• 2 of 4 • <br /> <br />Andrée Phelps • Attorney at Law <br />Andrée Phelps Law, LLC <br />541.221.1431 <br />andree@andreephelpslaw.com <br /> <br />I. The Proposed Building Code Amendments Create Security Concerns requiring VLT <br />Windows, Requires Architectural Features Every 20 Feet that are Arbitrary and <br />Costly, and Compels a “Commercial Building Look” that is not Conducive to Many <br />Existing Businesses Located in the River Avenue Area. <br />The 121 River Avenue property is zoned C-2. The single existing onsite structure was built in 1979; <br />the building is a rectangular-shaped, one-story building that is situated along the eastern border of the <br />property. The length of the River Avenue facing façade of the building is approximately 35 feet. <br />As the proposed code is written, any building addition constructed on C -2 property triggers the <br />Building Walls/Window Coverage standards requiring all windows to have Visible Light <br />Transmission of 0.6 or higher and that any blank wall of more than twenty (20) feet must have either <br />windows or other architectural designs elements along any façade, even facades not facing the street. <br />In addition, any building addition that increases the building façade facing a street by at least 100% <br />triggers the proposed minimum and maximum front yard setbacks of between five (5) and fifteen <br />(15) feet as well as the standard that 80% of that façade addition must be located within the setback <br />area. <br />There are two hypothetical building additions that are outlined on the attached Site Plan. Proposed <br />Building Addition A attempts to meet the minimum and maximum setback requirements by extending <br />the existing River Avenue building façade. Building A increases the existing street facing façade of <br />35 feet by more than 100% and so must meet the setback standards. An extension of the existing <br />façade only has a portion of the addition located within the setback. The addition also cannot meet <br />the 80% of the façade within the setback standard. It should also be noted that the addition now blocks <br />the existing access driveway. Furthermore, any building addition must meet the building walls and <br />window coverage standards. Here, this standard requires approximately eleven (11) windows, <br />colonnades, arcades or main entrances be included on the three Building Addition A façades. Five <br />(5) of these architectural features would be located on the façade facing Randy Pape Beltline. <br />Windows of 0.6 VLT or more would only be a security concern at this site. Due to not being able to <br />meet the proposed building code standards for hypothetical Building Addition A, adjustment review <br />would likely be required for multiple standards. <br />The second hypothetical building addition, Building Addition B, is an attempt to maintain existing <br />driveway access and to maximize use of property and size of addition. However, this street facing <br />façade is wholly located outside the setback area and is more than 100 feet away from River Avenue; <br />therefore, the addition cannot meet the setback standards. Furthermore, any building addition must <br />meet the building walls and window coverage standards. Here, this standard requires approximately <br />fifteen (15) windows colonnades, arcades or main entrances on the three addition façades. Eight (8) <br />of these architectural features would be located on the façade facing Randy Pape Beltline. Windows <br />of 0.6 VLT or more would only be a security concern at this site. Due to not being able to meet the <br />proposed building code standards for hypothetical Building Addition B, adjustment review would <br />likely be required for multiple standards. <br />8