Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - December 16, 1997ii CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING. COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 2, 1997 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:04 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chuck Piland, Candy Fish, Don Foster, Bob Gilkey, Karolyne Johnson, Jan Dunlap. Angela Curtis was absent. Also present were Jim Bennett, Planning Director, Ken Gerschler, Planning Technician, Lee Brennan, Public Works Director, and Arlene LaRosa, Public Works Secretary. IIL CORRESPONDENCE A letter was received from Mr. Dwight Buss concerning New Holland Equipment, Item B on the agenda. IV. MINUTES A. Commissioner Johnson made a motion to approve the Minutes of November 4, 1997, as written. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Foster. ROLL CALL: Dunlap, abstain, Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Gilkey, yes; Johnson, yes. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. review and decision regardine a Tentative Plan for a Minor Partition (37 2W lODB Tax Lot 84021 (R-1-6 zone~(Dean & Meridee Fancher applicants Chairman Piland opened the public hearing. There were no conflicts of interest or ex-parte communications. Jim Bennett reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report. Lee Brennan reviewed the Public Works Staff Report. Dean Fancher, 2457 Pinebrook, Medford, OR, applicant, noted that the Planning Department staff report stated that a pedestrian easement to Griffin Creek has been granted by the owner of Tax Lot 8400. That easement has not been granted, it is only in discussion. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 2, 1997 -Page 2 Jim Bennett stated that Mr. Fancher was correct that the pedestrian easement has not been granted by the owner of Tax Lot 8400. Mr. Fancher stated that they feel it should not be a requirement of this application to grant a pedestrian easement to Griffin Creek. Betty Kline, 3437 Snowy Butte Lane, Central Point, co-owner of Tax Lot 8400, stated that they do not plan to do anything with Tax Lot 8400 at the present time, but do not plan to designate it as open space. She also stated that they have not granted a pedestrian easement to the City. They have only agreed to discuss it. Chairman Piland closed the public-hearing. Jim Bennett stated that there are only three entrances to Flanagan Park on Griffin Creek and one of those is City use only. Commissioner Fish made a motion to adopt Resolution 40G approving the Tentative Plan for a Minor Partition (37 2W lODB Tax Lot 8402) (R-1-6 zone) (Dean and Meridee Fancher, applicants); including requiring the City to put a fence on the south side of the 5 foot easement along Tax Lot 8400 at such time as they conclude negotiations with owners of tax lot 8400 and 8401; that the wording "open space" in regard to Tax Lot 8400 be deleted in the Planning Department Staff Report; and requiring the applicant. to dedicate a public ingress-egress across the northern portion of Tax Lot 8402 (the partition parcel) for access to Flanagan Park. B. Review and decisio~reearding a Site Plan Review/Conditional L7se Permit for New Holland Egs;ipment,~37 2W 11C Tax Lot 1300~(C-5 zoneLtLes Gutches applicant) Chairman Piland opened the public hearing. There were no ex-parte communications or conflicts of interest. Jim Bennett reviewed the Planning Department Staff Report. Lee Brennan reviewed the Public Works Department Staff Report. Les Gutches, 4099 Tami Lane, Central Point, agent for the applicant, stated that only small tractors, lawn mowers, etc. will be sold at this location. They will have landscaping along Front Street and the width of the driveway requested by Public Works will not be a problem. They may have fencing along the rear of the property. Before any landscaping is done along the rear they will wait to see what takes place on the unimproved City street behind them. He stated that they don't want to discharge any water that would flood any houses behind them. They want to connect to the storm drain in Front Street or use other methods that would handle the water flow from their property. Chairman Piland closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fish asked if the applicant would agree to finish the landscaping in the rear CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 2, 1997 -Page 3 when the unimproved City street property is developed. Mr. Gulches, agent for the applicant, stated that they would do that. Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adopt Resolution 407 approving a Site Plan Review/Conditional Use Permit for New Holland Equipment, (37 2W 11C Tax Lot 1300) (C-5 zone) (Les Gulches, applicant) with the following conditions: (1) that a WB67 truck turning radius be provided at the driveway; (2) that the property be fenced and the landscape buffer be put in along the back when the unimproved portion of First Street is developed; (3) and including all staff report conditions. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Jim Bennett discussed future agendas. Jim stated that he will be interviewing applicants for the Planning Director this week Commissioner Johnson stated that there will be a Town-Hall Meeting on February 18 at the Student Center at Crater High School. Commissioner Fish asked that the Commission be given a report on why Mr. Fancher received a 2-page Staff Report at the Planning Commission hearing on his first partition and an 18-page Staff Report for the Final Plat. Jim Bennett stated he would give the Commission a chronology on that at the. next meeting. Commissioner Dunlap asked the Staff to consider afour-way stop sign at Hopkins Road and Freeman Road. Commissioner Gilkey suggested staff conduct a study of traffic signs on Glengrove, Greenpark and Far West. Russ Braughton, Eagle Eye Surveying, P.O. Box 4397, Medford, OR, stated that as a surveyor they do not put pedestrians competing with vehicular traffic in public easements. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Gilkey made a motion to adjourn. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnson. All said "aye" and the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: December 16, 1997 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: James H. Bennett, AICP City Administrator SUBJECT: Site Plan Review and Public Hearing to Consider a Variance Application for Rick Rapp Race Cars Applicants/ William R. Jr. & Valerie A. Rapp Owners: 487 Creekside Circle Central Point, OR 97502 .Agent: Daniel Park & Associates, Architects 6180 Shady Brook Drive Central Point, OR 97502 Property Description/ 37 2W l OAA TL 6300 - 0.46 acres Zoning: M-1, Industrial District Summary The applicants, Rick & Valerie Rapp, have applied to the City of Central Point for approval of a Site Plan Review to allow the construction of a 9,000 sq, ft. commercial/industrial building to be used fora retail automotive/boat shop and a machine shop. (Exhibit A). A Variance application has also been submitted to allow a reduced interior side yard setback and relief from off-street parking requirements. The project site is located on the east side of Haskell Street at its intersection with Oak Street in an M-1, Industrial District. Authori CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to render a decision an any Site Plan Review application. A public hearing is required for the review of any Variance application. Notice of the public hearing was provided in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 (Exhibit B). 1 Applicable Code Sections CPMC Chapter 17.48.010 et seq. - M-1, Industrial District CPMC Chapter 17.64.010 et seq. - Off-Street Parking and Loading CPMC Chapter 17.72.010 et seq. - Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval CPMC Chapter 17.80.010 et seq. - Variances Discussion The proposed uses fall within the categories of automobile sales, service, repair and rental and boat building, sales and repair. These types of use are permitted in the M-1 district subject to the approval of a Site Plan Review application by the Planning Commission. The uses must also comply with the height, area, width, yard, signs and lighting, off-street parking and general requirements of the M-1 district. The project proposes a zero setback for the building from the south lot line. This is considered to be the interior side of the property and has a required side yard setback often feet. The required off-street parking is 19 parking spaces and 1 truck loading space. The project proposes 21 parking spaces and 1 truck loading space. However, the parking spaces with access on Oak Street will require vehicles to back into Oak Street to exit the site. CPMC 17.64.100 (E)(3) requires parking spaces to be designed so that no backing movements withiri a street or right-of--way are necessary. The applicant is requesting relief from this requirement. The applicants have submitted a Variance application and the required fmdings of fact in support of their application (Exhibit C). Site Plan Standards CPMC 17.72.040 sets out the standards that the Planning Commission must consider in basing its decision on a Site Plan application: A. Landscaping and fencing must be consistent with the neighborhood and used to screen activities and uses that may impact existing neighboring uses. A 10' buffer and landscape area is proposed along Haskell Street. There is an existing six-foot chain link fence with slats that encloses the site. The fence is in need of repair in some areas. B. Ingress and egress points must be designed and located to maintain and improve traffic flows on public streets. Access for the project will be via Haskell and Oak Streets. Two driveway entrances are. proposed. A variance has been requested to allow vehicles using off-street parking on Oak Street to back into the street to exit the site. 2 C. Off-street parking and interior circulation must be adequate to serve the site and maintain good pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows. The project proposes 21 off-street parking spaces including one handicapped parking space and 1 truck loading space. Nineteen off-street parking spaces are required for the proposed uses. In addition, one off-street truck loading space is required. D. Signs for the project must be designed and located to be compatible with the use and not interfere with traffic control devices or traffic flows. The applicant will be required to submit a sign permit application for all signage proposed for the project. E. The site must be designed to be accessible to fire apparatus and have adequate fire fighting facilities. Fire apparatus will have access to the site from Haskell and Oak Streets. Fire hydrants will be installed in accordance with City and Fire District #3 standards as necessary. F. The project must comply with all applicable city ordinances and regulations and must be aesthetically acceptable in relation to the neighborhood and the City of Central Point. The project is in compliance with all city ordinances and regulations. The use of the properly for heavy equipment sales and service is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding commercial neighborhood. A variance has been requested from the south side yard setback and off-street parking requirements. .. Required Findings for Variance CPMC 17.80.010 requires 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; 2. The variance will not have any significant adverse impacts upon the neighborhood; 3. The variance will utilize property within the intent and purpose of the zoning district; 4. Circumstances affect the property that generally do not apply to other property in the same zoning district; and 5. The conditions for which the variance is requested were not self-imposed through the applicant's own actions, nor the actions of the applicant's agents, employees or family members. 3 If the Commission finds in favor of the proposed applications, staff recommends that the conditions of approval as set forth in Exhibits D and E be incorporated into any such approval. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the. Site Plan Review and Variance applications and adopt Resolution No. _, based on the findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the proposed Site Plan Review and Variance applications; or 3. Continue the review and public hearing for the Site Plan Review and Variance applications at the discretioir of the Commission. Exhibits A, Site Plan, Floor Plan, Elevations, Landscaping Plan B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Applicant's Findings for Variance D. Recommended Planning Department Conditions of Approval E. Public Works Staff Report 4 W ~. so' ~ mnnwn ~,I~ KELL STREET ~ ~ 5 RECEIVED . D~G101997' CITY OF CE1MT'RA~I. A~1Ryf 71ME 1l:Sd ~. O 19 iH O W ~ 0 O •Y !4 O '~ 12 O 20' fZ Ib' SPTB,4GK ///~ ///9 'AO~' T. !1 ~ o ~,~o ~o ~o ~ ono ~o ~o ~c ~ ~ ~x HA~.I~ELL STREET I' . ~o' 6 C'ty of Central Poi. ,t PLANNING DEPARTMENT City of Central Point E~HI~IT t'~:" ... __.. ..Planning Department -James H. Bennett, AICP City Administrator/Planning Director Ken Gerschler Planning Technician Deanna Gregory Administrative/Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: December 1,1997 Meeting Date: December 16, 1997 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 Variance and Site Plan Review applications fora 9,000 square foot commercial building addition to be constructed near the intersection of Haskell and Oak Streets. The proposed construction would be located in a M-1 (Industrial)caningdistrict on Tax Lot 6300 of Jackson County Assessors Map Page 37 2W lOAA. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Variances and Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street parking, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up-until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 16, 1997. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 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 Hall, 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, the Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staff reports, 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 Plan. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. \ e"'~ 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ! (541) 664-3321.• Fax; (541).664-6384 ~~ 8 City of Central Faint d:+alek park ~ nssocrnTES ~XHIEIT rr~,tt ARCHITECT 5 Planning Department 6180 Shady Brook Dr. Central Point, Oregon 97502 (541) 664-5858 Fax 664-5999 '' December 10, 1997 City of Central Point Planning Deparmern - I55 South Sewnd Street ~ - Centtal Poisn, Or 97502 Subject: Variance Application Set back reduction on an alley for a metal shop building : Dear Planning Commission Members and Planning Staff .. The attached variance application and findings described below are being submitted m an effort to receive favorable review and approval by the planning commission for the rodudion of ono side yard setback on as - "~,; M-1 ZONED lot on Haskell Sued in Central Poird and the use of Oak Street for auxiliary off-street parking _ maneuvering space. This lot will be the sits for several new businesses in Central Point. Project Description: The ,47 acre lot referkmced as lot 6300 ce the attached tax map is the subject property for aproposeii 9000 Stl:. Ft. Commercial build"mg. itwill be a pre6mished metatbuildingwith alaw-pitched gable roofand 16 fad high . eaves. See attached siteplan and elevations. The building will initially house aretail sutomohive/botu shop and - a machine shop. The bur7diog is proposed to be located ce the site as indicated on the attached site plan wiW " _ only the sdback on the ageyway bong diminished to a zero set back. All other setbacks and building and. ~g requirem®ts ate Proposed to be complied with. The attached findings provide necessary support fior , . the variance application. r Findings: ~ ' 1. The variaoca will provide added adva~ges to the neighborhood in the fallowing ways: - For the budding to meet the owners current and anticipated future needs, a building ccesisting ofihree bays• , -: ~_. ~~~' - of 3000 sq.$. each are iequired. For the front yard setback, Oak Strcet side yarn setback and the r~r yard ;' .: sdback to be met, and not kx,mpra®ise the building size, it is required that the build"mg be shifted up against ; Urn alley side property line. This allows the owner to have Oak street diiveway access and to use the sired for '::~~r :~ , maneuvering space for aranliaryoff-stroet parking. It is understood thht the alley is only one block long and is utilized as a service drive for the three abutting businesses. Osk stied is not paved. In all probability, the ,: alley may be vacated at some firture time and is not currently maintained. Ifthe carted setback requirernarts are toaintained, the building would be set back only 10 feet from ilia Oak ~- Strcet right-of~way. The advantagetotheaeighborhaodwill bewidar clearance ofbuddmgt: on Oalr Street, with ~._ the possibility of more ofF street parking on the proposed site as is currerrtfy happening with Fronek's Fish .: " ., P .:. 9 12-10-199'7 05~SSPM FROM TO 6646384 P.02• business. Withotrt a variance, the currant set back requirements often feet on both side yards wa61d exist and no qak SUreet access would be allowed (with only a tea foot setback): (The building is'120' wide sect the lot is 145'wideJ 2. The variance will not have any significant adverse impacts open the neighborhood: The"owner is ~adY ProP~B a ten foot landscapedbuffer across the frontage m Haskell. The alley is cnly a canveaience access forme adjacent business and fire souses. The proposed project does not anticipate using the alley fioi access. Access down the allay would not be impacted or vary substardially from what is mrtent. Also, since Oak is only me bkxac kng and mty serves the adjac®t businesses, allowing manmveriag m Oak will reduce the necessity and incidence of delivery truck maneuvering m Hasliel. 3. The variance wr71 utilize the subject property within the intent and purpose ofth zone district. The proposed building use is a permitted use and complies with zoning requiremcets. The variance will allow the owner to meet his requirements satisfactorily without creating any adverse impacts to the neighborhood or adjoinm8 ProP~~• 4. Circmnstances afi<'ect this property and it's intended uses that generally do not apply to the other adjaccet properties in the same zoning district. This property and the me occupied by Quality L~sulatim are similar, however, the nature of Quality brsulatim's business and building setup requires three-sided access. This owner's access requirements are generally from the frmt, Has&ell side. It is desirod that there be an.. auxiliary access to Oak Street. This build'mg site is bounded an three sides by two streets and an alley. 't'his is not typical in the neighborhood. Even ifthealley setback is diminished to 0 feet; because the alley exits; there will ahvays be a ZO foot separation between buildings. It is undarstoodthat the construction ofthewall adjacent:. to the alley would be 4-hour fund -rated ccnstructim if the build"mg is less than 5 feet &orn the property liner 5. The Applicant has net committed any actin that is now necessitating the variance. The existing ld is vacanE with the exceptim of a cyclme perimeter fence: The owner's request is similar to other acceptable variance applicetims and does not cmatihrte an extreme request. b7ernb7'ity gptioa: The Owner requests that a variance be approved for an alley side yard reduc6oa to Zero Feet; however, if : ' - Consbuction of a 4-hour fire wall becomes prohibitive, the owner would lr7ce the option to set his build'mg 5' .; back from the alley. neoessitalmg only a 2-hour fire wall. Therefore, when approval is made, please giwthe - ownerthe optimto reduce the alloy set backto zero feet with the appropriate fire wall constructim as dictated by the UBC. if for some reason the alley set back regaest is denied, die Owner requosts that a variance for a - ; p rkiug space roductim be considered to allow the proposed project to provide for I parking space pot 1000 square feet of - building equal to 9 spaces. Respecttblly submitted,: r :c_ ::. ~ n ~~ _ Daniel L. Paris, Ardrrtect - Agent of the Applicant F '.: -._ . TOTRL P.02 io EXHIBIT D RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The project shall be developed in substantial compliance with the approved site plan. 2. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscaping plan prior to final occupancy. Landscaping shall be continuously maintained in a healthy growing condition. An automatic irrigation system shall be installed for all landscaping subject to the approval of the Building Department. 3.Off-street parking shall be provided for the project in accordance with the approved site plan and CPMC 17.64 unless a variance is approved. This shall include required off-street parking and loading, handicapped parking, parking stall design and aisle width. Any revisions to the parking layout shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. Access to the project site may enter and exit from either Haskell or Oak Street. ;.. 5. Changes to or improvement of the public streets adjoining the project site, including all channelization, striping and signage, shall be constructed in accordance with city standards. 6. Each sign proposed for the project shall require a sign permit application to be submitted with the building permit application for the project. 7. An oil/water separator shall be required for the drainage system of the parking area. 8. The approval of the Site Plan Review and Variance is valid for a period of twelve months. The proposed use must commence within this period or a new Site Plan Review and Variance must be applied for. 11 City of Central Point - EXHIBIT "E" CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STAFF REPORT for Rick Rapp Race Cars Commercial/Industrial .Facility Site Plan PW#97060 Date: Applicant: Project: Location Legal: Zoning: Units:. Plans: Report By: Purpose December 10, 1997 William R (Jr.) and' Valerie A. Rapp 487 Creekside, Central Point, Oregon 97502 Rick Rapp Race Cars and Boats Sales and Service Facility Southeast Corner of the Intersection of Haskell and Oak Streets T37S; R2W, Section 10AA, Tax Lot 6300 M-1 1 - 9,000 square foot building and parking. (19 spaces). 1 page (Site Plan Variance) Daniel Park and Associates, dated 9/30/97,. revised 12/10/97. Lee N. Brennan, Public Works Director 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 Requlremenfs Landscape Plan: A final, more detailed (i.e. identify shrub and tree types, add shrubs, irrigation, etc.), landscape plan, shall be prepared and implemented by and at the expense of the Developer. At a minimum, the landscape plan shall provide for a landscape buffer adjacent to the public right-of-way along Haskell Street, while affording proper sight triangles at the driveway entrances with Oak and Haskell Street. Haskell Sfreet Improvements: The developer will need to install the required concrete driveway aprons and sidewalks on Haskell Street. An access ramp (meeting ADA and City Public Works Department Standard Specifications and Details [City PWD Standards]1 will need to be installed at the southeast corner of the intersection of Oak and Haskell Streets. Sidewalk widths aligned along Haskell Street will need to be a minimum of 6- feet wide. 3. Oak Street /mnrovements: Oak Street currently consists of an unpaved road section within an 80-foot-wide right-of-way. Public Works does not like the parking arrangement on the north side of the development, as this requires the driver to have his backing and turning movements performed out in Oak Street. Although this section of Oak Street only has a minimal amount of traffic volume, the PWD feels that this creates an unacceptable traffic hazard. One suggestion would be if the City were to vacate a portion of the 80- foot right-of-way (possibly reducing down to a 50-foot right-of-way1, and allowing for the ~.2 Rick Rapp Race Cars Preliminary Site Plan PWD StafjReport Page 2 subject development to add a 20-foot strip of land to the northern edge of the property. This would provide a 20-foot area for vehicle turning and backing movements which would negate the need for the long driveway fronting Oak Street. Thus a 40-foot setback from Oak Street's right-of-way could be obtained.. However, in exchange for the vacation of the Oak Street right-of-way, PWD would suggest the requirement from the Developer .and surrounding property owners for the improvement of Oak Street from Haskell to Amy. This would include the installation of all improvements to Oak Street, including, but not limited to; street section, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, storm drainage, and traffic control and delineation. Alocal-improvement district could be created to complete these improvements. 4. Street Lights: The installation of sidewalks along Haskell Street will require the relocation of power poles in the City right-of-way. The Developer will coordinate with the City and Pacific Power on the relocation of the power poles and the installation of a street light near the southeast corner of the intersection of Haskell and Oak Streets. 5. Driveways. Access Roads. and Truck Parking Areas: The driveways, access roads, and truck parking and turning areas on the. proposed development must be designed and positioned in a manner that will accommodate the turning movements and access of a WB-50 ruck. All driveways, access .roads, and parking areas shall either have asphalt or cement concrete surfaces. """ 6. Site Drainage/Storm Drain P/an: The developer shall design and implement a site drainage/storm drain plan that corrects and enhances existing site drainage for the entire area 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. Storm water discharge flows from the site into the public storm drain system cannot exceed predevelopment flow rates. A suitable system will need to be designed for a minimum 10-year storm event. The discharge point and potential retention of storm waterrun-off shall be coordinated with aspects of the proposed development to provide an aesthetically pleasing, efficient, and low maintenance facility. If applicable, the storm water retention facilities shall be suitably landscaped; designed to mitigate erosion 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. General 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 systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,) will not intertere with or provide for the significant degradation (in the opinion of the Public Works Director) of the existing effective level of service or operation of the infrastructurefiacilities, 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 wilt be improved by and at the expense of the Developer to accommodate the additional flows and/or demands while maintaining or improving the existing effective level of -~~ 13 Rtek Rapp Race Cars Preliminary Site Plan PWD StaJj"Report Page 3 service of the affected facility. 2. Development Plans: Developer shall 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, curbs and gutters and landscape buffers); storm drainage and sanitary sewer collection and conveyance systems; water distribution system (up to the service meter and including fire protection); street lighting; and traffiacontrol devices, street 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 the construction plans for the proposed development. During construction, 'changes proposed by the Developer shall be submitted in writing by the Developer's engineer to the City PWD forapproval prior to installation. 3. Aparovals: Fire Districf No. 3 (fire hydrant placement, waterline sizing, and emergency vehicle access), Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority (BCVSA, for sanitary sewers), and City of Medford Regional Water Reclamation Facility (commercial/industrial wastewater discharge permit) written approval of construction plans shall be submitted to the City PWD prior to final construction plan review and approval by City PWD. 4. As-Builts: Prior to approval and acceptance of the project, the Developer's engineer or surveyor shalF 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 AutoCA~, 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 the locations and or elevations (as appropriate) of actual installed items, including, but notlimited 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 light locations; other below grade utility lines; etc. Provide a "red-line" hard copy (on Mylat~), 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 of 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 on the plans. The closest City reference elevation is located on the brass disk in the northeastcorner of County Bridge No. 116 on West Pine Street at Griffin Creek in Central Point. 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. 14 Rick Rapp Race Cars Preliminary Stte Plan PWD Staff'Report Page 4 6. Existing Infrastructure: As applicable, field verify all existing infrastructure elevations and locations (i.e. pipe inverts, curb elevations, street elevations, etc.), tp 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 ground public infrastructure, and the location of the: associated easements with these facilities, shall be 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 1.5-feet of fill placed outside of public rights-of-way and that does not underlie building, structures, or traveled vehicular access ways or parking areas. 8: Road/Driveway/Parking Areas:. 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 to provide section for review. The driveways, access roads, and truck parking and turning areas on the proposed development must be designed and positioned in a manner that will accommodate the turning movements and access of a WB-50 truck, without crogsing into an opposing lane or additional travel lane of traffic. 9. 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, etc.).. 10. Area L/ghting Plan: Need to provide and implement an adequate area lighting plan for parking and public access areas. 11. Public Utility Easements: A minimum 10-foot wide public utilities easement (PUE) shall be dedicated on the proposed development for the installation of public utilities and should be located outside the public rights-of-way. At a minimum, The PUE should be aligned along the .exterior boundaries of the property that border Oak and Haskell Streets if a PUE is not currently present in this area.. 12. Clear Vision Areas: The construction drawings shall include clear vision areas (i.e. sight triangles) at driveway entrances designed to meet the City's PWD requirements. 13. Fire Hydrants: Provide locations of existing and any new required fire hydrants. Fire Hydrants need to be connected to 8-inch-diameter and larger lines. If applicable,. steamer ports at hydrants located near the building shall face the buildings. Fire hydrants shall be suitably protected from potential vehicle damage and encroachment. 14. Water System Cross Connection Control: Developer shall comply with Oregon Health Division (OHD) and City requirements for cross connection control. Need to know projected activities and water uses for commercial building to determine requirements for cross connection control and fire protection. Water will not be "turned on" by the City until such 15 Rick Rapp Race Cars Preliminary Site Plan PWOStafj'Report - Page 5 requirements have been met to the satisfactiorrof the City's designated inspector (currently the Jackson County plumbing inspector). 15. Water System: 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. 16. Sanitary Sewer Industrial Discharge Permit If applicable, obtain industrial discharge permit frdm City of Medford Regional Water Reclamation Facility (Medford RWRF). Obtain Medford RWRF's written approval to eohnect to the sanitary sewer system. Copy of application can be obtaihed from City PWD. 17. Storm Drain System 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 ahd 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. 18. Roof/Area Drains: All structures shall have roof drains, area drains, and/or crawl spaces with positive drainage away from the building. Roof drains shall not be directly connected to the public storm drain system, but could be connected to the private storm drain catch basins. 19. Grading Plans: Grading plans should have original/existing gradesand final grades plotted on the plan. Typically, existing grade contouriines 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. 20. Existing Easements: If applicable, Developer shall comply with all existing easement owner requirerrfehts regarding ahy 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. 16 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: December 16, 1997 Central Point Planning Commission James H. Bennett, AICP City Administrator Site Plan Review fora 6-Unit Multiple-Family Apartment Complex Applicant/ Elden Smith Owner: 9171 Sterling Creek Rd. Jacksonville, OR 97530 Agent: Pro e Description/ Zoning: Summary Dan Horton, Architect 3644 Delta Waters Rd. Medford, OR 97504 37 2W l OAB TL 7100 - 0.33 acres R-3, Residential Multiple-Family The applicant, Elden Smith, has applied to the City of Central Point for approval of a Site Plan Review to allow the construction of a 6-unit multiple-family apartment complex (Exhibit A). The project site is located on the south side of W. Pine St. between Glenn Way and Haskell Street in an R-3, Residential Multiple-Family District. Authori CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to render a decision on any Site Plan application. - - __ - __ -- Applicable Code Sections. CPMC Chapter 17.46.010 et seq. - R-3, Residential Multiple-Family District CPMC Chapter 17.72.010 et seq. -Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval 1'7 Discussion The project site is located on W. Pine Street across from Mae Richardson Elementary School. There are existing apartment complexes on either side of the project site and to the rear of it. This area is zoned R-3, Residential Multiple-Family. There is an existing house at the front of the property which will remain. The 6-unit apartment complex will be constructed at the rear ofthe property. It consists ofa single two-story structure. There will bean 18-foot wide driveway that provides access to the apartments from W. Pine Street. The lot area of the site is 14,560 s.f. or just over 1/3 acre. The lot coverage is approximately 38%. The maximum permitted lot coverage is 50%. The total number of dwelling units including the existing single-family residence is seven which is the maximum permitted for a lot of-this size. The density of the project is just under 21 units per acre. The maximum density permitted is 25 units per acre. Site Plan Standards CPMC 17.72.040 sets out the standards that the Planning Commission must consider in basing its decision on a Site Plan application: A. Landscaping and fencing must be consistent with the neighborhood and used to screen activities and uses that may impact existing neighboring uses. There are three existing trees at the front of the properly, one of which will be removed. Additional shrubs will be planted at the front of the property. The apartment complex will be landscaped on three sides. The project will be enclosed by'an appropriate wooden fence also on three sides. B. Ingress and egress points must be designed and located to maintain and improve traffic flows on public streets. Access for the project will be via W. Pine Street. The apartment complex will be served by an 18-foot driveway. C. Off-street parking and interior' circulation must be adequate to serve the site and maintain good pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows. The project will provide sixteen off-street parking spaces. This consists of nine covered spaces and seven uncovered spaces. There will be two guest parking spaces and one handicapped space. The project meets all off-streefparking requirements. D. Signs for the project must be designed and located to be compatible with the use and not interfere with traffic control devices or traffic flows. The applicant will be required to submit a sign permit application for any signage proposed for the project. ~8 E. The site must be designed to be accessible to fire apparatus and have adequate fire fighting facilities. Fire apparatus will have access to the site from W. Pine Street. Fire hydrants will be installed in accordance with City and Fire District #3 standards as necessary. F. The project must comply with all applicable city ordinances and regulations and must be aesthetically acceptable in relation to the neighborhood and the City of Central Point. The project is in compliance with all city ordinances and regulations.. The use of the property for an apartment complex is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding multiple-family residential neighborhood. If the Commission finds in favor of the proposed application, staff recommends that the conditions of approval as set forth in Exhibits B and C be incorporated into any such approval. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the Site Plan Review application and adopt Resolution No. _, based on the findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval; 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. Exhibits A. Site Plan, Floor Plan, Elevations, Landscaping Plan B. Recommended Planning Department Conditions of Approval C. Public Works Staff Report 1~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~,i-dr ' "Iq L ~ ~ y '~ '"- ~`OR r, ' I ~~. r- ~ , ~ : ~ . ~ ~ .::: ` F~~~-rrn~Nr~ - ~ ~ i I .. .1 ~~ ~ $ --'~~ ~~y i _~~ +~ City of Central Point ,~ ~ ~ . EXHIBIT "A" 1,7M~ Planning Department "~"'~ l fdl~T~R-*~ 1aN~i~a + ~ ~~ . . +~-~. ~~ ~ --,~ ~~, 6- ~ ~- ~~~ l~za ~~;-- *-: ~@7r -4 1~ ~• N~ ~..... ~u~..~~r.-,~. . F~~~~IQ,~x~a.,l'4-"`(IOU +~" •-~p. w _. _._ . ' .. ~ ~- -- ~- i 9 _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1!a 7x~ 2 ~ - ~yTH1b'CgIrJ'~fCW~ - ... ~ 6c1~'~T _~~ - - N ' ~i.1~.~ _...------:_ -- 1 20 '14~WH;l t - ~V~ : . _~-iTL-~ c-1-r~T: ~ T' I' , `' ~` ~ `' ,-' _ ~~ i ... : , i ~, • ..~ I ~ ~ t f '~' o0 .~~ ~ t ~ ; , _ - '" 1 1 ~ - . i . -- --- -- - . ~ ~ A --- i i i ~ . - 1-IVI~J~. - - .. ,t,~ - ! I ,~ .~ ~' ~:. _. i r ~ T'~ I r i I I I ~ i i ._ ~ _ '-_ .. I ._ ' ._......... f......,.... ~ ' - n y~.~y~~ ~ ~ . 2 2 ~,~~ ~ s~~ ~~ ~ Se \ y .'r ... i YS„,h i I ~_ 1 ~~, ~~~... .. ~"PI c uh 5~4--bu i+l~ 1 ~~1(IIPc .. V Its UM 'j't{-1%1~i ~. ` ~ . "~ i ~~JtipcL r ~Y~Y~~ '~v1'b5{10~ 11~Ib~1~ _ --- ~~ '1 isz Vlt'it~l-IUM `I"1N ~. SON ~'' Nwf~: ~ ~~`ti' EXHIBIT B RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The project shall be developed in substantial compliance with the approved site plan. 2. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscaping plan prior to final occupancy. Landscaping shall be continuously maintained in a healthy growing condition. An automatic irrigation system shall be installed for all landscaping subject to the approval of the Building Department. 3.Off-street parking shall be provided for the project in accordance with the approved site plan and CPMC 17.64. This shall include required off-street parking, handicapped parking, parking stall design and aisle width. Any revisions to the parking layout shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. Access to the project site shall enter and exit from W. Pine Street. 5. Changes to or improvement of the public streets adjoining the project site, including all channelization, striping and signage, shall be constructed in accordance with city standards. 6. Any sign proposed for the project shall require a sign permit application to be submitted with the building permit application for the project. 7. The approval of the Site Plan Review is valid for a period of twelve months. The proposed use must commence within this period or a new Site Plan Review must be applied for. 25 City of Central Point EXHIBIT "C" CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STAFF REPORT for Elden Smith Six-Plex Multi-Family Dwelling Preliminary Site Plan PW#97057 Date: December 10, 1997 Applicant: Elden Smith 9171 Sterling Creek Road, Jacksonville, Oregon 97530 Project: Smith Six-Plex Multi-Family Location: Td the East of the Intersection of Pine Street and Glenn Way Legal: T37S, R2W, Section 10A6, Tax Lot 7100 Zoning: R-3 Units: 1 -Six-plex Multi-Family Dwelling; and existing Residence Plans: 1 page (Plot Plan, no date, not title; assume by Dan Horton, Architect) Report By: Lee N. Brennan, Public. Works 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. 8pecia/ Requirements Landscape Plan: A detailed (i.e. identify shrub and tree types, irrigation, etc.), landscape plan, shall be prepared and implemented by and at the expense of the Developer. At a minimum, the landscape plan shall provide for a landscape buffer adjacent to the public right-of-way along Pine Street while affording proper sight triangles at the driveway entrance with Pine Street. 2. Daisy Creek F/oodzone: It appears that the proposed development will place improvements and structures within the 100-year floodzone of Daisy Creek, as indicated on the FIRM Map for Central Point. The Developer shall provide suitable engineered certification of what affect does the placement of these improvements and structures have on the floodplain elevation and floodzone boundary, and what affects will the modification of the floodplain. elevation and floodzone boundary have on the existing facilities and properties surrounding the proposed development. The Applicant's engineer shall determine the existing Base Flood Elevation contours and illustrate the existing boundaries of the Floodplain and Floodway fora 100 year storm event along Daisy Creek on the construction plans submitted for the development for City's PWD review and approval. The drawings shall also indicate the revised Base Flood Elevation contours and boundaries of the Floodplain expected to occur following the completion of any development within the identified floodzone (also referred to as the 'Area of Special Flood Hazard"1. All work shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the City's Municipal Code; in particular, the recently revised chapter pertaining to Flood Damage 26 Smith Sixth-Plex Preliminary Site Plan Revrew December l0, 1997 Page 2 Prevention and Hazard Mitigation (Chapter 8.24). 3. Plne Street ImRrovements: The Developer shall enter into a suitable deferred improvement agreemeht with the City for any public improvements to Pine Street, including, but not limited to, street section, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, storm drainage, and traffic control and delineation, along the property's frontage with Pine Street. 4. 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 a single unit truck and the Fire District's Requirements. All driveways, access roads, and parking areas shall either have asphalt or cement concrete surfaces. Site Drainage/Storm Drain P/an: The developer shall design and implement a site drainage/storm drain plan that corrects and enhances existing site drainage for the entire area noted on the site plan. -Sheet flow surtace 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. A suitable system will need td be designed for a minimum 10-year storm event. The discharge point and potential retention of storm water run-off shall be coordinated with aspects of the proposed development to provide an aesthetically pleasing, efficient, and low maintenance facility. If applicable; the storm water retention facilities shall be suitably landscaped; designed to mitigate erosion 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. General 1. Exist/ng 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 systems; natural drainage systems; etc.,) will not intertere with or provide-for the significant degradation (in the opinion of the Public Works Director) of the existing effective level of service or operation of 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 flows and/or demands while maintaining or improving the existing effective level of service of the affected facility. 2. Development Plans: Developer shall 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, curbs and gutters and landscape buffers); storm drainage and sanitary sewer collection and conveyance 27 Smith Sixth-Plex Preliminary Site Plaa Review December l0, 1997 Page 3 systems; water distribution system (up to the service meter and including fire protection); street lighting; and traffic control devices, street 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 the construction plans for the proposed development. During construction, changes proposed by the Developer shall be submitted in writing by the Developer's engineer to the City PWD for approval prior to installation. 3. Qoarovals: Fire District No. 3 (fire hydrant placement, waterline sizing, and emergency vehicle access) and Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority (BCVSA, for sanitary sewers) written approval of construction plans shall be submitted to the City PWD prior to final construction plan review and approval by City PWD. 4, s-Bullts: 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 Myla~) and in a "digital" format compatible with AutoCACP, or otherform as approved by the City PWD. As-builtdrawings are to be provided to the City which 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, inlet, and rim or lip elevations; spot elevationsidentified on drawings; water lines, valves,.and fire hydrants; water and sewer lateral; modifications to street section; manhole and curb inlet; street light locations; other below grade utility lines; etc. Provide a "red-line" hard copy (on Mylat°), 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 fiacilities completed as part of the proposed development, or as otherwise approved by the City Administrator or his designee. 5. E/evaflons; Alhelevations 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 on the plans.. The closest City reference elevation is located on the brass disk in the northeast corner of County Bridge No. 116 on West Pine Street at Griffin Creek in Central ,Point. 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 locations (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 ground public infrastructure, and the location of the associated easements with these facilities, shall be accurately portrayed (both horizontally and vertically) on the. construction 28 Smith Sixth-Plex Preliminary Site Plan Review December 10, 1997 Page 4 plans. 7. FiII 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 1.5-feet of fill placed outside of public rights-of-way and that does not underlie building, structures, or traveled vehicular access ways or parking areas. 8. Road/Driveway/Parking Areas: 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 to 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 that will 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 li.e Pine Street) shall be as follows: - 3-inches-Class "B" A.C. 6-inches of 3/4"-0" crushed rock -~ - 8-inches of 4"-0" crushed xock (City of Medford specifications), - Woven geotextile fabric over compacted subgrade. 9. Utility Plans: We did not receive any utility plans for the proposed development. The utility plans shall be drawn to scale with accurate horizontal ahd vertical depiction of utility lines and .appurtenances (transformers, valves, etc.). 10. Public Utili><y Easements: A minimum 10-foot wide public utilities easement (PUE) shall be dedicated on the proposed development for the installation of public utilities and should be located outside the public rights-of-way. At a minimum, The PUE should be aligned along the exterior boundaries of the property that border Pine Street if a PUE is not currently present in this area. 11. Clear Vision Areas: The construction drawings shall include clear vision areas (i.e. sight triangles) at driveway entrances designed to meet the City's PWD requirements. 12. Fire Hydrants: Provide locations of existing and any new required fire hydrants. Fire Hydrants need to be connected to 8-inch-diameter and larger fines. If applicable, steamer ports at hydrants located near the building shall face the buildings. Fire hydrants shall be suitably protected from potential vehicle damage and encroachment. If applicable, a suitable 15-foot wide easement for installation and access to the City's water line shall be provided. 13. Wafer 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 29 n` Smith Sixth-Plex Prelimtnary Site Ptan Review - Decemberl0,/997 - Page 5 designated inspector (currently the Jackson County plumbing inspector). 14. Wafer Sysfem: 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 System 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 crawl spaces with positive drainage away from the buildings. Roof drains shall not be directly connected to the public stdrm 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. Contouclihes should be labeled with elevations. 18. Existing 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. 30 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE OF HEARING: TO: FROM: SUBJECTt APPLICANT/ GA ENT: PROPERTY OWNER: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION/ ~. `` ZONING: SUMMARY: December 16, 1997 Central Point Planning Commission Ken Gerschler, Planning Technician Site Plan Review application for a Mansard Roof to be constructed at the Hope Christian Church. Atlas Construction/Scott Carlson 8181 Highway 62 White City, Oregon 97503 Hope Christian Church 325 Oak Street Central Point, OR 97502 37 2W 02CC Tax Lot 9800 C-2, Commercial -Professional The applicant, Hope Christian Church has applied to the City of Central Point for approval of a Site Plan Review to allow the construction of a Mansard (awning) to the front of the existing sanctuary facility. The project site is located near the intersection of Third and Oak Streets. AUTHORITY: CPMC 1.24.020 invests the Planning Commission with the authority to render a decision on any Site Plan Review application. Notice of the public hearing was effected in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 (Exhibit B.). APPLICABLE LAW: CPMC 17.36.010 et seq. - C2, Commercial-Professional District. CPMC 17.72.010 et seq. -Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval. 31 City of Central Point Planning Department Staff Report Hope Christian Church Mansard Roof Paget CPMC 17.72.020(1) required a SitePlan Review for all construction requiring the issuance of a building permit. The Hope Christian. Church would like to install a "forest green" colored 74 by 18 foot metal awning to the front of the existing building located at 325 Oak Street. The proposed awning would be similar to one located at the Roxy Ann Medical Clinic and would extend towards Oak Street a distance of 11 feet over the front walkway. This project does not impact any of the conditions that were required on the parcel as a result of the new child care building. SITE PLAN STANDARDS: CPMC 17.72.040 sets out the standards that the Planning Commission must consider in basing its decision on a Site Plan application. A. Landscaping and fencing must be consistent with the neighborhood and used to screen activities and uses that may impact existing neighborhood uses. No additional landscaping has been proposed with this project. B. Ingress and egress points must be designed and located to maintain and improve traffic flows on public streets. C. Off-street parking and interior circulation must be adequate to serve the site and maintain good pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows. D. Signs for the project must be designed and located to be compatible with the use and not interfere with traffic control devices or traffic flows. E. The site must be designed to be accessible to fire apparatus and have adequate fire fighting facilities. F. The project must comply with all applicable city ordinances and regulations and must be aesthetically acceptable in relation to the neighborhood and the City of Central Point. 32 City of Central Point Planning Department Staff Report Hope Christian Church Mansard Roof Page3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the Site Plan and adopt Resolution No. _, based on the findings of fact contained in the record and subject to the recommended conditions of approval; or 2. Deny the proposed Site Plan application; or 3. Continue the review of the Site Plan applications application at the discretion of the Commission. EXHIBITS: A. Site Plan, and Elevations B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Recommended Planning Department Conditions of Approval HOPEMANZ.REP - - 33 n Q 12116 FLL?Jf10~ ~ xrom~as aiaaaum ~nuuxa az bz ~ n, f ~ .oB ~ _~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~Z ~~ -~ ~ u g d ~` m 8 s~° ~ a ~ ~i~ -~ wom _ - 5 _S S N w X w AVIl~UJO A`LL~AC3 i ~ U ~ ~ d ~ - i a Z F ~ "~, . U ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ W ~ a \ a Vd2N ®hVd ~ ~` ~ .n Y ~~ ~ i i i i i ~ a i a u~ ~ ' -~ ~ ~~ Bg~ -~ \ ~ s: j `.~ a i ~~ > y ~ .~ j a a ~ j ~, 3 CZ I- a ~ \ ~ ' rTa~n~rn naui i ~ G~ r ' ~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ JI'IV/l~ 313M~N0~ 9N15M3 3~ v ~i f-- Z ~O O m~ ~~~ ~~ ~v0 z Q e ~. O x ~i r s 0 W 133?116 OM~il 35 .:icy of Central Point PLANNING DEPARTMENT Gtty of Central Faiittr" ° EXHIS~IT t'&.'r Planning Department James H. Bennett, AICP City Administrator/Planning Director Ken Gerschler Planning Technician Deanna Gregory Administrative/Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Date of Notice: December 2,1997 Meeting Date: Time: Place: EETING December 16, 1997 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) `Central Point City Hall -155 South Second Street C'.rnhal Pnint (lrrann Beg'uuiing abthe above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review a Site Plan Review application for the addition of a mansard to the front of the existing building located near-the intersection of Oak, and 3rd Streets. The proposed construction would be located in a C-2 (Commercial-Professional) zoivrig district on tax lot 9800 of Jackson County Assessors Map page 37 2W 2CC. Tlie requirements for Site Plan Review are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Regulations, Off-street parking, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans. The proposed plan is also reviewed in accordance to the City's Public Works Standards. PLIBL.IC COMMENTS 1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up until the clo§e of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 16, 1997. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, OR 97502. r. ~ 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 Hall, 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, the Planning Commission will review the applications, technical staff reports, 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 Plan. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Commission decisions. ~ .•, ~ - ;fit ,, .,~~~ Su 'ec Property ^!~~~ / ~\ 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ (541) 664-3321 ~ Fax: (541) 664-6384 3 `7 r. ~~ EXHIBIT C RECOMMENDED PLANNING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The project shall be developed in substantial compliance with the approved site plan. 2. The site plan approval shall expire in one year, December 16, 1997, unless a building permit has been issued and construction has commenced and diligently pursued toward completion. 3~