Approved Minutes - 2002-02-20I. CALL TO ORDER
City of Lake Oswego
Development Review Commission Minutes
February 20, 2002
Chair Sheila Ostly called the Development Review Commission meeting of
Wednesday, February 20, 2002 to order at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, at 380 "A" Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon.
II. ROLL CALL
Members present were Commissioners Sheila Ostly, Dave Powers, Krytsyna Stadnik
and Gary Fagelman. Members absent were Nan Binkley, Julie Morales and Bill
Tierney.
Staff present were Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager; Sandy Ingalls,Code
Enforcement Specialist; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; and Janice Bader, Senior
Secretary
III. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER
AP 01-06 [LU 01-00261, an appeal of the Planning Director's decision to approve a
minor modification to an earlier planned development (Skyland Heights PD 1-96).
Mr. Powers moved for approval of AP 01-06 [LU 01-00261 Findings, Conclusions
and Order. Ms. Stadnik seconded the motion and it passed with Commissioners
Ostly, Powers, Fagelman, and Stadnik voting yes.
ILy 0j : @ to:I:I_\:7h[oil
AP 01-07[LU 01-00601, an appeal by Ramsey Signs, Inc. of the Planning Director's
decision to deny a request for two variances to the Sign Code including a variance to
retain the existing pole sign, and a second variance to increase the sign size from the
maximum of 32-sqaure feet to 42.5 -square feet.
Location of Property: 15835 Boones Ferry Road (GK Travel), Tax Lot 100 of Tax
Map 21E 8CB. Staff coordinator is Sandy Ingalls, Code Enforcement Specialist. This
hearing was continued from February 4, 2002 meeting for deliberation purposes only.
Chair Ostly opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits to
be followed. She asked the commissioners to report any ex parte conflicts, biases or
conflicts of interest. Ms. Ostly, Mr. Powers, Ms. Stanik and Mr. Fagelman reported
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 1 of 3
Minutes of February 20, 2002
they had driven by the site. No one challenged any commissioner's right to hear the
application.
Mr. Fagleman stated there are a lot of signs similar to this sign along that section of
Boones Ferry Rd. It's impossible to ignore because of it's location. He understands
that there is a sunset on those signs in two years, and he thinks that it's for the best to
make them comply.
Mr. Powers agrees the sign is too big and too high, but trying to locate a monument sign
in the front of the building would be very difficult. There are a lot of trees, a fence,
vegation and cars. However, he supports the Code requiring the change of ownership to
comply with the Sign Code.
Ms. Stadnik understands this is the same type of business; however, with the new
ownership in mind they should abide by the Code.
Ms. Ostly stated this is a one of kind situation and a very difficult site. Since there are
so many other factors that impact this site, at this point, the Code should be enforced.
She asked if there are any provisions for exceptions to allow a pole sign?
Ms. Ingalls replied that there is a provision for an exception to the pole sign
requirement, if you have a vision clearance problem, a pole sign could be put there.
Ms. Ostly suggested that it's a dangerous enough location, that a pole sign brought into
compliance might be okay there. She also noted that if there was a sign on the building,
it may become more of a hazard with people seeing the sign late, stopping fast and
trying to get into the property. With the post office located next door, and a bad ingress
from Boones Ferry Rd., that could create potential traffic problems.
Mr. Pishvaie stated there isn't enough evidence in the record to show that sight distance
is a problem, however, there may be a perceived problem. He explained that staff has
determined there is enough parking in the back, and if the parking spaces out front
could be reconfigured it would allow for a monument sign to be placed in the front of
the property.
Mr. Powers asked if the Commission can require the applicant to redeisgn their
parking?
Mr. Pishvaie noted the Commission could make a finding requiring a redesign of the
parking lot in such a way that it would allow for placement of a monument sign outside
the sight distance area, therefore, negating the need for a variance or reducing the
amount of variance necessary.
Mr. Fagelman asked if we were to approve the pole sign, would they still have to
replace it in 2 years?
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 2 of 3
Minutes of February 20, 2002
Mr. Pishvaie noted if the Commission were to approve the variance, then you will allow
the sign to stay forever. He noted the business rents the sign, so the applicant (Ramsey
Sign) is the owner of the sign, rather than the business which uses the sign, GK Travel.
Mr. Powers stated that the existing pole sign is too high and too big, but the
Commission needs sight distance information.
Ms. Ostly stated the Commission didn't have any information presented on the sight
distance issue or showing any hardship because of that.
Ms. Stadnik asked if the monument sign would have to be reviewed?
Mr. Pishvaie replied yes, staff would have to review the sign. He noted that Exhibit E-2
provides a site plan with vision clearance area that was put together by the Engineering
staff, showing the required sight distance area and that there is enough room at the site
to place the monument sign outside the vision clearance area. He noted the monument
sign would have to be outside the triangular sight distance area.
Mr. Fagelman doesn't think that the Commission should set a precidence for all the
other pole signs in the area.
Mr. Powers moved to deny AP 01-07 [LU 01-00601. Mr. Fagelman seconded the
motion and it passed with Commissioners Ostly, Powers, Fagelman, and Stadnik voting
yes. Binkley, Morales and Tierney were absent.
VI. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Ostly adjourned the meeting at 7:25 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Janice Bader
Senior Secretary
L:\pc\minutes\02-20-02.doc
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Page 3 of 3
Minutes of February 20, 2002