Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2006-05-15L CALL TO ORDER City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes May 15, 2006 Chair Bill Tierney called the Development Review Commission meeting of May 15, 2006, to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City HaII at 380 "A" Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon. II. ROLL CALL Development Review Commission members present were Chair Tierney, Vice Chair Sheila Ostly, Man Binkley, Krystyna Stadnik, and Bob Needham, Commissioner Halliday Meisburger was excused. Staff present were Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager; Evan Boone, Assistant City Attorney, and Janice Bader, Administrative Assistant. III. PUBLIC HEARING LU 050084, a request by Mary Jo Avery and Avemere Lake Oswego Investors, LLC, for approval of the following: • A Development Review Permit to construct a 8,229 sq. ft., 3 -story office building. • A major modification of an Approved Development Permit (LU 00-00711LU 03- 0009) to modify the Resource Conservation Protection Area (RCPA) boundary on Tax Lot 5000, in order to provide access to the project site from Tax Lot 5000. • Establishment of a RCPA through the site. Removal of two trees to accommodate the development The site is located at 4580 Carman Drive, Tax Lots 5000 and 5500 of Tax Map 21 E 08BB. The staff coordinator was Debra Andreades, Associate Planner. The hearing had been continued for final written statements from the applicant at the May 1, 2006 DRC public hearing. Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney, asked the Commissioners to each report their business or occupation and any additional ex parte contacts (including site visits), biases and conflicts of interest, since the previous public hearing. All of the Commissioners present reported they had been either present at the previous hearing or have listened to the tapes of the prior hearings. They each related their business or employment as follows. Tierney (utility inspection business); Ostly (real estate appraiser) said she had driven by the site; Ms. Stadnik (civil engineer) and reported that she had not been present City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 1 of 5 Minutes of May 15, 2006 at the previous hearing, but had listened to the taped record. Ms. Brinkley (architect) and reported that she had not been present at the previous hearing, but had listened to the taped record. Chair Tierney reported he had made a quick site visit during which had had come to no conclusions. No one present challenged any Commissioner's right to hear the application. Mr. Boone stated the Commission had received the final written argument and staff had indicated there seemed to be new evidence in the memo. He continued that he would like a motion to exclude consideration of the statements that seemed to be new, as highlighted for the Commission in their memos. Mr. Boone noted that there were several issue brought up by opponents regarding signage, noticing and the zoning aspect of this application. He stated that several parties had noted the signage was not visible from the road; however, no one has brought up the fact that they could not prepare for this hearing due to not being able to locate the parcel. He continued that some confusion as to the street name was brought up on the mailed notice; however, there was a tax map attached to that notice and no one has mentioned that they were unable to prelpare for the hearing due to the confusion over the street name on the notice. Mr. Boone continued stating the City Manager has authority to combine or segregate the hearing for the zone change on the property. The City Council has requested that the Development Review Commission review this application prior to the Council hearing the zone change request. Deliberation Mr. Needham asked if the notice is defective on its face. Mr. Boone replied that no one has come forward, and if someone would raise that concern they would need to present that to LUBA or City Council. He noted that with the map attached to the notice, it would be difficult for someone to claim that they didn't understand where the property was located. Chair Tierney stated that there are several highlighted portions on the memorandum submitted by the applicant, which the staff considered as new evidence. He asked that the Commission decide which items are new evidence that should not be considered in the deliberation phase of the proceedings, Chair Tierney stated the first reference was to a 36,000 sq. ft. office building yet to be built on Boones ferry Road and Kruse Way. It was the consensus to strike this phrase. The second site going west from the first site, 48,000 sq. ft., four-story red brick building has been approved by the City, Chair Tierney noted if it was the existing Avery building that was in the record. It was the consensus to leave that one in the record. City of make Oswego Development Review Commission Page 2 of 5 Minutes of May 15, 2006 The four-sided Safeco building, which will be redeveloped in the future and will most likely be an extremely large recreational building in the future. It was the consensus to leave that one in. The reference to the LDS temple and the Centerpointe development that are large red brick office buildings. The Commission agreed that they had talked about Centerpointe, but did not remember any reference to the LDS temple. The consensus was to strike any reference to the LDS temple. The last reference was plans are in process regarding a very large six -story red brick office building across from the applicant's site on the corner of Carman Drive and Kruse Way. It was the consensus of the Commission to strike any reference to very large and 6 - story, but leave the reference in to the south side of Kruse Way brick building. Mr. Needham moved to approve the strikeouts in the memo as stated above. Ms. Binkley seconded; passed 5-4. Chair Tierney opened the Commission deliberation stage. He stated the areas that would be covered and in what order during the deliberation. He stated that many of the other issues that have been brought forward by opponents have been answered by Counsel. Traffic/Access from Carman Ms. Dstly stated that she had serious concerns about traffic, although she's not a traffic expert. She noted that you can always convert the project to a right turn only without destroying the project, if the two way access does not work. She noted she feels that relying on the experts is what has to be done, since she does not have the background to make that decision. Mr. Needham noted that he didn't think that project created an unsafe condition, possibly there will be more traffic and people will need to be more alert. Ms. Stadnik stated that the driveway is close to Kruse Way, but the Commission has had a lot of technical information presented it so she too must rely on the experts. Chair Tierney noted the Commission must rely on the experts who presented traffic statistics to them, although there will certainly be an impact to the traffic pattern in and around the area. Ms. Binkley noted that the reality is that once the traffic is backed up on Carman, there will be a certain amount of cars that will go through the neighborhood. Intensity of Development Mr. Needham stated that he's not comfortable with the project, given the site and the compatibility of the surrounding properties. He thinks the parking structure being elevated to allow for a truck to turn around under the first level is not pleasing and not compatible with the surrounding architectural designs. City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 3 of 5 Minutes of May 15, 2006 Ms. Ostly noted that an office building is compatible, but only in terms of the use. The site should be used for office or retail as opposed to residential. She stated that while the use was appropriate, but the intensity of the use is a problem. Ms. Binkley noted that one can do this type of building, same sq. ft. but not make it feel so perched on the property. It has a very unbalanced look on the street with the high floor to grade level for the parking. She expressed concerns about how the size is dealt with; therefore the architectural compatibility doesn't work for this building since the other structures in this area are nestled into their sites. A small office structure here should be fine, if it were more integrated into the site. Chair Tierney noted that the Council wanted to know how the CR&D zone would impact the site by allowing the building to go to 60 feet high. He noted that zoning would be negative by saying to the applicant they can build a taller structure. Mr. Boone noted that the zone sets the top height, but the building design standards may result in a lower height based on design compatibility requirements. Chair Tierney noted he was trying to address the compatibility and the building development for the site. Building Design Chair Tierney read the criteria from the Code for the proposed building. He noted that the other buildings in the area don't have such a site impact and this building would exceed all the surrounding buildings by 7-10 feet. The height is not complimentary to the site, the building across the street appears to be sunken into the ground, and has a berm in front that helps reduce its mass and scale. He's not in favor of supporting the application. Mr. Needham stated that he can not support the application as it's presented. Chair Tierney stated that no other buildings in the area were designed with open parking underneath them, and since there are none; this design is just not compatible. Mr. Boone noted that sometimes the Commission invites the applicant to come back with a redesign, or if there are conditions that could be proposed to make the project acceptable. Chair Tierney stated he would critique the Commission in a negative way for allowing other proposals to stay open for too long. He continued that he would prefer to bring closure to this application, rather than leave this item open. Chair Tierney asked if there would be sufficient changes made that the project could be redesigned. It was the consensus of the Commission that it would not be feasible to impose conditions that would make this project acceptable. City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 4 of 5 Minutes of May 15, 2006 Ms. Binkleye mored to deny LU 05-0084. Ms. Stadnik seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. IV. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS Ms. Binkley asked if we are scheduled to have another round with the Planning Commission to discuss the code language for the Lake Grove Village Center plan. Mr. Pishvaie noted that there is a staff team that is reviewing the suggested code language that will compile its task and present its work to the task force within a month. Then the Planning Commission will have a series of work sessions on it. Mr. Boone stated that the planned open house for the Planning Commission is anticipated to be 2ndl3rd week of September. Mr. Pishvaie noted there is time if the DRC wanted to get comments to the task force or the Planning Commission. It was the consensus of the Commission to have the plan for the Lake Grove Village Center put on the agenda once the task force is done with the code language. V. ADJOURNMENT There being not further business Chair Tierney adjourned the meeting at 7:50 pm. Respectfully submitted, 6 &'t-� eaAy- nice Bader Administrative Assistant Lldrelminutes105- l 5-06.doc City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 5 of 5 Minutes of May 15, 2006