HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - April 1, 1997n
^' CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION' AGENDA
April l', 1997 - 7:00 p.m.
~--c/~i
Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 382
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
IL ROLL CALL,
Chuck Piland -Angela Curtis, Jan Dunlap, Candy, Fish, Bob Gilkey; Karolyne
Johnson, and Valerie Rapp
III. CORRESPONDENCE
IV. MINUTES
A. Review and approval of March 18, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes
V. PUBLIC' APPEARANCES°-
VI: BUSINESS'
ps S . i A. Continued Public Hearing -Review and decision regarding a Tentative Plan for
the Central Point East Subdivision, R-1-6, R-1-8, R-2 & R-3 zoning districts.
(~;7, 2W OC Tax Lots 100.& 200; 37 2W O1B Tax Lots 2500, 2700 & 2900)
(Partners Trust Company, applicant)
z-z~ B. Public Hearing -Review and decision.regarding anamended Tentative Plan for
the. North Valley EstaEes Subdivision, R-1-6 zoning district.
(37 ~W,03B Tvc Lots 300 & 401) (I.,ou Mahar/Pactrend Inc.)
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
VIII, ADJOURNMENT ~~
~~
w
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING ;COMMLSSIbN
MINUTES,
MARCH 48, 1997
i. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 f'.M.'
il. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Angela Curtis, Jan Dunlap, Candy-Fish, Bob Gilkey.
Karoly~e Johnson and Valerie Rapp were absent. Also present were: Jim
Bennett, Planning Director; Ken Oerschler; Planning' Technician, Lee. Brennan,
Public Works Director, and Arlene LaRosa, Secretary.
III. CORRESPONDENCE
There was no correspondence.
IV. MINUTES
A. Commissioner Fish made a motion to approve. the Planning Commission
Minutes for February 18, 1997, as written. Motiori was seconded by
Commissioner Dunlap. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Dunlap, yeS; Fish, yes;
Gilkey, yes.
V. BUSLNESS
A.
Chairman Piland opened the public .hearing. `
Jim Bennett reviewed the basis for testimony and the-appeal prQCess.
Jim Bennett reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report. Jim read
letters received from the public after the packet was mailed and included
them as exhibits by reference.
The letter and photographs from Partner's Trust Company dated March 18,
1997 were entered as an exhibit by reference.
Lee Brennan reviewed the Public Works Staff Report. He stated that the
Staff Report was developed as a preliminary staff report. This is a new
A
M
r
There were no conflicts of interest or exparte communications.
d CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 18, 1997 -PAGE TWO
subdivision in a new area and the city is going to develop new standards
for that area. The applicant, seems. to be willing to work with the city in
this matter.
Commissioner Gilkey questioned the letter from Rogue River Irrigation
District concerning the irrigation ditch in this area.
Jim Bennett stated that the developers will have to comply with the needs
ofi the Rogue River Irrigation District concerning the irrigation. water.
Commissioner Fish, asked what will happen to the two ponds on the
property. Mr. Bennett stated that they have not stated their plans for
them, however, the City has notified. the State Lands that there may be
wetlands. ThefState Seems to feel they may be artificial ponds.
;.
Jim Bennett noted that ,.Page 1, 2, paragraph 3, concerning meeting
Jackson County Road's requirements, deals specifically with acceleration
and deceleration lanes.: However„ it should also deal. with any other roads
in that<area and,any other requirements:-they may have.
Jim Bennett also made a correction to the Planning Department
Recommended Condition. s, page-8, paragraph number 1: change first
- sentenoe to read; "prior to approval" rather than "prior to submittal", and
-paragraph number 4: change first sentence to read "prior to approval"
-rather than "prior to submittal".
Commissioner Fish Stated. that for safety. sake that there should be no
access to Vilas Road now or in the future..
pick. Stark,, 2Q1 ,;West Main, ,Medford,, a.representative for Partners Trust,
came forward on behalfi of the applicant. Mr. Stark stated that the
colnpreherlsive~~p,lan requlSes a special purpose .park for the trees and ridge
11~1a, but they proppae tQ'=use 7.2 acres off Gebhard Rpad rather than in the
dedeloprnent.and preserve the;trees and:.ridge line in the development with
~~~ ~ jlroposed restriotlve,opvenants.,_, ,
Mike Thornton, Thornton Enginearing> 1x236 Disk Drive,. Suite 1, Medford,
engineer for the applicant, came forward and described the location of the
.ridge Une. ~~ '
~; _,.
y <Mr..Stark requested that the;Pybec Works pirector be given the authority
~`to•revii3e.or edit~the Public Works Conditions as. necessary as they get into
y a
p
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 18, 1997 -PAGE THREE
the'Master'Plari in'the design process.
-Lee Brennan stated that his comments tonight in this meeting are
incorporated into the conditions. '
Mr. Stark stated that they would comply with any required conditions on
the po~tid. .
Clint Brummett, 801 Daffney Lane, Central Point, came forward to discuss
the impact this development will have orti the schools;
Doug :Pfaff, 4630 Hamrick F1oad, Central Point, came forward in opposition
to the development. He was concerned about the impact of the traffic
from the road connecting to Wamrick iioad Just after the curve. He also
stated that there is an old pipellr~e easement on that. property.
Naomi`Wood 4460'Hamrick Road, Central'Point, came forward to state
that there will `be lots `of smalP children' and they need a park in the
development so they will not be playing in the streets.
Gary Moberly, 7529 fold Ray Road, Central Point came forward. He owns
a meat packing plant on Table Rock Road. He is concerned that they may
get into an adversa'riaf position with the residential neighbors even though
they have been there for many years. There are a number of other
businesses along Table Rock Road that may have the same problem.
Would like to have this issue addressed.
Doug Pfaff came forward a second time to express concern about the
water run-off `from the development since it all.dralns through his property.
Mr. 5tar'k stated that they-are looking`forWard'to doing his right. They
wily have a master plan for a stbrM sewer. The issue before this body is
that they do comply vvith the comprehensive plan and. they do comply with
the subdivision ordinance: Forthe'buffering between the commercial and
..residential zones, they may have to do something unusual. They are
going; to put something there that is `going to do the job.:
Kevin Nering, 1045 Diana Ct., Medford, agent for>the applicant, came
forward on behalf of the application and addressed the issue of the pipeline
easement. The company that owned the easement;is-out of business and
the pipeline was' never put in so it does-not benefit anyone.
M
p
M
M
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 18, 1997 -PAGE FOUR
Commissioner. Fish.mac~e a motion to continue this hearing to April 1,
1997, .,Motion was seconded by.Angela Curtis. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes;
Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Gilkey, yes.
B.
There were no conflicts pf interest or exparte communications.
Candy Fish fated. thet the phurch she attends may. be selling some
property to the applicant, but it does not benefit her financially.
Chairman.Piland .opened.. the public. hearing,.
Jim Bennett reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report.
Lee Brennan reviewed the Public Works Department Staff Reports, both.
the previpUS staff report and.. the. current staff report on the amended plan.
Dave Freei;.1665Q Highway 62, Eagle Point,. epplipant, came forward on
;behalf of the application- and described the reason: for amending the plan in
relation tp the; lay of the land..
Wayne Christian, 2021 Bullock:Road, Medford, came forward and stated
that they have b0 Ipts on 16th Street and questioned where the sewer is
located in this development with respect to his property.
4,ee. Brennan stated .tha,plans- will ,be approved, by BCVSA and sewer will
be shared by both developments. ,
,. ; . ~~;
Commissioner Fish made a mc?tion to,adopt Resolutipn 3$O.to approve the
amended Tentative Plan, :for the Bluebird Heights Subdivision, R-3 zoning
district (37 2W02BC Tax Lots 1101 & 1500) (C. David Freel, applicant)
based on fingings,;of fact and subject to;recommended.cpnditions of
approval in,StaffrReports. Commissioner Gilkey seconded the motion.
.:ROLL CALL: Curtis,: yps;, Dunlap,-yes.; Fish, yes; Gilkey, yes.
,, ,
N
Y
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 18, 1997 -PAGE FIVE
C.
Jim Bennett reviewed the Planning Oep~rtnient Staff Report.
Ken Gerschler stated that there is an error'in the staff feport. Instead of a
metal carport it is to be constructed of prefabricated wood trusses which
will match the existing roofline of the'structure.
Wayne Pair, 251 S. 5th, Central Point, came forward on behalf of the
application.
Daniel Park, 6180 Shady Brook brive Central Point, agent for the
applicant, came forward on behalf of the application. -
Chairman Piland closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adopt- Resolution 381 approving
the variance of the side yard setback requirement for asingle-family
dwelling located at 251'S.'Fifth St. in am Ei-3 zoning district (37 2W 11 BB
Tax Lot 5600)'(L. Wayne Fair, applicant) based on findings of fact and
subject to the recommended conditions of approval in the staff report.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Curtis. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes;
Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Gilkey, yes.
VII. MISCELLANEOUS
Jim Bennett passed out copies of the actions taken by the Citizens Advisory
Committee at their last meeting on'March"1'1 and`reviewed the actions. If the
commission would like to pursue these kinds of changes, then he will prepare a
Resolution of Intent and bring it back to the Planning Commission for their
discussion and approval on April 1, 1997:'
Jim Bennett informed the Commission that property located at 49 S. 2nd Street
across from Ray's Food Pface was recently rented and the renters wanted to live
in the aparfinenf and use the downstairs area fora business. The type of
business is the issue. The name of the business would be Crystal Light
Fellowship. It would be counseling, hypnotherapy, massage therapy classes and
workshops, books, crystals and rocks. The questionable issue is that they want
to hold church services. This is not a permitted use in commercial zones.
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 18, 1997 -PAGE SIX
Commissioner Gilkey asked if the therapists are licensed by the State of Oregon
and received an affirmative from the applicant.
Debra Paine, 49 S. 2nd Street, Central Point, the applicant, came forward. She
stated that the Sunday services would only be two hours per week.
Commissioner Fish made a motion that the Commission finds that the church is
similar and compatible with existing C-2 zoning and that the building inspector
will go in and set the capacity for the building. Commissioner Gilkey seconded
the motion. ROLL CALL: Curtis, yes; Dunlap, yes; Fish, yes; Gilkey, yes.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adjourn. Motion was seconded by
Commissioner Curtis. All said "aye" and the meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
PLANNING DEPAI~TMSIVT STAFF REPC3RT
HEARING
DATE: April 1, 1997
Tb: Central Point Planning Commission
FRbM: lames H. Bennett, AICP
City Administrator
SUBJECT: Continued. Public Hearing -Tentative Plan for Central Point East;
37 2W O1C TaxLOts100 & 200; 37 2W Ol$ Tax Lots 2500, 2700 8c 2900;
Partners Trust Company, applicant.
At the regular meeting of IVlarch 38, 1997, the Planning Commission opened; the public
hearing and:reeeived public Testimony regarding the proposed Central Point East Subdivision.
The Planning Commission continued the public hearing: to its regular. meeting of April.. 1,
1997, and left the hearing. open to receive additional public testimony and to receive
additional informatior< from3he applicantregarding the buffering of residential lots adjacent
to the Table Rock Rd. industrial-area and the proposal of a new park site to serve the area,
among other issues.
1
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
HEARING
DATE: April 1, 1997
TO: Central Point Planning Commission
FROM: James H. Bennett, AICP
City Administrator
SUBJECT: Public Hearing -Tentative Plan for North Valley Estates
37 2W 03B Tax Lots 300 & 401
li n Pactrend, Ina 37 2W 03B TL 300 - 19:12 acres.
Owner of 1014 N. Riverside R-1-6, Residential'Single-Family (6,000 s.f.)
Rec r Medford, OR 97501
37 2W 03B TL 401 - 6.06 acres
R 1-6, Residential Single Family (6,000 s.f.)
Summary
The applicant, Pactrend, Inc., is proposing a tentative plan for the subdivision of
approximately 25 acres located south of Scenic Ave. and immediately east of Hwy. 99
(Exhibit A). The site is presently zoned R 1-6, Residential Single-Family (6,000 s.f.) and will
be developed as asingle-family residential subdivision, North Valley Estates. The total
number of lots proposed for the subdivision is one hundred fourteen (114) which will be
developed in three (3) phases. The average density for the subdivision is 4.33 units/acre. The
maximum density permitted for the site is 6 units/acre. The maximum number of dwelling.
units that would be permitted under the current zoning is approximately 151 dwelling units.
Authority
CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing.
and render a decision on any application-for a tentative pianforaland partition. Notice of
the public hearing was effected in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 (Exhibit B).
A~nlicable Law
Central Point Comprehensive Plan & Comprehensive Plan Map:.
CPMC 16.10.010 et seq. -Tentative Plans
CPMC 17.20.010 et seq. - R-i, Residential Single-Family District
Discussion
The proposed subdivision is located on approximately 25 acres south of Scenic Ave.
immediately-east of Hwy 99. This area was annexed by the City ~n August of last year. The
" applicant, Pactrend, Inc., is proposing to construct asingle-family residential subdivision,
North Valley-Estates, on the site. It will. consist of;1.14 single-family homes and will be
developed in 3 phases. Access to the subdivision will be provided from Scenic Ave..by way
of two new local city streets, Summer Glen Wy. and Northwood Dr. The distance of the
access poinYclosest to Hwy: 99, Summer. Glen Wy., will be approximately 650 feet.
The- Planning Department has reviewed the tentative plan for Compliance with the
Comprehensive flan and the Zoning Ordinance. No zone changes are proposed as a part of
this development. Accordingly, the subdivision complies with the City Comprehensive Plan
Urbanization Element which identifies this area (Subarea A) for future low and medium
density residential development and with t$e Comprehensive Plan Map. and Zoning Map.
Each lot meets the minimum requirements for lot size in its respective zoning district.. Some
lots will have to be adjusted to meet the minimum requirements... for lot width for their zoning
district.
Surrounding uses consist of rural residential uses to the south which are designated for future
low and medium density residential development; an existing single-family residential
subdivision, Green Glen Units 1 & 2 to the east; rural residential uses to the north which are
outside of the Urban Growth Boundary; and agricultural uses to the west which are
designated for future general industrial development. There is an adjacent tax lot to the south,
37 2W 03B TL 400, that is indicated on the tentative plan to be incorporated into the
subdivision design at some future date. When developed, this area would add ten lots to the
subdivision and allow Summer Glen Wy. to connect with Willow Bend Wy.
The Public Facilities & Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan identifies a future
elementary school site in this area. School District #6 has purchased a site on the south side
of Scenic Ave. just west of Grant Rd. for this purpose. The Public Works Department has
reviewed the tentative plan for compliance with the City's water, sewer, storm drain and
transportation standards. The Public Works staff report is attached as Exhibit D. Written
comments were also received from Fire District #3, Rogue River Valley Irrigation District
and Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority which discuss each agency's requirements for the
development of the proposed subdivision (Exhibit E).
findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law
The project site is located in the R-1-6, Residential Single-Family District.
The project is consistent with Subarea "A" of the Urbanization Element of the
Comprehensive Plan which calls for low and medium density residential development
in the area and with the Comprehensive Plan Map which designates the project site
as Low Density Residential. The project site is located in the R-1-6 residential district.
`~
This zoning designation is also consistent with the referenced portions of .the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The project consists of a tentative plan application for the subdivision. of
`approximately 2$ acres for the purpose of developing asingle-family residential subdivision,
North Valley Estates. The total number of lots proposed for the subdivision is 114., The
average density for the subdivision is 4:33 units/acre.
The proposed single-family subdivision meets the density requirements for the
R l-6 residential zone which is a maximum 6 units/acre. Each lot within the subdivision
will meet the `minimum lot size and lot frontage requirements for the .applicable
` residential 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, the findings of fact and the conclusions ofiaw and determined that the
project meets all City standards and requirements subject to the recommended conditions of
the Planning Department (Exhibit C) and the Public Works Department (Exhibit D).
Z~~chib
A. `Tentative Plan -North Valley Estates
13. Notice of Public Hearing
C. Planning Department Recommended Conditions
D. Publio Works'Staff Report & Recommended Conditions
E. Writteri Comments
~:
- --- ---
~, /
4 ~`
~( --11CC~~ > A
m y
^E aNi
E Ti p E'- 7 r / '~ o
g ! ~' ' ~~ `
1 E '~ " ~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ wy F
A ~ ~ dd /d~ ` • 5fn ~ +~
d0 ~o ~ ~~ 9cna .
/ M•" 1
II
/ (GS !N ~ ' ~J ' I I I
grr 1
/i ~/j g ~0W der ~ e ~~ YA ~.
/ ~
i 1 v X' W \ \ tDZ
_ Y i i •__ R J /a. ~ :A h III ~
II " 3EE I/ l I \~ ~A ~J ~ . s~ ._ ~ ~~f ~~ sill
~a1t~ If i iii ~ ~6
~ff F ---- 1 I __ _
1 1 ~~ -1
A 1 1 1 1
a. I ---1 I'1 -.- 3 - J
I! 11
1 d ^ 2
A i9
¢N 1 ~II 1 ~~ ~W I TI I I N
z m e( 1 ~~' r~ i-, 91 €u'
N O Lw I .1 I ~--N ~ _~i III ~- - -
` ~ ~ ,~ y~
~ ~~~ M- ~.--__ -
~\ I
f f O f• H
F i ~y y 1' ~N i~ I ~W AN YA - ~ ~~ ';
~ f I
._
~_ ~~ ~ - - -
° ~ @ E~
'F 1 ~ ~ 1 - - ~e..-_if:f
`c 1
~ s~ __
£f~n ~, ~ro
~Z~O
Y~
~a ~ ~W
i~
/'/ / ~_
pQ I
I
' II I ~ yf3dgd¢
I ~~~ q~A
.~.
~_
4.r1 ',.
I
1 I
~~ i I I
I ---
~~
~
~
~
~
~
,~ I I I kg~ b a
I~
Ir ylD r ~ y
~
y ~.
ro
o
I I
I I
~ C
~~
g I
4~ ~I
~ d T
D
~ N A H
J 'l
I II `~
W j,
Y
C I {
{
= ~~R
i 6` I 3
! I
6 N
Y; X 11
I
L
im
i0 1 .I
' _
I~~ III
~
1 .
1
N ~ I II I g A
~~
I';I1" •-
I I
~ ~
}Y _ Y :_1
x
4 '
- 1 I _
W
~
» ~~- I'
A
1 1
LI 1
yI.
I
' I I ' ~ I ~I
~ N p
9
y
W
LW n I }
}i~ ' . ;j 6
. n1^4.. .9
~~ -. [~ ~6`. ~tll ~t'. tW . CN ~,. I!0 ~~uffii~ T~ r ~~_ ~u~µlll
.n
1 'I
r g p
4[ a I gx I ~n I Fv 1 ~r I r 16: I ~o I ~~ I ~, I iyY i I Bp I I
IPPEfN 4.Exs;1p LMi x011 I \ I ~' ~ I t
\ 1aucEx Iuunan 1Pa1 x9. - J
A~$
~
~~
~ . ~~~ ~.w
R.K
w ~
I
q
_
q
~~AD D~
Z... yyf P •~=
{4~ C y~l'6~
ppA _
B8~
44Q9l~F 1
II
€
~
I 33
~,.,
~
~.~mlp'
d
'i
WRA~
~i
.
i
fS]
.
~X4 1
:
P
O
m
In ~,oV
O ~i O ~
° tl D v.
1
x
P~-f -°~tr w
NA~~ ~g
y -ni~ ~
~fn Vim.
~I ~I pp11
NNAW(~~S
6~N 0 Z
y
OQ~~p~ °
m n ~
y g
~
y
~
f fD ~'
Z
--- ~ TA
(L y i
uyZ D
~~~~ ~
~a~ mnoA mr
QD
~ ,9 bm N
~~~w~~D
to ~ '~ %" D N
^^^^^yyC{C a~ s ~ c
o ~
4_N
G
r~
~~~
;:
i~~
City of Central Point
PLANNXNG DEPARTMENT
NOTICE OP MEETING
Dale o[ Notice: March 3,1997
Meeting Dater Tuesday, April I st 1997 '
Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate)
Place: Central Point City Hall
155 South Second Street
City of Central Point
EXHIBIT 't'~.'~
Planning` Department
James Bennett
Planning Director
Ken Gerschler
Planning Technician
Central Point, Oregon
NATURE OP MEETING
Eeginning'at the above place and time, the Central Point Planning Commission will review an
application for a Tentative Subdivision. The proposed 127 lot subdivision is located in the
Residential Single-Pamily District, (R-1-6) .near the; easterly intersection of Highway 99 and Scenic
Avenue on Tax Lots 300 and 400 of Jackson County Assessor Map Page 37 2W 03B.
CRITE)Zi>, POR DECISION
The requirements for Tentative Land Divisions are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point
Municipal Code; relating to Commercial Zoning, General Regulations, Off-street Parking, Site Plan,
Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also. reviewed in accordance to the City's
Public Works Standards.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit
written comments ag until the date of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April l st, 1997.
2. Written'comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 1.55
South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502.
155 South Second Street • Central Point, OR '-97502. • (541) 664-3321 • 'Fax: (541) 664-6384
6"
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
Ball, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, Oregon. Copies of the same are 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, Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staff reports, hear
testimony from the applicant, proponents, and opponents and hear arguments on the application.
Any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the
conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve, modify or deny the Tentative Plan.
City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning
Conunission decisions.
r~
YICINIT7 MAP
EXHIBIT C
PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOIvIIvIENDED:CONDITIONS
I. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit to the City a copy of the
proposed covenants, conditions and restrictions (CCRs) for the North Valley Estates
Subdivision.
;~
2. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of BCVSA, Fire District #3, Jackson
County Roads Department, ODOT and the Rogue River Valley Irrigation District as they
pertain to the development of the North Valley Estates Subdivision. Evidence of such
compliance shall be submitted to the City prior to final plat approval.
l
interoffice
M E M O RAN D lJ M
to: Lee Brennan, Jim Bennett, Lois_Del3enedett.
from: Paul W. Worth
subject: public Works Staff Report, North Valley Estates Subdivision
date: March 28, 1997
Attached for your review is the Public Works staff report for the North Valley Estates
Subdivision Tentative Plan.
Some items to be aware of:
1. The financing construction of the 12'inch water line in Highway 99 needs to be resolved
by a consortium of developers.
2: Evaluate possibility of routing storm drainage to Griffin Creek instead of ditch along
Highway 99. The use of the ditch along Highway 99 will require ODOT and DEQ approval.
3. Evaluate possibility of stubbing streets south from proposed development to accomodate
future development and avoid access to ):Iighway 99.
4. Requirement for sound. screening berm alongHighway 99 and meander sidewalk along
Scenic Avenue will reduce proposed lot size:
1
City of Central Point
EXIIRIT' t~~ t~
Planning'Department
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT -
DEPARTMENT OF PUBL/C WORKS
STAFF REPORT
for
NORTH VALLEY ESTATES SUED/V/S/ON
PW #97013
Date: 03/27/97
Applicant: PacTrend Inc.. _
Project: Subdivision, Phased
Location: Scenic Road and N. Pacific Highway 99
Legal: T37S, R2W, Section 3B, Tax lot(s) 300 and 401
Zoning: R-1-6
Lots: 105 (three phases)
Units: 105 Residential
Plans: North Valley Estates Tentative Plan, 02/19/97, Hoffbuhr & Assoc.
Report By: RauLW. Worth, Public Works Technician
Purpose
Provide information to the Planning Commission and Developer regarding Public.
Works standards: and :proposed. new standards to be included in the design. Gather
information from the Developer/Engineer regarding proposed development.
General
1. Applicant shall submit to the City's Public Works Department (City's PWD),
plans and specifications for all improvements proposed for construction or
modifications within the City or Public rights-of-ways and easements.
2. Public improvements include, but are not limited to, streets including
sidewalks, curbs and gutters; storm drainage arid sanitary sewer collection
and conveyance systems; and water distribution system lup to the service
meter end including fire protection); street lighting; and traffic control
devices, street signs end delineation.
1
~~
3. All construction of public'impPobements shalllconform to the City's Standard
Specifications"and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction
(City PWD Standards) and other special specifications; details, or standards
'and upgrades as maybe approved by the City's Public Works Director.
4. During coristructiori, changes proposed by the-Developer shall be submitted
in writing by the Developer's engineer to the City`PWD for approvaf'prior to
installation.
5. No construction shall commence until the City PWD has reviewed, approved,
and issued aPublic-V1/orks permit for the proposed improvements.
6. The Developer shall pay for all costs associated with the design and
installation of the improvements spedified on the approved plans.
7. Developer shall provide copies of any permits and conditions required by!
other agencies, including, but"not limited to Oregon Department of -
Environmental Quality {DEQ~; Oregon Division of State Lands'(DSL), U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (ALOE); affected irrigation districts, Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Jackson County Road and Park
Services Department (JC Roads).
8. Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the developer's engineer or
surveyor shall provide the Public Works Department with a digital drawing of
the construction "as-builts"'in an AutoCAD compatible format. As-built
drawings are to be provided fo the City vvhioh provide "red-line" changes to
final approved construction plans which identify the locations and or
elevations (as appropriate) of actual installed items, including, but not limited
to, invert; ihlet, ahd rim elevations; spot elevations identified orrdrawings;
road alignment; water lines, valves, ahd fire'hydrahts; water and sewer
" lateral stationing; modifications to street section; `manhole and curb-inlet
locations,`street lighf locations; other belovv grade utility line locations and
depths, etc: Provide a "red-line"hard copy {on Mylar) of construction
drawings, and an acceptable AutoCAD compatible drawing electronic file to
the City at completion of construction.
2
11
9. All elevations used on the construction plans, on temporary benchmarks, and
on the permanent benchmark shall,be tied into an established benchmark
(F.E.M.A. or other City approved benchmark) and be. so noted on the plans.
At least. one permanent Benchmark shall be prov)ded for each project.
10. The developer's engineer or surveyor shall provide.to the Public Works
Department a drawing of the recorded Final -Plat map. reproduced on ;Mylar
and in an acceptable electronic from in AutoCAD format. The Final Plat shall
be tied to a legal Government corner and the State Plane Coordinate System.
1 1. AlLfill placed in the development. shall be "engineered fill", and compacted to
City standards
12. Identify asementdedications and widths on the Plot Plan.
13. Easements for City; infrastructure (i.e. sanitary sewer, water,. and storm
drain) must be a minimum of 15-feet:wide, and should not split Jot lines.
.Easements for storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water lines should be
dedicated to the:City and not just a; P.U.E.
14. All design, construction plans and specifications, and as -built drawings must
be prepared to acceptable professional standards.
15. All treet and water improvement plans must be approved, in writing by Fire
...District 3 prior to review by the City's PWD.
16. If the proposed development places structures within the floodzone, how
does the placement of these structures modify the floodzone. What, affect
will it have on the floodplain elevation and floodzone boundary, and vvhat
affects will the modification of the floodplain.elevation and floodzone
boundary have on he existing facilities and properties surrounding the
proposed development.
3
~~
3. Prior to construction. plan approval of the improvements for this Tentative
Plan, the developers' engineer shall provide the City PWD with a complete set
of hydrologic and hydraulic calculations and profile plots for sizing the
SD system. The engineer shall use the rainfall/intensity curve obtained from
the City PWD for hydrologic calculations.
4. The. SD system shall be designed to carry runoff from a 10 year storm event
if Q<100cfs. Use runoff for 50 year storm if Q> 100 or < 200 cfs. Use
100 storm runoff if Q. is'> 200 cfs.
5. Minimum storm drain diameter shall be T5 inches.
6. Materials shall be PVC, ASTM D 3034 with gaskets or HDPE, meeting ODOT
. requirements for corrugated polyethylene storm sewer pipe, including a
provision for premium coupling bands. Provide concrete encasement where
required to prevent pipe deformation in areas of minimum cover.
7. Construct grated inlets/catch basins in gutter section. Ref. APWA, California
Section, drawing #303-1
8. Developer's engineer shall provide hydrology and hydraulic calculations and
flow line plots for private and public storm drains. Plot HGL on profile or
provide a separate profile drawing that indicates the HGL on the profile.
Pipes must maintain cleaning velocity and have adequate capacities without
..surcharging..
9. All storm drain easements mpst be 16-feet wide, and inolude a clause to
maintain driveable'access to manholes for getting vector/jetterto manholes.
10. " Construction of private'storm drains is'discouraged by the City. However, if
a private.. storm drain is to be constructed; the following information must be
provided to~the City:
- How will the private storm. drains be maintained, repaired, etc.
- All roof ahd lot drainage must'be drained to the curbline.
6
~~
- Provide invert elevations and lateral stationing for construction
of private storm drain system.
_ Provide plan and profile views and elevations for any private
storms drain system that may be proposed.
11. Provide 0.2-foot drop through all manholes and curb inlets.
T2. Roof drains and underdrains shall not be directly connected to public storm
drain lines, and shall drain to the street,at the curbline, whenever possible.
Lots should be raised if necessary. Building foundation under drains (and
these type of facilities only) may drain to private storm drain lines that
discharge onto the streets, or into a storm drain curb inlet or manhole only;
must be approved before construction by the. City PWD; and must be
identified and accurately portrayed on as-built drawings.
13, Curb and gutter ections shall not exceed 350' feet before entering a-catch
basin or curb inlet,
Sanitary Sewer
Existing Facilities -
Master Plan -
8-inch ACP stubbed out at Marys Way in Scenic Ave.
36-inch. Regional Interceptor sewer adjacent to west side
of Griffin Creek...
15 inch proposed in Scenic Avenue. Connects to
Regional Interceptor
1. All sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system (SS System) design,
construction and testing shall conform to the standards and guidelines of the
Oregon DEO, 1990 APWA Standards; Oregon Chapter, Bear Creek Valley
Sanitary Authority (BCVSAI, and the .City PWD Standards, where applicable.
2. The developers engineer shall provide., hydrology and hydraulic calculations
and flow line plots for existing and proposed sanitary sewers to both BCVSA
and the City. Calculations and flow line plots should inolude allowances for.
existing flows and projected future or existing development that will be
connected to the system. Plot NGL on profUe or provide a separate profile
..drawing that indicates the HGL on the profile. All .pipes must maintain
7
~~
cleaning velocity and have adequate capacities without surcharging:
3. The construction plans and the as-built drawings shall identify lateral
'stationing for construction: of,sewer laterals.
4. The City upon completion of initial construction plan review and preliminary
approval, will'forward the plans to BCVSA for completion of the review
process with'DEO.. Upon completion of the review by DEQ ahd'BCVSA,
completion'of-final revisions to theplans by the Developer's engineer, the
Pubiic Works Director will approve the plans ih final form. -
5: Alf testing and video inspection of lines and manholes shall be done in
accordance with BCVSA requirements, at developer's expense. The
Developer shall provide DEQ, BCVSA and 'the Citywith test reports, TV
reports and certification of the sewer system construction prior to final
acceptance.
6. The SS System shall be designed in accordance with any master planning
prepared by Bear Creek :Valley Sanitary Authority (BCVSA) and/or the City to
provide adequate capacity for the proposed development area, any future
development on adjacent properties, and any existing sanitary-sewer
collection systems that may need to connect-into the proposed
development's SS System. If a master plan for the proposed development
urea is unavailable, then a master plan shall be prepared for the proposed
development which accommodates the capacity Heads for the proposed
development as well as the capacity needs for the adjoining properties, and
any additional flows as determined by BCVSA and the City PWD.
7. Any proposals requesting the City or BCVSA to share in costs for
development of the sanitary sewer collection system to accommodate the
upgrade of -line sizing to handle the additional capacity requirements for
surrounding development, shall include detailed engineering calculations and
costs analyses. The developer will be responsible to coordinate and develop
any cost sharing agreements with any identified adjacent property
owners/developers.
8
rl
Water System
Existing Improvements - 12 inch D.I. line ends on east side of .Griffin Creek
- 8-inch AC line stubbed out at Marys Way on
Scenic Ave.
1. A water distribution system shall be designed in accordance with a prepared
water distribution system master plan which accommodates-the proposed
development, any future development on adjacent property, .and any. areas
deemed by the City that will`need to connect=into the proposed
development's water distribution system. The prepared water master plan
shall-take ipto consideration the recommendations and plans that were
presented in the 1979 Water System MasterPlan and the development of.
the 12-inch-diameter,water line proposed for construction on the eastern side
of Highway.. 99.
2. Any proposals requesting the City to share in costs for development of the
water distribution system to accommodate the upgrade of line sizing to
handle the additional capacity requirements for surrounding development,
shall include detailed engineering calculations and costs: analyses., The
developer will be responsible to coordinate and develop any cost sharing '
agreements with any identified 'adjacent property owners/developers.
3. Developer's engineer shall design`the water systemto provided minimum
flow of 1,000 gpm and conform to Fire District 3 requirements. Maximum
-spacing, of fire hydrants shall be 300 feat.
4. Specifications for the design and construction of the water system shall be in
accordance with City PWD Standards.
5. Lateral/connection stationing and size shall be provided on construction plans
and as-built drawings,
6. Developers engineer shall provide a reinforced flow ("looped") water system
within the proposed development as well as any lines required in Scenic
Avenue and Highway 99.
9
~~
~~ Streets/Traffic
Existing improvements` -
Scenic Avenue -Secondary Arterial. ROW 60'
wide; pavement 21' wide. Jurisdiction -Jackson
County.
Highway 99 -Major Arterial. ROW 80' wide,
pavement 56' wide. Jurisdiction - ODOT.
1. Construction drawings'#or this Tentative Plan shall include a Street Lighting
Plan and Traffic Control Plan in accordance with the requirements of the City
PWD. The construction drawings'shall include clear vision areas designed to
meet the City's PWD Standards. 25-foot unobstructed sight triangle areas
shall be required at all uncontrolled intersections. 55 feet shall be required at
arterial )ntersections.
2. The City PWD'shall, at the cost of-the developer, evaluate the strength of
the native soils and determine the'street section designs in accordance with
the City PWD Standards. The City's engineering staff or selected
engineering consultant {at developer's- expense), shall evaluate: the strength
" of the native soils and determine the street-section-designs in.accordance
with the City PWD Standards. ° Minimum street section shall be as follows:
- ~' 3-inches Class "B" A.C.
- 4-inches of 1 "-0" crushed rock
- 8-inches of 4" ;0"'crushed rock (City of Medford specifications),
woven geotextile fabric over compacted. subgrade.
3. All improvements to SceniaAvenue and Highway 99 including, but not
limited to, pavemert curbs, gutters, and'sidewalks, shalF be coordinated and
approved by the JC Roads,'ODOT and the City PWD. Acceleration and
deceleration lanes meeting JC Roads standards may need to be provided at
the proposed development's intersections with Scenic Avenue.
4. Stop signs shalF be required at the intersections with :Scenic Avenue.
b. Provide a °neighborhood"araffic flow/streetdevelopment plan which includes
the undeveloped property to the'south of this project (TL 400, 500, 600).
Evaluate the possibility of extending Silverwood Drive and Cottonwood Drive
south to accommodate future development in the area.
4
1~
6. IVlinimum curb to curb width of local atreets is 36 feet. Radius. of cul-de-sacs
and street knuckles shall be a minimum of 45 feet.
Storm Drainage
Existing Improvements -
12 inch Storm. Drain is aligned in Scenic.Ave. from
a manhole at Marys,Way to a crossing under
Scenic at. a manhole west of Nancy Ave to a
underground conduit at a grated box.
a large (irrigation??) conduit is aligned along the
north side of Scenic Ave.
A RRVID:.irrigation, pipe is aligned along the east
side of Highway.99.
1'., The developer shall develop a master plan for the storm drain collection and
conveyance system (SD System) which provides for run-off from and run-on
onto the proposed development, any future development on adjacent
properties, and any areas deemed by the City that will need to connect-into
the proposed development's SD System. During the;design of the
SD System, the Developer's engineer shall .consider the discharge of
collected storm water into Griffin Creek (in lieu of the discharge of collected
storm water into the drainage ditch .along Highway, 99) at a point on the
north side of the .box culvert structure at the Scenic Avenue crossing of
Griffin Creek. If the developer wishes to continue to pursue the discharge of
collected storm'water into the Highway 99 drainage ditch, then the
developer must obtain written approval from QDOT„e copy of which must
be submitted to the City PWD prior to the City DPW's review of the
proposed construction plans.
2. Any proposals requesting the City to share in costs for development of the
storm drainage collection and conveyance system to accommodate the
upgrade of line sizing to handle the additional capacity requirements for
surrounding development, shall include detailed engineering calculations and
costs analyses.-~~The developer will be responsible to coordinate and develop
`° any cost sharing agreements with any identified adjacent. property
owners/developers'.
5
~i:
7. Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division (OHD) and City
requirements for backflow prevention. An OHD approved. backflow
prevention assembly shall be installed immediately downstream of the water
meter serving each dwelling unit.
8. Construction drawings shall include the size, type, and location of all. water
mains, hydrants, airvalves,`service connection, and other appurtenance
details in accordance with City PWD Standards and as required by the
City PWD.
9. All connections to'the water supply system must comply with OHD.
requirements: `Water wiN not be "turned on" by the.: City until such
requirements have`tieerti met to the satisfaction of the City's designated
inspector (cu'rrently the Jackson County plumbing inspectorl.
10. Water system shall be tested in accordance with City PWD Standards and
requirements at de~leloper's expense and must be approved by the City.
Site work, Grading and Design, and Utility Plans
Existing Improvements - Pond located on Applicants land (T.ax lot 300)
1. Developer shall provide agrading/paving plan(s) with theconstruction
drawing submittal to the City PWD. Plan(s)-shall illustrate the location and
elevations of the base flood event flood zone and floodway of streams in
proximity to the development (if applicable); curb elevations; finish grades;
and building pad and lowest floor elevations.
2. All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, and/or crawl spaces with
positive drainage away from the building. Drain lines -shall be connected to
the curb and gutter and discharge from the curb face. _
3. be4eloper shall provide the necessary "rough" lot grading to assure that all
lots will drain properly to the curb and gutter, or to a drainage system that
drains to the curb and gutter.
10
~~
4. Provide for meandering. sidewalks :with alandscaped sound buffer area along
Scenic Avenue. Provide a sound buffer .along Highway 99. Coordinate
design vvith'ODOT; JC Roads, and City PWD.
5. Provide the City with copies of any required permits and approvals (including
any mitigating requirements or conditions) from DSL, DEQ, and ACOE
(including any mitigating requirements), for any required wetland or flood
hazerd' mitigation work to be performed as part of the proposed
development.
6. Grading plans must 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 must be labeled with
elevations.
7. Need to place street lights on plans, with table indicating stationing and
offsets for locations.
8. Provide City with a utility plan approved by each utility company which
reflects all utility crossings, transformer locations, valves,. etc.
9. 'Utility locations must be included on the as-built drawings, or as a separate
` set of drawings attached to the as-built drawings..
Rights of Ways/Easements
1. All easements for improvements dedicated to the City shall have a minimum
15 foot width and-shall be located, (whenever possible) contiguously along
the exteriorboundaries of properties and shall not split lot lines. Public utility
easements shall have a minimum width of 1A feet.
2 The City will require a 52 foot ROW vvidth on local streets and 60 foot ROW
bh collector streets.
11
iv Q
3. Developer shall provide a "Statement of Water Rights" for property proposed
for development (Taxlots 300 and 401)
4. 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 must be approved by the easement's owner in writing, and a copy
of that written approval must be submitted to the City PWD prior to
submission of construction plans for City PWD review and approval.
12
c; ~
F,
Fire District No. 3
~,.ya~n R~
wnne cny ott s~sos
(5atl a2satao
Fax: (541) 82Cr-055G
City of Central Point
155 south 2nd
Central Point, Oregon,97502
attn: Planning deparpnent
Ken Gerschler
City of Central Point
EhHIPIT [tE tf
Planning Department
Re: North Valley Estates Subdivision:
Jackson County Fire District No 3 would like to address the following issues regarding the NORTH
VALLEY ESTATES SUBDMSION...
1. Addressing -Homes shall be addressed with a minimum 3" number visible from the street
frontage.
2. Street Width -The proposed street width of 50' meets the city standard. Parking may not reduce
the street width at any point to under 20'. Streets or access roads shall be installed prior to construction.
3. Fire Hydrants -Hydrant spacing for this project will be 300' intervals. The proposed hydrant
layout plan shall be submitted to the fire district prior to installation. Hydrants shall be installed prior to
construction.
4. Fire Flow -The minimum fire flow for residential property is 1000 gpm.
5. Cul-do-sacs - The R 50' cul-de-sacs as designed meet the city standard.
If you have arty other questions please contact LOU at 541-826-7100
a,_~1~tiroF~
Sincere] ~~ F at~~
Lou Gugliotta . _ (~,)~„
.. ^~,,.
V ~r ~,'
Division Chief/Fire Marshal G~ ~ .
c,^, ry
w ~+
,....
BEAR CREEK VALLEY-SANITARY AUTHORITY
PHONE (541)779-4144.3915 SOUTH PACIFIC HWY. • MEDFDRD, OREGON 87b01
March 12, 1997
Jim Bennett
City of Central Point Planning Department
155 So. Second
Central Point, Oregon 97502
Subject: North Valley Estates Subdivision
Dear Jim,
We have reviewed our records in the subject areas and determined that BCVSA has interceptor
sewer facilities near the site.
The applicant needsto be made aware-that the CH2M Hill Sewer System Master Plan has
identified a 15 inch sewer line requirement in Scenic Avenue. Please'have the applicants contact
BCVSA during their preliminary utility-planning process-for information on design, location,
connection, sequence, processing, and fees.
Thank you for the opportunity tocomment on this proposed action..
Sincerely, ~~/~`"
James May, Jr. ~)
District Engineer
~' e~
F:l
..ROGUE RIVER
3139 MERRIMAN RDAD ' S''O-
F~+.
Y
V~L~EY IRRIGATION DISTRICT~~
15D31993.6129
MEDFORD.ORE~ON 975D1.1270 '~'
March 17, 1997
Mr. Ken Gersheler
Planning Department
City of Central Point
155 South 2nd Room 214
Central Point, OR 97502
RE: North Valley Estates Subdivision
Dear Ken:
The Rogue River Valley Irrigation District operates and maintains a 15" pipeline that runs
along the west side of the project area, actually-located' between fiwy: 99 and the subdivision.
The District would require that the pipeline remain-open overthe top for care. and maintenance
purposes and that no obstructions or deep rooted plantsbe allowed withinthe right-of-.way:
On the tentative plat you sent me it looks like we will probably be outside the
development, however, if should be interesting to squeeze the proposed 12".'water line in the same
general area.
Sincerely,
ROGUE VALLEY:
IltRIGATi D STRICT
~~~.
Jim Pendleton
Manager
~~
Centua.-l. Pd.int, Gh, lra2.17, '47
Cent2a.1 ~'.Caruri.n.cl. Commi~.i.an,
Jn ngq_a,rLr/n, .to ~h.e p2opo~e.~ fio2~+.h. IIn.U.e;/, 6-o.ta.tea Slt,(rd.i.U.~a.dR, ,7 /taue aeue.na~.
cdn.ce_fin~ as a. p.ndryehfiai, dwnen dd2ectd.ty ac2o44 Scen.i.c Ave. .td .the lidntlL and be~~~:e.ea
khe •twd ex.i..t~ d~ ~t!).e deve%.dpment. Theh~ ~~n.e ~Iz2ee anci,ertt .~,(.aad cJu~nne.L~ .nom
-~-~.in C2eek k/Let came achdan .thcrt ~.i,e,1d., eaten. 3ohnerit., !~drime2 dwne2 dJ'. SetrB1).
Ua //J .'<a ll.CJ)., pe~ud.ded. fil).e Ca UfLtt/. ~O nil.-d. a dee2 d•.ltC1L 6/L ..f,,h.2 lld k.tll. 4+fde d.1_' SGe/L(.G
.to ca22ty ~'.todd. wa-ten. back .td khe cheek and dum.r~ -uz be~Lo~ ~:he b2ddae t,=h.~ae ~he2e
.i.~ an e.i.~/rt °dok dndp .!'2om..th.e channel abdue :the. ba-i.dae. Tl,.e Cduntt~ an,(.~.t- used
12~) Cu,Lvent. berS.ea.th .thz d2-i.vewoyn. wh.i.ch o~ cdu.~.~e'w.i;(..L na.t ca.¢rut, much o~ .t1:.e
.~.Lddd, ~d .that .i,t .~,Ldur~ Weo~t.gZ m~z phape7t~:, down .th~wualt an p.Ld {,(.add cJtnnne,C
.to .Ca.¢k .Lane .~tLhd..i.tr.~~i.on, and. do .tr. Seven Gak.~ be~b2e ge~t.ty»q dnto ~acl:~dn Cveek.
2 haue d..tved drL :thiw~ a2ea .~.t,n:ce -:1925 and..i.r)..tlt-L~ hou.~e ~~ince 19,56, edam. ~2e~t.t~i
urelb acaua.inted. with <t/uth .the ./.{.aad..n, wlu.ch ontey: get lydgg:ea as wate~uhed .t.imbe2
.tom fie~naved. and hdu~reo anal. pnvement covet mote d~ the alraaaG¢nt 4a-i.C dn..the ua,Ue~
~.Lod2. Bv.~dae ~.i.U,i.rtg .tlta, d.ttcJLe~ and. pavdnd. a 60' 2oadwaeF, .the dha.iiw.ge p.2ob.Cem.
needo .to be. add2eo~ed:The~ie ~ na dRen. ditch a.ldng. k.teuaty ,99 .,PJCOm Scentc .ta 7ack~i
Ca.eek, (dn Aairut• CaeeF d.~ .th.e au.2veyo2 coi.L~ dt), ~ ~rhdwn .i.rz .the Ra2thwe~x
co2ne2 d.f .the plat.
O.then cdn.cean.~ aRe pd~1.1u>~.on: a:~ a2oundwn.teh. bry .ye~t•i-C+~efi.~ and pe.<t~t~.cide.~
used. do 127 .Cawrt~r and ~(dwengand¢n~. The4e ~ a veru/. h.Lgh wateh .taAtie ne2e ana
my, uie~.L .ice gnaund wate2. W.t~.L .the /Ldme~ an .the !?o2th ~.ide a ~ Scen.Lc, be a,L.Lawed
.ta fiaµ .utto aLtty wate~i? I.a~.t~.y., .the2e .~ the prcdb~Lem, ap g2eatLty druJCea~~.tha.~f-i-c
wh.i:rJi, .ice a~C2eadty .too beauty and .tad ..~a~~t, e~p.eciccli.)L at .th.~..intehoect,idn a~ a.Ld
H•i.uraay 99 and Scenic:
The an,1.µ ~d.Lutdan .ta .P,Laadi,rzg .tn. mty dput.i.an, wawCd be .ta ~.owe2 .tlze base d.~
.the b2tdq.e overt ~ci.~fi.n. C2eeE. on Scen.i.c, .to .the deptlz d.~ the clLanneL .Ge.idw and
.then dti~ out'.the chanrze,L above a.U..the wary .ta .thz H.i,urcuy b2edge at Greaten H.i.sth.
S.uzceneL~f f~aurr.~, £dura2d. 7nrnart
2242 Scenic Ave.
<%~ ~~~~'Centrea,(- rd.i.r).t, Uri.
97502
~, ~.
3-16-97
Central Point City Hall
155'South Second Street
Central Point, OR ,97502
Planning Commission
-Ken-Gerschler
CONCERNS OF PROBhEM5 WITH PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ON
SCENIC AVENUE AND ROGUE VALLEY HIGHWAY
1. TRAFFIC: With school buses and traffic (which is
a problem nowt getting, on Scenic - and kids walking
to schools will Scenic be widened and have a side-
walk from the Junior High to Pacific Highway 99?
With only a blinking light .on 99. traffic will be
held up more than ,at present.' It will. be extremely
difficult for west bound traffic on Scenic to. get
on Highway. 99•
It will also complicate traffic flow with vehicles
.making a left•hand turn-off Scenic; creating more
congestion.
. 2. We~don't see. any provision fora park~or.play,ground
area in the new subdivision.
3, Is this subdivision in the-flood plane? If so,
how can this subdivision be justified?,
Sincerely, ~~~~~
G~ & oanne Johns
5236 Dobrot Way
Central Point; OR 9.7502
u ~?
Planning Department:
March 21, 1997
planned subdiv~siona rental property on 1843 Mary's Way, adjacent to the
(North Valley Estates). We were residents at this
location for 12 years and recently moved to Grants Pass. I am expressing
my views as a properly owner and taxpayer, even though we are not current
residents of the City of Central Point.
The concerns that we have with the planned subdivision are related to
problems that the area. has had with flooding. Particular hydrologic
problems occur in low-lying developed areas with sealed surfaces such as
building roofs, streets and driveways. Runoffformation in such areas is
clearly increased as a result of reduced capability of the ground to absorb
moisture. 'This phenomena was clearly evident in the flooding that occurred
earlier this year. Griffin Creek and Jackson Creek are very inefficient flood
control channels during periods of intense runoff: Leveling, filling and
sealing absorptive ground surfaces has only served to worsen the situation.
We strongly urge the planning commission to take a long hard look at any
future development within or adjacent to flood-prone areas.
whether the risk of flooding can or cannot be mitigated within the new is not
developments themselves (I'm sure that can be accomplished), but the
detrimental impact on existing neighborhoods that are situated in the lowest
areas. Our subdivision has 44 homes, and some consideration needs to be
made in regard to the area's history of flooding, potential for reduced
property values if and when damage becomes aregular occurrence, and the
devastating short-term economic effect this could have on households that
are subjected to frequent flooding.
In a nutshell, if the City of Central Point won't take steps to improve the
existing situation, then by all means do not make it any worse, I look
forward to discussing this matter further at the April 1st meeting,
Sincerely,
Q/vw~~
Steven nner
~~ ~a.~ i 1 :.:.:..: . ....
Fd cJ _ ....___._._.
'61 541 830 6407 JC ROADS & PARRS
JAGKSON COUNTY OREGON
200 ANTELOPE ROgD • WHITE CITY, OREGON 97503
~ 001
ROADS S PARKS SERVICCS
JOSEPH L. STRAHL, DIRECTOR
(503) 82fi-3722 yr (603) 776-7268
FAX: (503y g30E407
March 28, 1997
Attention; Jim Bennett
City of Central Point Planning
1 i5 South Second Street
Central Point, OR 97502
RE: Planning File 97013; 114-lot residential subdivision
Dear Mr. Bennett:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on North Valley Estates Subdivision, a proposed 1141ot
residential subdivision on 26,35 acres located on the southeast comer of Scenic Avenue and Highway #99.
This department recommends the following conditions of approval.
1 • The aRRlicant shall submit construction drawings to Jackson County Roads and Parks Services and
obtain county permits If required.
2. The 114.1ot residential subdivision will generate approximately 1140 trips par day, therefore we
recommend a traffic study. We would Ilke the opportunity to assist in the study scope and provide
comments on the traffic study prepared for this development.
3• In lieu of piecemeal frontage Improvements as along Beall Lane, we request a fair share payment of
$117,750.00 for frontage improvements along Scenic Avenue. This payment Is basetl on an
approximately 1,570' of frontage times a half street cost of $75.00lft. If the developer objects to this
amount he may submit his own estimate for half street frontage improvemenfs for a county A Standard
road, subject to bur review and approval-
4. AlI Scenic Avenue imprpvements shall be to Jackson County Standards. If the City of Central Point
agrees to aocept the maintenance responsibilities for the Improvements we recommentl the
Improvements be to City of Central Point standards. If additional right-of-way Is required for the
Improvements, dedication should be required,
5. The applicant shall obtain a road approach permit from Roads end Parks Services for all new road
approaches to Scenic Avenue.
6- Jackson County Roads and Perks Services would Ilke to review and comment on the hydraulic report
including the calculations and drainage plan. Capacity improvements or on site detention, if necessary,
shalt be Installed at the expense of the applicant.
7• We recommend no direct parcel access to Scenic Avenue or Highway f199 be allowed.
$• Comments should also be requested from the Oregon Department of Trensportatfon, as development
on these parcels wilt affect Highway #99.
If you have any questions or need further information feel free to call me at 826-3122,
...a aoi a! 12:06
BEAR CREEK pREENWAY / ENOlNEER/NO / REE7MANAOEMENT / M01bRppp~ / pgy~8 / RDAD MAlN7ENANCE / VEOETA710N MANAGEMENT
778-7168 BZ6SlY3
BY6.?1YY 776-7938 776-700}
818-3113 8Y631ZY
S~er
Eric Niemeyer
TrafFle & Development Section
1:1D EV ELOP\GITIESICNTRLPri97013.DSa
cc: John Martin, ODOT