Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - February 2, 1999I~ ,: CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA February 2, 1999, - 7:00 p.m. Q ~ Q Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 438 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Chuck Piland -Jan Dunlap, Candy Fish, Don Foster, Bob Gilkey, Karolyne Johnson and Paul Lunte III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and approval of January 5, 1999, Planning Commission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Page 1 - 2 A. Transit Oriented Design Presentation (RVCOG) 3 - 22 B. Public hearing to consider a request by adjoining property owners to vacate the 9th Street right-of--way between Pine Street and Manzanita and the Alley right-of--way between 8th and 10th Streets forthe purpose ofdeveloping anew Rite Aid shopping center. The subject rights-of--way are located in the C-4; Tourist and Office Professional zoning district. Q.~eeti~i.~a ye Couec.~ 23 -35 C. Public hearing to consider a request by Scott and Shawna Meyer to vary from the City's two car off street covered parking requirement in order to convert a garage into additional living area. The subject property is located at 5035 Crestwood Drive in the R-1-8, Residential Single Family zoning district. (Lc'e y3S~ 36 - 63 D. Public hearing to consider a minor partition and site plan for Noah vonBrandt to subdivide a 0.88 acre tax lot into two parcels; one for an existing single family residence and the other to develop a 12 unit apartment complex. The subject property is located at 443 North Second Street in the R-3, Residential Multiple Family zoning district. (~~e-ao cV,3q -Por{, ,} ion VII. MISCELLANEOUS VIII. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 5, 1999 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Jan Dunlap, Candy Fish, Don Foster, Bob Gilkey, Karolyne Johnson. Also present were Tom Humphrey, Planning Director; Ken Gerschler, Community Planner; Lee Brennan, Public Works Director; Sue Meyers, Office Technician; Jim Bennett, City Administrator; and Mayor Bill Walton. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Fish made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of December 15, 1998. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gilkey. ROLL CALL: Dunlap, abstain; Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VL BUSINESS A. Continuation of public hearing to consider a request by John Addington to partition 0.95 acres into three parcels and vary from the lot size requirements on two of the three parcels. The subject property is located 70 feet south of First Street between Cedar and Bush Streets in the C-5 zoning district. There were no ex-parte communications or conflicts of interest. Tom Humphrey, Planning Director, reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report. The property is located in a commercial zone and is occupied by an auto shop and six legally non-conforming dwellings. The applicant would like to separate it into three tax lots and will remove the cottage at 24 Cedar Street to provide better access to the back of the business. The existing water meter could then be used for the business. Lee Brennan, Public Works Director, presented the Public Works Staff Report. Public Works would request an additional 5' ofright-of--way on Bush Street and a Public Utilities Easement of 10' minimum width along the property's frontage with Bush and Cedar Streets, for utility installation. They would also request that ~ '1 City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 1999, Page 2 all remaining infrastructure improvements to Bush and Cedar Streets be completed. Some or all of these improvements could be deferred to a later date. Water meters should be installed in accordance with City standards. There is a well on the property and the owner would need to either show proof of abandonment or to install a backflow device. There is also a trash dumpster in the right-of--way that needs to be moved. Storm drainage would need to be addressed and corrected as necessary, and sewer modifications may be required by BCVSA. A separate water service may be necessary for parcel 3. Tom Humphrey stated that off-street parking would be required for each of the 5 cottages (one space per cottage). Mike LaNier, Richard Stevens Company, representing the applicant, explained the need for the partition and stated that the applicant would be able to meet all of the staff requirements. He also stated that new fencing would be installed between the parcels, which would help cleanup the area. There was no opposition to the partition. Commissioner Johnson made a motion to adopt Resolution #437 to grant a request by John Addington to partition 0.95 acres into three parcels and vary from the lot size requirements on two of the three parcels, per staff reports and exhibits. The subject property is located 70 feet south of First Street between Cedar and Bush Streets in the C-5 zoning district. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Gilkey. ROLL CALL: Jan Dunlap, yes; Candy Fish, yes; Don Foster, yes; Bob Gilkey, yes; Karolyne Johnson, yes. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Tom Humphrey introduced Mark Morgan, from the new newspaper in town, the Central Point Times (previously the Central Valley Times). They are affiliated with the Grants Pass Courier. Commissioner Johnson reminded the commission of the Town Hall Meeting scheduled for February 10. There is nothing scheduled for January 19, so the next meeting of the Planning Commission will be February 2. Everyone agreed that one meeting a month should be sufficient. City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes January 5, 1999, Page 3 Mr. Humphrey told the Commission that a consultant for the downtown revitalization has been hired. Rite Aid's application is expected next week. There is a Community Response Team meeting scheduled for Thursday, January 14. Central Point Auto Wrecking is working with the City on improvements. Nothing has been decided on the empty bank building. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adjourn. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnson. All said "aye" and the meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. ~~~~~~~~ Transit • ~~~~~~~~ Oriented ~ ~~~~~~~~ Deve%pment .Transit oriented development strategies • Supporting land use and zoning ordinances • Street design standards • Development opportunities which promote mixed use development • Well designed pedestrian-oriented environment, • All of which support and promote the use of the ransit system. An Introduction to Transit Corridor Development Strategies for the Rogue Valley Transportation District A team of local agencies is about to begin a major study of transit potential for the most populated areas of the Rogue Valley. The study will identify those areas within the boundaries of the Rogue Valley Transit District (RVTD) that have the greatest potential for developing into "transit activity centers." Transit activity centers are areas that are likely to experience high growth and are able to support mixed use development (housing, offices, and retail) within walking distance of transit stops. The transit activity centers will be designed with good pedestrian access. Good design as well as favorable public policy, public acceptance and market factors will determine the. success of the development of transit activity centers. The project is called Transit Oriented Design (TOD) and Transit Corridor Deve%pment Strategies for the Rogue dal/ey Transportation Dlstricl, and is being done by the Rogue Valley Couhcil of Governments, and RVTD, with the help of the consulting firm McKeever/Morris, Inc. For more information on Transit Oriented Development, call the RVCOG Transportation Program, 664-6674. 1 The TOD Study Getting the Public involved Once transit activity centers have been identified, public meetings will be held focusing on the activity. centers. Stakeholders and interested citizens will be identified for each area. The public meetings will be used to develoPconceptsforthe developmentoftransit activitycentersand i design guidelines and improvements for transit facilities, such as transit stops and transfer stations. W Pine Street ~"ti ~7 Hwy 99 1 VDowntown Medford S An example of Transit Oriented Design (TOD) E r' North Medford Southeast Medford ateway south stage Road ~~ WhatisTransitOriented Development2 Transftorienteddevelopment, or TOD, isa planning term that describesdevelopment influenced by and oriented to transit service, and responsive to the market created by transit patronage. Elements of TOD projects include good pedestrian access; moderate to high density housing; and mixed use such as offlce9, retail businesses and services, all cohcentrated within strategic areas linking the transitsystem. TOD Benefits , , The benefits of concentrating development at or near transit stations is an Increase in transit ridership, which in turn generates revenue for fran5it agencies, reduces air pollution, traffic congestion; and curbs urban sprawl..By creating an environmeht where people can live, work; shop, ahd be entertained within walking distance of each otherdecreasesnur dependence on the automobile for every trip we make. 2 !PLANNING DEPARTMENT TAFF FPORT MEETING DATE: February 2, 1999 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey, Planning Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing - To consider a request to vacate the Ninth Street right-of- way between Pine Street and Manzanita and the Alley right-of--way between Eighth and Tenth Streets for the purpose of developing a new Rite Aid shopping center in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district. Applicant: Hummelt Development Company 29911'SW Boones Ferry Road, Suite 3 Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Agent: Summary Jon Hummelt The applicant has submitted a request to vacate a public street and the alleys separating two City blocks in order to develop a Rite Aid shopping center and incorporate it with existing commercial and residential uses. The applicant has submitted a petition signed by all of the properly owners 'abutting the subject rights-of--way. The City Council will set the date for a public hearing after it receives a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Authority: CPMC 1.24.020 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing, review and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding street and alley vacations. Notice of the Public Hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. Applicable Law: CPMC 12.28.010 et seq. - Street and Alley Vacations CPMC 17.44.010 et seq. - C-4, Tourist and Office-Professional District ORS 271.005 et seq. - VACATION Discussion• The CPMC directs the Commission to review and make recommendations to the City Council regarding street and alley vacations as one of their advisory functions. The Hummelt Development Company (on behalf of Rite Aid) has requested the vacation of a section of Ninth Street and two alley segments between Eight and Tenth Streets. The vacation (abandonment) of these public rights-of--way would allow a new Rite Aid shopping center to be designed in a 3 manner that would allow better building orientation; integrate new and existing commercial uses; create no new curb cuts on Pine Street and result in more dedicated right-of--way on Tenth Street (a secondary arterial). The municipal code does not provide the Commission with any specific criteria for evaluating street and alley vacations however there are a number of policy. statements in the City's Comprehensive Plan which Commissioners may wish to use in formulating their City Council recommendation. Policies are taken from sections dealing with infrastructure, land use, economics, and circulation. I. Review all development proposals and ensure that they conform to the water system plan and that they can be adequately provided with water services. (Water Facilities & Services, Policy #6, Page VIII-35) The Public Works Department has reviewed the vacation request for compliance with the City's engineering requirements and has summarized these requirements in the memorandum included as Attachment B. They have expressed no objection to the proposal provided certain conditions are met. 2. Ensure that all future activities of the City are consistent with the goals directed toward continued improvement of the Community. (Incentives to Development, Policy #3, Page IX:28) The. Planning Department has .reviewed the vacation request for compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. and zoning code... The area is designated for tourist and office professional development and is zoned C-4. This proposal will result in a more efficient use of commercially zoned land and potentially improve. the overall configuration of this property and neighborhood. 3. Study the feasibility of closing some local streets that intersect with arterial streets to reduce the number of unnecessary arterial intersections and to channel local traffic to collector streets or secondary arterials, as illustrated in the "hierarchy of streets" concept. (City Street Development, Policy #6, Page XI-11) 4. When appropriate, take advantage of opportunities to close local streets or create cul-de-sac streets that will increase the circulation system's efficiency and contribute to neighborhood privacy and safety. (Circulation/Transportation, Policy #22, Page XI-27) This proposal is consistent with concepts proposed in the City's Comprehensive Plan for Clustered Commercial Development (see Attachment C). The vacation of this section of Ninth. Street would not substantially reduce street connectivity in this area of the City since it effectively terminates at Man~anita. Block consolidation would reduce,an unnecessary arterial intersection and result in on-site traffic,circulationthat would function independent of public rights-ofway. A primary reason for street and alley vacation is to create a wider right-of--way on Tenth Street while maintaining the Rite Aid building square footage and associated parking. 5. Promote the clustering of commercial businesses for the purposes of more efficient customer parking, better design and landscaping, coordinated signing, and increased retail sales. (Commercial Development Policies, Policy #4, Page XII-19) If allowed to'vacate the street and' alleys, the applicant will proceed with a site plan'review application to build a Rite Aid store. Non-conforming residences will be removed and existing commercial buildings (Abbeys, Liquor Store, etc.) will be integrated into a new shopping area thus improving the current overall area'design and operational efficiency. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Staff suggests the following findings of fact and conclusions of law as applicable to the project and necessary for its approval. 1. The project site is located in the C-4, Tourist &Office-Professional Zoning District and increases commercial land use efficiency in this area. The proposed street vacation may occur in any district including the C-4 zoning district. The Comprehensive Plan encourages innovative commercial planning and development techniques that would help to increase land use efficiency and reduce costs of utilities and services (Comprehensive Plan, page XII-12). 2. The proposed street and alley vacation transfers public right-of--way to private use for the purpose of redeveloping commercial zoned land currently used for non-conforming _. residential land uses. The proposed vacation meets the requirements of the City's municipal code for hearing procedure, review and recommendation by the Planning Commission. A separate public hearing is required by the City Council to satisfy the specific requirements of ORS 271.005 et seq pertaining to vacations in incorporated cities. 3. The Planning and Public Works Departments have reviewed the proposed street and alley vacation and the findings of fact and determined that the project meets all City standards and requirements subject to the recommended conditions of the Planning Department (Attachment E) and the Public Works Department (Attachment B). G:\PLANNING\99006. WPD 5 n Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: , 1. Recommend approval of the. street and alley vacation request. subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Attachments B & E); or 2. Recommend denial of the street and,alley vacation request; or 3. Continue the review of the vacation request at the discretion of the Commission.. Attachments• A. Notice of Public Hearing and Location Map B. .Public Works Staff Report dated January 26, 1999. C. Excerpts from the Central Point Comprehensive Plan D. Petitions and Correspondence E. .Planning Department Recommended Conditions of Approval, G:\PLANNING\99006. W PD CJ _City of Central Point Attachment A PLANNING.DEPARTMENT . Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Deanna Gregory Administraflve/Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: January 13, 1999 Meeting Date: Time: Place: NATURE OF MEETING February 2, 1999 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review a request by adjoining property owners to vacate the Th Street right-of--way between Pine Street and Manzanita and the Alley right-of--way between 8th and 10th Streets for the purpose of developing & new Rite Aid shopping center. The subject rights-of--way are located in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional Zoning District. The Central Point Planning Commission will initially review the request to deternune if it meets the requirements of local and state law. It will then make a recommendation to the City Council who will consider the matter at a formalpublic hearing. If approved, the vacated right-of--way would -become the property of adjoining owners and be incorporated into new development plans. CRITERIA FOR DECISION ,The requirements for Street and Alley Vacations are set forth in Chapter 12.28 of the Central Point Municipal Code. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance with ORS 271.080 et. seq. and the City's Public Works Standards. Pi TBLIC COMMENTS 1. Any peison 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 2,1999. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 7 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 wilCneed to berelated'to the proposal and should be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant aze available for public review at City ' 1-Tall, I55 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the same aze available at 15 cents per page. 5. -For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at (541) 664- 3321 ext. 231. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the request, technical staff reports, hear testimony from the applicants, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the request. Any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above: At'the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission will make a'recommendation which will subsequently be considered at a public hearing before the Central Point City Council ~~ \ II L~ AREA PROPOSED ~~ ' ~~6 ;o ~ -FOR STREET c^~~ , sT ~ VACA ION ' FFT ~pf~ S~; _ ~PF Fj, \ ROBERT PFAFF PARK ~~'i~ 155 South Second StreE /~ • __ N S1~ 0 AK Attachment B To; Tom Humphrey, Planning Director From: Lee Brennan, Public Works Director Subject: Public Works Department Comments Regarding 9"' Street and.. Alley Vacation for ..Proposed Rite-Aide Development Date: January 26, 1999 In regards to the proposed vacation of City right-of--ways of 9`h Street and the alley connection of 9'h and 10"' Street between Pine and Manzanita Streets for the Proposed Rite-Aide Development, the Public works Department wishes to provide the following concerns and/or conditions to be applied as part of the granting of the vacation of the streets: Easements: Suitable easements shall be provided for and dedicated to the respective utility/public infrastructure owners, for all utility and other public/private facility infrastructure within these existing rights-of--ways. 2. Utility and Public Infrastructure: Any relocation, modification, removal, and/or upgrading of existing public orprivate infrastructure/utilities to accommodate the vacation of these streets and/or the proposed development; shall be performed at the expense of the Developer: 3. 10`x' and Manzanita Street Right-of-Way Widths. Suitable additional right-of-way shall be granted by the Developer on 10"' and Manzanita Streets to accommodate expected future traffic/bike lane/sidewalk needs on these streets. These right-of--way widths may be wider than the widths illustrated on the Development's current proposed site plan. 4. Vehicular and Pedestrian Access to All Existing Developirtent. Deed restrictions will need to be granted on the proposed Development's property to allow for public and private vehicular and pedestrian access (ingress and egress) on and/or across the proposed Development's property to afford access to the existing development that is to remain, that normally had access off the vacated portions of 9"' Street and the alley. A staff report addressing other public works department requirements regarding the proposed development will be submitted to the City's Planning Commission and the Developer at the time that the site plan for the proposed development is presented to the City's Planning Commission for xeview and consideration. __~ g Attachment C ' Neighborhood convenience centers are proposed at the, intersection of Table Rock Road and Vilas Road, Table Rock Road and East Pine Street, Third Street at Tenth Street, Hopkins Road at Bursell Road, and Beall Lane at Hanley Road. Downtown Improvements: The Land Use Inventory of March 1980 showed that the downtown business district is expanding in two distinct ways. ..First, commercial development is taking place along Pine Street.. toward the freeway, replacing or converting older single- family dwellings in this area. Second, 'because of the short- age of available commercial land along Pine Street, new development (primarily financial and professional offices) is locating behind the established businesses and along Oak -an'd Manzahita streets. It appears that the-City is experi- encing the initial stages of a north and south expansion of the business .district. The Comprehensive Plan establishes ultimate boundaries of the business district, allowing it to expand in a_manner that will not result in land use conflicts with nearby resi- d'ehtial neighborhoods.' Manzanita Street '(one block north of Pine) is proposed on 'th'e Circulation Plan to be a secondary arterial street providing direct access to Taylor Road on the west side. of the City.. The intent of the Land Use Plan is to develop:Manzanita Street as a commercial thoroughfare with financial, aegal, and other business offices and service businesses west of Seventh Street, and tourist or office uses east of Seventh. The dividing line between commercial and residential uses to the north would be the alleys that parallel and lie between Manzanita and Laurel Streets. According to-this general concept, residential and commercial uses would back up to each other but would not face each other across the street, ,Manzanita would become. a totally commercial- oriented street and Laurel would remain residential. The same basic concept is applied to areas south of the business district, making_Oak Street a commercialsoriented street from Froht Street to Seventh. As the downtown area continues to grow and increase in com- mercial :intensity and activity, there will be,a'greater need for off-street parking. There is considerable potential for commercial parking behind existing businesses with access through the alleys. Development of such parking could be done through joint agreements among local businesses; possibly 'with the initiation and encouragement of"City staff. Ideally, such developments would be coordinated by a Downtown`Improve- ment Plan. Because of the. financial and staff limitations, • such a plan is not proposed immediately, but should be high on the priority list of future special studies. A Downtown Plan would also include a master plan for parking, coordinated design guidelines for commercial development, landscaping and signing guidelines, and a specific plan for pedestrian and XII-15 ~~ bicycle facilities and access. As discussed in the Circulation/Transportation Element, there will be an increasing need over the next few years to increase circulation efficiency in the downtown area. A major factor in the existing traffic problems is the great number of .local streets that intersect with Pine Street, a, major arterial. The "hierarchy of streets" concept discourages such intersections. There are presently ~1.~lntersections within the portion. of Pine Street between =' the freeway and railroad, not including alleys. As traffic. volumes increase, the level of traffic congestion at these points will also increase, slowing traffic flows and causing delays and excessive auto emissions. Because of the short 220 foot block faces, it would be advantageous to combine some downtown blocks to increase circulation and improve the shopping .environment. The combination of two blocks would create a 500 foot block. .The street right-of-way between the original blocks could be made available-for commercial development (in-filling) or retained for public parking or access to off-street parking lots. The illustration on the following page shows the street/block configuration in the downtown area at the present time and a conceptual design for block consolidation. This is only a concept to stimulate thought and ideas and is not intended as a specific Plan proposal. The completion of the proposed Downtown Improvement Plan would provide the necessary detail and supportive data to amend the Comprehensive Plan accordingly at a later date. Clustered Commercial Development: The theory of cumulative attraction states that a given number of ..stores selling competitive merchandise will do more business if they are located in close proximity to each other than if they are widely scattered. For example, four shoe stgres located close together will do more business than the same four stores if they were spread but. Also, a department>stgre and a variety. store adjacent to-each other.. will complement each other so that the two stores together will do more business than the same two in separatelocatigns. The additional. business comes from two sources, primarily. A.larger percentage of•the market area will be attracted`to the cumulative or larger group, larger. It has .been determined studies that it is not uncommon will do four or five. times more scattered stores will do: Such ment against "strip commercial" isolated and does. not encourage by" patronage. A policy is included in the Land clustered commercial development benefit of the merchant as well XII-16 and the market area wi11'be through commercial qr market to find that clustered stores; business than individual or figures present a good argu- development that is often pedestrian access and "walk- Use Element to encourage whenever possible for the as the cc~vpunity. DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN I ~ °u ~ a ~I, ~ ~ ~ L~JwL~~'~~~wuw~-+N~N~~ MANZANITA _ E+ , .. PINE .STREET E N a w OAK nn~-nnn CONCEPT FOR FUTURE CONSOLIDATION OF BLOCKS* ~ z w ~ ~ w w L~J ~L~ W 1.--~ ~ o MANZANITA :::cr:•:.•' ::::~5:::i .....k...... ;~:~:i~iikii? <s:~:~: #fSi:~ff:~ '~::;:;:~'r H t: .....$............ (~ :c;:t:E•:i3: ~:~?3:~ :;;`;ass's:::?:::>:i•;:>::>:> s :•.: ........ PINE w # # ~. ~~nnn .~;.; •. :'~i$:~i~3rit~:• ;;~Y:;;;:i£i:i:; STREET :a~:~fSS:~~ %~f:~: OAK :•::: •r~:k:::•::::• :•: :::;:~:k~:r::;~f:i~f %ax:: i s ~?: ~: f ~3'r' i ~: ~ :.................. . .....; :. ~:.: . ~ : ;.; ~f:~fT;;: ~S:2o: ............... :3:? ~: r::.:: :;;f:;::s:?;: ..:..:..... ('~~~.s~ ::; i:..;.::.::: r:;:>::t:: L...........~ *This concept provided for discussion only and is not a specific proposal of the Land Use Plan. XII-17 1 2. Hospital-related Development: As hospitals develop and grow, there is often a need to provide locations in the immediate vicinity for the develop- ment of medical offices, laboratories, and other related land uses. Presently, there are no such areas in the vicinity of Cascade Hospital. The land use inventory found that several single-family. homes in the immediate vicinity had been converted to medical offices. With additional future expansion-of the hospital, an .even greater need can ~: be expected for related development.. The Circulation/Transportation Element of this Plan proposes a major circulation improvement in the hospital area with 'the extension of Hopkins Road westward to Highway 99. This would provide easier direct access to the hospital and would also create a triangular block south of Central Point Elementary directly across the street from the hospital that could be redeveloped over time into a functional medical office "park". The following illustration is a conceptual view of the type of development proposed at this location, including the pro- posed circulation improvements. Hopkins ~ ~~ ~ xzz- a ~ 13 Commercial Development Policies: 1. Adjust'the`zoning Central-Point, as year 2000 Land Use of all commercial areas of necessary, to conform to the Plan. (Has been completed.) "Undertake an indepth study of the downtown business district and develop a comprehensive improvement plan that would include such considerations as traffic circulation and off-street parking, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and access, structural design guidelines, and guidelines for landscaping and signing. Encourage the development of shared commercial parking `areas in the downtown area to be carried out by local businesses with City assistance. Promote the clustering of commercial businesses for the purposes of 'more efficient customer parking, better design and. landscaping, coordinated signing, and increased retail sales. 5. Develop and adopt a specific plan for the hospital area and consider the need to establish a "Hospital District" section to be included in the Zoning Ordinance to ensure that future development is consistent with the specific plan and compatible with hospital and medical land uses. (City has developed a C-2(M) zoning designation.) b. .Undertake a study of the Highway 99 commercial areas between Beall Lane and the High School to determine what specific actions are needed to improve this corridor, improve traffic circulation, and improve the overall visual and aesthetic character of the area. XII-19 14 Attachment D ` ~ ' '~ Hummelt Development Company 'Real Estate January 14, 1999 Mr. Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director City of Central Point 155 South Second Street Central Point, OR 97502 RE: Rite Aid NWC Pine & 10th Dear Tom, ' Enclosed is site plan application with appropriate supporting materials. If you have any questions please call. We look forward to working with you on this project. Since ely, Jo Hummelt 29911 S.W. Boones Ferry Road • Suite 3 • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 • (503) 682-7100 • FAX (503) 682-4849 ,- 15 We are proposing to develop a freestanding 13;328 square. foot Rite Aid Drug Store with double drive-up window. In connection with the development the alley between 10th Street and 9th Street will be vacated as well as 9th Street between Pine Street and Manzanita Street. In association with the 9th street vacation there will be joint access between our proposed development and the adjacent retail complex immediately to the west. All existing structures will be demolished and the building and associated common area laid out as shown on the enclosed site plan. 16 ~~, ~~ ~ ~ a~a ~ z u i p@Lg q~ . ~8$~ ~F~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~a ~~ ~~r~~°~ ~~a~a°~ Ry Eyr F rl. ~® iu YIg1p WRJ ~ID (%i) Ni-NN s-- ir- IOrlAy 57. ~ ~~° ~ y~{ ooL PETITION I/WE, the undersigned, would support vacating-.the 9th Street right-of-way between Pine Street and Manzanita Street and the Alley,right-of-way between. 8th Street and 10th Street under the following conditions:. L 50% of the right-of-ways will. go to the property owners on each side of ,the right=of-ways. 2. No public street will be constructed within the.former right-of-ways. 3. The former`right-of-ways maybe used for access, parking; structures,. fences, and other uses' permitted by the City. 4: These'conditions will apply equally to the .property owners who will benefit from the vacation and division of the right-of-ways. TAX MAP 37-2W-02CC HUMMELT DEVELOPMENT CO.. 29911 S.W. BOONES FERRY RD. WILSONVILLE, OR 97070 DENNIS/DIANE SULLIVAN 835 E. PINE ST. CENTRALPOINT,OR 97502 MILTON R. BEALL 1793 LAMPMAN ROAD GOLD HILL, OR 97525 MICHAEUSUSAN SULLIVAN 825 E. PINE ST. CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 42 N, 9TH ST. (LOT 3700) 52 N. 9TH ST. (LOT 3600) 64 N. 9TH ST. (LOT 3500) 59 N. 10TH ST. (LOT 3800). 943 E.-PINE ST. (LOT 3900) 917 E. PINE ST. (LOT 4000) 919 E. PINE ST. (LOT 4001) 45 N. 9TH ST. (LOT 3300) 839 E. PINE ST. (LOT 4100) 46 N. 8TH ST. (LOT 3200) ~c1 ~wkw.~1~' 57 N. 9TH ST. (LOT 3400) _'~~ _' ~, /, ~ (y~~ . _. /~ ./~ c 825 E. PINE ST. (4300) . ~/ULJ 18 FROM QEgMER fOMPgNY FRX N0. 503+570+7956 Oct. 22 199(3 02:17PM P1 PE'fITYON UWB, the undersigned, would support vacating the 9th Street right-of--way between Pine Street and Man~.anita Street and the Ailey right-of~way between 8th Street'and 10th Street under the following conditions: 1.50% of the right-of--ways wilt go to the property owners on each side of the right-of--ways. 2. No public street will be constructed within the former right-of--ways. 3. The former right-of--ways may he used foraccess, parking, structures. fences, and other uses permitted by the City. 4. These conditions wilt apply equally to the property owners who will benefit from the vacation and division of the right-of--ways. TAX MAP 37-ZW-U2CC HUMMELT DEVELOPMENT CO. ?9911 S. W.' BOONES FERRY RD. wILSONVq.LB,OR 97(tt0 DENNIS/DIANE SULLIVAN 835 E PINE SC CFM'RAL POINT. OR 97502 MILTON R BEAi.L 1793 L.AMPMAN ROAD (SOLD HILL. OR 9752.5 42 N: 9TH ST. (LOT 3700) 52 N. 9rH ST. (LOT 3600) 64 N. 9TH ST. (LOT 3SOi1) 59 N. 10TH ST. (LOT 3800) 943 E. PINE ST. (LOT 39()(i) 917E. PINT; ST. (LOT 4000) 9i91i PINE 5T. (LOT 4001) 45 N. ~ri'H ST. (L01' 3300) 439 E PINE Sr. (LOT aIOD) 4C N. SiTi $T. (LOT 3200) 57 N. S~rH ST. (LOT 3400) M1CHA6USUSAN SULLI VAN 825 E PINE ST. CBNTRAt. POINT. UR 97502 825 E. PINE ST. (4300) ~~ : u~~ 19 Alice F. Morgan 64 N. 9th Central Point, Or 97502 January 20, 1999 City of Central Point Planning.Department Date of Notice: January 13, 1999 Date of Meeting: February 2, 1999 Nature of comments enclosed: Responaeto-request for writtencomments concerpi pg. the vacation of the 9th Street right of way between Pine Street and Manzanita and the Alley right-of-way between 8th and 10th streets for the purpose of developing a new Rite Ai d.shoPPing center. Zoned C-4. Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: I have been a property owner at the corner of 9th Street and Manzanita for twenty-one years. Twenty-one years ago I moved with my husband and six year old daughter i,r~``to a neighborly, quite, safe, friendly residential area„ People were moderate income earners raising their families and leading quiet lives. Today the area in question is a noisy mecca of strangers and commerce. Residential needs and the needs of commerce are very much in conflict in this area. It is my oppinion that the area. in question is no longer a safe and quiet place to live. Fast and noisy care, early morning dumpster dumping garbage trucks, all night and day delivery trucks, and name calling and meanacing neighbors who don't care about a permanent residence all take away the community pride and peace of mind a residential area should enjoy. Car alarms, sirens, screeching hot rod cars and those drivers who use Ninth Street as a'short cut to avoid the left hand turn signal at Tenth and'Pine, drunk, trespassing and loud trash tossinng and beer bottle throwing teenagers and drug use and sales all speak to me of the need to vacate this area in question and allow Rite Aid to locate here to provide better shopping for Central Point, and maybe employ some local people, and allow me to relocate to a truly residential area of my choice where I can feel safe, take walks, sleep and visit with my grandchildren I know you probably will not take personal gripes into consideration. If I don't like it here I can move, and I will; but For too long now Central Point has bean without areas to shop and commercial growth. With the new housing come pew people with families who need places to shop and to work. The quality of life improves for everyone when businesses come to town, and are located in easy to reach areas. The I-5 interchange here at 20 Continue from Pg 1: Pg. 2 OF 2 Comments: Vacation of the 9th Strest right-of-way between Pine Street and Manzanita and the Alley right-of-way between 8th and 10th Streets for the purpose of developeing a new Rite Aid shopping 'cen$er. ~L east end of town is an accesable and proper place to locate a business especially since the area is already zoned C-4. I did nqt receive a hotice of this meetins in the mail. My ` neighbor was good enough to lend 'me his; He has lived here twenty two years and knows the changes that .have taken place around us. Why did I not receive a notice but my neighbor did? Th/fa~n®®k yoluo far your time. GtiGGGC Y- ~/0',~j~CM~ Alice F. Morgan 64 N. 9th Central Point, Or 97502 `' 1 r.. ATTACHMENT E PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL l . The applicant shall comply with all requirements of affected public agencies and utilities as they pertain to the vacation. Evidence of such compliance shall be submitted to the City prior to recording documents which result in the transfer of the subject right-of--way. 2. The applicant shall provide utility and cross-access agreements and/or easements which' will provide unlimited access to public utilities (water, sewer, storm drain, etc.) and hermit the use of driveways that mutually benefit Rite Aid and other land uses within the redevelopment.... area between Manzanita and Pine Streets and between Eight and Tenth Streets. G:\PLANNING\99006. W PD 22 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: , SUBJECT: A lican Owner: ent: Summary: Authority February 2, 1999 Central Point Planning Commission Tom Humphrey. AICP, Planning Director Public Hearing - to consider a request to vary from the two,car covered off-street parking requirement at 5035 Crestwood Avenue (362W34DC Tax Lot 4700). Scott and Shawnna Meyer 5035 Crestwood Avenue Central Point; OR 97502.: Ken Brown Construction The applicants, Scott and Shawnna Meyer have applied for a variance from the two car off-street covered parking requirement to allow the. conversion of the existing garage to living space for a disabled child, The subject parcel is zoned R-1-8, Residential Single-Family. . CPMC 1.24.050 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application for a Variance.: Notice of the Public Hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. . Applicable Law: CPMC 17.28.010 et seq. - R-1, Residential Multiple-Family District CPMC 17.80.010 et seq. -Variances Discussion• Scott and Shawnna Meyer live with their son Brandon at 5035 Crestwood. Drive. They have authorized Ken Brown Construction to work on their behalf in applying for a variance from the off- street covered parking requirement. Brandon Meyer was paralyzed from the waist down in an automobile accident. in 1997. Scott and Shawnna would like to convert the existing garage into a wheelchair accessible living area which has its own bathroom (with. wider doors, grip rails, etc.) and an outside door (without steps) to the driveway (refer to Attachment A). 23 If the garage were to be converted. to living space, there would be no covered off-street parking provided at the residence. This would not comply with the following sections of the Central Point Municipal Code: CPMC 17.64.040(A-1) requires one and two family dwellings to provide a private garage or carport accommodating not less than two parkiug spaces for each dwelling unit. CPMC 17.64.080 states that areas needed to meet the parking requirements of a particular building or use shall not be transformed or changed to another type of use, nor transferred to meet the parking requirements of anot/:er building or use until the original owner of said parking area has adequately met the parking requirements of his use or has adequately provided his needed parking at another location approved by the planning commission. The Planning Department spoke with Mr. Brown about the possibility of expanding the floor plan rather than converting the garage. As the Commission will understand, it is less expensive to covert the garage for the applicant's use in this situation and Mr. Brown or the Meyers may wish to elaborate on this point. It is not feasible to construct a carport elsewhere on the site given the property dimensions and size of the existing home. Mr. Brown has submitted the application as-is to the Planning Commission for consideration. The Planning Department has received recommendations from both the Public Works and Building Departments regarding garage conversion (Attachment F). It is not realistic to condition approval of a variance for deed restriction and the Commissionshould expect that any variance approval would run with the land and that once converted, the re-creation of covered off-street parking would be abthe discretion of the property owner. The requirements of the building code would have to be met and the issues raised by the Building Official satisfied. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law CPMC 17.80.010 stipulates that the Planning Commission may grant a variance if findings are made that the following considerations will either result from the granting of the variance or do not apply to the requested application: 1. The Variance will provide added advantages to the neighborhood or the City such as beautification or safety; ^ A variance from the required off-street parking will not necessarily provide an advantage to the neighborhood in that there would be a greater inclination for the applicants and subsequent homeowners to park on the street. Garage conversion is a less expensive solution for the applicants to expand their existing floor plan to accommodate the needs of their disabled child. 2. The Variance will not have any significant adverse impacts upon the neighborhood; Z4 ^ If the variance were approved thus allowing: the garage conversion, the Meyers' vehicles would be parked in the driveway or on the street. 3. The Variance will utilize property within the intent and the purpose of the zoning district: ^ The subject parcel is located in a R-1, Residential Single-Family zoning district and the garage conversion does not change the building's residential use. 4. Circumstances affect the property that generally do not apply to property in the same zoning district; and ^ The circumstances leading to the variance application are not related to the property configuration. 5. The conditions for which the Variance is requested were not self-imposed through the applicant's own actions, not the actions of the applicant's agents, employees or family members. ^ The record of the Jackson County indicate that the Meyer's purchased the parcel in 1997 after the accident occurred. The applicant has submitted findings of fact for consideration by the Commission (Exhibit "C"). Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the Variance application based on the findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the proposed Variance application; or 3. Continue the review and public hearing for the Variance application at the discretion of the Commission. Exhi its: A. Site Plan and Floor Plan B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Applicant's Findings D. Correspondence E. Planning Department Recommended Conditions F. Public Works and Building Input G:\PLANNING\98081. W PD 2~ KE~~ BROWN CON9TRUCTI..N ii I ~[I~ P.O. Box 145 Gold Hill, Oregon 97525 Phon 0411855-1846 Lic !i 102440 i I .y ~~ t r'© 3.S C /Z EST G~OOO 26 ,3~co/(~ S ti e wNiv~ /t'~e~reF 5,.0 8s C R ~.A"WOa ~ CP,,,l~/ ~o e.w f B R ~75~2 /~~' . i o' ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~~~ o~o ~ o - ~ .~ ~ J ~ k o~ ~ ,.,~; C \ ~ l~ ~ h o ~ ~ ~~o ~ ~ ~ a ~ g i o ~ M ,,o c, o ~ e ~ u ~ ~ d 3J F '.WNW ~ ~ N O `~ ~ ~C ,, k~a~, o w .~ ~ e ___ ~~ jj _~ ,_ ~~~ ao~ ~~ ,, ~~ ~~ fl ~° w- ~ - ' ~ ~~~ o ~ ~ z~ ~ ~.~, - ~ ~ HI ~ Q _ y _ w ~ ,~ .. U 2c _ ~,: ~ ~ ~H ~n ~ ' ~ ~ ~~` D~ ® - O., ~ ~ys~a ,. .. M/vN/,., Ya0 E /' ,, ,'~,~J ,. ~~, 27 ~ ~ k =~ ~ 6 Citp of Cent ~iuti Planning Deparlmeu't Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Deanna Gregory Administrative/Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: January 13, 1999 ' Meeting Date: ..February 2, 1999 Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Place: Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEETING Beginning at the above place and time; the Central PointPlanning Commission will review an application for a Variance from he two caz coveredoff street parking requirement described in the Central Point Municipal Code. Theapplicant would like to convert the gazage into a living space to accommodate the needs of a disabled child. Ifthe garage were to be converted, there would be no covered offstreet pazking provided atthe residence. The pazCel is located 5035 Crestwood Drive in aResidential-Single Family (R- 1-8) zoning district on Jackson County Assessment Plat 36 2W 34DC Tax Lot 4700. At the meeting, the Commission will examine the documentation provided by the applicant, members of the public and City staff before deciding for or against the granting of the Vaziance. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Variances are set forth in Chapter 17 ofthe Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street pazking, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Anypersoninterestedincommentingontheabove-mendonedlandusedecisionmaysubmitwritten comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, February 2, 1999. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance ofthe meeting to Central Point City Ha11,155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. City of Central Point PLANNING DEPARTMENT 28 i l 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 Planning Commission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Ha11,155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the same are available at 15 cents per page. 5. Foraddifionalinformation,thepublicmaycontactthePlanningDepartmentat(541)664-3321ext, 231. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE Atthe meeting, the Planning Commission will reviewthe applications, technical staffreports, heartestimony from the applicant, proponents, 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 Planning CommissionmayapproveordenytheVariance. CityregulationsprovidethattheCentralPoint City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. W ~ r- _, - Z R o ` ,, o . ~ ~ - -5.. -- ~, `l< _ ...+~ 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 2 KEN SROR'N CONSTRUCTION ~~ . City of Central Point 155 South Second Central Point, OR 97502 .~.awu _~...~ ...~ G5ty of Ceritty-l E-otati ~XIIS~'T t~C't Planning Department In reference to chapter 17.80 we hereby respond to the following. 1. This Neighborhood will benefit most by allowing Brandon the oppertunity to grow up in an extremely challenging world and show the adults and children in the area how to appreciate what they have and over come any obstacle in their way. 2. No adverse impact will, be placed on this neighborhood from the vehicles owned by the Meyers. They 'would continue to park on the driveway as they have in the past. As with many of residential homes the garage area is utilized as storage and as for many homes parking in the driveway is standard. 3. This variance will allow the property to remain as family residential. 4. The accidental cause of Brandon Meyer to become handicapped is not a typical standard to this neighborhood. 5. This variance is a request to allow this family to remain in a house and neighborhood with their paralyzed son. No adverse conditions or actions will result should this be approved. Thank you 30 HEN BROR'N CONSTRUCTION ~~~el~~ City of CentralPoint 155 South Second Central Point, OR 97502 GYty of Centr7pt1.1.?oLtt EXHI~~~' t,~ tt:. Planning Department Ken Brown Construction is pleased to have the oppertunity to work with such outstanding community citizens. The Meyer family suffered a tragic automobile accident Ester Sunday1997, leaving their 5 year old son Brandon Meyer who'was 3 years old at the time paralyzed for life from the waist down. This accident was no fault of the Meyers. This was caused by the other driver, who was not insured. This has devastated the Meyer family. The Meyer family is extremely active in their community and local Church. This family'is trying to adjust to a new lifestyle and living peacefully in their neighborhood that they love. This project only requires interior modifications and hence no exterior changes are required. The close proximity to family, friends, and schools make this ` - home a desired place to raise their 5 children. We ask onlythat you wave the covered parking requirements to allow the garage conversion to a bedroom and bathroom young Brandon Meyer. Ken Brown Construction P.O.Box 145 Gold Hill, OR 97502 Phone(541) 855-1846 Lic#102440 ~1 x { , BEAR CREEK VALLEY SANITARY AUTHORITIP' 3916 SOUTH PACIFIC HWY. • MEDFOflD, OflE00N 97601.9099 • (641)779.4144 • FA%(641) 635.6279 January 21, 1999 Ken Gerschler City of Central Point Planning Department 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Subject: Meyer Variance -98081-VAR Dear Ken, We have reviewed the subject planning action with regard to sanitary sewer service to the parcel. Our records do not indicated the service line location on the property. However it is assumed the connection is to the Crestwood sewer main. The proposed construction should not have any. adverse effect on the sewer system. Thank you for the opportunity o comment on the proposed planning action. Sincerel ,%~ James May, Jr. P.E. District Engineer 32 EXHIBIT E RECOMMENDED PLANNINGDEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The approval of the V ariance shall expire in one year on February 2, 2000 unless a building pemut has been issued and conshuction has commenced and diligently pursued toward completion. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. 33 ~~ CITY OF CENTRAL POINT BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT APPLICANT: Name:_Scott, Shawnna Meyer Address:_5035 Crestwood City;_Central Point . State:_ AGENT: Name: Ken Brown Address:_Box 145 City:_Gold Hill State: Or OWNER OF RECORD: Name:_see applicant City: Zip code: Zip code:_97525_ Zip code: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Garage Conversion -Garage to Bedroom & handicap restroom BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: Buildine Plumbing, Electrical and Mechanical permits reouired. Areas of concern to be addressed include,but are not limited to: 1 Heating,/ air conditioning 2 Smoke detectors 3. Insulation 4. Emergencv eeress 5 Accessible facilities 6 Any mechanical now located in garage to be re-located. CENTRAL POINT ILDING DEPARTMENT By: Loi e enedetti City of Central Point E~HI$-IT' ttF t~ Planning Department Dated: 12/30/98 34 I N T E R - _ __ _ MEMO O F F I C E To: Tom Humphrey, Planning Director From: Lee Brennan, Public Works Director Subject: Public Works Department Comments Regarding Meyer Variance (5035 Crestwood Drive) Date: January 26, 1999 In regards to the Meyer variance for the conversion of an existing two-car garage into living space to accommodate the needs of a disabled child, and the elimination of off-street covered parking, the Public Works Department wishes to provide the following comments: 1. The location of the existing driveway apron and the available frontage of the property allow for the legal parking of one vehicle along the property's frontage with Crestwood Drive. The existing driveway is approximately 19-feet wide. Thus a total of one off-site and two on-site parking spaces are available. Typically, four to five total parking spaces are available with each single-family residential dwelling. We are concerned that current or future owners/occupants of this properly may not have adequate parking spaces on or adjoining this property, and this may cause impacts to adjoining property and street parking. 2. Although the desire to convert the garage to accommodate single level living space for a physically disabled child/adult is understandable, the granting of a variance for the elimination of covered off-street parking needs to also consider if there is available room on the property to allow for lateral and/or vertical expansion/extension of the dwelling for the space needed, while maintaining the existing off-street covered parking. It is suggested that if a variance was granted, that the variance be conditioned with a deed restriction on the property that when the property is sold or transferred, that the variance will no longer be in effect and that either the garage must be converted back into off-street covered vehicle parking, or a suitable covered off-street parking structure for two vehicles is otherwise provided for on the property. 35 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Applicant February 2, 1999 Central Point Planning Comrriission Tom Humphrey, Planning Director Public Hearing - To consider a Tentative Plan for an 21ot partition at 443 North Second Street in the R-3 zoning district (372W03DB Tax Lot 700). Guy W. von Brandt 2568 Crater Lake Avenue Medford, Oregon 97504 n r: Oscar Swanson Trust; Cheryl Robertson Executor 3360 North Pacific Highway Medford, Oregon 97501 Summary: Authority: Applicable Law: Discussion: The applicant has submitted an infill development proposal to divide an existing 0.88 acre tax lot into 2 parcels. CPMC 1,24.050 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application for a Tentative Plan. Notice of the Public Hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. CPMC 16.10.010 et seq. -Tentative Plans CPMC 17.28.010 et seq. -R-3, Residential Multiple-Family District CPMC 17.60.130 et seq. -Access The Planning Department has reviewed the tentative plan for compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning code. The area is designated for high density residential development'and is zoned R-3. This infill development will result in a more efficient use of residentially zoned land and improve the overall appearance and value of this property and neighborhood. This particular parcel is one of the last underdeveloped areas in this R-3, Residential Multiple Family zoning'district. For finance and development purposes, the applicant would like to create two separate tax lots that would segregate the existing residence from a larger vacant area that is the site of a proposed twelve unit apartment complex. 36 The Public Works Department has reviewed the tentative plan for compliance with the City's water, sewer, storm drain and transportation standards and has summarized department requirements in the staff report for the von Brandt site plan review (Attachment C). Since this tentative plan is being proposed to enable the infill development of an apartment complex a copy of the site plan has been included in the Commission's packet (Attachment B). As the Commission can see, the applicant has made no provision for a yard or play area for children. Planning staff believes that a tot lot should be part of the overall development of this property given the density of residential units proposed. In order to create a play area it appears that additional land from parcel #1 would need to be given up to accomplish this and still meet other requirements for parking, landscaping; etc: Staff is recommending that approval of a tentative plan be conditioned upon the addition of more land from parcel #1 to allow for a tot lot. The applicant may wish to propose the amount of additional area that he is willing to dedicate to this purpose. Planning staff will offer some suggestions at the time'of the meeting. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Staff suggests the following findings of fact and conclusions of law as applicable to the project and necessary for its approval. 1. The project ite is located in the R-3, ResidentiaLMultiple-Family Zoning District and increases residential land use efficiency in this area. Theproposedaentative plan for multiple family residential development is a permitted use. in the R-3 zoning district..The zoning in turn is consistent with the Residential Comprehensive Plan map desigriation. The Comp Plan encouragesinnovative residential planning and development techniques that would help to increase land use efficiency and reduce costs of utilities and services (Comp Plan, page XII-12). Infill projects of this sort are consistent with this city policy. 2. The project consists of a tentative plan application for the subdivision of approximately 0.88 acres into two separate tax lots for the purpose of renovation for the existing house and the development of a twelve unit apartment complex. The proposed multiple-family subdivision meets the density requirement for the R-3 residential zone which is a maximum of 25 units per acre. The parent 0.88 acre lot meets the requirements of the City's subdivision and zoning codes for residential lots as well as the. specific 7equirements of the R-3 zone. The tentative plan includes all information required by CPMC .16.10.010. et. seq. . 3. The Planning and Public Works Departments have reviewed the tentative plan for the proposed subdivision and the findings of fact and determined that the project meets all Citystandards and requirements subject to the recommended conditions of the Planniug- Department (Attachment E) and the Public Works Department (Attachment C). ~t 1`. r .. 5 Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: 1. Adopt Resolution No._, approving the tentative subdivision subject to the recommended conditioris of approval (Attachment E); or 2. Deny tk~e tentative subdivision; or 3. Continue the review of the tentative subdivision at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments• A. Notice of Public Hearing and Location Map B. Tentative Plat C. Public Works Staff Report D. Correspondence Received from Affected Agencies. E. Planning Department Recommended Conditions of Approval ~, G:\PLANNMG\99004TP.WPD ~© City of Central °oint PLANNING DEPARTMENT City of Central Point EXHISI~ t'A't Plarning Deparimeat Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: January 13, 1999 Meeting Date: Time: Place: NATURE OF MEETING February 2, 1999 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street' Central Point, Oregon :Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director IC¢n-Gerschler Community Planner Deanna Gregory Adininistrafiv'e/Platning Secretary Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Cornrnission will review applications for a Tentative Subdivisionand Site Plan Reviewthat could allowthe construction ofatwelve unitapariment complex behind the existing residence at 443 North Second Street. The subject parcel islocated in a R-3, Residential Multiple Family Zoning District on Jackson County Assessment Plat 372W03DB, Tax Lot 700. The Central Point Planning Commission will initially review the application of Tentative Subdivision to detemvne iftheproposed splitofthe existing 0.88 acre tax lotmeets therequirements oflaw. Ifapproved, the Subdivision would create a tax lot for the existing residence and a second for the apartment development. The Commissionwill thenprocced withthe Site P1anReviewapplication forthe 12 unitapartmentcomplex subject to the approval of the Tentative Subdivision. The apartments would be located behind the existing residence at 443 North Second Street and would access Second Street with a 20 foot wide private driveway. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Tentative Subdivisions and Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 16 and 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. ., 3 9 ,. 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS 1: Anypersoninterestedincommentingontheabove-mentionedlandusedecisionmaysubmitwritten 'comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, February 2, 1999. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City HaI1,155South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the-matters shall be raised prior to the expiration ofthe 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. 4. CopiesofallevidencerelieduponbytheapplicantareavailableforpublicreviewatCityHa11,155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the same aze available at 15 cents per page. 5. Foradditionalinfomiation,thepublicmaycontactthePlanningDepartmentat(541)664-3321 ext. 231. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staffreports, hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear azguments on the application.. Any testimony or ~,.~ r~.; ;~ ,, written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve or denythe Tentative Subdivision Plan and Site Plan Review. City ,y regulations provide that the Central Poir}t City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. ~~ 155 South Sewnd Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 _ ... tP Qq,Ly LIOV ~~ - ,~ - z F ,.. ~~ y~e~ 4 ~ ~ ~. ;_ ~~ ~~ _.-.- Kl Q~ h ~~o~. •' I '~~7 ~ ' ~. ~ I ~~. ~ yTGYcxtyTroHfTTC'e1yntTrai'f!aint . Planning Deparimen't W =, n L ~_ ~2 m ~~ V7F ~ ~~ w w au ~y^^ ~ 1~ g 1.~o m ti n o , i I ~`pOp~ - ~ i }1~y77~ N '4 ri Air V ~~ ~~ ~~ ~. ~ ~. N~ *~ ~~~ I I ~~~ rl~.~ r i ai ~f _~i. ~~ f d~~ a; ~ ~~ ~~ Nu $ a° g I a: g ~~ ~~ A8 3 .. ° ~ OHO ~°. ~.. ~, -~,~ - .-_ ~~ =i' _ . _ ~' _- - !: ~~. -:~ ~ i `! .^ - ~ _ :.~ _L' .:~._ ~p;4 '~ ;•~ ~~' ' ~ _~ IO ~~ ~~ ~~ 4~ 139?J1~1~anL~S~I~.~. L ~' i ~ ~ ~~ ® I, g i ~~ ~~ c vi F ._. ~~- j i ~Y °~ ~~~,~~ i p B~1 I•i ;. C~g;ppti• 0 ~ j~~ ~~ a - ~ ~~~~~s ~~~ /•r Exhlblt uG CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STAFF REPORT for vonBrandt Apartment Preliminary Site Plan PW#98067 Date: January 26, 1999 Applicant: Guy W. "Noah" vonBrandt, 2568 Crater Lake Avenue, Medford, OR 97504 Agent: Philip A. Schwimmer, Architect, P.O. Box 1105, Jacksonville, OR 97530 Project: vonBrandt Apartments Location; To the northwest of the Intersection of 2ntl and Cherry Streets Legal: T37S, R2W; Section 3D6, Tax Lot 700,; 443 N. 2"" street Zoning: R-3 Acreage 0.88 acres Units: 12 Apartments (1 building) Multi-Family Dwelling; and existing Residence Plans: 1 page (Landscape and Site Plan, dated 8/24/98; prepared by Agent. Report By: Lee N. Brennan, PubliaWorks Director. Purpose Provide information to the Planning'Commission and Applicant (hereinafter referred to as "Developer") regarding Public Works standards and additional standards and requirements to be included in the design. Gather information from the Developer/Engineer regarding proposed development. Special Requirements 2nd Street Improvements: The Developer shall install sidewalks (including a suitable driveway apron with 20-foot "throat"), along the property's frontage with 2"" Street. If applicable, the Developer shall be responsible for contracting with Pacific Power for the installation of a street .,light near the driveway entrance of the Development to afford proper night lighting of the entrance. 2. Driveways. Access Roads. and Parking Areas: The driveways, access roads, and parking and turning areas on the proposed development must be designed and positioned in a manner that should accommodate the turning movements and access of an AASHTO single unit truck and the Fire District's requirements. All driveways, access roads, and parking areas should either have asphalt or cement concrete surfaces. 3. Sife Drainage/Storm Drain Plan: The developer shall design and implement a site drainage/storm drain plan that corrects and enhances existing site drainage for the entire property noted on the site plan. Sheet flow surface drainage from the property onto the public rights-of-way, or onto neighboring properties is unacceptable. The storm drainage infrastructure will be privately operated and maintained. During the design of the storm drain collection and conveyance system (SD System), which provides for storm water run-off from and run-on. onto the proposed development (either surface ~~~ 43 VonBrandt Apartments Preliminary Site Plan Review January 26, 1999 Page 2 run-dn or culvert'or creek/ditch conveyance), the Developer shall demoristrate that the storm water flows from the completion of the proposed development (and aYany time prior to completion of development) do not exceed predevelopment flows; or that existing capacity, allowances, or provisions have' been made (and approval of the applicable properties owners and regulatory agencies has been obtained), which accommodate any additional flow which 'exceed predevelopment fidws: -The Developer and the City PWD shall agree on the applicable run-off coefficients, curve numbers, retardance, etc., to be used in the engineering'calculations. Developer's engineer shall provide a site drainage plan with the facilities being designed, at a minimum; to accommodate a 10 year storm event. The SD system must be designed to adequately drain the 10-year storm event without surcharging or must be provided with adequate storage to prevent surcharging; and be designed to not impact existing private or public storm drainage facilities.`-Any private storm drain system exceeding 3-inches in diameter shall be designed to directly connecfto the public storm drairrsystem (at a manhole or curb inlet only), Arid shall not be'designed to discharge to the street'surfaces. The potential retention of storm waterrun=off shall be coordinated with aspects of the proposed development to provide an aesthetically pleasing, efficieht; non-hazardous, and low maintenancefiacility. If applicable, the storm water retention facilities shall be suitably landscaped; designed to mitigate erdsion and sediment and hydrocarbon deposition; and to mitigate the "attractive nuisance" hazards associated with these facilities. Catch basins, curb inlets, and area drains shall be designed for sediment and petroleum hydrocarbon retention. There is an existing storm water "ditch" that traverses the property from south to north, and - ' which discharges into an 18-inch pipe on the School District Property. The storm drainage plan must allow for the conveyance of this and possibly other existing stormwater flows that run-onto the property: The alignment and construction of the storm water conveyance pipe should not underlie the proposed building. - The proposedplah-also irdicates thatthe stormwater will discharge to an "8" SD" (stdrmdrain) pipe of the driveway entrance,' The existing surtace grade of the proposed development apparently lies approximately3 feet lower than the street elevatioh, which makes drainage to the street unlikely due to the relative shallow location of the storm drain conveyance system on the east side of 2ntl Street. Any connection to the City storm drain conveyance system shall be at a manhole or curb inlet, o'r as otherwise approved by the City Public Works Department (PWD). Any storm water collection and conveyance facilities constructed within the public rights-of-way shall be constructed in accordance with City PWD standards, including the provision for water- tightjoints:. 4. Domestic Wafer Service and Fire Protection: The preliminary site plan indicates the location of a fire hydrant oh the property. 'A minimum 6-inch diameter tap and service lateral will need to be'made~to service this hydrant. The line and hydrant shall be placed within a 15-foot wide easement dedicated to the City. The City PWD is recommending that water service be provided to the existing residence and the proposed apartment complex bythe positioning df new meters in the area just east of the proposed fire hydrant. The number and sizes of the meters will be joihtly determined bythe Developer, arid"the City PWD and Building Departmehf. 44 VonBrandt Apartments Preliminary Site Plan Review January 26, 1999 Page 3 5. , Connections to City Infrastructure in 2"" Street: When we originally met with this developer in August of last,year, we indicated that any connections to infrastructure located in 2"'.Street or across 2ntl Street would need to be made and completed prior to the commencement of the overlay work scheduled;for 2nd. Street. This work has. been postponed,by the City's contractor and is not scheduled for commencement until March..Thus all connections to City infrastructure, or any planned underground infrastructure crossing of 2nd street must be completed prior to commencement of the overlay work on 2"d. street; no ater than March 1, 1999. 6. ,Aboveground Utilities: If applicable, coordinate efforts with Pacific Power, US West, and Falcoh Cable, to convert, any overhead electrical power, telephone;, or cable facilities within the proposed developmentto underground facilities, prior to the,acceptance by the City PWD of the ,: public improvements associated with the proposed development. All agreement$ and costs associated with the conversion of these facilities from overhead to underground facilities, shall be by and between the utility owners and the Developer. A power pole (PPL No.,611085) and telephone riser are located.at the driveway entrance:: These facilities must be relocated to afford ,, the required 20-foot wide driveway entrance. Any relocated utility facilities on site. should be ..placed underground, as feasible. General 1. Existing Infrastructure: The,Developer.shall provide suitable engineering certification and justification (i.e. calculations, analyses, plots, etc.,) that all connections;to existing infrastructure (i.e. street; water, sanitary sewer, storm drain ystems; natural drainage systems; etc: J will not interfere with or provide for the significant degradation (in the opinion of the Public Works Director) of the existing effective level of service or operation cf the infrastructure facilities, and that the existing infrastructure facilities have either adequate capacities to accommodate the flows and/or demands imposed on the existing infrastructure as the result of the connection of the proposed development's infrastructure; or the existing facilities will be improved by and at the expense of the, Developer to accommodate the additional#lows and/or demands while maintaining or improving the existing effective level of service. of the affected facility.. 2. Development Plans: Developershall submit to the City's PWD for review and approval, plans -and specifications for all improvements proposed for construction or modifications within the City or public rights-of-way and easements or for connections to City infrastructure. Public improvements include, but are not limited to, streets (including sidewalks, driveway aprons and, curbs and gutters); storm drainage and sanitary sewer collection and conveyance systems; :.water distribution system, (up to the service meter and including fire protection); street lighting; and traffic control devices, treet signs, and delineation, All construction of public improvements shall conform to the City's PWD Standards, the conditions, approved .and stipulated by the Planning Commission, and other special specifications, details, standards; and/or upgrades as may be approved by the City Administrator or his designee prior to the approval of he construction. plans for the proposed development: During construction, changes proposed by the Developer shall be submitted in writing bythe Developer's engineer to the City PWD for approval prior to installation. ~~- 45 Ip VonBrandt Apartments Preliminary Site Plan Review Jam~ary 26, /999 Page 4 3, Approvals: Fire, District No. 3 (fire hydrant placement, waterline sizing, and emergehcy vehicle access) and Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority (BCVSA, for sanitary sewers) written approval of construction plans shalt be submitted to the City PWD prior to final construction. plan review and approval by City PWD. 4. As-Guilts: Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or surveyor shall provide the Public Works Department with "as-built" drawings. If feasible, the Developer's engineer or surveyor should provide the drawings in both a "hard copy" form (produced on Mylar'®) and in a "digital" format compatible with AutoCAD®, or other form as approved by the City PWD. As=built drawings'are to be provided to the City which provide "red-line" changes to final approved construction plans which identify theiocations and orelevations (as appropriate) of actual installed items, including, but not limited to, invert, inlet, and rim or lip elevations; spot elevations identified on drawings; water lines, valves, and fire hydrants; water and sewer lateral; modifications to street section; manhole and curb inlet; street lightiocations other below grade utility lines; etc. Provide a "red-line" hard copy {on Mylar®), or an approved alternative format, of construction drawings, and if feasible, an acceptable AutoCAD® compatible drawing electronic file to the City at completion of construction and prior to acceptance of public infrastructure facilities completed as part df the proposed development, or as otherwise approved by the City Administrator or his designee.' 5. Elevations: All elevations used on the construction plans, on temporary benchmarks, and on •. "the permanent benchmark shall be tied into an established City approved benchmark and be so noted oh the plans: At least one permanent Benchmark shall be provided for the proposed development, the location of which shall be as jointly determined by the City PWD and the Developer's surveyor. 6: Existing Infrastructure: As applicable, field verify all existing infrastructure elevations and locatioris(i.e, pipe inverts, curb elevations, street elevations, etc.), to which the proposed development will connect into existing improvements, prior to final construction plan design and submittal for final approval. The accurate locations of any existing underground and above gi•oilnd public infrastructure, and the location of the associated easements with these facilities, ' 'shall lie accurately portrayed (both horizontally and vertically) on the construction plans. 7. Fill Placement All fill placed in the development shall be engineered fill that is suitably placed and compacted in accordance with City PWD and Building Department standards, except for the upper 15-feet of fill placed outside of public rights-df-way and thaf does not underlie building, structures;' or traveled vehiculaFaccess ways or parking areas. 8. Road/Driveway/ParkinaRreas: The Developer shall evaluate'the strength of the native soils and determine the access road, parking, and driveway section designs to handle the expected loads (including fire equipment) to be traveled on these private driveways, access roads, and ' parking areas. Need 4o provide section for review. The driveways, access roads, and parking and turning areas on the proposed development should be designed and positioned in a manner ~~- 46 VonBrandl Apartments Preliminary Site Plan Review January 26, /999 Page 5 ,that wiq;accommodate the turning movements:and access of a single;unit truck, without crossing into an opposing lane or additional travel lane of traffic: The. street section design for street improvements or connections to be constructed within the City rights-of-way (i.e 2ntl Street) shall be as follows: - 3-inches Class "B" A.C. 8-inches of 3/4"~0" crushed rock - 8-inches of 4"-0" crushed rock.(City of Medford specifications), - Woven geotextlle fabric over compacted subgrade. 9 10; 11. 12. 13. 14: Utility Plans: We did not receive any utility plans for the proposed development. The utility plans shall be drawn to scale with accurate horizontal and vertical depiction'of utility lines and appurtenances (transformers,valves, etcJ. - . Public Utility Easements: A minimum 10-foot wide public utilities easement (PUE) shall be dedicated along the proposed developments frontage with 2ntl Street forthe installation of public utilities<and should be located outside the public rights-of-way.: Clear Vision Areas: The construction drawings shall include. clear vision areas (i.e; sight triangles) at driveway entrances deslgnedao meet the City's PWD requirements. The existing hedge shall be trimmed/removed to afford the required sight diskances/clearances; and to clear the right-of-way. Fire Hydrantx Provide; locations pf existing and any new required fire hydrants. If applicable, teamer ports at,hydrants located nearthe building shall face the buildings: Fire hydrants shall be suitably protected from potential vehicle damage and encroachment. Water System Cross Connection Control: Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division (OHD) and City requirements for cross connection control: Water will not be "turned on" by the City until such requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the City's designated inspector..: r Water Svstem: Construction drawings shall include the size, type, and location of all water mains, hydrants, valves, service connection, meter, service. laterals, and other appurtenance details in accordance with City PWD Standards and as required by the City PWD and Building Department. , 15. Storm Drain Svstem. Design: Prior to construction. plan approval of the improvements for this development plan, the Developer's engineer shall provide the City PWD;with a complete set of hydrologic and hydraulic calculations and profile plots for sizing the site storm drain system. The engineer shall use the rainfall/intensity: curve obtained from the City PWD for hydrologic calculations, and the. negotiated run-off parameters. 16. Roof/Area Drains: All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, and/or crawtspaces with ,positive drainage,away from the buildings.-Roof drains shall not be directly connected to the 4'7 ~ , ~4 , Von6randt Apartments Preliminary Site Plan Review January 26, /999 Page 6 public storm drain system, but could be connected to the private storm drain catch basins. 17. Grading Plans: Grading plans should have original/existing grades and final grades plotted on the plan. Typically, existing grade contour lines are dashed and screened back, and final grade contour lines are overlaid on top of the existing grades and are in a heavier line width and solid. Contour lines should be labeled with elevations. 18. Exisfi~ Easements: If applicable, Developer shall comply with all existing easement owner requirements regarding any proposed development that may overlap any existing easement. Any development proposed which overlaps or alters an existing easement should be approved by the easement's owner in writing, and a copy of that written approval should be submitted to the City PWD prior to submission of construction plans for City PWD-review and approval. All existing easement locations and. those proposed for this development shall be shown on the. final plat with reference to the recordation number and Grantee. 48 arum uwtnu 590 BUCinatc P.rk Drive PO Bo.1709 MedMM, Oregon 97501 Tclophona 541-712-St91 ToOFree 800-fi59-1427 1 City of Central Point EXHIBIT t'Tl tt Planning Department January d 8, 1999 , FAX MEMO TO Central Point Planning Department ICen t:Xecschler; Planning Technician - 664-3321 Fax 664-6384 FROM' AVISTA UTILITIES David McFadden 858-4740 Fax 858=4790 Please include the following comments in your report. RE: Comments on Planning Action Applications File # 99004 Von Brandt Apartments, 443 iV 2nd St-, Central Point AVISTA UTILITIES recommends that a 10-foot Public Utility F,asement (PUB) be created along all public streets and highways within residential zones. It is also recommended that the driveway area and the first 10' contiguous to the driveway on Lots 1 and 2 should be established as a PUE. This PUE area should be landscaped in a manner that will avoid conflict with current and future utility facilities. Other utilities may require additional easements within the parking lot area of Lot 2 for above ground facilities. Natural Gas service is available to this development. Contact Sleve Wood, 858-4737, for details. Call Before You Digt 1-800-332-2344 It's The Lawl . - 4:~ , BEAR CREEK VALLEY SANITARY AUTHORITY 3916 SOUTH PACIFIC HWY. • MEDFORD, OREpON 97601.9099 • (641)779.4144 • FAX (641) 696.6275 January 21, 1999 Ken Gerschler City of Central Point Planning Department 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Subject: Vonl3randt Partition 99004 - SPR Dear Ken, We have reviewed the subject planning action with regard to providing sanitary sewer service to the project location. Comments from my September 17, 19981etter still apply. The recommended sewer line extension from the manhole at Cherry and 2"d Street should be constructed at minimum grade and terminate in a Standard permanent clean out structure. Additional design concerns can be discussed in their predesign meeting. _ Sincer , r'~%~ __ ~ j/ i James May, Jr. P.E. District Engineer 50 ATTACHMEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of affected public agencies and utilities as they pertain to the development of the parcel. Evidence of such compliance shall be submitted to the City prior to final plat approval. 2. The applicant shall adjust the boundaries between Parcels 1 and 2 to allow for the creation of a tot lot on Parcel #2 that would serve the needs of a 12 unit apartment complex. G:\PLANNING\99004TP. W PD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: February 2, 1999 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey AICP, Planning Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing= Site Plan Review of 37 2W03DB, Tax Lot 700 -von Brandt Apartments - Applicant, Guy W. von Brandt 2568 Crater Lake Avenue Medford, Oregon 97504 t r• Oscar-Swanson Trust; Cheryl Robertson Executor 3360 North Pacific Highway Medford, Oregon 97501 Pro er Descriptionf 37 2W 03DB, Tax Lot 700 - 0.88 acres onin R-3, Residential Multiple Family District mm The applicant, Guy vori Brandt has requested a Site Plan Review for the construction of a 12 unit apartment complex behind the existing single family residence located at 443 North Third Street (refer to Exhibit A). This application has been forwarded to the Planning Commission 'because it involves the addition of new dwellings on a lot requiring modifications to parking, access and site facilities{Chapter 17.72.020 B). uthori 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.'{Exhibit B). 52 A~nlicable Law CPMC 17.28.010 et seq.- R-3, Residential Multiple Family District CPMC 17.72.010 et seq.- Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval CPMC 17.64.010 et seq.- Off Street Parking and Loading Discussion During the previous agenda item, the applicant requested a tentative partition for the creation of two tax lots. The tentative approval of the partition will allow the applicant to segregate the existing residence from a vacant portion of the lot. The residence .located on the smaller of the two lots will eventually be sold and remodeled. The applicant would like to develop the larger lot at this time and requests that the Planning Commission review a site plan for the construction of a twelve unit apartment complex. The site plan and elevations depict a two story structure with garden decks and lap siding. Each of the twelve units is shown to typically contain two bedrooms with a single bath. The twelve attached carports and fifteen uncovered spaces meet the. parking requirements of the Central Point Municipal Code. An enclosed garbage collection area has been provided. The location of the complex to the adjoining Central Point School District's bus barn could create a conflict between future apartmenttenants and the school district. District officials have notified the City that bus engines are started at 5:00 AM Monday through Friday. At some point in the future, the bus barn will be moved elsewhere. Another potential problem may be the lack ofplay areas for children. The nearest open space is at Crater High School and the closest play equipment is located at Mae Richardson Elementary School. Therefore planning staff made the tentative plan recommendation that additional land area'from Parcel #Lbe added to Parcel #2 for a tot lot._ Landscaping for the project would include lawn areas along the periphery of the. project with 15 trees in the vicinity. of the complex. The landscaping plan provided by the applicant indicates that an irrigation system will be installed to ensure a healthy growing environment. The Central Point Building Department will require a backflow prevention device for the irrigation system. A driveway is proposed along the south. property. line Ghat would provide access to the proposed apartment complex. The municipal code requires that all areas used for off street parking, maneuvering be paved with durable materials for all-weather use and adequately drained. ~~ Arista Utilities (formerly WP Natural Gas) and'the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority have responded with recommendationspertaining tothis project (Exhibit D). Jackson County Fire District 3 reviewed the site plan during apre-application meeting and recommended a hammerhead turnaround which the applicant has shown on the site plan. 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 one for purposes of screening adjoining property. ^ The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan for consideration by the Commission. 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; ^ The project will access North Second Street via a common 20 foot wide driveway which is acceptable to the City and affected service providers. 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 project meets the minimum parking requirements of CPMC 17.64.040.A-2. 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 are compatible with the design of their buildings or uses and will not interfere with or detract from the appearance or visibility of nearby signs; ^ There is'no signage associated with this project. The CPMC will-require the address for the project to be displayed prominently. 54 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 apparatus, ^ The project, if approved would need to meet any requirements of Jackson County Fire District 3. F. Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations; ^ The proposed construction meets the minimum setback requirements for the R-3, Residential Multiple: Family District G. Compliance with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation 4o the neighborhood and the Central Point area and it's. environs. ^ The proposed structure is similar in architecture to other structures located within the R-3, Residential Multiple Family zoning district. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: L Adopt Resolution No._, approving.the Site Plan application for the .12 unit apartment complex, based on;the•findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Exhibits C and E); 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. Exhi its A. Site Plan, Landscaping Plan ,Building Elevations and Letter of Description B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Recommended Conditions of Approval D. Comments from Agencies E. Public Works Staff Report dated January 26, 1999 (refer to previous report package) ~5 ._.~- City of C~ntxal Paint EXHIBIT ttA« >ae .~~ ~ Pianning Departmcn't °A y ~ .~~~ ~~., o .a y I ~:!3 5"> _._ l.~9211fl~unL~l I.,,, . ~~ ~; ~„~I - ~ n: ~ i , i j O~ ~ ~. .; i ~ ~ '~ ', :~~,I3 I s _ ~ i _ i; ,,. ~~ _. .~ . ,- , _ -a _ f '-- -? '~~~ I: ~;~ 7 ~; + ~g ~ ~ ~:I~. I o~ ,~~ 1F~i 56 ~. a'D PHILIP A. SCHWIMMER ARCHITECTS / PLANNERS 21 December, 1998 City of Central Po.rit Planning Department 155 S. 2nd Rm 214'' Central Point, OR 97502 Re: Project Description Lot #37-2W-3DB Site Development Partition ' ' J Buyer, Noah Vonbrandt and architect, Philip A. Schwimmer acting as Agent representatives'for Oscar Swanson - Trust for the'ptrrpose of applying for site approval and subdivision of this property propose to develop a twelve unit apartment building and retain the 'existing victorian residence: This parcel of land is centrally located with-in the City of Central Point and is adjacent to,Crater'High School and its facility yard. The use ,of this property;for multiple housing' is in keeping with the current zoning and 'City Plan. The relationship of the school and its open recreation"area to the apartment site provides safe: and direct public access-to the future families to occupy the apartments without the. need to cross vehicle traffic and within view of the apartments.; The current surrounding neighborhood is!a mixture of single. and multi-family .units of the same scale and appearance of the proposed apartments.. The adjacent property, to the south contains two,four unit two story buildings very sim~:ar to this proposal. The existing residence is a nicely designed victorian structure in need of reconditioning and will be occupied by the buyer. Plans to upgrade the existing .structure and provide a new garage and' work shop are 'being developed and will begin shortly after occupancy by the buyer Access to the multi- family units and the single family residence will be through a single twenty foot 'wide driveway, thus minimizing the number of driveways on to second street and upgrading the current ten foot driveway and visual access to the `street.' P.O. BOX 1105 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 899-7726 5,r ..{ City of Central "oint PLANNING DEPARTMENT z .. City of Central Point ~~IiIl4~IT 'B't Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP Planning Director ICen Gerschler Community Planner Deanna Gregory Administrative/Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: January 13, 1999 Meeting Date: February 2, 1999 Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) .Place: .Central Point City Hall 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEETING Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review applications for a Tentative Subdivisionand Site Plan Reviewthat could allowthe construction ofatwelveunitapartment complex behind the existing residence at 443 North Second Street. The subject parcel is located in a R 3, Residential Multiple Family Zoning District onJackson County Assessment Plat 372W03DB, Tax Lot 700. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The Central Point Planning Commissionwill initiallyreviewthe applicationofTentativeSubdivision to determine if theproposed split ofthe existing 0.88 acre tax lot meets the requirements of law. Ifapproved, the Subdivision would create a tax lot for the existing residence and a second for the apartment development. ' The Commission will then proceed with the Site Plan Review application forthe 12 unit apartment complex subject to the approval ofthe Tentative Subdivision. The apartments would be located behind the existing residence af443'North Second. Street and would access Second Streetwith a 20 foot wide private driveway. The requirements for Tentative Subdivisions and Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 16 and 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to Gerieral 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. 58 ., .l ,: PUBLIC COMMENTS.. 1. Any person interestedincommentingontheabove-mentionedlandusedecisionmaysubmitwritten comments up until the close of the'meeting scheduled for Tuesday, February 2, 1999. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Ha11,155South Second Street, Central Point, OR97502. 3. Issues'which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the expiration ofthe 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. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Hall,155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon.. Copies of the same are available at 15 cents per Page• 5. Foradditionalinformation,thepublicmaycontactthePlanningDepartmentat(541)664-3321 ext. 231. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staffreports, hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, 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 Planning Commission may approve or deny the Tentative Subdivision Plan and Site Plan Review. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. <: ~~ 59 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 !Fax: (541) 664-6384 „ ,_. ~., ~~.. EXHIBIT C RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The approval of the Site Plan shall expire in one year on February 2, 2000 unless an application for a building permit or an application for extension has been received by the City. 2. The project must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. 3. The project must meet the off street covered parking requirements for twelve dwelling units, and parking, access and maneuvering areas shall be paved with durable materials for all-weather use and approved by the public works department. K _..,, 60 i vv ~,v,~ VV V !tV{SIB ~~~G 560 Business Perk Olive PO Boa 1709 MedMn1, OreOon 97501 Tclophone 541-712-5761 To6 Free 800-659-1421 January 18, 1999 FAX MEMO /~ i ~. r ~;. ~~' ,. City of Central Point r~HII~IT ttD't Planning Department TO Central Point Planning Department ICen Gerschler, Planning Technician 664-3321 Fax'664-6384 FROM AVISTA UTILITICS I3avid McFadden ; ~. 858-4740 Tax 858-4790 Please include the following comments in your report. RE: Comments on Planning Action Applications File # 99004 Von Brandt Apartments, 443 N 2°d St., Central Point AVISTA'QT'ILITIES recommends that a 10-foot Public Utility Basement (PU)/) be created along all public streets and highways within residential zones. It is also recommended that the driveway area and the first 10' contiguous to the driveway on Lots 1 and 2 should be established as a PUB. This PUB area should be landscaped in a manner that will avoid conflict with current and future utility facilities. Other utilities may require additional easements within the parking lot area of Lot 2 for above ground facilities. Natural Gas service is available to this development. Contact Sleve Wood, 858-4737, for details. Call Before You Digl 1-800-332-2344 It's The Lawl ~1 ~ '.4 f BEAR CREEK VALLEY SANITARY AUTHORITY 091680UTH PACIFIC HY/Y:.• MEDFOfl0. OREQON 97601x9099 • (EH) 7704144 • FAX (641) 696.6278 'January 21,1999 Ken Gerschler City of Central Point Planning Department 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Subject: Vonl3randt Partition 99004 - SPR Dear Ken, We have reviewed the subject planning action with regard to providing sanitary sewer service to the project location. ,Comments from my September 17, 19981etter still apply. The recommended sewer line extension from the manhole at Cherry and 2nd Street should be constructed at minimum grade and terminate in a Standard permanent clean out structure. Additional design concerns can be discussed in their predesign meeting. %// i James May, Jr. P.E. District Engineer ~~ o n.~, CITY OF CENTRAL POINT BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT APPLI(' ~ *TT• AGENT: City: OWNER OF RECORD: ~fN~N'~ ~GENl7 9q~0 7 Zip code: 9 "7 O `' Zip code: Address: City: State; Zip code: PROJECT DESCRIPTION`. /a, VNi T ' [~i9Q7-n~ ~T~tT' L~1 i l~d ~ nt 6 BUILDING COMMENTS: 5~~. i a 1..ry C'ow' CENTRAL POINT BUILDING DEPARTMENT By: ~ Dated: - ~/~ ~/ _ ES 63