HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Resolution 797w
RESOLUTION NO.~~I~
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (ROSEWOOD ESTATES)
(Applicant: Dallas Page)
(37 2W 10, Tax Lot 5900)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS:
,`l
i~,
' Section 1. Nature of Application and Procedural Background.
This matter came before the City on applicant's Planned Unit
Development ("PUD" hereafter) application for a 29-lot single-
family townhouse development called Rosewood Estates on 5.74
acres in an R-1-10 district. (The property was re-zoned to R-1-8
', subsequent ~.to_::the-hearing. ) The application -also included--- - ~ - - a--
requested variances to City standards pertaining to cul-de-sac
streets, types of dwellings, minimum lot areas, lot widths,
.. minimum setbacks, lot coverage, and special setback requirements.
The project is located at 3436 Hanley Road.
On May 20, 1997, the Central Point Planning Commission held
'a duly-advertised public hearing wherein it considered the
application, the City staff reports, and written comments and
testimony from all interested persons in favor of and opposed to
the application. The hearing was continued to June 3, 1997, at
which time the Planning Commission approved the application for
PUD and variances.
.After numerous appeals by aggrieved parties, on July 17,
1997, the Central Point City Council held a duly-advertised
public hearing wherein it reviewed the Planning Commission's
decision. The Council considered all written staff reports,
written comments from interested persons, and testimony from
persons in favor of and opposed to the application.
Section 2.
chapters of the
application:
:..._~.._.<<A. ~ `_Chapter
B. Chapter
C. Chapter
D. Chapter
E. Chapter
F. Chapter
Criteria Applicable to Decision. The following
~entral Point Municipal Code apply to this
I.24, Public Hearings Procedures;
17.20, R-1, Residential, Single-Family District;
17.60, General Regulations;
17.64, Off-Street Parking and Loading;
17.68, Planned Unit Developments (PUD); and
17.80, Variances.
Section 3. The within PUD application is denied for failure
to meet .the following criteria as set forth in CPMC 17.68.040:
1 - RESOLUTION NO. ~q`~ (07189?).
"B. The proposal will be consistent with the,
comprehensive plan, the objectives of the zoning
ordinance and other applicable policies of the City;
"C. The location, size, design, and operating
characteristics of the PUD will have minimal adverse
impact on the livability, value, or appropriate
development of the surrounding area;
"I. The PUD will be compatible with the surrounding
area."
The proposed PUD would be located in an R-1-8 zoning district.
The surrounding neighborhood consists of single-family residential
housing. The proposed PUD, when constructed, would consist of 14
two-family structures (duplexes), all of which would be located on
less than standard sized lots. The City Council finds and concludes
that the multi-family structures and less than standard sized lots
are not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood of single-
family residential structures. The R-1-8 zoning designation
contemplates single-family residential structures, and the City
Council finds that the proposed PUD will not be compatible with the
surrounding area and would have more than minimal adverse impact on
the livability and value of the surrounding area.
The variance applications are moot with the denial of the PUD.
Passed by the Council and
its passage this ~'~ day of
signed by me in authentication of
~vO,~S~ , 1997.
Mayor usty McGrath
ATTEST:
City Representative
Approved by me this `~,~~` day of V-4W`yS~- , 1997.
Mayor Rusty McGrath
2 -RESOLUTION NO. ~ q~ ("071897)