Agenda & Minutes

When available, the full agenda packet may be viewed as a PDF file by clicking the "Attachments" button and selecting the file you want to view.

Agendas are posted until the meeting date takes place.  Minutes are posted once they have been approved.

Planning Commission (View All)

Planning Commission Agenda and Minutes

Minutes
Thursday, December 27, 2018

The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 5:30 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers on the above date with the following members and staff in attendance:
 
Commissioners Present
Patrick Miranda, Chair
David McFadden, Vice Chair
David Culbertson
Joe Foley
Bill Mansfield
Mark McKechnie
Alex Poythress
 
Commissioners Absent
E.J. McManus, Excused Absence          
Jared Pulver, Unexcused Absence
 
Staff Present
Kelly Evans, Assistant Planning Director
Madison Simmons, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Doug Burroughs, Development Services Manager
Chase Browning, Deputy Fire Marshal
Terri Richards, Recording Secretary
Dustin Severs, Planner III
 
Roll Call
 
Consent Calendar/Written Communications.
20.1   ZC-18-132 / CP-18-133 Final Order for concurrent consideration of a minor General Land Use Plan (GLUP) amendment to reclassify four parcels of land, totaling 2.35 acres located at 2231 & 2251 Table Rock Road from Urban High Density (UH) to Service Commercial (SC); and a change of zone of the subject parcels from SFR-6 (Single Family Residential - 4 to 6 dwelling units per gross acre) and MFR-20 (Multiple Family Residential - 15 to 20 dwelling units per gross acre) to Service Commercial and Professional Offices (C-S/P) (372W13CA 2400, 4903, 4904 & 5000). Applicant: Housing Authority of Jackson County; Agent: Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc.; Planner: Steffen Roennfeldt.
 
Chair Miranda was informed that there is a correction to consent calendar 20.2.  It is to correct Exhibit M-1.
 
Kelly Evans, Assistant Planning Director reported that staff inadvertently failed to correct the reference in the Conditions of Approval from Exhibit M in the Public Works report.  It should be Exhibit M-1.
 
20.2   LDS-18-078 Final Order of tentative plat approval for Pioneer Marketplace Subdivision, a proposed two-phase, 12-lot land division consisting of six standard lots, four pad lots and two common area tracts on two contiguous parcels totaling 7.6-acres located at the southeast corner of West McAndrews Road and North Ross lane in the C-C (Community Commercial) zoning district (372W26AD TL 2400 & 2600). Applicant: CDT-Bar LLC.; Agent: CSA Planning, Ltd.; Planner: Dustin Severs.
 
Motion: The Planning Commission adopted the consent calendar as submitted with the correction noted by staff.         
 
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden          Seconded by: Commissioner Foley
 
Roll Call Vote: Motion passed, 7-0.
 
30.      Minutes
30.1   The minutes for December 13, 2018, were approved as submitted. 
 
40.      Oral and Written Requests and Communications.  None. 
 
Madison Simmons, Senior Assistant City Attorney, read the Quasi-Judicial Statement.
 
50.      Public Hearings - Continuance Request
 
50.1 LDS-18-153 Consideration of a request to revise the tentative plat of Phases 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B, 7A and 7B of the "High Cedars at Cedar Landing a Planned Community". The project area is located south of Cedar Links Drive and west of Foothill Road within the SFR-4/PD (Single Family Residential four dwelling units per gross acre/Planned Development Overlay) zone. (371W16CA, TL 2200-2206, 371W16D, TL 7000-7005). Applicant: Cedar Landing Development LLC.; Agent: CSA Planning Ltd.; Planner: Liz Conner.  The applicant has requested to continue this time to the January 10, 2019, Planning Commission meeting.
 
Chair Miranda stated that if there are members in the audience that have come to testify on this agenda item and cannot attend the Thursday, January 10, 2019, Planning Commission hearing, please come forward and the Planning Commission will hear your testimony at this time.  Please keep in mind that it is possible that your questions may be answered when staff presents their staff report on Thursday, January 10, 2019.  There will be no decisions made this evening on this agenda item.
 
The public hearing was opened. 
 
a. James Garner, 1020 Callaway Drive, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Mr. Garner showed photographs of the construction area.  There was a storm drain behind his house but the developer removed it and rain water floods his backyard. He wanted to make the Planning Commission aware of what the construction was doing to the area.
 
Chair Miranda reported that there would be more information from staff during their presentation at the January 10, 2019, Planning Commission meeting. 
 
Chair Miranda reported the record would remain opened to receive further information.
 
Motion: The Planning Commission continued LDS-18-153, per the applicant's request, to the January 10, 2019, Planning Commission meeting.           
 
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden          Seconded by: Commissioner Foley
 
Roll Call Vote: Motion passed, 7-0. 
 
50.2 LDS-18-149 / E-18-150 Consideration of tentative plat approval for McKenzie Village, a proposed 25-lot residential subdivision, along with a request for an Exception for lot depth, on three contiguous parcels totaling 3.51-acres located north of Midway Road, west of Interstate 5, and east of Cummings Lane in the SFR-10 (Single-Family Residential, ten dwelling units per gross acre) zoning district (372W13AA TL 700/601 & 372W13AB TL 211). Applicant: Tom Malot Construction, Inc.; Agent: Richard Stevens & Associates; Planner: Dustin Severs.
 
Chair Miranda inquired whether any Commissioners have a conflict of interest or ex-parte communication they would like to disclose.  None were disclosed.
           
Chair Miranda inquired whether anyone in attendance wishes to question the Commission as to conflicts of interest or ex-parte contacts. None were disclosed.
 
Dustin Severs, Planner III stated that the Land Division approval criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.202(E). The Exception approval criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.186(B).  The applicable criteria were addressed in the staff report, included with the property owner notices, and hard copies are available at the entrance of Council Chambers for those in attendance.  Mr. Severs reported that a letter was received from Mr. Hedley W. Bond.  He is in the audience this evening and will probably testify.  This letter will be submitted into the record as Exhibit J.  Mr. Severs gave a staff report.
 
The public hearing was opened.
 
a. Clark Stevens, Richard Stevens and Associates, P. O. Box 4368, Medford, Oregon 97501.  Mr. Stevens reported that Exception request is unique having I-5 as a major physical barrier.  Lot depths were inhibited so the applicant had to apply for the Exception.  Lot 9 is irregular in shape.  However, the frontage of the lot is over 89 feet.  It exceeds the area so there is more side yard available.
 
 
Regarding Mr. Bond's letter, he is correct that currently there is only one way out taking Midway to Table Rock Road.  Cummings to the north intersects with Foster Drive that is a planned public street that will go to Table Rock Road.  This is an infill project.  In the future as the properties to the north, Foster Drive will also create a connectivity to Table Rock Road for street circulation.    
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, it there a storm drain easement that bisects Lot 10 and clips Lot 11 to be removed or does it stay?  Mr. Stevens reported that it will be removed.  It will be redirected to Reanna then back north again.
 
Commissioner McKechnie has concerns with Lot 9.  Even though the lot is almost 4,900 square feet, a 15 or 20 foot setback on the front and 8 to 10 foot setback elsewhere it ends up with a lot of setback requirements and not much buildable lot.  In the future it would be helpful to have a graphic showing the buildable area.  Mr. Stevens stated that he would consider that.  Even with a side loaded garage there is plenty of area.      
 
Mr. Stevens reserved rebuttal time.
 
b. Hedley Bond, 2805 Cummings Lane, Medford, Oregon, 97501.  Mr. Bond and his neighbors do not have a problem with McKenzie Village.  It will cut down the noise from the Interstate when the proposed wall is installed.  There has been a lot of dry grass that will cut down a fire hazard. However, there is currently only one exit from that entire neighborhood to Table Rock Road.  Midway does not have sidewalks.  Children are dropped off from the school bus at the corner of Table Rock and Midway.  Without a sidewalk they walk down the middle of the street.  He has been told that currently Midway services approximately 1,600 vehicle trips a day.  Add 25 houses that is approximately an extra 250 trips daily.  Eventually Foster Drive will be an exit but it is not right now.  He hopes the City will look at this and realize it comes to a point where one cannot keep adding houses and vehicle trips.  It is time to upgrade services and facilities for the residents in this area.       
 
Mr. Stevens reported that Midway Road is classified as a residential street.  The properties are developed to County standards.  These are not developed to urban residential standards along these corridors.  As individual properties develop dedications will be required, sidewalks will be conditioned or located upon those types of development.  Midway Road has dedications and sidewalks for a portion.  Eventually when development occurs sidewalks will connect.  One day Table Rock Road will be improved to arterial standards in that location.          
 
The public hearing was closed.
 
Motion: The Planning Commission adopted the findings as recommended by staff and directed staff to prepare the Final Orders for approval of LDS-18-149 and E-18-150 per the staff report dated December 20, 2018, including Exhibits A through I, and adding Exhibit J.           
 
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden          Seconded by: Commissioner Foley
 
Vice Chair McFadden stated that he doubted there is nobody in the room that disagrees with Mr. Bond.  He appreciates Mr. Bond's comments.  There is nothing the Planning Commission can do dealing with his concerns.  He recommended that Mr. Bond contact his City Council Representative and make him aware of the concerns.  There is nothing in the State that allows the Planning Commission to require the developer to do all that extra work on the property that is not part of his project.  It is an issue of budgets and funding.  The City continues to actively look for grants.   
 
Roll Call Vote: Motion passed, 7-0.
 
50.3 LDS-18-155 / PUD-18-156 / ZC-18-157 / CUP-18-158 Consideration of a Preliminary PUD Plan for the Middlefork Creek Planned Unit Development - Phases 1-7, which include requests for a tentative plat approval for a 105-lot residential subdivision; a request for a change of zone from SFR-00 (Single-Family Residential, one dwelling unit per lot) to SFR-4 (Single Family Residential, four dwelling units per gross acre) on a 12.26-acre portion of the property and a 2.95-acre portion of the property, and a change of zone from SFR-00 to SFR-10 (Single Family Residential, ten dwelling units per gross acre) on a 12.61-acre portion of the property; and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in order to locate shared use paths and storm drain facilities within the Riparian Corridors of Larson Creek. The property totals 27.82-acres and is located south of East Barnett Road, east of North Phoenix Road, and abuts Coal Mine Road along its southerly boundary; is within the Southeast (SE) Overlay District, and is currently zoned SFR-00 (371W34300). Applicant: Southeast View LLC.; Agent: Neathamer Surveying; Planner: Dustin Severs.
 
Chair Miranda inquired whether any Commissioners have a conflict of interest or ex-parte communication they would like to disclose.  Commissioner Poythress disclosed that Neathamer Surveying and one of his firms has done business together in the past.  Neathamer Surveying made a contribution to his City Council campaign.  He does not believe that affects his ability to approach this topic judicially but he leaves that up to the City Attorney.  Ms. Simmons has no objection.
 
Commissioner Mansfield disclosed that in the past Mr. Neathamer has been hired by one or more of his clients to do work and established a good relationship.  He feels that will not have anything to do with whatever his decision may be in this case. 
 
Commissioner Culbertson disclosed that Mr. Neathamer and he sit on the Site Plan and Architectural Commission together. 
 
Vice Chair McFadden disclosed that his office has a business relationship with Mr. Neathamer through his employer but it will not cause any concern with his decision.
           
Chair Miranda inquired whether anyone in attendance wishes to question the Commission as to conflicts of interest or ex-parte contacts. None were disclosed.
 
Dustin Severs, Planner III stated that the Land Division approval criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.202(E). The Revision of a Preliminary or Final Planned Unit Development Plan approval criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.198(A).  The Zone Change approval criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.204.  The Conditional Use Permit approval criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.184(C).  The applicable criteria were addressed in the staff report, included with the property owner notices, and hard copies are available at the entrance of Council Chambers for those in attendance.  Mr. Severs gave a staff report.  Mr. Severs stated there are three additional discretionary requests: 1) Proposed modifications of standards: enlarged lot size for lots 7, 26, 27, 46, 47, and 50; 2) Five year time schedule for the phased platting of the development; and 3) Approval to construct Morgans Way as a cul-de-sac.  Also, a revision to Condition #11: Comply with all the requirements of the Floodplain Manager as outlined in Exhibit AA.
 
Commissioner Poythress stated that Mr. Severs reported that Public Works recommends a shared driveway.  By recommends does he mean a condition of this application?  Mr. Severs reported that it is included in the Public Works Staff Report.  To limit the number of driveways by doing shared driveways would drop it down from 6 to 3 and with the turnaround it satisfies fire concerns.  Mr. Severs deferred the question to Doug Burroughs, Development Services Manager. 
 
Mr. Burroughs stated that it is a Code requirement.  They have to do shared driveways to take access off the street and hammerhead turn arounds. 
 
Commissioner McKechnie stated that the northerly creek on some exhibits is referred to as North Fork Larson Creek and on others Middlefork Larson Creek.  Mr. Severs reported it is Middlefork.   
 
Commissioner McKechnie stated that some of this development is adjacent on both sides to undeveloped property.  Where it is adjacent to developed property across Stanford does it connect to a path on the other side or will there be a condition that will require this path continue on the portion that has no development but will in the future?  Mr. Severs reported that in the Parks reports they would like the applicant provide information on how it is going to connect in the future.  It is part of a broader plan to do a multiuse path throughout the entire Southeast development. 
 
Commissioner McKechnie stated that at this point it becomes a construction nuisance if there is a path that is 500 feet long with a dead end.  There is no way for people to get in and out of.  There should be some security concerns.  Mr. Severs reported that the Parks Staff Report states: "Before final plat, the developer will need to submit a construction plan to the Parks Department showing how these segments of pathway connect to any others within 200 feet of the project area.  Plans should indicate any intersections with streets or other facilities, plantings, or areas of vegetation removal, if applicable."        
 
Vice Chair McFadden stated that both paths seem to be on the south side of the riparian area.  Is it easier to maintain the paths adjacent to SFR-4s or SFR-10s?  Mr. Burroughs reported that Public Works does not have a preference.  They just need to have access to maintain.  There are detention ponds on both sides of the creek in some areas of this development.  Public Works will need to have access to those.  They would primarily use the paths for access to maintain channel flow of the creeks.
 
Vice Chair McFadden stated there are five streets going east.  How far do these streets extend before they are connected to another because of the block length requirement?  Mr. Burroughs stated that the applicants segments are under the maximum allowed for a block length. It is typically 660 feet for residential block length.
 
The public hearing was opened.
 
a. Bob Neathamer, Neathamer Surveying Inc., 3126 State Street, Suite 203, Medford, Oregon 97504.  Mr. Neathamer reported that in the audience is Mike Mahar who is an applicant and Randy Jones an applicant both here in support of this project.
 
There are paths on the other side of Stanford that continue along the creek.  Not to deviate from the Southeast Plan these creeks are required to be on the south side of the Southeast Plan. 
 
Block length does not apply in the Southeast Plan.  These streets are all planned for streets coming from the north.  They will connect properly in the future as the land develops. 
 
Commissioner McKechnie stated with putting the storm water management facilities near the creek there are several State agencies that get touchy about that.  How is that going to or could be handled?  Mr. Neathamer reported that they have started the design on the storm water management facilities.  They are permitted in the riparian areas and they will have to get the approval with the Fish and Wildlife.  Most of the detention and treatment area is on the north sides of the stream.  However, the Middlefork will have a small detention and treatment area on the south side too.     
 
Mr. Neathamer reserved rebuttal time.
 
Mr. Burroughs clarified three items in the Public Works Staff Report: 1) On Coal Mine Road the developer shall improve the north half plus 12-feet south of the centerline or to the far edge of the existing pavement, whichever is greater, along the frontage of this development.  Mr. Neathamer expressed concerns of not having enough room to do a 12-foot improvement.  Currently, there is 20 feet of right-of-way on that side of the road.  Public Works will add in their condition "or approved by the City Engineer." 2) Initially Public Works was requesting a 12-foot wide paved bike path for access of their maintenance vehicles.  Public Works would be happy to accept the 10-foot paved bike path with 1-foot shoulder on each side if it met the structural section so they could drive down it.  3) Public Works accepted the findings from Mr. Neathamer on the access way requirement because of the slopes. 
 
Vice Chair McFadden stated that the City was recommending no asphalt surfaces because it attracts more heat therefore, he thought some of Larson Creek between this point and Bear Creek was being done with the decomposed granite to minimize heat buildup along the creek and storm drainage.  Is that not the accepted practice?  Mr. Burroughs reported that the City has been asking for paved paths for a little while.  There are some unpaved paths. 
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, why is there a 10-foot bump at the south end of Stanford in the right-of-way?  Mr. Burroughs deferred the question to Mr. Neathamer.
 
Mr. Neathamer stated that the idea is whether than have a mid-block crossing for the creek on Larson Creek pathways they are going to build a pathway down to the intersection where it is safer to cross.  This is part of that pathway as it is going north along with some other improvements the applicant is doing.
 
The pavement for the pathway is better for bicyclists and for Public Works to run maintenance vehicles.  The applicant is appreciative that they are accepting a narrower width even though there is enough space.         
 
Ms. Evans addressed Commissioner McKechnie's question about the dead end pathway.  The pathways along the creeks in the Southeast Plan are planned.  It is part of the circulation plan.  That is the reason for the apparent dead end.  It will continue as it develops.
 
The public hearing was closed.
 
Motion: The Planning Commission adopted the findings as recommended by staff and directed staff to prepare the Final Orders for approval of PUD-18-156, LDS-18-155, ZC-18-157, and CUP-18-158 per the staff report dated December 20, 2018, including Exhibits A through AA, and 1) Proposed modifications of standards: enlarged lot size for lots 7, 26, 27, 46, 47, and 50; 2) Five year time schedule for the phased platting of the development; and 3) Approval to construct Morgans Way as a cul-de-sac.  Also, a revision to Condition #11: Comply with all the requirements of the Floodplain Manager as outlined in Exhibit AA.           
 
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden      Seconded by: Commissioner McKechnie
 
Commissioner McKechnie thinks the applicant has done a nice job on this application.  It appears they have worked hard to answer a lot of the questions and provide reasonable amenities.  He is happy with this development.
 
Commissioner Poythress commented that there is a lot going on with this application.  The entire thing is complicated.  He thanked the applicant for what they are doing for the City.  He encouraged them to keep doing it. 
 
Roll Call Vote: Motion passed, 7-0.
 
60.  Reports
60.1      Site Plan and Architectural Commission.
Commissioner Culbertson reported that the Site Plan and Architectural met on Friday, December 21, 2018.  They approved a major modification of the addition of four dwelling units to previously approved plans for an apartment building on East Barnett Road. 
 
60.2  Planning Department
Ms. Evans reported that staff received a notice of intent to file an appeal to LUBA on the Transportation System Plan.  It is a single person that submitted the notice.  
 
The Boards and Commissions luncheon is scheduled for Friday, January 11, 2019 at the Inn at the Commons at noon.  Ms. Evans encouraged the Planning Commission to attend.  
 
The next Planning Commission study session is scheduled for Monday, January 14, 2019.  Discussion will be on the Phoenix-Talent School District Masterplan. 
 
There is business scheduled for the Planning Commission on Thursday, January 10, 2019, Thursday, January 24, 2019 and February 14, 2019.
 
Last week the City Council adopted the Wetlands Inventory into the Comprehensive Plan.  There was no other language that was associated with it. They stripped everything except the inventory.   They also approved the Jackson County Housing Authority GLUP map amendment on Table Rock and Berrydale.
 
Ms. Evans thanked the Planning Commission for their service.  It has been a busy year. 
            
70.      Messages and Papers from the Chair. None. 
 
80.      Remarks from the City Attorney. None
 
90.      Propositions and Remarks from the Commission.
90.1 Commissioner Foley thanked Commissioner Poythress for his service on the Planning Commission
 
90.2 Commissioner Poythress thanked the Planning Commission and it was a pleasure and real privilege for him.  This is his last meeting on the Planning Commission. 
 
100.   Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m. The proceedings of this meeting were digitally recorded and are filed in the City Recorder's office.
 
 
Submitted by:
 
 
Terri L. Richards                                                     
Recording Secretary
                                                           
Patrick Miranda
Planning Commission Chair                                                        
 
Approved: January 10, 2018
 
 

© 2019 City Of Medford  •  Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A

Quicklinks

Select Language

Share This Page

Back to Top