Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Resolution 920RESOLUTION NO. ~~ A RESOLUTION ISSUING A FINAL ORDER ON THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING A FENCE VARIANCE AT 2799 OAKVIEW AVENUE (Appellants: Richard & Windy Middleton) (372WO1CA Tax Lot 4000) Recitals 1. This matter came before the City Council of the City of Central Point, Oregon, for hearing on June 28, 2001, July 12, 2001 and July 26, 2001, on appeal of the Planning Commission decision denying a Fence Variance for Richard & Windy Middleton, 2799 Oakview Avenue, Central Point. The City Council reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law adopted by the Planning Commission, and received comments from all persons wishing to be heard on the matter. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Criteria Applicable to Decision. The following chapters of the Central Point Municipal Code apply to this appeal: A. Chapter 1.24, Public Hearing Procedures; B. Chapter 15.20, Fences; C. Chapter 17.28, R-3, Residential Multiple Family District. Section 2. Granting of Appeal. The City Council hereby grants appellants' request and reverses the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the Fence Variance as hereafter modified: 1. The northerly and easterly fence sections that are the subject of the appeal and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A" attached may be constructed at a height of six feet (6') from grade and situated no closer than four and one-half feet to the back of sidewalk along the easterly property line at that height. Section 3. Findings. of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The City Council hereby adopts the following findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of its decision in Section 2: 1. The strict application of the provisions of Central Point. Municipal Code Chapter 15.20, Fences, would result in unnecessary hardship to the appellants. Absent any issues of public health, safety, welfare or convenience, the appellants have a reasonable expectation of privacy and the use of their property that the strict application of the law in this case would not allow.. 2. The variance will provide advantages to the neighborhood or the city. The fence will be constructed in accordance with the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CCRs) of the Central Point East subdivision and has the support of the majority of residents and property owners in the neighborhood. 3. The variance will provide beautification to the neighborhood or the city. The fence will screen the interior of the property from public view and will be built to the same standards required of other properties in the neighborhood. 4. The variance will provide safety to the neighborhood or the city. The fence will not create any safety issue with respect to pedestrians or the operation of motor vehicles. 5. The variance will provide protection to the neighborhood or the city. The fence will provide greater security for the neighborhood and discourage criminal activity. 6. The variance will not have any adverse impacts upon the neighborhood. There is no opposition to, and no concerns have been raised regarding, the fence from residents or property owners in the neighborhood. The city has not identified any adverse impacts resulting from the granting of the variance. 7. The variance will utilize property within the intent and purpose of the zone district. Fences of this type are permitted and commonly constructed in residential neighborhoods. Passed by the Council and signed by ine in authentication of its passage this ~b~day of x.51, , 2001. x ~~ all Yr~ ~ --~-~-`".`_ .w Mayor Bill Walton ATTEST:. City Representative Approved by me this ~~ day of ~v l , 2001. ~- ~ ___ ;Mayor Bill Walton .~ H ~ g f .TI . `~ ~~~ (~' F k`l0