HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2001-05-07I. CALL TO ORDER
City of Lake Oswego
Development Review Commission Minutes
May 7, 2001
Chair Douglas P. Cushing called the Development Review Commission meeting of
Monday, May 7, 2001 to order at 7:05 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 380
A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners present included Chair Cushing, Vice Chair, Nan Binkley, Sheila Ostly,
Julie Morales*, Dave Powers and Bill Tierney. Commissioner Bruce Miller was
excused.
Staff present were Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager; Elizabeth Jacob,
Associate Planner; Paul Espe, Associate Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney
and Jean Hall, Senior Secretary.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ms. Ostly moved to approve the Minutes of March 19, 2001. Mr. Powers seconded
the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms. Ostly, Mr. Powers and
Mr. Tierney voting yes. Mr. Miller and Ms. Morales were not present. There were no
votes against.
IV. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER
None.
V. PUBLIC HEARING
LU 01-0002, a request by David Emami, for approval of the following:
• A Conditional Use Permit to allow 100 percent office use in the existing and
proposed buildings on Lots 38 and 39.
• A Development Review Permit for a 3 -story 20,000 square foot office building on
Lot 39.
Removal of eight trees on Lot 39. Simultaneously with the above requests, the City
will initiate the dissolution of the existing Planned Unit Development (PUD 1-68)
that currently governs land use activities on Lots 38, 39,77,78 and 79.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 1 of 1
Minutes of May 7, 2001
The site is located at: 17252 Pilkington Road, Tax Lots 1500, 1700, 3500 and 3600 of
Tax Map 2 1 E 18AB. Staff Coordinator is Paul Espe, Associate Planner. Continued
from the April 2, 2001 DRC meeting.
* Ms. Morales joined the meeting.
Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the time limits and procedures
to be followed. He asked the Commissioners to report any ex parte conflicts, site visits,
biases or conflicts of interest. The staff pointed out that the Commission had received
a revised plan from the applicant and a staff memorandum dated May 7, 2001. Mr.
Boone advised the Commission to allow testimony related to the new information and
report. Mr. Cushing related that he had not received the May 7 staff memorandum and
the staff provided him with a copy. All other Commissioners indicated they had
received copies of the report. Ms. Morales and Mr. Powers reported that they had not
attended the prior hearing, but had listened to the taped record of the hearing. Ms.
Morales clarified that the poor quality of the tapes had made them hard to understand.
She also reported she drove by the site on a daily basis. No one challenged any
commissioner's right to hear the application.
Paul Espe, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He explained the May 7,
2001, staff memorandum addressed issues that had been identified by the
Commissioners at the previous hearing: color scheme, building height, HVAC
screening on the buildings on Lots 38 and 39, and the issue of a CMU versus a cultured
stone foundation. He related that the applicant had provided additional elevations and
color schemes for review at the hearing. He noted that one scheme showed Biltmore
Buff on the building body with Homey Gold accent features; and another scheme
reversed the application of those colors. He reported that the applicant agreed with the
staff suggestion to reduce the building height from 44 feet to 41 feet. He reported that
the applicant's elevations showed the proposed height of mechanical equipment and
screening on the roofs of buildings on Lots 38 and 39. He advised that the staff agreed
with the applicant that the landscaped strip could be eliminated in order to avoid a
higher retaining wall. He noted the applicant had requested that construction of 6 to 8
parking spaces on Lot 38 be deferred until construction activity along the Boones Ferry
Road access was over. He pointed out a recommended condition of approval that
addressed the timing and provision of surety for this improvement. He said the
applicants proposed to install either brick pavers or cast iron tree grates to hold soil in
the tree wells along Pilkington Road. He pointed out that the recommended conditions
clarified that improvements related to half street improvements along Lots 77, 78 and
79 were to be the responsibility of the owner of that property.
Ms. Ostly observed that the applicant's changes reflected what the Commissioners had
indicated they desired to see. Mr. Tierney asked why recommendations regarding Lot
38 had been incorporated into the proposed conditions. Mr. Espe explained that Lot 38
had been a part of the original Planned Unit Development (PUD), and he recalled that
the half street improvements along Pilkington Road; the tree wells near Buildings A and
B; and HVAC screening on Building B were conditions of previous approvals that still
needed to be accomplished and these conditions had been included to clarify the record.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 2 of 2
Minutes of May 7, 2001
He confirmed for Mr. Cushing that staff found the applicant's changes were acceptable,
except for their proposal regarding the location of power lines. He pointed out that a
memorandum from the Engineering staff justified the need to bury the power line on the
basis that would enhance the area's aesthetics by decreasing the number of observable
power lines. Mr. Cushing asked if the City anticipated that it would, eventually force
all other above ground power poles in the area underground. Staff advised that there
was no current City plan to require undergrounding of the other lines, but that might be
achieved in the future through the formation of a Local Improvement District (LID), as
a condition of redevelopment, or if the City changed its policy to require the lines to be
buried.
Applicant
William Horning, Western Planning Associates, 4621 SW Kelly Avenue, Portland,
OR 97201, noted that the applicant, David Emami, and architect, Bob Wolf, were also
at the hearing. He presented the applicant's new elevations. He pointed out the
mechanical equipment was to be screened with the same stucco material as would be
applied to the building exterior. He stated that the applicant was still willing to consider
internalizing the equipment, with the exception of roof vents, if the area of the
equipment would not be counted in the calculations for required parking spaces. He
explained that the applicant proposed a number of spaces that was in excess of the
Parking Standard if the 85% modifier was used. He explained that the applicant desired
to maximize the number of spaces available to the site and to relieve congestion on the
surrounding streets. He acknowledged that it would improve the appearance of the
proposed building to bury the power lines; however, it would be very expensive for the
applicant and would not affect other above ground lines in the vicinity that served other
locations along Boones Ferry Road. He held that undergrounding of power was an
issue that should be addressed community wide. He pointed out that during a recent
widening of the roadway no provision for sub -roadway sleeving for underground lines
had been made. He noted the applicant's new building would generate enormous
Systems Development Charges (SDC's) that the City could use to pay for
undergrounding of power. He advised that the applicant was willing to live with an
above ground power pole.
Mr. Horning pointed out elevations that showed mechanical units and screening to be
located on the north and south ends of the building. Ms. Morales indicated her concern
that the shallow -pitched roof would not conceal units that were typically 5 to 6 feet tall.
Mr. Horning explained that a screening wall would be constructed around the units, and
he acknowledged that final engineering plans had not yet been completed. He recalled
that the Code allowed mechanical equipment to penetrate the building height limitation.
He clarified for Mr. Tierney that the applicant would prefer to internalize the
mechanical equipment on two floors if he would not be penalized for that with a
reduction of parking spaces. Ms. Binkley asked how buried power lines would connect
to the building. Mr. Horning clarified for Ms. Binkley that the applicant did not yet
have sufficient information to draw an electrical diagram showing where the lines were
to connect to the building. He asked that the applicant be allowed flexibility in locating
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 3 of 3
Minutes of May 7, 2001
the power and water supply lines after he had located the exact location of the water
main.
Bob Wolf, Architect, Jerry C. Robinson AIA, PO Box 23541, Tigard, OR 97281-
3841, presented elevations to show the proposed 15 -inch high fascia would match that
on the building next door; the 4 -foot wide columns would project 4 inches from the
building (or 5.5 inches from the glass). He presented an alternate color scheme (a
photograph of the applicant's building in Tualatin Commons) that showed the building
body painted "Homey Gold," the columns painted "Biltmore Buff' and "Rocky Post"
(gray) highlights. He clarified that the applicant proposed to use sealed standard CMU.
He clarified that the building would slope to the ends of the building from a short center
ridge running across the building, and the parapet at each end of the building was to
hide the mechanical units. He acknowledged that the illustration of the mechanical
units might show them a few inches too short. He clarified the foundation would be
standard gray sealed CMU, which would be similar in color to the color of the columns.
He said the building would be 41 feet tall to the top of the parapet, and 44 feet to the top
of the mechanical units. He said the roof pitch would rise one-half inch per foot, for a
total of 90 feet of slope along the 180 foot long building. He specified the center ridge
would be 2 inches lower than the parapet, which would rise to 40 inches at each end.
He said 3.5 foot high screening would be constructed around the units that would be of
the same material as the building walls and painted "Rocky Post" (gray). He clarified
that ceiling heights were to be at 9 to 10 feet. He also confirmed that a parking space
shown on Exhibit 26 was positioned at the edge of the driveway; that the columns
shown on that exhibit were to be 24 inches square and constructed of CMU to match the
building; that one parking space at the end of the building was to be built into the
building wall; and that screening there was to be of divided open metal. He also
confirmed the balcony would serve as egress and that the iron stair railing would match
the railing on the retaining wall on the other side of the street (Exhibit 25, A4). He
explained that lighting fixtures would be placed around the top of the building and
under windows all around the building. He said all of the fixtures would match those
featured on existing buildings at the site.
Mr. Horning confirmed for Ms. Binkley that four tree wells planned at the front (west
side) of the building might have to be reconfigured to accommodate an awning. He
explained that the recessed lobby might have to be reconfigured in order to maintain a
sufficiently wide walkway in the area of the tree wells. He said the applicant had not
yet determined how to deal with the slope of the roadway in the area of the tree wells.
He confirmed that pear trees surrounded by ground cover plantings were to be planted
in the tree wells, except for one evergreen tree that was to be planted in front in
response to the staff recommendation to use a larger street tree there.
None.
Proponents
Opponents
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 4 of 4
Minutes of May 7, 2001
None.
Neither for nor against
None.
No one requested that the hearing be continued to allow additional written evidence and
testimony. The applicant waived his right to additional time in which to present a final
written argument. The applicant indicated that he did not object to Ms. Morales and
Mr. Powers hearing the matter. Mr. Cushing closed the public hearing and opened
deliberations.
Deliberations
Mr. Binkley recalled that the Commissioners had indicated at the previous hearing that
they desired to see design details that would provide additional interest to the building.
She indicated she did not prefer the color scheme that showed too much contrast
between the wall color and the pilaster color and accented the building's vertical
dimension. Ms. Morales observed the applicant had improved the design of windows in
the newest elevations. Mr. Horning confirmed for Ms. Ostly that the proposed gray
color was similar to the gray used on the adjacent buildings and that the proposed
columns were to be 4 feet wide, as contrasted with 2 foot wide columns on the
applicant's Tualatin building.
The Commissioners discussed whether to require the use of cultured stone. The
applicant clarified for the Commissioners that the cost of CMU was $5.00 per square
foot and the cost of cultured stone was $24.00 per square foot. Ms. Morales observed
that the adjacent buildings featured CMU. Ms. Binkley observed that the split faced
CMU could provide more texture to the base of the building. Mr. Powers opined the
building would look less box -like with lighter colored columns. Ms. Morales recalled
that the proposed columns were wider than those shown on the Tualatin building. She
agreed the columns should be a lighter color to contrast with gray horizontal features.
She opined that cultured stone would not fit the campus and she noted it would also add
to the cost of the building.
Mr. Cushing recalled the power company had estimated it could cost the applicant
$25,000 to bury the power supply. Mr. Boone advised the Commission to make a
design decision and not to make cost a deciding factor for that decision. He also
advised that the Code required utilities to be installed underground unless exempted by
the City Manager. He questioned whether the applicant was in compliance with
conditions of approval of the prior development. He said the applicant was arguing that
since he had obtained power from across the street for his previous development he
should be allowed to use that line for the new building. Mr. Boone advised that line had
never been permitted. He confirmed for Mr. Cushing that the Commission could make
a recommendation to the City Manager regarding undergrounding of power lines. Mr.
Espe explained that the staff -recommended condition had been carried forward from a
previous land use approval. He said staff had never had the opportunity to review any
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 5 of 5
Minutes of May 7, 2001
plans associated with rerouting the power lines, and those plans had never been
disclosed on the site plans during the previous land use action (Exhibit F-8, Engineering
Division Memorandum dated March 13, 2001).
Ms. Morales observed that the appearance of the columns changed from the upper level
to the lower level, which helped break up the building's mass. Ms. Binkley opined that
the use of CMU would make the building look monolithic, but she acknowledged that
split -faced CMU would look better than smooth CMU. Ms. Morales opined that
cultured stone would make the building appear more residential. Mr. Cushing
wondered if the added texture might only be obvious to people in close proximity to the
building. The Commissioners clarified for the staff that that recommended Condition
A(1)(b) should refer to the color scheme shown in Exhibit E-20 (May 7, 2001, staff
memorandum), and that a new condition A(1)(b)(ix) was to specify that the top cap of
the building was to be Rocky Coast (gray), pilasters were to be painted Biltmore Buff,
the building body was to be Homey Gold, the base cap was to be Rocky Coast; HVAC
structural screening was to be Rocky Coast; and the door was to be Rocky Coast.
Mr. Pishvaie recommended that proposed Condition A(1)(a)(6) regarding removal of
the utility pole and power undergrounding be deleted, and that A(1)(a)(viii) be revised
to read "Utilities, including the power lines that supply the site from the north side of
Boones Ferry Road shall be installed underground unless exempted by the City
Manager."
Mr. Cushing asked the applicant to comment on the modifications the Commissioners
had discussed. He observed that the Commissioners seemed to be inclined to require
split faced CMU. Mr. Horning asked how the Commissioners felt about not including
internal HVAC space in parking space requirement calculations. Mr. Cushing advised
that the Commission did not have the authority to exempt that space from the
calculations.
Ms. Ostly moved for approval of LU 01-0002, as recommended by the staff and
modified as follows:
• Condition A(1)(b) was to reference the color scheme in Exhibit E-20.
• Condition A(1)(b)(iii) was to read as recommended in the March 23, 2001, staff
report with the addition of language to specify that the CMU was to be the gray
color shown in the approved color scheme.
• Condition A(1)(a)(vi) was to be deleted.
• Condition A(1)(a)(viii) was revised to read "Utilities, including the power lines
that supply the site from the north side of Boones Ferry Road, shall be installed
underground unless exempted by the City Manager."
• Condition A(1)(b)(iv) was to specify that HVAC structural screening was to be
of the same material as the building body and painted gray (Rocky Coast).
• Condition A(1)(b)(ix) was to be added to specify color locations: the top cap
was to be Rocky Coast (gray); pilasters were to be Biltmore Buff; the building
body was to be Homey Gold; the base cap was to be Rocky Coast; the HVAC
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 6 of 6
Minutes of May 7, 2001
structural screening was to be Rocky Coast; and the door was to be Rocky
Coast.
Mr. Tierney seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms.
Morales, Ms. Ostly, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney voting yes. Mr. Miller was not
present. There were no votes against. Mr. Cushing announced that the final vote on the
application would take place at the May 21, 2001 DRC meeting.
Chair Cushing announced a five-minute break and thereafter reconvened the meeting.
LU 01-0008, a request by City of Lake Oswego for approval of Conditional Use and
Development Review Permits to construct a new softball field at Lake Oswego Junior
High School. The project includes the installation of two new athletic field light poles
and the reconfiguration of existing field lighting. The site is located at: 2500 Country
Club Rd., Tax Lots 600 of Tax Map 21E 5; Tax Lot 300 of Tax Map 21E 4; and Tax
Lot 3000 of Tax Map 21E 4CB. 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 the Commissioners to report any ex part contacts, site visits,
biases or conflicts of interest. Ms. Morales explained that her daughter regularly played
softball at the site and she then recused herself from hearing the matter. All other
Commissioners present reported they had visited the site. No one challenged any
Commissioner's right to hear the application.
Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She pointed out an
aerial photograph of the area surrounding the site showed that site was surrounded on
three sides by natural resources, including a tree grove and stream corridor, and
adjacent uses included Uplands Elementary School (to the south), Our Savior's
Lutheran Church (to the east), and residential uses along Sundeleaf Drive. She
explained the applicant desired to move an existing softball field slightly west in order
to construct a second softball field. She noted the change would eliminate an existing
practice field. She explained 3 of the 8 existing light poles were to be relocated and 2
new poles were to be added to serve the new field. She advised that a Conditional Use
Permit was required because the addition of a field meant that two games could be
played simultaneously and the use of the site would be intensified. She recalled that
schools were classified as Conditional Uses in residential zones, and most criteria for a
Conditional Use for the site had been met when the existing school had been approved.
She discussed criteria that remained to be addressed:
• The site is physically capable of accommodating the proposed use. Ms. Jacob
noted the new field was to be located on a portion of an existing athletic field and
would not encroach on any of the resource areas.
• The proposed use would be reasonably compatible with uses in the vicinity
(open space, forest, elementary school, church, high school). She observed the
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 7 of 7
Minutes of May 7, 2001
applicant's traffic report showed that most traffic would be generated during off-
peak hours and the increased traffic would not exceed the current LOS B.
• The proposed parking can be accommodated on site. She said there were
parking spaces available at Uplands School as well as the site to serve the site, and a
pathway connected the schools.
Ms. Jacob related that the two new light poles were to be installed close to the school
building. She related that the existing light fixtures were to be fitted with glare shields
and would then have less impact on the adjacent residential uses than any current
impact. She reported no comments had been received from neighbors, and the two
applicant/neighborhood meetings regarding the proposed use had been sparsely
attended. She explained the existing lights were controlled by the City's computerized
control system and all lights were automatically turned off at 10 PM. She
recommended that the system tie-in be made a condition of approval and suggested a
requirement that the fixtures be painted dark brown or gray to blend into the treed
surroundings. She advised that due to distance, elevation changes and intervening trees,
activity at the new field should have minimal impact on the residential uses. She
advised that the proposal satisfied applicable Development Standards. She
recommended that tree protection fencing be required to protect trees within 15 feet of
the construction zone. She explained that although drawings showed a pathway system
all the way around the edge of the field, the system would not be constructed. She
related that the existing pathway from the school parking lot to the steps to Uplands
School was to be removed, a new pathway was to be installed between the two softball
fields and a new set of steps down the grade was to connect with the existing pathway
to Uplands School. She recommended that the proposal for new steps to Uplands
School and reconstruction of steps to Sundeleaf Drive be removed from the proposal
because the steps were within a Sensitive Lands Overlay District and plans for the steps
had not addressed the requirements of the Sensitive Lands Ordinance.
Mr. Cushing referred to the plans for removal of steps and he anticipated that the
applicant would explain why they should be allowed to reduce access to public
property. Ms. Jacob clarified that the existing stairs to Uplands School would remain,
and new stairs would be built only as far down the grade as would be necessary to
provide a primary connection to the elementary school, but no further down into the tree
grove. She observed existing steps to Sundeleaf Drive would not be modified and
would still provide access. She advised the proposal could be made to comply with all
applicable criteria and she recommended approval of the Conditional Use and
Development Review Permit subject to conditions recommended in the staff report.
Ms. Binkley anticipated that the applicant would explain how the proposal related to
future building plans for the school.
AApplicant
Jennifer Joiner, Special Projects Department, City of Lake Oswego, recalled that
voters had passed a bond measure in 1998 to renovate 16 ball fields at parks and
schools. She introduced Ed Macleod, landscape architect for the project, and Ray
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 8 of 8
Minutes of May 7, 2001
Herman, Luminac International, lighting consultant. She related the applicant had
worked closely with Team Sports, the Parks & Recreation Department, and the School
District, and had invited the neighborhood to participate in the planning discussions.
Ed Macleod, Macleod Reckord Landscape Architects, 231 Summit Ave East,
Seattle, WA 98102, stressed that the project would provide a new athletic field for the
City. He said the field would be a premier women's' softball field that would be used
by students from both the high school and junior high school, and could also be used by
Little League Baseball teams and younger softball teams. He related that excess fill
from the project to install synthetic turf at the field across the street had been deposited
on the site and the project would redistribute the fill to reduce the slope of the field. He
observed that both the existing and new fields could be used simultaneously. He noted
that the existing field would also function as an overlay soccer field. He said that a
planned polyurethane jogging track would not be constructed due to budget constraints.
He pointed out how the pathway to Uplands School and the new stairs down the slope
would connect to a concrete path around the new field and between fields to the school.
He explained a portion of the existing pathway along the wooded area was to be
removed because of the School District's concern about safety of small children
walking from Uplands play area. He related that in some locations along the walk they
were completely out of view of others. He acknowledged that since the project would
steepen slopes around the field stairs were necessary, however, they could be timbered
stairs instead of concrete stairs. He confirmed for Mr. Powers that the project would
install a new irrigation system, the main field was to be covered with layers of sand and
organic material; and drainage systems were planned for the infields and some portions
of the turned areas, but a more extensive system would exceed the project's budget. He
acknowledged there would still be some surface water runoff generated during heavy
rains and drain lines could be added in the future. A disbursal trench was to protect the
slope into the wooded area. He explained that drain and irrigation lines would be
separated.
Mr. Powers asked if the existing wooden poles were in sufficiently good condition to be
moved. Mr. Macleod related that the lighting consultant had found the poles to be in
good condition and reusable. Mr. Macleod pointed out which poles were to be
relocated and where there were to be new poles. He said the fixtures would be
retrofitted with shielding and re -aimed to improve field illumination and reduce
perimeter illumination. The two new poles would have fixtures that shined in more
than one direction. He related that study results had found that even without the
surrounding trees, light levels were less than one-half foot-candle around the field
perimeter. He anticipated there would be no discernible change in offsite lighting
levels. He reported that no one had voiced concern about the proposed level of lighting.
Mr. Powers asked how the soccer field at the southwest corner of the site would be lit.
Ray Herndon, Luminac International, explained that the primary focus of the
lighting was on the baseball diamond, and the lighting reconfiguration did not favor the
soccer field. He clarified for Mr. Powers that additional fixtures would need to be
installed on existing poles to increase lighting on the soccer field. He also clarified that
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 9 of 9
Minutes of May 7, 2001
new fixtures were to be installed to light the new field and 144 existing fixtures were to
be re -aimed.
Ms. Joiner related that construction was to be scheduled for after school was out for the
summer to allow the elementary school students to use the site while their gymnasium
was being built. She reported that bids had been received and would be awarded by the
City Council after approval of the application.
Proponents
Julie Morales, 860 Boca Ratan Drive, Lake Oswego, 97034, related the existing
diamond was the primary high school baseball field. She worried that pedestrians
walking through the site would create informal pathways through the trees that would
adversely impact the tree groves if no formal pathway were provided for them. Ms.
Joiner clarified that the proposal would provide a more direct access from Uplands
School. Ms. Morales emphasized the need for the new field.
Opponents
None.
Neither for nor against
None.
No one requested that the record be held open to allow additional written evidence or
testimony. 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.
Deliberations
Ms. Ostly indicated she favored the project. Ms. Binkley indicated that she preferred
the original plan for a more extensive pathway system, but she recalled testimony that
the budget would not accommodate that part of the plan.
Ms. Ostly moved for approval of LU 01-0008. Mr. Binkley seconded the motion
and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms. Ostly, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney
voting yes. Ms. Morales had recused herself and Mr. Miller was not present. There
were no votes against.
Mr. Cushing announced a short break to allow participants to set up exhibits for the next
hearing and subsequently reconvened the meeting.
LU 00-0091, a request by Albertson's, Inc. for approval of the following:
• Remodel and expand the existing Albertson's Store by 9,060 square feet.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 10 of 10
Minutes of May 7, 2001
• Removal of Forty-three (43) trees.
• A Class 2 variance to LODS 2.020(7)(a) to increase the maximum building setback
from a public street from 30 feet to 77 feet (Quarry Road) for the proposed
Albertson's Store building.
The property is located at 4559 SW Firwood Road and 16199 Boones Ferry Road. Staff
coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner. The hearing was continued from
the March 19, 2001 DRC meeting.
Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits
to be followed. He asked the Commissioners to report any ex part contacts, site visits,
biases or conflicts of interest. All Commissioners present reported they were familiar
with the site and Mr. Cushing and Ms. Ostly reported they shopped at the applicant's
store. Ms. Binkley and Ms. Morales reported they had discussed the preliminary design
and its context within the neighborhood with the staff. No one challenged any
commissioner's right to hear the application.
Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner, presented the staff reports. She related that the
applicant desired to expand the store by approximately 9,000 square feet. She related
that the applicant's arborist had just recommended that an additional tree should be
added to the list of 43 trees to be removed. She said the applicant was requesting a
Class 2 Variance to the Development Standard that required the building to be located
within 30 feet of a public and/or transit street. She recalled that Albertsons had
previously requested approval for expansion and a variance to setback requirements in
1989 and more recently, a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from R-7.5 to
GC for lots that currently comprised the westerly parking area of the site. She recalled
that a condition of City Council approval was that use of the rezoned area was to be
limited to parking. She said a retail food sales market of over 25, 000 square feet was a
permitted use in the GC Zone and the proposed expansion met the height and setback
limitations of the zone, including the requirement for a 25 foot setback from adjacent
residential properties along the side of the site where the docking facility was located.
She said the site abutted a commercial zone at its northeast corner and the 25 -foot
setback did not apply there. She related the applicant proposed to update the building
by removing the mansard roof and adding a broad overhanging canopy along the front
and east side that would make the site more pedestrian friendly. She advised that the
canopy and a trellis would add visual depth to the fagade and break up the building
mass. She presented the general site plan, elevations, a perspective, the landscape plan
and a tree removal plan and a color board. She said the loading area would feature a 6 -
foot high CMU wall, and the wall was adjacent to an existing pedestrian pathway (to
apartments to the north) that would remain. She said a 6 -foot tall CMU wall along the
westerly property line would also remain to provide separation and noise attenuation
and buffer parking lot lighting. She recommended that additional detailing be featured
on the long walls, including a capstone and color relief similar to that proposed for the
building. She noted that heavy landscaping was planned along the west wall and vines
were to be planted along the wall near the dock. She recommended that a CMU wall
proposed around mechanical equipment at the northeast corner of the site be detailed in
a similar manner as the other walls. She clarified that the trash enclosure would be
internalized.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 11 of 11
Minutes of May 7, 2001
Ms. Jacob said the applicant was requesting a variance to the Building Design Standard
that required the building to be located within 30 feet of public and transit streets. She
recommended approval of the variance based on the nature of grocery store operations
and layouts, the location of the existing building and the fact that extensive changes to
onsite and on -street traffic circulation would be required which would create a hardship
for the applicant. She recommended that the applicant provide additional lighting
options that would reduce the average illumination. She advised that parking lot
lighting in the city was typically a maximum height of 16 to 18 feet and with 150 to
200 -watt luminares. She also advised that all lighting was to be designed to prevent
glare onto adjacent residential lots and the street. She advised that the Parking Standard
required the existing store to provide 96 parking spaces, and 95 spaces existed on the
site. She calculated that the expanded store would require a minimum of 122 spaces
and allow a maximum of 152 spaces. She noted that the applicant proposed 131 spaces.
She advised that the Landscaping Standard required 15% of the lot was to be
landscaped, and the applicant showed that 22% of the site would be landscaped. She
noted that 40% of the west parking lot was landscaped; a 30 -foot landscaped buffer
along the west boundary line would include existing trees, and there would be a 25 -foot
landscaped buffer in the northwest corner. She advised that removed trees were to be
mitigated one-for-one and the landscape plan should be revised to address the additional
tree to be removed. She noted that the applicant proposed to replant with vine maples,
which were not considered adequate replacement trees. She recommended additional
landscaping (ground cover and a tree) be planted in other locations on the site She
suggested that the area of the detention pond should be seeded and landscaped to look
more natural. She reported that the City Engineer had found the drainage plan, that
included detention ponds on both ends of the expanded parking area, complied with the
City's storm water detention and water quality requirements.
Ms. Jacob referred to Exhibit 16 and 17, which acknowledged the existing street
presented severe traffic hazards due to the width of the street, the location of striping
and vehicle stacking at the intersection of Boones Ferry and Firwood Roads. She
pointed out photographs of vehicles at that intersection. She related that staff had
recommended minor changes along the expanded parking lot area on the west side and
the applicant had responded by proposing to move the current 40 -foot wide driveway
approximately 18 feet further west in order to provide additional center line stacking
distance. In order to accomplish that and also accommodate a 6 -foot wide sidewalk
meandering through the trees, 6 additional trees would have to be removed and 15 feet
of additional right-of-way needed to be dedicated in that area and designed to connect
with the right of way along Firwood. She clarified for Ms. Binkley that the Exhibits 16
& 17 showed where the changes should be made. She then addressed the Tree Code.
She pointed out the landscape plan showed the locations of 43 trees originally proposed
for removal and she noted that removal of one additional tree had been requested prior
to the hearing. She observed that most of the trees to be removed were small trees;
however, there were two larger trees along the street that would need to be removed for
the street improvement. She recommended that mitigation be accomplished with
Douglas fir trees and that existing trees be protected by fencing during construction.
She said the proposed signage, which included a monument sign and a sign band,
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 12 of 12
Minutes of May 7, 2001
conformed to the Code, although she believed the size of the lettering would have to be
reduced to obtain a sign permit. She said staff found all applicable criteria had been
met and recommended approval of the application, subject to conditions listed in the
staff report.
Ms. Jacob confirmed for Mr. Cushing that the west wall would be 6 feet high, until it
came within 10 feet of the street, when it would be stepped down to 4 feet, and she did
not know whether the existing wall had been constructed at the request of neighbors.
Mr. Powers recalled that when large delivery trucks visited grocery stores, some drivers
tended to drive over curbing and planted areas. Ms. Jacob related her understanding
that the applicant intended to move the loading area so that trucks would access the
store from Boones Ferry Road and would no longer have to use Quarry Road or
Firwood for access.
Mr. Pishvaie observed that Exhibit 17 showed a large number of trees along the
property line where the westerly wall was to be constructed. He advised the Code
required screening between dissimilar uses, but a structural solution was not required,
and screening could be accomplished by landscaping or fencing.
Applicant
Mark Whitlow, Perkins Coie, LLP, 1211 SW 5th Ave, Portland, OR, 97204, stated
that he represented Albertsons. He testified that the applicant would agree to the
recommended conditions of approval. He related the applicant had discussed the
application with neighbors and had made changes based on their comments and
concerns. He introduced the applicant's team: Don Duncam, Real Estate Manager,
Albertsons; Ted Lundin, Lundin Cole Architects; Paul Ryus, Kittleson and Associates,
Inc., traffic consultant; and William Owen, William L. Owen and Associates, arborist.
He explained that delivery trucks would not interfere with traffic because they would
enter the site from Boones Ferry Road, drive west across the front of the store, then
back toward Firwood (but not onto it) and into the loading dock.
Don Duncam, Real Estate Manager, Albertsons, recalled the applicant had expanded
the parking area in 1993 and had purchased nearby houses in 1996. He said the
applicant had found in 1993 that abutting neighbors were in favor of the parking lot
expansion and the applicant had agreed with the neighbor to the west to construct a 6 -
foot high masonry wall to buffer her property from lighting and noise. He clarified that
the wall had not been constructed to comply with any deed restriction, and the neighbor
had since moved away. He stated that the applicant intended to continue to honor the
agreement. He confirmed for Ms. Morales that the proposed design was an original
design and there were no other stores like it. He advised that Albertsons planned to
remodel their stores and replace equipment every 8 to 10 years, but the store on the site
had last been remodeled in 1990.
Ted Lundin Lundin Cole Architects PC., 208 SW Stark St Ste 200 Portland OR
97204, clarified for Ms. Binkley that the east end of the canopy would serve to protect
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 13 of 13
Minutes of May 7, 2001
the entry to the store's coffee shop, and the recycling center would be located at the
north corner and enclosed to control trash and noise. He pointed out a trellis along the
walkway. He clarified that pedestrians would not have to walk behind the columns
along the front because the canopy overhung the columns by five feet. Mr. Pishvaie
confirmed for the Commissioners that the requirement for a canopy did not specify
dimensions.
William Owen, William L. Owen and Associates, PO Box 641, Portland, OR 97207,
stated he was the project arborist. He advised that Trees 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, 551
and 552 were relatively small maple, cherry and prune trees and were resilient species
of trees. He said he could not say for certain if two or three of them would be seriously
impacted by construction of the western wall. He said they appeared to be far enough
away from the location of the wall that the applicant could avoid them. He advised that
Tree 568 (a small Douglas fir) would most likely survive and Tree 600 (a 16 inch maple
tree within two feet of the wall) was of a large size and hearty species and would
survive if it were not destabilized. Mr. Lundin suggested that the applicant could build
pier footings every eight to ten feet that would avoid tree roots.
Mr. Tierney noted the wall would look stark and long from the other side. He asked if
the applicant would consider another type of screening. Mr. Lundin agreed that a wood
fence or evergreen hedge would be easier on the trees and would look more natural.
Mr. Duncam indicated he was not certain whether the wall was a condition of approval
of the zone change. Mr. Pishvaie offered to research that.
Ms. Binkley indicated she favored the proposed redwood and blue color scheme. Ms.
Jacob read from Planning Commission records that the Commission found that a buffer
was necessary to mitigate lights and noise. Ms. Ostly observed a thick stand of trees in
the area of the wall could serve as a buffer. Other Commissioners observed that the
house on the adjacent property sat approximately 200 feet back from the roadway. Mr.
Pishvaie advised that land was zoned R-7.5 and the City had received one
preapplication for a three -parcel partition on that property. He anticipated that three
houses would be built there because the neighborhood did not desire to see further
encroachment of higher uses into the neighborhood.
Mr. Pishvaie advised that his review of the zone change approval on the site showed
that the approval only limited the use of the rezoned area to parking.
Opponents
None.
Neither for nor against
None.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 14 of 14
Minutes of May 7, 2001
No one requested that the record be held open for additional written evidence or
testimony. 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.
Deliberations
Mr. Boone noted the rezoning approval had no included a condition requiring a fence;
however, he read the from the findings:
"Comments from the owner who would be most impacted by the commercial
conflicts — the property owned by Mrs. Cummings, immediately west of the
application property — has established that she believes preservation of the tree
grove, creation of 40% landscaping and installation of a concrete ornamental
wall along the westerly boundary of the application property will best buffer the
commercial property from her residential property and her nearby residential
neighbors. As a result, Mrs. Cummings fully supports the application... The
Council finds that the public need for better buffering and screening and a less
abrupt transition will be met even if the facility meets only the minimum
requirements of the Code and Development Standards."
Mr. Boone advised that the Code and Development Standards did not require fencing —
only landscaping and buffering. The Commissioners generally agreed that meant the
wall was not required.
Mr. Powers suggested a hedge or dense plantings could provide an adequate buffer.
Mr. Cushing observed that a requirement for a fence would ensure that the buffer would
be easily defined and permanent. Ms. Morales wondered about the ability of vegetation
of buffer noise and whether lights would glare through vegetation after the trees lost
their leaves. Mr. Cushing noted that a fence would be a more dependable buffer for
light. Ms. Binkley indicated the design of the fence should complement the design of
the building and include horizontal design details. Ms. Ostly stressed that the color of
the fence was important because of its size. Ms. Binkley suggested a natural cedar
color. Mr. Morales said its texture should match the texture on the building. Ms.
Binkley anticipated that the developer of the adjacent property would construct a wall if
he believed it would help buffer noise.
Mr. Cushing asked the applicant to comment on the Commissioners' discussion
regarding the fence. Mr. Whitlow indicated the applicant could agree to such a
condition.
Mr. Tierney moved for approval of LU 00-0091, subject to the conditions
recommended by the staff, amended as follows:
• Condition B(1)(c )(4) was to require a naturally stained wood fence up to 6 feet
high that featured a horizontal design in keeping with the architecture of the
building.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 15 of 15
Minutes of May 7, 2001
• Condition C(10) was to require the applicant to install the fence as required by
condition B(1)(c )(4).
Ms. Morales seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms.
Ostly, Ms. Morales, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney voting yes. Mr. Miller was not
present. There were no votes against. Chair Cushing announced that the final vote on
the findings and order was to be held on May 21, 2001.
VII. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS
LU 00-0090, Lakeview Boulevard
The staff related that Mike Winter had requested that his application for a Class 1
Variance be reprocessed with consideration of new evidence.
Mr. Powers moved to remand LU 00-0090 to the staff, subject to the applicant's
wavier of the 120 -day rule. Ms. Binkley seconded the motion and it passed with Mr.
Cushing, Ms. Binkley, Ms. Ostly, Mr. Powers and Mr. Tierney voting yes. Mr. Miller
was not present. There were no votes against.
Gramor Development
Mr. Pishvaie reported that the developer of Block 136 desired to relocate a wall, to
remove a cutout area on the corner of the development and to make some changes
related to window and door design. The Commissioners directed the staff to work with
the applicant to resolve those issues.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
They're being no other business, Chair Cushing adjourned the meeting at 10:35 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Jean Hall
Senior Secretary
I:AdreAminutes\05-07-01.doc
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 16 of 16
Minutes of May 7, 2001