Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 1988-03-21 CITY OP LAKE OSWEGO jr DEVELOPMENT _REVIEW BOARD M1NUTEs MAttCtt 21 190E1 T, cALt, To ORDER 'i'ho Development Review Board meeting of March 21, 1580 was called to order by Chairman Mille at 7t30 p.m. Ii. ROLL Chr,r, Board members presentwere M . swillinger, Mr. Miller, Mr, Grooves, Mr, Zinali and Mr, Foster. Mr, Martindale a;ncl Mr. Zngrim were absent, Also present were Robert Calante, saniar Planner) Michael Wheeler, nsseelato Planner) Cindy Phillips, Deputy City Attorney, and ayca traltuc, secretary, III APPROvnr. OF MXNUT1 F3 Mr. rincali moved .for approval, or the February 17, 190E minutes. Mr. Greaveo seconded the motion and it panned with Mr, Miller, Mr. Zinali, Mr, Swillinger and Mr. Creaves voting yea. Mr. Foster abstained, (Second Vote minutes arc approved.) I.V. P.),�OITION$ AND COMMUNICATIONS V. PUBLIC REAR/NOS PD 1-00, a request by James Kelley (applicant) to construct a 6.-Lot. Planned Development of detached dwellings in an rt-10 zones. The nits in located north of Canal Rood and west of Bryant toad (Tax rota 100, 103 and 106 or Tax Map 2 lE 17CC) ttobart Galante presented tho otofr report, explaining the site in located within a floodplain along .Otswe a Canal. The eppliCant has submitted evidence illustrating that ha is complying with all of the requirements of the Clty'n C'loedptain standard, As aaceaa to the development will be provided from Canal Road and ttoether' Inn Court) there icy a need to improve both, streets. JSRO Minutes March 21, 190B Cage .1 Of 11 1 ..111 Il. ' Regarding the Park and Open Space Standard, Mr. Galante 044 stated that staff believes a private tennis court does not meet the requirements of the Open Space Standard. He added that this area should be dedicated as public open space to be preserved naturally. Stafl recommends approval of PO 1..80 with numerous conditions. App,;1 kart Robert: price, David Rvanu & Associates Inc., 2626_SW Corbett.' Nort[i,n )7zoa Cntc, ftha4 e agreed with the conditions in the sCafC report, with the exception of the open apace issue, !leather Ann Court will be paved as a public street to provide access to the easterly-;nest lets and asaccess to the lots that are adjacent to Heather and Bryant. Ile acknowledged the need to maintain the berm along Bryant. Regarding the open space requirement, Mr, Price stated the land dedicated for open space would be divided into both public and private open space, The private open space would house a fenced tennis court and would be maintained by a homeowner's association. The fence would be set back from the floodway by approximately 3 to 4 feet, but would be in the floodplain, The vegetation would be removed from the private open space to install the tennis court, but would not be c,iearcut. The opportunity for the wildlife corridor would still exist. The Board asked IC the fence would require a variance and Mr. Galante responded that the Pence Standard restricts } fencing in residential zones to a maximum of 6 feet without a variance, t',arr Cohan l.3i3l!)onrbrush Ayenuo stated they provided a c na1 aaroage far the open space in order to build ' the tannin court. A 6 foot pathway in planned for access to the public open space. Mr, Cohen explained that approximately sixteen families would belong to the homeowner's association that would use and maintain the tennis court, which would have a 16' high fence around it, 1ropenen La Kant ZIeglor, 10517,,0w it antRoad stated no owns property "air jacent to t is canal ise ttii0Ch oL thin site. HO believes the developer in sensitive to the needs of this area, Mr Ziegler is in favor of the proposal and especial!y the private open space, as it enhances the safety of his property and the aesthetics of the area. ORB Minutes March 21, 1906 Page 2 of 11 Opponents Chris Knauss, 10164 Pioneer Court, President of Bryant Park homeowners AssocTstion, stated they were very concerned that, the big fir trees along the northern boundary be protected, and about how Ear the proposed homes (especially on Lots 4 and 5) are going to be sot back from the northern common property line (for appearance sake and for the sake of the trees) , Mr. Knauss added that the Bryant Park homeowners were also concerned about having as much access as possible to the open space. Mr. Miller asked staff for verification of the 25, setbacks on the building envelopes to the north!. Mr. responded that the applicant indicated they would"be set back 25' from the property line, and suggested the Board note so in the findings, Pntor. C. sarnark 4234 Ell.tot CLr; stated that the proposed ens ty Of tile save opment"ia�OI sing, but that ho was not happy about having tennis courts in his backyard, especially if they were lit 4t night, Cordon puck, 1015E Sw Pioneer Cr. stated that he is opposed to a 'tonnes' court, ospruolajj rT "it 1s lit at night, Since Lots 4 and 5 are very sloped, he asked about placement of the ,►ousel en them, and if the bottom of those lots would be filled. Mr. Cohen stated they would comply with City Code. Mr. (fuck then asked if there were 25" setbacks planned for those lots and Mr. Cohen responded affirmatively, Charles fourbeau 17540 SW Blue Heron Dr. stated he represents t c3 oaweggo Corporation. The Corporation Is concerned with storm drainage and with the buffer area. Regarding storm drainage, Mr. Bourboau asked by what statute or authority the developer takes storm drainage and dumps it into the Galva Oswego Canal, Mr. Galante explained r the Drainage Standar:l requirements and how they conform to State statutes, Basically, he said, water can be released onto neighboring property at the same rate as prosontly occurs (in an undeveloped state, not released faster than under normal circumstances and, therefore, would require some sort of detention facility which would slow down the runoff) . lie further stated that there is a condition of approval requiring erosion control during the construction process which must be submitted prior to final construction plan approval. Mr. Bourbeau then stated he hopes Lake Oswego Corporation would have the option of reviewing the drainage plans when they are available, as they are concerned about pollution n DRtl Minutes March 21, 1900 Page 3 of 11 in the canal and, ultimately, in the lake0 [le further stated that since Lake Oswego Corporation owns a 40' strip of land which separates the canal from this project site, ho assumes the developers would ask permission before developing a perk to the water's edge. Mr. Galante stated that any pub.4c access across Lake Corporation's property would require an casement from the Lake Corporation. Regarding tree cutting, Mr. I3ourbeau asked for clarification that tree-rutting would not take place in the public area. Mr. 3ourboau questioned the feasibility of erecting a fence along the common property line, as a condition of this approval. Naithor Car Nara n sleet llrlan Raison 10341 S.W..Ileather Ann Court referred to the berm in quostTon, mr. natson sa" �i a house is directly affected by condition A.3. as the berm is partially in his backyard, lie stated this condition is unacceptable to him because the berm offers Many benefits to his property: (a) protection against automobiles hitting his property; (b) a barrier to traffic noises on Bryant Road; (c) natural beauty and visual privacy; (d) prevents foot traffic onto his property from Bryant Road; (e) provides drainage control; and (f) safety for his children from the dangers of Bryant Road. Mr, Batson also stated the applicant has misrepresented a statement he made (in Supplement to Applicant's Narrative dated January 29, 1900) in his letter regarding moving the berm, no stated neither ho, nor his two neighbors, ever intended it be moved totally onto their property. Mr. Batson stated he is a proponent of a tennis court and that he is opposed to having a public park in his backyard. if open to public access, it is a detriment to his children's safety and the safety of his home, and could become a constant nuisance. lie further stated that ho wants insuraneo that the street lights will not shine directly into his home, and that this development would incur no financial encumbrances upon existing homeowners. David J. Zsroninnk,[ 103E S.W. h eatther.�Ann. Court stated ih It`x`s abs�olute:1y crit cor that thc: fir lreoti on the Waltz' property be preserved as they servo as a "gateway" to the entire development, and are the only screening Mr. Woltz hasp Mr. zarosinski further stated that the runoff from the Upper Wostridge development area is controlled and redirected by the berm. Ito added that it is estimated bRi) Minutes March 21, 191)0 Page 4 of ll ■ 1p _ traffic on Bryant will more than double, which makes the berm oven more necessary as a protection from runaway 1' vehicles, The primary concerns of the homeowners, he added, is that this development has no financial encumbrances on them and that, though they authorize movement of the berm, it should not be moved onto their property, Regarding the tennis court, Mr, Zarosinski stated that they are not permitted to use the tennis courts on Pioneer Court, putting tennis co wtu in the !leather Ann area would be inappropriate since it would be approximately 200 feet from the other tennis court. The adjoining owners, he added, agreed to study the possibility of a homeowner's association devoted to the care and maintenance of the court. The existing properties do not have tree barriers, he added, making the location of street lights a very important issue, Rebuttal Robert Pr.ico stated that if lightingthe tennis court oonstitutos a problem, it will remn a daylight facility. He further stated that the herons do not nest in the tennis court area, but in the 40' of Lake Owego Corporation land and the 40' of public open space dedicated from this proposal. ' Regarding the north property line setback, Mr. Price stated the 25' setback was probably advantageous in that the trees are already 10' back, so it would only be an additional 15 feet beyond them. With reference to storm drainage, he stated a 24" storm drain line exists in Canal Street that leads to the canal and enlarges to a 30" facility going into the canal itself. He stated that he believes, under the provisions of the City Code, they have the right to use that public facility and will provide pollution catchbnnins and will comply with the storm drainage requirements. Mr. Price stated that he agrees with the condition of approval referencing tree cutting. No trees would be removed from the public open space area and only a few from thepr.ivate open space to make way for the tennis court. The larger trees in the area would be retained. Regarding a fence along the Cake Oswego Corporation property line, Mr. Price stated he believes the City does not want a fence in the floodway. ORB Minutes March 21, 1908 Page 5 of 11 The berm might have to be moved to facilitate City widening of Bryant, Mr. Price stated, and the developers would work with the City and the property owners fronting along Bryant to determine the advisability of moving it, To move the berm mar jeopardise some substantial trees behind it, ho added, With no further testimony, the public portion of the hearing was closed for Board deliberation. poliboratient 1. The Board agreed the proposed tennis courts do not meet the needs of the open space requirements and had no objections to having a tennis court placed elsewhere. 2. The Board discussed its concern regarding the relocation of the berm, which is shown to be relocated on to private property, 14 was agreed the City Engineer and/or staff mist allow the homeowners to review the proposed design plans before work is done regarding the berms and lighting, It was suggested that the physical characteristics of the present berm be preserved and that the City should make an effort to replace any lost trees, (Mr. Galante responded that neither the applicant nor the City could move the berm onto someone's property or affect any existing trees on someone's property without a slope easement or another form of approval from the property owner to do ao, Feforo the City seeks approval for such an easement, it would try to modify the existing berm within the existing right-of-way, lt» is possible some significant plantings could be established on the berm that would ultimately have the ability to provide similar protection to what the berm now proviclen,) 3. The Board discussed its concern about tree cutting in the City along rights-of-we,/ and its concern about turning the matter over to the City Engineer without further review by thin Board. 4, The Board discussed the importance of the 25' setback along the north property line, which the present plans do . show, and agreed it should be a consideration of approval, 5. The Board concerned that the Fir trees along the Bryant td, entrance should be preserved. :Y+ DRB Minutes March 21r 1900 Page 6 of 11 6. The Board agreed that a fence adjacent to the Lake Corporation property is not appropriate and does net enhance the protoction of either the Lake Corporation or the property ownotu, and would bo an intrusion on an otherwise natural salting. Mr. Cronvea moved: to add, no a condition of approval, a minimum 250 natback on the northern edge of the propoticd dovoiopmontfi to the building envelopes on rota 4, 5 and 6. Or. t•ostar aocondad the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mr, Zinsli, Mr# Swill,inger, Mr. Coster and Mr. Groavos voting yes, Mr. 7,inoli moved for approval. Of Pt) 1w00 no recommcndod by Heft with the addition of Mr. Croavea additional condition of approval, with two furthor modifications: (1) The applicant be reatricted from obtaining a tree cutting permit for the treat) at the entry to Canal :toad. (2) That atarf or tho City t nginoor. will review with tali, oxiating property ownorn, any berm dorsign and atroot light locations, prior to any construction Mr. Zinali clarified (1) , explaining that the concern is that there. is an allowance for trod cutting permits for troom larger then 5"0 Thoaa at the entrance to Canal should not be nubjoet to those tree cutting permits. Ho added that they are shown as being on private property. Mr. rotator oecondod the motion and it panuod with Mr. Miller, Mr. Zlnoii► Mr, Tostor, Mr. Craavea and Mrs Swillinger voting year r *� A. 4M $ v.r. '� w .t �e a+ m w w '. ,. w r s ..,. w M. r r .o w, wra ar. rN Alit_ :001a dl, a, rog000t by lrnoat C. Moore for approval oil . our `var(ancom for the conotruction of a two-car garage after domolitlon of the axiating detached carport. The Caur varloncot3 includor (a) A Cloon 2 varitanco to the romtrietiona placed on nonconforming atructuren, which do not allow for any incroaimo in the nonconformity of oald utructuroa (rbc 40.700(2)(b) and (3)1t and (b) A Citron 2 variance to the restrict*, one placed on nonconforming atructurom, which do not allow for thrsir roconatruction if .destroyed by any moons beyond 50% of the replacement coat of the entire building ILOC 40.715(1)1 t and bills Minute.* March 21, 1908 page 7 Of 11 (c) A Class 1 variance of 1.0 feet from the required side and setback of 5 feet in an R-7.5 Residential Zone (LOC 40.215(1)11 and 044 (d) A Class 2 variance of 10 feet from the required front Yard setback of 20 foot In an R-7,5 Residential Zone f.00 40.215(1)1. The site is located at 17447 flue Uoron !toad (Tax Lot 5700 of 'Tax Map 2 1l:; 17AC). Michael Wheeler presented the staff report explaining that the applicant has not demonstrated eomplianco with the four applicable variance or.iteria. While an inconvenience may exist, no hardship is found which deserves remedy through a variance. Other alternatives do exist on the site, which would reduce or eliminate the need for the variance. Mr. Wheeler stated that staff recommends denial of this application. Applicant Nrnoat C. Moore,_39551 L3.R.Ilol nto lUvd tPortland .97202 took issue wi(:i some points ,1n tie staff report. ltg stated that a hardship will be realized by the owner by moving the garage outside the 20, setback, It will require removal of the Maple tree and, therefore, the loss of aesthetic value to the property, This tree, another 1 maple, and two cherry trees form a parklike setting for the front yard. The cost of the removal is a hardship and the value of the tree in irreplaceable. no stated it Is the minimum variance necessary for the garage location due to the aesthetics of the front yard, To, locate the garage € at another point would cause loss of lawn or Maple trees on the south, Mr. Moore stated that he is asking to replace a deteriorating structure which has been there for fifty yyears, with another structure which is more appealing to the neighborhood. In this neighborhood, he: added, there are a number of garages located near or on the roadway. When asked if he considered any alternatives of incorporating some typo of a garage Into the area that is currently used for oft-shreet parking, Mr. Moore stated he did. The problem there, he stated, is that the driveway would have to be altered to allow for a turnaround because to back out of the driveway would be too dangerous, b[itl Minutes March 21, 1980 Page 0 of 11 j1 With no further tostimony, the public portion of the hearing was closed for Board deliberation. Issuos raised! 1. The Board agreed that the purpose of tho Code is to eliminate nonconforming structures, 2. The hoard agreed this was not the minimum required Variance to moot the hoods or this proporty, nor a financial hardship. The lot is large enough to consider other alternatives and, perhaps, apply for a single variance. 3. The Board was concerned about the danger of backing out on to the road. Mr. 'l.;tna,l1 moved for, denial of VAR 6-00(o-d) based on the recommendations in the staff report and on Board deliberations. Mr. Croaven seconded the motion and it panned with Mr. Millar, Mr. zinnii, Mr. swillingor, Mr. roster and Mr. Oroavos voting yes. - - M .w - - A A w. - .M .0 .. A A. 0.0 A - A A r. 0. - 0. M A. 00A A A - KKVAl2 7-0A a-b), a request by David M. and 6unan C. Ceorgonon ' or two variances for the construction of on addition to an existing mingle-family dwoli..ing, an t foilown: (a) A Clone 2 var.J.anco to the rentrictians placed upon nonconforming otructuren, which do not allow for any i.ncroano in the nonconformity of nald otr'ucturon (LOC 40.700(2) (b)1t and (b) A Clone 2 variance of 20 root from the required netback of 25 feet from Oswego Lake (LOC 40.535(3)) Michael Wheeler prosonted the staff report explaining the sito has an Irregular configuration. A dwelling is located 155' north of the shore or Oswego Lake and in situated on the southerly half of the site. The site slopes gently to moderately down to Oswego Lake from Lakeview Blvd. Thn applicants propose to add a 2-story addition to their home, which will include 2 new bedrooms and romodoling of the existing master bedroom and bath. Under compliance with criteria for approval, the applicants' actual hardship is suffered by the imposition of the LOC 40.535(3) which requires that a special setback stti Minutes March 21, 1999 Page 9 o4 11 4E from Oswego take of 251 be maintained from the property , tt line, not the shore of the lake. The proposed addition would maintain 137 feet from tho lake shore. The section of the zoning code in question addresses properties in a 1 non-uniform way, by moasuring the special setback from property lines. In this case it is more than 130 feet from the shore, while in some cases properties extend into the lake. Staff believes the request complies with all applicable criteria and recommends approval of the request for the two variances. Mr. Miller stated that Mr. Poster is acquainted with the applicant. Mr. Poster advised the Board this acquaintenance represents no conflict of interest. APet,l:ppnL npvid Georgonon, 3910 Lakeview rlouleyprc! stated he agrees with the staff report and i�ara-be happy to answer any questions from the Board. When asked about his need for seven bedrooms, Mr. coorgeson replied that they have three children, a mother's helper, their own bedroom, and they need an office and a guest bedroom, accounting for the need for seven bedrooms. The proposal enlarges two bedrooms and adds two bedrooms. lie described the layout of the house. With no further testimony, the public portion of the t hearing was closed for Board deliberation. Issues raised: 1. The Board discussed that, in this case, the lake property does net impact other nearby properties. 2, There Is a hardship in building to the north side of this property and in keeping it open to view the lake. 3. The property lino is an unusual condition relative to the location to the lake front. Mr. swillinger moved to approve VAR 7-00(a-b) based on the recommendations in the staff report and bused on Board deliberations. Mr. Zinnli seconded the motion and it panned with Mr Miller, Mr. zinsli, Mr. Bwillingor, Mr. Pester and Mr. Grooves voting yes. VI. crallit'nr. PrttNNXNO Mond »itB Minutes March 21, 1988 page 10 of 11 Vll, CYl4U J IUSXNI 3$ Findings, ConciuSiona and Order Mr. Z,.i;no1 i moved for hpprovsl- of vlU2_2 EIEf�a�dj. 1'tndt:nga Conclusions and Order. Mr. Swil,lIngor. nee;oniled the motion and it passed with Mr. Minor, M . Zinaii, Mr. Swillinger and Mr, Croavos voting yes. Mr, Foster abstained, Mr.. °reeves moved for approval of ph. ?--AQ vAu,p-00 Findings, Cono.l,usiono and Order. Mr. Sw ,L ,ing©r socondod the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mtn, Swiiiingor and Mr. eroaves voting yea. Mr. Foster and Mr. Zinoli. abstained. (Second vote nocdod) Mr. °reeves moved for approval of pM2,,J.4-02 Moo.,0 flndinga, Conclusions and Order. Mr. SwTflThger seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mr, Swiliingar and Mr. Croavos voting yes, Mr. roster and Mr. Zinaii abstained, (second vote needed) Mr. Cranvea moved to ulnand DD 40 Finings, Conolusi.ons end Order, under the 'l ndings and—Reasons section, 112, to read, "It obeli be et staff's discretion to determ1r+o whether or not posting 'ia neconanry and, IC nocoasary, to dotormino diaLanceu that• would be required for that posting." Mr. Miller seconded the motion and it peened with Mr, Miller, Mr. ()reeves and Mr. Swiilingor voting yea, Mr, Zinali and Mr, Poster abstained. Mr. Creamer' moved .for YArst pr,ov.n t of the amonda [fit)2-00 Vindingu, Cono1un14nn one ti er. Mr.— ,Ing+ar! noconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller Mr. Grooves and Mr. Swiliingor voting yes. Mr. Zinbll and Mr. Foster aboteinod. (second vote needed) 1 VI.II. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Development. , Review hoard, Chairman Miller adjourned the meeting et 10140 p.m. itoopo Atfuliy Submitted, yc . laltud Secretary ORD Minutes March 21, 1988 Page 11 of 11 - II 1 (4 9 CITY OP LAKE OSWEG0 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1l0AHO MXNUT1S (� MARC(' 7, 1900ir O� 1 CALL TO ORDER' The Development Review hoard meeting or March 0, 1908 wan called to order by Chairman Millar at 7r30 p.m. xi. ROLL CALL floard members present were Mr. Swiiiinger, Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale, Mr. Ingrim and Mr. Greaven. Mr, rooter and M . zinnli wore excused. Aloe present wore Robert Galante, Senior Planner; liamid' Piahvaie, Development Review Planner; Cindy Phillips, Deputy City Attorney) and Joyce Paltuo, Secretary. Ixx. APPROVAL O1! MINUTES Mr. Swillingor moved for approval of the December 7, 1907 minute°. Mr. Martindale neconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale and Mr. Swil.linger voting yen. Mr. Ingrim and Mr. Greavoa abcrtainad. (Thin wan a necond vote ^ minutes are approved.) Mr. Swillingor moved for approval of the December 21, 1907 minuton. Mr. Martindale r econded the motion and it panned with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale, Mr. Sngrim and Mr. Swillingor voting yen. Mr. Croavon abstained. (Thin wan a necond vote - minuton are approved.) Mr. Martindale moved for approval of the annuar,y 10, 1900 a minuton. Mr. swillinger aecondod the.: motion and it p used with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale and Mr. Swillingor voting yen. Mr. ingrim and Mr. aroavon abotain,d. (This woo a Second vote - minutes aro approved.) Mr. Grenve►a moved for approval of the LFobruary 17, 1900 minuton, an amended, with a correction on page 1, Section lx, paragraph 2. Mr. Swillingor seconded the motion and it penned with Mr. Miller, Mr. Greaven and Mr. 8willinger voting yea, Mr. Ingrim and Mr. Martindale abstained. (aocond vote needed.) DRS Minutoa March 7, 1980 Page 1 of 12 lV, i 'it'lIONS AND CObtMiJNlCltllt7N5 Mr, Galante presented a letter from Mr. Dickan, an 444 attorney representing Mr, and Mrs, Lao, regarding an application that was reviewed by the Uoard on December 7, 1907, An per the Uoardla requopt, the applicant reduced the sire of the building and provided more parking, The been now nwn property formerly owned b Mr, Potter. Mr, picker) ntaton his clionta did not receive sufficient notice to allow them to participate In the hearing. The original owner, Mr, Potter, who died before the last development review meeting, head participated in the hearin n and hit) concorno were addret)ned, No conflict with City Code wan found. The Leen, concern wan that their building would not be an viniblo from Uoonot) Ferry Road it the remodel and expannlon occurred on the rontaurant. They wanted the restaurant net back further from the road, Mr , Galante advit)ed them there wao no guarantee in the Code that a building throe proportion removed from Beetles ferry Road could retain Ito exp onuro to Uoonen Ferry Road. He explained he in writing a letter to the Lean, advising them that since they did not oppcne the project within the 15 day appeal perloc, there in no opportunity for them to be heard on the matter now. Ho will provide the Ue')rd with a copy of the letter. ji V, PUBLIC IlEAlUNOS 1?I)/DR 20-07/VAR 50-.07 a ronuont by William K. Wileon, nooclatao (applicant) and Northviow height Proportion, Inc. (owner) for approval of a 63-unit apartment project, with novor.al modifications to the Setback rarluiromontai and, for approval of a variance to the Tranoit Standard. The alto in located north of McNary. Parkway and nouth of Partridge i.nna (trax Lot 1 of Multnomah County Map 4225). (continued from February int) Hamill Pinhvaie referred to hie memorandum to the Board, dated February 25th and explained that the applicant in roquonting further continuance) to prepare a written reopens° to tentlmony and to perform an additional eonsstud . The applicant is rocluonting the hearing be held April 10, Mr. Piehvalo oleo referred to Exhibit 56, a motion to diomican, submitted by the Concerned Citizens of Oswego Summit and Walking Woods, Inc. Mr, Pinhvaie recommended that the Board require the applicant to submit all the material by April let, giving staff a week to prepare the staff report and,, at the name time, giving the citizens three wookondo to review the material. Dim Mi►runes March 7, 1900 Page 2 of 12 1 wrrass:n„r;acs �st:mt^x.tre d R'l.. 1vr A'Y. ." 1 W. ,, tf w+y�4, �hg��,.,ry��' �j�4;�. �ih'y�}CyI.e R°VY'+i 1. I. ,,, 14,�,,:„,,,? ,11 1,X; ,r, t?r Yetatcd the 'Motion � 'A ` , lierl.".misp� 41 ' ' , 0 ' at re uwnt for denial. 4F7 , r It,. W 'q l ion would be � IA,a,,tot 74',:+i ' , 6 s + r as the items it + 4., �34., lilt ,10.,43' .s ;`i 1,% f atc nt, but not to hoar • tit o. ��A'i 4 I; it«)1irtt 20.437/VAR 50-67 to thou, ,,441' ,�i",, 1 r, z rtfldation that the public • ts, r , r ,nt,. ,giving diem three TA IS e '', } :t t, Allfc urination Mt. I;ngtint poo ar+ with Mr. Miller, Mr. y r t0ia y ,�Wire . fc}`:, ;1:4 1 .r . Inrgr .nt vot:. ng you. Mr, rriq *"tit i ,� i r iirporation for approval or a gwa ' ' 'tr? it e in ,ocated cat t:he r, tr , ,L ' ,t "a) 4w '�S <, t, fw�rr�ci :ndt iaeterm Road crtan trot w tt l� ^ _ A— , ear I a > ortb lie di+sougnd ; e t°t. iar Homeowner s al' 4 ! '19 relardingt traffic, �' c,; „ +� oral Exact. u (which has 4 t i(� h 9 , its Mr, Pinhvaio � t !r' fl 5 zoning requirements. ,�4, : i ° inn large grouping of W 1) } ,. L t 1 t'te nouthwaoterly corner of e{ r 1 r i with applicant to save as r ,,i h,.ant is ln'creaeirtg the , W to 15' . Where lots 1.,., �' oppliant Is proposing a ea, y .,t "k ari,i the nide yard setbacks 14,04,4, A'Forttainad by +�y,, fit,4 � � 4' n<att in concerned about i..:00`'N,, ,Y+' i' 411. 6 A it: City ltttornoy+s orrice) i F,, kt,„. :f .. tit with the City to rev, eqig '' 1�t' gel,i r MVh re�rt and maintenance of the 5,5t'145'14.40 elf �� F, i;r:rrn application subjoat to / h" e t, a. �° ,, ,i p r viouslyodescribede with )and ;'�' i i�, 4 )..09,.. prolcn 12-14 of the otaff 11 ete ,t �+ ke s $ ,5'. 1 ,, °lt{;� 'ik r na Minutes March 7r 1999 " C'" % i e. i arlo 3 of 12 , 'Yy 1 Apislieant Cordon Hobbs, 13050 SW Forest Way, stated he concurs with Cho staff report. Regarding the letter from Royal, Heights, to try to alleviate the view problems I) they have offset the property lines to create view corridors, and 2) they have agreed to increase the rear yard setback on the north line to 251 from the required jeo , Regarding the Mt. Park Homeowners Association letter: (1) concerning the traffic impact, he stated the City traffic plan has shows that lesser Road will be a connection road to the Haines exit on 1-5, (2) the major problem with access on to Peters is the steep grades to the north, exceeding the City's Codes, (3) 25, rear yards along the West boundary is not necessary as it abuts rear Yards of other houses, (4) OR-AK concurs with eliminating Tract S, which accesses to the Mt. Park private pathways, and (5) installing fences along the west boundary of the subdivision is unreasonable. Opponents Chairman Miller explained the time limits regarding testimony. Hand Wintormuto, 4000 Hampton count., submitted Exhibit 12, His concern regards the northalIerly corner of the property which has been identified as having potential for s 1 landslide hazard, and the northwesterly corner of the site which is identified as having a potential for severe limitations due to weak foundation soils. Mr, Wintermute asked the Hoard to conbidor that Tract A be moved to the northeast section, which would add a park, preserve the trees, and serve as a buffer for the homed that abut the north part of the proposed developments Bob lr,iccsan, Mt. Park liomeownor'n Abnocinoior: ,stated that the traffic probfiM t w i; it —be created is the main concern because Ringsgato, which is a residential street, is used as a collector street. Peters Road appears to be the obvious access to the project between lots 40 and 49 no also stated that Peters Road should be improved out to Melrose, as this would reduce traffic on Kingsgate. The association would like to see a fence along the property line to identify the separate developments and protect the Mt. Park pathway system from troapassors. If the developer installs the fencing, he added, it would be consistent and nicely designed, l)ouq_ni1 4 lavou, 900 SW Ilnntpton Court, btdtod his main concern is how t`hIs ppoject will affect his view, He stated that having the open space moved to the northeast ORB Minutes March 7, 1900 Page 4 of 12 f . section of the property would allow the flatter lots to be ' built on, and protect the views of people who abut the '. northeastern corner of the property, Will sonockod 4980 SW colon; stated that this development wI 1 e acoc to ' o'x ,ngsgato traffic situation. T'he access to this development should be Peters because there is a natural right-of»way there and no major slope problems exist. Regarding the Park and Open Space, he questioned the benefit to the neighborhood when the developer allocates lass than 20% and pays a fee in lieu of the remainder. xC made to adhere to the Comprehensive Plan, he believes must the trees in the northeast corner could be protected as well as the large growth of Oak trees on the site, With reference to the transportation policy, Mr, panache stated the City has to coordinate the timing of development with the provision of public facilities and services, which includes roads and, therefore, Peters should be improved now. The City should review the need to put Oofferson Parkway through to Lasser Road now as this would alleviate some of the road problems in Mt. Park. Bob Santecen 4912 SW Ttampton court, stated ho will have no view at'ai'i'""i' o development, is built as proposed, no preposed the common ground between the two developments should be the eloped area, whore the park should be located. no strongly reemphasized the access to the d proposed developed should be Peters Road, Mr. Santocca s;.atod that ho believed his property value would decrease if this development goes through as planned. savid, Bennett "a09A SW Calera, stated that traffic on 1(ingsg ii'I getting worse'every day and has become a major artery in Mt. Park. Ito urged the access to this development be Peters Road and to build the road so Jefferson Parkway extends through. Carol Palmer,, 5023 Hampton Court, stated that oho concurs with all' ao concerns stateJ—ProViously and asked the Hoard to consider the 35' setback on the north side, in addition to the park in the northeast corner and the Kingogato traffic concerns, Lyle 2ukku, 13G1Q SW .VoLern Road, stated Patera Road is a County Road 2 +—in w firth anri �:a very dangerous. i;,i;lcon ott'ernon 4s37G SW Colon stated' there are terrible traffic hazard n"'�valen and Kingsgato. She is Particularly concerned with tho decronma in property values if the bulk of traffic comas out practically in front of her home. Anaccess off Peters for this development is a bettor solution. I DRS Minutes March 7, 1908 Page 5 of 12 ct , Mark Colville, 4996 SW Hampton Court, reiterated that he t would like the proposed park moved to the northeast corner q and that it would be appropriate to put a walkway along If the northern boundary of the proposed development, similar to the Mt. Park pathway system. L3r, Dehecko, 4900 .SW Galen, emphasized the dangerous situation on Kingsgate to the neighborhood and especially 1 to the children. She suggested building Jefferson through to Tosser Road, having the access to the proposed development on ['oters, and enforcing slgwor traffic limits on Colon, Andrew Novack 4939SW Hampton Court, stated that all the previous testimony couldbe°surnntod up in one word - life- style. Too many houses are being crowded into this area and no attention is paid to the aesthetics and life-style L,aka Oswego is known for. coo Tepper, 4950 .r,W Celan, supported the previous eat,.monloo regard g traffic, the access to the proposed development, and moving the park to the northeast section of the site. Views would be loss impeded for residents of it Royal Heights. ebutta! Gordon Hobbs addressed the concerned of the opponentat 1. Soils tests have been done and the reports are part of the application. QuestianS regarding the stability of the soil will be handled during the engineering phase of this subdiviuion. 2, because th* northeast corner slopes aovorely, the lots are much larger than required so there is a lot of flexibility in placing the homes. There are only 4-6 trees over 8" in diameter in that area that are saveable. Two or three are fir and the rest is brush. The planned pork area has the majority of large trees. 3. As this is the last developable alto in the area, this Is the loot impact on the Colon traffic . When the connection to bosser Rood is complete, the majority of traffic down Kingagate will be alleviated. 44 The site was purchased partially because of the view. The view will be shared between the two developments. 5. Ott-Ali agrees to post nigne on the west line advising residents not to trespass on the Mt. Park path system. 6. The slope is too great for an accesa from Peters Road, DRH Minutes March 'X, 1908 Page 6 of 12 With no further testimony, the public portion of the hearing was closed for Board deliberation, Having heard numerous testimony relative to potential and perceived traffic problems, the Board requested testimony from .lorry Baker, the City Traffic Engineer. Jerry Baker, city Traffic w Engineer, stated that, with regard to the concerns expressed about traffic on Kingsgate while the volume of traffic is not that great, the traffic generally exceeds the 25 miles per hour speed limit. The City has a traffic study from the Mt, Park Homeowners Association, which will go before the Traffic Control Board within the next few months. A 4-way stop sign has been recommended for the Calen/Kingegate intersection, With regard to this application, Mr. Baker has considered having two entrances and having one entrance, if traffic is veered from Peters to Princeton, in a northerly fashion, there would not only be a horizontal curve, but a vertical curve too (going toward Melrose, there is approximately 150-200 feet of vertical curve, where the sight distance is hazardous) . This road wou.7,d receive very little traffic. Having traffic diructod toward using Peters during the interim period would not be a good .idea, as Peters needs improvements, is only 17-10 feet wide and the asphalt, for the most part, has deteriorated. The County has put a 13 ton load limit on Peters. Colon is better laid out, is wider, and the sight distance is greater. This subdivision will generate r about 250 evenly distributed trips each way, daily. Erom a traffic standpoint, the traffic impact from this development is acceptable on Colon and Kingsgato. When asked for justification of the setback modifications, Mr. Pishvaio explained that this zoning is R-5, designed for high density multi-family residential, and that this site could have (approximately a 40 unit apartment complex, with 10' setbacks. in order to be more compatible with developments around the site, the applicant chose increased setbacks, except for the decreased aide yard. He further explained that the Development Standards allow for a combination of open space land on the site and fee in lieu of the remainder (balance) of the area. A majority of the grove area will be saved, as wall as the trees on Lots 19, 20 and 21 through deed restrictions. Mr. Galante explained that the fee paid in lieu of, is substantial, and based on the assessed value of the property which would have boon provided to the City. In other words, they ore paying 100% of the value of the land they are not actually providing to the'Cit , giving the City a substantial amount of money to purchase open space within the City. bRB Minutes March 7, 1958 Page 7 of 12 Issues Discussed: 1. A 4-way stop sign at the intersection of Kingsgate and 024 Galen should be installed, Cindy Phillips, Deputy City Attorney, explained that this could not be conditioned as part of this application. Mr. Galante ex lained that the Board could make recommendation to other hearing bodies and this could be made under a separate motion or the findings could reflect the Board's recommendation to the Traffic Control Board to consider signaiizatian at that intersection. 2. A uniformly designed fence should be constructed along the roar of the properties abutting the pathway. 3. The Development Standards do not address views. The developer is trying to minimize the amount of loss and is building on the property within a proscribed manner. 4. The amount of the fill in the short cul-de-sac might hinder saving the trees. The Board discussed conditioning approval for protection of trees. 5. Regarding Mr. Swillinger's concern of a conflict in the CCR's regarding by-laws, Cindy Phillips, explained that the document for the homeowner's association do not meet with the approval of the City Attorney's office. There will have to be several modifications, one of which is that the City can also be a party to enforce those agreements. 'There also should be a reasonable standard of maintenance provided for within the document. Mr. Grooves moved to add, in the conditions of approval as Item A.12., a requirement for the applicant to provide, in the deeds a restrictions, a permanent fence along the west side (Lots 1-10) of the property where it abuts the Mt. Park Pathway. Such fence is to be posted at distances recommended by staff, with "No Trespassing - Private Property" signage. Mr. Martindale seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale, Mr. swillinger, Mr. Ingrim and Mr. Grooves voting Yost Mr. Martindale moved to amend item A.O. to modify the grading, if necessary, to nave the trees as determined by staff. Mr. Ingrim seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale, Mr. Swiilinger, Mr. Ingrim and Mr. Grooves voting yes. Mr. Martindale moved to approve PI) 2-00► with the amendments to the conditions of approval as previously approved, along with the findings that the Board is DRO Minutes March 7, 1988 Page 0 of 12 concerned for the traffic control at the intersection of Kingngate and Galen. Mr. Xngrim seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale,. Mr. Swilli,ngor, `( !PI M . ingrim and Mr. Grooves voting yes. OR 1-fist/VAR 5-00, a request by !leather Chrisman for Opproval to enclose a 317 seq. ft. porch to create additional interior space and to remodel the facade of the structure located at 400 2nd Street ('Tnx 'riot 3800 of Tax map 2 ,LG 301)). Variances to .00 40.700(3) to allow the nonconforming structure to expand and to the Parking Standard 7.005 are requested to allow the structure, which door, not have adequate parking to meet the Standard, to be remodeled. Robert Galante presented the staff report, explaining it is a nonconforming structure, and the applicant is requesting approval for a variance to the nonconforming section of the Code which says if anything ip expanded or rebuilt, it should now conform to Code. The appplicant+n discussion of hardship explains that the building is unattractive and there is a need to remodel it to attract business. The nonconformity that eari.stss primarily is the 4 parking spaces in front of the building. Theyare required to meet the needs of the building, but back across 2nd street. They do not conform to the Parking Standard, which requires cars to maneuver entirely en the property and provide backup space required hy the Standard, on the proptarty. The vehicles backing across 2nd Street create a hazard. Staff recommends denial of the variance request (thus denying the expansion portion of the remodel request!, believing hardship hen not boon demonstrated to a sufficient degree. propgnon L:ti Heather chr-.tnman ,1G70 Lakefront Road, stated that almost 'IEF—bui'i.drigs on the west R1,c e of 2nd Street, between A Avenue and B Avenue, have the same type of parking, With regard to remodeling, the only change in the height of the building would be by enclosing the porch. The property has been vacant for the last year. The old porch is not a pleasing entrance. Enclosing the porch on the front of the building (with slightly recessed brick), and heating it, lends itself as a display area, and would permit passersby to look In the windows. Roforring to Exhibit 6, Ms. Chrismsn explained that the building would not block any ether building's view or protrude any further than the other buildings, The buildings oven with the perch enclosed, would be under 3,000 square feet not ORD Minutes March 7, 1908 Page 9 of 12 . changing the required one parking space for every 300 feet The revitalization of the property is of extreme importance. Owner-occupied businesses tend to be better cared for and the individual character, charm and uniqueness of the buildings enhance the character of downtown Lake Oswego. The social interaction between 2nd and 3rd streets is also enhanced with the ease of the passageway Rather than entering the porch to walk around 4 the building to get to 3rd street, residents will have the use of a now walkway on the south side of the building,, with landscaping and lighting, Dick Chr.isman. 1628 Lakefront Read, stated that their bumingse has ben .located in the Village Shopping Center and they have boon operating without a lease for eight months. With the remodeling of the Center, they are expecting a rental agreement at approximately four times the present rent, This is not the type of business that can turn the dollar volume that high shopping center rents require. In essence, he stated, they aro being forced out of there. F"rom a merchandising point of view, enclosing the porch as a heated room, will permit easier visibility from the street. Paul Graham, 460 rtSecond, Street stated that although `ar nag c( f�fui lrhoro"`"S worko. This is an important area (the East end) and property/business-owners should be encouraged to improve facilities, more than by just painting them. This particular site strongly resembles a house. This is an opportunity for it to look more like a business, more compatible with the redevelopment offort in the last End, Mr, Graham stated it is a hardship on the entire business community when tenants are always vacating a property. It shows a lack of stability, he added. With no further testimony, the public portion of the hearing was closed for Hoard deliberation. Issues. (aisod l 1. The structure is conforming and the envelope of the built structure will not increase In size. The only thing nonconforming, is the 4 parking spaces. Mr. Galante stated the Code requirements are not entirely practical for this particular restrictive parcel. 2. Mr. Grooves asked, if this wan a vacant lot and one wanted!, to build a building on it as it sits now, in there any way to get 5 parking spaces in front of It Mr, Galante responded that there would have to be a ono Minutes March 7, 1980 Page 10 of 12 one-way drive-thru or parking under the building. In any case, it; would be very difficult. 00111 3. The Board folt the inherent nature of the site is a hardship on the property itself. It would be { difficult to imagine any business there, supporting ten parking spaces. 4. The Board agreed the proposed facade and the concept appear to be positive. 5. The Board agreed that to generate a" Code-responsive solution Is a Major hardship. It is a hardship on existing businesses if there are vacant properties among them. Mr. Martindale moved to approve OR 1-80/VAR S-00. Mr. Swillinger seconded the mo4lon and it paaned with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale, Mr. Swillingor, Mr, Ingrim and Mr. Creaves voting Yes. OR 14-82(Mod.'88 , a request by the 3-)C Restaurant Corporation to expand the area of the existing drivo- thru booth of McDonald's Restaurant by 200 Square feet. The restaurant In located at .,L6044 S.W. Noonan Perry Road (Tax Lot 4100 or Tax Map 2 IL: QCn). Robert Calanto presented the staff report explaining the proposal. to expand the drive-thru booth. He stated that: the materials are idonticul to what exists now and the expansion will not ga beyond the existing booth or canopy. To look at the building from the side, one Would hardly notice any appreciable change to the structure. The proposed change does not materially change the proportional relationship of the building or the building's compliance with the Building Design Standard. Staff recommends the proposal be approved an applied for. +trill leant r,innMet',nren 16044 S,W. Noonan merry.Pond, stated she is 1ho manager Oat the aub oot MccheRiiic 'a Restaurant. The expanded booth will lesson the congestion in the parking area and speed things up. Mr. Swillinger moved ror approval pf lytt 14-02(Mod.'00). Mr. Martindale seconded the motion and it panned with Mr. Miler, Mr. Martindale, Mr, Swi1linger, Mr, Ingrim and Mr. Grooves voting yes. DAB Minutes March 7, 1988 Page it of 12 . Ann I.r { T VI. GENERAL PLANNING M None 1 014) VII. OTHER BUSINESS .. bindtn a Conclusions and order. Mr. Martindale moved for approval of PI) 10-87 Findings, Conclusions and Order. Mr. Ingrim seconded the motion and it panned with Mr. Miller, Mr. Martindale; Mr. Ingrint and Mr. Swillingor voting yes, Mr. Grooves abstained. VAR 2-80(a-d) As not enough Board members wore present to vote on VAR 2-88(a-d) , a second Vete will be taken on March 21, 1980. VIII. AOOURNMENT There being no further business before the Development Review Beare], Chairman Miller adjourned the meeting at 10t45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ('; .,, x. Joyce A. l'altue Secretory E llt3il e12 o Minutesf12 March 7, 190t! pag 'i 1