Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes - August 6, 2002City of Central Point Planning Commission August 6, 2002 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chairman Chuck Piland, Rick Perry, Candy Fish, John LeGros, Paul Lunte, Wayne Riggs and. Don Foster were present. Also in attendance were Ken Gerschler, Community Planner and Dave Arkens, Planning Technician. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Fish made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 2, 2002 meeting as presented. Commissioner Foster seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Perry; abstain, Fish, yes; LeGros, abstain; Lunte, abstain; Foster, yes and Riggs, yes. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES 'T'here were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. Public meeting to review a request by residents within the Parkwood Village Planned Unit Development to vary from the maximum fence height requirements that are identified in the Municipal Code. The subject property is located near the intersection of Meadowbrook llrive and Parkwood Village Drive in the R-2, Residential Two-Family District on Jackson County Assessment Plat 37 2W OIBD. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department staff report. Mr. Gerschler explained to the Commission that the Parkwood Village PL7D is being mostly developed as a zero lot line community with both attached and detached structures. He also explained the fence ordinance and that there have been a few fence variance requests in this Cxly ofCeunnl PontE PlamiiuR Cmnnuslimi Minumr ~iegurt b. 200? Ynge 2 general area. He stated that the homes are being built on a lot of fill dirt which provides proper drainage of storm water to the street. This fill has raised some of the structures and yards above the rest which has resulted in varying lot elevations. The applicants would like a 2' lattice extension on a 6' fence because of the changing ]ot elevations. 'T'his will allow additional privacy for these residents. Mr. Gerschler asked the Planning Commission to grant the Planning Staff the ability to review and approve or disapprove other fence variances in the Parkwood Village PUD. He read the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and recommended that latitude be given for this particular development. Commission members asked if future development in this PUD and other developments be screened a little better to avoid such severe elevation changes in lots next to each other and that developers build the fences before the structure is finaled or sold. Mr. James Kontur, 2606 Parkwood Village Drive, explained there is a drain in his backyard for storm water from the field in back of his lot. 'Phis drain has lowered the yard. The house being built next to him has been designed so that the duct work for the furnace system is under the finished floor level. This design has resulted in a 2' elevation difference of each home. His bedroom faces the new home and if a deck is placed offthe back door it will look directly into his bedroom. Mr. Kontur stated that the variance would allow a 2' lattice addition on top of the 6' fence around the perimeter of his yard. Mr. Kontur also stated that there is already a lattice fence extension in the back yard of a Beebe Road resident and has been approved by the City. The statement from Mr. Kontur of extending the 2' extension around the perimeter of his yard brought about some confusion fi~om the planning commission. Commissioner Riggs read the letter from Mr. George H. Gardener where he had stated that the lattice extension would be on the rear fence line only. Mr. Kontur had understood that Mr. Gardener meant that the variance would cover both rear yard and side yard fences. Gristle Cox, 2778 Parkwood Village Drive, stated that she does not have any privacy from her bedroom and must keep the blinds shut at all times. The 2' lattice extension would allow her additional privacy. Commissioner Lunte stated that he would like to clarify if the applicants wanted the variance to include both side and rear fences. Mr. Gerschler said he would draft a letter to the applicants asking them if they wanted a variance for rear and side fences and will include a final date to respond. City of Central Poin! Planning Convnitrinu Atinnlcc itngurt (>. 2002 Page 3 Commissioner Lunte made a motion to adopt Resolution 552 approving the fence variance application based on findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval. The recommendations include approval of a 2' (hvo-foot) high lattice on top of the permitted 6' (six-foot) fence on the rear portion of the fence only. Aside fence extension may constructed at 2606 Parkwood Village Drive, Map Number 372WO1BC Taxlot 4700. All other applicants of this fence variance have the option, if reviewed and approved by a case by case basis by city staff, of side fence extensions. Commissioner Peny seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Gerschler invited members ofthe Planning Commission to the Oregon Planning Institute being held at the University of Oregon October 2-4, 2002. Copies of the schedule and registration forms will be available for each Planning Connnission member. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Perry made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Lunte seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 8:20 P.M.