Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning Commission Packet - July 7, 2009
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA July 7, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 765 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Connie Moczygemba, Chuck Piland, Pat Beck, Mike Oliver, Justin Hurley, Tim Schmeusser and Keith Wangle III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES -Review and approval of June 2, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Pgs. 1 - 62 A. File No. 09027. A public hearing to consider a Site Plan application for the purpose of a two phase project within a C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Corridor General Commercial zoning district. Phase I is the construction of a 4,275 sq. ft. pharmacy; Phase II is a 7,127 sq. ft. commercial building. The project site is located at 880 Front Street and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 11CB, Tax Lots 600 and 700. Applicant: Tyler Fitzsimons Pgs. 63 - 81 g, File No. 09028. A public hearing to consider an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The purpose for this CUP application is to occupy and operate a pizza parlor within The Crossing at Center Point which is located within the Transit Oriented District -High Mix Residential/Commercial zoning district. The physical address is 312 Oak Street, Suite 102, and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 11BB, Tax Lots 500, 600, and 700. Applicant: Tom Malot Construction Company, Inc. Pgs. 82 - 88 C. File No. 09025(31. Urbanization Element pgs. 89 - 96 D. File No. 09025(11. Economic Element Pg. 97 E. File No. 09025(21. Housing Element VII. DISCUSSION VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MISCELLANEOUS X. ADJOURNMENT City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2009 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Connie Moczygemba, Chuck Piland, Mike Oliver, Justin Hurley, Pat Beck, and Keith Wangle were present. Tim Schmeusser was absent. Also in attendance were: Matt Samitore, Interim Community Development Director; Don Burt, Planning Manager; Dave Jacob, Community Planner; Connie Clune, Community Planner; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary. Chairperson Connie Moczygemba introduced new Planning Commissioner Keith Wangle. III. CORRESPONDENCE -None IV. MINUTES Justin Hurley made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 3, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. Chuck Piland seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Wangle; abstained. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. File No. 07038. A public meeting to consider an Extension request of Site Plan approval for North Valley Center. Applicant: Bank of the Cascades There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Connie Moczygemba had made a site visit. Community Planner Connie Clune presented a staff report, requesting a one (1) year extension of the site plan previously approved for North Valley Center. The property is Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2009 Page 2 located on Biddle Road next to the Super 8 Motel. The new extension date would expire on April 1, 2010. Chuck Piland made a motion to grant a one year extension on othe site plan for North Valley Center until April 1, 2010, based on the standards, findings, conclusions and recommendations stated in the staff report. Pat Beck seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; and Wangle; yes. Motion passed. B. File No. 09025(11. Economic Element Community Planner Dave Jacob presented a broad overview of local, regional, state and national economic trends over the last 50 years. With the potential for an expansion of the City's urban growth boundary, updating the economic element of the City's comprehensive plan has become necessary to meet the goals established in the City's strategic plan for development and diversification of local businesses and growth in the area. The largest area of growth is shown to be in service industries. As we move forward, more detail will be presented and the policies and goals of the economic element will be developed over the summer. Mr. Jacob asked that Commissioners give some thought to the types of economic development that they would like to see in the City of Central Point and the policies and strategies for attaining these goals. C. File No. 09025(2). Housing Element Planning Manager Don Burt stated that staff is updating the housing element of the comprehensive plan in preparation for an urban growth boundary expansion. The purpose of Statewide Planning Goal 10, Housing, is to provide adequate housing for citizens and provides guidelines and requirements for the development of this element. In the near future, we will be discussing our housing goals and the policies needed to achieve those goals. Final recommendations will be forwarded to the City Council. This will all need to be done in sync with the Regional Problem Solving plan. The regional plan will create urban reserve areas within which an urban growth boundary expansion will take place without having to deal with exception issues, particularly agriculture. D. File No. 09025(3). Urbanization Element Mr. Burt reported that the Urbanization Element of the comprehensive plan is another element that needs to be updated as part of an urban growth boundary expansion, and the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (GBVRP). The urbanization element is the foundation element of the comprehensive plan as it will require a sufficient land inventory to be maintained to support growth in the City of Planning Commtsston Minutes June 2, 2009 Page 3 Central Point for the next 20 years. The GBVIZP identifies policies and areas for urban expansion that the City must comply with as it expands its Urban Growth Boundary. Soon the Planning Commission will have the opportunity to discuss and comment on the policies contained within the regional problem solving plan. Following review of the draft GBV1tP, a recommendation will be made to the City Council, and they in turn will forward a recommendation to Jackson County who will take the matter forward. Mr. Burt pointed out that any urban growth boundary expansion is dependent on the regional plan and its incorporation into the Urbanization Element. The Participation Agreement previously signed by the City of Central Point is still awaiting signature of the County and the Land Conservation & Development Commission. The County hasn't signed it because they are addressing legal costs to defend any appeals on this issue and until they have a plan for financing a possible appeal, they are not comfortable with signing the document. VII. Senate Bill on Extensions Community Planner Connie Clune introduced House Bill 3031 to Commissioners, a bill that would allow an automatic two (2) year extension of time on residential applications. As no further action has been taken towards its passage by the State, Ms. Clune suggested that the City proceed with amending its code. Co-location on Oregon State Police (OSP) Cell Tower Connie Clune, Community Planner, advised Commissioners that staff had been approached by OSP with a request to allow AT&T to co-locate on an existing cell tower on their property. Commissioners discussed the intent of code in the transit-oriented development district with regard to the location of cell towers, the possibility for visual blight and the availability of other cell towers in the immediate vicinity (none). By concensus, Commissioners asked Ms. Clune to obtain more information from AT&T prior to pursuing a code amendment to allow cell towers in the TOD under certain circumstances and to maintain a degree of control over these types of projects. The Crossing - Tommv Malot Don Burt told Commissioners that Tommy Malot was interested in putting a pizza parlor in his new building, The Crossing, on the ground floor adjacent to Anytime Fitness. Mr. Malot was advised that he would need to pursue a conditional use permit for this restaurant and that certain conditions of approval would be imposed, e.g. no music, due to the close proximity of residences. Mr. Burt wanted to give Commissioners a head's up in Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2009 Page 4 this matter as Mr. Malot wanted to open on July 4`h' and the next meeting of the Planning Commission would not take place until July 7`h. The City will not approve any permits or a liquor license prior to the Planning Commission review of the conditional use permit request. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MISCELLANEOUS DLCD Appeal of Membershia Warehouse Clubs Don Burt advised Commissioners that the City Council had upheld the Planning Commission decision to allow membership warehouse- clubs as a conditional use in the M-1 zoning district. John Renz, DLCD, appeared at the Council meeting and stated that DLCD was agreeable with IvIWCs in commercial districts and would prefer that the City do a zone change on the proposed property to commercial so that the City would have to revise its transportation system plan. Council will take final action at their next regular meeting. Matt Samitore arrived at 6:55 p.m. Twiu Creeks Crossing Interim Community Development Director Matt Samitore reported that Twin Creeks Crossing is supposed to be heard by Jackson County during the second meeting in June. COPR (Central Oregon Pacific Railroad) is asking for the Moores to replace approximately 7,000 feet of track which is adding about $500,000 to the project that wasn't originally requested. ODOT Rail, however, is ready to sign off. Bret Moore is not ready to start construction this summer but will by next year. There are also some hazard mitigation and flood plain issues that have to be dealt with and they are in the process of resolution. Flood plain issues Matt Samitore informed the Commissioners that Central Point had started flood plain updates in 2001 and five of the seven creeks located in Central Point have now been studied and new maps will soon be adopted. There are some major impacts to Griffin Creek and some to Jackson Creek, however, the majority of the problems are with Griffin Creek because the culverts on Taylor, West Pine and the culvert at Highway 99 basically serve as dams and with the new flood analysis and development that has occurred since 2002, we have some pretty significant spikes in flood volume. FEMA will be conducting open houses starting at some time during the month of June of 2009 to provide more information on this issue. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2009 Page 5 Twin Creeks has some flood hazard mitigation work to be resolved in the central core before they can start building. Mr. Samitore added that in addition to the residences that are already in the flood plain, the new maps will add an additional 400 dwellings to the flood plain and these dwellings will require flood insurance prior to any remodeling of the properties. X. ADJOURNMENT Chuck Piland made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mike Oliver seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the June 2, 2009 Planning Commission meeting were approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting on the day of , 2009. Planning Commission Chair CENTRAL POINT PHARMACY SITE PLAN REVIEW Planning Department S`C'AFF REI'OR7 Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator STAFF REPORT July 7, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: FILE NO. 09027 Consideration of a site plan review for the construction of an 11,400 square foot single-story building to be developed in two phases. The project site is adjacent to Providence Health Systems medical office building (MOB) and located at 880 Front Street. The property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 11CB, Tax Lots 600 and 700 and located within a C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Corridor General Commercial zoning district. Owner: Providence Health Systems of Oregon; Applicant: Tyler Fitzsimons, Central Point Properties, LLC. STAFF SOURCE: I Connie Clune, BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the construction of a pharmacy and adjoining commercial building on 0.99 acres (Tax Lots 600 & 700), known as Central Point Pharmacy. Construction will occur in two phases, with the pharmacy being the first phase. This project site is within the C-5 Thoroughfare Commercial and the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Corridor. Section 17.65.020(B) of the CPMC states, "At the discretion of the applicant, a development application within the TOD corridor shall be subject to: 1. The normal base zone requirements as identified on the official zoning map and contained in this code; or 2. The TOD corridor requirements contained in this chapter." The applicant has elected to use the C-5 base zone requirements for this site plan review. (Applicant response narrative I, page 1, Attachment B). General Project Description: The proposed 11,400 square foot, single story building will be developed in two phases. Phase I is a 4,275 square foot pharmacy with an attached drive through. The plan includes the construction of the entire front parking area, Front Street sidewalk improvements and landscape row. In addition, the site plan provides a reciprocal cross-access easement for the adjacent property to the south of Tax Lot 700, Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.1 (Attachment A). Phase II is a 7,125 square foot, commercial use building to be attached to the pharmacy. The specific use or tenant for the second phase has not been determined at this time. The applicant is aware that commercial use(s) of the Phase II building must conform to both the permitted uses as listed in CPMC Section17.46 and the off-street parking requirements of Section 17.64. A second reciprocal cross-access easement for the adjacent property is provided (Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.9). Page 1 of 5 j, Access: Although the project site fronts Front Street it will utilize the existing full-movement access point from Front Street (Hwy 99) via the Providence MOB. Providence will provide two (2) reciprocal cross-access easements to the project site. Each access will be constructed with two travel aisles providing ingress and egress as illustrated in Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.9 (Attachment A) and curb radius. The Providence Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) submitted as part the medical office building site plan (File 07019) included this project site. The TIA concluded that a single access point be used for both Providence MOB and the pharmacy project. As noted in the Public Works staff report dated June 12, 2009, a Traffic Impact Analysis is not required for this project. (Attachment C). Landscaping: The landscape design, (Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.2, 2.3 and 2.10), incorporates a perimeter frame of trees, shrubs and other plant varieties. As condition of approval, the number and species of street trees along Front Street (Hwy 99) will be added in conformance with CPMC Section 12.36. Trees are also located along the side and rear landscape rows. The plan also provides for plantings adjacent to the building and at strategic pedestrian and parking locations. The irrigation system (Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.3 and 2.11) will be designed to maintain all planting areas. Parking: The project (Phases I and II combined) requires a total of 46 parking spaces. The site plan provides 51 parking spaces (5 spaces more than required). Three (3) spaces have been identified as ADA accessible, which complies with the minimum ADA requirements. Construction of the eastern reciprocal cross-access easement provided by Providence MOB will consume a minimum of four (4) existing Providence parking spaces. To compensate for the lost parking spaces and as condition of approval, the applicant will grant Providence a parking easement for a minimum of four (4) spaces, thus each building element is conforming to provisions of Section 17.64. The City recognizes that this proposed development and the Providence MOB are independent developments; however, when it comes to access and parking, the two projects are inter-related. A parking study encompassing the Providence MOB and the Central Point Pharmacy, Phases I and II, was done in conjunction with this site plan application. The parking analysis finds that adequate parking is available for this proposed project and is summarized in Table I. Table 1 Central Point Pharmacy Phase I and Phase II Parking Analysis Parking Parking Actual/ Standard Sp Planned Loss/ Parking Modified Use CPMC 17.64 Required Spaces Access Easement Parking Providence h(2): 1/200 sq ft @32,000 sq ft 160 160 -4 4 160 Pharmacy Phase I G(i): 1/200. net floor area gross building 4275 net floor 3063.8 15 35 0 -4 31 G(1):.1/200 Commercial Phase IF net. gross building 7127 net floor 6176 31 16 0 0 16 Total Protect Spaces 206 211 -4 0 207 Page 2 of 5 ~+ The overall gross floor area of the project is 11,402 square feet, and as such, one loading berth is required by Section 17.64.020 (1) at the time Phase II of the project is implemented. The applicant is aware that the location of the berth identified on the site plan, Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.2 and 2.9 labeled "future loading berth," is situated within the travel lanes (ingress and egress) for the east access and as such is not accepted. The location of the required loading berth shall be reviewed as part of the Phase II submittals for a building permit. Floodplain: A portion of Tax Lot 600 is identified as being within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) commonly referred to as the 100 year floodplain for Mingus Creek (Attachment D). As a condition of approval the Civil Improvement drawings shall illustrate the location of the floodplain as conditioned in the Public Works staff report dated June 12, 2009 (Attachment C). FINDINGS: See Attachment H ISSUES: The loss of existing Providence MOB parking spaces as a result of construction of the eastern cross-access can be remedied by a parking easement agreement between Providence and the applicant. The parking easement has been stated as a condition of approval. As a condition of approval of the Providence MOB it was required that Providence provide one cross-access easement to the adjoining southerly property. This has been done; however, the applicant is requesting an additional cross-access easement. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The applicant shall provide Providence Health System-Oregon with a parking easement for a minimum of four (4) spaces to be located on Tax Lot 600, Phase I of the project site. The final design is subject to approval by Providence. Said easement shall be recorded with the Jackson County Clerk prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The applicant shall secure from Providence Health System-Oregon and improve two reciprocal cross-access easements for the project site to the south (Tax Lot 600) of Providence MOB as illustrated on Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.9. Said easements are to be recorded with the Jackson County Clerk prior to issuance of a building permit. Conditions as listed by the Central Point Public Works Department staff report dated June 12, 2009 (Attachment C). a. Tree plantings shall have at least a 1 ''/z" trunk diameter at the time of installation. All street trees shall be irrigated with an automatic underground irrigation system. Plans for all public improvements shall include a street tree landscape plan identifying tree type, location, and irrigation system. Maintenance of the landscape row shall be the responsibility of the property owners who own the property directly adjacent to the landscape row as illustrated on Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.10. b. The Norwegian Maple trees are not suitable for the proposed landscape row. Applicant will need to pick a different type to plant in this area and the species shall be the same or similar Page 3 of 5 c~ to the existing street tress within the Providence MOB landscape row. Additionally, the applicant will need to have a minimum of five (5) street trees with location and species identified on the resubmitted landscape plan prior to issuance of the building permit. c. Applicant shall install a six and a half foot wide landscape row to match what has already been installed as part of the Providence MOB facility and include this on the resubmitted landscape plan prior to issuance of the building permit. d. A portion of the lot for the pharmacy building is located in the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), commonly referred to as the 100-year floodplain. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project engineer shall illustrate the extent of the 100-year floodplain on the Civil Improvement drawings. All proposed development within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with the flood damage prevention and hazard mitigation provisions established in Section 8.24, as well as the special creek setback requirements established in Section 17.60.090(E) of the Central Point Municipal Code. e. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit to the Building and Public Works Departments and Rogue Valley Sanitary Sewer their storm water detention plan. Applicant shall conduct a pre and post development run-off plan and detain all water on site that exceeds the difference. 4. Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport (Attachment E) requests an avigation, noise and hazard easement for the project site as required by Jackson County LUDO Section 7.2(E). Said easement shall be recorded and a copy submitted to the City prior to issuance of a building permit. The Applicant shall submit lighting and signage plans prior to building permit approval. Said plans shall be consistent with the provisions of CPMC Sections 15.24; 17.60.110 and 17.67.050(M). 6. Conditions as listed by the City of Central Point Building Department (Attachment F), Fire District 3 (Attachment G) and Rogue Valley Sewer Services (Attachment H). 7. Commercial use(s) or tenant use, number of parking spaces and the location of one loading berth for the second phase building shall be reviewed by the City for compliance with CPMC Sections 17.46 and 17.64 prior to building permit approval. 8. Site plan approval shall lapse and become void one (1) year following the date on which it becomes effective unless construction has commenced. ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS: Attachment "A"- Applicant Response Narrative Attachment "B"- Site Plan, Building Elevations and Landscape Plan, Attachment "C"- Public Works Staff Report Attachment "D"- Floodplain determination map Attachment "E"- Rogue Valley International-Medford Page 4 of 5 4 Attachment "F"- Building Department Staff Report Attachment "G"- Fire District 3 Attachment "H"- RVSS Comments Attachment "I"- Findings Attachment "J"- Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of site plan approval for the two phase, 11,400 square foot single story Central Point Pharmacy building (File No. 09027). RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. _, granting site plan approval for the two phase, 11,400 square foot single story Central Point Pharmacy building (File No. 09027). Page 5 of 5 5 `~ CentraCPoint Properties LLC F ~_ ~ S ~' ~ R E tFt 4 ~ ~ e~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ri ;pe t~ ~~ ~ m s O8dI1iAL ~y D TAX LOT s.... `' ~~+^~ t. sa n m... ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~o-~ii i ~ivo ~~ ~~ ~ ~E ~ ~ ~ ~ #~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~g w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ rLnN •rwnr+MACr roar rrw~ACr nveYa~ 600 -F 700 'ei°~~„%+ e..mmtva....~.u® CHQRiAt.` PONr, OR !'o-n trn /~~niv~t ~Drn»artioc /'f!' slf~~E*..;hYfykYiiRa `G'X.FF.s.~,Yd'sc'3A~ ,.nTar~LSC~'^L(~'~lY1a?~,413`-"-~R'~~.'a~d#A~4W6~,z2t3'83i2't[~' xY+?~uYaK9'~'*Fs~.+~v~.4s;'a~1rY„~rFf:EF3,MT,i¢8W~,1 ,~R `Y ~ ~ ", ,~LPPLIC.~I'1"1'ON FOR'~~ A:NJ~TI'N~ APP2t0`V ~IL'i ~ , . , . ,~ Exhi~; ` . Pha~~ 1~~~,andsc~ui~~ ~Pl~n (Phar`~a~~. ~ite,~ ~ ~ ~ ~" r ~ < `~ ~,~ M~ ~ ~.r ~ ¢~ C ~, ~ =: ~~ ~ : . . C I ._.. l a. .. _. r' ~~ i; b ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ : t ~ - } , ki ~ ... F _ N O PHAeE ~ LAenec,4Pe PLAN ouw~n or CHi1pAL POM PNAFMACY TAX LOT 000 +700 - ## ~ CBQIAAL.POfiT, CN' $1[~~~ CentraCP F.~i ~ fivlY ~. ~ 1 a~uRM .,..k i 'fi d ,. 1 'i.~CS~ Y Y'kAF31P+YtYHSJr .:T .. 9, "..S.i 3 SN.Gd~3..$3.rYy}'a~! •~o i ~ ~~ ppii~ ~$ ag~~..~ i.. t y f s' r~i~'' k 4 ~, ~. P anima vm~ e..e,w~{nm ma ~ t~+ A a E ~, r f ~ `r j ~ 00 ~~~p b . g ~ ~~~ ` ~~ ~' ~ ~ ii yy 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ;? b ~~^ e 1 t€ Y~ 'v p {. 9 €k~{E ~ RV VF F 1t 4 ~ ~- E ! ~ . ' Yj t Y; ~~ ~ ~ 1 f ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ % .f ~ - t 99 i _ i ~ i m . N ~,.,,.. ~, . q{ggE ~ L6i PLAN ~ , aoo ~ ~ ~~ ~.~ ~~.. ~~`5`' d' - V° ` ' CentraCPoint Properties LLC }: F+ltt aJ ob"?ia4 )nh RRwt .t. 3Nf .1T .IlS~_f:. yt~FCi . Y i. 4e 4. c'F:e h` Y „N--rfS. VsrY il, f-~V~i~ .e Ft2 zii~ 1.4Y ~. `+ t ~ M k rti a ;.v. 31V}aV'v ehY ~, ~' = , 4 N e. ~.,, M1C 6 ~ I/ I k, l y. l ¢~ I r , ~ 1 Q ~ -~. 6 ~ A ~ ,~ ® .. PI~ABE I OFiOUpD pHY.t~I~A~T~ONB YYmm~~ ~r CY ~Q TAX LOT 600 `F 700 ~~: VH.Y~vmµ4ebm® ~~~ ~r~ Q~ CentraCPoLnt Properties L. Jr ..xl rF a44+t+-0R.A3F3.*h£x+. lNf ds'F .N.^R S.).i+8n~f-h3A ~3'i~Ant"~. , 5F5! y, [~ [kk:~. l~ t I A 1 j ~~ { {. t F. j: fs~ i kt ~ fib'-4". i b'-D" ;: rcas,e or PFIABEJ BOl7fF1-WEHr B-EVAl10NB wrnm CENTRAL PORT' PMAF1dAC,Y azsn..a"°~. I(F* ~ :TAX LOT E00 +700. y:K,o.m F I O e..v:orar CENTRAL POM, OR r ~~ `. CentraCPotnt Properties LLG ~ tt?,p . l hd°~Y~ r +. .gam-`RM1V $SZ ~ _. ".ma .9v A'~Y ~i~Y~IY QNb 'tc .923'x X f' ,. Sa"'~j+ rJ.;Z:c ...5 =. h) .V.A. LIV IU~I~I' ` '' ;~ +'-f .SY'+.-F ~},?atL~' t<,F -lEV t ~.-'fit mm~yv a a ~1WJ .(~*ut ~..: ti ~vltea,`Ytrs~w rox r[c;~rX~a~C7~ia~x.¢flsdr?.a'~i~as .~IPPLIG~I?fQ,7Y ~7 ~ ; • ~ ,, , ~;' (? 'e w „w.~ ~~ ~ '" , .~IPPlIC7~?~'G Phase 1 Building Ele` `~ 'r F _ i . z, 0 t~ rr-r N a „-r r m ~: ~_ s ~' ,,,_®„ ~s '~~ ~~ 19~_m~~ [ w 1 wwM n .. PFIAB~E 1~NO•F,iiHfJ18T B.EVAl10N6 [ 1 v M1W O CHlIRAL PONS %iAFIdACY ~~ C ~r Centre (5oR w~~^a.>..~.:.. ,_FS n n'NP _a6 E3,il b+ n T lao hv1 nq;.'F ,'¢y~2-`a m i F u vee~ ~. ~~. .n.3i~tir¢..~?cS., rnafi,#>'4Yt! .'~iti^F'M. ~3w?~+33.3.>?E~e#:f.~: ~t~,r 4 ¢T„%s.~c3xkdt~.~8 o ~ I ~ ~, ngg tl;~ ~ ~ ~ -- .~.~d'+~6K#"F§i}~if "f 3t§" T~ ~i'T~~hi~ ~5 H.f. 3je°f APs s i [~- ~fi ~, ~s ~ %~e~ ~~: ~ o {6 ~vy i i ,~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~ 1 i ~~i ~iQsi~6,~ ~~~_~' _ ~ I~ ~j ~~ +~~ Ie~ ~6 $ 1 °~~ ~1 1 ~1 ~~i i ~e ~ E ~~~1~9! + ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ iiE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ or . PHASE 2 BRE PLAN 'MX® UeE' a CBriRN_ PONS PIiAFM1ACY ~"°"°'°g, TAX LOT E00 +700 •si4.m'd"@ -_. CBlIf W_ PONS. OR m.mm~r - • /'o~n trn~rPniv~f rPrnnartinc /'f!' 1 'aJb£xN,F ~,.L~~u_~fPNav.4F>:Sk..P A;'•v~k`$`[/l.§~."fkJ'~!*,i~$"+1~1b1+$3~+T3a3ft]Y'a.2ii~Aa5=r~22t~~Yl#.X*.-.15;~4$~P'x''t;`f`kicbY~3*?]ix4~~A~3$iY Lv~y'i~j`~}~bSWAlY~d d#25*:9`~~Y?~. ..NS .~~Prre.~~ro.~r,~oR ~,crarr, APPROv.~ Exhibit 2.1Q P1 ase 2: Landsca 'in .Mixed Use`Site `; _~ .~ : . . ~ , r ~' . tlx~ ~ ~~ i ~ .~ ...o 1 ~ ~,' „ d . ~: b ~ ~ ~~ ~!~ ~ E'. ~ ~ ~kK~. ~. Kaa ,. ~ ~ ~~ n , ~ i ~; i ~ ~, t, „~ ^~ rfu~ i ~ArnecAre r~.nN N °" ca+rr+n~ rohrr rHnr..wcr a.u.«,a ~~ O ~ O TAX LOT E00+700 m.v.oetra"® ~. ~.~ a~ ~:t ~. CentraCPoint Properties LLC T iP ~ . 5.„. w Lz vC. i e+f 4 .~. +.h.-4' s ~. 1 aC~;°. a.o;lrt.n .Nfi. rv¢~/iOd~ A R. m /3's ,..;. '4r... ~. lde ~.,,...i~... ,t R. v.O.~Q•.`°5 x~ x-FrAF'Eie F8'X35'e^.a'%s6.Y~~xS'+K~fd~t`r1k~34'.<5"'+.'Cxt43~S,Y d`~i'~£SY.4°`o:1w s~Ndklvf~ .,~ieSh~`:£ P~;}x .~if~iT3diS~°ubt?M.~iSAY~l. ' dh - ~ .~LPPLI~.~L~UN ~OR PL.~IN~NC~ ;~LPPR.O~Y.~IL~ Vz , k Exhibit 2.11 Phase 2!Sorinltler>Plan.(Mixe~l Use Sitel s <, _, ~ Y; .~. .=~ .,;~„ ~ M ~ :~ y A • , bPoL£ lE DDVkAmMF„ ~ p ~~ • g t ` ® a~if- ' ,,. ~ `, P' ; .•.;.. Y ~ ® • • >; y P. • ,;- • ~'%~ ~ "' P P • • ~ Yq • Oo •P • • • • P • • O • ~i Y`.: 9 NLl'DO' W PB0.0D IN1Q(DT/~lE B/~TRAIEB BLDD LOT D a-~ ~ b b e0 0~0 ~~. ~~~~ ~ ~ R% a $ g .. • ~ € ~ e•vee DY...... PI'IABE~~ 8~~ p~N . w.. w ~ .DY CGIIRAL ~ ~+~~~ PFIAFI.~ACT yf]°r16 Y°'°'8. TAX LOT:600 t 700.. i "° m.no ar o® '.CHJifiAL PONf,OR- . CentraCPoint Properties LLC /r. i t,' r ' 1 ~ , f A [ ~~ }a '~„-1 o-'V wn~x.; dY .xfi. }t. r.,. d'f4 ,X,. ~;_f.3-,4f3o.t ,r. Y'a:. III 11 1 Y~ Pw0: DI4Y~w~~p Mb6® i ~. X. ~ { { t } 'ro~erttes LLC ~yYe`3t$~ ~ i~A ~.9 3£ •S t r 2 x~F~~r- j;'~~ ~n .C.r tit. ~~..~-rheKF'!F&u:d L~^J .'~ vV `aJi~4 i'~3:' dS3Yr.;1Gh 4t"L?k-L"-y'A§ ~~ ,E's s P~asB 2 BuilBiin~ Elevation P Y y 1 ~i { f. y ~~ ~ ej T .. jj Y ~~... . f, 4;? i= it p' 'r '~ ~, F.' ~ ~~ y ([S4 ic y Z A y .' ~~ !S yy~ { `i`, (.. ' r y' Y' 'uw ~~: n, er PFIAeE~ NOR7FFW68f 9.EVATIONB ow.rmm s CBfIRAL PON[PIiAF1iMCY _~~ ~~ TAX LdT QOO +700 -. ~ ~. ~'.. ~ ~ an,m~ir°4 w~a.u® OBffRAL P011~, CNi ~. '. CentraCPoint Properties LLC 'viY, it: e 1~~%nah. file ai,1~ ....SJ.~ s .~. nr'i,a. s.c. a-'z a. .vu - t, x;. s, ~z w w > w ~ " 1 . ' ; ~: +: r, 1 l ! _ gg;. wm .Y m ~ . PI~/19E ~ 90lJ CBRFiAL fH-EJ3I' ~VATIONE POMR PIiN#IACY t5 .V ~ TAX L OT 600 t 700' ~ tt,, 4~i ~r pi t(f ~~ ( ( 4i+e~ ~~ r. =~'..°~..a. .r,...:.?~ z.,. ., 313r, lei: a L]]6 V wM~OILY ryPU~6+m .~+~:F*€.~:sK'v ^"s ~~ii:'~retrsAl.3" usfss~~iz ~+.t?iv~7'~t~.x,. .~IPPIIC.~l~1'l?a ~, ~, _ Phase.2. Buiidin~ Eleya `F. ,~ { ' ~ ~* ~' } ~, y&yi ,K? ~, k, ~:~ ~._ W O1' - PHASE ~ lIORTFIfABT ELEVAl101 N ~ ~rmm s CENIRAI. pONf PHAFy.IACY `~/ , ~ TAX LOT,l00 + 700 a CENTRAL PONi', OR 2,~ $ ~ Tat^6 ~:Aa P~, ~i yr ~-s~ +e TS#iT'fi„ Y a ~rY .~ .~.ipdn)9 ~~~~ OL1tt P7'OUB?'t72S LLC Agent: TydenFilzslmons _~ ~, _ ~ ~ fi'<'~ Owner: Providence Health Systerirs,of Oregon ~' ~ ~ ~~ . ~~ $ -FOR TIYEAPPROVf1L OFA RETAIL PHARMACI' WITHDRIVE 7'HRU/MIXEJD ~IS~~ OFFICE BUILDING IN THE C-S ZONING DISTRICT. THIS PROPOSAL WILL BE PRE~,E~'T~~ INA TWO PHASE CONCEPT. ~„~`~ ~ ~~~~ F' THE FO_ LLOWING IS THE RESPONSES TO APPLICABLE CRITERIA '~ _ . ~ ~ r, ~ ly I. DESCRIPTION OF SITE PLAN REVIEW PROPOSAL ~"~ ~ ~ ~ `" ~~~ ~, . Central: Point Properties LLC ("Devglopert') is requestin~ srle plan feview and approval for a proposed plan thin will include a total of 11;440 square, Yg~k df buildings located on 43,503 sciuare feet of property. The buildings wilLbe constructed,~ep~rately im two phases. The first of which will be a 4,275 square foot pharmacy with an attached c~riv~`throti`gh (Central Point Pharmacy LLG) as ~; permitted outright in the C-5 zone (See Attaelment 1). The second phase will incorporate a 7,125 ~ square-:foot mixed use structure with undeterli~ined users at this point. This site is located to the ~~ South of the existing Providence Medreal O_£f ce Building (MOB) on Front Street in Central Point, tf Oregon (See Exhibit 1 for aerial overlay). ~` II. EXISTING CONDITIONS f`- 1. Site Description and Current Use. ! The .99 acre parcel (37,32lW11CB TL 600 & 700) is currently unimproved and has been cleared for f` , ~ the purpose oPdevelgprhelt by Providence Health Systems of Oregon. This site adjoins Providence ~;': (MOB) site to the south. t: ;~ 2. Vrcinity and Surroundine Uses. ,. A~ shown in'(Exhibit l) the site is located on Front Street on the West Side of the city. Surrounded K; ~;: uses'include a single family subdivision to the East of the site on the far-side of a 20 foot wide r 'sanitary sewer easement,. a battery sales warehouse to the South, and Providence Health Systems to f-<< " ' Elie North. The West side of the property. is buffered by Front Street and the railroad with a f=ti ;'' `subdivision located to the West of the tailroad. ~.< d `~ 3. Zonine• This site has two overlaying zoning districts. The primary base district is C-5 commercial with the TOD districtas an alternative overlay. According to Central Point Zoning Ordinance 17.65.020 it ' r CentraCPoint Properttes LLC ~~ r~.,. _.~; ,~< _ ,.~~ r < < .~~ {,x,,i3s ... fia::,rx3 +k....u<~. ut .fn=Ti >te l'(?s.4i c~+z.. s544s" v n.+a.rE_.#'e s'+~.4,.;>.... 4i`+.x\JS? Y%%iM'E .~.P2'LIC.~?1'ONFOR PL.~IN.T/INC3 .~lPP1t0" ~- fins been chosensto However we Will=a our site. This will apply efficient and 4. Transportation Fac l~ `The site has frotital Providence MOB 1; arterial standards s are Pine Strget (4 l: tst~inable land development practices advocated in the'fOD'district. ~4 ties. t `h _ ~.- ~y1 t~ ~ 3'S `liY'{ k 4 to Front Street (HW'Y 99), however the access his been, com tt~d tivith the fi= ... - - -- . ... . ~ .~ E..5,.., 6; 5. Utilities and Public Services. h Y t~t' The site is fully served by public and private utilities (Wateiz;~ sei~ei', pi F, established fire and police. services). f i;vYvA a.vawu4l~i Y,r .}v+b!,lui ~iiF. ,. ~v F crest~~€€mt~~eations to the site inOr~arte}1a~S~ x~r Q ~ ;,~ _~ ' K r,' . ~>~" ~lve'r, gas, and is within F,, ,~ .. , IIL PROPOSED USE. h ~, , `' 1. Site Desien. s' . See (Phase 1-Exhibit 2.1/Phase 2-Exhibit 2.9)the proposed facility has been located inside all setbacks required in the C-5 zoning district. The site was designed with the minimal walking distance in mind both from parking area and adjacent MOB facility (as we feel that many MOB clients will utilize the proposed facility as well). Access to the site is through a two way aisle on the west end of the property (an existing easement granted from MOB $te) as well as an additional two way travel aisle to the east end of the property (this will be an additional access easement which Providence Health Systems has agreed to provide as part of our purchase agreement). Traffic will evenly distribute through the MOB site to the r. existing easement aisles connecting to Front Street (HWY 99). On site traffic has a 30 foot wide two way drive aisle incorporated into the west parking area, and a 3~ foot<<wide; two way traffic aisle incorporated into the east parking area. The drive thnr area will be a, TS foo~ivide one way traffic aisle entering from east to west. All onsite parking is designed to '<, meet"or exceed City Standards. Site constructonwill be done in two separate phases. In the first phase the Pharmacy building and t'` ;z3'site will be constructed along with the entire front parking/ landscaping area and the proportional ~;, , L; rear parking/ landscaping area (See Exhibit 2.1). During the second phase of construction the t' remaining building will be erected as well as the remaining parking/ landscaping areas (See Exhibit ;:_ 2.9) s 2> Building Desi ii. h' ft:^ visual exposure at ground level. "v., The elevations of his strdcturE designed around traditional fee Windows will consist o;t`bl~ck '' reduced;energy Consurnption.~ &IF provided upon request, ~~ 3. Parkine and Loading_ ~' f! r,: ': .. 5. 51) parking.stalls parking,limitations of the complex. Phas the remaining 16spaces will be added in 4. Pedestrian Facilities. r;,:. e S `' ~ ~ s - ~ ~ ~, i , ~„ t{ates't ~`pne:(l~ parking space to every ise`bf the'Fomplex this will more than ~ ., t rie tlie,additional' business`that will operate ;d)tses-must fit within the combined. i spaces to accommodate the pharmacy, of construction. These buildings will have the train entrances and pedestrian access aisles oriented to face Front Street. We have designed,ample pedestrian accessibility between the side walk and main entrances. i The pedestrian aisle will be`constructed of textured, elevated concrete which will be marked by diagonally painted yellow striping. There will be a 5 foot wide continuous sidewalk that surrounds the entire building providing ease of access to all parking around the building. ~4 LandgCaptrig will cover 8,367 square feet. of the property or roughly 19.2% of the completed site. i T~ie~C=S;,zone gives no minimum requirement for landscaped-area. Phase one will develop 4,731 ,'<~ sgdare fget of landscaped area, while the remaining 3,636 square feet of landscaping area will be ti Constructed with phase. two. We designed this site in accordance with the Providence MOB site and ~; _ tried to keep a contiguous design between both complexes. We feel that the buffer zones, traffic g1~~; ~j, , `visionclearancecreas, and overall appeal of the Providence MOB site is best suited for both ei ;~ ~, . ~,, r complexes. (See Exhibit 2.2 &2.10. for description and layout of landscaping design. and treatment.) ~; ~ 6. Lightin ag_nd Si ngnage. ;~_ 24 ,~ F~.~_ ~'c,5..~*si .n,C&>, ~-Y~za..a.~.euit~~i,x'-YYamN.sF#§A^~:.k.°~gaa.R.S4~ss'a41'~..x .3sn.~h`~-1 .51.a-x+' i" eeG~4i,~a..,~7-~. P.z, ea 2. .. s~_~a ,naga~` 1 As indicated in out Pr"e-Application meting on 11-5-08 no Traffx for this site as it'shares accesses tc ]'rovidences MOB site in whtc IV. RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA ~~ F ~~ 1'. The following approval criteria of title 17, "ZONING" (the "C]?Z~ Code apply to this Slte Plan Review application. , • Chapter 17.65 T-OD District and Coiridora; Sectton ~7~4~ 020, az~ • Chapter 17.46 C-S, Thoroughfare Commercial District of application. • Chapter 17.72 Site Plan, Landscaping and constnrction'plan approved. Chapter 17.64 Off-Street Parking and Loac~irig ` . ~? 2. CPZO 17.65, TOD DISTRICT A. 17.65.020 Area of applicat `' These regulations apply ~` areas are shown. on the c ~' a. A developmental t. 6` chapter. ` b: At the discretion, ~' a; subjectto:" 1. The normal bas ntral Point TOD district and corridor. The boundaries of these two y comprehensive plan and zoning maps. within the_TOD district shall comply with the requirements of this applicant, a development application within the TOD corridor shall be zone requirements as identified on the official zoning map and contained ~'2. The TOD corridor requirements contained in this chapter. (Ord. 1815 § 1(part), Ex. B(part), t ~ . x;000).... t. ~ Res6onset The proposed building will elect to use the C-5 Thoroughfare Commercial District, ~' f base zoning requirements for site plan review. The TOD requirements do not apply.. e <3'. CPZO17.46, C-S THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT x, ~; A. 17.46:20, Permitted Uses The following are permitted uses in the C-5 District k~' ~?F ~~.-#. ~~.. i 3V,rv.n. `h-,(k N,{ o-~v'asq =1>9±7t ~ .~LPPLIC a. Professional at7 1. Banks arrd,si 2. Beal estate;.i E ~.. Contragfor~s d Ivladical eery b, Personal servic I."Self-seiice` including: cial tnstlttitions grid §imilar offices, ~; ~. ......,YY ..,..,,,, ~......,.., ~~, _~- 3, Printing? lithography and publishing, Y t 6. Locksmith, ~ ~,~ , ~ °. s ~ ~ ~ ~ <•" 7. Taxieab'dispatch office, ,~ 8. Ambulance/emergency services, ~ t 9; Art and music scfiools, G, t ~ ~ ~ "t.. ~ _ f 10. Business/vocational schools, <"~ ~ g 11. Physical fitness/conditioning center, martial arts scho$ls; L' ~~ i 12. Carwash, ~ ~= 13. Automobile and trnck service stations and rep£tn ~Sltops,, i'" ~ f: 14. Auto and furniture upholstery shops; ~ 4F `` ~ ~~ 15. Veterinary clinics (withinenclosed struch}re);r v, ~; F3 ~ 16. Barber shops, ~. 17. Beauty. salons, 18, Manicure salons; c. Retail outlets; including: 1. Auto and truck sales (new and'used), 2. Tire sales and service„ 3. Glass and mirror sales and service, 4. Wall covering, floor covering, curtains, etc., 5. Major appliances sales and service, 6. Hardware sales, 7. Monument sales, $. Super~n'arket,' 9. Convenience. market. "' i< d' 1. Feed seed and fuel within enclosed structure , ( ), ~ ~: 2. ~ 1 , Electrical and plumbing supplies, ~; s 13. Heating and air-conditioning equipment, ' ~ 14:' Stone, the and masonry supplies, ~ • ~; ` 15. Nursery and gardening materials and supplies " 16. , Antique shop; ~;~ 17. Art and engineering supplies, " i< 1$. Pawnsho p. ! €€, 19. Sit-down restaurants, including service of beer, wine and liquor, k; 20. Drive-in fast food establishments, ~~ fir,. 21. Tavern, beer sales only, - €`€; 22. Public/quasi-public utilities and services, Y, 23. Floristsales, CentraCPoint Pro p, ti ~ rv _ ...<; ~_ ... ~..;. ....;fxp ' }"+~'iG 1 +t.~yn~_ ~ F' ~~.;.,?.I::+ 4 f X3 s"at '~T~Ce~{A~ - .~IPPL.2G?I s. lr ~~ ~ ~ 29. 1?et sales, ' 25 General appal !"' 26. B`uirnituYe;sale ~ 27. Sporting goof ~ 28. State-regµlat~ ~; 29. Community s and the C-4 distrii 30. Large retail e 17.08.010, Retail d. Tourist/reereatior i, 1. Hotel and mote €k 2: Walk-in heatei 3. Bowling alley;. 4 Ice and roller s: z 5. Dancehalls (no !' t; 6: Billiard/pool hi G' 7. Miniature golf; ` 8: Club arid organ e. Commercial parhi ~ 1. Recreational of } £ Light fabrication,. s~ ' 1. Light fabricatic ~'. goods, and F 2. Light fabricatic }`,;, machine, sheet me €; s_ Response: The propos is Zoning Disdrict. (See ai B. 17.46.040 Height No building. or structur §2(part), 1981). of consumer r, heating, in the C-5 rd. 1436 Response::; The proposed building with Drive Thu Pharmacy is 18 feet 8 inches well under the 35 ;, ~ `} !' foot tnhximum light restriction which allows us to meet these criteria. `` C 17.x(.0505 Area, width and yard requirements. t; ~; ~` ~ a: _ Lot Area. No requirements except as necessary to comply with applicable yard and ~ E parking and loading requirements. t EI ;Response: The lot area is 43,503 square feet which is adequate to meet all design criteria as set ' ~"~~ ~~~~ fortbin responses to this section and section 17.64. ~ ~, e ' t`' b: Lot Width. The minimum lotwidth shall be fifty feet. ~~ Resnonse: The lot width is 150 feet. c. Lot Depth. The minimum lot depth shall be one hundred feet. ~ _ ,Y ; ' CentraCPotnt Properttes LLC ,_.. ., ., , .r~~. , ~;~ . ~ , , _ ..._ z, ,__.. ~ m_ .., , unl dux. x.~.:q:u~ur:IVy .ayPlcu vsu , noltiding?used fymlture> ales; inciuiiingfirearms '~~. e.s4~ ~.~; .,,x.,Y ns .: t,. <. ~d ~= ~e ..'ti+*Lim =a. ~;,-ipk~,o u5..;, 'kat~ea„„~..f ~:-, ..+,i3°sassiP ~,%._§ y..h.vui..,,ri,.4.u'cia 2rc'tW.ta~s ~~~. w`~.ruaa»ti .~lpPG1C..~1?lONFOR, P~:yL;N~YINC ~lPPRO1~.~11 ~ ~ z °- Response: The dot depth is 290feetl ~~ d. Front Yard. The front yard~slall be & minimum of ten fee"t aid shall- be maintained as b ~5: ,Xandscapedopemspace: When off streetparking,ie located in the front yard area, the a landscaped strip ritay be reduoed.to not'less than six feet With planning commission ap royal , t` of the site plan. ~"_ ~`' Response: The fro»t setback to the bualdmg rs 86 feet 6 inches. T hp front yard is 5 fee(,6`:rl?<~Jes ~ ' t deep, wlaich isslightly »arrower that the required 6 foot dimension, therefore we have (lacludetl~~~~~ three lbrge landscaping bays that protrude out an additional 20 feet. We have us~ifithts~ esig» at3"' k r> ~ ~, accordance with the neighboring Providence MOB complex to keep continutty betw~e~~3 Sites, The ~<; front yard landscaping requirement. has been,met. i b ~ ~~ ~, e. Side Yard:: The side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except vsh@h,alaut2ing structures r ~` are proposed with a,common wall that complies wath the Umforral 13ntlding Code. k Response: The sid¢ yards on both sides of the property are over S feet ~»'N~dth (The south side is 5 feet, an_d the north side 5 feet). This has been met. '` ` f. Rear Yard: No rear yard shall be required in the: C a5 di~trict,'except when the rear lot line abuts property in a residential`(R) district and then the r8ar yard shall be a minimum of ; e twenty feet. Where property in the C-5 das~ract i¢ separated from property in a residential (R) E~ district by a public alley or street, no rear yard`'setback shall be required. ~ ti Response: The rear setback is:108 feet 6 inches. This~has been met: I ~,', - f. i`° g. Lot Coverage. No requirements except as necessary to comply with applicable yard, parking o= and loading requirements. (Ord. 1436`§2(part), 1981). `r; Response: The site complies with all applicable yard, parking and loading requirement. ,,: ~:',; D. 17.46.060 General aequirements. f a. Uses that are,normally permitted in the C-5 district but that are referred to the planning ii commass'ion for further review,. per Section 17.46.030(26), will be processed according to A apphcatidri procedures for conditional use permits. No use shall be permitted and no process, ;. equipmenfor materials shall be used which are found by the planning commission to be r harmful to;persons living or working in the vicinity by reason of odor, fumes, dust, smoke, ;? cinders, dirt, refuse, water-carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination or glare, or are found ''~ ~ ~`°~o involve any hazard of fire or explosion.. . f~ Resboaise: The site complies with all applicable conditions of development. This application will j4 b2 IieaYd by the planning commission as a Site Plart Review not as a conditional use. No harmful ~" ~ ~~ odors, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water-carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination orglare ~ ~`' ,' `will result from this use. Garbage will be contained within a blockfaced enclosure: Deliveries will :. ; enter from the wear of the structure in a small delivery vehicle. Normal delivery and garbage schedules wilt be observed. Lighting will be designed to eliminate any spill over on to adjacent ' ~; ,: sites. There are no known hazards for fire or explosion. This standard has been meta i; -ir::. ~ 2 8 C t CP t P LLC rt N>- _,, ~~ ,.,x en ra oin rope ies . - ~. >. ~?[P2'I b. No use sr compliant Response: T'he , regulations. 71ti, 1 s~ t, c. Where residential (R hedge six feet 1 ensure effectii = ~ or street sepat ~ ` ~ the tlrne of ao: , ~ .,~ ........,...va k. ~: d. When toward the sti is Teen-met. 'rovidenee MOB site. This standard h beyond the 20 foot mtntmum. Ad site to help.reduce the tmpact on ~t parcels ir}ia at the rear of (Ord. 1684 ack fronn the rear properly ltne by 108 feet 6 inches well rlly rye'have tnclitded parking both to front and rear of the ~ortng restdential areas. Thts standard has been met. E. 17.46.070 Signs and lighting.. of premises: a. No illumination sign or'lighting standard used for the illumination of premises shall be so designed. and instal}eil that its direct rays are toward or parallel to a public street or highway or ? directed toward any property fhht lies within a residential (R) district. Response: At the time ofsu&mittal for construction plans a lighting plan will be submitted meeting this requirement: Parking and exterior lighting will be consistent with the neighboring Providence 't MOB'building: This standard has been met. i b., ,: No red;~green or amber lights or illuminated signs may be placed in such a location or position that they could be confused with, or may interfere with, any official traffic control i_device, traffic signal or directional guide signs. ~;; Response ~IVo red, green or amber lights or illuminated signs will be placed in such a location or ~_ ;position Zhat they could be confused with, or may interfere with, any official traffic control device, t3 :< 'trafJ?c signal or directional guide signs. This standard has been met. r; t, ,'' c. Signs in the. C-5 district shall be permitted and designed in accordance with Chapter ~' 15_24 and with Section 17.60ai0. (Ord. 1615 §17,1989; Ord, 1436 §2(part), 1981). ~, ' ~ Response: A signage plan will be submitted at a later date in accordance with the provisions of ~" Chap(er75.24 and section 17.60.110. This standard will be met. ~' ~; ' F. 17.46.080 Off-street parking. a# (: CentraCPotint Properttes LLC r „ue ,. ~ ~., ~.~,. .~ rz _2LrR,s~._c ~r - ., _ .'Ak: ., eu n. ;w- r6~3 e,~.,ae~ ,53v n IUr c .4., ~.Te in „.?+435^x 6a J..aT, b .,,[L~ ; .at bit ..,,ScT. „Lrg+ d StY 3WN' rv.-aR .~L~PL,TC:~I?ION,~'OR ~'L.~INa(INC .~IPPRO'V.~IL ~ ~ ,~ Off-street parlting and loading pace shall be provided as required in Chapter 17_64. (Ord, 1436 §2(part), 1981.): Response: The site has been designed to meet Off-Street parking and loading standards set forth in Chapter 17:64. This standard has been met.: K° ~E 4: CPZO CHAPTER 17.72:,~ITE PLAN, LANDSCAPING AND~CONSTRUCTION PLAN ~ ~ ~ APPROVAL. ~ ~~'`, ,,, ~ ~ .,~ f` ~ ~~ ~ A. 17.92.010 Purpose. ~, ~ ~ '~_ Thy purpose=of site plan, landscaping and. construction plan approvat is to reviev~ th°~ bite a~li landscaping plans.of the proposed usp, structure or building to detgrmine compliance'with thisttktle did the`buildirig code and to promote the orderly andhatmoniops development of the city, tha stability of (~a~~,vnl(es and investmetits, and the general welfare, and to' promote aesthetic consideratio~s~,=aiid o h"glp prevent i impairment or depreciation of land values and development by the erection of slructu'r~s or additions oz' `~ alterations thereto without proper attention to site planning; landscspin '`ittd the npsthetic aeaeptability in relation to the development of neighboring properties: (Ord. 1436 §2(p~art),E 1L9,81). ~• Resuonse: This application provides the necessary infortn~tton by which the City can make''a (letermination that proper attention'has been paad to~slte pldnn~rfg, landscaping and aesthetics of i the project in compliance with the<applicable stan~l~rds `~ €i B. 17.72.020 -Site planapproval'requiredf a: A site plan application conforming to the regGirements of Section 17:72:030 shall be l made: 1. For all construction requiring issuance of a building permit; or ~ 2. Upon a change of use. Response: A permit will be required. b. Except for the C-3 zc7zlingidistricY, the requirement for a site plan application upon a change of use maybe warped by'city staff if staff determines that no modifications are necessary to the existing access, parking, driveway, or any other facilities on the site. ~' C. 17.72.021 A ~ Ircaton and review. r pp ~,~. Applications shall be accompanied by a fee defined in the city's adopted planning application fee s"; scheduler Sach ,applications and the review thereof shall conform to the provisions of Chapter ` 17_OS,and ail applicable laws of the state. (Ord. 1786 §9, 1998; Ord. 1684 §64, 1993;. Ord. 1436 §~(p~).1981). {° , Response: The required fee has been submitted for both preliminary application meeting and site pl'anYeview. E ~,; .° =s` D. 17.72.030 Information required. } An application shall be filed which shall include the following information: ~' a. Name and address of the applicant; ~< b. Statement that the applicant is the owner of the property or is the authorized agent of the ' owner; ~;; c. Address. and legal description of the assessor's parcelnumber of the property;. ~. '~~L b'R s~ xx `€a x,.5:~ .~E Yv *5. d aA'ri.`s,i t i wd uSr~~Y d3S a+`k,r. +"aa.,.'~+:~.. ~+~ i., ut`"~xa..~?;'~i,~'Y C'a' .: .x' '~uM,. ~j< a,m4V^d 1P `...Ytuv~~a Atu .~lp~LIC.~I?IUN,~OR ~L.~ITININC .~lPPRO'V.~4.C ~ ~ <. . " d. The.application shall includcan accurate scale-drawing pfthe site, containing; at a rriininuni, '~ r~ 'the followings 1 North strove, 2 Scale used, °3. Address and legal'description of the assessor's parcel number and,-tax lot of the property, ~~. Lot dimensions, ~' P 4K ~~ S. Applicable city zoning designation, t ~ 6. Setbacks, r 7> Proposed landscaping, ~;;~ ~ i ~ j 8 Location of all buildings, parking areas, streets, accesses, sidewalks, and ~~1SeY ~~ ~' improvements, including the dimensions of each, ~~ p~p 9. Ground and architectural elevations, fi ~ ~f, „ ~ i~- ~' 10. Distances between buildings, parking areas,: streets, sidewalks ar~d O~h~}~iinprovements, . 11. Surrounding land uses, ~,` v ~~r 12. Easements, ~ ~- 13. Adjacent streets; ~" ~ E,'~ ¢: EQ 14. Off-street parking calculations, ' ~ [ ~~' _ 15. Existing trees, f `c ~ ~ 16. Pedestrian routes and sidewalks, ' 17. Fencing, ~ l ~ L8. Screening of outdoor trash bins, and , ~ a ~ ~ nd ail utilities, including their rclution tp other 19. The location ofall public~improverr l~nts i ~ utilities in the are&; ~~ ; ~~ j ~ , e. Construction plans and. such other plans and information as are required to show the '' ~ architecture of all buildings and ether improvements; " ' f: In the discretion of the city, a~Yraffic study performed by a licensed professional engineer; and ~' g. Such additional infonnation;as is necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. -(Ord. 1685 §65, 1993; Ord. 1436 §2(part);,1981). ~' Response: All above lisjzd information required in this application has been submitted. A traffic ~` studywas not believed to:be required as one has been provided by the Providence MOB side. '` E. 17:72.040 Standards. ~' In approving,rcl~ndrtionally approving, or-denying the plans submitted, the city shall base their decision on t)ig follow~rig standards: ~' a. ; Landscapin' an'd fencing and the construction of walls on the site in such a manner as to ? F.' cause the same to not substantially interfere with the landscaping scheme of the neighborhood, E and in such a manner as to use the same to screen such activities and sights as might be ~ , `het~rogenepus to existing neighborhood uses: The planning commission may require the ~ ~ ~ maintaining pf existing trees for screening purposes and for sound and sight insulation from r f E° , ~ `existing neighborhood use; i= Response: A 6 foot high CMU wall already exists on site to screen neighboring residential ~,. i' ,properties. This along with an additional 19 feet 6 inch landscaping strip with trees will aid in F ` - _ buffering. All mechanical equipment will be screened.. This standard has been met. `r * 7 E ~, b. Design number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid ~° interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ii i,~ I ~ r' t' CentraCPotint Properttes LLC ~ ~ _; Resaons Pt•ovider ~~ Stal7daGA c, To insuc capab on pul - RQ"" s in and ai surroun Sidewdlx ~. t~- di;: Sid 'i*6:,kh N3 ~~'S"l.,, TF t,.3 :.r ~fi .. oe,&i:tea ~y si'S 4« n.,t. § .5.~, .. ,H L.F i. ~-.. L cx.+J,. t3 `iRSR,Y.&"U^,3. xF~i3;^k PPLIC.~I?lON,~'OR PL.~NMNC~ .~lPPRO"V,~IL ~ ~ 'Ye wtll be using an_existing access point p>Sovided by the Providence MOB site. gas agr¢ed to full use of the cross a`ecess easements that are all ready existing. Tltis been rrtel. /ide _off-street;parking,~nd loading facilities and pedestrian and vehicle flow facfl}ties riatttter as is compatible with the use for which the site is proposed to be' used and~;i , 'use; and in such a manner as to improve and avoid interference with the traffic~t~9vg4 ~ ~,:;~, "wo:way traffic aisles both front,and rear of the building will=allow for`~ease;~of acpess - as well as generous: connectivity to Pro has been met. with or deter `~, &pm traffic control signs or devices and that they are compatlble,vSi~tli the±design of their ~ buildings onuses and will not interfere with or detract frpm t1i~ appea~~nce or visibility of nearby ~ signs; ~a Response: Signuge will be designed so as not to conflict with aeiy'tra~c control signage, or k ! detract from any nearby signs. This standard has been~met <~ ~_ ~ ~ ~_ ~~ e. Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighhng~`fa~tlities to such a standard as to provide for the j E'; reasonable safety of life, limb and properiy mcludrii~, but not limited'to, suitable gates, access l ~; Yoads and fire lanes so that. all buildmgs¢n"the premises are accessible to fire apparatus; r i'~ ~ ~ € ~~ <: ~ r ~;:. Response: Access on site has been designed to adequate widths and accessibility so that f re i;. apparatus can reach the building. This standard~has been met. ,; f. Compliance with: all city ordinances and regulations, including Section 16.20.080 pertaining ~.; to the maximum' number o£single-family dwellings or dwelling units allowable on cul-de-sac streets, and applicable state laws;' Response: This does ndt apply ' Ct i~ ~ g; .Compliance with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability ~` in relation to~the nei borhood and the Central Point area and its environs: The architecture and ' ~? design proposals ma~be rejected by the planning commission if found to be incompatible with ~; the existing aro~itectural or design characteristics of adjacent properties or uses. In addition, the plannirg coxtl~ission reserves the right to establish additional height, setback, buffering, or other t' , ~developmentrequirements that maybe necessary to ensure land use compatibility and ensure the k' $ealth, safety, and privacy of Central Point residents. (Ord. 1702 §4, 1994; Ord. 1684 §67, 1993; '~ ~ Qrd: (1436 §2(part), 1981). f ~ : ° Response: As indicated in our site, landscape, and building plans; this proposed building will be r ', afsthetically pleasing and will be found to carry forward the design elements of the surround area `t,;< ~E, F to a manner consistent with City of Central Point Guidelines. This standard has been met. k °: 5. CPZO CHAPTER 17.64, OFF-STREET PARHING AND LOADING f A. 1T.64.010 Purpose. r,,, f S, ~^ CentraCPoint Properties LLC ~. -~ ~ - a pnase ~pf~tnesFre rthe`comrtmo~i p`iYrking ~; €. ~ ,§ ~, 4~0: ~~ '.~.. floor area of five thousand ;berths in accordance with. f;~ ~- ! ` 15 . ` i ; : ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~, :~ ~. ~" ,;, if F, r; °' uildings, hotels, motels, hospitals, schools, institutions, public buildings, recreational ment facilities; and any similar use which has a gross floor area of thirty thousand or more shall provide off-street truck loading or unloading berths in accordance with ie table: Square Feet of F1oorArea Less than,30,000 30,000 to 100,000 100,001 and over No. of Berths Required 0 1 2 w ,.~_, ~~1'~ .,g~_.y ~ ~a~r~tr}S 54 r4ur:[. ,^ ~ Y 3n$d asr'idi: vl~ t~Fv „`,. ,. ii ,z -n,,; i i 3~ .fii:i~x .~.r:.t~r,. AnY. l ,«~l~tm~'Y. ~.~~rii~+"~Ya3z4' .~lPPL1C.~l?1'bN,~OR PL.?1.N~VINC~ ~IPPROv.41 Z . ~ ~ ~ ~- ~~ Restioitse No arlt:cipatt?d Truck tr~c is expected on this site r~t'this point, Oun floor aced foY thas~~- mrxed~use'bu:7dittg-will not exceed ~O,OdO square feet. This standard has been met, ~~ - it. ~, loading berth shall norbe Less Phan ten feet wide, thirty-five feet long and,have a height clearance o~'ttivelve ~faet Where the vehicles genera~lyitsed for loading fini} unloading eX~eed~ these dimensions, the required length of these berths -shall be increased. c. 'If loadmg'space has been provided in connection with an existing u~~or is added~to;an ;,."` ti~ ~s: t existing use, thezloading space shall not be eliminated if elimination would result unless spa~e~ fhan?is required to adequately meet the needs of the use. ~ `... ~ ~ ,< ~> d. Ofdstreet parking ateas used fa fulfill tale requirements of this titleshall no{eb~~cb~~ted'as ' 9' required.loading spaces'and shall not be used for loading and unloadingop~~ations'ifezCept ~; duripg periods of the day when not required to meet parking needs ~ , ;;,;~ e. Ix no case` "shall any portion of'a street or alley be counted as a part ~f~t~ie ~egttiied parking or s loading space,; andsuch spaces shall be designed and'located as to avpd ud~lue nterference:with .: ~ ; "~ the public use .of streots or alleys; (Ord. 1436 §2(pat't), 1481).: f _ ,~ ~~ ~~ ;; C. 17,64.030 Off-street parking--Required:. E ~=< ~ t ` In all districts, except those specifically excepted and noted; it~,cdr}nection with. any use whatsoever, here shall>be provided; at the time any building.or structure;is erected b~ t~` enlarged or increased in capacity;or the use.is changed or increased in intensity, off-streetparking spaces for automobiles for the enlarged or f: increased portion,in the case of an addition or for the b~ild~tig, structure or use in other cases, irtaccordance° ~t with the requirements herein. (Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1Q~1) r Resaonse: Offstreet parking has been provided an ac~orddnce with the proposed plan. This ~_ standard has been met: t " D. 17.64.040 Off-street parking--Number of spaces. ,.; The number ofoff-street parking spaces required for specific land uses shall be as set forth in the following schedule: USE STANDARD A. Residential ~ I. One- and two-family ,,; A private garage or carport accommodating not less than two p, dwellings. parking spaces for each dwelling unit. ' 2. Multiple-family dwellings. Not less than two spaces per dwelling unit, at least one of ` which shall be a garage or carport; plus one guest parking space for each four dwelling units or fraction thereof. 3,, Mobile Iiomeparks. Two spaces on the same lot or pad as the mobile home (may r; be in tandem); plus one-guest space for each four mobile r' homes or fraction thereof. ~ ~ 4: Rooming or boarding houses; One. space for each accommodation; plus one space per each r~kidential hotels or motels. two employees. r- ., ~" ' B. Commercial Lodging j l: Hotel or motel. Not less than one space per guest unit; plus one space per E' each two employees Units having kitchen facilities shall ~, t: r. provide two spaces each. e3 4 CentraCPoint Properties: LLC c a.,i'r.!::~.~rsv.,y,"a'a~ s smv rrw _ ii:,~wrvi~.rnu. ~a C. hl; I. QVE institu 2. Co r [[ ,;. .- nttrsin I T j. flanltarlum[ _ ~ ~~~ 3. Hospital, Not less than three spaces per each two beds, determtned)iy i= ~4 the tpaximum'designed capacity of the faci~i~ty t ~ t;. i D, Places of Public Assembly .Y - t' 1. Churches, chapels, Not less than one space per each four`~eats or eight square ~;" mortuaries; public. feet plus one space for every fifty Square ~eet of area ~~ available for portable seating, secondary a"ssembly or classroom purposes.: ` ~' 2. Library, readingroom, Not less than one space per`four~hulndred square feet of net ~;; museum, att gallery; floor area; plus one space per"each two employees. E^ rs E. Schools ~ ~ ~' ~~ 1. Child care center, day Not less than one space per employee; plus one space per five I- nursery,. preschool.. childrei} the'facility is designed or intended to accommodate; -No requirements for facilities caring for five or fewei` children simultaneously. k;! 2. Elementary and junior high Notles"s than three spaces per classroom, or, one space per ~_ schools. four seats in the main auditorium, gymnasium, or other place available for public assembly, whichever is greater. f ~' 3. High schools and colleges. Not less than one space per each five students, based on the ~? designed capacity of the facility, or, one space per four seats in the main auditorium, whichever is greater. 4. Private attd parochtal schools,. Same as subsection (E)(3) of this section, if in accordance ;; including"vocational schools. with Section 17.64.050. ~'' F. Commercial Amusement and -'; 2. Bowling al ~' 3. Dancehall; skating rink. Not less than one space per each four fixed seats or eight feet of benck length. Five spaces per lane; plus one space per each two employees. Other uses in the building shall be calculated separately,per Section 17.64.050. ` Not less than one space per each one hundred square feet of net floor (or ice) area or fraction thereof; plus one space per each two employees. .~IPPLIC~I?tON;~OR P.1 14', ~r: ~s' 4 Swimming pool (for public ~Iot less th VIN(j APPRO"V.~IL ` ,; use). pool`surfaee area. ~~ G. General Commeroial 1. Retaibstores; personal Not Tess than one space per each two hundred square -feet of ,~ ~; servtces and uses other than net floor a~ ~~ those listed-in subsections (G7(2) riond~spla3 ~ through (G)(7) of this section'. ~, ~ 2. Furniture, appliances, Not less th ~gholesale outlets. gross floor 3~. Automobile, boat, Not~less th manufactured home and mobile plus two s ~' home, and-recreational vehicle three hung sales, service and rental per each tv ~i sales area,: li 4: Nurseries, gardening. Same as s ~" materials, :building materials,: ~' ~~ and similar businesses requiring ~, large sales buildings or yards. F` S. Service or repair shop. Notiess th _~ oss floor Sr' ~' 6. Eating and drinking Notiess th ~'! establishments. hundred s 7. Restaurant, fast-food. H. Office-Professional 1. Banks, other financial .institutions, general~nd' professional offices; ` ., ;~ ` each five ^- ubsection{G)(3) ~: space'~er each three hundred squarefeet of an one space per each three seats, or, per each one quare feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater; pace per each two employees on the major shift. an one space per one hundred feet of gross floor area, plus three stacking spaces for drive-through window. Not less than one space per each three hundred square feet of gross floor area or fraction thereof. In no case shall there be fewer than three spaces provided. 2. Medical and dental offices; Not less than three spaces per practitioner; plus one space per chmcs °°: each two employees, or one space per each two hundred `` square feet of floor area, whichever is greater. =,j `~ I: Assembling and t; manufacturing businesses. -~ ~~ ~~ 2. Warehousing and other storage facilities. ~:`, ~. Not less than two spaces per each three employees on the two largest shifts*, or one space per each five hundred square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greatest. (*One space per employee if the business has only: one shift). Not less than two spaces per each three employees on the two largest adjacent shifts*, or one space per each one thousand square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. (*One ~~ ~' i h. f` 3`.Ind ~, fi= ~~ (Ord. 1912 §,1 Rp cv of Q, : ~, phi sp ~` ~" tiu ~`: def. "~.~~+`d3~..3.m€rS ut ak~wdV_.~~ '~,w., s. cu..<.P'-. ~33~<.e d.. `b et ,JY,.._s~.:.F s~~:a".x~n<`z_''r.-iM~+ 'PLTC.~I?1'ON,~02L PL.~I,N.NIN~ ~LPP7t.Q'V..~IL ~ ~ the valuated for its share of the: common been-met: ~ E. 17.t%4.Q50 1Vlixed uses. ~~ In the case of mixed uses in a bui ~:_ -shall b ~; facilit ~ except ~;. n. or on a lot, the total req each ofthe-various uses, d in Section 17.64.060. (Ord. 1436 §2(part e: Parking has been design in accordance m parking areas for both phases of the site. y building, will-have more than adequate~t F every 200 square feet=20 spaces). The~~se ! will have to be evaluatedfor its share oftl This standard has been met. ff-street parking u for any other use, ~:; rpp`len 'T'he site will use the concept I jll~ase (which is construction of the. cilitate this use {calculated at 1 of the site incorporating building parking. as uses for the building are F,; F. 17.64.060 Common parking or loadipg areas. Parking area requirements applicable to4two or more. separate building sites or uses in any commercial (C) t. or manufacturing (M) district maybe satisfied. by the establishment and maintenance of common parking .. i areas. Such areas shall be subject to approval by the planning commission as to size, shape, location and t other :factors. Such facilities shall;be iinproVed and maintained in the manner provided in this chapter. If ~: the common parking-area and thd~lirildirigs or building sites to be served are subject to more than one i! ownership, permanent imprgvement and maintenance of such parking facilities must be provided for and such facilities shall not be aged for any'`other purpose, unless approved substitute parking areas are I< provided. (Ord: 1436 §2(part);._19,81). E. Response: A' common area parking agreement will be made between the two phases of construction. As`Ihe uses for the second building are defined this will allow us to set parking space l=; requrements for each business. This standard has been met. ~_ Response• is •". standard hG ,° 1 Compact car adjustment. This is not applicable as we have no need for compact parking at this point. This s been met. k, ~ H. 17.64.080 Change to another use. ,t ,. ' Areas needed to meet the arkin re urrements of a articular buildin or use shall not be transformed or ii p g q~ p g changed to another type of use, nor transferred to meet the parking requirements of another building or use t; until the original user of said parking area has adequately met the parking requirements of his use or has ~` adequately provided: his needed parking at another location approved by the planning commission. (Ord. ~;• 1436 §2(part), 1981). ~`; f r',,....+..,,.r.o,.;....t ~.,,..,.,..,~:,.~ err' ,:: Y-f Ia4 .x.hia.3 n..zv?2~A ,A Fi3~e r.,+.- da ~~o-?u3 A`i ~.-S ,..5<. ,3.-...uo S4uR%3CaT-4Y.tF r fasv9 ~l?IOa!'FOR PL.7~NNINC~.yIPPRO~Y.~IL ~ ~ i' ~" 1` !r' ~ry ~' ,~ ~~ F' egress to all parking spaces. egress. This standard has been standard has been met. ieasyred at the driveway's narrowest point, including i..of driveways shall be as set forth in the Standard rls for Public Works Construction Manual. feet. This standard has been met. zedyfor off-street parking, access and maneuvering of vehicles shall be paved erials fbr all-weather use and shall be adequately drained, including flow of runoff water across sidewalks or other pedestrian areas. g surfaces will be made of a durable all-weather construction with the proper o direct run off properly. This standard has been met. i-parking areas shall be designed with painted striping or other approved method of the individual spaces, with the exception of lots containing single- or two-family dwellings. Resnon`se: All parking spaces are standard size nine (9) feet by twenty (20) feet delineated by ~~<, yellow or.white striping. This standard has been met. 3; Parkingspaces for uses other than one- and two-family dwellings shall be designed so that '4, ;" no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of--way shall. be necessary.. Response: All parking spaces maneuver within proposed private parking lot. This standard has been met. 4: Any fighting used to illuminate off-street parking or loading areas shall be so arranged as to reflect the fight away from adjacent streets or properties. ('omtrn ~'Pni-nt 'Prns~artiac LC[" figure 1 and Table 1 i - - _ _ i, ~ op nse: All parking spaces are standard size nine (9) feet by twenty (20) feet. ,7~12is standard has z met. << ~ - . When,a concrete curb is used=as a wheel stop,. it may be placed witfikn the pitrking space up to No feet from' he front of a space. In such cases, the area betweeft`nfhe wheel stop; and mdscaping need not be paved provided iYis maintained with appropri~t~ ground cover, or ralkway..In no event•shall the placement-of wheelstops reduce the minimum landscape or ..Response: The parking lot aisles are larger-than city c. Access. There shall be adequate pro Response: All parking spaces are having met. d. Driveways.. Driveway width shall be the eurb cut. The design and construoti Specifications and Unifonn Standard D Response: The existing driveway with is,; e. Improvement of 1. AlLareas utili with durable mat prevention of the Response: Atl parkin drainage enginegred t _._ ~ . i i~ i,.24a. .. ~L;~~'tf .~~ e, oP `S.@ ie'~ltk.r~ ° sFr~ e~..enntlq~p 'flt .h«rfi r~~, +~ ~,~5. ~'~„J, i-z~x P n;~1 ad ..n. a.5. z.a .., :'L~ ,kx3a..5 3',. F.S..X~'i;:59M.~;z+a, R~:»ce .~I PPLIC.~I?ION,~'OR PL.7INMNC APPRO`V.~I.C ~ ~ i? Response A. Lightin deli n , lan will be subzriitted at a later date include 18 pot ha h cut-b ti g g. p g ./~ g .ff Laghttng that ivil~be corisistelzt w)tkProvidettce MOBSte. This standardhas $een rizet. ~ ~~ k~ k~ 5 Service drives shall have a minimum?yision clearance area formedby the intersection'of the ~ ' `_ driveway c@nterline, the street right-of--way line, and a straight line joining the linerthrough is r ppints-twenty het froztt their intersection. ti Resnons0: This entrance has already been constructed and will reaming as ProvidenexetzYfO$ ~,,; ~s designed. -This standard has been met. ~, e t ;: ~! ~ ,` ~ . t ~ 6: °Parking`spaces located along the outer boundaries of a parking lotshall b cyh,nt~aried`by a f curb or a bumper rail so "placed to prevent a motor vehicle from extendrztg~ove a~ adfacent ~; property line, a public street, public sidewalk, or a required landscaping area k' Response: All parking spaces are-contained by a combinationof curbs dnd~b£r~itp Mops. This ~~~ standard hqs been met.. ~ 7; Parking; loading; or vehicle maneuvering areas shall nof1,~ located within the frontyard €, ,, ~ area or side yard area of a career lot abutting a street in any r'eszdential (R) district, nor within ~. ~;, any portion of a street setback area that. is required to lie landscaped in any commercial (C) or t i; industrial (IVI) district. ~, , '' t ~= Response: The front yard setback from FrPnt Strg~t z~ 10 feet per C-5 Yequiremertts 17.46.OSOD. t ~'` This setback as do be maintazYzed as landsca ed, o erts~3aee;..hut ma be reduced to a de th o scx 6 P, y p f~ ~ O t ~' feet when off-street parking, is located zn thz~ front yard area. The proposed site plan provides fora ; five (S~ foot sax (6) inch dandscape strzp foj~ ~r pertioz:.of this font yard setback, a little less than the ~ required six(6) foot depth. However, the Landscape plan provides for three (3) additional areas of ; landscaping along this front yard setback in`depths over twenty (20) feet, well an excess of the minimum depth as an offset. Therefore tLzis standard has been met. ~, 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 encroached upon , ~' in any manner. The p`arkirig fa`eilties 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 '. unreasonable impediment to traffic, will result. (Ord: 1912 §1(part), 2008; Ord: 1684 §61, 1993; f Ord. 1512 §1~~ 1984; Oi•d. 1436 §2(part), 1981). t. ~' Response: The, parking area will be used for the proposed mixed use site, and has been designed j? to provide for adequate parking and circulation that will not result in hazard to persons or property,: { or unreasonable impediments to traffic. This standard has been met. +` V. CONCLUSION ;" ` Foe the z~easons set forth in this application we respectfully request approval of this application. t;; jy ,' . ~ ``~.` t t'= ~' [i k 4 ~. f ~' ~'. .2LPPLIC.~lT10N,~'OR PL.y1Na/INC~ .~IPPRO",Y.41L ~ ~ Attachment 1 CityCorresponderice k Tylet• ' , ; This `is in response to the questions in your April 15, `2009 email. r: 1. 17o we have a choice of using either G-3 zoning ar TODD on this particular parcel? ;~ ~~ ` ~ t ~ 4' Yes. Per Central Point Municipal Code Sec. 17.65020(B)O) you have the discrhttoy to 21e3~1op the M property under the TOD Corridorrequirements (Sec. 17.65), or per the requiremeti ofFttte underlying C-5 ~ zoning district Sections 17.46 and' 17.72'. ~ t , ~~' ~ (A) If we have the choice of using C-5 since a drug. store is an outright tise~ is there anything stopping it ` from having drive-thru accessibility? '' i < ~ °~,<<~ s: A drug store is a permitted use as per Sec. 17.46:020 (C)(10): The CPMC,does not excludedrive-thru ~'. accessibility and therefore can be a design element. i, <,.: 2. If we find that we are to use TODD design guidelines the drtvetlru is an outright permitted use correct? F Yes. A pharmacy is categorized as sales-oriented iwtthin retail sales and services. of the TOD General Commercial zone. Both the pharmacy and drive-t}tnt are permitted uses in the TOD GC zone. Sec. 17.65.050 Table 1 lists the permitted uses. 3. In our meeting we discussed if we were to use the TODD design criteria we would have to have a compelling reason to set the building back off the road. We discussed Section D (1)(L) General design standards, this section indicated that'setback that compliment sun•ounding structures to provide continuity between pedestrian access, possiGly being'a good reason to go with. Also we talked about the overall campus in general being designed with,,a frontage road already and combined accesses would lend to our point. of designing the site with more set back. Do you have any more insight for me as to the TODD district and if you think this additional set back would be possible, ar do you think it is an uphill battle that ~: would be tough to convince planning of? Providence,elected.to use the C-5 base zone requirements for their Site Plan review primarily for this reason. During preliminary discussions with Providence representatives, landscape and `hardscape' revisions tviere suggested along Front Street to visually draw the building closer to Front Street and to provide for pedestrian access (sidewalk and building entrance) in accordance with TOD Corridor standards, in"es'sence creating the best of both design standards. `-Tyler I hope your questions. have been answered sufficiently to allow you to proceed with the negofiattons If you "Have any additional questions please call me. `Connie; Clune Community Planner City of Central Point Planning Department 541`-654-3321 Ezt:293 FAXi+541-554-6384 ~''~ k1i tp_41 tk" k d:- Member ~ TTTf MERITAfr ~` 1 ,.W IIWSNOIIOWd ~5 . r= I. ~ : F ~SQi~nce~rely/yours, (• C~ Dmiiet J. Drawn DJD:ieo cc: Kenneth S. Antell (via email) Providence Health System-Oregon (via email) Tyler ritzsimons (via email) DCMDX n5deB33 vl Islbr_Ip Bmanpn.doa INDEPENDENT MEMBER OF MERITA6. VNTH AFFILIATED OFFICER INMORE THAN 36a CITIES ANO Ba FOREIGN COUNTRIES 41 CentraCPo>;nt Properties LLC ~ i .~~Jn .. ~R arse ..~ n ~:4 s c<~T[~a ~z .k[~RP. iY3 rr .. ....Mi.. . ~Ya<e.:. xk .:i ~. - {. P.rs ATTACHMENT "~ Bob Pierce, Director Public Works Department ~•ew i=re w ~ Matt samirore, Dev. Services PUBLIC WORKS STAFF REPORT June 12, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Site Plan for a Pharmacy at 37-2W-11CB, Tax Lots 600 and 700 Applicant: Cascade Pharmacy Zoning: C-5/TOD-GC Thoroughfare Commercial/General Commercial Traffic: The proposed building will generate 31 additional peak hour trip (PHT), a minimum of 25 PHT is required to warrant a traffic study, and thus none is required of this development. However an analysis was conducted by the Providence Hospital Site as part of their development with a pharmacy included within their analysis. The analysis concluded that there can only be on access point for both businesses onto Front Street. The access was already put in by Providence Hospital and is shown as part of the Cascade Pharmacy application. No additional studies are warranted at this time. Issues: 1. Floodplain -The southwest corner of the property is within the 100-year floodplain of Mingus Creek. However a block wall was installed in 2002 that serves as a flood barrier for the stream. Additionally, the new maps indicate that even if the wall was not at the intersection the limits of the 100-year floodplain are regulated to just the back corner of the property. Lenders may require flood insurance on the building however because of the existence of a floodplain on a portion of the lot. Infrastructure: All City utilities exist in front of or adj acent to the proposed development.. Engineering and Development Plans and Permits: The Central Point Public Works Department is charged with management of the City's infrastructure, including streets, waterworks, and storm water drainage facilities. In general, the Department's "Standard Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction" shall govern how public facilities are to be constructed. The Developer is encouraged to obtain the latest version of these specifications from the Public Works Department. In general, the plan submittal shall include plan and profile for streets,. water, storm drainage and sanitary sewers, 140 South 3ro Street • Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 . Fax 541.664.6384 42 storm drainage calculations, storm drainage basin map, erosion control plan, utility and outside agency notifications and approvals. The plan may also include applicable traffic studies, legal descriptions and a traffic control plan. A Public Works Permit will only be issued after the Department Director approves the final construction drawings. After approval, the fees associated with the development will be calculated and attached to the public works permit. All fees are required to be paid in full at the time the Public Works Pennit is issued. Conditions of Approval: Street Tree Plan: Tree plantings shall have at least a 1 ''/z" trunk diameter at the time of installation. All street trees shall be irrigated with an automatic underground irrigation system. Plans for all public improvements shall include a street tree landscape plan identifying tree type, location, and irrigation system. Maintenance of the landscape row will be by the property owners who own the property directly adjacent to the landscape row. 2. Street Trees: The Norwegian Maple Trees are not suitable for the proposed landscape row. Applicant will need to pick a different type to plant in this area. Additionally, the applicant will need to have a minimum of five (5) street trees. Currently only two (2) are shown. 3. Landscape Row: Applicant shall install a six and a half foot wide landscape row to match what has already been installed as part of the Providence Medical facility. 4. Special Flood Hazard Area - A portion of the lot for the pharmacy building is located in the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), commonly referred to as the 100-year floodplain. Engineer shall illustrate the extent of the 100-year floodplain on the Civil Improvement drawings. All proposed development within the 100- year floodplain shall comply with the flood damage prevention and hazard mitigation provisions established in Section 8.24, as well as the special creek setback requirements established in Section 17.60.090(E) of the Central Point Municipal Code. 5. Storm Water Detention: Applicant will submit to the Building and Public Works Department and Rogue Valley Sanitary Sewer their storm water detention plan. Applicant shall conduct a pre and post development run-off plan and detain all water on site that exceeds the difference. 140 South 3'~ Street • Central Point, OR 97502.541.664.3321 • Fax 541.664.6384 ~~ ATTACHMENT ",.,~" RE: File # 09027 Central Point Pharmacy Original Message----- From: Marcy Black [mailto:BlackMA@jacksoncounty.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 4:11 PM To: Connie Clune Subject: File # 09027 Central Point Pharmacy The project is located within the Airport Concern Boundary; therefore, an Avigation, Noise and Hazard Easement should be required as part of the permit process. The easement form may be obtained from the county's planning department or from the Airport Administration office on the 2nd floor of the new terminal building - 776-7222. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. 45 _, City of Central Point,._Ore~on _______ 140 S Third Street, Central Poin4 OR 97502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.161 I www.cl.central-point.or us Request for comments File #09027 880 Front Street... Pharmacy 6/11/09 Please submit four sets of plans indicating compliance with Oregon Structural Specialty Code prepared by Licensed Oregon Architect or Engineer. If any preliminary questions, please call me at 541 664 3321 ext 228 Respectfully, r - Todd Meador 140 S Third Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 ~ Fax 541.664.1611 46 ATTACHMENT "~ Jackson County Fire District No. 3 8333 Agate Road White City, OR 97503 (541) 826-7100 (541) 826-4566 Fax www.jcfd3.com ATTACHMENT ".." Memorandum To: Connie Clune, Central Point Planner From: Hugh Holden, Fire Marshal CC: Todd Meador, C.P. Bldg Official Date: 0 6/1 212 0 0 9 Re: 09027-880 Front St, Central Point: Pharmacy Direct Fire District comments are limited to the provision of adequate water supply and access for first responders. Given the location of this proposal and the existing conditions neither of these concerns is at issue. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this proposal. ' 47 ~llx s~w~ ~~ June 11, 2009 Connie Clune ATTACHMENT ".~" ROGUE VALLEY SEWER SERVICES Location: 138 West Vilas Road Ccnhal Poinc OR -Mailing Address. P.O Box 3130, Ccnhal Point, OR 7502-0005 Tel. (54l) 664.6300, Fax (541) 664-7171 www.RVSS.us City of Central Point Planning Department 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Re: Central Point Pharmacy, File # 09027 There is an 8 inch sewer main within the vacated portion of First Street at the rear of the property that can be tapped to serve the proposed development. Connection to the sewer will require a permit from Rogue Valley Sewer Services which will be issued upon payment of related development fees. The development must comply with the Rogue Valley Sewer Services Stormwater Quality standards. Rogue Valley Sewer Services requests that approval of this development be subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant must obtain a sewer permit from Rogue Valley Sewer Services prior to the start of construction. 2. Applicant must submit a Stormwater plan demonstrating compliance with water quality standards to Rogue Valley Sewer Services for review and approval prior to the start of construction. Feel free to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Carl Digitally signed by Carl Tappert Carl Tappert, PE ~p~N: cn=Carl Tappert District Engineer Ta p peel ~ o~.Z$ Zo~07 oo't K:\DATA\AGENCIES\CENTPT\PLANNG\SITEPLANREVIEW\2009\09027 CENTRAL POINT PHARMACY.DOC 48 Attachment I FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW File No: 09027 INTRODUCTION In the Matter of a site plan review for construction of an 11,400 square foot, single-story building developed in two phases. Phase I is a 4,275 square foot pharmacy with an attached drive through. Phase II is a 7,125 square foot, mixed use building to be attached to the pharmacy. The project site is adjacent to Providence Health Systems medical office building (MOB) and located at 880 Front Street. The property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 375 2W 11CB, Tax Lots 600 and 700. The subject property is located within a C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Corridor General Commercial zoning district. Owner: Providence Health Systems of Oregon; Applicant: Tyler Fitzsimons. 17.65.020 (B) Area of application. These regulations apply to the Central Point TOD district and corridor. The boundaries of these two areas are shown on the ojf cial city comprehensive plan and zoning maps. B. At the discretion of the applicant, a development application within the TOD corridor shall be subject to: 1. The normal base zone requirements as identified on the offzcial zoning map and contained in this code; or 2. The TOD corridor requirements contained in this chapter. Finding: As noted in the staff report dated July 7, 2009, this project site is in the C-5 Thoroughfare Commercial and the Transit Oriented Development District Corridor (TOD). CPMC Section 17.65.020(B) states that the applicant can choose either the base zone requirements or the TOD corridor requirements. The applicant has elected to use the C-5 base zone requirements (Applicant Response narrative I, page 1). Conclusion: The applicant has elected to use the C-5 base zone requirements. The findings provided in this attachment will address the approval criteria applicable to this project within a C-5 zoning district. 17.46.010 Purpose. The C-5 district is intended to provide for commercial and business uses that are most appropriately located along or near major highways or thoroughfares, and are largely dependent upon highway visibility and easy vehicular access. 17.46.020 (C) (10) -Permitted Uses -Retail outlets, including drugstore. Finding: A proposed pharmacy (drugstore) is a permitted use. The CPMC does not exclude drive through accessibility and therefore can be a design element. 49 Page 1 of 12 Finding: The applicant states that the tenants or uses within the Phase II building are not determined at this time and the applicant is aware of the permitted uses specified in CPMC 17.46. Said use(s) will be reviewed at the time of application for a building permit review for code compliance. Conclusion: A pharmacy with a drive through is a permitted use in the C-5 zoning district. Phase II building uses shall comply with CPMC 17.46. 17.46.040 Height regulations. Height regulations - No building or structure shall exceed thirty five feet in height in the C-S district. Finding: The building elevations, Phases I and II, (Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.5 and 2.13) illustrate the building will not exceed nineteen (19) feet in height. The proposed single-story pharmacy, Phase I and Phase II are designed to be 18 feet 8 inches high. Conclusion: The proposal building complies. 17.46.050 Area, width and yard requirements. A. Lot Area. No requirements except as necessary to comply with applicable yard and parking and loading requirements. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be fifty feet. C. Lot Depth. The minimum lot depth shall be one hundred feet. D. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum often feet and shall be maintained as landscaped open space. When off-street pm~king is located in the front yard area, the landscaped strip may be reduced to not less than six feet with planning commission approval of the site plan. E. Side Yard. The side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except when abetting structures are proposed with a common wall that conplies with the Uniform Building Code. F. Rear Yard. No rear yard shall be required in the C-S district except when the rear lot line abuts property in a residential (R) district and then the rear yard shall be a minimum of twenty feet. Where property in the C-5 district is separated from property in a residential (R) district by a public alley or street, no rear yard setback shall be required. G. Lot Coverage. No requirements except as necessary to comply with applicable yard, parking and loading requirements. Finding: The project site is an existing legal lot. The proposed project does not require the partitioning of the property. Finding: The submitted building location site plan (Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.1) depicts the front yard setback at approximately 86 feet. This setback area is intended to include the landscape strip (approximately 6 feet in width) and off- streetparking. The Providence landscape strip is 6 feet 6 inches in width and the applicant states (Applicant Exhibit III (5), B (d)) that the facility is designed to Page 2 of 12 5 U correspond with the existing Providence Medical Office building located adjacent to the north of the project site. Finding: Front Street (Highway 99 West) is classified as a Major Arterial Street and as such the street tree provisions of CPMC Section 12.36.100 apply to this application. As a condition of approval, additional street trees will be added to the landscape plan to provide the sufficient number and species specified for the Front Street landscape strip. Finding: The setback on both side yards is approximately twenty five (25) feet deep except the abutting Phase II structure is proposed with a common wall that complies with the Uniform Building Code. Finding: The proposed rear yard setback is 108 feet for both Phases I and II of the project. CPMC requires a minimum twenty (20) foot rear yard setback when the rear lot line abuts a residential zoning district. Conclusion: The proposal complies. 17.46.060 General requirements (A). Uses that are normally permitted in the C-5 district but that are referred to the Planning Commission for further review, per Section 17.46.030(26), will be processed according to application procedures for conditional use permits. No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used which are found by the Planning Commission to be harmful to persons living or working in the vicinity by reason of odor, fumes, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water-carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination or glare, or are found to involve any hazard offire or explosion. Finding: As noted in the above findings, the proposed pharmacy (drugstore) with a drive through is a permitted use in the C-5 zoning district. Phase II building uses shall comply with CPMC 17.46. Said use(s) will be reviewed at the time of application for a building permit for code compliance. Finding: The application will be heard by the Planning Commission as a site plan review. The proposal is not expected to emit orders, fumes, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, water-carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination or glare, or otherwise be harmful to persons living in the vicinity. Normal delivery and garbage pick-up schedules will be observed. Lighting will be designed to the type used for the Providence MOB which provides no spill-over onto adjacent uses. Conclusion: The proposal complies. 17.46.060 (B) No use shall be permitted and no process, equipment or materials shall be used unless in compliance with all applicable state and federal environmental, health and safety regulations. Page 3 of 12 rJ ~- Finding: The proposed project will comply with all applicable state and federal environmental, health and safety regulations as stipulated in Applicant's Response D(b), page 8 (Attachment B). Conclusion: The proposal complies. 17.46.060 (C) Wherever the side or rear property lines of a parcel in the C-5 district abut parcels in a residential (R) district, a solid wall or fence, vine-covered open fence or compact evergreen hedge six feet in height shall be located on that property line and continuously maintained to ensure effective buffering and visual screening between the two land uses. Where a public alley or street separates the two properties, the barrier or screen shall be placed on the C-5 property at the time of construction and may include driveway and pedestrian openings to the alley or street, as approved by the Planning Commission. Finding: The property to the east is zoned for residential use (R-1-8). Presently there exists a concrete block wall (CMU) along the rear property line separating the two uses. This wall buffers the residential area from the proposed building. The applicant states that the wall will be retained. By deed restriction there is an approximate 20 foot wide landscape buffer between the CMU fence and the parking area at the rear of the property. The landscape buffer has been designed to coordinate with the neighboring Providence MOB site. This landscape strip is to be planted with trees, ornamental shrub and is expected to act as a visual screen. Conclusion: The proposal complies. 17.46.060 (D) Whenever feasible, buildings shall be located toward the rear of the lot with parking toward the street in the front yard area for easy access and to minimize traffic noise at the rear of the property, especially when the rear property line abuts a residential (R) district. Finding: The proposed building is located on the property to provide parking both in the rear and the front while providing drive through accessibility. A vegetation screen, parking and a concrete wall will minimize traffic noise at the rear of the property thus providing a buffer. Conclusion: The proposal complies. 17.46.070 Signs and lighting of premises. A. No illumination sign or lighting standard used for the illumination of premises shall be so designed and installed that its direct rays are toward or parallel to a public street or highway or directed toward any property that lies within a residential district. B. No red, green or amber lights or illuminated signs maybe placed in such a location or position that they could be confused with, or may interfere with, any official traffic control device, traffic signal or directional guide signs. J ~~ Page 4 of 12 C. Signs in the C-5 district shall be permitted and designed in accordance with Chapter 15.24, Section 17.60.110, and 17.67.050(M). 17.67.050(1Vn Signs. 1. The provisions of this section are to be used in conjunction with the city sign regulations in the Central Point Sign Code, Chapter 15.24. The sign requirements in Chapter 15.24 shall govern in the TOD district and corridor with the exception of the following: a. The types of signs permitted shall be limited only to those signs described in this chapter. b. All signs in the TOD district and corridor shall comply with the design standards described in this chapter. c. Decorative exterior murals are allowed and are subject to review and criteria by planning commission or architectural review committee appointed by city council. d. Signs that use images and icons to identify store uses and products are encouraged. e. Projecting signs located to address the pedestrian are encouraged. 2. Sign Requirements. 3. Sign materials. a. The base materials for a freestanding sign shall be natural materials including stone, brick, or aggregate. b. Signs and supporting structural elements shall be constructed of metal or stone with wood or metal informational lettering. No plastics or synthetic material shall be allowed, except for projecting awning signs, which nzay be canvas or similar fabric c. Sign lettering shall be limited to sixteen inches maximum in height. d Sign illumination shall be limited to external illumination to include conventional lighting and neon, if neon is applied to the sign plane area. Internally illuminated signs are prohibited. 4. Prohibited Signs. a. Internally-illuminated signs; b. Roof signs; c. Reader boards; d. SidewalkA-board signs; e. Flashing signs; f. Electronic message/image signs; g. Bench signs; h. Balloons or streamers; i. Temporary commercial banners. Finding: The applicant states that a lighting plan will be submitted at the time of building permit review and will meet this requirement. In addition, on-site lighting will consist of cut-off site light fixtures located at 18 feet above finished grade which will minimize light spill-over onto adjacent properties and public rights-of--way. 53 Page 5 of 12 Finding: The applicant states that no green or amber lights or illuminated signs will be placed in locations that result in or interfere with office traffic control signals Applicant's Response E(c), page 8 (Attachment B). Finding: The applicant states that signage plans will be submitted in accordance with the provisions of the CPMC Sections 15.24, 17.60.110. As a condition of any approval all shall conform to TOD Corridor sign standards CPMC Section 17.67.050(M). Conclusion: Compliance with CPMC 15.24 Sign Code and CPMC 17.67.050(M) will be monitored during the building and sign permit process. 17.46.080 Off street parking. Off-street parking and loading space shall be provided as required in Chapter 17.64; 17.64.020 Off-street loading. A. In all districts, except those specifically excepted and noted, for each use for which a building is to be erected or structurally altered to the extent of increasing the floor area to equal the minimum floor area required to provide loading space and which will require the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise by truck or similar vehicle, there shall be provided off-street loading space on the basis of minimum requirements, as follows: 1. Commercial, industrial, and public utility uses which have a gross floor area offive thousand square feet or more shall provide off-street truck loading or unloading berths in accordance with the following table: Square Feet of Floor Area No. of Berths Required Less than 5, 000 0 S, 000 to 30, 000 1 30, 001 to 100, 000 2 100, 001 and over 3 2. Office buildings, hotels, motels, hospitals, schools, institutions, public buildings, recreational or entertainment facilities, and any similar use which has a gross floor area of thirty thousand square feet or more shall provide off-street truck loading or unloading berths in accordance with the following table: Square Feet of Floor Area No. of Berths Required Less than 30, 000 0 30, 000 to 100, 000 1 17.64.040 (G) General Commercial (1): Not less than one space per each two hundred square feet of net floor area (excluding storage and other nonsales or nondisplay areas). 54 Page 6 of 12 Finding: The gross floor area of the Phase I pharmacy is 4,275 square feet; therefore, a loading berth is not required for this initial phase of the development. Finding: The gross floor area of the Phase II commercial building is 7,127 square feet bring the overall project floor area to 11,402 square feet and as such one loading berth is required at such time Phase II of the project is implemented. The applicant is aware that the location of this required berth, Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.1 and 2.9 labeled "future loading berth," is situated within the travel lanes (ingress and egress) for the east access and as such is not accepted. The size and location of the required loading berth will be reviewed as part of the Phase II submittals for a building permit. Finding: Phases I and II project total required parking spaces is 46 spaces. The proposed site plan provides 51 parking spaces. Three (3) spaces have been identified as ADA accessible meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Finding: Providence MOB will provide two (2) cross-access easements to the project site as illustrated by Applicant's Exhibit sheet 2.9. When constructed with two travel lanes and curb radius the eastern cross-access easement will consume a minimum of four (4) existing Providence parking spaces. The site plan provides 51 spaces of which Providence will have a parking easement for four (4) spaces, thus each building element is conforming to provisions of Section 17.64. Finding: It is recognized that this proposed development and the Providence MOB are independent developments; however, when it comes to access and parking the two projects are inter-related. A parking study comprising the Providence MOB and the Central Point Pharmacy, Phases I and II, building project was done in conjunction with this site plan application. The parking analysis is summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Central Point Pharmacy Phase I and Phase II Parking Analysts Parking Standard Actual/ CPMC Parking Sp Planned Loss/ Parking Modified Use 17.64 Required Spaces Access Easement Parking Providence h(2): 1/200 sq ft @32,000 sq k 160 160 -4 4 160 Pharmacy G(1):d/200 Phasel net floor area gross building 4275 net floor 3063.8 15 35 0 -4 31 'Commercial G(1)i 1/200 :Phase If net gross building 7127 net floor 6176 31 16 0 0 16 Total Protect Spaces 206 211 -4 0 207 Page 7 of 12 rJ rJ Conclusion: The proposal can meet the parking requirements and provide Providence MOB with a four (4) space parking easement located on the project site. However, the proposal for Phase II does not meet the loading requirements (1 space), and is not approved at this time. CPMC 17.72.010 (A) Purpose. The purpose of site plan, landscaping and construction plan approval is to review the site and landscaping plans of the proposed use, structure or building to determine compliance with this title and the building code, and to promote the orderly and harmonious development of the city, the stability of land values and investments, and the general welfare, and to promote aesthetic considerations, and to help prevent impairment or depreciation of land values and development by the erection of structures or additions or alterations thereto without proper attention to site planning, landscaping and the aesthetic acceptability in relation to the development of neighboring properties. CPMC 17.72.020 Site plan approval required: (A) A site plan application conforming to the requirements of Section 17.72.030 shall be made: 1. For all construction requiring issuance ofa building permit; Finding: The application and supporting documents provide the information necessary for review of the proposed 11,402 square foot structure. The proposed Phase II of the building will require review of the site plan and demonstration of compliance with all requirements, including loading prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase II. Conclusion: A site plan application for the proposed structure is necessary and the submitted application complies. CPMC 17.72.030 (A) - (E) Information Required This section of the code addresses all of the necessary information to make a decision for approval or denial of the site plan application. Finding: The applicant has provided all of the necessary information as outlined in the above referenced code. Conclusion: The proposal complies. CPMC 17.72.030 (F) In the discretion of the city, a traffic study performed by a licensed professional engineer; Finding: The City of Central Point Public Works Department found that a Traffic Impact Analysis is not required for this project as a traffic study prepared by JRH Engineering concluded that, "Because all mobility standards are met or exceeded at all locations under the build condition there are no proposed mitigation measures associated with this development." Providence Health & Page 8 of 12 rJ 6 Services Medical Office Building Traffic Impact Analysis, November 30, 2006, page 20. Finding: The Public Works Department has reviewed this document and is in agreement with the conclusion as evidenced in the Public Works staff report dated June 12, 2009. Conclusion: The proposal complies. CPMC 17.72.040 Standards. In approving, conditionally approving, or denying the plans submitted, the city shall base their decision on the following standards: CPMC 17.72.040 (A). Landscaping and fencing and the construction of walls on the site in such a manner as to cause the same to not substantially interfere with the landscaping scheme of the neighborhood, and in such a manner as to use the same to screen such activities and sights as might be heterogeneous to existing neighborhood uses. The Planning Commission may require the maintaining of existing trees for screening purposes and for sound and sight insulation from existing neighborhood use; Finding: The landscape design, (Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.2, 2.3 and 2.10), incorporates a perimeter frame of trees, shrubs and other plant varieties. The number of street trees along Front Street (Hwy 99) shall be added in conformance with CPMC Section 12.36. Trees are also located along the side and rear landscape rows. The plan also provides for plantings adjacent to the building and at strategic pedestrian and parking locations. The irrigation system (Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.3 and 2.11) will be designed to maintain all planting areas. Finding: Along the east or rear property line is an existing concrete block wall that is incorporated in the rear vegetation buffer plan. The applicant states that the CMU wall or fence will be retained. Finding: The proposal provides fora 19 foot 6 inch wide landscape buffer between the CMU fence and the parking area at the rear of the property. This landscape strip is to be planted with plant varieties to act as a visual screening between the project site and the adjacent residential uses. Finding: Front Street (Highway 99 West) is classified as a Major Arterial Street and as such the street tree provisions of CPMC Section 12.36.100 apply to this application. The landscape plan does not provide a sufficient number of street trees within the Front Street landscape strip and as such additional trees and similar species to Providence MOB landscape row are a condition of any approval as provided in Public Works staff report dated June 12, 2009, conditions of approval number 1. Conclusion: The proposal complies. 57 Page 9 of 12 CPMC 17.72.040 (B) Design, number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; Finding: There is an existing access point from Front Street. This proposal will utilize the existing full-movement ingress and egress point from Front Street (Hwy 99). Finding: As noted in findings above, Providence MOB will provide two (2) cross-access easements to the project site as illustrated by Applicant Exhibit sheet 2.9. When constructed with two travel lanes and curb radius the eastern cross- access easement will consume a minimum of four (4) existing Providence parking spaces and as a result the applicant will provide a parking easement to Providence. Finding: The project design provides two reciprocal cross-access easements to the adjoining property to the south. Conclusion: The proposal complies. CPMC 17.72.040 (C) To provide off-street parking and loading facilities and pedestrian and vehicle flow facilities in such a manner as is compatible with the use for which the site is proposed to be used and capable of use, and in such a manner as to improve and avoid interference with the trafftc flow on public streets; Finding: CPMC Section 17.64.040 G(1) requires 46 parking spaces, one (1) loading berth upon completion of Phase II. The proposal provides 51 off-street parking with three (3) designated ADA accessible. Finding: The loss of the four (4) existing Providence MOB parking spaces will result by the construction of the east access. To compensate for the lost parking spaces and as condition of approval, the applicant shall grant Providence a parking easement for a minimum of four (4) spaces, thus each building element is conforming to provisions of Section 17.64. Finding: The building main entrance is oriented toward Front Street (Hwy 99) and a pedestrian zone is provided between the sidewalk and the main entrance. This pedestrian zone includes a marked crosswalk differentiated from the general circulation and the main building entrance. Front Street improvements include a sidewalk and landscape row. The internal crosswalk is proposed to provide pedestrian entry point into the site. Once on site, the proposal describes a five (5) foot wide continuous internal walkway around the building providing pedestrian connectivity to and around the building. Conclusion: The proposal complies. CPMC 17.72.040 (D) Signs and other outdoor advertising structures to ensure that they do not conflict with or deter from traffic control signs or devices and that they are Page 10 of 12 rJ compatible with the design of their buildings or uses and will not interfere with or detract from the appearance or visibility of nearby signs; Finding: The site plan submitted for this proposal does not identify signs or sign locations. The accompanying Applicant's Response narrative states that "signage will be designed so that it does not conflict with traffic control signage or interfere or detract from nearby signage" (Applicant Response E.(c) page 8). Finding: Sign standards and permit requirements are found in Section 15.24 and 17.67.050 of the CPMC. The sign requirements CPMC sections 15.24, 17.60 and 17.67.050 (M) shall govern in the TOD corridor. Conclusion: Compliance with CPMC 17.72.040 (D); 15.24 Sign Code and 17.67.050(M) TOD Corridor Signs will be monitored during the building and sign permit review process. CPMC 17.72.040 (E) Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for the reasonable safety of life, limb and property, including, but not limited to, suitable gates, access roads and fire lanes so that all buildings on the premises are accessible to fire apparatus; Finding: The Fire Marshall, in a June 12, 2009 memo, Attachment G, noted that given the location of this proposal, adequate water and access were not an issue. Finding: District No. 3 will review the structural plans and comment during the building permit review process. Finding: Providence has agreed to two cross-access easements ou the east and west sides of the project site. Conclusion: The proposal complies. CPMC 17.72.040 (F) Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations, including Section 16.20.080 pertaining to the maximum number ofsingle family dwellings or dwelling units allowable on cul-de-sac streets, and applicable state laws; Finding: No single-family dwellings are proposed with this application. Conclusion: Not applicable CPMC 17.72.040 (G) Compliance with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area and its environs. The architecture and design proposals may be rejected by the Planning Commission if found to be incompatible with the existing architectural or design characteristics of adjacent properties or uses. In addition, the Planning Commission reserves the right to establish additional height, setbacl~ buffering, or other development requirements that may be necessary to ensure Page 11 of 12 `5 `y land use compatibility and ensure the health, safety, and privacy of Central Point residents, Finding: Applicant Exhibit sheets 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14 and 2.15 illustrate the proposed design of Phases I and II of the building. The architectural design combines traditional features and modern materials. The building exterior utilizes brick, stucco accents and CMU in earth tones. The window design is described as an aluminum frame with bronze reflective tinting to aid in reduced energy consumption Finding: The building is designed to keep continuity between the Providence MOB and the proposed building and will meet the height and setback requirements of CPMC Section 17.46. Conclusion: The proposal complies. 6U Page 12 of 12 ATTACHMENT "._.~." PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE PHASED CONSTRUCTION OF AN 11,400 SQ. FT. CENTRAL POINT PHARMACY AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING 37S 2W 11CB, Tax Lots 600 and 700 File No. 09027 WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a site plan application for the phased construction of a pharmacy and adjoining commercial building on 0.99 acres (Tax Lots 600 & 700), known as Central Point Pharmacy, in the City of Central Point, Oregon; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2009, the City of Central Point Planning Commission conducted a duly-noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff report and heard testimony and comments on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards and criteria applicable to the C-5 Thoroughfare Commercial Section 17.46, Off- Street Parking and Loading Section 17.64, TOD Corridor Signs Section 17.67.050 (M) and Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Section 17.72 of the Central Point Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, after duly considering the applicant's request, it is the Planning Commission's determination that the application does comply with applicable standards, criteria and subject to compliance with conditions as set forth in the Planning Department Staff Report (Exhibit "A") dated July 7, 2009; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by this Resolution No. does hereby approve the application based on the findings and conditions of approval as set forth on Exhibit "A", the Planning Department Staff Report dated July 7, 2009, which includes attachments, which is attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein. PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 7th day of July, 2009. Planning Commission Chair 61 Planning Commission Resolution No. (7/7/2009) ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 7th day of July, 2009. Planning Commission Chair ~~ Planning Commission Resolution No. (7/7/2009) BOBBIO'S PIZZA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STAFF REPORT STAFF REPORT July 7, 2009 __ Community Development Tom Humphrey, AICP Community Development Director AGENDA ITEM: File No. 09028 Consideration of an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of Bobbin's Pizza to be located within The Crossing at Center Point (The Crossing). Applicant: Tom Malot Construction Co, Inc. STAFF SOURCE: David Jacob, Commun'ty ~ e BACKGROUND: The applicant has leased the subject property to a business operator with the intention of operating a Bobbin's Pizza Parlor within The Crossing. The property is zoned High Mix Residential/Commercial (HMR) and is located with the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District. The address for the proposed business is 312 Oak Street. The pizza parlor is classified as "entertainment" and is a conditional use within in the TOD-HMR district. Currently, there are restaurants operating within the TOD-HMR district. To date, no reports have been received of these businesses having an adverse impact on surrounding neighborhoods. Due to the change in use resulting from this application, parking requirements have been reviewed to determine whether or not a restaurant in The Crossing would require additional parking spaces (See Table 1.). As previously approved, The Crossing had apartments on the third floor, professional office space on the second floor, and retail sales/personal services on the first floor. Thirty-nine (39) parking spaces were required to meet the needs for all these uses; which included a 25% credit for transit service proximity. The developer provided forty- four (44) spaces. With the addition of a restaurant, the minimum parking space requirements increased from thirty-nine (39) spaces to forty-four (44) spaces. Currently, the project site has the minimum forty-four (44) spaces required by CPMC. The applicant has stated in his findings that all requirements as outlined under CPMC 17.76.040 shall be met. (See Attachment `A') Outside agencies and other City departments have been given the opportunity to comment. (See Attachments "B"-"F"). This application has been duly noticed in accordance with ORS 197.763. 63 Table 1. The Crossin -Parkin Re uirements Type TOD-I3IvIR Requirement Required Developed Required (Without (With Entertainment Entertainment Residential Residential Units 1.5 spaces per unit (50% 8 8 8 covered) Senior Units 1 space per unit 50% covered Professional Office 1 space per 400 sq. ft. 20 20 20 = 20 s aces Retail Sales/Personal 1 space per 500 sq. ft. 16 16 8 Services = 12 spaces Entertainment 1 space per 250 sq. ft. NA 0 8 = 11 spaces Total 51 25% Reduced/Transit 12 Total Parking 39 44 44 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Apnroval of the Application shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Amplified music and/or live entertainment will not be allowed on the premises. 2. Conditions as listed by the Central Point Building Department (Attachment "B"). 3. Conditions as listed by Rogue Valley Sewer Services (Attachment "D") FINDINGS: Refer to Attachment "G". ISSUES: In considering this application there are two issues: Parking -The Central Point Police Department, in their written comments (Attachment "C"), expressed concern about the impact of a restaurant on parking in the general vicinity of The Crossing. As stated above, The Crossing meets parking requirement as established in Central Point Municipal Code. As a part of this application, the Planning Department has reviewed parking in the area around The Crossing to better understand where conflicts may result. After a review of the overall parking supply and demand within the general project area, there is a net surplus of approximately ninety-one (91) parking spaces (see Table 2). Each individual block meets the requirements of CPMC with the exception of the block containing Grace Christian Church. Most of the uses on that, and other blocks, are legally nonconforming for off-street parking spaces. 64 Currently, Grace Christian Church has eleven (11) spaces and Noah's Ark Day Care has five (5). If they were required to meet current CPMC parking standards, the church would be required to have twenty-three (23) and the day care, twenty (20) parking spaces. Even with the 25% reduction in parking spaces allowed because of access to transit, the block containing the church and day care remains in deficit for off-street parking spaces. With limited parking for the church and the day care facility, there is potential for conflict over parking spaces with The Crossing. There will be limited issues with the church since most activities that take place at the site will occur at night or on weekends when there are more parking spaces available. The day care facility creates the most demand for parking at 12 p.m. on weekdays when parents pick up their children, while the churches peak demand is on Sunday mornings. To facilitate the day care centers parking needs, it would be appropriate, at the request of the day care center, to re-designate on-street spaces for loading zone purposes. It is expected that by 2011 the public parking lot diagonally across from the project site will be improved and available for public parking. It is expected that the public lot will add a minimum of forty-two (42) spaces. Table 2- Parkin¢ Sunnlv and Demand (See Attachment "H" for full parking analysis) Existin Parkin S aces LOCK Spaces Req. by Code Off-Street S aces On- Street S aces Public Off- Street S aces Total Existing Parking S aces Net Surplus/ (Deficit) BLOCK 1 45 32 34 0 69 24 BLOCK 2 36 16 16 0 32 -4 BLOCK 3 10 15 12 12 39 29 BLOCK 4 75 35 28 21 84 9 BLOCK 5 19 24 23 0 47 28 BLOCK 6 39 44 0 0 44 5 TOTAL SURPLUS/DEFICIT 224 166 113 33 315 91 2. Music/Live Entertainment -Due to concerns about the potential negative impact of music/live entertainment on residents of The Crossing and of the surrounding neighborhood in general, music and/or live entertainment will not be allowed on the premises. EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A" -Applicant's Findings Attachment "B" -Building Department Comments Attachment "C" -Police Department Comments Attachment "D"- RVSS Comments 65 Attachment "E"- Jackson County Roads Comments Attachment "F"- Jackson County Fire District No. 3 Comments Attachment "G"-Planning Department Findings of Fact Attachment "H"-Parking Study Attachment "I" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. _, approving the proposed Conditional Use Permit. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. _, granting a Conditional Use Permit. 66 ATTACHMENI~ "~" 650 E. Pine St., Ste. #201 Central Point, OR 97502 (541) 664-1258 Fax (341) 664-2554 CCB#S21 May 20, 2009 The Crossing at Center Point, LLC Original Bobbios Pizza, LLC 312 Oak Street, Suite 102 Central Point, Oregon 97502 To: The City of Central Point Building Planning Department. Conditional Uses Permit Sec 17.76.040 Findings and conditions A. The.site of the proposed conditional uses is located at 312 Oak Street, Central Point, Oregon, inside the building known as The Crossing at Center Point. It will occupy the Suite 102. e. The site has adequate access to Public Street. Parking for the building consists of 44 spaces and only 43 is required from previous approval. C. The proposed use of this site will not have any significant adverse effect on the abutting property as it is located in previously approved mixed use building. D. The establishment (Original Bobbios Pizza LLC) is a Sit Down Family atmosphere Pizza Parlor. E. 1. There are no Adjustments needed. 2. There are no Adjustments needed. 3. There are no Adjustments needed. 44 Parking Spaces is required and there are 43. 4. There are no Adjustments needed. 5. There are no Adjustments needed. 6. There are no Adjustments needed. 7. There are no Adjustments needed. 8. Times of operation are: Monday- Thursday 10:30 am to 11:00 pm Friday -Saturday 10:00 am to 1:00 am Sunday 11:00 am ii:00 pm 9. There are no Adjustments needed. 6 ~ 10. There are no Adjust ents 11, The OLCC Appl/cat/on has posted as of the date 5/5/09 12. There are no Adjustments needed. been appl/ed for and the Notification has been needed. Live Enterta/nment wfll not be a permitted use Thank you, Tommy Malot 68 City_ of Central_Point, Oregon _..._, _ _ 140 S Third Sxreet, Central Point, OR 97502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.161 I www.cl.central-point,or us Planning Request for comment File # 09028 Bobbins Pizza Applicant must submit 4 Plan sets, indicating compliance with Oregon Structural Specialty Code as it pertains to an A2/Type VA, Tennant Infill. Jackson County health dept. will need to indicate compliance with proposal. If preliminary question, please ca11 541 664 3321 ext 228 Respectfully, _~r'.C~ Todd Meador 1 V 140 S Third Street ®Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 ®Fax 541.664.1611 69 ATTACHMENT" '~ " ATTACHMENT" G Dave Jacob From: Chuck Newell Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:19 PM To: Dave Jacob Subject: Conditional Use Permit for Pizza Parlor at 312 Oak Street, Suite 102 Greetings, I am very familiar with the existing business around'?he Crossing at Central Point" and unfortunately the biggest problem facing the pizza parlor is parking. Parking around the existing business are now at a real premium and the addition of pizza parlor patrons would stress the parking problem to the breaking point. Noah's Arch Daycare is very busy with parents picking up and dropping off children. People are already complaining about vehicles parked for to long periods of time at the Library and Fitness Center. The Police Department does not have the resources for parking time limit enforcement. Then you have Ctty Hall, Police, Municipal Court, and Council meetings ell fighting for limited street parking. If you have any question, please don't hesitate in calling me. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, CENTRAL POINT POLICE DEPARTMENT Chuck Newell, Lieutenant 155 South Second Street Central Point, OR 97502 Desk: 541-664-5578 (x613) Fax: 541-664-2705 www.centra Ioointoreson.eov 7U .ATTACHMENT" ~ ' ~~ June 15, 2009 ROGUE VALLEY SEWER SERVICES l.ooetion: 138 West Vilas Road, Centre) Point, OR -Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3130, Central Potnt, OR 7502-0005 Tel. (541)664.6300, Fex (541)664-7171 www.RVSS.us Dave Jacob City of Central Point Planning Department 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Re: Bobbin's Piua at The Crossing at Central Point, Flle # 09028 Sewer service is available for the proposed pica parlor. Connection to the sewer will require a permit from Rogue Valley Sewer Services which will be issued upon payment of related development fees. The applicant should contact Rogue Valley Sewer Services so that these fees can be calculated and paid. Rogue Valley Sewer Services requests that the City withhold occupancy of the building until the sewer connection is completed and approved by RVS. Feel free to call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Ca 1 I Digitally signed by Carl Tappert D stlri t Engin eE {~ ~~ 2009 06.15pert Ta p per ` 08:29:05 -07'00' \\BCVSA_TREE\BCVSA41_VOLLMEDOR.BCV SA\DATA\AGENCIES\CENTPT\PLANNG\ CUP\2009\09028 BOBBIO'S PIZZA_2.DOC ~~ JUN/16/2009/TUE 08:06 JACKSON COUNTY ROADS FAX No, 54i ~~~ACHMENT~"oo~„ -- JACKSON COUNTY Roads June 12, 2008 Attention: Dave Jacob City of Central Point Plannin0. 140 South Third Street Central Point, OR 97502 RE: Conditional Use Permit off Oak Street - a clty~maintained road. Plann(ng File:.09028 Dear Dave: roads >~sm~.+os Rneeell Logne cMbfnMP,O" &DowkpmcnrArc„agar 200 Mteldpe Road Whlta ClIryry OR 07508 PFafb: (tld1))riM6266 lopuere®Jeak80tkoumyArp vnwi.Jeoksonooumy.orp Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this'Conditiona) Use Permit application for the operation of a pizza pariorwithin'The Crossing at Central Point." The property Is located at 312 Oak Street, Sulte 102. Jackson County Roads has no comments. Since I , .e~G Russell Logu Construction Manager 1;1ErrplneeringW e~elopmenllCITIESICNTRLPT~00028.doa iGI ATTACHMENT ".~" Jackson County Fire District No. 3 8333 Agate Road Wh(te Ctty, OR 97503 (641) 826-7100 (641) 826-4566 Fax Memorandum To: Dave Jacob, Central Point Planner From: Hugh Holden, Fire Marshal CC: Don Hickman, DFM; Todd Meador, C.P. Bldg Official Date: 06/12/2009 Re: 09028-312 Oak St Suite 102 Pizza Parlor Direct Fire District comments are Ilmfted to the provision of adequate water supply and access for first responders. Given the location of this proposal and the existing conditions neither of these concerns is at Issue. The Central Point Building Official Is soliciting the Fire Districts comment on the construction documents. We will provide him with our specific comments within 5 business days. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this proposal. 1 ~~ ATTACHMENT "G" FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW File No: 09028 INTRODUCTION In the Matter of a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed operation of Bobbin's Pizza Parlor in The Crossing (The Crossing). The proposed pizza parlor is located is in the Transit Oriented Development District (TOD) High Mix Residential/Commercial zoning district and identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 11BB, Tax Lot 500, 600, and 700. The proposed space is located at 312 Oak Street, Central Point, OR 97502 (Applicant: Tom Malot Construction Co, Inc.) 17.76.020 Information required. An application for a conditional use permit shall include the following information: A. Name and address of the applicant; B. Statement that the applicant is the owner of the property or is the authorized agent of the owner; C. Address and legal description or the assessor's parcel number of the property; D. An accurate scale drawing of the site and improvements proposed. The drawing must be adequate to enable the Planning Commission to determine the compliance of the proposal with the requirements of this title; E. A statement indicating the precise manner of compliance with each of the applicable provisions of this title together with any other data pertinent to the findings prerequisite to the granting of a use permit. Finding: The applicant has submitted all of the necessary information to proceed with the review of this application. Conclusion: The applicant has met this criterion. 17.76.040 Findings and conditions. The Planning Commission, in granting a conditional use permit, shall find as follows: A. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use and to meet all other development and lot requirements of the subject zoning district and all other provisions of this code; Finding: Per the applicant's narrative, the existing space for lease is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. Conclusion: The proposed site and use meet this criterion. 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; 74 ATTACHMENT"G" Finding: The Crossing is a new development completed in 2008 with adequate access to public streets effectively meeting the anticipated traffic that would be generated by Bobbin's Pizza Parlor and other uses within the development. This was addressed in the site plan approval of The Crossing. Conclusion: The proposed use meets this criterion as a tenant of The Crossing. C. That the proposed use will have no significant adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof. In making this determination, the commission shall consider the proposed location of improvements on the site; vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; setbacks; height of buildings and structures; walls and fences; landscaping; outdoor lighting; and signs. Finding: All site improvements, vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation, building setbacks, landscaping, outdoor lighting were addressed with the approval of The Crossing. Conclusion: This criterion is not applicable to this application for a business within The Crossing. D. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will comply with local, state and federal health and safety regulations and therefore will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhoods and will not be detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community based on the review of those factors listed in subsection C of this section. Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with all of the above requirements as stated in the applicant's narrative. Conclusion: The applicant has or intends to meet this criterion. E. That any conditions required for approval of the permit are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare and may include: 1. Adjustments to lot size or yard areas as needed to best accommodate the proposed use; provided the lots or yard areas conform to the stated minimum dimensions for the subject zoning district, unless a variance is also granted as provided for in Chapter 17.13; 2. Increasing street widths, modifications in street designs or addition of street signs or traffic signals to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed use; 3. Adjustments to off-street parking requirements in accordance with any unique characteristics of the proposed use; "I J ATTACHMENT"G" 4. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress; 5. Requiring landscaping, irrigation systems, lighting and a property maintenance program; 6. Regulation of signs and their locations; 7. Requiring fences, berms, walls, landscaping or other devices of organic or artificial composition to eliminate or reduce the effects of noise, vibrations, odors, visual incompatibility or other undesirable effects on surrounding properties; 8. Regulation of time of operations for certain types of uses if their operations may adversely affect privacy or sleep of persons residing nearby or otherwise conflict with other community or neighborhood functions; 9. Establish a time period within which the subject land use must be developed; 10. Requirement of a bond or other adequate assurance within a specified period of time; 11. Such other conditions that are found to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Finding: The Project was physically constructed subject to a prior land use action. In consideration at this time is the operation of a use within the existing building. As such the above conditions are not applicable to the project with the exception of: E(3). The proposed use required recalculation of off-site parking requirements. Upon review, the applicant has provided the minimum required parking spaces. From an overall parking evaluation of the general project area (300 ft. radius from the project) it has been determined, based on current parking standards, that there is a parking surplus. The 300 ft. radius is the generally accepted walking limit from parked car to destination. However, it should be noted that within the general project area there is a deficiency of parking on Block 2 as illustrated in Table 1. Many of the current uses were developed prior to the City's imposing minimum parking standards, and as such the deficiency is not unexpected. However, since the project complies with the minimum parking requirements, it is noted that the general area deficiency is not the responsibility of the Applicant. The Applicant has complied with the minimum parking requirements for the zoning district and uses. ~~ ATTACHMENT"G" Table 1. Parkin Sur lus and Deficit Existin Parkin S aces able 1. BLOCK Spaces Req. by Code Off-Street S aces On- Street S aces Public Off- Street S aces Total Existing Parking S aces Net Surplus/ Deficit BLOCK 1 45 32 34 0 69 24 BLOCK 2 36 16 16 0 32 -4 BLOCK 3 10 15 12 12 39 29 BLOCK 4 75 35 28 21 84 9 BLOCK 5 19 24 23 0 47 28 BLOCK 6 39 44 0 0 44 5 TOTAL SURPLUS EFICIT 224 166 113 33 315 91 E(8). The proposed use, as entertainment, has the potential to include music as part of its venue. Based on the application it is not the intent of the operator to provide music as entertainment. This needs to be noted with a condition as follows: Condition E(8). Amplified, or live music is prohibited. Conclusion: Subject to the above conditions as set forth in the Finding, the proposed use is compliant with Section 17.74.40 (E) ~~ Attachment "H" Malot -Pizza Parlor Conditional Use Permit -File No. 09028 Parkins Analysis Existing Parking Spaces BLOCK Spaces Req. by Code Off-Street Spaces On-Street Spaces Public Off- Street Spaces Existing Parking Spaces Net Surplus/ (Deficit) The Crossing at Central Point Residential - 1.5 or 1 per DU 8 Professional Offices -1 per 400 sq.ft. 22 Retail Sales/Service - 1 per 500 sq. ft. 12 Entertainment - 1/250 sq. ft. 11 Sub-Total 53 25%Reduced/Transit 13 Total 39 23 21 0 44 Tyerman DDS Professional Offices - 1 per 400 sq.ft. 6 9 13 25 TOTAL BLOCK 1 45 32 34 0 69 24 Hope Christian Church Religious Assembly - 1 per 100 sq. ft. of main assembly area 23 11 8 19 Noah's Ark Day Care Family day care - 1 per every 5 children; 20 0 8 8 plus 1 per every 2 employees 5 5 5 Sub-Total 48 25% Reduced/Transit 12 TOTAL BLOCK 2 36 16 16 0 32 -4 Sinyard's Auto Repair Repair oriented - 1 per 500 sq. ft. 3 5 4 4 13 Marilyin's Tax Service Professionial Office - 1 per 400 sq. ft. 3 6 4 4 14 Rogue River Rustic Sales-oriented - 1 per 500 sq. ft. 4 4 4 4 12 TOTAL BLOCK 3 10 15 12 12 39 29 Public Offices 21 21 10 Attachment "H" City Hall/Jackson County Library Police Department 26 2 28 Tota TOD parking Stan ar or Professional Offices - 1 per 400 sq. ft.) 75 9 26 35 TOTAL BLOCK 4 75 35 28 21 84 9 Four Oaks Center Residential (9 du) - 1.5 or 1 per DU 9 14 14 Professional Offices - 1 per 400 sq.ft. 6 6 6 Retail Sales/Service - 1 per 500 sq.ft. 4 4 23 27 TOTAL BLOCK 5 19 24 23 0 47 28 Jehovah's Witness Church (for sale) Religious Assembly- 1 per 100 sq. ft. of 39 44 0 44 TOTAL BLOCK 6 39 44 0 0 44 5 TOTAL SURPLUS/DEFICIT 224 166 113 33 315 91 (a7 A1`TACHMENT" T " PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A PIZZA PARLOR LOCATED WITHIN THE CROSSING AT CENTER POINT Applicant: Tom Malot Construction Co., Inc. (37S 2W 11BB, Tax Lots 500, 600, and 700 - 312 Oak Street) File No. 09028 WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a pizza parlor located within The Crossing at Center Point. The subject property is located in the Transit Oriented Development-High Mix Residential/Commercial (TOD-HMR) zoning district and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 11BB, Tax Lots 500, 600, and 700. WHEREAS, on July 7, 2009, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted a duly-noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff report and heard testimony and comments on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards and criteria applicable to the TOD-HMR zoning dish•ict section 17.65, and Conditional Use Permit section 17.76 of the Central Point Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, as part of the Conditional Use Permit application, has considered and finds per the Staff Report dated July 7, 2009, that adequate findings have been made demonstrating that issuance of the conditional use permit is consistent with the intent of the TOD-HMR zoning district; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by this Resolution No. does hereby approve the application based on the findings and conclusions of approval as set forth on Exhibit "A", the Staff Report dated July 7, 2009 which includes attachments, attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein. 8U Planning Commission Resolution No. (070709) PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 7`h day of July 2009. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 7`h day of July 2009. Planning Commission Chair 8 ~. Planning Commission Resolution No. (070709) URBANIZATION ELEMENT City of Central .Point, Oregon 140 So.TBird St., Central Po1nt,Or 97502 541.664 3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.d.central point:or:us Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, .Community Development Director/ Assistant City-Administrator URBANIZATION focus will turn to actions ce with the draft Regional 4~ional Plan is the (¢rowth) needs over a From: Subject: Date: As we proceed with the necessary to bring each Plan. The comnreher~ specified planning p planning period has Planning Commission and Citizens Don Burt, Planning Manager cars. With the Regional Plan the typical to an additional thirty (30) years. In the gional Plan the planning period is based us to the year 2050. itlon Element is urbanization, which is defined of people from rural environments to urban ment to another. This movement can be .advance of demand. motivated by ari~' ber, or ~~ bination of reasons; such as jobs, housing, health care, and education. The : It movement is an increase in the demand for urban services such as hous' ~ ~ upport infrastructure, retail, schools, streets, parks, utilities, etc. Urbanization has its st negative impacts when the demand for support infrastructure exceeds supply, resulting in overcrowded schools, poor health care, inadequate utility services, etc. The solution is simple -provide for services reasonably in The cornerstone of the City's Comprehensive Plan is its Urbanization Element. From the basic strategies, goals, and policies of the Urbanization Element a baseline is established guiding the more refined goals and policies of such other elements as housing, economic, recreation, and public facilities. ~z TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM N0.1 The significance of urbanization on the economic, enviroxunental, and general welfare of communities is acknowledged in Statewide Planning Goa114, Urbanization; which establishes as a statewide goal the need to: "Provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities." Compliance with Goa114 is mandatory. The guidelines necessary for compliance are set forth in OAR 660-015-0000(14). The objective of the Urbanization Element is rather strai,,: : ~rward -identify the anticipated population and the land and policies nec to accommodate the projected ~/~i~., population. h1 this memo we will address the popl~l fY-;~j'ections and associated land needs in a very broad manner, and as noted; re ' - `(5?ir need -other Plan elements. In the next memo we will address the goals an . ~,~~ies for the ~~n ; 'zation Element. The basic input to understanding w 195.036 the County is required to within its jurisdiction. Based on t' that by 2030 the City's population population. By 2050 it is projected t for an additional 9,500~rk~tans. All Central Point will or a doubling of ii 0 opul~ growth. A~~'~rected by ORS *~ {%~. poor - { h 6pulation prolect~;n for all cities and Cr~y~'~ ulation Element it is expected 880 ad' ~ - 8,700 people to today's opula ~~vill double, reaching 35,250, the ~~ 0 it ~' ected that the City of rv ~ ~ ~~ an additiona117,200 people, to be considered in addressing the in ion projection? Tliis question has already been and acknowledged Population Element. 2. Acc ~ilifij of the `~0 population projection?The 2050 population projection is taken he Grea ~ ear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the Regional Plan), which was base ~ j}e * nd distribufion assumption used in preparing the Counfij's Population ~~' er ORS 195.036. This figure does not become official until adoption of the ~'gional Plan. LAND USE NEEDS With an understanding of the population growth it is possible to estimate the amount, and type of land needed. In the Urbanization Element the City's land use needs will be based on broad land use classifications, which in subsequent elements will be refined and discussed. The land use needs for any given city, and the area required by each use, varies depending on the cit}~s role in the local, regional, state, and national economy. 1 City of Central Point Population Element, 2008 ~J In the 1980 Comprehensive Plan it was estimated that overall the City required 170 acres per 1,000 population. That acreage would be distributed among five basic land use types as follows: 1. Residential 2. Commercial 3. Industrial 4. Parks & Open Space 5. Civic (schools, governrnent services, streets, etc.) The amount of acreage needed by the City was d similar size using acres per 1,000 population and identifies the ratios used in 1980 to determine the expected, Residential is the dominant land use type at 47% of all lands, followed by public right-of-way (20%), and industrial (13%). Using these ratios it was determined that 2,708 acres were needed to serve a population o~~r 16,000 by the year ~~~~f It was assumed t~13~ land would be city of 3 on a survey of cities of total acres. Table 1 reds. As would be 352 __ 3511 13% _.162.. __fiY _ ___ yoar zaoo Since 19 F- - ; Cit}/s urb ;` - a b~y has not changed2; however, within that boundar~ -J` ~ as occurr - e rect~~~sification of land uses. Table 2 compares the 1980 estimate in aixvst t ' -~ ~~'s land use distribution. The most significant change in land use distrl ~ ' ~ - s be •? ~ the industrial and civic sectors, with a loss of 127 and 98 acres respectively ,rz. i a Considering the changes fat have taken place since 1980, the current population, and the amount of land actually developed, we can ask ourselves how accurate were the ratios? By adjusting the Cit}/s total acreage to account only for developed lands and dividing by population (1,000) we can get an adjusted needs requirement based on our current population. Table 3 compares the 1980 estimate against what has actually occurred. 2 The appazent increase of 143 acres in the CiTy's total Gross Acres from 2,737 to 2,880 is the result of the more accurate geographic information mapping systems developed since 1980. The urban boundaries have not changed. CITY OF 8 `~ Z-__---- _.._.. 1980 vs. 2009 246 n<:.xmmi, c°mmer°~ai. a~a mau<m~ The most apparent changes in the benchmarks sectors. The 2009 adjusted ratios presented in' realized land needs between 1980 and 2009, between supply and demand for land and consideration should be given to adjusting s policy will be carried forward. Before extrapo3 let's discuss the major changes th, ~ k place TABLE3 __, I _._. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT 2009 vic / e ~ f ~tp 1, Industrial, and Ci ~3 are m e resentative of the nting a mod"~~~~urate relationship t policy. Based, this information the be chmarks; ming that current th~ sted benc ~~~' s forwards, ~~3~~' 0 and present. ~ z... - ----- _. ._ _. Q _ 1,205 f~ 166 X75) 6 74 ]0 r 2 _ ----- 88" _..-----«~ - _-- 9_ 165 5 10 11% 108 10 5% 25% 620 78 26°i Measured in acn Measured as per Based °n s 2008 Residential Sector =The reduction in the Residential sector is a result of development occurring at higher densities than originally planned; which is consistent with current policy. Consequently, the residential acreage need per 1,000 population is declining. Based on current and proposed policies this trend is expected to continue as residential densities increase. As an example, in the Regional Plan it is estimated that between now and 2050 an additiona1899 acres will be needed for residential purposes. Based on these figures and the current residential lands inventory, residential needs will drop to 70 acres per 1,000 population by 2050. By 2030 residential land needs will be reduced from 74 to 72 acres per 1,000 population. SJ To better understand the effect of increases in density think of it in terms of the reduction in the average gross sq. ft. per household. In 1980 it was planned that on average each household would require 9,374 sq. ft. for a gross density of 4.65 dwelling units per acre. By 2030 the average will be 8,437 sq. ft. for 5.16 FicuxE t dwellln linltS eY aCYe, and b 2050 It Will RESIDENTIAL GROSS DENSITY g p Y zaoo-zoso be further reduced to 8,202 sq. ft. for 5.42 dwelling units per gross acre. It should be noted that these are gross averages, and that in order to attain these averages the densities for future development will be higher, since existing lot sizes cannot be adjusted. Figure 1 illustrates the increase , in density per gross acre. ~ "° Policy Question, Land Use. promote housing policies that s .; densihj, to the extent that develop '' e Cihj's vision of mai - " 'ding a small 1,000 o ulation an s P P ~~,.year Commercial Sector -The rani as demonstratel~be use of ~ ~~~; -Residential T7us~ihz will continue to t increases in the ave>~ ~zuelling unit tan re in place ure that the t rance is achieve . 70 acres per / _ zaoo za5o zmo xozo zom xoso appears to be adequate, Is thze current ratio deemed acceptdlf~°,;or does ommercik~ yep c~ eco!~ Cokm~ /~ J I rial Sector e over anon of in combin of both. industria needs opportunitie g " proposed the F ~ c the City reviews it coy preferred Fudge Factor. Cihj in the Industrial sector is indicative of either an ial rids, a low demand for industrial development, or a common practice for cities to overestimate their means of promoting industrial development Factor'). Based on what was actually used vs. what was r represents a 340% overestimation of actual need. As mic Element additional attention will be given to the the ratio and encourage more the services and professional sector? Since as proven to be justifiable, given current Policy Question, Land Use Need -Industrial: As the Cihj reviews its Economic Element additional attention will be given to the preferred Fudge Factor. Regardless of hozu thze Fudge Factor is addressed, it is important that it be explained in both the Urbanization Element and thu? Economic Element. For purposes of this memo a fudge factor of 300 % zoos used, which would bring thze ratio to 15 acres per 1,000 population. It is suggested that the current benchmark of 22 acres per 1,000 population be retained. ~~ Parks & Recreation Sector -This sector relies on a nationally recognized standard for park lands. The National Park Lands Association recommends a ratio of between 8 and 10 acres per 1,000 population. The City has uses the higher ratio consistent with the vision of a community with plentiful parks and recreation facilities. Policy Question, Land Use Need -Pars £~r Recreation: The Cihj's Park £~ Recreation Element sets tlie standard, zohich is supported by national standards. This benchmark /1as zoithstood the test of time and should not be modified. Civic Sector - As with the Industrial sector the Civic its ratio (11 % to 5 %). It is likely that this change was a civic need. Policy Question, Land Use Iv ratio were most likely the result benchmark is justifiable. Streets -The established benchmark was 25% be reasonably accurate over used for public streets. Policy Question, ratio tc~'irfl~l~~tlftYn 22 % . lized a significant change in over estimation of lands for :es in the Civic sector such a reduction in tliis age. This' has proven to of the total ;' acreage is timed use of a 25 gained by reducing the Using th ` . > noted ~, in s,em to the projected population the land needs e City ea - and 2 ~ - e determined. As illustrated in Table 4 the pr' d 2050 lan nee ~ what rs oposed in the Regional Plan (RPS) are very close, wi 'r overall dif ~ ~ ce of res. By sector the biggest differences are in the Residential ~l~the Civic se ... s. The , ifferences have been discussed above. LAND NEED5 BY LAND 2050 ~d By adjusting the ratios as discussed in this memo the land use needs, relative to the Regional Plan, will improve. For the Residential sector the improvement is due to efficiencies achieved in density, while in the Civic sector it is represented by a correction to reflect the real demand for civic land based on past use. With the adjusted ratios the overall differences by sector and cumulative total are reduced to acceptable levels. Table 5 illustrates the land use needs using adjusted ratios. It should be pointed out that the projected acreage for Streets does not appear to increase. The reason for that is the projected figures for other sectors take into consideration street right-of-way. i IC TY OF CENTRAL POINT I ~ - L/~i~~ I LAND NEEDS BY LAND ]0 I 246 25% 620 but ~~~°lso reasonably representative r, these benchmarks are to be used to s. As we begin to discuss other more detailed to include sub- ~~ The ratios used m'' ~ 5 are ~; ~i/: of the Cites lustonc 1~~need. EC:01`IOMIC: ELEMEI~IT City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St., Central Pofnt, Or 97502 541.6643321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.cl.ce nt ral-poi nt.or.u s Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development pirector/ Assistant City Administrator ECONOMIC ELEMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM N0.1 To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Dave Ja ob,.C~nmunity Planner Subject: Economic Element, Employment Projections & Land.Use Scenarios Date: July 7, 2009 INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Economic Elefrtent of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan is to demonstrate compliance with Land Conservation a'nd Development Commission (LCDC) Statewide Planning Goa19, $conomy of the State, which calls for diversification and improvement of the, economy. Goa19 also requiares cities to provide lands that are suitable for economiE%growth. Accordingly, a major goal of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan is to promote the economic health of the. community by making adequate provisions for future'diversified industrial development, encouraging suitable industries and businesses to locate in the city, and by promoting healthy employment growth. Goa19 requires Comprehensive Plans to consider certain economic issues and incorporate polcies'designed to address those issues. Goa19 further mandates that Comprehensive Plans must include: • An,analysis of economic patterns, potentialities, strengths, and deficiencies as they relate to state and national trends, • An inventory of'{~uildable commercial and industrial lands for economic growth, and • Policies concerning the economic development opportunities in the community. NATIONAL TRENDS As described in Figure 1.1, since the 1950s, the composition of the United States economy has undergone a dynamic transformation. • Irt the 1950s, the economy was heavily weighted toward goods producing industries, comprising better than 30% of national employment. J Page 1 of 8 • Technological advances, increased construction activity, and contractual labor arrangements, such as outsourcing, are largely responsible for the Nation's economic shift. • Since 1950, service-oriented industries have experienced a 13.2% increase in their share of the national economy. Figure 1.1. United States Industry Trends -1950 to 2000 Government Services Finance, Insurance, Real Estate ^ 2000 Retail Trade ^ 1990 W holesale Trade ^ 1980 ^ 1970 Transportation & Public Utilities ^ 1960 Manufacturing ^ 1950 Constuction Mining 0% 5% 10 % 15 °k 20 % 25 % 30 % 35 % 40 % Source: U:S: Census Bureau -Statistical tlbstract of the United States, 2003 Over the next decade, e}nployxnentin the national economy is expected to continue to transition towards more service-oriented jobs. Service sector growth will be more demographically driven domestically than the previous decade. For example, Health Service jobs are expected to lead all industries over the next decade, largely driven by the aging national population. Iitaddition to consumer goods, growth in Financial Aciivities and Leisure & Hospitality,a'realso projected to grow significantly as the result of aging Baby Boomers. STATE OF OREGON AND REGIONAL TRENDS The State of Oregon and Jackson County mirror national industry trends in many ways. In both cases, there has been a consistent decrease in manufacturing employment and growth in the service industries as demonstrated in Figures 1.2 and 1.3. Page 2 of 8 Figure 1.2. State of Oregon Industry Trends, 1976 to 2000 0% 5% 10 % 15 % 20 % 25 % 30 % Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Mining Construction Manufacturing ^ 1976 Trans., Comm., and Utilities ^ 1980 Wholesale Trade a 1990 Retail Trade ^zooo Finance, Insurance and Real Estate services Nonclassifiable/all others Government Fi re 1.3. Jackson.Coun Indus 'T'rends, 1976 to2000 0°/a s % 10 % 15 % 20 % 25 % 30 % Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Mining Construction f Manu acturing ^ 1976 Trans., Gomm., and Utilities ^ 1980 Wholesale Trade ^ 1990 il T R d ^zooo ra eta e Finance, Insurance and Real Estate servic s e Nonclassifiable/all others Government Related to future industry growth in Region 8, which includes Jackson and Josephine Counties, Table 1.1 outlines the State of Oregon s most recent employment growth forecast which was used as a baseline estimate to forecast the rate of employment growth by industry in this analysis. J. Page 3 of 8 • Over the forecast period (2006-2016), the region s employment growth is projected to average 1.5% across all industries. • The Education & Health (2.6% Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR)) and Professional & Business (1.9%AAGR) sectors are expected to display accelerated growth at the regional level during the period. Only modest rates of growth are expected in the Natural Resources (0.2%AAGR), Manufacturing (0.7%AAGR) and Public Administration (0.7% AAGR) sectors. • Modest projected growth in the Manufacturing sector reflects anticipated declines in many traditional industries, offset by expansion in other manufacturing firms. While current operations may decline in employmefif;a commensurate decline in land utilization is not anticipated, as these firms-are not expected to reduce property needs. '~ , Table 1.1. Employment Projections, Region $ (Jackson & Josephine Counties) NAICS 2006 2016 Growth Rate Natural Resources 980 1,000 0.2% Consiruction 7,590 8,800 1.5 Manufacturin 10,420 11;220 0.7% Wholesale Trade 3,540 3,950 1.1% Retail Trade .18;300 :':21,160 1.5% T.W.U 3,200- ' 3,630 1.3% Information 2;010 2;170 0.8% Pinancial AcHvitles 6,090. 6,87,0 - 1.2% Professional & Business 9,580: 11,550 ~ r 1.9% Education & Health" 15,730 20;250 2.6% Leisure & Hos itaB ~ ' 12,120 14,580 1.9 Other Services 3,800 4,310 1.3% Public Administration 15;530 16,590 0.7% Total . 108;890 126,080 1.5% SOURCE; Oregon Employment Department CITY OF CENTRAL POINT CURIi$NT INDUSTRY DATA The primarysource of data'on current employment patterns for the City of Central Poini was derived from,the State o~ Oregon Employment Department's ES-202 reports which provide data on covered employment. Covered employment data provides information on those employees that aYe covered by state unemployment insurance. While it does provide data on all employment in the city, it does provide an effective snapshot of current industry in the city: As shown in Table 1.2, current employment within the Central Point UGB is concentrated in Education and Health Services (32.2%), Accommodation and Food Services (15.3%), the Retail Trade (13.2%), Construction (9.0%) and Public Administration (8.7%) sectors. Overall, Central Point contains approximately 3.2% of the workforce of Jackson County. For the purpose of comparison, in 2006 the City of Medford accounted for 60.7% of all employment in Jackson County, with dominant shares in the service and trade sectors. "' 9 ~ Page 4 of 8 Table 1.2. Covered Employment by Industry -Central Point UGB, 2007 Indus obs %Distribution Natural Resources 6 0.2 Construction 273 9.0% Manufacturin 104 3.4% Wholesale Trade 102 3.4% Retail Trade 402 13.2% Trans ortation and Warehousin 44 1.4% Information 48 ?-; 1.6% Financial Activities 109 l 3.6% Professional & Business 17.9 3.9% Education & Health Services 979 32.2% Leisure & Hos itali > 465 15.3% Other Services 128 `4.2% Public Administration 264 8.7 %,; Source: Oregon Employment Department, ES-2021ocal data-set for 2007 Table 1.3 presents a forecast of total,employment within the existing Central Point Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) between 2bQ8 and2030. This analysis updates the employment forecasts within the City of Central Point's UGB and is generated hrough 2030. The methodology will,be described in detail'in the complete Economic Element. The baseline foreca§t utilizes the State of Oregon s projected growth rates by sector over the next decade, and applies these rates of growth to the estimated current employment distribution within the Central,Point UGB. Two' additional forecasts are also generated, referred to as the high and loin growth scenarios:'4Vhile a final reconciliation of need will be based on the baseline projection, it should`be noted that employment forecasts are particularlg over a • As Town, the baseline renecung an average The high growth sceria low growth scenario pr Education & HealthSe to account for the laree scenarios. year horizon. employment forecast anticipates an increase of 2,493 jobs, annual growth rate of 1.7%. ro projects an increase of 2,498 jobs (1.9% AAGR), while the ojects 1,941 new jobs (1.4% AAGR). rvices, Professional Services, and Retail Trade are expected st percent of new growth over the forecast period in all A •a Page 5 of S Table 1.3. Em to ent Forecast, Central Point UGB, 2008 to 2030 BASELINE .Base Em to merit Forecast 2008-2030 Growth Medium Growth Forecast Year 2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 .Jobs AAGR* Natural Resources 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0.2% Construction 480 496 538 584 634 688 208 1.7% Manufacturin 125 127 131 136 140 145 20 0.7% Wholesale trade 125 128 138 148 160 172 47 1.5% Retail trade 485 500 537 578 621 668 182 1.5% Transportation and warehousin 61 62 66 71 75 80 19 1.3% Information 61 62 65 67 70 73 12 0.8% Financial Activities 238 244 261 ~ 280 299 320 83 1.4% Professional and Business 239 249 275 304 `-:.336 371 132 21 % Education and health services 1878 1975 2232 2522 2850' :-`-3221 1343 2.6% Leisure and hos itali 547 570 630 696 769 ` :850 303 2.1 Other services 308 316 337= 359 382 407' 99 1.3% Public Administration 279 282 292 303' 313 324 46 0.7% Total 4831 5019 5510 6054 6656 7325 2493 1.7% Base Em to merit Forecast 2008-2028 Growth High Growth Forecast Year 2008 2010 2015 202b 2025 2030 Jobs AAGR* Natural Resources 7 7` 7 7 7 7 0 0.2% Construction 480. 499 547 601 660 724 244 2.0% Manufacturin 125` ' 127 ;132 137 143 149 24 0.8% Wholesale trade ~: =125 ..129. 140- 152 165 180 55 1.7% Retail trade 485 502' 545 593 644 699 214 1.7% Transportation and warehousin 61 63 67 72 78 84 23 1.5% Information ' 61 62 65 68 71 74 13 0.9% Financial Acflvities 238 245 265 286 309 334 97 1.6% Professional and Business 239 250 281 315 353 395 156 2.4% Education and health services 1878 1990 2287 2629 3022 3474 1597 3.0% Leisure and hos itali 547 573 643 720 807 905 358 2.4% Other services 308 317 341 367 394 423 115 1.5% Public Administration 279 283 294 306 319 331 53 0.8% Total 4831 5048 5615 6253 6971 7780 2948 1.9% Base Em to went Forecast 2008-2028 Growth Low Growth Forecast Year 2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Jobs AAGR* Natural Resources 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0.2% Construction 480 493 528 565 604 647 167 1.4% /~ Page 6 of 8 Manufacturin 125 126 130 134 138 142 17 0.6% Wholesale trade 125 128 135 143 152 161 37 1.2% Retail trade 485 497 527 558 592 628 142 1,2% Transportation and warehousin 61 62 65 68 72 75 15 1.0 Information 61 62 64 66 68 70 8 0.6% Financial Activities 238 243 258 273 290 307 70 1.2% Professional and Business 239 247 268 291 316 342 103 1.7% Education and health services 1878 1956 2162 2389, '+,;-"2640 2917 1039 2.1% Leisure and hos itali 547 566 614 66Gf 722 784 237 1.7% Other services 308 314 330 346' 'x. 364 382 74 1.0% Public Administration 279 281 288. ' 296 ~ ' ' 303 311 32 0.5% Total 4831 4983 376'+ ' 5803 6267. 6772 1941 1.4% 2. SUMMARY OF COMMERCIAL AND INDU The results summarized in Table 2.1 highlights pt Central Point UGB for commerclal'and industrial findings by use type and growth scenario will be • Over the next twenty years, expected to range from 67 to Point's reslized grow{1TpattE • The baseline "Medium Grog .ND NETD FINDINGS net new demand within the 'n 2008 and 2030. Detailed a technical appendix. for commercial and industrial land is acres, contingent upon Central )30. indicates that Central Point can expect aggregate commercial aid'industrial`land need in the vicinity of 81 acres through 2030;additional acreage maybe.necessary to accommodate particular numbers and pes of•sites expected to be demanded, ~ These projections reflecfinet developable and, required only for building and .impervious surface pace,requirements. Roads, right-of-ways, parks and public facilities, among other things necessary to serve projected land development, are not ncluded. Table 2.1 Projected Aggregate'Need for Commercial and Industrial Land in the Central Point UGB. 2008 to 2030 (Net Buildable Acres) Use T e Medium Growth Hi h Growth Low Growth Office Commercial 22.0 26.1 17.1 Industrial 19.7 23.0 15.3 Retail Commercial 39.4 44.1 34.9 Total 81.1 93.2 67.3 In addition to the demand for actual sites, the need for public rights of way and infrastructure must be estimated in order to project the total amount of land that would be required in the event the Urban Growth Boundary were expanded to provide land for J Page7of8 needed employment sites. The Department of Land Conservaiion and Development Goal 9 guidebook recommends 25% for city's that would largely be extending infrastructure into new areas to serve new development. The below figure converts the acreages from Table 2.1 to total gross land demand by category. Table 2.2 projects the total land demand for Central Point Table 2.2 Projected Aggregate Need for Commercial and Industrial Land in the Central Point UGB 2008 to 2030 Gross Buildable Acres Use T e Medium Growth Hi h Growth Low Growth Office Commercial 27.5 {, 32.6 21.4 Industrial 24.6 ' 28.8 19.1 Retail Commercial 49.2 , '~ 55.1 43.6 Total 101.3; 116.5 54.1 ~`.. '~ '~ i (1 ~ Page 8 of 8 HOUSING ELEMENT City of Central .Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St., Central Polnt, Or 97502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.63$4 www.ci.cent ra I-po i nt.o r:u s I~ _Plartining ©epar•trnent CENTRAL Tom Humphrey, AICR, POINT CammunityDevelapmentDirectarf AssistantCity Administrator HOUSING TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO. 1 To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Subject: Housing Element, Current Buildable Lands and Housing Characteristics Date: July 7, 2009 At the July 7, 2009 Planning Commission meeting the Technical Memorandum No. 1 for the Housing Element will be distributed and discussed. Page 1 of 1 y~