Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2001-10-15CALL TO ORDER City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes October 15, 2001 Chair Douglas P. Cushing called the Development Review Commission meeting of October 15, 2001, to order at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 380 "A" Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon. II. ROLL CALL Commission members present included Chair Cushing, Vice Chair Nan. Binkley, Julie Morales and Sheila Ostly. Commissioners Bruce Miller, Dave Powers and Bill Tierney. Were excused. Staff present were Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager; Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney and Janice Bader, Senior Secretary. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Ostly moved for approval of the Minutes of September 5, 2001. Ms. Binkley seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Ms. Morales abstained from the vote. Mr. Miller, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney were not present. III. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER LU 01-0016, Silver Oak Construction Ms. Ostly moved for approval of LU 01-0016-1442, Findings, Conclusions and Order with the date reference to "consulting data" on page 3 to be corrected by the staff from October 26, 2001 to the correct date. Mr. Cushing seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Ms. Binkley voted against. Ms. Morales abstained from the vote. Mr. Miller, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney were not present. V. PUBLIC HEARING LU 01-0044, Emerick Architects, a request for approval of Conditional Use and Development Review Permits for the addition of a computer room to the existing Adult Community Center. Also proposed is the reconfiguration of the existing entry to create a covered portico and vehicle loading/unloading area and to accommodate an expanded lobby area. Two trees are proposed for removal. The site is located at: 505 G Avenue, City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 1 of 6 Minutes of October 15, 2001 Tax Lot 700 of tax Map 21E 3AC. The staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner. Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits to be followed. He asked Commission members to report any ex parte contacts, site visits, biases or conflicts of interest. All Commissioners present reported they were familiar with the site. Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner, presented the staff report dated October 5, 2001. She explained the application required a Conditional Use permit because the site was located in a residential zone. She noted previous Conditional Use permits had been granted between 1974 and 1983 for the original proposal, a proposal to increase parking from 26 to 84 spaces, and a proposal to expand the dining facilities and make some additional minor modifications. She explained that a request to increase the intensity of a use was to be processed in the same manner as a new request. She said that although the application showed the new computer room was to accommodate current computer users, the City staff anticipated that construction of the room would result in intensified use of the facility. She advised that the applicant had previously addressed most of the Comprehensive Plan policies, and Zoning and Development Standards; however, recently adopted First Addition Neighborhood Plan policies required that traffic and parking impacts on the neighborhood were to be considered. Ms. Jacob then discussed the applicable criteria for a Conditional Use. She reported the proposal met the R-7.5 Zone's requirements for setbacks, lot coverage and height. She said the site was physically capable of accommodating the proposed use and met the zone's floor area ratio, open space and landscaping requirements. She observed that the computer room was to be located under an existing deck and construction there would not increase the building footprint. She further observed that the front elevation improvement was basically just a porch expansion. She advised that the functional characteristics of the proposed use were such that they could be made to be reasonably compatible with uses in the vicinity. She said the proposed use would not increase any negative impacts on abutting properties because there was heavy vegetation along the property boundaries and the proposal was to accommodate current users of the site. She reported the site offered 84 parking spaces, which was more than the 63 spaces that were required by the Parking Standard for the current use. She related the proposal met the Building Design Standards because the addition was to be constructed using the same materials and details as the existing building. Ms. Jacob and Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney, explained that the Building Design Standard that required a building entrance to be within 30 feet of a public street did not apply to the proposal because the site was not located on a transit street, the proposed computer room would not have its own entrance, and the construction of a portico (which did not fit the definition of a "building") would not trigger the requirement. Ms. Jacob related that the applicant proposed to relocate one driveway further east to accommodate a new drive-through portico that was to extend another eight feet forward from the existing porch/roof structure. She recommended a condition that the applicant was to provide a landscape plan prior to construction to show the existing driveway was to be closed and landscaped, and that any new plants there were to be native species. She observed that to move the driveway further east would require removal of a birch and a maple tree, and the applicant's site plan did not show all trees on the site or any dimensions. She reported City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 2 of 6 Minutes of October 15, 2001 the staff believed that the plan could be modified to avoid impacting the birch andmaple trees if the driveway was slightly shifted, however, a small conifer might be impacted. She advised that the Tree Ordinance required that any trees that were removed were to be mitigated on a one-to-one basis and other trees were to be protected by fencing during construction. The staff recommended approval of the application, subject to the recommended conditions in the staff report. Applicant Kim Gilmer, Director, Parks & Recreation Department, City of Lake Oswego, explained that the applicant wanted to create a more suitable area for 15 computer users than was currently available. She said the changes would not result in an increase in daily vehicle trips because the facility did not anticipate an increase in users. She noted the proposal would not impact the Sensitive Lands area of the site. She said the new entryway would provide a covered area to protect senior visitors as they entered and existed vehicles and the waiting area was to be expanded into existing space. She related that Clackamas County was providing funds for the improvements. She reported that no issues had come to light during meetings between representatives from the Adult Community Center and the First Addition Neighborhood Association on February 7, March 7, and June 12, 3002. Brian Emerick, Emerick Architects PC, 3116 SE Clinton Street, Portland, Oregon, 97202, testified the addition would resemble the existing building. He presented alternative site plans: Option A would require removal of both the birch and maple trees, and Option B would relocate the driveway to save the birch tree, but require removal of a small fir tree. He advised that the applicant preferred Option A for reasons of aesthetics and traffic safety. He noted that Option A lined up with a one-way traffic loop on the lot, but Option B did not. He advised that birch trees were not native to the Northwest. Proponents George Benson, Chair, Adult Community Center Advisory Council, 505 G Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon, 97034, testified that he also served on the First Addition Neighborhood (FAN) Association Board. He advised that FAN supported the application and Option A, because that plan provided the best circulation. Opponents None. Neither for nor Against None No one requested that the record be held open for additional testimony or evidence. The applicant waived their right to additional time in which to submit a final written argument. Chair Cushing then closed the public hearing and opened deliberations. Deliberations Ms. Binkley and Ms. Ostly commented that Option A presented the more sensible and City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 3 of 6 Minutes of October 15, 2001 practical plan and offered a clearer line of sight for drivers turning left into the site. Mr. Cushing advised that the City would require that the birch tree be replaced one-for-one. Ms. Morales observed that it would be a challenge to design a roof over the existing deck. Ms. Morales moved for approval of LU 01-0044, with Site Plan Option A (Exhibit E- 8) and subject to the conditions recommended in the staff report, except for recommended condition A(1)(a), which was to be deleted. Ms. Ostly seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms. Morales and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Miller, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney were not present. Chair Cushing announced the final vote on the findings conclusions and order was to be held on November 5, 2001. LU 01-0057, Gramor Development, a request for approval of a major modification of an earlier Development Review Permit [LU 00-0007] in order to modify Conditions of Approval G(1)(b) and (d) to allow a cornice sign above the retail level (on the office portion) on the west elevation of the mixed-use building. The site is located at: 220 A Avenue, Tax Lots 8400-8600 of Tax Map 21E 3DD. The staff coordinator is Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager. Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits to be followed. He asked the Commissioners to report any ex parte contacts, biases or conflicts of interest. All Commissioners present reported they were familiar with the site. He asked for clarification that the applicant would lose all right of appeal based on a Constitutional issue if they did not raise the issue at the hearing. Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager, advised that the applicant sought a change in conditions of approval of the development in order to be allowed to have a second story sign on the west side of the building. Ms. Binkley questioned whether granting the applicant's request would set a precedent for future buildings in the downtown area. Mr. Pishvaie advised that while he could not predict whether the DRC would see similar requests in the future, each development proposal would be considered on its own merits. Mr. Cushing observed that the plans for Block 138 showed no second story signage, even though there were to be upper story offices there. Mr. Pishvaie reported the staff had discussed signage for Block 138 with the applicants. He related that they had explained the current request to change their original plan for a cornice sign on the first floor to a second story sign was because one tenant (Windermere) had agreed to occupy the entire second floor. He reported that the staff recommended that the sign be allowed up to 20 inches high and seven feet long and feature individual lettering. He clarified that additional or successor tenants would be limited to the approved amount of signage and any change in design would need to be approved by the City. He also advised that the City did not want to see second story signage along A Avenue. Mr. Boone advised that the variance process was available to tenants who believed the signage limitations did not provide them with a reasonable opportunity to communicate by sign in a manner similar to other businesses or if they were challenged by unique and unusual circumstances. Mr. Cushing anticipated more second and third story businesses downtown and he recommended that the City specify the allowed scope of second story signage. City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 4 of 6 Minutes of October 15, 2001 Applicant Matt Grady, Gramor Oregon, Inc., 19767 SW 72nd Avenue, Tualatin, Oregon, 97062, testified the applicant would agree with the recommended conditions of approval. He explained the requested sign would provide signage for a full -floor tenant who desired to communicate by sign on the east and west sides of the building. He noted the applicant had already been granted approval for an east side sign. He said the sign would feature letters that would be 2" thick and pegged off the cedar -shingled wall to create a shadow line. He said the applicant was asking for a smaller sign - approximately eight square feet in area - than the 24 square foot sign allowed by the Sign Code. He noted observers would only be able to see one sign at a time. He said he believed that in the event the large tenant left the space, the signs could be used by two different tenants if the area and materials remained the same, but a new approval would be required if the sign sizes or materials were to be changed. He confirmed the applicant was currently considering signage for Block 138. Proponents None. Opponents None. Neither for nor against None. No one present requested that the record be held open to receive additional testimony or evidence. The applicant waived their right to additional time in which to submit a final written argument. Chair Cushing closed the public hearing and opened deliberations. neliherations. Ms. Binkley observed the sign helped balance the proportions of the west fagade, which was too tall. Mr. Pishvaie clarified for Mr. Cushing that the DRC had not been requested to consider the request for the east side second -story sign because its location had previously been approved (Exhibit F-4). He confirmed the requested west side sign was proposed to be the same size as the east side sign. Ms. Ostly moved for approval of LU 01-0057. Ms. Binkley seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms. Morales and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Miller, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney were not present. There were no votes against. Chair Cushing announced the final vote on the findings, conclusions and order was to take place on November 5, 2001. VI. GENERAL PLANNING Open Commission Position City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 5 of 6 Minutes of October 15, 2001 Mr. Cushing announced that he would not reapply to serve on the DRC. The Commissioners observed that although City Council policy seemed to be leaning toward limiting citizen service on boards and commissions to two terms, the City would lose the benefit of the experience and knowledge of those who might be willing to extend their voluntary service to the City. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Development Review Commission, Chair Cushing adjourned the meeting at 7:54 PM. Respectfully submitted. Janice Bader Senior Secretary 1: \dre\minutes\ 10-15 -01. do c City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 6 of 6 Minutes of October 15, 2001