Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - June 16, 1998;. , `, CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA June 16, 1998 - 7:00 p.m. Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 426 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Chuck Piland -Angela Curtis, Jan Dunlap, Candy Fish, Don Foster, Bob Gilkey, and Karolyne Johnson III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and Approval of June 2, 1998, Planning Commission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES Page 1- 14 A. ~ Public Hearing to review a Site Plan submitted by the Central Point Assembly of God Church to construct a new sanctuary on property located eastlof the intersection of North 10th and Maple Streets. 15 - 20 B. 1, Withdrawal of Batzer Property (9.4 acres) from Jackson County Fire Protection District No. 3 following its Annexation to the City of Central Point. VI. BUSINESS ~ ~~~` 21 - 25 C. ~ Presentation of Horn Creek Flood Study and Drainage Plan for Country Meadows Subdivision (Public Works Director). VII. MISCELLANEOUS VIII. ADJOURNMENT 1 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 2, 1998 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Jan Dunlap, Candy Fish, Don Foster, Bob Gilkey, Karolyn Johnson. Angela Curtis came in at 8:35 p.m. Also present were: Tom Humphrey, Planning Director, Jim Bennett, City Administrator, Lee Brennan, Public Works Director, Kevin Chrisman, Public Works Technician, and Arlene LaRosa, Public Works Secretary. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Fish made a motion to approve the Minutes of May 19, 1998, as written. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Gilkey. ROLL CALL: Dunlap, abstain, Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were to public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. Public Hearing to consider a request by USF Reddawav for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to establish a truck terminal on 20 acres in the vicinity of East Pine Street and Hamrick Road. Chairman Piland opened the public hearing. There were no conflicts of interest or ex-parte communications. Tom Humphrey reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report. Tom stated that the Public Works Director has asked for more right-of- way, afull 72 foot right-of-way, which will require an additional 6 feet from each side of Hamrick where there is only 60 feet now. He is also requesting curb, gutter and sidewalk on Hamrick, on the west side of the property and along the south side of the property. Craig Stone, 708 Cardley Ave., Medford, agent for USF Reddaway, stated they will be moving the shop building north approximately 20 feet and removing one row of parking in front of the office for better The City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 1998 -Page 2 circulation and additional landscaping. He stated they would like to add to the wording in Public Works Department Staff Report. On page 50 of the packet, paragraph 1, second sentence under Water System, add the wording: "or as approved by Fire District 3". Fire District 3 has stated they do not intend to enforce the 300 foot requirement to the interior of the facility. Mr. Stone stated that the applicant has a major concern on the requirement for construction of 6 foot sidewalks along Hamrick on the south side of the property; they have no objection to sidewalks along the west side of the property. The applicants feel there will be no need for that improvement in the near future. Mr. Stone referred to two land use cases: Dolan vs Tigard and Nolen vs. California Coastal Commission. These cases indicated there has to be some correlation between the impact of the development and the exaction taken. Mr. Stone stated that this development will generate no pedestrian traffic. If and when there is a development of a motel to the north and industrial land to the south and this generates pedestrian traffic then the City needs to determine whether sidewalks should be required. John Hesson, Attorney for the applicant, agreed that a quantifiable social problem should exist. Jim Bennett, City Administrator, argued that the Public Work's requirement is justified based upon both state and local goals and anticipated developments in this area. Mr. Stone stated that the applicants would withdraw their objection provided the City will include the Deferred Improvement Agreement the condition that sidewalks be required only if there is a demonstrated need. Commissioner Fish made a motion to adopt Resolution 423 approving the request by USF Reddaway for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan to establish a truck terminal on 20 acres in the vicinity of East Pine Street and Hamrick Road, including conditions in the Staff Reports, and adding to second sentence, first paragraph under Water Systems on page 50 of the packet in the Public Works Staff Report the wording "or as approved by Fire District 3", that a Deferred Improvement Agreement be entered into by the applicant for the sidewalks on the South side of the property along Hamrick Road with the wording added "tb be done only if determined to be needed jointly by City and Developer". Motion seconded by Commissioner Dunlap. The City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 1998 -Page 3 ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. B. Public Hearing to consider a request by James and Sharon Mock to partition a 1.25 acre parcel at 527 Freeman Road into three parcels. Chairman Piland opened the Public Hearing. There were no conflicts of interest or ex-parte communications. Tom Humphrey reviewed the Planning Department's Staff Report. Lee Brennan stated the City has four concerns: 111 pedestrian traffic on the private lane where there will be no space for pedestrians except in the lane itself; 121 the mound of dirt, shrubs and a tree are in the vision triangle; (31 the 20 foot residential lane being proposed, after the curbs and gutters, will be reduced to18 feet; (41 there needs to be room for emergency vehicles to get through and there should be no parking allowed in the streets. Dallas Page, 900 Win~demar Drive, Ashland, OR, agent for the applicant, stated that rather than put a fence along the street next to or in front of the existing houses on the north side of the private lane, he wanted to enhance their property with landscaping. He stated that they will bring the sewer to the front 2 lots, improve the sewer to the back lot and bring all the utilities to the properties. They will also bring an 8" water line into the property for fire hydrants and stub out for future development. The three lots will drain to Mingus Creek. Anything that drains on the structures and driveways will drain to the street. He will adjust the boundary of parcel 3 to meet the street bulb. Lee Brennan stated that the City would like the power pole to be placed underground if feasible. Earl Mix, 685 Cedar Street, Central Point, OR, stated that his concern was the traffic on Freeman going past Shadow Way. The traffic count he conducted showed an average of 475 cars an hour going past that point and 17 cars came out of Shadow Way. He also stated that school children would have to cross Freeman to catch the school bus. Ron Musmecher, 411 Freeman, Central Point, OR., stated that the driveways dip down off Freeman and it is dangerous to back out. The City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 1998 -Page 4 Dallas Page stated that he agreed it is important that he try to obtain a 25 foot right-of-way for the entrance portion of Shadow Way. It would be acceptable to make that a condition of approval. Chairman Piland closed the public hearing. Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adopt Resolution 424 approving the request by James and Sharon Mock to partition a 1.25 acre parcel at 527 Freeman Road into three parcels, with the condition that the access to Freeman Road be a 25 foot wide access including sidewalk, and to include all the conditions and of the Staff Reports and staff comments on the power pole. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnson. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. C. Public Hearing to consider a request by W G Beard for a Conditional UsP Permit and Tentative Plan for the Cedar Shadows 26 Unit Planned Unit Development IPUD) on 2 3 acres off of Freeman Road Chairman Piland opened the public hearing. There were no conflicts of interest or ex-parte communication. Tom Humphrey reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report. Lee Brennan reviewed the Public Works Department Staff Report. Lee stated that Item 4 on page 3 of the packet is not applicable to this application. Lee stated that the commission could vary from the creek set-backs because this is a P.U.D. He also expressed concern that the water line is a dead-end line. The City would like the applicant to explore the possibility of running the water line out to Freeman through an easement so that it is looped. Dallas Page, 900 Windemar, Ashland, OR, agent for the applicant, stated that if they can obtain access through an easement to run the water line to Freeman they would do so. He stated they are proposing flood storage in the middle of the development, also designated for parking, and it will drain to Mingus Creek. Mr. Page discussed perimeter fencing. The house currently on the property will remain on the property and will be renovated on the outside. The public areas will be maintained by a homeowners' association. There will be a fence on the west side of the property and either a chain link or cedar fence on the east side along the creek for safety purposes. Mr. Page stated that if there are no trees to act as barriers the The City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 1998 -Page 5 decking on the second story houses would be on the street side rather than in back of those homes. There will be a restriction in the CC&R's that the trees cannot be cut down except if they are dead or diseased. Roger Smith, 555 Freeman, #27, Central Point, OR., stated that he would like a fence installed between the subdivision and The Meadows and would like all the houses to be one-story. Ron Musmecher, 411 Freeman, Central Point, OR., stated that if 2- story homes go behind his house, his view will be totally obstructed. Mr. Earl Mix, 685 Cedar, Central Point, OR, stated that the only way out of the subdivision will be the private road, Shadow Way, and will add 52 cars coming out onto Freeman. It is a dangerous spot unless the entrance from Shadow Way onto Freeman can be leveled off and widened. Mark Haynes, Central Point, OR stated the reason the partition had not been recorded before was because of the access problem related to the piece of property on the southeast corner of Freeman and Shadow Way. Dallas Page, agent for the applicant, stated that a person should be able to buy a piece of property and build one or two stories on it. He is not against working with the neighbors in that area, if possible. Mr. Page stated that he will try to get the owner of the piece of property on the southeast corner of Freeman and Shadow Way to move the dirt, enlarge the vision triangle and also grant an easement to widen the Shadow Way. Chairman Piland closed the public hearing. Tom Humphrey informed the Commission that two traffic studies are being done on Freeman because of the new shopping center and a local street network plan to analyze and improve city-wide circulation. Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to extend the meeting past 10:00 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Fish. All said "aye" and the motion passed. Commissioner Fish made a motion to adopt Resolution 425 approving the request by W.G. Beard for aConditional-Use Permit and Tentative Plan for the Cedar Shadows 26 Unit Planned Unit Development (PUD) The City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 1998 -Page 6 on 2.3 acres off Freeman Road including all Staff Conditions and recommendations; the building style is to be approximately the same as the pictures presented in the application; the fence along the creek is to be a chain link fence for safety; the water line is to be looped into Freeman if possible; all the trees are to be left except where located in the streets, or where dead or diseased; the builder is to take into consideration the neighbors privacy and views when building homes. Commissioner Dunlap seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. D. Consideration of Central Point Municipal Code revisions to eliminate references to Ian nning fees and adopt a planning fee schedule. Tom Humphrey reminded the commission about previous discussions to remove specific references to fees from the municipal code and create a schedule of fees..Tom passed out a proposed planning fee schedule and corresponding municipal code revisions. Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to recommend to the City Council approval for the removal of references to fees from the Municipal Code and the adoption a planning fee schedule. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Curtis. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. VII. MISCELLANEOUS There were no miscellaneous items. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Dunlap made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Curtis seconded the motion. All said "aye" and the meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: June 16, 1998 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review for 37 2W 02CB Tax Lots 7200, 7300 & 7302- Central Point Assembly of God Church. licant/ Central Point Assembly of God Church er• 310 No. 10th Street Central Point, OR 97502 en • Rev. Jeffrey Anderson ro e Description/ 37 2W 02CB Tax Lots 7200, 7300 & 7302- 3.34 acres o in R-3, Residential Multiple-Family umm The applicant has requested a Site Plan Review for the addition of a new sanctuary, classrooms and the remodel of existing buildings that aze part of a local church complex on North 10th Street. The church contemplated these changes several yeazs ago when it prepazed a site master plan for three separate tax lots under its ownership (refer to Attachment A). The plan before you is a variation of the original design which was never submitted to or reviewed by the City. Authority CPMC 1.24.020 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application for a Site Plan Review. Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. (Attachment B). CPMC 17.28.010 et seq.- R-3 Multiple Residential District CPMC 17.60.010 et seq: General Regulations CPMC 17.64.010 et seq.- Off Street Pazking CPMC 17.72.010 et seq.- Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval 1 Discussion The applicants are proposing the addition of approximately 8400 square feet to an existing church which primarily occupies two of the three tax lots in their ownership. The new sanctuary would be constructed in the existing parking area and consequently some, but not all, of the parking and vehicle circulation has been redefined in the new site plan. Reverend Anderson has stated that additional church parking will resemble that of the original site master plan.. There were 178 parking spaces (including 2-3 handicapped) proposed in the church's original site master plan. Although the capacity of the new sanctuary is less than that proposed for the original building, it appears that the. total square footage for classrooms and administrative offices has been maintained. The church submitted an Occupant Load Summary with its application (see Attachment A). The property surrounding the church is occupied by higher density single and multi-family dwellings, a public school and low density single family homes. The Willow Glen apartments take their access along the east side of the church's property. The largest of the applicant's tax lots (1.89 acres) is vacant and about 3-4 feet lower topographically than the other two lots occupied by church buildings. All three tax lots front on North 10th Street which is classified a secondary arterial. City Public Works has determined that an additional 9 feet ofright-of--way is needed from both sides of North 10th to handle future traffic volumes. Curb, gutter and sidewalk currently exists along the applicant's frontage and the entire perimeter of the church property is fenced. The Commission will notice that there are some pieces missing from this site plan application however, at the applicant's request city staff scheduled the public hearing with the expectation that additional information would arrive. At this point it appears that parking and landscaping plans will be presented at the meeting. This may or may not afford the Public Works Department ample time to respond to issues such as surface drainage, parking, driveway access and lighting improvements. The applicants would initially. like to make minimal improvements to the parking areas due to the cost of such improvements. Reverend Anderson envisions repaving the existing parking area, and grading the remaining parking area in phases with crushed rock. These phases and the number of new parking spaces have not yet been defined. Given the essential completion of the.. church's (building) master plan, the City would prefer full improvements, including paved parking, storm drain improvements, landscaping, lighting and additional right-of--way dedication along North 10th Street (which could be deferred). Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law In approving, conditionally approving or denying the plans submitted, the City bases it's decision on the following standards from Section 17.72.040: A. Landscaping and fencing and the construction of walls on the site in such a manner as to cause the same to not substantially interfere with the landscaping scheme of the neighborhood, and in such a manner to use the same to screen such activities and sights as might be heterogeneous to existing neighborhood uses. The Commission may require the. maintenance. of existing plants or the installation of new ones for purposes of screening adjoining property: 2 ^ The applicant has been working on a landscaping plan for the site and hopes to have something for the Commission at the public hearing. The original master plan depicts numerous planters and trees in the parking lots and around the new sanctuary. As stated earlier, the perimeter of the property is fenced with chain link. B. Design, number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ^ There are presently two driveways onto North Tenth Street and a third is proposed from the Willow Glen access drive. Service drives are required to have a minimum vision clearance of 20 feet from the intersection of driveway centerlines and the intersecting street right-of--way line. It appears that the church can design its driveway accesses to satisfy this requirement. Traffic generated by churches typically occurs at off-peak periods. C: To provide off-street parking and loading facilities and pedestrian and vehicle flow facilities in such a manner as is compatible with the use for which the site is proposed to be used and capable of use, and in such a manner as to improve and avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ^ The City. has received no new parking plan and the original site master plan depicts a '-~+ total of 178 parking spaces. Under CPMC 17.64.040(D) seating capacity for the - •-- sanctuary itself (378 people) would necessitate 95 spaces and as many as 113 spaces - ' ~' could be required to accommodate classrooms and secondary assembly areas. Design - - requirements in CPMC 17.64.100 call for paved, adequately drained parking areas for all-weather use; painted striping; lighting and the placement of bumper rails along property lines, sidewalks and landscaping areas. Additionally, parking areas should not be erected or maintained in special setback areas which in this case would be 60 feet from the centerline of North 10th Street. The applicant has not submitted any independent off-street parking calculations. The project would be eligible for compact car adjustment of up to 25% of the total D. Signs and other outdoor advertising structures to ensure that they do not conflict with or deter from traffic control signs or devices and that they aze compatible with the design of their buildings or uses and will not interfere with or detract from the appeazance or visibility of nearby signs; ^ The applicants presently have a sign and expect to replace it. The specific location will be identified on a revised site plan and/or landscaping plan. The submission of sign plans typically occurs subsequent to the Commission's approval and in response to conditions imposed at the time of approval E. Accessibility and sufficiency of fire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide for the reasonable safety of life, limb and property, including, but not limited to, suitable gates, access roads and fire lanes so that all buildings on the premises are accessible to fire appazatus; 3 ^ Jackson County Fire District Number 3 and the City's Building Department will .enforce State Fire and Building codes. F: Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations; ^ The proposed construction meets the minimum setback requirements for the R-3 District. There are general regulations governing special setbacks and landscaping (17.60.090 and 17.60.135 respectively). Special setbacks on secondary arterials like North. 10th are. intended, among other things, to permit eventual widening. The application of this. standard to the subject property would potentially eliminate a row of parking within 60 feet of the street centerline. As an alternative, this setback area may be used for landscaping which the planning commission may, at their discretion, attach as a condition to approval. The applicants are proposing only one light standard in the lower parking lot. City Public Works Standards and Specifications call for more to adequately and safely illuminate this area. There are street tights along the Willow Glen access road. G: Compliance with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area and it's environs. ^ ,The pitched metal roof proposed for-the sanctuary. is generally compatible, with the urrounding structuresand the building itself presents an attractive appearance. The applicants have submitted building elevations as part of their application package. Site landscaping, full parking.improvements and newsigns proposed by the applicants would enhance the aestheticvalue of the project. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Adopt Resolution No._, approving the Site Plan subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Attachment C ); or 2.. Deny the proposed Site Plan; or 3. Continue the review of the Site Plan at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments A. Application and Exhibits submitted by Assembly of God Church B. Notice of Public Hearing C: Planning Department Conditions D. Public Works Staff Report (delayed due to lack of complete site information) 4 SITE r LAN REVIEW APPLICATION City of Central Point Planning Department Attachment A MAY 121998' ~~~ ~~~~ APPLICANT IT Name: ~ Address: Telephone: Business: 2. AGENT City: '~ ~' Telephone: State: (.~ Zip Code:. -j'~f~ a~(-1, (o~y, 3~5 ~ Residence: (Zev~JeKe~ ~..Rr~aQrsov,~ ~qS~o<~-~9(9~-f-YZ4',~ ~c , -Qc J~C t"S ~ Cl Zip Code: cl'ZSGc~ Residence: CO(9'-~'~ ll ~ 3. OWNER OF RECORD (Attach Separate Sheet If More Than One) Name: Ce•rfraf Porhf,4sse~.r//y of l70~ clip/~ti Address: 3~o N, /o'`" sfreaf City: Ca~fr.,( Qoiefd nR State: ok Zip Code: q~so2 Telephone: Business: 5Yr•66y3353 Residence: '~A.-s PROJECT DESCRIPTION ''~ '~'~' TypeofDevelopment: ~cfcl~ t:on Township: 37 Ranger Section: D2 ~$ Tax Lot(s): 73~o r/3~.2 ?.~•~ Address: 3/o N. /o+'F st~~eef Cea~~a( ~oi~l'` 9>ro2 Zoning District: R 3 . R.ed.sle~~F.d/ /Y1~/><;die ~a.n,%/ Number of Dwelling Units: No+~n., Non-Sale Area Sq. Footage Sale Area Sq. Footage =Gross Floor Area NumberofParking Spaces: 5. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS This Application Form. ~ Legal Description. Application Fee ($200.00). ^ Letter of Project Description. Site Plan Drawn to Scale (10 copies). ~ Written Authority from Property Owner if Agent in Application Process. ~ Reduced Copies (8'/z x 11) of the Site Plan, Building Elevations and Landscape Plans (1 copy Ea.). ~ Landscape and Irrigation Plan (3 copies). Co~L,.~a w~fn s;fie P(,k. 6. I HEREBY STATE THAT THE FACTS RELATED 1N THE ABO VE APPLICATION AND THE PLANS AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED HEREWITH ARE TRUE, CORRECT, AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I certify that I am the : ^ Property Owner or Authorized Agent of the Owner of a proposedGproject sGit~e. Q~ Si nahr ` ~.~......_..~ - -- 5Date ~- O r ~ I ~ t~ v ,~ , ~ ; ; ; ' . l 6-' Z ,Q 04/04/lyy! 18:16 5108463102 CORNERSTONE (}1URCH PAGE 02 J p I I I I I~W00 Y!O?f'R9lUa~ E~~ I ,~I: `. I i f i ~ v MMrrMM<<~~II I~ I 0~~. ,~\sv~Mn R+ ~~ ~~ f~ I _ i° I ~ I I ;. i ~. c~ I~ I I ~ , j? I v i I I .t I I _ _ _ _ _ ._..r..~. .._ :~ i~~ I /~/ ~ ~~I ;'V1 .,I ~~\ ~.~ ~ ~, ~, ~ `~! '. `'~, , ~ g ~ \f .; f, ~ t ~`,,\ '~,` '` ,\ `` `` ~~ e 4 a S~~' ~ ~• ~ / ,/ , ; , ~. I ~ /, /z ~, ~ ;' / / // !, ! I ~! I i I~ ii i!: !. .._.. ._4..y ~ ~ ~ .~- I I 1J1J ~ ~ I I i I I ~: I ~ II' N I ~ I s .~ I '! I 1~' ~j~ I . ~ ~, t ~' / / / / / /. / /,/ % / ~ ~' ~' / ~1 •~ a ~. ~_ '. ^~ ~ i "I I VYI UYI IJ./: lU.1V .:a •+~rY V.+a •+.. CORNERSTONE CHURCH DEVELOPMENT, INC. .' y i:.,IZ, (l;Gf~~~E~t rid,, .~l~i~b,~~ ~~ ~~:~'. ' }' ~ > v' x ~ `ls''1 .:. :. •. ~.~.~,• .•.~;1 jR~~aY cc.l ~ ys r~ Irl-~(: xt; i'`~'N +1"t< < ~.:: >t.., . ;. !fir ~j1• ~ .~ ~ ''•::~~. .,E'.Ic~::.:,•I.::..::ea.: pp' • . ~ '. .:' . ~~~ .r f!r, t , - Occupant Load Summary •~ J• r4 t Projected Maximum Attend Yeer Attend In 2 Attend Ago Attend Now Yeare Projected v• Y~•1, t ~ Morning 70 180 300 500 Evening 40 Sub-totals 110 180 300 500 Pro)edad Maximum Attend Year A11end In 2 Attend Class Ago Attend Now Years Projected ..-.v.~:....Y:.., ... .i:~.1. }.//~f ~%~. ..,i: v ':,!~•li'' ..• eSS':T . IY' :' ~ ...:. :e .::':\'..: .:.'. •• ..: .. .. .. ~ .. .. uJ~'tn'~.:':l'l.•~'•: l.:'.~.1T:.1~" '.l . :. -. i~l.. i.. %~`t"'.i. -4(`.' -u~Z.:.,ii•3Y..~~t1':Iy e~%V~:.~ ~( . Ty `~.~'~I'~:1•.a .. ~j 14 ~P •1 ` ~ ~~ ~ .. . /I < : ~. .. ~..~ . . .. . ..... .. ,.: :~ :' .i. . Yi , , i.-..b .. Newborn 4 8 8 Nursery 10 20 20 -:_.:. .: Creepers (1 yr. old) 3 8 8 Toddlers (2 yr. old) 3 8 8 3 yr. old 3 8 8 ' Ayr, old 3 8 ' 8 IOndergarten 3 8 8 Grade 1 3 8 8 Grade 2 3 8 8 Grade 3 3 B B Grade 4 3 8 8 Grade 6 4 10 t 0 Grade 8 3 8 8 Jr. High 30 80 High School 15 30 CollegelCaraer 3 25 Adult 50 100 Additional 50 100 Subtotals 0 186 118 433 "` 9 ~ ;' ~~ ~~ ~c q i i ~ €~ ~~ io i $~ ~~~ ~ :" ~_~~~. ~ g ~gg S ~A T ~~ ~~ ..~ g~ ~ 3 6~ ~~ ~~ BUILDING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW ~a wurx secoxo ar cExttu~ roixr, on n~ox N~~Oli OWNER: CENTRAL POINT ASSEMBLY of GOD CHURCH ADDRESS: NORTH TENTH STKEET OCCUPANCY: A-2.1 SANCTUARY AREA:3,872 S.F. ALLOWABLE AREA: 10,500 S.F. OCCUPANCY: A-3 CLASSROOMS & EXIST. AREA: 8,608 S.F. ALLOWABLE AREA: 6,100 S.F. TYPE of CONSTRUCTION: SANCTUARY ; V-1HR CLASSROOMS & EXISTING ; V-N SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS: A TWO HOUR FIRE SEPARATION WALL IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE SANCTUARY AND THE CLASSROOMS WITH ALL OPENINGS REQUIRED TO BE ONE AND ONE HALF HOUR RATED. ALL PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PENETRATIONS OF THE FII2EWALL ARE TO BE METAL AND LIMITED IN NUMBER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 709.6 AND 709.7. THE SANCTUARY IS TO BE ONE HOUR CONSTRUCTION THROUGHOUT AS REQUIRED BY TABLE 6-A. THE EXISTING TOILET ROOM FACILITIES EXCEED THE NUMBER OF FIXTURES REQUII2ED BY TABLE A-29-A. EXIT ILLUMINATION AND EXIT SIGNS TO BE PROVIDED AS REQUII2ED BY SECTION 1012 AND 1013. PROVIDE DOOR HARDWARE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 1016.4. PROVIDE LIGHT AND VENTII,ATION AS REQUIItED BY SECTION 1202 AND TABLE 12-A. HEATING PLANS ARE REQUIRED; PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PLANS AND SCHEMATICS ARE REQUII2ED TO BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE. ii City of Central Point AttaehmentB PLANNING DEPARTMENT Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Planning Technician Deanna Gregory Administrative/Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: May 27,1998 Meeting Date: June 16, 1998 Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Place: Central Point City Hall 15$ South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEETING Beginning at the above time and place, the Central' Point Planning Commission will review an application for a Site Plan Review-that would allow the construction of a building addition at the Central Point Assembly of God Church.. The subject parcel, is located in a R-3, Residential Single Family district on Assessment Plat 37 2W 2CB, Tax Lot 7300. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street parking, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PUBLIC COMMENTS 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, June 16, 1998. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 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 Planning Commission. 12 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 ATTACHMENT C RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The approval of the Site Plan shall expire in one year on June 16, 1999 unless an application for a building permit or an application for extension has been received by the City. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan depicting any changes discussed and approved at the public hearing within 30 days of Planning Commission approval. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations including, but not limited to, the Oregon Uniform Fire Code and Structural Specialty Code. 3. The applicant shall submit final parking, landscaping, lighting and sign plans to the Planning, Public Works and Building Departments for approval prior to obtaining any building permits. 4. The applicant shall enter into a deferred improvement agreement with the City for improvements along the North 10th Street frontage including, but not limited to, right of way dedication and the relocation curb, gutter and sidewalks. 13 Attachment D Pa~G~ic I~Uvr~s STAFF R¢ pert To be submitted at the meeitng 1.4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: June 16, 1998 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey, Planning Director SUBJECT: Withdrawal of Annexation Territory from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District #3 (Batzer Annexation). i mm r , On June 4, 1998, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 825 ordering the annexation of 9.4 acres located on the southwest corner of Biddle and Table Rock Roads. Although this area is presently being used for agricultural purposes, it is designated by the Comprehensive Plan for Light Industrial uses. The subject property is one of several currently being considered for Comprehensive Plan amendments and zone changes and Batzer Construction would like to develop the site in commercialuses. h ri The Central Point Municipal Code (Section 1.24.020) vests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make recommendations to the City Council on withdrawals from special districts. Discussion Upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed withdrawal and consider adopting an ordinance declaring that the territory within the annexation area be withdrawn from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District No. 3. Coincidentally, Fire District No. 3 is now providing fire protection to the annexed territory under its current contract for services with the City. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council withdraw the subject annexation area from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District No. 3. Attachments A. City Council Resolution No. 825, Zoning and Annexation Area Maps 15 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. $~S A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF A 9.4-ACRE PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED BETWEEN BIDDLE AND HAMRICK ROADS INTO THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON (Applicant: Batzer Construction) (37 2W O1C Tax Lot 700) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: ecti n Application has been made by the agent of the owner of certain real property for annexation into the City of Central Point, Oregon. The property consists of 9.4 acres located east of the City limits, between Biddle and Hamrick Roads. The property to be annexed is more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein. The property to be annexed is not within the City of Central Point's current corporate boundaries, but is contiguous to the City's existing corporate boundary on its western boundary and is within the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary. Section 2. The ..owner of the .property proposed for annexation is Batzer Construction, which-has submitted a written,consent to the annexation by way of his agent, The Richard Stevens Company; LLC so designated in writing by the owner. There are no electors residing on the property. The written consent is on file at Central Point City Hall, 155 S. Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. tion 3 ORS 222.125 provides that when al( of the owners of land. in the territory proposed for annexation and not less than 50% of the electors residing in such territory have consented in writing to the annexation of the land in the territory and file such written consent with the City Council, the property may be annexed without the requirement for an election or a public hearing. e ti Annexation of the described property is consistent with the City's ability to provide facilities and services to the real property, as required by the City's Comprehensive Plan. Applicant's written "Proposed Findings of Fact:and Conclusions of Law" insofar as they address annexation and not a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zone change are hereby adopted and incorporated herein. ecti n Pursuant to ORS 222.125, the property described in Section 1 above, shall be and hereby. is, annexed to and made a part of the City of Central Point, Oregon. 16 Section 6. The City Administrator, or his designee, shall transmit a copy of this resolution to the Oregon Secretary of State, and this annexation shall be effective when filed with the Oregon Secretary of State pursuant to ORS 222,180. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of :S, ~.•Q., , 1998.' Mayor Rusty McGrath ATTE T: v City Representative Approved by me this 4 day of ~U hie. , 1998. Mayor Rusty McGrath 1~ Planning Department Exhibit A Commencing at the Northeast cornerofDonation Land ClaimNo. 56 iu Township 37 South, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 00° 01' 44" West (Record Soutlt 00° 01' 30" West) along the Easterly boundary of said Claim, a distance of 104.22 feet to a point on the centerline of Biddle Road, said point being on the current boundary of the City of Central Point, said point also being the POINT OP' BEGINNING; thence continue South 00° 01' 44" West, along said City boundary, 60.16 feet to a point on the Southerly right-of--way line of said Biddle Road, said point being the Northwest corner of tract as described as Tract "A" in Instrument No. 98-19989 of the Deed. Records.ofJaekson County, Oregon; thence continue South 00° 01' 44" West (Record South 00° 01' 30" West) along the Westerly boundary of said tract and along said City boundary, a distance of 723.32 feet to the Southwest corner of tract described as Tract "B" in said Instrument No. 98-19989; thence, leaving said City boundary, South 89° 59' 06" East along the Southerly boundary of said tract, 588.47 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of--way line of Table Rock Road; thence continue South 89° 59' 06" East 30.00 feet to a point on the centerline of said Table Rock Road; thence North 00° 02' 34" East along the centerline of said Table Rock Road, 731.52 feet to the point of intersection with the aforementioned centerline of Biddle Road; thence Northwesterly along the centerline of said Biddle Road along a spiral curve to the left (tlie long chord to which bears North 84° 19' 26" West 256.31 feet); thence continue along said centerline, North 85 ° 47' 17" West 364.55 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 10.78 acres, more or less. _„~. ~ ws ~c, nn s n ~ ~xt ~c Sri ,.. . t~t~C)FI~SSiON/4L j !_AIJb sutxveYat~ ~ C, r~ ~G~ EGON ~~~ J lY I0, 1900 ~OUGGIAS C. hkMAHAN ~~,- N°. 1913 Douglas C. McMahan L.S. 1913 -Oregon Expires 12/31/98 Hollbuhr & Associates, Inc. Batzer -Annexation (37SiWO1C TL 700) June 1, 1998 (98-106) (btzrannx.dcm) ~. g Z X W Z 3= $ . ~O .. o . ~. __ s ~ ~ ~ n ~~~ ~ boo ~ 2 N W C a s 6 ~ ~ ~ ~~ rLry~N~~ 38 F" p~ ~N ~(Sy ~~°ya~ ~ ~~~~ tl ~G~^ i @ n ~~W ~1~ w ~ 08+ ad,~ 08^ ~„x ^ s hex ~ ~~ ~' I - ~ LS'I CL 3.Yt,Z0.00N 8 / / \\ avoa Nooa aievll, ~ - - I n Sgg ~m~i° Lez o K n ~_~ / °f.d a Z QO ° u v~ ° n ~I n 9~v~W a 6666 F- co °~a r I J ~ o v ~F g o ° ~ s° /^n a ~ _ W m ~ . f z° $ Yt' I ~ - .6Y'OLfI MJg10.006 I 1' ~ I ' .OL'tLl / 1 ' s 1 V 1 ~1\ 'F ~ g r °f $ V ~ GV >w O C CN yQ NVI ,' ~~ / ~ ~, ood `~~ o ff9 nd 3 o F I ~ T '~ Io -d6oa NolawvH „i 4„ S V p/ m~ .-u K O I ° U J ° I I m n$ 2 .o F ~ w .m~ ~ \ ~ ~I &~50 I V i 7„ I I }~ ~~ ` , 1 I % 7 I 1 ----- - J - ,- --- . , - \ / ~ ' N00'S0'O6 W 65L.fi0 ~ ~ 1\Y/ vp dry, ~ ~ ~ ! YO rya: ~ "w . " ge~a ~ ~ ~ t I _ ~ 3 19 i~ F~ €~ ~' a CJ X N ~i F ZONING MAP City of Central Point, Oregon Exhibit 3 98042-ANX 'Subject Property 1V11L HAMRICK ~". ROAD e ~ o 20 C~1 0 a 0 ~ I Y U O K W J Q1 Q t- pf ANNiNG DFPARTMENT MEMORANDUM MEETING DATE: June 16, 1998 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey, Planning Director SUBJECT: Public Works Presentation of Horn Creek Flood Study Background The Commission may recall that a condition to their approval of the Country Meadows Estates development(s) involved the preparation of a master plan for storm drain collection (refer to pages$ through 11 of the attached PWD Staff Report dated July 9, 1997). Hammond Engineering has been preparing the Flood Study. referenced in the above referenced PWD Staff Report and the City Public Works Director will present the results of this study and proposed subdivision drainage plans on Tuesday night. Discussion There will be an opportunity for Commission members to ask questions about the Flood Study and matters associated with the storm drainage and irrigation improvements for Country Meadows Estates. This is intended to be an informational matter only and the Commission is not expected to make any decisions regarding this subject on Tuesday evening. Attachments A. Country Meadows Estates, Phase 1,2,3 PWD Staff Report dated July 9, 1997 21 Country Meadows Cutatec, Pfau !, Z,3, PWD Smf/'Re an u , 1 flfl7 PageB nu~,on~„c,i n 5. At the developer's option, the Developer may propose the use of a rolled curb, gutter, and sidewalk section (as developed and approved by the City PWD) in lieu of the curcent City PWD curb, gutter, and sidewalk standards. 6. It is suggested that a dedicated easement or piece of property be afforded on lots assodated with the Country Meadow Estates subdivisions andlor the Quail Meadows subdivision, that afford pedestrian and bicycle traffic from Mendolia Way (Bachand Avenue)' to Donna Way. The location of bike/pedestrian ways shall be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and Master Transportation Plan as currently written or as being curcently revised. It is suggested that these .easements could be combined with utilityeasements that will be required for utility interconnections or discharge points. 7. Due to the relative doseness of the two proposed intersections to Grant Road of Blue Hearon Dcive (of the proposed Country Meadow Estates subdivisions) and Quail Lane, (of the proposed Quail Meadows Subdivision), it is suggested that a suitable, City approved semi-permanent bamcade be installed across the wesfem end of Blue Hearon Drive that affords pedestrian and bicycle traffic only, but prohibits normal vehicular traffic. The barricade could be constructed in such a manner that provides for lockable modification to allow the passage of emergencyservice vehicles, as required. The barricade would be appropriately landscaped 'and irrigated, ad provide for adequfe AOA passage requirements. Storm Drainage, irrigation improvements F,dsting Improvements - Hom Creek traverses the proposed development from south to north. - Rogue River Valley irrigation District controls irrigation tights within the project area inducting conveyance of water in Ham Creek. 1. Developer's engineer shall develop a master plan for the storm drain collection, retention, and conveyance system (SD System) which provides for storm water run-off from and nan-on onto the.proposed development (either surface run-on or culvert or creeWditch conveyance), any future development on adjacent properties, conveyed sform'drainage; or surface water` flow (i.e. Hom Creek), and any areas deemed by the Gity that will need to connect-into the proposed development's SD System. 2. Developer's engineer shall determine how SD system will work during 10-year and 100 year flood events assodated with Hom Creek. Identify the HGL in Hom Creek during 10-and 100 year event, and what affect will it have on the proposed outlets and storm drain system. System should be designed to 22 CounayMeadowsErtales, Platt 1,7,3. PWD SG{Q'Repor! July O9, 1 fl97 Page 9 adequately drain 10-year storm without surcharging'or should be provided with adequate storage to prevent surcharging; and be designed to prevent baddlow of water from Hom Creek up into SD system during storm events. 3. During the design of the SD system, the Developer's engineer shall consider the effect of the proposed improvements and structures with regard to the 100-year base flood event floodway and floodplain of Hom Creek and the drainage ditches associated with Grant and Hanley Roads. The allowable flow rates into Hom Creek and the ditches along Grant and Hanley Roads from the proposed development shall not be greater than the run-off flow rates experienced from the property in its current status. The developer's engineer shall•provide suitable hydrological calculations and storm hydrographs to depict the existing predevelopment, and projeded post development conditions of the development area on Hom Creek and the ditches along Hanley and Grant Roads. The Developer's engineer and the City PWD shall agree on the applicable run-off coeffldents, curve numbers, retardance, etc., to be used in the.peveloper engineer's calculations. 4. Rlans which propose to include the discharge to Hom Creek ar the existing t drainage ditches on Grant or Hanley Road, and any consfrradion or modification within the floodway of Hom Creek or in the road ditches, shall be incompliance with OSL, ACOE, ODFW, DEQ, JC Roads, and/or City PWD (as applicable) guidelines and requirements and-any applicable conditions and or approvals, or these regulatory agendes. 5. Need plan atxl profile drawing of HGL's in Hom Creek, with indication of floodway and flood zone boundary during the 100-year flood event, taking into cansidecafton potential developmens~ de e o ment in the d~inage.shed of Hom Creek upgcadient of the propo P 6. Ali storm drain easements need to be 15{eet wide, and need clause in final property deeds or final CC&Rs to maintain driveable access to manholes for getting vactorretter to manholes and to discharge points in Hom Creek. Need copy of either document prior to approval of construction plans. 7. designed t provide an ae~stheticallytpleasin9, useful and Irnv maintenlance fadlity. 8. Prior to construction plan approval of the improvements for this Tentative Plan, the Developer's engineer shall provide the City PWD with a complete set stem. hydrologic and hydraulic calculatiens and profile plots for sizing the SD sy The engineer shall use the rainfal~ntensity curve obtained from the City PWD for hydrologic calculations, and the negotiated run-off parameters. 23 CouatryMeadows$s(a(es, PGau 1,2,3, PWD S4~'Report Jafy 09, 1997 Page 10 9. The SD system shall be designed to cony runoff from a 10 year storm event if Q<100cfs. Use runoff for 50 year stom7 if Q>100 or < 200 cfs. lJse 100 storm runoff ff Q is >200 cfs. 10. Minimum storm drain diameter shall be 15 inches. 11. Materials shall be PVC (ASTM D 3034 with gaskets), HDPE (meeting ODOT requirements for corrugated polyethylene storm sewer pipe, including a provision forpremiumwater-tight coupling bands), or approved equal. Provide concxete encasement or suitable reinforced cona'ete pipe where required o prevent pipe deformation in areas of minimum cover. 12. Construct curb inlets with side inlet in curb section and grated inlet in the In gutter section. If inlets/catch basins ace to exceed 4.5 feet in depth from the lip of the inlet,• then the inlets and catch'~basins shall be designed to,affocd suitable "man" entry info the inlets/catdt basin for maintenanee/deaning purposes. 13. Developer's engineer shall provide hydrology and hydraulic calculations. and flowline plots for. private and public storm drains. Plot HGL on profile or provide a separate profile.drawing that indicates the HGL on the profile.. Pipes should maintain cleaning velocity and have adequate capadfies without suroharging. 14. Due to fhe high level. of groundwater in fhe area, the Developer may wish to incorporate fhe use of a perforated SO system. If so, then the perforated storm drain system shall be designed to have adequate capadties to: Convey the collected groundwater and storm water with the minimum cleaning velodfles and without suroharging the collection and conveyance piping; and ~ . . O~ Mntmize silts, sands, gravels, and fines migration from the nafive soils into the SD system. The plotted HGL shall include both the groundwater infiltration, and the storm water run-off and run-on ir>fiows into the SD system. 15. A 30~oot virile storm-drain aooess easement shall tie located on fhe lots adjoining•Hom Creek to afford access to the main channel of Hom Creek. Gated aooess to accommodate a 15' wide access (beyond the tap of bank of the Hom Creek channel) shall be provided through all fence crossings of; easements. i` 24 CounkyAfcadowsEslatar. Phase I.I.3. PWD S(go'Rcpart Ju(y09, 1997 Page II 16. Construction of private storm drains is discouraged by the City: However, if a private storm drain is to be oonsfnlcted, the following-information should be provided to the City: - How will the private storm drains be maintained, repaired, etc. _ All roof and lot drainage should be drained to the curbline when a standard curb and gutter section is used. _ Provide invert elevations and lateral stationing for constnlction of private storm drain system. Provide plan and profile views and elevations for any private storms drain system that maybe proposed. 17. Provide 0.2~oot drop through all manholes and cacti inlets. 18. Roof drains and underclrains 'shall not be directly connected to a public storm drain lines, and if a standanl curb and gutter section is to be used, the roof drains and underdrains shall drain to the street at the alrbline, whenever possible. if a rolled curb and gutter section is to be used, Then the roof drains and underdrain dschar+ge lines shall either be connected to the rolled gutter section utilizing a City PWO approved design, or they shall be connected to a private storm dram system (with a suitable easement dedication for the private P. .E., that discharges into alicurb ilnlet og marsh ale that is part of the publd/or storm drain system. 1g, ~~ and gutter sections shall not exceed 350 feet before.entering a catch basin or curb inlet. 20. Developer shall be cequit+ed to coor<iinoart use of water from Hom ey~lgatton OtsG1ct to resolve any imgatton rights . Sanitary Sewer Existing Facilities - ' 15" =18" BCVSA Gravity Sewer is located in Grant Road. 21"•-24" BCVSsegwervis locatediin 0 t~iWayylor Road • _ 8-inch sanitary tKlS~~ ~- All sanitary sewer collection and~oonveyance system (SS System) design, construction and testing shall oorrform to the standards B guCrelek Valley e Oregon DEQ,1990 ~SA)~ a d ~BSC WD Stadards, where applicable. Sanitary Authority 25