HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 15, 1980 1 l
Minutes
July 15, 1980 - Planning Commission Meeting
Central Point Council Chambers
1. Meeting called to order by Chairman Hillyer at 7:40 p.m.
II. Roll call found Chairman Hillyer, Commissioners Dixon, Himmelman and Havice .
present. Others present were City Administrator-Kucera, Building Official
Ritchey, Planning Commission Secretary Georg Stotler-de Ruyter and sev-,ral
interested citizens.
Oath of the office of Planning Commissioner for the City of Central Point
given to Geroge Freeman by City Administrator Kucera. Congratulationsi
Mr. Freeman will be filling Position # 3.
III. Motion by Dixon, second by Havice to approve the Minutes of the June 17, 1980
Planning Commission Meeting. Roll call vote found all in favor, motion carried.
IV. A. No Correspondence
B. No Public Appearances
' V. No Old Business
VI. New Business
A. Public Hearing - Variance, Intrusion Into Required Set-back
601 Hazel St
J.C. Map Page 37-2W-3DA, Tax Lot 700
Sierra Heights Subdivision, Zone R-1-8
John R. Smith, Applicant
Chairman Hillyer opened the Public Hearing
1) Building Official Ritchey described the application stating that the variance
is to allow the erection of an open, covered porch that will intrude into
the 20 foot front yard set-back 34 inches more than the 18 inches allowable,
for a total projection of 54 inches.
2) Notice of the Public Hearing, published July 9 and July 19, 1980 in the
Medford Mail Tribune, was read into the record by Building Official Ritchey.
3) Commissioner Dixon stated that she had previously discussed this matter with
Mr. Smith who is her neighbor, but that she felt there was no conflict of
interest.
Motion by Havice, second by Himmelman to allow Commissioner Dixon to participate
as the Commission felt no conflict of interest existed. Roll call vote found
all in favor, motion carried.
4) Building Official Planner Ritchey presented the Staff Report stating that
the dwelling is set back 21 feet, the Municipal Code allows an 18 inch
Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
July 15, 1980 - page 2
projection for eaves, sunshades, etc, and that the granting of a variance
to allow a total projection of 54 inches from the building line will not
create a problem with vision or aesthetic values in the neighborhood, nor
create a situation that will effect the value of properties in the
immediate area and will be in compliance with the Uniform Building Code.
Staff recommended that a variance of 34 inches into the required front yard be
allowed with the condition that the proch shall remain open with no enclosure
other than an open railing.
5) Copy of notice provided of this hearing was marked Exhibit #1, Proponents
Application for Variance was marked Exhibit #2 and both Exhibits were
incorporated into the record.
6) Bob Smith, P 0 Box 1688, Medford, representing the applicant, stated that
the lot is an oddly shaped lot and a difficult one to develop, but it was
a corner lot and had plenty of room. The house had been designed for the
lot and the porch had been constructed to be in compliance with the subdivision
covenants which stated that porches and overhangs need not be considered when
determining set-backs. Mr. Smith added that he had contacted the neighbors and
there were no objections.
Building Official/Planner Ritchey stated .that since the Restrictive Covenants ,
do not comply with City Ordinance, Section 17.60.100 the covenants do not
apply in this instance.
Commissioner Dixon stated that because of the peculiarly shaped lot and the fact
that it is the only empty lot in the area, the development of which has a
positive impact on the area aesthetically, the Planning Commission should consider
granting the variance.
Richard Halley, 463 N 6th, Central Point, stated that he had examined the lot
and could see no problem. Mr. Halley then asked who it was that drew up the
subdivision covenants and if it was not the responsibility of the Planning
Commission to review covenants as to compliance with Municipal Codes.
Building Official/Planner Ritchey answered that it is up to the developer to
determine their own covenants.
Chairman Hillyer answered that the Planning Commission did not and has not
reviewed subdivision covenants.
Mr. Halley asked the Planning Commission if they did not think it would be
adviseable to furnish the city codes to those responsible for drafting covenants
so they know what the city ordinances are so the covenants do not create
hardships and conflicts such as this one.
Discussion
Minutes
Planning Commission fleeting
July 15, 1980 - page 3
Consensus was that Staff should review subdivision covenants for compliance with
city codes at some time before approval is granted for a new subdivision.
6) No one came forward in opposition of the variance request.
7) No further questions were voiced.
At this point, Chairman Hillyer closed the Public Hearing portion of this
meeting.
Commissioner Himmelman stated that she had visited the site and visually could
see no variation in set-backs.
Motion by Havice to grant the variance request and allow a 34 inch intrusion into
the required 20 foot set-back, thereby assuring the applicant substantial
preservation of his property rights; and, adopting the Staff Report and Proponents
findings as fullfilling the requirements for the granting of a variance.
Second by Dixon. Roll call vote found all in favor, motion carried.
VII. Miscellaneous
A. Election of Vice Chairman of Planning Commission
Commissioner Havice nominated Pat Himmelman for the position of Vice-
Chairman, second by Dixon.
Motion to close nominations by Commissioner Havice, second by Dixon, Roll
call vote found all in favor.
Roll call vote found all in favor of electing Pat Himmelman as Vice-Chairman
of the Planning Commission.
B. Building Official/Planner Ritchey stated that a person had approached him
concerning opening a seafood warehouse and wholesale business. The building
he is interested in is now located in a C-2 Zone and under existing city
ordinances wholesale and warehousing firms are not allowed, not even as a
conditional use; however, on the Comp Plan the area is shown as LC-LI where
this activity would be allowed. Mr Ritchey further stated that as the situation
now exists, a zone change would be required to allow the above use.
Commissioner Himmelman asked Building Official Ritchey if a conflict exists.
Building Official Ritchey stated that a wholesale food distributor has been
in existance in the subject building and that he could see no problem with it.
Mr. Ritchey further stated that there will be a change of occupancy involved,
but an appearance before the Planning Commission would not be required.
Discussion
Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
July 15, 1980 - page 4
Consensus was that the City could change the zone based on the existing Comp Plan
and the fact that the area is zoned LC-LI on the proposed Comp Plan also, however
it was felt that the owner of the property should initiate the action.
VIII. Motion by havice to adjourn, second by Dixon. Roll call vote found all in
favor, motion carried. Adjournment came at 8:30 p.m.