Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 15, 1979 Planning Commission Meeting City Hall Council Chambers May 15, 1979 Meeting was opened at 7:32 P.M. by Chairman McManama. Roll call found members present to be Emery, Hansen, Hillyer, Nordby, Thelen and McManama. Absent were Waldron, Loveland, and 1 vacancy. Councilmembers present were McBee, Halley, and Rayburn. Staff members present wereCity Administrator Kucera; Building Official- Ritchey and Secretary Stamper. Minutes of May 1, 1979 meeting were approved in motion by Emery, seconded by Nordby and passed "with all in favor. Request that Public Appearances be addres- sed later in the meeting. Old Business: Public Hearing continuation of the Kosmatka and Corcoran Re-Zone Request from OSD-5 (County) to City R-3 on property located on east side of North Tenth Street and northerly of Cherry Street known as J.C. map 37 2W 2BC, Tax Lors 600, 1100 and part of 1400. Applicants present were Daniel and Victor Kosmatka. Mr. D. Kosmatka presented map and explained in detail and re-stated the request for the R-3 zoning application proposal outlined in document "Proposal of Redesignation of Land Use". Publ-ic Hearing portion reopened from the May 1, 1979 Planning Commission meeting. No one wished to speak in favor. No one wished to speak against the proposal. The public portion of the meeting was closed. Document of names on petition was presented and made a part of the file in opposition to the Applicant's request. Procedure forms for the zone change were filled out by Paul Emery. Motion by Hillyer, second by Hansen to approve the zone change from County OSD-5 to City R-3 as petitioned by the Applicants, and forward the recommendation to the City Council. By roll call vote, all in favor. Carried. Will be forwarded to the City Council as recommended. Correspondence and Public Appearances. Bob DeLong, a Planner with Rogue Valley Council of Governments and working on our City's Urban Growth Boundary, made a presentation giving background of the Small Cities Assistance Grant the City had received and COG's part in the contract with the City to develop a new UGB document. He presented copies of "Analysis of Long-Range Land Needs for the City of Central Point" with 4 methods to arrive at the amount of acreage needed within our UGB. Mr. DeLong's analysis recommends 4,000 acres instead of the requested 5,400 acres which included land of the Green- Way Exposition Park and I-5 Freeway. Discussion on population figures and the anticipated predicted growth for the City of Central Point versus not determining the requirement for the different uses of the land such as commercial, industrial, residential, etc. Councilman McBee stated that proposed population figures of 22,000 by the Year 2000 would mean an overall picture of 1/3 million people with- in the County and 321 times the population for Central Point the City now has! He advocates wanting to protect our City and the Rogue Valley and protects its environment and feels the Valley can't sustain this type of growth. Member of Council Rayburn asked about the Seven Oaks Interchange as a commercial/industrial Planning Commission Meeting May 15, 1979 - page 2 Correspondence & Public Appearances (continued) area and not change it from its present farmland use it now enjoys! Mr. DeLong stated he did not know how to respond to the Ag. question. Planning Commissionmember Thelen stated Central Point will grow and should not grow in a hap-hazard fashion and that's why the City should have the power of control...not the County...and feels the Carrying Capacity Study will be helpful in the determination of the City's growth. More discussion. Statements from the audience were made by Mr. Edwin Gebhard, 446 Beebe Road, Central Point, citing planning involved in starting the B.C.V.S.A. in the 1900s for the growth we now have and the City must plan for the growth it will get; the laws keep changing all the time as trends keep changing and cited the importance of having both water and sewer available to take the load it now has! Member Hillyer spoke of the way certain areas nearby have been "botched up" by theCounty and calling out "Gibbon Acres" as an example. The City should be able to monitor its own surroundings. More discussions. Mr. Otto Bohnert, 4270 Grant Road, Central Point, owner_ of 180 acres, citing economics determines the land use. . .if the farmer can make money while so farming- then let him farm. If the land is no longer usable for farming, then let the farmer take that determination, not some c .. bureaucracy! He stated he had asked to be included within the UGB some time ago as some of his land is no longer feasible to continue farming and the ' classification of soils can not compare with soils in other areas of the State of Oregon, or California, or Arizona. Mr. Gebhard states the law has to preserve the land but their laws will break the farmer; can't spray without notifying people within 500' of his property; the increased freight rates imposed in our area, and other prob- lems farmers have. Councilman Halley stated the People's rights should be left up to those people involved with the issues at hand; farmers with farming while working with the County and State representatives...not the other way around! City Administrator Kucera stated that the City must have a presentation to L.C.D.C. in July, 1979 and this evening was just one step of development of the many! And recommended that the Planning ,Commission endorse the, recom- mended 4,000 acres. Discussion. Motion by Nordby to accept COG's 4,000 acre acres as recommended. Motion died for lack of a second. More discussion. Councilman McBee asked COG to work in the areas "we, the City" want covered and have a map prepared showing what the 4,000 acres would look like...then Mr. DeLong could come back before the Planning Commission and show us! Mem- ber/lhelen asked for more time to research the Urban Growth Boundary as he has no background as a newly-appointed member to the Planning Commission. Motion by Han sen, to correlate the recommended 4,000 acres COG Planner DeLong suggests onto a map and present it back to the Planning Commission at the next meeting. Motion was seconded by Emery and carried with all in favor with the exception of Chairman McManama who voted "No". . Planning Commission Meeting May 15, 1979 - page 3 New Business Public Hearing on City Hall off-street parking Variance was next order of busi- ness. Property located on J.C. map 37 2W 11BB Lots 9 thru 16 on north side of Alder Street in Block 8 of Original Town. Presentation made by Bldg. Official Ritchey; 38 notices mailed with 1 return.- Public notices published 2 times as required as well as public posting. Questions on parking for variety of uses _ within the building if joint-use will be addressed at time of a 1068 Review. No one came to speak in favor. No one came to speak against the Variance request. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Discussion. Motion by Emery to approve the Variance request to park in the 20-foot setback. , Second given by Thelen. By roll call. All in favor, and carried to allow parking within the 20' setback by unanimous:,,,-vote of those present. Preliminary Plat Review for Greenfield Circle Subdivision with applicant George Johns present,- land located on J.C. map 37 2W 34C for Tax Lot 3800. Planning Commissionmember. Thelen went on record stating he had spoken with an involved property owner but feels he can render a decision in a non-biased manner. Member Thelen exception was noted. City Administrator gave background information to all present and the problems with Dobrot Way and bringing it up to City-standards, various meetings held by the Council's Street Committee, that this would have to be an approved Subdivision 0 within our City. Continuing, Dobrot Way, because of its width, cannot be brought up to City standard but the City attorney advises it can be developed as a private road or street within a Planned Unit Development. Staff report presented by Kucera recommends making the development a P.U.D. Discussion on who has juris- diction over a private street, the City park-site, pedestrian way, and maintenance and liability of same? Summary given by Kucera: This has been a problem from the beginning of the proposed development and the Planning Commission could go with a Subdivision and allow a variance, or could halt the Subdivision process and embrace the P.U.D. concept, (P.U.D. ordinance is in the Variance Section of the Municipal Code Book under Zoning) and applicant could apply for less acreage of the 5-acres required for the variance; to allow the 4.69 acres the Developer has! Mr. Johns stated he does not want a Planned Unit Development, ust a small subdivision. Surveyor Verlyn Thomas came from the audience, stated he was the one who drew up the Preliminary Plat and addressed, the'Plann. Commission members. "He abhors PUDs and that the Plana. Commission should not feel reluctant to grant a variance on the property as a subdivision, etc. The City can (1) initiate a street improvement plan, (2) create Dobrot Way as a private way, 3 can accept Dobrot Way as a sub-standard street into the present City-system, 4) Require no sidewalks in the Subdivision as "not all street should have sidewalks"." More discussion. Variance needed to approve the Preliminary Plat would be to approve the Subdivision with a private sub-standard street! Mr. Johns stated the lot owners could have a l/llth interest in the street thru covenants to provide for street maintenance as necessary and go along with the subdivision idea he has presented showing 11 lots and an island turn-around at the northerly end with a definite flow pattern to ease traffic access on the narrow street. Mr. Johns said he and neighbors had been taking care of Dobrot Way for some years without any undue burden on anyone; and feels Dobrot Way can be taken care of in the same fashion after his Subdivision is developed. Planning Commission Meeting May 15, 1979 - page 4 New Business (continued) Building Official Ritchey reported on a recent visit to Eugene to see a PUB well-established there with wide streets, some sidewalks required on some streets...other streets having no sidewalks. . Storm draininage problems for the Dobrot Way area was discussed and the past histories of troubles the City has had in that area with flooding.- Motion by Finery to have Developer George Johns come back to the Planning Com- mission with a new Prelininary Plat with variance for the Subdivision develop- ment, and need 1. . Map showing all items addressed, 2. Written findings for the requested variance as part of the requirement for the Planning Commission to adopt as their own findings; at the neat regular meeting scheduled for June 5th. Motion seconded by Hansen. Roll call vote. All in favor but Hillyer and Chairman McManama. The majority carried. Discussion on the turn- around radius of Fire equipment accessibility at the island site shown on the plans will be referred to the Fire Department for their input. (Preliminary Plat will be again rescheduled to June.5th 'for continuation,of the process.) Miscellaneous Matters Building Official Ritchey spoke of issuing a building permit to the Louisiana- Pacific Columbia Corridor Division for new storage shed; a "Butler=type" build- ing; located at 594 South Front Street. Update of 1068 Review on Squeeze In remodelling plans to be a pants store now ' instead of a shop for plants and flowers .Mr. Ritchey informed Commissioners. Crater General Hospital has changed hands and former alterations and remodelling plans have been updated and in-house for rechecking stated-the-Building Official. No further business, motion by Finery to- adjourn was seconded by Hansen. All in favor and carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:55 P.M.