Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 2, 1980 Minutes September 2, 1980 - Planning Commission Meeting Central Point Council Chambers I. Meeting called to order by Chairman Hillyer at 7:30 p.m. II. Roll call found Chairman Hillyer and Commissioners Havice, Freeman, Novesad, and Himmelman present. Absent was member Dixon. Others present were City Administrator Dave Kucera, Buiiding Official/Planner Ritchey, Planning Commission Secretary Georg Stotler-de Ruyter and several interested citizens. III. Commissioner Havice stated that a correction was necessary on Page 6, Section VI, Subsection B of the August 19, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 9: 50 p.m. should be inserted as the time the meeting was called back to order. Motion by Himmelman, second by Freeman to approve the Minutes of the August 19, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting with the above correction. Roll call vote found all in favor, motion carried. IV. A. No Correspondence B. No Public Appearances V. 1063 Plan Review - Multi Family Dwelling (6-Plex) 112 Ash Street, J.C. Map Page 37-2W-11BB, Tax Lot 7700, Orig. Town William Earl Developments, Applicant Jeff Mayfield, 3431 S Pacific Highway, Medford, representing the applicant stated that the idea is to build one bedroom efficiency apartments using a colonial concept or San Francisco Row House Type design to blend with the existing structures in the neighborhood. The 6-Plex will have three different facades to provide interest and variety. Building Official/Planner Ritchey presented the Staff Report stating that the proposal meets all of the requirements of the R-3 Zone and stressed the condition that the landscaping will be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Mayfield stated that the applicant plans to fence the property line along the alley so the occupants would not use the alley for access; and that the areas shown as yard on the plans will be lawn, not bark dust. Commissioner Freeman stated that he would like to see the entire side property line fenced, rather than just the portion alongside the parking area, as the old fence is in a state of disrepair. Building Official/Planner Ritchey asked Mr. Mayfield if the old fence was on their property or .the neighbors. t,r.Mayfield answered that the property had been surveyed and as far as he knew the fence was on the property line. liinutes Planning Commission Meeting September 2, 1950 - page 2 Mr. Ritchey stated that the fence adjacent to the parking area will have to be a slatted chain link fence or a screened fence of some kind. Motion by Havice, second by Himmelman to approve the 1068 Review, subject to the Staff Report and with the condition that the applicant fence both inner property lines to conform to City Codes. Roll call found all in favor, motion carried. B. Adoption of Resolution #17, A Resolution of Recommendation of approval of the Outline Development Plan for the "Village" Planned Unit Development. Hopkins Road, East of Bursell Road J.C. Map Page 37-2:1-11B, Tax Lot 1800 C.A.M. Pacific Industries, Applicant Chairman Hillyer read Resolution ;617, A Resolution of Recommendation of Approval of the Outline Development Plan for the "Village" Planned Unit Development into the record. Motion by Himmelman, second by 11avice to approve Resolution X617 as presented. Roll call vote found Chairman Hillyer and Commissioners Havice, Novasad and Himmelman in favor. Member Freeman opposed. Motion carried. ' VI. New Business A. Preliminary Development Plan - The Village P.U.D. Hopkins Road, East of Bursell Road J.C. Map Page 37-214-11B, Tax Lot 1800 C.A.M. Pacific Industries, Applicant Robert Blanton, C.E. and Engineer for the Project representing the applicant, summarized their presentation up to this point stating that they had met with City Staff and discussed the problems with the project and that the applicants feel they have incorporated all the suggestions of City Staff in their present proposal. Mr. Blanton displayed a plan showing the physical facilities: streets, sewer, water, and storm sewer and described a 12 inch water main down Hopkins Road, key points of the drainage system, and the sewer system beginning at a stub-out on their north property line that runs through the Meadows before reaching the Village and will continue through Suburban, thence south through the R-1-8 property owned by the applicant and will eventually connect to Bursell; as well as a stub-out to the east that will serve the property as yet undeveloped. Mr. Blanton then displayed a map showing the surrounding properties stating that these properties have gone together to form the Local Improvement District and as a result each are an integral part of the other. lir. Blanton then stated that the storm sewer system will be maintained by the Village Homeowners Association and the water and sanitary sewer system along Minutes Planning Commission Meeting September 2, 1980 - page 3 Village Drive will be dedicated to the City with casements so the City can maintain them. Mr. Blanton suggested that the City reserve an 8 foot bicycle lane_ along the North side of Columbine Way. Nr. Blanton stated that the applicants would like to develop the entrances to the Village as curb cuts rather than curb returns. As a result, the entrances will be like a wide driveway rather than a street intersection, hopefully to discourage the public from using the private streets. Commissioner Havi.ce expressed concern with traffic at the intersection of Bursell and Hopkins. Mr. Blanton stated that part of the Hopkins Road L.I.D. includes the improvement of the intersection, that this eras one of the initial requirements for developing the area, that the intersection is in a county road and has been designed to comply with county and city standards, and that it is under construction at this time. Building Official/Planner Ritchey presented the Staff Report stating that the ' applicant had addressed Municipal Code Section 17.68.070, Preliminary Development Plan, items "a" through "i" satisfactorily. Mr. Ritchey continued, stating that the floor plans submitted by the applicant indicate a property line ' inch beyond the exterior walls and that if in fact this is a property line it would indicate that the Village has been divided into individual lots, and if that were so, the structures could not be built the way they are designed since they don't comply with the Uniform Building Code which requires 1 hour exterior walls,and a parapet if the building exceeds 1000 square feet. Abe Wilson, representing the applicant, stated that the reference to property lines will be removed as it is not their intention to divide the property into individual lots. Building Official/Planner Ritchey stated that the Solar Access for the project, although addressed by Architect Bruce Samuelson, needs further study by the Planning Commission. Georg Stotler-de Ruyter, Building/Planning Dept Staff, presented an analysis of the Solar Access for the Village stating that 30 of the 71 units are optimally oriented to provide solar access for future conversions to passive or active solar space heating, domestic hot water heating, cooling, ventilation or electrical production systems making use of either south walls or south roof areas or both. 7 additional units are optimally oriented for future conversions to solar systems, but solar access is limited to the south walls of these dwellings. The remaining 34 dwellings are oriented unfavorably for the use of solar energy systems. Minutes Planning Commission Meeting September 2, 1980 - page 4 Mr. Stotler-de Ruyter continued, stating that of the 71 units in this development 42% have major south roof and south wall access to the sun compared to the 70% required in our proposed Solar Access Ordinance; and, 9.8% have major south wall access as compared to the 20% required in the Solar Access Ordinance. This results in a total of 52% of the dwellings having adequate solar access for solar space heating, domestic hot water heating, cooling, ventilation or electrical production as compared to the 90% required in our proposed Solar Access Ordinance. Mr. Stotler-de Ruyter concluded, stating that the use of strategically placed deciduous trees, as shown on the typical landscape plan, to prevent unwanted solar heat gains in the summer, will do much to reduce the overall energy needs of the dwellings. Bob Blanton, Engineer for the Project, stated that he had worked on a project in which banks of solar collectors were mounted separate from the dwellings and as a result, proper orientation of the dwellings was not as critical. Mr. Stotler-de Ruyter stated that variances to the ordinance would be allowed if such a design were submitted and approved, that was equal to or better than the results obtained by compliance with the Solar Access Ordinance. Commissioner Freeman asked where the school bus stop is to be located. ' Mr. Blanton explained the fishtail turnaround at the west end of Columbine Way and suggested that a bus could make use of it. Commissioner Havice stated that from her experience a school bus will not drive doom a street to a turnaround and that the most likely location would be on the corner of Hopkins and Bursell; and then questioned the absence of a complete landscape plan for the development. Building Official/Planner Ritchey stated that he had suggested the applicant prepare a typical landscape plan of an area including some common areas, parking, structures, walking paths, etc; and that typical plan was included in this presentation; and that if approved the landscaping would be no less than what was shown. Potion by Himmelman, second by Havice to approve the Preliminary Development Plan for the Village Planned Unit Development. Roll call vote found Chairman Hillyer and Commissioners ilavice, Novasad, and Himmelman in favor. Member Freeman opposed, Motion carried. Building Official/Planner Ritchey asked the Commission if it would meet their approval to have Secretary Stotler-de Ruyter draft a Resolution of Recommendation of Approval and have Chairman Hillyer sign it on Wednesday or Thursday (Sept. 3 or 4). Discussion - Motion by Havice, second by Novasad to direct Secretary Stotler-de Ruyter to prepare a Resolution of Recommendation of Approval for Chairman Hill.yer' s 1 Minutes Planning Commission Fleeting September 2, 1980 - page 5 signature and forward some to the City Council. Roll call vote found all in favor, motion carried. VII. Miscellaneous Flatters A. Building Official/Planner Ritchey and Planning Commission Secretary Stotler-de Ruyter will meet with Marvin Gloege on Friday, September 5, 1980 to discuss program material for the upcoming instructional seminars for the Planning Commission. It was again suggested that we invite the Planning Commissions from other small cities in the area to participate. B. Cherry Park Subdivision North 10th & Cherry Street J.C. Map Page 37-2W-2BC Daniel & Victor Kosmatka, Gerald Corcoran, Applicants Chairman Hillyer asked Building Official/Planner Ritchey why this item was not on the agenda. Mr. Ritchey stated that it has been on and off the agenda for the past couple of weeks, that the agenda had been published prior to the submission of this proposal, and that the applicant had chosen to come in and request variances of the Planning Commission. Victor Kosmatka, 3094 ]dells Fargo Road, Central Point, Applicant, stated that this design has a 50 foot radius on the first turn coming into the proposed development where the City Code requires a 100 foot radius, and that they have designed a one-way street system that in their opinion could handle a fire truck or other emergency vehicle. Mr. Kosmatka continued, stating that they will dedicate the center area between the one way streets as a park equalling approximately lit acres of land; and that storm drains and sidewalks were not included on this presentation as this was the 8th or 9th revision and that these items would be included on the Final Plat after an engineer works on it. Building Official/Planner Ritchey presented the Staff Report stating that if you take the centerline radius of the first curve mentioned by Flr. Kosmatka, it equals a radius of 75 feet but is still short of the 100 foot radius required by Code; and that there is nothing in the Ordinance that addresses one way streets so we must use Section 16.12.050 requiring a minimum right-of-way of 50 feet. Mr. Ritchey continued, stating that a small park is expensive for the City to maintain, therefore one requirement mould be that the subdivider maintain the playground and park equipment; that the plat shows 10 feet of fall in about 50 feet at the first curve and we need to see how that is to be dealt with, as well as the drainage; that a 24 inch sanitary sewer line cuts through the property making two of the lots almost unbuildable; thnt in the City' s long range plans there is a 12 inch water line that will extend down llazel Street and then south for which an easement will be necessary; that there is no indication how the Minutes Planning Commission Mccting September 2, 1980 - page 6 how the property surrounding the turnaround will be developed, and that the potential traffic generated by total possible development is 917 trips per day. Dan Kosmatka, 1005 S Fain, Medford, Applicant, stated that Gerald Corcoran doesn' t want to develop his property for 4 to 5 years and that they would like to develop their property now; that they can' t show what kind of development is to occur on the property to the south as Gerald doesn' t know what he plans to do; and stated lie felt it was unfair for the City to penalize them for something they have no control over. Commissioner Havice stated that she had a problem with a park between two streets because of the traffic and the street dropping dorm a hill, around a curve and into the vicinity of the park. Myron Corcoran, representing Gerald Corcoran, 3570 Hanley Road, Central Point, stated that much of the drop had already been filled and that more fill was continually being brought in. Victor Kosmatka stated that he and Dan have compromised on the design, Mr. Corcoran has compromised and now all they can do is ask for a variance as they feel there are extraordinary hardships involved and that it is time for the City to compromise. ' Discussion Building Official/Planner Ritchey stated that the street system needs to be designed to handle the maximum development; that a 50 foot street, both sides, would handle whatever development occured on the properties; and that the design depends on what is to be developed on the property to the south. Victor Kosmatka stated that they have tried every possible way to provide access, that they tried to reach an agreement with the church to the North, the landowners to the West and the church and school to the South for a right-of-way for a street extension, but to no avail. Mr. Kosmatka continued, stating that they have been working on this project 32 years and have tried every compromise they could come up with and would appreciate some guideance from the Planning Commission on how to proceed or some method of compromise the City could live with. Discussion Motion by Freeman, second by Havice to deny the applicant' s request for variances. Roll call vote found Chairman Hillyer and Commissioners Havice, Freeman and Himmelman in favor, Member Novasad opposed. Motion carried. Myron Corcoran requested a Study Session to discuss the problem with the Planning Commission and see if some kind of a solution could be. reached. Chairman Hillyer stated that the Planning Commission Nembers are not designers but would meet with the applicants as requested. Study Session on Cherry Street Subdivision ser for September 16, 1930 following the regular Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Meeting September 2, 1980 - page 7 Meeting. VIII. Notion by Havice, second by Novased to adjourn. Roll call vote found all in favor, motion carried. Adjournment came at 10:30 p.m.