Metal Parapet Cap (Over Flashing) Roof Membrane Flashing ...
Analyses & Findings Analyses... · · 2017-09-08applicable for the highest type decision...
Transcript of Analyses & Findings Analyses... · · 2017-09-08applicable for the highest type decision...
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 1 of 36
Analyses & Findings This attachment to the staff report analyzes the application materials and finds through simple
statements how the application materials relate to and meet applicable provisions such as
criteria, requirements, and standards. They confirm that a given standard is met or if not met,
they call attention to it, suggest a remedy, and have a corresponding recommended condition
of approval. Symbols aid locating and understanding categories of findings:
Symbol Category Indication
Requirement (or guideline) met No action needed
Requirement (or guideline) not met Correction needed
Requirement (or guideline) not applicable No action needed
Requirement (or guideline) met, but might become unmet because of condition applied to meet separate and related requirement that is not met
Plan sheets contradict each other
Other special circumstance
Revision needed for clear and consistent records
Section references are to the Woodburn Development Ordinance (WDO).
Table of Contents Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Land Use & Zoning ........................................................................................................................................ 2
Statutory Dates ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Design Review Provisions .............................................................................................................................. 3
Variance Provisions ..................................................................................................................................... 26
Recommended Conditions of Approval ...................................................................................................... 33
Applicant Identity ........................................................................................................................................ 35
Notes to the Applicant ................................................................................................................................ 35
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 2 of 36
Location Address(es) 1299 N. Pacific Hwy
Tax Lot(s) 051W 08DB 02400
Nearest intersection
N. Pacific Hwy (U.S. 99E) & Alexandra Ave
Land Use & Zoning Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Commercial
Zoning District Commercial General (CG)
Overlay District(s) None
Existing Use(s) None because, though previously developed, the site is vacant
For context, adjacent zoning is as illustrated and tabulated below:
Zoning Map Excerpt
Cardinal Direction Adjacent Zoning
North Street right-of-way (ROW), CG across street
East Road right-of-way (ROW), CG across road
South CG
West Single-family Residential (RS)
Statutory Dates
Application Completeness
August 10, 2017
120-Day Final Decision Deadline
December 8, 2017 per Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 227.178. (The nearest and prior regularly scheduled Commission date is November 9, 2017.)
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 3 of 36
Design Review Provisions
4.01.07 Consolidated Applications An applicant may request, in writing, to consolidate applications needed for a single development
project. Under a consolidated review, all applications shall be processed following the procedures
applicable for the highest type decision requested. It is the express policy of the City that
development review not be segmented into discrete parts in a manner that precludes a
comprehensive review of the entire development and its cumulative impacts.
5.03.02 Design Review, Type III A. Purpose: The purpose of Type III design review is to ensure that new buildings or additions to
existing buildings comply with Land Use and Development Guidelines and Standards of this Ordinance
(Sections 2 and 3).
B. Type III Design Review is required for the following:
1. Non-residential structures in residential zones greater than 1,000 square feet in the RS, R1S,
RM, and P/SP zones.
2. Multi-family dwellings not meeting all architectural design guidelines and standards.
3. Structures greater than 2,000 square feet in the CO, CG, MUV, DDC, and NNC zones.
4. Structures greater than 3,000 square feet in the IP, IL, and SWIR zones.
5. For sites with existing buildings in the CO, CG, MUV, DDC, NNC, IP, IL, and SWIR zones;
expansions or new buildings that increase lot coverage by more 25%.
6. Change of use that results in a greater than 25% increase in required parking.
The proposal is for a structure greater than 2,000 square feet (sq ft) in the CG zone and so per
subsection B.3 requires a Type III Design Review.
The requirement is met.
2.03 Commercial Zones A. The City of Woodburn is divided into the following commercial zones:
2. The Commercial General (CG) zone is the community’s primary commercial area, providing for
businesses requiring extensive land intensive outdoor storage and display of merchandise,
equipment, or inventory.
B. Approval Types (Table 2.03A)
1. Accessory Uses (A) are allowed outright, subject to the general standards of this Ordinance.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 4 of 36
Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones Table 2.03A
Use Zone
Accessory Uses (A) Conditional Uses (CU) Permitted Uses (P) Special Permitted Uses (S) Specific Conditional Uses (SCU)
CG
B Commercial Retail and Services
22 Retail trade offering goods and services directly to customers
P
The proposed use matches a permitted use in Table 2.03A Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones, B
22, “Retail trade offering good and services directly to customers”.
The requirement is met.
Commercial General (CG) - Site Development Standards
Table 2.03C
Lot Area, Minimum (square feet)
Lot Width, Minimum (feet)
Lot Depth, Minimum (feet)
Street Frontage, Minimum (feet)
Front Setback and Setback Abutting a Street, Minimum (feet) 5 1
Abutting RS, R1S, or RM zone 10 4
Abutting CO, CG, DDC, NNC, P/SP, IP, SWIR, or IL zone 0 or 5 4, 5
Setback to a Private Access Easement, Minimum (feet) 5
Lot Coverage, Maximum Not specified 2
Outside Gateway subarea 70
Western Gateway subarea 50
Eastern Gateway subarea 40
Features not used for habitation 100
1. Measured from the Special Setback (Section 3.03.02), if any
2. Lot coverage is limited by setbacks, off-street parking, and landscaping requirements.
4. A house of worship shall be set back at least 20 feet from a property line abutting a residential zone or use.
5. A building may be constructed at the property line, or shall be set back at least five feet.
Setbacks: Front & Abutting a Street
Footnote 1 in the Table refers to the Special Setback, which 3.03.02A. describes as follows:
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 5 of 36
“Special Setbacks are necessary when the existing street right-of-way is less than the designated right-of-
way in the Woodburn Transportation System Plan. Special Setbacks ensure that development will
conform with setback and vision clearance requirements, after a full right-of-way has been acquired.”
Table 3.1.1. Special Setback by Street Classification establishes the number of feet (ft) from
each side of centerline for planned right-of-way (ROW) by street class, and Transportation
System Plan (TSP) Figure 7-1 Functional Classification Designations establishes the class of a
given road or street within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).
N. Pacific Highway / U.S. 99E: Fig. 7-1 designates it as a Major Arterial, for which Table 3.1.1
requires 50 ft from centerline, i.e. 100 ft total ROW. Per City Geographic Information System
(GIS) measurement, the highway ROW along the site is a consistent 88 ft total. Because the
ROW from centerline is 44 ft and so short of 50 ft, the Special Setback affects the property and
adds the difference of 6 ft to the total minimum setback from the east/southeast present
property line. The true minimum east/SE minimum setback is 5 + 6 = 11 ft.
Alexandra Avenue: Fig. 7-1 designates it as a Local Street. Of the three options of 50, 52, or 60-
ft planned ROWs for Local Streets, current policy of Public Works staff is to assume the widest
of these three options: 60 ft. Because the street ROW along the site is a consistent 60 ft, the
Special Setback has no effect on the north/northeast minimum setback of 5 ft.
The requirement is met.
Setbacks: Sides & Rear
The definitions under “Lot Line” in 1.02 determine that for subject property the north/NE lot
line Alexandra Avenue is front and the south/southwest lot line is rear. For a corner lot “the
architectural front of the existing or contemplated primary building” determines what is front.
Because the elevations indicate that the main entrance is on the north façade, this makes the
north/NE lot line into the front. Because the rear must be opposite the front, this in turn makes
the south/southwest lot line into the rear. The remaining north/northwest lot line is a side.
The proposal is as follows:
Setback Minimum Proposed
Front N/NE 5 ft 58 ft
Abutting a Street E/SE 11* 25
Rear S/SW 0 or 5 15
Side W/NW 10** 174½
Private Access Easement
5*** 120
*Including the Special Setback
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 6 of 36
**Greater than zero or five because subject property abuts RS zone
***Site plan delineates existing private access easement north-south between Alexandra Avenue and
Tax Lot 051W 08CD 00100 (1665 James Street)
The requirement is met.
Height
The maximum height is 70 ft measured per 1.02 Definitions “Building Height” and Fig. 1.02B.
The proposal with finished grade is for a flat site and a flat-roofed building with a parapet. The
distance from finished grade to highest segment of parapet is 21 ft.
The requirement is met.
2.05 Overlay Districts
Because the site has no environmental or zoning overlay district(s), the requirements are not
applicable.
2.06 Accessory Structures
Because the proposal has no altered or new accessory structures, the requirements are not
applicable.
2.07 Special Uses
Because the proposal involves no Special Permitted Use, the requirements are not
applicable.
3.01 Streets 3.01.04B. All public streets under the jurisdiction of the City of Woodburn shall comply with the cross-
sections depicted in this Section.
Requirement not Met: Because N. Pacific Highway / U.S. 99E, presently a Major Arterial with
88-ft ROW, is narrower than the 100-ft cross section in Fig. 3.01B, additional ROW is required
and so dedication of (100-88)/2 = 6 ft of ROW is required. The site plan fails to indicate
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 7 of 36
dedication of 6 ft along the present east property line to the highway ROW and to provide
documented evidence or proof of dedication.
The proposal fails to meet the requirement. Staff applies Condition D1a.
Context: Three public utility easements of different widths exist along the present east
property line as the site plan illustrates and describes. For this reason and to have clear and
sensible easements on record along with the ROW dedication, the applicant must revise and
shift easements to the new east property line as needed per City Public Works and Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) requirements.
Staff applies Condition D1b.
3.01.04C. For local residential streets which are not identified in the Comprehensive Plan, rights-of-
way and improvements are determined by the Director at the time of development, based upon the
existing and future estimated average daily trips of the development and surrounding development.
Because Alexandra Avenue, presently a local street with 60-ft ROW, matches the cross section
in Fig. 3.01G, it requires no additional ROW and so no dedication or reservation.
The requirement is met.
3.02 Utilities & Easements 3.02.01B. A five-foot wide public utility easement shall be dedicated along each lot line abutting a
public street.
The requirement is met, but staff applies Condition D1c because of the context below.
Context: The proposal necessitates ROW dedication and shifting of public utility easements as
explained earlier in this document, and staff applies Conditions D1a and D1b to this effect. As a
result, because the requirement might become unmet, a condition is necessary to ensure that
the requirement would continue to be met.
Remedy: To meet the requirement of WDO 3.02.01B, the applicant shall provide a 5-ft wide
City utility easement along both abutting public streets per Condition D1c.
3.02.03 Street Lighting A. Public Streets
The lighting/photometric plan notes that public lighting will follow lluminating Engineering
Society (IES) of North America Recommended Practice 8, Roadway Lighting (RP-8).
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 8 of 36
The requirement is met.
3.02.04 Underground Utilities. All permanent utility service to and within a development shall be
underground, except where overhead high-voltage (35,000 volts or more) electric facilities exist.
Requirement not Met: Overhead electric or power lines exist along N. Pacific Highway. Because
the site plans and the narrative do not address the requirement, it’s unclear if the requirement
would be met.
The proposal fails to meet the requirement. Staff applies Condition D2.
Remedy: The applicant must bury all permanent utility service to and within a development
except where overhead high-voltage (35,000 volts or more) electric facilities exist and shall
revise the site plans to indicate such. If the exception applies, the applicant must note such on
the site plans.
3.03 Setbacks and Open Space 3.03.02 Special Setbacks
Staff addressed special setbacks earlier in this report under WDO 2.03.
3.03.03 Projections into the Setback Abutting a Street
3.03.04 Projections into the Side Setback
3.03.05 Projections into the Rear Setback
Because the proposal involves no such projections, the requirements are not applicable.
3.03.06 Vision Clearance Area; Figures 3.03A & B
The site plan delineates vision clearance area triangles at the street intersection and on each
side of the proposed driveway meeting the placement and respective dimensional standards of
30 by 30 ft and 10 by 10 ft.
The requirement is met.
3.04 Vehicular Access 3.04.02 Drive-Throughs
Because the proposal involves no drive-through, the requirement is not applicable.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 9 of 36
3.04.03 Driveway Guidelines and Standards
Access Requirements
Table 3.04A
Commercial or
Industrial Use
1-way 12 minimum
20 maximum
2-way
24 minimum
36 maximum
(Add 8’ if a turn
lane is provided)
Curb Flare Radius (feet) 30 minimum
Throat
Length (feet) 5
Access or Local
Street 20 minimum
Corner
Clearance
(feet)
Guidelines 1
(See Figure
3.04B)
Access or Local
Street 30 minimum
Driveway on the
same parcel 50 minimum
Access or Local
Street None
Turnarounds
(See Figure
3.04C)
Access to any
other street
Requirements per
the Woodburn
Fire District
The standards for driveways and drive aisles are met.
The requirement is met.
3.04.03A. Unused driveways shall be closed.
The requirement is met, but the landscape plan sheet is not yet updated to match the site
plan sheet. It shows closure of the curb cut that the applicant had originally proposed. Staff
applies Condition D3.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 10 of 36
Context: The existing west curb cut – i.e. the portion of driveway within the right-of-way,
sloped to meet street pavement, and also known as an “apron” – is to remain open because
though with site improvements it will remain unused and not connect to any drive aisle, it
serves a private north-south access easement running between Alexandra Avenue and Tax Lot
051W 08CD 00100 (1665 James Street) delineated on the site plan. Though the applicant is
seeking to extinguish the easement, because the landowner benefitting from the easement
might not consent, the site plan and the improvements it illustrates are laid out to avoid
encroachment upon the easement.
Remedy: The remedy is for the applicant to ensure clear and consistent records by revising the
site and landscape plan sheets to be consistent and show that the existing west curb cut along
Alexandra Avenue is to be kept as is to allow physical access to the private north-south access
easement.
3.04.04 Improvement Standards
The site plans illustrate driveway meeting the paving standards.
The requirement is met.
3.04.05 Traffic Impact Analysis
Because there is no evidence that the development proposal may generate either 100 or
more additional, peak hour trips, or 1,000 or more additional daily trips, within ten years of a
development application, the requirement is not applicable. The applicant opted to provide a
traffic impact analysis (TIA).
3.05 Off-Street Parking and Loading 3.05.02 General Provisions
Staff addresses provision 3.05.02D.4. (surface parking in yards along streets to be screened)
through the other surface parking screening provision later in this document under 3.06.05B.
Staff does not address here 3.05.02L. – the exterior lighting standards from which the applicant
proposes to vary through one of the variances – because staff addresses it later under the
Variance Provisions section.
The requirement is met regarding the remaining provisions.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 11 of 36
3.05.03 Off-Street Parking
Off-Street Parking Ratio Standards
Table 3.05A
Use 1, 2 Parking Ratio - spaces per activity unit or
square feet of gross floor area
COMMERCIAL / PUBLIC
1. General retail sales (such as food and beverages, clothing, sporting goods, health and personal care items, and motor vehicle parts)
1/ 250 square feet
The applicant proposes (6,912 building sq ft / 250) = 27.6 28 parking stalls.
The requirement is met.
Accessible Parking Ratio Standards
Table 3.05B
Total Spaces Minimum Total
Accessible Spaces 1
Minimum Van
Accessible Spaces
Minimum “Wheelchair User
Only” Spaces
1 to 25 1 1
26 to 50 2 1
1. “Van Accessible Spaces” and “Wheelchair User Only” are included in “Total Accessible Spaces.”
The applicant proposes a parking supply of 28 stalls including two handicap parking stalls.
The requirement is met.
Parking Space and Drive Aisle Dimensions
Table 3.05C
Drive Aisle Width
(feet)
1-way 2-way
A B C D E F G
Standard or Accessible 9.0 9.0 19.0 19.0 24.0
Compact 7.5 7.5 15.0 15.0 22.0
Car Accessible Aisle 6.0 6.0 19.0 19.0
Van Accessible Aisle 8.0 8.0 19.0 19.0
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 12 of 36
Parking Space and Drive Aisle Dimensions
Table 3.05C
Drive Aisle Width
(feet)
1-way 2-way
A B C D E F G
1. A parking space may occupy up to two feet of a landscaped area or walkway. At least four feet clear width of a walkway must be maintained.
2. Space width is measured from the midpoint of the double stripe.
3. Curb or wheel stops shall be utilized to prevent vehicles from encroaching on abutting properties or rights-of-way.
4. The access aisle must be located on the passenger side of the parking space, except that two adjacent parking spaces may share a common access aisle.
5. Where the angle of parking stalls differ across a drive aisle, the greater drive aisle width shall be provided.
The applicant proposes dimensions, double-striping, curbing, and wheel stops that meet or
exceed the minimum standards.
The requirement is met.
3.05.04 Off-Street Loading
Loading Space Requirements
Table 3.05D
Minimum Size of Space (feet)
Width Length Height
Nonresidential uses, except office, in the
CO, CG, and NNC zones
0 – 9,999
10,000 – 41,999
42,000 – 81,999
82,000 or more
1
2
3
4
12 30 14
The site plans include for the commercial retail building of 6,912 sq ft a loading berth exceeding
the minimum dimensions.
The requirement is met.
3.05.05 Shared Parking
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 13 of 36
Because the applicant chooses not to exercise the option, the standards are not applicable.
3.06 Landscaping 3.06.02 General Requirements
The landscape plan provides irrigation and protective curbing and addresses the standards.
The requirement is met.
3.06.03 Landscaping Standards
A. Street Trees
Standard not Met: The number of required street trees is (424 ft total frontage / 50) = 8.5 9.
The landscape plan proposes 6 total through 5 existing and one new tree.
The proposal fails to meet the requirement. Staff applies Condition D4.
Remedy: The applicant must revise the proposal to provide and distribute along both ROWs
nine (9) total street trees.
Context:
The applicant proposes a new street tree within the area of the existing curb cut at
Alexandra Avenue. The landscape plan needs revision to not propose a street tree here
because the curb cut is to be kept.
Street trees may be placed on-site outside and near ROW per 3.06.03A.3.
Staff recommends that the developer site street trees along N. Pacific Hwy to be within the
future ROW line based on the Special Setback to remain in place while becoming a future
planter strip at least 6 ft wide between a future six-inch curb and a future 6-ft sidewalk
along the future ROW line.
Staff recommends that one of the N. Pacific Hwy street trees be sited near the south side of
the walkway to, at maturity, shade a segment of walkway to and from the public sidewalk.
B. & Tables 3.06A & B
Planting Requirements
Table 3.06A
Location Planting Density, Minimum Area to be Landscaped, Minimum
Setbacks abutting a street 1 PU/15 square feet Entire setback excluding driveways
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 14 of 36
Planting Requirements
Table 3.06A
Location Planting Density, Minimum Area to be Landscaped, Minimum
Buffer yards 1 PU/20 square feet Entire yard excluding off-street
parking and loading areas abutting a
wall
Other yards 1 PU/50 square feet Entire yard, excluding areas subject to
more intensive landscaping
requirements and off-street parking
and loading areas
Off-street parking and
loading areas
1 small tree per 10 parking spaces; or 1
1 medium tree per 15 parking spaces; or 1
1 large tree per 25 parking spaces 1
and
1 PU/20 square feet excluding required trees 2
RS, R1S, RSN, RM, RMN, P/SP, CO, CG and MUV zones: 20% of the paved surface area for off-street parking, loading and circulation
DDC, NNC, IP, IL, and SWIR zones: 10% of the paved surface area for off-street parking, loading and circulation
Landscaping shall be within or immediately adjacent to paved areas
1. Trees shall be located within off-street parking facilities, in proportion to the distribution of the parking spaces.
2. Required landscaping within a setback abutting a street or an interior lot line that is within 20 feet of parking, loading and circulation facilities may also be counted in calculating landscaping for off-street parking, loading and circulation areas.
Plant Unit (PU) Value
Table 3.06B
Material Plant Unit (PU) Value Minimum Size
1. Significant tree 1 15 PU each 24” Diameter
2. Large tree (60-120 feet high at maturity) 1
10 PU each 10’ Height or 2” Caliper
3. Medium tree (40-60 feet high at maturity 1
8 PU each 10’ Height or 2” Caliper
4. Small tree (18-40 feet high at maturity) 1 4 PU each 10’ Height or 2” Caliper
5. Large shrub (at maturity over 4’ wide x 4’ high) 1
2 PU each 3 gallon or balled
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 15 of 36
Plant Unit (PU) Value
Table 3.06B
Material Plant Unit (PU) Value Minimum Size
6. Small to medium shrub (at maturity maximum 4’ wide x 4’ high) 1
1 PU each 1 gallon
7. Lawn or other living ground cover 1 1 PU / 50 square feet
8. Berm 2 1 PU / 20 lineal feet Minimum 2 feet high
9. Ornamental fence 2 1 PU / 20 lineal feet 2½ - 4 feet high
10. Boulder 2 1 PU each Minimum 2 feet high
11. Sundial, obelisk, gnomon, or gazing ball 2
2 PU each Minimum 3 feet high
12. Fountain 2 3 PU each Minimum 3 feet high
13. Bench or chair 2 0.5 PU / lineal foot
14. Raised planting bed constructed of brick, stone or similar material except CMU 2
0.5 PU / lineal foot of
greatest dimension
Minimum 1 foot high,
minimum 1 foot wide in
least interior dimension
15. Water feature incorporating stormwater detention 2
2 per 50 square feet None
1. Existing vegetation that is retained has the same plant unit value as planted vegetation.
2. No more than twenty percent (20%) of the required plant units may be satisfied by items in lines 8 through 15.
The planting area and unit requirements are as follows:
Generic Location
On-Site Yard
Planting Density
Landscaped Area
Minimum Rate
Minimum Amount
Proposed Minimum Proposed
Alexandra front yard
3,625 sq ft / 15 = 241.6 242 PUs
242 PUs Entire setback excluding driveways
N. Pacific Hwy yard
2,000 sq ft / 15 = 133.3 133 PUs
133 PUs Entire setback excluding driveways
Buffer yards
W/NW side yard
1 PU / 20 sq ft
12,150 / 20 =
608 PUs Entire yard excluding off-
Entire yard excluding
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 16 of 36
Generic Location
On-Site Yard
Planting Density
Landscaped Area
Minimum Rate
Minimum Amount
Proposed Minimum Proposed
607.5 608 PUs
street parking and loading areas abutting a wall
off-street parking and loading areas abutting a wall
Other yards
S/SW rear yard
1 PU / 50 sq ft
122 sq ft / 50 = 2.4 2 PUs
19 PUs Entire yard, excluding areas subject to more intensive landscaping requirements and off-street parking and loading areas
Entire yard, excluding areas subject to more intensive landscaping requirements and off-street parking and loading areas
Off-street parking and loading areas
n/a 1 PU / 20 sq ft exc. required trees & 1 small tree per 10 stalls (28/10=3) or 1 med. Tree per 15 stalls (28/15=2)
2,444 sq ft / 20 = 122.2 122 PUs
122 PUs & 4 trees
CG zone: 20% of the paved surface area for off-street parking, loading and circulation
20% of the paved surface area for off-street parking, loading and circulation
The requirement is met.
Prohibited Trees Table 3.06C
Standard not Met: The landscape plan proposes a street tree species of Thundercloud Plum
(“Prunus Thundercloud”). This species is a listed prohibited species.
The proposal fails to meet the requirement. Staff applies Condition D5.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 17 of 36
Remedy: The applicant must revise the proposal to propose one or more street tree species
not prohibited.
3.06.05 Screening & Table 3.06D
Screening Requirements
Table 3.06D
N = No screening required F = Sight-obscuring fence required W =
Architectural wall required
D = Architectural wall, fence, or hedge may be required in the Design Review process
Adjacent properties – zone or use
that receives the benefit of
screening
Property being Developed – must
provide screening if no
comparable screening exists on
abutting protected property
CG or MUV zone W2 W2 D D D W2 W2
Outdoor storage in CG or MUV zone W1,
3
W1,
3
W1,
3
W1,
3
W1,
3 W1,3 W1,3
Refuse and recycling collection
facilities except for single-family
dwelling, duplex, child care facility,
or group home
W2,
6,7
W2,
6,7
W2,
6,7
W2,
6,7
W2,
6,7 W2,6,7 W2,6,7
The refuse and recycling collection facility, i.e. the recycling and trash enclosure, is enclosed
with a 6-ft high wall.
The requirement is met.
The property being developed is CG-zoned, and the adjacent property to the west/northwest is
a different zone and land use, RS and single-family residential. An architectural wall at least 6 ft
high would be required. The applicant proposes to vary from this request as analyzed further
below in the Variance Section.
3.06.05B.
All parking areas, except those for single-family and duplex dwellings, abutting a street shall provide a
42-inch vertical visual screen from the abutting street grade. Acceptable design techniques to provide
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 18 of 36
the screening include plant materials, berms, architectural walls, and depressed grade for the parking
area. All screening shall comply with the clear vision standards of this ordinance (Section 3.03.06).
The landscape plan illustrates a screen in the form of dense shrubbery that can reach 3½ ft at
maturity.
The requirement is met.
3.06.05 Architectural Walls
Because the applicant proposes to vary from the screening requirement of Table 3.06D
through one of the variances, the requirement is not applicable.
3.06.06 Significant Trees on Private Property
Because the proposal includes no tree removal, the requirement is not applicable.
3.07 Architectural Design 3.07.01 Applicability of Architectural Design Standards and Guidelines
A. For a Type II or III review, the criteria of this Section shall be read as “should” and shall be
applied as guidelines.
3.07.06 Standards for Non-Residential Structures in Residential, Commercial and Public/Semi Public
Zones
A. The following design guidelines shall be applicable to all non-residential structures and
buildings in the RS, RSN, R1S, RM, RMN, CO, CG, and P/SP zones.
B. Architectural Design Guidelines
1. Mass and Bulk Articulation Guidelines
a. Building facades visible from streets and public parking areas should be articulated, in
order to avoid the appearance of box-like structures with unbroken wall surfaces.
b. The appearance of exterior walls should be enhanced by incorporating three
dimensional design features, including the following:
(1) Public doorways or passage ways through the building
(2) Wall offsets or projections
(3) Variation in building materials or textures
(4) Arcades, awnings, canopies or porches
2. Materials and Texture Guidelines
a. Building exteriors should exhibit finishes and textures that reduce the visual
monotony of bulky structures and large structural spaces. Building exteriors should
enhance visual interest of wall surfaces and harmonize with the structural design.
b. The appearance of exterior surfaces should be enhanced by incorporating the
following:
(1) At least 30% of the wall surface abutting a street should be glass.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 19 of 36
(2) All walls visible from a street or public parking area should be surfaced with
wood, brick, stone, designer block, or stucco, or with siding that has the appearance of
wood lap siding.
(3) The use of plain concrete, plain concrete block, corrugated metal, plywood, T
111 and sheet composite siding as exterior finish materials for walls visible from a
street or parking area should be avoided.
(4) The color of at least 90 percent of the wall, roof and awning surface visible
from a street or public parking area should be an “earth tone” color containing 10
parts, or more of brown or a “tinted” color, containing 10 parts or more white.
(5) Fluorescent, “day-glo,” or any similar bright color shall not be used on the
building exterior.
3. Multi-Planed Roof Guidelines
a. The roof line at the top of a structure should establish a distinctive top to the building.
b. The roof line should not be flat or hold the same roof line over extended distances.
Rather, the roof line should incorporate variations, such as:
(1) Offsets or jogs in the plane of the roof;
(2) Changes in the height of the exterior wall for flat roof buildings, including
parapet walls with variations in elevation or cornices
4. Roof-Mounted Equipment Guidelines
All roof-mounted equipment, except solar collectors, should be screened from view by:
a. Locating roof-mounted equipment below the highest vertical element of the building,
or
b. Screening roof-mounted equipment using materials of the same character as the
structure’s basic materials
5. Weather Protection Guidelines
All building faces abutting a street or a public parking area should provide weather protection
for pedestrians. Features to provide this protection should include:
a. A continuous walkway at least eight feet wide along the face of the building utilizing a
roof overhang, arcade, awnings or canopies
b. Awnings and canopies that incorporate the following design features:
(1) Angled or curved surfaces facing a street or parking area
(2) A covering of fabric, or matte finish vinyl
(3) A constant color and pattern scheme for all buildings within the same
development
(4) No internal back lighting
6. Solar Access Protection
Obstruction of existing solar collectors on abutting properties by site development should be
minimized.
C. Building Location Guidelines
1. Within the prescribed setbacks, building location and orientation should compliment
[sic] abutting uses and development patterns.
2. The maximum yard abutting a street should be 150 feet.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 20 of 36
Guideline not Met: Staff opinion is that the proposal fails to meet the articulation guideline of
B.1.a.
The proposal fails to meet the guideline of B.1.a. Staff recommends that the Commission
find either that the proposal does meet the guideline or guide staff in drafting a condition of
approval. Staff requests Commission direction about what menu, number, and placement of
architectural features the condition would specifically require and that would meet the
guideline.
“Articulate/Articulation” is defined in 1.02 as, “the joining and intersecting of walls or building
spaces through offsets, projections, overhangs, extensions and similar features.” For context,
below are two excerpts of the color elevations:
Excerpt of “Elevation One” Plan Sheet. This front wall is 96 feet (ft) wide and faces surface parking and Alexandra
Avenue.
Excerpt of “Elevation Three” Plan Sheet. This side wall is 72 ft wide excluding awning and faces N. Pacific Highway.
The building has windows on the street sides, two different shades of masonry cladding, and
both a differentiated base and an accent stripe. It also has a projection in the form of an
awning at the main entrance. The building has no overhangs, one definite parapet extension at
the west/NW side, and appears box-like with unbroken wall surfaces. The north/NE and
east/SE parapets might be offset, but it’s unclear from the elevations if the offset area is part of
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 21 of 36
a sign band affixed to each of the elevations or if it is an extension of the main wall plane. Staff
opinion is that the building is not articulated enough based on the guideline and the definition.
Articulation with wall planes of the box as is – without offsetting volumes of the box – could
include heightening a section or sections of the parapet, such as to create a “saloon front”. The
west/NW elevation has this feature.
A second means is pilasters (also known as engaged columns, columns partially embedded
within a wall plane). The applicant’s narrative (Attachment 103, p. 55) states that the building
includes pilasters, but none are evident on the elevations.
A third is a main entrance canopy with structured roof and columns.
A fourth is a cornice, a form of horizontal and projecting moulding.
A fifth is to offset bricks within the wall plane to create quoining or horizontal accents.
Because the applicant proposes brick cladding, below are photos of commercial one-story
precedents illustrating some of these architectural elements with brick:
Example of quoining and additional offsets within Example of bricks offset from main wall plane as
main wall plane horizontal accent
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 22 of 36
21st Century example: Commercial one-story: Building within Willamette Marketplace remodeled strip mall, 2050
8th Avenue, West Linn, including cornice, pilasters, rain scupper as ornament, and (within rotunda at right) accent in
the form of dark bricks set perpendicular to main wall plane of light bricks as well as ornamental weather vane
Late 19th or early 20th Century example: Commercial one-story: 638 NW 23rd Avenue, Portland, including cornice,
pilasters, different brick bonding as horizontal and vertical accents, ornamental medallions, and horizontal band of
clerestory windows atop main vertical shop windows
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 23 of 36
Early 20th Century example: Commercial one-story: Marseilles, France, close-up of panel relief signaling original
use of building as auto service station
Woodburn example: Commercial two-story in downtown: 347 Front St, a remodeled 1891 building with cornice
and differently bonded bricks as vertical accents.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 24 of 36
Woodburn example: Commercial one-story along OR Hwy 214: 1000 Evergreen Rd, built after 2009, with pitched
roof, canopies, horizontally and vertically offset parapet, and a window as a display box.
Offsetting volumes of the box would open up means of articulation.
Regarding B.1.b, enhancement of exterior walls with three-dimensional design features, of four
suggested and not exhaustive options, the proposal includes item (4), an awning. The
remaining 3D design features are wall-mounted light fixtures and, on the west/NW side
elevation, four rain downspouts.
The guideline of B.1.b. is met.
Regarding B.2., materials and textures, for item (a.) the building exteriors have finishes and
textures that reduce the visual monotony of the bulky structure, enhance visual interest of wall
surfaces, and harmonize with the structural design. For item (b.):
(1) Guideline not Met: While the front elevation abutting Alexandra Avenue has at least
35.9% of the wall area as glass area and so exceeds the minimum of 30%, the east
elevation abutting N. Pacific Highway has only 23.3% glass.
The east elevation fails to meet the guideline of B.2.b.(1). Staff applies Condition D6.
(2) All three walls visible from streets or surface parking are surfaced with brick, meeting
the guideline.
(3) The building has none of the prohibited sign materials, meeting the guideline.
(4) The predominant color is earth tone, meeting the guideline.
(5) The building has no flurorescent or “day-glo” color, meeting the guideline.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 25 of 36
The guidelines of B.2.b.(2)-(5) are met.
Regarding B.3., roofing, for item (a.), the roof line establishes a distinctive top to the building.
The guideline of B.3. is met.
Guideline not Met: Though the applicant’s narrative (Attachment 103, p. 57) states each
elevation has roof line jogs “along the parapet walls and signage bands”, it is unclear from the
elevations if the jogs on the north/NE and east/SE elevations are of the parapet or the result of
affixed sign bands. The west/NW elevation parapet clearly jogs. Because the roof line might be
flat along the north/NE and east/SE elevations, the situation is unclear. Staff opinion is that the
guideline of B.3.b. is not met.
The proposal fails to meet the guideline of B.3.b. Staff recommends that the Commission
find either that the proposal does meet the guideline or guide staff in drafting a condition of
approval. Staff requests Commission direction about what menu, number, and placement of
architectural features the condition would specifically require and that would meet the
guideline.
Context: The above photos for item B.1.a. are useful for item B.3.b. too.
Regarding B.4., the elevations illustrate a screening enclosure of roof-mounted equipment.
The guideline of B.4. is met.
Regarding B.5., pedestrian weather protection, the proposal includes a fabric awning at with no
internal back lighting and covering the main entrance door and windows. An 8-ft wide walkway
is along the face of the building.
The guideline of B.5. is met.
Regarding B.6., the proposal obstructs none of any existing solar collectors on abutting
properties.
The guideline of B.6. is met.
Regarding C., within the prescribed setbacks, the building location and orientation
complements abutting strip commercial uses and development patterns along N. Pacific
Highway, and no proposed street setback is more than 150 ft.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 26 of 36
The guideline of C. is met.
Variance Provisions
The two variances accompanying the design review relate to the requirement for screening
between zones and uses (at the west/northwest property line in the form of a 6-ft masonry
wall) and the standards for maximum exterior illumination. The applicant submitted narrative
text addressing the criteria.
Variance Criteria 5.03.12 Variance
A. Purpose: The purpose of this Type III Variance is to allow use of a property in a way that would
otherwise be prohibited by this Ordinance. Uses not allowed in a particular zone are not subject
to the variance process. Standards set by statute relating to siting of manufactured homes on
individual lots; siding and roof of manufactured homes; and manufactured home and dwelling
park improvements are non-variable.
B. Criteria: A variance may be granted to allow a deviation from development standard of this
ordinance where the following criteria are met:
1. Strict adherence to the standards of this ordinance is not possible or imposes an excessive
burden on the property owner, and
2. Variance to the standards will not unreasonably impact existing or potential uses or
development on the subject property or adjacent properties.
C. Factors to Consider: A determination of whether the criteria are satisfied involves balancing
competing and conflicting interests. The factors that are listed below are not criteria and are not
intended to be an exclusive list and are used as a guide in determining whether the criteria are
met.
1. The variance is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship relating to the land or structure,
which would cause the property to be unbuildable by application of this Ordinance. Factors to
consider in determining whether hardship exists, include:
a. Physical circumstances over which the applicant has no control related to the piece of
property involved that distinguish it from other land in the zone, including but not limited
to, lot size, shape, and topography.
b. Whether reasonable use similar to other properties can be made of the property
without the variance.
c. Whether the hardship was created by the person requesting the variance.
2. Development consistent with the request will not be materially injurious to adjacent
properties. Factors to be considered in determining whether development consistent with the
variance materially injurious include, but are not limited to:
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 27 of 36
a. Physical impacts such development will have because of the variance, such as visual,
noise, traffic and drainage, erosion and landslide hazards.
b. Incremental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed variance.
3. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic
land forms or parks will not be adversely affected because of the variance.
4. Whether the variance is the minimum deviation necessary to make reasonable economic
use of the property;
5. Whether the variance conflicts with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan.
Variance 2017-04: Maximum Exterior Illumination 3.05.02L. For nonresidential uses:
1. Parking and loading areas should be illuminated at an average of 0.2 horizontal foot candle at
ground level (or 0.5 horizontal foot-candle if the applicant states that personal security or
vandalism is a likely or severe problem), with a maximum uniformity ratio of 20:1 (maximum
to minimum)
2. Entrance areas to the building should be illuminated at an average of 0.5 horizontal foot-
candle at ground level (or 1.0 horizontal foot-candle if the applicant states that personal
security or vandalism is a likely or severe problem), with a maximum uniformity ratio of 15:1
(maximum to minimum).
3. Illumination shall not shine or reflect onto residentially zoned property or a public street.
The applicant submitted Variance 2017-04 to vary from the maximum exterior illumination
requirement.
The applicant’s narrative states:
“The proposed parking lot will be illuminated with LED parking lot lighting. See the updated
photometric plan included with this submittal. The parking and loading areas will have an
average illumination of 1.4 foot-candles (fc), with a minimum value of 0.1 fc and a uniformity
ratio of 14.0:1. The entrance area to the building will have an average illumination of 1.5 fc, with
a minimum value of 0.1 fc and a uniformity ratio of 14.0:1. Illumination does not shine or reflect
on the residential property to the west, or to the public streets. The horizontal foot-candle
requirements in this code section are identified as an average, listing 0.2 fc required for parking
and loading areas, and 0.5 fc required for entrance areas. Based on coordination with the city,
for the purposes of the WDO, we understand these averages are interpreted as “maximum”
average values. Although the uniformity ratios provided by the proposed parking lot lighting
meets the WDO requirements, the average values do not, based on the city’s interpretation of it
being a maximum average. The applicant feels that the required maximum averages are very
low and do not provide illumination that is sufficient for a safe parking environment at night.
Accordingly, the applicant requests a variance to the average required lighting levels, as
identified below.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 28 of 36
The proposed parking lot will be illuminated with LED parking lot lighting. See the updated
photometric plan included with this submittal. The parking and loading areas will have an
average illumination of 1.4 foot-candles (fc), with a minimum value of 0.1 fc and a uniformity
ratio of 14.0:1. The entrance area to the building will have an average illumination of 1.5 fc, with
a minimum value of 0.1 fc
and a uniformity ratio of 14.0:1. As noted above, the horizontal foot-candle requirements in this
code section are identified as an average, listing 0.2 fc required for parking and loading areas,
and 0.5
fc required for entrance areas. Based on coordination with the city, for the purposes of the
WDO, we understand these averages are interpreted as “maximum” average values. Although
the uniformity ratios provided by the proposed parking lot lighting meets the WDO
requirements, the average values do not, based on the city’s interpretation of it being a
maximum average. The applicant feels that the required maximum averages are very low and do
not provide illumination that is sufficient for a safe parking environment at night. Accordingly,
the applicant requests a variance to the average required lighting levels, as identified below. It
should be noted that the “Model Development Code for Small Cities”, provided by the State of
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), identifies the following
standards:
Walkway lighting shall have a minimum average illumination of not less than [0.2] foot-
candles
Active building entrances shall have a minimum average illumination of not less than
[2.0] foot-candles
Parking lots and outdoor services areas… shall have a minimum illumination of not less
than [0.2] foot-candles
In addition, the US Department of Energy Guide for Parking Lot Lighting even recommends a
minimum illuminance of 0.2 fc in parking lots, with a minimum of 0.5 fc for enhanced security
areas. Note that these are just minimum values, not even minimum average values.
Even the Dark Sky Society’s (www.darkskysociety.org) “Guidelines for Good Exterior Lighting
Plans” identifies higher values than the WDO, identifying average values at active building
entrance areas of 2.0 fc, and minimum values of 0.2 fc in parking lots.
With this identified minimum value of 0.2 fc, there would be no way to keep a maximum
average of 0.2 fc as required by the WDO, since 0.2 fc would be the absolute lowest allowed in
the parking lot.
These other standards are identified to point out what is typically identified as industry
standards, both nationally and in the state of Oregon. Strict adherence to the standards of the
WDO would imposes an excessive burden on the developer when compared to industry
standards. In addition, it should be noted that the proposed parking lot is approximately 90 feet
from the western property line (adjacent residential use) at the closest point. At that distance,
the illumination created by the proposed parking lot lighting will be 0 fc at the western property
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 29 of 36
line. The adjacent property to the south is a commercial use, which has a building abutting
nearly all of the shared property line. The proposed illumination along the southern property
line is shown to be approximately 0.1 fc or less. Based on this information, a variance to the
standards will not unreasonably impact existing or potential uses or development on the subject
property or adjacent properties.”
Staff concurs.
The variance criteria are met.
Context: Granting the variance would allow the applicant to light at the requested levels.
Freed from the requirement and without a condition of approval, the applicant could choose to
change the light levels with no limit. Also, the WDO does not require full cut-off or fully
shielded light fixtures.
Because of these reasons, staff recommends a variance condition that establishes a maximum
exterior illumination standard applicable to the project and requires full cut-off models.
Condition VL1 mimics the text structure of the WDO lighting requirement and sets different
maximum and average maximum values that accommodate the values that the applicant
proposes while also establishing reasonable illumination limits:
A. Parking and loading areas shall be illuminated at a maximum of 1.4 horizontal foot
candle with a maximum average of 0.8 horizontal fc at ground level, with a
maximum uniformity ratio of 20:1 (maximum to minimum).
B. Entrance areas to the building shall be illuminated at a maximum of 2.0 horizontal
foot-candle with a maximum average of 1.3 horizontal fc at ground level, with a
maximum uniformity ratio of 15:1 (maximum to minimum).
C. Altered or new exterior lighting fixtures shall be full cut-off or fully shielded models.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 30 of 36
Variance 2017-07: Screening / Architectural Wall
Screening Requirements
Table 3.06D
N = No screening required F = Sight-obscuring fence required W = Architectural wall required
D = Architectural wall, fence, or hedge may be required in the Design Review process
Adjacent properties – zone or use that
receives the benefit of screening
Property being Developed – must
provide screening if no
comparable screening exists on
abutting protected property
RS, R1S, or RSN zone N N N N N N N N N N N
RM or RMN zone W2 D W2 D W2 W2 D W2 D N W2
DDC or NNC zone N N N N N N N N N N N
Nonresidential use in CO zone W2 W2 W2 N W2 W2 N W2 D N W2
CG or MUV zone W2 W2 D D D D D W2 W2 D W2
Outdoor storage in CG or MUV zone W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3 W1,3
IP, IL, or SWIR zone W3 W3 D W3 D D D W3 W3 W3 W3
Permitted use D D N N N N N D D N D
Conditional use D D D D D D D D D D D
Single-family dwelling, duplex, child
care facility, or group home N7 N7 N7 N7 N7 N7 N7 N7 N7 N7 N7
Multiple-family dwelling, child care
facility, group home or nursing home
W2,5
, 8 D
W2,5,
8 D
W2,5
, 8
W2,5
, 8
W2,5
, 8 W2,5, 8 D D W2,5, 8
Nonresidential use in a residential zone W2 W2 D D D D D W2 W2 D W2
Manufactured dwelling park W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 D
Boat, recreational, and vehicle storage
pad, if within 10 feet of a property line F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 N F2 F2 F2 F2 F2
Common boat, recreational, and
vehicle storage area
W2,
4 W2,4 W2,4 W2,4 W2,4 D W2,4 W2,4 W2,4 W2,4 W2,4
Refuse and recycling collection facilities
except for single-family dwelling,
duplex, child care facility, or group
home
W2,6
,7
W2,6
,7 W2,6,7
W2,6
,7
W2,6
,7
W2,6
,7
W2,6
,7 W2,6,7 W2,6,7 W2,6,7 W2,6,7
1. Screening is only required from the view of abutting streets, parking lots, and residentially zoned property. Storage shall not exceed the height of the screening.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 31 of 36
Screening Requirements
Table 3.06D
N = No screening required F = Sight-obscuring fence required W = Architectural wall required
D = Architectural wall, fence, or hedge may be required in the Design Review process
Adjacent properties – zone or use that
receives the benefit of screening
Property being Developed – must
provide screening if no
comparable screening exists on
abutting protected property
2. Six to seven feet in height
3. Six to nine feet in height
4. Abutting streets must also be screened.
5. Screening is required abutting multiple-family dwellings, commercial or industrial uses only.
6. In industrial zones, screening is required only where the refuse collection facility is in a yard abutting a public street, parking lot, or residentially zoned property.
7. Child care facility for 12 or fewer children, group home for five or fewer persons.
8. Child care facility for 13 or more children, group home for six or more persons.
General notes:
9. Screening is subject to height limitations for Vision Clearance Areas (Section 3.03.06) and adjacent to streets (Section 2.01.02).
10. No screening is required where a building wall abuts a property line.
11. Where a wall is required and is located more than two feet from the property line, the yard areas on the exterior of the wall shall be landscaped to a density of one plant unit per 20 square feet.
The applicant submitted Variance 2017-07 to vary from the screening / architectural wall
requirement.
The applicant’s narrative states:
“Due to existing and proposed site conditions, a variance is being requested to avoid
constructing an architectural wall in this area. The variance criteria are addressed further below,
with additional information as follows.
The subject site was previously developed with a McDonald’s fast food restaurant, and had a 6’
chain link fence with slats along the entire west property line. Although the McDonald’s building
has since been removed, the existing chain link fence still remains and is in good condition.
There are also several existing trees along the west property line that are proposed to remain
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 32 of 36
with this development, as well as existing hedges on the residential properties for a portion of
the property boundary.
In addition to the existing chain link fence, existing trees, and existing hedges, this project
proposes to install a viburnum hedge adjacent to the fence for the entire length of the property
boundary. Refer to the preliminary landscape plan. Also, as shown on the preliminary plans, this
development is providing an approximate 90ft buffer from the nearest parking improvements to
the western property line. This buffer area will be comprised of a stormwater pond, as well as
additional landscaping to buffer the existing homes to the west. Given the proposed hedge and
buffer, as well as the existing screening, the cost of an architectural wall along the entire
western property boundary would cause an undue financial hardship on the proposed
development. In addition, given the substantial buffer area and distance from the development,
a wall could be a target for vandalism which could cause more harm than good.”
Context: Below is a photo of the existing chain link fence with slats and plantings.
Google Street View July 2016, looking west
Staff concurs.
The variance criteria are met.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 33 of 36
Recommended Conditions of Approval
Staff recommends approval of the consolidated applications based on the findings submitted by
the applicant, which are incorporated by this reference, the supplementary staff findings in the
staff report and attachments, as well as applying the following conditions of approval:
General
G1. The applicant or successor shall develop the property in substantial conformance with the
final plans submitted and approved with these applications, except as modified by these
conditions of approval.
Design Review 2017-04
D1. To meet WDO 3.01.04B. and 3.02.01B., the applicant shall revise the proposal to:
a. Dedicate six (6) feet (ft) of right-of-way (ROW) along the present east property line and to
provide documented evidence or proof of dedication;
b. Revise and shift easements to the new east property line as needed per City Public Works
and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) requirements; and
c. Provide a five-foot (5-ft) wide City utility easement along both abutting public streets.
D2. To meet WDO 3.02.04, the applicant shall revise the proposal to bury all permanent utility
service to and within a development except where overhead high-voltage (35,000 volts or
more) electric facilities exist.
D3. To meet WDO 3.04.03A., the applicant shall revise the site and landscape plan sheets to be
consistent and show that the existing west curb cut along Alexandra Avenue is to be kept as is
to allow physical access to the private north-south access easement.
D4. To meet WDO 3.06.03A., the applicant shall revise the proposal to provide and distribute
along both rights-of-way a total of one street tree for every fifty (50) feet of frontage, which is
nine (9) total.
D5. To meet WDO Table 3.06C, the applicant shall revise the landscape plan to indicate one or
more street tree species not prohibited.
D6. To meet WDO 3.07.06B.2.b.(1), the applicant shall revise the proposal such that at least
30% of the wall surface abutting a street is glass.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 34 of 36
Variance 2017-04 Maximum Exterior Lighting
VL1:
A. Parking and loading areas shall be illuminated at a maximum of 1.4 horizontal foot
candle with a maximum average of 0.8 horizontal fc at ground level, with a maximum
uniformity ratio of 20:1 (maximum to minimum).
B. Entrance areas to the building shall be illuminated at a maximum of 2.0 horizontal foot-
candle with a maximum average of 1.3 horizontal fc at ground level, with a maximum
uniformity ratio of 15:1 (maximum to minimum).
C. Altered or new exterior lighting fixtures shall be full cut-off or fully shielded models.
Variance 2017-07 Screening Requirements / Architectural Wall
No conditions proposed.
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 35 of 36
Applicant Identity
Applicant Bryan Dickerson, P.E., PACLAND
Applicant’s Representative
n/a
Landowner(s) McDonalds Corp. c/o Greentree Enterprises Inc., under contract to convey to Woodburn AAP Partners, LLC
Notes to the Applicant
The following are not conditions of approval, but are important notes for the applicant to be
aware of and follow for the site development:
1. Prior to building occupancy, all landscaping and screening must be installed and prior to City
staff verification. Contact Planning staff at least three City business days prior to a desired
date of planning/zoning inspection. This is separate from and in addition to the usual
building code and fire and life safety inspections.
2. The applicant, not the City, is responsible for obtaining permits from any county, state
and/or federal agencies, which may require approval or permit, and must obtain all
applicable City and County permits for work prior to the start of work and that the work
meets the satisfaction of the permit-issuing jurisdiction. The Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) might require highway access, storm drainage, and other right-of-
way (ROW) permits. All work within the public ROW or easements within City jurisdiction
must conform to plans approved by the Public Works Department and must comply with a
Public Works Right-of-Way permit issued by said department.
3. The applicant provides for the installation of all franchised utilities and any required
easements.
4. Staff performs final review of the civil plans during the building permit stage. Public
infrastructure must be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the City, as well
as current Public Works construction specifications, Standard Drawings, Standard Details,
and General Conditions.
5. The storm sewer system and on-site detention for the development shall comply with the
City Storm Drainage Master Plan and Public Works Storm Water Practices. All required on-
site detention area for the runoff from this site will need provision in accordance with the
DR 2017-04, VAR 2017-04 & 07 Staff Report Attachment 102
Page 36 of 36
drainage report, hydraulic analysis, and approved plans. The detention system is private and
to be maintained by the landowner in perpetuity. The applicant must obtain Marion County
plumbing permits for all waterline work installed beyond the ROW and on private property.
6. All water mains and appurtenances must comply with Public Works, Building Division, and
Woodburn Fire District requirements. The City performs required abandonment of existing
water facilities at the water main with payment by the property owner.
7. If applicable, a grease trap would need to be installed on the sanitary service, either as a
central unit or in the kitchen/food preparation area. Contact Marion County Plumbing
Department for permit and installation requirements, 503-588-5147.
8. The applicant shall complete a City Nonresidential Wastewater Survey and comply with the
conditions of the Wastewater Permit. Contact Carol Leimbach, City of Woodburn Industrial
Waste Coordinator, at 503-982-5283.
9. Fire protection requirements shall comply with the Woodburn Fire District standards and
requirements. Place fire hydrants within the public ROW or public utility easement and
construct them in accordance with Public Works Department requirements, specifications,
standards, and permit requirements. Fire protection access, fire hydrant locations and fire
protection issues must comply with current fire codes and Woodburn Fire District
standards.
10. Because design review excludes review and approval of any signage, the applicant or
successor shall separately from this design review submit sign permit applications for any
changed or new signage pursuant to WDO 3.10.