The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet - 1995-05-01 _.�,_.....w.�.�._.-.._.K AGENDA I. )111 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO . . '" DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION• ° '`-��'�"""' CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS,CITY HA. L,380'A' AVENUE , I Monday,May 1, 1995 t 7:00 P.M. , I. CALL TO ORDER . 1 Agenda Book f , II, ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 3, 199;1 ` April 17, 1995 IV, PUBLIC HEARING -` ", piugrep_ofEA - .a request by James D. Zupancic for approval of 21 units of special use hooesing for seniors. An 11 foot variance is also requested to reduce the northeasterly side yard setback from 21 feet to 10 feet. The site is located near Lakeview and Pilkington,Tax Lot 3100 of Tax Map 21E18AC. Staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob. Associate Planner. This item , was postponed from the April 17, 1995 agenda. ti4,, • •., .. • ''...' ,, • AP 95-OS [VAR 18-94 (a-b11%an appeal of the City Manager's decision to appr4've two , y ,« , , variances: a)A four-foot variance to the east side yard [LOC 48.06.215(1)(a)1; and b) a 2.7% cry. , variance to the lot coverage [LOC 4$.06.225(1)] in order to construct a single family residence. w', ,z The site is Tay:Lot 5700 of Tax Map 21E0$CC; on Lakeview Blvd.,between Bryant Rd.and • South Shore Blvd. Staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob,Associate Planner. ,' V. GENERAL PLANNING ," VI, OTHER BUSINESS -Findings,Conclusions and Order 1, ;y; f t a 4 - 0 ,, Carter Case,JIGS Arcbitec .s,Findings, Conclusions and Order. VII. ADJOURNMENT • i w• ' °' ," The Lake Oswego Development Review Commission welcomes your interest in these agenda items. Fee free ' , to come and go as you please, DRC Membe,,, r' Staff , Skip Stanaway, Chair Tom Coffee, Assistant City Manager � / ' ` Martha F. Stiven,Vice Chair Hacnid Pishvaie, Senior Planner ` tiixnbeth Jacob,Associate Planner o�' :'' � '�, William Horning . . .� `. 't . ' Lawrence M, Magura Michael R.Wheeler, Associate Planner 1110 Julie Morales Craig Walkenhorst, Assistant Planner Charles Oldham Cindy Phillips, Assistant City Attorney ''y' William R, Stone Maris Kennedy, Senior Secretary " "{ , ` . i r A ,, ' 4 r L , ty y % • y-'' •'. '7, el�,�.'tF xly, tii,4 ,, ; 1Pr • 1 Y { - /u .) :. s 5.3 • .1" '� '1" ut �,";t✓ Whir;'« .1 '1 . .. '`Y,, . r. a ,. x _ ' _.. ., i i4, '.i, OQ rx `E Qs/� a��r l L',`4 1 ' a c L'* . ," ;6t..., W,.; • "+.,. ''.; '', 0 \....t ...:-":71,--7—' :1 '.l'i ',. OREGO4 ; wl 1�`I ti E1 . 1,',.,1. ,,: DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DLVPLOPMPN'1' ,, ,1 , `• ..' DR 3..95/PD 2-9!5/VAR 3-95 Staff Report Addendum , i 1 TO: Development Review Commission FROM: Liz Jacob,Associate Planner • 1 SUBJECT: DR 3-95/PD 2-95/VAR 3-95; 21-Unit Special Use Housing , ' .4, q+ r II ! Y DATE: April 21, 1995 N , ..p... :. -. • 1, The applicant has submitted revised elevations for the three buildings for DR 3-95/PD 2- t 95/VAR 3-95 (Exhibit 21). These revisions include the addition of windows in the front r r. • elevations,the addition of windows and bays in side elevations and cantilevering some , , :C ¢;' ••;.- 0 second story rooms to break the flat planes. Staff recommends the use of architectural r" " grade tab roofing to give more shadow lines and depth to the roof. Staff finds that while these revisions enhance the livability of the individual units,soften . the massing of the buildings and help provide visual relief from the predominant image of • garage doors and roofs, the applicant should provide further revisions to give relief to the �1., s1 " �.. Staff finds the north elevation of Building"1"has the potential to be the 1 ; roof massing. 1 ,� i ;: ry_ ,r '' most interesting of all elevations and recommends that similar design be applied to other ,r elevations. April 13, 1995,in support of the { 1 Exhibit 22 is a letter received from Leonard Stark,dated p , 1' proposal. Additional Exhibits• " " f 21. Revised Elevations 22. Letter from Leonard Stark, dated April 13, 1995 ..• k t ••,... , •. , , 41j/0 ,,• ‘�;, . :. DR 3.95/PD 2.95/VAR 3.95 Addendum x ^ ' ' , . Page t of I ', „. . �riq A"Avg�1u� 1'ual()(ft��t4nx;36�) • I.skr()awr�;n,C�r�iF��n 97014 E; - • tia Mammy,I)irp.10i (lu' )r',;(fi U2'i0• Budding;I)ivtahm:On)614 01(111 • FAX (ti0):3)nit;0269 re . . . '+,... ........• .'•:..,,,„.. •:I', -•4,•'..,• t r r'ri••• •'• '; ,,•.:;•,,,"•;:•'.i,,'•:.1,,,, r '."•...'..' *.r, !•1 ''.. PASCO Watt MACS iII. Corr.IsNolie TN; "711.1"1"1C• trinLill."711,19171117-iL. , "4"fieigiiiiiiiiirailit..:.17,"11713..111:=7; C‘141 lit 'Ve•-l''.....' :', ", . 1...:1•1•471411.411.1Fk.Intis ..:rmriviiirri , 111•111.11.1, .1, •Imorr,-.,-,EtallutiMINI,1.1, tAl '' • ,'!„,1 lialiglinitilIVIISAl I MI 1:21 I I 1111111411111,, ,.'4111,1114,11111111111,11i Mil 11 I I liall il ,r,•r....'',r in=t• __Iiirirgigilitikii 17" ., • ,,': '•' t•'•., .,,,', .ATIimmoille ..10 ••••••••tuvugg ..,. ,..,.141,p•o#44:21,44741,‘...,.,-..lirl,••• ,:,..1,1,111.2.7644,venni mum =r,inaW.::_ „-tguipailirm ,....,-,N'Pr'_... ... :,,niiirouiriiiiiiiihmr, .,..... •• • Asi. .!.:,: ,...ir!diuseitig illjlisiiiiplia SSW , , •sisilitil. .' , ,INIIItilillt11111 ' ••'•.'less A,•,,1,----,VII,11111 •,,, . ,,, • , • , . , ,7-•-•-•,,, , ..___7_„„,,,,,___. nuRincliests •,.,- ••.Immo.• ',-,--.....---. ..-11 .. :.. . -1-.! i•• • I • .... ,•I , p......, _..,....„„,„ ., ..•„.„„„ =,1 „.„..... ,..,,,,,,....i.,.........p,.:,„ ,.. . ." ,.,...—.,..,„„,„„,,,,,,r, , ,...,..)... .,......„,..,— ,....,. . . . - ' . — . • ' 4 ilt•••;11111F,41,3,7,i,:,:. '•.,.,_, '.:,..,1 4,:„!:,.. ..Jr111111.11111811111111 fill " oi•Ins '", •p •‘Z.. 3 k A=Pre'DWI . . . 4171:11,1111471At.,11.-•. firlig ''r. ,,,•, ...', 1111117,141721111174 ...'.- NW, "..,1171;.,.,.''.'.. .- ... ... . _____.t....."..., list1=1.117==siliiiiii , ,• .' E,,,,,x. iss .1i:,:.•,......ix,reAnni 16,04.0 • ' -.I ,,,, '' •'•• ' '•-•-••••••• '•.•''''''''-' '..1•-•-'-•••••-'1,•.•"1-."''', ',t • •1 . ,• , L., • . . , kE.o. 111,11111,111.1 •-•'' - .•'- f ... ,, • ., Jo 114. I.,....1!!! !! . : '1, ..; ,.. .. !N .. . ..- .-,. , ! P II si.. .., .0 1 -,..... ,I I f....,.4•• , . , '...-1"...Milo. ••••• , _ .§§„:,., .. ..,._ ,.. ..!.§..... ,. ,...IN •••f". ," ...', III III SI , ,. .. • ' S. Anci*lee 14 SAAS:111 DOOR SOUTH ILIVAT ON d") •,:.;',,I,',Y.:4;..,'"„;,,i -4,, A "-LCarvirieeD yllst ELEvATIoNS BUILDIN "I" . ., ‘... :,... ... . .... „ ..„--..*'"''''-•-- --"..--„' i POCP4A.1 Ail NOISO tv.No, L . . .M4Liee,je ii3Ot 4,3 ',,...,.,.,..... ,,,,,,, ....... 421 .,,.., I- 4 i .,,,r:. - .•,,,,,,.1 'r'1:'.•:. ''..,,'• '•;• ........, E3 1,111sIS TI,S1 SI 110HO III ,tirk . i ...--"- _ I k IA WS* ...,•,:'.',.'..''s:',r,,',,''•:, ........... k." E , 1... •,, .. . 0f°'''' ''.. uti ,-.,,,,,,„,,...1 , l _ ..__. ,,,„..,----'-- -_, ..q.r.,,,,z., ..„..4.1!, oarrivr.,1.4,..".•':-----7---__ •:..., ..,,.....- _ ...._ 2 ,•,,, ,..-. . . . . ,. . ___„_ _ • ,,...,_:______,r :-.......-.7-_,------.__.:.1___- .----,..:.÷.._,....._ ,...ja.,,, C.) "'' '' . t....„,,,,,,..,,,,,..4. - - ..77-.....--.,.7--- -.• ------;.,..-,--,.-,,------ . . . . .. :- ,,..---- 0 1 ,.... . , ' , f• .'' 7.- / r . ..r". e..11=----'-----tr-T.-., --**--• or- , ., . • - . • ,.." 1,1,10 ,t.A :,-4-4 , , , , ,...,...... ; ,- r, . — i : 4 .. t,, •,1, '... •.. . ' a ;,11--- ''.:------ 1 rEe— ----IL ,..,..7--__:....-... .. - --—----is ma- ---- ----,,,,,----- --- .,... . . . . 17------7\„, • - : . . . _...... . . .,,... . -- ...1.4., Ai', 2 .1 1995 .... NAST if I-NV.6.1'10N (I)1 . • • . , ,.... . . • dr"-.. PitetO 00•11,CCP,*0,004.21 • ..I 11 oi r°, . . . . __, Lk, CIO '..:,,, ..:..,. 6 i.1 siiiiii----.. • rre -..... • 1 ) , >4 .' k - -- nr=1 i=ir-ii ....... ,,,..._.,....,..„.....a,. 1. MN l• '' .. ..'•'''' . ‘-••••Ii) X ' '..''.'. i , IE ....... , ,..........4.4„.„ .. . „ . .,, .. /... ,,, •• , .:N.,:li !. 'raw••••••••••• '''''.....''SW ..........,, '`''''' 'Soy ,..P1400.4 ARAM . , t, , ,•.' ki tAl'.- , k ___ _ ........ _ a wow... oorwor ........ ' A 0 .kul.00.1 • _ ...— , . .,, —,..—... —_,----------...e.22w— i • •• ,.. '. t , . . NORTH 111.110/AT ION . . • . . „ , , • i• , , , • . . , , \...i&IAN,: . .1•10•1•01/MMIINi .01••••••••••111•1111•11...11111111111•1.1•011111111•••••=1.•••• ',. . , . , '''''''.0.1" ' ..: '•" •., . . ' . ' , . • ' - • . •. • • • -• - .' >' • ' L.'1.' . . ',. . . ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' . - . , • • '4' ' - • ,, •• • ...• '",tlil'''':.."'••''''' .. -'' • L..''' L • ' • ''. ,' .'' ' .- •, ••,', '.•. \` ' . ...• i )' 1 .-••'' ' '', . I '.,,, .. - ' - I. ,.• ' 't , . ' ,' '" ' ' .. ..?,.•‘','"'''.14' '",!, '. - '' ' +,...t.',t'L.c•.'',,•;."'4,' .:',.',.... __o_...____________........__:_e ---"e '4 1'.',... ' '. •'. , . •. ' ' .37 ..',.,., „'. `,**',.,'4 PASCO II0•11 CLASS'AV COM 8.14,421.1111 i I to$ • ArifiiriFifiliiiiiiiiiitiiilifoli iiiiisr.,.....,...,.,e0,,,,..,•,..t.,...1,..•...”0,.....,,,.•,4.•.....•.‘,, • - liptitratiltinueetorien in mil Nisi ale Tote,loos Imo Notio,totteil iv" nmettimitomple lei in anew lotto eituntiniute tin.,ti.4111 Milli; silis coulee minor lel. 'mu flits Nits misivireirethout IL In liviiviiv sylviimAtitimitinnottlitimnill Loa rim Di tom, t• ' I lin StIII.ISIII, IISSill *Mt 'cools Wilt 01111 sok a ottismin I Ill aim imam molirimwelk".141.101,11.41,111,821111,11111eliiinititmil --. Iiiillif Ililtilli 111111111.1 Pill to Ilium ii 44 1 moat suo IIIIIIINIIII VIVIIIIIIIVIPIIIIIIIIIJIIIIVI PAL 1 itie..1,11.sorstritt upirsiplui Wilt 1141•IV VIZ%NV is.Vita iiiiiiii;,..,:ivInumin,...,1,,mudollkids,'!•11111,!:"""I'l'"'"I 11:11' rieutommigimieio ill11 II ,MS .--'''',..,...:Allgrn jlitIgi'MAIDIIIIIItig111111111:111VIII1111171111111,1111111101r1Z;j1173"111VITIIII04" gtiinj:Min .... •'' 1g111S111 III I Illbrdy"."-"...*--,.. '41.:111,:141.:Ijilitur 1,1111,17111414.Iny'r ' ,.10110 awe outie.../i 1-7••••••-•••-Nmeligti”to.• -az- --4.4... • . 0., _ 4 ,44 .,'- 1 . , 4., , 1, , ,,,, CO .. ,.,4 -rt.ezVialt, ;. .11".•iii:11171:111:1:01ill.'I ' 1 .-:.. ' -7.1.'' . ;;;.7.'11. 2:77121x3:1 - 19 ' :.:' -t:. '' ....1-14 '.1'..''.:W.ditellthlkilktin igilliiP.'::: r ., im - .------.----,r.- ---, .,......-.,... , , ,..iimoit Niplo i '..• 4,,,i,', ... rof.. ....!..,„ 51..-- ••• .., iti-1111,41110111111.1111 le iv, III III I ....':''31- . , .,.,,,i,r., I ',,':.''7', ',: ..•:''. Wk,MI=lk.'4':''1111 illiellilialliiIINIIIII111111111114411:11114$11114113;i111"0eAMF '44 tliiiiii..".r.: luilimudillit .... ..,... .. , , . .., ,,......, . ......, , „,.........,, 7.........,„..._,..._rmille,ortuirn solomps milT,...lem,FIN..„ „..1,1,iurwt, Ili, ..,,, ,„, ,;4......Atotoron!..•.,limp I ;palm . •‘r II.1111,,t,. ' ilso!liNm 4i foi.isii.',, .saw •. 4 i.A,Ll',.,!!ir' sriji .,,. , .• , I• •1 el m 0 s ii•NI la is•mit nt:11 . r., iill 0 111L , 111 el ell MI'3 L.,4 4,, 1.,bi,wi , .1 1.•.1•••up.=No so num I...m MO i 1; 6 IN or of, '.' so iii gii a' .„.,.. ..• 'Z',V,,,'4.:•, '"`;.',' ' ......,_ ........:—.. --; ' . r"-. t -,... --....., ki&MU ...,- , _ie.: 4-.4.73;,/:'': me St 1/0 OH cla14011 DOM ' '`1,114f, ''':.•'•1/40•'; ,. ..,:"'''1;1.. ..`i'.1.*t•:.:.:,'*11.'1: Wrie•T IlLitv.AT ION (f) LANVIN°WIT 2 III OtOOMTIO 4 Notwo 0 --. .,,- „.•'' , (.). "''•';.:_'. 1,,,,,. ,' ,4; .... ,:1.;,':41•-:;*:.*',...' 1 I ft 3 MAU/MI 10 , LOVe411110 VISO r./N•VII** 110,4011 tvart M tolnito ...,...,.LAP VOHS i Ol ni. 9, 'It: M.S.TO 110A11011 • 0 , ,. .. .,,.•, ,.., .., :„„„„...,..-.41orp)tsintrniginnomm .' '4. ,,•'-,t ' '. ''''': •-••• "VgaiiiitigiiViligliii B in _ ..' -. • .. .?...,,,,w.,.,...,,, ..... , .. ... _. ---..„,...,,,v, . • 4. ..:.,..-, ...,, /: „....p",..„ ....,- -„,....... . . .. I LAP VOWS mi lona •'.1 41.,•,,... ,,,.. .,„.___ -"Mif,,,lommulmr I GOUTH DILGNATION LO , 4 . .47,7,...,.-..„. ---... ,..,..,, . .... ... • .;,,1•,,,I ...k. . tlime=0..4.; I , 'i • 1,,,,*'r 4 ===•, , •,eimmimm •r.-..----'•te • •--._-_-- . . , •••• '', '..:L i ' .•..: ,-4=.,'-'-%...I'• ':. t. - 4-,•'',,m," ..l. 4 I. , MIZVATIONS BUILIDINO "2" ---- - . . . NORTH RUINATION ... e..„, 1. r. , nAeco whit e.041*iimal.as ... , -" t liga 2;1 , .. . , t I . t APR 2 1 1995 (11TY Oi. L.. . pt.G!P: • 0 .6 •.• ,,. ' 1 ; • :.11". •° - : ., t` .....,....• • , - ,t• ...... .1.4 -......1 t• — . . , ... •••••••••• ......... ,. . . k:oom I = [ 1 1-.••••••---,la( 1144OS ,. . ., ........ .100rti ri....... ....... aL _ ...... . . , El.j''' E E D L "1"7"7"7"119"171..........H I_ r i'SPO•1114.4C1 ....; L•,,i Df ...._ ..... ' 11111. ,. .• .. . , , . ItAtIT itLIEVATIONI . • •• •A 11 ,. , • . . ' •'• ' .. •.' • ; • ? ,'. ' • • ,*0,IU ....1,..,,.it..„,,, . .. n.. '',,' ,i'Vti%k;:i.;,,•.:...i..,Alf. • '` V' L• • .. . .• ' .I.. ', . • •' ..'• '' .• '. ..' •. . '.i.'•• ' 4 • ' . . . . • • • . • 1 M . + $ 1 ' - ,'.1,:. • ,'.''...•."' '• ifith, 4;°.•.' ,'..:', ,.. 111117 Me=140.311 CLAIN 4.. C.Orie.SkiNaL1111 •iliairlitiWilraillitillititiliriTi 14.0 NiB .inetimpotwimeronespitytsjortrimu!ow_jtron__:nr_._11.1._n_ I .117".11111117.1171;re iirt ir."'litili villielliiiiiiiillifikrilkirillikikikalkiii pi ilsmilipicillivieltilkilliri!n11111,1111111 114111,11'1111.111,11111V1 lylitikrillik•Tinilirilari 1111111'1•111141111111411.41111111111111rktrilusirine mit vim einnsrmilatmAAIIIIIIIILItc_ptelpfillIiik_111 komilleasilli kite IN litinyinilikvai iimme,•ilirilitirlIkit Ikeri,olittli4iisitirlillirrIgtilim7..pustelitr..1.11.:Air,,117 11rj,,A1 .. ....*. I Mt fi. Ikiirfliti.1412". illA'araliv11140:willialu'azgivtuticultvgiiiiillinuv, aggitaTil • Mt- _. ,_i lc irrrilliiii , . pin.1 mil iggim, I" If 441,4:.11'.-1,12"41.rfri,triiiilduarly,_rva:vagintisviziriztuvid,.,...,1„,,...r .,.....,,,..,. .,...,7v:. ,Al. ...,„11.111;‘,4"1..... ..----- 141141117.1,r,gitlazimi....ztrw,ii .1.!1• 21.___Ii«mi4,...., ,. ...._, .11,7, ..ii ,• Ig=4 4,Boll-1.11111111 rilMtellilliglitilit1111111111.,".1 ,,,,', 11'... ..1.4; ,-;'' n,n,.1E1 ,„=-_..1•;...... II...„',''M.'4'..' Wi,14Fannriggriglifliki'aFillitim- . P'. ,r ,„ ;,..,-. ..., ..pro. -i4.0,..ii 14 •-• t*A CVMM"" r.,1 n''.'111/11 'iti A iffilakill..._'I__Al2__4, mow 11114 ,-..' '* ' nu!' ' 1.1111111mine ii.krinl /''°11122 Allalrulliuirgi'• 71: .-1'' g671arnir,j.-aturivirzw 1 of 11,111011011iiii lillikelelkoliski•..--.,;','(-''•.'''''...,.,,.'.,,•-'.. 6 r,.....'' • ..r. ' ' 4',‘i.i.'1n-;'t''H''i Ni.''ii're'..,t ii!ik!!i'Itt•rr..r4•Illfr i:m 1."ni.:1li -- n";•1s-!'.,"• ..........!- .1k ' . Hf- I$11•- tai ; 1l0oin . N aS Ia 7C?.;,I''-,•'.;,,''.: :*.•/;+.*.:;',14„4*, . W MST ILIEVAT I ON (1) .. . . .,... . LOWinitO VIN't III Pt0CMOCI.4.11HOTTO -...._ _.„.....„... a t3 ,,_... Ill 2_,,, - -, ___ __ _ ____ .......__ --- .., IFLAKY lisirl -.--- - ili -4. LaNik1117 MIT1 14•VIFINII VOR10 trot,All 1.101110 . it -laG--$04-1 *-- :: .....„.... - . -— - 0 mi ...„ ---- .4'. "") 4,• •,1________ LAP*OM 44.140t110: 2 ...• ,. . ,..:. : 3)1 6 114111,111 PO. ., SOUTH ZLIKVAT I OtN1 IC) - --,...,.. f .. 4 .•••. a r. ' Elli- . .. .. E I on , 4.0- I \........ } , , , • 4 ..- ------ __—. . ELEVATICNS BUILDINO "3" NI ORT I-I 111,f1YAT I ONI i1,&eG0141.}4 Cali 41,131.11111 .111 4".241 ':. *. i..• ' .... 1.• l't ,.:.‘ t''‘ t o''' i II le r , i o 0 t i,. 4,... . .. ... , .. : rt C C Lo /I k, 1995 . .,..) 0111111•11111111.1V INICONIIINNSIMIL ......., ........... IL ••••••••• ......... ' .....' • ......... ........ 1". .. .11 — L.,..,., i . . ....._ ..._.._ _ _............_21--._1 k A t11140141 •WeEr E i,........, .cx. , , _..... E ...... E ...... ....... ........ 41,1•110... ........ .. .. . • sAel. It LIEVAT I t1•1 ouq,t i ________ . . . . , ..,. ., - • '. . i k . ,Vir`...1,,,:.,'t.il.'r: ,,',,,r% , ,. ' . ., -' ' ' ' . ' n .' * '' • 1.. ' la Y ,. `I Ir. '• F/ 5` • t•f i • .I t A• .1 : I, •. 1 \. :fir ° /_ N t-$r&s/7A � p � l / 9 ' , f � ._' r .. .LA /< VJ /'.. `.� , ( Ii`- c. Cd i 1 *( J •it,L L _ / . • 7'1'i..aW..774.,c a._g... 4 ,S -7.CF C 1-*' rfr C <W// r/Jra • r r a e. . .. . .r / f=' o.,s is , �, C t -7 \J ,/, �, °, dr • q F. • 1.0 /; d /7 / c (./•••7 .7" er.-... -7 y _ .. 4- Gt l= L ! ZI s1 /'./7 /•J .1 .t C' G .. o ;; _aS V 7 /r / V_Ae '',''' '' 0 i .• .. N/-/ , rk11 ✓ c 71 C- 1 •7 ‘.J C c. tI / ctL :.y.p.. ._.. r /r v / a i :: r. . . q � ( �JI 7. p /r r 1-. .a el--* / 71 Cr <- -J � ,•. /— U /'' / -'/ 0/-NJ 6 • ••.1 J /_�% Ni C �J �J cy' C 7 ./ o /mil i'" 7)/ J A /./ r ,c-: s , ... (11-''./ /< t— A `) /e r •✓" / • I / .../ •/- �✓ :,- --//�// C /2 Cl k, 1 (zilsj ,x Zv _ . .*ft 134h R!Y �; •r4 .Y '11t I d ,• I 1r 5 ,. - .a vl ' a t` • • • • i ( '' ' . .i .. , , . i f :,-,',,r "*` ' .1 C. 4.� ~� 4 7' '_ �,-I'?'/ c, °r l.t �.. k. i K„fY4 1 G y, 77I ) • 1 , 1 1� --- -•..__ , r. . , l / '—a ,< ,/ Q 2 /r C. P L.. 1z I ./J . ;//."/ j A ,M 11 1 - ,, : . -''•:**• , G /-) e 7-1 CS c. n I fZ lc .,! Al C it c, 15 A • a /7 /-a- `, C S y C' )� 7 _ V A G 1 L 1 / .1.t,1 ,.. .C''d . )7...I � Y 4 cs, /1 /mil G "7 Ai• R L /cry AG , •a • NF n 2 /i) J 7 /3 s..s i s r 1 c , Cr/V 3!` /1/,-) 6 ‹.: ••..) .e._e_l_z...„,_,_,,,-., . .5'Cl .-a-"c•, c" /1 /G 11a - e ji 1".7 / L,.. / ( / — f! ,5 t- — / e. ,, C a 11. t 0 1 4 • 0 '4`' // ,ti, C x / el ,.•j , - c" • ... [ f r r °I _ -,n.1�dl' ' r•.- , �''•11.• l k'A'. -'''" ntl{r�:" Y '*le �. rp, r A. r•1 n' #�q) i 1- •t r '' d ' 1 it r e-•.q V%t kA f v ' i li, w STAFF AFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ,,.., ,,.., .. ..- .:-...,,t.... . ., PLANNING DIVISION �.. ,' y , r a f ,A .,:t a , APPLICANT: M: >r i James D. Zupancic DR 3-95/PD 2-95/VAR 3-95 ' 1 1 r � ` ,; PROPERTY OWNER: STAFF: �1, ,1 ) James D. Zupancic Elizabeth Jacob - LEGAL O RIPTION: DATE OF REPORT: `"' Tax Lot 3100 April 7, 1995 , , Tax Map 21E 18AC k+-•6 t NEIGHBORHOOl A f ,55001ATI�: LOCATION: " r Rosewood f,, on Lakewood Boulevard near j;,c Pilkington Road intersection ZONING I)ESIGNATIQN: ' COMP.PLA ►ECEL : R-3 k R-3 'I. APPLICANTS REOUEST ' ,. The applicant is requesting approval to construct 21 units of one and two-story apartments of special use housing for seniors. An 11-foot variance is requested to reduce the northeasterly side yard setback from 21 feet to 10 feet. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS ' A. City of Lake Qsv o Comprehensive Plan: 0 Citizen Irvolvement Policies Land Use Planning Policies Housing Policies Transportation Policies ii B. ,Cily..oflake_QsAggci Zoning Ordinl : LOC 48,02,015 Definitions °. LOC 48.04,120-48,04.155 R-3 Zone Descriptions DR 3.95/PD 2.95/VAR 3.95 Page 1 of'14 r . ti . , r , , LOC 48.,18.470-48.18.490 `Planned Development Overlay �.1 „ LOC 48.20.530(2) Vision Clearance ` LOC 48.20.535(4) Special Street Setback r ,,,,iii,.,,ii\i,,,,,,;,,,., ' LOC 48.20.549 Specific Standards for Special Use Housing 0 v LOC 48.24 Variances CY City of Lake Owego Develop_t Code: LOC 49.16.015 Definitions P LOC 49.16.020-49.16.030 Application of Code, Planning Director Authority,Fees �' ' '<1 , LOC 49.16.035 Development Permit Required ; LOC 49.16.040 Development Permits Restricted LOC 49.20.115 Major Development LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proof LOC 49.22.205 Development Standards c �R LOC 49.22.220 Review Criteria for Major Developments r t LOC 49.22.225 Conditions of Approval LOC 49.30.500-49.30.510 Application Requirements .'' LOC 49.36.700 - 49.36,720 Application Procedures , •4 LOC 49.44.900 - 49.44.920 Review by Hearing Body/Notice of Public Hearing • LOC 49.46.1000 - 49.46.1035 Hearings Before Hearings Body , 7+, D. City of Lake Oswegp Development Standard: 4'. 2.005 - 2.040 Building Design 5.005 - 5.020 Street Lights ti » , •.: 6.005 - 6.040 Transit System - z P 7.005 -7.040 Parking &Loading Standard 8.005 - 8.040 Park and Open Space, , t"1 �A 9.005 -9,040 Landscaping, Screening and Buffering , 11.005 - 11.040 Drainage Standard for Major Development 14.005 - 14.040 Utilities I .n 15.005 - 15.045 Erosion Control «" 18.005 - 18.040 Access • 19.005 - 19.040 Site Circulation - Driveways and Private Streets 20.005 - 20.040 Site Circulation - Bikeways and Walkways ' .x B. Cit„y_ol k s ego Cod hapter 45. Buildings: LOC 45.15, "Fences" . r F. City of Lake Oswego Sign Code: LOC Chapter 47 7 • G. City of Lake Oswego Tree Ordinance: • ‘ .:•: .„ .. ,, ., ... . LOC Chapter 55 `a DR 3.95/PD 2.95/VAR 3.95 Page 2 of 14 . .,+: � � 1 ` r` � • µt F. " " hr r YY •1 c • • Jr; :•'' ,,t''''- H. Oregon Adcnini gye T nsportation Plann�,g„Rule 6 40-12-000- 660-�,; Q 'e Dr. FINDINGS < A. BilckgroundlExisting Conditions: b 1. The site is approximately 37,189 square feet in area, after right-of-way dedication. The property is flat. Existing vegetation consists of a cluster of three hawthorn trees and apple trees along the south property lines,Exhibit 17. ')..,',,•, l'•,,,,,f. .‘ 2. The property has 218 feet of frontage on Lakeview Boulevard,a neighborhood collector. 1. 3. Water and sanitary sewer facilities are available to serve the site. Storm drainage y` will be provided by a dry well on site. �, , `:•a • . \ 4. The surrounding land uses are as follows: Ii ..t,,1 x, North: Single Family Residential (R-5 Zone) ' Northeast: Vacant and developed Single-Family Residential (R-5 Zone) ', 'ii', a East: Multi-Family Residential (R-3 Zone) ; South/Southeast: Multi-Family Residential (R-3) and single family '‘,j r' t residential (in Clackamas County) ', ', West/Southwest: Commercial (NC Zone) ' : 0 . '', r. 5. The applicant submitted a soils report to document that the soils on the site could ', support the proposed development(Exhibit 14).tit `yk. ' },.3' 6. In 1991, the Development Review Commission approved, with conditions, a 20- a ,' , unit special use (elderly housing) project on the subject property (DR 11-91, f ' Exhibit 3). Development did not proceed on the approved project. Fronosal ;_; The proposal is to construct 21 units of one and two bedroom apartments for seniors. The ,1 project is composed of three one and two story buildings. There will be 11 one bedroom/one bathroom units and 10 two bedroom/one bathroom units. Each unit has an "' attached garage. One additional tandem parking space is provided in front of 14 units, for a total of 35 parking spaces (Exhibits 4, 5 and 6). ,r An 11-foot variance is also requested to reduce the northeasterly side yard setback to ten ,' feet(Exhibit 5). ` ' t.�,. , . C. Compliance with Criteria for Approval: Yy 1 As per LOC 49,22,200, the applicant for a development permit shall bear the burden of proof that the application complies with all applicable review criteria or can be made to I. comply with applicable criteria by imposition of conditions of approval. The applicant has submitted the information required by LOC 49.30.500- 49.30.510 and LOC DR 3-95/PD 2-95/'VAR 3.95 , Page 3 of 14 1 1.1 III' , ,,..,*. A,.:••• , • , r a ti f : 49.36.700-49.36.710. These documents are listed as exhibits which accompany this ,L , ./1 - report. 4 , NOTE: After initial staff review, the site plan and grading plans were revised to comp , , with certain development standards. Whereas, the plans and computations were revised to meet these standards, the narrative(Exhibit 4)does not reflect these changes. 1 • •, , oi The Commission should note that in addition to the City's regulations and standards, theP proposed development should also comply with the state Transportation Planning Rule, Y \ `•., (TPR) requirements. Compliance with these requirements will be met by providing a • sidewalk along the property frontage,providing a paved connection between the . ' 1 sidewalk and the paved section of the adjacent shopping center,providing bicycle racks ®-', ;, as indicated on Exhibit 6, and orienting the buildings as close to the street as possible. . I n "42 20 J a'or DeveloPment ' Although the construction of an apartment complex is defined as minor development [LOC 49.20.110(2)(c)], the units are being developed as special use housing which must , y , ^d be processed according to the requirements of the PD (planned development) Overlay . i District [LOC 48.20.549(10(k)]. Planned Developments are defined as major development [LOC 49.20.115(2)(f)]. Class II variances are also defined as major 1 `,'.•• development [LOC 49,20.115(2)(a The applicant has submitted a complete application as illustrated in the exhibit section of this report. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting with the Rosewood Action z Group Neighborhood Association and the owners/residents of property within 300 feet r r. the site. The minutes of the meeting are included in this report as Exhibit 7. According ' ' , to the minutes, the proposal is widely suppo.•ed by the members of the neighborhood association. • . 's v As per LOC 49.22.220, for any major development application to be approved, it shall , A first be established that the proposal complies with: •y } 1. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan; City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan a,.. Citizen Involvement Policies . r These policies provide for citizen participation in all phases of the planning 1 , ' process. These policies are being met by this development proposal through the • notice,posting, neighborhood meeting and the public hearing process Land Use Planning Policies p I ,:I ` These policies require protection of natural resources from develo ment, \ ; . - comprehensive review of development proposals, and payment of an equitable 0 ., . share of the costs of public facilities. The policies require assurance that 1 s°;:;. 1 distinctive areas will be preserved, soil will be protected from erosion, trees will -° be protected from removal, streams will be preserved and density will be limited DR 3-95/PD 2-95/VAR 3.95 . Page 4 of 14 k.'''''— to achieve these results. These policies are implemented through several development standards and the tree cutting ordinance, addressed further below. aC Compliance with the applicable standards will assure conformance to the Plan �K _' policies. Conditions of approval will be imposed when necessary to assure 0 0. ' + compliance. `', _r, Housing Policies These policies assure that residential densities are appropriately related to site `' conditions and require mitigation of adverse impacts such as noise, traffic and visual aesthetics. These policies allow special use housing for elderly and provide for low to moderate cost housing opportunities. 'The proposed development satisfies these policies by compliance with the Zoning Code, special • use housing requirements and applicable development standards, addressed below. • ; t, Transportation , These policies require assurance that traffic generation does not exceed the design } capacity and function of the planned transportation system. A traffic analysis has , been submit d by the applicant to document compliance with these policies ' (Exhibit 13), This analysis will be discussed in more detail under the Access .` Standard addressed below, r 2. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; ,0 7 1 a. R-3 (Residential) Description [LOC 48.04,120 . 48,04.1551 , The site is zoned R-3. The proposed special use housing is a permitted use in the y` e`'"' zone. LOC 48,20.549(2)describes the method for determining the actual density •' da ,d on this site. The proposed 21 units is less than the maximum 25 units permitted �''�'. for this site. LOC 48.04.135 requires a minimum lot area of 3,375 square feet per unit; however, for projects reviewed as planned developments, there is no required minimum lot area. The maximum lot coverage permitted for building and required parking on the , site is 50 percent. Exhibits 4 and 6 illustrate the proposed 27 percent lot coverage 41 (which includes the required parking) is within this requirement, LOC 48.04,155 prescribes an average height limitation of 40 feet for the R-3 zone. The proposed maximum building height of 21 feet satisfies this standard, Exhibit 10, ` b • . Specific Standards for e i i Use Housing- ELOC 48.20,5491 • ' 0 The applicant's narrative (Exhibit 4) adequately addresses all provisions of this standard, except LOC 48.20.549(1) which requires that service, such as shopping and other commercial needs be available to the project via a paved walkway, The , DR 3.95/PD 2-95/VAR 3-95 , + ' i Page 5of 14 4. w . ` y 1 , p' • rl, + I fay site survey(Exhibit 17 ) shows an unpaved area between the site and the paved parking area of the shopping center to the west. This gap is approximately 55 feet long and should be graded and paved in order to satisfy this standard. This • improvement will be discussed in further detail under the'Transit Standard. `.;;, c. Planned Development Overlay fLOC 4$.18.470 - 48,18,4901 LOC 48.18.470- 48.18.490 requires that all residential development containing 20 or more units on four or more acres be reviewed as a planned development. • , : ;": The project is being reviewed as a planned development since it consists of 21 ' ate units. d. alas Variance to Setback Requirement of L C 48 04 150(51 T`1 ' r LOC 48.04.150(5) requires that when a new development occurs in the R-3 zone '� '• -; which abuts an existing less intensive residential use, a setback shall be established on the lot zoned R-3 of a depth of at least the height of the g t e principal Y building on the lot zoned R-3. The applicant has submitted a statement from the a+, ;,. , owners of the abutting property to the east(Tax Lot 3000,Exhibit 1) that the ' "' '{ single family residence located on the property is not being used as a single 1'',r :; family residence but is being turned into a group care facility (Exhibit 19). A group care facility is considered to be a more intensive use than a single family • : residence; therefore, a 10-foot setback would meet the side yard requirements. l ' Although the applicant has the assurance of the present property owners that a • .�. w.x group care facility will occupy the dwelling, there is no assurance that the group care usage will be a continuous usage. To protect the conforming status of the , `„, h� ; • development, the applicant has requested the approval of an 11 foot variance 1 from 21 feet (the height of the principal building) to 10 feet. • V. Per LOC 48.24,655(2)(c), variances of more than two feet from setback requirements in a side yard for structures other than single family shall be processed as Class II variances to the Zoning Code and processed as major . development, The subject variance application is appropriately being processed as a Class II variance [LOC 48,24,650]. • `• 4 • I Variance Criteria and Analysis FLOC 48.24.650 - 48.24,6851 ,i•. •, . As prescribed by LOC 48.24.650, the granting authority may grant a variance • from the requirements of Chapter 48 if it is established that; a. The request is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship; and The applicant's narrative in support of the variance (Exhibit 5)describes • K� .4 the required setback based upon the principal building height to be 18 feet, Staff finds that the setback should be 21 feet, thus requiring an 11 foot variance, , The narrative explains that if the variance is not granted, the 21 foot setback would require the elimination of the tandem parking spaces in front of Building 1, The applicant indicates the elimination of these DR 3-95/PD 2•95NAR 3.95 • Page 6 of 14 e • 0 1' parking spaces would create significant hazardous conditions, because r guest and delivery vehicles would have to park on Lakeview Boulevard. k Parking along the street could impede traffic flow on Lakeview Boulevard j " as well as block the vision of cars and pedestrians exiting the apartment ,��• complex. Also parking on the street could compromise the security of . residents and visitors. b. Development consistent with the request will not be injurious to the neighborhood in which the property is located or to property established to be affected by the request; and, The applicant indicates the elimination of the tandem spaces would create • more neighborhood concerns regarding traffic flow and safety than any '‘k, • s potential negative impact from a 10 foot setback. The existing residence is located in a multi-family zone and is surrounded by one and two-story 1 apartments and commercial uses. It is not ideally situated for continual single family use in the future in such a mixed use neighborhood. To mitigate any potential negative impact, the adjacent property will be buffered by a sight-obscuring fence and landscaping(Exhibit 8). c. The request is the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable 1'.";, , use of the property; and, •The only way to reduce the degree of the variance is to reduce the ' building height. The 21-foot building height is about the minimum height ® required to construct a two-story structure. A one-or-two foot reduction in the degree of the variance would not significantly change the impact of tx `.�' ','..4: reduced setback. az.' rSit1. fir j `,. ji d. The request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. ,,' j ;P11,",' , , 14 As discussed under C.1. (page 4, above), the proposed development will comply with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies through the implementation of applicable development standards, Zone Code requirements, and the tree cutting ordinance, . • 3. The Development Standards applicable to major developments; • There are no streams, wetlands, flood plains or hillsides on the subject property; therefore, these standards are not applicable. The applicant has provided evidence to demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards. This report addresses those standards which require additional discussion or where modifications to the applicant's proposals are recommended, . Building Design - (2.005 - 2.040) 1 41) . The narrative, Exhibit 4, pages 16-20, and elevations and floor plans, Exhibits 9 through 12 and 19 describe the proposed building design and site amenities such ' • DR 3-95/PD 2.95NAR 3-95 Page 7 of 14 1.• y�'1. as lighting,fencing and garbage enclosure. Cut sheets should be submitted for lighting design and photometric data for the review and approval of staff. • ,,034., Exhibit 10 illustrates the major components of the front elevations are garage 3�, ,da ,,..,, doors and roofs. Whereas the plane of the elevations vary, there is minimal visa r,L.e. 1 relief to roofing materials and garage doors. The primary window areas and balconies are at the rear of the apartments overlooking adjacent properties. The 't floor plans (Exhibit 9) show minimal glazing for light penetration into the apartments. Natural light is important to the well-being of the elderly. Staff •• 1 , recommends that the applicant revise the building elevations. At the minimum, the roofing masses should be broken up by providing exterior walls with windows. Windows should also be added in side elevat• ions.utrons. Kitchen areas arc r• greatly enhanced by providing windows. I The facade treatment and design of the Oswego Bay Apartment complex " immediately to the southeast, while similar in style, provide much more visual :ii,.• interest because there are no large roof expanses and there is more use of window treatments, Staff recognizes that the market is different between the two E complexes; however, staff believes there are design solutions for breaking up the k' massing of the roofs and garage doors. Staff also believes that providing more interior light in the units will enhance the livability of the elderly market. ' na Staff finds that the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with this standard 1'f • and recommends that the applicant provide alternative design solutions for staff ' review and DRC approval. If alternative solutions are not available for staff review and DRC approval, staff recommends a continuance of the hearing until the applicant can provide them. Street Lights - (5.005 - 5.020) Lakeview Boulevard does not currently have street lights. One street light which r meets city standards shall be required to be installed on the utilitypole on • the opposite side of Lakeview Boulevard. Transit System- (6.005 - 6.040) . Tri-Met Route 36 currently serves Jean Road. Bus stops exist at Jean and Pilkington Roads, at Deemar and Jean Road and at Tamara and Jean Road. Exhibit 6 illustrates a five-foot property line sidewalk extending from the driveway west to the property line. Staff recommends that the five-foot sidewalk be extended from the driveway to the easterly property line. • • In order to make a usable connection to the transit stops and local shopson ,_ Pilkington and Jean Roads, staff recommends the applicant provide the necessary grading and pavement to connect the sidewalk with the paved portion of the Rosewood shopping center, Exhibit 17 indicates there is about 55 feet of unpaved area adjacent to the subject property. The shoulder of Lakeview Boulevard tends to become very muddy in rainy weather which creates 40 unpleasant and unsafe walking conditions, particularly for the elderly. DR 3.95/PD 2.95/VAR 1.95 Page 8 or 14 . y, v s ft a �{ t • The applicant should try to obtain an easement from the property owner actbss . this unpaved section of the Rosewood shopping center in order to align a paved a,, walkway with the proposed concrete sidewalk. If an easement cannot be " .ti,,, ,!1* 0 obtained, a five-foot wide pathway should be paved adjacent to the edge of the 1;� • existing street pavement, This paved pathway should be marked with a white • ,„•''" ' '- strip to delineate the pathway from the street and it should be connected to the proposed concrete sidewalk. The proposed and recommended sidewalk connections will satisfy the I f requirements of LOC 48.20.549 to provide access to public transportation, {Iy. shopping and other commercial needs, and medical and dental care for residents of special use housing. These improvements will also satisfy the state Transportation Planning Rule requirement to provide pedestrian access from new * planned developments to shopping centers, transit stops and neighborhood activity centers. f P Parking & Loading Standard - (7.005 - 7.040) LOC 48.20.549(30(b) requires one parking space per unit for special use housing projects. Each unit will have one parking space in its attached garage. Fourteen additional tandem parking spaces are being proposed, Exhibits 4 and 6 illustrate • that the proposed site plan exceeds the parking requirement. Park and Open Space - (8.005 - 8.040) The open space requirement for special use housing is regulated by LOC ,, 48,20.549(2)(d). This standard requires that 30 percent of the site be landscaped or set aside as open space, The proposed 44 percent open space/landscaping ,} . :' • illustrated by Exhibits 4 and 8 satisfies this requirement. bi hi; iC_tf 7 The applicant has requested that the open space acquisition and development fees be waived because of the extent of developed open space provided within the i rr '' .r project. Staff does not find that the landscaping provided by the applicant meets 1 the definition of"Open Space,"as defined by LODS 8.015(1). ["Land to remain 1 t ry•.Ste• , a 1,, in natural condition for the purpose of providing a scenic, aesthetic appearance; protecting natural processes; providing passive recreational uses or maintaining natural vegetation."] Meeting or exceeding the open space requirement of the Development Standard does not exempt a development from assessment of the • Parks and Recreation System Development Charges which are applied to park acquisition and development. Landscaping, Screening and Buffering- (9.005 - 9.040) `' ' The applicant has satisfied this standard by showing compliance with the Open Space Standard, above. The landscape plan (Exhibit 7) illustrates numerous trees and shrubs will be planted along the perimeter of the site, This landscaping along with afive-to-six foot high obscuring fence (Exhibit 11) will provide screening and buffering from • f ; DR 3.95/PD,t-95/VAR 3-•95 • It i Page 9 of 14 0 rP J 1 Y . • ter R ,r ,ar ,1,1';t r 7,' ,' adjacent properties. LOC 45.15.020(1) prescribes that fences within ten feet of a . ll property line abutting a street shall be no more than four feet high. • .1 The landscape plan illustrates that six london plane trees are proposed along Lakeview Boulevard. Pin oaks are also proposed for small planting islands. These two species are not appropriate for planting in small areas and close to i`` a ' pavement as their root systems tend to upheave the pavement over a period of time. Staff recommends that the london plane trees be replaced with a specie ', recnmmended on the City's Draft Street Tree list. Also, the pin oak trees should ''' be replaced with a specie more adaptable to small areas. A revised landscape 1 plan and irrigation plan should be submitted for staff review and approval prior to ,4•n. .•,t. the issuance of a building permit. Drainage Standard for Major Development- (11.005 - 11.040) Access& Easements. Exhibits 8 and 17 illustrate an extruded curb and gravel t 1 area in the right-of-way adjacent to the storm detention facility. This gravel area is intended to provide for vehicular maintenance access to the outlet or control • ,. structures of the detention and water quality facilities, Staff finds that this gravel area is not necessary for access to the storm detention facility. There is no need for public drainage easements from this development, r,, Storm Water Runoff Quality. The proposed development provides trapped + catch basins and an extended dry detention facility to satisfy City water quality K qr requirements. �;„ 0 ' .:,:`„:'.1. The drainage report (Exhibit 15) provides information on impervious area calculations, sizing calculations, design criteria, phosphorous removal calculations, and an engineer's certification statement that "the water quality • ' d 4Gi•i' facilities for this development meet the design requirements to remove 65% `'">'�{ ,'$), phosphorous from the runoff from 100% of the newly constructed impervious surfaces", The drainage report also includes a water quality facility maintenance plan for the • development. Exhibits 15 and 16 provide adequate information to verify the size - . of the water quality facility and the space provided for the facility, Exhibit 16 '• • shows a drainage system for each building and parking area. ., The application includes a percolation test for the proposed percolation well • . which meets the 10-year storm runoff requirements (Exhibit 18), Exhibit 16 shows the location of the percolation well. ,Storm Water Detention. The drainage report includes accurate storm water n • detention volume calculations using the City's worksheet, Exhibit 16 provides adequate information to verify the size of detention facility and the space 1, provided for the facility, •i' , 4) ' \ . , DR 3-95/PD 2-95/VAR 3-95 ' Page 10of 14 , • i r r \ I r•:1 :b Utilities - (14.005 - 14.040) All required utilities,except storm sewer, are available in Lakeview Boulevard to • �,';'• serve the site. All overhead utilities, including power, telephone and cable , . , television lines, will be required to be placed underground, in accordance with LODS 14,020(10(g) and (i). Exhibit 17 illustrates proposed utility lines, 1 ' The Fire Marshal has reviewed the project and found that two fire hydrants are a required• in order toprovide adequate fire flow. Exhibitthe q 17 illustrates location ` of the two hydrants. Minor alterations were made to the parking and landscaped areas in the southwest corner to improve the maneuverability of emergency vehicles. " ,, Lakeview Boulevard has a special street setback of p 25 feet from the center line of • ' the existing right-of-way as designated in LOC 48.20.535(4). The applicant shall ,. be required to dedicate ten feet of right-of-way along the street frontage to meet 1,•: future right-of-way needs. No street improvements are required at this time, but a 'y'' nonremonstrance agreement shall be required to provide for future street �' o-: ' improvements. a ' ' The maintenance access area to the storm water detention facility is not required _' as shown on Exhibits 8 and 17. The applicant's engineer should work with the city staff to design the sidewalks, landscape areas and curbing in the right-of-way, ii, " Erosion Control - (15.005 - 15.045) No erosion control plan has been submitted by the applicant. A detailed erosion control plan, prepared in accordance with the "Erosion Control Technical fi, • Guidance Handbook", should be submitted along with the final construction l . plans. This plan should be submitted for review and approval of the City ```"''` µ • Engineer. ;"''�`' K y x . Access - (18.005 - 18.040) ' �, Access to the site is to be provided by a single access point. Exhibit 6 illustrates a revised widening of the access point to facilitate the turning radii requirements of L•. ' • emergency vehicles. The traffic analysis (Exhibit 13) documents present and ,, • projected peak traffic conditions in relation to projected trip ends generated by the proposed senior dwelling unit development, The report concludes that the .'4' development will not adversely impact traffic functions on the street system, The Public Works Department has reviewed this report and concurs with its •• • conclusions, • The applicant has requested that the traffic impact fees be reduced because of the reduced traffic impacts of the senior housing project relative to traffic generated by a multiple family apartment project. The applicant should contact the Public • Works Department to determine what these fees will be, • r` 0 • • DR 3-95/PD 2.95/VAR 3.95 • Page llnf14 • • dF�• . is it • _ _ , A, ..4 • •. , • b - •, j Site Circulation - Driveways and Private Streets- (19.005- 19.040) Y t:, , This standard requires that driveways for the proposed structures not exceed 15 ii percent grade or 5 percent cross slope. As indicated on Exhibit 6 and 16, the • driveway grades meet this requirement. The site plan has been revised(Exhibit 6) to satisfy code requirements for 26-foot aisle widths and better maneuverability for emergency vehicles. Per LODS 19.020(10(e), internal private streets must be declared fire lanes in the deed or on a recorded map and must be so posted. The maneuvering area near the waste enclosure along the west ' :, property line should be marked"No Parking." This standard is met. r 1- Site Circulation - Bikeways and Walkways- (20.005 - 20.040) This standard requires that bikeways and walkways connect to public streets: The ,�. proposed internal walkways and sidewalk along the entire property frontage on g 1.1 Lakeview Boulevard will satisfy this standard. Also see the Transit Standard and "a• , - specific requirements for special use housing above for recommendations ° I t regarding off-site grading and pavement to connect the site to the paved parking 1 lot at the corner of Pilkington Road and Lakeview Boulevard. 4. Any additional statutory,or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific Major development application; ` , K) Sign Ordinance FLOC Chapter 471 ' •f �, i t A., •,• All signage shall comply with the provisions of'the Sign Ordinance[LOC • Chapter 47]. Exhibits 4, page 18, and 11 describe the proposed signage. LOC h , 47.10.405(1)(A) permits a maximum area of sixteen square feet for a development containing four or more units. The final sign shall be revised to comply with this requirements. Compliance with the ordinance will be assured ' • through the sign permit process. Tr. ing_Ordinance jkcairgmfaus.ILOC Chapter 551 This ordinance is intended to preserve trees. Only those trees which must be removed in order to site proposed improvements will be granted tree cutting • permits [LOC 55,02.035]. Exhibit 17 illustrates the existing trees will need to be removed, These trees, which are not in good condition, will be replaced by numerous trees as depicted on the landscape plan (Exhibit 8). • 5. Any conditions of approval imposed as part of an approved ODPS or prior • development permit affecting the subject property. 4 The prior approval of DR 11-91 is not applicable, The subject proposal is being •. processed as a new application, • IV. CONCLUSION . . 0 . ' , • . _ Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff • concludes that modifications should be made to the front and side elevations of the proposed DR 3-95/PD 2-95/VAR 3.95 Page 12 of 14 • ' a' is structures in order to comply with the Building Design Standard. If the Building Design A;f `u standard is satisfied,DR 3-95/PD 2-95/VAR 3-95 can be made to comply with all applicable 4 r criteria by the application of certain conditions. ti, V. RECOMMENDATION d j 1 s r0...0 Staff recommends a continuance of the public hearing until the Building Design Standard is satisfied. Upon satisfaction of that standard, staff recommends approval of DR 3-95/PD 2- 95/VAR 3-95, subject to the following conditions: A. Prior to the issuance of a building nerinit.the anplicnnt shall: 1. Dedicate ten feet of right-of-way along the Lakeview Boulevard. ,. fii;rr.: 2. Sign a nonremonstrance agreement for future street improvements on Lakeview Boulevard. 3. Submit a final erosion control plan in accordance with the"Erosion Control Technical Guidance Handbook for the review and approval of the Public Works Director. , .! M sir 4. Provide final construction plans for the water quality/detention facility for the Wa 4• ;` ` + • review and approval of the Public Director, 5, Provide final construction plans for the percolation well for the review and . •, . • , ?, 0 approval of the Building Department. 6. Submit a final landscape plan, including irrigation system, for review and , approval of staff. The landscapeplan shall show the proposed londonplane trees �`` � PP P P P s replaced with a specie recommended on the City's Draft Street Tree list. The pin l�r,. oak trees shal' be replaced with a specie which is adaptable to small planting areas. "l. Design all improvements, including water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and one street light in accordance with City standards, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, • 8, Obtain a tree cutting permit prior to the removal of any tree which is over 5" in .. , diameter. 9, Submit final site lighting plan, including photometric data, for review and approval of staff., • • 10, The final construction plans shall show a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the , • entire site frontage on Lakeview Boulevard, The final design of the landscape • -- area, curbing and sidewalks within the right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director, 0 - DR 3.95/PD 2.95NAR 3.95 Page 13 of 14 • B. Prior to the issuance of all ®cc n nllcy P�il'Ti1it.the sophcant tail. .), .... ' • .: L'\ 1. Complete all construction improvements,provide the City with certified"as- built drawings,and receive a certification of completeness from the City. 40 1,, , ..b. 2. Install the landscaping and irrigation system per Exhibit 8 (as modified by ' Condition A.6., above), and submit the"as-builts"for the irrigation system to the satisfaction of staff. , \.,''''. :, .' 3. Designate the proposed driveways as fire lanes and post them as such,per LODS • �` 19.020(10(e). Mark the maneuvering area near the waste enclosure along the west property line with a"No Parking"designation. I. • ' k" EXHIBITS • 1. Tax Map `' 2. Photographs Illustrating Existing Site Conditions 3. DRB Findings, Conclusion and Order for DR 11-91 4. Applicant's Narrative 5. Narrative for Variance " v.. 6. Site Plan ` . 7. Rosewood Action Group Neighborhood Meeting Minutes, dated February 7, 1995 • ,.,.w 8. Landscape Plan and Details .:r;.,; 9, Floor Plans 10. Elevations ' 11. Details for Signage,Fencing and Garbage Enclosure 12. Building 1 Streetscape (original in color) 13, Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Charbonneau Engineering, dated January 1995 14. Soils Report prepared by AGRA, dated March 21, 1995 . -. 15, Water Quality Pond and Detention Basin Calculations, prepared by Harris-McMonagle Assocs,, dated March 19, 1995 16. Grading Plan ,.`< 17. Utilities Master Plait 18. Percolation Well Calculations, prepared by Harris-McMonagle Assocs.,dated March 19, 1995 • • 19 Confirmation of Use of Adjacent Property as Group Care Facility, dated February 7, 1995 20, Color Board (in file) 1. . Date of Application Submittal: Eebruary 17, 1985 Date Application Determined to be Completed: March 28. 1995 State Mandated 120-Day Rule: July 26. 1991 410 , • DR 3-95/PD 2-95NAR 3.95 Page 14of14 , t 1• ty i 0 ` • • ' ul 6900M1 4A • ��j 3334 4a9 t9 a ;,6900M I 6, _ ` �� •�! tier , #9 L '° 11300 .., mac= -�"• , n •r e -s.00.aza•d" //w+4oa'•--• + /ors• .i /v�rAi, .. _ ►® a aaanI is...ss e„ar yam FOP %•.mr ' I ® moo !-• (eivo•eamPwr y/ ,e•r 14 „. MOO . 0.52 AMc ,a' d►t 43� ` ' 5313 ®• t� 1 sae P, A).Y �� t;'f:4.' ' . PO j4a I 4 i ® - iaaw k ,i j efi �I100 * •i it I 00431\ 44 .v 0111,41, it ' • N4' l� 4 5311 o• •, ' ( . � S �r� �+ h• 4 yr, r 3.'i A `, I •, .:I,� �J0� 0 ?ir 3101 - %. 3i?r'•r�;. ITT9® • SIN ` . i i r i.,. ,, O.ge& PS*SSPa[ ® f °` o :'4 76E2 . , , . .., ellel alsrayso57 • . 41111 A+ :ITM-11110 �, ' • .• AC O O.> 1 w Y. 3905 " 532 5333 M • 5235 ace': 0ilitY t. alas • k AN' l P / �,[ ° 0e 5235 �L?/-/,l{�IV • ,a y C $ mew Ps .Ar. of ,aevt• ' . NNW 0,, �tA : a�'ir`�e-.,:�A11Yfe:Adl^,�•taa.'1'i+11�411.9. • t. iI+ ,. M AM/ b 0a0aao .�rAPa'.r -•A s�,•.r'la c. na pert Z v 0 /---'-r '' • N. s'a[ iv•/pyAev woJ ITIaa l .: ! TAX MAP 21 E 18AC • 'his sketch Is provided.without charge,for your I kirmat on.It is not Intended to show aN matters related to the N 0property Irv:Wang.but not limited to.ants.dimensions,easements.onoroeciunents.or loco Uon • is not a part of,nor does it modify,any report or policy to which It is attached.The Company- •- 1 E X H I B I T for any matter related to this sketch. Reference should be made to an accurate survey for , ,4.r+ -t.l t,,- - ' , l r, • •-.,.'•\ ',,.44::"' 'f'••••••.•,:..4.?•.,:-.-1 4...':, ".':,•, ','.'1.-•:••,',...•..,:......,,••,'..3.,* :,:••,-, •••`i 4;',..•)•.[..',,,.i,..,..,,41;,,..,...,,.. •,••.,. .••-:• ••s• •••-•••••- • • ,•-•-•• •••• • • ....,...,. . . • , . . \ . .•. , ,. .. . ... .. ...• • r.• '`.74'..,-. • ••••' . :'...L A.• •c'"'k .. , 4. . . - t N.s ••',:r1F.;1..,t' ..• . ,_.. ...4.',,,,I ; .. . '':.`"•• :N.. 'n . ...: . ,....4,:,••••, ,,,,' . 41.4: .,(•••••%;;'iri,•,-.,., ., . , ,, ,V,:-•'',1',°.' ; .1.4.r.''t,''• .' --'r•'-'• 1:.‘ -7.-it'.''.',' -,A,1',''''..:•64'-''-',. ' 'Al • "'L'':', . ..-1.41"•••'. I.'' View n'om Lakeview ..;..;-, ... .. .,a 7,;',-. .•. ;,-.•.,..,t... 1., .:k. ...,.,-,.-.,.,„.,,, , .. ....";„--,,„, ,....,....:..,. ,..; ,,,.,,,;;t:-.,. ... , ,.•,‘....:. , .:.,,,...- -,,. .,.... .. - ,. .....• ''.-- ..,.. --- .'!:t. ,...n.. ',.....,. , : ,.•. . .; . S' :;. ;;;;„;,,,.;;I. n.,t,1,:-:+!,...:„.,•;,:. ---.,, i.•,;,,,,,-%...i.-;.,-,-, ,..... ,,, -.. ,,-. .. ,,e4,, immen„,„i.,,i.., Blvd. to the Southeast (?:••',:!, , . . 4,„ • :. .•....:-J : 4........'. ' ..... .-.......1 ;,+,11'...,',',... :,..,..,.. ....,.1.: :,a,,,:„ ,Ii--;711.1.1,....io ,... :,...: -,,. ;-,i... ',..!... ; .. . ....' , , ,..,,,.,.1,.,.',••\i,.„:;•.; ,,,. ,': 4"„3„,•., 34•50.6., • ;1 ...,...,4,,,,,... --7, _,.,-;.'7, .. .4-,„......-...4.-;‘;,,.... . ,•,u...,....„,,,,,, ,,•;,•42„,,..4,...,...,-...,.-,.•.„.,-,/-4,..:,.,.., •,:„i tOWn1 a Jacksor .iare.Apartments ..N...,, c. -.''.;;,0„....!:, ,' 4.. :, ,..--•'.,,A.o,:•,:,..-..:,,;:,.',-,,,,,,.... . ,.i . ,'''.' '' -..' -••:-;4•-•.:e.-,';'% ."t -,.1.:::•-•,-,-•;,;-•••• :..;14:,,.•. i-•,, ,..-t#•.••,;"...•- - !..,- . . ,.. .. , - • -\,-. , • *0',1'1?ik,::._'..). 7:4'''''."--'''k.4'',',4! .2-'-'...,.:'•.;7''i,,...,e-':f-,,;',...., .:): -, I;••••!,-. ••1.,,' 4„ i•,,,.;•:••'.. .*••17',•',.'• ••,::„ ..,',* "*...' •.'"7.,,''`,c'.. .", •-... '• t •.e, ,;!,,,t1:••• . •••!7-.4- -. c•,t.-.:', ;•-• r •,:•...7,10,44:;i:,•,..,';;.:;.••...*If.:,.;.4,„,..4,z,.....„.i.... ..%,•,ip';. ,, -4 '•••,''... 1,.:-....J. '',-;4'•'.•‘4,.7;•''c-*,:,ii• .'1;i,..:. '..-174'.,..j: -, „f. ,. . • - ( '.....-. ',.." :1,.!,":-. _,:l'„ •,,,•'..4,!.'1,-°':: ti....:.''4,,,.,',,'c",-7.,,,''4.,;:fr:.':•,,,,,. '', y. ,,* '..,.1'. - • .., •• •, . . . . .. . 7*::.‘':::.1*.+':,C:'.'-' :.,.,k.*::. .-• ( ::'''; 1 : '''..* ;: '';:'*'...*: ::'...•, :.:. ''- ':: .'..: * *4' .•'. ..., ',(•,..'''"'4f;•\,...:1'•••''...4•'1,','‘..'''41.;>.1';74'41*'.. ;4... . •.,;,:.,, ., ", . 4 .„. ,,.."4,,-,,,-,,.,:',:•., ..,,,s ..",to,; .,,•,.,7:. c . ..,:'*,,r;; , , ,.)." ",,,'': •.1 , oirls.tly. ,t.:::- , .. f' ' • •••,..*.•-•,,,, :.:(1;.r..‘.,,.,,. •-,••..-• :.1/4,••!..•...-.:• ..,.,4..',,,'......',, ..•••• •j *,•..•;*. *.C...•••.••le,••• ••'''•,4.1•'• ,•'.'; *I..;ii;7 4'?...4;i;,'4 1:',* ;',..;:.:'';,;,, ;;,;,;;:;: ;;;'; ...,,;;;; :2* ' .;:,:';..: VAI,;, ''.;"..,,,in*;:.;;.,':';.;. ,;;.,t.4.;;'';;;;;; • *;.:'''.;;;\ • ‘,..; ..... ;;•f;)1.' ; . ' . l; ...;* .. t.t;,;,:;4'14:.'; ;•'\''; ;;';''' ;..;. : ..; ''' ; '. ;.ri';;; *; .':';';*;'q''V.; ,i F 4 4.‘'..!.'t;;;;; ;.;', .'; ' 4; t;;;;',;I"'';:...',; ;;;;;;;i.; ;;;;;*, . ;4,.,:',;;*t;;;*;;;'.'1•••kitstr:i•te.*••••likt,f•.,“',1:,•rs:"..,'1,•;'' :*" S.• • **'•*: .:*'• ''' IT .. `.'•*•*''';•;*••••*1• *s'•••:'.'*:•;*';*• •:-:' .' ''.•*'•''''.4 : .. '-'••*••:*."'•*.: ••••'1..::';'••• ".•'!4f*•:•*•:7•*il**1.•1e.S,%;)• •;;:;;**.I.,•:***: : • . • ' *.:‘**.t•!;••• • ••• ;•.*, *;.:•,:.:.,-• ,„••••••,•:•;"• ,:,••••;„' •• • .-,'A;'':''t ;1'',;4.;;;;; ; ;;;;.;'.;;'1!•.••,'',...1: .;/•••:•••,;'',,:.::,„•I.:,,,•'‘,••'•fit.i.:•,irti•k:krysi',,,t'..t'-',t% •:. „,' ..• . , ,,•', 4 :•,.': . ' :, . . . . •!! l; ' 1" , ., i-,k • ' r :'')' '''''''' ,r.'V• ' , ' : j • '7/ , . •,', . ' 4 4.•••• . i' ; •, I • V. I• ,... ,• .• 4 1 , :** '• ;.. . ' * • to.' • It.* :V , , • ••.•• i • • 4 •• ; ••• ' •- - #.**•, , , - :,.1:•••,, ;. , ••. °: • ,::::Vilr:*•••••••••t.• , .i''.•':'.'4.•' -.. , '' • • • .'''''' ' '`•:•-'''4 1,. "••*1;••ti, ./...'‘••,, . View from Lakeview • : .' -..,....,..,.. ,,..4• ,:t*1.,'.',.:..- •i,: Blvd, to the Southwest: 1. '.' ' 1.,i1.-.....,..,i,ty.-.;.,,... •-•'. '..' ''. ''. ... .:-,,-.',..,.....L''' '';',..-Ka,'-',L'...' I v."...Y'-'.. .n4re'r-'-tt":9117 ' ...4 -2,''.'„;;A,.....• •!,,,.i..., •".f43•1',...-,,,-• toward Rosewood -,,,.',,,,.....ii.t;::; '.A. • . • .. : :.-:, ,,,,..• ,-.y -. • . , ,.. .. .. .. .- .,. .. ,,. .:•,...,L,.'., •• --,...t... . -.4.0-:4i'lr,* .+.0 3.•'..v,' .,,-*;',. 1 .. . ''',:•?,).;.;:v1.,A.:.,..4 ': Shopping Center .., ' I ".• 4, • • . ' •- .•••.-•-•.-4"•'.•• ""- •'' ' . ' '.'•-'.."'..• 7 - "4.",'...',;'''.''77,;•1.;+4,--,";.,4..'4.4.1,,t.4,44 zel-.".,.:14;',1,11,1,,,,,;,,:,4,-,. 1,1• ‘,...4 . ,', Ike:Is-iv' •d' ,' • . 4 ..•-• '4 '••• . ••4. ••• .'' .' i'.'••- ' .40tfl•••.' ••a'44-::**t•#*•44•t'#•/-4.61••*t•-#.14.•"0••••*•••••4:.1 #•N•44..e.,• ••,*••••*t. e..0.0'...:n•'••••'• ' • J1 ,;•i••*,•,:.4' .- .;•••* .• • d.• '.:** •; .4; *, •,; , . •, ,,. „...,14"' •••••••• •.••••••••:,,„•••:.••:,,,,;•..-4:,,”,:tr•,,7,t7914,,...ta•-.7-,....44,.._;.„•-•; ••. .,. .{.'re`'.. :.. •. !.......44.4.%,,, _,_,,...•.•-.4. . ., .., , , , , . - ., -, . -,- .4. t.. . . 1,...1,-;)•.•,,,,,,,,•4,-1,411,)-.., .74...'••••••.-4........- ' 04-4'- 'to.-.4;' ' ."`""tr','4. ; ,• ,/,, -'' ..' '• ...'. ••• 7' ;'1; '.' ''.."01'.-:1-'7'..."e.':1'47\.1ki"'•';'' •--,14(..t.:;,,:•'•:Okt.'.4i;•?,P;L-.44.-,iz?,,; ;,!4....4. '!`,T1::•47.1...!17.1110..•l'I,:?*•1.• I ' ' . . - •. . '' i -'`.,, • - "" k..\+-04,L114.1,4,1,••-•i,t, ,,,,Ir.,.;...„,;•,,,,,444N-...-;;`,Pl,.„.1 40. '.. •••• .•-: ,, . ., .1.••',. .1*•* •**......„ .'• ***••• ‘'''•*•'...•••‘''''.'*•' ' :'.•Y'"?.:',', ••••••,.. .i.;71'••*1:1-1t.114 .10'...0,,I4',11*0:*' ••••••!• ;4•1,... .4441...•, .*.*"•••;•••••'••• .• 'It'••••. '', .•*j . e . . ' ; v , •;;;..,,. - .; .•J ,.,,..;,••41,1, ;;•,,,,, ;1.;;", el,•1• ,;'•.;',N:t•:itlIA,0ti•,';'' : i.•.*As•••••!,,,,,;* ie,:j.4.q*••••••:•7*#‘:;',.•49"411111.- r 0 e . •• •„ , . ••',•;;;,; „;., , ; e•;_,• 4,,,••••••••••1••,;•„,. .,••••!•.j./ ••'..,4-‘,;,j,•'',‘-:.6 i:.•''' ':'.^:A.fr r:k''•:t.,,..e '.,1 ,44,*„..A,.''...,'''•i"04. . 4,1i'..t-.4*• n••*•* i • . ''' • ,•••• • ':•• , ,' ;;or/. ' ' ,' •• .‘''. ..' •• a•'•," '...o‘II,'',• • ros!• ,,,".e...,4 -. . .,. 4, IQ.".,,, -,- • • . ., • .; •,: : ,,•. . ,, .; . ;•1I. .• • 1.4. ;1 • .;. • 0;•••1 ••• ••I•••• AL:.• •t:rt.,11.;,••••..4;•„,,••••,„.' ••..1,"••••4•10',.ti. '., •••404..:,*.y!: ''''":"•• :V , .• • •••.,'. '.*• •••- ie: ' ••'* • . •• ..; 44'. . 1 „...'1; , 4., .i,•,,,,t,.. .i.,42-"1.' ' ,-. m. .,,,, ., ,, -...": '..'...1 .' ' 1.1 •-- 4,..:, -..4-4..;..L1k,,,...,t,tt';'.4.1it,s4'.;,.,',..,",,..:,,i,,,......i..,.t.-;•-!,?;`•'.;''L .-'..4.",.. .;;J:biu.f7.-.'al,,P t,;1,• '',""'.•417;:•,' ,...or.'.44*' '.•.'-4.,1. , . , ,1 •,. .. 4,4 •4.':• •.4 , •1• • '.., ••' • -. • • ..'• ‘1. **•:**1••••.1**•,*••1*!'t•"*.•*Ii'kii....••••• •.::."•'• t.' *4••••!.•'aar• ,.,.. „.' ... ;•' : ‘'•. ' VI , •• ,, '-•'.•.•• '.. ; '• ' '', '',' '' '''• : ' 'T-',:,.'il.'•,.•o .0,-• •.0 .a• e••,. '' '.'-.,4: "-.. -, \ . •. ,,-"'•, '• -,.; . , , , - • . . . - , . •.•. ,. •-. .:- ': ,;;•:',',.,''itv t;„: ...t,s••••••••,-41.'..-4 ••••••',,„,••. • -',.' •••• •... •.-':,.".••4, ••• •.0,•••• '"''',,'''. ;. ' • N , , ' . • ,",. ,.;;;I,'ri r.i..••Ir.., ;••' •.,'.•,..' ', '• `‘',,••,,',. •t.'°' ."',• ' ... ' .,r '1''..- . ,t1.' :.f., ,.: t:'. ''''' .. '4•I' '•;t:••,1,{;*,•.0::,„ ;, •„.'1. ; . ,,••.•4 4',•••••"... -•-• ; '4:. '4'.'-'. • "•• 4.'; - ' •;.:'- '',. ' • ., t •• ;:,,,•,.,.„ t,,,• , ...:„,•..,,,,-;,„.,•-•/?7,4. •-,,,!,1••;4•,:;* .. .,;.•,- , . ...4 ,4.. *_,• ,4,,•-• „, .L• ,: . ' ,,", ,- ,..••-..! .4.., 8. , -,,;•.• • :, ' ,...'.•,••.1' ,, •';S., ' ,..' "1,1;!.•t'q.t•;:kr...;.''.: '' 1, . ::,." •,,• a a..,,. :I. ,,,, ,.,.:•', '', • . ._•.•. ...• . , 4040 • . . .. . ., .. . . .. , I, .• • , ._ • •-.• . . n ,t e ,,, ... rt .•', I .• • • ,(i.',r'„i*,•,, • I ‘,4 .•+- , , ,....1 •• . • .. • , tki,litr,;,,,:,)• ; ,.., ,• . , '.;:igi 47 , • •, , . :i • . • ., i„,„. . li•K 04. ....• ..... 3, ;‘, , • . .44 •.:*•11XZJ,;,!"•' ..11'4' ,4•;•?: ,, . . •.'.e... ir::.1i '' :'; View from the South • ....,,„.,,. . k t. -. •••• 4 --,...&,r, ''..)..,'n1,,•ol,r);4.•'',4-.:-•"a.' 7.•i, ' I! ' :' 4;.. ' 4 'I'' ' ‘e: ' '. ' to the North toward *If, 1....t., ,• •'• ••-4.47:,.., .,t..•-.. .•(,. -. r-0.o'•?' ,.•.-. . • '..64.: 44.:.*„. 4.'4 r,-;' ',;, . ,...1,• ,.....14';..Ni? ; ;.,,,4,,••• • .0 -,. ,.;, i• . , ,• -.11 i* .4;41., •i -.. ., , . ,,....- ; " '1. I.•,!.' ' ..' 17 -Ain.. le', ..1..'•1 '"7r;ir.1-..', ', ''. ';,!'"1...• . 1-.,.,!)444-1"' 4,v,qi...,.,.....,:), -:14,1'• .7„..', ;',°,7;;': Lakeview Blvd. . ,, ..:.,. . ••••, ,.:1•,..,,•\ii#:!.0n, ,•'. '',... ;,.....•.., ...•„:",-'.-t •• '.. .. ,•;.::„!.4';'.‘•. • ;,.. s4-..i-'7,,„. , --• ,.-'v .,. , . .. ..,...., .. •'..f. r.,..m!.,..,. „ . ..,,,.. ..:•. ..i.7.,i,. , .., . ,t ....-4:,-,4,..:,-1-.4: •...,..0 i , .p., t,.. , . !..,, .,.. . tIltil.-'‘1.1'iLI I,t. • ite",a,"„)..,,n7„,... ,..2.,,n,„,nn, 1_... ... .4. . ,,,,,! ,1 . , . . . .. . . , ,I, , •• • • 8. •• . •,: . % ' • ; , ,. • . „, , • , .. . , , , •, • . .• ,, „ , 't•4* *r. , i • . . 4. • • ',. ••• • • 1 I :*• * :•••It44/17.4 •. . Op . •It°.% : • ''.4 ::7••• ••)•.:'4L..' . ...',:;••• .,Ik*:.%•1'*••.,'"!:';4t,'• • bt 4 :'.•'",1*.':: . . 1i EXHIBI ,'''' -• ''', ,;. ;,4;:;, 3 3 : ; ,1; , . •*t t . • • ,•• ,•, , • , •• .• •• ,%•4*'•••.4.,•:•.• , `',4••.••• ,:' ,6.. . .4•••tv## *• 244 • . .• 11' • • 0 4 1 , • . .t ' .. . . •• • I' • 1 . , d . . . . . . , •• . . ••' V n' ':'4‘ *d' . .' ''• t •.; ' ' I :''''t•..11' '• • • . • • . • , • * In . n n •n ' 'n n.n I " ' n n • ' . 'r4 •'' ' ..'". . .,• `,..,,`, /11/ : 7 .1 '-4,,,„ . . • . ,. . , :•- •.•. • . .. • ), .•• • • •. •. ,,,...,, ..-1-0 , •••,.- . 1• ' - . , . • - . . 1 . d* • .1 , . . • . ,• .' *. , ,.• .•,7•' . , • .1 :••••••••I•.,L;*""4•f,,•••-•••'2•';',:'•••''•*ti•'•t'•** . •• , *'•'•• :'• ' *,a ** *. •* : . ' *,- *•t ,* •; .t.l'!••••'7•i•••••••;•17••,•1•04•4.::*:1,0•,•1*k•* • •* •• n ••' n•.•1.•••'"••1••./4.I.'***4'n, ...•••d.•4•• , .''. .‘,.1*,••..•'.„,n!I'':n'. •' • • • 4 • '\I• •• • • • ' • "'J./0;:•-•• "''•• . , • • . • • • •• '•-:**t'••t•tejt•"'". • • . t , ' I tl i 1 I A .I 1 • . S I. t r y • �. t r d • •.4 1/ W. y a �, • -•« } , , ' i y ak A , Y , ,J I j , ,, _ j nkt i > N .t' L 1 ,j , , '1 , ,tF 1 , V . e, ' •, Gr.;1 7, 4., .f r •.:Y ' ., 1 v. ., Y'• , A `r to . .•1.♦ 1 die i,ll 1 : 1 5. 1 p. ' Y /'^ '' •' • 2 *' BEFORE THE DEVELOPME F REVIEW BOARD . , OF THE NY ,t' ;; 3 CITY OF . '. LAKE OSWEGO N. i s ,,,,'�•''1•R• .. +t^ i 4 �` �I A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO; DR 11-91-921 r• 6 CONSTRUCT A 20-UNIT •" s .'' (Sc!(Sel Shariat&Farhad Darace) ( 7 SPECIAL USE[ELDERLY] ) FINDINGS.CONCLUSIONS&ORDER .rY. { S HOUSING PROJECT. '` ' 10 NATLiFe R OF PP I $� ►� µ 11 The applicant is rrquexdng approval to constructs 20-unit special use(elderly)housing ,, 'l 12 project. The site is located south of Lakeview Blvd.and east of Pilkington Road(Tax r 13 Lot 3100 ofT:.x Map 2 lE 18AC). f' f 1 7 • a 14 ,. is MARINO 16 The Development Review Board held a public hearing and considered this application at rt'',' • •1•`;I I t• • a 17 its meeting of November 18, 1991. •�{ ` J"'`k'j'�E;,�'l¢ P , 18 �,• • i , F 4 lei 19 CRITERIA 1'ND STANDARDS f`° X `` ;`; ' • y•• p:ir 4,,t h K ,' 0 20 A. �'itN of Lee Osweg4�4IDDrch��c__ +'v=ni n; .' r S'Vf?54'i�a ra�� '.� ""'•+ 21 >.. J rt , • Impact Management Policies r c+ 22 Social Resources Policiesol r•, • A. . Residential Site Design Policies ',, ,":' �,` •w " 1 23 Transportation Policies •' �':,' C • 24 B. 25 Citx of Lake Oswego Zoning Code: �, �� + ! 25 ., ,,• , Pi• e,.%r, 27 LOC 48.120-48.155 R-3 Zane Descrtpuion .,' LOC 48.549 Specific Standards for Special Use ' 2 B housing i c • a • 19 C. City of Lake Oswego U nrevelon _nt M+-; '' • '+ 10 i `• „; 31 LOC 49.090 Applicabilit;,r of Development Standards h~ '- LOC 49.300-39,335 Major Development Procedures ` 32 LOC 49,615 Criteria for r+^pmval ..' LOC 49,620 Conditional Approvals 33 • 34 D. City of Lake Oswego Development Standards: '. ' +• '4i •k'1• I .` �Y;'••' ,, 1, • ` PA 2Y005-:.030 Building Design •° ' I DR 11-91-921 t ' J • • .. •'1 '., �i '-• "et,, 4, 1, L r ,,,. ; ,, r, i Yt, ./ ?.. ' f 4 Y:'' 4' ' • � x ``__'' r:,•fir A`•! ,',, Y ,.+ , ,,,.' ` '• ' 4,'I,�' 4. / `•�,.•t• t d+'ti r� i +...� Y. �` ' Y':'r..Y fi 1 B�ellt) Y +r,' �' o:; .. a `..'`Y, ♦r .H}, ,,..y 7 '' • +sf , �.. 1' ' • ''' ' ''' ' ��•....../// . . •, •J i « ow, 9 ! r ,• is e .• `,, , ' ri •` _• 1 • 1 N i�. • '', ••. '� L"�(,•°Y/ f ',,'(• •1 rR4F ' p ' 'I 1• ; If �} .r " tf.4";4,t ti..-1•,,1 5•. • - 'r•,w ''',444.' - t� r r '�. ,i y I '` .. y ' ""w .~ .r • a �!- ) '' I'•''y,a t ''• A t •1 yN t lv a f t• 4-�"1 r r• t • • a I. .t • t r,i.- .,,.' }`fin t i' • r • i ', '.. 4/ ,. r ;'k•z' i i�\t '.��' 1 t. ` 'ie.'''V ,I a� 0/ •.A , f .,. •h' • �� • A.' '.' ..y, `•d } } +1 •r \� I • r,•��'+' ,�ti+•7r , .{. �,• \jt1- `'. .L ai �f t e .�- ' I •r. vt 'f _If. '( } i. ', t 'r'gq ` ti , 7 � '( � ;rr�ti L r'• � � • 'r. •�r{ � ,�• 11,! ,:iY7 �'�. -\ !�` 11 •,*. ,4 • `y,•; J •l. i if k • 1 t,. r ',.,l.a • .'' y ,; + t`V h1 � ;T-...A ,, r i �. t e a 't. y,• r v` `� I,r- y.Y. J, e• V'��.', • i r t\ P �// ,s! • t • - 1•r . . Fr '� I 5.005-5.040 ..� 1 Strut Lights �I , 6.005-6.040 Transit :�. i} 2 7.005-7.040 Parking x P 3 8.005-8.040 Park and Open Space -�., r } 9.005-9.040 Landscaping,Screening and Buffering 4 11.005-11.040 Drainage for Major Development .;, Utilities • • „ • + '�. 5 16.005-16.040 Hillside Protection and firosion Control :.; ! f • : 6 18.005-18.040 Access I � 7 8 19.005-19.040 Driveways and Private Streets :0.005-20.040 Bikeways and Walkways g E. f ity of Lake Oswego' ree..S' m.1 •,n g. rdincc: 10 LOC 55.080 Criteria for Issuance of 1'ermits r ` • t: ;1t: 11 'r k' 12 CONCLUSIONc it .;' , t". 13 The Development Review Board concludes that DR 11-91 can be made to comply with 1 c , e+ }' 14 all applicable criteria by the application of certain conditions. ' aiTtAt •r1' i- ` *• 15 rL , iaY1 .ki,3� bprlda ` ;",, ` 16 FINDINGS AND REASON r ,„,'� „:.'.,:..•, : . '• l•ea • . ' . 17 The Development Review Board incorporates the November 8, 19)1 staff report on DR `'tit s?44i1 t. 4 ; • "r p'' 18 11-91 as support for its decision,supplemented by the following: • 19 1. The following exhibits were presented to the Board and entered into the record at the ,y ' j r,. 20 hearing: !�.,`, w:1,F ,•4 �.'', 21 Exhibit 17 Colored Rendering of Landscape Plan � ,� ' arts 22 Exhibit 18 Colored Rendering of Front Elevation and Color Board `'" - liA,Ii' 1 • 23 Exhibit 19 Colored Rendering of Floor Plan ;;;,' P ,t..•Pt 4 ,r +,y+, .,,�; 24 Exhibit 20 Colored Rendering of Unit Floor Plan&Handicap Details .,a • 25 Exhibit 21 Sample of Rooting Material 26 27 2. After receiving testimony from the applicant and citizens,the Board made the ' 28 following findings: � ``, 15 - There are no plans to improve Lakeview Boulevard in the near future, The 1 I 1'' ' recommended half street improvements on this road will be the only •• : 70 improvement in this area. The Board found that it was more appropriate to •�.1t; I '• ' 31 requite the applicant to sign a nonremonsuance agreement for future street , '' ' L '° 32 improvement of this road. However,the Board also found that a 5'pioperry line 4' sidawalk should be provided by this development in order to satisfy the '.. 33 requirements of LOC 48.549(1)(1)(i)and LODS 5.02tl(l)-(2), Exhibit 11 illustrates the existingfence alongthe cast property- 34 - p line, The i applicant testified that depending on the condition of this fence,it will either be x�' • ''` t." repaired or replaced in order to provide adequate buffering to the existing single . ' '• ., PAGE family residence to the east, •�,• I. t , •` 2 DR 11-91-921 i•, , tl . } s .., +i" i '+ d•+- L i - . i •�0. a • 44 rti .„ 4, a• a 4 i1{ is i} NZ{ 4.•G.h'lt.4j• t'4. ,ry ' y ,2,'71.1 r wI i• n , - t F1 “4 , Pt1Y, , •-:i 1 t i•� ' , t .. .� - .'+ , � ♦ .: t .,�, •N3,•• r 7 •+. � t }i • n u • ;*j• ff ., . ' } -; • ' „ !' ti a 1'4',t7a •N'.t .ta i '- rji� ` P$ Ja P • ` r ' i • • • • • P., ' T . � r a=e i y. •}•F t ` + r . rW .1 ' Y. W; ! ,t. Fl , , r ` 1 r+t ' ' i: , 1 ��h •' ' , , a•, } i'.%. 1�+ . t •.' �I' `. , • 4 1t.. , .+ ,' a .a wa!I c- _LL :> 1. � / }.� Pr• rt •.• .yM ar i l. kg, a,. •, t • '+ . 11 • ; • • . h ; •r 1 t 7 ` • • I r A, r 1 ' ' °l�• ,1JI ', 1 r t F Ri I 1 M ' ,I t 1• 1� • t n t mtr k! 1 • ... . • 0 - . . • • •1 ► • �rX,.i�� 2 ti. -as• 3 i? nER ; ' •i•,, • 44 IT IS ORDERED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD of the City of Lake • -6'1 Oswego that: w: ; .'t 6 1. DR 11-91 is approved subject to compliance with the conditions of approval set r., forth in Subsection 2 of this Order'. ' �, 7 r 2. The conditions for DR 11-91 are as follows: • t 1 .. ,r 1 . A. Prior to the Issuance of a Buildjpg Permit; ' , r�'; 10 1. Revise the site plan to comply with the required 24'side yard setback r along the east property line(t removing the fire exit from the setback ' " • 11 tea). 12 , ", ` '. , , 2, Submit a final landscape plot showing Scanlons Red Maple,or other �' t{ 1" {1;;;; 13 species which arc not damaging to street improvements,as street trees. . ' 0 J fw• . ri, s , IjA r. ::� 14 3. Provide an irrigation plan for an automatic sprinkler system for review •r° ,44• •4, 4% S' 15 and approval of staff,per City standards. ; ' 16 4. Submit a final drainage plan,including surface water management and °� p'i' 17 disposal methods,for review and approval of the City Engineer,per City ', ;4'." ' r 18 standards. r ,,; 19 5. Submit a final erosion control plan in accordance with"Erosion Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook", ' • f for review and approval of the „ ° t y,,r 20 City F..nginecr. ,r' 3 ,,x' 21 6. Dedicate Ill'additioial right-of-way airing Lakeview Boulevard. l' 1'• ' 22r . , 23 7, Show a fire hydrant on the final construction plans°if rt.quirvd by the Fire ,,,r tt r �'1''r Marshal. •40 ••:.' 24 • ,a` ' • 25 8. Final construction plans shall show all overhead utility lines,including ',5Y 'i ' t? telephone and cable TV,be laced underground. 4. "• .'. 26 placed ►° • , 1 "' Y7 9, Final construction plans shall show the proposed sidewalks along .' r fi� • `,1,kei°i • Lakeview Boulevard extended off-site to connect with the existing ".' ��.`'• 28 pavement along the shopping center to the west ' 19 t le 10, Modify the roofing materials to create more texture and shadow-lines,to ` - 10 the staff satisfaction. ff • 31 ^ '" 11. Replace the T-111 siding with the horizontal siding shown as accents on t; • `+ 3 2 Exhibit 6, The siding shall be of cedar or other acceptable materials,to ,. •t,i'• 33 the staff satisfaction. a , v •• ''' 34 12, The applicant shall provide the City a signed nonremonstrance agreement for future street improvement anticipated on Lakeview Boulevard, , PACE '4' ' 3 DR 11-91-921 1 1 111 1 / •'} f y- ' _try • �° .' , i. • . t :J.✓ ' .• I }t'. 'lit , rt t r k*r •0Z• ,, d • Ott ° , '1� •r ,x t'., . •, tr _ r a - , 1. a . ' t . + , +t 1 it•- irk '3 A'' A 4 \ • } t r •` , �>� ',� _ J ` �:• t,, � t r 1.1 • `1 �} 7 ,fr.. � A . II L' r t , I,•. * `" vfP I , str 4•14 7' 11 •• '" .•` it , fu,, , ...,., , . ,,, , ,, „ ., ,, ,..,,,...,•Alk.t.,:•:: ••,,,. ,, ,:,1•.• ,:;4:1:i1;-,Y14.41'2".,''',..';',:e '''1 ' :4- ' •• ''' . I''.. ''''' ' 'i '.. . . '::: •, :.4 1 ,a, • 2 Re Prior to the u1U of Ocn,n8r�r Je_ +itil; 3 r II �• 4 1. Install the on—site detenticn and pollution control devices as approved in the final drainage plans,condition A.4,above. t "`' i 5 6 2. Install all landscaping and irrigation system appnoved by conditions A.2 and A.3,above,and submit the as—burlts for the irrigation system. t r .'j i ' * 7 a 8 3. All construction improvements,including sidewalks on Lakeview ' T7,,.t Boulevard,shall be completed,accepted and as-buiIts submitted to the r 9 City. 7 ; 10 C. L?11tci11gSanstrtctiQe Ap In t�iranhall• •,,1'•;Y ' •• /' 11 , * 1• 12 1. Adhere to the erosion control guidelines as set forth in the Erosion . ' ,t'' Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook,condition A.S,above, �,, 13 ' ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 7 1:j:, ' 14 t' ' s;' , t "• 15 1. Staff review of the preliminary utility plan only verified the location and ' f,M 16 capacity of utilities to serve the site. • 17 2. A tree cutdng permit shall be obtained prior to removal of any trees that are 5 `, ,. • '* , 18 or greater in diameter. � 19 3. All construction plans shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City • '• •, ; 4.: ' Engineer. "7 , , • 21 22 �;rr, , • 23 • b. 24 , 25 26 y, " d7 -6 1' 28 , .•. .49 tl ;. 10 • , `' 31 • . ,t.4. 32 ,1,; "" 33 \ 34 s' PAGE • 1i 4 DR 11-91-921 rL. p .i A , ' .r r . i t 1.,+ ,+w• = rl• ,1 •..,,. � ., tY`fit+Spat'.- '.'A Y', • •' ltk •1..k•-•.st., S,� '1 y" ° a • ::.‘41 v "+,r ,' • , •• •� . ..d• 4.+,;fs12, • ♦. 'NIP, t W .. • t I R ' -t L + t}! �� M 1 I) ! 'fry it„, ly ,� _, 1. �� 'j 1b A. � • �f • a', • r ', Ir 111IIIII 1 i 1 l I.1 2 3 I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED b , y the 4 Review Board of the City of Lake Oswego. i�t�hl„ 6 DATED this_ i __ day of i; 7 ,1�_, T • 8 ?• 9 10 Robert EL Foster,Chuirman t' Development Review Board 12 fir. ATTEST: r ' /�bit• ll( Lfj //'��' 'j' ' ' r ,1� �} 14 Secretary —^--•-- ��•Fri ,,-.. ° r . 15 16 ORAL DECISION—No. Camber 18 1991 3p.,,: , 17 Yr 9t ,C. e X,' AYES: 16 Stvtaway,Greaves,Foster and Starr °�\; z - 19 NOES: None +•. ,�!,''..+ 10 ABSTAIN: None '�';! # + t ABSENT': r'' Y .F •}F a 21 Sievert,Remy and Bloomer .,'' �' ' ,,1 22 WRI'I'I'EN s > 23 FINDINGS—December 2 1991 (l:trst Votes �i••' i ,,;, �+• ,,ry �� a orb, , 1. 24 i iri. AYES: Stanaway, Foster and Starr `, + 25 NOES: None , s 26 ABSTAIN: Remy and Bloomer 27 ABSENT: t .,1; Sievert and Greaves , 1 0 AYES: a 31 Stanaw v, Greaves, Foster and .Starr 32 NOES: None 33 ABSTAIN: None 3 d ABSENT: Sievert; Remy and Bloomer d � . PACE • }'. P . S DR 11-91-921 t ; • t;•i • J't t. ` '1 hi y,y p * ,, n. J .:1' ,!. M;, 1• . e,„ . , /^ w ' :, 4 (+/ I I, • • ' 7� 1• )dn L,a 1 tt, 1 6 . ! 'r }t1• :1'. rat. , t, , '• . ,,,- : • ,''' Y. „..1 .. `1, ,It . � i.i !', j •H+U.. .x P=:!F ..r.4).1.t 'rr• + +,a� ` " •! • a •. ;, •'ry 1f , .r I.• �q*i'YI .,",ih f.,t +4 k. ' a r •r•.(41 .('1 tt s ,ql d ;c r ' Fl.-'>•1.� ! • 0." .A P. , 1 , ,. „ F} 1 �• .C.•i.. r.N,..� t•' �r f.'�,,x. 4 • �. r `M«+at ,�•, ay Y, P:.IA, l •. < ` •4 1 f.. R e • •> i "., Pr• �, �,.' •- . . • o j t ., •n j .. •. pry. '7. filly• ',, 1' 1 i' �r1:I' +1`t,.4�„�,.4T.i>#1}�(`��,.i,js,• U t,,'kj. (�``•t�>.I , Lr ,,.p .I 1 ( •,: •,.. r 4 ,t,�ypp�� ' s. 7 r ' y��`,f 1 ,.7?:`, `lira !r 1.yl'lr •\4" I { iP, �r,'�:1 v V c. L. _fr �,�' } � i. �..,e1 f 71' ,,. �(� +y, / �l V�i .( Y "�F, t, .1��rr IV 'e} , , ,�{�, 2= c r�'I.�[ 'A^{� .R 'e. IM ?' •''[''�� . �" �sii d• 191'y r. ,1�,.� p:,�1 4, ff :, o,.1 '1 � .1 .. ... '.�••• i- ! °,. r r i '' 9'- 1 'Y •r" , �f�.,. ..„, t'1, 4f '1 '11.14Y•,i•• 4, i ni \^' ,, t, 4, r ' �'' 5;;,• .)r . �,, r• +Y ? . .,� '� fir., :., `. 1 '•1rf J A../�•�M• ,. „, �i.r,�;� :7. �t 1 i,.•4 .1 -,j f �,_ �1 '�.Ir!r ;t�. '�`l.; ,!•, .y�� f. 1 � 1h�•.' '� ,, •\� F'�F.;� y'.,.rr �,v. ,f sy,, ,.C'1 KN t Ai..•''},i ;ail i' �� '1, 1 ,� . 'J. "'�U•" .J M', [''1 �. '4 •I,r .4, 1' il. ,7,• �',�I ''�� '1, ,1 4` ...r f L� t«��' '•V' •y 1:'�,12 1 ��5r .I• .t �' �1: !',',7{�ff�(.� + �,i► rt:'3"` •.:' ',�1 i '4 . fi. r•{t V I • .,� , ! 't'+E' it t•6• •`f�a 1. • Ylq'•w 9'tl/.r A. �'!�' r' 'r -+ .t'1::' r+l r•,,,•'' 4(k.'n"4, .1,. Yl. r.+l,l 'i .,, ,k •i;. A _ , i !i 'Z 4r ' , .'. '. ► {�i4,i. I,r •,,r 151-r1P,� •ir �, • i Yc• :1 .r.q �,04° ,M,,t, , ,,, , , i'.,,, ..t /,. , ,,.... ... • `p .'� �t�1r� r', �s •..1 F w .S tF-', .}';r �itr,l• 1,1r': .�, (,. ,� '¢ ,�•+� � t .rr,'1.: .�.. .ri .(.,J it �,r'',, ,Ir '!��[L` ,�$ ',1, �� r 1,,,]5•' 1. eY,� �!'r.. ' �-+f. !r ,{t 1 rii;(�,�..I.i�' r. �3J r.`� rY.' a 1�,. r +l , -,•f :lR �• , •.';{•• t{' ,4 �'� ,y 4, '(„ d r t 1 t .� / �.,1� ,••:+ +,".1."c a t�1'.� �1. f, •:Yn' - r ,S' ;..�};.,, �', �,. + a'iY� Y., ,r ,k � �s,tl' �4�,y� C r, +,�t�� 'y• y t 11,fir« y . r "1{c'` 1 ti,,C•a t S\.r,'.,,. ,f �; r, � t �' .t9 � lyi • F'i}. it•"4�' �' 4 4 .► �a �. �.t ti. r!. q �-f'r�hrl1 -f 1A; C �� 1� �..Yt �F`x'1' 1 -'3 .'' -.►"t!•' !, r •, '1 !' i t, k f ic. 4n •,,u 1. ,- , .1r��t /- .;ir+'1.1,' s r,f 17 ,r'� .M+ Lz. iy 1,, , �, �"`4• {,y5:4( r t Apr. ,-....1,r ,* �'.I. t.,F. •'it .t 1la K♦ �••, 1 •',"1 •.•Y �'i1:1 'lr, S' h i ti' '(!•, 1 ..�•: .��, ,/[.; .I.,+V, ''1'f ,il �I.S+,� , �r•^ '•.tl. ,��5��. 1 a'. .` r� ��1s��° $;rr'� l ��r,,. f ,,:'.�t r{. � l N �'1 F ld'.�r. � { • .I. N r, vw �1 y. •o r .,+. 1,• ,t] • ,• ' r' ,u{,� y:.,i' S iajO,4♦,1y'.• ,aas1 ,,{ ti p ,f ,1 •, i r.Y )r .. . � ,4,,r,y1 1 41(4)•J � A. r,y' • .., '.11 with.., r. ,i. .F'l, _.Yy^-!Y .t�4.,1.t e- ,/. � ,'M1'h,t,, r^ - J .,! 'jt.1�+��? , 1 141,1 j/aY.l ,�'1•�"1,Y 1 ^ , ,,�i. t ., • , 1. 1 �:'at, ..A'� i.t. s . 14"g1•;7 1 (( t. i 6 1,,Or4; 1 �lt,,•e1(•,r_n �,, .• ",F-..r. C .. ., �J. t Zf.,11• hAl.�,*U1 t.'L`� � �,� .► ,+ /h 1); 4.1 !lt' ,�(,�, .?��L !�: -y," y!,-•{, ?. :k7 i.. '. t .. 4 .. __.•o j4+'� < itil, 'A �IfF�... , .,r H�.l�liCl „1 1,{y�s�r id,�T•ip�,, f,i `•' / fl 'h' ' r 1 1 f'� �4t1 F �� ,., r •, �' F II�� { tiF •r`��,/ f +' r' F '•r . r 't L fp t,t ... ..... .... ... I' Y 11 1 �titi 4rif /� �,• , r I , .. ,• i j'r4'' '�1: ''.•\•. i' t!i, t , , Worst. ►I ty� ' r�.....,,, \\':fAy ► , A ••1• 1411,.,••I.,t,4. •.'• f A {^► An.... „1171). tf L..+., 'SI 1 , f"~ • '1 ' •� / .fir , t��" xA �Vv, ,��.. ' A_ ,t,7"'• .,�,• ' 4 .....« ..; . +'t0 �'u•r,.., 14, w«'�1,J r 1 ,"�}. fl'',�,jJt�s/.t'; . 2 r "� ►-... ..•.. ,•,.a,. ...• +-.�•'•'�.w f al P..l.rl. .,:y 1 1 J 1 • , 34 4'J+ •f rY.e ter,• a1u`•Y•`��f 4 ,jft.r , o'l•:--='='�'�\ / '.. r r :-.try' `.,,.:t •,. I .+fi I, �' h'' n rr l„ • r. Y wq 1 , 14,. r 1 I�-•]� ,'�"•-L -Cai.' 7lr♦.r... 'a',, 1_ 1 y e t 1..w • 'tl4 0. '' ite•. +, `Dti l�//(�'''rI.ti,+ •,v •, {l.• _'J _ —..` • �._,_'•'_"''ry""",,. 1.1 • '1r•�'',j� �' •rfi r a r , 7i,'.,♦ r�tt.' , t '� �''Ir,F t_ 1 b�4' '' I I�'' ._r..�..�,',��+.•f 1,r Y 1 f •'•`.'� "" w f, , r I 1 I f lr• ,a ii'£l,-, \ '• )`.�j•'�{M,(♦r 1 •.' ; Y\4 ', '; -."<,i�.•.�_ Q �.. • _ •'�:►•. • • I� 1�4��t• ,', 44" •, ".• '(t�,�5 y-;, > ;v}\�y'4g1'..;1111 (` I %'��+�+ , r• • ''r y;.�,1} `' '• % ✓ 4' • , * ,.`�r...�,��V�A".L+ItL..- I - \w�y 11 ; ►= f;� ':'.2":�;1 f[.y,,• „..... ,�?'d 2"Y4�J. I I �N.'!f '��:�1 •;i,l��y7 j., 'A11p' l \ :., �v , \��•' — \ ,..:•._ a'"• `` ,' Y 1, �{Nt 1 K �� • •'k �: jr rl: �S }'lt ' Tti• �','.`�1 , i r tr-lnit' 1• (,a�`�r,,y i ♦ �,V•a .,/ "\ \ • y • !� 2 """r'."•.�i:....w._ , + P1 -1 h17C 1. S 11 t- tA, .,''_ 2 f41 r ♦�' \('\ .`:, ' ` ,` ,.` ';.t of•M +r I a 1"r. Z�;.y'.'.i�'1.11�/� y,`flit.•�•�v'R 1.111 ,(V 1'Mt, �,,,// ;;� I \•�\` •• \, .'1 I . �f•'ill(t • { �� 1 rr t+r(' , ri•1.,.'t�'�T~,,.,} f... .01., ' �• � , ' 1 �r ,' rr• ,,,Lt :,. ,. 'Y' r W ra`Li� i 4/ k ,'. h ti 't'il -, f.c,� 1 1 r ,, _• 11 { \7 i ♦ ) u 1 2, ,y,•_ (,,� \ r •''r'��.,,, 1 Ill l l¶r..r I !' • 1.1 , 1`'• \F • •,. �,. '•ns., ,L. t � f e ,11,, .r Y Ca 'F- 1.(: i 1, ":i al ,l. -a•i r',:,, �, r ,�y ,. \, , /.1,,�+ ` ,I 1.d t 'rl l l�jr,,, 4. ',} ,y,c fn, a' t ?' i t t;:,'�- r, •�. � ` „�, r' \ ;`,4 ' !4.' w" J•,� /,`1 1 1 Alt t •-.� .� ..�,y-i•{ 'j� i /1 le l r,1 tsv,- i/ I t� -,; •''X. ai, �• l, ..A, \ t M,1i 1 '. n..;a . N �t •12i /: j.! CLAgmAh'tnn , \�`� • r Q4 () \ i • •y+ r f {'�",f�,,•, A ;t ri /. l .'i i,l '�,`.,,\1` ",4\ ` � ,, 111 1' ,, 3j ' I} L'.[1, 4b`•i"'. k 'L.. ee•l `..7d Ir1y. I i.': �,tw, 'a'tl�\`\. .a �•. ., u j 4 g �,, ••., AV;I `l,r,, rr t"J' • 41, 1a'' I ,�.� '„ %. ; r1 h' ,1,r j, +'. \, Af iir, ��ith :\ iI',�1 r.•� ,` II 1� \� _�� __ _i�,'.' r: is ,A\ i 1 4 'el ..'.✓', r•rt.".9'•N� n V'.11111 1,14 i t `. ' ' ii , - r 9 ..� ;'t S,4+y• �,'ca• tt�1 �l rr}N A ri it , , °t'•}F•i, ;' rt.rfrrYM iT'fi�c • • . • a. 53MF. till-UTILITY • + , s ' ti4}1 i Ll.�,, i 1�G9�1 �,: r1- I F,1 Arr, � ,, s,r' I to NA �o,;;rvlcsn � s�I nG� ¢oU t ,,. r 1 aMa' f ,':iiiii:'i •♦ a Iti 1 E, 4 ,`�,. ,�r�•L er ` I• .,♦....f/ilr ,►'..,/ r1•.} /..1,.1 , • �11:2 arr •' ,, gli ri ,j1.1 IA .4. * m6' .....— . � j .. r, • .' •` ,+ _•_(. . {u 1 x; rc{\11« M4vt1 y , ''�c , i C y! Ke yf l" L_, +,1' ',— a.r1 i:.'�"'.. , '4 ..l A,I • •, 1 I,f 4 I , J,r va M `1,' J-;2n � 'M1 � 1 , I rlr•, %'.t "�(IPA. '�a:'►,;�i�lr,''{r• �i,iJrr,�� i' �.1 q ,,.FY;r1..t, ,C ,� :,'�l' 4 'o `�i'•rr f �' 'N,, \ . ,,,M ,.1t +'t. \ `'.t•' J.M 1..hie .. h a , tt •,11'v f :1'yt "1.7,.. t,i, NrM ; f' 1V- ,, Y 1, J.y.• / p ,« wf, q. *i ,i`.0e ' ' ,•: ,. Mhi �, .1 1. 1Y,�'�yl 144r !„�,7.A � i , 1,n ,�1�� .i `i+P.i * .� '-�': JIrr R'..6R ''1+•LIL I. .,1�•y r ii , ,.,JI�F �lV�i +.,:.(r r' -y . ,'11 • `..1,rd,,c„,,'.4(1 t ,0 ,t,ti f ,l ,;it dF X,l�'},,'M. f t x •�r r1 t /N' e ', ' 3 i e> r H r :L 1_ r r t5 � p, t • �'�, `t `4,7111..,,1., ',. !y 21,+�",'1�i11♦ `'iii ♦ ,1�,,{ ,� 1.' / U'1 , „ 1 1 { /[ h xIFr9,�' ,fit:♦ ii ',7ii .•,.� eft I"t;`♦." 1, y J✓'(.'+rjr•"1-1;, ..`Ir 1r lit, 1 1, �, :K 1,. f .t t M 2t' ; '+,,5`t�' •.'' •. 11 ,'' ` . t,L +Yyt 1C I , I q / 1. ♦ • - . • _. •. 'L, i .r , ,.I;r rh.'� !!�, 'j�1"•. '14.,,l {rr i. [ •r•r 'j�l ff�rA 1 .� jr A'M . f r ait t�.k1 1;11 Y 1, e Y C1 V. i PROJECT DESCRIPTION ` I( Request A' 'Phis request is for Development Review Board approval of Oswego Gardens • I Apartments. Oswego Gardens Apartments is a unique 21 unit one and two story frame • } ;a apartment project located on Lakeview Boulevard near Pilkington in Lake Oswego. The project • a, a• is Special Use Housing as defined under L.O.C. Section 48.20.549 and will be operated under the Fair Housing Act Section 807(b)(2)(C) and Fair Housing Public Rule Section 100.304. The composition is 11 one bedroom/one bath fiats and 10 two bedroom/one bath flats. Ail unite have attached single car garages with direct unit access and ground level entries with interior stairways for upstairs fiats. Parking exceeds City;tandards and is designed at 1.88:1, including 21 garages and 18 tandem and open spaces, a total of 39 spaces. • r• The developer of the project,James Zupancic,successfully developed the nearby "+ 54 unit two and three bedroom Oswego Bay Apartments. Since opening in November 1993,the Oswego Bay Apartments have made a significant positive impact on the Rosewood neighborhood. The Oswego Gw dens Apartments project is intended to compliment the Oswego . • Bay Apartments projects by r •iL.iing somewhat smaller one and two bedroom units, at lesser rents, which will be reserved go' occupancy by seniors. The design of Oswego Gardens . Apartments incorporates many of the developer's innovative design approaches, including of ' enhanced safety, security and convenience of attached garages and ground floor entry to both first floor and second floor flats. Architectural interest will also be maintained by orienting the 7 building on Lakeview Boulevard at an angle which will compliment gabled roof design to give an ` overall residential character to the project. • The community need for senior housing continues to increase because of •.0'.p: ' h ' `. (1) inmigration of seniors and (2) mature property owners who seek relief from the burden of e' .: •' . ' property ownership. Oswego Gardens is designed and will be managed to address this growing "r•,,': t . demand resulting from a greater number of active seniors in our community. l * The DRB previously approved DR 11-91 on November 18, 1991 relating to this site. Proposed by the previous owners, that project contemplated a single 20 unit monolithic ' rectangular residential building. The previous owners reportedly abandoned the project duo to a failure to obtain tax credit financing, Oswego Gardens Apartments is not a tax credit financed ;.. project. James Zupancic, a local resident,intends to build and hold this project. The project will be managed professionally and will significantly enhance the overall character of the Rosewood • area. . .Y The design of Oswego Gardens Apartments offers significant improvements to the previously approved DR 11-91. Among these improvements are: • Design - A dramatically improved three building design with creative and [.1 appealing architectural views from Lakeview and Pilkington. • • Traffic Safety - Improved safety by relocating point of ingress/egress further east �� ' �1 away from the Lakeview/Pilkington intersection, 1, lib Page 4 - Narrative �+ EXHIBIT • o OR .F�9,%'el d .fs, W , F , ' 40" : v Q . '•{.; e ,, f gyp: • • 9 rt' , Il • Parking - One attached enclosed garage with auto opener, plus 18 additional spaces (ratio 1.86:1 compared to 1.0:1). • 1 ;' • Site Plan-Improved for defined garden areas, including one for tenant use. Also, • reduced interior traffic speed by traffic flow design. Existing Site Conditions • This site is extremely flat with less than 1% slope. There is only a two foot differential between west and east boundaries. No native trees exist on this site. Historic land use of this site has been agricultural until approximately the 1950s. From the 1950s to the present the land has been • undeveloped. Extreme care has been taken in site planning to orient residential vistas to the interior of the project and away from adjoining commercial uses at Rosewood Shopping Center and Speedy Linguine's restaurant. The developer has also placed great importance on 'di landscaping and a special use vegetable garden exclusively for tenant use. Developer's Background James Zupancic is a Lake Oswego resident who resides at 18400 Delenka► Lane in Lake Oswego. James Zupancic is a member of the Lake Oswego School District Budget Committee and also is a member of the Lakerldge High School 21st Century Schools Site Committee. James and Maria Zupancic's children have all attended Lake Oswego public •... schools. Two have graduated from Lakeridge High School. • _ ft ibt • Page 5 - Narrative 0;u,«n. o.nk,,1, v, , • . : , eI ' , f eT ]' a COMPUANCE WITH COii1PCYEHE!®S0•F. PLAN The proposed Oswego Gardens Apartment project is In compliance with the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan. Each potentially applicable element of the Comprehensive Plan 1.:, IS addressed below,, and characteristics of the project arc cited and compared against Comprehensive Plan criteria. Both general and specific policies are addressed. Technical Information concerning compliance with the Development Ordinance is reserved for the "Compliance with Development Ordinance" Section 6 of this narrative. _._ 1 L Growth Management Policy Element A. Growth Management i OBJECTIVE: To define the City's future growth area as the basis for land use and public facilities planning, to identify short and long range growth areas within the future growth area as a basis for phasing of growth and public facilities, to assure coordination of growth with provisions of public facilities, GENERAL. POLCY: Ill. The City will manage and phase urban growth within the Urban Services Boundary with a logical planned extension of basic services. Specific policy number 3 provides all areas In the Urban Service Boundary not designated EiJTURE aaaa • L;. URBANI2'8LE shall be designated as IMMEDIATE GROWTH. The purpose of IMMEDIATE • �4�' ` GROWTHdes naation le to allow development to occur when the basic urban services and v'� • tj` facilities are available and other applicable growth management policies are compiled with. The. City's Capital Improvements Program will give priority to scheduling facilities which, .. ' 40 ' • , - , . serve IMMEDIATE GROWTH areas". 1. Oswego Gardens is a Special Use Housing development which will bear ', an equitable distribution of costs of public services. it will maintain the aesthetic character and distinct community identity and scale of Lake Oswego. It will assure the quality of public services . and preserve and protect natural features and processes from undesirable effects. , 1, 2. Oswego Gardens is within the Urban Service Boundary. r' L. 3. Adequate City utility services are available to the property, g' 4. The property is designated for IMMEDIATE GROWTH. c c+ 13 ' B. Impact Management L OBJECTiVE: To ensure that new development and redevelopment is I. compatible with community objectives related to the natural environment, community character, provision of public services, facilities and programs, and enriches the quality of Ulife. To minimize adverse effects of growth on natural resources or processes, phyalcsi ' • • e facilities, and aesthetic character. ' V• ''‘14;. f I . ; Page 6 - Narrative o:U„„. „ ,in.,,.r,,.d • 1 • W .. v \\) 1 ,, GENERAL POUCY; III. The City will require new development to pay an 40 c• equitable share of the costa of public facilities, particularly sewer, water, drainage, parks, I 1 open space and streets for traffic Improvements. Specific policy 1 provides "the City will 1.,�' •' require new buildings and development to pay for an equitable share of identifiable cost of public facilities required for or because of the development ". .F. 1. A traffic impact report is provided as part of this application, Traffic impact is minimal, and because residency will be limited to only seniors, traffic is only 44% of a < - comparable multi-family project not limited to seniors. Utility service needs, Including sanitary ' sewer, water and drainage are addressed in the civil engineering documentation provided with '' this application. 2. Historically,senior housing projects tend to have a very minimal impact on public services. In fact, residents of senior housing projects often contribute more to the ry, {�t, community than they cost. For example, Oswego Gardens Apartments will have virtually no ., .,;{" , impact on school enrollment. However,some of the residents may choose to become volunteers _ ?4, ,;.. in the local public schools. The net impact of this project should result in a positive contribution z t Y' to the Rosewood community and to the City of Lake Oswego. ' '� ;` r „. k ,{ k , C. Overall Den& OBJECTIVE: To maintain overall population density which can be adequately served by planned public facilities. GENERAL POLICY: I. The comprehensive plan will maintain the overall, lisi average residential density of the Urban Service Area within the capacity of planned basic ry ;}", . public facilities systems,including at least water,sewer,streets,drainage andpublic safety. '<<`'�� ': y g � f] � n�r�y 1,; Specific policy number 2 provides "facilities plans and Improvement programs for water, • sewer,drainage and streets both specifically explain how the above items were considered". °t t` ;; 1. The proposed density of this project is within the overall population density ' projections which were adopted ancillary to the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed population : increase is well within the capacity of planned basic public facilities systems, including water, sewer, streets drainage and public safety. This property is in a buffer zone between other residential and commercial uses. The proposed density is in complete conformance with r' LO.C. 48.20.549(2) density requirements. 1 2 A complete site evaluation has been prepared in connection with this J project. Oswego Gardens will not unduly affect any of the natural physical, economic, or social conditions of the community. The increased population resulting from this project will be well { within the benchmark growth rate policy of the City. ' p • "" II. Community Resource Policy Element 0 4� . Y A. Natural Resource d ,t, OBJECTIVE: Identify natural resource problems and assets and develop 0 ! meti' da for conserving these valued resources 0 ' Page 7 - Narrative 0 I o. oi • y . s , ,1 1. Storm water runoff,detention,and filtration are accommodated on-site and ar , , , are addressed in the civil engineering report. & ! OBJECTIVE: To improve air quality In Lake Oswego and the metropolitan are where possible, and to protect those areas still enjoying clean air from significant deterioration. , GENERAL POLICY: IL The City will take Into account the dispersion of air pollutants when making land use and public facilities decisions,and will prevent significant { deterioration of local air quality from sources within Lake Oswego. Specific policy number °I,; 1 provides °the City wild encourage land use patterns that minimize or disperse air a; pollutants, Le., preserve open space areas, guide growth through areas less prone to air inversion, and minimize trams congestion. • `a {;• 1. Because of the project'a proximity to public transportation, and because t.T I.„ bemuse the geographic proximity to Rosewood Shopping Center,air pollution impact will be minimized h'1' ` t. beuse of easy access to local sources and reduced vehicular traffic. C. Distinctive Natural Area OBJECTIVE: To preserve the wooded natural character of Lake Oswego,and .' the Individual distinctive features prized by residents. 1. Extensive landscaping will be used to mitigate any adverse impacts on air I,Irdir and noise quality. , T, ,,; V ; D. Potential Landslide Area x`°ti, OBJECTIVE: To protect life and property from natural disaster and hazard • a , due to landslide and to preserve the hillside beauty community residents value. Air, 1. No potential landslide areas exist on this site. ! / ' ,, ':. y E. potential Erosion Area • •r' OBJECTIVE: To protect life and property from natural disaster and hazard i� due to soli erosion and to preserve the hillside beauty community residents value. 1. There is a very low erosion potential for this site because of slight variations in elevation (less than 1% slope). Page 8 - Narrative g, d'" . .*. . . • 1. • Q - - • tl • - • • ' A 'it hJ y' IY• ' - C w '•, I i , .. . •{- . t. " • , 4 .' J.n .�Y'3'f f°-(J. li ,�'1 I i A F. Weals Foundation Soils • '�` ;t L:.P 91 I'. 1 111 4:i .01 f. OBJECTIVE: To protect private and public property from property lose due r'J ;' to construction on weak foundation soils. .. •,{' F 1 ! •, 1. There are no weak foundation soils on this site. , G. Quiet Erwironmeht OBJECTIVE: To reduce the level of noise in Dike Oswego and to protect and maintain the existing quiet arose of the community. , � GENERAL POLICY: II. The City will consider noise control In land use planning. Specific policy number 2 provides`thee City will plan land uses in such a manner as to keep noise lever and disturbancea to a minimum.° • 1. The design of Oswego Gardens contemplates attached garages for each unit. Noise from start up of vehicles will be minimized because of the sound barriers incident to r /, the garages. H. Energy Conservation • OBJECTIVE: To conserve energy in Lake Oswego and the metropolitan area, a , ', 4 where possible, through land use planning, education and the adoption ptlon of conservation • ' oriented policies. 410 . GENERAL POLICY: II. The City will encourage energy conservation through land use planning and site and building design review. Specific policy number 1 provides °the City will encourage higher density residential development near arterials, public transit routes, creinmercial areas and employment centers, were consistent with other comprehensive plan policies. Specific policy number 3 provides "the City will permit ,a mix of residential and commercial or industrial uses in areas where residentially developed neighborhoods will not be significantly impacted. 1. ' Energy conservation techniques will be respected by the orientation of the buildings, insulated walls and attics, and dual pane windows. ' 2. This project is very near a public transit route and near commercial and' • j employment centers, which is consistent with good land use planning. 3. This project will support a mix of residential and commercial and industrial t uses in the southwest Lake Oswego area. \' 4. This project will promote a reduced need for auto use because of proximity ` 1 ' il to local support services. .., Page 9 Narrative OhentAlups6vvtierMettsLY dot 40 ,, . MI 1 1 yF• .t*GlYx14�� • • .� di �• v a t �151 .'i , I. Solid W.eele OBJECTIVt To lower Lake Oswego consumer cost of solid waste management,to maximize the reuse and recovery of waste materials, to minimize energy • costs of the management system, and to conserve and provide a viable alternative to our nonrenewable resources. ' f ENERAL POLICY: IL The City will promote the reuse and recycling of waste • materials. •'/ •,.. 1. Roasmen Sanitation Company will provide solid waste management .eN: '.;';Y J,;t. SONIC ►s to the eite on a regular basis. k r •,`, w i 2. An on-sits recycling center wil be Incorporated to promote recycling of reusable matter. J. Wetlands 1 OBJECTIVE: To preserve adequate natural wetlands In order to safeguard the Igroundwater recharge system, maintain water quality, provide wildlife habitat and reduce , ~'• peak flooding of streams. 1. There are no wetland areas on the property. K Floodplaina 1 le . OBJECTIVE: To protect life and property (both public and private) from the natural hazards of flood waters. 1. There are no floodpiains on the property. L. Stream Corridor A V e f OBJECTIVE: To protect natural features of water courses,to maintain water tk rr 1 quality and to prevent damage to public and private property. , i. • 1. There are no stream corridors on the property. ' ,fi�.; r... M. Social Resources .,�'"': - \ , OBJECTIVE: The development of a community environment designed to „, encourage creative community living and sense of identity. 11,4 GENERAL POLICY: VI. The City will facilitate social interaction to foster an interesting community, through the provision of public facilities and programs, and by planning for a choice of housing types and housing costa which make possible a mix of ages, income levels and life styles within the community. Specific Policy 3(b) provided that the City will"allow for an appropriate mix of unit sizes,configurations and site plans in order led I::I:. ' II. Page 10 Narrative o' orb .4 t , <, la ,44 • that...retlred residents can remain in the community when they can no longer chooee large hone 0 . ' I. The community identity of Rosewood will be preserved and enhanced by y, this seniorThe multi-fami project will also encourage walkingto area housing project. �P j g shopping and services. 1.. 2. Thisei project will act as a sound buffer between existing residential neighborhoods to the east and the commercial property to the west. 3. This project will enhance the diversity of housing within the Rosewood area, ,, adding new multifamily housing to an area which Is now in a state of revitalization. 4. This project adds needed affordable housing for seniors during alime when • the demand for such housing is increasing. r N. Economic Resources 1 ' d , OBJECTIVE: Tir conserve existing economic resources, to maintain and improve the health of the local economy and to contribute to the overall well being pf the ;,f. �,' : ' .1'.,•. regional and state economy. , .,; 1. This projec •411 result in additional housing for the local employment base. The demand for City services will a very low compared to the generation of tax revenue F..: resulting from the project. e , /' 0 *ewe ve, - ill. Land Use Activities Policy Element y`I° �°14 tt OBJECTIVE: To maintain the liveability of existing residential neighborhoods. .N '1 ` 1#'4� i 4 ,t "•j1, GENERAL POLICY I. The City will assure that residential density is °i ,f ` appropriately related to site conditions, surrounding land uses, and capacity of public facilities, (especially streets), and overall growth management policies on density. Specific ♦ i policy 1 e provides Vie City will assure permitted density of residential developments Is suitably related to proximity to public transportation. Medium to high density development should prefercablly be located within walking distance (1/4 mile) of bus lines. GENERAL POLICY; iV. The City will provide for medium to high density designations to meet needs for such housing, in accordance with growth management policies, I • 1 4 14 This site is located near the Jean Road Tri-Met Public Transportation line, • L, Access to public transportation by residents will be extremely convenient. 2, This site has been designated for multi-familyresidential use. .. . . Pt i g • ;. ri, • y Page 11 - Narrative o,khoonslutP4160winArwelli,,a, 40 . • . s fi • D IriniRE41211Sta Land Use OBJECTIVE: To develop a coordinated transportation ayetern which serve the planned land use distribution, and meets complex community needs and desires Including economic, anal, convenience, safety, and aesthetic goals. 1. The Traffic Analysis Report prepared by Charbonnesu Engineering dated n ( ' January 1995 (attached) states (at page 2): The facility will generate a total of 57 trip ends Ina 24 hour period. During the a.m. and p.m. peak hour periods the facility will generate lees than 5 trip ends per hour. Eyl comparison, a regular apartment complex with 21 unite and not restricted to senior dwelling type units vrouid generate a total of 130 trip ends per day and ten trip ends during the peak hour. Therefore, the proposed ti. Oswego Gardens project will generate 44%of the total daily traf as compered to a regular multi-family facility. • In view of the slgtl¢jj / reduced Imoaact this senior howing oraioct will cause on Cltt_tree't Infrastructure. the applicant requests that the transoorttatlon development fees l reduced b t • r44 • • • • k •Page 13 - Narrative gAhomekarpoNanistAnanalv,dcb, ." Ago - y , • . • • COMPUANCE WITH ZONING ORDINANCE STANDARDS .. 0 • " 1. The proposed multi-family use is allowed under the existing R-3 zoning. , ' 2. The ov®raDl density of 21 units on .92 net acres is 22.8 units per acre. This density is in compliance with the Special Use Housing density allowance for R-3 zones which • permits 30 units for the first net buildable acre. • 3. The following are specific zoning ordinance requirements which relate to this project 48.140 Lot coverage Special Use Housings 70% maximum lot coverage and 30% minimum landscaping/open space required. • As shown on the site data chart on Sheet 1, the project is in compliance, The project lot , ..1. coverage is 5t396 and landscaping/open space is 4296. 40.150 Setbacks As shown on the site plan, Sheet 1,the minimum required property line setbacks are 10 feet on all boundaries. In all cases the setbacks provided meet or exceed the allowable setbacks,with the exception of the southwesterly corner of the open parking area which encroaches into the required setback by 5 feet to provide for four additional parking stalls (please refer to Section 6 0 . Variance). 48..155 Height of Structures. 1 j For lots greater than 1/2 acre, the code states that a structure height may average 40 feet with no individual height exceeding 50 feet. No proposed building height, as defined by this section, will exceed 40 feet. The highest point of any building is 30 feet above finish grade. The average overall building height is under 29 feet. Please refer to the individual building elevations for specific building heights. 48.20.549 Specific Standards for Special Use Housing. Development of Special Use Housing requires conformance with certain general and specific' ei conditio��n/��.s... References below relate to those specific code sections listed under • •4 • LO.C. 48.20.549. • 1 I1(a) Tho three apartment buildings are designed specifically for Special Use Housing. Because the project is designed for independent living for seniors,no state licenses are required ' - , ' .,- I before the building is occupied by the residents. 1(b) The occupancy is strictly residential. Period visits by medical or nursing personnel, such as the Visiting Nurse Association or personal physicians for medical or therapeutic care will be permitted, 9 :, , ..1 Page i 4 - Narrative pliam4A 2043001ffisrAment04•dlb 14 ' 4: .. 1 ar • 1(c) Public services have the capacity to serve this proposed development. • 0 ,'"; , ':• ...,, : ' • 1(d) Housing is provided as separate apartment units. 1(e) Wait yes will be paved and lighted and will not exceed 8% in grade. 1(f) Buffering of noise and screening of lighting will be accomplished by application • of appropriate fighting devices and incorporation of landscaping. 1(g) Adequate fire protection will be available to each dwelling unit by looting a fire ' hydrant at the entrance of the project. This fire hydrant will serve all three bulklinga and will be within 250 feet of the furthest point of any one building. 1(h) The requirements of the R-3 zone have been met as described in this section, 1 unless specifically modified by the special use housing provisions. 1(1) Occupancy of the project will be limited to seniors as provided in the Fair Housing Act Section 807(b)(2)(C) and Fair Housing Rule Section 100.304. 1(j) The alto is greater than one-half acre In size, totalling .92 acres. _ 1(k) This proposal is presented .according to the requirements of the PD Overlay , tt ., District, LO.C. Section 48.18.470 al " ' .`: act 1(I) Services such as shopping and other commercial needs are available to the 3h '•4, project through (1) the adjacent Rosewood Shopping Center and the Rosewood Plaza on the "' i . . 410 1 west side of Pilkington Road, and (2) a public community bus system which will provide on-alto service such as Dial-A-Bus or Senior Citizens Bus. �• . . 2(b) The occupancy of the units in the project will be limited to low and moderate w w income residents. 3(b) A total of 39 parking spaces will be provided for the 21 units, exceeding the 1. , . 4 minimum required one to one ratio. The ratio of parking spaces to units will be 1,86:1. w� m w 1 • Li L 1 a ' U .. /1 . f . Page 15 Narrative otemmeewaeremneTemeb ' ,w s .M der � a •1 , COMPUANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS 2.020 Standards for Approval. t• 1. Buildings shall be designed and located to complemente and d preserve e rve '1 the existing buildings, streets and paths, bridges and other uilt environment. ptoad acsnt a. Design buildingsto be complementary in appearance1 structures of good design with regard to: ' I) Materials il) Setbacks Ill) Roof Lines iv) Height ' v) Overall Proportions � group Oswego Gardens is the transition between the existing g p care facility use to the east and the Rosewood Commercial area west of the property which includes the Rosewood "' Market, new retail development at Pilkingtodn Roof the property. A variety of uses currently sewood Plaza), and the exists nguine 4S Cafe,which is contiguous to the west boundaryp p 1�� 4M r,. ,, in the immediat®vicinity, including Jackson Square Apartments east of the®ar ! ? 5 various office and industrial uses within 1/2 mile west of Oswego Gardens. , �-• �•:M.•� of buildings in the area vary widely. The majority of the older, single family homes in the area utilize beveled wood siding, composition or cedar shingle roofing, as well as brick, stone and other traditional building materials. The character of the commercial buildings to the west of the older are consistent in property vary depending on the age of the structure. Many of buildingstd newer cnsist buildings are 14 n the vicinity. • terms of materials with moch f including se guiccoed,fiat roof buildings,concrete structures,etc. considerably more contemporary, in the The objective of Oswego Gardens tos to reflect the the commercial development toe the west.homes As with rthe vast • . :. ^ ,� ' provide an appropriate transitionr' •� . majority of housing in the area, Oswego Gardens features pitched gable roofs, charcoal gray composition shingle roofing, beveled wood siding painted in neutral tones with subtle paint accents, , wood Yaalcony rails,and residential scale window groupings with wood trim. Consistent with other homes in the area, Oswego Gardens is a combination of one and two story building forms. Unique to Lakeview Boulevard, Oswego Gardens has a skewed orientation to ;i • • `' Lakeview Boulevard. The effect of this sawtooth configuration is to offer both significant visual n' interest to the project and increased pockets for landscaping adjacent to Building No. 1. • ' ii a Scale and proportion are also important elements to preserving the integrity of the typical apartment designs, which have large building • a,; : ' '� rosewood neighborhood: Unlike more p masses and broad, expansive roof elements, Oswego Gardens is broken up Into smaller e , elements consistent with the scale of other homes in the area. Each pair of stacked apartment fiats are defined by multiple roof elements which have the effect of offering greater variety ' , architecturally as well as defining a more intimate scale to the project a Page 16 - Narrative lb 11, •I .•' y �Ls. r l'4p v, 'i k Most unique to this rental project is that every home features an attached single 1, car garage. No other recent apartment development in the Lake Oswego area, except the applicant's Oswego Bay Project, offers this amenity. The developer of Oswego Gardens feels r that this provides a more satisfactory parking solution than either detached garage structures, • which tend to clutter the site plan aesthetically, or free standing carport structures. The garages are integrated architecturally as a design element into the overall building form. In addition to offering &dried convenience to the residents of Oswego Gardens, the attached garages offer a level of livability and security not presently offered in other senior rental communities in the area. This feature contributes significantly to the compatibility with existing single family homes in the L • area. • • c. Design bus shelteers, drinking fountains, benches, mail boxes, r . ' ,r- ' • etc., to be complimentary In appearance to buildings. • J No bus shelters occur within close proximity to the property. Ail mailboxes will be centrally located in a single location. The colors of the mailbox structure will match the adjacent , s buildings. 4 0 k d. Design those elements listed below to be complimentary in appearance to those buildings or structures upon which they are located: ' Windows Foundations Doors Mall Boxes 4-, y Downspouts Mechanical Equipment Utility Connections Vents '} ,;, • i 0 Meters Stairs Chimneys Decks and Railings Lights Weathervanes , Signs Aerials and other appendages attached to Awnings the roof or projecting above the roof line. 4 Windows and doors have been carefully located on the building facades to compliment the overall composition of the structure. Window groupings are deliberately formal and symmetrical, echoing the traditional placement of glazing in surrounding older homes. Window and door placement provides an excellent variety and balance to the building elevations. Gutters and downspouts will be painted to match the building trim and will run 'k a down the comer of the building. Utility connections and electric meters will be located on the Inside face of the ' , . 1 building garage at one or two locations per building, as required by PGE. Those locations will + be strategically screened with landscaping to the extent allowed by the utility company. Ail building lighting will be well mounted with a single light fixture at each of the • • combined dwelling unit entries and the street-side corner of each garage pairing providing ample driveway lighting, The entry drive, mailboxes and parking areas will be illuminated by decorative 3 , . Page 17 - Narrative o. diti , 1t •, . . '1 r. residential scale pole lighting 14 feet in height. Light fixtures will be located away from adjacent 40 residential to avoid undesirable glare. '" 1: properties `l- ,;��e. Snags will include "Oswego Gardens Apartments" signs flanking the entry driveway in compliance with Chapter 47 of the Development Ordinance, and small building and • unit identification numbering will be in compliance with Lake Oswego public safety requirements. Fire lanes will be posted by signage on curbs. Building foundations will be standard concrete footings and stemwalls. Due to the flatness of the property, the visual impact of foundation stemwalls will be negligible. S . , Attic venting will be provided in the form of decorative gable end vents (where applicable -per the submitted building elevation) and roof jacks located within the valley al the primary roof massing to minimize their visual Impact ", Unlike the majority of apartment communities in the area (except Oswego Bay), all stairways will be located within indh✓idual dwelling units and will not be visible from the exterior of the buildings. Second floor balcony railings are designed to be deliberately unobtrusive to the design. Railings will be of wood painted white. , No other elements or appendages protrude above the roof line, e. Us. trees and other natural elements to help define building proportion relationships and to provide scale to the structure as a whole. `` L ♦ "L f y A variety of deciduous and evergreen plant materials have been thoughtfully et'r designed around the buildings to enhance the building elevations, accentuate unit entries, and Ic{ '' provide privacy and maximize available natural light into the units. f. Limit the variety of styles of building elements. , The buildings incorporate consistent use of architectural elements, colors and building materials. This combination of elements provides the desired level of design . i. consistency. g. Screen mechanical equipment from view, or place In locations I1 4 ', *a where they will generally not be visible. r , • .i , Mechanical equipment will be placed in locations that will generally not be visible, ' bi h. Every attempt shall be made to design and locate buildings to 4 Y t, j provide access to desirable views, while not blocking the views of others unnecessarily , (density reduction not required). In general this site does not offer significant offside view orientations. Where possible to do so, buildings have been oriented to benefit from relationships with neighboring 1 residential properties, • y • 1 Page 18 - Narrative o' S .„ • .tit, . •- - . - • - - • •* ` -a.,. . • • 2. Buildings shall be designed and located to complement and preserve exiting natural land form, trees, shrubs and other natural vegetation. No significant land forms or vegetation exists on the property. The topography f, is an imperceptible gradient of less than 1% sloping from southwest to northeast. a, Consider land forms as design elements which must relate to building elevations to determine scale and proportion. The flatness of the site allows considerable flexibility In orienting buildings; however, the linear geometry of the property proved a significant limitation during the site r planning of Oswego Gardens. The developer hap responded with a staggered rowhouse concept ept which offers considerable variety and visual interest The placement of street lighting • and new plant material develops a more formal, yet intimate streetscape throughout the Interior of the community. b. Design foundations to match the scale of the building being supported. Berming, reading, or sheathing the foundation structure with wall siding are examples of methods which accomplish this purpose. See 2.020 (1 d) above. C. Use decks, callings, and stairs to relate a building to the contours of the land. Again,the site is virtually fiat. Ground level units feature small prlvrte patio areas which relate to pockets of landscaping around the perimeter of the property. All ground level patios are screened with low shrubs. • 3. Buildings shall be designed to minimize the personal security risks of users and to minimize the opportunities of vandalism and theft. Building hardware that discourages forced entry and provides appropriate ogress capabilities shall be used. As discussed above, all unite feature attached garages with direct unit access. This provides the highest measure of controlled access to every home. Vehicular access to the property is restricted to a single point of egress centrally located on Lakeview Boulevard. This • controlled access point discourages intruder access to the property. Landscaping has been designed at unit entrances to eliminate blind corners and opportunity for intruders to hide. All ‘.r entry doors will be of steel construction with security deadbolts. No windows occur contiguous to the entry doors to thwart forced entry to the units, All entry patios are illuminated from dusk tto dawn on a central house lighting circuit. 4. Buildings shall be designed and constructed to reduce noise Impacts on Interior occupied spaces and adjacent properties. • a. Use solid barriers such as fences,berms,natural land forms and ' . . r. structures to reduce sound levels. ; , �� 40 Page 19 - Narrative o.44 • w • rya rrrlr ! W �. a•4 . FF r� , The inclusion of attached garages 'reduces the amount of traffic noise generated ,� ore site. Other pawing areas will be screened with shrubbery and perimeter fencing. With the exception of Lakeview Boulevard, the entire perimeter of the property will be screened by a six foot high cedar fence and shrubbery. bu Minimize the window surface on sides facing adverse sound sources, where possible. Only one of the three buildings orient towards a major noise source, Lakeview y ; Boulevard. Ample landscaping will be provided to mitigate any adverse street at an s loi noisee to impsigniact Ad windows are dual pane, and par,Mo are skewed from th tly dampen adverse traffic noise. c. Hest pumpo, or similar mechanical equipment shall be located livingareas such as bedrooms, outdoor d so that operating mass does not affect use of J , decks or patio areas and adjacent property. No such equipment is anticipated. 5. Buildings shall be designed, and constructed with root' overhangs, flashing and gutters that direct water away from the structure. • N: The pitched gable roof configuration provides positive drainage to the roof gutter :,, system in all instances. The gutters connect via drain leaders directly to the proposed underground drainage system. 0 • .- 3.005 Stream corridors No stream corridors exist on the property. p?l 4.005 Wetlands No wetland areas exist on the property. 5.005 Streetlights • '~ ' As previously discussed, internal streets and driveways will be lighted by wall F • mounted fixtures at the corner of every garage pairing. Pole light fixtures will be located at the • 1 Pole fixtures will be located entry drive, parking areas and adjacent to refuse containment area. i � to eliminate glare onto existing properties. The level and uniformity of illumination will be In compliance with Lake Oswego standards. Additional lighting will be provided by building ^ r. mounted light fixtures at unit entries and patios. • Please refer to Section 2.020 (1d) for further discussion of project lighting. See the enclosed landscape and site plans submitted with this proposal. The manufacturer cut • sheets of proposed lighting fixtures have been included on the attached exhibl►a.,iii I- Page 20 Narrative a it d at • ,� • r+ Y r=+ y \ -' s ' 6.005 Transit System. a Tel-Met Route 30 currently serves Jean Road. Current bus stops for southbound buses exist at Piikington and Jean Road to the southwest and Deemer and Jean Road to the south of ths�,property. !' , Northbound buses currently stop at Jean Road and Tamara Avenue south of the property. Both stops will be linked to the property by walkways via Rosewood Shopping t�� w Center. 4% •�.' 7.005 Parking and Loading Standard. y Pleataa refer to the attached silo plan exhibits for information on parking end 1 dray configurations. A complete breakdown of provided parking has been included. r' i \ 1.\ The following is a summary of ordinance required parking for the project: 1* p ��p� ppft�.� Parking Ratio Unit Type Required Number of Units Spaces Required 4 per er uni+ 11, 1 . 1 bedroom —�-- 1 2 bedroom 1 per unit 10 10 Total Parking Required 21 The siteplan reflects a total of 39 parking spaces, which exceeds the code required parking. •, ,1 ,.n ,ht Qi I In conformance to applicable code requirements, one handicapped space has 00' 1, been provided. Please refer to the submitted site plan for location. :,.. Only ten percent of the parking spaces will be compact. No carports are <• r' 1 proposed. ' , ,. 0.005 Park and Open Space. ,., 1. All major residential development and office campus development shall provide open space or park land approved by the City in an aggregate amount equal to at least 20% of the gross land area of the development. ,.r 2. Where no Distinctive Natural Area, Protection Open Space, Public Open Space or Public Park Land is located on the site, the park or open space requirement can r be met by providing landscaping which meets the requirements of the Landscaping Lil Standard. "' sa '' ' Over d296 of the project site consists o Gardens for the enjoyment of all esidents, 4 ,' P P ' • 3 areas are fairly evenly distributed throughout Oswego as well as neighboring properties, ; ,a , ,,, Page 2i - Narrative g ome 'normelv'� .. •1- 1.. ... , i 1. pia ' a !/i"� I. . .. . '+ r tt r • . +,• . 4N • „' Pc '. ,' • 4, 4• 14.1:1-'f 411. i, n ..a tr0 • ' • A unique vegetable gierden area will be dedicated to tenant use. The applicant Ash is hopeful this area will be widely used for recreation, exercise, socialization and production. A beautiful flower garden Is also centrally located in the property. I I cllyen the extent of developed open space provides within tho ,g_ro ect the applicant req, sac ac uisition and development fees buialved. ce-• 0.00E Landscaping, Screening and Buffering, • The project landscape design concept has been carefully coordinated with the \ i ' • planning and design of buildings, parking areas and circulation. The efficient site layout results in tie landscaping exceeding Lake Oswego code requirements. The orientation of primary building forms and recreational areas provides excellent opportunities to create attractive outdoor r. I, spaces and an appealing streetscape along Lakeview Boulevard. • The centrally located entry driveway on Lakeview Boulevard is landscaped with ,, low growing shrubs and ground cover to maximize vision clearance. Internal street tree plantings 4 include conifers and deciduous trees. The areas Immediately in front of the buildings includes a variety of shrubs, lawn and deciduous trees. Areas where two or more garages occur will be provided with trellis work for vine-type plantings for softening. „, - The parking areas adjacent to the perimeter of the property will be buffered by a , u hedge of evergreen material in front of a six-foot high cedar fence to reduce traffic noise off site. The areas between buildings and parking will be predominately lawn to facilitate improved security for parked cars and pedestrians. The irregular areas behind buildings at the interior of the site, will be planted with a mix of evergreen shrubs to define patio areas and a combination of deciduous trees and • conifers for Intermittent screeningbetween units and to enhance buildingelevations from I' 11"Ma°!s adjacent properties. 'rry The proposed plant material species, size and spacing are identified on the - landscape plans submitted with this application. All plant material sizes and propraod spacing meet Lake Oswego code requirements, All plant material will be installed to industry standards , , and specifications. r An automatic irrigation system will be installed to irrigate all proposed landscaping A areas on site. d This site does not contain any rare or endangered plant species identified in the • j • Lake Oswego Development Ordinance, w a On-site topsoil will be stockpiled during construction and reapplied to form berms {� and to areas of proposed lawn and planting, n t All existing overi°,ead powerlines currently servicing the property will be removed, \ New utilities will be installed underground to City Public Works standards. i • te �, Page 22 - Narrative V,a++lnnd. iwNdb. . . S .. r . , i. .. ,.. . . : ; , ' f . • The site landscaping for the project will be maintained to City standards. • 10.005 Few. •,; }°• With the exception of Lakeview Boulevard, the perimeter of the project will be enclosed by a cedar fence with the height not exceeding 6 feet. • ' 11.000 Drainage Standard for Major Development, l' The subject property fails within a shallow drainage basin, sloping gently from �� i • southwest to northeast. Any alteration of existing drainage patterns as a result of this ,development will not adversely affect other properties. On-sits drainage systems will be V; engineered to comply with city storm water runoff quality. .' . No city storm sewer mains currently serve the property. The soil characteristics , of the property are highly permeable and provide excellent natural drainage. Storm water management is accomplished on-site through the use of an underground drywall. Such measures are sufficient to meet the city's storm water runoff requirements. .a.' 13.005 Weak•Foundstlon Soils. No potentially weak foundation soils exist on the property. A copy of a recent geotechnical investigation of the property has been submitted to city staff, 14.005 Utility Standard. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM , In order to serve the developer's previous project on Jean Road, Oswego Bay . I Apartments,the developer extended the 10" PVC public sanitary sewer line along the front of the }. subject property, then south along its westerly border, then east along its southerly border, eventually to terminate into Jean Road. At the southwesterly corner of the subject property, the wi� r , 4Y i,,,e developer installed a 'T' at the manhole junction in anticipation that future development of this } f4' site could take advantage of this connection. `!,£}.+;�; _ •�aa'y,q . J Therefore,no extension of the public sewer line is necessary for connection to the lateral lines. Sewer lateral lines outside the public easement are to be private, servicing one - building each. WATER SYSTEM/FIREFLOW t The proposed water system is to be line tapped to the existing e•Inch water main in Lakeview Boulevard, north of the project. Given the relative size of the development, a single 6-inch Water main is proposed to service the project. Sufficient water pressure is available to all ' ,• I dwelling units, as required by code. Where necessary to limit water pressure to 60 PSI, a private • f , . individual pressure reducer will be provided on-site at every water meter including irrigation system meters, ., • . • Wage 23 - Narrative c.V+ ft k+w+.wab ; w y, . r • a • err - g �4 •1 1 I y 1 c `f p, `r ' Firefow estimates provided by the Fire Department are 2250 GPM. Available 0 • fireflow is 3400 GPM. Therefore, adequate firefiow is available to the site. ;: Per the City Fire Department requirements, one new fire hydrant will be located s on site. The placement of the fire hydrant provides fire protection within 250 feet of all buildings. ",` 9 9.005 Hillside Protection and Erosion Control. , , No hiilelde conditions occur on the property. Soil erosion control measures will be maintained during construction and during , the first full year following construction (or. until soils have stabilized). An Erosion Control Plan 1� will be submitted by the general contractor prior to construction. . 19.005 Access. The site will be served by a single access point located near the center of the Lakeview Boulevard frontage. The proposed driveway location Is consistent with thee . recommendations of the Traffic Analysis submitted with this application. This location is '- . I ' significantly better than the location proposed by the previous developer because of the ` - ineased distance to the intersection of Lakeview and Pilkington. This location minimizes any '• ' 1 conflicts.with other traffic entering Lakeview Boulevard. The driveway provided is 24 feet wide at Lakeview Boulevard before widening at the Interior of the site. 'This provides two lanes at Lakeview Boulevard, including one lane for 0 + inbound traffic and one lane for outbound traffic. The Traffic Analysis indicates that the traffic impact from the Oswego Gardens is minimal. The total number of trips generated from the site t t expected to occur during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours is less than 5 trips generated from the :` site. Please refer to the Traffic Analysis Report submitted with this application.e. 19.O05 Site Circulation Standards - Driveways and Private Streets. All driveways and private streets within the development are in compliance with City standards. The primary clear asphalt driveway width between buildings is not less than 24 feet. Hammerhead style turnaround has been provided at the west boundary, The applicant has reviewed the internal street circulation with the Fire Department. All asphalt paving cross-sections comply with the construction standards of the Lake Oswego Development Ordinance. Reinforced concrete pads have been provided adjacent to all refuse collection areas, where loading tends to be heaviest. All interior streets are edged with extruded concrete curbing affixed to the asphalt surface, r a ,1 At no point on site is the driveway gradient greater than 1%. Page 24 - Narrative • It • • / :. I Sufficient maneuvering width has*been provided adjacent to ail garages. The minimum outside front wheel radius provided exceeds 24 fest. .. . 0 -. . t,:' +t t ,2O.O Circulation Standards d Bikeways and Walkways. A 5-foot unobstructed akiewaik will be provided along the Lakeview Boulevard frontage west of the entrance as a part Of this development t o point on the sidewalk will g exceed a gradient of greater then 1%. Ramps for handicapped Lcee will be provided at all points ' - .,. � where a path intersects a curb. • ' } l The applicant will maintain all walkways within the Lakeview Boulevard right-of-way. A bike y hss not been proposed as a part of this devek0pment. • 1 .a . •TT t�� rr ,, ''fie V47/ ry ••"y.t;dU.. FFF f a ' 7 . 0 „ . 9. ` 0. • • .., A • ^r rs Aq , •. Page 25 - Narrative .„r• `sir,;, Er 4 a ! "4 ,r' /.1a t3Y' Y�}s VARIANCE REQUEST/EXCEPTIONS Tb. site plan contains two features which are exceptional but justifiable, The Ci ,c' yproposes that neither Situation #1 nor Situation #2 (both described below) requires "S applicant a variance approval. Explanation of this conclusion is contained in each reference below. .a N Sltustion el . Building No. 2 Is sited outside of a tan foot set back on the eastern border of the property adjoining the group care facility owned by Mr. and Mrs. Eldon Edwards. LO.C. Section 48.04.150(5) provides as follows: ( s lfdYterr a new da�velopment or the expansion or reconstruction of an 1 existing development occurs In R-0, 3 or 5 zone which abuats an existing less intensive residential use, a set back shall be �° lY established on the lot zoned R-0, 3 or 5 of a depth of at least the e height of the principal building on the lot zoned R-0, 3 or 5. , I• parcel immediate to the east of the project The applicant has been advised that the adjoining immediately is not currently being used as a single family residence (see attached Confirmation). Instead,the property is in transition and is being remodeled into a group rare facility. Therefore, it la applicant's position that no variance is required because the adjoining Tax Lot 3000 Is zoned R-3 and is nal an existing less Intensive residential use. , a ' Nevertheless, in the event that a variance is required, it is the applicant's position r. t ';te. •` that the necessary requirements of a Class 2 variance under LO.C. 48.24, 50 have been met. 'tay4f': ,.' The primary reason for siting the building up to the ten foot setback is to provide additional width 0 In the driveway and additional off-street tandem parking abutting the garages to Building No. 2. This results in nine additional open parking spaces and increased safety. It is in the best • interests of the community to minimize off-street parking (see comprehensive plan regarding ' minimizing oft-street parking in Rosewood commercial district). Without the ten foot setback,the; �. } additional parking will be lost. Situation#2. In the southwestern corner of the property the site plan contains four d additional open parking spaces which sre intended to be utilized primarily by residents/visitors of Building No. 3. Since it is not generally permissible to locate parking areas within the ten foot a setback to commercial zones (Rosewood Shopping Center), request Is made for permission for this exception. Again, due to the fact that four additional parking spaces are created as a result . of intruding into the setback requirement by approximately five feet, greater safety is achieved. jand the Interests of the community is best served by permitting this exception. Pursuant to LO.C,Section 48.18,476(4),the Development Review Board may grant an exception to the minimum side yard set back of the underlying zone, without the necessity ' of meeting the requirements of LO.C. Section 48,24,650 to 48.24.690 (Variances) if the requirements of 48.18.476 are met and.,,Iesser set backs are necessary to provide„.protection of abutting natural areas. ', L.O.C. Section 48,18.476 is met because the use of the project Is for independent •.;` 1 senior living,the lot coverage is less than that permitted,and the landscaping Is greater than that fp . Page as - Narrative n' �� ,,,.73 ' 1 Ii .. . /, +. . 2 b p . B,YV^,h I , , required. L.O.C. Section 48.18.476(4)(b) is met because additional ott-stroot parking is a ;fi protection of abutting natural areas because it will result in less off-street parking or parking on \I, nearby undeveloped land which include natural areas. i For the reasons cited above, the applicant respectfully requests that the site plan be approved. r >, • 'tn•'if`k E�56 r T 7� ti , ! 41) . 4 • y - 6 , • '.• ` 1• • ._, i-.V y ^ 7. . 4 4 e r_. Page 27 - Narrative p.'Vwm�aipel lnrrallv.ddo ' A S h .,I r . . .4 . . / , .\ a . ,. r DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE b ep , Commencement of construction of Oswego Gardens Is dependent upon obtaining PI City approvals and financing. A timing City approvals are granted absent dsley, and fundtn� for construction and permanent financing Is committed soon,it Is possible that the project could begin within the 1995 Wilding season. if delays In obtaining City approvals or funding occur, .1. It is probable that the project will be built in 1906. • Oswego Gardens wig be constructed In five to seven months from goundbreaking, r .. depending upon weather and other factors. The applllcant forecasts that the project will be prepared for issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy y In the 4u1 quarter of 1995. 1 ro ,fit,, 1.e !r�7 .1 .• LL \ I i J f s ; • t ` w Iy Page 2C - Narrative °: , .„,n4t... , , . ... ;1.41 1. - • 1 Or ro I 0 , .• it • • • i .t Y�.. Application for Variance ,. James D. Zupancic Oswego Gardens 21-unit Seniors Apartment Project Lakeview Blvd., Lake Oswego Application is made for a variance as outlined in the previous submissions by owner of the subject site, James D. Zupancic. The variance would permit location of Building Number 1 a distance of 1.I 10 feet from the east side property line of the property. The property immediately to the east of '. the subject site has, in the recent past, been used as a single family residence(even though the • property is zoned multi-family). The current owners of the neighboring property have confirmed in writing that the neighboring property is not now being used as a single family residence, but is • being converted into a group care facility. Staff has determined that a variance is necessary because use of the neighboring property may at a future time revert to single family residence, a . • use which is"more intense" than multi-family, thus necessitating a greater setback than the 10 feet , ' 1 normally permitted if the use was not"more intense". If the use of the neighboring property was as a single family residence, because of the building heights the required setback would be 18 feet. The common setback around the property is 10 feet, which allows for a small private yard for •.••'t ,ro..-,,, tenants and an adequate landscaping buffer in parking areas. If the Building Number 1 setback fill,'�4 was required to be 18 feet, instead of the 10 feet requested, the most significant impact would be 1 ''i5: t:° `" loss of nine tandem parking spaces in front of Building Number 1. This is very significant F•'; because; .- - ..," . ''. 0 1. It is the owner's experience that tenants use and value such tandem parking spaces •.r because they allow for greater safety and convenience, In a senior housing project, these factors „ , :'k will be even of greater importance. ' r,: 2, If the tandem parking spaces are lost, motorists must nrcessaiily use street parking lye, t , ', p along Lakeview Blvd., a street which is not suitable to absorb additional on-street parking. It is I Yr • ,., ��" consistent with stated City policy to mitigate against increasing on street parking in the Rosewood , , A Commercial District (see DRB Application). ''y• 'i t , 3. If significant additional on street parking results, dangerous conditions could occur { from sight restrictions for cars leaving the project. Again safety will be of paramount importance •, for senicL tenants, 4, Significant additional on street parking could impede pedestrian traffic which could n cause a dangerous condition. The owners of the neighboring group care facility (in transition) have no objection to the 10 foot • .. �� setback. The impact to the neighboring property is minimal, Denial of the variance would be extremely significant to the applicant, and would cause increased health and safety risks to the senior residents. For reasons stated above and those cited in the DRB Application, the applicant requests approval of the variance request. ' 1 EXHI81rt X / 1 H, L� jDZ , Y . • 1.'. . • ' , :" ,'' . `,. . \\I. Y ... "... 1 1 v,* • . ' .' ..., \ r ' 1 r xF • JAMES D. ZUPANCIC 18400 Delenka Lane E Lake Oswego, OR 97034 I V E 00 ``" MAR 2 4 1995 CiITY Qi'i./'IfiL- j�' 1 March 24, 1995 Dept,of Planning h ..I��Gd n9 f ;alepmerM • r.. VIA HAND DELIVERY 1 Ms. Elizabeth E. Jacob Associate Planner N City of Lake Oswego "' 380 "A" Avenue • Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: DR 3-95, Application for 21 Unit Apartment Complex Oswego Gardens Apartments ' Y ,,; Dear Ms. Jacob: • F,, '4 ; ; This is in response to your letter dated March 9. 1995 in connection with the above , 4. referenced project. I will respond to your questions by reference to the paragraph numbers used 0 in your letter. 1. The water quality/detention facility has been redesigned to be completely within the property boundaries, A drainage report has been provided under separate cover, • including impervious area calculations. Revised plans have been delivered to you under separate cover (see attached cover letter), 2. The revised plans now provide for two fire hydrants as per the fire department requirement, , 3. A geotech report prepared yAGRA Earth & Environmental is attached,p p by along with a report letter dated March 21, 1995, • 4, Revised site and landscaping plans have been submitted to you under separate cover, Parking ha8 been illustrated and modified as per your requirements. Tandem parking spaces are now illustrated on the site plan, Twenty-four foot wide aisle or twenty-six foot ' wide maneuvering areas are provided as required, The parking/driveway at the south end of the project has been redesigned to provide for adequate turning radii and is in conformity with applicable minimum standards, 5, It is my understanding that the owner of the structure located at 3350 f, `. , kview Boulevard rtlis currently inthethat aess of remodeling the structure into a group care process facility, my understandingbuilding permit is not required for the remodeling under construction, Therefore, the City would not have been notified of the change in use, As 4) . . . .4--.2.._ , •. . ... , r .. , is.A' w y u ' �Ir, U • Ms. Biizataeth E. Jacob • 1, March 24, 1995 , ., 0 Page 2 confirmed by the declaration of the owners submitted with the DAB Application, the subject structure is not currently being used as a single family residence. Nevertheless,there is always the chance(however slight)that the use could revert ' ' back to single family use prior to requests for building permits for this project. Therefore, I 'l' request that the DAB approve a variance for a ten foot set back on the east'property line, subject �,. � to the stipulation that the variance will become moot if the staff confirms that the subject site is �' not being used as a single family residence at the time of grantingbuilding permits. A ten foot set back should be permitted on the east boundary line because the variance request conforms with all of the requirements of 48.24.650 as follows: `• p. The request Is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship because the tandem parking spaces in Building No. 1 will not be possible without the variance. , 0, H•tr b. Issuance of the variance would not in injurious to the neighborhood ' , , but would, in fact, be beneficial to the neighborhood by providing additional off-street .,;c` parking. c. The request is the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable r. use of the property. ' , ..''' 0 d. The variance is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. • e. The physical geometry of the property requires a creative use of building placement and parking space. f. The variance is necessary to make reasonable use of the subject l ' property. • f' , • g. The hardship was not created by the applicant, and the variance n may not be necessary provided the transformation of the neighboring property to a Group Care Facility continues, l h, The economic impact of a variance denial would be very significant , a.: to the applicant because of the removal of the tandem parking spaces. I. The adjoining J g property owner has no objection to a ten foot setback on the east boundary. r j. A ten foot set back would be consistent with the common set back " around the entire property. r k. The community wct4id be well served by increasing the number of ' . . , 40 off-street parking spaces available to future residents of the project, 4, C r>' 5-3 `1111V1 '11/ 1 t ��Y 1t-1�Jf•I, a� ` Y •!"1 i jy r , `Cr , ,,fix , ;�1 aXr • 't tr ,, `�` w Ms. Elizabeth E. Jacob March 24, 1995 0 .. . . : .•:,.1.1), s, 1' Page 3 �,tY„; ace has been modified on the south end of the driveway. 6, Maneuvering sp r•. �' The only place which encroaches on the ten foot set back is the tug ono at d e rfest refuse collection area on the we.at side of the project. This set backrequested instead of ten feet. A Class 1 variance is requested pursuant to LOC 46.24,650 for the following j . reasons'• a. The turn around requiring the five foot set back Is required for fire portion of the property. The turn around has truck turn around to access the far south been approved by the City's Engineering Department and the Fire Marshall. It is the minimum amount necessary for the proper turn around. • b. The turn around also provides access to the southern portion of the ' property for moving and service trucks. • c. The five foot setback on this small portion of the west boundary is against a commercial zone located within the county area (Rosewood Shoopping Center), P This five foot setback would not detrimentally impact the adjoining property. " ^ ' d, The request is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship. e. The development is not injurious to the neighborhood. 0 '. .: ' • :'' • • f, The request is the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable �4,1, • use of the property. rI J'1�f�'ryp,5� ".. ri � hLrt•• - � •.; ,� -.r,r; g, The request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. • •r" f . � • geometry of the site, this setback . , h, Because of the physical modification is necessary, I. A reasonable use of the property cannot be made without the variance. j, The hardship was not created by the applicant. • • K. The economic impact upon the applicant will be significant if the • variance is denied, I, The adjoining property owner does not have an objection to a five foot setback, .,.. 0 . , s . d - • _1P'+ r dui i.s xtc^) - +, , 1,.',,.•,', _ ., f `t.1 • • • • ti 4f ;'•.lh}4`I iF'��tR1 fin' .1 • t '1 ,ii• t s Ms. Elizabeth E. Jacob . March N, 1995 • Page 4 • m. The average setback along the west boundary is greater than the ten feet required because of the inclusion of a special garden area on the west boundary. • Respectfully submitted, , cf41/9 D-(50 James D. Zupancic a' JDZ:nmt o:ua+ilo +w►ooe01,1tr v • 6 'a • 10 � 1 v j 1 f,•h ' 4.. '! • Y, AO 410 •. • • 1 - I 1 t I '.f s f �•I i'_ 1 1 Y In.. Ed TIM I Ian j}T' Ire+ 111 t L ' ' 7k SUN l ' a o 7. [E F')II__ A, N (I) RIXF)O6LIR111 F,>a•o aAt , p, $r o t e UAATER lALNH ITY FUTON OAON �y A E ia N S 1I dr.r►.r l� QC 5 diV '‘-, 4 , • ..,. N r 1 \s. ®\I ! —6'•i'NWaJ Az 000Gl1RNfa RWGA ••001011.0 }y 1 \�� , LkgATION MAP 1 u r I r'nkt t s /'�` ��-ONE t/TORY „ rf, 'e, y • W , •` (gyp 1 \'� � I �, UNIT 6UMMARY 11 ENTRY Mal 1i). �' 11 ^ 'V EXIST UP GE CV(•AV6t' Nt f� •� II 'Al UNITE, • 10D 00.Ft. 1 t9EDFi00t'I I W111J 1a . ` .O/i • 0 GROUP' GARa 10 "Ar UNltb• 9w 00.FT 2 DECIZOOH I eAIN 1 DEDICATIGN ,`\ pAGILITI' �.,..,,,,I...-• .r rtaxo00n 0'01DEuAl1c0. ' �_• "' ,. AREA 6UMMARY r t 1, t', `• • •VOA , LOT COVERAGE 9A90 7't% Y t'atl iNl PRIVACY tSCREEtJb r/ ��'' w* PARKING AND DRIVEO W«�O2 )9% Y P 4 -/ . ,�rf' .,� AREA tJF LANDOCApING 16,592 44% ® ' I J 1�1�•En-'`-•n NET 01TE ARP.A )1,109 'P� "AG v`ti.0 !- AREA OF DCDICATIOfJO 9,SJ4 �' ',fj, ,,o„ II `�� 1.• GRO60 OITE AREA ,19?xi Ill �. ..--,' !1 a !4 y' , t ' it- 0111° , INA voi---40,'" •• 11" 3 P' -...".re�� 41 OFt" s3Tiaf= T PARIG.INCz �5cuR046 ILM ,, 11* . 0`y0'W 71 10/0 X 20/0 GARAGE DTALLO 100% 1 . ! 14• 14 b/O X 10/0 TANDEM OTALO VI 0 1 \\\\ I� j96M`R`o lb TOTAL 9PACE5 PROVIDED 141% uA T ` tl i INCLUDING I NANOIG'OTALL 1 �` `, I .,/tea+ JACk60N P�C,dUAR�t AI' s l .; > 11 t 1 A(. MANEVvERINo ARRA— I� • 4 R■'' -a r 10 0 APARTMINT6 y a I kt •1 c • 0� I ice. it 61 I IE3003 • w n Al a HAIL STATION UUOUMIITY A*INDICATED �++ 0b ?4' Ir6t� %' lalI b4-11tAIiY DROP DOX NY)ENCLObtJRE 01 w' AI.LE `a1►-air., 4 it & INTEPHAIIOtJAL I4Al1OICAP eit'feWL I. �'"�� ' do oICYCLE PARKING 3 .e `•� ."E:.atA6LE GARDEN\Z •' 01 c am- l�y;7 • p y l ! ROSEWOOD `� ua 1u .1' ' . 0 I '. .✓ tl144PT,N•••IT'61 N1ARiC�aT kk1' RIOR LIGHTIN�i 1 0'•10 NIGH OIGIIT •0 T 000C1Rt81G FENCE „a. :.,,_ 't�.,,, bINGLE ICAO Ie 38 I-1Pb••KEENE � 1 , • t + ^. t," . 11•�`'/ �! ) MOAT 14'ABOVE GRAM �`� 7ie G ?Iq >4 6i=lENDY OStU�GO MAY 1\ `•I•la WALL MC).$l llt>O•KECNE SAW IDyNLk•I ft1 k LINGUINpI'6 ,IS,. a tt�vNr 19'AeovE GRADE f 'I r,7; tl ` P 11T1 .` 0 . . . ,.. .... L I I CO i J r �It Ie , 1 •�'fl if l•t �. � 8 etrr L+: v 1, MINUTES OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING .. ` Ask • illir ROSEWOOD ACTION GROUP February 7, 1995 7:00 p.m, ,,, J N 9: A noticed meeting of the Rosewood Action Group was convened 1n the library of 'j the Rivergrove Elementary School on February 7, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to Q� order. Mr,James Zupancic was introduced by the Chairperson and was asked to present information about the proposed Oswego Gardens Apartments project, Mr. Zupancic introduced • , Mr. Ron Naff, designer. Mr. Zupancic then presented the overall concept of the project and I. v" design features, A color site plan was displayed as part of the presentation. • •• .;•‘ Upon completion of the presentation, comments were made and questions were •1 4 asked by members of the Association. Members commented that there was a significant need " in the community for this type of development. Members expressed appreciation for the creative ��,;• architectural design and residential feeling of the project, Suggestion was made to present the plan to the Lake Oswego Senior Center to (1) give Lake Oswego seniors the opportunity to get on a waiting list for the project and (2) solicit input from senior citizens concerning the project. An offer was also made to help Mr. Zupancic obtain community development funds to financially assist the project. Members of the Association were in overwhelming support of the project. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the following resolution was unanimously ► ,.r' adopted: '• ,,,i1 RESOLVED, that the Rosewood Action Group approves and r� ;. supports the Oswego Gardens Apartment project and encourages '` the City of Lake Oswego to approve this project as expeditiously ' k t as possible. •M14 pti k,,., ` r Mr. Zupancic and Mr, Naff were then excused from the meeting. ►.:a Dated this 7th day of February, 1995. • r, • .. -espectfully submitted, 40 James D. Zupancic q:V+omelzupaj\garden\m l nute0 t.Mtp A k r V. 1 " 40 1 EXHIBIT ; t 1 7 A o , ,...,1,,,,,,,,,.,.:,:;•,:,.......,,...*.,...'......,,,'.11.4.,,,L 0"151 T ' EXTRUDED CANC. • • LAND6CA.•!1 CURDN6 1 • O �1 T CUMIN*M1 EDGE 1•M T /i ..1,,. ;.;;,..,,,...,,.., 6TOR1 WATER DR1EOt61CN AIIKA .Fr� 6EE PLANT LIST O"OIQ PEED MIX � Off; :.. iiiik y � Ly tl� � 1 r' ' .�� !I�,,�e' C�c+q ILL MIX r ,+CIRCULAR .0 gip+ I ''':....1.: rf • • �`d ® •� r�'w� !!P 1 .I. :°.:.IERWG DAWN •, WATER oJAl.1TY '�,1,�11=1II . IIII Iii 1'. �j�� r�ATURc.oeE MET.. `'� \ _ .11=1 '' x 1 ♦ �'n ' •ii • 1U1111' h I I •i�- • teDo1 eALI. 1••••0 i••• 1 r +Y+RFOm I TaDls �j 1 �t j.! II►O•i!r 6?i 11 ��7 I II U=il f 1 ,'' � II w �{�j=j�?�� --- COMPACTED 9ACKFILL S '••: I r , NATIVE�,� -- / !, r To Ity Weil uErmtie , jjc v�i;' PLANTING I��TAIL 1 ei"..* );. NOT TO*GALE GRAvE.COvER DETIIfdEN*iDEW4LK ` 1 NOTSi61 lilt aAND ECGE OR `,, �.� C PVM , `' i I ALL E*TO CE*TAKEDIWbbr1LE LODGEMOLE (� .,)t, - �" T*• P T/KE UYJ R DDER TIE*,*TAKE TO 6-J�: , ` *r nR M ACED Syi -f�.♦ ,i1 CN WNDIWND 610E OP TREE.AND EXTEND INTO NANA y,IL R g/ v f / / �"y/° •.� T ALL PLANT TO OE TLLOCR THE UNDTN AND �a,. 1r G••.' �:. l DEPTH ,+I►• t�_: 4�� Cr TNR RopTDALLnCONTANER S�'f 1 +•� T/ `/rr�'Z ; .� 9 TOP PO ROOTDALL TO DR SET 1•LL m ADJACENT 1LIDO ^ ( ~V.. iI y O 1 A6NMOItfi TAD®TO DE map(WALL move AND 611fA1O6 •I� �.�'. 'y S• da 111'\11 AT THE RATE OP t TAD POOL I GAI.,!POR 6 GALAND. \J �( 0 ,►�� ;: S.. ��•. --� 1M 1.k111 1 FOR b ATE TAD NIXAD . R IC•* 1C Id.0 - ile <...., . .... .,. ., ,.. H . *sr ,....11 . , • JP 0,64.1CA, CEA t,�,,� yIN1► m 4,4Q `? 11 i° ��'1011111 c 111 1-:10: ,1111' ,,,•1044;441:",I'41.:11*4‘:triall.:h;\114, DI • •. 130 it '•,a PLANTf1SCL'D6 ', A 2 Ir ,..' II" 4 . nn [!� Da mei ,.1.`Pk. ® LL�..� �. U�. ODDS 1�, �a'' f�1., � RAI6ED PLANTER .t. ate/ l'0 20.104114111'. �' s! ® 1►- N_ a L a-w< • lk A Fi CD C—!\::a Oi. ‘vOl I Ii , : I 1UISpG VE6ETADLE r• c= af. (j) i 2 ''.':,...' ., VARY W!lGNTS heal MN,02 q' r .'r 'I MpG16,*.rume.E.I r GARDEN•6EE CET 6 TO MAX.or TC , . a I • �t�l° f77 "`.RCO ,,�w`�`'0��, OIDEWALK .41 Iloilo r-m, .. ,. , ,....,,. ...„.. .,, _...,4 Oa X ; ti AZ ir",.' ca6T DIN .• N mp t .:V. 1 7:10 ,0,4*:!:J.i Pe iiiil t 1i11 eL111 , •, • _... � ware Gau14l.ITY FEATURE EDGE a • TRATNIN'i• t� 1'AIL lib II NV MS iNNINIMIONINNISMIIMMINIM•111. } F - .._. .. 'r'r'oawr�e _ .. -. I.nnrrR.f�l.�•�•�sn�� . ,,—PLANTING LIST y •r •T11101.Ca41014 MAME I.7/10CAL ILIPa 01I441t-r •111 . CON(31404 I•I LP Larval NJIa rLATAPIM ACaarou• • PI•l.vl• a 4 s I , • I van V1III.00PTAPI,a MI A cwccNANIIA i A'••' s s a'.I' 8 i s OW Pal0.4K rD036000 COMO COMMA RW IIb OOAIIIA ) 144'•l' sIs Fro Pal 04X OMR=PA180080 4 I.N'•l' a I a WI 194000001:0404 046:000P000li•vANfrt M O.•34' a i s Ao Ave4 A3U HAI I OA r TDY 4vlsAlaa4II.T nY u IrAa AMr! OL OTTO 1.1/0711 n rAw I Aa11L re v au t O1DII retain 1.41l aaAM*'OTTO LUTh a M' NIIIII r't•.a ,u` 0mCa ra IiA NAa a soa P116I1$uYbca1AI16 ZAIILIMA 31 •84. carrA►an i d a P11 PHOTIIA RIOT1/41A MIAOW 4 1 OAI. COATAIi2a LAO4 MO Oa IOO `:a 11 d®I IIII At OUT KM MO•Ws sa30I IC.iM OIAo. ••� ) , j In NOTES W v7 T ! Auwac pY Mia PM arena ou i 1@LoCI.'4On rtcr�cAr�aw sY 01NIa ,� 2 q APPLY illTli At A DYPIN LP l'WALL Illalfs PLNirllo DIM AND r N IWgrO CONO1 aD• `I • IatO FIII.DM.Polo.TALL Pita/•'N 0Y ri< 1. IS.Uoa MITr► tsA00Y POITTAL.CA �.i ALIT®uowa•a MMMISLO en taM'Or.Ill MOT MAT.IA �/ a .,.‘,..... ..,.. . �1 III } . C. y ti 1 N•P 4 iaAit• - EON. • + k V' .4".', LA•N ' ill'- Ir a g P 610141 osldll0•1 PIMAIt il�}gt�',j+�1, A. ,L�.I-„i F.T IC4440884 AND , NI rerir. INITA�OT ► 4llj!{L'i' ... I, •I . , ,..-• ', • • • 4., 7:71,•1- (:... _L 4: • . ; UM III u u it 01 dMC1 C®I'1''IP®S`� SIN Pt AN VIEW �1 pai n • 4oAN•.u'WCMAIL . d w.r••' O P Y Cu, lNAM0.•� INI•IIkMWtI INAP.1 r'O•I• F?r4ISEt7 PL►4NTZi� DETAILS 0 i 1 9i:EiE.98 .. . . !!,,cm •• 1 . • .. ::::: itI::::: •! !i . I o uteoT ELEVATION 80JTH ELEVATION • II 40 ,..4 l. `.. 6.1.•++5+ On•mr••nk...........,....,..,............................,............................... o w _I . .' ir.l+:y,.yr .,' r, i' L. V • • .`e.. :' t '1 "�$�, 1 Ar,. Y.,�,u . 1 vl.. I 'II l e ',) 7 •�, .�'if,� '! •�'4la i!,i�d. 14� e:Axi + w + 1 . Y l Mr ♦ ~`r i - V ,sil r I ; ,. .., I a r 1I ' I p + 1PATIO I . ial 1 el'oomits'ar� u a /d DSCIC ii ,—rr \ r p -- 51 ROOM ��i Bela ROOM ,,c 1 /O O MON •• ,ram' h y �y-* i' 1 � ' 11t1 1 •} �'�r t ,� R ■I Y ' III -� Q f" �c7 �. _ t -n h , s � ,t�~ >tt '1, mar � '�[ e � ��1 01 d q u "�1 i� . i, . BATN S ""7 Yii 19ATN �Q Di 7 i Ill p r „,i i _ 1 ®_ I <[ �$ 1 10 �y ENTRY 0 ew r R ///. POYRR 1 i ^ c IL u'wrleJrwu n-- r tom _�� ._ .�. 1 —t `X U - - ' it5ItITCNRN f'' 0 KITCNRN 1---tr I 4}4tih•I 'laj It] ' w ENTR I a . - , .', -. II . , lil _ 1—awilum•--3.,,,,....1 111�, _1�I�UII( 1 L0 1 tl`) Flic9MDRO �.-Wit Lim tw Barr yyy.) 4"a I+� i NMION 1 Ar NIM.9'II. ��, �\ « 1 �rA..R N7! 0 • I g CV clA�,RAC! 1� 0 I e :d . TYPICAL UNIT TYPI[ "A2" TYPICAL UNIT tYPr.E�"AI" IN q ti r....®.� 4'r f•O' TM n ___________cD l"f1' �� O • i! '. ID 0 • • - t l ' f• . j, , 6r# a,� y ,I jy ..1 + » y..t �r>G. .� qr. • a' ' I l s '. . i' . • II t ,, ''d ,I, r _, • • , . III °' 1t 'u ' -a �' .,. . .l I .. ,. 'u. #H .Y i M- °t liar Y Vrn,. "1 ' #.' +i' ° ,.: :1 ,I . . ''it 1' 1, '. + i , r. "le t, h ' • rl' ''yi .' e ju r 4;e r 0 0 it F...tt\ h�� • CO 1 .1'' .•1 q fik.r. X � � CPT«+wLlII ��pp -1 N 1 •• WW1 'N loVWAVO':viii, I N•mu"Dawn p ,i t I • ,1.' �1 f I ■ 11 ill ■I 1 M CdttlN 1M4 I �1 ;� ff•.^_..1 N PLANAR IIO:WV Q�—r111��ra► �r,r� l . T ^, "� +;' 1 • p■� ■iGl■ and II .■ � S f I�i■ii■�. LI i 8 GO 1 i'riirTiltirk---"-irTiiirri- �■ nr • :■i , 1. ?�w� �, i,' vwS �,t 1 � ac al w ou m..Moa won SOUTH CBLRVATION } ��■■ AA�a�p AA'' II ff II �r�.y�ss''r L-] ':t'.,: IOMA.=VINO ELEV�l I©IVO ®VIi+VINO III"11' Is�a.0 a wino 4'.r•r, ( \y`:��i � )1",... ...„, \iota not u Num r!,, I M•1TNa ` 0 ..(ti • -IIMSMa role�� . ..-. .....,,, : i.. .. , ,Rppnirp---,- -�' �K • _ `: H ,',..:'1,'''' 0 p� i Al � ' ■ ■ II L a.� NAST NERVATION r a) .Iiiai t -.., oIc0I . . .- ..-44 Allah';itilriviliii ,' • 1 ii My M leAl IX t,A ", L r _ I - Q. �1NITIdM � LAa'IIDVtl �r• E j B I nEli...pri NORTH RLRVATION mauve I 4 .# x r - . 'r C1:u at3 d F • - �d4'il , 1, p 1. ...•1 y� f i ,.1 Tti "� , .� ,1 sr'.� ''�i t , •y• .•,',':+.,..:,:'.'-,-,.'-,,..,.. '.. ......,. ....•.' . ', :' .,.;•,'.. ..'.., ..„',..,,,', .,',:,:',,..„ ',"-..,-..'..,,,v,...'*:.',,:,..:.,.-- '',.,...,.. ,'. . '-'-'...,'''' .-,:..':,,.' ..•.''''-'.•••',' ''''';',.',',':-..''..'v... :•d•'''',..-- : ..../. ' ..- •:.0', •••,,'.' -. - ':-r' .•• ..' :"' :.','-'' .'4'.... '''''' :.:':1. ''-'''''.°' ' :/'''''',.... .''''r ;,' • . , ,,, ,. .. . .., ., i-- • ••. , ,*.-:::::•.'. .::•- :. ,........ ,.• ,..,•• ..,,, •••••.%.,..:•'. "...'•••,' J : :i'••::-,''-''. , 1',„:„..:;,,,,,7.'.,-,....:•• :,t,••,..,:;11',,,,,;,..-..•..,.; k;/.*•,-1-1" ." ' if#P-overt. A''''...\. -•,, .- ..' PFOCO 0041 CLA*4.A...\ COM.OkeeN.101 .. . .. I le, .1' ':,,..L.r,. .'• ';,..' .............] YI I MAIM kW A 1 0,•HIM,00.40EI ,. '", ,,,..',.,.1,‘ ..i ttil ),1 4 MINIM . III ,rni I III r ' • • ,. tete 11,J2Cfl. '.' ' .tIe. .,---- ..- .. ,- . .. ki . . . . • t N.... I , • ' -"" I i. 4.. . . ...,... , .. :'-..--4,:: ::::1 I n :;:i.; 4 ri.;: : _ '4 ' ;4;14 pi I ;Z 11_; 1 *„ •*.* ,! II I 2 :._i..4:11:4; . 1: - - 1[1749 Erin r.,-...{:-.1E.:.j.li.041,,,.le ii• nn nn I•• •ir-4-41 p. ... .• m ..... ... au. 'li 1 iii is is ii—ii is is a iii UU ! ii—ii is si 1 us ii'if• si ii ' is w ii ii UU uu ' is ii ii is , is oil is ii 1 1st Itale i Me x vs co l GAM.=Doom '.:'1'....;!?k)•,•'.' WILT 11.0..RvATION d) .• ••••AAA f.4.." ;•,,#,,, .....• :• . ' Le.4,I..0.... g , : ,...,.•• . . . _ ..• . , ... ...- , - ra e • ., .., ../.,.. 91 9 11111111P11.'":' a . 11 4 I/OROS Mei 0 ilL latritkeD MO I/1•1111.138 1410:14 IRMA rano- .. i'e.lirrligieltrk4 1 .„ .,. 1.3 . . ..., ... _ .,.:i',,,,.. .;;;;,:-..,.. E 4 - •• r • ..... ... LeP VOW OS Ha= LOUTH ILIvATION 0 'r. 'r- '•••:).•.' .... . .••.,...,, ,.,, ,. ,. . ... , .1 k.1=re \*..... . •, •, , . , -- ELEVATIONS ISUILOINO "2" . ,. . . ., . ke.•r.o. 1:::,:':.1 . . , . NORTH ILIVATION C-ITIN •• ...., ., • • . ' - 0 r PASCO No.t.I COT%Mali • . . • .71 Mil/ ,• 4.. . . ' 1 •. I L.-...i . .. , , . .• Lk Lv ,/ .• ,.. . OE kAIL r .... 1111.! I Mil I El E .. , . Eca E p. ...............„. ... . , ........, ... . : . i c 1 E] illiEl I Eill 13 E El El .ii .„ . .. .„ ., . . . . .. , .. . . f .... L... . NAST ILIVATION .. . 420.4..i . ... , , . . . . , .. ., .... HE , • ' • , . ,.. ... ... . . , . . . ... . { 0 40 ' • , ,..:, . (-4 ''''''%\i,i, . PAOLO 4 ;: IMf 71sY A. IA I N1tlil < ...., , . f N 1 ammo Num -mod E --- • , J. I 4 ►;.• iNIf11A11q OONIO•-� ...... h..r;1 ■f` ./ rs �Or■ • ■ ill] 0..X w OH 4N400 Doom ..: WEST iLRVATION 7. 0 v .R+W M Ia711115 �� • ... n, INANp NNI Y M 1 y �tR■t1u1 A•ratio '. Nf'll LM IbM 'V < °I�°tt. „ I'1. . .`_ u.M itllrAtH11 d t Fl .P A lb'�CN1 H N01�0. e - - • /,/ c F.` ^ ` f 4•/Immo.n , SOUTH ILgVATION 0 P.1 EI-EVATIONS CBUIL®INC•� "3" 4'.Y• NORTH lLIIVATION L •i r, olf,atlre•oomm1 litd � a , ,t L __, El Lni:-.1 Ipi 1 . El E r ri „,....lye pre ow.UP \ 4 1 co, Ei -II [31 Ei E to • ., NAST ILMVATICN y /ttAi.II .ems i; ti 4 •..+ ..` r - it (, • 0 0 1 1 p v , • 1..� + a r WMIDW 5 [—Ivy' I r ♦''r �[ iiIJ r.. its 'melt 6004 410 Intl 10 i mom..• i � J f ii r ML`Vr0 Cwr IO1.TMO LAI01 1 It I NlOtpy♦MIAW . . ^ r� r I/1 Y 4 INNla" It `.•r 0 VINO 1111 } NI n......1 caOUM u'1.a0alo�tallwn \E .HI M I MM UYIN BOON "'- II __.._ FRONT ELEV. a CO2 m~ 220 1'NJryow'1wI c "-....' :',.' I —� I ►ww1 Nna 102 w 120 LOOM MOON JOr w1♦ !'IIO.b4'A/11 • r M 1 c4+ m,IKI Mel acoar,+innNroln PLAN VIEUI BUILDING IDINTIFtICATION r t l i�� / r V e _.-. -` bJ1�IITARY DROP bOX twuu*vim 1'»ax I.Jrwanalit.e411 '., �.. waL taLANO �Npp DOa I1O01OI10 `I . wIm lOno me 1nl•,x+r'Io hd.ecwr i Y k r - r';IA�N WTk�enwCYr.Iu rwvxr a IV , .Y1 t IOW 10 1Urp1IWLONM ►H 41IRn ] % IIL t BIDE ELkv, r05i/EG0 G♦p n a" ' " '' ► �fxWFiNS'` I'1 th'w>Mo U1nNI { I , s. ♦4betbrm 1. N''iivc;C. 1No ro 111 17. • I 1 . .�9 ` I 3 x 4-�IN N 1a`r4rC(lNI•.. -T4 I •2 I I 1 l+' •Ira--I_� INItRIp gCOM11N root. I. / MOWNIb1f0 t� PRQIRCT IDIWTIPICATION ` ' � iPeoJMCr AI4NAg11p .- SIDE ELEV. u11Nn� FRONT ELEV. C 01 If+ ' 1 N 11'rA4 GP ql W o. IT \. is ♦r1 N 1 INn•� _., I �•!M 1 GW �� —�_ ` O C V . _ ! II (j IM NaW«d. 'M v 4441•06TMI Mi rwr♦♦ I II r nV43 r • I��IM�Nr�n�N1 I�r II' 1 . C ►N MAeW tMi w newt dN p Pl W view 14 I .__. IIIlN d.1/DIr SIN♦ 11040d 1 + T I M r viva rwr-i-a I I 'SECTION r'. ! tl x 1,4111102C 1 1 1 I M'.ha. t M♦mortal M► ' v1 \ I I I I + PRIVACY.OCR�IIN kLUva1T10N •Iti r r', irrYY l 1 h•.r. ....r•r 4ECTICN a �„ ;a. ., y� • p�ICs OtrAIL6 h'•r•r I - ro '- � 110 11n rtAE KMIOCd11W - x' ' t 1lWillll IA la y l l .1 1 4 1 ',. r r` ,r r • ; h,rl"1 1�'� �+ =f r,I1 .t d�,.* ptl","• n.'♦ `,;-.1 : w. a • - 11 .!•-'1*....,'''`,, -*••••'.:'••• , . .. .; i. .. '-'.'• . :" ,".' . • ., ;•.;., ... • ,......a.MMO...... .... ' '1 • 5 ,,,,,,./,..,„.,..........• ,., IIT- PLAN le‘ p. :...•,,..,0pr- ;4.. „' ;'.',1:., r,,'•,. \; 41;c4.,_.,' .I.S. ,.:,,,;\ GROUP CARE t.,.v:,,,,,, 0 kitio,LF.\, ,i,:l' 7.7,00,Als' ,.:,::,•11?).:,'-,\ PACILITY . ...to '6,• 4 '.. UNIT SUMMARY ( ---1 .- . . 1S' ,,,, 4.r.:„...' ,, .- "‘': : .11, ,1 11 'AI UNI10 e. 114 80 FT 1E1E0000Ni 0,01— 1 41,,,, . , , k • N, .414r UNIT5• .1)1 PO rt 2 DC0010041 1 DAM , .7'. ,iow A I NI ' •-: `';'..;.r.,••"%'..,57•..frir ' .. . — ,ic.,,, II W it.(t,. voist, ,... ....04.,. I OPT STREET PARKING . ,- , •',. ,,:."., ' , ,1:44,1r-•) 'fatielf11.%"•,,:io, , ;'. al lora k 40/0 GARAGE 5YAL1.11 balk 14 10/0 X 10/0 tAllOtri 3141.1.5 al% %iy• •;4,,,,:le." ti'A.4.• ---- 4 alb)4 16/0 COtiPAcr 51ALLO " •• - . .4 •'.., ,'•,.' 1,,' OP,1;e:V. • • • • ' Cr,3•,'/••. '•'';'t e‘,14,.• i4;4:41iAiAtik ' • • 31 TO1AL 6PACCA PNOv10ED 13" LinATION HAP .1 • ',t 1:4 41'iALAIIIIIII....!AW\ WO' ' 141.I."'..;',.4)1 .n t INCLUDII4 1 HANDICAP STALL ' . '.'' ' . ,,' A,t,o.1„.forptej„, ,„,4-,,,\A ,- t•sow•••41---A 4 A I.:,,,•••:,,t'„'l „,:411p,,\,,, .‘1.%.1 001000;',,,,'-iit'' .t,,'Ir. .- (.0 .,4trilot. .....4,-,..r,,.!,-,....1„ r o ) 07...•r••,•r.•.s.r,„;..•H.,. 2III 0 1,1•1;,,,,,5-:-..,1•,,,„t . ... ., . ,,,,, 1., ,... ... t . ori 11;•;:T:v,,,''• ''-- '''''' • , • - -2, ,"i: . 1 'r.' '' '' . .c1 .., I ''' ''l'' B w a ( c)i , ) ; f). . r- • , ''''' I ,4 .411...•t• . *...1 ',' .:`••,'• •. '7VAISoillii .1' '' i ., () P t - ' - ' ,. - ,..., ....PA,,.•.- . . mAi.tuvtiumo AIMA— -I ..A.' •. ' '... ,. i •. 471 47) :.,. :7"7 t 1 I i r kOZ=IC:r. .41%,1 D JACISON SQUARE ' ..,= . . ., 1 ri ,,., APARTMENTS orseams -6- p.41• - , ...., . 24'UDE p *) — Ala! `Sn•- ,, -,'. '1 •-, , , . , . i C el.,7,, 41,x! ....A, ..• 0 . . .•,112,..ii*: \ ROSEWOOD ....!_,A1 •,..• , , . 1 • . i ..,` ... ..4‘4:'",/ir'•::Z.:.:PRIP BILJILEAN "11 ' t?'".'• er MARktET SI-F:1 EE-11-S A P 3. . . MS.........m...............,...* .4.; . . OSUJEGO BAY • , '• I,I,D r, , 4 , ' SPEEDY 0i, 4.-c 16 ..• ,:(',4 f, ,..I , ,....t.A.I.r„..-..., LINGUINE'S , \ . . 4,,',,,v....eito•-ifp1.14,1.• , >i 4...CI41 •-,-. .I. .: , , ,?I e ' ' .' •*: - ....' *•• 7 , •• , . ., ' . -:' ', .1.,• : 1'44'1,4.." ,106.4* . . 01 aJTiji ' .. .*‘' ' 'a 1......• 0 . - • rie110•14•nne,1,1 I. II *.dro. ii.": ...... ,,,, , , • . , ,. ' .0:011`.,„,,,....,.1.. • . ilk%1 .' II .; t A , : m - . . . . . . k,+ --0. ' c• ' - I. in . 1 _ . i r7.7, •., • .. :• .,= =.„--00.1.51, ,... ,„_,.--. --. . ,/, . r- ... L...1,.. ,k, .0: . 1.- •1 la,j_k zoo. , • 11. ii' 'L'•• — ------ dininwr '• , , A r ....- -----,:_—.7:"--- ' I ' 1'4 -'---MIIIIMEI . ,,p,, -:__.- ,.- _- _—_ otiv4IW i A I 4 k ,......,•,.....,,,,,..... ,11, ..., , ... . , s . 1..1001.4 010 •,.'• ' i . • ,,.' 1, .•••• . l'' i °,° ' =: 12'H••4-I — • I I :...., ' •, i, , ,,r-z I: 1 V IA. -I.--- • -,- ' . I '14--'''— `.1 ,:::•...1:[1,1,-AI ;, -. . ,. , -•• ...,,t\ ... . , _.,_ , —.:-,I.- fr...r '- ',','•' . '• ' -‘ •, ••, 7 .&•., :"' , , r 7 ,, • lin . )1:,,.., . Eaead F=NdIZVI i , \\,....... ..•,17,, A...., ,„.._ • . '.,• o',,q4,./. ,, , .4' ;. • 0, . . '.' ., , . .. ' . ' 1. .. •.. ' .. ' .. .- . ‘,",:i!**4:ticla.:4'..'4.4.1-.. ,,. * .... ;‘,.*?....4, a , ' . 4 t •. , ,, • . • ' • • ,. ! .. .x' a �` - ,.•t I t 1 a, r v ! . 0• ::• • ,.;•. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORT j. ` FOR • t, OSWEGO GARDENS I.A. LA. IEiW BLVD. ,a° a LAKE OSWEGO V" r ,. Prepared Fay e:,«v t ;, 1 c44;o aINe `t % CRARBONNEAU Engineering i 9301 �'� � "_ R, r ORECON ., • " i 1 VI 1195 .. January, 1995 Project, 95-3 0 EXHIB , :qr. a--/ ' L .. : I 44 1 . I: <.. CHAREONNEA.0 FI. ri ENGINEERING l January 24, 1995 , MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. James Zupancic 18400 Delenka Lane Lake Oswego, OR 97034 A FROM: Frank Charbonneau, P.E. Traffic Engineer • f SUBJECT: Oswego Gardens FL9513 Traffic Analysi'3 Report Lakeview Blvd. , Lake Oswego This technical memorandum will serve as the project traffic a report for the proposed Oswego Gardens apartments project to project be developed in Lake Oswego. The will provide 21 6 , multi-family units for use by senior citizens. As shown on the attached vicinity map, the site is to be located along the easterly side of Lakeview Blvd. and northeasterly of the Pilkington Road and Lakeview Blvd. TT ,. intersection. The Rosewood Center Market and Speedy uinguine's restaurant is located to the south of the project e.,- ` site. The present land parcel is a vacant field. There . will be one access point which will be located approximately • 150 feet easterly of the Pilkington Road intersection. , , Near the access location Lakeview Blvd. is a two lane street having 24 feet of pavement width andgravel shoulders on each side. The speed is posted at 41 miles per hour, the road grade is flat, and the intersection sight distance is excellent at the proposed access location. Based on the existing street conditions and traffic ' HI IJ circulation patterns, the primary streets within the area include Boones Ferry Road, Pilkington Road, Jean Road, and Lakeview Blvd. These streets would be used by most of the site related trips for the proposed facility. .`' . • • zn' performing the study, the following information was • y. applied in the analysis. 0 , . . . , ,K .f . In One SW,Columbia,Suite 60, Itnland,OR 07258 (503) 228.9507 FAX k503) 228.9509 , 1 ' '.. f. a , 0', ti ,,. / T . ") / , � �1I` o Prepare capacity analyses for the critical intersections including, Pilkington Road at Lakeview Blvd. and the site access point on ` p �' Lakeview Road. • o It was necessary to look at present and year 2010 traffic conditions as projected in the City's 1992 Transportation Study, prepared by Clackamas 1 County. Y { o The site access point at Lakeview Blvd. will be f 24 feet wide and provide one inbound and one outbound lane. o Trip rates were applied for the proposed facility using the land use category for elderly housing. This category (I.T.E. code 253) is similar to apartments, however, it is restricted to attached housing for senior citizens. .wk , + Vehicular trip generation for the development was determined 2' q u,, using the I.T.E. trip rates from the 1991, fifth edition „Y manual. The facility will generate a total of 57 trip ends b ':W in a 24 hour period. During the AM and PM peak hour periods . —• ' , 0the facility will generate less than five trip ends per. • hour. • By comparison, a regular apartment complex with 21 units rM and not restricted to senior dwelling type Units, would ,5',.. . generate a total of 130 trip ends per day and 10 trip ends ` ` during the peak hour. Therefore, the proposed Oswego kk Gardens project will generate 44% of the total daily traffic ia ; as compared to a regular multi-family facility. Attached to this report are a series of traffic flow maps 4,' (see Figures No. 1 through 5) which depict the traffic flow ' 1•:. •� patterns on Pilkington Road and Lakeview Blvd. during the AM and PM peak hour for various scenarios. Figures No. 1 and 2 depict the existing traffic, Figures No. 3 and 4 depict the , ,�1 ' total site traffic (existing plus site generated traffic to 14 and from the site) . Figure No. 5 depicts the Year 2010 PM peak hour traffic volumes for the total site traffic • conditions. ' The volumes shown on these maps were then used in calculat- ' ing the peak hour intersection capacities for the critical :I intersections. A computer program for non-signalized •M.' ", intersections based on the latest Highway Capacity Manual • L and vehicular delay method was used. Printouts for the I` analyses are attached to this report. , hu tw. /3;3 4. • .. i • 9 s ` y. investigated currently operate and All of the intersections to operate at acceptablelevels of service will continue to t.. ct site traffic is added tsite the dstreet system.ems wh®n th® ptyje ses indicate that the durrnv the acck , wi capacity analyses:. (LOS) "A" year will operate at level r service the V' will occur at site buildoutlan through 2010. Athis kon Road and Lakeview Blvd. n and there Will intersection0 . olLOS operate at LOS A LOS will also hepeak hours. year ♦ be no traffic delays during the LOS Forll the r to 2010 conditions at this intersection, de].ag's• This level of ll level "B" and there will be short 1 service is also considered) acceptable. went will standpoint the development ' • ' From a traffic engineering zed. Impacted adequately function based on the databanal steely site f ; existing The 1 existing traffic conditions willh •, ded 1� by the providenew facility. • It isc lane nand one toutbound lane. access for one inbound on Road or Lakeview Blvd. will • No moredifications No adto Ptional et reasons • o additional turn lanes will nd safety due b the project. N erational ro ect, For traffic oP conjunction toh the p jelements should be implemented in •. the following � ,♦ ,� • with the project. ? f distance along �� :w .4z4 1.- ••,, . •, =a site frontage is ., o Maintenance of the existing' sightbuildings, Blvd. and theproject . ; Lakeview irking, z ;; ' .Y` /,,- essential. obstruction by p 4JE.' signs, or other objects would be unsafe ,;� • arkin should be allowed on the new site access ;' • _ � � � o No p g x"' `< approach to Lakeview Blvd. • S La• . , 1 • \ — 11 3I ® ni . . . r. . . . ' , . 1 ,, . . r' i , u;1 • 1 • b c � a •� • r A••t .. '. •"aw '•/ 1 ••i, 1 LI el II AO {7� `,) I •"rl ul / c.lle{�- • to . 1r t./ t'••,., _ • t t ', - ,.V V .r 1,,,,,vi I.,' tr ��th. '6'A I .•. .I , to""0. V I'^ .,a•aplr A M" �� .I 0. '•j ""'�'�'•..r.=sl+.�*+.�«w.�, 4 k '!: 1 •k t f �^. 1.`IyrCyy1�� t r s� •/•� + a ,u. « .n. L♦ ••/atf�rl4hA �,u. /ItL 4 ✓' / • s 9 ` f •f f AMP -9,41•44. ` Y, 00••/1� •/••nr ••r A iiiT••• 1 01 I • L • `. ,� 41_` A 4 "' a" +r-+ •' 0� it 1Le0►tCY v . 1121Y,44 r a► .... i�•., f•�/� ar ... .. r• r001 0,}0...�.all NW `3rF• /f` ' I • 611 tow, r• C J+ ," et . • •. r '\ , .mow A • 1. I{� � fw atilt —'i• t rli r• � illtut d�e p r S f 1 Ilarfe r1o1n ' '" I tIId 1 '1 9 /'' '� Ali• te •. . /� t' d pcAA l s h a u it i;r • .'�j co1,6.. �... ,\ ►1' ,•��,'y,��/Al VI /�•��/9 �li it �A ' .if• �•� 6f •r-�. 4 ` I 'Iq. t I14` S 1 .:/•i. minI y ,. .-,9�y .. es, _ II f.•'�I a ?, •.. I• a -;y�.bt••L• �Yf: 14 91 4 r }p, or p ;e1 C 041 a �E�.N( 1 �'"+B1Y A ,. A1oaL�`y1�� a a I'.:,.. •� t 1 1'mom*MN • "• .11 • C•csme,T .:. . 'I" y.,� / �y 11 ,t,a•x •:dR T • A_oa�U ,• O< - •p h• 1' . ♦'f/�'�..-�Ok'/ �1•r'~ .. H��r�i �. I..te~.L9. i- r•m•AeG�r.�•[.<y'1 "�iS; • 1 Jl 1 Y H . .Li f � . "1NIA f Ito, �1 flr I� .,,1 �' ► 1 �y�i rtsW L b� ' f s00 •YY i • 1} f f//f11 . „Ail ��/+� Q w�'1� �yy�, / � 1 Aahq pI 'r• �`,•. iiirg •yi•• " ...Am's, 111�.111 ,,• �t N _ wFt��•� M tT ^ N..N • ail ,�e •1 , --Zw.. at . '''''' .imiiiHrol • I '�ol m rA i ;jis!. ,•a iJ' ., 1, �' ,.•r".i py/� " + :•.'1r _ / •�•ft ww't+Ilry bhl r l-L":. ¶E. ‘If �V W T •, /.1'.� wI��r'•'Y�l. M T 1 (^�ni�l�. C ,sei••�•. 1 •.Y '• 1 ,1 I �1Nv''' a�•+•1 -/ Q rr •PA M-rpr . . './. ..1. ._ . . +N '+ ►, ACM ► 1 �Itr r� / r j�Q • , y i �� `a 1 •. 7. 4. --e •1••• ' 0••• ''`• ' IV *, Ailillt 0 e . . • • tia•IA! ,,,ri,o,„, ..,. . ... ,, ,_ .,,,,. _ ..: . . ...II • . , •.• • ,, 4 . Y t11.‘ V 4 *. . ,„ I i ••0 ,,, • ‘,1..A • . • ' ' • of t � C. / t •' a 1El / 714, f• 'l tit,@ U np - .r. _/'� ... a'0. • e• fib' i O J •. f�N 9 r � WW1 • • t .1' r � ram. '� • -� it 0� •OpaO t I S• n d f U 7 y••..• • I II re r LAOmt 0T ' • ! telw , �''�® d • , i'•••:' ` . .. {E • + Z �f.d/ITAINVItW 1 1. r .p �"•� •%•+ • w �LLth• . f 1•ret .tvcif .eaav ,7 i 4.1 I •VI � 1 /Oal•Yf Vlit baIeNl r:••- '. r •i , . ... 1al g roc. tiJ/ i ♦ �"rift tr �� X t I � 1..,• l .` 0 $ 1 if 6te111 a�•�.�,�` � •' e . Jr te.,. ,; n.. "' • �1V t • w• 1• .• • :2 .,f`. q @ rki %y a a•� •F' 0 •of, . ��+rt t - �,.a• y � ,I i' I `i.? q r i i .....•• ' _ • "�• I. OA II .>r6~��h ., w •T"�'• /l'• t .41 ` \L� pAI ��O A F: - �J� .I Iw.1/40 7L •I tl v' /�Ir��j ,. ,, • ��j `••ram• f 11 , ►`y�, P � • nar•1 �1 ri `," fi1 Fa• ' I `/MI, • _ .t1. % y 7 1 e. , 0...,••• Sirt..iN.alt: 4 ioN .'z,rt* . ,...,4... p; P t e•AT .M .r A A I ,, F W• • a ft . ; • L `' `M a j' i1L`-t+,�y ✓/ 1 /4 S ,. AV . '� 'S 1 /M; J / 1 /, '1 J Ir."; 1 ,I .. • �• S, I '..>1 • .r o *C / i% :h+ '/�� Ae r �J 3j "ramf' `.p,•r• .` • t-/ I t / [/ 1 . •t, J l' Pr /, L�.Y r „ • ,te rif•'•t 1%, i. .1 .fir„r, .n iVit .�• I j�• •i •w M• lI / .;i; ' IYiIAI 1 Q k •pt . Iw .,,, � . _ Y ti'"_ „P 1 Jt7 �011f !/YI1l \': P7TIM4. •14" ._ r, 6 a • Gri ! l rest ` �t 1 1 1 V 4'd r '"J. 411 . • a . , 1 1 f 1,�. t V. •E Y tie. 1 ,.•10 1rtNl i, �IIMr I :II 0�►• •1.1• 777/'p 1 e • t. v •s 1 f�,.. %r1.Oru tt sir .'t, �� • ` •Yfrt• y�O�6 -I •11 I ' -/�L • ". i 0 ,•� � • 0sI Irltr 1 1 L ✓ I w �.I'41 "•af"•'�. ,,w-1 ,14 trrl. 1 .tlw.t .. I: . ;r .g` la ,pliVtRG'RAVE il1.aw�,t ,=1• •�. /3•,s « LA t , I • 1w • _ • � .. ...t Tilt A�,_iA .. 1!. , •;�' 1 1 14 •,,Iw., I I {� � 1 . . t S 0 "T" a ii=z• L. A N C il; l;qn.-t W C CD ®®® ,':'.:.:'... \ 1 IA ® Ft ED6Ns eP , 12,0e 18T. rP 611D7' )1112 P ® r� .� ,-I\ • jt oNs STONY i; 1 ENTRY 01CAN to P ` ��, �. .. M M1+• .y 1°' GROUP CA i `� ��DEDICATION s e FACILI7 04. 0. ., ( 0 . P,'� O.' :. 1, ‘ .. . .. , • 43... .- . \,toi \boll lop- 0° % . ,i)11,1!,„,„ . "s ki b1�1w M '16. 3G0 . r e111A • 21 P1.Ua gal rl• 4,1'/ PARCEL DFEOP� ry C LOtuER �4 e r GARDEN SDE �� °t REG LINO ND' 8 MANQuvr��ama AREA z•�—► +"' =' JAc. ;, CANS SQUARE '' e • L..J e APATMENT....ow., I IN a --24'WIDE t e.� A I AICLtt 9 r '+ 10.' et •� 4 C Ay N ' AA1 A5Lkt GAIRDEN I m ■• e .....}....4 . 5 - ': . * ........___-) . ,,, • ROSEUJOOD 1.....i......0.....614..IMMENNO 1111 memo simimil • !id MARKET I21 bb PT.N 690 IT 54'W ry SPEEDY OSWEGO BAY • ;, LINGUINE'S 0 "'' I, • Figure lo. I 011'5811 Existing Traffic •• AM Peak Hour ` . Month gaa Lakeview 2 ." Blvd. Plikington Road 1 4 e 200 • kSi 100 80 Pro,' ec t Site .. 30 0/ 50 760 160 20 • t r4. 250 210 Y • Y . it 290 .a • al /3-7 J v • Figure Ho. 2 k 0F47b Existing Traffic • PM rook Hour 0 ,•. , �, \'' North 'L.I 1 ' 1. lrkevlas Dlvd. -) . ;1.,':,.,-,,? . Pl Ikingtcn ':`` Rood �‘ , r: t 165 • • b l' / Pro j ec t Si to 4/10 '-.7 ty' .F./-. 25 4 e '7' / 43 i C• • 60 l`' 270 If 10 ..� I I d. :� 140 • Li 315 : I 1 t les • •,,. ' ; . a 1110 , /.J/y i . R eki i 3+.i It .1 ( f i r..a. tl• 4 :1 - 1 a - - rtaS r... 4• a .. , c. ^ 1 . } 1 f. P'1 pure He, 3 afS111 Total Slto Traffic 0 AM Peak Hour North I• 1 ' Lakeview Blvd. •; , ' 1 • Se:// . v o0 i 1: — •, • �. Pliklntiton 6 (load ®� a / 6t1 S , 26® tlai• 100 63 °x / Project 0 17 Site • as 4 4/ 4s t, /65 ,•1 n,Ce ,'.' 7 •tllY+fd , r 1r ib! 20 . a4 5 ,n�I. • if 10. 1 1 t j�.;' 1 t [043 . . 250 -1. .►+ 215 tr • t 295 • f f-44 It l •I • r /3..y . . do ;i; . • t ,k 1.., 1 I { t4" ' . Figure No. 4 6F5S2 Total Site Traffic • PM Peek Hour 1 0 ., . North ' ,'• Lakeview oivd. •70/ ' � ' , ;I • j cV 1 Pllkingion \ 0 Road p� ' /Cii ‘. 165 r `qr ' a 7SA TS / Project '', 0 25 e S• /i 7 ia 60 270 lio . • _ _1' w1 r 45 140 320 y t s 1.4 185 It 0 ` /3-/6 P + figure No. 3 Ifi f. 1, t1 utr5$3 Year 2010 vrorr{a 0 Pk Peak Weer 1 Worth I, Lok•vl•w ®1vd. • 00 ,r �/ y PH k$nyton l' Woad �� , .. . // ii .4 i tes s • cs 0 t aes Pro, �r i ! ,v7 ....) ‘ if ,/ is a 53 i.; a�Ykt . 4 1 /,1e , .}, ... I M',i pfI 6:a• 1„ , 70 t,t,, 955 I 14 . • • 11.40 170 410 . .. . ,' 4 /I t 210 ..4 ' l . d ' ,tom'. ' ' /3-/I , 0 • d: 1 16' '` 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZ1D INTERSECTIONS Page IDENTIFYING INFORMATION _ AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET 35 :P, t f j I PEAK HOUR FACTOR 1 ,4 .10 AREA POPULATION 1000000 . + NAME OF THE 5'1'itl�1�"'1' Lakeview Blvd. `� ]kir. ij NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET r?'i gton Road „ ,a,d.�1 NAME OF THE ANALYST pc '' DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy) 1-20-95 ' TIME PERIOD ANALYZED AM Peak Hour : a+ , OTHER INFORMATION: Total Site Traffic fin" 1 , - INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL �j'�. 0 .... • INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION •• :q...,; MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH t { j . CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN ,, TRAFFIC VOLUMES `' EB WB NB SB 'I%• LEFT -- 55 0 20 THRU -- 0 250 160 • • ' E4 RIGHT -- 30 45 0 ,: • • NUMBER OF LANES i 4♦ • f i SB ' b EB WB NB *., r •LANES -- 1 1 1 40 , • v .. Ti / 3 - /A .c. •) Page-2 ,'':':' ".:*•1:: '..,i, • ADJUSTMENT FACTORS rr_arrrrrrr--a.. -- —r /f • CURB RADIUS (� ) ACCELERATION LANE PERCENT RIGHT TURN FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS ANGLE ` i GRADE -----•------------ C , —---• lV o �•. EASTBOUND A�y ' ��O 20 ` WESTBOUND 0•00 N 1 NO 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 t .R_ VEHICLE COMPOSITION % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES MOTORCYCLES , EASTBOUND 4 WESTBOUND 2 0 0 NORTHBOUND 5 0 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 5 CRITICAL GAPS ..-------------------------------------- TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST, FINAL VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP - - (Table 10-2) --- — ------_— ------------ 0 .00 4.70 ::, MINOR RIGHTS 5.70 4.70 WB R MAJOR LEFTS0.00 4 .60 • SB 5.�.0 4. 60 6 . 30 ' MINOR LEFTS 6.30 0 .00 WB 6,80 e a /3 /3 * 4 `' • 'r i R • TI ,, " t J J ' i ff Paf A ; .I CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE e '..' ' . // li POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW— TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE a =,: RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY v LOS MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) C (pcph) c M Sid R SN -b-.�u•Ye ---a0--_I • MINOR STREET > 513 > 463 > A 56 525 518 WB LEFT > 624 > 538 >A RIGHT 30 996 996 > 996 > 966 > lk .. MAJOR STREET *044 , gg5 975 A •5 �'k '' SB LEFT 21 995 995 1 1 Ii. p-'i'rd:A I.J'. 't • 1. 1 ' -. •J h , rl • 0 y. 1, ✓ Y ' a 1. ` 'L, •r ! 1 'a. .. 1 '. 1 { . n.. ,t kh 1.� i. I r . ‘ '' :\ , . ;. I\ °I t • 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 %,1"4. �t.j ; . •�F • IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4� PEAK HOUR FACTOR 1 4'': t AREA POPULATION 1000000 ,:`'r NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET Lakeview Blvd. I/ . NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET Pilkington Road NAME OF THE ANALYST FC �,$.f DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/ddl/yy) 1-20-95 . � - TIME .PERIOD ANALYZED PM Peak Hour '',.� '; •:, OTHER INFORMATION: Total Site Traffic +, ;1{4...r.: r a { ' " INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL . J � , IR INTERSECTION TYPE: T•-INTRRSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRICTION: NORTH/SOUTH • • t CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN J TRAFFIC VOLUMES EB W1B NB SB ---- --.,.- ---- ---- LEFT --. 50 0 60 n T'.. 3 THRU -- 0 140 270 V RIGHT -- 25 45 0 NUMBER OF LANES . 1 .. . 3 0 EB WB NB SB ... . , 1 LANES 1 1 1 m • /3-is . a , ,f" ., / w a Five•,r r T 1 • 1 tnCJe �+•1 CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE • -�-- y , y4 POTEN�- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE CAPACITY CAPACITY RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY (pcph) ,� c - v LOS MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) aM(Pcph) c SH R SH J • MINOR STREET 47S > 4713 > 423 > A • WB LEFT 55 498 > 579 > 496 >A RIGHT 28 1000 1000 > 1000 > 973 > A •• ' MAJOR STREET 1000 934 A SE LEFT • 66 1000 1000 ' ;F • s 40 ,. y.� 1, 1. • d i. I, . . alli . ,, . li . , , , ,... . , ', . 0 . . , ., , „. .., ` . ,, ,, a;•. b 1.' + 7 . ..I Fag:-1 GNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ** ***� ***�,*,�,�,� a-I *** HCM. UNSIGNALIZED J IDENTIFYING INFORMATION - ` a L.;. ,' , •F' AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET 3 5 1 PEAR HOUR FACTOR AREA POPULATION 1000000 1l' NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET Lakeview Blvd. i . ,.It NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET Pilkingon Road ' . r ' FC NAME OF THE ANALYST 1-20-95 DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy) �y I. PM Peak Hour TIME PERIOD ANALYZED °Y,;,t • OTHER INFORMATION: Year 2010 Traffic "a 4r",.i ,,.: INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL } INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES a .. EB WB NB SB LEFT 55 _r..0 70 a THRU 0 170 355 err RIGHT 35 40 0 ' : I . NUMBER OF LANES y I � EB WB NB SB LANES 1 1 1 tY i• - - t, 7 1 CAPACITY AND LEVEL—OF--SERVICE Page— l „ 8 POTEN' ACTUAL FLOW— TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY I,, MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) cM(Pcph) pc h — v LOS p SN R STi ' MINOR STREET WB LEFT 61 416 397 > 397 > 337 > B > 519 > 420 >A RIGHT 39 1000 1000 > 1000 > 962 > A MAJOR STREET . SB LEFT 77 1000 1000 1000 923 A • ai r 0 + J h 1 410 . , F Ili ?°5:. - , H •r� - ..r)its �y 1 • 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 P a ************,***************************************************,a***** I r•� IDENTIFYING INFORMATION 1. AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET 30 EAR HOUR FACTOR 1 ON 1080000 AREA POPULATION r NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET Lakeview Blvd. NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET Site Access NAME OF THE ANALYST DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy) 1-20-95 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED PM Peak Hour OTHER INFORMATION: Year 2010 Traffic INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL . ,410 INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION , MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN a TRAFFIC VOLUMES EB WB NB SB LEFT 0 0 5 -- THRU 105 85 170 -- hi RIGHT 5 35 0 -- • NUMBER OF LANES A FB WB NB SB Alp LANES 1 1 1 -- j I , N 4 • / 3-i5 _ _:. ` F. , r t x, A. 1 11 .. - a , . ioi,l i} .� t / ' r 4,if • ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page - sY9YY.Y 1 - w PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N 1 WESTBOUND 0.00 45 20 N `` M Y� 1 NORTHBOUND p.00 90 20 N ° IA1 SOUTHBOUND ~M.— r�MO VEHICLE COMPOSITION .. , " a� KI,11 % SU i 4.10CKS % COMBINATION M AND RV'S• VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES ? �. EASTBOUND 2 0 0 WESTBOUND 2 0 0 , NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 ' SOUTHBOUND wmMi. —__ OS ON A • CRITICAL GAPS TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL i (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP MINOR RIGHTS • NB 5.50 5.00 0.00 5 .00 � MAJOR LEFTS WB 5 .00 4.50 0.00 4 .50 MINOR LEFTS NB 6.50 6.00 0.00 6.00 • 0 ' d r e r r y , d . ' F o-f -A' ` • i • t ri ti•,. 0 . . . �S—SERVICE r.rllwrrrr LEVEL rrsroroweor�--- .'. . CAPACITY Al e—oorouwo--poi®ewao,s.00smsowsos—..ros—o.m+�oro�+o�i•rrwr-- ' ?' FLOW- TIAL POTEN- ACTUAL RESERVE MOVEMENT SHARED CAPACITY f. RATE CAPACITY` CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) ,� c — V LOS c (Fcphi) c (pcph) c SH R SH _rr CO MOON o— .rr--o.aii—�r—or oo—0000.r—oor J, MINOR STREET 798 > A N8 LEFT 5 8�J3 803 > 803 803 > 798 >A ; • 0 999 999 > 999 > 999 > A , . RIGHT \ MAJOR STREET , 10 WB LEFT 0 1000 1000 00 A 1000 ' 0 :0.•e. , , . ,rri •. ', r'S;JJ-, i` J fi fi 1 to •{ 14i 1 0 • tl f • r •I f • ? L :b � f k }1' { , 1`11` 1 I/, •`IVIaY y , 1,,. I - ' 11' ' '''•: �,r�itynt t�' 1v�3��.'. I- ,... . • Portland,Oregon • • ri. ft I y �. 18400 . • Oregon 97034 . . . SOILSear Jim: . . • • $ • • � • 1. LAKE • • • - • t I z findings of a soils AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc. (AEE) is pleased to present t of a proposed • : development, conducted• assessment conducted at the assessment was at your verbal • f March 14, 1995, 1,. Purpose • Scope of • . ., , 0 The purpose of the assessment was to compare the soil conditions at this site with those of an adjoining site previously investigated for you • •. i : •0 July 1992). • evaluate the similarity of the two sites and,• decide whether the • ■ • • recommendationsdetailed t: :r• • • subject • • the comparison appropriate for the subject site. The 1 .. • adjoining a• (Figure •• •• •f test •its • subjectn the • written presentation• • • 4. r the • • • r recommendations. . !I, ,7; i' I Exploration • 1 • • depths r • • three • services. The test pit locations • on estimated by pacing in the field and should be considered approximate,• ' Figure 2, These locations were • the its, It is be t • 1 generalized from observationsindividual. of the soil profile between pits as well. However, • should • •r• • • representativesubsurface differ . . . . conditions and water levels at other locations may • conditionsfound C icated test pit locations, Conditions may • •t • r r • can be described as follows: . ver time, The general soil profile .. , A . . Engineering ' / y 1+ x n .• r` Mr. Jim Zupancic March 21, 1995 21-08034-00 ' Pogo 2 : ... ., • "...:- • ••' : ram✓' TOPSOIL. At the surface, the soil consists of dark brown, damp, silty, sandy topsoil from 4 -, inches to 1.1/2 feet thick. In Test Pit No. 2, this soil was capped with a suspected fill zone , , of grayish brown, clayey silt about 1 foot thick, with an organic horizon about 1 inch thick between the two materials. Large roots from trees extend to about 1 foot or more in depth. BOULDERY GRAVEL. Below the topsoil is a dense deposit of boulders and travel in a dark brown, silty, clayey band matrix. The larger boulders were predominantly semi-engular to sub- rounded basalt, ranging In diameter from 12 inches to over 3 feet. Smaller boulders and cobbles of other rock types were observed as well. '" ,,' GROUNDWATER. Neither static groundwater nor seepage were observed. The test pits were backfilled upon completion. Every effort was made to compact the soil ► into the pits; however, it is likely that the soil density in the test pits is lower than that in the f- :4.,�s surrounding, undisturbed deposit. If any of the test pits are found to coincide with footing 'L > e or pavement locations, the pits should be re-excavated and backfilled with compacted, well- J. ,1 • graded granular, 4 inch minus or finer fill, with less than 5% by weight passing a U.S.Standard No. 200 soil sieve.. .. 0 ' ,• {11'° • 'pt.1 Findings e;, I7d`r ' S j The observed soil conditions at the subject site are very similar to those on the adjoining site. . With regard to the design and construction of wood-frame, single and two-story residential ;a structures, the geotechnical issues of design and construction will be the same as on the ,,,(v adjoining site. The recommendations presented in the RZA AGRA report for the adjoining site r',+ �v' . will in general be applicable to the subject site. Any exceptions or qualifications are detailed below. . ' Site Preparation. The stripping depth at this site is expected to vary from as little as 4 inches • ' :r, to over 1 foot. Stripping should be sufficiently deep to remove the root mat and the majority of large roots. A qualified geotechnical professional should be retained to observe stripped •. •t areas and make recommendations for overexcavation if necessary. • Subgrade preparation can be difficult in this type of soil. The boulders tend to leave holes and tears in the subgrade during stripping, grading, and scarification. Recompaction is also difficult in bouldery soils. It may be necessary to overexcavate the subgrades slightly and . place a leveling course of will-graded, 4 inch minus or finer crushed rock in order to satisfactorily compact the scarified subgrades. Foundations. A buried organic layer was observed in Test Pit No. 2 on the subject site, closeEl ; to the probable footing base elevation. The layer was discontinuous and thin, and would be • "• of no consequence unless footings are placed directly on this layer. Foundation subgrades ► AGRA Earth & Environmental • , I i, n ); ` '`, 4 ` 3 1 ? I° '' . . . , , 1b , . l Ir Mr. Jim Zupancic '� 1 v`�,,' ; March 21, 1995 ,,! 21-08034-00 Aagie,• 0 Page 3 \ should be observed by a qualified geotechnical professional before forms are placed to check for the presence of such a layer beneath footings and to direct overexcavation to remove the • layer as needed. ." On-site Stormwater Dispo8oi. The infiltration rates presented in the geotechnical report for the adjoining site are specific to the test locations. Infiltration tests were not conducted at this site. However, based on the observed soil profile, it would be reasonable to expect that on-site stormwater disposal systems for the subject site could be designed using infiltration rates of the same order of magnitude as those from the adjoining site. The disposal system 1.'. capacity should be field-tested prior to actual service and, if necessary, additional capacity N ., can be installed at that time. It would be prudent to allow for this type of flexibility in . i ` k' disposal system design, budgeting, and contract provisions. Y,ti,. 4; Impermeable Membranes. The geotechnical report for the adjoining slte discusses the dhl '''70'r� inclusion of impermeable membranes to reduce the potential for vapor migration through floor slabs. AEE routinely recommends the use of Impermeable membranes for concrete slab-on- + grade floors because many floor and wall finishes, including wall paneling, crarpets and hardwood flooring typical of residential buildings, are sensitive to slab moisture. It may be advisable to review the performance of structures on the adjoining property when deciding whether to include impermeable membranes in this project, if the construction details are similar, ,, Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. It has been a pleasure working with you again. Please feel free to contact the undersigned at (503) 639-3400 if you or your design . team have any questions about this site or any of the recommendations in the report for the adjoining site. As construction nears, we would be glad to prepare a proposal for inspection ' • services, including geotechnical, reinforcing steel, concrete, asphalt, or other materials testing services. • Sincerely, AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc. 172e.4,4,1 e....,................. . . s , , pRo, Miriam G. Liberatore, P. I N 1 •oy E. Moore, RE. �' Geotechnical Engineer ��4f 5,9es�,p ��•' Principal Engineer '`} r • MGL/skh ' 2 OREGON ` . Attachment 11eq GC i'21,`cf)fl�P '' ` -RAVER \-- 8034,1 x" 'r'''' . r , • #•, / Earth & Environmental • V r ITtv - i4k, Eaa�►�rrl - .>f M = a taG T'Y'-,• Iv„yfp, (r�t .,,,; �' y `Z W' ( ,�w� N1cA . • .revi,44.4 ,Yr{.4. //$�,. tiPROSE Z aril• '•F+_ �Vr�4{k C•{/�'�,41 A.. in f•U 'rlK, •^F4 ..r,if t Set,.;;.'" �p• SO •. d ? 10 - ir1 , 'ilSat000 .. d k • = a„ rt : , Att I �/ A''�^' f 8{'r PROJECT SITE Esc Y 6 1,_ •C .. • = ..21/4 :11:. n„. .4.'. ,.,r 4. : !�/1 ,'L-'�'�r, / 6000 o a l6.5'>SOgo < JR HS ,r ai If ,^ ` to •fl ,,i 4, 4 I .$ SU TUUAIA L$ , .jar '11 ;' ' ,E4► 'r.K>, PREVIOUS ADJOINING SITE ,T r—,-�I Ce '�" q'i, / ''/ tie:, t 1 v/,� %'S, MERRY y �a Z TUAIAT,4 jl "'ri WIPER e ' ° •' i(f /�''fr.,ti4t ke 7G CY-F-'e ��(O CT T119ER Cir , • , � di ,,5' SW FBINB`�1 s1tETz sl s v�..unzu aP't a' .' 4. '�*� 4. r ST a u .: a auunnd , tbG • I 9'.11 t�`�• • •1, b r.,! °SW N 1— a411rJ0v CC SW :l l,7 1+ 1 t, • /}'• • ' I EW000 ST I—I CT-. rui r, 1 i 1 - sr a w,r,? l�. ' ,�� ; o ' = iI 5000 Lea t5 y . ,` A.' . 44a•., •• T i'AYZATA < 6000 d +lUi o RED LEA •4'i • , ,.. . t, , � ,. a nrh p Ix co ST ' 'CT ._ x •1 `,., Ilt"',t, �c l OM h IJ J �' SSW DAWN < .,••S-T•X L,..•,w, cr, t ' er�'r4. v • _cr z • coil ;r ii; 5000 W ,cy,/J 1+q, 'W �", 4'`p1' � :-►7 A. `�' ne 514 COLBY eo'" �r�i' 3I - W i rr. ,ii%1` I n r `�!J ;F� �' .1,' RD C7 1 " .I SW `I Cl l l'°, ,~� lug ,r 1 f.Hid 'i y a, 'fir., M$ "Y,l}�5 l4' 1:' ,N •'` • ?�.o �' r w �t t ! • , y v i t '.. t, 1 .i , 1 !Uf 1.• 1.? Y 1 I 0 °t� .4 ''t. 41i7. ii4 .�1' r?,6+ rN `'tr.4. •d 1 •;)• 1(9 " 1 ( • r+ i4�1'�u.�t jy��o ,i"'� �1 Il� •rt /� I r¢,ailf A: , yy� 1� r 4`'A- ; P :,,,r•' t' yy,,+,b'r i/air,(-49,L 'ii i h t ',1,;�ti. :/5 RIVER ER •.„51,1t Do woo .Ot• • FIGURE 1 ///• ,21.Og03d-00 wlo. 2 OSWEGO GARDE �, AG R A DESIGN gi) . LAKE OSWEGO, OREG ' « Earth &Environmental DRAWN 7477 SW Tech Center Drive DATE MARCH 1995 4 ` Portland Oregon 97223-8O25 SCALE NONE VICINITY MAP • /4-4. • 1 4` { .. • /BSI!A«}1 !, ,y, tl • ,. > , Jr • • • `\ \ �•i ' 1 ••"'+ '1 C•1 • 'Itt•• , ,4� W ( r.., ‘( • •,�•. \\\\ iql s \ `%3 '\.,. ®` ,,, ;? I V " ' • ''.1:,.: . \\ v‘ 4,1 % ...Lp , 1 \\\ \\\`\s.si,\ 1\\11 , r fr a pa \� \ -.ram • , \ \\ '�`\ \ i i, ti s.„ \ 1\ l \ `�J� !�\\ \ix •1 wt ` •''". .�'d ��♦> I \ \\ ``\\ \'4•\\, \ a J '/ ---00--U1K—OSINIC \ 421. 'i,. S \ \ . hi Ee, 0.---. • • II \qa \\\\ • ,\ \ — w•n69'OC I M eL�r 00 S \ - ,, ., \. \ \ \ FIGURE 2 w.a ti•o a4-ao OOWEQO QAitt7ENs 6 AG RA ' oESHx1 LAKE OSWEOO'OR,QOU Earth&EnWronmental oM W 7477 sw Tafi Denier Drive DATE IANCH Iwe r Portland a.porl 97223-0425 NONEEXPLORATION PLAN , scn�! �.. . r • ' ,. ..=v�=,✓-._. ..a.. .�-.�..., �.... tea......z... r• J • 6 .. "I tl 411 ' I ' r TEST PIT LOG 1 Depth (ft.): Materials Encountered 0 .•. :. ' ' TEST PIT NO. 1 0.0 - 2.0 Damp, dark brown, silty, sandy TOPSOIL with rock fragments to about 4 inches in diameter and with a trace of clay. Fine roots in the upper 6 inches, large roots to 1 foot. • 2.0 - 3.5 Cobbles and boulders up to 3 feet diameter in damp; dark-brown, silty, sandy matrix. Boulders are predominantly semi-angular to sub-rounded basalt; cobbles represent mixed rock types. Bottom of pit at 3.5 feet. Backfilled on completion. No seepage or groundwater. Fair to ravelly pit wall stability, • TEST PIT NO. 2 0.0 - 1.0 Damp, dark grayish-brown, silty, clayey TOPSOIL with fine roots in upper 4 inches. ' 1.0 - 1.1 Organic horizon about 1 + inch thick. .r 1.1 - 2.5 Damp, dark brown, silty, clayey, sandy soil similar to the topsoil observed 0 in Test Pit No. 1. 2.5 - 5.5 Cobbles and boulders up to 2 feet diameter ih damp, dark brown, silty, sandy matrix. Boulders are predominantly semi-angular to sub-rounded ' .$ basalt; cobbles represent mixed rock types. i.��;4. Bottom of pit at 5.5 feet. Backfilled on completion. ,, No seepage or groundwater. Fair pit wall stability, '''' `'' TEST PIT NO, 3 0,0 - 0.3 Damp, dark brown, silty, sandy TOPSOIL with a trace of clay, with fine roots, ranging from 0 to 4 inches thick. Large boulders up to 3+ feet in diameter are present at the ground surface. • k , 0.3 - 4.0 Cobbles and boulders up to 4 feet diameter in damp, dark brown, silty, sandy matrix. Boulders are predominantly semi-angular to sub-rounded s , .," basalt; cobbles represent mixed rock types, ° bottom of pit at 4 feet. Backfilled oh completion. t No seepage or groundwater, Poor pit wall stability, 6AGIRA J 4- 4, Earth & Environmental Y, y. • f r J' i' 0 OSWEGO GARDENS .1 WATER QUALITY POND CALCULATIONS \. ur J . • t' Ohl. •,'r•:),k,^., r•I f+ OWNER Jim Zupancic ,y ' •t. ..' 18400 Delenka Lane Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 ECEI1/ ,-- r ENGINEEiVSIJRVEYOR MAR 2 3 1995 Hams-McMonagle Associates Inc. 12555 SW Hall Boulevard CITY OF LAKE t�4 .. ? x Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dept.of Planning d Geva: aietA 639-3453 . March 19, 1995 EXHIBIT ' /-$"" C�/�/'f4 /S=/ • pg3sr -029s • E "� WWt-ter veil ;i F%.,d . ; -,•ti.4a410., _ a/7d Ge?/c.L., /i 71/ J . __ 3/?/../' s . ...T=_o_•. ... _... - . __.. a.:4 8 ' / q v;red Vo / "n e - -7(o Z C..(. ( Re.. er s A-3) r CI n �4404r/A I Vo/vri►e — 2z 7, 3 ,c¢ 4. • - 935, 3 ) z X f,a = i 1 G ' , ' p / , . �y (Bsf°►6.-,ik'•�) CT p fir' � . • t, r' F=oold Gea,a '/ey 3 ; i Sae 5 ode" irR .k ' y A 1' ' ',, .- Poe 7d fth = 1 5 h e-cec �4r _Gc'!�SS.- /� O ri. Z/z. Q , 3 , a i�H�• �a01 .�Jro 77�m % /I0 6 �r..54'/!'1/0 , - f eo -r•1••r U 5' 4, re' 71, G ,Filet/iy- em r..1444r/en is : , ► v oP et : 1.-/— /S' i~o,, 4' o/ ,b.atp),Z. #4:•-.1,oe- .//mo d Wei / /0 '74-0,1 ,eh/r"Ane.e 7-oe D 7`rJ<^e, A ,. t. ,- U.Yer7//aw ai ,,e.,4 _ ;•S,0?///ldgLI ,:_. - T%4 ;g"i€1(.l t i•¢/D•.,/:�i o:, /D(„i w/ , ,./.' 2-, /f/,o 4'y . l'oine vr/74/-e Ga.•i-v/ sX--e.izti•---e= U1//1 a el- al S a .., ... Dr'.i711`.e &i &w..a .a4'"-ha ":: 1.1).C.,..,_....,... . .r>. 4.7..... o�►14 r t -- G X•9 X a C�H !"r%h ar.•4 ; .�' (//f2"4�9 iP,�', Rev►e„i aaa• _ a • i.,w a .a -Ws W,� .0..Y.r...u.i.�. .. •.+•H...f,Nw r.rr._We aLu,. .M.W r.•.�� . ..w .r„i .w •. ' - a ..0{y --.„ ..1+ref ., t" r.e ,,�',• ,,. .,. . .y -- Oyer-14/0,,,,i/Ern e'l 6747 S %/tad+y - Con-f hi' vex,) CI r- G�4v,'6y. ^. ,32. z Fr/s' Z it /4 = r44Ji�ah/ 4 J / eonaici. = -- 0. -----w----- --6271'-�0.6'L2(i.-y6 1 3Z,z).? . .;5. e.F'.5. _. I S :.. , . _�, .5-0 y. i ..514P>....7 ew:077` Ph' '/ 4 4 % .<- -- dec---. ASS . . Q = ‘...r 4- (417110,tai ile'.0")e d 14 ) AAA . { .. ... - � _ fs�t - - C j 0G= (p, q ) (z5, 4o I).... . t ( i 15� �3r. , 34 - 25,4or)�� oerv. fr�, .l4,ni4 .0 e. A--fi s /Y7344 . ,rif rr I a -7-/,1-C O t- 4717Geh71-A740h ' ,..� . ._. . . .... .S.�n 4,:e ....�k. nh.a s /4J/o 74 o //M 'rioc,•s W Ar✓cits.e. 74, h to//ec_tio., poer,¢ wt�lel y Ac 4 , A'A01',71. U.S e Te. . (/id.7 0",id", //.te x�„�: . V 7::. 2. 4 2. "I/4r (6 earl-Podielnd) .�. so .r le y ewet1 4�'= , 2e4in' 47 e.ere 4 .;..-4 51 . .4r = 3 344 3-'4la .YM. _(o.t,c)(z.42)(3r7, 344/43,56o) - 1, 4 G7(5 la Gas o - _ f 4, --' r►•aeiy e.'G 7 'ors'/lctisi al 1 et"`?o 1N.va.74. ... 'uG2? -. j/vj,�s 14 t .) Ate• . 0 ..... . . i 7etoad -7 �1. ,eve/iq�l�..�7°:.then /o`'', J07 vie• p G�f Grid/� 4 ✓•-a tr� �+.(? /P'�rl �,�+ a • . .�...-,.. . .... ..�.._.�.-7-- Gvaa • ,-- ve rt. le0'ai4' .` k/r /l-b• . t 14i,8.. b/ 2/C't/ei bon .`5 /412.Z0i ','.:..':',,.9.- . ,4 ..__.gris►ee l ••._ q�-, �°J./.4aA/_ '.n.1 �r Ai,�// . :Ir 17.4 L.O/'.f T�'"v -i4 d1°al,4e #. ' ? 4, £1l:eh,/ 8odlev,ar r`t� lh VI VS la IN VI n 3 o / , /4. ?/u. ,.:.., melee/'7- ....-/ ' 7 5ry. \. PPP •,.arcY.. .... - . .. ... h Ih A 1{w n nee orut�' serG:✓ .per , �� .�ni a�ce/r + --- 1A-f'1®s,49 ho rvs /2•e o vey l E� G ow 4.y : ,y t da/. ICra.e, ` y V yam,--c 3, 6 �� 3. /2 /� I, t��'` t 5 67 //I /' T sr�}w!' 1t �� h p' ^ / y./ /� 'I f/ j „fit,. irr 1. / ty \, ...... . - ,.t'e-e„r .1,,1///.. l..<C Hip we .-.Sa% 0 74_ 7074+/ hoJ A°r li /n cf 4fi 1i•ov/' . �id^ 7I,; 4 Pf Rem 6,) , 71�iA _ , /'4.41 o li ON 7 .!' 744.e eir vei'v Ade ,le,pec."... I y nr 01 `7 (Ael ¢ i/I h¢fs ) ....__. ... _.. ......___� _._ Y ,, 4..4. �. __._._ ... . __._.. ___ 1 .. '. . •• . ,.. . .. . II . t .r L�...w_.1Y.,. s.. .. Yw . ♦.. _M.a.l Y r .wM .� i. ......r . . - .♦ ..i. - _..s � 11 PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL EFFICIENCY EQUATION • COMPUTATION WORKSHEET A U A. \ 40 J'ect Name: 0 5 GOD /,-a G r►S ____,._ j; City File Number DR 3 -95 3/z l /95 Date: _----- r ' Stormwater Quality Control Facilities,when required,shall be designed to achieve a phosphorous removal efficiency as calculated from the following equation: Rp= 100-24.5/Rv. Where: Rp=Required phosphorous removal efficiency. Rv=Average site runoff coefficient. • Rv = (Al x 0.7) + (A2 x 03) + (A3 x 0.05) + (A4 x 0.0) Where: Al =the fraction of total area that is impervious and is not treated by a stormwater '• quality control facility . A2 =the fraction of total area that is impervious and is treated by a stormwater quality control facility. A3 =the fraction of total area that is pervious and that is vegetated or a water body. (i.e. grass, trees,landscaping,wetlands,ponds, etc.) A4 =the fraction of total area where runoff is collected and retained on site with no direct discharge to the downstream drainage system. Al = 0 / 3r7, 344- = 0 4 f (unmated im v pervia area) (total area) A2= 2 5. 401 _/ 3 r1, 344 = O. 6.8 (uteatcd unpctvious area) (total ttea) , • ,, L A3= I I . q 4 3 / 3'7, 344-. = O 13 2 , (vegetated pervious area) (deal area) 1, A4 / 3'71 3 44 (area Maimed) (total area) r' 41 R L' Rv = ( 0 x0.7) + ( O•6 53 x0.3) + ( _0r32 x0.05) + ( 0 x0.0) = 0: 2- • ; ' . , (Al) (A2) (A3) (A4) p = 100-24.5/ O. z2 __ r11 4 (Rv) When Rp is zero or less,no additional stormwater quality control facilities are required. • When Rp is eater than zero,additional stormwater quality control facilities are required. /5-..5-- . , 1 ' 1 1 F ' A * t • '` -J.., References Cited. Brown and Caldwell Consultants (B&CC). 1991. Surface Water Quality Facilities Technical Guidance Handbook. Study commissioned by Cities of Portland and Lake �'y Oswego,Clackamas County, and the Unified Sewage Agency. } l ' Metropolitan Council of Governments (MCG). 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff. A M Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Unified Sewage Agency (USA). 1991. Construction Standards and Regulations. Includes regulations on erosion control and permanent on-site water quantity and quality facilities. , • ' United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (USDA). 1985. Soil Survey of Clackamas County Area, Oregon° L` ' Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDE). 1992. Biofiltration Swale Performance Recommendations. and Design Considerations. Y, xti,s : New Impervious Area Calculation. 0 ' s, ' 1; Y J w 4 j' ,d' 1�• home sites: = , lots © Z64€.2 sq. ft./lot = P..1 sq. ft. home sites: /2# 99 6 sq. ft. buildings: Ar sq. ft. parking area: /O, /4 Z. sq. ft. sidewalks: // G sq. it.. ` streets: e sq. ft. other: .f sq. :t, . ,' Total Impervious Area: 251 4 d / sq, it, 0 i S$ , acres r Total Site Area: 37 344 sq. ft. 0 ' 9 acres / /� '�u S �''r . I I) l y 3 02 7 t r Y % .. J : AL ' , . Page 2 A-3 i J ,t / - 9 t EXTENDED DRY DETENTION PONDS • DESIGN CRITERIA Phosphorous Removal Efficiency. tit5 . , : The information on page 3.11 and Figure 3.6 on page 3.12 in (MCG) above provide evidence that"extended dry detention ponds"designed to the criteria herein listed will have a phosphorous removal efficiency of 50% (Figure 3.6 &page 3.11 attached) Design Storm. a'' The design storm for'surface water quality facilities to meet the phosphorous removal standard is the mean summertime storm event totaling 0.36 inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours with an average return period of 96 hours. (USA, Section 7.08) Pond Volume (PV). Determine the required pond volume (PV) by computing the runoff volume from 100% ,f of the proposed new impervious area during the 0.36 inch,4 hour storm event. ,, 1 h rft .) (1r./12 in.) ( 5 40/ sq. ft.) 76 Z cu. ft. . ' 0 '� , impervious area pond vo1'.ume Outlet Release Rate ri t': ��d 1 I.,I Calculate the outlet release rate needed to release the pond volume over a 48 hour `, .,.''?.'` period. I. Qout= ( 7 6 Z cu. ft.) / (48 hrs. X 60 min. X 60 sec.) = O.vat c.fs. pond volume • Outlet Orifice Diameter. • Determine the orifice diameter needed for the outlet release rate. utifice Equation: Q = C*A*(2gh)SQRT • C = 0.62, g - 32.20 .{ h l,S' feet Q = 0 i oo 4- c:f,s. Area: A - Q/C*(2gh)SQRTr `. A = D, c oo7z Radius: R = sq. ft. A - pi(R)SQ 0, O/5 z ft, R = SQRT(A/pi) ��, 0Diameter: D = a. 030¢ ft. .: ` (o0 3r7 5 " ) . . �` D = O. 3 inches • -- use. i� Page 6 ►i'U ' e :.`•• .1.'. .. v • i rF A-4 4 EXTENDED DRY DETENTION PONDS OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN Project Name: UJl.JG 1 a Z;c7 r i'1 I City File Number: PR -q 5 11•• Engineer: aire ► k rri°J I Engineering Firm: Hc,rr,i - Air /ici,e Ay 4. fide)c ;., , ; i eF The responsible organization shall perform the following tasks to maintain the surface water quality facilities on the above project: i • Mow the pond vegetation in the detention basin periodically to maintain an •I aesthetic appearance,to restrict the growth of undesirable vegetation, and to keep , ' the cover of grass dense and vigorous. • Re-plant pond vegetation in areas of poor plant growth and in bare spots with • appropriate plants. ,3 • Water the pond vegetation regularly during the establishment period and as needed in dry weather to maintain vigorous growth. : , • Remove debris and litter regularly to keep the facility free of leaves, rocks, and a•• other debris. Pay particular attention to the outlet grates and outlet control devices. ,+ • Remove sediment deposited in the basin during storm events and rake smooth to 0 • . . r ,;.. grade. e � , • Repair areas that form channels in the basin. " o„ , • Inspect the facility at least three times a year. Inform local residents of the purpose of the facility and the importance of keeping it free of grass clippings, oil,grease, or other inappropriate materials, • Maintain the access road to keep it in good condition. :• Responsible Organization: /rr� z�' v 4/�, L /0e,441'er i .' P Jam' , Contact Person: 1 ) irn vpirl ,t,- I' Phone Numbers: 241 -"Z ov (I-✓) 6 3 8-.3_3 45(H ) t ; 411, . . .., . . . I , Page 9 g' 4-5 ; Y n A Surface Water Quality Facilities OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN Project Name: ,C 6a,'Jii r ' 1 ''� j D.5/,►/l j� 1 City File Number: DE 3 —q 5- Engineer: 1—T",.,-, ,' '-r,.! Engineering Firm: �P�� .il� t. € ' lf��. ` a The responsible organization shall perform the following tasks to maintain the surface ;, water quality facilities on the above project: TRAPPED CATCH BASINS `• • Remove accumulated sediment at least twice a year to maintain the sediment ,' collection capacity of the catch basin. ' • Remove leaves and litter from the basin periodically to maintain the flow capacity of the inlet. J Responsible organization: 3 /� 2t-,/-ler76: r*r/ 44i , 0 , . . Contact Person: T>,--, e�pan�, c ; 24)-..23.00 le. . to. Phone Numbers: `,,.4 ':_`r 2i' POLLUTION CONTROL MANHOLES '" ; • Remove accumulated sediment at least twice a year to maintain the sediment collection capacity of the manhole. • Inspect the manhole periodically to monitor sediment levels and to assure that • the outlet orifice is open and performing properly. Responsible Organization: , ; Contact Person: .. Phone Numbers: • . ' , 40 • Page 11 ,sr / , 1 ..' . .. . + y: ` , ,, "a.... I{a it Chapter 3: Extended Detention Ponds 4 ., 6 't1 3.12 ,, } The field studies showed variable performance in removing phosphorus, Less than 15% of total phosphorus was removed at the Stedwick site over the long-term; whereas, initial results at the London Commons site indicated much - higher average (70%) total phosphorus removal (OWML, 1986a) , However, it is very likely that the long-term total phosphorus removal at the site is much vary low (or even negative) removal rates were reported for lower, since v 8 ,,,,., Y larger storms. Resuspension of total phosphorus was cited an the likely "'0' cause. • — NITROGEN In the OWML (1983) settling column experiments, the upper limit on nitrogen removal achieved after 48 hours of detention was about 40%. Again, ' + this is due to the predominance of soluble forms of nitrogen that comprise r about 70-80% of the total nitrogen found in the Washington, D.O. area urban runoff (NVPDC, 1983). Field studies at the Stedwick extended detention pond suggested a long-term total nitrogen removal ratan of about 25:0 which t compares well with the lab studies (Figure 3.7). Almost all of the �, ;a particulate nitrogen settled out from the pond, but only limited settling of soluble nitrogen forms was reported. A higher average storm removal of total .,: nitrogen wee reported (52b) at the London Commons site (OWML, 1986a) , although the long-term removal rates may not be as high. •4< Figure 3.6: Removal Rate Vs. Detention Time For Selected Pollutants 1 4• '� 100 —«- 7SS {, 80 Lead (rob..., .,•,•,••....r.�. ---• _,.- 7.n , CODseseen �� 7 0 a ..,,4 --- r dart sedim�n� " Ff 7PlI .c 60 v : : -: 14 by - r..- 50 TatalPhoaprw — 40 ' •-' \`'• .-w«��- - • 1 . tl fir' X. . . .., ,nee Oeme►nU T . _ ote NltroCel^ r n. . a.. 11 ;.,,.. .,e. 20 tl to . 0 11 1 T.- 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 DETENTION TIME (hours 0 1 NOTE: Based on OWHL (1983) settling column data, Average values • feet of settling. • 1 � ` for seven teats) Removal equivalent to 4 ,4 , . 4 • r , I • :t \ , V ' , ',,,O W G GARDENS DETENTION BASIN CALCULATIONS j ,. \:. • ' , `• I , ;S r�' L • V Ji g P1 C OWNER e Jim Zupancic ,, E �, 18400 Delenka Lane ''','; Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 ENGI NEERJSURVE RECEIVED YOR MAP, 2 �3 1995 Hams-McMonagle Associates Inc. CITY OF LAKE 08VVE iO 12555 SW Hall Boulevard Dept.of Planning&Ci dUloptnunt r ` Tigard, Oregon 97221 y' 639-3453 411) March 19, 1995 k • ' t f + a /t r • v • RUNOFF RATE WORKSHEET . ' ,:',. ' k O..$t e a 6 rI n S ,..r Project Name: t City File Number: [�,� —' 5 �, Computed By: Gd J irriJ Date: 3�22/' S' f I. REQUIRED RELEASE RATE (10-Year Storm) ,• .� 1. Total Site Area Atot tg 0.e ac. , •'. 2. Existing Land Use (4G10 e • 3. General Site Slope I.0 % • 4. Runoff Factor (use encloser] table) Cexist= O. 3 v ` 5. Longest Travel Route of Runoff 2/3 feet ^o"tome,-&, SE Goi,,#/ — I , 6. Drop of Runoff along Travel Route 2 ,.O feet fu e•./.,., 7. Condition (overland flow, channel, pipe, etc. ) over 8. Time of Concentration, T , (5 minute minimum) Y4 (Use nomograph) . . . ,, c Tc= /Z.O min. 0 , ''`' Y, 9. Rainfall Intensity, for 10-Year Storm ✓-�" (use precipitation table) T= �. 6`7 in/hr +(n,, ,.:s ,, r 10. Peak Runoff Rate, Q=CIA ,..----'y ` � ;; ( line 1 x line 4 x line 9) . Q= 0, 43 cfs ,Ar v.,,;'�„ II. Developed Site Runoff Factor ' ` '"'° 11. Impermeable Area Ai= D.•5S . ac. 12. Permeable Area r p A = 0/ 2''7 ac. 13. Runoff Factor for Permeable Areas . (use enclosed table) C = a, 15 4 . 14. Composite Runoff Factor (line 11) X (0.9 / line 1) + ( line 1.2) X (line 13 / line 1) Ccomp=-0° , 66 . f 15. Site Area (line 1) X C (line 14) = 0°51 comp --- 4 • III. Detention Volume Required f ill •16. From Detention Volume Work Sheet Vo).= _ 08 cuff' . (, . -1- �..--- d / / .-r ltJGGG/I�"� l- 4-4./Gv%.40 '1r. 4474,4, .. . .. • . V a ��' - `794 G�4, 6 1 > 60g G wb, L -et4, rem.. I C,/1 • 1. ' ',,' ,4, DETENTION VOLUME WORKSHEET Project Name: 0 , City File Number: 4'' �" Deno . * . .B. • . . •C OOOOO . D E + F G -., STORM 50-yr AREA X INFLOW RELEASE STORAGE DET. VOL. 1 TIME inten C comp. B X C line 10 D - E F X A X 60 mins. in hr line 15 cfs cfs cfs Cu . ft. 5.00 3 .43 0•5r7 /,16 0, 43 /,S'Z 45 7 1 t 6 .00 3.14 if /,7r'I I ' /, 36 4'q0 7.00 2.91 if �- GJ'� ' �� Z3 1� J 8.00 2.72 ' '' l 5* it �2 5 3 $ 9.00 2.56 'i is 4 t4 , ' /1 03 .556 ti t ; . 10.00 2.42 �� /135 ,, o q4 5'70 ' ' l'.'1 • ,b4: 11.00 2.30 �� /, ,�/ '' 0, gg 55 1 . 12.00 2.20 'I IJ 25 __ '1 00 Y2 5/ 3 u''1 13.00 2.11 �� I , Z0 '' 0. -77 � 43 14.00 2.02 � 15.00 1.94 '/ f . / i // 0, b (vO g v.S-� ' 16.00 1.86 �� , 06 - �'/ 0, 63 6os " 17.00 1 .79 " i • 0 2 H 0. 59 6 oZ {�,,,I.'': 18 .00 1 .73 1/ 0, q9 " 0, 56. 4 b I t � . 19.00 1 .67 I/ 0 q5 // 6 .5-2_ 555 20 .00 1 .61 21 .00 1 .56 22.00 1 .52 .. 23.00 1.48 24.00 1.44 25.00 1 .40 30 .00 1 .24 i 35.00 1 .13 i '' • 40 .00 1 .04 1 ..2,,. i,-` /3 •� '. fir. 1 t: � r:J, F. . ORIFICE DIAMETER WORKSHEET a, Project Name:_ C).5/.1/65.2 G Gt.rCte/ ' City File Number: DR 3 — . 5 f• • Computed By Date: 314.5 PROVIDE SKETCH BELOW OF OUTLET STRUCTURE • • - • .tq& fi- _5171z ' 2/2 (G reed rt) 91 � ) ` ?' r f2ro posed Ocd T/e 7' -.<71.-vG 74/�-e... '/- / ` e' /, i/i1 , levie.. will ii 7 ;Q -.1r'°Cli/.-'al /r7 .14 it` ' r e.f(c, 1 A 1 �r ;;L. s '..? _)A; .-e II- //z. (f/c,f 4..//`,-, J . 0 .,..... . , . ... . ,, . . . t . .,.. . . . .. . .,. .. . .. i. . . .:, . ,. . � Orifice Formula: Q - CA ( 2gh) • 5 Given: C = 0. 61 'Yt": ,, : Design Q = O .¢ 3 c. f.s. h = /, $' feet of head ;_ Solve for A: A = Q / ( C (2gh) ' 51 ` A = O' '3 / ( 0. 61 ( 2 x 32. 2 X 1 ,5 ) ` 5] • (c.f.s. ) (head r ) • ;� ,° A = O0017. sq. ft. (orifice area) Solve for D: A -- pi . (R) 2 1. R = (A / pi ) ' 5 = ( 0.07Z / 3. 110 ' 5 = 045 ft. .- '+ (area) a D = 2 x R x 12 = 3#62 inches 1S 4 " pipe 0 1 , ; ti 15- /y .I . . Fwasera••••••••••ws•••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••• ••••••Immr.... • ., . . - , Fla -' a 2.2 ---. �11 t' , 0.2 0.6 orb to =0tl93 1. , i0.4so.3 0.1 1 ,� ' 0.08 ii,, 'hr) a 0.06 0.6 Li,z w t, (blip) i8 0.04 0.4 c..9 Lift) —J 6 z ca /, 0.03 0.3 10 3 q +. • 3 N. 0.02 0.2 ►_- 20 N it- 30 0 2 c 0.10 40 • ® 0.01 0.08 60 8 a., 0.006 0.04 100 ' 4 03 U 0.6 • • 0.004 0.02 _ •-- 300 20 0.4 0.003 • . 30 ` 0.002 0.01 40 A. 0.001 60 Kinematic Wave formulation for • • ` a d'oterminiiti9 time of concentr +ion t s 0 ' /./ 0 14.1 IV y INN J/ / ` I IN1„10 / 1 I I.d17o J `� nlp rd. l `, 111 r �1, it kit -�;NI`Y r_ - ^ t • • Illn,tt/IN•IW•, • :I , Own*NNW • , i 1, `lt u+ 4.0 1b lw•1 I. • Iill N1 1 W r d .',/'M/, '1,. r,,Y�y� Nu.Nn,w Nw 1 j, r It._.. , JaP, A of yr rr'" a .• I Itoi 3Yr+ ' t A'• � `'1'`L�,' d ;Fi b`,, '}E�1°iiif rr 11 a \la aim oll:a 0110 nub alln u.a 0.1. 0,14 '� 5` It III TYPICAL WATER QUALifY/I)CTEN11gN POND SECTION A A • 7• /.. ,u 1 9. °'P OJT // of - (I//, 1i111 ,"~ „✓'" ',,,,,e e,„, <I. \ e , ,4\c-// � ,t,4- / /r4l t-.1 ,,,n , /, j6�I1'41 ;o'J I ll010� ,'A. 1 , , • , ,. 4 ,°..11, .--- r 1i iil II . „1Hu M41 7i d /t: 1 1 °‘41If IA rr.11�•• in ItN g two.NI M.IN, . ,`;'0, /.1 1-:" rt IIi1a 1 ` 1 ,II ✓ ,/,1U u • /r, , "• 1 / "� �..- ` _ 1 14.E 14 ' \� .`.. -...m.' ° t•� • UII .I I/ r.' lflli .. / / ,11,�' �V"rG 5N1 1°o�lf �„• Iir d F Ji.v4 N uo r 1•� t ..�_ 1 • ,,. td FLAP VALVE SIDE MO 141/1 v H..W1 INi '�• ' •.,. , I , 1 t rr woo . `e ^t."" aT., y • ,-° 1 , - ,u4 - rr 11J�o ,n�I u e POND N 1\\aaf�tt{ \j - El_. {` /y, f>� tI IA11a . ,A" Ft ' 14• ,44 1 1o•rNIMI .4 4x+, t �..., I t 6 I n "" " "i c 1., ._ "' ( \ t,1' , ,ant. �.. /r/ ' fl „ ••• 1., (d10 i/N ;4.° . • 4'•uo• s.. ,,,,40 . r . k 4Tr . k. +dt .. \ • _ 9 1..,1 I4 , •11 It 1 _ 4'�,��rl,/Il + ,r.K. • y� t r w'.t la' �' V r, °4a .It 1111,:1, 4,�.r+ �i a:l 1^ • '. i t 0.3 ., �._ yI MIIU lI E 1 T i 4\i O%t Writ . ,rM t - 1-,1(41 1 �`4 WATER OUALITY/DETENTION FACILITY tle �,.`,� u.N ,, A A I iLI ,,,,,,,1./ ,1"' �� 1 r�1, I I2 4. FLAP VALVE FACE CONTROL STRUCTURE 1 '+ y d , lm 2"IAIIGA4U*MA WNADIS ' I '�^1 \'V if 1+"t b u S A O Ma A /} G 1..1 ••.11J 0 rr u10 • a t,r -..., 3 �,1 u y.ud „s ,, a,� «. 1.• .N ;It • -••- ,141 1 F1�I 114:71°'1N. Y.,i. nu. 1 Y�AII HNGAD• eariel,a,1, ' 1 .N Itl / At y 11 • imr 1 1• rf Ill Ji• .. - 1, ,tl ` 11. •• r•1!'.YHI IPI 714 wA,, [I LNN Y..YM M1�t11 IH.„..,.n M 1N1. •� 1 1 • 16 !.1 • 1 1 bo • �V1 X ulCO • u .+ . 1 A‘ I TYPICAL PERCOLATION WELL UETAIL ' 1 . /\ 4111 Dutunrtr uuaaulllw Aun Nattb "`" JIM 'LUF'ANCIC 1dN __ Iw,o 10400 DELCNItA LAND JUN LANE OSWECO, OItECON 07034 OSWEGO GARDENS • • ""•" IIANIUS-4040NAOLE ASSOCIATES, INC. at..Av. N«I B'� >wn-- I;,Ay". GRADING PLAN '• e....' a• 'ul.a,r.nN,Ilia,41'r X"W UJ=dl 41 .P.1.1 II':I A, - f 1•0111411 MMII / J/ .: }44 .a.w•y F•u1i .' M y // 40, / Jul t, .11.4 ♦!1 ,..' ll / I/7!t }" , . 'tl, // � 1011.17139`W t4At.r" ' •..) erIl ^i }1 J Jj,0 , ,% l I p`fiE I�' 8 �ti, . ' c.� .+ ' plyt5.->//�� ✓ 4 'x ' J,{I *' y 1 1� 511i 1• j,i1�� I'Y 5 J^/, y ��..i �'1^ ,N L t/1i11G P I 1 I•i. r_ (( p1A1.111 IroN _ 1 / .,\I•• ,'f " +//✓�; It!, I.tNSMMl 1 L j 1 /G� Jeth ii % f .,... ..7., � J . 1 .0 I p "I',Ilk ow'�` IL -1; ' J �J s 4 + J ' { `' tip • - , ,,,,/'.e. f ; `p VICINITY MAP 4, , 1.. J J�� . t1 J d I • it li �, ,� 1000 + 2 1 , 1 , .• 'y ♦ .• /'//{ ' - 11��I� 11 y.'+ . yl'I1111,1r •I 4'4 • f M � •..- .p t \ It t w B/11x t �' _.- /•IlIM10 t11Y44'11 '1 1 1 ,. { I. h,'; J 91 \ 1 I . }} N. 4 11 11111, 1ArNl b.,�Mhl'1 .' r'' ,,.� I III I 1.1.1.1.11. .,! +- ' // I `.. ;� 11 -+t '' 1.1 I!{I 11iy xlrl / I „x4 7 TYPICAL PRIVATE STREET SECTION 4. tr. AA1\ 1, i^ / w' K� 41.1•111 y.1 \ r. N•��'se's�' ya,ee WATER QUALITY/DETENTION FACILITY NOTES: 1111 111 IIIi UWl11 M.6 W.'1 NAM. 1.11 N.I.101 I ,NIlw 44 .,W ,. 1�\I ' � MU WK.M I NNMI I4 IwU.11,IV,N / 1NIA INI I ki1A � �..- �' CW 1 IIV111N'1x111 1 0,11 N4µ1 IOW. ' lam 1 1 OObf It M'1 xi1�AW:lelllN - 2 IS IS ugAlm ion /Irl NY . �• .r I ..! Iutll1 , U 1111U 0k1411WfY lA 14 y 1. IN I NR/IIF W41 01 14 I wex41 1 a 1W a 1p+l ,{1,I . r I. M x.x:11xN I4likn I Ix I11 F14 Ix i i Y 11... I - ti f IW WIAA.4 YiF11W NA 11111'111111A N 1 -N4". '+ I,a ,{.1 - • I1r'•`� "�. <. IY''S C410lil1FNF1111WWU x'1 II w'.xir II,,.4•''M41 + • r .- "'@ •�V=•m 1 Ht..4.4.111.1 to N.a1.4,I . , ,4 11 I. nF�L.Fes- K - � _...,., ,._ 11^ .- x 1A utlA wUau.wool , ^"r^q�"•'a• 1 I 11{I / .1 1.41 I, ..111 , wu.'' ,. . '4a I r I` - NIFNO�Ns, /N1 11N111'1III 4411A411.NI ' 1 " r y yam, 11Iyy��pp�� (� IrII l /� • , �/V . Vf 1 I,Y'r♦ • : C1.1.1 1UUu.11 A 4.i...III 440I4111a l4 14e .I lx /7 1 0 114 Y111 W l 1 A. 11 IA 1 1 I 4 I 1 "-' 1 1 1.1 111 011 WI/IOW a I . !. 1\ ._r, .. \ . ,. .4 ' I NWd A14x1/14 4111l,l,+N I. . 1 a r 1 ` _ tll '' .0. 4 ' ' '�•• _If= 4 MO.ti111,4,isms, .W,111'4 x a I 4 1 + ..-1 N 54*0.N I.4011 i1W In diii N IPli h'A . .11 MYOWG,1 all IW Y illl 1.411: , ,• ^ A WATER QUI*LITY/DETLNTION FACILITY MAINTENANCE MOIL , 1 n A, { _ N e21 51 w a as •• •. ,• w _. - -. 115,6045 Null'.,wwl'/11. WIN Nu 11 1.11 , ' , ' -. 14 lllf CII11f 1f11M 't.. '. UIIy11 WI I 'all. .'1 ..l I U INC C111 of 1 Alt.1,M 1144hu1,' 411 111 1 11 ' 1 • UAINIINANII 1'NIf,IIAu 1A Ill t1 AO. ''II 44111 n,.1,1 1 i I SUCH 110154.Clt%MiliN IN NA,. A NI 1 4 Ah 4', ' Al I enW tilt UII'p 11YI,AIL ,.\ .. fln"n«I A/'14.111y'N 41,0 wilt' "1`" JIM ZUPANCIC "r 10I00 DELE1NKA LASE r i ( ". . 1.AkE� OSWCUO. UkKUUN Uv11i14 OSWEGO GARDENS 1 ,, , war. IIAI1N19.1AtI1UNAGI+ASSOCIATES, INC. • 6.5 Imltx«a Fw MASTER PLAN I<ur ii i f w . ..JAN•hit, OP di if Ywtlti il.Hf 4 :r. 't ' :fir 1 OSWEGO GARDENS ' ^'*,. ' PERCOLATION WELL CALCULATIONS . \ w '-o•. :1 _ , ' OWNER Jim Zupancic °" ry �t 18400 Delenka Lane `'u° ,' , �L Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 ENGINEER/SURVEYOR � ECEIVED i�AR N 3 '1995 ' Harris-McManagle Associates Inc. , ,:(. 12555 SW Hall Boulevard G17Y OF LAKE r) e:"s- Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dept.of Planning& '��'��'�' 639-3453 • • • March 19, 1995 Y 4 EXHIBIT fs s F F 05 w e y® 6arde,is 3/23/45 g% v, #. wa% -180fe r-6a1.41/49.,) -Mi2e4. 61Aela �Go�'�i'J /k • .• 51 N �/ // !tom / rs-G �" '0 !. ✓� n . Yee 'IG.ve°77/• N M tx'1 /G/ y /4 ..--0 t4 : • di - --•- a - 614 1z,,,z/;.,,.. , a"r1'7 v ile4 ) I� e:: 41'''' ,*I li e i )€ Q de¢= (,eSec �e-17c . ‘ 0.6C .a,w ry, ` ;4„j,`¢y ,E.i r `!/o /, .f / /� /A .d r s e sk' _,tca ot��_ (0. 6 6)j (1.6 '7)(4. e'6 ) _ 0, 15 •ce'J • /i/o A / 7L 71: /''-ear,4' , 7 - , 4.4,1, e- Ite-0/7'l ec-% . . , ..30/0-2,4,71,..A a 1 A.,/tif/74,,i'/J 7//$4.. tec26--fi 0 44,0,1 e.....4e ll 4 t .•' /42 is /he OA i'il ez:i4c,..isi...e ...44-714(...e. lo 71P-Krethent7-- . ' ,, . vefd S • - eadd/711 d i ) 'Aleut ,,,�4.- 5 e c1/ . g J G • 4 O f Q tee4 A al.+ r 1 74//Ut . , ; r, , „at %'' p.. • •i • • ( • • • • • ) .1 • 1. 1 ' 2/3 '!..-:', 1, ,,.. Rt 'e0/4740•� CAI :Pc. rea.a"k,nved) • 4 .� /04"i I''eT. /j'e- rLo Je4 f ivy .N �°�o a kir4.;4.. �: • q3 c.6 ._. . I ry ^ > P1 © IA 717.,�, r e . a 4' 4�1..,, SItiieli- /y40.5v rmo t ir) oa . /9 / /n /'ye. S N N N /4,V el I less/e . d o /+A/ t.,N .�.... ri • N 4, q = /© y, oe W S.EL. - W i/,bA lbw, e°lam. - heed`, t ,,, _ � �t/a�t7 I�s tl rI + ;; / SOD / 4�/4 D 7" <G�r/ 47�' O/I f/ .2 . , _ /'1"-'4 0 r�» ,410 6.4%-,e.4.--4,44/ve ) 1. . \ . ". ' -� �/e// bm / � // / . , q1,•. J � i > gP,,,,, ) 19S '4',‘,' ;2' ' . ' . A 4514)(L ( b es" ef.B‘Oset i I+ ., 4/9 dl°ZX S .fir♦c/ _ . ., -2ev) , 7 ,E-ev.�i.., /��•,2v�;, 4614 ems, , /` '3-/ce AI here, qo ^j p,� retie. - 9.s' ')�148.93 y P2 C410 = en iz 426.4 s 2�s ') °., , M.t /c = oss Ce ; _ 3p pv4 /7 '- 2,.; i I dlla _ 17!, al,i*nie .Ci-/s7 . .4.i c J = g !! • k .h r . 5/3 4. (eorri t IA 4,401 ) , .� (42,4(-)(i i 6 ' ) ( 424- 1. )1185 41• �� E 4 7l (/301185 ( 8 ►` )4�' I �{ •1 1 wb)w i x x Y rar) leiG=: �' 1)_"' 10'1 G� , woo Gz • 2 /' 1 •.M L.7 ,t Ir ; r.M�l' MMM V ram;4/-,4 ) VE/oc,' o 3a 4? = / tr, ritr- stag /i Sri, �r ' a M, i /�rO,� pat.-co IG .1 �e�T/0 r '( h �' i ti r.: Qp _ 2, a 941/• li'', ge.(er 7 11--- • r Yiu d /� t/i real /�r"- �i ...-.:I. /�i �Gyf — Qua/�p Are = , =4 � 2 /3 / -"T - 2- a tr.. P/4") ) , , . •,µay fr 4 r'Y ' • I, C a rY „:�bx • x r xs st v ...... ti f�� r , I! •t,. kr _..._x . &,,-- u• ), x 1 , I I it t .. . 'I M •'4 e ) • i• •. �„ _ x _� 4, M I�. 1, 4ry� •1 ' b "I . r MIRI ti i r ri 1`' v r ,t` SQUIER ASSOCIATESI , v ` / CEO'LCHNICAL 6: 42SS Oakridge Road 503.635.4419 Y /�/ * CEOENVIRONMENTAL t ` Iv PoscOrgce Box 1317 Fax835143b ,�{, ' .- • CONSULTANTS Lake Oswego,Oregon 4 '':K � 97035 • '�® e 91613 ; o , D.C. Group October 21, 1991 ' P.O. Box 41 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 1 "y' V': Attn: Mr. Farhad Daraee ' Re: Percolation Test Located Near Pilkington Street on Lakeview Boulevard in Lake Oswego, Oregon l 't'' Dear Mr. Daraee: ru 4 w i . ;: „: In accordance with your authorization, we have completed a percolation test for the site desig- nated Tax Lot 3100 of Map 21 E1 BAC, which is located near Pilkington Street off Lakeview Boule- vard (south side) in Lake Oswego, Oregon. A test pit excavation was completed to observe the 1. subsurface conditions and for use in a percolation test. This letter presents the results of our work, including a description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the excavation and ' the result of the percolation test for use in the design of storm water dry well, e d The test pit was excavated to a depth of 7 feet on October 12, 1991, using a rubber-tire back- a 1,7,.., Y' hoe operated by a local contractor. The location of the test pit, with respect to the site, is t^� shown on Attachment 1. The percolation test involved filling the test pit with a known quantityWI x„#Y ;,` of water and monitoring the rate at which the water percolated into the surrounding soils. Water ,i .,• was supplied from a water truck provided by the backhoe contractor, also. The subsurface conditions Deserved in the test pit consisted of a topsoil layer, approximately e 1.0 foot thick, Underlying the top soil, the test pit encountered brown cobbiy gravel with scattered boulders in a matrix of brown silt and sand to a depth of approximately 7.0 feet. Ground water was not encountered in this test pit. In general, the percolation test indicated that the brown cobbly gravel with silt matrix is mod- erately free draining below the test pit location. The results of the percolation test are presented on Attachment 2. The percolation rate presented on the attachment, assumes that the dry well penetrates at lea , 6 feet into the relatively permeable cobbly gravel layer. tt is assumed that µ ,Y , the seepage will be negligible through the walls of an excavation, therefore, the attached figure (Attachment 2) is presented in terms of a unit area (1 sq.ft.) over the base of the dry well exca- vation. The percolation rate presented on Attachment 2, is based on actual percolation test , results and do not include a factor of safety. In addition, subsurface conditions across the site . • . e 0 may vary, therefore, the depth to the relatively permeable gravel layer and the measured perco- r Y Y e ne. , lation rate should be considered appropriate at the test pit location only. t'• ' 1 Y 4 ' A. ti N,1Y SQUIERA1SSOCIATES •v ".� We have enjoyed being of service to you on this project. if you should have any questions, ,i please feel free to call us at your convenience. A`Ir I , :v Very truly yours, • Squier Associates, ir); • by Saiid Behboodi, P.E. .'1 Project Manager • ';' SB/DHS/es •� End: Attachments 1 and 2 , A� ^ •t f h ti1 I�x 4' 1 7�a t r5.11'C� ur. ' ��I 41 Jlii..y'r I 1.,4 , Ilt ' 1 gip. 1>.'' r. ,J } A • ! 1 i • • • t •{ `. A + • a - 4 a, - e LR . Unlit, Rj ......... L�.. r t� .;, _ _- —•--_ V •• ..,.. ' •.•pr•Y •- pan ., ..M.-:"i �' D ...• r ; • '• -- _TP-1 ., !' w of: 5 �\ � \MKS N y`,,. ' ,,.i • Y\y` /, �l.� \` f 1 .,,,,v\t •4 1 • •i 1.-rr.n II c. t • ,* '....4.*"....., '''••• .....r.,2.. /,.../. '' ,.:.1,,,..,,,.:.:. i • CA 1♦ •� 1 r�; SCALE: NONE`l tz r r 1f F. '41 1 f �1. , d 1 '• i f' r • NOTE; Features shown are for illustrative purposes only SITE SKETCH E ,.. ., i .y S': 1. SQUIF.R kr+SIXIIATES 4' ;.`•`" ., t , OCTOBER 1901 o1d1a .•, . • ATTACHMENT `I • 1 p f tl r n•• h Y • S / t1 4-4 { 0 ':.** '' '' • ' 5.0 _._ I ); • 4.0 I^3.0 Y '.� I jr LLI • tI 1 +�z2.0 1 I,I , I III , J . xiNc" y i ,re ; ',r {b '' A I 1rfir' } nw r.rlyir u i • • y —.t i 1nY 7 'p 0 YL ( , 1' ` • 0 .2 4 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1 6 1 8 2.0 22 2 4 PERCOLATION RATE, q (Gal /Min pe' sa I1 I�Y f I,Y . 0 IP t ate ryr , 4.r `.� 4.• • t ..• .a.. rr NOTE: The total percolation rata (0) may be determined by multiplying the percolation rate per square foot (q) by the area of the dry well bottom I (Area x q = 0). ' f. r 1: 1 PERCOLATION ,l. RATE - • .. Its y. 0 \ . . 411. ww SQUILR ASSOCIATES "0 ` OCTOBER 141)1 9ie13 a �•_. /fr 01f r/1VIYI EIY 1 • •.t + nY tpp4l--t�I 'm 4 Y { Y i �r 91 j,�,,.i:. d1'". M,. % 1' L Y• ' .I t!` a I. o. - r. CONFIRMATION OF USE AS'GI-1OUP CARE FACILITY Edon and Jacquelin Edwards, the owners of the real property located at • 3350 Lakeview Boulevard (21 E 1 CAC, TL3000) (the "Property's), confirm that the Property Is not l currently being used as a single family residence, but is being transiotmed into a group care tit facility to be licensed by the State of Oregon. We understand that this confirmation will be �{ forwarded to the City of Lake Oswego In connection with the proposed senior apartment protect ;:� to be constructed on the site to the west of the Property. Dated this day of February, 1996. • •M/-fir` ' idon Edwards • - /' ( J.O- :Iin Et! ards • 0• CAMS• '^ 1�'�e.•. k �. tT .41 • :b. 1 µ.AK •s " EXHIBIT /J .� J ri v r; +3 s:A it•. "e t i f t f J f. ^.I ,' 0 n ' J .� ` ,' POINT PAPER �.' t L Subject„ Errorsv Misrepresentations and Related In8ues, re , r° - VAR 18-94 `a-b) Staff Report �i Table of Contents: 'y Errors/Misrepresentations: / r Page # .,: Point No . Subject 1 Accuracy and relevancy a' •f' of data and information . 2 2 Decks as a part of houses' areas. 3 •ig 4.i ,' t3tt 3 Staff claim of no demonstration of .;,t, �',, . how neighborhood would be injured . 5 { ',+ +tip 4 Staff claim of no complaints regarding :,` t•', potential drainage hazards or shadows. 5 5 Conflict with the Comprehensive Plan . 6 6 Thrust of letters in opposition. 7 7 "Proposed plans not unreasonable for properties around the lake ." 7 8 Functional use of property. 8 9 Needed square footage of house area . 9 10 Surrounding area . 9 '" * ' •.a 11 Notification of Neighborhood Association . 10 .:`. 12 Three car garages . 10 13 Lot coverage. 11 " + 14 Lot widths . 12 � ; 15 Lake Corporation property. 13 ''' 16 House Plans of 30 ft in width. 13 17 Side setback weighted averages. 15 <�,��ft i“. , '� +'.• 18 House plans for slope . 15 " Ax� 19 Nature of the Appeal . 16 Related Issues: 20 1s it right to hold a long time 'p . owner of property to revised Code specifications? 17 �t 21 Distance between houses. 17 22 "Failure to provide any substantial ' evidence in support of appeal ." 18 %_..`.;` i•' ..ill, , t - L' 1 V - y♦ 4 I R p 1 ,F.''':,'!,?. 1 \ . r 11- ,• !01-:'., • 0 Errors AND Misrepresentations: (Points 1 - 18) Point 1. Subject: Accuracy and relevancy of data and information. Section III C 1 a . , page 6 of 14 . 1t4 • - ' In the second paragraph on this page , the report states, in f reference to my letter dated February 22, 1995 , that, "In "` considering this documentation , staff finds errors in Mr . Page' s analysis and inapplicable comparisons ." '> „ ' The staff , in reaching conclusions regarding the accuracy of my analysis apparently relied heavily on revised data submitted by +. the applicant on March 3 , 1995 following his review of my letter . '1',. The applicant' s revised representations were accepted by staff ,,; without a single call to me to check regarding his counter claims, and this despite the applicant' s acknowledgement of the Ih' multiple errors I identified in his January 28 , 1995 application ' '' regarding the same basic information . In this regard , please note that the applicant in Matrix 2 of his March 3rd submission (see Exhibit 8 of stafr report) borrows heavily on the corrected • data submitted in my Appendix C, page 2, of my February 25th , Y . letter . :'.A''::„.;'t:.f:' 0The multiple issues discussed in this overall paper address, and " ,. . are believed to refute, the statements in both the staff report ' R".,.,, and applicant' s March 3rd letter regarding their findings of errors in my analysis. As stated in my Feb. 25th letter , I strived to be as accurate in my data presentations as possible, and used pertinent specifications and criteria of the City and County Codes in data collection and presentation . n ' As indicated above , the applicant' s Matrix 2 (Ethibit 8) is a `, �cl virtual copy of Appendix C, page 3 , of my letter , with the exception that he has added data to his Matrix for lots 5900 and 6300 taken from the table of data on page 2 of my Appendix C. I did not include lots 5900 and 6300 in the table on page 2 of = V. ? c Appendix C because that table was provided to readily compare, as y Appendix , onlythose lots stated on the introductory page of that �1pp of 50 ' in width -- Lot 5900 is a 43 ' in width and lot 6300 is a odd shaped lot of 51 ' average width. It seemed to me , when . X, ' preparing the table, that my inclusion of those lots might be construed as being misleading , and thus I did not do so . j'1 a A . 1 'f a1C i — 2 - r,p t 11 ;A AI a AA_:♦ Aµ y :� r t ° - "" ,i 1� ' °'� i t FAA d Point 2. ; ; Subject: Decks as a part of houses' areas. ., Section III C 1 a . , page 6 of 14 . ' , ` '• ,; 9 ' In the last paragraph on this page , the staff report states t' "Exhibits 8 and 9 clarify information provided in Mr . Page' s I ,...) analysis (Exhibits 14 f and g) by comparing the figures for house ;,• . areas which include decks with house that exclude decks. Mr . ; Page' s analysis excluded deck areas from neighborhood houses but .�'•.,, included the deck area of the subject house." • .• This is wholly untrue , and the thrust of the tables presented in the referenced staff report Exhibits is erroneous because of .i ,:, multiple errors in the data presented in the applicant' s revised W� table (Exhibit 9) . Unfortunately, Exhibits 8 and 9 do not °� clarify but serve to further obfuscate the subject . I will �. attempt to illustrate why this is the case, but unfortunately the subject is somewhat complex and requires a rather laborious explanation . ,' '. e x p i Firstly, it is important to define how the City and County Codes _ treat decks when assessing house areas, for it was these codes from which I took my guidance when arriving at the data presented . nl in the comparative data tables provided on pages 3 rand 4 of' : :', _ 0 Appendix C to my letter of February 25th. One criterion particularly pertinent to the determination of lot coverage (footprint) is the applicablity of deck area . The City „..,. Code (Section 48 .02.015) specifies that only those deck,' above thirty inches in height shall count as part of the footprint. The County, for tax purposes, is interested in overall house . . area , and not lot coverage , and includes "walk-under01 decks , 4.4,.. - i .e. , not ground level decks, as part of the overall house area . t lb In this regard , the applicant in Matrix 3 (staff Exhibit 9) of "' his March 3rd letter misapplies deck areas to house area figures , ; ' " ,; which results in erroneous and exaggerated lot coverage figures, erroneous and exaggerated house total area figures, and erroneous conclusions therefrom. In Matrix 3 , the applicant adds decks . where there are none, adds ground level (less than 30 inches in height) decks , and counts second level (walk-under) decks where they have already been included in the basic figures. The following includes examples of each: the applicant in his In reference to Lot No. 5100 : pp Matrix 3�changes the Matrix 2 number "1989" in the "House Area (Base) " column to "2373" by adding in a 384 SF deck. This column was designed to represent the house footprint from which the :, percentage of lot coverage is derived . The applicant also added • the 384 SF to the House Total Area column figure by changing that ' . i, , +d W 3 - . Y. • ' J' IlN ' -h ,, Clr is : :-4' ,,:. d ,e \.' • '� _ ° ,t A 4-• l'F . • ‘,! :.A % • `'�'. vv n vv n �; 1;, ;, Matrix 2 number 3410 to 3794 in matrix 30. Both these changes a r",', are erroneous and misleading , for: o the deck on the residence on Lot No. 5100, �. + ,� although on the second level of the house, is directly above a ,rQ .•, portion of the lower level of the house , with no overhang outside of the footprint of that lower level . Therefore, to add the deck to the 1989 SF footprint is erroneous, and serves to exaggerate 1. the percentage of lot coverage, and 4) r5 o the applicant by also adding the 384 SF deck 1r ;• w . under the "House Total Area" column, results in double counting the deck in determining the total area of the house; for , the 384 r'i deck area was included in the County' s total house area figure of , :; 3410 SF as represented in my table on page 2, Appendix C. - on Lot No. 5600 the applicant added a 557 SF deck which does not exist, which again skews the Lot coverage and total house area numbers. The numbers for this residence were taken from actual measurements of the house, for the County i.,., 4 records do not have updated measurements for the recent expansion •» ti' of the house . Here again the applicant' s numbers exaggerate the � •" j -, percentage of lot coverage and total house area . ails ,�.. - on Lot No. 5900 , the applicant erroneously added 406 ►;`'•, SF for a ground level deck, which is less than 30" in height, 'r+; thereby again resulting in erroneously representing both the �,; percentage of lot coverage and total house area as being greater than they actually are. A picture of the deck is available for r review. - on Lot No . 5400 , the applicant adds 271 SF for a deck, when the actual size is 10 ' by 16 ' or 160 SF. In any case, the u - deck area was included in my footprint computations for it is a walk-under deck; and , as mentioned above, and as stated in my February 25th letter , I included walk-under deck areas in calculating percentages of lot coverage and total house areas, in 'IJnp0N:' accordance with City and County Codes. , The above, when added to the double counting of decks on those residences where the deck areas had already been calculated in the footprints, causes the applicant' s Mar . 3rd tables of ' `` comparative figures to be skewed by nearly 2,200 SF, which is like erroniously adding another one and one-third houses into the equation. r - 4 �:• :41,:::/,', '.,, ,1 :::::. ,:....:'::::::: 411 Point 3 ; y4 . J ` 1 Subject: Staff claim that no demonstration of how neighborhood ,' 1 „' °i ' would be injured. A v , 1Y . Stuff Report, Section III A 1, page 8 of 14 : �� i yY._ C ~: In the next to last paragraph, on page 8 of the staff report, it is stated that, QUOTE: "The comments and exhibits submitted by , • the neighbors did not demonstrate how the neighborhood would be injured by the subject proposal . " :UNQUOTE. It would seem that the overall thrust of all the letters, and exhibits thereto, P� clearly illustrates a concern on the part of the writers that the overbuilding of lots in the Lake Oswego area poses a deterimentala ,1,' impact on the enjoyment and livability of the Lake Oswego area . P. 1 This was certainly the concern of the City resident and City fathers when they adopted the Code limits. If the staff, Commission and Council are not going to enforce these Code ,, 'r4': specifications, we should change that law to reflect actual practice. However , I strongly suspect that there would be quite a public outcry if anyone attempted to do such. �✓ t f rP� Point 4 . J� 4 Subject: Staff claim that no complaints regarding potential q + drainage hazards or shadows were received. 4 ,�:: Staff Report, Section III A 1 , page 8 of 14 : The staff report states in the same paragraph that no one had 'a1. : stated that granting either variance would increase the potential ` for drainage hazards; however , when both Mr . Chun and I, on • separate occasions, verbally raised this early on as a concern , due to long existing severe drainage problems on the lot which impact on our adjoining lots , we were advised by staff that such was omething that would be resolved during construction. This " `' reaction on part of the staff, is reinforced by the statement in , �;! ° the second paragraph on page 11 of the staff report which reads, QUOTE: "This (drainage) standard requires that drainage alterations, including new developments, not adversely affect neighboring properties" and "Drainage for the proposed structure ►. will be reviewed and approved during the building permit 1 . ", application process to ensure compliance with this standard." :UNQUOTE. The drainage problem persists despite the reworking of . the storm sewer drain along Lakeview Blvd . and through the property. There is a severe percolation problem in the very area .... we are concerned about. The 1991 Blue Heron Neighborhood -.-. 4 I Association Development Infill Committee report addressed this " ' " • type problem. The proposed structure footprintplus the large " � ' '' P P p g Ill 5 a '...,If:.'..-- I t . paved over area in front of the proposed garage will significantly aggravate this problem. Section 12.020 of the Comprehensive Plan states that surface runoff patterns are to not k. adversely affect other properties. , • In regard to the staff comment regarding having received no complaints about shadows that will be cast on adjacent properties, i had no idea that Code specifir3tion LOC 57 .06 .050 ,;� .. existed. It should be noted that due to the excessive front ',G f setback requirements as compared to existing homes along Lake View Boulevard, the proposed house will pose a sheer wall some 44 feet in length and nearly thirty feet high casting a shadow over much of my home after about 1: 00 PM, particularly during the winter months . a I _'r Point 5. Subject: Conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. il `. Staff Report, Section III A 1 d, pages 9 & 10 of 14 : •'t •,4' ' At the very bottom of page 8 of the staff report, the staff , ., states, QUOTE: "The request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan ." :UNQUOTE. It is difficult to rationalize • . ..-:. •,‘ : ,: e this comment in view of its apparent inconsistency with the statement in the City' s Residential Site Design Policies, within the Comprehensive Plan , which encourage "small single family homes for small areas . " • . . .4 In this regard , on the bottom of page 10 of the staff report, under the heading Residential Policies, in the second paragraph, °^ it is stated that, QUOTE: "No conflict with the Comprehensive ' ' . • Plan exists because the applicant' s request has been demonstrated to comply with, or can be made to comply with all code provisions and development standards which are applicable to a single family residence." :UNQUOTE. This Seems to make no sense at all since r two variances to current Code provisions have been requested , and also in light of the Comprehensive Plan provision stating that the City should encourage the building of small single family -. . homes on small areas. • 411 6 - N N, • li ; Point 6 . ., Subject: Thrust of letters in opposition. � .; Staff Report, Section III A 1, page 8 of 14 : ' . i In the second paragraph of Subsection b. on page 8 of the staff ' report, it is stated that "Letters of opposition were received from six property owners within the 300-•foot notification area . The primary opposition appears to be based upon the desire to keep the lot free from any development. " 3 This is a seemingly subjective interpretation of those letters ,{ (Exhibits 14 a-g of the staff report) , for an objective reading of those letters certainly does not justify such a conclusion. The principal thesis of all those letters is a genuine concern :�-' ' ! for overbuilding of the lot. Those neighbors' concern is the same as that which led to the adoption of the current Code '' limits, when people became alarmed at the growing number of wall 4 ,. to wall mausoleums along the lake front and elsewhere in crowded new subdivisions. i believe all those who wrote letters in opposition recognize and respect the right of the owners to build on the lot, but wish to ensure that such construction is within Code specifications as long as no hardship is realized or that .p' • . such would preclude reasonable use of the property. Certainly neither such consideration pertains in this case . • Point 7 . Subject: "Proposed plans not unreasonable for properties around `" the lake." Staff Report, Section III A 1 , page 7 of 14 : In the fourth paragraph on page 7 of the staff report, it is stated regarding the application that\ '' '' ' g g pP , QUOTE: "Staff does find the proposed plans are not unreasonable fur properties around the lake. " :UNQUOTE. This represents a misapplication , or perversion , of the Code specifications regarding justification of Variances. The Code, does not read that staff, in approving a variance , must find that the requested variance is not unreasonable , but that the • i , applicant must demonstrate that "the variances are necessary in order to make reasonable use of the property, and that the . variances are necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship to the developer/owner . " The staff ' s finding methodology is a far reach from the Code specifications. • _ 7 - Ca t F Nt it rJ ,: ! ". r Point 8 . '� Subject: Functional use of the property. ,1 : .� Staff Report, Section III A 1, page 7 of 14: In the first paragraph on page 7 , the staff report states, QUOTE: "Staff agrees with Mr . Page' s discussion that a functional house with a width of 30 feet or less could be built on the property. , ' Staff agrees that denial of the four-foot variance would not . } . preclude any development of the property. However , staff finds an analysis of relevant standards also needs to consider whether reasonable use similar to like properties can provide ,,'il documentation that the proposed house plan is not substantially different than existing house in the area ." :UNQUOTE. Therefore, the staff position in support of the applicant appears to hinge on staff' s finding "that the proposed house plan is not substantially different than existing houses in the area," for i ,: they have found that a thirty foot (30 ft) wide or less functional house can be built on the lot. And , they have apparently based their assumption of similarity to other houses '�'SY , r, in the area on the applicant' s erroneous ' correction' (see Points > 1 & 2 above) of the information contained in my letter . It is 'Yp1{, '% readily apparent from an objective review of the information that the proposed house is substantially different from houses on "li.ko ""''4. properties" in the area . The invalidity of the applicant' s "corrected" dots , upon which the staff bases their applicant •. favorable findings, is discussed at length under Point 11 above . It should also be noted that the applicant' s basic three level ,{{ ' plan, but limited to 30 ft in width, can meet the owners' clearly 1 stated 2 ,000 SF house area needs (ref : application , page 6 , last • paragraph; and , my Feb. 25th letter , page 4 , House Width) . s i j The substantiality of the difference between the proposed house plan and the existing houses in the area is probably best ' illustrated in the following facts : . Of the referenced neighborhood lots and houses, the proposed house, once built, would be the second largest of the then existing sixteen houses, and it would be built on the . ' 'Q second smallest lot of the sixteen lots. - The only larger house in the referenced area is built on a lot 150 feet wide, or three times as large as Lot 5700. The proposed house , as approved by staff at 27 .7% lot coverage (footprint) , would be 30 .5% greater than the 21.22% lot coverage average of the currently existing fifteen houses. e • • • 1. - 8 - 4 d • _ 1 1 '• c k i?':.-.:.. -• The proposed house, at 27 .7% lot coverage , would be 18. 3% greater than the 23 .41% lot coverage average of the seven p houses on the other 50 ft wide lots in the referenced area . If •. : { ;•. one adds in the 43 ft wide lot (Lot #5900) and the 51 ft wide lot (Lot #6300) that the applicant includes in his ' corrected ' table, , the average lot coverage, for the nine lots, actually drops Ik slightly to 23 . 29% , and thus slightly increases (to 18 . 9%) the '` amount that the proposed house exceeds this average. t' -, - :-,, . , 11 ,,; Point 9 . Subject: Needed square footage of house area. ' • Section III C 1 a . , page 5 of 14 . _ In the last paragraph on this page , it is stated that "Initially, they (owners) had planned to have a house which was 43 feet wide and one story with a daylight basement. In order to obtain the • needed square footage within the 30-foot width limitation of the �' � site , a minimum two-story structure is required ." The latter statement would seem to confirm that the staff believes the owners square footage needs can be met with a thirty foot wide house, i .e. , within the Code specified set-back and :2.4;k, e.M`yl,. coverage limitations for small lots . • ':,:±': :: Point 10. ' Subject: Surrounding area. Section III A 5, page 3 of 14 . • The Staff report states "The surrounding area is composed of many lots which are less than 7 , 500 SF in area . " Seven of the seventeen lots in the surrounding area (between : Bryant and South Shore along the south side of Lakeview) are less than 7 ,500 SF in area . The Staff report statement would tend to give the impression that lot No . 5700 is not significantly • . . different from other lots in the area; however , this is somewhat misleading for on more than half (actually most) of the other . ' lots, the lake front (Lake Corporation) property is a very significant augmentation of the individual properties, it is • - g y . a Y. 1 y , S4y,r r�.. + `� �� understood that this provides no relief for the builder from the `� 'q buildable lot size consideration, and therefore might be claimed ra sy. ° � of no significance to the review of the application; however , when considering the impact of the proposed out of scale development on the neighborhood, it is of very real significance. Point 11. Subject: Neighborhood Association notification. • Section III C, pages 3 and 4 of 14 . Beginning at the bottom of page 3 of the Staff Report it is stated that the Bryant Neighborhood Association was notified of ' .. ! the subject application , and that no comments were received from the Association . Mr . Mike Roach, Chair of the Bryant Neighborhood Association , advises that he was unaware of the application for variances and that the Association received no notification of such. He also advised that such notifications are normally done by signature ' ,. / • 0 receipt required mail . 1.. Point 12. � '. Subject: Three car garages. Staff Report, Section III A 1, page 7 of 14 : : : The last sentence of the second paragraph on page 7 of the staff report states, QUOTE: "The (proposed) garage is a modest 401 square feet which is considerably less than many of the three car garages being built for new houses around the lake . " :UNQUOTE. This seems an odd rationale for justifying a house being proposed for one of the very smallest lots on the lake. �•' • In this regard , there is but one three car garage among the fifty • • some houses on the West Bay of the lake, and that is on the 150 ft wide lot . Further , that is a home that was constructed many years ago by joining two existing houses and converting a portion . of the lower level of one of those existing houses to a garage . i Interestingly, the owner does not use that space as a garage. , ` $ '°Y • • - 10 • y. .� .1 Y - ' . b . ,� .ft+ -#', •:. - • �• HI - • .. - l ,119 7 , t The only house currently under construction on the West Bay is a two car garage. A picture is available. The proposed garage is actually 420 SF, not 401 SF. It is 19 ft • by 21 ft 10" plus an area within the garage for the furnace and ,'' water heater . (19 X 21 . 8 = 414 . 8 SF + the utility area of about " ^ 5 ' ) 1 • Point 13. ,. Subject: Lot coverage. ;I Section III C 1. , pages 4 and 7 of 14 . In the Table presented on page 4 of the staff report, and at the ,; '' very top of page 7 , it is indicated that the proposed lot coverage is 30 . 9%. . This number doesn' t reflect any of the numbers presented in the '4,, applicant' s narrative, or the Staff' s Notice of Variance , I Application . The applicant requested a 6 . 2% variance bringing ' ; " < °\ .}, the total lot coverage percentage, by his own figures to 31.2% s ( i .e. , 25% + 6 . 2% = 31 . 2%) . �i r ,, ' ' In any case , 30 . 9% is in error , and, the applicant ' s original submission of 31. 2% is nearer correct, though even then slightly ':b low, for the garage footprint is about 20 feet SF larger than 41 they state . It is believed that the applicant may have arrived at his original near correct 31 . 2% by using off-setting erroneous , ' figures, i .e. an erroneous figure of 5675 SF for total lot area rather than the actual 5722. 8 SF, and an erroneous footprint area ' t 1.1 ., - 9. of 1769 SF rather than 1789 .8 SF. Regardless , the Staff Decision states that it approved a 2.7% variance to the City Code specified 25% maximum lot coverage, or '� 27 . 7% . This was the applicant' s original request, or first plan , as indicated on page 8 of the staff report. By the staff denying the applicant' s secondary request for 6 . 7% variance or 31.7% • , coverage, they merely approved the applicant' s initial request for lot coverage and side setback variances . On page 8, in the second paragraph of Subsection b. , the report states "Whereas the proposed house is larger in square footage A than house on the abutting properties, the house footprint, . 0 excluding decks, is less than seVen of nine houses within 450 feet east and west of the subject property. " This constitutes an 0 . , . . - 11 - I . , rF n I, 40 obfuscation of the actual facts, and is patently incorrect, .r• for: firstly, the proposed house is not only larger in square footage to that of the abutting properties (Webster defines "abutting" as bordering) , but it also larger than fourteen of the fifteen houses referenced for comparison purposes y in the applicant' s original application , and as modified by his letter of March 3rd . The only larger house is built on a lot three times as large as the subject lot No. 5700 . "i ctiw - secondly, the City Code specifies that a deck of a height greater than 30 inches as proposed by the applicant, ° '` constitutes part of the footprint, so to talk in terms of "house ' } ' ,r7,: footprint, excluding decks" would appear to be meaningless for • purposes of findings under the Code. - thirdly, there are thirteen houses (not "nine") on the lots "within 450 feet to the east and west of the subject property, " as can readily be seen by referring to Exhibit 1 of ,,,;•. the st aff rep ort and reviewing •.,that exhibit in comparison to the r''k'.:„.:,, table on page 3 of Appendix C of my Feb 25th letter . The table y¢t ;;; lists the houses and house footprints (base areas) for the lots "" depicted on Exhibit 1. secondly, thepertinent asp ect of house foot print , as specified in the Code (and by common sense) is not footprint total square feet, with or without decks , but is the percent of lot coverage, for only then does lot size, and the relationship of footprint area to lot area , come into play. In this regard, the percent of lot coverage as approved by the staff report at 27 .7%H. is greater than twelve of the fifteen homes listed in the - F table on page 3 of Appendix C of my Feb. 25th letter , and greater , than ten of the thirteen houses "within 450 feet to the east and west of the subject property, " and is thirty percent: (30%) greater than the 21 . 22% average (27 .7 -• 21. 22 = 6 .48 , & 6.48/21.22 = 30 . 54%) for the fifteen homes listed in the table on ;•r page 3 of Appendix C to my Feb. 25th letter . w Point 14 . Subject: Got widths. Section III C 1 a . , page 5 of 14 . In the second from last paragraph on this page , it is stated that "Exhibit 1 illustrates that the majority of the lots in the neighborhood are 50 feet wide." i 12 - • e► ; Y 1' 1 `' •• 'a 41 .. ,,;,,. This statement may be somewhat w t misleading , for careful review of Exhibit 1 indicates that ten of the eighteen lots (barely a majority) depicted thereon along the south side of Lakeview • `r Boulevard (Lots 4800 through 6500) are 50 ' wide . One is of the eighteen is less than fifty feet , and seven are greater than 50 ' width. f 1 •` Y 1,1: 1, ,W_y1• Point 15. t � Subject: Lake Corporation property. Section III C 1 a . , page 6 of 14 . • •+ In the third paragraph on this page , the staff report states "Mr . :- . .:-:.. .1 Page apparently attempts to use the Lake Corporation property to • make the small lot size appear less critical to the case." y ,�,+F r �,'4. , Quite the contrary, for my desire is not to make the small lot size appear less critical , but to emphasize that the small size .:0.''',41 of the lot is critical to the case, particularly as regards the overall area demographics . ' The subject of Lake Corporation property was addressed in the • i,:. { • ;i "Background" section of my February 25th letter , and was included : .$, for fear that by not mentioning that property I would open my '�` contention, that <,( in accordance with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan) large houses should not be built on small lots, to the argument that I had purposely neglecters to '' '; acknowledge the existance and utility of the Lake Corporation property. The whole crux of the matter , and the basis for my n protesting the large size of the house , is the smallness of the lot. In the text and summary of my letter , I repeatedly stressed � , the critical nature of the small size of the lot. �, , . , V. Point 16, Subject: House plans of 30 ft in width. Section III C 1 a. , page 6 of 14 . • '{ :' In the fourth paragraph on this page , The staff report states that, QUOTE: " . . . . , Mr . Page submitted several house plans as Illexamplesof 30-foot Wide house which could be built on the `' - 13 - s• i of , I. ' ` I - • • - �, F,`i;1l l+- ,% t{:Y t7. ° %1t.y� ,i rt N+S+��"0a ki + ,;0A4 . •I .� 4 0 `7 `'i r p"5 + 1� , ' property (Exhibit 14f) . Some of these plans , however , are deeper 1,, 5,ry �w�1 than what front and rear yard setbacks would permit. Each of these plans are less than 1, 500 square feet in area , plus the garage - not the typical size fO new houses being built in Lake • Oswego." :UNQUOTE. �� .. I, .:1 As stated on the introductory page of Appendix B of my Feb 25th j: ;.` ,,. : letter , the purpose of the inclusion of the several 30 ft wide ., I house plans in my letter was not to propose a specific home plan; I but, merely to demonstrate that there are numerous such house plans , in rebuttal of the applicant' s statement on page 6 of his ., ,?fi1r application that "only plans for homes having a width of 34 ft or • y , ,.;;, more will meet the functional requirements needed for a home. v PP It was apparent to me at the time that one, not "some" , of the sample plans was too long for the small lot, however , again + "+' my intent was merely to demonstrate that 30 ft wide home plans ' are available . Also , it was apparent that the plans were not ,. `�. 2 , 000 SF in area , but as stated in my letter on page 4 , that, ` ' QUOTE: " . . . the (applicant' s) proposed three level thirty-four (34 ) foot wide home plan provides well in excess of the 2000 SF desired; and , in fact a three level 30 foot wide plan also will meet or exceed the desired 2000 SF. " :UNQUOTE. Again , I wasn' t j attempting to design a house for them to use, and assumed that • . , any such thirty foot wide plan would be adjusted to allowable footprint configuration with a daylight basement added to provide >', further living area , similarly to that of the applicant' s 34 foot wide plan . I did not have then, and do not have now, any desire to stipulate the details of a house plan for anyone . My intended • • purpose for including those 30 ft wide plans was fulfilled , as the staff agreed agreed that denial of the requested four foot variance would not preclude development of the property. In this ;�. . .;, regard , Mr . and Mrs . Chun' s house is 28 ft in width, and is certainly a fine and functional home. ;r, In the first paragraph on page 7 of the Staff report, it is stated that, QUOTE: "Staff agrees with Mr . Page' s discussion that N:4 ,' a j a functional house with a width of 30 feet or less could be built „ . ., on the property. " :UNQUOTE. As regards the staff comment quoted above regarding the house sizes (for the 30 ft wide example plans) not being typical of , those for new houses being built in Lake Oswego , the most obvious answer is that neither is the lot size. •' , !II . - 14 - . Ly.l i• i a Point 17 . Subject: Side set-Back weighted averages. Section III C 1 a , , page 6 of 14 . �TIIn the fifth paragraph on this page the staff report addresses the subject "weighted side yard setback" wherein I had made a ; comparison of weighted side set-backs averages as well as f standard (or non-weighted) side set-back averages. The Staff report states that , QUOTE: ". . . , the Zoning Code does not make a I;.' distinction between a house with straight walls and one with ;,,-1r ' angles . Neither does the code regulate the esthetics of single • family residences by requiring angles in the walls to provide visual relief. " :UNQUOTE. 'N'. 6 I raised this subject to provide a possibly more realistic approach to assessing the impact on the neighborhood of a house with two long and high sheer , unbroken walls built to the extremes of the buildable portion of the lot, as compared to the more traditional (broken wall) home designs in the area . ::: The staff comment, in referencing their Exhibit 3 , that the r� houses on each side of the subject property have longer straight p ,t ;; wall planes than the proposed house is wholly incorrect. It ~rw_.a _1.4 ,,., • would appear that the staff, in reaching such a conclusion may „' ' , ; .1; have relied upon faulty data provided by the builder , for Exhibit , 3 does not accurately reflect the footprints or house designs of • '", the houses on either side . A corrected copy of the Exhibit is 0.". ',, provided as Appendix No . 1 to this paper . It can be seen on the corrected Exhibit that the 44 ft unbroken wall on the applicant' s , t' house plan is 10 . 5 ft, or 31% , longer than the longest wall on • , the house to the west and 19. 3 ft, or 78%, longer than the longest wall on the house to the east. Point 18 . Subject: House plans for slope. Section III C 1 a . , page 7 of 14 . • In the third paragraph on page 7 , the staff report states , QUOTE: "None of the (30 ft width) plans submitted by Mr . Page considered slope in their design ." :UNQUOTE. This is correct in very small part, and that small part is that the plans were submitted , as ,,' ' i • 0 V 1 - 15 - • ` d ' • t.„., ..:. i; 0 stated on page 4 of my February 25th letter , merely to counter 'I the applicant' s claim that "only house plans having a width of 34 -:0 , k.':.; L . ,. ft or more will meet the functional requirements needed for a home ." There was no intent to attempt to develop a house plan for the applicant, but merely to demonstrate that his claim was I�� erroneous. In this regard , the staff on the top of page 7 of r their report states "Staff agrees with Mr . Page' s discussion that J' a functional house of 30 feet or less width could be built on the property. " . • . The incorrect part is the staffs intimation that I submitted the 30 ft wide house plans with the intent to limit the construction "'io-' to two levels . To the contrary, I assumed , as stated on page 7 hr E;m.t::.V of my Feb. 25th letter , that it is "evident that a tee level • house can be constructed within the existing Code requirements ) ` (without variances) which will meet those stated needs (the owners' stated needs of 2000 SF) . " , F There is absolutely no reason to assume that a 30 ft wide three-level house can not be built on the existing slope of Lot R , 5700, similarly as proposed by the applicant in his 34 ft wide plan, nor did I indicate such. The assumption of such by staff is difficult to rationalize. In this regard I have obtained assurances from reputable construction firms to the effect that the modification of the sample plans, or most any other two level of 30 ft width, to incorporate day light basements below, poses no . • 1 great problem. , 1 at : T Point 19. {' . Subject: Nature of the appeal. The "APPELLANT ' S REQUEST" paragraph on page one of the Apr . 21st Staff Report states that I had , QUOTE: �� the VAR 18-94 a-b • • • • filed an appeal of - , ( ) , a request for approval of two Class I variances in order to construct a single family residence: a . A 4-foot variance to the 10-foot east side yard setback. b. A 6 .2 percent variance to the 25 percent maximum lot coverage. " :UNQUOTE. d:: .N This is not correct, for in accordance with instructions I filed with City Recorder an appeal of the Staff Decision, Which approved the 4-foot side yard setback variance, and approved a 2.7% lot coverage variance . Y , * 16 - • • 'rr 7.trN J• tr., - . , tr,l_y f a.` ',t 4''`: '•.ti'f 4i 1"'t i a, o , f -_. ti, *� v. SU- , l.♦ n Yk, v i.f" .f,@r1 ^ �'. 2ri.rr Ip U1^rr •k,C4�.. .. ' . 4 : '4"v. • . :rr , k r ,Jt , Related Issues: (Points 20 - 22) ', Point 20 . . S;abject: Is it right to hold a long time owner of property ;h to revised Code specifications? One might ask should the owners , who bought the property many . ' ? years ago, have to adhere to currently tighter Code specs than those in place at the time they purchased the property. And , i ' why should the neighbors now expect that the current Code specs ., \ '.. be enforced , when they knew at the time they bought their •properties that one day a house would be built on Lot 5700? ''' i • : - The answer of course , is that at the time we bought our I •'- ' properties, the largest house on the lake was comparatively modest as compared to the huge structures that have gorse up over the past few years. And , it was not the practice at that time to f • build out every possible square inch of buildable area so as to Ir. maximize profit at the expense of the neighbors. We purchased ; ;:1:1 ,'t`'' I our homes before speculators started purchasing established homes, tearing down the existing house, and replacing it with the biggest possible house so as to maximize profit for the builder . , }` The Lake Oswego Community' s concern at the rapidly increasing threat to the livability and character of the neighborhoods resulted in Council adopting the current Code specs. Thus the environment has considerably changed from the time the owners of Lot 5700 bought their lot and the time since we bought our homes. And the Code has had to change accordingly. Is it not safe to assume that, if the owners had wished to build a house at the time they bought the lot, the house would have appeared much the • same as those in the neighborhood at the time, i .e, a great deal ' smaller than the house they now propose to build? Also , insulation, fire, electrical , and other construction codes have changed in the intervening years, all for the public good. Should the owners be grandfathered on those requirements since they are just now getting around to building on the lot? • Point 21. Subject: Distance between houses. The applicant has represented that there will be 16 feet between the houses on each side, as if that is sufficient, What is not / . mentioned , however , is that: my lot is 57 ft wide; my house is ten feet from the Lot 5700 property line; and , that my front and �". 410 a• . — 17 ;'?1 I 1' .. ! ' • back doors are both on that side of the house. Further , I paid a premium for the extra seven feet of width of my property, which f' did not. And , thus, for the applicant ':'i the owners of Lot 5700 Pp to use that argument for the side setback variance is like asking for a free ride at my expense on their speculative journey. Further , the City Council , when adopting the current Code specs, t expressed the intent to limit the size of new construction on . small lots to preclude "overwhelming" adjacent existing residences . The granting of the variances will certainly have the resultant impact of overwhelming my home. :` Point 22 . I , Subject: "Failure to provide any substantial evidence in support of appeal." ' On page 6 of the Staff Report of April 21st, the report reads that the Staff, Quote: " . . . . concludes the appellant has failed V to provide any substantial evidence in support of his appeal ." 4 :UNQUOTE. This comes as a surprise to me for , when I filed my appeal on April 6th, I followed to the letter the instructions on t; r' ‘" , , the Planning Division' s Notice of Minor Development Decision, � ' �;�°'` which states that , QUOTE: "A Request for Hearing shall : 1 . List the File Number and Date of Decision . 2 . Request that a hearing be held on the application . '� 3 . Include name, address and signature of the appellant. j 4 . Be accompanied by payment of any filing fee . • No where does the Notice state that the appellant should provide evidence in support of his appeal . I discussed the possiblity with a Planning Staff member of mailing a copy of my planned fi t ' presentation at the hearing to the DRC members a few days before • +i. the hearing so that the members might have an opportunity to preview the considerable information to be presented at the �;. hearing , and was advised that no exparte contact is permitted . I explained that I did not intend to make one to one contact, but . . a was advised that it might be interpretted as such. The above ' '` .. quoted reference to a "failure" on my part seems an unjustified M , allegation . r . , 0 N . i .',.; ., , ,, 40, . . .. , . ., . . „ , : , : • . ',.., • - 18 • . ♦ r • • • t ,,tiA ' I 1' STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO . , . , „ .. imminsmamniessimuna PLANNING DIVISION loomeramIcreer..1...M.M.M_.. ... .` APPELLANT: FILE NO: George L. Page AP 95-05 [VAR 18-94(a-b)] PROPERTY OWNERS: STAFF: j� Erwin and Marlene Johnson Elizabeth Jacob LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE OE REPORT: •d Tax Lot 5700 April 21, 1995 fi. Tax Map 21E 8CC DATE OF HEARING: "� ' LOCATION: — May 1, 1995 '1; av :.r�'• Lakeview Blvd. between South Shore &Bryant Lake Oswego, Oregon NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: COMP. PLAN DESCRIPTION: Bryant R-7.5 l' ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7.5 I. APPELLANT'S REQUEST, ' The appellant,George L Page, has filed an appeal of VAR 18-94(a-b), a request for approval of • two Class I variances in order to construct a single family residence: , a. A 4-foot variance to the 10-foot east side yard setback, Q b. A 6,2 percent variance to the 25 percent maximum lot coverage H. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswe comprehensive Plan:• • Impact Management Policies • General Policy II, Specific Policies 2, 3 •„. . • 0 ii}J A • ` AP 95-05 (VAR 18-94(a-b)J Page 1 of 7 L* a >3 ( I `• is; Distinctive Natural Areas Policies Special Distinctive Area No. 54 ' Flood Plain Policies Residential Land Use Policies B. cv of I , l.1=g lg,Ordinance: • . ' LOC 48.02.015 Definitions LOC 48.06.195- 48.06.225 R-7.5 Zone Descriptlor 3 LOC 48.20.515(1) General Exception to Lot Area Requirements LOC 48.20.535(4) Special Street Setbacl•.s • • LOC 48.20.535(3) Oswego Lake Special Setback r LOC 48.24.650- 48.24.685 Variances • • C. City of Lake Oswego Development Code: 1 d. : LAC 49.16.015 Definitions LOC 49.16.020- 49,16.030 Application of Code, Planning Director if4,/$ "' Authority,Fees ' t LOC 49,16.035 Development Permit Required LOC 49.16.040 Development Permits Restricted " LOC 49.20.110 Minor Development `" `' • o LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proo'' LOC 49,22.205 Development Standards , .• I LOC 49.22.215 Review Criteria for Minor Developments LOC 49.22.225 Conditions of Approval s :'' LOC 49.30.500 - 49.30.510 Application Requirements LOC 49.36./00- 49,36.720 Application Procedures �. LOC 49.40.800- 49,40.815 Review of Minor Development Applications LOC 49,40,820 Appeal of Minor Development Decision :' •, LOC 49.44,900 - 49,44.920 Review of Appeals of Minor Development Decision LOC 49.46,1000 -49.46.1035 Hearings Before a Hearing Body,Decision of + the Hearing Body, Notice of Decision ••• • D. City of Lake Oswego Development_Stnndards: 7.005 -7,040 Parking and Loading Standard .• 12,005 - 12,040 Drainage Standard for Minor Development 14.005 - 14.035 Utilities 16,000 - 16.040 Hillside Protection ' • 17,005 - 17.035 Flood Plain 18,005 - 18,035 Access F 19,005 - 19,040 Site Circulation - Driveways and Private Streets • E. Siy of tt swego Tree Cutting Ordinance: • • LOC Chapter 55 4111 ' ' AP 95-05 (VAR 18-94(a-b)1 " Page 2of7 • ' F. City of Lake Oswego Solar Access Ordinance: ��{{• \1 LOC 57.06.050- 57.06.090 III. FINDINGS A. BA-C1=1111 Erwin '° and 1. On December 12, 1994, Keith Lucas,on behalf of the property owners Marlene Johnson, filed an application for two variances in order to construct a new house on the subject property. '' II 2. On March 22, 1995, Administrative approval was granted for a four-foot variance , 1,-,1 to the east side yard setback and a requested 6.2 percent variance was modified to approve a 2.7 percent variance to the maximum lot coverage. • B. Exists,ing_Condit : 1. The subject property is a vacant,rectangular shaped lot, approximately 5,722 • . . square feet in area (50 feet by an average 114.38 feet) (Exhibits 1 and 2). The _ applicant's narrative describes the lot as 5,675 square feet in area (based on the " minimum depth of the lot). 12 . 2. The property has 50 feet of frontage on Lakeview Boulevard, a neighborhood collector. Oswego Lake and Lake Corporation property bound the southerly side ' of the property. • 3. Exhibit 2 illustrates a 11 percent slope down from the northerly property line to the southerly property line. The site plan also illustrates the location of several , \, large trees. 4. The property is vacant except for a boat slip on Lake Corporation property and an �4 old barbecue along the southerly boundary (Exhibit 2), 5. The surrounding area is zoned R-7.5 (Single-Family Residential) and is comps;ed of many lots which are less than 7,500 square feet in area. 6. Public facilities are available to serve the property. 7, A damaged storm sewer line which ran lengthwise through the property was moved earlier this winter to the west side of the property, Exhibit 4 discusses the • City's participation in this repair and the requirement for a 10-foot wide public storm sewer easement along the west property line. The construction of the storm sewer line has been finished and the easement has been obtained since the submission of the subject application. Three of the seven trees illustrated on Exhibit 2 had to be cut to install the new sewer line. ` AP 95-05 [VAR 18-94(a-b)] I Page 3' f 7 n, • C. At' 1: On April 6, 1995,George L. Page,residing at 4242 Lakeview Boulevard, filed an appeal ` "rk • of the staff decision of VAR 18-94(a-b). Mr.Page's property abuts the subject prop r ,r•° d T on the east. Mr. Page's request for a hearing before the Development Review Commission did not describe the nature of his appeal (Exhibit 5). • Mr. Page submitted considerable information for staff deliberation during the initial review of the variance requests. This information is included as Exhibit 14(f) and (g)of the March 21, 1995, staff report (Exhibit 4 of this report). An analysis of this information is part of the March 21 report. Mr. Page has not submitted any additional information to-date. IV. ANALYSIS 1. The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story house with daylight basement and an attached garage (Exhibits 2 through 4). The proposed plan has 1,955 square feet of living area on two floors. An additional 683 square feet is proposed to be finished in the daylight basement, for a total livingarea of 2,638square feet. An additional401 square- .. ,r • foot area is proposed for a garage and a 364 square-foot deck is proposed on the lake side of the house at the main floor level. The total square footage proposed for the house, t= garage and deck is 3,403 square feet. b'. 2. As prescribed by LOC 49.40.820, the final decision of the Planning Director on a minor development application may be appealed to a hearing body by the applicant or any vis, , person aggrieved by the decision. The appeal shall be heard de novo [to be heard ane by the hearing body, pursuant to LOC 49.44.900- 49.44.920 and 49.46.1000 to 49.46.1035. 3. The Administrative decision to grant the four-foot side yard variance and modify the variance request to exceed maximum lot coverage by 2,7 percent was based upon the - . • following Zoning Code criteria, as prescribed by LOC 48,24.650: "1, The granting authority may grant a variance from'the requirements of this ' `? chapter[Chapter 48j if it is established that: a. The request is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship;and b. Development consistent with the request will not be injurious to the neighborhood in which the property is located or to property established y�hl� '' to be affected by the request;and, co The request is the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable use of the property;and, d. The request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, • "2. In evaluating whether a particular request is to be granted, the granting author® shall consider the following, together with any other relevant facts or circumstances, AP 95-05 (VAR 1 g-94(a-b)] Page 4 of 7 • , r • " • ' ' \' ' . \ \i' V I.' • " a. Relevant factors to be considered in determining whether a hardship exists include; (1) Physical circumstances related to the piece of property involved. (2) Whether a reasonable use similar to like properties can be made of the property without the variance. (3) Whether the hardship was created by the person requesting the variance. (4) The economic impact upon the person requesting the variance !f the request is denied. b. Relevant factors to be considered in determining whether development consistent with the request is injurious include; I (1) An analysis of the physical impacts such development will have, such as visual, noise, traffic and the increased potential for drainage, erosion and landslide hazards. (2) The perceptions of residents and owners of property in the t„ f neighborhood concerning the incremental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed variance. i . ••, 0 . c. A determination of whether the standards set forth in Subsection(1)are satisfied necessarily involves the balancing of competing and conflicting interests. The considerations listed in subsection(2)(a)and(b)are not standards and are not intended to be an exclusive list of considerations. ,•, VI The considerations are to be used as a guide in the granting authority/s f deliberations. d. Prior variances allowed in the neighborhood shall not be considered by the granting authority in reaching its decision." 4. In evaluating the four criteria for granting the variances, staff tried to balance competing and conflicting interests. Clearly, some of the criteria and guidelines are very specific and easy to evaluate: ' , a. The lot size is small--less than the minimum 7,500 square foot size required in the R-7.5 zone. However, the lot is a legal lot of record and therefore found to be developable under city regulations [LOC 48.20.515(1)]. • • b, There are specific limitations imposed by yard setback requirements and special Y: • street and lake setbacks which create a hardship in themselves on an undersized lot. c, The overall slope and grade change from the street to garage face are physical circumstances which affect building design and floor layout, AP 95.05 [VAR 18-94(a•b)] Page 5of7 I , kI • d. When the property was purchased 34 years ago, setbacks, height and lot coverage were less restrictive than today, which would tend to make the small lot more desirable and potentially useable at the time it was purchased than it is today, 0 )')• , 5. Documentation was provided by both the applicant and appellant from the County n Assessor records which can be used to compare the subject property with other properties in the immediate area [Exhibits 7-9, 13, and 14f and g of March 21, 1995 staff report] '< (Exhibit 4). Staff found that much of this information demonstrates that the proposal falls into the average range of size and setbacks of other properties in the area (Exhibit 4, pages 5-10). 6. Staff finds that a house plan of a lesser width could have been designed, but that would Inot have automatically made the house fit into the neighborhood better than the proposed r ' design. A determination of what constitutes reasonable use of a property is obviously 'f : ., somewhat subjective. Staff analysis of the floor plans finds that the rooms are modest in 1 • size and that the use as suggested by dining room, living room, family room and den are not unusual nor unreasonable for today's families' life styles, ' 7. Staff findings suggest that granr'ng the variance will not be injurious to the j' neighborhood: r :i i. . a. Potential negative impacts of noise, traffic, solar shade,drainage, erosion and v.''- landslides will not be increased by granting the variance. The outdoor deck area fi!iv' ,' which is on the west side of the property could have had a potential noise impact if it had been located on the east side of the house. 0 , b. Potential negative visual impacts which might occur as a result of the proposed four-foot setback variance appear to be minimal. The most significant visual impact is having a structure on a property which has been vacant for so long. t 8. Staff finds that the proposed plan with a modification to the size of the deck is not •unreasonable for today's living standards in Lake Oswego, particularly for properties • ;`•,,'; around the lake. The proposed plan is not substantially different than the existing houses i' in the area. V. CONCLUSION • Staff concludes the applicant has satisfied the criteria as prescribed in LOC 48.24,650- 48.24,685, Staff further concludes the appellant has failed to provide any substantial evidence in • support of his appeal. J . VI. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the analysis of all available evidence and findings presented in this report, staff recommends denial of the appeal AP 95-05, • • . , AP 95-05 [VAR 18.94(a-b)l .. ; Page 6 of 7 c a • 1. Tax Map 2. Revised Site Plan 3. Original Site Plan which shows Abutting Properties 4. March 21, 1995 Staff Report with exhibits for VAR 18-94(a-b) 5. Request for Public Hearing,from George L. Page, dated April 6, 1995 6. LOC 48.24.650-48.24.685 Date of Application Submittal:. � ppDecember 12. 994 • \• • Date Application Determined to be Completed: E bruna_31995 State Mandated 120-Day Rule: June 3. 1995 1. • o •�''i�i yd hr t".. r •ti I ' t I .'r . • • AP 95-05 [VAR 18-94(a-b)l Page 7of7 «, • I.; %fir lots, 4:177 ......••••• V , , i ? i„ ,/ i° 9 a �,‘ Ti A),17 1 r it t�, / 0 4 �• ~aU� o'rr �a �� OCP A - ...•• leg X .i 4, 1 ' 0‘ , . ir.., kcf-P,,.-zns -x, \ , ,P 0„,,,,, .kc %-- . 4 ,l. ��ti� ,l`+ ° ,:f`�+/4,• ,y••• �• «• ' P y Y ?e00 • A4dAs3(f i' • • f ', sect `\6 ��ZS ti �d��'{ •)e �g hr�ti °. r? 6i i). e' O0 p0 1� ro4 ,.gyp.'"' S��yv 8418 ` J -\• a ,ss `yii f° _n N"••e• /� `;� ;�f�," f 0 d 'tom/ O 3 4/s/ Ix ir tip®. �0 4 IV ,•irld '` to a �,'d ' s 3It. t h e�Q' • �� 1!� -•`.. .•!°'f j,4641 O - ' • i /�2 \ \ r'� •$0eil, `to. 3s P� ,�A6 "#00l'`%r�.t.'• �y 528 r n ;f 41< .0 41 \z ` .' hik 1; no . . 14Ar " 8 8400 J * ' .. r' \ ♦0a 9 .vim r 1 1. �2Y „ 1 ;oi0r ^ R. 1 i id 0 +p i . .0.i '55 526 2 : ,;, {tom S° 02 4D\ % 61. e.A 1 4 7600 4.1oM rvr�•.1 ,'®� .; 1u, ��e :r . 5y �� / QP� n 'a 18143• L'� 6�6 i6' 'we% 1 • ocp ,; as !4. Nt I 0 • , 48 it v• 'I r ) 11 l 7800�• 40• '�16521 • 0. _~ t k _ x Lei 161ti1�/- gas .1 , -- — — — le. —i ; 71900 ��tia r °i' 00 PART OF 2 f E 17 100 " +4 , i Tb • rt a. ,f `� OS 14//EGO LAKE 520 • �sl .tea e"+"j*lr•,", • rep e8 .$ , ,,...e.• , I., Q PART OF 2 . WEST BAY EXHIBIT + • Ir q fAN(d• GING 40eornM'prr-4WAird S 1 • dY /Vsd Ar14•44 'w'r•J5. d3 y. • 'f "a „1 � F� AA AO IF 17p1a TAX MAP 2 dE 8CC 1 , ,: • E• tr, w, , • r tF G • h i i \ Q�/ ; 1-lik 0* lip • `�1 7 • tt : . '' /.4:,. . '14)4 cfc 4#11% ..,. & '\is‘a .. ''';',:l i' ' . NNNNN • / • t fl• 1 1 \ . 4. .4\ 0 .. , CL • / \ 0 �y 0 - ,. • • �8tl �`& or t'+ 1r•. \ \ • illo • 1 . �.` N. 40\c„... . , ill", r . eoF i II; a EXHIBIT • r7 k5 �' z C7 All g ,... qft 4 AarI per, • I.. . I address: —•--•ram---- y` 1 A' 4o` r ti 14441E Vr 1 ,49LVO. L1r • — r ECEe%a-r7eX4) = /00.0 1 P� rwe — 50.c ELT 701 i . 00if r V ' r E Et.: .96..01 'Or • FEcL rF_ . to Taac Ler 5 'oo 't4 La r 0 Io < -----'~ •` ' -o • rD " zil 6.4'1S S'F, te • Ekersbu,-7714/1' .1 6c- -Vita. Qy bros.4 1,l aze S c I PR°',care 4ME —s'O.0°7 i �t« S lam; �• CEk- I ne � oLet fair,•/ / s 5%f c w I a I �''• . Y,r-ot ///ast'a-t-eS , 1 I `X I I EXHIBIT : ' lam' �• .1... ea. r / r it Y 4 Y • STAFF REPORT' il CITY OF LAKE, : .,... 0 OSWEGO .., , ........__• PLANNING DIVISION , APPLICANT: FILE NO: .. 1 1 Keith Lucas VAR 18-94(a-b) . PROPERTY OWNERS: STAFF: ; ) Erwin and Marlene Johnson Elizabeth Jacob + .4' LEGAL DESCRIPTIQN: DATE OF a EQE"I": . Tax Lot 5700 March 21, 1995 Tax Map 21E 8CC • NEIGHBORHOOD ASSQCIATI,Q.I: { I,,,O CATION: �•• Bryant ; a "t Lakeview Blvd. between South Shore &Bryant Lake Oswego, Oregon ZING DESIGNATION: �+ . i COMP, PLAN DESCRIPTION: R-7.5 R-7.5 /; # ., , I. ,APPLICANT'S REQUEST ,f" t The applicant is requesting approval of two Class I variances in order to construct a single family residence: • a. A 4-foot variance to the 10-foot east side yard setback. b. A 6.2 percent variance to the 25 percent maximum lot coverage IL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 41' i A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Impact Management Policies General Policy II, Specific Policies 2, 3 Distinctive Natural Areas Policies EXHIBIT Of Special Distinctive Area No. 54 Flood Plain Policies Residential Land Use Policies •�f '• - • la- VAR 1 g-94(a-h j Page l or 14 • , N ,' •• ; \1 /„• ,' , ,, 1 • �' • •1 u, B. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance: a ' • LOC 48.02.015 Definitions LOC 48.06.195-48.06.225 • R-7.5 Zone Descriptions 0 i ... ''. ' .`t; General Exception to Lot Area Requirements LOC 48.20.515(1) LOC 48.20.535(4) Special Street Setbacks LOC 48.20.535(3) Oswego Lake Special Setback . ` a, LOC'48.24.650-48.24.685 Variances • ` Ifu rI q a • C. fit1gS2 —Odd' LOC 49.16.015 Definitions • LOC 49.16.020-49.16.030 Application of Code, Planning Director Authority,Fees LOC 49.16.035 Deve..)pment Permit Required LOC 49.16.040 Development Permits Restricted > . LOC 49.20.110 Minor Development LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proof LOC 49.22.205 Development Standards LOC 49.22.215 Review Criteria for Minor Developments ` s+ -« LOC 49.22.225 Conditions of Approval A 4 LOC 49.30.500 - 49.30.510 Application Requirements LOC 49.36.700-49.36.720 Application Procedures r LOC 49,40.800 - 49.40.815 Review of Minor Development Applications LOC 49.40.820 Appeal of Minor Development Decision i 4t1 r • D. City of Lake Oswego Development Standards: 1 e _% 7.005 -7.040 Parking and Loading Standard • N N S w 12.005 - 12.040 Drainage Standard for Minor Development n ' _ 14.005 - 14.035 Utilities ` 16,000- 16.040 Hillside Protection ' 17.005 - 17.035 Flood Plain r.' 18.005 - 18.035 Access 19.005 - 19.040 Site Circulation - Driveways and Private Streets E, City of Lake Oswego Tree Cutting.Qrditz r ,t LOC Chapter 55 • F. City of Lake Oswego Solar Access Ordinance: LOC 57.06.050- 57.06,090 III. FINDINGS • A, Background/Existing Conditions: 9 -- , . 1, The subject property is a vacant, rectangular' shaped lot, approximately 5,722 square feet in area(50 feet by an average 114,38 feet) (Exhibits 1 and 2). The • j VAR 18-94(a-b) Page 2of 14 • a •' � q i 1 t .- applicant's narrative describes the lot as 5,675 square feet in aura(based on the 'I, minimum depth of the lot). •• . '' . , • 0 2. The property has 50 feet of frontage on Lakeview Boulevard,a neighborhood collector. Oswego Lake and Lake Corporation property bound the southerly side qq of the property. . a. 3. Exhibit 2 illustrates a 11 percent slopedown from the northerly property line to the southerly property line. The site plan also illustrates the location of several large trees. 4. The property is vacant except for a boat slip on Lake Corporation property and an old barbecue along the southerly boundary (Exhibit 2). 5. The surrounding area is zoned R-7.5 (Single-Family Residential) and is composed ' of many lots which are less than 7,500 square feet in area. y I 6. Public facilities are available to serve the property. ' 7. A damaged storm sewer line which ran lengthwise through the property was moved earlier this winter to the west side of the property. Exhibit 4 discusses the • i,' City's participation in this repair and the requirement for a 10-foot wide public •,, storm sewer easement along the west property. The construction of the storm `�'. sewer line has been finished and the easement has been obtained since the • submission of the subject application. Three of the seven trees illustrated on • Exhibit 2 had to be cut to install the new sewer line. B. 5i:i ;c Proposal: .,J,03 The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story house with daylight basement and an y , attached garage (Exhibits 2 and 4). The proposed plan has 1,955 square feet of living area on two floors. An additional 683 square feet is proposed to be finished in the ; daylight basement,for a total living area of 2,638 square feet. An additional 401 square- foot area is proposed for a garage and a 364 square-foot deck is proposed on the lake side ' of the house at the main floor level. The total square footage proposed for the house, garage and deck is 3,403 square feet. °y C. Compliance with Criteria.for Approval: As per LOC 49.22.200, the applicant for a development permit shall bear the burden of proof that the application complies with all applicable review criteria or can be made to • • • comply with applicable criteria by imposition of conditions of approval. The applicant has submitted the information required by LOC 49,30.500- 49,30.510 and LOC 49,36,710. These documents are listed as exhibits which accompany this report ' LOC 49.20.110 - Minor Develooment . isk The subject proposal is appropriately being processed as minor development, The . property owners/residents of property within 300 feet of the site and Bryant ' Neighborhood Association were notified of the subject application, Six letters Were ; VAR 18 94(a-b) ' • Page 3of14 submitted in opposition to the proposal. These letters are included in this report as ' Exhibit 14. No comments were received from the neighborhood association, i 1 • As per LOC 49.22.215, for any minor development application to be approved,it shal 1 '. first be established that the proposal complies with: 1. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; esidential Z a cri�]on OC 48.0 ,• Exhibit 4 illustrates the proposed location of the new house and garage. The matrix below illustrates the actual dimensions relative to code requirements for ✓ ' setbacks, lot dimensions, height and lot coverage for new construction [LOC I • 48.02.015(44.2)]. f t R-7.5 ZONE DESCRIPTION [LOC 48.06.195 -48,06.225] (New Construction) , ''' ... h.' Site Requirements Required Proposed �y y'. 4inimum Lot Area(S.F.) 7,500 square feet 5,722 square feet 1 M1,. Minimum Lot Width 50 feet 50 feet r'rl, ;� 0. Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 113,5 feet -" Setbacks Front Yard 25 feet 30 feet 0 " Side Yard 10 feet 1O feet(W,)&6 feet(E.) 4'1:,.`;';' Rear Yard 30 feet 30 feet �"`�;`.. Max.Height-Flat Lot 28 feet 28 feet Lot Coverage 25 percent 30,9 percent I . In addition to the above site limitations, there are two special setbacks applicable l e to the subject property--the Oswego Lake special setback and the special street setback for Lakeview Boulevard. `' LOC 48,20,535(3) requires a 25-foot setback from the property line adjacent to the lake. Exhibit 2 illustrates that there is a 34-foot setback to thy,structure and a 30-foot setback to the proposed deck. The proposal complies with the special lake setback. ' LOC 48.20.535(4)requires a special street setback on Lakeview Boulevard of 25 , feet, measured from the centerline of the total right-of-way, The existing `l right- of-way for Lakeview Boulevard is 40 feet; therefore, an additional 5-foot setback is required along the southerly boundary of the street right-of-way. The applicant ... i originalplan (Exhibit 3) comply - special .' revised the xhtbtt to tom l with the street setb tck, 1' Exhibit 2 illustrates the five-foot setback plus the 25 foot front yard requirement for a total setback requirement of 30 feet along Lakeview Boulevard, . • •,,.. .' • ' As per LOC 48,24,655(1)(a), variances from setback and lot coverage r . ., requirements for single family dwellings shall be processed as Class I variances to VAR 18-94(a-b) Page 4 of 14 A. w JS " J p 1 � • yn '. the Zoning Code and processed as minor development. The subject variance n ' application is appropriately being processed as a Class I variance [LOC 48.24.650]. . '7 •4• ' • • . Variance Crilero• nd Anaiveis fL®C 484 6�0*4$.?4 d8 j As prescribed by LOC 48.24.650, the granting authority may grant a variance from the requirements of Chapter 48 if it is established that: a. The request is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship; and The subject property was platted as Lake View Villas Plat 5 in 1923. The area was annexed into the City of Lake Oswego in 1959. The 1961 Zone Map designated this area as R-7.5 with a minimum `' lot area of 7,500 square feet and minimum lot width of 60 feet. The R-7.5 designation made many of the Lake View Villas platted lots nonconforming in area and dimensions. The nonconforming size does not preclude development [LOC 48.20.515(1)]. I • At the time the Johnson's purchased the property 34 years ago, the area was composed of small houses, many of which had been built as vacation houses on the lake in the 30's and 40's. Many of these houses sit very• • 1 close to the road and do not meet either the current (1992 code revision). • front or side yard setbacks or the setbacks prior to the 1992 code '``` `' revisions. • The subject property is about 5,722 square feet in area, 1,778 square feet less than the minimum lot size for the R-7.5 zone, The lot meets the minimum 50 foot width now required [LOC 48,06.210(1)]. A Lakeview Boulevard special street setback imposed by the 1961 code effectively R • limits the building envelope to an area 30 feet wide and 53.5 feet deep (1,590 square feet total area). However, the 25 percent lot coverage • `` requirement is more restrictive in limiting the building footprint to 1,430,5 w squarefeet. i .The narrative (Exhibits 5 and 6)explains the owners' request for the two variances, The major difficulties in developing the lot are its small size and grade change from the street. Exhibit 1 illustrates that the majority of • the lots in the neighborhood are 50 feet wide. Exhibit 2 illustrates a slope of 16.6 percent from the street to the face of the garage and an 11 percent slope from the face of the garage to the most southerly portion of the , house, • According to the narrative (Exhibit 5), the property owners reviewed numerous plans to find one which met their family needs. Initially, they • had planned to have a house which was 43 feet wide and one story with a daylight basement. In order to obtain the needed square footage within • ) 0 the 30-foot width limitation of the site, a minimum two-story structure is ...,,' i. ` required, 1 ,' • VAR 1 t3.94(a-b) Page 5 of 14 ,. 4 4 The applicant submitted a matrix (Exhibit 7) which demonstrates that of I r., 12 lots in the immediate neighborhood,all lots but one have houses over 34 feet wide. The chart is intended to compare lot coverage also, but the ' • • chart is flawed in that the"house area,"as taken from the County Tax da R Assessor records,does not show the real lot coverage. The house area illustrated on the matrix is not the same as the building footprint area which is used to calculate lot coverage. The applicant provided two matrices (Exhibits 8 and 9) which correct the information provided in Exhibit 7 and which provide an additional comparison of lot coverage of houses in the neighborhood. These charts illustrate that of nine properties • f which are under 51 feet wide, six have houses over 34 feet wide. Lot coverages, exclusive of deck areas range from 15.3 percent to 35.8 y percent. Mr. Page, the abutting property owner to the east of the subject property t (the side where the variance is requested, Exhibit 3), has spent considerable time to prepare and submit documentation which ' P F he believes support denial of the variance requests (Exhibits 14 f, and g.). In considering this documentation, staff finds errors in Mr. Page's analysis 1 V and inapplicable comparisons. t,t ' i For example, the Lake Corporation property abutting the subject property along the lake cannot be used in lot area calculations. Mr. Page apparently attempts to use the Lake Corporation property to make the H 5•\tiV small lot size appear less critical to the case. Lake Corporation property can not be considered in the analysis of the variance requests. In refuting the applicant's assertion that a 34-foot wide house is necessary • to develop the property and to meet the needs of the property owners, Mr. Page submitted several house plans as examples of 30-foot wide houses which could be built on the property (Exhibit 14 f). Some of these plans, • • however, are deeper than what front and rear yard setbacks would permit. Each of these plans are less than 1,500 square feet in area, plus the garage -not the typical size for new houses being built in Lake Oswego. • Mr. Page's analysis makes a point of using weighted averages to ry determine house width and side yard setbacks. It is true a house which is ,, not constructed in a straight line may be less imposing and give a more open feeling to a site; howeve-, the Zoning Code does not make a distinction between a house with straight walls and one with angles. Neither does the code regulate the aesthetics of single-family residences , by requiring angles in the walls to provide visual relief, Exhibit 3 indicates that the houses on each side of the subject property have longer straight wall planes than the proposed house, ,`- Exhibits 8 and 9 clarify information provided in Mr. Page's analysis (Exhibits 14 f and g) by comparing the figures for house areas which include decks with house areas that exclude decks. Mr. Page's analysis. ' excluded deck areas from neighborhood houses but included the deck area of the subject house. • VAR 18-94(a-b) •, Page 6 of 14 • 1 L°NY Y .-. .c •-., i s I ' { / t t i Ind. •ill ,.'a. /• R ..•.1 .e . .«. ` r. - I' i ; `«' 1 11 i P j Staff agrees with Mr.Page's discussion that a functional house with a ' width of 30 feet or less could be built on the property. Staff agrees that ,,7' ,, _; I denial of the four-foot variance would not preclude any development of •'• the property. However, staff finds an analysis of relevant standards also needs to consider whether reasonable use similar to like properties can be made without the variance [LOC 48.24.650(2)(a.2)]. Exhibits 8 and 9 provide documentation that the proposed house plan is not substantially f different than existing houses in the area. I, f; 4• li An analysis of the floor plans for the house (Exhibit 10)demonstrates that the moms are not large rooms and that the use as suggested by dining ''' room, living room, family room and den are not unusual nor unreasonable , for today's living style,particularly in Lake Oswego. The garage is a . modest 401 square feet which is considerably less than many of the three- ,,` :;. car garages being built for new houses around the lake. ,.,,,.•tr':, One of the difficulties in designing a house for this lot is the slope down , from the street to the lake. Slope is a problem for many properties in the area, not only in functional house design but driveway grade. The difficulties become apparent when looking at the existing houses along • this part of Lakeview Boulevard. The photographs provided by Exhibit • I m� r'' 13 illustrate some of these situations, Some garages are at street grade 1,a t.,,} with exterior stairs down to the house; some garages are not functional because of the steep grade; several garages have no parking spaces in front ",�,,,:±1; ,. . - . 40 of them and alternative parking pads have had to be developed. The slope affects both design and construction techniques,q (None of the plans • submitted by Mr. Page considered slope in their design.) for the subject • tot, the slope can be dealt with in one of three ways: (a) adding fill to construct a level grade, which would create the need for a high retaining wall along the lake shore, (b)constructing a tall foundation wall to create a level floor area,or(c)constructing a daylight basement. It is certainly ti reasonable to use an area for living space rather than crawl space when the .• opportunity is available and building height and lot coverage are not affected,. The proposed house plan considers the slope constraints within "`! • ' the 28-foot height limitation and is able to minimize driveway grade. Staff does not find the property owners' rationale supportable for not 6, custom designing a house plan to meet lot restrictions because of the cost °-,, or that plans are not available for houses which are 30 feet wide, ,,: '" '° However, staff does find that the proposed plans are not unreasonable for '• properties around the lake, The property owners have made modifications to the plans originally submitted (Exhibit 3) in order to meet the front ' •' � Ids .0110 yard, special street, rear yard and Oswego Lake setbacks: The side yard ,.;" setback is met on one side. Exhibit 12 illustrates that the final design will comply with the 28-foot height restriction for lots defined as flat lots F [LOC 48,02,015(25) and (34.5)1, a; Many houses around the lake have decks. The proposed house, exclusive of any deck area, covers 24,56 percent of the lot which complies with the VAR 18-94(a-b) Page 7 of 14 • ' • r . r r'� F '. I. y i 25 percent lot coverage requirement. The proposed 364 square-foot deck 1 ,_'hk raises the lot coverage to 30.9 percent The original plan (Exhibit 3) G, . illustrates a deck area of 182 square feet,one-half the size of the deck on the plan submitted later(Exhibit 2). Decks on the lake are common . j' • 4, amenities to lake front properties. However,only decks 30 inches above grade are calculated into the lot coverage. Decks are most frequently located off the main living areas, for instance,the dining and family I r • �' 1 • moms. The 364 square-foot deck as proposed in the second plan appears to be excessive and the property owners have reasonable alternatives to 1 „; constructing such a large deck 9-to-10 feet above grade(Exhibit 11). :- Staff suggests that if additional deck is desired, the deck can be ,n� constructed on grade or within 30 inches of the grade. Stairs could be I I constructed to connect the two decks if desired. A caution is that the b r • 1' portion of the stairs themselves which are 30 inches above grade are calculated into lot coverage. Staff does not find the proposal for a 364 square-foot deck meets the criterion of being necessary to make • reasonable use of the property and recommends that a maximum area for a ' I deck more than 30 inches above grade should not exceed 182 square feet. 'E' '� A 182 square-foot deck would bring the lot coverage to 27,7 percent, 2.7 ; r,-4ti,.a percent over the 25 percent maximum permitted for new construction. b. Development consistent with the request will not be injurious to the ; ,-, r, ,- -,: neighborhood in which the property is located or to property established to be affected by the request; and, , ., The applicant has submitted substantial documentation that the proposal ° .. : , not unlike existing houses in the neighborhood (Exhibits 5-9 and 13). Whereas the proposed house is larger in square footage than the houses on the abutting properties, the house footprint, excluding decks, is less than seven of nine houses within 450 feet east and west of the subject property. Letters of opposition were received from six property owners within the ' `4'+•...; 300-foot notification area (Exhibits 14 a-g). The primary opposition appears to be based upon the desire to keep the lot free from any • development. ; t,'' The comments and exhibits submitted by the neighbors did not demonstrate how the neighborhood would be injured by the subject a "m C , ,k ' r• proposal. No claims were made that increased traffic or noise would be a y, ,SM problem, that shadows would be cast on property and sunlight would be "" restricted,or that granting either variance would increase the potential for drainage,erosion and landslide hazards. . As has been addressed above under LOC 48.24,650(1)(a), the effect of the additional livable space in the basement does not negatively impact the neighborhood. The house needs to be sited where it is proposed to be located. It cannot be located closer to the street. It cannot be located closer to the lake. The slope from the street to the lake affects driveway , grade and floor elevation unless significant fill is added. If fill isn't I , ,, VAR 18-94(a-b) Page 8 of 14 4 a „ , . added,a four-to-five foot high foundation wall would face the lake--not usually a very attractive feature. ' r I • The fact that the garage is set back thirty feet from the street right-of-way “.,66.6 (approximately 48 feet from the edge of the pavement) will provide a -,� 6 . . much more open feeling along the street than provided by many of the existing houses (Exhibits 3 and 13). This distance provides the opportunity for attractive landscaping and reduces a major problem along this portion of Lakeview Boulevard where many property owners and 6 , their visitors park their vehicles within the public right-of-way. The proposed house without a deck is 1,405 square feet which complies :1 with the code with a lot coverage of 24.56 percent. The original plan (Exhibit 3) illustrated a deck of 182 square feet,one-half the size of the deck on the plan submitted later. Decks on the lake are common amenities to lake front properties. As discussed under LOC „ 1 ` • 48.24.650(1)(a) above, staff finds that the property owners have .h reasonable alternatives to a large deck 9-to-10 feet above grade. Staff does not find the proposal for a 364 square-foot deck meets LOC `. r 48.24.650(1)(b). ; c. The request is the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable f ':� use of the property; and, "F Whereas the neighbors have provided documentation that a smaller house could be built on the subject property (Exhibit 14), staff does not find that the size of the house and garage is unreasonable in the neighborhood in which it is to be located. An analysis of Exhibit 10 demonstrates that the • size of the rooms and garage are not unlike room and garage sizes of ' houses in the neighborhood and are modest in relationship to other new houses being built around the lake. All setbacks but one are met. The e. structure meets the height limitation for a flat lot. While the • neighborhood is composed of many older homes, staff does not find the proposed house to be unreasonable in area or that it will be obtrusive or detrimental to the neighborhood. The proposed plan requiring a four foot : variance on one side yard does not seem to be unreasonable, for the • reasons discussed in LOC 48.24.650(1)(a) and (b), above. ` ``' Staff does find that options are available to the property owners to reduce *. • the size of the deck which will permit them reasonable use of the property • and which will reduce any possible negative impact on the neighborhood. Staff recommends approving a maximum lot coverage variance of 23 percent to be applied to a deck only. • d. The request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. '. * r , • VAR 18-94(a-b) V Page 9 of 14 f i ) v \' City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plot4 • Impact Ma aggment Policies °0 °:.: , These policies require protection of natural resources from development, comprehensive review of development proposals,and payment of an equitable share of the costs of public facilities. The policies require assurance that distinctive areas will be preserved, soil will be protected , " -• from erosion,trees will be protected from removal, streams will be 1 preserved and density will be limited to achieve these results. These policies are implemented through several development standards and the i • tree cutting ordinance,addressed further below, Compliance with the '�• \''4 applicable standards will assure conformance to the Plan policies. Conditions of approval will be imposed when necessary to assure compliance. Distinctiya,Natural Area No. 14 Policies These policies require the protection of the scenic and natural resource that is Oswego Lake. These policies are implemented in part through the •,, tree ordinance, the special setback for Oswego Lake, and applicable ;; development standards which are discussed below. The proposal complies with the special lake setback. . ,. 1 •, {lb Flood Plain Policies , 410 : - /r These policies require that flood plain areas be designated as protection open space. Compliance with the these policies will be addressed under the flood plain standard reviewed below. :. Residential Policies ' ` , fi These policies include the consideration of housing density, site and h • building design criteria for four or more units, the provision for a range of housing types to meet the needs of various lifestyles and family types, and flexible setbacks and yard sizes. The subject proposal does not increase established density in the area. The code has established the variance process to implement the Comprehensive Plan policies by providing for g' flexibility in the range of housing types,design and setbacks. No conflict with the Comprehensive Plan exists because the applicant's • request has been demonstrated to comply with, or can be made to comply -- • with all code provisions and development standards which are applicable to a single family residence. 2. The Development Standards applicable to minor developments; • There are no streams or wetlands on the subject property. 0• VAR 18.94( .b) Page 10of 14 r: a 1 Parking & Loading Standard - (7.005-7.040) 4. This standard requires that a single family dwelling provides two off-street ,, parking spaces in addition to a garage or carport. Exhibit 2 illustrates that • 4 fsufficient area is provided in front of the garage to comply with this standard. Compliance will be assured during the building permit process. Drainage Standard for Minor Development- [12.005 -12.040)] 1 This standard requires that drainage alterations, including new development,not adversely affect neighboring properties. A new storm sewer drain line has /) recently been installed along the west property line to serve properties in the area. 4.....;<+�{ri Drainage for the proposed structure will be reviewed and approved during the building permit application process to ensure compliance with this standard. Utility Standard (14.005 14.040) 4 This standard requires that infrastructure improvements be installed underground, where possible. All new cable services shall be installed underground. Hillside Protection (16.000- 16.040) ' . The purpose of this standard is to regulate cuts and fills on land with slopes in •excess of 12 percent and to minimize the disturbance of natural topography, v, vegetation and soils. Only the portion of the property between the street ; •i;d pavement and face of the garage is over 12 percent slope. Exhibits 2 and 11 '1 demonstrate that very little cut and fill are proposed. Compliance with this , standard will be ensured during the building permit and construction approval • process. s ~' Flood Plain (17.005 - 035) The purpose of this standard is to regulate development within flood plains. The '`., Flood Insurance Rate Map indicates that the flood plain elevation for Osego Lake is 101 feet above sea level. Exhibits 2 and 3 illustrate that the proposed basement • ;, elevation at 105 feet will not be in the flood plain. Compliance with this standard • is met. 1 ' Access (18.005 - 18.035) This standard requires that each lot abut a public street for a minimum of 25 feet. As illustrated on Exhibit 2, the lot complies with the access width requirement. Site Circulation - Driveways and Private Streets (19.005 . 19.040) This standard requires that driveways for single family dwellings not exceed 20 percent grade or 5 percent cross slope, and prescribes driveway construction ' standards, Exhibit 2 illustrates that there is a 16.6 percent slope from the street 4 • i VAR 18.94(a.b) ' • Page 11 of 14 • pavement to the face of the garage. Compliance with this standard will be `. i reviewed and ensured during the building permit application process. 3. Any additional,statutory,regulatory or Lake Oswego Code provisions whi • , ' • ' may be applicable to the specific minor development application; ,, Ire Cuttime Ordinance Requirements and Analysis f1LOC Chanter 551 • This ordinance is intended to preserve trees. Only those trees which must be .'''., \.• removed in order to site proposed im rovemenrs will begranted Po p tree cutting � ,• permits [LOC 55.080(2)]. Three of the seven trees illustrated on Exhibit 2 were ; • .` 'I cut in order to install the new storm sewer line. One large cluster of firs is actually in the right:-of-way. One tree is within the proposed building footprint and will need to be cut for the house construction. The cluster of trees in the right-of-way and one additional tree are within the driveway area and may need to be cut. Staff recommends that these trees be preserved if possible by reducing R ' the driveway width, meandering the driveway,or reversing the plan to provide access along the easterly property line. No fill should Ix placed around the •remaining trees in order to preserve them. "' Solar Access [LOC 57,06,050-57,06.0901 This ordinance requires that existing structures be protected from shading when ` 7 new structures are constructed nearby. The Building Division has determined � ' ..., . that the construction of the proposed house will not shade adjacent dwellings. 4) ` "t`4 r, " '� The Solar Balance Point requirement is met. 4. Any applicable condition of approval imposed pursuant to an approved ODPS or prior development permit affecting the subject property. There are no applicable conditions of approval imposed by an approved ODPS or prior development permit affecting this site. IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the materials submitted by the applicant and findings presented in this report, staff concludes that VAR 18-94(a) for a four-foot variance on the east side yard complies with all applicable criteria. Staff concludes that VAR 18-94(b) for a 6,2 percent variance to the lot -' coverage does not comply with all applicable criteria but that a 2.7 percent variance to allow the ' construction of a deck more than 30 inches above grade will comply with applicable criteria. . III. ACTION Staff apprtves VAR 18-94(a) for a four-foot variance on the east side yard, Staff approves VAR • 18-94(b) with a modification to the amount of variance requested to the lot coverage. Staff approves a 2.7 percent variance to the lot coverage(a 6.7 percent variance is denied) for the purpose of constructing a deck more than 30 inches above grade, (Grade is determined prior too .' s any construction alteration,) \i VAR 18.94(a•b) Page 12 of 14 , .. .tit, Y• • ' i.., • ;:a . 1 f' ' t Prepared by: a Ct.:: _ ,,,,P a' . � '� . C� Elizabeth . J ob • Associate ner pr ,\ r,1 y " • t' L Approved by: Qr. ' -4,4' 3'"..i."1 *7-5 - • ...' I', Tom Coffee e i Date •_ i; Assistant City Manager 4 1• f 11', ':A F 1 r' Reviewed by: „ • 1l 1 .,•,.f,,.,:, ,5..,t4 ft$ d ' t ' (7. -.--./2'-7)(e.../7 ' ,...5%/4 c.-- Cindy Phillips Date r a Deputy City Attorney .I, t.• ,1\ '♦Y ,K IB1TS � EXH i"` 1. Tax Map ! 2. Revised Site Plan r. 3. Original Site Plan which shows Abutting Properties • , • 4. Letter from Rob Amsberry, City staff, dated August 9, 1994 regarding storm sewer line 5. Applicant's Narrative •:• ' 6. Narrative Addenda,dated January 28, 1995 and March 3, 1995 7. Matrix No. 1 ' 8, Matrix No, 2,House areas including garages but not decks 9, Matrix No, 3,House areas including garages and decks 10, Floor Plans ' 11, Elevations 12. Elevation illustrating Compliance with Height Limitation . , ' VAR 18.94(a-b) � Page 13 of 14 ; • 0 . • 13. Photographs 9.044,4 14. Comments from Neighbors a. Letter from Walter Neuburg,dated February 13, 1995 • b. Letter from M. Susanne Rimkert,dated February 22, 1995 c. Letter from Daniel and Kimberley Chun,dated February 27, 1995 d. Letter from Mary Reed,dated Februsuy 28, 1995 e. Comments from Harriet Harries, no date f. Letter with Exhibits from George Page,dated February 25, 1995 g. Tax Assessor Printouts submitted by George Page,dated February 25, 1995 '.:I • • Date of Application Submittal: December 3 2. 1994 is Date Application Determined to be Completed: Fjbrti 3. 1995 State Mandated 120-Day Rule: June 3. 1995 • t '1 • f. J ' Y 4 411 • , 1 VAR 18.94(a-b) 1 :. Page 14 of 14h,, • i ' . ca\, , ii. .° 00 • a b O .1. /' / .f�' e. o \Uf °• r p► Sg9 'A or4 A / \ \ . '\ `. , \\6 a e: $. M6 a � 04, t o 0 4 A\4# 50,CP '-‘t".k \0PC1•75 .; :. \ �s-0' A /bra ,s♦ '�5�_r A\�' r fie. ��6 d k pPti er` e te0 i. Nit‘ ' \I , ..- ,, b- gs e,.i fi' o 4G 114 ir z 00 r / f° �: ®d 1. e! �` -"Ss a N.. �,, 110i 1. ,0 \VO �4*42`� ^��. �yy.,1�� bp°� ��6\1cP .1' d0 O b1 13�*'>a S// .?g+yv�' ; ��'� ,�1.i 0 03�,�p'L '° •A/�,/ ,O �' 4/ + `I)19" 4 i . 3/3 A B`f'`j0(�""� �° r •' f \,l'Ste' b'h06\v, S' a'� gf QP. nl y`Ij��, '400`�,.....54y v �a a4•i . I ,• 13, ° vtal 8400 , .Y e°i,�,, $°a0 4 i,,+1 b a 0t s o '.50p a .11'S2T r.F s • 1 ... . w ,, �(P „� o 51'op 01 \0 '..41 �',1�f,,OUJi \� n (6115 'yi5 a° r al e,7s ; t• .0 ,i°I. 13 h �/ a 1 S 2 car 5 52 300 0'• •, C�0 o 5 ,L / QP a �1;143.�G'��y �y2�Ot •�� rD81 O Z -11� �` Y 1? • • .:: t o 5.�7 .1".. ‘ tiVt. ' `� ��n .sei•De ' U _ Z ti'� 16T6T4 �I15, ,+ ,,1k ov' 00 PART OF 2 f E 17 100 ;' r 'yti�' 1, u n o ,4e \ "vim*�� o� to Je f ell ;, s9s r% ` PART OF 2 sr Q` WEST BAY G71 s1I® ._, . d, EXHIBIT r1 a... .t'••Atte t/NC 20,�,rY/>N or,"r 44',4140 1 1, t);''k' 3N 7 Yd.0 g,P,R. 1W•I'JL. / qr•` '6v"4 4"b . • TAX MAP 2 Q��ee�a �i"IX �OI�eT i! IE �7VV ,14,14,...., 1 r K AA AC) I I7F1R , , 4,!4 6 • A '``�. . ., aG S• ' 4 ipp.....,1,..,,,. -.. .. . .• . cb,. 0 ilipp N F w' p • N.N. 63 ..., 4 , ..:•:' c‘ i . w f'G ems\ • -.... - At . „iJ r Y. 1M is- i t q K: 1 t 8 i c t d ii �4'�r,/^91 y 1 • • � • ��Y•y .f^ , 4 • rp ? . . yr s ,irk ' i J'. \ \ Ayr :f• 4 \ \ 4�� a • • $g N,vwe y\ • • ` 61 , •t il itil g g 1: taig.2.1.°".. rni--.X> illj) • �' xiEXHIBIT'.. J.r . * 0 `n , J + y , . • • Address; L 40 I" / EKE vai ,8Lvo, �•, _ .o. A EG EC/ -- 100.O .... ._.j e4J65..,1,./1/ tve. — 66.a t4 6.1_7:q?,a I 100 2y e 110 \V / r '''......4".'' =#'ol s•F y . _.G c 1 • Fits-►1,06 E ,.....:-----1--------- EmsruoG gross: c /ai ::: -r c z.r t64)0 14.-Iur c P 11-=f1004 �. 7Dtci4 oa ,gyp 44.64= .c �� h. I 182 s.F. r m E :64( _ k . / „ H 92 Lea rA 4 eL Na`re; Me. Lacu..I• s y . I 4 I 6(- �k a es, oeJ �t zr S< P2o Per�!•TY �iME -6-0.c'7' •1i. r / tli I I I Nti ' 144.*I W 4,1 /44'rS 51/-It. I I 4 I I 1 • '/0.n iifaSr1'',2.11- , , ^'I I J� I I " EXHIBIT '• I I . I III 7j • t/ r . �. 1. - ' ,1, . 0 . ,.I p •a •6..,4,,..: 1 1.I (-01,1 0,, . . .J . . . ;�,,,r�• „ , 4i . _.,...._;/ — ., ., oR��ox4 ,.. s. ,. . . . . - ... , .. 1W ) DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS August 9, 1994 \ ' i + Mr. &Mrs. Erwin Johnson 1700 SE 56 th w Portland,OR 97215 n ,,t, Dear Mr. & Mrs. Johnson: ': It has recently been brought to our attention that there exists a storm sewer line • .:: ', ' . a on your property on Lakeview Blvd. This storm line drains spring water from the toe . .a • of the railroad slope and surface runoff from Lakeview Blvd. A developer by the name of Keith Lucas, informed me of the pipe and the condition that it is in, Although the line has been in place for several decades, we have received no complaints regarding ,:. this system therefore we were unaware of fact that the pipe is broken and partially • • ; plugged. Through further research we were unable to turn up any easementF for this 4h . length of pipe. We believe the reason for this is that Lakeview Blvd. was origi,lally Road. I would assume that the County built the storm system an a � F County Rd either failed � ,• : to get an easement,or they got an easement but failed to transfer it to the City when the ;;. , City assumed ownership of Lakeview Blvd. I am writing you today to request an easement so that the city can proceed with repairs to this line. Enclosed is a site map showing the location of the pipe with regards to the property lines. As you can see the pipe is running between 8' and 12' r from the property line. The City usually requires a 10' easement, centered ever the storm line. The City currently has a contract with a private contractor to build a pathway As part of this project, the contractor will be rebuilding the . s � along Lakeview Blvd. ! storm system in Lakeview Blvd. It would be fairly simple to write a change-order an have the contractors rebuild the portion of pipe on your property while they are in the ,.• �. area. This would be the most economical and time saving method. The other alternative would be to put it out to bid as a separate project. This would take , ,. ..... 'ai EXHIBI '. 'i v R i 9.s9li-hJ .eI 380"A" Avenue • Post Office Uox NO • Lake Oswego,Oregon g7034 • (503)6154127() • VAX(503)b '3- .. 44 a f , • F / r• a 1 Mr, &Mrs, Erwin Johnson e • August 9, 1994 J1 Page- 2 ;..,'+' considerably longer, due to the bid and award process. The costs would also increase, ; f simply because another contractor would have to be paid for mobilization,bonding etc. r,._. ., The City Surveyor has begun mapping the site and a preliminary drawing is being put together. There is the possibility that we could rebuild the pipe closer to the property line. This would depend on the location of trees and other features on the • property. We understand that you are looking into the possibility of developing this 1: parcel and we would like to coordinate with you any work that needs to be done. If ' '' you have any questions,I can be reached at 635.0268. Sincrarely, • Rob D. Amsberry Surface Water Management Specialist - 1 • ,• • .. . ° t 1 II ./ 4 .•ut. 1 VE .\ . • '1• 0 C� 3 1 f . , : „ .., , ,.,.. , , . e 1 _ 1 ti a. / do- • I i to "�• macs- 1 4 11. ,y q �. , �• qo a .,�, tirg b. z w ,/ i Ian4 a ,,: c .• "` / o b ,�.. y4 .` ,�. , , I ' ,may a , I NI 4 fkif %. '''/Ar.r.. I 41 W /i '1 /I' T t.:` PP' 1 * • 1\11 1 w 19 es L'N . . , \ 04 •rauT.y� 4# aw 1 1 I ''- b g 0v -tra 0 I `+� il 1Qi ow �" \' Q►ti+Cf.O.yt iJRrf�/� $ . . t .N., A oar H` o�,i� � s. �� n n, .volit. I 1 ka 1. • fit, f . d . 'i ' .. _ .. . 1 ._.: ��• -.A.' •fir '' / • # ?•` I .. ` r T/L 5800 J s j °' SEAWALL w w Ya T/L 5700 Ir•. �rluuYOlrurua YUY1Ytw rpenYUlYmuYdaY.Y»Y,r,Yu ..■utluYnYHYu NYdu.uMulnrHYuYdre.aYUYuaq 7tlwYUY.YaYUYYulu 1 . 106 j _� 1328 i 1 11 95 5.87 5.67J 1 3.80 • . / : T/L 5600 . � ,� , . . .. MMtI M Mratme re, art a ��""""�� ..�. �_ an'orWlaonrwo e moeKinDA 1 Dimming a roam"ORKe EXISTING STORM LOr dgli PLAT or '�/' I SYSTEM LAKE VIEW VILLAS PLAT 5 X • MnYaa arm Ph WO / boottiono Ormeo11 el , • urrt Inn wu: R toM I ►.1. Iln own 'WWI NUN Ww . e r 4-10"11 1 rut URCVIMOWR 411 0 }L S O • a, . , • II , 1,4 1 L. Request for Class I Variance Approval Page 1 Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence 1 ' 1 I. SITE INFORMATION LOCATION The subject property is a 5675 square foot lot loacated on Lakeview Blvd. between Bryant Rd. and South Shore Blvd. See the vicinity map. The zoning is R-7.5. TOPOGRAPHY The subject property is a sloping lot which slopes from Lakeview Blvd, to the West Bay of Lake Oswego. There is an existing storm drain line that runs through the property which picks up spring water from the railroad slope and street water from Lakeview Blvd, See the letter and map from the City of Lake Oswego, Mr. Rob D. Amsberry. EXISTING STRUCTURES & EASEMENTS There are currently no existing structures on the site except for an old existing barbequc and boat slip. Tiler are no existing easements on the property even though an existing storm drain line runs through the property. II. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION• i .s a • This application requests Class I Variance Approval to construct one (1) sinile family residence on an existing 5675 square foot lot. See Plot Plan and House Plans. • " ` Two variances from the Zoning Code requirements are requested in order to accomplish the proposed development plan, The requested variances are as follows; A, A variance is requested to allow one side setback be reduced to six (6) feet from the allowable ten (10) feet, , . B. A variance is requested to increase the maximum lot coverage from 25% to 27,9%. • • EXHIBIT . l ' . ti .. VA/8 /11 -k) • • Request for Class I Variance Approval Page 2 Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence HI. COMPLIANCE WITH CODES AND STANDARDS A. COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ZONING; CODE rZoning District: R-7,5 48.06.195 Permitted Uses i - • i. The proposed use of the site, one(1) single family residence, is a permitted use in I ' the R-7.5 zone, • 48.06.210 Lot Size The existing lot (5675 sq, ft) is less than the 7500 €q. ft, minimum required. The lot width (50 ft.) and the lot depth (115 ft) both meet the requirements of the code. This is an existing lot developed over 30 years ago, and the lot size requirements have changed several times since, 48.06.215 Setbacks :. The proposed plot plan indicates that the rear setback and one side setback comply with the thirty (30) foot rear setback and ten (10) foot side setbacks required, The front setback is covered by a special setback requirement 48.20,535 I / addressed below. It is requested that the other side setback be reduced to six (6) feet. This variance request will be addressed later in Section E. 48.116.220 Height Limits The requirements for s sloping lot provides a height restriction off45-feet, The proposed house plan is a daylight basement plan with a roof pitch of 7/12, The overall height of the house will comply with the requirement by not exceeding 35 r • r feet. w ' 48.06.225 Lot Coverage The requirements state the lot coverage shall not exceed a maximum of 25%. It is requested that a variance be approved for this project, Per the plot plan, the proposed lot coverage be 27,9%, The Variance request will be addressed later in Section E. 48.20,535 SpoIal Setbacks The proposed plot plan shows that the front setback meet the requirement o' a thirty (30) foot setback measured from the center of Lakeview Blvd. N •'� 7 • Request for Class I Variance Approval Page 3 Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence B. COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AND OTHER APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS uw ,k This project is classified as a minor development as defined by City of Lake Oswego '• , Development Ordinance 49.20.110 in that it is the construction of a tingle family residence that requires one or more Class 1 Zoning Code variances. Authorization for granting of variances is provided for in Development Ordinance 49.28. •i: r Sewers (Chapter 41) -- An existing sewer lateral is available in West flay. A plumbing permit will be obtained to extend the lateral to the property and connected to the house, The lateral will be extended to the property while the water level is down in January of C 1995. ,. a'.`. Streets & Sidewalks (Chapter 42) -- The existing lot is located on Lakeview Blvd. between Bryant Rd. and South Shore Blvd. Lakeview Blvd. is a 40 foot wide dedicated right of way. The City is building a pathway along Lakeview Blvd, ar Charges Developmetn 39) -- System development charges will be paid p r6 (Chapter ter p • for at the time of issuing the appropriate permits, 4) Tree Cutting (Chapter 55) -- Trees affected by the building envelope and driveway as identified on the plot plan will be removed. The development will include landscaping to i include the use of trees and plants to preserve the natural beauty of the area, . r 'N • • rb r , ♦ • • • 5,3 • r � f.1 ro r�4•„144 l t + r „{. .+ .. .. 4 ♦ + x �� ., •�+ ` ` .. -r. 4,e,. � e 1 • • I \ • 7 A.. • t fit. v 1+ � . ' Request for Class 1 Variance Approval Page 4 • Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence C. COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 7.005 Parking 4. . As per the plot plan, the single family residence will provide for two (2) off street parking spaces, not including the garage. 10.005 Fences I• • The proposed project does not include fencing. r` 12.005 Drainage The existing lot is a sloping lot from Lakeview Blvd. to the lake. The slope begins at the street and drops off quickly and then levels off and gently slopes to •4 the lake. The site lends itself to the daylight basement design. There are no �. �• streams, swales, ditches that will be affected. An existing drainage line runs through the property, but is in need of repair. This line provides drainage for 4 springs from the railroad slope, and street water coming from Lakeview Blvd. • City of Lake Oswego has propsed to rebuild the line and relocate it within a ten (10) foot easement on the property (See letter from the City of Lake Oswego, 4, Mr. Rob Amsbury). ,+,+r 14005 lJtitlites • All required utilities will be installed in accordance with City of Lake Oswego • Y'J Standards. i • 18.005 Access• Access to the subject property will be via a driveway onto Lakeview Blvd. The lot is fifty (50) feet wide, and complies with the mi►limum lot frontage of ,i 111', twenty-five (26) feet. • • 19.005 Site Circulation - Driveways and Private Streets y The mximum gradient of the driveway will not exceed the 20% requirement and the driveway width will not be greater than 24 feet,• y ,r r R :Ir nd. . fir A •e . _ +tier ,Y�- } ! .1 } Request for Class 1 Variance Approval Page 5 I ' Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence o .L D, COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -.. ` Impact Management Policies 1.1 and 6, 11.1,2,3, and 8, and 111.1 I" +.,, i i` The subject property is an existing lot of minimum size (50 ft, x 115 ft) and t .y ?' ' slopes thereby making it conducive to a daylight basement plan, The project will )'r;" preserve trees that arc not impacted by the building envelope, Anerosion control "+• r .;,,. plan will be submitted at the construction stage of the development, to 1 • There are no new public facilities required for the development, An existing . } I . ; drain line that is damaged must be rebuilt as proposed by the City, A Wildlife Habitat Policies 11.1 and 2 "'7'^'` ' The subject property is an existing lot with a sea wall at the Lake with an -L^.r sax t"? existing boat slip. There are no streams or flood plains on the property. Distinctive Natural Areas Policies 1.2 ',° Oswego Lake is identified as a Distinctive Natural Area. The existing site is overgrown with blackberry bushes. The development will include landscaping to include the use of trees and plants to preserve the natural beauty of the area. • +I` Oswego Lake Policies 111.4 and IV.2 and 4 y '% >ICM',5 r' The proposed development will comply with the building setback from the Lake yY i;; as required by the Zoning requirements, • Vw 4Y� Residential Site Design Policies IV.3b and V.lb and lb ,tt , '� `r! ^ , The Residential Site Design Policies state that the City will encourage and assist ;. ' ,, the design and development of innovative residential dwellings Examples of ' flexibility include Ilexable setback and yard sizes, and small single family homes on small areas. The lot, is a small lot requiring flexiblity in the design of the M'> home and site, As can be seen from the plot plan, the designed setbacks will provide for 15 ft. to 16 ft, areas between the houses on both sides, It also provides the ability to grant an 10 ft easement for the drainage line proposed by the City, Protection Open Space Policies I and II. n The subject property is not identified in the Planned City Open Space System i, .' • ' nor identified for aquisition. It is an existing 50 foot by 115 foot lot along Lakeview Blvd, with houses located on both lots next to it. Its best use is for a ' single family residence and will not impact the City's policies regarding open MF spaces, tt r i � t • • w ` 1 . a dV7 • . Request for Class I Variance Approval Page 6 v t l Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence '1 • • .t E. VARIANCE REQUESTS ,b rl Two variances from the Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance are requested. The requested ..I.-' 1 ' variances are: a. A variance from 48.06.215 is requested to allow one side setback to be six (6) r= ��, feet. s b. A variance from 48.06.225 is requested to allow the lot coverage to be 27.9% Both requests are subject to review under the following variance standards of the Lake Oswego Development code 49,28.405: ,.. ';' A. The request is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship; F..",'t.,l,. '',tr'r,. ,' ,, .,,„t B. Development consistent with the request will not be injurious to the ,, •1 ej • rN;a, neighborhood in which the property is located or to property established to be i4 ' ,wti•A affected by the request; t t, za `:I.,*.' '',..' 0 C, The request is (lie minimum variance necessary to make teasonable use of the { property, e � ,+, D. the request is not. in conflict with Comprehensive Plan, Variance One - Side Setback l . The requested setback exception is necessary to allow rcasonoable use of the lot with '4,s,-4Ityke;• , respect to the physical limitations imposed upon it. It is an existing lot developed over 30 years ago with a width of fifty (50) feet. The imposition of ten (10) foot side yard ' set backs would leave a potential building envelope of only thiry (30) feet which is too narrow for contemporary home designs, Denial of the requested reduced setback would at worst eliminate the buildablility of the lot and at best, limit its buildability, The economic effect of denial would at least have a signific;..tit reduction in its value due to its limited buildability. The requested reduced side yard setback of six (6) feet is the minimum adjustment necessary to make reasonable use of the property. Many designs were considered, in choosing a 'plan that would meet the functional requirements needed for the home. A �• ,t•, I home of approximately 2000 square feet with 1.000 square foot on the main level was desired, The plan chosen met these requirements with the minimum width of 34 feet. All other plans considered, had a width greater than the 34 feet. nJ. * r ' • .•I' '�`_ ? arc 1 i t ," - �) yt d v + r"••:• •-�, 1 9 t r V ' °w •,- "` Spy...1 r .I. '' G , t I' ,t t ,r '•. - t' .. .. } y'..•: ,>`� -. '� ;'a ...L.�, t Iv 1 ± 1 ; + Request for Class I Variance Approval Page 7 t; Erwin & Marlene Johnson Residence The existing houses in the neighborhood are on similar lots (50 foot widths) and have • 4 ° side yard setbacks of less than ten (10) feet. Therefore, the request for reduced side yard " " setback of six (6) feet is not considered to be injurious to the neighborhood, • a 1` There are houses in the existing neighborhood that do meet the side yard setbacks, �' { however, they are typically on lots that have double lots or one and one,»half lots. The owner does not have the availability to purchase additional property on either side to ;% increase the width because of existing houses on the lots on both sides, of the subject .` L property. x 'rr t Variance Two - Lot Coverage : Ar "' " , ,. ' The requested lot coverage exception is necessary to allow reasonoablc use of the lot with respect to the physical limitations imposed upon it. It is an existing lot developed ' over 30 years with a lot area of 5675 square feet. A 25% coverage would allow a. . I` ',' coverage of 1418,75 square feet. If one would consider a standard 2 car garage of 400 '1: �' square feet, that would leave a remaining area of 1018.75 square feet, This area is slightly larger than the functional area requirements. The total area of the home with the • 0 garage is 1405 square feet which falls within the lot coverage requirement, TheZ rr difficulty comes in calculating the area of the deck and adding it to the lot coverage • requirement. Because of the sloping lot, the deck will be more than 30 inches off the ground and therefore must be included in the calculation. A minimum size deck 182 I•* , f square feet is being proposed to take advantage of the architectural design of the house. , 1 • Denial of the request would require a smaller home to be built on the lot thereby reducing the value of the lot. Lake front lots have a high value, therefore justify a , 4 ' • t larger and more expensive homes. The house plan considered for the site is felt to be of minimal area (1004 square feet on the main level). ' s „' The existing houses in the neighbor hood are on similar lots (under 6000 square feet) a and have lot coverages greater than the 25% requirement. Therefore, the request for . " increased lot coverage is not considered to be injurious to the neighborhood, There are houses in the existing neighborhood that do meet the lot coverage • ' • requireme►►t, however, they arc typically on lots that have double lots or one and have the availability topurchase additional properly one-half lots. The owner does not ' on either side to increase the area because of existing houses on the lots on both sides of _ j the subject property. 1 y\ , 0 v-, 411 r+f ,,,., ' wC1Nt : " r a! Keith Lucas Development Properties +• .' ..i 16230 S.C. Dagmar Rd., Miiwaukle, OR 97267 l'. (503) 786-3009 f ' .. January 28, 199S 1 ,,},' ow .1 ' „�t•, :� ,1 City of Lake Oswego �� 4.-r 6 �:� ews r1 Planning Division JAN u (I 1995 380 "A" Avenue J Post Office Box 369 nITY OF LAKL ',..,. 1 t Lake Oswego, OR 97034 ',1 ,nr r!-ln,, • , i Attention: Elizabeth E. Jacob a a Re: VAR 18-94; for property described as Tax Lot 5700 of Tax Map 2S lE BCC 9,{a `. Dear Ms. Jacob; ` The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter dated December 27, 1994 in regards to the referenced variance application. The following additional information is provided as requested, 1, Revise the plot plan to show a front yard setback of 30 feet measured from the front if), , property line at Lakeview Blvd, to comply with the LOC 48,06,215 and LOC 48,20535(4), 1 2. Enclosed is ten copies of a topographic survey with the location of the house identified with "•,; the 30 foot front yard setback per kern 1. 1,: 3, The revised plot plan identified on the topographic survey shows that the flood plain nk*y,' ''' elevation (101 ft.) is located in the Lake Corporation property and that the basement elevation i . will be approximately four (4) feet above the flood plain plain elevation and therefore is in , r• compliance with LODS 17, ..,,Y 4a. Many house plans were considered and evaluated to meet the needs of the Johnsons, and the w proposed house plan had the smallest width of the plans that were acceptable. The proposed „1 house is of modest size and minimally meets the requirements of the Johnson family. The main '.' ' floor has an area of slightly over 1000 square feet and the second story of 951 square feet, To . . . require a smaller house, would not meet the Johnson's needs and would be unreasonable. The , " ,,.`• proposed house is not unlike similar house sizes in the neighborhood. Available house plans of ,' less width are scarce, and none Were found to meet the Johnsons's needs. To require an architect to design a house would be very costly compared being able to purchase plans that are >f \.. ready and available. 0. '. 0 4b. The lot size is a non conforming lot in its area size (5675 square feet). Due to the small size i of the lot, the lot coverage requirement of 25% becomes difficult to meet. The proposed house EXHIBIT . ../ f//l' / /4-4 City of Lake Oswegor e ' January 28, 1995 Page 2 4!) plan and deck is of modest size. If the lot were to meet the minimum area requirement of 7500 + ;c •• square feet, the proposed plans would easily meet the lot coverage requirement. Therefore, the undersize lot severely impacts the lot coverage requirement. Additional property is not available,• '' as existing houses on the neighboring lots prevent the purchase of additional area. 4c. No neighborhood meetings have been held, as it was identified in the preapplication hearing • that it is not required for Class I Variance requests However, the neighbors on both sides are aware that the Johnson's wou;.J like to build a home, but the specific designs have not been k, shared. a fr• ' { 5. The house plans submitted show a fireplace that will protrude 2 feet beyond the house footprint. However, the actual detail will be a gas fireplace located in the front corner of then '� family room, with a direct vent through the family room wall to the exterior. Thereby, the chimney will not project into the required yard more than the required two feet, E. In addition please revise the figures regarding the lot coverage variance request to 31.2%, The revised °' plot plan on the topographical survey shows a change in the size of the deck from an area of 182 square feet to an area of 364 square feet. • If you have any questions, please feel free to call me, or you can page me at 952.4307. • 0.2 ^ t�� Sincerely, t I . Keith Lucas • s 1 t Enc. 10 copies - Topographical Survey c, Mr. & Mrs. Erwin Johnson • I 1 • .q • • 4 ‘ r I r G S , 6 -. • 'fr./ ;`; 'f a. Keith Lucas Development Properties 16230 S.E. Dagmar Rd., Milwaukle, OR 97267 ''' (503) 786-3009 ' March 3. 1995 RECEIVED �' MAR 71995 City of Lake Oswego EGO '• P Planning Division CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 "A" Avenue Dept.of Planning r Post Office Box 369 ' f. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 w z ' , Attention: Elizabeth E. Jacob f x Re: VAR 18-94; for property described as Tax Lot 5700 of Tax Map 2S 1E 8CC A'• ! (.•,, Dear Ms. Jacob: e ,t . 1 The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information in response to some of the neighbors 1• comments that you have received regarding the referenced variance application, 4�1 o • k'� ..,- In particular, I would like to respond to the letter provided by George L. Page dated 2/25/95, While I l believe that Mr. Page has done an excellent job, there are some flaws in the analysis he has provided as well as the data can be interpreted from a different perspective. First, Appendix C, page 4 of 4, shows a comparison of lots that arc 50 feet in width. He should have included in the analysis Tax Lots 5900 and 6300 as the lot widths are narrow and comparable to Tax I ' + Lot 5700, Appendix C also uses House Areas that do not compare appropriately to the proposed house. • Y� d The chart should include deck areas for the existing homes, or should not include the deck area in the proposed house. I wil' assume the numbers are correct for the existing houses, but the data for the proposed house is incorrect. I have updated the chart to reflect these errors, There are two charts, one with just the house areas, and the second with the house areas plus the deck areas. In looking at the chart that, reflects the house areas only, the following observations are made: 1, The house area (base) is less than the average by 223 sq. ft. or 13,7%. ,i. ?, The lot area is smaller than the average by 1675 sq. ft. or 22.696. ' ,. •4. ,p •, 3. The lot coverage is 24,55% vs 22.00% average or 11.6% greater than the average, However, the house footprint meets the lot coverage requirement not to exceed 25%. It is the proposed deck that exceeds the requirement of 25%. Of the 4 comparison lots under 6000 sq. ft,, 3 of the dd 4 have lot coverages greater than the proposed house, and greater than than 25%, 1' u 4, The house width is less than the average by 1,3 ft or 3.7%, 5. The house depth is less than the average by 8,6 ft or 13,5%, 6. The total house area is larger than the average by 743 sq. ft. or 32.3%, The possibility exists .• . 41) ' to eliminate the basement area of 683 sq. ft. This would bring the house size into a more i` •, r comparable range with the average. However, due to the street elevation, and the location of • 4 • ° eyt c t. lP 4 }—: 'I S " 1 t r 1. s of Lake Oswego March 3, 1995 J• Page 2 ., . .444„frz„,y1. >, 1 I . , the house 1 ft. fromtheproperty line), 1 , elevationswould probably not change there is a five foot dropfrom the street to 1 _ 1 • • i• basement 1 Ir • result in a crawl space the size of the basement. Therefore, the basement area is just taking advantage of the conditions of the lot. • The number 1 floors conditions than the average, but again, the + providing opportunity - • 1 ' basement • • added. one 1 1- daylight Y , A 8. 1 • side setback 1 1 requirement as shown by previously submitted documents. basement is an option, however, the proposed house does meet the height restriction Similar comparisons can be made with the second chart which includes the deck areas. As thedata indicates, • 1• 1 house would not • considered • neighborhoodhe �1 age would indicate. 1Johnson's haveowned thisproperty Y r•` • 1 1 1 • 1 �.i spent muchtime1evaluating many house 1 1 1the ,y r 4.• including • �fenclosed. 1 • � were • 1 11 1 1 1 • include 1 1formal dining, living room androom eas. The +A Y_Y,! 1 housesthat met theirneeds in both area and width. The plan they chose was the .i .0,1t..4. � • r h.,, 1 minimum house' 11 1 1 • 1 / 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 • variancenecessarya make reasonable • theproperty. 1 1 house not out of character for the Lake Oswego area. , . 1 ' ,": ,.., .' ': / -(-- C2 .c_., , ai , N' 4 41, 1/ t h 1 n d I. * t t. y c . 1 1 '' .i If "ty� 1 tl>,. tf . • Tax Map 2E IS 8CC • House Lot House Lot ; Tax Map Address Lot Area Area Coverage Width Width •• , ' , 5200 4350 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. 7392 s.f, 1568 s,f, 21,21% 40 ft. 50 ft. • < Note 1 5300 4330:S.W. Lakeview Blvd, .f, 2933 s,f, 25,80% 45 ft. -196 fl. \` 53 4.z- ® , Q . I Note 1 5400 4302 S.W. Lakeview Blvd, tt s,f, ,1137 s,f, 10,87% �-98:ftft, " f 5500 4288 S.W. Lakeview Blvd. 5487 s,f, 2141 s,f, 36.62% 42 ft. 50 ft, y 5600 4272 S,W, Lakeview Blvd. 5611 s,f, 1896 s,f. 33.79% 39 ft. SO ft, 1f ,•1 } , 5800 4242 S.W. Lakeview Blvd, '8 s.f, 1541 s,f, 26,54% 39 ft. -SH•f w . 565'a- 4`, r,, ,> 5900 4224 S.W. Lakeview Blvd -589' ,s,f, 2580 s,f, 43.77% 40 ft. -50'ft, Note 2 6000 4212 S.W.Lakeview Blvd, 8985 s,f, 1708 s.f, 19,(11% 40 ft, 75 ft, til ,`x,�;,..', I r ' ,ii , Note 2 6100 4186 S.W. Lakeview Blvd. 9252 s.f 1315 s.f. 14.21% 48 ft. 75 ft, .' It.., �? 31r'.5G- 6300 4146 S.W. Lakeview Blvd, 6409 s.f, 2056 s,f, 32,08% 34 ft. Varies kti trR°.,r Note 2 6400 4138 S,W, Lakeview Blvd. •8 96 s f, 1553 s.f, 18,07% 58 ft. 74.5 ft. Note 2 6500 4104 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. 7980 s.f. 2024 s.f. 25,36% 46 ft. 74,5 ft, °. Note 1: Lot is double(2.0)lots. Note 2: Lot is 1,5 lots Note 3: Owner of subject property does not have the availability to purchase addtional land to increase the size of the lot in both area and width. 1G • ii EXHIBIT . if '"._!. yi .wv. 1S Lot No, Lot Area House Area Lot Max,Hous Lot House House House# Act►.ubl Total Weighted W*kited (Base) Coverage Width Width Depth Total Area of Floors Side Scback House Width Side Setback °xY 4900 10629 1624 15 18% 35 50 67 1624 1 15 24,2 25,2 5000 10843 2070 19,09% 32 50 74 2070 1 18 29,3 20,7 ' 'fin • •� _ , r,','! 5100 9767 1989 20,36% 37 50 73 3410 2 13 27,2 22,8 F�};' • 5200 7392 1568 21,21% 40 50 60 3104 2 10 35 15 xt 1. 5400 5363 1137 21,20% 35 50 60 1137 1 15 28,9 21 t' y o • n,, 5500 5487 1965 35,81% 38 50 68 1965 1 12 29 21 a Y�`yei, 5600 5613 1735 30,91% 38 50 71 2500 2 11 24 26 �: rt 5900 5074 1414 27,87% 30 43 55 2796 2 13 .24,7 18,3 6300 6409 1148 17,91% 33 51 44 2056 2 18 28,4 22,6 t 1 Average 7397 1628 22,00% 35,3 49 63,6 2296 1,6 13,9 27,9 21,4 :Swb4r�t ?,,,,,,e4A,3 5700 5722 1405 24,55% 34 50 55 3039 3 16 33.1 16,9 ' .� House areas include garages but do.not include decks, ,': I .QY{ti M 0' i(NGA°•Iipnne,N.I ,' z fi h o� r 0 410 , , . , ,...,, ., 0 ......„,_ , , , , p,.. . , . - ,. . ‘ .. . .. . , ., .., , , ,,,,, „WA:,,j,',,,,P•;:, oi,t, :* '• ' , ' '. itVat,';4;1. 1 -..y ,� ' '1 d r ""1,.�, P, e 4 _1 ''';,I,''' .� 'l'i �d.'{43t'` - 'S1. r .fir t• , , . „ .. ,, • 0 , ,2 , .. ....„., Pi ',•4 ' Lot No, Lot Area House Area Lot Max.Hous Lot Width House House House# Actual Total Weighted Weighted w/Deck Coverage Width Depth Total Area of Floors Side Seback House Width Side Setback ` 4900 10629 1624 15,28% 35 50 67 1624 1 15 24,2 25,2 • I :Y , 5000 10843 ^070 19,09% 32 50 74 2070 1 18 29,3 20,7 j 5100 9767 2373 24,30% 37 50 73 3794 2 13 27.2 22,8 ry 4;1 5200 7392 1652 22.35% 40 50 60 3188 2 10 35 15 . . 5400 5363 1297 24,18% 35 50 60 1297 1 15 28,9 21 ` ,` I -1: Mt 5500 5487 2373 43,25% 38 50 68 2373 1 12 29 21 5600 5613 2155 38.39% 38 50 71 2920 2 11 24 26 • n. r `'y 5900 ' 5074 1820 35,87% 30 43 55 3202 2 13 24.7 18,3 1, 6300 6409 1468 22,91% 33 51 44 2376 2 18, 28,4 22,6 ,., I { r Average 7397 1870 25,28% 35,3 49 63,6 2538 1.6 13,9 27,9 21,4 ' ,� i i+ • 5wbieL� 5700 5722 1769 30.92% 34 50 55 � 3 16 33,1 16,9 F • , 1 House areas include garages and decks. • r`P+a.$.ti nee,N,1 1 7 �• M Ci q; 73X . • , • )•.0• II e•. r r ram• r.ls a•� r'w .6• ••••s. • ': . '' ' . I 1 1 I ilffllill • p1041 11 ill $ O !!IN 1 ylrrt ovVl-^�:-^ I�T�. ' , I:T' 1 11 li low III rr;. •�. .I M•., - NfM14MdP NWM•D" iryric"'r wow M pM p_I.._"10'�r�I '�. , ,., ..1 ., `•'.'We1O/ IN MI 1114 jI 11: Y ° WO k s» DI 1"'r KIT. w ." r IP�IIIJ� r1N k w NI 0 1�■ PI : N,•OX 100E ;1 1• .•. Mof421°6 g Ia M7 •r III p� _ +. PIP Mil I.irtf9 IN INK WM IIII1.f: 1S MAIN?'IN? IN IN IN �.: • A ; III'u '�•. \wi NIk1.M011 r70• 'N Iso r. 1 ..ram• .44 h ,0. .1 4 ••• r-to ' W yp•PALM �c — —. PI"ONI1 6 ,,,14 0 I a X IX '„.:4„......-•••—....=iiiiiii... l • r + 1:11 I \1' ¶1Ii21IIIiI ..� 1(►4JM^ I } n ,4 r. F�'CT'+��tl I, x�LF✓ li I � 11Mrli ® § LIVING r it ! xT 11� � Pr sh• 1 1/1►P4M • I. M' ' II 11AT+to,:all lY _ a p :::,.:rizt,' II.rI Iei r.. I rL➢11N+r.+y i' i • .�:. r.a• • .• \ 14. itis Ill a :10 ^ e p N i i t E d"+ ,a. 1 ♦ x jlNl • lty�i_Y -�I.gap�s3g' . :14• • ., \.............. . • r--- �,�}y.' •ill :.rp'yL� la.r.v'.'r. / „_____"..1 - 141PArtiftiv - 1 . 11 i Ila Alb, , IN �I • III two k vs on noon - - Ti iiiiromm /VG rZ---: 4 EXHiB,11:1110 i0 to, IV mmomillilinlillii, ,.,r,y, e ;lar /c —/ j t 1 r 1 Y J A. 7 •'.r •• t.es• a, Y-►• 1, p.q• y w.4. I -.• ,I • I Ai . %s%s% I I ,ii. .. .., ,i.... �t-,� isi •ram.. '' .. } B SR. 2 -' 3 ai3F2. U tarot We F ! : Iwo•Mr O it- ,ap p1.1•.uM r�1, ::.A.__„ ..� M % i. 093, a -- 'YID"`- 3 G1'dr ,,RtRI 4-1idz.---�,/�� 1 y T-41.2.'7 . i, r - • , r_, ,..,__., I ,i, t. Cw�,�n,�s rt -1,a. q LNPAS „ , T .g114 oil i ' M Mar I A:3TER II IVOX •�.� Il n '3 ktIPI , 17 d i Ar........411 Ate.�7 1 @tent. 401t i axw,vw 1S X 3ASP311x -1"'`- ro wry ._.: ' i ti , !'"4''A, tiaaaaa aaaaa,', TUB 1 ., ++ It mute UHT Mid J +, Ham sw ra T A t A N UPPER FLOOR PLAN . ' < •.,ALIT pi' .1.4+7' DIIIIGN A$$OCIATIa0 INC. r 1305N mu WtethAre , PcztWxl,O e®on 4MD9 • Yt y. It ` I i I 1 ."/" . 4 „,i,..T. t m , „ I G i m I it I to rasa`fI 2 a a Ls. ... OEM; eL __t ellsh __— I n ♦ 4 _ u3. j rte►I, rarxowe�� , O I It • tr.o, tense hN OW ! 'I ( 40%004N�AW 4 4 . . li • , . ri�L . . 1 'Loon �—�pBEir maternal j • AA �eldtt y„ ° spy pt�,t� 1 • �Md00 NopivonanWu v' ► '4":"... 1°4 x! M ` a 1 1 b w 4,.yr • 1 . b • •I ....--- ,,.N�ar�. IAA I 1. � �• ri I t '' Imill ~ I, I I \MJ ._,,,, x — — '• N ID*111.44.r.nw•le oo 'I ,` i oats b ' 0 4 A.3 k . . 2 ti h i 0 AM1'QfrWgl."i" ��I T e,uoe a b•OaJ . 1 M b I to vO a'be oai • 15 be "'.V fv-°' .1.1.1 CRAua..SPACE 4 ,I1 to S lcw.�er u � ` {N i i i ... • x _. I,„„,,_ _i_Bk,a,ti.e,1,04ALLI-111...$4—$:,eirizerzEzt:U. «, .• 1 „or • -1 i --0 'i 0-for.' ~ •T— LtDO•al • • �; i, . .., W.r .•.•• ♦ )'.9 ♦ r+d' , ,. • . , el?)p3 9. 0 0 . ,..of,,,,.„.,:, ,. I 1. 'ATION I ' ...........k ,r t,•k t, w IS t�}tr} t�h a, ; IP b ____, _� „....,: ....... __. ��.r 1 rwnn.a. % I n II • , h f» - .`IIIII—�Ik�-_ ri.....„.;`� f`o'�r af., _____,. ___ ,f , ni• i. .... ' . -, . • I r. ••-•._•__._4...__... . I I IIfllllf11[ounim1llhllllllf'Milli1II1imam _ _ I r =I .._„_....=:-.4..."-.••••-="""'"._ _ y LEFT SIDE ELEVATION = �1-_-_-=:—....-____4 ;:� .� .—. ._ —— -----_ • • _ PEAR ELEVATION . \ ✓ /-a 011111•M AI/•CIATIS.IMC. mI+wufAA..w • 44 ANN • • • • 444 a - 1 -� ,'r` . {^ • ' ray. , • i A.....• t.44 ,, • p rf. 1 rim-0,,,,. - = ELEVATION 14 ,,,,,..1:1::..i.r:.:t• �e+ar� Il • t ' �.•% ..�", ,t �1.'21 r AFC ' ` .ire .,,.►vt t r9!'K �� ! ;� 111111111 IM ME .1111 -+' rra••errowee+ v Ii 1N } 1�{J I�®� r i l '�. -,�• ♦ ` j. --1 4` S )4 1r Ijv o L=©==umY r�� • FRONT ELEVATION 2/44. RIGI-IT SIDE ELEVATION,_,__•,,,_ .a...,4. /o —., ,/g tJi Seat. 9sl •ae1eM Ae1ocl$$Yi,lMer wuaae.. r,LWe Poo( g3 aoMaimdoo• 3 • . • 1111 • e i •W+ • . 1. 410 0 r, s, -- - l'1):.:.}.:4:7.P... 1 A 1fN'ir,,},r�r moommo 4; tee' , :•< ' tiles Su RE p /�T t L r" w_..�_�. Nlt 0 . 01 N ,�c j Lg I 'sr G Attu C, allaNNEINI all .. IIIIIIM"Illik ....._______Ma i A nammimmlials ................... ._______ Maim=Illaam.....i ' MI= • '. '*. ' 11.1.11 1. 1"."Wik ' MEI =NNW 111MANNINmamoommg MMaaa MI • ..a �`_._..__._,. ._ �:fit= (,=�--�•Ilinnaal � mi, • - IIIIIII - ri ,"1 : � . r , .-.-.1 •_ .-. Iw` „.t. II ,�.Jyd,�,y�..T 14 '«- ,�+'"` ..w-- • 11 blill 111.1111110„.....,"'" '. * • ii %0 S� `i fill LEI=T SIDE ELEVATION 7(7 k 8GALE i V.1' • 1..0, y • • ty `` ,' • +'' ♦F .1 yyltxt1;.a.Ve rtii r Nr,' f 1' •e �'e ' IN'}a . • i ; 1O ti • 4• r ''f Y I ' .vyl iY .♦ ,1I ' t r tt�..t.. ' •.�.•�. •, S,ill. •�.• '* , `YC .•�•I 9: ,r' r ,.• Z Le,�ti�. ' • • k,• , t './ 11,,'`►`�►,iviat6i, 3 . ' •Irk, • , '`) .,t4 ,, * •' '"L, • r of 1 • 1\ c 1 t t t•' 1 i ) ( / i • e: I r t 7�� V �I 1t. (IV .s�' ; i1 f1'��`'•` r+ H' ; 4r ri* 5: 1• • 1.1^�y4 �� • r 'a t ','f0 ,tt :1 F e •��■p•,,[�� y I i{ - • `J'//�,,7,•,•je•;.• • ,'4' r, • •�' r r • �' M1 S,y�,. ,'' rj,t ,- •�t,• ..` ' w ?i1,, t+�.•N t .}' ,,A.v M ,F t u�."Vv101I,T..y+' e4 k ,t.1: 1 ',,4l '�''1,;'' , '.v 4r`�I -4:7 a 7. ,r. + M • , d�4a r •C 1 -R,l 1:J"r y•�'.,V , • �'� : S. �'r A'.1 , 1�}•y, t .if �'f v;d' • l �• t V • re 1E. , 1 t tF 1^ •. .';I ttu7 ,/r 1 '4' •�Aii•4e t401: . + b� '*ty./4''�ilk. , ,, 1 ' ' y .,,, Y ff. . , .l, • J tl '• 1 }, ' .. ,• Z�4,..t 4'1 4„ M1�Yle.�ea M1 -1.'1 , 44'�.7,r=I.`�":1.� '' y- ..1. - y ,kl' t 1� t,• Zt i "•` �.S• t ne. ti r''ri 444 I 11 .:,Ii- ,l�e r1 `a ?`^ j'�` .? -� ram,�a. �?t • r.• 1 41 .'1 • ► r L *'firj'r R ";� �' • t:.L. a it i • • • Subject Property , • i Tax Map 2C is 8CC Tux Lot 570() Lirl:cvicw Blvd, View if , i. . EXHIBIT , • /3 Cja111 • • . r • vPtrt • - VdN 't'' .... .. t: rr 1. `w M . ` :r • • 4} J. 1 • S • I 1 + J .,• -r!Kim.. f. 1 Y ,,1 +�` `"\ `JJ�'.fa• •t- r);,,fieJ rkii; l,� •.,;: I.`� I' S i1/ • ,N►• . (.1 L itier. M •'r • ►�4., , •I `r, ` n 1 • +E ,' .1. • ' I1 , 1 . ,• , • ,.y, 1, ,. •b.' 1 le , ' i q t * ,. •• ' \ . , i 1 \:. , 1 •1 J• +'1'� jar • a '' ,,/ ^ � � I J° ,r �, lie.^f.~9 v ' J•- r .J �n 1 i •J ti � ' J 1i v/e w ,t a fl / .� i�, r. 1 ip 1 t , ,.,tt y,,t` 14 1'y fir,1. r! ,'` eq k-f, r4;;:{{{... r 1 t,, 1h 4' 4 Ti•m i, , )" Il ' r -5,tt, 7rv�••• M1s. 4 'd•Y v y,i a'1t,4,,4 � '+r„ i 1-.•;,7'>>i 6 > .' 4 v ,1 :,•,•,,,•,14A:r.:•:.t., .• 0 1 1 1,‘ 1 1 a ...,••1 1�!1•ti:i tI, ''i ,/'ry,1. f 14"t , "'' _''''z ,/ f ` 4�y , .ii. •1rr%xL •� ;' 1�,1n '�� •J14�► 1++.� r �,.. rrik•tiw ` r�a'K yy .k.kt..4 ....•_ 1,,,e?-- f :a' :,� �t7'►I A` ., -`.4ti"\,; • ,R, y . � ,••h\ •. »ti/ u •.' it p1,►}• •`!.-. n', �` ,( ,A' 1 444 ..j-r Q.�.1► •♦" ' • .Hay .►�.•` t . ' • 1 1 �\( •.� �M�'i ♦y �t1y:, �.A v,S +i„ I' ,IM-`��} �, 1 4 a •{/'1' } . -.F 1, • • • • Subject Property 1 Tax Map 2E 1S 8CC Tax Lot 570() s..., West Bay View • • , ' s •i I ` Ir y 1 i, - R 1 A / wh • r • F' > • • • • M I L ' • yFy ' • 1 +tNY"+ iryi,aiY1 + ' n'�9 3-..,,,,,,,.....L.,.....:.tt1 J �U �V r `y 1t. 9.�• 1(7f. 1i a yed3Oi �, , 7J I • • t R +. .r 1 J 1• ,� ' I '1 , J \ 1... I. • • - ♦ a ,"l2a + ahh•Yr` 15. ! �' R "1°'» vi. . e ° . ( i, ' .• y • ii fyrr l S'• 4 6 r tr J f r •, ,..•i 1 \ a, a k f ,Y It xr�x, ` 11 1 7 Y r I I +rtI.y.l• + .� ,. r • �: (a`o � :I • '+ II , ,� r'• rrM , 1 f t '•1 .�. ,.h� • kv fr,.,.,",, .�.,,,.....,..•,.]1, ,n{IaJ • / ,1-t•, t �., s J a • P• "• e•4 ;'7 J,. t r;, f,f i ) Y "J a 1 r i ra �'.rr �• '1', 3'1'y { t' 0 t. N 1 . # a � �A �Z +•Y 11+ yr.'T- .0 r"4.f 7 LL i'� 1 I r' i� � J+,.. . •�I A n lc'•ss1-R, k�.Y► a 4 t�,r4 ti , Y��. \ail{t wh�;. . ` • ,t� • 1' 'ffN'fT ' �+`� 11 F• wL i;..., . lr �1 ,, -.411 0 .1�,•• Nf�C, w -�j �•\ ...h •, +Y e. c yfi7ttw''r�Yt!• �: .. Ii a( 1- t' I. ,1,4• - 1.1W4 • 1, . • • • tr r . • • Tax Muh [? IS SC.(' I'ua Lot 5()f1Q 1 • 4224 S.I . Lakeview Blvd. Lakeview 131vd. View a Y / t 1 ri:::,... ,,•,, • 0 i t3 • 44 •�fi h Sj , i C 1�1•C' , � .' "'n h 1 t„. La ...• ab 1 l ti ly ' 0,4,. 'erro l' �� 1 Jy '• P 'I s , 4.r. •' . r4• .. ,�'rw 1+ +. • its _..4w.1'` » ..'Yf �. _ '..J •. - ` t:, 'SIP ' /'• �..i,J.f ;A.1,," ',v • ;A - i .it' -•. " .)J'^f•_T i ♦ s` ;Y a.•• ,dy. yx.:. Rt x.. 1,[ 6. •'c}/1, • :: : It''t d • . •' be;11 tp .,, """*, -,)' 1.. •,,r4 ,,.r T'•h. • r � I •t t 'A Itt u.y r y i lr, :M1! r_ 1, . , \ •••1•14•014'Co La•:,-c6.,.b`•,'''''' • • •1 • f• • . dp•• • , 4,' r • h 1 1• t w... 1 • • :. 1Jy;Yid.. -J " , n A t ► � ; ' �,.. 'i.„ ' � •" i°nb�J °'{! �" + 9 � 14" � i � j. � 1tS�jjj• 4 r ,'n� tt .l,` fr,i, t �� i' • r t� 4' r. ,So r' 1 T, •n♦'' .� r .•ON .0,,wl• i; C , /1�r•i 1,1 h.. •� .•..JL c1cxJ.! 1'1 iv.IhNM,4ktl -t r'1. ... • • 1 • Lot Next to Subject Property Tax Map 2E 1S 8CC Tax Lot 5800 4242 S,E, Lakeview Blvd. i 0 Lakeview Blvd, View • • • yi ,t {.. 1 , ... , r I. • ► C? i jl • ,II. ~la , • A 1't 4.7 1 J '. 4 µ g ♦1 ' • • I., y Y r 1 >� t Ir '+r Ak. .r • V-lt to r -k- ,�� ` 1 1 � �w -r j+l ti i .`,• ��n `I ,* Ib •V. I. Lt ,fir �J 50. l!r 4 -� )� � • �,i . . a "u'. ii dam:' • t t }y7� • ti j b ' • l E �i1 JJI y • r� • j ; r , _ 1 • r °ly{`If t 1 ' . 1 ry , l i'"""' i..,..wl .f =.'! A..0..: 1 ''.i. ''414r r.1. ,,11 SIN,{2'+ a�. �,, _ • .)' 1:,i F _ , I; • • Lot Next to Subject Property Tax ;v1.1p .1: Is ti(,•(.• Tux Lot 581)0 a ,12.I2 S.F. 1.,theV'iem, 1 kd. • We,,i U3,I\ Vie‘ti0 -1, . +,,. \/ \, 1, J Dr '— 1<'' j I � 1 .�{'�y•Ily�� .• \r.`j` '�• 1i1 : ej y ' 11�_ i ' I, • 1 �4 d.IS14 ' .•• •1 •• C I V t + ,�n,y t•' ,t,V{. * ` ..1 • 1 1 1• .; �1 y t. "r y.•\` �1 � .y . • • # ft i , 1 . KI A` 1 . • rU •i . . + r 1 •., �'r II rH C kjrr��' yCp•Fp a yy eI:�k•',.1 .iP/lr.1 , ".,.,- '/{ , I y 1'. .. • „: „..... .„. , ,, . ,. 1114 . ,-. . ‘‘,. „ .,..„.,.;,,,: t .A. ; r pjt.ff 1 f t M t . A , `r,•.1,I •:. '4i; 4...1.. {ri, Str f 1 j1r r Y• .il is 1; 1 d / yc '` w p , ... •'1 fir' 1 :`...... + t. ..,. i • Lot Next to Subject Property Tax Map 2E 18 8CC Tax Lot 5GO() a 4272 S.E. Lakeview Blvd. IP. ! Lakevitrw Blvd. View r• •.,rr ; `♦ I • 1 • 1 - « a ' r ,s.,,,1�L. I. , • - . . :•,.• .,,, . ., ,., ,,!, .,...,', .-„;', ' '...', ". •r :!, .'. V:•::•;•‘i. •••••.. . :,,„'•, ; ':'•:., ., ,i ,,,*.* ''....1 .-. .,..,•,.:, ' ' ' , .' 'I''',.;Y ,,..' :,'.••: :'"' \•, .; :,' '' '1 a' 0 • , . . .._ • . •/,' 1. .' .. ,•., ., -, • ' • 4' 0 . .. . r _ •r.': ' ,,,• 1 .t! , •,, , ,,..,, • . ... , .? ..,, 't•Ai.••••',,,' ,,. 'e • Veo .,,,•4,,''.47,,,.',,:.. •••'d , -,t0.4 i • •.. ", .. 4,, ”1,„,I,.si,\4.:/ .%,...I ,1 t4!,,1,,f ti.t.L'',1,;.4.s, ....I,/ V..k;• '''''.; t.1' • ;"" 'A'`' .'.. `,7.?.4 '),...,-'01', 4. ,4,i. 1 • , . 04'6 '"I.'" r`'.. .t ••• ;k.,),:...i..s;t.P4•e ...‹.1.1 4,..1.1.••••L:',.°16,' ',it. :k, .6/ . ..,,..if •. .,.4,4 4 6 ..,4.1;',.4. 7.,t6e4'i i•.'t ,:j' id.•-, 'rt. '''..41 'il'ir, , .. ?", . ).' ..). ... ' ,.,,• '•...•L.i .1'. ..` l.‘r .. k'"' • -' ...' ""i• • .\ 4;•1'11. .4.'". ''''..!...%111:;irk •')?t.......1 •i r• •• -' ', ':.' *".N.i' 6 it i'`#si(.. '".4 : 'k •'''l " :•'• '‘ lit' ' ' • • , '1,• • '. ••'• •,, '•,' ' - .'', •,,t,'....'< ‘• •",,,-- -• ; ' *4 .k. ‘ .. . , ..-,. -ri- - ., , ..,... .. ..1 ,. ,. 1.. . . . ,,,,,,,, k, , .., :- , , ,, .4,,ri„,,•,., • , ., • ••••••,,,:\ ...,! ,- ; ,Iko,,1 '' •1, '•' •'''; :- ''••‘,• ' . 1 .. •'f' ,. t, , ' •: % . •2,.• ... -- i 1...,-.4]..... ;,•"•• • •0 ..i , ,,., fr• •." , 't.' , ''' 1 . , ,, '4,. :,j, .- . .#7- :_, ..e.:4...;pii:r,,,,;?.,,;,Ii.:, •, :'.1.+..414 ,i 1 1. :, .. • • .1.t.I riMAlitk;MArl.f.:PTVI's'1'"q:17•Nir'i,te., ';,ii.t,i, l'A4v,4t '' • ,,,,,,4.,.t ..• ...Ina 0 . o',•`,.1,' f,,lf,'1"",..ui.•41:ft•ite.` .' • - ' ' • .t 'r • t :.t.ti.t• ' . ,= . •.r. 1. ' ^.A.,1/4z: „.1,4:7.4 Pf.','„-k..o I. .1 '. 4 %1 .. 1 6,. 4'.• 1.1..f.ttrk".1.. ''',4,,,fe„:1•',A,r..."''' .','.0..7.'.1 ' . t1.14%.;ii ." v --- . ; ,.P.'''...4*...X4'...t4k41, C‘,10',vi"!. ` '''.1' 1 i ,,"%••,,,,.tZit:';','.!,..: .., 1.,;;:.:tyCL'i'v.i. . t ot. k .-- . `.."' '.4". .',.i,l'40.!;4'•?;1'''Oer'llit'44./:',‘. t'''''• .1'4 ' ' . .' 't . 'F?44!,„17'-.k...., • -7 ' ..g.' rim_„,---_7-.,._ 1,, i.,-.„ , ,,, ,:,••mi.,,,,t,„,,,,,N„...:,1:.,•,, ,, • . . • ,,,, ., - 1%AI ., "iit1,4'",-.1 '' ;*.. ..., ' __., '— * I, I; A'•e•n;i}'' .',-7•,' , '. ' .., ,1,,,„ ' • . , 'd )4 t „ .•..1.,1 - - -*------ %'..-.- ''.; 2..` • ...".. ..`,„ ',. a .ii 4:',,,;,,,,; ',Eli ; ;. 1 II 1 . .. ' 4 ',•., i:ii,;.;:',...,, :: --''' '' = ',::::.• ' .‘ A.:,,,,,v,i , ,. ,f . .. . , . .- '01A-f'if. '' 4..''''',,' ..* n. ;i4P '•: • '' !, 1• '.*:•...1',4 r,.,,01';',:,,..ti'le";`.;'t. !.:. i- • 0 ,..'s '&,.=,• 1,1 if,4. , • , '. ,,. .... ' ' .• -',....,4 ..', ,.,.i. . •!• ' ' ; ' ,-., *,.e,.'`4).`' c'.‘ C t ,1v.,;','. • „ibi'' . • 1.1.`,,,• ••• 't' • i '"- *' 1'. • ' 't ' , ,t4•L'"'c''''' '' 1 ,. , i,;'. 1;',"'„:41,'1,..,,,;,t ..•:;4', rti;";# ,I.,''..‘.'4,.."f'•' 4 .i.1,\I.;•, ,7 . „,:.,-)1... 4..•,..„ •••• .., A i,"' :, ,‘ ....... ...e.r.'N;t4....‘ ..,. ; ' •.. •' "; •*;°.f.. la',.....s.."I. i't' i 4 ! / t. ('' ti,a-: '..,.•-•,4- •,....3.,:f:: ''..",f.,, k! .',-.?•,;!,,...,-.•,‘,' 10...t ,1 .,,f)••t, —,...".,.. , , ••••• ,.....,.. 74., ..... .I, .-,/4:4•,. ,... ., -..•*"...0 I i' ‘ . ,, .,. • 4''''' j' tt..."'00.-4 :.e.'i410111. i t .e " ' ..‘,k IIY ' ' .0\b : 'ili It' ' • ' r i lc A )* •4:. ' ,..4 ..,,, .. . ' ' ••... 6.'1 " , •4. ''.‘".. ....i3O:V5.1. :1: .',6'\ .-..i. 4 e '',, ! 1 A k'/•‘'. .., ‘;',c,,74' ,,z,, ..,•% '"--:,' .., :. ., .4. • ..,,,,, . ., _‘ • .,,,,••••• , 4, dit4.,•:'•' ,n '1'..P... .'l'.• •''' , . ' . . ' .. :.,. • . . . . , •. 4 , • . • . - • ' . , .... .. . • 4 ' • 4 4 , • 6 . , r , s . , • • , . Lot Next to Sul)Jek.t lirt)pert • , ',. Tux Map 2F. IS 8('(' °I.,tx 1. )t s( () • . . . ,127":). S.I . Likes ie\k 13Ivi.l. AEL or• . . I. •\'e,,t ILI\ \ lew NIP , • . . • ' . ., /7•:' - -4 • , . • • • • . I •, . ..,.. ' , • ' , , • ., • ' • • qt,t'•••;„, . .. , • .• , • , • - • , , , Y.,',..".,L,';'; •• ' , • , ' ' ••• -, ,2 • • • .• ..4., ' i ' , . . . • . . , , . . ; . . • - 44 • to : . ,......,„,. , ,. . , .. .. „...,4 „4„..,,...., .... .. 6.4,,,,,... . ......, „, .,,,,, . 4.43/4,.•'.1ri 1 .1 a • aNY•'Y�J r'• AJ. Ft..kt :oi. ram' :•r ..i• 1♦ 1. .4.14•w4 41'Y.8%c •'! J`M•rtr,+. Y"�.• .N.d.4n klai'IG•.AAy MM.rrMrA•'(J✓..i f - .«.. aua.. twt�wulYw...l�f w,l;y. • ,hw i, r' .' i• •1JI.r''yY•1- r,n..r.rl �r Mt/. F l♦' f-. Y 1.'p..1./1M M ! N.MIxL IIw Ndt.,4 a+ I "•r ( i }.•1}LYiM/Y.aYill--.4�w.•l 1l • —• �Y • r "1. Tom1 fir• ) • .fir • � (1 '• ' / y 1 ..". ' .. -' ' 0 •"• '• . • ..k• . 4%.a. '\6,1'ON, '',4r-r4, ' •• ,A. ,''' , . , tiw ,n \ � r , .r.• h I14t It s 0 h •••'•-a' 1t ,�''��.!'.A I 1 '+-`', S l Gt.1 r'1,(Niii.4 `41' ;-11 .Yt em s r + + 1 ., , i ' '" r j4.^�1a !u y '" r, r • w d t 1 r T ti.Yla. A• 7. '1r1 rt � . • I LIJ • """" ^ ^n-.�+r,..,-., r., �', ' r 1 ` are "' • �. ., .. • • Tax Map 2E 18 8CC Tax Lot 55p() ' 0 4288 S.E. Lakeview Blvd. Lakeview Blvd. View • • .. 1l 7 J L. • 1.1 • I 1 .. y , ir•f • 1 -•C�•7!.". • + • •ai •1` yC 't. 9 + J • Z.y 14 L - 1 •] . I ' 1 r ,:• J , [T '.�• V�Fir�J1f Tom' ` 9 ; • -• I. • vtY R•Nkk V ., IIr ALiN. M A 1 • • •. 1 r.«r t'ti r...q+Rl �t +a �d♦r.,v 1�! • • ixytiln :wp . aid f ra • r ., a ` 'f .� 'a•w1+�•1. p ` •�.'fit � ' • Jy • ay'(4'n••tl•r vl•,. '�.j,flitl.,lUt'�1 ♦.'e.y"a;Y��1+. Ot ;'(j�n f l ` • • Tax Map 2E 1S 8CC Tax Lot 52(1(i 435() S.E. Lakeview Blvd. • Lakeview Blvd. View (110 , .1 9 /- I • I l , � 11 , c • . I , , I f -s , t; ' '. 0 . ' ;1 p • ; Y wr x I1 :C1 n l , • I r , 1 " ..1,,,iib"Ji.41. agkko-o:.tt4} ., 0 .. *r..1,.1.:‘,/: „!41. .4.....4'`..: ',:,.',,:;!.: ,:::1` **f''':•°.3, ..,,':', ,- :'3' , .,'-7 ' ,,,i. '..,. ' %l'I'lor, ... .• 1 'Ll+,IA'1 ' 4 '" a s• ,w I X3. , .s dt I y ,ngvn • }t u '' • 1 1 m . • 1 Tax Map 2E 18 $CC Tax Lot 5()00 437U S.C. Lakeview Blvd. .J 0 Lakeview Blvd. View it it.. v . C ;: . 16661 SW Graef Circle Lake Oswego, OR 97035-5502 �G ;sr, Feb 13, 1995 0 . Lake Oswego Planning Department 1935 Lake Oswego City Hall I. P 0 Box 369 Lake Oswego OR 97034 Re: File No: VAR 18-94(a-b) ' Lakeview Blvd between Bryant and South Shore Blvd Applicant: Keith Lucas , .. I object to the granting of a four-foot variance to the 10 �. foot setback on the east side of this proposed single family &: residence, item "a". I object to this four foot variance because the 10 foot setback requirement is in place to provide adequate space between residences. In planning the residence to be constructed on this lot the applicant knew that that the lot was only 50 feet wide and • he knew that the setback requirement on the east and west sides of l .. the lot was 10 feet. If this applicant feels that he must build a house which cannot be built on this lot without a variance from the 10 foot w setback requirement he should find a larger lot to put the house on. Under "b", the notice I received describes a "6.2%" variance from the "2.5/." maximun lot coverage. I understand that this is a typographical error, and is supposed to be "25% maximum lot coverage. I phoned Ms Jacob, and was assurred that this was in fact a typographical error. I have not received a corrected version of the original faulty notice. y O0,YA Since the original notice was faulty and unclear I must ask � .. just exactly what is meant. Is it 25%+6.2%=31.2%? Is it 25% x • •„:) ;$ 1.0625=26.56%? Or was a typographical error made on both 1 percentage numbers so that I may be agreeing to a figure of 1.625 x 25% - 4O%• I request that this variance from the standard 25% requirement not be considered until it is made clear just what final percentage of lot coverage is being asked for and opportunity for comment . and/or objection has been offered all parties concerned I live across West Bay from this proposed residence. I understand that there is a two-story height limit in this area. What i s the proposed height of this house from r;�rade on the lake-- .F front, (SE) side? Sincerely yours • \4 t,-r� I pe-Lc A r�� . E X H I B ) T Walter B. Neubuf'g 1 a ° • e � , 1 • RECEIVED _ q• FEB 2 2 1995 . co OF LAKE OSWEGO c1,ei- ,2a /ffrJ Dept.of Planning&Development . . ( '-e'et. 4Zr friftve . . . ----6-de-a ...-e-c; 0 .7‘ i/AV 4/9-iy ( -. _,J , • ... %-i-e4,..„-- ,..e ....., ,,a,...,1e,, ,a÷, r. .4, Age--x)e /:‘-•-•(--"Pe . 4c-1-4'A-A4 --1#'-• - ,217,z4.. if4 W. .,5, /zee, _ea/ • , , , . ..,ir i',„e • , ../„.y. e_A°_,."-et44-hy % ‘.61 .4. .,..-,,,;,, ., 4e9:2/A-1 -- -ie... 4---4-, 4' ‘',,Z-ro fir' -�- i �� ,.. . 0 -'71-w-z" iz ,zok 4.ye /'I 4'4 ad4/ miJ (12, 1r -JZ' S'C,) .rCr42,•.: d , .4 i • • 4 . EXHIBIT 1 Ali ,. h4fr /rc'f1( ...d1 • J.'• 1 .1...‘' RECEIVED FI February 27, 1995 F E B 2 81995rpt 1 • Lake Oswego Planning Department CITY OF LAKE C►SWf=GO • '' ' .1 Lake Oswego City Hall Dapf.of Planning&DavAlJp, / P.O.Box 369 • ' - 380"A"Avenue Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 RE;File No, ;VAR 18 94(A B) The following are comments regarding the variance request. $.• .! ;;^ : Variance one -Side Setback • While not directly impacting me since my home adjoins the property on the side which is not affected by the variance,I have concerns over the impact to the neighborhood and to the applicants claim t) that a variance is at'kolutely necessary to take full advantage of the lot and that denial would eliminate or limit the lots bur Kelley. I feel that there are many options available which wculd allow the applicant to take .'` ., 1. J full advantage of t°. property,to build a beautiful home,and still stay within required building codes.It is obvious that the applicant wants to build,as I would,as large a home so that they can take hail monetary advantage of the lot.However,I do not believe that this objective should come at the expense of the , neighborhood. I believe that the applicant should scale back there plans and comply with current regulations. Almost every supplier of house plans has plans specifically designed for narrow lots.These companies provide plans with contemporary designs since narrow lots are not uncommon.Therefor 1 do not believe that it is unreasonable for the applicant to review and consider plans designed for a 50'lot, The f, applicant knew the lot was narrow when they purchased it and can easily find a contemporary house design ' which would be attractive.The 10'setbacks were instituted for a reason and I do not believe tlurt it is any hardship to comply with the requirements,1 feel that the applicant should realize that they purchased a narrow lot,as we all have,and pick from suitable plans. I feel that it would be injurious to the neighborhood if the applicant crams a house designed for larger lot configurations onto their 50'lot, J' At the very least, I would support a home design which encroached upon the setbacks only for the . garage portion of the home.Realizing that a 20'garage only leaves 10'for the entry door and front room,I see this as a reasonable compromise.By allowing for the garage to be offset they can have a reasonable • house"FRONT" ,The rest of the structure could then be easily fit into the 30'building area,,This would \- also have the benefit of giving the home some style rather than a 3 story structure with straight sides from the front of the home to the back, It should also be noted that most,if not all of the homes in the area are . 1 built in this fashion. •• • I would also like to point out that the schedule provided by the builder addressing house width is •• • • somewhat deceiving and seems to suggest that the homes in the neighborhood are wider than they really are and that the homes are that packed in..Under the column heading"House Width" it seems to suggest that all . " homes in the area are designed like the applicants with the home width constant from front to rear. Most homes are in fact not this"house width"for the entire length and are varied for livability,architecture and the little privacy that we do have. It should be noted that my home adjoins the subject property and is 28' wide if the garage is not included. , 4 a• EXHIBIT /¢d, �2 �, tV4e Iii*..4C- ) ��AH ,A,'AEI . r - ,. i. n - . - Y. Variance Two-Lot Coverage '' Regarding the second variance request,the application states that the variance is necessary to allow reasonable use of the land.First,it should be noted that the applicant is trying to put a 3000 sq ft home(includes garage and basement floor)on a 5675 sq ft lot.They further claim that the deck is the problem in that it is causing them to exceed the footprint requirement.1 would be much more likely to support the variance request if the deck was at a modest level and not just an extension of the 2nd floor. I feel that a reasonable compromise is for the elimination of the basement floor which would allow them to have as large a deck as they would like since it could be constructed leas than 30'off the ground.By t doing so they could build a very nice deck area to enjoy the west bay and their functional requirements of r 1000'main would be met.The added benefit to this proposal is that their home would not tower above those of the neighborhood but would instead blend into it.It would also alleviate having to build a smaller home and hence reducing the value of the lot as stated in their application for variance As you can see,elimination of the basement is a viable alternative. Since they have no plans to finish the basement, 1 do not see a major hardship since the house would still have 4 bedrooms,and the h Johnson's do not have children.If the basement is absolutely necessary for the applicant because they want additional square footage for square footage sake,they should have to comply with the 25%lot coverage. i 1 Its a tradeoff that only they can make,There are obvious options available to the applicant and I do not feel that the variance should be granted just so that they can build a bigger structure.I do not see any hardship or injury in this case. Further,it should be noted that the schedule provided with the variance application is deceiving at best.It's calculation of"LOT COVERAGE"is based on the total sq footage of neighboring homes,as if they Y,,;„',�,;..• are all single story structures.This is just not the case and this claim is somewhat disturbing, Its use in supporting the applicants claim that their 32%coverage is therefore not unusual nor injurious to the , neighborhood is not a fair nor truthful statement, It should be noted that using their method of calculation the applicants lot coverage would be approx, 53%,far exceeding that of neighboring homes, s Finally,the original application was for a 27, /o coverage.This was subsequently increased to 32%,by the apparent addition of decking. If the smaller deck was originally sufficient for the applicant,the ' minimum variance should be approved foe this amount only.The additional decking was obviously and afterthought because"It would be nice",and not a requirement to prevent them hardship,injury or ;, devaluation of the lot. In summary, it appears that the applicant is trying to squeeze the largest possible structure on the r e;w r.,•; lot to maximize their investment. They are asking for approval to build wider and cover more of the lot in doing so,They are also just tinder the height restrictions, Sounds like a pretty large home for the lot size, they are pushing the envelope in all directions, I do not believe the Planning Department should approve of ' .' .: the variance because the applicant is under no hardship and is just trying to build the largest home possible, i .. ,,, feel I have offered reasonable options and believe they should be explored by the applicant before they claim hardship,Approval of the variance in its entirety would make a mockery of current building codes and encourage other developers to claim hardship and injury where it does not exist., : ' While it does not directly affecting the variance decision making process, it should be noted that the lot was for sale last year.The applicant indicated to us that they decided to build on the land for tax reasons and plan to sell it after 2 years. I personally do not feel that the variance should be granted so that they can build an oversized house for speculative r , ariances should only be applied in true hardship * • cases. \ �, Daniel and Kimberley Chun . . 4272 Lakeview Boulevard • . . , • ... ' ,i .. �4 - `HML' F ', 1.� 2/28/1995 15:54 5036357795 M. REED & R. FLECKER PAGE 01 It •` at \' ',, .. • . oeV, ,1 Mem:Mary Reed 1a 7 Greet Mole , lain ..OR..•t FAX 1/HOME PHONE 5205.7705 To:Lairs Oewagefferwing 7 °A"Avg • r Lam Oswego.OR. tl , Re Variance Flee#VAR 1844(at) On Lakeview Elvd.-betwearoZrynral Rd.and South Shore Blvd. Faimpety 1605 I em opposed.to the request for 0 Q.2%vortenos.latoreseo to dte 26 S+ice+Iot°owns.vie 4• polo,/Ie• t piece fora meson to okra Unpie n the houses k4 Lake Oswego.Titre houses k1 t4de �nhay etmr oar�Oco�' ` 1916 t Ilia privacy the neighbors on whatfl) ' d i+ ` 9�IeQ�6{s+t0i8 k1 • •The •o the hoaeee►19t the ny r variance be appeared,b brio Jthail would boa t4l veritom doe green shoe of hie k . Four of the bees on eta let hove @b ody been dleiroyed,�anti b og•® on this Int beget then Is • • will rrdd to the tam • end wildlife ona the rem I moved .4,)i u 4,' to Lake Oswego.These spatting detroyed et en ktoreesed pro'due to A ' !,' t• • ".t t„ �1 • r MeV R • , • �_._... a EXHIBIT --.. /4)• m. 1. , t ..4 ' ''' 4• 1 N ,01 'T I F•�I)I+' DEVELOPMENT NOTICE OF MINOR DES {[ I*IGOM • File No.: VAR 18-94(a-b) Applicant Keith Lucas. 16230 SE Dagmar Rd.,Milwaukie,OR 97267 1 Location of Property: On Lakeview Boulevard,between Bryant Road and South Shore Boulevard. Description of Proposed Development: This is a request to construct a new single family residence requiring two Class I variances: a)a 4-foot variance to the 10-foot east side yard setback, ' b)a 6.2 percent variance to es •rcent maximum lot coverage. Applicable Approval Criteria: Please see attached list. Description of Process: A decision on the application will be made by staff. Any person may subehit comments or testimony regarding the application. In order to be considered and ti;,,T, become part of the record,such comments or testimony must be submitted in writing and t* '..,.1 . . ` 4, must be received by 5:00 p.m.on February 17, 1995 at the following address: 0 Lake Oswego Planning Department ,,, ie % .e.,t;'. Lake Oswego City Hall . w d ,', P.O.Box 369 • - 380 • "A" Avenue , , 1.-Lake Oswego, OR 97034 ,', t t 44 1,,44,4• i How to Obtain Further Information: The applicable approval criteria and all evidence relied 3" on by the applicant are available for review at the above address,and copies may be obtained r,;a,c at cost. The City staff person assigned to this application is Elizabeth Jacob. Associate Planner,phone(503) 635-0290. Note: Issues which may provide the basis of an appeal to the State of Oregon Lan 1 EXHIBIT I s , • Board of Appeals (LUBA) must be raised in any written comments with suffici t /4e, lvs,> • specificity to enable the City and other parties to respond to the issue. 61-�G'-r'Ufa /N/ ) II • _ / Tod /� c I7ec..d ✓A s Alvoh varigiOet i r- Sac.) /. Ne7-he hat/.t i$ r 9 For The size of " bCC4'S On s.vta tl 10T of ors e2a7 :n.p f"o 4 roe. ri v, 6v " �o r:41 oVev-ly ).. .1-fe �. /�`� vrew • �0w — � s7" a� Wn1•0 . n ,; h'of ),00C . duo ,ior ),Kt whir .L. see v ;, '} S400(.4 *o% 4 6" e)e77'e"le3 Fro g o o4 0.17" Therekn o i u) ;r i4�p 0 e 4,r d.//,�cu A,h P es 0 ) • • i�ie or�'9,'ha/ ti m . , .G '~' J` �� i N". T e Firf,�epT; been cac ns'uiee-1 . Cdwe1-, • ..... +, ,-T' /�J,gpe.��Q in n�� rlCrr hWohho�K ; -rerrrTl�ee,J a . i 4 " �sf .rT.*er. J r r t�oorset rFm� v�s.7'opu SjLev/� /1e I"ri'�r�.p Fir eve ' r, t. cJ.w�ll: Cw1ca� never rr• •t T de Ft 'N"..�4/r4, ,_ I .r 1,0144e.rs p(a.as . ..., 6'0 .4iii040.404..........4„, .01.112.."4.4„ji,..L.1 .., /, 44:s" .. , • .'bo. ,i.'llip V •• i' '447N 11 •4 di \`Y47re . b p 'c S< yr N. r , ,1, .tt,,0 -----4..- i\' N.. ..,t ' \ 'Al 0 '.i.'I . q $• ^� ~ Bea 'f` �b r� '� ,y `v Rk.� °,,y r ft h f. .I • o ✓. ,gi•g `l'a \ N. y``�: c". r)• . i ,,� r; \\\ N. .. ' . I • 7%it N� a +.,I 0 . •,'‘ .. 1,... ill Iwi fi ' g • r AP.. A 7 � h ijt T� .0 ` f • i ��1' . ii ig 1 .t , P (I) < e . arls r. [f C I. fr t Mryry 4 ,Li 1 • RECE IVED 1. 0 .., FEB 2 8 19 ��. - February 25 , 1995 CO P- a-LAKEOSW Dept,of PI GO anning DBvelo Planning Department preen Attn: Ms. Elizabeth Jacob City of Lake Oswego L • 380 "A" Avenue 1 . ., Lake Oswego , OR 97034 Re: No: VAR 18-94 (a-b) File Dear Ms. Jacob: The following comments are forwarded for consideration by the • • Planning Department Staff in its decision making regarding the above referenced file which is a Minor Development Application , ` for two Class I variances, namely: . 1 (a) a four foot variance from the ten foot side yard setback requirement stipulated by Section 48.06. 215 of the Lake :,s o Oswego City Zoning Code (City Code or Code) , and (b) a 6 .2 percent variance to the twenty-five percent maximum lot coverage requirement stipulated by Section 48 .06 . 225 'X of the City Code. i Back round Information: • Section 48 .06 .210 of the Code which specifies "the minimum lot dimensions for each zone" and "the minimum lot area for each dwelling unit" stipulates such minimums for a R-7 . 5 zone as : o 7 , 500 sq. ft. •r ` • a 50 ft lot width at building line o 100 ft lot depth Lot No . 5700 (akg #491 on Tax Map 2 IE BCC) , which is the subject • of the above referenced file, is : - 50 ' wide throughout its depth which therefore meets the minimum lot width requirement, and , - 114 .4 ' deep [ (115 . 25 ' +113 . 5 ' ) / 2 = 114 .4 ' ) which \ . , • therefore exceeds the minimum depth requirement by fourteen , , percent (14%) , not counting the approximately additional 30 feet in depth of lake front property, and . - 5723 SF in area (7 ,225 SF when including the Lake Front ' , • property) which is about 24% less than the 7 ,500 SF requirement; however , when adding the approximately 1 ,502 SF of Lake Corporation• property, which virtually belongs to the property ::EXHIBIT. .. , . 111, f. oifrPj . ,:: V l 01, • 9' I •• �, 0. City of Lake Oswego Planning Department .� ': ` February 25 , 1995 r. 1•. Page 2 `-. ,;,. r • owners for all practicable purposes, that shortfall more reasonably equates to but 3 .6% or 275 SF. a (Note: the numbers used in the above calculations were taken from the topographic surface plot submitted with the application) Section 48 .06 . 215 of the Code specifies side setback requirements for lots within a R-7 .5 Zone of 10 ' or greater . Section 48 .06.225 of the Code stipulates that lot coverage for new construction within R-7 . 5 Zones "shall not exceed" a "maximum" of 25% . Pur ose of this Letter: �' The purpose of this letter is to specifically indicate how and • • . where the subject application for variances to the City Code ,tJ, specifications falls far short of the Code stipulations that the applicant must clearly demonstrate that: . r . - the variances are necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship to the developer/owner , and i • the variances are necessary for the developer/ owner to make reasonable use of the property, and - that approval of the variances will not be injurious to the neighborhood. Introduction of Exhibits: There are three detailed exhibits (Exhibits A, B & C) appended to this letter , each with its own specific purposes. The first page of each exhibit provides an outline of the purposes of the • exhibit and comments regarding the nature of the data and information presented therein . The Discussion and Summary '+ sections of this letter are based in large part on the data , ' information , and comments provided in the exhibits . DiscUssiO��'d Il • Contemporary Design Considerations : On page 6 of the • applicant' s Request for Class I Variance Approval , the applicant states "The imposition of ten (10 ) foot side yard setbacks would 0 0 1. .ti •• r. , • .x� ' ` City of Lake Oswego Planning Department February 25 , 1995 . Page 3 { leave a potential building envelope of only thirty (30) feet which is too narrow for contemporary home design . " ', ' Comment: The applicant provides no specific supporting rationale for the assertion that Lot No . 5700 is too narrow for contemporary home design , other than the possible inference that small homes are not contemporary. Such inference would seem to be out of step with the City' s Residential Site Design Policies which encourage "small single family homes for small areas. " ` Exhibit A to this letter provides specific evidence that small homes can indeed be contemporary. . Lot Buildabilit `he applicant goes on to state "Denial of the requested setback would at worst eliminate the buildability of the lot, and at best limit its buildability. " T )u Comment: No specifics are provided by the applicant to support these assertions. Most certainly, however , denial of the • requested setback would not eliminate the buildability of the lot R, ' ' as evidenced by, the numerous small area, and narrow lot, building plans available from various architects and construction contractors within the City, and also from home plan booklets , available at both Powell ' s Book Store' s Technical library and the Barnes and Noble Book Store' s technical section . EXhibit B ' contains a sampling of same . . It is agreed that the setbacks limit the buildability of the lot, r which of course is the purpose for which the City established the setback re uirements;" however , as demonstrated in Exhibits B and ..�. q C the limited buildability still provides the opportunity to meet the stated desires of the owners . Reduction in Value: Also on page 6 of the application, the applicant states "The economic effect of the denial would at • least have a significant reduction in its value due to its • , limited buildability. " ` Comment: From a speculative investment viewpoint on the part of • the owner , or from an overall contract marginal profit viewpoint of the developer , it is understandable that the desire to C. uild \ '. ' as large a structure as possible is the objective; however , such considerations are not particularly pertinent to the determination of "unnecessary hardship" or "reasonable use of the 5 '< : . • !.•. - 4� - - µ • •1 / • 1 11 tr , yl 1\ : , City of Lake Oswego Planning Department February 25 , 1995 Page 4 1, property" under this application. Here again , the applicant provides no specifics to support the assertion that denial of the variances would result in a "significant reduction in its value" , or how such would either result in hardship or preclude the reasonable use of the property. • House Width: In the last paragraph on page 6 of the application , the applicant contends that only plans for homes having a width of 34 ft or more will meet the " functional requireme1ts2needed for a home" , and also states that "A home of app y square feet with 1000 square feet on the main level was desired . " Comment: The information provided in Exhibits B and C clearly % ` indicates that the proposed three level thirty-four (34) foot wide home plan provides well in excess of the 2000 ST desired; and, that in-fact a three level 30 foot wide plan will also meet or exceed the desired 2000 SF. In this regard , the applicant refers elsewhere in the application 0 . '-',4:.e,. to the Johnson family needs and desires, seemingly inferring yzy, justification for a larger home; however , it is my understanding v.:. that the Johnson family is actually comprised of just Mr . and Mrs. Johnson whom are believed to be in their mid to late fifties. Further , Mr . Johnson has advised me on several occasions that they intend to live in the home for merely the three years requisite to qualify for the one time $125, 000 capital gains exemption for persons over 55 years of age . • Neighborhood Side Yard Setbacks : In the first paragraph on { •` page 7 of the application, the applicant states "The existing '4 homes in the neighborhood are on similar lots (50 foot widths) and have side yard setback's of less than ten (10) feet. " He • goes on to state "Therefore , the request tt'r reduced side yard setback of six (6) feet is not considered to be injurious to the neighborhood . " • Comment: At first glance one would tend to be sympathetic to such an argument; however , upon furthet investigation one finds • that argument does not accurately reflect the actual livability � ' ;. , considerations involved. It is true that most of the homes on , ' 1 the neighboring fifty foot wide lots were constructed when the • Code specified a minimum of five feet and a combined (2 sides) minimum of fifteen feet . However , the setbacks along the sides • . of the existing homes vary considerably as one proceeds down the \' l City of Lake Oswego Planning Department February 25 , 1995 Page 5 side of any one of those homes; whereas, the setbacks along the sides of the proposed plan for Lot 5700 is virtually uniform throughout the lengths of both sides of the proposed house. , • A more reasonable measure in assessing the overall impact of a setback requirement on the livability of a neighborhood would seem to be the overall total area provided between the houses on adjacent lots . Because of the irregular nature of the side lines ,A; ' '' ' - of the existing homes, a twenty-eight (28) foot wide home such as the Chun' s next door (to the west) to Lot 5700 may have a minimum of five foot setback on either side, but merely along short ' 1. lengths of the side . If, however , one calculates an average • • side setback, for any of the existing houses, by weighting the various actual setback distances along the side of any one of the existing homes one comes up with a very different picture of the overall impact of the requested variance. For example , in the r Chun' s case, as depicted in Exhibit B, the weighted average of . the combined side setbacks on their fifty foot wide lot is 26 .0 feet as compared to, a 16 .9 foot weighted average combined sides ' F setback provided by the applicant' s plan for Lot 5700 . • In fact, only one of the seven 50 ' wide lots presented in Exhibit a,, • B has a lesser weighted average setback (Lot No . 5200 with 15 .0 .reG ' ,', ft) than that proposed for Lot 5700 (16 .9 ft) , and the other six have well in excess (>20%) of that requested by the applicant. �` .►,; It should be noted here that the overall house area, both in !` •• footprint and total area , of the existing house on Lot 5200 is ; ' " a significantly less than the applicant' s proposed house footprint and total area . Further , the percent of lot coverage by the house on Lot 5200 is only 21. 21% . Also, the applicant' s compliance with the ten foot setback on both sides as specified in the Code would still only provide a weighted average combined sides setback of about 20 .9 feet which is less than the 21. 8 ft (see Exhibit B) average of the other seven 50 ' wide lots. Therefore , it is believed that the applicant' s statement that " . . . the request for reduced side yard setback of six (6 ) is not considered to be injurious to the neighborhood. " is problematical at best. , Lot Coverage: On page 7 of the application , under the heading "Variance Two - Lot Coverage" , the applicant states "The requested lot coverage exception is necessary to allow r. . • a. . S • l City of Lake Oswego Planning Department t : February 25 , 1995 • Page 6 reasonable use of the lot . . ." and goes on to hinge his whole argument on the claim that a minimum of fourteen hundred square feet on the main level (1000 SF of living space plus a 400 SF garage) is necessary to allow reasonable use if the lot. In the ° ' ' same paragraph he states that "A minimum size deck (walk under) of 182 square feet is being proposed to take advantage of the architectural design." In the applicant' s letter dated January 28, 1995, he revises the deck size upwards by 100% to 364 SF. Comment: The applicant' s rationale for the exception to the lot coverage constraint is difficult to follow, and is seemingly ".�i insupportable when considering that there are clearly house plans t1 . available, as evidenced in Exhibit S, that when modified to t � include a daylight basement, would closely approximate or exceed . � the stated desires for 1000 SF on the main level and 2000 SF ; , r ; overall , without exceeding the Code lot coverage specifications, '� '." and certainly not nearly to the extent (6 .2%) requested . I,� N Lot Coverage Continued: Under this section of the application, the applicant goes on to state that "The existing houses in the neighborhood are on similar lots (under 6 ,000 'iut * F :1 square feet) and have lot coverages greater than the 25% ` requirement. " `,, Fi Comment: A review of Exhibit C will clearly show this statement _ ,,.. to be incorrect; for , of the seven 50 ' wide lots considered four of the seven exceed 6000 SF in area , and only two have lot coverages in excess of 25% . And of the latter two , one is a . single story house , and the other is a two story house, as �.': compared to the proposed three story house for Lot 5700 . The •4 average percentage of lot coverage for' all seven of the ". referenced 50 ' lots is 23 .41%. There ate more 50 ' wide lots to the west of the seven addressed in Exhibit C and they are even ' ' larger in overall area with correspondingly smaller percentages : of lot coverage . Even More on Lot Coverage: In the last paragraph on page 7 , the applicant states "There are houses in the existing neighborhood that do not meet the lot coverage requirement, • however , they are typically on lots that have double lots or one401 ,; and one-half lots. " • 1, };..+. Comment: i believe the applicant meant to indicate that there are houses in the neighborhood which do meet, not "do not 0 ;. :. 'i,' , . r •�., ty '.. y ,' City of Lake Oswego Planning Department February 25 , 1995 Page 7 J/ �\ meet" , the lot coverage Code requirement of not more than 25% ; 1 coverage, because such houses were built on larger lots. This is true as can be seen in Exhibit C; and, those larger lots bring the average lot coverage for the total fifteen neighboring houses \,',,' _i, to but 21.22%, or about one third less than the percentage of coverage (31. 2%) sought by the applicant. A very significant margin indeed, and again places the applicant' s aactcrtion that no injurious affect on the neighborhood would result from the " requested overbuilding of Lot 5700 in the categoryof problematical at best. Applicant' s January 28 , 1995 Letter : As mentioned briefly above , the applicant modified his application by his 1/28/95 letter, which in part states "The proposed house is of modest •: . size and minimally meets the requirements of the Johnson family. " He goes on to state "To require a smaller house, would not meet the Johnsons ' needs and would be unreasonable." And , he further states "The proposed house is not unlike • similar house sizes in the neighborhood. " - ` a Comments : As mentioned above, the requirements of the Johnsons 11• are only very briefly described as 1000 SF living space on the • . ; s main level , and 2000 SF overall . Considering that the proposed • structure includes a daylight basement, the overall living area 1 g ,%w; .; (not counting the 364 SF walk-under deck and the 400 SF garage) comes to about 2600 SF, which significantly exceeds the 2000 SF . , , , ; living area desired , and the 364 SF deck proposed far exceeds the 182 SF deck minimum needs stated in the original application . If one were to concede those needs (although unsubstantiated) , it is still evident that a three level house can be constructed within the existing Code requirements , q (without variances) which will ' meet those stated needs, and would appear to invalidate the applicant' s assertion that a smaller house (than the one • a,. proposed) would not meet the owner' s needs. As regards his statement that the proposed house is not unlike r similar house sizes in the neighborhood, review of Exhibit C • points up that only one other of the fifteen neighboring houses (Lot No . 6000) has three floors ( the lowest being a daylight basement) , and the Lot 6000 house has a 1530 foot SF base plan " bei . . :. o ( footprint) as compared to the 1806 SF of that proposed for Lot • 5700 . Both numbers include walk-under decks and garages. ' Further , the lot coverage of tho 8 , 985 SF lot is but 17 , 03% , . .: .•,'., 0 `,A*1. 4 . • • • City of Lake Oswego • Planning Department , . February 25 , 1995 Page 8 • • • • This is poor comparison indeed. It is also difficult to • • rationalize the applicant' s assertion of comparability with � ` ' neighboring house sizes when the proposed house has nearly 1000 SF greater total area than the 2 ,497 SF average for the 15 houses considered. It is even more difficult to rationalize the • applicant' s claim of comparability in size when one considers that, of the sixteen houses (including the one proposed for Lot 5700) , the second largest of the 16 is proposed to be constructed • on Lot 5700 , the fifth smallest lot of the sixteen . In otherwords, eleven of the sixteen lots are larger than No . 5700, while the house proposed to be built thereupon is the second largest of the 16 . The only one of the 16 houses of greater total SF area is built on three adjoining 50 ' lots with a total lot “No. 5300) area of 16 ,478 SF. rx, .• • Applicants 1/28/95 Letter , Cont' d: In the same letter , the '44 •. • applicant states "Available plans of less width are scarce• . . . " Comment: As addressed herein above, and as indicated in Exhibit • B, there are a considerable number of available plans of thirty (30) feet width, and I found some of 28 ft and 26 ft widths. I am not suggesting the latter , but merely indicating that the ' applicant' s argument in this regard would seem insupportable . • • Summary: In summary of the above , it is respectfully submitted that: • - the applicant has not convincingly demonstrated that denial of the requested variances would either work a hardship on him or the owners , or that the variances are necessary to 1' . make reasonable u`se of the property. - the information provided herein above and within the attached exhibits demonstrates that: o a contemporary home of more modest size than that proposed in the application can be constructed on Lot No . • 5700 within the side setback and area coverage specifications of the City' s Zoning Code and adequately satisfy the minimum needs of the owner as expressed in the application . o the construction of the house, in accordance with the proposed dimensions , would not be in accord with the expressed intent of the City' s Comprehensive plan that small homes be built on small areas . I. 4414 H ` ✓. t.1•r t ty 15 .'IGi . • ` 4,4, .. rvi r:"..•to +14''., • H ,tlp t ,1 • City of Lake Oswego Planning Department . February 25 , 1995 r•,• Page 9 II o much of the demographic data upon which the applicant bases his assertions is either erroneous or appears skewed to support the application . 01 o the only larger house in the referenced listing of houses (Exhibit C, Page 3) is one existing on a lot three times as large as Lot No. 5700. The total area of the proposed structure is 37% larger than the average for the existing neighborhood houses, while the lot area is 31% less than the average of the other lot areas. o the proposed house is more than 914 SF larger than the only other 3 level house in the neighborhood , and 925 SF larger than the average house in the neighborhood . F• ' o the requested combined sides setback of 16 feet is 25% less than the average minimum actual combined sides setback within the neighborhood of 20 ft, and the weighted y' t '•'I ' average combined sides setback of 16 . 9 feet of the proposed structure is 44% less than the 30.4 feet of the existing homes in the neighborhood. ',; . o it is certainly feasible for the applicant to scale down the proposed structure to meet City Code without loss to any significant degree of functional use, while preserving the livability of the neighborhood. In conclusion , the City of Lake Oswego' s Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan places the burden of proof upon the applicant .' ;. regarding his contention that the variances are needed to , ' preclude unnecessary hardship and to be able to make reasonable use of the property. It is believed that the information and comments provided herein above clearly illustrate that such a case has not been successfully made by the applicant, nor is it likely that such a case could be made under the existing circumstances . The City changed the side yard setback and area 1.' coverage requirements of the Code for the specific reasons that . • this letter addresses. We have already had more than enough •: • overbuilding of the lots along Lakeview Boulevard. . Your sine 1 . ' ' • George L. Page r 4242 Lakeview lvd . • (503) 635-2658 ,Y .• I v 1 ,. 't11 � I 1 0 :.',.:.,•',, �� J' APPENDIX A I , • V ' \ Purpose of Appendix A: j III' . F {:: - to demonstrate that contemporaryhouses can be small . ` •� r F } .; ° Information re Appendix A: - Titan Properties is a developer in Washington County, OR, which has built several major subdivisions in that county in ` . ' the recent past. Titan has offered a spectrum of very attractive, well built, and well appointed small and medium sized Lf4„.r.', contemporary" homes varying from 1240 square feet to "'k"y4` ''' J`d°'" feet (1640 SF to 2239 SF when countingag400 SF garage) as square :, as `z ,�r1'y,,„< indicated on pages 2 and 3 of this exhibit. - The development for which the following pages were prepared is located near the Portland Community College Deerfield Campus off Suuset Highway. - Page 2 is a listing of options one could select when contracting to have the home built. S'F:9:.'�.�:.x<�1tAJ V ;F;; . - Page 3 is a flyer for one of the Titan homes that was tom ; , for sale after construction . 1. `I . F ,1 Appendix A Page 1 of 4 k y I , ` .,i { l,. DEERFIELD ,, BASE PRICE LIST PLAN # DESCRIPTION BASE PRICE j 1240 3 Bedroom 2 Bath, Ranch style f` 1487 3 Bedroom 2 1/2 Bath, 2 Story, 2 Car Garage $97,900 N, I 1510 3 Bedroom 2 1/2 Bath, Tri-level, 2 Car Garage $100,900 1600 3 Bedroom 2 1/2 Bath, 2 Story Contemporary $103,900 1677 3 bedroom 2 1/2 Bath, 2 Story, Kitchen. Nook $108,400 j 1800 4 Bedroom 3 Bath, 2 Story Contemporary $111,900 1836 4 Bedroom 3 Bath, 2 Story Contemporary $113,900• ° 1839 4 Bedroom 3 Bath, 2 StoryOpen Stair Contemporary $113,900 BASE PRICE INCLUDES LOT COST BASE PRICE INCLUDES: Sliding , 0 glass door, concrete patio, brocade ceilings, electric range, dishwasher, disposal, energy efficient gas water heater, . I ° energy efficient forced air gas (80%+) furnace, hose bib front and rear, custom oak veneer cabinets, double stainless steel kitchen sink, metal entry copper hot & cold water door, •. pipes, P P � energy efficient R-30 insulation in ceilings, R-11 ' • insulation in walls, R-19 under floor, plumbing pipes wrapped to Pp code, R-5 ➢ . insulated duct work, insulated windows, beautiful carpet with upgrades available, 20 year asphalt shingle roof, your choice off exterior color. Due to • slope in the lots access stairs may be required. Some models may have outside vented range hoods. See your Titan representative for options that may add a personal touch to your new home. Models display some of the options available for your viewing. Please ask your sales representative about them. lil ALL }HOMES i ARE ]�'�:T�,. HIl�� WITH A A© YEARI-H r OI�IIEOWNEiS WARRANTY. PRICES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE Form date: February 11, 1992 il, • „ 1 . Id/44244414? & . . Rt.pe GO ,, ° 1 a ".S a "• - ° r i ` 1 _... ' EXHIBIT TITAm PROPERTIES CORPORATION PLAN NO. ' ',, 1 - OPTION PRICE LIST • ?' DEERFIELD BLDG NO f BASE PRICE OF HOME ,� KITCHEN, FAMILY,POWDER ROOMS Standard Range ' Electric range, dishwasher, disposal Add 285 Range - electric self clean - Model 8 Brushed crome range top, with black front Add 1000 Gas range Model '--- ' Add 510 • Gas range slide in self clean Model 263 4 Gas fuel line Microwave space maker - add $140 for circuit 263 90 Plumbing for ice maker 985 Euro style custom cabinets 215 _._______ • Oak self edge B5 Standard .` Stainless steel •. Y Sink -- Enamel coated steel various colors � Sink - Kohler Lakefield - White $270, Color $350. . . __ � � , LIVING ROOM / DINING ROOM 2495 Brick fireplace (approx 5' wide mantel atl1600h• plan - ad 595 Fireplace brick face to ceiling see + Nonmasonry fireplace w/ tile face (tile allow 125) • 1350 Raised brick hearth (4 bricks high) 410 ' Two story masonry fireplace - additional flu cost . . 360 ' Gas log lighter Wood stove alcove - single story without stove 2890 . ;, } 1 r.. MASTER BEDROOM & BATH - ""� 335 � ' Ai ; Skylight (2x2) 252 Shower doors - opaque glass (add $89 for clear) . • • ' 252 `4"r ' r l -,�r ; re. Second sink in bathroom where possible 690 Y 'a, ' Vaulted ceiling 690 Optional bathroom window 'a,4�.��'.w 1r MAIN BATH KF «,.. ,, `, Standard Tub or shower225 Shower door w/tub - opaqUe glass (clear add $82) 335 Skylight (2x2) 335 Optional bathroom window DEN/THIRD & FOURTH BEDROOMS 1 . • • �___— r. ' Prices & materials are subject to change without notice prior to written J agreement . A 0 ss:' \,f I ...— a ri • 1 . i x t • I • , ,� ,r I'• f 1L. I r iil} l , ,.'• ,• _ 1.,....t., , ' 1. 1 ...14,!i.'l• I 1, . E Li.; 5341 N.W. DEEFIRa.D WAY PORTLAND, oP.EGON (Sunset con-idor, FEET . SCE: $116,500 , 1.g, . ,; . ▪ 1487 sQUARC ,,�a, , . COVERED WALKWAY . SKYLIGHTS AND VAULTS • 2.5 ATI1ROC�IS WITH OAK CABINETS . WIRED FOR CABLE TV AND PEDN S ' ▪ 3 BEDROO ER.MS - MAST HAS SAY WINDOW AND SEPARATE BATH f • LWVL`VG11f)CM HAS FINER-ACE AND BAY WINDOW • GOURI�T KITCHENS OAK CABINETS AND ICE . ia' PLUMBING NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH BRICK CHI 1NEY AND BRICK AND BRICK DETAIL • • TOTALLY LANDSCAPED a ;.1.1e park is not far away and the schools are excellent. f ' I 4. r 1 • • I' ; A , 1• i • • iti /,a/ig /° '6 / ► , i j . • . - . APPENDIX 13 f I IM1 � lJ . f N ' ,. Purpose of Appendix B: to provide a sampling of the numerous proPessionally produced house plans for contemporary homes of thirty feet width , :•:� in dispute of the applicant' s claim to the contrary. • u Note: More examples of such house plans can be obtained from any number of local architects and construction contractors , as well from major book stores within the metropolitan area . • ti Appendix B g ob,, t Page 1 of 4 ,,,,: • I0i „ . • y' ' • .'d .a '' -~ •. •1•_t}M1F '14,a I�$'oaf +a' n ' - _ +l q.s , -+�1 a1• ,,. • 't - L.M. BRUINIER & P.3! "IATES , 12' ' W, BERTHA, :,�'D. ,.. :, ,d'..±'d r',..'to4 r'. ,I 'I PO` '' AID, OREGO;�! 97219 aN.'L A 'y • Oda 24&•3022'FAX(5031246.7G77 �� • PS w , G ' R , • ,, i.. ...04.4` . ' • ,,,,-74..ar A* r,',A.....• ,4,,,,41...,.0.40.4„i„.... . , , ,,,, it...,. ,,,,t. . , te • II 1 5�.•, "` zI k , ,,, I'1, ,''• w ', t r . ✓0i' .!4 C rii �� J"s. J NO. 9 PLAN O 109t3 ''• '' ' • • i � , ; �� ,�- ye `' 30' s 0' WIDE •. ? • " = � 5 9' 0' DEEP ' :r r .,•` ` "��- r "' ;,•0.4r.'N..+,iy .{¢,„.,. 'i: IP 882 SQ. FT. 1ST. FIR. .�0 � !!^��,", "o•:��"'rA ''JEGK I r .S i �i i p N 1 SLE:�N�i�3_ ,.F�•.S w G 2 • ji.1 V MI_ " [I 1 d ,.. , � . II .1;I DINING tj 1' " .OAT N'a._ ( '!—'r ... --,,,- ,-,,•-rr ........ 1 . - , S.L P1NG'I ATTIC STORAGE JUL •.. ` It FOYER ,t� % ., i ...... \ ' .' 605 SQ. FT. 2ND. FIR. , J • 1 i , GARAt,,)` • • d 1 . • ?I • ' 4, Alia,4.4 I)4, 4(4 • , Pea " ' • UPPER FLOOR 740 SQ.FL .. '� MAIN FLOOR 704 SQ.FT. • �,v�� I ,,,. . • t e w , • • - /•~\ ')•.•,�-I 1 Y vs, • y'` N" ` ,, `) TOTAL AREA 1444 SQ,FT, YiJ + UY ill` Ct; .,{ 4.. 4a `f • • r}r. i,'r ; r. llt /1� lM v},`1 yYr•tf .f,44:, yc,' y ,a 'r..i .,, �.� /'�,,�MN�/1(ti^.,,.lYd•( -� t`l },�t+,��Y'1 .:i• . •,[� S .1. '' "'Is 1iei {.I ''� •r Il 1 � � • • �yyt,nY + ;MM,..,;,,,,.,yi+r�+s ,\.r✓_w'��, r .• � �b+ + O /i�;tr ';4 ,,+• ,f 1�5 n 1 * ;., w.r>;�r"�`iM �.r.....,,a..,:e�.✓ +..'"s✓+• +' r `//y' tt 'IW� r ,I 5^�,; LI �f :I� �,y� , � 1 f /��'.'' s,I J_fi• r � a `•r t �'y j/ •^ ' • • '' . fj �u. 11t<� Yi,. 1 I d'°- Ir-•. �i�+•.,► -,'•�jaf .tt''I?'t jY' ' 1 �. '�' t�tY� .I •k 1 Y1, r .,.1 qv,:,.1�� I �� H I iP N i w ! t •/ t 1 rt4 I ,rtilj .l.K, II p tfo .:"'^' ...r r�•',,.c t:l'.r«L+S' ..�.. - I.t. �/.. t t 1 i' n fi • • r y •'� 1 ��j^ . �,`I � �U I L I.f r ' . T 4: 11,7^1N IM:t'.• •YM'N-•/'11 ( kt • 'II f� ��vltfr1 • ,,,,,„lig .r.,/y,..Fn,- ;,+ `�,?r ..,1 rt..„,,,Lt.,2i...-I !P, •;V\13 : 1.1'iv"),,.. moo b�l ,,• ?ft if h P. i\ r„•• 1 r� rn ,d It1I'1 ,nTfit r7: MvCll `.�.rl ,71.• . A�.'.. -�.N�1 {'I1 t'/ •'r `,�'•.i A' I.i T'�':•. ��,rM,�+f� 11 ,.. • ,• • :., J`.,SL_ . I' utir;11.4 •'•�,,i; r•, .�,a,. ' ,,,,r,,,:r t••, C..,.,J,IJ,, .).,.., .tf ' h MASTER BR.2 '4 30' -• wo A iti 4 ,O 104C X r?:0 1� a • gcii it W. °.i.l'/ , Q , LIVING L � DINING tw BR,3 rlrf x iio faro R in/h I tai � .4y+1 q,0 r ,Io '(....) lit R 1,4,1 r , f., : . • j N the M oi �! �� f . / • , 1 cc�r .. 0 COLLECTION AlA N MA CORD DIS1GN ASSOCIA1 ES,INC, • 1515 N.W 23rd Avenue • Portland,Qie on 97210 + (503)225-91b1 p mg CORD .. �. .._.�. a.�... .. _.... _ ..W.__..._� .. . .._ . . t. r, n ..�,•.'" • y y r•M; j .y •.rn` 1-, i•,, - ., 1{,... 1.1.4 n ' .4;'.•1. 1 1 • ;,'� a t' "x^ ,' �... a ' te ` 4. q r �.N. 'sk'r 5.� �r'1" •.i !.t 1 �IUJI n T`/. a s .."4 ,u..,'' �pa+:y,.,, .?r�.7u `'� 7"":'4` . _ •i i.Y L r i ' w gRll a w. r .�' i..., ' —pt.. • • ,{)IIKs • -; : ~n E L E V.'/'"�" , I . .,.1...-f� � /R .ram 1 DECK PATIO I ' 1 a srr • 1 v ,, ......m 1 I .. •••141.1C' 1 I'Utt• y.1'0410• I 015 SQ. FT. UPPER FLR. ' 'rear=� • i17 ;�,:,, / �. • L.M. pRUINIER & AS '''.",!?TE3 PLAN NO. E6625T 1:. . :'. 6ERTHi. .•.VD. 30'-0# WIDE gARAcE PO : :D, OREGON 97219 S1'—O DEEP (EXG F.P.) , (E i ,146.3O22.FAX(503)246.7677 • • .--`4 -w4‘,.i.1.*Th, • • i • MrX J3`4 � , .. fly. 440_ ,. .-;.., 041 5Q. FT. MAIN FIR✓• .m•` ...". -. 0.1 + • , • �r j ^ x r, : 1. . y �, � I '�' •..+ ..? : am ` . � ° t , » p � 4 r I IId. • 411 I • '.: , ' " jr-w, . W ELEVrD'yh�� 11 "• D , * 'k Inot20 11/411"1>lei 4/ 4I /IS 4•4 ' r, '‘ • 4 13 ' ' ', • �• ,•'x;1H 1.4 " ! - .RUMS • r 4 , +.. ••,r, t., . - ti 1 .h .1 ,a.• 1 • `*1•a i 1 APPENDIX C Purposes of Appendix C: Qr' - Page 2 is a copy of a page taken from the applicant' s Class I Variance application (File No. : VAR 18-94 (a-b) , and is provided herein to indicate where there are rather significant • I .: errors in the application supporting data . The pen and ink corrections on the page 2 schedule reflect careful review of • Clackamas County Property Tax files and are backed up by actual sightings and measurements in certain instances . , ' 1 - page 3 is the same information, corrected , and • poss ibly a more realistic in range of demographic data . the spectrum of existing homes referenced on page 3 is Ac' `: broader than that provided on page 2, in order to provide a , , •r possibly more balanced representation of neighborhood demographics. This is believed appropriate for : o it extends the frame of reference to the west of Lot No. 5700 equally distant to that provided by the applicant to the east, and ' .,' o it includes a greater spectrum of 501 lots for comparison purposes. Page 3 lists seven 50 ' • lots in addition to Lot No . 5700 , whereas page 2 addresses but four . - page 4 is included to provide ready comparison of the proposeddevelop:tent with just those lots from • ° fifty feet (50 ' ) in width. page 3 that are • • Appendi, C • Page l of 4 t • 1 { I 1 y ,, • r ... . E I' : 7N .... . 0 Tax Map 2E 1S 8CC H . 1,/ ; House Lot House Lot w Tax Map Address Lot Area Area Coverage Width Width , 5200 4350 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. 7392 s.f. 1568 s.f. 21.21% 40 ft. 50 ft. �, /608' ao 3' it,40' 9r /AV' Note 1 5300 4330 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. .1a3-79 ss.f. 24133.s.f. 2.S&% 49'1R. AM. • .Hotel 5400 4302 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. �j046's.f. 1137 s.f, aka 988 8 ft. • • 5500 4288 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. 5487 s.f. 2141 s.f. .36:62% ft. 50 ft. ` 1 t- SZa Ills' 2 aig, lie 5600 4272 S,W,Lakeview Blvd. ,56411 s.f. J.89Q s.f. ,33.49w/o ft, 50 ft. • e 5800 4242 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. 5807 s.f. 1541 s.f. 26.54% ft. eft. 1.;Y 1 , ( /04I* .1 a 9 3 b ifej 1 �t .,f fl y•... 5900 4224 S.W.Lakeview Blvd, ,,5id9ss.f. ..2580 s,f. 13�7a/o n. .S9'R. /510 .f. 0/%6J Note 2 6000 4212 S,W,Lakeview Blvd, 8985 s.:. ,1.3081.f. .19:OT% 40 ft. 75 ft, %, , Note 2 6100 4186 S.W.Lakeview Blvd, 9252 s.f. 13.19's.f, 14• % 48 ft. 75 ft, 23 6300 4146 S,W,Lakeview Blvd, 6409 s.f. .2036 s,f, 32.08% ft. Varies Note 2 6400 4138 S.W.Lakeview Blvd. $596 s.f. •L553 s:f, 1.8 07% 58 ft. .74;5 ft. . Note 2 6500 4104 S.W.Lakeview Blvd, 7980 s.f. _20 4 5.E .23.36`44 46 ft. IAT5-ft, Note 1; Lot is d. lots. Note 2; I,0t is 1,5 lots Note 3; Owner of subjcci property does not have the availability to purchase addtional •• ia�nd to increase the size of the lot in both area and width, , ' ,•. e. J i )• ' February 25 , 1995 " f Minimum Weighted Weighted House Maximum Average Actual Average • 1, ..‘ Got House Lot Area Lot g House House Total Total �, rs Go . House House Lot House Total No . Area (Base) Coverage Width Width Width Depth Areaof (2 Sides)ba (2 Sides)ba P Floors Setback Setback ., . .� 4 900 4398 10 , 629 SF 1624 SF 15 . 2E% 35 ft 24 . 2 ft 50 ft 67 ft 1624 SF 1 15 ft 25 . 8 ft • 5000 4370 7.0 , 843 SF 2070 SF 19 .09% 32 ft 29.3 ft 50 ft 74 ft 2070 SF 1 18 ft 20.7 ft r 5100 4368 9 , 767 SF 1989 SF 20 . 36% 37 ft 27 . 2 ft SO ft 73 ft 3410 SF 2 • �` � b 5200 4350 7 , 392 SF 1568 SF �1 . 21$ 40 ft 13 ft 22 . 8 ft 35 .0 ft 50 ft 60 ft 3104 SF 2 10 ft 15.0 ft • r � 5300 4330 16 , 478 SF 3033 SF 18 .41% 98 ft 70 . 8 ft 149 ft ' F 44 ft 4828 SF 2 �Il 51 ft 78 . 0 ft q 5400 4302 5, 363 SF 1137 SF 21 . 20% 35 ft 28 .9 ft 50 ft 60 ft 1137 SF 1 15 ft 21 .0 ft " ; 5500 4288 5 , 487 SF 1965 SF 35 . 81% 38 ft 29 .0 ft 50 ft 68 ft 1965 SF 1 12 ft 5600 4272 5 '613 SF 1735 SF 30 . 91% 38 ft 24 .0 ft 50 ft 71 ft 2500 SF 2 '''�r ' 11 ft 26.0 ft 5800 4242 5r807 SF 1541 SF 26 . 54% 41 ft 31 . 5 ft 57 ft 49 ft 2257 SF 2 16 ft 25 . 5 ft • 5900 4224 5 , 074 SF 1414 SF 27 . 87% 30 ft 24 .7 ft 43 ft 55 ft 2796 SF f _ 2 13 ft 18. 3 ft 6000 4212 8 , 985 SF 1530 SF 17 .03% 40 ft 29 .4 ft 75 ft 52 ft 2508 SF 3 35 ft 45 .6 ft 6100 4186 9 , 252 SF 1263 SF 13. 1:3% 48 ft 33.2 ft 75 ft 38 ft 2130 SF 2 27 ft 41.8 ft ti ; �: 6300 4146 6 , 409 SF 1148 SF 17 . 91% 33 ft 28 . 4 ft 51 'avg . 44 ' 2056 SF 2 1, 18 ft 22 .6 ft 6400 4138 8 ,727 SF 1609 SF 18 .43% 58 ft 45 .1 ft 74 .6 ft 36 ft . { 3049 SF 2 17 ft 29. 5 ft 6500 4104 7 , 980 SF 1208 SF 15 . 14% 40 ft 33 .6 ft 75 .4 ft 36 ft 2024 SF 2 +eragest 8 , 254 SF 1656 SF 21. 22% 43 ft 33 .9 ft 63 . 3 ft 55 ft 2497 SF 1. 8 20 ft 30 . 4 ft \ - 570A 5,722 SF 1006 SF 31.50% 34 ft 33.1 ft 50 ft 55 ft 3422 SF 3 16 ft 16.9 ft , :4_43dElle C410 0 0 . February 25 , 1995 '' ` Y, Minimum Weighted ; Weighted House Maximum Average Actual Average Lot House Lot Area Lot House House Total Total House House Lot House Total No . No . Area (Base) Coverage Width (2 Sides)b (2 Sides)b �r '9 Width Width Depth Are�;� � of +�;� P .._., Floors Setback Setback ,� , , 4900 4398 10 , 629 SF 1624 SF 15 . 28% 35 ft 24 .2 ft 50 ft 67 ft 1624 SF 1 15 ft 25 .8 ft 5000 4370 10, 843 SF 2070 SF 19.09% 32 ft 29. 3 ft 50 ft 74 ft 2070 SF 1 $ 18 ft 20 .7 ft 5100 4368 9 , 767 SF 1989 SF 20 . 36% 37 ft 27 . 2 ft 50 ft 73 ft 3410 SF 2 13 ft 22 ,8 ft °' b260 4350 7 , 392 SF 1568 SF 21.21% 40 ft 35.0 ft 50 ft 60 ft 3104 SF 2 10 ft 15 .0 ft '. ' a 5400 4302 5 , 363 SF 1137 SF 21 . 20% 35 ft 28 . 9 ft 50 ft 60 ft 1137 SF 1 15 ft 21 .0 ft 1 .k 5500 4288 5 , 487 SF 1965 SF 35.81% 38 ft 29.0 ft 50 ft 68 ft 1965 SF 1 12 ft 21 .0 ft 5600 4272 5 ,613 SF 1735 SF 30 . 91% 38 ft 24 .0 ft 50 ft 71 ft 2500•� SF 2 11 ft 26 .0 ft Averages :9 7 , 871 SF 1727 SF 23 . 41% 36 ft 28 .2 ft 50 ft 67 .6 ft 2259 SF 1 .4 13.4 ft 21.8 ft 5700 5,719 SF 1806 SF 31.58% 34 ft 33.1 ft 50 ft 55 ft 3422 SF 3 16 ft 16.9 ft 1 Lot 5700 comparative 27% 5% 35% 6 . 7% 17% same 18 . 6 52% 110% 19% difference less greater greater less greater less 2 or greater with average however however greater greater 4 . 9` less house on 4 of 7 are 4 of 7 are 50 ' wide but 1 level lots but 1 level , • .y t k ,' r•. t i.,'.0, L. ..: I .j t' ' r . v tY. • L p� bra i�q� ._ top 71995 0�LAKE f75WEGG s : ''- :,..,0;f:A.' CITY g(ksvnlopmeM 1e1 of Planning February 25 , 1995 Planning Department " Attn: Ms . Elizabeth Jacob r � City of Lake Oswego ' 380 "A" Avenue Re: E'ile No: VAR 18-94 (a-b) 1 'i `. Lake Oswego , OR 97034 .tv Dear Ms. Jacob: In my letter dated February 25 , 1995 , regarding th(b above referenced file, it was stated that certain of the data 1 7-7� _�.,< information submitted by the app licant., and upon which the ; '! assertions within the application were based , were erronious. No supporting official documentation was provided with my letter to support my statements to that effect, and it has occurred to me that such documentation might be of some assistance in the Planning Department Staff' s decision making process, so I am forwarding herewith .copies of current County records to that ; r . 0 effect. Yours sincerely, :.. George L. Pag ` 4242 Lakevie Blvd. . (503) 635-2658 y: v. • ♦ yI tr Ate a . �; r ,r 4 F 1• . } I EXHIBIT a - • ! 1 ERTY ADDRESS�•- l` v . I ZONING I USE , AX CODE SP-GISTS.' DATE PRINTED I CLASS I PCS I AREA a I 04350 LAKEVIEW BLVD LO 0 0211-0 04/03/85 1714 00 LO5 21EOSCC05; t', / .• -v .i AallITMSNT POcTOR44 Ty UNIT AM).UNIT A Li Ci IJ P i , 4TF 95 3/89 SIZE LOCJYR. SPEC.CLAS! ADJ. COND, PS PRICE PRICE .r won, MALUE DVEllI AT) 3006920 11M h S 1 X =100 100 9125000.00 125000 .30 1.00 125000 USN 0138421 R1SI3MU S X - 100 7.60 7.60 1536 11674 B 447 LAKE VIEW VII R1513MFPF S X - 100 8.30 8.30 1152 9562 B LT 484 R15APPL U X - 100 1220.00 1220.00 1.00 1220 B UCL 171-152-58-01 • S15FP2 U X = 100 3300.00 3300.00 1.00 3300 B .a** o.a** .i.* * R15HTFA S X -• 100 1.15 1.15 2144 2466 B SENIOR TAX DEF A, R15CPCXT S X 1065 = 65 6.20 4.03 357 1439 F DEFERRED 1981 J PAVING S X 1085 C= 85 1 .25 1 .06 225 239 F PAVING S X 1080 A= 80 1.10 .88 1600 1408 F �: S RECOVER S X 1065 G- 65 6.00 3.90 5S7 2328 F • T R15PLMB U X A= 100 1350.00 1350.00 1.00 1350 6 ' k •• NA DECK S X 1080 A= 80 4.50 3.60 84 302 F e ` ' ' E PATIO S X 1080 A= 80 1 .50 1.20 224 269 F N WDFENCE X = 450 F' + 450.00 450.00 1.00 r T OFFICIAL Type DATE S R15ROOF S X A= 100 f .50 .50 1568 784 6 REconO IneL, Mo, Yr. Ft1SCPROOF S X 1065 A= 65 .50 .32 357 116 F 645-1140C1;07/87 `' •+ 645.13 41 1:00/00 y I 1 1 1 1 BUILDING PEP ' LAND LAND-ADJ INCOME USE SP.-OLDS FEATURES BLD-ADDS UNITS Numbef Dile. 1 ` ,125000 6551 30356 +' Clore Unlu Urlte 9oee map�!: Ali Roll •I Yew Sup Ago Norm Obw. Puns. Sa l I%R O, Mp4 Cael Nei I Depr,Kul Cool Medea!Helot Room Salim Pelt !elaY 1 efr Dept. Pfry. , R1E 000 100 100 28. 70 28.70 58 58 31 100 65 100 65 75358 48983 1.0 10 4 ,•. Deeer:plIon Pais square Feel Rspl.Cast MKT.INDEX: 1.0 0 IMP.SY/DATE: 95 3/8 9 SCALE: I /0 0.5 6 ELEMENTS CODS CONS BAS 100 28.70 1568 45002 LIVING...AREA 3104 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CNST GP:00 t3MF .00 1536 *---16-28+--12-* FOUNDATION OICONCRE r� JJd ..�/ +--12--• BMF ! EXTERIOR 0I�AVG PL' '.•4 /v e : 44'4 lad is-4eS>c i(i ! ! ROOF r � O GA6LE� ! 4 R00r COVER 02WOOD SI � � (',QAS�) rwa.�:dof s 1.1 FLOOR! PART�TYONSR 01DRYUALI ;� T 6L -P /k.t.�St�. -4' 17' 7`0 •7` 31 ! • G r ',` ,� r�.d oAPPLIANCES OIOR OW I , D �tlr` / 'F.-- �-e- BASE m PLUMBING 03THREE t 1 ', - L ¢W ! 48 E RN-Ora-a I NG - 1:17rOR C`L CT • 1 68 ,J,,, ; ! FIREPLACES 03S•[ACKE[ E I AUXIl1Agy AREA5 � Biii� / _' ` 4 BUILDING DIMENSIONS , r f ! - 0 0 I3A3 C27 s12 E13 N48 W12 NO2 W16 .t� it y Op. �` .- " A S07 BAS W12 S31 .. BMF E27 S12 lJ�t@' "� X 27' • r - _.. ' , ' I l l? N4N W28 SO5 VHF W12 S33 .. O3/ ! ! _ ... ... .... ""• ,_ L + 1MPRVRESIDENTIAL C,' 'y"+,tAy� �j7 12 LAND 19/iir.1.0 d . ' o ! PARCEL w ,� 1 ,• J /j�S , `' `, I y .907021L0 04/03/89 1714 QO L(� "`I R21E08CC09'1 1 j 266 ' LAKEV I E41^ BLVD LO ,• :�; ••. ,0` ALEXANDRO ` { ic`JUar�ecNr Qtll 'UNIr it "AIDJD.ui01v.,. f'`,�I,t +'si+4} • v' t?+�'°' -_ - , .,4 IWRI ,:..�, rr Y •. ,,' c' K tlK1Y8.ti �' ` .s?v u�q,,•P' °c'�`��°4�35 50 18498 :tart► 1 95 3/89 4►P '' PRICE QIZE'' LOCJYA:.!SPEC.CLASS ADO COND. PRICE' =1QQ 100 �100000.00 100000.00 1e019 100000 $$SN 0138455 11M H S 1 X '` ', R24FP1 U X = 100 1450.00 1450.00 1.00 1450 D �I97 LAKE V1Ck� V 7 • R14ATU S X = 100 7.40 7.40 416 3078 B LOT 489 R14HTFA S X - 100 1.05 1.05 1725 1811 0 MCL 371-1.41-4040 i ' R14GRU S X 1050 = 50 8.19 4.09 240 983 F e,aaas.000 .aoaa ►a DECK S X 1040 A= 40 4.50 1.80 408 734 F BOAT HOUSE X = * 3000.00 3000.00 1.00 3000 F �'�' R14APPL U X = 100 • 150.00 150.00 1.00 150 B U 4ua Y i 1 ,,1‘' '_M ' otPia pd ' (,hTE riN ��..., "•'^ Ins I.fir 1 V4 �'• ' 650-629 100 '00 r ( LDIPI)P Number Dots I LAND LAND-ADJ INCOME I USE SP-BLDS FEATURES DIED-ADDS UNITS 100000 4717 G489 . Do ,n. owe, Bataan So! ' a Claaer : +"` .e aL;) pro d i t Adt.Beta.r;. Asa •Ci� I Ot+ov.r� If,h.®. .1,RopL Coo!IIeM � PL . R14 000 100 100 24.60 24.60 40 40 49 100 35 100 35 48924 17123 1.0 5 2 Rate Square Peel Rail.Cool MO(Y.INDEX. 1 1 •0 0 GIMP.SY/DArlt195 3/19 SCALE: 1/0 0.4 2 " ' !ELEMENTS ~' '' • , (.ONs , , wro« 60 1725 42435 LIVING-AREA 2141 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CNST GP:00 BAS 100 24. a-a8-* -54 a FOUNDATION 0 CONC1 k• ATU ..00 240 ! E:XTCRI0R- - - 0;BEIlC '. - •. ! ! ! • e GRU .00 24 0 i 1i/ ! ! 1 ! P)OF 01 G ABL•t 4K 4//1S'f'`�1"/ l4l"4 ! ! ! 1 RUOF_ C�J_UER _ 0]COMMIS .Up��-' ' tt -e. y G� + �f'f'd0�' j'! r ! FLOOR-C_D,VER^ 0 •CARyP H i, (/ ru� Lts! it 7.1...2 /7,.4(r a/�I��orfY ! i 47 PwA R T l 1 I�O N S � ' O I D R Y 1.0 L '-. /' / /Y.ow'r a Ai'PLI ANCES U 1)7/4Co 4, /7/ 1 �JNvv.�/d/ SIR ! 52 52BASE • C hu' Co /2�5,1 0 "`'4� P_LU_MNBYNG_ , OIONE t A eaa ? ' �y' ..t�' 4125 ` ! ! ! ! EHEAi_/000LING • 0 FORC(I,0 A .1 ! • ! F 1REPLAC S o .. 0l S41NG1,AUxtRE S 2 e, E L O DIMENSIONS ! ! ! .. TA. BAS COG ATU E08 N52 N08 S52 .. ! ! ! a-126 • 0 ' BUILDING 7 BAS Eli N01 E 03 N04 GRU S20 112 X-ATU17--4"a ! �- - -- ~ , N20 U12 .. HAS EDO N47 W34 S52 20 20 IHPRV RESIDENT LAND 1AL f - �"1 .. !IGRU!. , ..40 ..:.. PARCEL EL . ^ � t Aakm s tau 'tY APpwk 3Ai= 6C 7�D AREA ,•«. . w „ r 4 01 ) i V t ZONING I USE AX CODE SP•DISTS.I DATE PRINTED I CLASS I PCS I AREA O'r '' 1 i 4224 c' 1 AKEVIEW BLVD LO 0 21LO 04/03/89 1714 00 L055 IE OACC059 , '",.' di,' ', a .. '.% . , 12. AC JUSTMEJ{'f P.�CTORO ...... { Y •t ' UNIT ADJ'D UNIT I1.7l rl`bUN Li ' a 95 3/89 •t•41.'r; SIZRI!1' .;d,:1 LOOJYEI. SPEC.CLAn ADJ. COND. PE.. PRICE . PRICE , UNIT$ VALUE DosEr.N i 3007987 is 1119 H S 1 X =100 100 . 95000.00 95000.00 1.00 95000 USN 0138497 '' 9 ' P14ATF S X = 1.110 17.60 17.60 216 3802 B 447 LAKE VIEW VIL R14USF S X - 100 18.30 18.30 1166 21338 H PT LT 493 k' t'' 1 R14APPL U X = 100 • 700.00 '700.00 1600 700 B aCL 171 -142-38-04 • a R14PLMO U X B= 100 750.00 750.00 2000 1500 B ******e*N *•***.** R14FP1 U X - 100 1450.00 1450.00 1.00 1450 B SENIOR 7AX DEF A.J Ita R14HTHP S X = 100 2.15 2.15 2000 4300 , B DEFERRED 1981 ',: f: :R14GRU S X 1057 = 57 8.19 4666 216 1008 F ,•r J DECK , S X 1075 A= 75 4.50 3.37 406 1370 F •;'(, �r PATIO S X 1070 A= 70 1.50 1.05 300 315 F ' PRYING S X 1050 A= 50 1.10 .55 702 386 F A BBO X • 200.00 200.00 1. Y+•� 'i 00 200 F • `�11i - PORCH S X 1057 8= 57 12.00 6.84 152 104C F ' R14R0OF S X A= 100 .45 .45 1198 539 B ._„ • .fir►tii‘ 1 R14GRROOF S X 1057 A= 57 .45 .25 216 55 F RYPICI gyp DATE 1 "_. Xtr1 j. j _ ma, Yr. ,I �589290 I'00/00 ' BUILDING PERI. 9,' Number Date LAND LAND-ADJ INCOME USE SP-BLDS FEATURES RLD-ADDS UNITS ' 95000 ,. , 4374 33629 coruL To ei Ya•i Niel; 'A RuN Y•ar"Ill' Lott ,, Unb Un�te " .• �'.. . +tiro 4m d;nM N1111i � t. ,r„ wens. 11:53 16�LQ. i R•p.Cost New Dep.IIepL Coal Stories I.--- I Rome I he Mt. `Oaue R14 000 100 100 27.20 27.20 38 38 51 100 40 100 40 66215 26486 160 6 3 D.eertpttoe Mail _J.Igursoo Peel' '1 `RIL C•at:•,' ,MKT.INDEXt 1.0 0 RIP.BY/DAM 95 3/89 SCALE. 1,00651 ELEMENTS • CONIT.1 f r :1 BAS 100 27.20 1198 32586 LIVING-AREA 2580 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CNST GP : 00 . .'. , . USF .00 1166 * --. 2b-- FOUNDAT_ION 0 C_ONCRET I �' GRU .00 216 - ! USF ! EXyEl120R� a-SNAKE ,' • •' ATF .00 216 16 16 ROOF __ _ 0 FLPT _ • /1/OC/ `/d L'Y.e 'd'�' ri4-d' ! ! ROOF (COVEN_ _ 0 'Ili DOD_SII ;p FLOOR COVER O 'CARPET I. ' �ll '�� `�7/ l/ SF wl P H'fl fI- NS - 0 .P'LASTER d /l9�!"s�' 44 't. ��'�tl) /G °I;'K ! •-8-a ! APPe1_ANCE S U I - � " - . 18 ! ! 14 �>rY04.aesuL?6 6' 4 , 44 ! v PLUMBINGr 0 .T_WD BAT( '' !BASE EHEAT/COOLING O�HEA fPUl� AUXrLURY AREAS a 216 DIM d - _ 1198 ��//_� f /It¢�/- f 9 I P FIREPLACES 0 SINGLE,. SUILQINO DIMENSIONS /u•P OM Sc text- " O-10-• 27 0 • 0 I - " - ' • ' BAS S29 E26 N15 E02 N14 WO1 N16 ((// ` to /IQ�S� ,t�dlS !GRU I ! 15 �1 1426 BAS S16 Wf O 1 .. USF S 18 E I 0 .1..,,.Q 74v ,�.�/ /f//4/r1;1 11 ! ! 0 t 18 1, L GRU W12 S18 E12 N18 .. - . '� r, ATF E 08 N27 W 08 USF S11 ATr c mils 1B 1 A'rF ! ! IMPRV RESIDENT IAL CA; ii . USF E16 ',*----+26-16--* LAND •• N15 E02 NA 1101 N19 W26 S19 USF I ! PARCEL ,. ' . er1r,1 1 l '..1:rV -'1 I Y -• N 11 • h.h 4Y t 1 'I 1!' .ha t . 04W12 ,...' LAKEVIEW4 BLVD �"` ' Y' ♦. LO J07021L0 04/03/89 1714 CO L055 R21E08CCO60 t:' ° DESCRIPTION _ A JUOTMSNT CTOR ` + T • UNIT ADJ'D,UNIT 4,� Y''tTF 95 3/89 �.:!' " SIZE LGC✓YR.�MlC.CIAI4 ADJ.�COND. YPa PRICII PRICiif UNIT$ VALUE D uo , i llh M S 1 X � N a 38502TT�CUG =100 100 *120000.00 120000.00 1.00 120000 447 LAKE VIEW VIL 4` R14. =TF S X = 100 14.90 14.90 578 8612 B LT 494 PT LT 495 R1iKU S X = 100 8.30 8.30 •` R14BM"U �C, S X 800 6640 B UUCL 171 -154-39-04 '•` 1 of = 100 5.20 5.20 7 R1+4s".PPL U 600 3120 d so'.arrd.rrr.wa*• X = 10 0 1095.00 1 095.0 0 1.00r_;,,.,,,` ti R14cP1 U X 100 1095 B CORR 83-2A5 BE 82 ,,�;t; ,k} A R14HTFA S X = 100 1450.00 1450.00 1.00 1450 B ; ,., <:� R14GRU S X 1065 - 65 1.05 1.05 1678 1762 B �;° . : 7.48 4 .86 a j DECK S X 1070 A= 70 330 1604 F 4.5 0 3.15 660 2079 F v ` ' HOT TUB ' X = 2600. 00 2600.00 1. r R1gk00F S X 00 2600 F , , A= 100 .45 .45 800 360 B ' v1 R14GRROOF S X A= 100 .45 .45 330 149 F C RI4FLHB U X A= 100 1200.00 1200.00 1.00 1200 B • trba ud , ♦ S 1'"' RECORD`,` o� DATEis s 82-31575 I00/00 s, II,t `A.Ni LAND 'h t''`2 + It BUILDING►ERI 12LAND00 LAND-ADJ INCOrE I SE SP-BLDS FEATURES BLD-ADDS UNITS Number Dale 7. , 1 4 tt� r 1 lA 1l 3,ti,1`.41'�,t t 6432 24239 yU" i' s Cle•e CUekO Ue 11 NaN R•4tl. I pMw. /111.G. i ii.), .,t 1,. m P o' Deer,Reel Cool Multi N•IpN Roon. tea Pet Satre ,', '' r,e, 1 ; 1414 000 100 100 30.90 30.90 39 39 50 100 45 100 45 48959 22032 1.0 8 D..aac� RN• • uu•Fed jr t' R•pk Ceel.♦1� ' MKT,INDEX! 1.Q 0 IMP.MY i DATE: 95 3 J 8 9 SCALE: 1/0 0.6 6 °" , BAS 100 30. 90 800 24720 LIVING-AREA 2178 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL � I°�I�NTo CODE coNar ATF . 00 578CNST GP :00 * 40 * FOUNDATION OICONCRET BMF .00 800 * 40 * EXTERIOR 04BEVEL ` GRU .00 330 ! 4 ATF ! ... _ _ t Pole `44,„,,,r 7 A c/a,/i t' �•Hu•t i(t.b'a 6-€97r) 4 ROOF OlGABLE 5`�fs SF, �, � �,9,� Bc0lF a� N ebte BASE 4 �. .. _ ROOF COVER 02WOOD SH -q FLOOR^COVER�� 03CARPET �eu,c, .13osx-r/ ;m ld�u)� u /9TF S9�'�f _ ��urJ 7 ! _ ! PARTITIONS 02PLASTER w 044 .G�'yb7t,Lert do ... P /7 a'S f's ..rvt c c�- r-..__17-• _ *BMF:'----17----* APPLIANCES 010R DW H �' . , '. 4/vo SF torakt..0.�✓a2'e1,k taw a.o6 ig►C044. ,+) X` 15-• •-* -40*- PLUMBING 02TW0 BAT D S30 Dreo. $Op 32°S.fa�lgq/ ! ! EFI AT/COOLING 02FOfiCED AUXILIARY FIREPLACES 01SINGLE ' BUILDING DIMENSIONS / 6{.�LO�Y ! ! I A A3 E40 NO3 ATF N14 W40 S14 Ely /S'30s'f,: 22 22 OC r a`. 303 E06 NO3 ATF Eli .. BAS N17 ! ! • OC , �; L W4b 520 •s RMF E40 N20 W40 S20 � -- 4 ow CRU S22 E 15 N22 W15 •. alev� ! �I MPRV RESIDENTIAL CA �, }t �, ! GRU LA ND 4 1 0 . C, , G16.. 14IIda:L'� . . ,� . . . , a , .,. ; e ;� .. ,' AREAE • L III . -a ♦ d . v ` ., tTY ADOR - I,L,,... .. i 4 .. .."t�,• ` r, ?'. L ZONING USE tAx CODE s ` : o41H ,, u AKw ieLur� _ L O l Sp•bIS�$,I bRTE pRINi'Eb I OLAg I pdg ( A��pI DES.-•'g ION ACJUSTNIEN�t .;. T G 21 L d 0 41 b /B i 1�9 b 8 L b 'i �d�C C a�l 1 l = 95 3/89 I SIZE LOCJYR. JU T CLASS! Al.):. COND. YP UNIT ADJ'D.UNIT tG�OVE TF , ' n' '' 11 M. N $ 1 X [ PRICE PRIC[ tINITrD VALUE D ho =100 100 120000.00 120000.00 3A510 "` j R15bMU _ S X -� 100 1.®0 120000 447 LAKE VIEW VILL R15EPF S X8•60 8.60 915 7869 8 PLAT 5 rQ , R15FP1 U X = 100 8.80 8.60 730 6424 B -T 2-6 PT - ;: 100 1750.00 1750.00 OCL 1T1-152 49-Oq. RISPLME3 U X 1001. 00 1750 B e••••n• •a••••,e••.e I` x�x ' R15HTNLIE'B S X _ 500.00 500.00 1.00 , 100 1.35 500-8 OOPR SN 003113 ,,, k15GRU S X 1065 1•�5 1830 2471 8 PAVING S X 65 8.70 5.65 300 1697 F BOAT HOUSC 1070 A= 70 1 .10 .77 336 X259 F PATIO _ • 2000.00 2000.00 1.00 2000 F S X 1040 B= 40 7.50 3.00 ' R 15R0 OF S X A_ 108 324 F 100 i' R15GRROOF S X 'S0 •50 915 458 [i GREEN HSE 1065 A= 65 .50 .32 300 X 500.00 500.00 00 F l LAWN SPRINK X _ 1.00 500 F • - 500.00 500.00 1.00 500 F OFFICIAL RECORD [IniC L' Tppu DATE G etyr ` / [ Yk. } 360-149 I00/00 ,, : BUILDING PERMI LAND LAND-ADJ INCOME , SE SI'-BLOB FEATURES BLD-ADDS UNIT$ Number pale 7ypl y f 120000 R cIM. con. To11r 5378 18472 ;,i DAV I Unlle J wee Row I Ai.jai h,par wSl A®e I NDee I Fears. [o�. I!1,fl40. Reel Coil Nevi Dept. • I.15 000 10 0 100 � �� •C�1 ' 1 HsIpIN Ream I h0 A,er, I Bathe 33. 30 33.30 48 48 41 100 58 100 58 48942 L Oeecr•ollon Rule tgUire Feel Rep&Coil MKT.INDEX: 1•0 0 IMP.5y/DATE: 95 3/8 9 iCAlE. 1 /00.74 2 @ 38 6 1.0 9 2 '� ',: BAS 100 33. 30 915 30470 LIVING-AREA 1830 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ELEMENTS'---COD[ CONSTR1 I ' RAF .00 . ' ° GRUR F .00 30015 r -48 UNDT IO «00 •> �; q • FOUNDATION O1CONCRETE HFAF AJoYa ` .�.d.P 4.04, .Ps-srl,G S ° 1 EXTERIOR 0gFIEVEL , r 18 BASE ! ROOF 02NIP ROOF COVER 02WOOD SHI • w 21 FLOOR COVER 02HARCWOOD A• iai✓�r•-+1 /2 l S.-Sr „� I FAT fi 10lg f' _" `. 0]bA Y A L 1: A , p �✓✓-ge� • I APPLIANCES 0 0 X---`15----31 o r, '' {� ! PLUMBING 061r]/2 BA AUXILtApYAREA5 300 Date h15 I 3 ! EHEAT/COOLING IOHOT 61ATC I ! °w----17-` `- • FIREPLACES OISINGLC BUILDING DIMENSIONS , I • BAS C31 S03 C17 N21 W48 S18 .. 20 • 00 •• HMF C31 S03 C17 N21 W48 S18 •• 20 • 00 ; '� GRU S20 r 15 N20 W15 .. I ! , , IMPRV RESIDENTIAL CAN I ! ! 1, I GRU I LAND PARCEL e R • • ' 1 AREA � v r N,''•. r , a l A U rt-tF '` 4 ^ R1'Y ADDREs : V I ZONING I USE TAX CODE SP•DISTS.I DATE PRINTED I CLASS I PCS I AREA i C 0414 SW' LAKEV EW BLVD LO 007021LO 11 /09/87 1014 00 0007 R21E08CC063 ,.;t . I DESCRIPTION • AVU TMCNT PaCTORS T L.'t ; WILSON L S O N PAUL U L 9 2 10/8 7 � T UNIT ADJ'D,UNIT ,, �� ' f rt. SIZE•`•sE;;•• LOCJYR. SPEC. :ADJ. COND. PE":'' PRICE •%. PRIC4 UNITS .,•. VALUE Inn r uL�1L$ f325 36253 0 ' \ 10MARKETTOT 1 X =100 100 • 25000.00 25000.00 1 .00 25000 #SN 0138536 7 ''. '. '- \. R15USF S , X = 400 20.00 20.00 1148 22960 a 447 LAKE VIEW VIL R1SAPPL U X * 100 1220.00 1220.00 1 .00 1220 B LOT 498 � ' R15WSH/ F U X • 100 800.00 800.00 1 .00 800 8 #CL 101 -153�'69-04 ,.", K;' R15HTFA S X * :� " 100 1 .15 1 .15 2056 2364 B ****R*****+►,a+o*,R** i`-1r�' r , - R15PLM8 U X a 100 * 500.00 500.00 1 .00 500-H R15CPEXT -S X 1085 a -85 6.50 5.52 192 1061 F r ) DECK S X 1070 An - 70 4.50 3. 15 320 1008 F lit hY/ °.•4.7,, J PATIO S X 1085 An •85 1 .50 1 .27 392 500 F i ?'";,. • a �� OFFICIAL' Typo DATE • _ RECORD Inst I II�a Yv ) s+ ' f 67-03797 I100/00 1 '6 t -.. :, ' ,r,, BUILDING PEIII Number Dale Ty LAND LAND--AD., INCOME USE SP-BLDS FEATURES BLD-ADJS UNITS ' � ` 25000 - 2569 26844 �g ', cla«I I I ran Unlb n R Ilaalo`, 11"Ad.Ratjr"• 'Yetd"ill" 'AN D°^� VI' PWit.• late. %R.O. .41 Hopi.Deal Ittatr.i' Dap.Rept Meal,.. NMd u HelgM Rooms SM Pat I str % i i•e .41. R15 000 100 100 33. 30 33.30 69 69 18 100 85 100 85 57080 48518 1 .0 9 5 „ uD..ctlpdon Rafe Square Peal Rapl.•Coal'"'• MKT.INDEX: 1 •0 0 : IMP.BY/DATE: 92 1 0/8 7 scum:: 1 /0 0.6 3 ELEMENTS' . CODE ' _ CONSTI 1 BAS 100 33. 30 908 30236 LIVING-AREA 2056 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CNST GP:00 ' • USF .00 1148 * 25 * FOQINDATION .4P,ILR/FPO • ri ` 1 1J4& sr � M R9OF 4�HIP CGSF, ! ! R,�OF CQVER 02WOOD SH " � ✓ al forrsr (4/16 ire �d !28 r FLOOR COVER 4TILE_ _ • r ' ` PARTITIONS OIDYWALi ' DA5E� . PLUMBING 0 61 /Z 9 M ! 1 EHEAT/COOLING 01 FORCED 1.AU%ILIARY ApEA5 p�I..� M3 usf. E 908 I I FIREPLACES 01 SINGLE . BUILDING DIMENSIONS '7 4 4.* /W X4-*-16---+ *-7�-* �' `• Oq • A BAS E16 S16 E13 N16 W04 N28 W25 a o l I ! �' -- 1 BAS S28 . . USF E04 S16 E28 N16 ! 0� " * ,. ,, L WO7 N28 W25 USF S28 . . - 16 16 16! • ! SCHOOL DISTRICT 7 ,, , . :: \ 40 o ! ! I LAND . �Jor, PARCEL 40 0 , e ARF + '-r 'r � r, • Ye. � ,� `. 1' ,! « IM •a •• ,;r`'. "r..r,' t :, - - M ~ r "I. ` W .y, 'I• +' .. 4` •:1 l aSl �.'ra1 .y,_, . I. • `dr i d, i 'ra 1 a 111I �� a r 4 1 • i.• 77 1 t '' 1, �"' cFiTY ADDRESS I •• r .l ', 1• , , �. ,t t i g' + y r X LOB.,v �- I : ' i k I'� 04104 L k K V I F ZONING I USE . CODE L Q SP•DISTS,I DATE PRINTED I CLASS I PCS I AREA SIZE LOCJYR. SPEC.CLASS ADJ. CONb, Pa PRICE 7 7 1014 n r�l O 7 , '11 E rr ' C 0 1 L1 M A R K E T T G T 1 Ty UNIT ADD UNIT UNITS 1 MCRU S X '10'0 _ 0C 2cU0r VALUE DaLCnplton w 55I L 5 .1H r , �1yoMFPF X - CC � .Gu 2t;J0U. 0C1 1 .0 .DO r osl` =13:551 r a;f :414EM L S X = CC 7 . 50 7. 50 2 �� 4..7 '31 - VI r, M U il 8 1U12 759J " � � �, I � f' �� R16aL b U = Cr� 5 0. 35 bqa LT 5 . 1 . T �T s �,J �: X � 1095 .00� 1095. 00 1095 2 *CL 1.1 -1 . 1-47-C I ' A• R14HT FA� 140L U X A- CO 120,3 .00 1200. 00 1 .00 1200 t�M. w..., . t �I R1»Cp2 S X .7 CC 2E.00 .U= 2.10O. DC' O3 d R»« +n . * . } L T S X Ov 1 . i f r 1 .t71 .00 2803 { ti'; U PATIO 1070 - 7y 1 . 1G 1397 50 " r ,,, S ECIi S X 1070 A= 70 �' • 5= 3. 20 i �3? ? �' " } ` ; X1 . 501 . 05 2 4 235 F T PAVING - 00 1 . r05 �4 ri ;. S X 1GEG A= 700.GC 700. jt0 2` 1 f5 F Nar � , E "' 1 . 1C . 3� 1 7'00 F try N �24 b13 F ;Mttren•`: L . T ' r. ` OFFICIAL' Typo DATE • ti RECORD IroL r. ° —14••^3IJD — r Y ' 1 I r,�/ o :r;j'Ir LAND LAND-ADJ !NCO i 2 E U` E SP-9LD5 FEATURES 9LD-ADJS UNITSNumber �uubtaGaa1 t Date ii; � ToIM 2376 2t00S0 Up10s • '1 �r 1 000 1 Qu 10u — 2--="' 1 •- ns"", °be!' R.O. r , ,_, v 26.3( 47 47 4 ] 1�� o.ar.Rept.Coa �N.IOM RoomsCal .. _ .non note au N. Coa MILT.INDEX: 1 7 5 1 G 0 75 4 5 b Q C 3:.5 100 2E. 3G 1012 28643 LIVID!) 1 "AO >MPiRYIoAT[I 4 ' 1• /S 36,;1 3 1 . 0 Malt) ,>. �`�F Q as /1"' oy • 1 �12 *----- ..02ti SINGLE r'AMILY aCSIDENT'IALco ;N ' ,� /�P Lmr i / 1 -------- _.,46_ ---------- CNST 52 : 00 ,, i, I -- --- w-----* Fs?iLN.D3T1s�ti _ . . . �, t , . t: t l ,l ..a, t • ..y k.0. r.Z I • 0 ul� _ _ �o ' o9S/S J - I 4.5? F�Gy`_ �'1 DQ"!a4 ` 22 i F-�paa C-4�/^q` A r ` 1 �--- : ti R�b D �00$ ► &A y! ,-r r A3 °acT Ij::g _ 1 `� Y!^14 ( I E . �xt`►SA E.1. `F lit �'ie✓C•A3�' W! 1 2z AFC LY�NCc�,.. " 00 BAD 1L12 • a� �MdLN�T 0 TW^ f t. T SU Loma-DIMENSIONS W ��5L,TiC00LI_r&6 73FD'CEo ; a A N22 w4b N22 H46 S22 . . SMF F 6 I I FL,LR..E°LACE3 _ ..13F a p 2 . . 4 yr 1 ��L C Xr_rr r-rw��.wrrrrrrb • C. I .— _—. .� SCFIOOL DISTRICT 7 ~ 1 At LAND DARC EL i e ; • 3 ;I:',..":". '° • . • r , tr..' y ,„w- .•, ,p'.j l•i 1 -., ir.- � V _ r' 11� 1,:., y r. V , a L,�,livid��rl r r e. • f..a •� t 1:Y.R ,...lr i 0 , j 4 •S 1.; r r r Y •J 4 ` C: Doug Schmitz . ' . ',►. Jeff Condit ''' ,, Tom Coffee . AA °'4! Planning File t Liz Jacobs P 9 os`re...._..0 1 r .1 . DATE §... e- J. April 6 , 1995 TIC ,02:60 -rn• 1:1 Ms. Kristi Hitchcock City Recorder takeBawds City Hall 380 "A" Avenue • Lake Oswego , OR 97034 Ref : Staff Decision dated '.!! March 22, 1995, re ' t$, Dear Ms. Hitchcock: File No . VAR 18-94 (a-b) . 3 This is to request a public hearing before the City of Lake Oswego' s Development Review Commission (DRC) regarding the above referenced City Staff Decision . '' This request is made by myself , George L. Page , a City resident • ,,� ° at 4242 Lakeview Boulevard , Lake Oswego , 97035, tel. # 635-2658 . 'r• l 1 • r ''r. - This information is provided in compliance with procedures set �... . w • forth in the Right to Appeal section of the City' s Notice of >', ".4 Minor Development Decision referenced above . In that regard , my •„ . ' - : signature as required therein, is as signed below. 0 • • t. 6 Enclosed herewith is a check for $100 . 00 as payment of the City ' :3 filing fee for such hearings. Yours sincerely, .. .A•4' . . /.;=---1 .--- , George L. Page ";,` ` y GLP:agp Encl : Check for $100 . 00 made out to City. � . Copy of Notice of Minor Development Decision dtd 3/22/95 . j „ . ' EXHIBIT � r,, 3 o 5 r ..A /• •'' 4'. I.. 55`r ' • NO'TICE OJF MINOIR DEVEL.OPMEN']C " '' ' DECISION , �. u ,. d ;R • 1 ' File No.: VAR 18-94(a-b) ' ,- r, Applicant: Keith Lucas, 16230 SE Dagmar Rd.,Milwaukie,OR 97267 : , Location of]Property: On Lakeview Boulevard,between Bryant Road and South Shore Boulevard. `. • •' Date of Decision: March 22,1995 Description of Decision: Staff approves VAR 18-94(a)for a four-foot variance on the east side yard. 1 ' Staff approves VAR 18-94(b)with a modification to the amount of variance requested to the lot coverage. Staff approves a 2.7 percent variance to the lot coverage(a 6.7 percent variance is denied)for the purpose of constructing a deck more than 30 inches above grade. (Grade is ` 4 ,1 ',' determined prior to any construction alteration.) This decision will become final unless appealed as described below. 'I How to Obtain Further Information: The decision is available for review,and a copy rr,ay be '•`1 "i obtained at cost,at the following address: , . Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall " P.O.Box 369 ion t 380"A"Avenue q, ,� •'* Lake Oswego, OR 97034 4' gf' `' ` 0 Phone: (503) 635-0290 Right to Appeal: This decision may be appealed by filing a written Request for a Hearing within 1 fifteen calendar days of the above noted date of Decision. A Request for Hearing shall: ., ..� • 1, List the File Number and Date of Decision. 2. Request that a hearing be held on the application. 3. Include name,address and signature of the appellant. I.A1 ; '• , 4. Be accompanied by payment of any filing fee. 4 i ,D Failure to comply with these requirements can result in rejection of the Appeal The Request for a Hearing must be filed by 5:00 p.m.on April 6, 1995 with: I{risti Hitchcock,City Recorder ' Lake Oswego City Hall ' P.O.Box 369 1 380"A" Avenue `, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Phone: (503)635-0236 Decision Making Process: If appealed,this application will be heard at a noticed public hearing held by the Development Review Commission (DRC), Any person may appear and testify. The DRC ' ? will render a final decision , which may be appealed to the City Council, If not appealed,this decision will become final and binding, y ' °' . 0 .3 - 1./ ., r � 4 ` • E • 1s,1 • city o/ cEahe •O4we o 241766 LAK OSW'EGO, OREGON Crs RECEIVED OF dr, e �. ADDRESS - . • ACCOUNT_._._.....,_• r,o-2' �� z - 3 a 6 2 6, • P/4 E- - .• V/4,r-' / 9 4( 1 f; 51) ^'ram• • This Receipt to be delivered to the parsonmeshingpayment.'!~ city of La • Oswego, Oregon 1„ 4 A t 1 4 • w47 1 ; • • 1i • • • • 10 • 0 i• F„ ,i• . w. h• ` Eau W� , try, t^ ;...� 48e22s10 ZONING CODE ,.- 2. Members of the organization proposing 48.24.650. Authorization. ' and which will use the non-protlt facility or use 1. The granting authority may grant a 410 shall reside in adjacent planned dev+elaxpmenr or variance from the requirements of this chapter, within 14 mile of a planned development with except as prohibited by subsection 3, if it is 14 •• participating residents awl shall not be separtra.'d established that:. , (hem the proposed development or each other b;r a. The request is necessary to prevent a freeway,a major or minor arterial or the urban unnecessary hardship; and, service boundary of the City of Lake Oswego. e b. Development consistent with the 3. Adequate utilities, streets or other request will not be injurious to the neighborhood Improvements shall be provided by the developer in which the property is located or to property of the facility or use. established to be affected by the request; and, ° 4. When loci in a residential zone, lot c. The request is the rrdnimum variance '" area shall be sufficient to comply with the lot necessary to make reasonable use of the . coverage, setbacks and yards required by the property; and, zone. d The request is not in conflict with 5. Sound barriers, buffers or reduction the Comprehensive Plan. techniques shall be required for noise generating 2. In evaluating whether a particular request activities, facilities or equipment located on is to be granted, the granting authority shall properties adjacent to residential areas. consider the following, together with any other .y '' • 6. Lighting shall he designed to avoid glare relevant facts or circumstances. � � on adjacent residential uses. a. Relevant factors to be considered in , 7. The time,manner or nature of operation determining whether a hardship exists include; `' shall be adjusted to avoid conflict with adjacent (1)•Physical circumstances related to uses. the piece of property involved. (Ord.Ni,.2096.Enacted.0621/94) (2) Whether a reasonable use similar I • ' : • ' 0 to like properties can be made of the property Article 48.24. Variances. without the variance. (3) Whether the hardship was p ,* 48.24.650. Authorization. created by the person requcstinn, the variance. 48.24.655. Clusslfk;ation of variances. (4) The econoease impact upon the 48.24.660. Application. person requesting the variance if the request is 48.24.665. Notice Procedures for Class 1 denied Variances. b. Relevant factors to be considered in 48.24.670. Review of Application. determining whether development consistent with • • 48.24.675. Authority of Manager, Class 1 the request is injurious include; Variances (1) An analysis of the physical `, 48.24.680. Action on Class 1 Variance impacts such development will have, such as , Application. visual, noise, traffic and the increased potential 48.24.685. Class 1 Appeals. for drainage,erosion and landslide hazards. 48.24.690. Action on Class 2 Variance, (2) The perceptions of residents and • . - Appeals. owners of property in the neighborhood • p concerning the incremental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed valance, �' ... c. A determination of whether the c l r '. standards set forth in Subsection (1) are satisfied ' ' necessarily involves the balancing of competing ' (Rev, 06/21/94; bp) 48-52 ' ' '% 0 .w , , r EXMIIIIT 6 opt) \'' / ,-, ZONING CODE $ 4$.24.650 "t and conflicting interest,. The considerations Class 2 variances include: ! . "'<, ' liscdd in subsection (2)(a) and (b) are not a. Variances from minimum lot width '' .' e. standards and are not intended to be an exclusive or depth of more than five feet; i41. ,' list of considerations. The considerations are to b. Variancea in setback requirements for be used as a guide in the granting authority's structures other than those described in y E`.`.' deliberations. subsection(1)(a)of this section of more than two ' d. Prior variances allowed in the feet in side and front yards and more than five neighborhood shall not be considered by the feet in rear yards; ,,, >` granting authority iin reaching its decision. c. Variances in lot coverage, building i 3. No variance may be granted which will height, or FAR for other than single family V. permit a use not permitted in the applicable residential dwellings and accessory structures, zoning district or which will increase the . d. Variances to any requirement of this allowable residential density in any zone. (Ord. chapter not expressly classified pursuant to No. 1851, Sec. 1; 11-16-82.) subsections (1) or (2) of this section except density and use restrictions. • 48.24.655. Classification of variances. 3. The City Manager shall decide the 1. Class 1 classification of any variance application. ,'^,z$.2 Class 1 includes minor variances which 4. For Class 1 variances, the City Manager '': are small changes from the Code requirements shall have the authority to require an applicant to " ,'• and which will have little or no effect on fulfill the requirements of LOC 49.36,705 at ' '` adjacent property or users. Administrative his/her discretion. This authority is solely at the ., le :;5' •approval by the City Manager of Class 1 discretion of the City Manager and is not subject as "` variances may lie granted to appeal.(Ord. No. 1851,Sec, 1; 11-16-82, Ord. Class 1 variances include; No. 2020,Sec, 1; 12-18-90, Ord. No, 2053, Sec, 0 " a. Variances from setback requirements 10; 04-07-92,) ' for single family dwellings and accessory (oat.No.2091, Amended,04/19/94) structures. b. Variances from setback requirements 48.24.660. Application" for structures other than those described in 1, A request for either class variance may subsection (1)(a) of this section of two feet or be initiated by a property owner or the owner's ,.,, V,rW'.- less in side and front yards and five feet or less authorized agent by filing an application with the in rear yards. Manager, c. Variances from nunInium lot width 2. The application for a Class 1 variance •i, i or depth of five feet or less. will include the following information: ri d. Variances in lot coverage, building a, name,address and telephone number height, or FAR for single-family residential of applicant, dwellings and accessory structures, b, map number and/or subdivision 2. Class 2 block and lot, ` Class 2 includes variances which are c, narrative concerning the proposed significant changes from the Code requirements request, a` and are likely to create impacts on adjacent d, vicinity map, . property or users, A Class 2 variance may be e, one map showing existing use and a • granted by the Planning Commission or second map drawn in the same scale showing 41i , Development Review Commission. proposed development, placement of lot lines, "• etc, Survey map is not required, (Rev, 01/17/95; bp) 48-53 0 :, , 1,11 6 r �pA \"". ,'" . t. t° , • 1' ZONii`G CODE •,y. 48..,4.G60 f. detailed plans for the specific project, with a list of omissions within seven calendar g, names and addresses of property, days of the date of submittal. owners whose property is within 300 feet of the 2. A preappl3,cation conference may be applicant's property or contiguously owned scheduled at the request of either the applicant or .` property, and the City Manager for a Class 2 variance. The :. .' e. h. proof of payment of the applicable conference may be required by the City m ,1 1 fees. Manager. , r1" 3. The applicatoe for a Class 2 variance 3. As soon as an application is itccpted as ` , will include the same information required for a complete, notice will be sent. � Class 1 variance, plus information concerning 4. Staff may make a field visit to the sire Y drainage, surveys or other information required before preparing the stall!report. (Ord.No. 1851, tr by the City Manager. (Ord. No. 1851, Sec. 1; Sec. 1; 11-16-82.) 11-16-82,) ' , , ` 48.24.675. Authority of Manager, Class 1 • 48.24.665. Notice Procedures for Class 1 Variance. "e... The Manager shall have the authority to m Vai�iancxs. `1.�, Class 1 variances shall require fourteen approve, approve with conditions or disapprove calendar days notification of pending action. an application for a Class 1 variance. The b Notice shall be sent to: Manager shall have the same authority, as set b r 1. The owner of the property that is the forth in LOC 49.22.225, as the hearing body to J' ti subject of the variance, and the applicant if it is grant conditional approvals. (Ord. No. 1851,Sec. . P a different person. 1; 11-16-82.) • 2. The owners of property and residents t �* y included within an area enclosed by linesparallel 48.24.680. Action on Class I Variance , `` ' • to and 300 feet from the exterior boundary of the Application. , property or contiguous property of the applicant. 1. The Manager shall make a decision to 3. Neighborhood association for the area in approve or deny within 24 calendar days of ' ; I which the proposal is located. • submittal of a complete application. ' The content of the notice shall be the same 2. The Manager shall determine whether the as that described in LOC 49.40.804. The notice criteria for approval established by LOC .: shall solicit written comments on the proposal 49.22.215 has been satisfied, ";,e k, . ,' and inform the recipient that they will receive a 3, All decisions shall be in writing and will !: copy of the Manager's decision and may appeal include at a minimum; that decision. Failure of the City to send notice a. name and address of applicant., . or failure of a person to receive notice shall not b. location of property (street number, invalidate any proceeding in connection with the map number and block and lot), , application. (Ord. No. 1851, Sec. 1; 11-16-82.) c. date of the decision, • , "»1 d. the Manager's determination of the 48.24.670. Review of Application. conformance of the application with the criteria Upon receipt of an application for either for approval established by LOC 49.22,215, class variance, the following staff actions shall e. conditions of approval, if any; and f. notice of the appeal time and �'t occur; 1, The assigned staff member shall review procedure. ` ' ' the application for completeness and shall either 4, The decision will be mailed to the accept the application or return it to the applicant applicant, the neighborhood association and ... n‘ r ` (Rev. 01/17/95; bp) 48-54 :, r r4 • ,, t I. S '• ti ;: § 454�t1 • �,,•� • to comply with or would not be �;,�,xrnitted to exist , � � e' ZONING CODE .3. peons to wham notice was sent pursuant enactment ameent to 1 placed in the case file.(Ord. under a subsequent � � '� LOC 48.24.665 and Na: this Code.1851, Sec. 1; 11-16-82.) 2. a. A use or structure for which a , granted under the zoning code variance was , 4g•24 685. Class 1 APB° visions is not considered non-conforming The derision of the Ivlauager on a Class I Pro � a ' �.t,''..Y.' appealed to the Planning solely by the fact that the characteristic of the 4�+ variancx may for which the variance was I'? :: to LOC 49.40.820. (Ord. use or structure 1 thevariance of '• " Cotes granted fails to comply with of such variance does I. ' i; 1�-1tS-€12.) chapter.The existence n•: c :. NO. 11r See. this G}t , <, not prevent • the use or structure from being • .» Action an Class 2 Variance, classified as non-conforming if some other AID• characteristic of the use or fails to cements structureof this chapter. 1. a Clastc :2 variance will be comply with the regal purulent to LOC Article 49.44.Notice P y which r conduct�i b. A residential structure 49.44.920.of will be given as re>t(u ed by LOC classified as a non-conforming structure by this �+ •� ` be enlarged, expanded or ..�i .. 2 Appeal of derision on a Class 2 variance section may • l e t to LOC 49.50.1100. reconstructed in a manner which does not Shad be takenp increase the, degree of non-conformity. a , `�' (Ord No. 1851, Sec. 1; 11-16-82.) 3. Subject to the provisions of LOC � • ` 48.26.700 to 48:?.6.735, and except as otherwise J Uses. Article 48.26. Non-Conforming provided by this chapter, a non-conforming use ortnin Use, Structure or structure may be continued and maintained in 1. Qg.1,�.700. De Defined; & repair so long as it remains otherwise ' t� Granted. reasonable iscont Rigid lawful, but it shall not be altered in a manner to • .70y. Discontinuance of a enlarge or expand or reconstruct the use or '`" Nflra-Conforming Use. structure.(Ord. No. 1851, Sec. 1; 11-16-82. Ord, i 4$.26.?10. Applicability to Approvals, Na. 2027, Sec. 1; 04-02-91.) t�, ° �•, ^Y Inesmpleted Construction. } a Ikstruction, Movement and ' 4$,?b„71.i. 4g.2£.705. Discontinuance of a . Replacement of Structures. �, Nun-Conforming Use. 48-26.720. Pxpansion of Non-Conforming If anon-conforming use is discontinued for Industrial or Commercial Uses ' aperiod of at least six months, further use of the or Structures. property upon which the use was located shall r 4'8.26.725. Repairs and Maintenance. ' ements of this chapter. �� • conform to the requirements�'• • 48.26.?30. Uses Under Conditional Use Provisions Not Non-Conforming (Ord. Na, 1851, Sec, 1; 11-16-82.) Uses. 48.26.710. Applicability to Approves, 48.26.735. Non-Conforming CharacteristicsIncompleted Construction. of Use. This chapter does not require any change in 48.26.736. to 48.26.749 reserved. plans, construction or use of a non-conforming 1 • I 48.26.700. Non-Conforming Use, Structure use or structure for which a final development ` ii ' .., ': : ' " approval, of a type listed below, was received Defined; Rights Granted. { ` 1. A use or structure is considered a prior to the date that the use or structure became '11 use or structure if the use or nonconforming if construction of project , • � . ,� ;�.� .� nonconforming - structure was lawfully established, but does not (Rev, 01/17/95; bp) 48-55 ' i 0 , r' ' 6- d. ., I