HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Resolution 652RESOLUTION NO. 652
A RESOLUTION DENYING A SITE PLAN
APPLICATION AT 427 LAUREL STREET
(Leon Smith, Applicant)
(37 2W 3DD Tax Lot 4300)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Nature of Analication
This is an application for site plan approval for a second
living unit in an R-2 zone on a lot located at 427 Laurel Street,
Central Point, Oregon. The second unit would be connected to an
existing single-family structure., thereby creating a duplex.
At its January 19, 1993 meeting, the Planning Commission
approved the application, which approval was later put into
written form in Planning Commission Resolution No. 248.. At its
January 21, 1993 meeting, the City Council voted to review the
Planning Commission decision, pursuant to CPMC 1.24.080.
On February 18, 1993, the City Council conducted its public
review hearing, pursuant to CPMC 1.24.080, to consider the merits
of the application.
Section 2. Criteria Aanlicable to Decision
The following chapters of the Central Point Municipal. Code
apply to this application:
1. Chapter 17..24, Requirements for Residential, Two-
Family District;
2. Chapter 17.60, General Regulations;
3. Chapter 17.64, Off-Street Parking and Loading;
4. Chapter 17.72, Site Plan, Landscaping and
Construction Plan Approval.
Section 3. Findings
1. The proposal. would create a two-family dwelling in an R-
2 district, which is a permitted use.
2. The proposed new single-story structure is less than 35
feet in height and, therefore, complies with the height
requirement in the Cbde.
1 - RESOLUTION N0. 652 (021693)
3. The lot is approximately 7,650 square feet, and
therefore meets the R-2 minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet for
interior lots.
4. The proposal would meet the set-back requirements for
front (20 feet), side (5 feet per story) and back (10 feet).
5. The proposal complies with Chapter 17.60 regarding set-
back, clear vision and related requirements.
6. The development is required, under CPMC 17.64.040, to
have four 9-foot by 20-foot covered parking spaces. The site
plan submitted shows three 8-foot by 16-foot and one 10-foot by
16-foot spaces, which do not meet the 9-foot by 20-foot standard.
7. CPMC 17.24.080 provides as follows:
"17.24..080 Restrictions on additional dwelling units
on a single lot. No additional dwelling units, as
defined in this title, shall be constructed on a single
lot upon which there is an existing dwelling unit or
units, unless all of the requirements of this chapter
are met, and:
A. Lots meeting the requirements of this title can be
created by partition for each of the additional dwelling
units proposed; and
B. Unoccupied and unobstructed access not less than
twenty feet wide shall be provided from the. street fronting
the lot to the rear dwelling or dwellings on the lot; and
C. Primary access to each dwelling unit is not gained
through an alley for either pedestrians or vehicles."
"Dwelling units" is defined in CPMC 17.08.195 as follows:
"17.08.1.95 Dwellina unit. 'Dwelling unit' means one
or more rooms designed for occupancy by one family and
having no more than one cooking facility."
Since applicant proposes to build an "additional dwelling
unit" on a lot upon which there is an existing dwelling unit, the
three requirements of CPMC 17.24.080 are applicable. Applicant
could meet the requirement for a 20-foot wide access as required
by subsection B, and the application complies with subsection C.
However, the lot is only 7,560 square feet and the minimum lot
size in the R-2 district is 6,000 sauare feet. Applicant is,
therefore, unable to "create by partition for each of the
additional dwelling units proposed" lots "meeting the
requirements of" the R-2 district.
2 - RESOLUTION NO. 657 (021693)
In a case such as this where an additional dwelling unit is
proposed on an R-2 lot, where there is already an existing
dwelling unit on such lot, the minimum lot size is 12,000 square
feet. Since the subject lot is only 7,560 square feet, the
application for site plan approval must be denied.
Section 4. Denial of Application
The within application for site plan is hereby denied for
the reasons set forth above.
Passed by the City Council and si ned by me in
authentication of its passage this day of
l 1993.
/~'
Mayo~/Roger Westensee
ATTEST:.
City Re esentative
Approved by me this day of ~~ath~~ 1993.
Mayor.. oger'Westensee
3 - RESOLUTION N0. h57 (021693)