Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2000-07-03 PM PLANNING DEPARTMENT FILE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA PACKET JULY 3 , 2000 F ANEOStytCO City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Monday, July 3, 2000 7 p.m. OREGO$ City Hall Council Chambers 380 A Avenue Members: Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Julie Morales,Chair Nan BinkIey,Vice Chair For Information: 635-0290 Doug Cushing Douglas Kiersey 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. Agenda Book * I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - - - May 15, 2000 IV. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER V. PUBLIC HEARING LU 00-0007, an application by Gramor Oregon, Inc. to redevelop Block 136. The request consists of the following items: • A lot line adjustment affecting Tax lots 8400, 8500 & 8600 and a portion of the existing alley. • Approval of Development Review permits for a 41-lot townhouse residential planned development,and a 16,844 square foot,two-story retail/office commercial building. • Approval to remove approximately 50 trees. The site is composed of Tax Lots 8400-9100 of Tax Map 21E 3DD. The staff coordinator is Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager. Continued from the May 15, 2000 and June 5, 2000, DRC meeting. LU 99-0054, a request by David Emami for Development Review approval to demolish a 4,500 square foot building and construct a 5,700 square foot second story addition to an existing single story structure. This request will increase the overall square footage from 18,775 square feet to a total of 20,440 square feet. Modifications to the parking and landscaping are also proposed. The site is located at 17010-17120 Pilkington, Tax Lot 1500 of Tax Map 21E 18AB. The staff coordinator is Morgan Tracy,Associate Planner. • VI. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT MEMORANDUM • (t ° L"K`°swF� TO: Development Review Commissioners VAil FROM: Morgan Tracy, Associate Planner filj kDATE: July 3, 2000 °'EG°" SUBJECT: LU 99-0054 Additional Findings and Analysis This memorandum supplements the February 18, 2000 Staff Report for LU 99-0054 and presents additional information with regard to the status of the original PUD,the change of use requested, and presented design proposal (as modified June 21,2000). To the extent that the information conflicts with the findings presented in the original staff report,the matter herein controls. AMENDED PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting the three following approvals: 1. Modify PUD 1-68 to enable an additional 1,860 square feet of building area on Lot 38. The building footprint would be modified to eliminate a portion of the existing single story building. The additional square footage would be provided within a second story addition. The previous • authorized PUD uses are proposed to be increased in size in proportion to the increased building size. 2. Modify PUD 1-68 to authorize those uses presently permitted in the underlying IP Zone, within Lot 38. 3. Design review for the building remodel, site plan revisions and landscape changes. It should be noted, and is discussed below,that this PUD may be the subject of involuntary termination proceedings initiated by the City, based on lack of compliance on several grounds. As this application was received prior to the City's intent to terminate the PUD, the application shall be processed under the authorization provided in the Code. PUD STATUS The subject site(Lot 38, owned by David Emami) is one portion of a larger planned unit development consisting of Lots 38, 39, 77, 78, and 79 of Bryant Acres approved in 1968. The regulations in effect at the time this "PUD" was established vary from current"PD" requirements. Current PD's, PUD's can specify development limitations that differ from the underlying zoning requirements, such as setback, height, and lot coverage or FAR limits. However, early PUD's were granted even more flexibility in that they could also specify uses which varied from the underlying zone. However, once approved, the allowable uses (and the size of those uses) within a PUD were limited to those as shown in the PUD Final Development Plan and Program. Any other uses not specifically granted approval would require a • modification to the PUD approval, similar to a request to modify a setback or height limitation requirement. It is the position of staff that minor changes which do not significantly alter the PUD approval may be processed without the full consent of all owners within the PUD site(Exhibits 52 and 53). Upon closer • examination of the record for PUD 1-68, staff determined that the applicant's prior submittal, Exhibits 4-33, went beyond the authorization granted by the original approval and would therefore require the signatures of all owners within the PUD. The applicant proposed demolishing 4,500 square feet of the existing building and constructing a 5,700 square foot second story addition. As the application did not contain the signatures of the other owners within the PUD, that application was postponed from the March 6, 2000 hearing date until such time that the applicant could secure the necessary signatures. The applicant has secured the other owners signatures as shown in Exhibit 68, thereby enabling this application to move forward. Prior Approval Mr. Emami was granted an approval on May 4, 1998 for PUD 1-68/DR 40-78 (Mod. 10-97). This request included modifying the appearance of the structures on Lot 38,providing additional landscaping, and reconfiguring the parking lot. Staff believed that since the original PUD was silent on the appearance of the buildings on Lot 38,the proposed remodeling would not technically change the PUD approval. Moreover,the 12 parking spaces and landscaping were perceived as minimum standards prescribed from the PUD, and therefore by providing additional parking spaces and additional landscaping,the PUD approval again was not violated, and no offsite impacts would result. Consequently, signatures from the other owners of the PUD were not required to process that application. 0 Non Compliance and Termination of PUD The City has had an opportunity to closely review the record for this PUD and has uncovered that there are a number of inconsistencies between what was approved in 1968,and what exists on the site today. Most significantly, Phase III, which specified a 22,000 square foot minor manufacturing, assembling and storage building to be constructed on Lot 39 has never been built. In addition, many of the present uses on Lot 38 are not in compliance with the approved list of uses, as well as the landscaping, access, parking, building size and location for the PUD site in its entirety do not reflect the original approval. The City has accepted this current PUD modification application while reserving its right to involuntarily terminate the PUD by virtue of these non compliance matters. In no way shall an approval be perceived as the City waiving its right or ability to terminate this PUD. Furthermore, in light of this impending termination,the present application will be reviewed with regard to improving compliance with the approved PUD, as well as in respect to current zoning and development code requirements. Where two requirements are in direct conflict, the PUD requirements shall apply, as the PUD is still active. Allowable Uses The record for PUD 1-68 is indefinite in many respects;however, the record does identify four uses for Lot 38 by tenant name(Exhibit 46). Information was additionally provided by one of the original owners of Lot 38 regarding the nature of these uses (Exhibit 54). Staff has evaluated these uses and • estimates, based on the approved site plan,the size allotment for each use: Tenant General Use and Size • Fold-A-Fence Corporation(small decorative 5,000 s.f.retail,2,565 s.f. office,and 2,565 fences and garden tools) s.f.storage H. Skibinski and Son(painting contractor and 500 s.f.retail and 1,500 s.f.building services supply) Lake Grove Warehousing(offices) 2,450 s.f.office Automatic Actuators(assembled and sold drapery 500 s.f.retail, 1,500 s.f.assembly,and 2,000 pulling appliances and manufactured traffic signs). square feet sign shop From the revised narrative submittal (Exhibit 67), the applicant has proposed including the IP underlying zone uses be allowed on Lot 38. These uses include: 1. Research facilities, testing laboratories. 2. Facilities for the manufacturing,processing or assembling of products. 3. Offices accessory to manufacturing, warehousing or research uses. 4. Vocational schools. 5. A dwelling for caretaker or watchman. 6. Recreational vehicle storage. 7. Major and minor public facilities. 8. Professional office space not to exceed 15%of gross site area. 9. Remanufacturing or repair of vehicle engines and electrical systems 10. Incidental retail uses. As well as the following uses which are allowed conditionally: 1. Professional office space which meets the Industrial Park guidelines in the Comp. Plan. 2. Retail establishments which directly and primarily provide goods and services to employees and businesses in the industrial park 3. Commercial transportation facilities. 4. Commercial recreational facilities. 5. Animal boarding facilities. 6. Alteration or expansion of non-conforming uses. 7. Retail sales of tires, batteries and motor vehicle accessories. In addition, the applicant has proposed that the amount of storage space authorized in the original PUD be apportioned equally amongst the other uses,as storage is more of an incidental use to the other uses, and not a primary use in and of itself on the site. The applicant further proposes that to account for the 1,860 square foot (roughly 10%) increase to building size, each of the PUD uses be increased in allowed size by an equal proportion. The following table compares the proposed uses and their respective sizes in contrast to the original PUD approval. Uses (Lot 38) PUD Uses Uses with Storage Area Proposed Size of Use Authorized Apportioned (with 10% increase) Light Manuf.,Processing or Assembly 1,500 s.f. 1,740 s.f. 1,914 s.f. Storage 2,565 s.f. N/A N/A Professional Office 5,015 s.f. 5,818 s.f. 6,401 s.f. Retail Sales,General Merchandise 6,000 s.f. 6,962 s.f. 7,658 s.f. Services—Business 3,500 s.f. 4,060 s.f. 4,467 s.f. • TOTAL 18,580 s.f. 18,580 s.f. 20,440 s.f. Staff is concerned by the represented increase in the retail use category. Staff acknowledges that this • site is not constrained to these uses by virtue of the PUD authorization. However, in light of the City's • impending request for PUD termination, staff recommends that this request to modify the allowed uses in the PUD consider compliance with the underlying IP Zone uses rto lessen the degree of the non conformity when the PUD is no longer in effect. Full compliance would not be attainable without drastically altering the proposed program; although greater compliance can be achieved by limiting the amount of space provided to non IP allowed uses to what is currently authorized by the PUD, but allowing the difference to be made up by uses allowed in the IP zone. This is more clearly shown in the following table: Uses (Lot 38) PUD Uses Staff Recommended Use Authorized Limitations Light Manuf.,Processing or Assembly 1,500 s.f. Per IP Zoning. Storage 2,565 s.f. N/A Professional Office 5,015 s.f. 5,874(per IP zoning) Retail Sales, General Merchandise 6,000 s.f. 6,000 s.f. Services—Business 3,500 s.f. 3,500 s.f. Outright permitted IP Uses Up to 20,440 s.f. Conditionally allowed IP Uses Up to 20,440 s.f.with CU approval TOTAL 18,580 s.f. 20,440 s.f. Recommendation Staff recommends that the uses that do not conform to current IP zoning standards (retail, office in excess of 5,874 s.f.[15% g.s.a.], and services to businesses) not be allowed to be increased in size. However, to enable full occupancy of the 1,860 additional square feet, the difference in square footage would be allowed to be occupied by any combination of outright permitted IP uses. Staff also recommends that blanket authorization for uses that are allowed as Conditional Uses in the IP zone not be granted without a caveat which requires that such uses undergo a conditional use process. Otherwise, staff is in full support of the modification of the uses as proposed. CHANGE OF USE REQUEST (BERNINA) The Change of Use request was to permit Bernina, a sewing machine repair and assembly, to have retail sales as an incidental component of their business. This type of incidental retail is allowed per current IP zone requirements, through the Change of Use process. After staff thoroughly examined the original PUD record, it was determined that 6,000 square feet of retail uses were already authorized outright by the PUD. This amount of retail space exceeded Bernina's requirements, even after deducting other present retail tenants. In fact,there is a 1,500 square foot surplus of retail space afforded between the applicants original proposal (Exhibit II) and that authorized by the PUD. Nevertheless, the Change of Use request is no longer deemed necessary to enable this use, and is therefore withdrawn from consideration. S Recommendation • Staff finds that the proposed Bernina use is classified as a mix of"Assembly," and "Retail". So long as the total amount of retail within the site remains below the PUD authorized allowance of 6,000 square feet, and the amount of assembly uses is below 1,500 square feet,no additional action is necessary. DESIGN REVIEW ANALYSIS and SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS The following analysis supplements the March 6, 2000 staff report, and focuses primarily on the ' development standards that are affected by the most recent revisions. These include the Building Design Standard, the Off Street Parking and Loading Standard,the Landscaping Standard and the Drainage Standard. LODS 2.020 Building Design Staff had previously made several recommended design changes to improve the building's design and site's functionality. The applicant has revised the plans as shown in Exhibits 57-66 and responds to staffs recommendation in his most recent narrative(Exhibit 67). Staffs recommendations have been reiterated below, along with an analysis of how the most recent submittal has addressed each: 1) Provide a clearly defined staircase and elevator court. This shall be centrally located between the two ends of the second story addition, in an approximate axis with the existing two story structure to the north. SThe applicant claims that by positioning the staircase centrally to the upper floor, flexibility in lease areas is lost. Rather than being able to provide one large space,the staircase would bisect the floors, complicating interior circulation. As a compromise,the applicant has proposed a defined elevator court located on the right side of the second floor and in the center of the first floor(Exhibit 64). 2) Distinguish the entry to the elevator court with an arched canopy or other building treatment to clearly distinguish it from other tenant spaces. The stairs could wrap around three sides of the elevator to minimize the depth needed for the stairs to ascend to the second story and allow more natural light to flood the stairs. This recommendation envisioned a large,two story, open lobby area with an elevator surrounded on three sides by the wraparound staircase. Large windows would flood the space with natural light providing a welcoming and inviting entry to the second floor refer to Exhibit 69. The applicant has instead proposed a linear stairway in a hallway with the elevator shaft positioned in front. While the entry is much better defined both through the arched details and projected façade, the space is not tremendously inviting as the user is greeted with a blank wall and hallway (Exhibits 62 and 64). 3) Second story tenant spaces shall be accessed from a centralized"lobby" where the elevator and stairway terminate. The applicant noted in meetings with staff that the balcony was essential to accommodate industrial users that need to move large equipment to the second floor(which could not be achieved in an elevator). Staff, however, is concerned by the pattern of windows and doors along the front elevation 41) (Exhibit 64) and the duplication of the upper and lower floors. Staff continues to recommend that the access be internalized, enabling a more creative treatment of the upper floor façade. By repositioning the stairway and elevator to one side, access from the central lobby is probably not feasible, however, the hallway could be internalized. The windows in this hallway could be of a type to be removable and ' thus allow large equipment to be moved in and out of the second floor. 4) Second story windows should be distinct from the first floor design by using different sizes, different placement or different arrangement of divided lights(window panes). The window(s) for the second floor lobby area should reflect the arch of the canopy below and visually reinforce the center access area of the building. See discussion under#3, above. 5) The balcony shall be eliminated, replaced by canopies that match the remainder of the center. If necessary, a rear accessway could be included behind the tenant spaces for service deliveries and secondary stair access. See discussion under#3, above. 6) Canopies above the second floor windows, if any, should be distinct from the lower canopy. One example is open end shed type awnings,possibly constructed of steel, placed individually above the upper windows. By revising circulation and building elevation as noted above, the canopies may not need to be revised. The applicant notes that the canopies provide a unifying element between the second floor and the single story portion of the building. 7) Provide an additional trash collection area in closer proximity to tenants of the building subject to the second story addition. One possibility would be to create this area behind the elevator court within the building. Another option would be to eliminate one parking space along the east • property line, adjacent to the building and incorporate an enclosure there. The applicant had very creatively addressed the trash enclosure issue by locating it under the auxiliary stairway along the east elevation. This was however,deleted from the latest submittal and should be reincorporated into final designs a shown in Exhibit 69. 8) Provide lighting details and photometric information for the parking light fixtures reflecting maximum 100 watt high pressure sodium fixtures on 18 foot tall poles. Relocate the pole adjacent to Boones Ferry Road to be more internal to the site, located near the staircase of the existing two story building The applicant has furnished this information and relocated the light pole as recommended (Exhibit 66). 9) Demonstrate (either in the site plan or in narrative form)how the three required parking bicycle spaces will be covered. Staff recommends internalizing one set of cycloops in the elevator court, if space is available. The applicant has provided this information in his narrative (Exhibit 67, page 6)and positioned the bike racks under the building canopies. Recommendation Staff recommends that the upper front elevation be revised to enhance the variety of elements and to avoid the"duplication" of the first floor onto the second as described in item#3, above. Also, the • elevator court should be revised to make the space more inviting to tenants and customers as discussed in item #2, above. Furthermore,the additional trash enclosure should be placed under the stairway as • shown in Exhibit 69. LODS 7.020 Off Street Parking and Loading The applicant has provided a table (Exhibit 67,page 7) that demonstrates that the approved PUD plan and program required a total of 59 spaces for the 18,580 square foot building, which were ostensibly to be provided for in the PUD,through the use of shared parking. The applicant goes on to provide a table which shows how a conceptual mix of the proposed uses could be accommodated in the 49 spaces.' provided for on Lot 38 in the site plan(Exhibit 57). There are many variations of uses and their respective sizes that can be satisfied by the 49 parking spaces provided. The applicant shall note that it is up to the applicant/owner to ensure that adequate parking be reserved for vacant building space. For example, should the building be occupied by 6,000 square feet of retail, 5,874 square feet of office and 6,095 square feet of vocational school,all 49 spaces would be utilized, and the applicant would be forced to leave 2,470 square feet of the building vacant. The applicant has provided information showing that a reasonable opportunity exists to accommodate a variety of the proposed authorized uses within the parking supply. LODS 9.020 Landscaping The applicant has provided a landscape plan(Exhibits 60 and 61) demonstrating that a 22% (8,622 square feet) of the site is in landscaped area. This meets the minimum 15%gross site area requirement. There have been no substantial changes from the previous landscape plan, aside from a small detail adjacent to the present two story building where a fountain has been proposed. LODS 11.020 Drainage for Minor Development The only change represented by the revised submittal as it relates to drainage is that the storm water compost vault as shown in Exhibit 5 has been replaced by compost filter catch basins(Exhibit 59). Necessary updated storm water calculations for this revision will need to be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. If these catchbasins cannot meet City Engineering standards for water treatment, then the previous compost vault will be required to be installed. CONCLUSION Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that LU 99-0054 can be made to comply with all applicable criteria by the application of certain conditions. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL of LU 99-0054, subject to the following conditions: • A. The applicant/owner shall abide by the conditions of approval as memorialized in PUD 1-68 (mod. 10-97) as it relates to completion of improvements as required in that application, to the extent that said conditions do not conflict with the conditions • set forth below. • B. Prior to issuance of a building permit,the applicant/owner shall: 1. Submit the following plans and documents for the review and approval of staff (prepared in accordance with the City's design specification manuals): a. A final utility plan illustrating: i. Underground placement of all utility services. ii. A final stormwater management plan for the compost filter catch basins designed by an engineer. The plan shall include all installation specifications,pretreatment for the removal of sediment and oils,and a minimum of a 2 minutes of active storage in the sedimentation device. If the compost filter catch basins cannot meet the required treatment criteria, then the single compost vault shall be used, subject to demonstrating compliance as stated above. iii. Pavement elevations of sufficient detail to ensure that the parking area drains to an approved storm drain system. b. A final erosion control plan in accordance with the "Erosion Control Technical Guidance Handbook. 2. Construct the public improvements as required by PUD 1-68 (Mod. 10-97) or submit a financial guarantee for the construction of required public improvements as required by LOC 49.58.1415. 3. Submit a site plan in substantial conformance with Exhibit 57. Bike racks shall be painted in a complementary color to the building. The"Hadco" light standard detail shall be deleted as it is no longer relevant. 4. Submit building elevations in substantial conformance with Exhibits 64 and 65, except as modified as follows for review and approval by staff: a. "Bldg. B South Elevation" shall provide additional relief, either through use of color or texture,to simulate window openings on the second floor similar to the windows shown on the east elevation. b. "Bldg B North Elevation" shall revise the entry to the elevator by providing glass windows and door on the first floor and to reflect the changes as shown in Exhibit 69. Additionally, the accessway balcony shall be internalized and windows which are distinct from the first floor • windows shall be provided to allow natural light into the internal accessway. 11 5. Submit floor plans in substantial conformance with Exhibits 62 and 63 except as modified by Exhibit 69, for review and approval by staff. 6. Submit final lighting plans in substantial conformance with Exhibit 66 for review and approval by staff which illustrate: a. Exterior lighting shall be low wattage (50W) downcast lighting to wash the front building façade. Such lighting shall be designed and screened so as not cast glare upon adjacent properties. b. All parking lot lighting and exterior building lighting shall be designed with proper shields to prevent glare onto abutting and adjacent properties and shall not exceed the brightness of 100W high pressure sodium fixtures and shall not be any taller than 20 feet measured from the adjacent grade to the top of the fixture. 7. Submit final landscape plans in substantial conformance with Exhibit 60 for review and approval by staff. Such plans shall note the type of vines proposed over the trash enclosure trellis and shall accurately reflect the grass groundcover along Pilkington Road in front of Building B. C. Prior to the Issuance of Final Building Inspection Approval. the Applicant/Owner Shall: 1. Install landscaping and irrigation as approved under Condition A(6), above. An irrigation plan shall be submitted to the City. 2. Complete all public improvements per Condition B(2)above, provide the City with certified "as-built" construction drawings of the public improvements, and receive a certification of completeness from the City if this has not already bee done. 3. Submit a stamped parking lot survey to demonstrate compliance with the final grading plan as approved by condition B(1)(a)(iii), above. 4. Submit a letter of certification from the compost filter manufacturer that the installation was done according to their specifications, and 5. Provide evidence that the compost filter manufacturer has been retained, and will continue to be retained,to periodically maintain the compost filter. D. Prior to the Installation of Any Signs.the Applicant/Owner Shall: 1. Obtain all necessary sign permits in accordance with the requirements LOC 47.10.400 for any additional signage. E. Miscellaneous Requirements: 1. No outside storage of goods, materials, or vehicles in the process of being • assembled or that are inoperable is allowed.-No vehicles are permitted to be stored in required parking spaces. 2. The site will continue to be utilized in the manner envisioned by PUD 1-68, DR 40-78, and PUD 1-68(Mod. 10-97) until such time that said PUD is either modified or terminated. 3. Uses authorized for Lot 38 of Bryant Acres via this PUD Modification Request are hereby limited to the following: Authorized Uses (Lot 38) Use Limitations Retail Sales,General Merchandise 6,000 s.f. Services—Business 3,500 s.f. Plus the following IP Permitted Uses: Up to 20,440 s.f. 1. Research facilities, testing laboratories. 2. Facilities for the manufacturing,processing or assembling of products. 3. Offices accessory to manufacturing,warehousing or research uses. 4. Vocational schools. 5. A dwelling for caretaker or watchman. 6. Recreational vehicle storage. 7. Major and minor public facilities. 8. Professional office space not to exceed 15%of411 gross site area. 9. Remanufacturing or repair of vehicle engines and electrical systems 10.Incidental retail uses. And the following IP Conditional Uses: Up to 20,440 s.f.with separate 1. Professional office space which meets the Conditional Use Approval Industrial Park guidelines in the Comp.Plan. 2. Retail establishments which directly and primarily provide goods and services to employees and businesses in the industrial park. 3. Commercial transportation facilities. 4. Commercial recreational facilities. 5. Animal boarding facilities. 6. Alteration or expansion of non-conforming uses. 7. Retail sales of tires, batteries and motor vehicle accessories. Additional Exhibits 51. Letter from Western Planning Associates, dated March 7, 2000 52. Letter to Western Planning Associates, from Staff, dated March 24, 2000 53. Letter to Western Planning Associates, dated April 5, 2000 • 54. Letter from Ronald Baker. dated April 12, 2000 regarding original uses in PUD 55. Letter from Western Planning Associates, dated April 12, 2000 56 Letter to David Emami, from Staff, dated April 20,2000 IIIF Applicant's 46 Submittal,received June 21,2000 57. Site Plan 58. Survey 59. Utility Plan 60. Landscape Plan 61. Landscape Details 62. Floor Plan, First Floor 63. Floor Plan, Second Floor 64. West and North Elevation for present one-story building 65. East and South Elevation for present one-story building 66. Lighting Data 67. Revised Narrative 68. Signatures of Authorization from remaining owners within the PUD 69. Floor Plan showing desired additional trash enclosure area and"elevator court" 70. Letter from Bernina(Common Thread), dated March 22, 2000 regarding nature of proposed use. Date of Original Application Submittal: September 2. 1999 Date of Most Current Modified Application Submittal: June 21.2000 Application Determined Complete: June 21. 2000 State Mandated 120-Day Rule: October 19.2000 S WESTERN PLANNING ASSOCIATES, INC. 4621 SW KELLY AVE. PORTLAND.OR 97201 503.294.0222 360.695.8340 FAX: 503.294.0223 • March 7, 2000 Mr. Evan Boone Deputy City Attorney City of Lake Oswego P.O. Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 RE: LU 99-0054- Office Space on Lot 38 of McCart-Die»:co PUD Dear Mr. Boone: We are writing to inform the City Attorney's office and the City Staff of our intention to request a clarification from the Development Review Commission regarding a matter related to the McCart-Diemco PUD. As you know, the portion of the PUD owned by Mr. Emami is currently undergoing Development Review. The project was scheduled to be presented at hearing on March 6th . We requested an extension to the hearing schedule in order to clarify issues raised in the staff report. We will be asking the DRC for clarification of the amount of office use allowed in the PUD. The underlying zone of the PUD was M-P as a result of the PUD approval in 1968. The M-P zone allowed office space without restriction to a particular percentage of site uses. Lot 38 was rezoned by the City sometime after 1972 to IP. The current IP zone allows "professional office space up to 15%of the gross site area". During the pre- application process, we requested an amount of office in excess of 15% of the gross site area of Lot 38. City staff addressed this request in the pre-application notes as follows: • EXHIBIT 51 LU 99-0054 Evan Boone March 2, 2000 "Your preapplication narrative asks for an increase in office use. The PUD • approved in 1968 was in an MP (Industrial Park Zone) with office uses without limitations on office use size. So long as the PUD approval did not list specific use allowances in the conditions of the approval, the current allowed uses in the IP zone (i.e. the 15%office use limit) applies... " Contrary to City Staffs response above, the applicant has a different opinion about what uses should be allowed on Lot 38 in the PUD, based on the following arguments to be presented to the DRC for clarification: 1. We (the applicant and applicant's representative) believe that the PUD approval (Ordinance 1217, May 1968) vested both the uses allowed in the underlying zone and any specific use requests included in the PUD plan that were above and beyond those allowed in the underlying zone. LOC 48.18.4Z5 establishes that "the ODPS shall contain a section which • identifies the zone requirements to be applied in the PD Overlay. These requirements may be adopted by referring in the Final Order to existing provisions of this chapter or by creating special zoning standards pursuant to the Planned Development Overlay. " The Final Order for the McCart-Diemco PUD establishes the zone requirements to be applied: "Adoption of a Planned Unit Development for Phase I of the McCart-Diemco Planned Unit Development is approved as shown on the final plan and written program submitted to and adopted by the Planning Commission; said Final Plan and written program is expressly made a part of this zone change, and an underlying zone is hereby established of M-P for the said Planned Unit Development. All ordinances and codes which are applicable to an M-P zone shall apply. " • Page 2 Evan Boone March 2, 2000 111 The adoption of this PUD Ordinance created the P.UD Overlay zone and changed the underlying zone of all PUD lots from R-7 and Industrial to M-P. This ordinance established the zone requirements and development standards for the PUD. The PUD approval did not list specific use allowances in the conditions of approval because the uses were allowed outright in the M-P zone that was adopted as part of the PUD approval. 2. We don't believe the City's rezoning of the property to IP removes the vested rights of the original PUD approval. The PUD uses and development standards were created through the adoption of the McCart-Diemco PUD ordinance and the concurrent rezoning of the PUD properties. The City's assertion that "...so long as the PUD approval did not list specific use allowances in the conditions of the approval, the current allowed uses in the IP zone...applies... " is in direct contrast with both the Final Order of the PUD and LOC 48.18.490, which states that "The City Manager may approve minor changes in any planned development approval, except zone requirements adopted as a part of the approval.. " (LOC 48.18.490). Contrary to this code, the City is changing the zone requirements of this PUD by not allowing a use permitted outright under the original McCart-Diemco PUD approval. In addition, Staff appears to disregard the intent of the PUD process by using the specificity of the PUD to restrict the underlying zone. LOC 48.18.490 states that the intent of the PUD process is to "provide greater flexibility in development of land as compared to a standard subdivision,...and provide for flexibility and variety in the location of improvements on lots. " 11 Page 3 Evan Boone March 2, 2000 3. The original buildings on Lot 38 were not designed to current light industrial • standards or to meet the current restriction of 15% office space. The plans and written program for the PUD show that Lot 38 was zoned Industrial and the buildings on Lot 38 were pre-existing and housed the offices of four different companies. The design of the buildings reveals that they may have been originally constructed for commercial/office use due to their low ceiling heights. Contemporary light industrial buildings typically offer 16'-20' clear space below roof joists to facilitate stacking and storage of light industrial/manufacturing supplies. The average clear height in the existing buildings is 9'-13', well below industry standards. The site's building and lot configuration limit its past and future use as a standard light industrial facility. The current major redesign will help this facility more fully comply with current city parking standards while its historic PUD zoning uses will allow it to be upgraded to meet current City Comprehensive Plan goals for this area. In summary, the applicant maintains that the zone requirements of the PUD as adopted are applicable, and that those rights are vested during the life of the PUD. The applicant recognizes that the City is continually seeking to improve the quality of life for it's citizens by implementing new development standards. The applicant has been and is willing to comply with development standards that are increasingly more restrictive than those approved as part of the PUD. However, the applicant does not wish to lose the right to unlimited office space as it 1) is an outright use allowed under the original PUD, 2) would not create an intensity of use, 3) would not significantly affect other property or uses, and 4) does not affect any condition specifically placed on the development by action of a hearing body or City Council. Page 4 Evan Boone March 2, 2000 The applicant respectfully requests a clarification of this issue by the Development Review Commission. We hereby submit this memo to be part of the record of this Development Review permit request. Sin er • ./(/ William F. r in , AI for the applicant cc: � pplicant ` organ Tracy, Associate City Planner • Page 5 LAKE OS `, wf'O • I II 111 I I I I I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Bill Horning Western Planning Associates • 4621 SW Kelly Avenue Portland, OR 97201 March 24, 2000 RE: Request for clarification of PUD allowed uses Dear Mr. Horning: In your letter of March 2, 2000, you informed the Deputy City Attorney of your intention to request a clarification of a matter related to the McCart-Diemco PUD from the Development Review Commission. It appears that you are requesting what amounts to a code interpretation [LOC 49.16.060]. Interpretations are first made by the Planning Director, not the Development Review Commission. There are two types of code interpretations: formal and informal. • • Formal interpretations require an application and fee, along with a written request to interpret specific issues as related to proposed development of a property. The formal interpretation shall be binding on the City as it relates to any future development proposals for that property. These formal interpretations are processed in the manner provided for a minor development, subject to the same notice and appeal procedures. Appeals of these interpretations are reviewed by the Planning Commission. [LOC 49.16.060(1)]. • Informal interpretations are requested either orally or in writing, are not subject to notice or appeal, and are not a binding interpretation upon the City as it relates to subsequent development applications. You will need to clarify in which manner you wish to proceed with this interpretation request. It appears that your letter seeks a formal interpretation that would binding upon the development of the site. To proceed with a formai interpretation, please submit a filing fee of$287.00. Your letter will serve to identify the remaining issues. Upon receipt of the filing fee, a full formal interpretation will be conducted. Until a formal interpretation is issued, the informal interpretation is not a final land use decision and is not binding on City staff or City appellate authorities regarding future development of the subject site. EXHIBIT 52 LU 99-0054 Page 1 of 6 3811 A Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego,Oregon 97034 Planning Division:(503)635-0290 • Building Division:(503)635-0390 • Engineering Division:(503)635-0270 • FAX(503)635-0269 Staff has nevertheless preliminarily reviewed your arguments in support of an unlimited office use: on the basis that the PUD approval (Ordinance 1217, May 1968) vested in perpetuity both the uses then allowed in the underlying zone and any specific use requests • included in the PUD plan that were above and beyond those allowed in the underlying zone." Staff does not preliminarily read the uses permitted in the PD zone so broadly and timeless. To determine the scope of permissible uses now available to the subject property, we must examine the PUD zone provisions that were applicable at the time of creation of the • PUD zone.': "Any property may be zoned Planned-Unit Development zone in accordance with the provisions of this Article; provided that the City Council adopts the final development plan for such property in accordance with this article, in which case the Council shall adopt the final development plan as the zoning on the property provided that such property is not less than four contiguous acres in area.' Ordinance 1172, Section 1, adopting amendment to Section 124 of Lake Oswego Zoning Code (adopted July 10, 1967). Thus, to determine the zoning on the PUD site, we must examine the final development plan: "The final development plan and program shall contain the following information: • (1)(a)A land use plan indicating all proposed uses within the Planned-Unit Development." Ordinance 1172, Section 1, adopting amendment to Section 132 of Lake Oswego Zoning Code, then codified as LOC 53.3203 (adopted July 10, 1967). The City Council adopted Ordinance 1217 to establish the McCart-Diemco PD Zone: "Approval of the Planned-Development for Phase I of the McCart-Diemco PUD as shown upon the development plan and program submitted by the applicant is hereby granted upon the following conditions: 1. Adoption of a Planned-Unit Development for Phase I of the McCart- Diemco Planned-Unit Development is approved as shown on the final plan and written program submitted to and adopted by the Planning Commission; said The code section you cite[LOC 48.18.475]is taken from current ordinance, and not the 1967 code(in effect at the time of the PUD approval). 2 The McCart-Diemco PUD site is 4.9 acres. 3 Code references in this letter in the 5 digit format(##.#1#)are from the 1967 Lake Oswego Code, while 410 citations in the seven digit format(##.##.###)relate to the current Code. Page 2 of 6 Final Plan and written program is expressly made a part of this zone change, and an underlying zone is hereby established of M-P for the said Planned-Unit 11111 Development. All ordinances and codes which are applicable to an M-P zone shall apply. 4. Following installation of a sanitary sewer to service the property, the applicant may seek approval of a Planned-Unit Development from the Planning Commission for Phases II and III." Although each PUD parcel has an underlying zone (in this case, M-P), the Final Development Plan establishes "all proposed uses" "as the zoning on the property.-4 • In Chapter 53, of the 1967 Code, relates to Planned Unit Developments. Section 53.030, Permitted Uses, states: "The following uses may be permitted in a planned-unit development: [for Planned Commercial and Industrial Districts] 1) uses permitted in the underlying district, 2) other uses as approved by the Planning Commission consistent with the development plan and program approved by the Planning Commission, 3) Accessory buildings and uses." (Emphasis added) Staff believes this section allowed an applicant for a PUD (in 1967) to propose a specific mix of uses, including uses that were not permitted in the underlying • zone.' This differs from current code standards, which do not allow deviations from the list of allowed uses in the underlying zone to be allowed in a PD. The greater flexibility authorized by the PUD provisions relates to an applicant's ability to prescribe specific standards (and in 1967, specific uses)which would better relate to the particular characteristics of a property apart from the typically applied standards. This flexibility was not to enable vesting of an entire zoning and development code for a particular moment in time, unless that was provided for on the Final Development Plan. Otherwise, there is the anomalous situation of where a parcel adjacent to the PUD is subject to the changing zone uses and the PUD parcel is not subject to the changing zone uses (absent some definitive "The fact that Ordinance 1217 establishes an underlying zone of M-P for this property does not affect the PUD uses that were approved as part of the final plan. It merely designates the underlying zoning code requirements that are utilized in evaluating the proposed development for those remaining development standards and uses not specifically proposed or altered by the PUD application. The adoption of this underlying zone was a requirement as part of the annexation of the subject property and not the PUD approval. 'Current code standards do not allow for uses not permitted in the underlying zone to be allowed in a PD. LOC 48.18.470, .476. To the extent uses are permitted in the PD Final Development Plan adopted prior to the current code,the continuation of those uses is subject to the non-conforming use provisions. LOC 48.26.700(1), The proposed PD modification proposes uses which are not permitted in the underlying zone and thus must come within the scope of uses granted as part of the original or modified PD Final Development Plan prior to adoption of the current code provisions. Page 3 of 6 statement that the then underlying zone uses were being fully included as part of the PUD Final Development Plan). The only evidence provided in the McCart- Diemco PUD related to uses on Lot 38 is a list of tenants: Actuators, Inc., H. Skabinski and Son, Lake Grove Warehousing Company, and the Fold-A-Fence Corporation. The purpose of the PUD was flexibility in land development standards, not that the PUD parcel would necessarily have a right to lock in unstated and unapproved uses within the overlay zone. Ordinance 1172, Section 1, adopting amendment to • Section 124 of Lake Oswego Zoning Code (adopted July 10, 1967). Staff is of the opinion that if your interpretation were to prevail, other limitations would result including the inability to utilize incidental retail provisions of the current IP zone, and vocational schools and research facilities would not be permitted, as they were not provided for in the MP zone. • Any change in the commercial uses for the PUD must be the approved: "Changes which alter or change ... commercial uses ... shall be made in the form of a petition for approval of a new Planned-Unit Development and shall be made in accordance with this Article. Ordinance 1172, Section 1, adopting amendment to Section 140 of Lake . Oswego Zoning Code, then codified as LOC 53.420 (adopted July 10, 1967). Staff interprets the combination of the 1967 PUD Chapter requirements to mean that an applicant was required to propose a specific mix of uses [LOC 53.220 and 53.320], a circulation plan, a drainage plan, and parking plan. Other development standards would be as required by the zoning code unless specifically altered by action of the Planning Commission [LOC 53.110]. Those standards which were specifically proposed or varied remain in effect so long as the PUD is in effect as the zone development requirements. Other standards which have not been altered or specified will be controlled by the other sections of the Lake Oswego Code [LOC 53.110]. A more troublesome discovery from staff's investigation into the PUD requirements from 1967 is the fact that this current application to modify the building location and size seemingly violates the PUD program, plan, and approval. A. Development Standards "[T]he following development standards' are adopted as part of Planned-Unit Development ordinance in addition to all other development standards provided for 6 Minimum development district size,neighborhood compatibility, lot coverage, residential density, density increase and control,peripheral yards,open space,commercial development in residential PUDs. Page 4 of 6 in the City's Zoning Code .... In cases of conflict between standards set forth in this • Article and other parts of the City's Code the standards provided for in such other code sections shall control unless the Planning Commission and Council shall have granted a variance from said standards in the approval.of the Final Plan or subdivision plat as provided in this Article." Ordinance 1172, Section 1, adopting amendment to Section 126 of Lake Oswego Zoning Code(adopted July 10, 1967). Staff similarly finds that the development standards that are applicable to the McCart- Diemco PUD zone are by express reference the development standards of the underlying zone, not as they may change from time to time but as established. B. Modification of Phases The PUD program: "shall contain the following information: ... (d) A time schedule showing construction commencement, rate of development, and approximate completion date for each phase of construction and type of structure." The McCart-Diemco application provided for 3 phases in construction: • Phase 1 Lot 38 —landscape beds Lots 77-79, and 39 - construction of 14,000 sq. foot single story structure Phase 2 (18-24 months following Phase 1) Lot 38 —none (original); removal of gun shop delayed until Boones Ferry Road widening (1979 PUD modification) Lots 77-79, and 39 -expansion of 14,000 sq. foot single story structure to 38,000 sq. feet. Phase 3 (No time frame given) Lot 38 —none Lots 77-79, and 39—22,000 sq. foot structure placed on Lot 39; buffering landscaping on Lot 39 postponed from Phase 1 to Phase 3 (1979 PUD modification). Concluding that the nature of the commercial uses are fixed by the Final Development Plan, and that the means for altering the commercial uses within the PUD requires "a and construction standards. Ordinance 1172,Section 1,adopting amendment to Section 126 of Lake Oswego Zoning Code(adopted July 10, 1967). Page 5 of 6 l petition for approval of a new Planned-Unit Development", staff thus preliminarily . concludes that a PUD modification is required. Since changes to the commercial uses in • the McCart-Diemco PUD zone must be in compliance with the Final Development Plan, a modification of the Plan is necessary in order to allow the proposed incidental retail and vocational school, unless the applicant demonstrates that the proposed uses are similar to the original uses as specified in the Final Development Plan. However, the current PD standards would be applicable to the permissible uses, which as noted previously are the current underlying IP base zone. Accordingly, a modification for office use would require that this project be reviewed under current standards, including the 15% limitation • on office uses. Staff recommends that the applicant determine whether to proceed with a formal code interpretation. If a formal interpretation is requested, a filing fee of$287 along with two sets of mailing labels and a copy of your March 2, 2000 letter will be needed. This letter essentially represents staff's informal interpretation. You may seek to reverse this interpretation through a formal interpretation request and if needed, appeal to the Planning Commission. As it stands, staff is recommending that the current application be placed in abeyance until such time that this interpretation matter can be resolved. In any case, staff finds that a modification of the PUD plan and program will be required before a decision can be made on the subject application. 410 Sincer ly, MORGAN TRACY Associate Planner C: David Emami 3380 Barrington Drive West Linn, OR 97068 Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager IIII Page 6 of 6 f ARE O44 O Lipp r ��J • ONEGON • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Bill Horning Western Planning Associates 4621 SW Kelly Avenue Portland, OR 97201 April 5, 2000 RE: LU 99-0054 Design Review and PUD Modification Dear Mr. Homing: We appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and the applicant, Mr. Emami, on April 3, 2000, regarding the status of Mr. Emami's pending application. This meeting was in response to your letter of March 2, 2000 to Deputy City Attorney Evan Boone, which we construed as a request for an informal interpretation, and my reply dated March 24, 2000. In addition to clarifying the issues in the March 24, 2000 letter, you also updated us on your contact with Mrs. Taylor and her sons, who own adjacent lots that are part of the 1968 Planned Unit Development. • In order to obtain the zone change from residential to industrial' in 1968, the then owner subjected the property to future development restrictions under the 1968 PUD zone. There does not appear, from Staffs determination, to be sufficient legal (code) flexibility to support Mr. Emami's argument that the 1968 M-P base zone uses are "locked-in"to the PUD, absent express consideration of the effects and approval of the wide range of uses allowed in the M-P zone. From his perspective, it is regrettable that the 1968 PUD was created on the multiple lots and then the ownership of the lots separated, but that is what happened, with its attendant effects on the flexibility of future development. From the information and argument presented, staff has made the following determinations: 1. Technical Completeness. Staff had deemed your application to be technically complete on February 4, 2000 based on your submittal's position that the proposed modifications to the existing structures would not affect the PUD Final Development Plan and Program, and that the proposed uses were in conformance with the current IP zone. EXHIBIT 53 LU 99-0054 M-P was the designated underlying zone in the 1968 ordinance. M-P was for Industrial Parks. The M-P zone has since been repealed and the I-P zone has been adopted for industrial parks. Page 1 of 4 380 A Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego,Oregon 97 034 Planning Division: (503)635-0290 • Building Division: (503)635-0390 • Engineering Division:(503)635-0270 • FAX(503)635-0269 We note that the application was not signed by all owners of parcels within the PUD, e.g., the Taylors, and therefore the applied-for development must not encompass work or uses that would require a PUD modification.' Your request for interpretation caused Staff to thoroughly investigate the 1968 PUD ordinance requirements. As stated in my letter of March 24, 2000, we find that a PUD modification would be required if there is a change in the approved' commercial uses, or there is a change in the building location and size. • Although we continue to find that the application is"complete" in terms of information submitted, the current application would likely require that Staff deny this application absent Mrs. Taylor's signature or consent because changes in approved uses and building locations would constitute a PUD modification. [You indicated that you are making efforts to obtain Mrs. Taylor's signature.]5 A modification to the PUD may be approved by the City Manager if the proposed changes to the PUD Final Development Plan and Program do not increase the intensity of any use or significantly affect other property or uses.6 Effectively, as long as the proposed PUD modification does not result in an intensification of usage or significantly affect other properties (even within the PUD), then the PUD modification will be treated as a"minor development"for review purposes. 2. Prior Approval for Facade Modifications. Mr. Emami has a previous approval for façade modifications. He may complete these approved modifications without any further approvals from the Planning Department. • 2 See Evan Boone's letter to you dated August 9, 1999. 3 The use of the term"approved uses"is meant to refer to the uses that were outlined in the PUD's Final Development Plan and Program,not any uses described in the underlying base zone,whether as it existed in 1968 or as it exists now. As set forth on the PUD's Final Development Plan and Program Mr. Emami indicated that he terminated tenancies in anticipation of development application approval. It is unfortunate that he terminated tenancies in the hope that the development application would be approved, and as a result he states that he will experience lost revenue. Although we do understand the financial burden created,and we will work expeditiously towards a resolution,this burden was the result of Mr. Emami's actions taken at his own risk. 6 LOC 48.18.490 Authority to Approve Changes in Planned Development Approval. "The City Manager may approve minor changes in any planned development approval, except zone requirements adopted as a part of the approval,provided that such change: 1. Does not increase the intensity of any use, or the density of residential uses; and, 2. Meets all requirements of the development standards and other legal requirements; and, 3.Does not significantly affect other property or uses;will not cause any deterioration or loss of any natural feature,process or open space;nor significantly affect any public facility; and, 4. Does not affect any condition specifically placed on the development by action of a hearing body or City Council. Any change not meeting the criteria set forth above shall be processed as a new application. • Requests to modify zone requirements shall be processed pursuant to LOC 48.18.475(4)." Page 2 of 4 • 3. PUD Owner Options IllIf Mr. Emami desires to continue working towards development that would trigger a PUD modification' (as outlined in my letter of March 24, 2000), we believe there are two options: a. Modification. The City urges Mr. Emami continue his efforts work with the Taylors to obtain either signatures authorizing a more comprehensive PUD modification, or at the least a letter indicating no objection to the development application. • b. PUD Voluntary Termination . Another option would be the voluntary termination of the 1968 PUD8 and reestablishment of a new PD for Lot 38.9 The new PD would not"lock—in"uses (based on current LOC 48.18.470 - .490 provisions) but could establish reduced setbacks, most particularly the zero lot-line setback for the building abutting the property line of Lots 38 and 78-79. Otherwise, if a new PD were not formed for Lot 38, the proposed second story addition would be subject to a 10-foot setback from the southern property line if no new PD were in place. Uses would be allowed as permitted in the underlying IP zone.10 A conditional use approval in conjunction with the establishment of the new PD would permit office space in excess of the 15% gross site area. The Conditional Use and PD applications would be classified as "Major Development". 4. PUD Involuntary Termination. • The City may consider initiating PUD revocation proceedings based on non-compliance with the Final Development Plan and Program, e.g., construction of Phase III has not begun after 32 years and the Phase III area, and possibly other parts of the PUD, have been used for uses not authorized under the Final Development Plan and Program. To my knowledge, this would be the first involuntary PUD termination in Lake Oswego and the grounds for termination may be subject to some dispute, given the lack of PUD schedule clarity and the history of this PUD. A contested PUD termination would undoubtedly be a much more lengthy process than a voluntary PUD termination. As noted above, termination of the PUD would not be without further procedural requirements in order to obtain Mr. Emami's change in commercial uses or building construction." Potential changes to the circulation plan,building layout and construction phasing,and the list of allowable uses. "Voluntary request for termination would require the signature of Mr.Emami and Mrs.Taylor and her sons(you have indicated that there is some concern about her present ability to fully understand the nature and effects of a PUD modification.). 9 A new PD,either consisting only of Lot 38 or encompassing Lot38, is necessary to address the setback and other development violations that would otherwise occur upon the cessation of the 1968 PUD for the structures on Lot 38. 10 The adoption of the I-P zone as the replacement zone for the M-P zone would thus change the underlying zone to I-P,but under the 1968 PUD,the uses stated in the Final Development Plan and Program would continue. If expansion of commercial uses were sought,requiring amendment of the 1968 PUD,the permissible uses would be those listed in the underlying I-P zone. '' The future uses would be subject to the underlying IP Zone requirements,and expansion of the second floor would require compliance with applicable setbacks or a PD for the property might be necessary. Page 3 of 4 We offer the above options as methods that we believe would best address Mr. Emami's short- and long-term development goals. 411 As a point of procedure, you may still seek a formal interpretation and challenge this interpretation through the appeals process, as addressed in my March 24, 2000 letter. As to the pending development application, please advise by April 13, 2000 whether Mr. Emami wishes to proceed, so that we may schedule this item for an April 17th hearing, if necessary. Sincerely, MORGAN TRACY Associate Planner C: David Emami 3380 Barrington Drive West Linn, OR 97068 Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager L:IMORGAN TINETDOCSIREPORTSIOPENCASE\LU99-0054-emamiNcCart.PUD.1tr.006.doc • 110 Page 4 of 4 Apr- 19-00 OB: 32A P . 01 April 12, 2000 David Emami: You asked me to recall what businesses were initially in the buildings that my partners and 1 sold you, and what subsequent businesses have been in that area. As best as I can recall, these were the renters, and the businesses that they were in: • Sabinski and sons : Painting contracters and retail sales of ladders, paint, and paint supplies. Fold-a-fence: sold white wire fencing, about 8 to JO incites high, mostly ornamental rather than a functional fence. Automatic Actuators; sold electric drapery pulling appliances, and also made and sold traffic signs to the state of Oregon and cities within the state. Also, one of our tenants was Stevens Marine, that is now located in Tigard. This renter was engaged in selling boats, motors and related goods. • We also had, for a brief period, a .:ompanv that sold modular furniture and office components, hut I can't remember the name of that company. They occupied the area that is now V'al's Auto Body. Rich's Gun shop has been there selling guns and related goods since we bought the property in 1978. Sins in Depth made and sold and installed foam signs. Lake Oswego Blue Print sold design and architectural supplies and made blue prints. Airflow, an HVAC firm, had an office in our complex where he designed H\'AC systems, and also stored some l•IVAC supplies, hut his primary storage facility was in SE Portland. I don't know what bearing that this may have on your existing property, but this is as best that I can recall. n df wonald E. Baker Baker-Silver Investments EXHIBIT 54 14697 S Vti' W oodhue St LU 99-0054 Tigard Or. 97224-0903 WESTERN RECEIVEDPLANNING ASSOCIATES.INC. 1211. 1 4621 SW KELLY AVE. PORTLAND.OR 97201 503.294.0222 CITY OF LAKE C 5WECO 360.695.8340 Capt.of PlanninG&Development FAX: 503.294.0223 April 12, 2000 Morgan Tracy Associate Planner City of Lake Oswego P.O. Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 RE: LU 99-0054 Dear Mr. Tracy: We received your letter dated April 5, 2000 regarding the McCart/Diemco PUD and our interpretation request. You stated that "the use of the term `approved uses' is meant to • refer to the uses that were outlined in the PUD's Final Development Plan and Program, not any uses described in the underlying base zone, whether as it existed in 1968 or as it exists now." We are still not clear on what uses are allowable, so we are requesting that the City clarify the PUD's written and plan program by outlining the uses that were approved and are approvable for the PUD without hearings or PUD modifications. We anticipate meeting with City staff to review the requested clarification of uses. It is our intent to reserve the option to request a formal interpretation pending our review of this final aspect of the City's informal determination. Thank you for your attention and assistance with this matter. Sin r I , • William F. Ho g AICP cc: David Powell David Emami EXHIBIT 55 LU 99-0054 „so o,1.sc[OswE� '11111A111111i • arwo$ David Emami COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 3380 Barrington Drive West Linn, OR 97068 April 20, 2000 RE: Allowable uses in the Rosewood Industrial Planned Unit Development Dear Mr. Emami: This letter is to relay staff's final determination regarding the uses that are authorized by the Planned Unit Development (PUD 1-68). As you are aware, staffs interpretation is that the uses that are allowed in a PUD (established prior to 1984) are limited to those specific uses that were proposed in the application and approved by the Planning Commission. The information contained in the record for PUD 1-68 does not explicitly list the uses proposed on Lot 38, as it does for the remainder of the PUD site. The final development plan and program, however, does indicate the tenants that occupied the existing building at the time of the PUD approval. Those tenants were: • The Fold-a Fence Corporation (supplying small decorative fences and garden tools, 10,130 sqare feet). The present classification for this use would be retail "under 10,000 sq. ft. including apparel and accessory, department stores, building supply, garden, sporting goods, furniture etc.”. The rear portion of this tenant space was used for a mix of office and storage. The respective sizes for each use is 5,000 square feet retail, 2,565 square feet office, and 2,565 square feet storage. H. Skibinski and Son (painting contractor and supply). This use would be a split classification, part"Services to Buildings (including dwellings), cleaning and exterminating"and part retail sales. The respective sizes for each use were 500 s.f. retail and 1,500 s.f. building services. Lake Grove Warehousing(offices). While the tenant's name implies that this use was a warehouse, staff concurs with your assessment that the limited size of the space, and limited ceiling height made this an impractical location for a warehousing use. Therefore, our best determination is that this space was used for the Lake Grove Warehousing office needs. The present classification for that use would be"Professional Offices". The size of this use was 2,450 s.f. Automatic Actuators (assembled and sold drapery pulling appliances and manufactured traffic signs). This use would also be a split classification, part"Sign Shop", part"Light Manufacturing, Processing, or Assembly of Product", and part retail sales. The size of 411111 these uses were 500 s.f. retail stores, 1,500 s.f. assembly, and 2,000 square feet sign shop. EXHIBIT 56 380 A Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego,Oregc LU 99-0054 Planning Division: (503)635-0290 • Building Division:(503)635-0390 • Engineering Divisi Also present was the Gun Shop (repair and sales). This use cannot be relied upon as the 40 development plan and program that was approved showed this building (and included use) to be removed. The table below summarizes the amount of space allowed for each type of use. The location of each particular use within the buildings is not restricted; however, the size and type of use shall be limited to the following: General Use Size of Allowed Use on Lot 38 Retail Sales, General Merchandise 6,000 Services—Business 3,500 Professional Office 5,015 Light Manuf., Processing or Assembly 1,500 Storage 2,565 TOTAL 18,580 Staff understands that there have been many uses in this center, and concurs that there may have been several uses that were not authorized by the PUD. This inconsistency was not apparent until a close examination of the 1961 Zoning Code PUD requirements which revealed that the uses authorized by the PUD are limited to those that were approved in the final development plan and program. More specifically, on Lot 38, only the uses that existed at the time of the PUD approval would be authorized. New or additional uses apart from those listed above are allowed only through a modification of the final S development plan and program, accomplished via a PUD Modification process. Please note that if the present PUD were dissolved, these uses (with the exception of the professional office, and assembly uses) would become non-conforming and would be allowed to continue so long as they were not discontinued for a period greater than 6 months. It is staff's opinion that a request to modify your PUD to alter the permissible uses would be limited to the selection of uses allowed in the underlying IP Zone at the time of your proposed modification. Current PD standards (1984-present) do not allow a Planned Development to propose specific uses and the uses allowed within a PD are a function of the underlying zone, subject to change from time to time. I hope this resolves the issue related to what uses you can enlist as tenants in your current development application. Should you have any questions please call me at 635-0290. Sincerely, MORGAN TRACY Associate Planner C: Bill Horning • S f. s • SITE DATA PROJECT TEAM "'• ''"' 9.I6_5 ;y I`- Owner/Developer: Civil Engineer/Landscape Architect: Architect: Surveyor: I*tat llu.Idmq A,Pa ,n aa0_SR.!I HunB111q h*mprlm n,tea iy 1�J0 snJ.I. Conta.:I Uay.o E.18.n. Cn«l a..l W,n,a.n Flrn mnq, AICP Contact f3ub WO Conlact Harold P Salo y C Holunsn.., A.• CS. Aan No if.A.Accan,4lr9 Inc f3n.IIln,5 I'ave.1117V arr. Ja89 nI"nowt.Drove II'};Sl'f liN 457.SW xnlr AV( izoou SW v.nwu^a rn„II Y Wasl lmn P B708a)Bel p*nllAMe.on snot , Tigard.09 977)A •5982 Ho u.<I•41. NSSn I anchca*e /•Ir..a 4Sa22 1<<L.I f. 15011 set 3390 IIANNINIi IBWI 670)n7 Lake Oswego,OII>tl095 WESTERN J'I'GRN 1,nldrr.I(1r I'n+r,'In,' 7::L r A x 15n71 457•335? -- 15071)9A 8777 AWAITS at IWII 79A c771 re% FAx I6081 614 5/81 1593I 636 3141 111,ANNIN(1 . I. 1 tr.1 r•1 nv.ned do rpm-es * �o �'_mm ASSMfA1B a1r. EEO •:IanI II) I9 rntneatrl 4e' , +- .,. _ • __- SHEET INDEX f `~ 1 SITE PLAN Iwesle,n ngn,.s I' t 9 nsaocl 4. •�---»»as i::ae..'�"'....nod':a ..C� ` a° _.! 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS IA. ,.Puns a Aasoc•vnsl land Hannon' \ 7 1 3 GRADING / UTILITY PLAN IWeata.n Plann.np Assacl Enn4erape f,' \ r.. '''''fr•«•..rr ., .`, o 4 LANDSCAPE PLAN IW^•.In,n w^n^mq Asor 1 Arebaeelore w�:u."r...' :..•..,.r r t1.il Engineering . iT i --- -_ - 5 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 8 SPECS Iwo Ploitmog ASSOC I �• ' \ 1 nw..e s.<,...etiv..•,w7 ";` i i _ A-1 ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLAN B Imn, C Ree.noon Alat 0 ,, �,� \ *wore+ne.w..« r, ll J,T A•2 ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLAN B Wa,ry C Romnaon 61A1 • �• A-3 ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS B I^"+ r nec,nso^ Al al /a'r \ ne....0..,.. v .+u I�e C nnb.Mnn 0..<I real n seill Alt ^"";p rtila,.^"" "«., r .r-. A•A ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS 0 •,r ennAxo,ne erro1 N. !! \ p,'.1«1..-..r.1"S:'::.. � ,A.-,.yZ! A-5 ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS A Iles, C aemnsan AI<I tas/n,•elzt p \ X \ ..^. -t ' -'? A-.8 LIGHTING PLAN I1a•, - 11-c Asa• <1<, 349105-97,10 rsl»rmzs 1 `\ /' " "" TAX LOT/VICINITY MAP ifl l RECEIVED aa7 XSxolte Q Q �;«� \ \„ ly "1, WIr t/11/N lG /y/ l3LD(1 A /\ Iwo..^......�. a11Bea I.,,e/» k ��'✓ �- ,ern. 1/a/ee / .... k . \ _ % 1....."/ 7num ---:-..... 11 ifil jj ,ItiN 2 .I Z000 4/70/90 • I. / I'"'' N ,W :" `G 1 -' ••. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO �.< �' - Bc- ..;Bo` g ry �a\ 1--1.------- .�-1w;_, ;�_ Dept.of Planning&Development o~*.`R7:,f 1 -e ..l�c �% �ilk.o.; \./`\ '` lUST NdfK INSTA7.EdTMNy f•?/rF.AR(\\ c c 0 - c /��' 1' O »aw...w.writ Ara r - ,", 1 _ r lX410r: i o I 1 � , n,l • s - •\i . �I n�11 i'1 w 1 I_I , rZy • ', xelameaes• . ID T: ;i 0 �� - , U 1 Z ; \` Tioher.vs, 4x1 �i} El�, -4 m `Z IA.i• n:JT.' _... ,.., I i eat z t3t Dt1 a Ill,`,; ,4 v,I Ao _.. • ll,�y E o co LI w .. X r, I 0.V m i 1 _ McCART-DIEMCO INDUSTRIAL PARK MASTER PLAN fT1 of \D W Proposed Site Plan '4 ,a PUD 1/1.88: Lots 38. 39, 77, 78• 79 n s 11 • S . WESTERN PLANNING /� , wowtn WC WO l'Isootsng 1apd.r.pe 0_ rrrhllrrlpr. 01 '43,3tr4.•,mrr. Cldl[ntme.rint / / P ///J �\ wxi sr Icn1.ar PUK11.110,MI Wei 6115/=64 d21. 10 MI OM �Q. ma, N+ .,��: I .r.lt: a MORO Wit rfll/.r ormta lot/diem/se o 1lxr/o. $ ifta //:%*''' r/ ..,. 'ii..•,•-•:,• ::—.• it ft \r R • y MU sco s. ...WW1 +4U d_r an a .�1. 74 p le ..f. i mod' CL4 W A.a _ _ 2 O C• 11 —i to so—, dy Andy ...5 6 ASSOC..IeS, 7C1 199E M A .y 1999 e e . o ne..no..(3)......CS11.n...VMS*1SO0.1rt..e ...Iw.t..un.en 111 `• S . • GENERAL UTILITY NOTES .f:....:A•'.:..:.r...ii.::a:.....•1.w‘..-z•4:...:.a^ao.:A<.w.,..--'____.____ r.•. .«w.«.•.w w...�-..r.... .ram..+. w «. ...a..w.r.r o.. «...•...w.• •r r,•......,••..w••.11••... r.. .w... .... _N. WESTERN PLANNING a to...•••••n rW Mr••.•rr r•M•.M•. ....•••••........AA..•„w .•••ry••••..0••••..„r•sK i.•.•.1111. / -- ro M n.... n . .w w..�.•....w r�.•..•,...w.w•..••o•....�•••••• .•.•..•••»••••.6....•..•••••..r••••••...,••t 1 ANIMUS UC. / \/-yy/ - _ n�.rb• •. ',��.n SANITARY SEWER ANO WATER NOTES land Pl�mm�r /� Y' IL rr: •...• wr.L-"'I --�.�.i,•�•i 'ii.tii•.•.".1 G n..;• - _ - -_ AIIhtw'I.nr .,. / 11T - x.rw...r.+.,.. Civil FAT•..extor r« STORMVTATER NOTES / • r[..w:F.•—aw.-:' 'Perin i01 ......1.4--..r ..1..-_f.n rH p•i�:ilti'.AIYb'%F-::n ARP9Yrtt A• A. /,. Q I` �. ` ` r„w~nl ..na•M ,.........r•M••.r r«•w•••.•w••.ww•r cA..w••r.f.1••.•COW..•Mw1 T' \ :?.. • I •� • ow* •.••••••.0* ...••r•Mr a••w...•..n••.••• 021 M11.2D.1 4.1 G ate. r ,m ..w w...wr.•.•.• w•w•.0.. ..•..•... r1114n1 W AMA •...•.•.„.•w•.•...r.w....•..�.r•r�.•�...•..••..+w...•.•.•..•.„Awvr r w.......•........•�•..w.- 111]/1.1-1222 ` 1 • • • • • rAI L•1-1.12 .e / • \ r Aug+»•I.•.. ... ]W/6r5.1]l0 P +'r BLDG.A r� IMPERVIOUS AREA CALCULATIONS 4ALC A XOM . 44, I NEWLY CALMED 1APERVIDVS AREA 11.812 51 111VP0. 11/11/N ] NEWLY GAGA ICO PERY•p.15 AREA n? SE /,A� �.07 ,�....•. _ ] 10rA1 NEWLY CREAIEO A1•ERnDuS ARIA 9A).Sr I/R/m A �' /0� >> ...F s•- ...../,-; vii,,,,,,1.„ ...„' tl 1 :•mow,.n•,:47, 7,7..:m -- (.:i. / >< !L' ,M•Mr'li.� `I I `�- -��'�,=N , 5�\ /\ '� i: ••� 1. ••-•.••• FO11 JURISDICTIONAL 1 I Q I n ii 1 1 ll 11 RFVIFW n , -` PROTECTIVE TREE FENCE_DETAIL 0 i t ; _ , ,1 --- .- _ .,...,, -7 •,]1•$4111-.441 �1 ` A r ii c et ai ... . 'Q{ A•...a...,._(1.,.r..81 / I \ O � I .1.] Op., mak I I :O 6A 8tsr8.rt.,,.11M . ..... o . . -F.J...... lb- t- -... ........ ......- - AI CU r., gym/ i 1•---..,•--1.--•.- -I w" I-- ...„ r _.. �,- — X �.'GTMMM)_dten_Ay1..ALMA. 0 N�ClCfl t..©. 3 `D = • of �O W (/ CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER O •C....u., A.A r•.t ..•,, ,n ..„.. .. ...O «r.... r .•,nu•.t.1N,Ian f 0 • • ues__SCA _ales PLANT SCHEDULE ., i..r..l'Ch.•,ip"r w~Mt~" tr•[ WV OM COMMA,4ut4 WMY .[l I MWM.S [a .1. w•.�,w.✓,u, '✓z. �_w,~;ri :. •" 1..••la.._.,,�..•... •..a,•.„._....• PLANNING MUMS NG 1 nn.....ry,wy.............7...r. • M .•••••....•4,.......:••1.•....„. /� //� --• t -•--c.w....'to....---- -_P•....,I c.....—...--- -- -- ./\ _ N 'I bend I.ripe t ........�. , . ....,... // t'•.rv.•.•.•1..1. ..,n1 w - _ --- _—_ .� ...-- _—__ _. landempe IP w a t" Po, •.,n....P.A. I oe Atehlltel_te `I.. ' ISe',.l:.-.."•...w n^.. •--0 Q,e ,w ..,r.......... ,....� y,«.1."..o..«...toms Nowa, :on l:nil RnRin..rinR or .0,,, .....,...._ ,...PpoP optoePP.PA • PO x�.. •FY3' \1 �'! ....t.`�iv...w. V II'fell„w" ` w ,x .....,....... I.. ..e,,✓•x. ralewiistotrnte, NA MN 4021 awlees"Nu .__W 1 d, x �j��/l/, y - r m•••. Scut as wrm! Q. •. not sp,ns / -.1iq',t• \\ 1e ,«.«.... etente a/nryt tp L EILDC3.a � wb wow 5(100 I: ., i/e:'O`•�S•1191,81it. ° -{l7 ° ''�� i��"4111 -�-•-•'1 ui o..r+mol m - ,...1w ff +k".wr t44::.::.: Y, � c i`1\ a `fillip,A��` '� \ .. . ii 1 punlr.. 1 r11tY(� N` •.0 .e / cvrA ►y y' �', s 4r,F�Syf • S •.. ,10 . e *A- •mow cd ix CO. O z BLDG B 1 � •.... -- y y H, - to E y AS tom ..CD 0o LANDSCAPE PLAN e'i „f 0 • s 410 S I'111M1.l(•W .w ww .•a•..oa ";'�r""...:"'n'•.'"'i,wn 10 w`�_•.... .r.., •M.MT.OP MY.IT �;'"•.r�..•'x'r.`M•<..,.n •rc w.r _.....r�....»�.._..._..._.....,........-.». •��:"..+r .."..'TT mrr• TT _ /I .. .•Me.. " 1 NIL will "�� _ "• a -• :':=•• - {YI?S'ft';ItN r,. ; My .cam" _ �' '� Y �•`TT '�._.._s ._r "�:"% W ;: = PLANNING -e ^'�i1r <.� �r. ».w M• ' L .'I now. 'oimPfs." '• ..•TT'"•.•_.. _ *SUMS IMF • I. M•r,., f iiittiii-iirr- •- • ..00.':•:`'M.::...w...w,w.,.,.•,•.i.r» w ...:.,« .....::':.T.'..:'+ 'y'•"�... r.l •f.._..r,<. r,w.M..•--- , -ie::tl..m r�.1.a .- W—"..."r.'._.-_...........". _..^!'.. ...«.•r•_ r: ....r M.._' '•/---- r.•::.'..�.w••..... M..ru» •..r..•M. ..... r... `...""" ...-_ ..,-».."..»...,, y•.��=�.... ...,. L.nd I'Irrrnln. Yr om v :7<I �' '••'• w'�w� "' _,,.._....r_e.,m•rrr_ `w.'▪ '.u'"'.^.�w ^r.."f� � Arrhilerlurr I I ,I 0• � •VAg...n"• \.'IIOUSLE Ct1EC1I VALVE DETAIL______-__ _ ................................. ---'�'—' C1.11 F.nllir<rint \JJ 6%OTIMa • r.r....»•......................_ _.r..�. r...... I Y f♦ 1 ___. w[ "+r"M'f 74 .._w•. ._.._�m..r.r.~• :••• r r.".','rr•or..0.�w���.:�.u�i w�•wr i.. •IL 11 ."»rr r r" •r•.r", -'- •••..M.• • — _.r 1••••w'a -..."w+•.••••••• y * . ".�w.•_••r._•••••.**,••.•`�.. IMI S•f1111.R No 1 W ......11/:t'II ttOlIN 7RL:f:1`I.ANTIMtI RETAIL - •. .».•m.•..w »w• .� .•._ "�~»Yo+` " _ -•11xu.rr..."w« ▪ "_•.,«<r,... ,,•`,.- •..y,.. ......• ,........ • 1., .TT* »•.. .. A.IC 0 IIOIO c».-...•� <• �s To ivrr . » �iy�.rr rr.•....•_,. `_'^_.....n.. yu• _r •- _._ 1100. II/I./M 3/21/00 c'„�• " ® EMOYE CONTIIOL VALVE DETAIL To�•`_ 11....i_ I/IL/or Au ANN �•' . ,vN Y,1..•» ,' ..ro1a ••.."_...r"�. .�_'�-�.w"' ..'"^"�..... '+'..::..'_W:. o...•�'...r... ./L./00 oww ...•_r 4 it it%W. •••••• �?`r o. �11 r•....wa.... •".:e•F"' �,:,a•.fir. .. ....... ..';▪ '.^'•....r▪ 1..:»M'_",•,r...' ..T.•�•"`�:,` bl'iSTF a•l•Isof 000. 11-- 14- TT tomo iti 1l'7'r''''ill 7 �;«�''n"«r•.N 3I , w.... ......._..» »w.. -_.....-.::.- . .._..r.»«•�«r..."- w.�r,bN.,1 R ..._r.• .r....r--I.......... .'r'....` wWrr --- 'I'i a Y' T I. «• r«r_•r••.•.••"s...An AA. ••.••••,.:AA•`..r�A••••••�:•..•.•-.._ A 1.,,,.N. (.r l M_ANUAI.DRAIN YAI.V6 F''••' • ..._.•.••"•00:1•.... •...__.....•......,•_ '�-•:Jo'`. EVRRUREEN TREE PI.ANTINII DFThIL c / 1 O.• TTP _ ▪ "•`- ..,,,�,TK.,,.w"ram. r..-......q..•.. 7. ^4ri r.M eem.4.i»n .rr,W ,cM -."r r•M. ,...• �•..",.`.rr.r. ..•r...•.... ▪ .. -Mr.�:e N°.I ...w. _ •••••NO--•r'�^• ., _wT.:..Ste'.:.«...«.•:7r,..1 ...o,•"e. r'ewwp. 1o.wu, r=. .- �..�• •:r. zrz .:�'1'.�:::.".:".:'.'.:r rC:....5 I ...•.I...a 4..........................................L................."1'•........»r.............. w• •w.'"'. •.'L. �.N, C I JJTt 1,11Ir._"_....", .. ..•. . .. . . ...,......`:..••_.I_.... 'cti eat ...«..• �<...!•i"`S_R 8 'PAW SPRAY IIGO DETAIL ��rw� - » qrr _I ,_._�:��r�•'•...�r•«�,.'•`�'w�,:.:'�,:,. y 113 • J.AY wo 1 ".,.. 1.,, ...r.",. .... ` /1 r...1I•.,r.,i ND r•_. ram. .'.Y�':''. -^.;ri: a.' E w OS DI 44 13)NIIN11•I A 11111111NIN'OYY.M DETAI0. •1• R1 r , ••••••••••• ■: r r •'(((• , , -•��L< __ ••_ _ (^.v W y RI = M7 ■.may r .e,•_ , rx.� :- _ -»I•.•. •.r_� h C. ni, •.w'eD`•.+r, »r•• tf`�- —n....r. I-�■ ..rw�..M..r.._e.....r.r...r .wr_.'�' •r r....r..r,•...... I _,.. -.0 t •� O 1"�I .I AII•� V 11•Y• , rI ...-1 I..� Il ��-••"••• •I -- 1 _.\ �'i,.^•�„_iwrT. .�.M•f�.e.....LT;•.•rw.n•'• BARB L'ATLTI ORTAII w DETAIL •-�`+ • 11` 1 ))--- -- - . -- ---, (9)f{UICII aDUP1.INO YALV6 •1r ()0)SL E. INSIAw110N__ .., .... .� ... ,•.r w.. ..._....•.•... <s..1•c,,,(IC)NIT n..•C.•rw".,,... 1.11..r. 411••».11 ON,.... • • S . P P I_ .......... N -N.I.e II . 11 m 1 3 • II $1112 I{ 1 it it 41 il D I a a O _D— a Z i--— — — -- ---�_—a O II 11- FIRST FL.P- PLAN EXTERIOR LIGHTING LEGEND 0 II 1:7 Spiro Ru1.10 Sleek L) I I`Iiti Spiro Eno Black ) Ll CI Exterior Grails wcwe•ed 00.Liars IV `> IV Ir lY.g w 6 cn a 0 U U.I a0 I 13 J Z 0 oa' Oell II bias1mx I�T_ RANal xe_O = N-)!esO NJII .... .,e �._.__.�I—— __......_._.,�I - • 40 0 _ — i II l! u I! If ! di '2 I I I 4 g f N d IA 1 ,, ,' }„, „,,,,. .?„, 4_______g___11,,_ I I Il --- cl) a ® o o a o o _ I q• F= SECOND FLOOR PLAN EXTERIOR LIGU-ITING LEGEND `I 1- ,, J Spro IBtl u•IO Black V n 45 w Bpuo 624,Black • Q 13 E4Llor Cv.1oe Receabetl Pawl L1914 0/(Z I.1 z Iv on-ICI O I1I0.0 J W O r—Q r4X U °A ^ JCR CDU AS pip.?^ W E T� tle0. iwel • • • 0 '.0 R OaO , n : C -- —---- '_ BAIL DING COLORS V} ILWIVIIMErari •NUMMMi — R Illfil ! &'I rt ,S :.'I J'.; Rl kl®Y,itl L'!1- fi) .+'. ! �d �0# J j .111 M (y R L__ I n BLDG B WEST ELEvATICN Z () E 0 0 f.�� II f��js� ===Ii� �� ill (� um iiiiiii INI III' Ail Mil MUNI" _____ ___ . _. � x IJIO °'a = BLDG B NORTH ELEv4TION VD Ea Crt 4 - 2 • S • S . ,p • FFI _• LL - c yq 101.LP NAP - -- I�.L - BLDG B EAST ELEVATION Z 0 Lr L 0 U > CI- [k (k ti IL �a y •=1) 11100 ---- -- --- - - - U r, _----_._-- -.__ ._ __ �- -,_ _._ ___ . �.- ._. _, I, lll J vp 03 BLDG B SOUTN ELEvATION r \ — R_ O^ _ �p 9•YJ - T al 4,p!nr51� ar A _ 4 �� MISd . u OMNr asp .� •A' y J 'o.s...V..,0..11111011 d ,, - �p 11 .IMN111 SW noel 111.1.02 - I a.11P11,k...) na.n.1t9..nCj Q - - -- I ylaln.nl win,m n.uall..�lval naq 02-„a..ws p \ �.o,... L I 10 1'�III UIL9 n>I1.15 lINa731 .)Nl IHDI7 dU1N31%3 .�„y0, O R I cm \\\1 - ,Z m fll \\11 a �� ! ` �,� z1 a n °o ` - A 14 (,l m ALP 9!Y.14n,, ; \ +� �, r I.tll.q i.)5'fIM uo auM Imirva 111, ,,( `l 0 rn o ,....0,ttHbN1.IT 1 1 \\.(3 \\ �` 1 v Oil , Itsii,.- c) s.- , ...... 11 \ _I.,_\ \ \ „b O \-1 -.Adirt‘ 71;/..''\I 14P/l'ilt.'s',.i'I: . .,,/:;/41. ' C2'.0 zi „..., ! -.-.::1.7::.7. IV ...C . / / y S N 112 oiler=•••••1•••••••••••• 0 ' >( f o r. .---- -- ---?? .. "WT ;.1T,zi 9.`... ..;; ., / ao n al n moon 1 'yra: ' / WAS OM n l wl on Nd.0 +a 1 ... Go,I.na �SepSs-1ndla03 . u.11.11'a.ln1 Ist3 410 9.."019'"'0 -a.- 1M...i. VMS ON . to s air INDUSTRIAL BUILDING REMODEL PILKINGTON ROAD LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON Development Review Permit and PUD Modification Application Narrative • for RECEIVED DAVID A. EMAMI JUN 2 12000 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Dept.of Planning&Development by Western Planning Associates, Inc. REVISED June 19, 2000 Ell EXHIBIT 67 LU 99-0054 APPLICATION CONTENTS REVISED NARRATIVE • REVISED MASTER PLANS AND OTHER MAPS (24" x 36" & 8-1/2" x 11") Site Plan Existing Conditions Plan Preliminary Grading/Utility Plan Landscape Plan Landscape Details & Specifications ARCHITECTURAL PLANS (24" x 36" & 8-1/2" x 11") First Floor Plan (New Addition-South Bldg) Second Floor Plan (New Addition-South Bldg) West/North Elevations (South Bldg) East/South Elevations (South Bldg) Elevations (North Bldg) Lighting Plan PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED MATERIALS APPLICATION FORM PUD Property Owners Signatures • APPENDICES A. Right of First Refusal and License Agreement B. Reciprocal Easement Agreement For Access Purposes C. Title Report D. Pre-Application Conference Notes E. 8 t/z"x 11" Reduced Drawing Set F. Stormwater Analysis Report G. Neighborhood Contact Documentation H. Property Ownership List & 2 sets labels EXHIBITS 1. McCart-Diemco PUD Area Plan 2. McCart-Diemco Phase II Plan 3. Aerial Photo 4. Photo Key 5. Photos A&B 6. Photos C & D 7. Photos E & F 8. Photos G & 9. Conceptual Access Road Grading I REVISED 6/19/00 • INDUSTRIAL BUILDING REMODEL PILKINGTON ROAD INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS, SW Boones Ferry Road & Pilkington Road For: David Emami By: Western Planning Associates, Inc. The enclosed materials are submitted for Development Review Commission action to allow changes to the site plan and improvements for the existing industrial buildings at S.W. Boones Ferry Rd. & Pilkington Rd. This application is to be processed also as a PUD Modification as required by the City. The other PUD property owners have signed on as co-applicants (see Application). REQUEST FOR REVIEW This application is requesting review and approval of the following proposals: 1. Remodel and improve building, parking and landscaping located on Lot 38, including change in building footprint and height. The following narrative outlines the proposal and applicable development standards. 2. Allow a proportional increase of the existing PUD permitted uses based on this proposed increase in building area (10%). III 3. Allow IP uses to augment the PUD permitted uses in order to maintain full tenancy in the buildings and meet current parking requirements. GOAL The goal of this project is to upgrade the site plan, parking and architectural character of this older light industrial facility in response to current market conditions. The proposed remodel will continue in the style and with the materials already approved and underway on site. These additional changes will enhance the appearance of this site and improve its parking and circulation while complimenting other changes taking place in this neighborhood. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT Existing uses adjacent to the subject property: NORTH: Boones Ferry Road, Southern Pacific Railway, with residential (R7.5)beyond. EAST: Vacant property, zoned (I-P)Industrial Park. SOUTH: Existing manufacturing and warehouse, zoned (I-P) Industrial Park. WEST: Commercial building, zoned(I-P) Industrial Park. PROJECT SUMMARY The property consists of Lot 38, Bryant Acres, and it is identified as tax lot 1500 on the County Assessor's map 2 1 E l 8AB. The lot is 39,165 square feet in size and is entirely covered with building, • REVISED 6/19/00 1 industrial Building Remodel asphalt, gravel and landscaping. The site is one of five original Bryant Acres tax lots that comprise the McCart/Diemco PUD approved in 1968. Currently this Boones Ferry Industrial Site has two buildings; an"L" shaped 14,775 sq. ft. single-level building and a two-story 4,000 sq. ft. building. All existing structures are made of concrete block walls, glu-lam beams and 3 x 6 t & g decking roof structure, and have flat roofs. The buildings are in very good condition inside and out and are currently in industrial use. Table 1 outlines the PUD uses authorized for this site. The applicant has taken the storage square. footage and applied it as a percentage to each of the other uses, as the exact quantity and location of this use is unknown. This approach has been approved by City staff in order to more accurately reflect the uses in place at the time of original PUD approval. The applicant has also proportionately increased the square footages of each authorized use as a mechanism for establishing the amount of authorized uses within the proposed increased building area. The original and revised square footages are shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: PUD Uses Authorized/Proposed Increase in Square Footage of Uses for Lot 38 Uses (Lot 38) Original PUD Uses PUD Uses Authorized PUD Uses Authorized Authorized with storage included in with proportionate each use (approx. 16%) increase based on new building size Light Manuf., 1500 SF 1740 SF 1914 SF Processing or Assembly • Storage 2565 SF See Note 1 See Note 1 Professional Office 5015 SF 5818 SF 6401 SF Retail Sales, General 6000 SF 6962 SF 7658 SF Merchandise Services-Business 3500 SF 4060 SF 4467 SF Total 18,580 SF 18,580 SF 20,440 SF Note 1: Storage will be included as part of the main square footage for each use (16% average) It is the applicant's intention to upgrade the existing site plan, parking, building massing, and landscaping to provide an improved response to market demand and to complete the enhancement of this facility. The first phase of the remodel approved in 1998 is currently complete and illustrates the quality of the approved and proposed improvements for this site. This proposal includes removal of approximately 4,500 square feet of existing one-story structure and the addition of 5,700 square feet of second-story structure representing an additional 1,860 square feet of building area. The proposed building improvements will provide architectural features that are consistent with the newly-installed canopies over existing entrances and storefront windows in existing openings. The revised site plan reorganizes the parking layout using conventional ninety-degree parking and creates 20 new parking spaces not available under the old building footprint. The revised parking layout is consistent with the approved circulation plan for the PUD. Table 3 outlines parking counts for the proposed uses on this site. A review of this table shows that the site is seriously underparked when parking requirements are calculated for original PUD authorized uses REVISED 6/19/00 2 Industrial Building Remodel using current parking standards. The applicant is required to meet current City standards with each application for remodel or upgrade of the site. However, the original design of the PUD did not anticipate having to meet today's parking standards. Therefore, the applicant has two choices: he can leave the site as it is, or he can seek to upgrade the site and find away to meet City standards while creating a more functional and aesthetically pleasing site development plan. As the applicant is choosing to upgrade the site, he is proposing a building size in excess of 20,000 square feet in part to gain the use of a parking modifier that will assist in meeting the current parking standards. The applicant is also requesting that Industrial Park uses be allowed so that he may maintain full building tenancy while meeting current City parking standards. Table 3 depicts a sample mix of uses that would combine PUD permitted uses with underlying Industrial Park zone uses in a way that would allow the applicant to meet parking requirements. The exact nature of the businesses to be included has not yet been determined, but they will be consistent with those specifically allowed by the PUD and the IP (Industrial Park) uses permitted by this PUD Modification. DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE The project will take about 180 days to complete. Demolition of the existing northerly section of the one-story building will occur following city approvals and lease agreements. The framing and support for the new second-story addition including windows, doors and canopies will occur following issuance of the building shell permit. After the outer shell is weather tight, interior walls and dividers will be added to accommodate individual tenant needs. Acoustical tile ceilings will be installed where appropriate. Terrace construction and landscaping will be completed prior to occupancy. Project signage will be added as the remodel progresses, and will be consistent with current staff approvals. The parking lot remodel will occur simultaneously with building construction and will include installation of new curbs, paving, sidewalks, stormwater quality facility and planters. MATERIALS DESCRIPTION Walls: Exterior finish and insulation system will be Dryvit with colors as proposed and previously approved by the Development Review Board. Windows: Pre-manufactured storefront sections with '/4"polished plate glass set in the existing opening. Canopies: Wood and metal frame with exterior gypsum board and metal tie rod anchors. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES The Lake Grove Industrial Park district accommodates several light industrial businesses, a few heavy industrial operations and a number of technical/professional offices. The area also contains warehousing, automobile repair, distribution and printing operations. Recent development and redevelopment activities in this area reflect the growing trend toward professional employment. REVISED 6/19/00 3 Industrial Building Remodel One of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to maintain and enhance the appearance and design quality of Lake Oswego. The proposed improvements to this site plan and these buildings implement this goal. Additionally it is a city economic development goal to "provide for economic development 411 opportunities which enhance the prosperity and livability of the community." The remodeling of this older facility, including the renovation of parking, building massing and enhanced landscaping, creates a more livable community and encourages the creation of new economic opportunities. Further, this proposal directly implements several City policies supporting the redevelopment of existing and underutilized industrial lands. The increased flexibility of the space and upgraded look of this proposed improvement will encourage other uses, in addition to traditional industrial activities, within this Lake Grove Industrial District,thereby increasing employment opportunity and diversity within the city while enhancing community identity. The approval and completion of this project will bring the subject property up to date with new and remodeled buildings in the Lake Grove Industrial District and will reinforce the desired character of the emerging improvements to this most westerly part of the city of Lake Oswego. This project's industrial activity will not impact nearby residential areas because it is separated by an intervening tax lot (part of the McCart/Diemco PUD) from residential properties to the east and by railroads, roads, intervening uses, topography, and vegetation from residential properties to the north. Existing light industrial buildings are located immediately to the south and west of this site. COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING CODE, ZONING DISTRICT (IP) ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS-LOC. 48.12.340—48.12.375 This project will comply with all use regulations and development standards required in an Industrial Park zone and as approved in the McCart-Diemco PUD. The IP zone setbacks, FAR • and height limitations are listed in Table 2 below. The setbacks are measured from the edges of the PUD. There is an existing nonconforming front yard setback stemming from the original location of the buildings on this site prior to and along with PUD approval. The IP zone has no maximum FAR but the Lake Grove Industrial Park district standard indicates a maximum of 1.0 and this proposal is in compliance with that maximum. The height restriction in this zone is 45' and the existing and proposed buildings in this project are less than 45' in height. The existing two-story building is 29'-8"high and the proposed two-story is 29'-11". Table 2: Site Development IP Zone Compliance Table Lot 38 Existing Proposed Front yard setback—20' 8'* 8'* Side yard setback — 10' 10'/O' 10'/O' Rear yard setback— 10' 10' 10' Height—45' 29'-8" 29'-11" FAR(Lake Grove)— 1.0 .50 .52 * The existing front setback for this property is 8' and is legally non-conforming, as determined in PUD 1-68/DR 40-78 (Mod. 10-97). • REVISED 6/19/00 4 Industrial Building Remodel PLANNED DEVELOPMENT—LOC. 48.18.470-48.18.490 • This project is part of Phase I of the 1968 McCart/Diemco PUD project reviewed and approved by the Lake Oswego Planning Commission as PUDI-68. The PUD consists of lots 38, 39, 77, 78 & 79 of Bryant Acres and was approved as a Unified Site Plan with all properties sharing on- site circulation and parking. Subsequent to this approval, portions of the PUD were sold to different owners. Cross-easements were established to clarify PUD access among the various owners. Currently one shared-access easement exists between Lots 38 and 39 and a licensure agreement is in place to provide access from this easement to Pilkington Road (see appendices A and B). The PUD also shares a common 25' wide utility easement for sewer and storm south of lots 38 and 39 across lots 77, 78 & 79 (see preliminary utility plan and city records). This current proposal enhances shared on-site circulation in keeping with the original PUD plan and established easements. No shared parking agreements have been recorded between PUD property owners at this time. This current proposal will not need to utilize any offsite spaces, as outlined in the Parking section below. Previously approved modifications to the PUD include DR40-78 and Mod. 10-97. Modification 10-97 adjusted the parking on this site (Lot 38) without the removal of any building area and conditionally permitted the remodel design and character maintained and expanded upon in this application. VISION CLEARANCE—LOC 48.20.530 • This application in no way changes the site accesses to adjoining streets permitted by the original PUD approval. To the best of the applicant's knowledge this proposal complies with City vision clearance standards. DEVELOPMENT CODE AND STANDARDS BUILDING DESIGN- [2.005-2.040] The proposed improvements will enhance and update the buildings and site plan for this property. The proposal offers an improved site plan with better organized parking and interior landscaping. The improved building elevations provide new windows, decks and a terrace, more well-defined entries, and eliminate blank walls. The design of the second floor allows flexibility, as the applicant does not know who the future users will be for these spaces. The balcony design allows a platform for loading of equipment for industrial users. The window and door locations are conceptual, and will be completed to meet individual tenant's needs when the spaces are occupied. The project architectural components, color scheme and details were previously approved under the 1997 modification and remain substantially the same. The building elevations tastefully continue to incorporate structural awnings with metal anchors, railings, wall lighting, and architectural window details. The removal of the northerly extension of the south building will open up Tax Lot 39(Phase III)improving its visual connectivity to the primary streets serving this PUD. This opening up of the site plan will also benefit the overall PUD and area by improving user identification and pedestrian access. This revised site plan presents a more coherent overall development plan. • REVISED 6/19/00 5 Industrial Building Remodel The Development Standards criteria requiring integration of this site with adjacent industrial and commercial structures have been taken in to account as is evidenced by the content of the • proposal. The addition of a partial second-story with roof top terrace adjusts the scale and visually connects the remodeled southerly building to both the northerly two-story building and the overly large single-level high wall manufacturing building to the south. A tree-covered plaza between the two buildings on Tax Lot 38 will also serve to visually integrate the site. The intervening parking lot provides an organized circulation plan that improves upon the previously approved design and offers substantially more parking spaces with enhanced pedestrian circulation. The proposed project represents a substantial increase in the amount and character of landscaping on this lot and at this intersection. The reorganization of the parking, enhanced landscaping with plaza, pedestrian walkways and the improved sense of scale provided by the partial two-story addition are improvements that will benefit adjoining property owners and enhance this portion of the Lake Grove Industrial District. STREET LIGHTS- [5.005-5.0201 There are streetlights on power poles on the east side of the property, across Pilkington, and on Boones Ferry Road. Additional non-glare lighting will be added to parking areas (see attached Lighting Plan). TRANSIT [6.005-6.0401 The Tri-Met number 37 bus provides service to the area, with its closest stop at Washington Court approximately (2) blocks to the northeast on Boones Ferry Road. Current scheduling provides 12 bus trips per day in each direction. This new site plan will provide on-site sidewalks connecting all buildings to the public street sidewalks on both Boones Ferry and Pilkington. A • new staircase will provide a pedestrian connection to Boones Ferry Road. These site improvements and the site plan's new `open to the east' feature will enhance pedestrian connections to local streets for both the users of the project as well as the neighbors to the east along Lower Road and south along Pilkington. PARKING- [7.005-7.040] It is the applicant's intent to provide sufficient parking to meet the current parking standards for the proposed mix of light industrial and office uses occupying the on-site structures. The revised site plan will generate 49 parking spaces on site. Two handicap spaces have been provided. A minimum of three bicycle parking spaces will be covered by awnings as required. Table 3 below outlines the parking requirements of the proposed uses on this site. The parking spaces required upon approval of this proposal will be 49 for Lot 38 (with application of the 15% parking modifier). These spaces will be located on the site, and, provided the applicant is allowed to utilize IP uses to augment the PUD permitted uses, no offsite parking spaces will be required. The applicant's proposed total new building area will exceed 20,000 square feet and consequently the applicant is requesting application of the ordinance permitting a 15% reduction in parking requirements. This parking modifier will be applied at time of tenant occupancy and accounted for as the project fills and revised tenant mixes emerge. • REVISED 6/19/00 6 Industrial Building Remodel Table 3: Lot 38 Parking Calculations Summary ORIGINAL PUD USES AUTHORIZED FOR 18,580 S.F. _ Light Manufacturing,Processing or Assembly 3 spaces (1740 SF 41.6 sp/1000 SF) Professional Office(5818 SF 43.33 sp/1000 SF) 19 spaces Retail Sales(6962 SF 43.3 sp/1000 SF) 23 spaces Services-Business(4060 SF 4)3.33 sp/1000 SF) 14 spaces • Total spaces required for authorized uses: 59 EXAMPLE USE MIX TO BALANCE PARKING FOR 20,440 S.F. Light Manufacturing,Processing or Assembly 10 spaces (6040 SF 41.6 sp/1000 SF) Professional Office(5700 SF 4,3.33 sp/1000 SF) 19 spaces Retail Sales(4500 SF 43.3 sp/1000 SF) [includes blueprint 15 spaces shop] Vocational School (4200 SF @3sp11000 SF) 13 spaces Total spaces required for uses: 57 Total spaces required with parking modifiers:* 49 Total spaces provided onsite: 49 Parking deficit: 0 *Parking modifiers= .85 x total spaces required for uses PARK AND OPEN SPACES- [8.005-8.0401 The parks and open space standards can be met by the landscape standards required for this site. See section below. LANDSCAPING, SCREENING AND BUFFERING- [9.005-9.0401 The proposed site plan will provide over 22% landscape area exceeding current code standards, minimizing impervious surfaces, and providing a landscape-enhanced site development pattern. The plan incorporates pedestrian walkways and a new centrally located outdoor terrace. The existing parking lot is proposed to be completely redesigned and will include a significant amount of additional landscaped area. Some of the areas adjacent to the existing parking lot are currently landscaped and will be maintained as landscape area. Additional areas adjacent to the current parking lot, including some portions of street right of ways, are covered with asphalt. These areas will have the asphalt removed and will be landscaped as part of the proposed project (see Landscape Plan). The wall adjacent to the access stairway to Boones Ferry will be landscaped. In addition, a seating wall will be added to improve the scale of the retaining wall. Trees, shrubs, and ground covers will be automatically irrigated to ensure their continued growth. These improvements,together with the newly remodeled buildings, will enhance this portion of the Lake Grove Industrial District, contribute to the livability of the area and continue the momentum of improvement to this westerly Lake Oswego corridor. • REVISED 6/19/00 7 Industrial Building Remodel DRAINAGE FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT- [11.005-11.040j Stormwater currently drains into two existing catch basins and is piped to a 36" storm drain in the easement south of the site. This system is plumbed to an existing regional detention facility. • The amount of new impervious surface proposed for this site requires the installation of a water quality treatment facility. Catch basin stormfilters are being proposed after discussion with City Engineering staff(see attached Utility Plan). These stormwater filter catch basins will meet the required City of Lake Oswego stormwater quality standards. The attached drainage report will be revised to reflect the use of these alternative catch basins following this land use approval. Stormwater Management describes the proposed catch basins as follows: "Stormwater Management's Catch Basin StormFilter.system, an extension of the widely accepted StormFilter Best Management Practice, has been engineered to replace the standard catch basin. Polluted runoff enters the system through a traffic-bearing grate into the primary settling chamber where heavier solids drop to a sump. Lighter solids and dissolved pollutants are then directed under a baffle into the cartridge chamber where the StormFilter cartridge is housed During filtration, lighter solids and soluble pollutants are removed and clean water is discharged from the.filter into the outlet. During extremely heat);storms, water in the primary settling chamber overflows the bypass weir,preventing the re-suspension of sediments and pollutants trapped in the chamber cartridge. " The attached drainage report provides the calculations demonstrating the project's commitment to a treatment facility meeting City standards. This water will continue to be plumbed to the existing regional detention facility after treatment. This improvement of onsite water quality is another benefit of this enhanced site and building plan to the community. UTILITIES- [14.005-14.035J • All utilities are currently in place. The amount of serviceable building area on this site is expanding approximately 8% and, based on current and known as-built conditions, there are no capacity constraints. The applicant will continue to monitor the condition of on-site facilities as demolition and new construction proceeds to ensure that all improvements meet City building, engineering and development regulations. EROSION CONTROL- [15.015-15.045] There are no areas of open soil on this property that could be subject to erosion. There is a steeply sloped section along Boones Ferry Road that was planted and stabilized during reconstruction of Boones Ferry Road. ACCESS- [18.005-18.040] Access to the main parking area off Pilkington is existing and is not proposed to be changed. The improved parking to the east along the shared-access easement is consistent with the approved PUD for this site. Any future connection of the shared-access easement drive to Boones Ferry Road will require the construction of a ramp (see attached conceptual grading sketch). This ramp would require the removal and/or remodel of up to seven parking spaces as indicated in the sketch. The applicant is aware of this and will be responsible for any adjustments to these spaces required as a result of the Phase III owners' desire to make this ramp connection. Any necessary adjustments will be consistent with the cost-sharing provisions outlined in the recorded easement for this portion of the site. While it is not this owner's • REVISED 6/19/00 8 Industrial Building Remodel • decision, it is the professional opinion of the applicant's team that the expense necessary in • construction costs, and the loss of land area required to make this improvement, makes this development scenario unlikely. SITE CIRCULATIONS-BIKEWAYS AND WALKWAYS- [20.005-20.040j There are existing sidewalks along both public streets fronting this site. The new site plan illustrates connecting internal sidewalks to both streets and a new staircase providing improved access to and from Boones Ferry Road. Both covered and uncovered bicycle parking will be provided on site, as directed by the zoning ordinance. OTHER ORDINANCES UTILITIES- (CH.38) WATER- Existing water service to the subject property will be continued. Future tenants will be provided water service by the applicant as part of the terms of each lease. SEWER- Existing sewer service to the subject property will be continued. Future tenants will be provided sewer service by the applicant as part of the terms of each lease. GARBAGE- An appropriate garbage receptacle will be provided for use by future tenants and garbage service will be paid for by the applicant. Enclosed areas for earbage and recycling will be located along the east side of the existing two-story building and on the first floor of the proposed two-story building addition. ELECTRICAL- Separate electric meters will serve each office space. Future tenants will contract with the local provider and pay electricity charges separately. GAS- Separate gas meters will serve each office space. Future tenants will contract with the local provider and pay gas charges separately. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES- (CH.39) The applicant will be responsible for any Systems Development charges generated by a net increase in building square footage. SIGNS- (CH.47) The signage program and plans for this remodel have been staff approved under the current building remodel permit process. OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE- 660-12-000 TO 660-12-070 In keeping with the Transportation System Plan this proposal includes a sidewalk and a more clearly defined roadway and bikeway. It will improve and more clearly delineate the traffic and circulation pattern of the parking serving this site. • REVISED 6/19/00 9 Industrial Building Remodel CITIZEN PARTICIPATION This minor application does not require a neighborhood meeting but the applicant felt the • additional opportunity for neighborhood contact would improve communications about the proposal. The applicant gave notice to the Rosewood Action Group and many adjoining neighbors and conducted a neighborhood meeting in the evening on August 16, 1999. The meeting was held in the two-story building on site. Attached are the minutes of the meeting attended by four people from the neighborhood. PUD TERMINATION Applicant acknowledges that the City's acceptance of this application for PUD Modification does not prejudice the City's right to seek PUD termination in the future. SUMMARY The Lake Grove Industrial District is on the verge of a tremendous revival. The renovation of the industrial buildings at Boones Ferry Road and Pilkington Road should be considered an integral part of that revival. These proposed changes to the buildings, site and landscape plan upgrade the area. Residents and visitors will appreciate the improvements to this site and intersection. This proposal implements many of the City of Lake Oswego's goals and policies designed to enhance the livability and vitality of the city. • • REVISED 6/19/00 10 Industrial Building Remodel May 11, 2000 i City Planning Staff City of Lake Oswego Department of Planning& Development 380"A"Ave. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: LU 99-0054 (Deign Review for 1.ot 38) Applicant: David Emami TO THE CITY PLANNING STAFF: City staff are currently processing a Design Review Applicati (LU 99-0054) for proposed site improvements on Lot 38 located in the McCart-Diemco PUD. We have reviewed the application and the staff report. Although we had initial concerns about parking, the application has subsequently been modified to eliminate any proposal for parking on our property. Additionally, we understand that approval of this application will not impact our property with respect to the amount of office that may he constructed or required landscaping and other requirements because the City Code has been applied to the Emami proposal based on the site area of the Emami property, and not based on the site arca of the PUD as a whole. Additionally, we understand that by signing this letter, we are in no way subjecting ourselves to conditions or approval requiring any modifications be made to our property. • With these understandings. as the other property owners within the McCort-Dicntco PUD, we wish to support tins application and sign on as co-applicants so that the application may be processed as a PUD Modification Request. We hereby submit this letter to the record of the application. Sincerely Paul .. Ta tor. Presi ent CEO Taylor Made Labels, in . • /J� / C:J(��i I�f .-, r/Y c '.'7: . • =t --- yi'fL �.c C i' .,�: i !rr l..,: Or ,6/7.7 ,; , ,; Joan'l a or, 'trustee Robert L.Taylor Trust �,� O ;i,tALSEAL • '- STEPHEN PFEIFER NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO 499a7 WONT(COM9AlibtON t WIRES OCT 3 4Q0 / - . Pf?Xf I Q596?i l 17147/1t'hL'8It8�30 . 4. if J.., EXHIBIT 68 LU 99-0054 • II Ir 1 I' ` is II �1 I {7lt li II I; II PROPOSED TENANT ' .^.Sc''EN6N� II =R p','EG=!vaNr '.f..eGE iI &PACE =.ACE i ii � I ° I UM I ii NOTE: E I ELECTRIC • i JN lit I Ii II p • Il 'MIMI II 11 r"on" .. J11 dl , , Li ., 11 i . f/>- "mac: s t= q .:, , ( i - i 1 1 • ilL. 1 ,Jr, ter— l=r r=1 EXTERIOR L FIRST FLOOR PLAN va'.r-Co ® Exec -.,,,- 16'urc:; • EXHIBIT 69 LU 99-0054 A Common read 18925 sry 85°i Lake Oswego.Or 97035 Phone-503 624-7440 Far 503.870.91380 • March 22, 2000 Planning Department City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 To Whom It May Concern: A Common Thread, Bernina Sew n Vac is a business that has many components. We have been located in the Lake Grove area for 10 years. Our biggest component is the lasses we teach. We teach classes on sewing, quilting, kids sewing classes and use of sewing machines as well as sewing and quilting software classes. Our second largest component in the store is the project kits we put together that accompany each class. We assemble to kits from components we purchase and sell them with the classes as well as sell them at different shows and fair we participate in. In addition we sponsor offsite workshops and retreats. These kits contain materials to complete the projects as well as the sewing supplies needed for the project. We sell the materials and supplies separately also. We are expanding to selling these kits on the Internet and project that well over half of out business will be through this media. • In addition we sell and service vacuum cleaners and sewing machines. We carry vacuum and sewing supplies and parts. We currently sell them both on site and by mail order. Both the vacuum leaner and the sewing machines require us to do finish assembly before they can be given to our customer. We will be including these items on or Internet site as well. Our repair service is 10% of our business. Of our sewing machine sales 10%are for commercial use. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ura S. Wallace-Dickson President A Common Thread, Inc. S EXHIBIT 70 LU 99-0054 MEMORANDUM • `"K`oswfro TO: Development Review Commissioners FROM: Morgan Tracy, Associate Planner DATE: June 28, 2000 oamGO$ SUBJECT: LU 00-0007, Block 136 Revisions The Development Review Commission opened the public hearing for LU 00-0007 on May 15, 2000, and continued the deliberation phase of that hearing to June 5, 2000. At the June 5' hearing, the Commission identified several issues of concern with regard to the overall proposed design for the commercial structure and 41 townhomes. The applicant agreed to continue the matter from the June 5'h hearing until July 3', in order to submit revisions that respond to the Commission's concerns. The Commission's issues are summarized as follows: Commercial Structure Issues 1. Second story building material. If the brick is utilized, more detailing should be incorporated to provide visual interest, better contrast and definition. Wood cladding would be acceptable on the second story if it achieves a smooth transition between the first floor, second floor and • roof. 2. Roof form. The pitched roof does not seem to be an integral part of the building. The pitched form is nice, but the roof lines are illogical and not proportioned for the building. 3. Details. The clock appears to be too large and out of scale. The size of the clock represented by the perspective drawing seems more appropriate. Other items, like the awnings, windows, and materials in the color board, are nice and should be retained. 4. Landscaping requirement. The applicant has requested an exception to the 15% landscaping requirement based partly on the fact that the pedestrian access through the site (a public right of way) will be heavily landscaped to act as additional open space. The Commission wondered if the building's design merits the exception. Townhome Issues 1. Density and Open Space. The Commission was concerned by the massing of the townhouse blocks. The elevation along Evergreen Avenue was preferred as the massing was broken up. The Commission also noted that there seemed to be a lack of a cohesive casual gathering place. Additional open space should be provided to allow residents of this project a place to enjoy and call their own. • 2. Entryways. The entryways presented two issues for the Commission. The uniformity of the doorways was monotonous and made distinguishing one unit from another difficult. Also, the • long corridors leading from the front elevation to the actual door were uninviting. Some concern was expressed about the security of the dark entries as well. 3. Scale of Elevations on 2nd and 3'd Streets. The composition of architectural elements and their placement on the townhouse units created a predictable rhythm. Together with the height and close placement of the buildings to the street, an uncomfortable scale for the pedestrian was created. The Commission wanted to see the rhythm in the elevations interrupted and some other treatments incorporated to ease the scale of these buildings into their locale along 2' and 3'd streets. On June 20, 2000, the applicant submitted revisions (Exhibits 59-69) to respond to the above stated concerns. Staff has reviewed these revisions and provides the following analysis as it relates to the Commission's concerns. Commercial Structure Responses The applicant has revised the commercial building by replacing the brick cladding on the second floor with wood. The one exception is the area at the corner of 2nd and A where the brick cladding continues to wrap this corner, in essence anchoring the building. These changes help smooth the transition between the "heavier" ground floor and roof. The applicants have also revised the roof lines which make it a more integral part of the structure. The applicants revisions also include minor changes to the braces on the south elevation, as • well as the windows on the upper level. The combined effect evokes a more Craftsman period feel. One change that does not seem in place with these revisions is the clock. While the downsizing of the clock's scale is sensible, the clock face has been deleted, and the numbers are affixed directly to the brick. This appearance is more often found on contemporary buildings, while this particular building has a more traditional look. With the requested exception to the landscape requirement, Staff notes that the exception is granted for projects who exhibit design excellence. In this case, the applicant has designed a building that is tailored to the street and the pedestrian. Parking is placed behind and underneath the building. The building is of a substantial enough size to command the feeling of a commercial downtown project and establish the downtown streetscape. The effect of these requirements preclude full compliance with the 15% landscaping requirement. However, staff believes that the landscaping provided in the pedestrian accessway, offsets the lack of landscaping provided on the site itself. To any observer, the property lines will not be distinct and the landscaped accessway will be a visual continuation of the project. Townhome Responses The applicant has made various revisions to the townhomes in an attempt to respond to the • Commission's concerns. To generalize, there are four "themes" that have been introduced. • Four styles of entryways are presented, and four types of front elevations have been assembled. These themes are generally repeated along the length of the elevations. The rooflines have been varied somewhat so that the units appear to be carved out of a larger building rather than being "stacked" next to one another. To offset the additional cost of these material and structural changes, the applicant is requesting that the roof material be downgraded from "Grand Canyon" to "Grand Sequoia" or "Celotex Presidential Shake". Staff is particularly concerned by this proposed change. The Downtown Design Standard (LODS 24) requires slate, tile, shakes, or wood shingles for the roofing materials. The previously proposed "Grand Canyon" has much greater textural relief, which better mimics a wood or tile roof than the proposed "Grand Sequoia." Staff does not believe that the proposed Celotex shingles (Exhibit 69) satisfy the intent of the design standard, and should not be granted this exception. Staff is also not in support of the modified roof lines as shown in the revised elevations (Exhibits 60-64). The previous elevations submitted show dominant gable ends above each unit to help distinguish one unit from another. The subordinate gables as shown in the revisions blur the distinctions between units. Moreover, as previously shown, the gables as perceived from street level would appear to project higher than the main roofline behind it, creating a more interesting roofline. The subordinate gables will blend into the main roofline and won't sufficiently interrupt its linearity. • The introduction of the horizontal mid roof lines does help tie some units together and interrupt the rhythm of the units. However the bay window and other introduced elements do more to fragment the unity of the project than introduce variety and break up its massing. Moreover, the introduced elements seem to be from different architectural styles, e.g. the turned balustrades, the bay window, shingle siding and brick quoin columns all borrow from different periods. Staff believes that it is important for each building to appear as though it was built at one time and not a collage of several incremental additions. The townhome units can remain distinct using variations within one architectural style. As an alternative to introduce more variety to the project, each building could be designed with its own catalogue of elements, perhaps in the different historical period styles. As there were no revised floor plans submitted, staff is unsure whether the doorways have been brought forward, or if the "corridors" still remain. This should be clarified by the applicant. The open space issue remains unresolved. The applicants note that the private street system functions as a "woonerf' (Exhibit 59) or semi public gathering space. Staff feels that woonerfs are typified by other elements, which de-emphasize the space as a transportation corridor, and make it feel like a public plaza. If this is the intent, then alternate paver materials, additional benches, tree wells, broad walkways, meandering vehicle circulation and other pedestrian amenities should be introduced. The applicant notes that an additional 800 square feet has • been gained through elevation design revisions, but has not demonstrated in a site plan where this space has been gained. Staff alternately recommends that to provide a suitable amount of combined open area to meet the Commission's intent, the south end unit(s) on Building Number 2 be deleted to provide an owners' common area. This area enjoys privacy from off site traffic, yet remains connected with the public realm through the accessway that runs adjacent to it and creates a node where pedestrians can centrally gather, making it the most sensible place for an open space tract. The contract signed by the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) and the applicant authorized between 38 and 41 townhome units for this project in anticipation of design changes which may be necessary to fulfill the Code and the Commission's requirements (Exhibit 70). CONCLUSION Staff recommended previously (in its May 5th Staff Report) that the Commission approve the proposal as shown in Exhibits 7- 29. Staff recommends that the changes as outlined in this memorandum be applied to the revised proposal and that the conditions as noted in staffs May 5th staff report and modified per staffs memorandum dated May 15, 2000 be applied, except where a condition refers to a specific exhibit that has since been revised. The Commission may approve, approve with modifications, or deny the applicants proposal as previously submitted or as revised June 20, 2000. ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS 59. Applicant's Written Statement 60. Building 1 Elevations — Revision of Exhibit 10 61. Building 2 Elevations — Revision of Exhibit 13 62. Building 3 Elevations — Revision of Exhibit 16 63. Building 4 Elevations — Revision of Exhibit 19 64. Building 5 Elevations — Revision of Exhibit 22 65. Commercial Building Floor and Roof Plans — Revision of Exhibit 27 66. Commercial Building Elevations — Revision of Exhibit 25 67. Commercial Building Enlarged Elevations and Section — Revision of Exhibit 26 68. Color and Materials for Commercial Building — Modification of Exhibit 40* 69. Townhouse Roofing Sample (Celotex Presidential Shake) — In lieu of Exhibit 43* 70. Development Agreement Between LORA and Gramor (excerpt) * Exhibit Not Reproducible 11pub_wksldatalcommon_plmorgan_tlnetdocslreportslopencaseUu00-0007-gramorlmemo to drc.doc • June 20,2000 Mr. Morgan Tracy RECE IVED City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 CITY OF LAKE O WEGO Re: LU 00-0007-Revisions to Design Review Plans Dept.of Planning A.Development Dear Mr.Tracy: This letter describes the changes made to plans submitted in the above referenced application, based upon comments and concerns expressed by the Commissioners on June 5, 2000. The changes are discussed in two components relative to the concerns: 1)Townhomes; and 2)Commercial Structure. Townhomes Concerns: 1. Massing of the buildings and the continued repetition of design needs to be altered to create more variety,particularly along Second and Third Streets. 2. The entries to each unit need to be varied, such that not all units have the same design features. • 3. Not enough open space. Design Response: Elevations for Buildings No. 1 through No. 5 have been altered in the following manner: • Varied from our original,traditional urban townhome theme to design of the units as individual dwellings to blend with the design criteria of"village". • Introduced more horizontal lines for variety and to break up "density" concerns, actually, massing concerns as expressed by the Commission. • Created four(4)different front porch themes to increase variety and individuality of the homes. • Varied from the "all gabled" theme in the earlier submittal, again,to create additional variety. The architectural features of the townhomes have been varied to provide four(4)different design types. The four(4) units repeat in the elevation,however, the same elevation is not adjacent to each other. The units are briefly described: Unit 1 —Remains as originally proposed with brick base,arched entry, porch over the entry with brick up to the top of the railing, arched upper windows with shingles and lap siding above. Unit 2—Brick base,angled entry, porch over entry with open railing, midway roof over second level windows, upper story with two windows recessed 2 feet. Unit 3 —Brick base lowered to the height of front porch railing, arched entry flanked by wooden columns mounted flush with the bay. EXHIBIT 59 LU 00-0007 • ,7i. - 'i.' -7 'AVE SUITE 100'TIJALATIN OP.t17002-8352. 1503,24 -19'8 F4 • Mr.Morgan Tracy City of Lake Oswego June 20,2000 Page 2 of 3 Unit 4—Brick base lowered to the top of the front entry,square entry flanked by brick quoin columns, • angled 2 story bay with no balcony, roof angled at peak. The entries for each unit have changed to create more variety and contrast to each unit. The plans integrate squared entries, arched entries and different materials along each side of the entry door. The roof material is proposed to be one of two composition 40-year warranty styles in lieu of the original proposed "unlimited"warranty. This change will allow the multiple architectural changes in the building elevations to economically take place. The two options are: 1. GAF Grand Sequoia Shingles: "...extra large shingle with unique design creates a dramatic visual impact for prestigious homes and properties". Class A fire and wind rating. Super Heavyweight design. Warranted to withstand 80 mph winds. 40 year limited transferable warranty with non- prorated material and labor coverage for the first ten years; or 2. Celotex Presidential Shake Shingles: "...thick, laminated shingle offers the classic sophistication of traditional wood shakes in a modem shingle. Patented, sculptured tab. 40-year transferable warranty. Class A fire and wind resistance. Algae block granules. The amount of open space has increased by 800 square feet as a result of adjustments to the depths of each townhome unit. This will benefit landscape area along the public street sides. Aside from this minor shift the open space has not been altered. The design team had discussed the merits of incorporating picnic tables and a hot tub or a gazebo within the linear park and found that perspective residents are not seeking such active uses in their front yards. • The open space is identified on the plans as the linear park with a paved trail and landscaping adjacent to the private street system. The gathering places are situated at either end of the tract. To the north, the plaza area adjacent to the commercial building provides benches and plantings. Similarly, to the south, the trail terminus at Evergreen Road provides for benches and sitting walls along with generous plantings. In addition to these two gathering locations,the private street adjacent to the open space tract functions as a "woonerf." This is essentially a multipurpose street that permits motorists to access their units but primarily serves as a gathering area for special and regular functions held by the residents. Commercial Structure Concerns: 1. The roof appears as if it were pasted on. What is shown seems top heavy, arbitrary and needing more depth. The roof needs to transition better to the upper story. 2. The upper story clad in all brick could meet the design standards as being "exceptional" if more detailing is added. Design standards call for materials other than masonry on the second level. By changing the brick at the upper level you will comply with the design standards and possibly transition to the roof in a better manner. 3. The nine percent landscape area does not meet the required 15 percent standards. 4. The clock appears too large in the rendering. It is preferred to have a smaller sized clock as shown in the elevations. • Mr.Morgan Tracy City of Lake Oswego June 20,2000 Page3of3 Design Response: Elevation sheets AC-2, AC-3 and AC-4 have been altered to reflect a full, deep roof with a 6-inch overhang from each view. The roof material is still a concrete tile but now a special version called "split shake", colored"weather ash"which is lighter gray compared to the original color. This change responds to the lighter feel and look provided by the wood upper story. The upper story brick material has been replaced with a combination of horizontal lap siding and shingles. The only area that brick remains on the upper elevation is on the corner of"A"Avenue and Second Street to define the corner clock tower. The upper level windows remain the same,yet will be framed with 8- inch wood trim painted white. Natural finish cedar siding shingles are located in the gables on the upper level on both the north and south elevations. I- orizontal lap siding is positioned immediately above the brick and continues up to the roof overhang. The clock has been downsized and changed to be subtler compared to the original proposal. The face now measures 6 feet compared to 8 feet. Numbers and hands will be mounted on the brick background instead of an illuminated canister clock. The amount of open space remains at approximately 9 percent of the commercial land area. A detailed discussion of this exception request is explained on page 65 of the narrative dated April 19, 2000. We look forward to continuing our public hearing with the Design Review Commission and request a forty(40)minute presentation time to clearly answer questions and concerns raised in the previous hearings. Should you have questions about this submittal please contact me at(503)245-1976. • Sincerely, Gramor Development,Inc. 4/14(1101— Matthew Grady,A1C Project Manager MG:kf Attachments: 10 Sets of Revised Plans(8 Full Size, 2 Reduced) Commercial Structure -Additional Color Board (Separate Delivery) Commercial Structure—Roof Sample(Separate Delivery) Townhome— Roof Sample(Separate Delivery) cc: Mike Diamond/Real Estate Investment Group George Diamond/Real Estate Investment Group Ted Argo/Agro Architects Marne Maykowskyj/Sienna Architects Chris Freshley Barry Cain/Gramor Development, Inc. Matt Keenan/KPFF • • 0 0 Z 0 11.1 10....... CL :--- ----- got'--- ....-...... 0 1 -.. ---- -,./.4,!:t.tiii .,..-.;-;,...,,,,,,, ,..„ iii . _---_/,_,1,-, 11..1.10116i. 1 u !Epni- Eli •NNE al-al Ell CO LE. 1., otimr .. vaiiii 11_ ' ' =7.,-,:4,,..z. - 1111 lit!IHP ..i.02,01 01 MI Ell I M .t... .04 i.-,;74. _______ __.win 7r1..........1.___Ivil _,.__. .. ... ........1.1. -1".. 1111-",t 11111,1=h --C••40110iiiii i I 1 "lb i f 11.1. 11111.1.M . REM - '. 1141EM P UN 1- Ma - , i il: Vii 1.111111.1"1:-31M111.1.11 NIEL M.'. 1.iii if ill L Mill Illiir',..-Ar" .: i' I L"..---,--:::- -1 iddillielli mos Rei __ 1 kii•••,...'—' A molt ;01. III. IF . " - - - a RN-,--Tafra,r-i.. ... ___ __ ___ „„„id, .. ,.., '!whom , , .-4 .- tg "II II ...— ,-,E-- ,r,,i me. ..... .,1,... ____ --- min pi not .. 11:I._ I IIIII II III 111111 02 •,:,-...!•••• In II E .171 ,,;I.ml,,„1,111111111 1 in' al r awn —I..... < 0 ....._., . . „' ....no .MEHIP, nil Oa , MIKE I 1 . —.., .0,7i..g;,..•...I -•II..411111t1 311 1 SO, on 1,m ,inummi mist uu Ern 111.1111 im _ ,_ •;14:1',.. __I ,I 1.1'1 ; 1 IT tin 1 i oo OM '"''''____. L' 'mil " nog BEIM II _11 LU I 111 I,.,... --irir _ - 1:2C =PI•0 MR ..1.".. .1.1101.. EAST ELEVATION - SECOND STREET - - /1111 _ / 75.1.1.1.E 4vroaNetanun r— -7.--.....---:U l'WX ----'....`".. _, 111 "• :II n- _ __in, _141-__\n il ,,,,,,_. or_.- ___Inv__— -u - __ _ __ ....,...,.... _ _ _ _ _- _ -__-.,._-_-,-_--- is ...t.--- - --_- 7..,,,-.1 , --s-_-7-,-. es •- •-•• - -137113:in es is ._ z,,,,,;,,,,,r.,. ili i ...1111.1.1 111, ''"'' -''''"'' - _ I 41> LDI .„,„,,,„,„...,,. ,„...,„,,, .... ....,... ,,,,,, .......„. -- ...,.....- .. ., ,,-.t, SOUTH ELEVATION SlTE KEY NORTH ELEVATION ,ITAISTOPHIR fit$1111.11' 1...11.1“../t +•rn,III 1 , ILIWItr,r.!,1"" ...:414:4..• - 14,4:- i , :1\19111r4 :./ ......,/±...1',... 17-' M .---. - - =-40m, vg-4,,,,,,,,, --- - sir-,-..-.1 r---444!#•-' 1.4"1. -Itliiir--77.--,--„---im-_-.n.linni_-_-_;%/1)1.-ii— . , 4,7,4•:edti,tothi_MIMI - _- ----- no__t.. . l ' A , riC04 i..•.71.14i; I 1111121t ,........._... ‘ammi >< / . - ---- Ira/Z.7P- '1 ---- Ftlic:,,:z.f,i,,r4.• = _ : ..-., -- -_---= -=--`="1 •M 7-112.4,5J ,a ii -%- n.'..?...........01.7.1161......V.A...nr, I.... .... =--- . - ...,,, . ... ..-.. ict......41° - itsZ, 01111411q-rir El rim ,,,„,. ____._,,, i.„,,„ .117 .. _ _ 1 8. rTi 1 Nei ,r1 - - i w • prig _ -I I= les- --- - ---t- - -,INEMEI psis in = :II III lusin I ..--- F. ,, , , i , . 1.1 ; IIII . . El '--1 f- ill- imi El . .., =,.,17_.- 1.0.....rift -`-- .W. 111114 1 ---- - ---- - MI NM- '011.1=1111111 BUILDING I ____...... . _ _ --. 0 .,•,.." 1,.i.m.1 I 111111IIIINI4 P1111111110117-17 ' ---- i rt S ............. tubtii, C 0) 4 ____„....______— --- - er, ELEVATIONS z- -...3 C:i ,--"t•W::"::': t ' L I,' . 1 .''" Es 1 ILI I- -- ...114 -2t •• -1rd 1,417,-1-1- , i.., i r_-s....1_ta I 1 1 I 7-ET' - - .."r , I? I, S li II ,1-Li r.sx ---`'''' .7, 1 . , ::..1-,,,, .I.Ik F-0,.• _ A IT,/ I i -iiJrrl.1_ • 1 I I I-1-I:I-I " '...11---C - rii'L' .. 111A-1=1, Ell I _ _ ' Ir-• - -711-1E1.-4-T- ,..1,.. -11 _-1-_LT 1 L.r i t. -tra. 7 ' .v a-int 1 I-k . ' T.6•1 Su+ 1 I . WEST ELEVATION , ....... I A D • 0 • , z 0 ,..0 WY..1111...• /i/ t'M s /.' .-7.'•FriA. di>..... Allik\• /. lai Cf: ci. WI..••••••4.41.I. \t. /*44\ / cr) 0 15 4••••.li 4.41.••1. / IMA / Alt,a.lit" 1\1 - • 4 -/ -_ . -.'b;1/1:1"tzt..%- , /4-_ Afi'l it ,i1M.,... ',:\,7_,_ / Alkt,91 ____--- , Ili 11^I 'HMI -:-..umnil ICel at -,Acill17116,- n.1610- Trilt-. 7-7,-...-- =4:5111- --i_ _'ir.iim im .77..--en:-..iinarrii • ,..,;,..',..'"=";.1.. 1 t — ., _1 Egg MUMNII: . - INV so Ht III _- big • - , 1 im 0° n: u u, _ 131-a 111 Mmilmalli.'s a• ;za--- — 0 uj i .„,,,Iliabli,imi - :IillitilleillaillemeirilIN '1113012111611,1-'3;1131261/1 'II-t,17;--- —1111"1..!Mg II.g.=1117-iiirss.eieilii","1„1,71=7 ___.....rox„,:i. Lu > irt ' • ' " ' • ' 1111[111'. '111111111i IT IMO" I. rf.414 11111.1, '"'" i. i=11111111111111,-4- , _I %I IMP1111111111alitq '-'-` rdINIIII-11 ---le. —,_.,. - -- ,....... in 1:1naafi.Dal, Mill: '17 ,- li Ili! If 4.:-.211:.:P":..."' ''i -11.---MIF:CO::771 II •Tr---4c---'-i.t.ci- : ;i'l ----T-' .------1.--.-:u::"'- Lu co ........‘,.. ..• in, al ilmil .ii„,„i:na' 1 [ wit.,,, ,R,-. 10 P..1•0 < 0 40•••••...;:nr-- .. -- ILLI •• _ 110:. ! __1111 II NI 1.1 d OM kg:;;Al MI ua:!ou 4 ::::::',.:: :',... ' '---' '' ''-'''-'-'4)461 _- -•' - . '-,-. ..'F-'i Um' ......., i__--.... .43,___.,. ,, ., l WEST ELEVATION i.1,1•13. ./a• 0 11, 1,6 ,.,.‘ A it ..f 05.5,X.C• CRAW.AEC,' 4er / ' WO \ utIlS S,Stall.Vilit k14....S'E ,. ARGO orp...,•' ''''' _ AS or -' sr - - ---_ ,..i.,.• ____..,,,.„,.„.. r.:''' -,_:.-• • Mr'',_ till;:=Z-7-r-74:----7.,I; 111-':'. 211E la -- ......•••• ••••••••••0•1•••••••••• 1 •:--=.111 - - ----.:.-Z-.--i-7-:-• ..k......-.--Ilfr- 1 - - --,-. III §I•K . ‘,..•'..S...- ......f....,--;.•-••••••""--.;', ......,,I=••2,__- _- 1.!_e_. lin .Z:g'•'V 1'...'.'' 7'..:21-.110Eralk: :1 1!I I ED E. I 11 .11- - - - 1111-::-:.e--.-.-.;- • •--,--,--,,-.----,---------------,,-----,----7--afi.A. 1 , .xi • ....r.,'21.,r.T.,"'" ' 11•:.____ sienna nMIC,Irinin,l,iptept ....., CIIIIIISTOPHER FRESIllrf SOUTH ELEVATION lArrinit Aro•0.•....1,li NORTH EL-EVATiON '.• ' /N. .7\\ ,,,,,,ii, ps, ,:,..,,q,,„.„...1.--Ab\u- ."-"". ,/ilt•-•\ ...,..011,.: z.,,,•--.,/ \ :=..--..:„7_ ,,4"' ----...:0/1\111V/r4D41`. 71:71.4.' irP-42fr'it' • ' L.,...4.......,......7...r.‘,.....,.... U.'".:"*.t"''''' - ',:i...\ANI„. .1.4'M- 'iLti;', --- -"441.14. -1'llibiiiiit.. '- .- _ -ft-A '7"4.:Ii• 7 ,if 7-THEY= KUM '-i-.!._.1 _11_11W' ,.., ......-.m /\ .....,- ,__.A ....•,, ;,,.,pimpik_ In/It'-- - .r....-,4114-4.1=-...xviiantgual_ni...nit_.:1119:91_ :..#7::___ _, mon..__. ._:......7,1,rd:4,12.er:23r, •.*........U1 _ _11 ‘::-_. - •...,,,,,4, :so :::: _,4,,,,,,t..,,,,.., -.„....„..::. zum, ii„ Nu,mcdi ,win mit, -llama:=L=,/I am 1.- . ,..,.., 1 ,„„ .......,a. •••••mr,,,..} AI.*MO..we il• '''''''".''4----7,tr..=• X s..vn en, C . .• r,..I. 7 .*:-7'^_,- -..---•—•_ ---- - - t_10 irptig;Ea t-ill Ills' RV 111.-"0-•,='iliiii!!!1 ' --•--, ,,, 7 liTyiki Itlig itifE--Ai-_11:'11111_,,IT in. ' igli li I I I i 1 c) .—. ' UV;-:-:" -Li' .-7_ ' ...1,-..2. ,---I . . , :Ill 1 nl -_,--:---,-- ' • ••• 18• ••11 — -:E:=-_ - 1....Ma...... ....1 -1 - - _ .1.L BUILDINGi —-- - I — Ft EVATIONS I 5 cm --------:--_-....= _- ____ _, - --------- - - __or -1_ z; 1, r I irk ' .' X cr-2' _JC3 11 Lir r. --' ... irr.r_c- - sr r_or.cit .. I I_____J NORTH t-ri rlf-s . I 1 I'1 It ILA EAST ELEVATION ' I • ' 51 rE KEY • 0 • . • --------- I P-- Z 0 0 a)LL1 , :,':::44:"' •.,',;„';',11:1,,. , .46, ..Z,..\.. ./,.,./..• \ --- 4-..."'" ,;-7-=\ /- \ / -_ ,/14 \ __, 11 :;-4:1'.:1`7";--- - .47:1,t;',W-.x „4';' ;_4,---W; --\• /-6141111hb:.\ 1\1 \ ...A4 .,_ ,--,-/:\\t\,..t.M. 3,1,--1L-,-.-' _ 1" 0 ,%.„''''..7,,„, ja F.I.II mill oh..iliNt.rii.....11:2:-1"11.ALI r•-:- LI'',--:-FC EMI I: ..,-"_,.. ME111111=7.7,__ liw, a Fr.1-4:11. _J '..:-.. ' il 1•1m•... •11.11.M..4-' r ',I, ---- MINN -.-----,-i• - -,---:,am! ,im p ...•,-..- lim Ian Wt-r-11 1E- "1-'7 ' -111.g*--1 1 __ , • or ill 1 ....,,Itill,Ivly 0 C-) UJ i ,gi- gliditilingl. 4.minim' .9 rl,_-I, gu 1, - rig!A ;LSI ailkuniggil=i114- __,'-'-: •121111 1 _LitA so ,,„„.„,,,,,",- 0 UJ > IIE MIMI J : -1111111111 Sip!MR III. .. ' , oil 1111BIVI'l----1-'-' LL1 IN,.' _ _ -.... rn 17.w. Bra'' „„I'il„,,an mil". IN ill I'.I " n min . HUI= i4 1/ LI rri I 1.. 'IN CI' --=„t',:::'-- < p ::-.- - - KINN i lid i i NM NE 1 BB OEN 1111111 i 111111111 ri i i mi.i -, ILIJ -- .6.14...< ...I "1:41*"" Woul•Olt In.14. ct SOUTH ELEVATION - EVERGREEN ROAD W*10 ULOC4.34 LANE PAM PICP OR //iN 11/1141011,P0...11, 11.1C s` .......- .fI - /.:. ....., /: /tIS Si 5011105101.kW, 51 P 1114...1 RACK4A04.34 4%01: / -W-./11.., `.......'- - 31 - ---:r.' 1 '1'.0 li i 1 we II rim - in p n T 13 111 _ ..., • ., :::::1'.'3',Lt" 8111 0 II ni-___-_-, __" II 1m -at,,t17;.g.. tt _ im,- __-_ _,Ii, zi -;•=41,7--- 111 II ---_=----1-, -.-- ,,,,,v,,,,: 11111111dt -. ' siPnna .1;ar.!_ , , ,,, , ' t it" ":V.t";" j ...1h6VA.,....-4- --, ,, :,st• •rea... "-'41,,rj-w',arr.."-ea ik.1:, --Ch.1 I11.4 0 1 rftV:,., IA- ?‹ 'Aftt.V.SW."...TAC, ' •• 151.,PIIER 141i14141. WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION - SECOND STREET '0„...',•:.:,:;,,,'..,:,'' ..A, ,„*A r... 4„,N,N p 1 p,,,_ ‘t1 I ..,,.,,,,,„,.,• _ ...., =...„ ,,,,.,., ....„ ......7.,,,k,_ /__--_ -, .4 •- \IN .., - - = Mroi4.4--4.h,,,,JA4-4.4.4..A. '---/ \ ,__ : _ . , ,--.. .-- .- / - , „...:-...-T..47 -__. -- A .. '-`' ..,tal :1181 14',4:1;:#11111"=.,7=2/11117:1117, --a z;-&-m..1, 6.g..,:'„:2:, ,t,,,-",,,Itr.-,1,• N., .':•74.,',;/..-•- - - :-.....,,....„,.,,,.....,... .._- E. 1.0.=:=Immi,:::,7-r•,,----= v t,'.,,,r4,.....7.,„:. -- - - rriTct,----V6.1 .,-f..-7--- vz.....,.....t.--.... ....- - 01 A .....,.. ..-...- -==_......,-,--- ' •- - ----_,- in mon.a maa'mai roo ii it . — 0.e.0 CD Oa i 1, 401.1 rir ism III lair, Ain , al____lin, III ,E.. ..111 1E'0 o __=, - ---I '7"1 1 liti ilik'it --til 1111111111 I'':: --='-' r I I',,,,,„A <I BUILDING_3 c) --1 -_-_-,,, :---: _1 .,. 1., ...1'.0 MCRTH -- -- -0 a) PA el ELEVATIONS siTE KEY - - it r ,No i:JCL ri Ern ' I.-1-,1111 -aa-r-K-,E '--- "„a;- „„,..1,..., 1 I •I r 1 p .1 II'il ii-1---EC _p ,1 ,P-lc JO, I -I- 1 )P. -I I./_11.11 It 1 I _ ri r&„ '4571 NORTH ELEVATION I • 0 0 • -- - --- ---- ----- F-- Z 0 / L11'.:,..,4"......'...:' ' 0 co .......... .. .„.. 41,11111.10,...1., — • .,110Ipt r*\77 ——-\ n7:40-41rt\s-\• 401......c:41 gn si.: ...fg, - Fpn mill Fara:. in_,,, -__.,.• •. all ,.,..,_ _ *mu C.". I-'h - - 7-11 Aireill.2171111iii: rat;; umo, FP- - ..,-1;•,,,-...,>1....;;. 0(-) 0 Lu Lu 6A, Es tItt no at rtr, ellifli 1,..1-111g l'IP -§-, 1 .,..,rmai ig-iii Iii no 2 • __- _ lipE1 i . __ _1 ' - Av0E- ' -vrilmirpromil ttniTt,:tt,..tviAt _ :41---m""'1"zr-4-• .,,;,:-J,,- . . 1-------------'1'01'11.......... , , CO WI aU n3f 111111 '171 7P PIN/ 'Malt 88 ••••• _ - 0 i i iiiAi• i III I ii " ii' I ,011 n° -.III III I --i Ell -4'illilliii On•I MI, ' - . - -r.r.z.%- __J , ii , _ ___, .1 . Lli• _ - •ILIE POSI Of OM ay i It .n. CC 7.47,..V.,' .... Mk...; SOUTH ELEVATION - EVERGREEN ROAD ....".. 130 1.1(f illSWIgi Y. - __ GRAM aid Itifl Ild: iii.SUMI.SIDI WV* .il ii.IM-041.i rA OM 1 - i.PC.C.,) liAll lroptet no Wil 7i: .,yii ir- --,.---- -a i - .--k.:---- —' .--‘,L.-'t..::"' :E-7_—_-.--:,_ -',:,-:--*g --- r...n.....• FJ• 111;:i2:: - : ; z -=--1 21 - =-- -pe- "..`4. ••..,••, --1 f :-.-:-.a,.7-•-=',ii IMF -- .,„ .. ------=-=--- i li ..' • .... l'Ir, 'f:-."-1111:1::.-:•:-:. ::I sienna , .. - ,.I.:....noit:-- th, . , . i .: '.-('',r1.,4f,-t• ,',,.$i;:. ,s4v. . - 1 Li/M[51-0,11LN I ItESilLEY EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION - THIRD STREET . , ..„......,.. - =--- I'-' - 4'2-ltd.* --.,=-/---- •">, - . . ---- . ,...... p IR _-_--- :-...-gow --.- INN \ _ r _ :44.';.-,:„:.:-...-...=-...44•:.., ... . - - "In rit li---__,, -._um ,,m t , M tr.'s.:1" jrI I ill 111 . 'Sim ir , 1 3 -•, i ......,...M:y: --11111 t RE • .,.x , 1141;imrt inia4 1.,-.......T_-_ ... __. 1 1 ,11:._ so • ..._ L.: ._ 4_,,______ ._ :_ _ _.....,.;,. 1 Iii;1111111" i IIIIIIIIII,,,i1 I 1111111VMM- ----- __, _ r;,„, BUII,DiNp 4___ e...„ I I•,)-Ai I __I 41) _ .... - _ NORTH FIEVATIONS ___ _? 03 z:,.;;•,.. .,-- r , ,1 c I. . I. t I i D r 1...t *1! , ,'cr.. - SITE KEY --- -- - ., ., ' - a-' r ' ' 1 _ E -• ,k. a. ,. - cm a) ,..•..... - .- • ....) 44 NORTH ELEVATION AR — 1 5 1 • • • • _ I_ .___ .. ..... , \N ./;74,„\\ Z 0 0 co w ....... : ..._. • . 41r111.11,.. M , --• ,L14 -.-I\\./."-'it \ /Xt.& ..-- ..c,.... :•._ . _ ' '•::'..- .1---1 illit'-- - 9E1[1 tu.- rff•fillnatia•-.LI _."\- - / lek. - 74,. .. /4"..i..\ - .1 Cf) 0 1 __A Nip s .-'174111,:i' llim ._':: ! D , c 11111111111:111 .:-....' .----\—/ ' ..,..CW-- .--.- ---\ _1-' - \ 1 tit-r-r `,-, ;i4111nOnligni .,,,._1-ra. L- .40....:0 :--t: ; " '0.1.6- --:;... _Alippli lam A r,.. "-. d ..1_._ .. ,., . It ' ',IM-, , .„/4 . III ;.UI ir , ,------ :--,-• s'N / -, . •'''41....!..1tt?.‘,,,,C..., AU..‘1,..., 1';',7,I - .:--...,„ - .- gm'.___- ,1,1,:,%iii11111:11111111114-;--trili 'di'—' '• rillillir- mall' ''.'M •.':--;.---; .L-141412 1 um .. •.,... ' 1 nol,no Ing IC :in n 0, li.lig.. ..,::. ....2 z1;i1, •.. _4,4a.,.... ... , . i ,-,12.11 ! [ , . . • VTAIII., LU,:..„:.....Se• ila;,'111111 MI ' ,.... .1 _ on II Du ilim7v.,,,:,.. .., ... ...-_,:_,,,q0...!..4.,,,..,4,-,,,,,,gmr24...i,-„-.if- 1111111=c-„:::Jri,MOM ..:--1 ' ''' - _II <CO p , OD, ., , nom oi nn DO Alm 1.1.,-.9,1A','Illar:,,,,,.--.,,'„•-:1---.....—"s,,,t,-, 1 L.',..'''',..,',...2 i . ',,q',I- A IIVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIir' I r-'-':'ib 1 geOlgi 11141111W Ullit 111 .‘Jznatl,„. 1 t:. '-=--- • - • ••, -.--. .•. . ggig.1 no f......,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,air:..-,1"-:iiipluipowri -•••• ,ib ,,,,,..1:J,....-1,, ,....- -,,,, ,.. -Iiiiiim...- • a mi BE 111.1 ...... '. - •-• iii .,„...,,,,,41,..,1„,,L47-i-l___,.Do.. DO 1 L' ..t,.'ad 1' ' `..'r9,-9 ili".............. , -,.''.,I.:-'.''"'' " ' '---*--i-All'il'- -..- in. L_..ig - --1 w ,.,M*2.1 47:nit.' :-:•,14.-1171-1111V-OD i -•••-••••--- ' • .,.;. - ,--- -- -x....m...,1 1.11 1.4.-..''11/.-,..Fr,4'6.4,3i • p`..... 1 ii .'-.4.11'.•;?: .1 OD ii:Da 41 ,1 4 ',4 . -- .1.„...0.:. . , :. .-,. , . ,I•la ',..:rt'ii.1111111 00'1 On'..111 ' 1' I.':-1 liMill la .!m WI.Mill '--............." cC g go ...,- t---:-' '2.-..- --:- .--..,1;..._-_.:uo:111 ' •'• III IE. •-- 'up ' 1.7""•;"-." WEST ELEVATION - THIRD STREET . ' .. ' " 'i •..- Lt..= \ -- — -.,.._.......:...,,-_-_,-.,, -444,,/.4.444 46.64,66. .....lift/m011 1,..{ tISIWOJ OP =ion. .i.W.. 61646616 41611.10N.4.41. 11430 WO 40 16, '1,1'36 .46.\:---- I ir. 11111Milfr _--_--•:-N4 _ fil. - ---I. •:.:....r.-11-.::-.-1 . --1- .. ,..,'' :::'.1:':::::,1,:"` ''''''""`--------.. -_,-„..2.•. ,,._-_ •[... - :._.....,.i7,. ^V. h Z. i tt V:.:.L.'1',...t." .re ITOOD 11 i:1-1-11)EDED SI.. ...:----::.;•.:::,::,- „„.„ .- 6•444644.4 = .lei ............ .g3"1 ''.1 r:-.---1.1 -----, 7o/1 .. _ -....-•, . , . r ._._:-1, -,•-•-- - ,..,-. 11111 IIIIIII ..„,......,•- ___..-- !LEI._._._ _ _._; T' ...,:..tff.,.. [ i i \-1N sienna -- _ I NORTH 14.t.,:;.;,.,'' :..s%V1r4,., i. - =- - t 1 a:111V4V,II..- .- R.,,,,,,,r,i-i, ;. .T.T-. tvg.,-. I ;I- - ,,Li - li ---- 1 - .._,... .•:•.fi.,<.L:.,4i,r.,.g; -:-..!,.d.:...-•:::.,'-:;','-.,-.:, .,',6,.,....,,,,-t.'ll "...,.". ,.., SITE KEY ..,-.. .,-i, ut. ::.'z.q.;:,-:-.,,,,,,'„,'",l'L'..,,,4;',..,:5-.'g!':,•.,....; ...',.'ZI...,.':-.- • 7',.:;Z, ''"..' Iv - _,_ ----_ ' - .--- --------='"------- . ....t.,/\. 91Ki,-1,t::nli. SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION . ,„.., . , _..14,1•14.1. ..,..... ''•.'' _kiglirg/X/.1\\,. .0..4;1'..*... =-. ‘1 ' .P....-..!'"77,11...C.' /44.i. .r4' .'''''.-.. -.71: ...22. ........,....,.............. .0. ar-Z,Thfille-fi-r'..--6fivrr r-^ "r- — - 1MM i , • =7,1=- ---1 - .4131`.'31..6.11,rrg:7."tannin itilfilf 1r .3.31,M. A_Milik ' 1.1111.n/11,1010 I. A '''''':77.1 NE 1.t.i .•. .- ..-_,-.- ---7,--._.,I 3111. --, - .,:r - l'''',-r- - ---1. ,:itualit___:.0,42,4=7,4.11.0.1.-: __z____, ..,. .1,._...j_ • 1., ! 1 . ___,-,,It F..", —' ' ----• -.f.rf-=r,-!.1,,,, -:;-.Am, 'a .Ncr, 7--,;-,, ,,.._ .zit Arn,..91111/IINCLE.Eti. 'I-ma':I. •--14'7_ ..::—. . ',-r.,_13 ,,,,:„.,., , ,.... „„.,,", , ..__ __. , ,,,„...,,„„ •. i.,„,,„,,, .,_____ ..... ...„....... .. __,_,,_,..... _ .,,.. .. ., ,,i6 a Afilti.#•■ ••dilim.-_,...--_-.....-=_.,.. -- 44 -1 I . I,-'T ,.: L,. I 1:' VIM!.II lima --' L--.i p Hiliiirri ±_, ,•.... ......ia — .- ..._-__-__:-...-_-:-...F-, Ns..By 0.3.••0, ‘,... ..... - - . ..,.......... 7..I1 . _.. ..., '-',' • - i•,,- MN 1 i =111,-_-_-..:- t I um :...-im;1;;;:•.1 -,:;-,-:. • ,..-"........---.„,.:-_-- __..ii, , , lu ,„,,„. -:-„,,_:--- --7- .67;Mi - .,_,. _ ....• = --:.- ..-...=-_-:,-,,rAAM:I k ,. : . , : I-A i nuia -r. . 'trill al --- 111 1 L---' ' . 11,i1,•14 ---'- -----=• - c) ra ,_ ....., ..._ Ill , 1 - „ 11!:;111111111.1 - - -- - a- •- --------7•.'-''',.4J alr13- -- -MI7 1_,. , /I 1; /•-,3:1.- :--' 1 ' • / .i.JCI I- • -- 1 1-i TIE —.•-•- 1,-.7...,=-..si•ai,..-_-....,,,,.,..- in, c,::, -17-1: ,i.A 1,1!in 1:.-; ;:'.1- : I '' 1;ICJ 1 1-1-12- •1 BUILDING 5_ - , i - - -• •••••• , I ..1...M .4,11", ii ' -- .Nocioillu ' ___----- --------- ---- 1-,, ;,.!•.-ri.t.r..1 .,.•./ li.i...;',.:, 1. ,.. ;..., r, ,1 !! ; .,•,,•,-,--,, ,,L , „ , , ,. ,!- • -- ELEVgION5 .. ._. ,b--' ""11 ..=.---t : ,777,, lahliq . • i i.... , _ _ ;. r.1,.-._1,•_!. .,._„.:,__,- .,.,..A, 1..,,.-• -• - ! bilinitui __ ,,„/ .. ,,, .`..T.1-.4,44.4i.....,_.r.),- = cn :!-li- i:!4'..' 1! I i :.ii 11-4-,- ,. i...rinr--rj- '. ...... III 4 '111 '4i1.-4114. :/-1'.21:i'.' [ 11 11 r 41t.11 '..:" ."- •-•'. --A . {-.3-/ ,. III ,•, .. ;.? 1: 1 • 11 '1 . ;4.1_1.1 1 j •'., .• 1.6 -.••.. ..,;j; 1 1 4 4 1 1'CC ',. 1 1 11 1. Y I 't':•1;1.4' 1' '' i...-- ' 1 . ••• ,..71.,/ r 1 ., 1 1 / 'll,'' -• ' ' . ., EAS/1" ELI-EVATIPN • _ . .., ., ., -.._ • . • 0 • .-... - -----•- . • --- .. . - ---- ti.-17- --_I-- • 2....,,,. , , _ I-- _ ......— • — ...... -.`, '..:.ov•••OOOOOO• I , r . . , r• -I- -r- .If FtLet SR 0,I1 u•l• LIJ ISWS Ir00 0.1 c• ,s11772t:alliiiiill Hillia ilgt 111.711 i151111111111111111 I., .1,11 0 CD 'II - 0) . Iztt MIPIIIII,11h11111E1111111111111111 I II IIII::::::shed II : / iiiiiniiiinnumuimi iiniiii ;7-4.- .,,,,zz,„n....,,„...., Flir 1 I t LLI cn 2 L .i, ...1 u 1 .% Ili a. 6 r . ._ ----- •• _J• '' ; , , ..._.:= ..__ ›.. .,-- 0 i.o \\'• ''l Cf) ,.. I.1, 0 CD Lij Lo 0 a . . .._ .._..., • : .. t 1-1-1 > a , 4; I _ .. _ ---L__ _Aiii.:71.7, _______ • 7 • L. 0 f t trtf-fr _.... 120 0-- --- • - —-- II 111-0. %S1 -1 • _L. _ _r_j_. L jj • ' UV en V " --..-....-. •- os - 1 ...... 1:=1 i- 1 El:/j/ ::/' ---- 1 •_ri_ t. _ _A .-1 ,...., ..,.. 1 .. . , . WINN i 1?1 I r 0••11. t 14,.t:,::,;,, .11.. 1.., Iv 1' IS 98'35 a SAI7a1415101.4:0.0 R0,0".:...7......170.("4:P: p,gliggitl 011111-iii lu tilikil:::NI- 1.• .- .--I.- - 1-...1:•-i[:--. - . , g1=6".z.% iii 1-• :01 idjur..111,111N1.11r ...7.:r --(Z 1112 •I!.17.7. •: , .111.1•• •a••"op.ro••MIII••.•.111 . .I, :Mg$61•••••a mr4r mr..... SASA: PARKING PLAN RETAIL FLOOR PLAN Aim 42E) VW. .Ar) VW-r-Ce 11. „---..---"'•,-,----,,,,.--_,-/<_,...=/ c It •••,,,,,,_ . , .....•-t-' / • [sienna .-r 1 -----7-1- 1. -1 - -E i -- -1,- .................. - , ____ iii:',!..•!,::::1 ' !-.. - EA":gr,?'ell-l-61:115,7',III, . $ 1 r' , "\ .Ilk",' ',!:!•,i: l•';:' '.1," --- ,...., aill2 000.4 V 4.10 WA• 4., 1.10 0.0t•It y- I r 1010.111.1 Sr ="1 I ' . • r.° I :.'71--triSZCAI.Loos — MUMMY moan FEYIEW •• 1: nf0-0 -- 1 -- '1 ---- •• I ,r-4,- , . 11 i • l'1,,t s, .,. ./ 0.0.•40 me 04 nog.fr ler re...,...mom......re....MP. r , •IMPOtt••Ash•••I12..101••••MI 1 , Ca ._._ _ Ow.e•Tt•Mr..*al.NOM DN..0, Om..." IMI• 1 ' - - -,' ...•••••-,. P Our% WAT OSACO ir . , _ ,i_9 L,--4) II ..--- Wm.Inie--.--------- MIXED-USE/COMMERCIAL ______._ _ _ 1 1 - --.-,:, i _____ -1 131 rek FLOOR PLANEI . 1.--yin___.t . [.1 ' I P , -' ..___ 1 11 t AND ROOF PLAN r ,.,. - - T. i ....._. _. 11 _. I: c- '' _, ..... :_,... ....1. _________. ..s,. _.._._ 1 O..:till u..# iii.A ,.. , -I i , ,:i-,,r11:71-9111,l'tliafFilliffM: ! 1 . .I-:- -."-- - § 1-7'll:'il:'i 1'iTh - . .1:41TF".r' Srloot No 1 ' '..- 1611±.1 F-I '.,14-11--'i•-)-44-.1,-,-5. - 4, OFFICE FLOOR PLAN .....- r ROOF PLAN _i 1 AC-1 r 1/16.-r-0- 1)_ 1/06*• rr _ _ • • . . r.re..�_..._I ..tiKrr""1 [! AI - .tn no.otsv •w14.1 [UV man O%re..ae rt.4 I MOM.R wmD.[.IN rw-1.111100, W az Y ,"1 111 CO &iiirt /I I,rG..u.Kr _/��. •=- �. v't'nwwe°.c"' 1 r. 9iff�ir— j -- r.. 1j ' .. .. 0 ill11 wu.R0in4.elv-.i J .ate. r - :: ■AIR AEI O W , . tr v,.:CI<..pdIIIII i ii �I A■Q■o a■o■a �,, .tot. a!� �Wala �ltew 1,. - a tL, 1 �►1Q ;".ati6Ys Al-• CCI I1• —de�..I IIII�III�_.11II'4t.�SL'�� T-- C�? ®NM= -" e.l t.fwa S. < 0 J-y , -... 11.•• •,....iii 1..'......!.!,.. • .1111110 IR LIJ :mow EWt0.t1®f . `, w rn.N G., ti.owt .- K•itt9n0., __-r�r rY NAZI '\"MU(G.. t110Ln IM . n •a t n1ssG LWG OS*K60 OR w Ma.csY M1.rYr -.11.1.11.110.111.1.as v990 SC00.1/011 OPCSOM.I WC �fF�'- ----.1 _ OP VOIS .. ..... ... ..........._.__._-.. _.. CLAC.AWAS fro YPlaJ NORTH ELEVATION —_ — 1 i rsiPnna 013111.11111 100-\ I W... , M.,..1.0.f M I_..-. 1 .' _- _-ri1r.,0cwq.00401 tq V V 7-- �.. _ :.•� - - ♦0...e n.. R.HMaI o7AFil-•FICISfiCF91 Ij .om .w. Yeescxerc 1,1IIT . ttlRxnu 10� I- ` ' t Mn1G.4 I�- 1 • / .0 i,irf..a IWW,4 SO Mr4�I _ r• .. 1- ! . 16 I' �� III Ili ..I iki r.,.. ‘ 4,-,....-x....z.g...::: �a i {a0, �!z :t7�.ii t,-....., -.„-____,„-........_=,..... __ . .-- - wtM.c[+'.. ...VW WM..rt* '.i. \ ]. '�fi,�y5til I. PRELINMY DIMON RENE% q�—I�1. — It „A... "�y`°.�s,`7:: � '� Ell®'►7�lillfYRlhglbll� d1S1y�r i1 �{ }}��,��� ✓ l h� 11 }"C � �R ;I� ifCI�QI ; �ee�ier� .ra�..�.. ...,o�._ ;did. r....."'=ppi;�tyy. �,�_w,�. I^��k ,.����kt _ I �'�' �t®9®�®�� ���_ l� r 3n WAYfIN�AOt•yc „31p•. ��'i t;i 1 ` �i s ^ f i G •:.. _•.a _- •_a. M ._'!a_e.�1 ..._._. l.x.,tu. t--•t r ITV' 1`� � t I �Y� M tyf: r._ 1NII r-�� _GCCa..a.srK e, F ` AMBe,E MIXED-U9E/COMMERCIAL xY- 1pF W� �� uo aohNNt���■!4 mil I -- :? " ' �; . I , �::,r ' \. ..,x. BUILDING ELEVATIONS ` n, . O dl 1T�a iI Y11L jS • s 5i.4 k t lwno.w xaua u m pF k, -,C,: isS.. .-- iN ••...Farr. / .//SOT 10.164 0.L.A.Idr.IrtNrY/ L n!21 C » ,,6I 00.µ n.r `.:ow.,.r WI «.p,.11.11 EAST ELEVATION .......... n wH....n..; A°.°HONu . - LA AC-2 0 • 0 _._ III 4 F- MAW.,Imi„...11 M10011.1 MM.*OM MOM) 1 ,.-•Kato tol1r...81, ,-MOOS V/WARM Z .60•000 rMr../.rw I i wk meow.ro. ! / MOP OVA*mat 0 I / 9MW.010 L1J / I I \ r112.1,000C iD10/ 0 C.0 LII CO S'6A-L 114.11/Ce MM•••••.„ Wilt VIM( • -- 0•-• • _ _-..- I MK Ill NW \ . t .7.:'.........77-7.-L-..tt7-....- - 1.1.--,.L -k,'"-:7-......7..,...777;,. 0 ,-..e....r. co MOW Mr illACr 111/1110 WO. -- Var"Igni I ''---Emre 'll - -- ona-_"' km sini .- IN • Lai ...-- ......- , -1 MI _ km in i IEEE NE 1 IN NE EN Ini el go fan LLT , • --=.0,--I'l•iri.-'- ..m.w• , .,,-44,711/1----v• .,i.r. IE. - - - . . 7.- . - I .-.. .• , . - - •i.' ---. .• .,,,m I,Tall,01111 411.1.10;II/I . '1.‘," 'I it 1111111116,fr-tff6- •, *tisk,11'II 1111 lilt 1 ''-,,,I,Artliiiilli lid:i'i,tf-, . . • i 1 tA' . :! - • ' .!---.. *w ' - Ire 1051111'PIM li "1.)„, imis rep;Ina' : •-f- . --- T..,‘,... . :' _i LLI i El ___,.; - _ I - . Chi 1 1 \.494m- "-s,Tq".:Iglilin - own, .1---',''..It_w_._•_isamommmonsi=""iiiii -- ____/---------,--- 1.. •_•••• -, .....:............;, t , . . ws- - Mal -•,; ,-:;Q• u-III-',• „ , I - -'ri• .'''A Al' •. KOCK IA ., .. -- I I--; - \ 0,E 05K00.CR • GAWP LatrAPI,INS -e9g-t., -•-. . . \ m MAI 00,0 Man rmlso 9800.08111ERT 9895 St 9.11110310(IONS Sit P ClADA10.5,011 91015 L -MUM..100.0000.00.0.001. 1.111Ral we.alas Ann* ...... 1.0 MOM 0.401 Elmm..:II 0.-• I(10.M. SOUTH ELEVATION r ‘, Sit • / -, . • _ / -41...t 00,001.0 WORM Mr; .00/01.10 I • ..'-• ...... _ 1,. .--./ El.M1 0EMI wen. ; • MW0M1 0 I MOM111/1111d 0 •-i .. ---' --- . -Thr - -- - __ ...itoca...srul" ...9.01101.4.•c0:, 90013,11w mlw mf).01 . ! MIMS I /-170::="14"W [sienna , . I -::.:i.t.-_:.:-...•: i .-.:c==z. riValllirsin '-i ....f...c. \ IM41.NOW 'I - - \ I , .. • , .0 -----...--- ... IIIIIIIIIIII •immwl Mm1110. -.-- -' ----.---' ii!iii!igi 7=' 944 000/210010 , . Inglie•MesIM0.100/0/4/01 - • • - --. 7 7/..- 4:i' M300.114,01041, ! El pgr6711611-7Wrintri i i ,...., ..n. M111 mmw0.1 •:1 II I GRILL DETAIL '14Arlir"r-. _ , mii .- •.. If- 1.1"-----.----- 7.-/-7311iri.7://2/-e.,....tr ' - ii - , ,r / .000. I 4. -WV./MSC 10.41.01,0 11.1•1/CAM WwW10106t0 ...._ / ..10,41M,A1,......r016....104•r•Ar 0.001.0001,SM011111.1.111/1 ' M•00.04 0011. 10101 1 PRELPANARY ONION REVIEW 1 ,....., i ' • . -`.1 '../..".1/- 1 TM ,/ r• ik 0 m ...." , ,.. ,,.,,,,,,,,...,.,. / 00,4 Kam 10•10 1 7 // WM m.r.1.0 / •.6.4.........4.0W, ••-.7"t.. .-. 3 . ommmum mow..AO YI PM w el 1 "- -=----=-711_ _St_____________ I , .,, _ . 1 .i fa 2VI'"'" •••11..010 0 NM W. WV.*I. ••.•esnlai 10111•11.1 A MIME IM.0110 ma .s•- MA MCI , I 11131211C II IT* CM.*Pr 011/ ir•-•''.1.77.7rie. 1110 fi.,,O. ...XX. h. . .h - ..as.•. , .-was.00/WW4.MD „ IMmOr ImM , CA.M.1 VI M. VIM mem VW 011.1Pco . Oli)\,111 Itl.ffilii01 I)ti inr Ir 0 ir al le, ....--_imam WOMEMMil '‘ giM Moo 40 AMA 000010 14M0 WM M.Wm Illit0L/.....' f i .MC . 1110.000015 ..0 0-.11440.1 01.400 1.1.11.4 __-_--_-__-_ MIXED-USE/COMMECIAL ow• MAL WI 004111 ••m mw mmr 0.0wwskm 01•10 WM., ‘ 0.0,14.MWM0•1 BUILDINO ELEVATMS L-Ili14.11 4 MAN P.01110 .•-4.11.nl•OM.•••••••• II.•la,*WO 3.0.•UAW SU, WE 5.•••5“...,,110.,• -- MOW.WIND 51 M.ImakKa.41.0-110111,M RALJNO DETAIL _ _ ._ _ _ RALING DETAIL WEST ELEVATION(ALLEY) __________...._ __ • _ __. MIIINOVal Skeet 00 AC-3 1 • • • -. --. . ._. I- Z 0 LL1 CD CO I--..__. I.1.1 C 0 2 , 0_ , . ..."-N. : ....Meg 1.00 300•C tfeiCa-------______ ; , ; ; • _,;;.;_ i 0 11-l• , 00.0 01;44 000%0.00 f ASOle-.... -.--. '-' • / •-- . ,,,, ' e/•-•s N CO ii I •N... . -_ - .. o 0 w . _ : , .301.11 1••W.., 41.11.1-•-••,,, N.,,,,.. /1 ill-• i 0 ' I 1±1 > %SI .., ..., , . . . ... -... . , *Ka Illi.wee,AK.•-•....„,...., ,... 4./ ,.• .' ." ....1 . .. . <CO W I • WI•.000 000100 00. - ... vf . '• ' I 0 ......„ . • 4-.....„ .---...1;• -'''''.• ''..•'3-1/- '' I . •0.000013111006 0100 '... ..., . -4".., i -\-.-----___ ' ' CC . I .7.- I. 1 , 1 , , .1 .._ .. , t ,.+1...._, 4.. •-.....w. ... 0.0.136 __ . ! _.!_ N MiE OSWEGO.OW • , crawl 00,0.10•312.111.1.ir;I-,,,....... _ •,' 1. i-J'. . i ••; : I I C.11(PP 0031.0.COM. -‘,. \ , GRAWOG°WOK IIK. • ueSS SS SOWPOLOS WO.Sir P ,.. ' I - -- -. - -• --. ....,.....G..-. ' .• I .00•1011 0.0;0•00:1;40ir=-4,;•:..; • . CaW1.4.5.OP WOIS 7----1 i .......,..........0000•044- , P000100 110301 PC..Pe.PAW -,......... ',...... ;' '; ; wt.Ono awn Knit*.... ,....s-, I a.fe0,0 M.011110-. ...,, •-- 1.1.0 WO iaN.WOW.o- • . ,.... , ' weir.4..0. '. '''.... . . 010.0.40•..0.0144:11=- .;;; ........; ,,...; i . -- _II 1 il I ' '''...:;.114g1114:Z:Lr=-4. •... . e-'1 e•, h.,1,01.11 00.01,01,000,1- .0,0 010 ler•••000 444 , ;.(rr,,r-,--7-----7-----."-•-•-1- ;-;,--r,'41• i I - - 1 e.,,.I••.4010.014 Ye•4 - '''.•••,"• er.:. " 1 4 .•''.''' ••• •'" ' "' 4'•? ' I I • • I '''''' •.! ..`• 'f..? • •‘,.. L's I ! I • ViliS ‘,,e, -,„ SHOPS ; .,; • -.7 '- -- : ,. JI .. ,• :s. •• ,, :.. I•i so.nn.1.1.170•Ct 0!Ora-,. ›,..., ,,,... /\.` . l'sienna. ..... _ . . . . ' uworp trur scam p isPopn wurr-. ' ' ; . ; '•'. ..1; . . . .. . 1..."- i',: i 1'' I 1 I 00.40 ght•1P1101 GOkowit bk.- / In Mit CiweAtoo.leoe_00-1111. .0.00 ON•011000 001031.121-. .;;;;. • i I ' i 1 10.0 l• 4" ' •'-` \ . --.'.ri_..?2,.L....__,.. o• ! ,yi ff.gT.T21.71,;tf,.T.10 -.-- ,-..,..--:-Jr, .. , 03..40I;4'•11.WIZ:::---..„ . II --,4 i , a. Aloamtom tortx 0.1.0.10- .1 . • .,4 . .1.'; 21 i 00000 G.•IV A r 0.14.00.flr.-.- •4;11 • 'r'.r.nr.1.1.rs:1".."- ', • LN • , •___tl __t'l . 1 ! .! •.1 1 1r e le 010330. 0000101•-...„;;P•••,,,',''• 4 1'• 1.11 4' ;' • I 1;••! 1 1 i .-. il • 3100 TO 0,PM MI 0010_,/ I-4.. 11 , PRELSAVARY Dew&REVEW !'I . Ii• ; tfi .11\ , i ; I 1. ,• 1 ; , i ?•11,1, 4,•:,••4,-.1,, .1.1 1 .i 11 • •••••.....••••••.••4•••••• . I 1 iii 1 11 ; . ._ L...) , • %ow ppppir ot pp weer.,e4 v.- • II ' ..t.. 0...00 ea*.art 01 et el 4 •. '' II I. 1 •1- ,`J : 1 1 It-•l'! ........!.,,40.1 10.0 le.•••'44. ' ''''.".i''11 1 4 •4 .. • •• 1 i , i • • ' • 4 . t• •1, C I MOD IMO MEL.0 Ie. ._._._ . ,.- •,..i ,I, . .. . i I! . - ' I k I NI.1.• 0.1.4•1 Iti ....r. . tram IPAT 002000 . ._. ._..._ . _ . ,....... X X r..., rn " .1.- ---." 0.1....114 ---4-- MIXED-USE/COMMERCIAL I '\ ....awl* --.... :. . s ENLARGED ELEVATION _ . 0 ,-... 0 co AND SC-CTION G _..i ,,.....,... 0 a) As SHOWN ... . _ . ,.3 .4 Shrol No NORTH ELEVATION WALL SECTION A-A AC-4 AGREEMENT AND SECOND AMENDMENT OF DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN: LAKE OSWEGO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("LORA") AND: GRAMOR OREGON INC., an Oregon Corporation ("Gramor") DATED: /7 Ape`I , 2000 RECITALS A. LORA and Oswego Shopping Center("Wizer") entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement on 8 August 1990. The Disposition and Development Agreement related to the development of Lots 1-12 and 21-32 of Block 136, Extension to Oregon Iron and Steel Company's FIRST ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas, State of Oregon ("Block 136"). The Disposition and Development Agreement also provided LORA an option to acquire Block 136 in the event Wizer failed to proceed with the development of Block 136 as prescribed under the agreement. The Disposition and Development Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference. :• B. The Disposition and Development Agreement was amended on 8 July 1993 (the First Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement shall hereinafter be individually referred to as the "First Amendment" and the First Amendment and the Disposition and Development Agreement shall hereinafter be collectively referred to as "DDA"). The First Amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference. C. Wizer and Gramor entered into a Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated 9 June 1999, with Wizer, as seller and Gramor as purchaser, wherein Wizer agreed to sell and Gramor agreed to purchase Block 136 ("PSA"). The PSA is attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated by this reference. D. Wizer and Gramor cannot complete the transaction contemplated by the PSA without a prior assignment of Wizer's interest in the DDA and LORA's consent to such assignment, as required by and set forth under section 3.04 of the DDA. The assignment and consent thereto are provided via a separate agreement. E. The parties wish to set forth their agreement as to the development of the Block 136 Properties and to amend certain provisions of the DDA. • Page 1 —AGREEMENT AND SECOND AMENDMENT OF DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT K:121064100010URBURB_A208R(Flnal) EXHIBIT 70 LU 00-0007 AGREEMENT Each of the Parties hereto, in consideration of the foregoing recitals which are • incorporated herein by this reference, and for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, covenant and agree as follows: 1. Conditions Precedent to Development of Block 136. Prior to Commencement of Development of the Block 136 Properties, Gramor shall obtain from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ("DEQ") no further action letter(s) (collectively"NFA Letter"), as provided under the DDA and paragraph 13B of the PSA. Gramor shall also obtain design review approval from the City of Lake Oswego before commencing development. 1.1. Notice of Receipt of NFA Letter. Within twenty-four(24) hours of Gramor's receipt of the NFA Letter from DEQ, Gramor shall provide a written copy of the NFA Letter to LORA. 1.2. Phase I: Improvements. Phase I improvements shall be comprised of a minimum of eighteen (18) rowhouses, all of the commercial retail use structures and all related improvements, as shown on the plans and specifications provided to LORA on November 9, 1999 and attached hereto as Exhibit D. 1.3 Phase I: Commencement Date. Gramor is currently conducting water-sampling tests from three(3) separate well locations on a quarterly basis to determine the presence and levels of contaminants on Block 136. So long as Gramor receives • findings relating to the presence of benzene of less than 180 parts per billion from the next quarterly water-sampling test(which are expected by the end of May, 2000) and obtains design review approval by July 15, 2000 and the NFA Letter by October 1, 2000, Gramor shall Commence Development of the Phase I improvements on or before December 15, 2000. For purposes of this paragraph 1, design review approval shall mean the final approval and adoption of findings relating to the Development of Phase I by the City of Lake Oswego. In the event Gramor fails to obtain either design review approval by July 15, 2000 or the NFA Letter by October 1, 2000, Gramor's obligation to Commence Development of Phase I shall be deferred by a number of days equal to the delay of either design review approval or receipt of the NFA Letter, whichever is longer. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this paragraph 1.3, Gramor shall Commence Development of Phase I no later than July 1, 2001. 1.4 Phase II: Improvements. Phase II shall consist of the difference between the total number of Block 136 rowhouses (between 38 and 41) and the number of rowhouses actually included within Phase I. For example, if the prescribed minimum of 18 rowhouses is included within Phase I, then the rowhouses within Phase II shall equal between 20 and 23. 1.5 Phase II: Commencement Date. Gramor shall Commence Development of Phase II no later than ninety(90) days after achieving Phase I rowhouse sales of • Page 2 —AGREEMENT AND SECOND AMENDMENT OF DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT K:12 7 0 94100 01 0U RBURB_A209H(Flnal) In witness whereof, the parties have executed this agreement as of the date written above. • GRAMOR OREGON, INC., an Oregon corporation By: Barry A. Cain,President On this Iin' day of April, 2000, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon, personally appeared Barry A. Cain, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument, on oath stated that she/he was authorized to execute the instrument, and acknowledged it as the President of Gramor Oregon, Inc., to be the free and voluntary act and deed of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. OFFICIAL SEAL Y~ KRISTIN FARRELL Notary Public in and for the State of � Oregon,�.* " NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Ore �•_+ COMMISSION NO.31273o g residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 19,2002 C loktie cx.rf o_I a 6312> My Commission expires : t cui I ct 1 ?.COZ, • LAKE OSWEGO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Lake Oswego By: STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Clackamas ) On this iq day of Z 2099, before me Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon,personally appeared / 0WaS �-- ,personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis 61 satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument, on oath stated that she/he was authorized to execute the instrument, and acknowledged it as the G .e/71J' of the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency, to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said body for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. °Fr{cl. Not Public in and for the State of : 1 KATHLE_N KERN rP'LATT NOTARY P:JEUC-OREGON __ Ore on, resi/d`ing at �,. COMMIS�'ON NO.054211 Gs MY COMMIS IO! E '? S MAY 20, 2000 0 My Commission ex ir6s: • Page 8—AGREEMENT AND SECOND AMENDMENT OF DISPOSITIO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT K:127064100010\1RB\JRB A209H(Final)