HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 165 - Stuckey VarianceI ~ 'Cj
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOT~UT:ION ~~1.65
A RE50LL3TION ADOPTING FINi}~.NGS AND CONCI,tJSIONS AND RECOMMRNI7ING
.APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE' 0~~' bONALD STL#CK1sY
WHERE?-~S, an application for a variance i'or t_he creation of 6 :lots
through a subdivision of land of less than the required minimum width of 60
feet for a R-1 zone within the City and more particularly described as ;Iack-
son County Tax Assessor's map page 37 2W 11D, tax lots 800, 802, 803, and
804 and
WHEREAS, the Central. Point Planning Commission has reviewed and
recommended approval of the application at a public meeting held on the
fourth day of April; now, therefore,
SE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TkiE CITY OF CENTRAL
POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The relevant criteria applicable to the within appli-
cation is Central Point Municipal Code Chapter 1.6.36.010 which describes the
conditions the Planning Commission must consider in order to grant a vari-
ance.
Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds as follows. The
request meets the criteria for granting a variance because:
1. The variance will provide advantages to the neighborhood
or the city.
The advantage provided to the city will be efficient use of
urban land and services. If the variance was not granted one
less lot will result from the subdivision which would waste
valuable urban land and not use city services as efficiently.
6. The variance will utilize property within the intent and
purpose of the zone district.
The R-1 zoning district intends that lots should neat be less
than 6,000 square feet in size. The code also establishes
minimum setbacks which must be conformed with these require-
ments. The lots will simply have larger back yards to make up
far the reduced side yards. The back yard space is more
important to most people than the side yards.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. 165 - page 1
MINLDPT.OI/PCRES
Section 3. The Panning Comm:i~ssion f.i.nds that the record herein
and the findings therefrom support the conclusion that the proposal is in
compliance with the applicable standards of the C.i.ty's Subdivision regula-
tians.
Passed by the Planning Commission nn this ~fth day of Ap~-i.1
4~h ,
].389 and signed by me in authentication of zts passage this day of
April 1989.
1~"?
Planning Commission Chairman
ATTEST:
Planning mmi ion Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSIO~i RESOLUTION N0. - Page Z
MINLDPT.DZ/PCRES