Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - September 5, 2006A CEiVTRAI. PO[NT CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA September 5, 2006 - 7:00 p.m. Next Planning Commision Resolution No. 70S L MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Connie Maczygenaba, Candy Fish, Damian Idiart, Chuck Piland, Wayne Riggs, and Pat Beck III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and approval of August 1, 2006, Planning Commission Minutes. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Pis. i - 30 A. File No. 060$2. A public hearing to consider a Site Plan application for the creation of a Iive (5) unit zero lot line structure located in a TOD-HMR, High Mix Residential zoning district. The address is 124 North Third Street and is located north of Manzanita Street, west of North Fourth Street, east side of North Third Street and south of Laurel Street {Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2W 43DD, Tax Lot 7700). Home Brothers, LLC, Applicant. Pgs. 31 - 50 B. File No. 06095. A public hearing to consider a Tentative Plan application for the purpose of creating five (5) attached single family residential units on property located in a TOD-HMR, High Mix Residential zoning district. The address is 124 North Third Street and is located north of Manzanita Street, west of North Fourth Street, east side of North Third Street and south of Laurel Street (Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2W 03DD, Tax Lot 7700). Home Brothers, LLC, Applicant. Pgs. 51 - 73 C. File No. 07004. A public hearing to consider a Site Plan application far the purpose of allowing the construction and operation of a Les Schwab Tire and Service Center. The proposed Site Plan is within the C-5, Tharaughfare Cammereial zoning district {Jackson County Assessor's map 37 2W OIC, Tax Lot 803). Les Schwab Tire Centers of Portland, Inc., Applicant. ~co~oso~ Pgs. 74 - 81 D. File No. 060$9. Consideration of an annexation and concuz-rez-zt zone change frozrz SR-2.5 {County) to R-2 {City} on 2.23 acres located on the south side of Beebe Road approximately 300 feet west of Hamrick Road {Jackson County Assessor's Map 37 2W O1 C, Tax Lots 2300 and 2400}. Michelle Nistlez- and Michael Menefee, Applicants. Pgs. 82 _ g~ E. File No. 05060. Consideration of an annexation and concurrent zone change from SR-2.5 {County) to R-2 {City) on .94 acres located on tkze west side of Hamz-ick Road approximately 400 feet south of Beebe Road (Jackson County Assessor's Map 37 2W O 1 CB, Tax Lot 900). Wisnovsky Hon•zes, LLC, Applicant. VI. MISCELLANEOUS A. Update on Urban Growth Boundazy Expansion VII. ADJOURNMENT Pca~oso~ City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes August 1, 2006 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Connie Moczygemba, Chuck Piland, Damian Idiart, Candy Fish, Wayne Riggs, and Pat Beck were present. Also in attendance were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director; Don Burt, Planning Manager; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence. IV. MINUTES Damian Idiart made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. Chuck Piland seconded the motion: ROLL CALL: Fish, abstained; Idiart, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes; Beck, abstained. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. File No. 6082. A public hearing to consider a Site Plan application for the creation of a five (S) unit zero lot line structure located in a TOD-kIMR, High Mix Residential zoning district. The address is 126 North Third Street and is located north of Manzanita Street, west of North Fourth Street, east side of North Third Street and south of Laurel Street (Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2W 03DD, Tax Lat 7700). Home Brothers, LLC, Applicant. There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Plnnrting Canmis'sion Minutes tlugust 1, 2006 Page 2 Don Burt, Planning Manager recommended a continuation of the public hearing in this matter to September 5, 2006 as the applicant had presented a letter to staff requesting a 60-day extension of time within which to submit revised plans. Shane Elsdon, applicant, apologized far the tardy submission of an extension letter, citing a miscommunication with staff. Chuck Piland made a motion to continue the public hearing in this matter to the next regularly scheduled meeting of September S, 2006. Damian Idiart seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Fish, yes; Idiart, yes; Beck, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. B. File No. 06095. A public hearing to consider Tentative Plan application for the purpose of creating five (5) attached single family residential units on property located in a TOD-HMR, High Mix Residential zoning district. The address is 126 North Third Street and is located north of Manzanita Street, west of North Fourth Street, east side of North Third Street and south. of Laurel Street (Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2W 03DD, Tax Lot 7700). Home Brothers, LLC, Applicant. There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Planning Manager Don Burt recommended that the public hearing for this Tentative Plan application be continued in the same manner as item A on the agenda. Wayne Riggs made a motion to continue the public hearing in this matter to the next regularly scheduled meeting of September 5, 2006. Chuck Piland seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Fish, yes; Idiart, yes; Beck, yes; Piland, yes; Riggs, yes. Motion passed. VII. MISCELLANEOUS Don Burt, Planning Manager, shared projected population figures furnished by Jackson County with Commission members far years 2020 and 2026. Mr. Burt indicated that based upon these numbers, it would be incumbent upon the City to ultimately consider how much of its Urban Resezve property to take in for future Urban Growth Boundary expansion, what the land use distributions will be and what types of housing will be required to meet projected population growth. Additional information will be presented to the Planning Commission at the September S, 2006 meeting. Tom Humphrey welcomed Pat Beck to the Planning Commission as its newest commissioner. Mr. Humphrey then advised that Commissioner Mack Lewis had resigned. Platzrring Cofnmrssion el~lirrules ~I¢rgirsd 1, 2006 Page 3 IX. ADJOURNMENT Damian Idiart made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Pat Beck seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 'x:35 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the August 1, 2006 Planning Commission rr~eeting were approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting on September 5, 2006. Planning Commission Chair OTHERS St„t,E pL,p,N NOME' BR 'I~~nir~,~ ~par~rrrent T P Tcarta Hurr~(aiarey, AICI? C~on~rmuraity (~~v~la~amer~t ~7irectorJ Assistant pity Ac1r7,inistratcar STAF~ ~.Ep~RT September Stl', 2006 AGl~I~IDA ITEM: FILE NO. 0()082 Site Plan Site Plan Review to consider the construction of five ~5) attached single family units on a .1$ sere lot located at 124 North "l'hird Street, in a T(~D-HMl2, High Mix Residential zoning district. '1"hc s~ibject property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 3'7 2W 03DD, Tax Lot "7700. Applicants: Home Brothers STAI~"F SOURCEt Lisa :Morgan, Planning Technician I3ACKGI20UND: This application was initially noticed for the July 1$tt', 2006 Planning Commission, at which time it was continued to the August 1, 2006 meeting. At the August 1, 2006 meeting the applicant requested a 60 day extension to extend the 120 day final decision deadline. This continued the application to the September ~, 2006 agenda. The purpose ofthe time extension was to allow the applicant to modify the site plan as necessary to comply with the T4D-HMR site plan and design requirements. ~"" ~ °' "~' The applicant is proposing to demolish existing aging ,: '~ .. ~~ duplexes and replace them with five (5} zero lot line ~'~ single family residential structures, also referred to in the '~;" T4D District as attached row housing. The applicant's will be constructing a driveway along the east side of the property line. Each unlit will have a two car garage ~-~~ ~, ,, ~'~'`'~~ accessed off of the new driveway. There will be a deck an tl~e second story facing N, Third Street, with the front ~~ ~,~ facade of the building being oriented just behind an existing S' sidewalk, that will need to be replaced as Hated in the Public Works staff report. What would be considered the back wall of the garage will have windows facing N. 'Third Street rather than 20' of garage doors for each unit. FINDINGS: Refer to Attachment "C"> ~~, Home Brothers Site Plan Page 1 of 3 ISSUES: The following issues apply to CPMC or Public Works Standards requirements that need to be poi~~ted out as a matter of explanation, or because of their discretionary nature: 1. Public Works Standards -The Applicant's site plan provides for a drive connecting the existing alley with Manzanita Street. The Public Works Department would like this private drive brought up to "courtyard drive" standards from 1~1' wide to 16' wide. This will necessitate the building being zrioved forward 2' to meet this requirement. This requirement further improves the Project's compliance with the minimum back-up standards for perpendicular (garage) parking, and minimum backup requirements. By code it is necessary that atwenty-six (26) foot back-up lane be provided. The Site Plan as presented provides for twenty-two (22} feet. The Public Works' requirement increases this to twenty-four (24) feet. It is the applicant's contention that the additional two (2} feet needed are located within the garage. Moving the proposed building forward 2' will result in a zero {0) foot front yard setback, which is consistent with the minimum requirements of the HMR/TOD district. This will result in a loss of landscaping along the front of the building; however the 15% required landscape will still be met. 2. CPMC 17.67.050(E){2). This criteria applies to the compatibility of a proposed project with the existing neighborhood. As would be expected, and based on the variety of architectural styles within the neighborhood, this is a discretionary consideration. In the Endings (ATTACHMENT "C"} the discretionary nature of CPMC 17.67.050(E}(2) is noted. 3. CPMC 17.67.070(1)(x). This code section is similar to the one previously noted. Again, a favorable finding is discretionary. 4. CPMC 17.67.070{D}(1 }{e}. This code section requires that the dominant feature of any building frontage shall be its habitable area. As proposed on the Project plans the frst floor is atwo-car garage and therefore not habitable area {which does not meet cede in the HMR district for non commercial uses on the first floor). However, the Project's design does attempt to comply with the intent of CPMC 17.67.070(D}(1)(e} with the provision of windows along the Third Street frontage of the garages, giving the residences the appearance of being habitable area. It is up to the Planning Commission's discretion to determine if having the windows on the first floor is adequate and the illusion of being habitable space meets the intent of the code architecturally. Again, there is not a definition in the CPMC that defines habitable space. CPMC 17.67.050 {5} The landscape rows between the curb and sidewalk wi11 need to have trees planted that are on the City's approved street tree list for urban conditions. {See attachment "H"}, The Flowering Pear is an the approved list, the Portugal Laurel is not on the list and a suitable replacement will have to be identified on the final landscape plans. The landscape rows identified on the site plan will need to have landscaping. 6. CPMC 17.67.050 (5) The sidewalk, as part of the tentative plan application (City File No. 06095), will need to be replaced and relocated to allow for a minimum four (4) foot planter strip. Home Brothers Site Plan Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS: Attachment "A" -Site Plan Map/Landscape Plan Attachment "B" --Elevations Attachment "C" -Site Plan Planning Department Findings Attachment "D" -Public Works Staff Report Attachment "E" -Building Department Staff Report Attachment "h'" -Fire District # 3 Comments Attachment "G" -Planning Department Conditions of Approval Attachment "H" -City approved Street Tree List for Urban Conditions Attachment "I" - Vicinity Photographs Attachment "J" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of a Resolution approving the revised Site Plan. RECOMMENDATION: As a result of the discretionary consideration of the design criteria as outlined in the findings that are applicable to this application, staff does not have a recommendation. 3 Home Brothers Site Plan Page 3 of 3 ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ d 3 3 ~~ ~'~ t t i~ 3 a ~~~ iV F~~ ~~~ a `ai ~S ; ~ i-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ :~~ r ~ a ~~ ~ ~ ~~# i ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~`~ ~~. ~~ -~o ~~ N ~ FF11 k. ~~ ~g~~~ ~ ,- a t tI 1 I 1 i ~ ~~ge ~~! ~~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ § ~~~~~ ~~~~xr t ~~~ ry K~ S;b A ~~ ;~~~ a~ ~e ~~~~ ~ w~ ~,:~.~ i_____ _---~-= ~.. ~ ~ ~ €€II ~r 4 ~~ ~ ..~~ ~~ ~ ~~~; ~ ~ ~ ,~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ . } 6 _. $ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ; t~~ ~~ ~ ,~~~~~~~~~~ ft~~~ ~TTAC~MENT " G _-" Findings -Site Plan Applicant: Home Brothers Purpose: Consideration of a Site Plan for constructing five (5) Single Family Attached Dwelling Units File No. 06082 CPMC 17.fi6.030 (2) -Application and Review- TOD DISTRICT ~ CORRIDOR - Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval. The provisions of Chapter 17.72, Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval, s1uz1I apply to permitted and limited uses zt~ithin the TOD district and car rdor. For deveIapment or land division applications involving more than five acres of land ar forty dzi~elling units, a master plan appra~lal, as provided in this chapter shall be approved prior to, or concurrently with, a site plan, landscaping and construction plan application. Findings: The Site Plan application meets the purpose o£ this section. Conclusion: Purpose has been satisfied. CPMC 17.b7.020 -Area of application -These regulations apply to the Central Point TOD district and TOD corridor. The boundaries of the district and corridor are shown an tl~e official cifl~ zoning map. Findings: The site plan is located within the TAD-District and identified on the zoning map as T4D-HMR, High Mix Residential. Conclusion: The design standards are applicable to this application. CPMC 17,67.040 (7) Circulation and access standards -Connections shall be provided between new streets in a TDD district or corridor and exisfing Local and minor collector streets. Findings: The project as designed is adequately served by the existing street system, no new public street or the expansion o£ existing public streets are required. Conclusion: The applicant has met this requirement. Page 1 of Il CPMC 17.67.050 (S) (2,) The number and z~iidth of drivezva~s and curb cuts should be minimized and consolidated znlzen possible. Findings: Vllith the revised site plan and providing a new driveway along the eastern property line for garage access, this eliminated access for five units onto N. Third which is classified as a collector street. Conclusion: The applicant has satisfied this requirement. CPMC 17.67.050 (C) (2) Provide an attractive, convenient pedestrian accesszc~a~ to building entrances. Findings: The site plan, by moving the front facade of the building to the sidewalk provides for convenient pedestrian access via N. Third Street. Conclusion: The applicant has satisfied this requirement. CPMC 17.67.050 (E) (2) New buildings proposed for exisfing neighborlu3ods with a zvell~defined and desirable character should be compatible with ar complement floe architectural character and siting pattern of neighboring buildings. Findings: As illustrated in the attached photographs (See attachment "I") of the general neighborhood the only definable architectural characteristic is the predominance of single-story structures. Whether the proposed project design is compatible with, or compliments the existing neighborhood is subject to the Planning Commission's determination. The Project's design is within the limits established for development within the HMR district. . Conclusion: Compliance with these criteria is subject to the Planning Commission's discretion. CPMC 17.67.050 (H) (3) A21 on-site service areas, loading zones and outdoor stowage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, transformer and utflih~ vaults, and similar activities shall be located in an area not visible from a street or urban space. Findings: The site plan identifies that waste storage shall be placed in each garage. Since these are individual units, there will not be disposal facilities. Conclusion: The applicant has met this requirement. Page 2 of 11 CPMC 17.67.050 (H} (4} -Screening shall be provided for activities areas and equipment that will create noise, such as loading and vehicle areas, air conditioning units, heat pumps, exhaust fans, garbage compactors, to avoid disturbing adjacent residents. Findings: The proposed driveway will run along the eastern portion of the property, where there is an existing fencing/wall for the adjacent 3 scary development, this will screen the vehicle areas. Three heat pumps will be off the existing alley, and the other two heat pumps off of Manzanita Street. All will be screened with landscaping. Garbage compactors (if any) are generally located within the kitchen. Conclusion: The applicant has met this requirement. CPMC 17,67.050 (J} (1} (a} -Off street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of buildings. Parking at midpoint or behind buildings is preferred. Findings: Parking access will be from the existing a11ey &Manzanita via a private driveway located along the rear of the property. Conclusion: The applicant has met this requirement. CPMC 17.67.050 (J) {~,} (b} -Off street surface parking shall not be located betzneen a front facade of a building and a public street. Conclusion: The applicant has met this requirement. CPMC 17.67.070 (2} -Building Design Standards -General Design Requirements -All development along pedestrian routes shall be designed to encourage use by pedestrians by providing a safe, comfortable, and interesting 7vaIking environment. Findings: With the architectural detail of the building, and landscaping orientation of the building it provides an interesting and improved walking environment. Conclusion: The applicant has met this requirement. Page 3 of 11 CPMC 17.67.070 {1) (a} ~- The architectural characteristics of surrounding buildings, including historic buildings, slxauld be considered, especially if a consistent pattern is already established by similar or complementary building articulation, building scale and proportions, setbacks, architectural st1~Ie, roof forms, building details and fenestration patterns, or materials. In some cases, the existing context is not well de~-rned, or maybe undesirable. In such cases, a znell designed neu1 project can establish a pattern or identih~ from zc?hich future development can take its cues. Findings: As illustrated in the attached photographs of the general neighborhood the only definable architectural characteristic is the predominance of single-story structures and front yards. Whether the proposed project design is compatible with, or compliments the existing neighborhood, ar establishes a pattern or identity Pram which to base future development is subject to the Planning Commission's determination. The Project's design is within the limits established far development within the HMR district. Conclusion: Compliance with these criteria is subject to the Planning Commission's discretion. CPMC 17.67.070 (3) {a) Residential- The main entrance of each prfmary structure should face the street tyre site fronts on, except on corner lots, rc~here the main entrance may face either of the street or be oriented to the corner. For attached dwellings, duplexes, and multi-dwellings that have more than one main entrance, only one main entrance needs fo meet this guideline. Entrances that face a shared landscaped courtt~ard are exempt. Findings: All of the attached dwelling units face N. Third Street. The entrances for each unit face N. Third Street. Conclusion: The site plan meets this requirement. CPMC 17.67.070 {3) (b) (i) -- Residential buildings fronting on a street shall luwe an entrance to the building opening on the street. Single family detached, attached and rowhouse/townhomes residential units fronting on a pedestrian street shall have separate entries to each durelling unit directly from the street. Findings: All of the attached dwelling units face N. Third Street. The entrances for each unit face N. Third Street, with the openings to the stairs open to the street. Conclusion; The site plan meets this requirement. Page 4 of 11 CPMC 17.67.070 (3} (b) (ii) -Ground floor and upper stanf dzl~elling units in a multi- family building fronting a street may share one or more building entries accessible directly from the street, and shall not be accessed through a side yard except far an accessory unit to a single family detached dzclelling. Findings: Lots 2 & 3 share a common entry, and lots 4 & ~ share a common entry accessible directly from the street. Conclusion: The site plan meets this requirement. CPMC 17.67.070 {c) - The main entrances to houses and buildings should be prominent, interesting, and pedestrian-accessible. A porch should be provided to shelter the main entrance and create a transition from outdoor to indoor space. Findings: Though there is not a porch on the ground level, balconies have been provided for each unit on the second stoxy. The entrances to each unit with the exception of the first few steps are sheltered. CPMC 17.67.074 (D} (1} {a} -Building Facades -General -All building frontages greater than forte feet in length shall break any flat, monolitlxic facade by including discernible architectural elements such as, but not limited ta: bay windou1s, recessed entrances and zc~indozc~s, display zi~indozvs, cornices, bases, pilasters, columns, or other architectural details or articulation combined with changes in materials, so as to provide visual interest and a sense of division, in addition to creating cotnmunifiy character and pedestrian scale. The overall design shall recognize the simple relief provided by zaindou~ cutouts or sills on an otherwise, flat facade, in and of itself does not meet the requirements of this subsection. Findings: The details identified in the elevations meet this requirement in creating a sense of division, adds to the community character and the placement of the windows as well as private balconies can be construed to contributing to compliance with the above criteria . Conclusion: The applicant has generally met this requirement. Page 5 of li CPMC 17.67.07 (D) (1) (e) -The dominant feature of any building frontage that is visible from a pedestrian street ar public open space, shall be the luzbitable area zvitli its accompanying zvindozvs and doors. Parking lots, garages, and solid wall facades sluzll not dominate a pedestrian street frontage. Findings. The site plan places the garage entrances in the back to be accessed from the new proposed driveway. The front facade gives the appearance of being the habitable area with the placement of windows, balconies, and entries to each unit facing N. Third Street. There is nat a definition of "habitable" space in the CPMC. Conclusion: The applicant has not specifically met this requirement, though it has the appearance from the N. Third front elevation of being habitable area. The attached homes directly across from Pfaff Park (HMR/TOD) have set a precedent for the proposed floor plan. Compliance with these criteria is subject to the Planning Commission s discretion. CPMC 17.67.U70 (D) (2) (a) Residential -The facades of single family attached and detached residences (including duplexes, triplexes, fnurplexes, townhouses, and rozvhouses) shall comply with the following standards: i. No more than forh~ percent of the Iwrizantal Length of the ground Haar front elevation of a single family detached or attached dwelling shall be an attached garage. ii. When parking is provided fn a garage attached to the primary structure and garage doors face the street the front of the garage should not take up more than 40 percent of the front facade in plan, and the garage should be set back at least ten feet from the front facade. If a porch is provided, the garage maybe setback 10 feet from the front of the porch. In addition, garage doors that are part of the street facing facade of a primary,/ structure should not be more than square feet in area, and there should not be more that one garage door for 16 feet of building frontage. iii. Residential building elevations facing a pedestrian route shall not consist of undifferentiated blank walls, but shall be articulated with architectural details such as zvindozvs, dormers, porch details, balconies or bays. iv. For any exterior wall which is within twenty feet of and facing onto a street or public open space and which has an unobstructed view of that pedestrian street or public open space, at Ieast twenty percent of the ground floor wall area shall be comprised of either display area, zvindozvs, or doorway. Page 6 of 11 v. Architectural detailing is encouraged to proz1ide variation among attached units. Architectural detailing includes but is not limited to the follozning: the use of different exterior siding materials or trim, shutters, different znindazv tijpes or sizes, van~ing roof Tines, balconies or porches, and dormers. The overall design shall recognize that color variation, in and of itself, does not meet the requirements of this subsection. Findings: The applicant has provided all of the above recommended £a~ade designs in their site plan. These consist of separate balconies, windows on the first floor, varying roof lines, meeting the minimum 20 % with windows and doorways and attractive landscaping. The HMR district is the highest density allowed, with 15 % required landscaping. Conclusion: The applicant has met the requirements of the above sections. CPMC ~.7.72.0~0 -Purpose - The purpose of site plan, landscaping and construction plan approz?al is to review the site and Iandscaping plans of the proposed use structure or building to determine compliance zc?ith this title and the building code, and to promote the orderly and luxrmanious development of the city, the stabilihJ of land values and investments, and the general zvelfare, and fo promote aesthetic considerations, and to help prevent impairment or depreciation of land values and development by the erection of structures or additions or alterations thereto znithout proper attention to site planning, Iandscaping and the aesthetic acceptability in relation to the development of neighboring properties. Findings: The proposed Project has been reviewed for compliance with the standards and criteria applicable to the development of property within the HMR/TOD district complies with the minimurr- standards of that district. There are certain discretionary criteria that have been noted that will be subject to consideration and acceptance/ denial by the Planning Commission. Conclusion: Compliance with these criteria is subject to the Planning Commissio~i s discretion. Page 7 of 11 CPMC 17.72.020 -Site plan approval required - A. A site plan application conforming to the requirements of Section T 7.72.030 shall be made: ~. For all construction requiring issuance of a building permit; or 2. l.tpon A change of use. Findings: Requirements under CPMC 17.05.4Q0 for a redevelopment application that takes place in the Transit Oriented District/Corridor, is a type TII application and requires consideration by the Planning Commission for approval. Conclusion: This site plan proposal for redevelopment is located within a TOD- HMR, High Mix Residential ,zoning district, therefore requires approval from the Planning Commission. CPMC 7.7.72.021-Application and review - Applications shall be accompanied by a fee defcned in the city's adopted planning application fee schedule. Such applications and the reviez~1 thereof shall conform to the provisions. Findings: The applicant has submitted the proper application, required documents for consideration and paid the necessary fees far a site plan review. Conclusion: Applicant has met this requirement. CPMC 17.72.030 - In, formation required - An application slu~l2 be filed ulhich shall include the follozving information: A. Name and address of the applicant; B. Statement that the applicant is the oztmer of the propert7~ or is the authorized agent of the ozcmer; C. Address and legal description of the assessor's parcel number of the propertt~; l7. The application shall include an accurate scale draz~1ing of the site, containing at a minimum, the follozc~ing: 1. North arrow, 2. Scale used, 3. Address and legal description of the assessor's parcel number and tax lot of the property, 4. Lot dimensions, 5. Applicable cih, zoning designation 6. Setbacks, 7. Proposed landscaping, Location of aII buildings, parking areas, streets, accesses, sideu1alks, and other improvements, including the dimensions of each, Fage S of Il S. Ground and architectural elevations, 9. Distances between buildings, parking areas, streets, sidezc~aIks and other itrzprouements, 10. Surrounding land uses, 11. Easements, 12. Adjacent streets, 13. Off street parking calculations, ~~. Existing trees, 15. Pedestrian routes and sidewalks, 16. Fencing, 17. Screening of outdoor trash bins, and 18. Tl~e location of all public improvements and all utilities, including their relation to other utilities in the area; E. Construction plans and such other plans and information as are required to show the architecture of all buildings and other improvements; F. In the discretion of the city, a traffic study performed by a licensed professional engineer; and G. Such additional information as is necessart~ to caa•ry out the purposes of this chapter. Findings: The applicant has met the requirements necessary to make a decision for the site plan. Conclusion: The site plan and req~.ired documents and/or supplementary information necessary to either approve or deny this application has been submitted to deem the application complete. CPMC 17.72.1140 ~ Standards- in approving, conditionally approving, or denying the plans submitted, the city shall base their decision on the following standards: A. Landscaping and fencing and the construction of u1alls on the site in such a manner as to cause the same to nat substantially interfere ulith the landscaping scheme of the neighborhood, and in such a manner as to use the same to screen such activities and sights as might be heterogeneous to existing neighborhood uses. The planning commission may require the maintaining of existing trees for screening purposes and for sound and sight insulation from existing neighborhood use; Page 9 of 11 E. Accessibilin~ and sufficiency of fzre fig)zting facilities to suc)z a standard as to provide for reasonable safeh, of life, limb and properhd, including, but not limited to, suitable gates, access roads and fzre lanes so that all buildings on the premises are accessible to fire apparatus; Findings: The proposed site has accessibility from the alley, North Third and Manzanita Street. Conclusion: The site plan meets this requirement. F. Compliance zzlith all cite ordinance and regulations, including Section X6.20.080 pertaining to the maximum number of single dzclellings ar dwelling units aIlozvable on cuI-de-sac streets, and applicable state Iazvs; Findings: This proposal is for redevelopment on existing streets and is not located on a cal-de-sac, therefore is not applicable Conclusion: Not applicable. G. Compliance zvitli such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area and its environs. The architecture and design proposals maybe rejected by the planning commission if found to be incompatible with the existing architectural or design characteristics of adjacent properties or uses. In addition, the planning commission reserves the right to establish additional height, setback, buffering, or other development requirements that may be necessary to ensure Land use compatibility and ensure the )zealth, safefi,, and privr~cd of Central Point residents. Findings: As illustrated in the attached photographs of the general neighborhood the only definable architectural chaxacterisHc is the predominance of single-story structures and front yards. Whether the proposed project design is compatible with, or compliments the existing neighborhood, or establishes a pattern or identity from which to base future development is subject to the Planning Commission's determination. The applicant is using a similar design as the attached single family dwellings across from Pfaff Park The Project's design is within the limits established for development within the HMR district. Conclusion: Compliance with these criteria is subject to the Planning Coxxunissian's discretion. Page 11 of 11 ~$a m ~~ '! x .1V ~ ,~. u lic orks ~~~~ ~~`~,>` e Bob h'rerce, Director Matt Samitore, Dev. Services Cooed. PUBLIC W(JRK~'STAFl~'R~YC}~Z1' August 23, 20t~6 AGENDA ITEM: Five Lot Subdivision for 37-ZW-~3DD, Tax Lot'7'7aQ Applicant: Horiic: Brothers, LLC., 33 l-lathorne, Medford, 01~ 9"~~t4 Zoning: TaD-Hl~'ll~. Traff icy: Based ova the Intexricttional 'F'~~ali~c En<>"nccrs (1'1'1_:.) 'frig Creneration M~a~nual, a five lot residential snhdvision *v~~ill ~entrate approximately ~.OS peak hc?ttr trips (pTlTj. The City of Central Point typic~illy rcrluires traffic studics for any development that generates mare than 25 PHT, l~to traffic study is warr~inted for this ~:ievelol~r~ient. Watc~~: ,~1 l?-inch. water line exists in Manzanita Street. Storm 1_)rain: A l2-inch storm drain pipe exists on Third and M ~ Hite Streets. ~ireet ;~cction. Manzanita is an improved. local residential street. North Third Street is an improved Residenti<~1 Collector. Engi~~ec~~in~ and Devele-Pment Plans and Permits: The Central Point Public Works Departmeztt is charged with mana~ernent of the City's infrastructure, including streets, ~~aierworks, and storm w4rter drainage facilities. l~z ;~e.ncral, the Department's "Standard Specifications acid Lruform Standard Details" f<>~; 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 Depa ent. In ~cneral, tl~e plan submittal shall include pl{t~~ and profile far streets, water, storm drainage and s~:initary sewers, storm drainage calculations, storm drai~~a~c basin map, erosion control plan, utility and outside a~cacy, 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. ai:ter 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 rec{uired to be paid in fu11 at the time the Public Works Pe~~a~it is issued, except Public Works Tnspectio~n fees. After project corr~pletion during the final plat application process, the Public Works Inspector will calculate the appropr~i~tc aa~iount of inspection time to asscsv the deg eloper. Before the final plat ~ipplication is processed the developer must pay the relevant inspections fees tend bond for any uncompleted improvements (as determined. by the Public Works Director. 94© South Third Street ~ Ccr~tral Point, ~7~i' 97"542 541.664.3329 ;Fax 54?,64.6384 _. Conditions of Approval: 1. Allen Improvezx~ent -Applicant shall pave the portion of the alley that will be used for access to the proposed driveway/courtyard lane along the eastern property line. 2. Street Trees -The proposed landscape and irrigation plan omitted street trees in the planters along the Third Street Side. An approved street tree shall be planted in each of the planters or no less than one tree per thirty feet of frontage. 3. Public Utility Easement - As part of the Final Plant and Civil Improvement PIans proper easements for utilities will be required. 4. Court and Lane -Applicant shall design the private access to the TOD courtyard land configuration. The configuration shall not include any parking. Parking shall be provided as part of the driveways servicing the proposed townhouses. 5. Sidewalks -New sidewalks will be required to be constructed around the perimeter of the property along North Third and Manzanita Streets. 140 South Third Street Centro! Poinf, OR 97502 ~ 541.664.3321 , Fax 541.664.6384 i 1 f""4~~IV1~~~ Gi ~ 39 City of Central Port, Oregon Building Department 144 So.Third St.,Central Paint,Or 97542 543.bb4.3321 Cax 541.6~4.b384 www.ci.cen tral-poi nt_or.us E.ois DeSenedetti,(3uilding Oil~icial BUILDING DEPARTMEIeIT STAFF REPORT DATE: 06!27/06 T4: Planning Department Planning file: 06082 FROM: Building Department SUBJECT: ~oznes Brothers, LLC ~lalrne: I-Iome Brothers Address 33 Hawthorne City: Medford State: GR Zip Code: 97504 Property Description: 37-2w-03DD- TL 7700 PURIPUSE: 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 ofthe proposed project. This Is n©t a plan review. This report is preliminary and compiled solely for use by the Central Paint Planning Commission. 1 City of Central Point, Qregan 140 So, Ti~ird St., Central Point, Qr 97542 541.564.33 1 Fax 541.564.6384 www. ci.cen t ra I - po i nt.o r, u s Building Department Lois DeBenedetti, Building Official ~U~I11~II`1G ~I' PAIITII~IENT GI~~IIVIEI>ITSe ~ . Applicant, agent and contractors must comply with all current State of Oregon adopted codes, and apply far all permits through the Central Foint Building Department. 2. ff 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 4SSC Appendix 3 and chapter i 8 of the 4S SC. 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 ail test borings and/or excavations. b. Descriptions and classifications of tl~e 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 Appendiz ~ and chapter 18 and regarding any fill material placed an the site. Fills to be used to support the foundation of any building or structure shall be placed in accordance with accepted engineering practices. 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 gradinglexcavation 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. 2 ~~ City of Central Point, Oregon 1 AQ So.Tlaird 5t., Central Point, Or 97502 541.664.3321 fax 541.664.6354 www.ci.central-point.or.t~s Building DeRartment Laic ~eBenedetti, Building Of~tcial ~. 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 manmade 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 f©rth in the Central Point IV~unicipal Code 8.24.120. 9. Dust control, and track out eliminations procedures must be implemented. 10. Application for building permits will require theee sets of complete plans indicating compliance with Oregon I~.esidential Specialty Code {2005}. See Rowhouse Construction Appendix O {QRSC~ 11. Fire District 3 will determine fire hydrant location, as we11 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. 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. AUgust 24, 24CI~, 2d4~ Nome Brothers, LI~C p64~2 Fire District #3 comt~ents~ Post "IVo Parking Any Time" Signs 'rn the alley access The primary concern is this route will access the garage, which pass a higher fire risk. Alley Access has been allowed in certain situation to be 16 feet minimum. The Oregon Fire code requires 24 feet. To allow the 1 ~ feet access width the No Parking requirement will need to be strictly enforced by local law authority and code enforcement. Mark Moran DFM Planning Department Recommended Conditions of Approval Applicant: Shane Eldsan Home Brothers, LLC File No. U60S2 {Site Plan) Condition No. Descri tion 1 of 5 Applicant must meet all of the requirements of the Public Works Department, Building Department, Planning Department, other outside agency requirements, the requirements must be met of the prior to si in of final lat. 2 of 5 Prior to final plat approval, the landscape strip shall meet adequate landscaping requirements for landscaping strips, with trees identified on the final landscape plan #hat are on the City's approved street tree list for urban conditions. The landscape plan for the landscape strip shall be submitted and approved by the City. Applicant must match the sidewalk and landscape strip with the development to the east on Manzanita Street. The applicant must move the trees to the landscape strips on N. Third Street and Manzanita Street. 3 of 5 CC & R's should be submitted to ensure the upkeep and use of the proposed private driveway along the eastern property line shall be submitted prior to final plat a royal. 4 of 5 The revised site plan shall identify the building moved forward two {2) feet towards N. Third Street, to meet the Public Works requirement fora 16' "Courtyard Lane" vs. the 14' proposed. Prior to final plat approval a revised site plan must be submitted, for approval by the Planning De artment. 5 of S Prior to final plat approval the applicant must provide a four {4)' landscape strip and five {5)' sidewalk on N. Third Street. /~ ~ f: 'F ~ '1 ~ ® ~ t ' '' ` ~~~ rq,~ `4 R i J/ American Yellotivwood Cladrastus Lutea _ Kentucky Coffee -Tree Persian Ironwood G2uercus Kelloggil Zelkava um tra urge Trees _ California E31ark Oak Gymnocladus Dioc,cus Parrotia Persiaa Prtan:~s Sar~garitii Sa~ent Cherry ~elkova Serrata Trees far Urban Ca~ditic~li~s City trees must contend with tremendous bialoc~ical, physical and chemical sfresses; too much water or too li#tte; hot summer temperatures; polluted air, water and soil; and physical damage from vehicles and vandalism. listed below are species that the Tree Commission recommends for withstanding the stress of urban conditions In downtown locations. Exam les of Trees fcrr Urban ~Corldtons: Acer Came estre Acer Ginnala _- Acer Platanoides Amur Merle ~ I~cer Rubrum Car inus Betulus ---- European Hornbeam Goldenrai;~ Tree Fiowenng Pear G mnocladus l~iocus Hedge Maple _® __ Kentucky Coffee Tree ' Koe;reuter~ia Paniculata Little Leaf Linden _ Norwa Maple __. P rr,s calleryar~a "Non-Fruit Bearing"" Quercus Rubra Red Made Red t7ak Tilia Cordata tt X4'9 z, o i ~" i _,. ~ ~ .~ a; ,i f $".~ f- ;' ~`/ r ~~~ A / ~ { T ~.: ~.~_ ._ - F'~- ..~, e ,. .u ~ _.. ~, P8 :.~++, ,yak-3"' .. - _ - .._; >, _ - „~_ - - '. __' ,§~ _ $_ s ~.: ,_, ~- :' ~ ~ ~ %~°:, t' ~, - _ - ~ f ..~ ~ - _. X ;,, ~ ,,n mid ~„ ~ ~ _ _ -- - ~ - .= _ ~~ eft ~`,,• r ~1 a ~~ s~ k ~ ~ ~ ~ tY _ < r ~ ~ -L ,- h _._ +~ ~~.......e. >„n .,_: -~ _ ~ ti~h.~.y f ~~~'"'"-' ~., ~, z~ _ ~° s `j ' ~,a ~~ ~~° ; 'k ATT~~~~~R~T "~.~.,,~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT ATTACHED ROW HOUSING STRUCTURE CONSISTING OF FIVE (S) DWELLING UNITS, LOCATED WITHIN A TOD-HIGH MIX RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT {Applicant {s): Home Brothers) (37 2W 03DD, Tax Lot 7700} Recitals 1. Applicant(s) has/have submitted application for site plan on a .18 acre parcel located on property identified by Jackson County as Account 10141007 in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On, July 18th, 2006, August 1, 2006 and September S, 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. Naw, 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 Paint Municipal Cade apply to this application: A. Chapter 17.66, Application Review Process far the TOD District & Corridor B. Chapter 17.67, Area of Application, Design Standards C. Chapter 17.72, Site Plan, Landscaping & Construction Plans 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 17.66, relating to application review process for the TOD District & Corridor B. Chapter 17.67, relating to Design Standards for the TOD District & Corridor C. Chapter 17.72, relating to Site Plan, Landscaping and Construction Plans Planning Commission Resolution No. {o9ros/2oo6} Section 3. Conditional Approval The applications for site plan herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibit "A", 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 5t~' day of September, 2006. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 5`h day of September, 2006. Planning Commission Resolution No. Planning Commission Chair {0910512006} c~ HOME BROTHERS TENTATIVE F-'LAH ~M.... STAFF P RT ~ ; ~'.",: ~' STAFF REP'C11~T Septezrzber 5, 2006 Planning eprtmene T~ont Hurrti~hrey, AICI', Comn~ur~ity Development Director/ Assistar7t City Aclr77inistratar AGENDA ITEM: Ffie No. 06095 Tentative Plat Consideration of Tentative Plan for a Iive (5) lot subdivision located at 124 North 'T'hird Street, in a TOI7-HMP, High Mix Residential zoning district. The subject property is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37 2W 03T~D, Tax L,ot 7'700. Applicants: Home Brothers STAFF SC}URCE; Lisa Morgan, Planning Technician BACKGROUND: It is the applicant's abjective to develop a fzve (5) unit tawnhouse development an the .18 acre project site (File Na, 06082 , Each unit wzll be awncr accu zed, re ' L11TIn e .. property to be subdivided rota five (5)~ats pcr~this application. ~~~ ~' "~ ~ ~~ ":. ~M Under the current zoning (TC)1~-HMR) the Property can be ~, " ~ ~. .... developed with aminimum/maximum of five (5) units. "~... ~ The prapased subdivision complies with the minimum and average let area and lot dimension requirements as set Earth in Section 17.65.050, Table 2. Vehicular access to each unit will be via a private driveway, This private driveway will be spawn on the final plat as a crass access easement far cash of the proposed lets. 'This easement is Shawn an the tentative plan as a Fourteen (14) foot access/utilzty casement. Public Warks requires this to be sixteen (16) feet width. See Public Warks staff report under City File Na. 06082. (Site Plan application) The Property is currently occupied by a duplex; which will be demolished to accommodate the proposed townhouse development, PROJECT IIw1PI1T Gross Acreage O.18 nVlromnental Lands - Exchtsive Employment Areas - Exciusive Civic Areas - Right-af--Way - Net Acreage 0,1$ Zoning kIMCt Minimum Density per Acre 3Q Maximum Density per Acre 7<IA Project Minimum No. Dwelling Units S Maximum ]rSo. Dwelling Units NA Min. No. Dwelling'I'ypes 1 \\Serverzilla\pl\2006 Land Use Files\6095 Home Brothers Tentative Plan, LLC\06095 Staff Report SUB 9-5-06.doc FINDINGS: Refer to Attachment "C" -Tentative Pian Findings ISSUES: 1. Because the Property has alley frontage and uses the alley for access the Project has been conditioned to improve the full width of the alley to City standards along the Property's entire alley frontage (see Public Works conditions of approval). 2. The three {3) large trees Iocated along N. Third Street, will have to be removed to meet City Standards. They will be replaced with a 5' landscaping strip as well as a 5' sidewalk. This was noted during consideration of the Site Plan application regarding this property under City File No. 06082. ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS: Attachment "A" -Tentative Plan Map Attachment "B" -Public Hearing Notices Attachment "C" -Tentative Plan Findings Attachment "D" -Planning Department Conditions of Approval dated September 5, 2006 Attachment "E" -Public Works Staff Report dated August 23, 2006 Attachment "F" -Building Department Staff Report dated June 26, 2006. Attachment "G" - Proposed Resolution -Tentative Plan ACTIN: Consideration of Resolution No. ,approving the Tentative Plan Application REC~MMENDATI4N: Approval of Resolution Na. ,approving the Tentative Plan Application 11Serverzilla1p112006 Land Use. ta"iles16095 Home Brothers Tentative Plan, LLC106095 Staff Report SUB 9-5-06.doc ~. I __~_~-~ :M' g Utt17~ ~ t~~?~ ~~~WItG~ 6SF+~E hl~ G~~rAL tppVtT, aR, ,,,.a+ ,oo- ro-n~o ,our,.,, r. •~ ~sr~Y '°~ -- --""~~- ,4'C '~ I ~~' ,~TT~~H~E~VT " ~ City of Central Pornt CENTRAL PLaNNING DEPARTMENT Poi NT Tom Humphrey,A1CP Community Oeveiopment I]irector Notice of Public Hearing Date of Notice: June 99, 2006 Meeting Date: July 18th, 2006 Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate) Place: Central Point City Hall 140 S. Second Street Central Point, Oregon NATURE OF MEETING Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review Tentative Plan and Site Plan applications for the purpose of creating five attached single family residential units. The subjec# property is located in a TOD-HMR, High Mix Residential zoning district and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor: map as 37S 2W 03DD, Tax Lot 7700. The address is 426 North Third Street and is located north of Manzanita Street, wes# of North Fourth Street, east side of North Third Street and south of Laurel Street. Applicant: Home Brothers, LLC. Pursuant to ORS 197.763 (3} (e}, failure to raise an iss~ie during this hearing, in person or in writing, with sufficient specificity to afford the decision-makers and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal based on that issue and cannot be raised at the State Land Use Board of Appeals; This notice is being mailed to property owners wi#hin a 100 foot radius of subject property. Notice to mortgagee, lien holder, vendor, or setter: The City of Central Point Land Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it shaft be promptly forwarded to the purchaser. CRITERIA FOR DECISION The requirements for Tenta#ive Plan application review are set forth in Chapters 16 & 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Information and conditions of the project approval, PUBLIC COMMENTS `~ 1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, July 18th, 2006. 2. Written comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 140 South Third Street, Central Point, 4r. 97502. 3. Issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the expiry#ion 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. 4, Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Hall, 140 South Third Street, Central Point, Oregon. The City File Number is; 06082. Copies of the same are available at 1 ~ cents per page. ~. For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at (541) 664-332'1 ext 291. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the application and technical staff reports. The Commission, will hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the application. If allowed, any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set Earth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve or deny the Tentative Plan application as submitted. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about ail Planning Commission decisions. 5~ ~~~ ~ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING State of Oregon County of Jackson S5. I, D i d i Thomas being first duly sworn, depose and say that I arri the P l a n n i n S e c r e t a r far the City of Central Paint, a municipality in the State of Oregon. On the 19th day of ~ ~ n e 2005, I caused a Notice of Public Hearing to be placed in the United States Mail at Central Point, Oregon, addressed to the applicant (and/or applicant's agent), ali owners or contract purchasers of record of the property, and to all property owners within 100 feet of the real property (based an the records of the Jackson County Assessor's Office} that is the subject of this application described as: Tentative Plan and Site Pian applications for the purpose of creatin five attached sin 1e famil residentiai units at 126 North mhird Street (37S 2W 03DD, Tax Lot 7700). Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2 ~ t h day of 3 u n e , 2006. OFFICtAi. SERI. LISA K MDRGAN NOTARY Pt1IiLIC - SR~GQN G4tu4iviISSIC3h! NO. 36481G ~'""---- htY COA#M(SSIQI! EXPIRES JAN. 16.113I17 Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: ~~Zr~ D s-z:.-sip ~V ~ B ATTACHMENT " ~ Findings -Tentative PIan Applicant: Hone Brothers Agent Shane Elsdon Purpose: To create (five) 5 zero lot Iine residential lots File No. 06095 CPMC T6.10.010 Submission of application -Filing Fee. The applicant shall submit an application and tentative plan together izrith improvement plans and other supplementary material as mad be required to indicate the deveIapment plan and shall submit ten (1 O) copies to the cit7~ together with a filing fee defined in the citi~'s adopted planning application fee sclu'dule. Findings: The applicant has met the criteria, and the application has been deemed complete. Conclusion: The application coar~plies with Section 16.10.010. CMPC 16.10.030 General Information -The fallazning general information sluzll be shown on or included with the tentative plan: A. Proposed name of the subdivision. This name must not duplicate or resemble the name of another subdivision in the counhj; B. Date, narthpoint, and scale of draining; C. 1Jocation of the subdivision by section, tazttnship, and range, and a Legal description sufficient to define the location and boundaries of the proposed tract or the tract designation or other description according to the records of the count2~ assessor; D. Names and addresses of the Dinner or owners, applicant and engineer ar surveyor; E. A title report indicating all interest of retard in the propertT~ which is the subject of the application. Findings: With the exception of 16.10.010(A) the applicant has properly identified on the tentative plan all of the required 'information noted in items "S - E". Conclusion: Subject to the condition that pxiox to final plat approval the applicant shall have a County appxoved subdivision name, the application complies with Section 16.10.030. Page 1 of 6 a"'; ; Cam' ~~ CPMC 1G.10.04D Existing Conditions -The fallowing existing conditions shall be slwzvn on the tentative plan: A. The locafian, z[~idths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public zc~ays zi1ithin or adjacent to platted streets or other public ways within ar adjacent to platted streets ar other public zijays within ar adjacent to the tract, easements, railroad rights--af zoay and such other important features within or adjacent to the tract as maybe required by the ci hj; B. Contour lines related to some established bench mark or other datum as approved by the city when the city determines that the nature of the topography or size of the subdivision requires such data. Contour lies shall have the following minimum intervals: 1. Tzr~o foot contour intervals for ground slopes less than five percent; 2. Five foot contour intervals for ground slopes exceeding fzve percent; C. The location of at least one temporary bench mark within the plat boundaries; I7. Location and direction of aii zvatercourses and drainage systems; E. Natural features, such as rock outcroppings, marshes and wooded areas; F. Existing uses of the propertty, including location of aII existing structures which tl~e subdivider proposes to leave on the propertTy after platting; G. The location within the subdivision and in tl~e adjoining street and prapertty of existing sezners and water mains, culverts and drain pipes, and all other existing or proposed utilities to be used an the prapert?y to be subdivided and invert elez~afions of sewers at points of probable connection. H. Zoning on and adjacent to the tract. Findings: The applicant has adequately identified iterns "A, C, F, G and H" Conclusion: With the exception of items "B, D, and E"; which are not applicable to this application, the application is in compliance with Section 16.10.040. CMPC 1.6.Tp.050 Additianai information -The follazving additional information shall also be included an the tentative plan: A. Streets, showing location, width, proposed names, approximate grades and approximate radii of curves and the relationship of all streets to any projected streets as shown of any development plan adopted by the Cihy; B. Easements, shoo?ing the width and purpose; C. Lots, sltou1ing approximate dimensions, area of smallest lot ar lots and utility easements and building setback lines to be proposed if any; D. Sites, if any, proposed for purposes other than dzi1ellings; Page 2 of 6 L~ "~ E. Area in square footage of each lot and the average lot area. Findings: The tentative plan includes all of the above information.. Conclusion: The application is in compliance with Section 16.10.050. CPMC 16.10.060 Partial Development-When the properh~ to be subdivided contains only part of the tract owned or controlled by the applicant, the city may require a development plan for layout of streets, nurnbered lots, blacks, phases of development, and other improvements in the undivided portion, indicating inter-relationship zaith the portion sought to be divided. The city shall have authorihy to require that any adjacent parcel or parcels ozclned or controlled by the applicant but not included in the proposed subdivfsion boundaries be included in the development u1henever inclusion of such parcel ar parcels would be an appropriate extension of the development and in the best interests of the public, considering the development plan and the relationship betz~1een the surrounding area and the area proposed for development. Findings: This project will not be developed in phases since the development consists of a single structure (consisting of zero lot line single family residential lots). The applicant is redeveloping an existing lot, with existing streets already in place. Conclusion: Not applicable. CPMC 16.10.070 Explanatory information - An y of the folloz~~ing information may be required by the cit7f and if it cannot be shozUn practicably on the tentative plan, it shall be submitted in separate statements accompanying the tentative plan: A, A vicinit3y map shozi~ing all existing subdivisions, streets and unsubdivided land ownerships adjacent to the proposed subdivision and showing hoz~1 proposed streets map be connected to existing streets; B. Proposed deed restrictions in oufline form; C. Approximate centerline prafzles shozi~ing the proposed finished grade of all streets, including the extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision; D. The approximate location and size of all proposed and existing water and sewer lines and storm drainage systems. Page 3 of 6 Findings: The additional information identified in Section 16.14.070 is not mandatory and only required if requested by the City. The City did not request such information during the pre-application meeting. Conclusion: Not applicable. CPMC 16.10.pSU Tentative Plan Approval -Approval of the tentative plan shall not constitute final acceptance of the final plat of the proposed subdivision or partition for recording; hou7ever, approval of the tentative plan shall be binding upon cih~ for the purpose of the approval of the final plat if the final plat is in substantial compliance zt?ith the tentative plan and any conditions of approval thereof The action of the council in approving the tentative plan shall be noted on tzt?o copies thereof, including reference to any attached documents describing any conditions. One copy of the tentative plan shalt be returned to the applicant and the other retained in the city's files n1itlz a memorandum setting forth the action of the council. Findings: The above procedural requirements for approving a tentative plan are governed by the Municipal Code, including conditions of approval as set forth in the Planning Commission's resolution of action. Conclusion: Submittal of, and action on this application complies with the requirements of Section 16.14.080. CPMC 16.10.090 Conditions on Tentative Plan Approval -The cit7~ may attach to any tentative plan approval given under this chapter specific conditions deemed necessary in the interests of the public health, safeh~ or welfare, including but not limited to the following: A. Construction and installation of any on-site or off-site improvements, including but not Iimited to sidewalks, curbs, gutters, streets, street signs and street lights, traffic control signs and signals, zi3ater, storm drainage, sanitan~ sewer, and park and recreation improvements. In requiring off-site improvements, the citl~ shall find that said improvements are reasonably related to the development and would serve a public purpose such as mitigating negative impacts of the proposed development. All Improvements required under this subsection slu~ll be made at the expense of the applicant, and shall conform to the provisions of the Standard Specifications and I.l~niform Standard Details for Public Works Construction in the City of Central Point, Oregon, houlever, the city, in its discretion, may modifi~ such standards and determine site specific design, engineering and construction specifications when appropriate in the particular development; Page 4 of 6 B. An agreement by the ozimer of the properh~ to waive, on his or leer behalf, and on behalf of alI future owners of the Iand, and objection to the formation of a local improvement district zahich may be formed in the future to provide and of the improvements specified in subsection A of this section; C. An agreement by the ozi?ner of the propert?~ to enter into a 7c~ritten deferred improvement agreement, providing that one or more the improvements specified fn subsection A of this section s1u~11 be made by the ozcmer at some future time to be determined b~ the cita~; D. And Agreement entered into pursuant to subsections B or C of this section shall be recorded in the counh~ recorder's office and shall be intended to thereafter run zc~ith the land, so as to bind future o7vners of the Iands affected. And and all recording costs shall be borne by the applicant; ~. And other conditions deemed b~ the cit1~ to be reasonable and necessary in the interests of tl~e public health, safeh~ or zt1eifare. Findings: Conditions of approval addressing the above are presented in the Public Works Staff Report Dated August 23, 2006. Conclusion: Based on the conditions of approval set forth in the Public Works Staf£ Report dated August 23, 2006 this application is in compliance with Section 16.10.090. CPMC 17.65.050 TOD DISTRICT ZONING STANDARDS - Table 2 (pgs. 1 and 2j identify the required minimum and average lot area and dimensions for development in the TOD-HMR zoning district. Findings: The maximum allowed number of units per net acre is 30 units. However, when you apply the minimum lot size allowed of 1200 square feet with the average lot size required of 1500 square feet for rowhousing the maximum number of units that can be allowed on this .18 lot (7,840 square feet) is 5 units. The minimum Iot width for attached row housing in the HMR district is 18' wide. The two smallest interior Iots are 23' wide with the two end Iots measuring between 33'-38.3b'. Page 5 of 6 The minimum lot depth for this district is 50'. With the access/utility easement along the eastern property Iine, the Iot depths are 55.18' deep. In the TOD District, easements are not deducted from the gross Iat area, since this is an easement and not a right o£ way, this is allowed. Conclusion: The application complies with the minimum standards set Earth in Section 17.65.050. Page 6 of 6 f..3 f~ ATTaGHMENT " ~ Planning Department Recommended Conditions of Approval Applicant: Shane EIdson Home Brothers, LLC File No. 06095 (Tentative Plan) Condition No. Descri tion ~ Approval of this Tentative Plan as set forth in Attachment "G" is subject to approval of the site plan a lication Ci File No. 06082. 2 Prior to final plat approval applicant shall submit CC & R's addressing use and maintenance of the access easement alon the eastern ro er line. 3 Applicant must have a Jackson County approved subdivisian name on the Final Plat A lication. (/~iQ', pi y~ ~$ VT .... ~~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 _ ~dtli~ C)i'~C' ~~~r!`tri'~'l~!` ~~F~s 8~~7 I-'terc~, C-drecfQt Miff Sar~itor, C7ev. Services Cvorcf. P~BLI~" C1 STAF'.1'?FI'~1R"1" Arrgrast ~3, 20~G h~i~~e Lot ~'ubdivision for 3~-ZVd-tl~DD, Tax Lot 7~t~0 Ahl~lie~~t: Ila~rt~: l.~ratlt~:.rs, LLC., 33 T-lar,~~tho~~ilc, ~'~~Iedfard, (~R 9'75€14 ,Zoning. TO~D-H1v1R T`r~-ff~ct 3ased orr floc .Ittternation~~l 'T'raffic Rngineers (~.l..R~ Trip Generation Matxual, a five lot residential subcl~~ision will ~cni;ratc ahhroxi~natcay 5.~5 peak hour trips (FfTT}. The City of C,'e~itral Point typically rctluires tr,tl~fic studios far any development that generates more hart 25 1'Il"1', No tr~~fiic study is warranted far this dcrrelc>l~ment. I~:.~isiin~ Jrrt'raratructurrc. ~?!'<ii%r: ;~ 1?-inc1~ ~-vaCer line exists in ~,~1an~anit<~ ~treei. Storm Drain.: :~. 1?-inch stot~nt drain pipe exists oal 'T'hird and anr..azlita Streets. Street Section: ~9at~arlil£i is an improved local ~~esidential street. North Third Street is an improved Residential Collector. Ertinecrir~~; artd DevelvTrent p'Ians anal :Permits: 'l'he Central Faint Public Works Department is charged with manabemcnt cif the City's infrastruct~trea it~cllyding streets, waterworks, and storm ~~~atcr dra~inai;i~ facilities. In ~enct~al, the Department's "Standard SpeciiicaCions and Uniform Standard Det{ails l~.>r Fut~li Works Canstruction'° shall govern haw public facilities are to be constructed. The Developer is ealcouraged to obtain the latest version ofthese specifications Pram the Public Works Dep~irtmetlt. In general, the plan submittal. shall include pl~~it and profile for streets, water, stor~~~ drainage and sanitary sew+~rs, storm drainage calculations, storm draina~;c b~7sin map, erosion control plan,. unlit}~ anal outside agency notificatia7~s ~in~l approvals. The plan may alst~ include applicable traffic studies, legal descriptions and a trahlic control plan. A 1'uhlic. L~t~c~rks 1'~;rmit will only be issuedcliiel~ the Department Di~•ector apprave~ the final construction drawings. After approval, the fees associated ~~;rith the developxilent will be calculated and attached tc7 the public works permit. X11 fees axe required to be paid in full at the time tl~e Public Works Ferrrtit is issu~;d, e:~cept Public ~~~orks Inspection fees. After project completion dru•ing the final plat application process, tl~e Public ~'~'orl:s lz~spcctor will calculate the appropriate amount of inspection time to assess the developer. ~eiore the final flat application is processed the developer must pay the relevant inspections fees and bond f~~r any uncomplet~;d improvements (as det~:rininetl by the Public Works Director), ~ 40 South Third Street ~ Cenfral Paint, {~R 9752 54 ~. fi64.332 fi Fax 541. Sfi4, 6384 Conditi©ns of Approval: 1. Alley Improvement -Applicant shall pave the portion of the alley that will be used for access to the proposed driveway/courtyard lane along the eastern property line. 2. Street Trees --- The proposed landscape and irrigation plan omitted street trees in the planters along the Third Street Side. An approved street tree shall be planted in each of the planters or no less than one tree per thirty feet of frontage. 3. Public Utility Easemenfi - As part of the Final Plant and Civil Improvement Plans proper easements for utilities will be required. 4. Courtyard Lane -Applicant shall design the private access to the TOD courtyard land configuration. The configuration shall not include any parking. Parking shall be provided as part of the driveways sezvicing the proposed townhouses. 5. Sidewalks -New sidewalks will be required to be constructed around the perimeter of the property along North Third and Manzanita Streets. 144 Soufh 7"hird Street Central Point, OR 97502 ~ 549.664.3321 ~- Fax 541.664.6384 .~~T~"~~~ME~1~' " ~ City of Central Point, Orogor~ Building Department 344 So.Third St.,Centrai Point,Or 97502 543.664.3321 fax 541.664.b384 www.ci.censrai-point.arus F_ois C3eBenedetti, Building Offtciai BUI~,DING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE: 06!27/06 'T'O: Planning Department Planning file: 06082 FROM: Building Department SUBJECT: Homes Brothers, L~.C Name: Home Brothers Address 33 Hawthorne City: Medford State: OR Zip Code: 97504 Property Description: 37-2w-03DD-- TL 7700 PURPOSE: The staff report is to provide information to the Flanning Commission and the Applicant xegarding City Building Department requirements and conditions to be included in the design and development of the proposed project, This is n©t a plan review, This report is preluninary and compiled solely for use by the Central Point Planning Commission. 1 City of Centre! Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St., Central Pa+nt,or 97S€12 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.ci.ceatra {-poi nt.or.u s Building Department l.ais ~e8enedetti, Building Official BUILDING DEP~TIVI]ENT CGI~IENTS: Y, Applicant, agent and contractors must comply with all current State of Oregon adopted codes, and apply for all permits through the Central Paint 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 I S of the DS SC. 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 r 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. A soil investigation report, and a report of satisfactory placement of fill (including special inspections of placement of fill and co~npaetion} acceptable to the Buildzng 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: l . 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 ar parking areas. 2 E~ ~~ City of Central Point, Oregon 14~ So.l~hird St., CenEra! Paint, Or 975(12 541.6G4.332f Fax 541.564.b384 +nrww.ti.eenTral-ppint.or.us Building Department Lois [}eBertedetti,6uilding Official 6. To move or de;inoIish any existing structures located on the property ca11 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 eliminations procedures must be implemented. i0. Application for building permits will require three sets of complete plans indicating compliance with Oregon Residential Specialty Code (2005}. See Rowhouse Construction Appendix 4 {QRSC) i 1. 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. 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. -~ /" PLANNING CO~~~%IISSION SOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION GR,~NTi'~O TENTATIVE PLAN APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION FOR AN ATT~t'1 IL;D It.OW HOUSING DEVELOPMEN"1' CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL Ol~ "1'J-f E S 1"I 7 ;PLAN FOR THIS PARCEL UN ! )1 ~;R CITY` I~ l 1~E NO, 06082 (Applicant: Home Brothers) (37 ZW 03DD Tax Lot 7700) T~~~~ it<~I~; 1. Af~l~licant{~1 l~a~;'~~~-zve submitted application f:or tentative five (5) lot land divi~i~~n on a 0.18 acre parcel located ~~~ property identified by Jackson County as Map 372W03DD- TGax. Lot 7700 in the City of Centz~al Point, Oregon. 2. On, July 18, 2006, August 1, 2006 anal September 5, 2006, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted adult'-noticed pzrt~l is 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 PLAI~TNING COMMISSION OF T1-IE CITY OF CENT L POINT, O GON, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Criteria Ap~lic~ble to Decision, The following chapters of the Central Point Municipal Code apply to this application: A, Chapter 16 -Subdivisions A. Chapter 17.65, TOD-HMR, High Mix Residential District Section 2. ~I~indiz-r~> <rr~d Conclusions. The Plannin~~ Commission. hereto}r adopts by re f'crence ail findings o1~ 1 a~:t set forth in the City staff rLportS, tend concludes that, except where addressed.. in the conditions of approval, the applications and proposal comply with the requirements of the following chapters ofthe Cezrtz`ai Point Municipal Code: A. Chapter 16.10, relating to rcquirt.rl information on plat, processes and the assi`,~nment of conditions by the City pcriincnt to the application. B. Chapter 1..7.65, relating to uses, lot sire, lot coverage, setback and building height. Planning Cormnissio~x Resolution. No. (09/OSf06) Section 3. Conditional Approval. The applications for tentative land partition herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibit "A", being the official staff report 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 5th day of September, 2006. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 5th day of September, 2006. Planning Commission Chair Planning Commission Resolution No. {09/05106} ~ Ag 'T`[RE GE'NTER LES ScH ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS: Attachment "A" -Site Plan Map/Landscape Plan Attachment "B" -Elevations Attachment "C" -Applicant's Project Narrative Attachment "D" - DLCD Notice Attachment "E" - Site PIan Planning Department Findings Attachment "F" - Public Works Staff Report Attachment "G" -Building Department Staff Report Attachment "H" -Fire District # 3 Comments Attachment "I" w. RVSS Comments Attachment "J" - Planning Department Conditions of Approval Attachment "K" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of a Resolution approving the Site Plan for a Les Schwab Tire Center. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution ,conditionally approving the Site Plan for a Les Schwab Tire Center, contingent upon the completion of the split ,zoning issue. Les Schwab Site Plan Page 2 of 2 ~ j 44 w N V V ~ +w~y 5EE NEXT SHEET FOR NOTES d DETAILS ~ ~ Qn~ . p 7 K ( ~ ~ ~ Q .n _ [ ~1 Q 2 J m V ~1 uar n]a O 1.p J lOG ~° ..~s.o..s--~ ~ ,'~ .,_- __ >. { t ~.iS~ E~~vATICtI I t ti ~-...,., ~.a ... ~m .~ 'v ' i .. ~~ b,,,,. . i_ ` ] waaxraA ~ :: _ - ~~ ~ ( r _~ . _ . _.._ h h -' f Fr 1 r. ~ - _ `. - -~-r-.-x--'--r- 'r ~ ~ti ~ _ _ Y .. __ 'TZ -L~.~ evww { ~ t ~ _ { j {{ {C` k A 1 ~ t .. ..~ 4 y~ f 11 _ .. ,pu ~ J. t 1 ,i __ .~STpLP:'A.~IOp CE3dTR6~L POINT, oR ~~~ _-~: L~tbViYlF C ~~ ¢ ~:+ i G U z£f ~,: e 7 ~~ a°`z'' ~~~ '~z~ `- u ~ _ t ^ ", t= V "z a.:i~ F~-~5 G ~n '~~ a to s~ ~''' ,. ~ tl? ~° Fb' r '~ ~ :~ ~ o i t~'~' ~ P ~~ ~~ Z ~ ~ ~~~~lE SCHIIVAB TIRE CE RR ~S ~onstrucit~n C~ ~ItN~ ~ ~ ATTACHMENT ".__.~„" D L C D NO'~'IC~ OF PROP~S~D AMENDMENT This form must be received by DLCD at least 45_days prior to the lirsf cvidentiarv hcarinix per ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter bb4 -Division 18 - and Senate Bi11543 and effective on June 30, 1499. See reverseside for subrnittai requirements) Jurisdiction: ~ ~LN~YaI dot n.~- Local File No.: ~pol~-A~-I.~3 ,,..._.. _ (Ifna number, use none) Date of First Evidentiary ~iearing: ~_~Y'~,~ Date of Final Hearing: QC{~~x.Y3rZlSdfv (ivtust be filie3 in) (Must be filed in) Date this proposal was sent or mailed: ~8~ (Daft mailed or scut to Di..CD) . 'Has thus proposal pz~eviatisly"Flee"n subrimi~ed to DLCD'1 -Yes: - - X10:_ / ~ Date: .Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Land Use Regulation Amendment /' Zoning Map Amendment 2~[ew Land Use Regulation ~ Other: (Please Specify Type of Action} Briefly summarize the proposal. Igo not use technical terms. Do not write "See Attached." . 7o Gornplc~t. ~ ho-,~Kc,cprrr9-~si~fora parrelt~a~-~asc.+~ca-tad wt+i-spl~z~ntnq. r -i' er~t'ovt. s~,~ fat 75ya a aS a C-$ a -~ar+f~ Co m~.v~la1 zon ~n+ ,n., ~ a~ppraur r~rna~ ng ~QD~Cfion ~25?'~ s a ~ `c'at~s~-~~~~ ,d~stric~ ~n ~ceroreianct - ~v o' ~- ~ ce' t x. asr~, ~.h~. ~1-'G tot ~cd 1~ pt3ctd tn~-W>G d;>~rECh~k4ta.+ acacos,~t~ -brhL rca-ftr ia~-a~c8~ ~ d a za Sara, Plan Map Changed from : ~ ~~ , ...._. to k~ k r ~ - V~~r ~r~W'i Zone Map Changed fro 5 Tour~at t t 40'~~ C 5.~ TTha rouq k-Fa~ ~ ~a. p ~ ste not ......,._;,...., ....... , ,. , .,...._ Location: ~~ 6~s+~~'~e~u{d.1e,_Ra~d,~ ~_ Acreslnvolved~ ~oIO pr~'ar ~~ ~~'h'T"sb~.ftot~K Rs ~~ i~>y+~-e,~S. ~+~nr«k. Specified Change in Density: Current: ___~ ~,4. ,,, ,,.._ Proposed: ~1~j4 Applicable Statewide Planning Goals: ~ [k Is an Exception Proposed? Yes: No: / Affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts: ~' o-~ C~+'a~ Pa~f r DLC~ Local Contact: ~,,1~d /Ltb rc{arL _ Area Code + Phone Number: a4t- folod~-~.~L( ¢,~{. Z~'J Address: 1413 S . T~ir~ S-~rre~ City: I ~Ol?'~ ~ Zip Code + 4: g7~Z DLCD No.: c E ... ~ s .j~ ~ ~ ~ .,. ,~ ~ ~: \ , ~ ~ , ~, ~ x~ 1 ~f"1~ I l I V 1~ l ~I ~" 99 Findin s -Site Plan Applicant: Les Schwab Tire Centers of Portland, LLC Agent: George Bunting Purpose: To construct a Les Schwab Tire Center File No. 07004 CPMC 17.46.010 ~ Purpose -The C-5 district is intended to provide for commercial and business uses that are most appropriately Iacated along or near major highways thoroughfares, and are largely dependent upon highzr~ay visibility and easy vehicular access. CPMC 17.46.020 (C) {2) -Permitted uses -- Tire Sales and Service Findings: Under the above referenced section Tire Sales and Service is a permitted use. As noted under Issues in the Planning Department staff report dated September 5, 20Q6, this project site has a split zoning designation that was created with the approval of Hamrick Business Park. The project area currently has approximately 25% C-4, Tourist & Office Professional, and approximately 75% C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial zoning district. The site plan would have the split zoning boundaries located almost down the center of the proposed building. CPMC 17.12.050 allows a parcel that was created to inherit the greater portion of the zoning district (in this case the C-5 zone) provided that the lesser zone does not exceed 20' in width. Since in this case, the C-4 zone is approximately 50', proper notification was provided to DLCD to legitimize the entire parcel having a zoning designation of C-5. The split zoning can be approved by the Planning Commission, and will be brought to the Planning Commission at their regularly scheduled meeting on October 3, 2Q06, for recommended approval. Conclusion: In the C-4 zoning district fire sales & service is not a permitted use. Tire sales & service is a permitted use in the G5 zoning district. Therefore, no building permits may be issued for the construction of Les Schwab Tire Center, until this housekeeping action has been completed. The Findings provided in this attachment will address the approval criteria applicable to this project within a C-5 zoning district. CPMC 17.46.040 ~- Height regulations - IVa building ar structure shall exceed thirty fzve feet in height in the G5 district. Findings: The maximum height of the proposed building at the screened rooftop unit is approximately 25 feet in height. The remainder of the roofline is approximately 21 feet in height. Page 1 of 4 Conclusion: The proposed building meets this requirement. CPMC I7.46.050 (B} -Lot width. The minimum lot width shall be fzfh~ (50) feet. Findings: The lot width varies from 197.41' to approximately 210' at the widest portion of the lot. Conclusion: The lot width exceeds the minimum lot width required. CPMC 7.7.46.050 (C) -Lot depth. The minimum lot dept sha21 be one hundred (100) feet. Findings: The lot depth is a total approximately 465' feet deep. Conclusion: The lot depth exceeds the minimum. lot depth requirement. CPMC ~7.4fi.050 (D} -Front yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of ten feet and shall be maintained as landscaped open space. When off street parking is Iocated in the front yard area, the landscaped strip maybe reduced to not less than six feet with Planning Commission approval of the site plan. Findings: The applicant has provided approximately eight ($) feet of landscaped area on site. The applicant has provided additional landscaping and a six {6} foot sidewalk within the public right of way for the East Pine Street frontage. The applicant has also added an additional landscaping strip along the east side of the property where a new road will be Iocated. The applicant has provided a landscaping strip along the west property line where the trash enclosure and recycle trailer will be Iocated to serve as screening. Conclusion: The Planning Commission can approve the landscape strip at approximately eight ($) feet with the site plan approval. There is parking Iocated in the front yard area, with additional landscaping and sidewalk within the public right-a£ way. Page 2 u£ ~ ` ti CPMC x.7.46.050 (Ej Side Yard. Tlie side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except when abutting structures are proposed zuitlz a common zc~all that complies with the Llrniform $uilding Code. Findings: The applicant has allowed for a fifteen (15) foot setback from the building to the west property Iine at the narrow portion of the Iot closest to East Pine Street There is approximately an eighty-two (82) foot setback along the east property line where the greatest portion of the parking lot will be located, Conclusion: The applicant has exceeded the side yard set back requirements. CPMC 17.46.050 (Fj Rear Yard. No rear yard shall be required in the C-5 district except when floe rear lot line abuts propertl~ in a residential (R) district and then the rear yard shall &e a minimum of tzventl~ feet. Where propertz~ fn the G5 district is separated from property in a residential (R) district by a public alley or street, no rear yard setback shall be required. Findings: Though the site plan allows for a rear yaxd setback, the applicant is not required to do so, therefore exceeds this requirement. Conclusion: The applicant has exceeded the requirement for a rear yard set back since one is not required in this case. CPMC T7.46,05p {G) Lnt coverage. No requirements except as necessan~ to comply with applicable yard, parking and loading requirements. Findings: The applicant has provided the minimum parking spaces allowed based on the square footage of the building and loading requirements. However, based on the Uniform Building Code for ADA accessibility and the number of required parking spaces, a total of three (3} spaces must be reserved far ADA. The applicant has provided a fatal of two (2} spaces. Conclusion: The applicant must dedicate ane more parking stall for ADA accessibility to meet this requirement. Page 3 of 4 .~. CPMC 17.46.070 Signs and lighting of premises. A. No illumination sign ar Lighting standard used for the illumination of premises shall be sa designed acid installed that its direct rays are tazuard or parallel to a public street ar highway ar directed ta~aard any properh~ that Ties within a residential district. B. ~'a red, green or amber lights or illuminated signs maybe placed in such a locatian ar position that they cauld be confused 7~}ith, ar may interfere u1ith, any official traffic control device, traffic signal or directional guide signs, C. Sign in the C-5 district shall be permitted and designed in accordance zuitli Chapter X5.24 and with Section 17.60.10. Findings: The applicant has noted on the site plan that all signs or lighting placed on the building shall have the internally lit signs shielded downward to meet requirements outlined in A - B. Item `C' shall be reviewed for compliance during the building permit process .for the pole sign proposed for the NE corner of the subject property, CPMC 17.46.080 Off street parking. Off street parking and laading space shall be provided as required in Chapter 17.64. Findings: CPMC 17.64.040 (5) sfates that: Not less than one space per each three (300} hundred square feet of grass flaar area. The gross floor area is 16, 240 square feet, so a total of 54 spaces are required. The applicant has provided 56 spaces. Two of the spaces have been reserved for ADA accessible parking stalls. Based on the number of required parking spaces a total of three (~) ADA accessible parking stalls shall be provided. Conclusion: Applicant will have to provide one (1) mare ADA accessible parking space to meet the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Page 4 of 4 ~~ '~ Findings. -~ Secfiion 5 (Economics) of the Comprehensive Plan Applicant: Les Schwab Tire Centers of Portland, LLC Application: Site PIan Purpose: To construct a Les Schwab Tire Facility SECTION 5.1 Scape -The Comprehensive PIan also recognizes the communih~'s interest in playing a leading commercial role in the Rogue Valley by providing a full range of goods and services to its market area. Findings: The nearest Les Schwab Tire Facility is located in Medford, approximately 4.8 miles from Central Point. This facility will provide a local service to residents of Central Point, as well as traffic along East Pine Street and Interstate 5. Conclusion: This proposed service meets the scope of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 5.4 Market Opportunities -Strategically, businesses in the planning area are situated to also intercept shoppers traveling south to central Medford. Findings: At this proposed location for Les Schwab, there is the opportunity present to intercept shoppers going to a Medford location (approx. 4.8 miles away). The next nearest stores are located in Ashland and Grants Pass. Conclusion: The location for this business would attract the attention of local residents, travelers heading south to Medford, and travelers headed north to Josephine County. This use and proposed location meets the possible maxket opportunities. SECTION 5.S Traveler Services District - Interstate 5 Freeway is tl~e only nortlz- south freeway between the Pacific Ocean and the Rocky Mountains. Intercepting freeway traffic is a most profitable form of commerce. Travelers passing by on the freeway use fezv if any tax supported services, Yet, when they pull off the freeuray, spend the night at a motel, eat a meal or tzvo, gas up the car and get back on the road, they substantially enhance the Ioca1 economy. In economic terms, the money they spend is counted as export income to the Local economy. Findings: Les Schwab Tire Centers offers a variety of services such as batteries, brake work, alignments, lifting, lowering, shacks & struts including the obvious, fire sales. It increases the available services to the local community as well as providing limited emergency vehicle services. This increases the potential for travelers along Interstate 5 to use this facility, and take advantage of the existing commercial uses in the vicinity. Which are food and lodging. Page I e£ 1 . ~;{; ., ~ ~cali~ brs ep~rtment ,;, u .P~.~LIC' WC7.~'.~"S S~A~", Rpt~RT Augat I ~, X006 ~Cgf~~~'I):~ liT;~: -- - - - ~ite }'}an }~e~, ic~~~ f~~r 3'7-2W-Ol~C, ~"ax Lots 80~ a ~a~b Pierce, Director Nl~~att ~S~~rr~itof°e, Dev. ti~ervices Cvc~rd. Applicrrr~t: I,es ~cl~wal~ Tire Center r?fPortland, Inc., 6~1i~ I`~"~~ ~Sa~Iras "dwy., l'rir~c~aill:~, C~ 9'~'I54 Zoning: C'..>, Coanraacrei~al Thorou~lalare `~ ~ ~-aftii~ a 13ascd on t}ac InsCitute of Transp~~?'tatiora 1?n~incers (}'1'L?) "1 r.i}~ Gencrati~> I~Iaa~ual, ~ Tire Moro adjlrsted Pcak IIcnrr "l~a•i}-~ is 2.99 leer ~ 100f1 dross square feet. I~he proposed. }('~,?t~U square font facility world ~rcncratc ~ri~ cstiri~ated 48.55 peak brrtrr~ trips (l'HT`). 'I"he Public Wo.t•}cs }~)epartrazcrat did. not recluir•c a Trarasportatitm tmpac~t /1.n~rlysis ~'I'IA) for dais dcvel~~~~a~aent because t}u Last 1?ine ~trcct Cor•ric}or fn~t~rr~vcrncr~t }'}are traraspc~rt~r~tioar ir~aprowements to this area and ia~tcrse~Ctior~ ba~c-c beery co~~~pleted lay the do~~c}opcr prioa' lta ilru s~rbrr~issiora of this Iartd use application. "l•hc City ,af Ce~~tra} Point will nzoalitc~r ta`al'(ic rates at~c} ttrr•r~in; :noven~rer~ts as the area develops. When appropriate, }inaiti~d access to the area will be rewired by the City. far traffic 4ta~~y ~~~~ re~huari~cc~. l~;~istin~ Iaifrs~at~ ~~~~ifl~r~:: - -- ~11(rt~~ titi}fries exist ill front of or adjacent to t}ac, ~t~c~posed developra~ca~t. ~';rtgir<7~~~rirflt; aYid D~wclof~a~x~ret Pl~~~a land Peru~it~. J~}~e. C~cr~tr•al Pcai~at Public ~,ri~'or}s Department is claartx~etl with rzranapcmcr~t of the City's i~~}r•astructure, }r~clric}iz~~, ~treefs, u~atc>rwc~r•lcs, sand storm watez' da'ai7~abc ~;~eilities. Ire ~cr~eral, the ~Dc~~artrncnt'S "`~trriaclard ~pccifications and t 1nili~rnl Standard t~etails for Public ~~ors Crr7a5tructior~'" shall govern. low public fay ilitieti arc tc~ be co~astr°~ictcc}. 'l'he Dc:~+eloper is encouraged to obtain the l~tt~st versit>n of these specifications from the P~ul7lic Wc>r}~s })cpartaraerlt. In, tcnera}, tltc; p}an s~zbr~itt~rl shall include plan and profile for streets, water, storrla da•air~ra~e ar~d sar7itary sL•uers, storr~2 drarinagc. calculatioaas, storm drainage basin map, erosion control. plan. trtitity and~ou~sidc a~cracy Hoff}icatiort and approvals. "I4he plan may also include applicable traffic studies, legal descripli~~ns and a traffic cc~rrtrol plan. A Public ti'~or•~s }'erit will only be issued after the Departr~~cnt Director approves the final cc~nst~~uction drat~~;~inbs, Af•~er approval. the Iec~ associated with the develc>pn~rer~t e~~il1 be calculated ar~d <rttaclled to tlac public works permit. ill 1"~es are required to be paid h>r full at t1~e tins~e the Ptablic Works Pcr•rnit is issued, except Public Worlts Trrs}.~~~;ti.4»r fees. ;~ftcr project ccrmplctio~~ tlt.a~•it~g tl~c final plat app}icatiorl ~~r•ocess, the Plrb}ic Works luspoctor ti~~ill calcu}ate the appa•upriatc amount of ispectioaa tir~lt; to assess the developer. I3eforc thc~ final plat application is hrocissed t}~c' developt;r arnrsi pay the relevaaxt inspc;c~tio~as i-ces ar~d boa~et :fii.rr' 1417 South 7`hird Sfre~t Central P©Int, OFc 9~5t12 541.664.33 ~ Fax 5~ 9.664. fi384 any uncompleted improvements (as determined by tlae Public Works Director}. Deviations from Public Works Standards ar~d Specifications: Commercial Access Point -The northern most entrance from Biddle Road is approximately 125 feet from the intersection of the private drive and Biddle Road. The Public Works Standards require a minimum of 200 feet. The applicant states that a lesser standard will work at this site because of the multiple access points for the development, future limited access controls at the intersection of Biddle and the private drive, additional right -in/out facilities and because of the deceleration. lane on Biddle Road in front of the subject area. The Public Works Director has reviewed this request and has agreed to allow the access at its proposed location based upon the applicant's site specific reasons. 940 South Third Street Central Point, OR 97502 ~ 549.664.3329 ~ Fax 549.664.6384 e.3 r !9 ,f! C.;.i~.~~r cif t.~entra~ 1~'c>ir~t~ ~.,~~ ~~,~,.~: ~~ ~ ~~ail~rF~~g ~~~>>p~~i-~~.~ i ~~~ ~~ ~t 14C+5~.TE~irc~5t„C~ntralPUir7E,4?r~JSC~ ~~, .~`,] i' ~.',<r ,~~.. 1~i ,_' ~ ~ ~_ t ~,I~.ui~:lu~~C!ici~l a4~.E+64.3~21 Fax 541.~64.63~34 , ~ vuww.ci.cenEral-paint.c~r.us ;, '~, ~' ~; ~ `~, ~. BUILDING DEl'ARTMET STAFF REF'QRT DATE. 8I16/06 TQ; Planning Department Planning ale: ~' FROM: Building Departnae~~t SUBJECT: Les ~c1~tiv~zb Sitc Plan Name:. Les Schwab Tire Centers of Portland, Inc.. Address: 646 NNW Madras Highway City; Prinville State. Or. Zip Code: 9'7'754 F~•operty Description: 3'7-2'~N-Q ] C-TL 843 ~iS~l'€~SL: TIZe staff report is to provide information to the Planning Commission and the Applicant regarding City Building Department rec~~lirements anal conditions to be included in the design and dovelop~7~~~?t of the proposed prpject. 'Phis is not a plan rep ic~~~. This report is preli2ni.nary and.. compiled. solely for use by floe Central Point Planning Commission I ~t~ c~~ ~~rttra~ F'c-int, C~rc~c~~-~ _ ~ i i It~ix i;,~, it~c~~~~t~ti-r-~~~~~~; 14USc~.Ti~~irdSt.,C~ntratPair~t,~r~IlS'G<' ~ ~ ~'~_,~ ~~t.~,~,, La~s1~eE1c~~_ ~~ t~,!~~.,i#<lin~;~CJfl~cial ~ , ~1 '~ l~ ~I '~ . 541.664.3321 Fax 541.064.6384 ~,rrrvvv.ci,c~ntra{-paint.c~r.~rs ~, '~„~ f N°,~.~~ i7iCl1L.~~1~Vr EPA +~T~~~T ~'~~~~~T~. City of Central Pair-t, u ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 14t} Sa.Tk~ird fit., Central f'oint,t~r 975U2 541.64,3321 Fax S~l.f~64.6384 www.ci.central-paint.ar.us ~:~.~-~ i?~- ~~uilcJiti~; ~:~c~~p~~i.i.~r~~wr~ i.c)t:. ~?_ ~ i 11^iic L~,~i,,Ii~t ~:lCj C7f~lCla~ Any changes proposed shall be s~>bzntted in writing by the Applicant, or Applicant"s contractor to the Building Department. for approval. prior to start of work.. 3 August 22, 20C}6 City of Central Point Planning Dept. RE: Les Schwab site plan d7C104 Fire hydrants will be required far this project. The fire district steal! approve the lacatian. Contact Deputy Fire Marshal Mark Martin far pre design review. ( 541 j 826-7100 F"rre sprinkler systems may be required far this project. Submit a set of building plans for fire district review. Mark Moran DFM i; 1. 1 August 21, 2006 Lisa Morgan FAX 664-6384 City of Central Faint i,la~~ning Department 166 South Second Street Central Paint, C~regan 97502 lie: Site Plan review far Les Schwab, File 070(74 The sewer main far which serves the subject property has been constructed but has net been accepted far use by Rogue Vall''ey Sewer Services. Pia sewer connection is allowed until the main line has been accepted. The sewer main viii be accepted open submittal to RVS of as-built drawings and certification of the cast of construction by the project developer. The property is within the NPDES Phase 2 Starmwater QuF3lity rr~~~~~gement area and must comply with relevant stormwater quality guidelines. `i-l~e applicant must submit a starmwater plan demonstrating compliance with these guidelines. Feel free to ca[I me if you have any questions regarding this project. Sincerely, ~_.. Carl Tappert, PE District Engineer ,y K;\I>t1'I'~\,~~encics\C;FNTPTOPT<AN~G\SitePla~xRevie~r\2007\07004-Les Sclir~ab.~crc " ~9 1 1 . d' ~ ~~ G ,: T'Zt~~.ttxi.~t~; T~e~~ar"Etttetxi ~ecan~tt~ended ~oxtsiitiot~~ off' .f~~h~~ovbtl 11~~~~(ictt~ttt T.e~ `~cl~rval~ 'l"ix'e ~ertttc~~'s old l~ortlr~-td, inc. ~~ile Moo il~fJ04 bite 1'laxt) Canditicxn No. ~:?esc:~tiarn _ tAl3t~~O~ral O~ t~ti~s bite Ilan 1'i C.olltlll~ettt tr~c'rt ~:~~[' ~i~lit zo~ting I~eixxg eliminated axed the e~ttire pay°cel cax~tie~ the ~-,~ zoitirxg de~i~xtaki.oxa a~ int~x~ded. '~t~ l~uildin~ lrerit~ shall ~e i~~~ted sat°io~• to this action l~eilt~ coinitleted, 2 Applicaxzt t3~~xsfi K~adhe~'e to t'edtxire ents of all local, Mate, aTtd fedcx'al x'eclrtirentents, 3 .~4.pplicant m1a~t ohtaan a t~~tildi~l~ permit ~'o~ the dole sign idextti£ied oi~ the bite Plan, at which tune the ~tuila~ixt~, laerrxtif will. he reviewed l"or cvxnpliax~ce with si,n code recl~.ri~~einextts as outlined in ~I~~i1C: 'l ~ 24 -- ~i~,n Codes 4 Ap~licarxt txt~.x~t c~e~ignatc a total of tltx•ee {) AZ/1A acces~itsle l~arkin~ spaces in accord~-tnce with the Uni~'o~~ixt Building Code. .:;,; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER LOCATED WITHIN THE HAMRICK BUSINESS PARK WITHIN A C-5, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT (Applicant (s}: Les Schwab Tire Center) (37 2W O1C, Tax Lot $03} Recitals 1. Applicant(s) has/have submitted application for site plan an a 88,460 square foot parcel located on property south of East Pine Street, west of Table Rock Road, east of South Hamrick Road in the City of Central Point, Oregon. 2. On, September 5, 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 an the application. Now, therefore; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON, AS FOLLOWS: Section. l . Criteria Applicable to_ Decision, The following chapters of the Central Point Municipal Code and Comprehensive Plan apply to this application: A. Chapter 17.46, C-5, Thoroughfare Commercial B. Chapter 17.64, Parking Requirements C. Section 5 of the Comprehensive Plan Section 2. Findin 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 and Comprehensive Plan: A. Chapter 17.46, relating to application review process for the C-S Zoning District B. Chapter 17.d4, relating to Parking Requirements C. Section 5 of the Comprehensive Plan PIanning Commission Resolution No. {09/05/2006) r~:: ~~ Section 3. Conditional _Approval_, The applications for site plan herein is hereby approved, subject to the conditions set forth on Exhibit "A", attached hereto by reference incorporated herein, imposed under authority of CPMC Chapter 17.76. Passed by the Planning Comrr~ission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 5`~' day of September, 2006. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 5`~' day of September, 2006. Planning Commission Resolution No. Planning Commission Chair (09/0S/2006} 6 NISTLERIMENEF~E ANNEXATION ,~ . r' ~,., ~~'A~'~'~ I~~!,1~OR~' ~epti;rl~h~:•r 5, 2006 ~'I~xr~r7ir~~ ~cwp:><;~rrtrt l cni= liui u~ ~l'irc>y, l\=C i', (~c~iniYll~nrl, I)c,~t,+ ~<~~ I nttttOrl J\SS=;laf11 t 11~ `. iIS(Yc11.lJ t• ~'~~L~'1~A I1'~: FILE Nth. 06089 %1~~r~e~atio~~ and Concurrent Zane Chan e Consideration of anne~atian ana c~~ncu~•r=:~:L~ lane el~ax7e dram SR-~2.5 {County} to R-2 {City) an x.23 acres located an the south side of Beebe Road. approximately 300 feet west of l-lamrick Road {Jackson County Assessor's Map as 37 2W 02L7, Tax Lots 2300 and 2400). Applicants: Michelle Kistler and Michael Menefee,. STAFF Sfl~~2CE: lion Burt, Planning Manager A.~ i ~ l.. ~ 1J .x.4.'1./ ~.A. ~ ~ M The applicant is requesting the annexation anal concurrent zone change of two parcels totaling 2.23 -.--- ---~- - -~ acres. The Property ~s currently zoned. SR'2.5. The ~ ~ ' ` r } tP proposed zoning is R-2. The Property is designatcd on 25~o za~o ~~~oe ~ 2a~~,' j ~24D = ~~°° ~ _~ E 1. a +, r, ~ =~~F ~~ , ~~ 0 b2 J,. ~ 4 c~ +. the Comprehensive Plan Map for Medium Density t . aoo ~ Residential. The R--2 znnin~ is consistent with the land (~~a~~~~~. j ~ ~ "~'a "` ~' . .__.. ~ use designation. The Cit~° Limit abuts the Property's ~ southerly boundary, 4n the south side of the Property I~ 4>'•~=: ; ~ ` the land is zoned C~4. There is a pending retail development proposal on the C~4 lands. ~Jith the exception of water services, all necessary urban services are available to the Property and are adcqu~~te in capacity to service developm~•~~t of the ` ~_® .~ ~ ~ - P a r + 1 ~ ~ ~ , „ ~ ~ ,~ s ~ ~,y~m,:, ~ __~ Beeba Road ~ i'1 '-; ~ ~;-~ ~ R2 a, ~L,. r_r ~ 1 ' . . w ~ puaaaa~nga ~ ,.; hr~+*t+ I ~ yf C . ~ ~ r ~ .~ f e J I 1 1, ..1 ~ I ~ . ~ ~' ~ ;T ~ - I ~ ~,,. 1 _. i~~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ' , • f ~ ccamvm _ ' .~ ~ti~ _ _East Pine tr•~ ~ r ~~ ~ _ , , ~ e, ~1-- , r .~. • .. ~ 7r- ~~ i i~ ~ ~ ~I A 3~ Property at R-2 densities. A water main. in Beebe l~aad is scheduled for construction summer of 2007. At R-2 densities the Property could accommodate approximately 18 dwelling units {see Attachment LGA7?~. ~~1`R~~1 V~~ls~: Not Available ISSUES: 1. Watc~ ~~~-vice. Water service ~ the pr~~~~~rty is ct~~~'~ntly not available. The City has completed plans and will be constructing a public ~~ ~~t~;r ling, etiU~~~ Beebe Road with a planned completion date of summer 2007. ~~„~ ,.. 2. Circulation, Within tl~e ~:-Herat project '~~~~~~~~a~~s~ t ,1t~1±~ ~~~„I~~~~F G~~~~t;f~,ii~~,~~1~ r area there are twelve (12) properties, ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~a'`F, ~ ~ k; xncluding the property under x, ~ ~ r' ~ ~ 1 consideration, that arc outside the City , . ,~ ,.; „ ° ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~' '~ ~'~~. ~ ~ limits and bound by l~ce~be Road on the r ~ ~ ! _ : ~ti north anti the City Liniils on the south. ' ~ ~ a.~ r ~ All total thc~~c is slightly over 18 acres in t' a® ~~ thrs area equally spirt between Medium ~-~ ~: ~ Density (R-2} ~irul Lo~~° Density ~R-1-6). ~~'_~'~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ It is estimated that the area will yield ~ ~ ~ approximately 1 ~0 new dv~ tilling units (45 ~,'` ~;"" - duplex units and. SO SFR waits). To ~®~~ ExlslfngSlleeY DRAFTCIRCUL~tii"IUNI~LAN realize the most efficient develo ment of P ~~~.~,n ,, Propa3ed hiabr Re t~,~l SheOt •--- MinarR~stdent,ai~tr~,.; tl'~C area. 1t Is appropriate that the City cc?~~~ider a master circulation plan tc~ assure that as the area is developed an adequate streei s} ~tetn is available. The Draft. Circulation Plan Illustrates a Staff proposed general circulation plan foz the vacant lands south o Beebe Road. The east/west proposed road. is broken up to separate the two distinct land use types {R-2 vs. R-1) and to discourage the proposed street as a short-cut between Gebhard Road (Collector) and Hamrick Road (Arterial). ATTACH ~II~J"~ T~/1~~IiIT3iTS: Attachment "A" -- Application.... AC'TIO» Consider recommendation to City Council on annexation and concurrent zone change, bile No. 06089.. forward a fay orable recommendation to the City Council for annexation and concurrent zone ehaz~;,~e. 1~ile 1'*l0. 06089 subject to compliance with. the Draft Circulation Plan. ATTACHMENT "~._ APPLICAT~4N FOR ANNEXAT~4N GITY OF CENTIL4L POINT PLANNING pEPARTMENT S 2 5-D~, DATE STAMPED FOR OFFICE l1SE ONLY APPLICANT INFORMATION Name: Address: City: Telephone: Business: State: Zip Code: Residence: 2. AGENT INFORMATION ~-~-~- •• Name: C-_" l_1 ~~.. ~ >, ~+~~ =a ~>'~_~ `~J~l - Z`I / ' Address: ~.. ~ Yl• 1,~} t ~) `~~ ~ ~ iL . City: fl }t=~"~i-~C~~~_~~ .~-`State: {``,!1? Zip Code:._..1r} l~~~c-!. Telephone: Business: ~~ ~ ~ ""' ~ Residence: 3. OWNER OF RECORD {Attach Separate Sheet If More Than One} Name: fl'11C.111=2_LL- 111"~iL~\~. fb 1L11%\LL. 1?`) .;I i .. ~-L-~~- Address: ~ 3 - i'>r~ilsv jl~ ~ _ ` City: t!' t_;~~+=U~.~~ State: ~f~.. Zip Code: ~-1~ ~U Telephone: Business: ~ ~-~~, ~~F;~~ Residence: 4. PRO.IECT DESCRIPTION Type of Planned Development: ~~~~\U~~J 1 U'~~ ~~~\`l~ ~--~-> > Township: 31 Range: 2 t.~ ~ Section: c_1 Z 5] Tax T ots: ~ ~~UC>> Address: ~-k--1~7 fit=~'~ f ZcSta-i~ . (' ~~v i R~`-}L.. LAC 7~~v s UiZ ~ 1~=aC~~- Township: 3~ Range: ZL..~ Section: C12 h Tax Lots: ?~-U( ~ Address: 4~~5 i~~.i. - f~;~~~~ C_~?v f~.~G.~-1 L. '~c~~~' ~ ")iL. ~i ~SC~Z. Township: Range: Section: Tax Lots: Address: Planned Zoning District: ~ Z Tota] Acreage: z. ~-3 Tota] Number of Existing Dwelling Units: 5. REQUIRED DOCUMENTS / ~- This application farm o Application fee (Se urrent Fee Schedule} ~ ~~~ "`~ ' ~ Preliminary Plat ~ Written authority from~operty Owner if Agent in application process. Annexation Petition '~ j~ Legal Description of extension boundary of proposed annexed territory 6. I HEREBY STATE THAT THE PACTS RELATED IN THE ABOVE APPLICATION AND THE PLANS AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED HEREWITH ARE TRUE, CORRECT AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I certify that I am the: ^ Property Owner or~Authorized Agent of the Owner of the proposed project~ite. t\ Si ature~l ; . l`~~,i{~,--`~-~ ~ ~"~ ~~ C.:) y, gn ~:~1.~-. Jc--"_-- Date t Tf any wetlands exist on the site, it is the applicant's responsibility to apply for a permit to Division of sire worts POR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Application Accepted as Complete on: I20`h day of Land Use of Limited Land Use Decision: Land Use Case Fife Number: UPON P'ORMALLYACCEPTING YOUR APPLICATION, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1f'!LL MAIL A COPY OF TflIS FORM ro rou F`~'~ < ~ ~" Revised 09 August, 2601 • ~ ~_-Central point City omits ~~ I ~ Tillage ~L 2~ao ~eeb a p,~exatioxll~ P ~' ~ ~.~ ~ ~ TL 23Q0 & 2~QQ s I ~~~"~~ TL 2~ ~ I N~ ~ s,. N "CL 2300 ._,7 TL 2301 I ~.._ __--f . f~ , ~ ,,, .,~~ Scala: j ineh = 4Q feet uric ~olmson ~~Roaa Prepared~y~ ab1e~°ckR~ pate~xep' pea' ~'&Michael'Menefee Subjccc Haranok Road tchelie Kistler FropeRy n:a,tteRo~ (1'Nn0T6: N~ ~ 10 5 6 33 6 5 10 °- 62 FO Loc n SH 3'sb0 sq R. Lot ttGA 3420 sa.a. La»5n ~ YUE i 3760 sq.ft. ~.._._~~. La # sF3 3760 sq.fi. La #:A 35b+sq.ft. ~ is ,.. ~ i0 5 ~ <-- Central Point City limits • Beehe Village Snhdivision and Pad Lod Development 37 2W 02D TL 2300 & 2400 598.56 51 50 59 50 50 Lot#6l3 `~' Lot#7A La#7B Lot#RA Lot#Sp 3Gf0 sq.(l, 300D stf fi ]000 s4 R 3000 sq ft 3000 sq R 1'L'E !o Lottt315 Lot#3A Lotd2U La#2A 3650 sq.D. 3R50 sq.Si 3R50 sq.ll. 36SD sq.ft. 33 b S ID .» ryq 70 70 70 Beebe Road Subject ab€e Rock Road pro~~, )"lamrick Road Biddle Road Vicinity Map ~>a zsoo 5L3 62 ~~~I~~ 6 7.5 2S Lot # 4A Lot # 98 3078 sq.a. 3A20 sq.(t. C~ n ~ e .~.,. wr La # IS Lol # lA ~ ~ 3RS4 sq.R. 3620 sq.a. 70 71,q b 7.5 2S ~rz.23a1 ~ Scale: 1 inch = 40 feet Prepared by: Eric J©hnson Date Prepared: May 2b, 20Q6 Owners: Michelle Nzstler & Michael Mene ~1,nnexatian of Beebe Village Legal Description Properties: 37 2W O1C TL 2300 37 2W O 1 C TL 2400 Account #1-019SSS-G Account #1019557-2 Beginning at a point 811.14 feet North and 420 feet West of the southeast corner of Donation Land Claim No. 55 in Township 37 youth, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon, being the southeast corner of document 2004-020047; thence North, parallel with the east line of said Claim, 599.0 feet, more or less; thence West parallel with the south line of said Claim and along the center line of Beebe Road 170.42 feet; thence youth, parallel with the east line of said Claim, 599.0 feet, more or less, to southwest corner of Document 2005-027570; thence East, parallel with the south line of said Claire, 170.42 feet to the point of beginning. @5126f260b x.7.:25 ~4~8581?`39 FIRST CALL. M`fG & TNV PAGE 61 ~~~ GNS GV~ Central Poi,~t Planning ~cpartment Ta ids. ~t May ~~~rn; 'We,11fli~hel~e Ni~tler and I1~iiah~el ~enefe~, a~orize ~rxc Jvhnsan ~ act as ot~' agcat xolatxv~e to a~~xe~ion and ~a~d ditvisx~n of proper#ias located at.477 and 49S ~ebee Rn~l., C~tral Pciz~~. ~~ y0~ r ~~~~~~~ Miahal~~ ~Vistler N.~ie~ Mcn~fe~ -. ANIrIIXATIt]N PETITION The undersigned hereby request and consent to the annexation to the City of Central Point, Oregon, of the real property contiguous thereto described in Exhibit "A"attached hereto and by this reference made a part of the within petition. By their signature hereto, the undersigned certify that they are either "owners" of land in the territory proposed to be annexed as described iri Exhibit "A", or are "electors" registered in the territory proposed to be annexed as described in Exhibit "A". This petition, containing the request and consent to said annexation, must be filed with the Central Point City Council on or before the date ofthe public hearing to be held upon the proposed annexation pursuant to ORS 222.120. ~ "Owner" is defined by ORS 222.120 as meaning the Iegal owner of record or, where there is a recorded Land contract which is in force, the purchaser there under. If there is multiple ownership in a parcel of land, each consenting owner shalt be counted as a fraction of the same extent as the interest of the owner in the land bears. in relation to the interest of the other owners, and the same fraction shall be applied to the parcel's land mass for purposes of the consent petition. Xf a corporation owns land in a territory proposed to be annexed, the corporation shall be considered to be the individual owner of that land. "Elector" is defined in said stature as an individual qualified to vote under Article II, Section 2 of the Oregon Constitution, which in turn requires that the individual be 1$ years of age- or older, a resident of the area in question, and registered to void as required by applieabie state law. Furthermore, ORS 222.170(2) requires that electors petitioning for annexation be registered in the -territory proposed to be annexed. ~~ Elector or Property Owner: (If property owner, insert . Name: property description) Signature: Date;- 1 L~ ~1..~ N1S~L...~:.. iZ ~~~ Lu~,~--L r~ ~~-~~ ~~~~ ~ c~t,.~ ~~:~,~c~ G~' ~~ SID Annexation Petition {1208$7) V .i ~. ~j1S1`IDV'KY AN~,~~,Tio~ 1 C ~~cllll I1111111ui:i~~Ilir~y,F~1{..l', tic ~,~rr.u ;' Iic~vr~l:>~~;ncnt Uirt~i[oif k;aa;;t tit; h~1r;7iri~trt,~s~t ~~t"gi~i'~T1.4 ITEM: F ilc Nc,. OSOCC) ~'~r11~t~~:.~~~r~u aN~d Concurrent Zany c~ian e Consideration of anne:~ation and conc~~rr~ nt uric change Pram R-~.S ~Caunty) to R- (City) an .94 acres located c>n the west side of Hamrick Road approximately 3010 feet south of Beebe Road (Jackson County Ass;ssc>r' Map as 37 2W O1 CB7 `l'ax Lot 900). Applicant. Robert Wisnovsky7 Wisnovsky Homes? LLC. STA~"F SCl-URCE: Dan Burt, Planning Manager T~:~CI~GROUD: Tk~~; applicant is requesting the annexation and. concurrent zone r~+, t. change of a .94 acre parcel. The Property is currently zoned "" . ~ '~ SR-2.5. The proposed zoning is R-~. The Property is designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map far l~fedium Density Residential. The R-2 zoning is consistent with the `~ ~ Iand use designation. The City Lamit abuts the f'rupez-ty's Y southerly boundary, On the south side of the Pru}~erty the land is zoned C-4. There is a pending retail development proposal 1 _:~ on the ~-4 lands. ,.~,,. All necessary urban services are available to the Property and - .. ~ ~ _ L ,t GAtr~ are adequate in capacit} to service development of the ~,°~ Property at R-2 densities. ~~.t R-2 densities the Property could "' ~x c , accom~myyoydate approxix~~at~;ly 10 dwelling units (see _. hment 4iA77\« ~ {-} 1 ........ 4Ca~+ ~^ As Hated on the ._ .m ~: ~~~ . .. , adJacent map _ . BecbceRoat! the ~-"~ , ~ ~ k ~; properties _ ~~ ~.°rithin the general annexation area and outside the City. `~w ;,~„~ ` ~«~M' , ~ Limits (yellow) are long and narrow. The applicant is ~"', , ~ -~~~'`, ~ -. ~ ' ~ f~ f.'r proposing an eastlwest public street from Hamrick Road i ~L ~ ~ ~ i along the southerly border of the Prc,1~c rty (see ._ ~ ~, ~ Attachment ~`A77}. The Draft Circzzlatic~n Plan relocates ~' - ~ ~ , ~ ' ~' ~ the ra osed road to the northerl border of the Pro ert .. _ ~, ~~ ~ _. ', h _ .,~ p p y p y~ __. ~str ~RS~~ ~~ -~ _.., _ _ .__ _ ~ _ _ ,. This realignment provides for future access to the property to the north} allowing for its future development. FIl'~I~I~C~Sa Not available. _. ISSUES: 1. Circr~latior-~ within the general ~~roject ar~,a th~,re are twelve X12} prope~~lic~s, iilclttding~ t11~ proi3erty under consideratio~~; t11at a~~s, ot~tsiclt~ d~ic. City limits and. bound by Beck?: 1~c~ad an the ~wrih ~zr~d the City Limits on the south, All tot~ll there is slightly over 18 acres ~n this area equall~~ split between Medium Density (R-~} and Low Density (R-1-6}. It is estinl~rted that the areut will yield app~~r>ximately 1.40 new dwelling units (4 duplex units and 50 SFR units). To realize the mosi ~: i~i icie~Tt development of the ~~~ area it is a ro riatc that the Cit consider a `~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~Iyr,~~,,,~~~ ~~ pp p y ~ ~ ~ , master clrculation plan. to assure that as the ~~ ~£ ~ ~°~ "' ~ ~_ ~ ~Ur~ ~ t l area is developed an adequate street system is ~' ~`egV~r - '~ _ s A i ~_~j'; available. The Draft Circulation Plan ` ~ ~" ~ r~ r°r~j~,' ~ ~ ~' Fr•i~ ~ ,:~pryxa4 ~ iR ~1)Y ~^:'•~ri8ST84T41P illustrates a Staffproposed general circulation. ~~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ i_ _.~`~s plan for the vacant lands south of Beebe ~•~'' .. ~ i Road. T`he eastfwest proposed road is broken . ~> `. `~ w up to separate the two distinct land use types ,` ~_;~ ~a (R-2 vs. R-1 }and tc a d i `courage the proposed street as a short-cut bettiveen Cebhard Road ~F~p~Bd~~ (Collector} and Hamrick Road (Arterial}. ~~~~.~~®~~r~~~®~~~~~~Ir~~~p~l~I~~~~~`~I~~r~~~. .~._ ;.: _ . „ , . ~~~s,...ar The County is rC'CQ7I7 TI1CTlding that access to f7RAFT CiRCWl.ATION pLpN ~®~~ fxi stln~5trc2t Hamrick Road be. lirnttcd to r~ ht-xn and ~~~~_~ proposed Major Rg5ld8ntYal street g ~° MfnorResidx~nnti~IStreet right-out only. The. separation between the intersection of Beebe Road and Hamrick. Road and the proposed street ajzd 1-Iarnj'ick road is in excess of 300 feet, which. is within. the intersection separation limits for artcri~al streets established by CPMC 1.6.24,020. 2. It will be necessary to annex Hamrick Road right-of-way along the Property's frontage as part of this annexation. ATTAd`'Tt~~~E'.~TS"f~~E~~I~IT: Attachment "A>' ACTItJNs Consider recomme~Id~Tiic~n ~c> City Council on annexation and concurrent zone change, File No. 06089. RECOlVIl1?[ENDATTUN: Forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council for annexation and concurrent. zone change, File I~lo. 06089 subject to compliance with the Draft Circulation Plan.. APPLICATION FOR ANNEXA~CH~~F~T ~~~.~" ~~ ~ ~ v~ sy C1'TY OF CENTRAL POINT PLfINNING DEPART ^lTy OF CENTRAL POINT APR 2 8 20Q5 ~ ~d1. ~~Y--- i~i.,q~}NiiVG C.I i3UItD3NG L' ZL~.~7,~1'~R~S~~ DATE STAMPEiJ ~U6LIC WORKS DEPT. C3 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY APPLICANT INFORMATIi Name: 0 Address: 1 1~- i Ctty: t~ !.-~' Telephone: Business: 2. AGENT INFORMATION Name: Address: City: State: Zip Code: Telephone: Business: Residence: 3. OWNER OF RECORD (Attach Separate Sheet If More Than One) Name: I Address: ~ ~ ~ _~~ ~~'. .~ J ~._ City: State: Zip Code: Telephone: Business: Residence: 4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION G I L~-'w' ~'"`-c 5 Type of PIanned Development: ~ - 'mot.-`. Township: 3 ~ Range: ~ Section: i '"' ~'ax Lots: 2-~~' {~'~ ca Address: ~~3 ~~i~nr-.~. i~. ;~.~~.` Township: Range: Section: Tax Lots: Address: Township: Range: Section: Tax Lots: Address: Planned Zoning; District: Total Acreage: . Q Total Number of Existing Dwelling Units: S. REQUIRED DOCUMENTS a~This application form to/ pplication fee (See Current Fee Schedule} a Preliminary Plat ~~ritten authority from Property Owner if Agent in application process. ^ Annexation Petition ^ Legal Description of extension boundary of proposed annexed territory 6. I HEREBY STATE THAT THE FACTS RELATED IN THE ABOVE APPLICATION AND TFIE PLANS AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED HEREWITH ARE TRUE, CORRECT AND ACCURATE TO THE BEET OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I certify that I am the:roperty Owner or ^ Authorized Agent of the Owner of the proposed project site. is Signature _ ~~,/\i? , ,~-- ~ /""'~---y- Date ' E _ ! (~-- J =a Tf any wetlands exist on the site, it is the applicant's responsibility to apply for a permif to Division of State FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1JSE ONLY Application Accepted as Complete on: 120'" day of Land Use of Limited Land Use Decision: Land Use Case :=ile Number: O UPON PORMALCY ACCEPTING YOUR APPLICATION, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILL MAIL A COPY OP PHIS FORM ra rou. Revised 09 August, 2D01 ANNE)CATION PETITION The undersigned hereby request and consent to the annexation to the City of Central Point, Oregon, of the real property contiguous thereto described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part of the within petition. By their signature hereto, the undersigned certify #hat they are either "owners" of land in the territory proposed to be annexed as described in Exhibit "A", or are "electors" registered in the territory proposed to be annexed as described in Exhibit "A". This petition, containing the request and consent to said annexation, must be filed with the Central Point City Council on or before the date of the public hearing to be held upon the proposed annexation pursuant to ORS 222.120 "Owner" is defned by ORS 222.'120 as meaning the legal owner of record or, where there is a recorded land contract which is in force, the purchaser there under. If there is multiple ownership in a parcel of land, each consenting owner shall be counted as a fraction of the same extent as the interest of the owner in the land bears in relation to the interest of the other owners, and the same fraction sha11 be applied to the parcel's land mass for purposes of the consent petition. if a corporation owns land in a territory proposed to be annexed, the corporation shall be considered to be the individual owner of that land. "Elector" is defined in said stature as an individual qualified to vote under Article I1, Section 2 of the Oregon- Constitution, which in turn requires that the individual be 18 years of age or older, a resident of the area in question, and registered to vote as required by applicable state law. Furthermore, ORS 222.170 (2j requires that electors petitioning for annexation be registered in the territory proposed to be annexed. NamelAddress Elector Signature Date or Property Owner? ~,~ '(.- -~ j _, f`~ 3 E` W'- I •F~r t Ll ~~. ~3~~ 4~~45~ :-`...f~~~ -- H ~r ~ ~ r (r.''~. ~ F. -~.. u - F ~-_ Revised 2118105 ~ ~~~'~ ~~~`?~ `° ~~~~~v~ ~I~"Y OF CEI~7RA! ?DINT ~~1~`~~~~~~ PE.ANNING © BU4LDING C~ r~iJBLIG WORKS DEP'~. ~,~.~~~~ CITY GF GEN"f RI,,~._ POIi~T APR28Z005 Legal Description: PLANNING t_i 8 iI~_~1NG C€ PUBLIG WORKS f7LPT. C7 Commencing at a poinf an fhe east line of Donation Land Claim No. 55 in Township 37 South, Range 2 West of the Willameffe Meridian in Jackson County, Oregan, said point being 811.9 ~ feet North of the southeast corner of said Claim; thence North along said Claim line, 936.0 feet; thence West, parallel with the south line of said Claim, 330.0 feet; thence South parallel with fhe easf line of said claim, 136.0 feet; thence East, parallel with the soufh line of said Claim, 330.0 feet to the true point of beginning. .., ~~~~ ~ff~~ Yq~^ ~~~ ~t ~~~ _~ w ~~ ~ i ryf~ d `~ ~/ 7Eb ~~~(~¢~- V ~F w ~ § ~ Q O_ ~" ¢~ ~ O4 3 gas .wat' r~ . ~u. w. t .xn.r .m~...y w .. ~+ M.e b+. ~t~oM A w sc iri .ao~`a,~r. a Y O e..~~.. Q, ~.p~ F`°`~" °"r a n n t o ~ tm EXHf61T '1' m ~.. o y, u~w^ aro .. P~.~ tu~N S~~a- tYw w~w~w ~rr~ SG:f. i.-SO' ri.r w~~..ra