HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2020-11-23 PM APPROVED: 12/14/2020
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Planning Commission Minutes
November 23, 2020
•
2 1. CALL TO ORDER
3 Chair Rob Heape called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. This was a video conference
4 meeting held via Zoom.
5
6 2. ROLL CALL
7 Members present were Chair Rob Heape and Commissioners Dave Beckett, Joel Fischer,
8 Jacob Semler, Philip Stewart, and Kim Whitman. Vice Chair Pape was excused.
9
10 Staff present were Scot Siegel, Director of Planning and Building Services; Erik Olson, Senior
11 Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; and Iris McCaleb, Administrative Assistant.
12
13 3. COUNCIL UPDATE
14 None.
15
16 4. CITIZEN COMMENT
17 None.
18
19 5. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT - GENERAL UPDATES
20 None.
21
22 6. MINUTES
23 6.1 October 12, 2020
24 Commissioner Fischer moved to approve the minutes of October 12, 2020, as written.
25 Commissioner Semler seconded the motion and it passed 6:0.
26
27 6.2 October 26, 2020
28 Commissioner Whitman moved to approve the minutes of October 26, 2020, as written.
29 Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion and it passed 6:0.
30
31 6.3 November 9, 2020
32 Commissioner Beckett moved to approve the minutes of November 11, 2020, as written.
33 Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion and it passed 5:0:1. Commissioner Semler
34 abstained.
35
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of November 23, 2020 Page 1 of 5
APPROVED: 12/14/2020
1 7. PUBLIC HEARING
2 7.1 COVID Shelters for Commercial Uses (LU 20-0040)
3 A request from the City of Lake Oswego to amend Chapter 50 (Community Development
4 Code) of the Lake Oswego Code for the purpose of 1) exempting awnings and canopies over
5 outdoor dining areas from design review during COVID-19, and (2) replacing the 14-day
6 restriction on temporary shelters with a longer timeframe for certain commercial uses during
7 COVID-19. Staff coordinator was Scot Siegel, Director of Planning and Building Services.
8
9 Chair Heape opened the hearing. Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney, outlined the hearing
10 procedure. No financial conflicts of interest were declared, and no one challenged any
11 Commissioner's right to consider the application.
12
13 Staff Report
14 Mr. Siegel stated that the proposed amendments were before the Planning Commission at the
15 direction of the City Council and they were part of the City's ongoing response to the COVID-
16 19 pandemic and the restrictions placed on businesses as a result. He noted that due to the
17 spike in positive cases the county was currently in the middle of a two week freeze declared by
18 the governor and that restaurants were not allowed to have in-house dining until December 5th
19 at which time it would be reevaluated and possibly extended. He indicated that there was still
20 a need, once the freeze was lifted, to have a plan in place to allow restaurants and other
21 businesses to operate while maintaining physical distancing requirements. The City Council,
22 in response to local business owners, asked staff to look at ways to help facilitate use of
23 temporary structures such as tents and permanent structures such as awnings that could be
24 installed over outdoor dining areas as a way to help businesses that were having a hard time
25 to continue operating. He recalled that the Planning Commission recommended and the City
26 Council recently approved code changes allowing the use of seasonal outdoor dining
27 enclosures which was initiated prior to the pandemic; it provides flexibility on an ongoing basis
28 where enclosures could be installed and then removed in the summer and then put back up;
29 the design standards were more rigorous than what would be required for a temporary
30 structure.
31
32 Mr. Siegel stated that the ask from businesses was for the City to provide some relief and
33 some way to use temporary shelters, such as tents, for more than 14 days which the current
34 code restricted them to; they also wanted the ability to install awnings over outdoor seating
35 areas without going through land use process. Mr. Siegel summarized that the proposal was
36 twofold, it would put in place a policy that would allow temporary shelters to be up for more
37 than 14 days, but be removed by after Memorial Day weekend, May 31, unless they wanted to
38 use the 14 day temporary allowance currently provided by code. He clarified there were
39 controls to protect adjacent residents in terms of requiring a minimum setback of ten feet and
40 complying with fire and life safety requirements (using existing Fire Department permitting
41 process); tents would not require a Development Review permit. The second component—
42 canopies or awnings—to take advantage of exemption, awnings would have to be setback 20
43 feet from any residentially zoned property and cover no more than 30 percent of the width of
44 street facing façade; the intent is to manage impact on adjacent residents by requiring a
45 setback and minimizing any negative impact on streetscape appearance or aesthetics by
46 limiting the overall width of building that could be built out. The owner could choose to go
47 through the design review process to reduce the setback. Mr. Siegel stated that the only
48 public comment received was from Rob Moneyhan, Exhibit G-1, expressing concern with the
49 setback (for a tent) being too large for a smaller property. Staff took this into consideration
50 and modified the proposal to have a setback of ten fee rather than twenty feet for temporary
51 structures unless a larger setback was required for fire and life safety by the Fire Marshal. He
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of November 23, 2020 Page 2 of 5
APPROVED: 12/14/2020
1 noted that one additional standard was that any lighting would have to be within the structure
2 or under the awning and directed downward and shielded and screened to prevent lighting of
3 off premise areas —a standard typically included in design review.
4
5 Mr. Siegel also shared with the Commission that due to the timeline for processing code
6 amendments, the City was allowing businesses to obtain building permits for awnings and to
7 use temporary shelters in accordance with the proposed code changes while the code
8 amendments were in process of being considered. He explained that prior to issuing building
9 permits, staff will require the owner to sign a waiver on a form approved by the City Attorney
10 releasing the City from all liability; the applicant assumes the risk of having an awning or
11 canopy that is not in compliance with the development code if the code changes are not
12 ultimately adopted.
13
14 Questions of Staff and Deliberations
15 Chair Heape asked if there were any businesses that were adding temporary shelters or
16 awnings. Mr. Siegel indicated that there were, but he couldn't provide a current list because it
17 was changing daily. He noted that activity for restaurants had halted as a result of the
18 Governor's two week freeze. He pointed out that while restaurants were receiving a lot of
19 attention, there were other businesses that were being impacted as well. He provided an
20 example of retail establishments being limited by the number of customers allowed to be in the
21 building at one time and the need for a sheltered waiting area while they waited their turn.
22
23 Commissioner Stewart referred to the staff report where it mentioned that three local
24 restaurant owners had approached the city asking for a more expeditious permitting process
25 for installing awnings over their outdoor seating areas, he asked if those would be permanent
26 and not be required to come down after May 31 st. Mr. Siegel stated there had been inquiries
27 about awnings covering a private patio space and about a canopy to cover a storage area
28 rather than dining. He reported there had also been code enforcement issues regarding a
29 restaurant had installed a canopy prior to the pandemic which had not been in compliance with
30 the code and that proper permits had not been obtained. It has since been brought into
31 compliance and the owner was now interested in installing a canopy or tent over an outside
32 dining area in compliance with the new code.
33
34 Chair Heape asked if there had been any applications submitted for seasonal dining
35 enclosures, Mr. Siegel shared that there had been none. Chair Heape questioned from a
36 financial perspective the cost and viability of restaurant owners being able to afford such
37 changes. Chair Heape also questioned what kind of safety restrictions would be put in place
38 for tents and awnings. Mr. Siegel advised that anything attached to the structure was
39 governed by the building code (i.e.: snow load, wind load) and temporary structures would
40 have to follow the fire code (i.e.: heat). Mr. Boone reminded the Commission that the scope of
41 the Commission was to determine the planning impacts and that the Fire Marshal role and
42 economics were not in their purview.
43
44 Commissioner Fischer was concerned about the reduced setback and how it impacted
45 neighbors. Mr. Siegel indicated that the reduction was proposed for only the temporary
46 structures and was as far as staff was comfortable going, he commented that setbacks varied
47 by zone. Commissioner Semler asked if the outriggers or staking of the tent or enclosure were
48 required to be within the setback. Mr. Siegel commented that it of course couldn't go on the
49 neighbor's property, but from a land use perspective the code was trying to manage the mass
50 from a certain distance of an adjacent residence and the outrigger or stakes wouldn't have the
51 same impact; for permanent structures, the setbacks were measured from the outer perimeter.
52 Mr. Siegel confirmed for Commissioner Stewart that the code changes would apply to all
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of November 23, 2020 Page 3 of 5
APPROVED: 12/14/2020
1 commercial zones; he clarified that neighborhood plans identified in the staff report were all
2 neighborhood plans where staff found regulatory policies that had to be addressed. He
3 indicated that for neighborhoods that didn't have neighborhood plans with regulatory policies,
4 the Comprehensive Plan policies were relied upon.
5
6 Commissioner Beckett asked if the code included enclosures extending over adjacent off
7 street parking areas. Mr. Siegel indicated that it did allow for temporary shelters over existing
8 off street parking areas provided they met the Fire Marshal's guidelines and permitting
9 process.
10
11 Testimony
12 None.
13
14 Chair Heape commented that at the state level he felt actions were reactionary and that
15 decisions should be scientific and data driven; he also believed that the state was providing
16 top level information and that hopefully more detailed information would be shared so the city
17 could make better informed decisions.
18
19 Commissioner Beckett moved to approve LU 20-0040 COVID Shelters for Commercial Uses,
20 based on staff's recommendation. Commissioner Whitman seconded the motion and it
21 passed 6:0.
22
23 Staff will return with draft Findings, Conclusions and Order on December 14.
24
25 8. WORK SESSION
26 8.1 Planning Commission and Commission for Citizen Involvement Goals 2021 —Work Session #2
27 The Commission reviewed comments and finalized their goals for forwarding to the City
28 Council. Staff coordinator was Scot Siegel, Director of Planning and Building Services.
29
30 Mr. Siegel noted that the annual code amendments had been added as requested by the
31 Commission at their previous meeting. The Commission discussed updates to the Citizen
32 Involvement Guidelines listed under"Discretionary" projects. Mr. Siegel referred to
33 Attachment 2 of the staff memo which provided the legislative history of the Commission for
34 Citizen Involvement. He noted that in 1998 an ordinance was passed appointing members of
35 the Planning Commission to serve a dual role as the Commission for Citizen Involvement
36 (CCI). He indicated that the charge of the CCI was rather specific centering on implementing
37 the City's Citizen Involvement Program on land use issues. The Commission also discussed
38 the letter previously submitted by the Neighborhood Chairs Committee and generally agreed
39 that the roles of the Planning Commission and new"Citizen" group needed to be better
40 defined and that the City Council needed to provide direction. The Commission agreed that
41 updates to the CIG should be included as a goal. Mr. Siegel announced that the Boards and
42 Commissions Summit (virtual) was scheduled for January 7cn
43
44 9. OTHER BUSINESS
45 9.1 House Bills 2001 and 2003 (PP 19-0008)
46 The Commission received an update on the State rulemaking for House Bills 2001 and 2003.
47 Staff coordinator was Erik Olson, Senior Planner.
48
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of November 23, 2020 Page 4 of 5
APPROVED: 12/14/2020
1 Commissioner Beckett asked that the Mountain Park Planned Development be exempt as it
2 already had a mixture of single-family and multifamily housing. He also noted that waterfront
3 properties should be exempt due to floodplain level concerns.
4
5 Mr. Olson noted that the state had a special hearing scheduled for December 9th. He advised
6 that the City was currently under contract with Cascadia Partners to help with updates to the
7 Comprehensive Plan and Code. Mr. Siegel explained that the consultant was also tasked with
8 completing an analysis which would include impacts on neighborhood character; he clarified
9 that the analysis would be on a limited number of neighborhoods. The next update to the
10 Planning Commission would be at the January 11th meeting.
11
12 10. SCHEDULE REVIEW
13 Mr. Siegel reviewed the updated schedule.
14
15 11. ADJOURNMENT
16 There being no other business, Chair Heape adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of November 23, 2020 Page 5 of 5