The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Commission Packet - February 20, 1996r e~ Gs^`g9 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ~~ a~ ~'`~ ~_~ i PLANNING COMMISSION x:1'.~,t;~;, ~"b:i's E'~ MINUTES ~"~~'£~ `'~ ;. ~: FEBRUARY 6, 1996 I. THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:04 P.M. , II. ROLL CALL.- Those present were: Chuck Piland, Jan Dunlap, Herb Farber, Candy Fish, Valerie Rapp, Karolyn Johnson, Bob Gilkey III. CORRESPONDENCE There was not corre`§pondence IV. MINUTES Commissioner Fish moved to approve the January 16, 1996 Planning Commission Minutes as written. Commissioner Farber seconded the motion. ROLL CALL-VOTE: Dunlap, yes; Farber, yes; Fish, yes, Johnson, abstain; Rapp, abstain, Gilkey, abstain. V. PUBLIC. APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. Review and determination regarding Final Plat Application for ~perty on Hopkins Road 137 2W 11 AC TL 112031 (Aoolicant: Herb Farber for Anne McKibbenl ., Herb Farber declared a conflict of interest as project agent and surveyor..:. - .Sue Riegel reviewed the Planning Commission Report. She stated that the developer has not completed. one condition: removal of the existing garage. She also stated that because apre-existing home encroaches into the Public Utilities Easement, Planning recommends approval of the Final Rlat with signing of the Final Plat subject to completion of conditions stated in Public Works Report and inclusion of a notation on Final Plat: "If-the subject premises is fully destroyed, or if that portion encroaching into the 10' PUE is fully or partially destroyed, no City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes February 6,1996 -Page Two rebuilding of any structure or part of any structure will be permitted in said easement." Herb Farber, Agent, 908 E. Jackson, Medford, Oregon, spoke on behalf of the application. Mr. Farber brought an updated Final Plat which includes the above notation. They have encumbered the house with the PUE. Mr. Farber discussed condition 4. The owner has to give -the tenants notice to move their things from the garage. There is also a possibility that the potential buyers may want to move the garage. However, it will take no longer than 30 days to move or tear down the garage. Chairman Piland stated that the final plat will not be signed until condition 4 has been met. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the Final Plat Application for property on Hopkins Road (372W 11 AC TL 11203) (Applicant: Herb Farber for Anne McKibben).. Commissioner Gilkey seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE: Dunlap, yes; Farber, abstain; Fish, yes; Johnson,. yes; Rapp, yes; Gilkey, yes. B. .Review and determination regarding Final Plat Application for property locatari in Co mtryside Village Subdivision. Phase 2, This ~~y is located on the corner of Columbine and Briarwood Drives (372W11 Lots 49. 50 and 521 IAnplicant: Bob Fellows) The Commissioners read a memorandum from Susan Wilson Broadus, Public Works Director, recommending that determination on the Final Plat for this partition be continued until the next Planning Commission meeting. .Public Works has not received the materials for review. Bob Fellows, 2750 Heritage Road, Central Point, Oregon, applicant, came forward to speak on behalf of the application. Mr. Fellows stated that they have made a revision to the dwelling location as requested in the conditions from Public :Works. He stated that he would like to have the Final Plat approved at this meeting subject to any concerns the Public Works Department might have. City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 1996 -Page Three Commissioner Farber stated the final plat has no bearing on where the building is built. He also stated that it is the applicant's risk if Public Works places conditions that are not acceptable. Commissioner Farber made a motion that the Planning Commission approve the Final Plat for 372W11, Lots 49, 50 and 52 (Applicant: Bob Fellowsl, dependent on Public Works Staff Report and subject to the concerns that the Public Works Department may have. Commissioner Dunlap seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE: Dunlap, yes; Farber, yes; Fish, yes; Johnson, yes;'-Rapp, yes, Gilkey, yes. C. Review and recommendation for Minor Zone Text Amendment for CPMC 17.60.190 relating to vehicular traffic in residential zones. Sue Riegel reviewed the Report from the Planning Department. Rather than delete CPMC 17.60.-190, Planning recommends it be amended to read: "8. the home occupation shall not encourage customer or client visits to the dwelling that would result in more than a limited increase in neighborhood vehicular traffic levels above those levels generated by the residential uses." Sue stated that this gives discretion to the Planning Commission and Planning/Zoning to take a look at what use is being proposed for a residential neighborhood and make that decision upon a case by case basis. There are a number of criteria that would vary by neighborhood and this would give the city flexibility. Commission Farber made a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approving the Zone Text Amendment of CPMC 17.60.190. relating to vehicular traffic in residential zones as amended. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE: Dunlap, yes; Farber, yes; Fish, yes; Johnson, yes; Rapp, yes; Gilkey, yes. It was the consensus of the Commissioners that they did not want Item 8 of CPMC 17.60.190 eliminated but amended per page 17 of the Planning packet. J City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes February 6, 1996 -Page Four D. Review and recommendation regarding Minor Zone Text Amendment of 17.16.050D. 17.20.050. 17.24.505E and 17.28.050E pertainina to Side Yard Setback Standards for Side Yards Abutting Streets. Sue Riegel reviewed the Planning Department's report. This amendment is to assure adequate setbacks to allow for driveways and define a little more clearly the front yard. Commissioner Fish made a motion that the Planning Commission Yecommend approving the Minor Zone Text Amendment of 77.16.050D, 17.20.050, 17:24.050E and 17.28.050E pertaining to Side Yard Setback Standards for Side Yards Abutting Streets. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Rapp. ROLL CALL VOTE: Dunlap, yes; Farber, yes; Fish, yes; Johnson, yes; Rapp, yes; Gilkey, .yes. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Sue Riegel told the Planning Commission that she and Dave Kucera wanted to bring to them for their review a proposal to make the approval of Final Plats an administrative action. This would keep it within the Planning/Public Works area but would not have to come before the Planning Commission, if the final plat is substantially the same as the tentative plan. If there are major changes from the tentative plan, then it would have to come before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Farber stated that if there is significant and substantial changes from the tentative plan, they would have to redo the tentative plan and bring it back for review again. The City of. Medford and Jackson County now approve Final Plats administratively. Commissioner Fish stated that the Planning Commission needs to be kept informed on the final plat decisions. Chairman Piland rquested information on how this change would be made to the Central Point Municipal Code. Sue Riegel stated she would bring the information concerning this proposal to the next Planning Commission Meeting. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Fish made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Dunlap seconded the motion. All said "aye" and the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. .+~a -r~ v v~rr I cu 1J 11 ..y4 ALEX FOitRESTER AND ASSOCIATES Consultants in Land Use and Developnnent 303 N.E. "E" Street Gtants Pass, Otegon 97526: Tel (503) 479-1098 FAX (503) 476-8955 Date: February 13,1996 To: Planning Commission City of Central Point From: Sue ltiegeI, Associate Alex Forrester, Principal Interim Planners for City. of Central Point RE: Tentative Plan, Jackson CreekEatatea, Phase Yll AMP 37-2W-10C, Tax Lot 3000 Authority. CPMC 1.24:020.B. authorizes the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and decide on matters concerning subdivision tentative plans. Background. In November, 1995, a Tentative Plan for Jackson Creek >3states, Phase VII was reviewed by the Planning Commission in public hearing. During this session, the following issues were reviewed. - a. The lengths of the two cul-de-sacs. exceed the maximum length permitted by code. (CPMC 16.20.080 specifies a maximum length of 400 feet and a limit of not more than twelve single-family dwellings or seventy-five dwelling units being served.) b. Lot 227 would be reduced in size due to the future widening of Beall Lane and, as a result, not meet minimum lot size for the zoning district after the future widening. (CPMC 17,20.050, Zoning District R-1-8, minimum lot size 8,000 SF.) c. Public Works required looping of water in order to maintain adequate pressure and suggested pIadng the water line in an extension of Madison Court, a public right-of-way, extended westerly across Jackson Creek Drive connecting with the southerly cul-de-sac. This proposal would resolve the length issue for the remaining cul-de-saa d. Alternatively, the Planning Commission suggested extending Annalee Drive westerly to the edge of Jackson Creek, which would resolve the length issue for both cui-de-sacs. Actions. Planning. has reviewed and compared previous staff reports,. the submitted revised Tentative Plan, and met with Public Works and Building/Fire Safety. The following are Planning observations. a. The site chosen for development lies adjacent to the east side of Jackson Creek and west of the existing roadway, Jackson Creek Drive, and west and south of other phases of the Jackson Creek Subdivision: Zoning is R-1:8; minimum lot size is 8,000 SF. b. Jackson Creek Subdivision is developed with extensive use of cul-de-sac design. The City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan, through the Housing Element, (Section V., Conclusion #3, Policy 1) encourages this design approach: "Promote clustered housing end other dovelopment designs that minimize the need for costly and unnecessary streets, walks, and other mut>icipal expenditures. Snmurage the use of cul-de-sac streets hi residential neighborhoods whenever possible in lieu of the "grid" pattern of streets." And again in the Transportation Element, Section XI, page XI-10: "The dead-end or cul-de-sac street provides for the most completz privary and traffic separation of ai] the residential streets. 17us type of street closure clearly distinguishes an htdividual group of homes while providing access to them without the intrusion of through traffic.. " The Plan further encourages the City "...to study the possibility of closing some local streets to through traffic and creating cul-de-sac streets, especially in locations where the local street now intersects with a major arterial street:.:' (See Transportation Element, Section X~, page X1-19. c. The lengths of the north and south cul-de-sacs, measured from the nearest connecting non-cul-de-sac street Qackson Creek Drive), indicate approximately 501 feet (north cul-de-sac) and 523 feet (south cul-de-sac) and serve a total of 21 lots. A review of the munidpal codes for Medford, Ashland and Grants Pass indicates the following regarding cul-de-sac lengths. No. of Dwellings MAY. T~pi14~ Gp~,r~d ~nroval of Lon~eer Lpnath Medford 450 ft. No mentlon. Yes, if in opinion of the approval agency lengthening is the only feasible method of developing the property far the use for which it is zoned. Ashland 500 ft. No mention. Grants Pass 400 ft. Nu mention. Central Polnt 400 ft. l2 homes, or 75 du's No mention. Ycs, if no other means of access is available. No mention. Variance procedure available. d. The City does not have a traffic plan for this portion of the .City. Extending Annalee Drive across Jackson Creek raises questions about its potential intersection location with Hanley Road and the distance it would be from the Hanley Road intersection with Beall Lane. Additionally, with no information about the future. development of lands. adjoining the west. side of Jackson.Creek (lands which are not owned by or under purchase option by the Developer: of Jackson Creek Phase 7), the location of Annalee Drive cannot be determined and the cost assacfated with the potential bridge across the creek shazed. e. A review of the Tentative Plan shows that Lot 227 will not be affected by the future expansion of Beall Lane, as the #en foot expansion area is already provided for on the Plan. Lot 227 will maintain its 8,010 SF lot size. Findings. Planning finds the following: 1. Extension of Annalee Drive. With no City Traffic. Management. Plan for. this section of the City, requesting the extension of Annalee Drive could cause major problems for future developers of land situated along the west side of Jackson Creek. 2. Cul-de-Sac Length. Although the CPMC specifies a maximum length for cul- de-sacs and the number of homes or dwellings to be served, other cities' codes reflect differences in length and non include the number of homes or dwelling units to be served. Two of the codes recognize the need to adjust a cul-de-sac to a longer than specified length under certain conditions. The overall design of the existing subdivision, the presence of Jackson Creek along the western portion of this site, and the approval by Fire Safety of the .proposed cul-de-sac length, not presenting a hazard to emergency vehicles, provide a reasonable foundation for approving a variance to the CPMC ordinance on cul-de-sac length. 3. Looping of Water. Looping of water is permitted. in public rights-of-way as well as in easements. The Developer has agreed to provide easements to the width and length required by the City Public Works Department. Recommendations. Planning, Public Works and Building/Fire Safety staff have met with the Developers on several occasions to modify and agree to the Tentative Plan as herein submitted. Planning recommends approval of the Tentative Plan as revised and submitted herein with a variance to the length of cul-de-sac, subject to the following: 1. Conditions documented in the Public Works Staff Report; and, 2. Conditions documented in the Building/Fire Safety Staff Report. Miscellaneous Comment. , The presence of Jackson. Creek adjacent to the subdivision offers the City an opportunity to provide a greenway and/or bikeway linking other areas of the region and providing the citizens with a valuable recreation area while preserving a natural and feature. Discussions with the Developer, City staff, interested groups and individuals should take place to pursue overall design, route mapping and funding options to take advantage of this opportunity. END OF MEMO STAFF REPORT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY Date: 2!13/96 Project: Jackson Creek Estates Unit # 7 Final Plat Developer /Applicant: Tom Malot Surveyor :Douglas McMahan Agent: Dennis Hoflbuhr This Staff Report Review covers the Fire Protection aspects of the proposed Tontative Plat. The requirements outlined herein. are based on the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code with 1992 State of Oregon Amendments. This-review assesses the Fire Protection needs related to Water Supply, Fire Department Access, Required Fire Flow. THE FOLLOWING ARE MY FINDINGS: 1. The required fire flow for this project is established at 1000 g.p.m. ,based on Appendix A-III 5. for One & Two Family Dwellings when the largest structure within this development does not exceed a fire area of 3600 sq. ft. Tf there is planned for a structure to be built within the development that would exceed a fire area of 3600 sq. ft. the required fire flow will be established using Table No. A-IR-A-1 of the of the Uniform Fire Code. Fire Area is defined as the total square footage of all floors 2.. Water supply is to be calculated and designed by applicants engineer and submitted to the City for their review to substanfiate proposed design as shown on Tentative Plat submitted. City of Central Point Standard Specifications for water lines, specifies a minimum of an 8" water main when'serving fire hydrants. Currently on the Tenative Plat submitted shows looped 6" lines. Applicant should change his proposed looped lines to 8" minimum to meet current City of Central Poim Standards. Hydrant locations as shown meet with the approval of the Fire Chief. 3. The proposed cul-de-sac design configuration submitted does not meet the Central Point Municipal Code Section 16.20.080. Cul-de-sac design criteria is established not only to move traffic for the motoring public safely but also, and most importantly provides for appropriate Fire Department Access to facilitate operational logistics in the event of a Fire Emereencv. (cont'd) Page 2 3. Although the proposed street design is not ideal the Fire Chief has determined the proposed design submitted is acceptable provided sizing of the water mains is increased from 4. Timing of the installation of the water system for required £ro flow and Fire Department access shall be completed, tested, and approved by the City prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. Approval of the submitted Tentative Plat is not an approval of omissions or oversights by this office; or ofnon-compliance with any applicable regulations of this jurisdiction. Note* COPIES OF THE CODE SECTIONS PREFACED IN THIS REPORT WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE DEVELOPERS OF THIS PROJECT FOR THEIIZREFERENCE.. Reviewed By: Mark A. Servatiua Fire ChiefBuilding Official 3 j' ~"„ ro Alex Forrester and Associates Consultants in Planning and Land Use 303 N.E. "E" Street Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 (541)479-1098 FAX (541)476-8955 Date: January 27, 1996 To: Public Works, Building and Fire Safety From: Sue Riegel, Associate Alex Forrester, Principal Interim Planners for City of Central Point Subject: Application for Site Plan Review, Hastings Furniture 150 N. Front Street, AMP 37-2W-3DD The application for Site Plan Review was accepted by me on 1/27/96 as providing alt necessary information in ordef for the City to complete its review. The parcel is zoned C-5 which now allows as a Conditional Use the manufacture for on-premises sales. (CPMC 17.46-030.(18)) According to the Tentative Plan file, this use was allowed as a Non-Conforming Use, Class B. AClass BNon-Conforming Use is not permitted to be expanded. Please let me know your comments on the Site Plan request. I don't believe that Hastings needs to apply for a Conditional Use Permit, but I will check that out with Doug Engle. I drove by the site on 1/27, and it appears that the improvement expansion has already been completed. END OF MEMO cc: Sandy Lommel ~. PUBL/C WORKS DEPARTMENT S/TE PLAN REV/EW ~~Q~~ ~2G°~~G°31~ Date:. February 15, 1996 Project: Hastings Furniture, Addition PW# 96002 Zone: C-5 # of Lots: 1 No. of Structures 1 (addition), 2 (existing) Applicant: .John Hastings 150 North Front Street (Highway 99) Central Point, OR 97502 Phone: (541) 664-9259 Agent: None indicated Engineer: None indicated Plans Prepared By: Submitted by Applicant Location: T37S, R2W, Section 03DD Type of Land Increase square footage of existing shop (additional building) Use Action: Prepared By: Paul W. Worth, Public Works Technician ~~ February 15, 1996 -Page Two I. STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Includes: Street sub-grade, street base, street paving, street lighting, traffic control/delineating improvements, curbs/gutters, safety improvements, ingress/egress improvement, off-street parking, delivery truck access, traffic requirements, sidewalk, and bikeways. A. Existing Conditions 1. Street Name -Front Street, MA3 (Hwy. 99) Jurisdiction - ODOT 2.. Alley at--rear of property is unpaved. Description Existing Conditions Future Requirements: -Right of Way -Street Width -Moving Lanes -Parking Lanes -Traffic Volume -Sidewalks -Curb & Gutter -Street Lights -Bikeways 80' 56' Curb to Curb 4 w/addnl. Lt. refuges none 13400 VT/D (1994) None Curb only Yes None 100' -110' (Comp Plan) 84' (Comp Plan) 4 - 6 (Comp Plan) None 10 = 40,000 VT/D Required Required Required Proposed by County 3. Discussion -The original Planning Commission Resolution 272 (1 /25/94) required the alley be paved with 2 inches of asphalt over 6 inches compacted base and subgrade within 18 months. Resolution 328 (9/13/95) extended the allotted time to March 1997. It is anticipated that the Cameron Quality Meats owner (PW #95041) adjacent to the Applicants same alley may be paving the alley adjacent to tax lot 6300 in the near future. The requirement for this project is 3 inches of asphaltic concrete over 7 inches of compacted base and subgrade. Cameron Quality Meats may substitute 3 inches of asphaltic concrete of 4 inches of compacted 3/4 minus base and 6 inches of 4 inch minus subbase. It would be desirable if these activities were coordinated between the two property owners. B. App/icant s Required Conditions -See Exhibit "LI "Conditions. ~~ 1. CPMC 12.02, 17.72 -Street Improvements: February 15, 1996 -Page Three a. Standard 12.02.010 Required: The City finds and determines that the construction of buildings or other development of property within the City directly results in the increased use of the City's streets and street-related infrastructure, such as sidewalks and storm drainage. The City further finds that in order to mitigate the negative impacts of new development on the City's streets and street-related infrastructure, it is necessary and just that those persons engaged in new development within the City be required to improve streets and street-related infrastructure adjacent to the property_ being developed, if the same is below the City's current standards for such improvements at the time of the development. See (1 and 5) Exhibit "A" Conditions b. Any person constructing a building or otherwise developing property within the City which is adjacent to a public street, highway or alley shall, as a condition of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for said construction or development, cause improvement of the street, highway or alley in accordance with the same standards and requirements as are in effect for the creation and improvement of streets within subdivisions, including, but not limited to, the design standards set forth in Chapter 16.20 of this code. The City Building Official is authorized to withhold issuance of a certificate of occupancy until such improvements are completed. The Applicant has entered into an Agreement to be included in a Local Improvement District (1 /21 /94) 2. CPMC 12.02, 17.72 -Street Lighting Improvements: Not applicable for this action. , 3. CPMC 12.02, 15.40, 17.72 -Traffic Control and Delineation Improvements: The Applicant has entered into an Agreement to be included in a Local Improvement District (1/21/94) i3 February 15, 1996 -Page Four 4. CPMC 12.02, 15.40, 17.72 -Curb /Gutter Improvements: The Applicant has entered into an Agreement to be included in a Locaf Improvement District (1/21/94) 5. CPMC 12.02 and 17.72 -Safety ,Improvements. (See report from Central Point Department of Public Safety.) Standards -CPMC 17.72.040 G. Other development conditions can be implemented to ensure the health, safety, and privacy of Central Point residents. Various timing factors may apply. 6. CPMC 1.5.40 -Ingress/Egress/Vision Improvements: Standards -CPMC 1J.72.040 B -Discussion: City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan,. Part XI Page 4, states that "Major arterials are intended to primarily move large amounts of traffic and not to provide access to property" CPMC 17.72 B indicates that driveways should be located and designed so as not to interfere with traffic -Applicant has entered into an Agreement to be included in a Local Improvement District (1 /21 /94) 7. CPMC 17.64 -Parking: See Planning Department Report. See Exhibit A, Condition 10 8. ..CPMC 12.04 and 15.40 -Sidewalk Improvements. Standards - CPMC 12.04 -Applicant has entered into an Agreement to be included in a Local .Improvement District (1 /21 /94) II. WATER IMPROVEMENTS , Includes: Mainlines, Property Service, Fire .Service and Back-flow Protection. A. Existing Conditions 1. Not applicable to mainline service. No additional water usage anticipated for this action. 2. Sprinkler irrigation system on site. See Backflow below. ~~ February 15, 1996 -Page Five B. Discussion 1. Not applicable to mainline service. No additional water usage anticipated for this action. 2. Property Service -Existing meter at NW. Property Corner 3. Fire Service: See Central Point Department of Public Safety Report. 4. Back-flow: Standards -OAR Chapter 333. See (7) Exhibit "A" Conditions. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Includes: Mainline, Property Service, Regional System Development Charge, Local SDC. A. Existing Conditions 1. Not applicable to mainline service. No increase in service is anticipated for this action. B. Discussion 1. Not applicable to mainline service. No increase in service is anticipated for this action. IV. STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Includes: Discharge Basin, Wetlands Requirements, pretreatment requirements, mainlines, services, catch basins, and erosion protection. A. Existing Conditions -Applicants property is surface drained West towards Front Street and East to alleyway 15 February 15, 1996 -Page six B. Discussion: 1. None required. 2. Mainlines: None required 3. Property Service: According to CPMC 15.12, the plumbing plan for this project must include connection for all roof drains, crawl spaces and areas drains'to an approved storm drainage system. See (8) and (9) Exhibit "A" Conditions. 4. Flood Management, CPMC 8.24: This property is not located in the flood way of the 100-year flood. plain. ~~ EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS Hastings Furniture APPLICANT SHALL COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TIMING FACTORS AS NOTED. TIMING FACTORS TF - 1 To be submitted as a part of construction plans and specifications for :review by the City prior to issuing permits. TF - 2 To be completed prior to issuance of any Construction or Building Permits. TF - 3 To be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. TF - 4 To be completed prior to Approval of the Final Plat. TF - 5 To be a continuous condition, to be set at the time of future land use action decisions. erah 1. Applicant shall construct all utilities, streets, and other structures discussed herein, within rights-of-way owned, or to be owned by the City of Central Point, in accordance with all rules, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, standards and other applicable requirements of the City of Central Point for the construction of this development. 2. This review for the SITE PLAN submitted by Applicant was done so in accordance with all the rules, regulations, ordinances and standards in effect as of the date of this review. Any modifications by Applicant of this project after City Planning Commission approval, could require re-submittal of an application, and approval by the City Planning Commissiorrbased on the recommendation of staff. responsible for this review. 3. Applicant shall pay all costs associated with this development and the conditions placed on this development, 4. No construction will begin on this project until the Public Works Department and other pertinent departments or divisions of the City have reviewed the project plans and specifications and have issued a construction permit. 1 "F! Exhibit "A" -Page Two 5. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, or Master Transportation Plan, TF 2 the construction of this development shall include future street subgrade, base rock, paving, lighting, traffic control and delineation improvements, storm drain, water and sewer improvements, including alleys, sidewalks, and utility crossings to Front Street. Developer has secured the above improvements by executing an agreement for consent to inclusion in a Local Improvement District to construct the above street improvements (1 /21 /94). 6a. TF 3 The City will inspect and test all existing improvements proposed for dedication to the City. The City will conduct the inspection and testing in the same manner, where practical, as required for new construction. Applicant shall repair or replace any improvements not meeting City standards for new construction. The City's inspection will include the existing pavement, base section and sidewalk improvements adjacent to Front Street. Applicant shall apply for a permit with the Oregon Department of Transportation and coordinate with the City for all existing and proposed improvements in the Front Street (Highway 99) Right of Way, dedicated to the City as part of this project. 6b. Applicant shall be required to pave the alleyway with 3 inches of asphalt over a minimum 7 inches of compacted base material or Cameron Quality Meats may substitute 3 inches of asphaltic concrete of 4 inches of compacted 3/4 minus base and 6 inches of 4 inch minus subbase. Completion of paving shall be in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution #328 (time extension) Please note this condition modifies the paving requirement as outlined in Planning Commission Resolution #272 (1/25/94) in order to be consistent with current thickness standards for vehicle loading and frequencies. 7. TF1 Applicant shall install an OSHD approved. testable backflow device behind the City water meter for any system which connects to Applicant's irrigation system or any other water system which may be a potential cross-connection. Location, type(s) and size(s) of backflow prevention devices shall be shown on construction drawings. If Applicant currently has an approved device installed as required above, this condition is waived. 18 Exhibit "A" -Page Three 8. TF1 Applicant shall provide the City with a complete set of construction drawings for the storm drainage system to serve this property. All roof drains, area drains, crawl spaces, and parking lot drains shall have positive drainage away from any structures, and shall connect to the storm drainage system located in Front Street. 9. TF1 Applicant shall provide the City with a grading and drainage plan for the entire project. 1D. TF3 Applicant shall post signs stating that the turnaround area at front of premises shall not be blocked by parked vehicles: No backing or vehicle manuevers shall be permitted in the public right of way or street. ~~ ~~~ ~ ( 3 J J~ ~ (~ ~% ~~ \. '. a ~ ~ ~' P !S ~`P .a o s ~~ f 6o E, Z°i~ ~~s~< ti ,. as y. ~P 9 ~~~ ,~- ~~ r . L i b_ ~0 9 ~ ~' ,o ~ .~~ti~ s~ ~ J q~ 9C i~ i~ O ~~ \\ ~~ \~~Lp.5z.9) ~_ \ s~ ~ ~° . o ~~. ~~~ 3~ ~~ ~.P~ _ a` s ~, ~`~` \~. z ~ . , .:.f~.C..L;~ Y ~ 1 .. ~ - .. .:leG~-o'f- ~ .. __ -- --- . ~Cis-r LANtx~CAPI NCa _ t.= • • ~ • '«~:?{: • :~: . I. Q! 1!.. 1 Q~ . ... _. ;:;<<'.:}< ~:vtiv :+ - .}`,i•:::t{}rr{iv it .rig , ! i IM~I~`r E~ . W / •iriL:v:{•ii•'r,}:,v';r, :~3 . ~+F~d.(71r17 L?~V~L.. .,_. r;::::.:.ti:.:}}'::;xti 1 ~O °,( D. i::.:K:;.;y:;;<:\rt;:;x -p.• -, :.~{~~({~s :f~:};i :}}'r,}'r,'{}:$•.{{'}:vii yam,/ ~_~y ~F/ l~•~ •{~:•}}:ti.}Ft:f.}}:::' n1 4}:'}}::.}::'. {1Y:.~N. ~ If ~aCl J9~;. ~L~V ti~{i~•~:~:::ti ::: :~:i%~:iti:i;::'r,'r{'' }?~:;:::•i:%:~::•a:1: $' • '!~?~'I~ ~~I- If 1• I( ._ '•~ti:::}}:•: •••• .. •...t ;••.. •.. 'tom '. V :::}?}:: {~:r:•:v' {i : v~ }f:~::' ,~, ~.^I f~l'1 /'V ~~i~{% ! \ '.}: is i:{:fiX•:}:{v v{•4t{{vFFiv:4 .•.r•:{{L:{ I ~ :'.F :r:::i:.:}:::•:{•iv~: t}tinr n:.F{y. r: ~}ty~y{}{:{~ }'}ikC}~}}i'r.'uv ? i ••"{'•::{fivii•~ i ~ r :i'vtif~:?M1ti•.?i,::::•~ ~::' <:}: {i~•.i{~}-.{}<:•';:~.. . ;tv}•t :''ii:•} } mv.{}r •v~::ry •::}.vii}:v:•$:v#:rin;. •{. - ;:;S:;:Y~v}5~~f • :. j .. .. .::{•}::•:•:v: .. .. {r:;.,{n ~;{~^avkr'(`^'if t }.~rYYn{:+~" . ..... :$;'{'. .. :•iry{;iYi jt!'r,'F 'I' 'fir.{•}.{•{:.vr i~'r• }:::::i{r,•.v.}:;. .. <{: •:{{ :{ ::: ~; ~~ v•:;:;i.•:•:•:•:•' ~• (OA44NG C1WC .• v.•.:{{v::/:S} ~I~~• ~' I •••• s:•:...,y }}v, is ,;,, r rr tF•• ~ {•:•F •:' ' I •t • •~{~.{,'trh::• ~~'J 1 ~' C : ~ ~~{ f ,{;4• •.A'i} r}v}" hti.Fv:'y'tt,.ti t .) {L/.~ ~.~...1 v,~4~\ }•tttn,AY•~v {:i Y{:: '~ .• t - : :r : r'~ }: '}' r:?•'t'h~i:{~vi~' F;•, t Y'• t 1 I ,:<•::?} .:n _ '. IBC' L?4'lPiv? :F~i.}'t rxF~{t}i':}7C'r: : F} : r w• wrrrFr Mrl~(/r F+~, y~ ' 11 ~y~ •1•j}•j . • ~O I\~~X'ly ::~•::1~{f~}v~l: • .1.1µ',L:'. •~{nt {'Y.•:Y•• :V..:::Y•{::: ''• j~ . ;{ X. L_~..~! .. i.. L:t,.'. •. {v.: v..tn nrr,F::r r i '.F}:::.,{r Fr }• ~9 :: }{;v;.• ti~titYi •:}4,r1?• "v}}':r}. Fr:i:{:{:}: rL': !~ .l ^ • -• vFrin'¢ {: ~~( . :Ci?:::~Y',>.;:{{; rt t,{~^ri' y'v}~vvx; Y r F$+Y}t .i~.~~'^~' S / •~~~. ~~~WNVI• ~!^/G ~ ' 'it' 'T•~ ~t Nr•. / • ` < ~~.~._ ~ 1 `G \'~~ I r t : ~ -... ~' TkIJUF~[1,lf~1NCa ~= ~ - 5=` •.'",••• `• `• - ~ 1•ri~.-~UV~~ .MrLoYEE __ '' ••, ~ `;•GO•pn I,F~ACE FoF ~t75GApING1 ~.REAS ~24! ~", m (4_Oa• t ~ •~ 1 Tl~RNNt4UI.) ~ • •,~orw~o •- • -- . i. . • :; ;: ~' -• .. ~~y.~ ,.-.. ~ '~ N ; ..- t_ia{ .•:372:~LI~o31?t?.-;r~t>c ~-r ~~0.0_..._- _.-•;.•__-- -- 1 o .. STAFF REPORT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY Date: 2/13/96 Project: Hastings Furniture Expansion Developer /Applicant: John Hastings Surveyor :None indicated Agent: None indicated This Staff Report Review covers the Fire Protection aspects of the proposed Tentative Plat. The requirements outlined herein are based on the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code with 1992 State of Oregon Amendments. -This review assesses the Fire Protection needs related to Water Supply, Fire Department Access, Required Fire Flow. THE FOLLOWING ARE MY FINDINGS:. The required fire flow for this project is established at 1500 g.p.m: ,based on Appendix III-A, Table A-III-A-1 of the Uniform Fire. Code. This is for a building of Type V-N construction with a fire area of 2480 sq. ft. Fire Area is defined as the total square footage of all floors. 2. Water supply is based on Part III; Article 10; Division N; Sections 10.402 & more specifically Section 10.403. Existing hydrants already in place have been found to be adequate to meet the required fire flows, and hereby approved by the Fire Chief. 3. Fire department access shall be in accordance with Part III; Articie 10; Divisions II, & III. The existing street frontage as well as the alley access is adequate to provide for Fire Department Access to facilitate operational logistics in the event of a Fire Emergency, (cont'd) ~ry Page 2 Approval of the submitted project is not an approval of omissions or oversights by this office; or of non-compliance with any applicable regulations of this jurisdiction, except as noted... Note* COPIES OF THE CODE SECTIONS PREFACED IN THIS REPORT WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE DEVELOPERS OF THIS PROJECT FOR THEIR REFEREI!'CE. 'I~' -- Reviewed,By: Mark A. Servatius Fire Chief/Building Official <•-. F3 ORDINANCE NO.. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CENTRAL POINT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 1.24.020, 16.12.050, AND 16.12.060 PERTAINING TO CITY REVIEW OF FINAL PLATS FOR SUBDIVISIONS AND PARTITIONS THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF .CENTRAL POINT, OREGON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:' Section 1. Central Point Municipal Code Section 1.24.020 is hereby amended to read as follows: The planning commission shall rev hearings, the following matters: 1. Fence variances; 2. outline development developments; Yu;,}ctions. A. thout public plans for planned unit 3. Site plan reviews, except for. those applications city staff is authorized to review and approve; 4. Nonconforming use designations; 5. Authorizations for similar uses; 6. Final plat approval for subdivisions and land partitions(;--aid), when referred to the planning commissipn by city staff: and 7. Final development plans for planned unit developments; B. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing and decide the fc 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. allowing matters: Conditional use permits; Zoning variances; Tentative plans for land partitions; Land partition variances; Mobile home parks; 6. Preliminary development plans of planned unit developments; 7. Subdivision tentative plans; and 8. Subdivision variances. C. The planning commission shill review and make recommendations to the city council on those matters specified in subsection D of this section; provided that, the planning commission shall not review and make recemmendations on any annexations for which a public hearing is not required under state law. Annexations which must be decided at public hearings shall be subject to planning commission review and recommendation. D. The city council shall hold a public hearing and decide the following matters: 1. Amendments to the text and map of the comprehensive plan; 1 - ORDINANCE NO. (021496) %~.`~ 2. .Amendments to the text and map of the zoning ordinance; 3. Annexations; provided, however, that a public hearing shall only be required in those annexations wherein state law mandates a public hearing. All other annexations may be decided by the city council at a regular meeting, without a formal advertised public hearing; 4. Street and alley vacations; and 5. Withdrawal from special districts. Section 2. Central Point Municipal Code Section 16.12.050 is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.12.050 Staff ~:~r-eva~) review. Upon receipt by the city, the final plat and other data shall be reviewed by the city to determine that the final plat as shown is substantiallyy the same as it appeared on the approved tentative plan, that it complies with all conditions of tentative plan approval, and that there has been compliance with all applicable ordinances and state law, provided however, survey adequacy required by ORS 92.100 shall be approved by the county surveyor. The city may make such checks in the field as it may desire and it may enter the property for such purpose. If the city determines that full conformity has not been made, it shall advise the applicant of the changes or additions that must be made for such purposes and shall afford the applicant an opportunity to make such changes or additions within a reasonable time to be established by the city. Section 3. Central Point Municipal Code Section 16.12.060 is hereby amended to read as follows: decision. (~€)~inal plat approval(, --..:`:~~) shall be evidenced by signature of an authorized city representative on the original plat. The approval of the final plat by the city shall npt be deemed to constitute or effect an acceptance for maintenahce responsibility of any street or other easement or way shown on the final plat. 2 - ORDINANCE NO. (021496) `~'~ 16.12.060 Final plat approval. (~_.._ ^^'.,.a ^° a1. i, sr....., v.l ,a ai... .S a.. ...-~11 a..a ........i .. ..~.,a L.. to .. c.. i i, i Y I Z ,, Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of , 1996. Mayor Rusty McGrath ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this day of , 1996. Mayor Rusty McGrath ~V 3 - ORDINANCE NO. (021496)