HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2003-03-24
City of Lake Oswego
Planning Commission Minutes
March 24, 2003
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Daniel Vizzini called the Planning Commission meeting of March 24, 2003 to
order at approximately 6:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 380 A Avenue,
Lake Oswego, Oregon.
II. ROLL CALL
Commission members present were Chair Daniel Vizzini, Vice Chair Frank Groznik
and Commissioner Alison Webster. Commissioner Mark Stayer was excused and
Commissioners James Johnson and Ken Sandblast were absent.
Staff present were Dennis Egner, Long Range Planning Manager; Sidaro Sin, Associate
Planner; Lisa Hamerlynck, Natural Resources Coordinator; Robert Galante,
Redevelopment Director; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney and Iris Treinen, Senior
Secretary.
III. CITIZEN COMMENT – Regarding issues not on the agenda.
None.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A vote on the Minutes of January 13, 2003 and January 27, 2003 was rescheduled to
April 14, 2003 for lack of a quorum.
V. PUBLIC MEETING
P 03-0001 – Temporary Parking Downtown at 2nd Street and B Avenue
This discussion was postponed for lack of a quorum.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Page 1 of 6
Minutes of March 24, 2003
VI. GENERAL PLANNING – OPEN WORK SESSION
Outlook 2025 Comprehensive Plan Update (P 02-0001)
• Goal 5, Open Space, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
• Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
• Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway
Identification of issues to address during 2004 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Review.
Staff coordinator was Sidaro Sin, Associate Planner.
Sidaro Sin, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Goal 5, Open Space, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
Mr. Sin reported that the City currently implemented statewide planning goals related to
protection of natural, scenic and historic resources through the sensitive lands overlay,
the tree code, development standards that protected hillsides and addressed erosion
control and storm water standards, development requirements that called for planned
developments to include open space, the new floodplain ordinance, the open space
acquisition program, and the historic preservation chapter. He advised that the
Comprehensive Plan needed to be modified to reflect a change in Statewide Planning
Goal 5. He advised that tree-protection language in Goal 5 should reflect the City’s
current approach of protection of tree groves, rather than individual trees. He reported
that the City planned to update the sensitive lands inventory, and that the City had never
inventoried archeological sites. He pointed out the staff report highlighted relevant
policies, Recommended Action Measures (RAMs), and Quality of Life Indicators that
related to Goal 5.
Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
Mr. Sin reported that the City currently addressed Goal 6 through the sensitive lands
overlay, development standards, the floodplain ordinance, the noise ordinance, an
employee commuting options program to reduce vehicle trips, and through water-
quality monitoring stations on City streams. He reported that the City was in
compliance or would soon be in compliance with Metro Functional Plan, Title III
requirements through recently adopted floodplain standards and future greenway and
water quality standards. He reported that the area was in compliance with current state
air-emissions standards, however he anticipated that those standards may change and
the City would need to consider how those changes would affect the Comprehensive
Plan. He observed that the City’s Sustainability Program addressed the amount of solid
waste generated in the City, enhanced recycling efforts, and utilized commuting options
to address air quality. He pointed out that the staff report included Quality of Life
indicators that applied to Goal 6.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Page 2 of 6
Minutes of March 24, 2003
Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway
Mr. Sin explained that Statewide Planning Goal 15 required the City to adopt Greenway
boundaries, specify allowable uses, identify properties for future acquisition by the City,
and adopt a review process for development in the Greenway. He noted that the portion
of the Willamette River Greenway in the City was approximately 150 feet inland from
the river’s low water line and included Roehr Park, George Rogers Park and the Tryon
Creek Sewage Treatment Plant. He advised that the City currently protected the
Greenway area through a Greenway Management Overlay District that specifies
allowed uses and provides a review process. He suggested that during periodic review
the Commissioners consider Metro Title III requirements; the current status of the
regional Willamette River Corridor Plan; and whether the City policy to designate the
Willamette River Greenway as protected open space should be amended to more
specifically identify protected areas in the Greenway. He advised the Comprehensive
Plan should be updated to include references to newly acquired spaces (e.g., property
north of Tryon Creek and the chip plant park site), the riverfront pathway and the
Foothills Design District Plan. He pointed out that no Quality of Life Indicators had
been suggested for Goal 15.
Lisa Hamerlynck, Natural Resources Coordinator, presented written comments from
the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB). She explained that Board members
were concerned that the policy that there was to be “no net loss” of resources did not
include performance standards to benchmark the resources and prevent them from being
slowly degraded over time. She related that the Board felt natural resources were
actually being allowed to degrade. They suggested that Goal 5 should also address
maintenance, enhancement and restoration of the City’s natural resources. They
recommended that natural resources be continually measured against a benchmark
resource inventory and the Comprehensive Plan should include clear and measurable
goals related to resources and thresholds. They recommended that the Plan should
specify natural resources management and maintenance methodologies. They
suggested, for example, that such standards would help the City restore resources that
had been degraded by invasive ivy and blackberries when a property that included such
resources was part of a development review application. They suggested the preamble
to the Goal 5 section should emphasize that the City desired to move toward
improvement of natural resources. Ms. Hamerlynck reported that the City planned to
inventory natural resources on land outside the City, but within the Urban Growth
Boundary, that had never before been inventoried. She advised the updated inventory
should be reflected in the Sensitive Lands Ordinance. She relayed the NRAB’s concern
that owners sometimes destroyed natural resources on their land before it was annexed
to the City. She said they desired to see the City and county work together to increase
protection of natural resources within the UGB, and they desired to see a City policy
adopted to review and protect natural resources at the time of annexation. She pointed
out the Board recommended that protective buffers be enlarged. She advised that Metro
was considering buffers up to 100 feet that contained increments with different
gradations of protection. She pointed out the final section of the memorandum included
one NRAB member’s specific and detailed list of things to consider during periodic
review.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Page 3 of 6
Minutes of March 24, 2003
During questioning by the Commissioners Ms. Hamerlynck clarified that the NRAB
had listed issues that they had identified during several years of Board discussions. She
recalled that the NRAB and Metro’s Goal 5 Technical Advisory Committee members
had acknowledged that it was a challenge to resolve the goals of higher density
development and protection of natural resources and that there would be further
degradation of natural resources until the community was completely built out and the
City could focus on restoring the value of natural resources in a sustainable manner.
Mr. Egner advised that the City could consider site-specific performance standards to
demonstrate no loss of value, such as the Oregon Fresh Water Assessment Methodology
for wetlands and a riparian assessment process that had been developed and modified
over past years. Ms. Hamerlynck explained that the NRAB wanted to see citywide
measurement and response to degradation of resources over time. She also clarified for
the Commissioners that because the City had not conducted a formal (Endangered
Species Act) fish survey, the staff only suspected where species of fish that were on the
endangered species list, or that they anticipated would be placed on the endangered
species list (such as Cut-throat Trout) might be found. She reported that other
jurisdictions were working with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to count
fish in their creeks and determine appropriate fish-protection measures. She clarified
for the Commissioners that she was not aware of any streams or ponds in the City that
were stocked by the state.
Chair Vizzini observed that the NRAB list of issues seemed to reflect a lack of
implementation of policy, rather than goals. Vice Chair Groznik suggested that the
NRAB meet with the Quality of Life Subcommittee to review the issues and identify
applicable indicators.
Public Testimony
Norma Peterson, 890 “F” Avenue, Lake Oswego, 97034, recalled that she had
worked on the original Comprehensive Plan. She asked how the City had allowed
many beautiful oak trees along Kruse Way to be lost. Ms. Hamerlynck explained that
much of Kruse Way development had taken place when the area was in the County and
outside of the City. She anticipated the loss of the tree canopy could be measured using
aerial photographs taken before Kruse Way developed. Ms. Peterson questioned why
the “Major Issues” section of the staff report suggested eliminating or modifying
statements related to the impact of traffic on the ozone level; diversion and
impoundment of streams as unsound environmental practices; and a statement that
“Archaeological sites on public lands are protected”. Chair Vizzini explained that the
staff report highlighted issues that either had already been resolved in public policy or
that needed to be re-examined and clarified in the updated Comprehensive Plan. The
staff explained that the statement about archaeological sites stood alone in Section 8 and
that section did not explain how the sites were to be protected. They related that the
NRAB had observed that such sites were not mapped and the Board had recommended
that the sites be inventoried and protected during development. Vice Chair Groznik
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Page 4 of 6
Minutes of March 24, 2003
suggested that the staff seek advice from the State Historic Preservation Office
regarding the inventorying of archeologic sites. Ms. Peterson indicated she was also
concerned about the increase in impervious surfaces in the City.
Chair Vizzini observed that the Community Development Code included policies that
addressed storm water management and made new development responsible for
collecting, treating and directing runoff caused by an increase in impervious surface.
He then directed the staff to enter a letter from Ms. Peterson regarding Goal 2 into the
record and distribute copies to the Commissioners.
Jeanette Egger, 1800 Ridgecrest Drive, Lake Oswego, 97034, stated that she was a
retired audiologist and had helped to write the original Comprehensive Plan Noise
Report in the 1970s. She recalled that the Noise Report had recommended that noise-
sensitive property (where noise interfered with sleeping) should not be allowed in some
areas of the City. She said the City had never implemented her recommendation for an
acoustic noise ordinance, but had only adopted a noise ordinance that defined noise as a
“nuisance” and was too subjective to be enforced by a court. She recalled that the DEQ
had enforced noise standards until 1979. She advised the City to adopt an acoustic
noise ordinance and employ staff to enforce it by using noise meters to measure noise at
levels that interfered with health and welfare. She indicated that she supported the
Recommended Action Measure for an effective noise ordinance that minimized impacts
in residential areas from power tools, barking dogs, and house and car alarms. She
advised there were model standards available and that the City of Portland employed a
noise officer.
Ms. Egger then recalled that the original Transportation Committee had recommended
that the City consider allowing water taxis on the Willamette River that could alleviate
road traffic and noise. She further recalled that another committee had recommended
that there be no regional draw to Lake Oswego. She questioned how seriously the City
considered citizen comments.
Chair Vizzini observed that the issue of noise could be addressed by regulations or by
land use planning that would structure a community in a manner that would keep it
quieter. Vice Chair Groznik asked how noise from leaf blowers and lawn mowers
could be addressed. Ms. Egger advised that some jurisdictions limited those devices to
certain hours or required them to be muffled.
Chair Vizzini then closed the work session and encouraged interested citizens to submit
any additional comments to planning staff.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
None.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Page 5 of 6
Minutes of March 24, 2003
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Page 6 of 6
Minutes of March 24, 2003
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business, Chair Vizzini adjourned the meeting at 8:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Iris Treinen
Senior Secretary