Planning commission approves Mountain View Reservoir master plan, allows setback adjustment for city buildings

The Oregon City Planning Commission on March 27 approved the Mountain View Reservoir Complex concept master plan and a conditional use permit to bring the city's reservoir and associated Public Works uses into compliance with the institutional zone.

The master plan lays out phased work including a seismic upgrade and replacement of existing reservoirs, consolidation of tax lots on the north side of Mountain View Street, expanded site landscaping and staging/parking/storage facilities for city operations. "The site has been used as a municipal water supply variety of vehicles, trailers, equipment, and reservoir support structures," staff told the commission during its presentation.

Why it matters: the plan supports reservoir capacity, operational reliability and seismic safety while aiming to reduce the visual and operational impacts on neighboring multifamily and single‑family properties through landscaping, buffering and building siting. The commission accepted staff's recommendation to apply more stringent design standards (Oregon City standard 17.62.055) to the office‑style building fronting Mountain View while allowing more general industrial standards for interior storage buildings.

Phasing and facilities: staff outlined four phases with target milestones (phase 1 by 2010, phase 2 by 2014, phase 3 by 2018, and phase 4 by 2025). Reservoir 1 previously approved and under construction replaces a 1,450,000‑gallon in‑ground reservoir with a new 2,000,000‑gallon concrete tank; staff said Reservoir 2 will be reconstructed for seismic resistance. "These phases are not expected by the city to be executed all at once," architect Jean Von Bargen said in explaining the design approach.

Design and neighborhood protections: the applicant proposed extensive landscaping, bioswales and buffering along Mountain View Street and Holmes Lane and requested a 5‑ft setback (rather than 25 ft) for certain office buildings along the west property line; staff recommended the reduced setback be conditioned on landscape buffering and on the building meeting the stricter design standard for transparency and articulation. Commissioners questioned proximity to adjacent apartments and emphasized windows/transparency and buffering; staff and applicants said the A1 office building would meet the higher design standard and that landscaping and bioswales would separate buildings from neighboring properties.

Public comment and decision: no members of the public submitted testimony. Commissioners praised the plan's design and environmental improvements, encouraged use of eco‑friendly materials, and moved to approve the master plan and conditional use with staff conditions; the motion passed unanimously.

Next steps: the commission's approval is a concept master plan; detailed development plans for each building will return to staff for design review and engineering approval, and the city will coordinate right‑of‑way dedication and construction standards before permit issuance.