Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2018-05-21 APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 1 of 7 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Development Review Commission Minutes Monday, May 21, 2018 The Commissioners convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380 A Avenue. Members present: Chair David Poulson, Vice Chair Brent Ahrend, Paden Prichard, Jason Frankel, Nick Shur, Jeff Shearer, Kirk Smith Members absent: None Staff present: Jessica Numanoglu, Planning Manager; Leslie Hamilton, Senior Planner; Evan Fransted, Associate Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney and Jean Hall, Administrative Support. COUNCIL UPDATE Councilor Theresa Kohlhoff briefly gave an overview of her visit to the Clackamas County Domestic Justice Center and Children’s Center, noting that the City of Lake Oswego does not contribute to those centers. She noted that she will now be taking on the Metro liaison functions for City Council. She reported that Council has been working on Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations. She reported that there will be three openings coming up on City Council. MINUTES Moved to June 4, 2018 meeting. FINDINGS LU 17-0047, an appeal of the staff decision to approve a Sensitive Lands modification to reduce the front yard setback in the R-7.5 zone from 25 feet to 17 feet in order to construct a single-family dwelling on a lot mostly encumbered by a Resource Protection (RP) District (wetland) and the removal of six trees to construct the dwelling. The site is located at 667 Lake Bay Court (21E10BA06100). Staff coordinator is Leslie Hamilton, Senior Planner. • Motion by Mr. Shearer to accept the findings of the appeal. Seconded by Chair Poulson and passed 3:2 with 2 abstentions. PUBLIC HEARINGS LU 17-0065, a request by Ottbone Investments for approval of a 2-parcel minor partition, including one flag lot, and the removal of 14 trees. The site is located at 1923 Mapleleaf Court (21E16BA03002 and 4402). Staff coordinator is Leslie Hamilton, Senior Planner. This hearing was continued from the May 7 DRC meeting. The opportunity for oral testimony was closed by the Commission at the April 2, 2018 hearing. The Commission, on its own motion, left the record open for written testimony regarding only slope stability as it relates to the proposed drainage systems (new and rebuttal evidence to be submitted by April 20 and 27, 2018, respectively). Persons submitted Exhibits F12 through F16 and G203 through G210 during that time period. On May 7, APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 2 of 7 again on its own motion, the Commission left the record open until May 14, 2018, at 5:00 p.m. for written rebuttal testimony only to Exhibits F12 through F16 and G203 through G210 regarding only slope stability as it relates to the proposed drainage systems. Mr. Boone asked Commissioners to make their declarations of ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest since the last meeting. Commissioner Ahrend stated he was not at the last meeting but that he viewed the last hearing on video. None of the Commissioners expressed any bias, ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest. Staff Report Leslie Hamilton gave the staff report, noting strikeouts made by staff to the written testimony that staff found did not relate to the limited scope of soil stability and proposed drainage system per the continuance for rebuttal testimony. • Exhibit F-13 – staff struck out irrelevant text on stormwater conveyance and trees. No one on the Commission objected to staff edits. o Motion by Mr. Smith to agree with staff recommendation on strike out text. Seconded by Mr. Ahrend and passed 7:0 • Exhibit F-14 – Ottbone Investments rebuttal: staff struck out irrelevant text and an image. o Motion by Mr. Smith to strike text and image related to trees per staff recommendation, seconded by Mr. Shur and passed 7:0. • Exhibit F-15-Rebuttal from applicant (sales agreement): staff recommended striking the entire exhibit as it is outside the scope of soil stability and drainage system. o Motion by Mr. Smith to strike entire exhibit per staff recommendation, seconded by Mr. Frankel and passed 7:0. • Exhibit G-204-Supplemental testimony from Black Helterline dated April 20, 2018 regarding conveyance and tree issues. Staff recommended striking the irrelevant testimony on portions of pages 2, 5 and 6 and the warranty deed at the end. o Commissioner Smith recommended that testimony describing the conveyance by deed on page 4 should be stricken; modification and tree removal text on page 5 should be stricken, as should the warranty deed. He recommended not striking the page 6 testimony on tree removal and soil stability. Chair Poulson disagreed with Mr. Smith—on the page 6 testimony—and that it should be stricken. Motion by Mr. Shearer to strike all testimony as noted by staff. Second by Mr. Frankel and passed 7:0. • Exhibit G-205-email testimony by Patricia Thiery-Bourque, dated April 20, 2018 - staff recommended striking all irrelevant testimony on earthquake hazards, 1994 Comprehensive Plan text and other issues as noted by staff. o Motion by Mr. Shearer to accept the staff recommendation for strike outs as noted in the staff report. Mr. Prichard asked why testimony related to the City’s classification of landslide risk was not relevant and that it should be left in. Mr. Shearer stated that it relates to earthquakes and not drainage systems. Chair Poulson disagreed, but noted that earthquakes could be related to soil stability. Amendment to the motion was accepted by Mr. Shearer to include the testimony and earthquake and hazard maps related to landslide risk. Chair Poulson asked for clarification from the Deputy City Attorney on opportunity to rebut the testimony. Mr. Boone stated the testimony was submitted prior to April 27, APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 3 of 7 2018 and could have been rebutted by the May 14th deadline. The question is only if it is related soil stability and proposed stormwater facilities. Mr. Prichard noted the history of the property from the testimony is relevant and stated that the history related to slope stability and should remain in the record. Mr. Ahrend disagreed with Mr. Prichard based on rules in effect today. Mr. Smith recommended that the three lines in the third paragraph on page 1 and landslide maps (Figure 4-5, page 7) be retained in the record. Seconded by Mr. Shur and passed 7:0. • Exhibit F-17--Ottbone Investments rebuttal evidence dated May 14, 2018: New testimony was new text and graphs from Rapid Soil Solution (RSS), which was not included in earlier testimony. o Shawn (Ottbone Investments) made a comment that the testimony was in response to rebuttal to show that a more conservative approach was used for the EEI study. The Commission discussed whether the testimony went beyond rebuttal and included new information. o Mr. Smith said he agreed with the staff recommendation on the striking of the testimony. o Chair Poulson gave his opinion that the information presented went beyond rebuttal with new tests and should be stricken. o Mr. Ahrend asked if there was a way for them to rebut when only one assumption was changed. Mr. Poulson stated that new information was presented in the new testimony. o Motion by Mr. Smith to accept staff recommendation on strike outs. Mr. Shur asked if new test holes were done. Mr. Poulson said only new parameters were used in calculations, which results in new evidence. Seconded by Mr. Frankel and passed 5:2. • Exhibit G-211, Earthquake Hazard map, as previously included in G-205. Staff recommended striking the map. o Motion by Mr. Smith to include the Earthquake Hazard map in the record, as previously included by the Commission. Seconded by Mr. Prichard and passed 7:0. • Exhibit G-213—Testimony from Rutherford, et. al., dated May 14, 2018: Staff found evidence outside the scope on tree removal impacts (Item 3 on page 1 of the exhibit) and should be struck. o Motion by Mr. Smith to agree with staff recommendation to remove testimony on tree removal impacts (Item 3, page 1 of the exhibit). Seconded by Mr. Frankel and passed 6:1. Mr. Boone then asked the applicant whether they would like to delay the deliberation and decision for final written argument. Applicant Mr. Ty Wyman , 851 SW 6th, #1500, Portland, OR 97204, Applicant’s attorney, testified that he wished to keep the record open for a final argument. He stated that his client would like to delay the deliberation and decision for submission of final written argument. He asked for an extension to May 31, 2018 for delivery of a final written argument. APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 4 of 7 Mr. Boone stated that staff would not respond to the final written argument. Applicant’s document shall be due to the Commission no later than May 31, 2018 close of business, and deliberations continued to June 4, 2018. Motion by Mr. Ahrend to give the applicant until close of business May 31, 2018 to submit final argument and continue Commission deliberations and decision until the Commission’s June 4, 2018, 7:00 PM meeting. Seconded by Mr. Shur and passed 7:0 PUBLIC HEARING LU 18-0020 a request by Kimberly Ann Moyer Trust for approval of the following Residential Infill Design (RID) variances and removal of three trees in order to construct a new single-family dwelling: • Reduce the required 25-foot front yard setback to 12.3 feet; • Reduce the required 10-foot south side yard setback to 1.5 feet; and • Increase the maximum permitted floor area from 5,058 square feet to 5,142 square feet. The site is located at 1136 North Shore Rd. (21E10BB07600). Staff coordinator is Evan Fransted, Associate Planner. This hearing was continued by request of the applicant from the May 7, 2018 Development Review Commission meeting. This is the first evidentiary hearing; public testimony on all applicable criteria is permitted. Mr. Boone gave an overview of the public hearing process then asked Commissioners to make their declarations of ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest since the last meeting. None of the Commissioners expressed any bias, ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest. Commissioner Ahrend stated that he visited the site. Commissioner Shearer stated that he had done some work with the applicant over 5 years ago, but was not biased on this case. Staff Report Planner Evan Fransted presented the staff report and recommendations. He stated that on the previous Friday (May 18, 2018) the applicant submitted a revised site plan and written evidence (Exhibits E-9 and E-10) that eliminated the need for the front yard setback and the maximum floor area variances. Also added was a spiral staircase on the exterior of the garage and elimination of a third bay of the garage. Exhibits G-201 through G-204 were letters received in opposition to the front yard setback variances. Mr. Fransted outlined the code that allows front yard setback averaging and noted that the front yard setback variance was no longer needed, so the opposition was a moot issue. The revised site plan now shows a 21-foot setback, which is permitted outright by front setback averaging. Staff concluded that the applicable code criteria were met and recommended approval of the proposal with the revised site plan and written evidence. Stormwater management will need to be provided, reviewed and approved as a condition of approval. Tree removal of two Big Leaf maples (15” and 17” dbh) and a Douglas fir (53” dbh) is proposed for the development. Exhibit F-8 is the City arborist’s report and states that there is no reasonable alternative to removal of the one significant tree, the Douglas fir. A tree protection zone of 14 feet was recommended for the fir tree, if retained. The arborist’s report also stated that the Big Leaf maples were not significant trees and in poor condition and could be removed. The applicant showed three dogwoods for mitigation on the original site plan (Exhibit E-3), but not on the revised site plan. Ms. Numanoglu stated that actually four mitigation trees would be required per the code, which was not currently in the staff report conditions of approval. A 2:1 mitigation ratio is required APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 5 of 7 for the removal of a significant tree for development purposes. The conditions of approval should be revised to require a total of four mitigation trees if the application is approved. Questions of Staff Commissioner Ahrend referred to Exhibit F-3, Arborist’s Report, and asked for clarification of the tree locations for removal. He asked how far the new garage is from the tree location(s), since the garage size is now reduced. Mr. Fransted and Mr. Ahrend opined that the location is about 9 to10 feet from the garage edge. Mr. Fransted referenced City arborist’s report (Exhibit F-8), which called for 12-foot tree protection zones for the maples (if retained). Mr. Ahrend opined that the trees were too close to the foundation and the tree protection zone cannot be met. Chair Poulson asked about the turning movement into the garage and if a template was used to measure the turning movement. Mr. Fransted said he did not and that the turning movement was only one small factor in the review. Mr. Ahrend asked about the second floor egress to the garage/art studio. Mr. Fransted reviewed the site plan with the Commissioners indicating the location and functionality of the staircase. Mr. Smith expressed confusion with the staff conclusion, specifically the use of the words “better meet”. Mr. Fransted reiterated his conclusions citing the conformance with existing development pattern. He opined that a side-loading garage was more compatible with the existing development and the code than a front-loading one. Applicant Testimony Dana Krawczuk, applicant’s attorney, Stoel Rives, 760 SW Ninth Ave., Portland, stated that on behalf of her client, she accepts the modified conditions of approval for the tree mitigation as recommended by staff. She noted that full sized plans were available and provided to staff at the hearing. Ms. Krawczuk described the difficulty in designing the driveway and turnaround and encroachment into the setback. She noted that the neighboring property owner is supportive of the encroachment of the garage into the setback. Tree issues were addressed by Ms. Krawczuk. Kim Moyer, applicant, stated that she wanted to build a home that neighbors loved and would fit into the neighborhood. Dave Shott, Architect, described how he arrived at the house design. Questions of the Applicant Commissioner Frankel asked about shrubbery on the North Shore side. Ms. Krawczuk said that the shrubbery is in the public right-of-way and not the applicant’s property. She stated that there will still be landscaping with dogwood trees along that frontage, even if the street is someday widened. Commissioner Prichard asked Ms. Krawczuk about the house being accessible when it cannot be entered without stairs. She pointed out that it is accessible by a pathway to the kitchen entry. It is not ADA compliant, but accessible for aging-in-place. Mr. Shott gave an overview of the accessibility features of the house. Commissioner Prichard asked if the garage level could have been dropped to a lower elevation. Mr. Shott replied that it is as shown at the specified elevation to minimize the need for additional grading. APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 6 of 7 Chair Poulson asked Mr. Shott if he did a turning movement assessment. Mr. Shott said he did not, but by just looking at the site you can see that there is a tight space for maneuvering a car. He stated that the new garage doors are where the existing garage doors are located. In response to a question, Mr. Shott explained the need for the spiral staircase for a legal means of secondary egress from the studio over the garage. Civil engineers Don Cushing, PE and Alan Schmitz, PE, Don Cushing Associates, responded to questions by Chair Poulson on the sanitary and storm sewer systems proposed for the house, given the basalt rock and slope on the site. Mr. Schmitz stated that the sanitary sewer will connect to the existing sanitary laterals in the street. Pumping to the laterals will be necessary. For stormwater, Mr. Schmitz said the design will include two flow through stormwater planters and be discharged to the lake. Chair Poulson noted a high groundwater level in the stormwater report. Mr. Schmitz said there would be a foundation drain and the elevation of the house is above the lake level. Commissioner Prichard asked about the necessity of grading so deeply near the garage. Mr. Shott stated that the new plans still need further examination to determine landscaping and hardscaping in relation to the new design. He also pointed out one of the mitigation trees will be located on the site within an area on the northwest corner of the site, near the boathouse. He stated that the percentage of landscaping has been calculated by the civil engineers. Ms. Numanoglu stated that there was no minimum required percentage of landscaping in the code that applies to this type of project. Public Testimony In Support: Peter and Missy Bechen, 1128 North Shore, Lake Oswego, property owners to the south of the site, testified that they are longtime residents of the area. Mr. Bechen expressed concern about the maple trees in bad condition, which may fall on their property if not removed. They are both in support of the project. Neither in support nor opposition None In Opposition None Mr. Boone stated the applicant or others have the opportunity to continue the hearing for additional evidence. No request for continuance by the applicant or others was heard. Deliberations Commissioner Ahrend agreed with the City arborist’s report on removal of all three trees. He supports the new site plan and configuration of the house and garage. He supports the side yard setback variance. Commissioner Prichard stated he could support approval with an increase of the setback on the south side to 2.5 feet, noting that there would be plenty of room for a turning radius. He said he would like to see a drop in grade of about a foot to reduce the prominence of the garage and increase the visibility of the house. Chair Poulson presented some scenarios where the turning radius may not be adequate. Mr. Prichard reiterated he wanted to see at least a 2.5-foot setback on the south side yard. He stated he did not have any problem with the tree removals. Mr. Ahrend APPROVED City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of May 21, 2018 Page 7 of 7 said that there may be room for an additional setback, but he wishes to give the applicant additional room for maneuvering and allowing the smaller setback. Commissioner Shur said he liked the design of the house but would like to see more of a setback on the side yard of the garage. Mr. Prichard agreed. Commissioner Smith opined that the house is beautifully designed and he understands the site limitations, but that the 1.5-foot setback is just too small. Minimum setbacks for property maintenance are usually 5 feet. Mr. Prichard said that it could work with a larger setback. Commissioner Shearer said he thinks the 1.5-foot setback is fine as it is for an existing structure. Mr. Shearer is in support of the design and variances. Chair Poulson said that future development of the adjacent property could be impacted by the smaller setback. No turning radius template has been applied so the impact of turning on the site into the garage is unknown at this time. Commissioner Prichard disagreed with the staff findings on the RID compatibility criteria. Ms. Numanoglu clarified that the cited criteria relate to a code-compliant design as a comparison. Mr. Smith opined that having more of a setback would allow a visual corridor between buildings. Ms. Numanoglu informed the Commission that Conditions A (1), A (6) and B (4) would need to be revised to require submittal of the revised plans proposed by the applicant eliminating the third bay of the garage and requiring four mitigation trees, if the application is approved. Mr. Ahrend made a motion to approve LU 18-0020 with a revision to Condition A(1) substituting the site plan in Exhibit E-9; a change to Condition A(6) four mitigation trees with locations to be three trees in the southeast corner and one in the west end in the planter strip; and B(4) to reflect four trees. Seconded by Chair Poulson and passed 4:3 Findings and conclusions are to come before the Commission on June 4, 2018 at 7:00 PM. ADJOURNMENT Chair Poulson adjourned the meeting at 9:46 pm. Respectfully submitted, Jean Hall Administrative Support