Loading...
Approved Minutes - 2020-07-20 PMCity of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of July 20, 2020 Page 1 of 6 14 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Development Review Commission Minutes July 20, 2020 The Commissioners convened at 5:59 PM online, via “WebEx.” Members present: Chair Jeff Shearer, Vice Chair David Poulson , Craig Berardi, Kirk Smith, Jason Frankel, Mark Silen, and Randy Arthur Members absent: None Staff present: Jessica Numanoglu, Planning Manager; Erica Rooney, City Engineer; Will Farley, Traffic Engineer; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director; and Kat Kluge, Administrative Support REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIVITIES Councilor Kohlhoff indicated that the first chance that the City Council would have in addressing the question asked by commissioner Arthur at the last meeting would be in September, as the Council is off for the month of August. She informed members that the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) matters are still in flux and that is taking a great deal of time. The Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant information came before the City Council and they are still working on final decisions, which could last into September of 2021. FINDINGS LU 19-0041, a request for the following:  A lot line adjustment;  RP District delineations;  A Development Review Permit to construct a 160 -unit multi-family housing project;  Approval of a parking study for shared parking;  An unavoidable utility crossing for a stormwater facility;  Minor variances to retaining wall standards; and,  The removal of 112 trees. This site is located at 5600 Meadows Road (21E07BA00900). The Staff Coordinator is Johanna Hastay, AICP, Senior Planner. Commissioner Arthur opined that Vice Chair Poulson made some good, insightful, and compelling comments regarding the process, the evidence, and how they go about making their decisions. In the end, he was persuaded by Commissioner Smith, who reminded members that their job is to apply the criteria to the evidence as it is presented to them. He stated that he will be voting in favor of these Findings and had no modifications to make to them. City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of July 20, 2020 Page 2 of 6 14 Commissioner Arthur moved to approve the Findings, Conclusion, and Order for LU 19-0041, on the entire matter involved in the Application. Seconded by Commissioner Smith and passed 5:2. LU 19-0044, a request for the following:  A 10-lot subdivision with a planned development overlay; and,  The removal of 152 trees for construction of site improvements. This site is an unaddressed, vacant lot located on the east side of Waluga Drive (Map and Tax Lot Reference: 21E07AD02800 & 21E07AD02802). The Staff Coordinator is Evan Fransted, Associate Planner. Commissioner Smith moved to approve the Findings, Conclusion, and Order for LU 19-0044, as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Arthur and passed 7:0. WORK SESSION: Recommendation to the City Council for a traffic study in Lake Grove and the Kruse/Meadows/Carman Drive area in light of recently approved projects. Chair Shearer noted that in the last three years, three large construction projects and three other mixed-use or linear residential projects have been completed in the Lake Grove area. He opined that it seemed there was a lot of new traffic in that area (as mentioned by the people that come before them) and he was unsure what the City had planned regarding any traffic studies. His recommendation is to draft a letter noting the concerns over the approved projects that will impact traffic, as the last completed traffic study is now quite outdated. He asked for a discussion among the members. Jessica Numanoglu, Planning Manager, informed the Commission that members of the Engineering staff were available to give a background information presentation, which includes recent studies regarding the roundabout at Kruse and Carman. Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney, reminded members that their task in approving development is to mitigate the impacts of each development (i.e., look at each development individually, determine the impacts, and apply mitigation measures). The Commission's job is not to look at traffic in general, as that is up to the Planning Commission; however, if members wish to communicate to the City Council on items that are tangential to their responsibility, tha t is fine. Chair Shearer acknowledged Mr. Boone's directive, stating that they were only informing the City Council about the problems that they have seen and heard about. Commissioner Arthur noted that the emails that he received from the Waluga Neighborhood Association and from Jeff Novak requested that the DRC communicate with the City Council regarding the traffic issues in the Lake Grove neighborhood and how they would continue to grow their economic opportunities, given the possible traffic ramifications. He opined that sending a statement noting the DRC's interest and requesting that the City Council consider this a high priority (among the other things that they are addressing), would be sufficient. Vice Chair Poulson opined that what Mr. Boone was saying was important, as the DRC is to approach every project with as much objectivity as possible to avoid potential biases. A short letter stating that they had seen some things that were making their job difficult would be the approach that he suggested. The example that he would cite would be the Shorenstein development, which had a 20-year-old agreement, that held the traffic criteria from that time as part of their application. He noted that most applications have a shelf -life of six years, with City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of July 20, 2020 Page 3 of 6 14 extensions (the purpose being that the world changes). Kruse Village was an example given of another recent development site that heavily impacted the roundabout at Kruse and Carman. His concern is in how to phrase the letter to show how these past developments have been precluded from their deliberations. Chair Shearer acknowledged Vice Chair Poulson's points, adding that his idea was to inform the City Council of things they have noticed as the eyes and ears of a Commission Board. Vice Chair Poulson indicated that the top three things that they hear from citizens involve trees, traffic, and stormwater, with traffic being number one as it affects their quality of life. Erica Rooney, Director of Engineering, and Will Farley, Traffic Engineer, shared a slide presentation with the DRC. Ms. Rooney started by discussing the recent traffic analysis work that has taken place. The Waluga Neighborhood Association (WNA) requested that an analysis be done on Quarry Road in July of 2019. New speed reader data results were calculated and the roundabout analysis (Carman/Meadows/Quarry) was completed in the fall of 2019. Quarry Road is a neighborhood collector, a two-lane roadway (with residential and park access), and 3100 feet from the roundabout to Boones Ferry, and has a posted speed limit of 25 MPH, three all-way stops, and 3 speed bumps. The traffic volumes on Quarry Road peaked just before the recession and have now tapered off (down a total of 15-16%). One date to note is 2014, when Kruse Village was up and running, and there was no spike seen in the traffic volume between 2014 and 2017 when counts were taken on Quarry again. Traffic volume on five of the major collectors in the area rose to pre-recession levels in 2019. These are trending upward from 15- 24%. Major arterials in the area are still below the 2008 and 2009 -era levels in traffic volume. The summary is as follows: Quarry Road volumes are trending downward; Quarry Road speeds are below or near the speed limit; nearby arterial volumes are trending upward; and some cut- through does exist but is expected from the roadway system constraints. The Planning Commission may take this into consideration as part of their work plan to look into some of the code language as related to the Kruse Way corridor. Vice Chair Poulson noted that Kruse Village was approved in 2014, while construction was completed sometime in 2015. He asked when this site was fully occupied to reach the peak a.m. and p.m. traffic patterns. Ms. Rooney replied that she was not entirely sure when full occupancy was achieved, but it has been for the last three years. Vice Chair Poulson asked who completed the studies and what were their parameters. Ms. Rooney stated that this work was completed internally and was based off of the annual traffic counts taken all throughout the City. Mr. Farley described the results received from the speed reader board installed on Quarry Road. These devices cost approximately $40,000 e ach to operate. This reader collected travel speeds and volumes for southbound traffic on Quarry Road beginning January 1, 2020. Due to COVID-19, there was a reduction in traffic volumes between 45 - 55% in March 2020, and in June 2020, traffic was about 75% of normal. The 85th percentile travel speeds have remained consistent at about 25 MPH. Several land-use cases have involved the roundabout on Quarry Road since 2012. The traffic studies performed have used multiple analysis methodologies and software, with operational results between service-level A and service-level D. The City's standard is service-level E, so anything beyond a 50-second delay would be considered failing at that intersection. Keller Associates conducted an analysis of the roundabout u sing all of the different methodologies used before. New data was collected November 14, 2019. Total errand volumes have dropped by about 130 vehicles since 2017 during the peak hour. Roundabout analysis findings: the consultant was required to verify and validate results with field observations; a queuing analysis was conducted that compared the field -observed back of queue to results from each analysis methodology; HCM 6th Edition and SIDRA (being the most acceptable) were found to represent values closest to reality; HCM 2010 was found to be significantly overstating delays and queues. City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of July 20, 2020 Page 4 of 6 14 Using the Transportation System Plan's (TSP) forecast for growth, Keller performed a future year analysis to see what things would look like in 2035. With SIDRA and HCM 6th, the roundabout will remain at service-level C (with less than 30 seconds of delay). Ms. Rooney reminded members that a roundabout analysis is not the same as a signaled intersection analysis. Over the years, it has been found that most people are more comfortable now driving roundabouts compared to 10 years ago. In conclusion, volumes on neighborhood collectors are holding steady, not increasing. Volumes on collectors and arterials were approaching pre-recession level prior to COVID-19 impacts (no longer seeing a.m. and p.m. peaks, as volume patterns are more spread out throughout the day now, and at 75% of normal). The roundabout at Carman/Quarry/Meadows was operating at acceptable levels of service (LOS) and is still projected to do so in 2035. Commissioner Berardi thanked staff for their concise and excellent presentation. He asked whether this information could have been used last week versus the contractual information presented. Mr. Boone replied that the issue was whether they were under their ve sted cap or not (to trigger a traffic review), and the question is not what the background traffic is, but what is the impact of development on existing traffic. The DRC would need to know the peak time for traffic coming out of a development; however, the generalized history of an area would be more information than necessary. Chair Shearer agreed that the information given was exceptionally good, opining that new developments would not affect traffic as much as they were hearing. Before this, they only had one side of the problem. Mr. Boone acknowledged that if there were no vested cap, the Applicant would be required to show the impacts to neighborhood traffic (each development bringing the impact back to zero). Vice Chair Poulson asked if the analysis looked at traffic at each leg at the roundabout and averaged them to arrive at the LOS, as he did not hear specifics about the individual leg of Meadows coming east into the roundabout from a diameter point of view (seeing that it was sized too small, as Me adows backs up from people entering at Carman). Mr. Farley replied that Keller did look at which was the worst leg and how it operated. At the worst leg, they are still looking at less than a 50-second delay in 2035, so at a service -level D. Vice Chair Poulson pointed to the inconsistencies within the traffic engineering community. Mr. Farley noted that the software used has vastly improved in the last 20 years. Ms. Rooney stated that is why they hired an independent consultant, one who had no prior knowledge of the area and one who used improved technology. She also pointed again to the fact that people have gotten better at driving roundabouts. Vice Chair Poulson stated that he appreciated the objectivity, but it still did not address the small diameter. Chair Shearer stated that he believed the information given answered their questions, and there was now no longer a need to send out a letter unless it was something that requested City Council to inform the community about this traffic analysis, as this roundabout is shown to be performing at or above standard. In his mind, there is no longer a need to do anything, as that falls to the Planning Commission, unless members feel otherwise. Commissioner Berardi stated that he understood Vice Chair Poulson's opinions, but his concern was over the letters and complaints received and not being able to communicate about the studies done. Chair Shearer suggested that they be pointed in the right direction on where to find the information. Vice Chair Poulson pointed to both traffic engineering and stormwater engineering not being a perfect science (coming with their own uncertainties), adding that the methods may not change but the software to calculate the data has improved (citing the Kruse Way Village as an example ). Mr. Boone addressed the comment of pointing people to the traffic studies, stating again that the DRC's job is to receive and weigh evidence, but not to manufacturer or refer people to other evidence that is not in the record. Each party has an obligation to present the evidence they wish to rely on. Some of this evidence may be independent engineering studies or layperson testimony. It is up to the DRC to determine which City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of July 20, 2020 Page 5 of 6 14 evidence is more credible, but it has to be evidence that is in that record and not other evidence that the City may hold. Chair Shearer noted that the DRC now has more background information and education, but in his opinion, going any further gets out of their area of expertise. Commissioner Frankel stated that he looked at this as more of an educational piece, as they do get a lot of questions from both the citizens and each other. He agreed that a letter no longer needed to be sent because many questions were cleared up through the spot-on presentation (given the DRC's role). He opined that citizens are able to seek their own education regarding this matter as well. Vice Chair Poulson indicated that they thought about sending the letter to the City Council because Shorenstein may not have had all of the available information and this could possibly happen again with a future application. This issue comes up frequently (i.e., what the Applicant says that the traffic can handle versus what the public perceives as a traffic problem), and he would like to see that these Applicants are aware of the current conditions. Ms. Numanoglu asked Ms. Rooney if she was aware of any other development agreements for this area. Ms. Rooney replied that there were no ne in process and any future development or redevelopment would be looked at to see if it would trigger the need for an individual traffic study (a difference above 250 ADT or 25 during peak hour). Vice Chair Poulson pointed to the Mercantile project and how it initially did not have a traffic study required, but the Applicant obtained one after questions were asked during the first hearing; acknowledging that there should be a minimum level that would trigger a study. He agreed that they did not need to write a letter. Chair Shearer noted that the initial reason for the meeting was to get more background information, and he is satisfied with the presentation of staff and no longer has further questions. He asked members if they felt that anything more needed to be done. Commissioner Smith opined that with the information given, there was support to say that the City has looked at this issue and it appears that things are not as bad as they have been hearing, so sending a letter is not needed. Commissioner Silen opined that sending a letter regarding something that has already been done seemed redundant. Commissioner Arthur stated that he appreciated the presentation and the professionalism of the staff, and he agreed that it was not necessary for the DRC to write a letter. Chair Shearer thanked staff for putting in the effort to bring this educational information to the DRC, adding that he always tells people he knows that City staff does a really good job and are following the rules that the Boards, Commissions, and City Council create. OTHER BUSINESS Code Amendment Information Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director, noted that the Planning Commission has studied this issue and will continue to look at traffic conditions in the Kruse Way corridor, as well as the other planning issues routinely looked at during the TSP review. When a problem with the system is noted, they step back and look at the area with the Planning Department. The Code Amendment that they will be looking at later this year or early next year is more of a maintenance item. There is language in the code that guides traffic studies in the Kruse Way area (which was developed many years ago as that area was being built up) that is somewhat redundant and contains items that are not enforceable (e.g., the City apportions all of the trips that may be allowed in tha t area across properties). This example would be more of a zoning question. One of the triggers is when the LOS at a certain intersection drops below level E, at which time, certain mitigation measures are put in place. Another trigger is when the LOS drops below level C, requiring the formation of a task force. The City cannot require an Applicant to form a task force and the City Council, in their authority, has not appointed a task force to look at traffic in the Kruse Way corridor. When this comes up, he suggested that it might be a good time City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Minutes of July 20, 2020 Page 6 of 6 14 for the DRC and the Planning Commission to hold a joint meeting so each can offer insight to the other. Vice Chair Poulson asked for an explanation about the traffic studies, when the LOS goes to C or D. Mr. Siegel replied that he was describing what was currently in the code. Currently, the DRC may impose mitigation when the LOS drops below level E, and there is a second section that discusses establishing the task force, which cannot be required by the City. He pointed to the system operating at an acceptable LOS based on current standards. They then discussed how mitigation costs are assigned. Schedule Review and Management Update Ms. Numanoglu updated DRC members on upcoming meetings: August 3, 2020 has one tree appeal scheduled. She will be out of town and Scot Siegel, Planning Director, will attend in her place. August 17, 2020 has a tree appeal and one development review application for a small accessory structure that is in the Lake Grove Village Center Overlay District. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chair Poulson adjourned the meeting at 7:20 PM. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Kat Kluge Administrative Support