HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2008-07-2111
I.. CAUL 110 ORDER
APPREW00
City cfLahle Oswegc
Development review Commission Minutes
JulM 21, 2008
Chair Bill Zliemey aa:lleid thea Lleimalopment Aevicivu Commission rr.eieting of July] I,
X108, to ore epi al approximalely 1(13 pm in thea Council Chamiberis of'C:iq Hlatl at 38(1 "A"
Avenue, Llakei O:ivuego, Oncigon.
H. ROLA CALL
Carnmissicincirs pncisenll weuie Cb1air Tieimay, Nan Hinkley, Krytsyna Stadnik and Don
Richards. Commissi onem A lby Hlenedia was excused. Staff pncisent weirei Hamid Psi sblvai o,
AssistaiiltPllanding Diineictor; Dcibnal Andraaidei.% Associate P:lannem; Evans Boonei, Dcipuly
City Atilom aN; and Janice Hadeir, Admilnistnative Support.
III. MINUTDS
Mr, Web ards moved to approve the Minutes of May 5, 3008. Ms„ Stadn ild sccionded
® the motion and ill p assead 3: Cl. Ms. Binkley abstained. Ms. Stade ik mieawid f a.appr_ove
the Minutes of_June2, 20.08. Mr. Ricihard.,i licicon ded thea motif an and it pasased 3:0.
Ms. Binkley abstained. Ms. Stade ilk micivcd tea approve tbe.Minutes oilJuric 116, 2008.
Mr. RicHards secacindead the mal ion and it pasiscad 10. Ms. Binkley abstained
IM. AHPHOVAL C Ill BINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER
LU 08-0014, a taequesl by Mary lo Avery / Avarnene Bake Osweago Inveasilars, LLC
Ms. Stad nild move to approve LU 08-0014-1676, Findings; Conclusions and Ord
Mt. Richards sccionded the motion arae it passed 3:0. Ms. Binkley abstained.
V. PUBLIC HEARING
LU 08-0001, a request by JRff Construicilion, IJIJC fora approval of tho f611avuing:
Rkisi deanl i a] Infill. Dus:i gn I JRIDI) Fkm i ow f✓car the following exacipl ions to tr a FJ -7.-'l zone
requirements in oiiden ilea con:itruat throe sells aft zero -loll lina dwellings:
Excaeiptions to 1ho 25 -foot front yard setback as f6.1llaws:
- A,12 -foot axaeptican for Unit 2
- A 10 -foot eaxaepticin for Unit 1
- f . foot exceptions kir Un:i it s 3 and f
A _` -foot eaxaepticin to tha 10 -focal side }land sotbaak fol thea extcriior wale offal]] six
until s.
C ity of Lake C s wieglo Develapmend Reviews Clarrimissian
Minutes of July .I1, Xlff
Haile 1 of 81
a A 1_`I% oxcieptiion to thea maximum 25% ]a ciavearaga standard fhr all units reasulIing in
a ] al coveraga of 40%
® ® An exciept.ion to tha 1-irniitalions ofILCC 50.08.W10(3) in order fbr Elroposiad garages to
t a aonstructac with coma: an party veal ] s. Thisi exception wi] ] a] ] ow th& a pairs of
attacahed garageas..
e Reamoval of 13 a tress to acacommodate tha devel apmiemt
Laaciation of F tuperty,- 339, 343 and 359 6th Streict (Tam Lots 12601=l 2( 04 and 12300 of
Tax Map a l E 03DC). Coni inued from Juay 7, 2(1(18 at the raquasl of thea app] i aant.
CHair 1li erney opanead the put ] i c hearing and explained that lI asl imony was to be ] i milled to
the now dwi gn submitted by tHo appli cianit. He askad the Comm isisii onears lo report any ax
parta contacst (ii nal udi ng site visit -s:, bias and csonf] i ct of ii nl erect, and ,I a iderrl i fy any
krlawn prosenit or antiaipatead future bus-iness relationships with thea projecsl or tele
appliiciant. Ms. Stadnik, Mr. Rlcahands and Chlair Tiearnay eacill reportad they had mads a
site visit, and Ms. Bink lay reported that sha had ] i sl ened lo tha recording of I the previous
hear'1ng. Eachl aflthle Clommissioniens present dec:lanad thaiii busiriess or occupation. No
one present challenged any C lona. i ssioner' s riigltl to hewn 1l he app] i cati on.
Staff Hepalrl
Debra Andreades, Asisociiallei Manner, ptesenited the stafflteport I1dated June 31, 2008)
and Staff Memorandum (dated July 18, 2008). She addneassed aarnci arras rakied in
testimony by clarifying tHal thea proposed development was r.ial a "major residential
davelopmenil" beciausa eacih dwalliing unit was on a separalla ]cal; and than tHea Residential
® Infill Design (RID) revieaw process was not t einig used to inicraasea density, but 10 a]Iow
exceptions to zone requiremeants. Stulff obsearvead thal some axhibit,,i Had been submitlled
aftor the duadlina for sucah subm ii ssions. Ms. Andnciades iieported thlat the applicant had
worked with the neighborhood and them submitted a neavisead design thal ref lactck many off
thle cahanges the Cammissiornears and thle neighlborhlaad had suggeasilad (Exhibits E-24
through E-29). Shea said llhea neavised plans showed 111a side yards had bean incneaasad to]
feet. Sha said bociausea Height Had beaean teducead to 22 fbet, tha pnojecil was a:llowead moue
lot ciovaiiage I13 _`I%o rather th an 25%), and thea excaplion to lot ciovaiiage they askad for was
now only 3% of what the Code allowed. She nolled the appliciant proposed Ila vary
materials and slaggeii fronit yard satbacaks to cnciate a parcieptiorn caflseapanata units. S1.1a
advised that i ti a front sell t ack p:l aini was to be based an thle RID-modifiead frons yard. Shea
said tha app:liciant had not moved Units 1 and 2 as fali bacik as the neigHbors wanled
because that would aompramiise two trees.
C
Applicant
Dan Goodrich, Icon Architecture/Planning, Inc., 17140 Pilkington Rd, Ste. 211, said
the chlanges reflected whlal the neighborhood wanted, exceapll thal the first two units could
not t a moved as far bacak as thea neighbors wanted bacause 1Ihat would imipact trea toots.
Howeven, He pairited out thosea two units were! thea farthest away from adjacenil tesidenicaeas.
He stressed proposed lot ciovearage was now close to what thle zona allowad and included
patios. During rhea questioning period, hes confirmad w r.idows Had began rearranged to
City of Lake Oswcigc I]eveloplmerit Raviaw CemmisMon Paga a of 8
Mibuites ofIRil}l 2:1, 20(18
pnovide inure variation in deaign and he clarified for Ms. Binklay how some arahitealural
fealures ofIthe roof Iporahle;i and the aaurli planter were 1o'Ioold.
Propanentli
Warrcin.Bacon, nepnesieinting tole Dvurgnefin Ne_ igbtlorhood Awiaciation, lestifiec thal
the Asiaaiation now supported lila application.
00pon ein is
Daryl Bloom, PO Elox.378,.Lakci Osiwc_igo, 97034, asklec if the south and of the project
wauld be at the existing grade cir if a neaining wa]] would be nacessaryl. He added what
fencing or sareening would bei provided.. He added who owned and wou. d maintalin Iwo
trees shown on the property :line. Ha questianed why the staff report had riot addressed
the Code requiremiarit that a residential davelopmenll of four ar more u :1 s was to be
required to pnovide transit faailities. He questioned why the dameloper hlad been a; lowad
to use the RID process for a zero lot line development and miany exaceplionis. He
acknowledged that ha undarslload that the Evergiieeni c esign overlay could niot be applied
because the appllicaliori had teens siubmitied befbre thle overlay was adapted, buil He asked
the DIRK to consider :i1 anyw ay. He won ied tt: at soma other developer would t uil d
another sal of row houses aven alosm to his praperty. He urged the DRC to daisy the
appl:iaation. During tha questioning pariod, Chair Tierney alarifaeid that tha currenll
hearing was Iim:itedto cor_s:i.deirat:ion ofl!landard! that were in affeal at thea time oft
appl:iaataorn subm:itlal and that thea URC could not lagally apply the Evergrean design
overlay.
Dianna Bloom,_PO_Box 328, Lake Oswego, 97034, said she appreciated the fhct that the
appl:iaant Had revised the plans, but she thought the r.aighborhaad should have beein
involved eianl:ieir in lhle proccm. Mr. Boone adviseid the Planning Comm:issiori was abut to
consicar making changes to the RID process and interested parties could affar comments.
Kim_Hawkins, who resided across 6th Street from the development, opiried th at th e
now plan still showed units that were too similar 10 each othar. She ! aid the pnojeat &
nal ref act the "eclectics" ahanacter of lila neighborhood and was not compatible with thea
othler struicilureis along thei stieet. She said shle naw opposed ill due 10 the propased density,
sJiae anc mass. She qua! 1 ioned why the RID prase; s hac been useid., She as ked tha
Clamrniis s:ioniers lei conisider the facet lhlat 1hi! type ofldevela9mar it would set a plreaedent
for future inifill in t . a area. Stela pointed out that the June E Staff Report reported that
fide af136 trees wares to be preserved, but hair raaominended conditicros of apprcivial ori y
called fbr two trees 1a be plreservad.
Jim Bolland, 804.5'4.S1t., contended the RID priocess wa; be:ing used to g6n more der.isily
than the 1 hrae houses the aor. a would allow. He said the proj eat did not miaet RID ariteri a
because the six -unit project was mucH difftirart scale than was niormal in thei viiainity, and
woua d si gni fi cantl y change the paittern and aharacter of devel opmien t of I all lots within 200
feel of the site tHall the RID procieiss was to consider. Chlauir 1lierney obsermed tHere was a
® commaraial use and dense apartment! within :100 fMet ofltHe site. Howaver, Mn Bolland
City of Lake Clsweplo Develoy mer. it Review Cammiss:iori Aatle3 c f S
Mini. tes of July 211, 210( 8
nal ed tf.a ciommiarcial use was :in the HC zone and the proposead developmanl was of a
di ffenent character tf an tha ex isting residential 1 of s in tha RIR area. He stressad thal
® approval would cahangea tha pattern of davalopment cafhthe entire neighborhood and that
was not what thea RID prociess was intended to do. Chaiir Tiearney agread. Mt. Bol:land
asked thal tha second show that the DRC had chlor cin not to discuss that issue..
nji
Ha tastified that thea Associalion would haver preferred to see siingla-family detached
horn, as, and they quasticanead a:lI awing the applicant to usa of thea RID prcacaesls. HowEavala,
thle applicant had made changes the niaighlbonhewd had asked for thlat would help reiducie
the scale oflthe development and n - aka elach bu'ldinifl look as'Iittllea different, so they would
support it iflapproval incorporated a Ilisl of cahanqas and additions to staff]'-recommandac
clonic itions of approvall. Ha advised that techri;icaal specifications in the July 1 V Staffs
Merr. orandum regarding tha new axcaaptions neadac to be ciorrecrted to shave 1he eipplicanl
was novo asking fon a l '6" eaxcaept:ion fear the upper floor and a 4'6'1 exceaptioni fbn the front
plorcih entry column.
NU. Priilchlard than read aloud a list of cahangas the neighborhood association waritad to the
caonditionsa of appnoval. Two changes were to say thlat tf u Assoc:ietioni was to revieaw the
lrae mitigation pllan and building permit application plans Into enswe that thosa plans wene
substantially the samea as what w as appnoved by the Deval opmen t Reivie A Aarmit' . Staff
and thle Clcimmiissionens advised thlat DRC approval would be tieid to speciific exhibits and
that bi ]ding permit aapplical or. plans were public records tHal anyone could neview and
comment an. Mr. Aritchlard askad than Condition H(:I)(b) pnoteaat more Iheir. Tncias # 1.5
and 34, but also Trees # 2, 28, 211 and =18. He mated the Ilattear twlo tnci as were on the
neighbor's property. He asked that a large magnolia trea on thea south property line also
be piiotecilad, if possible. He asked for new Condition Q-11) to require thea applicant to set
a benchmark elavation at 166 ftaat to be usead to veari fyj,the matin floor and roofleleavat:ions.
He aaskead for new Conditions D(1 and 2) to nequ:inea the appl:icaant to provide bets' tha City
and the Association with cert ifieales from as :licensad surveyor verifying Assoaiaticin-
specified rr.aain fscion arc roofIell evat:ions. He said that wauld assure the r al ghbonccicid
associalion thal those ealevatior. s wenea substanlia-1y tha same, as approved by the
dev€il opmen t parmit
Du ing tha questioning pef ad, Ms. A r c reades agneead to the lechdicaal caorrecticans of I l' 6"
and 4' 6"'. She mi pl ained thlat the tw(i treeas i r thea rear ware spac:i fi caally pnoteal ed by
caandilionas of approval because thay were most at risk, but the other Imes would be
protected by the-appraved plans. Staff ea)aplained they .measured bei;lding height fram thea
gnada at every] poi nl around tha strinactune and not frcam i one beanahmark eil evail i on, anc th(ay
did not ]look at. the fi ni shed flown el avati can. THey advised that the Cada did not all l ow
them to measw a structui as based on one ben chmark elevation somewhane on the sit a.
Thay confirmcid that thley would miank tha newly submitted plans with exhibit numbernsa.
Thay advised that caor.ditions of approval could anlly pnotecal treaas on tha ,site, and nal traas
on the neaighban's pnoperty. They obsearvead the suggested chlanges to sciat:ion DI would
neaquire tha City to caharigea its administrative pnocaeadureas.
C431 of Lake Omega EcNclapmenil WN'em Comm.*uioi Pagel 4 af18
Minuses afl ul) 711, 20(18
Mr. Flritcahard ;laid the Assocaialion insisted an using a beanchmark, and haadvised tray
only neaeaded one to verify the dimensions of4ll six buildings. He worrrick thal stafflwould
® find taut aftear it was too :late that the cionstrucited buil ir.ig was too high and/or that the
devellcapear might "pack mode dirl arcaund the struclurea so they could say it was canlly 22
feed High. He stressed thea conditions ofIapproval should bei used to ensurEa all the trams
weve proteacated. Wean asked, he crAplained hei had signed thea teastimiony form as an
"`opponent," eavean thougrl the neighboncacad association supported the applicalioni, because
he had teastif ed as an opponent at the pnevicaus h€oaring. However, He cautioned that the
neighborhood associiaticm would not support the cunent applicaation iflthein suggeasleod
conditions caf approval were not incorporated into it. He advised it was impossible to
impact the rocaf l sheaathing afllen tr a roofing rr ateriiala had been instal led and that thea
Assocaialion and the applicant's anchiteacat had agreed the height could be measured to tie
roof sheathing. There was no catrem testimony.
Rebuttal
Mr. Goodrich axpll ained the appl i cant cou:l d only deal with the tl ees that Were actually on
thea site, but they would try to protecat cafffitea trees that were alosea to the properly line. He
asked the DRCI not tca address offlsaite trees in the conditigns oflappnoval. He pointed out
thaay had chiclead the five lreoes they planned to save can Drawing A0.01. He said the
app.liclant would nal objecal tea using elevation 166 ase a data point, He advisee that :il was
posasib:lea thea finiall height might end up being a fraction of an inch hie.ar than what the
plan speacaifiead, but it would not be any taller than that. He said the applicant clad no
opinion reagarding thea suggested conditican regarding tie finished main floor.
® Dlelibenations
1\ca one reaquEastead that thea record behelld open tea all1aw mare time to sutmiit additicanal
wiitten teastimiony or evidence. Chair Tierney cllased the publlic heaariing. Thea applicant
waived thein right Ica additional lime in which to submit a final wri.lten argurnenit.
Staffcaonfrmed tl•at the appllicant had identified the five trees to be retained, anldthea tree
along the south prcapearly linea was actually on ,i arrieaonea Balsa's properly, but its roots would
be pliotectud on lhel site by true proteacltion ftar.icaing. Mi. Rlcahardsl recalled that the
neightorhood asscacaiation had not yet sedan the revised rriiit:igation pllan (E-30) but it was
parl of tr a public necacard fear any inleresated parry tea reviaw. Ms. Bink. eaN saw the revised
height, scaale, variation caf eoloni and miateriials on front elevations, stepping back caflthe
project and retention of exhiling treoesa as positive changes that made the development
mare ccampatiblea with thea character oflthea neighborhocad and surrounding rasiidanitial
development. She said she was glad to see porcahes that would encacaurage residents to be
cautsidu. She eautioried, hcawever, that a lot ofllandscaping would bel neciamary to muitigate
identicaal sides el eavat:ions. Ms. Sladrik said the ravisaed design was an improvement and
better refleacated what the neighbors wanted to seaea. She necaalkid the appl;icaant and the
neighborhood associalioni had reachud mutual undemslandinig and agreemeonl.
Chair Tierney explained he wase troubled that the RID process was used. He said a
® development of si)g, YKI0 sq. ft. :l ats did not reflecat what the RIM pnoeem was intended to
City al Lake Clsweglo Deiveloplrrienil RevicAN Commission H%e ` of 8
Minu les al July :11, ;ICI08
achicive and appiioval would set a priciciedent that would change thle ahaaacilar of thle
neighbotHcacid. He ilndiciatod He f6vcaread applying the cion itions of approval recicamrrmended
® by thea neighborHcicid associiation, but the U14C1 m:ighml not have thea authoriiq to change the
governmental process currently in place by bequiriing a neaighborHood associialion ri vieaw.
When M:a. Binklay recaallud the intent of RI13 was to aahlievea a battar pnoducit than would
othlerv<h,i a be built on the site, He acknowlleidgeid thal 11 milghl be un ual:istia tca think that a
developer would cinly con:itnicit a acitlago tHena.
Mr. Boone sugaustead iiflthle neaighlborhood association simplN wanted to sue the Building
Pearmitapplication plans, thay ware available to any party, who acid comparea thelrn with
what wa:a approved in the Dlevulopment Permit and disciuss dliscreapariciies with
Building/Plann:inlg staf.0 Ha suggeasteac thea Commissicinenas ciould duaide to nequirei thea
appliiciantto notify the neaighlbcarhood associialion teen days befbiie ofltheir inteirit Ica submit
those plans. He reacommended against making thea Building staff "reifeireesi" Ms. Stadnik
advised that final planes should ba requiread to ba "substantially sirnlilar," but not identicial,
to lhla plaans apprcivead by the DRIC. Ms.. B:inkleay agreaead thea Commisasicineuas should reily can
the app] sant and the neighborhood associationtca continues to ciommunicate with each
others. She sand shea did not favor adding a n€aighborhood association ncivieaw praciess to 11.1a
current deivedoplment reviow proeeass, Chlair Tiearnq then agreed to add a provision 11a
panagraphl H(l ) that the applicant wars to notify the neighboncaod a;asoeiation cif their
intunl to submiill Building Purinit application plans. The naighbarhood association could
then arrange lice look at thea ,iubmittcid plans and submlittheir ccamments to the Building
slaff, who would ccinsider them during thle,building pearmait review process.
® Ms. BinHey said the development revieaw peirmit should be tied tca the exhibills and she
asakead staff to asesigrl numbeie:e to tfla nava eaxhibitsa. Staff m arked 11hei nevuesat eaxhibitsa as
follows: Revised Mitigaticin Plan (E-=10) Site Alan (E-31) North side elevation arec wast
front €elevation (E-32,; Front eleavatildn oflUnitsa 1 and 2 (E-=1=1); Front eleevation of Units 31
and 4 (B-314; ; and Front alevallion of Units _`I and 6 (B-315). Ms. Hinkley observed shat the
revised drawings ;ihowed thea Heiighl and ealevalions that Condition DI shlould rafter to. so
tHerea was no need Mr stalffto depend on a non-c:111N surveyor's report. She agreed Heaighlt
:ahou:Id be suruayed afllen thea shuathIng imirleacit:ion and prion to iinital laticin of roofing
malleueials. Mr. P;ishlvariea agreeae tha11 establishing the LE 6 -foot eleavation data) poiinl was
unraeces:aaryl, and ;alaff would measure the Haighlt and compares :i1 againsll the sp€acificiatiicans
in the exhibits. Mr. Bcaono obsearveacl tHa11 :icemen eaNhlibit:a contained infbrmation that was
beyond then :aciopea of dusiign, and the DIRK shcauld address that :ao it could ben reciordad in
the finding;a. Ms: Binkley aidvisead that the additicirW suryey;a the r. ieighlboiihaced
association called fbn to caeartify 1Hattre main f icer sheathing and the highen:nt point of thea
roof meat ourtain neighboncciod association-sapeacifaead elevations uxaaeded whlat was
necessary to ensurer then building was atda allowable heaight. Staff clarified that the City
nequiiread a height Survey after then shuathing was installleael and thea Hou:aea wa:a closed.
Ms. Bigklciy meavcd 11a approve LU 08-0005, subjecll to the aeanditions catlapproval as
they had befan m cidifted during d eliberaVicimi. Mei. Stadnik seconded thea motion and it
passed 3:1. Chair Tiearray voted against. He announced 11hat 11hei final votes wauld be
held on August 4, 3008.
® - - __----------
C it3
_________
Cit} aflL6e 0swe€iai Elevelcipmeml 1i&iview Commissian Paige 6 ofl8
Minwes afAuly 21, No
Clhair `llierney annauncac a five -minutes break in the procaac ingls and subsequenilly
® reconvened the meeting..
LU (18-0017, a request by Cain Petroleum for approval clfla Dleveloprrent Rlaview Hermit
to ramoc el aric convert the ei)� i sil i n g aull am icltive sarvi ae building into a con vanienc is store,
and aanstruict a variety of site improvemems. 'Ilha structure wi:Ll not be expanded. No
trees ane raquesstac for removal.
Locsation oil pnopert3 : 159(15 Bclon es Fenry Road (Tax Lot 2100 of 'flax Map I I IA
08CIB).
Chair'lfierney clpanadtha public hearing and explained llha applicable pnoceidune and lime
limit's. He asked tra Commissioners to report any ex parse csanlact (including site viaita;,
bias and conflicrt of interest, and to idesnlify any knawn pnesent or anticipaled future
bus'nassrelat:ianships Mthl the project on the applicant. Ms. Sladrik, Mr. R ahands and
Chain'lfierney each raporled they Had made a site visit. Ms. Hinkley rapanad than she had
l:istanac to the nesaordin El of the previous heariir, El. Eacsh of tha Conu issionaiis present
declared their business clr occupailion as follows: Binkley (archlitact); Richards (arborist
and landscsape areshitecst); Stadn k (civ'] en&aan) and Clhain'Diernsey (ullil;ilies 'nspecslion
business). Na onie prasent chlaalenged any Commissionar's right to hear the application..
S Itaff RleAorl
® Debra An dresades, A ssaaiate Manner, pnasentad the staff ncsport (dated Junes 27, 2(108)
and StafflMeimioraric um (datesd July 119, X108). Shlerescal led lhes Hearir. l had t een
continued from July 7, 2008, to address accsess issues. She pointed out lha rr amoranduri
from C'ly enginesars in Exh*bis RA neportec they found the proposal would improves
traffic Um i nl o and aut of the slita and tt ey reaanirnen ded that tt a C akridge driveway be
aligned with the opposite (lPost Cfflces; driveway to thle extent tHail was possibla. They
anticipaled no advarsa traffsa :impaats on Hooves Rem Road, but csaut:icinesd thall corner
sightdistariae sHould ba ma'ntadried, and that the Clity Bnginaer was aullhan:iaed lla a]ler
acscess on any stneseit iifltHat ware nacsessary to ac dnessss any future safety issue. Mss.
Ar draa des renal lad the app] icanl Had abj acted to staff- racommanded con dit:i on that
rieiqui reid hlim to dedi aatei rigbt-of-waN on C aka idge and Boonas Fesrry Raasds She
naportad thal sut sequently, Cily Eng:inesesring stafif found shat a sidewalk easemenil waulld
be appropriata at the internseclion and along Boones Haml Rload, but lhe}l still
reicsommended a csandillion iequiriing dedication of night-of�%ay an Oakridga in the esvent it
were r.acessar31 to make mares noom for a travel lane and a sidewalk there. During) the
questioning period, Ms; Andteadas cslar' find that 11 he weslerns portian ofIthe proposed
driiveway would align with the eastern parl of the Po; l C ffi ce (exit -only) c ri vawaN
Mr. Richards obsesrvad the applicsant hac not csarresated the c ralwings to show two axi sti ngl
lnees that hes wanted preserved Tha larges Hawtharn tree bahind tha existing pnoparie lank
and tha Colorado blue spruces in the northwest ciamar of tha sites. However, he also
absery ed that the appl ical ion stalled that no trees were proposed fon namoval . He advised
the applicanil to plant a difftsrart species oflmahori a than he proplo, ad, baaausa the
City all Lake Osv;eglo Deivelapineril Rkivicm Cammissian Pagei 7 of10
Minaleis of July 21, 2(108
proposed speuies Would grow so lall ill could initurf6re with s:igHt distarncia all thea
initursuationi.
0 Ncithcr.ibr. nor Against
Rcn Anderson, 15951 Quarry Rd., Apt a?,-reiprememting the Wlaluga Neighborhood
Association, wikud who owned a true nuan the property line in the northwest corner oflthe
site. Mr. Richards absiervied a lettur from the adjacent Lakes Gnome Garden Cenitur
ird:icatud it was an the applicant's site. Ms. hircheadesi admisud it Had to be preserved nio
matter who owned it.
Deliberation s
Na ore nucluestad add:ilioval limes to submit addilioral emidencu on luslimory. Chair
Tierney closed the public hearing. Thu apphiciant waiiued His riighh to additicinal lime to
submit a final wnitler argumunl.
Mr. Rlchlavds observed the application stated that no trees wenei to be nemomed, but the
landscapes plan did not show some existing trues. Staff ladmised that lhla True Cvdinancu
mould iiequim the applicant to apply f✓`ir a 'Hype II True Rlamoual Permit to nemoma a tree,
and it was possible lhlat the applicant mighll blame to remove a trees along Oakridge Road to
make room f✓`ir the s:idawalk impnouemenl. Mr. Richlands indicaled Hes Would riely on the
protecitions in the True Ondinancu.
Mr. Richards micved to approves LU 08-0011. Ms. StadniIJ seconded the miclior and it
® passed 4:0. Chlair Tierney announced the final mote wou: d be. He] d on A ugust 4, 2(108.
n
Vl. GENERAL PLANN13 G & O TIIEH BUSINESS
Ms. Binkluy reported that r.eighlbors were concurred about the way a City -owned
property on Sunnyda a Rload wa.i mair,itained. Stiff admired them to diiscusis that withl ilhe
Parks and R icnieation Department.
VII. ADJa URNMENT
There being not further business Chair Tiurney adjourned thle meeting at 9:30 pm.
Respectfully submitlled,
�W Y
3 ice Badev
Adm:inistratime Support III
L`draVninuild.Amy 2 , 2008A a
City ofILake C,,wepla Developinienit Review Cammiss'an Hage FI cif18
Mimtes aflJuly .2I, 3008