Loading...
Approved Minutes - 1992-11-02 !:r • ,, Il � r•4 L. . CE GC PLANNING D"EPT. FILES 11 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD INUTESi •• 1, (\ eixop. f .„ a M•. ' Ire' !I •• • • • • • • 1. k w! r• � C , CITY OF LAKE OSVVEO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW HOARD Minutes from the Meetirug of November 2, 19N12 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Stanaway called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. IL ROLL CALL. Board members present were Mr. Bloomer, Ms. Stivert, Mr, Foster,Chairman Stanaway, Mr. Sievert and:Ms. Remy. III. APPRO'VAI, OE MINUTES Ms. Stiven-`moved for approval of the August 31, 1992 minutes as written+ Ms, Remy seconded the 'lotion and it passed unanimously, IV. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS none V, PUBLIC BEARING PD :1 R 6-92(A-b.1,,a request by Land Develdpment Consultants for approval of a $ lot single family residential planned development and two variances, including a variance to LOC 44.390 "Length of Cul-de-sacs and DeadrEud Streets" and a variance " to LOOS 4.020(@)(a) "1:0evelopmei t within Wetlands". The site is located south of Childs road and north of Dogwood Drive between Sycamore Street and Canal Road(axe Lots 100& 101 of Tax Map 2 lB 19A1"2.4 and Tax Lots 400, 500, 600, 700, 800"and 900 of Tax Map 2 IE 2013C). Staff coordinator is i h m P'tanne . Continued from October 19, 1992 for Af pllcant's Rthuttol and Board Deliberation. 4 r r,. DRU Minutes of 1112/92 Page 1 of 6 f, („„ ARckul li d RX ,O'Brien, Land Development Coi sulii n:s, stated that they had been involved in this project almost a year and a half and had contacted literally every government agency involved with the project, met many times with staff, had some discussions with surrounding, property owners and neighborhood !groups, Mr. O'Brien; said that the substantial information that is missing from the opponents testimony is non-subjective or objective testimony from experts in the field, Mr. O'Brien said that a lot of the information from the opponents is superfluous, misleading and hear say. Mr. O'Brien said that determining`where a mitigation site should be located is a decision handled by the Corps of 'gineers and the Divisions of State Lands, Mr. O'Brien said that water quality was addressed in every single issue. They are providing 2,000' sanitary sewer lines to the neighborhood so they can get off of septic tanks. Mr. O'Brien said that over a hundred homes could be developed on this site. Mr. O'Brien said there would be an expansion of Bryant Woods Park and that they were protecting the wetlands corridor, In accordance with the NRC,Mr.O'Brien said that they were proposing a rural road section. Mr. O'Brien said that in reference to flooding, this site is very dry in comparison to the houses that currently exist and is well below the hundred year floodplain. This site will provide other emergency access for residence that live there. Sedogirk Land Development Consultants, stated .that the Code allows for development adjacent to wetlands. Mr. Sedourk said that their buffer was 10' beyond ilk what was required. In blocks adjacent to the wetlands, they're proposing an inground NNW infiltration system to treat storm water before it enters the wetlands, They're containing chemical applications in the CC&R's, chemicals, copper compounds and other wetland harmful chemicals in the subdivision to control moss on the roof and other things. In regards to the access to the site during flooding from Childs,Road, the bridge is above the 100 year flood plan, The emergency,access for the subdivision is for emergency vehicles getting into the subdivision if there is an accident or some type of blockage. The amount of fill in the flood plain is permitted and is minimized, Mr. Sedourk said that they " feel the t traffic concerns tied been adequately researched. Bill Cox, Attorne for the apnllcimt, stated that they are in agreement with the conditions of approval that are proposed by the staff with the exception of wording on „ Items 27 and 28. Mr. Chit said that they were in agreement with an archeologist remaining on hall during major ground disturbing phases of property dev4lopment, Mr, Cox said that they had no problems with the NRC recommendations, Mr. Cox said that they were opposed to a fence and would rather make natural vegetation buffers. Mvlike + '.Brien, Co-Chair NRC, said that they didn't want to get into a position of whether or not this project ought to be Approved, but felt it it was approved it should be designed to protect the wetland and so they make the list of recommendations DitB Minutes of 11/2/92 Page 2 of C tr Board Deliberation Ms. Remy stated that whether a project is right,,wrong or indifferent when there is an extreme public distaste to the project, the Board should make sure they consider it. The Board was in total agreement of the fencing issue along the Canal. There was some disagreement with the length of the;cul-de-sac. Ms, Remy stated that the lots that were under minimum lot size requirement did not meet the R-10 standards. She said that she felt there could be a viable project on the property without having to make the adjustments in the wetland and the negative impact on the wildlife. She was not in favor of the roof-drainage going into the wetlands. Ms, Remy was concerned about only protecting trees in one area. ' Mr. Sievert stated that two issues that were not going to be addressed by the Board were school capacity and purchasing of this property by the City. These 18SUOS were not in the Boards hands to deal with. Mr. Sievert stated that he also had concern wit the length of the cul-de-sac, He said that the impact on the wetland concerned him because of the number of lots and particularly the ones that are going to be undersized. Mr, Sievert was concerned about the impact of this project on the wetland and the wildlife corridor. q � Mr. Bloomer stated,that he felt the criteria had been met for the length of the cul-de-sac, Mr. Bloomer said that he had some concerns with the archaeological investigation and the bio-filtration in the non-essential wetlands. Mr. Foster said that he felt the criteria had been met for the length of the cul-de-sac, also. Mr. Sievert moved to deny Pi) 2-92/VAR 6-92(a-b). Ms. Remy seconded the motion, The motion failed with Ms. Remy and Mr. Sievert voting in favor. Mr. Foster, Mr. Bloomer and Chairman Stanaway voted against the motion, Subsequently,,Mr. Foster moved to approve PD 2-92/VAR 6•92(a•b). Mr. Bloomer seconded the motion. The motion passed with Mr. Foster, Mr Bloomer and Mr.;Stanaway voting in favor, and Mr. Sievert and Ms. Remy voting against the motion, DR 16-92,a request by Blockbuster Video for design review approval of a 5,000 sq. ft. video store. The site is locates on the south side of Lower Boones Ferry road across from the intersection of Quarry Road (Tax Lot 4300 of Tax Map 2 18 5BC). Staff coordinator is gliznbeth Jacob, Associate Planner,Continued from October 19, 1992. Vice»Chair Sievert asked if there were.,any ex parte contact or bias in regard to this DRB Minutes of 11/2/92 Page 3 of 6 Alai application. Ms. Remy reported that she had worked with Blockbuster Video on other locations but had not worked with them in regards to this application. Ms Jacob said that the applicant has submitted a traffic report, Staff recomrncnded that a right-turn out only be permitted; that signs be posted to direct traffic to the rear access road; and the driveway in the rear should be widened. Ms. Jacob 'stn,ted that staff recommended approval with the conditions setforth in the staff report. Mr.Falcons said that the curb of the island proposed will follow the curb of the sidewalk The purpose of the island is to restrict the movement of the vehicles coming in and out of the development. Mr, Falconi discussed the traffic in the area with the proposed development. The Board felt that limiting access to this project would cause citizens to travel through residential areas to reach the Video store with greater ease, Applicant Ryan O'Brien.Land Development Consultants,,submitted some photographs as exhibits into the record. Mr. O'Brien stated that they are definitely opposed to the restriction of the left-turn into the site and will not develop the site if this is a condition. Mr. O'Brien discussed that if the turn was restricted into this area it would cause other traffic confusion in the area. Mr. O'Brien said that this is the last development in this area and it seems unfair to change the traffic pattern at this time, Mr,O'Brien said that the additional traffic created from this, site will not be during typical peak .:.traffic congestion.`' Mr. O'Brien discussed the building materials to be used on this project. He said that consideration was given so that this building would blend with existing buildings, Mr, O'Brien stated that they had worked with staff to come up with this design, Robert Tech Teech &Asasleigtglii, said that he prepared the traffic study,;for this project, He said that they looked at restricting the left-turn into the site and felt that even if it were restricted they would be forcing traffic or directing traffic into the car wash driveway which has other turn conflicts already. Mr. Teech said that he recommends a right-turn in, left-turn in, and a right-turn only out, Proponents, DRI3 Minutes of l l/2/92 Page 4 of 6 �/ 0 d nl +(haalartCtp stated that he is favor of this project. He said that he will be iiding his bike when he comes to this project and would ask that there would be some undercover parking for those riding bicycles. He stated that there was a tremendous traffic problem in this area. Qpipopents, ni i A. i stated that they had not had any information ort this and therefore had.not been able to discuss it with people in their area. She said that the traffic in the area is a major concern and therefore she doesn't see the necessity of putting in another video store. Neither in favor of nor opposed to the project none Rebuttal Mr, O'Brien said that they are in favor of the bike racks and would do that. He said that this is the only site in Lake Oswego that suits the needs of the Blockbuster Video. Mr. O'Brien stated that this is the last site in the area to develop and the traffic problems go beyond this site and they feel :his is a good use for this site, 4. Deliberation The Board decided to allow a left-turn in to the project, however they had a restriction for left-turn out of the project. The Board felt it would cause other traffic problems in the area if they were to restrict the left-turn into the project. 11 Ms. Remy moved for approval of DR 16.92 with conditions stated. Mr. Bloomer seconded the motion acid it passed with Mr. Bloomer,`'Mr. Sievert and Ms. Remy voting in favor,`` Ms. Stiven voted in opposition. VI. GENERAL PLANNING f VIL OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Sievert moved to approve the Findings, Conclusions and Ostler on DR 9.92(Mod. 8- 92)-980-Touchstone Learning Center, Ms. Remy seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Mr. Sievert moved to approve the Findings, Conclusions and Order on DR 17-92/PD 3- 92-981- upancic/Gray Development. 11,1 DRB Minutes of 11/2/92 Page 5 of 1) 0 n Ms. Remy seconded the motion and it pisPArd unanimously. 0 VII. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10;00 p.m, Respectfully Submitted. Y , C" fit)ieteitt.,//1„,„ ' ' Sheri C. Eva1t1 ,,.,. ". Secretary 0 . sr. 't lid i di 1:)R13 Minutes of 11/2/92 l' ‘ w Page 6 of 6 1- ry f`! 7 ors n I1.1 J U p" C .. ) I 1, _