Loading...
Approved Minutes - 1998-12-07 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES December 7, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER The Development Review Commission meeting of December 7, 1998,was called to order in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 380 "A"Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon, by Chair Douglas P. Cushing at 7:06 PM. II. ROLL CALL Commission members present included Chair Cushing, Vice-Chair Julie Morales, and Commissioners William Horning, Lawrence Magura,Nan Binkley and Sheila Ostly*. Commissioner Douglas Kiersey was absent. Staff present were Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager; Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney and Janice Benn, Senior Secretary. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Morales moved for approval of the Minutes of November 2. 1998. corrected to delete the second"not" in the second sentence on page 4. Ms. Binkley seconded the motion, and it passed with Mr. Horning, Ms. Binkley, Mr. Cushing, and Ms. Morales voting yes. Mr. Magura abstained. Ms. Ostly and Mr. Kiersey were absent. There were no votes against. *Ms. Ostly joined the meeting. Ms. Morales moved for approval of the Minutes of November 16. 1998. Ms. Binkley seconded the motion, and it passed with Mr. Horning, Ms. Binkley, Mr. Cushing, Ms. Morales and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Magura abstained. Mr. Kiersey was absent. There were no votes against. IV. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER None. V. PUBLIC HEARING City of Lake Oswego Page 1 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 CU 4-98. the applicant, Three Rivers Land Conservancy, is requesting a conditional use permit to locate the offices of Three Rivers Land Conservancy, a non-profit corporation, in the Oswego Heritage House, a historic landmark. The site is located at 398 Tenth St., Tax Lot 5300 of Tax Map 21E 3 CD. Staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner. Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits to be adhered to. He asked Commission members to report any ex parte contacts, site visits, biases or conflicts of interest. All Commissioners present indicated they were familiar with the site. Chair Cushing asked if any person in attendance desired to challenge any Commissioner's right to hear the application. No one presented such a challenge. Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner, related that the applicant desired to locate their offices in the Oswego Heritage House, an historic landmark. She recalled that the Zoning Ordinance had been amended to allow non-profit office uses in historical landmark structures located in residential zones and the Heritage Council had been granted a conditional use for an office as well as a museum in Heritage House. She clarified that several conditions of approval remained to be satisfied before occupancy of the structure was to be permitted. Ms. Jacob recalled that conditional use requirements at the site had been thoroughly analyzed during the previous Heritage Council use hearing. She related that although the previous traffic study had reviewed the impacts of both the Heritage Council and the Chamber of Commerce at the site, the Chamber was no longer planning to occupy the site. She advised that because the applicant anticipated employing only two to three persons, its usage would be much less intense than the Chamber's use. Additionally,the original site parking plan had showed 19 parking spaces; however, 20 had been constructed. Ms. Jacob advised the requirements of the zone had been met; adequate public services were available to the facility; and the site had adequate area for anticipated parking needs. She said there appeared to be no use conflicts between the usage by the Heritage Council and the applicant. She noted that meeting times for the two occupant's board meetings would not overlap, and only 3-4 visitors were expected at the site at any given time. She related that the applicant conducted a summer youth program where attendees typically met at a park location, and would not need to meet at the site. She recalled the Heritage Council had a shared parking agreement with Christ Church Parish, so visitors to a large once-per-year special meeting hosted by the applicant could use the Church's parking area. She also recalled the DRC had imposed a 7 AM to 10 PM limit on uses at Heritage House. Ms. Jacob advised that conditions of approval of the Heritage Council use meant that the neighborhood was to be protected from any kind of adverse impact, such as glare from City of Lake Oswego Page 2 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 cars in the driveway, or privacy issues. She recommended the current application be approved subject to compliance with all of the conditions that had been imposed upon the original conditional use application. Applicant Jayne Cronlund, PO Box 1116, Lake Oswego, 97034, testified that she was the Executive Director of the Three Rivers Land Conservancy, and her group looked forward to the opportunity to occupy the historic structure. She said her organization, formerly known as the Lake Oswego Land Trust, was a land conservation group which had expanded its area of interest to include southwest metropolitan Portland. She said they had two full-time staff and anticipated hiring a third staff person in about a year. She said the organization's monthly board meetings were attended by twelve to fifteen people. She said the group averaged one visitor per day, and held a weekly meeting with approximately seven attendees. She said the summer youth program involved six local youths and one crew leader, who accomplished restoration projects. She related the group had met at George Rogers Park the previous summer and could continue to meet away from Heritage House if parking was not available there. She stated that 50-75 people usually attended the applicant's annual meeting, which would be held in the future at Heritage House. She opined that three parking spaces would be sufficient for the applicant's use. She clarified that the applicant's lease was a month-to-month agreement. Mr. Harold Campbell, 398 Furnace Street. Lake Oswego, 97034, stated he had resided in the City for the past 46 years and was currently treasurer of the Heritage Council. He expressed his pride in the Heritage Council's restoration of the historic building. He stated that the Council planned to locate an air conditioning unit on the south side of the building which would be 60 feet from the closest residential property and buffered by a dense laurel hedge and shrubbery. He requested that the applicant be allowed to share Heritage House office space. Opponents None. Neither for nor Against None. Rebuttal None. City of Lake Oswego Page 3 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 No one requested the hearing be held open to allow submission of additional written evidence. The applicant waived their right to additional time in which to submit a final written argument. Chair Cushing closed the public hearing. Deliberation Ms. Jacob clarified that final approval of the Heritage House application hinged upon adequate screening of the air conditioning unit(a condition imposed by the building permit), and screening along the west property line. She pointed out that the staff report recommended a condition requiring a vegetative hedge or fence along the parking lot. She noted the existing hedge had been significantly trimmed; and until it grew back, the neighbor would be impacted by glare from automobile lights in the parking lot in the evening. Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager, explained the applicant was reconsidering their original plan to screen the mechanical unit with three-foot high screening with lap siding to match the existing building. The applicant's site plan was designated as Exhibit 11 and photographs to show the necessity for screening were designated as Exhibit 12. The Commissioners reviewed the exhibits and discussed whether a vegetative or structural screen would be more effective at the site, and whether there would be sufficient room around the air conditioning (AC)unit for screening and landscaping. Chair Cushing read a letter from Mr. Headlee, dated December 1, 1998, into the record. Mr. Headlee's communication included photographs and recommended that landscaping would provide sufficient screening for the AC unit while installation of another type of screening would not provide any additional visual or sound screening benefits and might restrict the pedestrian walk. Ms. Ostly moved for approval of CU 4-98, subject to conditions recommended by the staff and an additional condition that a screening fence be installed around the air-conditioning unit, as shown on Exhibit 11. Mr. Magura seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Morales, Mr. Horning, Mr. Magura, Ms. Binkley and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Kiersey was absent. There were no votes against. Mr. Magura moved for approval of CU 4-98, Findings, Conclusion and Order. Ms. Ostly seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Morales, Mr. Horning, Mr. Magura, Ms. Binkley and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Kiersey was absent. There were no votes against. City of Lake Oswego Page 4 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 DR 15-98. the applicant, Stuart Greenberger is requesting development review approval to construct a second unit on each of two existing single-family residences in the Old Town Design District. The site is located at 405 & 411 Durham Street, Tax Lot(s) 2600 & 2700, of Tax Map 21E 10 AD. Staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner. Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits to be followed. He asked Commission members to report any ex parte contacts, site visits, biases or conflicts of interest. All Commission members present indicated they had visited the site. Chair Cushing asked if any person in attendance desired to challenge any Commissioner's right to hear the application. No one presented such a challenge. Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner, related that the applicant proposed to attach a 992 square foot dwelling unit to an existing house on each of two adjacent lots. The newer units were to include a two-car garage, with one garage parking space to be used by the occupants of each unit. She said the applicant also proposed to add 210 square feet to the existing houses. She noted the application was required to be heard by the DRC because the site was located in the Old Town Design District (DD), even though duplexes were permitted as outright uses in the zone, and each lot met the zone minimum of 5,000 square feet. She noted the two existing houses did not currently meet the special DD setbacks of 10' for all yards, and she advised that any addition to the structure must comply with the setbacks. She pointed out on the drawings that the setbacks were not met on the common property line (the rear yard) and the proposed additions to the existing structures would not meet the setbacks. She related the applicant believed that by reducing the new structures by two feet, and relocating the additions to the existing structures the setbacks would be met without significantly modifying the exterior appearance of the buildings. She recommended that a final site plan be prepared to show compliance with the setback requirements of the zone. Ms. Jacob clarified that the single-family structures were only required to provide one parking space per unit. She reviewed applicable Old Town Design Standards regarding building style,materials and landscaping. She said staff found the materials and window trim planned for the site conformed to the Standards; however, window design should be modified to better reflect the Old Town Standard. She explained the applicant had designed windows to reflect the existing building's ranch style and provide more privacy in the back. She recommended that the front and side windows be of a style more in keeping with the Old Town Style. Ms. Jacob advised that sidewalks were required to be a minimum unobstructed width of 5', except where necessary to preserve a natural resource. She recommended that the existing 3' sidewalk be widened to 5' and be designed to meander around the large trees along the Durham Street frontage and that a 5' sidewalk be installed within the right-of- way along Wilbur Street. She also recommended that an additional street tree be planted at the southwest corner at Durham Street. She noted the applicant proposed more trees City of Lake Oswego Page 5 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 near each entrance. She recommended the alleyway be graveled and not paved because usage was low and the neighborhood desired to maintain a non-urban character. Ms. Jacob recommended approval of the project, subject to the conditions recommended in the staff report. Mr. Pishvaie clarified for the Commissioners that a"duplex"was defined as a building on a lot designed to contain two dwelling units and used for residential purposes. He also clarified that the covered breezeway was considered an appropriate connection between the units. Ms. Jacob advised the application met the zone's lot coverage requirements. She explained the staff had determined the primary street frontage for Lot was Durham Street, and not Wilbur Street, and because of the configuration of the lot the garage could not be set further back. She said the applicant planned to use trellises as a design element to minimize the garage frontage. Ms. Jacob entered a letter from Mr. Banks into the record as Exhibit 12. Applicant Stuart Greenberger, 13342 Troon Drive,West Linn. 97068. testified that he owned both properties. He indicated that he had tried to incorporate all suggestions provided by the staff and the neighborhood association into the plan. He indicated his agreement with the staff's recommended conditions regarding the windows. He stated the relocation of the new construction would not significantly affect the utility of the buildings on the site. He related that the neighbors had recommended that Clematis be planted next to the arbor. Staff clarified for the Commissioners that the Street Light Standard was not applicable to the development. Stewart Straus, 1532 SW Jefferson St., Portland, 97201,testified that the applicant agreed to the recommendations of the staff. He clarified that the internal dimensions of the units would be adjusted to reduce the depth of the garage and other rooms; however, the applicant would meet the minimum depth requirement for garages. Ms. Binkley observed that the structure would appear to be a split level house, although there were no split level homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Straus stated that the design was intended to include a craftsman-style porch and provide room for the interior stairway. He related that because of the size and configuration of the lot, the garages could not be relocated on the site. Proponents Bill Savage. 397 Furnace, Lake Oswego, 97034. Chair of the Old Town Neighborhood Association, testified that the Association supported the application. He related they preferred the alleyway be graveled and not paved; they opposed the installation of a sidewalk on the south side of Wilbur Street because there was an existing sidewalk on its north side that was adequate for the area; and they felt that if a sidewalk was to be constructed along Durham Street, that it be 3 feet instead of 5 feet, and not be a concrete- surfaced walk. He indicated the Association agreed with the staff report regarding window style. Mr. Savage explained that the Association was stipulating narrower City of Lake Oswego Page 6 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 sidewalks than the Old Town Design Standards required because they preferred a nonurban neighborhood character. Opponents None. Neither for nor Against Chris Peterson, 1729 SW Stephenson, Portland, 97219,testified he was the owner of property at 313 Durham Street. He praised the applicant for working with the neighborhood. He indicated his respect for the position of residents who strongly opposed sidewalks, although he commented that at the time he lived in the neighborhood he would have preferred that his child had a sidewalk to use to go to the park. Rebuttal None. No person requested that the hearing be held open for additional written evidence. The applicant waived his right to an additional seven days to submit a final written argument. Chair Cushing closed the public hearing. Deliberation The Commissioners reviewed the applicant's elevations. They discussed possible options for locating the garages further back on the lot and they indicated their concern regarding the mass of the structure as observed from the street and a lack of visual connection of the entry with the street. They recalled the staff interpretation that the structure met the definition of duplex because of the breezeway connecting the units. They asked for guidance from the staff regarding the DRC's ability to determine the width and type of construction of sidewalks. Staff clarified that the Design Standards provided that a sidewalk should be on the street frontage of any development, and constructed according to City standards, unless an exception was approved by the City Manager. Ms. Binkley moved for denial of DR 15-98. Mr. Horning seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Horning, Ms. Binkley, Ms. Morales and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Cushing and Mr. Magura voting no. Mr. Kiersey was absent. The applicant asked the Commission for a reconsideration of their decision. The applicant indicated his understanding that the Commission preferred that the Wilbur Street frontage include additional exposed windows and a design to mitigate its mass, and that they preferred more connection between the entry with the street. He stressed that the applicant was dealing with a fairly confined buildable area, and that certain spacing was necessary in order to meet fire regulations. He requested the hearing be continued on that he could develop alternative design concepts in order to address the Commission's concerns. City of Lake Oswego Page 7 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 Ms. Binkley moved to continue DR 15-98 to January 20, 1999 and withdraw the previous motion. Mr. Horning seconded the motion and it passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Morales, Ms. Binkley, Mr. Horning, Ms. Ostly and Mr. Magura voting yes. Mr. Kiersey was absent. There were no votes against. The Development Review Commission recessed until 9 PM. DR 12-98/CU 3-98/VAR 13-98, the applicant, Barrentine Bates Lee, Architects, is requesting development review and conditional use permits to expand the existing Lake Oswego United Methodist Church facilities by constructing an 10,020 sq. ft. multi- purpose building and an approximately 5,536 sq. ft. classroom building. Also requested is a 2% Class I Variance to LODS 20.020(3) in order to increase the grade of a walkway from South Shore Boulevard to the building entrances from 8% to 10%. The site is located at 1855 South Shore Blvd., Tax Lot(s) 3600 of Tax Map 21E 10 CC. Staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner. Chair Cushing opened the public hearing and explained the procedures and time limits to be followed. He asked Commission members to report any ex parte contacts, site visits, biases or conflicts of interest. Mr. Cushing reported the he was familiar with the site and his wife had attended the church in the past. Ms. Morales reported she had worked on a small remodeling project at the site 15 year ago. Commissioners Horning, Binkley, Magura and Ostly indicated they were familiar with the site. Chair Cushing asked if any person in attendance desired to challenge any Commissioner's right to hear the application. No one presented such a challenge. Elizabeth Jacob, Associate Planner, entered a newly-received exhibit(Exhibit 37) into the record and clarified that neither staff nor the applicant had an opportunity to review it. She noted the church had received previous approval in 1992 for conditional use to expand parking on the east side of the property by an additional 78 spaces; however, since then only 27 spaces had actually been constructed and the applicant was requesting approval for construction of the remainder of the spaces. She noted that conditions for screening landscaping along the east side of the lot related to the 1992 approval had been included in the staff recommendations regarding the current application. Ms. Jacob related the applicant desired to construct a 10,000 square foot multi-purpose addition to the west side of the existing sanctuary and a separate 5,500 square foot classroom building behind the church at some time in the future. She also noted the applicant was considering a future conversion of a room in the basement to an apartment; however that was not part of the current application. She advised that the property owner was to provide evidence of conditional use approval for the preschool use on the site, as a separate matter from the current application. She indicated the site included two sensitive lands overlay districts protecting Lost Dog Creek and a significant tree grove. City of Lake Oswego Page 8 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 Ms. Jacob advised that the conditional use criteria regarding setbacks, height limitations and lot coverage for institutional uses had been met and the proposed use could be made reasonably compatible with uses in the vicinity. She noted the applicant's traffic impact study,which indicated minimal traffic would be generated on the adjacent residential streets as a result of the proposal, was of the existing uses because usage would not be increased, and the improvements were intended to serve the current congregation. She advised that some neighbors, particularly those residing on Oak Street, were concerned about the impact of parking lot lighting. She pointed out exhibits in the staff reporting showing the relationship of lighting installations and the street. She noted the applicant had provided evidence the lighting fixtures would reflect light away from the neighborhood and downward. She noted the sensitive land protection area would preserve many of the trees and provide additional buffering. Ms. Jacob observed that the applicant proposed to set the new building deep into the slope and to step it back in order to reduce its mass as perceived from the street. She noted the new construction materials would match those used on the existing structures. She advised that the windows should be made more similar to the existing building than what was shown in the applicant's proposal. She noted the applicant had provided an analysis of uses at the site and their related parking requirements, and planned for a total of 164 spaces at the site after construction, which would exceed the Code's actual parking requirement of 160 spaces. She noted the applicant had a written agreement with the adjacent Armory to use that building's parking lot for overflow parking on Sundays when the National Guard was not using their facility. She advised the applicant's tree inventory only included 196 trees which were within the development area(not those in the stream corridor) and 132 to 152 trees were designated to be saved. She noted the applicant proposed to plant additional non-native trees along the east side of the property; however, she recommended that native trees be planted there. Ms. Jacob advised that the current Code required connectivity between public walkways and the building entrance and that the walkway should meet Americans with Disabilities (ADA) standards. She explained that although the site plan showed the walk's slope would exceed the ADA requirement of 8.33 percent, staff had determined that no variance was required because the ADA allowed an exception in circumstances where the grade would not permit that degree of access. Ms. Jacob read a statement into the record that advised that the 16" water line along South Shore Boulevard was a low-pressure transmission main and might not be able to supply adequate fire suppression service to the site. It indicated that a high-pressure line was available at the southeast corner of the site that was a more appropriate source for internal hydrant service, and could mean that the final design of the internal water system would be different than what was shown on the exhibits. Ms. Jacob noted the applicant had been informed of that situation. Ms. Jacob clarified the staff had not recommended one-to-one tree replacement because the trees to be removed were not in the tree grove area, which was fairly dense. Mr. City of Lake Oswego Page 9 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 Horning noted at least 44 trees would be removed and 34 trees were to be planted in addition to ornamental trees to be planted. Mr. Magura observed that Lost Dog Creek had a significant volume of water flow and noted that Exhibit 37 conveyed the neighbors' concern that appropriate drainage be installed at the site. Mr. Pishvaie recalled that the 1992 staff report had not discussed the issue of drainage and the 1998 report found that water detention was not necessary at the site. Apnlicant Eric Carlson, 907 Oak Street, Lake Oswego, 97034. testified that he was chair of the applicant's administrative board and also chair of their building committee. He stated that the congregation included approximately 800 people, and the applicant had recognized the inadequacy of their existing facilities since 1995. He explained they desired sufficient space to provide meals for 200 people (and currently could only seat 60); an activity area for volleyball games; accommodations adequate to host wedding receptions; meeting space for large gatherings (including a fellowship space for use after services); ability to use the facility as an emergency shelter; additional classroom space; a new music room; a new nursery and an elevator He said the congregation currently included younger families than it previously had. He noted that the meeting to approve the project had been held at Lake Grove Presbyterian Church because its own facilities were not adequate. He stated the project was intended to service the existing congregation, which had grown by 100 members over the past 10-12 years. He indicated the applicant was also concerned about drainage issues and desired to be a good neighbor. He opined the development would be well-screened from the neighboring residences. He said the applicant was prepared to work with the staff to resolve the South Shore School issue, which he described as a new issue for the applicant, and not part of the current application. Rob Barrentine, Barrentine Bates Lee, Architects, 200 North State Street, Lake Oswego, 97034, indicated that the project would be a phased development, with construction of the multi-purpose building and some remodeling of the existing building in the first phase; and construction of the education building in a second phase; with timing dependent upon successful fundraising. He noted the parking plan had previously been approved and he pointed out on the plan the improvements to be made to the parking lot. He related that the applicant was currently interviewing a general contractor for the project. He said 196 trees were surveyed, but the survey did not include many trees outside the resource protection area that would not be endangered by the project or trees behind the resource area and beyond the limits of where any work would be done. He stated that tree replacement would be was close to a one-to-one ratio. He noted the resource protection area had been enlarged from that shown on the exhibit while working with the staff. He said the applicant would agree to the conditions recommended by staff regarding site work. He presented photographs of the site and the project model. He stressed the applicant wanted to avoid the perception that the new buildings overpowered the sanctuary. He said the education building would not be visible from South Shore Drive and would be minimally visible from Oak Street. He noted that even with the leaves City of Lake Oswego Page 10 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 off of the trees, the density of the tree grove made it hard to see the existing buildings. He stated the colors to be used on the new construction would match the existing building and explained that the existing building roof was to be replaced. He clarified that the new windows were higher and of a different shape than the existing windows in order to allow light to enter and to obscure the view of the parking lot. He described the existing windows as inexpensive mill-finish residential proportion windows. Mr. Barrentine explained the applicant's consulting engineers had discussed the issue of drainage with the City several times and had revised the storm drainage facility design three times. He stated the conditions recommended in the staff report were acceptable to the applicant. He acknowledge that the communication received into the record at the start of the hearing had not been available at the time the applicant met with the neighbors; however, the applicant was prepared to resolve the issue of drainage. He opined that the increase in storm runoff was not due to their parking lot because the lot was too small to have caused the magnitude of concern in the neighborhood. He clarified for the Commissioners that the challenge of placement of a detention pond at the site was due to the existence of the resource protection area. He said the applicant had discussed cleaning and enhancing the existing drainage ways with the staff He noted the staff report recommended a condition for onsite review of the potential for a small detention area at the bottom end of the site, either on or off site. He said he understood there could be three possible solutions: 1) no additional detention would be required at the lower level; 2) detention would be required and there would be grading and seeding to accomplish that; or, 3) detention would be required and riprap would also be required to help disburse the velocity of the water flow. Mr. Magura observed the applicant's engineer's report did not provide the evidence upon which its conclusion regarding the sufficiency of the existing detention was based. Mr. Barrentine recalled that the engineer's conclusion had been mutually agreed to by the applicant and the staff Mr. Barrentine confirmed for Mr. Horning that the erosion control plan included sediment ponds. He clarified for Ms. Binkley that there was adequate screening planned for the mechanical unit, and it would not be visible from South Shore Drive. He indicated that the height of the wall would be adjusted, if necessary. He explained that the multipurpose room included a sloped wall to minimize the impact on the view from the sanctuary windows. He noted that the style of the lighting fixtures in the parking area had been chosen because they reduced the impact of lighting on the neighborhood. Mr. Barrentine clarified it was approximately 60 feet between Oak Street and the parking lot. He clarified that the configuration of the skylight matched the pitch of the "A" frame portion of the design. He also clarified that the applicant was in the process of designing overhangs on the multipurpose building that would visually tie it to the other buildings. He said that the trellises in front of the building would probably be supported by posts. Ms. Jacob presented the applicant's color board. Mr. Barrentine said the applicant proposed to use tongue and groove siding that would be stained to match the existing City of Lake Oswego Page 11 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 building; however,the new construction windows would be a dark anodized frame that would be different from the existing building. He said glass block and small pieces of color in a couple of the high windows were to be accent pieces. He related the applicant was also considering frosting some of the lower windows. He clarified for Mr. Magura that the original building had first been occupied in 1959. He said that the only change to the existing building materials would be a new roof. He clarified that the applicant would provide an easement for the existing sewer line, because such an agreement currently did not exist. Proponents None Opponents None Neither for nor Against Kathy Williams. 1873 Oak Street. Lake Oswego. 97034.pointed out that she had provided written testimony to be considered at the hearing. She noted that her lot (Tax Lot 2919)was immediately downslope from the project site. She explained that a tributary of Lost Dog Creek ran through her yard and entered a pond at the base of her yard. She expressed her approval of 1997 improvements the City had made to the channel of the creek on her property. She clarified it had been widened, deepened, areas that often overflowed had been straightened and pooling areas had been installed to slow down the water. She said that in the past 4 of the 10 years she had resided in the area, the increase in water flows from development above South Shore and other changes has been tremendous. She said that flash flooding of the Creek did not just occur during major storms, but with almost every rain. She noted that during the last 5 years a new tributary had formed from water coming from behind the church and the another property located above her's and flowed through her side yard. She opined that was probably due to additional development and increased rainfall. She related that she had installed terraces, french drains and boulders the past summer to manage water on her property; however, during recent storms the rocks washed out of the basin and the water was flowing across a wide swath of her side yard again. She related her home owners association had raised the bridge across the creek by 9 inches to allow flood water to go under the bridge and not overflow its banks. She opined that the additional impervious surface the applicant planned would cause more water runoff problems on her property. She asked that her concerns be addressed before the project was approved, and additional water control facilities be required to prevent flash flooding of her property. She expressed her confidence in the work of Dale Shank, Pacific Habitat Services, who accomplished the reconstruction for the City two years ago. Martin Baker. 1936 Palisades Lake Court. Lake Oswego. 97034, testified that he and his wife owned Tax Lots 2610 and 2907. He described the route of the Lost Dog Creek tributary and clarified that the creek channel was not actually on the applicant's property. Mr. Pishvaie advised that the main channel of the creek was located just west of the Armory property and ran along its north side. Mr. Baker observed increases in water flow City of Lake Oswego Page 12 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 during the last three years and explained that he had attempted to prevent erosion on the back of Tax Lot 2610 by adding nearly 200 tons of boulders and an overflow pond He requested that the project be required to alleviate any additional storm runoff. Larry Logan, 1821 Oak Street, Lake Oswego, 97034, testified that he owned Tax Lot 2917. He expressed his appreciation of the applicant's efforts to prevent impact from parking area lighting. He related that teenagers currently used the parking area at night, and the lights could be seen from his residence. He observed that the applicant's proposal would not add trees between his residence and the parking lot. He recalled that in 1992 the pond had been deep enough to be over his head; however, it had filled in with silt so that it currently was the depth of up to his knees. Barbara Freedman, 1765 Conifer Drive, Lake Oswego, 97034, testified she resided at Tax Lot 2500, which was on the east side of the site and 15 feet from the parking lot. She expressed her concern about the impact of lights from the lot and the impact of more automobile activity there. She recalled seeing a variety of wildlife in the area where the new lot was planned. She opined the tree grove there was not being protected. She requested the hearing be continued to allow her time to obtain more information about the proposal. She indicated that she had elderly neighbors who could not attend the hearing who were also concerned about the impact of the project. Mr. Cushing advised that anyone who had testified had the right to request more time in which to submit additional evidence; however, a request for a continuance was usually requested by an applicant. Liddy Logan, 1821 Oak Street, Lake Oswego, 97034, testified that she was a member of the board of directors of the Palisades Lake Estates Homeowners Association. She presented Exhibit 36, a letter from the Association, which conveyed their concern regarding lighting and water runoff impacts from the project. She asked what recourse the neighborhood would have if the problems were exacerbated by the development. Rebuttal Mr. Barrentine stated that the parking lot would be significantly screened and the size of the vegetation to be planted had been increased. He related that he had heard more residents expressing their concerns in testimony than he had heard at the neighborhood meeting. He observed that as he drove the street at night recently, there was only one place where he could see the parking lot lights. He clarified that the resource protection area was to include the small area between the existing and new parking lots. He indicated that the testimony regarding Lost Dog Creek flow was more detailed than had previously been expressed to the applicant; however, the problem to be dealt with was one that pre-dated the development and had not been created by the applicant. He stated the applicant would work with the staff regarding mitigation of storm water runoff. He said the applicant planned to begin construction in July, and the project would be delayed another year if the hearing was extended. He clarified for the Commissioners that the light poles were 16' 2"high and the fixtures were slanted to direct the light away from the neighborhood. City of Lake Oswego Page 13 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998 Ms. Freedman requested that the hearing be continued to allow submission of additional written evidence. Chair Cushing moved to continue DR 12-98/CU 3-98/VAR 13-98 to December 21, 1998, with any additional written evidence to be submitted by 5 PM, December 14, 1998, and the applicant's response to be submitted by 12:00 noon on December 17, 1998. The motion passed with Mr. Cushing, Ms. Morales, Mr. Homing, Mr. Magura, Ms. Binkley and Ms. Ostly voting yes. Mr. Kiersey was absent. There were no votes against. Mr. Magura requested the applicant provide evidence regarding the impact of the proposed development on the quantity of storm water runoff. VI. GENERAL PLANNING & OTHER BUSINESS None. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Development Review Commission, Chair Douglas P. Cushing adjourned the meeting at 10:50 PM. Respectfully submitted. Janice Benn Senior Secretary 1:\dre\minutes\12-7-98.doc City of Lake Oswego Page 14 of 14 Development Review Commission Minutes of December 7,1998