Loading...
Approved Minutes - 2022-09-19 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Development Review Commission Minutes September 19, 2022 The Commissioners convened at 7:02 PM at City Hall, in the Council Chamber, 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034. Members Present: Chair Randy Arthur, Jeff Shearer, Bruce Poinsette, Timothy Lyons, and John Dewes Members Absent: Vice Chair Kirk Smith, and Dwight Sangrey Staff Present: Jessica Numanoglu, Deputy Community Development Director; Evan Boone, City Attorney Pro Tem; Evan Fransted, Senior Planner; Ellen Davis, Associate Planner; and Kat Kluge, Administrative Support MINUTES September 7, 2022 Minutes: No corrections were noted. Commissioner Shearer moved to approve the Minutes of September 7, 2022, as written. Seconded by Commissioner Poinsette and passed 4:0, with 1 abstention. FINDINGS LU 22-0002: A request for approval of Conditional Use and Development Review Permits to construct a major public facility: a new 62,900 sq. ft. recreation and swim center and 183-space parking lot on the Lake Oswego golf course site. The proposal includes the requested removal of 88 trees. This site is located at 17525 Stafford Road (21E16A00600 & 21E1600101). The Staff Coordinator is Johanna Hastay, AICP, Senior Planner. Commissioner Shearer moved to approve the Findings for LU 22-0002, as written. Seconded by Commissioner Dewes and passed 4:0, with 1 abstention. PUBLIC HEARINGS LU 22-0041: A request for approval of the following: • Development Review Permit to construct additions on an existing dwelling in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District; • Minor Variance to reduce the combined total 15-foot side yard setback to 12 feet for the proposed second story and east additions; • Design Variance to reduce the north side yard setback to 2.9 feet and south side yard to 3.7 feet for the proposed west addition; • Design Variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 20 feet to 4.5 feet; • Design Variance to increase the maximum lot coverage from 35% to 47%; and • Design Variance to increase the maximum long wall plane on a narrow lot from 60 feet to 72.21 feet. This site is located at 520 5th Street. (21E03DC03300). The Staff Coordinator is Evan Fransted, AICP, Senior Planner. Evan Boone, City Attorney Pro Tem, gave an overview of the public hearing process, outlined the applicable criteria and procedures, and gave instructions for oral testimony. Mr. Boone asked DRC members to declare any ex parte contacts (including site visits), biases, or financial conflicts. All DRC members present declared they have no ex parte contacts, conflicts of interest, and no bias, except as follows: Commissioner Shearer indicated that he drove by the site and through the alley behind the site that evening. There were no challenges to the Commissioners’ rights to consider the application. Staff Report Evan Fransted, Senior Planner, added Exhibits G-200 to G-202 (letters in opposition) to the record prior to presenting the staff report. The site is unique in that it is developed with a single-family dwelling and is located in an R-2 zone (high-density residential) in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District (DRD). Properties to the north, south, and east are zoned R-2 and developed with attached zero-lot line dwellings or duplexes, with the exception of a single-family dwelling at 566 5th Street. Properties to the west are zoned R-6 and developed with single-family and duplex dwellings. The lot is approximately 3,660 square feet with a 30-foot lot width. The existing house is 884 square feet and is two stories. The existing accessory structure (located at the rear) will be removed, as well as the existing driveway off of 5th Street. The existing house was built in 1938 and is small in stature with a height of 18.7’. The proposal includes building 3 additions (front addition to the east, rear addition to the east (garage and mudroom), and a 2nd-story master bedroom addition over the existing dwelling). The site plan shows the addition of landscaping, street trees, and a new brick entry pathway. The Applicant is requesting setback variances to allow a combined 12-foot setback (instead of 15’) for the side yards for the east and 2nd story additions, reduction to the west side yard setback at 2.9' from the north lot line and 3.7' from the south lot line for the west addition, and reduction to the rear yard setback to 4.5'. There is also a request to increase the lot coverage to 47%. The proposal includes removing approximately 40% of the existing walls to construct the new additions. The front (east) addition includes a covered entry porch on the front and covered patios on the side. The proposed building height is 25.58'. Proposed materials include cement board shiplap siding, fiberglass-framed windows with clear glazing, cedar tongue-and-grove soffits at the covered front entry area, composite decking, metal deck rails on the front porch, and metal roof with skylights. The proposal triggers the DRD standards because the additions change the appearance of more than 50% of the building elevations, and as such, is considered a substantial remodel. The existing building is non-conforming to the architectural styles permitted in Lake Oswego; however, staff finds that the proposed additions do not affect the non-conforming style of the building (non-conformity is not increased). The Design Standards also require that buildings use masonry as primary building materials for the walls of the ground floor and prohibits metal as a primary roof material. The proposed cladding does not include the required masonry materials and the proposed roof is metal. Condition-of-Approval (COA) A-1.c requires that the Applicant submit a revised building elevation plan showing that masonry will be used as the predominant material on the ground floor and COA A-1.b requires that the Applicant submit a revised plan that will utilize one of the allowed roofing materials rather than the proposed metal roof. Overall, staff finds that the application complies with the applicable DRD standards, with COAs A-1 through A-4. Staff finds that the proposed additions will not be detrimental to public health or safety, as they do not impede vision clearance areas for vehicles entering or exiting the site. The Fire Marshal has determined that the proposed side yard setbacks will not violate any fire regulations. There are approximately 63 properties within 300' of the site boundaries. The adjacent properties to the east and west will see no increased effects. The properties most likely to be impacted are the abutting properties to the north (approximately 11' distance from the dwelling at 540 5th Street) and to the south (approximately 6.8' distance from the dwelling at 518 5th Street). The front and side yard setback planes are met. The proposed height is below the allowed maximum height of 28' to 32' in the R-2 zone. Staff finds that: the construction of the additions has minimal potential negative impacts to the abutting or nearby single-family dwellings; therefore, the proposed minor variance will not be materially injurious to the neighborhood or properties; that approving the Minor Variance will have no negative impact on the streetscape because the front yard setback is met; that there are no designated sensitive lands on the site; that the proposed alley driveway meets the sight distance standards; and that traffic will not be affected. COA A-5 requires submission of a final drainage plan and report to comply with the stormwater management standards. The site is not mapped on any of the hillside protection areas, nor is it located near any parks or open-spaced tracts. The proposed additions will not cast shade on the abutting properties. Staff finds that the criteria for a Minor Variance are met. Overall, staff finds that the Design Variance criteria are met to reduce the proposed setbacks, to increase the maximum lot coverage, and to increase the maximum long wall plane on a narrow lot, as the options are limited due to the retention of the existing non-conforming detached dwelling, small lot size and narrow lot width, and the placement of the alley-accessed garage is consistent with garage placement in the neighborhood. The design includes multiple roof pitches, asymmetrical composition, roof/window/porch projections, and horizontal siding that improves the perceived building form and breaks up the massing. Questions of Staff Chair Arthur asked if the definition of remodeling was newly adopted. Mr. Fransted replied that the definition Chair Arthur referred to dealt with a different standard (demolition), and that staff’s definition applied just to the DRD. Chair Arthur then asked if the expansion of the floor area was addressed. Jessica Numanoglu, Deputy Community Development Director, indicated that the expansion of floor area applied mainly to commercial uses, and that in this case, the DRD standards were triggered solely because the remodel changes more than 50% of the exterior appearance of the structure. Commissioner Shearer requested a further explanation of the lot coverage analysis. Mr. Fransted showed the site plan drawing and explained that the maximum allowed lot coverage is 35%, based on the building height, and that the Applicant was requesting 47%. This amounts to 388 square feet more than the maximum allowed, and that staff found this to be a relatively small amount. He stated that, with the narrow lot, the building footprint would need to be spread out to meet the setbacks and building plane requirements. Ms. Numanoglu added that the R-2 zone had a flat 35% maximum lot coverage, regardless of height, which was different than the sliding scale seen in other zones. Staff further described the narrow lot constrictions.