stay in touch as we work through the process toge£her. Sincerely, eorge Rubaloff Administrative Assistant City of Central Point GR:sb ~~- 69 ITEM PETITION FOR VACATION OF STREET, ALLEY OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE THE UNDERSIGNED APPLICANT hereby petitions the City Council of the City of Central Point, Oregon, for the vacation of the street, alley or other public place designated below. This request is-for: 1. ORS 271.080 (petition by property owners)* X- ORS 271.130 (vacation on Council's own motion) 2. The legal description of the property proposed to be vacated is as follows (also attach a map showing the property proposed to be vacated): See Attached Exhibit "A" for legal description. See Attached Exhibit "B" for map of proposed vacation. 3. The purpose for which the property is proposed. to be used is as follows: Co~runerical/Light Industrial 4. The reason for the proposed vacation is as follows: 1.) Eliminate public access via existing alleys within project boundaries. i PETITION FOR VACATION OF STREET, ALLEY OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE - 1 (072589) ..., ., t Q n 5. If the proposed vacation is pursuant to ORS 271.130 (vaca- tion on Council's own motion), the names and addresses of all persons owning or claiming any interest in the property abutting the. property to be vacated are as follows (attach title report, lot book report or 'other verification of identity of ownership of abutting property owners): 6. The undersigned warrant and represent that they are the. owners of record. or contract purchasers of property. abutting the. foregoing proposed alley vacation; that the same will not adversely substantially affect the market. value of such abutting property, or in the event of a substantial adverse affect thereupon; that they nonethe- less consent to the 'proposed vacation and waive damages. 7. Tendered. with this application is a non-refundable fee of 5325.00: The undersigned applicant hereby agrees to pay, in addition to said fee, all costs incurred by the City in processing the within application, including, but not limited to, gross personnel costs, materials, attorney fees, recording costs, publication costs and all other costs reasonably related to the processing of the within application and verification of information. Said costs shall be paid prior to final Council action upon the within application. DATED this 30th day of January 19 91 . ~ ~J~ir . ~~ (If individual) STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Jackson ) DATED: Personally appeared the above named PETITION FOR VACATION OF STREET, ALLEY OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE - 2 (072589) ~ ~ ~~ -- and acknowledged the foregoing Consent to be his or her voluntary... act and deed... BEFORE ME: Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: (If Corporation) STATE OF OREGON ) )i ss. County of Jackson ) DATED: January 30, 1991 Personally appeared Steve E. Rietmann and G.rP..A F_ R;armann who, being duly sworn, each for himself and not for the other, did say that the former is the President and that the latter is the Secretary of W. F. S. Materials, Inc. a corporation,.and that the seal affixed to-.the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation and that .said. instrument. was signed and sealed in' behalf of said corporation bg.authority of its Board of Directors, and-each of-them acknowledged the forego ng Consent to be its voluntary act and deed. BEFORE ME: Not y u is -for Oregon My Commission Expires: 9/10/93' * If this urocedure is chosen, please attach a completed petition on forms provided'by the City.. FOR CITY USE ONLY Date filed with City Received by PETITION FOR VACATION OF STREET, ALLEY OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE - 3 (072589) ~~ 72 APPENDIX 7'O PETITION FOR VACATION OF STREET. ALLEY OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE (Consent of Owners) Description of proposed vacation of street, alley or other public place: - , Sae--Ex,HIBIT 'A', akGashed STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS: ORS 271.080(2) requires that any petition for vacation shall have appended thereto as a part thereof and as a basis for granting the same "the consent of the owners of all abutting property and _ of not less than two-thirds (2/3) in area of the real property affected thereby". The real property affected thereby shall be deemed to be the land lying on either side of the street or . portion thereof.prbposed to be vacated and extending laterally td the next atreet that serves as a parallel street, but in any case not to exceed two hundred (200) feet, and the land for a like lateral distance on either side of the street for four hundred (400) feet along its course beyond. each terminus of the part proposed to be vacated. Where a street is proposed to be vacated to its termini,-the land embraced in an extension of the street for a distance of four hundred (400) feet beyond each terminus shall also be counted. In the vacation of any plat or part thereof, the consent of the owner or owners of two-thirds (2/3) in area of the property embraced within such plat or part thereof proposed to be vacated shall be sufficient; except where such vacation embraces street area, when, as to such street area, the above requirements shall also apply. Consent of the owners of the required amount of property shall be in writing and duly acknowledged before an officer authorized to take such ack- nowledgment of 'deeds. ~ CONSENT' The undersigned represents and warrants that he or she is the owner of record or contract purchaser of real-property affected by the vacation proposal described hereinabove, said affected APPENDIX TO PETITION FOR VACATION OF STREET, ALLEY OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACE - 1 (072589) ~~~ 73 EXHIBIT 'A' Those certain alleys or portions thereof within Block 2 and Block 7 of AMY and HARBAUGH'S ADDITION to the City of Central Point in Jackson County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: That alley lying northeast of and adjoining the northeast boundary of Lot 2 in Block 7, from the most northerly: corner of said Lot 2 to the most easterly corner of said Lot 2; Also those entire alleys in Block 2, Jying between Lots 7, 8, 9 and. Lots. 4, 5, and 6, and between.Lots 1, 2, 3 and Lots 4 and .9. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR JULY 14, 1978 ROGER R. ROBERTS 1656 Roger R. Roberts LANDMARK SURVEYING -- 74 EXH181T 'B' Page 2 of 2 E e c3 .~.... . ...:. I'1'EM r THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY 155 SO. SECOND ST. CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 Date: April 16, 1991 C 2 TY OF CENTRAL PO2 NT NOTS CE TO AGENC 2 E S [X] City. of Central Point [ ] .Rogue Valley Transit Dist. [X] AT & T [ ] School District No. 6 [ ] Rogue River Irrigation Dist [ ] [ ] BCVSA [X] C.P. National [X] P P & L [ ] TCI Cablevision [X] U.S. Sprint [X] U.S. West [ ] Jackson County. [ ] State Hwy. Div [] [l Re: Proposed Vacation of Alleyways as per attached map Attached you will find material(s). relating to the referenced application. Please review these materials and submit to the Central Point Planning Department a written report setting forth any necessary conditions as required by your agency for approval of said request. Your concerns may relate to future utilities as well as utilities which are currently in place within the right- of-way. Please provide maps to illustrate the location of your facilities. If no comments are received by Thursday, April 25, 1991, the Planning Department will assume that your agency does not have any comments regarding the application. Sincerely, G orge Rubaloff Administrative Assistant GR:sb Enclosure NOTICE TO AGENCIES.ADMIN v .. .. ITEM `_ C/TY OF CENTRAL PO/NT PUBL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT ~1r~r~F ~~~®~~ DATE.- 4/25/91 PROJECT.- Vacation ofA//eyways LOCAT/ON: Between T37S R2W Map 10A6 TL 1000 & 1100 Between T37S R2W Map f0A8 TL 200 & 300-400 Between T37S R2W Map 10AB TL 100 & 200 Between T37S R2W Map 10AB TL 500-400 AREA TO BE VACATED: TL 1000 & 1100 2080 SF TL 200 & 300-400 2240 SF TL 100 & 200 1000 SF TL 500 &400 " 1~.Q0 SF Tota/ 6620 SF APPL/CANT.- Qua//ty Fence P.O. Box 3985 Central Point, OR 97502 Representative: Steve Rietmann SURVEYOR: Roger Roberts Existino Utilities: 1. A 3/4" waterline is located 15' north of the new Quality Fence Building and serves the house located behind and north of 136 E. Pine. 2. No other City Utilities are Idcated in the remainder of the proposed alley vacations. COND/TlONS: 1. It may be necessary to service the home behind 136 E. Pine from another direction if the operation of the fencing facility. will interrupt usage of water. cc: 02-014 13-040 ALLEYWYS.QLY 1 ITF,M _, ~ ~_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE VACATION OF CERTAIN ALLEYS LOCATED WITHIN AMY HARBAUGH'S ADDITION, A SUBDIVISION PLATTED IN 1889, LOCATED GENERALLY NORTH OF WEST PINE, EAST OF HASKELL STREET, SOUTH OF TAYLOR STREET AND WEST OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD IN CENTRAL POINT, OREGON WHEREAS, Steve Rietmann has requested a vacation of certain alleys described in Exhibit A and illustrated in Exhibit B, both of which are attached hereto and made a part of this document, and, WHEREAS, the Central Point Planning Commission held a public meeting upon said request for alley vacation on May 7, 1991, pursuant to Central Point Municipal Code Section 1.24.020C, and having at said public meeting received the application, City Staff Report and testimony., and being fully advised, now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That based upon the Staff Report, evidence and record relating to said application, the Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: a. Alleys will not be needed now or in the future to serve the motoring public. b. Utilities do not exist in the' alleys and there are no utilities planned for future installation within the .alleyways. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. HARBAUGH.VAC/RESO ., ~ ~ ~ g The Planning Commission therefore concludes that granting the proposed alley vacations with Amy Harbaugh's Addition will be in the public interest. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval to the City Council of said request for vacation of an alley described in Exhibit A and illustrated in Exhibit B attached hereto. Passed by the Planning Commission on the 7th day of May, 1991, and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of May, 1991. Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST: Planning Commission Secretary Approved this day of May, 1991. Planning Commission Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. HARBAUGH.VAC/RESO ~- 79 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Commission /' ' FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant I~~~/ DATE: April 25, 1991 TOPIC: Master Street and Development Plan Meadow Creek Area ACTION This item is continued from the March 5, 1991 Planning Commission Agenda. Under the authority of Chapter 15.16 of the Central Point Municipal Code, the Commission may adopt the master development plan to serve as a guide to future growth and development in the Meadow Creek area. However, the report provided in your packet is informational and the commissioners are not being requested to adopt the plan at this time. On March 5, 1991, the Planning Commission conducted a public meeting during which public input was received. Staff has reviewed public's input and prepared a status report which highlights the proposed revisions to the draft plan. ATTACHMENTS Item A - March 5, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes Item B - Public Works Staff Report dated April 25, 1991 n r, " - ~ 1 ITEM i'^ ;• ~' ~`' C/TY OF CENTRAL PO/NT ~' P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes ::t3;'~ ~, ~ March 5, 199 9 <s~~~~~ Page One . ly;„ i -~^~•`•ii /. ' MEET/NG CALLL'D TO ORDER- 7:00 p.m. //. ROLL CALL Those present were Garth Ellard, Rick Bettenburg,'Dick Halley, Bob Matthews and Chuck Piland. Also present were George Rubaloff, City Administrative Assistant, Larry R. Blanchard, Public Works Director and Cecelia Gordon, Secretary. Karolyne Hugo and Jack Crumm had each phoned in and asked to ,. -:;, .1 be excused from tonight's meeting in order to attend other business matters. ~.. ;, ///. APPROVAL OF M/NOTES -~•~~:~~` Commissioner Halley moved to approve the February 5, 1991 Planning ~~`~"~' Commission Meeting Minutes and the Motion was seconded by Commissioner "" Bettenburg. Roll Call Vote: Bettenburg, yes; Halley, yes; Matthews, yes; ,., ;r Piland, yes; and the Motion carried unanimously. , ~:~« `4;.~. /V. CORRESPONDENCE -; ~,° «x=;! ~,~~;, George Rubaloff read into the record, Calvin Martin's letter dated February 20, .:NR;a::-.. 1991 Mr. Martin requested an extension of time on the West Park Place development. . V. BUS/NESS \ A. Pub/ic Meeting Review of Deve/opment P/an -Street Master P/an for area known as Meadow Creek Drainage Basidin the Southeast Quadrant of The Citv of Central Point. City Administrative Assistant, George Rubaloff, read his March 1, 1991 Memorandum and entered it into the record by reference along with the attachments of the Vicinity Map, Certificate of Posting and Mailing and the Public Works Staff Report dated February 28, 1991. Rubaloff also handed out a copy of CPMC Ordinance 15.52, Chapter 15.16 defining the Planning Commissions role in establishing Development Plans. At this point, .Public Works Director Larry Blanchard placed a transparency of the Street Master Plan for the Meadow Creek area on the overhead projector and explained to the public the definition of a Master Pian. g~ C/TY OF CENTRAL PO/NT P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes March 5; 1991 Page Two ."'"t~::"ef~' f~''`w ;~~`~;~ The Commission asked Larry Blanchard if running streets through the middle of property would cause any undesirable conditions such as sub lots or flag lots, and if so, would the City be willing to purchase these pieces of property. Larry Blanchard stated that sometimes land is divided by roads, but that this Master Plan was just an engineering framework to show where the best topographical areas for streets would be. George Rubaloff commented that every entity such as the City of Central :Point needs to have Master Plans for streets in order to .avoid uncontrolled placing of streets, eta Garth Ellard, Commission Chairperson, stated that at this point, the suggested layout for streets in this Master Plan were not written "in stone", that this was merely a proposed plan at this point, and opened the Public Meeting. The persons that came forward, their addresses and concerns are as follows: Ron McAvin, son of Geneva Hitt, 3458 Bursell Road, Central Point, expressed opposition to any development of new streets, as he felt there were too many streets in the area already. He also expressed his opposition to the Storm Drainage LID and the Sanitary Sewer LID. Michael Sowell, 3363 Marilee, expressed his opposition to any new development, and asked if the majority of acreage vote would outweigh the majority of property owners vote in whether or not to develop the proposed Meadow Creek LIDS. Larry Blanchard explained that this was a time to discuss the Street Master Plan and that there would be a time set aside to discuss the other concerns, and that .the Planning Commission would .make recommendations based on the consensus of the majority of property owned, but that the City Council would make their determination based on their decision as to the best interest of the City, and that the Commission could not second guess what the Council would do. Charles Olson, 3358 Bursell, expressed his opposition to the development of any additional cul-de-sacs or enclosed circles in the Meadow Creek Drainage Area, as he had already lost value. on .two lots from cul-de-sac design and would lose availability to other property he owned if the Street Master Plan were to be developed as shown. He also expressed opposition to paying for development of the two proposed LIDS. ., ~ ~ 82 ~; ~ ~ '~ C/TY OF CENTRAL PO/NT ~`~' P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes - March 5, 1991 -Page Three Robert Johnson, 654 Beall Lane (representing himself and new property owner, Harold Thies) expressed his opposition to the street layout as shown on the Master Pian, especially the cul-de-sacs and circles, and was also opposed to paying for the development of the proposed storm drainage and sanitary sewer LIDs. Barbara Ritter, 794 Pittview, asked what the City planned to do with Pittview Avenue, that it in poor condition now and traffic load would incrdase if the street were improved. She also was concerned about why she should pay for storm drainage that benefitted someone else who was profiting by new development in that area. Mitchell Huli, 764 Pittview, expressed his concerns about the storm drainage and sanitary sewer development in that area. Larry Blanchard explained that good planning looks at all the needs, grid explained the planning process once more and that the decision on the drainage issue would be up to the City Council. Di Grensky, 910 Beall Lane, expressed her opposition to paying for any new development in that area. She also was concerned about whether new development would disturb wetlands, ifiany of the land were determined to be wetlands. Larry Blanchard said that, he had invited one of the representatives from the Oregon Division of State Lands to come on-site and make a wetland determination. He asked Mrs. Grensky if she would like to go with them that day. Mrs. Grensky informed Mr. Blanchard that she is in close communication with Steve from the State Division of Lands and that she would depend on him to give her any news or information. Larry Blanchard explained that the correct process is for the City to communicate with the Division of State Lands then the State could notify the property owner. George Rubaloff, City Administrative Assistant stated that in any Land Use Application that the wetlands determination is part of the process. Clifford Fuchs, 3476 Burrell, expressed his opposition to new development, ' that he vvished to keep open areas such as the Meadow Creek Drainage Area is now, thaf he opposed increased traffic load and speed on improving existing' streets and developing new streets. ~~ 83 ;: CITY OF CENTRAL PO/NT P/arming Commission Meeting Minutes March 5, 1991 -Page Four .. ~ r, -~ _.~ U Robert Blanton, Engineer, 130 W. .9th Street,. Medford, Oregon, stated that development should be organized and have a basic pattern for traffic, That a Street Master Plan is the first step in this: process. Larry Blanchard told the property owners present that another Meeting would be scheduled to continue the Street Master Plan, and that they would be notified by mail. No one else came forward in support of or in opposition to the Street Master Plan. Garth Ellard thanked the participants and closed the Public Meeting. The Commission voted by consensus that they. would carry this item over into a future Planning Commission Meeting. At 8:55 p.m. Chairperson Garth Ellard granted a 5 minute recess. The Meeting resumed at 9:00 p.m. B. and Trustees of the First Preshvterian Churchl. George Rubaloff, City Administrative Assistant, entered into the record by reference, his Memorandum of February 28, .1.991, the Vicinity Maps, Certificate of Posting for Public Meeting, Site Plan Application: Materials, Tax Assessor Map, Aerial Map, and the Public Works Department Site Pian Review dated February 27, 1991. He also stated that Mark Servatius, Fire Chief/Building Official was ill and could not be present tonight but wished to be consultedin the placement of the proposed fire hydrant to be located on the property. George Rubaloff also informed the Commission that the applicants had reviewed the required conditions and. had agreed to comply. Garth Ellard, Chairperson, opened the Public Meeting. Dwayne Brown, 671 Prairie Court, Central Point, Church Trustee and Jerry Hunter, Architect, 839 E. Main, Medford, Oregon came forward in support of the proposed Church Addition in the Site Plan Review. The Commission asked if they understood the requirements for the Deferred Improvement Agreements. Mr. Hunter. said that they .understood and were. willing to meet .these ,requirements. Garth Ellard, Commission Chairperson, asked if there were any others that wished to come forward in support of, or in opposition to the Site Plan Review. Being none, Ellard closed the Public Meeting. ~_ 8~ ITEM CU1P4( ®IE C(E(RI'~4~A~ ~®ORJT PUBL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT ~~~~~ G~[~~®G~~ DATE: Agri/25 999f PROJECT: MEADOW CREEK Master Street and Development Plan.'' AREA: See Attached Map Authorizing Legis/ation: C.P.M. C. 15.16 Ordinance 9652 PROPERT/ES /NCLUDED /N DEVELOPMENT PLAN BOUNDARY TAX LOTS OWNER ACREAGE 372W 11 D 3600 Alger .67 372W 11 D 3301 Gilman 1.3 372W 11 D 3300 3.4 372W 11 D 3200 Metz 1.49 372W 11 D 3100 Maehren 3.00 372W 11 D 3000 Thies 2.48 372W 11 D 2900 Grensky -- 372W 11 D 2800 Johnson .28 372W 11 D 2700 .18 372W 11 D 2601 .24 372W 11 D 2600 Hulse 3.13 372W 11 D 2501 1.9 372W 11 D 2500 Sowell 1.89 372W 11 D 2401 Maple Grove 7.15 372W 11 D 2400 Close 2.5 372W 11D 2300 Dale 2.1 -1- ~~ Tax Lot Owner 372W 11 D 2202 Richardson 372W 11 D 2201 " 372W 11 D 2200 " 372W 11 D 2100 Campbell 372W 11 D 2000 Hendrickson 372W 11 D 1901 .Brewer 372W 11 D 1900 Hough 372W 11 D 1800 Cartwright 372W 11 D 1700 Beale 372W 11 D 1600 Olsen 372W 11 D 1500 Straus 372W 11 D 1400 Fellows 372W 11 D 1300 McCoy 372W 11 D 1200 McAvin 372W 11 D 1102 Fuchs 372W 11 D 1101 Samples 372W 11 D 1100 Weber 372W 11 D 1000 Russell 372W 11 D 901 Shannon 372W 11 D 900 Dodge 372W 11 D 805 Schipper 372W 11 D 804 " 372W 11 D 803 " 372W 11 D 800 " 372W 11 D 700 Hale 372W 11 D 600 Rosenberger 372W 11 D 500 McCartney 372W 11 D 400 Boring 372W 11 D 300 Holmes 372W 11 D 200 Wold 372W 11 D 100 Horsley/ Cooper 372W 11 A 2901 Newell 372W 11 A 2902 Casey 372W 11 A 2900 372W 11 A 2800 McCartney 372W 11 A 2700 Hull 372W 11 A C 100 Ritter 372W 11A 1800 Horsley/ Cooper. 372W 12C 3300 372W 12C 3200 " 372W 126 500 " 372W 12C 3400 Gilman 2 V .. Acreage .31 .93 .17 .34 .26 1.53 .51 1.01 1.01 3.11 .46 4.3 4.6 .67 .42 .39 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 .5 1.0 14.77 1.05 2.00 .37 1.21 1.78 2.91 29.06 29.06 7.14 13.00 2.00 20.87 86 DES/GNATED STREETS 7. Loca/ Street 7 E/W Location: Southerly Boundary 37 2W 11 D 1300 Northerly Boundary 37 2W 11 D 1400 Approximate length: 1670 Ft. From: Bursell Road To: 1670 Ft. E. Required R.O.W. - 50 ft. Required Street Width - 36 Ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Less than 1500 vt/d 2. Loca/ Street 2 E/W Location: 600' north of Beall Lane between Marilee Street and Lot 1700/1800. Approximate Length:. 775' From: Tax Lot 1700/1800 To: Marilee' Street. Required R.O.W. - 50 ft. Required Street Width - 36 ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Less than 1000 vt/d 3. Loca/ Street 3 E/W Location: 600' north of Beall Lane between Marilee and Gilman Drive Approximate Length:, 1200. ft. From: Marilee St. To: Gilman Dr. Required R.O.W. - 50, ft. Required Street Width - 36 ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Less than 1000 vt/d 4. Loca/ Street 7 N/S Location: 510' E. of Bursell Road Approximate Length:. 1130 ft. From: Beall Lane Toi local Street 1 E/W ' Required R.O.W. - 50 ft. Required Street Width.- 36 ft, " Projected Traffic Volume -Less than 1000 vt/d -3- ~- 8~ 5. Loca/ Street 3 N/S Location: 1000' E. of Bursell Road Approximate Length: 600 ft. From: Beall Lane To: Local Street 2 E/W Required R.O.W. - 50 ff. Required Street Width - 36 ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Less than. 1000 vt/d 6. Mari/ee Street Location: 1280 Ft. E. of Bursell Road. Approximate Length; 1130 ft. From: Beall Lane To: Local Street 1 E/W Required R.O.W. - 50 ft. Required Street Width - 36 ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Less than 1000 vt/d 7. Loca/ Street 3 N/S Location: 450' N. of Beall Lane- 450' E. of Marilee St. Approximate Length: 2700 ft. From: Beall Lane To: Glen Grove Avenue Required R.O.W.. - 50 ft. Required Street Width - 36 ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Greater than 1500 vt/d. 8. Loca/ Street 4 N/S (Gi/man Road1 Location: 1200' E. of Marilee Road Approximate Length: 1000 LF From: Beall Lane To: Gate Park Drive. Required R.O.W. -,50 ft. Required Street Width - 36 ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Less than 1000 vt/d 9. Pitty/ew Avenue - Co/%ctor Street Location: 900 ft. S. of Hopkins Road, 1700 ft. north of Bursell off Beall Lane. Approximate Length: 2700 LF From: Bursell Rd. To: Glen Grove Avenue Required R.O.W. - 60 ft. Required Street Width - 40 Ft. Projected Traffic Volume -Greater than 1500 vt/d -4- ., - 8 8 COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS: 1. Of the total of'43 property owners in this Master Street and Development Plan, 13 property ovvners responded to the Questionnaire. (See Exhibit "1 ") A summary of the Questionnaire is shown in Exhibit " 2". 2. Comments from property owners were as follows regarding screening: HORSLEY.• Since it is farm land and being farmed, there is no need to do .anything different from its present state. BOR/NG: Leave as is. WEBER: I believe the property that is developed should be responsible for screening property from theirs. Do not put Pittvievv Through. GRENSKY: I have not thought how to screen my property from development. I should think that it would be necessary to know what the development looked like before making that decision. I doubt that there is any effective screening for something of this nature. ROSENBERGER: Just leave it the way it is. HULL: I can see nothing wrong with the Proposed Plan as presented this April 1, 1991, looks as though finally someone is getting the message after looking at all the hodge podge subdivisions, that are now in and wondering what to do as far as utilities and etc. is concerned. Has been ~ Planning done, on most of them to may way of thinking. MAEHREN: The property I have is long. There is no way I can put it into lots. The only vvay is if someone would buy that land next to mine and make it one piece, so all this is doing is costing me a lot of money and doing me no good. HOLMES: The most attractive, economical separationwould be to plant trees or hedges. If my finances change for the better, I might even look into building a new structure that is placed in a different location on my lot. Thank you for listening to my input. STRAUS: 8 foot fence around it with bared wire on top. OLSEN: If proper streets are laid out on a city block system, screening of property is moot in that back yard and people's property abut and then it will be an individual prerogative whether a fence is needed. This type city layout automatically causes traffic onto street instead of through other people's property. Pedestrian traffic would not wish to travel through other people's property to get to their destination. -5- 89 see that in less than 50 years the automobile, as we know it, will probably be aching of the past. Shortages of petroleum and environmental problems will dictate. change; We need to .think of how streets 'should relate to such changes, obviously down through history, before automobiles, streeta were laid out in city blocks to facilitate most sorts of traffic flow. It was probably a good plan thought though, .over several hundred years.. COND/T/ONS: 1. The street layout needs to follow the guidelines established by the hierarchy of streets (See Exhibit "3"1. 2. The streets in this Development Plan are located to accommodate the drainage of properties which abut the street and the entire Meadow Creek Drainage Basin. 3. Utilities shall be designed according to the Central Point Public Works Standards and shall follow the proposed Street .Plan.... 4. Individual properties will need to design access and street improvements to connect to streets designated in this Development Plan. 5. These streets are an approximate location and. final location will be determined at the time individual subdivisions are final platted. 6. No street will be constructed or subdivision built until the property owners receive the proper land use approvals .and applicable permits have been received. 7. The comments from property owners includes a comment that Pittview Avenue should not be constructed as a through street. Although our preliminary review based on projected traffic volumes identified Pittview Avenue as a Collector Street, a final review may be appropriate. Recommendation: 1. Prior to final approval of this Development Plan, a Traffic Engineer should review the plan and provide a letter of recommendation regarding the final street location and classification Attachments: Exhibit."1" -April 1, 1991 Letter, .Questionnaire Exhibit " 2" -Questionnaire Resu,its Exhibit "3" -Map cc: 02-014 cc: 13-160 -6- 90 EXHIBIT "1" ~m°~/ 155 SO. SECOND ST. CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 (503) 664-6325 .~ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT April 1, 1991 LARRY R. BLANCHARD PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Re: Street Master Plan -Meadow Creek Area As discussed during the Planning Commission Meeting held March 5, 1991, the City wilt continue the discussion with property owners regarding the Street Master Pian -Meadow Creek area. Another Public Meeting will be held on May 7, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. with the Planning Commission to review a final report from staff regarding the Street Master Plan. Staff in reviewing the comments from the property owners needed to consider aii .aspects of development of this property. As you know, the zoning established in this area is R-2 -Multi-Family development and R-1-6, Residential f dingle Family 6000 square ft. minimum lot size. This is an urban standard that is normally accepted within Urban Growth Boundaries. One of the LCDC functions is to assure land within existing urban growth boundaries is maximized prior to approving future expansion of Urban Growth Boundaries. Each individual property owner will eventually identify the type (if any) of development that will occur on their property. The City will look at each property owner's response and develop a Street Mastet Plan keeping all property owners responses in mind. I have attached a questionnaire for you to complete, and a map showing the proposed Street Master Plan. Please fill out the questionnaire completely, and draw on the Map any changes, additions or deletions to your property you would like to make at this time. Return the map and completed questionnaire to the Public Works Department at the address listed above. If you should have any questions, please contact me at 664-6325. Thank you for your continued cooperation Sincerely, Larry R. Blanchard Public Works Director Attachment: Comp Plan Pg. XI-1 to XI-12 Comp Plan Pg. III-7 to III-14 Proposed Street Master Plan Questionnaire Map cc: 13-160 sfnrstrp/.mdw ~~~ 91 ~~EE~ ~~~~E~ P~~ - MEAD®W c~EEOS AG~IEA QUEST/ONNA/RE Property Description Property Owner (PLEASE CHECK YES OR NO) 1. Do you plan on developing your property in the next 3-5 years? [ ]YES (]NO 2. If you are planning to develop your property does the Proposed Street Master Plan meet with your approval? [ ]YES [ ]NO. 3. If the Proposed Street Plan does NOT meet with your approval, have you included those changes on the attached map? (]YES (]NO. 4. Do you think that through streets should be constructed instead of cul-de-sac streets after reading Page XI-97 (See hierarchy'of streets on: Page XL-4) [ ]YES [ 1N0. 5. Will you be attending the next-Planning. Commission Meeting to be held May Z, 1991? [?YES [ ]NO. If you do not plan to develop your property; how would you screen it from other .developments: stmstrpl.mdw ~~ 92 i I. ,ICZ / ~~ ~qP ~~ ~~~ 6 / P~ ~~~ ~j i~,;- ,_. ~_ 93 .~ ~. ^ E 3 O ~ 3 2 "~ J ~I I11 N 2° Vj m - ~ ~ ail , xf x m x~ v2 X yl ai x xx y Z X X Q ~ W tl >I X Q W ~ W ~ 3 4 O ~ Q N ~ ~ C ^ ~ ~ N o X m ~y C ti y y c> zz. z z. z. z ~ zzz~°CS ~~~~ zzz ~. z ozz?z zzzz ~ .... C T C _ m m m~ ~ N C m ~ U > Z 3 I `m b o m ~. ~ =. ; H ~ E m m m o• . m Q s m m mss . E c;~ C a m°~ m m m o m m !' o o a ° ~' O ~ ~ m t 'Q U' .~~ F (7 -~ r.= r M f m _ C7 U O K s s U Z a0 = U m O M LL~ ~ LL O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 8 ~p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O In ,T 0 tON pO O N O O O O O O O O O O O N Q O O ~O O O O ^O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V M N'- MNNN~-O NMMI~~O N tpM MN~OOf W 1~ M M M M M M N N N N N N N N _ N N N N N N N '' y ~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~'~ O D 33333333333333 33333333333333333 ~C N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n ^ MM n n ^ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M ' MM M M MM ^ n' M MMMM n ti c '/M gMM t q MC qM M M t ~! t .. . t +l t 1 t 9 ~_. 94 r m NZ m X X X Nj, y ~ m m J ~I m } f ~y ~, ~ X X X XXX nM m X X V 2I X W m m ~ m m m ~ a m m m m ' m m M m y2 X X X X XX XXX m~ W > tl X N y? X X X m X X X 00 X X X m '~ }~ c> f ~v ^O y2 X x xx x xx xxx a >I ac ¢~¢¢ ¢..z ~ a2¢ z T z z zzzz. z m zz. ~, N y ~ m m O ~ tl m m a ~ W m T - O . m c m a c m a m m ~ T `m m> m m `m d l Z E a of m a t e .. m N U ~ E° .m. 0 3 q s U- m ~ o° •• ' O N 3KNONs e s 2K~Nm 232 UZUe ~SOC S U s r m ,W c c o K .y 2. m an d 0 0 ~ O In Y M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O O 0 O O M ' u. m m O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M T M M M W I~~ O N M N ~ M m m N W n M O m ~~ N N N N N O M N m H~j y 0000000000000000 QQQQQQQ U00 '~~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N d 0 m m )( 1%1~ H M~n+1M MMMMMCn~IMMMM~MM ~^'/~^'lMM MMM Mt^~l 1^(1Q 95 EXHIBIT "3" The Central Point Circulation/Transportation Element is concerned with five basic classifications of streets and highways_ The following illustration and brief descriptions of each type show the relationships of each street type to the others and the functions of.each, based on what is often termed the "hierarchy of streets". A -- Freeways are the largest of the street and highway types. Because of their size, traffic capacity and traffic speed, access is provided to the freeway only by major arterials. Freeways are grade-separated at intersections with other freeways or streets and direct access is not permitted from adjacent properties. B -- Major Arterials are the main arteries of the City. Because they carry large amounts of traffic, including trucks, they are intended primarily to move traffic and not to provide access to property. C•-= Secondary Arterials serve 'to distribute traffic from the major arterials to the business districts and other centers of Community activity, and also to the collector-streets. A -- Collector Streets, as the name imp ies, collect the traffic from residential areas and local streets and transfer this traffic to the arterials. These streets serve to "feed" traffic in and out of the neighborhoods. E -- Local Streets are intended to provide access to homes and not intended to carry through traffic. All local streets should connect with a collector or secondary arterial to provide a safe transition out of the. neighborhood and onto larger thorough- fares. ' a i » a- - w' - L.'' . i x z~ ~ -~ ~ h ~ 2=cx+ w " ~55 s'` ~ ~ -q' ~ ~~ 95' ~'2 - ) > /Yy ~i y~. x ~x ,~ ~ r e x•. ~ y;~ s ~ ~~..) ~;5~ M "y` ?~'~ R~ti'~va ~ 9 -. b ~ 3 x s i ~ a'~..'a~.. ~F,~. .. .~~ :ta~ a'k~ F ~:S~.ct,''~3.5 £~'S'..Sx:.Ys~e' ~.r~4 ~a~.F ,`~i w.F;~.a;°« .~-_, ~~ 96 A STAFF REPORT T0: Planning Commission FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant DATE: April 25, 1991 ~~ TOPIC: Public Meeting - Review and make recommendation to City Council for preliminary plat for Jackson Creek Estates Unit No. 3, Phase I PRRF-f`F In accordance with the procedure outlined in CPMC 1.24, the Planning Commission is scheduled to review the proposed preliminary subdivision plat and then formulate a recommendation for the City Council. BACKGROUND On May 17, 1990, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Unit No. 3 of Jackson Creek Estates. The subdivider was required to obtain final plat approval within one year after such approval. Developer Tom Malot does not intend to seek final plat approval by the May 16th deadline. Therefore, according to City procedures, Mr. Malot has resubmitted a preliminary subdivision plat application to the City. The original preliminary plat consisted of 65 lots in the R-1-8 zone ranging between 8,000 and 16,200 square feet, with an average lot size of approximately 9,800 square feet. The proposed plat has been modified over the original preliminary plat with regard to the unit being divided into two phases. George Flanagan has renewed a particular property lease for a portion of Tax Lot 3100 for another year and the lessee has planted a crop of alfalfa and rye grass on the southerly portion of where Unit No. 3 is planned. Thus, the proposed preliminary plat for Phase I of Unit No. 3 extends southeasterly from Vincent Avenue in Unit No. 2 of the Subdivision and includes the most northerly 39 lots of the original Unit No. 3 Plat. Phase I of Unit No. 3 includes 39 lots. The proposed preliminary plat is slightly different than the conceptual Jackson Creek Neighborhood Development Plan adopted in April 1985 (Planning Commission Resolution No. 95). However, all of the same opportunities exist within the proposed subdivision layout for traffic circulation. The proposed plat follows the master utility plan prepared on March 11, 1988 and received by the City on May 6, 1988. 9'7 Staff has reviewed the preliminary plat application in accordance with the following: 1. Chapter 16 of the Central Point Municipal Code relating to City's requirements for subdivision layout, park dedication, street standards, water system standards, sanitary sewer standards and storm drainage standards. 2. City of Central Point Public Works Standards relating to subdivision development. 3. Applicable zoning standards contained in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code. The Public Works Department has analyzed the plat and has prepared a staff report which contains a list of proposed conditions of approval. Item A - Vicinity Map Item B - Certificate of Posting Item C - Preliminary Plat Application Item D - Assessors Map Item E - Public Works Staff Report dated April 25, 1991 Item F - Proposed Resolution recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat ... ~ _ 98 ~, ITEM ~! ___ ~- 99 ITEM 155 SO. SECOND SL 'CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 664-3321 CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Sandy Berryhill CERTIFY THAT ON THE FOLLOWING DATE OF Wednesday May 1, 1991 I POSTED A NOTICE FOR A PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULED ON May 7 +. 1941 DURING WHICH THE CENTRAL POINT' PLANNING COMMISSION WILL REVEIW A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR JACKSON CREEK ESTATES PHASE I OF N0. 3 (37 2W 10 Tax lot 3100) _ - AT OR NEAR 1. CENTRAL POINT POST OFFICE 2. CENTRAL POINT BRANCH LIBRARY 3. CENTRAL POINT CITY FIRE STATION 4. CITY HALL BULLETIN BOARD irr~~ ~ Q if~.oiooyl S TU DATE 100 THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY ITEM Ci Application Filing Deadline CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ,(' Application for Preliminary Subdivision Plat Name ~~ V~'lIQ-~s~`~' j~.ddress~t-.O ~Uox 3€~4~t ~'~ Phone Number LQCs ~- IZ-S8 Proposed Site Location Assessor's Map Page Location Tax Lot(s) Recxuired Information: A legal description as it appears on'the deed. Deed copies may be obtained at the Jackson County Assessor's Office .Requested information as contained in the attached Central Point Municipal Code Sections 16.24.020 to 16.24.070 and completion of a Statement of Water Rights (form attached) I, ~ certify that I am the owner or authorized agent: of the owner of the proposed site (If authorized agent, attach written authority)/~~ `%//ny¢o ~~ ~. .iIiL~G~~L~G(/`' ..Date ~ Z~C 9~ (Signature of owner.. or authorized agent of owner, please in icate ich) Application Fee: ',$1D0~ ~~2 ~ LUAP/ADMINI ~ 1 O 1 3 ~.~~ z ~.~ r~ iy~, ,y tn' 4, ' ~,p~ ~~ yyggY Y '.~~~8Xm~~~„~o~B~COV . xaRFasassaa~xs_ ~~c3og~~a~n~~"sa~~~ {.:c'. .~ -..c:: '. ~J'. .'. ;~ ~~ i; '; i ~ RnRA~~.'°,F P.FR0 g0Y0Y08RR Z a :A~88888=8888 ariaaedxdda~sa~ 5 W ~ ~ o O q S 8 p.Wpu 18s R,n"IB F. d IBFW--§8 2 ~ i SiY L108888..8NYa$ ~4aa~~~~s~~~~~ ~ - a Z u i i 4 ....n....~aaa: 3U O 3~ Nm Z Y ¢U N ;~ ~ W N ~ ~`1 ~ m m Q ~~ y ~ °O a „ y ~~ 0 ~ u~ u 0 u ~U w Y ° 0 Y U ~SS r 5 i ~y 9 a D "x 4 a 14 ctc; 102 N k 0 N u m m N sie~s'saagaaiaea:.aieea9s~~~'aspsa~es A898~aX~8R 6,~fl~YHSd 6~nA9Y411B~6=RFRF BReaF9.tA8A8ARRA86S:R0R08RRA8RX wR«iI7 Yt«'7Nk«Si Bfl IB %19 TI=RYI tId $.C g1lG 7.. 88R,Y 0884a89RRR8Ril99A07,,08898g4 R' 9Ra:il:FMJ3R-=piRCf 1U S'OC9atl17 :fit F.2AR R7dFaA88gVRA8E9,S8axR~RRASOVaRA TIB Ff17FR:AR«fA :.8RAg91'«AIPaRFY.IgFF7: 88888888°.,888888888888888888888 ARRRRRRRRRA X'K'I~AAAgRRBR.R RRSAA~%J F 8~WYIBRSB~BCtltt1 FI S~d~~8~f7 W~9 ~RpR8:il (7 L8~.1:RYF A8~R888RRR99737x9a8ffiR8 ~7B$AA7RRRRAAWRR A:EF~RhB098~99 ..«...e~esR:paEa:°.BaRNAPAARAAAA M ~~ 'I :,: i to lo. e5 ut• /' h' ~«; roti I ~ 0y- .e ~ M 1. 5q 60 b. „y •' Ob 4l bb a0 .. ' ~ ~ .: ~ g_IroM _ 9~ep:o 45 / .~Q i 6~rou~ ~ '{cxV'.^e rxmoe + lajw f h' _ I _ po .. ~ ~ "io- - la= )i-t' $o• ~ '°'~ 5 v 1o-15Fb~i T8, / ~1"~ :. _y,-h1- Q•lou. ~c,. .or ~°e'^~~QSo. A 10. 1, p /1 - _ 10 P,J. 01 BL 0 ~ 1 r'V ~ p. ~ i v' 9} .i~^r N.aooC I ~o ~ 1,ieo4 .' 9,tmT $ 16iyo+~ '`~. ~,`/ Sti.. ' .4,woV u '~. ... _-_ 0A to. m ly moo; l0 5; `~ 85• Qv\ t ~''-`_t' l5 ~ _ _ _ 5u So \ lti hl ` fl, ~~ °~' 'I.i,oeaP ~ ~i _ _ _ CIF 111>ao'} q~5ob .`°~ 0'1 ~e. it lx -- - lyrox.a ie. o' 11. J 6. ti L.loo •P ~ ~ - -' - 0 9i: ,+'~y e• ~ B~wo4 N Nnwo * ~ ~~ ^~r IY:j`1 ~ ~ r° 6 be Y IaSw4 F 9•}0. G 15 '~' -' 100.,4 1 ~_ O• 4 I _ .~ 14u .~'~ I , . ~.' ~ '. . qs )!• lo'- le• ~M'' vi a r° ', B.bJJ r° i "\-' to' -, 95 .1y ~•R - 9l 8 90 e ! 1~ ' h ' ~ . I f5.. '\eoo4 , .bbd} ' B,•IcoP aP'0Q 4moP ` ~ - n e_,4ma ~ ' r ./ ~ PP lao 3, gg9o+ v 3 : 4,MC6'm IO~OIf `I . ~)AgKgv11 :JiH P•Y. ~ i ~ )gp/wp .,o' ~ ~ Its tA'I•~e ~_ --t 141 2\ A 01x1 ' Id.^.~ ~ ' '~ ~iC 4~eo '\r~'.. 'q^oo d• \1 ~ , ' I ~~ ` IoL ~ 111 L' IrS 114 _ IIS :a 1 emu, , la ae+. u,~w ._. taew+ ~ elewa ~ ~.~„~ \S ~5 ~? 1. I • /~ S g ~ - - ~ - - _ ~~ ~\~° a / ~ _ _ a. \ S 415' ~ ' It\MwF 1 8 ,ice v // Ilo :.. un F,So' _ a+o ` Ie9 Wlo °I )oOp p . Ib.ooo'+ 1. _ __ ,.e•e.-____ o Ile, ^ e p1,~oQ e°~ ~ y SY ''~ a , 5 ~ l 'S. Ati.". , 1c 104 ~ L i \ I ,~. `~~ wa..o4 to td `~' ,\ ~- 17 ~ / ! ~ I, - - ;~ 110 3 I'9 `[~:. ~. Icy .I I O. ii ~.8 ...._ ~ 2.4m § «^. I?`t7o ~ 1 i'z / ' ~'. y _ - 110. ~ ~\ •. 1~ f' lob ~ Se 9boo° 0 111°°'d,y Icl \-.p ----~~ ----.. ~om0° ~ i~ ) L.ny. b• i - 'LC HIYb. x:.1,5 ~i ;~ 1 5(000: ~K)I. J~.>I). •. I.rJ( 1'Fu•...J•~. 1' 1.. .~. :1 :. E.cuq 1t9, 6. o... t..) 4b•1 1'I. arl+Rrn)c, g~. ~ ~ ITEM ;, ts.. ' n ~' a ~~ ~, ~N i^+ •'• .1 ~ ry \ i 'SEE .MAP IOBD ice" ~ 41CAONV.LN ~0. Ka ' u. CEV TR6. JAI ~E Y- ~ ~OR ~ F~ ~'4j T ~. . .. -J ~••, `.i4 f ~ ~ III ~~.... • 15- ... ...... .....rcm.. ........ .. .. ..... ~ • lid! ~ IM ~J '~.. ~I F- ~ ,~ YI ~~m .av`. 'a '• 4169 AC w1` e ~~~, ~ Jackson Creek Estates a,l H II I .. Io and 2 ~ i. Units to ' ~• ,- I~ ~ N ' 3? 2 ` IOpB ~• 3 37 Z IA CA ~ ~:~ • i 2~ E Ley S. r I, y o S.W.COR. lOT N ~ ~ ~~'~ ' SNOWY BUTTE `~' ~" ~ - ORC NARCS ~ :' t16 ..... ... .. .. .... .. N, ;., 1 s i ~:, ~ ~__.. S.W.a:ORI ) I' • ;I LrT L II 31C I i I.I `I ~ i. I 1~ Xc ~ : ~ \~ •" ~ \ ~ R ~ ~' S I ~. ~ o ~ ~,~ .; ~, ~, I" SEE w ~\, .• ~_1~~~~ N.W.COR. N.E. COR. I - N.W. COR ~ DLC 66 DLC 66 i DLC 65 Cfi-TZmv) ~ ~~ _ I \ /~ I i ~ 1~. I ~ -1 - _ - . ~1.0' I I~~ 80. 18 CN. GlO I +I 2oi5.94 Gl0' I :5291.88) I 1,• I ~ ~ ,: ~ ,I 37~W15 A 1U" ITEM ~oT~r ®~ ~E~T~AL P®o~T PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT' DATE: April 25, 1990 PROJECT: Jackson Creek Estates Unit #3 LOCATION: T37S R2W WM Section 10 TL 3100 ZONE: R-1-8 NO. OF LOTS 39 NUMBER OF DWELLINGS 39 -One (1) per lot SUBDIVIDER/OWNER Tom Malot Construction P.O. Box 3847 Central Point, OR 97502 PH. 664-1258 SURVEYOR: Hoffbuhr and Associates 219 N. Oakdale Medford, OR 97504 PH. 779-4641 TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: Residential Subdivision TYPE OF LAND USE ACTIN: Tentative Plat /. TENTATIVE PLAT REQU/REMENTS: lTit/e J6.24) (Check One) Meets Not Does Not Title Description Standard Acalicable Meet Standard 76.24.010 Filing Fee X - 18.24.020 Scale X - - 18.24.030 General Conditions a. Name of Subdivision X b. Date North Arrow Scale X a Legal location of subdivision X d. Names/Address of owner - - engineers X'- 16.24.040 Existing Conditions a. Location of street widths and easements, eta X b. Topographic dnfo X c. Bench mark established X d. Location and direction of all water courses X 1. Conditlons (7) ~ ~~~ } (Check One) t~Aeets Not ~ Does Not Title Description Standards Applicable Meet Standard e. Natural features rack out- croppings, marshes, wooded areas. ~ X f. Existing uses of the land X g. Location of all existing streets and utilities X h. Zoning on and adjacent to tract is compatible X 16.24.050 Proposed Plan a. Street location, end the lanes, grades, radius of curves, relationship to other existing or proposed streets and other utlllges. X b. Easements- widthe/Purposes ~. X c. Lot Dimension X 16.24.060 Partial Development Is other property adjacent to this property being considered in the design. This property can be owned by the subdivider. Sae Master Plan 16.24.070 Explanatory Information a. Vicinity maps to explain 'relationship to existing - sveeta can require correction to existing - street. X b. Proposed Deed Restrictions N eed a list o. Center lane profile of ... streets to show grade (100' beyond street) Provide information on final construction drawings d. Approximate location end proposed size of utilities X See Master Plan 16.32.020 Requirements Generally X 2 CondiSons (2) (3) (11 (4) - , 106 ll. Subdivision Layout (Check One) Meets Not Does Not Title Description Standard Applicable Maet Standard Conditions 76.16.010 Blocks Length X Width R-1-8 X Shape X Not greater 1200' X 16.16.020 Blocks Sizes X 16.16.030 Blceka Easements a. Utilities X l11 b. Water Courses X c. Pedestrian Ways X 16.16.040 Lots -Shapes & Size X (4) 16.78.050 Lots•Size & Determination (Lot length greater than 2 1/2 times width prohibited) X 16.16.060 Through lots X 16.76.070 Lot sldelinea X 16.16.080 I Large Lot Subdivisions X /ll. Street improvements A. Existing Conditions f. Connecting Street Street No. - LS 93 Vincent Avenue, local street, city jurisdiction, Existing R.O. W.- 50 FL, Future R.O.W. - 50 Ft. Existing pavement width - 36 ft., Future street width -'36 ft., Existing curbs and gutters, existing sidewalks traffic volume street can carry 1000 vehicle trips/day existing traffic volume - 250 vehicle trips/day traffic from this project - 390 vehicle trips/day Iota/ traffic including this project 630 vehicle trips/day B. Street Standards 16.12.010 (Check Onel Meets Not Does Not Title Description Standards Applicable Meet Standard. Conditions 16.12.040 Street Generally a. Location X b. Width X c. Grade X ~ !4) d. Relationship to existing street X 3 107 Meets Not Does Not l Ti Description Standards Applicable Meet Standard e t e. Topo0raphy as it relates to drainage X f. Provide for street construction X g. Follows a Master Plan X h. Traffic volume X i. Safety Features X 16.12.050 Street R.O.W. & Widths Local ROW 50' S[reet Width 36' X 16.12.060 Street Reserve Strip X 16.12-070 Street -Alignment X 16.12.080 Street -Extension X 16.12.090 Street-Interaectian Angles 90° X 16.12.100 Existing Streets Additional Width X 16.12.110 Haif Street X 16.72.120 Cul-de•Sac and/or dead end streets e. Shell not serve more then 121ota X b. Shell not be greeter then 400' X 18.12.130 Street Names X 18.12.140 Street Grades and Curves - MA SACS not greater than 8% X - Not greater then 12°~6 X' on1S -Cannot be leas than .5% X - Shall have at minimum 100' curve radius. X lV. Water System A. Existing Conditions An 8" Water Main Exists on W. Pine with an 8" water main on Blandon Street and Vin cent Street B. Water System Standards Meets Not Does Not Title Description Standards Applicable ~ Meet Standard 16.32.060 Water System - Provided Mains X Service Laterals 1 each lot X Firs Hydrants - not greater than 500 ft. apart X Fire Fiow 1000 gpm provide minimum pressure 40 psi X 4 Conditions (5) (31 (3) (3) Condition (it) ~n~ V. Sanitary Sewers A. Existing Conditions 2. An 8"sanitary sewer is stubbed from the manho% at the intersection of Jackson Creek Drive and Brandon Street and at the end of Vincent Street. B. Sanitary Sewer System Standards : Meets Not Does Not Title Deacriotion Standard Aoolicable Meet Standards Conditions 18.32.050 Adequate Sizing X Mainline X Services X 161 Vl. Storm Drainage A. Existing Conditions ! An f8" storm sewer is located for this portion of the Jackson Creek Development. The storm sewer was installed as a part of Jackson Creek Estates, Unit. # f B. Storm Drainage Standards Meets Not Doea Not Title Deaicnation Standard Aoollcable Meet Standard Condition 18.32.040 Surface Drainage end Storm Sewer System -Provide drainage through the aubdivlsion X (5) • Are there adverse effeots placed on down-stream' etmotures7 X (14) - No catch basin located greeter then 350 ft. for any curb and gutter section. X if, 115) JCKSN.NEW i 5 ~.0 g ~~~~~®~a ~r~~~~ ~~T~~~~ a~u~oT u~®. ~, r~~~~~ o 1. Provide the easement information for the Storm Drainage System between Lot 80 and 81. Also show the Sanitary Sewer Easement required to service this Development. 2. The Developer shall provide information from the Division of State Lands that this Development does not impact designated Wetlands within the proposed Development. 3. Place a note on the Tentative Plat, that street grade shall not exceed 6% nor be less than .5%. Radius of curves on residential streets shall exceed 100 ft. 4. Lot 86 and 87 need a minimum of 60' street frontage.. Only cut-de-sacs can have street frontage less than 60'. 5. All roof drains, area drains, and crawl spaces shall have positive drainage away from the structure, and shall be connected to a curb drain or an approved storm sewer. Provide topographical information to determine that all lots will drain and all streets will drain. 6. Provide a Plan Profile on the Construction Drawings that gives proper cover and fall for all sanitary sewer services. 7. Street name signs including posts, labor and equipment for installation of street signs shall be paid for by the Developer of this Subdivision, and the installation shall be completed by the City. 8. A Traffic Control Signing Plan shall be included as part of the final construction plans, and will be installed by the City and all costs associated with traffic control sign installation shall be paid for by the Developer. 9. A soils engineer must evaluate the strength of the soil (R-value) to determine the street section design. The City's Engineer shall be used, and the developer shall pay for the costs of these services. A design life for Vincent Street in the subdivision with a minimum 20 year life, given a daily traffic volume not to exceed 1000 vehicle trips per day and 2% truck traffic shall be used. All other streets shall be designed fora 20 year life, a daily traffic volume of 1000 vehicle trips per day and 2% truck traffic. ~1~ Jackson Creek 3, Phase I -Conditions April 30, 1991 -Page Two 10. A Street lighting Plan shall be included in the construction documents according to the requirements of PP&L. Ail intersections shall be illuminated. Street lights shall be located no greater than every 200 feet. Developer is to install ail pads and conduits for street lights as a part of the construction of this subdivision. The Developer shall also pay for street lights and for the installation of all street lights in this subdivision. 11. The Developer shall construct a valve aYthe end of the street in this phase for the future connection of the next phase of this development. 12. Ladder rungs shall be installed, in each sanitary sewer manhole of a depth greater than 3.0 feet to the flovv line of the manhole. Developer shall use ladder rungs approved by the Central Point Public Works Department. 13. There is a small seasonal stream which flows through this property at its northern property line. Developer shall construct a storm drainage system which collects the flow from this subdivision and carries it through this subdivision in such a manner as to not cause flooding of any lot in the drainage .area of this seasonal stream. 14. According to the. Master Plah for Jackson Creek Estates, a 15" storm pipe would cross between Lot 80 and 81. The storm sewer will cross lots 80 and 81 and discharge directly to Griffin Creek. 15. Catchbasins must be located no greater than 350' feet for any section of curb and gutter. 16. Developer shall design the storm drainage system to provide for discharge of properties in future phases or within the drainage service area of this subdivision's storm drainage system. The developer shall follow the Storm Drainage Plan done as a part of the Stonecreek Subdivision No. I, Master Plan, a copy of which may be obtained at the Public Works Department in Central Point City Hall. 17. As originally approved iri Jackson Creek Estates Unit #1, the Developer shall provide park land in lieu of paying S200.00 per tot development fee for property located along Griffin Creek as a part of the Park Master Plan. This property is to be dedicated as the requirements set forth in Title 16.20. Total park land to be transferred to the City free and clear of taxes and/or liens is 4.67 acres. ~i~ Jackson Creek 3, Phase I -Conditions April 30, 1991 -Page Three 18. The Developer shall install or cause to be installed conduits for utilities at intersections or locations determined by utility companies who will not install their services until after the subdivision is constructed. The Developer shall be responsible for all costs associated -with the installation of these conduit crossing. 19. All construction for utilities, streets and other structures discussed herein in rights of way owned or to be owned by the City of Central Point, shall be done according to all rules, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, and other applicable requirements of the City of Central Point for construction of this Subdivision. 20. The Final Plat for this Subdivision. shall not be approved by the City Council until all conditions as herein stipulated and as approved for this Subdivision have been met, unless adequate provisions have been made according to C.P.M.C. 16.28.070 and 16.28.080. 21. The review for this Tentative Plat submitted herein by Tom Malot Construction was-done in accordance with the rules, regulations, and ordinances in effect as of the date of this review. Any modifications by the Developer which require further conditions to meet standards set forth in the City of Central Point Municipal Code or would intensify the use of the. property beyond the standards set forth herein, shall require resubmittal of the Tentative Plaf to the Planning Commission. 22. The Developer must remove the 1 ft. reserve strip from Unit No. 2 on Vincent Avenue. 23. A 25' clear vision area at all intersections shall be noted on the Tentative Plat and provided as a part of the Subdivision Construction Plans. 24. Driveway accesses at street intersections shall be placed at the furthest point on the lot away from the intersections. 25. No construction will begin on this project until such time as plans and specifications have been reviewed and. approved, and a Public Works Permit is .issued. cc: 02-014 PW 90015 - 112 ITEM PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR JACKSON CREEK ESTATES UNIT N0. 3, PHASE I WHEREAS, Tom Malot has submitted a preliminary plat for Jackson Creek Estates Unit No. 3, Phase I, a subdivision located in the southwest quadrant of the city where Vincent Avenue is proposed to extend easterly ahd southeasterly, further described as Jackson County Assessors map 37 2W 10 Tax Lot 3100, and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Central Point held a public meeting upon said application for review of the preliminary plat on May 7, 1991, pursuant to Central Point Municipal Code Section 1.24.020C, and having at said public meeting received and reviewed the City staff report and testimony, and being fully advised, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMIMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Based upon the staff report evidence, and record relating to said application, the Planning Commission hereby finds that said application meets the requirements for preliminary plat applications, that said preliminary plat as proposed is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning code, and if the conditions set forth hereinafter are met, said application meets the City's requirements for subdivision layout, park dedication, street standards, water system standards, sanitary sewer standards, and storm drainage standards. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat submitted by Tom Malot, for Jackson Creek Estates Subdivision Unit No. 3, Phase I, subject to the conditions set. forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and by this reference expressly made a part of the within resolution. RESOLUTION N0. PREPLAT.JCE/RESO 113 } Passed by the Planning Commission on 1991 and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of 1991. Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST: Planning Conmiission Secretary J~pproved by, me this day of 1991. Planning Commission Chairman RESOLUTION N0. PREPLAT.JCE/RESO 114 x ,~ i M O C K STAFF REPORT T0: Planning Commission FROM: George Rubaloff, Administrative Assistant ~~ DATE: April 25, 1991 TOPIC: Mock Public Meeting: Site Plan Review of Industrial Park and Quality Fence Project, Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 1000, 1100, 1200 and 1300, 37 2W (Mock Applicant: Gordon Hancock of Tri- Arch, Inc.) SUMMARY Upon request by Crater High School, Planning and Public Works Staff has been working with a group of Drafting students to help simulate a site plan review process, thus giving the students a learning experience which approximates the real world. Students Gorden Hancock, Jason Jenkinson and Luke Cuttbirth have prepared a Mock Site Plan of an industrial park development located in the M-1 zone generally west of the railroad tracks east of Haskell, south of Taylor and north of West Pine. The Commission is scheduled to conduct a public meeting, receive the staff report, take testimony and decide on the proposed site plan, all in mock fashion. ASSUMPTION To facilitate the review of this Mock Site Plan, Staff has made the assumption that: 1. Streets and alleys existing on the property in question did not have utilities and would not be needed to service the current or future transportation needs of the motoring public. Therefore, all existing streets and alleys were previously vacated by the Central Point City Council. f 115 i 8. Condition: Off-Street parking facilities shall comply with all applicable design requirements in Section 17.64.100, a copy of which is attached to this report. Head in parking shall be changed to slant in parking on Amy Street to accommodate one way traffic. MOCK ATTACHMENTS Item A - Parking design standards (Ordinance No. 1512) Item B - Vicinity Map Item C - Certificate of Posting for Public Meeting Notice Item D - Maps: Tax Assessor, Aerial Item E - Public Works Staff Review dated April 29, 1991 Item F - Site Plan and application form 116 °. ~:~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW The Site Plan application was reviewed by the Planning Department for compliance with Chapters 17.48 (M-1 Industrial Zone), 17.00 (General Regulations), 17.64 (Off Street Parking and Loadinq), and 17.72 (Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan approval). 1. The Site Plan provides for permitted uses (warehouse, general repair shops, quality fence, industrial something) and therefore, meets the general purpose (light industrial zone) of the M-1 zone. Condition: Developer shall select tenants in accordance with CPMC 17.48.020 permitted uses or CPMC 17.48.040 for any land uses deemed to be'conditional uses. 2. Condition: CPMC 17.48.030 - All raw materials finished products, machinery and equipment with the exception of automobiles and trucks normally used in the business, shall be stored within an entirely enclosed building or sight-obscuring fence (minimum six feet in height). 3. Proposed .site plan conforms with landscaping requirements in CPMC 17.48.030. 4. Condition: Structural elevations were not provided in this site plan. All buildings or structures shall not exceed a height of 60 feet as per CPMC 17.48.050. 5. Yard requirements are consistent with 17.48.070 and 17.60.090. 6. Condition: As per 17.64.020, 29,070 square foot shop building in center of the development shall require a minimum 10 x35 ft landing berth with a minimum height clearance of 12 feet. 7. Condition: Development is short 113 9 x20 off-street parking spaces. Buildings need to be scaled down to provide for the required number of parking spaces. a. Warehouse 47,130 square feet calculated on standard 17.64.040 I-2 one space per 1000 square feet. b. Shops 29,070 square feet calculated on standard 17.64.040 G- 5 one space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. c. Quality Fence - 21 spaces. d. Industrial something 11,820 square feet calculated on standard 17.64.040 I-1 - one space per 500 square feet or gross floor area ~i PARKING STANDARDS Orci^.2nce ijt2 N P S A C P.NGLE OF WIDTH OF CU?2B PARKING "PARKING DEPTH WIDTH LENGTH SPACE SECTION OF STALL OF AISLE PER CAR (Degrees) (Feet) (Feet) (Feet) (Feet) p 32~_p~~ 9~_p.. 14' 22'-0" 30 99'-7" 17'-10" 14' 18'-2" 35 51'-8" 16'-10" 14' 15'-8" 40 53'-4'' 19'-8" 14' 14'-1" 45 55'-2" 20'-7" 14' 12'-8" 50 60'-2" 21'-1" 18' * 11'-8" 55 61'-2" 21'-7" 18' * 10'-11" 60 61'-8" 21'-10" 18' * 10'-5" 65 66'-0" 22'-0" 22' * 9'-11" 70 65'-10" 21'-11" 22' * 9;'-7" 75 65'-4" 21'-8" 22' * 9'-4" 80 68'-8" 21`-4" 26' * 9'-1" 85 -67'-10" 20'-11" 26'.* 9'-0" 90 66'-0" 20'-0" 26' * 9'-0" * Width of aisle permits two-way circulation only when a turn-around is provided. * Width of aisle permits two-way circulation. EXAMPLES I- rs' I` ~: . ~i i ~ ~o.. t~ y; .-~,.o.-. ~.~- ,. F ~,~ .. Or~_~ance `~:c. 1512 - 2 r ~ ~ O ~~l ..,~-- ~: ~: c 4. Any lighting u<_ed to illuminate off-street parking or loading areas shall be so arranged as to reflect tl~e light awa}• from adjacent streets or properties. 5. Service drives shall have~a minimum vision clear- ance area formed by the intersection of the driveway centerline, the street right-of-way line, and a straight line joining said lines through points twent}• feet from their intersection. 6. Parking spaces located along the outer boundaries of a parking lot shall be contained by a curb or a bumper rail so placed to prevent a motor vehicle from e_<tending over an adjacent property line, a public street,. public sidewalk, or a required landscaping area. 7. Parking, loading or vehicle maneuvering areas shall not be located within the front yard area or side yard area of a corner lot abutting a street in any residential (R) district, nor within any portion of a street setback area that is required to be landscaped in any commercial (C) or industrial (PI) district. F. Limitation on Use of Parking Areas.. Required parking areas. shall be used exclusively for vehicle parking in conjunction with a permitted use and shall nob be reduced or en- croached upon in any manner. The parking facilities ehall be so designed and maintained as not to constitute a nuisance at any time, and shall be used in such a manner that no hazard to persons or property or reasonable impediment to traffic will result. Passed by the Council. and signed by me in .authentication of its passage this 17th day of May 1984. _.- /C~f ., r ~;.~:,~ ,, c Mayor , ~~ '~ - ATTEST; ~ e J ~~_ a' • , City Representative Approved by me this 18th day of itav 1984. ~_ i_ •~ ~ - ~._ /~ -=, Mayor ,, _~ ,. ._-nanoa ~Jo. .ill' _ ~. .i~ 121 ~1i ~ ITEM r 122 t; ITEM CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97502 CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Sandy Berryhill CERTIFY THAT ON THE FOLLOWING DATE OF Wednesday,-May 1, 1991 , I POSTED A NOTICE FOR A PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULED ON .May-7, + 1941, DURING'WHICH THE CENTRAL POINT. .PLANNING COMMISSION WILL"REVIEW A MOCK SITE PLAN FOR INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST PINE BETWEEN HASKELL AND AMY STREETS AT OR NEAR 1. CENTRAL POINT POST OFFICE 2. CENTRAL POINT BRANCH LIBRARY 3. CENTRAL POINT CITY'FIRE STATION 4. CITY HALL BULLETIN .BOARD ~~~ ~~~ ATURE -~- ~~ DATE i~ 123 155 SO. SECOND ST C 664-3321 THE HEART OF THE ROGUE RIVER VALLEY ___ _ '75. R2 W ~I ~. ~.'•'<~a.~.Ff~"i~~~~ G~ `-seaO e~ - T~h1 J S~ i0 ~i, r p''0g - 7727-77{nT777777771777:i TfT7~~1.•: ~1~~r \ AI/TS. - CENTRAL PO/NT ~ 37 ZW LOAB K.6e ` 900 37 2W 300 ~:.. ~~ _ 9~' _ yoo ' tE~PQRT~~~` IS MAP FOR ASSESSfr~. TAXATION PURPOSI ONLY ---~~. 7 ~~ , :, ~. ~~ ~~ S y • T ~l ~ 9-~ °- ~CKS /,3,s,5, 9 6 ,ae~ucHS woo. J m a~ a say'' , . ~ ~~ ~~ ylrt) ~~ ~ Cl 6~ .. ~ ,~ J ~ ~ ~~~~`' ~~ ~,. ~ s~ y6 .l 1~ <, .., 00. <~ ~~~ ,_ _ '~ Y ~~ ~~. .~ .a a, n ` N M ,., 124 n 1 ~^. 4 :~ \a ~~\\\~ ~\\ ~~ \~~~~ -~ ' ~ 1,,. r , ` . ____-- CURB _. ~ ppRKING oC.e. 1272.7/ X ~ 4~ ~ . \11~//~\ 1273.0 \\ \ U \ \ -- ~ X1273.2 \\ ,~ l~~ t~ > ~- PAVED iKING~ R. ~ 1271.z f, x .? % 1270.6 ~r %~ ~~ D~~ ~d y ~ o,,,~ J \ \ RPMP \ 1 /~ ~ ~ OM (~ YV) 1272.8 X M.HO 0 /+ ~ ~~~ ~~. _~ ~~, ~ ~~ o Q \\~ < ~'r ~. i 1271.3 TS. ~ < 4 ~ s 0 \ ~ G~'YF. ~ ~ ~~ ~~ , ~ k ~~\\/ 1274.3 ~ ~~\~ :~_.O \ \M.N. Q ~ x x 1\ ~~ ~.~+ ~ ~ ~,~, /~ 5.0 // ppRKING 99 ~-~ TS. I \ \+\ ITEM ~ ---'~ :, DATE.• PROJECT.• PROJECT OWNER: REPRESENTAT/VE.• ARCH/TECT.• LOCAT/ON: ZONE: TYPE OF LAND M O C K C/TY OF CENTRAL PO/NT PUBL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT Apri/ 29, 1991 %ndustria/ Park Tri Arch /nc. 4410 N. Rogue Va//ey 8/vd. Central Point, OR 97502 Gordon Hancock Tri Arch /nc. T37S R2W Section 10AB, Tax Lots 100, 200, .300 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300,, 2900 M-1 USE ACT/ON; S/TE PLAN REV/EW APPL/CABLECODES; 15.40 Pub/ic Works Standards 17.72 Site P/an Review ASSUMPTIONS: 1. W. Manzanita Street has been vacated and all required utilities have been relocated. 2. A complete Traffic Analysis was completed on Haskell Street, W. Pine Street and Manzanita Street. The Traffic Engineer determined that W. Manzanita Street should not be constructed across the railroad tracks to provide for a second crossing. 3. Amy Street has been built to a City Standard 50' right of way, and street width 36' curb to curb. 4. West Pine Streef and Haskell Street have already been improved to the required right,of way width and street width. 126 ~~ Mock Staff Report April 29, 1991 -Page 2 5. Amy Street is a right turn in/right turn out only, a median curb has been installed on W. Pine Street to restrict turning movement from Amy and W. Pine Street. 6. Haskell Street has been improved to a secondary arterial standard with a median curb 250 north of W. Pine Street. 7. All traffic control signing, striping etc, has been installed. 8. Bike paths have already been installed. 9. 1/isiori cleararice has been maintained at the intersection of Amy/West Pine, Haskell/W. Pine, and Haskell/Taylor. 10. Sanitary sevver connections have been provided for each building. STREET /MPROVEMENTS: A. Existing Cohditions 1. Street No.-MA 3, Street Name-W. Pine Street, Street Classification- Major Arterial, Street Jurisdiction-City of Central Point, .Existing Right of Way-60', Future Right of Way-88', Existing Street Width-46' to 50', Future Street Width-66', 5 lanes, Curbs and Gutters-Existing, Future Curbs and Gutters-to be moved 8' to 10' toward the property on each side of W. Pine Street, Existing Sidewalks-None, Future Sidewalks-5' curbside required, Street Lights-Existing at Railroad Crossing, Southwest side, Future Street Lights-22,000 HPSV at intersections and_not less than 350', Existing Traffic Volume-11,000 VT/D+, Future Traffic Volume 20,000 VT/D, Existing Traffic Control-Pine Street and Highway 99 (Front Street), Future Traffic Control-Pixie Street and Haskell Street. 2. Street No.-SA 12, Street Name-Haskell Street, Street Classification- Secondary Aerial, Street Jurisdiction-Jackson County, Existing Right of Way,,-60', Future .Right of Way-arterial' @ intersection with West Pine Street, Existing Street Width-24', Future Street Width-56' at West Pine St[eet,100' North, 48' from 100' North to Taylor Road, Existing Curbs and Gutters-None, Future Curbs and Gutters-Required. Existing Sidewalks-None, Future Sidewalks-Required 5' curbside, Street Lighting- Existing at E. Pine Street, Future Street' Lights-9500 HPSV at inter- section and spaced not more than every 200', Existing Traffic Volume- 1500 VT/D, Future Traffic Volume-7500 VT/D, Existing Traffic Control- None, Future Traffic Control-Signal at Haskell and West Pine Street. X27 Mock Staff Report April 29, 1991 -Page 3 B. Developer's Required Conditions 1: Ingress/Egress a. W. Pine Street -Right Turn in/Right Turn Out only. Solid median curb has been installed on either side of the driveway to prevent left hand turns from and to W. Pine Street. b. Haskell Street -Full service driveway can be installed on Haskell Street. c. Create a Tee intersection. design at Haskell Street and Taylor Road to provide adequate traffic control according to MUTCD. 2. Street Lighting shall be installed at all ingress/egress locations. } Street lights shall be 9500 lumen, high pressure sodium vapor, ...mounted on aluminum poles. 3. The Parking areas shall' be surfaced with asphaltic concrete designed to carry the maximum loads to the development. 4. Developer .shall complete the application for sewer use to determine if an industrial waste discharge permit is required. If required a permitshall be submitted by the developer to The Regional Rate Committee. 5. Developer shall submit. a complete plumbing. plan so a determination can be made on the amount for the Regional Systems Development Charge and whether a backflovv device is required on the meters. 6. Separate water meters can be installed for each building based on the. size stipulated by the developer's engineer. Large size meters 3" or above, require a vault and a remote reader for the meter. The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with these installations. 128 ~'~ Mock Staff Report April 29, 1991 -Page 4 7. The developer shall complete a storm drainage system analysis for the development, and design or cause to be design; a system which carries the storm waterrunoff from this site, and properties upstream fora 26 year storm 1" per hour intensity. Determine the maximum duration impact. - 8. Maneuvering of trucks -for loading and unloading shall not be allowed within the City's Right of Ways.'Developer is to provide a detail on final construction plans and specifications which show the maneuvering pattern for loading and unloading. 9. Developer shall install or cause to be installed, conduits for utilities at intersections, or locations determined by utility companies. Developer shall also provide conduit crossings for utility companies who will not install their services until after the facility is constructed. The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the installation of these conduit crossings. 10. All construction for utilities, streets and other structures discussed herein within rights of ways owned, or to be owned by the City of Central Point, shall be done so according to all rules, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, and other applicable requirements of the City of Central Point for construction of this development. 11. The review for this Site Plan Review submitted by Tri Arch, Inc. was done so in accordance with the rules, regulations and ordinances in effect as of the date of this review. Any modifications by the developer of this development after City Planning Commission and/or City Council approvals could require resubmittal of an application and approval by the City Planning Commission and/or City Council. 12. All costs associated with this- development shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant or owner. 13. All roof drains, area drains, and crawl spaces shall have positive drainage away from the structure, and shall be connected to a curb drain or an approved storm sewer. Developer shall provide the building's finished floor and property topographical elevations to determine that all structures will drain properly. 129 ;l Mock Staff Report April 29, 1991 -Page 5 14. The Developer shall provide information from the Division of State Lands that the development does. not impact any wetlands. 15. No construction will begin on this project or any building in this development until such time as plans and specifications have been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department, and a . construction permit has been issued for each portion of the project :requiring a permit. MOCKSTFF.RPT cc: 02-014 13p ITEM r' Application Filing Deadline CITY OF CENTRAL POINT MOCK Application for Site Plan Approval Name / n; Arm ~ ZnG. CC'~ -- -- - ------ Address ~~ ~Q ~eC f ~ ~ac, t:c /Ywy. ~~/ i Phone Number (z~ J ~~~ Proposed Site Location Address ~~ / ~tS _I f ; n c J~• Assessor's Map Page Location Tax Lot(s) Reouired Information: A legal description as it appears on the deed (metes and bounds or subdivision lot and block number) Deed copies may be obtained at the Jackson County Assessor's Office ~ Accurate scale drawing of the site and improvements proposed. The drawing of the site must be adequate to enable the Planning Commission to determine the compli- ance of the proposal with the requirements of the attached Central Point Municipal Code Section 17.72.030. Name of Address y~~~0 ~,(ol`~'~ ~ ac: t ~c ~v // // i Phone Number 6 (, y - /, b I, (J~f~eiJ H-ar,coc~ certify that I am the owner or authorized agent of the owner of the proposed site (If authorized agent, attach written authority) ~Y'~- ~~~ ~.--~L..~ Date /'~~ 4 / 1 (Signature of owner or authorized agent of owner, please indicate which) Application Fee: $0 * A filing fee for recording a Deferred Improvement Agreement with the County Clerk may also be required LUAP/ADMINl 21