The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet - 2000-05-01 PM PLANNING DEPARTMENT FILE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA PACKET MAY 1 , 2000 pt LAKE pS�Ep City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Monday, May 1, 2000 �-�--- 7 p.m. oREGo$ Marylhurst Conference Center Commons Building (Room C-106) Members: 17600 Pacific Highway Julie Morales,Chair Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Nan Binkley,Vice Chair Doug Cushing Douglas Kiersey For Information: 635-0290 Sheila Ostly Bruce Miller Dave Powers Agenda This meeting is in a handicapped accessible location. For any special accommodations, please contact Janice Bader at 635-0297,48 hours before the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER Agenda Book II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 20, 2000 April 3, 2000 IV. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER None. V. PUBLIC HEARING LU 00-0029,an appeal of the Planning Director's decision to deny the requested tree cutting permit by Lisa and Mark MacKenzie to remove one 38 inch Cottonwood tree from their front yard. The site is located at: 16 Westridge Drive, Tax Lot 128 of Tax Map 21E 17CD. The staff coordinator is Sandy Ingalls, Planning Technician. LU 00-0037,an appeal of the Planning Director's decision to deny the requested tree cutting permit by Jane and Gregory Drew to remove one 15 inch Douglas Fir Tree from their side yard. The site is located at: 6 Dover Way,Tax Lot 3810 of Tax Map 21E 17DC. Staff coordinator is Sandy Ingalls, Planning Technician. LU 00-0001,a request by Miller Cook Architects for a Development Review approval to construct a one- story, 5,300 square foot addition(including basement)on the south side of the existing US West Communications switch building. Eight trees are proposed to be removed. The four parking spaces that will be removed for the building addition will be relocated to the east side of the building, in a secured garage. The site is located at: 531 First Street, Tax Lots 700& 800 of Tax Map 21E 3DD. The staff . coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner. VI. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT STAFF REPORT • CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISION APPLICANTS: FILE NO: Mark& Lisa MacKenzie LU 99-0029 [AP 00-06] PROPERTY OWNERS: STAFF: Mark& Lisa MacKenzie Sandy Ingalls LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE OF REPORT: Tax Lot 128 of April 19, 2000 Tax Map 21E 17CD DATE OF HEARING: • LOCATION: May 1, 2000 16 Westridge Drive NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Westridge R-10 ZONING DESIGNATION: R-10 I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST 38 -inch applicant has requested removal of one 38 inch Cottonwood tree. The tree is proposed for removal due to direct impact to the property and the existing house, Exhibit 2. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS City of Lake Oswego Tree Code (Chapter LOC 55) LOC 55.02.041 Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees Greater than 12 Inches, • Exception LU 99-0029 Page 1 of 4 LOC 55.02.065(1)(a) Review of Permit Applications S LOC 55.02.085 Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Tree Cutting Permit III. FINDINGS A. Background/Existing Conditions: 1. The applicants originally applied for removal of a 38.1-inch, diameter at breast height (DBH) Cottonwood Tree on February 16, 2000. This application was received as a Type I permit under the Emergency Tree Ordinance (The Tree Code in effect today was enacted on February 17, 2000). Upon site inspection, staff found that the tree did not meet criteria for a hazard tree, nor did the tree meet criteria for trees that are not dead, or hazardous. The Type I tree removal permit was denied on February 28, 2000, Exhibit 5. The applicants filed an appeal of the staff decision on March 13, 2000, Exhibit 6. 2. The 38-inch Cottonwood tree is located in the middle of the front yard, Exhibits 2, 3 and 4. The applicants state the tree is a nuisance and it stains the house entry, and that unsightly droppings get tracked into the house. The applicants have not retained an arborist to comment on the health of the tree, Exhibit 4. 3. There are 15 other trees over 5-inch DBH that currently populate the site. The predominant trees on the property are Douglas Fir, Birch and Alder. Other tree species include Plum, Cottonwood, Common Hawthorne, Dogwood and Maple, Exhibit 4. 4. The subject property is rectangular in shape, and is developed with a single-family dwelling, Exhibit 1. The lot is approximately 11,000 square feet in size, and zoned R-10. Access to the property is from Westridge Drive. No historic designation exists. 5. Properties abutting the site are zoned R-10, all with single family dwellings upon them. 6. The site topography is sloped,Exhibit 3. B. Compliance with Criteria for Approval: On September 28, 1999, the City Council adopted an amendment to the Tree Ordinance (LOC Chapter 55) by adding section LOC 55.02.041 in order to 1111 LU 99-0029 Page 2 of 4 address removal of trees that are larger than 12 inches in diameter. This • amendment affects both Type I and Type II tree removal applications. The current application is being processed under the Emergency Tree Code that was in effect between September 29, 1999 and February 16, 2000. At the time of application submittal, the request was classified as a Type I permit. However, because the tree proposed for removal measured 38-inches in diameter, it was required to comply with the Emergency Tree Ordinance, which will be discussed below. LOC 55.02.41 Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees Greater than 12 Inches, Exception states: "Notwithstanding LOC 55.02.035(1), 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3), no tree greater than 12 inch caliper at DBH shall be removed, except the City Manager may grant an exception to this prohibition when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. The City may impose such alternative site plans or • placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs as a condition of approval of the permit, in addition to any other conditions or provisions provided under LOC 55.02.042(1)and LOC 55.02.080(3)." Under the new ordinance, in addition to the basic requirements for a Type I permit, the applicant is required to provide additional analysis in order to determine whether any proposed development may be re-sited (alternative site plans) or other landscaping designs considered that would lessen the impact on the 38-inch Cottonwood. If it is not possible to site the development by means of alternative site plans or other landscaping plans, an exception may be granted and tree removal the 38-inch tree. The Cottonwood tree has not been found to be dead, dying or hazardous. Removal of the Cottonwood tree is not for landscaping or development purposes, only because it is a nuisance. See the applicant's tree removal application, stating that the tree "sheds, stains the entry of the house, is sticky, and tracks into the house", Exhibit 2. The large Cottonwood tree sits predominately in the front yard away from other trees, Exhibit 3. It is not part of a continuous canopy. Removal should not compromise other trees in the yard, as it does not seem to act as a windbreak for other trees on the site. However, the tree removal will • LU 99-0029 Page 3 of 4 r leave a significant open area in the front yard, changing the character of the yard, Exhibit 3. • Two neighbors have commented on this tree removal application, Exhibits 7 and 8. Both neighbors are in favor of the removal. IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that LU 99-0029 should be denied. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of LU 99-0029. EXHIBITS 1. Tax Map 2. Type I Tree Permit Application, TC 00-0057 3. Site visit photographs • 4. Tree Survey 5. Denial Letter, dated February 28, 2000 6. Request for Public Hearing, received March 13, 2000 7. Letter from Patrice Mitchell, dated April 12, 2000 8. Letter from William Williams, dated April 13, 2000 :Sandy_VCases/LU 99-0029/LU 99-0029Repori • LU 99-0029 Page 4 of 4 • viX ,� Y _' a ti'' .� - 1k .y c "' .q.' '—.2't �?" )`rys ,.z_{Xr - ry^/ry1, _.64:?: f ��• �s nn-� ( k� i•aC 1 7 ;� 1a�iaLs-� A_ �Za3Y�� >�'�� _ •h� �i�,T� '�a�� 'sa'. ''�ri:.,g0— �z,,,, -� +'• '�` l`, 'S'G s.- ."`a- E•'`.y,. t.j e `h_ F-ri. 1 {y„esgl�`� .� : `•s ,y iir:;'y-,,i'.'.�!G� .d L:reP� Px�' - b' N. .- xS,C —�' --4-,a•' r-- sit, {k 7.'t: :2w� £:- �, 'x_. :,"r d� .e a..K�3F i „t 3F �•' {-. -n.e �,�._,;, ,... - x. `. C . :,: - .4<. S 7 n} .may s�Y.,,.4.. a w i' 'n ."Tf -- 4et1• '.Ss• '. YAM. ` . .ye,� . pv der- xt '� dn• - +� rF r'.4'� 14-,1f4 ,_ .4 €4:;M:_i 7?▪t- 'd.` k� h.�, y ' jt- ,., '-'� a{� 4°{ 'x'i..-.'r.' -Vt y, s 't.�4 's r - ' 3 F s . .4 +sa4 t- .ev - tom ?- '4P.` ,1 1 •ca .14, -r74,. „s.of s -15%°�a �r ,.,,F^' ."i tom ._:),:- ` '.'c14. 3�K sw a-., "�'"i" A, n -'rtLr`7 ti � .1, . .^"'":1 ` _'F ""'r'`_+ i,� F°-12 1 G '<' .. �7'� �� -.Y1_ ii?...:-"_ k••, 'fi �!` ( 'sayr33n., v a. • ! %xta •'.q+-•e�.-.;TF ' ' k.t�. aL"--el - F4'v,,.t.: h _. I��- s�`T't+ r..� lti .. �L .ise .e*'C`t,� "� ! r r- f+ -max+' z" 4 t � k iS:oP a aeslfcco' as 00 a1' CC ' i i`r3t..KV • 456 - I 95 0 0 1 QP F sr , SAo-�� lo- .; ` . - „ 3 0 ci ► ':� -I=� "• - 'Iz I ,o 8 1 I0 9 . irk - • 17 ¢qc e 4 I - e ,c J t' a „, a 3.5.,;,S C -,! _ .e ,a vE- S I. RIDGE - DRIVE - - -.: a aa • 4?.z4 './ ?.43 - c3 �3. ` \ •�°3.:l3 - ,,,,,. 43,_ , 1,' `'-- ...)18 o 2. `1 • 5 r I a n' ;` \u � 1 v, - I c _ _ ,. /� - Fr , 3ao ' V• .00 /0-, 1 G /On 53 s y. ° ` sitre -., c,g 00 �- -_� - o - 129 1 ou n • 120 ° a I. r • .. 3 i -----\ C ° V . - 5a - / ',. Saco -� � ° Il ,o , ;,ice ,/-- o /vd--=-- ',— y1 V 7 W- \-- \-ti.c oc- fl 55 Ysn /° 48- 0-°° . cam • y 12f / �• - A ',�- a ' fo�.c9 \' ..,, . c,4 fl 56.. p ,/. ..s ,0.� C o, 4: �) a -9 c-\ Q ` ir� og9z` ` ( 1. 3 ,4 itintlawa i-,1',.,'- e N 63 - 1:, c o o - .r;, 1.z ,_ c. • 6 `-,) 7, ,a ; ,`� , 11:2 -'.gin` _ 23.,,2.E i `1L o \ ; 3JO w - - • l900-14 a '- I�8 N° o AFC = i 4 0`... I s , ! - c/° • J47 PER° ,,y•' _' ' EXHIBIT 1 j- LL 00-0029 s 703 1g90-142 o°° I48 _ PARCH- 1, -7 L2 . W �' 2 2G AG-) - = J la {C .p Tom' \ �� I' i17 . L1 2 s)' i / : moo. 9 • - Sg,S. `J V l./ - Dui 4� .• �� L0 150 ; a7 -. • S vvt�•: Tree Removal C 2 Permit No".1. Fee: Application Receipt Nok. lz 410 Date: Oa[40N Applicant: f V C1 r '` /"1 ` '.t�' Phone: 3 —Ce0S Property Owner: s q/bt e Phone: �w Address of Tree Removal: t b 5 r y a 1), y -2'� • Size. Number. and Type of Trees to be Removed: "' Reason for Removal: ��`""'r` ' Y`e: t s . - Anticipated Removal Date: I agree to comply with Lake Oswego Code, Chapter 55, regarding tree removal. I grant permission to the City of Lake Oswego for employees to enter the above property to inspect the trees requested for removal. )4Y-est- g-,,yji Signature of Property Owner(required) Signature of Applicant (if different) The City must sign for trees located on public property Please tie a ribbon around the tree(s) and restrain your dog on inspection day. Permit Type (Fill out with City Staff) • SITYPE l; Submit: (1)Removal plan ❑ TYPE I,2 DEAD Submit: (1)Removal plan (Oversized lots) To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon ❑ EMERGENCY Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Photograph of tree/or mark tree with yellow ribbons ❑ VERIFICATION Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Mitigation plan, if required (Prior approval) To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon, (2) Stake building envelope& driveways ❑ TYPE II,DEAD Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Photograph of dead trees,(3)Mitigation plan To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon ❑ TYPE II,HAZARD Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)ISA Hazard Evaluation, (3)Mitigation plan To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon ❑ TYPE II,DYING Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Arborist report,(3)Mitigation plan, (4)Copy of notice letter To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon, (2) Post sign, (3 Wait: (1) 14 days until the comment period is complete EXHIBIT 2 ❑ TYPE II,OTHER Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Questionnaire, (3) Mitigatior LU 00-0029 To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon, (2) Post sign, (3 Wait: (1) 14 days until the comment period is complete City Staff to Fill Out: Intake Staff Zone - 10 Tax Map. ;it .--7C')Tax Lot 2.tom Due Date t. Planning File# Removal Approve _enied 1 Building Permit# Mitigation Plan Approved/Denied Revised Nov. 1999 1:kforms`,applctns\tree removal app•july 98.doc l`� L 'Ti -5 7 t � - A/? f'_ -✓� (L yfk0ir/ 0003 • • • Uuu4 00004702 (751x1790x24b jpeg). , . . ,_ __• , . 4 „.,,,,, . .4. - i , - .4,14'. ,„„k - ' - ,• - e—'. 11,. , ,, _f . „ _.,... L iz, ..,, ... v . ..- 7 ' it -1-7-' .. t'"-: 's ': '•-• % 7 . , 4 " '? _ -.. ..4,-- , r1 r.4 •1 ►►. � ,7 =y g IV. } ti • -tr • t •a . '!I r J le . .,.. _ . , • . . .r5w r ' e:331 ..sy �' I SM.�. ''1 i11p,!, c,t.T. 1 F� +k 4 ' 'uy�14 . �} ' • r T 9- i s ) i1 } I� r t •tAP� «i of 9: ; F O �:. i 1 raj Q _ .t `-:;. i 1:• J i r ,yam ,t ,1, t -t_ \ aW l: .I . 1 IIt11 fi { J 3 r0 Double trunk large Cottonwood EXHIBIT 3 Tree LU 00-0029 6 pace's 00 (► 5 • • • 6u06 _._ . , . p0000471 (1200x1792x24b jpeg) 1111) :---•- --A , • -7.,.. . ,... 4 --..-%":-• . ' Pt f -. ..\,, ' *--\ lipy ....--. ../ , ..r • I '' ----"--. : r •• 10' .. rt;41111L0 •. , , • •N , , ,.tv.......•,,t.a.- 6,,. ,..,....,,,..: , -_ • - i,r... •:,,fige•.; •,,,,' .,. . - ,.....••••'•' V • .:".. ? `... • •V ••••—. ...,>...t• ••r •k le „ 4 4 ..1 -e" 'IP i • .... .. 03:11 ''.--...t'- - '/ • 4' :-• • 1 , • ..... P- • ' 4,..-' -----;..7-.-L-' . -...,_ .-:'• e- ..-• • i. . . :L...---- . N, '• •-. . „ .."I. - .:', •I''‘. 7 ---•- 1 ; A . -.. -•-.;........ ,,,,:', , • , 4,_., -:-/ •- . .. 1:•.- - .Y.-0. ....! -....,: • , ....,-.-- .... ••; ...-- •-.., ,,•'' I, •-,-- , , . . — ,,, .. •-, ...-..- • flia,,,..., ....- .„,„ •...41, ! • _, .2_,.-s ..44,...-.1;p. ,,,-. --. -1---,.ir,„4).111-, .1 • , -<,17,:g; ..44::: t..,, /---,• ._.'Id,'14 ‘J • ---t: ••-- • . • •,.., --.. '--. ,,A...___346.0.:.tl.'•.. : 1 . :_,..-," .4,06,-0--• .. . . • t _A•ier •1 . • - - - 1- - • ',Ail 11.15.,,.....s.•!,..A.Art-1.3•0.: I .. ...r ', --17 *VI i.'"' ' illy' .../ 4,....„.. . ,. irtliffr..P,4‘.' , t i ',Ili, .• ''"tii........%'el, 111' ../ - . -..‘ AlsOk‘ olgta.." AI' st-Irdit r J 1 ;..----4..-:—...,.. L .0.-- ...A.,. i'114P•415fr‘;.14.P.',V. tilf 146„;/411r-, . .., ;.)- :. - -' -.. . _. . r- r.ik• :----:-.: '. . .- • .Art.j&le4YO i'7141.11 ill' • t..„}•-• 0 . ,.;,*--ii•• ‘ .04b. ?V.*. ;,4 I 0;11 rib7ftfrd I, pl -.2 .."._:-.. • 'h..,., •• - , • ' 'OP-. • f":/-' 1/r- ler .40-• offi . ••7)54••%._I c,: - to .,..-!•:-..0 Jr-41 tIters-Nr°°;Prfr.' .1 -44ar_, ., I•••'' ' ‘• • , 11 0 r,:.• r -rm...., -.., ..431 I 't •I fir.41 .'. i',-° '. itiv*,1 ' , A i • ves:.--, -,'','t,;-..•.l.'v_.k.-.l.i.;-oo.:v.:p„i.F,it4a:-krt o4 i,,'.3.4'-,'.-•.i..k-•,'•..-.o,•t%•.o•'•r•"t..1-3 I-t.t.4•-,Ag•..,.i lti,•.l,.•:', 1*1ii:I•k.,V"',.:o:.,rNa•.cri,'ag.:-.t,4„A.,i .--- /,v"e r,.:,;,,•e•.•/r.o.1P_.;.,"..'/..1"/::.•„„,4...'1 1.t,i..'. - l '44 1' ,%. ••.-..-3./ .,( ,• ....nmeaki ,...„,,A„mal 1 ,s-• •Alf .0* tip' - r wit :pth,,„„ • mom" r4f. ....,..,. , ‘,.....,,,..,.., . . , ., ,,.1.1., %it Arq 1,....,.. ...., __ k .,• ...;., . -,..7.7 .,,•... c.,I ....,,, Ifr'' "'.7 I, ;:•4 AlTik -.-• -? p l' 114112. _ . e.. II •.'. .*.; 1 •,.. •c• ..:- .- V-•4' /--- ..i ' .,A • 16117P- 14.• ...',..,_••- # ,„:.kk.4' , A --• .4- (--- tf- • i , ,I p• . r •-4.41 tr 44% • , 7101% a ig, •Ar AT-ifrir . 444.' .', '' NIT,, .. ,.. ... . ..„ ....,,,,„, _.... ._ ..... ,.. ..:,... API 14-7" .a It: : !..,' t .711441t V, ,,e•iikr."...4ty:„...0740L. 7.,,41... VI 0.. . ...•.. 1 i i ;III:. , • .: lik yit•A, ,1,,t,_1_.: "-Yr , :: ..,a,......v 4r. . -:.-4--ie* --Illa,;• g . • 1.I4 •!•-. . • • - ••• .4% zw.--'Aim * *. 4 ".."*.'t• .q. ,,-. • - .. ...13,wy,..t ......,•.: . 4..14,- '4?' • • ..:tr 't A ').11.1‘' -Wf'',06 ...: . . . ;• • ' ••-, •**,...0. • - .... ...* 0 lisIl illiiii ..,:•: `i 4r., 71" - • . .- • • . • " • i* • . 0 • ••• •'; _; Mid-trunk of Cottonwood, straight trunks 0 0 0 7 Ovii8 • -,r 00x1792x 24b jpegl • .- 04-_ I • � -a ►• • •. k kNk / fg. .., AA - .rt � v• V +ir -. . y ,$. . .3, 0 %‘. .- • .1-,;.••,, er...we' - . . . '/ ` !ii T• /l �f��i�,t ,._l • . livo. 2 NU.: ,...1144, AV. :k; r 'F.• :pi7. • e It 1 oh...... - ;-_,...ONALIIIV41!. ..pa.pkeljr.,... ,.....4 in Si/.,-..?,. . • ,4%,.. .,•&:.,-. •_I-rt -.•,, 0 0 ,,..tr4 z,....,,, ... ::.• .. I,.47.." 'r.., .. 1.4 .,4 ii,. ,• g, .g.,..7..,4 i.„ ,, 1..• to ,.1..).,, , ,*„. .. ... . . .3,..• . . ,. , i- 44-1 N. :A.. `' ,•! , ,v .4.4.''y� f :MOT, `y ^'"A'N' "Ttailgisi; t"1.21°.:.14.`..7Vike:Viii' -4 7.? .- '.jet ". .#11 :le- ... ._ ,. ?",„z410* fis-r.,,,,,. .,„ .., -...,, .--,.. ...., -., - „ .:1- . . ..., .. .- ,,,-.. ...,,,.„ . 1 1V11,1 I I I 4 tkir 4.•, ny. le ail 40 s �Y3. 1 4 kee101irAliAlPdvaii..4, C. t., • ';"--..4414014/ ''''.4kAr v..y.... Iv.- spr,, • a Adr-f* 1 '.; 11 sy* iai t a r`i �R�• 1; �',,,,. _ grip- •7 .•4: J {t2. -r‘ '. 4k ,'' .1:A.-26 . ..._, -,_ ef,,, . ., -,- _... -4-e:it*. ••!•,-:-IF Vt.' _..� iraf •�' F' bra .� , Y -.• AG'W1 1�a 4 S ,a':. `�t tom. " ' `'_.�. t. ` g, = r •'VA?its `'n • �, :. a R Yq '.,. .: 1'' rr 3 _. eliflAv ;-:-doe ,-` - • ,Tirrg ii*40. fi t ) fi: P �'•�+ E= ii'� �',i i.'.'r l'f V r?rb, fQJr §‘..-,to41 ' t� � f t'/',RL r.,fS ,..!." .•eI' i I ��-s" -' �t.�o . r.a R•.r et.rat At-t�• '� �'. - ....e:/goiliWW,Ir.•••-_--. , .44/420fois tat s‘,..141.44405,,,,..., A. !7V.liA i0CI��_.•®®Il�y` qG{ ly .1..0�'` '•wK.If +�/ F4'...--9'''„•.'••.-''..'4•.,L, �z �o, 6F ,y :.4 1 1„s1E9gP �' ttS••• v.2., 11'. -s` . 1Z1i1.71.P' w1'�';L: aa/ m yI •A'•✓ N• .i' i.Y., •+.{tr. .. M!• �' J;q� ci - . PN.Oy.r 4VI4. •• SP." •tt:��j1 . :try fi:10 ��.,t�. � r�,tf r3_" y�� TQ:t L dt J ' a1•1)47 1� •g1 .• i i 7by..'.ar loe/. 4.4,•w b•71 NT,- • Canopy of Double trunk Cottonwood,round and healthy looking 0 CI 0 9 1 • • • Oul0 .--1 •••••-• ....- _-- Mites -:-4 •—,*•,, - .,„ , ,•.,„ . ..•:•-•1 •• •'-•• .-••• .... • •'4., , •. 41 . ii.••4.'.._ te• ' '''' '''-:.. '..' - ''-l't - 41:-. .rt 1; ."it'i°41'.'1:4 A.. .1r4.74'4116.475 :'•'.....7":" 1 1; .18:Ci.«I 4';',••••• •• t.',I•-•- ''' ' '' '1.'.t..,,'1'.7. 2:4•Tt.''' ... ?lc 4r • .-- ..wt- , r; , .-• ."‘ 6'. :••rhe,A' .terleikWdligir ••--::.;ft..., • ' - , - --,, r ..'• .., ms,it:. . - '••• ..,',...• ..1,00. • '-•,.' .,./.....L'o•V *•-•-••' . '• ',11/4" • ' e" L----' • • - "'•• • /•• ...71-,,,,,,,. .0,tu: :-: --•-- 4"".. '- 1.iii--" -4,74U), . •;.; 4 . •ii• v •''' • 1... f 4.••10. , •. • ' •. :, ,14, '',,V,N t, •„'' •`. $,4,0,•',„,"„' ' .•- •••••••re_.1..,,,,,,„•••••• ' ., ., , ,....,• , ....• . ,,. 4%,,,,,,,,,..%„,•,,. „, „ s. -i'71,'... '-•tt. j iI" ' ' I/ .; ir , TA' •• •• "•• .... • $... , 44:'14,. ,,, .,- • -, ., •. -., , ,34.,..T'• pr... _ , ' -,'--- ..", ......,. 4w-.... -' • ..,,' .... .,•.-. m- % . -1.,-,....", -mg.-V:0r:-..z...y„,-... •;;,',Ior,i,...-• ..;- -z---.. ....:-,..„1.A•••' It, '• • .. •••• • '".,..41", ,, #,t• ' , : ., ,,.'"I. '., 1 2.:,#,..,-It. ,„•:•-,••p,00,,,• . . ' ••••••••• . 1.•••••••,-r,„••• • ••••• :,, .,. • , . . t• . , , , ', • •• . 4",ittli12,.......'."•" „,..„,_•1 ••••,,, , •• • 0 4.•''4^ , 'II. .' .4•I'• •$0/1:,..1,,Wit•"" 1.-.44,1'.....41040104movr., ••• .„'••.,„.b.-_ ,,_, ,•. : ,'. Ye:' •••-` „" •• 1 . ''...14 1, tP,`,",' • a° • .• ' ," . '' • .' -„$A.flit .SI 1',..:,:,•t.,!, ,.t. ,,,'..,"$;•.;t , ,`'.. 4 .77,ii,,I,4"•- —..-. ' .** 11er• ' • ''°- ,t . 'IN',• s'‘....-L' .. .., . 1:. ,• 1 l'4A1.0t... t,S.1,4..44. •" . 4, •:,-. - •• • I 1'.rb• •r= • # • " • .• ... - ' • '• ' ,,i,...y • • .• . ",.„.. • ....; .. . • , ,.. , , .1.. ?,%-../;:...• . ,,, • =.... I-. ,v..t.,..-...,-.p. . • •• . .. ,.,.„ . f., ..0-4-.•. ......,.. ,,•t, 0, . • #4 •• . li• rt•'',..,,1 ‘t••••=• • 1.1' •-;••.• .• •-•• • " '•s• . $ 1 4i•;* -,• ••• • ' :••• • ' "' - • a • • e • ... 1.-`I. ., -.7.;5.%,*. '1 k...."•• r •"'. • . •• '• .. , 1,,• --. ' • • "4 Imm.1 Wm, Nii•A • 4. •••• = C,I r;:i e,• •. •-• '.. .. ..• :.:• . .: •,':•••1 ... • .• • • ' •••• , ' ' •• • .. . ' Al 13, ? 1. . = l$ •, . ' •.• . .-4iY.,. •••• ° . .. . 7 •• . ' S't .• '':'.•. . .d m• War' • - . .• •'i•.• . • • •..•$ , ; . , ", 0 .• • 1, • ,•kr,.,-,. i. ,!f• 1 k ,.. . /4? . 1 x Ki 4'4' .4". •,..,, ,..,..r _ . . ... • ... ,.,..... ..; .f. .. ,. .,,. .,„, . , . • ..; •- . . : .: . , , . ,• ;,.'• . . ' -,:. •V" ,i..*„.1' , 0., • . I • 7 t r ,. , .. . i:'I*. b .•' • • ••`,. '.• • '..'.:-.A-:•'•-.1.4.•• .0 r." . • k•.•". z. • • • • • •t t . ••••' . • $.0,,,„ h'• pit .••••'.i.#11tr t' 1$4.• • I: .1,,'; # •,,,•'' 4;•s•' • IP--• g' • •`. - . •'''• - • • - . ' --.• "r..• `.,.• t'713"' '• • ,-• '1, . • II •• iir. ;•. • _ . I +I.,: '- ..-- ,‘,..1.," ? 1.11'.'• ' ', ,, .,:4•7r• " , • ', , Clio 0 :::,,4,„,!0t: •' ',,,,l'',11';''' ,. ,.'..' .1.1.42 :L: 1:;:::::114:'':::::.* -., t: ': - • ' t....:.'4::;"'.. .1.-..v. '. .3. . --",'.-fr.' ' at...L i•-'4,...1, .' .1.' ...4,' ' '.-. - ' ''' ''' ..•: * " , i 1A.4'' ''''.' ' Ai* *' I " It's f eir ...,,,,, .. ,,. , . fr.r, . 0,,,r.,. ,..;,, .4. ,,-' , ,rt, . N..,„;,'Y'', •• l':' ' f' .'i, .' i• .i:.s.: •.t.,1;-.1t F.,,T.:::-:: °,',... b , , . `*' .%.r , -, 1,,, . -,07.•. k --, • - 1, -.1* i i SO 't •31, ,,. ,•'1 -+ e',1 ' 0,.4 "`• ke :, 1 1 ••••••I'Vt.,'••••••31••••."it - - " • 4 ^ .., 4., ., - , * ,-, • , • ,',4el':11,- Ai -1•• • tr,- " ' • — ' , r, • .. ,,,,....,_ettry%.eorNiti4.1., 1.-, l' ." . ", .! al! - , ' • •"••• tt 'I. '' ' "• • I' OP.* I • 10.$4* $ • 4 ,t.,, _ . 4 , • „ ; & • ,,. , t . 4. ,4 1 t 4, ' •1,,- -..,,...• •J." ....717r. •• &EP' - dit. ' • ,'Inky ;'-C*4.1-•- 9 l'"'Lt• s , ,i ''..s. ri.. - ......,v,. . ...' 4- ., 4 •'. ' ' ,..t.• , . 0 : 1 t ti. 4. - • .. 4 , .... Yli,Ite-"Ati. •-• • 0 0 • S • UU12 . p0001324 (1792x1200x24b jpe9) 41_ .., • . l tl. . ..,ate ', 1 .7„,'t We s ter: A :-s ( ty;5t�'rr V.. r ,it a. lc't � j . . yt 4 0 .,%., „.,.....,,, ,, -. .........., . . 4, . _ Sys` , •r uY -, ?ft r'1 gel. ' ` '1 -tt .-,.. t. • The Cottonwood in middle of front yard. Also seen are the other trees in the front yard III - I13 • • • uu14 p0001323 (1792x1200x24b jpeg) • __. _ ...„..... ..,_ 1,4 -• ., - . ..--t:';?.''....4.....'"-'.,''' .. ..L. ' • is t �� I' m .fi r U- i r?.# �`IF f , I :' - \ 41. �� •k`{•, .•1 1 J k ( •1, •, "''s •ue Y. '.,".. ?-'s i j i °.r,�• • 1. Y h Y t1t y• . I4• s •- :''�' 1. rI?' f.5'i;,� 1.,. e, is- • . . .. ,i, . . i. ,:. ... . ,. _ ... . . .,..,...,..,. ..Yrh . ..:4 .- • y, •c 1 -, ..y Lr [ s- Fjl - ,, -- A S ., 'p s_ •t --yy�' i- •-'7r �r� S '' n _, ''err ,2 _ry' , :e.-: S. 1 . t'`,_i t. ;•' ofr'£ r• 4 f- ,4.r-u r 144. Looking from Westridge Dr along western property line toward the tree of the property. Large open area highlighted in front yard III • • • 061E i 1 . j>°4.444%)Nli jai"(1!14 .V7 ), 8 # . i 1 1 I 1 i f ) 4. l',7,16 1 f f 1 y 4." . 'r - •, f ity-.. " > /1 04,.. 1 I ; ... -,,,,N,,i_ 4.1 i r-- 1101 I --1,•,,,,a .' Z 9 ,,,-- .,fri rir-'4' „...D..,..„.._ --„, own' • . ,I. 3._I i 414 a # f / k ,,,.5., 1 : i rtritel 11 P C.:., tr- )1 f 4 CO 4 1 kAti-dr ) 0 CL, = C:I 1 X c'e 1 '4 ill) .1 441 O 173 t'S4,. -444 a t c• \ 1 I 0 i ,I 4 • I 114 ,. ,1 L. i k....— 4‘111 t 1.1 ii 101, ' i I ---". i it, i 1.. k j I ---41 .---,, C.,-,7-1 _........__ el Pir't t ....,.._.,..... ... I dell ini! 7 Cr.") k i WOO 1 . a (I%) &19 *I i f fr".-- ----_,,,, V a Of • I 06 ,---..r.r."r•zg,-.40.re-,---,''--p,texIcvrawererrarrsrr .1-07trzurrrrelrec'm...-r-...Prw,n,irr:--.,-nleaszvvv.-s-t,..vitve. 6.11111, 7/111111 f irk i '7', -4 .,.-fp,".. II 3. il .-,-. .i';'. 'MP' otk 144, `-'3. ..... ,,A, „. , _ .., ,. 4,.4 1, 1 t •,‘-1 -,,,#,tm . >I' ., L., ,14 1,:-';‘k Al . 1_,,,Wtrin tilki-Wo. =al .... ,- ; .1);$ g 1 ,. 0. A, ,I.,• 0 "1"." ,-..j. v... .44,4,0444,44.4V14.4444.404.4tccr.14-,leMeTT,,r-]4.1.4.111444'..F.r.114,-4444--44-1.4.,4444,Frine-V-.:411.t..,'44 rerefXrAVM.S74rePR4 ns.rilssrt n,r.,'n rewernn m-rn•-•••••-•-^n,...”-^en 44a-r"r.4”.41.414-61.te.71 r 14 fp I er"' 4 •Al.f.. o •.....," •,"yo' ..; alt. °k.. 41 t ...: • - V .Q e S u r- v t Tree List for 16 Westridge Drive • 1 . Douglas Fir 60 ' Diameter 2. Douglas Fir 50" Diameter 3. Birch 21" Diameter 4. Birch 21" Diameter 5. Birch 16" Diameter Dcugias F:r 30" Diameter iai:�e:er 3. Cottonwood see city's report) 9. not able to identify 47" Diameter 10. not able to identify 31" Diameter 11. Common Hawthorne 14" Diameter 12. Dogwood 30" Diameter 13. Alder 32" Diameter 14. Alder 37" Diameter 15. Maple 46" Diameter 16. Douglas Fir 40" Diameter We contacted Phil Hickey, an Arborist, but we are unable to afford his fee for a report on our Cottonwood tree at this • time. 001. 3 (40.KE0, W coot+ • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT February 23, 2000 RE: Tree Cutting Application TC 00-0057 } Tax Lot 1 20 of Tax Map 21 E 1 7CD 16 Westridge Dr. Mr. Mark MacKenzie 16 Westridge Dr. Lake Oswego OR 97034 Dear Mr. MacKenzie, On February 16, 2000, you applied for a tree removal permit. As a result of 111 action taken by the City Council on September 28, 1999, all requests for removal of trees greater than 1 2-caliper inches shall address review criteria prescribed by the Council, as part of the Type I Tree Removal permit process. These criteria are as follows: LOC 55.02.041 : Prohibition of Tree Removal of Trees greater than 12 inches, Exception. Notwithstanding LOC 55.02.035(1), 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3), no tree greater than 12-inch caliper at DBH' shall be removed, except the City Manager may grant an exception to this prohibition when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternative landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. The City may impose such alternative site plans or placement or structures or alternative landscaping designs as a condition of approval of the permit, in addition to any other conditions or provisions provided under LOC 55.02.042(1) and LOC 55.02.080(3). EXHIBIT S 110 DBH = Diameter at Breast Height, that is 4.5 feet above ground level. LU 00-0029 oZ �aa � .i 380 A Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego,Oregon 97034 J J Planning Division: (503)635-0290 • Building Division: (503)635-0390 • Engineering Division: (503)635-0270 • FAX(503)635-0269 - 2 - In your application, you stated that the reason for the tree removal because the tree is a nuisance, sticky, shedding and stains the entry of the house and • stuff is tracked into the house. Based upon a site inspection on February 22, 2000 and on the arborist report, staff finds the following: 1 . The 38.1 " double tracked Cottonwood tree stands in the middle of the front yard. 2. his tree does not seem tc be dead, diseased dr hazardous. t s healthy looking with a good canopy and stands straight and tall. Based on the above findings, as confirmed through a field inspection, staff finds that it is not necessary to remove the existing Cottonwood tree. It is on that basis that the staff denies your application for removal of Cottonwood tree on this Type I Tree Removal Permit Application. Under LOC 55.02.085 (2) "An applicant for a tree removal permit may appeal denial of a permit or conditions imposed on approval by filing a written notice of intent to appeal, along with the applicable filing fee established by resolution of the City Council, within fourteen days of the date of decision on the permit. " If you have questions, please telephone me at 635-0290. • Sincerely, Sandy Ingalls Planning Technician • 0 443 c)C - 0(e, pt March 12, 2000 r, "•K 3 21100 CITY OF LAKE 08WEOO RE: Appeal denial of permit Dept.ofPlannir- &Development 16 Westridge Drive i C rsG —eG 5 fl Lisa and Mark MacKenzie 16 Westridge Drive Lake Oswego. OR 9703 To whom it my concern, We intend to appeal the denial of our permit to remove a Cottonwood tree that stands in our front yard. We purchased our home in November of 1998 which had been used as a rental property and was in great disrepair. We had to replace the carpeting throughout the house due to stains which we later discovered were caused by the sticky droppings that fall in the spring from the Cottonwood tree. We have also replaced the driveway and front steps due to stains from the droppings and cracks. We discovered the sticky droppings do not come off our car and have stained the paint permanately. therefore we can not park in our drive way. • In the fall, the leaves don't start falling until late December and continue through January. It has been difficult to get the leaves picked up in a timely fashion at this time of year and the leaves fill the storm drains on the four corners of Westridge and Westminster Drive. We planted a lawn in September and we'd love to get started on adding plants and trees and would be happy to replace the Cottonwood with a smaller tree further away from the house and drive way. I believe if the previous owners had lived in the house and had taken care of the property the Cottonwood tree would have been removed long ago be- fore it got so large. The yard has many trees which are in need of tender loving care, but we are only choosing to remove the Cottonwood tree due to the extreme damage it has caused to the property. Please make an exception and allow our family to remove our Cottonwood tree. Sincerely, • �� yt / � `'`v01' Lisa MacKenzie Mark MacKenzie EXHIBIT 6 LU 00-0029 • • • 002 Patrice Mitchell 5 Windsor Court Lake Oswego. Oregon 97034 Home Phone 503 638-9053 RECEIVED L' } ' ri April 12, 2000 - `�` CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Dept.o4 Planning&Development Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall 0. Box 269 30 =a' Avenue Lake 0s weao, Oregon 97034 Review Commission, Recently I received a notice of a public hearing concerning the Planning Director's decision to deny Lisa and Mark MacKenzie from cutting down a tree on their property at 16 Westridge Drive, Lake Oswego. When the MacKenzies moved into their home it was a disgrace to the neighborhood. The front yard was intertwined with weeds, an uprooted tree decorated the entire front yard, and there was debris scattered everywhere. Within a few months of this family moving into our neighborhood, this house went from being a mess, and an eyesore to a magnificent home, . These new homeowners turned 16 Westridge Drive into a beautiful, well manicured, tastefully remodeled house worthy of Home and Garden Magazine. To deny them the right to cut down this Cottonwood tree seems unfair to them. Please rethink your decision and let this family cut down that tree. Who knows what special treat they have in store for the neighborhood. So far, I have been impressed with their remodeling and gardening decisions. As a neighbor, who has never met this couple, I want to thank them for helping to increase our property value. I want to support them in their request to cut down that tree. Sincerely, 6 i L 7L-*/ / Patrice Mitchell EXHIBIT 7 LU 00-0029 • u (! 23 RECEIVED APR 1 7 7000 • CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO April 13, 2000 Dept.of Planning&Development Hamid Pishvaie Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall P.O.Box 369 330 "A" Avenue Lake Oswego. OR ;0 4 File No.: LU 00-0029 Applicants: Lisa and Mark MacKenzie Dear Mr. Pishvaie, Recently I received a notice concerning a public hearing on the MacKenzie's appeal concerning the decision of the Planning Commission to deny their application for the removal of a Cottonwood tree from their lot. At this time, I would like the commission to reconsider their decision concerning the removal of this tree. These homeowners have been very responsible from the moment they joined our neighborhood. There home has become a showpiece in the last few months. They have spent many hours • in their yard beautifying it to the delight of all of their neighbors. If they wish to eliminate just one of their trees I think the Commission should grant them their request. As a homeowner in the Westridge Ridge housing development, and a tree lover, please approve the Mackenzies application to remove the Cottonwood tree. Sincerely, Lam`. \4 William Williams • EXHIBIT 8 • LU 00-0029 l. t_• 2J STAFF REPORT • CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISION APPLICANT: FILE NO: Jane E. Drew Li.: 00-0037 LAP 00-08] PROPERTY OWNERS: STAFF: Gregory and Jane Drew Sandy Ingalls LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE OF REPORT: Tax Lot 3810 of April 19, 2000 Tax Map 21E 17DC DATE OF HEARING: LOCATION: • May 1, 2000 6 Dover Way NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Westridge R-10 ZONING DESIGNATION: R-10 I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant has requested removal of one 15-inch Douglas Fir tree for the purpose of constructing a detached 2-car garage, Exhibit 5. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS City of Lake Oswego Tree Code (Chapter LOC 55) LOC 55.02.080 Criteria for Issuance of Type II Tree Cutting Permits LOC 55.02.085 Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Tree Cutting Permit LU 00-0037 Page 1 of 7 III. FINDINGS • A. Background/Existing Conditions: 1. The applicant had originally applied for removal of a 15-inch, diameter at breast height (DBH) Douglas Fir Tree on March 1, 2000, Exhibit 5. Upon site inspection, staff found that the tree did not meet criteria for a hazard tree, nor did the tree meet criteria for trees that are not dead, or hazardous. The tree removal permit was denied on March 27. 2000. Exhibit 6. The applicant filed an appeal of the staff decision on April 7, 2000, Exhibit 7. 2. The 15-inch Douglas Fir tree is located in the middle of the eastern side of the property, Exhibits 2 and 3. The applicant states that the tree is to be removed for construction of a two-car detached garage. There is another large Douglas Fir near the proposed construction site that would be protected during construction, Exhibits 2, 3, 4 and 5. 3. There are over 25 other living trees over 5-inch DBH that currently populate the site. The predominant trees on the property are conifers, followed by a variety of deciduous and specimen trees, Exhibit 2. 4. The subject property is rectangular in shape, and is developed with a • single-family dwelling, Exhibits 1 and 3. The house has an existing attached 3-car garage on the lower level. The applicant proposes to add an additional detached 2-car garage to the site. The lot is approximately 22,000 square feet in size, and zoned R-10. Access to the property is from Dover Way. No historic designation exists. 5. Properties abutting the site are zoned R-10, all with single family dwellings upon them. 6. The site topography is sloped. The site is on a moderate slope with approximately a 20% slope in the proposed construction area, Exhibits 3 and 4. 7. The property was posted with a public notice sign regarding the tree removal and letters were sent to the neighborhood association and all property owners within 300 feet of the site on March 8, 2000. The application notice period concluded on March 23, 2000, [LOC 55.02.075]. S LU 00-0037 Page 2 of 7 B. Compliance with Criteria for Approval: . Tree removals proposed for housing construction purposes must meet the criteria of 55.02.080(3). LOC 55.02.080(3)- Tree that is Not Dead, or a Hazard "The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not dead or a hazard if the applicant demonstrates: "(a) The tree is proposed for removal for landscaping purposes or in order to construct development approved or allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego Code or other applicable development regulations. The City Manager may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application." The applicant is planning to construct a new detached 2-car garage on the site. There is an existing 3-car garage attached to the lower level of the house. The footprint is staked, however, no plans for the new structure have been submitted to the Building Division as yet. Building permits for new detached garage construction on residential lots are classified as Ministerial Development per Lake • Oswego Code section 49.20.105. The subject 15" Douglas Fir stands adjacent to the proposed construction site as seen in Exhibits 2, 3 and 5. Staff suggests that an alternative site plan could be designed to preserve the impacted Douglas Fir. This alternative is presented in Exhibit 8. The site plan includes a retaining wall around the trees at the dripline to protect the two Douglas Firs and retain the soil. Another retaining wall is needed along the eastern side of the driveway for all of the submitted plans. Retaining walls are further discussed, below. Please see staffs original decision in Exhibit 6. "(b) Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks." Erosion: For the purposes of tree removal requests, two time frames need to be examined; immediate (during the project) and long term (after project completion). For the immediate term, Lake Oswego Code Chapter 52 governs erosion control when more than 500 square feet of soil is disturbed. This chapter requires that erosion control measures be included as part of the home construction. These measures are to be put in place prior to and during the disturbance activity to prevent sedimentation and soil migration. The applicant states in her tree removal questionnaire that "removal of the tree • will not increase erosion." She has previously planted vegetation on the slope and LU 00-0037 Page 3 of 7 with the addition of new landscaping, the slope should not erode, Exhibit 5. The building pad where the proposed excavation will occur is sloped. Because of the steep slope a grading plan illustrating the existing and proposed contours along with an erosion control plan indicating where silt fence would be installed to prevent any possible erosion will be submitted to the Building Division for review and approval by staff, at the time building permits are applied for. The Building Division administers the erosion control plan. Staff will monitor the site during the entire course of housing construction to assure compliance with the approved erosion control plan. The applicant is also proposing to landscape around the proposed garage area; however, the applicant has not submitted a specific replanting plan at this time. Staff recommends that a landscape plan be submitted prior to issuance of the building permits, if approved. Soil Stability: This standard is typically applied to areas of extreme slope (20%+) where existing trees and vegetation have been instrumental in retaining the soil of the bank. When the removal of trees may cause slope failure (landslide, sloughing, etc.), then either the tree should remain or a solution to mitigate the loss of the tree needs to be engineered. The site slope is approximately 20% Exhibits 3, 4 and 5. Landscaping along the eastern edge of the property retains the hillside from eroding onto the neighbor's driveway. Please see the photograph • in Exhibit 4, showing the elevation change from the neighboring driveway up toward the proposed construction site. The applicant states that "the soil is heavy clay and will not be adversely affected by removal of the Fir tree." The applicant, in her appeal notice (Exhibit 7), discusses the increased costs associated with not removing the Douglas Fir and rotating the garage, Exhibit 7. The applicant states that a 30-foot long retaining wall would have to be installed and an additional 750 square feet of driveway would have to be paved for an alternative building location. Staff finds that regardless of which plan is used, a retaining wall will have to be constructed for the new garage and driveway because of steep slopes associated with this site, Exhibits 3 and 8. The retaining wall along the eastern side of the driveway could be reduced in size by cutting the edge off the wall as illustrated by the crosshatch marks on Exhibit 8. That extra area is too small to be used as a turnaround, so it could be eliminated. A small retaining wall will be needed along the western side of the driveway, at the base of the Douglas Fir trees. It should be constructed along the edge of the driveway at the adjacent Douglas Fir's dripline. Size and dimensions of the retaining walls will need to be reviewed and approval by staff as part of the building permits process. The applicant also comments that utility lines for "sewer, storm, gas, electric, water, telephone and cable" (Exhibit 7) will have to be extended another 30 feet • LU 00-0037 Page 4 of 7 farther for an alternative plan, then what would be needed for the original plan. • Staff notes the unusual need for all of the above utilities in a garage. No building plans have been submitted for building permits with the Building Division, to date for staff to review. Staff finds that the proposed site plan, (Exhibit 3) shows stairs ascending up to the proposed garage on the eastern side of the building and a set of stairs inside the garage. These improvements indicate that possibly a second floor studio, shop, granny flat or storage area may be proposed for construction above the future garage. If the applicant plans on constructing a two-story garage with a living unit on one floor which includes kitchen facilities, then the applicant will need to apply for approval of a secondary dwelling unit, under LOC 48.20.547 (minor development). As Exhibit 2 illustrates, the site slopes approximately 20% in the area of the proposed new garage. Given the steep topography in this area, staff finds it is necessary to require the applicant to submit a grading plan showing minimum excavation and fill around trees to remain. The applicant shall clarify how the excess excavated materials will be hauled away from the site in order to minimize damage to remaining tress. This information would be necessary at the time of building permit issuance. Flow of Surface Waters: This standard is typically applied to areas with stream channels. This property does not contain or border a stream. The new impervious • surface on the site will only consist of a small segment of driveway from the northerly existing driveway to and including the new garage. The impervious areas will be designed to drain to a positive storm drainage system on the site without impacting the adjoining properties. Drainage issues are addressed by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) at the time of building permit plan review. The applicant plans to landscape with new plants, scrubs and trees after the garage is completed. Protection of Adjacent Trees, Existing Windbreaks: Trees adjacent to the construction zone should be protected. Trees close to the building footprint, within 15 feet will need protective chain link fencing put in place prior to commencement of construction along the trees natural dripline as required by LOC 55.08.020. The applicant would be required to install and maintain tree protection fencing with a minimum of 6' tall chain link fence attached to posts driven into the ground at maximum 10-foot intervals at the edge of the tree protection zone or dripline, whichever is greater, and at the boundary of any open space tracts that abut the parcel developed. This issue will adequately be addressed at the time of issuance of a building permit. • LU 00-0037 Page 5 of 7 "(c) Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the character, aesthetics, property values of the • neighborhood. The City many grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternative landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code." Staff finds that removal of the 15.3-inch Douglas Fir will have an impact on the site, as it is grouped closely with another large Douglas Fir adjacent to the existing house, Exhibits 2, 3 and 5. Lose of the tree will change the character of the canopy coverage on the site and affect the remaining Douglas Fir. The two trees most likely have an intertwining root system and lose of one tree may cause some instability on the part of the remaining tree. Staff finds that construction of the proposed garage foundation on the northwest edge of the garage interferes with the Douglas Fir tree, Exhibits 3, 4 and 6. Both Douglas Firs adjacent to the construction site seem to be in good health. Staff recommends that the garage be situated so that these trees are preserved. • Recommendations include relocating the garage further to the southeast so that it pulls away from the two Douglas Firs in question. This design is presented in revised Alternative B, Exhibit 8. Staff finds that the existing, original and alternative site plans, Exhibits 3 and 7 and staff's revised plan, Exhibit 8, all require the applicant to back out of their existing driveway. Non of the plans have included adequate room for a turnaround. At least an 18-foot for a compact car and up to a 25-foot for a normal size car outside radius is required for a turnaround in a driveway. This distance may not be available in this location on the site. Staff recommends that a certified arborist be retained in order to evaluate and submit a plan with specific pre-construction and post-construction recommendations for preservation of the trees in order to ensure maximum tree protection on the site. The arborist's recommendations may result in changes to building footprint which must be shown on revised building plans for revision and approval of staff prior to issuance of any building permits. One neighbor commented on this tree removal application, Exhibit 9. The neighbor is in favor of the removal, as there are many other beautiful trees on the site. • LU 00-0037 Page 6 of 7 IV. CONCLUSION • Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that LU 99-0037 should be denied and the garage should be relocated to preserve the two Douglas Firs adjacent to the existing house. The applicant will need to submit a revised site plan showing the rotated garage and alternative driveway location no closer than 10 feet to adjacent trees. The revised site plan, a grading plan and an arborist report should be submitted along with the building permit application for review and approval of staff. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of LU 00-0037 EXHIBITS 1. Tax Map 2. Tree Inventory Site Plan 4111 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. Field Photographs 5. Type II Tree Permit Application, TC 00-0072 6. Denial Letter, dated March 27, 2000 7. Request for Public Hearing dated April 6, 2000 8. Staff's Proposed Site Plan 9. Letter from Cliff Robinson, dated April 20, 2000 41) :Sandy_[/Cases/LU 00-0037/LU 00-0037R LU 00-0037 Page 7 of 7 HI LLbhi mL 4°3 r 1841i 1 30 00' 6,. 100.0e' 6,s 44 /00 5200 5100 50o fps:g� 6. Bey. r7' 5400 , 5300 49 . 51 s 900 ,ti /v.>B4•si' a • rA /74.1o' 45 4z NO w 52 tb°. 4 35I5 " a I . 2 I r� .�J� 18453 • J . 3 !.. e, /ss.00' 4. . ,r' v X 5 0 • xo,oa tp — /ss.T• 3801 o :s�� , y - 2 ��-, ¢S - 3803 F 3.802 Ivi — _5000 a 3 5 16 .,,'Q 3 S - t., r • I8495d _ J J .r 7 — .__. I �_/s s. � .. :S2.c0 .Qo •0B 62_'G +J' ? ~*, c .RIVE _-gg, �� .,3 _ aia f�'� 9 • 7 ;� N t 0 \ .4.) _ , i IV. a�. T.O 0 WAY 12'' . 3811 ad• 4c' /,vim;,,. y3. G' /63.00• !O -50,-, f�±'/4,, 308 3809 38i.0 12 fiiv tt Vod n ;' 1 oh y a wN . SEE ° ?Al 3 . \0 h 30' ye 7,,.zo' � - --/ Ja5".52'-' - 'B5,'3.. _ 0 . i •;(*:"\i' 1 i'-;.?_tSITE s?' r317 -1h — ,s -„ ,' - 9 5 i L ian., a. -I. floi Z..^ 95G ;TO. ' , ts.e ;�I 4 `s 1- . ••n 169.44' • N 9° ¢S'i •79.2. - 29 0 500 600 f, 601 i602.4 - _ >.: • I^ ki 5 ago 5!'7.}"1✓ IY .Yit?g,--8' 44• ... /83.4. `,'' 11 --) i. IJ ! EXHIBIT 1 LU 00-0037 c , ,,,_. i • .n- x' '? / 4. -- ri ' 1 300 U !) 1 'A „/ • • • Uki nl �. .0 UUtLLIUJ U 1 ' JPII ICI DAILVGi ILL•JUJ LLl lb4r 1'. UU1 max. • A April 20, 2000 t,. FAX 635-0269 Ms, Sandy Ingalls City of Lake Oswego Community Development Dept, PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Dear Sandy; Attached is the topo map which had been created for the proposed construction. Although the map does not actually show our entire lot, I have indicated the existing trees on the property that are 4" or more in diameter at the 4 %2 foot height mark. Smaller trees are not indicated. • As you can see by the map, we have over 30 trees on our property in that category. I hope this helps the Development Review Commission in their review of our application for a tree permit to remove one tree. I look forward to meeting you on May 191, If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at my office, 221-7632. Thank you. Sincerely, an- . Drew 6 2 over Way Lake Oswego, OR 97034 attachment EXHIBIT 2 LU 00-0037 O (l 3 C DO 17....Fry (.F LAKE Cigfit.'ot clannin 11 taavticlinr.en •_.; 2" ALUMINUM CAP ._ OA, AP• (4 . . 1 T8M L ELEV.=356 \ .62 A Pe . • , N i 1 • to (51 , , , r . V — . \ N \ \ \ i EDGE OF / CONCRETE E\ 70.99' ' , . CH , 50.00' \ \ . / P=125.00\ SF2.3'043,3: \ • \ \ , ‘ . , NA LC •. • ' t FENCV i \72\-::::"Y° ,..-- ,_<'D t 4 1 i 1 \\-- -•: , ...., F i ,‘\i\s'.\• ‘- 5.:API— is, 2123141- * . • 'il.c.\ / a smer$4 6% \\\ N3 — — • , a !. \ . I, III,. , _ • 4, 4;1 / i 1.1,‘_., r'L :::L f12 1 ' ) ; ‘ ,/ i c.„ kb-. , _L.-4:-.• ..:1- , / i ,,/ i " 1 ; , \\ \ A 1, \ \I / 1 *GEO \ T /i ECHNICAL 1)(PLORATION\I-iQL \iAl 1, / / / / / : 1 If • 1... . _ , n .... IA i ... i GEOTE,tNICAL EXPE0qATIO HOLE 0 / • / 1 1 ' 1 ''- i I 1 i / 7- / ' i. i \ L CP 3 i!' \ 1‘\ \ i,, • i / ., \ \ 1 1 II i ! ( i . \ \ , i ' / / SZ I ' ' I) / / i ; t1.4 't I ir r ' ) 1 ) j • i i ' .' / / i / I 1 (• I k 1 if/ / '' 1 / , 1 1 1 ./ t 4 I ; I / / / 1 1 1 / / ! I II 111 i i i -OUND "V\3.8,51000/1.'iP i 1 I „i 1 {. ( il / l ; '' 4110• P- 1 ' 311e4 ,,,,;.,.. \ SfieratifA i ( \ \' \ ' i , . 1 , ,(1 l / 7/ NiAr4. : il ,s. 0., „..1. . a.:01 jct. ... ', \ i/ , I N ',. • '•-_ \ IIPN. • 0, % , / , / / Jr 0 N "..s./I i , ! / \ \,.. ot _IA , 1 N89‹52'03's Ary • / ". -; -4'5. 0' '\ :If "1, , ' i / / / • \ . ..../..._ ' '. \ .‘ \.\\ \ ' 1 i i 0 0 4 ,. . .... \ \ i i " '" \ \ , f I ( I I, A z o o .d Lt,91. JZZ (209:131 ABINVEI HilliS H: 01 (11Hi) 00 ,0Z- 11c1V • .k.t.... :.],• , .7. ' ,":AA L! .•-47 i , • ,-, \ \ ‘ Jrami -// . • / / 4 ,. sil----- 'r • P=125.00', ' L=50.34' \ • Ar23.04‘.23" ••. -.. / . • 4' WOOD 'V11 . - -_ ', , . 'FENCE .r., . . .• . \ \ , - V . ''- ''' .• •. - . • . *: \ . • • ' •_/) , .. . . --.,..,. _ '--- - \-------____ - -- ‘,..1,t....."*.; t) - • ,: . -.-- • : , i z-. -- , --NIAG . , :i,','' - .,: — c ,.. ' eri, Ej•\- ...--------„, •. s- :-. kn 1 ? • )77 14/ 1 Z In f -..., 7\--„ D , . ' , \ / 4" . :,--1F1'. A i / \ 05...r.„Y• / 7- -., l / ,, ,t, 1 . . / • i / •'••••, , .7 , \ / . • • ' / . ' ' ' ' \ / 1 \i 1 / / . I -. -•i• \il / ':---- . _ % . ,:ki . • - •-•-. .. • • • ...• .' ,., ' 1 A'' 7:F4i, ' .e., •\ ,, ,.., ' , . - ../..-.• -A.k ', 1 -. k / • „ 1 , f-• -',- • 0 ,.. .. ....: •. .-.,, - ,z.,,_ ., • . . • \ •. : ,•-• .•• . . . \ .i.,-). • . . • ....„,, , , . • • - . - , r--- / • .• ., . o , • . . , • • , •-.... . • • . . .. , • (..,4 LOT 3 ..' . • . . c . . . .. . . . , . . 1z/ . • . V. . • . .1 I 4 # / \ \ " H ) Hii I II I '.. 1 ( 1 1 ,1 / , / i '' ,. H i &...„... i / . ) 7, / / ,' 1 , r 1 ... ..... I , I 1 1 If 1" / / / ii/ , / ro. S./ I I, I • ..._.., 1 1 1 ,_ ....., •- -1 I 1 1 1 .--• i I 1 I i \ 1 '• i , 1 . 1 J / • v,i 1 i .' 67,- <Pi • • ,' '1 I 1 1 1 I 1 i ; if-- i - IRON ,ROD FOUND ( ,,„ „ , 1 i . ( . 7; / ,IAA ,/ ,,-, . fiiil . , -4i-' ie.!Pic i et? ;,' !;• ' i: / \ 01UT ki: P,OSITI,ON . - .,.. \ . '‘ \ ,.. ',, t‘i rr- - 1. i . \ , I '‘ ' \ \ .i ".-4._ • ., .... .1;4-7\ -- 1 . ,. r .. `*- . . • — .• . . : ••, - , .• ,-..q., ' ••••. 1:.--!..-;.C.--)C ' • ..• -• '•-• ' N 8,91E2'0_7" :.- `, , / - - I i ,• • - ,,--- ......A .....3 , • \\\ \ 1' ' ' ) \ .... ...l ',....-, A Li\ On I i LA 4 L 0 ,/ i i 01 (5\ 0 N pr o e0 .5t - _i_ pf.3 5 , i r ' EXHIBIT 3 LU 00-0037 T W. COX AND ASSOCIATES, INC- 00 5 • • • 00 6 1)0000633 (1200x1792x24b jpeg) 0 , - ,� i .r. J i; 1. -14*. •e'• •. y1 ems• !' , •c ps'• • y it. . i of XI r.• ik �' • �- •. ., . r , •• •ice •fir• • ♦a 4...,.S .a • • Ilr. - : 'ir A.7- k•-.. ,•:a it i `l• �. ..i 9 .' •1 K I '4' - 1. - ' • • r '= 4110 1 ; . . • • _1 yr� :,. 1'ter`%= . .� ` :L:':41:r:,1' 7� 1''_-'t-• .-'p in r- .l_ d . any ` i•'1 • -- y • kC _ • • Tagged 15.3" Douglas Fir within EXHIBIT 4 proposed driveway footprint LU 00-0037 :0,2--5 0G0'7 a • • • Uuu8 7 . . p0000634 (,121.0 Ox.:1792x724 b.s.j p e gi..) I. .:.. :,...4 0. • ., . 7 a i A •, t .. _ ..... • • , _. , 't4 Yip walk •• - I t L • i* 1•'. .. I 4 t. .$. :._ • •, -7' a.71- *'.. i. e t.-c . - ..2% , 4r.46ri N - - . `..` '"• ‘ •,IS IS '--0-** - P 4•I' - , ... . -ta ' di. •. F'': -' sl 't •• , .. — . .. , • sr ,,•:4*-,-tsx•' ., .:• • . 2- Ort . -4- .. .....0 - '•s N• . v.,. •• ., . . .. ... I__ .A. •.-- , ...: " . -..-.. -..... . , •-x •... .iphs,1 10 , ..-:_ .e. . •.- . • ill •.:. f"if jr ,-4, ...eit... ipt • , - •-• 4'-, •• —. _ :it ...._ sillt: .5.4: •c . •......,.. .. •— - 44t;I 4r, ',lea: , 1,- •• ..... .- . ,.. .• 1101. 4 . ...• . .. .. .. . .... . a .Yr . 7. :3,....• . .. . ._. _ . •••• :-4 "... yea'r '.' ir'''.1 .• . - -,:---:.1:.••••.•-•-2:,- ,- ,•• '417- ..•-- grill; •wimp:: -.•-- - . .. . • .-• ..s's":.s.:-'-'-.It.„ 1 '- • -slit' -• • - . ; • AP,: . • ••A . .. • is. • -.a , •°. •I• . .' .;•. *, 40r&II. .: .. . ., A., „.4°.'"•-a- .- - • • • • .a '• ..'.I.1- • iltr a • ,... . ..;, ,, ...•4 F. • . -- .-. g . •JP, . • .- . • • we..-• .4 - aik. *.I i . ..-. I • "X. ? 1-;• ••••• Jo :,,f:'..,.• .14;1%4 ef-.. • . . _..., jt % . • 01/701:. ...4 .411116Vird;41 ... • AI' .0- ii••••`71-,' . -.0*17.:'-c!tr4:- . .i .. . • . • .4.7•;.. • ,. , •,.. ....,-,:•.-.,ty,,.. ,. .„,.. . (4, , :.' •..:..; ; ;Le- ; ; ,,it- ; .....:19-- • •s . s • tt;gi- ,!„.1. • . . •••• • .. 0 a 7.. -.,:0.744 1 iiiern...; IP•"ft!. •• .. .1. . - i .. , • ‘.......- i'• •16'...-Ii• .. .. . .., -Kr ...,,,,..;:itif .. ..._,--„ , -p. ' • . ..-•tor.. 1 ...,'7'''.• . * • . . di?. .4- -70. . . ---..- • : -.. •'- ---., • J lif.;• •! . -. ' ';V.,-4'i - 'r ••;•4' - le•;„.. ' - i- •:..:I*7 , .• gr"141 - i . 401 ,r11"--• 11 ..s..' y : -• .11. '.:.. It. . ..; *.--.. : •- II 11• •. il-. .. 44 *0 .. •• • . . • • . a ...- .,.... • ' • i •'-' -• • • ,•• • _yr -1 i - . . • . e • lits I 11 ••1,.." .......-. . •‘11:rk•.'04... -0 :....i.. • .. , • ,.o.. : .*. - • At* .: -; :-.-•4%b.- •.• `" . . • .....,..ft 4.4...• .-- a - - -* 41‘.. "...Ci;' - •:Or' "'I. -. . ;le-- - _. • ••• ?il - . . .., ,. 1?7-f ft- 'I • ? • : I . ,A•. . • -...3.• dif.• ,. .. . A V1 ..' .. J. • ....,.;11;6.41 k •I I. • • • a' .g • ..:..; .• . •4 • • , . . . • 1 ....i•: 11' ••• 2 ,.i. • 11 It:. X ...•-•i li " Iii =- / .7.A • . I•• . 41., . ,9: •yeilki 'L_Ir e....- - • e • . e3`..'•s. '. s••- •••-• • is f*',11 4•••".i s.',.ir st. • ar #•.• i• _, , ,.' • 41. it. ., '7' . A .., . s • $ . . .. . 1. ' - • • ••• i.- 1 --V. -. ,• `1 •:‘' P . - ' A.,--•ili ,...ill"'. 7 tr-..-- .. • .i . • . • . 0".•4k: ' ..., . . .. . . • '. . v.,- • • .•.7, •• of. - --:„.. . • ,• lit :,1.:. ',.; ' A *4 4 - 7•••=-• - • 1 411 1 4 ' ' '' It.' .:.• . . •. .1, y .. ..., ...'• . . . . • iiitb.• la'. . ar• , 414451 '; . . . .• • . '14•4''''' , . . . Both Douglas Firs,straight trunks and good canopies • ..... _ ....., J i i • `•iU .:. 0 p0000635 (1792x1200x24b jpeg) 0 , . . 1-0, . zap•.'.• • ..:-..., #.+.- yi...:;.;"=:.: ••• - 44'. ''.. "i.:`. .t...4);,: -• ot _ ...,,=• - • , .. :-.--- ...„, ,..!\._ •••• ..- g :-. ..... .,......... --, rdi.,..,i;„;-.pr .... .. ., . _•,,i..,„ . . ........ • . _. .• il'• ' ......A.,-e ti :.:._,_ - ,..,.,..„-..........-.,.. :._ ,__,,,,. :- 1.4 • e,am (6,•••••-• --.---• - , •--' - , . .A._.4-. .--•-•-• .- ..F•., --iti.',..ut.....ie, ••%.----ti--_,•,,‘ , ••-•4_ •,....-.---# ..:;,,,,,t.,k-,c--4.:-.- • .-• . -• . - - • •', •rp,..-::i Kit :44.-;-.;;;Iit.,.:..:401ir##, -, •';'."4..i.,tit,) . :.- .7 . ':.4. -ii ...711J...'..--. •' ! i . i I 1 0 .1.. ..-..-jilo•15.'"• _.,•.thiair I ' 1 1 1 1 1 ljIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIM5,;-].;;,,,.:.i.;• .' - — . .•• , ... ... , . ., :,...i....- -v...9..e.•. ,i• . ...-,' -I',ir,''It. . .",, .-4 ci 0 s7..1,11T,k%':".:•:---fl•-,7:At. .• ..-.....•4,2..i.;;, ., ,....',...•-,;..i.:_.'t.........,..!...'J.,.... ',...101.-,,...if.,.?..ET•a..,,T-405 .-',. . - .•- ,,i.,,,,,, ....,•,:i....-•-• ::---_____,•wittfg.„' .. •..• ,. , .%,.' . - •-.:-••-.:EZ,.••":.• . • • , -,- ::-.:1-• , = •„. ;--1.-.1- ....0.74°T,..'. '54. •". .. - .-/Cit"....)--.",1, 411. .''... .."' •• •- h, ..., -:,,,: -... -.- r.-."- '-..A.; ..7 '..-..1-......-jo...;..1';-• 'titl., . ' '. ".;• .....!.,...•,e..-/-.f 1,1 • -/f•••••:- i:,-;0 •••A . ''''''-i•.• •.. 0 . --1.t• : --. • --.';:.ie:',;..;9-"-..t-t... .eitic -• ,• -,-. -••.....--,;p, .. ..:-:.-, .......,. • .•. .-;• ,..-.-..•-.tc--...4.,...•-- -143,.,,,,,- „le,. -..,,i4 • '''!.'-;!-- '.1r,',44 ' "4 ...'''..1"Via • • . • ?,. - ' - . !,.-- 49.. - • ..xt ...• . •r,1.:•• -- ).•. - • ;..:...;--•-_ -.1'.'•''...., .. . '''',.. . .-... .,4..,-. •..,..- 1., .,,i.:„..... s.,,,,., . ...1 -..,.,mh..„... .. .... 7.•4,- :L , ir-- - - • -7.-.•..J-4 • ,.. .9„-• •.:ti... .-•. ... , .. . . ... ...7 ...•- .1.,0.4-11t,ag ....&47•11.2!. - "I.,'--''4' '01e. '' :. .....4.3 '-;.:. ;''''" •- ,tr... : . . . • .: t-• . . ,. •,.;.1.,.....'),k4.1. .........,,,,i, ,. 4-4....:4:,:.,.ir.:.tit....4igi. , .,,,e,:,:.-,-.,. .,;•,.,.-•,,_/.4••,... ., . . . . .... • ••." , '. • • -:• . .1,..-„,“..e.-e,r""'-.1"jtr-• t• . --7ei.;;I:'7,-.4r.z....ir.._' , ,' • - ' r". : :•`?-7 : ,•: r...4 ' 7' ''.;• .., :,.......e, i ...t.,‘ !IR .. •- •.4 .. --..., , if• . . '' --..-!--,,-. ;-.I'. !- ,'• -..7%,... " , PI ....rtri,-'7,4*:',7 - .I.,• gj, '..,...?;..,' e -• - '',.*-•' -, - - ••'-...-0-.-"•-:• . ::-•$-"•‘-‘*4 . '-';•:..-14*...I74-.;-:4•• ...!. . .--. ./ `-- ', -.;A . . -.. ,.... . ...1.'kuh.gt,:, ,,..-.:" , '1,,•N4.,,,,,..,;,;•,;•-- -:If.....- ' '''.',.,11:.e,•„„;..,.•,?,„;•.„„t-1,,. ..7.;.,x.,„;•,: •-•, , ,,.. „,.... • :,....,• , 1 .!;•‘-i- •::f•• z...'llv :.i-,i t.4.-C`VW.,',4•• '. .-'.,,;7-- ''..74,-,if -.7-6,4-. • ,f „.... . ... --..:.. ..,, 71-•f..4.•44...:4- ' -• '4....i '',-.;..' ...TV- - -• --,.. .. •,4.-'..'....'' - • --,.:"....,:i4r • .,. ,c,,i t......'. : ...t...V2.7,.. ,i -. . ' ;..lit,' • ..,,.. . . •1 °, .„-,.., . 14.?.-ti•-•,..„- j,',-.. - • -..,..4 .0 ,•,:i...e,,.*:„:,,•..., '41g.4".., „ - .. .. . • ji ' . -•• • . - .. • 0 . . .. .- . - • • - • :-'i - .. . : • . 1•;" . -- - - ' .•• '' .. '`,.• .' • :: ' ••• • C.. .. ..t.,- . „. . • .. . . DBH 15" 0 a • • • � u 12 0 p0001325 (1792x1200x24b jpeg) a • -jam. 1 •l;1 e'a •%� n'. 'I -',� t• " < 0 .. ---=-i- ,:_-.7,_--- t, • ii i' r {31,. v � i ` ., - ,1 * it r Attached 3-car garage and location of proposed detached 2- car garage in left-rear of photo • 1 L V 0014 1 p0001326 (1792x1200x24b jpeg) 0 : ` - .ten - R .1 ,..•':• .,. x'• C+.'�hr{' �JLL� ` }-_ . !• 1.i , nY j'i.IN''`,.'"., .'1. .♦ , • �, A- ►c ••N.N..�• ' t'fir' f' ..i: _ r _ �' y•,/ t� •y d KI.1 ' ir P: :�4 `fig.:; ,., i'{ 3! .1 .,d f.! r r • � • ) • r ' '` It 4'1.Ig. -Jo, �� y • Las r'r' - .swl./S,/ j-'. *"Ir '.- •. i/t�r ; r >t.►r r}: • fi ` .-. '• _ Ir" L' 'i r YE I. Site Slope looking toward proposed detached garage location • p ._f • • • Uuld `';o,U.rlo,y,e Tree Removal Permit No. _ ',, _,r,,, vL: ;r �� Fee: v � :y Application Receipt No. O Date: �GLLOK / -2---2- i 7 6 11 2_ Applicant: j. >r r ! -E- Phone: F - (o 3 Y- 'l i Address of Tree Removal: (. ° �` LA- AI - �% . Property Owner: - -.' -O;�=�r -I— _l;11— 1� &.:-;: Phone: _ _ _ - i _. Address to Send Permit: _• - �� (�S L;,c'_v `-- 3 , City: State: �--=, Zip: r �= L. Size. Number; and Type of Trees to be Removed: OP 6 1`l" F , A- `7`� ' , -_ Reason for Removal: @ID tm S T'-'o c1 t°^i e,C A 2-(2 c 3 I agree to comply with Lake Oswego Code, Chapter 55, regarding tree removal. I grant permission to the City of Lake Oswego for employees to enter the above property to inspect the trees requested for removal. ' /7_1 ( 4/Pjj ''' /- it-- ------ 0 SiFfiature of Property Owner(required) Signature of Applicant (if different) The City ust sign for trees located on public property including rights of way Pfease tie a ribbon around the tree(s) and restrain your dog on inspection day. Permit Type (Fill out with City Staff) ❑ TYPE I Submit: (1)Removal site plan TYPE u Submit: (1)Removal site plan, (2)Questionnaire or Hazard Evaluation, (3)Mitigation plan To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon,(2)Post sign,(3)File Certification Form Wait: 14 days until the comment period is complete, if no hearing requests are filed,and the City approves the permit,the permit will be sent to the address listed above. You will be contacted if a hearing has been requested. ❑ EMERGENCY Submit: (1)Removal site plan, (2)Photograph of tree/or mark tree with yellow ribbon ❑ VERIFICATION Submit: (1)Removal plan,(2)Mitigation plan, if required (Prior approval) To Do: (1)Mark trees with yellow ribbon,(2) Stake building envelope& driveways ❑ OTHER City Staff to Fill Out: ` ` Intake Staff : " -_, - Zone —. - Tax I y : _�,; , -. — . • Due Date 3/02 3/�v ' e.g.(R21E08CB 2100). . Planning or Building-Fite # Mitigation Plan Approved/Denied • �..., • AN, 1 .--, / Removal.Approved7Denied/ . ,- /% 6 u: Decision Staff v- --- - Revised Feb.2000 1:Rforrrulapplctns1february 2000 tree permit app.doc EXHIBIT 5 - LU 00-0037 0(^i i 7 3 pd4e5 TREE REMOVAL QUESTIONNAIRE For trees not "DEAD" or "HAZARDOUS" If a proposed tree is dead or hazardous, use the "Hazard Evaluation Form" instead. • Please be as thorough as possible with your answers to the following questions. You need to provide sufficient information for staff to review(i.e.photographs,site plan,technical report)to demonstrate that the provisions of the Code have been satisfied. You may answer on this form or attach additional pages. In deciding whether the responses to these questions satisfy the required criteria, the City may consider and impose alternative site or landscape plans that will have a lesser impact to existing trees on site. QIs the tree proposed for removal for landscaping purposes cr to construct development approved or allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego Code or other applicable development regulations? You must include specific site plans and be prepared to demonstrate that your plan will have the least impact to trees on the site. -9,..._ 4..� 6 4-11-e-CLevey (2_t_c_e_t,_.e_..4) ccol,„.„..,„,_,_p ILI 71-.4_ t-eha--yt__,-z-i ,L,27,",„_,_ 7.--,,,,___a_,,_:.: Will removal of the tree have a significant negative impact on any of the following? If so, Q describe what measures will be used to negate the impact. If not, explain why there will be no impact. (1)Erosion le,j_Lzetin -Q-e .' a-A- tit 4-11,,,..,4- frt4t.e.. ,l'��- -<� c_ Cn, , e -� �L' „% -fie% , (2)S tl Stab. ity AA....__,-y-,--v---A---e ,-,.(ii? A-k- L, (i)Flowi' Surface Waters. i,//„, - g.,,,,J i ,tom,�..o ___ c-�-e . `-ALIT � �- 4.1" , t,f.e_�. "1-1- 7 6.L.r Prot�-i- , h /,sit� �v� , ection of Adjacent Trees,(mam g existing windbr aks or tree groves) t /mot •�'�-c_t_ �'�/ CA•-e .-1- l GJ/ L`t a Will removal of the tree have a significant negative impact o ' e character, aesthetics, r property values of the neighborhood? This is especially crucial when the tree is contributing to the skyline of the area,provides a"forested"feel to the neighborhood or if there is some unique characteristic in the tree. Explain. • 6./..z_., C�.�G�.t V � �'L i�� 42-7 }G`�' c`'�ry,---" mil e . -6 �k - ti p a.y _ S-c ,, . .�G,.;, L L"-� 7`Lt1 /u `- - Cam, le4 h a /- -i- � e-:` �„ 40 .,_, 7-7„...„_. L...., 2..,...c, ,,,,„_...,....„......,_ ,..,„ R ised Feb.2000.1:\forms\applctns\tree p tm t appA uesuonn re.doc '� te_ 't-A-- 41-1-c- , '� 0618 /ort►�x1os �` _ woo City of Lake Oswego -.r ; PUBLIC NOTICE • � r Pending Tree Cutting Permit p1-oN Name of applicant % 7 IU L f-�/��- L`� - Tree Permit No. +a s — a a _. PUBLIC NOTICE TO OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF PROPOSED TREE REMOVAL SITE I. �14-1\'v `) do certify that I am, or I represent, the party requesting a print your name /permit to cut trees on property located at 6, -1 ,,,,,e,i. z 3 ``k number address or Nation Pursuant to LOC 55.02.082, this notice has been prepared to notify the neighborhood association and property owners within 300 feet of the site of the pending removal. I will mark the proposed trees with • yellow tagging tape and post a public notice sign on the subject property prior to your receipt of this notice. If you wish to request a public hearing on this proposed tree removal, you may do so by submitting your request in writing, along with the applicable filing fee, to the City Recorder's Office within 14 days of the postmark of'this notice. I understand that I am responsible for maintaining the notice and marking during the entire 14 day comment period. ?,T6-2,e_. Siana e (.�/ THE 14 DAY PUBLIC NOTICE PERIOD COMMENCES ON THE DATE THAT THIS NOTICE IS POSTMARKED eltEMINDER; .4 tree cutting permit is required to remove trees larger than 5 inches in diameter. Topping trees is prohibited in the City of Lake Oswego. Revised Feb.2000 Iaformslapptctns'ttree permit appslpublic notice letter.doc v6i9 • • • 0 '✓ 2 of IA[!SW �tco oRLGott COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March 27, 2000 RE: Tree Cutting Application TC 00-0072 Tax Lot 3810 of Tax Map 21E 17DC 6 Dover Way • O ): i. Ms. Jane E Drew 6 Dover Way Lake Oswego OR 97034 Dear Ms. Drew; On March 1, 2000, you applied for a tree removal permit. As a result of action taken by the City Council on February 1 7, 2000 all requests for removal of trees greater than 10-caliper inches shall address review criteria prescribed by the Council, as part of the Type II Tree Removal permit process. These criteria are as follows: • LOC 55.02.080: Criteria for Issuance of Type II Tree Cutting Permits. 1. Dead Tree: The City shall issue a tree cutting permit for a dead tree, except as provided by subsection (a) of this section, if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is dead. a. In order to provide for wildlife habitat and natural processes, the City Manager may require the retention of a dead tree. Dead trees shall not be removed if located in wetlands, RC Protection Areas (LOC 48. 17.205), stream corridors, parks or open space areas required to be preserved as a condition of development approval, unless the tree presents a potential hazard to persons or property. 2. Hazard Tree: The City shall issue a tree-cutting permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal. 3. Tree that is not Dead, or a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree cutting permit for a tree that is not dead, or a hazard if the applicant demonstrates the following: a. The tree is proposed for removal for landscaping purposes or in order to construct development approved or allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego Code or other applicable development regulations. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and • c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact o the character, aesthetics, property values of the neighborhood. The City may grant an exception to EXHIBIT 6 LU 00-0037 G QQ- 380 A Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego,Oregon 9703. ti 1 Planning Division: (503)635-0290 • Building Division:(503)635-0390 • Engineering Division:(50, - 2 — this criteria when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. in making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement4111 of structures or alternative landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. d. Removal of the tree is not for the sole purpose of providing or enhancing views. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree pursuant to 55.02.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. In your application, you stated that the reason for the tree removal was for construction of a two car detached garage. Based upon a site inspection on March 23, 2000, staff finds the following: 1. The 1 5.3" Douglas Fir does not seem to be dead, diseased or hazardous. 2. The City, under the new tree-cutting ordinance (discussed above) may ask for alternative sites plans to be considered in order to preserve trees. The site is large enough to consider rotating the garage (see enclosed site plan) to clear both Douglas Fir root and canopy systems. Please submit a revised plan as soon as possible illustrating the new location for the garage and a protection plan to be in place throughout construction and the final inspection has been completed. Based on the above findings, as confirmed through a field inspection, staff finds that it is not • necessary to remove the existing 15.3" Douglas Fir tree. It is on that basis that the staff denies your application for removal of 15.3" Douglas Fir tree on this Type II Tree Cutting Permit Application. Under LOC 55.02.085 (2) 'An applicant for a tree cutting permit may appeal denial of a permit or conditions imposed on an approved permit to the Development Review Commission (DRC) by filing a written notice of intent to appeal, along with the applicable filing fee as established by resolution of the City Council ($1 13.00), with the City Recorder within fourteen days of the date of decision of the permit." If you have questions, please telephone me at 635-0290. Sincerely, Sandy Ingalls Planning Technician Enclosed: site plan • ')r1 • AP d0 - 08 TC Od -- Co 7 Greg&Jane Drew 6 Dover Way . Lake Oswego, OR 97034 April 6, 2000 Ms. Sandy Ingalls City of Lake Oswego • Community Development Dept. PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Dear Ms. Ingalls: On March 28. 2000. we received a letter regarding the status of our request to remove one tree ("15.3" Douglas Fir)from our property at 6 Dover Way. Our request was denied. We are hereby appealing that decision. We feel our request is justified and the removal of the subject tree can be mitigated to have minimal impact on the neighborhood while improving our overall property. Apparently the request to remove the subject tree was denied because City staff felt that our proposed garage/studio structure could remain functional without requiring the removal of the tree. We disagree with that decision and are concerned with both the functional capacity of our small addition and the aesthetic impact of this decision. We request that we be allowed to remove one subject tree based on the following: 1. Adding new trees can successfully mitigate the impact of the removal of the one tree. The Lake Oswego code requires the addition of only one tree-we would be willing to plant more than one new tree. The new trees can be place closer to the property line and would improve the landscaped border • of our property. Please see attached sketch. 2. Without removal of the subject tree,our proposed addition(which has been preliminarily approved through the pre-application conference process with the Lake Oswego Planning Department)we would be required to place the new structure much closer to the rear property line. This would force us to add a retaining wall approximately thirty feet long, pave approximately 750 square feet of _ PP Y additional driveway,and extend storm, sewer, gas, electric,water,telephone and cable approximately 30 feet farther than is necessary. Obviously, the addition of more concrete driveway and a retaining wall are undesirable from aesthetic,functional and financial perspectives. 3. The site plan you have proposed would not allow us to turn a car around in front of the garage. We would be forced to back-up out of our driveway for a distance of over 50 feet! 4. The tree in question is immediately adjacent to another, much larger fir tree that will certainly continue to contribute to the sylvan appearance of our property. As we have outlined, the preservation of the tree would have an enormously negative effect on us. Hopefully. The above explanation and attached sketches will assist you to better understand the situation and our concerns. We trust you will approve our proposal to substitute one poorly situated tree with an appropriate number of replacement trees. Thank you for your onsideration, • C ,114)._,LY • Jane . Drew EXHIBIT 7 LU000037 -CITY �r:: _ t>"Jy�E ; 3p4gls � , '..Of la inin $Dtveit;men= • 4111 . el)10 OM ti.)kt . • • )(1'1 . 731ibLCWA.:, -5kow4. H 4-rci4ar) 4 k, PL 6-, irc.,.... . -Voist Log...Arnen4 ) „...,....,,,, 41111 x'Sc• 'C 0 f rAtoP. i_r4c . . ..____ .._.____.____ir.. . . r f Epilyg1.1 VIZ 1 L,SO4) Alf let t4riA) 11448 e *gembutT)ritt5 r - �+ •1+• oc V = 3D ' A 1 412-rse\A-f t kit_ A lii/ N' �� `)24 7..2 ?Syd HO6V a3z_Jc_ =2/WC ace6-EEE2S Li :b? 0206 2/02 1 • • eT)0 v og IA)AL' (7'3(7 • .. ` 1 \ i i. 7. V ‘a 11110111116' i.x1.6- "ICI ue AY ;-tai TX/tercil94r- • r\-A rt. . 441k .,...0.40,...h....1 0 . 10,//. We,,j A,...L.I..) rwrAit • : ED x 1 , I MO? L+ \ 1 .. • 1 %L 0 c 7-el OS AIL( - .. r C 0 i,__________- 4 A / 1-T.h 4 ,7'1 v e 8 _ Pi !--,:,Nt, 32 E icy _, u 306ESEEEas - :b- EEeVoe/ba tyIP a 1 . . ,. r-i--) v,g_ Lt)ik( . . . _ . ., . 3 .1 x15 i IsY , 10,,... 4PIce"' dal 5mowN7� � �� .0 Illi �► ( D�let� x hu ached . r Arcu j E1061 TOO ,►� . • • , 1. ?MO. L+r.4�c' a i :1 • I11ld, 5+4s pro pv r cL S r it EXHIBIT 8 Pia lA LU 00-0037 d _`Jvd Hpeiv ?3ZlId 3J1r'C 'r@/pe • • • (u2 CLIFF ROBISON 8 Dover Way Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Phone(503)880-9607 Fax(503-638-2735 April 20. 2000 Hamid Pishvaie. Development Review Manager Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall 380 "A" Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Dear Mr. Pishvaie, I am writing to you regarding File No.: LU 00-0037, Owners Gregory and Jane Drew. The Drew's property abuts our side yard, and we can see the tree in question from our bedroom window and balcony. We are in favor of granting approval to remove the tree in question for the purposes of the proposed construction. First, there is another beautiful tree, apparently slightly larger as well, which is quite close to the tree in question. The second tree also appears healthier than the one slated for removal, and could possibly benefit from the removal. There are also several other beautiful pine trees in their yard and ours on that side. Some of these, although smaller, are beginning to mature and provide substantial shade even now. The Drew's proposed project has no negative impact on the ambience of the neighborhood, and in fact offers a visual positive (inside storage of automobiles). Sincerely, EXHIBIT 9 LLT 00-0037 Cliff Robison cc: Sandy Ingalls. Planning Technician _. -� ;� STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO • PLANNING DIVISION APPLICANT: FILE NO: Miller Cook Architects P.C. LU 00-0001 PROPERTY OWNER: STAFF: US West Communications Elizabeth Jacob LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE OF REPORT: Tax Lots 700 and 800 April 21, 2000 of Tax Map 21E 3DD DATE OF HEARING: LOCATION: May 1, 2000 531 First Street NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: III COMP. PLAN DESCRIPTION: First Addition GC (General Commercial) ZONING DESIGNATION: EC (East End Commercial) I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Review permit to construct a one- story, 5,300 square foot addition (including basement) on the south side of the existing US West Communications switch building. Eight trees are proposed to be removed. The four parking spaces that will be removed for the building addition will be relocated to the east side of the building, in a secured garage. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Land Use Policies 11111 East End Community Business District Policies I-A LU 00-0001 Page 1 of 16 B. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance: LOC 48.02.015 Definitions LOC 48.02.025 —48.02.085 Interpretation, Regulations and Procedures, Delegation • LOC 48.10.300 -48.10.315 East End General Commercial (EC)Zone Descriptions; Special Requirements LOC 48.20.530(2) Vision Clearance C. City of Lake Oswego Development Code: LOC 49.16.015 Definitions LOC 49.16.020 -49.16.030 Application of Code. Planning Director Authority. Fees LOC 49.16.035 Development Permit Required LOC 49.16.040 Development Permits Restricted LOC 49.20.110(2)(d) Minor Development LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proof LOC 49.22.205 Development Standards LOC 49.22.215 Review Criteria for Minor Developments LOC 49.22.225 Conditions of Approval LOC 49.28.400 -49.28.405 Variances LOC 49.30.500 -49.30.510 Application Requirements LOC 49.36.700 -49.36.720 Application Procedures LOC 49.40.900 -49.44.920 Review by Hearing Body/Notice of Public Hearing LOC 49.40.1000 -49.40.1035 Hearings Before Hearings Body LOC 49.56.1300 -49.56.1310 Effective Date of Decision LOC 49.58.1400 -49.58.1430 Compliance with Approved Permit; Modification of Approved Permit D. City of Lake Oswego Development Standards: 2.005 - 2.040 Building Design 5.005 - 5.040 Street Lights 7.005 - 7.040 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access 8.005 - 8.040 Park and Open Space 9.005 - 9.040 Landscaping, Screening and Buffering 11.005 - 11.040 Drainage Standard for Major Development 14.005 - 14.040 Utilities 18.005 - 18.040 Access 19.005 - 19.040 On-Site Circulation - Driveways and Fire Access Roads 20.005 -20.040 On-Site Circulation—Bikeways, Walkways, and Accessways 23.005 - 23.605 Downtown Redevelopment District Design E. City of Lake Oswego Systems Development Charges (LOC Chapter 391: LOC 39.06 Collection LU 00-0001 Page 2 of 16 F. City of Lake Oswegeo Streets and Sidewalks (LOC Chapter 42): LOC 42.08.400 Sidewalks IIIa G. City of Lake Oswego Tree Ordinance (LOC Chapter 55): LOC 55.02.035(1) and(2) Tree Removal in Conjunction with Major or Minor Development Permit LOC 55.02.080 Criteria for Type II Permits H. Previous Action: DR 1-82 III. FINDINGS A. Background/Existing Conditions: 1. The 12,000 square foot site consists of Lots 13, 14, 15 and 16 of Block 30 of Oswego Plat. The property is bounded by First Street on the west, C Avenue on the north, and an improved alley on the east (Exhibits 1 and 2). 2. An existing 17,226 square-foot switch building, including basement area, and a 2,600 square-foot garage are located on the site. The original building was IIIconstructed in 1950, with subsequent additions in 1957, 1969, and 1982. The 1982 development permit was approved by the Development Review Commission to construct a 4,300 square-foot addition to the existing building (Exhibit 13). DR 1-82 also approved a variance to reduce the landscaping requirement from the required 15 percent to 7 percent. In addition, 12 compact parking spaces were to be provided on site to accommodate the occupancy of the building at that time. 3. The site is zoned East End Commercial (EC) and has a Comprehensive Plan Map designation of General Commercial (GC). Properties to the east, south and west are zoned EC and developed with a variety of general commercial, office, and multi-family residential uses. Properties on the north side of C Avenue are zoned R-0, a high-density residential zone, consisting of a mix of single-family residences and multi-family units, and several non-conforming medical office uses. B. Compliance with Criteria for Approval: As per LOC 49.22.200,the applicant for a development permit shall bear the burden of proof that the application complies with all applicable review criteria or can be made • to comply with applicable criteria by imposition of conditions of approval. The applicant has submitted the information required by LOC 49.30.500 -49.30.510 and LOC 49.36.700 - 49.36.710. LU 00-0001 Page 3 of 16 Construction of new buildings and substantial remodeling of an existing building in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District are required to comply with the standards of LODS 23. Per LODS 23.010(2)(a) "substantial remodeling" is defined as "exterior remodeling that changes the appearance of more than 50 percent of any • building elevation." The proposed addition is clearly less than 50 percent of the west building elevation (Exhibits 5 and 9). The only difference between the existing south elevation and the proposed south elevation is the removal of stairs and some louvers on the existing south elevation. The applicant has requested an exception from the requirements of LODS 23. as allowed by LODS 23.605(1)(a) (Exhibit 11, page 1). This subsection of Development Standard 23 allows an exception from a standard without the need to obtain a formal variance if the "applicant demonstrates that the physical characteristics of the site or existing structure make compliance impractical." The subject development is unique in the EC zone and Downtown Redevelopment Design District. The use is classified as a major public facility (LOC 48.02.115). The building is strictly a utilitarian building which was originally built about 50 years ago and has, over the years, been expanded in several phases, as noted above. Unlike other development in the EC zone, the US West facility is not open to the public. The buildings are not designed to provide public access. The location and design of the current expansion proposal is dictated by previous approvals and expanded public facility needs. It would be impossible to comply with the Downtown Design standards without extensive reconstruction of the facility. Based upon all these findings, staff concludes that requiring the owner to • q g property comply with the Downtown Redevelopment Design District requirements would be impractical. Staff finds that minimizing the visual appearance of the building by matching existing colors and materials and by enhancing landscaping will satisfy the intent of the Downtown Redevelopment Design District as practicably as possible. Therefore, staff finds that LODS Chapter 23 is not applicable to the subject development. LOC 49.20.110 - Minor Development The subject proposal is appropriately being processed as minor development. The applicant has submitted a complete application as illustrated in the exhibit section of this submittal. The First Addition Neighborhood Association(FAN) and adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the site were invited to an informational meeting. The minutes of the meeting are included in this report as Exhibit 12. As per LOC 49.22.215, for any minor development application to be approved, it shall first be established that the proposal complies with: • LU 00-0001 Page 4 of 16 1. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; EC(East End Commercial) Description FLOC 48.10.305 - 48.10.3151 • LOC 48.10.310 specifies site development limitations for the EC zone. There are no general setback requirements in the EC zone. The existing structures with the proposed addition will have a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of approximately 1.05, well within the 3.0 FAR limitation of the EC zone. There are no vehicle trip maximum requirements. The EC zone has a 60-foot height maximum. The existing buildings comply with this standard and the maximum height of the proposed addition will be approximately 19 feet; thus satisfying the standard. Commercial Land Use Policies (East End Land Use Policies): LOC 48.10.315(5) prescribes that specific conditions for each commercial area identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map and text of the Comprehensive Plan are made a part of Chapter 48 and are conditions and limitations of the zone. These policies require commercial development to minimize impacts on residential areas from traffic, lights, visual appearance of parking and loading areas, building bulk and height, noise and drainage. These policies encourage providing street trees, pedestrian walkways, and street furniture and landscaped areas situated to encourage people to visit. As discussed above,the use of the subject property as a major public facility has existing for 50 years. Existing sidewalks are located along the property frontages • (Exhibit 2). The buildings are not open to the public, although entrances are located along First Street. Street trees exist along the First Street frontage and two additional street trees will be planted when the driveway curbcut is eliminated. However, efforts should be made to minimize impacts on the adjacent residential areas by enhancing the existing landscaping,replacing trees being removed, and reducing traffic through the adjacent residential neighborhood. Recommendations to implement these policies will be discussed under the development standards addressed below. LOC 48.20.530., Vision Clearance: This standard prohibits objects over 30-inches high within a defined area at street,alley and driveway intersections. There are stop signs on C Avenue at the corners of First Street and C Avenue. No changes to the building or landscaping are proposed at the intersection. Therefore, this standard is met. 2. The Development Standards applicable to minor developments; LOC 49.22.215(2)prescribes that construction or alteration of structures as described in LOC 49.20.110(2)(c) shall apply development standards applicable to "major developments". The subject proposal falls into the above-described category. There are no natural resources,weak foundation soils, hillsides, or flood plains on the subject property. The following discussion analyzes the applicable "major development" 110 standards. LU 00-0001 Page 5 of 16 Building Design - (2.005 -2.040) The applicant's narrative and elevations (Exhibits 11 and 5 and 9, respectively) describe the proposed design. The addition will match the existing building in height, materials and color, as illustrated by the color board (Exhibit 14). The new addition 111 will be set back approximately 8.5 feet from the First Street elevation of the rest of the building. This offset helps to break up the massing and linearity of the building. It will also provide an area for landscaping. Exhibits 5 and 6 illustrate the location of a utilitarian door and canopy on the west elevation near the south end, facing First Street. Staff recommends that the stair railing and canopy supports have some architectural detailing to provide a visual amenity to a very plain facade. Canopy supports with decorative metal medallions could be used which would reinforce the Arts and Crafts style, as has been done in other canopy retrofits recently in the Downtown Redevelopment District. Exhibit 6 also illustrates the location of three wall-mounted lights on the south elevation. Light fixtures should be designed to shield adjacent properties from glare and, like the canopy supports, provide some visual connection to the Downtown Redevelopment District Design standards. Staff recommends that prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant/owner provide light fixture details, including wattage, for the review and approval of staff. The applicant should note that only high pressure sodium (HPS) luminaires are permitted. In addition to lighting details, canopy and stair railing details should be submitted with the building permit application, for the review and approval of staff. The color board(Exhibit 14) illustrates a gray/blue metal material. However, •g y o ever, the application is unclear where this material is intended to be used. The color board indicates it may be used on the canopy and stair railing. Existing railing and architectural appendages which hide the recessed lights at the front of the building are this same gray/blue color. Staff recommends that the building permit plans clearly specify where this material and color are intended to be used. The arborist's report(Exhibit10)refers to the retaining wall along the south property line. The arborist comments that some of the trees may be buckling this wall. The architect responded to staffs concerns about this wall by stating that it would be investigated by a structural engineer at a later time. Staff is concerned that should the wall be required to be rebuilt or reinforced so that the new structure can be constructed on it, design concerns could arise which will impact the approval of the subject application. If the reconstruction of the wall impacts the building design or would reduce landscaping below 7 percent, approval of the building permit plans could be delayed until a modification of the Commission's approval is approved. Any mechanical equipment, whether located on the existing roofs or proposed to be located on the new roof, shall be screened from public view. If the mechanical equipment extends above the roof form, it shall be screened to match the surrounding building material and color. Ground mounted mechanical equipment and trash 1111 receptacles also need to be screen in order to comply with LODS 2.020(1)(h). LU 00-0001 Page 6 of 16 Staff finds that the building design complements the existing building on the site, and with substantial landscaping to minimize the linearity of the building and some additional architectural detailing in the canopy, railings, and lights, the new addition will satisfy this standard. Street Lights (5.005- 5.020) This standard is applicable to all development which include public or private streets, public pathways, or parking lots. There are cobra head street lights at intersections in the First Addition Neighborhood, mid-block on First Street opposite the driveway, and at the northeast corner of the lot where C Avenue intersects the alley. No additional street lighting is required. This standard is met. Off-Street Parking, Loading, and Bicycle Access (7.005 - 7.040) In situations where parking requirements for uses are not specifically mentioned, LODS 7.020—Table 7.1(h) allows the City Manager to determine a use most similar to the use not specifically mentioned, or the standard requires a parking study. DR 1- 82 established a parking need, hence requirement, for 12 parking spaces. That need was based upon the number of employees using the facility at that time. Four parking spaces were located in the area that is now proposed for the building addition. The remaining eight spaces were to be located at the back of the building. Four of these spaces are now unavailable for parking because heavy equipment is either permanently or temporarily located on them. 11111 Although the site plans illustrated on Exhibits 2 and 3 show angled parking space striping on First Street and C Avenue, there is no striping on the south side of C Avenue. On-street parking on First Street and C Avenue is frequently fully occupied. Staff suspects that a number of these spaces are occupied by employees or clients of the professional buildings across First Street and C Avenue and possibly by residents of the apartment complex across First Street. In addition, according to conversations with the applicant, remodeling of the interior of the building is currently occurring which accounts for some of the contractor vehicles staff has observed. The applicant's narrative (Exhibit 11, pages, 2, 4-7) discusses parking issues at some length. Originally, discussion focused around the availability of on-street parking and parking requirements for office or industrial use. The subject property is not located within the Downtown Parking District, which would permit on-street parking to meet parking requirements. Because the current usage does not fit into any use defined in LODS 7.020—Table 1, and because the previous approval (DR 1-82)based parking requirements about the building usage and number of employees attending the building, staff recommends that the parking requirement for the current development proposal be based upon the same criteria. According to Exhibit 11, there are two full- time employees and 10-18 support employees who come and go during the course of a normal workday who provide on-call periodic support. • Parking is an on-going concern for the First Addition Neighborhood (FAN) and was brought up in the neighborhood meeting (Exhibit 12). FAN requested that trucks, including trucks and equipment used during construction, be parked along the east side LU 00-0001 Page 7 of 16 of the building and garage, off the alley. Further,trucks should be routed along First Avenue, not the adjacent residential streets. Staff finds that to protect the adjacent residential neighborhood as much as possible, a condition of approval should be imposed to require the service personnel to utilize the • parking spaces along the east side of the building, with overflow parking, only if absolutely necessary, on C Avenue. Further, parking space striping on C Avenue should be required in order to maximize the parking availability on C Avenue, and eliminate company vehicle parking on First Street. [The applicant states that parking striping will be marked on C Avenue (Exhibit 11, page 7.] As illustrated on Exhibit 4. page 2, the applicant proposes to provide six spaces within the existing garage, accessed off the alley and 6 spaces along the east side of the building. Although staff is concerned that these spaces may not be used extensively, because of inconvenience in accessing the garage or maneuverability in the garage, these spaces definitely should be used for vehicles parked overnight at the site and by the full-time employees. Staff believes an additional parallel parking space should be marked in front of the two ACU units shown on Exhibit 4. (These ACU units now occupy four of the 12 parking spaces approved by DR 1-82.) With this additional space, the total number of on-site parking spaces will be 13. Per LODS 7.020(2)(a), bicycle parking spaces are not required for additions to commercial and industrial buildings. The applicant's narrative, however, states that two bicycle parking spaces will be provided within the garage (Exhibit 11, page 2). Park and Open Space- (8.005 - 8.040) • This standard requires that commercial development provide open space in an aggregate amount equal to at least 15 percent of the gross land area of the development. However,the standard permits the 15 percent landscaping requirement for commercial development to meet the open space requirement for commercial development when no Distinction Natural Areas, Protection Open Space, or Public Open Space or public park land are located on the site. As there are no natural resources on the site, this standard will be met by the Landscaping Standard, discussed below. Landscaping, Screening and Buffering- (9.005 - 9.040) This standard requires that commercial development shall provide 15 percent of the net buildable area in landscaping and/or open space. Based upon a 24,000 square foot site, 3,600 square feet of landscaping is required. However, as previously noted, a variance was granted by the Development Review Commission in 1982 to reduce this requirement to 7 percent, or 1,680 square feet(Exhibit 13). Of concern to staff in reviewing the subject proposal is that the landscaping should not be reduced below the seven-percent minimum approved by DR 1-82 (Exhibits 7 and 13). The applicant has submitted Exhibit 7 which illustrates that the proposed addition will not reduce landscaping below what was approved by DR 1- 82. What is unclear by the 1982 approval is that the 7 percent included LU 00-0001 Page 8 of 16 landscaping in the public right-of-way, along First Street, even though staff made some reference that landscaping in the right-of-way could not be used to meet the landscaping requirement (Exhibit 13). Staff has reviewed the 1982 plans and calculated that the only way the 7 percent area could have been obtained was by iusing the landscaping within the First Street right-of-way. Exhibit 4 illustrates proposed replacement landscaping, including upgrading the landscaping along the east side of the building, which is now occupied by a large generator. Exhibit 10 is a report from a certified arborist which describes the conditions of the trees which must be removed in order to construct the addition. As noted on Exhibit 4,page 2, twopyrus Calleryana 'Trinitypear' will be planted gp ted as street trees, one in the area where the existing curbcut is currently located, and the other just south of the existing most southerly tree. Tree wells should have a minimum 15 square foot area. with a minimum unobstructed five-foot sidewalk clearance. Ten Juniperus Torulosa, 'Hollywood juniper,' are proposed as replacement trees along the front of the addition and along the southerly property line (Exhibit 4, page 2). Another Hollywood juniper is proposed to be planted as replacement landscaping for DR 1-82 at the northeast corner of the garage. Mahonia Aquifolium, `Oregon grape,' is proposed as ground cover around the trees. Although five of the trees being removed are Hollywood juniper, staff recommends that there should be a mixed variety of replacement trees. Small flowering trees, such as Arbutus unedo, `strawberry tree' or Stryax japonicas, `Japanese snowbell,' would enhance the landscape strip along First Avenue and • give some visual variety. Staff recommends that additional landscaping be provided between the sidewalk and the face of the new addition. Such landscaping could include azaleas or rhododenrons. Exhibit 4 illustrates that the existing landscaping at the northeast corner of the building is to remain. However, a site visit indicates that most of the plant materials have died or are in very poor condition. Currently there is power equipment located in this area. Staff finds that the landscaping in this area needs to be upgraded and the two parallel parking spaces restriped. One of the neighborhood meeting comments suggested adding a planting strip along the sidewalk at the north end of the building. This strip could serve as a bumper overhang area for the parking spaces(Exhibit 12, page 2). Whereas this idea would have been appropriate at the time C Avenue was improved along the property frontage, staff cannot make a nexus at this time to require the street to be torn up and a new curb constructed in order to create a landscape strip along C Avenue. Staff recommends that all shrubs shall be a minimum three-to-five gallon size. All deciduous trees should have a minimum 2-inch caliper and conifers should have a minimum 8'-to-10' height. Revised landscape plans which reflect the above recommendations should be submitted for review and approval of staff prior to the issuance of any building permit. • LU 00-0001 Page 9 of 16 Per LODS 9.025(3), all planting shall have an irrigation system installed to meet the standards of Turf Irrigation Manual, current edition. The irrigation plan shall be submitted prior to final building inspection approval. Drainage Standard for Major Development- (11.005 - 11.040) • There is a storm drain catch basin at the east end of C Avenue connected to the north- flowing 18" drain in the alley. Site surface water sheds to alley, then flows south down the alley's valley to a catch basin and 18" storm drain in B Avenue. The area proposed for the building addition is currently paved for the parking lot. Consequently, there is little, if any. net increase in impermeable area. The Engineering Division staff finds that the proposal does not generate enough additional surface runoff to be subjected to detention and water quality requirements. Any changes to site drainage will be governed by building and plumbing codes. Compliance with this standard will be reviewed and approved as part of the building permit review. Utilities - (14.005 - 14.035) The following utilities are available to the site. Because it is not feasible to underground the existing overhead utilities with a small building addition, staff recommends that the applicant/owner sign a nonremonstrance agreement to participate in a future underground conversion Local Improvement District (LID) that may be formed in the future for the entire Redevelopment District. SanitarySewer: An 8" sanitarysewer line is available in the alley. • Y Water System and Hydrants: There is a 6" water line in First Street and a hydrant at First Street and B Avenue. The building is sprinkled and there is a fire department connection on the north wall. Frontage Streets: First Street is a two lane street with diagonal parking along the east curb. C Avenue is an improved stub street intersecting an improved alley. Street frontage and sidewalk improvements currently exist. No additional improvements are required, except that four or five new diagonal spaces will be constructed on First Street where the current driveway curb cut exists (Exhibits 3 and 4). Access - (18.005 - 18.040) This standard requires a minimum of 25 feet of frontage on a public street and prohibits direct permanent access to an arterial street where an alternate access is available or is expected to be available. The development has frontage on two streets, both designated as local streets. Parking is available along both street frontages. Access to the parking spaces designated for use of the employees is on the east side of the building, off the alley. This standard is met. • LU 00-0001 Page 10 of 16 On-Site Circulation -Driveways and Fire Access Roads - (19.005 - 19.040) This standard is applicable to all development proposing a new use or an increased use on a site when the development will result in the construction of or increased • use of driveways or parking lot aisles. This standard has limited applicability to this proposal. Parking spaces are access from the alley. Utility trucks will be able to park inside the garage. Emergency access is available from improved streets and the alley around three sides of this building. This standard is met. On-Site Circulation—Bikeways,Walkways and Accessways - (20.005 -20.040) This standard is applicable to all minor and major development involving the construction of a new structure or a modification which increases the square footage of commercial. industrial or institutional buildings by more than ten (10) percent. This standard requires that walkways shall connect at least one public entrance to the nearest public walkway and that walkways shall meet accessibility standards of the American Disabilities Act as found in the UBC Chapter 11 [LODS 20.020(2) and (3)]. Public sidewalks exist along the First Street frontage. Although this facility is not open to the public, the building entrance is directly off the public sidewalk on First Street(Exhibits 3,4 and 5). This standard is met. 3. Any additional statutory, regulatory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific minor development application. • Systems Development Charges [LOC Chapter 39 ] An increase in the gross square footage of a building would normally involve payment of a traffic impact fee. The narrative states, however, that the building addition is for "switch growth," implying that the site will not generate additional employee traffic or parking demand. If the building permit plans are consistent with this initial representation,then the traffic impact SDC will be waived. Streets and Sidewalks (LOC Chanter 421 This section of the Code contains slope and other geometric design criteria for streets, alleys and intersections. In addition, LOC 42.08.400 prescribes specific dimensional requirements for sidewalks when a property is developed or traffic is intensified through structural additions. A minimum seven-foot wide sidewalk is required on local/residential streets for commercial and industrial use [LOC 42.08.400(2)]. Except where necessary to preserve a natural resource, such as trees or landscaping, the sidewalk width may be reduced to maintain a minimum unobstructed width of five feet. Tree wells and landscaping strips between the sidewalk and building face on First Street create a meandering walkway, ranging from five to seven feet wide (Exhibits 2, 3 and 4). Existing street improvements comply with this Chapter. • LU 00-0001 Page 11 of 16 Tree Cutting Ordinance Requirements [LOC Chapter 551 This ordinance is intended to preserve trees. Only those trees which must be removed in order to site proposed improvements will be granted tree cutting permits [LOC 55.080(2)]. All trees over five inches in diameter at breast height • (dbh)measured 4-1/2 feet above grade require a tree cutting permit. Exhibit 10 illustrates the location of seven trees that will need to be removed to develop the site. Staff has included an eighth tree which is probably the same specie as the Hollywood juniper. The location of this tree is illustrated on Exhibit 2. The applicant retained a certified arborist to determine the health of the trees and construction impacts (Exhibit 10). This report concludes that even if the trees were not required to be removed for construction purposes, one should be removed immediately based upon ha7ardirisk potential. According to the report, all the other trees have been severally restricted by limited planting areas and damaged by bumper overhangs. At the time the application was made(January 5, 2000), the City was operating under an"emergency tree ordinance"which required a needs assessment for any tree over 12 inches dbh to be removed. Staff finds that based upon the condition of the 13.4 inch Callery pear tree,as reported in Exhibit 10, and proposed excavation and construction within two or three feet of the tree trunk, this tree cannot be preserved. There is no other location for the building addition, and according to the application (Exhibit 11), the expanding public need for telecommunication services dictates the maximum area possible. As prescribed by LOC 55.08.020 and 55.08.030,prior to conducting any development activities, including excavation or demolition, a Tree Protection Plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of staff and tree protection measures shall be required. Staff recommends that chain link fencing, a minimum of six feet tall shall be installed at the edge of the tree protection zone. Staff has prepared Exhibit 15 to illustrate the recommended location of tree protection fencing for the two street trees which are within the construction zone. In addition, if roots of the existing street trees are found to extend into the excavation area, the consulting arborist shall be on-site to recommend how the roots shall be cut or if other excavation methods are practicable. As required by LOC 58.02.084, the applicant is proposing to replace the eight trees being removed with 11 trees on-site and two street trees, as described under the Landscaping Standard [LODS 9]. The landscape plan, Exhibit 4, Page 2, illustrates the location of replacement trees, including the two street trees. A tree cutting permit shall be required, as part of the building permitting process. 4. Any applicable condition of approval imposed pursuant to an approved ODPS or prior development permit affecting the subject property. • LU 00-0001 Page 12 of 16 The conditions approved by the prior development permit (DR 1-82, Exhibit 13) have been reviewed as part of the subject approval. I . CONCLUSION Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that LU 00-0001 can be made to comply with all applicable criteria by the application of conditions of approval. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of LU 00-0001, subject to the following conditions: A. Prior to the Issuance of any Building Permits. the Applicant/Owner Shall: 1. Sign a petition and non-remonstrance agreement for participation in a future Local Improvement District for the underground conversion of overhead utilities. 2. Submit final plans, for the review and approval of staff, which illustrate the following: a. A final parking plan with 13 parking spaces, which complies with the dimensional requirements of LODS 7.020 - Table 7.2, that illustrates the following: • i. Standard-sized parking diagonal spaces on the C Avenue g P g P frontage. ii. Garage plan that illustrates six parking spaces and aisle dimensions iii. The replacement of the driveway cut with a curb and sidewalk, and striping for diagonal parking in front of the old driveway on First Street. iv. An additional parallel parking space shall be marked in front of the two ACU units shown on Exhibit 4. v. Company employees and service personnel shall utilize the parking spaces along the east side of the building, with overflow parking, only if absolutely necessary, on C Avenue. b. Submit a Tree Protection Plan for the street trees that are within the construction area, as prescribed by LOC 55.08.020 and 55.08.030. The tree protection plan shall include the location of • chain link fencing, a minimum of six feet tall, installed at the edge of the tree protection zone, as illustrated on Exhibit 15, or as recommended by the consulting arborist. LU 00-0001 Page 13 of 16 c. Final Building plans that illustrate: i. Substantial compliance with the plans and elevations submitted as Exhibits 3 and 4. 111 ii. Exterior lighting design details which compliment the Lake Oswego Architectural Style and which prevent glare onto adjacent residential properties. High-pressure sodium luminaires shall be used. iii. Screening enclosures around trash receptacles, ground-mounted mechanical equipment, and any mechanical equipment that extends above the roof parapet. Roof top screening shall consist of materials that match or are similar in color and materials to the roof. iv. If the retaining wall along the south property line is required to be reconstructed or relocated, which requires a change in the building design or a landscaping reduction below 7 percent, a modification of the subject approval shall be required prior to the issuance of the building permit. d. A final landscape plan that illustrates substantial compliance with the landscape plan submitted as page 2 of Exhibit 4, with the following additional information: • i. Tree wells for the two additional street trees along First Street shall have a minimum 15 square foot area and shall provide a minimum five-foot wide unobstructed clearance on the sidewalk. ii. Landscaping at the northeast corner of the building shall be upgraded where plants have died or been damaged. iii. Additional landscaping, such as small ornamental flowering trees, shall be provided in the new landscape areas along the south and west property lines. At the minimum, (shrubs such as azaleas or rhododenrons) shall be planted along First Street, planted between the sidewalk and the face of the new addition. iv. Large shrubs shall have a minimum three-to-five gallon size. All deciduous trees shall have a minimum 2-inch caliper and conifers shall have a minimum 8'-to-10' height. 3. Obtain a tree-cutting permit prior to cutting any tree that is over 5 inches in diameter measured 4-1/2 feet above grade. • LU 00-0001 Page 14 of 16 B. Prior to and During Excavation and Construction, the Applicant/Owner Shall: 1. Install temporary tree protection fencing, a minimum six-foot high chain link fencing, as approved under Condition A(2)(b), above. • 2. Retain the consulting arborist to be on-site during excavation in the area of the root zones of the two street trees on First Street. If roots of the existing street trees are found to extend into the excavation area, the consulting arborist shall recommend how the roots shall be cut or if other excavation methods are practicable. In no event shall a root larger than two (2) inches be cut without staff approval. Notify contractors and subcontractors that their workers vehicles and equipment used during construction shall park along the east side of the building and garage, and that delivery trucks shall be routed along First Avenue, not the adjacent residential streets. C. Prior to Issuance of any Final Building Inspection Approval,the Applicant/ Owner Shall: 1. Install all landscaping, as approved under Condition A(2)(d), above. 2. Provide an irrigation plan. 3. Stripe the parking spaces on C Avenue, in front of the reconstructed curb • section on First Street, and the employee spaces in the garage and on the east side of the building, as approved under Condition A(2)(a), above. D. Miscellaneous: 1. The land use approval of this project does not imply approval of a particular design,product, size, or layout of public infrastructure, except where findings or conditions of approval have been devised to specify or otherwise control a particular product or design element. EXHIBITS 1. Tax Map 2. Existing Site and Landscape Plan(Dwg. A1.0) 3. Proposed Site and Landscape Plan 4. Floor Plans (Existing and Proposed) 5. Elevations(Dwg. A3) 6. Canopy and Railing Details 7. Existing and Proposed Landscape Area Comparison 8. Property Survey 9. 3-Dimensional Graphic • 10. Tree Condition Assessment,prepared by David Cory, Pruett Tree & Landscape, dated 2/25/00 11. Applicant's Narrative with Addenda dated March 15 and March 20, 2000 12. Minutes of Neighborhood Meeting, dated December 1, 1999 LU 00-0001 Page 15 of 16 13. DR 1-82 (excerpts from Staff Report, Minutes and Findings, Conclusion and Order) 14. Color and Materials Board(in file) 15. Recommended Location of Street Tree Protection Fencing Date of Application Submittal: January 5, 2000 • Date Application Determined to be Completed: March 29,2000 State Mandated 120-Day Rule: July 27, 2000 • LU 00-0001 Page 16 of 16 4 • •2 IE 3DDs.E SEC. 3 T. 2S. R. I E. V . M. CLACKAMAS COUNTY D.L. C. JOSIAH FRAM KLI N NO. 43 LAKE. OSW E GC 1"- low ALBERT DURHAM NO. 44 sE Map MI ► 1 0 --i 2 1E —. �I 3 Dq 1 / / I SAW t ► 1 i Y�Ir1�• 1 F: : �i: / MI i'•,'. --____JI : / ji. 1 6700 y° —'�� __ 4 580 °I H ' LIE,..,ti,�� f?.a , c, l ► CANCELLED TL'S 2 4� L — ` ,h' 80p' o �e b� 9tidw. I/ 9300D 1. S ti ` ,S, �• • 100 r .. { 6700A1 y IqQ�_''�-_ c 4 594d' _ - _� 6500AI 3 V y Sa O 2 �, _� , n 59g _=a` !y- �EiOQ ;II , '''' S900A1 N i4ti 3� y .2oAc. 8200A1 1M'77 M rr.. ,, --� 5 �� 2t e j I ? 6901A1 1 I ,1 �� =Y W m k 1, 1.I 6902E1 (`J� 1. k 4 4100 w '3 „ ; �IOQp 20p l I ,�� a 1— ��1i ti 5�f '`'� a 701r 4 .0rloQ sa ,�•q ` `• 4 1, { 6601 u 7 1800 "pi__ �. h _ .1 ►, 11 ti� 12Q0 a 12 6 . !/. .. 1 1 / { I 1900 -a. ti o99201 52 , 1 1 1 { ^i 7200E1 �� 5J /33 0 Cr in .11 , , 1 1`� Ta. 41 h: 1 1 7j 30• lo o W 6 Id �'. A a 55r ► ,37,00 a ' i CV CD r s 27 ~�_ 7 I 1 ,- 4 504 1 j1 5g00' HV 8 �SiA� 1I 1 J l h ti r--------„,_ 55QQ I C� �1 !T,� Sin I 1' '�f . Y^ 0� �~ '� �r I I1L 1 ?i • • • 00u2 ci - o c Or SREE7 I O 4 qO e o o o ii Ji � 11 1, !f 111i I I I � M s1 ,I iz [ AVENUE a t000-oo xi ////////// /, An it Z 1181HX3 II it ! II - w(�� i 4.'J'`. h; '74 Z 9 I \ kit • I� eat, m ) i P Ft E i • I f _ i ,a N ii tI ,o 1 it 0 flo% r,,9, E9. 1 I' Ilie T40, Iv 1111111111 '�G. NUNNN 3, � � I • - I I 6 1 is L'"% 3 s "1111111 1 >§5I • ;; a I ' I `- s, i I ri eI I EXISTING SITE PLAN .• US WEST - LAKE OSWEGO f n mca ' o BUILDING ADDITION I architects I SP] 19T AVENUE 0L , p.c. ' a,l,al r— LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON •o rL-r.••� uos:•soo•u rorruro,o••oor •rm• •— 411 1 n-!w IT ¢a-m 04•r•lb..1G•HC•CO n. .O dddj l _ • 0 GU4 0 p^.....\ t ' '0 I ''''''----.....„: 5_riir. "-IQ LOMA. • ::: 1 I UT *. A I 1 U IIII lffflllll ID i ft a • \` it (L) SWITCH oUhLOINC ` em ',) ., . ,, '''''' 0 '''.'''''''''''''--: Aik•- ma NM I. vs mewl Ina] ---+ m M— 0CD _ /\ \\ 11J CDm OO I S T STREET 0Z O CA) E of STREET ll.l O Y F- I .PROPOSED SITE PLAN — —�p F-Ur ¢o t PANTING NOTES. � INFO: 9UIIDING INFO: PLANLEGEND; Cr)Z u c or MS. �� C.� wow..,urn.. __wa.+4 m.....�.. ..—,.._ MM.ox[ari o J m` o ®:e te— �n � _,�A 4 .m _ �" .1..a.c QM. I -TIM 5.' 0 D o Y �^ =Q0 n m L- O-� am row me a,a..Nara Me.. _ — IIIIIMM '""._..._ A 1.0 • ®Lana at/co .o. L. �= ^� J • • • 0006 L000 1000-00 nz ti JI8IHX3 10 S.z Ir;-9 F D GI 1.- rNI 1111111 ! a a c I if Z .,, tli:.,4 \ . 1 :40.,__sto2 , x ... ,...i._ . . , I imp. , . v_ N - 0 1 ,,\\ k :X \N , i i Ali''& • \Nx • .1, E9 ...441& Il k•.‘ . , ' 111, _ N___11+-1-19 Par 4 N; NI NI i \ 0 o = I I I I . I g OIV 0 ! 4 _',1 _144 ! i . © 1 1 FT.-. iii i ..,,,, :I . . i 1 11 Irte 1 ; t....,,,ti.gt, .„.... 4._ ,„. 0 II II 1 il 1 __ i 1 io Fi �,� I € �'�` 1 I I I I a i 24k, 1 -r., ! I 1 litil l l'l l l �9;si 11 I i 1 'swill , g , I "0 O 1 IC rry-f-r-ravr 1 L., a1 E L i f IIII7 r BUILDING PLAN AND ELEVATIONS c US WEST - LAKE OSWEGO r nrp mca BUILDING ADDITION IXT a I "Dcil architects, p.c. • a.i.a. 339 1ST STREET _ LAKE OSWEGO.OREOON ro�i � Me..) raw1 --- lio1).., 9 0 1 \_______,- I I I 1 i 1 C AVENUE I 0\ r; !I , i li'--t I I - -- .. • PM! I I 0 \ 0 . . ., ° riel '1 i . :, , . ,, , •Im..- -.:40......4 r • I I r , , _ _ 1111111 I I a co 00 I MEM= NUMMI' . CI F1-71 L' " I p 411'11 Alei' . . .. ___ _____L,_ _ _ _ _0 * el I 1 11 , 111 i . . .016.../ 1 .........- . 'E. .„, I1 nromminTnom i I , 1 I 417 HA I I 1 I I 1.il!,i, A ih AINIII,IMIgl .„ m . , i . . . tn., „, ...;,,,,..s.i..,..,... .,114111,1, 1 . 1111111 1111111 I . l a I - Pi • 1 . r 111111111 / I: _ MI I . r- 111-1111-.1111111j. I RI vin•••=d3 1 . nit i • r. I 1 111111111 I 1 gal:II 0 I 1.] I . ...I 111i111111111111 0 rr'! 1 1 =-.. 1 ..„ _ I a, — • .IIIIIIIIMIIII MMNIM 10,..i.,... iiirill =m . _ _..... • - . ___, _ =I 4.• i _, ' II CO= ' 1IIII ' I ',,Lir,„. .14 la--a s.,.. pac-.=oi ..... — — 411 Ork 1 I e I „,..,B.,.;•.,:: .1 Illaiii.litII I I I .1 I 0,---zti.1"611b, : . I i I , 1 1 , k i t t i I I I - il um_L_Li4 1 $_.1....1 , 1 il 1 km...ma Olii I s .t.k .... • II „Au tied my ,..s,ma...•>.•,a.x, cgtomsz — . _—0 IIi 1 .0,irT,C;'- MI=EZE1:IMMINEZEI a ,. I a i I I I I I de4HitV.., El2=2116=12333 1 I .,710.41p =Ems ozzEzmn ",,,___________,,, . 1 I 1 i II: e „„i„ 4-1 MIMEO VIVVIMMV.VIVVF IMUM111111 0111MINUM , ,...-$011/0.,.s. ---................-----..../ il I NI. I 'fa,11.1r‘ 77,0 I 1 kiv St51:1M VAR; ERZE:=3 121t3.., 'ii .1... ann immmim fitenIME1 =CI I , • .,11,1 .1.. DEM:IMMISEME1 aks•It•zozm.0 ws. 172M3 1 I 1111111 1. ! ' I s . p '1416.14 CIZOOMMEEM Ep2=0104:325 WV i 'L• I . 1, ..... 11111111 41i ;ie.,.- :LA E. . GI EMMINME111311=111110_ _ I MIS 1 IIIIIIII I 0/11 ..45.111MIN imitdommerziazio-rtk‘zika.: . E .... • 1 ' I r, I 0 1 111. it l! r 1 . I 1 Al* - ' E!1 EthiM ..-FiLiriz '''''l 1r .010:* Igi,t_ z • Or , ,MMED VMWMK‹.‘ , MUMS 411S.Vls• VIZi3s'Illl V.,31V,.` 0 417-,K71165fIV167c; I ."IV. 11. ai•,, --0 \... IIIILMMIS PLAN Al US WEST - LAKE OSWEGO re, BUILDING ADDITION 11202245 0 In 1 i AM IIII:i 1 architects, p.c. • a.I.a. 0 IN 1ST*TOW & LMM OSIPIPSO,01•11061 A Wait One me ism= \,..... ...m am I was on 1-0.4 MOM WI IIII 0100 la II .i ___. • • ...,_ i ,-- .----- . • 3I 4. Q�� I � I l . . I — _.o— 7�. r9 ...x e---L__L_ _ ,._:_L__1__. L., --1,_...-- ............ 01 ' i E I 4. AOOITpM&ISEYENT -Q E y wrzana QaAJr/iC/r17Ar2 9 7 , T/2/22 s U21 r Sp �—. r""T -, 17 rczcvrrssx- Sao 1 c 1 —if c= virr_a = as2 I I 41141ln :) 6) 6 o p O O I 0 y0 i SITE INFO• 9IIILINNG INFO 0 „ YED oz gga JQ 1 , R��.Y•R �m�=\III I � 4 eraser--- 3 ;_a1 1 rt lti�' B7,.." L.s � _- i.ai ji i�,°� W ter =-- -- AP,AN 3� i 1�\L RIM i/MEN i =m 4 __ _— u � PUN - � 9u Lag IM 1 I'.itaI - _ , J Tr) 0 1000-00 n-1 S 118IHX3 ' I or, it Eh II = I I. I� nri Z T _ �i IZ x ie N - O I! J o 1 I Egli yam,,' III ,,. his !v:� I d 1 1 .:. ..,.. . , � s Y 11 i 1 1 ip �' 1 ^'--- ____— — 010r is a EP , E i -ill; I IhIj; i i 1 I.! � �illlli i Ij C �_�l.Y :) 6k 1 ' 9 `Iiillil �:� 1 r-� Y 1 I ix 1, 1 --J !� I 1;� =Ilillll �� ! 1 1I ' liI q ! II' II ° Ht 11 , m a xI 0 3l1 I 1 1 1 II j ri i 1 • 1 ELEVATIONS r • US WEST - LAKE OSWEGO .-mnD mca BUILDING ADDITION 1I II °1� architects, p.c. • a.i.a. 592 1ST STREET ,�,J_J�Q _ LAKE OSVEOO,OREGON ��'��o•a ro•+u•o•u \ • .ewruro. oor •stir• \ roa 1 ra yr, . r ,a..•er n • • • 0C. I2 i a DR4 • it Il ` I EXHIBIT 6 LU 00-0001 CANOPY AND RAILING PARTIAL ELEVATION DR5 N.T.S. L i CCPYR ,T r Yi USWEST - LAKE OSWEGO ----p mca i BUILDING ADDITION ___,Eon architects, p.c. • a.i.a. 30 N.W. lit AVE- PORTLAND, OROOON 0720• 16031 226-04322 539 1ST STREET LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97034 Job No. Dote Drawing No. PRECAST CONE TCP Of J U TOtie crew c WO+E7 I e \\ ..\�� .•y.;.:.:.:.;I THROUGH a1LL GP �� RECEIVER ::�.•1.E.§ CM flA4r.0 • 'NZ =i.KJO4 (TTPP STRP t:.: 1:i/ >�\\\1\\\\�\� �.!i�.�i�i�i� __.S: SA PRECAST CO/CRETE .?A\�\�\\� s I 2.a j�\\ a A 4 \-NUS \ .PAPER Osr PRECAST / 41 A C7.CR£71 SIM 41 OEY6 PAD•/STRUT; SEE STRICT. maittA G a a CN-RES6 M41 — x a . ERCK tE•t6'O.0 G (Tr.) e CEE IS PIO•/STRUT: SEE S,RUCT. EPrJ.ROOTS+C \� / \ It�4nC \ ^� 2'ROI WR - TS.SEE - r } -- \... .. — STRUCf I 2' \� OECF l� am! ( \+,Va.. _ 6 STEEL Y1 Ia ,M 2 I OETOND SEE ° 6.-O. STRICT. PEEPS MC r°A'A V1L�Rp) •s .:,.�,,Jokot. R1514C MR 1 i I 0 I 1 1 I' 1-1/T STal i' STmOAROS AND 1/2'P1OKETS I i • ____ `� PAPER TM 1 PRECAST — COMMIE SUB CANOPY AND RAILING DETAILS DR4 N.T.S. IUSWEST - LAKE OSWEGO ---- mca ° COPVR CHT� BUILDING ADDITION ___r900(l architects, p.c. - a.i.a. 411 00 N.W. lot AVE. roRTR,ANO, OREGON 07209 10001 2215.0022 539 1ST STREET LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97034 Job No. Dat• Dramtng No. 99-228 Mar. 28, 2000 DR4 C STREET • EXISTING USWEST SWITCH BUILDING • C,, H 457 H I r1LANDSCAPED AREA TOTAL SITE AREA: 24,000 S.F. TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA: 1702 S.F. 7% REQUIRED LANDSCAPED AREA: 1680 S.F. III _ TOTAL PARKING LANDSCAPED AREA - 687 S.F. of—' EXISTING USWEST GARAGE EXISTING LANDSCAPE AREAS /I\ DRI N.T.S. USWEST - LAKE OSWEGO - "- �� mca i BUILDING ADDITION __tom architects, p.c. • a.i.a. SO N.W. lit AVE. PORTLAND, OREGON 97' 539 1ST STREET LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97034 Job No. D•t• EXHIBIT 7 99-22e Mar. 20, 2000 LU 00•000110 r.J.. C STREET I 7:;( • • EXISTING USWEST SWITCH BUILDING V ELANDSCAPED AREA TOTAL SITE AREA: 24,000 S.F. TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA: 1708 S.F. 7% REQUIRED LANDSCAPED AREA: 1680 S.F. 3 \, • IIII 4- - PROPOSED BUILDING ADDmO EXISTING USWEST GARAGE TOTAL BUILDING ADDION LANDSCAPED AREA = 693 S.F. EXISTING AND NEW LANDSCAPE AREAS /I\ DR2 N.T.S. „ USWEST - LAKE OSWEGO --D mca © c .Hr-`) BUILDING ADDITION __Dofl architects, p.c. - a.i.a. • 60 N.W. 1.t AVE. PORTLAND, OREGON 97209 16031 226-0622 539 1ST STREET LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97034 Job No. Dal* Drawlnq No. 94-226 Mar. 20, 2000 DR2 1 . ' r t • �� Mo; A✓e, ` ��; ''.; b�° • r Erey o 1 / ret. red „w a de • SPI ''flB.' g1 7�_`�` Set Sri 9ern 4 + a,,v,, /zo/S ms .5 d 9e cb Op ! »-.-. E,r/srin . / • Ci 9 t...3, True Coi /4.j F 5 042 i'''/a"'l 0V,445 Bu/7o/,29 sf V o 0 1)1-...\-\\ 1 /2 E/Bk...e 0-/ 1'i"�.Pa v ti - Q CL.ACr\AMa5 COUNTY FILED JAN 17.1978 scab,: /s3O' . • D MILN ty Surveyac iron Rods set ars 1/e'.Jo' 8os/s of Bearings, PE9t Ai7q/e6 PROPERTY SURVEY or E1E013TERED LOT /3 , eh 30► PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR "F/RST .40D. TO THE TOWN OF OSWEGO " Situated in the SE°Sec.3, T.2S., R./E., W.W. C. . . ; aii. - / ORIGON r_1 C7/c/(dmc9S Co., Oregon i JUL, a, IeeO JAME5 W. CHASE Dais, Dec. JO, /977 5 10 1,,:, Y • MARX 8 CHASE Surveyors Inc.. �+•- EA ar.shom,Orepon Phone: 665-2//6 JOB NO. 77-597 C. EXHIBIT 8 LU 00-0001 0 I t;/o Fib Girave/� r i.b,r 1\1 oast'Jilt,,L ne=S �?`Vc/ty . lob, . �.:c lit le4.. • • . A2. • 5 i 7 b '`,4'41 - - tC' _ I� _ _ 1�t. .— toy �,,q. . elk" ro. "' , Ob !1� o% fi"h deleta • , I \ 1. '1IR�$e t i R.E i � ;.f, ; ., N Frcrore Atsivt.nce« 14' . .do dItvsr.nent F/oor� �tr/6 20 � .• Fhr.:loss - ¢. �3 ryS t ,.,. 9T ,, Goroye . L 0 1�°1 zo 9a 1 lob. Fret'._io6:0 1o6.`.1 „ k # I . 7 ' hole Seydre --% •":' _ _ — — — — —— —— — f'p Rd of D t` A' o1/ 06'' ( • d. QI' zApP ok-20I . x.. • a ?)i ai ' • . s.. .• : :-,:.. . .,,,-•: ,I.....), 2.05.rr/rS: #' 0 ' . - - .„. d l01 ,}1ot' i }ok • I° + �%% I 1 . _ I f%$,:�1- - ._ ... .. •_ _ {— — _sg _•T _ _ _ _ _ —.. r ...fit,. 7/ephane . .r . I°" t',,` .'„[::::. . _ . _. • it ,,•••• 0,1' Ot t • " : • . Itit.51 el . .- -. ..,.-, . xl b m - ybT� �. .. . e! meter •• I. f�,.3R !L j� - .''.• . .: ......_:is. .. . > - f``yo. - •;I -- - ..—i /2 -7:7.7-7 R% et',S wire z_i ti P 4 - 0 .. I ' • -, om 15uRY;EY .Or i t� • + , t �e a ? V..,4 /wiz S IC �.I ;' f {_ ` ' • OREGON:/ROW a°°37ZZL• CO ,I?ADD. Tr) r0W O osw t " �. m y 1?a9 Scale:/`20 .i I J 1 r.�. B.rgs j!,441v^laeh, Ciri/e! r.s 4�: ,r'�' il,f .` j-.• �},. v�.1'i:: ".v' 'f•�; i`i `ti:t'r.F!j.'+Y^'ti t IIt 4 ,,LI., :\k':.,�: :i,i'ha '.1v„% b J i,t_ ,I' ii;..'y �' U,a,fM .K M. H tt t. kr t'` Y - !Y r n J c�2 irrl `4a e� r. !1 ,n, f � 4 c� u t o r i i ,` ',k'„y t;*ti �;• , �4' d *-- •:ram .,a=fi ��s r I,. " 'i. 0 't1i l s' ♦i- � • 3_ }S'cY 7„t`"(fr \I sY f+ s '+ '434 r1 a,1 `lY �^' Y '.}y i` ��ti~ :t1?�!• i'• S„_"�� p�` �, y��r7 � 1 .�`...., i k tirti��-ta•rY.f AY+ '\n , ,�7;i ,� ��4n�, Sent �bs -l'• t'; �` <��'?i?�� Qyi `yR�]y>t„<' y' +�'{S;• y t; e g :•1` ''',fh.' 't r,` `t�?RY•,, t,..'�l�i J +4�,5 t it s 'T �' •'`' .li p:A'' i 14•)t` ,' .'�� .•+:l i.• •,,' t'bill.' L !•'i :•iT S�C.t t `r t. ,; y a' ,s . r,t'.} t t t t'0r,S(, ( ^1•fi n, 2 h 'i' '' b�?�1 .4 '1,TrAgli•'+' .1, t"1- rY t\� uo v 1 1.` ;' •t,-. ,t, r}j ��r r, L•',wi. ':.1 ,il ` 1.y 55, 74 rt • r r•1 •f p�1 1�,; w Ie1r y! �., t�1 1'.t.'<"�{Ir„u:,lr' tn� , t t. f'c t} • .11.'t'{."�: �f":k'� �`.��5° •! '�� rlb;��ilN�tt��k•+L��t1,'";.kt\ y,. '4 J!Y . N;; �4,• } f4 v`t 4 t }��4 e' •it,t .fin,t a� l! , r yyLr Ltiy('7\�},�(r!• /L� t`h .7 .Y ',; P i•;;It�•;,p�:,C�'j:.�, kl ;� r . ,(Na.S 6�i�. y „l \,1 I I} `! > L'+T' r t 11,, JrS�i'.�11;,`L; �'it S ki�l,,, :ley,• y^� .' Y,`1 F a�;:riliWw,�q} ia:��l 't Cr tL.}rq,\ A } 1 l li(tA.k t o.fli X +.19•f�j `.3'•1�[]�{.'N +•..YtI':• .1` r ,' dyQ;1;- ,T,.1 ar t tit? fL �'`'f•, r •t'r �+ \: I ..f5 t ' t- ' Ll e. Ir:•5,1 d1 +, '. ti1 1'• w."f• d . '( - , f . ,.N ,.a:,.`` t. r 13,1'` 'r Iv{ {f�`• ,Yr G :rt:'i i. 1,,,rig,- r:S4.1 t ,.,.5., k R 1 s g` ,`@tilt < �"ri.rLt r `C !4 y� Y,'�,t OF t.W,�N rlr Y}r t`�ti Ilt Iw l •'��J,h' \} y+l t 1C .'��4�'' e t.�`1 j��', '''!� .'¢YI S' FSr ,k 4'y'l.vr �:��`�t.4,a . ;r;P`a"'� ti�' t 1 t,Wx,4t1 ; iilt 1 I 7 1 r ,r' 1r 5 ,.�•� • r i }�7ygt.' . t' A s x'' '.,f•Sr +a,� � $' .y )It •.' � \ t, t 4•n rs Fu.+r r ,rr.Xyiti�tSE� .+�-, J�i�.( .}, 'Y''C:��'. f,� +tt r )', j ri�y� `��` '�i i a•�v i',, e4 • •\. irlr'�k, ..A:n.. r -:�• i 1 :}t,Y�,y,r:.'lel :1:�I\ } 7+ 7 ( '^�� 'tSi h, r'^" +J, VR: ,i 4ir ,,. J'ik >Y2> S ] J"1` r'• kilt '3 '•l•,eR 1 t \ w !11 `.1 :. }I)I`7 r .t Y Y ;� 3` d,.. t 1,r::�l' }1'•ti•♦ l)` .•!':'FI 'j,lei „i}e i, �i. y,1?,. lt, �t�.•k' t r ,•r .. '' 7 ;:I I svi4?/�/t .ry i�i;�t}t•n ..y �ri 5 !''�S�o �, s Y" i"1d z a' a� a yy�d•i Y "�aS '( yyx. ;.;s.,y,i' „� ,.y,�,•'ti• •t. 'Sr••� ( •,t >t�' ,et '!\\t!, t l&„- +-1,,ti.: ,,rn .� t V�•, A' • `,PI,s. Y' � 1 •k Y� k. ,�•C.. .dl �.',S`,• hG. ,nr t Y,, , s r.• t •� ,} (.�. .1 iit ,''�', h;= �, '.�(7•' k' ::�r'3�<,+ ,� '1 •f ' t4�, t. •1 k4� k..• ..�{ i,•• ,,tit �F' s.S} 4'jljll'..��t4, ,.,,r-, (�y!�� t �[�� d. n�i• � ��•7� \ ,`% yt� i,� , ti J Y.v':�t'. ry• ;,%' >�`ifil ts.s..t !; . " t t ,,,' r.�".tti i ,tv� ' 11i'4 '' tl t-;Rf3! r K�•i�1ta,' f, :.• .i;� ! t t {',�. 3 1...„,-,,,,..,`rP ' y, *h. � > r Ptr i..tll':t. i 111�1.ttl:('(�S. , : ". Ef?,i sf {. u if, .ae J ?t :t 1. �rC �1 T. xt+ I i& nY4 "'" tt k l £ ! 1,r �/ t!1.. d e 7•, ., 4ii 1 r M FYI t e s, r` a '. � ��'� _ � ��'t .1 � diii '� •t '- e { `` e11.G.v, q as .rk V��Y��,Ut �la i'�� ,Cr �r � ..�ay�' t �, t,r ,�.t5�'s,y ' : t:tt'- 's.C. ,R' ... fi -J a. " '� 1y,r i,} v S i l„` , A-.t)! ,,, k G.y• i • .,y,, •� ,,�} r;, 1,,� 1 E+,.,� �' {)Ayy ,,'4 t 5 V h{;?.�•'('7 ,{tiy,YV+j,, ly�,.r�j esi-Y��4`,l•.'illy- f J y4{-i�5 i� wtt�js�t`K;�'ry1s�a. 7 g ':✓��.,� M t:o, 1�1 11, ,i� �ti.]e� h ''�''l;t� 1'1 ��tt•. iJ:rJl. '( 1.. !S• t'i .. .,.\1 1 . 1i., :t S��• ij' �\ r.4, ',;. ,,F 1 'ii 1 0 .Yr,_-„,,, �'. \ �4 , t',, 11,6„,.,. •'\,. j�0 ^"1., ' N .^� r2 •t 1 i 1, Ti G.. a ). till 1.1.•. � ( 1, 1'n 7,./• 1' t I�{ �y�"tu�,c� V 1, •"f ,at� �' .l•��} ••t 1;f' "�'4:•''•��, �� '�,Kf• ,L i�c`r. • . .�\''.4':'S`•• :�¢sOF:I'�4�'t�n{F?�yt 3;��t�ilJ:`a��.tr.�' ;Lt., yid-�l �.t�,1(� >. '� �,Y`*�i ��M1•y�2;t y f a �t. � •e.,G ,',� i.l,i' �,. , ,, ` i . ,4,3'`�d, , t1 t ps,y•„Lr 1;•f'0 .k r4 1,fP f 5?'•At ,•'t_rA•` of `Z' „AI A ♦ "L"4,¢ \ 1 , u, x.,4'tl4') • :�1 a tt Zk. � a k i�, '� } 1 �?. ' . •e41;2 T�t �t,•1�S'�Y Ay FG' 1 'rs7 '7• i'� V',Y!`�','y�F� ti R .t .�^�' 3 i•tr` L s� r"t it !'i't� �'G'`is 'IY 1 M .\ ' t' •, yip+ ,t �y r'• t [ r Jay J• ,,r� �• rl<5,• 'S • .�W r,�, � .i+w .�; !',.\ , tG.Y'i,t"+•S:.S n`'� tj't1.:�I•rti•'.,`.,Y yl� 4' rf',;l�r :11..,1.e C4� ,'�',,Y�'Ft� �o,}.� K; rW. !; ,� t�'. 'k' .r» ..y,\e '1,/• `"'. +``Ljf;• 4 �i r ,,It• U. r`< .. �(}t• {,`7 �hr 1 Y�,�ry..1•{'�iY�7f,+J.;x '•.S f \1�. S�{ri°�:t. f'� V '-ice •e: r, v, �. t 1.`t•,�\t• l.„ �e4 . .�,It t,. l. r4 s ,!/', �i . i,61k.'• t. Vi tt "- k �. t5V _ , ^'.' t ' ;^T,Y\ '�. 1 a i .`. ,t� .tJ �F �.`I „ �;, ttR• 1. •�r -Y'� Irf��t4�:1:�1s.. ,,� ,~5r l%k v�,1• k S`., t�n s ,a �� 1 IS� n�� 4I .n�l? .'V•a `"�l•{+. {`��• �, �,.. st'12.rtt' V �r1 fir. •�rl. ,•1" v 1'r'ti(:••,�'1,�t�Hi 1?�, �t ' i ir�. 7 r' t '�: �, r ,. � �-CC .�. �"... R�i { (�uNa��' ��T" 7 4 'K t ,a?;;,�a,•��,i�lll�y� f}t�' y .i` s r.YY� fo-� , tf:j�' ti � YFt,.• r�t�•',f�,'PY�..•'Y!'P'''_';�r}>: v \,1•`ftrr�i;bM4:�,tom"%�•. .;1,:o�.�` + Y, ')�`St, VY.I?s.•2•'•: �,N , � Y (t �. r" 1 ht, Y•^,t^'i S Jr r t t t ,� .>� �? �,. ��,',�„`.•r�((`� ��„ �Z•� � ��' ��5�3, � 1� r.��' t 1�>•�,{�"+��k 'XA 'i� z as ,'s�� ^i J(fint c�„q, u" vl->t ,>v�<, a+t ;•+ f�k S'] lttl ,ft '1 i,A� .t�)_rr r•+ It �' rS � 7 r�rr" y 1,Y d :L,�rY... r r' 1 � ;,,1j} � +T•.1,#. 4, �,i�7tH'\;..1 � 't\. '1k'i�as�} .' 'jl � ". � \'�It h�1,1•' e ;�"� ,f'� '.�, .,� i° \i� o �! ''Ck7ta� •�• � :.a 4•.' 14�� J��;�� 3't�A ��' �-��r','��4,1 P•�e: ,t� + •H��k '.a F Fi +; '•�� " r�Q Q�rr..-,N •r.. i T r'�!''a' v t�'�4,5, a 1 't�,{�}�n• p�.d it a ,a'i 'D,,.�., ?,,` '\4i5 ,+ 11�)•�1t 117''fl1��4� q ,t I,r,1tt?'J?��yV,U, i( � A•a i.l .,�r- \ ,•f,t:s ,:",t i' IFY � t•t �' �5 d. �r' f fiL• iii ri t{7 t• 'tt�M iiS?��•(�. >� ';{^F , C s 't S .3., y7� '4 r�� V.'kt' r t � •My )•. `` `` i, ;�:'v, '��F� i 1 h �•: ,t �:t,' BLS,, 'S� d' t�•„ �t 4,1�'�.t ,-..,, Yi,t ''fir 'y'�` t'1«:.Y�Y 4ri,� xp t.. S-.s}� j,n . Z� „�..f n• ?u a,'fi• i, M 'F4 E5 otir;Z.� ;i''•1 t• • r• } �t:'1( a .1 '•d. 4i i.s � 1 a1 ,M, .r, ,, L ,rj ri.•ri.� ,: t�r.•�5 ''i t5�' A 1 a 'Y"; .i T 1,xt ! it, ,1 r 1, y ` n i if a It ,Z rat `533 { S +. 1// rot tiJ�i' its S's,� tL 15Y y� t" 4{;�1•pp((-' t .'.fi! 1, ,(G1a F a ^�y W�1�'' f r �tity��5, i:�t '. >>� y.(l.� �:,"Y,"n.{t S� t1 Y S, ilY,=l"� t,,a1E�a.«(7r''�T'� �;et�'^��.ti�� f 1� �Ql�"'�(q1� 4 U� 1 �t,rk,�y f.�•,�?r�rit '<s'' �. t't� 1,i. a e „..,„.„..,,,J.r:l i, .•Y�t.�' •'p°I•trr•,{tip Il'1 'a �` J� p.,r,�`�•K,h�''.S. �'r�l.:t"i" � ' �tiY •l '`��2'ai,.q'ys't } 'A,t�� J y �••Y^^'�(.."?f•F •,Jtd ir;'r 't;a�',:b'•�l-, t• ••`'' .:, '1 ,.: M i., r ,,t. y�.',,, r�^L: ',. 7.-'•,,-il� 1 I•Iw L'�' ;• ..^0i,• , .*, •rrl 1 �•t,(� ') �..,..�r�'� t-,,,,i. yM1'f y1 �N }, ��1 ", ;t` a # 4�t �t �t 'i }y Y,)a .`� u n'� ; y ,ysy: t'"w�j �4v t'tv ' - pr I F • �° rtti ,'(k _.h'+l ;,,. I� �ri r r.>;: ..:.>%.r-,t 15 `�i 11 •,. ^ tv !�`� 't•.1:�r j ,N' y' F,•r��nn.°,,i°,1 1.(„rY�• i � ��t�t,'ni,!i �s , y�:oci5t4 • t' � '"�, �i'ifi,Y�r�. ,•• .t�'y. ( r. .v1� •'t', kti+,I vy1/ 9S"'y^ t'<. it +J,"�' .. kk . .. ! r �y,r, ';� .MF ,.�• uS •7h'!t -Jc7(�L5'� y, t 7'' I;°,. `" 'l�tt'"' �'S, ', ,1 t2�' a �`^ `I '��Ivihit'4sY't'u ,, s ,Y�?,- ',�, �, iiC�lY��, Sr .fl;�'�'1iJt?;:S�t�S,SKt ;.�.(�''''',S� �� l• �'J' ?j\�,. • t UY' .1. .. .. .;,,t,,t' :4.tli .�i t,1""sT 14 . v 't11,, 't a ' }y ,,•p S r, �4� . p;, ,4 1 � �{ly�Y{�F.'�,4�k��^i.`�y I` fi!. �y),,yjy� . jy'+ E St; S+i--i ,�y{7t�♦� •: i 1.i. ',:1_,*: : '�[`ti rtit` 3P�;s,, ,„.,,,,,1 t �:' �. 1 �'•ii11,4;ri.73f1t'?c C 'r ,J' �,74,„0 Lt„'4 N:1,,'1; `l d1.31,( ,, �rl i:;y0'{V) {.� � ,��' �,v' t!f'�t 4' ��-..1).t 1.�,J„. yryr :`A"c (, .t 1,,}� ��.c tfY'k ( t ,, ` t,,,,i., fj�-r,{r'.4. l µy l l_, •'' s'�",E 91 � `,+.gtr'oNtl, .Yt+t'^' • .•j�Yi 'ri 'Xt'1}s�4t? "� t �pT��.5, t t?Il?+:4 Y,Si y1 •4 1 �"�',A' .r` { "IA w ;n^1f'.1:£: ?` 4',1l t"S-h� `r�'�`a,{'``'>I�c'C�Ts {ate *� #`1 pJIt �•r} '�rAAA""'1, 1SS ,al�. ;, r. '!K 41� :N, ut ''Er'� }'h2�r'fi ssi,�,ryt1 ^fit`'"`i,tr ,t T�•tt"t%e...."....1.r•• •d r �i(Lt 9't0,i} } ��`�1� .�1` .1 1 �t.�1• '� 1 >� tyttsft.At�f ,ti✓\ttW r_ , ,, t F t,1,it w f' • �t` ,�ll'('' r"� Yr rG�t, ''' t }A z♦ ''1 si ,l�' ��lGf i 1��'rti. •^v} ,Y .. _i't r'1"4„��++,.i'�ti�}l�,• ,d• ,'I l"Sr.,.p',t 1.1,4,} I '1 /' �:. 1 ra)y ^V ^� '� rlty�JJ,iVc IF" S t� d\S. 4 K7r +'�• - ^}il," 1�YA1 a ^ttt ✓`„e�'}•,�nr J.ile!. 5k1?;,\4, Srt'..t - � , . (\t, 'f�J"!fi t '�a'� . +9S? '• tipg"• a kt},:,rrC tY' '' h r t! ll` ��'� ` �: 1 1r� �C.r/7t rt Y o a < 1"'i t ,. 1:,,I. lfit"Yj„ 1+7 ., ,, i 'tit t • 1 -. D1lo��1�l 4 i rj{ d t i n5 L y j ' 1 i'w i,t 1,11tS rx 1 ` I r t ,,t1, ( X r iG P tY`',Sl'.' -+t IJr�, ,'. :.• + fi tYt L 4 tafi,` 4 tt l O 1 tL t "i,= .'ram 5}d l 4rlik44°' h ° �H b�tf\7r1�5°��t*�w r,. �M fin S �"1�� r a, r 1 1 2 ;„, s �v'"T` "` t, :,} � �, ya', Al��,fiv r? ��i Y Fti}� AjZ itsPf W i�5t ,iizt,'",iT�l5e4; .�1 l<! t• `4 y f .6J J3ktiq _ +y}{i'4,I a� g,,r`to k 7. 1it f •7p�� f • R�"y -� t, • ;Y,`. `Yy Ill p,' : }i,-yl M1Qk µ ik i? 1�, �} .r i.th'�'+_ ty ! l ��'n s) S j}i 'st•J kt Y. r J 't-tc. .:i!(1`,L �3f} -ri,L a', 2a:111,,JlSY?` C, '4 ' :, S"Li 'v1'�ii•''i's "`'!,. `�,51A�4•1, �'�``7l s r, MCA Architects Lake Oswego - USWest Building Addition Dec, 1,1999 '.'"",i . . •.• . . ..... -•.' •':"...•i:‘;:•.,',.4.i i:•:;,li::::'-•,,:::::':••,::••::.::••'•••••::,;•.••:::•::4i1:'.;Alf':$,v.::::,,•.;,1,1.tt.:•.•11";:i'.::.1.:::::;;•.:,:•;•1'.` • ••• . • .",..'•.-•. .... :•`........*.,.•%.,:•-:--:•••:•,-:.!;,•:;.; :•.-IA‘-'••::,:"•-:-..-:•%!..-':):-:•'-':,.:;•;':::-:','.N ,y ..- ltr.f.,',:.--*:::,::*,.:-..:^,-,,e..,:-• . , . . , . - „•:::.•..,,-••.-..,,;.......:•.,.: ,,,.!..,.:,:.:.:.!,-,::.;-',.:.!.:.'.ii.:i J:.:10.1.;;:.::'-';'.2•":.‘..:•';•:. i 1 i..1....i:•;;IA"•..*!,!.%4:•':VItIg1::: •7;',!.'41:%:."...:.:::;','Z''.';:,:!Z•71:: -.". • , :' 4- ::• .' .' '". •::'''''':•••:':.:''''''.;:'...':. -::: ••'..•:iii'.1::.:.11....:?:'•';;.ii :i..:ii'.;;i'.:.'..;!..:••..:.:''':.•'i 1'.*.!:,i%?•;iiliWiirNni.41^t?trit'4t':$•:1•:•'),tr-:.;: :•,. - -. • • . ' . •:. :: ••• ' •:t;;;-....:::::...::::::::..:•.:•,%•::i::•1-"....::i:.*:::,:;I:j:!:.,%'..;•:::::::;:t3,•••...i.j 1 ...,•••,1,3„ i. , : :.•:. ' ' ',. ".•':?.:,....f...,:14E11-::•...,•:;i:ii ?;.,<•.,,::,:•.`l'F: d:4'ti.til:v T(''±';''`..'?.:A';::t:,•:.:•••Pti'• •.:\'.. ' • • . . . :' • .•:...••' .•:: t..f.':::::.4.:*•:•viFr.;92.:: :',.,:*e.•:' 1 Air.:41...cif;,.......reP,'.:: • *.•:-"::. . ';-::' '• .'.:•......:.:"...,:.::;.:.::.:.:.,i.:1'.,i1.-:4.i..,.:1*::.:Ii '',;.e: 1!?i.:11.:.':41'0' i''41V1iftiii;' . , . •. .: ... .............:.:•:•.....:...::...P.:::.::i;;.:::......:,:e.s....::.:,..1,,..^..1'.:;t:0.174;iii3:'.,. l':, 1..41A:;ii,!;?..' * • • . '. . :,......,:::'..,.':.',:..., ',.....,..i:r;•:.!:.:,.,:::!•*::.*:,:i.:i.:i:".:iii':F.:•:::;::.•,1,:r;;;4•.-:;:;:is Kii. 14;',:..,(—:."411111';.!: ' %.4,4c1.11:1•4:::' . ...:•. •.:. ....., . '' .f:.::,?:e:f.-:•*.*:::::::::ii..z1.1,::?..itit..3:. 'If ,.4):,..,:o:F.r , , ..:.,.:::::::„.,).--... ..,'. ,-• 'Ii!::::.Fi.:Iiiii;i:1).:::•:- .:,::::::r;;;II., *-,, TivIt.,:,,* 1),•2 "14,..:St'';:••. •-• -`,-.1- .;;;:•::••.,•..:!:•,,e;::..:•%:t'':,:c.r.i.t1:-;:i I %,,,C,I•te..1: , , . - .. . . . , ......,,;;.::::::,:::-,,•::::::::',.:1.)1' -03:, r../41i.:,,, , ,,, • • - ..,....i....Vc;•.:e • '2,:':'zi:.:•: ::'.::• ,::::::.!:..'i 16:.,.,;:r".?::::::.: . . . .• \fr ;••••••-:•:;:i:::....::.•••.:::;', .t. ,,'":•elf.', ,,•,,.-:',':.•:•':::::••::::: •:t.,,•t. ,'.• . s'I't'f!.' :1:::.;•::.-;•'•'....:.•.'.,',11 .,., ,...- ... ,-. • ,r4. li••;. . . ...., P f •• ' II• ift•'•• .. '. ...-:if':.;:....',:::•-•,....:';, . .:.. '-'1. ', 1 , 1• . 11, ::''....'.1'.':•.;::-::::.:4:1..V. ar•.1 - -- It '' %•,....11: ' ., , - .r.,, I I' • . ' , t , . I . . , . . • i . ... . , . .. . , ,. Tc.... ''• $. 1, .•I. 'I I...? • .. . I . • • „ Ij •,-,, ' • • , i • „ 1 , ., ' - ,? .•,••••• ,1....c.T.,„ . .. . „. . „ -,,... ..,...-..:7,..,:,...:,I.,-..,..,.,:,,,‘„,„...,.,. .-..,-, .--...--•,.,...,---..,-..,„,-... .,...... _ : .,.. .,,,_ ...,i,.. 1 .•• •... ,.. • ,., . , '.4,•:-.1f•-•,..:.,,•:.fs,,..,•:•.li,,,,,,t1„,,,,ii*-„cf,.,•,$,0y,:::,.,:-...''"7 i'r,---7 :17 -7"."'"4"Da4C4 ,1-5r4177741,'"r077"c‘Fr:;.77..-1:7--'-77-..... .. . .• ' • 1 . 41.441.:::i:'1,!4'4.0.•,.,;t......- -:- cle''.' - - ' '-''' '.•— :-... __ 4'""a--11.-rd..e.t...1z..4•444W4.4 40.., :Y',;!,,-:1-''';',1,-." ...lc _ — _ .,.....7.7". ••••;---- ,f1-?..-•,,:.•., . . 41..,...y.,,t.tai.. ?„,,,ihr‘,,,,, , • • • •• • • • • ,•'. 1,- ••• - ..41,,. •i'd±i- ivj 1. 4 1, 4,,,,,,,,teri,...,,,g mel..41.,, lc. - •.F- •,,,, ‘4,.‘..eZ11.1tiL•,,l,„k144$12`..:.'... ., , ,, _,_ , , -_ , , , , , ,,..•,: ::..,--;,' • ' .:74,}.,Irk;:.T.,it, '''''. ,64 .1':1,, •A,,,,,Ay-r,,,,kroi,,...0,LT,R,Avo,,,f,.s il.-„t; Ay4i,•Afitivil,,,:, ,.....,:.: :, . .. . .. - - .:.:,..'..:.,..:.,.,,z,ii.;:....,,, : ,::,:m.vg; ' :,,,, fa. '/:i:4,':.',:fil'41",,q4pti$014180k,'..)1...1,.}...14.. ,,.- i Lc !! ...1.,,'1,,4,-i.:.....-•-..,,, , .. . ' , , . ' . . ''' ::•.:,.'''..:,':':. . t''':.;'.iii•;!ki.sText1.4•5.,T4.,;:( ,A1/21".0.4.4•IiIgngitveksitvlit.:',2, * .*._• •:.v.t. . ,k4,:t .. . ,. , , . ,-... ,.... „. , , . , •.• ..,,,•....,. . ,:...,,,:,:1,11..111: . , ...:,,e, ,-,,,,,,,, • ,....$, ,-.40Y:::•,-.)?•.":•..r. k.R" , , ,,-:, , .• :-: --i Iv,, At... 1. . t ,, mite- ., %A !,,,.ek,surty 0,,rt.- •,,> rVI, t:al 0.1.)111;".' , . '. -' , -, , , , ' . , ' , ,' , ' ,',i'.‘, '-':,-;ii:.:A ssioc..ric• st./.., . ,,t.....,,k4.50,14.,,tr;:tg. •.„,e-01*.... ..11,..wir., ,y4. .4.Nzlicp:f;„1.r.0.0,,fill-' ' , ' ' ' . , . ' " •••'',";—:. "i;a1:11.•1.-91A1, -vitiVt4, • W'ePri:iewil"k,'"4.1.4:1ti:'.. 141.re.iity,i416:tiv.rt....,vv, *,16t,worf-ztiftA1.-?!..:t,..,..: , .. , . ,, ... . . ' ', •''.: . •.•::••'.'..ill'Ziiggiti;.. %Aim.‘,.144%);.:ZivAkti)geetviAl!1:4%.4410;0,1,4:1 o(g.,..kt,'.0.110.va.,-1..`.:.i.','.- , . , .' ' ' ,' , '' •', , . ..M'Zr.f.;4^fik,k.:..k.IA'1.4.*, •;.k ife.....viggIti-T,Ayo../A.4.4artfloit; v.k5::‘,.v..,!....2krvv.:•:,.....,•,:. , .• , • , ,• . • . • , • . . .. , ..,..x4:f.ii,,,...i.....),,,,,„746::41.,$41 d.p.o.b1,,,i,.::::,„),.., .;,„;61; ;400 ,A54),..r*,1;11.111,...;.1t,:: .,..$.!.$.1.:Vi.`11,4,411C..; ... "ill. ,. ,.•. ' . , , ,' , ' , -•. ' , , , . . , • .-....,...-•:,:r:g.:•c•dtP:Olvi,';z41 IMEPlik,14•'.!•?‘.„i'.,^Arry,A10,v;;;,•,:if.b-:,;...;•1....44..„0.415i...„04...m. ...12,.„..•00,..,d..,,,,,,,..,.,,„,„, , . .., ,, . , , ,,,,, , .. ,. . . • , . , . ,. . , •. ...,.....1,1.,...41,..i..,,.7...wc,kbi,,:.,\,,;,.-T.r ii. Jo...I.A.....t.4...,e4-0:041.1,vice...41Z,,,,.. 41.1,,,40,1,11;1•4,4, ki:,. .!4:;,ift,N,IF,..,;.1:,..t70,t,;•,.; ,, ,,, , , ,, . , .. , , , r. , • . ,, ..:. ,, ' . . ..,..•,4•11°,..',1:.!4,4?....J,(K).-04.4,..,..1,.1q,^ ', gt.,4.0.41/4t,..e.f4;54.K.N.44)*41$•.;•,W.‘ kt‘i'VV6.%." .41 -,?(`‘;;;;;•:...,,,Sli•S::::',2,,.i:i.::;,... ., . . .' ', • • :•:,' , . ' , . . .,, ,.• ,•....,,. . . .,-,...,:...::.;1.:3,..z.,-:,....4:...,:h•Ify.„..,Si 't,-.141tWii.ye.::%,,,,-14,,4-„I'vk.:...),,N,),..,g-'.._:%,111,1......;,7r,,,,,,litatl. ...4-;;T:1;:..411:!,A,-:;,,,:,7.-,1•i :,I' ' ..‘, f , , , • , ,' , , .-,!,. , , .- . ..r.".‘tz,,o'Af;;;;;4'.1:.?4,..!,-,Ve.o. ,s,,,. 'F. ,Xil,;';,.:1V-V,I,'1..."7,47":„.,..c,IV",-Wriaftz",01._„',I,TtiV,‘,11,' .s.:,,,:,,,1„;.,..,:,a.!.4,:......1,.,,•,,, . ,,, , ,. .. , . , , . , , • ' *.:'• ' • . ',..`,•g's,44:1.Y,'•'....tj;FATt:''' 41.era*Artt:.,1):;$ ,:.:4;:4:Riksize:,,,riexi,:,,,..rsttil ,0,,,ilt.liii.::,,N.,:::.- ,, . '- , , , , .' . ' . •' . ' ' :...-,0,4.1...,...;','---... im„. t vit...acci,,s,..ntk. q-ek,,..it.,..4;:.ii....,,,:tiv1;t.• ,it'••:,::,,.z.T..-4,2,,:•;-•':---..-.., ,', ' . ' -, . - .. , , ....,.......,7,:-;:,...... ..-.,,,,...r,kip-4 • ,.7—,..:Pv- 5;1,.N.14rq..-fi..'',L,1;1!1..:A4^,,,I.T.4',...li-' '.(4'.'-2;,:::'..i;4',0t..":'•2': * '-,' .' ' • • ", , " ' ' .' • .".."-'---: -'•:-...h*:?..14.•,1/4.41.44**,t,,>41,:',5• 1?:•:it,:',=<1.i,?,,ii".;'4121•11 ..... -,(4.0.v..f.t.,,Nr.-.V...::....;-•• ,: •. '' :: .- • . ' , - , ' ' . - - . . ,. '•••' '...'.;',:-....IYAt,„•,4eft 1, . ye -T.'.1.:0,;:ix7,-,,,;;,.*;',it .,.f,,i'::;,11.144,.i:tvi,;.t.+41,*,"! 0..k;;;;;;.„2:,y,,,;:•(..,:..1....,..;;:,,. ,, ,_,;;-. ...•,.,:, ,. - • • . . ., ; . , ; ; ;• ; . - ; -...,. ;•; ;• .--....,_.,•,;-...•:•,?,...1,...?0;,b , .4,,,,, 14.,..5.,,..,:e.s.,lik;y....,.7,..:•:;.1:4-,•,;:gotitif.-..;10,,,s4....„2 :tt.:4,,,.:-..,•rir?;;;.:;: •;;•.:!•:;',•',.'.:_.-:•::',.•••,••..,...•::.:-' ,. •:,'.•' *;..:;, . . ' ' , : . ' ':' :: • • •.•• . ' ••• -• . • ' . - ... -........,....-:. - -,!,''''..-..•••••-•?.1:iftv.ile!'4 ..i ItT4S::;?f,:;11i,.44,:i*.,01:,`::,:,‘.:;'''••:::';'4....1. '.41'il.:,ilitil'Aili;,;f:. CI'. .:......',,,•.:,..i:,•:...:•.:„;..::,,.,•••,•...,.....-.... :.•,:•„• .•,,..::....-,;:,: • .. .,, ., •• .... • . • '' .,. •,• ,•, • • :' ' - . ',::,...','•• : ',:-....!:::Airi,,t;0). it:,,11 ,#,Pit/Acirt'.0:14.0.•,':•,-,!.-,-•;.•Viriz•'1..,1,;..1:15,147(t1.,foctik-1i,.'•,:i.,2•."':'•-•:-.:::..- :.-.... ! ':•,..!..''''-..:-',..."..''...:''-,-.;:T.'.',-.-,• „; ', -•., - ,. .- •:;- - ..1.-;...': ., • - '''. - •-- -.• ,•...' -..•.'''fi'•--' • : .•',.::::../.•••:%•••-':.•'??,:,,,1:7;•,:!'; ::''ll'f.'!r...,;;;'4"1;13.2'f..Si."'f:t:I',..4.K.i,,,•:.,..:'`•,::-:.+Igitki'it'ar.aiir04."011 c:D. Merchitects Lake Oswego - USet Building Addition Dec. 1.1119 ASSESSMENT OF CONDITION OF TREES US WEST BUILDING 539 FIRST STREET LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97034 FEBRUARY 25, 2000 Prepared for MCA ARCHITECTS, P.C. 30 NW FIRST PORTLAND, OREGON 97209 11 Prepared by David R. Cory Pruett Tree and Landscape PO Box 1967 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035 (503) 635-3916 Copyright ID 2000 by Pruett Tree and Landscape.All rights reserved. 111/ EXHIBIT 10 Lt? 00-0001 ( r;1 J _ E., TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE OF ASSIGNMENT 1 BACKGROUND 1 SUMMARY 1 SITE DRAWING 2 TREE INVENTORY KEY • Tree Inventory Code Information 3 Condition Ratings Table 4 TREE INVENTORY 5 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 7 • 0622 • Assessment of Condition of Trees,US West Building,Lake Oswego Page 1 Prepared for MCA Architects, P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25, 2000 SCOPE OF ASSIGNME NT The scope of assignment is to provide arboricultural consultation services, specifically, to visually assess and report to MCA Architects the condition of the trees at the site of proposed construction at 539 First Street,Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034. BACKGROUND Site-specific information provided included A1.0, "Building Plans and Elevations," and AO- L, "Existing Site Plan," a photomontage of the proposed building site,and copies of excerpts from a January 21, 2000 letter from a City of Lake Oswego planner. David R. Cory, ISA Certified Arborist WC-1403, did the fieldwork on February 11 and 17, 2000. • Recommendations are based on visual assessment and are relative to conditions observed at the time of inspection. SUMMARY One of the trees is partially failed and leaning toward the parking lot. It has an unacceptable risk potential in an area of high-value targets, i.e ,people and vehicles with people in them. It should be removed immediately.It is identified on the site drawing (see next page) as tree #7. None of the other trees at the proposed construction site is a good candidate for preservation.All but one have grown too large for the planting spaces and the one exception has been repeatedly damaged and partially uprooted. Five of the seven trees are within the footprint of proposed construction;the remaining two would have had reduced root zones and required crown reduction' pruning in order to accommodate the proposed construction. • Crown reduction is pruning that"...reduces the height and/or spread of a tree."Amerian National Standard for Tree Ger Operations,ANSI A300-1995,pi. OU23 Assessment of Condition of Trees,US West Building,Lake Oswego Page 2 Prepared for MCA Architects,P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25, 2000 SITE DRAWING Proposed Construction Site - US West Building • 539 First Street Lake Oswego,Oregon 97034 NOT TO SCALE l I FIRST US WEST BLDG STREET S { W i c , 3 _. uti 4111 PARKING L' I ` � C 7 ; I . w 6 ti., 5 S u `� 4 Assessment of Condition of Trees,US West Building,Lake Oswego Page 3 Prepared for MCA Architects,P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25, 2000 • TREE INVENTORY KEY Proposed Construction Site— US West Building 539 First Street Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Tree Inventory Code Information TREE Tree identification number. The numbers correspond to the numbers on the drawing. SPECIES Juniperus chinouis `Kaizuka' (`Torulosa) — Hollywood Juniper;Py'us caller}ana—Gallery pear. DBH Diameter at breast height (54 inches above grade). ROOTS Rated 1 through 5. See Condition Ratings Table, next page. TRUNK Rated 1 through 5. See Condition Ratings Table, next page. BRNCHS Rated 1 through 5. See Condition Ratings Table, next page. TWIGS Rated 1 through 5. See Condition Ratings Table, next page • FOLIAGE Not used for deciduous trees in this report. Rated 1 through 5. See Condition Ratings Table, next page. CONDITION RATING: See Condition Ratings Table, next page. OBSERVATIONS Narrative of observation noted through visual inspection only. DISCUSSION/ RECOMMEN- DATIONS The recommendations are written with this expressed intent: They are to be carried out by an Approved Tree Care Contractor:A licensed contractor registered with the Oregon State Contractors Board as a Tree Care Provider,employing International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborists working under the supervision of a qualified consulting arborist or a City of Lake Oswego Forester/ Arborist. S t - 7 Assessment of Condition of Trees,US West Building,Lake Oswego Page 4 Prepared for MCA Architects,P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25,2000 • Condition Ratings Table 1. Determine condition rating by adding rating scores for roots, trunk,large branches,smaller branches/twigs, and foliage. High numbers indicate a high rating. No problem 5 No apparent problem(s) 4 Minor problem(s) 3 Major problem(s) 2 Extreme problem(s) 0 or 1 2. Determine condition rating percentage by dividing the total points by 20 or 25 (depending on whether 4 or 5 factors were rated), and then multiply the quotient by 100. Rating Condition 90-100 Excellent 70-89 Good 50-69 Fair 25-49 Poor 00-24 Very Poor • 0li26 Assessment of Condition of Trees, US West Building, Lake Oswego Page 5 Prepared for MCA Architects,P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25, 2000 TREE INVENTORY • 4 TREE: 1 SPECIES: Juniperus chinazsis`Kaizuka' (Hollywood juniper) DBH:7.5 inches ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 2 MAJOR BRANCHES: 2 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 2 FOLIAGE: 3 TOTAL: 11 CONDITION RATING: 44% - Poor OBSERVATIONS: Confined root space, in a curbed raised planter between parking lot and building. Curbing displaced and cracked. Large old wounds to trunk. Confined canopy space, between building and area with moving vehicles.The growth habit of its canopy is "flat" on the side next to the building. Broken and hanging major branches. Very dense canopy- not the typical, slight sprawl, or openness, of Hollywood juniper. DISCUSSION/RECOIvLMENDATIONS: Tree has outgrown its planting space and has been badly damaged. Its root ball is likely highly congested. It is in the footprint of proposed construction and it is not a good candidate for preservation. TREE: 2 SPECIES:Junipaus chinanis `Kaizuka' (Hollywood juniper) DBHs: 6.0, 6.0 inches ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 2 MAJOR BRANCHES: 2 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 2 FOLIAGE: 3 TOTAL: 11 CONDITION RATING: 44% - Poor OBSERVATIONS:Confined root space. Parking lot curbing displaced and cracked. Large old wounds to trunk.Confined canopy space, between building and area with moving vehicles. The growth habit of its canopy is "flat" on the side next to the building. Broken branches. Very dense canopy. DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS:Tree has outgrown its planting space and has been badly damaged. Its root ball is likely highly congested. It is in the footprint of proposed construction and is it not a good candidate for preservation. • TREE: 3 SPECIES: mrpeus cfi mazsrs `Kaizuka' (Hollywood juniper) DBH: 5.8 inches ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 2 MAJOR BRANCHES: 2 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 2 FOLIAGE: 3 TOTAL: 11 CONDITION RATING: 44% - Poor OBSERVATIONS: Confined root space. Compacted soil in root zone because of footpath between it and tree #4. Parking lot curbing displaced and cracked. Large old wounds to trunk. Confined canopy space, between building and other trees. Broken and still attached major branches. Very dense canopy DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS:Tree has outgrown its planting space. Its root ball is likely highly congested. It is in the footprint of proposed construction and it is not a good candidate for preservation. TREE: 4 SPECIES:Jwnpem.s chinatsis `Kaizuka' (Hollywood juniper) DBH: 6.0 inches ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 2 MAJOR BRANCHES: 2 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 2 FOLIAGE: 3 TOTAL: 11 CONDITION RATING: 44% -Poor OBSERVATIONS: Confined root space. Compacted soil in root zone because of footpath between it and tree #3. Parking lot curbing displaced and cracked. Around the corner of the building from the tree the walls of the building are separating. Large old wounds to trunk. Confined canopy space, between building and parking lot. Broken major branches. Very dense canopy. DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS:Tree has outgrown its planting space and has been badly damaged. Its root ball is likely highly congested. It is in the footprint of proposed 411 construction and it is not a good candidate for preservation. Assessment of Condition of Trees, US West Building, Lake Oswego Page 6 Prepared for MCA Architects, P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25, 2000 TREE INVENTORY(Continued) TREE: 5 SPECIES:Pyres calleryana(Callery pear) DBH: 13.4 inches • ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 4 MAJOR BRANCHES: 3 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 4 FOLIAGE:NA TOTAL: 13 CONDITION RATING: 65%-Fair OBSERVATIONS: Confined root space — raised planting space between retaining wall and parking lot curbing. Large railed, retaining wall to the south of the tree is displaced (lean is to the south) toward a walkway immediately against the wall on the adjoining property. Visible from next door (to the south) is broken cinder block and split unions between cinder blocks in the wall of the building. Parking lot curbing displaced and cracked. DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS:Tree has outgrown its planting space. Proposed construction will lessen its planting space. Transplanting usually is considered impractical for trees of this size, especially in compromised condition, located in confined surroundings. It is not a good candidate for preservation. TREE: 6 SPECIES: Pyres calleryana(Gallery pear) DBH: 8.5 inches (adjusted) ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 2 MAJOR BRANCHES: 2 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 4 FOLIAGE:NA TOTAL: 10 CONDITION RATING: 50% - Fair OBSERVATIONS: Confined root space — raised planting space between retaining wall and parking lot curbing. Parking lot curbing displaced and cracked. Large area on trunk has callus formation on top of callus formation between two and three feet above grade on the parking lot side. The trunk leans to the south from grade level,then bows, and corrects to the north. A five-inch diameter branch on the parking lot side is wounded at seven feet above grade. DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS:This tree's bowed trunk and the evidence of 1111 repeated wounding at vehicle bumper level suggest that it may have been partially uprooted in the past, long enough ago for it to have adjusted its growth habit to accommodate its new relationship with its environment. If it was relatively the same size as its immediate neighbors of the same species when planted in the same relative environment, something happened to retard its growth by approximately 30 percent.Transplanting usually is considered impractical for trees of this size, especially in compromised condition, located in confined surroundings. Proposed construction will lessen its planting space. It is not a good specimen, nor is it a good candidate for preservation. TREE: 7 SPECIES:Pyres calleryana(Callery pear) DBH: 11.3 inches ROOTS: 2 TRUNK: 4 MAJOR BRANCHES: 3 MINOR BRANCHES/TWIGS: 4 FOLIAGE:NA TOTAL: 13 CONDITION RATING: 65% - Fair OBSERVATIONS: Confined root space — raised planting space bordered on three sides by public sidewalk,driveway, and parking lot curbing. Parking lot curbing displaced and cracked. Entire tree leans to the east, and there are no growth corrections to the vertical. Grade on west at base of tree slightly higher than surrounding grade. Broken branches and otherwise wounded branches over parking lot. DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS:This tree has been partially uprooted, probably by wind. It leans toward a parking lot where there are high-value targets, i.e., people and vehicles with people in them. It has an unacceptable risk potential and should be removed immediately. Even without the unacceptable risk potential, it is in the footprint of proposed construction. • UU � J Assessment of Condition of Trees,US West Building, Lake Oswego Page 7 Prepared for MCA Architects, P.C., by Pruett Tree and Landscape February 25,2000 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS • 1. Any legal description provided to the Pruett,Inc.,Arborist is warranted to be correct.Any titles and ownership information as to any property also is warranted to be accurate.No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character.The client further warrants that the property/project is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances,statutes,or other government regulations.The Pruett,Inc.,Arborist assumes no responsibility as to any information involving legal information or as to opinions based on incorrect information. 2. The Arborist cannot independently,personally verify all information necessary to provide this report.The Arborist will reasonably attempt to obtain information from reliable sources.All data have been verified insofar as reasonably possible,however, the Arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 3. The Arborist will give testimony related to this report only if separate contractual arrangements are made,including payment of an additional fee for such services. 4. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 5. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply a right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed,without the prior written consent of the Arborist.Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report,nor copy thereof,shall be used for any purpose by anyone but the person to whom it is addressed,without the written consent of the Arborist,nor shall it be conveyed by anyone,including the client,to the public through advertising,public relations,news,sales or other media,without the written consent of the Arborist. • 6. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the Arborist and the Arborist's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value,a stipulated result,the occurrence of a subsequent event,nor upon any finding to be reported. 7. Sketches, diagrams, graphs,and photographs in this report,are for explanatory purposes,are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys,and should not be relied upon except as an aid to understanding this report. 8. Unless expressed otherwise:(a)information contained in this report covers only those items requested to be observed and reflect the condition of those items at the time of observation;and(b)the Arborist's observations are limited to visual examination of accessible components without dissection,excavation,or probing. There is no warranty or guarantee,expressed or implied,that problems or deficiencies involving the plants or property in question may not arise in the future. 9. Client hereby waives and releases Arborist and Pruett Incorporated,its agents, directors,officers,employees,representatives,successors and assigns and insurers of and from all damages, claims,actions,suits and liability of any nature whatsoever, known and unknown,now existing or arising after the date of this report and related or pertaining to (1) the information in this report, (ll)information not contained in this report,and/or(lll) any other act or omissions of Arborist with respect to the subject matter of this report. S U G 29 • • i J Design Narrative • 4 US West Communications Lake Oswego Building Addition Lake Oswego, Oregon General US West Communications is proposing a building addition at 539 151 Street in Lake Oswego. The new work falls under the category of minor development and is therefore subject to design review. The existing structure is used as an equipment building containing telephone switch equipment. The addition includes an expansion of the switch equipment,the emergency power and a new secondary building entrance. Zoning Issues As outlined in the Lake Oswego Zoning Ordnance Section 48.10.300,the building is within the East End General Commercial Zoning District. Therefore the following issues apply: 1.) Setbacks - There are no setbacks in the EC zone except when adjacent to a residential • zone. Although the building addition is not adjacent to a residential zone, there is a 9'-0" setback from 1S1 street and a 6'-0" setback from the adjacent lot to the south. These setbacks also help to break up a monolithic appearance to the 1" Street facade. 2.)The maximum FAR for the EC zone is 3.0. With both proposed and new structures,the FAR for lot 13 is 1.25, well within the FAR limit of 3.0. 3.) Height limitation - The proposed addition has a maximum height of 17.67' from 1s' Street, well within the height limitation of 60 feet. Since the new construction is an addition to an existing building under LODS 23.605.1.i, an exception is requested due to the fact that the design was generated to create a complimentary relationship with an abutting existing structure that was not designed in the Lake Oswego Style. This addition to the south of the existing building is necessary since the existing equipment layout dictates where growth can occur.The addition will have no new signage,therefore LOC Chapter 47 does not apply. The proposed addition will not alter the existing flat contour or geography of the site. The site and proposed development will not alter or impair the existing configuration of the surrounding streets and sidewalks thus LOC Chapter 42.03 and LOC Chapter 42.08 do not apply. An upgrade in services including power will apply to the building, as this is not only required for the addition,but will also benefit the telephone service as well.There are no improvements that alter • the circulation inside, at or beyond the property line. EXHIBIT 11 LU 00-0001 Parking Issues According to LODS section 7.020.1.a.i (Table 7.1)office use requires 3.33 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of gross floor area. Since both the existing and proposed building gross floor area total up to 22,226 s.f., 74 parking spaces are required. There are 44 existing parking spaces. Since there are only two full-time employees and 10-18 transients at the most, the requirement for 30 more parking spaces appears to be excessive. We request using a different category on table 7.1, i.e. 1.6 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of gross floor area. In accordance with LODS section 7.020.1.g there exists an off-street loading_ berth that satisfies the needs of both the existing building and the proposed addition. This area is labeled on the site plan. Utilizing the LODS section 7.020 (Table 7.4)commercial office category, a minimum of 5 bicycle parking spaces are required. Due to the small number of employees working at this site, we request a reduction on the number of required bicycle parking spaces to two. The bicycles may be stored in the existing garage, secured under lock and key. Landscaping Sheets DR-1 and DR-2 enclosed with this submittal document the existing and new landscaped areas. As shown on the drawings, the 7% minimum landscaped requirement has been met and exceeded with all due deference to LODS section 9.020.1. The 1982 variance appears to allow for • the accounting of landscaped strips between the sidewalk and the building. We request that this area be included in the landscaping total in this design review submission. The proposed addition is set back from the adjacent lot to the south and is provided with screening and buffering in accordance with LODS 9.020.6.c According to Pruett Landscaping,the five existing Hollywood Juniper trees have to be removed.The poor condition of the Junipers render them undesirable as relocated landscaping elements.The three Pear trees also have to be removed as per the arborists's recommendation. We request a tree removal permit as part of this application. Fire Protection In response to the memo from the Fire Marshall, the following information is enclosed: Building Code UBC 1998 Occupancy Group B 21 Construction Type II N Max. Allowable Bldg. Ht. 2 Stories Max. Allowable Bldg. Area 12,000 sq. ft. Allowable Increase (Sect. 505.1.1) 6,000 sq. ft.=12,000 x(.0125x40) • 11 - z () J2 Total Allowable Bldg. Area 18,000 sq. ft. Total Bldg. Area(Bsmt.Not Incl. 14,306 sq. ft. • Sect. 504.5) Total Bldg. Area(Incl. Bsmt.) 22,226 sq. ft. Total Parcel Area 21,050 sq. ft. New Addition Area(Incl. Bsmt.) 5,000 sq. ft. Sprinklers None Standpipe None Parcel 13-16 Zoning District East End Commercial The existing building is equipped with manual fire alarm pull stations,ionization detectors,a 4-zone annunciator panel, as well as visual and auditory alarms. New fire-protection systems such as fire extinguishers, ionization detectors, and pull stations will be provided for in the new addition. Conclusion The First Addition Neighbors Association has reviewed and is in favor of the proposal. Upon agreement with the association it has been decided that we look into landscaping the northern facade of the existing building by adding window boxes. Although FAN requested that MCA look into landscaping the vestigial spaces along the angled parking area,this zone falls within the public right of way and landscaping this area may not be possible. MCA has also agreed to look into rerouting the majority of the telephone truck traffic along 1"Avenue thus reducing disruption to the local neighborhood. We will also look into proposing that trucks presently parked along 15'Avenue be moved to the east parking lot. By: Joseph Boquiren MCA Architects,P.C. • II -� March 15, 2000 S Ms. Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner City of Lake Oswego, Department of Planning and Development 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Re: Narrative of Proposed Building Addition. LU 00-0001 Dear Ms. Jacob, I am writing in response to your letter dated March 8, 2000 which brought up issues concerning parking and landscaping relating to the new building addition. 1.There are still 12 parking spaces on the east side of the site to accommodate employees.There are six outdoor parking spaces consisting of two parallel and four head-in spaces. There is currently an emergency diesel power generator temporarily located on the two parallel parking spaces. This unit supplies electricity to the telephone switches in the event of a power outage until the new permanent generator has been installed within the existing building. After such time,the temporary generator will be removed and the two spaces will once again be made available for parking. There is also • additional parking being provided for within the existing parking garage.(See the attached site plan). Since the indoor parking spaces are secured,there is an opportunity to house more vehicles than the one parallel and 5 head-in spaces shown on the plan. The dimensions of typical parallel,90 degree, and angled parking spaces are shown on the site plan in compliance with Table 7.2 from LODS. 7.020. 2. The interior of the building is given to automated switching equipment, air-conditioning units, emergency power generation, and supplies. Since the 1982 building addition, USWest has sought to integrate its office personnel into centralized locations. This has meant that the offices once located in Lake Oswego have been moved to other locations. The building is now dedicated to housing automated telephone switches and support equipment(See the attached Basement and Site Plan for space usage information). Two full-time employees concern themselves with the maintenance and smooth running of the telephone switching equipment. There are an additional 10- 18 support employees that come and go during the course of a normal workday who provide temporary periodic support.These employees provide help and services to the permanent staff at this location as well as other USWest communication installations in the vicinity. The vehicles currently parked around the building is due to the interior renovations taking place at the present time. 3. There is a total of 40 existing and new parking spaces shown on the site plan. We feel that this number is adequate due to the small number of employees working at the site. Since this is a telecommunications facility which is not covered under the types listed in LODS 7.020 Table 7.1, 411 a determination of parking spaces under Section H, Table 7.1 is requested. II- 0G34 4. The landscape plan has been revised to show size, spacing, and specie by Latin and common • name. 5.The parking striping along C Avenue is existing.No modifications to the existing parking is being done along C Avenue.The site plan,however has been expanded to show conditions along the north side of C Avenue. _ 0 5 • March 20, 2000 • Ms. Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner City of Lake Oswego, Department of Planning and Development 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Re: Narrative of Proposed Building Addition, LU 00-0001 Dear Ms. Jacob, This is a narrative revision based on out March 17 meeting. 1.There are still 12 parking spaces on the east side of the site to accommodate employees.There are six outdoor parking spaces consisting of two parallel and four head-in spaces. There is currently an emergency diesel power generator temporarily located on the two parallel parking spaces. This unit supplies electricity to the telephone switches in the event of a power outage until the new permanent generator has been installed within the existing building. After such time,the temporary generator will be removed and the two spaces will once again be made available for parking. There is also additional parking being provided for within the existing parking garage.(See the attached site plan). • Since the indoor parking spaces are secured,there is an opportunity to house more vehicles than the one parallel and 5 head-in spaces shown on the plan. The dimensions of typical parallel,90 degree, and angled parking spaces are shown on the site plan in compliance with Table 7.2 from LODS 7.020. 2. The interior of the building is given to automated switching equipment, air-conditioning units, emergency power generation, and supplies. Since the 1982 building addition, USWest has sought to integrate its office personnel into centralized locations. This has meant that the offices once located in Lake Oswego have been moved to other locations. The building is now dedicated to housing automated telephone switches and support equipment(See the attached Basement and Site Plan for space usage information): Two full-time employees concern themselves with the maintenance and smooth running of the telephone switching equipment. There are an additional 10- 18 support employees that come and go during the course of a normal workday who provide on-call periodic support.As we discussed in our March 17 meeting,I am listing down the approximate work hours of the full-time and periodic employees. This is only a general approximation, and as we discussed, there is no way of predicting the number of visits the periodic on-call staff will make at the facility. Status Work Hours Number Full Time 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. 2 • On-Call Periodic-Variable 10-18 )1- C- ju36 • The on-call employees provide additional assistance on general and technical maintenance. The vehicles currently parked around the building is due to the interior renovations taking place at the present time. 3.As we discussed in our March 17 meeting,the condition and load-bearing capacity of the existing retaining wall will be analyzed as part of the scope-of-work. We will include a foundation engineer to address this portion of the work. There will be no net loss or gain to the landscaping as currently shown on the site plans. 4 There is a total of 40 existing and new parking spaces shown on the site plan. We feel that this number is adequate due to the small number of employees working at the site. Since this is a telecommunications facility which is not covered under the types listed in LODS 7.020 Table 7.1, a determination of parking spaces under Section H, Table 7.1 is requested. 5 The landscape plan has been revised to show size, spacing,planting size, and specie by Latin and common name, As per our conversation,new plantings are shown on the northeastern corner of the site. As shown on sheets DR1 and DR2,there is a net gain in landscaping area around the proposed building addition in comparison to the existing parking lot. 6. There is no existing parking striping along C Avenue. The parking area will be re-striped according to the site plan. • By: Joseph A. Boquiren MCA Architects, P.C. • 1 1 - 7 , :, ;.. J7 miller • cook architects . p.c. • a.i.a. 3p n w 1 s[ ove Portland. or 97209-4057 15031 2260622 FAX 15031 226-0626 • US WEST Communications Lake Oswego Switch Growth Neighborhood Meeting Minutes of December 1, 1999 Attendees: First Addition Neiohborhood Association [FAN) Jim Bolland -Chair Linda McNulty- CoSecretary Bari Thompson -Treasurer Karmen Thompson Cynthia Blanchard Dr. Joe Eusterman • Kim Gruetter Andrew Harris Judi Lardner Phyllis Novak MCA Architects, P.C. Joseph Boquiren Alton Darby Tim Eslinger The following items were discussed, not necessarily in the order listed. 1. Opening Remarks: The meeting opened with a presentation of the minutes from the previous FAN meeting. 2. Presentation: MCA gave a brief presentation of the addition to the Lake Oswego US West switch building. Using a wall pinup and handouts, MCA described the need to expand the existing building in order to meet the increased telecommunication needs of the community. MCA addressed the needs of creating a less monolithic facade along 1 Street by setting the addition back from the street and creating a landscaped zone between the building and the street. 3. Landscaping Issues: FAN asked if the new addition will further cut into the 7%landscaped zone already allocated for the existing building. FAN also asked if the possibility existed for placing the addition on the east side of the existing building. MCA assured FAN that the setbacks designed into the addition will allow for a more generous landscaped area that the 7%allowance calls for. MCA explained that any switch additions would most likely be as extensions along established equipment layouts. This dictated the location of the addition on the south side of the existing building. • 4. Purpose of the Addition: FAN asked what will be housed in the addition. MCA explained that along with new switchgear,supporting mechanical equipment and emergency power generating systems will be located there. EXHIBIT 12 LU 00-0001 u l t 3 r US WEST Communications Page 2 • Lake Oswego Switch Growth • Neighborhood Meeting Minutes of December 1, 1999 5. Traffic Concerns: FAN expressed concern about the large number of trucks parked by the existing building and their contribution to local traffic. They requested parking the trucks at the parking lot and garage on the east side of the building and routing them along 1st Avenue. MCA agreed that this would be a reasonable request. S. Construction Concerns: FAN asked when construction will start and requested that construction equioment be housed at the east side parking ,ot and carace. MC,= estimated that construction may ay start in August and end possibly in November. MC, agreed to locating as much of the construction equipment and macninery as possible on the east side of the building. 7. Closing Issues: Before closing, FAN requested an investigation into adding more landscaping along the north side of the existing building. MCA stated that little could be done due to the existing hardscape and narrow constraints of the area. FAN suggested that due to the angled parking in this area, some plantings could occur in the spaces between the sidewalk and the wheelstops. MCA agreed to look into this. The preceding is believed to be a complete and accurate record of the significant items and actions discusses at the meeting. Please advise the author immediately of any additions or corrections to these minutes. By: Joseph Boquiren • MCA Architects, P.C. Dist: all present 99226mm.211s S ' 0 • 0 • .- I BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 2 of the CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO s A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY AND ) DR 1-82 (Pacific Northwest 4 FINAL DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO ) Bell ) ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A ) 5 4,300-SQUARE-:COT ADDITION TO FINGINGS. _cNr1:.S2"`;S ;ND THE EXISTING PACIFIC NORTHWEST �DcDER . b BELL STRUCTURE ) 7 NATURE OF APPLICATION 8 'The applicant is requesting preliminary and final approval to allow g the construction of a 4300-square-foot addition to the existing 10 Pacific Northwest Bell building. The site is located at 593 1st • • 11 Street . In addition, the applicant is requesting a variance to the 12 landscape standard to reduce the required 15% landscaped area to 7%. I3 (Tax Lots 700 and 800, Tax Map 2 lE 3DD) . •14 HEARING ' IS Hearings were held on this item on March 1 and April 5, 1982. Appearan.:es were made and exhibits entered as indicated in the 15 minutes of those meetings and in the staff reports of February 18 and 17 March 26, 1982 . The request was approved with conditions. 1 , CTITERIA AND STANDARDS 19 20 LOC 49. 300 to 49.235 Major Developuent Procedures LOC 52. 110 to 52 . 150 Central Commercial Zone 21 Development Ordinance and Standards: 22 Al_ Development Standards 23 Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Land Use Policy Elcment East End Community Business District 24 Policies, pp. 68-71 25 26 1iDR 1-81 ) EXHIBIT 1 oat* Lli 00-0001 r-, In 4 . If I/ V pi .. r Ili 411 • 4 • • I CONCLUSIONS 2 The Development Review Board concludes that this project meets all - 3 criteria and standards to the extent that preliminary and final 4 approval can be granted subject to the following conditions: 5 I . That the alley, along Pacific Northwest ant: ' s East . procerty line and the 'Louth half if the :last end c:f "" Avenue, be improved according to the specifications of the 7 8 City Engineer . 2 . That the flood lights on the northeast corner of the site 9 be eliminated and that the proposed wall lamps be high 10 . pressure sodium. 11 3. That the irrigation system be designed to the satisfaction 12 of staff. 13 0 FINDINGS AND REASONS 14 The staff report prepared on this item dated March 26, 1982, is by IS s and Conclusions of Law to support this reference adopted as Finding.. PP 16 the decision of the Development Review Board. 17 There was some discussion at the April 5 , 1982, Development Review 1" Board hearing regarding the use of high pressure sodium lighting vs. 19 metal halide _iaht_rig for the wall _amps or. the addition. The Board 20 decided that high pressure sodium lighting was preferable as _ _ is 21 more energy efficient . The Board agreed with the Traffic Engineer ' s 22 recommenda`ion to eliminate the flood . ights or. the northeast corner 23 of the site, as the existing and proposed wall lamps will provide j 24 adequate lighting for the site. As the final irrigation plan had not . 25 been submitted, the Board recommended that an irrigation system be 26 designed to the satisfaction of staff . In addition, condition #2 p 2 (DR 1-02 } U .' 'i-a-- .. , ` • • 4110i '^ .1• \ 1 concerning matching the new brick to the old brick was eliminated. / 2 The applicant explained that the new brick will match the original f '` 3 building exactly in size and color. d The Beard has found that: a. A hardship exists due to site conditions, as the na, ,r_ty 5 of the site is paved and built ucon. b. This request will not be injurious to the\eighborhond as 7 1 - s this is the maximum practical amount of landscaping which • can ba incorporated into the site. Therefore, the 4 variance requested is the mi'nimum necessary. 10 - c. The variance request is : t in\,conflict with the 11 r Comprehensive Plan in that the East End Community Business 12 t. District policies have been met . I3 SIT IS ORDERED BY ':HE DEVELOPMENT' REVIEW •BOARD that approval be 14 granted for DR 1-82 with conditions. 15 •• DATED THIS 19th day of April, 1982. 16 17 1 s Chat an, Development Review Board 10 �� : - .� - / / 2G ATTEST ��/ .'Se_re:arv, Deveocme^.t eve aGa_ AYES : Bonney. Pet_ 1e, Nishimura , Ola:Ke, Eslick, Bates 22 NOES. None - ABSTAIN: None . 23 AE..ENT: None 24 LMM:ma ; 25 0330P 26 r Pew 3 (DR 1-82) 1ji.j :, 3 -d DEVELOPMENT REVIEk1 BOAMEETING MARCH 1, 1982 1 PAGE 6 Ms M&strantonio-Meuser presented the staff report. • Eloice Osterholme, 6519 Apollo Road, West Linn, explained the sign and left it up to the Board to aecide the colors, which she suggested as black and white or red and white. OOOOSlt?Cn -- None. Ms. Nishimura moved fcr. approval the that the colors be crown and ;;� J s_a^, with the =_ti?u_aticn the- shopping center. - -- to -^`cr. _:ate with ;then sla ms in The motion was seconded d-� and passed unanimously. _ To consider a request by the advertising the CollectorGallery eWwhi Center located erect a wall sign Center •bn the northwest corner o State and Middlecresth Streets. The solid redwood sign is approximately five feet by two feet. The 10 white. (Tax Lot lring and logo are painted ) • 04000, Tax Map 2 1B Oppos; cion -- None. A discussion on the possibility of other signs being erected at the Lakewood Center followed . The City has been assured that this will be the only sign request forthcoming for that location. Ms , Petrie 1110 moved for-approval of the sign as presented. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. The meeting recessed from 10:15 to 10:25 p.m. VAR 1-82 (Jerome and Dorothy Di ➢ ' ) reques approval or a variance to reduce the required o251footnsiderarear yard setback to 13 feet. The site is located at 749 South View Road (Tax Lot 8100, Tax Map 2 lE IOAC) . Mr. Galante presented the staff report, and showed photos of the site. Ms. Petri.. moved approval of the seconded and passed for request. unanimously , The motion was • — — _ !v^-'` cgs- _^- _ _ - ` r ��, - T: cons-der :ecues_ fo: e c ; - wok _ne construction c_ a 43C , e existing structure. in - C licare toot requesting�a variance the 'landscape standard on, the applicant .s '2qui_ed ' S$ _andscaned^area -_ 4%. �. to reduce the Street (Tax hots 700 and BOO J 2 Esi2Dte is located at 5S5 First Tax :Sap 2 iE ?DL) . : Ms . ".astrantonio-Meuser presented the staff report, with irevised site plan showingthe refuse colt along n plan collection. The drainage plan a EXHIBIT110 ' ! I.. i4 IP� i:�z I-sz r_ — ---- -.----• :'. . 2r.":Sfeet "g""'tfnm' ".w"."--'-"--oraparkingaisle DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOA0 MEETING MARCH 1, 1982� PAGE 7 sceptabie, but there is still a problem with the 1ardscamena and ains dimensions. '"he 1i' Mina plan ^ias '.lot been reviewed by the ris E gineer The edge of -e paveahe ,t to :he alley should be { sh , and :he alley _ecu_.: be improved e.. -ne ercoey , 7lne. :''^e 4 ea :nc spaces :.re a __:ate at :h:s time. Mralante mentioned -.hat there may be problems matcning the old and nerick walls : They will join along one plane and this usually I sh even Minor variances unless there is a jog or some type of t br in the line. i tieeck, 1640 SW ?er.t_ncton, Portland presented- a site plan Two trees or. the site are diseased and well be replaced. le submitted the :tents orcocsed for the site. These nave not been reviewed lee 1 thC "rat_:.= Engineer, buy they are planned to be mounted 10 feet 1 abe tirade. The City prefers higie pressure sodium, and the apicant is willing to can_ The Northwest Bell vehicles will not usthe improved alley; therefore, they do not wish to make that imvement . The face of the concrete block building will be . stcoed to match the other building. There are six to seven emyees and five trucks. He questioned the City;s requirement of S feet for a parking aisle width, and argued that the City of Portland and Washington County only require 24 feet Hose bibs will be • provided for the irrigation. Mr. Peck read a letter into the record i from the landscape architect regarding the irrigation of trees (Exhibit I ) . The landscape area as now proposed is 7%. Handicapped • people will not be working in the facility due to the type work done the. Mr . Hates suggestf' : additional planting area could be taken from the ' sidewalk , as one right feet is required and the site has 12 foot wide sideway:s. plenter boxes against the building interspersed with benches could be z .'sidered. I Peter Cassette, - 97, S.W. 173rd, Beaverton, reported that the additional planting exea would be costly, and this increase would effect phone rat-ts eventually. He showed the cable ducts on the i plan, and that this makes it physically necessary for the building to 1 i be arranged as proposed. Ms . Petrie questioned _hc requirement for the telephone company to 1 improve City propt- . ..y in the alley area and stated that the unimproved alley _ aza deterent to speeding cars: Mr . .rseniev 1 responded `hat rep_' r nc improvements is a policy of _he City at timee of develcpmeee . • d.scussic,n on the possibilities of mac= _-onai landsc' in_ fel-awed . ''he parking could be designated mpeee ' and . woe_.- net require a yartance. The public hearing was closed. ` I V Mr . Eslick ncted eat h , has worked with P & B, but does not feel this will affect his decision on the request presented. • I . . 41 • 1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW HOr MEETING MARCH 1, 1982111 PAGE 8 Mr. Bates summarized the Board 's concerns: a . 1 . Provide additional information regarding light-ing, 2 . Parking lot changes should be noted on plans to remove the need for a variance. 3. Additional landscaping should be explored. 4. Irrigation requirements sho•tid be e In-groundnotedplans.irrigation should be planned for l landscaping 1 other than the street trees, 1 which -- ed -o w_ e allow .244J irrigated by hose with j'bibs along area :he two paring. spaces off the alley. • The alley should be recommended improved p by staff. 6. The brick color match and the separation of the abutting walls should be presented. Mr. Eslick moved fo r preliminary approval with the above 1 requirements. The motion, was seconded and passed unanimously. 1 GENERAL PLANNING The Annual Report was discussed, ari various ways to cut down the work load of the Development Review Board were explored. 1111 • FINDINGS • The following findings were approved and signed: VAR 27-el SD 34-81 SD 33-81 VAR 3-81 DR 19-81 DR 12-80 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 12:04 p.m. , March 2, 1982. Reaped=---. submitted, . 7 �� / r ,ff yr' ' / , evae�• _7,. . ogn.. 1, .. -_ Se:toter_, 1 -'0198P r 1, 4111 , DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING April 5, 1982 'Page 2 „ difficulty attracting tenants to the-tiiirraTng. He tunic. the size ei the .sign the Bnard is proposing will not be seen. Ills, ninn is needed toeettraet traffic that is on State Street . Applicnn, Ic. ,suing tor reasonable rapport in helping City be more viable . .r . Clarxn .i9ked if this was the only form used to .rttreicr. tenants. - . 7eenxer eaid on-site marketing :s the best thing Lo 1,r. lone . Best people 'rate eoc;.auon en emotion when they see sotnnthing they . Ms . Hite::.:lira asi ed ... a . eng the sign would he neeck.l . The avo1 ^_en. .ould like to .;ave lee e c until the but ld i ns; i s :u: . .tut Tar earl -e .:ouid net.u , . lfist two oonthe until bui !.ling : s c:--);nnri.T.:c and two more months to rent . Sign should be down by July . Mr . Bonney .asked If two regulation signa�eepetldn • i. lie• mere effective I down at the street level . Applicant alreajh.td a eiciii ! refer•: end tilt!not get any response . Mr. Galante mentioned th\t one of the grounds for eppe;.ti ; ,; d Jemonstrateu hardst:le.e tea applicant cannot advertise hl !: ,,sines as others . The :;tat: does ;got\believe there is a hardship. 411110 There were no others speaking for or against the sign.. Mr . Clart.:'_ doubted the reasons for allowing the sign were unique e•neegh . h•d . Petrie had no troubles reading sign inside -the window lrnm .i Tri-Met bus . yr . Fsiiek felt a sign approximately tetee,times size permitted is tot large. Mr. Bonney moved for denial of the dppee! . The Boarci voted to dent request with Mr . Bates abstaining. PUBLIC HEARINGS i DR 1-82 (Pacific Northwest Bell) -- To consider a re.•riue et for final . ---,acproval. ..o i•Olew '.he construction of a 4 ,300 equate- trot -aeiciticm ro tile existing structure. :n addition, the applicant in reeeestlne .1 variance to the landscape standard to reduce the required ,5 percent 8 landscaped area to 7 percent . The site- is located at 595 1st Street (Tax Lots 70C and 500, Tax Map 2 IE 3DD) . Ms . Mastrantor.:o-Messer presented the staff report . This t.rejeact wee f i s t heard before one Cevelopmenc Review Board on March : , :982 . ,J• PreL,I..._nar, approve. was granted with conditions . The Sr. .. f believes .. .meta?Cr eerereens he ..oar_. and Staff :ave been resolved . The e"to f f. r c-coreeenee, _ . reva: s:. jest ec eenti t ion5 al Me . ES. : is sta:C.c:Vya ."13 worked E. -s with Pact_. . Northwest s_i , tutees. not feel _nis te eineer es decteion on _n. s rc ecz. € -r. Sates asked . f ael plans had been revised and were _-e. _ �_. c..r sistenr with proposals. M . Mastrantonzo-Me_ser ;eel ^,.a landscape plans end 1 i_ahtir.g plans have been presented anti^they were g consistent . The app1,i :aria intended to eliminate the f lose : :ghta to 4 . meet the conditions of Traific Engineer. N fir " r ' re .. _ J '.. : t I g 1 IP l t t Parkins: The PaC Northwest Bel- telephone communication sw tchir equipment bu..ld.ing is a "closed"Thebu�` .d:nu -- not open to the• he a ip_ Dees are all se: ejmai `enance perscrne_ The current number of emp .o gees is seven and is projected by Pacific Northwest Bell to remain between six and se"ren employees. This does not include the present network maintenance facility personnel who will no longer be located at this site. 11 Pacific Northwest Bell will maintain between five and nine vehicles on site. Thus, e total of sixteen on-sit parking spaces are required and provided. 1 '''- ID 3 . g r ::5 40 0 ti 3 1 =. PACIFIC NORTFWEST BELL Lake Oswego I I '_r inc Reuir=:rents . I' c Proposed: 36 :spaces Employees 7 maximum Company Vehicles 9 maximum Revised: 12 Employees 7 mr,x i mum Company Vehicles 5 maximum 1 f t 2 k p f I I. r i 1 0 i Y 1 EXHIE ( T I s 0 G 4 9 ^. � ,- 410 Jib 4111 PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL Lake Oswego Lot Ccverace/Landscazed Area Mble: Lot Area: 120 x 200' 24, 000 sq.ft. Lot Coverage: Existing 16, 185 sq. ft. Proposed 15, 775 sq. ft. • Decrease 410 sq.ft. • Landscaping/Open Space: Area Required 0 15% 3,600 g. ft. Existing 252 sq. ft. Proposed 912 sq. ft. 410 increase -- over 300% 660 sq. ft. ; Percentage 4 % 005 0 1111 IIIMMIIMPOMENOMMO - AlliA=OiWN4 1 410 410 A // PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL Lake Oswego S_•v1aed LandsCaDlnc;Coen Space : Proposed : 912 sq.ft. Revised: Add : Front Parking 163 sq.ft. Rear Parking 582 sq.ft. Trash 25 sq.ft. Sub Total 770 sq. ft. Total 1;682 sq. ft. Revise: Percentage 7 % EXHIBIT r. u u • • a r 4111 STAFF REPORT February 18, 1982 a OR F.L= DRi-$? ; f7t � � 31 T APPL:CANT Pacific Northwest 3e11 1 -37 '-_ '- ' - tree' -ax Lots 70C and 800 33f tax 'gap - 1 c. 3t)D NEIGHBORHOOD =irst Addition APPLICANT'S REQUEST Preliminary auproval to allow, construclirm of a 4300 square foot addition to the existing structure. Iri•1Iddition, the applicant is requesting a variance to the landscape standard to reduce the renuired 15 landscaped area to 4%. CRITERIA AND STANDARDS • LOC 49.300 to 49.335 Major Development Procedures LOC 52.110 to 52.150 Central Conrnercial Zone Development Ordinance and Standards: All Development Standards Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Land Use Policy Element S East End Community Business District Policies, pp. 63-71 EXISTING CONDITiONS The 24,000 square foot site is located on the southeast, corner of_First Street and "C" Avenue in a Central Corrunercial zone. There are few significant deciduous trees on the site. The site is bordered on the north by a dental office building (across "C" Avenue), on the west by apartments (across First Street) , on the south by a veterinarian office, and on the east by a steep bank and commercial structures (across the alley). Storm drainage facilities are located in "C" Avenue and the alley along the east boundary of the site. Water facilities are available along First Street. Sewer facilities are ava 8h le along First Street and the alley. First Street is •constructer with sioewalks and curds within an RG-lent right-of-rya' . Avenues . `or-tru::ec witrin a vC-foc: -wcv `r , sidewai a ice' .n. no--.- -.Og. Tne Comprehensive Plan indicates that Lnerr• i , 'a potent.'al for wear Ioundal.ton soils on the site. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS The applicant urunoses to construct a 4300 square foot, �WQ ;tCfy aiialtlCn LO tfa aXiitinq ! i ., .iri ,LIUaI'e foot structure. The existing maintenance facility located on the southeast Lorner of the site will be denroiishea to provide five standard parking spaces. Two additional parking spaces are pro- vided along the east boundary of the proposed addition as well as nine spaces along the east boundary of the existing structure. The addition will have exterior brick facing. The west Loncrete block face of the service garage will be stuccoed and painted to match the color of the existing garage building. ;✓ 2 _;Staff Report _-- _ ,4.._.___. 2- 18, 19i12 The following items illustrate the concerns of staff regarding this proposal : The applicant is requesting approval to reduce the 157. landscaped area requirement to 4':. The staff believes that the applicant has not shown that a hardship exists nor has illustrated that 4.4 is the minimum variance needed. The fire revised compact parking spaces along the east boundary of :ne e-ds::nQ Duiidinq exceed City standards. These ::an he reducc'n in :9 r'2Eultn9 in les :avement and an increase in 7enfls-.iree, . on. :Sidi lilu v '2' anters :,lon0 _ : ''• ewei < ? -1 7ccr ..rn- =e - es -'Cu'd _e -.,quire . ,as not peen <1Pmi __ed. Screen' s mechanical ni ._ ^,y' '.'-:,I The applicant eroeoses a landscaped buffer along part err rie perimctcr of the new parkino lot, as well as a 3.5 to 8.5 foot hind retaining wall . The land- scaping will consist of hollywood junipers , cotoneaster, nregon grape and pear trees. Staff finds these plants to be acceptable for this parking area. The staff believes that the retaining wall is compatible with the site and the adjacent office building to the south. Presently, the et.ructure to be removed presents a blank wall to the adjacent property which is much higher and ob- trusive than the proposed parking lot retaining wall . The parking lot will be built upon fill excavated from the construction of the new addition. The addition will be connected to the existing structure and will be ,If the same height and scale. The staff believes that this will create a lairs. massive StruC- S tarp. The addition could he set back from the existing huildirrq allowing adequate space for landscaping which would scale down the length of the structure and allow a better transition from the old to the new brick . The Applicant proposes to match the addition to the existing structure by u'.irrq cirril,rr colored brick. Eleven standard park inn spaces ar'P provided. tkrw'•v'•r,, t hog are too small and do not meet City standards. The Pacific tlmrthwest Cell facility is not opened to the public and the number of employees will re- main at six or seven. in addition, between five and nine facility vehicles will park at the site. Therefore, the staff believes that a total of 16 parking spaces is adequate. In addition. a handicapped perking space is not required as the facility is closed to the public:. The aisle width of 24 feet illustrated in the new parking lot is not sufficient. Twenty-eioht feet is required for an 8.5' wide parkino ;tall and 25 fee: is required for a 9' wide parkins tall . The alleye parkino �� should b_ inrorovea tc _1 atancar'as, if tris done, th.S' aIle can be usec for back-uu space forte five parkinc spaces alone the na5t boundary line. n total of 36 few is necessary for the compact parking stall and the pro- per back-uo space. The site nian does cot adequately illustrate .'xistinc and proaoseo grading a on the entire bite nor 'he site iidtlCitlQ. The dd'ac'nt structures, in particular the veterinary office should her shnwn on the site plan as weil as a table indicating lot coverage and percentage of area landscaped. In addition, refuse facilities and their screening should be shown in plan. • I FEflPIIARY 1f3� 1982' The drainage plan meets City standards. However. there is some concern • over/the large amount of paving on the site. This could be resolved by increasing the amount of landscaping. The- staff believes that this project cannot be approved until the above items are resolved. RECOMMENDATION Denial - I EXHIBITS ". Tax-- i aX Mao '3" -- -vicinity Mao "C" -- Site Plan "C" -- Utility Plan "D" -- Elevations "E" -- Landscape Plan "F" -- Narrative "G" -- Existing Site Conditions "H" -- Pictures • - 1 110 STAFF REPORT March 26, '982 DR I- ILE DR 1-82 APPLICANT Pacific Northwest Belt `_OCATION „ 3 1st eats -_3AL _c:- . 0O arc 300 .)? `ax hap _ ;DO NEIGHBORHOOD First Addition APPLICANT' S REQUEST Final approval to allow construction of a_4300 square foot addition to the existing structure. In addition, the applicant is requesting a variance to tne landscape standard to reduce the required l5Z landscaped area to 7 . CRITERIA AND STANOARDS LOC 49. 300 to 49. 335 Major Develol.ment Procedures LO!' 52. 110 to 52. 150 Central Commercial Zone Development Ordinance ano Standards: All Development Standards 111 Comor. hensive Plan: Commercial Land Use Policy Element East End Community Business District Policies, pp. 68-71 • EXISTING CONDITIONS This project was heard before the Development Review Board on March 1 , 1961 . As described in the minutes of that hearing, (Exhibit N ) , preliminary approval was Granted with conditions. A comolete description of existing conditions and the applicant's proposal is illustrated in the original staff report , (Exhibit0 ) . ANALYSIS The aooiicant has revised tne parkins and landscapinc figures. The original proposal contained 5 c-Jmpact parr:inc spaces ano s:ancarc sPeces. The apaliaan: now proposes :C :.ompaa: marking spaces, wnicr ln=ruse= :n amour.: c= :ancscapinc Inc :nis to oe ac:eozaoie. The original proposal illustrated cf the site to be landscaped. The applicant now proposes that 7= of the site oe landscaped. Additional landscaping aiong First Street provides for a total of 9.4Z. rlowe\•er, :his cannot be includes in tne caicuiations as this area is in the public rignt-o H way. The applicant has indicated in his letter of March 9, 1982, (ExnibitM ) , that providing additional landscaping benind the building along the alley would interfere with the service area. in addition, this site provides the necessary off-street parking while other commercial • 4* Staff'Peport (DR 1- March 26, 1982 4110 Page Two 5+te in-\the area do not. The staff believes that the applicant is 4111 requesting the minimum landscape variance needed and believes that a hard- ship exists due to site conditions and the need for an addition of this size in order to adequately serve the Lake Oswego area. :he landscaping along 1st Street includes 6 in-ground street trees and two, 3' - 5' wide planting beds resulting in a 5' - 6' wider sidewalk. The planting oeds will contain 1.1' - 5' high Hollvweod Junipers , aperoximateiv 35, _c totted St. Johnswor: and 6 Trinity rear trees. The s1af= rinds this to be acceptable. The applicant has Indicated ::;at :he ear'ing area wi : 1 nave an enderground 'rricat'cn system with automatic controls wnicn will be car- of :he final woreing crawir.gs. The Balance of the landscape area will be irrigated by hose bibs. Staff concurs with this proposal . The alley along Pacific Northwest Bell 's property will be improved according to the specifications of the City Engineer. The final working drawings will illustrate the Improvements. The applicant has ir.dica:.ed that the proposed retaining wall will be a smooth finished exposed concrete to match the adjacent veterinarian's building retaining wail. The staff finds this to be acceptable. The lighting plan, which utilizes a 175 watt metal halide lamp, was found to by acceptable by the City Traffic Engineer. However, the Traffic Engineer believes that the flood lights on the northeast corner of the site should be eliminated as the existing and proposed wall lam; , will provide adequate lighting for the site. 4111 At the March 1 , 1962 Development Review Board hearing, the Board expressed concern over the problem of matching the old and rew brick walls. The Board decided that the applicant should address the separation of t-he ' o walls and illustrate the matching brick that will be used. At the preliminary submittal of this project, the staff did not recommend improvement of the most easterly IO to 12 feet of "C" Avenue at the alley entrance, which is presently gravelled. The staff recommends that the applicant improve his half of "C" Avenue to City standards. This is in conformance with the City Ordinance requesting that all driveable areas be paved, This request is appropriate because the applicant's vehicles travel over the unin;roved roadway. Paving of the other half of the street may be completed sometime in the future. The t:af „_ ievet :na: the meig- concerns " :ne Bparc an: st2` nave oe` The staff recommends apuroval subject to the following conditions : 1 . That the alley, along Pacific Northwest Bell 's East property r 1111 u 1.) b Staff Report (DR I-410 March 26, 1982 410 Page Three • line and the South half of the East end of "C" Avenue be improved according to the specifications of the City Engineer. 2. That the applicant indicate how the separation cf the abutting existing and new Walls will be aidressed and illustrate the matching brick to be used. EXHIBITS A Tax Mac 3 '!i _:ni:v ,tap Site and Utility Plan l Revised Site Plan With Utilities C 2 Revised Site Plan With Lighting Plan.and Revised Parking 4 Elevations ..� E Landscape Plan \. E 1 Revised Landscape Plan F Narrative G Existing Site Conditions H Pictures 1 Letter From Landscape\Architect J Revised Parking Requirements K Revised La-.dscaping Requirements L Lighting Information N Letter From Applicant Describing Revisions N Minutes of March 1 , 1982 Design Review eoard`tiearing 0 Original Staff Report , February 18, i982 • Too Large to be reproduced • sj OD 5$ MATERIALS & COLORS BOARD (In File) EXHIBIT 14 LU 00-0001 v i I • IJ �J60 • . - ., .•. •e ._ _ . . 0 - - .//' ',:- .;/;" - . . . ,- • . , . I <> .._. .....4; //, (N) r(p. , / ... „/ ,.., ,, , ' •• /i .././ .,../ _ ,./.., //„. xl •-/- — . . p. ,_ ft, \_ r5 UTURE-SWITCH-GROWTH - - --- -FUTURE-SWITCH ROWTH o \ p .1 -. -- /' j . .., :„. ,,.... . ... eZ, //, 4/;;;>/: 1 r , ., .- 17; 7 ../.. ,, 7 , 5- 4 ,. .. ga. //, ,,, ,, ,./... /. /",/. . - -,,,, x , DO ... // ...:Isr 'YspC)CY'sxp . < .------- ------ -- ,-: - - "-- - -- ,' X x 1r ,<--Vk'A: --7 ../ 1- / -a: c, /.. -1.- E, (N) TYP. 1-t + + 1-i's cn la ,-,. mei et 6'-10" 6'- \Q' ,-t- -g y------- i- et. et. .....,- (N) TYP __ (N) TYP. .? • I-I .•011/ II/ I, V A i \ 0 \' \tri I • :\'‘,( '-6" 7-- ,-.. /---- v`s s`'-• - i •• 1 7 -6" , . 18- -- '- .-., .-- -,-, •,.. ,. .1 ., /„., v----__‹.. ....: 1-4 _.iiir_ AlliiI :II ' ,iLON,....NIII -Z.: et, Its,' • -Ali'."----"',. 1111ft. ' -'''' ftr-7.4_mdaNtillilk L.' .. . _,----1 I I L.:,,.Ai p...'A 7-'-'"' :.-.;_...)-'-?. -Ale --.....-. ......m. -.5..--- '... me.vgaski.. -oommili. amoile...___ ins,visicassammir miumhzmitismg-...imikai,. _A = . - *IT 2. '....-,____z__.• -,- 1 -, )11411k - # 4., = V----- _ ,._ ',I Ttz : -- ,/ri,/ ' .\ .‘ \\ . t N V'\ •. 01 A \ \\ \. it\ . > 11__g c_isessivwc, , I i ,-.1.:sltV REMAIN <> (E) TO REMAIN (F) TO R , AIN et tc...e.siS (N) TYP. (N) TYP. c% -. --.. t")%1 t—' m (=> = ..... k-g1 5) cT3 i--. N..,11 .... ..... C...' ,7 _.. 1