MEMORANDUM

 

DATE  September 10, 2020

 

TO:  Mayor Ted Wheeler

 Commissioner Chloe Eudaly

 Commissioner Amanda Fritz

 Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty

 Commissioner Dan Ryan

image

FROM:  Rebecca Esau, Director

 Bureau of Development Services

 

RE:  City Council hearing appeal of LU 20-102914 DZM AD GW

 

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a summary and brief description of the land use review that will be presented to you in public hearing on September 10, 2020 at 2 PM, time certain.

 

Site Address: Property bounded by SW Bond, SW Lane, SW Lowell & Willamette River

 

BDS Representatives:  Staci Monroe, Senior City Planner – Design Review

       Morgan Steele, City Planner – Greenway Review

Land Use Reviews Requested: Type III Design and Greenway Reviews with Modifications and an Adjustment for a four-block development in South Waterfront Sub District of Central City. Proposal includes:

▪  Five (5) new buildings (2 high-rise, 3 mid-rise) providing 1,200 residential units, 22,000 SF of commercial space and 738 parking spaces. 52 units of the units meet the Affordable Housing requirements.

▪  New Greenway bike and pedestrian trail connection with landscaping and other public amenities.

▪  Modifications to vehicle parking and bike parking standards and an Adjustment to allow vehicle access off of River Parkway requested.

 

Key Elements of Proposal:

▪  Project originally submitted on September 11, 2019 (case file LU 19-225732 DZM GW). After first hearing application was withdrawn with the intent to resubmit to take advantage of Zoning Code regulations from April 2017, for which the project has vesting under due to a land division application. The regulations of CC2035, specifically, bird-safe glazing and ecoroofs, were noted as cost prohibitive by the applicant.

▪  Subsequent application filed on January 8, 2020 (LU 20-102914 DZM AD GW) and had four hearings with the Design Commission.

▪  A lot of public interest and participation. Staff received 42 written comments, the majority in opposition of the project. Primary concerns focused on the location and character of the towers which impacts views, proximity of buildings to the greenway, lack of building erosion along the greenway, quality of open spaces and elements in the greenway, scale and lack of articulation of the façades, loss of green roofs and bird-safe glazing, and parking and traffic impacts.

▪  The following findings and facts relevant to the appeal items include:

-  The stepdown to the Willamette River indicated in South Waterfront Design Guideline D2 is achieved through the heights allowed through the Zoning Code, including height bonuses in eligible areas. This guideline does not require that every building on each block step down to the next and the next and the next as development moves towards the river. And, the Zoning Code does not require all buildings build to their maximum heights allowed. Rather, the intent of the purpose is to ensure that, overall, South Waterfront achieves a step down to the river by construction of projects consistent with allowed zoning heights. The South Waterfront Sub District has several different zoning height “transects” from west to east. West of Bond the height limits are the greatest with 250’ and up to 325’ via bonus height. East of Bond the height limits drop down to 125’ with the potential for 250’ with bonus height. Heights within 125’ of the top of bank are further limited to 75’. While the buildings on the western blocks do not take advantage of the maximum allowed building heights (250’), the building on the eastern blocks step down from the 250’ allowed bonus height down to a +45’ tall podium which is well below the 75’ height limit, in part, satisfying this guideline.

-  There is no required setback for the buildings on Block 41 and 45 from the Greenway, however, the guidelines encourage erosion of development along the Greenway, which is reflected in the development to the north. Rather than a more uniform setback of the buildings along the entire Greenway frontage, deeper setbacks at specific locations where public amenities were provided was supported – at the Abernethy terminus for a public plaza and at the southeast corner for an outdoor patio accessed from Lowell. Articulated elevations and recessed facades with balconies that step back provide additional erosion along the Greenway.

-  Regarding the tower massing on Blocks 41 and 45, South Waterfront regulations limit the north-south dimensions of towers to 125’. This is to ensure visual access through the district to and from the Greenway and Tualatin Hills and result in an urban form that is visually permeable and varied. Both towers meet this limitation with the northern tower well below at 65’ in its north-south dimension. The bar tower form on Block 41 is evident in the northern end of the district and two blocks to the west. The L-shape of the southern tower was determined to contribute to the varied tower forms in the district. The stepping of the southern tower and series of balcony clad glass facades further articulate and emphasize the tower massing to complement the sculpted towers in the district.

Central City Fundamental Design Guideline C1 calls for protection of “existing views and view corridors”. Significant views and view corridors are set forth in the City’s Scenic Resources Plan, and that consequently the requirement in this guideline for protection of view corridors requires a project to protect existing public view corridors as designated in the aforementioned plan. Such protection does not extend to existing private views. There are no public views or corridors designated within or through the site.

-  Rather than meet the minimum Zoning Code development standards for landscaping and bike and pedestrian trails, the applicant opted for an enhanced Greenway design that includes removing the dilapidated wooden pilings and pier structure from the river, laying back the river banks, providing a public overlook at the Abernethy terminus at the river, and placing large woody debris and root wads to enhance shallow water habitat in the river. The addition of more trees, benches along the paths and grass areas for recreating are also included. These improvements are also supported by the Parks Bureau and Urban Forestry.

 

Design Commission Decision: The majority of the Design Commission found that the applicable approval criteria had been met. Numerous conditions of approval were added ranging from material details, planter dimensions, greenway improvements and requirements associated with the land division.

 

Alternatives Facing Council

▪  Deny the appeal and uphold the Design Commission’s decision of approval with conditions.

▪  Deny the appeal but modify the Design Commission’s decision of approval with conditions and instruct the applicant to revise the design and return to Council at a future date.

▪  Grant the appeal, thereby overturning the Design Commission’s decision to approve with conditions. In this case, the project would be denied.