Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 1988-09-18 Cl'�"ar 04 LAKL OSWLCO 0 1)EVJ rOpMGN'T`'REVIEW UQr11U) MXNUT1 S t So mbe p � � 19, 1900 Va I. CALL TO Ont)1:K The Development Review Uoard mooting of September 19, 1900 was called to ardor by Chairman Millar at 7c30 p.m. I I. not t CALL Beard members present were Mr. Miller, Mr. Swill1ngor, Mr, zinsli, Mr. Oroavos and Mr. Coster, Mr. Martindale and Mr. Ingrim were absent. Also proaent were Iiamid Pishvaie, Development Review Planner, Cindy .Phillips, Deputy city Attorney; and Joyce 1altua, Secretary, ITl, APPROVAL OF MINUTES - None IV. PETITIONS ANI) COMMUNICATIONS - None V. PUBLIC HEARINGS im n..00/vA 27,-op, a requeut by O'TAK for approval to cJovia"" op a ;L4` o4 planned development; along with four variances an foll.owat a. A variance to Section 10.020(1) of the Acceno Standard, which requires, that every lot abut a otreet (Public) for a width of at leapt 25 feet. Two private roadu are being pr'oponod in the development. b. A variance to Section 19.025(5) of the Site Circulation -0 Private Streets and Driveways Standard, which requiron a maximum 51f crone-elope for any driveable area. A 7% croon-sIape is proposed for the two private .rondo ,in tltr, develr+pmcnt. c. A variance to Section 19.025(6) of the Site Circulation Privets !itreeta and Driveways Standard, which requires that private street!, not exceed a I5% grade. A 17% grade In proposed for the two private roads in the development. DR11 Minutes 9/19/00 Page 1ef0 d. A variance to LOC 44.304 which establishes a 10% maximum grade for collector street©. A 12% grade is proposed for the easterly portion of the Jefferson Parkway extension (a collector street). The site is located west of Spinozo and Jefferson Parkway (Block 62 of Multnomah County Tax Map #4224) . tlamid Piehvate presented the staff report. llo submitted a letter (lxhibit 27) from Guido 2akovics, which referred to the extension of Jefferson Parkway and stated the writer's opposition to the extension. Mr. Pishvaie explained the background of the application. There are significant natural features on the site, including very heavy tree coverage and two streams that aro parallel to one another. The streams, along with a :largo number of trees, will be preserved in their natural states through dedication to the City as public open space Tract "A". Some development is planned within the stream corridor which includes an unavoidable road crossing necessary to provide access to rots 0 and 9, minor, underground utility installations, and the construction of a storm water detention pond along Jefferson Parkway. This 14---lot single family subdivision is located in fl-0 zoning, which is the highest density zoning designation in the City and does not prescribe any minimum lot or unit area requirements, 'rho proposed lots represent an R-l$ density in an k-0 zone. The lots are oversized in order to maximize tree preservation. Mr. Pichvaio explained the applicant's proposed setback changes, adding that staff supports them, with the exception of two modifications. Staff supports the applicant's request for a 12$ grade for the easterly 260 fact of the Jefferson Parkway extension as this will facilitate the future extension of Jefferson Parkway to the west. Staff does not support the variance to the Access Standard regarding private streets because experience proves that, in most cased, residents of private streets often request the City to take over the streets for maintenance purposes. For that reason and because staff recommends private and/or public streets be designed to public street standards, staff does not support the variance to the OiLC ':tr °ulation - Driveways and Private Streets Standard regarding the design of the proposod westerly street. Staff supports the applicant's request for modifying the cross-slope gradient of the easterly street (Vivian) and does not support the same modification request for Haynes. DPI) Minutes 9/19/08 Page 2 of )1. ii Staff recommends approval of PD a-Da/vAA 27-60(a,c,d) ( (a) and (d) only with respect to Vivian) , subject to the ' ' requirements of the it-O zone, with exceptions as noted in the conditions. Staff also recommends denial of VAR 27- 60(b), Me, Pishvaio also recommended rewording Condition t1,7. to reads "The internal streets shall be designed to public street standards, With 100' centerline radius, 150' sight distance radius on all internal streets, and 60' modified oul.de-saes instead of the hammerhead turnaround, as proposed, Applicant i)on Hansen, oPA1(, said the site is small and complex, with *tgn):ricant naairal festurost two stream corridors and a wet area at the southern edge, stoop sloped, to hoavlly treed, has unstable soil, bedrock as little as four feet below the soil surface, and will require off-site work and sewer pump lift station. Although the site wns initially approved for 107 apartment units, only 14 single family homes are proposed, Mt, Hanson explained he disputes the additional $' setback on the lots bordering the open space, since there is a 254 setback on each side of the stream corridor, and the open space represents 2741 of the site, QTAK piano to barricade the stream areas with wire during the construction period after the street are in, to prevent builders from intruding, Some areas of the channel ere as wide as 4-$ feet and deeply cut down to the bedrock, The applicant intends to start the 25' setback from the edge of the channel on each side, and that at the construction document phase of the project, to verify the stream channel width and areas where there might be more potential for erosion, fogerding the public versus private streets, Mr. Hanson explained why private ntroobu are proposed! 1, The way the property is divided by the stream corridor leaves very narrow parcels 40 work with, 2, i3osides the construction methods required for a public street, the 40' right-of-way d tat atien required would greatly affect at least nt of the 14 'hots negatively, 3, The private streets will be constructed to public road standards, The only variations requested are the Slope and configuration en site. The road design fits the terrain as closely as possible, if the gradient is reduced by 26, the amount of grading en each side 4,„) DAD Minutes 9/19/00 Page 3 of 0 ri�rr�rrrft _ :; r A of the road is increased, causing the removal of more '4 trees and reducing the access to the :lots 4. The road will be unique in that it will provide access to all the homes and still meander with the existing terrain. 5. Regarding service vehicle access, group mailboxes will be provided at the southern edge of the site because the postal service prefers their vehicles not have to back up in order to turn. 6. Regarding developments trying to turn private streets over to the city after construction, Mr. Hanson stated that usually happens when the streets are in need of repair. The applicant plans to design CC& 's to prevent that. 7. Cul-de-sacs would reduce the site of the lots. Mr. Hanson further stated the criteria for the planned development overlay is being not by providing open space and protecting the natural features of the site. With the improvement of .efferson Parkway, the applicant is providing off-site infrastructure and purchasing additional rights-of-way and easements to provide that nonnection There wan a discussion between the Board and Mr. Hanson about the ourface of the road and whether asphalt would hold up very wall on such a steep slope, For such a steep slope, tt might be best ;o study the construction methods (i.e. the depth of the asphalt) versus the use of concrete. The applicant stated that he would appreciate input, especially since the developer and homeowners would be liable for the maintenance of the roads. Regarding the issue of hammerheads versus cul-de-sacs, the applicant explained that hammorhenda can double as driveway access points and easily .fit the slope. Regarding the extension of jefCoroon Parkway, Mr. Hanson stated it was not a recommendation, but a City requirement, Mr. Pishvaio s:xpiained it to a requirement of the comprehensive Plan. Jefferson Parkway and z,osoer are identified as major collector streets and the linkage is shown on Page 157 of the Plan, tttl3 Minutes 9/19/88 Page 4 of 8 Neither Ear Nor Against r, ► ttyan,�cr.ant,,1 27,30 sW 551.h Rises stated he is concerned about Che propene traffic proiien on Lasser Road and that Jefferson Parkway will become en outflow of traffic from Mt. Park. lie was not aware there was any controversy about the Jefferson extension. Jerry linker, City et t'.eke 9rlwe;to 9'rofflc tan hear stated that this connection'is a very impertan. part:`of the Comprehensive Plan. Presently traffic flow from Jefferson Parkway to Kingsgate to Melrose. Kingsgate, he stated, was not designed to be a through street. Over the long term, the City expects a heavy traffic flow on Jofforaon Parkway. With such heavy development in the area, the city envisions getting traffic to Posberg, then along Westlake to Kruse Way, to the interchange. The City Plana to recommend a three-way stop at the Intersection of Fosberg and Jefferson Parkway until a traffic signal is warranted. With regard to the 12* grade, the City is satisfied that the developer has done everything possible to bring the grade as close to the City standards as possible. Regarding the grades in the cul-de-sacs, Mr. Dakar stated that if the pavement is not sanded, a 2-wheel vehicle could not even climb a 10% grade, so with icy conditions, a 17% grade would nearly be impossible to negotiate. For that reason, the City prefers 15% grades unless it is proven to be i►rpossible. The City has also found that rusldonts come to object to picking up mail at grouped mailboxes, which in why the City prefers postal vehicle turnarounds (like the modified GO' cul-de-sac Mr. Pishvaio referred to) to hammerheads. Rebuttel. PISS,18Rurahaahis_o't`AK.. l:nc. stated that the cul-de-sacs were reclosigno after tIko with the postal service determined the mail delivery vehicles can negotiate a 39' radius turnaround. Regarding the asphalt pavement, Mr. Kurehashl agreed that 15% slopes require sanding. In his experience, asphalt has been an accepted standard up to 17% slopes, and then concro1. to required. pon Hanson,, O'I Inc. ntatr'I that the reduced building dens ty rrei urea' the-c x-nits traffic impact. lie added that, to benefit the area, they are constructing a storm water detention facility en the southern portion of the site which will take care of the site's storm water ORB. Minutes 9/19/88 rage '3 of and a groat deal of the runoff from Portland community College and some portions of Mt. Park. In rosponso to a question about setbacks on each side of the stream corridors, Mr. Ranson responded that while start recommends 25' on each side oC the channo plus 10' on-site, they are proposing a Si setback on-site, With no further testimony, the public portion of the hearing was closed for Board deliberation. xssuori pisdusOcadt 1. The issue of public streets versus private streets was discussed by the board and staff. Staff explained the basis for recommending public streets was duo to maintenance and sight distance. Staff further explained that the City to rev sing the Code towards not allowing private streets in single family residential subdivisions, 2. The Board discussed the proposed hammerheads with respect to emergency vehicles. The Board also discussed the hammerhead grades versus the grades on a cul-de-sac and the different rights-of-way. M�•. Pishvaie pointed out that a modified culi-de-sac might lava the 24" f'ir tree en the northerly side of the hammerhead near Got 5. 3. The Board discussed the feasibility of a reasonable set of requirements built into the CC&R'n regarding street maintenance on the private streets so as not to become a problem for the City in the future. 4. The Board discussed the conditions staff- recommended, should the private streets be approved: a. dedication as fire lanes and be no noted on the plat; b. require public easements for public utilities and construction plans showing whore meter box will be located for private street lighting: and c. street drainage to ht tic ir'r to reaching Jefferson Parkway, and a majority of runoff taken to detention site. 5. The Board discussed adding a condition that staff and the engineering department meet with the applicant to review the appropriate Penstre ion techniques for the proposed grades. BBB Mindtes 9/19/88 Page 6 Of 0 { ■ a Mr. Groavob moved for. approval of t')) 0-00/VAR 2`1-00(ra-d) /; with uthff'o rccommendationn, modifiod no follow(): 1. Variance ►b► ehell, b(q approved once the appiJ cant demonDtratan the critc?r, n hnu boon mot to moot that variance: 2. holoti.an of A.6. 3. Deletion of language In 11.7. end rov, oo with ,Language that hnmmorhood turnaroundu, nn propnood by thq applicant, be approved 00 privnto ntrootu In the development, but dedicated no fire Innen and onuemonto for public utilitien, an required. 4. 0.9. be u►odifiad to rend) The final, conutruetien Plano ohall. Dhow all pubil.q road improvements to be within doOlonted public rig1►t-or-way. S. Ad41.t1on of Condition 0.10 to reads The nppl,icent in to review the appropriate conntruct.ion tochniquoo for tho proponod otreot gradon with staff, to be approved ndminlatratively. 0. Condition n.2., part 2, that the 10' building notbuck rcquir'omont be .chnngod to a a' building outback requirement. ( Mr. zinsii oeconded the motion end it carried with Mr. Millar, Mr. Zinali, Mr. 3:'oatar and Mr. Croavee voting in Trever. Mr. Swillingor voted ngainot the motion and Mr, Martinc]a10 end Mr. Lngrim wore oboont. VI. OTtit,M 11US1lNI SS 1 indincga, Cdnciurtiono and order Mr. Swil,l..ingor moved for approval oi: UR l5 00/chit 36 t30 ti.ndincn, Corrclunione end Order. Mr. Creavav nocandod the motion and it carried with Mr. i000tor, Mr. Cron.ven and Mr. Swillingor voting in savor. Mr. Miller and Mr. Zinali abntalnod, (need uacend) Mr. Swillingor moved for approval. or DR 16.08/sl) 40-40 iindingn, Conciuulone and Order. M,r. Croevon necondod the motion and it curried wtth Mr. Swillingor, Mr. roster end M . CreavOO voting in favor, Mr. Miller and Mr. 2innii abstained. (need 0eee0d) Mr. Swiliingor moved for, approval or DR 17-00 ii'lndinga, Conciunlonn end Order. Mr. Fontor seconded the motion and it carried with Mr. Swlllinger, Mr. Fester and Mr. Ortraves voting in favor. Mr. Miller and Mr. .,xinali abstained. (need necond) Dt1t1 Minutes 9/10/80 Page 7 cPage 7 of 0 Mr. swil,l,ingor moved to modify the language or DR 14-00/ � VAR 37-00 Findings, Conclusions and Order on the top oC , ' page 3 to rand: The Board did not rind the landscaping around the propane tank was appropriate at the present limo. Mr. Groavea seconded the motion and it carried with Mr. Master, Mr, Groavos and Mr. SWillingor voting in raver' Mr, .Minor and Mr. ?.insl,t abstained, (need second) Mr. Or,dove. moved Lo table VAR 29-00 Findings, Conclusions and Order to October, 3, 1900 to enable staff to clarify the portion on page 3 which roads, ""T'he site moats the definition or wetlands. The Board to constrained by the Wetlands Standard because the site is interlocatod within close proximity to the wetland, which is not a suitable pito," 0e r4quoatod that start. consider whether the findings should include the tact that the applicant did not address the economic impact or ecological data. He said the Board had made a strong statement that the applicant hod totally railed to meat the criteria necessary J!or granting a variance and it may be or a inervico to the applicant to know precisely which aroao btill need to be addressed. Mr. Loutor seconded the motion and it carried with Mr. Miller, Mr. zinoli, Mr. Swillingor, , Mr, Foster and Mr. Grooves voting for approval. VII, ADJOURNMENT t There being no further business borer° the Development Review Board, the meeting adjourned at 9a55 p.m. Respoctruily Submitted, t oyco A. 1?oltun Secretary DR0 Minutes 9/19/00 Page 0 or 0 1