HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - February 18, 1997(I ~vx-der ~ _...
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
February 18, 1997 - 7:00 p.m.
Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 379
I. MEETING CALLED. TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
Chuck Piland -Angela Curtis, Jan Dunlap, Candy Fish, Bob Gilkey, Karolyne
Johnson, and Valerie Rapp
III. CORRESPONDENCE
IV. MINUTES
A. Review and approval of February 4, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes
V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
VI. BUSINESS
A. Public Hearing -Review and decision regarding a Site Plan Review for expansion
and remodel of a historic building, 445 Manzanita St., C-2 zoning district.
(37 2W 03DD Tax Lot 8200) (David & Sera Gihnour, applicants)
B. Review and recommendation regarding a Zone Text Amendment to amend CPMC
Chapter 17.56 as it relates to nonconforming uses and historic buildings.
C. Review and recommendation regarding a Zone Text Amendment to amend CPMC
17.60.210 as it relates to padlot developments.
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 1997
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER TO 7:00 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Angela Curtis, Bob Gilkey, Karolyn Johnson, Valerie Rapp.
Also present were: Jim Bennett, Planning Director, Ken Gerschler, Planning Technician,
Lee Brennan, Public Works Director, Arlene LaRosa, Secretary.
III. CORRESPONDENCE
There was no correspondence.
IV. MINUTES
A. Commissioner Rapp made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Minutes
for January 21, 1997 as written. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Curtis.
ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes; Rapp, yes.
V. BUSINESS
A. Public. Hearine - Revi w and rl c• o, o -
g8Ld1II9 a and eneiuen i
Chairman Piland opened the Public Hearing.
There were no ex-parte communication or conflicts of interest.
Jim Bennett, Planning Director, reviewed the basis for testimony and the appeal
process.
Ken Gerschler, Planning Technician, reviewed the Planning Department Staff
Report.
Commissioner Gilkey questioned if the house would be up to code. Jim Bennett
stated that the house would be inspected by the City Building Inspection
department to see that it meets all applicable codes.
The applicant, Mark Bryant, 436 Lauret Street, Central Point, came forward in
favor of the application. Mr. Bryant stated that Peak Environmental Services
inspected the house completely for asbestos and the report was given to the
Planning Department.
Chairman Piland closed the Public Hearing.
Commission Rapp stated that Condition #5 in the Conditions of Approval, should
be changed to 90 days because of weather conditions.
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 1997 -PAGE TWO
Commissioner Rapp made a motion to adopt Resolution #377 to approve the Site
Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit for Moving a Second Dwelling Unit onto
an R-2, Residential Two-Family Lot, 436 Laurel Street, (372W 03DD Tax Lot
4700) (Mark & Sandra Bryant, applicants), subject to all Conditions of Approval
with the change in Condition No. 5 to read "90 days." Motion was seconded by
Commissioner Gilkey. ROLL CALL VOTE: Curtis, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes;
Rapp, yes.
P ~bli He^ring -Review and decisio
B n regarding a Site Plan~ieview for Berg's Old-
.
F shinned B I.eYy R41 E Pine St 137 ~"J 02CG Tax Lot 41001 (Robert Bera
anolicant)
Chairman Piland opened the Public Hearing
There were no conflicts of interest or ex-parte communication.
Jim Bennett review the Planning Department Staff Report.
The applicant, Robert Berg, 6000 Rock Way, Central Point, came forward on
behalf of the application.
Chairman Piland closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Johnson made a motion to adopt Resolution #378 approving the
Site Plan Review for Berg's Old-Fashioned Bakery, 841 E. Pine Street (372W
02CC Tax Lot 4100) (Robert Berg, applicant) subject to all Conditions of
Approval. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Gilkey. ROLL CALL VOTE:
Curtis, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes; Rapp, yes.
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
Jim Bennett introduced Lee Brennan, the new Public Works Director.
Jim Bennett reviewed future agendas for the Planning Commission.
Jim Bennett also reviewed the status of the City's negotiations for receiving water from
Lost Creek Lake reservoir.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adjourn
Rapp. All said "aye" and meeting adjourned at
Motion was seconded by Commissioner
7:44 p.m.
PLtLNNiNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
HEARING
DATE: February 18, 1997
TO: Central Point Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Bennett, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Site Plan Review for the Expansion and Remodeling of a Historic Building
Located at 445 Manzanita St. in a C-2 Zoning District.
(37 2W 03DD Tax Lot 8200) (David & Sera Gilmour, applicants)
Summary
The applicants, David & Sera Gilmour, have agplied to the City of Central Point for approval
of a Site Plan Review to allow the construction of a 627 sq. ft. addition to an existing
residence designated by the City of Central Point. as a historic building. -
h rit
CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to render a decision on
any Site Plan Review' application. CPMC 17.70.030 further invests the Planning Commission
with the authority to act in the. capacity of historic review board and to render a decision on
any SitePlan Review application involving a historic building.. A public hearing is required
for consideration of any Site Plan Review application involving a historic building. Notice of
the public hearing was effected in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. (Exhibit A).
Applicable Law
Comprehensive Plan
CPMC Chapter 17:36
CPMC Chapter 17.56
CPMC Chapter 17.70
CPMC Chapter 17.72
Historic Inventory
C-2, Commercial-Professional District..
Nonconforming Uses
Historic Preservation Overlay Zone
Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval
~~
Back roun
The building at issue is an existing single-family residence and has been designated by the City
of Central Point as an undocumented building of historic interest. The house was built by
E.C. Faber, a prominent Central Point merchant, in 1910 building. It was also the boyhood
home of former Central Point Mayor and Jackson County Commissioner Donald Faber.
Except for the years 1967-1970, after a fire destroyed a rear sleeping porch, the house has
been continuously occupied. The building is listed on the State of Oregon inventory of
historic structures and has been approved for nomination to the National Register of Historic
Places. (Exhibit B)
Discussion
The applicants are proposing to construct a 627 sq. ft. addition to the existing residence that
will be designed to match the exterior of the existing residence and preserve the historic
integrity of the structure. (Exhibits C, D and E) Any expansion or remodeling of the building
is subject to, the approval of a Site Plan Review by the Planning Commission sitting as the
Historic Review Board.'The Planning Commission must determine whether the proposed
expansion constitutes a significant change in the appearance of the building that conflicts with
its original character or architectural style. The residence is also classified as a Class A
nonconforming use because it is now located in a C-2, Community-Professional zoning
district. Class A nonconforming uses are permitted to expand subject to a Site Plan Review
by the Planning Commission.
The decision of the Planning Conunission/Historic Review Board must be based upon Endings
that the expansion complies with the purposes of the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone set
forth in CPMC 17.'10.010 and with the site plan standards set forth in CPMC 17.72.040.
Historic Preservation Purposes
A. Provide for the preservation and protection of sites and improvements .within the
community of Central Point that reflect or represent elements of the city's cultural, social,
economic, political or architectural history;
B. Safeguard the city's historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage as embodied and reflected in
such improvements and areas;
C. Complement the efforts of the Southern Oregon Historical Society, State of Oregon and
other organizations or individual efforts aimed at historical preservation;
D. Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of Central Point's past;
E. Carry out the provisions of Statewide Planning Goal No. 5.
02
ite Plan Standar
A. Landscaping and fencing must be consistent with the neighborhood and used to screen
activities and uses that may impact existing neighboring uses.. The applicants have submitted
a landscaping plan (Exhibit F) that proposes additional shrubbery and a 3-foot wrought iron
fence. Three large existing trees on the property will be retained as well: The existing trees
adjacent to the garage and back walkway will be
B. Ingress and egress points must be designed and located to maintain and improve traffic
flows on public streets. Access to the residence will be from N. 5th St. where the existing
driveway and garage are located.
C. Off-street parking and interior circulation must be adequate to serve the site and maintain
good pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows. The existing garage will be retained for off-street
parking. Additional walkways will be constructed to improve pedestrian circulation on the
property.
D. Signs for the project must be designed and located to be compatible with the use and not
interfere with traffic control devices or traffic flows. No signs are proposed as part of the site
plan review application.
E. The site must be designed to be accessible to fire apparatus and have adequate fire fighting
facilities. Fire apparatus will have access to the site from both Manzanita St. and N. 5th St.
A fire hydrant is located adjacent to the site at the corner of Manzanita St. and N. 5th St.
F. The project must comply with all applicable city ordinances and regulations and must be
aesthetically acceptable in relation to the neighborhood and the City of Central Point. Staff
finds that the project is in compliance with all city ordinances and regulations notwithstanding
its status as a Class A nonconforming use. The use of the property for asingle-family
residence is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions:
1. Adopt Resolution No. ~ approving the Site Plan Review application for David & Sera
Gilmour, based on the findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the
recommended conditions of approval (Exhibit G); or
2. Deny the proposed Site Plan Review application; or
3. Continue the review of the Site Plan Review application at the discretion of the
Commission.
03
hi i
A. Notice of Public Hearing
B: State Historic Preservation Office Letter of October 29, .1996
C. Site Plan
D. Floor Plan
E. Elevations
F. Landscaping Plan
G. Recommended Conditions of Approval
i~
d4.
CYty of Central Point
City o~ Cent~ar Point EXIiIEIT 1tAtt
Planning Department
PX.ANNXNG DEPARTMENT
James li. Bennett, AICP
City Administrator/Planning Directo.
Ken Gerschlei
Planning Techniciar
CORRECTION TO
NOTICE OF MEETING
Date of Notice: January 30, 1997
' Meeting Date: Tuesday, February 18, 1997
Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate)
Place: Central Point City Hall
155 South Second Street
Central Point, Oregon.
NATiJRE OF MEETING
Elizabeth Barren
Planning Secretary
Beginning at the above place and time, the Central Point Historic Presexvation Board will review a Site
Plan application for the enlargement and remodeling of a designated historic building located at 162 N.
2nd Street (CORRECTED ADDRESS: 445 Manzanita) in a C-2, Commercial-Professional District.
The proposed improvements consist of a 527 sq. ft addition to an existing single-family dwelling that has
been designated by the City of Central Point as an undocumented building of historic interest The specific
site is located on Tax Lot 8200 of Jackson County Tax Assessor Map Page 372W03DD.
t"RITERiA FOR DECISION
The requirements for approval of Site Plans aze set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal
Code, relating to the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone, Commercal-Professional District, General
Regulations, Off-street Pazking and Loading. Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The
proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit
written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, February I8, 1997.
2. Wxitten comments maybe sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South
Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502.
155 South Second Street • Central Point, OR 97502 • (541) 664-3321 • Fa~c (541) 664-6384
e~
V `~~
3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the
expiration of the comment period noted above.. Any testimony and written comments about the
decisions described above will need to be related to the proposal and should be stated clearly to
the Historic Review Board.
4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Hall, 155
South Second Street, Central Pornt, Oregon. Copies of the same are available at 15 cents per page.
5. For additional information, the public may contact the Plazuung Depaztment at (541) 664.3321
(ext. 231)
~UMMAR'Y OF PROCEDURE
At the meeting, the Historic Review Board will review the applications, techzucal staff reports, hear
testimony from the applicant, proponents, and opponents and hear arguments on the application. Any
testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the
review, the Historic Review Board may appirove of deny the Site Plan Application. City regulations
provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all such decisions.
o~
October 29, 1996
David R. Gilmour
445 Manzanita Street
Central Point OR 97502
Dear Dr. Gilmour:
This to confirm that during its meeting in Salem on October 1Q 1994, the State
Advisory Committee on historic Preservatiomreviewed and approved the
following properly for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places.
Faber, Edward Charles, House (1910)
445 Manzanita Street '
Central Point, 7ackson County, Oregon
As is customary, we may be providing you or your preparer with a list of technical
corrections or amplifications which we ask you or your prepares to respond to by
means of replacement pages or continuation sheets for the nominating document,
as may be appropriate. Rquestions are appended to this notification letter, we
would appreciate a response as soon as practicable.
The nomination will be signed and forwarded to the National Register once any
outstanding supplementary material is received and routine production work is
completed by our office. All concerned will be notified when final action of the
nomination has been taken in Washington, D.C. The remaining steps in the
process will take place overa period of about wo months.
If questions about the National Register nomination process arise in the meantime,
I can be reached`at the following number: 503/398-5001, ext: 226.
Sincerely,
Elisabeth Walton Potter
National RegisterCoordinator
PARKS AND
RECREATION
DEPARTMENT
STATE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION OFFICE
1115 Commercial St. NI
Salem, OR 97310-1001
(503) 378-5001
- FAX (503) 378-6447
f~j 73414807
FABER, EDWARD CHARLES, HOUSE (1910)
445 IVlanzanita Street
Central Point, Jackson County, Oregon
15 slides
Dr. David Gilmour, owner and preparer
Public comments:
Technical issues: What, exactly, is false bevel clapboard? We are unfamiliar with the term.
Willamette College and Willamette University are being used
interchangeably when the correct title is Willamette University, if the
school in Salem is the subject.
Gross ground plan dimensions would be helpful. Has exterior color
analysis of the house been made to establish the original treatment? When
was it that the interior woodwork was painted white?
Klamath County community is correctly spelled Merrill, page 8-2.
The two-story, wood'frame, front-gabled Homestead house, a vernacular. form in the tradition of
Queen Anne-style architecture, built for Central Point drygoods and grocery store owner E. C.
Faber in 1910 standsat the northwest corner of Manzattita and Fifth Streets in the historic trading
center on the Oregon and California Railroadalignment in the Rogue River Valley. of southern
Oregon.
The house is proposed for nomination under Criterion B in the area of commerce as the property
most importantly associated with E. C. Faber, one of the leading merchants of Central Point, who
occupied it with his family from the time of its construction to his death in 1946. Faber's. widow
held the property until 1969, when it was sold after a fire which caused much damage to the rear
.section and upstairs late in 1967. The building which had been the Faber and McDonald dry
goods, grocery and shoe store was razed in 1970.
This application is thoroughly documented with respect to the property's development. Faber
entered into the picture in 1910. Thanks to close accounting of development in the Rogue Valley
by local newspapers in the historic period, it has been possible to identify the contracting firm as
Hathaway and Scott, a firm specializing, as per its advertisements, in "Modern Cottages and
Bungalows." The application reports on the central heating plant, a wood furnace, original
outbuildings, no longer standing, and it also reveals that the house was among the first in Central
Point to be wired for electrical service at the time of construction. The existing garage, anon-
historic construction of 1970, is counted anon-historic feature of the property.
The two-story, gable roofed house, with its rectilinear ground plan measuring x feet, is
oriented longitudinally on the lot, facing south onto Manzanita. There is a single pedimented
cross gable on the east side elevation covering atwo-story dining room window bay having
clipped corners at the ground story. The facade is organized symmetrically as two wide bays
~~
with jettied; shingle-clad gable peak and.full-width hip-roofed porch supported by Tuscan
columes interspersed with sections of an unusual lattice-style railing. The front entry is offset to
the westrof center. The exterior is clad with narrow lapped weatherboards and trimmed with
plain boards for corner angles, frieze and watertable. There is no stickwork or fancy trim except
for scrolled brackets supporting facade eaves and jetty and the east window bay sandwich ;
brackets.
The original roof cover was cedar shingles. The central brick chimney straddling the roof ridge
originally had a corbelled cap. Fenestration is more or less regular, consisting typically of one-
over-one double-hung windows framed with architrave molding. Across the rear elevation was a
hip roofed attachment of about 1911, a double screened porch consisting of kitchen utility area
on the lower level and a sleeping deck above.
The interior is organized on a conventional side entry stairhall plan in the Arts and Crafts.
Tradition. The front door has a large panel of oval beveled plate glass,. and the first landing of the
stairhall has a fine window of diapered leaded glass. The front parlor is separated from the entry
hall by a column screen composed of octagonal tapered Tuscan columns on a high podium
supporting archway beam. The high base walls are decorated with inset panels. The"staircase
newel postin the Craftsman vein is square in plan with a flat cap and inset panels matching those
of the column screen podiums. Most of the rest of the interior finish work, now all painted, is
standard, good quality millwork of the day. It is intact, including the dining room wainscot,
French'doors and built-in cabinetry. Despite the damage sustained during the fire of 1967, the
downstairs interior retains a high degree of integrity and some noteworthy features, trim elements
and hardware.
As a result of the fire, the house underwent atleration at the north, or rear section, which was
modified aswhip-roofed single. story, attachment. The upper sleeping deck was removed. The
kitchen was comprehensively remodeled. Upstairs rooms were so badly damaged they were all
remodeled around the original west side circulation space. In 1992, the deteriorated replacement
roof of 1970 was supplanted by a standing seam metal roof.
The house also.:underwentsorne change:in its historic.period ofo~cupation by the Fabers. It was
first remodeled when the back porch was enclosed at the. ground story as a living suite for Mr.
Faber's mother in 1932.. During the wartime build-up in the 1940s, Faber converted the upstairs
to an apartment since his sons were no longer at home and construction of the extensive Camp
White cantonment area outlying Central Point created a demand for worker housing. After
Faber's death in 1946, Mrs. Faber moved, and the house became a rental property exclusively.
The wood furnace was converted to gas. The 1967 fire is believed to have originated as an
electrical fire in the rear attachment. The house was sold in 1969 to Rodney Hall, who proceeded
with improvements and code work, which included removal of the sleeping porch deck, removal
of the upstairs kitchen, and removal of lath and plaster wall finish throughout the upstairs. The
walls were insulated and sheetrocked by this previous owner. The damaged flooring was
overlaid with carpet, and the roof was replaced with cedar shingles.
Ultimately, in 1981, the property was acquired by its present owner, Dr. Gilmour, who
~~
cortlmenced his rehabilitation. The floors were refinished oroverlaid withhazdwood. The
kitchen was remodeled: In 1992, all windows were replaced with wood framed double-glazed
sash, the house was painted, and the deteriorated roof was replaced with sheet metal. A wood
stove was added to the parlor. Dr. Gilmour's plans for the immediate future include seismic
reinforcement of the foundation and removal of the rear attachment and construction of a new
two-story family room addition along the lines of the eazliest configuration of c. 1911.
The premise of this nomination is that the developer of the property contributed significantly to
the life of the community during his period ofresidence and that the house is the place most
importantly associated with him remaining in Central Point.
Edward Charles Faber (1879-1946) was an Ohio native educated at Baldwin-Wallace College in
Berea, Ohio[ He married Elizabeth Schell in 1906 and moved to Iowa, where he entered the
grocery trade. Encouraged by a former Iowa friend, Chester McDonald, who :had preceeded
them to Oregon, the Fabers removed to the Rogue Valley in southern Oregon in 1909. Faber &
McDonald Mercantile was opened in Central Point in 1910. The store location changed a time or
two. over the years. -Iii 1916, E. C. bought out McDonaid's interest in the store, and the erstwhile
partner took over management of a market the pair had earlier opened in Merrill, in the Klamath
Basin: It was at this time that Fabei's store moved to its final location in Central Point, a single
story brick building with a 50-foot street frontage at the southwest corner of Pine and Fourth.
The Fabers raised three children in the house on Manzanita, Everett, Donald and Frances. At the
peak of his career in the 1920s and early 19306, we see E. C, Faber as a man of expanded
business interests which included insurance and real estate sales.. He opened subsidiary graocery
stores in the rural communities of Eagle Point and Butte Falls in leased buildings. As a measure
of the consequences of hisenterprise, the store at Butte Falls-operated somewhat vitally as an
informal cash bank for area loggers. 'In Central Point, Faber-set an example his notably public
.spirited sotis would follow in promoting improvement of the city. He was a founderof the
Central Point Mutual Telephone Company in the 19206. He campaigned unsuccessfully to have
the city join the Medford Water System to end local dependence upon shallow wells. In the
19306, as his fortunes declined with the economy at the depth of the Depressions, and his health
declined.alsp.: He nevertheless extended credit.liberally.to his customers who were in straitened
circumstances. `In 1937; Faber signed over the grocery and feed business to his wo sons and a
third partner and remodeled an adjoining building foramen's clothing and shoe store. Finally, in
the fall of 1945, he sold the remaining shares of his business to his sons and retired.
.~,.
,4'.; y:
si.C
(pity of Centrai Point
EXHI~~T ttCt
Punning Department
a~ 4~
~_
N
X
i1
~,
96-`-
Z
__
i City of Centrnl Point-
~xxl~rT t,~tt ,
Planning Department
. .
Il'-3"
9 -Z
3°3~u 3°Sw ue
3~
r
9 I
li
caN I
S
AN
"a®arc~H i
~13 i FAM(WY RM 9n
-
~ ~
sEC g eee
A A Y A.A
.
.
.QQQ~. 7 0 ~ I e~~
O 4 ~ ~ ~
.. ..' S8 2' -6 ' ~ I
..
p ,I,
i 1 ~
O. ®M ~ 4
157 FLOO R PROP05E D..PLAN
Ir - I
I
~
. ii
Iii I.
II
II ,
ii ~
II
II
~
I ~
1
ATTIC
MEE1ROfX II
ii ~
II
I I ~ ~
I,
~
i I NSl(IR i i
II STORAGE
11 I
.I~ ~.
II I
II I
~ /GR6! I
1
'
' II IGCf6
~ 5 awc ~\ I '
II
..
LOWER ROOF NOT tl
TO BLOCK EXIST. ~
- I ~
1
wNDOw r ,E.,.r, I I
d
~ Ji. L ~ ~".c ~ ~. I "v
DN
~ e" RISE
IP TREAD
2nd 1=LOOR PiZOPOSED PLAN ~-'~
o°
a'
w
w
>~
L ~-
O
z
~m Q
isu ~
v O
IpU
~~O 'O
i~~
U
a ` -~~
s£
^~ ~ City of Central Point
_~ E~HIF,XT ttEtt
o;
Planning Department
fi
~]
3~
~ ~
M m .~ 7 A~ "+~d.-.1
~ m~ w~~~ ~W'~~
L.l ~' ~ ~ ~ Z
~ ~ m
!]. _ o "
u~Wl~
~ ~ ~~^ 4
~3 ~S'ku ~tu as 3~' ~
~t
Yc
~ M w
~' ?-
° ~ ~ d
Z ~ W '~
~
~. W `. ~ t~V o_o.
Qru ~`~ ~e
~t,
3
lil V L1' m
^
_ l~
~ X
W ~ W
_ ~ /
'~
1Q
!~
h
Q'
~_ Q.
V
<i1
~r'
._...J
4~
ri
N
N
X
_,..._ A,
G3itp of Central Paint Z
EXHIBIT' t'F tt
Planning Department
1 ~:
EXHIBIT G
RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The project shall be developed in substantial compliance with the approved site plan
2. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscaping plan prior to
final occupancy. Landscaping shall be continuously maintained in a healthy growing
condition: An antomatic irrigation system shall be installed. for all landscaping subject to the
approval of the Building Department.
3. Off-street parking shall be provided for the project in accordance with the approved site
plan and CPMC 17.64.
4. Vehicular access tathe project site shall be fromN.Sth St. via the existing driveway..
5. The approval of the Site Plan Review shall expire in one year on February 18, 1998 unless
a building permit has been issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward
completion.
b. The project must comply with all applicable local,: state and federal regulations.
~~
PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 18, 1997
TO`. Central Point Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Bennett, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Review and RecommendatiotrRegarding alone Text Amendment to Amend
CPMC Chapter 17.56 as it Relates to Nonconforming Uses and Historic
Buildings
mm
The application under consideration is a Zone Text Amendment: initiated by the City to
amend CPMC Chapter 17.56 relating to nonconforming uses and historic buildings.
A thori
CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make
recommendations to the City Council on amendments to the text.and map, of the zoning
ordinance.
Annlicable Law
Comprehensive Plan Historic Inventory
CPMC Chapter 17.56 Nonconforming Uses.
CPMC Chapter 17.88 Amendment.
Discussion
At the regular meeting of January 16, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 778
stating the Council's intent to amend CPMC Chapter 17.56 as it relates to nonconforming
uses and historic buildings. The purpose of the amendment is to protect historic buildings that
are nonconforming uses because of their location in a commercial or industrial zone.
Presently a nonconforming structure that is destroyed to an extent greater than 50% of its
appraised value may not be rebuilt unless it is in accordance with the requirements of the
zoning district in which it is located. The proposed amendment would exempt any historic
building designated as a historical resource by the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan
Historic Inventory from this requirement and allow it to be restored to its original condition.
in the event that it is damaged or destroyed.
i6
Recommendation `
In making its recommendation, the Planning Commission must find that the public health,
safety, welfare and convenience will best be served by the pCOposed change.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions:
I. Recommend approval of the proposed Zone Text Amendment, based on the findings
of fact and conclusions of law contained in the record; or
2. Recommend' denial of the proposed Zone. Text Amendment; or
3. Continue the review of the proposed Zone Tent Amendment at the discretion of the
Commission.
Exhibits
A. City Council Resolution No. 778
B. Proposed Ordinance Amendment
1'7
PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM ,
DATE: February 18, 1997
TO: Central Point Planning Commission
FROM: ' Jim Bennett, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Review and Recommendation Regarding a Zone Text Amendment to Amend
CPMC 17.60.210 as it Relates to Padlot Developments
Summary
The application under consideration is a Zone Text Amendment initiated by the City to
amend CPMC 17.60.210 relating to padlot developments.
horit
CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make
recommendations to the City Council on amendments to the text and map of the zoning
ordinance.
Annlicable Law
CPMC Chapter 17.60 General Regulations.
CPMC Chapter 17.88 Amendment.
At the regular meeting of February 6, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 779
stafmg the Council's intent to amend CPMC 17.60.210 as it relates to padlot developments.
The purpose of the original padlot ordinance was to allow the minor partition of a lot along
with the partitioning of amulti-family structure on that lot into single-family ~
dwellings. In some cases, however, the ordinance has been used to partition a lot and to
construct individual single-family de h dwellings on each padlot. The attached ordinance
would correct this situation and make it clear that no detached single-family dwellings may
be constructed on padlots.
Recommendation
In making its recommendation, the Planning Commission must find that the public health,
safety, welfare and convenience will best be served by the proposed change.
18
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions:
1. Recommend approval of the proposed Zone Text Amendment, based on the findings
of fact and conclusions of law contained in the record; or
2. Recommend. denial of the proposed Zone Text Amendment; or
3. Continue the review of the proposed Zone Text Amendment at the discretion of the
Commission.
Exhi i
A. City Council Resolution No. 779
B. .Proposed Ordinance Amendment
~~
City of Central Point
EXHIBIT ttAtf `
Planning'Department
RESOLUTION NO. 779
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO
AMENb CPMC''17.60.210 PERTAINING TO
PADLOT DEVELOPMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT, OREGON, that it is the City's intent to consider amending
CPMC 17.60.210 so as to prohibit construction of detached,
single-dwelling unit structures on padlots.
Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of
its passage this day of February , 1997.
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this
Mayor Rusty McGrath
day of February , 1997•
Mayor Rusty McGrath
RESOLUTION N0. 779 (012397)
~, Ly
Glty'of Central Poipt
EXHIL~IT t~B't
Planning Department
.ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CPMC SECTION 17.60.210
PERTAINING TO PADLOT DEVELOPMENTS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT,
OREGON, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Central Point Municipal Code Section 17.60.210
is hereby amended to read as follows:
17.60.210 Padlot Developments. Padlot developments shall be
a permitted use in all zoning districts in the City, except R-1
districts, subject to the following:
A. Padlot Development applications shall be presented to
the City, and processed by the City, in the same manner as a
partition or subdivision application: first, in the form of a
tentative plan, and then in the form of a final plat. All
provisions of Title 16 that apply to subdivisions and partitions
shall also apply to Padlot Developments; provided that, the lot
size provisions of Title 16 shall apply only to the parent lot
and not to the padlot.
B. The parent parcel, from which the padlots and common
area, if any, are to be created, shall conform to the standard
requirements for lots in the particular zone in which the parent
parcel is located, including, but not limited to, requirements
pertaining to lot area, lot width, lot depth, lot coverage, yard
and setback requirements, number and height of buildings, density
restrictions, parking requirements, and distances between
buildings.
C. The padlots within the parent parcel are exempt from the
lot area, width and depth, yard and setback, and lot coverage
requirements to which the parent lot is subject.
D. Structures on padlots must meet all applicable State of
Oregon building code requirements, as well as all other
applicable city, state and federal regulations.
'~~~~~ ~'o ~'~in` a~'p~a~~~or ~'t`~ie creation of a padlot
development shall be approved unless and until the developer has
also previously submitted and received City approval for the
Convenants, Conditions and Restrictions applicable to the common
area, if any, providing for the continual management and
maintenance of the common area and any improvements thereon.
1 - ORDINANCE NO. (012397)
~,;
ti
r
Section 2. An emergency is hereby'd'eemed to exist, and this
ordinance shall be effective upon passage.
Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of
its passage this day of , 1997.
Mayor Rusty McGrath
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this day of ~ 1997•
Mayor Rusty McGrath
2 - ORDINANCE NO. (012397)
~~~