Development Review Commission
FINALIZES its decision on Block 137
(and next there'll be the appeal)
FINALIZES its decision on Block 137
(and next there'll be the appeal)
Disclaimer: This post is done from recall and may not have exact wording correct. Since this is a characterization of the meeting and not journalistic reporting, it reflects my opinion as to what transpired. If you were not at the meeting, I encourage you to watch the video recording in order to make your own judgements.
Something was off last night and you could tell right away. The written summary of the DRC hearings on July 30 was wrong. The planning staff, who created the summary, had a key sentence backwards.
The Commission finds that the ground floor commercial uses, as proposed, create a high‐density
compact shopping district with density that supports retail uses,
The Commission saw this right away, and all agreed that this was not the way it was supposed to be - even the two who who were in the minority on the decision.
The Commission changed the wording to read, "does not create a high-density compact shopping district" and moved on. This first topic was easy, but if the entire commission agreed on this item, how did the staff get it so wrong?
A discussion ensued about the merits of the reasons the three Commissioners denied the application, and for the first hour of so, the Deputy City Attorney and planners interjected comments that changed the debate. It seemed as if they wanted the Commission to re-argue its decision and change its vote, either by inserting language into the document that nullified or confused key issues, or by encouraging contentious debate.
After awhile, the Commission got passed the quality of the written summary and went to work revising it so that the wording matched their thinking on each point. The Commission found that the original and revised development application, including the orally-made options, were not enough to approve the application. The final vote was 3-2 to deny the application.
According to the National Apartment Association. mid-rise apartments can expect a turnover rate of about 52%. With 207 apartments that would mean about 100 units would turn over in one year, or about 2 per week. Since each tenant makes 2 trips with their belongings, that adds up to 200 truckloads of furniture and belongings moving in and out, or about 4 trucks per week. This is an astounding number, the likes of which downtown Lake Oswego has never experinced before. The Commission agreed that another tenant on-site (not on street) loading area was necessary.
Developers should write a plan for how they would mitigate for the impacts of construction like foundation or other damage to condominiums on Second St., noise, damage to city streets from about 3,000 dump truckloads of dirt and rocks from the excavation site, water intrusion, etc.
The Commission saw this right away, and all agreed that this was not the way it was supposed to be - even the two who who were in the minority on the decision.
The Commission changed the wording to read, "does not create a high-density compact shopping district" and moved on. This first topic was easy, but if the entire commission agreed on this item, how did the staff get it so wrong?
A discussion ensued about the merits of the reasons the three Commissioners denied the application, and for the first hour of so, the Deputy City Attorney and planners interjected comments that changed the debate. It seemed as if they wanted the Commission to re-argue its decision and change its vote, either by inserting language into the document that nullified or confused key issues, or by encouraging contentious debate.
After awhile, the Commission got passed the quality of the written summary and went to work revising it so that the wording matched their thinking on each point. The Commission found that the original and revised development application, including the orally-made options, were not enough to approve the application. The final vote was 3-2 to deny the application.
Compact Shopping District
Specific code language says that first floor uses must be retail; there should be no residential on the first floor. The design did not meet the requirement with regard to the purpose of the redevelopment plan. Which was to create a compact shopping district including Block 137.
Village Character
Is "village" separately defined by numerical codes as written in 4 places in the Development Codes? Or is there a broader definition of the meaning of the term that must apply as written in the Downtown Redevelopment Plan? Staff used the first definition to meet the requirement of village character. The Commission looked at the primary definition in the Redevelopment Plan that calls for complex massing and an assembly of small scale structures. The Commission found that the design does not achieve the purposes of the urban renewal plan in a way that is equal to or better than what is required."
Loading
According to the National Apartment Association. mid-rise apartments can expect a turnover rate of about 52%. With 207 apartments that would mean about 100 units would turn over in one year, or about 2 per week. Since each tenant makes 2 trips with their belongings, that adds up to 200 truckloads of furniture and belongings moving in and out, or about 4 trucks per week. This is an astounding number, the likes of which downtown Lake Oswego has never experinced before. The Commission agreed that another tenant on-site (not on street) loading area was necessary.
Other
If the residential areas on the first floor changed to retail, then more parking would be necessary. Developers should write a plan for how they would mitigate for the impacts of construction like foundation or other damage to condominiums on Second St., noise, damage to city streets from about 3,000 dump truckloads of dirt and rocks from the excavation site, water intrusion, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment