HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2002-06-18 PMCITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
INCLUDES MINUTES, AGENDA
FOLLOW-UPS',
AGENDA AND PACKET.
(NOTE: BLANK NUMBERED PAGES
IN PACKET WERE REMOVED
PRIOR TO MICROFILMING).
*FOLLOW-UPS MIGHT NOT HAVE
BEEN DONE FOR MORNING AND
SOME EVENING MEETINGS.
City Council
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Ellie McPeak, Council President
Jack Hoffman
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
Tuesday, June 18, 2002
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
380 A Avenue
Karl Rohde Also published on the Internet at: ci.oswego.or.us
Bill Schoen Contact: Robyn Christie, City Recorder
Gay Graham E -Mail: public_affairs@ci.oswego.or.us
John Turchi Phone: (503) 675-3984
This meeting is in a handicapped accessible location. For any special accommodations, please contact
Public Affairs, (503) 635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting.
Estimated Start
Time
6:00 1.
2.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
6:05 3. PRESENTATIONS
3.1 Distinguished Service Award to James Kronenberg for service on
the Transportation Advisory Board
Pape #
3.2 Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) .........................1
information regarding AT&T Comcast change of control materials
Resolution 02-43, a resolution consenting, with conditions, to
the change of control of AT&T Corp., the indirect parent
company of TCI Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc.
6:20 4. CONSENT AGENDA
♦ The consent agenda allows the City Council to consider items that
require no discussion.
♦ An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the consent
agenda.
♦ The City Council makes one motion covering all items included in
the consent agenda
4.1 COUNCIL BUSINESS
4.1.1 Resignation of Marta Furman front the Arts Commission..............................I�)
Action: Accept resignation with regret
City Council Regular Meeting
June 18, 2002
4.2 REPORTS
4.2.1 Bid Award: WO 1067, 2002 Pavement Management Program . .....................23
Street Overlays
Action: Award a public improvement contract for Work Order 1167, 2002
Pavement Management Program — Street Maintenance Overlays to Brix
Paving Company in the amount of $1,034,865.25
4.2.2 Design Contract for Lakeridge High School Softball Field .............................29
Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract between the
City and MacLeod Reckord for architectural design services of the
Lakeridge High School softball field
4.3 RESOLUTIONS
4.3.1 Resolution 02-36, authorizing the Mayor to execute an amendment .............33
extending the lease agreement with the City of Portland for use of the
Jefferson Street Branch (Willamette Shore) Rail Line for the
operation of a trolley and recreation uses
Action: Adopt Resolution 02-36
4.3.2 Resolution 02-39, authorizing the Mayor to execute a Joinder ......................39
Agreement with the Clackamas River Water Providers to
participate in and jointly fund Clackamas River Watershed
Activities
Action: Adopt Resolution 02-39
4.3.3 Resolution 02-40, authorizing the Mayor to execute a Memorandum ...........45
of Understanding between the Cite of Lake Oswego as a
member of the Clackamas River Water Providers and the
Clackamas River Basin Council
Action: Adopt Resolution 02-40
4.3.4 Resolution 02-42, designating alternates to the Planning................................51
Commission
Action: adopt Resolution 02-42
4.3.5 Resolution 02-44, authorizing the Mayor to renew an....................................55
Intergovernmental Agreement with Clackamas County designating
the City to be the Fiscal Agent for activities of the Lake Oswego
City Council Regular Meeting Page 2 of 4
June 18, 2002
Asset Builders Coalition funded by a Community Mobilization
Grant
Action : Adopt Resolution 02-44
4.4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3.4.1 ;kpril 8, 2002, information session......................................................................63
4.4.2 April 16, 2002, morning meeting........................................................................77
Action: Approve minutes as written (or as corrected if Council
adds corrections to the motion)
MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA
VOICE VOTE
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6:25 6. CITIZEN COMMENT
The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens to present
information or raise an issue regarding items not on the agenda.
A time linat of three minutes per citizen shall apply.
6:30 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
7.1 Resolution 02-33, amending the Master Fees and Charges .........................81
Schedule to establish fees for planning inspection and site plan
review
Motion: Move to adopt resolution 02-33
Discussion
Vote
6:35 8. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL,
This agenda item provides an opportunity Jnr individual Councilors to
provide information to the Council on rnatters not otherwise on the
agenda. Each Councilor will be given five minutes.
8.1 Councilor Information
8.2 1Zelmi is of Council Committees, Organisational Committees,
and Intergovernmental Committees
City Council Regular Mcctill" Page 3 of 4
June 18, 2002
6:45 9. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
9.1 City Manager
9.2 City Attorney
7:00 10. ADJOURNMENT
CABLE VIEWERS: The Regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 22/28,
at 6:00 p.m. Channels are listed with ttso channel numbers. The first channel number
(22) is for the AT&T Portland system serving Unincorporated Washington County
Residents; the second number (28) is for the portion of the AT&T Tualatin Valley system.
The meeting will be rebroadcast on Channel 22/28:
Tuesday, June 18 11:00 P.M.
Wednesday, June 19 7:00 p.m.
Thursday, June 20 10:00 a.m.
Friday, June 21 7:00 & 11:00 p.m.
Saturday, June 22 2:00 p.m.
Sunday, June 23 9:00 p.m.
Monday, June 24 10:00 a.m.
City Council Regular Meeting Page 4 of 4
June 18, 2002
3.2
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 06/18/02
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC)
information regarding AT&T Comcast change of control materials
Resolution 02-43, a resolution consenting, with conditions, to the
change of control of AT&T Corp., the indirect parent company of TCI
Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to adopt resolution 0243.
ESTIMATED FISCAL 'ATTACHMENTS:
IMPACT:
• Powell memo of June 14,
2002
• Resolution 02-43
STAFF COST: $ . MACC Report and
BUDGETED: recommendation
�• Questions & Answers
Y N
FUNDING SOURCE:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
signoff/date
(;ENDA8\C0UNCIL\2002\E Reporw\MAcc.doe
I NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance no.:
Resolution no.:
Previous Council
consideration:
CITY MANAGER
signoff ate
1
City Attorney's Office
To: Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Members of Lake Oswego City Council
Doug Schmitz, City Manager
From: David D. Powell, City Attorney
Date: June 14, 2002
Council Report
Subject: Resolution 02-43
Approval of AT&T/Comcast Change of Control (TCI cable system)
AT&T Corp., who operates TCI of Tualatin Valley cable television system, has notified the
Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) of its desire to transfer control to a
new entity resulting from the pending merger of AT&T and Comcast Corporation. The new
entity will be known as "AT&T Comcast Corporation."
MACC reviewed the proposal and concluded that AT&T Comcast will have the legal, financial
and technical qualifications to own and operate the cable system. On May 91h MACC adopted a
resolution approving the change of control, and recommending that each of the MACC member
jurisdictions also approve.
Attached is proposed Resolution 02-43 approving the change of control. Also attached are a
Report and Recommendation, together with Questions and Answers About the AT&T Comcast
Change of Control, both from MACC.
Bruce Crest and Sarah Hackett from MACC will be at the June 18"' City Council meeting to
provide further details and to answer questions.
M
RESOLUTION 02-43
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
CONSENTING, WITH CONDITIONS, TO THE CHANGE OF CONTROL OF AT&T
CORP., THE INDIRECT PARENT COMPANY OF TCI CABLEVISION OF TUALATIN
VALLEY, INC.
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission, hereinafter "MACC", is an
intergovernmental commission formed under ORS Chapter 190, with Washington County and
the cities of Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro, King City,
Lake Oswego, North Plains, Rivergrove, Tigard, and Tualatin as members; and
WHEREAS, TCI Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc., whose indirect parent company is AT&T
Corp., hereinafter "AT&T", is the Grantee under a Cable Television Services Agreement
approved by MACC and its member jurisdictions, dated February 1, 1999, hereinafter
"Franchise"; and
WHEREAS, AT&T and Comcast have agreed to merge their companies to create the new
AT&T Comcast Corporation. AT&T has requested the consent of the MACC member
jurisdictions for a change of control, by filing a Federal Communications Fortin 394 with MACC
and with each member jurisdiction thereof, pursuant to Section 17.2 of the Franchise; and
WHEREAS, federal law establishes a procedure and criteria for local franchise authorities to
review requests for changes of control to assess the legal, technical, and financial ability of the
new controlling entity to assure their obligations will continue to be performed under the terms
and conditions of the Franchise, as amended; and
WHEREAS, MACC staff has reviewed the Form 394 from AT&T Corp. and has requested and
reviewed certain additional information from both AT&T and Comcast, including assurances
made by each entity, in order to assess the legal, technical, and financial qualification of the
Grantee to continue to perform as required by the Franchise; and
WHEREAS, MACC held a public hearing on May 9, 2002 wherein it received public testimony
and written and electronic communications; and
WHEREAS, MACC has received a letter of assurance from AT&T, wherein AT&T agrees to
abide by the terns and conditions of the Franchise as amended and recognizes significant local
issues of concern, which letter of assurance is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, following consideration of testimony received during the public hearing and the
M1 record of those proceedings, the Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2002 - 04
recommending approval of the transfer request to its member jurisdictions, attached hereto as
Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in furtherance of the public interest and the welfare
of its citizens to consent to the transfer request;
Page 1 of 3 — Resolution 02-43 5
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The findings of MACC demonstrate that the applicant's legal, technical, and
financial qualifications to perform under the Franchise are adequately assured.
Section 2. The City Council hereby consents to the change of control of AT&T Corp. as
set forth in Federal Communications Form 394, pursuant to Section 17.2 of the Franchise.
Section 3. The consent granted herein shall not take effect until all of the following
conditions are met:
a. Grantee shall continue to comply with all valid local laws, agreements, and Franchise
requirements consistent with applicable federal and state law;
b. Each of the members of MACC has approved the Application for the Change of
Control by a duly authorized enactment of each jurisdiction's governing body;
c. MACC staffs formal written determination that all member jurisdictions have so
consented; and
d. Completion of the merger, as identified in the Form 394, by midnight, May 10, 2003,
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon signing by the Mayor.
Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on
the day of , 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Judie Ha.mmerstad, Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
Page 2 of 3 — Resolution 02-43
6
APPROVED AST ORM:
At—z Z�
avid D. Powell
City Attorney
Page 3 of 3 — Resolution 02-43
EXHIBIT A TO MACC RESOLUTION 2002-04
May 7, 2002
Mr. Bruce Crest
MACC Administrator
1815 NW 169th Place, Suite 6020
Beaverton, OR 97006
RE: FCC Form 394 Filed March 4, 2002 - MACC
AT&T Corp. Merger Transaction
Dear Mr. Crest:
We understand that the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission and its
member jurisdictions ("Franchising Authority") have several concerns relating to certain
compliance matters under the franchise held by TCI Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc.,
a.k.a. AT&T Broadband ("Franchisee"). The Franchising Authority has notified
Franchisee of its concern that it would not be appropriate to approve a change of control
prior to resolution of alleged franchise violations with respect to the following issues.
There are two categories of issues needing documentation: first, those issues the
Franchisee has received notice of pending violations; and second, those issues that
may be noncompliance issues. The issues are more specifically set forth below:
Current pendingfranchise violations:
(1) Credit of 30 cents per month for each subscriber whose service has not been
upgraded as required under the franchise;
(2) Franchisee's compliance with franchise customer service standards and
requirements, particularly telephone answering violation of 4th Quarter 2001
standard is not yet cured; and
(3) System design of the Upgraded PCN was not built as required by the Franchise
Agreement and serviceability.
Potential noncompliance issues:
(4) Franchisee's notification that it will not collect or pay franchise fees based on
revenues derived from its cable modem Internet service as of April 1, 2002;
(5) Franchisee's dispute resolution policies and procedures relating to disputes
between the subscriber and Franchisee;
EXHIBIT
A -
RFs��H�to,
Mr. Bruce Crest
May 6, 2002
Page 2
(6) Use of the Franchising Authority's public rights -of -ways, and use of
Franchisee's facilities by others within the Franchise Authority's public rights-of-
way;
(7) Franchisee's decision to recover the cost of franchise fees on certain non-
residential subscriber revenues from residential subscribers (the so-called
"Pasadena pass-through"); and
(8) Reporting related to the Upgraded PCN regarding system problems (e.g.
"trouble tickets").
In order to successfully complete the consent process currently taking place by
the Franchising Authority on the change of control of AT&T Broadband and Comcast
Corporation ("Merger") by July 2, 2002, as agreed to by the Franchise Authority and the
companies, the Franchise Authority and the companies agree to discuss the identified
issues towards reaching mutually satisfactory resolutions, separate and independent
from the consent process. The parties agree to meet within 120 days from May 9, 2002,
and make good faith efforts to resolve the identified issues within six (6) months.
It is understood that the consent to the change of control of this Franchise shall
not extinguish the Franchising Authority's right and ability to pursue any remedy against
Franchisee available under the Franchise with respect to any compliance issues not
mutually resolved. This letter may be referenced in any action taken by the Franchising
Authority concerning the proposed change of control or Franchise compliance.
It is also understood and agreed that the Franchising Authority and the
Franchisee shall not be deemed or construed to have waived any claims, actions, or
defenses with respect to identified issues, or other possible or alleged Franchise
violations that remain unresolved.
By signing below the parties acknowledge and agree to the matters described
herein above.
By: MACC
By: TCI Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc.
Bruce Crest - Administrator Curt Henninger - Senior Vice -President
10
METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 04
A RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE CHANGE OF CONTROL OF AT&T
CORP., THE INDIRECT PARENT COMPANY OF TCI CABLEVISION OF
TUALATIN VALLEY, INC., WITH CONDITIONS, AND RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE OF CONTROL, WITH CONDITIONS, BY THE
MACC MEMBER JURISDICTIONS
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission, hereinafter
"MACC", is an intergovernmental commission formed under ORS Chapter 190, with
Washington County and the cities of Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest
Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro, King City, Lake Oswego, North Plains, Rivergrove,
Tigard, and Tualatin as members; and
WHEREAS, TCI Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc., whose indirect parent
company is AT&T Corp., hereinafter "AT&T", is the Grantee under a Cable
Television Services Agreement approved by MACC and its member jurisdictions,
dated February 1, 1999, hereinafter "Franchise"; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2002, MACC received a Federal Communications
Commission ("FCC") Form 394, by which AT&T requested approval by MACC and
its member jurisdictions of a change of control. Under the proposal, the ultimate
parent of the Grantee will be merged with Comcast Corporation to form a new
ultimate parent corporation, AT&T Comcast Corporation; and
WHEREAS, following completion of the transactions forming the change of control,
the Grantee will be controlled by AT&T Comcast but will continue to operate the
cable system and continue to hold and be responsible for performance of the cable
franchise; and
WHEREAS, Federal law and Section 17.2 of the Franchise authorize MACC and its
member jurisdictions to review any proposed change, transfer, or acquisition of
control, including the proposed transaction, in order to determine the impact on the
Grantee's ability to perform the Franchise obligations based on the legal, financial
and technical qualifications of the transferee; and
WHEREAS, the Section 17.2 of the Franchise further authorizes MACC and its
member jurisdictions to address the resolution of any outstanding issues of
noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the Franchise in conjunction with
any request for change of control; and
WHEREAS. AT&T Comcast has stated that the Grantee will continue to comply with
the lawful terms and provisions of the existing Franchise and agreements following
the Merger, and all parent guarantees will remain in place; and
EXHIBIT
13
�'FSOcut/Ov OL -4
2
WHEREAS. the Grantee and MACC have, in a separate agreement (attached
hereto as Exhibit A), documented the existence of certain relevant issues
concerning the Grantee's performance under the Franchise, and the Grantee has
committed to exercise good faith efforts to resolve such issues separate and apart
from the consent process; and
WHEREAS, MACC staff and consultants have reviewed the proposal pursuant to
the above criteria and commitments, and have recommended approval of the
proposal, provided certain assurances and considerations are obtained from AT&T
in the public interest and contingent on approval by MACC member jurisdictions;
and
WHEREAS, the Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on May 9,
2002;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION:
Section 1. Commission Action on Form 394 Application.
The Commission hereby approves the Application for Change of Control, as
submitted March 4, 2002, subject to the conditions contained herein.
Section 2. Recommendation to Member Jurisdictions.
The Commission hereby recommends that each of the member jurisdictions
approve the Application for Change of Control by duly authorized enactment of each
jurisdiction's governing body, subject to the conditions set forth in Section 3, below.
Section 3. Conditions
A. The approval recommended herein shall not take effect until such time as each
of the following conditions are met:
1) MACC and its member jurisdictions' consent to the change of control shall
not be construed to constitute a waiver or release of any rights they may
have under the Franchise and any separate written agreements with the
Grantee; and
2) Grantee shall continue to comply with all valid local laws, agreements,
and Franchise requirements consistent with applicable federal and state
law; and
3) Grantee and the Guarantor of the Franchise acknowledge the conditions
of transfer approval in writing; and
12
4) Each of the members of MACC has approved the Application for Change
of Control by duly authorized enactment of each jurisdiction's governing
body; and
5) The merger transaction between AT&T Corp. and Comcast Corporation
shall close consistent with the terms identified in the Form 394 and the
supplemental information provided by the Grantee through the request for
information process undertaken by MACC.
B. Approval of the Change of Control will be null and void if the merger transaction
between AT&T Broadband and Comcast Corporation does not close by midnight,
May 10, 2003.
ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION this 9th day of May, 2002.
Dean Gibbs, Chair
Attachment: Exhibit A
13
Gabif, I-V Franco se Regulation • I elecommunications Advice and Support + Public Communications Network (PCN)
Metropolitan Area Communications Commission
Report and Recommendation
AT&T Comcast Change of Control
On May 9, 2002, the Board of Commissioners of the Metropolitan Area Communications
Commission (Commission) unanimously recommended that its fourteen member
jurisdictions consent to the Change of Control of their local franchised cable operator,
TCI of Tualatin Valley (TCITV), from its current indirect parent, AT&T Corp., to a newly
created company AT&T Comcast Corporation. Before taking this action, the
Commission reviewed the MACC staff report, and held a public hearing, where
representatives of AT&T and the general public testified about the proposed transaction.
Executive Summary of MACC's report on the proposed change of control.
The Legal Authority
Any change of control of a cable operator is governed by your Franchise with AT&T and
Federal Law. Section 17.2 of the Franchise grants MACC and its member jurisdictions
the ability to review a change of control and to either consent, consent with conditions,
or to deny the request. The review process begins when the local government receives
a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Form 394 from the cable operator that
contains information about the new controlling entity, and details their qualifications to
own and operate the cable system. Receiving a valid and complete 394 Form triggers a
120 -day review period during which the local franchising authority must formally decide
whether to consent to, or deny the request. However, the Federal Law limits this review
to a single question; Does the new controlling party have the legal, technical, and
financial qualifications to own and operate the cable system? It is generally not
allowed to withhold consent for this transaction based on matters not germane to this
question can place the local Franchising authority in legal ieopardy. If the local
franchising authority does not make a decision regarding this question within the 120 -
day time period, consent is considered "automatically granted" by Federal Law. Any
denial of a change of control is open to judicial review at the Federal Court level.
AT&T Change of Control
On March 4, 2002, AT&T delivered to MACC an FCC Form 394, formally requesting to
change the control of TCITV's parent company, AT&T Corp. The new parent would be a
newly created entity that would result from the merger of AT&T's Broadband with
Comcast Corporation (Pennsylvania based company). That filing also contained
information regarding the legal, technical, and financial ability of the new entity to own
15
PA
and operate the cable system. MACC staff reviewed the filing and determined that the
Form 394 submitted by AT&T was valid. MACC also sent AT&T -Comcast a request for
information and a separate letter regarding pending franchise compliance issues. The
Form 394 filing and the responses to MACC's RFI and the franchise compliance letter
formed the basis of MACC's review of the new entity's legal, financial and technical
qualifications to own and operate the system.
Commission Recommendation
The recommending resolution passed by the Commission on May 9`h is attached. In
adopting this resolution, MACC acknowledges that AT&T Comcast does have the legal,
financial and technical qualifications to own and operate the cable system. It also
includes several important conditions that are also reflected in the resolution your
jurisdiction will be asked to consider. The resolution also references an attached "side
agreement" from AT&T identifying several current and potential Franchise violation
issues under discussion with AT&T and MACC.
Your Role
The Commission is asking your governing body to consider their recommendation to
pass your own resolution consenting to the change of control. (Since MACC has already
held an advertised public hearing, it is probably not necessary for you to hold another.)
To meet our 120 -day deadline of July 2, 2002, we are asking jurisdictions to adopt the
enclosed resolution as soon as possible. According to the MACC IGA, all fourteen
MACC jurisdictions must consent to this Commission recommendation. If any one
MACC jurisdiction does not agree, the matter is vetoed for all the other members.
MACC staff and AT&T representatives will be available to attend each jurisdiction to
present the Commission's recommendation and to answer your questions. In the
meantime please contact your MACC representative, or MACC staff members, Bruce
Crest, Administrator, or Sarah Hackett, Senior Communications Analyst, for assistance.
Attachments: 1) MACC Recommending Resolution #2002-04
2) Draft Jurisdictional Resolution
3) Questions & Answers about AT&T Comcast
16
Questions & Answers
About the AT&T Comcast Change of Control
Prepared by MACC staff
Q1: How large if this merger transaction?
A: Comcast is purchasing the AT&T Broadband holdings for $72 billion. Once the
merger is complete, the new AT&T Comcast Corporation will be the largest cable
company in the world, with over 22 million subscribers.
Q2: What local changes will we see?
A: According to AT&T, very little will change since this transaction is really taking
place at the ultimate parent level. Local operations and staff are not expected to
change at the current time. The new company will operate under the name of
AT&T Comcast Corporation.
Q3: Will subscriber programming change as a result of this merger?
A: AT&T states that no major changes in programming are planned at this time.
Q4: Will cable rates increase as a result of this merger?
A: AT&T does not expect that any rate increases will result from this merger, but
they reserve their right to increase rates in accordance with Federal Law. AT&T
also hopes that the new combined company will provide them added leverage
when negotiating with suppliers of programming channels — this could result in
reduced costs for these services.
Q5: Will subscribers to AT&T Broadband Cable Modem Internet Service be required to
change their addresses?
A: AT&T states that neither their customers, nor those of Comcast, should be
required to change their addresses.
Q6: When will the merger be completed?
A: AT&T expects this merger to be completed prior to the end of calendar year
2002.
Q7: Has AT&T improved their telephone answering performance locally?
A: AT&T is in the 2nd quarter of a two -quarter cure period. They are currently
averaging approximately 90%, the required standard. AT&T's telephone answering
performance has improved since January, though we are not convinced that AT&T
can sustain that trend. MACC continues to monitor AT&T's telephone answering
performance, as well as other customer service issues.
Q8: Will the current upgrade of the MACC residential cable system be completed on
schedule?
A: AT&T is making significant progress on the upgrade and must complete the
physical construction of the system by July 31, 2002. They have stated that the
funds to complete this work are available and that the proposed merger will not
affect their ability to complete the upgrade in the MACC service area. MACC
continues to monitor this situation.
is
Cqu
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
June 21, 2002
Sarah Hackett
MACC - Senior Communications Analyst
1815 NW 169th Place, Suite 6020
Beaverton, OR 97006
Dear Ms. Hackett:
Enclosed you will find a copy of Resolution 02-43 of the City of Lake Oswego. The
Resolution consents, with conditions, to the change of control of AT&T Corp., the
indirect parent company of TCl Cablevision of Tualatin Valley, Inc. Please let me know
if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
Enclosure
380 "A" Avenue • Post Office Box 369 • Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 • (503) 635-0236 • FAX (503) 697.6594
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Resignation of Marta Furman from the Arts Commission
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Accept resignation with regret.
ESTIMATED FISCAL
IMPACT:
STAFF COST: $
BUDGETED:
Y N
FUNDING SOURCE:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
signoff/date
Document27
ATTACHMENTS:
• Furman letter dated
June 6, 2002
NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance no.:
Resolution no.:
Previous Council
consideration:
CITY AGER
/3 2_
signo date
4.1.1
06/18/02
1, 9
RIc"ar'c'TPIP
JUN 0 7 2002
Doug Schmitz CITY OF LAAE UovvLov
City Manager
City of Lake Oswego
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 June 6, 2002
Dear Doug,
This letter serves as notice of my resignation from The Lake Oswego Arts
Commission effective August 1. 2002.
I don't believe I need to tell you how much I have enjoyed my time with LOAC.
I have learned a tremendous amount and I am very enthusiastic about all the exciting
ideas and projects that will take place in the future. I hope that my efforts have helped to
ensure that the arts will continue to enhance the lives of the citizens of Lake Oswego.
Thank you so much for supporting the concepts that Jean and i formulated; it was
a pleasure working with you!
Slnc _
arta F rmdti
cc: Ellie McPeak
Kim Gilmer
21
4.2.1
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Construction contract award for the 2002 Pavement Management Program — Street
Maintenance Overlays (Work Order 1167)
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award a public improvement contract for Work Order 1167, 2002
Pavement Management Program — Street Maintenance Overlays to Brix Paving Company in the
amount of $1,034,865.25.
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT:
• Komarek Council Report
$1,034,865.25 dated 6/6/02
STAFF COST: Ordinance no.: NA
N/A
BUDGETED: Resolution no.: NA
Y X N
FUNDING SOURCE: Previous Council
consideration: None
Street Fund
Street SDC Fund
1 ENGINEER
4 /7/�.
Date
Of
CONN. DEV. DIRECTOR
� oz
Date
H Kathy_g\WOV I67\WO 1167 Agenda Rvpurt.duc
CITY MAGER
/3�z-
Date /,,,
--
23 N
TO:
FROM:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
l 7rlil
Action
CITY OF LAKE OS WEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
Joel B. Komarek, Acting City EngineerV If --
George Dwire, Construction Supervisor
Recommendation of Bid Award for Construction of Work Order 1167,
2002 Pavement Management Program — Street Maintenance Overlays
June 6, 2002
The City Council is requested to award a public improvement contract to Brix Paving Company
in the amount of $1,034,865.25 for the 2002 Pavement Management Program — Street
Maintenance Overlays project.
Introduction
This Contract requires Council award in order to comply with the City and State contracting and
purchasing procedures.
Discussion
At 10:00 a.m., on Wednesday, June 5, 2002, the City of Lake Oswego opened bids for the above
referenced project. Three bids were received with the apparent low bid being submitted by Brix
Paving Company. The bidders and the amount of their bids are tabulated below:
Bidder Bid
Brix Paving Company $1,034,865.25
Benge Construction Company $1,043,207.51
Eagle Elsner, Inc. $1,269,810.51
Engineer's Estimate $1,138,375.50
Council Report
June 6, 2002
Page 2 of 2
Based upon a review of the bids by staff, the bid submitted by Brix Paving Company was
deemed responsive and responsible.
Alternatives
l he alternatives are to: l ) award the contract or 2) reject all bids and re -bid the project.
Conclusion
City staff prepared the bidding documents for this project in accordance with the City's
requirements for public improvement contracts. Tlie bidding process was conducted in
accordance with the City's public contracting procedures. Staff, therefore, recommends that
Council award the contract to Brix Paving Company in the amount of $1,034,865.25.
/ch
H \Kathy_y\WO\l167\WO 1167 Council Report doc
96 N
J
City of Lake Oswego Pavement Management Program - 2002 Street Projects
S1H ET PROJECT
L 8
�� L_ `—� � m.lAfrw•m.w.rin..v.e.Nar.
`� �; (�r L' f �• � om Nrr.•I. ]Mr/rtlM•1010tlrWMbt'M•n.,
`� _ 1N.rnall•., Drl.• IlonY a]• om. b fa. m.r
F_ CHEEK
Y �i.. 1 � , l_ ` w� 17enD en•..• a.....N b �•.n•r c:AA. Naan
�T (\% 1 (j'� • r �hf•I. fgbq M.tl b Wsbr.pr.0 INMer
SPATE
�.�
TAF
"fTN 's—.l� t\pi (1 -.7� 0 I.. Nnaau.Y. u•woaMlN, oY.nsw.•.
PARK \ 1 / ,p oD • A N.... No.a e r r M.e
. � 1 � I el` � ••N.t4•a �� .J IAN flr<NN
,N aw.
Pu
D..Ia.A..m..0
o•• cDsl.. u
IISAWYofm:-�—p-.'�L -` Yl�i>`l i FM'" .. AMrRw fM.•tlina Na0ro1]tCDlWrxun lMw�
' NfAA ,IIY t/ �• � � I` INnGw.tlWaRa]an prlww
I. - ' ` � / r (� 1 _, +. �/ �- � _._... _ _ � - •""'^ l / {•g' NMn pll lla•tl�Dow.WM bNSIabMyMA11 W.]o lbs
3 1A.
eT T
n
J
r
k "mn• � f' •.� i a ��I a.m• wn caws.. am I _ �� .. _ I•...m.M Y.r.am•m P..el.m r D.wr c>„r.,
- B y., _ � 1 S�� _ 1 ." � --�.. cAVM. •arem•IbensM�
t
_�T)/�\�j/\'lR _. � lit% �Nm : C- \ (...1_ — Alw lAa•. M
v[ y p 1�
l t�y .,1
� � � i'` 1'' aI•111. L R � n 0. sl CwN • N
a Y3, R
%0W
.�i. r BaH - �PeJ 111 .moi,.. _� s xaM. Wl.naderop.b eN..�.l l�or.'
«t �, c+� t R•.. Lake i nuW NM
oe
... • Il,• .aR aMai t+, rNi NII s/Ilse . M
5 oumal lln .Y.' tr"'��.�/.`' AJr3d G e��la .:, P.0 _ '\ .. � I vMMonn lnu. WE•Nb 9MIm<�i.•r.n.�rr.
.,4r •^' ,/'"" e9° MMM ..� r : x _'.1.1-•�\ ParMr.nlWnPm•M lnNnm-eMrl 6••N
p Og'W Al «� - ;, — \ .\ YI•) MMa•N..tl reMn No.rl lu IN N•rw•r4w
M
1• _f. RY tW. II � 1.. V� TlrnMxMw lNw.]101Fno•nrrr llv a. t... N•
•.raNeme,n '¢, f Vii' a..f' �F, �St� �-.,. � �lt .r°iAr o•bn sM« N
Al
�i � Irib YImkI lnl,.N•. M
`rbi r� i y� n1AI 11 Urku
RI Mr Y- � �1i � r'f11ae flea Wlup•1MM.tMIIun U'Mb\1]111 Ntpr•DM
.�.....�••II y � e1•] UA4Nmtl eM1 • N
YfMw•r. � 1 � �,� y 81 DR ��n NV�aI^Mlnr 1. Nle ��In L rt • I lan.w.ee BMI mrq b iwi 1. Nes
Ilbbbbkk••.. �Jtil 1r 1 vl � •fnrNf ar•Nllrer•-R
YAn Mar � N €, '� I� f iP � r.o..bu. rbn.. n.0 J► " wNW..a.r. nrnr D.1.,a...r.. N
L' F G h • b 0.sbn• Drlr. IrslqLvw b IIp01 IAMM M1M
�I .Ip P 1p76....t- 9i RR .ala" b Whl.w Lwrl.N
f 1..` hmi�ri nvl R'nly: rl,•I'GYpprul ' �... ITt YsrD. Cnb NaA l wran11-11 YWNI'.ntl Wrt
r ^ ! � ruN _ 1 rs NI.�..•r Nptl - M °a
L, � ntN P•mbM Nwp-N'.
lul T
d my.m tMY MweNrY M/•M.
te..n i
q: ":z�6'• 'tea N.n •b. .
ani E6
River Not to Somie Apr112002
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - STREET CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 2002
The Pavement Management Program (PMP) for 2002 will continue to preserve the City's investment in its street infrastructure system.
Funding sources for the 2002 PMP include State gas tax revenues, State revenue sharing funds and a one-time use of transportation systems
development charge reserves
The projects highlighted in the accompanying map will take place from May through October 2002. Generally, the work will be accomplished
between the hours of 7 a.m. and 8 p.m., Monday through Saturday. To keep residents "in the know," the City's public information plan
includes this HELLO L.Q. insert as well as the following
✓ Local notice from the City: This notice will be sent out shortly after the City has approved a constructinn schedule. It will provide a
preview of what period of time the contractor is planning to be in the project area.
✓ Nand delivered notice from the Contractor: These notices typically come in the form of a door hanger, 48 to 72 hours prior to the
work. The notice will provide important project information such as time and location of the work, who to call for inquiries, and the
duration of the work. If access to your property is significantly restricted during construction, the notice will include instructions about
alternate parking/access arrangements
✓ Project Notice Signs: This year's projects are spread across Lake Oswego so we anticipate using 12-18 temporary notice signs that
would be moved around according to the progression of the work. The intent is to post one or two project Information signs in the work
zone a couple of days prior to beginning the work
✓ Construction Update Hotline: The City uses a prerecorded construction Information line to help pass along project information
during construction. This information is updated as needed to convey the latest, need -to -know information. The line is also available
for callers to leave non -emergency messages, project comments, or requests for Information. The Construction Update Hotline can be
reached at 503-635-0261. Please use this number, as it is our most efficient tool to obtain useful project feedback and to ensure your
calls are returned in a timely manner
Pavement Management Program - Reconstruct
The streets listed under "Pavement Management Program - Reconstruct"
will typically include a crew to mill off two to four inches of the existing
asphalt pavement and a second crew to replace it with two to four inches of
new pavement. Often the milling will occur a day or two prior to the new
pavement.
I he streets listed under "Pavement Management Program - Overlay" will
include placement of new asphalt over the existing street surface
-
T lie City and contractor will work very hard to ensure that residents have
access during the milling and paving operations.
Pavement Management Program - Reconstruct
STI 10th Street - South lot line 420 10"' Street to 'B' Avenue
ST2 Timberline Drive - Bonnie Brea Drive to Fox Run
sT3 Redwood Court - All
ST4 Shireva Drive - 13800 Shireva Drive west to Country Club Road
ST5 Shlreva Court - All
5T0 Glacier Lilly Street - Fosberg Road to Meadowgrass Street
Pavement Management Program - Slurry Seats
T he streets listed as "Pavement Management Program SI, r, els"
onsists of an oil emulsion applied over the entire width of fl, 171•ol. The
rry seat prevents water from entering the pavernent to extend street lila
r, ilsions, applied during warm summer days, require 3-4 hours to cure
before traffic Ceti resume, Curing times during cool days or Hdthin shaded
>er_tions of a street may Increase to 8.10 hours
ST7 Taylors Crest Lane - Glacier t.11ly Street to gate
STB Kingsgate - Melrose Street to Galen Street
STB Lake Grove Avenue - All
ST 10 Upper Drive - Reese Road to Twin Flt Road
ST 11 Bonaire Avenue - Washington CI In 16523 Bonaire Ave.
5T 17 Washington Court- Boones tory lid. to Lake Forest tllvd
S11:1 Cortez Court - All
ST 14 Maple Circle - All
ST 15 Cardinal Court - All
ST Ill, Cardinal Place - All
ST 17 Deer Oak Avenue - Ali
ST I B Deer Oak Circle - All
ST 14 River Run Drive - Childs flood to 19100 River Rim Di rve
ST20 35th Court - Childs Road to City Limits
ST 21 Riven Dell Road - Dover Way to W property line 2937 Riven I
S172 Tameway Drive - All
ST 13 Overlook lane - All
S'124 Overlook Circle - All
ST25 Lookout Circle -AR
ST26 Glenwood Court - All
Pavement Management Program -- Ovei Iny
S T27 'C' Avenue - 4" Street to 6"' Strool
ST28 Capllano Court - All
ST29 Carrera Lane - All
ST30 Atwater Lane - All
ST 31 Sibelius Court - All
ST32 Doris Court - All
S133 Oak Knoll Court - All
5134 Summit Drive - East end of Bridge to Summit Court
ST35 Wren Court - All
5136 Coho Lane - All
ST37 Leafy Lane - All
ST38 Campus Way - All
ST 39 Kilkenny Drive - All
S1'40 Kilkenny Road - All
ST41 Patton Street - South Shore Blvd. to Laurel Street
ST42 North Shore Road - State Street to Greenwood Road
Pavement Management Program - Slurry Seals
S T43 Berwick Road - North Shore Rd, to 202 Berwick Rd.
ST44 Bayberry Road - All
S145 Timberline Drive - 820 Timberline lir. to Fox Run
5146 Bernlnl Court - All
q14? Galen Street - Kingsgate to Peters Rood
3148 Amberwood Circle - All
S1'49 Amberwood Court - All
5150 Bunlck Drive - All
5T 51 EI Greco - All
Sl s2 Walugs Drive - Carmen Drive to 15570 Waluga DO—
S t ', t Galewood Street - All
S1 `.4 Douglas Circle - Lanewood St. north to Twin Fir Rd.
5155 Graef Circle - All
5156 Dellwood Drive -2944 itellwood Drive to Fomwood Circle
5157 Delanka Lane - All
S 58 Overlook Drive - Treetop Lane to 179n1 Ovorlook Drive
87'59 Las Street -- Laurel Street to Cedar Strout
ST60 Grandview Court - All
S If, I F.aslvlew Court - All
ST62 Middle Creat Road - Lakewood Rd.to 623 Middle Crest Rd.
ST63 Ridgeway Road - All
ST64 Fairmont Road - All
ST65 Booties Ferry Road - Country Club Rd, To Knaus Rd.
4.2.2
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Design Contract for Lakeridge high School Softball Fiew
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a
contract between the City and MacLoed Reckord for architectural design
services of the Lakeridge High School softball field.
EST. FISCAL
IMPACT:
$94,716
STAFF COST:
BUDGETED:
Y X N
FUNDING SOURCE:
Fields Bond FL111d
CHIEF OF STAFF
"�/-/f
Signoff/date
ATTACHMENTS:
May 14, 2002 Staff
Report from Kincaid
CITY AGER
__ qC) 2—
Signoff ate
P'Special Proiects/Cover Summar I Acridge SoRhall
PUBLISHED NOTICES
(Date):
N/A
Resolution no.:
Previous Council consideration:
r4
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
FROM: Robert A. Kincaid, Chief of Staff UO `�
SUBJECT: Design Contract for Lakeridge High School Softball Field
DATE: May 14, 2002
ACTION
Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract between the City and MacLoed Reckord for
architectural design services of the Lakeridge High School softball field.
BACKGROUND
In the 1998 bond measure for athletic fields and open space, one of the projects was to improve the lower
practice field at Lakeridge High School on the Cloverleaf Street side.
At the request of the Lake Oswego School Board and the approval of the Teams Sports Advisory
Committee and City Council, the project has been significantly changed in size and scope. It is now
proposed to be a new women's' softball field.
Because of the legal issues surrounding the project, it was best felt to have a separate contract for this
project to more easily track the costs.
As a result of the change in the project, it is anticipated that it will be more expensive than provided for in
the bond measure. The City Council has committed $250,000 for the project. The School Board has
committed the balance of the funds needed for the project.
RECOMMENI)ATION
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract between the City
and MacLoed Reckord for architectural design services of the Lakeridge High School softball field.
Design Contract for Lakeridge Iligh School Softball Field
Page I of 2
31
JUN 18 '02 09:24AM LAKE OSWEGO SCHOOLS
LD7
June 18, 2002
lake Oswego School District
2455 Country Club Road
P.O. Box 70
Lake Oswego, OR 97034-0070
503.534-2000
Mr. Doug Schmitz
City Manager
City of lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Doug:
P. 22
� // (�/o -2-
This letter provides confirmation that the Lake Oswego School District views the new softball
field at Lakeridge High School to be a joint project with the City of Lake Oswego, and subject
to our Joint Use Agreement.
It is anticipated that, as is the case with the new softball field at Lake Oswego Junior High
School, the new field at Lakeridge will be used by the school district for its athletic programs,
and by the city for its Parks and Recreation sports activities.
Sincerely,
William A. Korach, Ed.D-
Superintendent
WAK: nd: sh
9K.C70
4.3.1
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: A Resolution of the City Council of the City Of Lake Oswego Authorizing the Mayor to
Execute an Amendment Extending the Lease Agreement with the City of Portland for use of the
Jefferson Street Branch (Willamette Shore) Rail Line for the Operation of a Trolley and for Recreation
Uses
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to adopt Resolution 02-36 Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Amendment Extending the Lease
Agreement with the City of Portland for use of the Jefferson Street Branch (Willamette Shore) Rail Line
for the Operation of a Trolley and for Recreation Uses.
EST. FISCAL
ATTACHMENTS:
NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT: $0
• Komarek Council Report
dated June 12, 2002
STAFF COST:
Resolution 02-36
Ordinance no.: n/a
BUDGETED:
Resolution no.: 02-36
Y N
Previous Council
FUNDING SOURCE:
consideration: No
N/A
��W. l � �1
s
6 // 3/i -L-
Date
COMM. DEV. DIRECTOR
Date
C:\windows\,I, ,MP\ogenda_ehecklist HO 02.366.3-02.doc
Ljl/
CITY AGER
Date
33
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
FROM: Joel Komarek, Acting City Engineei el—
PREPARED BY: Tom Tushner, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Jefferson Street Branch (Willamette Shore) Rail Line Lease Extension
DATE: June 12, 2002
Action
A resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego authorizing the mayor to execute an
amendment to the lease agreement with the City of Portland for use of the Jefferson Street
Branch (Willamette Shore) Rail Line for the operation of a trolley and for recreation uses.
Discussion
The Cities of Portland and Lake Oswego entered into a lease agreement in 1990 that allowed the
City of Lake Oswego to operate an interim trolley on the Willamette Shore Rail Line. The lease
agreement was renewed in 1995, 2000 and 2001. The current lease agreement expired on June 1,
2002. The proposed extension of the lease agreement would be for a five-year period. The lease
agreement has a clause which allows for termination of the agreement should the line be needed
for Rail Mass Transit.
As stipulated by the lease, Lake Oswego has carried liability insurance for the operation of the
trolley and the City of Portland has been identified as an additional insured. This has been done
under the City's overall insurance policy. The lease extension also amends the original lease
agreement to allow recreation uses on the rail line.
During the course of the lease agreement, the City has safely and successfully operated a trolley
service with several trolley operators. Continued use of the rail corridor is essential to preserve
the corridor for future commuter rail service.
35
Council Report
June 12, 2002
Page 2
Alternatives
] . Adopt Resolution 02-36 authorizing the mayor to execute an amendment to the lease
agreement with the City of Portland for use of the Jefferson Street Branch (Willamette Shore)
Rail Line for the operation of a trolley and for recreation uses.
2. Do not adopt Resolution 02-36 authorizing the mayor to execute an amendment to the lease
agreement with the City of Portland for use of the Jefferson Street Branch ( Willamette Shore)
Rail Line for the operation of a trolley and for recreation uses.
Recommendation
Council is recommended to adopt Resolution 02-36 authorizing the mayor to execute an
extension to the Willamette Shore Rail Line lease with the City of Portland for the operation of
an interim trolley service and for recreation uses.
/tt
H:\TOM—lVrojects\Trolicy\trolley_agree PDX 5-28-02.doc
;Sh
RESOLUTION 02-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT EXTENDING THE
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF PORTLAND FOR USE OF THE JEFFERSON
STREET BRANCH (WILLAMETTE SHORE) RAIL LINE FOR THE OPERATION OF A
TROLLEY AND FOR RECREATION USES.
WHEREAS, the Cities of Lake Oswego and Portland entered into a lease agreement for use of
the Willamette Shore Rail Line in 1990 for a period of five years to allow the City of Lake
Oswego to operate an interim trolley;
WHEREAS, the Cities of Lake Oswego and Portland renewed the lease agreement for an
additional five-year period with an expiration date of June 1, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Cities of Lake Oswego and Portland renewed the lease agreement for an
additional one-year period with an expiration date of June 1, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Cities of Lake Oswego and Portland renewed the lease agreement for an
additional one-year period with an expiration date of June 1, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Cities of Lake Oswego and Portland desire to execute an amendment to the
lease renewal agreement for the continued operation of an interim trolley and for recreation uses;
and
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The Mayor is authorized to execute the amendment to the lease agreement (attached)
between the City of Lake Oswego and the City of Portland extending for a five-year period the
use of the Willamette Shore Rail Line for the operation of an interim trolley and recreation use.
Considered and enacted at the regular Council meeting of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular
meeting held on the 18th day of June, 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Judie Hammerstad
Mayor
37'
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell
City Attorney
Agreement available in the City
Recorder's Office for review.
Resolution 02-36
Page 2 of 2 38
4.3.2
001 18102
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Resolution 02-39 of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Authorizing
the Mayor to Execute a Joinder Agreement with the Clackamas River Water
Providers to Participate in and Jointly Fund Clackamas River Watershed
Activities.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Adopt Resolution 02-39, a Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Lake Oswego Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Joinder Agreement with the Clackamas
River Water Providers to Participate in and Jointly Fund Clackamas River Watershed Activities.
EST. FISCAL
ATTACHMENTS:
NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT:
Komarek Council Report
-
$34,772
dated 6/12/02.
STAFF COST:
Resolution 02-39.
Ordinance no.:
BUDGETED:
Resolution no.: 02 39
Y X N
Previous Council
FUNDING SOURCE:
consideration: No
Water Fund
0-4- 16 � I -- -- I -
-761,1,-illd
4Y ENGINEER COMM. DEV. DIRECTOR CITY M NAGER
Date Date Date
li .IUM. KEN:NV_SRRV�WAT�R\Glxckwekereh�d WQ\rgond�_chcekliwl_krxll't•YU_IGAnFxnxe�mml.d�w•
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
FROM: Joel B. Komarek, City Engineer$0w
SUBJECT: Resolution 02-39 Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Joindcr Agreement
with the Clackamas River Water Providers to Participate in and Jointly
Fund Clackamas River Watershed Activities.
DATE: June 12, 2002
Action
Adopt Resolution 02-39, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego authorizing
the Mayor to execute a Joinder Agreement with the Clackamas River Water Providers to
participate in and jointly fund Clackamas River Watershed Activities.
Background
Since 1968, the City of Lake Oswego has been diverting the waters of the Clackamas River for
nuinicipal drinking water purposes. As such, the City has a vested interest in advocating for and
participating in joint efforts to preserve and enhance the quality of water emanating from the
Clackamas River watershed. In addition to serving over 35,000 residents of Lake Oswego,
drinking water produced at the City's water treaUnent plant is also supplied under surplus sales
contracts to several Cities and water service districts located in or adjacent to the City's Urban
Services Boundary. The City holds a water right certificate and permits issued by the Oregon
Watcr Resources Department authorizing withdrawals of water from the Clackamas River up to
38 million gallons per day.
Discussion
Understanding how the myriad of activities occurring within the Clackamas River basin affect
water quality is of paramount importance to the City. With this knowledge, we can devise more
effective public education efforts and better treatment strategies to ensure the quality of the raw
41
Council Report
Page 2 of 2
(untreated) water continues to be excellent and that our treated water is unsurpassed in terms of
meeting public health regulations and taste. In 1996, amendments to the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA) required all municipal water systems to begin monitoring for waterborne pathogens
like Giardia and Cyptosporidium and for disinfection by-product precursors. Other SDWA
amendments require the conduct of watershed assessments as a means to understand the affect
human caused activities have on water quality. Since 1996, Lake Oswego has participated with
its Clackamas River water provider partners to collaborate on such monitoring and assessment
efforts. Resolution 02-39 demonstrates the City's continuing commitment to protecting and
enhancing the quality of water produced by the basin and ensuring Lake Oswego consumers that
their drinking water is the safest and best tasting that it can be.
Alternatives
1) Adopt Resolution 02-39, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
authorizing the Mayor to execute a Joinder Agreement with the Clackamas River Water
Providers to participate in and jointly fiord Clackamas River watershed activities, or 2) do not
adopt Resolution 02-39, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
authorizing the Mayor to execute a Joinder Agreement with the Clackamas River Water
Providers to participate in and jointly fund Clackamas River watershed activities.
Conclusion
The conduct of watershed assessments and continued monitoring efforts are crucial to our
understanding of the watershed and its many influences on water quality both natural and
manmade. The public trusts that its water purveyors are taking steps to ensure their drinking
water is safe and pleasant tasting. Federal and State regulations require municipal water
suppliers to gather such data to optimize treatment techniques and reach ever more stringent
water quality standards. It is for these reasons, staff recommends that the City Council of the
City of Lake Oswego adopt Resolution 02-39.
Attachments: Resolution 02-39
11 VOBL-KAINV,.til{RV\WATI>RI('lackwatenhcd_Wp\('OIIN('RPT,.Rea02-394oindcc agnwnenl doe
4 ''
RESOLUTION 02-39
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A JOINDER AGREEMENT WITH THE CLACKAMAS RIVER
WATER PROVIDERS TO PARTICIPATE IN AND JOINTLY FUND CLACKAMAS RIVER
WATERSHED ACTIVITIES.
WHEREAS; on or about May 2001, the Water Providers entered into an intergovernmental agreement
"Agreement" for the joint funding of Clackamas River Watershed activities and
WHEREAS; the Water Providers desire that the City of Lake Oswego join the agreement by executing
the Joinder Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit `A' and incorporated by reference and
WHEREAS; the City of Lake Oswego desires to participate in some of the activities which it believes are
beneficial to Lake Oswego and pay its proportionate costs therefore in accordance with the cost share and
allocation tables included with the Joinder Agreement and
WHEREAS; the collective actions by the Water Providers and the City of Lake Oswego will achieve
many benefits including reduced costs for regulatory compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act, a
better understanding of how current management activities in the watershed impact water quality and
more accurate stream flow data and
WHEREAS; the City of Lake Oswego agrees to reimburse Clackamas River Water as paying agent for
the Water Providers a sum not to exceed $34,772 for its share of the costs to condtict approved watershed
activities in Fiscal Year 2001-2002:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego authorizes
the Mayor to execute the Joinder Agreement attached as Exhibit `A'fwith the Clackamas River Water
Providers to participate in and jointly fund Clackamas River watershed activities.
Considered and enacted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular meeting held on the
18'x' day of June, 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
ATTEST:
�_.
AP OVED AS, TO FORM
David Powell
City Attorney
lAgreement available in the City
Recorder's Office for review.
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
43
4.3.3
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Resolution 02-40 a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Authorizing the Mayor to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the City of Lake Oswego as a member of the Clackamas River
Water Providers and the Clackamas River Basin Council (CRBC).
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Adopt Resolution 02-40, a resolution of the City Council of the City
of Lake Oswego Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding between
the City of Lake Oswego as a Member of the Clackamas River Water Providers and the
Clackamas River Basin Council (CRBC).
EST. FISCALI ATTACHMENTS:
IMPACT:
None
STAFF COST:
BUDGETED:
Y N
FUNDING SOURCE:
CI ENGINEER
Date
• Komarek Council Report
dated June 12, 2002
• Resolution 02-40.
NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance no.:
Resolution no.: 02-40
Previous Council
consideration: No
COMM. DEV. DIRECTOR CITY MA AGER
Date
_/3 l 2 -
Date Date
W
It)I';I K\ENV_SEli V\WA'11:R1,Clackwa(ers1wd_WQ\tigenda_checklist-Reso2.40—CItHC_MOU.doc
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
FROM: Joel B. Komarek, City Engineervs,-
SUBJECT: Resolution 02-40, A resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the City of Lake Oswego as a Member of
the Clackamas River Water Providers and The Clackamas River Basin
Council (CRBC).
DATE: June 12, 2002
:fiction
:'adopt Resolution 02-40, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego authorizing
the mayor to execute a memorandum of understanding between the City of Lake Oswego as a
member of the Clackamas River Water Providers and the Clackamas River Basin Council
(CRBC).
Background
Since 1968, the City of Lake Oswego has been diverting the waters of the Clackamas Rivcr for
municipal drinking water purposes. As such, the City has a vested interest in advocating for and
participating in joint efforts to preserve and enhance the quality of water emanating from the
Clackamas River watershed. In addition to serving over 35,000 residents of'Lake Oswego,
drinking water produced at the City's water treatment plant is also supplied under surplus sales
contracts to several Cities and water service districts located in or adjacent to the City's Urban
Services Boundary. The City holds a water right certificate and permits issued by the Orcgon
Water Resources Department authorizing withdrawals of water from the Clackamas River up to
38 million gallons per day.
4 �%
Council Report
Page 2 of 2
Discussion
In early 1997, the Clackamas River Basin Council was formed as a volunteer non-profit
organization in accordance with state statutes and the Council is recognized by the Clackamas
County Board of Commissioners. The Council stakeholder groups are diverse and
comprehensive and include a special "Water Providers" group consisting of' those Special
Districts and Cities who divert the waters of the Clackamas River for municipal drinking water
purposes. As one of the water providers, the City of Lake Oswego has participated in finding
the operations and activities of the CRBC since its formation and over the last Iew years,
members of the City Council have occupied chair positions on the CRBC. The mission of the
CRBC is stated thus:
"The goal of the Clackamas River Basin Council is to enhance and protect
the quality of the Clackamas River watershed by promoting and
facilitating integrated watershed management through education and <<
cooperative policy-making process involving all the stakeholders in the
region."
The MOU between the Water Providers and the CRBC establishes the principles and processes
by which each party will operate to further the goals of the CRBC and accomplish mutually
beneficial projects undertaken within the basin. Understanding how the myriad of activities
occurring within the Clackamas River basin affect water quality is of paramount importance to
the City. With this knowledge, we can devise more effective public education efforts and better
treatment strategies to ensure the quality of the raw (untreated) water continues to be excellent
and that our treated water is unsurpassed in ternis of meeting public health regulations and taste.
Resolution 02-40 demonstrates the City's continuing commitment to protecting and enhancing
the quality of water produced by the basin and ensuring Lake Oswego residents continue to
receive drinking water that is unsurpassed in quality.
Alternatives
i ) Adopt Resolution 02-40, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
authorizing the mayor to execute a memorandum of understanding between the City of Lake
Oswego as a member of the Clackamas River Water Providers and the Clackamas River Basin
Council (CRBC), or 2) do not adopt Resolution 02-40, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Lake Oswego authorizing the mayor to execute a memorandum of understanding
between the City of Lake Oswego as a member of the Clackamas River Water Providers and the
Clackamas River Basin Council (CRBC).
Conclusion
Continued participation in the CRBC in furtherance of the goals stated above, will provide
substantial benefit to the City of Lake Oswego in terms of our understanding of the watershed
and its many influences on water quality both natural and manmade. It is for these reasons, staff
recommends that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego adopt Resolution 02-40.
Attachments: Resolution 02-40
46
II�JOF.L.K\r.NV_S13RV\WA'I'Izk\('IockwnleixheJ_WQ\COUNCRPf Res02.40.('RD(' MOUJ.w
RESOLUTION 02-40
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY
OF LAKE OSWEGO AS A MEMBER OF THE CLACKAMAS RIVER WATER PROVIDERS AND
THE CLACKAMAS RIVER BASIN COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the Cities of Lake Oswego and Estacada, incorporated cities; Clackamas River Water, a
domestic water supply district; South Fork Water Board, an intergovernmental entity between Oregon
City and West Linn; and the North Clackamas County Water Commission, an intergovernmental entity
between the Sunrise Water Authority, a water authority and Oak Lodge Water District, a domestic water
supply District, hereinafter "Water Providers" all divert and treat waters from the Clackamas River for
municipal drinking water purposes and
WHEREAS; the Clackamas River Basin Council (CRBC) acting as an advisory body to the Board of
County Commissioners in Clackamas County acting in the interest of all citizens using the Clackamas
River watershed and acting in accordance with the CRBC Charter and Rules, seeks to provide basic
management direction and guidance for the broad range of beneficial uses and activities in the Clackamas
River watershed and
WHEREAS; the Water Providers each and collectively are members of the CRBC and as such are
committed to the improvement, protection and monitoring of water in the Clackamas River and the
overall health of the watershed and
WHEREAS; the Water Providers and the CRBC enter into the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
for the purpose of providing a framework for communicating and coordinating efforts in the conduct of
the Clear and Foster Creeks watershed assessment:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego authorizes
the Mayor to execute the Memorandum of Understanding attached as Exhibit `A'. #
Considered and enacted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular meeting held on the
18`x' day of June, 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FO
40
David Powell
City Attorney
'Agreement available in the City
Recorder's Office for review.
Judie Harnmerstad, Mayor
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
49
4.3.4
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 06/18/02
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Resolution 02-42
Designating Alternates to the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to adopt Resolution 02-42, designating Mark Stayer as the first alternate to the Planning
Commission to serve if a vacancy occurs on the Planning Commission due to attrition through
April 30, 2003; and designating Jeff Lindberg as the second alternate to the Planning
Commission to serve if a second vacancy occurs on the Planning Commission due to attrition
through April 30, 2003.
EST. FISCAL
IMPACT: N/A
STAFF COST: $
BUDGETED:
Y N
FUNDING SOURCE:
DEPT. DIRECTOR
Date
ATTACHMENTS:
Applications of
Mary Stayer and
Jeff Lindberg
ASST. CITY MANAGER
Date
NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance No.:
Resolution No.: 02-42
Previous Council
Consideration:
CITY MA AGER
3 a-- / z --
Date
J1
RESOLUTION 02-42
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
DESIGNATING ALTERNATES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, a City Council Interview Committee, consisting of Mayor Hammerstad,
Councilor Turchi, and Daniel Vizzini, Chair of the Planning Commission, met on June 6,
2002 to interview candidates for alternate position(s) to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, it was the consensus of the Interview Committee to recommend to the City
Council that Mark Stayer be designated as the first alternate to the Planning
Commission to serve if a vacancy occurs on the Planning Commission due to attrition
through April 30, 2003; and
WHEREAS, it was the consensus of the Interview Committee to recommend to the City
Council that Jeff Lindberg be designated as the second alternate to the Planning
Commission to serve if a second vacancy occurs on the Planning Commission due to
attrition through April 30,2003;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Lake Oswego hereby designates Mark Stayer as the first alternate to the Planning
Commission to serve if a vacancy occurs on the Planning Commission due to attrition
through April 30, 2003; and designates Jeff Lindberg as the second alternate to the
Planning Commission to serve if a second vacancy occurs on the Planning Commission
due to attrition through April 30, 2003.
This resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular
meeting held on the 18th day of June 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
53
-80 "A" AVENUE
'POST OFFICE BOX 369
;LAKE OSWEGO,
OREGON 97034
(503)635-0213
FAA 1503) 697-6594
N 1,A; Y O&&c hoswego. o r, u s
IUDIR HAMMER5TAD,
MAYOR
GAY GRAHAM,
COUNCILOR
;ACI: HOFFMAN,
COUNCILOR
June 25, 2002
Jeff Lindberg
665 4th Street
Lake Oswego OR 97034
Dear Mr. Lindberg:
It is a pleasure to advise you that on Tuesday, June 18, 2002, the
City Council of the City of Lake Oswego designated you as the
second alternate to the Planning Commission to serve if a
second vacancy osccurs on the the commission due to attrition
through April 30, 2003.
On behalf of the City Council, I wish to thank you for your
ELLIE McPEAK, willingness to share your expertise and experience with our
COUNCILOR community.
KARL ROHDE, Sincerely,
COUNCILOR
BILL SCHOEN,
COUNCILOR
IOHN TURCHL J die Hammerstad
COUNCILOR
ayor
JH/sms
c: Members of the City Council
Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
Dennis Egner, Senior Planner
380 "A" AVENUE
June 25, 2002
POST OFFICE BOX 369
LAKE OSWEGO,
Mark A. Stayer
OREGON 97034
(503) 635-0213
5700 Meridian Court
FAX (503) 697-6594
Lake Oswego OR 97035
M AVORQci.oswego.orms
Dear Mr. Stayer:
DIE HAMMERSTAD,
MAYOR
It is a pleasure to advise you that on Tuesday, June 18, 2002, the
City Council of the City of Lake Oswego designated you as the
CAYGRAHAM,
first alternate to the Planning Commission to serve if a vacancy
COUNCILOR
osccurs on the the commission due to attrition through April 30,
2003.
JACK HOFFMAN,
counlnLCTR
On behalf of the City Council, I wish to thank you for your
ELUE McPEAK,
willingness to share your expertise and experience with our
COUNCILOR
community.
KARL RC)I 11)1 . Sincerely,
COUNCILUk
BILL SCHOEN,
COUNCILOR
1OHN TURCFII, J die Hammerstad
COUNCILOR
ayor
JH/sms
c. Members of the City Council
Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
Dennis Egner, Senior Planner
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING COMMISSION
"ate, J
Application JJ//
Please Complete in Black Ink or Type
PERSONAL DATA
(503) 796-2992 (wk)
Name Mark A. Stayer Telephone_(503) 620-0581 (hm)
Address 5700 Meridian Ct. Lake Oswego OR 97035
Street City State Zip
Years of Residence in Lake Oswego 17 * Occupation lawyer
Employer Schwabe; Williamson & S%att Employer's Telephone ( 503) 22.2-9981
Employer's Address 121.1 SW Fifth -Ave., Suites 1600-1900, Portland, OR 97204
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND B.B.A. University of Wisc.- Oshkosh
J.D. Willamette University College of Law
PROFESSIONAL OR VOCATIONAL BACKGROUND See attached
PRIOR CIVIC ACTIVITIES See attached
WHY WOULD YOU LIKE TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION?
See attached
SIGNED
DATE -/?LO Z
RETURN THIS APPLICA IONTO: CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, MAYOR'S/CITY COUNCIL
OFFICE, 380 A AVENUE, PO BOX 369, LAKE OSVVEGO OR 97034
NO LATER THAN 5:00 P.M., FRIDAY, APRIL 26,2002.
IT IS STRONGLY RECOMMENDED THAT YOU ATTEND A MEETING OF THIS COMMISSION BEFORE
YOU INTERVIEW WITH THE CITY COUNCIL. CALL 635-0270 FOR MEETING DATES.
*For the current selection process, candidates must reside inside the city limits of Lake Oswego.
Please use the other sine of this application if necessanf.
MARK STAYER
ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION
City of Lake Oswego
Planning Commission
Professional or Vocational Background: Prior to entering law school I worked for 5 years with
Kohler Co. (Kohler, Wisconsin) working as an international sales representative. My territory
was Western Europe and the Middle East. During that time Kohler Co. sent me to the American
Graduate School of International Management ("Thunderbird") where I earned a Key Manager's
degree in Arabic and Middle Eastern studies. I entered the Willamette University College of
Law in 1982 and graduated in 1985. In 1984 I was elected as Editor -in -Chief of the Willamette
Lam, Review. 1 joined the Portland law firm of Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt in the fall of 1985
and have been with the firm since that time. I started practicing law in the firm's corporate and
business law department. In 1990 I transferred into the firm's real estate law department. I am
presently chairman of the firm's Land Department, which includes the real estate, land use,
condemnation and environmental law practice areas. My practice includes all facets of
commercial real estate law. I have two kids at LO High School and one at Our Lady of the Lake.
Prior Civic Activities:
• Chairman of the firm's United Way campaign from 1986 through 1989
• President of the Westlake Homeowner's Association from 1986 through 1988
• Member of the board of directors of Infant Hearing Resource (nka Chairman of the Our Lady
of the Lake School Endowment Fund Board since January 2000 and member of that board
since 1997; Hearing & Speech Institute) in 1989 and 1990
• Chairman of the Our Lady of the Lake School Endowment Fund Board since January 2000
and member of that board since 1997
Why would I like to serve on the Planning Commission: Lake Oswego is a wonderful place to
live. Our City offers so much. We have great schools, great services and a community that
cares. Not only is Lake Oswego is one of the most beautiful places to live, it is also one of the
more exciting places to live from a development standpoint. It is wonderful to see the
redevelopment of the downtown and the new life and energy which are being injected into the
downtown area. I intend to live here the rest of my life and believe it is my civic responsibility
to give some thing back to the City. Every city needs a solid core of volunteers. Real estate and
development issues fascinate me. I would really enjoy working on the Planning Commission
and I think I could contribute something to the process.
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Application
Please Complete in Black Ink or Type
PERSONAL DATA
Name: Jeff Lindberg Telephone: 503 699 1095
Address: 665 4th Street Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Years of Residence in hake Oswego 2.5 Occupation Attorney
(For the current selection process, candidates must reside inside the city limits of Lake
Oswego.)
Employer Oregon Court of Appeals Employer's Telephone 503 986 5659
Employer's Address 1162 Court Street NE Salem, Oreyzon 97034
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
See attached
PROFESSIONAL OR VOCATIONAL BACKGROUND
See attached
PRIOR CIVIC ACTIVITIES
See attached
WHY WOULD YOU LIKE TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION?
See attached
SIGNED DATE April 25, 2002
Jeff Lindberg
665 4th Street Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Home: (503) 699-1095 Work: (503) 986-5659 email: jeffrey.t.lindbergria)ojd.state.or.us
April 25, 2002
Mayor and City Council of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue, P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
I write to express my interest in being appointed to the Lake Oswego Planning
Commission. My family and I moved to Lake Oswego over two years ago. Since then, I
have been looking for an opportunity to become involved in the Lake Oswego
community. The planning commission's work is of particular interest to me and my legal
training and experience make me a strong candidate for this position.
As a staff member at the Oregon Court of Appeals, I have had exposure to a
number of legal issues surrounding land use planning and development. Additionally, i
have made it a priority to familiarize myself not only with Oregon's statewide land use
planning goals and their attendant statutes and administrative rules, but also with Metro's
2040 Growth Concept and Lake Oswego's Comprehensive Plan. Thus, I can offer the
commission my understanding of the interplay between those regulations and how that
interplay relates to local land use planning efforts. Finally, I am a quick study and am
willing to work hard to make a valuable to contribution to the commission's work in
order to better serve the city council in its effort to make responsible and informed land
use decisions. Thank you for considering my application.
Sincerely,
C�,<w /;�
Jeff Lindberg
Jeff Lindberg
665 4th Street Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Home: (503) 699-1095 'Work: (503) 986-5659 email: jeffrey.t.lindberg(a)ojd.state.or.us
EDUCATION
Northwestern School of Law of Lewis & Clark College
J.D. 2001 G.P.A.: 3.25
Honors & Activities: Cornelius Honor Society; Scholar List, 2000-2001; Law Review, Notes and
Continents Editor, Journal of Small and Emerging Business Law, Moot Court Honor Board, 2000-
2001; Moot Court Appellate Advocacy Competition, 2000; Volunteer, Oregon Trial Advocacy
College, November 2000; Honors Brief, First Year Appellate Competition, 1999; Dean's
Fellowship for Excellence, 1998-2001
Arizona State University M.A. History, 1998 G.P.A.: 3.88
Honors: George E. Paulsen Award for Best Paper on U.S. Foreign Relations; Regents Graduate
Scholarship, for nonresident graduate students with outstanding academic records
Thesis: "Advice and Dissent: Senator Wayne Morse and U.S. Foreign Relations, 1945-1964"
University of Portland B.A. History, 1996 G.P.A.: 3.26
Honors & Activities: Rev. Joseph L. Powers, C.S.C., Senior Award in History, awarded to top
history graduate; Member, Phi Alpha Theta, Blue Key, and Delta Epsilon Sigma National Honor
Fraternities; Dean's List, final four semesters
EXPERIENCE
Oregon Court of Appeals, August 2001 -present
Judicial Clerk to the Honorable Virginia L. Linder
Oregon Department of Justice, Special Litigation Unit, Law clerk, October 2000 -April 2001
Research and writing support for civil and constitutional litigation.
Multnomah County District Attorney's Office, Trial intern, May -September 2000
Experience included numerous jury trials, motion work, and negotiations.
Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College, August 1999 -May 2000
Teaching Assistant, Legal Writing Department
Oregon Department of Justice, Appellate Division, Law clerk, May 1999 -May 2000
Drafted appellate briefs and motions in civil and criminal appeals.
U.S. West Communications, 1989-1996
Customer Service Representative, Operator and Information Services
BAR MEMBERSHIPS and COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES
Oregon State Bar: Sections on Real Estate & Land Use, Environmental & Natural Resources,
Appellate Practice, Business Litigation; New Lawyers Division Leadership Development Program
American Bar Association: Litigation and Labor and Employment Sections
Moot Court Judge, Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College
Member, Oregon Historical Society
4.3.5
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: ,tune 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Resolution 02-44 authorizing the Mayor of the City of Lake Oswego to sign on behalf of
the city an Intergovernmental Agreement with Clackamas County awarding the City a
community mobilization grant funding the activities of the Lake Oswego Asset Builders
Coalition through June 30, 2003.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
If City Council wishes to accept the staff recommendation, the motion should hc:
Adopt Resolution 02-44
EST. FISCAL
IMPACT:
None
STAFF COST: $
BUDGETED:
Yes No
FUNDING SOURCE:
Community
Mobilization Grant,
Clackamas County
ATTACHMENTS:
• Council Report dated
06/12/02
• Resolution No. 02-44
NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance no.:
Resolution no.: 02-44
Previous Council
consideration:
14
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ASST. CITY MANAGER CITY NAGER
Date Date Date
55
To: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
From: Helen Bicart, Chief of Police
Subject: Resolution 02-44
Date: June 12, 2002
Police Services
Council Report
Action
City Council is requested to adopt resolution 02-44, authorizing the Mayor to sign
an intergovernmental agreement with Clackamas County awarding the City of
Lake Oswego a community mobilization grant funding the activities of the Lake
Oswego Asset Builders Coalition.
Discussion
The Police Department is making this request on behalf of the Lake Oswego Asset
Builders Coalition (LO ABC). The LO ABC applied for and received a $20,000
community mobilization grant from the Clackamas County Office for Children
and Families. The program goals are to: 1) Provide public service information by
holding a minimum of six coalition meetings, release 12 news articles, distribute
2000 "Developmental Assets" brochures, release 10 public service announcements,
and go online with the LO ABC website; 2) Provide 24 asset presentations to the
Lake Oswego Community; 3) Oversee the Youth Advisory Board's administrative
functions including a minimum of six meetings; 4) Provide Youth Employment
Workshop series to 200 local youth; 5) Provide Second Step training to 25
teachers/ counselors; 6) Provide "Asset Banner" to local schools utilizing 15 youth
to develop and distribute.
.alternatives
1 _ Adopt Resolution 02-44
2. Do not adopt Resolution 02-44
Conclusion
Staff recommends that City Council adopt Resolution 02-44 authorizing the
Mayor to sign an intergovernmental agreement with Clackamas County for a
Community Mobilization Grant.
5'i
RESOLUTION 02-44
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM CLACKAMAS COUNTY TO FUND CERTAIN
ACTIVITIES OF THE LAKE OSWEGO ASSET BUILDERS COALITION
WHEREAS the City, through its Police Department, oversees activities of the Lake
Oswego Asset Builders Coalition (LOABC); and
WHEREAS Clackamas County proposes to award the City a grant of $20,000, provided
that the City agrees to:
• Oversee LOABC's administrative functions,
• Provide 24 asset presentations to the Lake Oswego community,
• Oversee the LOABC Youth Advisory Board's administrative functions,
• Provide a youth employment workshop series to 200 local youth,
• Provide Second Step training to 25 teachers and counselors, and
• Provide an "asset banner" to local schools; and
WHEREAS the City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the youth of Lake
Oswego for the City to enter into an intergovernmental agreement accepting the grant
from the County to fund these activities;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
that the Mayor is authorized to execute an intergovernmental agreement, in the form
attached as Exhibit "A,"Iaccepting a $20,000 grant from Clackamas County to fund certain
activities of the Lake Oswego Asset Builders Coalition.
This Resolution shall be effective upon passage.
Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego on the 18 day of June, 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
1 of 2 - Resolution 02-44
4Agrecmcnt available in the City
Recorder's Office for review.
J ��
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APP OVED AS TO RM:
David D. Powell
City Attorney
of 2 - Resolution 02-44 60
4.4
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes from:
1. April 8, 2002, information session
2. April 16, 2002, morning meeting
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Approve minutes as written (or as corrected if Council adds corrections to the motion)
EST. FISCAL
IMPACT:
STAFF COST: $
BUDGETED:
Y N
FUNDING SOURCE:
ATTACHMENTS:
Minutes from:
• April 8, 2002, information
session
• April 16, 2002, morning
meeting
NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance no.:
Resolution no.:
Previous Council
consideration:
CITY NAGER
113 dz
signoff/ to
MF
n
OREOON
TO:
Public A f faiys Department
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Robyn Christie, City Recorder
SUBJECT: Correction to Minutes
DATE: June 18, 2002
C: Douglas I Schmitz, David Powell
The following correction has been made to the minutes on the consent agenda for the
June 18, 2002 Council meeting. Please make the motion to approve minutes as corrected.
Date of Minutes
Page
Correction
April 8, 2002, information session
10 of 11
First paragraph under 'Term Limits' change the
(74 in
word `good' to `qualified'
(_packet)
�• Rul,�n nine nirnu,.�l�,r
MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 2002
SPECIAL MEETING
4.4.1
00/18/02
63
`` i" 1..1 (1, h"
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 8, 2002
Mayor Judie Hanunerstad called the City Council information session to order at 4:00 p.m. on
April 8, 2002, at the Main Fire Station, 300 B Avenue.
Present: Mayor Hammerstad, Councilors McPeak, Rohde (arrived 4:05 p.m.), Schoen,
Turchi, Graham, and Hoffman (arrived 4:05 p.m.)
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City
Recorder; John Lewis, Associate Engineer
3. INFORMATION SESSION
3.1 Transportation Advisory Board recommendations for the Carman/Meadows
intersection
Doug Schmitz, City Manager, reported that staff received a fax from Equity Office this
afternoon. He advised the Council that he informed Reuben Clark that the Council's intent was
to continue to study the roundabout versus signalization.
John Lewis, Associate Engineer, introduced Marc Butorac and Sonia Hennum, traffic
engineers from Kittleson & Associates (the traffic sub -consultant for WRG, the City's civil
engineering consultant). He mentioned that they made this presentation to the Transportation
Advisory Board (TAB) and the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB).
Mr. Lewis recalled that staff gave serious consideration to the roundabout alternative after
meeting with the consultants and the neighborhood, from whom they heard issues that they had
not thought about in detail before putting the scope of work together. He mentioned their hope
that they could start construction this season.
Mr. Lewis said that this Kruse Way project funding came from County transportation SDCs
($533,000) with the balance coming from City SDCs.
Sonia Hennum, Kittleson & Associates, gave a slide presentation. She reviewed the study area
for the project (page 9). She noted that they included nearby intersections as part of
understanding how the subject intersection operated within the transportation system as a whole.
Ms. Ilennum mentioned that they have worked closely with TAB, in addition to City staff,
because Steve Schulte attended all their public meetings and relayed information back to TAB.
She indicated that the project team also included pavement engineers and an arborist.
Ms. Hennum reviewed the project schedule. She noted the public involvement process in
particular, including two newsletters, two public meetings, three meetings with TAB and oiie
meeting with the property owners adjacent to the intersection.
his. I-lennum summarized the City process for the project. She mentioned that the inventory
and analysis of existing conditions found that the intersection operations currently met City
standards (but there were concerns with respect to vehicle queuing), and that there was a lack of
connectivity for pedestrian/bicycle facilities.
Ms. Hennum reviewed the four points they heard from the neighborhood at the first public
meeting: slowing traffic down, eliminating/reducing cut through traffic, transportation safety
and impact to adjacent properties.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page I of I 1
Apri 18, 2002 65
Ms. Hennum stated that their forecast/evaluation of future conditions found that this 20 -year
design project would not meet the 20 -year traffic demand forecast for this area. She mentioned
needing enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities, maintaining adequate access to neighboring
properties and enhancing the aesthetics of the intersection.
Ms. Hennum mentioned the two base alternatives they developed to address the needs: a traffic
signal and a modern roundabout. She referenced the conceptual designs they developed for the
two alternatives in order to evaluate the right-of-way impact, operations and other performance
criteria (page 15, 17). She indicated that their preferred alternative was the modern roundabout
design.
Ms. Hennum pointed out that the roundabout design had fewer intersection conflict points (8)
than the standard signal intersection (32), which meant that it performed better with respect to
traffic safety. She noted that roundabouts also had lower, more consistent travel speeds for all
vehicles entering the intersection, as opposed to the variety of travel speeds found in a standard
intersection.
Ms. Hennum said that the roundabout provided adequate, although not excessive, capacity to
meet the 20 -year demands of the intersection. She noted that the free-flowing traffic form of the
roundabout reduced travel times, especially during off peak hours, in that vehicles could go
through without stopping when there were no other vehicles to yield to. She observed that it also
provided enhanced system-v.ide traffic operations because of the shorter queues, which did not
back up far enough to interfere with downstream driveways or intersections in the vicinity.
Ms. Hennum reviewed other benefits gained with a roundabout: maintenance of accessibility to
neighboring properties, landscaping, aesthetic and neighborhood gateway opportunities,
minimization of noise and pollution, less overall right-of-way and property acquisition, and
lower construction and average maintenance costs.
Ms. Hennum commented that when they presented this preliminary alternative to the public,
they also told the public that it was not a done deal; staff still had issues and concerns to work
through. She mentioned the need to acquire more property from the immediately adjacent
properties because of the circular form.
Ms. Hennum reported that overwhelmingly the written and oral public comments they received
supported the roundabout. She mentioned the lower vehicle travel speeds, the ability to design
the roundabout to discourage inappropriate truck traffic, and the opportunity for aesthetic and
neighborhood gateway treatments, in particular. She noted the concerns regarding property
impacts and pedestrian safety.
Ms. Hennum presented the refined design, developed by staff in response to the neighbors'
concerns. She reviewed the changes from the original design: reducing the circle diameter by
another 5 feet to minimize impact, and designing meandering pathways to save existing trees and
to minimize impact to adjacent properties. She noted that the refined design had a greater impact
in the southwest quadrant and a significantly reduced impact in the northeast quadrant, where
apartments sat close to the road.
Ms. Hennum reviewed statistics comparing the standard intersection and the two roundabout
alternatives for a variety of elements. She noted that the refined roundabout alternative with the
meandering pathways removed significantly fewer trees and had less impact on adjacent
properties in terms of livability and property aesthetics, even though it had more right-of-way
impact than the original roundabout design.
Ms. Hennum reviewed the supplementary recommendations, which staff suggested for future
Funding and construction. These included protected northbound and southbound left turn
phasing at Kruse Way and Carman Drive in order to eliminate cut through traffic on Quarry,
traffic calming improvements along Quarry Road, and signalization of the Meadows Road/Kruse
Wood intersection in order to allow more pedestrian connections across Meadows Road.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 2 of I I
April 8, 2002 66
Councilor McPeak asked for a comparison of the refined roundabout to the roundabouts on Iron
Mountain Blvd (at the Hunt Club) and in First Addition. Mr. Lewis explained that the smaller
inside diameter of the refined roundabout would create a wider travel lane and allow larger
vehicles to negotiate it than could negotiate the Iron Mountain Blvd roundabout.
Ms. Hennum commented that a traffic circle, such as the one at the Hunt Club, was designed
differently than a modern roundabout. She explained to Councilor McPeak that a roundabout
was a traffic control device whereas a traffic circle was a traffic -calming device. She indicated
that a roundabout used yield control on all approaches, giving priority to the circulating
driveway, as well as having a wider travel way to accommodate vehicle turning movements.
Mr. Lewis indicated to Councilor McPeak that the rules for entry into this roundabout would
be consistent with the rules of entry for the Iron Mountain traffic circle. He described, as
another difference, the diverter islands, which channeled vehicles approaching the roundabout
into the circle.
Ms. Hennum noted that the deflection created by the diverter islands reduced vehicle travel
speeds and provided pedestrian refuge between the travel lanes, so that drivers coming up to the
roundabout did not have to deal with pedestrians and vehicles at the same time. She mentioned
that pedestrians did have the right-of-way; vehicles had to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk.
Mr. Lewis indicated to Councilor McPeak that the First Addition traffic circle used stop signs.
He commented that using stop signs lost all the efficiency of a roundabout; staff would not
propose stop signs unless there were complications.
Councilor McPeak commented that she has lived in areas where the rules for a roundabout
differed from country to country, which posed a serious danger. She spoke to standardization of
the rules. Ms. Hennum concurred that they did not want to violate driver expectancy.
Councilor Turchi asked what parameters did they change in the refined design. Ms. Hennum
explained that, in running a computer simulation, they discovered that they could reduce the
standard 125 feet to 120 feet and still accommodate the design vehicle.
Ms. Hennum confirmed to Councilor Turchi that the refined roundabout design led them to
think that it was better to have a queue running from the intersection west, rather than from the
intersection north. She noted that it also reduced the queue to the east as well. She explained
that the queues from a signalized intersection would interfere with a nearby driveway and the
Kruse Way intersection while the queues from a roundabout would not reach back to the
driveways on adjoining properties or block the Galewood intersection. She reiterated that a
roundabout worked better from a systems standpoint.
Ms. Hennum explained to Councilor Turchi that the volume to capacity ratio represented the
total number of cars that the intersection could accommodate. She gave the example of a 70%
volume/capacity ratio: at an intersection with a capacity of 1,000 cars, 700 cars could get
through at the peak hour. She indicated that a roundabout was a little less efficient from a
volume to capacity ratio standpoint; when looked at in isolation, a signalized intersection
operated at 70% of what it could handle whereas a roundabout operated at 82% of what it could
handle.
Ms. f-lennum pointed out that this was not the only performance measure. She said that the key
factor in their recommendation was the vehicle queuing, which was the bigger problem; a
roundabout was better at handling vehicle queuing.
Ms. Hennum explained to Councilor Turchi that the `250, southbound approach traffic signal'
meant a 250 foot storage requirement during the pm peak hour (25 feet per vehicle); 95% of the
time, the queues would not be longer than 10 vehicles.
Ms. Hennum indicated to Councilor Graham that the device at 39`x' and Glisan was a traffic
circle, and not a modern roundabout. She described what the pedestrian crossing would look
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 3 of 1 I
April 8, 2002 67
like. She confirmed that they designed the roundabout to accommodate all emergency service
vehicles. She described the use of the `truck apron,' which provided large trucks and emergency
vehicles with additional roadway outside of the normal travel lane for turning movements.
Ms. Hennum indicated to Councilor Graham that they took into account the potential
developments on the other side of Kruse Way in the projected traffic volumes for the design year
2020. She explained that they based the traffic forecast on the Metro regional model and the
City's Transportation System Plan traffic growth projections, which they Hound consistent with
each other.
Councilor Schoen asked if they took into consideration any changes in the traffic patters out to
1-5 and Carman, when forecasting future traffic volumes. Ms. Hennum indicated that Metro's
regional travel demand model included all the roadways in the Portland metro arca. She
explained that the model developed forecasts for each facility in conjunction with the parallel
facilities, and simulated drivers taking different routes in response to traffic congestion at any
point.
Ms. Hennum explained to Councilor Schoen how the right-of-way priority worked in the
roundabout. Councilor Schoen commented that most roundabouts that he has seen in Europe
used two lanes, rather than one lane. He questioned whether the peak hours would see
tremendous queuing. Ms. Hennum commented that one reason that a roundabout was
appropriate for this intersection was its location in a neighborhood and business area; the same
people would tend to use it every day. She said that studies have found that the acclimatization
period for drivers becoming comfortable with the merging aspect was one to two weeks.
Ms. Hennum indicated to Councilor Schoen that they included two yield signs for each corner:
one before the pedestrian crossing and one before entering the circulating driveway. She said
that, while they have not conducted any studies to determine whether there were less accidents at
a roundabout compared to a signalized intersection, the industry research found that that was so.
Marc Butorac, Kittleson & Associates, discussed Bend's use of the modern roundabouts on the
way up to Mt. Bachelor. He commented that the Bend Council asked the same questions that
this Council was asking. He said that, after about one and a half weeks, drivers greatly
appreciated the roundabouts. He mentioned reading an article about the increasing use of the
modern roundabout in the U.S., including Bend's plans to implement 35 additional modern
roundabouts.
Mayor Hammerstad noted that the letter that the City received from Equity Office asked
similar questions, and spoke of the traffic engineer it dust hired. She asked if the consultants
would meet with the Equity Office people to address their concerns. Ms. Hennum said that they
would be happy to meet with Equity Office again to address their additional concerns. She
mentioned that they presented the preliminary concept design to them already.
Mayor Hammerstad observed that the configuration, with its lack of right angles, was similar
to the Borland Road/Stafford intersection, which she could not get improved three years ago.
She commented that a roundabout would be a less expensive alternative than acquiring the right-
of-way needed for that intersection. Mr. Lewis concurred that it should be considered.
Mr. Butorac observed that a roundabout, as a traffic control device, was not appropriate for
every location; they should be placed where they made sense, similarly to placing signals or stop
signs where they made sense. He commented that they picked a roundabout because the
numbers showed that it was the most efficient traffic control device for this situation, and not
because roundabouts were aesthetically pleasing.
Councilor Rohde asked for a better breakdown of the funding than provided in the staff memo.
He asked what the expected costs were of the additional items and what were the expected
sources for the money. Mr. Lewis pointed out that the hard construction costs for the
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 4 of 1 I
April 8, 2002 66
roundabout alternative were $100,000 less than for the signal. He mentioned that they knew that
the cost of the sanitary sewer extension down the southbound Carman leg was missing.
Mr. Lewis commented that the money for the 900 -foot sewer extension would come from the
sewer fund. He mentioned other costs of property acquisition and improvements as well as the
meandering pathway. He indicated to Councilor Rohde that the right-of-way funding would
come from the County and City SDCs.
Mr. Lewis confirmed to Councilor Rohde that the design and engineering fees were over and
above the $360,000. He explained that, for comparison purposes, they looked at everything
within 200 feet of the intersection but they would incur additional costs if they moved further
along the intersection legs.
Mayor Hammerstad summarized Councilor Rohde's request as asking for a matrix comparing
the design, engineering and right-of-way acquisition costs for each alternative. Councilor
Rohde said that he also wanted to see what draw down there might be on the City's budget. He
indicated that a written staff report was fine for presenting that information.
Mayor Hammerstad noted that they would need to schedule this as a regular Tuesday night
agenda item, following staff s meeting with Equity Office.
Ms. Hennum confirmed to Councilor Graham that the majority of the 20 trees slated for
removal would come from the Galewood Condominium quadrant. She explained that the
arborist told them that those trees were so closely spaced that they formed one root mass: touch
one, and they touched all of them. She indicated that the tree removal was the sole natural
resource issue.
Ms. Hennum confirmed to Councilor Graham that they had talked with the property owner
and the condominium owners/renters representatives. She noted that representatives of the
property owner attended some neighborhood meetings and the TAB presentation. Mr. Lewis
described their concerns as the significant impacts to the complex, with the moving of the street
traffic that much closer to the buildings, and the removal of the trees.
Mr. Lewis commented that many of the trees slated for removal were in the right-of-way but a
few were on private property. He noted that they could save a significant amount of trees on the
Kruse property with a meandering pathway as opposed to a curbed sidewalk. He indicated that
they would save the large oak tree on the southeast side, which the arborist was in awe of.
Councilor Graham asked what replantings staff contemplated to mitigate for the removal of the
Douglas firs from the condominium area. Mr. Lewis mentioned replanting higher quality trees
in the center of the roundabout. He indicated that the lack of space prohibited replanting
Douglas firs on the Galewood side but there were opportunities to add trees in along the Quarry
leg. He said that they have not yet done an analysis to determine whether they could plant some
other kind of trees on the Galewood side.
Mr. Butorac discussed the tradeoff between saving trees by using a meandering pathway and
public safety considerations of planting shrubbery that could obscure people on the pathway.
Mr. Lewis indicated to Councilor Turchi that the northwest corner was in the county but the
other three corners were in the city. He confirmed that the trees on the northwest corner could
be cut down at any time.
Councilor Rohde asked if the consultants considered additional movements to the west. Ms.
Hennum described the process they used in designing the roadway as far away from the
buildings as possible. Councilor Rohde suggested eliminating the base line and moving the
intersection over enough to preserve the Douglas fir grove, rather than preserving the three
parking spaces.
Ms. Hennum explained that, with a roundabout, it was important for the roadways to come in as
(lush to 90 degrees as possible in order to get the vehicular movement around the corners, and to
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 5 of i 1
April 8, 2002 69
control the traffic speeds. She said that moving the roundabout over further to the west got into
issues of realigning two of the roadways in order to achieve that 90 -degree alignment. She
indicated that they could do those realignments but it would significantly increase the project
costs to do so.
Mr. Butorac explained that moving the roundabout over without moving the roadway with it
meant that the vehicles on that roadway would be able to cut directly across the circle. He
indicated that shifting Carman on the south side over 10 to 12 feet eliminated an entire row of
parking on that side. Ms. Hennum pointed out that shifting the roadway on the north side
interfered with the trees on that side. She said that they tried to minimize the impact to each
property as much as possible, given the existing constraints.
Mr. Butorac noted that they already shifted the alignment of the Carman northbound lcg in
order to save the large oak tree. He explained that they would have to meander the roadway
almost like as "S" curve or take it all the way back to the corner in order to get the alignment
right, which would take out even more parking.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor llanutnerstad opened t11e meeting to public testimony
• Joseph Schaefer, Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt, land use planner representing
Galewood Apartments
Mr. Schaefer directed the Council's attention to the footprint of the Galewood Apartments
shown on the map. He mentioned a meander loop of the sidewalk to avoid two large trees on
Quarry, which was not shown on the map.
Mr. Schaefer expressed their appreciation for staff's effort in addressing their concerns. He said
that they were pleased with the movement of the intersection to the west but, given that it did not
save many trees, their concern was what would be the best way to mitigate the tree removal and
the resultant starkness of the apartment building.
Mr. Schaefer indicated on the map the location of their preferred mitigation: a five-foot high
rock wall. He argued that visually, a rock wall would be a more attractive sight for drivers to
look at than into kitchens. He noted that a rock wall would also block headlight glare into the
apartments. He observed that a roundabout created more sweeping headlight movement than a
standardized intersection. He commented that he was not advocating for a standardized
intersection, lie was advocating for mitigation of the impacts to the property.
Mr. Schaefer discussed their second concern: noise. He argued that a vegetative buffer of
shrubs did not address the noise issue but a rock wall would protect against noise. He indicated
that they supported anything that could be done to save more than the four trees that would be
saved. He commented that they realized that the City would do what it would with its
intersection but they hoped that the impacts to their property could be mitigated as much as
possible.
• Drew Prell (Gatewood Investors, PO Box 1989), property owner
Mr. Prell said that his major concern was the damage to the property value from noise and the
reduced aesthetics ,N,ith the tree removal. He noted that when this property was built in 1984,
which he purchased in 1989, the developer made every effort to maintain a `forest' feel. He
observed that the trees in front of the building were an attractive feature for both the residents
and the neighbors.
Mr. Prell questioned what moving traffic to within 20 feet of people's living rooms would do to
the livability of the apartments. He concurred that the intersection needed improvements. He
argued that a good solution to the noise and aesthetics would be a rock wall.
City Council lnfornrrtion Session Minutes Page b of 11
April 8, 2002 l (�
Mayor Hammerstad asked if the mitigation was the City's responsibility, Mr. Schmitz
indicated that it should be part of the project costs. Mayor Hammerstad asked staff to include
those costs in the matrix.
Mayor Hammerstad noted that Tom Wright from Equity Office was present but he would wait
to state his concerns when staff met with his firm.
Henry Germond, Transportation Advisory Board
Mr. Germond mentioned a concern discussed at the Board with respect to the foundation of the
rock wall and what it might do to the roots of the trees that they were trying to save. He noted
the suggestion of small post foundations with precast panels to reduce the impact on the root
system.
Donna Jordan, Transportation Advisory Board
Ms. Jordan commented that the people on Quarry Road did not want the improvements. She
asked if it was possible not to make the pedestrian improvements on the northeast corner at this
time and to leave the trees. She noted that the pedestrian connectivity would occur on the
southeast side walkway down to Quarry and across Meadows to the northwest side, which would
help people on Carman get across Kruse Way.
Mayor Hammerstad indicated that they would include that alternative in their discussions
• Mayor Hammerstad recessed the meeting at 5:08 p.m. for a five minute break.
• Mayor Hammerstad reconvened the meeting at 5:12 p.m.
3.2 Advisory Committee Discussion
• Board chairs or vice chairs present at interviews
Councilor Turchi reported that the situation with the Library Advisory Board and the NRAB
worked out, in that the interview committee delivered the message about the Council wanting
people to turn over. He noted that they ended up reappointing all the people who applied
anyway. He concurred with Councilor Graham that having the vice chair present also worked.
Mayor Hammerstad indicated to Councilor McPeak that reason behind the Council's goal in
having the Board chair or vice chair present at the interview was that the chair knew the
committee balance and what points of view needed representation. She observed that the chairs
were reluctant to deny reappointment to a sitting member. Councilor Schoen commented that
the chair would also know if a candidate was not compatible or if there was a problem with a
current member who was reapplying.
Councilor Graham asked if the City employee staffing the board should be present. Mr.
Schmitz indicated that he was not comfortable with putting staff in that position.
The Council agreed by consensus to continue to have the Board chair or vice -chair present at the
interviews.
• Process for dealing with applicants who have conflict with interview date
Mayor Hammerstad noted that this issue was for those who were out of town or out of the
country when the interviews were held.
Councilor McPeak commented that she evaluated people more fairly against one another when
she did so within a short span of time. Mayor Hammerstad noted that it was easier for Shirley
to set up the interviews ifthey were done all at the same time. She suggested asking those who
could not make the interview date to reapply for the next opening.
Councilor Rohde asked to notify the applicants that the interviews would likely take place in
June. Mayor Harnmerstad noted that Shirlcy has developed some language along those lines.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 7 of I I
April 8, 2002 7 1
Councilor Graham spoke to picking one day of the month to hold interviews. She argued that
if the applicants knew what the definite date was for interviews, then they could work around it.
The Council discussed which day of the month to set for interviews. Councilor Rohde noted
that there were no City Advisory Board meetings on the third Thursday. Councilor McPeak
expressed concern that one night a month might not be enough time to conduit all the
interviews. She suggested setting one date and adding dates as needed.
Councilor McPeak asked for the second Thursday. She explained that when the third Tuesday
was the last Council meeting for the month, she usually left town. Councilor Schoen suggested
a Monday, if they held their study sessions down to two per month. Councilor Rohde noted that
some advisory boards met on that night.
The Council agreed by consensus to try the second Thursday of the month as the day for Board
and Commission interviews, from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Mayor Hammerstad commented that she did
not hear support for scheduling a special interview time for those who were out of town on the
interview day.
• Role of Liaison to Committee
Mayor Hammerstad explained that this was on the agenda because there tended to be too much
ownership on the part of the Council person serving as the liaison to the Board or Commission
on which he/she had served in the past. She expressed her concern that a Councilor could
become more of an advocate than a liaison. Councilor Hoffman asked if this has been a
problem this year. Councilor Schoen commented that Ile could see the potential for it
happening.
• Residency Requirements
David Powell, City Attorney, explained to Mayor Hammerstad that the reason why the
residency requirements varied from board to board was because the ordinances creating each
committee were adopted separately using different language. He noted that generally all the
boards required a majority of their members to be city residents; those that accepted non-
residents required residency within the urban growth boundary. He mentioned that a few
required professional members, such as the Development Review Commission. He commented
that the Budget Committee followed state law in requiring electors.
Mr. Powell observed that the Council could make the language consistent in requiring that all
Board members be city residents or UGB residents. He noted that the Council could leave the
language the same if the existing ordinances met its needs.
Mr. Schmitz indicated to Mayor Hammerstad that the Building Appeals Commission met once
in 10 years. He explained that it functioned as an adjudication board for appeals of the Building
Official's decisions. Mr. Powell noted that its members had to have some expertise in materials
and construction methods, which explained why it had no residency requirement: the City took
whomever it could get.
Mayor Hammerstad suggested eliminating that as a regular Board and appointing it ad hoc as
needed. The Council concurred.
Mayor 1-lammerstad suggested having an overall requirement that the majority of a Board's
members be city residents but all should live within the urban services boundary (the City's
sphere of influence).
Councilor McPeak noted that the Forestry Commission required professionals. Mr. Powell
commented that arborists who worked in town but lived elsewhere might be willing to serve on
that commission, so lie would not advise interpreting the residency requirement too strictly.
Mayor Hammerstad held that at least three of the five should live in the city.
Councilor Schoen commented that the Development Review Commission might be difficult to
till. Mayor llanuuerstad spoke to the importance of having city residents serve, as they had
City Council Inforniation Session Minutes Page 8 of I 1
April 8, 2002
more ownership. Councilors Schoen and McPeak concurred. Mayor Hammerstad suggested
that a minimum of four Development Review Commissioners had to live in the city while the
remaining three could live within the USB.
Mayor Hammerstad indicated to Councilor Rohde that their goal was to have people living
within Lake Oswego's sphere of influence applying for City advisory boards. The Council
discussed what areas were located within the City's sphere of influence.
The Council discussed reducing the membership requirements of those boards currently
requiring 7 of 8 as city residents to 5 of 8 as city residents.
Councilor Rohde commented that the selection of Transportation Advisory Board members
from districts had been important during the formation of the Board and its initial work as a
hearings body on traffic calming device applications. He questioned whether selecting by
district was as important, given the Board's new scope and mission of focusing on system -wide
performance issues. He suggested asking the Board for its opinion.
Mr. Powell confirmed that any change to the membership requirements would require an
ordinance change.
Mayor Hammerstad indicated that she would like to present to the board chairs these uniform
residency requirements, when she and Mr. Schmitz met with them. Councilor Schoen
suggested simply stating that the majority of Board members had to live within the city limits,
and not put a number to it. Councilor McPeak noted the exceptions of the Forestry
Commission and the Development Review Commission, which required an expertise that they
might have to look elsewhere to find.
Mayor Hammerstad indicated to Councilor Hoffman that the reason not to limit Board
membership to Lake Oswego city residents was because the people who lived in the USB and in
the county participated in City or County funded activities, and therefore, they had an interest.
She noted that they had a Forest Highland resident serving on the Planning Commission and
county residents serving on the Library Advisory Board.
Councilor McPeak indicated to Councilor Rohde that the 6 of 14 residency requirement for the
Arts Commission came out of trying to get artists with particular talents. The Council agreed
that the Arts Commission should have a majority as city residents (8 of 14).
Councilor Graham referenced Councilor Rohde's suggestion to ask the Transportation
Advisory Board about residency requirements. She argued that if they went to one board, then
they should go to all the boards for their input. Mayor Hammerstad reiterated that she wanted
to take this to the board chairs, while noting that the Council did make this decision, and not the
Boards themselves. Councilor Rohde clarified that he suggested talking with the
Transportation Advisory Board because of its different structure of district representatives.
Mayor Hammerstad indicated to Councilor McPeak that they would achieve this distribution
through attrition. She reviewed the suggested language changes to each Board or Commission
ordinance
• Arts Commission majority residents in Lake Oswego, remainder in USB
• Budget Committee leave as is, due to state law requirements
• Building Appeals eliminate commission
• Planning Commission majority of 4 as residents, instead of 5 as residents
• Transpiration Advisory majority residents in Lake Oswego, remainder in USB; eliminate
district requirement
The Council leR the following ordinances with their existing residency requirements (a majority
residents, remainder in USB): Development Review Commission, Historic Review Advisory
Board, Library Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, Parks & Recreation Advisory Board,
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 9 of 11
April 8, 2002 73
and Planning Commission. Council left the Forestry Commission as majority residents but no
USB residency requirement for the remainder.
Councilor Rohde argued for keeping geographic equity as an element for consideration in
selecting Transportation Advisory Board members. Councilor Hoffman commented that he did
not see that that helped or hindered the process. Councilor McPeak did not support doing so.
Councilor Graham indicated interest in considering it. Councilor Schoen described it as a
good thought but pointed out that usually they did not have sufficient candidates to make it
practical.
Mayor Hammerstad suggested that staff bring back for Council review language listing what
elements the Council looked for when appointing board or commission members.
• Term Limits
Mayor Hammerstad reviewed the situation with the Natural Resources Advisory Board
(NRAB) applications and interviews that led to putting this item back on the agenda. She
explained that four current members of NRAB applied, two of who have been on for a long time.
She said that, while they wanted new blood, they also did not want to say no to the sitting
members who were good candidates. She noted that the new candidates were not as good as the
current candidates were.
Councilor Graham mentioned that they named one of the new applicants as an alternate.
Councilor Turchi indicated that those reapplying concurred that the Council's concern was a
problem but they all wanted to be reappointed and no one had any suggestions. Councilor
Graham recalled that the re -applicants were surprised to be asked the question.
Councilor Turchi described the interview committee's dilemma as the least senior member of
the NRAB was the least qualified but she had the youth and enthusiasm that they wanted to
nurture, and therefore, they did not want to bump her out in order to move the more qualified
Bureau of Land Management person in. Councilor Graham commented that Chris Roth, who
has served well and faithfully on the NRAB a long time, should have gone off'with the BLM
person coming on.
Councilor Turchi commented that he felt that eliminating people through term limits on this
Board at this time would have weakened the Board.
Councilor Hoffman observed that term limits became a problem when an insufficient number of
people applied for the number of positions available. He suggested setting length of time served
as an element in the Council's consideration, similar to geographic equity as an element.
Councilor McPeak argued that that was awkward to carry out because of their desire not to hurt
people's feelings. She held that people took it personally when they were not reappointed. She
spoke to having a set rule that allowed turnover and by which they all lived.
Councilor Rohde argued that term limits were a mistake, as they have heard from the advisory
boards. He contended that they had very few people who served on advisory boards for more
than two terms. Councilor Schoen spoke to making a statement that the board members served
at the pleasure of the Council.
Mayor 1f-lammerstad recounted her experience at the County in which they had a member of the
Fair Board who had served for 18 years, and other members who had served more than 10 years.
She said that they solved the problem of getting new blood on the board by setting up term limits
with an extenuating circumstances exception. She described an example of `extenuating
circumstances' as a large turnover on a board, and the need to retain more experienced people.
Councilor Graham cited the situation with the NRAB interviews as an argument for term
limits: they could not appoint the eminently qualified BLM person because of politically correct
reasons and not wanting to hurt feelings. She asked why should the boards outlive the Council,
which had tern limits. She mentioned a suggestion from an NRAB member that the Council
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 10 of 1 I
April 8, 2002 74
appoint a board member, who went off because of term limits, to a subcommittee or task force
related to that board.
Mayor Hammerstad asked if there was sufficient Council interest to pursue term limits
language. Councilor Hoffman spoke in favor of term limits with the extenuating circumstance
exception. Councilors Rohde and Schoen opposed term limits while Councilor McPeak
supported them. Councilor Graham supported them but wanted to see the language.
Councilor Turehi opposed term limits on philosophical grounds.
Mayor Hammerstad directed staff to bring back term limit language, as four Council members
were interested. She noted that the PRAB terms came up for reappointment at the same time and
they needed to get back in sync with staggered terms.
• Updates from Ad Hoc Committees
• Other
Councilor Hoffman reported that several members of the Team Sports Advisory Committee
(TSAC) have spoken to him about becoming an actual City Council Advisory Board, as opposed
to being a subcommittee of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). He commented
that, with the decreasing budget, the City might have to cut staff in Parks & Recreation; since
these people provided a significant recreational opportunity for kids, they might take over more
responsibility.
Mayor Hammerstad commented that that was a good idea, because it would be an advisory
board with its own funds. She pointed out that the Council would be in control of what the
groups charged and spent their money on.
Councilor Hoffman mentioned that TSAC wanted to continue the past practice of having one of
its members sit on PRAB. He concurred that PRAB needed a member who represented youth
sports in the community.
The Council discussed how to allocate the two free Internet c -mail. It agreed by consensus to
give them to the Adult Community Center. Councilor McPeak said that she would inform
MACC and find out whether the City needed to send a formal letter.
Mr. Schmitz indicated to Councilor Turchi that staff was addressing the community concerns
raised with respect to sand based fields.
Mr. Schmitz indicated to Councilor Schoen that the Parks & Rec field fees were scheduled for
a May 14 study session.
4. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hammerstad adjourned the meeting at 5:55 1).m.
Respectfully submitted,
1
Robyn Ch sti
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
N
udie Hammerstad, Mayor
City Council information Session Minutes
April 8, 2002
Page I 1 of i 1
75
4.4.2
06/18/02
MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 2002
MORNING MEETING
o,,w�co
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 16, 2002
oA«�
Mayor Judie Hammerstad called the special City Council meeting to order at 7:35 a.m. on
April 16, 2002, in the City Council Chambers.
Present: Mayor Hammerstad, Councilors Rohde, Schoen, Turchi, Graham and McPeak.
Councilor Hoffman was excused.
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City
Recorder; Janice Deardorff, Human Resources Director; Kathy Peck; Kathi
Alford, LOCOM Communications Manager; Police Capt. Marc Galloway; Police
Lt. Dan Spiering; Police Chief Helen Bicart; Richard Seals, Financial Planning
Manager, Stephan Lashbrook, Conununity Development Director; Joel Komarek,
City Engineer
J. REVIEW EVENING AGENDA
Doug Schmitz, City Manager, advised the Council that the Planning Commission
subcommittee working on Item 9.1.3 with the Lake Corporation has requested a continuance. He
noted that there was no time rush on this issue.
Councilor Schoen moved to continue item 9.1.3 at the request of the Planning; Commission
subcommittee. Councilor McPeak seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the
motion )assed with Mayor Hammerstad, Councilors Rohde, Schoen, Turchi, Graham and
McPeak voting `yes.' 16-01
Mayor Hammerstad noted that Councilor Rohde would review the consent agenda tonight.
Mr. Schmitz indicated to Councilor McPeak that the information about the Portland crosswalk
deaths, which she had requested at the March 5 meeting, would be included in an upcoming staff
report.
Councilor Graham mentioned that Berta Durman has already slated the additional money
coming from the County for a drug education seminar at the Adult Community Center
(Resolution 02-04).
Item 9.1.1 Amendment to personal services contract
Mr. Schmitz confirmed to Councilor Schoen that the amendment represented an increase in the
original contract. Joel Komarek, City Engineer, clarified to Mayor Hammerstad that the
original contract amount was solely for the permitting and design phase; the amendment covered
the construction phase.
Item 7.1 Appeal of DRC denial of sign code request
David Powell, City Attorney, confirmed to Mayor llammerstad that the only person who
testified at the Development Review Commission was the applicant. He concurred that the
Council has not had a hearing on the sign code variance criteria for a long time.
item 9.1.4 Authorization to extend the Infill Task Force consultant's contract
Councilor Schoen questioned the $4,000 for the cost of preparing a collection of design
alternatives, which was in addition to the $10,000 contract extension. He commented that he
thought that they were going to stay out of design on this matter.
Oty Council Morning Meeting Minutes
Aril 16, 2002
Page I of 2
Stephen Lashbrook, Community Development Director, explained that the Infill Task Force
had felt strongly that the City should make a publication available to the public showing
examples of good design that met the requirements. He noted that they could complete the work
for the $10,000 without spending the $4,000 on the publication but reiterated that the Task Force
did want the publication.
Councilor McPeak held that this sort of publication would help clarify the words and guide
people in understanding this hard to understand concept of fitting into the glass jar. Mayor
Hammerstad indicated to Councilor Schoen that the intent was to get away from setting design
standards by giving examples of what could be done to enhance compatibility but without
requiring any particular design. She mentioned that people found the guidelines coming out of a
design competition held for Sunnyside Village in Clackamas County very helpful.
Mr. Lashbrook indicated to Councilor Rohde that they could include flat roofhomes in the
design examples.
4. REVIEW FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Mayor Hammerstad observed that they should still have a quorum at the Budget Committee
meeting on April 29, even with three Councilors not in attendance.
5. OTHER BUSINESS
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Hammerstad recessed the meeting at 7:35 a.m. to Executive Session pursuant to ORS
192.660(1)(d), for deliberations with persons designated to conduct labor negotiations and (e) to
conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions. Mr.
Powell reviewed the Executive Session parameters.
7. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Mayor Hammerstad reconvened the morning meeting at 8:50 a.m.
Councilor Turchi said that he would report on his preliminary meeting with Patrick Blaedorn
regarding the transit center and making it more accommodating to handicapped individuals.
Councilor Rohde said that he had a JPACT and League of Oregon Cities Board report.
Councilor Graham agreed to make the Earth Day announcements requested by Nancy Bantz.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor llanunerstad adjourned the meeting at 8:52 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
PPROVED BY THE CITY COUN
N
udie I lammerstad, Mayor
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2002
Page 2 of 2
80
7,1
06/18/02
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: June 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Revision to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to authorize the mayor to sign Resolution 02-33 and revise the Master Fees and Charges
Schedule for the 2002 calendar year.
EST. FISCAL
IMPACT:
STAFF COST:
N/A
BUDGETED:
Y N
FUNDING SOURCE:
N/A
C M. DEV. DIRECTOR
V -e / �-Oz.
Date
ATTACHMENTS:
• Community Development
Memorandum dated June 10,
2002
• Resolution 02-33
CITYMANAGER
/3 //", 6Z
Date 01
i )OCU Mh— I \S1'hIlFIA-1 \ 1.0CAI,S— I\Temp\etephen_ugendt►_checkliet.doe
NOTICED (Date):
Ordinance no.:
Resolution no.: R 02-33
Previous Council
consideration: No
ME
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AM1►�16 A 1, D ►l
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
FROM: Stephan Lashbrook, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Planning Inspection Fees
DATE: June 10, 2002
Action:
Adopt Resolution #02-33 revising fees and charges as shown in the Master Fees and Charges booklet, for
the City of Lake Oswego — calendar year 2002.
Background:
In the course of preparing the budget for fiscal year 2002-03, the planning staff recommended that we
institute a fee at the time of building permit issuance that is specifically intended to cover the costs
incurred by planning staff in reviewing the proposed building permits and conducting follow-up
inspections. Although collected at the same time, this fee is separate from the actual building permit fee.
An additional part of this involves charging a re -inspection fee to cover the cost of having planners return
to job sites and conduct repeat inspections when required work is not accepted on the initial inspection. It
is not uncommon for development projects to require multiple re -inspections by planning staff, partly
because the City does not currently charge for that service.
State law limits the fees that can be charged for planning services in reviewing development applications.
Such fees cannot exceed our actual average costs. Staff evaluated Planning costs in reviewing applications
for building permits in calendar year 2001, including inspections completed by planners, in order to
determine our actual average costs. We also contacted other cities to see if they charge a similar fee.
The City of Wilsonville has charged a comparable fee for approximately ten years. Wilsonville charges
$100 for planning staff review of building permits for one or two-family dwellings and charges up to
$7,500 per building (the greater of $300, or .4% of building value) for all other construction. Wilsonville
also charges $50 for each re -inspection if a development fails a final planning inspection.
The City of Roseburg charges a "site review" fee of $100 for one or two-family dwellings and $350, plus
15% of the building permit fee, for all other construction applications.
Planning Inspection Fees 06/10/02 1 83
Recommendation:
The staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution #02-33, enacting the following fees,
Building plans / Site review fee for single-family dwellings on infill lots (not approved as part
of a minor partition/subdivision): $100.
This fee will cover costs in the following areas: a) initial review, b) preparing a letter to the
applicant outlining any omissions in the application, c) 2nd review and approval, assuming all
issues have been satisfactorily addressed.
2. Building plans / Site review fee for single-family dwellings or townhomes approved as a part of
a minor partition/subdivision/ptanned development application: $250.
This fee will cover the same costs as above, plus research time and final inspections that would
be required to assure compliance with conditions of approval.
3. Building plans /Site review fee for non -single family residential development, including
apartments, commercial, industrial and institutional uses: 5j 00.
The fee will cover the same costs as items 1 and 2, above, plus multiple plan reviews and
inspections that are generally associated with these types of development.
3. Re -inspection fee: $50, if multiple "final" applications are required.
If these fees had been in place during 2001, they would have generated approximately $25,000 in
additional revenue. It should be noted that the approved budget for 2002-03 does include $25,000 in
projected revenue from this source.
Planning Inspection Fees 06/10/02
84
RESOLUTION #02-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AMENDING THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE TO
ESTABLISH FEES FOR PLANNING INSPECTION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW.
WHEREAS, the City has adopted from time to time various fees and charges for
services and,
WHEREAS, the City has found it necessary to add, revise, or delete various fees;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego, Oregon that:
Section 1. Section 11 (Planning), subsection J (Other Planning Fees) of the
Master Fees and Charges schedule is hereby amended to add the following:
3. Site review and inspection fee for single-family dwellings on infill lots (i.e., lots
or parcels not approved as part of a land partition/subdivision): $100.
4. Site review and inspection fee for single-family dwellings or townhomes
approved as a part of a land partition/subdivision/planned development
application: $250.
5. Site review and inspection fee for non -single family residential development,
including apartments, commercial, industrial and institutional uses: $500.
6. Re -inspection fee: $50.
Section 2. Effective Date, This Resolution shall take effect on July 1, 2002.
Considered and enacted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular
meeting held on the 18`h day of June 2002.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
ATTEST � 5
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney's Office
86
6 0 0 NORTHEAST GRAND AVE N U E P O R T L A N D. O R E G O N 9 7 1 1 7 7 1 3 6
T E L 5 0 3 1 9 7 1 7 0 0 I F A X 5 0 3 7 9 7 1 7 9 7
METRO
July 1, 2002 .J U L 0 5 2002
r ri O►; ►.AM -
Robyn Christie
Mayor's Office
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Robyn:
Thank you again for the time you took in helping with orienting me to your chamber for
the Metro Council meeting on June 27, 2002. You have a beautiful chamber. This year
the Council is making a concerted effort to hold meetings at a variety of sites in our
region. We all appreciated the beautiful surrounding that you provided for our Metro
Council meeting. I look forward to this opportunity again.
Sincer y,
�G "
Chris lington
Cler of the Co cil
R.. ,. I. - d Papr.
www metro region org
T D D 1 9 7 1 8 0 4