Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 4, 1979 Planning Commission Meeting City Hall Council Chambers December 4, 1979 I. Meeting called to. order by Chairman McManama at 7:35 P.M. II. Roll call found the folliwing members present: Hillyer, Mialk, Nordby, McManama, Thelen, and DeArmond. Absent were members: Sorensen and McPherson. Others present were City Administrator Dave Kucera, Building Official-Planner R. J. Ritchey, Administrative Director Bill Donahue, City Council Members Candy Rayburn, Building-Planning Dept. Clerk Georg Stotler- de Ruyter and 13 interested citizens. III. Approval of the Minutes of the November 20, 1979 Planning Commission Meeting was extended to the next regular meeting because copies were received too late for consideration at this time. Motion by Member Thelen, second by Member Nordby. Motion passed with all in favor. IV. Correspondence - Thank you card was passed around from Mabel Banks in appreciation of the flowers and the remembrances from the Building Department and the Planning,-Commission. Public Appearances -- Kathryn L. Wilds was sworn in by City Administrator Kucera as Planning Commission Member Position #9, replacing Orville Hamer. City Council Member Candy Rayburn presented a map of a preliminary pro- posal for a bike path for the City. Bike paths were established as an agenda item for a joint study session to be held Thursday, December 6, 1979. , V. Old Business A. Review of Ordinance establishing a Uniform Hearings Ordinance for Land Use Decisions. This matter was set to it later time on the agenda so the public business could be takenecare of first. VI. New Business A. Ashenberner Zone Change Request from R-3 to M-1. J.C. map 37 2W I 10AA, Tax Lot 5600-5800 in Cooksey Addition. Public Hearing was called to order by Chairman McManama. Proponents presenta- tions were requested. Medford Attorney Carl Krack, representing Mr. Ashenberner, made a preliminary presentation including the following: Ashenberner Molding Company's basic location is zoned M-2. Subject property is R-3'. Property directly adjacent to subject property is M-1. Mr.-Ashenberner has been there for 15 years and has an enclosed manufacturing operation. Mr. Ashenberner applied for a zone change last year to M-2 but the City Council overturned the Planning Commis- sion's approval and denied it. Major objections to the zone change were the noise created by the operation and the fact that Mr. Ashenberner had developed no definite plans illustrating how he was goind to use his property once it was rezoned. The creation of dust was another consideration. The Council placed a limitation on the hours that trucks could use Haskell Street. Mr. Ashenberner posted signs and no- tified trucking companies about the use restrictions. Planning Commission Meeting December 4, 1979 - page 2 There is an existing house, now being used as a residence, that will be con- verted to an office and remain as a buffer between industrial and residential zones. Mr. Ashenberner is asking for a zone change to M-1 rather than M-2 at this time. M-1 is aamore restrictive zone, but Mr. Ashenberner feels he can abide by these regulations. Bob Gantenbein, an Environmental Engineeer with Marquess and Associates, iden- tified hemself as representing Mr. Ashenberner. Mr. Gantenbein stated that he and the DEQ had examined the molding plant and measured noise levels. Mr. Ashenberner has acted on recommendations of Mr. Gantenbein and now the noise levels are within the DEQ Standards. Mr. Gantenbein displayed a plot plan of the subject property and immediate vicinity. He explained that the manufacturing facilities would stay in the same place. Storage for finished projects and a shop area to maintain trucks and equipment would be in the new area. No buffer zone now exists between the industrial zone and residential uses in the area. Attorney Krack stated that the Comprehensive Plan designates the area for L.L.I. (Light-Limited Industrial) uses. Mr. Ashenberner is submitting himself to fairly tough restrictions in the M-1 Zone and feels that he can comply with all regulations. e Chairman McManama then called for opponents' presentations. Wade Tucker, 147 Haskell Street, Central Point, related that Ashenberner's property drains into his property and floods it. Attorney Jerry Scannell, 241 Smokey Lane, Grants Pass, identified himself as representing Mr. Gerald Morris of Amy Street, Central Point. Atty. .Scannell made�istatemeats in opposition to this rezone petition. Stated that he. has represented others of the neighbors opposing a zone change for Ashenberner's . �Tpperty several times previously. Mr. Scannell stated that Mr. Ashenberner's property has been used as though it were zoned M-1 for some time although it is now zoned R-3. The adverse impact of this activity on the neighborhood is apparent! At this time Chairman MCManama closed the Public Hearing portion of this zone change petition (when ono one else wished to speak for or against). Building Official Ritchey presented C.A.C. Minutes of October 29, 1979 meeting. The concensus of the Citizen's Advisory Committee was that L.L.I. on the Com- prehensive Plan Map was intended for uses similar to M-1. The zone change would conform to the intended use of the area. Building Official Ritchey *,:read from the Minutes of the October 25, 1979 Plann- ing. Commission Meeting which identified M-1, M-2, L.LC-LI Zones and concluded that LLI is intended for uses similar to M-1; a relatively restrictive use zone. Bldg. Official Ritchey stated that the existing dwelling owned by Mr. Tucker could remain as a non-conforming use in the event of a re-zone and that a non- conforming use may be extended in time, but not expanded, in case the property is sold. Planning Commission Meeting December 4, 1979 - page 3 Planning Commission Member Rich Thelen asked Mr. Ashenberner to describe his wood molding operation and how he would make use of the new area. Mr. Ashenberner explained there would be two storage buildings for finished products, a shop for tuning and repair of fork lifts and trucks, and off- streetiparking as they now use Alder Street for parking purposes. Extended Discussion. Mr. Ashenberner agreed to take positive actions to correct the drainage problem presented by Mr. Tucker during opponents portion of the public hearing. Planning Commission determination of the Fasano Findings were as follows: 1. 3 The proposed change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan as M-1 and LLI uses are very similar. 2. There is a public need because of the necessity of manufacturing or industry in Central Point. 3. Public need would best be met by the pagposed zone change as aa- there is a very limited amount of industrial land available and adjacent property is already M-2. 4. No adverse effects. 5. Proponents carried their burden of proof. Motion made by Member Nordby to recommend to Council to pass a "Resolution of Intent to Rezone". Second by Misik. Bldg. Official Ritchey explained "Intent to Rezone". It means the property would be rezoned when the use was overtly-established by Bldg. Permit or similar means, and not until. l In this way the City can retain some control. City Administrator Dave Kucera was asked by Bldg. Official Ritchey to provide additional explanatory remarks concerning "Intent to Re-Zone". City Admin. Kucera explained that there may be a use that would fit the zone but have a more adverse effect than the proposed use. "Intent to Rezone" in- sures that the impact the zone change was approved for remains the same. Roll Call vote. Motion passed. All in favor. B. Request for 6-month extension to prepare change in plat for "The Village", CAM Pacific Industries, Andy Maurer, Applicant. Motion made by Member Thelen that the extension be denied without prejudice as no one was present representing- the Applicant. Second by Member Nordby. Roll call vote found all in favor. Motion carried to deny without prejudice. Break called at 9:00 P.M. Planning Commission Meeting December 4, 1979 - page 4 Meeting was reconvened at 9:10 P.M. and Chairman McManama called the meeting back to order. Old Business (Deferred to this place on the Agenda earlier in this meeting) A. Review of Ordinance Establishing a Uniform Bearings Ordinance for Land Use Decisions. Presentation and explanation given by Dave Kucera, City Administratuxa General Discussion. VII. Miscellaneous Matters Building Official Ritchey recommended to the Planning Commission that they consider the materials dealing with recreational areas in multi-family developments that were distributed at an earlier meeting, and develop some suggestions as to how 'Xthis element could be incorporated into the City's ordinances. Georg Stotler-de Ruyter, Bldg.-Planning Clerk, explained the additional mater- ials regarding solar access that were included in the Planning Commission Member's packets. Mr. Stotler-de Ruyter suggested that the concept of solar access protection relates well to Section 11.010 of City Ordinance 1068, and by the addition of a "standard", including solar exposure as an element of a site plan review, to Section 11.040 (Ord. 1068) protection of solar access could be incorporated into an existing ordinance and existing site plan review processes: This would minimize the cost to the City of implementing solar access protection. VIII. Adjournment Motion made by Member Mislk with second by Member Nordby to adjourn when no further business was before the Commission. Motion carried with all in favor. Meeting adjourned at 10:25 P.M.