Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - April 4, 2006~~- CENTRAL POINT CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA April 4, 2006 - 7:00 p.m. Next Planning Commmission Resolution No. 689 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Connie Moczygetnba, Candy Fish, Damian Idiart, Mack Lewis, Chuck Piland, and Wayne Riggs. III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and approval of March 7, 2006, Planning Commission Minutes. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Pgs 1-16 A. A public meeting to review a request to amend a previously approved Tentative Plan application for Phase I of Twin Creek Crossing subdivision. The amendment would create a total of 26 lots that would be consistent with the approved Twin Creeks Master Plan. The subject project area is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37 2W 3C, Tax Lot(s) 100, 203 & 204 and 37S 2W 3B, Tax Lot 100. The property is located south of Scenic Avenue, north of Taylor Road, east of Grant Road, and west of US Highway 99. File No.: 05050 (Continued) Pgs 17-34 B. A public meeting to review a Site Plan application for the purpose of allowing the construction and operation of an Industrial Park in phases. The proposed development is within the M-1, Industrial zoning district. The subject parcel is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37 2W OlBD, Tax Lots 300, 400 and 700. The property is located at 4595, 4611 and 4625 Table Rock Road. File No.: 06025 Pgs 35-45 C. A public hearing to review a Tentative Plan application for the purpose of creating three individual parcels. The subject property is located in a C-4, Tourist & Office Professional Zoning District, and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 02D, Tax Lot 2100. The subject property is located on East Pine Street, west of Hamrick Road, and east of Interstate 5. File No.: 06053 PC040406 Pgs 46-54 D. A public meeting to review a Site Plan application for the purpose of allowing the construction and operation of a telecommunications site within Mt. View Plaza. The proposed site is within the C-4, Tourist & Office Professional zoning district. File No.: 06072 Pgs 55-103 E. A public hearing to consider a legislative Land Use Regulation amendment and creation of a new Land Use Regulation. The Planning Commission is to formulate a recommendation for the City Council to review these amendments on April 13, 2006. File No.: CP06-02-14 VI. MISCELLANEOUS VII. ADJOURNMENT PC040406 Planning Commission Minutes March 7, 2006 Page 1 City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes March 7, 2006 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chairperson Connie Moczygemba, Damian Idiart, Mack Lewis, Scott Mangold, Chuck Piland, and Wayne Riggs were present. Candy Fish was absent. Also in attendance were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director; Don Burt, Planning Manager; Ken Gerschler, Community Planner; Lisa Morgan, Planning Technician; Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary; and Matt Samitore, Development Services Coordinator. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Mangold made a motion to approve the minutes from February 7, 2006. Commissioner Riggs seconded the motion: ROLL CALL: Idiart, yes; Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. Planning Commission Minutes March 7, 2006 Page 2 VI. BUSINESS A. File No.: 06049 A Public Hearing to review Tentative Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development applications for a proposed mixed use business park known as Table Rock Business Park, within a M- 1, Industrial zoning district. The subject property is located at 3791 Table Rock Road and is located south of E. Pine Street, west of Table Rock Road and east of Bear Creek. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, requested a continuance of this public hearing until such time as the Planning Department is able to meet with Hoff~uhr & Associates to determine if they have all of the information that they need. B. File No.: 98051 A Public meeting to review an amendment to a previously approved Planned Unit Development known as Miller Estates. There were no conflicts or ex pane communications to disclose. Lisa Morgan, Planning Technician, presented the staff report. No one came forward to speak in favor of or against the application. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Lewis made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 685 to allow an amendment to Miller Estates Phases I and II, a PUD (37 2W 03BA, TL 9000) to allow rear patio covers/awnings to be constructed as close as 3 feet of the rear property line. Commissioner Piland seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. Commissioner Idiart arrived at the meeting at 7:10 p.m. C. File No.: 06059 A Public Hearing to review a Tentative Plan application for the purpose of creating two (2) single family lots located within an R-1- 10, Residential Single Family zoning district. The subject property is located at 3634 Grant Road, south of Blue Heron, west of Mendolia Way, Planning Commission Min:ctes March 7, 2006 Page 3 north of Beall Lane and east of Grant Road (identified as Tax Lot 37 2W lOBC, 2300). Applicants: Richard and Andrea Cook There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the staff report to the Planning Commission, and Matt Samitore, Development Services Coordinator, recommended that the application be approved per staff report. Neighbor Greg Haga of 873 Mendolia came forward with questions concerning an irrigation line at the back of the subj ect property and also expressed concerns about the elevation of applicants' property being so much higher. Ken Gerschler stated that the applicant will have to coordinate any work affecting the irrigation system with RRVID. Any fencing would be measured from the higher grade. Neighbor Jim Marron of 869 Mendolia came forward and expressed concerns about the future uses of the Cook property. Ken Gerschler indicated that the proposed parcel 2 could be split further. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Idiart made a motion to adopt Resolution 686 approving the tentative plan for the creation of two parcels on Tax Lot 37 2W lOBC, 2300 which is located at 3634 Grant Road. Commissioner Mangold seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Idiart, yes; Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. D. File No.: 06056 A public hearing to review a tree removal application within a previously approved tentative Plan for a subdivision known as Jan's Court (Tax Lot 37 2W l0AB,1400). Applicant: Shawn McFadden There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the staff report on the requested tree removal permit. Discussion focused on the definition of the term "unsafe" as it applied to the tree in question. Herb Farber, a licensed surveyor with a college degree in forestry, gave testimony in support of removing the tree and felt that the Planning Commission Minutes March 7, 2006 Page 4 commissioners should rely on the professional opinion of the certified arborist by supporting removal of the tree. He further stated that he was not representing the applicant. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Chairperson Moczygemba stated that the Planning Commission needed to try to protect the trees and the arborist's report indicated that at this time the tree in question was still in "excellent health and vigor." The Commission collectively decided that the tree did not represent a hazard at this time and that it should be saved for the time being. If the tree were to become a hazard in the future, another tree removal application could be completed. Commissioner Idiart made a motion to deny approval of the tree removal permit (Resolution 687). Commissioner Riggs seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Idiart, yes; Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. E. File No.: 05050 A Public Meeting to review a request to amend a previously approved Tentative Plan application for Phase I of Twin Creek Crossing subdivision. The amendment would create a total of 261ots that would be consistent with the approved Twin Creeks Master Plan. The subject project area is identified on the Jackson County Assessors Map as 37 2W 3C, Tax Lot(s) 100, 203 & 204, and 37S 2W 3B, Tax Lot 100. The property is located south of Scenic Avenue, north of Taylor Road, east of Grant Road, and west of US Highway 99. There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Lisa Morgan, Planning Technician, presented a staff report to the Planning Commission. She indicated that final plat had yet to be submitted for this development and that the developer would like to modify the tentative plan at this time to allow for additional smaller lots. These lots are consistent with the master plan and meet code requirements for lot size in this district. Bret Moore, applicant, spoke on his own behalf and informed the commissioners that Boulder Ridge Street is on the master plan, that the new plan is more consistent with Planning Commission Mir:cctes March 7, 2006 Page 5 the master plan as it has more detail and provides further clarification of uses. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Mangold read a written statement concerning construction traffic with "proposed conditions of approval" that addressed construction traffic safety concerns. Commissioner Idiart suggested that the public hearing on this issue be reopened so that the applicant and members of the public could comment on the "recommended conditions" identified by Commissioner Mangold. Herb Farber, agent for the applicant, suggested that the public hearing be continued to another date. Bret Moore, the applicant, came forward and stated that he felt that Commissioner Mangold had a conflict of interest (as a resident of the neighborhood) and should have stepped down to bring up items of concern after the public hearing had been closed. Mr. Moore requested a continuance to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director concurred and stated that those who are a parry to this proceeding can be noticed. Commissioner Idiart made a motion to continue the public hearing on the amendment to tentative plan approval for Twin Creeks Crossing, Phase I to April 4, 2006. Commissioner Lewis seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Idiart, yes; Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. VII. MISCELLANEOUS There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. A. File No.: 06048 Planning commission review of Site Plan for a townhome development in the Residential Multiple Family (R-3) Zoning District on property identified as Tax Lot 37 2W 02CD, 1600. Applicant: Skillman Brothers, Inc. Ken Gerschler, Community Planner, presented the staff report for this development and informed the Planning Commission that the site plan meets all code requirements and that Public Works has viewed the project and made their recommendations. Planning Conttnission Minutes March 7, 2006 Page 6 The public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Piland made a motion to adopt Resolution 688 approving the site plan for Tax Lot 37 2W OZCD, 1600; Skillman Brothers Inc., Applicant, with the recommended conditions. Commissioner Mangold seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Idiart, yes; Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. B. Staff Report and Discussion on Large Retail Establishments. Don Burt, Planning Manager, discussed definitions for various types of shopping centers to Planning Commission members, as well as to explain some of the differences between shopping centers and "big box" retail establishments. He additionally described some of the differences and similarities between large free- standing retail outlets and shopping centers. Commissioners were encouraged to consider the information presented and determine how the City is going to process and regulate these types of establishments in the future. Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director, added that there may or may not be locations available in the future for these uses but suggested that a nationally recognized standard definition be adapted to fit the City's needs. VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director, announced that the City's open house which was held on March 6, 2006 had been a great success and well attended. He hoped that the City would continue to do this on a regular basis. Mr. Humphrey further announced that the Regional Problem Solving process was getting to a point where there would be solid information available on land use, housing analysis and traffic analysis by the end of the year and the public would have an opportunity to get involved with the process. Mr. Humphrey then introduced Didi Thomas, new Planning Secretary, to Commissioners. Planning Commission Minutes March 7, 2006 Page 7 IX. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Idiart made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Piland seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Idiart, yes; Lewis, yes; Mangold, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. Meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. ~~.`~ Planning Department ____ ._e.,_~ ..__.~______~___._.____.... __ .____ __ S~I"AFF REPORT CENTRAL~W__ ____ . _ Tom Humphrey,AlCP, ~V ~ NT Community Development Directorl ,'+ Assistant City Adminlsirator STAFF REPORT March 7, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of an application to amend Tentative Plan approval for Twin Creeks Crossing, Phase I. Twin Creeks, LLC, Applicant. (Map 37 2W 03C, Tax Lot 100, 203,204, Map 37 2W 03CB, Tax Lot 100, Map 37 2W 03CD, Tax Lot 124, Map 37 2W 3DC, Tax Lot 3300) STAFF SOURCE: Lisa Morgan, Planning Technician BACKGROUND: On June 7, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a Tentative Plan application for Twin Creeks Crossing, Phase 1. The approved application consisted of 33.49 acres of land and consisted of TOD- HMR, High Mix Residential; TOD-EC, Employment Commercial; and TOD-OS, Open Space zoning. (Please refer to Exhibit "A") The applicant submitted the original Tentative Plan, with the intention of further dividing the 6 lots that were created as development plans were submitted. In the interim, the applicant has submitted an application to further divide Lot 4, of the originally approved Tentative Plan. Since the original approval has not been final platted the applicant is proposing a modification to the previously approved Tentative Plan. (Please refer to Exhibit "B") In the original approval, the Tentative Plan was consistent with the Master Plan, with one exception. It did not include a road that extended to the north through Lot 1 and approximately 139 feet to the south into Lot 5, The proposed modified plan includes the road, and 23 additional lots. Both modifications are consistent with the Master Plan. The additional lots being proposed range in size from 1,484 square feet to 2,626 square feet, We have not received any comments from outside agencies regarding this amendment. Oi FINDINGS: See attached exhibit "E" ISSUES: 1, Approval of the proposed Tentative Plan will supersede the Tentative Plan approved by Resolution No. 654, and is so noted in the new Resolution. 2. The original approved Tentative Plan was primarily to align with the geometry of the Master Plan. There was not proposed development with the original approval, and therefore we did not require CC & R's in connection with the approval. This modification will allow for development, and the applicant will have to submit CC & R's for the City to review prior to final plat approval. Please refer to Exhibit "C" for Conditions of Approval. Exhibits: Exhibit "A" -Original Tentative Plan Exhibit "B" -Proposed Amended Tentative Plan Exhibit "C" -Conditions of Approval -Revised Exhibit "D" -Proposed Resolution Exhibit "E" - Findings Exhibit "F" - Building Department Staff Report Exhibit "G" -Response to Written & Oral Communications on March 7, 2006 ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. _, approving the amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. 02 ~i R.+r~ V 57-2W-x TL t00 WSTtNG ` tRRIGATIGN LRt / ~~\\ \\ \ ~~ ~) Y /~ l \ 1ti rt.Q / y q 'F+t • ~ \ ,6 -`~~~ LOT 791 1 71x6 1- "I 1 ~ ~\ ~ LOT 78 ~LOY 1T` ~ 15,72 \ FLbt"7€r II iA'i 2 \\ Hbt^iiI ~ 6.52 Aeros. \ y FLbT"73~ r 1248 ~ F'LO'Ti2 ~ r LOT 71{ 4~ • / 7.ST A~1•~ / \ LOT 7Q~ `t` \ SLOT b~ 1 37-.2W-3CB TL 700 .~/~,• 4 9.88 .~ / `LOT 6B~ - 20.00 ~~ICp9S1N6 J ..-..--^ TWIN GKEkXi ...~--... 1 L 37-2W"3C T7' '~`_~-- _ ~"' 1 t` 1.70' PUE r" 95 }LOT WI I \ , I T+ , {{ WT 39i i i lAT 47 rgsti\\ ~" `{f j toT s7 t ' ! L__J ! I 5+~ ~ (- N ,~ it ~ (~ ! ~ { 1 ~ ~-I-~^ 1 o I ! __5--~-••~ ^_L^iHR1EA110N ~!SELENT 1NSf._N0._75-_1F?S9__4t~Yi_~... ~ ~ _ _ ^ ~.. THIS EA5EµFNL' l j~ °~""{r ri~~ PORTIONS ~tT CWLfED lA, 1 ~ ~ ` HAVE BEEN 1 o ALL RE4AA1N1NG PORTIONS t L ~ ~ / ARE PENDING CUVT CLAtY _ _ J .- f P LOT t M1%ED ZONING rpL1MERClAL OPEN SPACE .- HIGH MI% R t COIAMERCIAL Ey,PLOYMEN ~~ ~~ 5.2pACia 227TD5 59•H• ~J~ ~~ i s g ~`FI ~ A,O. \ y\ ~• ,. _ 1 , t~" _ \ Si ~~ I • ~ ~'T+ 8.7 / `\~ S. ~ ni\ , ~'/// .oT 1 ..,-'1250 g 3.28 Acn ~ LO Attn. ,R' i ,~ 141882 Sp ~ 18 230588 S9•N• ~ r~ w ZDWNG 9~ 1 ~, Q/ \ R 203 w~ ~~ ~~ ,J?~'Qq ~ 7.; ~yM1 , , \ t92465 SryIL . \ ZONING tlldB ~ \ y> \ I I ~~ ~\ ~; `20.00 \ ~\ ~;i \ \ \ l i\ i) _ 37-2 3 - O /t / O \~ 1,Z6Y~A\0~' 3T_2w-3w TL o/\ ~~ ~o~~~~~~ Ctpg v -~ o`er\,\?a~,`~` `C.~~~ \ 15.43 ~, ~e~,yy 6Yy~*/~ \ ~xY ~A~`i \ \ C' // oo~ J PARK AREA O 4~jr \\~ i T Na 3 I-,\~Of 1\ / NOING GRIFFIN OAKS tJN< , / GRIFFeI OAKS UNIT Nu• ~ i>tiASE 7 !~ -I`~, y~ INSS.NO. 02^82388 " CURRENT CREEK iNST.NO. 70-99958 INBT.NO. TO-09987 IACATiON Sheet 1 of 1 203. 204, 37 2W 3PG 3500, 37 2W 3CP 724 ASSESSOR'S MAP tT4E NO. J7 TW O3C8 tl 7Q0' 37 2µ' 03G TL100. TWIN CREtt~~ ., .--_ located in the SOUTHWEST & SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SEGTION 3, TOWNSHIP 37 SOUTH. WEST. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT JACKSON COUNTY• OREGON RANGE 2 WILLAMETTE MERIRIAN, for 7Y~N CREEKS DEVELOPMENT CO.+ LLC P.O, BOX~REGON 97502 CENTRAL POINT, LOT 5 MI%EO ZONING . OPEN SPACE ~RGAL _ - Eµ yMENY ICAIAUFRCICOIA LOT 6 ZONING .. MEDWM MIX RESIDENTIAL --PROPO`-~ GREEK RELOCATWN Cs ~~ ~ ~~~ k ~{ TAriOR NGNITI' MAP ~ s~~ ENO SCALE) ~ -TOTAL AREA 33,09 ACREA SMALLEST LOT 3.26 ACRES _ A~RAGE LOT 4.82 AGRES NUMBER OF LDTS ~' 6 ..BRASS CARK ELEVAT10NE125325 FT BENCH M ~w,~,,,,, ~ TAX LOT LINES _ THE LARGE LOTS BEING CREATED ARE EXPECTED TO BE REPLATTED AS FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS PLANS ARE SUBMITTED. xBOS,sraB¢D pROFE95I0NAL !?LAND ST3RVEYOR /~o~ ~ zees iFJ8ERT2j y~ RENEWAL DATE 12'37-05 r Surveyed by FARBER & SONS, ING. dba (54R) b54 05599 NG PO BOX TREET 431 OAK S CENTRAL POINT, dREGON 97502 "~"~- scALE: 7• -zoo' zoo' sao' 20D' tOD` 0pPR1412. 2005 OjOg ND.: 0549-9 ni+l~wl aimo t"°u"n W><-A^~u~+i +,,,,we wa Aauanu..a~^""'' am+twwow+°^°°° N ro g N ~_ 5 W v N # n. V Q '7! V 1 ~~ ! a • ,,~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~pO N ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ O s ~ ~ ~G L.I N .yy~ $ X ~ ~g s -~ -~ ~ V o ~ -~ r C o 2 o~ M N ~,e m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ N ~ y C m r -~ ,~ / \ ~ ~~ ~~ i ~~, m C~ JACKSON OAKS PHASE IV ~ \ \~~/_~~ m O O O O ' r r r r r r r r r r r r ~V\'OJ` LOT 25 ~ -~ -~ -~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I y -i -1 -y -d -1 -1 -1 -~ ~ I~ .J-J I ~-W O I~I~I ~I-IN~WI AI ~I p~jl vl ~l J~, t W ~~ ~ ~ - Ti 1_ ~~-~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~ v9c~S I z' ~ ~ R R~ (7m~ 0~09~' Oy I v` ~ ~ NI ~ ~ rn~ 1 ~ Z rn~ Exhibit "C" REVISED -Conditions of Approval Modification to Twin Creeks Crossing, Ph. I Condition No. Descri Lion 1 of 3 Approval of the modified Tentative Plan will supersede the Tentative Plana roved b Resolution No. 654. 2 of 3 Applicant must submit CC & R's for review prior to Final Plata royal. 3 of 3 Prior to final plat approval, applicant agrees to submit a construction traffic map/plan emphasizing the existing construction access points on Scenic Avenue & Grant Road. This map shall be approved by the Public Works Department and Police Department. Approved construction traffic map/plan shall be distributed to home builders and subcontractors. This map should be updated as development occurs or changes in conditions arise. J ATTACHMENT "~" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING TENTATIVE PLAN APPROVAL FORA "SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS TWIN CREEKS CROSSING, PH I", THIS RESOLUTION SUPERSEDES RESOLUTION N0.6S4, APPROVED JUNE 7, 2006. (Applicant (s) :Twin Creeks Development Co., LLC) (37 2W 03C, Tax Lot(s) 100,203 & 204 ) (37 2W 03CB, Tax Lot 100) (37 2W 03CD, Tax Lot 124) (37 2W 3DC, Tax Lot 3300) Recitals 1. Applicant(s) has/have submitted an application for tentative. plan approval for a subdivision known as Twin Creek Crossing, Phase I on 33.49 acres located north of Taylor Road, east of Grant Road and west of Highway 99, in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On, March 7, 2006, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted adult'-noticed public meeting on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Approval Criteria. The requirements for approval of Land partitions and tentative plans are set forth in CPMC Title 16 and 17, relating to informational requirements, zoning, lot dimension, access, and similar requirements. Section 2. Finding and Conclusions. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. Tentative Plan Requirements. The application and tentative plan are in the correct form and contain aIi of the information required by CPMC 16.10. And that this phase is substantially compliant with the Twin Creeks Master Plan B. Area and Width of Lot. This subdivision in an TOD- HMR- High Mix Residential; TOD-EC, Employment Commercial; TOD-OS, Open Space; and TOD-MMR, Medium Mix Residential would create 1 lot consisting of approximately 4.41 acres zoned Medium Mix Residential; 3 lots consisting of approximately 4.49 acres zoned Qpen Space; 2 lots consisting of approximately 3.83 acres zoned Employment Commercial, 7 lots consisting of approximately 13.64 acres zoned High Mix Residential, and 23 lots consisting of approximately .97 acres zoned High Mix Residential: Exhibit "E" - Findings Amendment to Twin Creeks Crossing, Phase I File No. 05050 Code Section Descri Lion 17.65.040 (A) (3) This is the highest density residential zone intended to be near the center of the TOD district. Low Density residential uses are not permitted. Findings: The proposed modification is within the TOD- HMR zoning district and is located near the core of the TOD district. Conclusion: The applicant has met the purpose of the HMR, High Mix Residential zone, and is consistent with the Master Plan. 17.65.050 (E) Dimensional Standards. The dimensional standard for lot size, lot dimensions, building set backs, and building height as specified in Table 2. Findings: The minimum lot width within the HMR district for attached rowhousing is 18'. The minimum lot depth is 50'. Conclusion: All of the lots proposed range in width from 21.5 feet to 35 feet in width, and range in depth from 70.30 - 75.91in depth. The minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet has been met. The applicant has met the minimum width and depth for this zone. The building setbacks and building height will be verified during the building permit review process. ~. A°TTAC~MEN`T " BU[LD[NG DEPARTMENT Lois DeBenedetti, Building Official BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE: 2/02/06 TO: Planning Department Planning file: 05050 FROM: Building Department SUBJECT: Twin Creeks Crossing Name: Twin Creeks Dev.Co. LLC Address: P.O. Box 3577 City: Central Point State: Or. Zip code: 97502 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Southwest and Southeast one quarter of Section 3, Township 37 South, Range 2 West, City of Central Point, Or. (Phase 1) PURPOSE The staff report is to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Applicant regarding City Building Department requirements and conditions to be included in the design and development of the proposed project. This is not a plan review. This report is preliminary and compiled solely for use by the Central Point Planning Commission. 1 9 BUILDING DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: Lois De6enedetti, Building Official 1. Applicant, agent and contractors must comply with all current State of Oregon adopted codes, and apply for all permits through the Central Point Building Department. 2. If a private storm drain system is proposed it must be reviewed and a permit issued by the Central Point Plumbing department. 3. Any private street lighting must be reviewed and permitted by the Central Point Electrical Department. 4. Provide the building department with a Geotechnical report as required by OSSC Appendix J and chapter 18 of the OSSC. A written report of the investigation shall include, but need not be limited to, the following information: a, A plot plan showing the location of all test borings and/or excavations. b. Descriptions and classifications of the materials encountered. c. Elevations of the water table, if encountered. d. Recommendations for foundation type and design criteria, including bearing capacity, provisions to mitigate the effects of expansive soils, provisions to mitigate the effects. of liquefaction and soil strength, and the effects of adjacent loads. e. When expansive soils are present, special provisions shall be provided in the foundation design and construction to safeguard against damage due to expansiveness. Said design shall be based on geotechnical recommendations. 5. Grading/ excavation permits are required in accordance with OSSC Appendix J and chapter 18 and regarding any fill material placed on the site. Fills to be used to support the foundation of any building or structure shall be placed in accordance with accepted engineering practices. 2 ~. ~ BU(LD(NG DEPARTMENT Lois DeBenedetti, Building Official A soil investigation report and a report of satisfactory placement of fill (including special inspections of placement of fill and compaction) acceptable to the Building Official shall be submitted prior to final of the grading/excavation permit. Building permits will not be issued until grading/excavation permit is finalled. Exception: 1. The upper 1. 5 foot of fill placed outside of public rights-of- way. 2. The upper 1.5 foot of fill that does not underlie buildings, structures, or vehicular access ways or parking areas. 6. To move or demolish any existing structures Located on the property call the Building Department for permit requirements. 7. Notify the City Building Department of any existing wells, or septic sys#ems located on the property. 8. Any development (any man-made change) to improved or unimproved real estate located within the flood hazard area of the City of Central Point shall require a Development Permit as set forth in the Central Point Municipal Code 8.24.120. 9. Dust control, and track out elimination procedures must be implemented. 10.Application for building permit will require four sets of complete plans indicating compliance with 2005 Oregon Residential Specialty Code. 11. Fire District 3 will determine fire hydrant location, as well as access to buildings. The International Fire Code (2003) with Oregon Amendments (2004) will be implemented as part of the plan check code requirement for these proposed buildings. 13 ~~ BUILDING DEPARTMENT Lois DeBenedetti, Building Official Any changes proposed shall be submitted in writing by the Applicant, or Applicant's contractor to the Building Department for approval prior to start of work. 4 -4- ~.. - ~~ Attachment "G" Twin Creeks Crossing, Phase 1 Modification City File No. 05050 (continued) Purpose: Staff is responding to written and oral concerns communicated on March 7, 2006 regarding a modification to Twin Creeks Crossing, Phase I application. The concerns/statements are addressed in the order in which they were heard and identified with bullets as follows: • CPMC T/TLE 76 - SUBD/VlS/ONS 16.10.90 -Conditions on tentative plan approval The City may attach to any tentative plan approval given under this chapter specific conditions deemed necessary in the interests of the public health, safety or welfare, including but not limited to the following: Findings: Under subsection "E", the City may impose any other conditions deemed by the City to be reasonable and necessary in the interests of public health, safety or welfare. The Developer and Planning Commission can mutually agree to a specified construction traffic path, however the Planning Commission or Developer does not have the authority to prohibit use of public roads. The City Council does have the authority except as noted below: CPMC TITLE 10 -TRAFFIC REGULATIONS 10.04.20 City Council powers. (5) Streets where trucks, machinery or any other large or heavy vehicles exceeding specified weights are prohibited, except for delivering or picking up materials or merchandise but then only by entering such streets at the intersection nearest the destination of the vehicle and leaving by the shortest route; • The Planning Commission imposed three (3) additional conditions of approval at it's June 7, 2004 meeting for Tentative Plan approval of Grin Oaks, Ph. Ill.: Communication, Signage and Barrier on Griffin Oaks Drive. Findings: At the June 1, 2004 meeting construction traffic concerns were discussed and two additional conditions of approval were attached as follows: Condition # 4: Tentative Plan approval is valid for one year from the Planning Commission approval. Condition # 5: All construction vehicles and workers shall use the Scenic Avenue or Grant Road service accesses. A temporary barrier shall be .. ~ ~_ c~ installed at the intersection of Griffin Oaks Drive and Haskell Street, until City staff and developer determines it is no longer needed to calm traffic. Communication: The issue of communication was not added as a condition of approval, the agent for the applicant stated he would have Twin Creeks speak to the contractors again. In addition, anytime an application comes before the Planning Commission, an update regarding progress of development triggers is discussed. Signage: The developers have had construction traffic access signs posted off of Scenic Avenue and Grant Road, which still remain. Barrier: It was necessary to have a temporary barrier in place on Griffin Oaks Drive, until other road improvements were made and the new roads were "set" and ready to be used. Those improvements were made, and the temporary barrier was removed. There are currently two other barriers in place at both ends of the Griffin Creek Bridge. Haskell Street Bridge is nearing completion leaving a few cosmetic loose ends to wrap up and should be open very soon. Valley Oak Boulevard is a public street, approximately the first 400± feet is classified as a residential collector street, then tapers down to a standard residential street as it moves to the north. • Safety restrictions not enforced. Findings: Speeding of any vehicle would be and has been monitored by the Central Point Police Department. Valley Oak Boulevard is a public street. The City can not prohibit use of public streets. Central Point Municipal Code Book states: 10.04.340 - TRUCK PROHIBITED ON CERTAIN STREETS When the use of certain streets is prohibited to trucks exceeding a specified weight or other classification, no person shall operate a truck on such streets contrary to such prohibition except for the purpose of delivering or picking up materials or merchandise, but then only by entering such streets at'the intersection nearest the destination of the vehicle and leaving by the shortest route. 10.16.020 - TRUCK TRAFFIC AND PARKING PROHIBITIONS (A) It is unlawful to drive or park any vehicle having a gross vehicle weight in excess of twenty thousand pounds upon any public street within the city, with the following exceptions: (3) All service and delivery vehicles on bona fide delivery or service trips on the most convenient and direct route within the city; • Letter to Planning Department dated April 78, 2005. Findings: The letter was received after any hearing regarding Twin Creeks. It was however looked into. On April 27, 2005, Mr. Gerschler received communication from Public Works that the barrier as still in place at that time. • Twin Creeks CC & R's Findings: CC & R's are a civil matter. The City of Central Point does not enforce CC & R's. The City requires copies of CC & R's before they are recorded to ensure that they are not less restrictive than City codes in place at that time. In respect to parking of RV's in front of homes, the Central Point Municipal Code reads as follows: 10.04.112 MOBILE HOME, MOTOR HOME, CAMPER, VAN, CAR OR TRUCK - PROHIBITIONS. {A) No person shall park any mobile home, motor home, van, car, camper, camp trailer, boat or other recreational vehicle, truck or utility trailer: (7) In one location on any portion of any public street or alley for any period longer than seventy-two consecutive hours, except that short-term out of town visitors may park such recreational vehicles for a period not to exceed two weeks in any one calendar year; or (2) In one location on any portion of any public street or alley or in the front setback area of any residential property, when parking in such setback area impairs clear vision for traffic safety. Background on similar conditions to other developments:- Blue Grass Downs: Jackson County Roads commented on this subdivision. Because the subdivision is a county maintained road, the county required the applicant to indicate to the county where the construction access would be located due to weight limits on Gebhard Road. Beebe Woods, PUD: Though this was not a condition of approval, construction access was discussed. The agent/applicant stated that there would be a temporary increase in noise during daylight hours. The developers fully intend to have construction traffic to take access from two existing driveways on Hamrick Road, therefore eliminating the need to have the construction traffic go through the existing, established subdivisions, until the roads within Beebe Woods were completed. This information was discussed voluntarily by the agent, and not a condition of approval. 1.5 Summary: It is the Planning Commission's responsibility to attach conditions deemed necessary in the interests of public health, safety or welfare. The types of conditions that can be imposed are limited by superseding laws. Barriers and blocking of public roads, can only be done by City Council. We can recommend construction traffic take other routes if available, however our code states the shortest route available can be used. Streets within City limits built to code can withstand construction traffic per Public Works. The new Highway 99 Intersection can not be designated as a recommended construction traffic access route. The final design for the crossing is pending approval after working out a variable width ROW issue after taking over jurisdiction over from the State. The City, The Developer's and their agents have taken every measure legally possible to slow down traffic. Posted speeds within a residential zone is 25 mph. We can not prohibit use of public streets. There should be a certain degree of construction traffic expected until full build out is achieved. Recommendation: The developer and shall prepare a recommended construction traffic plan/map. The purpose of this map is advisory only. Prior to final plat approval, the construction traffic plan shall be approved by Public Works and Police Departments. This map should emphasize the existing construction access points at Scenic Avenue and Grant Roads. Approved construction traffic plan shall be distributed to home builders and subcontractors. This map should be updated as development occurs or changes in conditions arise. ~~ STAFF REPt~RT ~~-- ~ENTRAL. POINT STAFF REPORT Apri14, 2006 Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant Clty Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Site Plan Review to allow 3 building industrial park in the Industrial (M-1) Zoning District on Property Identified as Tax Lot 37 2W OlBD, 300,400 and 700; D. and E. Peugh, Applicants (Abeloe & Associates, Agent). STAFF SOURCE: Ken Gerschler, Community Planner BACKGROUND: The applicants received previous approval from Jackson County to construct three buildings in an Industrial development known as "Peugh Industrial Park" (Exhibit "B" Site Plan). During the County approval process, City departments were afforded an opportunity to comment on the development as it is located within the Urban Growth Boundary for Central Point. The property was annexed in 2005 and the applicants are now requesting that the City review the site plan for compliance with the municipal code. The project is comprised of four phases and the applicant intends to construct phases 1 and 2 at this time. Phases 3 and 4 would be reviewed by staff administratively at a future date subject to certain conditions. FINDINGS: The applicant's site plan (Exhibit "A") can adequately address all approval criteria as set forth in Section 17.44.020 provided that issues related to lot lines and easements can be resolved. As a supplement to the findings staff has included by reference, as a condition of approval correspondence Exhibits "D" and «E,~ ISSUES: In considering an approval of this site plan application, the Planning Department identifies that there are four (4) issues worthy of consideration: 1. The application packet includes a recorded access easement that could adversely affect the proposed placement or structure size for new buildings on phases 3 and 4 of the site plan. Planning staff have requested that the project agent provide the City with a map to reflect the location of the easement relative to the building placement. If the easement displaces any of the required off-street parking or trash storage areas, these facilities would need to be placed elsewhere which could result in a decreased building footprint for phases 3 and 4. To address this issue, staff would recommend the following condition: A) The applicant or agent shall provide the City with a map describing the easements identified by Official Record 2005-056012 as recorded at Jackson County. If any of the structures, parking or trash facilities encroaches within the portion of the easement reserved for "roadway", it shall be the obligation of the applicant to relocate these facilities or remedy the Peugh Industrial Park 06025.doc Page 1 of 2 ~~ easement before the City will process building permits. If facilities are modified, a revised site plan shall be submitted and reviewed administratively by City staff. 2. There is an existing structure on the project site to be demolished and a building permit will be required. 3. Phases 3 and 4 show building footprints that conflict with the property lines. A lot line adjustment will be required and shall be completed prior to the City processing building permits on Phases 3 and 4. 4. The landscape plan is not easily readable and appears to be inconsistent with the overall layout of the project site. The City will need a copy of the landscape plan that can be evaluated and a condition has been recommended. EXHIBITS: Exhibit "A" -Site Plan Maps, Aerial Photograph Exhibit "B" -Landscape Plan Exhibit "C" -Applicants Recorded Access Easement Exhibit "D" -Public Works Memorandum Exhibit "E" -Correspondence from Jackson County, RVSS and Fire District Exhibit "F" -Correspondence from RVSS Exhibit "G" -Correspondence from Fire District Exhibit "H" -Planning Department Conditions of Approval Exhibit "I" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. ,approving the Site Plan RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. Peugh Industrial Park 06025.doc Page 2 of 2 1 Q TOI~• }D-NCI v M4y~ 111.,Yr ----------- I L,L~14 A4 14rtawwx I~'^ 7D N~tN YWN1 ~1~"D' b W ~ I ____ tM,d Exlsntrs ~ u" ewtDUrG 8 ~-. f ~ Q ~ ' F ' ~I arj,l~ 8 `~C PHASE I I. ~i [~!~ @ 4 BUILDING ' F I rrv•' „~i_1: 4DTVACK i 4•e DOK LI J I ~~ 9 ' D W~II rr z~dD SK~~S I ~ ~ ~ ____ _ :__;__ __ _ 1 _ _ I o -_- _- '-ID'„i'i ~-~-~ I I1--r ---r----------y - onuTY I I I I i IiAWM+DA4 ( I II I I1 1 I I I I ~ i trlL I s;. ~~~;~ I o I1 I ri I II I iE I I I I ~ i i i I I I I I I ' I I I I 1 i I I I ~ I t l I 1 I I I .~.__-___________-_____-_--_______L_Ll._,___ 34a~1L' YOl14' Ab•/IAI 51TE PLAN PHASEI< II xmx w+n P•.foro r it s, axw, m rve 'Yk~ LoT4 ~~ {w }7rs 19x.bx' II i ii it ~ 1 I 1 1 T 1 4 1 t~~ Q a~~ ~ ~~...~ o < p~ a L ~¢ ~ ~~ ~~ Q ~~~ l C.. I j ' ~ ~ P I - I i I ~ ,D ' ~ I I ~- ~ h ~ ~ rt I I 1 nn Y , I ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ l~ - ~' ~ I DUDW AL DATEYD) . Crt CWN / AbIDIG ~ 1 `~ I -TTAI'INI9ReV FILL44L iIGINL ~_ w ;99~ , I ~b~ox o.~a er t~ Nof<rH ' I/e" -I'-o" b i wr H N ORAWINb STATUS 517E REVIEW DNGGT NJNDGR A510Z v` ., SITE 1(WiPf~iQVEMEP*iT PLANS FOR P~UGH INDUSTRIAL PARK 1 A ~?• 1 „^ u F i_ (~. hII 1.. l I_ r•. ,. ;r ~ ~: '~ ~ ~. ~ ..~ ~. E~. s5 -~"- [~. 5 -~ ~~ E~. 55 I it 1' '1 ij w 1 1 1 ~ l I ~ ~I ~ ~ ~I I I 1 ` ~, ,. 11 ~ Ti n a lil u, i 11 ~I I 1 I ~ 1 !II ~ u 11 r p r g. ~ I. 111 ~~ II ~ ti~ll~ ~ 77 'i I ~ I i 1 ~ ~ ~ I ~ ; ;~ 11~1i -" 11 i I l I~; I Q O Y I , W 1 1; ; ~i A 11 W U O 1 1 I. 1 1 1111 i 1 i. ~~~~ n„ ~ W J a ~ 1 11 W ;{~~ I I 1 I 1+1i I 111 '11 1 I I 1G1 1 1411 # i .' 1 I '111 u `; 11 I 1 11 I I 1 ~I 1i ~ M1 I +I Vt I i 11 ,~; a I.u wl~ i i1 u ' !I 1: ,, i 1 I I j I ; ,.. q11 it is 11 k. i ~1; it i „:,: 1, 1 oI: i '!;~ i 0 C~ INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Map Maker Application Front Coutrter Legend Ta><LotOutlines TS><tot Numbers N JACKSON COUNTY Oregon This map is based on a digital database compiled by Jackson County From a variety of sources. Jackson County canrwt accept responsibily for errors, amissioru, or positional axuracy. There are no wananties, expressed or implied. 100 12:08:50 PM using web.jacksoncounty.org ^ ~ Created with MapMaker 61ap crested on 3Y281 P!e25e recycle wrth colored oT;ice otc62 peps' / .J NYU ~.'.'"°1 z w c, 7 r~ N ~ at-~L / Ft~~ 'c+ G :~ •.5 .J ,:; .: :• y7 7 :t _ i) ..J G :i J J S~: J CJ a c' :~ .>..`~... _7J .,..'~.:J..~......:7..~ v t- J D . ~ to PPF o ~~ ~ ~c•• MP ! 6 ..$ ~ ~~ tih• G L ~j: ~ - NNSl ! ~ Arc R) ooO o ~ (~~ ~ p $ ! ~~L ~ c:;GO~ ~~FG ~A. ! cs ~ ~ 31 / ~~ ~~~ °o ih ~° ,~ ~V 1 ~t 1 .~ ~~ ~' tw 0 . ~° ,. ~ ~C^,~ j l.~. 1.1 ~^ J ~, #.- ~~o N; 7 ~~.~ ~~ ~ ! o+ a~ °~ P o~ o ! ! Il. W~ LPA ~ j iCRO Frr a !~ N~ 1, ;, 1~vea G t,io i C~" ! ° ~/ '! ~°" a. ~ ! '~~ cP ~ o. o ~r.:~ :: ~ ~, !7 C F +~nrvvn,+v~+k 3 Nit P 0 G ~/~~veli- .r i~ r 1 ~~.....~......~.. t ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~ ~ a a i4RF~4 hVCUMBERE BY }1.5'EtiIENT ;NOT ,aua2aB[E /~OR OE'iVEL OPMENT ~ ~ ~r^! .: , > ~- :: Y E ~,~ ~ is t t ! t. .. +.~ ~ ~ t -_~ y ` t. `y L~ _ _. ........_ .. ___...._.. 5 1 ~~~` `l r ,~ ' ~ L t € 'F ~~ t` , ~ yY~ ~t. ~ ~ P C ~ ~.~ ~ ~+ ~ t. . -,„ 5.5.,.,~1 ~+^ j~ ~ Y S ~ fig{ `~'Y` b e ( ~ ~` . _ i ~. ~ ~~ ~-l ~ , `_ :~ 4 .~t M1 q) t~ .t V~I ~ ~•fEf ~~ ~fF ~~ ,,. E~' i;~,' ~..1 E ~_,._. ~w, ~ ~ ° { ;•~ r ~ K F f 6 F '` E. ` ~ #' , E_ ~~ s. { T f ~ ~ tt F~~ FF- z ti i~ s ~ ~~ . k n°` ~~ d" t F. i ,, _ _ t j 4 ,i ~ ~ t ~i ~~~ ~~ € , . /. Jackson County Official Records 200rJ~0 ~~~'~ R-e ~~q !141200511:27.16 AM Cnt=1 Stn=10 AICNZOKlVr' /q~ µ~ AA $25.00 $5.00 X11.00 Totai:$41.00 011418952005D0560120050059 1, Kathleen S. Beckett, County Clerk for Jackson County, Oregon, certify hat the instrument Identified herein was recorded in the Clerk records. Kathleen S. Beckett -County Clerk Type ofi Instrument: GRANT OF ROADWAY EASEMENT (common grantor) Grantor: Dennis O. Peugh and Edith A. Peugh 733 Glenn Way Central Point, Oregon 97502 GRANT OF EASEMENT Dennis O. Peugh and Edith A. Peugh, Grantor, declare, grant, and establish a perpetual and non exctus'sve easement to provide a roadway and utility access over and across real property the Grantor owns, which easement is intended to be appurtenant and to run with the [and. COMMON GRANTOR: Grantor owns in fee simple three contiguous parcels of real property s[tuated [n Jackson County, Oregon: As mare specifica[ty described on attached and incorporated Exhibit A. [Jackson County Assessor's map 372W01 BD, tax lots 400, 300, and 700; (hereafter "Parcels")] EASEMENT DESCRIPTION: The easement here[n granted is for a roadway twenty five (25) feet in width located and of the dimensions set forth in the surveyed description attached and incorporated as Exhibit B. The roadway is intended to provide a means of access, ingress and egress to and from a public roadway for al[ three described Parcels. REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE: At{ casts of installation, maintenance, repair, or relocation ofi the roadway and any common utility access and installation shall be allocated among and shared by the three Parcels in the following percentages, tax lot 400 - 21 %, 300 - 39%, and 704 - 40%. Any utility access which is not to the common benefit of all three Parcels shaft not be shared or allocated expense or cost and all costs. of installation maintenance and repair shat[ be that of the owner so benefited. The allocation shall not create a Iim[tat[on on, Page 1 of 3 pages -Grant of Easement 2 4~ waiver or release by any owner seeking damages or indemnification for intentional or negligent damage to the roadway or easement area by; any other owner or third party. In the event any owner of a Parcel benefited or burdened by this easement faits, refuses, or neglects their repair and ma°sntenance obligation hereunder, the obligation is subject to enforcement under ORS105. eq., or its successor statute. USE OF EASEMENT: The easement shall be used for private roadway and utifit access to the Parcels for all legal uses of said property. Legal uses shall be defined as those uses then and there permitted by the applicable zoning ordinances, including approved conditional uses. tt is intended that the easement area shalt at all times be and remain paved, curbed, and improved to commercial standards. Access and use of the easement and roadway shall not be blocked, prevented, or otherwise interfered with by any owner of the three Parcet 400 is the only Parcel of the three that presently borders a public road and is thereby; servient to Parcels 300 and 700 fior public roadway access, however, the common grantor intends the scope of this easement to include the right of a!I three Parcels to have roadway use and access over and across the entire roadway described in Exhibit B, unless that use is hereafter otherwise agreed, limited or terminated. CROSS tNDEMNIFIDATtON; An owner of an}~ of the three described Parcels ("Indemnitor") shat{ fiuity indemnify and hold harmless each other Owner ("Indemnitee°) from and against any claim, demand, or civil action of the indemnitor's customer, invitee, licensee, or guest for negligent injury or damage related to the roadway or easement area and caused or contributed to by Indemnitor's acts or omissions. PRIORITY: The grant of this easement is prior.to any lien, charge or encumbrance of the described Parcels. REAL PROPERTY TAXES: The owners of each Parcet shalt be solely responsibte. for all "ad valorem" real property taxes assessed against their parcel, including any portion of which is within the described easement. ARBiTRATiON; A1[ disputes, disagreement, claims, and demands arising from or related to this easement, in its broadest.construction, shall be subject to mandatory mediation before any party shall have any right to seek judicial relief or file a civil action. In the event mediation is not successful, for whatever cause or reason, then aIf said disputes sha{I be subject to mandatory and binding arbitration under the rules and procedures then set forth and in use for court annealed arbitration by the Jackson County, State of Oregon Circuit Court, save and except ail owners shall be deemed to have waived their right of "de novo" appeal The arbitrator shall, Page 2 of 3 pages --Grant of Easement ~~ among other powers, have the discretion and the right to award to the prevailing party reasonable attomey fees and costs and the discretion to determine the amount of said attomey fees. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT iN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANN{NG DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY L{MITS ON LAWSUITS AGA{NST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. DATED this la day of ctober 2004. Dennis O. Peugh: Edith A. Peugh: ~? . ~ STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Jackson On this L} day ofd, 2004, personally appeared before me Dennis O. Peugh and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his untary act and eed. oFF~clai. s~,t. . ,o~ NorARY Puezic. onEC~ Notary Public for O ego Mlss~ ~°' t My commission. expires: S ~ a-! --0 t~v Cot~ledlSSION EXPIRES MAY 21, 2006 .. ' STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Jackson ) On this day of c , 2004, personally appeared before me Edith A. Peugh and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be her vol ntary act and deed. OFFI~ SEAT. ~ DiAEL4 Q tEV~rB '~'~~ NorARY Plf$tiC _ oR~oON Notary Public for .ego COMMISSION No.35567T My commission expires: ~~ 21 -~3 IdY COF.ttdISS40N EXPIRES MAY 2i,, 200 ATTACH AND fNCORPORATE EXHIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRiP'T10N OF THREE PARCELS EXHIBIT B - LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT Page 3 of 3 pages -Grant of Easement ~~ Mutual Private Access ~ IItility Casement: T37-2W-O18D TL 300,Q00 & 700 A 36 feet wide "Mutual Private Access & Utility Casement°' over, across and through those tracts described in Document Number 89- 00508, Official Records, Jackson County, Oregon, being situate in the 2~Iorthwest One-Quarter of Section i, Township 37 South, Range 2 West, Willamette Meridian, said County and State, for the benefit of said tracts; Public and Private emergency vehicles shall have the right to use said easement for emergency purposes. Said easement shall be a 36 feet wide strip being 18.0 feet in width on either side of the follow described centerline (Basis of Bearings County Surveyor Filing Number 17376): COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT TRACT DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER $9-00508, OFFICIAL RECORDS, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON; THENCE SOUTH 00°05'43" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 18.13 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°44'20" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 575.43 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TANGENT TO SAID LINE; THENCE WESTERLY, SOUTHWESTERLY A DISTANCE OF 45.63 FEET ALONG THE CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 29.50 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°33'48"; THENCE SOUTH 00°49'28" EAST TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 110.41 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TANGENT. TO SAID LINE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY A DISTANCE OF 45.98 FEET ALONG THE CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 29.50 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89°18'22"; THENCE NORTH 89°52'10" EAST TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 218..19 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TANGENT TO SAID LINE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY A DISTANCE OF 74.64 FEET ALONG THE CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 47.50 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°01'49"; THENCE NORTH 00°09'39" WEST TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 122.49 FEET TO THE END OF TRAVERSE. ~~.~~~ i ~~~0 PQ4~'~aS~~a~a`dL L~~a ~~'~~~~ ~ hibit ~ a~fcoad ~ ~~~~ 1 1 JtkT 1i, Sff'dd ~~a~~ ~ ~.~~~~ r.i Expires 12/31/05 ~~ 4_~~ Bob Pierce, Director Pudic Vt/orks Department ~'4~ Matt Samitore, Development Services :~~~~t P+~L~i~` ~~~~;~ Public Works Department MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: MATT SAMITORE SUBjE CT: PEUGH INDUSTRIAL PARK DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2006 Planning Department: The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the Civil Improvement Drawings for the Peugh Industrial Park submitted by Hardey Engineering in December 2005/3anuary 2006. The plans were submitted when the development was to be built under County jurisdicition. The civil improvements will not change substantialy now that the development is being processed under City standards. The plans are in compliance with Public Works Standards for an Industrial Park. 940 South Third Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 •549.664.3329 ~ Fax 549.664.6384 ~~ MAR/01!2006/WED 10:44 JACKSON COll~~TY PO~~DS FAX No. 541 7`~4 6295 JACKSON COUNTY Roads February 28, 2QQ6 Attention: Lisa Morgan City of Central Pont Planning 115 South Second Street Central point, OR 97502 Roads P, 0011001 ~rlc N(cnteyer, ~~ . Tfaffic &Deve(aprnenY Engineer 200 Mtelope Road While City, Oft 97503 Phone: (541)774-6230 Fa~c (541) 774295 T1IetTl8y81~jaC{Cfi8ti000nfy.QfQ WVnY,JdCk56t1G0Ufily.6t^~ RE: Peugh Industrial Park off Table Rock Road - a county-mainta[ned road. Planning File: 06025. Dear Lisa: Thank you for the oppartun[ty to comment on this application for approval of tha Paugh Industrial Park. The properly is located at 4595, 4611, and 4625 Table Rock Road. Roads and Parks has the following comments: 1. A Commercial Road Approach Permit from Jackson County Roads is required for any new or unproved driveways off Table Rack Road. 2, Utility Permits are required from Roads and Parks for any utility work within the county road right-of--way. 3. The applicant needs to provide a hydraulic report and plan for review and approval by Jackson County Roads. Storm prainage to Table Rock Road is limited to that area current{y draining to the roadside ditch. Please contact Nancy Coates of Jackson County Roads at 774-6261 ar a drainage basin map. 4. After construction, the developer's engineer shall certify that the construction of the controlled storm water release drainage system was constructed per plan. A copy of the certification shall be sent to Jackson County Roads. Sin rel , Eric N[emeyer, PE Traff[c & Development Engineer \EngineerfngidevelopmentlClT(ESICNTRhF7106025.wpd 02!22/2006 12:52 ~~EY 5EW'~~ O~~ ~. ~Pr 4 I~~~ ~ 541°6647171 Rt1S ~ PAGE 05105 ~~~A~~~IVICIV~ tt RQ-C~1E y~-LLElf SEWER_ SER'1+r~CES Locution: 13~ west Vitas Road, Central Point - Mailing Address: P.p. Rox 3130, C.ent~l Ppint,OR 975Q2-U(xl5 Tal. (541 a 6G4-63Q0 or (541) 7794144 FA3~ (Sat)664-7171 www.RVSS•us ,lanuary 5, 2006 Kan Gerschler FAX 664-6384 City of Central Point Planning Department- 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Re: Site Plan review for Peugh Development, File ~ ~ : _~ There is an $ inch sewer main along the East boundary of Tax Lot 700 and the East half of the South boundary of Tax Lot 400. The existing building on Tax Lot 400 is connected to this main line. There is also an 8 inch main line on Table Rock Road with a service stub to Tax I_ot 400. The existing connecfiion must be located and sealed when the building is removed. Sewer service to the new buildings will require connections to the existing main lines. Individual buildings can share service lines provided the services are adequately sized and the buildings are located on the same tax lot. The existing service stubs can be used if they are conveniently located, or new connections to the main line can be made. Each new connection will require a permit from RVS and payment of related development fees. The property is within the NPDES Phase 2 Stormwater Quality management area and musfi comply with relevant stormwater quality guidelines. The applicant must submit a stormwater plan demonstrating compliance with these guidelines.. Feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this project. Sincerely, Carl Tappert, PF District Engineer ~~ ~~~, PY~~. , . ~ y~. February 22, 2006 City of Central Point Planning Fire District #3 comments: Project# 06025 Peugh Industrial Park ATT'ACHMENT' "~~ • I will need to review a larger scale plan to make comments Mark Moran DFM Jackson County Fire District No. 3 8333 Agate Road ~~~~"55jp°~ ~- ~~: White City OR 97503-1075 j ~, (541) 826-7100 (voice) (541) 826-4566 (fax) "An Int"ernationa//yAccredited Fire ©epartment" Internatiot'9, Je 31 ATTACHMENT H PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Peu~h Industrial Park, FILE 06025 CHECK NUMBER DESCRIPTION OF CONDITION BOX 1 of 4 The applicant or agent shall provide the City with a map describing the easements identified by Official Record 2005-056012 as recorded at Jackson County. If any of the structures, parking or trash facilities encroaches within the portion of the easement reserved for "roadway", it shall be the obligation of the applicant to relocate these facilities or remedy the easement before the City will process buildin ermits. 2 of 4 Demolition permits shall be required by the Central Point Building Department for existing buildings proposed for removal. 3 of 4 Phases 3 and 4 show building footprints that conflict with the property lines. A lot line adjustment will be required and shall be completed prior to the City processing building permits on Phases 3 and 4. 4 of 4 A readable copy of the landscape plan shall be provided to the City prior to issuance of a building permit. \\SERVERZILLA\PL\2006 LAND USE FILES\06025 PEUGH INDUSTRIAL PARK ANNEXATION & SP\06025SPRCOA.DOC .e- ATTACHIV(ENT " -' " PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A MULTIPLE PHASE INDUSTRIAL PARK (Applicant (s) : Peugh Industrial Park) (37 2W OlBD Tax Lots 300, 400 and 700) Recitals 1. Applicant(s) has/have submitted applications for site plan on a three (3) parcels with an aggregate total area of 3.33 acres located on property identified by Jackson County as Accounts 10195078, 10195060 and 10195094 in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On, April 4, 2006, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted aduly-noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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 application: A. Chapter 17.48, M-l, Industrial District B. Chapter 17.72, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Section 2. Findin~Land Conclusions. The Planning Commission hereby adopts by reference all findings of fact set forth in the City staff reports, and concludes that, except where addressed in the conditions of approval, the applications and proposal comply with the requirements of the following chapters of the Central Point Municipal Code: A. Chapter 17.48, relating to uses, lot size, lot coverage, setback and building height. B. Chapter 17.72, relating to Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Planning Commission Resolution No. (04/04/2006) :~ Section 3. Conditional Approval. The application for site plan permit herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" attached hereto by reference incorporated herein, imposed under authority of CPMC Chapter 16.36. Passed by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 4~ day of April, 2006. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this day of April, 2006 Planning Commission Chair Planning Commission Resolution No. (04/04/2006) J ~J ~ ~~ , ~~~ .. Planning Department STAFF REPORT ~•s~NTI\l'1L _ Tom Humphrey,AlCP, p~~ NT Community Development Director! Assistant City Administrator STAFF REPORT April 4, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Planning Commission review of tentative subdivision application for a commercial parcel within the C-4, Tourist and Office-Professional Zoning District on property identified as Tax Lot 37 2W 02D, 2100; Bear Bridge LLC, Applicant. (Hoffbuhr and Associates, Agent) STAFF SOURCE: Ken Gerschler, Community Planner BACKGROUND: The subject property is located south of Pine Street and east of Bear Creek in the Layton Business Park This application would create three (3) parcels of land of 0.75, 0.87 and 1.16 acres respectively. Parcel Number 1 will be for the Sonic restaurant for which a building permit has been issued. FINDINGS: Staff finds that the tentative partition is compliant with code subject to the recommended conditions of approval shown below. ISSUES: In considering an approval of this tentative plan approval application, the Planning Department identifies that there are several items worthy of consideration: The Public Works Department is familiar with the project area and the pending Sonic restaurant and has determined that a traffic study will not be required. Traffic movements will be limited as identified in the Public Works Staff report. 2. Jackson County Roads and Parks will require a copy of development plans. 3. A lot line adjustment has been shown between parcel 1 and the adjoining parcel to the west. The Planning Department will require that the applicant file an application to adjust the line before proceeding with the final plat. EXHIBITS Exhibit "A" -Tentative Plat Exhibit "B" -Public Works Department Staff Report Exhibit "C" -Building Department Staff Report Exhibit "D"- Jackson County Roads Correspondence Exhibit "E" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. ~, approving the tentative subdivision. Bear Bridge Partition 06053.doc Page 1 of 2 `~ RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No., subject to the staff reports, correspondence from agencies and the conditions of approval. Bear Bridge Partition 06053.doc Page 2 of 2 ~~ vtGtNt'~ M'°'P ~. .. ~,~ no+°p'O~~ ~~ T~~~xaseoi° ~~[ •~`~~ ~a 4~~ ~ ion Z (~t1>, 0114 of 8~ 11~~• ~dgon '~.al potrrt.. 0 1~ Gity oP fax ~- D uW.~ ~ _- • ~,pnd g't~ ~~for~Ora9°" R '"" ~~~,i ~` cu ~~*rti ~~''"` ~ ~ory f~ tas ~~ SEA y~„G ~~dEord a~°n ~-~~ __.-- _--- ~ _ ---"" ~.~..-- .use -.-" ~/ `{f -'`"~' ... ~R ~vW ~_ .r"- ~- yam ~ ~M ... tr~A/{~ 1 ti`s -"' ' _ ,,~._ . .. .,.--- ` ~~ ~Z~ ~ sm r-~''+, `~ gg,1Q)'~ of i i j ~ pafora= 6~- ~foraf ~~,~~ i b 4 ~ ~ ~_ ~ovictd "'~~ ~~ s ~~ ~° btAtB d d~'~ ~-.'~ axr . . _~~w~ ~ °r'sv M~ ~~ 9'~$(flY~ il'i"19'~#b ~ t5# aan! 19, 2~6 I JArr b4 w ~~~`~ e'"t ''~ .c+ r~~~ ~,a~`Gei 2 ~ ,r~~ ~~ taRAF'NIG 9G~ LE ,.. » M ~I~ w (~~~ l ud+ • ~It. i ParG~~ ~ ~.-~~~L b ~` P~r~~~ 3 5~~a5 ~~ ~.l~~ -„ ""`-- ...---^-w«'~ i~ !"" -,--. ~ ,. Public Works Department ~~~T~.L Pty l NT ~~~~~~ 4°1~TTf~i~1 A~~N 9 LL ~ 99 Bob Pierce, Director Matt Samitore, Dev. Services Coord. PUBLIC WORKSSTAFFREPORT February 16, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Four Lot Subdivision for 37-2W-02D, Tax Lots 2100 Applicant: Bear Bridge, LLC 717 Murphy Road, Medford, OR 97504 Zoning: C-4, Tourist and Office Professional Zoning Traffic: Public Works recently required a Sonic Drive-Thru to update the E. Pine Street Corridor Study to decide on development triggers. This analysis will be conducted this spring. No traffic study is warranted for this development. Existing Infrastructure: All City utilities exist in front of or adjacent to the proposed development. Engineering and Development Plans and Permits: The Central Point Public Works Department is charged with management of the City's infrastructure, including streets, waterworks, and storm water drainage facilities. In general, the Department's "Standard Specifications and Uniform Standard Details for Public Works Construction" shall govern how public facilities are to be constructed. The Developer is encouraged to obtain the latest version of these specifications from the Public Works Department. In general, the plan submittal shall include plan and profile for streets, water, storm drainage and sanitary sewers, storm drainage calculations, storm drainage basin map, erosion control plan, utility and outside agency notifications and approvals. The plan may also include applicable traffic studies, legal descriptions and a traffic control plan. A Public Works Permit will only be issued after the Department Director approves the final construction drawings. After approval, the fees associated with the development will be calculated and attached to the public works permit. All fees are required to be paid in full at the time the Public Works Permit is issued, except Public Works Inspection fees. After project completion during the final plat application process, the Public Works Inspector will calculate the appropriate amount of inspection time to assess the developer. Before the final plat application is processed the developer must pay the relevant inspections fees and bond for any uncompleted improvements (as determined by the Public Works Director). 940 South Third Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3329 ~ Fax 541,664.6384 ~~ Conditions of Approval: 1. Right-of--Way Dedication -Applicant will be required to dedicate thirty feet along the southerly property line of Parcels 2 and 3 for a new east-West Street as is described in the E. Pine Street Corridor Study. 2. Half-Street Improvements - At a time described by the City of Central Point applicants shall build the half street improvements associated with a local street in accordance with Condition #l. A Deferred Improvement Agreement (DIA) will be required to be signed by the applicant prior to the issuance of the final plat. 3. Ri t In/Right-out Movements -The west entrance onto E. Pine Street shall be right-in and right-out only. A raised concrete divider delineating this movement is required to be designed and constructed before the any development occurs for parcels 2 or 3. 140 South Third Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 + 541.664.3321 ~~ Fax 541.664.6384 ~ r~ ,j I F Bl11LDlNG DEPARTMENT Lois DeBenedetti, Building Off`iciaf 8 @ A~~IVI~N~ 6B ~ 99 BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE: 2/02/06 TO: Planning Department Planning file: 06053 FROM: Building Department SUBJECT: Bear Bridge LLC Name: Bear Bridge, LLC Address: 717 Murphy Rd. City: Medford State: Or. Zip code: 97504 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Southwest 1/4 of Section 2 (2D), Township 37 South, Range 2 West, W.M.,City of Central Point, Tax Lot 2100 PURPOSE The staff report is to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Applicant regarding City Building Department requirements and conditions to be included in the design and development of the proposed project. This is not a plan review. This report is preliminary and compiled solely for use by the Central Point Planning Commission. -1- A !9 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CENTRAL __ _ _ POINT Lois DeBenedetti, Building Official A soil investigation report and a report of satisfactory placement of fill (including special inspections of placement of fill and compaction} acceptable to the Building Official shall be submitted prior to final of the grading/excavation permit. Building permits will not be issued until grading/excavation permit is finalled. Exception: 1. The upper 1. 5 foot of fll placed outside of public rights-of- way. 2. The upper 1.5 fioot of f:l! that does not underlie buildings, structures, or vehicular access ways or parking areas. 6. To move or demolish any existing structures located on the property call the Building Department for permit requirements. 7. Notify the City Building Department of any existing wells, or septic systems located on the property. 8. Any development (any man-made change) to improved or unimproved real estate located within the flood hazard area of the City of Central Point shall require a Development Permit as set forth in the Central Point Municipal Code 8.24.120. 9. Dust control, and track out elimination procedures must be implemented. 10.Application for building permits will require four sets of complete plans indicating compliance with 2004 Oregon Structural Specialty Code. 11. Fire District 3 will determine fire hydrant location, as well as access to buildings. The lnternationa! Fire Code (2003) with Oregon Amendments (2004) will be implemented as pact of the plan check code requirement for these proposed buildings. Any changes proposed shall be submitted in writing by the Applicant, or Applicant's contractor to the Building Department for approval prior to start of work, Please. call Guiding Dept. if questions. ~~ BUILDING DEPARTMENT CE[~TRAL Lois DeBenedetti, Building Official __ . _ ..._ . r_____ ._._ __._.. Pa ~ N-r BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: 1. Applicant, agent and contractors must comply with all current State of Oregon adopted codes, and apply for all permits through the Central Point Building Department. 2. If a private storm drain system is proposed it must be reviewed and a permit issued by the Centra( Point Plumbing department. 3. Any private street lighting must be reviewed and permitted by the Central Point Electrical Department. 4. Provide the building department with a Geotechnical report as required by OSSC Appendix J and chapter 18 of the OSSC. A written report of the investigation shat( include, but need not be limited to, the following information: a. A plot plan showing the Eocation of all test borings and/or excavations. b. Descriptions and classifications of the materials encountered. c. Elevations of the water table, if encountered. d. Recommendations for foundation type and design criteria, including bearing capacity, provisions to mitigate the effects of expansive soils, provisions to mitigate the effects of liquefaction and soil strength, and the effects of adjacent loads. e. When expansive soils are present, special provisions shat[ be provided in the foundation design and construction to safeguard against damage due to expansiveness. Said design shall be based on geotechnical recommendations. 5. Grading/ excavation permits are required in accordance with OSSC Appendix J and chapter 18 and regarding any fill material placed on the site. Fills to be used to support the foundation of any building or structure shall be placed in accordance with accepted engineering practices. -2- ~t ~ FEB/02/2006/THti 09:37 Jp,C1~SON COUNTY RO,~DS FAX No, 541 774 6295 P. 001/001 ~~~L'-~~~9Y1~~~ B694 JACKSON COUNTY Roans January 31, 2006 Attention: Lisa iViorgan City of Central Point Planning 115 South Second Street Central Point, OR 97502 RE: Partition off East Pine Street - acounty-maintained road. Planning File: 06053. Dear Lisa: Roads Eric Niamoyor, PE Tic & Dsvelopmcnt Engin~Y 200 Antelope Roed White CRy, OR 97603 Phone: {541) 7yd-6230 Fexx (541)774-6285 niemeyal~)ecksoncaunty.org ~wrw.)acksoncounty.arg Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application for a Land Partifiion. The property is located at 1760 East Pine Street. Roads and Parks has the following comments: 1. ~ The applicant at the time of development shall submit construction drawings to Jackson County Roads and Parks and obtain county permits if required. 2. The applicant shall obtain a road approach permit from Rands and Parlcs far any new or improved road approaches off East Pine Street. We recommend limited shared access where possible on East Pine Street. 3. Please Hate that East Pine Street (County Arterial) has a variable right-of-way. The !average Daily Trafi•tc count was 29,877 as of July 2005 west of Hamrick Road, ~. A north-south connector with a signal is planned east of the Sear CreeK bridge. We would like to see land reserved for the future roadway. 5, We recommend preserving and enhancing the riparian zone with native plants. Sincerely, Eric Niemeyer, PE Traffic & Development Engineer 1.1Engineering\Deve loptnent\CITI ES\CNTRLPT106053.wpd ~~ . ,~ r~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING TENTATIVE PLAN APPROVAL FORA "LAND PARTITION" TO CREATE THREE INDIVIDUAL TAX LOTS FOR COMMERCIAL USE (Applicant (s): Bear Bridge LLC) (37 2W 02D Tax Lot 2100) Recitals 1. Applicant(s) has/have submitted an application for tentative plan approval for a land partition on a 2.78 acre parcel located on property identified by Jackson County as Account 10195953 in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On, April 4th, 2006, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted aduly-noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Approval Criteria. The requirements for approval of land partitions and tentative plans are set forth in CPMC Title 16 and 17, relating to informational requirements, zoning, lot dimension, access, and similar requirements. Section 2. Finding and Conclusions. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. Tentative Plan Requirements. The application and tentative plan are in the correct form and contain all of the information required by CPMC 16.10. B. Area and Width of Lot. This partition in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional district would create 2 individual parcels: All parcels meet the minimum area and width requirements for lots in the C-4, Industrial zone as set forth in CPMC 17.44, and such parcels meet the general requirements for lots contained in CPMC 16.24.050. Planning Commission Resolution No. (04/4/2006) Q ~. Section 3. Conditional Approval. The application for tentative plan for land partition herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" attached hereto by reference incorporated herein, imposed under authority of CPMC Chapter 16.36. Passed by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 4~' day of April, 2006. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 4~ day of April, 2006. Planning Commission Chair Planning Commission Resolution No. (04/4/2006) ~~ Planning Department STAFF REPORT ~E~~R.181~.,.._ __ _. TomHUmphrey,AiCP, PA1 NT Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator STAFF REPORT Apri14, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: Site Plan Review to allow 60 foot high telecommunications monopole in the Commercial (C-4) Zoning District on Property Identified as Tax Lot 37 2W 02D, 1201; US Cellular, Applicant. STAFF SOURCE: Ken Gerschler, Community Planner BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing the installation of a 60 foot high monopole that will allow additional cellular phone capacity to the community (Exhibit "B" Site Plan). Telecommunications facilities such as this are listed as a permitted use in the C-4, Tourist and Office District [Section 17.44.030(A)] provided that the structure not exceed 60 feet in height. FINDINGS: The applicant's plan packet (Exhibit "A") adequately address all approval criteria as set forth in Section 17.44.020. As a supplement to the findings staff has included by reference, as a condition of approval correspondence Exhibits "D" and "E". ISSUES: In considering an approval of this site plan application, the Planning Department identifies that there are three (3) issues worthy of consideration: 1. Does the proposed site plan application meet the requirements outlined in the municipal code? Based upon the site plan the project meets the requirements for the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District. The Planning Department has worked with the applicants in developing a suitable landscape plan that will include adequate irrigation to the shrubs that are to be located outside the 6 foot high security fence. The site is located approximately 12 feet from the rear lot line which abuts another C-4 zoned lot. If the site is developed as proposed, less the barbed wire fence, (see Condition 2, Exhibit "E") the project will comply with the applicable regulations of the zoning code. 2. Are there other design issues to be addressed as a part of the approval process? In previous applications for telecommunication towers, the Planning Commission required that the structures be painted a tan color which makes the facility blend with the surroundings as opposed to the bare and shiny stainless steel poles that exist in other communities. While the Federal Aviation Administration requires that telecommunications facilities over 100 feet in height have a navigational beacon, some providers voluntarily install the beacons at lower US Cellular Monopole 06072.doc Page 1 of 2 structure heights. The Planning Department has included conditions to paint the pole and omit any navigational beacon unless the device is required bylaw. 3. Does this proposal meet the flood prevention regulations since the proposed structure is near Mingus Creek? The Public Works Department originally requested a denial of the site plan based on the project proximity within the 25 foot riparian setback described in Chapter 17.60. The applicant has since revised the site plan to bring the structure into compliance. EXHIBITS: Exhibit "A" -Site Plan Map Exhibit "B" -Elevations Exhibit "C" -Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" -Public Works Memorandum Exhibit "E" -Planning Department Conditions of Approval Exhibit "F" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. ,approving the Site Plan RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. US Cellular Monopole 06072.doc Page 2 of 2 A F69 r ti Legal Description Commencing at tfia southwest corner of Lot 3 as shown an the survey filed as CS 17065, In Jackson County, Oregon; thence North 83°25'42" East, 293.25 feet to the no heast corner of a existing concrete block wall, for the true poirR of beginning; thence South 00°40'00" East, along said block wail, 18.00 feet; thence North 89°20'00" East 16.00 feet; thence North 00°40'60" West 18.00 feet; t thence South 89°20'00" West 16.00 feat to the We point of beginning. Containing 288 square feat of land, more or less. Basis of Bearings Filed Survey # 17065 Statement of Accuracy This is to certify that the center of the proposed site shown hereon has the following geographic location: Latitude: N 42°22'32.8" (NAD83) Longitude: W 122°54'21.5" (NAD83) Accurate to within fifty {50'j feet Ground Elevation: 1272 feet (NAND 88) _/' Accurate to within twenty [20'j fe~ / Location dete~d static GPS procedur REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON JuIY 18, 199A WILLIAM 65COLISGH RENEWS 12j31/05 " SITE PLAN Located in SE 1/4 of Section 2 T37S, R2W, W.M. Jackson County, Oregon for US CellulaC b / ~ Mountain View Plaza -~' 9404 Sit , e ~ January, 2006 / / / rn c / '~ / "x / W " ,~ \ \ Q \ ~ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~~47~ 16.00' ` \ \ \ i 89'20'00" g \ \ \ \ \ ~ SCALE 1"=10' ~~ 0 10 \ \ ~ ~ Permanent Access Easement ~ ~ o \ ~ ~ \ \ \ \ per OR 98-39000 3 ~ o f w\ \ \ \ o o a / Proposed o o \ \ \ \ \ \\\ ~\ ~ ~ ~ ~ .ease Site ° ~ ~ ow rOO f ~~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ --- -- J w , s.oo' J ~ f ~ 1~ 15' PUE ~ 37-2W-020 Tax Lot 1201 I r NEW US CELLULAR - PANEL ANTENNAS v NEW 60' MONOPOLE BARBED WIRE FENCE PROHIBITED PER CPMC 17.57.040 (a) NEW FENCE NEW BTS CABINETS NEW ELCTRIC METER (E) TRASH ENCLOSURE BEYOND (E) SHRUBS ,.~~.~:. ... ~ '~.1..; i. L..., _':?.;::.i ~. i _.. GRADE • TITLE MOUNTAIN VIEW PLAZA 111' ~e ~~' US ANTENNA SITE . ll . EAST ELEVATION REF. A, ,/s° _ ,'-o^ ELEVATIONS _ No. REVISIONS DATE 8Y SCALE SHOWN DWG. NO. TO S T 3 23 O6 DJF MEIER Enterprises, It1C. 800-3322344 E SHIF TED SITE OU H DRAWN DJF 2 BUSINESS DAYS D ADDE D GROUNDING PLAN 3/03/06 DJF w~.me~dnc.~m APPROVED AZ BEFORE YOU DIG C ISSU ED FOR CONSTRUCTION 2/27/06 DJF 8697 Goge Boulevard Kennewick, WA 99336 783 5075 1589 fax 509 h 509 735 DATE 2/24/06 B ISSU ED FOR APPROVAL 2 27 O6 DJF . . one . . p JOB N0. 4840.0 9S? i~ ~~ i~ ~~i (E~ ACCESS ROAD ~,~~,,, ,~~~ ~' (E) pvBltG ROAD -~' Ep,SEMENT ~~ ,- ~,, ,- ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~- 'ter ~ ~ ~~y ,~ 9 ~~ ~ ~'F ~~' ~~ti ~y ,tip ~~, ~~~ ~~~~. {E) ca~~~~•~ g~,pCtC .TRASH ENCLOSURE ~~ 3 ~ } 2.b' l N89~ uNE 1 t~_ ~ t ~ ~u.s~ ` ~Rd W c ` ~ b~ 1 sa~•z~ ~~w ~~.~'~ ~,sE uN~,~.~,-~--- LA~DS~A`~E -~gA`VVII~G wry,- ~~ , 4 ~~ ~, -~~ ~~ ~~~ _~ ~~ ~ ~``, '~t5 i ~4 1 p~~CENNE'4 SITE, A1'1'ACHMENI" " ~ '~ ,,:,~, Public Works De artment Bob Pierce, Director p Chris Clayton, Deputy Director -- -- ----- ---- CENTRAL - - ----_ __---- -- -- __ - --.- POI NT Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPT. AND MATT SAMITORE FROM: DAVE ARKENS SUBJECT: PROPOSED CELL TOWER AT MOUNTAIN VIEW PLAZA (FOLLOI~ UP MEMO) DATE: MARCH 23, 2006 (3:30 P.M.) The applicants and I discussed the earlier memo at the counter for a short time and then I met Stephen Schanck and Allen R. Potter at the site. We staked out the 25' top-of--bank setback area along Mingus Creek and Mr. Schanck decided to move the tower and the cabinet boxes to the southeast corner of the current block wall. In this location the proposed site will be out of the 25' top-of--back setback area and out of the floodway area. The site will still be in the Special Flood Hazard Area and should be built to floodplain standards per building department requirements. The side setback from the southern property line should be 10' or better. A new site plan will be submitted with the changes mentioned above. With the new site plan the issues mentioned in the earlier memo will be resolved. The Base Flood Elevation (BFE) at that location is 1261.00 and is taken from the NHC Mingus Creek Work Study Map dated 01/07/2004. 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ®541.664.3321 ~ Fax 541.664.6384 i:: ~-~ ATTACHMENT E PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL US Cellular Monopole. FILE 06072 CHECK NUMBER llESCRIPTION OF CONDITION BOX 1 of 3 The applicant shall ensure that the landscaping plan includes shrubs that are an acceptable size at time of planting and that the irrigation is suitable. The elevations provided to the Planning Commission show the hedge shrubs as full in stature at approximately 4 feet in hei ht. 2 of 3 Barbed wire is prohibited within the City and shall not be included in the proposed fence. 3 of 3 The monopole shall be painted tan and no navigational beacon shall be installed unless required bylaw. \\SERVERZILLA\PL\2006 LAND USE FILES\06072 US CELLULAR SITE PLAN(MT. VIEW PLAZA)\06072SPRCOA.DOC ~i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FORA 60 FOOT HIGH TELECOMMUNICATIONS MONOPOLE (Applicant (s) : US Cellular) (37 2W OZD Tax Lot 1201) Recitals 1. Applicant(s) has/have submitted application for site plan on a 1.70 acre parcel located on property identified by Jackson County as Account 10940113 in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On, April 4, 2006, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted aduly-noticed public meeting on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff reports and heard testimony and comments on the application. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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 application: A. Chapter 17.44, C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District B. Chapter 17.72, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Section 2. Finding and Conclusions. The Planning Commission hereby adopts by reference all findings of fact set forth in the City staff reports, and concludes that, except where addressed in the conditions of approval, the applications and proposal comply with the requirements of the following chapters of the Central Point Municipal Code: A. Chapter 17.44, relating to uses, lot size, lot coverage, setback and building height. B. Chapter 17.72, relating to Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval Planning Commission Resolution No. (04/04/2006) v ,• Section 3. Conditional Approval. The applications for site plan and conditional use permit herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" attached hereto by reference incorporated herein, imposed under authority of CPMC Chapter 17.76. Passed by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 4~ day of April, 2006. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 4~' day of April, 2006. Planning Commission Chair Planning Commission Resolution No. (04/04/2006) ~~ City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Tliird Si., Central Paint, Qr 97502 541.664.3321 fax 541..664.&384 wvaw.ci.cent ra i-poi nto rus -'~~"'. ~~~ L ~~,.:~. ~,~ .~..>> CENTRA.L~_. P01NT STAFF REPORT April 4, 2006 Planning Department Tom Numpi~rey,AKP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator ITEM: Consideration of amendments to Title 1.24 and Title 17 of the City Code, City of Central Point, Applicant. STAFF SOURCE: Don Burt, AICP, EDFP BACKGROUND: The City's procedural codes for conducting public hearings and classifying procedures applicable to different types of land use applications needs to be updated, particularly with regard to the procedural distinction between legislative, quasi judicial; and administrative actions. The proposed amendments address procedural issues only, and do not alter, or otherwise modify existing development standards of the Code. 1. Title 1 General Provisions, Section 1.24 Public Hearing Procedures The Public Hearing Procedures set forth in Section 1.24 do not distinguish between legislative and quasi judicial hearing and appeal requirements. The proposal is to eliminate this section of the City's code and replace it with Section 17.05 Applications and Types of Review Procedures. 2. Section 17.05 Applications and Types of Review Procedures Summary: Identifies types of applications and the review procedures that apply to each application type. As proposed there are four (4) procedural types as follows: a. Type I -Administrative. Requires action by Community Development Director or designee. Decision cannot be appealed. These are non-interpretive and non- discretionary applications of the Code, i.e. home occupations, lot line adjustments. b. Type II -Administrative. Requires action by the Community Development Director. Director's decision can be appealed to Planning Commission. Examples of Type II applications include; minor partition, site plan review. c. Type III -Quasi-Judicial. Requires action by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission decision can be appealed to City Council. Examples of Type III applications include; TOD review, subdivisions, zone change. Page 1 of 3 .~ ~. 5 ~ d. Type IV -Legislative. Requires final action by the City Council after recommendation by the Planning Commission. Can be appealed to LUBA. Examples of Type IV applications include; annexations, code amendments. Each procedural type describes the application, hearing, and appeal process. Table I7.OS.01 illustrates by land use application the applicable procedural type. Pros: This amendment updates all procedural requirements to comply with land use decision procedures as set forth in ORS. Cons: None. 3, Section 17.09 Modifications to Approved Plans and Conditions of Approval Sunznzazy: Currently the Code does not have provisions addressing requests to modify previously approved conditions of approval. The addition of this section provides such request. Pros: Provides a procedure to amend previously approved plans and related conditions. Cons: None. 4. Section 17.10 Zoning Map and Text Amendments Summary: Replaces Section 17.88. The proposed amendment follows similar provisions as the replaced code section. Pros: Aligns the procedural requirements in the proposed Section 17.04 with amendments to the zoning map and ordinance. Cons: None. 5. Section 17.11 Code Interpretations Summary: The proposed amendment formalizes the limits of code interpretations by the Community Director and staff. Pros: Recognizes, authorizes, and tracks code interpretations. Cons: None 6, Section 17.13 Exceptions to Code Standards Sunznzary: Replaces Section 17.80 Variances. The proposed modifications provide for three (3) variance classification (A , B, & C). Class A allows the Director to grant variances to setbacks (10%), lot coverage (S%), and landscape area requirements (S%). This is very similar to the Minor Variance in the current code, with the exception that it specifically identifies areas of application. Class B allows the Planning Commission to grant variances to certain prescribed development standards, and Class C is the typical variance to any other request that falls outside Class A & B. Page 2 of 3 ~~ Pt•os: The proposed atnendmetzt provides additional flexibility in the administration of zoning standards, while maintaining the intent of the City's land development regulations Cons: None. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1 ACTION: Consideration of proposed amendments and recommendation to the City Council RECOMMENDATION: Forward proposed amends as presented, or amended, to the City Council with a recommendation for approval. Page 3 of 3 ~~ City of Central Point Notice of Public Hearing Publication Dates: March 24th & March 31ST, 2006 Meeting Dates: Tuesday, Apri14, 2006 -Planning Commission Thursday, Apri113th, 2006 -City Council Times: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Place: Central Point City Hall Council Chambers This is public notice that the Planning Commission will be considering a legislative Land Use Regulation amendment and creating a new Land Use Regulation. On April 4, 2006, the Planning Commission will formulate a recommendation for the City Council to review on April 13th, 2006. PURPOSE: To delete the following sections from the Central Point Municipal Code: Section 1.24 -Public Hearing Procedures Section 17.80 -Variances Section 17.88 -Amendments And to replace the above sections with the proposed sections listed: Section 17.05 -Applications and Types of Review Procedures Section 17.09 -Modifications of Approved Plans & Conditions of Approval Section 17.10 -Zoning Map and Text Amendments Section 17.11- Code Interpretations; and Section 17.13 -Exceptions to Code Standards In accordance with ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter 660 -Division 18 and SB 543, effective on June 30,1999, proper Notice of this proposed amendment was filed with DLCD on February 14, 2006. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned legislative land use amendment may submit written comments until the close of the public portion of the meeting scheduled on April 4, 2006 for the Planning Commission and until the close of the public portion of the meeting scheduled on April 13th, 2006 for the City Council meeting. 2. Written comments maybe sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, Planning Department at 140 S. Third Street, Central Point, Oregon 97502 or by email to lisam@ci.central-point.or.us. ~Q 3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal in this matter 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 & City Council. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon are available for public review at City Ha11,140 S. Third Street, Central Point, Oregon 97502 or by visiting our website at www.ci.central-point.or.us under Public Notices. Copies of same can be purchased at City Hall for 15 cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at (541) 664-3321 ext 291. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE: At the April 4, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission will review the amendments, technical staff reports, hear arguments if any on the proposal and make a recommendation to the City Council. At the Apri113fh, 2006 meeting, the City Council will review the amendments, technical staff reports, hear arguments if any on the proposal and consider the Planning Commission's recommendations. At the conclusion of the review the Council may approve, modify or deny the amendments. ~~ City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St., Central Point, or 47502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.ci.central-point.or.us MEMORANDUM Planning Department Tom Humphrey,AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DON BURT, AICP EDFP Planning Manager SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENTS, ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES DATE: March 7, 2006 Attached is a draft of changes to the administrative procedures in the City's Code. The changes replace/modify the following chapters: The purpose of these amendments is to update the City's procedural requirements for various land use actions, particularly as pertains to the public notification process. Consideration of the attached amendments is scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission at the April 4, 2006 meeting. ~n CHAPTER 17.05 Applications and Types of Review Procedures CHAPTER 17.09 Modifications to Approved Plans and Conditions of Approval CHAPTER 17.10 Zoning Map and Text Amendments CHAPTER 17.11 Code Interpretations CHAPTER 17.13 Exceptions to Code Standards CHAPTER 17.05 Applications and Types of Review Procedures Sections: 17.05.100. Purpose and Applicability of Review Procedures 17.05.200 Type I Procedure 17.05.300 Type II Procedure 17.05.400 Type III Procedure 17.05.500 Type IV Procedure 17.05.600 General Provisions Applicable to All Reviews 17.05.700 Special Procedures -Expedited Land Divisions, 17.05.900 Traffic Impact Studies 17.05.100 Purpose and Applicability of Reviefv Procedures A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard decision-making procedures that will enable the City, the applicant, and the public to review applications and participate in the local decision-making process in a timely and effective way. Table 17.05.1 provides a key for determining the review procedure and the decision-making body for particular approvals. B. Applicability of Review Procedures. All land use and development permit applications and approvals, except building permits, shall be decided by using the procedures contained in this chapter. The procedure "type" assigned to each application governs the decision-making process for that permit or approval. There are four types of permit/approval procedures: Type I, II, III, and 1V. These procedures are described in subsections 1-4 below. Table 17.05.1. lists all of the City's land use and development approvals and their required review procedure(s). 1. Type I Procedure (Administrative). Type I decisions are made by the Community Development Director or designee without public notice and without a public hearing. The Type I procedure is used when there are clear and objective approval criteria and applying City standards and criteria requires no use of discretion; 2. Type II Procedure (Administrative. Type II decisions involve limited discretion and are made by the Community Development Director or designee with public notice, and an opportunity for a public hearing if appealed. The appeal of a Type II decision is heard by the Planning Commission, which makes the City's final decision. 3. Type III Procedure (Quasi-Judicial). Type III decisions are made by the Planning Commission after a public hearing, with appeals reviewed by the City Council. Type III decisions generally use discretionary approval criteria. City of Central Point Page 1 of 42 Land Development Code 4. Type IV Procedure (Le isles ativel. Type N procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementatiozl ofpublic policy (e.g., adoption of land use regulations zone changes, and comprehensive plan amendments that apply to entire districts, rather than just one property). Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council. Approvals* .~• Review Procedures ~ Applicable Regulations Annexation Type IV Chapter 1.20 Code Interpretation Type II Chapter 17.11 Code Amendment Type IV Chapter 17.10 Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Type IV Chapter 17.96 Conditional Use Permit Type III Chapter 17.76 Home Occupation Type I Chapter 17.60.190 Planned Unit Development Type III Chapter 17.68 Modification to Approval Minor Major Type II T e III Chapter 17.09 Cha ter 17.09 Plan Amendment or Zone Change - Quasi-Judicial - Legislative Type III Type IV Chapter 17.12.30 Chapter 17.96 Property Line Adjustments and Lot Consolidations Type I Transit Oriented DistrictlCorridor Review Type III Chapter 17.66 Non-Conforming Use Type II Chapter 17.56 Partition Tentative Plan Finat Plat TypelI T e It Chapter 16.36 Gha ter 16.12 Land Use Review Type I Site Plan, Landscaping and Constnrction Plan Review Type II Chapter 17.72 Subdivision Tentative Plan Final Plat Type III T e II Chapter 16.10 Cho ter 16.12 Right-of--Way Vacation Type IV Chapter 12.28.020 Tree Removal Type II Chapter 12.36 Variance Type II or III Chapter 17.13 Zoning, Major Zoning, Minor Type III Type II Chapter 17.80.10 Chapter 17.80.20 Subdivisions, Major Subdivisions, Minor Type III Type II Chapter 17.13 Chapter 17.13. Conversion Plan Review Type II Chapter 16.32 Uncategorized Decision Type II * An applicant maybe required to obtain approvals from other agencies, such as the Oregon Department of Transportation, or Rogue Valley Sewer. The City may notify agencies of applications that may affect their facilities or services. City of Central Point Land Development Code ~~ Page Z of 42 17.05.200 Type I Procedure (Administrative). A. Application Requirements. 1. Application Forms. Type I applications shall be made on forms provided by the Planning Department. 2. Application Requirements. Type I applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; and c. Be filed with the required fee. B. Administrative Decision Requirements. The Community Development Director's or designee's decision shall address all of the approval criteria. Based on the criteria and the facts contained within the record, the Community Development Director shall approve or deny the requested permit or action. A written record of the decision shall be provided to the applicant and kept on file at City Hall. C. Final Decision. A Type I decision is the final decision of the City and may not be appealed further. D. Effective Date. A Type I decision is final on the date it is made. 17.05.300 Type II Procedure (Administrative). A. Pre-application Conference. Apre-application conference is optional for Type II reviews. (Pre-application conference requirements and procedures are found in Section 17.05.600(C).) B. Application Requirements. 1. Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the Planning Department. 2. Submittal Information. The application shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Include a narrative statement that explains how the application satisfies each of the relevant criteria and standards in sufficient detail for review and decision-making. Note: additional information may be required under the specific applicable requirements for each approval as referenced in Table 17.05,1; City of Central Point Land Development Code ~~ Page 3 of 42 c. Include one set ofpre-addressed mailing labels for all real property owners of record who will receive a notice of the application as required in Section 17.05.300(C). The records of the Jackson County Assessor's Office are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall produce the notice list using the most current Jackson County Assessor's real property assessment records to produce the notice list. The City shall mail the notice of application; and d. Be accompanied by the required fee. C. Notice of Application for Tvpe II Administrative Decision. 1. Before making a Type II Administrative Decision, the Community Development Director or designee shall mail notice to: a. All owners of record of real property within a minimum of 100 feet of the subject site; b. All City-recognized neighborhood groups or associations whose boundaries include the site; c. Any person who submits a written request to receive a notice; and d. Any governmental agency that is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City. The City may notify other affected agencies. The City shall notify the County or ODOT, and the rail authority, when there is a proposed development abutting or within 100 feet of an affected transportation facility and allow the agency to review, comment on, and suggest conditions of approval for the application. 2. The purpose of the notice is to give nearby property owners and other interested people the opportunity to submit written comments about the application before the Type II decision is made. The goal of this notice is to invite affected persons to participate early in the decision- makingprocess. 3. Notice of a pending Type II Administrative Decision shall: a. Provide a 14-day period for submitting written comments before a decision is made on the permit; b. List the relevant approval criteria by name and number of code sections; c. State the place, date and time the comments are due, and the person to whom the comments should be addressed; d. Include the name and telephone number of a contact person regarding the Administrative Decision; City of Central Point Land Development Code ~~ Page 4 of 42 e. Describe proposal and identify the specific permits or approvals requested; f. Describe the street address or other easily understandable reference to the location of the site; g. State that, if any person fails to address the relevant approval criteria with enough detail, they may not be able to appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue and that only comments on relevant approval criteria are considered relevant evidence; h. State that all evidence relied upon by the Community Development Director or designee to make this decision is in the public record, available for public review. Copies of this evidence maybe obtained at a reasonable cost from the City; i. State that, after the comment period closes, the Community Development Director or designee shall issue a Type II Administrative Decision, and that the decision shall be mailed to the applicant and to anyone else who submitted written comments or who is otherwise legally entitled to notice; Contain the following notice: "Notice to mortgagee, lien holder, vendor, or seller: The City of Central Point Land Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the purchaser." D. Administrative Decision Requirements. The Community Development Director or designee shall make a Type II written decision addressing all of the relevant approval criteria and standards. Based upon the criteria and standards, and the facts contained within the record, the Community Development Director or designee shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the requested permit or action. In some circumstances, a Type II application may be referred to a Type III procedure. When such a referral is made, the application shall be processed as a Type III application, including the requirements for a hearing, notice of decision, E. Notice of Decision. 1. Within five days after the Community Development Director or designee signs the decision, a Notice of Decision shall be sent by mail to: a. The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site that is the subject of the application; b. Any person who submited a written request to receive notice, or provides comments during the application-review period; c. Any City-recognized neighborhood group or association whose boundaries include the site; and City of Central Point Page 5 of 42 Land Development Code ~' d. Any governmental agency that is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City, and other agencies that were notified or provided comments during the application review period. 2. The Community Development Director or designee shall cause an affidavit of mailing the notice to be prepared and made a part of the file. The affidavit shall show the date the notice was mailed and shall demonstrate that the notice was mailed to the parties above and was mailed within the time required by law. 3. The Type II Notice of Decision shall contain: a. A description of the applicant's proposal and the City's decision on the proposal (i.e., may be a summary); b. The address or other geographic description of the property proposed for development, including a map of the property in relation to the surrounding area, where applicable; c. A statement of where the City's decision maybe obtained; d. The date the decision shall become final, unless appealed; e. A statement that all persons entitled to notice may appeal the decision; and £ A statement briefly explaining how to file an appeal, the deadline for filing an appeal, and where to obtain further information concerning the appeal process. F. Final Decision and Effective Date. A Type II administrative decision is final for purposes of appeal, when it is mailed by the City. A Type II administrative decision is effective on the day after the appeal period expires. If an appeal is filed, the decision is effective when the appeal is decided. G. Appeal.. A Type II administrative decision maybe appealed to the Planning Commission as follows: Who may appeal. The following people have legal standing to appeal a Type II Administrative Decision: a. The applicant or owner of the subject property; b. Any person who was entitled to written notice of the Type II administrative decision; c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments. 2. Appeal filing_procedure. City of Central Point Page 6 of 42 Land Development Code ~? a. Notice of appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 1, above, may appeal a Type II Administrative Decision by filing a Notice of Appeal according to the following procedures; b. Time for filing. A Notice of Appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director or designee within 14 days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed; c. Content of notice of appeal. The Notice of Appeal shall contain: (1) An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision; (2) A statement demonstrating the person filing the Notice of Appeal has standing to appeal; (3) A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal; (4) If the appellant is not the applicant, a statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the comment period; and (5) The applicable filing fee. 3. Scope of appeal. The appeal of a Type II Administrative Decision by a person with standing shall be a hearing before the Planning Commission. The appeal shall be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the Type II administrative review. 4. Appeal procedures. Type III notice, hearing procedures and decision process shall also be used for all Type II Administrative Appeals, as provided in Sections 17.05.400(C - E); S. Final Decision. The decision of the Planning Commission regarding an appeal of a Type II Administrative Decision is the final decision of the City. 17.05.400 Type III Procedure (Quasi-Judicial). A. Pre-application Conference. Apre-application conference is required for all Type III applications. The requirements and procedures for apre-application conference are described in Section 17.05.600(C}, B. Application Requirements. 1. Application forms. Type III applications shall be made on forms provided by the Community Development Director or designee; however, if a Type II application is referred City of Central Point Page 7 of 42 Land Development Code ~ ~ to a Type III hearing, either voluntarily by the applicant or staff, or upon appeal, no new application is required. 2. Submittal Information. When a Type III application i.s required, it shall: a, Include the information requested on the application form; b. Be filed with one copy of a narrative statement that explains how the application satisfies each and all of the relevant criteria and standards in sufficient detail for review and decision-making. Note: additional information may be required under the specific applicable regulations for each approval as referenced in Table 17.05.1; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; and d. Include one set ofpre-addressed mailing labels for all real property owners of record who will receive a notice of the application as required in Section 17.05.400(C)(1)(a)(1), (2), (4) and (5). The records of the Jackson County Assessor's Office are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall produce the notice list using the most current Jackson County Assessor's real property assessment records to produce the notice list. The City shall mail the notice of application. C. Notice of Aearin~. 1. Mailed notice. The City shall mail the notice of the Type III action. The records of the Jackson County Assessor's Off ce shall be the official records for determining ownership. Notice of a Type III application hearing or Type II appeal hearing shall be given by the Community Development Director or designee in the following manner: a. At least 20 days before the hearing date, notice shall be mailed to: (1) The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the property that is the subject of the application; (2) All property owners of record within 100 feet of the site; (3) Any governmental agency that is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City. The City may notify other affected agencies. The City shall notify the road authority, and rail authority and owner, when there is a proposed development abutting or affecting their transportation facility and allow the agency to review, comment on, and suggest conditions of approval for the application. (4) Owners of airports in the vicinity shall be notified of a proposed zone change in accordance with ORS 227.175; City of Central Point Land Development Code Page 8 of 42 A Fl (5) Any neighborhood or community organization recognized by the City Council and whose boundaries include the property proposed for development; (6) Any person who submits a written request to receive notice; (7) For appeals, the appellant and all persons who provided testimony in the original decision; and (8) For a land use district change affecting a manufactured home or mobile home park, all mailing addresses within the park, in accordance with ORS 227.175. b. The Community Development Director or designee shall prepare an affidavit of notice and the affidavit shall be made a part of the file. The affidavit shall state the date that the notice was mailed to the persons who were sent notice. c. At least 14 business days before the hearing, notice of the hearing shall be printed in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. The newspaper's affidavit of publication of the notice shall be made part of the administrative record. 2. Content of Notice. Notice of appeal of a Type II Administrative decision or notice of a Type III hearing to be mailed and published per Subsection 1 above shall contain the following information: a. The nature of the application and the proposed land use or uses that could be authorized for the property; b. The applicable criteria and standards from the development code(s) that apply to the application; c. The street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property; d. The date, time, and location of the public hearing; e. A statement that the failure to raise an issue in person, or in writing at the hearing, or failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, means that an appeal based on that issue cannot be raised at the State Land Use Board of Appeals; f. The name of a City representative to contact and the telephone number where additional information on the application maybe obtained; g. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence submitted by or for the applicant, and the applicable criteria and standards can be reviewed at City of Central Point City Hall at no cost and that copies shall be provided at a reasonable cost; City of Central Point Page 9 of 42 Land Development Code h. A statement that a copy of the City's staff report and recommendation to the hearings body shall be available for review at no cost at least seven days before the hearing, and that a copy shall be provided on request at a reasonable cost; I. A general explanation of the requirements to submit testimony, and the procedure for conducting public hearings; and j. The following notice: "Notice to mortgagee, lien holder, vendor, or seller: The City of Central Point Land Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the purchaser." D. Conduct of the Public Hearin. 1. At the commencement of the hearing, the hearings body shall state to those in attendance: a. The applicable approval criteria and standards that apply to the application or appeal; b. A statement that testimony and evidence shall directed at the approval criteria described in the staff report, or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or land use regulations that the person testifying believes to apply to the decision; c. A statement that failure to raise an issue with sufficient detail to give the hearings body and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue, means that no appeal may be made to the State Land Use Board of Appeals on that issue; d. Before the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, any participant may ask the Planning Commission for an opportunity to present additional relevant evidence or testimony that is within the scope of the hearing. The hearings body shall grant the request by scheduling a date to finish the hearing (a "continuance") per paragraph 2 of this subsection, or by leaving the record open for additional written evidence or testimony per paragraph 3 of this subsection. 2. If the Planning Commission grants a continuance, the completion of the hearing shall be continued to a date, time, and place at least seven days after the date of the first evidentiary hearing. An opportunity shall be provided at the second hearing for persons to present and respond to new written evidence and oral testimony. If new written evidence is submitted at the second hearing, any person may request, before the conclusion of the second hearing, that the record be left open for at least seven days, so that they can submit additional written evidence or testimony in response to the new written evidence; 3. If the Planning Commission leaves the record open for additional written evidence or testimony, the record shall be left open for at least seven days after the hearing. Any participant may ask the City in writing for an opportunity to respond to new evidence City of Central Point Page 10 of 42 Land Development Code ` ~ (~ ..r . submitted during the period that the record was left open. If such a request is filed, the Planning Commission shall reopen the record to allow rebuttal evidence. a. If the Planning Commission reopens the record to admit new evidence or testimony, any person may raise new issues that relate to that new evidence or testimony; b. An extension of the hearing or record granted pursuant to Section 17.05.400(D) is subject to the limitations of ORS 227.178 ("120-day rule"), unless the continuance or extension is requested or agreed to by the applicant; c. If requested by the applicant, the City shall allow the applicant at least seven days after the record is closed to all other persons to submit final written arguments in support of the application, unless the applicant expressly waives this right. The applicant's final submittal shall be part of the record but shall not include any new evidence; d. The record shall contain all testimony and evidence that is submitted to the City and that the hearings body has not rejected; e. In making its decision, the hearings body may take official notice of facts not in the hearing record (e.g., local, state, or federal regulations; previous city decisions; case law; staff reports). The review authority must announce its intention to take notice of such facts in its deliberations, and allow persons who previously participated in the hearing to request the hearing record be reopened, if necessary, to present evidence concerning the noticed facts;[????] f. The City shall retain custody of the record until the City issues a final decision and all appeal deadlines have passed. 4. Participants in an appeal of a Type II Administrative decision or participants in a Type III hearing are entitled to an impartial review authority as free from potential conflicts of interest and pre-hearing ex pane contacts (see Section 17.05.400(D)(6) below) as reasonably possible. However, the public has a countervailing right of free access to public officials. Therefore: a. At the beginning of the public hearing, hearings body members shall disclose the substance of any pre-hearing ex pane contacts (as defined in Section 17.05.400(D)(5} below) concerning the application or appeal. He or she shall also state whether the contact has impaired their impartiality or their ability to vote on the matter and shall participate or abstain accordingly. Hearing participants shall be entitled to question hearing body members as to ex parte contacts and to object to their participation as provided in paragraph (5)(b) of this section; b. A member of the hearings body shall not participate in any proceeding in which they, or any of the following, has a direct or substantial financial interest: their spouse, brother, sister, child, parent, father-in-law, mother-in-law, partner, any business in which they are City of Central Point Page 11 of 42 Land Development Code ~ , J~ then serving or have served within the previous two years, or any business with which they are negotiating for or have an arrangement or understanding concerning prospective partnership or employment. Any actual or potential interest shall be disclosed at the hearing where the action is being taken; c. Disqualification of amember of the hearings body due to contacts or conflict maybe ordered by a majority of the members present and voting. The person who is the subject of the motion may not vote on the motion to disqualify; d. If all members of the Planning Commission abstain or are disqualified, the City Council shall be the hearing body. If all members of the City Council abstain or are disqualified, a quorum of those members present who declare their reasons for abstention or disqualification shall be re-qualified to make a decision; e. Any member of the public may raise conflict of interest issues prior to or during the hearing, to which the member of the hearings body shall reply in accordance with this section. 5. Ex pane communications. a. Members of the hearings body shall not: (1) Communicate directly or indirectly with any applicant, appellant, other party to the proceedings, or representative of a party about any issue involved in a hearing without giving notice per Section C above; (2) Take official notice of any communication, report, or other materials outside the record prepared by the proponents or opponents in connection with the particular case, unless all participants are given the opportunity to respond to the noticed materials. b. No decision or action of the hearings body shall be invalid due to ex pane contacts or bias resulting from ex pane contacts, if the person receiving contact: (1) Places in the record the substance of any written or oral ex pane communications concerning the decision or action; and (2).Makes a public announcement of the content of the communication and of all participants' right to dispute the substance of the communication made. This announcement shall be made at the first hearing following the communication during which action shall be considered or taken on the subject of the communication, c. A communication between City staff and the hearings body is not considered an ex pane contact. City of Central Point Page 12 of 42 Land Development Code ~~ t~1 6. Presenting and receiving evidence. a. The hearings body may set reasonable time limits for oral presentations and may limit or exclude cumulative, repetitious, irrelevant or personally derogatory testimony or evidence; b. No oral testimony shall be accepted after the close of the public hearing. Written testimony may be received after the close of the public hearing only as provided in Section 17.05.400(D)(3); c. Members of the hearings body may visit the property and the surrounding area, and may use information obtained during the site visit to support their decision, if the information relied upon is disclosed at the beginning of the hearing and an opportunity is provided to dispute the evidence under paragraph (5)(d) of this section. E. The Decision Process. 1. Basis for decision. Approval or denial of a Type II Administrative Appeal or of a Type III application shall be based on standards and criteria in the development code. The standards and criteria shall relate approval or denial of a discretionary development permit application to the development regulations and, when appropriate, to the comprehensive plan for the area in which the development would occur and to the development regulations and comprehensive plan for the City as a whole; 2. Findings and conclusions. Approval or denial shall be based upon the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision. The written decision shall explain the relevant criteria and standards, state the facts relied upon in rendering the decision, and justify the decision according to the criteria, standards, and facts; 3. Form of decision. The Planning Commission shall issue a final written order containing the findings and conclusions stated in subsection 2, which either approves, denies, or approves with specific conditions. The Planning Commission may also issue appropriate intermediate rulings when more than one permit or decision is required. If the application is for aquasi- judicial zone change, the Planning Commission shall issue a denial as a final written order. However, if the Planning Commission decides in favor of the zone change, it shall issue written recommendation to the City Council, which shall hold a hearing and adopt either an order denying the zone change or an ordinance approving the zone change. 4. Decision-making time limits. A final order for any Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III action shall be filed with the Community Development Director or designee within ten business days after the close of the deliberation; 5. Notice of Decision. Written notice of a Type II Administrative Appeal decision or a Type III decision shall be mailed to the applicant and to all participants of record within ten business City of Central Point Page 13 of 42 Land Development Code .~ / days after the hearings body decision. Failure of any person to receive mailed notice shall not invalidate the decision, provided that a good faith attempt was made to mail the notice. 5. Final Decision and Effective Date. The decision of the hearings body on any Type II appeal or any Type III application is final for purposes of appeal on the date it is mailed by the City. The decision is effective on the day after the appeal period expires. If an appeal of a Type III decision is filed, the decision becomes effective on the day after the appeal is decided by the City Council. An appeal of a land use decision to the State Land Use Board of Appeals must be filed within 21 days of the City Council's written decision. F. Appeal• A Type III decision maybe appealed to the City Council as follows: 1. Who ma~ppeal. The following people have legal standing to appeal a Type III Decision: a. The applicant or owner of the subject property; b. Any person who was entitled to written notice of the Type III decision; d. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments. 2. Appeal filing_procedure. a. Notice of appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 1, above, may appeal a Type III Decision by filing a Notice of Appeal according to the following procedures; b. Time far filing. A Notice of Appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director or designee within 10 days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed; c. Content of notice of appeal. The Notice of Appeal shall contain: {l} An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision; (2) A statement demonstrating the person filing the Notice of Appeal has standing to appeal; (3} A statement explaining the speeif c issues being raised on appeal; (4) If the appellant is not the applicant, a statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the comment period; and (5) the applicable filing fee. 3. Scope of appeal. The appeal of a Type III Decision shall be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the Type II City of Central Point Page 14 of 42 Land Development Code 't j administrative review. 4. Appeal procedures. Type III notice, hearing procedures and decision process shall also be used for all Type III Appeals, as provided in Sections 17.05.400(C - E); Final Decision. The decision of the City Council regarding an appeal of a Type III Decision is the final decision of the City. 17.05.500 Type IV Procedure (Legislative). A. Pre-Application Conference. Apre-application conference is required for all Type 1V applications initiated by a party other than the City of Central Point. The requirements and procedures for apre-application conference are described in Section 17.05.600(C). B. Timing of Requests. The City accepts plan map amendment and annexation applications twice yearly, on January 30 and June 30, provided that the City Council may initiate its own such proposals at any time. C. Application Requirements. 1. Application forms. Type IV applications shall be made on forms provided by the Community Development Director or designee. 2. Submittal Information. The application shall contain: a. The information requested on the application form; b. A map and/or plan addressing the appropriate criteria and standards in sufficient detail for review and decision (as applicable}; c. The required fee; and d. One copy of a letter or narrative statement that explains how the application satisfies each and all of the relevant approval criteria and standards. D. Notice of Hearing. 1. Required hearings. A minimum of two hearings, one before the Planning Commission and one before the City Council, are required for all Type IV applications, except annexations and Measure 37 claims where only a hearing by the City Council is required. 2. Notification requirements. Notice of public hearings for the request shall be given by the Community Development Director or designee in the following manner: City of Central Point Page 15 of 42 Land Development Code ~ a. At least 20 days, but not more than 40 days, before the date of the first hearing on an ordinance that proposes to amend the comprehensive plan or any element thereof, or to adopt an ordinance that proposes to rezone property, a notice shall be prepared in conformance with ORS 227.175 and mailed to: (1} Each owner whose property would be rezoned in order to implement the ordinance (including owners of property subject to a comprehensive plan amendment shall be notified if a zone change would be required to implement the proposed comprehensive plan amendment); (2} Any affected governmental agency; (3) Any person who requests notice in writing; (4) For a zone change affecting a manufactured home or mobile home park, all mailing addresses within the park, in accordance with ORS 227.175; (5) Owners of airports shall be notified of a proposed zone change in accordance with ORS 227.175. b. At least 10 days before the scheduled Planning Commission public hearing date, and 14 days before the City Council hearing date, public notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. c. The Community Development Director or designee shall: (1) For each mailing of notice, file an affidavit of mailing in the record as provided by subsection a; and (2) For each published notice, file in the xecord the affidavit of publication in a newspaper that is required in subsection b. d. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DECD) shall be notified in writing of proposed comprehensive plan and development code amendments at least 45 days before the first public hearing at which public testimony or new evidence will be received. The notice to DECD shall include a DECD Certificate of Mailing. e. Notifications for annexation shall follow the provisions of this Chapter. 3. Content of notices. The mailed and published notices shall include the following information: a. The number and title of the file containing the application, and the address and telephone number of the Community Development Director or designee's office where additional information about the application can be obtained; City of Central Point Page 16 of 42 Land Development Code ~ J -~ ~a. b. The proposed site location, if applicable; c. A description of the proposal in enough detail for people to determine what change is proposed, and the place where all relevant materials and information maybe obtained or reviewed; d. The time(s), place(s), and date(s) of the public hearing(s); a statement that public oral or written testimony is invited; and a statement that the hearing will beheld under this title and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall (See Section 17.05.500(E)); and e. Each mailed notice required by Section 17.05.500(D) shall contain the following statement: "Notice to mortgagee, lien holder, vendor, or seller: The Central Point Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the purchaser." 4. Failure to receive notice. The failure of any person to receive notice shall not invalidate the action, providing: a. Personal notice is deemed given where the notice is deposited with the United States Postal Service; b. Published notice is deemed given on the date it is published. E. Hearing Process and Procedure. 1. Unless otherwise provided in the rules of procedure adopted by the City Council: a. The presiding officer of the Planning Commission and of the City Council shall have the authority to: (1) Regulate the course, sequence, and decorum of the hearing; (2) Direct procedural requirements or similar matters; (3) Impose reasonable time limits for oral presentations; and (4) Waive the provisions of this Chapter so long as they do no prejudice the substantial rights of any party. b. No person shall address the Commission or the Council without: (1) Receiving recognition from the presiding officer; and City of Central Point Page 17 of 42 Land Development Code ~ y~ (2) Stating his or her full name and address. c. Disruptive conduct such as applause, cheering, or display of signs shall be cause for expulsion of a person or persons from the hearing, termination or continuation of the hearing, or other appropriate action determined by the presiding officer. 2. Unless otherwise provided in the rules of procedures adopted by the Council, the presiding officer of the Commission and of the Council shall conduct the hearing as follows: a. The presiding officer shall begin the hearing with a statement of the nature of the matter before the body, a general summary of the procedures, a summary of the standards for decision-making, and whether the decision which will be made is a preliminary decision, such as a recommendation to the City Council or the final decision of the City; b. The Community Development Director or designee's report and other applicable staff reports shall be presented; c. The public shall be invited to testify; d. The public hearing may be continued to allow additional testimony or it may be closed; and e. The body's deliberation may include questions to the staff, comments from the staff, and inquiries directed to any person present. F. Continuation of the Public Hearin. The Planning Commission or the City Council may continue any hearing, and no additional notice of hearing shall be required if the matter is continued to a specified place, date, and time. G. Decision-Making Criteria, The recommendation by the Planning Commission and the decision by the City Council shall be based on the following factors: 1. Whether the request is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals; 2. Whether the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. If the proposed legislative change is particular to a particular site, the property and affected area is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or such facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. H. Approval Process and Authority. 1. The Planning Commission shall: City of Central Point Land Development Code ~ ~ Page 18 of 42 a. After notice and a public hearing, vote on and prepare a recommendation to the City Council to approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny the proposed change, or adopt an alternative; and b. Within 14 business days of adopting a recommendation, the presiding officer shall sign the written recommendation, and it shall be filed with the Community Development Director or designee. 2. Any member of the Planning Commission who votes in opposition to the Planning Commission's majority recommendation may file a written statement of opposition with the Community Development Director or designee before the Council public hearing on the proposal. The Community Development Director or designee shall send a copy to each Council member and place a copy in the record; 3. If the Planning Commission does not adopt a recommendation to approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny the proposed change, or adopt an alternative proposal within 60 days of its first public hearing on the proposed change, the Community Development Director or designee shall: a. Prepare a report to the City Council on the proposal, including noting the Planning Commission's actions on the matter, if any; and b. Provide notice and put the matter on the City Council's agenda for the City Council to hold a public hearing make a decision. No further action shall be taken by the Planning Commission. 4. The City Council shall: a. Consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission; however, the City Council is not bound by the Commission's recommendation; b. Approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny, or adopt an alternative to an application for legislative change, or remand the application to the Planning Commission for rehearing and reconsideration on all or part of the application; and c. If the application for legislative change is approved, the Council shall act by ordinance, which shall be signed by the Mayor after the Council's adoption of the ordinance. I. Vote Required for a Legislative Change. 1. A vote by a majority of the qualified voting members of the Planning Commission present is required for a recommendation for approval, approval with modifications, approval with conditions, denial or adoption of an alternative. City of Central Point Page 19 of 42 Land Development Code ~~ 2. A vote by a majority of the qualified members of the City Council present is required to decide any motion made on the proposal. J. Notice of Decision. Notice of a Type IV decision shall be mailed to the applicant, all participants of record, and the Department of Land Conservation and Development, within five business days after the City Council decision is filed with the Community Development Director or designee. The City shall also provide notice to all persons as required by other applicable laws. K. Final Decision and Effective Date. A Type N decision, if approved, shall take effect and shall become final as specified in the enacting ordinance, or if not approved, upon mailing of the notice of decision to the applicant. L. Record of the Public Hearin. 1. A verbatim record of the proceeding shall be made by stenographic, mechanical, or electronic means. It is not necessary to transcribe an electronic record. The minutes and other evidence presented as a part of the hearing shall be part of the record; 2. All exhibits received and displayed shall be marked to provide identification and shall be part of the record; 3. The official record shall include: a. All materials considered and not rejected by the hearings body; b. All materials submitted by the Community Development Director or designee to the hearings body regarding the application; c. The verbatim record made by the stenographic, mechanical, or electronic means; the minutes of the hearing; and other documents considered; d. The final decision; e. All correspondence; and f. A copy of the notices that were given as required by this Chapter. 17.05.600 General Provisions: 120-day Rule; Time Computation; Pre-application Conferences; Acceptance and Review; Planning Official's Duties, Amended Applications; Re- submittal A. 120-day Rule. The City shall take final action on Type I, II, and III permit applications that are subject to this Chapter, including resolution of all appeals, within 120 days from the date the City of Central Point Page 20 of 42 band Developinent Code p Q application is deemed as complete, unless the applicant requests an extension in writing; however, the total of all extensions may not exceed 245 days. Any exceptions to this rule shall conform to the provisions of ORS 227.178. (The 120-day rule does not apply to Type IV legislative decisions -plan and code amendments -under ORS 227.178.) B. Time Computation. In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by this Chapter, the day of the act or event from which the designated period of time begins to run shall not be included. The last day of the period so computed shall be included, unless it is a Saturday or legal holiday, including Sunday, in which event, the period runs until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday or legal holiday. C. Pre-application Conferences. 1. Partici ants. When apre-application conference is required, the applicant shall meet with the Community Development Director or his/her designee(s) and such other parties as the Community Development Director deems appropriate; 2. Information provided. At such conference, the Community Development Director or designee shall: a. Cite the comprehensive plan policies and map designations that appear to be applicable to the proposal; b. Cite the ordinance provisions, including substantive and procedural requirements that appear to be applicable to the proposal; c. Provide available technical data and assistance that will aid the applicant; d. Identify other governmental policies and regulations that relate to the application; and e. Reasonably identify other opportunities or constraints concerning the application. 3. Disclaimer. Failure of the Community Development Director or designee to provide any of the information required by this Section 17.05.600(C) shall not constitute a waiver of any of the standards, criteria or requirements for the application; 4. Changes in the law. Due to possible changes in federal, state, regional, and local law, the applicant is responsible for ensuring that the application complies with all applicable laws. D. Acceptance and Review of Applications. 1. Initiation of applications: a. Applications for approval under this Chapter maybe initiated by: City of Central Point Page 21 of 42 Land Development Code ~ .~ (1) Order of City Council; (2) Resolution of the Planning Commission; (3) The Community Development Director or designee; (4) A record owner of property (person(s} whose name is on the most recently recorded deed), or contract purchaser with written permission from the record owner. b. Any person authorized to submit an application for approval may be represented by an agent authorized in writing to make the application on their behalf: 2. Consolidation of proceedings. When an applicant applies for more than one type of land use or development permit (e.g., Type II and III) for the same one or more parcels of land, the proceedings, may, at the option of the applicant, be consolidated for review and decision. a. If more than one approval authority would be required to decide on the applications if submitted separately, then the decision shall be made by the approval authority having original jurisdiction over one of the applications in the following order of preference: the Council, the Commission, or the Community Development Director or designee. b. When proceedings are consolidated: (1) The notice shall identify each application to be decided; (2) The decision on a plan map amendment shall precede the decision on a proposed land use district change and other decisions on a proposed development. Similarly, the decision on a zone map amendment shall precede the decision on a proposed development and other actions; and (3) Separate findings shall be made on each application. 3. Check for acceptance and completeness. In reviewing an application for completeness, the following procedure shall be used: a. Acceptance. When an application is received by the City, the Community Development Director or designee shall immediately determine whether the following essential items are present. If the following items are not present, the application shall not be accepted and shall be immediately returned to the applicant; (1) The required form; (2) The required fee; City of Central Point Page 22 of 42 Land Development Code ~. (3) The signature of the applicant on the required form and signed written authorization of the property owner of record if the applicant is not the owner. b. Completeness. (1) Review and notification. After the application is accepted, the Community Development Director or designee shall review the application for completeness. If the application is incomplete, the Community Development Director or designee shall notify the applicant in writing of exactly what information is missing within 30 days of receipt of the application and allow the applicant 180 days to submit the missing information; (2) Application deemed complete for review. In accordance with the application submittal requirements of this Chapter, the application shall be deemed complete upon the receipt by the Community Development Director or designee of all required information. The applicant shall have the option of withdrawing the application, or refusing to submit further information and requesting that the application be processed notwithstanding any identified incompleteness. For the refusal to be valid, the refusal shall be made in writing and received by the Community Development Director or designee. (3) If the applicant does not submit all of the missing information or provide written notice that no further information will be provided (whether some of the additional information has been provided or not) within 180 days the initial submittal was accepted, the application is void. (3) Standards and criteria that apply to the application. Approval or denial of the application shall be based upon the standards and criteria that were applicable at the time it was first accepted, unless the application is for a change to the plan or land use regulations. (4) Coordinated Review. The City shall also submit the application for review and comment to the City Engineer, road authority, and other applicable County, State, and federal review agencies. 4. Changes or additions to the application during the review period. Once an application is deemed complete: a. All documents and other evidence relied upon by the applicant shall be submitted to the Community Development Director or designee at least seven days before the notice of action or hearing is mailed. Documents or other evidence submitted after that date shall be received by the Community Development Director or designee, and transmitted to the hearings body, but may be too late to include with the staff report and evaluation; City of Central Point Page 23 of 42 Land Development Code b. When documents or other evidence are submitted by the applicant during the review period but after the notice of action or hearing is mailed, the assigned review person or body shall determine whether or not the new documents or other evidence submitted by the applicant significantly change the application; c. If the assigned reviewer determines that the new documents or other evidence significantly change the application, the reviewer shall include a written determination to the approving authority that a significant change in the application has occurred as part of the decision. In the alternate, the reviewer may inform the applicant either in writing, or orally at a public hearing, that such changes may constitute a significant change, and allow the applicant to withdraw the new materials submitted, in order to avoid a determination of significant change; d. If the applicant's new materials are determined to constitute a significant change in an application that was previously deemed complete, the City shall take one of the following actions, at the choice of the applicant: (1) Suspend the existing application and allow the applicant to submit a revised application with the proposed significant changes. Before the existing application can be suspended, the applicant must consent in writing to waive the 120-day rule (Section 17.45.600(A) above) on the existing application. If the applicant does not consent, the City shall not select this option; (2) Declare the application, based on the significant change, a new application and reprocess accordingly. e. If a new application is submitted by the applicant, that application shall pay the applicable application fee and shall be subject to a separate check for acceptance and completeness and will be subject to the standards and criteria in effect at the time the new application is accepted. E. Community Development Director's Duties. The Community Development Director or designee shall: 1. Prepare application forms based on the criteria and standards in applicable state law, the City's comprehensive plan, and implementing ordinance provisions; 2. Accept all development applications that comply with Section 17.05.600; 3. Prepare a staff report that summarizes the application(s) and applicable decision criteria, and provides findings of conformance and/or non-conformance with the criteria. The staff report may also provide a recommended decision of approval; denial; or approval with specific conditions that-ensure conformance with the approval criteria; 4. Prepare a notice of the proposal decision: City of Central Point Page 24 of 42 Land Development Code a. In the case of an application subject to a Type I or II review process, the Community Development Director or designee shall make the staff report and all case-file materials available at the time that the notice of the decision is issued; b. In the case of an application subject to a hearing (Type III or IV process), the Community Development Director or designee shall make the staff report available to the public at least seven days prior to the scheduled hearing date, and make the case-file materials available when notice of the hearing is mailed, as provided by Sections 17.05.300(C) (Type II), 17.05.400(C) (Type III), or 17.05.500(D) (Type Imo; 5. Administer the application and hearings process; 6. File notice of the final decision in the City's records and mail a copy of the notice of the final decision to the applicant, all persons who provided comments or testimony, persons who requested copies of the notice, and any other persons entitled to notice by law; 7. Maintain and preserve the file for each application for the time period required by law. The file shall include, as applicable, a list of persons required to be given notice and a copy of the notice given; the affidavits of notice, the application and all supporting information, the staff report, the final decision (including the findings, conclusions and conditions, if any), all correspondence, minutes of any meeting at which the application was considered, and any other exhibit, information or documentation which was considered by the decision-maker(s) on the application; and 8. Administer the appeals and review process. F. Amended Decision Process. 1. The purpose of an amended decision process is to allow the Community Development Director or designee to correct typographical errors, rectify inadvertent omissions and/or make other minor changes that do not materially alter the decision. 2. The Community Development Director or designee may issue an amended decision after the notice of final decision has been issued but before the appeal period has expired. If such a decision is amended, the decision shall be issued within 14 business days after the original decision would have become final, but in no event beyond the 120-day period required by state law. Anew 10-day appeal period shall begin on the day the amended decision is issued. 3. Notice of an amended decision shall be given using the same mailing and distribution list as for the original decision notice. 4. Modifications to approved plans or conditions of approval requested by the applicant shall follow the procedures in Section 17.09, All other changes to decisions that are not modifications under Section 17.09 follow the appeal process. City of Central Point Land Development Code Page 25 of 42 G. Re-submittal of Application Following Denial. An application or proposal that has been denied, or that was denied and on appeal or review has not been reversed by a higher authority, including the Land Use Board of Appeals, the Land Conservation and Development Commission or the courts, may not be resubmitted as the same or a substantially similar proposal for the same land for a period of at least 12 months from the date the final City action is made denying the same, unless there is substantial change in the facts or a change in City policy that would change the outcome, as determined by the Community Development Director or designee. H. City Council Review. The City Council shall have the authority to call up any Type II or Type III application for review. The decision to call up an application may occur at any time after the application is filed until the decision is otherwise final. When the City Council calls up an application, the Council shall, in its order of call up, determine the procedure to be followed, including the extent of preliminary processing and the rights of the parties. At a minimum, the council shall follow the procedures in Section 17.05.400(F), regarding appeals ftom Type III decisions. 17.05.700 Special Procedures. A. Expedited Land Divisions. An Expedited Land Division ("ELD") shall be defined and maybe used as provided under ORS 197.360 through 197.384. 1. Selection. An applicant who wishes to use an ELD procedure for a partition, subdivision or planned development instead of the regular procedure type assigned to it, must request the use of the ELD in writing at the time the application is filed, or forfeit hislher right to use it; 2, Review procedure. All applications for Expedited Land Divisions shall comply with ORS 197.360 through 197.380 and the Central Point Comprehensive Plan; ORS 197.360 through OR5 197.380 details the criteria, application and notice requirements, and action and appeal procedures for expedited land divisions. 3. Appeal procedure. An appeal of an ELD shall follow the procedures in ORS 197.375. 17.05.900 Traffic Impact Analysis The purpose of this section of the code is to assist in determining which road authorities participate in land use decisions, and to implement Section 660-012-0045 (2) (e) of the State Transportation Planning Rule that requires the City to adopt a process to apply conditions to development proposals in order to minimize impacts and protect transportation facilities. This Chapter establishes the standards for when a proposal must be reviewed for potential traffic impacts; when a Traffic Impact Analysis must be submitted with a development application in order to determine whether conditions City of Central Point Page 26 of 42 Land Development Code are needed to minimize impacts to and protect transportation facilities; what must be in a Traffic Impact Analysis; and who is qualif ed to prepare the Study. Ae When a Traffic Impact Analysis is Required. The City shall require a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) as part of an application for development, a change in use, or a change in access in the following situations: 1. If the application includes residential development, a TIA shall be required when the land use application involves one or more of the following actions: a. A change in zoning or a plan amendment; b. An increase in site traffic volume generation by 250 average daily trips or more, c. An increase in peak hour volume of a particular movement to and from the State highway by 20 percent or more; or d. An increase in use of adjacent streets by vehicles exceeding the 20,000 pounds gross vehicle weights by 10 vehicles or more per day; 2. If the application does not include residential development, a TIA shall be required when a land use application involves one or more of the following actions: a. A change in zoning or a plan amendment designation; b. Any proposed development or land use action that a road authority; including the City, Jackson County or ODOT, states may have operational or safety concerns along its facility(ies); c. An increase in site traffic volume generation by 250 Average Daily Trips (ADT) or more; d. An increase in peak hour volume of a particular movement to and from the State highway by 20 percent or more; e. An increase in use of adjacent streets by vehicles exceeding the 20,000 pounds gross vehicle weights by 10 vehicles or more per day; f. The location of the access driveway does not meet minimum sight distance requirements, as determined by the City Engineer, or is located where vehicles entering or leaving the property are restricted, or such vehicles queue or hesitate on the State highway, creating a safety hazard in the discretion of the Community Development Director; or g. A change in internal traffic patterns that, in the discretion of the Community Development Director, may cause safety problems, such as back up onto a street or greater potential for traffic accidents. City of Central Point Page 27 of 42 Land Development Code ~ y~ B. Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation. A Traffic Impact Analysis shall be prepared by a Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer licensed to practice in the State of Oregon with special training and experience in traffic engineering. The TIA shall be prepared in accordance with the Public Works Departments document entitled "Traffic Impact Analysis". If the road authority is the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), consult ODOT's regional development review planner and OAR 734-051-180. City of Central Point Page 28 of 42 Land Development Code Chapter 17.09 Modifications to Approved Plans and Conditions of Approval Sections• 17.09.100 Modifications -Purpose 17.09.200 Modifications -Applicability 17.09.300 Major Modifications 17.09.400 Minor Modifications 17.09.100 Modifications -Purpose The purpose of this Chapter is to provide an efficient process for modifying land use decisions and approved development plans, in recognition of the cost and complexity of land development and the need to conserve City resources. 17.09.200 Modifications -Applicability A. This Chapter applies to all development applications approved through the provisions of Chapter 17, including: 1. Land Use Review approvals; 2. Site Design Review approvals; 3. Subdivisions, Partitions, and Property Line Adjustments; 4. Conditional Use Permits; 5. Planned Unit Developments; and 6. Conditions of approval on any of the above permit types. B. This Section 17.09 does not apply to Comprehensive Plan amendments, land use district changes, text amendments, annexations, or other permits not listed in subsection (A). Any matter not identified in subsection (A) above shall be changed through the applicable process for the initial approval of such a matter. C. When an application for a modification is complete, the Community Development Director shall review the proposed modification and determine whether the modification is a major or minor modification and the process to be used in processing the proposed modification, as described below. City of Central Point Land Development Code Page 29 of 42 ~~ 17.09.300 Major Modifications A. Major Modification Defined. The Community Development Director shall determine that a major modification(s) is required if one or more of the changes listed below are proposed: 1. A change inland use; 2. An increase in density by more than ten (10) percent, provided the resulting density does not exceed that allowed by the land use district; 3. A change in setbacks or lot coverage by more than 10 percent, provided the resulting setback or lot coverage does not exceed that allowed by the land use district; 4. A change in the type and/or location of access-ways, drives or parking areas affecting off-site traffic; 5. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 15 percent where previously specified; 6. A reduction of more than 10 percent of the area reserved for common open space; or 7. Change to a condition of approval, or a change similar to items 1-6, that could have a detrimental impact on adjoining properties. The City Planning Official shall have discretion in determining detrimental impacts warranting a major modification. City of Central Point Land Development Code Page 30 of 42 ~~ B. Major Modification Applications; Approval Criteria. An applicant may request a major modification using a Type II or Type III review procedure, as follows: 1. Upon the Community Development Director determining that the proposed modification is a major modification, the applicant shall submit an application form, filing fee and narrative, and a site plan using the same plan format as in the original approval. The Community Development Director may require other relevant information, as necessary, to evaluate the request. 2. The application shall be subject to the same review procedure (Type II or III), decision making body, and approval criteria used for the initial project approval, except that adding a conditional use to an approved project shall be reviewed using a Type III procedure. 3. The scope of review shall be limited to the modification request. For example, a request to modify a parking lot shall require site design review only for the proposed parking lot and any changes to associated access, circulation, pathways, lighting, trees, and landscaping. Notice shall be provided in accordance with the applicable notice requirements for Type II or Type III procedures. 4. The decision making body shall approve, deny, or approve with conditions an application for major modification based on written findings on the criteria. City of Central Point Land Development Code Page 31 of 42 n~ 17.09.400 Minor Modifications A. Minor Modification. Any modification to a land use decision or approved development plan that is not within the description of a major modification as provided in Section 17.09.300(A), above. B. Minor Modification Review Procedure. An application for approval of a minor modification shall be reviewed by the Planning Official using a Type I or a Type II review procedure under Section 17.05.200 or 17.05.300. The Community Development Director is responsible for determining the appropriate review procedure based on the following criteria: 1. Minor modifications that involve only clear and objective code standards may be reviewed using a Type I procedure; 2. Minor modifications that involve one or more discretionary standards shall be reviewed through Type II procedure; and 3. When the code is unclear on whether the application should be a Type I or Type II review, a Type II procedure shall be used. C. Minor Modification Applications. An application for minor modification shall include an application form, filing fee and narrative, and a site plan using the same plan format as in the original approval. The Community Development Director may require other relevant information, as necessary, to evaluate the request. D. Minor Modification Approval Criteria. The Community Development Director shall approve, deny, or approve with conditions an application for minor modification based on written findings that the modification is in compliance with all applicable requirements of the Development Code and conditions of approval on the original decision, and the modification is not a major modification as described in Section 17.09.300(A), above. City of Central Point Page 32 of 42 Land Development Code Chapter 17.10 Zoning Map and Text Amendments Sections• 17.10.100 Amendments -Purpose 17.10.200 Legislative Amendments 17.10.300 Quasi-Judicial Amendments 17.10.400 Conditions of Approval on Quasi-Judicial Amendments 17.10.500 Record of Amendments 17.10.600 Transportation Planning Rule Compliance 17.10.100 Amendments -Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures for legislative and quasi judicial amendments to this Code and the Central Point City Zoning Map (Zoning Map). These will be referred to as "map and text amendments." Amendments maybe necessary from time to time to reflect changing community conditions, needs and desires, to correct mistakes, or to address changes in the law. 17.10,200 Legislative Amendments Legislative amendments are policy decisions made by City Council. They are reviewed using the Type IV procedure in Section 17.05.500 and shall conform to the Statewide Planning Goals, the Central Point Comprehensive Plan, the Central Point Zoning Ordinance and the Transportation Planning Rule provisions in Section 17.10.600, as applicable. 17.10.300 Quasi-Judicial Amendments A. Applicability of Quasi-Judicial Amendments. Quasi judicial amendments are those that involve the application of adopted policy to a specific development application or Code revision, and not the adoption of new policy (i.e., through legislative decisions). Quasi judicial Zoning Map amendments shall follow the Type III procedure, as governed by Section 17.05.400, using standards of approval in Section 17.10.300(B). The approval authority shall be as follows: 1. The Planning Commission shall review and recommend land use district map changes that do not involve comprehensive plan map amendments; 2. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council on an application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The City Council shall decide such applications; and 3. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council on a land use district change application that also involves a comprehensive plan map amendment application. The City Council shall decide both applications. City of Central Point Page 33 of 42 Land Development Code ~ &~ B. Criteria for Quasi-Judicial Amendments. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following criteria: 1. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals; 2. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point Comprehensive Plan; 3. The property and affected area is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or such facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided in the planning period; and 4. The change is in the public interest with regard to neighborhood or community conditions, or corrects a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or land use district map regarding the property which is the subject of the application; and 5. The amendment conforms to the Transportation Planning Rule provisions under Section 17.10.600. 17.10.400 Conditions of Approval for Quasi-Judicial Amendments A quasi judicial decision maybe for denial, approval, or approval with conditions; conditions shall be based on applicable regulations and factual evidence in the record. A legislative amendment may only be approved or denied. 17.10.500 Record of Amendments The City Recorder shall maintain a record of amendments to the text of this Code and the Zoning , Map in a format convenient for public use. 17.10.600 Transportation Planning Rule Compliance. A. Review of Applications for Effect on Transportation Facilities. When a development application includes a proposed comprehensive plan amendment or zoning district change, the proposal shall be reviewed to determine whether it significantly affects a transportation facility, in accordance with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060 (the Transportation Planning Rule - TPR) and the Traffic Impact Study provisions of Section 17.05.900. "Significant" means the proposal would: 1. Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors). This would occur, for example, when a proposal causes future traffic to exceed the levels associated with a "collector" street classification, requiring a change in the classification to an "arterial" street, as identified by the City's Transportation System Plan ("TSP"); or City of Central Point Page 34 of 42 Land Development Code ~ ~~ 2. Change the standards implementing a functional classification system; or 3. As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the road authority's adopted transportation system plan (TSP) /City's Comprehensive Plan allow types or levels of land use that would result in levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; or 4. Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the City's transportation system plan (TSP) /Comprehensive Plan; or 5. Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the City's transportation system plan (TSP) /Comprehensive Plan. B. Amendments that Affect Transportation Facilities. Except as provided in subsection C, amendments to the comprehensive plan and land use regulations which significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the function, capacity, and level of service of the facility. This shall be accomplished by one of the following: 1. Adopting measures that demonstrate that allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function of the transportation facility; or 2. Amending the Comprehensive Plan to provide transportation facilities, improvements, or services adequate to support the proposed land uses; such amendments shall include a funding plan to ensure the facility, improvement, or service will be provided by the end of the planning period; or, 3. Altering land use designations, densities, or design requirements to reduce demand for automobile travel and meet travel needs through other modes of transportation; or 4. Amending the planned function, capacity or performance standards of the transportation facility; or 5. Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development agreement or similar funding method, specifying when such measures will be provided. C. Exceptions. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or land use regulations with a significant effect on a transportation facility, where the facility is already performing below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the City's transportation system plan (TSP) /Comprehensive Plan, maybe approved when all of the following criteria are met: The amendment does not include property located in an interchange area, as defined under applicable law; City of Central Point Page 35 of 42 Land Development Code ~ 2. The currently planned facilities, improvements or services are not adequate to achieve the standard; 3. Development resulting from the amendment will, at a minimum, mitigates the impacts of the amendment in a manner that avoids further degradation to the performance of the facility by the time of the development; and The road authority provides a written statement that the proposed funding and timing for the proposed development mitigation are suff cient to avoid further degradation to the facility. City of Centrat Point Page 36 of 42 Land Development Code ~ ~-i Chapter 17.11 Code Interpretations Sections• 17.11.100 Interpretations -Purpose 17.11.200 Code Interpretation Procedure 17.11.100 Interpretations -Purpose Some terms or phrases within the Chapter may have two or more reasonable meanings. This section provides a process for resolving differences in the interpretation of the Code text. 17.11.200 Code Interpretation Procedure A. Requests. A request for a code interpretation shall be made in writing to the Community Development Director with the applicable fee. B. Decision to Issue Interpretation. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to interpret the code, or refer the request to the Planning Commission for its interpretation. The Community Development Director shall advise the person making the inquiry in writing within 14 days after the request is made, on whether or not the City will make an interpretation. C. Written Interpretation. If the City decides to issue an interpretation, it shall be issued in writing and shall be mailed or delivered to the person requesting the interpretation and any other person who specifically requested a copy. The written interpretation shall be issued within 14 days of the request. The decision shall become effective 14 days later, unless an appeal is filed in accordance with E-F below. E. Type II Procedure. Code Interpretations shall be made using a Type II procedure under Section 17.05.300. F. Appeals. The applicant and any party who received notice or who participated in the proceedings through the submission of written or verbal evidence may appeal the decision to the Planning Commission for a Type III decision. The appeal must be filed within 14 days after the interpretation was mailed or delivered to the applicant. Initiating an appeal requires filing a notice of appeal with the City Planning Department pursuant to Section 17.05.400. G. Interpretations on File. The City shall keep on file a record of all code interpretations. City of Central Point Page 37 of 42 Land Development Code ~ r~ 5.3 -Lots of Record Chapter 17.13 -Exceptions to Code Standards Chapter 17.13.100 -Variances Sections• 17.13.100 Variances -Purpose 17.13.200 Variances -Applicability 17.13.300 Class A Variances 17.13.400 Class B Variances 17.13.500 Class C Variances 17.13.600 Variance Application and Appeals 17.13.100 Variances -Purpose This Chapter provides standards and procedures for variances, which are modifications to land use or development standards that are not otherwise permitted elsewhere in this Chapter 17 as exceptions to code standards. This Chapter cannot provide standards to fit every potential development situation. The City's varied geography, and complexities of land development, require flexibility. Chapter 17.13 provides that flexibility, while maintaining the purposes and intent of the Code. The variance procedures provide relief from specific code provisions when they have the unintended effect of preventing reasonable development in conformance with all other codes. The variance procedures are intended to provide flexibility while ensuring that the purpose of each development standard is met. 17.13.200 Variances -Applicability A. Exceptions and Modifications versus Variances. A code standard or approval criterion ("code section") may be modified without approval of a variance if the applicable code section expressly allows exceptions or modifications. If the code section does not expressly provide for exceptions or modifications, then a variance is required to modify that code section and the provisions of Chapter 17.13 apply. B. Combining Variances with Other Approvals; Permit Approvals by Other Agencies. Variance requests maybe combined with and reviewed concurrently by the City approval body with other land use and development applications (e.g., development review, site design review, subdivision, conditional use, etc.); however, some variances maybe subject to approval by other permitting agencies, such as ODOT in the case of State Highway access. C. Types of Variances. As provided in Section 17.13.300, there are three types of variances (Class A, B, or C); the type of variance required depends on the extent of the variance request and the discretion involved in the decision making process. City of Central Point Page 38 of 42 i,and i?evelonment Code 5.3 -Lots of Record 17.13.300 Class A Variances. A. Applicability. The following variances are reviewed using a Type II procedure, as governed by Chapter 17.05, using the approval criteria in Subsection B, below: 1. Front yard setbacks. Up to a 10 percent change to the front yard setback standard in the land use district. 2. Interior setbacks. Up to a 10 percent reduction of the dimensional standards for the side and rear yard setbacks required in the base land use district. 3. Lot coverage. Up to 5 percent increase of the maximum lot coverage required in the base zone. 4. Landscape area. Up to 5 percent reduction in landscape area (overall area or interior parking lot landscape area). B. Approval criteria. A Class A Variance shall be granted if the applicant demonstrates compliance with all of the following criteria: 1. The variance requested is required due to the lot configuration, or other conditions of the site; 2. The variance does not result in the removal of trees, or it is proposed in order to preserve trees, if trees are present in the development area; 3. The variance will not result in violation(s) of any other adopted ordinance or code standard; each code standard to be modified shall require a separate variance request. 4. An application for a Class A variances is limited to one lot per application. 5. No more than three Class A variances maybe approved for one lot or parcel in 12 months. 17.13.400 Class B Variances. A. Applicability. Class B variance requests apply to the types of requests meeting the approval criteria in Sections 17.13.400(B) through 17.13.400(G), and that conform to subsections 1-3, below, Class B variances shall be reviewed using a Type III procedure, in accordance with Chapter 17.05: 1. The Class B variance standards apply to individual platted and recorded lots only. 2. The Class B variance procedure shall not be used to modify a standard for lots yet to be created through a partition or subdivision process; such requests shall utilize the Class C variance procedure. City of Central Point Page 39 of 42 T and T1PVPlnnmant C'nr~a !~ .„ 5.3 -Lots of Record 3. A variance shall not be approved that would vary the "permitted uses" or "prohibited uses" of any zoning district. B. Variance to minimum housing density standard. The City may approve a variance to a minimum housing density standard after finding that the minimum housing density cannot be achieved due to physical constraints that limit the division of land or site development. "Physical constraint" means steep topography, unusual parcel configuration, or a similar constraint. The variance approved shall be the minimum variance necessary to address the specific physical constraint on the development. C. Variance to Vehicular Access and Circulation Standards. Where vehicular access and circulation cannot be reasonably designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, shared access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If shared access in conjunction with another parcel is not feasible, the City may grant a variance to the access requirements after finding all of the following: 1. There is not adequate physical space for shared access, or the owners of abutting properties do not agree to execute a joint access easement; 2. There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; 3. The access separation requirements cannot be met; 4. The request is the minimum variance required to provide adequate access; 5. The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; 6. The visual clearance requirements of this Code will be met; and 7. Variances for street access deviations shall be subject to review and approval by the roadway authority. 8. Variances for access deviations on an ODOT or Jackson County right-of way may require approval, respectively, by ODOT or Jackson County. D. Variance to Street Tree Requirements (Chapter 12.36). The City may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for a variance to the street tree requirements of this Code after finding the following: 1. Installation of the tree would interfere with existing utility lines, and no substitute tree with a lower canopy is appropriate for the site; 2. The tree would cause visual clearance problems; or City of Central Point Page 40 of 42 band Development Code • n ~ 5.3 -Lots of Record 3. There is not adequate space in which to plant a street tree; and 4. The City may require the installation of additional or replacement landscaping elsewhere on the site (e.g., parking lot area trees) to compensate for the street tree variance. 5. Street tree approval or modification of standards within an ODOT or Jackson County right-of--way may require approval, respectively, by ODOT or Jackson County. E. Variance to Parking and Loading Standards. 1. The City may approve variances to the minimum or maximum standards for off-street parking (quantities and dimensions of parking spaces) in this Code upon finding all of the following: a. The individual characteristics of the use at that location require more or less parking than is generally required for a use of this type and intensity, or modified parking dimensions, as demonstrated by a parking analysis or other facts provided by the applicant; b. The need for additional parking cannot reasonably be met through provision of on-street parking or shared parking with adjacent or nearby uses; and c. All other code standards are met, in conformance with this Code. 2. The City may reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces as required by this Code, if the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed use by its nature would be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking. 3. The City may allow a reduction in the amount of vehicle stacking area required in for drive-through facilities if such a reduction is deemed appropriate after analysis of the size and location of the development, limited services available and other pertinent factors. 4. The City may modify the loading area standards if such a reduction is deemed appropriate after analysis of the use, anticipated shipping or delivery traffic generated by the use and alternatives for loading/unloading, such as use of on- or off-street parking areas during non-business hours provided that traffic is not impeded. F. Variance to Maximum or Minimum Yard Setbacks to Avoid or Reduce Impacts to Floodplains, Significant Trees, Wetlands, or Other Natural Features. The City may grant a variance to the applicable setback requirements of this Code for the purpose of avoiding or reducing impact to floodplains, significant trees, wetlands, or other natural features. Modification of the standard shall not be more than is necessary for the preservation of the nature feature to be protected. City of Central Point Page 41 of 42 5.3 --Lots of Record G. Variances to Transportation Improvement Requirements. The City may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a variance to a transportation improvement standard in the when the variance does not exceed 10 percent of the standard. When a variance request to the standards in exceeds 10 percent, then the request shall be reviewed as a Class C variance. 17.13.500 Class C Variances. A. Applicability. Class C variance requests are those that do not conform to the provisions of Sections 17.13.200-17.13.300 (Class A and Class B), and that meet the criteria in 1-4, below, Class C variances shall be reviewed using a Type III procedure, in accordance with Chapter 17.05: 1. The Class B variance standards apply to individual platted and recorded lots only. 2. The Class C variance procedure may be used to modify a standard for 3 or fewer Lots, including lots yet to be created through a partition process. 3. An applicant who proposes to vary a standard for lots yet to be created through a subdivision process may not utilize the Class C variance procedure. Approval of a Planned Unit Development shall be required to vary a standard for lots yet to be created through a subdivision process, where a specific code section does not otherwise permit exceptions. 4. A variance shall not be approved that would vary the "permitted uses" or "prohibited uses" of a zoning district. B. Approval Process. Class C variances shall be processed using a Type III procedure, as governed by Chapter 17.05.500, using the approval criteria in subsection D, below. In addition to the application requirements contained in Chapter 17.05.500, the applicant shall provide a written narrative or Letter describinghis/her reasoning for the variance, why it is required, alternatives considered, and compliance with the criteria in subsection D. C. Approval Criteria. The City shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance based on aI1 of the following criteria: a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Code, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; b. A hardship to development exists which is peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography, or other similar circumstances related to the property over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the vicinity (e.g., the same zoning district); City of Central Point Page 42 of 42 Land Development Code !li 6° ~... 5.3 -Lots of Record c. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, natural resources, and parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development occurred as specified by the subject Code standard; e. The hardship is not self-imposed; and f. The variance requested is the minimum variance that would alleviate the hardship. 17.13.600 Variance Application and Appeals. A. Application. The variance application shall conform to the requirements for Type I, II, or II applications (Chapter 17.05.300, 17.05.400, 17.05.500), as applicable. In addition, the applicant shall provide a narrative or letter explaining the reason for his/her request, alternatives considered, how the stated variance criteria are satisfied, and why the subject standard cannot be met without the variance. B. Appeals to variance decisions shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 17.05. PDX_DOCS:369623.1 [35140-00200] 02/27/06 12:06 PM City of Central Point Page 43 of 42