Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 15, 1980 Minutes April 15, 1980 - Planning Commission Meeting Central Point Council Chambers I. Meeting was called to order by Chairman Nordby at 7:50 p.m. II. Roll call found Chairman Nordby and Commissioners Hillyer, Stallsworth, MacDonald, Thelen, Himmelman, and Dixon present. Others present were City Administrator Dave Kucera, Building Official R.J. Ritchey, Planning Commission Secretary Georg Stotler-de Ruyter, and a number of imterested citizens. III. Correction to April 1, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes under New Business, Item A. Minutes show Commissioner Thelen voting when he was not in attendance. Motion by MacDonald, second by Dixon to approve the Minutes of the April 1, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting as amended. All in favor, motion carried. IV. No Correspondence Public Appearances Ron Carlson identified himself as the owner of property located at 608 Glenn Way, Central Point. Mr. Carlson stated that he had contacted Grantland ' Realty regarding the location of the front property line at the above address, as he wanted to build a fence. He was informed by Mr. Grantland that the property line was the back of the sidewalk and no mention was made of a permit being necessary. Acting on Mr. Grantland's statement, Mr. Carlson installed fence posts with poured concrete bases along the sidewalk edge. Building Inspector Allan observed this activity and a letter was sent to Mr. Carlson informing him that a permit was necessary and that he would have to move the posts. Building Inspector. Allan, responding to a call from Mr. Carlson, inspected the position of the posts assuming a 50 foot right-of-way and approved the posts as installed. The next day it was discovered that the right-of-way of Glenn Way is actually 60 feet with the resultant property line being located 5 feet in back of the sidewalk. Mr. Carlson could not be reached until after the weekend when Building Inspector Allan contacted him with the information. Mr. Carlson has been informed that he will have to move the posts back 5 feet to comply with the City Code and is now appearing before the Planning Commission to see if a variance request is in order or just what recourse he has. Chairman Nordby stated that it is not within the authority of the Planning Commission to grant a variance to fence public property, which is what Mt. Carlson is actually wanting to do. Cliff Motes, 2851 E. McAndrews Road, Medford, suggested that sidewalks could be put 5 feet back and use side lane for parking. Building Official Ritchey stated that would put the sidewalk over the utilities in Stonecreek. Minutes Planning Commission Meeting April 15, 1980 - page 2 Chairman Nordby stated that the 60 foot right-of-way was to reserve that land for future widening of the street and that the City Attorney William Carter had advised the City that no fence be permitted beyond the property line,and that the Planning Commission has denied such requests in the past. Commissioner Thelen made a motion to continue the matter to the May 6, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting for further deliberation. Second by Commissioner Stallsworth. Roll Call vote found members Stallsworth, MacDonald, Thelen, Himmelman, and Dixon in favor. Chairman Nordby and Commissioner Hillyer opposed. Motion carried. V. No Old Business VI. New Business A. 1068 Plan Review - Multi-Family Development 215 Snowy Butte Road & 162 Glenn Way J.C. Map Page 37-2W-10AC, Tax Lots 2000 & 2001 ' Boldt-McGraw, Applicants Darrell Boldt contacted the Building Department and requested that the 1068 Review scheduled for this time be withdrawn from the agenda as his architect was unable to revise the drawings as directed by the Building Official in time for this meeting. B. Review of Annexation Application Approx. 29.5 acres, vicinity of Beall Lane and Snowy Butte Road J.C. Map Page 37-2W-10, Tax Lots 3901, 3902, & 4000. 37-2W-10AD, Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, 4009 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 11000 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600. Gayle Franek, Applicant. Dennis Hoffbuhr 219 N. Oakdale, Medford, representing the applicant, proposed to give a brief outline of the proposal and requested that the matter be put on the May 6, 1980 Planning Commission agenda so the Planning Commission can review the complete findings submitted. Primary concern of the applicants is the sewer problem. Six out of eleven inspected septic tanks in the area have failed. Well problems have developed as a result of the failing septics. No zone change is involved at this time, no construction anticipated. Mr. Hoffbuhr stated that 5 out of 19 property owners did not sign the annexation petition. Gayle Franek, 1676 Beall Lane, Central Point, stated that four parcels have been sold since the petition was signed, and pointed out several other property owners that had not signed the petition. Minutes Planning Commission Meeting April 15, 1980 - page 3 Building Official Ritchey suggested that Gayle Franek circulate the petition again to bring it up to date. Mrs. Franek agreed to do so. Jack Spencer, 1704 Beall Lane, Central Point, voiced objection to being in the city. Has horses and cattle, cannot agree with city ordinances concerning livestock. Mr. Spencer stated that he had moved from the vicinity of 10th Street to Beall Lane as a result of a similar situation of property being annexed to the city. Discussion. Motion by Hillyer, second by Thelen to continue the matter to the May 6, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting. Roll Call vote found all in favor. A five minute recess was called by Chairman Nordby at 8:40 p.m. Meeting was called back to order by Chairman Nordby at 8:50 p.m. C. Review of Construction Drawings for Stonecreek Subdivision, Phase 11 Located between Snowy Butte Road, Chicory Lane, Beall Lane, and Snowy Butte Lane. , J.C. Map Page 37-2W-10AD & 10 DA Willcuts, Motes, and Duke, Applicants Building Official Ritchey presented background material on the project, distributed prints of the Construction Drawings to Planning Commission, and stated that there were three major areas of concern that he recommended the Commissioners consider. These areas include the following: 1. Farnsworth Drive a. Building Official Ritchey had a question on the radius of the cul-de-sacs. Subdivision ordinance requires a 60 foot radius to face of curb. Proposal, as designed, shows a 60 foot radius to the property line. Results in a 43 foot radius on cul-de-sac, to curb. b. Centerline radius at corner of Farnsworth Drive and Timothy Street was 100 feet on the original, approved plat of Stonecreek Subdivision Phases I & II. The design now submitted shows a 65 foot radius. 2. Fluctuating distances between property line and curbs. Setbacks Become as large as 17 feet in some areas. Building Official Ritchey recommended making the set-backs uniform and reducing set-backs to 7 feet throughout the subdivision. 3. Flag lots. A number of lots around cul-de-sacs have minimum frontage resulting in narrow widths. Dwelling would have to be built 80 feet back of property line to comply with city codd. Question by Tom Burton, Burton Engineering, 3944 SE Hawthorne, Portland, OR., if anyone has built a cul-de-sac of 100 foot radius in Central Point. Minutes Planning Commission Meeting April 15, 1980 - page 4 Building Official Ritchey stated that there have been none built in the five years that he has been with the city. Mike Ashby, 905 Comet Av, Central Point, representing John-Wayne Construction Medford, stated that to his knowledge there are no cul-de-sacs that large in Central Point. The only place he has seen them built is for commercial areas, Mr. Ashby stated he would like to see some agreeable arrangement made. Chairman Nordby stated that he would like to measure some existing cul-de-sacs. 60 foot radius has been Municipal Code for a long time. The Planning Commission had investigated reducing the radius of cul-de-sacs and it was found that 60 feet was needed. Cliff Motes suggested that these are not true cul-de-sacs, they are just birds- eyes off the street and questioned the need for such a large area as it is not the end of a dead end street. Mr. Motes and Mr. Ashley left the Council Chambers to measure Centennial Circle and Travertine Circle, comparable cul-de-sacs. Upon their return, they stated that both Centennial and Travertine Circles have a radius of 43 feet to the curb. Discussion. Chairman Nordby stated that Lot #7 could be construed to be a flag lot. Discussion on moving property lines. Discussion on granting a variance to the lot frontage requirements in the subdi- vision ordinance. Chairman Nordby read Municipal Code conditions for granting a variance. Discussion. Commissioner Dixon made a motion to grant variances in the following instances of variations to the minimum lot frontage requirements: Block 2 Block 3 Block 8 Lot 3 - 39.021 Lot 1 - 69.93, Lot 5 - 26.51, Lot 16- 53.17, Lot 6 - 45.49, Lot 17-. 31.131 Lot 7 - 35.65, Lot 27- 55.431 Lot 8 - 25.301 Block 9 Block 10 Lot 5 - 25.00, Lot 2 - 55.411 Lot 3 - 46.00, Lot 4 - 46.00+ Second by MacDonald. Roll Call vote found Chairman Nordby, Commissioners Stallsworth, MacDonald, Thelen, Himmelman, and Dixon in favor. Commissioner Hillyer opposed. Motion .carried. Minutes Planning Commission Meeting April 15, 1980 - page 5 Commissioner MacDonald made a motion to grant variances for 43 foot radius on the cul-de-sacs and move the property line to within 7 feet of the curb. City Administrator Kucera stated that he has trouble with granting a variance to measures that are in the code to provide for the public safety. Scaling of the original pla-z shows a 60 foot property line radius giving a 53 foot radius at the curb. This is nothing new to the developers. Mr. Kucera suggested the Planning Commission consider changing the ordinance rather than continually granting variances. MacDonald withdrew motion at this time. Further discussion on cul-de-sacs and changing the ordinance. Discussion on 100 foot radius on curve at Timothy and Farnsworth. Commissioner Dixon made a motion to follow code on 100 foot radius or curve. Second by Hillyer. Roil Call vote found all in favor. Motion carried. Commissioner Thelen made a motion to grant a variance for the "turnouts" on Farnsworth Drive to allow a 43 foot radius to the curb and a 50 foot radius to the property line, because the turnouts are short and do not fit the code ' description of a cul-de-sac. Second by MacDonald. Roll Call vote found Chairman Nordby and Commissioners Stallsworth, MacDonald, Thelen, Himmelman, and Dixon in favor. Commissioner. Hillyer opposed. Motion carried. Commissioner Thelen made a motion directing Staff to draft a Resolution of Recommendation to the Council recommending approval of the Construction Plans of Stonecreek Subdivision, Phase II as submitted with conditions from previous Staff Reports, variances, and corrections passed in this and previous Planning Commission sessions. Second by MacDonald. Roll call vote found all in favor, motion carried. VII. No Miscellaneous Matters VIII. Motion by Hillyer, second by Dixon to adjourn. All in favor, motion carried. Adjournment came at 11:22 p.m.