HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 1986-11-04CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1986
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA SUMMARY
I. ROTA CAK,
II. MINUTES - Regular noetinq of October 21, 1986.
Approve,: as amended. Change 1,653 to 1,563
in the sixth line of Agenda item III.
NT'I'Tnm
A. Presentation Of Distinguished Service Award to James R. Page, Member,
Committee for Citizen Involvement
14tty to send to pogo.
C(IMMUNICATIONS
Walter AVOI-y, Dorothy 14dwiq, Elizabeth
Ryan re: !god ovolopllont.
V. PUBLIC III-ARINGS
P" ArIval Q tho Planninq 11)" !k'. i::i0n 011 C1 1-80-06 Hoqirdiliq
THIdLy of =0 lYoliminary PPL A IV1111 t4A)ds SUbdiVi,,:ion, SI) 17-79.
11PIWId. At t
VI. CONSENT AGENDA (Items 1 [A, B, C) and 2 [A)
1. Findinqs, Conclusions and Orders
A. PA 8-85-408 - Appeal of the Planninq Commission Approval of PA 8-85
(Marlene Deaton)
Approved.
B. ZC 11-85-407 - Appeal of the Planning Cot;)mission Approval of 'LC
11-85 har ene Deaton)
Approved.
C. ZC 20-84-406 - Request to Amend the Zoning Code to Increase Maximum
FAIR From .30 to .38 in Office Campus (OC:) Zone
Approved.
2. ORDINANCES - (1st reading by title only)
A. ORDINANCE NO. 1944 - A GENERAL ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TrAKE OSWI-;C;O AMENDING LOC 48.315 TO ALLOW UP TO A MAXIMUM FAR
OF .38 IN A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OFFICE CAMPUS ZONE
(1st roadinq by title only)
Asil.-)rovt,d .
VII. m.,so UTIONS
A. RESOIUTION Nig. 1R-;0-28 -- A RE.,k)I.rUTTON OP THE CT'11'1 OF THE CITY OF
TAKE AUTHORIZING THE, MLNYOR 'l'O EXI•;i'UTE ON I?EHAIJ oF THE CITY OF
TAKE, NN A6RI,FMI,N'I' WTTH MUTT'*?OMAH ('(MINTY TAS EN'.I'I;R INTO A COMMUNITY
I)WEIPI'fill I -NT 1114\'K GRANT PROGRAM
Al �l �r ���• ��, i .
R('1,it inq to uI I'iro :;t.ItA011 hotld!.i :Arid Adv.mo,
R��P.untlirnl of 117rovi.(ti:, Htmd
AI,I �t ,,v� •� 1.
VIII. WRIT EN COMMUNICA'T'IONS
A. LL-tter from the Lake Oswego ChaA)er of Commerce Regarding Placement of
Christmas Decorations.
Flanl',Jning to followup with assistance
oMaintenance.
I
13. Letter from CzIscade Construction Company regarding Compliment on Fourth
Street Construction Project.
No action.
IK, REPORTS
A. contract Award for Relocation to New City Hall.
Approved. 30b Kincaid to follow LIP -
B. Potential COUncil Representation on Metro Area Solar Access Project-.
Mayer to foll�-)w up; Karen to advi,-W
1'l,ituti.n(1 Com.nittoo.
C. Rrklue: t t,or Driveway A<� t .,., - 1k .�d Did of West View Drive (Tax Map 21i'.,
21B, 1,0(
to prt-,.\ive agreemotlt.
1). ltt-kluot t tram Lor. City on ()I)PS APplicati.un.
IJi I hdr k w
X. Itl?I't)IfCS (.)I"('ITY O l It
XI. BUSINESS FROM THE COUNCIL
A. Appointments to the Committee for Citizen Involvement and Budget
onorm i h t- f?B _
Budget Committee
Karen Kopplein - 3 -year term extending to June 30, 1989.
Sally Fuller - 3 -year term extending to June 30, 1989.
Giovanna Zbzzi - 3 -year term extending to June 30, 1989.
Committee for Citizen involvement
Don Davis - 3 -year term beginning March 1, 1987 and
extending to February 28, 1990.
Donna Green - Fill interim term now until February 28, 1987, then
3 -year term until February 28, 1990.
Tett Nudelman - Fill interim term now until February 28, 1987, then
3 -year term until February 28, 1990.
Kathy St.romvig - Fill 1 -year term created by Jim Page vacancy
March 1, 1987 until February 28, 1988.
\II. ADJOURNMEW
S*
Ix apPointed to •
commovolun ..,ees
Leers to work with bud
The Lake Oswego Cier:~
t)' Council ap
I?0nnterd three volunte
Hudgct Committee Yast 1`r Asda)
t
et three others to the ('nn�nrit-
for Citiren Involvement.
C'hamn for three-year' terms on the
Budgtt Committee were Karen Kop-
plein, sally Fuller and Giovanna Toz-
Zi. Kopplein was re -appoint
lervo a se�,ond to ed to
help ths, Council draft each year's ci-
ty
bur"lget, whi(•Irlaborican involve
months a nr 'eting;4 over several
months a year.
A1:I"o!nrtQes t(� the (;Urn1111ttee for
citizen jr, or CCI, were
�n Davis. Donna Green,
Nudehnan and Kath Jeff
lvi
Stnomvig, the current CC'lr(rchair-
Kvnnan, will continue on the conurnit-
tee for one year. The others are new
to the CCI, and will serve thcecLyear
terms.
Aiso on TuL'8da a spokesman for
Vieira-Darrow withdrew his
pany's request to have its proposed
riverfuront development he subr posed
to the Planning Comnris:e
groin ion PPr•lor to
g, before the new city redevelop-
nnont advisory conunitteE or
I.ORAC.
1110 company, wlni(•h hupcs to put a
gets, citizen invol
mixed-use project at the abandoned
c'(nnent plant Property east of State
Stmt, wanted to go through land use
"hooeps" before gtting entangled in
the redevelopment' Process, That pro•
0ess will involve negotiations over ci-
t" financial ass
swaps, istance and land
City Manager Pete Harvey had
recommended the company P ny first go
Budgeting is
heavy duty
member task
through 1.ORA(';ruse he said the
land use' grr(`sti,
ons were interrelated
With redevelopment questions.
One example of that
stipulationwould be a
by the Planning; Conunis-
sion that the developer build major
public facilities along( 'the Willamette
River, Vieira-Darr
the city redeveloows plan calls for
pment ag;ellcy to pay.
for that with public tax in
financing proceeds. crement
1910 Planning "onunission nigh
not he able to assure Its requinemen
wee a be' met until the (sty (,ournci
tenPnA'('d such public spending, ac
-
Ing
membe s co endatiun o
Randy Tyler, Vleira-Darrow
develapment director, said his com-
pany could cornplY with Harvey's
recommendation rend withdraw its
earlier request.
[n a separate interview after the
council meeting, 1'yler clarifiod the
requests for public assistan(e his
coml>tunY made in its re00ntb' sut>
rnittctil development propusaL 'lire
propos, I stated that public
assistance would be needed to fund
construction of a main traffic
thoroughfare into the development, a
publrc park and aunphilh('rltrr, :and
partial costs of a new nrar'inr1, Public
Sub, would also he needed for
demolition of the cement plant equip.
meat to ready the site for develop-
ment, the proposal slated.
('osts for• those r•equcsts nverc' not
spe(1fi(4I.
but Tyler, said they would
fall within the an►ounts for public
assistvn(t laid out in (11 city's
redevelopment plan. '11uri lists a
nlaxunrrull of $1.b million for denlole.
Vement
t tion and infrastructrrr(' inr-
ts prover►rents and $400 00 for a river -
In
i im-
I front park.
In other business Tuesday, the
f council:
• Denied a request to uphold a
preliminary land plat for the Penn
in Woods subdivision originally drafted
y a The council voted 4 to 3 to
deny an appeal, with Mayor Bill
Jack f1(,Mid Councilors aLee Fawcett,
Jack
cilorDeet Curt Woller in the
s Stan Ashy r"lizabeth Dixon and
Lynn Sinclair,
Approved
13ekins a contract with the
Moving and Storage Co, to
move city supplies and furnishings to
the new City Hall. c
would cost an estimatedThe ontract $7,45tI,
Approved findings for a Preveous
decision to prohibit construction of
apartments a disputed site on
Nike Grove Avenue.
Approved
decorations on city
sy o!
this December. Y streets
• Itenewed an agreement with
(,oil uun;rin County allowinK that
to include its share of Lake
(kwega when computing Ix)pulation
to qu,llify for federal block grants.
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETIN
G
TOBER 21# 6
7:30 P.M.,
CITY COUNCIL OCHI�ERS
MINUTES
Of the Lake Oswego City Council was convened
I, ROLL CALL - A regular meeting or Young asked Council and
atm p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Y of John Clarke, Parks and
audience to observe a moment of silence ed away last
week. Mayor Young
Recreation department employee, who Pa
characterized John as a real Professional unq noted dtt atwith
all councilors smile
we
Following the moment of silence,
,mayor
present. (Present: Mayor Young, Councilors Diity/Aincl ir,jim FaColeman and
Woller and Holman► City Manager Peter Harvey,
staff members)
ouncilor Woller; seconded by Councilor Ash that Council
II. MINUTES - Moved by C of October 7, 1986 as written.
approve the minutes of the regular meeting
Ztie motion passed unanimous) with Sinclair, Fawcett, Ash, Woller, Holman,
Mayor Young, and Dixon voting "yes."
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Walter Aver , 2.(131 S. W. Cedar Court, addressed Council on behamif of nt Plan. 3e
signatures in a 5-6 day
cLtizt�lis of bake kwc�n��olvedein'collEctinge1�346 ast ��y Redevelopment
displayed paperwork
period to a pet-it.iotl which would have lecreferred the Plan City'
(enactede ref.erendlm
ordinance No. 1942) o natures f the
obtainea %ytt►e cle Of ose le c ofbusinesson
required that 11*5,3 described delays tie had encountered
reg 11186. Mr. AVeLy
Monday, CXtobc.r '20,
because of vacation and illness in tht'de larationttof blighted area,
City
9
Recorder. He cited tax implications, and the public
possibi 1 it -y for colldemnat:ion, tax incre,;k'nt financing, ile
expt�tldittire of $18 millionsas arylOPPOstdtto,F' ettil)ld 1�edevtel pnent,tlbut felt
tx,t.it ionvrs were not necc._, Y I I
very st Tangly t h.it tht optx
�rtunit_y to vete on the issue should be affor ec
LO Cltl7,t'ils. Mr. Avery suy9ested that. council Ct'CIORS1deC their aery ction
an
Av
otter citizen ill, opportunite the ni--iTbersy to vote oil ttof�L RAC (newly .-for ned adv sor t ,<
sugyy-sted that. council advis nt Agency) that they do not. a to
colinittee to the I.ake Oswego Redevelotrie
ht
coiranunity on t
spirit of tht�his project unless r.itlzens have the rig
vot V on it .
that txtnnsive optxortunity was providt'c,
Mayor Yc-1unrl conunc•ntt%d to Mr. Avery the Plan, and tics dice
for Ixiblic intxrt t..hroughout ttie prcx't'ss of dcvopinions
t ho:pin ng
not find Mr. Avery or others expre, ss
i,,,tticj ate tin auc:hiprel�itninary`�.
He encourayt'ci Mr. Avery and cit i
meetings in the future when they ,hold strong f s and 3were Miynored ciwntc�r�r
that some tx�t itioners had attended the mt.t t:ing
Dorothy Ludwig, 3400 S. W. Upper Drive, presented Council with copies of r:.r
October 17, 1486 letter written to the Oregon State Ethics Commission, a
copy of which was received by Council. She suggested that a Council
Committee present to candidates information regarding public relations and
the rights of the public.
Mrs. Ludwig continued with another question to Council. She asked why a
training tower is included in the Westlake Fire Station proposal. Stating
that she had talked with fire officials in other jurisdictions, she
contended that training towers are obsolete since the advent of the
requirement for sprinklers in buildings meeting certain specifications.
Mayor Young stated that Council response to Mr. Avery and Mrs. I1udwig would
be considered later under 'Business from the Council.'
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Ordinances
1. Ordinance No. 1938 - Applying within the City Clackamas County Ordinance
83-1929, Clackamas County Adult Foster Homes Registration
2. Ordinance No. 1943 - Repealing LOC 16.100, 16.110, 16.120, 16.130 and
1161440 - Library Trust Fund
Moved by Councilor Woller; seconded by Councilor Dixon that Council approve
the consent agenda enacting Ordinances No. 1938 and 1943. The motion passed
unanimous with Sinclair, Fawcett, Asti, woller, Holman, Mayor Young, and y
pixon voting "yes." Mayor Young read the ordinances by title only.
Oi2DINANC:F. NO. 1938 - A GENERAL ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIN
OF LAKE OBWEGO CRAN7ING THE CONSENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO THE
APPLICATION WITHIN TliE CITY OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY ORDINANCE 83-1929, THE
CLACKAMAS COUNTY ADULT F(XSTF:R HOMES REGISTRATION (2nd reading and
enactment)
ORDINANCE 1943 - A GENERAL ORDINANCE OF THE CI'PY C.l)UNCIL OF THE CITY 01-
LAKE
FLAKE OSLO,O REPEALING LOC 16.100, 16.110, 16.12Q, 16.130 AND 16.140
(2nd reading and enactment)
V. RFSOLUT I ONS
A. RFSOLU`r1ON R_-86-26 - A It1 S0I,tT1`IC1N OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI'PY OF
LAKE O:;WIX O DECLARING, THE INTENT OF '191E Cl7i COUNCIL TO VACATE LARCH
S`1'R1;F�1` RE'IWF,F.N THI' '1'F1iM1NUS OF' THF. LARCH S'I9tL1!'P CUI,-DE-SAC AND CORNEI.I,
S`I EI•`1'
City nAnager Peter Harvey, conunr-nt ing on the Ci Ly Fzigineer's memo of
October 9, 1g8t, indicated that a p0tition had been received from
property owners in the area roquosting the vacation. He located the
area to he vacated on the i1tt,iched nkap. The: resolution, if adopted by
Coulicil, would set a txiblic hearing on the matter of the vacation and
cause the City Recorder to give proper notice. He pointed out. that ttxj
I2c���iiZar rit.y <rxinciTFleeF'ing
October 21, 19th, - Page 2 Doc. 0155M
VI.
date for the public hearing would be held on December 3, rather than :.ne
2nd as noted in the resolution. City Attorney Jim Coleman noted, in
addition, that the statutory reference in Section 1 of the Resolution
should read 271.130 rather than 227.130 and would also be changed if
adopted.
Councilor Ash considered that Councilor Fawcett might have a potential
conflict of interest in voting on this issue as he lives in the vicinity
of the proposed vacation. The City Attorney said there was no conflict
under requirements of ORS Chapter 244. Councilor Fawcett responded that
he doesn't know anyone involved in the vacation; lives 2-1/2 to 3 blocxs
from the area; and does not see that he has a conflict. Councilor
Fawcett then ascertained that there is no monetary payment to the City,
other than a processing fee, as a result of the transaction.
Moved by Councilor Ash; seconded by Councilor Dixon that Council adopt
ResoTution R-86-26. The motion passed unanimously with Sinclair,
Fawcett, Ash, Woller, Holman, Mayor Young, and Dixon voting "yes."
B. RESSOLUTION R-86-27 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAKE OS'WK;O AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SUPPLEMENT NO. 3 OF THE
MISCELLANEOUS CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS N0. 6962 BETWEEN THE CITY OF UKE
OSWEGO AND THF OREGON STATE HIGHWAY DIVISION FCR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO
STATE STREET
Mr. Harvey conunented on the City Engineer's report of October 13, 1986
and the State Highway Department's letter agreement revised September 3,
1986. 'These documents indicate project fruiding for improvements to
State Street (Work Order 62.20) and the City's acknowledgement of these
funding responsibilities. ltlis supplement is in addition to the other
agreements in effect for the State Street project.
Moved by Councilor DLXon; seconded try Councilor Fawcett that Council
approve Resolution R-86-27 authorizing the Mayor to sign the agreement.
Tilemotion :used unanirrx�u:;� with Sinclair, Fawcett, Ash, Woller,
Holman, Mayor Young, ano Hixon voting "yes."
WRITTEN C("IUNICATIONS
A, letter from Ethel 0161,10tt. S'Chaubel, Vice 1,,re sident, Oc:wego Pioneer
Cemetery Association roklardinq the City's 'faking Over the Pioneer
Cemet ery (1kited Sept emior 20, 1986) .
MI. H,lrvey rrlatod that. ho had undertaken very preliminary investigation
into qt atC I,ew plovi::ion ; to cometerie s as operated by
private, ur public groups 311d h,ad t.alked bt iotly with Oregon City :,t,el t .
(Oregon c'rt.y nr,'intairr:; a e e>nx�t.ery.) Ne` ,idvjse(] that this is a complex
area of law Alld d that COMIC11 rete°r the question to staff for
further :,1 udy, dnd, 0(ii t ional ly, lx�rh,rl s .i14x-)int a Council subconunittee
to work with staff in di r wink] at a r-Vwnum!ndation on whether or not t.o
accept t ho nraint t"IMICe' rnd m,rnatlenxent est the pioneer Cemetery from the
A.,sociation.
Rc�yul..+r City o )n1i,-i 1 M, t my Doc. 0155M
October 21, 1988) - t', a ie' 3
Ethel Schaubel, Vice President, Oswego Pioneer Cemetery Association,
reported that that Association had built up the cemetery to its prese._
status from a very poor condition at the time they acquired it eight
years ago. She believes the cemetery is able to support itself at th:s
time and will not require City funding.
Bill Blizzard, President of the Association, pointed out that the
cemetery is listed in the top ten sites in the City's Historic Resources
Inventory. He mentioned Comprehensive Plan Policies which call for
preservation and possible public acquisition of these historic sites.
Commenting that the cemetery is now within City limits, he recounted
some history of management of the cemetery. Mr. Blizzard enumerated tae
assets of the cemetery and urged Council to act favorably in response -�o
the request.
Hortense Sylvester, 199 'E' Avenue, #216, spoke in favor of the City',
acquisition and management of the Pioneer Cemetery. However, she wanted
reassurance that the invested memorial money would still be used for
cemetery maintenance and not be appropriated to the general fund.
In Council discussion, there was consensus to form a Council
subcommittee to study the proposal further. (This subcommittee was
formed later in the evening under "Business f.rm the Council.")
B. Letter from James R. Page resigning from the Committee for Citizen
Involvement.
Moved by Councilor Sinclair; seconded by Councilor Fawcett that Council
accept Jim Page's resignation from the Committee for Citizen
Involvement. Tiae motion fxassed unanintousl� with Sinclair, Fawcett, As:.,
Woller, Holman, Mayor Youny,'annd Dixono oting "yes." Mayor Young
commended Mr. nage for having done a good .job on the Committee.
VII. REPORTS
A. Aspen Street Improvements Associ it -ed with SD 25-79.
Mayor Young declared that tht^ ::ole issue before Council this evening was
whether or not. to grant: the e a_,erxint. requested. He added that the land
use issues had been decided by public hearing bodies and the opportunity
for discussion was past.
Mr. Iiarvey t erountetl that t he minor part it ion was approved in 1979,
based on a nunttler of conditions, prior to the establishment of current
develot-Atont standards and ordinance. It(, said that the City Attorney had
reviewed the situation and stet ermined that the developer may process the
minor partition in compliance with the conditions in effect in 1979.
Cne of the Conditions placed on the project wits the widening of kspen
Street , and the grantinq of the :lolx o asemont on City property would
facilitate ctvnplitance with this: hl,annincl C(miunission-imposed condition.
(I City �-(i inr it Meet i iiy
October 21, 1988 Patio 4 Doc. 0155M
Mr. Harvey reported that staff had considered alternatives to grantin=
the easement. placement of a retaining wall would be expensive and
would be an obstruction if the City decided to use the parcel it owns,
which is it considering for a water storage facility. Councilor FawcE_t
questioned why the developer was proceeding with the street widening, as
the frontage variance has not yet been granted.
Roder Filwards, 4207 Harvey Way, represented John Niemeyer in his
remarks. He informed Council that the variance applies only to a thiri
lot, and even if that is not approved, they will still develop the otr-�!r
two lots. Thus, he reasoned, the widening is required and asked that
Council grant the easement.
Norm wcati, 1437 A..spen Street, recounted denials of development in tl�--
area made by hearing bodies in 1977, 1978, and 1979 for reasons of
topography and slopes and maintained that these conditions still exist.
He quoted from previous staff reports material pertaining to the
physical conditions of the area and stressed that erosion hazard is high.
Cindy Slomkowski, 1401. Aspen Street, described dirt, mud and water
runoff in the neighborhood. She reasoned that it more trees are removed
to accoiwilodate the easement, these conditions will worsen. She
requested that the city maintain control over debris and runoff.
Referring to Condition #5 placed upon the minor partition in October,
1979 that drainage be handled in a manner to assure that impacts upon
existing developed properties would be mitigated, Ms. Slomkowski asked
for information as to the type of drainage that would be constructed to
handle the runoff resulting from the street widening and removal of
trees.
Council Basked City l)111 neer Paul Haines: to connrlent . Mr. Haines used a
topographic wall Irlap to show the area of inlprovenk�nt and the surrounding
drainages basis. lig' reported that drainage from city -owned property
falls away from LA -'e to the north on Aspen St. The improvement will be
constructed so that this runoff will be collected and drained down
Aspen. Some e Xistinq runoff down Lee Street will continue, but shoula
not exceed current levels, he ::aid. oirther, drainage will be
considered cis lots are dev,`lope,i.
councilor Holnvin que:tioned Mr. liaiiie!; as to w'�iettle't a rotainir►q wall
solution might improve drainage✓. Mt. %iainoo' Ioplled that this; would Ire
a more complex dosign with approxinkite�ly the - Ime result in effective-
ness. Drainage in this case would be collected along the south side of
Aspon and taken wo.sterly alcmq ASjxk n.
Muvo(i i)y cotit►cl loi A,h; :;e 'ended by Counci lot Dixon that Council
rn:;i r'nct t hey Cit y Kiiiaklor tee :akin t hc> oxe•avat Ion :.lope ca!;e!ment for the
I k4't i.n►proverlent. The nlot ion pds�;e'd unaninxausly wit h Sinclair,
lawee t t , A:;h, Weil lest, 11oIIl4i11, Mayer Young, anct ulxon voti.nq "ye,:;."
w1yor Young ca I led a ;Hur t t e`� e :;:; i n the nk,ot l ny ,ui poople' were leavi ng in(] took
the ot4)ortunity U) ►e ev inl'1.r, the PtC:10nce Ln t hv� ,itadience of Webelo Scout. 'Troop
#129 from lake (;rove- F,lernnrntaly �kl)ool. Fig: x--kcd t:ho boys, who are working on
their Citizennhlp llttid,-'.;, to stand and lntroduco t.ho11liielVvS.
ifi�<jtlisir Zity count• l 14'(1 the
oc:tober 21, 1986 - t ago 5 Ix)c. 0155M
B. Street Widening Request, South Shore Boulevard and Greentree Road.
Mr. Harvey noted that the request is described in the City Engineer's
memo of October 10, 1986, and accompanying drawings. The Development
Review Board required these improvements as a condition of approval o
PD 03-86-01, a 33 -lot planned development with frontage on South Shor_
and Crrentree. The request to Council is for approval and initiation of
the required noticing process.
Moved by councilor Sinclair; seconded by Councilor Woller that Council
approve the widening as proposed and direct the City Recorder to
initiate the noticing process required by the City Charter. The moticc
passed unanimously with Sinclair, Fawcett, Ash, Woller, Holman, Mayor
Young, and Dixon voting "yes."
C. Ballot Measures 7, 9, 11, 12 - No vemi-)er, 1986 election. - Moved to later
in the agenda.
D. Referendum on Fast End Redevelopment Ordinance.
Mayor Young called for a status report from the City Manager and for
comments from the City Attorney in response to charges made earlier by
petitioners that there was delay in handling their filing of the
referendum petition.
Mr. Harvey reported that the petition needed to be signed by 108 of
registered voters as of November 15, 1985, which meant that 1,563
signatures were needed by close of business on October. 20. He commented
that an initiative petition, on the other hand requires 158 of
sicmat tires.
Mr. Coleman distributed to Council copies of a memo prepared by Rosema_y
Mader, City Recorder, recollecting the chronology of events surroundir:1
the filing of the petition. Ne said that Mr. Avery's description was
essentially accurate. He continkiod that the poLition forms that were
suLciitted were wrong; that it is not the City Recorder's responsibility
to draft petition tornz, but rather to provide information. Because tle
lay: is complex in tho matter of roferendum petitions, additional time
was slvont. on Monday morning to :fissure that there were no defects in th-�
forms that were to be approved. Mr. Coleman asserted that no one other
than the City Recorder has authority to approve petition forms and
aWroval by anyone else could result in a technical defect invalidating
tlio lxm it ion drive. He conclu:ied that care was exercised because
eloction laws are strictly const.rood.
F. Wt matin Temple Remind by LURA.
Ki\1,r Young recalled that at the la�:t tour,c•i l meeting, Council had
tAluest-od that st.atf prepare additional t indintls based on evidence in
the t e cord to rc�sEx)nd to the recent rei,yind I r cpm lkll3A. Disposition of
this n,�ittor was not determined, however, at the last meeting. `Me Mayor
noted that tho City Attorney had providod new tfindings under date of
C,-tohor 17, 1986 and askod for :staff cornunF>nts. Mr. Harvey advised that
(-,unci 1's options: are as out -lined in his, cover mcnx) of Octot,er 14, 1986,
i.e. aptx-al the 1,LIBA deci:;ion to the Court of. Aplx-als, send the matter
Rr�yul a r't`i Ely -i�iCiiic il�1�Ti�i�f i nil
October 21, 1986 - 1 -,age 6 Doc. 0155M
back to the Development Review Board, or adopt the revi: •,i, supplement~1
ad
Council. Order. Ar. Coleman
nti the court theCouncil
o ncil st,dwhicS. h factulty doeshnc�
appealed the LiJB
affect his recommendation to Council.
Moved by Councilor Fawcett; seconded by Councilor Holman that Council
adopt supplemental Findings, Conclusions and Order in the matter of DR
17-85-405 as presented this evening. Mr. Coleman responded to Councilor
Ash's questions regarding possible future avenues of appeal in this
matter. The motion�sed with Sinclair, Fawcett, Ash, Holman, Mayor
Young, an Dixon voting "yes" and Woller abstainin(i.
VIII. RF1'CRTS OF CITY OFFICERS - Mr. Coleman reported in executive session later
in the agenda.
IX. BUSINESS FROM ;j, -t -1E Ca'WlL
A. Status Repx)rt on the Southern Pacific Right-of--�4ay Acquisition.
Mayor. Young indicated that the material submittc1d with the agenda was
current as of last week. He said that he had received a telephone cal*_
today from Ernie Munch, Portland Friends of the Willamette Greenway,
reported that the Portland City Council had approved the resolution
enclosed in the packet material. This resolution directs the Portland
Bureau of 'rransportati.on to work with Lake Oswego and other interested
agencies to develop public participation, funding and planning P Po -
for the .�r�servation anci ,�(1pui�it i��n of the .r��f.fer;;on Street Branch rail
corridor ,ind ry seek Stair (�(.�n.�.ni : deve I opjj <�nt. and anergy conservatio :
funds. riayor younq t..(ll.d COL111cil t luit as Lake l:�wego's representative o
the regional INAicy CUnulllt.t ('c', 110 did voi.cc> support for involving the
public in the process and tot tiet.c�rmininq feasibility of acquiring the
right -f -+.:Y.
Mayor Y,�unc; ..ici�ir(i, is that the Statc ',ran:;portation
Arlothe.r i:i\iat:k'r which
y Board for $y75,000,
Commi:;:loll nKl t an(i a(Ire-ed t�� a::k the t)lttt�l�rl� oss:ibl 10(),000) be
rpue: t wou.lo rokilitre that_ the op,t ic,tt 111011(. � p Y $
'Locally ; t hill., tile r ��r.>,l l nd(Il- of thkI $`.37 a , OOQ be matched by local
pier t:;a t sans ; i.ltld t h,lt.. ()t t hi' t (lllt'St be y iven by
all,
)1111: lons. '1'I1L' ince i �' 111 illnCilti�l ,.)VOL the P`t`;vJ°uslY surveyltioned
expenses
$1.2 1;1111 icxl p)r ctvidcr:;
tl:illllltli (..Xpx'
txi t.h�' p,,,;i;ihi 1 ity ref u:.irn� a vltlt .l,t( rall(..ir ,1:; wall .a:; purchase.
f,rnie *lunch tt,a:; rcxlu( ,;t (.�i that. th( l'l t y Ike (X;wc.yo roatt itm
JX)sit 101) as 1)1(IV1011 ;py cit:;. u.:_>r�� atl(i :. n.i .l let.t.:er agrc(�ing to
p>irti l:�lte 1n t.h(� per"()je(,l. 10 the lK,p*tltrllent. of 'Tr,arlsportation. M,lyc�r
ycninq aa.c,i that. ('cn.lnci l , it int (t r::t (gid it1 inuing to invest iO,at (y t
h1k111 p?t for ity to the ut i l i zat icm
State i.un(i;; as a p1 .,:;lt le n>,lti:.tl Cur the purchase of "Its
i)t these
r t(rht <,t• -way.
(ti�utl� 11
,il:., f .:. ci 1 hc� rc�iu :•t �'u,ul(i t(�l 'woi ler t,jrlk( in :;ltp�p�(1rt of
cxmtlnulnq rtt�trl.:� to (ieltminttu' 1.ra:.;il�iliLy c)f ac.�cpuio-;itl��n and
p,llt�l lC Use ut t hr (.ort id��t . '01oklyh he un(iet:;t.�tui:; the Orb jeCt ton of sa x,
in t.h(r area, rue view:; thi.; a:; all oppx)rtunity which will result.
12 rc�tiT.:i[ c'it.y i`(�uti: it Moot 111 Doc. 0155M
(x,t ober 21, 1 ONt• - 1'<iye 7
ultimately in great benefit to the public and should not be lost.
Councilors Fawcett and Sinclair were in agreement with this stance,
while Councilors Dixon, Ash, and Holman cautiously agreed to support
continued investigation of feasibility. No commitment of City funds vas
made at this time, but Mayor Young indicated that it is clear that
eventually such a request will be ►nade of Council if the project proves
feasible. There was consensus that the Mayor would write a letter in
support of continuing exploration of this project and requesting a hien
priority for State Department of Transportation funding.
B. MACC Update - Sale of Cable System and Related Matters.
Mayor Young reported that the cable system was sold to Tidel
Communications, Inc. and is operating under the name of Willamette Car -Le
TV as related in the MACC letter of October 3, 1986. Additionally, he
noted that a MACC committee is actively pursuing the replacement of the
MACC Administrator, who recently resigned to accept another position.
C. Mayor Young called Council's attention to the revised Council schedule
distributed in this packet. As he will be out of town on the 28th of
October, Council President Holman will conduct the interviews of
candidates for the Budget Commission and Corrmittee for Citizen
Involvement. Kathy Stromvig and Dave Berentson will be invited to
attend the session. Mayor Young also underlined the fact that the first
Council meeting in December will be held ,on Wednesday, December 3
because of possible lack of a quorum on Tuesday, December 2, due to the
National I,eaque of Cities conference.
D. Mayor Young initiated discussion about cere;.xmiies in relation to the
opening of they new City Hill in November. t•Ullowing brief comments,
there was conr:enstrs to request the Committee for Citizen Involvement to
coordinate :111 (:etomonies. councilor Wollor suggested an initial ribbon
cutting sonx�t.i me sexon art t er city Hall is and Mr. Harvey mentioned
the desirability of l-K�rhetht; having tours for those. citizens interestec
in an early viewing of the building, it wa, agreed that CCI would
coordinate an oEx-n house Sometime in De(N-irl-,er or. January, in conjunction
with an unvOiling opt the Jerry Josl.in sculpture. In May a formal
dedication, couibirn�d with .t dedication of they other major art. works,
would be coordinatend by (VI, involving they City Art Selection and
Eundraisind Committee:;.
E. MUncifor Fawcett ,u*c-i whot-her a Written re::E)on:se would be sent to Mr_-;.
I-adwi.g in .in!:wor t() tier inquiry about the tiro training tower. Mr..
Harvey reel ie,d that they tower was just one of a variety of training
facilities inti 11-tctibed how it nric_iht: serve .r dual function as a park'
facility (lk,t Fr,erv. .t scoreboard) . Noting t hart the P'ire department now
uses gcheel t,wi I it ies for training, he statt,ei that a detailed letter
would he .ent tee rir Iardwiei (•xl)lainin(I the intended functions of the
tower.
F. Councilor Vk')lle,r r.iIled at tont ion t() a hazardouu situation it Westlake
Drive and Kru!;e Uty tiding !;oath. Mr. Harvey said he would investigate
and, if this area i!; in the County, would explore a solution with the
County.
Rectular. City Council Meeting
October 21, 1486 -- raga 8
Doc. 0155M
conVents
ed in
JAke
C. Councilor Holman, ttlat�rlEed�essaY muctltin Council meetpngsgo
Review to the effect
re ated an anecdote excerpted frog' Marcus Aurelius' address to the Roan
Senate concerning one of his colleagues.
H. Mayor 'Young
asked if there was interest in forming a subcommittee of
Council work with
studying theaccepting
responsibility
iiyfohepane rCe)etrvtuncilors wollerHolman and
Ash declared their interest in serving and were appointed to the
subconronittee .
Mayor Young then returned the meeting to ttO Following agenda item.
V1I.
r_ lallot measures 7, 9, 11, 12 ; ember, 1986 election.
RPf.erring
to his cover me")() of \vtt)t,er 14, 1k)86 and information made
available by the lt�ague of t)I.<'�.;c�;� Cities, the State I�ee orted on the Revenue
()ff. ice, and t1le state Justice Del: ,I tm��nt, Mr. strHarvey repo
Measures in ;;c'.luence. In fell -I -Al ;araet d be l di n aUur ,ted titshe Council
with the packet. He br> y
implications, and how it would affect taxing districts.h verfthee
measures are proposed to be constitutional amendments;
legislature would .1sf31 il.itith \ working
fund servicesdetails,
the presentsaid.
le el.
would impact tilt. t •i tY
inf c)rm talc• public on these issues and
(r voter::,. Mr . Harvey stated
R(_?view on Thursday
},'t:'• itl l'1 t`:(`11' ,It 1(m In an article.
Mayor Youn(1 feltit. imlx)rt.ant
;alc�i�E" t t'd t I i.lt a t .lc't. 1;h --t
t Ilat he Wil:- 1}h't,t. Ing With
.and would .lt 1 ('r,lpt. I -c)
x)It::c' tt, ^layor Yonrnt, 1,'1 til: tl:>;t'tj taklny 111, official
In rt':;i j:alt,.. ;lllci tilttcre(i in their
lx):>i t t On a:; •l body t:m t h! t .}
l)l ri"n .. }.Inpp(,:, ,' j t(.) :;11(igesting to
out Iook . ((,ltn:: i .li}r: ; �,',nl 1 lt,r Wt)i lcr t c, l t t Ililt it is important
1,eoplo how t h"Y :•;hc)u Id vol. (' .
to len(i c't`un: t1':> vc?ii'(' t. becakl of the
t�.l; t1} ' n,rusur.loss of
,. - .l; t. t!l:;t ,Idt'tlult�° now, he added.
revt'nllt' to the City. t'1 \ ..Y'
(UUill'1IOI:; ';Illi lair ,1nci {tt `-'':�:". Ld
i.lvc lod plov111g information to VOt('CS
as to how t t}t` P\t'aa: 11C 1': 11!1 \?:'. ;lt`lll lit I t'i lil:: of servl ('C`s provided by the
Cit V.
h1ayc)r Y(ultl,l ::nnu;llr 1 ;%1 d t hX'
Ci t y Nti 1r1,Itler i n n> IV, 1 n(1 1 t't Ile,
i e,,11..11 c
in11)'Icls 111,on City :}r'Ivi((' :`�('lz: it
would t,lkt.' ;A }))_;it.i.on to supixort the
t)t I ht' f,lrt s ot: the Itioasures and th('
t he Int`,l:;lit'i'S JN W; s.
lilt It`,lul.ar nx`t'tin(1 w,l,: tt't�`r;:;rti
it ). '`' '(11 I-xt`(•utivt' ::(:;:,icln tinder authority Ot
(�2.5 1`11..bbU(1)lt) ltrt•(it.
i:: ox"1110 l,`; t ; `,la i,l 10111 and ORS
192.t,t,ll(1)(h) lull rent or pendin(.) lit l•:•at 1t�n1.
At 9:'-,tl 1',m, tll+' It'tllll�al 11101't 11(l w.l; '` Ir,tlltllnit}�itll,lltlnwilh 1plovidiyd(itt�([(IIx'il,lirhr
refer('ndkilll Lx't It It?Il 111 rel,,t "111
l tt t' `;'`.. 11 t ,Ind tlt'VI`1t,l�tnt� the 1"Ist. 1114
test imolly t_hrt,utlht,ut the In tlt �' ;:; tit
12edevc�l0lrllt'nt l'lrin.
Moot incl Ixx;. 0155M
OcLuber 21, 1446 . 1'`ltt(' t1
X. ADJOURNmEr,rr - The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
�� Ick of� the Council
APPROVED BY COUNCIL:
mayor
'R6gdl a r i` i 1. y �''� iu n; i t �k l iiia
October 21, 1 `)80 - Pakle 10 Doe. 0155M
■,
ReeeVe a ovemher
City Council
meet[ng.
November 4, 1986
Mayor William Young
City of Lake Oswego
Cite' Council Chambers
Lake Oswego, Orejon
Dear Mayor Youn7:
On September 19, 1986, at that special city council meeting,
Ordinance No, 1942 with its e=xhibits "A", "B" , and C"
enacted, My interpretation of the lanoua<3e as containedain
these documents, if implemented, will infringe on my consti-
tutional ri(Thts as a citizen.
It is my contention that you contel"Plate by wa
Plan creating a Private debt by bona inq , y of this
If the aforegoing be the case, I am requesting that you
furnish me with proof in writing wherein I have obligated
myself or accepted any liabilit\• for this debt which will
certainly 11cipptn if you proceed with the plan as stipulated
in Ordinance No. 1942.
In absence o;: YC'Ur being able to furnish me with th(required
documentation in writing within the next. tc+n (10) 1.),ess
re f
days, you M-0ht-reby put on notice that c>"llOre not: to use or
el .r.e:lncc� tiny ��' the Avery family pro,,,_; t i.('G ;is collateral
tinder any c i.rr"1a�ns t ancos wl)atsoever. .
Fi.naI ly, you art, .�i2'ert.t�ii to Properly not i . \, th(-� l,onrlinq
c011t.�,uric ; '1.,,.r1t (st r,t- this CoT1111111nicat1011.
fir) z I sw ct.1'ia1' X111 t.
i.akr� (.)swc�yo, i31-�,,1:1n
-Ire-e—e-i-ved FE-ITO—Vember 4"1, 1"5
meeting Of City Council.
i I't Y ane
6 i � �-49 4A 22 6reaon 1,7334
oamber 4 th
,,c t ! ve Notice (")rr
.ent !'Arect *�ttaclk
U
ti 'land hodevelooment
45?.L35)
wash to r �6 ounc 11 that h s v e t e s t i f I e,
..na.neinv 1'�)v Urban 'Iiea iewifor . several year.s
Te
novoilld Cv, :'; t. i. 1,
;e subject,;ame tl,) al.Lowing public Input..
'
sI n d has i'reauently
Ine 1,10 avair e e
i�� s t i f i e d a g a i i is t it 11 �4. s 0 - VA) (VI t h 0 'A I I b I e c t c R' 1 at a m
Ing at the hijult tenter on Atx�xilst '-)th, WO test
-.`ed avairlst it with
,. any others. Ln I'act,tt)vl*e test-Il'y"ng
r. I t-. than for
a.,!;i.nst l
though one count J11011 Oas nsKt-d where, t:.IjC
were ti n 0 why
dn' t th(,,y come font) jjtlj�, state their lob llea �-
tostll f" ed RqS
�rj 1epteinber qth,and
thein or000nents.
t
aBoor led d-
further substanti-te or posit"Orl, 1
as of' the -,)etltion-
,o
rndum pvitt.ie nn to put th
)f the refee
,
to IVi tvo t. e T'S on
,.Brch bALIot-
Since Gouncil hFiS voted to 3roceed. with these
--lans for tho east end
redevelo,)ment i.n which there w;'11. be incurred
a future debt, and/or
liabill-tY, or' thea obligation of other prIlvate
c-'tlzens to boovfle in-
de'te.,., Ivtible by bondinv for tax inororlent
financinor, we leish Rt
t,o (jeiiy any linbilitv Or' d'ut.) t.0 je
,,form, any nppefivanize
i io t,,,, 1 ths tand
c LI 1.1 V d
11 o t on
d Ilk, ()VIOT'
ut-Aj.f,(I, kxbt- s 1 nrlwl, ".v y
o 1, tai w. soou Id be o "I: t.0 1 i��N 1'1�1 I t.
plil
fill,
C.
I'vol or.
(0,
that,
I L t/ai al
kc
tcli
-A
C.
November 4, 1x86
Mayor Bill Young and
Members of the Lake Oswego RM, i -.,t November 49 1986 -
city council hall City Council meeting.
Lake Oswego city
Dear council Members:
At different times I h ve Incrementritten �rinancing w thouttters to The ea v�otePoflthe
city participation in
was read at the September � public hearing.
people. My letter to you
If you wonder why citizens have not downprotebuildsted ings,eassembling they uland,
as Americans, the matter of tearing public
condemning private property, displacing owners and renters, using _
land for private projects, and levying; taxes --would require a vote of
nxious they are to sign petitions'
the people. You should see how a
3hould..you wonder wily few citizens protest hear
ntpsyour mumbledhdi3cussionhamong
the use? It is almost impossible
yourselves before you vote as you'd already decided. You do listen
to a large crowd. east
As council has voted to proceed u with
red plans
fortile
re .iebt and/ornliabilityo able
went in which there will be
or the obligation of other private citizWeswish at thisindebted
toodeny
by bonding for tax increment financing,
any liability or duty to perform, any appearance to the contrary.
Due to the p ocess of conversion. .and contribution, if an objection and
and denial of Liability is not made i�riosrac tileya teal incurred
the future debt becomes a reality,
tion opera -
of t}�e law.. It should be quite apparent t}at ovideeusbwith anythe
doeu-
concept of urban renewal and insist that y Pr
mentation that shows you have the legal and equitable title to our
property, per or real.
If you do not provide ourld}ebt oreobligationotoraPerform the
of anhave
nby
signed indicating w}1
your own failure tohproTu a 10Agsusch CO
exist.
ntracta, you will have agree
and substantiated t
your
We will exPect the t'et�npicaos tilis afterdreceiptaofJthaisdletterwritten
reply, no 1.<3.ter than Y
Our property inclu�ia the house on1.1 acre, rlus Block 2 lots 8,9,
and 1O irl the ;;utitty ',i i1. L t3ubd i.vision. the owners are Mr.. and end
Robert N. Kronqui t;t ani Robert ?. Ryan of IkAke Oswego, and Mr.
Mrs. J,,jme:3 F. pomliiit on of New York City. I have a Life estate in
this property. Sincerq 1y, ^,." ('f
cc LO}tk�j
.,ta.ndard & L'���3r t:l.ir,abtth,-h. Ry<an
cc �
16)06 Cherry Crest Dr -
cc others !,ake Oswego, Oregon
97034
t Received at November 4th 1
muting of City Council
Mayor Bill Younp
316 N Point Road
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Dear Mr. Noyor:
Counailman Woller spoke to our scout troop 130
and explaigned the downtown redevelopment to use
I think it is a good idea. I think it will
improve the look of downtown. It will make it a better
plane for more people to live. And it will. bring more
people to Lake Oswe.zo to see the lak4vt'h'it�1i- w11„�i�h'r� Y
the business in the aVea. I think the shopping will
be easier too.
Your. Friend
Richard R. Blackham
Received at ovember 4t
meeting of City Council.
L ��' �� l `' - �.c�. L',��.'. ` ��A ~� � �� !
C,17,17' 112
L
11
41
Lit)
kll-"
.,e
-��
171
r
E
uh
Received at Novem er 4th, 14
meeting Of City Council.
4
COUNCIL RF.PORT
TO: Peter. C. llarvey
City Manager
FROM* Karen Scott
Assistant (,,i ty Manatlor
Planning and D(Welopment
SUBJECT: Appeal of Nl.anning Cc,rnmi sionl t i�-ryn on C-1 1-8nn06
Regarding Val.iklity ()f th(. Pct
ld<7cr s Subdivision, S") 1.7--79
)A'rE: C)C:t()ber '20, 1,986
This is an ►P1��'.11 pursuant tt, 1,oc 48.825 Ot a Planning <:()mmission
jacisik,n. �.1,11111.1.L�4 consider�atioll Ot the aL,t�cal i,� to be
accordinq to) the proc eduCe sprkx. tlul.es) 1 in l:1nd 4s•onJthe�urecord
Judicial I:v i�i��nt.y IIc.3 it g
establishod tletur0 tile may e 1?Lattninl t'<1t,ultissic�rl. No 1ebeF"pr`esent()(A at
that is ev Wonce not contained in tile ecc)a f irtn,
the hearing before the City Council. rhe Council may
revise, Inc,<iify or rcvc
verse, �rtlbackcto��l
the,Co mmisf tile lsionC1fotl; tklirtherlon
or it may remand the matte
consideration.
Laxt•1 Ili C'1'S
t'he ti>.I l l,w tllll exhil-, i tr, i�cmll�t. i�: �, t.i1e . k'�'�,L'Ci to I,k.` cc.)ns; illL rt+t1 l.)y
'i t.y c'„klllh i l .
N.
wpL i; ,t.,1 .,
1.ettoI NPpi",il
It.
1 i.��•,iti 1�j
,',r11,
l`)ilk� ,�1t.11 ;11't.:li'hlllt.'lll..i tt .,lu
!`tl'l?l.`, 11,t�lli1
t,t .ttlt`,
ltir
t`1,1nt?in j Ili t.l•r,,,C
:' sS 1' t lit. Pity At tt>rlt ,. y
jl.
tt 1.h!i �llr�tltitl
`t
`
t `-) ,t, t�l?w i, 1 �: Ill'i1 11111
1;
111ly t
j�>yt, l'utst lti: Itl,._ir; incl
I'
X1111111lJ;; ilt.
i�' 1` 11W 'Pklt?I ll Ilbrlt:.1tl(.j
l_
t,t .IUI�'
1,1'cic lk' tt\t lI,it,i Ll\I:�t;t' h'til:
,',�a1Nt' l 1. ,•�`� t UP;It111' l►)tV
,l` I l rlilt 11.1>; Llll`Ill I t k! k, 1.::tll':I
i I l
k'l I V l�;�Ull.'l l Ilr l.jlli; .it,l?.�.11 l,�rj?il`1t �,
t„' .1 i ,;l•u�,,;1�,1 .,ril,,tt .lt-l: 1 y .
`I,ihrllr�.�niticut,nnill.l.kki�ttwith;1
11t,,.
11lit.rt
the `l,t t ik-l.,l jil.,t' be j j ,t
rkl�kltl it:11.e 1 Intl' I" t 10tl.' App 1 1 i .,111 .1-;-4'T 1 It h.0 t hl y lit.
11
COUNCIL REPORT-cI 1-86 06 (SD 17-79)
PACE 2
LOC Chapter 44 was the section of the code that governe(l
subdivisions prior to the adopti._)ti of the Development Code, I,,)('
Chapter 49 in September 1931. 1,0C: 44.310 required that "The
official plat must be prepared and suhMit_ted within six (t-)
months fallowing the approval given on the prel imin,)ry plat by
the Planning Commission and City Council..." (i.,xI)it) t D, page
2). The Code sections tt)l.lowing 44.310 .fit ;;. ik)t t hu contont,
form, information and I)rocess requirei3 ft:)r fit in(I til final plat
{Exhibit D, LOC 44-320, 44.330, 44. 350, 44.3111i, :and 44. 360) .
,'tit prt>I.imina:.r' �)lat was Ci )l)7;:)vtpd an September 25, 1979. rhe-
atat>e�ll�ant.s ;u!)s��3uent:ly rt<.tal.'s:tre.i 1 six month ext-Onsion tot-
tiling alldict brought in
r.Opy of the t i.n:al plat :�umc)t..i nt� befo) e September 4, 1980, w!iich
was within the oxtendeti tittle Period. '17110 d0culllent brought in at
t'1,at time w,"' i ); uffit i.c'nt. in epver<11. 3r.fas (Exhibit D, pages 3-
11) . The City E" Ikl ineer t o rwarded the document t,( the County
surveyor for tlleit- r,>Wiew. The County 110tifiead the city and the
appellant's Ongineer of two errorI that needed correcting. No
farther action w,,18 taken on the plat at that time by :dither the
City or the appellant.
The appellant contends that the rectoir-er»epnts of LOC 44.310 were
Met. They argue a distinction between "Official plat" and "final
}plat' The Pltanni.nd Commission found that the term "official.
plat" mtlarlt a ,'ocumunt that was recordable. Tn other words, the
term "otticial ;plat" i5 rt;yrlonymc)u;; With "final. plat.". Taking i,,o(,
44.310 Sl:; �a wli:,;= wit.11 the Coil-, std l Ions thIit fO1,1oW it which
t)St.rihe tho Oonl,i`Ilt., i )Gill, till >r"IIl,II t ail 1111 1 t)CCJi'( t :; inv(.l.lv(?d, it.
is Clear that a �pct)r'cial)le cic cllmr`Ilt i , wh,t. w;ls nl.>zlnt:. in 44.310.
ahe <II)IIe I IaIIt 1111"1r't'1 I , the teat -III "t Bill t)I,ir 11 111 tits; le L.ter,' of
Mat. -ch .i, 1980, "i`l:is I'3 .{ requost r a ,
I ( .1 :pix in<,Ilt:li �,xt,e.nyion for
lily) ot. ,) fillli pl.it. 111 OOMIOCt:io tl with
yhihit. t', A t t tlIll c=�I.It
MW 49.020(2)(5ie) ,)ive grandtathet prc)t:ect.iran t« the
t�r.el ilnin<ary p1,at apprc,v,{l t,t the t)enn Wca()(Is subdivision?
Applic;ant5 dsscart that. it does."
c4.
k) 49. '�Itlt.'1, .''Ithe
.030(1.) ::t.ltt°;;:
n I`1 �1?tili'ii till
IWO i
�)I W11 it'll
I)r e i :t.l Y pkat. fitly t',1 I ) l 111,11 I)l':i hill
kt?v l i`1ti t:, ;lI d rl'
)tOV,I i
I1 11) Ir'�'1 t' ,i .till (`�i
c opt c.,,t.'t'r I'), 11)tt i 111,1\
I llr`>Urillt tc) hllt`h
COUNCIL REPORT -Cl 1-86 06 (SD 17-79)
PAGE 3
The above pat.aklraph was intended to establish an interim process
for those projects "caught" between the repealing of the
provisions of Chapter. 44 and the adoption of Chapter 49. It was
intended tj allow projects that had received preliminary
approvals to proceed with the necessary steps for finalization
without having to be reviewed again by a hearing body for
compliance with the newly adopted Development Code and Standards.
It was not intended to render good an approved preliminary plat
that had riot been finalized within roquired timelines, nor extend
indetinitely all previous preliminary approvals. If it could be
deti.-I-Illitled that LOC 49.090(2) does apply to this particular
install( -O, then, LOC 49.330 would also apply. 1.,oC 49.330 describes
the steps ne,:,essary for the prepavation and submittal of a final
plan or plat. It reqijires that final plats he submitted within
one year of prelimirlary approval. This can be extended for an
additional :,-ear by the City Manager it requested in writing by
.the applicant prior to the expiration of the first year.
Therefore, a,7tive preliminary plats approved prior to September
1.5, 1981 to which LOC 49.090(2) applied would have a maximum of
two Years to record the tina.l plat. The appellant made no
efforts to prepare their plat for recordation wittllin two years
following the September. 15, 1981 adoption of the Development Code
and Standards.
Applicant's Issue #
"Were applicants entitled to rely on the letter from Ms. Sandra
M. Young, Planning Director, dated November 23, 1983 and
representations made by Ms. Young regarding the development of
,Penn Woods? Applicants assert that they
they were."
The lettetr oto.,-e(j t.,) j�; ill Exhibit C, Att_ichill(;lft C-1. The
Planning Cor,-mijs,*j.ol) t1l,it tho latter did not constitute
() t. L- . I
'C"11 11" t 4 t -ll(' ('i t , Y Oil thea I)r0litilill ' I!y plat, but was an
illfor-lilal k'111"111t, (d proct"'kii"'IS ill order to record a
Hilal plat. N was not made or stated at that time
that the pz�-o'l jilt i ll,it y 1)1,,It w A' 4
, -i invalid. d - '110 Commission, however,
.1l.so foutid that (hu '11)P011 -Jilt did not tallow up on any of tAie
procedLlre,li 0'.- *,*0i,jtlir(!lfl0lltS in the Novombor. 23, 1983
1 e t ter. Thcv Lound that the appe I I,int cJik.j riot tol. Low up oil the
letter ill 'i reason .1111okillt- cit I: illio.
As disckis--c,4.
;:i coilpi(ic(ioll witAl appol #2, (.-Ilrrellt
CGide
i r e Z ; L I ± 'I it i t . I a I t
ilt with i 11 0 11
y
t lit, (It. d0t :3 (I t t, i 1141 ttlr til
t Ilt t illal dec isioll.
This
play hc
'\ttllllkil>ti I -W 0110 YO,lt: 1) y t ho Ci
t.y Winaijer i t-
oi I!%
W1 i t i 11,1 by t.ho q)pI ic,111t., . Any
I ,Ir I It(- r -•t
k1\tL1tP;l()n
t -11k, holy.
it
Lilldt"
111 IppI i c3ilt. would 11,*ivo
( wi) y I k, ",0
tillal
pl.lt
I I he appl icallts roI inti
111),)[1 1 1w Novomher 2
198.1
let
Lhoy 111.1114� I)() attollipt", to 111vot
thf• ,inti int"llt-
() I t 110
i'Ll'
Ck )d i-. .
COUNCIL REPORT -CI 1-86 06 (SD 17-79)
PAGE: 4
t`(_ MPI I1CTC)r,1
It has been shk)wn that the applicant dick not meet the letter or
intent of either the former or current codes in the handling of
their preliminary plat. The Planning Commission found that
failure to file .a recordable plat almost seven years after the
approval of the preliminary plat is an unreasonable amount of.
time. The Planning Commission found that the purpose and policy
of the Development Code would best be implemented by requiring a
resubmission of the preliminary plat for compliance review under
current requirements.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the record before the Planning Commission and the
preceding discussion, it is staff's recommendation that the City
Council deny the appeal.
KS:kh
At tachmer nts
TONKON, TORP, GALEN, MARMADUKE & BOOTH
LAW OFFIL.E9
CERTIFIED 'VAIL--
RETURN RECEIPTREQUF.STED
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
City Reco, , er
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 9"1034
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision SD 17-79
Lake Oswego-Planni_nn _Commission CI 1-86-06
Dear Ms. Mader:
This is a Notice of Appeal to the Lake Oswego City
Council of the final decision made by the Lake Oswego Planning
Commission on July 28, 1986 (Cl 1--86-06) regarding the Penn
Woods Subdivision.
I am the owner of a portion of the Penn Woods
Subdivision, and am the legal representative of the Other owner.
The preliminary plat for the Penn Woods subdivision
was approved by the City Council of Lake Oswego on September 25,
1979. By letter dated June 2, 1986, thio, City Manager, through
Sandra Duffy, Deputy City Attorney, advised the applicants that
(i) under LOC 44.310 (1978 Zoning Code), the Penn Woods pre-
liminary plat approval was void, and (ii) that LOC 49.020(2)
(1981 Development Ordinance, and Standards) gives the Penn Woods
preliminary plat no gratuifathering protection. Applicants ap-
pealed theso interpretations of LOC 44.310 and 49.020(2) to the
Planiiinq Commi011, and the C'lanning Commission adopted the
City Manager's interpretation. I,111s is an appeal of the Plan-
ning c'ommission's clec.ision.
A
1600 OR®ANCO ®UILDINI•
JEFFREY H KEE-EY
Mot M TONKON
ALSERYH AENNEDY
boos -19641
1001 5_ W. FIFTH AVENUE
MARK F. L.ROu[
PORTLAND, OREGON 97 2 04-11 62
SARBEE B. LYOM'
BARER'
((10:11221^1440
Do% M. MARMAOUAE'
BRLrCE O. BERNING
WILLIAM f. MART501,
OW{M C. BLANK
MICHAEL M. MORGAN'
MAIRC S.BoCCI
JANET C NEUMAN
lift• I O BOOT"'
July 31. 1986
JON W. NICKEL'
6Yl ART M BROWN .,
INGOif -OTO
T OWLIT.1 J. CONWAY
AMY JOSIE_ PEOER5EN
M[La• L, Cu6HIM0
EDWIN C-PER""
.19.r.M E fRONNMAYER'
JON. M. ROSENf[lD
gt`.wg16 J• GALEW
SCOTT O. SEIOMAN
qM ALD L GREENMAN'
SUSAN A. SMITH
J[Y'fA[Y E.1•IARMES
AEN.ETN D. STEP"["
C."'OL CET HIBBS
FREOERICA N. TOR/'
,ill{L S KAPLAN
JOSEPH 5. VOBORIL'
".AJORY A.WALI
• �pY'[f[IOM A� COKpp KAt IDK
CERTIFIED 'VAIL--
RETURN RECEIPTREQUF.STED
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
City Reco, , er
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 9"1034
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision SD 17-79
Lake Oswego-Planni_nn _Commission CI 1-86-06
Dear Ms. Mader:
This is a Notice of Appeal to the Lake Oswego City
Council of the final decision made by the Lake Oswego Planning
Commission on July 28, 1986 (Cl 1--86-06) regarding the Penn
Woods Subdivision.
I am the owner of a portion of the Penn Woods
Subdivision, and am the legal representative of the Other owner.
The preliminary plat for the Penn Woods subdivision
was approved by the City Council of Lake Oswego on September 25,
1979. By letter dated June 2, 1986, thio, City Manager, through
Sandra Duffy, Deputy City Attorney, advised the applicants that
(i) under LOC 44.310 (1978 Zoning Code), the Penn Woods pre-
liminary plat approval was void, and (ii) that LOC 49.020(2)
(1981 Development Ordinance, and Standards) gives the Penn Woods
preliminary plat no gratuifathering protection. Applicants ap-
pealed theso interpretations of LOC 44.310 and 49.020(2) to the
Planiiinq Commi011, and the C'lanning Commission adopted the
City Manager's interpretation. I,111s is an appeal of the Plan-
ning c'ommission's clec.ision.
A
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
July 31, 1986
Page 2
I. ISSUES.
This appeal raises three issues:
1. Did the applicants satisfy the requirement in LOC
44.310 that the "official plat" be "prepared and submitted"
within the requisite time period? Applicants assert that they
did.
2. Does LOC 49.020(2) give grandfather protection to
the preliminary plat approval of the Penn Woods subdivision?
Applicants assert that it does.
3. Were applicants entitled to rely on the letter
from Ms. Sandra M. Young, Planning Director, dated November 23,
1983, and representations made by Ms. Young regarding the devel-
opment of Penn Woods? Applicants assert that they were.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
After two hearings before the Planning Commission and
two hearings before the Conservancy Commission, the preliminary
plat of Penn Woods was approved by the City Council on
September 25, 1979. Penn Woods is a nine -lot subdivision at the
intersection of Larch and Cornell, consisting of over four
acres. Applicants made numerous concessions to obtain prelimi-
nary plat approval, including (i) setbacks from Cornell Road to
preserve a maximum number of trees, (ii) substantially larger
lots than were required to preserve slopes and limit run-off,
and (iii) devotion of a larq_e area for on-site water retention..
The approval princess cost the applicants over $10,000 and
involved the Hiring of three different engineering companies ---
Burton Engineering, Thompson Engineering and David Evans 6
Associates --and a geologist, Mr. Paul Hughes.
The official plat was filed with the City of Lake
Oswego before September 4, 1980. This was within the six-month
extension period granted by the Planning Commission. Applicants
never heard from the City after that date. Apparently, on or
about Soptemher 17, 1980, the City received a letter from the
County Survoyor re(jardlnq two de minimis errors in the official
plat: ( i ) Otio monument was missing, and ( ii) one radius was
mi,sstatod by .03. Applicants did not pursue the subdivision as
000110111ic. conditions steadily worsened. Nevertheless, the City
A-2
1(INK 11N, 10111` �:♦l1 N, MAli MAW 1041 i 11111.111
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
July 31, 1986
Page 3
(i) made no effort o theSOofficial plat, (ii) madever to inform the lnonindication
two minor errors tid not
that the plat was def icy possibility t in anyyth tdthe� preliminarylplat
Cate that there was any
would become void.
of 1983 applicants' representative asked
In November
Sandra M. Young, Lake Oswego Planning Director, what additional
to proceed with the recording of a final
steps were required
th a letter dated November 23,
plat. Ms. Young responded wi
1983, a copy of which is in the record. The letter says nothing
iminary plat be
about file preling void, or a requirement that the
preliminary plat be resubmitted for approval. In fact, when
asked directly whether the plat had to be resubmitted for ap-
proval, Ms. Young responded that it did not.
Applicants took Ms. Young's letter and made it avail-
able to prospective purchaser's of the property. On January 30,
1984, applicants accepted a purchase offer for the property,
which offer eventually lapsed because of the failure
ofacrtain
contingencies. On February 17, 1984, applicants
another offer for . tle elected 'l turchase of thto rclosey thehetpransaction.
purchaser uective
ltimate y
Applicants brought legal action to recover the purchaser's
earnest mclney • p'with 1 Lha thrchase purchaser'sdefense
dthee1was toldthat
by the
did not proceed P preliminary plat was no
City's Planning hepartment that the pl'elY P
longer effective. The lawsuit was heard on September 6, 1985,
at which time the court ordered all earnest money forfeited to
the appl icarlts .
Becau>e of the def ollse raised in the lawsuit regarding
the status of the plat, appl i.:allts cotltacoul Ms.
Copaz Faulkner
on November 21, 1985- She said that she would examine the sit"--
oot
il
i o ll alid c3et back to the applicants. W11e11 Ms . Faulkner did IIr
rl_sl)lllul to the applicants, they cent.acted h('I- again, and ar-
rangeti a meetinq tllr February 27, 1986. rhF' fc)jjowinq then t.oOk
p] ACs'
Frilruary 27, 1c)86 Mc_l.�ting with Topaz Faulkner and San(ira
911ffy in which they prom�;ed o review
t ill' s .1 t.11at 1 (til clild ] -
,lpp] icants .
M.11:ch 20, 1986 1.et t or f'r11m Topaz. 1'atiIkiier at 111(1
1' 1 .bill l Iltj Depa r t nlent ' s i)u:; i t. 1 oll .
F1- 3
I \1NVION. 1)1W 1. 111 N. MA110An11•In 1 A 11•`•`111
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
July 31, 1986
Page 4
April 10, 1986
Letter to Topaz Faulkner asking that it
be treated as a request for a formal
interpretation by the City Manager.
May 15, 1986
Letter from applicants to Topaz
Faulkner indicating no response for 35
days.
May 27, 1986
Letter from applicants to Rosemary
Mader indicating no written decision
from City Manager for 47 days.
June 2, 1986
Written decision of Sandra Duffy
received 53 days after request for
interpretation and 194 days after
initially contacting Topaz Faulkner
about status of plat.
June 4, 1986
Applicants filed Notice of Appeal to
Planning Commission.
July 14, 1986
Nearing before Planning Commission at
10:30 p.m. No resolution of issue.
July 28, 1986
Receipt by mail of statutory analysis
by Assistant City Attorney.
July 28, 1986 Second Planning Commission hearing,
10:00 p.m., approval of City Manager's
interpretation by City Manager.t
III. LOC 44.310.
The preliminary plat of Penn Woods is still in effect
unless former LOC 44.310 stated otherwise. That ordinance pro-
vided:
"The official plat must be prepared and
submitted within six (6) months following
the approval given on the preliminary plat
by the planning commission and City Council
and it shall incorporate the reconunendations
and conditions made by t ho convnl ss io11 aIld
any made by the City Council . If the owner
or subdivider wishes to proceed with the
subdivision of his land after the expiration
R -q
IONKON, 10140, (,A1 F N. MAI?M^OkI hl A t%()()114
Rosemary A
31, 1986
5
of the six (6) month period following the
approval of the preliminary plat, he must
resubmit his preliminary plat to the plan-
ning commission and make any revisions
considered necessary by the planning com-
mission and City Council to ineet c:hanged
conditions."
LOC 44.310 unposed only one requirement; namely, that
the "official plat" be "prepared and submitted" within a speci-
fied date. First, observe that what had to be filed was the
"official plat" and not the "filial plat". This makes sense,
since you cannot have a "final plat" until the City has approved
it and Ilumerous other requirements are met. There is nothing in
LOC 44.310 requiring approval of the official plat by any given
date. All that is required is preparation and submission. The
official plat: for the Penn Woods subdivision was pr(:�,pared and
submitted within the required time.
The Plaruling Commission took the position that the
hardboard and mylar originals which were filed with the City did
not constitute an "Official plat" for purposes of LOC 44,310.
'they ,),i -,e -d this conclusion on the grotuids that "Official plat"
meant 'final plat." They then proceeded to argue, that they
materiels which were? filed could not have been a final flat
since there were two errors which they Country Surveyor found;
namely, the ()lit, ,hissing monument and a misstatement of a radios
by .0 (011 ,)lily 28, 1986, the Ioput:y City Attorney attempted
to identity four ether "errors" in the plat wlli(:h was filed,
thereby making it an insufficient final plat.)
At tlit, Planning Colttl111s51(.)11 ll(?ill' ill(.l, Comm iS:;l,
1.aW rt,iicv R() ; one r ant 1, expressed his 1)();; 1 I 1 cell t Il,l t undi -i
LOC 44.310, l plat ill perfect (-)t iit,r ! �),, 1 (�('(�riiirlq h,i(i 1, I)r
filekl w'ithitl the .;ix-wonth period. 1 off-eirld thea hypot.Yltrtic,ll
of the official plat heing filed cine day h(t c>l (� th(.�f�}i�)ir%lt: i„►,
of tlit' six month pol'lod. His response was that sticli '111 appI1.
cant was taking the) risk that there? would 1q, ,ell torr ,r in t h,
plat altholl(1)1 it he v,�ry mmol., and that orror Would
Ic-SkIN111Ssion ()t t. lit? entiT-o pt01iminary I . 1;1)1'`i1C:tllli:.
Ap1)11can ts
do not contend that what was fil.ed was a
final
plat:. fiat her,
they contend that. ail
"c,ff.icial. plat" was
tiled;
a plat which
the applicants in goo,,i
faith cont iderk?d Lo
be a plat. i wady fOr
rocordat1011. Apparont.iy,
the City of Lake
Oswego
t hoticili t: so as
well cit the time . since they Inr1;tE? n0 ad
ver ;e
(1(nlullnt1, about
the plat whatsoove�r .
At tlit, Planning Colttl111s51(.)11 ll(?ill' ill(.l, Comm iS:;l,
1.aW rt,iicv R() ; one r ant 1, expressed his 1)();; 1 I 1 cell t Il,l t undi -i
LOC 44.310, l plat ill perfect (-)t iit,r ! �),, 1 (�('(�riiirlq h,i(i 1, I)r
filekl w'ithitl the .;ix-wonth period. 1 off-eirld thea hypot.Yltrtic,ll
of the official plat heing filed cine day h(t c>l (� th(.�f�}i�)ir%lt: i„►,
of tlit' six month pol'lod. His response was that sticli '111 appI1.
cant was taking the) risk that there? would 1q, ,ell torr ,r in t h,
plat altholl(1)1 it he v,�ry mmol., and that orror Would
Ic-SkIN111Ssion ()t t. lit? entiT-o pt01iminary I . 1;1)1'`i1C:tllli:.
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
July 31, 1986
Page 6
believe this is an erroneous interpretation of the ordinance
which makes no practical sense. Under stich' an interpretation,
each applicant would be dependent upon a nlwmber of city offi-
cials performing tasks before a specified Late. This would be
an unrealistic expectation and is not contemplated by the Code.
Finally, Comnlissio:ler RosF:�ncrantz advanced the argu-
ment that tale plat which was f fled would have to be corrected
within a "reasonable time." First:, there is nothing in the
ordinance imposing such a standard. Second, since the City
provided no notice of any corrections required to the plat, and
in fact advised the applicants that there was no deadline to be
met, any such time limit would nat yet have begun to run.
IV. LOC .49---0-90(.2 1.
LOC 49.090(2) provides in part:
+* * * Subdivisions * * * for which
Preliminary plat approvals * * * were
granted prior to September 15, 1981 may
occur pursuant to such approvals. -
The preliminary plat of the Penn Woods subdivision was
approved prior t o September 1 s , 1.981. Esy its express terms, the
ordinance provides tilat the suudivisioll may occur pursuant to
such approval.
The Planning (commission r(;asolled that LOC 49.0901(2)
does not apply to (.)ur "Ituati.on because of our failure to
satisfy the requi.remerlts of i ,.`, 44 , 310. As described ibed above,
clearly met t:he E3`Cllress tell we clt 1_,UC 44 .310. The fundamental
purpose of LOC 49.090(7.) is to r,].low older plats to be use(9
withot.lt:, llavitlq to be reapproved under the new devel.ol:)ment. co(j(].
'Phis is exactly the applicants situatloli, and the Commission wC.►s
unable to cite any authorit}• that the (Irandtathering protect i()rl
does not. apply.
V- hEPRESUNTAT IONS HY PLANNING D 1 RI•'l"1'011 .
Ill 111"" l'0('o1:d i:, a 10t t Ol 11,(t Pd Novemht+t 1 ((w,
Ms, `,tli(tlf' `e(>(lllg, former Flanlllnq I)11l (;t UL' t1t tilt' (,ll y' (A +
Oswe'lo, :;�n(unar i ing th(4 facts in th t,asE�. Ms. Yotlll(l's It,l t
lists :,eV(,rl Utej'1 ; for obtainiV.l) t ht� ( lnal plat apwrovai t,,i
Penn Woods subdivision. Rel". l:tm i t t i l,l l thE� prE�l .itni miry l> I .t t
not one of those s t.t3ps .
1 Uri K('N. IU141• -AilN X4Al1M+II.II.'1 A nl+l+1H fi�! \A.l
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
July 31, 1986
Page 7
Apparently, at some time between November 23, 1983 and
July 28, 1986, Ms. Young's decision was changed, without any
notice whatsoever to the owners of the subdivision.
Commissioner Rosencrantz expressed his opinion that
applicants were not entitled to benefit from Ms. Young's letter
since they did not rely on it. The Commissioner's conclusion is
based on a faulty premise. Applicants relied heavily on
Ms. Young's letter in two important respects. First, since she
represented that nothing heeded to be done to protect the
preliminary plat, nothing was done in that regard. Second,
applicants relied on Ms. Young's letter by furnishing it to
potential developers of the property inquiring about the status
of the subdivision. The City's reversal of the position in
Ms. Young's letter resulted in a costly lawsuit.
V I . SUMMARY.
In summary, all applicants are requesting is a deter-
mination that the preliminary plat of Penn Woods is still valid
and in full farce and effect. In reaching such a decision, the
City Council would not be allowing an entire subdivision to be
developed which does not comply with the current development
Code. LOC 49.090(2) specifically states:
''The physical development of property
or const. r uct loll of structures on ally par-
ticular site or lot within such developments
for which all approvals had not been re-
ceived prior to September 15, 1981 shall be
subject to review for conformance with those
standards applicable to specific site im-
provement, construction and design."
In other words, applicants are not askincl that the physical
development ,Incl consttuction of structtll-(-s lin Penn Woods be
exempt from ctlrrent C o(lo . Rather, applicants only seek an
interpretation of LOC 44.310 which does not require them to
repeat the ont.ire prelimin,iry plat hearing process.
Thi!; Not ictl of Appeal i;; 1)eing filed prior to the
receipt Thi!;
t h(1 of t,110 final written Order setting
forth the Plllnnin�l 011,
the
ci(lc islOn. Applicants have, to
the b(lst of their rt'col 1(,ct ion, fail-ly representod the Planning
Coimiiission's (loc.ision. if the final written Order: of the Plan---
Ilinq commission Varies fl-om applicalits, recollectioIl, this
1 ONNl1N. 111111•, ,.A1 1 N, MA14M All 11 N1 \ 1%0 C'11/ A,1
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
July 31, 1986
Page 8
Notice of Appeal will be supplemented with a statement of any
corrections and/or additional grounds for the appeal.
Enclosed is a check for $100 representing your fee for
this appeal.
Your consideration of this appeal is appreciated.
Very truly your ,
John H. Rosenfeld/
JHR;kju
Enclosure
A -v
IONNON I ORh. Cl AI IN. MA14M Ah 4l hl X 010011/
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lU
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
L)
t
22
23
24
25
26
BEFORE' THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
AN APPEAL OF AN )
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION )
OF THE CI'ry MANAGER )
CITY OF LAKE 0SWEC,0
SD 17-"79-378
(PENNWOODS SUBDIVISION)
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION & ORDER
NATURE OF APPLICATION
This is an appeal of an administrative decision of the Cit
which held that the Y Manager
preliminary plat in the above
referenced matter,
which was approved on September 25► 1979 by the City Council, must be
resubmitted to that body for review in light of new Code provisions
and/or changed conditions affected by the subdivision.
HEARINGS
The Planning commission held a public hearing and considered this
appeal at its meetings of duly 14 & July 28, 1986. Following the
presentation of exhibits and testimony at thane hearings, the
Planning Commission voted b to U to affirm the City Manager's
decision.
PAGE. 1 C.1 1-85/SD 17-79-378
SD: kh/39871)
""B
C1. -Y6 -6l0
PtQpc-.l (wre.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1%
18
i9
20
CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
Subdivision Ordinance (1978)
LOC 44.310 Final Plat submitted within six months from approvml
of preliminary plat
LOC 44.320 Preparation and form
LOC 44.330 Information required
LOC 44.340 Submission
L;OC 44.350 Review by city engineer
LOC 44.351, Approval by Planning Commission
LoC 44.36' Approval by engineer and president only
State Statutes (1979-80)
ORS 92.050
Requirements of survey and plat of subdivision
ORS 92.060
Marking certain points of plats with monuments;
specifications of monuments
URS 92.065
Marking interior monuments after recording of plat;
bond or cash deposit required
ORS 92.070
Surveyor's affidavit necessary to record plat;
contents of affidavit; notice of monument markings
ORS 92.060
Preparation of Plat
URS 92.060
Payment of taxes required before plat recorded
ORS 92.100
Approval of plat by city engineer or surveyor or
county surveyor; approved by county assessor and
county clovernInt-a body; fees
ORS 92.1:.0
Filinq and recording plats; copies
ORS 92.2115(1)
Policy (regarding underdeveloped .subdivisions)
PAG I:, 1. CI 1-85 tit) 17-79
SU:kh;'39871'
I Development Code (1986)
2 LOC 49.315 Final plat requirements
3 LOC 49.335 Review of final plan or plat,
4 Filing requirements
5 LOC 49.065 Adoption of development standards
6 LUC 49.090 Applicability of Develop;;pont Standards
7 LOC 49.630 Appeals of City Manager Action
8 LOC 49.b!O Hearing procedures
9
lid CONCLUSION
11 The Planning commission concludes that the preliminary plat for SD
12 17-79 must be resubmitted to determine whether it complies with
13 present code requirements.
14
15 FINDINGS AND REASONS
16 The Planninq commission as support for its decision, relies on the
17 Memorandum of July IU, 1986 from the Planning Director to the
16 Planning Conwiission and the attachments thereto which is incorporated
19 herein by reference, the Memorandum of July 24, 1986 from the
2l1 Assistant City Attorney to the Planning Commission, which is
21 incorporated herein by reference, and the following supplemental
information:
23 1. The commission found that the word "shall" in LOC 44.310(1978)
24 requires that an "official plat" must be tiled. The Commission
2. also tound that the term "official" is not. meaningless
.:r
CI 1-H5: tiU 17-79
SD: kh/ 398'7N
Iw
-'0 —W
1 surplusage. The official plat which is filed must be
2 recordable. To be recordable, the official plat must incorporate
3 all the conditions or recommendations made by the Planning
4 Commission in its Order approving the application, as well as all
5 other Lake Oswego Code and Oregon Revised Statute requirements.
t5 The Code does not contemplate that the requirement of submitting
an "official" plat can be met by not meeting allrequirements.
6 2. The Commission found that the "official." plat which was submitted
9 by the applicant failed to incorporate a number of conditions of
10 approval, and failed to comply wit. l: Lake Oswego Code and State
11 Statutes in a number of particulars (see memorandum of July 24,
12 1986).
13 3. The Commission found that a copy of the notice of September 17,
14 1980, from the County Surveyor to the City Engineer, indicating
1'_ the plat was deficient was sent to David Evans & Associates,
1^ Inc., the engineer and agent for the applicant.
1' 4. The Coimnission found that the applikant never corrected the
deticlellcie,, noteki by the Count}' surveyor.
y 5. The Commission found that* the letter of November 23, 1983, from
Sandra Young, former Planning Director (Exhibit 1 of July 10,
1986 memo to the Planning Commission), did not constitute an
_ official a�eion by the City on the preliminary plat.. The
Commis;;ion (ieter►nined that, the latter was an informal statement
:4 required in older to record a t incl plat and vest-e(i
no right.; in applicant..
F 4 c'1 1-tv)/Sl) 17-19
Sl): kh/398'111
1
6. The Commission found that the applicant did
not follow up on any
2
of the procedures set forth by Ms. Young in
the November 23, 1983
3
letter.
4
7. The Commission found that the applicant has
allowed his
5
preliminary plat to .lapse by failure to follow
up and ascertain
6
the status of his plat within a reasonable
amount of time. No
7
follow up in almost three years to Ms. Young's November 23, 1983
8
letter is an unreasonable amount of time.
Failure to file a
9
recordable plat almost seven years after the
approval of the
10
preliminary Mat is an unreasonable amount
of time.
11
S. The Commission found that the purpose and
policy of the
12
Development Code will best be implemented
by requiring a
13
resubmission of the preliminary plat for
an analysis of its
14
compliance with present Code and changed
conditions.
:r
ORDER
i s IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego
)at the., al?EjliCant mu::t resubmit the preliminary plat along with an
analysis of it s c.olnpl i ance with present Code requirements and changed
ondi t ions .
cL-,,wE'lt1Y THAT
C, 1-8,D/so 17 -*19
SD:kh/39611'
ej.jy of A11�11110 lyNt�.
Adrianne Brockman, Vice -Chairman
Planning Commission
Karen Scott, Secretary
July 28, 1986
ATTEST:
AYES: Rosencrantz, Ross, Wexler, Rodrigues, Robinette, Brockman
NOES: None
ABs'PAI N: None
ABSENT: Burton
CI 1-85/sl) 17-79
S1): k h / 3 9 8 7 P
CITY OF LAE. OSWEGO
MEMORANDUM
Planning Commission
_y.
FROM: Topaz Faulkner, Planning Director
SJBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Director's Decision Regarding Penn
Woods Subdivision SD 17-79
TATE: ,July 10, 1986
The Penn Woods Subdivision was approved by the City on September 25,
1979. There were requests made for time extensions, and the final
plat was submitted to the City for review sometime between March 10
and September 4, 1980. On September 4th, the City submitted copies of
that plat to the County for review. On September 17th, 1980, there
was a letter from the County Surveyor regarding errors on the plat.
There is no record of further action. The City has both the hardboard
and mylar originals. Attached to the plat jacket, there is a note
indicating that the project was "placed on hold", presumably by the
applicants although there is no request on file.
In response to a request for information, I determined that a
resubmittal of the preliminary plat would be necessary.
John Rosenfeld, one of the owners of the property ano representative
for the other owners, has appealed my decision which was further
supported by the Deputy City Attorney in a letter on Tune 2, 1986.
Background
Bill Siewert, a realtor, contacted mc, to diGc•uss the Penn Woods
`ubdivi.Sioll sometime- in Janu,rry lIai16. Hey indicated that City staff
waft lit) t- (Ii vinq c.IPar responses s ttl pot (-nt ial puI cIIasi, rs of t he Iof
which was; making his jot) much nik)re diff icult . He also provided int,
with it copy of Sandra Young's letter (Exhibit 1). I told him that
when i had an opportunity to review tIIH fila, 1 would he in a better
position to respond to his cone e 1 ns. Wo agrood to (liscus,.; the mat t e.r
at a later date. After reviewinkt the, file and discussing the issuf-;l
with the Dvputy City Attorney, 1 told Mr. Siewert that. I had no
authority to either 'l)ut on hold" nor to "reactivate" a subdivision,
thus; it would ho necessary to resubmit. He then requested a mevtinq
with Sandra Duffy and myself.
C
t•111NtMIII\1A11 Ikt\ 140 INI riv11�lt.of1 ,ttN l.'ut•1 ri�tit u, it,nC�l'4V'�S1D
ApPea 1
Memo to Planning
CI 1-86-06, Penn
July 10, 1986
Page Two
Commission
Woods Subdivision
A meeting was held on February 28, 1986, which was attended by Bill
Siewert, John Rosenfeld, Sandra Duffy and myself. Sandra and I
exp'ained the City's position and, in response to requests from Mr.
Rosenfeld, agreed to research the codes and statutes that he felt were
applicable, and to respond in writing.
Research of the LOC Code sections in effect in 1979 and 1980, as well
as applicable State statutes, provided the basis for my letter to Mr.
Siewert dated March 20, 1986 (Exhibit 2). Essentially, I explained
that no final plat had ever been recorded as required; therefore, a
resubmission of the preliminary plat would be necessary to address
changed conditions, including State statutes and City codes.
In his letter of April 10, 1936 (Exhibit 3), Mr. Rosenfeld responded
to my interpretation. He stated that. LOC 44.310, quoted in Exhibit 2,
requires an "official" plat to be filed within a specified date, and
that the "official" plat is not synonymous with "final" plat. The
Penn Woods official plat was filed as required. The County Surveyor's
letter (Exhibit 7A) was never received by Rosenfeld. LOC 44.370
requiring a final plat within 30 days does not apply, according to Mr.
Rosenfeld; and, based on his assertion that Penn Woods has already met
Loo 44.310, Mr. Rosenfeld believes that LOC 49.090(2) relieves Penn
Woods of the need to comply with current standards.
At my request, one of the City Engineering staff has done a cursory
review of what would be necessary for Penn Woods to comply with
,urrent standards. He noted the following:
- ttio twenty foot ri,111ts-of-way are not adequate;
- a cul-de-sac with a private tract may be required;
- Cornell Street improvements must be addressed;
- the location of the intersection with Cornell may require
modification;
- the public drainage easement must be specified;
- and, building setback lines must be dimensioned.
nt.erestill(jly rnouyh, it 1,0111, Woad:; were to be revised and brought
t,a, k as a planned development , it_ may be eligible for density
transfers re:tlltin(I in less costly street improvements and, possibly,
s lower open space fee.
Exhibit:; 4, ') and 6 illu:lt tate the yrowiny sense of frustration on the
part oj all parties invoIv0d. The Ueput.y city Attorney's response to
mt I. RosenfeId's Apri 1 10 1eLAei is included as Exhibit. 7. The history
of Penn Woods is documented in the remaining exhibits, beginning with
t hr t i nd incls too si) 17-7`1 and the 11111111t e5 of t hip Seel t then ?.5, 1979
Flannin(_) Co►nn►ission meeting (Exhibits 9 and 9A) .
VA
Memo to Planning
CI 1-86-06, Penn
July 10, 1966
page Three
Commission
Woods Subdivision
Conclusion
The Commission must determine whether or not a resubmittal of the Penn
Woods preliminary plat, in a form that addresses changed conditions,
is necessary to allow the owners to proceed.
Exhibits
1. November 23, 1963 letter from. Sandra Young to Bill Siewert
2. March 20, 1986 letter from Topaz Faulkner to Bill Siewert
3. April 10, 1986 letter from John Rosenfeld to Topaz Faulkner
4. May 15, 1986 letter from John Rosenfeld to Topaz Faulkner
5. May 19, 1986 letter from Topaz Faulkner to John Rosenfeld
6. May 27, 1986 letter from John Rosenfeld to Rosemary Mader
7. June 2, 1966 letter from Sancra Duffy to John Rosenfeld
7A. September 17, 1960 letter from County Survey Department to City
Engineer
8. June 4, 1966 letter from John Rosenfeld appealing City's decision.
9. SD 17-79 Findings, Conclusions and Order
9A. Minutes of September 25, 1979 Planning Commission meeting
10. February 26, 1980 request for time extension for filing hardboarz
11. March 4, 1980 request for time extension for filing final plat
12. April 25, 1984 letter to the County from John Rosenfeld
TF:kh/868z
Ir
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Bill Siewert
MBA Properties
267 "A" Avenue
Lake Oswego, OR
Dear Mr. Siewert:
97034
November 23, 1983
You have requested information on the status of the Penn Hood
Subdivision plat (SD 17-79).
The facts, as I see them are:
September 25, 1979 - The City Council approved the
preliminary plat.
February 26, 1979 - Request for 6 month extension in
filing time for hardboard plat.
Larch 3, 19180 - A request for a 6 months extension
in filing time for final plat.
March 10, 1980 - Planning Commission approved
extension request.
Between March 10 6 - Final plat submitted to City and
Sept. 4, 1980 County for review.
September 4, 1980 - City submitted copies of plat to
County for review.
Septeml)er 17, 1980 - Letter from County Surveyor
regarding errors on the plat.
There is no record of further action. The City has the hardboard and
mylar originals. There is attached to the plat jacket a note
indicating that the project was placed on hold, presumably by the
applicants, alth,-)ugh there is no request on file.
C 1
Cz.%-1PPP bk
341, NOR IH SIAII SIklII / POSI Of ICI BOX 369 / LAO,I (MVIGO ORICAN 97034 / (503)6% 3601
V
Letter/Bill Siewert I
November 23, 1983
Page 2
platting process, the following must be done:
To complete the final
1. The applicants need to request that the plat be
reactivated. They also need to come into the City and
check the plats we have to see if they are the ones they
wish to record.
2. The corrections as per the County Surveyor's letter need
to be done.
3. Construction plans for improvements must. be submitted to
Alex Arseniev in the City's Engineering Department for
review, together with an estimate.
4. A letter of guarantee or other method of guaranteeing
ired in the amount of 120% of the
improvements is then requ
estimate prior to the signing of the plat by the City,
if
hey wish to
5, The City will contact ain he County
o ntyhe coorectionsseetare made and
check the plat g royals.
will check the plat for consistency with all City aF
6. other County requirements must be
me(i.e., taxes, etc.?
before the County can sign the plats.
the City with a reproducible
7. The applicant then provides
mylar of the recorded plat within a week of the recording
date.
P18t- if
This summarizes the work necesslease record to
callor come ill.
.Fngineer.inge
can be of further assistance, 1
questions should be directed to Alex Arseniev
Sincerely,
Sandra M. Young. AICD
Planning Director
IBOW'/Sffy/m.+s
cc: Alex Arseniev
5-
CITY OF LAKE OSWECO
March 20, 1966
Bx11 Siewert
ynA properties
267 'A' Avenue
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Bill:
The letter you received from me dated 28 March 1986 contained a
significant typographical error. Please disregard my former
correspondence and utilize the following in its place.
The City Attorney's office has reviewed the City Code sections
and State Statutes applicable to the Penn Woods (SD 17-79)
approval. It has been determined that the following City Code
section was in effect at the time of the subdivision approval:
'FINAL PLAT
44.310 Must be submitted within six months from
approval of preliminary plat.
The official plat must be prepared and
submitted within six (6) months following the
approval given on the preliminary plat by the
planning commission and City Council and it
shall incorporate the recommendations and
conditions made by the commission and any made
by the City Council. If the owner or
subdivider wishes to proceed with the
subdivision of his land after the expiration of
the six (6) month period following the approval
of the preliminary plat, he must resubmit ha.s
preliminary plat to the planning conunission and
make any revisions considered necessary by the
planning commission and City Council to meet
changed conditions.'
C 2.
C71 1 -?'6--0I0
�, p peb,�
%At% NOR 11/ %IA)( %IKIII ft)"l ()I i 1 Mxi O%V% c�, ORI(A)N 97014 / NII) h)b W)I
Letter/Bill Siewert
March 20, 1986
Page 2
This section must be complied with or the preliminary plat
approved "expires' and must be resubmitted to the Planning
Commission and City Council. An 'official' or 'final' plat was
required to be submitted within six months of the 25 September
1979 preliminary plat approval. A six month extension was
granted on 10 March 1980. On 17 September 1980, the County
Surveyor sent a letter regarding errors in the "final' or
'official" plat. There is no record of the 'final' plat being
corrected by 25 September 1980.
At our meeting on 28 February 1986, it was apparent that you
and Mr. Rosenfeld feel you have a 'final' plat that is simply
unrecorded. However, LOC 44.370 provides that if a final plat
is not recorded within 30 days of the last required signatuve,
it is null and void.
'44.370 Approval of final plat void if not recorded
within thirty days.
Approval of the final plat by the City as
provided by this chapter shall be conditioned
on its prompt recording. The subdivider shall,
without delay, submit the final plat to the
county assessor and the co.unty governing body
for signatures as required by ORS 92.100.
Approval of the final plat shall be null and
void if the plat is not recorded within thirty
days after the date the last required approving
signature has been obtained.'
Although the current. LOC 49.090(2) provides that "subdivisions
. . . requiring Design Review Board approval for which. .
preliminary plat approvals . were granted prior to 15
September 1981, z1ay occur pursuant. to such approvals", the
requirement under LOC 44.310 as cited above operates to void
the original Penn Woods preliminary plat.
There is no authority in our City Coda to either "put on hold'
or "reactivate' an application, preliminary plat or final
plat. Therefore, it will be necessary to resubmit a
preliminary plat, including an updated application to adddess
any changed conditions in both City Codes and State Statutes.
Letter/Bill Siewert
march 20, 1986
Page 3
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me.
Cordially,
Topaz Faulxr\er
Planning qirctor
3733P/7F/mas
cc: Sandy Duffy
i�
CERTIFIED MAIL --
RETURN RECEIPT RE tlQ ETED
Ms. Topaz Faulkner
planning Director
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
(SD 17-79)
Dear Ms. Faulkner:
This is in response to your letter dated March 20,
1986 addressedrt stating in
pre-
liminary Plat our letter
effect. For the following reasons,
I believe y
misstates the law, misstates the facts and applies an inter-
retation to the law and the facts which is unwarranted:
p
1. LOC 44.310 impo sed only
nlare u r aulu ni tted"
namely that "the official plat be"prepared
irst, observe that whala�u. Th
within a specified date. Fis
filed is "the official plat" and not "e he fili f
makes sense,
since you cannot have a "final plat" ��.�ntil the
City has approved it. Your letter incorrectly assumes that
"official plat" is synonomous with "final plat", which
allows you to take a leap of logic. that. LOC 44.310 required
that the "final plat" be approved within a specified time.
There is nothing in LOC 44.310 requiring akpjroval of the
official plat by any given date. All that is required is
praed within the
esration and submission. The official plat for the Penn
Woods subdivision was prepared and submitt
required time.
�PPCa\
GALEN, MARMADUKE 6 BOOTH
TONKONJORP,
LAw OrrICE"
J[rlwlr K el tNl.
1000 OnDANCO •UILDING
AL890" N IIINNEoT
r TOM.OY
1001 L. W. ►IYT►1 AVENUE
Ltl
=Erg,
moot
wtO1-I*",
PO"TLANO. OREGON 9720A-1162
LION p.wpEc p. N
DON N.r.wr AOVIIC'
15031![I-14*0
►. "AWTOON,Joe:
p".iCE D- 99' -G
"ICNAIL ". NOwO&N*
Cw[Y D. "LAr•
J LN[T C NlVr•N
JON W. NIC II[L'
�r�!• �. 6040'r'*INOOLr
NOTO
t•« YI[DEwt[N
p.Ialrr r. OwOWN
♦rT JOp
EDWIN C. PcwW
Tim(ltrT k CCMW)Ar
JO«N «. Ir[)[[Nr[LO
r4A• L•CVpNIrO
[ WINONrr.TEw
April 10, 1986
tco" O ar"O•'AN
JOrY
.0am't J 04L[N•
tu[.N 410"'T«
IIIN NIT« D. STE"«ENl
w0\lLO L, t•M [Nr1.M'
rw[Otw.Cw N. TO"
[r►sE• [ Nswmo[p
JORp« t. vOSOW L'
G •wOL OlT rI�"p
rAwJOHI •.W&LL
JOIE •1WL1N
. ..an��ow. coa►ow••Now
CERTIFIED MAIL --
RETURN RECEIPT RE tlQ ETED
Ms. Topaz Faulkner
planning Director
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
(SD 17-79)
Dear Ms. Faulkner:
This is in response to your letter dated March 20,
1986 addressedrt stating in
pre-
liminary Plat our letter
effect. For the following reasons,
I believe y
misstates the law, misstates the facts and applies an inter-
retation to the law and the facts which is unwarranted:
p
1. LOC 44.310 impo sed only
nlare u r aulu ni tted"
namely that "the official plat be"prepared
irst, observe that whala�u. Th
within a specified date. Fis
filed is "the official plat" and not "e he fili f
makes sense,
since you cannot have a "final plat" ��.�ntil the
City has approved it. Your letter incorrectly assumes that
"official plat" is synonomous with "final plat", which
allows you to take a leap of logic. that. LOC 44.310 required
that the "final plat" be approved within a specified time.
There is nothing in LOC 44.310 requiring akpjroval of the
official plat by any given date. All that is required is
praed within the
esration and submission. The official plat for the Penn
Woods subdivision was prepared and submitt
required time.
�PPCa\
Ms. Topaz Faulkner
April 10, 1986
Page Two
2. Your letter incorrectly states that we feel
we have a 'final" plat that is simply unrecorded. What we
said was that an official plat had been prepared and sub-
mitted within the requisite time -period under LOC 44.310.
We also advised you that although the County Surveyor sent a
letter regarding two minor errors in the official plat, we
never received a copy of that letter and only recently be-
came aware of the errors. Everyone agrees that these errors
are extremely minor.
3. Your letter quotes LOC 44.370 which requires
that a final plat be required within 30 days after the last
approving signature. Since our plat never obtained the last
required approving signature, the time period described in
LOC 44.370 never began to run. Accordingly, that ordinance
has no application to our situation.
4. Your letter states that current LOC 49.090(2),
which grandfathers all subdivisions approved by the Design
Review Board prior to September 15, 1981, does not apply to
our situation because of our failure to satisfy the require-
ments of LOC 44.310. As described above, we clearly met the
express terms of LOC 44.310. Consequently, any grandfather-
ing provided by LOC 49.090(2) applies to Penn Woods. The
fundamental purpose of LOC 49.090(2) is to allow older plats
to be used without compliance with the new development code.
Consequently, your statement that there is no authority in
the city code to "reactivate" older plats is inaccurate.
The owners of the Penn Woods subdivision spent
more than $10,000 in obtaining approval of its preliminary
plat. They do not intend to spend that money again to ob-
tain the approvals which they already have.
Please let me know exactly what steps tilt City
intends to require in order to proceed with the Penn Woods
subdivision. If you do not concur with my interpretation of
the situation, please consider this letter a request for a
formal interpretation of former Code sections 44.310, 44.370
and current 49.090(2). We would appreciate a prompt response,
as each day that passes adds additional cost to the project.
Very truly yours,
John H. Rosenfeld
JHR:kju
cc: Mr. Jamc-s Coleman
Mr. Peter Harvey
(w/cc of City latter)
Mr. Bill Siewert,
Macadam, Forbes, Inc.
TONKON, 7004P. GALIN. MA"Id ADUK! l O()(;)i"
IT,)
rOt r TOrw Or
of D!'1f�1
Tt Ol" la. s^^tw'
ww,,lGf W •[0""10
rawi f. *&CC,
1bfol"'
tTU&N, r. MOw"
T."OT"T i CO"w^'
r aaw L.CYf"I"o
JO M" c ►TaOMNY aTCa'
r O.P1Nf J f^Law'
wON alo L-0"t[a"aN'
�trrav [.06^0"[6
CawOl oc• Miss*
JO[L f. a^PL^"
. .+o•awa•o•�� cowro.•,�o.
LBOOTFI
TONKON,TORP, GAL.EN,MARMADUKE
L^yy 0►rkccs
jer►wl„ M wtc"tT
•UIL01N0
nLstwT K a[NrCOT
1000 OAO ANGO
atawl ►. ►a^�ON■
1001 S.W. r1r-T" AVENUE
•awf[t
OwCGON p'720�' 1162
06✓ ". Y^/�"^ONPc'
PORTLAND.
W1L11^r ►. Y^OTS Oa, Jw'
119031 RR"AA0
YIC"aCL
JaN[T C.
JON w NIC a[L'
I"OOL, Nolo
^rY JOta1'" PtOlwf ["
cowl. G ►tail.
JO"" N.woftNrtLO
May15 , 1986
sco" O 9610"^-
fUfa11 A. f"ll.
^111"[T" D• fT [P"lN6
rilloC0lCa N. TORP
JOftP" O. VOf ON�L'
N "JOa, ^.TIn4L
CERTIFIED yAIL--
aTURN R_E_CEIPT
REQUESTED.
Ms. Topaz Faulkner
planning Director
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369 97034
Lake Oswego Oregon
Re: Penn woods Subdivision
(SD 17 -79) ---
Dear pis, Faulkner:
of my letter to you dated
Enclosed is a copy s later, and I have had no
April 10, 1956. It is 35 days la May 7, 1986 you said that
response. When I spoke to Y
"rhe attorney
will be back tomorrow and will COOp'-'�ayy13 I
8irectly
• I did not hear from the etbacX that the attorney
telephoned you and received a messa9 dict not hear from the
would be calling me the. next day- 11.4 and was told that the
I called your office May but
attorney. the office for six weeks,
from
city attorney would be out of you_ I did not h_
that my messal3c' would be left f o roffice again and left a
you. Today, May 15, T called y
message• I have not had any response.
matter is
Your failure to take any action on thlE- meet of
since it precludes the dE-Ve_ -1'
in itself an action, sinal time. If I do not hear. from you
p 1956, retatic)n of my
the property at a
by May 2 T will assume that the in c.rp
C�
Pelle
J
f
Ms. Topaz Faulkner
May 15, 1986
Page Two
letter dated April 10, 1986 has been accepted, and will
proceed on that basis. In other words, there will be addi-
tional costs incurred in connection with the project in
reliance upon your inaction.
Very truly yours,
John H. Rosenfeld
JHR:kju
Enclosure
cc: Mr. James Coleman
Mr. Peter Harvey
�2.
TONKON, TORP. OALIN. OAAAMAOLIKC L 6007H
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
May 19, 196b
John Rosenfeld
Tonkon, Torp, Galen, Marmaduke b Booth
1800 Orbanco Building
1001 S. W. Fifth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204-1162
RE: Penn Woods Subdivision (SD 17-79)
Dear Mr. Rosenfeld:
When we spoke on 17 May, 1.986, I said that the P2puty DeputyCity
Attorney was preparing a response to your 10 April, 1986 letter
and would contact you directly. 1 also mentioned that the lack
of response to your letter was due to the workload being
particularly heavy with the City Attorney out of. town.
Obviously, you have a sense of urgency regarding Penn Woods
Subdivision that has not been fault since 1980. It must be
equally obvious that the response to your 10 April letter must
come fl-om the Deputy City Attorney and that she will complete
it at her earliest opportunity. In other words, I do not
recommend that you ' . . . assume that the interpretation of my
letter dated April 10, 1986 has been accepted and will proceed
on that t)asis', as stated in your 15 May, 198b letter.
Sincerely,
0 aA 1 _ C 4,' ft.�
Topaz Fa 1kner
Planni q Director
.18511` - TF/nlas
cc: Peter C. Harvey, City Manager
Sandra Duffy, Deputy City Attorney
C9
C-1 I -Vo -o\o
A PPea-i
J
;4N NllkIII tiIAII tilkl l l I`t0\1 1,I 11( 1 Ikl\ 1610 1 NKI ,) I)kl(.ON 10114 1'.0114)If. 1110
j....
70NKON. TORP, GALEN. MARMADUKE 6 BOOTH ..
,.AW
O►rtC[f V w
l
j[rrw[T .[N[T
1000 ORIDANCO BUILDING AL�[wT N i[NN [OT
t0..0. IOOI S.W. rlrTN AVCNUC
MARK F. LANOLIN
nw•-.��'
PORTLAND. OREGON 87204-IIE2 •Awe[[ �. �t ON•
DON N MARMADV.['
•
1603122< IAwO
t[�-T � V [�• WII-l1A04 r. MAwTSON, Jw•
so, ct a s[ -.-.a
MICHAEL M. MORGAN'
"t\ IS S;Ar.
JANET C. N[VMAN
M.wC a BOCCI JON W. NICKEL,
�-A. 6 •CCT.• INOOL► NOTO
S tL.A O•OW. AM, Jost*. pt DtwStw
w A.
M.
r..w.
w:r., May 27, 1986 JOHN SCOTT 0. 0. 1EIDMIDMwN SAND
lC,w ..: O.[CN MAN•
SUSAN A. SMITH
KENNETH 0.
Nt
[ .A.M[s rw[D[wIC. N.TOORP
C A., , -t` -681%
.Ct •+e, Aw
J06[P. S. v0.Owl L'
%
MARJ OwT A.wAu
—.-It.. •. C ow 1O 1-0.
CERTIFIED MAIL -
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ms. Rosemary Mader
City Recorder
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97039
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision's
SD 17-79
Dear Ms. Mader:
This letter is regarding the preliminary plat of
the Penn Woods Subdivision, previously approved by the
Planning Commission and the City Council. The City now
claims that the preliminary plat approval has lapsed, and
must be resubmitted. I believe that the original approval
is still effective and that the plat need not be resub-
mitted.
Enclosed is a copy of my letter dated April 10,
1986 to Ms. Topaz Faulkner responding to her letter to
Mr. Bill Siewert dated March 20, 1986, a copy of which is
also enclosed. I still have not received a written response
t.o my letter of April 10, which indicates that if the City
does not agree with my interpretation of the issue, it
should consider the letter a request for a formal inter-
pretation of the relevant Coda sections.
Also enclosed is a copy of my letter dated May 15,
1086 outlining my fru;:ti-at ing attempts to get a response
from the City. Finally, 36 days after my letter., I received
C.6
�. -a k4"N 4� p
C- 3 P
Ms. Rosemary Mader
May 27, 1981
Page Two
a telephone call from Ms. Sandra Duffy. She said that the
City agreed with the conclusion of Ms. Faulkner, and not
with my letter of April 10. I told Ms. Duffy that I would
like a formal decision immediately, so that I could begin
the appeals process. Ms. Duffy said that the earliest she
could provide me with a written decision would be May 23,
1986. I have yet to receive the written decision. It is
now 47 days after my letter of April 10 (and many months
after my initial contacts with the City regarding the status
of the plat).
I asked Ms. Duffy whether I could consider her
oral response a decision by the City Manager so that I could
begin the appeals process. She said that she was acting as
the agent for the City Manager, and that I could treat the
oral decision as such.
Please consider this letter a notice of appeal of
the oral decision relayed to me by Ms. Duffy.
Enclosed is a letter dated November 23, 1983 from
Ms. Sandy Young, former Planning Director of the City of
Lake Oswego, summarizing the facts in this case. One fact I
would add at this time is that I was never sent a copy of
the letter dated September 17, 1980 from the county surveyor
regarding two minor errors in the plat.
Ms. Young's letter of November 23, 1983 lists
seven steps for obtaining the final plat approval for Penn
Woods. Resubmitting the preliminary plat is not one of
those steps. Apparently, at some time between November 23,
1983 and the present, Ms. Young's decision was changed
(without any notice to the owners of the subdivision what-
soever). Our reliance on the City's representations in its
letter of November 23, 1983, has already resulted in one
lawsuit regarding the development status of the property.
since the City has not formerly replied to my
letter of April 10, 1986, it is difficult to address its
justification for requiring a resubmittal of the premliminar.y
plat.. From my conversations with Ms. Faulkner and Ms. Duffy,
however, 1 have heard nothing to refute the arguments in my
letter of April 10, 1986. Specifically, there is and was
nothing in the 1,nke Oswego Code requiring approval of an
offici.11 pint by any given date. All that was required was
pTcparltion and submission of an official plat by a speci-
fied date, which was in fact achieved.
15
IONKON, TO RP, G At r N, N4I40144110K 1 A 0001H
Ms. Rosemary Mader
May 27, 1986
Page Three
eal of the City
Commission pursuant to
Please consider this letter an ao which will
Manager's decision to tand notifynning me of the body
LOC 48.025 and 48.830, the hearing,
hear the appeal, and the date of
veryl truly Y04TS
John H. osenfe
JHR:kju
Enclosures
cc: Ms. Topaz Faulkner
(w/o enc.)
Mr. Jim Coleman
(w/o enc.)
IUNKL?N, TORS', UALCN, 1„NApM^0"! A ®lJUl/l
01-Y OF LAKE 0SWVC0
June' 2, 1 qfl(,
Mr. John H. Rosenfeld
Attorney at Law
1S00 Orbanco Buildinq
1001 SW Fifth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204-1162
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
(SD 17-79)
:`ear Mr. Rosenfeld :
This letter is a response to your letters of April 10, 198(.
(to which Ms. Faulkner and I have already given you verbal
responses), May 15, 1986 (to which Ms. Faulkner responded in
writing on May 19, 1986) and May 27, 1986.
I agree that you submitted, in a timely manner, an official
plat which, had it been approved, would have become the final
plat for SD 17-79. However, the September 17, 1980 letter from
the Clackamms County Surveyor's Office (copy enclosed) is a
rejection of your plat. You will note that a copy was sent. to
:)avid Evans & Associates, Inc., your engineers. It is the
City's position that notice to the engineers was notice to you
that the official plat was inadequate. It is my understanding
that you did not make the minor corrections to the official plat.
or pui si)v the project. because of the economic climate. We
zannot Allow vOu to simply make those c()rrections and file the
f inal Milt . 1-0 49.100(3) prohibits any sul\division plat from
being r ernrdod ;ln l ess it has 11cen approved pup slant trl Chapter
49 ( 1981 Devel pinent. Ordinance anti Standards) .
It i!-, still the City's pO!:ltinn that 1.00 44.310 (1978
oninq ('<ul(') I OtluireF, thi,; r(• r:uhnlis�,;iun b(IC,III -- C iv) approvable
final pl'It w,ls subnlit t ed within the-tq)(•ci f ie'l time. 1 inlit and
your M—i(lirlr+l hlr- limin.ity plat approval it; vrl,�i. 'Thus, you have
Ilo }-Irr'linlin,fly Mat '11"prnval which frills within the }IrOt('c-tion
l.(lt
:f '.f l:lll♦!\11 'IK111 11, ISI (1111(I WI\ tO. 111 fl't11(,tl tIKi ''. r udi'.
June 2, 1986
Mr. John H. Rosenfeld
Page 2 September 15,
plat approvals prior to Sep
grandfathering preliminary P s limited to Design
1981. Additionally,
that Code section i- approvals. your
approved b the Planning Commission.
Review Board (now
Deveyo ment Review Board PP
project was aper you
had
LOC 44.310 does not apply to Your fact situation as y
roved final plat.
no approved portions of
will require a resubmission of thosro. ons
The City new Code p
visi
your application which are affected by
project or theuirement
and/or changed conditionsYoufwereninformo foCettasswelgl as in
surrounding properties. 00 p.m• in y
on February 27, 1986 at 2:
subsequent. t.elephppe conversations with Ms. Faulkner an me
Manager regardingy
This letter is the decisionf �lrsuantyto LOC 49.630.our
1986
SD 17-79 from which you may appealp
appeal received by the City Recorder oono ache decision
28,
notice of aPP 4lhile I agree that I informed y the
is premature. ou told me you were treating
of the City Manager orally, Y appealable
as an appealable decision rather than awaiting
"oral decision You that it was an
this letter. I did not tell
decision or that you should treat it as such
•
Very truly yours,
Sandya Huffy
DePuty City Alto",
SD:rm
Doc. No. 2512c
CC . Ms. ToPa7 F1tl \'.ih1.
7
`3'•''!
1 (A
'L\TER E 1MLw L
punt) Sunc� o•
LC» h A ROBINSON
.Irput\ Sur.cyof
..
0 U
CO U NT .r •
CKA1\1AS
SURF FF10E
• D o•.
Mr. Rorcrt F, Anptnan, City Engineer
City of 111'e Oswero
F. 0. Fox 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97030
Septe-mher 17, 1990
Room 706. Ha.,dint Build1nl
511 Alain Snce.
C1 tgc�n City, Ok 97045
Ft.unc 655 B60C
RECEIVE®
SEP 2 2 taw
CITY Vt J,' VFGo
DIP1, U PUBLIC WORKS
Pear Sir: �– --�
Ve are prepared to sign approval of the sybdivision plat PUP,' WOODS^ t'. A—t-
A R.EPLAT OF LOT 5-A b PORTION OF LOT 6, "CHUM CIRCLE",�ituated�in
Section 15, T. 2 S., R. 1 E., h`.Y., after the following corrections
and/or chanFes have been rade in the field and on the tracing and
hard board:
1. Our field check revealed one monument, not srt,
on the eastern end of a 20' radius curve in tract 4.
2. The map of tract 5, dcricts a radius of 1175.95'
on the curve alor.- Cornell Street extension; thr
surve•yor's certificate states, 1175.92'.
In addition, nonur-cnts were found dividing tract 5 into two parts;
the northern part being called "tract A". If these mono;,Aents are no
10nFer needed, pcil,aps tt,ev should be ICr,nved to avoid later confusion.
1.AF 10,
c 01,V : U.wi C Inc .
okii s t rulS ,
I I d' A. 1. ; i T0,On, UenutY
ecninty !ml vvy N -pat trent
W
EXHIBI?
TONKON,TORP, GALEN.MARMADUKE &BOOTH
LAW OrrICES
CERTIFIED MAIL --
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
City Recorder
City of Lake Oswego •- 1
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
SD 17-79
Dear Ms. Mader:
Enclosed are the materials which you returned tto
ette
f
me by letter dated June 2, 1.986, including le Faulkner
you dated May 27, 1986, (ii) copy Y letter to
Sated April 10, 1986, (iii) copy of letter from Ms. Faulkner
a lkner
to Bill Siewert dated March 20, 1986, (iv) copy Y
to Ms. raulkner datedMay 15, 1986, and (v) copy of letter
from Sandra M. Young, Planning Director, to Mr. Siewert
dated November 23, 1983. I have now received the written
decision of the Deputy' City Attorney on behalf of the City
Manager dated June 2, 1986. Please coniderhatdthisionis letter and
the enclosed materials as an app
eal of I will briefly respond to Ms. Duffy's letter of
June 2, 1986:
1, The letter incorrectly states that the reason
I did not make the minor corrections to the official plat
was because of the economic climate. The reason I did not
make the changes is becatl;e I did not know about them.
C.
C 1 , m. — o to P Ppe a�
L'ti 9P'�
�i
puILDING
J[rrRtT
1000 ORSANCO
ALSCRT N ACNN[D`
W04L RI TpNf ON
IOOI S. w. rIFTH AVENUE
yA11111 T. L[ROUM
w•oa•aaA
GJRTLAND, OREGON 97104-1162
•AR•t[ S_LTON'
QON N MARMADURC•
qt--. a YwtR'
t5031221 1440
WILLIAM r. MARTSON. •'R•
LSC[ i L[wN,NO
Mi CNA[L N. MORGAN'
S •, •L.Arw
JAN[T C N[UMAN
MaK • **CC
4 1986
JON M. M GRIL'
• ` •oOT•
June ,
1NGOLr NOTO
STyART K •ROrM
ANV JOf [PN PCD lRSC
e...pT... J CO..-
10"'N C. PCRR•
NARw .-Cuf N'NO
JOHN N.,,OS[NrELO
�{,; ..� l rR0'+'••'►`[R'
SCOTT G. SCIDMAN
r�+Mf J GAIIN'
R'�w ►..,0 L ORC Ir MAN'
SUSAN A. LMITN
ACNNCTN O.fTCPN[NS
J[r+Tt(v t NARr[f
JS PRICA N.TORP
GA.RI^, D[T N'Ofe
JOSEPH S. VOSORI L•
.,e[� • ►AP LAw'
MARJ Ort, A. WALL
CERTIFIED MAIL --
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
City Recorder
City of Lake Oswego •- 1
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
SD 17-79
Dear Ms. Mader:
Enclosed are the materials which you returned tto
ette
f
me by letter dated June 2, 1.986, including le Faulkner
you dated May 27, 1986, (ii) copy Y letter to
Sated April 10, 1986, (iii) copy of letter from Ms. Faulkner
a lkner
to Bill Siewert dated March 20, 1986, (iv) copy Y
to Ms. raulkner datedMay 15, 1986, and (v) copy of letter
from Sandra M. Young, Planning Director, to Mr. Siewert
dated November 23, 1983. I have now received the written
decision of the Deputy' City Attorney on behalf of the City
Manager dated June 2, 1986. Please coniderhatdthisionis letter and
the enclosed materials as an app
eal of I will briefly respond to Ms. Duffy's letter of
June 2, 1986:
1, The letter incorrectly states that the reason
I did not make the minor corrections to the official plat
was because of the economic climate. The reason I did not
make the changes is becatl;e I did not know about them.
C.
C 1 , m. — o to P Ppe a�
L'ti 9P'�
�i
Ms. Rosemary A. Mader
June 4, 198b
Page Two
2. The corrections purported to be required by
the surveyor consist of one miscuing monument and a misstate-
ment of a radius by .03. This cannot be the type of error
which causes $10,000 of ground work to be lost.
3, Ms. Duffy's letter says that "we cannot allow
you to simply make those corrections and file the final
plat". There is ample latitude in the Code to allow the
filing of this plat. It is simply that the City has arbi-
trarily decided not to allow it.
4. There is nothing in the Lake Oswr:go Code
stating that the surveyor's letter constitutes a "rejection
of your plat". This is a subjective conclusion unsupported
by the law.
5. The City and County had no authority to treat
David Evans as my agent for purposes of. complying with the
City Code. HP is an engineer, not a lawyer.
Please let me know immediately which body will be
hearing this appeal, and the date of the lleaiing.
Very truly yours, /
John ll. Rosenfeld
JHR:kju
Enclosures
cc: Ms. Sandra Duffy
Ms. Topaz Faulkner
,). o
1 C)N KON, 10tW. 0All N. MA14M AD11K, L fi 001N
September 25, 1979
Of the Council of the Citv of Lake uswt'{W was convened at 7:30 PID
A regular meeting or N. Campbell, Councilmen Marquis,
in the City Council Chambers. Present were May City Manager Pete Harvey, City
Neely, Avery, Henderson, Glaze and R. Campbell,
Attorney Jim Coleman and staff members.
MINUTE.- Regular Council meeting of September 1N, 1979.
. - 6
Moved by
Councilman llenderson; seconded by Councilman Avery that the minutese
approved as written. It was so ordered.
IV. PUBLIC Ht:_ ARINGS _ Pe Subdivision'
Public hearing on request for approval of preliminary plat attor-
rLt or H. Campbell called attention to an encs letter from Gregory
R. Mowe,
y
ted
he letter was not received until
Sarah Hrtrlan and four other re sident�taef the
City who would be affecetin y
my for S or noted t
tite proposed development• The May riot to this me g
September 24th, and several Council members had not seen i ecp inFs that have taken
resettled the staff report, commenting on the. m
Pat Barnum p Comm The proposed 9-10t single
place and the involvement of the Conservancy
Planning Commission with nine conditions,
subdivision was approved by ect to those conditions.
family royal by the City Council t;ubj
reviously furnished to Council. In
and staff now rcc°mt"ctt`jed app Council members direc-
tor . Barnum Tvad into the record the exhibits
cs tp ing diagram)
regarding the extent
addition, lie circulated Exhibit "1Ination given the
ted question:; to D1r. Barnum, and etDititi~tctivemN tural.sArea designation g
and location of � the ravine
inand
plle
property in the. Comprehensive
n.
'lh_e public he 3trint was op,encd.
ro ,crty . explained to
,rOpert. as docs t.ltat of Mr. G;►rtung, his
Cohn Ru:,tnirld °f Urvon lune, oar of the owner.; of sub}ect p {
Council that his rr:;idence abut:; the 1 { y plan has; been to
part.nt r.
llr reviewed actions to date ott this op project
Iletl sta l dt t.lic pt he at;d It un-
partner a�;rrr with staff conditions fol, dive l
„ of the property, Icuvinit the fragile section
cluc,t0r the 1•uilding.s tlt t.l,e reserve B5-90% of the trees.
touched. Hr added that the. plan would p
93B NW Fvrrct t StTo, t't , �;polcr on hi'h;tl f of Mrs,sr`;.
VI varies from very steep alon}; Cornell
l`hil il, 'l'ltt�ml� ; n, ;+ethic rc t , lie said the 9
Rosetticicl ;trt.l Galt on},• Hr said the' 1 1 y, will Thompson
to rel :ttivcly lt!vrl t"w,riatlet'focrhthc•t,stittttandtteal5i11� hulIdal,tlttr Mr. {'
lot:; pr;,l,t,::rd art` ltl'Prt 1
• t'tl
(lilt ion:; frt,nt Crnutcit nhtutt the puttrnt ial runof 1 and ltow it will ,t•
1
han.l l rd .
i;t r{, M„w,• tttlll :;1d `,t b St t rt't 1'ut t 1 .tad , {
at t ()Imy tut Sat ah ll;tt 1;tn, 'I,•d
ed
Smith, Poll "Ill Robertson and Kiik,ti'ms`tt,iunr'tdslt,tttt t't tt�t�t 11lrt,tht tt t aitlurltr►ww,
llt• ;tpulu{,i: rd it,t nut :;ubmII 1 inl, tht
not pt
,.;:;tl,lr t,, tit)su. Mr. Mowe t;umntat ford the canteen'' `(t 1!`tt)`,`ul'thu`tti,lit,lito,t`
l) Thert, is +► lai:;t iniac 1Ft Govt redihvt than desir.1111ttit,rttt t t
trot ricer how mu C
2) Thr Ili y hat; severe dt•vt'lopmrnt nl compl ic;tt it>n:; • Ca I -
F,pcat�
3) Under provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, the burden of proof is on the
developer for compliance with the Plan and other standards and requirements.
Mr. Mowe said it is obvious that most of the property is intended to be included
In the Distinctive Natural Area and that the entire property should be so con-
sidered. He proceeded to review the remainder of the 8 -page letter. touching
briefly on each section.
Mr. Mowe offered two exhibits for the record --Council Exhibit "1" (excerpt from
the Physical Resources Inventory headed "Nominations for Distinctive Area") and
Council Exhibit "2" (planning area map and vegetation, soils engineering geology,
erosion and landslide overlays).
Mike Ho&an, owner of property about 400 feet before the entrance to Cornell Court, said
it is unbuildable without sewer, and the Hogans previously deeded 20 feet along
the entire length for the widening of Cornell Road. He said they have owned the
property for twelve years and have been unable to do anything with it. He sugges-
ted that the owners of the proposed subdivision might wish to purchase it for a park.
ill Robertson of 118 Larch Street did not object to the project but insisted that
adequate steps be taken to handle the potential drainage problem. He described the
hazards, particularly to school children, and said specific guidelines are needed on
what is to be done, how and when.
Maxine Jones, who lives on the lower end of Devon Lane, arid Donald Pope of 223
Cornell Court elaborated on the road hazards and the drainage problems in subject
area.
':ark lRlis,'who lives on Cornell directly across from Larch, showed slides which
verified the drainage problems and the hazardous configuration of Cornell Road.
losr�It Voboril, atte;-nev for the applicants, commented coil the Distinctive Natural
Area designation of the property ltnd the condition of Cornell Road. He disputed
Ole statement of Mr. Mowe that there should not be any development on the subject
property, saying the proposed plan show; remarkable serlsIttvity. lie said his clientr<
w-ould agree to Condition No. 1 that there will not be an increase in water runoff.
He felt the: traffic impact oil Cornell would not be appreciable. lie added that since
it is 11 collector, ativ problem~ should he addressed on an area -wide basis.
Faul HL!k1tc,s, registered engineer and geologist, said sonic sort of water detention
will be necessary, an.i there is n place for it. He noted that the drainape_ ditch on
%.orncll will have to Iv improved. Mr. 1111glie" said that althottp.h there Js'a severe
sail problem 111 tilt .11,,;1, the subject site is frer of landslides with the existing
vegetation cover. 1n Answer to Council que:tionf:. this subject was covered in some
detail by Mr. Hughes and the Director of Public Works.
Crv� Mows spoke ag.11n about the landslide potential and said thet e should Ise a
.iemcnlstr,tt 1011 of engineering approval before the plat if: approved.
Messrs. Robertson, F���e and In lis again expressed their' pl l•vious concerns;.
The rubric he;uritlg was closed.
M,wed by Councilman glaze; seconded by Councilman Neely that the preliminary plat
Ot Fenn Woodf; bV approved and that t.ite findings of the Plartning Commission be
Regii1ar Council Meet ing
September 25, 1979 - i.ni,e 2
7L,
adopted subject to the following conditions:
that the developer be required to I,ru(luce a plan sat
Concerning drai`i`y
Engineer that all drainage developed by the aubdivislon
factory to the
the site, and as shown ott the
be retained on istinguished Natural Area,
2) Include as Finding No. 7 that the ll
Comprehensive
Flan and related to this site, be the area within the required
setback lines•
Campbell; seconded by Councilman Marquis that the motion be
Councilman R. Camp with Councilmen Marquis
Moved by Henderson, Glaze and
Firstling No. 7. T_he matiAveLyil.e_
amended to delete
proposed n eS„ and Councilmen Neely,
and R. Campbell voting Y
no •
Mayor 11. Campbell voting �� ilendcrson, Glaze, R. Campbell
„n0„-
_ "Ves" and Councilman Avery votlnF,
The main mc,tion passed with Co unr.ilmc,t Marquis. Neely,
and Mayor il• Campbell voting
to suspend the rules
onded assed tmanlmous]y with all members voting'
Moved by Councilman 1" Cam71 e motion p_-----`. Councilman
very
and proceed to Item V
V. D. Reconsideration of Kruse Oaks ballot measure.
Campbell reviewed past actions on this isStic• included were the de -
Mayor H. Ca { Subsequently,
Lion
cisict
t (if Counci.l in August not to takui�lltionconmtl,daballo f tlSubsegs Iry r c rc.-
lace the Kruse Oaks acq and Art picule p
Commission top regarding a possible
Nancy Murray, President of the LeearedobforeCoUllc reg They
sent IngIIometitte Development, aPP
option to be granted to the Lcague and later transferred ln�°eYl'1nCtime for rcvicu
ty
Cotmcil has been presented with a letter from MS. Murray
were told such option ;;houlc{ he submitted LO t -lit, Cint the option. The Mayor
bef ore this meet lttf'' to till proposed
to the effect that ai;reemerst could not b.: reached e
sire `;eel that: ally discussion that not: ensues must relate off'_
ballot measure- 1979, and sighed
League n{ W"Nmett Vot el—, of West Clackamas County
in de-
Nat1Cv 4lutta� read her letter to the COUncil dated September 2�.
outlin
_....__ ,sidc•rtt o{ the Le. },
b\, her a pre � t ,tri of the of ficial tilt, on this ill taking the f anal
The letter, which i•; 1:
tail tilt,q difference"; which c:attseti the l.eaFue to dec.lde ai,:
option oiit,red•
}ue t
elabu
' nk .l.�sst,lr;utt ul hrl lwuotl, ,tt ttrt�cv tot the I.ea , in his; matt ter,
Ft _..
rat aeol ors the prt,rt,nt at ion m:+dt, by M:.
m ;tit,{ t u Mr . }tun i c•k . Ile asked for
Ail 1'ttul
.•I1 V'tc••.iJrttt of Ilunu•::itr 1!.•v�'l``1't,ent l'.utpur,ttiott, told C.uuuril t. tat
tilt, l.r.t
tt,,.. I4•1 t.•t c:unt, :►�; n :;utpt (>:t, tc t
tt tit in t�•c,,�,�, ,lut Inl; whtclt tht,v ntt,�l,t t,•virw the itu,tt ton.
lt• :,u:p,•u,{ LI" tult,r, and
uttdc.t} 1 %'
t,,ttt,r llut.ut Nrc IY }'hc mut ic?tt l,.t'�t:t,d un;u l
r.un:ic}t,t l:e::c,lutlon
No. R-79-4tt (Charts t lit t icer �;a1Jtt'it,�)
with Jill meutbet.; voting. Z'
Ret,ulJtt Ccuuttcl1clMt)t't
Septrntbrt' 25, i
Lake Oswego Planning Comission
Res File No. SD 17-79, Pennwoods Subdivision
Owneres John Rosenfeld and Leon Gartung
The undersigned, on behalf of both owners, hereby requests a
six month extension to file a final "hardboard" plat of the
approved subdivision. The City Council approved the sub-
division September 25, 1979•
lulu_� E � VV E 0
FEB E6 1980
PLANNING DEPT,
Thank You,
Leon Gartung
Cso
1004, 0 ••RtR
••VC• • •IR NINO
Ow/r • KANR
400001 t CARLr JR
40•10 C GAM.
CA.O, C 011
JC�+w t •a. •.NA,u 171.
MDAs.i • GA �iw
•piIALC L •RtI NYAN
MIC"Atl IS 9401NAR0
0••048 • LTON
"N M IN&SMAOUKt
Tilt LIAM ► MARTSON JK
M-iMai•. M MORGAN
JOA 0 AA,CRCL
.PC-- • 7.0it NItLO
064ftiLl. O •TAPHIN•
i►Oi M T'ONKON
P*4 Vs i,•CK M, TORP
400660. • VO.ORIL
Planning Division
City of Lake Oswego
P. O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon
Gentlemen:
TONKON, TORP & GALEN
LAM OPiICES
1010 PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING
020 B W BIXTM AVENUE
PORTLAND OREGON 87204
March 3, 1980
D
MAR 4 1980
PLANNING DEPT.
97034
Re: File No. SD 17-79: Penn Woods
T11L1-.C1NE 77' 1A•C
ARLA COOS •O•
This is a request for a six month extension for
the filing of a final plat in connection with the above
matter. The extension is needed for the following reasons:
1. We were arranging for the development of the
property with others when economic factors made it impossible
to reach any agreement. This caused a substantial delay in
beginning preparation of the final plat.
2. We arranged for the property to be surveyed.
The surveyor was delayed in beginning the job because of the
inclement weather, including the ice storms. Although the
weather has somewhat improved, the debris from the ice storms
has made it impossible for our surveyor to complete his task.
We assure you that. we are moving forward in preparing
the final plat and will have it filed within the six month
extension, if it is granted. After the much time and effort
we spentin obtaining preliminary plat approval, it would be
extremely unfortunate to lose that on account of conditions
outside of our control.. Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
John H. Ro'senf ld
JHH:mms 7-1
cc: Leon Gartung
�lop P-A�
TONKON, TORP, GALEN, MARMADUKE b BOOTH
LAW Of I1GES
Mr. Dennis Everson i`� rI
Department of Environmental
Services of Clackamas County CITY OF SAKE GS'rRK
902 Abernathy Road DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
Oreg6n City, Oregon 97045
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
Dear Mr. Everson:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation
today regarding the Penn Woods subdivision located on Tax
Lots 3100 and 3201, Tax Map 2S lE 15BA, and adjacent to
Cornell Street in Lake Oswego, Oro9,,�n .
I telephoned you because some questions had been
raised regarding what improvements the County might require
to Cornell Street, a county road, in order to approve the
Penn Woods plat. You said that you were now aware that the
preliminary plat for the subdivision had been approved by
the City Council cif Lake Oswego on September 25, 1979, and
that the City Council then determined that the only improvement
required for Cornell Street would be a possible widening by
up to two feet. For your reference, I will quote the specific
language from the Findings, Conclusions and Order of the
I,.,Ke Oswego Planning Commission (File SD 17-79) which were
adopted by the City Council:
',The Appl i(,ant improve Coi nel l Street by widening
the street by up to two ieet. for the entire length
o1 the subdivision, with the final width and type
of improvement to be determined by the City Engineer."
C' 1 2--
lil,p pe -x\ (7-Vr)
1000 OROANCO mU1LDINO
••w•[[ • LNUN,
•t YA• • ••waw'
1001 fj W FIiTM AVENUE
DON N rAwr AOvw[•
Hui[ i •lwNiNO
/ MAwf •OF Jw•
,_,r,(„ •. •rw
PORTLAND, OREGON 97ROA-116t
AR w rpwp •N•
MIIC"AR
•,w •w • •Oof N•
IO031 ttl•IAwO
4AN97 C NIUMAN
1•. ww• r •oo.N
JON W NlCwll•
.AN a t'*.,NO
INOOII NOVO
.a t DANL
owwlN w oNwaN
• f•t•to Doo•
G.A. D pill...
Aril 25, 1984
JUNK N w
•
E�
n %VVN
•coo I.O AN
A(FN(7N D •f lwN[Nl
NAfIw N 7N0MA5N0W
.t-4. [ N A. -LS
NO[ M 70N•0N
. •wc. t'f • NI•••
/p[O[wiCA N fOw.
mac• -.t, w Naw►wc
JoswN l voaow,i•
.Zt. S. •ALAN
MARJOwt A WALL
• •ti• fAA.Ow•. co• P""O'
RECEIVE!?
Mr. Dennis Everson i`� rI
Department of Environmental
Services of Clackamas County CITY OF SAKE GS'rRK
902 Abernathy Road DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
Oreg6n City, Oregon 97045
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision
Dear Mr. Everson:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation
today regarding the Penn Woods subdivision located on Tax
Lots 3100 and 3201, Tax Map 2S lE 15BA, and adjacent to
Cornell Street in Lake Oswego, Oro9,,�n .
I telephoned you because some questions had been
raised regarding what improvements the County might require
to Cornell Street, a county road, in order to approve the
Penn Woods plat. You said that you were now aware that the
preliminary plat for the subdivision had been approved by
the City Council cif Lake Oswego on September 25, 1979, and
that the City Council then determined that the only improvement
required for Cornell Street would be a possible widening by
up to two feet. For your reference, I will quote the specific
language from the Findings, Conclusions and Order of the
I,.,Ke Oswego Planning Commission (File SD 17-79) which were
adopted by the City Council:
',The Appl i(,ant improve Coi nel l Street by widening
the street by up to two ieet. for the entire length
o1 the subdivision, with the final width and type
of improvement to be determined by the City Engineer."
C' 1 2--
lil,p pe -x\ (7-Vr)
Mr. Dennis Everson
April 25, 1984
page Two
You confirmed that the County had no power and
would not attempt to require any improvements to Cornell
Street as a prerequisite to the recording of the p
lat and
the development of the subdivision, except
is
the
is required by the Dake Oswego City Eng p that
above quoted language. You also veering plansforintersection
your office must approve the engineering p treet, and the plan for
of the subdivision road and Cornell S
nell Street. you so
any sewer or ot.her lines sentering uch orents disrupt Cornell
said that to the ext
Street, the developer will be required to restore the roa
Ve�/_ tru 1 y o
/
J 0)tt) FI . Ro e n f,.l d
JIlR:oyb
cc: Ms. Sandra M. Young, AICD
planning Director
City of I,ake Oswego
p.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Mr. 11i I1 ,,iewert
Mt;.. Neth Biet.z
Mr . D1�v id E�lens
11 111 M 4 1 N 1 1 1111., l 4 IS W I N H• II IA 0, 1111 M 1 !. ,, 1' 1 1 1 11
4�
CI -VY of LAKE oSwV-GO
To: Planni nq CornM s$i on
From: Sandra Duffy, Asst City Attorney
Re: Pennwoods preliminary plat approval
Date: July 24, 1986.
At the July 14, 1986 meeting you requested:
1. A checklist of what the 1978 statutes required for final
platting
2. A checklist of requirements of the current code
3. Matching of the 1978 requirements with the 1.986
requirements
4. A check -off list. with the official record for
compliance with flatting requirements.
First, T have set �,ut the relevant 1978 code sections
as wrll as .a statement as to whether the official record evidences
comf\l i,tttce with these section. ;second, i have set out the relevant
1979-80 ORS ',Octiotts �tnd a �statement re(iarding compliance. A
review of the pry`:;t,nt ORS t t`yllirvment.s :;luow only minor changes
(ex. only a crrt .i t ied sur%I0%'or IS new allowed to prepare a
f i lta 1 plat , wh i 1 t• pl ev.iou.; l y all rrltl i nt. er could also) Third,
1
have ,rt telt thr lttrsent rc.lrvant 1.Oi' pi..ovi.sions which
olw i t�\I:: l y t10 t t`tlu i reg eluant i t at ive-,ly more information ,-end/or
prt�ct`tiut vs. 1 t wa: ju:;t tc��� t imr cotl:,tnni rut to do a thus:ough
an,tlysi;; of. thi aCtu.t.t tiilt��tt�nceS ttut the engineering staff has
provit.lo"t a fait ly ct>mhtc`h\`n:;tve "for .;t;trt:;.
1 .have also
P Pea,
{11',`,ltNlll\1\II `•INI11 I'tt\11111111 IU 1\ th'1 I\11 It\\\II.'I tINI(,On'I/llld IAW1,th UMI
-2 -
analyzed other codes and statuses which support a review of this
preliminary plat.
(1) LOC (1978)
a) Requirement:
44.310 Must be submitted within six months from approval of preliminary plat.
The official plat must be prepared and submitted within six (6) months following
the approval given on the preliminary plat by the planning commission and city
council and it shall incorporate the recommendations and conditions made by the
commission and any made by the city council. If the owner or subdivider wishes to
proceed with the subdivision of his land after the expiration of the six (6) month
period following the approval of the preliminary plat, he must resubmit his prelim-
inary plat to the planning commission and make any revisions considered necessary
by the planning commission and city council to meet choNed conditions. (Ord. No.
565, Sec. 5; 54-58. Ord. No. 1176, Sec. 3; 8-1547.)
C��r,ri>1 iance�? m'Iybe-
City COU",::il approved preliminary plat on September 25,
1979. Final plat z;ubmittod Auqust 10, 1980 after approval
of 6-mOnt11r. oxtension of time by Planning Commission. Tf
planning Commis:;ion acted within their authority, the
requircinont_ was met. Tlie code provides for no extension
and t1le 1 3nyu.�ge of LOC 44.310 is mandatory ("plat must be
prepared and submitted within six months').
h) • Rok:i1r r r ('111011t. :
44.320 Preparation and form.
The final plat shall be submitted in the form requi-ed by these regulations and
state laws including Oregon Revised Statutes 92.08G and 92. 120 for plats of record.
(Ord. No. 565, Sec. 5; 5-.6-58.)
-3 -
Compliance`:' S e all other
LO120 requirements and
requirements under ORS 92.080 and
<.) 1�e.quirement:
330 Information required.
addition to that specified by state law, the following infarmotion shell be
In
shown on the final plat:
(1) Date, northpoint and scale of drawing.
(2) Legal description of the trvct boundaries. subdivider, engineer or surveyor,
(3) Name and address of the owner or owners,
and land planner or landscape architect.
4 Tract boundary lines► right-of-woy and centei lines ofasd"ea c anPoi nts of cur -
lot alleys and
lines with dimensions. bearinas or deflection angleshall be shown to the nearest
voture and tangent boarings. All bearings and angles
ten seconds and all dimensions to the nearest one-,undredth foot.
(5) Dimensions and purpose of all easements.
(6) Any building setback lines if sees restrictive
than residential he city lots, o e ded nee.
(7) Location and purpose for which
icated or reserved.
ther arras for public use' dedicated without any reserva
(8) Easements and any o
-
tion or restriction whatever.
(9) A copy o{ any decd restriction in addition to t�e deed c.ovenonts required y
10C ".630 written on the face of the plot or prepared to record with the plat with
references on the face of the plot.to feu
(a) All impn>vement+ tlre•the action been nofed in the planning commission"
om m'issio'n g vyngr con-
(a)
of these regulations and
ditionol approval of the preliminary plat, or
(b) A mond or certif ird check has bcen,lPoso posted,
all which
requiiredr',mp overnenh.
city si,d in sufficient amount to ns c rT
The bond or certified check shall be delivered on t�rnnd'thteen months iromther
complete the imi�rrwerr,ents required by this chapter,
g
date• on which such plat is filed in the. Ror�of theld Of n Plot's of roveme 1 tcannotrbe maderlo�he
opinion of the city council t},c con,t�l _t of
account of adverse weather or adver�e construction conditions, it may in its discre-
iod ic,r c.,mpletion of improvements for not more than two suc:ces
tion extend the per `
sive %Ix -month periods t�, prpvide on additional
rthe bendiuction er deposit ofnCertBred chock is
irnf,rwcme Itt may E>e cor„t,leted, Prov 5--b-5b.
continued in effect for such periods of
No.r1132C Sec. 3; 9--20-66 )• 5;
Ord. No. 1103, Sec. 1, 2-20
-4-
,�NDITIONS OF APpR- OVAL
�,i�, Commission further concludes that the following conditiont
The Pian g compliance with City
should be attached to approval of the req
uest, to assure
and Comprehensive Plan policies and with good design criteria:
Codes a that
on-site storm water detention methods be otic=d if feasible but,
. That ----. - -
is not feasible, downstream effects be accom„odated to the ..tis
faction
the City Engineer.
Z, That no
direct access from any of the propose`' lots to Cornell Street
be allowed. sho,�n as
3• That the City be given
a drainage
r_1 �age_eas�ent over.. the pr-�.rt'y__-----`.
Tract— W� on the pi, t.
e widened to 25
line of the hammerhead
bright-of-way ^J____—._---
4. That the northerly --
e required s`
et fr`ontayc
feet to provide thfor lot 5•
5, Sin conformance with tile s
e Street Standard
That Pennwood treet be improved
Ordinance.
G. That special setbacks as shown on Exhibit
'Bit be required_,to protect_existing
setbacks.
slopes, _
i n additio.__n to required zoning _
.___-----------
feet of additional right-of-way be dedicated along -CO""'" Street_
). That 5 -- -to two
widening the street by LIV) ,
$, The applicant improve Cornell Street by
feet for the entire length of the subdiv, with the' l width and
to be determined by the Crty
[nq n�•er.
type of improvement
hr. City Attornr•Y to determine
9.
lilt! appl ica"et is ' `•`t`iit ed to work with t
MIM
Compliance? No.
-, review by the engineering staff indicates that
LOC 44.330 (5) (7) (8) and (9) are not met in the submitted
final plat as follows:
1. The setbacks are not dimensioned.
2. The dimensions of the easements are not on the plat
and some whole easements are missing.
3. There is an access restriction (no access on Cornell)
which is not stated on the face of the plat.
4. There is a slope protection and stream corridor
protection restriction which is not shown on the face of the
plat.
There are also plat requirements in the conditions of
approval which are not in the plat as follows:
1. Condition #2 is not met; a note should be placed
on the plat.
2. Condition #3 is not met; there most be a "public"
drainage easement 30' in width (does not go to top of banks).
3. Condition 46 is not met; no dimensions.
4. Condition #8, if followed verbatim may not allow
for widening Cornell up to 20' which is current minimum.
d) Requirement:
44.340
The subdivider shall file the original drawings, the cloth copy and at least one
print of the final plat and any supplementary information with the secretory of the
planning commission. The secretary shall promptly suF.nit the plat to the city en-
gineer.
Ccll,j)Iiance ? Prohahl}. The official fila does not
reveal to whom the f incl plat was submit:tc�d.
However, a hard copy 0i the plat and certifications
and mylars of the plat and certifications are in the
City hlanninq mp,rrtmrnt.
e) Requirement:
44.350 Review by city engineer.
The city engineer shall examine it and the supplementary information to deter-
mine that the subdivision as shown is substantially the some as it appeared on the
approved preliminary plat and as required by this chapter and that the plot as pre-
pared is technically correct. the city engineer shall submit said plat to the county
surveyor of the county of Clackamas for checking of the plat for mathematical ac-
curacy and to determine that all distances, angles, bearings and other data shown
within the plat are correctly calculated and to determine if the plat and computa-
tions comply with the provisions of ORS 92.050. After said check and report by the
county surveyor the plat shall be returned to the city engineer
who shall, if necessary, submit said plat to the planning com-
mission for signature as provided for in this chapter. (Ord.
No. 565, Sec. 61 5-6-58. Ord. No. 1203; 3-19-68.)
Compliance ? Partial. The City Engineer did riot
sign of f,�,the final plat and them is nothing in the
file to indicate that he examined it and determined
that it complied with this provision. However, it is
clear that. the�ity 1:ngineer did submit the plat to
the Clackamas County surveyor for the necessary
checks. (See ORS 92.050 requirement below.) The
City Engineer did riot suhmit the returned plat to the
Planninq Commission.
-7 ._
f) Requirement:
I
44.355 Approval by planning commission. .
Approval of the final plat shall be indicated by the
signa'.ure of the president of the planning commission and, as
requ-ire3-by dregon Revised Statutes 97.100, by the city
engineer. (Ord. No. 565, Sec. 6; 5=�
Compliance: No. The plat was never signed by the
President of the Planning Commission. (See ORS
92.100 requirement below.)
g) Re uire;irl�Ilt:
44.360 Approval by engineer and president only.
_If the. gity-_engineer determines that__the__in�l__plat is in
full conformance with the approved preliminary plat and other
- -----------
regul-ations, h�11_JQ adyje_th!__p resident of the planning
commission. The president of the planning commission and the
city_engineer-_--_ -- the then 5,xcP --the- plat -without f urth_er actio by
the Planning commission. Yf the final lat is not in full
formance or if the cit en ----"'�-- 4n -
y gincer elects, he shall submit the
Plat to the planning i__
P q__cvmmx,,sion. If the frna-1 plat. is referred
to the president for signature without submission to the plan-
ning commission, the president may elect to submit the plat to
the planning commission for further review. When submitted to
the planning commission, approval of the final plat shall be by
a majority of those present. if the plat is signed without
further review by the planning commission, the action Shall t,e
reported to t.hc. planning commission by the pr.-(�:;ident of the
couunissic)n at tt:e next regular meeting. In the absence of the
t,r e:ijc9ont, his duties and powers with respect to action on
`
final plats shall be vested in thea vice-president. (Ord. No.
lb5, Sec. 6; 5-6-58.)
ME
Compliance? No. (City's duty). There was never a
determination that the final plat was in full
conformance with the approved project, thus the
president of the Planning Commission was not so
advised or his (her) signature obtained. It is clear
that the final plat was not in full conformance and
it was required to be resubmitted to the Planning
Commission. The official file does not indicate that
action ever took place. I believe this is one basis
upon which to require a resubmission of the
preliminary plat to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission can then request an evaluation in
light of changed code and conditions.
(2) OKs (1979-80)
��) Requirement:
92.050 Requirements of survey and
plat of subdivision. M No subdivider shall
submit a plat of a subdivision for record, until
all the requirements for the survey and the
plat e subdivision have been met.
(2) The survey for the plat of the subdivi-
sion shall be of such accuracy that the error of
closure shall not exceed one foot in 4,000 feet.
(3) The Bey acid plat of the subdivision
shall be made by a surveyor who is a regis-
tered engineer or a licensed land surveyor.
(4) The plat of a subdivision shall be of
such scale that all survey and mathematical
inf ormation, and all other details may be
clearly and legibly shown thereon. Each lot
shall be numbered and each block shall be
lettered or numbered• The lengths of all
boundaries of each lot shall be shown- Fach
street shall be named.
(5) The locations and description' of all
monuments shall he carefully rm) ded upon
all plats and the pmper
courses �own distances
of all boundary r
I Amended 6y 1%5 c_75b 4101
1986 adds 209.250
Not engineer C.,,I�h. -
C1 z.o70
'b aok ;ISO
Com2liance? No. This statute requires an accurate,
recordable plat be prepared. There was a minor error
on the distance of a boundary line noted by the
County Surveyor (Exhibit ), thus subsection (5)
was, not met.
j. till( IL�4 . )
r1 G-
►til>�C(� ��'tt,tltlLlO��.
S-UlYaL oU�yl (t) (,n a-*'Tf
-10-
b) Ree u i r. ement =
92.060 Marking certain points of
plat_, with monuments; specifications of
monuments. (1) The initial point of all subdi-
vision plats shall be marked with a rtionu-
ment., either of stone, concrete or galvanized
iron pipe. If stone or concmte is used it shall
not be less than 6 inches by 6 inches by 24
inches,. If galvanized iron pipe is used is shall
not be less than two inches in diameter and
thrx-e feet long. The monument shall be- set or
driven six inches below the surface of the
ground. The location of the monument Shall
be with reference to some known corner
established by the United States survey.
(2) The intersections of all streets and
mads and all points on the exterior boundary
where the boundary line- changes direction,
shall be marked with rnonument_s either of
stone, concrete, galvanized iron pipe, or iron
or steel rods. If stone or concrete is tilt -i it
shall not be less than 6 inches by 6 inches by
24 inches. If galvanized iron pipe: is used it
shall not be less than one inch in disnieter
and 30 inclies long, and if iron or stty 1 nods
.art- used they shall not be less than five_
eit-hth, of an inch in least ditnerision and 30
i nclu-s long.
(3) All lot corners except lot corners of
cemetery lots shall be marked with monu-
ments of either galvanized iron pipe not less
than one-half inch in diameter or iron or steel
rods not less than one-half inch in least di-
mension and two feet long.
(4) Points shall be plainly and permanent-
ly marked upon monuments so that measure-
ments may be taken to them to within one-
tenth of a foot.
(5) All monuments for the exterior bound-
aries of a subdivision shall be marked and
such monuments shall be referenced on the
plat of the subdivision before the plat of the
subdivision is offered for recording. However,
interior monuments for the subdivision need
not be set prior to the recording of the plat of
the subdivision if the engineer or land survey-
or perfonning the survey work certifies that
the interior monuments will be set on or
before a specified date as provided in subsec-
tion (2) of ORS 92.070 and if the person subdi-
viding die land furnishes to the governing
body of the county or city by which the subdi-
vision was approved a bond or cash deposit
guaranteeing the payinent of the cost of
setting the interior monunte nLs for 'the
subdivision as provided in ORS 92.065.
IAenerded by MS c.756 611, 1973 c.e% §121
Compliance: Partial, Exterior boundaries must be
marked accurately with monuments prior to recording,
and it appears this was done in compliance with
Subsection (5) of this code provision. Interior
boundaries nc`ed not be marked prior to recording, but
it is lo,iical to assume:
t('(tt
(1),,if they, are marked, they "lust he accurate (the
County Survleyor indicated a requirod interior
monument was not :et., see Exhihit,;1 or
(2 ) the required surveyor certification attesting
that the interior monuments will be accurately set
(which was not: done) along wTUTFLhe requisite hand- ►..<<Jt ltt
See ORS 92.0b5 below. �11nv,►l1�(t
.2.065 Marking interior monuments
after recording of plat; bond or cash de-
posit required; release of bond; return of
cash dep-osit.; payment for survey work;
count}' surveyor perfornting surti•ey work.
(1) if the interior monuments for a subdivision
are to be. marked on or before a specified date
after the recording of the flat of the subdivi-
aii,n, the pe r ;on subdividing the land de
ccsibed to such plat shall furnus.h, prior to
n corthng the plat, to the governing hody of
the city or county by which the plat was
d or cash deposit, at the. option
approved 9 bon
�
of the governing t�ody,ran oaf1 the estimated
ount equal to
not more than 120 pe
cos5t, of performing the work for the interior
niontunentation.
(2) if the person sulxlividing the lands
described in sulvl^-ion (1) of this vc-(-tion pays
the surveyor for lx rfonning the interior
monumentation work and notifies the govern-
ing body of such payment, the governing body,'
within three months aft.'►- Ruch notice, shall
release the Mind or return the cash deposit
ulvn a finding; that such lu+ynu•nt lues been
made i_ll)on written recluc�st fmrn the person
sulxlividing the land, the governing lxxly 'nay
pay the surveyor from moner, within a cash
de' -.t held by it for such purj'Kxk' and lreturn
the excess of the cash deposit, if any, to such
(3) lin the event of the death, disability or
retirement from practice of the surveyor
charged with the responsiblity for setting
interior monuments for a subdivision or upon
the failure or refusal of such surveyor to set
such monuments, the governing body may
direct the county surveyor in his official
capacity or contract with a surveyor in private
practice to set such monuments and reference
such monuments for recording as provided in
ORS 92.070. Payment of the fees of a county
surveyor or private surveyor performing such
work shall be made as otherwise provided in
this section.
I t 473 c.6% 4111
comp1 ianc-e? No. No bond a cash deposit
monument.:, was turnished t)y applicant., nc
payment to any surveyor 111<ide for -;uch a
92.070 Surveyor's affidavit neces-
sary to record platy contents of affidavit;
notice of monument markings; filing of
plat. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this
section, all plats or diatmiciic de:�ignating the
location of land in any county in the State of
Oregon, offered for record, shall have attached
thereon an affidavit of the surveyor having
surveyed the land represented on the plat., to
the effect that he has cormvtly surveyed and
marked with proper monuments the lands as
represented, that he marked a proper monu-
ment as provided in ORS 92.060 indicating
the initial point of such survey, and giving the
dimensions and kind of such monument, and
its location with reference to some known
corner established by the United States sur-
vey, or giving two or more objects for identify-
ing its location, and accurately describing the
tract of land upon which the lots and blocks
are laid out.
(2) If the person subdividing any land has
complied with subsection (1) of ORS 92.065,
the surveyor may premre t1 , plat of the
subdivision for nx-ording with only the exteri-
or monuments referenced thereon as submit-
ted for recording. There shall be attached to
any such plat. the affidavit of the surveyor
that the interior monunienty for the subdivi-
sion will he marked on or before a specified
date in accordance with ORS 92.060 and
referenced on the plat for the subdivision as
approved by the city or county.
(3) After the interior monuments for a
subdivision have been marked as provided in
an affidavit submitted under subsection (2) of
this section, the surveyor performing such
work shall:
(a) Within five days after completion of
such work, notify the person subdividing the
land involved, the surveyor or engineer of the
city or county by which the subdivision was
approved and the governing body of such city
or county; and
(b) Reference such monuments on an exact
copy of the subdivision plat as previously
recorded; and
(c) Upon approval of such plat copy under
ORS 92.100, file such plat copy with the
county recording officer with whom the plat of
the subdivision was previously recorded.
(4) The county recording officer, upon
receipt of a plat copy filed pursuant to subsec-
tion (3) of this section, shall record such plat
copy and indorse the recording reference for
such platcopy upon the plat of the subdivision
previously recorded. The recording reference
for such plat copy shall operate as reference to
the interior monuments referenced on such
plat copy and shall constitute constructive
notice of such monument references for all
purposes as though such monuments had been
referenced on the plat of the subdivision as
previously recorded.
I Amended 1+y 1973 c 6% 4131
Comp1� iance? Partial. They applicant's surveyor has
completed the subsection (1) cerLifiCat.ion required
above. However, the subsection (2) atfidavit has n
born prepared which would be necessary in order to
Enlace intorior monuments until after recording of t
P la t.. (:::�C ( �'(o k 'r- � I ( 1 )1 ( t t )
-13-
e) Re uirement:
----
9-080 Preparation of plat. All plats
subdividing any tracts of land in any county
in this state, and dedications of streets or
reads or public parks and squares and other
writings made a part of such plats offered for
mord in any county in this state shall be
made in black India ink, upon material that is
IS inches by 24 inches in size., that i,5 suitable
for binding and copying purposes, and that
has such characteristics of strength and
permanency as may be required by the city or
county under OILS 92.044. 'lice plat shall be of
such a scale, and the lettering of the approvaLs
thereof, and of the dedication and affidavit of
the surveyor, shall be of such a size or type as
will be clearly legible, but no part shall come
nearer any edge of the sheet than one inch.
Rle plat may be placed on as many sheets as
ncxx--,sary, but, a face sheet and an index page
shall be included for plats plact d upon two or
nrore sheets_ Plat nwt.erials may be placed on
both sides of a sheet.
1 Amendt%d tg• 19d ) c.7W)i 412, 1973 c";
Comp 1. i ani
been met.
f) Requirement :
Cit this requirement has
412.0%. Pa"lent of iaxi-s rxv.letire tl
before plat rrc-ortied. (1) No plat shall lx�
recorded all ad valory-111 taxes and tall
tipt,cial 1W,' `S--ntc•nty, fav:v, sir otlw ch
rrequired by law to lx, lrltuYA uIx 11 they t:ax rt,ll
lulve lVen paid which have It lira c►1x,n
the :rttbxlivision or which will becom • a Derr
during the cs►le,cxiter year.
(2) After January 1, and bx!fore the certifi-
cation tender OR,,; :Ill.lo> of any year, the
subdivider shall:
(a) If t.l1e' exact amount of taxes, spec ia)
trbtie�tisrru�tlttt, few and charges etre able to lac.
c0mpt.ltA-d by the aiwvt s yr, pity t:uch amount. to
the tetz,;e8w)r who is authoriim(d to levy and
c0lect Ruch aount.
-14-
(b) If the amc aor is unable to compute
such amount at such time, either pay an
amount computed easing the value then on the
aspeosrnent roll for such subdivision and the
previous year's millage rate increased by 10
pezrent plus the asse--nor's best est.irrrate of
special asst'ssments, tees and other chargers, or
deposit with the tau collector a bond with a
goad and sufficient undertaking in such
amount, as the as.5essor calisiders adc,quate to
insure payment of the taxt_� to become due. In
no event. shall the bond amount exceed twice
the amount of the previous year's taxes,
spenal assessments, fees and other charges
upon such subdivision.
(3) Taxes paid or bond(A for under para-
graph ta) Or (b) of subsection (2) of this aection
shall be entitled to the diwount provided by
QRS 311.505.
(4) '1°he provisions of ORS 311.370
apply to all such taxes so collected, r_xt }eat
any deficiency shall constitute a personal debt
against the person subdividing the land and
not a lien against the subdivision land,
, and
the
hall be rnllected as provided by law
collection of personal property taxes -
jig rS c 3W4 42 1973 c-& 4171
Compliance? Unknown. There is nothing
to indicate whether said taxes had been
q) Requirement:
82.100 Approval of plat by city 4'14i'
neer or surve)•or or by county surveyor,
approval by county ees++ sor and county
governing bx)dJ -, f et'a. ( i) Before any plat
can be recorded, c ovel-Ing land within the
c,,r},orate limit-, of any city, it must be ap-
proved by the city engin Vr or city surveyor• if
nY; otherwise by a county surveyor. Howev-
er, the governing body of the: city Huey lier of
e
nate any county stu-veyor to serve in
the city eligineer. FALNTt a-, provided in
ctrixcection (3) of this section, it the land is
out -,ids the cxlr lxvrnte li,,.its of any city, the
plat shall 1►e epprov-ed by the county Purveyor
Wore it is reauYied. All plat,; moil -,t ,I%D be.
al l,roved by they tYnrnty axwe FOW and the
goventing txAy of the aAunty in which the
pn>}x riy is l(t-Iluxl IVforr r,")rding.
('L) llt,fore avlAroving the plat as rtquired
by this tt,ttion. (lire city e, gineer, city survey
or or the alunty surveyor, as the c+se may be,
shall check the .;ubdivisi•.�n site and the plat
and drill take such rnens.retnents and nuke
in the record
paid.
such cN,111putations as are necessary to deter-
mine ttlIt the plat complies with the provi-
sions of 0RS 92.050 and with the subdivision
reygerir2lncnts in effect in the area. For per-
forming such trerviee the county surveyor
chap czlllect from the subdivider a
fee in
eem,rd 1jI,v with the following
ta) For subdivisions, containing 10 lot-, or
lxenv ls, or less, $40;
(b) For subdivisions mntAtining over 10
but not more than 25 lots or pam!ls, $90;
kc) For subdivisions containing over'� but
not more tluen ri0 lots or pa
(d) For subdivisions containing over 50
but not more duet' ]00 lots or parcels, $190;
(e) For srrtxliv�rsiAn con$2 for ae1t, over 100
ach addition -
&I
or parcels., $4.l
al lot or parcel.
GI) Any plat preluered by IN; munt.y sur-
vleytir in hit: private caluetit.y trhallIe approved
in au-1-Amlance with 11111** ction (2) of this
,;e•ct.jt,n by th(• surveyor of it county other than
the tti►lmty where the land is located. The
..)ullty i;ovenling body 61ue11 refer such a plat
tk, the exrernty surveyor of another mun
ixlor�:enlent on the plat. The atlurty govern
,jig body, in accemciance with OILS 'AM 401.
nue). provide allowanMS (or travel and other
e Ivntres of the esurveyor to whom the plat is
refernd.
1 &nwn&d Ivy Ivul) c 31 12, 14W) c 756 114. 1'. 57 c CM 11
iQM c.2Rb 11; 1971 c 419111
-15 -
compliance: No. The plat has not been approved (as
evidenced by a signature on the official plat
certificate) by anyone other than the applicants and
their surveyor.
h) Requirement:
92.120 Filing and recording plats:
copies. (1) The plat of a suixlivision described
in ORS 92.050 when made and approved as
required, and offered for record in the records
of the county where the described land is
situated, shall, upon the payment of the fees
provided by law, be filed by the county record-
ing officer. The fact of filing and the date I
thereof shall be entered thereon, and it shall
then be securely bound with other plats of like
character in a txx)k eslxcially, prepared for
that purpose and designated as "Vuecord of
Town plats," or filed ir% a spe-cial cabinet for
that purlxase so as to insu►e� s;rfekc�e ping and
preservation of the plat.
(2) At the 6111"of (►1►ng stall plat, the
person offering it for filing shall also fila with
the county rt-Ct)rdi►rg off icer and with the
couryty surveyor, if nxluested by him, an exact
a►py thereof, itlade with black India ink or
photcxxzl)y ulxm it Kocxi quality of linentracing
cloth or any other suitable drafting nu►tffial
i.lnce ' No.
having the same or better characteristics of
strength, stability and transparency. The
engineer or surveyor who made the plat shall
make an affidavit to indicate that the photoco-
py or tracing is an exact copy of the plat. The
copy filed with the county recording officer
shall be certified by him to be an exact copy
and then shall be filed in the archives of the
county, and be preserved by filing without
folding. The subdivider shall provide without
oust the number of prints from such copy as
may I* rcxluired by the governing body of the
county.
(3) For the purlx>v of preserving the
original suixiivision or town plats, any such
plats may be stored for safekeeping and a copy
of the original plat certified by the county
rXVI' lic>g officer may be used as the official I
plat for public use.
I A nCj,A d by 1965 1.756 016. 11.473 c 696 419. 1977 c 488
61 I
Chr 111.It w<►:; nevo•r filed.
-16-
(3) LOC ( 1986)
a) Requirement:
49.330 Preparation and Submittal of Final Plan or Plat.
Nom .
(1) The fal an or_-.--ail__.be submitted within one year of
the date of the order setting forth the final decision. Upon written
appli���on_,__prior to_expiration o the on:e_ jrear period, a ity -
Manager shall, Ln writing, grant a one year extension.-._, Ad.dltj4.n_a1 ex-
tensions may be requested in writing_and be� submitted to the hear-
- f-,--- --_�
iilg�o3 for. re ---view— of- tie- r -_o ect for conformance with the current law,
d��-rpt stad.ards ana compatibility" with development which may ave
occurred in the surrounding -are—a.._- Th6—t!xYe—nsion maybe granteTor"
deniecd and 11 6e conditioned to require modifications to
bring the project into compliance with then current law and
compatibility with surrounding development.
COMMENT: This, specific authority to allow extensions
gives credence to the argument that 1978 time extension was
without authority.
b) Requirement:
(2) A final plan shall include all information required in LOC
49.315(12), amended to conform with the hearing body final decision on
the Plan.
COMMENT : Soca t eyu i t ement s of I.,0 49.31. ` (A2) which
f(,)] low.
-17-
49.315 DEVELOPMENT CODE
49.315
i
( ) N/ae s ad a resse of p pert owne nd residents w ose
wit in 00' of he pplican props y or ntiguous
pr er y lie
pr r owned he apP
(12) Preliminary pian or plat which shall include narrative and
t• Maps. except detail maps, shall
maps showing proposed developmen
be drawn at the same scale as each other and as the site information
from the previous sections. Submittals shall include:
A. Grading plan, including dimensions, spot elevations and
finish contours; cross sections of critical slope
areas, slope ratios, retaining walls and provisions for
drainage, including easements; any proposed fill and
method of consolidation or stabilization. The grading
plan must show all changes up to property boundaries
and the relationship that will exist with grades on
adjacent property or lights -of -way. Grading plans for
individual lots to be created for residential use do
not have to be shown-
B. 1.,ocation, width and purpose of all proposed easements
and rights-of-way, including relationship to abutting
property.
C. Proposed streets, including proposed names, locations,
dimensions, centerlines, beginning and ending
of
curves:, radii and radial centers of curves, grade and
elevations proposed at 1001 intervals, cut. and fill
slopes to scale, relationship to existing streets;
location and dimernsions of parking and .loading areas,
pedestrian and bicycle circulation, and related access
ways.
Street designs shall include typical cross sections
_;bowing width of roadways, curbs, location and width of
wal)'.Ways, size of utility mains and drainageways-
D. Propos,0d lof r:, _inclu�liny
i. Pimen!:ion :end 'Area.
ii. 1110ck anci 1:it number s -
iii . The lnii ldinq c,nvelope on each lot, where applicable -
1„ I•ocation c.�f proposed sanitary sewers,
r;howirlg grades
and pike sizes.
F. 1,ocation of c;torin water rc,tnd (letention
facilities -%11(1 .,form dr•tins•
G. 1c�c'at ion c>f w,+t er s:y:;t,•m, illclt1ding pipe t;ize s and
1►ydt ant s .
(Rev. 11-16--82; im)
2t1O.20
49.315
-18-
DEVELOPMENT CODE 49.315
H. Location and exterior dimensions of all proposed
structures and impervious surfacing.
I. Table showing building area, number of units by type, lot
coverage, landscaped area, parking area, number of spaces,
ratio of parking to building area or units, number of
bedrooms per residential unit.
J. Lighting and proposed signs.
K. Provision for waste disposal and recycling facilities,
including access and screening.
L. Dimensional elevation drawings of all buildings, showing
relationship to the site and to other buildings.
M. A project summary explaining how the proposed development
is related to the existing site conditions and including:
i. The supporting factual information and reasoning which
demonstrates compliance with the Comprehensive Plan,
development code and applicable State goals.
ii. Justification for any variances which are requested.
iii. Proposed dedication of open space or other reserved
land.
iv. Exterior materials description and/or samples of
materials.
V. Powers and functions of the homeowners association, if
applicable.
Vi. Development schedule.
N. Landscape and open space map showing:
i. property and lot boundaries and tights -of -way.
ii. Structures and impervious surfaces.
Plant. material.; and locations, whether existing or to
be pl:�ritc�d, including a schedule listing the common
and botanical names of plants, sizes at planting and
maturity, quantities to be planted, comparison of
existing and to be ret.1ined planting and any special
planting instructions.
280.'27
-19 -
iv. Erosion controls, including plant materials and
soil stabilization.
v. Landscape -related structures such as fences,
terraces, decks, patios, shelters, play areas,
etc.
vi. Boundaries of open space or reserved areas to
remain, distinctive areas, access to open space
and any alterations proposed.
vii. Boundaries of stream corridors (available on City
Public Works Department maps).
viii. Flood plan elevation or boundary (available on
City Public Works ((Department maps).
lit>>�>>1>L ► 4C' h C LL'
c) g_ etc u_irement
ly
eflect the
incl plat for a subdivision shall accwitheall rconditions
(3) A f the hearing
preliminary approval granted by information:
satisfied and shall also contain. the following on. The name shall not
The proposed name of the subdivision.
du licate or resemble the name of another subdivision in
P
the urban Service Area-
B. Location of the subdivision by section, township and
range.
C. Reference points of the existing surveys. ids, andEd,
r cl ated to the p1 at t,y cj i stance and bearng
reference to a fi.w book or map as follows:
-20-
49.330 DEVELOPMENT CODE 49.330
i. stakes, measurements or other evidence found on the
ground and used to determine the boundaries of the
subdivision.
• ii. adjoining corners of adjoining subdivisions.
iii. other monuments found or established in making the
survey of the subdivision or required to be installed
by provisions of this ordinance.
D. The location and width of streets and easements inter-
cepting the boundary of the tract.
E. Tract, block and lot or parcel boundary lines and street
rights-of-way and center lines, with dimensions, bearings
and deflection angles, radii, arcs, points of curvature and
points of tangency. Flood plain or high water line for
major water bodies. Plat accuracy shall be determined by
the County Surveyor.
F. The width of the portion of streets, being dedicated and the
width of existing rights-of-way. For streets on curvature,
curve data shall be based on the road center line. In
addition to the center line dimensions, the radius and
central angle shall be indicated on each right-of-way line.
Also, arch and cord data shall be shown on each line for
all lots as applicable.
G. Easements, clearly identified and, if already of record,
their recorded reference. If an easement is not definitely
located of record, a statement of the easement shall be
given. The width of the easement, its length and bearing,
and sufficient ties -to locate the easement with respect to
the subdivision lines shall be shown. If the easement is
being dedicated by the plat, it shall be properly
referenced in the owner's certificates of dedication.
H. Lot number beginning with the number "1" and numbered
consecutively in each block in the subdivision.
1. Block numbers beginning with the number "1" and continuing
consecutively without omission or duplication throughout a
subdivision. The numbers shall be solid, of sufficient
size and thickness to stand out and so placed ab riot to
obliterate any figure. Block numbers in an addition to a
subdivision of the same name _.hall be a continuation of the
numbering in the original subdivision.
J. I(jeritif ication of land to I)v dedicated to the public and a
specific stat(.,meat of the E)urpose of the dedication.
280..31
-21 -
The -following certificates may be combined where ap-
propriate:
J. certificate signeda�atlekinterestdinythellandties
having any recorded
(excluding lien holders), consenting to the preparation
and recording of the plat.
ii. certificate signed and acknowledged as above,
ded i-
cating all land intended for public use except land
which is intended for the exclusive use of the lot
owners in the subdivision or their lessees, tenants,
employees and visitors.
certificate with the seal of and signed by the engineer
or the surveyor responsible for the survey and final
map.
iv. certificate for execution by the chairman of the
Development Review Board.
v.certificate for execution by the County Surveyor.
vi. certificate for execution by the County Tax Collector.
vii. certificate for execution by the County Assessor.
viii. other certifications now or hereafter required by
law.
L. Other information as required by URS Chapter 92.
M. Deed restrictions and covenants shall be submitted as a
separate document at the time as the final plat is sub-
mitted. (Ord. No. 1607, Sec. 1; 9-15-51.)
CoMMI. r: A (pt ick rc't el enc:(.. hl-lc•k t O which
cut l .i 1u s the 1 i'clu i c'm�'1�t 1 <�r ► [ i n,1 i 1�1 it. w i l l graphi call y show
the C�1)1111111:�Sioll that tlit'1"' ;rc, tic,w tn,1r.�' mute roquirement:; which must.
be met in older to 11tivk' a rc'(-c)1t1'Ih.1c' flat.
-2? -
d) Requirement:
49.335 Review of the Final Plan or plat, Filing Requirements.
(1) Staff shall determine whether the final plan or plat conforms
to the final decision of the hearing body, including all conditions, and
other applicable State and City codes.
(2) If staff determines that the plan or plat is in conformance,
then the appropriate signatures shall be affixed to the plan or plat,
such signatures signify City approval of the plan or plat. Final plats
shall be recorded with the appropriate County within 30 calendar days of
signature. Acceptance by the City of the land dedicated to the public
by means of a plat occurs upon the recording of the plat. Any plat not
so recorded is void.
(3) If staff determines that the final plan or plat does not con-
form, the applicant shall be advised by a written notice which shall
list the reasons for the decision.
(4) The applicant shall have 30 calendar days to correct the plan
or plat or to schedule a review of the final plan or plat by the
Development Review Board. when the differences have been resolved and
the plan or plat approved, the procedure in subsection (2) of this
section shall be followed.
(5) Approval of a final plan or plat authorizes the issuance of
development permits for actions or uses as approved therein. (Ord. No.
1807, :pec. 1;
COMMFNT : Thes0 1)1 OV t to t .l t t (110t
)list_ (`11(t 1llool".11l(l) the (let ermi flat 1: n whether th(' plat_ conforms,
to reyu i i rmeiit s , ill 11-1.1 r ('spec t c:. Z f tt all r('(ln 1 1 ('111011ts .l l r met ,
staff obtain -s til(` llQC(.`SSill'y Sik1ll,ltllrt
`this hrOvi:.inn ill --o c(,llo,ct th(, pi.oblem we had in
thi nl,lttr.t . 11,1ki this, lx (n ill Of "Oct in 1980 - tile staf t wood.
have 1)r('n i rtln i I ed t) 11Ot i t y t lie apt"l 1 r,1nt. with ,l notice
of the !;pot' l t l '1(;f i c i ollc i es (liven t hoii lh tale Comity Surveyor
al i o,l,ly llad) . 1'h( jj y i i (7ijllt will then h,1ve 30 d.1ys to correct
the del isien(•i( .'.
-23-
(4) Miscellaneous Code Provisions (1986) witineerith this;
plat does not comply: (Provided by eny 1)
a) Radius must be 100' from entrance of Pennsylvania
Ave. Make intersection 80* instead of 904.
b) Show drain and sewer easements through lots where applicable
for main lines.
c) North hammerhead to be private tract - variance required
but approval recommended. We don't want to maintain long
skinny streets that only serve a lot or two.
d) No mail delivery to streets without turnarounds.t
,rlony edge 0lot 9
e) Might treed vision clearance easement
and lot 1 depending on field check.
f) Dimension 1ouil.ding setbackel line
onarplat
- show
fo building
envelopes for lots 6 and 7 (they are
variance.)
g) Proof that platted street location meets 15% max grade
and that intersection can be 5% maX for first 251-
�� c
h) Cor 'struction of sti:c-et probably requires steep cuts
or requira.r+4 slope easements on lot: frontages or retainage in
right-of-way. Need 011tl i 11eer i ng drawings to determine if it must
be shown on face of p1.1t .
i) Geot.echtlic al T t E>r t. required it one nat in file. Lot by
lot soil report rOcluirCd 101 each lot at pet:m:i.t time.
(5) other hal-;Os for r(%(jkr.irirl(] Planning Commission review of
preli.mitlar.y
1)wC' 49.090 (2) does not. nivr "clrandfither" rights to
this P I -I t. .
-24-
49.085 Development Standards.
The standards to be applied to developments reviewed pursuant to
this chapter :;hall be set forth in a document entitled "City of Lake
1981" which shall be adopted by City Council
Oswego Standards Document,
resolution arid, may from time
the addition of new
edostandards orlution be amended
the deletion of
change of any standar
y be iitiated onl
any standard. Proposed ahtanll��betconsideredto the document
by the P�lanningnCommission.y
by the City Council. and s
Any person may present a request to the Council to initiate amendments.
The Commission shall hold a public hearing on the matter pursuant to the
of LOC 49.635. The Commission may seek the co m ntment
amend
Development Review Board oof the
provisions r. other. City bodies on any proposed
re
p ro sed
After consideration, tCouhe ncilnwi9hCa�recommendation mission shall foconcerning pts
amendment to the pursuant to LOC
adoption or rejection. e The
eoro Council,
modify intanyer a -inner nthPlanning
49.635, may accept, rej
Commission recommendaticonoiderationand(O1le rd.n,Note1807,tSecpllnning
Commission for further
9-15-81.)
a licability_of Development Standarda;_ Special
4_ .090 APS' _.__
`"Development Districts.
(1) The requirement of this chIpter that (ievelopment conform to
the applicable standards adopted
anPdoUtiop8shapply
all development permtyednorafterSeem9e0151981except as
i)the,rwise provided by this vection.
(2) Planned unit development: subdivisions and projects requiring
RBrprVo�hhlil_ ,,ul
narY
'i)esign lsweregrantedpr or
Mat approvals orfanil)rilnR>ewttoarar.
__--
'to September 15, 1q81 may occur pursu;Ant to such approvals. ' The
p?,ysical development of property or construction of structures on any
t��rticular site or lot within such developments for which all
approvals 1wid not been received prior to September 15, 1981 shall be
subject to review for conformance with those standards applicable to
specific site improvement, construction and design.
-101 t cl�
-25-
COMMENT: I.00 49.085 adapts the "City of Lake Oswego
Standards Documents, 1981". LOC 49.090(2) addresses the applicabil-
ity of those development standards. Subsection (2) was intended
ito allow applica �h�t��s who had obtained a preliminary plat
roceed with
approval, but without a recorded final plat, wsthout mply returning
the steps necessary to perfect 3rrecheir reliminary plat analyzed
to the Planning Commission to have their p
for complaince with the new Development Standards. These part-
icular projects are then subjoct-ed to review for compliance
with development standards who actual development �WJrd o ( t -t <«1x�
This provision, read 'A conjunction with LOC 4-15-8 11
would mean that the preliminary` plats approved before 9-15-81 '\\
would have up to 2 years to c:�1n,�lete plat recordation before tJG4C�
being required to go bac) to the Planning Commission. That �( {t
time has long passed. GLS tic r- �y.tj.)ci�
�ju,tY).wt
c kWAt
��SIS b) ORS 92.205(l) (;t, is the same now as in 1979) I t�Cat-
sets out:
92.206 Polic . t (1) 'rhe Legislative Asaem-
f which plats
Enda that many slit -IN 1-0115 or__-- . 1'
h+ been tlp)��ov `d : .� rt �. nled have nc,t been
1'd and that n):lm s:+.h sulxlivisions were
Priur to the a.:'i'tion of a c•onlprellen-
Plan, :u)nilig regulate u� Ana rtlinnnces :lad
na suixlivisiou c.•ntrol .standards t,y the
�d)ction within which the lands described in
tnbdivision platy ar situated.
2) The 1A•t,isl:ltive Asgenthly finds, 111L= --
7et it is neccss:tr� for the prott titin of the
ic
6t.alth, safety ac1,i ,vclfare to t�nwide for
.k7 w (if Iimlt�'cl,_IxNi s1l1tlivisions �'N�
of modify)tlg such st:h:livision%, if ntves-
•�comply with the ct:rrent coInvrehens)ve
zoning ordinances :tad ret,'ulations and
ntautxiiviairn <<�nt.n)1 stanclanly, or, if such
�0i��lcation is nuot fr rsible, of vacating the non-
rn)int;, undevcl,•t,tvi aubdivisiorls :nld to
Any lllntiy dtviicyttKi for public fust, that are
l fed in the plat of each ""ch vacated stlb-
vv>.t it
IU d Ra
It 1:;
cle'll tlt,lt lhor'.0 i:;
.i tett
y+,11 �t1:;tttl liyllt to develop I)t1r—
sll,ltlt
to all :11�I+I �,V '�l plat
which
114 t)Il l \' : 1 V1111 to those plats
City':; ic)11 that applicant
which
are rtlt::l�i� .1. it I.
tho
1,;,::ii
l i�rt I imin.lry I)I,lt: approval
h�ls no
vc�sttll , i�lllt:; with
�1nly
which
is :lln1�,:;t :;+ vc n yt�.it
PLANNING CO AMISS ION-*'KI)TES
July 14,_1986
Commission held a workshop beginning at 6:30 P.M.,
The Planning m. Vice-chairman
and then began public hearings at 7:UU p• m. Members
Brockman called the workshop t.o order at 6:35 p•
present were Commissionersan, Ross, Robine
excused fromtthe meeting.
and Wexler.
Commissioner resent were
Chairman Rosencrar a arrived Director; SandrA Duffy, Deputy City
Topaz Faulkner, Planning
Attorney; and, tris Hitchcock, Secretary•
AtFaulkner said that Ann Schukart and her representative, Bill
office earlier. that day to
Holden had came into s planning below Lakewood Bay Bluff.
discuss Ms. Sc hukart's cabana property y the
They were in attendance at tonight's Lakewoodto request that
Ms.
cabana property be included in the kwood BayBluff
for a
Faulkner said that she recommended that the app ert be
Plan amendment and zone changed r ttcon:aban prop. separate
initiated by the property
issue from the Comprehensive Plan amendments currently under
discussion.
Ms. Faulkner said that all the Plan amendment proposals would be
heard again on July 28► 1986,changes to aaf ahecrrder staffould be reportsaonpted
at that time. She said thatCity Attorney's
those amendments had been suggested by the thepuffy explained the
Office, and she listed those changes.
reasoning behind the 6r�gre�,n�d�;gh155E'shous. Oldeof not he deleted gfrgnas
that criteria 5 and reed
the criteria for a Oeographic amendment. The Commission agreed
that they did not want. t.hese criteria deleted.
ff
Another cha'100 r.'c'„Llmrnencl1`i W.tt,-I�tcilod t o "i,hall" in LOC. 56age 4 of t.he . 155( :3) so
report, the word is c�� ,uk,lic. facilities have capacity
that. it reals: cls t.erminc that 1
and are available car shall thy' mach ;available to serve the
proposed chancle .
The Cc,mmissi.,n agreed thilt t.l�twcrr,ci �ht;`�e t
areasinclOr uhintent
dedin
that services bO macic. ��
c eograi,hi.c .jmonclment.
Vice -Chairman 1Ir,�c•kman �,i�i��tc'd t.hca r��qui.�r meeting at 7:U5 n•tn.
APP�ROVAIt cir' MINu'C►;S
'nc�� C'c,mmi�:s;i�,n cunnideroki thr minuttI c•t' thc> Jct n4 1'2, 1986
wcarks;hc�h t �,t 11ppc c,v,t I . Comm i,;,,, Ik,,,,•t R
•I�inc�t t �, nuwc�cl for rtphroval
111111104"', t itt�,. if),, way; seconde(l by
ct 410 '111110 1.
Robinet.te,
('emtnissionot- Rodrigkjo:; etrnl V)ASS "'vwith i.c1r11tniS'3lonE`rs Brockman and
Rood itILIt", -Incl W(' )(I,t't l►Vc,tw�1t e� nc,t E,T ,,�;c'nt t1 t h,►t mE�etinq.
Rc, `; !; ,, 1, n t -I l it E �1 , Y
will t)e needed to
1 t1 c,n 1 h1• .Itlrti, 1
>, I�)t�t� mtnrrtc•.;
a
A t,E%c ung
verity tht� 3-11' v"t��.
Ae
uve
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 14, 1986` Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
CE' 05-86-01 - A continuation of the public hearing of a request
by Marylhurst Early Childhood Education Center for approval of�a
conditional use to allow a pre-school in an R07.5 xt,ne. The sole
issue to be heard will be access and parking and loading.
Ms. Faulkner said that the applicants have submitted a letter
tExhibit 27) in which they requested continuance of the hearing
because negotiations with the Lakewood Center on the parking and
access issue have been reopened.
Commissioner Wexler moved to continue CU -05-86-01 to July 28,
1986. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Rodrigues and
passed unanimously with Commissioners Wexler, Rodrigues,
Robinette, and Brockman voting in favor. Commissioner Ross
abstained.
Pa 06-86-04 - City of Lake 0sweclo - proposej amendments to LOC
Chapter 56, including provisiolls for a Geographic Amendment to
LOC Chapter 56 (56.155 and 56.157); and, tile addition of the
phrase "or can be made available..." to 56.155(3) to conform with
phrasing in the current Zoning Ordinance.
`!s. Faulkner presented the staff report. Staff recommended that
the Commission adopt sevond alternative that would limit the
riteria applied to major plan amendments to only the first four
. isted in 1.0C "t,. 155. Tlli!; Would provide a simpler method of
a.hieving the 1111endl"lont..
,:ommissloner !;'lid that 'It -ern at lvo wording needs to be
.L,veloped to det t`c1•lilit' 1(w',t it,n,ll t -r i trri,a, deciding how and
4:)ort% land ul ;t, t'Cltt`t' 1.1 ,It, ,lppl lt'tt, lilt] wht,n ,.and where It takes
?"l ace, t om1111 `i;; 1 `tlt'C Idelh i Ilut t e ?',Itch?tit l'tt' that perhaps three types
,f amendments wove Ilrt'tic!ti: llla iol , minor and long Corm.
`s. hutt:y Said that tht` prt,hlt'm w,ll; in detininq "long term".
I''lt', Co_ l'h;tl ail c;i t.ho Lake O:;WreLo lh.alitbt?r of. l'ommerce Land
C'n111mi.ttt%t', .l.alti t`lit?` (,tltllltllt'.tot,1;; conCt`l 1) Watt that if language
»torr t cul (10t A i I 01 it wt 1111 (1 CAU! -;t' prr,t)l t'nl! They requested that
"'1r 1`l,annin s t'r,nvlli:;�liun nt,t ,adopt lantluatlr unt i I it was stated in
simplcll;t trrmr:.
Mtlr,ln I't, ;t llt t: lee Itt)x 14 leak(_` cl:;wt (t), l i fst.ud his concerns
ptt,pus<'ti taeographic amoildmt?nt. w0rd111(1:
1. I';I il1linatl0l) of c r'ilt'vi,ls 4-6 in l.00 56.155
-2-
PLANNING COMMISSION -"MINUTES July 14, 19'86- Page 3
2. Limiting application for these types of amendments to
the Planning Commission or City Council, eliminating
public application
3. 'There are a great many places in the Comprehensive Plan
where the, terms "ma, ! " and "minor" are synonymous.
4. Elimination of the reetu i cements for buffering of
existinq residential neighborhoods from the adjacent
ureas be i nq planned.
l?ennis O'Neil,_ 641 First Street_, First Addition Neighborhood
Chairman, a(;�r ooki-with they concerns listed by Mr. Moran. They are
very ct twornod iht,ut ell imin.it. ion of the criteria 4-6 in
LOC `)6.1'x'), feelin(1 th*,it those criteria require analysis of the
impact.!; ()t planning for donsit ies in large areas on the existing
dove 1.()l,ITIVlit .
Mr. ()'N(, i l <iskeid wily this amendment was being proposed. He said
that he felt that betore the Planning Commission approved this
amendment, statf should be asked to give better justification of
the proposed changes.
Vice -Chairman Brockman said that this hearing would be continued
to July 28, 1986 at. 7:30 p.m. The Commission indicated that the
only criteria which should be eliminated for the geographic
amendment should he these locational criteria which obviously
cannot he met by a lar(1t, etee)eiraphic ,aro such as distances to a
Tri -Met. bus ;:top and Cle SOTIOs—; to a cO1111iiet-clal,'industrial area.
Chairman Rosen, ralit7, ch.lired the' i talleaitidelt' e,t the meeting.
PA 06-86-01 - Prt,l,l,soki i ne• ,!iire>tit:;._ 2y__. It _City of Lake Oswego to
--
the Comprehensive 11 111 ,-imond the I eosidential Neighborhood
P o I I c I e s �,e�, t iein h i(I(itnt� i I 'l' (int it le'(� Lakewood Ba Bluff
_._J'.�._y —
Area.
PA 06 -tib --02 - Pt roused ame'nelmont '; hy_t.he city of Lake Oswego to
amend the Comtr,ehensive flan tt,\Vt rfminierc ial Land Use Policies
Section, General Poliicy Ill -,-[he 1-; !;t End Policy, and the East
End Area and Wil1��m(�tt Rb4t r Tndut.r ►al 1)istric.t Mads.
PA 00-86-03 - I't (1,,,>st ti une mime �1►'`.__�'Y. t h,,,._ Cit1-__ot_Lake Oswego) to
.aM,11, 1')l the I ,'.k(•wOOd B BIkif f Area
b y ldtt l t:Ii tions r .i 1 ,1ll\1lle•1 1.11 tr tit I.,'thot h(.)od Commercial to
the cur i ent Hi(lh I)oII : i t Y. 1,1( Ilii I I , i' •t t 3111(ln(1 the
C(,mll,t h(n .ivt i'I.In M,11, hY it l" I ilut I tle' I,, iu t I i,1] designation
ft rtml t ht It a ,i :ht t i t i l lv le e t I h(:(I Ill. t IIs 1,; t,�)<,;,aj section of
I-,I
th(� sl ,It t I t,1)e,rt. ,Ind I rl,l'Aco i t W i t_It It t illi lit n:'. i t Y.
Resident i,tl -Gol e•t ,ii 0,nmwl. i,il .
Ms.. 1)11t I stI(IkIk,>;l t,tt t 11,11 ( 11,� t ,,tlt 1 h 1),11 1,11 .11)11 un 1)�I(II` 1 hr
kit, lrt("I. rht•te• wa-, Ik,c •nt 1y i ( .I:;(1 in whi"li WOr(IIII(1 !;imilar t(,)
t hr W1, I (i i I1(] i 1) t ilt, tOtIi t 1? p k ,i(1 t ,hili wa! i ,�tIlit i by i 11(• rotlr-t to be
PLANNING COMMISSIOI—MINUTES July 14, 1986— Page 4
a land use decision. The City Attorney's office feels that the
Comprehensive Plan should not have wording which may be construed
as a land use decision in contracts between the City and private
parties for land exchanges. (The fourth paragraph refers to the
possibility of a future land exchange between the cement plant
property and Roehr Park.)
The Planning Commission understood the City Attorney's
suggestion, but felt there was a need for wording about a
possible land exchange. They discussed the passibility of
wording which could not be construed as a "contract", but which
would meet the intent of the possibility of a land exchange
taking place.
Public Tostimon
Bill Holden, Real Estate Consultant: rel)rosent.ing Ann Schukart,
said that. Ms. Sl-hukart was requesting that the Planning
Commission consider includinq lane she owned in cabana area (Tax
Lot 100) below Lakewood Bay Bluff in the plan amendments. He
said that Ms. Schukart felt this; land would provide an
opportunity for the City to construct a pathway along the lake
shore of approximately 2,000 square feet.
Ray Pyle, Chamber. of Commerce Land USO Committee, said that the
Committee would prefertlit no percentages for residential or
Commercial uses ht? pl acod on t ht,, Lakewood Ray Bluff Area or the
cement plant property. Ho :•l l,? they could f.orasee problems,
especially with the I,akewt,tt i l.l\ Fluff. At-oa, with future division
of tho The Bay Wut-t area would be
particularly dict Philo toil i l,;llllllj poi—onta(ws hecause it is
held in several d ; t f ort iit wnt r:,h il)s. Mr. Pyle said that
assigning nuinhot-t: of unit—; wokil,i !)e rot-or;ihlt` to percentages.
Bob Herbst, 1900 North :�Iwt IZt .,,i, !-;a iti that it tOo much detail
is put. in tho 1,1.111, ln.lny tto\ 1, w 11 not ht, int rested in
developinij the hlutf alga. :i. 1.I,IA'!;t_0ti t111t I)erllal)s high narrow
buildings which would allow open -,pace (or viows of Lakewood Bay
Would ho preferable to 1:11t, lan(j1.1aAkj0 pI o1)(-'a.ed. He was opposed to
ally C0111111er1 Pal de\'Oloptllent of tilt-, hlllt t al't`o. Ile -;aid lit'
tit llol-a l ly suhhu I t od ill(' 1)1 ,11111 1 ntj t, illlil l t.r' 1 "' t o t t o I t ill amend i nq
the Compli llons'l\," Man t:O :A 1n1t,11,1to tilt, F,Arzt End ar(!a.
I)iCk Moran said he was; Co llt•t'l nrti lho,ilt lclroval of the text
dt`t iIII, nti LIX,ICt h0llil,t211 to"; ('t thc' 1`:t olld. 'tit, said tho map of
tilt, alga.,: hound,ll it,..; w,1!; rl,tt 1�; dct init ivt`. Mr. Mot -an s.?iid that
he t ol.t t hat the tt,!: idcnt i,11 ton ; i t i,", ,hokilki he put- before
devolopillollt of t tmunt`t t ial . lit, t;.1 id th,1t t ht. comont {dant
pl'olorty should hr doveltgw,i with dow;ity i;; high a4 possible as
lolltj v; viowt3 lr(` 11"t hkwkeki. IIt' :,11,1 111„h ,1tt11!;Ity In tlll`; arca
Would 1 (`l ieve the Ilood if) t't-zotill cot 1101 AI t`at ,t1 tilt` (•1 t y to
11itjllel dons itit's; in ()rclt.r to ill ok,t LC IW retluiI(-mono!;.
P
'July 14 , 19-8'6 Page 5
..—T wv` i'r 1MM rti.`i iUi+i�INUT ES �'
"111— .—
Ed Hart said lie agreed with Mr. Moran's concerns about
residential development before cot support moretcommercialthinks
that the economic climate will not Suppn the
development. He foredresidenaialhich had been and commerciadlone development. Mr.
economic climate
Hart said that he was concerned that allowing commercial
development on Lakewood Bay Bluff would e courag en
commercial development croachment of
I. the existing
neighborhood.
John Bradshaw, 185 North ;shore, was concerned about negative
of
impacts which cot, j ht',ry� eclthatCrl�nttan 1chisl. dwife�boththoped the
Lakewood Bay Kluft. parking
Planning CopmnliSston wt)uld cc)nsids the issues d
availability, public �3cc-ass, transpc7rtation, and noise and visual
issues in their r;�nsitltr,atic:�n of pass.3ge of the amendments
that buffering and
r.elatincl to t,akewood t;ai• Bluff. tie said the
integration of residentialtt,nddc. mmforemost rciato(See E:xhibitg3 of
framework of devc lol)mc 'It
the July 5, 1986 s0 ;,t t report fur lett. dr ted .June 30, 1986.
lake ()Swe o, agreed with
Marguerite Leche., 1'I�st office �Bo_- X `�' ron3 i,nc that her major
concerns stated about the river -five y
concern was that accc`s;s t<� the rivers ex tt with driver uf.rontage.
tresspassing on adjacent private property
She asked what.}"publ I,- ,t(,cehs °kedealtivebE fotawardedht.osthe 1City
a letter (attached) wl"c
Manager "I'd•(,ity Coll 11ci.l.
1 •'1 't; Ft�rn 1'lctt•1�,_,�•YT_t n1,11t t, t. tile Parks and
..
Ellen It.'St.l.t- tc�t --
Recreation Commissit,lt, sal.
id the Comlltis;:;inrl is c:ancerncd that. al
of. t—'-' t1e (;.'J. acre; il�asi rt�atecj ic:,r 1:,�etlt teat k hu developed as a
park. Shc� s,t of 1 and as long as 6.2
acres i:; m,Iint ,1 park. .
Ra Pyle, spc+�tkilt,; t, t htln.,;(IA at tt.T`' ic)iT1t said thrlt. the
y L-
a,L- tsyn 1�, ,11,1 1 1h i,tt.� •Tt c cunt the economic impacts
plan
of lcinti cll'Filqndt 1oT1 1 1`•
me f,t '
�: ,r t l i „� ) ,�•,' ;•.tt,,,n.t l.,tlle, �tskc'd that there
Phi 1 i iims l e (Chc'c� k
_ 1... ---
------- f.
l,.th,`wcu„1 1+.1y - l 1 1 ,mt t1i1, „t t hl bluf
be v t :3llct l �1, 1 t' ``' t,
lie c)F'h''s'/'ci '11•`•�`�•'`•• t '� t 11'' I `IF 1` • tic' .,;t i 11 1 hr bl ut t alea should be
limited to r�`:: i,l,',lt t.11 1�`v,' 1 e+{nne t}t tact t h,it there dt l' many areas
more �Ahhropri,ttt' t,,t i „nnl rc i,ll in shit al eas of town. tie was
CMIC01 It(`il 11,,,,11
Mt' . l)u t'hanl , ::;1 10 t h.t t t 11,' � ,,,: i a ncl ttt'1`�ls; � l,•.11 ,trace 1,1
CC.lrl:;t ruct icTn c,n t hl• c oilloill {,1,1nt. pi op"I ty + wel 1 as in the
In the
(7e�:i.ln Ili s;l.t irt., NI` ..,:1i,1 ,1 1,,11.tn.•1` >,11c�lllcl 111 achievedachieved
o,ts;t
•1•bl'l111.1 t•11i1n�'YI I,WIIt't cit t 111' 11t ih'I 1 A_ •It 1,14
1,��'�I1.11�1 , tial lel s;ht• was
t 1 .Ikowk1[)- 11,,y 111111 1 .
c)FIF�t�:;tact .t_(� c•c,nnney c t a l lc,vl' 1 „Im11 lit 11,,1 ttc'ci , 111 l 1 1,,1 1 t hl t 1.` t1C t1
t c':� idollt i ,t l cii'vc- I c,lnnc`rtt 1
m.+l►Y I
w., 1„t ,•,mlwl I, I,,I I i 11 -
PLANNING COMMISSION -MINUTES July 14, 198b Parte 6
Ron Hanson, 2460 Wembley Park Road, said he was concerned with
the run down condition of businesses in the east end area. He
had concerns about lack of parking and increased traffic caused
by density increases in the area. He said he was in favor of
proposals allowing river access, protecting Mt. Hood views and a
pathway along the river.No one else spoke and Chairman
Rosencrantz closed the public tlenring for Commission
deliberation. Chairman Rosencrar:tz listed his concerns with
amendment wording:
1. Dual designations (i.e. RU'GC etc.. )
2. No numbers being assigned for amount of commercial
development
3. Traffic congestion and '.:ick of (larking
4. public access being de`.,,"Od
The Commission discussed how ma-, units were appropriate for the
East End. No agreement was re ac.,.ed.
Chairman Rosencrantz suggested 3ddit.ional wording to be added to
Policy 3, PA 06-86-03 (riverfront subarea):
3. E. public open spaces and public use facilities of a type
and size which support cultural and civic activities,
i.e. museums, theaters, etc.
F. A strong mixed use orientation which includes
restaurants, shopping and other mixed uses.
Chairman Rosencrantz :-;aid that the suggt°sted wording was an
attempt at addinc; W0 11 -ding whi,`'. Weald C'r1CO L1111(10 the east end
being used as a focus for
Comtnissionc't" th<lt thoue he a separate policy
written which would include type's of public taci 1 ities encouraged
in the rivet -t rant ,uh.lre;1.
Commissioner l uocknl.ln :;t rc ::e` i c ,.1t a ;c':; :;hould ho those which
bring people to the
Due t o t h o l at t` Il,,III Incl k,t.hc" :',`.1 t 1 I1tjP; t cl hc' he` i cl t.hfe
Commission set a special n1t`et
tot Thursday, July 24, 1986 at
7:30 p.m. to del iberat.e turthor ot1 i no east end amendments.
7.0 4-86-06 A City i n i aled to change tilt- zoninq of the
propertty at l 1 10 11()_()dv i,•w t 1nlc 1 „n1 ('cllltll y R 20 t..o City R-15.
Ts hirequc";t tol low:; Illli '?..1 `I Ili- 111 ol,c`1 t y c•(lml)leted May 21,
19Sh- 1110 pt'Ol,t't ty ()w1 i to t` Not 1 i:; h CattO Wohh (Tax Map IE
4AB, ';,ix l,ot
Ms. Fatil knot hrc`>;tint o`d tilt, �:t .1t t r <`ll„t t !,111• :;,011 t hilt. tale
prOpOl ty hild t)00I1 11lt1/'X0(i t 0 "It, -1111 :;l'Wt`1" ' 1 V Il'1':i. The request
meeting comprollonsiVt. 111 all ;W,. ",'11111(1 Ot,1111,t11c e rlrtluiroments.
- tl
• - ; :_y 14, 1"6 Page 7
PLANNIN(., COMMISSIt)N 1t4INii'i,.5 _
No on spoke for or against the proposal, and Chairman Rosencrantz
closed the public portion Of the tiocir. ing. Commissioner Brockman
moved for approval of ZC 4-86-06. The Lotion was seconded by
Commissioner Ross and passed unanimously, with Comm issi0n0T 3
Brockman, Rosti, Wexler, Rodrigues and Rosencrantz voting in
favor.
Cl 1-86-06 --_An al)1jeal by John R.�senteIol, rel)r.esent"irig the Owners
of Penn Wo -i Subdivisl_onn, of the Planning nict3ctor's
tnterpretatTon of Ji process necessary to 1)roce(d with the
subdivision (SD 17-79, Tax Map 2 1 E 15BA, 1'ax Lots 3100 and
3201).
Ms. Faulkner presented the stat t ." `;).`rt.. ;,he gave the history of
the process fc)llow(�d sc� far. : I,r ".li.l that under Lake Oswego
Code, no final plat has been :1;`;`; '� (�(j. �'� preliminary plat had
been submitted Lo th(? City but that the County had
her inti)rmation wi; t,
11.1,; 1),)t leen submitted
requested furtby the
applicant. 5h(? saki that f.ollc)wll;•., ,1 interpretation; the City
Attorney's Office had arlalyz(�et that inte`rprotation and upheld her
decision.
.john Rosenfeld, representing him:(�lf and Leon Gart.ung, owners of
the pr(perty, gave a history of Itis and Hill 5ieW(art's (realtor
representing the subd i.visi.i)n) �`t t1�r1:. to prove that the
Commission and City
preliminary plat approvt_?d 1)y ttli 1'l.(nnincl
Council in 1979 still :.tan(ls minutes dated 9/25/79,
h;xhihit. aa) . (I)l�t,li l:; (f Mr. I;t
;,�",t 1,V i .lk'000nt. cat, be found in
1 ( i .11:ne 4 1986.) Mr.
Exhibit. 8, lt't t(`t f rOItl titr . t.,` :`'t.r at t
Rosentc>ld al'Sw(`1 (`kt jlll`tiL l (,11 '• I i OIt11T1 l ::E;lOn reclai. tics
efforts to :;at i:;1 'l' t `'111(1 r(. m( nt t ; t h(' t in,ll plait. and the length
of
t inu> b(?tWrl'll ;ll,l)t , t tut il �' plat anis Mr.
of this Penn Woods
Siew(�rt':i 191; t i 11111 ; t ri?llal a
subdiviAion 1)I,1l .
MS. l)1It'ty saidth.11 t11:`t'l' 1*, 1 i},1,t \'e`.1 1 h111lllrlilr"y plat
hrlt't`Cti.11(1
l` ap1)I 1 r' tlll Wt"` `'.ttt> Said there is
t`rr (Ir., w(,1 t`
IIla l" 1)1 at..
a dittt�r(`ni-e Ilclw('(`11 "Ot±it't,+i ''
Thi? Comilli ilt)Il t't`(1I1t`:;i `,i 1 IIT t Ilk '. 1111 .,I lil,lt 1 `il i l ?Itt the t l ty
Attol-11 `y dei Orr 11" i "! 1 1l`r' 1 :
1. A e ht`(kI 1:;1 ,I wh,t1 t Ile` 1`?'Ir 1 .11.111 t.`(lnir(>d for final
1)1 ,ll t. 1 lul
' A ('11l'(•kl
r. C1.lt ('II i lu1 I 1 h(` 1't ':t t ('.,u t1t tlt 1 1 11 t 111 19111,
1 (�(1u 1 t r`n1t'It1
1. A i :;l w l 1 }; t !,t t I 1 1 .11 t ,•( ,lr(`(1 1 (>r
wit 11 pl.ittII•1 111it(`rtnl
'1'ht• i' t .tett 1 n(1 t'ctmm i ;ion lirh(•(111 1 t`lf t hr nit•x t h(•,t r i nll un C11 l) 1 --86-06
toy 'rtlut !;di1y, July 1.4, 1911(, at f : il► h.m. They r( yur.alt (gid this
item he t i r-st on t hat a(loildrt.
PLANNING COMMISSIOR—MINUTES .July 14, 1986 Page 8
?ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to conduct, Chairman Rosencrantz
adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kris; llitchcock
Planning Commission Secretary
- JULY 28, 1986
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
The Plannincl Commission meeting of July 28, 1986 was called to
t�tz at 7:30 P•m•
Commissioners present
order by Chairman Rosencra
were Chairman Rosencrantz, Adrianne ArttissmonerMF3urtonlwas Chontas
Rodrigues, and Jeanne Robinette.
excused. Staff present were Topaz Faulkner, Planning Director;
I)eput.y ('i.ty Attorney; and, Kristi Hitchcock,
Sandra Duffy,
Secretary.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
f July 14, 1986 was tabled to the
Approval of the minutes o
August 11 meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING!
PA 06-86-04, an amendment. too ieniment�called6 of h eeoara ke hsweao Code
,,.
creatinc3 a new_type of «a
tShe said that the
Ms. Faulkner presented the staff repor.
amendment also proposes an amendment to the criteria u ed to
assess all types of plan amendments by adding to the p
"n be made available prior to the
or ca
facilities criteria, permits". She said the July 25 staff report
issuance of buildinq p
incorporated the wording of the Plan Commission recommende a
the previous hearinc)s•
Ms. Faulkner said is one c.:hanye to 56.155(3) . Thephrase
discussed byt. the Commission was "prior tois,tuance of. development
lem
permits"- She said that thi:; lan.luage couermituanctse atpatbpublic
because ;any apptic<at.ir,n ic; a cjc:�c 1c�pment p
f aeil i t ic•s cannot: hc, lntt in until appl lCat lops arcs approved by
the Plannincl C��mmissic,n `„t,tlic,rc't,ahtissuancelof bu�ldingSpermhe �its”
that tisinq the lanquagc l
w(,ll1d bu h0ttt`t
C,)mmis-:icynt�r Robinette ���ic1 the t �� tta� also been
imrit�clwtodFo9rest.ange
to 1(a) trc,m m,t'�k,t tk, it►c�lu. , Ms. Faulkner said that
Hiclhl.-And!; tnd tithe ne�idhbc)rttc�,1,i tr ctas
'�ci two other c�Xam.v.�lc�ti inc1luded for neighborhood
shc. had t c m� vt ,:id shv head su99ested the word
trc'ac;,
Comm i �>;i�,nrt- !trocknt.an , or". It was decided to
"coml,rnhc�nsive he :;ub:;titutaci tc)r "md.)
uSe "()t 1lot 1 arklt' nr ighhonc��cxi Al ea"
Ms. v.rulknier ,aid the tin.al phta-,in�) for the definition would be:
bc.►t not limited Lo V-- H i cti l and; and other
hubl it 1'r �t im�,nY.
_.._-----
w,,
�t.h and `;
Wc�k MOrMl Post. t.)ttic't' -.._
cuncurned about
evctr�al t h t nc1�
r;
PLANNING COMMISSION'MINUTES 1'0 JULY 28. 198F,
1. The fact that a Geographic amendment could only be
proposed by the Planning Commission or City Council.
2. More specific language was needed to define what
constitutes a large area.
3. That "major" and "minor" are used throughout the
Comprehensive Plan, and in all other areas of the Plan,
except those covered by 56.155, and that Geographic
should be considered synonymous with major.
No one else spoke and Chairman Rosencrantz closed the public
hearing for Commission deliberation.
Commissioner Brockman asked Ms. Faulkner why 56.155 was being
amended. Ms. Faulkner said the wording should say "...or can be
made available prior to issuance of building permits". She saki
that 56.155(3) is to apply to all amendments. Commissioner
Robinette disagreed that the wording should be changed. She was
concerned that development permits be approved without it being
demonstrated that public facilities can be made available.
Ms. Duffy said that the concern of the City Attorney's office
with the language "or can be made available prior to issuance of
development permits" is that this language could be construed to
mean that the improvements would have to be in the ground at -the
application stage, which isn't possible.
Following further discussion, the Commission reached a consensus
that they wishr,i the language to rom,jin "prior to issuance of
development I)tltnlit�; for both I -OC 56.155 and 56.158.
Commissioner Hrockman moved for approval of PA 06-86-04 (see
July 25, 1486 c;taft report) subject to the changes stated:
1. 56.155(.1), by adding the phrase; "or can be made
available prior to the issuance of development permits"
2. 56.135(i)(a), "...including, but not limited to Forest
Highlands and other large neighborhood areas.
3. 56.158, by adding the phrase "or can be made available
prior to the isSilanc a of development permits"
The motion was seconded by C(mumissioller Ross and passed
unanimously with t'ommi:,:;ioneer:; Brookman, Robinet.tor Koss, Wextor,
Rodrigues and Chairman Rosencrantz voting in favor.
t',�mmi:;s;i<,n� r Itr��tkm.ln !;,lid thr 1`l.lnninot Collllrlie;.ion aholuld look at
in tilt, tut.utr.
PA Ut.-80-01� 0 1 ll tj;_�men<imc nis t:k, t.htz C��mhrc�hc`►lsive F'l�ln text.
re. at t ny to, E?ast- End Redoye t� � tiiOnt
2
PLANNING COMMISSIO'h—MINUTES JULY 2fj 1986
Ms. Faulkner presented the staff report. She said the Commission
will be hearing only proposed amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan. The Commission's review of the City's proposed
Redevelopment Plan later in the evening will limited to making a
recommendation on the Plan to the Council.
Ms. Faulkner said these amendments relate specifically to the
creation of a Riverf.ront Subarea, an amendment to the Lakewood
Bay Bluff Area to allow some limited commercial uses, and some
related amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map making the
Riverfront Subarea a High Density Residential/Genercial
Commercial area, rather than the Industrial that it is now. She
said these amendments have been discussed at a series of
hearings, and she has made language changes requested at the last
hearing on July 24, 1986 (see staff report dated July 28, 1986).
She said she has included some synopsis of the testimony received
at previous hearings, and then Lased on that testimony, she has
suggested an alternative wording on page 4 for. the Fast Find
Policy 1:
"The East End Community Business District Boundary shall
remain at 'C' Street on the North and the alley between Fifth
and Sixth Street on the west as shown on the map, page 101,
with no expansion into the First Addition Neighborhood."
She has also, based on the Commission's July 24 deliberations,
further defined the Riverf.r.ont Subarea as follows:
"'rhe site could accommodate a plana or an esplanade adjacent
to the river pr,, -iv id i ng views and a focal point. such a
facility, in combination with a variety of commercial, retail
anis office uses and a residential component, could create an
attra:t.ive center that would henefit the entire East End
Business District."
This would be a new second parat)raph in the Rivertront Subarea
description ort 3 of the ,duly 18 staff report.
Based on tho Comm i ss inn' k1 i s;t u ; ; 1 .)n it w11 ich they altered ttie
Lakewood Bay Bl tit f Art:?a dot ,(-r i pt. ion, Silk' included alternative
word i n(I on pagt` -1.
"Thr art"I houn'lrtl by t ho West okittr of 'Third Str(Aet, Evergrr,rn
Road, the. Ci ty-tlwnod pat k ing Iot acid rai 1 road t racks is
kloneral ly known a1 ; t,,%k(?wc�tltl Bay Bl ut 1 . With the exception of:
11110 prt pot t y on Ev4'rgrt?CI1, tilt` ont l rt` til tt' is developed it)
,11)at t111 t'III " mlel eX t"4."
In order to (,Ioatt, the? tr iang Le wi th t: ht• ex ist i n(l wtlyd int), t he
area would h;• �liviAotl int() iwt, runos, which c()ul 1 inhihit
development (,I the III tit I Art,. . Visual Ii.-; been addressed
thrtluclhclut. t lit- 111 opo!;od unt,tit iments .
3
PLANNING COMMISSIt" MINUTES
JULY 28, 1986
Ms. Faulkner said her final POint is that on page 9, based on the
Lakewood Bay Bluff description, she recommended deleting Policy
5, Page 8► and adding a new policy: "There is no intent to allow
Public access to the water of Lakewood Bay.
On Page 12, criteria section, Ms. Faulkner said that criteria 3
was based on LOC 56, which the Commis:>io.11 lust reworded, and
based that that recommendation, this wording would also have to
be amended to read "...prior to issuance of development permits".
Public Test.imonr
Dick Moran, Post Office
concerns: Box 74, Seventh and listed his
- –.--
I. The next step, the zoning changes which will implement
these Plan amendments. He asked that the Commission
recommend that the Zoning changes be made at the time
the OOPS is received, and that when tho actual zoning
designations aro. implemented, individual parts of the
Rivertront Subarea not be designated as E>.O/GC, rather
either one zone or the other for assessment purposes.
He restated prior testimony of Ray Pyle, Chamber of
Commerce Land Use Committee.
2. That the kind of commercial development in the Lakewood
Bay area will be oriented to leisure activities such as
restaurants, recreation,
that. boating activities, etc., and
these types of. commercial will draw new business.
Ann Wolverton, tijreaident of the Le ac ue of Women Voters of West
Clackamas County, subrni.ttod a letter in testimony attached .—
Th.l
e etter. sari ttt,jt th�jt: they sup
port. revital ir.ation of Lake
Oswego's East F'nd. They ,11'0 concerned about the opportunity for.
public testimony e.u,, in they P' "1nni-110 P1-cjc-t'Iss (the staff report, was
not available u,ttil noon hofore the hearing). They felt the time
frame is not ,j.iequatc. I`or
support visRiverr..s t Ik
hearing the public's views. They
Willamette Rl - , 4i -A0wood Hay anis Public access to the
Phil Livesl�.,
from L,jkewc.;�,i
reit Cates
fa.j�' ljluff,
Lane,
tlut
saki hc, .jcjrt`N: with
visual access
oppose:;
j gess to
the lake.
,1ohn IIradsh:jw,
submitted in lrt:tcr
185 Not.h
r.
t)(,
shr
Ilo d, r(`>;t.ate�d hi:3
testimmiy
support of tilt,
cjf
Iuncit)
,111(1 ,tulY 14, 19116
ha5ical ly in
quest.iorls ot. tho
Commi:;sion:
H1. ar;kc*ci
1 • Why art- thr pro lj(>;ad c�cc�(tr ,,t,li i c 1r.;crnimtjnt t ct he in iatv(i
by t:hc? city.
2. On tho 1)1,tnt l,rc>Etc rt.Y► what art, the plans for
puh.I is ICce.:;r;, pcihl i( 011 S1)aICOS public streets,
4
PLANNING COMMISsloyf MINUTES JULY 28s 1986
3. was a planned development approach considered.
Chairman Rosencrantz said some of these questions were answered
in the previous staff reports. The plans for the cement plant
property will require an overall Development Plan and Schedule
for the site, which is required to address such questions. He
said that at least half of the Plan amendments in Lake Oswego are
requested by the City because large areas and multiple properties
make it difficult to obtain signatures and coordination.
Mr. Bradshaw asked that for the Lakewood Bay Bluff Area, as on
page 6 of the July 14 minutes, the employment of the Neighborhood
Commercial intent be applied ---not General Commercial.
Commissioner Brockman pointed out that this had been incorporated
in the July 28 staff report.
Marguerite Leche, Post office Box 26, said that since she had
given constructive notice in her letters. She had several
questions. She asked why the City's cost to demolish the cement
plant had been mentioned. She assumed that since this was
private property, the developer would be doing their own
demolishing at no expense to the City.
Chairman Rosencrantz said that the development of the property
was not at issue in this application and hearing, and that the
decision of the Planning Commission was not based on proposed
development. Of any ()1 the sites involved.
Ms. Leche said she was concerned with the difference in the way
the Lake Corp,)r:t t i on private rights were treated as opposed to
the private rit7ht!7, ()f property owners alone] the Willamette River.
Lastly, she ,1-1,e i t or an lnsw(,r I() what will happen when the
Riverf runt Suture j it the taxincrement plan is not implemented.
will the Plan •ttnendments t)e revoked, or will they be permanent.
Chairman Roc.t•nC r.)nt z !;aid "loe I)lanninc] (,'t)nunisSion is making a
recommendation to Council on these amendments and any future
development proposal for an ODDS on the sites. The Plan
amendntt`nts will be permanent .
NO ()np else ~puke ,inti chairman Rose3nc t ant z closed the public
heptrinq fir cit*liberation. The Commission tirst.
d i !;cussed whet her they w i :;hod to adopt the alternative language
su,lcle:;terl by c;t .tt I r>n p•tcie 'J of the ,lu ly t1 t;t.lf f roport .
cont;en-;u4 w,lr: that tilt, doscript it)n could ►ei,tain as t)ri(jinal.ly
wt)rklod. Commissioner Ross af;kecl th�it tilt` wc)td ,aloIjq" he added
ht`fc)re °11Ur'Llt t311i�` ()t the I-ai linad tr,i kt;". it was aque.ed this
would he
c'�)mmir:t;loner Rnhinc)tte a:;keci that the :1)ek, tie' pulit:ies be read
inf o) t ht• rt`C )rd which t;upp )) t t•�i t h)` c'ommi ; ;iutl' findings
(prt.lm-,od t in linc{r; listed in July 2tl t;t at l reipt)rt) anti said that
0
PLANNING COMMISSIOt—MINUTES � JULY 28, 1986
the following policies would not be met without including the
triangle described in the alternative wording on page 7 of the
staff report:
- Page 14, Specic Policies 1 and 4
- Page 15, Specific Policy D
- Page 20, Specific Policy 10(a)
Commissioner Ross said that a new Policy 6 had been proposed,
"There is no intent to allow public access to the water of
Lakewood Ray".
Commissioner Brockman moved for approval of PA 06-86-01 with the
changes agreed upon above. Commissioner Ross seconded the motion
and it passed with Commissioners Wexler, Rosencrantz, Brockman
Ross and Rodrigues voting in favor. Commissioner Robinette voted
against the motion because she said commercial should be a
conditional use in the Lakewo(xi Bay Bluff area and she objected
to Specific Policy 1 limiting the amount of uses in the Lakewood
Bay Bluff area.
The Commission discussed PA 06-86-02. The consensus was that
alternative wording on page 4 of the July 25, 1986 staff report
be included and that the wording "and must include river..." in
the fourth line of the first paragraph of the Riverfront Subarea
description be changed to "and including..."
Commissioner Ross moved for approval of PA 06-86-02 with the
changes in wording:
- Deletes the page number in the alternative wording for
East End Policy I, and substituting "of the East End
Community Business District_".
- Reword first. paragraph of the Riverfront Subarea, fourth
lines to say "and including" instead of "and must
lneludo".
- Acid new second par;lgraph as suggested by staff on page 4
of the July 25 staff report beginning "The site could
accommodate..."
Commissioner Wexler seconded the, motion and it passed unanimously
with Commissioners Wexler, Robinette, Rosencrants, Brockman, Ross
and Rodrigues vot incl in favor.
Commissioner Brockman moved for approval cit PA 06-86-03 as worded
in the July 2'.), 1986 statt report.. Commissioner Rodrigues
seconded the motion.
Commissioner" Robinette ..rr:ked that. the Commission delete the
Lakewood Nay Mutt Area. They Commission disagreed with this
suygceFrt. ion .
A
-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINurEs — JULY 28, 1986
The motion as originally stated by C mmissioner Brockman passed
with Commissioners Wexler, Rodrigues, Brockman, Ross and
Rosencrantz voting in favor. Commissioner Robinette voted
against the motion.
GENERAL PLANNING
Peter Harvey, City Manager, discussed the Redevelopment Plan. He
,said it is a separate statement from the amendments just. adopted
by the Planning Commission. He said the Redevelopment. Plan does
not replace the Comprehensive Plan, Development Code or Zoning
Code. Mr. Harvey said that the Commission needed to develop
specific amendments addressing Floor Area Ratio and building
height within the redevelopment area. lie asked that the
Commission make recommendations on the the Redevelopment Plan and
Report to the City Council.
Following discussion, Commissioner Brockman moved that the
Planning Commission recommends to the City Council the adoption
of the land use portions of the Redevelopment Plan and Report to
the extent that they comply with the City-wide Comprehensive
Plan, and with the recommended amendments to the Comprehensivell be
Plan adopted July 28, 1986, that the second paragraph, page
deleted, and also that Project B, page 5, boundary be amended to
delete that portion which was included in the Bluff area in
accordance with the Planning Commision recommendation for the
Lakewood Bay Bluff Area. Also, that Project C, the description
on page 5, changing the "or" to "and" to protect visual access
from the bluff, and that the Planning Commissioni was nots marking
a recommendation on Tax increment Financinci.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Rosas and the motion
passed unanimously with Commissioner Wexler, Robinette,
Rosencrantz, Brockman, Ross and Roth igucs vOt inti in favor.
CU 05-86-06, a request by Mar.ylllut'st E2..l - Childhood Center for
i�-c` Sc pool S zone. The li arinq was
approva 1 of "I 1---
clintinu(;e1 fc,r furthc`l inf.l�rmat.i�ln .gin the aec;e�;s lnd p�lrkiny and
leading from the 1,11krwood ('ontcer.
Ms. Failikilell the st,lt t loj'%ox t.. Elbe s;,l ill that the
appl ic,int. Ilild s;(lhmi t t r,i Ili) now int l lm;lt icln X111(1 w,ls Clot present to
testify. llc*,wevl`r, silk, .„lili t h,1t (f the property, Mr.
,lary l S was present AI)d W,:l!; re(111"t l iltl t hilt 114,. hl` a1 et0
testify in behalt (it the clwnVl` -;. "Ilk, said two le114,.
to
r hhaad been
re(10iv0d froom the APIN1 iCA'It . Tho Appl is allt!; i1t'r a
he;lrin,l the ownrr make :1 I,rl`l:ent,lt loll, lee( clniz.inq that he (foes
not act. ill, F(lent too. the appl is atit In their Letter, the
;lppl i cants i nd i r<lt O11 f hrl l l;t l�c`nwc�(�l9 ltcltl(1 i!_1 n()t acceptable as
access fo1r. the (.(%T)tor.
1 Il ry poll o t ,, !loot":t 1 o11 l loll f. r(,I11 t hc` 1111111T1 loII a.s t ,) wilat.
ill for111aI ioll Mt . JaTv i , , had t hat at t rk•ted t h•! III opo,;ill, the
C(1lnmii-;!;ie,n dl�t,�Tinin, •t ih,lt MI t,1r� i!; l;hclutcl t,c 11I()we(I tel
t ost 1 i y on all X1,11 w1 t 11 t II,! 1,,lk('wood C(.,inter which
PLANNING COMM CSS1O4' MINUTES `"' ,JULY 28, 1966
affected parking and loading and because a representative of the
Lakewood Center was present to testify, but that since the
applicant was not represented by Mr. Jarvis, the public hearing
would be continued to August 11, 1986.
Commissioner. Ross stated she had not participated in the July 14
public hearing and would not participate in further hearings.
Mr. Jarvis said the agreement with the Lakewood Center had only
been worked out at 6:30 this evening. He said he had submitted a
plan for a turnaround that has been reviewed by the City Traffic
Coordinator and found acceptable by him. He said that Marylhurst
had reviewed this plan and determined it would not adequately
facilitate their program.
Warren Oliver, President of the Lakewood Center for the Arts,
1534 South Cherry Lane, said that a compromise on the 10 parking
spaces for shared use to be used by the mothers of toddlers who
would be working at the center. They will allow a gate to be
built from the playground and the parking lot so that State
Street will riot need to be used for entrance to the center. He
said the parking and entrance will be shown on the original plan.
The access and gate use will be based on an annual contract. He
said this should resolve the area of the playground, parking (not
loading and unloading) and entrance to the center. He said this
agreement is still subject to approval by the Lakewood Center
Board.
Commissioner Brockman moved to continue CU 05-86-06 to August 11,
1986, and that. notice be (liven to adjacent owners. Commissioner
Rodrigues seconded the motion and it passed with Commissioners
Wexler, Rodrigues, Robinette, Rosencrantz and Brockman voting in
tavor. Commissioner Ross d,bstained.
C1 l-56-06 SD P)-'79, In a)uea.l by lohn Rostenteld of an
inte I'll ann1Ilg l)irr-ctor that the plat for Penn
Woody; Subdivision ni'eded to he v esullmitted.
Ms. taut t y lirasi,nte,,i thee st it t report., sayint.1 that nothing had
cha11,10ki since the laM' 11e,11in"7. She` hieltll i(lhted !;1wcifie points
for the Colmnigsion. 'rhe rr'quir-ements (l.oC 44.330, 1078 Code) for
a final pi It rlry indic.it-ed on 1.akle 3 ot. her moilloran(iunl dated July
14, 1986. fiche siji(i thrrr is a list of at lceast nine items
relevant to ipproval OI t incl plats. Pago S indicates there
wasn't- t'cimlil i.lnr r with tilt, Code. A r 'view by Engineering staff
sh(iw: Ilial ;1111';(`('1 r(�nS (�, 1, ti, and 1) Wlero not in the submitted
ti ng ; Mat S('t hac•k!. w(,r(� not moat ionod, the dimensions of the
t'atit`i??c'nt W(`r(' noton 111(` lilac, illi tllll'l`titi Y('titrictLOn oil Cornell
l ; nit 5i1 at o(I (111 t)1(' I I('(` (it thce Mat , and .1 slope .110 stremn
(•(il'l id')l lir ((1 (-(•t io n 1 ("tl I 1('t ion I!; twt r;llowll on the tact' of the
pl.lt . c'(In(ii t i(in ; n()t Im-1 W01 (` C,in(ti t i011 2, a I-O(luirement that
tltc`re would II(' n() di r(q•t. 1 t Ottl any hroposod lots to Corncll.l.
Str ret; ('Onein' ion I, 111,11 t her(' lice a
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 28t1986
public drainage easement 30 feet in width; Condition 6,
addressing special setbacks was not met because thero were no
dimensions; and, Condition 8, requiring a widening of up to two
feet. Ms. Duffy said this shows that there were many more items
Mrbng with the plat than the two minor issues raised in the
letter from the County Surveyor (Exhibit 7A).
Ms. Duffy said that the State requires an accurate recordable
plat be prepared. Due to the minor error in the survey of the
boundary line, subsection 5 is not met.
Ms. Duffy listed ether areas in which Codes were not met, both
1979 and current (see memorandum). She said that at the time
this subdivision was approved, the final plat was required to be
filed within six months. Current Code requires a one year period
for filing, with a one year extension that may be granted. The
1979 Code does not allow specific authority to allow an extension
of the time period for filing of the final plat.
Ms. Duffy said that in comparing the 1979 requirements with the
1986 requirements for filing of a final plat, there are pages of
requirements that. would now be required to be met.
Ms. Duffy addressed the "grandfather" clause referred to in the
prior hearing. She said that Subsection 2 of 49.090 was intended
to allow applicants who had obtained a preliminary plat approval,
but who were without a recorded final plat, to proceed with
finalizing their plat without having to return to the Planning
Commission.
.john Rosente Iki, OW110r dIld represen tat: iv of Leon Gartung, the
other owner, .argued that 44.310 does not require approval of an
otftcial plat." t,lust he ohtained by a requisite date. Mr.
Rosenfeld's malar -'ontent.ion was Uvt,r t110 kit-11inition of "official
plat". Mr. Rosenteld said they have ct-smptied with 44.310 and
that the City Attorney of Lake Oswetlo a,�rrts.
Chairman Rosont.:rantz said that the statutO does not. intend that
any plat, s;uhrll i t tOd moots requirements of t:he Code.
Mr. Rosenfeld sari that thtl only deficiencies of the plat are
shOwn on page 5 of Msc. Taut t.y's memclrancium, and that these are
minor dept iCien:'i0s. lit' ,OMittOki t. hat ho had not. met the
conditions rey,lired .;tach ,t : ;l honcl, 0Lc., but said that nothing
in the Ord i n,ancos i egtI i r 1 h i submi t.t in,i these items by a
palticuI I (I'ltk,.
(IIAI-111;11) Rosen: t .ant 2. -I-:ked it ,any clt't l0l) 11,1(1 ht�vll l akon by the
„wnors to dett'tnline it they plat had hoon rOctlt,(Io 1.
Mt I;,, .nteld Gai.i that al l hey asks
111.11 l Its 0.1 iminary plat. apprrwal fins
I hot o 111.1y he "t hor rf�gtl l 11,111vilt t .
III
is tut' the! City to recognize
hePil ';tit.. 1141 tattid that.
PLANNING COMMISSION!' MINUTES `-` JULY 28 1986
Chairman Rosencrantz asked again what action had heen taken to
determine finalization of recording of the plat seven years ago.l
Mr. Rosenfeld said there is nothing in Lake Oswego Code requiring
him to check on progress fo the plat.
Chairman Rosencrantz said that the issue is whether or not an
official plat had been filed. He said the the plat filed was not
an "official" plat. He said that Lake Oswego code does not
contemplate submission of a document, allowing it to "sit" for
years, and then be reopened when the laws have charged and the
requirements have changed dramatically.
Mr. Rosenfeld said that if that were the case, when his six month
extension was granted, there are many other plats that are
invalid that were submitted at the same time. lie pointed out
that current code does put a time limit on the applicant to "get
back", correcting errors that are found.
Mr. Rosenfeld asked for a decision. Chairman Rosencrantz asked
if any of the list of requirements in the letter from Sandra
Young dated November. 23, 1983 had been done. Mr. Rosenfeld said
that they had said that they would be marketing the property and
asked that the file be made available to prospective buyers.
Mr. Rosenfeld reiterated his contention that 44.310 does not have
a time limit within which the applicant must act, other than to
file the "official" plat, which he contends he did. tie said that
an adverse decision woulki he contrary to the 1983 letter stating
that a preliminary plat had been filed.
No one else spoke and Chairman Rosencrantz closed the public
hearing for Commission deliberation.
Chairman Rosencrantz st,atoki his recommendation for an
interpretat icon:
1. 'rhe ward ";11,1I l" in 1,0C 44. 310( 1978) requires that an
"ofticia.1 1)l,1t" must he tided.
2. 'Che term "cit t i i ,t l ' i>-, not meaning less surplussage; the
"ttiCi;al Plat i:, t ilea must he rrrordable.
3. 'r() ht' .an ""It i. t.il" Plat it must comply with the various
re(Itt i romt'lit y . F :1. t t►,a l 1)11 , i s was supplied by Counsel
that thr plat ,lid not c(mi)ly.
4. Tht� .mnotlni to t irate, wltik•11 h,t:; is in excess of that
gal Iowrd I o r comp let i( -)n ,)1 tIic t i ,,11 hl�at. The letter
ft'um stat I int nest Coll�;1 i t lit e ;tn it iciral ,acstion. It
c.0nstitutOd al, int olma] s;t,itement (it intormation that
l.:htlld h1-IVV 1 1'1'11 l't coivOd "OVer the counter".
10
'
PLANNING COMM ISSIOIr'MINUTES - —1JULY 28, 1985
5. Notice was sent to the agent, of the applicant that there
were deficiencies in the plat which were not followed
up.
Chairman Rosencrantz moved that the recommendation stated above
be the Planning Commission's interpretation. Commissioner
Robinette asked that the memo from the Deputy City Attorney be
incorporated into the motion. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Robinette and passed unanimously with Commissioners
Wexler, Robinette, Rosencrant.z, Brockman, Ross and Rodrigues
voting in favor.
OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Faulkner ,asked for an interpretation for the Marylhurst
Center of total capacity (75 feet per child). She said that her
interpretation of total capacity is the 35 children being allowed
use of the play area at one time. The Commission's consensus was
in agreement with that interpretation.
ADJOURNMENT
'There being no further business to conduct, Chairman Rosencr-antz
adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
Res})ec,t.fully Submitted,
Kris ititchcock
hlanniliq Commission Secretary
11
O+awing meehberahlp from.
Lake OVW"O
Weat LMw+ and
surrounding area
WEST CLACKAMAS COUNT
17706 Tree Top Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97036
July 26, 1966
Tot City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
RE. East End Redevelopment
Affiliated wUM tM
League of Woman
Voters of Oregon
and the United Stelae
The League of Women Voters of West Clackamas County is
very interested in East End Redevelopment and has testified
before the City Council in 1981 and the East End Redevelopment
Committee in 1985 supporting revitalization of Lake Oswego's
East End. We would like to reaffirm our support for the East
End Redevelopment concept to the Planning Commission.
We are concerned, however, about the procedure that is
taking place regarding the opportunity for public testimony
at this stage of the planning process. The final wording of
the proposed comprehensive plan amendments was not available
until noon today, yet you expect thoughtful public testimony
this evening. We feel this gime frame is not adequate for
properly hearing the public's views.
Although we have not had time to review the specific
final wording of the amendments, we would like to express
our general support for two areas you are dealing with:
visual access to Ltkewoo,l Ray and public access to the
Willamette River.
In the comprehensive plan it is stated (p.4�) that "the
City will establish significant public viewpoints to assure
that residents of the cor�urnity can iclrntify with and enjoy
the Lake." We strongly support the city taking advantage of
the area's physical resources by acquiring lakefront property
or encouraging the private acquisition of lakefront property
for public use.
The Willamette River Greenway portion of the comprehensive
plan was written with the intent of providing our community with
visual and recreational access to the Willamette River. This
access is as important today as it was whet+ the plan was
written. The League is concerned that when development in
this arra orc ur :. th+ h.isi, inte++t of the plan will not be lost
We will c(mtinu+• IC m,,nitor lhls planning process. We
acr very intrrr ,tad in 1,,,)king at specific development plans
as they are available, and will comment at future public hearings.
Since illy, )
Z,�
Ann Wolverton, President
LEAGUE OF Wt)PfEN VOTERS OF NEST CI,ACKANAS CO.
CITY OF L.AKT; OSWEGO
PLANNING COMMISSION
11ZARING OF JULY 14, 1986
PENN WOOD SUDIVISION
1 t7-79 (CI 1-86-06)
Conmlissioners Present
lirocl:lllan
Ross
Robinette
Rodriques
Wexler
Rosencrantz
;;t;lt: f Present
111.111CnL,11,, Planni-lli'• Director
lhlffV, I)ePuty City Attorney
,,It c11c()cl< , Secretary
C1 1-86-O6 - APPEAL BY JOHN ROSENFELD REGARDING THE PENN WOOD
SUBDIVISION
Faulkner: Yes. The Penn Wood subdivision that was referred by
the City
in 1979 and this cover memo indicates that there were
for review some time
requests for plat extensions submitted
between March 10th and September 4th. On September 4th, the CitY
submitted a copy of the plat to the County for review. There was
a letter from the C01111t.Y Surveyor regarding errors on the plat .
'There is no record of f.urt.her action.
Rosencrantz: Is there any record of any further correspondence
from the (unclear) from 1979 until currently?
Faulkner: 1.983.
12OSE'tic rdll- . 1() R 3 •
Faulkn(.,,r: YOSt
r�
hirlcI bc,twoen ' 83 and '86.
and
U((f I_Z
Ni t ll.i.rlcl tic t.W((11 )U ,111(1
'z; Tho onI otht,I litter;; liStCd in
I h� i� 1 I ' MI i ( .
your exhibits is a 1984.letter that is to the Council. so- very
soon after I arrived in the City,
I was contacted by a realtor
this property and the upshot of the whole tYtinq is
representing
that I- it. requested his request for information and the research
of the plats and code sections. I told him that he needed to
resubmit. Now, the other point I wanted to point out is that in
response to my request, the City Engineering staff has done a
cursory review of what would be necessary
to address changes; and
there's a list here, in here, in your memo, of what. lie has noted -
and I want to underline that's cursor. It's not all-inclusive.
In conclusion, you must. determine whether or not a resubmittal of
Penn wood's preliminary plat in a quantitative (unclear) changed
condition is necessary to allow the owners to (pursue this).
Rosencrantz: okayrhrough testimony (uncle arl .
Rosenfeld: A l 1 ri.gllt , ovoryone I wako up l Wake up! I' m John
Rosenfeld.
1 ' m thc� owns t Of
{)cel: t. ion of i.he propeY
r t
r opre,;Oni i nq t h� k, II Wood subdl v l :: i on , and I ' m a 1, so het e
roprcsont.itty Loun c:.jrtuttq, who t110 owner of the other
CI ty. Inc �,n ,,�� t l ware joint. proporty owttors and we developed
lpro 1uick ly
t hr Int c�l�ori y t oc)(h•t l would like i c, ju;;t , as q
{Nose ih1r, ({ivo you and fill in Some of the gaps
incl eonu c,f t ho dttc ::t ic,n;; 1 h,it worn {ti:ins) r:;k< d herd. Yos,
1h�� {,r�,{u•tty w,r:; ti,•,tlly t�l)l,rc,vrd ,r;� a :;ttt,clivi;;ic�n by ill(' City
(c,�inr i 1 i n Soht rmhot c,t 1971) . W want tttrc,tlgh a lot
2
there. The property is a unique parcel, in that it was over four
a, -res, and the zoning allowed as many as eighteen or nineteen
units on the property. But because of its steep
nature, because
of some special designation as a distinctive natural area, we
ended up with a nine lot subdivision; and that's what we were
talking about, and that's what was approved. To get to the City
council approval in September of 179, we started in June with the
staff and went t.tlrough two planning
Commission hearings, two
hey
hearings before the Conservancy Commission- I don't know if they
exist anymore- and then finally,
the City Council.
preliminary plat was approved in September of 179 and we got. an
extension to file the actual official plat with the City; and we,
in fact, did file it within the requisite code time. Which comes
really t -o the "nuts and bolts" of the issue that's in frontof
you, and that's t111,3 interpretation of former LOC 44310. And if
you've read my letter to the City and you've read the material
from 'Topaz .end t hP i i ty At torn0y, you' 1 1 see o>.tr differences Of
is clear in that all
opinion. In my opinion, thcode pr�tt��
e
that i. :i rt�clui.t'Fd is tljat an of f icial Mat. be prepared and
submii.tOd wl.tl;in a rr�quisikc� timeiacl.
Ill ?t t`,,l,t'l -i
1)�,c that mean
Rosc�ncr�nt .�ci} }
YOU r. an tiuhmt t a I)Iank pieCt' t,t },,I},� r chit ; 1 i hr }�l�lt --
Wa. } } 1 ;u�?ht,,;r it Wc,u 1 .i 'jt
X1)('11 t r, r, wh rt yt,ur
'
Rosencrantz: All right.
Rosenfeld: Keep in mind that if there was an error in this plat,
it was the errors outlined by the letter from the City Engin- I
mean the County Engineer, which you have a copy of. Now I'd like
to make two points about that letter. First of all, the two
"errors" are: one monument is missing (one out of hundreds);
tw:-- a radius is tiff by .03, rather than .95, .92- okay? So,
we're talking about errors of minuscule significance. That's the
first thing I'd like to point out. A blank piece of paper was
not submitted.
Rosencrantz: All I'm saying, I'm drawing a ridiculous
,inclusion; somewhere between there (words unclear, as both
,alkinq at once) it is sonleth.nq that is in all respects ready to
t�cord.
senic�ld: R.i.ght. And that's what was tiled, in my opinion.
:<�stanc'rantz : Wt� 1 1 , 1 aut�ss ttiat ' , an issue Cor us to dec.i de,
ut-
I Ilia 10t t c11' W.'i:; a t t tit' amo it 1I11P Iwo cont at -too ,audita Ycluny 1 n 19-
4
Id:
I'd I ike
to 111.11w )110
of hrr Po6111 i C
you don't mitld,
.illi]
t h'lt I:i
t flat) llllt0rtU
Ila t t'1y
le t i rs,1, t 1mic-'
I 1)ot'allle awaro o1
I Ilia 10t t c11' W.'i:; a t t tit' amo it 1I11P Iwo cont at -too ,audita Ycluny 1 n 19-
4
Faulkner: First exhibit; the yellow sheets.
Rosenfeld: Right. In 1983.
)3roclavaiL._
F3ul 1et's assume, just for the sake of argument, that
you didn' t have proper notice. Does the statute give us
authority to give you final plat approval just because you didn't
get some kind of notice? In other words, is there- tell me what
the correlation is between- the statute sets up certain
requirements for a final plat, and local ordinances have to
satisfy those statutory provisions. I don't. know what the whole
ordinance says, but I do know what the statute says. And my
question is, did you have all those things that are required for
a final plat- surveyor's approval, tax department's approval- all
those kinds of things that you have t.o have for a final plat?
Rosenfeld: As far. as I know, we
jumped-
as far
as I knew then
was- we had jumped through all
the hoops
to get
a final plat;
other: than those outlined in Mrs.
Young's
letter,
Sandra Young's
letter.
Rruc m I'I�at' s 'lot the Point..
Ro,wnteld: But-
ciln i makes a lea i.nt here? And
that is
that the
code xr.yui.res
cel,tain things be done; that an
official
plat be
f i lr'ei. okay?
IL requires other things best ores
the final
plat can
5
be filed, okay? The code sets a limit on what you- a tine scope
when you have to do certain things, okay? It does not set a time
scope that a final plat has to be recorded within a certain date
that we haven't met. In other words, there is not a deadline you
can point to in the code that we have not met.
Oh, I agree with that; I think that's an issue --
Because you define an "official" plat as different than
a "final" plat.
Rosenfeld: It has to be. Because, how can an official plat be a
final- a final plat is something that's been approved by the
City. I think if you look at the way this is worded, it makes
sense. Because, I think that the code is not trying to put a
1i.mi.t on the time. period within which the city has to respond.
Because it: you i.nterpret:i_t that way, then that means that not
only would we file our official plat, but the City would also
have to respond within a requisite period of time, or our rights
would be affected. I don't think that's the intentof the code.
,jewel. represent your group in 1983? is that.
folletter: of Novembor 23rd?
t�c�:t`Illt`Itl: night. in 19113, I C"rnta(-t,(t Mr. Siewert to assist us
in market inq the t,rc,pc'rty .A►u.1 I- tho f ir:;t- was 10 CW d()wn to
the city and ask Sandra Youncl what was I'd like to
6
also point out at this time, that Sandra Young said that no
resubmission was required. And if.. you'll read her letter, she
says nothing about a resubmission.
Rosencrantz : What did she say in the leiter?
Rosencrantz: Certainly, she talked about seven different items
that needed to be done. Were any of those done?
Rosencrantz The print is, in 1983, you were certainly apprised that
your plat. hadn't been recorded.
Rosenfeld:
I that correct?
Rosenfeld: Absolutely.
Rosencrantz : So you knew somethinq was amiss in 1983. You might
argue that: you d i dn' I know back i n 1971? ; I f i nd that di f f icul t to
believe, bocause as a lawyer, when you ;uhmi t documents to a
court.- or any of hoz body- you usua 1 ly verify whether or not
they've boon recorded. You don't :-,it back and just expect that
thin<l.; (lot done; usiia l ly you t ,t back a i oc (- i pt , or some other
civ i �lcnc E. , that your do cunuOn t 11,1:; beOtt I O O I LIOd .
Rosenfeld: You misunderstood me, if you understood me to say
that I had thought it had been recorded; and, in fact, I learned
i. t !-.adn' t .
Rosencrantt Well, I thought your letter indicated that that was
your response to the argument that you didn't go ahead with the
project because of economic conditions. You said, no, you didn't
go ahead because you assumed that it had all been taken care of.
That it didn't (words unclear); maybe I misunderstood. The rest.
of your letter incorrectly states that we feel we have a final
plat that is simply unrecorded. What we said was, the official
plat had been submitted.
IuOsncrant2 The plat was approved by the City.
t:, senfeld:
Yes. And
they
sent
it-
the preliminary plat. was
approved by
the City.
It wasn't
a
blank
piece of paper..
Rosencrant z: And it was submitted--
'�Zc,gpnfoId: It was submitted to the County.
Rosencrant z : And not. accept Od--
it►c)ht .
R
The notice was sent to you, and the Engineers ---
Rosenfeld: And to the City.
Duffy: Doesn't it. have to have had a final approval by the City
before it becomes a plat?
Yes.
Duffy: And that's what's
Rosenfeld: Yeah. And I'm not contending today that I have a
recorded filed plat.- or a plat that's ready to be recorded- the
Planning Commission, or, Planning Department is taking the
position that. I have to now go hack and resubmitfor preliminary
plat approval, even though we had preliminary plat approval back
in 1979.
Rosencrantz: The critical ismit', whish you just_ indicated, you
don'thave- and did not have- a final plat ready for recording.
The difficulty is, Lake Oswego codes .in that. circumstances don't
hrovido too resubmittal. 1'ht,rO is no authot-ity for the Planning
hepartmr��t ��r t.he� 1'lann.iny Ci�mmis�:ian to simply request. a
resut>m i t t a 1 . Tht, ()Illy t h i nrt that wo can do is ask you t.o re-
f i lo.
e-filo. And thAt'S tilt' dit.fi.culty.
0
Rosenfeld: But where in the code does it say that a final- just
let me finish my question- Where i.n the code does it say that a
fi^,al plat has to be recorded by any specified date?
Rosencrantz: Because your plat. no longer complies with current
requirements. You're asking us to record your plat today, when
it doesn'tt comply with the current requirements.
Rosenfeld: Okay--
Rosencrantz: That's the difficulty. You are the individual who
sat with this condition, certainly since 1983. And you're asking
the City now to accept the fact that you've sat on it for four
years, and to still accept the conditions that applied in 1979.
Rosenfeld: Let's take a look at the code section today that says
that that still is a good plat. And specifically, I'm referring
to 49,090 (;) .
huffy: Wait a minute. Where are you-- are still on the letter
signed by you, dated the 10th? is that where you are now?
Rosenfeld: l' m on number 4, paragraph 4, of that letter.
nvii ty: All rikllit . His let tel, cit the l0t:h.
10
Rosenfeld: I don't actually cite the entire code section, but I
have it here. Paraphrasing from 49,090, it says subdivisions
requiring preliminary plat approval were granted prior to
September 15, 1U81, may occur pursuant to such approvals.
Duffy: But it. wasn't: granted.
Rosenfeld: V -e preliminary plat was approved!
RoI)i rte While we are looking, may I ask you something? I read
all this this morning. I honestly did- even though it may not
look it now. Why don't you resubmit this thinq- take the extra
density transfer you could have here- and get going with this?
Rosenfeld: The extra density- the extra density- we were allowed
extra density back in 1979. We wanted it; we went through
hearing after hearing because everyone- the neighbors- did not
want it.
R.�hinette : No, 1)ut i :;c r we have a new code now that allows this
kind of thincl; whY d0ll't you justquickly como in with a new, a
new proposal?
Roseliteld•
Wt
t w(, sperlt: t(,rl
tllk)usand
dollars paying two
onginoors,
,oils
x{ rl., dt,:,igners,
to do this;
subdivision.
11.
Rosencrantz: Well, but the soils haven't changed, all of the
information is still valid, soils haven't changed--
RnqPnfeld: But the neighbors are there--
Rosencrantz: Is that rt,.:illy your concern, i.s going through the
public hearing process again?
Rosenfeld: Yes.
iwsencrant :.: okay. Okay .
1 don't know, let's see- I don't know where it is --
Where is it?
Rosenfeld: Where is the subdivision? It's at the inter-- if you
go up Cornell Street, which is off McVey, and you, it's between,
as you hit. Larch- if you've gone to Burgess Road, you're too far.
What will they charge you for this, this time around, if
you--
12osenf o Id: Wr 1 1, 1 c9on' t know i t t ht,s(� people are- s t i l l cox i :,t .
The who worked on thc,--
0
No, I don't mean privately, I mean, what does the city
charge for plat processing?
Faulkner: Frankly, I don't have my fee schedule.
Duffy: The point is, does he come within the ordinance language,
or doesn't he?
Rrockman : Well, I think- they convinced me that technically, he
does not. And I'm just trying to find why he's spending all this
time on this one, it seems like he ought to --
Rosenfeld:
Okay. Okay. Okay• If You feel that-- excuse me-- if you I
technically do not, I think you'd better re -read the code.
llro •kman But you see I happen to be a lawyer, t, "Id every day,
two lawyers go into a court, both think they're riclht, and the
court adjudicates one is wrong. You, and perhaps- 1 don't know
how the vote's going to come out in Planning commission, or you
and staff disagree- bath interpret the language differently.
Maybe the court's going to have to adjudicate it.
Rosenfeld:Maybe they will.
And t hk,n Illoa11wI11 I
you have a :;ut,a t v i r; i.cln through
and bu.i 1 t ; is why i w,-AS,t:;k i nc1 my yuc:�st i on. I "Pvm--
13
Can you answer another question?
Rosenfeld: Yeah.
You could have put eighteen units up there- why wasn't--
,Senfe1d: The- there's some steep slopes up thor_e, and the
--:-.tent was to keep all the building on reasonable grades. And
also, a portion of the property was designated in the
:omprehensive Plan as a distinctive natural area, which was a new
.Incept at the time. And they really weren't sure what .it meant,
and we offered to treat it as an area where we leave it unbuilt;
in other words, leave the trees that were there. And that was
very appealing to the Planning Commission and the City Council at
the time. So, when you cut out a bunch of the treed area, and
you cut out the steeper slopes, it condensed the buildable area.
\ow, we still could have gone with the P.U.D. at the time, but
hat was just a decision we made, not to go that route.
auIkner: But now you could transfer the density off of all
,base slopes, ncow.
senfeld: 1 don't know.
z'aulkner: Yes, you could. That's how we havo the code now.
14
Rosencrantz:You see, if you did a new plat., you wouldn't- you'd have
advantages there.
Rosenfeld: Mr. Rosencrantz, the 49090(2), the letter from the
City Attorney, seems to think that. only applies to matters
regarding design review development.
Rosencrantz: I disagree with that. I've read it. what I think,
though; however, what this language is intended to do was in
effect to grandfather only for the intervening period. This -
these changee occurred September 15, 1981 and we've got other
sections of the code we've dealt with the very same issue. It
was not intended to permanently grandfather anybody who got a
development in 1981; it was simply designed to bridge the gap of
people who were in effect:- had the approval but. hadn't started
their subdivision prior to the date that the standards changed.
And, in effect, it's conformi.ny language. That's the way I would
interpret this, because that's the trey date that: this went into
effect. it doesn'tgive you gland ather rights forever, simply
because you had your preliminary plat In 1.979.
Rosenfeld: well, what is the time deadline, then, in the code -
how long is it. good for?
ltosetic rantz: I
1 pink alit,
t ting
is simply
t lit, t inu, i hal would
have
l: eon normal,
in othrr
wards
tht" six
111"lltlt period; i.f,
for
15
example, you had gotten your preliminary plat approval in August,
You would have still been able to file your plat- your final.
plat, excuse me- commenced construction, and go on with your
subdivision, under the old rules, even though you did so after
September 15, 1981. This is simply grandfather.inq language for
conformance.
Rosenfeld: I ' d like to, I ' m getting the flavor of what. your
opinion is on this and I'd just like to :ging to your attention
that I've sought an answer to this question since 1983. 1 t_ was
When I- what happened was, we wanted to market the property, so
we went to Sandra Young. She told me, face to face, no
resubmission of the preliminary plat would be required. And then
s1le summarized what would be required in this letter. As a
result of that, we marketed the property, and sold it. And the
fellow who bought it contacted the ,' i t y ;1:-.,i was given conflictinq
answers, whether resubmission would t,(, required. He subsequently
towed out of tale contract; I sued hi.m for his earnest money and I
L:on. one of his defenses was that submi,,z�,on of the preliminary
Mat was goinq to be required.
Rosencrant z: Okay- I don' t know
wl;..: the details ��t y��ur
:.ntr.act were, lntl urlcie�r wh,lt basis; )W, y;u know, so I'm
�N'.l.lt t 110 1,01evant'e ttt (lliat
Rosent:eld: Well, the relevance is, ti1.1'. it h,:: t,,ken nu- yc,u
1.6
know, you say why haven't you done anything since 1983? I have
asked since 1.9- I got an answer in 1983. The answer was that it
didn't need to be done!
Rosencrantz: All right, so --
Rosenfeld: It was only--
Rosencrantz: Okay, so I understand what was--
Rnsenfeld: Could I, could I, could I just finish?
Rosencrantz: Yeah. I want to understand what you're saying --
Rosenfeld: Okay.
Rosencrant 7.: I think that 's vt,t.-y important. Did you
sell the property, than, following this letter from Mr. Siewert.,
in 1983? Is that, wlion the sale took place?
Rosenfeld: Yes. Correct.
Rosencrantz: Okay. And--
RosenfScald it twice, as a matter of fact.
17
Rosencrantz: You sold it twice?
Rosenfeld: Right. one backed out and then I sold it- I sold it
:n January of '84 and then again in February of '84.
sencr.antz: Al.1 right. And when did the court adjudication
:;me down?
,osenfeld:
That was in
September
6th of 1985. And then right.
after that,
I said, "Bill"
(see we're--)
Rosencrantz: Uh-huh.
Rosenfeld: I said, "We'd better find out exactly what the City's
position is on this, because they're- the people tried to use as
a defense in that law suit that the City is going to require
i-esubmission of that plat." So, Topaz, may not remember, but we
first met with tier in November of 198'x. She'd probably been in
ciffice for two days, or somethinct. And at that time, she said
she would look at it. AnJ then we had another meeting, and then
that started- we had anotho"r meeting in February of 1986. It is
now ,]uly of 1986 and this: is something that [ had an answer for
back in Novembo r Of 1983.
think E at t of t hk� ki i i i-icu l t.y i S that you had an
,111:;Wel i ,j 1081 that was --
l8
a
That applied in 1983.
Rosencrantz: Excuse me?
It applied in '83.
Rosencrantz: Yeah. It applied in 1983, and I guess what's
difficult is that you never had a final approved plat. And that. -
you were certainly aware of a recorded plat, you were certainly aware
of that in 1983. And to now, in 1986, ask to record a plat under
the conditions that existed in 1979, that's where the difficulty
is.
w<Osr��•r1�.{2. : (wh}, h.ad you) not. complied with the seven points listed
in Sandy Young's memo of 1983?
Rosenfeld: My intent at that time w.;s to immediately sell the
property and allow whoever- we furnished this with our offering
materials.
Rosencrantz: But did that individual ever comply? Obviously
not. .
I:.�seni e• l (t :
N
l ;ee.• whE, rr t 1l .i s
is go inq- 1 just- i n your
dcc1s �n
1 l ,j:;
m,iko clear where in
your readinq of. 443llt- or
any
thw code- it toyuir(•:;
thaat a preliminary plat,
19
t1nat once the plat is filed with the City, that it then has to be
recorded within a specified date.
Rosencrantz: I think the difficulty is in the concept of a final
plat and my personal conviction is, is that until you had met all
of the requirements, you had not submitted something that was
ready for recording. You needed the Surveyor's signature, you
needed the various other signatures and sign -offs. Those were
not obtained at the time.
Rosenfeld: Then, under your reading, if I were to file- let's
take a look at 44310- if I were to file my hard board (mylar)
plat with the City on the day after five months and twenty-nine
:lays, then there would be no way I would have complied with this
:ode section. Because that would have given the City no time to
review i.t, themselves, send it to the county, make' sure the taxes
-ad been paid- do all that- because what you're--
Rosencrant.z: That's why you are allowed a six month period.
Rosenfeld: Well then your reading of this says that. the City is-
; -he City has- you have to give them time within this period.
Rosenfeld: I thank that's t rue cif a lot o.f things. When you're
arquinq a case in court, you have so many days to file an appeal,
.ion' t you?
20
Rosenfeld: But the court does not have a limited number of days
to respond. What you're reading of this is that the City has a
limited number of days to respond. You're saying to me that if I
file this after five months and twenty-nine days, that. I haven't
met the statute.
Rosenerantz: No, no. No, I'm not saying
it has to be recorded
within that
timt, frame, I'm saying you have
to submit something
that is in
all respects ready to be recorded within that time
frame. That's
different. The City may
record it three weeks
later, but
I'm saying that for you to have
a final plat, it means
that it has
to be in all respects ready for r.ecordi.nq; otherwise,
it is not final.
Or it is not official.
And that didn't occur.
You didn't
have the Surveyor's signature
and it wasn't- all the
requisite
steps hadn't been completed
within they six month
period. You can't simply- and that's
what I- l was usinq a
different
example, the blank sheet of
paper; but i.t's riot
sufficient
to submit, in my judgment., to
submit simply something
that is not
complete and say that you've
submitted a final plat.
You can't
have submitted a final plat
until .it's ready for
recording.
Rosenfeld: kay. Well, let's go down this list that- Sandra
Younq herv, then, on the letter of November 23rd and see what
it. its t h" t ' s missing. Okay? One i s , I've al ready !c ubmi t t r. d the
plat.
21
Rosencrantz: You've noted her comment is, request you notice
comment, September 26th- request for six month extension in
filing time.
Rosenfeld: Right. You know why that was? Because there is a
code- there was a code- it's this code section! IT had to make
sure that my official plat was recorded within the requisite
time.
Rosencrantz: No. She says "filing time", not recording time,
"filing time".
Rosenfeld: No, that's right, filing my official plat--
Rosencrantz:
That's my point, that's
my
point. That means that
you have the
thin.i- already filed it,
in
all respects ready to be
recorded. It's
up, to the City, then,
to
record it --
Rosenfeld: But that: wouldn't make any sense, because why- are
you saying that every plat that is recorded with the City is all,
is just_ perfect, when the City reviews it and when the County
reviews it, they're not going_ to find any mistakes in it?
Rosencrantz: I'm ScAYing that i L's your obligat i()n witliin ix
months to get that in ►-(-corded Corm, Vis.
22
Rosenfeld: But what if I file- what if I file, Larry, what. if I
filed it five months and thirty- are you saying that--
Rosencrantz: You're running the risk of having the thing not be
accepted and losing the filing period. That's correct. That's
why there's six months for you to get off the dime and get the
thing in, and get:. it all ready for recording. Prudence would
tend to dictate that you get that thing in in three months; it
gives you three months if you have to correct something. six
months is not an unreasonable, time. The construction that you're
asking for is that you could have gotten a plat approval in 1912
and come in today and expect. it to be recorded. You're asking
that there be no time limit whatsoever on a plat, simply because
some time in past history, you got approval. I don't (think the)
construction stands, either.
Rosenfeld: Well, I agree that. t hat may not sound appealing to
you; my argument is, though, if you read the code, that's what it
says.
Rosen crant.z: No, i.t. doo,; not.. That's my judgiPent and I- what
the coda says to me is that you Il.lvo six months within which to
clet your final plat in ready f:or m tor rec: ordi.nd .
Rosenfeld: Okay . My I osporl-, , tc) t hat wclu I d bo 1 11,11 I Ilo only
t I11 n(..l t hat ' S not - was not ready- was t ho I e`spoll!;i' 1 t, t llO;;(. t w()
23
You tY minornor
take
dim
jnlmou
s
qqqq
a look at the
s re9ues is by
e h
Rosencldntz• other items e r� ty Engit,e
(YF,� or.
us
but) Beca_
uose ifejd'
RW they we en t e 4 y
t,ti ej1 do
I
19,93
1 wool d done Whose
�o`E, `ontet,d that w �aujt Is th
dt�
ter . e
,`a!1t ,, n did f� I t kn
t! ka.Y. °h' a
1`�t i E`er Thi b 0 u t
th
�r�irlk pocic di fflc em
when that You j 1Y } °u as uj t� You h
You make a ja have w
cls submit SuZ.6, wyer, 1 th t
c4tly jjY get a a deed that those and 1 /m �� j that 1s that
what COPY bac u /Hake th Z ngs awyer a T
getkit,cl k. sure get t s wejj
a � answer. s of rec :�nc3 I was that j t / taken car ,
to know th I t would
o eipts, or w trY1n9 to s recorded. e °f.
u d h d,
to belie ve at, before wet be helpful for t, we i fjt,d out f2- YOu
black ho that we s make a d fO1' me t S.S and I om the
`je' 1 think imply accept ecj slot,, And ° kt,ow� j wo clad not
the plat r f u1d
P�jk`e rh t e must be s° s and they `end i t diff
I f f . like
clot,' ere
s cul t
t knoc�r w me k j t,d Of appear
e is
a t. ,
h °w� what receipt
or-_ own a
kclsena���r�g 1t, mY no
(.g Okay, could t N t o You
eveta! You .f}1jd I
ca �,P j t, tC, �� t tv
ajk�jtg at what
E'�►stPd
th,, in , 1979?
time
j�,`�T.
1,
1Q
very minor diminimous requests by the City Engineer. Because if
you take a look at these other items--
Rosencrantz: (Yes, but) they weren't done. Whose fault is that?
Rosenfeld: Well, I would contend that we didn't know about them
until 1983.
Rosencrantz: okay. The difficulty you have with that is that I
think that., especially you as a lawyer, and I'm a lawyer as well,
I think that you make sure that those things get taken care of.
When you submit a deed, you make sure that it's recorded. You
usually get a copy back. And I was trying to find out from the
City what kinds of receipts, or whatever, we issue and I did not
get an answer. It would be helpful for me to know, I would like
to know that, before we make a decision. And I find it difficult
to believes that we simply accept plats and they disappear down a
black hole. I think there must be some kind of receipt or--
Faulknoi: There is now, what I'm saying in my note to you is, I
don't knew what.--
I,osoncrant z: okay, could you find out what Existed in 1979?
l.u?ople talking at thl z-11110 "m('; Unc1('kl1 ) .
24
Rosenfeld: When someone goes to the City and says, what's the
star �f something? And the City says to you, this is what
S, ou do
needs to be done; someone looks you in the eye and say. y
the things you need to
not need to resubmit the plat- these are
do. When she listed these things, she didn't. say,
,you have to -
by the way, you better, now that you know about the County
Surveyor's letter, you better do this withitl "X" number of days.
She didn't say that.
Faulkner: Maybe she (unclear).
r
Rosenfeld: I don't think you know when the date is;
because the
City didn't know. Because when I went back and asked,
when we
went back and asked in November of 19`85,
the answer was, "we
don't know." We went back in February of lash, the answer was,
"we don't know". Finally, the City Attorney looks atit, and
says,
"this is how we interpret it; now we know."
Mr. Chairman, 1 have a question. I did
want_ •t.o hear from Sanclt�r� huffy what. Jim Coleman
Would you please point tt�c� phi:ase? Bc�caus�� he
�>f f is ial legal �I( l- i t, ions fair the City, 'I'd l
attorneys, and everybody- wc�l l , [ mean- t h ' :: isn't
t lt- 1 dun' t t 1� i nk thi:; :;huld 1 a iu.l,7mc'nt
read this- but I
s about this.
say make
is hired to
know you're both
a _judgment for
for tile Planning
�'„nuni:•:,icit, l Ilttnk I want to kn()w will -it
the law
is.
Duffy:
Jim says there's not an
approved
preliminary
plat
any
more,
once notification came back
that there
were errors
with
it.
That there isn't even a preliminary plat any more?
Duffy: Not an approved preliminary plat.
All right. Well, then that's the issue, isn't it? Right.
t''..: e .
C j: Now you've got to go back and get another approved
preliminary plat.
Now, wa:, that true then?
:.;t£Y: That's what I -
Wait. a minute, are you saying that was true at the time --
buff : We were dealing with the 1978 code. Yes.
Rosencrantz: All right. c'an you verify that?
11111,1t ' wh.ji wr JAkIt"I.
Rosencrant. z : art, o f ow t hi ngs I woII I (A 1 i ke t o know. One
26
is, was that true in 1979? And secondly, what was the process
for notification of unrecorded plats?
Given all of this, Crow could we expedite this through
ow?
RosencrantZ:
Well, I think really what Mr. Rosenfeld wants to
avoid is
a
public hearing.
Am I correct? I
mean, let's strip
away all
of
the rest of
it.
I think the issue
is--
Rosenfeld: We 1, it's riot just the public hearing; there were
some big money issues involved in the conditions that were going
to be attached to the development of the subdivision. One of the
biggest money issues is what was going to happen to Cornell
Street. And what one of the conditions attached to the approval
of the preliminary plat was that the developer would add two feet
to Cornell Streit; which we priced out and it was a reasonable
thing we couli afford. What other people were pushing for is
that the deve;,,por would be responsible for re -doing entire
rne11 Stre�t.�t . Now, t hr property has hundreds of feet along
ornel 1 St..r-et?t ; t t ' s 11)('N common- It run„ t-rc,m the top of the
hill, all the way down to the bottom. And thatwould make it
lustan t`conomir thing to do.
F:encurant : fl; -hull. 'low many unit :; w010 yoll planning on this
subdivision?
J '7
Rosenfeld: Nine.
Rosencrantz: Nine units.
Rosenfeld: Nina units. So, one of the big e, canomic issues was
that Cornell Street. And the other big economic issue was the
drainage. And there were some trade-offs involved with the
drainage. That's another reason why I don't choose to go through
the hearing process again, is because I don't choose to make the
issue of the development of the improvement of Cornell Street.
It's a Count -.y road and it's
a road that the County has chosen to
ignore for a lot of years; as a result., it needs attention.
Rosencrantz: It.'s not alone in that respect.
If,I,: t!f._• But. 1 don' t: think we've required someone- the Cit
------ � g y has
110v0i 1 equired someone to build a whole Cornell Street.
Rosenfeld: Wall, M". Arselllev, a former--
Rosencrall tz: 1 hate to tell you, but Washington County has askod
us, in connect -ion with a development, to completely regrade a
street in Washington County.
A .,, -1 For 111.11N 1.111i. t -S ?
i_2os�e1lc;ra11t7: No, it's not fo,- nine units, but it's about
28
$250,000; I mean, it is total for a piece of property that: costs
$50,000. Because they don't have the money in their budget and
the site lines aren't there, and so what they're saying is is
that they expect the developer to absorb it, and it's ridiculous.
Rosenfeld: If you base your decision, though, .:n the rationale
that lost our preliminary plat. because it was deficient in
ttat-se two- in the t.wo areas pointed out by the County Surveyor,
I'd just like you to recognize how de miraiMI13 the comments.
Rosencrantz: That isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not
you've had a plat that was accepted and recorded. It's not what
the- you're missing my point.. It isn't the rationale; I'm still
concerned, or troubled, by the fact that- I'm still keying back
in the issue of what kind of receipt you get back. I'm concerned
about the fact that nothing was done for seven years with this
particular plat, and I have a qreat deal of difficulty, asking us
now to record a plat that was accepted under conditions in 1979.
That is grossly urafair to other individuals who comply with
current requirements.
ttosenfeld: Well. 1 .-ould, you knew, maybe there's a compromise
position that the rJanninq Depar tmc'nt could take, in the sense of
not. requir.inq ra E,uhlis hepariraq On thcmittt�r, lout requiring us to
1eet ccs t t �a i n curb he i qht s, sand what rvt,r- yc�u know- i s required
currently.
29
pYL•ck„..N-N" ; Excuse me, we've just debated this- you know what I would
really like to see? I hate to put you to all this work, but I
t.l;;nk we ought to make a really good record as to whatever our
decision is; what I would like to see is (and it i.s work, I'm
really sorry to tell you this, but) the st.atutory scheme we have
to follow is, it's mandatory as I understand. What do the
statutes require in 1978? A check list.. The preliminary plat
has to be in compliance with the comprehensive Plan; there are
certain other requirements. Final plat has to meetcertain
requirements. It has to close within a one hundred and whatever
it is, has to have tax- County tax certificate- it has to have a
bunch of other things. I'd like to take what's in the file- well
then, the second thing is take L.O.'s code at that point and
match it, because we've gotthis little debate about. the
"official"- which I think will came out. when you put it into the
matrix of the State scheme, as to being- it'll probably come out
as a "final" plat. That column. Then, let's take what's in the
official record and let's check off just where we are. And if
we've complied- if he has, complied with everything that is
requi.i-ed of a prt-liminary plat; you know, you don't get twenty-
two days to file a case, yk�u know, you get twenty-one to go to
L1113A . Well, ono day, to a 1: t ")f. us- kle mi.nim,ts it. ain't. If
lie c oml>l ios with all the t h teas on t 11t, check list, then his
aryunu nt. is :�ustai►lc�d.
It ht, dco:in' t., then lie hasr" t .
30
Rosenfeld: Let me ask you a question about. that approach. My
memory is that one of the prerequisites for recording your final
plat. is that you either bond your improvements, or you put them
in. Okay? Now, I think that's a good example of something that
has nothing to do with a preliminary plat, but does- is a
prerequisite to a final plat. Now, what if I haven't- I didn't
do that?
00-0 : We're going to make check list; we'll take a list and --
Rosenfeld:
Okay. I
would
contend, though, thatthat would not
be on the
check list
for a
preliminary plat.
vtilCkm2h
If
it's
a statutory requirement, let's take a look at -
let's
take
a look
at what they are.
Rosenfeld: Okay, fine. In response to Ms. Robi.nette's- the
reason why this is before you, is because there was a City
Manager decision and your code says that. you appeal
interpretations of city codes to this Board.
��,, a,. t think also impol•tZint to this is a clear interpretation
from You, in addition to tilt., al lo(jed grandfathering provision,
'111d what t ht's' 111(`all. 1,11, k,Il l 1' w,ly we l i -o okling to resolve this is
to mako ,11, c)I jrk•t i ve and opp l y t hl, t ,W t in the record to what's
rE'qu i T cid .
If his final plat's recorded, he's home free. It could
take twenty years, thirty years—
ZS; pkat', he could have done it. in 1912, or whatever.
sure! There's a provision in the statute to abandon
those, to().
So, when are we going to do this?
r �.. Next time. Regular meeting?
Rosencrant2: At that. point, it should not 1)t' a 1011�1 discussion.
We do have time the 24th.
RoSe.T1Cr ant; z• Can you do it? Is that.. all t 0,111t with you?
Rosenfeld: The 2 4 t h?
Rosenrt"ant R i yh t .
Rost, nIt, V1110
32
I would
like
to
know,
say that he had the "official" or
"f ;nal"
plat, and
did
not
start
construction—
If his final plat's recorded, he's home free. It could
take twenty years, thirty years—
ZS; pkat', he could have done it. in 1912, or whatever.
sure! There's a provision in the statute to abandon
those, to().
So, when are we going to do this?
r �.. Next time. Regular meeting?
Rosencrant2: At that. point, it should not 1)t' a 1011�1 discussion.
We do have time the 24th.
RoSe.T1Cr ant; z• Can you do it? Is that.. all t 0,111t with you?
Rosenfeld: The 2 4 t h?
Rosenrt"ant R i yh t .
Rost, nIt, V1110
32
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING COI-DIISSION
HEARING OF JULY 28, 1886
CONTINUATION OF PENN WOOD SUBDIVISION PLAT APPEAL
SD 17-79 (CI 1-86-06)
Commissioners Present
Rosencrant:•.
Brockman
Wexler
Rodriques
Robinette
Staff Present.
Faulkner, P lanni'V, Pi ".'cto,.
Duffy, Deputy Citv Attorney
Hitchcock, Secretary
c � � -- a b P�►1
( age e)
CI 1-86-06 AN APPEAL BY JOHN ROSENFELD- CONTINUATION OF PENN
WOOD SUBDIVISION PLA'r APPEAL
Rosencrantz:
There
is also
some additional staff infor_;ation
that you would
like to
comment.
on?
1)uf ty : okay. If you've read this, I ' m not going to go through
;t again; otherwise, 1 can make specific comments on things that.
1, you know, things that are probably of most importance- I don't
know how you want to--
r;o ahead and highlight those for. us. We've had it now
since (unclear- much noise in background).
Duffy: Okay. On page
under LOC 44,330. Thi.;
three, I've indicated the requirements
refers back to the requirements for a
final plat, under the1978
code. There's a list of nine- at
least nine things- ,ind
some subsections there as well. Page
four, then, lists the
specific conditions of approval that
project had. Page' t ive,
I i;ltiicat.e that ttlt,re wasn't: compliance
with the cods? i n thtit a
review by Our enq i nt-t,r i nq staf f indicates
thatsubsections, 5, -1, 8
and a weren't mot ill the submitted final
plat, as follOWS: the
sot-b,ick`, weren't dimensioned; the
t.litnt:ns i c,n:: .'t t 1►t� '17 ;ement "; art, not ill tilt, pial and some whole
easements mi:;sinq;
tliolt' i:; 111 i.e-. no
aced;,;; ont0
which i:; slot :;tateki oll thr (taco) of they
protection restriction which isn't shown on the (face) of the
plat. All of those are requirements before the City Engineer
would have signed off on that plat. As far as the conditions,
Condition #2 wasn't met, which was a requirement that t.here was
no direct access from any proposed lot to Cornell Street.
Condition #3 wasn't. met, in that there must be a public drainage
easement 30 feet in width (and it just goes to the top of the
:auks). Condition #6, which addressed special set -backs as shown
.n a specific exhibit, was not met because there weren't any
dimensions. And Condition #8, required a widening of "up to two
feet." and it indicates that if that's followed then, it would be
less than (the span of) twenty feet- which is now the current
minimum- so that's a combination of current requirements with the
codes, plus that conditional requirement at the time. All of
:hat ends up saying there was a whole lot more wrong with that
final plat. than just those two very minor things that came back
from the County Surveyor.. I refer you to page nine; that is a
:tate requirement of survey and plat or a subdivision. That.
provision roquiles all accurato recordable plat be prepared.
There was a minor error in the distance of a boundary line, noted
t ho County Survoyor; and therefore, subsert ion 5 of that
t icul.ar statute isn't. IIIc?t:.. Ansi then [ think all the
.le f is i enCy 110t end Prov ious ly by the eno i noer i ng staff indicates
that sub:;ect icon 1 of that pill t iculal :;t,it ut o (unc•leal ) . On page
o l evoti t holo' :; allot hel ORS, wh i Ch Ad j ld i c ate.,, that t her. e are
mark.i ncis of intoi i.0t monument :; ,.1 t t or t'tIcol ct i llq of t ho p 1 a I ; or
!gond c>1 c',l:;h dopmL l t rt`qui rt`moill , it t hol o i s;tl' t a sot t illy ()t
1
those interior markers. And there wasn't any bond or cash
deposit for interior monuments, and
one of those interior
monuments was missing; so either you're
going to have to have all
the interior monuments set, or the cash
bond was going to have to
be provided, which it was not. Page fourteen,
there- well, it's
actually thirteen and fourteen- OHS requires a payment of tax
just before the plat is required. We
don't know that the taxes
but there was no .>igr.-off
on the plat by the county
weren't paid,
Assessor to indicate compliance wish that
particular code statute
section. Page sixteen of my 111E`1110
indicates- this is LOC
requirements, 1986- "preparation ;and
submittal of final plat or
plan- plan or plat". Now, tho final
plan or plat must be
submitted within a year of the date of the order setting forth a
final decision; and upon application,
prior to the expiration of
a one year period. And then you c-11
yet. a ono year extension, if
you apply for t ; arlci you have,
l m(1t tt`l- of right, can get
that. i'hat �: ��c i t i c authority
laws ext onsi.ons and it gives
credance to tl.le argument. that ;'
pro-vi.ous requirements and
submission rt plat within ::ix
the from the approval of the
preliminal", .•iat, had no :.}`e
it authority allowing an
oxtension. porhaps ill(" :at 11111k
1 lie.,; that because there. WAs
110 sp('C'ltli allthll►'1iy, tll,at tllt` (,`:Illlll5�'�L�1Tl
acted outside of it-',
,Ali tll()liiy in .1;lowlTlq all extt'llE;iloll.
And ihai, Wllat I'm saying is
:; t ,l t l l t o code P1 ov i :.
"ll, which (lives
nit Ilo1' i t y t; ill(, P 1 ,11111 i lilt Colllm l
; i oil to have all a xt oil , i cell of
t illiv, cl lvc`;: .,, ('d,111c'e t o t he I 'Ict
i heat t hen` wclsil' t allt hill i t y
pi e'viuur:ly. Oil llrlyW tw0lity-t 111 et,,
t ht,1-e we I r ,;omr illi :.'el 1,111e tial:
77 7 1,77
code provisions in 1986, whic,
the engineering staff went
through, and they've got a long de,.,;
I'm not going to go through
all of them- A through I- there's—
these are a list of the
problems that exist with the
Mat now, which make it
unrecordable. And in comparing tht�
list under the code of things
that are necessary, with the list
that was previously- you can
see there are just pages more c,-
obviously, they are there for some
requirements. And, I mean
•-ason.
I would like t.o address that granui
ather right that is provided
by our present. LOC 49.090. On 49,085
was an adoption of the
development standards; it just goes
through and says the City of
Lake Oswego adopts the City of Lake
Oswego's standards (adopted)
in 1981. And then, 49.090 address,:,
,; the applicability of those
development standards. And my
is that subsection 2 of
49.090 was intended to allow "PI
preliminary plat approval, but Wilk'
111:ants who had obtained a
without a recorded final
plat, to simply proceeLi with th.,
-'tOPs flecessary to perfect: a
recorded plat without r'o.hirn.i ng t
-0 "arin i ng Commission to
have their prt,l iminary plat. an. ,
, . fc)r COmpl.iances in new
development standards. That's t.h,;
1,.;,Inu'nt thllt You brought up,
Mr. (hatl'lll�jn, h�1vitic) t.c) do with
;` l: i,Il ly an i,trter. im kind of
thing that wa cit t u l r l req .
alt' ol h(`1
, ns lit t he l'odit t hat tit I, l i Ze
I�,�I tialtl!' proV'lsIon.
Duffy: Okay. These particular pr -jests are then subjected to a
review for rompliance as develop: nt standards when the actual
development begins; so, what they' done is they caught him at a
different stage. Instead of the 1, ;i.nninq, they catch him at the
time that the" development is goin(: t.o actually occur. And then
this provision, run in conjunct i .,Ti with LOC 49,330(1), which
allows the one year to submit a t nal plat, and then the one
additional year for an extension, wt,.,uld lead you to the fact that
never would you have more than t\, , years before you would be
required to go back to the Plannin,7 Commission. And in light of
the fact that this approval occurrea in 1979, 1 think that there
is plenty of code and Oregon statutory authority to have you go
ahead and be supportable in requi., ng this project to come down
before you.
Rosencrantz:
That's a pi i ty ohiect.iv(, evaluation.
you have any questions?
Not at this timo, no.
Rosenc,r. antz : Okay , w(`' I 1 r(` -Op(-:. t.hE, pull 1 i c: tieari nq and hear
some testimony in :ctippol t cit t.hc� 1 (` llle::t t of (unclear- background
Rosenf eId: M�• n,lnu` i jOIln 1:, :,(`nt i, i ' m t lio owner of a portion
of t ho t't r111 Wood Inki i optosont .i nq t ho other owner,
I,00n (;.II t un(1. t ins :;:; 1 11 1 :; � 10 i examp I o ()i why we have
lawyers and disagreements, because just as confident. as Ms. buffy
is that she has provided you a definitive statement of why this
preliminary plat is no good, 1 think I can provide you with a
brief explanation- and most of you have heard this already- of
why there is absolutely no authority for the premise that the
preliminary plat as approved is still a good preliminary plat.
And that's the one issue that I went you to focus on, because Ms.
Duffy, in her memo, agrees with mt,.
If you take a look at her very first
item on page two, we look at
the issue in front of us, and that -'s
in (LOC)
44,310. Because
that's the only authority that silo's
providing
to me and to you,
to say that our preliminary plat
approval-
to say that our
preliminary plat approval- is llo good.
I'm
not contending we
have a valid final plat, or that: ', ':
ready for
approval, or that
it would be approve„ as filed; I'm
not contending
any of that.
The City has told mo that because, t
44::310, our preliminary plat
is no good. 44310- all it. says
(hat all official plat has to
be filed by a FOLIulsite date. i
's all it
says. It doesn't-
say anything has t." he approved 1,\-
requisite
data, all it says
is that an offi-cial plat has to t ailed.
And
that. makes sense;
because they wort, n,,It trying to i,i,i
tht., City
to get back to mcg
within a requrtiitt° Period of- i ini,
Now. If
you look at. her
r esponst", hcIr r �`;;t���r,i.t� i:;, y�Is-
with
44,310. The City
Attorney tl(%te is �.imrt t inq my
;:ayiny
that we have
compl.it'd with 44.310; we havr ;;ut
mi ► tt�d t hi'
plat within the
requisite pee-io,t1 .,r time.
0
Rosencrantz: Mr. Rosenfeld, this still brings back this issue
that we talked about last time; t lave a ridiculous example of
submitting a blank piece of paper. I think the argument that
you're advanc incl is that if YOU -..bmit anything that has some
bare resemblance to a plat, that: t:
becomes an official plat.
I don't think that was what was intz�:%ded by this statute at all.
What your point. was at that time, i might finish, was that you
had merely a couple of. technical <i�erences in the measurements,
(so you could balance the) dc:;c t iE ns; whereas what counsel has
shown is that ,your olai.m is far mot.:: .leficient than that.
Rosenfeld:
okay. Isn't it
intet.-ting, isn'tit interesting -
the only deficiencies in the
plat- `,lt I find that she's talking
about now,
show tap oil page five; ^cause everything else after
that has to
do what- it takes
to c?i` final plat recordQd, And I
never- for
rxampl��, p�)sti-ng
1`,t, ;, t:t tvC,c' of thinq- I'm not
saying I aver gcit t hrt
t here`' s no nothing in
the ordinance
that said you
it.;,j t�`t the -'re l)y a particular
data. l;ttt
the thinq's that
you t r r i nc� t ��, Mr.. Cha firman, l
think are
1 iSt06 (,_)n page
five; -illy, in Items 1
through 4
there, lsn' i i
t nt �' i i ny t h t t hc' applicant is
i
advisc`k1 of
�� July 28111
1'h<_;E
t.; 1 itvt�t w,is advised of this
�`1 1 r r
it, 1983- of
1479.
Ctc��:c�nc�r,ynt x: 1�iit volt take any
t irti whet -over ofi.er you
l
a k I II%•I I!; plat into the pry co' =' It i of �tnyl,()(ly (-j,111 and ask
What happened with their plat- w,l3 I recMritc`d I mean, that'",
the difficulty I have; there's b- en no follow up on this for
seven years! And you're now com.iii- before us seven years later,
saying, "Gee- 1 want my plat re -instated."
Rosenfeld: A 1 1 I want is the � i t y to recognize that a
preliminary plat approval has --en set. Now, there may be
ordinances that require that the ,velopment of that plat meet
new requirements. There may be re.:.: i cements like that.
Rosencrantz: I3ut, the question wa.,, why is
the
City
raising this
at this time? 'Pile City is raising 1.1l.is at
this
time,
because you
are raising this at this time. Where were
you
seven
years ago?
Rosenfeld: My point to the Ch,airm.;)1 :is simply this: that there
s nothing in your code requir:iiw io to be. here two years ago,
three years, or five years aqk
"osencrant.z: i.m just a:;k i na y, ,j t.o come 1),I.`}: to this issue
.about- what's all "official" plat; :,I I think the argument is, is
wl.1t, r )1- 1)()t you h,1d rf ,�i ly file, In of plat. And what
I believe the Ci t y At ki, iii y' s P, i t,. i on is, i s your plat was
�jef.icle'nt E'.nOUyll nclt i' `)l :;t l ; �' do "Otf i� 1.9 I" plat. And
certainly, I Ion' t t i nk 1 t' ummi>nI)la e that. a document
would be s;lll)mi t t ed 'Incl I(,I t t r fui :-,ovon yoars_; and t hon
:,I)r i.rjq into being acla i n , when t l awe; havo changed and the
rt-quirement'i il,lvil chanc100 dr.lill�lt i,` I y .
I
Also, the City Attorney stated that the extension granted
by the Planning Commission after the original six months might
have been an invalid situation.
Rosenfeld:
But,
if that is the case,
I mean- I was
actively
involved-
and you
can imaging with the
plat at that
time; and
there were dozens
of plats that got
that extension for six
months. I
mean, I
was told how to do it
by the City;
if that's
invalid, there
are
dozens of plats out.
there that are
invalid
plats. 1
mean, that's just.--
and t he 1,o:0 t 11 i nit th,lt ' :;
Ilk, t't)In41 ()ut Ot t.lt i s t.hinq i :; a
Rosencrantz: I think that's a little- an extreme assertion.
Rosenfield: But, Chairman, I'd like to point out one thing to
you- and that i �; t hl,tt yC,1111-
i3Otjt, I:i'\% does put a time limit on the
applicant to q0t hack. n
t t.: t w.;i ,i:s, it the City finds errors
in the plat now-- in oti,el
the plat's submitted, the City
says "no- you tlav011' t MCI
this." Now the t e' s something that says
,
it s�lys, yoll've� cl.�t.
t.i� .let back to us within thirty days,
or you've out 01 H10 .7amt� .
Al;a , l n i Ir t , the City Attorney says
here, says, t:.hi rc�mi�dir';,
this pri�hl�nl wove clot in front, of us
I: fight now. To min, that
11 tl.l,;t rat -:; th.:1t thr, k-o(iu does not
'lddres ; it . Ansi this p1.lt
- 1 lne.lrl, wt^'vc. qunc� t hi-ouittl al.1 t.hi.s,
and t he 1,o:0 t 11 i nit th,lt ' :;
Ilk, t't)In41 ()ut Ot t.lt i s t.hinq i :; a
doc i :, 1 till; boc all:;t` l askloki
;;allt31'.1 youll(l l 11 1')i;.1 , whclt do ] have t o
tl;iht` itaVCa r1w l h l:; tl't
C el , Ills` ill t ho oye and S;,l lti,
u yt,ut prt�limin�lry plat i�,
still 11.1vo t ()t to do tht`:SC' th 1 llq!;" .
��t,t,tf; y 1
I
I t
is now
almost three
years late:, you
know,
and
the decision
apparently
has changed-
but please-
VOu'll
give
me a
decision.
Rosencrantz: All right.
Rosenfeld: Okay.
R,�sencrantz: WOUO any of the tt:, that were requested in 1983
>ne?
Rosenfeld: The two--
rosencr.ant.z: With Sandra Young?
Rosenfeld: What happened is, as �;ai.d before, is we took this
:otter of Sandra Younq and im ;ately provided it to such
.;0\70Loper.s--
encr:'ant:.z: My quest iOil Was, w' -
scanfId: W01 , 1 think ttie :)nc-
done i :;- s I I f i i
.."'A that. wo'; kik)ne-
-,irket t1w; I,i,,t'r'Ity• i'('O1,Ie r�
ind gill intri m,at ic,rl;
hem. And
IMI 1('11 olrl kit deet ;t
111Y of those things done?
�Inq that you could say would
to pulled out and activated,
wo said we are going to now
,M(] to ho com i nq i n here to
.rvir i ►abler and active for
t hat ." And apparently, it
..h(�r4�vei It m1s, and brc,iiglrt.
I
up. Before I rest, I just want to make sure--
,c,,f:: ; What other things were on there? I don't have that
before me any more. In other words, did you come do all those
things now? or just have them re -activate? I don't think you
have.
Rosenfeld:
No, I
hadn't
done th(-e things. 'These things are all
the steps
to get
a final
plat.
so you didn't --
Rosenfeld: No. They're steps to get a final plat, though.
Rosenfeld: N tiillal
iNosenfeId: But , t 11(� 1)(yi1it;; I mako hero and t.hf, points 1' 1.1 make
later at -o -imPly that (ItOc) 41.110 does 1101 have a time limit
w.it.hi.n which tht' �11)1111('dllt "'t a('t ; k)""' than to file that
"offic:ial" plat, which w(l 1('(-1 w` tl;ti. wt� It t l 49.091) does give
US tio"If` pl of eci 1()1I .111d W(' 1 I 1 et` ', t II,I I Ili(. city ha:; made
certain ion.; to 11 a; Iii It.,. lettt,l (If NOVc'mbOl' )1, 1983
11,
otller
w(.)rd
;ht. ;,Iti, "(;cit guin(1 with these things;
iNosenfeId: But , t 11(� 1)(yi1it;; I mako hero and t.hf, points 1' 1.1 make
later at -o -imPly that (ItOc) 41.110 does 1101 have a time limit
w.it.hi.n which tht' �11)1111('dllt "'t a('t ; k)""' than to file that
"offic:ial" plat, which w(l 1('(-1 w` tl;ti. wt� It t l 49.091) does give
US tio"If` pl of eci 1()1I .111d W(' 1 I 1 et` ', t II,I I Ili(. city ha:; made
certain ion.; to 11 a; Iii It.,. lettt,l (If NOVc'mbOl' )1, 1983
that an adverse decision here would be contrary to.
Rosencrantz: Okay. And you have a letter from 1983 that was n
acted upon. of
Rosea: Well, that's n()t
entirely- it was acted upon, in the
entirely -
sense, as I explained befog -e, it: was
provided to potential
Purchasers of the property and ultimately resulted in a law suit.
Rasencralltz; 1 think you recogrli�-L-, as an attorney, that until
YOU went ahead and done the steps and filed the plat, you cannot
represent what the City is or is not going to do in connection
With the plat.- or any other land use decision, for that matter.
I mean, I think you acted in (unclear).
Rosenfeld:
III wh<lt rt�gaY'tl'
Rosencrallt:': IIl relylnq i)Il cl lt'ttl`l ti
ty about cer'ta i n
is h i nq;; to be licant� • Because that. ' :.-
tlli:, h`IF'F>t`tls alt
say, wt�l l , tllt'tit` c I'c` t h l nt ;; wt,
think need to bF,
tit�nl'; \'cell dl t
down Wl tll t ht� rl > >
F F l t, ,tt�l t Itt` s;►,ltt 'It is 1livo.IVed,
Oth(?I' till r rlq�: t heat llt`t'.1 t „ lit` ,lulls', i Il Cl C` 1 I'C 1F.
T - yta 1.1 know- I 'in not' t7�) i no And
t < 1 i }•l`tl I1t)W t pi'cll't tt'tl liiW or
,�' i I i•1 t ty, l)Ut 1 t.11111k t h.lt�
}' i Illt`Wjt,l t illi (11t1cl e, I
you se1 1 ) when
a E It c ofE,'I opt,rt y t hilt I .t;; I,I l,t`t`n platted;
unci that
,111 of the rte(
1Uisih, slept; h�1\'t`Il' I I„ t,lt I ,tkt`tl.
And t l� ,t:;:;ttmt•
ghat you call rely oil di.scu::;;loli!;
I I� •I Int�ntl�t't ut the' si , t f i
M
think, causes this kind of a problem.
Rosenfeld: Well, when there's nothing in the code that says
you're preliminary plat is no good, and when ;nmeone looks you in
the eye and says your preliminary plat i:; good, that's good
enough for me.
Rosencrantz : All right. 1 think yctuu' r c making ,()me assumptions
and I wantt to just. make 1 1 c i (,at I t h i nk thatthere's an
assumption that the plat was c oo,i. 1 think there's been some
indications that the plat was riot, good; that there were a variety
of things that i.t did not comply with. ms. Young is not- she is
a member of t.lie planning staff, but slie does riot issue official
doctrine; and ghat.':; a function 01 1 vzr iety of. City agencies to
.sign off on. And I ih.ink it.'s 111itort..unat.o i.f you've relied on
that information; t think i t.' urifc l t unit �� that. the information
was incorrect it; wol 1 . l,ut tltt�n, itt 1i11, nothing was acted upon.
Ind l yut`:;;; 1 11, 1 ' :, I ,it t t,f t ht' 11 i s that now we're
AIld w `' 1 t .i l k i no .its(`ut t.II i ny:; t h,it ha},pc'nc d in 19H3 .
Mid 1 d��n' t know It t h!` t't 't` 11 is t ht�rlt7t ti
t. kill 191l.i 1 o 1.9136, but.
i t co) Lain l y 11'1:; rll.irltled I t tem 1 ti lit ,
1ko!'t'111 !` t t1 : I 111 I Ilk, t lit` l'};,1 l l 111.111 c ""; 1 t`t.'tlttilli:(`, t I1C�Ug11, thin EI
Act.1 1 till 1 h..il 1 h.lt }`i t` 11111111.11 y l : lio tloo tl Ilt't'l';;tic31: 1 ly It1E'iinl>
nl,ik i Iit1 ,111 I lit t`1 }t1 t`t .it IOn of (I 111'1 •1.1.31 U- t h It we d i.d not
W 1 I II I ILII 111`1' 11::.1` 1 Ilt'1 tt)1 hc`r cmle Clt cel ht r
,I tit I!t,l I i y !;,ty i lit I h.lt t h I k' l,lI i lit, 000d . TIIt`rr' :; TA 0t. 1 o r
deadlines in the code- anywhere.
Rosencrantz: You've made one ot. arqument, which is that the
code now sets tOI t h a time by w- (unclear) . I don't think
it's an unreasonable statutory con: auction, to construe that you
have to comply within a reason .. '.e time. Certainly the laws
change; I think it's very reasonai: to expect that if you don't
act upon your ptrat. within a reason.:.'. -Io time, it's due to expire.
Wo l I, if that's the p:—, t ion you're going to take, I
would hope that you would incot,p( ate that: into your decision.
But , tho bast: thing you could do `,)night is give me a decision.
Thank you.
lw!i'`n.•r,3nt': You're welcome. 'lq no further tc�st:imony, the
pub I is 1)earinq i.s closed. Thaons this discussion with the
'01111lllssion. We will request lot, nt-orprotation.
Y'k I!": I'm
(lo i nq to 1)ow
to
.l
on 44.310,
it would :.eem
to
ink,
only doe"
the I,l,lt
10
1'0
C011form.
1 Ille'lll, 1 :;la' t
1 h,lt
whcl
hrancls on
that , a l:w,
i
that i. t: didn't
meet --
t t of neys on t h i s one; but ,
t hat wird "shall" has some
AM 1 confusod? I mean, not
;III in hot e, but it- "shall"
I 1 t ho 1 esI of Sandy's work
,111 :;u it is clear in 44,110,
Itosc:,ncrant r,: Th'lt ' :; "c,l.t a i 11 ly 111\' i t i oll.
Rosencrantz: well, I think that what I would recommend is our
interpretation; Ls that the t 'rm "official" plat is not
meaningless surplusage- it means a plat that complies. And hence
the language that it. shall :i.n(-.•rporate recommendations and
conditions made by the Commissi,—, and (unclear) by the City
Council. I think it also invo i ,,'s the concept that to be an
official plat, it has to comply wi+ , ti -ie various requi.remerits. I
think that's an assumption of the statute; it does not
contemplate that you can miss t !ie mark by a great deal and
consider that, you've met the r,,:tju>, rement of submitting "an
official Plat". I think counsel has indicated a number of
factual bases where the plat. did not comply- whether they were
minor or not- the plat dict not comply. I also feel that it's
relevent , i.n terms of the amount of time, this loc:ument (fell
between han.is? and I think th,lt i t-lcjardless of' whother the
property w andel ::alo, l t hi! it wa�, incumbent upon the
prop('rLy own.`r tt; at lo,ist it)l • up and iscortain what was
happ('rlill(i w'.1111 that ofticlal pl'li of unofficial plat- oi: what
the status w'i" . l think }'t111 I`1 . -,I ""i w i t 11 t he S I t` .11 Y o U V
1)e'riI by iI,,t qt,t t ince bslck t() t he t)• nIld t indi.ng out wllat tho
I t,tls wa , 7 3'.l' t i lid i lltj olit i 11 1 'i: .ill'i '1'l.1 i 11 not fact i Il(j .I I I ho t
ltt�Ilit , to i\ 1 I i1i'll ot:Lii i,i1 i I,'11. And I don't tool that a
1011; it Col):;t .i t.Ut od
lii It`I11I.i t.Itt'lllt`Ilt tt .Illy Illttl than tlit` kInot of 1nIormcit1('11
Ill. I! �'(tll ''c" ovet t III` co'IIIIt ('I .
' \ t r!: l" 'iltltl It'.Ilit ttl t Ilt` Il`lt't ,lilt ' tIt'tiltjn;lt ('(1 11N1 .;i 111 .11:,tt
received notice in 19/9 that the t it was deficient.
Under the conditions of apr=r.oval.
Rosencrant 2: To the anent of the-
Uru_L_lj _: Right .
0
Rosencrant.z : 'Pile ak3ent of the apl' ,Leant was notified that there
were deficiencies; and those were Iot, followed up, either. The
applicant may wish to contest whetllt,r or not that's an agent; but
certainly an engineering firm that jas submitting work for you in
connection with the plat certainly 1s, I think could be deemed an
agent. But that's a legal questi u. Any other observations or
comments? Tllc`r, i would so move t1.. t that t)o our recommendation
and interpretat 1011.
i was by- your: a: ument was--
Rosenc rant z : l sc,vt` r a 1 ba ; t r the Position -
\. A -I (ilk t�Ut. tllc`i�':: alSi�, 1 IIIE'�lil, think th,lt ttl,' way this h"ts
lcarly c.illlod out oach t(,tluisaid compliant'('- yOs ter nc�-
t ,1 l k .i ntr I t
li 1: 11 'l ,tt11 l\' l I ' Itt`t`Il Illi l 111.t t,t`t'iinitl`c{; 1'. t ht`1 t` ;illy
discu::Slll: at 1 l Ilk` toll .
1u
tiitc` k- Commissioner. Wexler.
Rosencrantz: The 111otion is for the interpretation- to adopt the
interpretation that Z hav,. '• 'l.
plat dogs not. meet: the City
In essence,
srandards--
Rosencrantz: That it i:' "Ot a'1 "c)f f i.cial" plat; does not comply
as an "af f i -c iia l" plat. And all the other reasons that I have
the interpretation that the
stated. Yes means you are adopting
plat is not valid, for the reasons stated.
Wexler: Yes, but i ' m [lc)t an attorney.
Rosencrantz : You ct()n' t 11.1vO to b(...
;11 tchcocX: ('01111M -1;'m kt 1 t��)�i
Robinette: Y(�9-
lilt('}1�^ C�il�llLllldR i��`:-�o'll� l'allf'L.
'oc'k :
Brockman: Yes.
u;trhcock: Commissioner Ross.
Ross: Yes.
Ni.tchcock: Commissioner Rodrigues.
Rodrigues: Yes.
Rosencrantz: It's unanimous. You've got an interpretation. You
may not like it, but you've got one.
Rosenfeld: I appreciate it.
----------
Rost. ncran ! :
okay. 'Chant you t o l your time.
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
C111 MANAGER'S OFFICE
TO: The City Council
FROM: Peter C. Harvey, City Manager
SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant Agreement with
Multnomah County
DATE: October 29, 1986
Attached is a letter to Mayor Young explaining the current
status of the Community Development Block Grant program in
Multnomah County. In March of 1984, Lake Oswego and Multnomah
County entered into an agreement which allowed Multnomah County
to count the population in that portion of Lake Oswego which is
within Multnomah County toward their urban County designation,
'rhe attached resoluti��n with agreement would ext..end the 1984
agreement, which is scheduled to terminate on September 30, 198'1.
The aclreement ,'Il.ows �-t,lltnomah County to be eligible for tends
within their Lill inCorpo:-aced areas and the cities of Multnomah
County, 0XcI uding Portland, which has its own entitlement.
This aorooment would not have any iillpact ()n uur arrangement witfl
Clackamas County, I have roviowo(j the platter with Clackamas
county CDBG staff, and they have no objections to our continuing
to asSlst. Mill tnomah county, I wol.ild recommend that Council
approve the 1-0SOIutioll authorizing the agreement.
PC11% 1) 1 t)
Doc . 18 b 1 fi
148 NOR III %IAII %IRltI / IX)51 k.l{I I( I BOX 169 / tAKE e)SWIt;O, OR[(,ON 4704 (5Oi) hit, lwI
muLTnomaH eounTY oReGon
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENI DIVISION
2115 S.E MORRISON
PORTLAND, OREGON 97214
(503)248 3631
October 1.4, 1986
Honorable Bill Young
City of Lake Oswego
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
RE.: Multnomah County Community Development Consortium
Dear Mr. Young:
DENNIS BUCHANAN
COUNTY EXECUTIVE
As you may recall, in 1983 Multnomah County qualified for Urban County status for
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) purposes by proving that our population at
that time exceeded the required threshold of 200,000 residents. As expected
however, we have continued to lose population since that time due largely to
annexations by the City of Portland. Therefore, we have anticipated losing our
entitlement status at the end of this program year (September 30, 1987). Over the
course of the three-year funding cycle from 1984-1986, the consortium (made up of
the County and the six small cities) has received CDBG funds totaling $5,226,000,
100 percent of which has gone to the benefit of law and moderate income residents.
I am delighted to inform you however, that it now appears possible that statuatory
changes may be made that would allow Mutlnomata County to extend our Urban County
status through fiscal year 1967 or later. With the help of the National
Association of Counties (NACo) we have been successful in attaching a new
"phase-out" provision to legislation currently being considered by Congresn. This
phase-out provision would makes Multnomah County eligible to qualify for a full
grant. for FY 187 and a grdnt equal to half of a tull entitlement for FY '88 (with
the other half goinq to the State of Oregon to be addded to their Small -Cities CDBG
programs).
Anot hor possibility is extension anei updat incl of "grandfathering' provisions in the
ul11rin County dol init icon. No such amendment is now written into the House or SVnate
hi I Is being col),iilirtcei. liowaver, :should the phage -Out. provisions fail t.o yain
allproval by the (',,wit :; ;, ,i "q, in it at tierinq" provision would likely be added t.) the,
Iryislat ion, crn:,ldof 111'1 t ht- hi';( ory of t'on,II*?Ssional action,: to prevent
1•.111 it lement Io, ll1ernt t Ilml losinet their Ent it le-ment status. Moat likely :;tith ,a
"y l atlftdt for i nil" , l au:;i• wiul ld only pe t ini t Mu l t nt,mah t'nunt.y 0110 year ell
,lila I i t icat icon.
Ei t her approach 1 eI rxtrndinki kill 11111;111 (•.)unt y tat at uta wi 11 it at x�• It lrn1 new
cooperation s with ,all lx ,I lout units of local yuvel nment (r(iIt V11 LW
Creshfnll, lake 011wotio, MAYWI)k'd 1',11 4,, 'I'I kill', di IV and Wood VI I Iagvl .
Pon uxift- op"CM V% V n
As you know, Lake Oswego currently has signed intergovernmental cooperation
agreements with both Clackamas and Multnomah Counties. However, as required by HUD
in CPD Notice 86-7, I hereby notify you as a unit of local government with
population split between Multnomah and Clackamas Counties, that you may elect to:
participate entirely in one urban county and be excluded from the other county;
tpr
continue to participate in both counties' CDBG programa, provided that:
No single portion of your city is included in both entitlement counties at
a time (in other words, portions of your population cannot be counted
twice) and
As long as you are participating as a part of any urban county, all parts
of your city must be included in one or another of the two entitled
counties.
Obviously, Multnomah County is eager to have you continue the current arrangement
of participating in both counties' CDBG programs. It is my understanding from HUD
that in order to requalify under either the "phase-out" or "grandfather' scenerios,
we must execute cooperation agreements with all of the units of general local
government currently in our consortium.
If you elect not to participate, please notify Multnomah County and the Portland
Area Office of the Department of Housing and urban Development, 520 SW Sixth
Avenue, Portland, Oregon, 97204, no later than December 1, 1986.
Assuming you will decide to once again join with Multnomah County and the other
cities in this program designed to develop viable urban communities through the
Provision of decent housing, suitable living environments and expanded economic
Opportunity, I will be sending a copy of the intergovernmental cooperation
agreement for your review. I would like to request placement on your city council
agenda the evening of. November 4th to answer any questions you may have. Please
notify me if this date i:: a problem.
I sincerely look torward to an extended opportunity where we can work together in
Addressing Some of the housing, urban and economic problems of our low to moderato
income residents.
R..
Jane 1Aurda, Mana 4 r
Co rim i i n i t y Devv I o1iment
Pet et C. Harvoy, ('ity MaIM'It-1
Penni 1Alit'hanan, county xxeckit Ive
VAkil Yal twat -1-0i, DFS Ili ret't tit
Jahn Fi,)nh4m, HUD Al e,e Of I 1 ov
y DiCenzo, Cttnununity D eve Iopment
(,Iack.unas County
RESOLUTION R-86-28
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CT -Y OF LAKE OSWEGO
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR To EXECUTE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF LAKE
OSWEGO AN AGREEMENT WITH MULTNOMAH COUNTY TO ENTER INTO A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the city of Lake Oswego
that:
Section 1. The Mayor is authorized to execute on behalf of the
City of Lake Oswego that certain agreement, attached hereto as
Exhibit "A", to enter into a Community Development Block Grant
Program with Multnomah County.
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council.
of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 4th day of November, 1986.
AYES:
NOES :
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
William -VE. Young, Mayor
A`I"TF.sT :
itosematy A.~ Mader, City Recorder
APPROVED A:" TO FORM:
1, les M • I l"`111'111
C t y At t 0l 110Y
1i R6-28
1'I�Ic• l
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
MULTNOMAH COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
PROGRAM YEARS 1987 - 1988
This Agreement is entered into between Multnomah County (COUNTY), a political
subdivision of the State of Oregon, and the city of Lake Oswego (CITY), a
municipal corporation of the State of Oregon within Multnomah County, for the
cooperation of units of local government under the authority of ORS 190.010.
It will become effective upon adoption by the parties and will continue until
terminated as provided herein.
The circumstances surrounding the making of this Agreement are as follows;
A. WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States has enacted the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 with amendments made by the Housing and
Urban -Rural Recovery Act of 1983, and the Department of Housing and Urban
Development has adopted regulations pursuant thereto (hereinafter jointly
referred to as the "Act'); and
B. WHEREAS, the Congress has found and declared that the Nation's cities,
towns and small urban communities face critical social, economic and
environmental problems; and
C. WHEREAS, the Congress has further found and declared that the future
welfare of the Nation and the well-being of its citizens depend on the
establishment and maintenance of viable urban communities as social,
economic and political entities; and
0. WHEREAS, the primary objective of the Act is the development of viable
urban communities, by providing decent housing and a suitable living
environment anti expanding economic opportunities principally for persons
of low and moderate income.
F:. WHEREAS, consistent with this primary objective, the Federal assistance
provided in this Act is for the support of commuity development activities
which are dircet.ed toward the following specific objectives:
(1) The elimination of slums, blight and the prevention of blighting
influori es and the deterioration of property and neighborhood and
community f.acilit.ies of importance to the welfare of the community,
principally persons of low and moderate income; and
(z) The tliminat_ion of conditions which are detrimental to health,
safety, and public welfare, through code enforcement, demolition,
intetim rehabilitation assistance, and related activities; and
(3) The conservation and expansion of the Nation's housing stock in order
to provide a decent home and A suitable living environment for all
persons, but principally those of low and moderate income; and
(4 The expansion and improvement of the quantity and quality of
,-ommunity services, principally for persons of low and moderate
income, which are essential for sound community development of viable
urban communities;
A more rational utilization of land and other natural resources and
the better arrangement of residential, commercial, industrial,
recreational, and other needed activity centers; and
(6) The reduction of the isolation of income groups within communities
and geographical areas and the promotion of an increase in the
diversity and vitality of neighborhoods through the spatial
deconcentration of housing opportunities for persons of lower income
and the revitalization of deteriorating or deteriorated neighborhoods
to attract persons of higher income; and
(7) The restoration and preservation of properties of special value for
historic, architectural, or aesthetic reasons; and
(8) The alleviation of physical and economic distress through the
;stimulation of private investment and community revitalization in
areas with population outmigration or a stagnating or declining tax
base; and
(91 The conservation of the Nation's scare energy resources, improvement
of energy efficiency, and the provision of alternative and renewable
Energy sources.
F. WH`";E:As, it is found that certain of these objectives are pertinent to the.:
co,-:e=tns and needs of the COUNTY and its communities; and
FAs, on March 7, 1984 the COUNTY and the CITY entered into an
r9overnmental agreementwherein they agreed to join together with
units of general local Government to qualify the COUNTY as an urban
tv for federal liousinq and Community Development clock grant funds; and
H. WH:, this agreement was scheduled to terminate on September 30, 1981;
an.'
I. W}1' :. continued eligibility for block grant funds as an urban county
dctonds on continuation of such intergovernmental agreements; and
,1. W11' tl)e' COUNTY Department. of Houoin<_1 and Urban Development has
:1P 1,0,1 (ho minimum provisions which must be included within any
In o11am4•nt,ll aaree^me,iit into which local governments enter to qualify
fo n cwint y vligibilaty;
NOW, THEREFORE, providing that Multnomah County can continue to meet necessary
criteria for participation in the federal Housing and Community Development
block grant program as an urban county, and in consideration of the mutual
promises made herein and the mutual benefits received hereunder, the parties
agree as follows:
(1) The CITY and the COUNTY agree to cooperate in undertaking, or assist
in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing
activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing.
(2) The CITY authorizes the inclusion of its population for purposes of
the Act; and joins together with other units of general local
government to qualify the COUNTY as an urban county for Housing and
Community Development Act block grant funds.
(3) The COUNTY, as the applicant, assumes full responsibility, including
final decision-making, and also assumes all obligations of an
applicant. as specified in the Act and the regulations thereunder.
(4) For the purposes of updating the Three Year Community Development and
Housing Plan and Annual Community Development Program for an
additional two years as required by Title I of the Act, a Policy
Advisory Board is hereby established which shall advise the COUNTY on
program policies and project selection.
Said Policy Advisory Board shall be composed of one representative or
a designated alternate from each unit of general government executing
these intergovernmental agreements. Each such representative shall
have one vote on said board. Each such representative shall be a
public official or employee of said unit of government.
(5) The COUNTY and CITY agree to take all required actions to comply with
the previsions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VIII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1968, Executive Order 11988, Section 3 of the Housing
and Urban Development Act of 1968, and other applicable civil rights
laws.
(6) This agreement shall remain in full force and ettect from the date of
execution for the program years commencing on October 1, 1987 through
September 30, 1989 inclusive, provided that the COUNTY qualifies as
an urban county under, and block grant funding is allocated to the
COUNTY pursuant to, the Net.
24661/24931
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties have executed this Agreement
this day of , 198
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CITY OF
By:
Presiding Offer
Title:
County Executive
I hereby find that the terms and provision of this Intergovernmental Agreement
are fully authorized under state and local law and that the agreement provides
toll legal authority for the County to undertake or assist in undertaking
essential community development housing activities.
JOHN N. LEAHY, COUNTY COUNSEL
FOR MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON
By
Noelle Mair
Assistant County Counsel
'4881/:491[
-4
STOEL, RIVES, BOL_EY, FRASER & WYSE
ArTORNEIS AT LAW
goo S W FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 2300
PORTLAND. OREGON 97204-1268
Very truly
yours,
TELEPHONE 150J1 22+ 3390
t ELECOP1ER 15031220-2,180
CA®LE LAWPORT
TELE -A703455
L
NRIIrRS WRp'L'1DIAL NL'M®ER
N
NOVI
r4 •_��
Iv}
(503) '294-9458
November 3, 1986
Ms. Karen Scott 12Y MESSENGER
Planning Director
City of Lake Oswego
348 N State Street
Lake Oswego, OR
Dear Ms. Scott:
Re: Penn Woods Subdivision, CI 1-86-06
This office represents Ted Smith and Sarah Harlan,
property owners residing in the neighborhood of the proposed
Penn Woods subdivision. My clients were parties to the prior
proceedings involving the Penn Woods preliminary platt (SD 17-
79), but did not receive notice of the Planning Commission hear-
ings on CI 1-86-06, and therefore slid not appear at such hear-
ings.
On behalf of Mr. Smith and Ms. Harlan, we support the
position of the city staff and the Planning Commission and urge
that the proposeCi subdivision be reviewed in light of current
Code provision: and current. environmental, traffic and engineer-
ing consideration:,. We also request that Mr. Smith and
Ms. 11arlan's app .icance through this letter be submitted into
the record before, the City Council.
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly
yours,
L
Grcyo�r ' -fi.
M��we
,. a�=
1+ � _AV, `� 1)
GRM/dlc
Ms. S'11 \Ih 17.1.I I'm
1 II.�� 1 Irl Irl ��rr lr .\ I
i rI Irl l I I !+ r �.
\� VIII �r � I� I
1
•\n .I l�r.� �, r. \'N11 \ r ,,1
111 l It � � , N • I NT I It "•I X111 -1•I�'
�I���� 1\ •. 1111 N1\I�It.� 1f.rAl`
111-111• cl \ 1N , .. 1 r,J•r'
I .rI lII„. 1.1 •Ir
.nll�
\r .I ��•11' •\�� v. I`N rl 1'1\.1
1 � IIIA. I'\\ A• I I I
��I �� Ir. \\.\'\. rl�r�.l� 11 'r 111 .Ir.. 1 1
• .. I. 1.1 I, • �1
C-ITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
C:IT1 MANAGER'S OEf ICF -
October 24, 1986
John H. Rosenfeld
Tonkon, Torp, Galen, Marmaduke and Booth
L,aw offices
1800 orbanco Building
1001 S. W. Fifth Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97204-1162
Dear Mr. Rosenfeld:
I have held off responding to your letter and telephone
call until we were certain that everything was in order for the
Council hearing on the Pennwoods Subdivision SD 17-79. The
notices have been placed and the staff report is prepared so
that the Council hearing is set for the November 4, 1986 Council
meeting.
I very much understand your concern for the time it has
taken to process your appeal. We are working with a substan-
tially understaffed Planning Department at the present time. in
addition we feel it is important that a thorough and complete
record is presented to the City Council for them to make a
decision on the matter.
Very t.r'ul\' yllllT'S,
4 0 �' /0; 6 Z/'�
Peter C. Harvey
City Manager
PCH/blb
Doc. 184` 11
k48 NOK111 \1111 ',IKI11 111`.1 111I K 1 IllA 114 I AKI 01%%%1CO ORICON 47014 / (Y) h11• 11-11
_.. ,. .. .., -.
•
TONKON, TORP, GALEN, MARMADUKE & BOOTH
LAW OFFICEt;
Mr. Pete Harvey
City Manager
City of Lake Oswego
Post Office Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Re: Pennwoods Subdivision
SD 17-79
Dear Mr. Harvey:
In November, 1983, I asked Ms. Sandra M. Young,
Planning Director of Lake Oswego, a simple question: Is the
preliminary plat approval of the Pennwoods subdivision still
effective? She said that it was, and outlined for me by letter
dated November 23, 1983 the steps necessary to complete the
subdivision.
On November 21, 1985, Ms. Topaz Faulkner refused to
stand by Ms. Young's representations. in fact, she refused to
give me any answer to my u1aostion. When she finally dial givo
me an answer, it was adverse, and I Lippealed her decision to the
Planning Commission.
On Jul\ ,1, 1986, I appealed the decision of the
Planning Commissi01)- On September 10, 1986, 1 was told that the
matter had been tcYn(,tatively scat for hearing on October 21,
1986. Today, I was told by Ms. Chris Hitchcock that the hearing
would not be on thilt dale, but hncl tentatively been reset for
November 4, 1980. l'hi i'. 96 da after m � notice of ht1,1���a1 f
I homer you can . ppi-ocil-d e my fr 1.;tr t. .ion .iin t ir:;t havincl the
City reI'u ;ing to .11)i111, I)y III(, ro�l�resentat ions by Ms. Yo�tinll in
1.983, and 'low c,111:,i nli Ine to w;I i, t. week after week to 11,1k- my
Alio oRf3ANCO BUILDING.',
JEFFREY H. KEENEY
MOE M.TONKON
ALBERT N KENNEDY
W, FIFTH AVENUE
MARK F. LrROU%
• I. , - -113'
4'LANL11 204
B. LYON'
TERRY W. BAKER'
DONH. MARMAOUKF*
BRUCE G. BER-ING
1150 31 2?1 -;.1X10
WILLIAM F. MARTS ON, JR.'
OWEN D. BLANK
MICHAEL M, MORGAN'
MARC S. BOCCI
JANET C. NEUMAN
BRIAN G. BOOTH'
JON W, NICKEL'
STUART M. BROWN
ING01.1' NOTO
TIMOTHY J.CONWAY
AMY PEDERSEN
MARK L.CUSHING
EDWIN .". PERRY
JOHN E. FROHNMAYER'
J011N r4. RCS EN FELD
MORRIS J. GALEN'
SC.011 0, AEIOMAN
RONALD L. GREENMAN'
October 10, 1986
SUSAN A.13—TH
JEFFREY E. HARMES
KENNVI STEPHENS
CAROL OEY r.IBBS
FREDE,t ._ -ORP
JOEL S. KAPLAN
JOSF.. t-JRI L'
M All.
. Rt�f T:11 .•�.Li1R V� iAl i�1N
Mr. Pete Harvey
City Manager
City of Lake Oswego
Post Office Box 369
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Re: Pennwoods Subdivision
SD 17-79
Dear Mr. Harvey:
In November, 1983, I asked Ms. Sandra M. Young,
Planning Director of Lake Oswego, a simple question: Is the
preliminary plat approval of the Pennwoods subdivision still
effective? She said that it was, and outlined for me by letter
dated November 23, 1983 the steps necessary to complete the
subdivision.
On November 21, 1985, Ms. Topaz Faulkner refused to
stand by Ms. Young's representations. in fact, she refused to
give me any answer to my u1aostion. When she finally dial givo
me an answer, it was adverse, and I Lippealed her decision to the
Planning Commission.
On Jul\ ,1, 1986, I appealed the decision of the
Planning Commissi01)- On September 10, 1986, 1 was told that the
matter had been tcYn(,tatively scat for hearing on October 21,
1986. Today, I was told by Ms. Chris Hitchcock that the hearing
would not be on thilt dale, but hncl tentatively been reset for
November 4, 1980. l'hi i'. 96 da after m � notice of ht1,1���a1 f
I homer you can . ppi-ocil-d e my fr 1.;tr t. .ion .iin t ir:;t havincl the
City reI'u ;ing to .11)i111, I)y III(, ro�l�resentat ions by Ms. Yo�tinll in
1.983, and 'low c,111:,i nli Ine to w;I i, t. week after week to 11,1k- my
no
Mr. Pete Harvey
October 10, 1986
Page Two
position heard by the appropriate body. It would be greatly
appreciated if you could provide me a definitive date for my
hearing before the City Council, and an explanation of why this
matter is continually postponed to my economic detriment.
Very truly youvrs.
joho H. R IJ
JHR:kju
cc: The Honorable William Young
Ms. Karen M. Scott
11,N1(1?N, 1111121', -411 N. MA I IM A1'1 Ih1 \ 111111111
W
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
2 OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PA 8-85-408
3 Appeal of the Planning
Commission Approval of PA 8-85 FINDINGS, CONCi.,USIONS AND c_)RI;k R
4 (Marlene Deaton)
5 Nature of the Appeal
This appeal. was filed by the Lake Grove Neighborhood
6 Association by letter dated May 8, 1986 from the Planning
7The Planning
Commission approval of PA 5-85 dated April 28, 1986.
I application, ZC 11-85 dated
Commission approval of the accompanying app
a
May 1, 1986, was also appealed.
10
Hearings
public bearings and considered
The Planning Commission held
11
this application at its meetings of December 9, 1985, January 27
I - 13
and Marc11-t 24, 1-986.
I 14 Criteria
15 Commission
w The relevant cr i trir is are set fort.lt in the Planning
16
Order of 1?A i3-85-3:31 .
17
�0 , ' Conclusion
tS The C�)uncil c�i,ilc�t•.).?rad the �tl:)pc�;il :;hc�uld 17r-. granted l�t•c••+Ilse:
y. 4
1J
1 • flr.iPnt e
There is it►sltfvidence it, the record to cle t.(.yrmine
` the nu_•attiny cif t" t e�tn. :;ul�:,t�tnt.ittl ly developc�cl" as applied to the
y
21
(acts of this race.
:; i'h�•rcic; it�;;tt f is icant evidence in the record to determine
2.
61 13 wIlethet or. not llle tele�v<+nt. I,�tkc� c;tr)ve rtei(lhborhoc is
74 sulostant ial l y de• vel ope(?
5
?5 3• 'l'I�e .�L�I�It�'�;ttr�n cif iltct �'c)ni'eht clf t.i`��n61t1c1n 7.��t'1]ng
6
Vage. l - CoNCI AI'I ONS ANI) ORU1:12
I inappropriate because it is not included in the Comprehensive Plan
2 nor a relevant Plan amendment criteria.
3 Findings and Reasons
4 The key issue in this appeal is whether or not the amendment
5 to the Comprehensive Plan allowing a density change for a 28,000
6 square foot parcel. from R-7.5 to R-3 conforms to Comprehensive Plan
7 Residential Density Policy III (p. 75) which requires that
8 substantially developed single-family neighborhoods be maintained
Q at existing density designations. Specifically, appellants allege
10 that there is not sufficient evidence to support the Planning
Commission's determination that the site is in a low density
11
residential zone that is not fully developed and is therefore not
12
substantially developed.
13
The Code does not define the term "substantially developed"
o0
14
W z
11 lid the Planning Commission did not interpret the term. The
o
15
o
)U
Planning Commi.,;:;ioil's findincis were based on a review of the Tax
W EL
a °.
16
Map (Exhibit. 14) which illustrate-, that most nearby single-family
w uu
o°z
17
L),. �,
rOsidences ai e cc,nstr.ucted on large lots which are further
N�
U, > a
subdlVid:ibIV
t w A
°•n'
lV
The Neighborliond Association illustratod the need to address
the Plan pol icy; however , no spec i t i c ev idencc! was submitted by tb-
oi
I
21
Association to i11,11:trate that tht` noi,lhbOrht)od is substantially
�
ydeveloped.
71
h
2;
Tht� c'iltlnri l f i ltcls that t1tt- env i denc•t, (I:xh i h i t 1 4) is not
24
Adt,(,Il,ct v to iipp )rt: a finding that thr Tic, icl}lborhood is, or is not.,
:
f 11 1 1 y dowel opod anti t 11rz afore i t cannot dot or m i no whet hear the
:0
appi icat ion c ompl itss wi th Resiklnt i,il Pon!; i t y t'()l ic•y 111 .
V,igc 2 - F 1 NIl I NGS , CONCLUSIONS AND 01MER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Another issue of concern to the Council in this appeal was the
Planning Commission's use of an R-3 designation on this parcel to
create a "transition district" to help prevent expansion of
existing R-0 on Lake Grove Avenue into the R-7.5 residential area.
Council noted that a "transition district" is not a legal zone
category or zone overlay, nor is it provided for in the
Comprehensive Plan. Council found that use of a "transition
district" concept to support a Plan amendment was inappropriate.
IT IS ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
"0
21
n 22
n
23
24
25
26
that :
1. The appeal on PA 8-85 is upheld and the application is
denied.
I certify that this order was presented to and approved by the
City c.()unci 1 0f the City of Lake Oswego.
Pelted this (lay of 1986.
Pave
William E. Young, Mayor
vote at, the Council meeting
hol,l on OctO1W1- ?, 1986
AYF1.3 : l'i,und, Ash, hi xc�n, 1'tjw4L-Ot t 1101111,111. Wi,l ler
NOES: Sinclair
ABSTAIN:
I XCUSED :
3 NINIaINGS, CONCI,ll!"I( !; ANI) 011,01.It
Doc. No. 1,12C
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
g 12
13
o 14
Ll
15
u�
' 16
za
u N
0 .,
r
,�• > a
1s
:0
21
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Appeal of the Planning ) ZC 11-85-407
Commission Approval of ZC 11-85 )
(Marlene Deaton) ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS ANT) ORDER
Nature of the Areal
This appeal was filed by the Lake Grove Neighborhood
Association by letter dated May 8, 1986 from Planning Commission
approval of ZC 11-85 dated May 1, 1986. The Planning Commission
approval of PA 8-85, an accompanying application, was also appealed.
Hearings
The Planning Commission held public hearings and considered
this application at its meetings of December 9, 1985, January 27
and March 24, 1986.
Criteria
LOC 4S-Sl5(2)(b)(iv).
., 2 3
24
2S
:6
This Application is ins onsist tint with tale (lesignation for t11 -
property oil the Comprehensive Plan Map and must be denied.
Findingsani R0,"ISOns
�'['he Cr a;prehensive Plan map dt-�Si..l,;It III(, subject Marcel as
Residential 7. 5. A zone map amendment must -)"'Ply with the
Comprobvilsivt? Plan. An R-3 zone desi(IT Atic)n i!; riot consiste" t with
the Comp" 0h0nsiva Pli►n <irlej 11.1ows (1(,vrlc)I1mvnt of a more intensive
resident i,zl u:.r allow".
IT IS by the City (-,f the City of Lake Oswego
1 . S-£11) i (lI•n i e(I .
I - V IND 1 N.; , , C()N('I.I)S IONS AND (.)Kt')I-'.R
1
I certify that this order was presented to and approved by the
Z City Council of the City of Lake Oswego.
da of 1986.
3 Dated this y
William E. Young, Mayor
5
6
7
8
0
vote at the Council meeting
held on October 7, 1986
AYES: Young, Ash, Dixon, Fawcett, Holman, Woller
NOES: Sinclair
ABSTAIN:
to EXCUSED:
11
12
13
of
14
�� 15
' 16
V �
17
is
1
21
` i
1.4
1'+►gr 1. - FINDINGS, l'()Nc'1,11'; I ONS AND ORDI",R
1)r ,c
No. "Ii? C
I BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
2 OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
3 A Request to Amend the Zoning i
Cede to Increase Maximum FAR )
ZC 2.0-84-406
4 From .30 to .38 in Office )
Campus (OC) Zone ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER
5
Nature of Application
6
This application proposes an amendment to LOC Chapter 48 to
7
add to L,OC 48.315 a provision r,hich would allow up to a maximum
8
FAR of .38 in the 8-acre site bounc3ecj by Kruse Way, Kruse Way
9Place and Boanes Ferry Road. The site is zoned Office Campus and
10
the present maximum FAR is .30.
11 The original application of ZC 20-84 as considered by the
17 Planning Commission was a companion to PA 19-84 and was a request
0
e 13 to increase the allowable FAR in the Office Campus Zone from .30
o^' 14 to .42. The Planning Commission recommendation of denial of PA
u �
W z
V° is 19-84 reduced the scope of the application to only the NW Quadrant
'Wo 16 of the OC area. The City Council. action of approval of PA 19-84
,
J° z 17 further reilucr.9 the scope of the application to an 8-acre segment
p
IS of the NW Quadrant..
yl ) Q
W
1Q Bear i nom( s
?0 Thr Planning Co n"nifsiol, 1-jeld hearings ;end considered this
ap}�licrtt.ion at it.m
; (•(,t.it-1gs of January 28, April 2.2, June 10 and
71tnh 2.4, 11185. The City crunril considered this matter at its
23 ujoet inn of Au(lust. 6, 19t15, Ipproved the Plan amendment; and,
24 r�m;en(ircl thr zone* cliali qr to the Planning C()mmi ,sign for t ehear ing
,,S ;1:, ;1 (lu<t::l- j11t11C1711 u(,(t t tit
The* Pl�+nning C0nuni-„ion ht�1d a
26 hoa r i n(1 (,n the rvinand ;i t it-S m('"nq c"f M"""' I O, 19t").
FA�c l F 1 Nle 1 N0,", , CONCLUSIONS AND ORDKR
I Criteria
2 LOC 48.815(2)(x) and (b)(iv)
3 Conclusion
4 The application is consistent with applicable criteria and
5 should be approved.
6 Findings and Reasons
7 The Council incorporates the "analysis" portion and list of
8 exhibits of the September 22, 1986 staff report and the February
9 28, 1986 staff report on ZC 20-84, as well as the February 26,
10 1986 letter to staff from John James (attachment B), as support
11 for its decision.
IT IS ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
m
12
that.
12
I. ZC 20-84, allowing a FAR Illaximum of .38 for the 8 -acre
o� 14
WZ Office Campus; area boutz.ied by Kruse Way, Kruse Way Place and
;s, 15
WQ Boones Ferry Road, is .ranted subject to compliance with the
c 16
condition of approval set forth in #3 of this order.
0"'t 17
"r o 2. An ordinance be prepared to amend LOC 48.315 to add a
"' " is
„ Section 1.2 to read as follows:
"12.. a. For the 8 -acre site bounded by Kruse Way, Kruse
'.= 20 Way Place and Booties Ferry Road and ,zoned Office
Campus, the maximum FAR of .30 is allowed if
21 .ievelopment consists of a maximum of 20,255
w, sgtiare foot of retail commercial use and the
:2 balance of the allowable squ;ire footage is in
noti-retail commeLcial use;
i
23 For every sgtiare foot of reduction of retail use
24 there result:; a proportional increase in the
a11.��:.3t�lc VAR to ,a maximum of .38 as deiieribed in
Ms the ioliowinq chart.
i
6
Fa -&c 2 - FINDINGS, CONC I SUS IONS AND ORDER
FLOOR AREA RATIO GRAPH
22
20
.30009Ff�R
2
13
3
N
16
.317
Ic
14
a d
.333
12
s
10
M
0
n
1•- -C
6
,358
E
`1
.366
374
2
80
100 120
1--42 1��0
(Thousands)
M 0 M R E I
12
o
RETAIL NONREYAIL
.FAt1
1
O 133091
O. 3B
1000 130692
0.378
�
u m
1
2000 178272
0.374
2000
C) Z70
c W
1
4000 123454
0.366
`:,000 121044
0.362
6000 110635
0.358
17
7000 11 K276
0.354
1 1 1>617
0.3 50
0r`lOoO
W
is
9000 111407
0.346
u' > ;
10000 1OUVYB
0.341
11000 10&7j 39
0. Z37
17000 104179
0.333
�.
",
: 0
13000 1017 70
0. 3129
14000 9`7-',61
C► ;►
21
1'--,00o 96951
0.371
1 b000 9111)42
0.317.
i
,
17000 92133
0. 31 12
1 8000 13111 7 Z
0. _209
23
19000 H 131 4
0.305
20100 134'105
O_ 301
24
20".',.`, H24Yn
0.300
:5
:b
Page
- F'INDINi::;,
CONCIAUSIONS
AND
b. The allowable FAR will be fixed at the time ;j
development permit approval is given by the
Development Review Board.
c. Each property owner is entitled to a pro rata
share of the allowable retail and non -retail
commercial square footage based on each owner's
percentage ownership of the entire 8 -acre
parcel. The allocation to each property owner is
` transferable to another property owner.
6 d. The lot coverage of building and parking areas
shall not exceed 70%. There shall be a 20'
7 setback from the property line along the site's
frontage on Kruse Way and Aoones Ferry Road.
4
c�. No access will be allowed from Boones Ferry
9 Road. The main access shall be from Kruse Way
Place. A 'right -in, right -out' access on Kruse
10 Way may be used only as a secondary access to the
site."
11
3. A document be prepared incorporating the language of the
$ 12
text amendment which shall be recorded at the County Recorder's
13
Office in the deed records. This document cannot be changed
o� 14
without the consent of the City.
W •►
z c is4�
<' This order was presented to and approved by the City Council
.. c
In
of the City of Lake Oswego.
this day of
IQ William E. Young, Mayor
71 Vote at the Council meeting
1l ,
of Oc:tot�c�i- 7, 1. Si
�2 AYES Y���t►td, Josh, I)ixoji, 1••awr„tt, 11��liu,tii, tiinc,lair, Woller
23 NOES
74 AIISTM N :
25 KXCUl ; '.D :
26 Doc. N..,. 7 31 C
11age 1 F l Nle I NGS, IONS AND 010)VI,
ORDINANCE NO. 1944
E CITY
A GENERAL ORDINANCE OF THE CITY 48.315 TO ALLOW UPLTOF A HMAXIMUM OFLAKE
OF E . 38
OSWEGO AMENDING L
IN A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OFFICE CAMPUS ZONE
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section I. The Lake Oswego Code is amended
Section 12 to LOC 48.315 to read as follows:
For the 8 acre site bouc(cleo by Kruse Way, Kruse
Way Place and Boones Ferry Road and zc-►ned
Office Campus, the maximum FAR Of .30 is
allowed if development consists of a maximum of
20,255 square feet of retail commercial use and
the balance of the allowal)le square footage is
in non -retail commercial use,
by the addition of a
"12. a.
For every square foot of reduction Of retail
use there results a proportional increase in
the allowable FAR to a maximum Of .38 as
described in thf? following chart..
FLO,* AREA MT 10 6WH
72
-r p,,,
21J
.ata 0 F Ax
0 . til
.389
10
O . 1 n
16
.317
14
.3 33
12
.341
10
,t'741
n
•
6
7INh1J
O• ���
�358
4
2
IilrPf,
17,x77
0.31W
1pg 129 13Z 144
f l l ep7
(ihnvxand%)
7 (Kr(K/
NONRFTAIL
No. 1 `►•1 .1
Rl 1All ~UMMaI•r►
-r p,,,
0
13 XH 1
0 . til
1 1p0
13LX.H2
O . 1 n
:nw*
17Y777
0. �7•
♦(KK+
I1.'faZ1
O rµ
•
♦(ri Kr
7INh1J
O• ���
IilrPf,
17,x77
0.31W
gulp
f l l ep7
0 14►
7 (Kr(K/
I(NrVVM
O. lal
I I i K70
I f M "Jle
O. 131
f 7l K)D
7(r�17•
0. 1�3
1 ?tKKr
llri/l•
0 32V
1 •(KKr
4Y1.�1
0. >.�
1711 K14,
Yava
O. \21
7, lr(YL
V l l t3
0 113
11►f KK,
lay 1 13
0. NOV
1t(KKP
U71/4
0.'11:
1(K K)O
"4K13
Cl. 301
RJ•v'S
0.300
The allowable FAR will be fixed at the time a
b. the
development permit approval is given by
Development Review Board.
C.
Each property owner is entitled to a pro rata
share of the allowable retail and non -retail
commercial square footage based on each owner's
percentage ownership of the entire acre
parcel.. The allocation to each property owner
is transferable to another property
d. The lot coverage of building and parking areas
shall not exceed 70%. There shall be a 20ite's
setback from the property line along the
frontage on Kruse Way and Boones Ferry Road.
e. No access will be allowed from Boones Ferry
Road. The main access shall be from Kruse Way
Place. A 'right -in, right -out' accesson Kruse
Way may be used only as a secondary
the site."
Read for the first time by title only at the regular meeting of
the City Council of6e City of Lake Oswego held on the day
of __� 1g
AYES :
NOES :
ABSTAIN:
FXCUSi?D :
React fort.h(, sc•ic�ticl time by title only and c�uacteed at the
regular 't.ing of t.h(� City Council of the City of 986. Oswego
held on the (lay of.
AYES
NOES .
A}lSTA 1 N
EX(1IS, l?1)
ATTEST:
i
i
Ordinance No. 1944
I,a g e 2
Wi 11 i rrm E. Yc•ung, mayor
Rosenc,+ryA. tl;rti(rr, City Rc:�( L�r�lc•r
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jo oleman
C Attorney
Doc. No. 2778c
Ordinance No. 1944
Page 3
LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUTHORIZING SALE OF
GENERAL OBLIGATION FIRE PROTECTION BONDS
SERIES 1986
The Lake Oswego City Council held its regular City Council
meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 4, 1986 in the City
Council Chambers at 348 N. State Street. At this public
meeting, it passed Resolution R-86-29 authorizing the sale of
$950,000 City of Lake Oswego General Obligation Fire Protection
Bonds. A quorum of Councilors was present at this meeting and
the vote was unanimously in favor, 7-0.
An excerpt of the minutes pertaining to Resolution R-66-29 is as
follows:
"VII. B. POSSIBLE RFSOLUTIONS Relating to Sale of Fire
Station Bonds and Advance Refunding of Previous Bond
Issues.
"Karen Scott, Assistant City Manager, referring to
Peter Harvey's memo of October 29, 1986, commented
that Resolutions R-86-29, R-86-30, and R-86-31 are
being proposed because of the possibility of the
passage of Ballot Measure 9.
"Fred Matthias, Finance Director, supplemented
information contained in his October 31, 1986 memo
to the City Manager. He stated that Resolution
R-86-29 for sale of the fire station bonds would be
void if the bonds were not approved by the voters in
today's election (Measure 51). If approved, the
resolution would allow the City to deliver the bonds
before Ballot Measure 9 would take effect, should it
pass. Cit\ Attorney Jim Coleman added that passage
of this resolution would authorize the sale of fire
station bonis regardless of the outcome of Measure
9, provi.ied that the voters approve Measure 51.
"Moved by Councilor Dixon; seconded by Councilor
Holman that Council approve Resolution R-86-29.
Mayor 1'ounq ascertained that all three resolutions
propose,i had been reviewed and approved by Mr.
Coleman as well as by the bond attorney. The motion
passed unanimously with Fawcett, Ash, Woller,
Holman, mayor Young, Dixon, and Sinclair voting
'yes.'"
Betty L. Burke
Clerk of the Council
sui).,cr shed and ---woril lwtore Ing^ t Ill:, .".11d (Liy of Dklc(( ]A -1 ,
Nc�t ,i r % 1' 11.41c tor Ot otjon
My Cil;expires. _ �� �•� �`'� f~ �___
CITY OF LAKE OSW E CSO
C1 T 1 '\1 \NA I R'S UI 1 1( 1
'Lit:
,%he City Council
FROM: Potor C. Harvey, City hanalor
tit18,T1?C'l: Possil).lo Uosolat lons ltel.atin�l to Sale ut Dire Station
Bonds anis Advance Itetundi.nq of Previous Bond Issues
DA, PF,: tictohor 29, 11166
j'llt' vot?rs Ut lako Qswel?10 on NUVC'mor 4th Will Oe(lticidin(l ICl
whothor or noapprove t t.O prove a t:)ond issue? t'Ur fire Shit ito"
0divion, V(.)tOrs statewide Will Do Voting 0" i constitutional
t property I' ' rty tax reforr,l. Bond at.l-orneys teel
t I 'ncir.l"nt r(' lr�t. in a o ,l ocoss nust oo :gold and the
0,"Ai!;.;Ilt� or 1,T11 t)Oncis in 1
'Illi, :;houltl Mt`.I:,ur(:` 9, they
dol Ivorod prior to 1lt't't`Iloor 'l, 1 l)t, ;;Jl, 11`t:i , i ,
gwrI V t.1X l i.rliHit.'onI 1� 1:,:;► in .)rtlt i to not
pioVl.:;l l!1:; of the!; Illoaullre', l)Lhorw jso t.11t' I.,t)nds Wo•Iltl rt'i111iro
11101 llt't 11111! oval key t do vot_ors at `;t)"lt` t lltllrt' 11:.jy tit. Nov,21ill)('r
Moot ion, Ch(� I)t�( (`mt)e,r ath ti ilk' t.,'days atter t'ho Novemu`"t
t' l t't'i 1 t)I1 tt Wh 1 ,h l 1, "t' tno pl-o or t V I ,I X 1 i11111.-AiIonit` l)ou d l 1)(°
t`t I t'l'1 ivk, :;11,)11ltt
It I, I,IIt, r �`��11t 11C't't ''let h,lntl(�!i ill
! ht' l t`,lt r,l ► 1 •IX 1,.1W;-; .
nt?y
;;, ;t,ttl na
\;01 K i n'l 0X1 ( 01' lt' l',' 1.11',1 (o 1)os; i 1 ion to 111ovo Vt!rY
I 11`I ,{ j ,' 011 f ht' 1 1. f t` :;t .tl 1 on ;toll,t:; � :�l)oll ltl 1 nt'y :it' ,311110 oVt,d ant1
Illi \J t'
I V Ik Il
..
t'l)Illlt' l I t'oll:', I tit'r •I 11 Onv "lttt`t
wt11 t'll \+t`:l l tt ,lilt lloi 1 ':'.t`
11 II t't)utlt i 1 I;!t l't I n 1 { tilt' l,rul,t`t: t
;;I .11 !otl ;toll,{,. ;lloill.l t let ,t` I Ov.1ti ,lllti !;hotlll
t 1 t'1'lt ! •It inn It I:;!; , vilI of t tln.tI t' l Y w(' h;IVt` not I)t`t�n .II>lr t o
it I ,)n t It t i 1'.lt` 1 o I1 int 1 n(it`tt ► n l nr .Itlt'ntl,l
('olllit, I
hill hond.;� Wt' II•IVt` .l W')I l� lll'1
� :;tet. wit 1 t'h wuu I t1
oil t 't t`o" ; 11, 1 I I ( y tt t .111 adv II1,'t' t t't itll( i l 11 I ! :; � tt l tl ,It
Oell :;t .111,11 11,1 ltt)Iltl l :; ;let`:, 'rill It'll tdt't t'
111 tlllt`I I Ill ''I t',;l 1 a t`:; t 11,111 Wt`
I4NN0RIIINIAII NIR111 19)\11)111(111(1\ It") IAKI ONWI(,O.OHI(,0N11-014 (N1)111,11, 41,1)1
-77-77,77— 7777777�7,77777-`r x �.
SUB.FCT : Possible Resolutions Relating to Sale of Fire station
Knurls and Advanco- Refundinq of Previous Bond ISSUeS
(i(•I.oher 24, 1480
Two
t -I.vy. This aivaAcO r0fundinq i�=,ue would apparently tall
i-ier thF� same Decemioer 4, 1986 time deadline as the tire bonds,
? the property tax limitation 1-wasure pass. rhe advance
r'ei _. . lin(: issue is more complex and involved than I_he fire
,tat, on bonds. It must also be evaluated in light of the new
rc-.;ural tax law changes. We are still evaluating this
;)0::_ ic)i lity, and r,Iay oe Presenting resolutions for advance
ret-ndinq for council consideration at the Noveriber 4th council
me -inq.
Respectfully submitted,
t).).:. 1H4411
L. o�
October 31, 1986
ilap
To: Pete Harvey, City Manaber LW
From: Fred Matthias, Finance Director i7,
Subject: Resolution R-86-29, 30 and 31, to be Considered by
Lake Oswego City Council NoNcmber 4, 1986
Tuesday night, the City Council 1.6 being requested to approve of three
res.�Llutiotts regarding possible bond sales before December 4, 1986. These
resolutions are prompted as a safety measure just in case Ballot Measure 9 is
ap roved by the voters on November 4, 1986. Passage of Ballot Measure 9 will
make it impossible to sell bonds for a considerable period after December 4,
1,46-. (date measure becomes effective) and will destroy the City's bond rating;
thereby increasing interest costs.
The three resolutions are for the following purpose:. R-86-29 is for the
s:je of the fire station bonds if they are approved by the voter 11-4-86. if
tr.r bonds arc not approved this resolution is void. if the fire station bonds
.lppro\cd by the voters, tilt` City can then proceed with the sale as
:Deese r;atrs have dropped as evidenced by Treasury Savings Bonds interest
dca},ping from i li,:% to 6% on 11-1-86. When the bonds are sold, the City will
be required to spend (obligated with contract, etc.) $2:3,750 within 6 months
and 85% of the bond proceeds within 3 years.
lho secortti resolution R -6t-30 is required by state law for selling
�,dvancc Refunding; Bonds. Oregon Revised Statutes require that an outside
:::zarltial adviser be hired to develope the Advance Refunding Plan and to
k,esent it to the State Treasurer for approval. The resolution will be. voided
Ballot Measure 9 is defeated.
The third rec;olutiotl R-60-31 authorizes the sale of Advance Retundilag
^,-nds to repl,ice the outstandin;; City liall Bonds and Bancroft Bonds sold in
1 t
is ,tilt t c i pnt.ed t hat t ho City ri,n now st 11 ndvanre rel undine, bona -,;,it
rstantial-ly lowor interest rites and save the City approximale.ly $75,000 on
:'.c City Hali bonds and $50,00\` on tha Bancroft issue. Phis savings is
. ,c (:ltd is lata:;Dile vra.lut• basis and the tactual dollar saving', t; will be
s..h:,l;antiatly �;rtatrr. 1'itis re solution is void if Ballot Mt',asure 9 is
„ttoatrd ,as the .lnticipateti s,avinl;s is only 7.5� anti thelclore duns not mc'c't.
;;tier 1rra:;Illy Ili Ill mull, s.lving;s reyui rt'nlent of 3b. Lake Oswv.7,o 11": h n
nerd til: o\empttoil to ttae 3`� savings rule only if Ballot Measure 9 t.;i! :..
.. But lot 111clnrr t1, 11 i t p;a• t's, wi I I :
l t.tt , Itar i , t I tet urr Cit y hand saIcS beclaut;r even t houp,h bund;: wvrl-
1 t ry 1 rn:.l v ;lpill o: I`y i ht• vol vI t; I hey +are uu:;o ld , anal t horn I rpt I-
wi 1 I h;kve t o be I-c:approved at allot hoe elect toll. Tlllt; w I 1 be I r tet'
of t Ill' N i I Slot fol; Bonds ( i t :al)l+rovrti un Mt)vcnllwi 4, 19,tib) cu1t1 t int
A6\itIWc ltofItItdinl', of the Btult•roft Bonds ;Intl flit' Advance RV uut11111',
of I,:ity llnll Honds. At; a pr,lrtirnl nl,ltter, it t./ pa st'S, lho luturt•
r l ot• t toll!, w i l l ut;t'd w l t h volt ou:, u}.ont y bu�il;t't uvc I r 1(14,
t Dior:;t t, t h,at rr.alahr, v fIll honti I :;t;tit, b may mo:,I rt t c i ve t ht
} Ire tIII, t tit(, vot(,I twit/ not appr()vc• of
nt,k,t, st;;ley volt'I at t ant on.
t It \ whit 1',t Ilt'l.' 1 t`hI lt`,al it'll 11,lckllll', tilt t+.111( full holed:..
2) Force the City to lose its L vorable bond rating thereby
substantiially increasing bond interest costs. Lost revenue from
Ballot Measure 9 will force the City of use its reserves and
reserves are a big factor in the City's favorable credit rating.
11. Advance Refunding Bonds. Advance Refunding Bonds'are considered when
they can be sold at a cheaper interest than the original bond issue. The
proceeds for the Advance Bond Issue are placed in an escrow bank and the bank
then pays off the old bonds as they mature. The citizens of Lliv City then pay
off the new issue which has the lower interest rate and in case of G.O. City
Nall Bonds will reduce their taxes. This computation of the exact amount of
bonds to be sold, the selection of the escrow bank and the legal investments
placed in the bank is very complicated. internal Revenue Service watches each
�p in this transaction and the computations of the Financial Advisor are
.:rified by the State Treasurer, an independent CPA firm, and the bonding
:orney.
RESOLUTION NO. R-86-29
A XEsoLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI.1•Y OF LAKE OSWEGV
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE 01'• ACQUIRING
LANG, CONSTRUCTING AND FURNISHING TWO FIRE STATIONS AND ACQUIRING
FIRE PROTEC11ON EQUIPMENT
WHEREAS, This Council submitted to the legal voters of
the City of Lake Oswego, Counties of Clackamas, Multnomah and
kashiripton, State of Oregon (the "City"), the question of
contracting a general obligation bonded indebtedness in the sum
ot; $950,000 to finance acquiring land„ constructing and
furnishing two fire stations and acquiring fire protection
equipment; and
WHEREAS, The election was duly and legally held on the
day of November, 1986, and in anticipation of approval, it is
royri,ate to authorize the issuance and sale of bonds in the
sum that has been ;approved by ra majority of the qualified voters
of the City voting at the election;
NOW, 1'HERE:FORE, BE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Laky onwego that:
beet ion I. Issue. For the above purposes, the City
shall issue its (:cncra.1 ObJ eat ion Fire Protection Bonds, Series
,•:tic,, in thr amount of Nine hundred Fifty Thons.and Dollars
1. c• dal ed i>
l` ,
t�1 19M6 to be in dvnominat i ont,
11 1 l c �•c r::,h� :'
0t FiVt, 'lhuu:,,,nI1 I i o I iars or I n I u g r a 3 multiples tnvrvci
EO hc.t: in!vivst pavabic on .lune 1 and December 1 of each year
not urity or prior redumption, commencing .lune 1, 1981, ano
r.ttto, re >;(crially on Dpuvmber 1 of each year .as follows:
Naar
Amount
hear
Amount.
D ic 1,
1` t�7
S,�>`-,,OU(
Dec 1
1'7`.'+1
550, ON,
0 a V
q Sb
25,000
Dec 1
l
50,UOG
Der 1
4ho
10,00(
h P I i .
1
55,11U(
,
11ec
1`)`11
S.a(1,0(1
Iii•, 1
00(
M 1
t`i`t;
a0, U0
I,rr I
Tool
6u Out
11, r 1
1'1 `a!
35,(10(,
5 V ( 1
2000
60,000
11,,, 1
Iyo t
40,00(1
but 1
2003
65,000
5, r l
1` 44
40,(10('
i r l
2004
b5,0O0
0 r 1
1945
45 00C
I ( l
200)
10,000
5,1 1
1446
4'1,0111.
1)1'( 1
,1011
15,000
seri ion 2. R,•dVilipt ion. rhv 7:1ty ra•:•1'a vv 1 he rIrht to
a I 1 or any port Iun of : he li,,d , Ont tin t nr •+Iter 11or,•wbot l
1.1nt,, in IuvorBr order D mn; urIt y and by 101 within a malut ll y
Olt l , c , 1;.5,r 1, 1
744, and on tnV 11111.1 v b I p,tywvnt date t hereraltot,
at 1,;11 plu1. nrctnrd Iniorval to the r,•d,•wlliion date.
Pare 1
+
but A ,ttty call or rrdrml,t iut,
orI ion a. Not. 1e'I_ ::uch call to
not less than thirty days prior t° �
�hrtll t,r maile'd and ottlerwiSE. given a.
the r�!'t:.Ivrvd owners of Llai bfaflure to give notice shall not
law; however+ Y All Bonds called for
required by tion of the bonds. ,naiad
invalidate the redemp
r
cae't^rt iuu ::hall cease to bear interest 1 rc„a the date dest},
in
It t•,e nut i l L .
Security. The null faith and cofdthe°bonds
ect iun 4. sive, owners of each
are pledged to t ne success ,tt ions, When due. The City
City payment of such oblig
for the punctual P as provided by law, a direct ad valorem tax
shall levy
annually �t1L�, within the City in ::ntficient
upon all of the taxable pz°l
ien
on
amount,
after taking into considerate)aymentcofnsuch �ttaxes nand all
*ayment of debt service
Ciel:;;quencirs that may occuz in the ►
oti:er monies reasonably available for the 1 mature, and that
prom tly as they such a
on the bonds, to pay the hoods 1 P
covenants with the
vearowners
that anyits
of thebonds
bonds,eor bonds
the City eRch
t;tx annually during
,,,,,d to refund them, rare outct.indtnl;.
The City
may issue
_ _ _ --" bonds which
tiectiott �. i'orm of -Fed istered Bt`S°nary
the bunds as one °r more typewritten, P the following
" � exchnttf'-.cable for de:�finitivinbsubstRtttiaciclyi.nitive bonds
Shrill be shall be
are available. The bonds
ivrm:-
- ----
UNITED STATES OF Al!!"
C1'1•l' OF LAKE USwi":•��
TIES OF CLACKAMAS, MULTNOMA't;
COl1NAli)
t;'.VFROpLIGATION F1KE PROTECTION
W A till l NGTON
SYRIES 1986
��il�l:l'1'1
A'C F.1, IN '1' FR FST
UyK ANNUM
t,:�wreo, in 01, . aunties
uE C1'11 OF Lake of Gt er,ot: ( t he
•'ultncltr;+lt, and washinK,On, (tate
;,•c•rtvrti aVKile,Wledges it::rlI indebted tt'.., hereby
DA'1'l. CU S 11'
of Clackamau,
City), for valet
promises to l,ay
or reg,isteivC
t t he pr t nc• i 1'a 1 amount of
no 1 I a r ;; (5 .
n t br hove wat ur i t, date t F
ethrt with interest thereon irate
,rr annum indic•;ttrd above. lntcr+•t.
��n t he f t r st dad of .lune and the f i rt;t
t lir ,i .,t �' Illi Vol at the Vol e• 1 ,t i of rc•drtnpt i c,n,
pavabl e :.ruit:,ititu:t 1 1 y or 1
taY t,t i�rc rtube'r in earlt vrar unt 1 1 w;tt tit f t Y
I,IIt; lntere;;{ upon thi:, bl,nel i:: ,IisLrare (the
„mmrnr i n}'• .1 tlnr 1, vnt and t vg
c heel.~ .�r drat t :• wl 1 1 be mai led
1 hrungh t hr e,1 1 i rr tit the city's
itf t 1;y l,.ty is}: ;t}, ;t , ,r:+r on
^}l,•g,i::t t at") by rhrrk e r t rrru �,wnrr at, they I I t o
tiS cit t he. re} t'' rt1 the month prior
tt, the nc,mr lttt! "left`'= ,Tinct ,n1 is Payable
t hr l,rnd r rg.i st rr :+r ut t he f i p � ,duels day
1 !
I hr dot r un Whirls int rust come t:
ti un
III ,•:.rnt at ion and :rut t rndrt. of t h{ . bull t o t he Frp,l st t or
I'
Rpnolnt ion I: -Bb 0`4
rare 1
Al)Ul'1lUNAL PKoVISIUNS OFErH IS SAMEbEFFh-C1'APPEAR
IFON. "EY WEKEKSL
11iESE PKOV1SIONS HAVE 1 H
1'K1N'1'EL tIk:KE1N.
, .'F.K'1'lh'1k:U, KhCI'1'EU, AND UE.'I.AKEU that ali
1'1' l HEKh.HYto happen, and to
cond!,
ition, ane
cts, and thillFs TI'll he ed s ance ,
be pertormc•a Precedent to andctve been1l>erformedf inkTdue lttimek,avc
existed, nave happened, an
tes Of
corm,
and manner as required by the Constitution [thatStheuissue
the State of Oregon and the Ch.+rtes of the City;
Of which this bond is a plimit art, and all other obligations prescribed
City,
City, are within every debt limitation and other
herand that the City
by such Constitution, Statutes ad Cha I 'illy of a direct ad
Council has provided for the levying nnwithin the City so taxable for
valorem tax upon all the property
it s purposes, in an amount sufficient t�nciPalt ofot.herbonds l of l suchn T ,
to pay the interest on aTtd E and 1 ,ayable.
issue as such obligations become due of Lake
IN W1'1'NF.SS bHEREUF, the City Council of the City
Ure on, has
g
UsweE,o,
Clackamas, Multnomah and WashiuEton (onature,of its Mayor
signed by facsin.ile sig and
caused this bond to he sig nature of its Finance 1)Arc`ctor,
and att(rsIed by facsimile sig
has caused its seal to be affixed hereto or printed Wesco❑ as o
the date indicated above.
Urc` +on
M_ayor, City of Lake Oswego, t>
SVA1, )
hinanc•c 1)tre•r10r
City of L;,ke OswuE;o, UreFon
1'H1S litil;h ;;HALM. N01 lik; VAL11) 11NLl::;:
1'KU1'li.KLY AI!TIiF.N ICATF1) 11Y '1'11 k: KI•:(;I 5'CRAl.
IN '1'111. .;!'ACF. 1Ni)1('"'k' }il:LUl..
CI;K'I'1k 1CA1'r 0Y AU'1U :N"C:ATION
I'h1s is ruP 0 the CI t. V's (,vncrh1
ithlit`ritic,n F'itr lItitIiott Ron(is, ti+rig:
1'tK(,, t, t,,.ei ;.�'.1 •n:+ttt to t he Kc'r;otut ic�u
by
loll 11 60
Note to Printer: The following languaVe should he printed
on the reverse of Lhe bond:
]lite; hand is one of the General Oblill,ttion Fire Protection
hoods. Series 1986, of the City, and is issued by the CiLy for
the purpose of constructing fire stations and acquiring equipment
in full and strict accordance and compliance with all of the
provisions of the Constitution and Statutes of the State of
t i.regon and the Charter of the City.
The City reserve.- the right to redeem al.l or any portion
of the bonds maturing after December 1, 1996, in inverse order of
..aturity and by lot within a maturity on December 1, 1996, and on
."y interest payment date thereafter, at par plus accrued
:terest to the redemption date.
Notice of anv call or redemption shall be mailed riot less
than thirty days prior to such call to the reflistered owners of
the Bonds, and otherwise given as required by law; however, any
:ailuro to five notice shall not invalidate the redemption of the
bonds. All bands called for redemption shall cease to bear
interest from the date designated in the notice,
The bonds are issuable in the form of registered bonas
without coupons in the: denominations of $5,000 or any integral
multiple thereof. Bonds may be exchanged for bonds of the same
.1 v1,rel;ate principal amount, but different autnorized
:rnotllinat 1
Atty 11-;11,:;1(11. of this bond must be repistered, ns pro�ieied
1 the ris.)ltition of the City, authorizing the issuance of its
feral t)hli"at ion Fire Protect for, lionds, Series 1986 (the
rsc,lutic�t:'} up<1❑ the hunii reE;i::ter kept for that purpose at he
Lice of the R ristt'ar• Tlie t:ity and the
r Pel ;:Vu to whose name this bond is rrl',i sI vredLasriltsy Lreat
Ibsoluta
�nrr for all purpo:cc's, ;t� 1)rovided in tltr kesollit. ion.
Thr i ond;Iwill". m;►y 0\C1Iilnl1,e• or l. r;ln:ci 1-r ;illy pond only by
;:rrcndeI i:;, i I ollot het wit h 1, W i t t en t o::t r uill 1,t ofCC e xc: u;It:1 t
irnnsicr ahirli �,: ;.nti fnrtuty to the k11,tt.trar ;Ind dull.
ut (1d by It he oI t e1- ed owue'r or his dul y nut. hor i read at. t
hot'nr,
.-it tile ottic, f the ho Fti',Lrar In Iile 1111 e'
and Subject Lo the. y
Andiliorls st,t Ic I11 itt the. hesoluLio11.
ASSIGNMENT
FUR VALUE kECE1VEL, the undersigned sells, assigns anc
ti .:zero unto _
Please insert social security or other
identifying number of assignee
the within bond and does hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint as
attorney to transfer this bond on the books kept for registration
thereof with the full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated:
NoiiCE: The Signature to this assignment must correspond with
the name of the registered owner as it appears upon the face of
the within bond in every particular, without alteration or
enlargement or any charge whatever.
Signature Guarantect
(Bank, frust Company or Firm)
(Authorized Uf i icer
`Phe Jollowtnr abbreviations. when used in
the inscription
on the i;tce of the within bond. shall be conStrued
as though the)-
..r -r writteu out in full according to applicable
laws or
I t g t at ion:..
'1 EN CUM - t vnant s in cvmmon
EN ENI - as tenant s by the vnt i ret iv,
JT TEN _ as ioi nt t vu"nt s with right of
survi vornhi l•
and not as tenants in cUllwon
OREGON CUSTOVIANS use the tol lowinl,
CUST Ul, ONEG
MIN
as cuss odian for known of
minor)
UK UNIF TRANS MIN ACT
under the ettvgon Uniform Transior to
Minors Art
Adult lo"al ibpjrviat ions: way also be used
though not
. , t 0d Above.
��lut tun L' �il7ej
1 .ire �
T
t
,
, U n
ti
(li .
Ao t
nl,n
i
uttdt,ri nd \lr� ion
Of fyll tt<h`is rti`oe Ent, �N�istr�t
t n e e Ek Of tbh e n l tutr t1 01,
u t (! t'h to a t i On
of tth11t4. at t `ar `' ty's r!, ie`eted esioltrti�;ht o ranVsil,
aUth is bo e all Th ayin bj. i ion.. r b&ne
f
(2 e c n a n P r eo to all u o 'u tia n �t o eb e s t r a'� t na n ci t r' O' inz E d s Iit t
All bon t trans on pro all dad i vPred
ll e€istrar Re 1'rVe natsda D hnl 1 be i pursuant l a SUrr On 1 tY el osi a�
orRr, tranRegistrt' the J-°.t;is tuts kEered fo
!,r c -sol mai. at f Cir. t tete solo r
krf'ivs de not on o f appo j t he b f po t E,i-m, tion,
(3 10l l oytirn at
not el to tbo Cf tty d f °t di IArtd The 's ate City
1 ?,he R the eater t downer The he bonaioeessoor to will
opt, hap han s o Re'Ri s b
Cbond te. or
Re fn R the b� any c ttar s ordin
c,wnv and or mq all bo eRiStrad•Payinenge ill t ance
e n n
for dllln tho kel,ist ainEdds shat date he
J pu bon tar by l h
7'/ro, rpOse d rot may
the, R e Nnt
n`rntekopistt s istv1 0 rat tc/, ist01 E'd in
t ho 1, and add a saa t 1, l t / `,r.ti ' and the
In0n and r, 1,(- ss l.! WI -N "rt l the
tate h prr,E cR.istt, `�t t`ai1 E'rr t,l th l StE'd a
ll'rli r7f, .3 �s o,•, bontr'c/l 1)onn e bong s
arty !�<It0 ke,t'i p �.lne hull,. t ne f `''n0r Pa V, n
r s t r. r r n t i s P a Y rrt c, i l t Ea E., s t rt e, t t o
o so nr nth Y t,)
hull llS 111: t �uoh ^•i`'' 41ai! d;it E, Cap apm';t E,
,'f br tlr ,v bE Pa1•rE have, r c'0, ne ( tl;E of t h r on
4rjlr,�nrirllt,t t'I trlc,\t hrr)Pc,; nt nv 1t)t thec'r thh'c 01"d
v t. o
d
tS 1 t t,tt4< t;,u)e `v� l iab ci t l
hotntt 4r°r)cits Uri t�y) vglj,,! l r l i tY tc
nt�l b,
tillttlrl;rinstl e, rti<t) tclt•1 ;lwc,l,rt
�trn rlc, t01 vt'ci till rl t
t c,t rtrrl'i rr trllt1 t i,t'ry t c) t lt;',r c ul i i p i rrl,t t)t ort h t,rrt
t 1)r, rlt t, hrs �j','1 r .�l•tr t Irr
1h)
1 � l'lrtt
8
t t
u„ �! ti •; rt c �' ! rt ?+ f rt c 1; 11 c, d ;, rt ;; t r,
t t�
it ' nr;lr�rit ;ttrEi t'!' t llt, r
f r
vu
r
" i Y
colon o. Authentication, keristrat 1on and lranste'r
(l) No bond shall be entitled to any rip,ht or benefit
under this resolution ( t tic "kesoltit ion") unless it
sha 11 nave been aut hent 1 cat ed by an all (tori zed
officer of the City's baying agent ana registrar
(tne "Registrar"). The Registrar shall
authenticate all bonds to be delivered at closing
of this bond issue, and shall additionally
authenticate all bonds properly surrendered for
t-xchanfe or transier pursuant to this Resolution.
(2) All bonds ;:hall be in registered form. The City will
appoint a bank in the City of Portland, Oregon to
serve as Registrar for the bonds. A successor
Registrar may be appointed for the bonds by ordinance
or resolution of the City. The Registrar shall
provide notice to bondowners of any change in the
Registrar not later than the bond payment date
following the change in Registrar.
(3) The ownership of all bonds shall be entered in the
bond register maintained by the Registrar, and the
City and the Registrar may treat. the person listed as
owner in the bond register as ttic cwuer of the bona
for all purposes.
(4) The Registrar shall mail each botld pr,}'tnent to tae.
name and address of t tie 1?oll(I0wIIVr as t trey appear oil
t'tic bond register as of the tittrenth clay of the
m'Nut h 1)rrred111g a bond pay r,:r•nt rate t t he "Record
t).lte"), l; havnleut is so mailed, neither the City
nc�r the strar shall have a11V t11rtIter liability to
,+rt V Cllr s11c11 paVill ellt .
(�) botld.- u:.lhe c'xc•har+ged for ;In ry+tal 1)ri1)cipa1 aill ount
of btnci;. the sceme mllturity whlrh cite in different
kit",omtn:tt ioits, .lad bonds o:.ly be t ransterI-vd to of her
wners it the 1>on<iuwner sutmit:. the lollowinl; to lht
kr;•.i �t rat' :
l;+) writlrr, itlt:t tact ioIt : tot eartian!e ore t t 1 n:,t 4,t
+t etot'y t.o the krl•,iatt;it , sigitvci l+y the
hrnura'ner or hi 1, at t of ney ill i act and
)'uc+1 .tilt cl-d or. wi t ne;:sed ill + ln:lllner sat it;f itc•t of �
to the kel;i:;ltnl; anti
(b) t he 1,rrtds t o he eXc•h;+ut,.ed of t t .in;•ie'rred
F;, Int f„n K St. :9
(a) Thu Registrar shall not be required to exchange or
transfer any bonds submitted to it ouring any periuo
hupinninr A In a Record Uete and ending, on thu next
following payment date; however, such bonus shall be
exchanged or transferred promptly following that
payment date.
(7) The Registrar shall note the date of authentication
on each bond. The date of authentication shall be
the date on which the bondowner's name is listed on
the bond register
(8) For purposes of this section, hands shall be
considered submitted to the Registrar on the date the
Registrar actually receives the materials describes
in subsection W of this section.
(9) The City may alter these provisions regarding
registration and transfer by mailing notification of
the altered provisions to all bondowners. The
altered provisions shall take effect on the date
stated in the notice, which shall not be earlier than
45 days after notice is mailed.
Section 7. Compliance with Federal Law. The City
covenants for tha bcnef:it of the owners of the hoods to comply
with all applicable provisions of. the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (the
"Act"), uaaiess the City obtains an opinion of nationally
recurni4ed bona counsel Ih,at such cumpl lance is not required in
order t or t he int Brest paid on t he bands t o be exempt i roll,
tedcrol income t. xration. The City makes the folloiing specific
covenants with ►vspvcI to ttie Act:
l.I' The City shall take no action nor fail to take
appropriate action which would cause the bunds to
become "arbi t rage bones" under t he Act. .
ov.a nnj 8 to be coat :a i ned in t he non-arb i I rug#V
I It arnte to be executed on behn.li of the C11N
1• it I he enlercvable as it contained herein.
ha no 1 ut fun V 86 -29
1',are !
t l on o f the t a c i l it i
v s f i n"n c e d with the
wndv :,hall be used by :any
person except t. he City
01 d membct ut the general
public.
a on h. D,s i reat i un of bunds
at (lural 1 t i ed Tax Exempt
tlbI Irat
I K V The City Veni,•n,ates the
bundt, ns "qualified t ax-
Vxempt
ubI il,at ionr," pursuant 10 section
4o2(b)( i) of t he 'tax
Retotm
Act ut IgB6. The Cit v a ovvnant
:• nut t o 50 dvaignat e t .ax
v\ri pt
obi irai Ions In the : ul Lent c:ilendaI
vVnr in .an ra1;i•,ter.al e
nt
u: "T e t h;an $ 111. a'r`il, 001J. The
a' 1 1 v , a,a" not ► v a:,onab I v
I c t
to . or more than $10,000,000
of I . x exempt ubl ignt i"
dut iur
t b, , Lia a Baal a nivnAAi year.
ha no 1 ut fun V 86 -29
1',are !
Sect ion 9. �:I Its n1 honds. 'file FiIIanct' r c c t or :.hall
Cause to be Itublisliva in the Lnite (Isw(-go Review, Lake 0swal1,o,
01 t•11kill ;lII I t I,l' 11a i I v .luurIII aI 01 l l mIII vrce, 11ort l and, 01 I•i'utl,
nut ict I, of t.:III' u1 t lit, uona;, in 1 lit I%,rIII suUai;lilt Tal ly ab :,I,uwl�
on ixhiblt A at t ached lieret.o and bN• t lits relent-nce incorpurat ed
herein, or :summaries, as provided by law. The bonds shall b,u
sold upon the terms provided in the attached Exhibit A. The
bunds shall be sold on the date and at the time and place stated
in Exhibit A, unless the Mayor or Recorder establishes a
different date, time, or place.
Section 10. Measure 51 Effect. This resolution will be
det.—med void and of no efle.ct if Mt1.ISure 51 is defeated by the
voters at the General Election held on November 4, 1986.
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of lake Oswego geld on the _ day of
November, 1986.
Ali F.S:
NOES
ABS'1 AIN:
EX%.:1lSED:
W i 1 1 i am F. Youii Mayor
A 1 i i �-'l :
ktusr;:.,ars• A. Ma III,I kccur0eI' -
Ai . KOVI-II AS TO F'OKM:
01AC
(.U.1 l'III;I I.
t l v1 Ill'\'
ht,!.o l 111 I (111 1, 86 -19
E,XHIB11 r.
uEFIC1AL NOT1C:L OF BOND `.AL.
S9SO,OOG
CITY OF LAKE OSWE:GO
COUNTIES OF C:LACKAMAS, MULTNOMAH AND WASHINGTON
STATE OF OREGON
GENERAL OBLIGATION FIRE PROTECTION IiONDS, SERIES 1986
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids will be
received on behalf of the City of lake Oswego, Clackamas,
'.",ul ; nomah and Washington Counties, Oregon (the "City") , until
tour o'clock p.m. (Pacific "Time) on November 24, 1986, at the
oij ices of Lindsay, Hart, Neil 6 Weigler, Suite 1800, 222 S.V.
Columbia Street, Portland, Oregon 97201, at which time they will
he publicly opened and announced.
The bids hhnll be considered and acted upon by the City
within jour pours.
ISSUE: NINE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($950,000)
consisting of registered bonds in denominations of FIVE THOUSAND
nOLLARS ($5,000) or integral multiples thereof, all dated
December 1, 1986.
INTEREST RATE:: Maximum not to exceed a net effective rate
c i ten pvrevnt (10.C) per annum. Interest is payable semiannually
on ,,unt 1, and Utrrmbvr I of each year until maturity or prior
:ciemption, cvmmtnriny .lune 1, 1981. Bidders must specify the
. .Ivlvht Into or rates: which they bonds nvichy ofipttd for salt
11 hear. They bids shall comply with the iollowinU Condit ions:
, t karh Interval rate specified in any bid must he a multiple
I/8tn or 420th of one pvtcent (l;.); (2) No Ruud shall, bear
awle Ina" opt r.It t of int et cyst ; (:3) Etch bond :•pial 1 bear
:'.tt u vvI. Irv, i t s. date to its stated mat ut it y dart at the
i u I u i v s t srvciIivd in they hip; ( 4 ) All honob maturing; at any onr
:mv r,hnil &car the same t nt t of int ervst ; and (5) ho rate.' of
,attrtst may t:,tttd twelve pvicent (111).
fore I INhlbit A Not Ire of Bond Salt
RM STRATION: The bonds will be issued in fully
registered form, and may be exchanged at the expense of issuer
tear similar bonds of different authorized denominations. bonds
Cay not be converted to bearer form.
REDEMPTION: The City reserves the right to redeem all or
any portion of the bonds maturing after December 1, 1996, in
inverse order of maturity and by lot within a maturity an
December 1, 1996, and on any interest payment date thereafter, at
par plus accrued interest to the redemption daLL.
Notice of any call or redemption shall be mailed not less
t`An thirty days prior to such call to the rehistered owners of
jir Bonds, and otherwise given a:: roquirvi by law; however, any
Ailure to give notice shall not invalidate the redemption of the
'ponds, All Bonds called for redumptlon shall cense to bear
interest irum the date designated in the notice..
PAYMIST: Principal and interest are panablo, either at.
;.;turity or upon earlier redemption, by chuck through the ofti"
of the Vvristrar and paying ai,unt of the Wily. which is current t\
t no 01 t ic•o of the Ure•h,on l ..ttk, in Yort l.a;;d.
ut ugun.
VURlOSE: The bonds ate• hoinr is,s"vd to ltnancv acquitiul',
j,ann, const ruct ion and t "I'"" hing t wo 1 Ire stations and acqui r iul-.
t t t u int of ee• i t ou oqui ptacnt . The bonds we i e ant Iiot t .•.od at earl e
election hold within the City on Novemhet 4. ltBU—
;;ht'liRl'1'1 'the• be,O, ate pvtivt.tl oblt1•,ationt, of the City'
ho Li t y has coveu:,nt od to levy an od roIII tax tnnual 1 y whf e h,
with Whet gvai lr;blo t unet:,, w''l be• :.ut t tcic•rtt t o pay bo"(;
1 : i nc i pa l and i nt r i vot as they come 0""
I.tCAl. OPINION: Thr apptovinl opinion of Lindsay, Batt,
Nri 1 t. 6'cirlvl , 1 ,,.:vers, of Part land, lit rI c.rn, wi I t he ptoviued at
nu cot.t 1, t n, put . na se t , and wi 1 l he int i nt od on the bonne aI t ht
t,.,l,vn5u of t by t'i t 1 -
1'"VV , I %hihlt A Net ice of bond SoIV
:. r, t '•C:, r n
e
MATURITIES:
Itte bonds
shall mature
serially
on the iirst
day of December
of Tach
year
as follows:
Year
Amoun
rar
Amount
I c 1
1987
525,000
Lei
1,
1997
$50,000
f;c 1
1988
25,000
Dec
1,
199b
50,000
l;ec 1,
1989
30.000
Dec
1,
1999
55,000
h 1,
1990
30,000
Dec
1,-2000
55,000
Wee 1,
1991
30,000
Dec
1.
2001
60,000
Dec 1,
1992
35,OOC
Dec
1,
2002
60,000
Dec 1,
1993
40,000
Dec
1,
2003
65,000
Doc 1,
1994
40,000
Dec
1,
2004
65,000
Dec 1,
1995
45,000
Dec
1,
2005
70,000
Dec 1,
1996
45,000
Dec
1,
2006
75,000
RM STRATION: The bonds will be issued in fully
registered form, and may be exchanged at the expense of issuer
tear similar bonds of different authorized denominations. bonds
Cay not be converted to bearer form.
REDEMPTION: The City reserves the right to redeem all or
any portion of the bonds maturing after December 1, 1996, in
inverse order of maturity and by lot within a maturity an
December 1, 1996, and on any interest payment date thereafter, at
par plus accrued interest to the redemption daLL.
Notice of any call or redemption shall be mailed not less
t`An thirty days prior to such call to the rehistered owners of
jir Bonds, and otherwise given a:: roquirvi by law; however, any
Ailure to give notice shall not invalidate the redemption of the
'ponds, All Bonds called for redumptlon shall cense to bear
interest irum the date designated in the notice..
PAYMIST: Principal and interest are panablo, either at.
;.;turity or upon earlier redemption, by chuck through the ofti"
of the Vvristrar and paying ai,unt of the Wily. which is current t\
t no 01 t ic•o of the Ure•h,on l ..ttk, in Yort l.a;;d.
ut ugun.
VURlOSE: The bonds ate• hoinr is,s"vd to ltnancv acquitiul',
j,ann, const ruct ion and t "I'"" hing t wo 1 Ire stations and acqui r iul-.
t t t u int of ee• i t ou oqui ptacnt . The bonds we i e ant Iiot t .•.od at earl e
election hold within the City on Novemhet 4. ltBU—
;;ht'liRl'1'1 'the• be,O, ate pvtivt.tl oblt1•,ationt, of the City'
ho Li t y has coveu:,nt od to levy an od roIII tax tnnual 1 y whf e h,
with Whet gvai lr;blo t unet:,, w''l be• :.ut t tcic•rtt t o pay bo"(;
1 : i nc i pa l and i nt r i vot as they come 0""
I.tCAl. OPINION: Thr apptovinl opinion of Lindsay, Batt,
Nri 1 t. 6'cirlvl , 1 ,,.:vers, of Part land, lit rI c.rn, wi I t he ptoviued at
nu cot.t 1, t n, put . na se t , and wi 1 l he int i nt od on the bonne aI t ht
t,.,l,vn5u of t by t'i t 1 -
1'"VV , I %hihlt A Net ice of bond SoIV
iA}+ r.XEM1'I S'TA'EUS:
Interest on the bonds, in the opinion
of Lona roun5el, is exempt from taxnsiou,,v tltiolrttcetrdtainSL art+ittimun
Met pre:•, nt t uttc•ral income tax taw: t P
Loxes) and trom pc.r;,onal income taxatiot, by the Slate of Oregon
under prvbent state law
with the provisions of
The City has covelianted to cotrtj'ly Assuming compliance by
Act of 1986 (the "Act") interest on
the- 'lax krform applicable requirements of the Act,
the City with the tiP personal
income
the Bonds will continue to etXeliaw,sf and frommr}1 Income t dcrt the
unaer present ftd.ral incomea under present state law un
taxation by the state of Oregonorations. The
except for alternative minimum taxes on corp
Act, private
activity bonds" under the Act.
Bongs are not l
BAtt1C pUKCHASE: The City has designated the Bonds as a
•Qualiobligations" pursuant to the Act.
fied tax-exempt 11
he
le
,EST glp, Eye bonds wcultbinathedlowesteto lnet rCos t[tt.ol,the
hose proposal will re..
bidder w
!he oil bid will be determined by computing the
City•
would be required to pay
cctive maturity date at the
total amount of interest which the Y
As-, no bonds are called
from the date of each bond to its resp Each bidder is
rr;1e or rates specified in the bid if njl`
prior to m0iturity, less premium inteofferest
requested to supply the total interest cost
and net effective
will pay upon ttte issue if the bid is
interest rate that the City
computed on a
i,rch;isc=r must pay accrued interest, E
accepted. E'ye } the
3.0 -day basis, from Inc date o1 the bands to the date of
delivery. The cost of printing Inc bunds will be },aid tY
C:ity•
Delivery of the bonds will be wade without cost
IIF.LIVIRY: of. portlan",
It) the :.uccr-t:tn1 bidder At such hank in the City
01 V"Ou, as !he BUVCV •ful bi.:�ier shall u:tme. Payment. for the
st
bond" r.us,t be made in l�ederalt ndSivivuayDvlibe tn`+tt, muth ,a Lmmporarye on ur
bet e► t i„•, i mhet j, 1986. l iY g
Pond whist, :hall he exchatuE'cAble for dctinit,�� to istered bona:.
on o. i„ t,�te 1+,'t, llt 19,
E
tax I i mi t at ton .,red of her
, , i I ii ,pi pa on Novvmher G,
are del iv, t, a
bonds 1 the 1„0n,i:,
Mi NNUR . 4. 'fhe pt vPvrt y
„sed by M�'asure
t c4ui t ri•.„,�nt :• imposed t o these
I.ano, shall not +} ply
her 3, 1 18(,.
}'t tet to Its, am
;OHM O Bill; All bid:, m,u;.t be for net s ::�; n O all tl„
110110Vhclvby Ofiv, 1nC
aleand for not
}, :;:; than (enc 11un,it, d
,
}',�t, ,�u1 l IttttG) of t he pat vnlut• t h,�t e1i .tnd a,•ct u,•d Int t�r�'::t t.o
the i,+l+ ut .1t ltv� ty Each bid Iol,etl,,•t with blddV"Ye up chuck :++
h t,�tu 1,,, Hien n,a:,t br �nrl,
Sed in a :.,'tiled t uve}t,pt nddt, >.;,, <t
tial 1 ut bonds”t o 1111. city and tie:: i } nat ed "Ft rl.„:
1'ap,e
I xhl bit A Not lcc 01 Bond ''.ale
BID LHECK: All bids must be unconditional and accompanicc
t,y a certified or c•asnier':� check uu a bank dump, business in tun
;:talc u1 Ut go" tut Ninteen Thutiband Dull at: 15.19,000) Payable Lc
tilt; uru+t ut the Ctty to becure the City itum any iu:,s resultinf..
irum the tailure of the bidder to comply with the terms of the
hid. Checks will be forfeited to the City as liquidated damages
in case the biduer to whom the bonds are awarded withdraws its
bid or tails to complete its purchase in accorcance with the
terms thereoi. No interest shall be allowed on the deposit but
the check of the successful bidder will be retained as part
payment of the bonds or for liquidated damages as described
above. Checks of the unsuccessful bidders will be returned by
the City promptly.
RIGHT OF REJECTION: The laity reserves the right to reject
any or all bids, and to waive any irregularities.
uFFICIAL S•TA!EmENT: The City has prepared a preliminary
official statement relating to the bonds, a copy of which will be
furnished upon request to Fred Matthias, Finance Director.
CUSIP: CUsip numbers will be imprinted upon all bonds of
this issue at the City's expense. Failure, to print, or
improperly imprinted numbers will not constitute basis for the
purcrinser to ref use to accept delivery.
NO LITIGATION: At the time of payment for the delivery of
said bonds, the laity will furnish the successtul biduer a
certificate that. here is no litigation peu,iing affecting the
validity of the brn6s.
FUKTHKR 11FO KMATION: Additional intotmat ion reg,ardinp. the
City and this sale r..ay he obtained from 'reed Matthins, Finance
Pitrctot, 380 A Avcnue lake Usweho, ore gou _x1034, ('5U3)635-0761.
Fi nancu 0i I vc I or
city 01 Ka KU USwVQ
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AUTHOKLZING SUBMISSION OF AN ADVANCE REFUNDING PLAN TO THE S'L'ATE
TREASURER, DESIGNATING THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND BOND COUNSEL.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Oswego, (the "City") is a
public corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
the State of Oregon and is authorized pursuant to the
Constitution and laws of the State of Oregon to issue advance
refunding bonds for its outstanding general obligation bonds; and
WHEREAS, the City has reviewed an advance refunding
plan, Schedule A attached, submitted to it by the Oregon Bank for
its outstanding General Obligation l.ulprovc ent Bonds, Series
1980 and its General Obligation City Hall Bonds, Series 1985; and
WHEREAS, the approval of the State Treasurer is
required before advance refunding bonds may be issued;
NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of lake Oswego, Oregon that:
Sect ion 1 The City hereby approves the advance
refunding plan proposed by The Oregon Bank. lSchedule A Attached)
Sect ion 2 The Oregon hank is hereby aut hori zed, oil
tohaII of the City. to submit the City': a6vance refunding plan
E o t he St at c I re;asurer f or rev ew ,and apvrova ; .
Section s: If the State I rr,asuror approves the
is su:ance of advance r a I u n d i u ; bonds an a:rordanev with thr
.,,iv.anrc Ici;!t;ding• 1)1 an proposed by The 0ue;:on Bank, the City
cxpvcta to nutho►ize the issus"ce of advanec refunding; bonds (th(-
"Refunding•, bonds") in a principal .amount sutficivnt to pay the
cost of ictunding; the outstanding bonds and casts inciuent to thr
authorivAt ion, sale and issuance of the kctundiug Bonds. The
vIcg;o►1 h,arlk, Portland, Oregon, is hcic1)y :authorircd to act u:
t ;nanciM ;advinVr Lu t Ake tall IIrrei'. a".y act iulls, aIle"
o"sulIat Ion Wilh thr 01Uaurc lairertor of the City of Lake
onwvg,o, t o i mpl umeut I gat 1)1 o1,o-,cci ;attv.ancc i ei uud i lll,, inc L 11di111
but not Ilmited to t hu I o I I owiug; ;el vire•:::
Cool din.li inr the di all 1lir of the HeIunding;
Bond kvsolut ion, Enu l ow vci•os it Api vemlont ,
t hr of i 1 o 1 a1 til ;►t enlrnt and of her 1 eg'al
dorumvni t: nvvvss;a► y to el i ort uat e the
rel uuding; plan;
Png'e I - ITvnoIut ton No. K A6- 10
G. Identifying and arranging or subscribing for,
as agent for the City, the acquisition of
goverumen t oblivations including the United
States 1-rc,a>ury Certi f icates of 1 11 d V 1) t U d n e 6 ,
Notes and Bonds --State and local Government
Series to be deposited in escrow in
connection with the refunding plan; and
C , Making all computation with respect to yields
on ttie Refunding Bonds and the obligations
acquired with the proceeds of the Refunding
Bonds and arranging for verification and
review of t: lie se computations by a firm of
independent certified public accountants.
Section 4: The firm of Lindsey, Hart, Neil b Wel ler
is designated as bond counsel for the proposed Refunding Bonds
section 5: Mun
casure 9 Efiect. This re sol will ba
deemed void ,Ind ot- u of feet i f mv.isure 9 1s def c;it ed by t he
voters at t1le General Election held on No%lember 4, -1986.
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Lake Oswego held oil the day of
November, 1986.
AY ES :
A1�STAI N
1) V .
1,'i 1 1 i:im E. YrunE;, M;,yor
Ko.,,vmary A. Mn6vr, Vvc'()rder
\ 1- 1) A,- TO 101K*'
,• R c lot 1�n hc�. I; i1' 0 1k) 110,11wt;"0
RESOLUTION NO. R-86-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGCI,
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BUNDS
SERIES 1986A AND 1986B.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Oswego, Counties of Clackamas,
Multnomah and Washington, State of Oregon (the "City") is
authorized pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of
Oregon to issue advance refunding bonds for its outstanding
general obligation bonds; and
WHEREAS, the City resolved to submit to the Oregon State
Treasurer a plan to refund the City's outstanding 1985 City Hall
Bonds and 1980 General Obligation Improvement Bonds
(collectively, ttie "Refunded Bonds");
and
WHEREAS, the Refunding Bonds may need to be delivered
before December 4, 1986 if Ballot Measure No. 9 passes, and the
Council finds it to be in the best interests of the City to
authorize the issuance and sale of the Refunding Bonds in
accordance with this Resolution;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City Of. Lake Oswego that:
Sec -t. iun 1 . Issue. For the above purpose, the City shall
issue its general obla_'ation refunding bonds (the "Refunding
Bonds") in the ;e-•ries, approximate principal amounts and
substantially under the terms described in Exhibits A and B to
this Resolution.
2 Purpose. The net proceeds of the Refunding Bonds
::,hall be II30d• to .tk�v;ince refund the Refunded Bunds. The
12ufundinq Bonds .hall be in an amount : utf ici.ent., t0g0t.1l('r
with any a6dit.ional funds cc)nt ributed by tlte City to pay all
principal and interp:;t on the City's Refunded Bonds through the
time they are callcld for rc:�demption. The net proceeds of the
Ref:undinq Bonds ::hall be used to purchase government oltl igat. ioll",
which pl,'"d irrevocably in escrow and used ::;ulely to
Pay l,l incipal, anci inte�re��;t due> ern the Refuneie'(1
I . 1tedemul i ren . (.e) Tt)e Ci t.y rc ;cit V( -s t he t i uht t o
rclde,em a 1 1 car any l,c)t t loll c,t 1 he Rcpt unci i nc) hmidr, ()Il 1 hey dat e:; .incl
t.c ruts ;pc ci f i e d
ill they at.l .te'hwd Fxhihi t :, A .111d 13.
(h) Not i e`er 01 r Odi"mPt c c ec :,h,e t ve n
l,uhl i c.It i nn ar; t e,(lu i t o by l .tw ;Inti 1)y m,t ► 1 i nd nc;t i e , the c e ,,l
to lilt- r e �1 i :; t c� t end swill t :; not
1 h.en 40 day:; pr I t , t lit-
I odetttpt ie,n d,et o. i nt e t c st oil .illy 16-i and i net 1totte.i:; .;() e•,t 1 1 (gid
Ro-,ol tut ion R-86 - 3 l
P.,,ae 1
for redemption shall cease on the redemption date designated
in the notice.
full faith and credit of the City
q. Securit (a) The
the successive holders of each of the Refunding
are pledged to
e.
Bonds for the punctual payment of such obligations, whendl
The City shall levy annually, as provided by law, a direct ad
tax upon all of the taxable property within the City in
valorem
ts
sufficient amount, after taking lnoccuroinldtheapaymentsofusuch
taken and delinquencies that may the payment
taxes and all other monies reasonably available tttor
,Refunding
of debt service on the Refunding Bonds, to pay
, promptly as they mature; the City covenants with the owners
Bo -ds
each
of -,:s Refunding Bonds to
y such
xa orbondsissued to refund
year that any of the Refunding
them, are outstanding.
(1)) The Series 1986B Refunding Bonds shale be
meets
additionally secured by the installment assessment pay
which secured the 1980 General Obligation Improvement Bonds.
5. Maintenance of Tax -Exempt StroceedsThe
of theCity
Refundingtake
no action nor make any use of the gross p
Bonds which will cause the Refunding Bonds to lose their tax-
on income tax laws,
exempt status under fealror ad ml or inistratitate of Oveegnterpretations. The
reaulatioils ind ludic
ity makes t1le :`ollowing specific covenants:
ta) The excess cif t1le aggregate amount earned
on all investments of gross proceeds over the amount
which wnuld have been earned if the
elinvesd oiltments hadibgen
invested at a rate equal to the
Bonds shall be placed in a special account and held and
rebated to the United States at least once every
five (5) years, pursuant to Section 148(f) of the
Internal Revenue Code (tt;e "Code").
(b) The City will c-tperate all facilities
financed with the Re f und0d Bonds so t.ha r i vatteS isact suividyto
finance ,urh t,lci]ities would not be "p
defined in Section lAl of theCode.
(c) The City >t7hall Cc�ldlely with all loderal
rrtlort ing recluirc,mc nts ct
tcl) t c,r 1,ur ho :es of Lilts
i t: nU
i l uc1c�:; , but t 1 011 t 0d top R� f undi.nq
t�ruc I`(t:: nc .
si debt.
, 'Ind u
N)16 1rtt(�;, eiCllnC;?t1jt�rcun
rvicc• fund:. �►nd ::inking fund for tit('Rrfuncling bund:.�.
lit ion R -t10- it
t'�lye 2
6. Form of Reqistered Bonds. The City may issue the
Refunding Bonds as one or more typewritten, temporary bonds which
shall be exchangeable for definitive bonds when definitive bonds
are available. The Refunding Bonds shall be in substantially the
following form:
R -
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTIES OF CLACKAMAS, MULTNOMAH AND WASHINGTON
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BOND, SERIES
DATED INTEREST PER ANNUM MATURITY DATE CUSIP
THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, in the Counties of Clackamas,
Multnomah and Washington, State of Oregon (the "City"), for value
received acknowledges itself indebted and hereby promises to pay
to or registered assigns, the
principal amount: of Dollars
($ ) on the above maturity date together with
interest choteon from the date hereof at the rate per annum
indicated above. Interest is payable semiannally on the first
day of _ and the first day of in each year until maturity
or prior redemption, commencing - 1, 1987. Interest upon
this bond is payable through this of-fice of the paying agent and
rt�gi:;trar (the "Registrar") of the City by check or draft.
Checks or drafts will be mailed --in the interest due date to the
flame and ,address of the registered holder as they appear on the
bond tegi:,ter as of the fifteenth day of the month prior to the
date on which int ert•!:t conies duh. Band principal is payable upon
presentation and sni z ender of t hi_, bond to the Registrar.
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS OF THIS BOND APPEIAR ON THE REVE:14(;1
SIDE; TE1L;tiE; 11ROVISIONS HAVE `l'HE SAME, I.,FFE,CT AS IF THEY WERE
PRINTED HE12E,IN.
HI•-,KE,BY CER`1'IFli,I), RZECITE'.D, AND 0Y-,CI,ARI.D that all
coedit ficins, ac•t ; , '111d thine:; rt,,lu i i ed i o ox l l:t , to h,ippen, and t(,
he he'r f orim'd pl oc e(lvnt. to and III 1;w 1 -;!"Banco tit 1 h i !; holld havh
OXl.;ted, hl five tial)ll 110d, 011d 11.ivt- lwt•n ttt•rtormed In due time,
f of m, alld a:; 1 eklll l r ed by t lll' ( OIl`:t i t ilt Ion ,ind Stat ut e.s of
the titatt, l,t tlll'tatln; th.it the il,:;ut of which thi!; bond is, a 11,art-
;and ,ill other obl it.Iat lon:; of such City, .Ire within every debt
l imi teat ion and cit het 1 1 111 i t pro-'k•I l lwd by .;licit ('cinst 'i t ut. ion .and
5tatwes; and that City 11.11.; nantlad to hrovi• il' for the levying
,Innually of a diit,ct ad v,110tvill tax tipon all the 1tro party within
the t'ity `i<-1 taxable for it.,; lluellilsen in an amount ;uf f lcivilt,
l lit it>n
14 tiO - 11
with other available funds, to pay the interest on and the
principal of the bonds of such issue as such obligations become
due and payable.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas,
Multnomah and Washington Clackamas Counties, Oregon, has caused
this bond to be signed by facsimile signature of its Mayor and
attested by facsimile signature of its Finance Director as of
this 1st day of December, 1986.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Finance Director
:'HIS BOND SHALL NOT FIE VALID UNLESS
PROPERLY AUTHENTICATED BY THE REGISTRAR
IN THE SPACE INDICATED BELOW.
DATED:
REGISTRAR'S CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of City of Lake Osweqo, Clackamas, Multnomah
and Washington Counties, Oregon General Obligation Refunding
Bonds, Series issued pursuant to the Resolution described
herein.
eN3me of Reyi�tr;,rl
By:
Authorized
Note to Printer: The following language ;should be
printed on the reverse of the bond:
Thi:
Notice of redemption shall be mailed by certified mail
to the registered holders of the bonds to be redeemed not less
than thirty days prior to the intended redemption date, and
otherwise given as required by law; however, any failure to give
notice shall not invalidate the redemption of the bonds. All
bonds called for redemption shall cease to bear interest from the
date designated in the notice.
The bonds are issuable in the form of registered bonds
without coupons in the denominations of $5,000 or any integral
multiple thereof.
Any transfer of this bond m.st be registered, as
provided in the ordinance of the City authorizing the issuance of
its General Obliqation Refunding Bonds, Series (the
"_c,solut.ion"), upon the bond register kept for that purpose at
the office of the Registrar. The City and the Registrar may
treat the person in whose name this band is registered as its
absolute owner for all purposes, as provided in the Resolution.
This bond may be exchanged for bonds of the same series and
maturity, but of different authorized denominations, as provided
in the Resolution.
The bondowner may exchange or transfer any bond by
surrend(�ring it (together with a written instrument of exchange
or transfer satisfactory to the Reai=tray duly executed by the
registered owner or' his duly authc:.:ed attorney) at the office
of the Regisrar, n the manner an" sutobject o the conditions s_
tt
t.�rth in the Resolution.
ASSIGNWEN:
IOR VALUE RECEIVED, the ,.:.:.ersigned assigns and
transfers unto —
Please insert. f;oc ial :,Or.urlty Or other identifying
uber of :assit-1ne(
nm
the w t t.h i n t3�)nd .�n�i tjt.�l :, h(�ret�y i r evocably ccan�;t i tutu and
.11)po i n t
;1:: ; t tit' books kept for
t'ijiFtt rat ion t llt�t t't)t with tall' t ll: ;` `� !'r C)t f;l.lb;;t.1t Lltlgn in the
-.' 1 t' Ill 1 F' ("i .
Dat t'tl:
Ilit it)I1 i� lits ij
ilage
10
NOTICE: The signature to this assignment must correspond with
the name of the registered owner as it appears upon the face of
the within bond in every particular, without alteration or
enlargement or any change whatever.
Signature Guaranteed
(Bank, Trust Company or Firm)
Authorized Officer
The following abbreviations, when used in the
inscription on the face of the within Bond, shall be construed as
though they were written out in full according to applicable laws
or regulations.
TEN COM -- tenants in common
TEN ENT -- as tenants by the entireties
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not
as tenants in common
OREGON CUSTODIANS use the followinq
_ CUST UL OREG
as custodian finder the laws of Oregon for
MIN
---- - (M i rt o r Name)
.iitional ibbreviations may also be used though not in
the list above.
7. Authentication, Registrationand Transfer.
A1.1 Refunding Bonds shall be in ri,trred form.
The Finance Director shall appoint a mai:;t rar Ind paying agent.
for the Rofiindinq 11(-)nds (the "Roojist1ar") A t;llccprsor Regist.ritr
may h(- appointed for the Refundinq Bonds bv )rdinancp or
resoltrt icon of thy, City. The Registrar sh.11l provide notice to
bondot.,ners; ,,t .illy change in the Registrar not later than the hand
payment ;. ,,t c t t 1 e,wl rlq the l'hallgein Ree 1 :;t rar .
(b) No ket tend i nq Bond ,hall be ent i t 1 eol to any r i gllt c>r
henF,f it under this unless it shall h,Ive been
ant h(-nt icat Pei by an ,tut hest i .•eel k,t f icer of t hte heti ;t tar . The
RegisA 1,11' nhal1 ,1111 hent ic'lte .111 Refundinq 11()nd!" to he d1.1 ive►eol
at c 10 . i nq of 1 h i hand i; :ur , and -'ha 1 i add i t i c>n.11 l y
authent i cat p all Pt,t tul(li nq Hc)nds properly .;ui i ond(!i (- l tc>r
exch,ln(te or t r,uv l tet pursuant to this Resolution.
Rv!,,Olut iun R-80 it
Page 6
(c) The ownership of all Refunding Bonds shall be
entered in the bond register maintained by the Registrar, and the
son l
City and theRegistrar mtheaowneraofthe theperRefundingted Bondsforner allin
the bond register
purposes.
(d) The Registrar shall mail each bond interest payment
on the date such payment is due to the name and address of the
bondowner as it appears on the bond register on the fifteenth day
of the month preceding a bond interest payment date (the "Record
Date"). if payment is so mailed, neither the City nor the
Registrar shall have any further liability to any party for such
payment.
(e) Refunding Bonds may be exchanged for an equal
principal amount of Refunding Bonds of the same maturity which
are in different denominations, and Refunding Bonds may be
transferred to other holders if the bondowner submits the
following to the Registrar:
(i) written instructions for exchange or transfer
satisfactory to the Registrar, signed by the bondowner or his
attorney in fact and guaranteed or witnessed in a manner
satisfactory to the Registrar; and
( i i ) the Refunding Bonds to be (-,xchanged or
transtl�rred.
(t) The Re'nistrar
shall not be regii1red to exchange or
;ran fer any Refunding Bonds
sutmitted to it. during any period
ending on the next following
h(�gil�ning with a Record Date
such
and
Refunding Bond, shall be exchanged or
payment date; hawt'vpr,
transferred promptly followincl
that payment nate.
(q) The Registrar
shill note the date of authentication
be the
.In each Re Nridinq Bond. The (late of authentication shall
bond
date on which the bondownesr
' s na"10 i, listed on the
register.
For r ,s
of' ? !',l'Ct loll, Retand 1. nq Botltlt; '.01a l
-
ire CpnS l cll'rF'Cl .`illl,lill t. t e'd to
be
the Roo, 1 '.;t rar t he date t ht
in ;tihse(ti<�n
1On
Reaist.rai actu,llly r,'ceivhs Hit,
(e) of 1 hit; :;('(•t iutl.
�) Thl' City nl.ly
.I l t of t Ile:;l'
tht� clltl'll'(1
I't's]l:;t l ,l loll .Intl l f.111:;11'I'
by mail incl IIOt ll lc'It 1, 11 „l
l'h(' l t o l eti lIl uv i t; i "n:; :;h.31 1 t ,lke
t_(1 .1 I l I,��n(l0vdill's'
t h(' (i.lt l' !;t at od
::. .I
In the nut i (.e, Which shill n 't hh
('('t Ill
etJ00
eaI 1 i ('r t hall 41) d,ly'; .11 l el
nut i k'c' I!; 111,1 i l l'd .
1.7 e� 7
8. Sale of hefunding Bonds. The City shall cause to
be �3bIished in Lne f.aKe Gswego Review, Lake Gswego, Oregon, the
Daiiy Journal of Commerce, Portland_ business_Toda�+, Portland,
Oregon (for the Series 1986B bonds), and in the The _Bond Buyer,
New York, New York, notices of sale of the Refunding Bonds, or
sum-aries, in the form substantially as shown on the attached
Exhibits A and b, or summaries, as provided by law. The
Refunding bonds shall be sold substantially upon the terms
provided in the attached Exhibits A and B, with such changes as
may be authorized by the Finance Director. The Refunding Bonds
shall be sold on the date and at the time and place stated in
Ex' -:bit A, unless the Finance Director establishes a different.
date, time, or place.
9. Escrow. As provided in Section 2 of this
F s iution, the net proceeds of the Refunding Bonds are to be
ced in irrevocable escrow. The Finance Director is hereby
au,,norized to select an escrow agent and approve and execute
es,r-ow agreements, which shall be substantially in the form
attached as Exhibit C, with such changes as may be approved by
the Finance Director. The escrow agent or Finance Director are
hereby authorized to subscribe for and purchase the government
obligations to be placed in the escrow, on behalf of the City.
10. Redemption of Refunded Bonds. Contingent solely
cr the issuance of t;I,e Refunding onds and the deposit of the net
;seeds with the escrow agent, the City nereby irrevocably calls
_ redemption of all its outstanding Re:',:::,:td Bonds, on the
rliest dates on which such bonds may be ::.fled for redemption,
at the redemption prices applicable to re.;r:r.ption on such dates.
�,nlit.ion as Qualified T:rx-;'Aempt Obligations.
7n e City cies: .r -,.,ren lire hefund ing Bonds as 11gwalif'ied tax -exempt.
igat iOtis" :rrsu;rnt. to Sect ion 902(b) ( 3 ) of the 1nLernal
venue Code . The t•. i ty covenants not to o designate more than
$10,000,000 oi' t:rx-exempt obl i j,,at ions during the current calendar
year, and dies noL reasonably expect to issue more Llan
s*,0,000,000 of' tax-exempt obligations in tnz current calendar
.ear.
1 . Me;+sure 9 F'ffeot.. This r-c:�o1uti.on will be deemed
,�.)id and of no effect it, Measure 9 is dcfcat,cd by the voters at
the General Election held on November 4, 1986.
?,vs Mullion R -8b-31
Y'age 8
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of
Council of the City of bake Oswego held on the day
November, 1.986.
William E. Young, Mayor
Rosemary A.—Mader, Recorder
APPROVED A5 TO FORM:
�lll ':; M . Ccs 1 �uian
y Attorney
Re! -,O I u t ion
P.Itic, 9
EXHIBIT A
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF BOND SALE
APPROXIMATELY $4,330,000
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTIES OF CLACKAMAS, MULTNOM,AI-I Ar1D WASHINGTON
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
C,ENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SER11-'S 1986A
NOTICE is hereby given that scaled bids will be received
on behalf of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, until 1:30 o'clock
p.m. on November 24, 1.986, at the offices of Lindsay, hart,
Neil & Weigler, 222 S.W. Columbia, Suite 1.800, Portland, Oregon,
97201, at which t..ime they will be publicly opened and announced.
The bids shall be considered and acted upon by the City
within four business hours.
ISSUE: Approximately LOUR MILLION '1HREE HUNDRED THIRTY
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($4,330,000), consisting of registered bonds in
denominations of FIVE '1HOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000) or integral
mttltivles t1)prec�f, all dated December 1, 1986.
1NTERF:S7' RATE: l nt er est is pavahl e semiannually on
February 1 and Auotlst 1 of each year until maturity or prior
reC'E'AiDtion, c,orumencinq August 1, 1987. Bidders mtist specify the
inset est reit e car - at (..Is which the bands hereby offered for kale
sha11 t)t rar. The bids sh;311 r.omply with the following
c-ontii t ions t (I ) F ach inter est rate specified in any bid must be
a multiple of ()ne-eighth or one -twentieth of one percent; (2) No
bond hill lr(',3r more than one rate of interest; (3) Each bond
shall 'uear i(lterest from its: date to its stated imit.iirlty date at
the intei('st rcit'e specified 1n the bid; (4) All I)On6s maturinq a;
:ill\' OraP t tJIIB .Shall c3('ar the •,edge rate of lnte)(.".:,t: (J) Np
;ntt`rt`St bite shall exceed ten ppi cent (10%) ; and (6) The
rnt.('1 t'St ri3te for any maturity ;hall not be 1(,!.;s than the
i(lvetest rate :;pecif ied for any prior matiii ally.
MA'.I'lIR111,11'S: The l)onds ::hall n,ii ul t, !'.er i.111y on t hE
f i t F.t (illy of rebru,al y of vach year as, f cel 1
r.att(' 1 t'xhibit A to Rv'',011)t ficin (N"t irr (-)f f"10)
Year
Amount
Year
Amount
1.988
100,000
1997
240,000
1989
150,000
1998
250,000
1990
155,000
1999
270,000
1991
160,000
2000
'90,000
1992
175,000
2001
305,000
1993
180,000
2002
330,000
1994
200,000
2003,
355,000
1995
215,000
2004
365,000
1996
2.25,000
2005
365,000
The principal amount maturing in any year may be changed
in order to maximize savings and properly size the issue.
REDEMPTION: The City reserves the right to redeem all
or any portion of the Bonds maturing after February 1, 1994, in
inverse order of maturity and by lot within a maturity on
February 1, 1994, and on any interest payment date thereafter, at
par plus accrued interest to the redemption date.
Notice of redemption shall be given by publication as
required by law and by mailing notice thereof to the registered
owners not less than 30 days prior to the redemption date.
Interest on any bond or bonds so called for redemption shall
cease on the redemption date designated in the notice.
REGISTRATION: The bond-; will be :-,sued in fully
registered form, and may be exchanged at the expense of the City
for similar bonds of different authorized denominations. Bonds
may not be converted to bearer form.
PAYMENT: Principal and interest .are payable, dither at
maturity or upon earlier redemption, through the office of the
registrar ,and paying agent of the City.
PURPOSE: Proceeds of the honds will be cased to advance
refund the City's outstanding general oblioation 1985 City Hall
1�onds .
SEVURITY: The bonds are general Bbli(l:at ions of the
City. Till, City h,a:; coven anted to levy an .ail valorem tax annually
Which, with other available funds, will be sutf icient to pay bond
llr i nCi Il,l 1 ►nd int of ol;t ,aa t hoy come due.
I,1 -:G1\1, OPINION: The approvi►lca opinion ol- l.ind!._1Y, 11art,
Neil & Woigler, l,.a��yc t s, elf Part land, Orea%.-)n, will he provided at
Ilk) h) t hO IMI C11.a ;c%r , and wi 1 l he Printed on tilt' bonds at the
rxll(11)511 Ol the City.
Page 2 - Exhibit A to Re -,olut ion (Not ice of. Sale)
TAX EXEMPT STATUS: In the opinion of bond counsel,
e City with its covenants relating to
assuming compliance by th
the tax-exempt status of the Bonds and except for alternative
minimum taxes on the book income of corporations, interest on
the bonds is exempt from federal income taxation under existing
federal law (including the Tax Reform Act of 1986) and Oregon
personal income taxation under existing laws "of the State of
Oregon. The City has the legal authority to comply with its
covenants relating to the tax exemption. The bonds are not
"private activity bonds."
BEST BID: The bonds will be awarded to the responsible
bidder whose proposal will result in the lowest true interest
cost to the City. True interest cost will be determined by
doubling the semiannual interest rate necessary to discount the
debt service to December 1, 1986 and the price bid for the
),,-,tads. Each bidder is requested to supply the total interest
cast, and true interest cost that the City will pay if the bid is
accepted. The purchaser must pay accrued interest, computed on a
360 -day basis, from the date of the bonds to the date of
delivery. The cost of printing the bonds will be paid by the
City.
REOFFERING PRICE: The successful bidder must certify
the initial reoffering price of the Bonds (calculated for
ettlelnent on December 2, 1986) to the City's financial advisor
within 30 minutes after the bids are opened.
PROPERTY TAX LIMITATION: If the Bonds are delivered
before December 4, 1986, taxes levied to pay the Bonds will not
be subject to any tax limitation measure on the November 4, 1986
ballot.
l')t;LIVERY: Delivery of the bonds will he in the City of.
Portland, Oregon, at the expense of the City, or elsewhere at the
t.11c, 1) i (Wer . Payment for the 1),)11(3s must. be made in
expense of
Federal tunclS. 1)el ivory must be made prior to December 4,
. The City r(`!;c?rves the riclilt to deliver a temporary bond,
1986198Ei
. will rtrhl..r('ed with (1(,t initive bends as soon as
definit � tx)nd!,> are available.
F'012M O1' RID; All 1)icl:; mlt! t. be for clot lt` it 'ln ,111 the
h()nds hc'`r(`hy c�if(rc'(l ii)1 _;.ale`, 1n(l for n.�t le:,', than nin(�t.y-eight
and c,nn h•111 l,rrc rnt (gat;.`.��) c)t t h(� par value t1lel- 'of. Ph'!;
3ct"ru(`(i int ('lc'!;t tc) tIl(` d'Itr t ft'live`ry. t;.r(h 1)id tc.�rlt`ttle!r with
tlll,ltlt`C' `_; l'►1t'i:iC .1!; 11l'l t` t ll ;i,t`i' 1 I 1 �`�1 IllUat t,t' c'ill 10l;(?d 111 a sealed
env('tt)1)(`.1(1(lrt'!;!•i'(1 tO tllk� ('lty ,1n�1 de:;i.tnat(�(l "Prol)osal for
1,11,16A11.(m1!;." Rl(i(it.'r!: '�h,1II �il)k-ClIy the price as a
poo t'nt ;1, -IV of i he I i n.tl 1111oullt (,t 1k0116 pi i ncipal ..
page .1 - 1',xhll6t A to Rot;olut ion (Notice of Sale)
BID CHECK: All bids must be unconditional and
accompanied by a certified or cashier's check on a bank doing
business in the State of Oregon for not less than $86,600,
payable t.o the order of the City to secure the City from any loss
resulting from the failure of the bidder to comply with the terms
of its bid. Checks will be forfeited to the City as liquidated
damages in case the bidder to whom the bonds are awarded
withdraws its bid or fails to complete its purchase in -accordance
with the terms thereof. No interest shall be allowed on the
deposit but the check of the successful bidder will be retained
as part payment of the bonds or for liquidated damages as
described above. Checks of the unsuccessful bidders will be
returned by the City promptly.
RIGHT OF REJECTION: The City reserves the right to
reject any or all bids, and to waive any irregularities.
OFFICTAL STATEMENT AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The City
nas prepared an official statement relating to the bonds, a copy
()f which will be furnished upon request to its financial advisor,
The Oregon Bank, 1001 S.W. Fifth Avenue, Sixth Floor, Portland,
Oregon 97204, telephone (503) 796-2655, Attention: Daniel
Anderson. Requests for additional information should be directed
to the City's financial advisor.
CUSIP: C17SIP numbers will be imprinted upon all bonds
>f this; issue at the City's expense. Failure to print, or
improperly imprinted numbers will not constitute basis for the
Durchaser to refuse to accept delivery.
NO 1,1TIGATION: At closing, til+' City will furnish the
:;uc-c,e ,sfu1 t)idcier a certificate that. there is no litigation
the validity Of the bonds.
pending ,3f feet i ng
BY ORDER OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
i"Itit. .1 I'xhtbit A to 01,1in.11ACc, (Not ice of ga1e)
11Wf2III t !; 1 `i 1
EXHIBIT __B
OFFICIAL NO'T'ICE OF BOND SALE
APPROXIMATELY $705,000
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTIES OF CL CK , MUL pOMAH AND WASHINGTON
OF
GENERAL Oi1L,IC,ATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1986B
NOTICE is hereby given that sealed bids will be received
on behalf of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, until 1:30 o'clock
p.m. on November 24, 1986, at the offices of Lindsay, Hart,
Neil b Weigler, 222 S.W. Columbia, Suite 1800,
porandn , Orece(j.
97201, at which time they will be publiclyopened
The bids shall be considered and acted upon by the City
within four business hours.
ISSUE: Approximately SEVEN HUNDRED FIVE THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($705,000), consisting of registered bonds integral
denominations of FIVE. THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000)
multiples thereof, 31.1 dated December 1, 1986.
1NTERZ:ST RA'Z'E: Interest is payable semiannually on
1 o
r prior
June 1 and December junec1,y1987 - Biddersr mustospecify the
redemption, commencing
,Intel cyst. rate or rat Ps which the bonds hereby of f ed for sale
bids shall comply with the following
,hall bear. The
conditions- 1) Each interest rate specified in any bid must be a
multiple of one ei:lhth or one --twentieth of one percent; (2) No
bond ;hall bear sr l e than one rate of i nte' Ost ; (3) Each bond
shall bear interest. f rom its date to its 4t aAll bonds 1matarinGate dat
the interest r.lte t:v)t:'cif.ied in the bid;
( )
(t_ No
any (�llt` time .hall be<-tr the same rate cif interee't; ')The
i nt el est rate sh,a11 exc u -ed tell Pt's cent .and (6 )
inttyrt�st maturity shall not be lt�ss than the
rate.` for any
tntrlest ratty spee=d ied for any prior matut ity.
N�A'l'I�t� t l i The t.)()11Clci `.:hal 1 111',1 t ll 1 t, t t` I 1 ii y on t. he
bay (A Ut-cemher of c.ac•h year as t rT Iow,;
f'.xhihit It to or(tin.tn(e (Nt,t it E� (�t ti,rlcy)
Year
Ariount
f ear
Amount
1987
55,000
1995
45,000
1988
45,000
1996
50,000
1989
45,000
1997
50,000
1990
55,000
1998
50,000
1991
50,000
1999
40,000
1992
50,000
2000
40,000
1993
45,000
2001
35,000
1994
50,000
The principal amount maturing in any year may be changed
in order to maximize savings and properly size the issue.
REDEMPTION: The city reserves the right to redeem all
or any portion of the Bonds maturing after December 1, 1994, in
inverse order of maturity and by lot within a maturity on
December 1, 1994, and on any interest payment date thereafter, at
par plus accrued interest to the redemption date.
Notice of redemption shall be given by publication as
required by law and by mailing notice thereof to the registered
owners not less than 30 days prior to the redemption date.
Interest on any bond or bonds so called for redemption shall
cease on the redemption date designated in the notice.
REGISTRATION: The bones will be issued in fully
registered form, and may be exchanged at the expense of the City
for similar bonds of different aiit.horized denominations. Bonds
may not be converted to bearer torm.
I'A1'M1.•,NT: Principal and are payable, either at
maturity c)r upon earlier redemption, through the office of the
registrar and paying agent of thc-I City.
PURPOSE: Proceeds of the bonds will be used t.o advance
refund the City's ou'L-standing :'?8t� General Oblicat.ion Improvement
Pends.
hl?t:Ultl'1'Y: '1'ttc, bc,nds are oeneral obl i.aations of t:he
City. rho city has c-c)venanted to levy an ad valorem tax annually
which, wit1vail,lble funds, will be sufficient to nay bond
l,t incip.il and interest 's they come due. The bands are payable
primarily lrom ins;tallmc�nt ast;E`::;mc'nt. payinont_;.
-1 1,1.c;AL OPINION* The Ippi �vinq opinic�;: of I,in(P;ay, Il.itt.,
Neil ` Wvioler, I,awyvrr„ of Pot t l.((1d, ffi ((Jon, wl 11 he provided at
nes cora IL) t h(� .((ld will bre print ('d "11 t her be.)nds
Oxpen.;o of the City.
1'AX I:X1:M}''1` STATWI: : 1 n the bored colln'.t('l ,
inq co"It)Ii.rnce by thr city with it (•Ovenants relat_.ing to
p;3�le - Exhibit f3 to llydin.�nr;cr (Not ic:e of
the tax-exempt status of the Bonds and except for alternative
minimum taxes on the book income of corporations, interest on the
bonds is exempt from federal income taxation under existing
federal law (including the Tax Reform Act of 1986) and Oregon
personal income taxation tinder existing laws of the State of
Oregon. The City has the legal authority to comply with its
covenants relating to the tax exemption. The bonds are not
"private activity bonds."
BEST BID: The bonds will be awarded to the responsible
bidder whose proposal will result in the lowest true interest
cost to the City. True interest cost will be determined by
doubling the semia nr.ual interest rat.e necessary to discount the
debt service to December 1., 1986 and the price bid for the
bonds. Each bidder is requested to supply the total interest
cost and true interest cost that the City will pay if the bid is
accepted. The purchaser must pay accrued interest, computed on a
360 -day basis, from the date of the bonds to the date of
delivery. The cost of printing the bonds will be paid by the
City.
REOFFERING PRICE: The successful bidder must certify
the initial reoffering price of the Bonds (calculated for
settlement on December 2, 1986) to the City's financial advisor
within 30 minutes after the bids are opened.
PROPERTY TAX LIMITATION: if :he Bonds are dPli.vered
before December 4, 1986, taxes levied tc, p.-jv tale Bonds will not
t)e` subject to any tax 1 i m i t at i on ninas ure on the November 4, 1986
;).11 lot.
DE;l.1VE'R\: I)t'1 ivory of the h,,nds will he in the City of.
t.land, Ore(ion, It tile expense of the City, or elsewhere at the
'`:'.)e nse of the h 1 .i+iPt . Payment t Ot- tile b0ndS 1111.13t be made in
.t',leral fund-. fit`: iVt'ry 1nust. be Illaae prior to December 4,
. )86. The C 1 t )' ' t';:t'1 v('r.; the r i'jht. to deliver a temporary bond,
'. i ch Will 1)0t'c`'..1t t c1 with tie f i r• i t i\ e:' 100nds as scion as
t init..ive h:,t ti:: .11 t lvai bible.
FONM 01' 1,:U: 1111 hid,, must he for not loss than all t.11t'
bond:, 11e'r !!i,y t,t t t't t'tl to' !;.11e, dill] t Ur" 1101 I01,1s, than n l ne.t'.y-'-eight.
'111d c)rle •h,11 t 1;t't , r'1;t (rIE1.','1) \)t t h1' o,lr value t hereof=
,t•t,'ruei e'irtl 1.1 r'•;t t, t he cl,ctP cit tit`l IVPry. Each hidt.c,clE tttc r with
f)ldde?r''; c�hec k 1;: ;,t't c' 1 n l;lu'c i t I t',i nntst tic.' t nc 1tu:r'rl in .1
t`ttve?lt)l,c' ,ir{t1r� :•:;c`.i ; ti 1 Itc' ('t t y lttei dots; i ait.tt od "}'t c)!tr)!•,71 1 ut
Serie' ; I'lEiO13 Itt,n11 ; . " H i cEdol !.
pc,t t c'nc ,crag r t t 1tr' 1 1 rt.c 1 '1111m1nt of Bond pr 1 nci pa l .
A l l 1, i cis dill:;t: hem llnt•,)n(l i t i,)11•1 I lrccl
i f i t'cl c)r e ,t:�►ti c`t'' :; t ltc't k t)n .1 hank cic)i nr.1
he ;;t .1t e ()f Or(gjon l or slot It";s t h ll $1 4, 100,
}),.ty,1hlP tr, Ihr• t)ttit�r ()f Ilie City to �;vcure the C'it,y from any
i'aq' 3 Exhibit. P t.o Ordinance (Notice of sale
F),1(i(.-, 4
resin __
t�
Of -tS Ino from
the
W, theWith a damabI �•cashe checks f� Ilure
as sit b Of
do the to ms ts bI d h r bf dde bet f orfel the bI °der
de part ut the thereo falls to whom ed to to cOm
rete Abed a� ent of eCk °f NO int °mPlete bond s Ci pyY W. t -h
ned b °1,e• the b the s erest its are as li the tP
�Y the Ci e „s bonds forsfSl . be alaSPa t'ieduidatP�m
,reject an` I�� a of 10 RETE ��mptly he �1nsUcceSs d`d ed Wi 1 be or
ache dart
Of s Pr op Ids, 1 dama
beds Grand :t The C' f`ri bidders w as,talned
The WhI ch wed an Off. STATM. O Iva i �e tY rese I 1 1 be
1
Oreg. or 11 be ci al "�'T AN ani, I t, r� VS t
Andn 9720 Bank, lernisi,e=tat eme NL) ADplTr 1-09ular1 right
t° the c1 ty Req.es is ho�neS. TV. Upon
neques a t . �N�,oRMA ti es, to
0 Ino o Ip
°f t c(1 $ f Inanc al a dI ti 796'2b nue' S I trs fhN bon
rhe
°ul4c Perly sue at CUSIP n ao�,lSor nal Informattent�i on o°r GIP 1 ,advi PYY
haler t0rliprinthe Cit` tubers ion `;ho, Dani.,or Ind,
rt,Fus ed 11 s ext, wll.I b u1d , Pl '
su�.11 Np e t° ace`s Wi nse• rmArin ciI rPCte
Aendi l�ry fattlrP dgNr AaIUN• ceP; de lI �Pr 00 pa r,st l t tt ,,,i P Aon t r d
tlr� 0 A� S. utt., Int, 6011
v the tij tt:;
Val I
. .e ,
d1 'Y'J that t=he Ci t�,
r the '
S. is ��°�jt•tfern;
sh
`� c�RDER � I°at
Ororhe,
rNE CIT
Ah E OgWt,;(;t �
tq Or
di nanc'e
Now
(N<,ti`,e
e
resulting from the failure of the bidder to comply with the terms
of its bid. Checks will be forfeited to the City as liquidated
damages in case the bidder to whom the bonds are awarded
withdraws its bid or fails to complete its purchase in accordance
with the terms thereof. No interest shall be allowed on the
deposit but the check of the successful bidder will be retained
as part payment of the bonds or for liquidated damages as
described above. Checks of the unsuccessful bidders will be
returned by the City promptly.
RIGHT OF REJECTION: The City reserves the right to
reject any or all bids, and to waive any irregularities.,.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT ANY) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The City
has prepared in official statement relating to the bondii , a copy
of which will be furnished upon request to its finan(-i,kl advisor,
The Oreqon Sank, 1001 S.W. Fifth Avenue, Sixth Floor, Pt)rtland,
Oregon 97204, telephone (503) 796-2b55, Attention: Daniel
Anderson. Requests for additional information should he directed
to the City's financial advisor.
CUSIP: CUSIP numbers will be imprinted upon all bonds
of this issue at the City's expense. Failure to print., or
improperly imprinted numbers will not constitute basis [or the
purchaser to refuse to accept delivery.
NO LITIGATION: At c•losinq, the City will furnish the
urces.;tul bidder a cot-tif icate that there is no l i i i�l )t ion
pending affecting the validity of the bonds.
UY ORDER OF THE CITY OF 1,AKG; OSWY?GO
4 - Rxliit.)it. N to Orrftnatice (Notice of Sala) IIWRmt ,153
T
EXHIBIT C
F.SCkOY DEPOSIT AGNVEMENT
ESCROW DEPOSIT AGREEMENT, dated as of 11 1986,
by and between THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon (ttie*"l:.;suer"),
and , Portland, Oregon (the "Escrow
Agent") and its successors.
THE PARTIES RECITE:
A. Pursuant to „ bond resolution, dated as of
1986 (the "liesolution"), the Issuer has
determined to issue its General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 19B6 (the "Refunding Bonds"), for the purpose of providing
funds to pay the costs of refunding the Issuer's currently
out.st,anding _ Bonds, Series ^_ (the "Refunded
Bonds").
B. The Escrow Agent has reviewed the Resolution and
this Agreement, and is willing to serve as Escrow Agent
Hereunder.
C. The Escrow Agent has received true copies of this
Resolution, the Resolution authorizing the issuance of the
Refunded Bonds (the "Refunded Bonds Resolution"), ;and the
verific;at:iora of Certified Public
Account ,ants, which a ti d;,te,r , 1980 ( t.l,c
"Verit'acation").
THE PARTIES A(JiE:E::
1. Notice of l(t cic mi t � ou. F'ur:;u.,ut t u t.hItc ;;ol ut.ion,
the Refuuded Bontis ifive beer, aets i grated for recic•n,pt i c n on
November 1 , at. a price of _- -� of par, p i us r ritcrest
accrued on NoV Umber 1 ,
Tt,c Escrow Agent Lc) gave riot, i rc of the'
redemption of the Refunded Bonds in the- traanuer provicl,'d in t.iae
Refunded Bonds TivsOl ut. a on, and in the form Al „cued
hereto its Appendix "A". The Fser•ow Agent herc•t,y cerl.r f't, ;, that
provision ;;,t.i!;factory ;rrrd acceptable to tyre F.:;crow AN,(:r►t 1),is
been made for t.lae giving on
f ot ice of redemption of u
the Hef•uded
Bonds, The cent,0rlt of t.tae not ice slial I be the r•espcan:, r b t I i ty of
the lssuer.
?. F.:;tal,l i :;lunc•nt. of E scrow. There a s Fr,rreby er—cM ed
anti c:;t,ablieheci with the •,:3crow Ageni. d :,heci;il olid irrevoc•„ble
trst•t"Ow deposit: fund ( the "E.scrOw Dept,:; a t, Fund") to be he I d Ill t.l,c
eu:.t c�dy of the Escrow Agent sep,lraty .and apart frole other [muds
of t lar Issuer or of the E .ncrow Agent. The escrow Deposit. Fund
wi I l ccint:ain direct obl igatioas of, or obligations guar.rnteed by,
Pijge 1 - Exhibit C to Rc-:;ccl ut a un (E':;crow Agreement)
he United States Government ("Government Obligations") and
moneys to be applied as provided herein, which will be in an
amount at least sufficient to pay, as of any date of calculation,
the principal of and the interest on the Refunded Bonds as the
same shall become due through their redemption on the date
indicated in Section 1 hereof, as shown in the Verification.
3. Deposit and Use of Funds. The Escrow Agent hereby
acknowledges receipt of (i) the immediately available monies and
(ii) the Government obligations described in the Verification and
agrees to deposit both in the Escrow Deposit Fund.
(a) Such Government Obligations and monies,
together with any income or interest earned thereon, shall
beheld in escrow and shall be applied solely to the payment
of the principal of, and interest on the Refunded Bonds
thruuy_h their redemption gate, as shown in the Verification.
(b) The Escrow Agent shall receive the matured
principal of and the interest on the Government Obligations
as the same are payable. On or before each interest payment
date on the Refunded Bonds, the Escrow Agent shall transfer
sufficient funds to the paying agent for the Refunded Bonds
(the "Paying Agent") for the payment of interest on and
principal of the Refunded Bonds pursuant to the schedule
shown in the Verification.
4. Irrevocable Escrow. 11he deposit of the Government
i l,tt.ions
and -
mon I es in the t?scrow Deposit. Fund shall
_.t. itute an irrevocable deposit and escrow for the 1lenef.i.t of
: -o holders of the Re'funde'd Bonds.
5. t,,einve:;tment ; Substitllti011 CNt lI1Ve:;t.l1WIIts. Any
ni.es remaining in elle :,C 1,010 Deposit. Fund atter all i
investments in the Escrow Deposit Fund will be sufficient to pay
principal and interest due on the Refunded Bonds according to the
payment schedule shown in the Verification.
6. Favnent and Duties of Escrow Agent.
(a) In consideration of its initial fee, the Escrow
Agent agrees to establish the Escrow Deposit Fund, to invest the
monies in that fund pursuant to this Escrow Deposit Agreement and
the instructions of the Issuer and make disbursements to the
Paying Agent, and to give notice of redemption, all as herein
provided. The Issuer agrees to and shall pay to the Escrow Aqent
its out -o£ -pocket expenses, Ind its reasonable fees and expenses
for additional action taken pursuant to this I',scrow Deposit
Agreement at the request of the Issuer. Such expen::ies shall
include the fees of any independent consultants, including,
without limitation, attorneys, regardless of whether formal legal
proceedings are required and, if required, on trial and appeal
therefrom, from any monies of the Issuer lawfully available
therefor. However, in no event shall the Escrow Agent have any
lien whatsoever upon any of the monies and Government Obligations
in the Escrow Deposit Fund for the payment of such fees and
expenses. The Issuer hereby assumes liability for, and hereby
agrees (whether or not any of the transactions contemplated
hereby are consummated) to indemnify, protect, save and keep
harmless the Escrow Agent and its respective successor,.;, assigns,
,Agents Ind ervants, from and a(lainM any and all l iabil.it.S.e;;,
obligations, l,,)Sses, dama(ies, penalties, claims, act inns, suits,
costs, expense -s and disbursements (including legal ir(`:; and
disbursements, r.egardle .s of whether formal legal pl (weedi.ngs are
required, and, if roqulred, cin trial :uld appeal the!r('t rom) of
whatsoever kind and nature, which may be imposed on, Incurred by,
or asserted a.Aains►., at ani• t inle, the i:'ncrow Agent (wh(,the_r Or,
not also aga i n,;t by the t :,:;;:er or any of h(•r per:ion
under any o:hvr a(Ireement or in:;trument) and in any way rel,lting
to or arising out of the execution and delivery of t 11is E!lc:row
Deposit Agreement., the establishment of the Escrow D( -posit. bund,
the a(•ceptance of the monies and securities or the proceeds
thereof and any payn4trnl , t.l"all`. fer or other applicat ion ut mr)nies
or spcuri.t. ic,t3 by ttie i::;(grow Agent in .Accordance wi t:h t rie
provlsiollS 4t tills I:!iCl'C7W 1)t°Cosit Agieoment, or as may .lr 1!;(.' by
1'Ca�;on of :illy lCt., 0n1i:;Si0Tl OI' ('1'101 01- the Escrow A(-1ent. Inado ill
,1()(ld talttl 111 the conduct of 1t.!; (lilt provid('d, IIO1J(-Vee" lhlt
the Issuer shall not he I-okilli I I'd U) in,it mllit'y the V!,(-rrow Agent
a(I'l i n!;t i t s own lwq l i (It'llco , act Ivey Or 1'.It;:; i ve, ()I ill 1 :,( on(illut . 11)
n(.) ('vont tlhal l t h( I ,!:ut r be 1 1 able to any pet !;on by i (ia!u)n Ot
the• t ratl`:t�ct i.�n!: c:Ont (!uplat rd horeby other than to I h(!
Agent a_, set, forth in this section b. The ind en►n i t I r ,, c(;n t ,l i ned
in t11Is section 6 !,hall survive tile trrminat.ion nt 111i-, I-,!u:r(Iw
Deposit Agreement.
tb) Thr I:!;<,ow Anent roialI be under. no (A)Iigat. ion 10
Dago 3 - Exhibit. C to Ordinance (Escrow Agree►nc-nt)
inquire into or be in any way responsible for the performance or
nonperformance by the Issuer of any of its obligations, or to
protect any of the issuer's rights under any bond proceeding or
any of the Issuer's other contracts with or franchises or
privileges from any state, county, municipality or other
governmental agency or with any person. The P:,,crow Agvnt shall
not be liable for any act done or step taken or omitted by it, or
for any mistake of fact or law, or for anything which it may do
or refrain from doing, except for its negligence, misconduct, or
its default in the performance of any obligation imposed upon it
hereunder. The Escrow Agent shall not be liable or responsible
for any loss resulting from any investment made pursuant to this
Escrow Deposit Agreement and in full compliance with the
provisions hereof.
7 , Escrow Inviolate- No paying tlrl('llts' fee: or ether
charges of. ally nature may b(� paid from the e!;(rowed money or
Government obligations prior to retirement of. all Refunded
Bonds. The I;suer agrees that it will pay any and all such fees
from its other legally available funds as such payments become
due prior to such retirement.
g. Notice o_f Deficiency. If at any time there shall
be insufficient tunds-on hand in the T. ;crow Deposit Fund for the
payment of principal and interest and premium, if any, falling
due an t.Ile Re't tllloje(i Bonds, the Escrow Agent shall promptly notify
the Issuer of :;tl(-h (Jef iciency.
9. Re'onrt ing. I'h(n Escrow Ationt t;hall not later than
the la:;t. (1i1y <lt
of e',lch ye,lr alai 1 a report. to
the I SSUel- t)I the loceipt:;, income, 111\'('S;t 111('ilt !;, 1l'tll'illpt i(a118 ::incl
payment.;,; nt and f` rom all ot• thee,hed
hereunder (itil- i llel the next precedi nkl t i :;c ill yl',1l
or F,lynlont.. `S'ht, V..!,( c,w l� lt'nt :;hall I nl•11ce,
payments telt Ot t tl(' Fscrow Deposit 1'llncf to i h(' '1'.ly i ncj Ati 'nt in
stiff i cient t i nie t O p('rmit the Pay i no ntiellt. to Pay pr i n(: i P-11 0t.
and int ('rt'!;t on f h(? Roftlnd('d Bonds without dt't ,111 It . At t e'r 11 1
Slims Ii'tlttir('d for the p,-1y,11(ant of pl ilit- Ipal Of and i1ltor'.t, on thh
Ref und('ci 1l. (1,1:; htive bt,011 pal i d i o t Ile? P,iy i rlg r\(WIlt a!i hl r o i n
provided, t lie E'Wr(Ow Agent :;lltll t t I an,;i yr .illy rema'i.lnl nq HIM' IcS OT
Gove.rn1 (1 nt OW igat:1011:; to t.11t? l:'•:;Ut'r.
ll. Irr('vc�c.ltll(' I',;;crc)w for it cif The
F.:;crow Akll'llt 111c1 1 hl? I:;:;url :�(' 1 h,Tt. t h(� 1101ti(-er; f rc)In t inl(:'
to t inu? of the 1tr'ttlnded li(,rldl ; '1116 .illy t (cul,(>Il:l .lnlu f t a 1 n 1 nel
t he?T 1't O 11.1\'(' ,1 hl'lll't 1l' I Ll rll(A v(",too l llt t'I t";1 11) til(' GOV(,I lllllt'llt
Ohl igat ioll!; '111d nlolllt':; to hl' hc.?1(i by t hl'
plovidvd '111d in the l�rOvi!;ie)I1:; (�t thii; 1.:.clt)w t'pt):;It
A(yr('/'lul'll► . It I!; t1nder -stood '111d r1g1-1'1'd t h:1t
4 1'�h 11) i t C to Orli mint: e? ( 1?:;( row Aq l (?t'Ine?Ilf
Uk
this Escrow Deposit Agreement shall not be subject to revocation
or amendment until its provisions have been fully executed.
12. Escrow Aaent not Directly Liable. None of the
provisions contained in this Escrow Deposit Agreement sahal.l
require the Escrow Agent to use or advance its own fundr3 or
otherwise incur direct financial liability in the perf(.)I•Inance of
any of its duties or t':e exercise of any of its rights ()r powers
hereunder. The Eset ow Agent shall be under no liability for
interest on any funds or other property received by it hereunder
except as herein expressly provided.
13. Segregation of Escrow. The Escrow Ac3ent Shall hold
the Government tbl gat ions and"all monies received by it from the
collection of principal of Ind interest on the Govt`rnrnent
Obligations, and all monies. received from the Issll(`c hereunder,
in a special fllntl and separate trust account wholly !segregated
from all other funds and inv(`sstments deposited with the Escrow
Agent, and shall never c,)Ilnni ngl e such investments wit -JI other
monies or investments. Title to such Government obligations and
monies shall remain in the Issuer.
14. Governing 1.aw. This Escrow Deposit Agroement shall
a►,d construed in accordance with t:ho Daws of the
be governed by
-
state of Oregon.
Nt)t l ct"; . Ally not ice, r t'tltlt'St , c0IIllllllII 1 ('.It 1.011 Or
(�tller Ilal>er "Il.11 l 1,t" stlftI(•it'nt ly givt`n rind shall 1)t' tic�E�mE�d given
when dt`l iVPrt`d Cir m.l ; led, by I ('`q l Stert`d or c'rr t i f ied mail,
P 0 S t I kle PI I'1)'l Id (`: t'Ilt by I (' 11'q ra1T� ,a:; tc)l l (�w ; : if I () the
ISSUCI , at : _, I.f to
t! -ie E.Wrow nc10nt 1: _The
C ssur r .and t hc` : A�lt',It nl,ly des lUilat r' 'lny t ul t ht r or
diffe lt'nt ,addrt`:..t`: which !subsequent not Ict—,, rt',I(I( sts,
t•ommu[Iicat it,n:: Or t'cht'1 1),Ilt('I:, shall tie r011t...
any Ocie (ar more OI I hP rOvt`rlants
`'.; l II I Ila:.; I, Crow 1]epO:;lt f1 C7r('t'lll('nt, on thE'
1�'art t.)t thO 1 .1', r t t hje 1;:;crOw AcIt'llt t_o t)r 1)t'rt(,I 111('(1 r;ht,tlld be
kit, tf'r1111ned by .1 t'.�1:it t t t',)IIII)(`tC'Ilt 111C1Sd1t't l')ll to It(' cmiI nary I(,
law, :;llt' V't`Ila 11C :�l' .1%11 l'l'lllt`Ilt `shill I be dt`t'metl x11,1 l', ill!;t I lied t(i
1't` :;t'Vt` •il' i 1 ()Ill t no 1 ellla 1111 Ilq covenants all(l .sell r'('l11('nt `; Ilt`rei n
0nl'Itn(''i .,,i :;h.l! 1 in nu w.1y 'If tett the v,111dity O1 the,
tit 1 h i V.!,crow
t`r1).11 1 This; V,(•row tlep,,.� I t A(Ir t'('1111 -lit m,ly 1)t'
0\(`('111 ed 11) !,I,vel'I't c"kint('1part!;, alI or .Illy ''t wh1('ll !;11.111 be
lt`(1;11,1t't1 t()l all W. ('n(, t`I lginal and :;hall rr)n!.1 it.utc�
.111(1 1)t' 1)ut On(` '1116 the "lint' 111!;1 l lllllent .
Parle, 5 Exhibit C to Ol (1 i n,ll)ce (Vacrow Ay r t`c'lnlrnt. )
IN
WITNESS
WHEREOF, the parties hereto
have each caused
this Escrow
Deposit
Aareement to be executed by
their duly
authorized
officers
as of the date first above
written.
THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON
By:
ESCROW AGENT
By:— _. _._...__,
At -it or zec�^ Off Ce I'
0 I:xlt i 0 t t c' t „ ( )i (i .i n,tnce (t'.`iCCOW At1t t"`mt"nl )
1lW{2►ttl s V) t
APPENDIX A
NOTICE OF REDEXPTION
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTIVS OF CLACKAMAS, MULTNOMAH AND WASHING'T'ON
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
BONDS, SERIES
The City of Lake Oswego, Oregon has called for
redemption on __ __, _ ► all of its General Obligation
Aonds, Series maturing
Lter _ (Bonds ni�ttibered to -
inclusive).
inclusive). Tt�e- Bonds will be dice and payable at the office of
in , Oregon, at a
redemption price equal to the perncipal amount plus interest
accrued to _ All interest on such Bonds shall
cease to accrue after
THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON
By
L,:scrow Agent
ppi,nd i x A t k) Facrow Agreement ItWllmt�, 1'� t
AvAkl- OREGON
BANK
City of Lake Oswego
Plan for Advance Refunding of Bonds
This plan is submitted to the Oregon State Treasurer
pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 288 of the Oregon
Revised Statutes. This plan has been prepared for the
City of Lake Oswego ("the City") by Oregon Bank ("the
Bank"). The City has retained the Bank as Financial
Counsel for this transaction.
The elements of the plan are as follows:
1) "Request and Authorization for an Advance Refunding Bond
Sale", Treasury Form Alt 1--8b, is attached as
Exhibit A.
2) Resolution of the governing body authorizing submission
of this plan. A copy of resolution number R-86-30, which
was passed by the City Council on November 4, 1986, is
attached as Exhibit B.
3) Statement of Purpose. The purpose of thit; rc•tun(Iing is tc
effect a debt service savings. "'ee also itrm (1) below.
4) Description of bonds to be retunded. Two it:ru+ t; will be
rt'tunded:
C:ent'ial Obligation City Hall hondt;, Series 1985, first
callable on February 1, 1990.
General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Sories 1980,
first callable on December 1, 1990.
Debt service sc.lte.iule Lor the two 1-efunded
ali t aclie(t as F,xhibit s C and 1).
5) Description of the refunding bond issue. T— trli,n1l+n,
bund it"suc•t; will he t+o ld, reflecting tile two ill 14 l ell,
r:our.:es ut bond holdar t;ecuritN-.
The Series A refunding bonds will be full faith and credit
general obligations of the City and will be used to refund
the 1985 City Hall Bonds. Series A bonds are estimated to
have a par value of $4,330,000. The bonds will be dated
December 1, 1986, and will mature serially on February 1,
1988 through February 1, 2005. Interest on the Series A
refunding bonds will be payable semi-annually on AuKust 1
and February 1. The refunding bonds will be callable
beginning on February 1, 1994.
The Series B
refunding bonds will be secured by
assessments
on benefited properties in a companion local
improvement
district or dintricts. The bonds will
additionally
be full faith and credit general obligations
of the City.
Series B bonds will be used to refund the
1980 General
Obligation Bancroft Improvement bonda. Series
B bonds are
estimated to have a par value of $705,000.
The bonds will
be dated December 1, 1986, and will mature
serially on
December 1, 1987 through December 1, 7001.
Interest on
the Series B refunding bonds will he payable
semi annually on .rune 1 and December 1. 'rhe refunding
bonds will be callable beginning on December 1, 1994.
Sales of the Series A and Series F refunding bonds are
anticipated to close on December 2, 1986. TIC for the
Series A bonds is estimated to be 6.17%. TIC for the
Series B bonds is estimated to be 5.86%. 'tables of
estimated semi annual debt service for the two series of
rt, tunding bonds is presented as Exhibit I" and F. A
refunding bonds receipts fend disbursement;: vclscdit1,• i
presented as Exhibit G.
6) Description of the escrow account. Two oscrow accounts
will service the out at andrng issue: A yield restricted
escrow with an estimated purchase price of $4,9'18,800
and a yield unrest rioted escrow wit 11 an est imnt cd I,tirchase
price of ;479,000.
Only U.S. State and local Government Series srcurtt I e s
will be utilized in the restricted escrow accc,teu( either
open tit arke. t purchased U.S. Treasury seeur it i e:: or St at e
and Local Government Series securities will be lit i11zvd in
the unrestricted escrow account. The escrows will he
redressed following, the call of the refunded City itn11
bonti s on February 1, 1996.
7) Present Value Savings Table. A l,rescnt v.t11t,, rtnvinp,st
table i-, presented 41 ti h:xhibit It. Note that t h,, pi Ioct o,d
ptcunt value satvings is It's!; than 3.00 pts, •nt o
v t tnt;tt cti par refunding bonds.
Ativarcc Ret itnd 1nt; P I an • 2
The City requests that the State Treasurer's office waive
its customary minimum present value savings rule in this
case and issue a preliminary authorization for the
proposed sale of refunding bonds.
They request is made pursuant to the recent passage of
ballot measure number nine on at the general election of
November 4, 1986. In the opinion of bond counHeI (see
attached letter, Exhibit 1), the City will lack legal
authority to effect a sale of refunding bonds and capture
the present value savings estimated here if the sale of
the refunding bonds is not closed prior to the effective
date of Measure 9, December 4, 1986.
City staff and the City Council have reviewed estimated
available savings at this time and have chosen to pursue
currently available savings by filing this Plan and
requesting this rule waiver rather bear the risk of loss
of presently existing authority anti presently available
sav ings .
8) Administrative cost detail. Administrative costs are
estimated as follows.
Costs allocated to the refunding bonds:
Financial Counsel fee $
12,000
Financial Counsel expenses
500
State Treanurer f eta
5,000
Bond Counsel fee
18,500
Public Accountant (t,e
3 200
Publication costs
2,000
Rat Ing agency
5,000
Registrar / paying agent
,000
pond print int,
1,500
49,700
Costs allocated to the escrow:
F:: - row t rustee $ :: 400
9) Copy of contract between issuer and financial consul
-
I ant . A t o1)y of t he cont r:►ct iH at t ached as i-;xh ihi.t I
Nott, that the, contract (page 4, "Fee") provi(le-s for
nppre,ximately 79;1. of tilt, Batik's tev as payable on a non
cont illgolll 1)a8i.s.
Advance ReI"-I:119 Plan -• '1
� a.
EN I B I W.
1 rc anury Form
Revolution Authorizing We
' rvice^ Schedule - Clt.y Hall Bonds
Debt Service Schedule - 1980 Bancroft Bonds
S; h,dule - City Hall Advance Refund Bonds
nchc'.c ulv - hancroft Advance Refund Rands
Schedule - Advance Refunding Sources A Unes
: chedu 1 v - Frosent. KIM Savings
Harvey Roger's Wal Opinion
Contract with Financial Advinor
Exhibit A
It Paa.try yore kR • -y
oaplete and •et.. State Treasur-t
ISO state r'aptt.,
Salem. .`R V' IIf,
RRQURSP AND AUTO,
R1tATl(IN
FOR AN ADVANCR REFUNDING BOND SAL[
%te of App1:.Atl;,n: ��1_'. ,:rt
■ e u e t : -_.1..1. t ..1 _ -1-.1 k F (i ti,w t` ,;;,1`_ _
con at act pet ran, DaIIIVI Alttirlsoil
Bond Counsel t ��id$ t� (l;t.t t_.CI til
NaNf of Oregon Tru•te•: �LC1_hra datr+rr
RRFUNUING ISSJe:
It .
Par A•iountt¢ l� i� .U.SLIZ S).i) Type of ponds'
Cr
Proj•cte.1 Date of
Pfolected Dote of I••uet NICOMI)Ct
VIS p,.0PI
Maturtty l4t••: art i;111�
he ; ... a.•nt a
Purpose of Iaaue (check one);
ProjectP
_ t4bt Service S•vtngs (A1
He�lulrt•�P�ta
Reoigfnttat ton ,•t pebt (H'
Year PV!
•---
M Y Financlal Dlattess (,'I
Pat Xwoont of 64ond• to be Hetllndeall
c_ .►..t11t1.UUU.UU
Nu•b!t fit 1►ond 2••uPla) ,
Total call prealldft•:
5 11
'a•n tO be Added, ,f any(
g „. J l , 1. _) 1.1
Pfol•ct•d Ptea•nt Value SaVtngtt:
y I lf•, Ill.(,(`
i Pate ..t PrPaPnt :,t'„•r
! i'I I'r, h
Savinye Nat I'll _.. 1... ..-.. ...,..\ Tat Ha1P lata ,•.
I•et Sl 00 t)
►.•ct nv Pund• 1nveat•d at lin, Pa;r1. 1P•1 yIr•.'
TrPaSJf Form Ae ,
corar',utP and aPt7 State Trea•ater
148 State rapltol
Salem. uH )1I10
l'ARLY P.V.S.
Pt event Value 1,avin14
Issuer:
I �AtP �! :•r rsr,! .'� r �altulat ••„u,n �_ •"_..___..___._.._ __..
lint lelat•�' � \ .�,.".`.' _�..... _. __..
t
It .
'+gat
q,, IaI
•. Ind l nq
VIS p,.0PI
he ; ... a.•nt a
AdvAn,P I, --f,, rig
ProjectP
Ft” tl t
He�lulrt•�P�ta
Savings
Year PV!
•---
(PVI
'1V T A L';
Mltlue ( Alt) Added+ ¢
Mlnnn Ptt Pnaru i. r �a.I fret♦
HPfn'I Iran P t PP.1•
`\l. PRt\IVSI TYh 11RCt3BNT e' • �t !tr,•„ .... __. _... _..
4
Exhibit C
` Oregon Bank Public Finance
zz:ssma.-�==:s cess=sass�canz sa=
Debt Service Schedule for City of Lake Oswego City Nall Bonds
02/01/87
08/01/87
02/01/88
08/01/88
e2/01/89
88/01/89
02/01/90
08/01/90
02/01/91
08/01/91
02/01/92
08/01/92
•2/01/93
08/01/93
02/01/94
08/01/94
02/01/95
08/01/95
02/01/96
08/01/96
02/01/97
08/01/97
02/01 /98
08/01/98
02/01/99
®8/01/99
82/01/2000
08/01/2000
02/01/2001
08/01/2001
02/01/2002
08/01/2002
02/01/2003
08/01/2003
02/01/2004
08/01/2004
02 / 01 / 2005
85, 000
90,000
100,000
110,000
120,000
130, 000
140,000
155,000
170,000
185,000
200,000
215,000
235,000
260,000
280,000
305,000
335,000
350,000
360,000
3,825,000
Outstanding Bonds
mr�emass=:=ss:a��a
INTEREST
173, 875.00
168, 775. 00
168, 775. 00
163, 375. 00
163, 375. 00
157, 375. 00
157, 375. 00
150, 775. 00
150, 775. 00
143, 575. 00
143, 575. 00
135, 775. 00
135, 775. 00
128, 775. 00
128,775.00
122,497.50
122,497.50
115,527.50
527.50
115,527.50
107,850.00
107,850.00
99, 450. 00
99, 450. 00
90, 312. 50
90, 312. 50
80, 325. 00
80, 325.00
69, 275. 00
69, 275. 00
57, 375. 00
57, 375. 00
44, 412.50
44, 412. 50
30,175.00
30,175.00
15, 300. 00
15, 300. 00
3,935, 725
TOTAL
258, 875. 00
168, 775. 00
258, 775.00
163, 375. 00
263, 375. 00
157, 375. 00
267, 375. 00
1 J0, 17-.00
270, 775. 00
143, 5.75. 00
273, 575. 00
135,775.00
275, 775. 00
128, 775. 00
283,775 ,
83,775. eQ
.22, 497. 50
292, 497. 50
115,527.50
300, 52 7.50
107, 850. 00
307, 850.00
99,450.e*
314, 450. 00
90, 312. W_
325, 312. 50
80, 325. "
340, 325. 00
69,275.00
349, 2.75. 00
57, 375. 00
362, 375. ON
44, 412.54A
37`x, 412. 50
30, 175. ON
380,175.00
15, 300. 00
375, 300. N0
7, 760, 725
258,875.00
427,550.00
426,750.00
41-'4. 750. 00
421,550.00
417, 150.00
411,550.00
412,550.00
414, 995.00
416, 055. 00
415,700.00
413, 900. 00
415, 625. 00
420, 6`.50. 00
418, 5:50. 0121
4 V), 750. 00
4,'3, 825. 00
410, 350. 00
390, 600. 00
7,760,725
REMAINING
PRINCIPAL
3,740,000
3,650,000
3,550,000
3. 440, 000
3,320,000
3,190,000
3,050,000
2,895,000
2,725,000
2,540,000
2,340,000
125, 000
1,890,000
1,630,000
1,350,000
1,045,000
710,000
360,000
0
Exhibit D
i
Oregon Bank Public
Finance
aaa_'. .--�ffi=csa=mar.----
--T_.-_--
Run Date:
31- Oct -86
Debt_Ser•v:ce Schedule for CitY
of Lake Oswego
1980 Eancroft
Bonds
S
ds
Outstanding
Bonds
PtRIOD
ENDING
_
66/01/87
PRINCIPAL
___ _
COUPON
---`--
INTEREST
-'---------
TOTAL
YEARLY
TOTAL.
REMAINING
12/01/87
06/01/88
40 000
`
10' 500
38, 386. 25
38 ;86.
__
38, 366. 25
PRINCIPAL
1L/01/88
06/01 /89
40,000
'
10. 000
C5
36, 286.:?5
36,
78 366. 25
36; 286. 25
1 16 7�, :."". �0
745, 0,00
12/01 /89
06/01/90
40,000
'
10. 00P
C-186. 29-S
34, 286. 25
•. �
34, •86.
76. • •86. 25
34, ,-86. 25
1 1 :. `.. ,', ��
IN`s, 000
12/01 /90
06/01/91
50, 000
10. 000
�5
3`-+ � 86. 25
32, 286, 25
74, 266. 25
32,286..25
108, 572.:-)0
665, 00a
12/01/91
®8/01 /92
50,000
'
10. 200
29,786.25
29, 786. 25
82, 286.25
29, 786. 25
114, 572.150
615,000
1P/01 /92
06/01/93
50, 000
.
9 000
27,236-25
79, 786. 25
27 236.25
109,572.!50
365,000
12/01/93
06/01/94
50, 000
9. 150
24, 986. 25
24, 986.
77,236.25
24, 386. 25
104, 472. 5Qi
515', 000
12/01/94
06/01 /95
50, 000
9. 300
25
22, 698. 75
22,
74,980-25
22, 698. 75
99,972.50
465, 000
12'/01 /95
08/01 /9G
55, 000
9. 450
698. 75
�0, 373. ; S
20,
72, 698. 75
20, 373. 75
X7"5, 397."i0
r
♦ 1 �, 00Qi
1L/01 /96
06/01 /97
60, 000
9. 600
37 3. 75
17, 775. 00
17
75, 373. 75
17, 775. 00
95, 747. 5o
360, 000
&2/01/9760,00014.
06/01/98
9. 750
775.
R95. VI4
77, 775. 00
! 4, 895. ON
95
`, 550. 00
3�. 000
12/01 /9811,970.0074
06/01/99
60, 0009.900
14. 895. 411
1
895. 00
11,970.00
89, 790. ►lei
40 000
.
12/01 /99
0610112000
60, "0
10. 000
1, 970. 00
9, t Oto. 00
71, 970. 041
` 000. 00
83, 940. 00
180, Q100
12/01 /2000
06/01 /2001
60, 000
10. 000
9, 0041. ON
6, 0041.00
E'`3+ 000. 00
,
6, 000. 00
78, 000. 00
1 0, 0N0
1P101 i BA1
60,00o
10 000
6, 414141• E'►0
3, N4'►4'1. Oki
66,000.0o
66, 1210N. 00
O0o. 00
72, 000. 0�1
�, @Q1O
- ---� --
785,000
.
, 00o.. 00
63, ONN. 00
- -
66, N00. 00
0
657, 933
�-
1,442,933
--- ----- --
+ 2 770
r,
Exhibit E
City of Lake Oswego City Nall Advance Refunding Pends (Series m
Debt Service Schedule
PERIOD
ENDING
08/01/87
02/01/86
08/01/88
02/01/89
08/01/89
02/01/9e
08/01/90
02/01/91
08/01/91
W-/01/9`
06/01/92
02/01/93
08/01/93
02/01/94
08/01/94
02101 /95
08/@1/95
021011%
08/01/96
02/01/97
08/01/97
02/01/98
08/@1/98
02/01/99
08/01/99
02/@1/2008
08/0172000
02/01/ZW1
08/01 /2w1
0210112002
08/01/2QW%
02/61 /213@3
08/01/2003
0e/01 /2e3fc44
08 / 01
02101
PRINCIPAL.
100,000
150,000
155, 000
160,000
175,000
180,000
200,000
215,000
225,000
240,000
2`.50, 000
2,10,00o
290,000
305,000
330,000
3,55, 0@1r
365,000
365,000
4,330,000
COUPON
4.000
4.500
4.700
5-06o
5. 200
5.400
5.600
5.800
5. 900
6.000
6.100
6. 200
6.300
6. 400
6.490
6.1500
6.550
6.550
INTEREST
$17.2,103.33
129,077.50
127, 077. 50
t27,077.50
1:'3, 702. 50
060. 00
1 c'0. 060. 00
116,060.00
1 16, 060. 00
111,510.00
111,510.00
106, 650. 00
106, 650. 01<l
101,050.00
101,050.00
94,815.00
94, A 15. 00
88, 177.50
88,177.50
80,977-50
80, 977. 50
73, 352. 50
73, 352. 50
64, 982. 50
64,982.50
55, 847. 50
55, 84 7. `,30
46,087-50
46, Mil 1. 50
35,445.00
35,445.00
23, 907. 50
-3,907.50
11,953.75
11,953.15
3, 064, 493
TOTAL
172, 103.33
229, 07 7. 50
12-7,077.50
X77, 077. Std
i, "O1 _10
120, 060. 00
-80,060.00
1 16, 060. 00
C-91,060.00
111,510.00
c-91,510.00
106, 650. 00
306, 650. 00
101, 050. 00
316,050.00
94, 815. 00
319, 815. 00
88,1-77.50
328, 177.50
80,977.50
3.30, 977. 50
73,352.50
343, 352. 50
64, 982.-,)o
354,98-.50
55, 847. 50
360, 847. 50
46, 087. 50
376, 081. `)0
35,44n.00
390, 44`,5. 00
23, 907. 50
388, `)07. 50
11,953.75
376, 953. 75
7.394, 493
IL
P,
I*
I AA
Exhibit F
City Of Lake
Oswego, 1980
Debt Service
Schedule
Barrcr,, ft Ref and
i n g Bands
PERIOD
(Series
B)
ENDING—
PRINCIPAL
'------
06/01/87
—
COUPON
02/01/87
INTEREST
6/01/88S5,
12/01/88
000
4.000
"------
$19, 476. `5
TOTAL
__ --------
06/01/89
12101189
45,000
4. 500
19,476.25
18. 376.25
19. 476. 25
74, 'i76. 25
06/01/90
12/01 /90
45,000
4.700
18, 376. 25
17, 363. 75
18, 376. c5
63,376.25
06/01/91
12/01/91
5S9000
5.0.0
1 /. 36;3. 7S
1c>, 306."
17, - 63. 7!1�
E_cl• .`:r.,.. '.
06101192
/92
50, 000Q
5
5.200
14� 931, `5
606 :,
76. 306,
06/011
1 /93
50, 000
14,931.L.3
14, 931.25
12/01/9
06/01/94
45,000
5.400
13, 631.25
13, 631.25
64, 1331.25
13, 631.25
12/01/94
06/01/95
50,000
S. 600
1->, 281. 25
1 , 281. 25
63, 631. z,
1c, ► 81. 25
12101193
06/01/96
45, 000
5.800
11,021.25
1 19 021. 25
S7, 281.25
1 1, 021. 25
12/01/96
06/e,1/97
50,000
5.(300
9,571.25
9, 571. 25
61, 021.: 5
91 571. 25
12/01 /97
6. 000
8,243-75
54,571.L 5
06/01 /98
12101198
06/01
50, 00111
6. 100
8, 43. 75
6. 743. 75
6,
8, 243, 75
58, 243. 75
6,
/913
12101199
50, 000
6. 200
743. 7S
5,218.7-,
743. 75
56,743-75
06/01 /2000
12/01 /2000
06/01
40,000
6. 300
S, 218. 75
-3,668.75
3,668-75
5, c718. 75
55,218-75
3,668.75
/2001
40,000
12/01
6. 4002
408. 7;-;
431 668. 75
_ 3 5 000
--------
6. 450
2 408.7
1 , 1 c�8. 75
1
, 408.
� 5
7
4,408.75
1
705, 000
_ , 1.'B. 75
, 128. 75
36, 18.
3L'0, 743
7S
7_
1,025,743
P,
I*
I AA
fl*
■ 1^
®•
Exhibit G
City of Lake
Oswego
Schedule of
Refunding Ponds Sources
and Uses of Funds
Sources
Refunding Bonds Par
5, 0351000.00
Underwriters Discount
(55, 365.00)
oleo
Accrued Interest
Issuer Contribution
_491, 100.00_
Total Sources
5,470,715.00
Uses
Restricted Escrow
4, 936, 6001. 00
Non Restricted Escrow
479,000_00
Escrow Subtotal
5,417,800.00
Cost of Issue
52, 100. 00
Sinking Fund
0.00
Unspent
�___-B15_00-
Total lyses
5, 470, 715. 00
Oregon Bank Public Finance
System
Advance Refunding Present Value Debt Service
Run Dates
Savings Table
31 -Oct -86
for City of
Lake Oswego
Present Value Date:
02 -Dec -8f,
Discount Rate:
Peri,_)d
(--Annual Debt Service--)
Refunding Outstanding
6.170%
nnd
Ei
Issues
Issues
PV
_9_
01 -Feb -87
- -----_ - -
____
Savin s
q
PV Fact or
Saving -ii
01 -Feb -88
01 -Feb -89
0
495, 133. 33
258,875.00
544,-32,--.50
258,875
{�• 189
_ -�-^
0. 990-5 7
256, 353
01- Feb -•90
485, 907. 50
482, ] 32. 5N
539 322. 50
533,322.50
53,415
0. 931814
0. 876933
45, 8?,H
46,841
@1 -Feb -91
@1 -Feb -92
487 732.50
'
486, 98`.
536,12`.50
51+190
48,390
0.825231
0.
'
42,244
01 -Feb -93
50
480, 282. 50
526 722. 5039,740
516 022. S0
, ` 40
J9, 740
7
0.730791
37,571)
29 29,04.
01 -Feb -94
01 -Feb -95
482 862. 50
489, 14`.
09
51 `, 52 . 50
35,740
0.68770524,571)'
--
-
01 -Feb -96
50
478' 772. 50
+
510 3902. 50
511 80`.50
21, 250
7160
0. 609005
12,
1`
@1 -Feb -97
01 -Feb -98
482, 842. 50
475, 442. 50
511, 250. 00
33,030
'
28, 408
@. 57309'
0.539310
9e1
4
18, 929
01 -Feb -99
@1 -Feb -2000
47-7,142.50
503, 690. 00
499 565. 00
'
8, 248
0. 50 7514
15, 320
'
14,
@'1--Feb-2001
467 302. 50
'
461 512. 50
498, 650. 00
22, 423
, 348
0. 477592
0. 449434
`736
10,709
01 -Feb
@1 -Feb -2003
459; 432. 50
425,89.o.0
490 X50. 00
485, 750. 00,
`g Oa8
26,318
0. 422936
14,089
12, 281
@ 1 -F*eb-•2004
Q1
412, 81 ";. oo
423,825.00
410 350. 00
(:-, 065)
0.398001
0. 37453`-�
10 474
(
01 -Feb -22,005
432, 801.25
390, 600. 00(42,201)(,
465)
0. 3`;24;:,4
773 )
(86'.) )
-----__-_.
$8,464,130
_ _
$9,203,658
0. 331674
(13,99/)
------_...
739,528
Less cash issuer cont ributian
595,110
Less Issuance
expenSPS not paid from issue
proceeds
4 713, 00(A
N
Total pr'c, jected
PV savings:
116 11(A
Refunding Bonds
Pat, Va 1 tie :
5, 035, 000
PV Savings a%
a X Refunding ISsup
Pars
� �..
W*SyD TnADa CaNTaa DuSUDINO
Sx-tTa 0704
P O, 57
4t/:wTO•RI'
ToaTO 1011 JAPAN
1Q;1 4:12 - R9QH
LINDSAY, HART, NEIL & WEIOLER
I.AwyzHti
Soho 1800
QQQ S. W COLUMN%^
POHTI.AN113.OHEC)O1T 07201'0818
Tal-arMONIt 16001 206.1101
TaLrcorlaw 15001 1RVO-0070
Ta Lax 404 70nQ'
November 3, 1986
Mr. Dan Anderson
Vice President
Orbanco Securities
Orbanco Building, Sixth Floor
1001 S.W. Fifth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
Be; Effect: of Statewide Ballot Measure No. 9 011
Ability to Issue General obligation Bonds
Dear Dian:
JarraasoN pLwca
:%0 N. OTN, SU 1Ta 400
fN11BL.IDwaO 8:1702
IQ081 (lao-8841
Q1111 Brt STa919T.11.W.
WAI,NINOTON.A.r 110030
,2081 won -0000
i
Section 5 of Ballot Measure No. 9 imposes a restrict on
on the ability of local governments to ,levy new tax rates" is
without additional voter approval. As Oregon local g
do not directly levy tax
xrates, it is means. difficult to understand
what Section 5 of Meas
The Attorney General has concluded thathat it wOU1(3 tly
prohibit the levy of new taxes. Oregon
provide a means for
distinguish
ationinq
been iswthat"
anew
t'axalev1ir,ltljto pay
taxes. One possible
bonds issued after the measure is in effect would be a new tax
law is clarified, we could not give
Therefore, until the
an unqualified opinion for general obligation advance refunding
bonds which are issued aftereDecember
ecemb r 3, 11986. anhe 11.iv,
.tnininion yf.othe
Section 5 of the Court, clarifiedlegislation. Either type of
Oregon Supreme Court, or possibly by 9
clarification iscliktlyertainto kthat Pheelawtwiillludtlim,itemy be
obtain, and it is n � n�rai
clarified to permit the issuance Of unlimited tax, q'
obligation ref.undinq bands.
vary truly yours,
N1)�;nY , N.Al2T, NEIL & WEIGLER
U
Harvey W 9ers
11wRmt ,162
OREC' ON
. BANK
October 17, 1487
Mr d Matthiss,
Ire
llty of Lake bswego
3yN StAtP JtrePC
Lake Oswego Y oregot
r,XNIBLT J
Finance Director and City Treasurer
97034
Mr. Matthias: to
t1PHr a ement letter
leas eu present thea ensagement.
u►l ►lank is p Oswet�.o by provi.ding advance re-
l` City of Lakr
the cti.an with the aThis letter
assist in cunjun' This
Counsel bond is"kies. E.ment,
a.ivirP and outt►tandin$ of this enga$
;undilig of certain ed to
s:ribea the purpose
a,,d benefits r►►i�l fees charged
staffing to be provided,
aervice6 A►ld
,:,llduct the ,•ilgaSesent.
sackg=Ou" "tile C ity11)
of Lake Oswego (hereafter of a
In 19115 the City bonds to fund construction
et ion the City has periodically
issued general obligation bonds to
City Hall. Additionally.
nt_w improvement (BancT`°vement
issued general obIi9Atioat1l periodic
the required
f finance the coats gH°tc ttt► s►i bonds, tile
til lmant ly in excess of
For somenl.f bond
districts a meat obligations Are sig 'With similar
interest P y, which Would be associated w ate
interest rates in trdaya interest r
issues brouKht to market
environment. 288.690) Provides a
law (0►15 288ALObond issuers u►ay issue
Oregon State bonded debt
mechanism vhpreby ml of in all exist in$
bonds to refinance meets certain standards ,e
Addit ional debt aery i
A ion if the refinancing the issuer's to as
obli$ nate reduction of a are referred
inctud,ing an sdeq of this typ
ubligatioil S. yI.anaactione
"advance refundings .
if in advance refunding iall ed
]t is tilt' Hallk's upini.on that, f
f, ac comp
could b would
for tl,r above named "'""e educlion
a sip►►if ican! d� bt sery ice r
lrAneaction of thi• ,►hove
At thi,► time, lite Cit
bi. ►� AI ir.t•d .,ver t 1ik' remtiiulnK
'file. tl:►nk h,►e furnished tilt
I aL%t, trn"i1)ility
r�.terencea bond sis ut rrt ►IX ancing
wish « l,ru forma all aIY61B
which supports this opinion-
Two circumstances complicate any possible refinancing at this
time. First, the exact operative federal tax law and its
interpretation by bond cou;isel have been undergoing
relatively rapid change in recent weeks as the final shape of
the Tax Reform Act of 1986 has become established. Any
financing (or refinancing) seeking an unqualified opinion of
bond counsel must be structured so as to be compatible with
current interpretations of the Act.
The second complicating circumstance is Measure 9 on the
November 4th general. election ballot. Measure 9, if adopted,
would place new, additional requirements in the face of any
local government seeking to pledge its basic taxing power as
security for a financing. As a refinancing would likely
involve such a new pledge in conjunction with the refinancing
bonds, the refinancing must be closed prior to the
effective date of Measure 9 (December 4, 1986) to avoid the
additional complicating requirements of the measure.
Finally, the City has expressed a desire to provide certain
of the package of services traditionally furnished by the
Bank in an advance refunding consultation engagement.
Accordingly, Oregon Bank presents this proposal be serviced
as financial counsel in conjunction with planning and
attempting to effect advance refunding several of the above
referenced bond issues.
Approach
The flank, acting on behalf of the City will immediately file
a Plain for Advance Refunding of Bonds with the OreKun State
Treasurt-►'s Ofti.ce. The plan will reflect the most current
thinking of bond counsel regarding new structural constraints
imposed by the Tax Reform Act of 1986 and the Rank's updated
analysis of market conditions and likely refinancing results.
If the currently required minimum savings test of the State
can not be met in the Bank's analysis, the Plan will request
a waiver of the test or a r e f i x i n g of the test at a lower
value. The waiver request will be made on the grounds that
the possible passage of Measure 9 may preclude the tuture
realization of any savings, regardless of the ►nagnitude of
that savings. The waiver request, if made, will commit the
City to withdraw the Plan if Measure 9 is defeated on
November 4th.
Engagement Letter - 2
In addition to filing a Plan, the Bank will provide the
following services:
- Design the technical features of the refunding issues)
- Design and structure the refunding escrows to ensure
full compliance of the tax code
- Engage a public accountant to verify all escrow related
calculations
Provide editorial consultation to the C.ity for
preliminary and final official statements
Provide marketing support for the refunding issues if
required
Manage overall scheduling and information flow among the
several parties to the refunding
- Solicit bids for and recommend engagement of a refunding
escrow trustee
Review bids received at a refunding bond sale, resize
the refunding issue(s) as required, and recommend
adoption or rejection of bids
File a final Advance Refunding Plan, reflecting realized
sale results
- Coordinate the closing of the refunding bond sale,
including purchakle of refunding escrow securities as
required
The City aKret's that it will provide the followinK services
in this engagement:
y,,ii.turial responsibility for prepal'atloll, printing, and
diHtribution of preliminary and final offic'sl
st ateme nt s
-- Filing of rating applicatioll(s) with ratilig agenrles
Selection of a registrar / paving agent for the retunding
bands
Arrange for printing of the refunding bonds
The City agrees to solicit and obtain Bank approval of the
p,ral,hic design ()f llle front rover of llle prelilninary and
tinct �>tlicisl at ateinents.
Engagement Let t el, -- 3
Staffing
It is the Bank's philosophy that significant public debt
offerings such as those associated with an advance refunding
benefit significantly frot direct involvement by senior level
personnel. Accordingly, the engagement will be handled by Mr.
Daniel Anderson, a Vice President of the Bank and Orbanco
Securities Corporation. Mr. Anderson's primary
responsibilities cover analysis and transaction packaging to
support the funding and balance sheet coordination needs of
the Bank's Public Finance clients. Mr. Anderson joined the
Bank in 1981 and holds Bachelors and Masters degrees from the
University of Oregon. Mr. Anderson served as financial
counsel to the first and second general obligation advance
refundings in Oregon under the IRS Code as prospectively
modified by UR 3838.
Fee
Our tee for the entire engagement is $ 12,000, payable at he
closing of the sale of the refunding bands. No fee will be
charged if the City withdraws the Plan pursuant to the defeat
of Measure 9. If a bond sale in held pursuant to the Plan but
the sale fails to close for any reason, our fee is $3,500.
Out of pocket expenses to the Bank (word processing,
reproduction, long distance telephone, and travel outside the
Portland metropolitan area) will be reimbursed by the City.
The Bank's fees are based on the scope of effort outlined in
this letter. Note that in pursuing the refunding transaction,
the City may incur other fees from Band Counsel, it public
accountant, printers, escrow and paying agents, the State of
OreKon, and providers of credit enhancement services.
The Bank, as financial counsel and in couslderat ion of the
fe•en contracted for herein, agrees to exercise itu beat
efforts on the City's behalf. This agreement does not,
however, bar the Bank from bidding to be a purchaser of the
refunding bonds at a competitive bid sale.
Terra of Engagement and Cancelation
Tho term .,t this engagement shall be from the date of the
(,.ity's acceptance of this engaKement letter through the
dnto of the closing of the sale of the refunding bonds.
Alternatively, if a scheduled bond sale is canceled or
postponed duty to development in the securities market which
would adversely affect realized savings from it retunding, the
ta•rm of this engagement shall be from the date of City
acceptance of this engagement letter until a date one year
alier canceled sale date.
�'.ItAAKell"'11t l.et t PT 4
Either party may terminate the engagement prior to the date
of a successful sale of refunding bonds upon ten days written
notice to the other party. In the event of cancelation, all.
costs advanced by the Bank on behalf of the City will be
reimbursed by the City. Additionally,
l materials
and
prepared by the Bank will become property o
the City will reimburse the Bank for time and expenses
involved in their preparation.
If the terms set forth above meet with your approval, please
y of this letter and return it to our
sign the enclosed cop
office.
We are prepared to begin preparation of an advance refunding
plan immediately upon your acceptance of this letter. i you
have any quest ions or wish to discuss any Aspect of this
proposal in detail, please do not hesitate to contact Daniel
Anderson, Vice President, at (503) 796 2b55.
Yours very truly,
Daniel Anderson
Vice President - Public Finance
Acknowledged for City of Lake Oswego:
-Vol
(by)
(title)
(dace)-~ _ _ .._....._
tthe t.r�.V i,,i��n: cif' 011S ;,"N. tt;'; 2"l9
to
F11KItF,ement Lel t et - 5
" f
. ,. ., ...... ,t:T7777
,..,-7777777" ,.
CITY OF LAKE OSW EGO
CIT)' MANAC:IMS OFFI
TO: rhe City Council
FROM: Peter C. Harvey, City Manager
SUBJECT: Request from Chamber .)f coiiwierce for Chr i ,t.mas
Decorations
DATE.: October 29, 1.986
Attached is a letter from the chamber of Commerce to place
Christmas decorations. Under the current sign ordinance, the
City M 1naklor is authorized to approve seasonal decorations. I
will pI,, to approve the request nless Council Obi('Ct-s
IIequ.
Council ;:Mould note the inv i t at icon to attend t hO l i gl1t.. ing on
Friday, NOvember 28, 1986 at 0:45 p.m.
�I�.�,IdL�
PC '11/b It,
At ( achment:.
0
1)oc . 16t'.111
48 NOR II1 tiiAII Si NI I1 1•(1\1 OIIKI IIOX 10 1AKI OtiWI(.O.ORi(:UN 97014 / (`,fit)hth 4h01
�E OSWEGO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE::.
47 N. State Street
P.O. Box 368
1_,ake Oww"o. Oregon 97034
636.3634
October 23, 1986
Mayor William Young and
Members of the City Council
City of Lake Oswego
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dell- Mayor Young and City Councilmen:
The Chi:iruber of Corirnrercrl is looking forwnr(I to the
Christmas season and the opportunity to dc:c:or-ate. our
business districts in the traditional theme.
As you know, the Chamber annually provides for the
Christmas trees, lights and decoration materials (made
by the Girl Scouts). This program could not be done
without assistance from the city maintenance, fire and
police departments.
We are -19,lin rc'cjtlesting your ass i ,,;Larrk•e, ;rnd perm s -
:.i on to i, r•oceed with our Christmas plan:; ,
011 F ri.daV, Novcmbr 28, 10800 the publ i.c.
i'19 will :;tart ;rt trppi,oximatel-y 6:4`5 p.m., tit
the corner of Fi.fth ;rnd A Avenue,. Wr. would Ukr Lo invite
vou, Mayor. Youn6, C.I.ty C;ounc i l.rr►e,n, acid City t.;t1 1 , to
"it toild.
Thi.:; 11;0:; be t'll a w:u-111 t raci i t i oll ill Lake e):;w� },e1 trod
i t. i :; a cle nlunstr;rt. i un cif t-olli un i.ty spirit i.irvoly i lig the
Chamber, City, Youth O-O"Ps, ;nrd others. The C1►;►mber is
r rood to coordinate ;ted ba,ulgc t this annual. c ve nt as all
cut wrt r'cl c1 i .;play of the, hol i city spir i.t.
S I lice re I v,
c ter,
(MYs.) tlrt Ile ttt.0111
L! --- TD
Cascade
t Construction
CornpanV, Inc.
General Contractors
P.O. Box 4287• Fortlenll, Or0gon 97208
I)JiIONE. -22.6421
Equel OPPOrtunity E -Ploy"
October
Peter C. Harvey. City Manager
City of Lake Oswego
348 N. State Street
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Pete, side
Cascade has just completed your project on Fourth Street along
As you know Saturday, I received the attached letter from Ms.
the new City Hall Building.
like
s are
rs
Nelson and couldn
't help but forward it to You amaketthat projectlsuccessfulcertainly
few and far between. It took an entire team to difficult for
d his crew were as much a part of but son etimes Mike.
i , Cascade does
eam a
and George l n ,►.�� yet ty owners
strive to work with adjoinin(l I 1
the contractor's people to understand the neighbors' concern.
Jroud of Mike and his efforts. A copy of Ms. Nelson's
We of course are very I
people must. remember
�t ufi'E�rs us the opportunity to were 1ook1inl forward
wish
letter will be in every paycheck this Iriday for all of
r P
that it is the taxpayer l,hr
you would thank Geor Kiri alio then Of your prollec tsf soon .
to being low bidder
gest regards,
,11 M.10e
:i�lt� 1th tit .
I ake
Nelson
Olt 97031
CASCAIII CONSTRIICT I ON COMPANY, INC.
f v1
Jon l . Morris
Pres i dent
4111",
II I;I1P11;111• ,Clnllnlnq Ill( 1,11j,tl 11 AWARD 10,1`179, IW11s `A1 t o i1N 111i111( ION (;0 IN1 •UI pR IM II,I�pAlhs,pl\IVIR11111111111p111 ul Ihll lllllpun l' it P
r
�'J,12_�� AA
'IV A,.41,
LA
� x-1411 A. Ire
-�-
f,f % L_�, r.. >i� C% -fl.-(-. /.• L %,�..C�
It-
o
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Peter C. Harvey, City Manager
FROM: Robert A. Kincaid, Assistant City Manager
Finance and Administration
SUBJECT: Contract Award for Relocation to New City Hall
DATE: October 14, 1966
I. BACKGROUND
On September 22, 1986, tht+ City published a requo.-,t for proposals
for relocating its o£ficos to the new city halt 1,kit1ding.
Pursuant to the City's pnrt•hasing regular -ions, tho contr.lct for
the move itself would be ,A personal services agreviiient. The cost
is regulated by the Publics Utility Conllnission.
Proposals for vendors were flue on October 7, 1986. Six proposals
were received. Proposals were received from Rose City Van and
Storage, Bekins, Lile, Maddox Transfer and Storage, Chipman -
Mayflower, and O'Neill Transfer Company.
11. ANALYSIS
E'stimates
of the proposed Move ranged from
a low of
$4,188.69 to
a high of
$1.8,000.00. `1`ht, ar..tiial. rates for
services
(i.e., one
person and
one vall) were the same for each
firm.
Three of the proposing fit-nls were selected for all interview.
Selection was basO,l 11P011 110W e0111131ete rnld thol•ouyh 1.111� f i.r.ms were
in responsr to tho request. The three firms intel-vi ewed were
Rose City Van ani Storage, Bekins, anti bile. The Qsl; ilwltk�tl t'Ost
of reloc,lt ion f.ror.l t.11osv three firms wore:
l't�r an Vstilnl.lt rfl Co"it:.
11eki.tis c'
1.i l e
Rose Ci t v 10,971 .30
llowOvOr, 1110 art.I.11 CO. -O.'; will. ht' 1),11;041 111,(,n P11111 i.c I11_iri.ty.
Colillilissioll liltt'8, th0 11111111)or of 110nl':1, nUllll)OF of workers, and
1111111111'1" lit t I lloks.
l�l;t'l)PIMI',ND1'i' t ilN
I1;1!wd tlln)ll t lit` l lit 0l vi eW tlll,l I1.I0k,1rt)1IIItI CIIOCkS 01 1)t t`V I Ulii; IIIOVt`!;
111.1d0 Ily 0"1t•il ot, the thr'00 f i 11'11;, it i!; rt-conunOLl.ied I Il.lt the City
C- )Illlt' I l '1W,11 -d the ro 1 ok"I t Lull 4'()llt I .Ict to it0k 1 115 .liltl lilt llt)1' 1 ::t? tilt,
City M,111.1,t0r to ex0cnnt o an ,till orllit'llt 1k)1- t.h i s sol -Vice.
I"
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
--- -- CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE --
110: The City Counci I.
FROM: Peter C. Harvey, ('ity Manager
SUBJECT: hotential Council Representation oil Metro Area Solar
ACcess Project
DATE: October 29, 1986
Attached is information from the Department. of Energy on the
Metro Area Solar Access Project. They are requesting
representation from staff, Planninq Commission and elected body
to serve on either a steering and/or technical, cominittee.
We plan to :submit a copy of this int.of mat Ion to t -ho Planning
C.ommi:::;i.on to set? if any Commission inembe t. -, .ire i titerest.ed.
This also provides an opportunity for Cou11C11 me'mbors to serve,
if intereste(j.
/I �
PCH/blb
At tachm(,n t
Disk' . 1 N6211
148 NORIIf '�I�\It SIRIII / I'MI 0IIR 1 R0\ W) IAKII OSWI(.O,OR[ ("ON 97014 / 1'i)11 b11. 4101
Department of Energy
625 N1,,ARION ST, NE. SALEM, OPEGON 97310 PHONE 378-,340 TOLL FREE 1-800,221.8035
YEl"RU AREA SOLAR ACCESS PROJECT
;OM: JOHN KAUFFi"I 'P
S_'BJECT: APPOINI LIAISONS
DATE: OCT. 16, 1986
RhCFIVED
OCT 17 1986
:�ctober 15 has sk pCITY Of LAKE OSWEGO
and volunteer committee representatis a evpsdto theer to PletvO,P01 itan�Arr,Jea - ljr
Access Project,
Solar
I've attached the forms again for vote, convenience. Please get them to
me as soon as possible. We would lime to get started with project work
in November.
The Ad Hoc Steering Cornmittee interviewed consultants and decided to hire
Conservation Management Services. The team includes Mike McKeever,
vlariel Ames, Al 6enkendorf, Carole Cannell, and Larry Epstein, whom many
of you know. We are pleased to have such a qualified team.
T"'le consultant has assigned members of the team to serve as local
representatives for' Your communities (list attached). I've also
attached a summary of previous projects in which the consultant team has
peen involved.
1:e will work with the consultar)t tO ,et a time and place for the
November 13th seminar, and will notify you soon.
Please feel free to call if you have any questions.
Jk: j
376 o(DI,fl)
1O.. 1 6..86
ill' ")Ie o) Dclr llmow
f j Department or Energy
VSALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE 378-01040 TOLL f REE 1 -Boo -221 -8035
625 MAfAION ST. NE.
SOLAR 14 ACTION ITEMS
Dint three liaisons to projec* - cne each from
} By October 15, ap ommission, and elected body. Their role is to:
stuff, planning
receive project information: es },�formea:
- keep respett�Ve 9pVet"r�ijp�tb�ommittees•
provide feedback to P
�. Indicate 1
iaison(s) willing on Steering andlor Technical
Committees. ` ,or project, sets
Committee is decision making body
Steering 4-8 hourslmonth.
policy direction.
nical Committee reviews technical data, makes technical
Te th Committee policy•
recommendtel°n4 hours%montht �aeiable throughout project.
ApproO ma Y
3, Complete
Directory, return to ODOE by October
letter requesting homeowners to grant e��try to consultant for'
4, Draft Return to ODOE by October 15"
sunchart photos•
5• Inform liaisons to reserve november 13 for seminar.
log of time spent on project, return to ODOE mcnthly.
6. Keep
3K,. jY
3034J(fl)
09109/86
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 21, 19136
TO: Peter C. Harvey, City Manager
( j
FROM:
Paul Haines, City Enginoer '.
SUBJECT: Request. for Driveway
Access
C)f. f
Dead -End of
I,ot 201.
West View Drivo; 21E,
2111,
Tax
t1
The city has received a r.eg%lest from Mr. eEd 11Ylome , (-)weer enol x
Lot 201, Map 21E, 1111 to access lts Drop y
West View Drive. willl require himstbjcrossect o"Tractv11" Of`the ePlat
Oeltjoll s ac
of Tol.kien Sleights, which is clesiclnat��y3 oCiit/l��tlic?.lviseaand reservestrip and not public right cit way.
regulation of Tract B is subject to the hearing body which
controls city owned parcels.
BACKGROUND
plat of 'lolkien Heights was approved by the city in 1975,
The
with l reserve strip at tho end of West View Drive. The city
Limit. Line, t.ht urban servit:f� district. line, incl tho urban growth
line uccut: At. t.11e lt�.tl enl �t West View.
In 1482, a lat:kjo parcel i n un ntI()r"l't':,; t.t`1
of
s.
appl ital for a utinot" partition I3u lthet c.ilty :Fa; pollkio ll hy�,not ingt t
thk•iew
coltirllonts Wove
parcr.l wc,lllki li,;�. l ,, t ake .IcC0 ;r' c,t t tlt;rce�l rdodicatr`J
r right- kitway
The city Als,) t-��1luu5tOki tl;,;t tht ttew 1
for the, fut_ur0 ��xtens�iun tit Wast View. Tho appli.catit comp] iod
With Hie .: ity s request:.
Fur t. ho p.At:ttt.ionirxl .),,Cllrrt'1 March 1at33 resul.tincl in two
whl(.11 would t,'like ak-c0';'; ')t't: ot'. West. Vi"'
n I, �i liitttl !'`rn;it
was i ;:;uc l by t:.ho : olinty 203 1 ��
l�ci�tu>;t. 15):1 .3, wi i.hc,ut rc'tlutj:;t, i -or r i t 1 approval.
111 (1'l�l,t`t' 1`�t1h, thl' t'lty CeCN1VE'1 .\ t'Nl1tlNgt tt, citlt'0V0 Mt .
I,ot 201 .
P01.1CY
the
city's 1,t l I i c•y t, 1 i, t t,
limit. 1011
ot. t
till' tit`,ill
n1lilltrt
t �t r ,t C;
which 011(i .-It the t•;ty
'i1r,�
t1
ill t ht` list . 1
"t 1intyl l ,tn11Y;
gii.+rant �`t` that
ill( devol(wlmit'iit
lnlarl�;, 1 ;
the()rint.y
and harm�,ni iii
with c•i l y p1,tnttin.� �t
s. someday, until those lands annex
lands WilL in all likelihood Sstandards ood wish to annex and benefit for
on►
the host of city amenit , regulatory
and become subject t:, the city's regu yr, cit
development, they should not be a burden on existing Y
tll
facilities by making use of ssinconsistent,
be permitted to dewrath lhnq ran90
velop in way
in which can become liabilities to the
planning goals or
public rather than assets.
POLICY ANALYSIS analytical
present policy seems to re the cau ive Plan's
,
apl. emphasis ort
Broach evident. in the Cumpwhlich��places,tElrea,tGempt 1
Management Policy Element" r controlling
the integrity of existing tac i vowt s,
preserving �)nd coordinating 'It
owth and ryltrvice
the quality of k1rowth,
with adjacent atlencies and districts -
EV A IM AT
istricts•
gVAl.l1A'1 1()N
rhe original E,wnar re5l)c)tlsiUle for the minor pat-ti.tion
hat
lat of way for.
E,rov icic:d substantial assurance tfuture
action would not
impede tutur.e (Irowth by dedicating r his
road purposes. The present owners have also respecextensionted tthe
he
possibilities �t future growth a� thou��htoutsido theservice
E, arE?tlll sitinll ,�t their Homes.
anli (Ito wth ,liont ; l t, tho parcels could t)F? se ltEt(„l,w,,?-stthat.
t.tc.il.it.ic`:; wit'1.`.:t impodiment. All in all, { I
utfil i(
has hl:E:n pail t(, the city's l s e(,ncovns, and
for the
e stjqo
t hAt the city has part. ipar.celst inr)quelst.ion have no
,,llu(,r;t botore c�>uncil1'h E' I
"t hor' :0 root t wontage ;avai law'
h to them.
Ut' lil'll1Cc11 llllt t -1)l? rE?.'il'YV(, Strt{7 i1:'i
l'11,' (' t t.y h,;:; t 'lc' (lilt ionto
a(•cos,s t_O the .app l 1 Cant 'AnO
1(lht of wK, thereby allowin(1 t.ho city would
t hE` Own( t
K, ox i st. i nli h0111(' . l n dl� i rail so,
Z-0 lY u1,u1, tut ',;t l' l .anil "90"90,►(• t. i l,n:; C(, 1)rl)v file i n1,111
l ann i n(l c 0a l s . l t the :t''11h I r,Ot pa wc,ll,l li
icl)i.E3vin(1 loo ;t)(1`' { urisdiction,
wuro to suhdiv i,i(� un(t('r ; �E`ti��al ion ,►';
wE�ll as r► }�arti.tionin(l
1 c•(lu i r(: a 'Ll�t`.c` Ch'IMP, ,Il 1 1 lin CiLy (,t
►ppl.irat tl)It ansa i:; unlllrr ohlill;at.ion t.c, nl)t•iiY(`HI A(1roement
{,Etn(1 i n(l ,a.• t i,,;► unll(rr (;rOw tihOMttljacthlr 1,•Ir (•E' l,; g(:►
,;;t Arl`,►>; font ract.. t(> I.h,• (• i ty t i 1-st-,
Fol I)JI'l l lilt l • e ;1 :ander
I.hl ouctll 1 hl, r•l`: E`:;r;,.►ry !)t'.,r(`liurE�t tE, ��l
any I nr i hl`t �,,►:tit ir,ni n(1 w(,ull1 contorm to city I
ityI
l`llu r, l.hrt i t ;.�I1 1`; l O L:: ;1►lT ;a t l!v l?l ,►I�il,
lx�t nl i
t h�� i ntEa(lr i t.y rpt '11 act It ,1:; ► ritr(1l 1
1• ;( t V t llc) a [ letIIIi t. sh()tl l (1 'Iddt
1)1 t1q. E'l�ll,t ; t i,,n>; tit t .11'h('d tE) nirr (�monl tot,
I ul ur(� �1(•(•Oss Po",t:;, n ►n-rumens`E (
and t.hlt e obl iq,ion of th(t
part icipatt,`1 in lull!,, 1,.1.1)•
s
owner. t�> bear the cost of driveway relocation if, and when
West View is extended. A similar permit will be necessary
for the owner of Lot 203, who is out of state and unavailable
to,- comment at this time.
RF;COMMI•.NUA'P ION
r, permit or licenso
1. That the city issue Mh plat
a .vocable ts, for purpose
to cross Tract 8 of the plat of 'Col0t Haig permit should
of access to one residence on Tax I,ot 201. The
he subject to the following minimum conditions:
it be limited to one residential ingress and
a. That the p��,m
egress.
remonStrance agreement for
That the c)wner sign a
future annexation and participation in future
for all
That the `'an rother.lappuc
appurtenances of
e
andwh0nt�West'lView
driveways
is extended.
d. 'That any new access points or driveway relocAtions be
subject to city approval.
rect. thy' city attorney t.o prepare, the
2. That the city council dithe city manager..
�ippropr!Lite t:"rm for executi011 by
vt � ,wwnents
,q
Mr. Paul Haines, City Engineer
Administrative Offices
34B N. State Street
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Mr. Haines:
28 Westridge Drive
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
October 15, 1986
RECEIVED
CITY (k uAokt VbWEGO
DEPT, Of PUNK WORKS
I recently applied for a country building permit to construct a home on a five
acre parcel of land I own adjacent to the City of Lake Oswego (Address 18785
Nestview Drive - Tax Lot 201, Section 21B, Township 2S Range 1E). My builder,
Mr. Bill Lee, Tri -Lee Homes, was informed by the county that the City of Lake
Oswego has utilized a device called a "street plug" to control access to the
city street from my property (again, which is located in Clackamas County). I
might also mention that I was not informed of this "plug" and that it did not
show up on any title report when I purchased the property.
I hereby request the city of Lake Oswego remove this restriction and grant me
full and unrestricted access to my property. A similar problem exists for an
adjacent property owner, Mr. Ken Grothe, 18777 Westview Drive (also on a five
acre county parcel). This would -allow me to proceed and build my home as
planned. Suggested solutions might be to deed it as a public right of way, sell
the property to me for a nominal fee, or simply declare the "plug" removed.
If I later wanted to subdivide or minor partition the property, it is my
understanding that a request for City of Lake Oswego annexation and LCDC.
houndary modification would be necessary at that time.
i would ask thatwhatever solution is arrived at, that it be transferable in the
'uture to any purchasers of my property so as not to unduly impact my property
\.aloe or ability to sell/access the property at a later date.
I understand this is scheduled to come before Citi Council on November 4.
Please advise if so, and I will be happy to present my case ii necessary.
Thank you very much for your consideration in this matter. I am hopeful we can
resolve it in a timelN matter, so I can proceed ►0 11h construction.
Sincerely,
Ed /i
Oltjen
sf
cc: Mr. Bill lee, lvi-lee Homes
Mr. Steve Wynn, Attorney at Law, Lindsay, Hart, Neil & Weigler
m
S—T
FAM
0
C14
0
0
to
CY
18 CI:A Ac
4 85Ac
C—P
03
86 Ac
V. 0%
R 1R VF - .1;
300
5 02A,
4
1 37 Ac
401
3 64 Ak
?1S1
F�,
k
Q
C\)
C -i
OL
4
Lij
Ld
V)
FAM
0
C14
0
0
to
CY
18 CI:A Ac
4 85Ac
C—P
03
86 Ac
V. 0%
R 1R VF - .1;
300
5 02A,
4
1 37 Ac
401
3 64 Ak
?1S1
F�,
k
28 Westridge Drive
Lake Oswego, OR 91034
October 31, 1986
Mr. Peter C. Harvey, City Manager
Administrative Offices
CITY OF LAKE OSWE.GO
348 N. State Street
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Mr. Harvey:
I received a letter (copy enclosed) dated October 29, 1986,
with the Engineering Department's recomlendpptionreciateregarding
my request for access to my Property-
very
much the quick response tQ�ntherequest
Counciloclear the agenda Nove1mbere4t
plug��and for putting it on
1986.
I feel, however, the solution of granting mroariatecwable
to
permit to access my property is not the app P
solve the problem. From a legal standpoint it is mythat it
understanding, after consulting with legal counsuch as this.
is not possible to withhold access to property
While a "permit." addresses this problem, I would far profer
the other solution �I)entioned in Mr. Haines' staff report;
this strip of land as right. of
namely, the dedication of
way.
I might add that if the concern is that zoning control of
the property (approximately five acres) be under county
control (vs. city), I feel an affinity to the City of
Lake Oswego due to the location of the property.
i11(I
considering at this time the possibility efO equesiinrin a
annexation to the city simply
because much better position to provide basic services such as
police, fire. etc. than the county.
Thank you t .,r your consideration to Lh i s mat t or
Sincerely,
' NOV 1L1tiC�
Ed Oe tjen r'
CI f Y OF LAKE OSWEGO
October 29, 19S6
Mr. Ed Oeltjen
28 Westridge Drive
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Mr. Oeltjen:
Enclosed is a copy of the report that has been included in the
City Council agenda packet for the meeting scheduled Tuesday,
November 4, 1986. In addition, your letter of request and two
maps were also included in the packet to assist council members
in picturing the site.
At the meeting,,, Paul Haines, City Engineer, will be pr(,sent to
answer questions Council may have regarding the City's interests
and the history of the property. Your ,attendance is w(,lcomed
and encouraged. Please feel free to call if you have :any further
questions.
Very truly ,yours,
o�,
Russ Chcvrette
Ellf',insuorinF Dcpartnuent
RC/ji
1'.1I 1():;tart
I Itt NOR III tilAII ,IRIIa , $,ONI OIl ltt 1111\ 169 1 1AM O1AN'Il`.U,OR1 WN (17014 / ("o I)I, if, Ildla
CITY OF I . AKE OSW EGO
c l l ANA G I k•s
('ity tA,Ynagor
: k t ti rata Vii i ria -Dar 1:0w for City Sian,lt.ure or) ODDS
SIIt�,iFC'.TIt('({u
Applic;lt_ i<in
Vi o w r
Atl:r,c:11c>(i i ; l(,I>'l(l.c;,litioltl tc rl tileDar ODPS (OveraltlLlloVc�llop font
s>unature on tile it aF} llave
n 3n(I ht�(iult ) for till' ec�m(�nt plant al nt. ()nt, ()p I. ion i.;,, to
in l)roc(-o6in(1 with lltk.ir (j�-velop
Ili
ki
he }'?t,cit)I,llk�nt { Ia
t ions :�F Nlik at ik)ttshi ('{ihkak�l t 11 t' t){�tt(IU111)Il1tS�
':'i'nk? clllll(Ir illt� (i(. V . l } a a rail
l..O ki0 1_ n L t)U+ill Lilt' ltl (1i. Vt l l)j)lllk.-Ilt A a' ( II.I V(1 cho:-, 'n
t_'tt�ll }�r(,(;(�(,({ w't.lt t1 t. i1 (I In`1{Il3appr lttionc,1lt i rs .1k
:,L ut t t`ci t 1 t 1
�t (Ilr(` :i 11 OUI'�i lot I"no
ty-t'll(! (0111 })rialll'1151.Vk` I �illl :llil(`Iltil;ll?n't'•i Ck }Owllekl 11x01)('rl'y 111(1
Ir(,lt, whik'll int L`I`}'llt�` 1a})})botIlIk;11t1.ioil })r(WO11'.. roqu1r'(':; t.11,ll
tar1e111 i.l-Ynt prt pop t:y . l llltr: t ll(` i 1 r,.gil(o;i. t or
?.ia })1OI)('r1:y (}wllt'Y Itill 1Ilt` cY}�1)ltc.aLlOI1; ( ; ItII1.ILIIC' `
!ilka l'ily l(., :;hits tllt� :,}>pI1t.11 iOn. LJithOul lnt` k`it�
ot
ic,lt.iiln(�t•�t)(�t tl v<111-i.i 1:�ut)n11itL(:
��{.:; L
�:•.1u;;t' i I wOu l 11
t't,(Int'I I :;l1011l({ rt`V Iow LIl1.'i 1`k`(}llt':;l 1:; ,l 01)t`1'
rl..V l ''w l llt t lit` I oquk`;;t 111 <111 'Ipp(`•1 l 1C rt'i ('C C •►l t l 1)111
i ,1 I �111ti 11:;(' �lttt`:'t 1 ,111 . 17.11 Ilt`r pm
t nt will) .! ? Or IIL1`)/ tlt)t 1)(` 111
?rt' 111 IFI(' 1)ll:;ll trill i)t l litOhk'rCy t)Wlll'r
()It w i t II .1 ti('Vt' I opt,I tJ l 1 t lit` I :IIt(t 11:;e
l Vit) i nt tJ(`n1 Ilrt` l
:;11(,11 I (i i
„r.'1;SIU11;1 •t{i1,1y111'1 IO Y011t L,r'(ll)l`rty,
;t�Il,lY.11 t t y t)l' Ill t'OI1 Illll('1. 1011 Wt t 11 :;(Ir I out (1111 ,t t
ul,ini(,n, i-Ot r O1)I it)n wit1.c .Irt`
1t)w:,
I'mmwill SW1'114111 ' I`O"1 (AIR 111M 11,') i IAKI OSWI(.O.(1RLt.kIN 91Otd ; (YIk11,ill tl.OI
Request from Vieira-Darrow for City Sitanature on ODDS Application
A,to1)('r ?y, 19R6
:. Council could chooSe not to S i qrl t ;1t' appl i r,l t- ion at
time (;nd have the pro]oct qo throu(lh the rt'(Iov',Iopi;lt'nt
proces!; t i C':;t, th011 havt' the ODDS (lo to tht` 1,1 .inn 1 n,1
Comm issioil .
COUncil could sign the .Ij'p1iCati0Il but requ(`:;t. chtau,l':; In
the OOPS ,ipplicat.ion which they tool would l't' apprt,t,l l,lto
as a landowner . These o h a n g e s wt)u I (I typical L 1 btu 1`1 ,)pt'r t -y
owlior tYpo decisions as c'ontrastod with lanai use (It `,•i:;itlns.
CO Ll l) t'11 t'('llld :;1<:jtl t11t4 •11'1)L1c,1tioIi with 'I (111r1.L1fiC,Il 1OIl
that t ht, :;igninq i:, only to allow a:llt)l;tl!;SIMI of tilt, O1)1':;
fur taut, I i ( t eviow inti t It(' cit y c" ;1: i 1 expi (`:;:>c :; lit) tilti n i c)tt
on t 110 collt elft o ; :', = .11'1,1 it ,it i(',l .ln.i no ul'i11 iurt un
(`ul.l1' l C allt't` with t lilt ('ilt`nr; l Vt' ;' i.in, !,(711 I tltl 11C (11 11,111'''' t)C'
dovt, I uplit(,IIt o r d i mince .
1. COunt.il could sicln tho tpplicat_iona without: qualltic(ltioll.
I (',ill re, -,p ct Vieira-Darrow ts reque_;t: to 1.)r(lC't'Pd wil.l)
r 1)1.o j 0 c t ,111(1 qet it into the 1)1.lnnint7 1)r0C :;:;, I IIso
t ht,` t im(' which may he invoIvt,ti in quint' t 11roug11 t ho
i'Jove I ''1'I'lont 1'i')cess t l riot t owevor , ot`t'atIso ('t t lit,
-.'..torrokit ion.;hip betwoon tht' R(Ad0v(1iOjvllt1llt- Aq('ncv .ind 1111'
tit'volttpmont: I:; we i I1'I t'1'(`I I V, 1 tt`t 1
t?ru 1t`t't :;hu;l I qo througIi t - he L"t'tit`\-t`Io1)lit oIIt 1'1'Ot'.`;;;; ,111(1 t I1('tl
0I)1'.; ,111'1 lt'.it 1(711 t);` p?,oparOil l),'l::t`kI 1110 Gill t t i.lt' t'( t hail
Add I t 1 ona I I y t tit, s(' .11 t:` tllit`:;t t t)ll:, wit 1 t''1 %�,• '',111 t I
i:;:;tJt'C it t hitt 1 Otto .1:'t':it t il(' rodt`vtlklplietlt prt)t•(':;:; t't`1,It Itit1 I )
`•`:;:;it)1t' 11111:L.It ivt' pt, I, 1C IoIls .11ld tilt, 1�11',It'I ol, ill(`,1:;U1 oil I II(•
`vt'1'ht'1 I).lI lot wil1ch (Till,l "Ltllllt I'•,111i I\' Ilit 1.LIt'llt•t' till'
�,'J0V0 1''1'1;1'`111.
11 copy tit t Il(' LL' Ot11'S .I pp L i (',i 1 oil i t; 1 I1C L(ldt`(i 1 Il t Ilt' •lyt'`I1t1,i
1 or Count, 1 I rt_'view iil ('O1111 l`t I%)11 wItII thi:; tt`<I,lt`:;t
ItQar;1)t`\�7 t.tLII I t;Uh111it t(,(I,
,'11 I)It,
I Ht, 4H
VIBRA-DARROW
\I 1I,III' II III IlII1I'�i I ��\'4i1N1) • ,.� I,',,1'Ir
October 27, 1986
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Lake Oswego
348 North State Street
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
RE: City Signature on application, Rivertront O.D.P-S.
Dear Mayor and Council members:
It is our understanding that the recently adopted changes
for
area require
in the Comprehensive Plan i ccludeeo
theentirnt te�area (including
that Any proposed development processed
Roehr. park and the �>l�j sewage treatment. plant)
and be
through the Overall DevelopmentPlan
land tha►t`jyo Schedule
ordinance.P.S. )
procedure. Further, we and
requires that all property owners within the area of the
proposed O.D.P.S. sign the application.
ere
use Of
Apparo►rily w have (Roehc Park andtuation l�the oldasewage
the C i t:y-owned property
treatment plant.), your staff cannot c.omplante a review Of
• •_:al w it-hout the City's signature on the
our O.h.P.S. pro a Council would
apptication. We can appre`t�tPProv1�l testa pr.<,I,onlI
not went to =Oar to be giving
which has not ya�t' been reviewed by your :;raft. In order
to .a I low the res`v l ov ot: our pr Oposal t�� continueCity
i tounc in i l alcknow lr,i O
►na►rn� r: , we .....>.'t• ively request that
t.l►�' process by :,iclni.ny
apl)tov.Il t the start cif thy. resviow F
t11+` 1r.11.F'.:;. application. alapr��v,al a•ciarld in1�111d1,
om
wl;,►t + v,°t: .lua.l i t i.•.at ion:s tt1�' ,.+;1i�1►tat.ult a'Y ulr` the �alaj)j,111l c•,1at.lion
that it is c load that the 1 �r:c�c;`:;:;r
i only tortheE�uupo se LA beginnin�l the review t
uot. c.,ust i tate an appr:aval or eun,j .�rse►nent. 0I the
l,l`a i t is olrulont; oL t110 Proposal itnol t..
1
CJI• Would be ploa:,ad to meet wi th the
,I a"y LWO to VC view this situation
i111c,cmat,ion you might ►:oquires,, Thank
all'i colla; i cl0r,at ion.
,,i n C CV01y,
� � s
01 1 uC tot of
1"1, / , ..,;b
PC Va�l,>l,mcant.
Mayer. and Ci ty c.c,unc.i..
,and Prov i do any additional
you t ur your time
O.D.P.S. SUBMISSION
and
RE -DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
THE RIVERFRONT SUBAREA
of the
Ea -4t End Community Business District..
Lake Osweyjo, Oregon
V 11? lRAi llA1212UW
October 20, 1.980i
,,WrRAL.L DE'VII k -)PM �T: PLAN AND SaT1 9 J
LAND USE APPLICATION
for
PLANNIDIG OCK4ISSION REVIEW
�� R *APPU ADI:
NAME AS11 GROVE, CEMENT WEST, INC. NA1-1E VIEIRA/DARROW _
ADDRESS 5550 SW MacAdam Ave. S 300 ADDRESS 1950 112th NE, Suite 100
CITY Portland STxrl.' OR LIP 97201 CITY Bellevue STp�EWA ZIP 98004
SIGNhTURL pit -Ac. 503/224-5747 PHONE 206/453-ij494
'-RIPTION OE' E'ktOPFMY (TOTAL PE21.Y URN
PRIVATELY OWNED:
21E-2CC-00700
21E-IOAA-03600
21E-2CC-00800
21E-IOAA-03700
21E-2CC-00900
21E-10AA-04400
21F-3nn-7100
21E-111IB-00400
PROfi'EYM (UNERSHIP L1:11'
CITY OWNED: LOT SI':E: 48.8 Ac.
21E-11BB-00200
21E-02-00200
If necessary, attach a list: of the nimiw> s and addresses of the owners ami
renters of prc4)erties lcx-m.etl within 3W feet of the subject property (See
Attached Form). Lists of property cwiers may be obtained from any title
insurance c(_xnpany or from the County Assessor. Street addresses (for
rental property) are printed in the Lake Oswego City Atlas. If the
property owner.ship list is incomplete, this may be cause for postponing the
hearing car administrative (lecision.
USE
1 ?iISTII�l; L.MF;NT PLANT PhtY,0.c;L) MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
L'XIS;INC3 ;I'EtIX'1`lI1tE.(S)_~`'�eral - .;ee existing conditions map
PR33W.r I.)t2RIPTION
This Proposal is fou an innovative mixed-use development which will _
include up to 536 dwelling units, a marina, riverf.ront restaurant,
re at 1-0 .ice comb an(] mayor pub is
Zt)NING INDUSTRIAL access to t:he W i l l amette Ri.vor .
F:LAiINSIVLPIAN DF
S.1CJNATItYV Mixed-use
NE 1u11I1U14 K)OD None
PIZVVIOI N At7rTON None
_ lkl Nt7r W1ZIi9: BF _k. TtilS LINE
k:t I:IVI:d) 13Y
111171: ROL"F k V1.D�
11Kl.-Al:' mi -17111% _
Ow mK111111N(.'1
F l ;vAl , Ai r 1 ( IN
1`k.`'01'xr c'cx)10LNN1X)R
•1t the q)t)liCant is nut tht'� Iuk10rty owner, he mu:it attach ki(vinivnit,iry evidence ut 111!1
.uuhor sty to �ar.t .u; agent in making applicatitAn.
-I-
I consent to an on-site inspection by an employee
of the City of Lake Oswego•
Description of Property:
PRIVATELY OWNED:
21E-2CC-00700
21E-2CC-00800
21E-2CC-00900
21E-3DD-7100
21E-IOAA-03600
21E-10AA-03700
21.E-10AA-04400
21E-11BB-00400
Da t e
CITY OWNED:
21E-11BB-00200
21E-02-00200
Signature
11►te Signature
0`i: 31' ( 6/133 )
-4-
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Riverfront Subarea consists of the Ash Grove Cement-
Aland and the undeveloped Roehr Park property. Thi3 area
has the unique distinction of being located on the
Willamette River and directly adjacent to the Central.
Business District of bake Oswego. These properties have a
lend area of 48.8.
The Cement Plant has been i.n operation since just after
the turn-ot.-the-century, and was the ,majorDemplue toye r rotting
City of Lake Oswego the
for many Y'
economics and market factors the operations of Ash Grove
are currently transferred to other locations and the
existing facility is being phased oirt.
The termination of these activities presents an
opportunity for an innovative r#13 -development of the
Riverfront area into a prestigioue3 mixed-use waterfront
community which will b*- primarily residential, but may
l
also include a marina, restaurants
and
he
retail/otti.ce activities, as well as public
riverfront.
0!03mso 3NVIiv i►awaw��rw
EXISTING LAND USE
oment
For the past 75 years, the site has d jacentbeen ea o sthel north
plant. The City -owned properties adjacent
(the old treatment plant and undeveloped Roehr Park) are
vacant and used for storing sucPlus city materials.
The Willamette River is the easterly
border, with
waterfront single- alal amil�y`' homes tile east
abank.
tht-, River, and
South side has s g
multi -family Oil top of the
hill Ih4 western boundary is
State Street, with a variety of retail/commercial usesa
The north line abutts industrial uses, including
CO ncrete p�'a-mix plant, mixed industrial uses, and a Crown
on the n�>rtheast corner.
Zellerback chip stora��e area
MOMMVQ-VmIS A
IV INOMA113AIN
9».L .....swve— 003mso 3'�Vl
1 114 1 f, o""ll
INTRODUCTION
community For several years, leaders, business people, City
staff, and local citizens have expressean interest in
d
the
implementing programs which could assist in rhe
revitalization of the Lake Oswego East
End
property community.Ir
been
redevelopment of the old cement plant
identified as a key element in East End revitalization
because its size (48.8 ages, including city-owned property),
immediately adjacent to the Downtown Business
location
District, and Willamette Riverfront. ammanity•
An innovative, high-quality mixed-use development will make a
substantial contribution to the East End Redevelopment for
the quality and character Of the
several reasons. [first,
in itself . a Sec nd,signifl`ant new the addition of°V1e
development will an
and attraction in the arca.
resultin;� from the residential
affluent new population
hiwalkiil,l distance to existing
development will be wit
hops and services, and will help
downtown Lake Osweyu s
S ac'rinitial
stimulate C.B.D. businesportion ofRoehr Park and new
development of the northerly p
esplanade along the Willamette River will be both a
significant new attraction to the area jc1i� `' [ourthr,tthe
increase in public accessability to the River.
nd
development of retail/office icefront complex will add restaurant,mar
new community
river-oriented re reviously exist in Lake
activity center which did not p ciblic facilities which
Oswego. Combined with the adds hase� the Riverfront Village
will be developed with this p a major
community will have sufficient "critical mass" ltoi e outside
attraction for both local residents and people
Lake Oswey10 -
This multi-milli°`Hent finandollar l4
ct . ln�whichlwillrovide nut onl.yuen
helpthis
for the t ax incrc
t tacome a reality, bur. Twill also help fund Other
project
downtown improvement projects. ogether, these p1:0-Octs will
servo to improve the quality Ot life in the area.
t Of
City le.A.i�>:rs hive also recognized stuabstatle ntiald project �awith
the cement plant property
ar►t risks including:
l . Extens.ive demolition 'Ostrs
,pioneerin,.3" developilrent of luxury residential units
in an industrial area with continuing industrial uses
immediately to the north; and
z. the outcome of thea regulatory
The uncertainties ot
proce .,3; Pact icurl
laywithrd to the
marina and otherriver-orientedputeut�al
Page 2
In consideration of the economic and sociological importance
all East
16
of the cement plant re and
inpconsideration mentto the oof rthe costs arnd
revitalization effort,lementing the actual redevelopment
complexities of imp
to
project, City leaders identified some specific
e�t,3nde also
both attract a developer to undertake this p ro project of this
to help mitigate the inherent risks in a p
magnitude.
Four primary incentives were identified:
1,
��� exchange of the City's
The transfer, contribution,
interest in the two city - to the
owned properties
developer-
stoma development charges .end fees
2. The waiver of sy gl of the Comprehensivf-� Plan,
(provided for on Page
policy III, 1 and 2)•
3, The cooperation of City staff in expediting the
approval process.
ng to
et
4. The provision of "Tax Incrpublic tfacil tyl devel pment,
the costs of demolitiona„development•
and public access and Pr
Initial meetings
W 1 City leaders and the developer
tese could tle
indicated that all of i tlions and ►t i r al ,Ipprova l,�ofa thel City
�iubject to certain coed
council' been
several months t:ttie developer has
Over the past ordinances, studying the specitic
researching existing Mid refining
characteristics of the site, and developing
proposed site plans to ��chieve in .)pti►nua► balance) between:
)ortunity trot: a successful, innovative,
* Creating an OP ,Ise primarily
mixed-use development. which will
residential, but will. alio provide opportunities for a
trlaClna, riverfront restaur;:nt, Cee city-,,)wn complex,
is well as an esplanade along the city -Owned por:t.ion
of the River.
k MiximizitZ�t the positive economic impact on the Last
I: I�nsiness District.
a
i'rotectin.i .end enhancir``cusigss nif cantto the itl latne`tteaiveraat
prov.idina tot public
approl)t:late points
M
Page 3
Planning Commission and City Council Guidelines
The Lake Oswego Planning Commission spent several meetings
reviewing and refining the changes in the Comprehensive Plan
which would facilitate redevelopment of this area. While a
variety of thoughts and ideas were expressed, there seemed to
be concensus on the following topics:
-
I. The plans should be general enough to allow the
developer sufficient flexibility to interpret and
respond to market conditions in deciding what to
build.
2. The project would be primarily residential, with an
opportunity to develop 500 or more units. Further,
that this new population would in itself make a
significant contribution to the East End business
community.
:3. The Planning Commission was concerned that. public
access to the Willamette be enhanced, but did not
require that a public pathway along the river through
private property be provided.
4. The Planning Commission did not suggest that the
city -owned properties be restricted to park or open
space use; but rather suggested that the opportunity
be created for some significant, livel.y public
attraction. The Riverplace project in Portland was
cited as an example of a public attraction with its
marina, riverfront esplanade:, restaurants ,and retail
shops. (Lt was acknowledged that while Rivorplace was
appropriate for its location in downtown Portland,
they did not expect it to be duplicated.) The
Planning Commission's conclusion concerning the
city -owned properties was that private development.
could occur, with a condition that .at least
equivalent public access to the river %nd public.
facilities be provided.
Whon the City Council ruvi0wOd the Plaanninq k 'ommission':►
ut-commendations, they geanevally aft i.rmed the report.,
3upporte:d the idea of flexibility to allow the developer 1.0
respond to market conditions, and concluded that they idea of
"max i mi z inq the quality and location of public ac:ceos" was
murr important than quantity. Tho city Council did not
:;pu,c i L i cally ruquire that a public path along the river be
doveloped through the priv,st.e property.
Mp
CITY OWNED PROPERTY
Bdckyc: vurid
The City of Lake Oswego currently owns two parcels
immediately north of the cement plant property. These
properties include the abandoned sewage treatment plant (Tax
Lot 2113-111313-00200) consisting of 1.56 acres and a 4.6 acre
pares adjacent to the north (Tax Lot 21E02-00200) which is
generally referred to as Roehr Park.
This property is not yet a park, is currently undeveloped
and is presently used for temporary storage of surplus city
materials. An evaluation of the potential of developing a
park was completed as part of the City's Parks and
Recreation Plan. That evaluation concluded that the
property was not desirable for park development, and that
the City should either develop a track for small dirt bikes,
or consider declaring the property surplus and using the
proceeds of the sale for the acquisition and development of
other parks within the City.
According to staff, this property is not identified as a
potential park in any of the City's plans or policies. The
exisiting zoning is industrial. The area is identified as a
Distinctive Natural Area, Protection Open Space, and Public
Open Space. We understand that the distinctive natural area
and protection open space classifications were because there
is apparently a small stand of cottonwood trees along the
riverbank. Further, we understand that City staff are
currently in the process of conducting an inventory of the
site to determine whether the distinctive natural area and
protection open space classifications are appropriate, and
if so, tuu what portioll of the site.
The c la" .", i. t i.%..at i on 1113 planned publ is open space was
apparently designated prior to the Parks and Recreation
evaluation of park potential, and subsequent conclusion that
the property should be considered for sale. Tho "public"
de8i(,jriati.on was .apparently used because the pi.—i)outy is
currently owned by the oity and because of the cottonwood
trees and views of the Willamette River. A mint, precise
dotinit.ion of the specific portion of the proprrty which
actually leas unique natural areas will allow for more
ottecti.vej implementat:.i.�11 of this section of the I0,111. The
other ippl icablu policy in the Public Open -paco ch,ipter of
the plan calls tor: protection of unique views tram Natural
areas. The regent amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
would cncourage mixed used development oii the portions of
I.hc sil.c? w11ir.11 .ar:e not unique natural areas, combined with
enh,.►n�:ed views cit and public: access to the Willamette River..
Tiii.o area i.,3 _3ulrject t.) the guidelines of the Willamette
Greenway policies, 111.3 much of the northerly portion of the
prol>,arty is within the 100 -year floor zone.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF CITY -OWNED PROPERTY
the unique natural features of the
Careful evaluation of
City -owned property reveals that the only significant
City_ cuar.ter
clusters of trees are concentrated
ntof the tsiteywtlich is
of the site. This is also the portion
and ther�e>rore hats more
within the 100 -year flood p
developmental conrelatively
flat, until the To the ttsharp drop-off
the property is relatively
Willamette River. Because of this
at the edge of the
- topography, the best views Jf the river era obtained while
very close to the shoreline, ani the views diminish very
quickly a3 one moves want.
The criteria for development of public ac r usertyto twith1the
should protect those areas to the public prop
greatest. value. Clearly, those areas lone the the riverbank.
northerly�portion of the site and a narrow strip g surveytures of this
The City's current natural t�data necessary to more
property should provide the specific
accurately tdelineate llamette Riiverern quarter and the as Distinctive Naturals Area
edge along a►1 Space.
and/or Protection of Op
Phase l The proposal tar enhancing the public access to
these areas occur in phases. The development which
first phase includes four main elements.
would occur in the
First would be general cleanu t lusm3teri.alsthe r'jeposEit(.1d there
removal of the scrap and sure
JVeC the past decades . Second wO�.l ld be ` 3l1 steer 3 1 tson at the
public parkis�a 14t for approximately
thi
northwest portion Of ttse property. 'rd, ind perli 11�� most
important, would be the construction of �s major I�,►l.ot Or
esplanade a1.Jn
the entire riverfront length vt the
Property. [� inally the,arktiopenblspaic nert3tandarki }ions of Ise si it i'l would
landscaped tJ E
including Pr
nt
include several components, where nf�1,(-,,�t1'%arYato
l,lterrl of trees, thinning and pruning
�11c:t. n up views Ot the river; and adding
new spe(: , ,�3 where
Fall
,%ppcopriate tJboth' t odn�and coverore c3dlot, as well
for.wildlife
,1:, to erlhanca
I'li i s first phase Park deve1Opinent would occur
with the tirst phase J£ re:sident i. al
I t..,nc:.uusIy
,ti.,�,,1„t,mktnt, and would in ure that all
tile
continuertoobe
'III-ve stly Owned by the. City
public and wul.11d for the first time be made
The completion Of this public acc�l:s:i Project
would ensUrO c.,nlpIiance with the requirement
that
property
pri.vat.e development Of the currently City-
provirlt, at least ,equivalent publ.i.c river access”.
All of the park and esplanade development activities would
be in compliance with the Willamette Greenway Policies.
Title to public park on the north end of the parcel would
remain vested in the City, while title to the balance of
the property currently owned by the City would be
transferred to the developer upon satisfactory completion
of the Phase 1. public improvements. The next phase of park
development would provide even greater public access to the
river and a much wider range of activities.
Phase 2 & 3 Phase 2 of the O.D.P.S. would be residential,
while Phase 3 would involve commercial and further enhanced
public access projects. The commercial development will
have five primary components; including a marina,
waterfront restaurant, a river -oriented retail/of.fi.ce
complex, additional public access and park development, and
a new boulevard to provide better auto and pedestrian
access to this area.
MARINA The marina is planned for 150 slips, which
would be twice the size of the marina at Riverplace in
Portland. Approximately one-half of these boatslips would
tentatively be available to the public, and the balance
would be available to Riverfront residents.
No new parking or traffic: impacts will be created by those
boat owners who are alao residents of the Rivor.front
complex. For non-residents, parking will be provided away
from the River, north of the railroad tracks which serve
the C-2 chip plant. One or two of the docks would be
de:giynated as guest docks where beaters could temporarily
tie-up while visiting friends, dining in one t) 1, the
ad 'i,ic.ent restaurants, or shopping in Lake Onwogo. The main
connecting piers, the breakwater, and the yuoat do(-k:s would
all be open to the public. In addition, ipace would be
available to the City Parks and Recreation Department for a
floating storage structure which could accommodate racing
shells, canoes, kayaks and/or sailboards. These could be
available for High School teams during certain hours and
available to the general public at other times. total
lineal fota<le of new dock apace available to tho public
would exceed the exist inq footage potentially ava i. l ahlo otr
the city -owned property. rhe addition of the mar. in,r would
IkoV only ciatiot:y a pent-up demand for more quality moorage
3p-Ik,e on the river, but also add a siynif i.c arlt new
rek,rcat ion,.t 1. opportunity to the Lake ()swego population
which would not otherwise exist. The development; of the
marina and rol,tted public access tacilities is contingent
on both sat:ist.actory response from all the governmental
por.mit i:isuing ayencios, and also a favorable financial
analysis.
Some portion of the tax increment financing ma be
requested for the public portions of the marina as y
the "public infrastructure" allocation. Part of
RESTAURANT The waterfront restaurant is tentatively
proposed to be located where the existing barge unloading
platform sits, between the two large round structures in
the river. This facility will be a creative and adaptive
re-use of an industrial water dependent structure, and
would total about 5,000 sq. ft. Valet
available, and cars would be Parking would be
spur serving C-Z. Parked north of the railroad
While some variance at the Development Review stage may be
required to lace the structure closer than 150 fee y
river, si nifiant p
g recedent for this has alreadyto the
established in the Riverp.lace, John's Landing and Salty's
been
areas, where there are several examples of restaurants
located closer than 150 feet to the river. The most recent
Of these is the floating restaurant at Riverplace, which
has reportedly been very successful. The intention is to
create one of the finest restaurants in the entire Portland
area. It should be noted that the proposed
this restaurant is not on city-owned property. location of
RETAIL/OFFICE COMPLEX The retail/office
planned to be located complex is
waterfront restaurant,
just west of the nrarirl,-, and
along the ri\yer. adjacent to tile i,• e pul)l.0:11,lanade
A total of 301001,)
developed, again with parking on the north sQi�lrt,',,tt t I� iI`i be
spur. The retail component would he tail
shops, clothing ,
Specialty high-t,nct
gourmet deli or cafe* The tenant mixt wouldabe stCli,'I`i�C?i/
to avoid a tourist Orientation, but rather emphasis,' ',;,td
quality goods and services. The office
component poent w, �il,l hedentsts,
high end profeprofessionaloffices, marketed to docs -1
ior
other professionals WI1J desire a ptu:,t ,ye
location overlookin.i the marina and river. The a rL%: b0tw�,en
retail and office would be influenced by market 1q.111,111d
prig to the start of this phase. For
_ we assumc�,j the most intensive uses t`, Planning purp0,:;4,:3,
Possible harkiil(I re111,111 tens've Plan l:or the m,.'x r �►nrm
waterfront: r�'staur,lnt, we will ask t.`rina var, iacncee of
from Che
Willamette ,,Veenway setback requirement t.o al '-(,)W etfrom rIls
to be located closer
because of the topo'.1ralptly, 1 tthef feet
variance he river. Aga i rr,
ti th,it public views of the Willamette River from rt�llirs s'an►ljlex
can be maximized. The variance would be reyu�:.ited during
the Development Review aPPlicat.ion,
accomplished without intruding and could he
area. 9 on any Sensitive naturn.l
AD1, )ITIONAL PUBLIC ACCESS AND
to the marina-oriented RE�1:EATION In 'Addition
phase wood ,also irtc.l�delladdiaccess
rioted
v`,ab()ve, this
f,ici.lities tor the public. lopillent. of
plans call for the development of a large
Specifically,
bandstand style gazebo which would be the focal point of an
outdoor amphitheatre. This facility would overlook the
river and could be the site of public gatherings for
concerts in the park or other public activities. This
facility would be located in the public park portion of the
property, on the north end. In addition, it permits could
be obtaineted
d for the marina and otheractivitiesc rivtieser no the
above, a pathway extending south alongthrough the
end of what is currently city -owned property osed
privately -owned property to a point south of the pro p
restaurant site would add approximately the same linear
footage or waterfront access to the public as currenthe
tly
y exists an the city -owned ly would eeasement new ffectivelydouble the
in with a
public over private property
footage of access to the river, and would tof the public
`- ramp to floating pier, which would be p
ac
access portion of the marina. Funds for: the additional
public activity centers would come from the tax increment
financincl allocated for that purpose.
NEW BOULEVARD Finally, to provide public access to
these new acitivities, a new boulevard would be built
between upper Foothills and these new centers on the river.
with a center
This new street would be heavily athsland on Phe/ side. Again,
median and bike and pedestrian p
- funds for the development of this new public: access
corridor would come from tax increment tinanciny
allocations.
This c.ombinatiorti of activities, residentiial,marine,
restaurant, shoshop,.;and oftices, connected by :r)►'here are
has been compared to Riverplactr in important Portland. d i t. t erences.
3on1e similarities and some Lmp r� riate for its
Riverplace is very urban, which is app"_P
location in downtown Portland. Riverfront will
lhae much feel
more of a small. town village feel. It will app
ear _ much ;)otter due to the extensive landscle: rs massive
al)ing,
se f d
buildings, and �`Urrldter be twin the size eofoRiveri,)l ace, and
at i6verfront 1
The quality of the dc.l
)veopment
the esl)lanade much Longer.
at: Riverfront will reflect the quality acrd chcsr.,yc:t.er that
has d,8t..inquisht)d Lake Oswego for decades •
PRl)1'Oil�p UEVE[,l)l'MEN'1• OF PRIVATE PROPERTY
ho
4 Of
'rhe I',�rtland area 11.13 only r:ecerltlY ed 1,tim,�ni y value for
tt1. w i l l amette River ,]:; A rveryhe ,lohn' s L attractive in i area in
dtavelO. )Illellt.
I .•, i I ,,n l hdenson8trat (Id that the redevo I Opment of
vi„u:1ly industrial properties into attractive
-or,011teC,sidetItlal and/or mixed Use conun,snit.ies has
d
t,,1,1 very enthu:')iastic market accept.�n�'�'• M�)r, recently,
rh, Itiver.place development i3 downtown Portlanci h.rs been an
,t 11-111dirrcl example of sUccesstul cooperation oI public anti
I•vivate development and use of tax increment t:in.'ncing.
lends itself toward an
The old cement plant property ment, and in
exclusive, private high ehasrential thed potential al to be even more
many ways this property alon the Willamette.
attractive than any other community 9
The two primary reasons for this are the character of the
site itself, and its location adjacent to the East End
Business community in Lake Oswego.
VILLAGES CONCEPT Concerning the property, although its
ormer use was heavy industrial, it is very well suited for
residential development be of its waterfortionscoflthe
the attractive stands of eshas s everal distinctly
site, and because the property ue areas make the property
ditterent areas. These only the residential development
ideally suited for clustering
in several "villages", each of which will have its own
. Further, the large size of the property
special character
- allows the residengia of `hes to b concentrated
site,whilepreseryn
ng large
developable portio
open areas with natural vegetation.
The different residential villages will each have
unique
features as well as unifying elements to p For
cohesiveness throughout the
vecommunity.For
variety and in one village
brit compatible architectural and exterior ndscapi g treatment rom
example, the buildings one
each of the others. Similarly,while another
village may feature concentrations of roses,
rhododendrons.
m,ly have the emphasis o►1 a ar Other details will
of
Lighting fixtures, signs, and
Nerve as unifying elements throughout the commrinitY•
provide all opportunity to
,rjlee distitict:ive areas of the site p Mort of the
. r:eate four separate residential village` leve► a:s State
upper area is at approxi.matelY the
Street. This areas has several very nice tree Clusters-
Street.
developer's objective is to retain Is many tcoes as
poi sible, while mall. bu►ildinys l8 rto s10 ,n its)�,rr wh .h can
u:3ing relatively tree preservation cart be
be oriented in of ways, a variety 1nd1V l�.i►lai. trees,
maximized. In adddition to saving
:3evera ► C lusters of 3tree the It the enhancebe s ►
the r��u
indivi,ival unit c
,�drits Lo L' 1@
;iense of connection wi.th the environment,c al care will be
feeli►,t) of privacy between buildings• t
taken (luring construction to minimize damage to root
i to minimize tree loss. Specitic are,rs may be
.1ysteni:3, 1n, �� ,u►ent
r.enced oft t.�� prevent intrusion of construction ,� � E
'T'hi.a iat,t���r: area has
other attractions ,is well.
i�r�ati�;rtr"Lr,�l❑,lt'he
hi.. ul) >t this area has enough grade set•
►r'� •► ews to the east' wlti.cl► ni<ry include
lower to Provide vi
ews
t.
'100, u►� w:'.. of th(.'i`I_veotentrl�c
ial turthis,1r a, denMlt
ritywill
To oj)t.►.n►i..o the v wi Of this slope.
be ,:on�;rantr.ated at the top
Thio ui%per area is at the same elevation as y state shopping
and is immediately adjacent to a wide variety
and services. Thl,15, the residential units in this area may
be particularly
attractive to seniors who enjoy being
located so close t-' these facilities•
of the
The area along the Willamette River, at the
residential
bank, provides another opportunity for a unique
cluster or village. Because of the view opp
ortunities,
dge of
density will be concentrate d toward the easteandepruningl�of
bluff overlooking the River. Some thinning en up
the vegetation along the bank will be required to op
views of the river below. d
will be located
between the
upper area an
of most of the
A third village
the Riverfront area.
was the site
Therefore,
existing trees
major cement plant
1di gsa
buildings-
of this area.
Extensive new
are limited to the
be
perimeter
added to create a park -like
environment
will be
in will
landscaping
this internal
villi
No river
views
core cluster.
for
1 ble from this
relatively
flat, central
aval a
e will be located just north of the
The fourth village storage area. This
existing rail spur serving the C -Z chip mint or could
would be the last phase of residential develop
have commercial potential. If, in the future, a trolly or
light rail line�cosout erly enOdsofgth`r�line, andDowntown
couldlhadve
this could be t,1e lout Y
significant commercial potential.. Like the third Further,
this area will require extensive landscaping.
deeloPed to
heavily landscaped berms rt andlethe v industriai ll..3esinsula`to this
phase from the Lail spu
north.
Mach villa��r' and
will have its own rlr�atrecreati,,nnal f,lbuilding
served by a very A network o
will also 1 and
located to t l �`�vwrlil`�`�etie the rive
ss. to(I,'tilerI
pedestrian paths The site i)1,111 will be
provide ac: '= s to the river. CI—11i. ,,l:,timum
c.lc�:si�lned t.� Tient the individual units tohe� •att,, I tile:
i
un
i�portt.� for
�,vec-
views of the smaparcc}ttt
topoy,f the sll site, only a tnul,;lt.rllc.tod
total units will have riverfrontage with
views. a special effort will be male t�, r,nh,in, a the
viewsfeelin.
of �nnecti.oll with the river fur tho:io ,tnitrl whi, h
do not l,avQ direct river views.
a .•,,m ,,n�,tl , t n. I t1r11 tl�l
1'i11:3 w:L11 .,011sist- of several separate E'
1.. Watorfeature:s to provide moving wrjt�,, :,I tm;ti ,n•l
sill i 1 1
ponds,
which flow down to tile• t,',tttt,�l
ve:si.ients of their connection w'" t v,
internal pedestrian spina will It
river.
opportunities along
om
3, passive and active
recreational esmall rowing craft
the river- From paths in the marina, to woods with quiet
storage,
contemplative areas. rovide
ain r
4. The mecreation building will also P
active errea w ere
passive and tt,e river can be
viewed, even in wint
It is important to note that while it would theoreticallyrnearetica lthe
ly
be possible to develop mid or high-rise buildings Lon 13 not
rovide each unit with views, this option i.,1 not
river and p important reasons. First,
practical for two very P develop
mid
or hiylr-r isci
financially feasible to high in relatiO113hip
The costs are excessively gthe high-ritre or
structures. Potential. Secondly,
to the revenue Ps generally rejected by the marketplace.
mid -rise concept refer�ance i3
Most people do not want to siva in buildings with elevators
and long corridors. The overwhelming market living without
for housing which approximates single ey penses and time
the ownership obligations of by will
maintenance• The developers proposal ortunities
consuming reservation of view oPP feasible
ies
provide for the maximum p
within a land -use concept that is both financially
Y and very successful in the marketplace.
Will— amette Greenway concerns
The Policies of
the Willamette Greenway will be r.r�spected
Th P ment . Passive' retreat i o,►►�r l uses
in the ltiverf cont develop the r Iver which The
1, r eade 11
will include nd
a pathway line, Zhu- f
just north of the south UlYpropertyo,providing viewr+ of and
meander in and out of the woods, P
access to the river, �a►rcjSitting illares includes for s bot.hl pocket
picnicki.nq, These small ( outer►ippin9 ,
ictiic:j along, the shoreline, areas on ro k
anti areal within the woods with views out to the river.
<�nhanced .
The existing vegetation will be maintained edi onsi t_cint with
New planti►ag materials will
ring an(ddeFall color, rancj to
native .r:iteria,
to ada Sp Trimming, prunilly or
corridors
provide food and covet fir wildli e• c uiil,�l Ines of
;}t2lect i va removes be ;``ompl i owithin they is .c,nf l icts
of th(l river willpotential
the GrOe►rway policies. Whert� t h� Ce '„n potential
cor.�r irtors vs.
between Creenway poli�:ias, li_ o{
rhe cirve.loper will. :►tr,ive to
m,�intcri.►r existing vc,,1.�t_:►t:ion
loss ,I Oxisting
achieve a veaso�cid ntlt`,l,i►pati.bleby rrplanting
. materi,►I:1 within
vegetations by
the Greenway ire'
As noted above, the topography of the site and the fact
that a small percentage of the total acreage is located
along the waterfront severly limit the number of units
which will have an opportunity for uninterupted river
views. Further, market and cost factors prohibit densities
in excess of two or a maximum of three stories. In order
to appeal to an upper end market, and create a prestige,
exclusive residential community,' it is necessary to
maintain exclusive use of the private riverfrontage for
residents of the Riverfront community. The exception to
this will be an easement for an extension of the esplanade
open to the public which will be extended into the
northerly portion of the private property as a part of
Phase 3 development. When fully developed, the public
would have access to over 50% of the total shoreline area,
and the private area would be less than half.
Thus, the balance is clearly weighted in favor of the
public.
city staff have indicated that they will recommend a public
pathway along the entire length of the riverfront. We
submit that this is not consistent with the Willamette
Greenway Policy which calls for protection of private
property as follows:
J. TRESPASS BY PUBLIC
Nothing in this Goal is intended to authorize public
use of private property. Public use of private
property is a trespass unless appropriate easements
and access have been acquired in allowance with law
to authorize such use.
Further, we understand that the Trails Committet' Of the
Parks and Recreation Committee recommended that iii general
public paths not go through private property, and t.tiat with
regard to this specific area, the plan show % pathway
within public rights-of-way rattler than along 010 river.
Finally, while Oregon law provides for trail system
acquisition and development, it is clear that ,► city or
county cannot use its condemnation powers tc) ac:quire
private property for trails. if the city cannot lc)yally
take private property without the .owner's consent Lor trail
systems, can the city require that easements be provided as
a condition of the appr.,val process's We believe that the
total package of quallt i.ty, qua.l i ty and v�ir i ��ty of
'ct.ivities available to the public at the River's cold e will.
be much more than "equivalent" to that which currently
exints, and that the public: will be exceptionally well
3erved by this development.
ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS
ONSITE PUMP STATION
ft station
icate
A review of the ertmonthsflow hduringarts operiods r the lof intense rainfall,
that in the win capacity acit during the peak
the pump station is at or above Capt appears that this only
sewer inflow periods of the day• lasts for a few hour:.
occurs once or twice a year and only protected from
In order for tho proposed development to be
potential backups or surcharges, two alternatives are
a storage
feasible. The first wot.tank of
uld be w construct
flows
ntfrom the site for a
`r sufficient size to store the sewag
six hour period. When the downstream head achieved a certain
level, an automatic valveite. Sinceethef any flows aores[ cyclic -al,
-- leaving or entering
capacity would return to the downstream system allowing the
storage tank t<, be drained prior to the next cycle. Another
alternative would
Citybtsystemawhich ll a lwould ift tboost the ation thead
discharge to t
enough to prevent backflows onto the site. Standard locations ow
prevention valves will be installed at all requireeakoflow
ons
-- to protect individual units and buildings during p
periods.
ONSITE/t)E'FSITE DRAINAGE
11t. Of
The stc,►,n dra i iAaq ]. system
be desigttadtto< convey ted L dLtiti nagee f r()nie c,n and
this �)t' ,i E't'ty will
off the' .,�tc� Lhtrunkll ►ttetwhilchvis lxto"
i►Iyl►<:onstruct e1tl`aslan
storm. the 111,1 to
part of the tit,lte St. project will betl1xt.lndi t Yd tllitht' Liver
assumink, Over:sizing participation by
l
Of
of a manor rainstorm ellt�e
nwdesignedet<`�l
ocot1vey10 cthe � ,vYrflow
this Lille, tt. s
itediviws to
by suI ta. r. �lr,ii.nage down streets and between POint ,' for
avoid any pote�rlt.i.al. flooding problems. Pick-up,bE rovlded.
the other mit1or offsite drainaq<' basins will. be p
-- TRAIF1C/'Vl--\NtiPOR'TATION
A<cc��;:; t �,r the
will Lie provided tlirou�lh three ,,`�II;W�1t1 i��tl
points t o 1'ootlli 1 l s Blvd. The first and second p
acces:, ho 10
i h0- situ ": ot <S�Ibeing►�collstructedew t isl1awpartith toti t hc'1 i'ctft'et-i;l
;,t 1,►,,�,.�t., The t'ZLrtl atld fourtl�t phase.5 will
acct—;.; the'
t ltr��u:7t► i hc� c OnstI:uct ion of a new public boulevard and a
,n►t'�'t i.Ot� t�'`,Foot.hi l lsdiwilletieodeseiynedast < tonecol l."tr ot lo r ;t reet
The ►t�,w E,uhl. L two six foot bike lanes, one
:;t.,Inktareiwith _; two way traffic, enter
f i vc� loot _; i.de�w�+l k, and .I center 1.7ndsc-aped median. Adequate
r i�attt-Ot-way will be do-di<ated to the Litt' of LakOx►lewsgontof
contain the proposOd improvements. the
exi.stumg station will
Foothills which currently serves the City s pump
be improved and aligned with the Phase 2 connection to the
new public boulevard. All three intersections will be stop
sign controlled. It appears that there is adequate vision
clearance at all three intersections based on the REV 1965
Rural AASHO Standards.
, " , V OWYN, , ,
ouamso 3Nv1so
IV 1NOM3W3AlW L
ill ij.1 ILI
O
07
*************** TOTAL PROJECT ****************
1. RESIDENTIAL : 536 UNITS (POTENTIAL), 992
PARKING STALLS PROVIDED (1 1/2 STALLS/1
BEDROOM UNIT, 2 STALLS/2 BEDROOM UNIT).
- 2. COMMERCIAL, : RETAIL/PROFESSIONAL OFFICE OF
APPROXIMATELY 30,000 SQ. FT., A RESTAURANT OF
APPROXIMATELY 5,000 SQ. FT. AND THE POTENTIAL
FOR A 150 SLIP MARINA. 255 PARKING STALLS
PROVIDED FOR COMMERCIAL BASED ON 1/200 FOR
RETAIL/OFFICE, 1/75 FOR RESTAURANT, AND 1/2
SLIPS FOR NON-RESIDENT USE OF MARINA.
3. OPEN SPACE : WILLIAMETTE GRLENWAY, AREA OF
NEW PARK IMPROVEMENTS, SELECTIVE RETENTION OF
GROUPS OF EXISTING 'TREES, STEEPLY SLOPED AREAS
WITH NATURAL VEGETATION, AND NEWLY LANDSCAPED
AREAS.
4. OPEN SPACE AREA SUMMARY :
TO'l.'AL SITE AREA (LESS DEDICATION FOR
_.
STATE STREET IMPROVEMENT) = 48.8 ACRES
OPEN SPACE RELUTRED = 9.4 ACRES (41.5
ACRL:S AT 20% AND 7.3 ACRES AT 15%)
OPEN SPACE;
l`ROV l DED :
W I ISL I
AME T'TE, GREENWAY
4.1
ACRES
PARD
IMPROVEMENTS
3.6
ACRES
.4
ACRL.
SLOPi;I) AIRF.AS
.9
ACRE
E.WIA
I,ANPSC'APED AREAS
2.9
ACRES
'1'0 T;\L
'PROVIDED
1 1 .9
ACRt'S
PHASING
The Riverfront area will consist of several village
clusters. The first phase will include all of the upper
village and about half of the centraland
willeberthe
villages. Also included in the first C` the full
development of the Rivertront esplanade along
length n the currently city -owned property, and the
landscaping of the park area.
The second phase would be a small. residential project,
completing the central and Riverfront villages-
The Third phase will include the waterfront restaurant,
the marina, the retail/office complex; the develont pbe t Of
the southerly portion of a r�vTilerthird phase would also
the Park and thea restaurants. 1 landscaped
include the c,)mpetition .)f the new, heavily P -
"boulevard", between Foothills and Roehlr Park. This slew
street_ will provide public access to all of the new public
areas and points of interest along the river. 1114 unitsle .
would be the North Village, consisting
Depending Oil market c`llphase it ions, may so be Lpossiblemlilasclall
use for this fourth p
alternative to additional residential units.
Park t RatalI/
;t�rti Rosldent (al
Phase 0111ca Marina
wi M ate Units Restaurant FsplanMde
_ ___ 292 No --
Io' No No
130 No No No No
- II
's 000 sq.tt. Yes }0,000 g.t. 150 Slips
III 9:'SLl^ti.?21� 0 r
Possibl,i N.A. Possihln N.A.
I V N fit)
114
_ --
55t,
5,000 30,000 150 Slip.
m
0f)3MS0 3WI
IV INOWAM3AM
�( § � | �h \� � : �|�
\���§�•][�,|���|4
fill
'all T
r;
PHASE i
1. RESIDENTIAL : 292 UNITS, 540 PARKING STALLS
PROVIDED (1 1/2 STALLS/1 BEDROOM UNIT, 2
STALLS/2 BEDROOM UNIT).
2. RECREATIONAL : SWIMMING POOL, VIEWING AREA,
HEALTH CLUB, ACTIVE AND PASSIVE: AREAS, AND
RECREATION BUILDING.
3. UTILITIES : WATER MAIN TO BE LOOPED BETWEEN
STATE STREET AND FOOTHILLS BLVD., STORM DRAIN
OVERFLOW FROM LAKE TO RIVER TO BE OVERSIZED
WITH PARTICIPATION FROM CITY, AND SANITARY
SEWER WILL OUTFALL TO WILLIAMETTE INTERCEPTOR.
4. ACCESS : PRIVATE DRIVES TO SERVE PHASE 1
WITH ADEQUATE TURNAROUNDS FOR EMERGENCY VE-
HICLE ACCESS.
5. OPEN SPACE : WILLIAMETTE GREE?NWAY, AREA OF
_ NEW PARK IMPROVEMENTS, SELEC'T'IVE RETENTION OF
GROUPS OF TREES IN OTHER AREAL; OF THE PHASE,
AND STEEPLY SLOPED AREAS WIT11 NATURAL VEGE-
TATION.
6. PARK IMPROVEMENTS : CONSTRUCTION OF RIVER -
FRONT ESPLANADE TO GIVE PUBLIC ACCESS TO 475
FT. OF RIVER FRONTAGE, PAVED PARKING LOT FOR
- COMMUNITY ACCESS (40 SPACES), AND LAND CLEAR-
ING/LANDSCAPING.
7. LANDSCAPING : PHASE? LANDSCAPING WILL EXCEED
THE 20% REQUIREMENT.
_ 8. OPEN SPACE ARKA SUMMARY
TOTAL PLEASE. AREA = 20.4 ACRE6
OPEN SPACE REQUIRt:D = 5.3 ACRES (20*)
OPEN SPACE VROVIDED
W I LLIAME TTE 0:Rt-.E.?NWAY 2.9 ACRE.S
PARK I MPROVEMFNTS 3.6 ACRI-,S
`FREE 61.41UPS .4 ACRES
1;1,01)1'1) ARI.A:: .9 ACRES
111011'AI, PROVIDED : 7.8 ACRES
IV INOUMOMU
/
`
'
�
^ �
�
. �
� _.~'
MEW
PHASE 2 ******t* r******k**
1. RESIDENTIAL : 130 UNITS, 241 PARKING STALLS
PROVIDED (1 1/2 STALLS/1 BEDROOM UNIT, 2
STALLS PER 2 BEDROOM UNIT).
2. UTILITIES : WATER MAIN TO BE LOOPED INTER-
NALLY, STORM DRAIN TO CONNECT TO PHASE 1
SYSTEM, AND SANITARY SEWER WILL OUTFALL TO
PHASE 1 SYSTEM.
3. ACCESS : PRIVATE DRIVES TO SERVE PHASE, 2
WITH LOOPED ACCESS TO TWO POINTS IN PHASE: 1.
4. OPEN SPACE : WILLIAMETTE GREENWAY AND NEWLY
LANDSCAPED AREAS.
5. LANDSCAPING : PHASE LANDSCAPING WILL EXCEED
_ THE 20% REQUIREMENT.
b. OPEN SPACE AREA SUMMARY
TOTAL PHASE AREA = 7.5 ACRES
OPEN SPACE REQUIRED = 1.5 ACRES (20%)
OPEN SPACE PROV IDiD
WILLIAMETTE; (;RI;E:NWAY 1.2 ACRES
LANDSCAPED AREAS .3 ACRES
TOTAL. PROVIDED 1 . 5 ACRES
IV INOk1JU3AAJ
till
�
�
"
PHASE 3
1. COMMERCIAL : RETAIL/PROFESSIONAL OFFICE OF
APPROXIMATELY 30,000 SQ. FT. AND RESTAURANT OF
APPROXIMATELY 5,000 SQ. FT.
2. MARINA/WATERFRONT RESTAURANT (SUBJECT TO
PERMITTING AND FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY) : 150
SLIP MOORAGE WITH POTENTIAL FOR SHELL/CANOE
HOUSE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC USE.
3. UTILITIES : WATER MAIN TO BE LOOPED INTER-
NALLY, STORM DRAIN TO CONNECT TO EXISTING 36"
DRAIN LINE (FLOWS FROM THIS LINE WILL HAVE
BEEN DIVERTED TO THE NEW OVERSIZED LINE REF-
ERENCED IN PHASE 1), AND SANITARY SEWER WILL
OUTFALL TO THE EXISTING LIFT STATION.
4. ACCESS : PRIMARY ACCESS TO THIS PHASE WILL
BE VIA THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED PUBLIC BOULEVARD.
SEE ITEM 7 BELOW.
5. PARKING : 255 STALLS PROVIDED. 1/200 FOR
RETAIL/OFFICE, 1/75 FOR RESTAURANT, AND 1/2
SLIPS FOR NON-RESIDENT USE (APPROXIMATELY 50%
OF MARINA IS INTENDED FOR USE BY APARTMENT
RESIDI.NTS) .
6. OPEN SPACE : THE. OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR
THIS PHASE WILL BE MET BY NEWLY LANDSCAPED
AREAS.
7. PARK IMPI:OVEM}-.NTS : CONSTRUCTION OF AMP111 -
THEA`l'RE WIT11 BANDSTAND/GAZEBO, CREATION OF
PUBLIC VIEW CORRIDORS TO RIVER, EXTUNSION OF
PUBLIC RIA'VRFRONT ACCESS AN ADDITIONAL 475 FT.
TO THE .1300111 AND CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC
BOULEVARD FOR ACCESS (SUBJECT TO FINANCIAL
ASSIS,TANCV) .
8. LAND,1 CAPING . }'MASE LANDSCAPING WILL EXCEED
THE :0* REQUIREMENT.
9. OL'EN SPACE AREA SUMMARY :
TOTAI, PHASE AREA = 7.3 ACRES
OPEN SPACE REQU 1 R'FM1.NT = 1 . 1 ACRES (15%)
0I11%N SPACE PROV IDUD :
NEWLY hANDSCAPED AREAS 1.1 ACRES
4,OWVVQ- VkMMA I .
003MSO 3
Ng I Ar )1V-1 I IV INOWARAIN
****************** PHASE 4 ******************
1. RESIDENTIAW COMMERCIAL : PARTICULAR MIX
SUBJECT TO FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY.
2. UTILITIES : WATER MAIN TO BE LOOPED INTER-
NALLY, STORM TO CONNECT TO EXISTING 36" STORM "
DRAIN LINE (FLOWS WILL HAVE BEEN DIVERTED FROM
THIS LINE TO THE NEW OVERSIZED LINE REFERENCED
IN PHASE 1), AND SANITARY SEWER WILL OUTFALL
TO PHASE 2 SYSTEM.
3. ACCESS : PRIVATE DRIVE LOOKED INTERNALLY TO
PROVIDE ACCESS TO UNITS.
4. OPEN SPACE : THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR
THIS PHASE: WILL BE MLT BY NEWLY LANDSCAPED
AREAS.
5. LANDSCAPING : PHASE LANDSCAPING WILL EXCEED
THE 20% REQUIREMENT.
- 6. OPEN SPACE AREA SUMMARY
TOTAL PHASE AREA = 7.6 ACRES
OPEN SPACE REQUIRED 1.5 ACRES MAXIMUM
E
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED
NFWLY LANI)SCAPt:l7 AREAS 1.5 ACRES
PUBLIC TRANSIT PLAN
There is adequate space near the new Public Parking area
on State Street for a public transit waiting shelter.
Extensive pedestrial paths within the development provide
excellent access to the metro stop on State Street.
9 w..n.r�•w.•�r.... y.•. �.... MOUNTO-WO13 A
Z OJ3MSO 3Xb1 - Y=
ld 1NOtl:tl3Altl »�. �. •
1 IIQ 1 • .IYy Ntl ,11
E
/
I
azo
1+ a x
k
H H m
ill
I
z E+EA
l l
co w
04M
aXcn
1
N
r
1 IIQ 1 • .IYy Ntl ,11
Additional Comprehensive Plan Policies/Objectives
Air Quality Policies
The proposed development will conform to the air quality
objective as follows:
1. Extensive open area with abundant oxygen producing
vegetation will be preserved, particularly along
the banks of the Willamette.
2. Many of the exisiting trees will be retained. This
developer has had good success with transplanting
fairly large trees on site.
3. Thousands of new trees and shrubs will be planted,
creating newly landscaped areas in what had been
acres of concrete.
4. Residents within walking distance to shopping and
services will use cars less during good weather
when air pollution is most severe.
5. Residents will have easy access to mass transit.
Wildlife
The proposed development will conform to the Wildlife
objectives and General Policies I & II as follows:
1. :several acres of open space will be pro3orved,
particularly along the Willamette River.
2. Thousands of now trees and shrubs will be I)I nnted,
replacing the tormer indiistrial use, and cr. Gating
a significant addition oC new habitat.
3. The new planting materials will include, where
appropriate, plants which provide tood and cover
to enhance the habitats carrying capacity.
Distinctive Natural Area
The proposed devolopment will conform to the Distinctive
Natural Areas Objective and General Policies I h LI as
toIIowi3:
1. open space within the Willamette Greenway will be
preserved, as well as other s1.3nific+nt areas
within the site.
7. �'areful attention to tree pre:iocvation will Save a
:Subetantial portion of the existin.i veoetatlon.
i. 1:xtOn3iVO landSCapincl will crt�ate new worxled Areas
within the development.
Potential Erosion Area
The proposed development will conform to the Potential
Erosion Area Objective as follows:
1. Prior to Development Review submission and final
site plan preparation, an extensive soils study
will have been completed which will include
identification of any potential hazard areas.
2. If hazard areas are found, specific engineering
solutions will be evaluated for technicial and
financial suitability.
Quiet Environmental Policies
The proposed development will conform to the Quiet
Environmental. Policies Objective as follows:
1. Extensive use of berms and landscaping, including
large trees will help reduce noise levels.
Energy Conservation
The proposed development will comply with the Energy
Conservation Objective as follows:
1. Multifamily, common wall structures are more
energy efficient than detached units.
2. Units will be very well insulated.
3. A variety of on-site attractions will minimize
oft -site trips.
4. Tho development will emphasize usable open space.
`i. Many goods and services are within walk i.nq
distance.
6. Mas:; transit is readily available via internal
pathways.
Solid Waste
The propoied development wi1.1 comply with the Solid Want.e
Ol.. jective as tot lows:
1. 'Che devt'lopery and their property manayemont
company will cooperate with local efforts to make
the residents more aware of local re• -cycling
possibilities.
Water Resources
The proposed development will comply with the Water
Resources Objective as follows:
1. Replace several areas of impermiable surface
(concrete) with landscaped areas which can help
restore ground water levels.
Floodplain
The proposed development will comply with the Floodplain
Objective and Policies I & II as follows:
1. Identify floodplain areas.
2. Insure that any structures within the floodplain
are appropriately designed to insure against
damage (Marina, piers and docks) to public or
private property.
Stream Corridor
The proposed development will comply with the Stream
Corridor objective and Policy III as follows:
I. Insure that any structures within the stream
corridor are appropriately designed to insure
against damage to public or private property,
(Marina, piers, floats, other structures).
Willamette Greenway
The proposed development will comply with the Willamette
Greenway Objective and general policy i as tollowt):
I. See detailed narrative on WiILamette (,reenway
earliou in the application.
Social Resources
The proposed development will comply with Social Resources
objective and general policies I, IV and VII as follows:
I. The project will protect much valuable open apace
and replace areas of concrete with areas of
heavily landscaped areas.
2. The new public facilities, esplanade, marina,
waterfront restaurant and retail/office canter
will provide a new focal point of community
activity.
3. These new commercial activities will provide new
local employment opportunities.
Economic Resources
The proposed development will comply with the Economic
Resources objective and general policies I, II, III and IV
as follows:
1. The new commercial activities will create new
local job opportunities. New residents will
stimulate existing local businesses.
The expenditure of tax increment dollar:i will
facilitate this development, and stimulate
economic growth.
3. Use of tax increment tinancing uoes money from the
developer (property taxer) rather than a much
_. large general obligation to the public.
4. Exisiting local businesses wi1L benefit from a new
resident population.
Residential Density
The prot)oaed development will comply with t he Real i dent. i a l
Density Objok:tive and gent?ral policies I and LI 13
tol low. :
L, 5lN ,c itic :.1 L flans will relate density to t:he
uni lura texturof the site, preserving Lr. E: os
m,Anximizind views.
is z,irc.i areas exIst, and en(lineering :3olutiono
ire not feasible, no construction will ucct!r in
l.hene areas.
Residential Site Design
The proposed development will comply with the Residential
Site Design Objective and general policies I, IV and V as
follows:
1. The proposed development will preserve open space,
add substantial new landscaped area, and create a
very high quality living environment.
2. There will be a variety of building types and
exterior treatments, harmoniously coordinated.
3. Streets and pedestrial paths will be well
landscaped and well lighted, an exceptionally
livable environment.
4. The developers proposal will be very innovative,
as evidenced by previous design awards for other
projects.
Housing Choice Policies
The proposed development will comply with the housing
choice policy and objective as follows:
1. 'there will be a wide range of unit rental rates,
and they will be located conveniently to-ihopping
services.
Commercial Land Use
The proposed development will comply with the Cmimurcial
Land Use Objectives as follows:
1. The combination of pub 1.iu ac0e33 and public
facilities, new retail/ottice complex, wnturfront
restaurant and marina will have Sufficient
"critical mass" to create a new focal point for
public and commercial activity.
Protection Open Space
The proposed development will comply with the Protection
Open Space Objective and general policies I and II as
follows:
1. Those areas designated Protection Open Space will
be very carefully planned to insure that any
activities within them are compatible with
protection of whatever is important: in the
specific area.
1. As the plan states "protection does riot mean total.
prohibition of this land from other used, rather
it means wise and managed use...".
Public open Space
The proposed development will comply with the Public Open
Space objective and general policies I, II and III, as
follows:
1. In addition to saving and developing the most
valuable park potential in the Roehc Park area and
retaining all of the River frontage as open to the
public, we are proposing to add an easement over
private property in an amount equal to the
existing public property for public use.
Bikeway
The proposed development will comply with the M keway
Objective and General Policies I, II and III as follows:
1.. The plan will provide for a bike path to be
developed as part of the new public boulevard in
Phase III of the development.
2. This path will connect the new public areas to
State Street.
Park and Recreation
The proposed development will comply with the Park and
Recreation objective and general policies I - IV as
tollows:
1. As discussed earlier, the proposal will involve
substantial development of Roehr Park,
construction of a pedestrian esplanade connecting
the park, the ►taw retail/office complex, the
waterfront restaurant and the marina, all of which
will be open to the public and will add to major
new public interest and public tecreation
opportunity.
Transportation
The proposed development will comply with the Transportion
Objectives and policies I - VII as follows:
1. All streets within the project will be well
designed, and will allow for adequate emergency
vehicle access.
2. Streets within the residential portions of the
project will be private, and the balance of the
streets will be open to the public.
3. An extensive network of pedestrian paths will
connect the residential areas with internal
recreational opportunities, external shopping and
services, and mass transit.
_. Public Facilities
The proposed development will comply with the Public
Facilities objective and policies III, V and VI as
follows:
1. The developer will work with the city to
facilitate the coordination of those Public
Facilities which impact or are impacted by this
development.
2. Tax increment tinancing can provide some portion
of the revenues necessary to continue to upgrade
public facilities.
3. The school district will achieve much higher
revenues once the tax increment financing bonds
are retired.
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Lake Oswego Planning Commission recently reviewed
and approved a city initiated proposal to amend the Comprehensive
Plan for the East End area, adding a new Riverfront Subarea,
and providing for a mixed-use development.
To show the correlation
between this proposal and the existin,l plan (and the recent proposal
revisions), we have inserted specific comments after each of the
policies in the Planning Commission Report, as follows-
CRITERIA
The request under consideration is legislative in nature and
regulated by LOC 56.150. Applicable requirements of the
Comprehensive Plan, LCDC Goals and City Codes were considered. The
following criteria were found by the Planning Commission to be most
relevant to this decision:
LOC 56 as amended
Comprehensive Plan
Willamette Greenway Policies, page 55-56, General Policy I,
Specific Policy 3
Social Resources Policies, pages 61-66, General Policy I,
Specific Policies 2 and 4; General Policy IV, Specific
Policy 1; and, General Policy VII, Specific Policy 1
Economic Resource Policies, pages 70-71
General Policy I
General Policy IV,
Specific
Policies
1, 2 and 3
Residential Density
Policies,
page 75,
General Policies II and IV
Commercial Land Use
Policies,
page 97-100, General Policy I,
Specific Policy 3;
General
Policy 11,
specific. Policies 1, 2,
3, 4 and 5; General Policy
V, Specific
Policies 3 and 4
East End Commercial
District
Policies,
pages 100-1.04,
policies 3, 5, 7, 9 and 10
Protection Oben Space, page 129, General Policies 1 and 2
Public Open Space Policies, pages 129-130, General Policy I,
Specific Policy 1 and 2; and, General Policy 11
Planned City open Space System Map, page 131
LCDC Goals 5,9,10,1.`, and 13
WINDINGS AND REASONS
1'h�� Planning commission incorporates the July 25, 19H6 staff report
1 -2-
on PA 06-86-02 as support for its decision, along with the following
evidence and testimony.
The following information substantiates a conclusion that the
proposed amendments involving the Riverfront Subarea conform to or
better implements Plan policies for the particular uses involved, as
required by LOC 56.155(1).
Willamette Greenway
General Policy:
Lake Oswego will assure, through its public actions, that land use
and activities in the designated Willamette River Greemway will be
consistent with state interest in the Willamette Greenway, and will
enhance Lake Oswego's Willamette shoreline.
Specific Policy:
3. Manage land within the Greenway boundary, including public
lands and rights-ot-way, in accord with the Willamette
Greenway policies and regulations as adopted by the State.
1n its effort to enhance the shoreline of the Willamette
River, within the Greenway boundary, the City will:
a. direct development away from the river and establish
a setback for nonwater related or nonwater dependent
-3-
structures which will separate structures from the
river in order to maintain natural, scenic, historic,
and recreational qualities of the Greenway;
b. maintain natural vegetation in areas viewed from the
river (including areas outside the 150 foot Greenway);
--
C. provide public views of the River and increased
public access to the River;
d. seek right-of-way for a public trail connecting Tryon
Park, Roehr Park and George Roqers Park. 11/6/84
The Riverfront proposal conforms to or better implements the
Willamette Greenway policies by:
1. Providing a comprehensive, integrated development plan and
schedule for the entire area.
2. Providinq for significant public access to the river (see
site plan)
3. Protecting and enhancing views of the river t.rom the
subarea, and
- Social Resources Policies
General Policy
1. The City will develop and protect features valuable to
community identity and preserve the natural and aesthetic
qualities; which are the pride of residents.
specitic Policies:
2. Preserve and enhance the natural environment.
including hills, wooded areas, lake, rivets,
st.reamways, pasture land and rural homesteads.
-4-
4. Encourage preservation of views of the lake, rivers,
and distant mountains through development review
procedures, through the location of public facilities
and open space, and through safe turnout spots along
scenic street rights-of-way.
The proposed development conforms to, or better implements
these Social Resources Policies by providing chat development plans
provide for the protection of views, and that equivalent public
access to the river be assured in any land exchange involving Roehr
Park.
General Policy:
-- IV. The City will facilitate the revitalization of existing
business districts, where civic, social, cultural, amusement
and business activities will form focal points of community
activity.
specific Policies:
1. Develop, adopt and implement revitalization plans for
both east and west end community business districts.
These action plans should provide for:
a. Incorporation of social, cultural, re:iidential,
commercial and civic activities within the business
districts.
-5-
b. Development of safe and convenient parking,
pedestrian/bike ways and public transit facilites, to
encourage shoppers to leave their cars and circulate
-- within the business districts.
C. Places for people to meet, in neighborly atmosphere,
such as meeting rooms, street furniture, pathways,
sidewalk cafes, alleyway plazas, cultural exhibit
space.
d. Views or access to adjacent lake, river and park land.
ii. In the east end this should include pedestrian
or view deck orientation to Lakewood Bay and the
Willamette River, as well as trail access to
Tryon park and Roehr Park via a trail along
Tryon Creek.
'rhe proposed development conform► to, or better implementA these
Social Resources Policies by allowing for mixed uses that will
provide for both an increased number of residents and for
- activities that will attract the additional people necessary to
facilitate revitalization of the East End business D►:itrict. The
Riverfront Fropoall includes such major public fac'iIitiea as Public
PAck, Waterfcont, Restaurants and a Macina connected by an Esplanade,
providing connection to and views of the river. Such a
tacit ity, in conjunction with the allowed mixed uses, can function
as in attraction that benefits the entire East End liu:;iness District.
General Policy
VII. The City will plan for industrial and commercial land to
provide local job opportunities and private investment, and
will serve these employment centers with a transportation
system that will take residents conveniently to their jobs in
the community and in the region.
Specific Policies
1. Plan for Industrial, commercial and office land uses and
activities which provide opportunities for employment and
investment.
The proposed development conforms to or better implements the Social
Resource,policies by planning for Commercial/Retail and office land
uses that provide opportunities for employment and investment.
Economic Resources Policies
General Policies:
I. The City will designate land and establish development policies
to preserve and expand commercial and industrial development in
a manner compatible with community character to assure a
healthy and balanced economic base in Lake Oswe(ao's future and
Lo increase local employment opportunities.
The proposed development. contoriiu to, or better implementathe Economic
kiesources ►policies by expanding opportunities for commercial
development. and Employment. Although the City's industrial land
-7 -
inventory is reduced by the change in designation, the site's
location adjacent to the East End Commercial District and the Old
Town District, along with its river access, makes it more
appropriate for a residential/ commercial/retail mix.
IV. The City will foster protection of private economic resources
such as investments in homes and businesses from adverse
effects of growth.
conforms or better implements the Economic
The proposed development
Resources policies by expanding opportunities for commercial
development and employment.. Although the City's industrial land
inventory is reduced by the change in designation, the site's
location adjacent to the East End Commercial District and the Old
Town District, along with its river access, makes it more
appropriate for a residential/ commercial/retail mix.
Residential Density p�ilicies
General Policy:
t1. Tile City will teguire major residential development. (defined as
zo or more units or 4 or more acres) of densities R-0, it -3 and
R-5 to be located where public facility design and construction
can be coordinated with new development.
-a -
The proposed development conforms to
or better implements the Residential Density policy by {providing that
ail development 'conform to an Uverall Development Plan and
Schedule.
IV. The City will provide for medium to high density designations
to meet needs for such housing, in accordance with Growth
Management policies.
The proposed development- contorms to or better implements the
Residential Density policy by providing that approximately 574
multi-tamily units be developed as the residential component of
the site.
Commercial Land Use Policies
General Policies:
I. rhe City will encourage development of commercial areas to meet
the community's consumer needs.
Specific Policies:
3. Encourage more intense land coverage and pedestrian
circulation within commercial areas.
'rhe proposed developmeltt call tu1-m,3to or better implements these
Commercial Land Use policies by encouraging the development of a
conunercia1/retail area that has pedestrian circulation, including
external aut.u, oike & pedestrian connections to the I:aat h:nci
11118010s3 DistriCt.
-9 -
The impact of this development will assist the revitalization of
the East End by drawing the community's consumers downtown, with a
resulting •intensification of land coverage in that business district.
II. The City will plan for a mix of social, cultural, commercial
and governmental activites within commercial centers, so that
these centers are attractive community focal points.
Specific Policies:
1. Plan land use patterns which will guide commercial and
service activities into groups of establishments, which
will be mutually supporting and convenient to the public.
2. Prevent additional strip development along arterials and
make provision for parkinq, rear access and
redevelopment, to minimize the negative impact of
existing strip development.
3. Adopt design policies which encourage site plans whi�:h
are in keeping with the general character of. the
comm;init.y, and which will make sound healthy huc;inesn
centers.
-10-
4. Encourage development of the East End Commercial District
and the West End Commercial District as centers of
commercial and social activity and employment
opportunities.
5. Encourage a mix of residential, commercial and service
activities in commercial centers.
The proposed development conforms to or better implements these
Commercial policies by allowing for a mix of residential/commercial,
retail and office uses with public facilities that will combine to
create a community focal point. The proposed development provides
opportunities for developments that will involve social, cultural
and commercial activities, while guiding the new development into
groups of mutually supporting establishments, avoiding additional
strip development.
V. '1'he City will assure minimal negative impacts of commercial
development on adjacent residential areas.
Specific Policies:
1. Design and construct commercial development to minimize
the impacts on residential areas from traffic, lights,
visual appearance of parking and loading areas, building
bulk and height, noise and drainage. Such means as
landscaping, berms, fencing, tree, open space,
-11-
culs-de-sac, building orientation, lower intensity of
commercial uses (e.g. officers) should be utilized.
4. Where feasible, pedestrian and bikeway paths should
connect commercial development with adjacent residential
areas.
The proposed development conforms to or better implements these
policies because the location of the project allows commercial
i development with access/egress onto State Street by providing
pathways to be included in the design. The topography of the site
and lack of streets connecting to the Old Town Design District will
allow development with minimal impacts on adjacent residential areas.
Specific policies:
3. Plan for adequate delineation of adjacent residential
neighborhoods to enhance living environment and
neighborhood stability. This includes the following:
a. peripheral traffic circulation plan which separates
commercial and through traffic from residential
neighborhood
b. methods to implement solutions already proposed in
previous studies, both short range solutions to be
implemented immediately, and long range solutions
C. the involvement of property owners and the City, in
stimulation of private investment
• 12-
d. criteria for the intensification of commercial
activity in appropriate locations (see Design
Standard, Specific Policies 9 and 10)
e. schedule for provisions of needed public
improvements, including traffic and parking
improvements, pedestrian facilities, street trees
f. criteria for re-examination of commercial
requirements, should a substantial portion of present
commercial land located east of State Street be
eliminated from commercial use, or should industrial
area use change
g. as redevelopment occurs on State Street and "A"
Avenue, encourage development to re -orient toward
alleys and interiors of blocks
5. Encourage the development of an interconnecting network
of bicycle and pedestrian ways, to encourage shoppers to
leave theft cars and circulate easily among shops,
restaurants, cultural and civic. activities. This network
could include:
a. covered walkways and mid -block pedestrian paths where
feasible
b. alleys as paths, places for benches, outdoor eating,
kiosks and landscaping
C. bike racks and lockups, covered where feasible
-13-
d. sidewalk extensions (using up to eight feet of
parking lane at street corners) to decrease street
width pedestrians must cross
e. stairways or possible elevated street crossings, to
connect adjacent properties which are at different
elevations.
7. Require adequate parking space to be provided to serve
each business and public activity. Businesses will be
required to provide such parking either on-site or in
shared facilities.
9. Provide design standards which encourage revitalization
of the business district.
10. Develop design standards which will improve the social
interaction and aesthetics of the commercial district,
including requirements for the prevision of:
a. views of the lake, river, and Mt.. Hood (could include
open space, roof or other on -building public, view
points)
b. pedestrian orientation to distinctive features,
particularly recognizing the aesthetic value of the
Lake
C. street trees to provide shade and aesthetic re>liet
from concrete and asphalt
d. pedestrian walkways (covered where possible) and
bikepaths in alleys and walkway easement:
-14-
e. street furniture and landscaped areas situated to
encourage people to rest awhile for conversation
(could include publicly owned pocket parks)
f. lineal parks (could be developed in alleys like court
yards, with potted trees and furnitures)
g. implementation of these standards as a condition of
Development Review approval
— The proposed development conforms to or better implements the East
End Policies by providing for pathways and
view plazas, while maintaining the requirements regarding adequate
parking space to be provided, either on-site or in shared
' facilities. opportunities for the establishment of mixed retail
use, delicatessans, sidewalk cafes and a lineal park along the river
all act to encourage pedestrian circulation by shoppers.
Protection as
General Policies
1. The City will designate the tollowing lands as PROTECTION OPEN
SPACE::
Stream Corridors
Flood Plains
Willamette River Greenway
Wetlands
Oswego Lake
Hillsides
Distinctive Natural Areas
-15 -
Weak Foundation Soils
High Ground Water Areas
Slopes with Potential for Erosion Hazard
Slopes with Potential for Landslide Hazard
II. The City will regulate the uses of lands -so designated in
accordance with the policies set forth in the NA,ruiiAL RESOURCES
POLICY ELEMENT, in order to preserve essential natural
resources and processes, avoid natural hazards and damages and
to Preserve significant natural featUC es in the community.
rhe proposed development conforms to or better implements these
policies by maintaining public access to all of the Rivertront
_ along Roehr Park as well as significant additional public access
to the river.
Public Open Space Policies
General E,olicies:
1. The City will develop a Public Open Space plan which will
preserve fragile natural areas and provide for put)lic access to
unique natural areas, view spots, histoi:lc site.,] 111d
neigw)k)rhood green spaces.
-16 -
Specific Policies:
1• The City will:
1. Designate as Public Open Space, natural areas which
are chosen as:
a. unique natural areas
b. fragile lands requiring protection from development
c. unique views
d. historic sites
_ e. neighborhood green spaces
f. critical habitat
2• Manage public open space lands to assure:
a• preservation of natural areas
b. protection of views
C. protection of endangered species
d. careful development of trails or parking l(;)ts to
protect natural areas.
The Proposed development conforms to or better implements these
Open Space policies by pr.ovidiny public viewpoints and pathways.
The management of the public open space land (Roehr Park and tht�
abandoned treatment Plant) may involve land exchange, but will
as:;ure
preservation of natural areas along_ the willamette Greenway
and protection of views.
-17 -
General Policy
II. The City will develop an intra -city pathway system, connecting
parks, school grounds, open spaces and public facilities with
residential and shopping centers.
The proposed development conforms to or better implements this Public
open Space Policy by providing pathways to connect the residential
and commercial areas.
Goals
The following information substantiates a conclusion that the
proposed Riverfront development is consistent with any applicable
Statewide Planning Goals or Regional plan policies, as required by
-
r OC 56.11)5(2).
C,0a1 5 - -To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic
resources.
'Pile proposed Rivertront development is cun."istent wit -Al Goal
The proposed project will provide for public acce:3c3
to viewpoints at the river will conserve open space and
protect scenic resources.
Goal 9
Goal 10
Goal 12
-18-
To diversity and improve the economy of the the State.
The proposed 'Riverfront development is consistent with Gaol 9.
The proposed development encourages economic growth and
activity in underutilized areas, thereby contributing to a
stable and healthy local economy.
- To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the
State.
The proposed Riverfront development is consistent with Goal 10.
The provision tor 574 residential units will contribute to
the availability of an adequate number of housing units.
- To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and
economic transportation system.
The Proposed Riverfront development is conaint-.ent with 00al l
The change in use from Industrial to High p«n::tity
Residential;'General Commercial for the RIverfront. Subarea
will recycle vacant land along a high capacity
transportation corridor to allow an increased density
gradient. As a result, mass transit and carpooling could
Provide convenient and economic transportation
alternatives.
-19 -
Goal 13 To conserve energy.
The proposed River front development is consistent with Goals 12 &
13. The opportunities afforded by the proposed
development to cluster residential/commercial/retail and
public facilities can reduce the transportation demands
of the residents and act to conserve energy.
Goal 15 - To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the
natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic
and recreational qualities of lands along the
Willamette River as the Willamette Greenway.
The proposed Riverfront development is consistent with qoal 15. The
provisions for public access to the river and for the
preservation of scenic views, pathways and the maintenance of
equivalent public access in the event of any land exchange
will, in combination with the City's specific Willamette
Greenway Policies, act to maintain the qualities of this area.
i.uC 5 b
The following information substantiates a determination that the
propoLied development complies with LOC. 56.155(3), as amended.
The Riverfront development public ta`ilities have reviewed L,y ('it.y
Engineeriny staff. They have determined that the water lines arty
adequate, the storm system will require upgrading and the capacity
of the sanitary system must be evaluated.
The following information substantiates a determination that the
proposed development complies with LOC 56.155(4).
The physical constraints within the Riverfront Subarea site include;
a steep slope, access to and the traffic capacity of State Street,
the Cit:y's desire to retain views of Mt. Hood from the area west of
State Street, the Willamette Greenway, the railroad tracks dividing
the site into two segments, and the demolition necessary to clear
The user proposed can be physically on
The prcll)osed Rivectront development is in�.omplian�.e with
LOC. 56.155 as amended, applicable :sections fo the ComPrehensive Plan
and statewide Planning goals and regional 1)I.an policies.
-21 -
COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSED AMENDED POLICIES
General Policies
I. The 45+ acre Riverfront Subarea is designated R-0/GC to
allow for a mix of high density multifamily residential,
commercial, retail and office uses.
II. At a minimum, 500 multifamily units shall be developed as
the residential component of the Subarea.
111. The Subarea shall be developed only pursuant to an Overall
Development Plan and Schedule (ODPS) which will provide for:
M
-22-
TF:kh/9272
A. Significant public access to the river
8. Protection of Mt. Hood views from 'A' Avenue and the
Bluff
C. Protection of the views of Mt. Hood and Willamette
river from the Subarea
D. A future pathway allowing access to public pathways
connecting the Subarea to Tryon Creek and George
Rogers parks
E. Major public use facilities such as an esplanade,
amphitheater, public square or plaza which provides
for connection to and views of the waterfront
F. Pedestrian access to the Subarea from the adjacent
East End Community Business District
IV. Ruehr Park acreage may provide opportunities for sone land
exchange to facilitate private development; however, any
such change of ownership will assure at least equivalent
public access to the river and public facilities.
D. AMEND the East End Community Business District Map on, page
101, to include the Riverfront. Subarea.
E. AMEND
the
Wtl.lanette
Ri-er Industrial District. Map,
page
123,
to delete
the Riverfront Subarea.
-23 -
The proposed Riverfront development conforms to or better implements
these proposed amended policies by providing for:
1. A mixed use development, including high end residential,
waterfront, restaurants, retail/office uses, marina
and park, and space uses.
2. The proposal calls for a totoal of 574 units in two phases.
3. The proposal will be subject to review by the O.D.P.S.
and Development Review procedures.
4. The requirement for significant public access to the
River will be accommodated by providing that:
a. A public park be developed on the Northerly portion of
the Roehr Park property, using tax increment financing.
b. All of the existing Riverfront along Roehr Park area
will continue to open to the public.
c. ,additional riverfrontage, not currently open to the
public, will be provided adjacent to the retail/office
,and waterfront restaurant areas, and rhe marina. Thi.S
new public access will approximately double the footage
ct riverfront Open to the public.
,i. rhe marina, (if pemits can be obtained .and it tinancially
tensible) will have portiorac, open to t:10 publ i,.:. This
will. include areas where boaters can t.iv up .an<i visit
"110 ..are.►, ,as well as a t loat or tloat..0 where communi ty
vowing cratt would be stored.
5. r'iv ma- or public tacilit-le:a requirement:n will 1,v :�.al.i:slieri
by the to] Low iny combination of use::
a. Watertront restaurant ou restaurantn
b. RetaiL/ofticet complox
c. Public [) ark
-24-
d. Marina with some public access and rowing storage area.
e. Esplanade connecting all of the above areas together.
6. Public access to the existing East End Business District
will be provided by a new extensively landscaped boule-
vard connecting State Street with the new development-
via
evelopment
via Foothills. 'chis new street will provide for auto,
bicycle and pedestrian access.
Traffic Studies
Planning
Safety
TOM R. LANCASTER, P
Transportation Engineering
� Eo PROfr,f
„,* ORQ�N
5
-4s R. L ANAP
2239 Monterey Lane
Eugene, Oregon 97401
(503) 683-4818
TOM_ R. LANCASTER, P.E.
Tf MVIpoI181M0 IE mill'"nnQ
ASH GROVE CEMENT [` %0I)ERTY
Capacity Analysis
SUMMARY: A capacity analysis, using the critical lane
method, was made for the intersection of State Street in
Lake Oswego with the proposed main access to the Ash
Grove Cement development. The analysis assumed c(�mplete
build -out of the proposed development, including Apart-
ments, marina, restaurant, and retail space.
It was found that with the projected traffic vol-
umes, the intersection will operate at level of service
TRIP GENERATION: The analysis was made for. the 1'M peak
hour, because the volumes will be greater than to the AM
leak. 'Trip gpnerat.on was estimated as follows:
1. 150 -slip mar.na: It was assumed that. halt e)f t.ho
Slips would be- leased by apartment tenants, which would
result in nrtili..Tible additional trips. The remaining 75
.,lips would result in 13 peak -hour trips, of which seven
were a4sumed to be entering And six exiting. A 50/50
directional sll :t on State Street was assumed.
2. 5,000 rel ft restaurant: A quality restaurant, wast
,isstimed, restilt t.nq in 19 entering and 12 exiti.nq trips
,iurinq the pock hour. A 50/50 split on State Street was
3. 30,000 sd ft retail/office bui.ldinq: To analyze tho
worst-case situation, it was assumed that the ontire
roM R. _LANCASTER, P.E.
_.___..F r. rwaom Engineering
area would be retail. Because the shops would probably
not be easily visible from State Street and not readily
accessible from the community, it was assumed to be a
specialty retail center rather than general shopping
center. No reduction was made for pass -by trips, but a
ten percent reduction was made assuminq that apartment
tenants would be customers. A 50/50 split on State
Street was ,assumed. There would be 68 entering trips and
68 exiting trips.
4. 536 apartment units: This is reduced from the 580
units in the original plan. Because most of these will
be home to work trips with work places being to the
north, a 67/33 State Street split was assumed. There
would be 214 entering trips and 107 exitinq trips.
5. Existing uses: There are some existing commercial and
warehouse uses in the area. Trip generation was
determined from a manual count. Thera are 14 ent.orinq
and 49 exiting trips at: present.
The projected trip generation and direct conal
distribution are summarized on the following two 1),Iges.
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
PM Peak flour
T,AND USE
1. Marina - 150 slips
2. Restaurant - 5,000 sq ft
3. Retail - 30,000 sq ft
4. Residential - 536 units
5. Existinq
Total
TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E.
Tian�Drn�ellon Pnpineeung
ENTERING EXI'T'ING
7
6
19
12
68
68
214
107
14
49
322_ �'4.'
DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION
TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E.
7rompnrUlUnn Enpin"cmg
SOUTH
DRIVEWAY
NORTH DRIVEWAY
From
From
To
To
To
South
North
South
North
North
1.
Marina
3
4
3
0
{
2.
Restaurant
9
10
6
0
0
_ 3.
Retail
34
34
34
0
34
4.
Residential
77
155
35
39
33
— 5.
Existing
4
10
17
0
32
_
Total
127
213
95
39
10B
TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E.
h�m0���uon F,, i, Ing
STATE STREET VOLUMES: Traffic volumes were obtained from
a hose count made by the Oregon State Highway Di.vi.si.on
on State Street just north of North Shore Drive in 1.983.
Hiqhway Division staff indicated that they believed the
northbound volumes to be higher than shown i.n th(2
counts. However, Highway Division traffic volume tables
indicate that the average daily traffic on State Street
has decreased 14 percont from 1983 to 1985. For this
reason, the hose counts were used without any adjust-
ments, assuming that the possible undercount would be
offset by the volume decrease.
The hose counts Are as follows:
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND
..�
-\m PEAK (7 t o 9 AM) 800 600
1'M PEAK (`; to, b PM)
X00 1600
1�AIiY
8b00 1.' ,'100
TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E.
-- __ T,IlmpminUpn F-ol-wmg
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: To test the sensitivity of the
capacity analysis to variations in the projected traffic
volumes, additional capacity calculations were made with
varyi.nq traffic volumes.
It was found that. northbound traffic volumes could
increase to as high as 1000 vehicles in the PM peak hour
while retaining level of service B at the intersection.
Southbound through traffic could increase up to 1.800, or
the southbound left turn into the access could increase
up to 500, or westbound left turns onto State Street
could increase up to 175 vehicles while retaining level
of service B.
It is apparent that the capacity calculations are
not: highly sensitive to the traffic volume project -ions.
CONCLUSIONS: After complete development of the Ash Grove
Cement- property, the intersection of. State Street with
the main access to the development is pro.jec:t:ed to
operate at a level of service IA.
Thore art, two reasons for the high level of ser-
v.tce. First, the highest driveway access movement,, which
is the southbound left turn, overlaps with the* I,tclhest
State Street movement, which is southbound. This ronults
in efficient usage of the intersection. Sec;nnTf, the
largest movement exit:inq the driveway ac<ess, whtoh is
tho wr:;t hound left turn, is only 95 vehicles. This, is a
tl l,lt ivoly small volume, requiring .only a rimall
poy cont -uio of the signal yrven time.
TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E.
----`--.----� r�nxPnnxlion Fn�inxennp
LEVEL OF SERVICE
i.,eve1 of Service is used to describe the quality of
traffic flow. Levels cif Service A to C are considered
good. Level of Service D is typically the Level of
Service for which an urban street is designed. Level of
Service E is tlac, maximum volume a facility can accommo-
date and will result in occasional stoppages of
momentary duration. A more complete description of
Levels of Service follows:
Level of. Service A: Low volume, high speeds,
- speeds not restricted by other vehicles, all signals
clear with no vehicles waitinli through more than one
signal cycle.
Level of Service B: Operating speeds beginning to
be affected by other traffic; between one and ten
percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehic.lt-s
which must wait through more than one signal cycle
during peak periods.
I,evel of :service C: Operatinq speeds and maneuver-
ability closely controlled by other traffic; between 1.1
nand30 percent of the signal cycles have vehiclos which
wait through more than one cycle during the peak laeriml;
recommended ideal do -sign standard.
Level of Service D: roietabio oper,atinq apoods; it
to 70 percent of they signal cycles have one or more
vehicles which wait through more than one cyc Icy duo a nq
leak traffic periods.
TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E.
Trsnsp�lsllnn FnpinsennQ
Level of Service E: Capacity; the maximum traffic
volume an intersection can accommodate; restricted
speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one
or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal
during peak traffic periods.
Leval of Service F: Unstable flow; long queues of
traffic; stoppages of long duration; traffic- volume aTW
speed can drop to zero; traffic volume will be less; then
the volume which occurs at Level of Service E.
+=ri+:,.al M1-1•:�_rn�_r-1t Wn2 1 •,i �, r'I_(,rININ+,
Iriterr+�ct.i •r,; r t•� k at. Ash Grove Aches-,
Problem I'M Peal:: Hour
,ter, I . IL'ENT'IF'Y LF14E I ECIMETRN
Step 4. LEFT TI.JRhJ I. HEI:F'.
ApF'r'; ,1_I 1 '?: yt.at a_ St
1 '~1
II; L N
1,,.NI_I. ;f cl'larrae.+ II li (;1 11
_.. R T 1- 1 L. I
--_.___..... T H H 11 T -_ _.__-_--•
1b. LT if: '.'r'1 C) ii 0 rl
1 > RT 1
1 _h~ng? (VO -1)
LT--'" v v v -RTH
i{:.+7/C• r'E,trl 11 I;I II 1,1
LT H- :` TF1 1i
j. l l("•p1 1C l l r 7 V} T l.lfna 1; I.i
TFI_ _LTH
1 ire vr''r•1
-LT
1 •--. LT car�al�'i t.y �_II'1 li I,I ii II
f2T- v APpt-?&C1.1 ._
(vr4-0
__...... L L_ 1 R R .__ .___.._-. __.._;
f.LT
r 'r Fi r r 1 A.: -,.es ,
1 vph (b+e)
H H 1
19.Left turn vr111_Irne ti ii 11 11
v p h
' Appt ,. �_I I 4: �;r ata St.
I h. Is vol lune at', NIl I',li, NI I
Stec, 2. I['ENTIFY VOLUMES, in vrh
I Step 5. ASSIGN LANE VC)I_IJhIF::' in vrh
1
1 1 �
1 I
1 71:1 39
TH'
LT= h
1 v
1
1
1
._.. 1 r'1 t-•t'•r I�1111_I I 41
'
1 1
I1J.11I I1 ,r ill IA,,INI,
1 ;tap r;r1, +:.r?rTI.C.AL. V(A.I.Ihlf_' IrI ;I.II
r I`1
1 1+i1 1-'I
011_:.I
' I
,.... , 1 ri )1? 1
1
1 I
1
1
1
I 1
•
, I
1 �
1
1 1 1 i51'•I•�r11�1�:".I1 �I
� 1
1 1
1
['-s i �r I Fl_►.+r' : PM F', -&k
StRP 6b. VOLUME ADJUSTMENT FOR
MUKTIPHASE SIGNAL OVERLAP
I_rit+ca1 Carryover Critical:
�.t, I • V,,1 Lune 1_ t, -.t V; 1 �.+rnM :
in vph please in vph :
-------------------------------
""S (0
----•----•- -----__-------•- ------_,;,_,(A ) OR 0(A1) 95:
��-+1.�•r
213(R4) 110_. '213= Ifi�7(A�) 213:
A 4A•1 5:'.`7(A:+) OF: ' 14(A4)`
,
,
:
-IM liF�` CRITICAL VOLUMES :
I :3. INTER`aECTION-LEVEL OF'
GERVICE
. (,_omr-•are step 7 with table 6) '
_ .. - - .. . ..- ., .. ,__ _•. -_ _ � ]•.. T. a .. ...r- :
"MIN T
M
N�
NNW
s�
tv to �1 ^.7 �• .� 6" .C�1�'� ,�j '�� i. w O
.i C O •w,-7 .N OC.�d +_ �� j' Vt ~ 'CCgcA
?� .-I y U ro •rj •.r.7
�
r•7 �+ '� v .�. U
pp.d
��+ �, �. .�•! i
GAh'. G r� �(,._. V T.� � 'O � •;;t Y til �; 9 t: �" :n C�tS' O t. ��! �a7 1 � ±S
WE
N
�Tn' �Gytu y?7jvrcj,u .g�..o p,,�au25`,
aoa�:7atLr. �7 �vv�.. r ciw di�y�
3 � � $ y � � pop..`� �
•4" p�' tL�w , •rte. ,,(py� p 'C1 �+�.
..`.. � � • G � � .� a � ,v ..^. a• J+ o u v � v �i C...-, � {� � �' .Lr c �. H •� cc � � � � .R
"quo — � — v �tLq A m
tv y t3'
y U Obi r�
v� g N 3 u 6� J' vyXT E Qw to f. -Orn �_ uz�.� , off' �a1�5� �' ;•.
�r Nctl
o C u' ;✓, y n .�('S y ffi y �' .T. c ,1 -JD y .G •aCi Si C-• ;� w �i a v, '�f' p'i �4
;Fjro
w��.Y aQa-C o�w.
°�f�a�°ro5o��w:
� � G s... u(+ O � ; n •� Cpl � 4 C� � ' J � � �. y `,� y . .
G M O ..� �,".•, ''� r G V. T`d ro N t'. U .c7 ,.�`.
y
& o a `" yam ,
ory w Ira Cly y...... �
1�
3 =• y rR U N w n, cC
> `�•v� yaYc- If y4;
" Cp• °'�5�5" u^c t.i «�'+`';.iF 'Ja �f:
' �. 61 ►� '.v'3 CO •� 0) w ti w u '
i� a �. Fa .`�'' •� t$Q? n � :n ;�3 �. !'• '� ,iCi' �' ` ;i �� t-�.t � � cep' �y C{'�' Y o oc - �, � 1+;' �� � - 3 � � u i-1- .: •$ � �. L � � Fi
y, M t1, cis k�: • I 'i's
--