Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2023-04-18 04LA E O AGENDA 7-1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 18, 2023 DREG°`' 3:00 p.m. Council Chamber- 3rd Floor of City Hall Contact: Kari Linder, City Recorder Email: Klinder@lakeoswego.city or CityRecorder@lakeoswego.city Phone: 503.534.4225 Also published on the internet at: www.lakeoswego.city. The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. To request ADA accommodations, please submit your request online or call 503.635.0282, four business days in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be livestreamed on the City's YouTube Channel and at www.lakeoswego.city as well as broadcast live on Tualatin Valley Community TV; check their website for details. How to testify: If you would like to provide public comment or public testimony at an upcoming City Council meeting, please refer to the City's instructions for in person and electronic (via Zoom or by phone) participation. In order to participate online or by phone, email: CityRecorder@lakeoswego.city by Noon the day of the meeting. Pre-registration is not required to testify in person at City Hall, but is encouraged and appreciated for meeting preparation. Simply fill out the request to speak card located on the table to the left as you enter the Chamber. Thank you. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Lake Oswego City Council will meet under authority of ORS 192.660(2)(d) Conduct deliberations with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations; and (f) Consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT—remaining agenda items to begin around 4:00 p.m. The purpose of Public Comment is to allow the community to present information or raise an issue regarding items not on the agenda or regarding agenda items that do not include a public hearing. A time limit of three minutes per individual shall apply. Public Comment will not exceed thirty minutes in total. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503.534.4225 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 6. CONSENT AGENDA • The Consent Agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion. • An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the Consent Agenda. • The City Council makes one motion covering all items included on the Consent Agenda. Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda. 6.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes. January 21, 2023, Draft Special Meeting Minutes February 7, 2023, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes Motion: Move to approve the minutes as written. 6.2 Resolution 23-15, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Intergovernmental Grant Agreement with the Clackamas Health, Housing, and Human Services Department's Social Services Division for Fiscal Year 2022-2023. Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 23-15. 7. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 8.1 Ordinance 2925, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel, Consisting of 0.98 Acres at 13237 Knaus Road; Declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain Districts (AN 23-0003). Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2925. 8.2 Ordinance 2921, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map to Change the Designation for a 0.79 Acre Parcel from R-5, Medium Density Residential to R-7.5, Low Density Residential at 1710 South Shore Blvd. (21E1OCC05000, 21E1OCC05100, 21E10CC05200 and 21E10CC05300); and Adopting Findings (LU 22-0058). Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2921. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503.534.4225 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 8.3 2023 Legislative Session Update. 9. STUDY SESSIONS 9.1 Emergency Medical Services Update. 9.2 Housing Needs Analysis and Housing Production Strategy Update (House Bill 2003)— PP 22-0005. 10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 12. ADJOURNMENT Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503.534.4225 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY 6.1 D�t'p` E � COUNCIL REPORT r Alig o OREGO� Subject: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: April 18, 2023 Staff Member: Kari Linder, City Recorder Report Date: April 10, 2023 Department: City Manager's Office Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑X Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑X Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Approve minutes as written. Recommended Language for Motion: Move to approve minutes as written. Project/ Issue Relates To: NA Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑X Not Applicable ATTACHMENTS 1. January 21, 2023, Draft Special Meeting Minutes 2. February 7, 2023, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT 1 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING rrA Ifir MINUTES V ! January 21, 2023 aREGO� 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buck called to order the special meeting of the City Council for a goal setting retreat at 8:37 a.m. on Saturday, January 21, 2023. The meeting was held both virtually via video conferencing and in person in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 380 A Avenue. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Buck, Councilors Wendland, Mboup, Verdick, Rapf, and Corrigan. Councilor Afghan was excused. Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Manager; Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney; Kari Linder, City Recorder; Madison Thesing, Assistant to the City Manager; George Burke, Police Chief; Don Johnson, Fire Chief; Ivan Anderholm, Parks, and Recreation Director; Melissa Kelly, Library Director; Megan Phelan, Assistant City Manager; Weston Pay, IT Director, Erica Rooney, City Engineer I Public Works Director; Anthony Hooper, Deputy City Manager; Shawn Cross, Finance Director; Scot Siegel, Community Development Director 3. REVIEW MISSION AND VALUES STATEMENT City Manager Bennett welcomed Council and the community members watching via video conferencing and those in attendance in person at City Hall. This was the only time of the year the City Council had the opportunity to talk about the comprehensive agenda it planned to tackle in 2023 and Council time was limited. The better job the Staff and Council did today in making sure it set realistic priorities, the better the execution. City Manager Bennett led a reflection on what had been accomplished by the Council, Staff, and community in 2023. Councilors listed the 2022 accomplishments they were most proud of as follows: • Mayor Buck: Collaboration with Metro on Boone's Ferry housing. • Councilor Wendland: The most successful Fourth of July Parade the City had ever held. • Councilor Verdick: Collaboration with the neighborhood regarding Rassekh Park wants, needs, and design. • Councilor Rapf stated he was not in a place where he felt anything significant was accomplished in 2022. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 9 January 21, 2023 • Councilor Mboup: Collaboration with police and the community. • Councilor Corrigan: The grand opening of the Boone's Ferry Road project. City Manager Bennett observed the diversity of accomplishments mentioned by Councilors and stated that diversity reflected how the Councilors saw the retreat agenda and highlighted all the places where the City touched the lives of people in the community. 4. DISCUSSION OF COUNCIL POLICIES AND AGREEMENTS City Manager Bennett began her presentation, via PowerPoint, and outlined the City's mission and values, goals and initiatives, and the Council and Staff's separate roles in carrying out the City's purpose and vision, strategic goals, priority action items, planning and oversight, and projects. She presented a revised and updated version of the City's Draft Preferred Future for Council reflection and discussion. • Councilors agreed the Draft Preferred Future was a realistic document and the City had already achieved some of what was outlined. 5. DISCUSSION OF STRATEGIC GOALS AND INITIATIVES City Manager Bennett led the Council through discussion of eight strategic goal areas and proposed initiatives for each area, noting the proposals reflected input from Councilors, Executive Staff, and the community. Goals and initiatives were reviewed one by one and then ranked by Councilors. Councilor comments and clarifying responses from Staff were noted on the following initiatives as noted: Public Safety • Public Safety/Initiative 3: Creating a process for external community groups to collaborate and communicate with each other about emergency management in neighborhoods and with volunteer networks could go a long way in helping neighbors during a large disaster as the City would be focused on clearing rights of way. Economic Development • Economic Development/Initiative 2: Reviewing the Status of the City's Urban Renewal Areas would allow the Council to discuss its philosophy around Urban Renewal which the Staff could then use to guide decisions and recommendations. The policy had not been discussed since 2013 and would require engagement from the School District and the County. • Economic Development/Initiative 3: Purchasing property for Lake Grove Urban Renewal Parking was phase 2 of the Lake Grove Urban Renewal Plan. Councilor Corrigan provided a brief history of the area and stated that while no property was currently available, the City's Redevelopment Manager had confirmed there was $2 million to $3 million available to purchase a property. • The City could still choose to purchase a property when the opportunity arose even if the Council chose not to prioritize phase 3. • The money set aside for the Urban Renewal District had to be used in the District for a project already identified in the plan unless the plan was amended. • Economic Development/Initiative 4: Ensure the Council was implementing the Economic Development Strategy adopted in 2022 would follow through with implanting the plan and review items with temporary funding and others that needed more permanent funding. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 9 January 21, 2023 Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion • The goal had been rewritten to incorporate the wording suggested by one of the Councilors to become more of an outcome statement that read, "Foster a welcoming and inclusive community where all people have the opportunity to thrive and have equitable access to City services." • DEI/Initiative 1: Guiding the highest priority recommendations of the DEI Advisory board needed Council time around developing relationships with culturally specific community- based organizations. In addition, while the City had previously revised its purchase code to ensure it prioritized women, minority-owned, and emerging businesses in its purchasing processes, a method to track this was necessary. Council time on expectations would be worthwhile. • The DEI board needed the Council to provide feedback and be a sounding board and resource and help integrate its work into the rest of the City's organization. Integration was an aspiration of the City's DEI work. • The City had some success in 2022 with integration among Boards and Commissions and the Staff was trying to figure out how to better structure internal conversations to support Boards and Commissions. With the DEI specifically, that meant figuring out how to use their expertise as a resource for other Boards and Commissions. • DEI/Initiative 2: Erica Rooney, City Engineer I Public Works Director, clarified the ADA Transition Plan had identified more than $200 million in needs for ADA and that the City needed to figure out where that money would come from and how to best spend its limited resources. • City Manager Bennett added the City would undertake the work; the initiative asked to what extent the work would become a priority. The City was required to make reasonable progress on the ADA Transition Plan and every new project the City built would be ADA compliant. The question was whether the City would accelerate projects already in the City's plan and elevate the ADA needs over other capital desires. Council took a break from 10:02 a.m. to 10:14 a.m. Climate Action • The goal had been revised to read, "Combat climate change and strengthen the community's resilience to climate impact," and details had been moved to the initiative. • Climate Action/Initiative 1: This Initiative is closely related to Climate Action/Initiative 6. It's focus was on the City's Operations within Climate Actions versus a policy • Climate Action/Initiative 2: Solar energy options were previously identified as huge opportunities to increase renewable energy in Lake Oswego. However extensive public outreach was needed, and the Urban Canopy was the largest constraint to effective use. This creates a "right versus right" situation: solar versus trees. • Climate Action/Initiative 3 would update the Urban and Community Forest Plan, which was 16 years old, with findings from the 2020 State of the Urban Forest Report. The City knew more about how the climate would change in Lake Oswego than it did in 2007. • Climate Action/Initiative 4: Scot Siegel, Community Development Director clarified there were some procedural issues and legal requirements involved with incorporating the Tree Code into the Community Development Code in addition to the substantive side of what would change about the Tree Code. • If the Code was prescriptive and could be applied ministerially, over the counter, appeals would not go to LUBA. The permit decisions would be like building permits and not City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 9 January 21, 2023 appealable. If the City maintained a second track and someone proposed more than what was allowed in the prescriptive code, that would be a potentially discretionary decision that could be appealed to LUBA. Today, those decisions could not go to LUBA because the Tree Code was not a land use code. • The more substantive policy question was what the City would be trying to accomplish by incorporating the Tree Code into the CDC. If the idea was to protect and preserve trees, then what was now a tree removal code, superseded by development regulations and Development Code, would make the Development Code subordinate to the policy direction of the Tree Code. The Sensitive Lands use regulations worked similarly. Making the Tree Code a land use regulation had an impact on property and all that went along with what happened when the City limited the use of property. • City Manager Bennett suggested the changes could result in two sets of Tree Code: one for tree removals tied to development and one for those not tied to development. • Climate Action/Initiative 4: Director Siegel stated the City would need to explore what the ramifications of incorporating the Tree Code into the Community Development Code would be for the Comprehensive Plan and the City's compliance with statewide housing goals and administrative rules. If the City's tree regulations became land use code that limited development in some way, it would then need to recalibrate its housing needs and Staff was currently updating its housing needs analysis. The City would then need to demonstrate to the state it had maintained adequate capacity and capability of delivering housing using a clear and objective process. Changes to the Tree Code would have to be coordinated regionally. • Councilors discussed their opinions on tree removal, tree code suggestions, the differences between Initiatives 3 and 4, and the need to update the Urban and Community Forest Plan at length for the Council to vote. They agreed to update the Urban and Community Forest Plan as a first step. • Climate Action/Initiative 5: Director Siegel stated the health of heritage trees was an element of the Urban Forestry Plan and those trees would be reviewed as part of Initiative 3. • Climate Action/Initiative 6: Accelerating implementation and update of the Climate Action Plan. Mayor Buck clarified this initiative was based on feedback from the community survey which indicated the community wanted to focus on items related to climate. The City and community needed more frequent updates status on initiatives in the plan. • Climate Action/Initiative 7: Councilor Verdick expanded on initiative seven which would seek to preserve existing buildings by requesting an increase in funding to the Historical Resource Advisory Board and grants to non-profits as well as work with existing buildings to make them more energy efficient by educating the community on existing programs, such as Eco Home. Making existing buildings more energy efficient had a huge impact on the environment. • There were qualifications for the HRAB grant program, and while it was small, it served nonprofits and homeowners. The grant program helped to offset costs associated with the expensive materials necessary to maintain historical integrity. • City Manager Bennett added there were state and utility-run programs for energy efficiency so the initiative could help the City promote other programs not necessarily using City funds. • City Manager Bennett clarified there were not any state mandates on the climate outside of the Climate Friendly and Equitable Community Act but that was mostly related to transportation and parking. • Director Siegel suggested Climate Action/Initiative 3 be updated to include housing along with the other factors of equitable outcomes, tree species, and climate change. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 9 January 21, 2023 City Operations City Manager Bennett stated the goal was a catch-all goal around City Operations and public trust and she listed the ten initiatives. Councilor Rapf stated he believed that over the past six to eight months, there had been growing distrust in the City's governing body because projects like the wastewater treatment plant and parks plans had not gone as smoothly as they could have. The good the Council did for residents did not matter if the people who elected them did not trust them. Lake Oswego was a very engaged community, but the engagement was overwhelmingly negative and not healthy. The City Operations Goal was number one in establishing the community trust with the City and community members. Councilor Mboup replied Lake Oswego was a democracy and neighbors coming to the City Council to have their voice heard was healthy. The fact that parks projects had not gone smoothly was not due to slack on the Council's part but to the environment and economy. As representatives, Councilors should tell residents the City had a competent staff who worked hard on the residents' behalf. Councilor Rapf agreed and added the problem he described was with communication. Many people in Lake Oswego did not understand the work that went on internally or the nuances of the Council's decisions, which was unfortunate. The Council needed to do a better job of communicating externally what it was doing and why. Councilor Corrigan noted self-awareness and reflection were valuable. The Council wanted the public's trust and gaining that trust was based on the four elements of communication, accountability, openness, and transparency. The Council could evaluate itself on those elements and if those things were kept in mind, trust would be less of a concern in future years. • City Operations/Initiative 5: City Manager Bennett stated conducting a long-term strategic review of the City's finances, including revenues, expenditures, and capital funding would necessitate Council time and involved a deeper review than what was normally done during the budget process. She suggested Initiative 6 regarding public education on capital needs and available funding could be included under Initiative 5. • City Operations/Initiative 4 would work to advance the City's agenda at regional and statewide tables beyond its current efforts. • Mayor Buck noted the level of regional engagement was very high currently with tolling, supportive housing services, and generally regional housing goals. The volume of information was difficult to keep up with and if the Council wanted to be relevant and have the City perspective heard on broader topics, he needed support. • City Operations/Initiative 8 would help the city's neighborhood associations stay relevant and engaged. The system was created before social media and fed into City processes in specific places. The neighborhood associations want to be relevant and contribute to the community and they were not sure the current way the City engaged with them was working for their neighborhoods or the City. If the Council took up initiative 8, Director Siegel and his team would explore the neighborhoods and examine how to engage with them and where they fed into city projects. Parks and Recreation Director Anderholm could engage with associations around community parks where some dissatisfaction had been reported. • One of the possible contributions of the neighborhood association was truly knowing their neighborhood so that in the event of emergencies, the neighbors were checking up on neighbors as opposed to calling 911 and asking the City to come. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 9 January 21, 2023 • City Operations/Initiative 7: City Manager Bennett stating a hearings officer for tree appeals would free Council from arbitrating a conflict where the Code dictated what the Council had to do. The difficulty was people liked the ability to appeal to their elected officials. Councilor Wendland said he suggested the initiative because while he respected the right to appeal, a hearings officer in the quasi-judicial situation of a tree appeal had the same ability to make a decision, but the current process represented a significant cost in Staff and Council time. • City Operations/Initiative 2: The Council would lead the community visioning process for the library and come up with the strategic plan; the Council would oversee the outcome of the process. The community may have a huge appetite for library and a small budget, but the focus was on the Council making the decision. The Council had commissioned the process in their December meeting and needed to own the fact it would spend its time over the next year dealing with the results of that process. Parks, Natural Areas, and Recreation This goal contained four initiatives. • Parks, Natural Areas, and Recreation/Initiative 4: Director Anderholm said Parks Plan 2025 was set to expire in 2025. An updated plan required a framework, a consultant, and public outreach. The first year of updating the plan would include a work session before the Council, followed by a meeting with the selection of a consultant. The Council would also receive invitations to engage with the public during public engagement. City Manager Bennett added if the initiative was prioritized, Staff would ensure it was fully fleshed out in the budget process and Council would not see most of its work until late in the year. Council took a break from 11:42 a.m. to 12:18 p.m. Transportation City Manager Bennett highlighted the goal and five initiatives. Transportation/Initiative 1: George Burke, Police Chief, stated reducing the speed on residential streets to 20 miles per hour would not change how streets were policed. A reduction would open the door for more traffic stops and speed was already the number one category in citations issued. City Manager Bennett added the City would not do any extra policing of the streets, if the speed limit was reduced; the parameters would be changed. The general challenge the Police Department had was that residents expected police to cite every driver who sped in the neighborhood, which was not possible. • City Engineer Rooney provided background on the Speed 20 program and noted both Portland and Eugene had implemented the program and went through an extensive and expensive program to change out signs. Since the speed limit would only apply on streets with signs, any street in Lake Oswego with a reduced speed would need to be signed. • The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) had reduced speed on its goals to observe, watch, and talk about an implementation program. The City was watching for results out of Portland and Eugene. • Overall, reduced speeds did not seem to change people's behavior too much until enforcement came into play. People drive at the speed they were comfortable driving with conditions, and it's very hard to change. • Lake Oswego did not have a lot of high speeds on residential roads. Since the law applied only to local residential roads, speeds could not be reduced to 20 on Country Club Road, Boones Ferry Road, or Bryant Road. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 9 January 21, 2023 • The City was cautious about how to approach reduced speeds and wanted TAB to give insight or feedback as it took into consideration what other agencies had already done. • City Manager Bennett said there was no Department standard or ORS requiring citations be given at certain levels of speed over the posted limit; it was a question of what a judge would do with a citation given for speeding 1 mile an hour over the speed limit versus 10. • The City would research the initiative before implementing reduced speeds to determine associated costs and time. • Speed was a high predictor for crashes and reduced speeds would reduce the potential for crashes. Following Council discussion about the merits and efficacy of reduced speeds, Councilor Verdick noted more than 50 percent of those polled in the community survey highlighted pedestrian safety, so the initiative was worth looking at. • Transportation/Initiative 2: Continue construction of sidewalks and pathways and focusing on safe routes to schools would allow the Council to prioritize allocation of discretionary street funds when available. • Transportation/Initiative 4: City Manager Bennett indicated a work session with TAB and School District Representatives about the engineering requirements for safe pedestrian infrastructure might be a productive use of Council time. The community did not seem to have a shared understanding of what a safe facility was. • Transportation/Initiative 5: Explore an e-bike library pilot program. Mayor Buck expanded on what an e-bike library program would involve and where in the City the program would be offered. The City would not run the program but would work with the Chamber and business programs to find a sponsor. Community Development City Manager Bennett noted the final goal's wording had not changed in the previous year and that it contained six initiatives. • Conversations surrounding homelessness were part of a larger regional conversation. Council time should be allocated as this issue would trigger community dialogue and partnerships with other jurisdictions were needed. Director Siegel answered questions from the Council about reviewing the Development Code processes and the timelines for Staff to conduct a comprehensive review of the Development Code. • One path would be to implement the Housing Policy, comply with House Bill (HB) 2003, improve the process around housing to produce more housing and housing options, and then focus on the economic side independently. • A second path would look at the Code holistically, which could have some benefits. In the past, the City had elected not to start over on its Community Development Code but the City was almost built out and was in a different place. A holistic examination of code could include structural changes and a substantive look at how zoning was set up. • The Planning Department had the capacity to make systematic changes in operations, but it would be a 24-to-36-month process. • The work on housing and HB 2003 might find the City needed to structurally rework code and economic development review work with the Chamber and the business community might arrive at a similar conclusion. Staff would present options and strategies fall of 2023 for the Council to pursue in 2024. • There could be some efficiencies in systematically addressing housing and business Code needs in the same effort. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 9 January 21, 2023 • Community Development/Initiative 5 Connecting homeless people with services. Currently, the City was not proactive in connecting people with services; the effort came in response to calls for service and began with the Police Department and sometimes the behavioral health specialist. Staff suggested the Council have a better understanding of regional happenings before it decided on what the City should do programmatically. Council took a break from 1:19 p.m. to 1:33 p.m. City Manager Bennett reviewed the results of ranking with the Council and removed the item regarding interim solutions for pedestrian safety because it did not necessitate Council action. Councilors discussed the rankings, the time commitments associated with each item, and what each item communicated to the community. Councilors worked through a second round of voting and discussed the resulting ranking of initiatives and the need to limit adopted goals to items that made transformative changes in the community. Mayor Buck urged the Council to adopt Urban Renewal as a goal for the upcoming year and stated the residents of Lake Grove deserved some type of analysis of what would happen with the rest of the project now that phase one was done. Urban Renewal was a big part of the City's future vision. Councilors debated the merits of appointing a hearings officer for tree removals. While the appointment may save the Council time, residents may perceive the move as the Council shirking its duties. In addition, the appointment of a hearings officer would require an investment of Council time and it was possible the issue would be addressed when reviewing the Urban Forestry Plan. City Manager Bennett reminded Councilors in previous years 17 goals had been accomplished. The Council could adopt more but should expect to accomplish 17 during the next year. Council undertook a third round of voting and finalized Council's Strategic Goals and Initiatives for 2023. Proposed Work Plan Items for Council Discussion: This item contained three proposed work plan items: • Create a City App centered around sustainability that also enhances communication and engagement with residents. Mayor Buck recommended the City outsource to improve the technology of its Eco Home website. He noted apps were difficult and expensive to build and stated the main goal of the work plan item was to create ways to empower, incentivize, and educate residents to make more sustainable choices around accelerating the actions in the Climate Action Plan. • Continue education efforts to increase e-bike safety. Councilors agreed the e-bike safety item would be the charge of the City's Public Safety Department. The Department would share responsibility for communication with the school district, but enforcement would be through the Police Department. • Improve the working relationship and communications with the Lake Oswego School District. Councilor Rapf stated the schools were one of the primary reasons people moved to Lake Oswego. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 9 January 21, 2023 6. DEBRIEF AND WRAP UP City Manager Bennett would provide the Department heads with the list of goals and initiatives to develop work plans. The Council would see the list for adoption on February 7tn City Manager Bennett reviewed with Councilors things that had gone well during the Council retreat, including the pre-work done by the Council, good discussions surrounding goals and initiatives, Staff guidance and support, and the fact that the Council and Executive Staff were on the same page with many of the goals and initiatives. In the future, the Council would avoid verbal hyperbole and find a way to physically seat Staff in a round table setting with the Council. 7. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Buck adjourned the special City Council meeting at 2:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kari Linder, City Recorder Approved by the City Council on {insert approval date} Joseph M. Buck, Mayor City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9 January 21, 2023 ATTACHMENT 2 iTt, , . CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING I CI MINUTES VV February 7, 2023 . .......EGO� 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buck called the regular City Council meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. on February 7, 2023. The meeting was held both virtually via video conferencing and in person in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 380 A Avenue. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup,Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Manager; Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney; Kari Linder, City Recorder; Scot Siegel, Community Development Director; Jessica Morey-Collins, Senior Development Specialist (via video conferencing); Don Johnson, Fire Chief; Erica Rooney, City Engineer I Public Works Director; Stefan Broadus, Assistant City Engineer 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Buck led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Lake Oswego City Council will meet under authority of ORS 192.660(2)(e) conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions and (f) consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection. Ms. Osoinach reviewed the statutory basis for entering executive session and outlined the parameters. The City Council met in executive session beginning at 5:36 p.m. and ending at 6:08 p.m. The Council reconvened in open session at 6:08 p.m. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Buck observed that some of those planning to speak wished to address pickleball at Westlake and/or George Rogers Park. While welcoming their comments, Council is precluded City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 20 February 7, 2023 from interaction with those speakers as long as related public processes remain open. This prohibition will continue as long as the City is engaged in active land-use issues at the two facilities. It also pertains to persons communicating via email. He reviewed the format for comment, noting the total time allocation of 30 minutes for this agenda item. Via Video Conferencinq • Scott Collins As a Westlake neighborhood resident living near the tennis courts, Mr. Collins expressed concern about potential adverse effects of pickleball play on First Responders at the nearby fire station. Impacts on neighbors there are also a concern, based on the closure of the courts at George Rogers Park. Citing national statistics of the U.S., he noted that about 2.6% of the population participates regularly in pickleball, as compared to 6.3%for tennis. He particularly does not wish to see outdoor tennis courts being decommissioned in favor of pickleball. Clearly, pickleball play is growing, and Council should consider an appropriate place for siting courts. In Person at City Hall Council Chamber • Kent Drangsholt Mr. Drangsholt, as owner of At the Garages on the south end of Lake Oswego near 1-5, reported that he will be installing pickleball facilities there. In the first phase, they anticipate installing two outdoor courts, plus two smaller two-player courts; in a second phase, three more courts may be added. This business enterprise can help the City by offering a desirable option to meet growing interest in pickleball. Unlike the City, he believes, his club facility will be offering food and alcohol services and other benefits. The City's decisions regarding pickleball create a void that he is willing to fill, and he asks that Council allow businesses to help with that. • Emily James Ms. James noted that her family's house is one of the closest to the tennis courts at Westlake Park. Noise that would be associated with pickleball there is a big concern. The children's daytime hours require homework, reading, and other quiet activities. Their early bedtimes can create difficulty when tennis play continues much later into the evening, as other parents would likely recognize. One of her children being neurodiverse and therefore very sensitive to sound, proximity to the courts is a concern. She expressed sympathy to those who hope pickleball courts can be sited there, but is not sure it should be at the expense of others' well-being, especially children's. Council is asked to consider the nearby residents. • Harlan Levy Another resident living close to Westlake Park and its tennis courts, Mr. Levy expressed his opposition to siting pickleball there. Along with family and friends, he plays tennis at the courts regularly, finding them in constant use year-round; many of the players can be seen at tonight's meeting. The community process that had explored alternative Lake Oswego sites for pickleball did not recommend Westlake as a prospect. In fact, the task force voted against using Westlake because it offers the city's only outdoor courts with lighting and is very well used. Also, staff had noted that residents live less than 150 feet from the courts. The Westlake fire station is literally next to the courts, where noise from pickleball could disturb their rest and hamper their critical City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 20 February 7, 2023 work. Of note, the Westlake station in 2022 responded to significantly more incidents than seen at the City's other three stations. He reminded Council of (1) the earlier speaker's plan to add pickleball courts at his nearby business; and (2) availability of pickleball facilities planned at the City's new recreation and aquatics facility. Finally, the tennis courts at Lake Oswego High School (LOHS) are underutilized, while also situated far from homes. He requested that Council explore the option of working with the Lake Oswego School District on this option, rather than Westlake Park. Council may hear from other Westlake neighbors who are concerned about impacts of this proposal, including noise, traffic, and other issues that would impact their right to the quiet enjoyment of their homes. They also should recall Councilor Afghan's statement on January 17 to the effect that this problem in Westlake dates back to 2015; people are hurting. Why would Council consider hurting other community members? Moving a problem is not solving a problem. • Taylor Drake Mr. Drake conveyed his opposition to conversion of the Westlake tennis courts to pickleball. At his house, directly east of the courts, he has found the park to be a good neighbor. Pickleball courts, however, will destroy the peaceful environment of Westlake. He outlined reasons that remediation efforts now being considered by staff will fail to reduce harm to neighbors: (1) The high-pitched sounds unique to pickleball do not fade into background noise; rather, studies have found they are more annoying to the human ear than lower-pitched sounds. The extent of this conversion to pickleball courts,with sounds of these impacts and loud voices of players,will create a disturbing level of noise that will flow into the neighborhood; this is the harm that Council had voted to terminate at George Rogers Park. (2) The acoustic fencing that may be moved from the George Rogers courts to Westlake will not overcome that harm because of the unique remediation challenges at Westlake. These include topographic issues whereby some houses are situated over 20 feet higher than the courts and ear levels of residents will be above or otherwise outside the protection of fencing. (3) The acoustic fencing fabric is reflective, rather than absorbent, of noise,which will worsen the problem for houses at higher elevations and directly east. Importantly, neighbors will be able to hear the noise from both outside and inside their homes, as will First Responders at the fire station. Homeowners will see negative impact on their property values, a real harm. Based on his research of noise studies, outdoor pickleball courts need to be placed at a distance of 500 to 600 feet from homes unless earthen berms and concrete walls, in conjunction with costly sound-absorbing materials, are placed strategically. Here, that option is not on the table, but Council does have better options. If supporting pickleball is a goal of the City, he concluded, it should be done the right way. A real solution would not penalize Westlake or any other neighborhood. Harm should not be shifted from one neighborhood to another, and Council is asked not to tolerate harm in any neighborhood. • Carrie Jones Ms. Jones advised that she, her husband, and three children, ages 9, 7, and 4, live in the house nearest to the Westlake tennis courts. The distance being less than 150 feet from the courts, they are extremely concerned about effects of loud and constant noise that would be generated by pickleball play, specifically impacting the health and well-being of the children. The children's bedrooms face the courts. With the youngest taking daytime naps and having an early bedtime, the parents are concerned about negative impacts of chronic sleep deprivation; Ms. Jones noted that she is very familiar with these, as she is a pediatric physician. Another of the children has anxiety, and they worry that pickleball noise will adversely affect her well-being. The next-nearest neighbors to the courts also have small children and share these concerns. Additionally, her husband's longtime workplace is his home office, also facing the courts. Since much of his City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 20 February 7, 2023 workday is comprised of virtual meetings there, they are concerned about severe harm to his quality of work and even impacts to their personal income. If they need to move, they expect it to be very difficult to sell their home. They value and support the opportunity for recreational activities in the community, but believe this proposed location for pickleball is not suitable for this or other residential areas. She implored Council to consider alternative locations for the courts. • George Vlaisavich Mr. Vlaisavich, also a Westlake neighborhood resident, opined that a valuable lesson has been learned through exploring pickleball issues: that this sport is not compatible with a neighborhood setting. He likened it to shooting or golf driving ranges in terms of the related rhythm of noise, probably requiring special zoning designation(s). It is understandable that the extent of pickleball noise issues would not be known from the outset. However, at this time he finds himself opposed to siting of the courts at Westlake Park, based on the extensive research, thought, and input brought forward by Westlake neighbors. Two points for Council consideration: (1) Pickleball may call for a special zoning designation. (2)The desire for a quick fix may be involved here. Speaking of his family's desire for access to an outdoor swimming pool when they moved to Lake Oswego 20 years ago, he noted they had needed to find a solution outside the city. Only now is that pool coming to Lake Oswego. While he recognizes there may be great desire for pickleball facilities now, sometimes people must wait. He and others believe that the right solution will ultimately be best, and they trust Council to make the right decision. • John Devlin Noting his residence as very near the Westlake Park tennis courts, Mr. Devlin asked that Council reconsider their January vote to explore Westlake as a pickleball site. He reviewed the work performed by the Council-appointed task force over a period of months. After establishing criteria and then identifying and analyzing potential sites, the task force had strongly rejected Westlake for consideration; in fact, no reference to Westlake was shown in the task force's final report. Even with a reduced minimum allowable distance from homes, the Westlake site did not satisfy that criterion. The Westlake fire station, which responds to 80% of Lake Oswego 911 calls, is even closer to the courts, staffed by EMS personnel working 24-hour shifts. This, too, was taken under consideration when the task force rejected Westlake as an option. Having listened to recordings of the hearings, Mr. Devlin heard people voicing concern about moving the problem to another location. Another factor was the strong desire of the task force not to displace existing activities, and tennis at Westlake is very popular. At an early stage in their work, the task force questioned keeping Westlake on the list of potential sites; he urged Council members to review that discussion. Prior to the Council's vote in January, Councilor Rapf had asked how the neighbors would react to the proposal, since they not been consulted. It is now clear there is strong opposition, as with George Rogers Park neighbors even after mitigation was undertaken. Council has determined that the task force's recommended options for a new pickleball facility are not affordable at this time. Neither location is suitable for pickleball, based on the task force's criteria. Therefore, Council is urged to respect their work and not simply move the problem elsewhere. • David Wiszneauckas Mr. Wiszneauckas described his interaction earlier with City PARKS staff when neighbors complained about pickleball noise at their homes near the Westlake tennis courts. He displayed an example of signs posted by the City, directing them to the George Rogers courts. Having subsequently read in the City's 2022 summary of activities that the City wishes to build bonds with City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 20 February 7, 2023 neighborhoods through listening to them, he emphasized that the same issues seen at George Rogers Park will recur at Westlake. He echoed the prior speaker's comment about the absence of Westlake from the list of prospective sites in the findings; at the same time, Westlake neighbors are willing to work with the players, Council, and PARKS staff to find a viable alternative. He understands that the City has identified a preferred site, but lacks funding to build a facility. Sources of suggested support might include (1) grants from various organizations, including the State of Oregon or (2) cooperative partnerships with businesses that might contribute funding, perhaps with recognition on an onsite plaque. It is essential to find the right location, where the neighborhoods are not impacted, and the task force has done that. Some Westlake neighbors' homes are slightly less than 300 feet from the courts, in contrast to the 400 to 600 feet suggested by acoustical engineers. He requested that Council review their decision and consider ways to act on the task force's recommendations. • David Dunning Mr. Dunning raised questions about the process that preceded the City's decision to close the pickleball courts at George Rogers Park. (1) Had the City considered the simplest, least costly solutions to the noise issues? Primarily, these would require use of quiet pickleballs and paddles, tested and found effective; he displayed examples of both and a listing of paddles. (2) Was Council aware that the curtains installed at taxpayer cost of $70,000 were actually sound- reflecting and not sound-absorbing? (3) Despite this, the curtains did reduce noise across Ladd Street. In the testing commissioned by the City, was any conducted inside the homes there, with doors and windows closed? (4) In considering matters of mental and emotional health: Were the joys experienced by the George Rogers pickleball players considered or was the behavior of one woman from across the street given undue consideration? On two occasions, he had been present when she came onto the courts, yelling and crying. Regarding the decision to close the courts there without any viable alternatives in place, he asked: Had Council taken seriously the PARKS Board's unanimous decision in December to `continue the use of George Rogers courts until such time that new courts and equal opportunity can be made in Lake Oswego'? Regarding Council's 4-3 vote in January to close the courts immediately, he discussed the recusal requirement for any City Council member who may have a conflict of interest or lack of impartiality, with personal financial interest in the decision's outcome. Here, he believes that newly-elected Councilor Afghan has demonstrated a clear lack of impartiality at parks and recreation meetings over the past year, specifically at the July 20 meeting. More importantly, his recusal is necessary because his home property is near George Rogers Park. Lastly, Council was reminded of its mission to cultivate an exceptional quality of life for all community members. • Doug Anderson Mr. Anderson introduced himself as an officer in a Lake Oswego pickleball club and a member of the task force studying a suitable site(s) for pickleball. He noted that recent Council meetings have focused on financial restraints faced by the City, with some long-anticipated projects now delayed or shelved. Citing the city's motto (`Live Where You Play'), he contrasted the number of public courts for tennis (21) with pickleball (none, unless the two are reopened at George Rogers Park); this strikes him as unfair. Given the large number of pickleball enthusiasts needing a place to play in Lake Oswego, he noted that Westlake was not their choice. However, they would play where courts were made available, and hoped that the Westlake offer was sincere. His club recognizes that the City must complete its due diligence, but that opposition may nonetheless continue. The pickleball community has compromised when requested to do so, and they ask that everyone engage in solving this problem. Several ideas to consider include: (1) Four imperfect City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 20 February 7, 2023 sites can be set up for temporary play, including the suggested LOHS site. (2) For the summer, play could be split between the Westlake and George Rogers sites, perhaps with different days specified at each location. (3)The South Shore Tennis Courts, with four existing pickleball courts, might be made available for a few hours. (4) Play at George Rogers Park could be restricted to the three courts next to Ladd Street, where the cement barrier and fence would block most of the noise. (5) To a limited extent, e.g., on alternate Friday evenings, pickleball play might be designated at the Tennis Center, such that tennis is not disrupted. His pickleball club has a significant number of members, and they are calling on Council to fast-track any efforts to increase residents' playing options. Parks and Recreation staff needs guidance from Council to make that happen. He reiterated the pickleball community's willingness to compromise and work together for the greater good, until funds are available for a permanent facility in the right location. • Stan Sasaki Mr. Sasaki, a 30-year resident of the Holly Orchard neighborhood and avid tennis player, expressed sadness at the closing of the Westlake courts. Located within walking distance of his home, the two-court configuration there provides the capacity and accessibility suitable for neighborhood children; they can also reach the park on foot or by bicycle, navigating only residential streets. Based on many years of observation, he believes the typical tennis player at the courts is a neighborhood resident. Importantly, the limitation to two courts is a disincentive for players to drive from other areas and then have to wait for a court. Recreation with neighbors at their local park also weaves the social fabric of community, he opined. A large, centralized approach would be more cost effective for specific park activities, and this is essentially what had happened at George Rogers Park. People coming from all around the area to play pickleball at an overutilized venue in a neighborhood park would greatly change that park's character. Rather than set up an ongoing sport-versus-sport controversy, Council could consider the seven-year George Rogers experiment a resounding success. In his view, a great deal was learned; validation of pickleball as a popular activity was achieved. He asked that Council reconsider the elimination of neighborhood tennis and ask PARKS to explore the bigger picture, rather than the narrow purpose of finding a new location for the six George Rogers pickleball courts. Mayor Buck thanked all of the speakers and encouraged participation of all in the public process underway regarding pickleball. Additional comments may be provided to all Council members via email, addressed to the Council distribution list. Written Public Comment Received and Posted on the City's Website • Mary Reisch and Peter Kroepfl • Michele Barnett • Carl and Jane Schmits 6. CONSENT AGENDA Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda. 6.1 Awarding a Public Improvement Contract for Preconstruction Management Services for WO 298 Blue Heron 2 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Project City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 20 February 7, 2023 Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign a Public Improvement Contract with J. W. Fowler in the amount of$95,265 for preconstruction services for WO 298 Blue Heron 2 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Project. 6.2 Awarding a Public Improvement Contract for Construction of the Annual Water Rehabilitation Project for WO 315 Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign a Public Improvement Contract in the amount of$647,765 for construction of the Annual Water Rehabilitation Project for WO 315. 6.3 Ordinance 2909, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) for the Purpose of Clarifying and Updating Various Provisions (2022); and Adopting Findings (LU 22-0038) Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2909. END CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Buck reviewed the three items listed on the Consent Agenda. Councilor Wendland moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Mboup seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting 'aye' (7-0). 7. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA No items were removed from the Consent Agenda. 8. CONSENT AGENDA - Councilors Only Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda. 8.1 Resolution 23-05, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego Approving an Appointment to the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Advisory Board. 8.2 Resolution 23-06, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego Adding Kimvi To as a Member of the Ad Hoc Housing Production Strategy Task Force. Councilor Wendland moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Verdick seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Mboup, Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting 'aye' (6-0). 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 20 February 7, 2023 9.1 Ordinance 2922, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending Ordinance 2920 by Deleting Section 3. Ms. Osoinach noted that this ordinance related to a matter that came before the Council in December, 2022. Likening it to a code"housekeeping" measure, she advised that its purpose was to update a reference to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in current code. Council President Verdick is the only member affected by the start date of this change (July 1, 2022). Therefore, she will not be voting on the ordinance now before Council, for the same reason that Mayor Buck and others did not participate in the previous vote. Ordinance 2922 simply brings all Council members in line with the CPI currently in effect, she advised. Councilor Wendland moved to enact Ordinance 2922. Councilor Mboup seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting `aye'. Councilor Verdick abstained (6-0-1). 9.2 Findings, Conclusions and Order for AP 22-06, 499-22-001206-TREE, Appeal of the Development Review Commission's Decision to Approve a Type II Tree Removal Application for one tree at 817 D Avenue Ms. Osoinach reviewed background of the matter, including the related January 17 quasi-judicial hearing held by City Council. The appeal, from the First Addition Neighbors and Forest Hills Neighborhood Association, had sought to reverse the Development Review Commission (DRC) order allowing a tree removal, as detailed in the Council Report. Also of note: Councilor Mboup had abstained from participating in that hearing and therefore would not be participating in the vote now before Council. She discussed Council's option to vote separately on the order of evidence. Staff's recommendation, however, would be to simplify: Make only a single motion that would affirm and adopt the findings, conclusions, and evidentiary order voted on initially. Councilor Rapf moved to adopt both the order on evidence and the findings, conclusions, and order for AP 22-06. Councilor Wendland seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting `aye'; Councilor Mboup abstained (6-0-1). 9.3 Adoption of the 2023 City Council Preferred Future, Goals, and Initiatives Ms. Bennett thanked Council for their hard work at the January 21 meeting where they discussed major City goals and projects for 2023. She considers the agenda for this calendar year to be quite ambitious, but also achievable. About 10 major policy projects have been identified; these will require considerable Council discussion, along with extensive community engagement. Of these projects, six will require continued high-level monitoring of activities by the Council, documented with quarterly reports. The Council also has five new initiatives this year. All told, she appreciates that the package encompasses all major operational areas, as appropriate for a full- service city. Upon adoption, staff will move forward with a timeline that first completes projects that are already underway. The new initiatives will follow, so progress on those will be seen later in the year. This will give Council an opportunity to consider and adapt the work plans, ensuring that their intentions in setting the new goals are addressed. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 20 February 7, 2023 Councilor Mboup moved to adopt the preferred future and the City Council 2023 goals and initiatives. Councilor Wendland seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting 'aye' (7-0). Councilor Wendland complimented Ms. Bennett and staff for coordinating the very productive Saturday session, echoed by Mayor Buck. 10. PUBLIC HEARING 10.1 Ordinance 2891,An Ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego Amending LOC 50.01.006 Nonconforming Uses, Structures, Lots and Site Features and LOC 50.07.004 Additional Submittal Requirements; and Adopting Findings (LU 22-0008). Mayor Buck reviewed the Ordinance title. Ms. Osoinach noted that the matter involved a legislative decision, including testimony, in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. Staff Report Mr.Siegel introduced the staff report and provided background, dating from Council's March 2022 study session on demolitions. At that session, Council also discussed the policy and regulations governing nonconforming development and the ability to continue a nonconforming development; that term, he clarified, refers to an existing structure or a lot that was established lawfully under either a different set of City standards or developed in the County and then annexed into the City, where it does not conform to current Code.Also, there is the related issue of what property owners are able to do in the way of remodeling or adding on to those structures. At that same study session, Council had provided direction on three fronts: (1) Update the definition of demolition to more appropriately distinguish a demolition from a remodel. Accordingly, Council amended the Building Code, establishing that removal of 50°/0 or more of the exterior walls or perimeter foundation on a residential structure would constitute demolition; there are related implications for the public notification and permit processes, as well as the demolition tax. (2) Consider removing the sunset on the demolition tax established in 2019. Council had extended this by passing an ordinance in fall of 2022, essentially making it permanent. Also included were policy changes related to manual deconstruction and greater opportunity to preserve historic elements. (3) Review the standards and process for remodels of nonconforming structures, i.e., residences. This required the most time as it entailed changes to the land use code, including significant study by the Planning Commission. The Commission conducted four work sessions and a tour of existing development in various neighborhoods to explore effects of existing policy. Their recommendation is now before the Council (Ordinance 2891, Residential Nonconforming Structures (LU 22-0008). Displaying slides (Presentation —Ordinance 2891, Residential Nonconforming Structures LU 22- 0008), Ms. Morey-Collins expanded on Mr. Siegel's overview of the topic before the Council. She differentiated nonconforming structures from illegal structures (Presentation, p 2/40). The Community Development Code(CDC)that is currently in effect allows for a legally-nonconforming structure to be continued or maintained. Upkeep and repairs are allowed, but structural alteration is disallowed as maintenance. So long as the change does not increase the degree of nonconformity, current Code allows for expansion or change of such structures if the new construction meets today's Code (Presentation, p 3-5/40). Next, she reviewed the proposed draft City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 20 February 7, 2023 Code amendments (Presentation, p 6-7/40). Essentially, these seek to align the nonconforming code with the definition established under the new building code. The effect would be such that any project requiring a demolition permit as prescribed under the 50% threshold for removal of exterior walls would be required to conform with today's Code standards. If there is an increase of 50% or more in a dwelling's floor area, where the total floor area after the addition exceeds 90% of the maximum allowed, that also would require conformance. Exceptions have been considered, including (1) conversion of a single-family dwelling to middle housing; (2) projects located on public property; (3) affordable housing projects that meet the criteria for system development charges waiver; and (4) projects that retain a native tree species meeting a minimum size requirement. The draft Code amendments also include changes to project submittal requirements. These are intended to provide the City with enhanced clarity on proposed projects, thereby helping to remedy some issues encountered with existing nonconforming structures. Over time, some older structures have sustained damage and/or have been subjected to outdated construction that cannot be merged safely with new construction. Upgraded controls for recordkeeping related to demolitions and structural inadequacies are also included. In another effort to identify compliance, a public hearing on December 12, 2022, (Presentation, p 8/40) involved the Planning Commission and public testimony addressing middle housing exemptions, the desire to streamline review processes, and whether the 50% or some other threshold would be a better place to start. Ms. Morey-Collins next discussed a series of slides that illustrated nonconforming development issues encountered by staff and how this Code change would apply. The slides encompassed eight case studies chosen by staff (Presentation, p 10-38/40), with site photographs and other graphics. In each case, she identified the project by type of housing, development plan, nonconforming element(s), means through which approval may have been received, ultimate outcome, and compliance in terms of both the current and the proposed Code. Both she and Mr. Siegel responded to Council members' comments and requests for additional details concerning some of the cases. At one point, Mr. Siegel noted the challenges of interpreting the City's very complex code, which includes standards that are specific to certain building elements, e.g., garages, and that are unique to neighborhoods that are overlays. No one code will fit every situation; this is why design variances, minor variances, and many alternative paths are offered. In fact, a desired outcome expressed by neighborhood chairs when they asked the City to pursue this matter was to achieve greater conformity with overlay standards. They wanted to see that redevelopment or replacement of dwellings would achieve the goals of the neighborhood plans. Mayor Buck posed questions about the benefits sought by the applicant in a specific nonconforming development project. In ensuing discussion, Mr. Siegel, Councilor Verdick, and Ms. Bennett indicated that the applicant and/or architect, rather than the City, could provide that information. This, like other information about the owner's intent for the property, may not be known by staff. Mayor Buck emphasized his desire to understand the situation as fully as possible, especially as applied to single-family or middle housing; it would help guide the Council in making this legislative decision. Ms. Bennett suggested that another benefit of the case study was to illustrate how challenging it will be as compared to other projects. Rather than trying to determine an applicant's motivations, the Council might find it more helpful to ask: How big a burden are we putting on someone trying to do development in Lake Oswego? In the case of this project, Mayor Buck opined that the new house was a modern adaptation of what had been the original one, as compared to a development that simply scrapped the look. Councilor Afghan asked if the proposed code required that the nonconforming structure remain in place or if instead the concept would be"grandfathered". Mr. Siegel advised that the physical structure must remain City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 20 February 7, 2023 in place in order to maintain entitlement to the nonconforming right; once removed, it is subject to current standards. Ms. Morey-Collins discussed key implementation issues that the proposed code change is seeking to resolve (Presentation, p 39/40): (1) substantial amount of staff time needed for compliance review of nonconforming remodels, resulting in a slower permitting process for all applicants; (2) situations where structural deficiencies are discovered after partial demolition or deconstruction, sometimes necessitating a new review process and frustration for applicants; (3) need for multiple corrections or redesigns, where earlier staff assistance could help ensure applicants' consideration of all possibilities and risks; and (4) recognizing the importance of timing inspections appropriately, with staff capacity and coordination to verify that nonconforming structural components remain on site after partial demolition or deconstruction, so that what remains will be sufficient to support future construction. Considerable coordination is required not only to verify that plans are in compliance, but that they are executed as approved. Mr. Siegel affirmed that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of the proposed code amendments. As noted earlier, the Commission had received testimony, primarily related to the proposed exceptions. However, the Neighborhood Chairs Committee, as well as the Council, had received testimony from community members who do not support making exceptions for remodels or reconstruction projects that are for the purpose of creating middle housing or that are creating income-restricted affordable housing; both of these had been exceptions proposed by staff, and the Planning Commission did support those. The related policy objective, he noted, was to provide flexibility for housing that has been identified as needed housing that is consistent with the City's housing-production goals. Finally, he commented that the State allows the City to be more forgiving in regulating middle housing with respect to single-family development, but not more restrictive with middle housing. Council does have the ability to put those exceptions in place to help facilitate middle housing or affordable housing. Council is not obligated to do so, but any restrictions placed on middle housing must be equivalent to those on single-family development. Mr. Siegel next addressed Council members' questions. Among these, Councilor Afghan requested a high-level justification of the middle- and affordable-housing exceptions. Mr. Siegel stated that flexibility was the objective, adding that no middle housing had been produced since enactment of the middle-housing codes. He acknowledged that this exception may only be used rarely for middle housing. However, it is in the spirit of providing flexibility to address the community's stated shortage of middle or alternative housing types. He next responded to Councilor Afghan's questions about specific development scenarios for these housing types. Finally, Councilor Afghan asked about the logic behind projects on public property also being exempt. Mr. Siegel indicated this relates to the existing demolition ordinance, and the demolition tax does not apply to dwellings on public property. While there are few such instances, the City occasionally will acquire properties with residential structures on them, hence the exemption. Councilor Wendland inquired about benefits for development of multiple dwellings as compared to a single-family dwelling. Mr. Siegel advised that the code as proposed would be favorable toward a project that is creating middle housing. By remodeling a single-family dwelling to create a duplex or larger multifamily development (triplex or quadplex), the property owner would be allowed to maintain the nonconforming right. Both middle housing and single-family housing are currently subject to the same standards insofar as the City regulates nonconforming development. The proposed changes would adjust the parameters upward for remodeling or adding on to single- family and affordable housing. The policy question before Council is: Should the thresholds remain as they are now for middle housing and affordable housing in terms of being able to City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 20 February 7, 2023 maintain a nonconforming right or should the thresholds be set higher? He provided additional background on the community's discussions and concerns about middle housing over the past three years, including issues of demolition and increased density on the lots. Over that period, a more intentional body of work related to housing has been seen. The goal now is to remove barriers to housing, particularly housing for those with the greatest need for smaller units and affordable units. Ms. Bennett requested clarification of accuracy and applicability of language pertaining to exceptions shown in the proposed code (Attachment 2 to Council Report, p 1/3, i.e., p 7/36). In responding, Mr. Siegel explained that middle and affordable housing would be exempt from the full conformity requirement if they were to demolish or add on, a sort of blanket exception. They would therefore continue as they would today with that nonconforming part of the structure. Councilor Wendland asked how the preservation of large native trees came to be an element of the proposed changes to this code. Mr. Siegel indicated that this arose in very early discussion with the Planning Commission and perhaps in a subsequent study session. He recalled concerns heard about how forcing development to come into full conformity could create a sort of adverse incentive to remove trees. Responding to related questions from Councilor Wendland, Mr. Siegel explained one concern: that more applicants would choose full demolition. This exception would offer an alternative where the applicant could save a large native tree while being allowed to keep the nonconforming part of the structure. Choosing to do so, he confirmed, would be solely the owner's decision. Councilor Wendland emphasized that he did not support undertaking any changes to the Tree Code, and Mr. Siegel advised that this proposal does not do that. He noted provisions of the current development code that provide exceptions where a development preserves a significant tree, now essentially in commercial areas.Where this occurs, the minimum landscaping and parking requirements can be reduced. It is a precedent for the proposed code and does not involve revision of the Tree Code; rather, it is a development standard. In response to further questions, he reiterated that it is entirely at the property owner's discretion. The key change is that the owner does not have to apply for a variance. Councilor Wendland commended this as a great solution that provides property owners with all their choices. In follow- up to Councilor Afghan, Mr. Siegel noted that the applicable tree in this context would be a native tree 30" in diameter or greater; if no such tree stood within the building envelope, any native tree 15" in diameter or greater would suffice. As a newer Council member, Councilor Corrigan inquired about potential uses of the lot and impact on neighbors regarding one of the case studies (Presentation, p 25-26/40). In essence, the development standards would apply the same as to a single-family remodel or middle housing, except that the owner could retain the nonconformity, Mr. Siegel advised. In related discussion, he noted effects based on whether the owner wished to do an internal remodel or multifamily development (e.g., duplex); two alternative scenarios were described for the latter. Councilor Corrigan reiterated her concern about impacts on neighbors and other aspects of the exception. Specific to this case study and Councilors' questions, Mr. Siegel and Ms. Morey Collins provided additional information about the building envelope and footprint and the maximum lot coverage. Mayor Buck asked if the maximum floor area and lot coverage would be the same, whether the proposed structure is to be either a single-family home and/or middle housing. Both Ms. Bennett and Mr. Siegel confirmed that to be correct. In response to Mayor Buck's questions about any consideration of exceptions for preserving trees outside the building envelope, Mr. Siegel indicated that had not been proposed; such trees are considered to have sufficient protection under the Tree Code when reasonable alternatives are available. Noting the high importance of both tree preservation and the appearance of garages to neighbors, Mayor Buck perceives a challenge in terms of balance for the City, e.g., as in the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 20 February 7, 2023 fifth case study (Presentation, p 25-26/40). Discussion ensued, with Mr. Siegel noting that the City's minor variance process could offer reduced setbacks and other dimensional standards that might allow for preservation of a significant tree. However, the owner cannot be compelled to apply for a variance. The exception being proposed seeks to provide an option for preserving a tree where it would otherwise be eligible for removal. Beyond the matter of nonconforming structure, property constraints are also a factor, e.g., driveways or utilities such as sewer lines or laterals. They present another kind of problem related to removal or disruption of trees. What solutions or alternatives might address these? Constrained lots that are narrow or oddly configured are seen across the community, he added. Councilor Wendland inquired about any outreach to builders on the proposed code changes, including the exceptions, and any reactions heard for or against. Mr. Siegel noted that the Planning Commission had received testimony from builders who did not favor adding these parameters to nonconforming development. In his own outreach to the Home Builders Association (HBA), he had heard input to the effect that setting a higher threshold, i.e., allowing removal of more of the existing structure in order to add on more square footage without triggering these changes, it might be an alternative. Having heard these viewpoints, the Commission had sought a balance between the two. Councilor Wendland indicated his greater question was about the middle housing: Would builders in that sector now have a great opportunity for finding creative approaches that might subvert the intention of the code? Mr. Siegel clarified that the HBA had not approached the City with this idea; rather, it was driven by staff's efforts to address what is being heard about housing and how the City can facilitate more economical forms of housing. Answering a final question from Mayor Buck, he advised that no applications for prospective middle housing had yet been received, though pre-application conferences have been conducted. Testimony In-Person Testimony • Carole Ockert, Neighborhood Chairs Committee Ms. Ockert noted that she spoke as representative of the Neighborhood Chairs Committee (NCC), and thanked Council for their diligence in working toward a fix for the City's demolition code. The NCC supports the extensive work of staff in preparing the well-considered language now before City Council. The NCC supports staff's work and the Code language as written and subsequently passed by the Planning Commission; however, NCC does not support the exemptions for middle housing and affordable housing. She highlighted major achievements since launching this initiative in March 2022: (1) fixing the definition of demolition; (2) setting the demolition tax amount; and (3) establishing a threshold for deconstruction. At the meeting now in progress, the Council's desire that only true remodels be allowed to maintain various nonconforming entitlements has been addressed. After years of attempted "end runs" to circumvent existing code, the proposed changes will meet the community's needs. Lake Oswego is a community that primarily removes older houses and replaces them with new, hence the importance of having land use code that is followed. That contributes to maintaining it as a desirable place to live. Reiterating the thorough exploration conducted by staff and the Planning Commission, she cited a specific instance the Commission considered in public testimony. They learned that the new code would not mitigate the adjacent property owner's issue in this case. However, Ms. Ockert opined that the proposed code changes will indeed address it for many more residents and for the community going forward. From the Commission's findings, she quoted their statements that this new Code "improves predictability in the permit process" and "balances City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 20 February 7, 2023 flexibility for development with neighborhood character and avoids impact on neighboring properties". Accordingly, staff convened a working group comprised of staff members, the DRC chair, a neighborhoods representative, and a developer with extensive experience in Lake Oswego, both on new builds and remodels. In a spirit of cooperation seen from the outset, staff strove to incorporate collaboration and balance into the language; the NCC understands this need for balance that considers the many individuals and groups, as well as City property tax. The result being considered now by Council represents compromise: a mix of interests and balance, and is now ready for adoption. As noted in the Commission findings, it allows for addressing unique and difficult site conditions by continuing the options for Minor Variance, Major Variance, and Residential Infill Development. Additionally, the new code offers a genuine incentive that can support this and prior Councils' desire to encourage preservation of older homes. Property owners may retain pre-existing nonconformities if(1) more of the original home is left standing or(2) more of the original home is incorporated into the upgraded property by staying within the generous add-on percentage. Next, she discussed reasons for not making middle and affordable housing exempt from the proposed code, i.e., enabling complete demolition while allowing owners to retain all nonconforming rights. The negative impact of a nonconformity is multiplied with middle housing, she asserted, with potential to become much worse over time. It is the adjacent neighbors who will bear an unequal burden in carrying the subsidy up front and for the many years of the housing's lifetime. The Planning Commission did not send this message to Council, she believes, mainly because they had not heard the public testimony of the Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (MHCAC); otherwise, the Commission would have come to a different decision. She discussed the diverse group of stakeholders comprising the MHCAC, designed and appointed by City Council to "conserve the community's quality of life by planning for change and growth". The MHCAC, when asked to consider if the City should offer regulatory incentives for projects that include affordable and/or accessible units in middle housing developments, advised against it. She cited specific concerns reflected in MHCAC memos and votes, and a staff summary noting that"...(MHCAC) members voiced concern that loosening these zoning requirements could diminish many of the characteristics that residents stated they valued about their neighborhood..." in a recent neighborhood character survey. Members also expressed concerns that regulatory incentives could result in less-desirable housing being constructed; low-income residents should be offered the same quality of housing as offered for market-rate housing. Based on her own lived experience, she endorsed the MHCAC's message that middle housing regulatory incentives should not be offered for any middle housing projects. She urged Council to allow time for the recently-activated housing production strategy task force to choose and implement code relating to production of middle and affordable housing. Council is asked to pass the Code now as written for pre-existing conformities without the exemption for middle housing or affordable housing. Written Testimony Received and Posted on the City's Website • Ruth Bregar • Grant Howell • Cheryl Uchida • Gretchen Sabo Seeing no other persons present to testify, Mayor Buck closed the public hearing. Councilor Mboup moved to tentatively approve Ordinance 2891 and direct staff to return on February 215t, 2023, with a final version of the ordinance, including findings and conclusions for LU 22-0008. Councilor Afghan seconded the motion. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 20 February 7, 2023 Mayor Buck called for discussion. Councilor Afghan expressed agreement with adopting the recommendations, except that he is concerned about effects of the three exceptions for middle housing, affordable housing, and projects on public property. Those who wish to develop middle housing should comply with current codes. Councilor Corrigan noted her preference for treating everyone the same, mainly to avoid unintended consequences. She asked about the possibility of adopting the ordinance now without the exceptions, but to allow the housing production committee to proceed with their work. If passed now without the exceptions, everyone would be treated the same, and the task force could observe what happens and return with an amended version to add the exceptions, if deemed appropriate. Mayor Buck noted that he views the exceptions as simply optional, certainly not a requirement of anyone. Since zero applications for middle housing have been received to date, he regards concern about impacts of including the exceptions as somewhat unrealistic. Providing this kind of flexibility is consistent with other policies to address the missing housing types needed in the community. Whether it is single-family housing or middle housing, truly impactful aspects, such as floor area ratios, do not change. The objectives are to encourage more diverse housing types and to preserve vegetation, especially significant trees. As proposed, the ordinance addresses both. However, it will not result in creating incentives sufficient to achieve more needed housing. Councilor Verdick indicated she was not completely comfortable with the middle- housing exception, which can allow developers to build and offer multi-million-dollar units. Recognizing the community's need for more diversity in its housing, she opined that can be done without allowing this exception. If the exception were allowed for affordable housing instead, it might be effective in getting more affordable housing into the community. Councilor Wendland expressed mixed feelings, commenting on the extraordinary range of nonconforming structures in the community, some dating back a century or more. As the ordinance is now proposed with the demolition code changes, he expects change to numerous aspects of how building will be done. State leadership is calling for more housing and aggressive plans to achieve it. City Council represents a community that values neighborhoods and unknown potential impacts on neighbors that may not yet be identified. He indicated he would favor approval, without the exceptions, and observe how the State process moves forward. The impact this ordinance would have on middle housing is questionable, but he suggested the City work more strategically to bring in middle and affordable housing. In his view, the Marylhurst and Boones Ferry projects,for example, offer more potential than remodeling million-dollar houses. Councilor Afghan noted concerns about the potential for affordable housing or middle housing to be situated in close proximity to neighbors' property lines. In order to enable construction of affordable/middle housing, he would instead favor financial incentives to support building it. Councilor Mboup touched briefly on a possible alternative to the motion that would exclude middle housing only, though he preferred that all exceptions remain. Mayor Buck reminded his Council colleagues that no applications for the staff-initiated variance option had been submitted to date. The motion now before Council simply provides one small tool for such development, though it may never be used. He sees it simply as offering some measure of flexibility, not having major impact.As such, approval of the ordinance is perhaps a gesture of good faith that incentives will be found. Councilor Rapf expressed his preference for a Lake Oswego that treats everyone the same, regardless of whether they are big or small or have an orientation toward business. If the City wishes to advance affordable or middle housing, the proposed ordinance as worded is not the way to do it. Following additional discussion between Council and staff members, Mayor Buck called for a motion. Councilor Wendland moved to amend Ordinance 2891 by striking 3(a)(v)(1) and 3(a)(v)(4) from Attachment 2 to the Ordinance. Councilor Rapf seconded the motion. A roll call vote City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 20 February 7, 2023 was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting `aye'. Mayor Buck and Councilor Mboup voted 'no' (5-2). After procedural clarification from Ms. Osoinach, Mayor Buck called for a vote on the motion now before the Council. Councilor Mboup moved to tentatively approve Ordinance 2891 as amended and direct staff to return on February 21,2023,with a final version of the ordinance, including findings and conclusions for LU 22-0008. Councilor Afghan seconded the motion. A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Verdick, Rapf, Afghan, Corrigan, and Wendland voting `aye'. Mayor Buck and Councilor Mboup voted 'no' (5-2). 11. STUDY SESSIONS 11.1 Fire Department Update This update, pursuant to Council's approved 2023 Goals, addresses implementation of a sustainable business model for the Fire Department that meets the City's 21st Century needs. Chief Johnson noted that this initiative supports the goal of ensuring a safe and secure community. In subsequent Council meetings, he plans to address other issues, perhaps to include the emergency response system, County initiatives underway, and modification of the American Medical Response (AMR) contract for transport. He hopes to offer Council members a learning opportunity with firefighters on duty, where they can gain insight on the variety of daily calls and responses. The current group, he emphasized, is extremely committed, professional, and proficient; he also regards them as the kindest people he has worked with in his 40-year career. Reviewing slides (Presentation - Fire Department Update, p 2-10), he presented an overview of the four fire stations and number of homes receiving emergency, medical, and fire services. Excluding dispatch center costs, the Fire Department provides those services at a rate of about $1.50 per thousand dollars of assessed value; dispatch adds about $.42. The Riverdale, Alto Park, and Lake Grove fire districts typically operate under a five-year contract with the City. The next upcoming renewal is for Riverdale, due in 2024. In response to questions from Mayor Buck, Chief Johnson and Ms. Bennett provided background on the function of those three fire districts as related to the City. Councilor Mboup inquired about the total charge of Lake Oswego's department($1.92 per$1,000 of assessed value), which Chief Johnson compared to nearby fire districts that could provide the services, though at higher rates. Next describing the four fire stations, he noted that all had been seismically retrofitted, except for the living quarters at the South Shore station (No. 212); a grant is being sought for that purpose. Types and capabilities of apparatus housed at each station were outlined, followed by allocations of 52 full-time equivalent staff members and department organizational chart (p 4-5/10). He described conscious efforts to achieve greater department diversity over the past two years. Despite low turnover, with average length of service at 11 years, the past two hiring processes have added people of color to the staff. With a focus on character, the result is not only diversity, but a very productive department. A simplified breakdown of calls in 2022 (p 6/10) was reviewed by category, including response prioritization strategies, focused on productive use of resources. Yearly incident counts (p 7/10) reflected an overall reduction in calls during the Covid pandemic; the latest counts are now in the pre-Covid range of 4,500 to 4,700 calls per year. He highlighted one aspect of managing demand: reducing the number of calls for help with care center residents who have fallen out of bed. With training and other assistance from the Fire Department, care center employees have learned proper techniques, while reducing demand for Department response. In addressing related City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 20 February 7, 2023 questions from Councilor Afghan, Chief Johnson advised that the distribution of calls tends to be throughout the 8:00 a.m.-to-8:00 p.m. period seven days a week, rather than concentrated Monday through Friday as a commuter city might be. Seasonal differences are not significant, he noted, except during significant ice or other storm events. Next, he discussed the component of inspections and plan reviews (p 9/10), starting with the regular licenses, e.g., licensed care facilities, schools, certain medical facilities. At the City's option, some of these inspections may be conducted by the State; however, he prefers that the inspections be done by the Department, as has been the case with his predecessors. The process enables Fire Department personnel to be knowledgeable about the buildings and staff. Starting about 18 months earlier, wildland inspections had begun with Department staff inspecting private properties accompanied by owners. This has been well received, and is regarded as a means of encouraging ongoing self- inspections. Finally, he touched on the revenue/expense components of the budget (p 10/10), including comparable percentages of General Revenue and Personnel Expense. Councilor Afghan expressed high regard for the Fire Department, citing his family's experience in several incidents. He recognized all as caring and courteous professionals, notably the First Responders. Two questions were posed, perhaps for a subsequent meeting: (1) In an instance of disaster, has scenario planning or perhaps tabletop exercise(s) been done by the Department, based on the resources currently available? How would the City react and what impacts on residents would be seen? (2) The statistics provided by the Chief indicate that a majority of responses are related to medical issues, with transport by the Fire Department or AMR. Has there been discussion of how that process might be made more efficient, while maintaining the level of care and concern for the patient? Chief Johnson provided an overview of the City's disaster- response coordination. He estimated that five tabletop exercises had been conducted in the Council Chamber over the past year. In addition, Fire and Police departments conduct their own "tabletops". He would anticipate a study session with Council soon, perhaps in late April. As to AMR transport, he indicated that a recent County study suggests that a pilot study be conducted within Lake Oswego. This will involve careful study and follow-up regarding potential changes under consideration, both from labor and medical perspectives. Councilor Afghan reiterated his concern about the need for seismic upgrades at the South Shore Fire Station. Referring to the slide showing incident count by fire station (p 8/10), Councilor Wendland inquired about the count for Westlake station, showing about double the number for each of the other three stations, though with the same staffing levels. Chief Johnson explained that station assignments are made for about three months, after which there is an opportunity to change stations. Many tend to prefer staying at the assigned station. Mayor Buck thanked the Chief and the Fire Department for their ongoing work in the community, expressing confidence that Lake Oswego residents have higher rates of survival in a cardiac event because of the Department's excellent response time. 11.2 Pavement Management Update Ms. Rooney introduced Mr. Broadus, acknowledging his key role over the past six years of focus on improving the Pavement Condition Index (PCI)of the City's roads. She acknowledged Council members for supporting this goal and the bond funding needed to achieve it. With accompanying slides (Presentation—Pavement Management Update, p 1-21), Mr. Broadus provided background on the program, highlighting the PCI as an industry-standard objective rating tool to measure the condition of a roadway. The 2016 comprehensive score for the City's roads City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 20 February 7, 2023 network as a whole was found to be 68. City Council subsequently set the goal to achieve a PCI of 70 by the year 2021. Projects in support of that goal began in 2018, with additional PCI assessments in 2019 and 2022. The five-year program had concluded in the latter part of 2022. Councilor Afghan inquired about the significance of a two-point improvement. Mr. Broadus differentiated it from a subjective goal, noting that a single point of PCI improvement becomes harder to achieve as the PCI rises. After discussing the staff and third-party providers comprising the project team (p 4/22), he outlined the City's two major approaches for pavement management (p 5-6/22): (1) Preventative maintenance. The chosen treatment, slurry seal, is effective in preserving the current PCI. (2) Rehabilitation, i.e., repaving. Though more costly, this process restores the PCI to a level near 100. Next displayed were graphs illustrating the nonlinear nature of pavement life and degradation (p 7-8/22). In order to maximize PCI, the City's strategy has been a combination of treatments: to address as many roads as possible when preventative maintenance remains viable and to use rehabilitation selectively, as appropriate. Additional slides showed historic data on City PCI (p 9/22)and a map illustrating the scale of this five-year program (p 10/22), which involved 28% of the mileage in the City's roads network. Significant successes were highlighted (p 11/22); notably, the PCI improvement from 68 to 75, with 58 lane miles repaved and 63 lane miles slurry sealed. Nearly 300 curb ramps were upgraded to current compliance levels, and the City established an internal policy to upgrade catch basins within the paving limits. Among other benefits, this extends the life of the storm infrastructure and averts the need to dig into new pavement if older infrastructure were to fail. A series of photographs illustrated examples of pavement restoration, refreshed striping, curb ramp installations, and other improvements at several locations (p 13-16/22). As to program costs, just over $38 million was spent, across nine different construction contracts (p 17/22). The Street Fund was the source of much of the funding, he explained, supplemented with $12.3 million through a bond issued in late 2019 (p 18/22). With bond funding complete, staff is now working on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to be presented soon to the Budget Committee (p 19-21/22). The six-year CIP is proposed at$1 million per year, affording the community a relative break after the recently-completed work. This will provide for minor patching this summer in small areas where it is most needed. In 2024, the plan calls for a package similar to the work done in the last few years, though likely smaller. A key question will be: What effect will this level of investment ($1 million per year) have on the PCI? In related discussion, Councilor Wendland inquired about the funding projections underlying the tentative budget. Ms. Rooney discussed the impact of greater focus on pathways in the coming years and other factors that will preclude larger paving expenditures. Projections for revenue are not yet finalized, but other Street Fund components must also be taken into account. These include electricity for street lights and signals, operation of signals, beautification and related maintenance, signing, and striping. Mr. Broadus noted that about $750,000 each year is also tentatively allocated for addressing the backlog of deficient ADA ramps. Ms. Bennett suggested that, as part of the budget process, staff should articulate for Council the tradeoffs involved in this and other types of capital projects. Ms. Rooney emphasized that their projection represents a worst-case scenario. However, PCI is certain to decline with reduced funding, as is always the case. Councilor Wendland recognized the significant efforts made to achieve the higher PCI, along with ongoing efforts needed to maintain it. He emphasized the positive feedback being heard from citizens, who also consider ongoing improvements to be very important. Councilor Afghan, noting the projected decline in PCI by 2028, asked if the City should assume that another $38 million would be needed to resolve that. If the proposed $1 million was indeed the amount invested annually, the PCI would certainly deteriorate, Mr. Broadus advised. Returning to the graph (p 21/22), he pointed out that the deterioration would likely not be uniform. Rather, roads now rated "Good"will largely remain in that category five years later. More adverse impacts would City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 20 February 7, 2023 be seen in the current "Fair" and "Poor" categories, where more movement downward can be anticipated. He clarified that$25 million will be needed between now and 2027 in the CIP in order to maintain a 75 PCI. In response to questions from Councilor Corrigan about an optimum level of investment, Mr. Broadus discussed related considerations of cost effectiveness. To raise its current level from 75 to 85, for example, the City would be paving many roads that get little traffic or are already in good shape. He indicated there is merit in considering the "feel" of conditions, too. Ms. Rooney cautioned against comparing Lake Oswego roads to those in neighboring municipalities. Lake Oswego's roads are based on what was once rural infrastructure. As annexation has occurred over time, many roads continue to lack curb, gutter, and sidewalk. "Very Poor" and "Poor" ratings tend to be seen on the City's low-volume local residential roads, while arterials are the best in the area. This is a direct result of the choice to undertake this program. In general, it is deemed a better investment as it affects more people, commerce, transit, etc. Next steps to raise the PCI will focus on small roads that need complete reconstruction, particularly those rated "Very Poor". These require considerable work, but have great impact. They may entail additional repair, e.g., to the sewer or water lines. These are challenges that come along with rural infrastructure. Mr. Broadus noted that the PCI segmentation by road classification is much closer to theoretical optimum when local roads are excluded, reflecting the intentional priority given to the City's high-volume roads. Mayor Buck observed that over time PCI has been a primary focus for Council. Staff's reminders about the many related expenditures from the Street Fund may call for more comprehensive consideration of what has and has not been done. Community feedback will help to find a good balance. A more holistic approach that focuses on safety, including roads, but also on pathways, street lights, and other improvements might also be more cost effective. Councilor Rapf commended the work accomplished. Rather than focusing on a metric, he recommended that Council improve residents' lives by finding and repairing deteriorated non-arterial roads. As suggested by Councilor Wendland, Ms. Rooney agreed to provide Council with at least the executive summary for their report. An email to the City's distribution list, he opined, might also help people to understand the challenges, including funding. In a closing comment, Ms. Rooney observed that the Street Fund, unlike other utilities, encompasses a broad range of expenditures; staff may follow up with detail for Council as budgeting moves forward this spring. 12. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL Mayor Buck highlighted the City's celebration of Black History Month in February, with resources and other information available on the City website and the LO Down newsletter. Listeners were reminded that the public portion of the February 21st City Council meeting would begin at 4:00 p.m. instead of the usual time. 13. REPORTS OF OFFICERS No reports were provided. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Buck adjourned the meeting at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 20 February 7, 2023 Kari Linder, City Recorder Approved by the City Council on {insert approval date} Joseph M. Buck, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 20 February 7, 2023 6.2 04; COUNCIL REPORT o ORE00� Subject: Resolution 23-15, Amending the 2021-2023 Intergovernmental subrecipient grant agreement with Clackamas County Social Services Division. Meeting Date: 4/18/23 Staff Member: Maria Bigelow, ACC Manager Report Date: 4/10/23 Department: Parks & Rec—Adult Community Center Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑X Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑X Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 23-15, Authorizing the City Manager to sign an amendment to the 2021-2023 intergovernmental subrecipient grant agreement with Clackamas County Social Services Division, to allow for reimbursement to the City for services provided. Recommended Language for Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 23-15. Project/ Issue Relates To: Funding Lake Oswego Adult Community Center social services Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities EAdopted Master Plan(s) ❑S Not Applicable ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Shall the grant budget be increased to allow the County to reimburse the City for services through June 30, 2023? Respect. Excellence. Trust. Sevice. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 BACKGROUND The 2021-22 grant agreement with Clackamas County Social Services described the scope of services, compensation, manner of performance, general conditions and various service agreements for services delivered by the Lake Oswego Adult Community Center.The County's grant funds are from the Older Americans Act. Services include information and reassurance, case management, transportation and nutrition. The Council approved the City accepting the grant by Resolution 21-21. A 2022 amendment both extended the term to June 30, 2023 and increased the budget amount by$119,850 for services during FY 2022-23. The Council approved that amendment by Resolution 22-22. This is a cost reimbursement grant and disbursements will be made in accordance with the requirements contained in Exhibit 5— Reporting Requirements and Exhibit 6— Budget and Units of Services. DISCUSSION This 2023 amendment increases the grant budget by $23,750 for the cost of services through June 30, 2023, allowing the City to be reimbursed for additional services through the end of FY 2022-23. Resolution 23-15 authorizes the City Manager to sign an amendment of the FY 2021-23 intergovernmental subrecipient grant agreement with Clackamas County, increasing the grant budget by an additional $23,750, to a total of$278,477, for ongoing delivery of services for FY 2022-23, and thereby allowing the Lake Oswego Adult Community Center to submit documentation for reimbursement of those additional funds for social services. FISCAL IMPACT The FY 2022-23 maximum, not to exceed, grant amount that Clackamas County will pay is increased by $27,500, to $143,600, which would allow for reimbursement to the City of additional costs for service. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution 23-15. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 23-15, with Exhibit A Respect. Excellence. Trust. Sevice. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION 23-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CLACKAMAS COUNTY HEALTH, HOUSING,AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT'S SOCIAL SERVICES DIVISION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023. WHEREAS,there is a need to provide social services to the citizens in Lake Oswego; WHEREAS, Resolution 21-21 approved a 2021-22 grant agreement with Clackamas County Social Services, funded through the Older Americans Act,for the City's Adult Community Center to provide information and reassurance, case management,transportation and nutrition to Lake Oswego seniors; and WHEREAS, Resolution 22-22 approved a 2022 amendment that both extended the term to June 30, 2023 and increased the budget amount by$119,850 for services during FY 2022-23; and WHEREAS,the City will provide additional services to the end of June 30, 2023 than budgeted; and WHEREAS, Clackamas County has the additional funding available to reimburse the City for the additional social services to citizens in Lake Oswego; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that: by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that the City Manager is authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Lake Oswego an amendment to the intergovernmental grant agreement with Clackamas County Health, Housing and Human Services, Social Services Division for fiscal year 2022-23, in the form attached as Exhibit A. This resolution shall be effective upon its adoption by the City Council. // // Page 1 - Resolution 23-15 Approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of April 2023. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED:Verdick Joseph M. Buck, Mayor ATTEST: Kari Linder, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney Page 2 - Resolution 23-15 EXHIBIT A Subrecipient Amendment (FY 21-22) Clackamas County, Department of Health, Housing and Human Services Subrecipient Agreement Number: 22-002 Board Order Number: Department/Division: H3S, Social Services Division Amendment No. 3 Subrecipient: City of Lake Oswego, on behalf of its Amendment Requested By: Brenda Durbin Lake Oswego Adult Community Center Approved to Form: County Counsel Dated Changes: ❑ Scope of Service ® Agreement Budget ❑ Agreement Time ( ) Other: Justification for Amendment: Amendment#3 to Subrecipient Agreement 22-002 ("Agreement")with City of Lake Oswego, on behalf of its Lake Oswego Adult Community Center provides budget adjustments for ongoing delivery of services for fiscal year 2022-23 and results in an increase to the budget by an additional $23,750, for a total Agreement amount of$278,477. This Amendment#3 is effective upon signature and continues through June 30, 2023. Except as amended hereby, all other terms and conditions of the contract remain in full force and effect. COUNTY has identified the changes with "bold/italic"font for easy reference. AMEND the following portion of Section 4, Grant Funds: 4. Grant Funds. COUNTY's funding for this Agreement is a combination of Federal, State and Local dollars as specified below by title and Catalog of Federal Regulations ("CFDA") number as appropriate. The maximum, not to exceed, grant amount that COUNTY will pay is $254,727. This is a cost reimbursement grant and disbursements will be made in accordance with the requirements contained in Exhibit 5 — Reporting Requirements and Exhibit 6— Budget and Units of Services. a. Grant Funds: COUNTY's funding of$229,370 in grant funds for this Agreement is the Older Americans Act (CFDA: 93.043, 93.044, 93.052, 93.053) issued to COUNTY by the State of Oregon, Department of Human Services ("ODHS"), Adults and People with Disabilities (APD), Community Services & Solutions Unit (CSSU) . TO READ: 4. Grant Funds. COUNTY's funding for this Agreement is a combination of Federal, State and Local dollars as specified below by title and Catalog of Federal Regulations ("CFDA") number as appropriate. The maximum, not to exceed, grant amount that COUNTY will pay is $278,477. This is a cost reimbursement grant and disbursements will be made in accordance with the requirements contained in Exhibit 5 — Reporting Requirements and Exhibit 6— Budget and Units of Services. City of Lake Oswego— Lake Oswego Adult Community Center Subrecipient Agreement 22-002—Amendment#3 Page 2 of 4 a. Grant Funds: COUNTY's funding of 253,120 in grant funds for this Agreement is the Older Americans Act (CFDA: 93.043, 93.044, 93.052, 93.053) issued to COUNTY by the State of Oregon, Department of Human Services ("ODHS"), Adults and People with Disabilities (APD), Community Services & Solutions Unit (CSSU) . THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Lake Oswego— Lake Oswego Adult Community Center Subrecipient Agreement 22-002—Amendment#3 Page 3 of 4 AMEND EXHIBIT 6- Budget and Units of Services, Section 2, UNIT COST SCHEDULE, 2022-23: LAKE OSWEGO ADULT COMMUNITY CENTER Fiscal Year 2022-23, Amended Funding Category CFDA Max.Total Required Services No.of Reimb. Funding Type Number Award Match* Units Rate Case Management 120 $ 30.00 Reassurance 120 $ 30.00 Client Services OAA IIIB 93.044 $ 11,600 $ 1,289 Info&Assistance 250 $ 17.00 Outreach 3 $ 50.00 Outreach and Vaccine COVID Support Vaccine Access Expansion 93.044 $ 1,000 NA NA NA Promotion OAA Meal Site Management 21,000 $ 1.55 OAA C1&C2 93.045 $ 87,000 $ 9,667 Food Service 21,000 $ 2.35 Nutrition HDM Assessment 170 $ 30.00 Services Supplemental OAA C1&C2** 93.045 $ 3,500 $ 389 Food Service 5,000 $ 0.70 NSIP 93.053 $ 11,200 NA Food Service 16,000 $ 0.70 Health OAA IIID(ARPA funded Evidence-Based Health& 93.045 $ 4,780 NA NA NA Promotion project) Wellness Programs Family Caregiver Support Respite OAA IIIE 93.052 $ 11,020 $ 3,674 290 $ 38.00 Program Respite Ride Connection: In Dist. NA $ 13,500 NA Rides within the TriMet Service 1,500 $ 9.00 TriMet Area Ride Connection: Out of Dist.- NA $ NA Rides outside of TriMet Service NA NA Transp. STF Funds Area Services TriMet STF Funds NA $ - NA Transportation Expansion NA NA TRIMet STF Funds Taxi (actual NA $ - NA Transportation Expansion NA NA cost) Total Maximum Award $ 143,600 Federal Award Total: $ 126,600 *Source of OAA Match-Staff time **Supplemental OAA C1&C2 is only to be used for reimbusement once NSIP Food Service funding is fully expended. City of Lake Oswego— Lake Oswego Adult Community Center Subrecipient Agreement 22-002—Amendment#3 Page 4 of 4 SIGNATURE PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment#3 to be executed by their duly authorized officers. SUBRECIPIENT CLACKAMAS COUNTY City of Lake Oswego, on behalf of its Lake Oswego Adult Community Center Commissioner: Tootie Smith, Chair Commissioner: Paul Savas Commissioner: Martha Schrader Martha Bennett, City Manager Commissioner: Mark Shull Commissioner: Ben West Dated: By: Tootie Smith, Chair Council Approval Date: Dated: Approved as to form: Digitally signed by Evan P.Boone DN:cn=Evan P.Boone,o=City of Lake Oswego,ou=City Attorney's Office, email=eboone@ci.oswego.or.us,c=US Date:2023.03.29 11:25:21-07'00' Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney 8.1 D�t'p` E � COUNCIL REPORT r 11 o OREGO� Subject: Ordinance 2925, Annexing property at 13237 Knaus Road; AN 23-0003 Meeting Date: April 18, 2023 Staff Member: Paul Espe, Associate Planner Report Date: April 5, 2023 Department: Community Development Department Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑X Approval — Planning Commission ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑X Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: The Council held a public hearing on April ❑ Council Direction 4, 2023 and tentatively approved the annexation. ❑ Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Enact Ordinance 2925. Recommended Language for Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2925. Project/ Issue Relates To: Annexation of Property Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Comprehensive Plan ❑X Not Applicable BACKGROUND Owner/Applicant Vivek and Meenakshi Dogra,Trustees initiated annexation of approximately 0.98 acres of residential land to the City at 13237 Knaus Road. The Council held a public hearing upon the petition for annexation on April 4, 2023. See Council Report dated March 15, 2023. DISCUSSION At the public hearing, written testimony (Exhibits F-1— F-3) was received from Jeanne and Charles Lemux, of the Lemieux Family Trust (collectively "Lemux"), owner of nearby property at 13092 Amber Place (21E04BA02500 and 21E04BA02600), expressing concern that annexation would affect the rights and obligations regarding an easement that benefits the Lemux property. Staff advised that the annexation does not affect the legal rights and obligations of parties to an easement, and that no annexation criteria was relevant to the Lemux testimony. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi:c,. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 The Council voted to tentatively enact Ordinance 2925 and direct staff to present findings and conclusions finalizing the Council's tentative approval on April 18, 2023. AYES: Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Wendland, Verdick, and Rapf NOES: None ABSTAIN: None EXCUSED: Councilors Afghan, and Corrigan Attachment C to Ord. 2925 has been prepared as supplemental findings to address the Lemux testimony (Exhibits F-1— F-3), finding and concluding that the existence of an easement upon the subject territory does not affect any annexation criteria. Note: If Councilors Afghan and Corrigan wish to participate in the consideration of Ord. 2925, they must review the record (all exhibits and video of the April 4, 2023 Council meeting1), declare that they have done so, and state any ex parte contacts, bias or financial conflict of interest. ALTERNATIVES The Council may approve the Finding and Conclusions (Attachments B and C to Ord. 2925) or direct staff to make modifications and return with amended Findings and Conclusions. RECOMMENDATION Enact Ord. 2925, which approves the Findings and Conclusions as presented. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Ordinance A-1 Ordinance 2925 (Draft 04/05/23) Attachment A: Map of Proposed Annexation, 02/01/23 Attachment B: Criteria, Findings, Conclusion and Effective Date, 03/15/23. Attachment C: Supplemental Findings and Conclusions 1 Public hearing video is at 2:10:07—2:19:27 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akW5TQJV1sk Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi:.c:. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT A-1 ORDINANCE 2925 AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ONE PARCEL, CONSISTING OF 0.98 ACRES AT 13237 KNAUS ROAD; DECLARING CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ZONING PURSUANT TO LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); AND REMOVING THE TERRITORY FROM CERTAIN DISTRICTS (AN 23- 0003). WHEREAS, annexation to the City of Lake Oswego of the territory shown in the map in Attachment "A" and described below, would constitute a contiguous boundary change under ORS 222.111, initiated by petition from the property owners as outlined in ORS 222.111(2); and, WHEREAS, the City has provided written notification of this annexation as required under ORS 222.120(3); and, WHEREAS, the City has received consent for the proposed annexation from all of the property owners and not less than 50 percent of the electors residing in the territory as outlined in ORS 222.125; and, WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Lake Grove Fire District #57 will, by operation of ORS 222.520, be withdrawn from that district immediately upon approval of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District will, by operation of ORS 222.520, be withdrawn from the district upon approval of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, LOC 50.01.004.5 specifies that, where the Comprehensive Plan Map requires a specific Zoning Map designation to be placed on the territory annexed to the City, such a zoning designation shall automatically be imposed on the territory as of the effective date of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, this annexation is consistent with the Urbanization Chapter of the City of Lake Oswego's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan, Oregon Revised Statutes 222.111(2), 222.120 and 222.125 for boundary changes, and Metro Code Sections 3.09.040(A) (1-4) and 3.09.050. Now, therefore, the City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. The real property described as follows is hereby annexed to the City of Lake Oswego: A tract of land located within the northwest quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas County, Oregon, said tract being all that property conveyed to Meenakshi Dogra and Vivek Dogra, Trustees, by Warranty Deed recorded November 14, 2017 in the Official Records of Clackamas County, as Recording No. 2017-077479; said tract of land more particularly described as follows: Ordinance 2925,AN 23-0003 (21E04BA02800) Page 1 of 3 Beginning at a point being common to the northwest corner of said Dogra tract, and the northeast corner of Mission Commons (Plat No. 4498), plat records of Clackamas County, said point also being South 88°35'30" East, 204.19 feet from the most easterly-northeast corner of Lot 40, Forest Hills Acres (Plat No. 598), plat records of Clackamas County, as described in said Recording No. 2017-077479; Thence South 88°35'13" East, 192.85 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of that tract of land conveyed to City of Lake Oswego, a municipal corporation, by Warranty Deed recorded September 25, 1981 in the Official Records of Clackamas County, as Recording No. 81-33298; Thence South 0°14'36" West, 224.83 feet, more or less, along a line being common to the easterly line of said Dogra tract, and the westerly line of said City of Lake Oswego tract, to the southerly line of that tract of land described in Recording No. 75-14171, Official Records of Clackamas County; Thence North 89°00' West, 192.11 feet, more or less, to a point being common to the southwest corner of said Dogra tract, and the southeast corner of said Mission Commons; Thence northerly, 226.20 feet, more or less, along a line being common to the westerly line of said Dogra tract, and the easterly line of said Mission Commons to the point of beginning. The annexed territory is depicted on Attachment A. Section 2. The annexed area lies within the following districts and shall be retained within these districts upon the effective date of annexation: Lake Grove Park District Library District of Clackamas County Section 3. The annexed area lies within the following districts and shall be withdrawn from these districts upon the effective date of annexation: Lake Grove Fire District#57 Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District Section 4. In accordance with LOC 50.01.004.5, the City zoning designation of R-10 shall be applied to the subject property on the effective date of annexation, as shown on Attachment A. Section 5. The City Council hereby adopts the findings of fact and conclusions set forth in Attachment B in support of this annexation ordinance. Section 6. Effective Dates: a. Effective Date of Annexation Ordinance. Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter, Section 35.C, this ordinance shall be effective on the 30th day after its enactment. Ordinance 2925,AN 23-0003 (21E04BA02800) Page 2 of 3 b. Effective Date of Annexation. Following the filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State as required by ORS 222.177, this annexation shall be effective upon the later of either: 1. the 30th day following the date of adoption of this ordinance; or 2. the date of filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State. Provided, however, that pursuant to ORS 222.040(2), if the effective date of the annexation as established above is a date that is within 90 days of a biennial primary or general election or after the deadline for filing notice of election before any other election held by any city, district or other municipal corporation involved in the area to be annexed, the annexation shall become effective on the day after the election. Read by title only and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on April 18, 2023. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED: Verdick Joseph M. Buck, Mayor Dated ATTEST: Kari Linder, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney Ordinance 2925,AN 23-0003 (21E04BA02800) Page 3 of 3 co co Annexation to the City of Lake Oswego w 1f AN 23-0003/Ordinance 2925 7 Highlands 1867 `fir' w w 0cD o 1858 1 1845 -- "' s�,Meadows Way 0 1836 1823 129124 1.� r o rn 1814 0 1801 0 12977 13050 • 41, a) w Knaus Rd _ <C- ---- '1_____ rn o rn h I 13062 0 13124 co gyp 17,3 w w 13136 "' w Hood `� cri 13061 View Ln R-15 13080 13084 ct __MI 13201 r.r f� o 13079 = r. o 0 a R-10 Y CO -15 13101 13092 cn cri w c>, 13233 13217 13214 Timberline Dr 13236 N rn w J1651 13305 13245 13240 a)- - E 13258 1640 Q 0 cn co o 471 w 1 0, al a) o N630 - oFj, Commons N � N �,\ a) o 16', o o 01 �. 0 0 �tp R-15 N 1655 13311 13322 rn _ co 13300 1677 \co 13337 13348 Yi ' Mr 'y lie Attachment A oEo4 - ! Tax Lot Ds: 21E04BA02800 'aor� �'11� City of Lake Oswego: . ` COMPREHENSIVE PLAN = R-10, Residential Low Density _ �. 4 ZONING = R-10, Residential Low Density Clackamas County: N '' 14\_ 13595 ZONING = R-10, Residential Low Density ,, -Pr AO I 1 Lake Oswego Subject i _ / -1 iil 1 13611 I——-J City Limits Property 1 0 100 200 300 400 500 i 1 , Feet 2/1/2023 ATTACHMENT B Criteria, Findings,Conclusion,and Effective Date APPLICABLE CRITERIA: A. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Boundary Changes; Mergers and Consolidations. 1. ORS 222.111(2) -Annexation of Contiguous Territory,Authority and Procedure for Annexation, Generally. 2. ORS 222.120 Procedure for Annexation Without Election; Hearing; Ordinance Subject to Referendum. 3. ORS 222.125 -Annexation by Consent of All Owners of Land and Majority of Electors; Proclamation of Annexation. B. Metro Code. 1. 3.09.040(A) (1-4) - Requirements for Petitions. 2. 3.09.050- Hearing and Decision Requirements for Decisions Other Than Expedited Decisions C. Comprehensive Plan - Urbanization Chapter 1. Policy A-3 -"The Urban Services Boundary(as depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Map) is the area within which the City shall be the eventual provider of the full range of urban services." 2. Policy C-3 -"Ensure that annexation of new territory or expansion of Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary does not detract from the City's ability to provide services to existing City Residents." 3. Policy C-4-"Prior to the annexation of non-island properties, ensure urban services are available and adequate to serve the subject property or will be made available in a timely manner by the City or a developer, commensurate with the scale of the proposed development." D. Comprehensive Plan -Complete Neighborhoods and Housing(Statewide Goal 10) Policy B-1 - "Provide and maintain zoning and development regulations that allow the opportunity to develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types, and that accommodate the needs of existing and future Lake Oswego Residents." E. OAR 660-008-0010-Allocation of Buildable Land FINDINGS: A. Oregon Revised Statutes(ORS), Boundary Changes; Mergers and Consolidations. 1. ORS 222.111(2)-Authority and Procedure for Annexation Specifying Tax Rate in Annexed Territory. ORS 222.111(2) provides that a proposal for annexation of territory to a City may be initiated by the legislative body of the City, on its own motion, or by a petition to the legislative body of the City by owners of real property in the territory to be annexed.The owners'of this property have petitioned the City for this annexation.The proposed annexation complies with this statute. The property is actually owned by the Meenakshi Dogra Trust u/a dated November 10,2017,and its two trustees have executed the petition for annexation. For ease of reference, reference to"owners"shall be to the two trustees. Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 1 OF 10 2. ORS 222.120- Procedure for Annexation Without Election; Hearing; Ordinance Subject to Referendum. ORS 222.120 states that an election need not be held on the question of annexation to the electors of the city for their approval or rejection if the legislative body provides for a duly noticed public hearing before the legislative body at which time the electors of the City may appear and be heard on the question of annexation. The City has provided written notification of this annexation by publishing a notice once each week for two consecutive weeks prior to the day of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and posted the notice of public hearing in four public places as required under ORS 222.120(3). The notice was published in the Lake Oswego Review and was posted at the City Hall,the Adult Community Center,the City Library and Luscher Farm. A notice was also posted on the site on March 15, 2023.The notice contained information about the affected territory, time and place of the public hearing and the means by which any person can obtain a copy of the written report. The annexation notification and review procedures comply with this statute. 3. ORS 222.125 -Annexation by Consent of All Owners of Land and Majority of Electors; Proclamation of Annexation. ORS 222.125 states that an election need not be held on the question of annexation within the area proposed to be annexed if all of the owners of land in the territory and not less than 50 percent of the electors, if any, residing in the territory consent in writing to the annexation.The property owners, who are also the only electors residing on the property, consented to the annexation.The proposed annexation complies with this statute. B. Metro Code 1 3.09.030- Notice Requirements A. The notice requirements apply to all boundary change decisions by a reviewing entity except expedited decisions made pursuant to MC 3.09.045.These requirements apply in addition to,and do not supersede applicable requirements of ORS Chapters 197, 198, 221 and 222 and any city or county charter provision on boundary changes. B. Within 45 days after a reviewing entity determines that a petition is complete,the entity shall set a time for deliberations on a boundary change.The reviewing entity shall give notice of its proposed deliberations by mailing notice to all necessary parties', by weatherproof posting of notice in the general vicinity of the affected territory and by publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the affected territory. Notice shall be mailed and posted at least 20 days prior to the date of deliberations. Notice shall be published as required by state law. C. The notice requirements in Subsection (B) shall: 1. Describe the affected territory in a manner that allows certainty; 2. State the date,time and place where the reviewing entity will consider the boundary change; and 3. State the means by which any person may obtain a copy of the reviewing entity's report on the proposal The City has provided written notification of this annexation to necessary parties (mailed notice),to the general vicinity (posting of the notice of annexation on this property on March 15, 2023), and by publishing 2"Necessary party" means "county; city; district whose jurisdictional boundary or adopted urban service area includes any part of the affected territory or who provides any urban service to any portion of the affected territory; Metro; or any other unit of local government." Metro Code 3.09.020(J). Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 2 OF 10 notice in the Lake Oswego Review, a newspaper of general circulation in the City. All notices were given at least 20 days prior to the date of the public hearing for annexation as required under MC 30.09.030(B). The notices contained information about the affected territory, time and place of the public hearing and the means by which any person can obtain a copy of the written report.The annexation notification and review procedures comply with the Metro code requirements. 2. 3.09.040- Requirements for Petitions. A. A petition for a boundary change must contain the following information: 1. The jurisdiction of the reviewing entity to act on the petition; 2. A map and a legal description of the affected territory in the form prescribed by the reviewing entity; 3. For minor boundary changes,the names and mailing addresses of all persons owning property and all electors within the affected territory as shown in the records of the tax assessor and county clerk; and, 4. For boundary changes under ORS 198.855 (3), 198.857, 222.125 or 222.170, statements of consent to the annexation signed by the requisite number of owners or electors. The above information was submitted as required by Metro Code.The property owners, and the electors on this property, have signed the application and petition. A map and legal description in the form required by the City have been included in the application materials and are on file. The owners of this property are the applicants and have therefore consented to the annexation on the annexation petition, meeting the consent requirements of ORS 222.170(1).The annexation petition complies with the Metro code requirements. 3. 3.09.050(B, D) - Hearing and Decision Requirements for Decisions Other Than Expedited Decisions 3.09.045(D, E) - Expedited Decisions(criteria incorporated for non-expedited decisions by MC 3.09.050(D)) B. Not later than 15 days prior to the date set for a hearing a report shall be available to the public that addresses the criteria identified in subsection (D) and includes the following information: 1.The extent to which urban services are available to serve the affected territory, including any extra territorial extensions of service; 2. Whether the proposed boundary change will result in the withdrawal of the affected territory from the legal boundary of any necessary party; and 3.The proposed effective date of the boundary change. These findings meet subsection B. D. To approve a boundary change through decisions made through procedures other than expedited, the reviewing entity shall apply the criteria and consider the factors set forth in Subsections (D) and (E) of section 3.09.045. 3.09.045- Expedited Decision D.To approve a boundary change through an expedited process,the city shall: 1. Find that the change is consistent with expressly applicable provisions in: a. Any applicable urban service agreement adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065 The City has entered into ORS 195.065 agreements with: 1) Lake Oswego School District and 2) Lake Grove Fire District. Lake Oswego School District: The City and the Lake Oswego School District entered into an ORS 195.065 urban service agreement for park services in July, 2003.The School District operates the Lake Grove Swim Park located at 3800 Lakeview Boulevard, which is limited to residents of a defined Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 3 OF 10 portion of the Lake Grove Area. The agreement states that the annexation of property by the City within the Lake Grove Area (which funds the swim park) shall not cause the withdrawal of this property from the School District. Lake Grove Fire District: The City and District entered into an ORS 195.065 urban service agreement for fire protection in July, 2003.The agreement states that upon annexation of property within the district by the City,the annexed property shall be withdrawn from the District and the City shall provide fire protection services.This property is within the boundaries of the Lake Grove Fire District #57 and the annexation will withdraw them from that District. The proposed annexation is consistent with these agreements. b. Any applicable annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205. There are no applicable annexation plans adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205 relating to the affected territory. c. Any applicable cooperative planning agreement adopted pursuant to ORS 195.020(2) between the affected entity and a necessary party. There are no ORS 195.020(2) cooperative planning agreements (which relate to special districts) between the city and a necessary party. d. Any applicable public facility plan adopted pursuant to a statewide planning goal on public facilities and services. Consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11 (Public Facilities) and the Community Health and Public Safety Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan,the City maintains a Public Facilities Plan (PFP).The PFP consists of master plans for streets, sanitary sewer,water, and stormwater facilities, which provide the basis for long-range planning for both the incorporated and unincorporated lands within Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary.The PFP is comprised of the Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan, Wastewater Master Plan, Water System Master Plan, and Clean Streams (Stormwater) Plan, pursuant to Statewide Planning Goals 11 (Public Facilities) and 12 (Transportation). Wastewater Master Plan: Sanitary sewer service can be made available from an existing eight- inch public sanitary sewer main that is located in Country Commons that currently terminates at the southwest corner of the site.The property owner would not be required to connect to the city sewer system unless the septic system has failed or the property is redeveloped with a minor or major development. (LOC 38.18.305; LOC 50.07.003.14.d.ii and .15.d.ii; LOC 50.06.008.3.f). The sanitary sewer service that would potentially serve this property could be provided in a manner that is consistent with the Wastewater Master Plan. Upon connection to a city sewer line, the existing septic tank on the property will need to be decommissioned per DEQ standards. Water System Master Plan:Water is available from an eight-inch City water main located within Country Commons along the site frontage. Future extension of water lines, if needed to serve future development, will be constructed and maintained in accordance with the City's Water System Master Plan.The nearest fire hydrant is located approximately 240 feet south of the site on the east side of the roadway. Future extension of water lines, if needed to serve future development, will be constructed and maintained in accordance with the City's Water System Master Plan. Clean Streams(Stormwater) Plan:There are no public stormwater systems in the vicinity of this property. After annexation, on-site surface water management requirements will fall under various provisions of the Lake Oswego Code. For example, stormwater runoff from new and/or replaced impervious surface areas shall be managed in accordance with the City's Stormwater Management Code (LOC 50.06.006 and LOC Art. 38.25), consistent with the Clean Streams (Stormwater) Plan. No Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 4 OF 10 new impervious surfaces will be proposed as part of this annexation. Transportation (Statewide Planning Goal 12): The City's 2015 Transportation System Plan (TSP) implements the multi-modal transportation system that will meet the needs of the city for a 20-year planning horizon. Country Commons is identified in the city's TSP as a local street and is under the jurisdiction and permitting authority of the City of Lake Oswego. Tri Met Line 37,which runs along Boones Ferry Road operating between downtown Lake Oswego and the Tualatin Park and Ride, provides the closest bus service to the subject property. Future roadway construction to serve future development, will be constructed and maintained in accordance with the City's TSP. e. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies Comprehensive Plan Map:This property is currently designated Low Density Residential and R-10 on Clackamas County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps. It is designated R-10 (Low Density Residential) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Map.As required by LOC 50.01.005.5, upon annexation, a City zoning designation of R-10 will be automatically applied to this property. The City and County have coordinated their comprehensive plans within the Dual Interest Area outlined in the City/County Urban Growth Management Agreement(dated February 4, 1992 and updated November 18, 1997), hence the City/County designations have been determined to be compatible.The proposed zoning designation of R-10 is consistent with the Urban Growth Management Agreement between the County and the City. Comprehensive Plan Policies:The Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan contains the following relevant language in the Urbanization chapter: Policy A-3: "The Urban Services Boundary(as depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Map) is the area within which the City shall be the eventual provider of the full range of urban services."This property is within the City's Urban Services Boundary.Therefore, the proposed annexation and the withdrawal of this property from the identified districts is consistent with this policy. Policy C-3: "Ensure that annexation of new territory or expansion of Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary does not detract from the City's ability to provide services to existing City residents." The approval of this annexation will result in the addition of 0.98 acres to be served by the City.As stated in Section 2(b)(1),the addition of this territory will not detract from the City's ability to provide police and fire protection to existing City residents. As outlined elsewhere in these findings and the incorporated materials, annexation of this property will not affect the City's ability to provide parks and recreation services, sewer or water services. Policy C-4: "Prior to the annexation of non-island properties, ensure urban services are available and adequate to serve this property or will be made available in a timely manner by the City or a developer commensurate with the scale of the proposed development." Availability of urban services serving this property is discussed below: Water: Water is available to serve the subject area, as detailed in subsection D.1.d. Sewer: Sanitary sewer service is available to serve the subject area, as detailed in subsection D.1.d. Stormwater:As detailed in subsection D.1.d, future development will be required to comply with the City standards for stormwater management. Fire Protection: Lake Grove Fire District#57 provides fire protection services to this property by Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 5 OF 10 agreement with the City. Upon annexation, this property will be withdrawn from this Fire District and served directly by the City. The Main fire station on 300 B Avenue, located southeast of the site,would be able to respond to emergencies under the eight-minute goal established in the Comprehensive Plan. Police: Upon annexation,this property will be withdrawn from the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District and served by the City.The Lake Oswego Police Department reviewed the proposal and indicated that it does not have any concerns with serving this property upon annexation. Parks and Open Space:The City has 629 acres of park and open space lands, or 14.6 acres per 1,000 population. The parks nearest to these properties are Tryon Creek State Natural Park, Woodmont Park, Springbrook Park and Iron Mountain Park.The City's park system will not be overburdened by any additional population annexed to the City with this application.The City's park system will not be overburdened by any additional population annexed to the City with this application. Lake Grove School District(Lake Grove Swim Park):The Lake Grove Swim Park is operated by the Lake Oswego School District and located at 3800 Lakeview Boulevard.The swim park is approximately 1.3 acres in size with restroom, play and swim facilities.This property is within the Lake Grove Area that is permitted use of the Lake Grove Swim Park, and the property will remain so following annexation. Transportation -Streets and Mass Transit:Transportation infrastructure and transit service is available to serve the subject area, as detailed in subsection D.1.d, above. Other Urban Services: Community Development Code Section 50.06.008.3/ LOC 50.07.003.14. d. ii and .15. d. ii requires that all minor and major development be provided with the following utility services: sidewalks, pedestrian and bicycle paths,traffic control signs and devices, street lights, streets, and TV cable.These utilities are now in place or can be put in place to serve this property upon major or minor development. In the event that future development occurs, an applicant for development is obligated to construct all necessary public facilities to serve their development. Statewide Goal 10 and Complete Neighborhoods and Housing City Comprehensive Plan Complete Neighborhoods and Housing Chapter The Complete Neighborhoods and Housing Chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan implements Statewide Housing Goal 10 and the Portland Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR 660-007-0000 et seq.), which requires that the City plan for a supply of residentially zoned land with an average allowed density of 10 dwelling units per net acre, and the opportunity to develop a mix of housing types consisting of not less than 50% attached and multifamily dwellings. Compliance with the State rules ensures the opportunity to provide adequate numbers of needed housing units and the efficient use of buildable land within urban growth boundaries, while promoting certainty in the development process to help reduce housing costs. The following Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) provides standards for compliance with Goal 10 "Housing" pursuant to ORS 197.296 (Buildable Lands) and ORS 197.303 through 197.307 (Needed Housing): OAR 660-008-0010 Allocation of Buildable Land The mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection. Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 6 OF 10 and density range as determined in the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands inventory must document the amount of buildable land in each residential plan designation. The Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan, Complete Neighborhoods and Housing Chapter, adopted pursuant to Goal 10 and the Metropolitan Housing Rule is designed to meet Lake Oswego's housing needs for not less than a twenty-year planning period.The Comprehensive Plan Map designates residential land use designations within the City limits and within Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary(USB) through the year 2035.The Comprehensive Plan Map's residential land use designations were adopted consistent with the City's Buildable Lands Inventory and Housing Needs Analysis (HNA, 2013), also incorporated herein by reference, and the City of Lake Oswego-Clackamas County Urban Growth Management Agreement (UGMA), which specifies future zoning of lands with the USB upon annexation to Lake Oswego.The UGMA anticipates the City eventually annexing all of the unincorporated lands that exist within the USB, and application of City zoning to those lands consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; hence, the HNA is for both the incorporated area of Lake Oswego (City) and unincorporated areas within Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary(USB). The Comprehensive Plan Map's residential land use designations are based on the HNA.These designations match the corresponding Zoning Map designations such that there is only one zone for each Plan designation, and therefore only one zone that is applied to each lot upon annexation, consistent with the HNA and in compliance with Goal 10 and the Metropolitan Housing Rule. In the case of the subject application, the applicable Plan Map designation and corresponding Zone Map designation is R-10.The City Comprehensive plan and corresponding Zone Map designation of R-10 provide an equal amount of housing density to the Clackamas County R-10 residential zoning designation. If this property was to be redeveloped,the City R-10 zoning would allow four additional primary dwelling units and accessory dwelling units if the primary use is a single-family dwelling, or accessory dwelling units) (ORS 197.312) (LOC Table 50.03.002-1 Residential Districts Use Table). Note: Additional dwelling units would be permitted if developed as middle housing. The proposed annexation and designation of City zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Map, and the City's Buildable Lands Inventory, and does not change the City's housing needs from those identified by the HNA; therefore, the annexation and zone change comply with Goal 10 and its implementing administrative rules. In this case,the zoning district would provide the opportunity for needed housing identified in the Housing Needs Analysis. The City uses the following approach for findings supporting two types of annexation zone changes: • Option 1 is for annexation-related non-discretionary comprehensive plan and zoning map amendments. • Option 2 is for annexation-related discretionary comprehensive plan and zoning map amendments. "Non-discretionary" amendments are zoning map amendments applied to an annexed property (or properties) where the applicable zoning designation is prescribed by the city's comprehensive plan and a zoning conversion table in the city-county urban growth management agreement(UGMA). "Discretionary" amendments are where more than one zoning designation is applicable, as prescribed by the city's comprehensive plan and the city-county UGMA, and the City Council has discretion in applying zoning. The proposed rezoning in AN 23-0003 is non-discretionary because the zoning is prescribed by the City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan. The City's R-10 zone is proposed to be applied consistent with (matching)the R-10 land use designation in the City's Goal 10/Metro Housing Rule-compliant comprehensive plan.The City Council does not have discretion to apply a different zone to the subject property unless it is Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 7 OF 10 amending the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation; therefore,the City does not evaluate proposed zones against its Housing Needs Analysis (HNA). The City simply applies the zoning that is prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan, consistent with the HNA and the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing(Goal 10) chapter of the Plan. In doing so,the City relies on LOC 50.01.004.5.a,which states that the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Map provides for the future City zoning of all property within the City's Urban Service Boundary. In cases where the Comprehensive Plan Map requires a specific zoning map designation, this designation is automatically imposed on territory when property is annexed to the City. In conclusion, the proposed R-10 zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and City-County UGMA for the subject property and the City Council does not have other zoning options from which to choose in approving AN 23-0003. Urban Growth Management Agreement General Urbanization Policy 4.A.4 of the Clackamas County Comprehensive Plan calls for the establishment of Urban Growth Management Areas and Urban Growth Management Agreements to clarify planning responsibilities between the County and cities for areas of mutual interest. Policy 4.A.5 directs the County to establish agreements with cities and service districts to clarify service and infrastructure responsibilities for areas of mutual interest. Similarly, the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan, Urbanization Chapter, Policy D-3, calls for entering into and maintaining an Urban Growth Management Agreement (UGMA) with Clackamas County for lands within the Urban Services Boundary. In furtherance of these policies,the City and County have entered into an Urban Growth Management Agreement that stipulates a mutual interest in coordinated land use planning, compatible comprehensive plans and provision of urban services and facilities. This agreement ensures coordination and consistency between the City and County comprehensive plans and outlines responsibilities in providing services and managing growth within the Dual Interest Area. Subsections 6 and 7, provided below, are applicable to annexations. "6C. City and County Notice and Coordination: The City shall provide notification to the County, and an opportunity to participate, review and comment, at least 35 days prior to the first public hearing on all proposed public facilities plans, legislative changes to the City Comprehensive Plan, or quasi-judicial land use actions adjacent to, or in close proximity to unincorporated areas. The City shall provide notice to the County of private or City initiated annexation requests within five days of the filing of an application with the Portland Metropolitan Boundary Commission." The Urban Growth Management Agreement specifies that the City notify the County of an annexation request within five days of when it is submitted to the Boundary Commission.There is no longer a Boundary Commission for the Portland Metropolitan area. Staff relies on the notice requirements of Metro Code 3.09.030(B), which requires mailing notice to all necessary parties, posting of a weatherproof notice in the general vicinity of the affected territory, and by publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the affected territory. Notice shall be mailed and posted at least 20 days prior to the date of deliberations. The notice required by MC 3.09.030(B) shall follow the requirements under MC 3.09.030(C),where the notice shall describe the affected territory in a manner that allows certainty, state the date, time and place where the reviewing entity will consider the boundary change; and, state the means by which any person may obtain a copy of the reviewing entity's report on the proposal. Clackamas Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 8 OF 10 County is a "necessary party" under the Metro Code definition and was notified on March 15, 2023, 20 days before public hearing. "7. City Annexations A. The City may undertake annexations in the manner provided for by law within the Dual Interest Area. The City annexation proposals shall include adjacent road right- of-way to property proposed for annexation. The County shall not oppose such annexations. B. Upon annexation, the City shall assume jurisdiction of the County roads and local access roads pursuant to a separate road transfer agreement between the City and county." The City is undertaking this annexation in the manner provided for in the applicable provisions of State Law and Metro Code for the territories that lie within the Dual Interest Area.This annexation is consistent with the City and County comprehensive plans, which have been coordinated in the Dual Interest Area within the regional Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Country Commons is identified in the City's Transportation System Plan as a local street and is under the jurisdiction and permitting authority of the City. f. Any applicable concept plans There are no applicable concept plans in this area. 2. Consider whether the boundary change would a. Promote the timely orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services b. Affect the quality and quantity of urban services c. Eliminate or avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities or services The proximity of this property to existing City services will allow this annexation to promote the timely, orderly and economical extension of public facilities and services.This property can readily be served with urban services and facilities. If and when additional development occurs in the area, provision of public facilities and services will occur consistent with the City's adopted public facility master plans, ensuring that it does not adversely affect the quality or quantity of urban services and avoiding unnecessary duplication of facilities or services. Therefore,this boundary change is consistent with criteria 2.a through 2.c. E. A city may not annex territory that lies outside the UGB except it may annex a lot or parcel that lies partially within and partially outside the UGB. The property to be annexed is located entirely within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). CONCLUSION: Based on the criteria and findings set forth above,the City Council concludes that AN 23-0003 can be made to comply with all applicable criteria and the annexation should be approved. EFFECTIVE DATE: A. Effective Date of Annexation Ordinance. Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter, Section 35.C.,the ordinance shall be effective on the 30th day after its enactment. B. Effective Date of Annexation. Following the filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State as required by ORS 222.177,this annexation shall be effective upon the later of: Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 9 OF 10 1. the 30th day following the date of adoption of this ordinance; or 2. the date of filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State; provided however that pursuant to ORS 222.040(2), if the effective date of the annexation as established above is a date that is within 90 days of a biennial primary or general election or after the deadline for filing notice of election before any other election held by any City, district or other municipal corporation involved in the area to be annexed,the annexation shall become effective on the day after the election. Ordinance 2925 (AN 23-0003) ATTACHMENT B/PAGE 10 OF 10 ATTACHMENT C SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS—EXHIBITS F-1—F-3 1. LEMUX EASEMENT CONCERN (Exhibits F-1— F-3) The Council received testimony (Exhibits F-1— F-3) from Jeanne and Charles Lemux, of the Lemieux Family Trust (collectively "Lemux") regarding an asserted 10-foot wide easement for road purposes located along the southern boundary of Lemux's 13092 Amber Place (21E04BA02500 and 21E04BA02600) property. Lemux asserts that the easement burdens the subject property and benefits the Lemux property. Lemux states that "this easement must be maintained when providing the Annexation of 13237 Knaus Road which borders and is located on the south side of this easement." (Exhibits F-1— F-3). Lemux does not identify any applicable annexation criteria on this issue. Staff advised the Council that annexation does not affect the private property rights of parties to an easement upon annexed property, and Lemux does not present any contrary legal argument. The Council notes that countless properties have been annexed over the years and undoubtedly some of the properties had easements of some nature upon them. No one has previously asserted that an annexation would or did alter the private property rights of the property benefited by an easement upon property annexed. The Council is informed and believes that the rights and obligations of parties by easements on property are not altered by annexation to the City. The Council finds and concludes that the existence of an easement upon the subject territory does not affect any annexation criteria. AN 23-0003 (Ordinance 2925) ATTACHMENT C/PAGE 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT F-1 From: Linder,Kari To: Esoe,Paul; McCaleb,Iris Subject: FW: Comment on Agenda item 10.3 Date: Tuesday,April 4,2023 8:23:06 AM Attachments: LO Quasi-judicial public hearing 13237 Knaus Rd.docx EPSON004.PDF Comments received on Annexation AN 23-0003. Kari Linder City Recorder I City Manager's Office City of Lake Oswego PO BOX 3691380 A Avenue l Lake Oswego OR 97034 503-534-4225 Respect. Excellence.Trust. Service From: CHARLES LEMIEUX<cjlemieux3@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, April 4, 2023 8:16 AM To: Linder, Kari <klinder@ci.oswego.or.us> Subject: Re: Comment on Agenda item 10.3 CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Please find attached the following: Written Testimony With Attachments by Jeanne and Charles Lemieux The Lemieux Family Trust Tax Lot 2500 and 2600 13092 Amber Place Lake Oswego, OR Re: Potential Annexation of Territory 13237 Knaus Road (21E048BA02800) Owners/Applicants: Vivek and Meenakshi Dogra AN 23-0003 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 1 OF 4 To: Lake Oswego City Council City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR From: Jeanne and Charles Lemieux Lemieux Family Trust Tax Lot 2500 and 2600 13092 Amber Place Lake Oswego, OR Date of Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing: Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 5:30PM Re: Potential Annexation of Territory 13237 Knaus Road (21E04BA02800) We are submitting written comment regarding the above application in order that our concerns can be voiced and recorded. It is our intention to alert the City Council that the Tax Lot 2600 (Parcel II) In our Deed (Attachment 1) indicates the following: PARCEL II: An easement for road purposes to be used in common with others over and across part of Section 4,Township 2 South,Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in Clackamas County, Oregon described as following: BEGINNING at an iron pipe in the West line of the County Road,known as Knaus road, said iron pipe is South 548.89 feet and East 1363.60 feet from the Northwest corner of the Josiah Franklin D.L.C.No. 43, in Section 4, Township 2 South,Rangel East,of the Willamette Meridian: thence North 80 35' 30"West a distance of 550,00 feet:thence South 10.00 feet:thence south 88 35' 30"East paralleling and 10.00 feet from the said North line first herein described a distance of 550.00 feet to an iron pipe in the West line of Knaus Road;thence North 0 00' 30" West and tracing said West line of Knaus Road 10.00 feet to the point of beginning. A Record of Survey (Attachment 2) was submitted to Clackamas County in March of 1980 and is on the County website. In April 2021, Weddle Surveying Inc. researched, verified and identified this appurtenant easement. We wish to have on record that this easement must be maintained when providing the Annexation of 13237 Knaus which borders this easement. We are in attendance at the Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing if the Lake Oswego Council has any questions regarding the above. AN 23-0003 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 2 OF 4 WARRANTY DEED --STATUTORY FORM (INDIVIDUAL or CORPORATION) FRANCES B. FOSTER Grantor,conveys and warrants to Charles E. Lemieux and Jeanne E. Lemieux, husband & wife Grantee,the following described real properly free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein: PARCEL I: Part of the Josiah Franklin D. L. C. No. 43, in Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, of the Willamette Meridian, in Clackamas County, Oregon , described as follows: BEGINNING at a point in the East line of the Northwest one-quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, of the Willamette Meridian, 583. 99 feet Southerly from the one-quarter corner on the North line of 'NJ Thisi said Section 4, said point being also on the Northerly line of the bleland I use I: Josiah Franklin D. L. C. ; thence North 88° 35' 30" West and tracing said le to the prop( Northerly line a distance of 304 feet to the Northeast corner of that es. Enclur tract of land conveyed to Thomas D. Holder, et ux, by Deed Recorded in k 257 , p age 6 Book 449, Page 650, Clackamas County Deed Records; thence South 0° 03' d August e 1, l 9 East 326. 85 feet to the Southeast corner of said Holder Tract and the true point of beginning; thence continuing South 0° 03' East 188. 15 feet to the North line of the easement reserved by the Oregon Iron and Steel Company and described in Deed to C. C. Hofele, et ux, Recorded April 29, 1954, in Book 481 , Page 7, Clackamas County Deed Records; thence West Thetl irements along the North line of said easement a distance of 284 feet; thence �- ofO R North 0° 03' West a distance of 188. 15 feet to the Southwest corner of said Holder Tract; thence South 88° 35' 30" East along the South line of wDated said Holder Tract, 284 feet to the true point of beginning. s name to be•sig "1 / PARCEL II: F a An easement for road purposes to be used in common with others over and across part of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, of the Willamette STATE Meridian, in Clackamas County, Oregon, described as follows: )ss, C, BEGINNING at an iron pipe in the West line of the County Road, known as and Pf Knaus Road, said iron pipe is South 548. 89 feet and East 1363. 60 feet uiysworn, from the Northwest corner of the Josiah Franklin D. L. C. No. 43, in aris Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, of the Willamette Meridian; ter is the thence North 88° 35' 30" West a distance of 550. 00 feet; thence South menttc 10. 00 feet; thence South 88° 35' 30" East paralleling and 10. 00 feet id instrument from the said North line first herein described a distance of 550. 00 dot directors; feet to an iron pipe in the West line of Knaus Road; thence North 0° 00' (ntary act and f ( 30" West and tracing said West line of Knaus Road 10. 00 feet to the point of beginning. Notify. 433 05 My comrnisgon '.,,, (3 �•r. ' Notary Public for Oregon • My commission expires: If the consideration consists of or includes other property or value,add the following: "The actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is part of the whole consideration(indicate which)". a 3 y A: m OV cp tl) Q E o c AN 23- s Name and Address EXHIBIT F-1/PALG3 OF 4 0 ?`� N 0 1,\Z ` y 1 ., (,„ N * o p. A, r o -d rr V."- •- ii es' - • rrL.' lorlo — i✓, 000.r:7'o`;� *it i E ➢io /88 37 . ' ,a (4)EEW N.G.p47,2 'Y✓' ' i . w oil L oo Z oo y \ti 1:;-,:i :)-- ': ,'-:, - ..t 0 , 5C'88./J' aEEo} ���, (� 0�0.3 'E I�tfti+) JN-0 /B,7,B2 Fca. - r�a t,in. .'r 0, A- 0 INC :. � j- m �Cr?� 1s tru V ° _,.i .1.1 `11:11.f.: • pro (ar�Q r �` o \off ° y�� ill \ �' ) ))t b w T . o v w o tiC��i ��10 tk q),.0 � � a�Z C N A) `► e t N� • m oP aZk, N a JVAIc 1,1 i rw oQ O !� Qy � � ooN Co � �� ;sue /1 >.Vfi Zr9 k� ,DIVA US ,�OAD ,�.� ; ;�,rE ti s?� � b t k• n� n rem �Z �Z '1 `':: -CtiA Gl ao t sa i • 1 I Z o AN 23-0003 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 4 OF 4 g EXHIBIT F-2 From: Linder,Kari To: McCaleb.Iris Subject: FW: Further information on Easement for Tax Lot 2500(21E04BA2500) Date: Tuesday,April 4,2023 12:20:39 PM Attachments: EPSON006.PDF Kari Linder City Recorder City Manager's Office City of Lake Oswego PO BOX 3691380 A Avenue Lake Oswego OR 97034 503-534-4225 Respect.Excellence.Trust. Service From: CHARLES LEMIEUX<cjlemieux3@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday,April 4, 2023 12:10 PM To: Espe, Paul <pespe@ci.oswego.or.us> Cc: Linder, Kari <klinder@ci.oswego.or.us> Subject: Further information on Easement for Tax Lot 2500 (21E04BA2500) CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Find attached mapping attached to Notice of Public Hearing Development Review Commission March 7,2016 AN 23-0003 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 1 OF 2 coc Io ui �> N ! QC:ns# e f N V O ci liii FF Ua n Z J13 # 3 �Ili co I ° ,I c I I k V z61 a zu w S Yii/•S A)ry: . `• i' i'<} xr>`w^,y `C'x '- `r `<• ',ti fyY S• J ( 4 '.,Y.'"›,'"/,\ ><' ,l� ,r ,i %, !, S _ ✓ *,✓S',,CC, ±\ .>> '.> Y.X�+;<, 'v, if✓�`,. �\ y'T: �' +cT.�va c,�1, x� \` rV}>v v'.r, "" • .. CV>-r',e'Y /,}''r` ., r v Si ), >{C.'"Yy ,, vi v} �.- h)„hn ,+/{y y^.> :>f(Y>\� • v. Yy}i. ,.rf v ' <Vn.:<r �J Yx+' ''„y, �. 'Y: ,�{Y) v' r .••• i \ w ;t/ >>'v T},v . �y, !`R.y�S .�T\. "x'�, > r < �>'�k t(. X;,.• x`n v , V-r ?. X u%:` v (,, k T y rr 't r�>�,1`�C�',;. .�(Y' >, t v ` , .,,ry k,t >`C{YTS .. ,. :Y.,"< v4} /�> �> ) 'X -� , '' <: '�yr ;i ! ,` `.,> •.- /v )!xn {),{'. 'x^\♦ ,,.e 'd r'i i y'><C . x\ .` ", / '✓•) T n•''c- >7: x `y ../ .}a )'>'� .k -f. x} ,{<C,ir�Y n h)^ .\ <+'2,,,v {,�'C' YNx<.. ).' `}/`x� ', r'`.r ��Ji''), .+K '.4 X . X K. -}x1 ,�/Y`K aS}tiv .\ . )�;<<:{ > „yY> Y V.„;.,„1.1 , 4S.< >,v, r>,, \Jf >, .r i�>` + { kniCJ ' . X/> .yvte'�'.>r.. C.l / 'I `.Y ,1. „, �) //,, `.�> l7 Yl ( �. I�J�v`�Y : 1,'!Y i\ J Ry� ♦�,,V !����! . �\ X_ rp " 1 • :V1> >'),�C r �CdC!`, k },. v 'se ,.nr< t y-t• )r yvx r tFON .� , !,; - '- {Tr'v'.^lv',i i J `lam x /, .x �� q , • IA ,s�,">�!n<'\Y;1>` i. ♦ 4 F fQ. ' \ '''> i \, Yz, , i s ) .\{ ,/ A. .. ` • > ., n pppp( > ,` r d Y ggk r+. f �, y '. X !Ni Y. (yd7rna3awv' .-• Re�I gg: ` s ? > r .% ",�5,� •� . xi R€ Lrl R \ y Y rYr, Z 1 O i B; rt / Ct y C,< yk F ; < ' `'^LbottT a i1R G $i x b �". ix yr, , `;a , . % ;{ ,z _ i = X' Kr xYN ,1 t T is � fi4Cl r?Y Yti ` r, , •7, C� `(v,.,_ �tqnn� 'e be L. ti r.. " t ! ; ' _ L'" J Yt . 'r), x 7. > <Y �Y Sy Y . x Sy Sf ' ^i I Y I yy Y t i 81 . in 1. ' "" '{,�5t y)!)`xT`', �,,.<ti [ • ..FISH. ..<. Y _ i `' �-,,,,,,,,,AA.:(f v Lio 1 A t� a`, F n,-, i 9 *.> ' t - .�. - _.L-�.r M19 ..�,�'JT/,I��i,l y< ` ', _ -AL � �Y. . i > ( y " \%{., .. 4cLi 4. V , ,, 4 --- ri7 ! i _r sg!g �L� `l ).}'w{�4x�\T/T 17, Y l > Y ,•..., // •,l !° 3M7 N 7f1e`!''Y Y.R r T .. v•.� /'5' *) <'�. I er '' e, -`d'f 8 ,r<,Ji. ., >n 1,f 6 /,. {S ./"k , S < ') , '.a ,} - tr.:< i Kt'✓) > - ti, ,.,C i , r'r /G . t L. > , ,\ ,: \ 1' '\ /w + ' ._'f/ r \''i '>, l ,'' '' fir,i+'r),Y ''' , r r, l x r } y ,C<xy f ) ' �,- ti ' , -vr { v w r y{ rX xi t. a: t i '' _111 •_ EXHIBIT F-3 From: cjlemieux3@comcast.net<cjlemieux3@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, April 4, 2023 11:52 AM To: Espe, Paul <pespe@ci.oswego.or.us> Cc: Linder, Kari <klinder@ci.oswego.or.us> Subject: Photos of survey markings for Tax Lot 2500 of Easement i IIIIIIIIMPIIIPIP it 6 y» re yy ~Pi u T+ { T _ . it. .. . . , f i � .,. .Yµ ... , .' 4 ._... - - a-F.,• y� ' _ • Y, +i 4 Ott: ;:'.--•..-.2 , 14 ip,..- _ l' ,.....) -.I . _ '4 ,_ ,,..,.. . .._.„ :._, • .. . . AN 23-0003 EXHIBIT F-3/PAGE 1 OF 2 • • • • • � I �r. • c - .. ` { • • • F . . • a' •y t s ' •,. CAUTION:This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links,especially from unknown senders. These photos give a clear view of the easement drive to properties. The Weddle Surveyling Inc. markings are clearly visible on these photos taken in March,2021 and September,2021. Sent from my iPad AN 23-0003 EXHIBIT F-3/PAGE 2 OF 2 8.2 °aVA 4� COUNCIL REPORT �� o AEG% Subject: Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map designation from R-5 to R-7.5 for properties at 1710 South Shore Blvd., Tax Lots/Maps: 21E1OCCO5000, 21E1OCCO5100, 21E10CC05200 and 21E10CC05300 (LU 22-0058/Ordinance 2921) Meeting Date: April 18, 2023 Staff Member: Paul Espe, Associate Planner Report Date: April 5, 2023 Department: Community Development Department Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion 0 Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial O Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: The Council held a public hearing on April ❑ Council Direction 4, 2023 and tentatively approved the proposed Map ❑ Consent Agenda amendments. Staff Recommendation: Enact Ordinance 2921. Recommended Language for Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2921. Project/ Issue Relates To: Not Applicable Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Comprehensive Plan Not Applicable BACKGROUND Owner/Applicant Jeff Prince (Wendie Kellington, Kellington Law Group), initiated an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designations from R-5 (restricted by condition of approval) to R-7.5. for properties at 1710 South Shore Blvd. The Council held a public hearing upon the petition for these map amendments on April 4, 2023. See Council Report dated March 15, 2023. DISCUSSION At the public hearing, no written or oral testimony, other than from the applicant who support the application. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 The Council voted to tentatively enact Ordinance 2921 and direct staff to present findings and conclusions finalizing the Council's tentative approval on April 18, 2023. AYES: Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Wendland, Verdick, and Rapf NOES: None ABSTAIN: None EXCUSED: Councilors Afghan, and Corrigan Note: If Councilors Afghan and Corrigan wish to participate in the consideration of Ord. 2921, they must review the record (all exhibits and video of the April 4, 2023 Council meeting1), declare that they have done so, and state any ex parte contacts, bias or financial conflict of interest. ALTERNATIVES The Council may adopt Ord. 2921, approving the Finding and Conclusions (Attachment A) or direct staff to make modifications and return with amended Findings and Conclusions. RECOMMENDATION Enact Ord. 2921, which approves the Findings and Conclusions as presented. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Ordinance A-1 Ordinance 2921 (Draft 04/05/23) Attachment A:City Council Findings and Conclusions Attachment B:Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map Amendments, 01/05/23 1 Public hearing video is at 2:10:07—2:19:27 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akW5TQJV1sk Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT A-1 ORDINANCE 2921 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AMENDING THE LAKE OSWEGO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION FOR A 0.79 ACRE PARCEL FROM R-5, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO R-7.5, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AT 1710 SOUTH SHORE BLVD. (21E10CC05000, 21E10CC05100, 21E10CC05200 and 21E10CC05300);AND ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 22-0058). WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing for consideration of this Ordinance was duly given in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on February 13, 2023 at which the staff report, public testimony and other evidence were received and considered; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that LU 22-0058 be approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Planning Commission recommendation was held by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on April 4, 2023, at which the staff report, public testimony and the record of the proceedings before the Planning Commission were received and considered; WHEREAS,the Council finds that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning map from R-5 Medium Density Residential to R-7.5 Low Density Residential is consistent with all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, Metro Code requirements and Statewide Planning Goals, and Administrative Rules; and, The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions (LU 22-0058) attached as Attachment A. Section 2. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps are hereby amended as illustrated on the maps of Attachment B from Medium Density Residential R-5 to Low Density Residential R-7.5. Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4: Effective Date: As provided in Section 35.C. of the Lake Oswego Charter,this ordinance shall take effect on the 30th day following enactment. Ordinance 2921 LU 22-0058 PAGE 1 OF 2 Enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 18th day of April, 2023. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED: Verdick Joseph M. Buck, Mayor Dated: ATTEST: Kari Linder, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney Ordinance 2921 LU 22-0058 PAGE 2 OF 2 ATTACHMENT A 1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL 2 OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 3 4 5 A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO LU 22-0058 6 THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 7 DESIGNATION FOR A 0.79 ACRE PARCEL FROM R-5 (MEDIUM DENSITY) 8 TO R-7.5 (LOW DENSITY) AT 1710 SOUTH SHORE BLVD; (ORDINANCE 9 2921) 10 11 NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS 12 The application consists of following actions: 13 • Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from R-5 to R-7.5 for Tax Lots 14 5000, 5100, 5200, and 5300, Map 21 E10CC. 15 • Amend the Zoning Map designation from R-5 (conditional) to R-7.5 for the same Tax Lots. 16 The site is located at 1710 South Shore Blvd.: 21 E10CC05000, 21 E10CC05100, 17 21 E10CC05200 and 21 E10CC05300. 18 19 HEARINGS 20 The Lake Oswego Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and 21 tentatively recommended approval of the application on February 13, 2023. The 22 Commission adopted their Findings, Conclusion and Order (Exhibit B-1) on February 27, 23 2023. The City Council held a public hearing and tentatively approved the application on 24 April 4, 2023. The Council did not receive any additional testimony. 25 26 Page 1— FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS (LU 22-0058/ ORDINANCE 2921) ELLEN OSOINACH LAKE OSWEGO CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE PO BOX 369/380 A AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97034 503.635.0225/503.699.7453(F) 1 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS 2 A. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code-Procedure (LOC Chapter 3 50) 4 LOC 50.07.003.1.b Burden of Proof LOC 50.07.003.3.c Notice of Public Hearing 5 LOC 50.07.003.4 Hearings before a Hearings Body 6 LOC 50.07.003.5 Conditions of Approval 7 LOC 50.07.003.7 Appeals 8 LOC 50.07.003.15 Major Development (excluding subsection 9 d.ii) 10 LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decision Defined (Quasi- judicial Comp. Plan Map, Zone Map, and 11 CDC Amendments to be processed via 12 Major Developments Procedures) 13 LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to Department of Land 14 Conservation and Development (DLCD) 15 LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation 16 Required LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision 17 18 B. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Policies 19 Land Use Planning 20 Policies A-1 (b, c, f, g, h); A-6; D-1; and E-1 (a-g); E-2 21 22 Complete Neighborhoods and Housing [Buildable Lands and Housing Needs 23 Analysis] 24 Policies A-1 b, A-1 c, B-1 25 26 Page 2— FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS (LU 22-0058/ORDINANCE 2921) ELLEN OSOINACH LAKE OSWEGO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PO BOX 369/380 A AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97034 503.635.0225/503.699.7453(F) Connected Community 1 Policies B-1: Transportation Choices 2 Policies C-1, C-6: Efficiency 3 Policy F-2: Livability 4 5 C. METRO Urban Growth Management Functional Plan 6 Chapter 3.07 7 Title 7: Housing Choice (Title 7, Sections 3.07.710 through 3.07.750) 8 9 D. Transportation Planning Rule (Chapter 660, Division 12) 10 OAR 660-12-060(1) and (2), Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendment 11 E. Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR 660-07-000) 12 13 FINDINGS AND REASONS 14 As findings supporting its decision, the City Council incorporates the Planning 15 Commission Staff Report dated February 12, 2023 (with all exhibits attached thereto), as 16 support for its decision. 17 18 CONCLUSION 19 The City Council concludes that LU 22-0058 complies with all applicable criteria 20 and should be approved. The Council also concludes that proposed Ordinance 2921, 21 which implements LU 22-0058, should be enacted. 22 // 23 // 24 // 25 26 Page 3— FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS (LU 22-0058/ORDINANCE 2921) ELLEN OSOINACH LAKE OSWEGO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PO BOX 369/380 A AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97034 503.635.0225/503.699.7453(F) 1 2 AYES: 3 NOES: 4 ABSENT: 5 ABSTAIN: 6 EXCUSED: 7 DATED this day of April 18, 2023. 8 9 Joseph M. Buck, Mayor 10 11 12 ATTEST: 13 Kari Linder, City Recorder 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 4— FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS (LU 22-0058/ORDINANCE 2921) ELLEN OSOINACH LAKE OSWEGO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PO BOX 369/380 A AVENUE LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97034 503.635.0225/503.699.7453(F) ATTACHMENT B Ordinance 2921 LU 22-0058 Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map Changes 1710 South Shore Blvd. (21E1OCC05000, 21E1OCC05100, 21E10CC05200, & 21E10CC05300) Current Proposed Address Tax Map/Lot Acres Comprehensive Plan Map/ Comprehensive Plan Map/ Zone Map Zone Map 1710 South Shore Blvd. 21E1OCC05000 0.15 R-5 R-7.5 21E10CC05100 0.27 R-5 R-7.5 21E10CC05200 0.27 R-5 R-7.5 21E10CC05300 0.10 R-5 R-7.5 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Comprehensive Plan Map 1 798 f179 ,7 TL5100 CO TL5000 R_7.5 1788 1710 TL 5200 1785 5300 1778 73ss 1766 1,, 1765 J 1399 1387 n 1385 LU22-0058 Comprehensive Plan /Zone Map Amendments Jeff Prince, 1710 South Shore Blvd. January 5, 2023 ATTACHMENT B / PAGE 1 OF 2 Zoning Map Amendment ' Zoning Map South Shore Blvd I 1798 1797 '` Ra.s � TL 5100 r \ CD r77 r go) I TL 5000 � R-7,CL rj 1. 743 e c — 1710 L1 7 Q 5 \TL530O TL 5200QJO V7,9 ,/ t)4, LU22-0058 Comprehensive Plan /Zone Map Amendments Jeff Prince, 1710 South Shore Blvd. January 5, 2023 ATTACHMENT B / PAGE 2 OF 2 8.3 Dt'1` E 4 COUNCIL REPORT cc) Subject: 2023 Legislative Session Update Meeting Date: April 18, 2023 Staff Member: Madison Thesing, Assistant to the City Manager Report Date: April 7, 2023 Department: City Manager's Office Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑X Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑ Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: No Council Action is requested—informational only Recommended Language for Motion: No Council action is requested. Project/ Issue Relates To: 2023 Legislative Session Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑X Not Applicable • ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Staff will provide an update the 2023 Legislative Session. BACKGROUND At the February 21, 2023 City Council meeting, staff presented an overview of the 2023 legislative session that is currently underway, as well as City Council approved the 2023 Legislative Priorities grounded in the City Council's goals and City-adopted Master Plans to guide staff in legislative efforts. At the March 21 City Council meeting, staff provided an update on the legislative session and the proposed approach to address bills related to housing and tolling. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 DISCUSSION The 2023 Legislative session is over 1/3 completed. During session, staff has been tracking various bills that either enhance or hinder the City Council and City operational goals. Legislation is moving to the next phase—bills were in the first assigned committee during that time they either passed, were amended to pass, or died in the committee. Last week, bills were required to move out of their first committee to meet the first major deadline. During the City Council, staff will provide an update on housing, tolling, and sustainability bills. FISCAL IMPACT No fiscal impact at this time, however, adopted legislative mandates can potentially impact future financial priorities, including consultant and administrative costs to implement changes to City code. ATTACHMENTS 1. City of Lake Oswego 2023 Legislative Priorities Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi:.c:. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT 1 /0` ',DT\ MEMORANDUM EGDta 2023 City of Lake Oswego Legislative Priorities City of Lake Oswego Legislative Principles The legislative principles are the overarching principles that guide our efforts at the Oregon State Legislature. The principles are the framework through which we address policies that transcend partisan politics or legislative sessions. • Preserve Home Rule Authority—The City of Lake Oswego aims to preserve home rule authority and local decision-making. Local control allows the City to act on behalf of the interests of the community based on context, needs, and objectives. Additionally, the City opposes efforts that pre-empt or limit local government authority. • Avoid Unfunded Mandates—The City of Lake Oswego opposes unfunded mandates and state-issued requirements that do not have dedicated funding or resources. • Leverage Regional and State Partnership—The City of Lake Oswego aims to leverage partnerships and coordination with outside agencies to achieve community goals. These partnerships support streamlined service delivery, fiscal responsibility, and a thoughtful approach to public services that cross jurisdiction boundaries without duplication or waste of resources. 2023 Legislative Priorities Legislative priorities are grounded by the adopted 2023 City Council goals, as well as previously adopted Master Plans that guide City operations and ongoing investments, such as the City's Comprehensive Plan,Transportation System Plan, and Sustainability and Climate Action Plan. Ensure a safe, secure, and prepared community Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Continue to oversee and guide the action • Monitor policies related to public safety plan to implement the recommendations and services, including statewide of the 2021 Community Dialog on standards and those that could preempt Policing, including increased reporting local decision making and public dialog about policing in Lake • Support legislative funding packages that Oswego address wildland-urban interface preparedness Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servic:c:. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 of 4 • Implement a sustainable business model • Support legislative funding, grants, or for the Fire Department that meets the opportunities to encourage community 21st century needs of Lake Oswego emergency preparedness • Create a process for externally-based community groups to connect and create a plan to support residents, especially seniors and people with disabilities, in the event of a disaster • Support business investment and job creation in Lake Oswego Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Ensure the North Anchor • Support policies and programs that invest redevelopment stays on track in workforce training in partnership with • Review the status of the City's Urban Oregon high school and higher education Renewal Areas, including the status of • Oppose legislative that directs or previous planning for Foothills preempts land use and conditions • Implement the initiatives in the 2022 Economic Development Strategy Foster a welcoming and inclusive community where all people have the opportunity to thrive and have equitable access to City services Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Guide the highest priority • Encourage legislative policies that recommendations of the DEI Advisory promote inclusion and equitable access Board: Develop relationships with to public programs, services, facilities and culturally specific community-based policies organizations; develop and implement • Monitor policies related to public inclusive community engagement contracting practices; and ensure COBID procurement process requirements are met Combat climate change and strengthen the community's resilience to climate impact Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Integrate climate action and resilience • Support legislation that advances local strategies into City projects, such as efforts to combat climate change with capital improvement planning, housing local authority, which includes opposing policy, and City facilities and fleet preemptions and state mandates decisions • Support legislation that provides direct • Update the Urban and Community Forest funding or grant opportunities to advance Plan using the findings of the 2022 State local efforts of the Urban Forest Report Page 3 of 4 Strengthen public trust in the City through continuous improvement, outstanding customer service, infrastructure investments, and fiscal stewardship Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Collaborate with the City of Portland to • Oppose legislation that limits or make a financially and environmentally interferes with the City's ability to collect responsible long-term investment in a local revenues sources wastewater treatment plant • Support legislative funding packages that • Lead the community visioning process for support infrastructure investments, the Lake Oswego Public Library; including highways, stormwater, implement a strategic plan based on the wastewater, and drinking water recommendations of the visioning process • Leverage Lake Oswego's position as the largest city in Clackamas County on regional bodies and with other groups such as the League of Oregon Cities and the Metropolitan Mayors Consortium • Conduct a long-term strategic review of the City's finances, including revenues, expenditures, and capital funding Invest in Lake Oswego's high-quality parks, natural areas, and recreational amenities Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Guide delivery of the LORAC and Golf • Encourage legislation that protects our Course Construction waterways and natural spaces, while • Develop a Funding Strategy for Rassekh encouraging investment in park Park, and construct the skate park acquisitions and improvements portion • Start the process to update the City's Parks Master Plan Improve transportation connections, mobility and safety for all travelers and all types of trips in Lake Oswego Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Continue construction of sidewalks and • Support legislative funding packages that pathways, focusing on safe routes to support transportation infrastructure schools investments. Transportation packages • Adopt a transportation framework plan should address multimodal needs and for Stafford/McVey promote local decision-making on needs • Support legislative direction that reexamines tolling projects and the tools available for funding infrastructure Page 4 of 4 projects, as well as encourage regionwide approaches for reducing congestion Conserve the community's character, sense of place, and quality of life by planning for change and growth Council Initiatives Legislative Priorities • Continue work on key housing initiatives, • Oppose policies or processes that allow the housing production strategy, guiding private development to guide Urban the HACC/Metro project on Boones Ferry Growth Boundaries expansion, or Road, and support for other non-profit requires City service delivery outside of led housing projects City-adopted Master Plans • Conduct a comprehensive review of the • Support Oregon Mayor's Association City's development codes and processes proposal to direct funding to local to make our processes more efficient and solutions for addressing housing and homelessness predictable and less expensive to reduce • Encourage policies to include local the cost of housing and commercial funding and grant opportunities to development address housing needs • Support policies that encourage local land use decision and local authority 9.1 COUNCIL REPORT o ORE00� Subject: Emergency Medical Services Update Meeting Date: April 18, 2023 Staff Member: Don Johnson, Chief Report Date: April 7, 2023 Department: Fire Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑X Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑ Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Not applicable Recommended Language for Motion: Not applicable Project/ Issue Relates To: Council Initiative: Implement a sustainable business model for the Fire Department that meets the 21st century needs of Lake Oswego. Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable BACKGROUND In 2022, Council directed staff to complete an in-depth evaluation of emergency medical and fire services. This Study will provide Council with an overview of the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system in Lake Oswego, focusing on both Basic Life Support (BLS) and Advanced Life Support service delivery (ALS). Additionally, staff will provide Council with an overview of the Clackamas County EMS Strategic Plan and a review of the recommendations of the Cambridge Group Consulting Group relating to EMS service delivery that were provided to the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners earlier this year. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY 9.2 ,vA E 4\ COUNCIL REPORT �� 0 AEG% Subject: Housing Needs Analysis Update + Housing Production Strategy (House Bill 2003) PP 22-0005 Meeting Date: April 18, 2023 Staff Member: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager Report Date: April 6, 2023 Department: Community Development Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution 0 Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: At their meeting on February 21, 2023, the City Council approved a public involvement plan O Council Direction to update the City's Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) ❑ Consent Agenda and develop a Housing Production Strategy to comply with the requirements of House Bill 2003 (HB 2003). Staff Recommendation: Provide direction regarding the findings and assumptions outlined in the draft Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) and Housing Capacity Analysis (HCA) documents, which are components of the City's HNA update as required under HB 2003. Recommended Language for Motion: N/A Project/ Issue Relates To: Council Initiative to "Complete work on key housing initiatives, including... HB 2003 compliance..." Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): Research and long-range planning to update the Housing Needs Analysis and develop a Housing Production Strategy in order to comply with state requirements under HB 2003. (]Council Goals/Priorities: Conserve the community's quality of life by planning for growth and change; complete work on key housing initiatives, including HB 2003 compliance ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Staff is seeking direction on the findings and assumptions outlined in the draft Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) and Housing Capacity Analysis (HCA) documents, which are Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 important components of the City's efforts to update its Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) to analyze what housing is needed for current and future residents. The HNA must be adopted by December 31, 2023 in order to comply with the requirements of House Bill 2003 (HB 2003). In addition, HB 2003 requires that cities adopt a Housing Production Strategy (HPS) within one year of the adoption of the HNA that outlines what actions the City will take to address the needs identified. Staff initiated this work in October of last year, and work will simultaneously be conducted on the HNA and HPS through approximately Fall 2024. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with the City Council goal to, "Conserve the community's quality of life by planning for growth and change," and the Council initiative to, "Complete work on key housing initiatives, including HB 2003 compliance," staff is engaged in a multi-phased work plan to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan in order to comply with the requirements of the bill. The City is required to adopt an updated HNA by December 31, 2023, and must subsequently adopt an HPS within one year of the updated HNA's adoption. Staff is seeking Council direction on the findings and assumptions outlined in the draft BLI and HCA documents (Attachments 5 and 6, respectively), which are each components of the City's HNA update. The final HNA Report will reconcile these documents through an analysis comparing the amount and type of land available for future residential uses with the amount and types of housing units needed by the City of Lake Oswego over the next 20 years; the Council will then consider whether to adopt the updated HNA at a public hearing on September 5. BACKGROUND Housing Needs Analysis An HNA is a document, incorporated into a city's comprehensive plan by ordinance, which assesses housing need and capacity over the course of a 20-year planning horizon. An HNA must include the inventory, determination, and analysis required under ORS 197.296 (Factors to establish sufficiency of buildable lands within urban growth boundary) (3) In performing the duties under subsection (2) of this section, a local government shall: (a) Inventory the supply of buildable lands within the urban growth boundary and determine the housing capacity of the buildable lands; and (b) Conduct an analysis of existing and projected housing need by type and density range, in accordance with all factors under ORS 197.303 ("Needed housing" defined) and statewide planning goals and rules relating to housing, to determine the number of units and amount of land needed for each needed housing type for the next 20 years. Respect, Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 The City last updated its HNA in 2013 as part of an update to the Comprehensive Plan; the HNA is currently an appendix to the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan (see Attachment 1). House Bill 2003 HB 2003 (2019) was adopted by the Oregon Legislature in order to help local jurisdictions meet the housing needs of residents throughout the state by requiring that cities with over 10,000 residents: (1) analyze the future housing needs of their community through an HNA, and (2) develop strategies that promote the development of such needed housing through an HPS. Under the requirements of HB 2003, Lake Oswego is required to adopt an updated HNA by December 31, 2023, and to update its HNA once every six years thereafter. On June 21, 2022, the City Council approved staff's work plan for compliance with HB 2003 including issuing a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit consultant services. Council also committed to appoint an ad-hoc Task Force to provide high-level policy guidance to the Commission and City Council as the City proceeds with HB 2003 compliance. The Commission held their first work session on this subject on June 27, 2022, in order to provide guidance to staff on the proposed work plan prior to issuing the RFP. On October 4, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 22-30 in order to create the HPS Task Force and appoint its members (see Attachment 2). The City subsequently contracted with MIG, Inc. (with sub-consultant Johnson Economics) to complete the scope of work outlined in Attachment 3. On January 23 of this year, the Planning Commission held their second work session to receive a presentation from staff and project consultants at MIG outlining the requirements of HB 2003 as related to updating the City's HNA and developing an HPS (see the materials from Planning Commission Work Session #2). The presentation also outlined the proposed public involvement plan in Attachment 4 and included an update on the progress of the HPS Task Force. On February 21, the City Council held a study session to receive similar information and approved the public involvement plan proposed by staff (see the materials from Council Study Session #2). HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS: INITIAL DRAFTS This section includes brief summaries of two components of the City of Lake Oswego's HNA update: the BLI and HCA. Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) Staff and the consultant team have prepared a draft BLI (Attachment 5) to identify land that can be expected to provide residential capacity for the City of Lake Oswego in the next 20 years. The general steps taken to produce the draft BLI include: Respect, Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 4 • Step 1: Study Area and Land Classification. This step identifies the land in the City that is available for residential uses, using information such as comprehensive plan/zoning designation, ownership information, and tax assessor data. Land that is in public ownership (such as owned by a school district or commonly owned by a homeowner's association) or religious/fraternal ownership is generally not considered available for residential uses. Figure 4: Land Classification is included below, depicting the results of this first land classification step per the methodology in Attachment 5. Figure 4: BLI Land Classification I ,.—rr Study Area i' b• s 4-0 ,ril`• 9 = Lake Oswego City t! rh _ _ _ Limits —, .*� ' Land Type t, f Frn b iiiI '�I�L��i++� a i/A i 1 t.M'!""izl...r,i r Residential MixedUse Public/other �BRgHdi j,� Oak ,� Non-Residential �I �� ■ I�.Lr/7H. d�' y�Adupp'Al FA I Val &Ithabli4lp/P.-- 4.7.1\1:14. ' r 4 � 4, I y a. :0,4 „oat. .sli_r-,....._ :§uvin..iir-..Ist et"A illArtAlwa. .=1-7146iiirailli , a 1 1 , „Li.. t. f reWmali 11 -- EP".11".&771/44, i',/ Alai 11 duz .ToLV•11, -v- : it. feex _.. Ali i wry l•S � � I p 11.75 -... MIles.- ` / °RFGO''.% Lake Oswego Buildable Lands Inventory I Land Type • Step 2: Constraints to Development. This step identifies constraints such as natural resources, steep slopes, and utility easements that may limit development. Land affected by these constraints is totally or partially removed from the inventory. Figure 5: Constraints to Development is included below, depicting the land within the City that would be considered constrained based on the methodology in Attachment 5. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi; c:. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 5 Figure 5: Constraints to Development Study Area r t • Lake Oswego City IT i z,,e' Limits {- R! Y'� , ,p li .� ;lt _ Major Roads may: �7t 2 ; .— - - ` Taxlots :'.I''' t.� Z� Greenway Mgmt. Overlay District Slopes>25% . -, _ - nJ FEMA Floodplain pi ` V9 RD •Ir' r^•>, 4` Sensitive Lands Overlay i= eRuSF crnv QF_ - rt qy. Habitat Benefit Areas r= ',EAUo•.vsA., a OHBA) i 1� � r 1R e.C..IN SW FSDNITA RD 1 o. "��� Resource . ' =FI1, Conservation Areas o C' 4' i - (RC) n g,,,rn N Resource Protection N 4.1 _,n J4eE w�" �., oN �� " Areas(RP) V, rrc so,,"" `, - r .. G7 k ENTREE R� e:�;1 �=�ft• F A 7. 7 LLd '� .‘N, � C 1,,.„ 1,L0OKO' :;--i BE R75-RDIII/ "�. ..R L 7 vr`7 LI. I-'.. .v SPn�, n`Fa LE 014 tt Lake Oswego Buildable Lands Inventory Environmental Constraints • Step 3: Development Status. This step assigns a "Development Status" of vacant, partially vacant, or developed tax lots in the inventory. Partially vacant land has an existing structure but is assumed to be available for future infill —for example a single home on a lot that is large enough to accommodate more homes. Figure 6: Development Status of Residential and Mixed Use Land is included below, depicting the development status of each tax lot in the study area as either "Vacant", "Partially Vacant", or "Developed" based on the methodology in Attachment 5. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c:. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 6 Figure 6: Development Status of Residential and Mixed Use Land _ • ®study Area •e,L`FJ. 1� '17i SW STEPHENSON ,-T Fq •}``p, Constraints - I _-PP". . °, i Development Status ssE� - z.e AS r a. r o° ' -r,r.i .- b Developed Ao " ^d �a.:a J it 1..- c •, ' r`*-117 --�. - -1 i ir�i►- _ _ _•-A Partially Vacant pT. - �, _ ,`'tk r Vacant } 9 r r �_ ww .- fKq USE WAY .?; _ - A AVE r! t O` L1^.lFl� .y-� • ..•- Cyl SW INITA ISC =-7F 9 5' .,,,• '�•. , ;,'J- •'� 1 .1Y., 1 - ar.Lc R( r 1 i 3 P• rFF O",F,N.2,LVo _ :t Ati- „7" ► P E'L F's M __y _• 1 L' + . LPG SSHUI! \� ._ _ , 'N_ _- •'� .4, c ORE F.N7REE:fl O'i'' �� 4., . N.. . r., I - i r� 1 1 r a / 11� t 'O r I ►. ` aj , . . o S ._.. R r :ti Lp5 4. sF� xo4. \. ~ p CHILOS RO 'I /; u� . :5 01,T = 114 P,' �t .. - / •f; \Oq F GO'''; . r f,0 0.25, .0.5 M1 1 �I. f 'P Lake Oswego Buildable Lands Inventory 1 Development Status • Step 4: Net Buildable Area and Unit Capacity. This step removes land for future rights- of-way and other land needs to provide a net number of acres for each City zoning designation, then estimates number of units. Table 5: Net Developable Acres of Residential and Mixed Use Land is included below, summarizing the net residential developable acres for both residential and mixed use land in the study area in the City, accounting for employment uses on mixed-use land and assumed right-of-way. Table 5:Net Developable Acres of Residential and Mixed Use Land Gross Constrained Unconstrained Developable Unit Capacity Land Type Acres Area (Acres) Area (Acres) Acres Residential 4,413 951 3,547 345 1,218 MixedUse 493 96 399 15 178 Non-Residential 181 21 160 - - Public/Other 3,491 1,309 2,215 - - Total 8,578 2,377 6,320 360 1,396 As outlined in Table 5, above, there are approximately 345 developable acres of residentially-zoned land and 15 developable acres of land zoned for mixed-use, resulting Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servii ,:. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 7 in a total of 360 developable acres within the City. The estimated unit capacity for this area is approximately 1,400 dwelling units. The contents of the draft BLI are intended to be a work in process—they will be refined with feedback from the HPS Task Force, the Council, Planning Commission, and other stakeholders. This inventory will inform both the HCA and HNA Report to provide a picture of the availability of residential land as it compares to the need of certain types of housing units in the next 20 years. Further analysis into potential redevelopment, the characterization of "partially vacant" land, densities, housing mix, and other attributes of the BLI is expected to occur prior to the release of the final HNA Report—tentatively scheduled for July 2023. Housing Capacity Analysis Staff also worked with the consultant team to produce the draft HCA (Attachment 6), which includes research and analysis to outline a forecast of housing need within the City of Lake Oswego by the year 2043. The primary data sources used in generating this forecast were: • Portland State University Population Research Center (current population) • Metro (forecasts of future population) • U.S. Census • Claritas1 • Oregon Employment Department • City of Lake Oswego • Clackamas County • Other sources are identified as appropriate. This analysis relies heavily on Census data from both the 2020 Decennial Census and the American Community Survey (ACS). All Census data feature some margin of error but remain the best source of data available on many demographic and housing subjects. The analysis includes the following components: • A demographic profile, including population growth, income trends, and poverty statistics. See the summaries below in Figure 2.1: Lake Oswego Demographic Profile and Figure 2.9: Commuting Patterns (Primary Jobs), Lake Oswego. 1 Claritas is a third-party company providing data on demographics and market segmentation.It licenses data from the Nielson Company which conducts direct market research including surveying of households across the nation.Nielson combines proprietary data with data from the U.S.Census,Postal Service,and other federal sources,as well as local-level sources such as Equifax,Vallassis and the National Association of Realtors.Projections of future growth by demographic segments are based on the continuation of long-term and emergent demographic trends identified through the above sources. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 8 Figure 2.1:Lake Oswego Demographic Profile POFULATfON, fiOUSEHOLUS, FAM UUJES,AND YEAR-f OUND 1OUSWG LIMITS 2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth IlCensusj (Census) 00-10 (PSU) Populations 35,278 36,619 456 41,5.50 13% Households 14,624 15,893 7% 17r481 10% FamiIies3 9,775 10,079 3% 11,.842 17% HousinglJnit.4 15,568 16,995 S% 18,3.45 8% Croup Quarters Pffpulatiflns 163 222 36% 329 48% 1-fausetroJd Size(non-getup? 237 2.29 -3% 2.36 3% Avg. Famr.iy 5+ze 2.93 2.88 -2% 2.37 3' PER CAPITA AND NMFE Atu' HOUSEHOLD INCOME 2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth I;Census) (Census) 00-10 (Proj.J 10-23 Per Capita?5) $42,166 553,.652 27% $74,600 39% Median HH ($) 5.71,597 584,.186 18% 5123,3.00 46% SOU RCECensus..MetroCanso-lidated Forecast,135.1.1 Population Research Crater,andJohnson Economics Cxnsus Tables: 6P-1(Z006,2010);DP-3(2004 S1901;519301 1From Cells us,PRI Popul atian Resa]rChCenter,grawth rate a010-ZOZZeMtended toZ0Z3 2 2E123 House h l ds=(202 3 population-Group-Quarters Papul ation).202 3 HH Size 3Raboof2023 Families tototaI HH is based on,21721l1i55-year Estimates 42023 housing units a re the'20Cer us total plus new units permitted from 20 through'22(source:Census,CZity) 5 2023 Group Quarters PopuIa4on!lased on S-rearACSestimates 2017-2021 As shown in Figure 2.1, above, Lake Oswego has an estimated current population of 41,550 residents, representing a 13% increase between 2010 and 2023. The average household size in Lake Oswego is currently 2.36 persons per household. Lake Oswego currently has an estimated existing stock of 18,345 housing units, representing an 8% increase since 2010. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 9 Figure 2.9: Commuting Patterns (Primary Jobs), Lake Oswego Met?ger I MilwaukkiieHosp 0 TryonN trtuek l State Milwaukee ara Area 1:31 M iDunthprpe N. r r — Vi, . lard I '4 Oswego 20,900 2,250 • 15,800 Work in Lake Oswego, Live and work Live in Lake Oswego, live elsewhere in Lake Oswego work elsewhere L (Wing Durham ' •II - , ritage Center 90% i / 10% 12% / 88% Jeroriii f ■ j MARYLHURSi i, - c ,River Gro►re 1 -ualatin IAA St-afford Legacy Meridian As shown in Figure 2.9, above, there are approximately 20,900 people who work in Lake Oswego but live elsewhere, 2,250 people who both live and work in Lake Oswego, and 15,800 people who live in Lake Oswego but work elsewhere. • Current housing conditions, including housing tenure (rental/ownership), age of housing stock, unit types, and assisted housing. See the summaries below in Figure 3.1: Estimated Share of Units by Property Type, 2023, and Figure 3.4: Current Inventory by Unit Type, by Share. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c:. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 10 Figure 3.1:Estimated Share of Units by Property Type, 2023 Lake Oswego, Oregon 80% 63% 60% 40% 21% y 20% p} 6% 1% 0% 0% 0% Single Single Duplex 3-or 4-plex 5+Units Manuf_ Boat, RV, Detached Attached MFR home Other temp As shown in Figure 3.1, above, 63% of the existing housing units in Lake Oswego are single-family detached housing, with 21% of existing units provided in multi-family residential buildings of 5 or more units. Figure 3.4: Current Inventory by Unit Type, by Share Number of Bedrooms 5 or more 1% Renter 11% Owner 4 bedrooms 5511 39 3 bedrooms 19% 33% 2 bedrooms 1 -•mm- 43 14% 1 bedroom 1 27% r Studio 6% }q� 0% 1(yam{ 20% 30% 40% 50% if fP 1()% Respect. Excellence. Trust. 5ervi,.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 11 As shown in Figure 3.4, above, the number of bedrooms for housing units in Lake Oswego differs between units available for rental and those available for ownership. For example, 43%of the housing units available to renters are two-bedroom units, and 27% of those rental units are one-bedroom units. On the other hand, 43% of owner- occupied housing units are four-bedroom units, and 33%of owner-occupied units are three-bedroom units. These numbers illustrate that owner-occupied housing tends to be larger and contain more bedrooms than housing units on the rental market. • An assessment of current housing demand, based on population characteristics and the availability of housing units. See the summaries below in Figure 4.1: Current Lake Oswego Housing Profile (2023) and Figure 4.2: Estimate of Current Housing Demand in Lake Oswego (2023). Figure 4.1: Current Lake Oswego Housing Profile(2023) CURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS (2023) SOURCE Total 2023 Population: 41,550 PSLtPop.Research Center - Estimated group housing population: 329 (0.8%ofTotal) US Census Estimated Non-Group 2023 Population: 41,221 (Total-Group) Avg. HH Size: 2.36 US Census Estimated Non-Group 2023 Households: 17,481 (PopfHHSize) Total Housing Units: 18,345 (Occupied+Vacant) Census 2010+permits Occupied Housing Units: 17,481 (=#of HH) Vacant Housing Units: 864 (Total HH-Occupied) Current Vacancy Rate: 4.7% (Vacant units/Total units) Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi,.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 12 Figure 4.2:Estimate of Current Housing Demand in Lake Oswego (2023) Ownership Price Range #of Income Range %of Cumulative Households Total $0k-$80k 330 Less than$15,000 2.7% 2.7% $80k-$130k 267 $15,000-$24,999 2.2% 4.9% $130k-$180k 357 $25,000-$34,999 2.9% 7.8% 5180k-$250k 636 $35,000-$49,999 5.2% 13.0% $250k-$350k 1,051 $50,000-$74,999 8.6% 21.7% $350k-$440k 1,147 $75,000-$99,999 9.4% 31.1% $440k-$510k 1,109 $100,000-$124,999 9.1% 40.2% 5510k-$560k 892 $125,000-$149,999 7.3% 47.5% $560k-$680k 1,827 $150,000-$199,999 15.0% 62.5% $680k+ 4,577 $200,000+ 37.5% 100.0% Totals: 12,191 %of All: 69.7% Rental Rent Level Hof Income Range %of Cumulative Households Total _ $0-$400 348 Less than$15,000 6.6% 6.6% $400-$700 383 $15,000-$24,999 7.2% 13.8% $700-$900 554 $25,000-$34,999 10.5% 24.3% 5900-51300 621 $35,000-$49,999 11.7% 36.0% $1300-$1800 837 $50,000-$74,999 15.8% 51.9% $1800-$2200 764 $75,000-$99,999 14.4% 66.3% $2200-$2500 505 $100,000-$124,999 9.6% 75.9% $2500-$2800 410 $125,000-$149,999 7.8% 83.6% $2800-$3400 271 $150,000-$199,999 5.1% 88.7% $3400+ 596 $200,000+ 11.3% 100.0% All Households Totals: 5,290 %of All: 30.3% 17,481 As shown in Figure 4.2, above, approximately 70% of households in Lake Oswego live in owner-occupied housing, and approximately 30% of households live in rentals. Among owner-occupied housing units, the highest proportion - 37.5%- is available to households at the highest end of the income-range, or households earning $200,000 or more annually. Among rental housing units, the highest proportions are the 15.8% of units available to households earning between $50,000 and $74,999 annually, and the 14.4% of units available to households earning between $75,000 and $99,999 annually. • An assessment of future housing need, based on forecasted population growth and a variety of other anticipated demographic and housing market trends. See the summaries below in Figure 5.1: Future Housing Profile (2043), Lake Oswego, and Figure 5.2: Projected Occupied Future Housing Demand(2043), Lake Oswego. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 13 Figure 5.1:Future Housing Profile (2043), Lake Oswego PROJECTED FUTURE HOUSING CONDITIONS (2023- 2043) SOURCE 2023 Population(Minus Group Pop.) 41,221 (Est.2022 pop.-Group Housing Pop.) PSU Projected Annual Growth Rate 0.05% metro Coordinated Forecast(2021) Metro 2043 Population(Minus Group Pop.) 41,629 (Total 2043 Population-Group Housing Pop.) Estimated group housing population: 332 1.7%of total pap.(held constant from 2022) US Census Total Estimated 2043 Population: 41,961 nnetroCoordinated Forecast(202i) Metro Estimated Non-Group 2043 Households: 19,298 Metro Coordinated Forecast(2021) Metro New Households 2023 to 2043 1,816 Avg. Household Size: 2.16 Projected 2043 pop./2043 houseolds US Census Total Housing Units: 20,313 Occupied Units plus Vacant Occupied Housing Units: 19,298 (=Number of Non-Group Households) Vacant Housing Units: 1,015 (=Total Units-Occupied Units) Projected Market Vacancy Rate: 5.0% Stabilized vacancy assumption As shown in Figure 5.1, above, the estimated population in Lake Oswego for 2043 is 41,961 residents, with an average household size of 2.16 persons per household. This represents a relatively modest projected annual growth rate of 0.05%, which is much lower than the amount of growth the City experienced in the last few decades. The decrease in household size from 2.36 (2023) to 2.16 (2043) is also notable, as even though the growth rate is expected to decrease, the number of persons per household is also expected to decrease. This results in a projection of more new households than new residents over the 20-year study period, with 1,816 new households projected in the City by 2043, and an estimated need for 20,313 housing units in total. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c:. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 14 Figure 5.2:Projected Occupied Future Housing Demand(2043), Lake Oswego Ownership #of Price Range Income Range %of Total Cumulative House holds $0k-$80k 364 Less than$15,000 2.7% 2.7% • remelt' <30% MFI $80k-$130k 295 $15,000 -$24,999 2.2% 4.9% Low Income $130k-$180k 394 $25,004-$34,999 2.9% 7.8% Very Low a50% MFI $180k-$250k 702 $35,000-$49,999 5.2% 13.0% Income $250k-$350k 1,160 $50,000 -$74,999 8.6% 21.7% Low Income <80% MFI $350k-$440k 1,266 $75,000 -$99,999 9.4% 31.1% $440k-$510k 1,224 $100,400 -$124,999 9.1% 40.2% $510k-$560k 984 $125,000-$149,999 7.3% 47.5% $560k-$680k 2,017 $150,000 -$199,999 15.0% 62.5% $680k+ 5,053 $200,000+ 37.5% 100.0% Totals: 13,458 %of All: 69.7% Rental if of Rent Level Households Income Range %of Total Cumulative $0 -$400 385 Less than$15,000 6.6% 6.6% ` Extremely <30% MFI $400 -$700 423 $15,000-$24,999 7.2% 13,8% Low Income $700 -$900 611 $25,000-$34,999 10.5% 24.3% Very Low <50% M F I $900 -$1300 686 $35,000 -$49,999 11.7% 36.0% Income $1300 -$1800 924 $50,000 -$74,999 15.8% 51.9% Low Income <80% MFI $1800 -$2200 843 $75,000-$99,999 14.4% 66.3% $2200 -$2500 558 $100,000 -$124,999 9.6% 75.9% $2500 -$2800 453 $125,000-$149,999 7.8% 83.6% $2800 -$3400 299 $150,400-$199,999 5.1% 88.7% $3400 + 658 $200,000+ 11.3% 100.0% All Units Totals: 5,840 %of All: 30.3% 19,298 As shown in Figure 5.2, above, the majority (51.9%) of the demand for rental housing units is projected to be for households categorized as either low income, very low income, or extremely low income. Only 21.7%of the demand for owner-occupied units is projected for households in these same income ranges. After receiving feedback on the BLI and HCA, the next step for the project team will be to conduct an analysis that compares the amount and type of land available for future residential uses with the amount and types of housing units needed by the City of Lake Oswego for the final HNA Report. The findings of this comparison will form the basis of further work about the policies, programs, and actions that the City can consider to address its current and future housing needs through the HPS. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi,.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 15 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT UPDATE The following events have occurred in the time since the Council's last study session on February 21 related to this project: • On March 20, the draft BLI and HCA documents were distributed to City-recognized Neighborhood Associations, City Boards and Commissions, and interested members of the public for their input and review; • On March 24, the HPS Task Force held their second meeting to review and provide input on the initial drafts of the BLI and HCA documents; • On March 31, the City released an Online Open House that explains the information in the draft BLI and HCA documents and allows for public input through April 21; and • On April 6, the City hosted a virtual Community Forum to provide information and receive direct public input on the draft BLI and HCA. The final HNA Report, which will include the BLI and HCA as components, is tentatively scheduled to be considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on July 24, and by the Council at a subsequent public hearing on September 5, 2023. QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL Staff is seeking direction from Council related to the following questions: • Do the findings related to the amount of land available for housing development in the BLI seem reasonable, or are adjustments needed? • Do the projections of housing need in the HCA seem reasonable, or are adjustments needed? ATTACHMENTS This staff memo and all attachments referenced below can be found by visiting the Planning Project webpage for the case file. Due to file size, attachments are available in the "Public Records Folder" using this link: https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-22-0005-housing-needs-and-production-strategies 1. City of Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis, 03/19/2013 2. Adopted Resolution 22-30, 10/04/2022 3. Project Scope of Work, 10/17/2022 4. Draft Public Involvement Plan, 01/10/2023 5. Draft Lake Oswego Residential Buildable Lands Inventory, 03/17/2023 **ATTACHED** 6. Draft Lake Oswego Housing Capacity Analysis, 03/20/2023 **ATTACHED** Respect, Excellence. Trust. Servi;.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 16 To view these documents and other documents in the public records file, visit the Planning Project webpage: https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-22-0005-housing-needs-and-production-strategies Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi,.c. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT 5 LAKE OSWEGO RESIDENTIAL BUILDABLE LANDS INVENTORY DRAFT Methodology and Initial Results I March 17, 2023 Introduction This memorandum provides a Residential Buildable Lands Inventory(BLI)for the City of Lake Oswego, which will support the creation of a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA)for the City.The methodology for this BLI is based on the 2018 Metro BLI1 with further refinements through review and discussions with City staff. The BLI is conducted in the following steps: • Step 1:Study Area and Land Classification.This step identifies the land in the City that is available for residential uses. • Step 2: Constraints to Development.This step identifies constraints such as natural resources, steep slopes, and utility easements that limit development. • Step 3: Development Status.This step assigns a "Development Status" of vacant, partially vacant, or developed tax lots in the inventory. • Step 4: Net Buildable Area and Unit Capacity.This step removes land for future rights-of-way and other land needs to provide a net number of acres for each City zoning designation,then estimates number of units and mix of unit type (single detached, multi-dwelling, middle housing) expected based on the results of Step 4. Step 1 : Study Area and Land Classification Study Area The study area for this analysis is shown in Figure 1.The study area includes land within the Lake Oswego City Limits and unannexed areas with City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan designations. 1 https://www.oregonmetro.gov/sites/default/files/2018/07/03/UGR Appendix2 Buildable Lands Inventory.pdf PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 1 OF 18 Figure 1.Study Area Map r_,.,....„, 1SW5TEHENSUN5T f`A 6L - 9 q � <tD o D._. yy1G J ` II fir`= ~i J 7 :y 1 MELROSE ST : Oar .s,5 Q LOUN7R y G o "'� r. -` 4 CUS RD C C]❑ f 4 0 Mx, KAUSE WAY -0 y A Avt y i n' MEADOWS ft° v p4' 2 A�1 cS O . �pUNTAiry / SW RaN1T]A R` U .-P'�CA¢ QG �N BiVD J 7 U'' �YL s, sF F �'D 1 a a + cc kLIA F-L6,,,,,r,u,,,lThio 3 C� Q ..BLVD PE- 16 UQPER`,,„,1E y410RE Q1v „OJ,, v .,.. .1 q GREENTREE S� ¢� gyp$ v 5 D;.)1# N �4 Y� y R x w LOOKp S-flRG15R0 ` JEli' c�i1 3 0 C _ S� � AY t s. - E. z a ��R GI. a } yk -Po 44p tOf J :CHIEDS RD i - yT, -- tt•-• ■ PO U ` I +Miles' � CREGc% • 0 0.25 0.5 1 Study Area 77 Lake Oswego City Limits Land Classification Parcels in the inventory are categorized based on their Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations, property ownership, and other characteristics available in City/regional datasets.These classifications are described in Table 1 and shown in Figure 4. Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Districts The City of Lake Oswego's Comprehensive Plan Districts are described in Table 1.This is the primary basis for classifying lands into the categories of Residential, Mixed-Use, Nonresidential, and Publicly Owned/Other. Alignment with Zoning Districts are shown in the "Implementing Zones" column. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan map designations are shown in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Overarching categories of land and how they are considered in this inventory are described on the pages following those figures. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 2 OF 18 Table 1. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Districts Comprehensive Plan Implementing Zone Purpose Designations Zones R-15 To provide lands for single-family residential development with Residential Low R-10 densities ranging from two to five dwelling units per gross Density acre,and to provide lands for middle housing development. R-7.5 To provide lands for single-and multi-family residential R 5 development with densities ranging from seven to eight dwelling units per gross acre,and to provide lands for middle housing development. (1) The purpose of the R-DD zone is to assure that both single-family homes and middle housing are protected from noise,light,glare and reduction in privacy to the maximum extent possible during the area's transition to higher density residential use,to facilitate good architectural design and site planning which maintains residential choices of unit size,cost and other amenities R-DD Zone and supports the economic feasibility of new construction and development,and to assure protection and compatibility of all land uses,including commercial, residential,park,open space and historic sites. (2) The R-DD zone is intended for use in low density residential districts which are undergoing transition to increased densities,and which have scenic,historic, natural or residential features which should be preserved and integrated with new development. Residential The FAN R-6 zone is intended to implement the land use Medium Density policies of the First Addition Neighborhood Plan.The purpose of this zone is to ensure the design quality of proposed development in the neighborhood by: (1) Ensuring that proposed building designs are visually compatible with the character of existing structures,maintain adequate light and air between structures,and complement the neighborhood's architectural character. (2) Minimizing the visual impact of garages from the street, and to continue established alley uses and functions such as R-6 access to garages,off-street parking and trash removal. (3) Encouraging compatible and sensitive remodeling and renovation of existing residences. (4) Preserving the small-town character of the existing streetscape by allowing single-family and middle housing development that is human scale and pedestrian oriented. (5) Enhancing the natural environment of the neighborhood as one of the dominant characteristics. (6) Preserving FAN's historical and architectural character by encouraging infill development that is compatible in design character to landmark structures on abutting lots. Residential High R-3 To provide lands for single-and multi-family residential Density R-2 development with densities of at least 12 dwelling units per PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 3 OF 18 Comprehensive Plan Implementing Zone Purpose Zones Designations R-0 gross acre,and to provide lands for middle housing development. R-W Neighborhood To provide land near residential areas for lower intensity Commercial(NC) commercial activities that primarily serve the surrounding neighborhood,smaller public facility uses,and residential uses. To provide lands for a mix of higher intensity commercial General activities supplying a broad range of goods and services to a Commercial(GC) market area approximately equal to the planning area identified in the Comprehensive Plan,as well as residential, public facilities,and cultural uses. To provide lands for commercial activities which meet the Highway needs of the traveling public as well as other highway-oriented Commercial(HC) retail uses which require access to a market area larger than the general commercial zone.This zone is not intended for regional shopping centers. To provide for a mix of uses requiring highway access and Mixed which provide a strong visual identity.Intended uses include Commerce(MC) local and regional convention type facilities,office uses and Commercial supporting retail uses. Office Campus To provide lands for major concentrations of regionally- (OC) oriented offices and employment opportunities for a market area larger than the planning area. Campus To provide a mix of clean,employee-intensive industries, Research and offices and high-density housing with associated services and Development retail commercial uses in locations supportive of mass transit (CR&D) and the regional transportation network. The purpose of the CI zone is to provide zoning regulations for Campus the Marylhurst Campus in order to provide land where Institutional(CI) permitted or conditional uses can be provided for in a unified campus setting. To implement Comprehensive Plan policies applicable to the East End General Downtown Town Center and to provide land for a mix of Commercial(EC) higher intensity commercial,residential,and cultural uses and public facilities that support a traditional downtown commercial core. Industrial Zone The purpose of the industrial zone is to provide land where (I) general industrial development can be located. Industrial To provide lands where primarily light industrial and Industrial Park employment uses can occur in a campus-like setting under Zone(IP) controls to make activities mutually compatible and also compatible with existing uses bordering the zone. West Lake Grove To provide zoning for townhome residential,commercial,and Zones mixed-use development in the West Lake Grove District that (Townhome accommodates lower intensity commercial,public facility and Residential- residential uses;and to provide a transition between the Lake Mixed Use WLG R-2.5, Grove Village Center and adjacent residential neighborhoods. Residential These districts are intended to supply services to a market area Mixed Use-WLG that is comprised of adjacent neighborhoods. RMU,and Office- Commercial- WLG OC) PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 4 OF 18 Comprehensive Plan Implementing Zone Purpose Zones Designations To foster a mix of housing,retail and office uses in a central location proximate to downtown and along the Willamette River.Commercial uses are allowed but are not intended to dominate the character of the area. Retail uses are limited in size to complement the downtown core and facilitate the development of neighborhood-focused retail served by transit. The design and development standards are intended to create a unique Lake Oswego community.The emphasis of the zone is on residentially related uses. The Foothills Mixed Use code provisions are intended to: Foothills Mixed i. Connect the FMU area with downtown,Tryon Creek,Old Use(FMU) Town,the Willamette River and Oswego Lake; ii. Create a sustainable walkable neighborhood that possesses a thriving,active,and comfortable pedestrian environment; Hi. Create visual interest through varied building heights that are urban in character,yet include detailed amenities at the ground floor that enhance the pedestrian environment; iv. Create high quality buildings,of long lasting materials,to promote the permanence of the community; v. Allow for a mix of residential uses,with urban density,and neighborhood scale retail and office development;and vi. Establish a standard of design that reinforces Lake Oswego's sense of place. The Public Functions(PF)zone is intended to specify Public Use Public Functions appropriate land uses and development standards for public (PF) uses,such as government services,education,and similar activities. The purposes of the Park and Natural Area(PNA)zone are to: i. Protect,preserve,conserve and enhance natural areas, greenways and parks; ii. Permit a wide range of passive and active recreational Park and Natural Park and Natural uses,and accessory uses,on property for the future use and Area(PNA) Area(PNA) enjoyment of the City and its residents; iii. Implement Statewide Planning Goal 8,Recreational Needs;and iv. Establish a master plan process for park planning and development. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 5 OF 18 Figure 2. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Designations 1 Portion:: o- Cornmu d 224 . ttl. College--Syls.a I'.: , Lyon Creek ' rate Na Rural a_ I ~ m PNA. N , S -,r eta:..E. H I 5 q 1' i ,iH o, R_5 PNA - Milwaukie • Tigard oa Mimif r� 1#� ri �i�� R-io (� R 5 I '� d R-6 Oak Grave P P.e� �� 11i .I f��A. PNA R ro a DEC Bonita 4phit,ir, . o sW 6an to Rd ' • R.7.s Sin _ e.,.. r. rlit . SW Durham r. e I R- MI 1101- io R i' • 2 Concord R-7 5 -P Cook Park Durham 1 o PNA ' - CI Trolley Trail ' R.ye ii� -4,� J alatin • 'I i' PNA�� -�1�r1 uryy Club P _ O n Rs5 t Jer R-rs Esri,NASA,NGA,USGS,FEMA,Oregon Metro,Oregon State Parks,State of Oregon GEO,Esri.HERE, TIM Iarir PNA II 1 Rivergrove I_ I parmin,SafeGraph,Grechnologies,Inc,METIINASA,USG 5,Bureau of Land Management,EPA,IPS. USDA Mary S.You riq Lake Oswego- Buildable Lands Inventory-Zoning Districts Legend =Lake Oswego =NC 'F CI R-6 LATER 0 I 'PJA 0 R-7.5 ▪CI ®IP R-0 ©R•DD MI Cl/CRC 0 MC R-LA ®R-IS MI CR&D (]NC .J R-1.5 I I VLGOC l=EC =NCfR-0 -R-2 =INLG R-2.5 —EC/12-0 0 DC 0 R-3 0 AILS RMu 0 0.25 0.5 1 O GC 0 cC/R-3 0 k-s Miles PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 6 OF 18 Figure 3. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Designations Portlandrill p i 224 Commune yVW '' I ) CoRege-Sylva Tryon Creek _ i• Y i Slate Natural a. I ( iu 1111 &A Sr 1. illili .,• is. SP .sr_ 'Ra :1 ; 141 rr tilll . C}` i' ' i'.L - r5 Milwaukee i V .R ` tr-�o.♦ v Heights Tigard rr D°� �o -� ;iiiiY���� :.� ry 111 F ►.r' . R-6 d Oak Grave 1- �r� §f rk Bonita SW He ne Rd .42k -34'' v it, SW❑urharn RdI1/1p1;: R_y,5 di .2 I.0 Concord R i5R. Cl : "A� Trolley Trail _aok Park Durham i Rno Pfl� Ii.:' � ?• aiaten 440111 •r �� , - 'try Club .. ao R-as I t � L Jer -� fta5 Esri,NASA,NGA,USGS,FEMA,Oregon Metro,Oregon state Parks,State of Oregon GEO,Esri,HERE, Tualatin I Riverg rove Gamin.SafeGraph,Ggaiechnalogies,Inc,METIINASA.USGS,Bureau of Land Management,EPA,NIPS, USDA c' Mary S.Young. Lake Oswego- Buildable Lands Inventory-Comprehensive Plan Designations legend 0 Lake Oswego 0 HE 0 PHA O R•7.5 LAYER 0 IP =R-n il R-W MI CI 0 MC 0 it-to Mg SP Ml CRe) 0 NC =R-15 ©Win OC ®EC =NC/R-0 O R-2 p P&G R-2.5 MI EC(R-a O IC O R-3 0 WLG RMU dFtau C]ogR-3 CI ♦maltothervalues, 0 0.25 0.5 1 =GC OPP 11R-6 Miles Residential Land Residential Land is intended to meet the City's need for residential uses of various types. It includes land within the R-0, R-2, R-3, R-5, R-6, R-7.5, R-10, R-15, R-W, and WLG R-2.5 Comprehensive Plan designations, unless it meets the criteria for"Publicly Owned/Other" land. Mixed Use Land Mixed Use land can be developed to meet the City's residential and employment needs—sometimes within the same structure. It includes land within the WLG RMU, CI, CR&D, EC, FMU, GC, HC, NC, OC, and WLG OC Comprehensive Plan designations unless it meets the criteria for"Publicly Owned/Other" land. More information about the assumptions for future housing development in these areas is found later in this report. Nonresidential Land Nonresidential land includes employment land and "Publicly Owned/Other" land, as follows.This land is not included in the inventory. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 7 OF 18 Employment Land Employment Land is intended to meet the City's employment needs. It includes land within the MC and IP Comprehensive Plan designations unless it meets the criteria for "Public/Other" land. Publicly Owned/Other This category of land includes the SP, PF, and PNA designations, as well as land in the following categories: • Land in another Comprehensive Plan designation under City, County, State, Federal, or Special District Ownership • Land commonly held in Homeowners'Associations (HOA) common ownership, such as required open space. • Religious or fraternal properties (with the notable exception of Marylhurst University,which is accounted for in a separate line item). • Private driveways and ROW Parcels in this category may be included in other classifications if information is available to suggest that they have development capacity for residential or employment uses. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 8 OF 18 Figure 4.BLI Land Classification I ��� i ®Study Area ::+ 7 i ‘;r1„41, ;J'l11 UM O t = Lake Oswego City "o.. i• .- Z161;i, i. r - - - Limits i ,.. ,ii+ric- .,. ;; ,;; �� i Land Type 10 `j1‘---4 try .: i 1 \ ;Il'�,�,ll :jyel� 'p� �'�!` �Z �._-; 1�� i Residential �L••`I�fif! ,'P�r I-P1 ,lE L�0 2i ■ mil �" i17 ` � Mixed Use �' -�� >�`'°Aty,,,='��._11 �►-� 1,416.4* I�� Public/Other 1� 'j-•4'y !� II V ,... q�L�� �'`_ ' , Non-Residential y-; c E % r y�hll� uil i llllll r. mo j.,IIIr • 0 2 18116F,5„...4IWb.ad-ll migeP;ftleiikoiiirA l ...,„.g.s.-,,pV-,....i..).a....11.l-..i,--.1--,4.1.—1-,..01r14ro1arb1,-s._,i*m,.--..,,,,,,,a:.-. I , dd I'1i OiI.r.&lli.r"r....r.d07.,1V 1.-..,*-.41E%ma. 10r.1I ' ttl.:— r ■ A. ems,✓� +r ; 4 44:I I I 110W. t1)1 Se 4-41.:b 4k• IMI-01.47-1701:11- I._-•-r -till Ai ri#112,41,2=6:11eitei*:412L111,iill or. '%. 1• it,eAt IP, WAN= MM. ,.. .1,....iii-... , ,‘ Walli :417 p041 pieNi Ali -art ‘ c„,:fli.1 ert 4•44,411L 44 'AO . (6,„ , i'' „4011$ 1...\-1, !,,,-,,, 1,2_, — r i likAfet% , -11 3' ,...,=, s 11111,Tat _.:-.-,t.i.Ad, ii Vali i ,, i , 0%04, ,....* w wgrow ice=i 1� �ik v o: II Miles- - \ „RE, 0 1 0.25 0.5 1 Lake Oswego Buildable Lands Inventory I Land Type Prepared by 1313 0 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 9 OF 18 Step 2: Constraints to Development One of the primary tasks of this BLI is to identify land that is constrained by one or more of the following physical constraints. Constraints may overlap one another spatially—in this case the more restrictive constraint applies.Assumptions for these constraints are listed below—they have been discussed with City staff but are subject to further refinement, as needed. Constraints are described in Table 2 and shown on Figure 5. Table 2. Development Constraints Constraint Description Developable Portion Steep Slopes Slopes greater than 25%. Density transfer resulting in 5% Developable the construction of 1-2 dwelling units allowed. Water Bodies Includes lakes, streams, other areas of open water 0% Developable FEMA Flood Includes Zones A,AE, and X. Density transfer resulting 5% Developable Hazard Areas in the construction of 1-2 dwelling units allowed. Greenway Protects land along the Willamette River. Permitted Management uses include single-family dwellings and accessory 25% Developable Overlay District structures associated with such dwellings. Includes Resource Protection (Streams and Wetlands; RP), Resource Conservation (Tree Groves; RC), and Habitat Benefit Areas (Tree Groves; HBA). RP and RC areas are tightly regulated, while HBAs are areas with optional resource protection incentives rather than regulations. RP—50% Developable Sensitive Lands RP—Density transfer possible. RC—0% Developable RC- Mostly applies to public land and open space HBA—95% tracts, which are not developable (PF and PNA zones, Developable OS tracts in private developments,typically). HBA- Incentives, rather than regulations, are applied to protect natural resources. Usually does not limit development beyond a modest reduction. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 10 OF 18 Figure 5. Constraints to Development k )Study Area SW STEPHENSON ST `_9 Ro Lake Oswego City ¶ q y M S aP wY ER - N Limits �SFR o =j K �o° S L o Major Roads 5� o_ _- Taxlots °1 j J.Sf ) _ Greenway Mgmt. h �', Overlay District MELROSE ST -Sri— ,.... o Slopes>25% i o COOiER,i- o0 7�Eo FEMA Floodplain �2F y 4 Sensitive Lands Overlay �/ Q Habitat Benefit Areas ���� KNUSE_WAY 0,,2�J,�q"` S- A AVE it- ME oJ�Q. o,.: z (HBA) SW BhONITA RDu �'EA.,P5> p, mo z o�"ouNrA/>Brvo Resource - i FI o �W Conservation Areas o i", es R 4 Resource Protection 1 [1 oR �E`N gw v PJ b, 1 j oQeEP`P EJ SHORE ew Areas(RP) 1 0 I� t. ' SO� h 0 0<()9 `J YYYYLLLL����FF�F p GREENTHEEP e �o� LFRN �� I ' `^ P�OOK� s BERGIS:RD _ 0 "`iii 1 '� 3 OAF 9 C. y 0 Ni,'i , r °GEwAY o _ SS ��- G' mot,'¢ z 0 �� cHILDSRom 3 vosRbya� 1 AgrF�� oii » t/s (0 9 Li 1 ' l -t :Z 1Miles a _ _ � 'i T___ y 0 0.25 05 Y IN.Pri,Lake Oswego Buildable Lands Inventory I Environmental Constraints Prepared by ® 0 Q The BLI includes the following information for each tax lot in the study area based on the location of constraints. • Acres—Total size of the tax lot • Constrained Acres—Acreage of constrained areas, per Table 2 • Unconstrained Acres—Total acres minus Constrained Acres The following table shows gross acres of land in each primary land classification in the Study Area. Table 2. Constrained and Unconstrained Acres by Land Type Land Type Total Acres Constrained Acres Unconstrained Acres Residential 5,889.2 1,307.0 4,582.2 Mixed Use 615.2 120.2 495.0 Non-Residential 212.2 8.4 203.8 Publicly Owned/Other 1,699.0 906.2 792.8 Total 8,415.6 2,341.5 6,090.4 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 11 OF 18 Step 3: Development Status Each tax lot in the study area is categorized as Vacant, Partially Vacant, or Developed.The following data is used to determine development capacity of Study Area tax lots: • Assessor data, including Property Land Use Code, Improvement Value, and Land Value • City inventory of outdoor areas, used in identifying public and commonly-held open spaces such as public facilities, parks and Homeowners Association-owned open spaces. • Metro Vacant Land Inventory derived annually from aerial photo information. • Review of recent aerial imagery • Discussion and review with City staff and Housing Task Force Generally,vacant tax lots are assumed to have development capacity equal to the area unconstrained by natural resources, minus additional set-asides for future Right-of-Way and infrastructure (see Step 4). Developed parcels will be subject to further screening for redevelopment potential, described in later steps. Partially Vacant properties have an existing home but are large enough to subdivide based on criteria such as parcel size and allowable lot size, as described in this section. Residential Development Status • Vacant. Land that has a building improvement value of less than $20,000, as indicated by assessor data.All land outside of constrained areas is included in the developable area for these properties. • Vacant—Platted.Vacant land that is part of a platted but unbuilt subdivision is included in this category. Platted lots are assumed to contain one unit each unless other information is available (see Step 4). "Developable Acres" is shown as "0" because they are treated separately from other acreage in the inventory. • Partially Vacant.This designation is intended for parcels with an existing single-detached home that are large enough to further subdivide or develop to provide additional residential units. While middle housing and townhomes are allowed in many zones, this analysis uses the minimum lot size required for single-detached dwellings as the basis for the Partially Vacant designation, as follows: o Parcels greater than 5 times the minimum lot size:These lots are categorized as "Partially Vacant." 1/4 acre is assumed to remain for the existing home and the remaining unconstrained acreage is assumed to be developable. o Parcels between 2 and 5 times the minimum lot size: For lots with building value below $200,000-%acre is assumed to remain for the existing home and the remaining unconstrained acreage is assumed to be developable. o Parcels less than 2 times the minimum lot size: These lots are categorized as "Developed" if improvement value is present or aerial photo review shows development. • Developed. All other residential land is designated Developed and has no developable area. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 12 OF 18 Mixed Use Development Status Mixed Use development is subject to the same criteria as Residential Land. However, an additional screen is used to determine the likelihood of redevelopment of mixed-use parcels in Step 4, and assumptions about the residential/employment mix (see Table 3) are applied. Mixed Use Residential Proportion Mixed use designations are assumed to develop partly with residential uses and partly with non- residential uses, per the following table. Table 3. Residential Portions of Mixed Use Tax Lots Mixed Use Residential Nonresidential Notes Designation Portion Portion West Lake Grove 50% 50% Townhomes only allowed with office use in the Residential Mixed Use same building (WLG RMU) West Lake Grove 25% 75% Residential limited to Boones Ferry Staging site, Office-Commercial per LOC 50.03.003.2.d. Residential limited to (WLG OC) Boones Ferry Staging Site... Percentage based on the size of this site in relation to the total size of district(see LOC 50.03.003.2.d for geography). Campus Institutional 50% 50% Multifamily development is limited to Subarea I (CI) of the Marylhurst Campus. Marylhurst Campus zone—probably needs a special look at any vacant area. Refine based on analysis of Marylhurst campus...ask DR planner? Campus Research& 30% 70% Assumption based on trends in this area Development(CR&D) East End Commercial 80% 20% (EC) Foothills Mixed Use 80% 20% Most similar to EC in terms of res/non-res mix (FMU) General Commercial 30% 70% (GC) Highway Commercial 10% 90% (HC) Neighborhood 50% 50% Commercial (NC) Office Campus(OC) 30% 70% Summary The following table lists the number of tax lots,total and constrained acreage, and developable area by land type.A map summarizing development status is shown in Figure 6. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 13 OF 18 Table 4. Developable Area of Residential and Mixed Use Tax Lots Gross Constrained Unconstrained Developable Land Type Acres Area (Acres) Area (Acres) Acres Residential 4,413 951 3,547 345 MixedUse 493 96 399 15 Non-Residential 181 21 160 - Public/Other 3,491 1,309 2,215 - Total 8,578 2,377 6,320 360 Figure 6. Development Status of Residential and Mixed Use Land `Nv t f' . s !.L pf' ,_9iL 'q� ,/ y�',} f Development Status i, a Developed _ a P �5�, I ,-,:it A Partially Vacant •►/ J� ':A,Nt p ) 1 Vacant • T. \ ‘ ...MELROSE ST ITill - ! I N � , y . i� I ._ , \'.1i ....ler il �9�` 60U Tqih. r� / .....„.. ....._ ,,.ti k. I; Yf '- - - jKRU�E WAY. it _�• 4- _, :• ol.&- Ain,°„. rF 1 1 _ MEADOWS RD S- Y oe, .a _ _ 1 . OUNTA/N ��•- 2 ' �//SW'BONITA RD•"— CAP 9. --0. F �Ch BLV,D: � -'TYw \ D IR APO / '.P 1 'a o + 3 Jul o F.Q'�R\E�.gIVD. I' :' 4',_ v, R 'al 1 - 1 L f•% 50�.• a y • Q% b J °H/ i s! 'II' a GREENTREE RD 1' _ / 0S' .FRS 0 ) . , , _, .. . / '^elf EOOK. _ S BERGIS.RD F' a ..1•1 ► oft. ... 31, / _/^` 4'�FI•�_'1 ' m .1`I�ry_� :��E�S RDyy�\$ s'F2jO 1 A. yo 't�.-� Itt""111_ CHILDS RD l c, tiT . ti R' — is AT_'0 0.25_ 0.5 1- - � :, J, r �i 0 _-- ,y,a Lake Oswego Buildable Lands Inventory I Development Status Prepared by IM 0 0 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 14 OF 18 Step 4: Net Buildable Area and Unit Capacity This step of the BLI establishes the net buildable area of residential land in the Study Area by removing land needed for future right-of-way and other infrastructure set-asides, and by subtracting the non- residential portions of mixed-use zones.This step also accounts for platted subdivisions and other development with known approvals. Right of Way and Other Set-Asides When vacant land develops, land for roads, infrastructure, open space, and other needs reduce the gross available acres into a net developable acreage.The BLI uses the following assumptions to calculate net developable acreage for each parcel. • Residential Land: 20%of vacant properties, 0%of partially vacant properties • Mixed Use Land: 20%of vacant properties, 0%of partially vacant properties Assumed Density Table 7 shows the assumed density for various zoning designations in the City of Lake Oswego.This information is based on the minimum lot sizes, likely densities, and staff assumptions based on recent projects and comparable zones, and parcel-by-parcel analysis. Table 4. Unit Capacity on Residential and Mixed Use Land Zoning Density Notes Assumption for BLI Designation Residential-Low Density Zones R-15 Min 15,000 sf lot area. 2.9 2.9 DU/AC net (could increase DU/AC net slightly to assume some middle housing) R-10 Min 10,000 sf lot area. 4.3 4.3 du/ac net. (could increase du/ac net. slightly to assume some middle housing) R-7.5 Min 7,500 sf lot area 5.8 du/ac 5.8 du/ac net (could increase net slightly to assume some middle housing) Residential-Medium Density Zones R-5 7-8 units per gross acre, per —8 du/ac code. 5,000 sf min lot size for single- family. 1,500 for townhouse. R-DD Buffer zone. 21 du/ac —8 du/ac theoretically possible. R-6 First Addition Neighborhood —7 du/ac (FAN) zone 6,000 sf lot area for Single- Family. 1,500 for townhouse. Residential-High Density Zones PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 15 OF 18 Zoning Density Notes Assumption for BLI Designation R-3 At least 12 du/ac. (3,375 min —12 du/ac per dwelling, or 12.9 du/ac). Townhomes up to 29 du/ac R-2 Min 12 du/ac 12 du/ac R-0 Min 20 du/ac 20 du/ac R-W —12 du/ac Mixed Use Zones West Lake Grove Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 —5 du/ac Residential Mixed density or greater" Use(WLG RMU) West Lake Grove Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 35 du/ac expected in BFR Office-Commercial density or greater" Staging Site, nothing in other (WLG OC) areas Campus Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 Generally applies to Merylhears Institutional (CI) density or greater". Must have University, which is treated commercial on ground floor. separately. Campus Research& 54 du/ac for projects that Development Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 include residential (-30%of the (CR&D) density or greater" district, as above) based on LU 19-0041 East End Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 ^'56 du/ac Commercial(EC) density or greater". Must have commercial on ground floor. Foothills Mixed Use Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 ^'56 du/ac (FMU) density or greater" General Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 ^'27 du/ac based on Mercantile Commercial(GC) density or greater". Must have project(LU 18-0026) commercial on ground floor. Residential not allowed "In the GC-zoned area in the vicinity of Jean Way and Boones Ferry Road" Highway Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 8 du/ac (or R-5 density) for the Commercial(HC) density or greater" 10%that may develop as residential Neighborhood Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 67 du/ac for the 50%that may Commercial (NC) density or greater". Must have develop as residential (based on commercial on ground floor. LU 07-0031) Office Campus(OC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes "R-5 21 du/ac for the 50%that may density or greater" develop as residential (based on Galewood Commons Apartments) PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 16 OF 18 Summary Table 4 describes the net residential developable acres in Mixed Use zones, accounting for employment uses on mixed-use land and assumed right-of-way.Table 5 summarizes net residential acreage for both residential and mixed-use land in the study area. Table 5. Net Developable Acres of Residential and Mixed Use Land Gross Constrained Unconstrained Developable Unit Capacity Land Type Acres Area (Acres) Area (Acres) Acres Residential 4,413 951 3,547 345 1,218 MixedUse 493 96 399 15 178 Non-Residential 181 21 160 - - Public/Other 3,491 1,309 2,215 - - Total 8,578 2,377 6,320 360 1,396 Figure 7. Unit Capacity by Zoning Designation Land Type Unit Capacity Residential 1,218 EC/R-0 5 R-0 2 R-10 215 R-10 Comp Plan 468 R-15 114 R-3 22 R-5 104 R-7.5 136 R-7.5 Comp Plan 133 R-DD 10 R-W 1 WLG-R 2.5 8 Mixed Use 178 CR&D 39 EC 67 GC 12 NC 23 NC/R-0 9 OC/R-3 5 R-0 8 R-3 5 WLG-OC 7 WLG-R RMU 3 Grand Total 1,396 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 17 OF 18 Additional Capacity: • Remaining Marylhurst University approval: 70 units • Additional Middle Housing Capacity(estimated at 3% of developed lots with single-detached dwellings): 410 Units • Redevelopment on Multifamily and Mixed Use Land:TBD. Further analysis will include a look at "strike price" (current value per square foot), age of structure, and recent trends related to converting office uses to residential uses. Total Unit Capacity: 1,876 Units. Mix (e.g. single detached, middle housing, multi-dwelling)TBD. Next Steps The contents of this inventory will be reviewed by City staff,the Housing Task Force, and other stakeholders. Further analysis into potential redevelopment,the characterization of"partially vacant" land, densities, housing mix, and other attributes of the BLI are expected. This inventory will inform the Housing Capacity Analysis and Housing Needs Assessment to provide a picture of the availability of residential land as it compares to the need of certain types of housing units in the next 20 years. PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 18 OF 18 ATTACHMENT 6 DRAFT :4 • - 41% k .,,, - _..____.,,, miii`(1 !1 I- - -..-. 1. `-: -_ - - _-< i I I ! .ice ,1 ''I - 1lflulRiiiii1 ;. Source:Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OR HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS (OREGON STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 10) 20-YEAR HOUSING NEED 2023 - 2043 March 2023 \4.■ 1 = JOH NSON ECONOMICS PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 1 OF 29 Acknowledgments Johnson Economics prepared this report for the City of Lake Oswego.Johnson Economics and the City of Lake Oswego thank the many people who helped to develop this document. City Staff Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager Jessica Numanoglu, Interim Community Development Director Advisory Committees Consultants Johnson Economics MIG This report was prepared in accordance with the requirements of OAR 660 Division 8:Interpretation of Goal 10 Housing. This project is funded by the State of Oregon through the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the State of Oregon. City of Lake Oswego Johnson Economics 380 A Ave. 621 SW Alder Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Suite 605 (503) 635-0270 Portland, OR 97205 (503) 295-7832 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 1 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 2 OF 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 4 A. POPULATION GROWTH 5 B. HOUSEHOLD GROWTH&SIZE 5 C. FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS 5 D. GROUP QUARTERS POPULATION 6 E. HOUSING UNITS 6 F. AGE TRENDS 6 G. INCOME TRENDS 8 H. POVERTY STATISTICS 9 I. EMPLOYMENT LOCATION TRENDS 9 III. CURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS 11 A. HOUSING TENURE 11 B. HOUSING STOCK 11 C. NUMBER OF BEDROOMS 11 D. UNIT TYPES BY TENURE 12 E. AGE AND CONDITION OF HOUSING STOCK 13 F. HOUSING COSTS VS. LOCAL INCOMES 14 G. PUBLICLY ASSISTED HOUSING 15 IV. CURRENT HOUSING NEEDS(CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 17 V. FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS-2043(CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 23 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 2 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 3 OF 29 I. INTRODUCTION This analysis outlines a forecast of housing need within the City of Lake Oswego. Housing need and resulting land need are forecast to 2043 consistent with the 20-year need assessment requirements of Oregon Revised Statutes.' This report presents a housing need analysis (presented in number and types of housing units) and a residential land need analysis, based on those projections. The primary data sources used in generating this forecast were: ■ Portland State University Population Research Center ■ Metro ■ U.S.Census ■ Claritas2 ■ Oregon Employment Department ■ City of Lake Oswego ■ Clackamas County ■ Other sources are identified as appropriate. This analysis relies heavily on Census data from both the 2020 Decennial Census and the American Community Survey (ACS).All Census data feature some margin of error but remain the best source of data available on many demographic and housing subjects. One limitation of the 2020 Census is the release schedule of data sets,which takes place over several years following the year of the Census. Thus far, data has been released on: Population; Race; Latino ethnicity; number of Households; number of Housing Units; and Group Quarters population. While these are key baseline data sets utilized in this analysis, any additional nuance on demographics and housing from the 2020 Census are not yet available,with the next data release expected later in 2023. Despite the limitations,the 2020 Census is relied upon here as the best available source for the key indicators listed above in Lake Oswego,as of 2023. For more detailed data sets on demographics and housing,this analysis relies on the American Community Survey (ACS), which features a higher margin of error on all tables than the Decennial Census. The ACS is a survey of a representative sample of households which the Census uses to make estimates generalized to the population of the relevant geography.This analysis relies whenever possible on the most recent 2021 ACS 5-year estimates.The 5-year estimates have a lower margin of error than the ACS 1-year estimates. 'ORS 197.628;OAR 660-025 Claritas is a third-party company providing data on demographics and market segmentation. It licenses data from the Nielson Company which conducts direct market research including surveying of households across the nation. Nielson combines proprietary data with data from the U.S.Census,Postal Service,and other federal sources,as well as local-level sources such as Equifax,Vallassis and the National Association of Realtors. Projections of future growth by demographic segments are based on the continuation of long-term and emergent demographic trends identified through the above sources. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 3 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 4 OF 29 II. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE SUMMARY The following table (Figure 2.1) presents a profile of City of Lake Oswego demographics from the 2000 and 2010 Census. It also reflects the estimated population of this area as of 2023 from PSU estimates,forecasted forward to 2023 using the estimated growth rate between 2010 and 2022. ■ Lake Oswego is a City of over 41,500 people located in Clackamas County in the southern-central area of the Portland metropolitan region. ■ Based on estimated population, Lake Oswego is the 13th largest city in the state by population, similar in size to Oregon City regionally,or Keizer and Grants Pass statewide.Lake Oswego has about 1.5 times the population of neighboring West Linn or Tualatin, and about 75%of the population of Tigard. ■ Lake Oswego has experienced modest growth, growing roughly 18% since 2000, or less than 1% per year. In contrast, Clackamas County and the state experienced population growth of 26% and 25% respectively. (US Census and PSU Population Research Center) FIGURE 2.1:LAKE OSWEGO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS, FAMILIES, AND YEAR-ROUND HOUSING UNITS 2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth (Census) (Census) 00-10 (PSU) 10-23 Population) 35,278 36,619 4% 41,550 13% Households2 14,824 15,893 7% 17,481 10% Families3 9,775 10,079 3% 11,842 17% Housing Units4 15,668 16,995 8% 18,345 8% Group Quarters Populations 163 222 36% 329 48% Household Size(non-group) 2.37 2.29 -3% 2.36 3% Avg.Family Size 2.93 2.88 -2% 2.97 3% PER CAPITA AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth (Census) (Census) 00-10 (Proj.) 10-23 Per Capita ($) $42,166 $53,652 27% $74,600 39% Median HH ($) $71,597 $84,186 18% $123,300 46% SOURCE:Census,Metro Consolidated Forecast,PSU Population Research Center,and Johnson Economics Census Tables: DP-1(2000,2010);DP-3(2000);S1901;S19301 1 From Census,PSU Population Research Center,growth rate 2010-2022 extended to 2023 2 2023 Households=(2023 population-Group Quarters Population)/2023 HH Size 3 Ratio of 2023 Families to total HH is based on 2021 ACS 5-year Estimates 4 2023 housing units are the'20 Census total plus new units permitted from'20 through'22(source: Census,City) 5 2023 Group Quarters Population based on 5-year ACS estimates 2017-2021 ■ Lake Oswego was home to an estimated 17,500 households in 2023, an increase of over 2,650 households since 2000. The percentage of families has increased slightly from 66% of all households in 2000 to 68% in 2023. The city has a similar share of family households to Clackamas County (69%) but higher than the state (63%).Average household size is estimated to have remained fairly stable during this period. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 4 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 5 OF 29 • Lake Oswego's estimated average household size is 2.4 persons. This is lower than the Clackamas County average of 2.6 and similar to the statewide average of 2.44. A. POPULATION GROWTH Since 2000, Lake Oswego has grown by nearly 6,300 people within the UGB, or 18% in 23 years. This was lower than the countywide rate of growth. Clackamas County as a whole has grown an estimated 26%since 2000,while other cities in the county such as West Linn and Oregon City grew by 23% and 46% respectively. Portland's population grew by an estimated 19%during this period (PSU Population Research Center). B. HOUSEHOLD GROWTH&SIZE As of 2023,the city has an estimated 17,500 households. Since 2000, Lake Oswego has added an estimated 2,650 households.This is an average of roughly 115 households annually during this period.The growth since 2000 has paced the growth in new housing units,which have been permitted at the rate of roughly 117 units per year. There has been a general trend in Oregon and nationwide towards declining household size as birth rates have fallen, more people have chosen to live alone, and the Baby Boomers have become "empty nesters." While this trend of diminishing household size is expected to continue nationwide,there are limits to how far the average can fall. Lake Oswego's average household size of 2.4 people,with 68%family households,is smaller than Clackamas County (2.6 persons;69%families). Figure 2.2 shows the share of households by the number of people for renter and owner households in 2021(latest data available),according to the Census. Renter households are more likely to be one-person households,with 75% having two or fewer residents. Owner households are more likely to have two or more persons. FIGURE 2.2:NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER HOUSEHOLD,CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 0 7-or-more 0' Renter 6-person 1% Owner 2% 5-person 3% 4% in 2° 4-person 11% 18% 0 = 3-person 11/ 19% 2-person 35% 38° 1-person 40% 20% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Share of Households SOURCE: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: B25009(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) C. FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS As of the 2021 ACS,68%of Lake Oswego households were family households,up from 63.4%of households in 2010. The total number of family households in Lake Oswego is estimated to have grown by over 2,060 since 2000.The Census defines family households as two or more persons, related by marriage, birth or adoption and living together. In 2023,family households in Lake Oswego have an estimated average size of 2.97 people. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 5 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 6 OF 29 D. GROUP QUARTERS POPULATION As of the 2020 Census,the City of Lake Oswego had an estimated group quarters population of 0.8% of the total population, or 329 persons. Group quarters include such shared housing situations as nursing homes, prisons, dorms, group residences, military housing, or shelters. For the purposes of this analysis, these residents are removed from the estimated population total, before determining the number of other types of housing that are needed for non-group households. In Lake Oswego,nearly 90%of the group quarters population is found in assisted living facilities. E. HOUSING UNITS Data from the City of Lake Oswego and the US Census indicate that the city added roughly 2,680 new housing units since 2000, representing 17% growth in the housing stock. This number of new units is slightly higher than the growth in new households estimated during the same period (2,660), indicating that housing growth has kept pace with growing need. As of 2023, the city had an estimated housing stock of roughly 18,350 units for its 17,500 estimated households. This translates to an estimated average vacancy rate of 4.7%. Residential Permits: An average of 117 units have been permitted annually since 2000, with 24% being multi- family units. Most multi-family housing in Lake Oswego has been built in the last decade. FIGURE 2.3:HISTORIC AND PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL PERMITS,CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Housing Permits •Multi Family 350 •Single Family 300 250 200 150 1050 0 iii . II III ' ' 111 00 `l � 0 09' y0 yL y0 ti 'b ,LO ,LO ,ti0 ,y0 ,LO ,LO ,y0 ,ti0 ,LO• ,ti0 ,y0 ,LO SOURCE:HUD F. AGE TRENDS The following figure shows the share of the population falling in different age cohorts between the 2000 Census and the most recent 5-year American Community Survey estimates. As the chart shows,there is a general trend for middle age and young cohorts to fall as share of total population, while older cohorts have grown in share.This is in keeping with the national trend caused by the aging of the Baby Boom generation. Overall, Lake Oswego has an older population than the county,with a similar share of children, but a smaller share of those aged 25 to 44 years. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 6 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 7 OF 29 FIGURE 2.4: AGE COHORT TRENDS,2000-2021 25% Lake Oswego(2000) o N Lake Oswego(2021) 20% N o 0 coti o Clack.Co.(2021) 15% ti M a e o N d o N N o e-I o e-I e-I o r1 O o .--I O `"1 r1 O .--i c 1-1 10% O1 0 0 0 o Lf1 ul ip e 5% o N N 0% yh�eat5 ���aie ���eat5 ����at5 ���eat5 ����aie �1), Ott., A6`fix a aec �o �o �o �o co ,�0 ,`0 co J° N, .1, 0, o, 4h cod AG) SOURCE: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: QT-P1(2000);S0101(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) • The cohorts which grew the most in share during this period were those aged 55 to 74 years.Still,an estimated 79%of the population is under 65 years of age. • In the 2021 ACS, the local median age was an estimated 46 years, compared to 40 years in Oregon, and 39 years nationally. Figure 2.5 presents the share of households with children, and the share of population over 65 years for comparison. Compared to state and national averages, Lake Oswego has a similar share of households with children. However,at 21%,the share of population over 65 is higher than the state and national figures. FIGURE 2.5: SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN POPULATION OVER 65 YEARS(LAKE OSWEGO) Share of Households with Children Share of Population Over 65 Years 40% 40% 31% 31% 30% 28% 30% 21% 20% 20% 18% o 16% 10% 10% 0% 0% Lake Oswego Oregon USA Lake Oswego Oregon USA SOURCE: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: B11005;S0101(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 7 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 8 OF 29 G. INCOME TRENDS The following figure presents data on Lake Oswego's income trends. FIGURE 2.6: INCOME TRENDS,2000—2023(LAKE OSWEGO) PER CAPITA AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth (Census) (Census) 00-10 (Proj.) 10-23 Per Capita ($) $42,166 $53,652 27% $74,600 39% Median HH ($) $71,597 $84,186 18% $123,300 46% SOURCE:Census,Metro Consolidated Forecast,PSU Population Research Center,and Johnson Economics Census Tables: DP-1(2000,2010);DP-3(2000);S1901;S19301 • Lake Oswego's estimated median household income was$123,000 in 2023.This is nearly 40%higher than the Clackamas County median of$88,500, and 75%higher than the statewide median of$70,000. • Lake Oswego's per capita income is roughly$75,000. • Median income has grown an estimated 46% between 2010 and 2023, in real dollars. Inflation was an estimated 34%over this period,so the local median income has well exceeded inflation.This is not the case in many regions and nationally,where income growth has not kept pace with inflation. Figure 2.7 presents the estimated distribution of households by income as of 2021.The largest income cohorts are those households earning between $100k and $200k per year(32%), followed by households earning over$200k (27%). • 41%of households earn less than $100,000. • Roughly 19%of households earn less than$50k per year. FIGURE 2.7: HOUSEHOLD INCOME COHORTS,2021(LAKE OSWEGO) Household Income Groups $200,000 or more 27% $150,000 to$199,999 12% $100,000 to$149,999 20% $75,000 to $99,999 11% $50,000 to $74,999 11% $35,000 to $49,999 6% $25,000 to $34,999 4% $15,000 to $24,999 4% $10,000 to $14,999 2% Less than $10,000 3% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% SOURCE: US Census,Census Tables: S1901(2021 ACS 5-yr Est.) CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 8 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 9 OF 29 H. POVERTY STATISTICS According to the US Census,the official poverty rate in Lake Oswego is an estimated 4%over the most recent period reported (2021 5-year estimates).3 This is roughly 1,700 individuals in Lake Oswego. In comparison, the official poverty rate in Clackamas County is 9%,and at the state level is 17%. In the 2017-21 period: ■ The Lake Oswego poverty rate is low among all groups,but highest among those 65 years and older at 5%.The rate is 4%among those 18 to 64 years of age.The estimated rate is lowest for children at 3%. ■ For those without a high school diploma,the poverty rate is 11%. ■ Among those who are employed the poverty rate is 2%,while it is 7%for those who are unemployed. Information on affordable housing is presented in Section II F of this report. FIGURE 2.8: POVERTY STATUS BY CATEGORY(LAKE OSWEGO) Poverty Level of Subgroups Under 18 years 3% 18 to 64 years 4% 65 years and over 5% Employed 2% Unemployed 7% Less than high school 11% High school 10% Some college, associate's 7% Bachelor's degree or higher 3% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% SOURCE: US Census Census Tables: S1701(2021 ACS 5-yr Est.) I. EMPLOYMENT LOCATION TRENDS This section provides an overview of employment and industry trends in Lake Oswego that are related to housing. Commuting Patterns: The following figure shows the inflow and outflow of commuters to Lake Oswego according to the Census Employment Dynamics Database.These figures reflect"covered employment" as of 2019,the most recent year available. Covered employment refers to those jobs where the employee is covered by federal unemployment insurance. This category does not include many contract employees and self-employed and therefore is not a complete picture of local employment.The figure discussed here is best understood as indicators of the general pattern of commuting and not exact figures. 3 Census Tables: S1701(2018 ACS 5-yr Estimates) The Census Bureau uses a set of income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty.There are 48 separate income thresholds set based on the possible combinations of household composition. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 9 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 10 OF 29 As of 2017,the most recent year available,the Census estimated there were roughly 23,100 covered employment jobs located in Lake Oswego. Of these,an estimated 2,250 or 10%,are held by local residents,while nearly 21,000 employees commute into the city from elsewhere.This general pattern is fairly common among many communities in the Metro area, but the pattern is particularly stark here.The most common homes of local workers commuting into the city are Portland, Beaverton,or Tigard. This data set predates the surge in remote working that has taken place over the last few years. In prior years, it was safe to assume that most residents holding jobs outside the community likely commuted physically. Now a resident might hold a job in another city but work from home. Unfortunately, these data do not quantify this growing segment. Similarly, of the estimated 18,000 employed Lake Oswego residents, 88% of them commute elsewhere to their employment. The most common destinations for Lake Oswego commuters are Portland and Beaverton. Smaller shares work elsewhere in the Portland metro or in the mid-Willamette Valley. FIGURE 2.9: COMMUTING PATTERNS(PRIMARY JOBS),LAKE OSWEGO Metzger ��• Milwaukie Hosp 0 Li von Creek State© a3 Mllwaukle ® M Natural Area , Duntho lit_' • - 'r1 '4 99 E jard � • Oswego 20,900 2,250 15,800 Work in Lake Oswego, Live and work Live in Lake Oswego, live elsewhere in Lake Oswego work elsewhere 17- :ryant n's 1-4-- -\____) , :. Landing Durham ,�1 ""1 _ . ' ritage Center 90% / 10% 12% 88% Jennii Lr 1 MARYLHI'F—I River Grove.` i Stafford • ualatn © Leg,dcy Meridian Source: US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Jobs/Household Ratio: Lake Oswego features a balanced jobs-to-households ratio.There are an estimated 23,000 jobs in Lake Oswego (covered), and an estimated 17,500 households in Lake Oswego.This represents 1.3 jobs per household.There is no standard jobs-to-households ratio that is right for all communities,but it can provide a guide to the balance between employment uses and residential uses in the city. There is an average of 1.0 job held for each Lake Oswego household, a majority of which are located outside the city. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 10 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 11 OF 29 III. CURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS This section presents a profile of the current housing stock and market indicators in Lake Oswego.This profile forms the foundation to which current and future housing needs will be compared. A. HOUSING TENURE Lake Oswego has a greater share of homeowner households than renter households.The 2021 ACS estimates that 71%of occupied units were owner occupied, and only 29% renter occupied. The ownership rate is little changed since 2000.The estimated ownership rate is higher across Clackamas County(73%)and lower statewide(63%). B. HOUSING STOCK As shown in Figure 2.1, Lake Oswego had an estimated 18,350 housing units in 2023, with a vacancy rate of 5% (includes ownership and rental units).The housing stock has increased by roughly 2,680 units since 2000,or growth of over 17%. FIGURE 3.1: ESTIMATED SHARE OF UNITS,BY PROPERTY TYPE,2023 Lake Oswego, Oregon 80% 63% 60% 40% 21% 20% 9% 6% -0% 1% 0% 0% Single Single Duplex 3-or 4-plex 5+Units Manuf. Boat,RV, Detached Attached MFR home other temp SOURCE: US Census,City of Lake Oswego Figure 3.1 shows the estimated number of units by type in 2023 based on US Census.Detached single-family homes represent an estimated 63%of housing units. Units in larger apartment complexes of 5 or more units represent 21%of units,and other types of attached homes represent 16% of units. (Attached single family generally includes townhomes, and some 2 to 4-plexes which are separately metered.) Manufactured homes represent well less than 1%of the inventory. C. NUMBER OF BEDROOMS Figure 3.2 shows the share of units for owners and renters by the number of bedrooms they have. In general, owner-occupied units are much more likely to have three or more bedrooms,while renter-occupied units are much more likely to have two or fewer bedrooms. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 11 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 12 OF 29 FIGURE 3.2: NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR OWNER AND RENTER UNITS,2021(LAKE OSWEGO) Number of Bedrooms 5 or more 1% Renter IMMI 11% Owner 4 bedrooms 5% 39% 3 bedrooms 19% 33% 2 bedrooms 43% 14% 1 bedroom 27% 2% Studio 6% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% SOURCE: US Census Census Tables: B25042(2021 ACS 5-year Estimates) D. UNIT TYPES BY TENURE As Figure 3.3 and 3.4 show, a large share of owner-occupied units (81%), are detached homes,which is related to why owner-occupied units tend to have more bedrooms. Renter-occupied units are much more distributed among a range of structure types.About 18%of rented units are estimated to be detached homes or manufactured homes, while the remainder are some form of attached unit. Nearly 60%of rental units are in larger apartment complexes. FIGURE 3.3: CURRENT INVENTORY BY UNIT TYPE,FOR OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL HOUSING(LAKE OSWEGO) OWNERSHIP HOUSING OWNERSHIP HOUSING Single Single 5+Units Manuf. Boat,RV, Total Duplex 3-or 4-plex Detached Attached MFR home other temp Units Totals: 10,557 1,292 9 337 781 32 0 13,008 Percentage: 81.2% 9.9% 0.1% 2.6% 6.0% 0.2% 0.0% 100% RENTAL HOUSING RENTAL HOUSING Single Single 5+Units Manuf. Boat,RV, Total Detached Attached Duplex 3-or 4-plex MFR home other temp Units Totals: 934 332 250 675 3,145 0 0 5,337 Percentage: 17.5% 6.2% 4.7% 12.7% 58.9% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Sources: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS,CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 12 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 13 OF 29 FIGURE 3.4: CURRENT INVENTORY BY UNIT TYPE,BY SHARE Lake Oswego, Oregon 100% 81% Owner 80% Rental 59% E 60% co 40% 20% 18/ 10/0 13% 60 6% � 0% 5% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Single Single Duplex 3-or 4-plex 5+Units Manuf. Boat, RV, Detached Attached MFR home other temp Unit Type Sources: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS,CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO E. AGE AND CONDITION OF HOUSING STOCK Lake Oswego's housing stock reflects the pattern of development over time.The greatest periods of development in Lake Oswego were in the 1970's and 1980's. Roughly 15%of the housing stock has been built since 2000. FIGURE 3.5: AGE OF UNITS FOR OWNERS AND RENTERS(LAKE OSWEGO) 30% 25% Owner 25% 23% 23% Renter 20% 20% 20% 17% 15% o 10% 7% 10% U o 7% 5% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 1% 0% 05 �0005 c)oy ti°coy \oy (c)oy 4 05 ti°�oy y eat\\eC of Year Housing Unit Built SOURCE: US Census Census Tables: B25036(2021 ACS 5-year Estimates) • Unfortunately, good quantitative data on housing condition is generally unavailable without an intensive on- site survey of all local housing,which is beyond the scope of this analysis.Census categories related to housing condition are ill-suited for this analysis, dealing with such issues as units without indoor plumbing,which was more common in the mid-20t"Century, but is an increasingly rare situation.Age of units serves as the closest reliable proxy for condition with available data. • For ownership units, older homes may be in poor condition, but are also more likely to have undergone some repair and renovation over the years. Rental units are more likely to degrade steadily with age and wear-and- CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 13 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 14 OF 29 tear, and less likely to receive sufficient reinvestment to keep them in top condition, though this is not universally true. F. HOUSING COSTS VS. LOCAL INCOMES Figure 3.6 shows the share of owner and renter households who are paying more than 30% of their household income towards housing costs, by income segment. (Spending 30%or less on housing costs is a common measure of"affordability" used by HUD and others, and in the analysis presented in this report.) As one would expect, households with lower incomes tend to spend more than 30% of their income on housing, while incrementally fewer of those in higher income groups spend more than 30% of their incomes on housing costs.Of those earning less than$20,000,an estimated 91%of owner households and 100%of renters spend more than 30%of income on housing costs. Even among households earning between $50,000 and $75,000 per year, a majority are housing cost burdened. Because Lake Oswego has an income distribution skewed towards higher income levels,there are relatively few households in these lower income segments,compared to most other cities. In total,the US Census estimates that over 31%of Lake Oswego households pay more than 30%of income towards housing costs(2021 American Community Survey, B25106) FIGURE 3.6: SHARE OF LAKE OSWEGO HOUSEHOLDS SPENDING MORE THAN 30% ON HOUSING COSTS, BY INCOME GROUP 100% 100% 91% 92% 88% Owner Households o 82% 80% 74% Renter Households 64% 60% 51% U, U, 0 0 v ao 40% c z =• 20% 12%0 16% ai• 0% co Less than $20,000 to $35,000 to $50,000 to $75,000 or $20,000 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 more Household Income Sources: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Table: B25106(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) Housing is generally one of a household's largest living costs,if not the largest.The ability to find affordable housing options, and even build wealth through ownership, is one of the biggest contributors to helping lower income households save and cultivate wealth. Even if renting, affordable housing costs allow for more household income to be put to other needs,including saving. The following figures show the percentage of household income spent towards gross rent4 for local renter households only.This more fine-grained data shows that not only are 49%of renters spending more than 30%of their income on gross rent, but an estimated 29%of renters are spending 50%or more of their income on housing and are considered severely rent-burdened. The Census defines Gross Rent as"the contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities(electricity,gas,and water and sewer) and fuels(oil,coal,kerosene,wood,etc.)if these are paid by the renter(or paid for the renter by someone else)." Housing costs for homeowners include mortgage,property taxes,insurance,utilities and condo or HOA dues. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 14 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 15 OF 29 Renters are disproportionately lower income relative to homeowners. Housing cost burdens are felt more broadly for these households, and as the analysis presented in a later section shows there is a need for more affordable rental units in Lake Oswego,as in most communities. FIGURE 3.7: PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME SPENT ON GROSS RENT,LAKE OSWEGO RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 35% 30% 29% 25% . 25% 22% 0 a, 20% o• 15% 14% 10% 7% s 5% 3% 0% � ■ �Oo�o y0I0 ��10 ���o ���o 0 L 10 �O �O t. Ot C� o o\o o %of Income to Gross Rent Sources: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Table: B25070(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) G. PUBLICLY ASSISTED HOUSING Oregon Housing and Community Services(OHCS)tracks three currently operating affordable housing properties in Lake Oswego,with a total of 76 units.These are properties that are funded through HUD programs,tax credits and other programs which guarantee subsidized rents for qualified households.All of these units,save one,are offered for elderly residents. The Marylhurst Commons, currently under development, is planned to offer 100 affordable units for families.Completion is expected in 2024. The Housing Authority of Clackamas County administers over 1,600 Section 8 housing choice vouchers that allow low-income participants to find rental units anywhere in the county. Under this program, the renters can find participating landlords and the voucher helps to subsidize the cost of a market-rate rental unit.The unit does not have to be in a property dedicated to subsidized affordable housing but can be in any rental property. The high share of renters still paying over 30% of their income towards housing costs indicates that there is an ongoing need for rental units at the lowest price points. Agricultural Worker Housing: Lake Oswego is not currently home to properties dedicated to agricultural workers. This population may also be served by other available affordable units. People Experiencing Homelessness: The Census does make a multi-faceted effort to include the unhoused population in the total Decennial Census count, by attempting to enumerate these individuals at service providers, and in transitory locations such as RV parks or campgrounds, as of the official Census data (4/1/20). However, it is difficult to make an accurate count of this population, and it is generally presumed that the unhoused are undercounted in the Census. The most recent (January 2022) Point-in-Time count of people experiencing homelessness and households experiencing homelessness in Clackamas County' found 597 unhoused individuals on the streets, in shelters, or Figures are for the entire County CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 15 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 16 OF 29 other temporary and/or precarious housing. The estimated 597 unhoused individuals represent 0.1% of the county's total estimated population in 2022. • An estimated 45%of individuals were in some sort of temporary shelter,while 55%were unsheltered. • The total included 51 children (under age 18),and 26 youth(aged 18-24). • Of those indicating a gender,60%of those counted identified as men,40%women. • 5%of those counted were Hispanic or Latino compared to 9.5%in the general population. • 304 individuals,or 51%,were counted as"chronically homeless".6 While the Point-in-Time count is one of the few systematized efforts to count people experiencing homelessness across the country in a regular, structured way, it is widely thought to undercount the population of unhoused individuals and households. People who are doubled up,couch surfing,or experiencing domestic violence may not always be accurately counted. In addition to the impossibility of finding all unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness,the count is conducted in late January,when homeless counts are likely near their lowest of the year due to inclement weather. It also relies on self-reporting. A recent analysis prepared for OHCS to test a potential approach for preparing Housing Capacity Analyses on a regional basis included estimates of the unhoused population in Oregon communities, including Lake Oswego.The approach utilizes a combination of data from the bi-annual Point-in-Time count and from tracking of unhoused school-aged children in keeping with the McKinney-Vento Act.The analysis estimates 239 households experiencing homelessness in Lake Oswego as of mid-2020. These include households that are unsheltered, in temporary shelters, or staying with friends or relatives. These households are a component of current and future housing need. The persistence of people experiencing homelessness speaks to the need for continuing to build a full spectrum of services and housing types to shelter this population,from temporary shelter to subsidized affordable housing.An analysis of the ability of current and projected housing supply to meet the needs of low-income people and the potential shortfall is included in the following sections of this report. e HUD defines "chronically homeless" as an individual with a disability as defined by the McKinney-Vento Assistance Act,who has been in uninhabitable conditions for more than 12 mo.or on four separate occasions in the last three years;or has been in institutional care for less than 90 days;or a family with an adult head of household who meets this definition. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 16 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 17 OF 29 IV. CURRENT HOUSING NEEDS (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) The profile of current housing conditions in the study area is based on Census 2010, which the Portland State University Population Research Center(PRC) uses to develop yearly estimates through 2019.The 2019 estimate is forecasted to 2023 using the estimated growth rate realized since 2010. FIGURE 4.1:CURRENT LAKE OSWEGO HOUSING PROFILE(2023) CURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS(2023) SOURCE Total 2023 Population: 41,550 PSU Pop.Research Center - Estimated group housing population: 329 (0.8%of Total) US Census Estimated Non-Group 2023 Population: 41,221 (Total-Group) Avg. HH Size: 2.36 US Census Estimated Non-Group 2023 Households: 17,481 (Pop/HH Size) Total Housing Units: 18,345 (Occupied+Vacant) Census 2010+permits Occupied Housing Units: 17,481 (=#ofHH) Vacant Housing Units: 864 (Total HH-Occupied) Current Vacancy Rate: 4.7% (Vacant units/Total units) Sources:Johnson Economics,City of Lake Oswego,PSU Population Research Center,U.S.Census *This table reflects population,household and housing unit projections shown in Figure 2.1 We estimate a current population of 41,550 residents, living in 17,481 households (excluding group living situations).Average household size is 2.4 persons. There are an estimated 18,345 housing units in the city, indicating an estimated vacancy rate of 5%.This includes units vacant for any reason, not just those which are currently for sale or rent. ESTIMATE OF CURRENT HOUSING DEMAND Following the establishment of the current housing profile, the current housing demand was determined based upon the age and income characteristics of current households. The analysis considered the propensity of households in specific age and income levels to either rent or own their home (tenure), in order to derive the current demand for ownership and rental housing units and the appropriate housing cost level of each.This is done by combining data on tenure by age and tenure by income from the Census American Community Survey(tables: B25007 and B25118, 2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates). The analysis takes into account the average amount that owners and renters tend to spend on housing costs. For instance, lower income households tend to spend more of their total income on housing, while upper income households spend less on a percentage basis. In this case, it was assumed that households in lower income bands would prefer housing costs at no more than 30% of gross income (a common measure of affordability). Higher income households pay a decreasing share down to 20%for the highest income households. While the Census estimates that most low-income households pay more than 30%of their income for housing,this is an estimate of current preferred demand. It assumes that low-income households prefer (or demand) units affordable to them at no more than 30%of income, rather than more expensive units. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 17 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 18 OF 29 Figure 4.2 presents a snapshot of current housing demand (i.e. preferences)equal to the number of households in the study area (17,481).The breakdown of tenure(owners vs. renters) reflects data from the 2021 ACS. FIGURE 4.2:ESTIMATE OF CURRENT HOUSING DEMAND IN LAKE OSWEGO(2023) Ownership Price Range #of Income Range /of Cumulative Households Total $0k-$80k 330 Less than $15,000 2.7% 2.7% $80k-$130k 267 $15,000-$24,999 2.2% 4.9% $130k-$180k 357 $25,000-$34,999 2.9% 7.8% $180k-$250k 636 $35,000-$49,999 5.2% 13.0% $250k-$350k 1,051 $50,000-$74,999 8.6% 21.7% $350k-$440k 1,147 $75,000-$99,999 9.4% 31.1% $440k-$510k 1,109 $100,000-$124,999 9.1% 40.2% $510k-$560k 892 $125,000-$149,999 7.3% 47.5% $560k-$680k 1,827 $150,000-$199,999 15.0% 62.5% $680k+ 4,577 $200,000+ 37.5% 100.0% Totals: 12,191 %of All: 69.7% Rental Rent Level #of Income Range /of Cumulative Households Total $0-$400 348 Less than $15,000 6.6% 6.6% $400-$700 383 $15,000-$24,999 7.2% 13.8% $700-$900 554 $25,000-$34,999 10.5% 24.3% $900-$1300 621 $35,000-$49,999 11.7% 36.0% $1300-$1800 837 $50,000-$74,999 15.8% 51.9% $1800-$2200 764 $75,000-$99,999 14.4% 66.3% $2200-$2500 505 $100,000-$124,999 9.6% 75.9% $2500-$2800 410 $125,000-$149,999 7.8% 83.6% $2800-$3400 271 $150,000-$199,999 5.1% 88.7% $3400+ 596 $200,000+ 11.3% 100.0% All Households Totals: 5,290 %of All: 30.3% 17,481 Sources: PSU Population Research Center,Claritas Analytics.,Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Tables: B25007,B25106,B25118(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) Claritas Analytics: Estimates of income by age of householder The estimated home price and rent ranges are irregular because they are mapped to the affordability levels of the Census income level categories. For instance, an affordable home for those in the lowest income category (less than $15,000)would have to cost$80,000 or less.Affordable rent for someone in this category would be$400 or less. The affordable price level for ownership housing assumes 30-year amortization,at an interest rate of 5%(somewhat less than the current market rate,but in line with historic norms),with 10%down payment.These assumptions are designed to represent prudent lending and borrowing levels for ownership households. The 30-year mortgage commonly serves as the standard. In the 2000's, down payment requirements fell significantly, but lending standards tightened significantly since the 2008/9 credit crisis. While 20% is often cited as the standard for most buyers,it is common for homebuyers,particularly first-time buyers,to pay significantly less than this using available programs. Interest rates are subject to disruption from national and global economic forces, and therefore impossible to forecast beyond the short term. The 5% used here is roughly the average 30-year rate over the last 20 years.The CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 18 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 19 OF 29 general trend has been falling interest rates since the early 1980's,but coming out of the recent inflationary period, the Federal Reserve has raised its base rate significantly in recent years and mortgage rates have also climbed to levels not seen in almost 20 years. CURRENT HOUSING INVENTORY The profile of current housing demand(Figure 4.2)represents the preference and affordability levels of households. In reality, the current housing supply (Figures 4.3 and 4.4 below) differs from this profile, meaning that some households may find themselves in housing units which are not optimal, either not meeting the household's own/rent preference, or being unaffordable(requiring more than 30%of gross income). A profile of current housing supply in Lake Oswego was estimated based on permit data from the City of Lake Oswego and Census data from the most recently available 2021 ACS, which provides a profile of housing types (single family, attached, manufactured home, etc.), tenure, housing values, and rent levels. The 5-year estimates from the ACS were used because margin of error is lower than 1-year ACS estimates. • An estimated 71% of housing units are ownership units, while an estimated 29% of housing units are rental units. This is slightly different than the estimated demand profile shown in Figure 4.2, which estimated a bit higher demand for rental units given local income and age levels.The inventory includes vacant units. • 81%of ownership units are detached homes,and very few are manufactured homes. 17.5%of rental units are either single family homes or manufactured homes,while 59%are in structures of 5 units or more. • Of total housing units, an estimated 63%are detached homes or manufactured homes. 37%are some sort of attached unit type. FIGURE 4.3:PROFILE OF CURRENT HOUSING SUPPLY BY TYPE(2023) Lake Oswego, Oregon 100% 81% ■Owner 80% 59% Rental 60% 0 0 v i1 40% 18% 20% 10% a 13% - 6/0 0% 5/ 3% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Single Single Duplex 3-or 4-plex 5+Units MFR Manuf. Boat,RV, Detached Attached home other temp Unit Type Sources: US Census,PSU Population Research Center,JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Tables: B25004,B25032,B25063,B25075(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) • The affordability of different unit types is an approximation based on Census data on the distribution of housing units by value(ownership)or gross rent(rentals). • Most subsidized affordable housing units found in the city are represented by the inventory at the lowest end of the rental spectrum. • Ownership housing found at the lower end of the value spectrum generally reflect older, smaller homes, or homes in poor condition on small or irregular lots. It is important to note that these represent estimates of CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 19 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 20 OF 29 current property value or current housing cost to the owner,not the current market pricing of homes for sale in the city. These properties may be candidates for redevelopment when next they sell but are currently estimated to have low value. FIGURE 4.4:PROFILE OF CURRENT HOUSING SUPPLY,ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY IN LAKE OSWEGO(2023) Ownership Housing Rental Housing Affordable Estimated Affordable Estimated Income Range Share of Total Units Price Level Units Rent Level Units Less than$15,000 $0k-$80k 135 $0-$400 70 I 1% $15,000-$24,999 $80k-$130k 129 $400-$700 43 I 1% $25,000-$34,999 $130k-$180k 170 $700-$900 106 I 2% $35,000-$49,999 $180k-$250k 406 $900-$1300 518 • 5% $50,000-$74,999 $250k-$350k 735 $1300-$1800 1,852 14% $75,000-$99,999 $350k-$440k 839 $1800-$2200 1,289 12% $100,000-$124,999 $440k-$510k 753 $2200-$2500 602 7% $125,000-$149,999 $510k-$560k 924 $2500-$2800 223 6% $150,000-$199,999 $560k-$680k 2,217 $2800-$3400 229 13% $200,000+ $680k+ 6,700 $3400+ 404 39% 71% 13,008 29% 5,337 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Sources: US Census,PSU Population Research Center,JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Tables: B25004,B25032,B25063,B25075(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) ■ Most housing (58%) in Lake Oswego is found in price and rent levels affordable to those earning at least $125,000 per year,which is close to the city's median income.There is very little housing available to those in lower income segments. Over 90% of housing is affordable to those earning at least $50,000, and only 9% affordable to those earning less than this. COMPARISON OF CURRENT HOUSING DEMAND WITH CURRENT SUPPLY A comparison of estimated current housing demand with the existing supply identifies the existing discrepancies between needs and the housing which is currently available. The estimated number of units outnumbers the number of households by roughly 865 units, indicating an average vacancy rate of 4.7%. In general, this identifies that there is currently support for more ownership housing at lower price points, while the upper end of the market is generally well supplied.This is because most housing in Lake Oswego is clustered at higher property values, which matches the community's high average household income but leaves some households underserved. The analysis finds that the current market rates for most rental units are in the $1,300 to $2,200/month range. Therefore,this is where most of the rental unit supply is currently clustered. However,the greatest unmet need is found at the lower end of the income scale, where many current renters pay more than 30% of their income in housing costs. Rentals at the most expensive levels generally represent single family homes for rent. Figures 4.5 and 4.6 present this information in chart form,comparing the estimated number of households in given income ranges,and the supply of units currently valued(ownership)or priced(rentals)within those income ranges. The data is presented for owner and renter households. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 20 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 21 OF 29 FIGURE 4.5:COMPARISON OF OWNER HOUSEHOLD INCOME GROUPS TO ESTIMATED SUPPLY AFFORDABLE AT THOSE INCOME LEVELS IN LAKE OSWEGO(2023) Owner Households vs.Current Units 7,000 N 6,000 •Est.Owner Households Y_ 7 5,000 Units Valued at Income Level 4,000 0 v 3,000 0 0 2,000 I 0 1,000 . . . . 0 — 0 0 0 0 0 0 x0 o 0 0 0 0 o o o0 � � � 0 0 0 0 � O h, b, b �, , ,Ab' 0 1, b 0) 0,hy L q h 0 c � � a 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0r0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '5 0 uh 0 0 0 e qqhh 0% h, 0, te h 0 h hti hti hti Income Cohorts Sources: PSU Population Research Center,City of Lake Oswego,Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS FIGURE 4.6:COMPARISON OF RENTER HOUSEHOLD INCOME GROUPS TO ESTIMATED SUPPLY AFFORDABLE AT THOSE INCOME LEVELS IN LAKE OSWEGO(2023) Renter Households vs.Current Units 2,000 Est.Renter Households N E 1,500 Units Affordable at Income Level o -6 1,000 v VI 3 = 500 o ■ ■ I II 1 . A o 0 c c c c, c,) X0 ) ) , 0) o 0) 0) 0)0 � � � � g o e o o° h, , , h, C, ,b, �, 0, 0 b At' L b 0 0'y L h h 0 tzti ho c . L e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tee, hyh, h,Lh, h,"h, hh0, huh, 00, �h0 h0, hti hti hti Income Cohorts Sources: PSU Population Research Center,City of Lake Oswego,Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS The home value and rent segments which show a "surplus"in Figures 4.5 and 4.6 illustrate where current property values and market rent levels are in Lake Oswego. Housing prices and rent levels will tend to congregate around those levels.These levels will be too costly for some(i.e.require more than 30%in gross income)or"too affordable" for others(i.e.they have income levels that indicate they could afford more expensive housing if they chose). In general, these findings demonstrate that there are few lower-value housing opportunities for many owner households, and potential support for some less expensive types of ownership housing.There is a need for more rental units at lower rent levels(<$900/mo.). HOME SALE PRICES It is important to note that the figures presented in the prior section represent estimates of current property value or current housing cost to the owner, not the current market pricing of homes for sale in the city. For instance, a household living in a manufactured home that has been paid off over many years may have relatively CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 21 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 22 OF 29 low housing costs.This indicates that one owner household is living in a"lower value"unit. It does not indicate that units at this price point are available on the current market. If this hypothetical household were to sell their home,it would sell at a higher price reflecting inflation and current achievable market prices. For this reason,many of the lower value or lower rent units found in the previous section will actually become higher-priced units when they are sold or become vacant. For reference,this section presents home sales data from 2022 to indicate housing costs for new entrants into the market(Figure 4.7). • The median sale price was$860,000. • The average(mean)sale price was$1,075,000. • The average price per square foot was$430/s.f. • The median square footage was 2,300 s.f. FIGURE 4.7:LAKE OSWEGO HOME SALES(12 MONTHS) Home Sales by Unit Type Home Sales by Price Level $900,000+ 319 $800,000-$899,000 66 20% $700,000-$799,000 67 $600,000-$699,000 56 8% $500,000-$599,000 ■ 39 0 0 72% $400,000-$499,000 . 31 $300,000-$399,000 47 $200,000-$299,000 ■ 43 $100,000-$199,000 13 Detached Home Manuf. Home <$100,000 0 Attached Home Condo 0 100 200 300 400 Sources: RMLS,JOHNSON ECONOMICS • 48%of sales were priced above$900,000. • 34%of sales were priced between $500,000 and $899,000. • Only 18%of sales were priced at less than$500,000. • Only 7%of sales were priced below$300,000. Affordability: As indicated, roughly 75% of recent sales in Lake Oswego were priced at least $600,000. Homes in this range would be mostly affordable to households earning at least $175,000 per year, which is well above the median household income of$123,000. Roughly 66% of households earn less than $175,000 per year, meaning that the bulk of housing supply on the current for-sale market(75%) is likely too expensive for most of these households. The findings of current need form the foundation for projected future housing need, presented in the following section. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 22 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 23 OF 29 V. FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS- 2043 (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) The projected future(20-year)housing profile(Figure 5.1)in the study area is based on the current housing profile (2023), multiplied by an assumed projected future household growth rate. The projected future growth is the forecasted 2043 population for the City of Lake Oswego included in the most recently adopted Coordinated Population Forecast from Metro for all cities in the region.This was adopted in 2021 and projected a very modest growth rate for Lake Oswego of well less than 1%per year. FIGURE 5.1:FUTURE HOUSING PROFILE(2043), LAKE OSWEGO PROJECTED FUTURE HOUSING CONDITIONS(2023-2043) SOURCE 2023 Population(Minus Group Pop.) 41,221 (Est.2022 pop.-Group Housing Pop.) PSU Projected Annual Growth Rate 0.05% Metro Coordinated Forecast(2021) Metro 2043 Population(Minus Group Pop.) 41,629 (Total 2043 Population-Group Housing Pop.) Estimated group housing population: 332 1.7%of total pop.(held constant from 2022) US Census Total Estimated 2043 Population: 41,961 Metro Coordinated Forecast(2021) Metro Estimated Non-Group 2043 Households: 19,298 Metro Coordinated Forecast(2021) Metro New Households 2023 to 2043 1,816 Avg. Household Size: 2.16 Projected 2043 pop./2043 houseolds US Census Total Housing Units: 20,313 Occupied Units plus Vacant Occupied Housing Units: 19,298 (=Number of Non-Group Households) Vacant Housing Units: 1,016 (=Total Units-Occupied Units) Projected Market Vacancy Rate: 5.0% Stabilized vacancy assumption Sources: PSU Population Research Center,Metro,Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC *Projections are applied to estimates of 2023 population,household and housing units shown in Figure 2.1 The model projects growth in the number of non-group households over 20 years of over 1,800 households, but with accompanying population growth of just 411 new residents. The difference is that the household size is expected to decrease significantly to 2.2 persons,meaning more smaller households to house the same population. (The number of households differs from the number of housing units, because the total number of housing units includes a percentage of vacancy. Projected housing unit needs are discussed below.) PROJECTION OF FUTURE HOUSING UNIT DEMAND(2043) The profile of future housing demand was derived using the same methodology used to produce the estimate of current housing need. This estimate includes current and future households but does not include a vacancy assumption. The vacancy assumption is added in the subsequent step. Therefore,the need identified below is the total need for actual households in occupied units (19,298). The analysis considered the propensity of households at specific age and income levels to either rent or own their home, in order to derive the future need for ownership and rental housing units, and the affordable cost level of each.The projected need is for all 2043 households and therefore includes the needs of current households. The price levels presented here use the same assumptions regarding the amount of gross income applied to housing costs,from 30%for low income households down to 20%for the highest income households. The affordable price level for ownership housing assumes 30-year amortization,at an interest rate of 5%,with 10% down payment. Because of the impossibility of predicting variables such as interest rates 20 years into the future, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 23 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 24 OF 29 these assumptions were kept constant from the estimation of current housing demand. Income levels and price levels are presented in 2023 dollars. Figure 5.2 presents the projected occupied future housing demand(current and new households,without vacancy) in 2043. FIGURE 5.2:PROJECTED OCCUPIED FUTURE HOUSING DEMAND(2043), LAKE OSWEGO Ownership #of Price Range Households Income Range %of Total Cumulative $0k-$80k 364 Less than$15,000 i 2.7% 2.7% Extremely <30%MFI $80k-$130k 295 $15,000-$24,999 2.2% 4.9% Low Income $130k-$180k 394 $25,000-$34,999 2.9% 7.8% Very Low <50%MFI $180k-$250k 702 $35,000-$49,999 5.2% 13.0% Income $250k-$350k 1,160 $50,000-$74,999 8.6% 21.7% Low Income <80%MEI $350k-$440k 1,266 $75,000-$99,999 9.4% 31.1% $440k-$510k 1,224 $100,000-$124,999 9.1% 40.2% $510k-$560k 984 $125,000-$149,999 7.3% 47.5% $560k-$680k 2,017 $150,000-$199,999 15.0% 62.5% $680k+ 5,053 $200,000+ 37.5% 100.0% Totals: 13,458 %of All: 69.7% Rental #of Rent Level Income Range %of Total Cumulative Households $0-$400 385 Less than$15,000 6.6% 6.6% Extremely <30%MFI $400-$700 423 $15,000-$24,999 7.2% 13.8% Low Income $700-$900 611 $25,000-$34,999 10.5% 24.3% Very Low <50%MFI $900-$1300 686 $35,000-$49,999 11.7% 36.0% Income $1300-$1800 924 $50,000-$74,999 15.8% 51.9% Low Income <80%MFI $1800-$2200 843 $75,000-$99,999 14.4% 66.3% $2200-$2500 558 $100,000-$124,999 9.6% 75.9% $2500-$2800 453 $125,000-$149,999 7.8% 83.6% $2800-$3400 299 $150,000-$199,999 5.1% 88.7% $3400+ 658 $200,000+ 11.3% 100.0% All Units Totals: 5,840 %of All: 30.3% 19,298 Sources: Census,Claritas Analytics,JOHNSON ECONOMICS The number of households across the income spectrum seeking a range of both ownership and rental housing is anticipated to grow. It is projected that the homeownership rate in Lake Oswego will fall somewhat over the next 20 years to under 70%from 71%. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 24 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 25 OF 29 COMPARISON OF FUTURE HOUSING DEMAND TO CURRENT HOUSING INVENTORY The profile of occupied future housing demand presented above(Figure 5.2)was compared to the current housing inventory presented in the previous section to determine the total future need for new housing units by type and price range(Figure 5.3). This estimate includes a vacancy assumption. As reflected by the most recent Census data, and as is common in most communities, the vacancy rate for rental units is typically higher than that for ownership units. An average vacancy rate of 5%is assumed for the purpose of this analysis. FIGURE 5.3: PROJECTED FUTURE NEED FOR NEW HOUSING UNITS(2043), LAKE OSWEGO OWNERSHIP HOUSING Multi-Family Single Single 3-or 4- 5+Units Manuf. Boat,RV, Total %of Unit Type: 2-unit Detached Attached plex MFR home other temp Units Units Totals: 708 132 31 57 92 3 0 1,024 52.0% Percentage: 69.2% 12.9% 3.1% 5.6% 9.0% 0.2% 0.0% 100% RENTAL HOUSING Multi-Family Single Single 3-or 4- 5+Units Manuf. Boat,RV, Total %of Unit Type: 2-unit Detached Attached plex MFR home other temp Units Units Totals: 52 87 73 148 585 0 0 944 48.0% Percentage: 5.5% 9.2% 7.7% 15.7% 61.9% 0.0% 0.0% 100% TOTAL HOUSING UNITS Multi-Family Single Single 3-or 4- 5+Units Manuf. Boat,RV, Total %of Unit Type: 2-unit Detached Attached plex MFR home other temp Units Units Totals: 760 220 104 205 677 3 0 1,968 100% Percentage: 38.6% 11.2% 5.3% 10.4% 34.4% 0.1% 0.0% 100% Sources: PSU,City of Lake Oswego,Census,Claritas Analytics,JOHNSON ECONOMICS • The results show a need for 1,968 new housing units by 2043. • Of the new units needed, roughly 52% are projected to be ownership units, while 48% are projected to be rental units.This represents more renters than the estimated tenure split, but it is projected that more rental units will need to be added to correct the current modest deficit of rental units,plus the future ownership rate will fall slightly. This results in a proportionately greater share of future units being rental, rather than ownership units. • There is some need for new ownership housing at the middle to low-end of the pricing spectrum. But income trends suggest that the greatest demand will remain in the upper-middle price ranges($300k to$600k). • The greatest need for rental units is found at the lowest and some higher price points. Market rents are currently clustered in the $1,300 to $2,200 range in current dollars.Therefore, most units are to be found in this range. • There is insufficient rental housing for the lowest income households making $35,000 or less or detached single-family homes for rent. Many households will need rent levels lower than the market rate in order to maintain housing costs that are affordable(see more detail below). CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 25 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 26 OF 29 Needed Unit Types The mix of needed unit types shown in Figure 5.3 reflects both past trends and anticipated future trends. Single detached units are expected to continue to make up a large share of new housing development for ownership households over the next 20 years. However,an increasing share of new needed units is anticipated to be attached housing types to accommodate renters and first-time home buyers. ■ 39%of the new units are projected to be single detached homes or new manufactured homes, while 61% is projected to be some form of attached housing. ■ Single attached units(townhomes on individual lots)are projected to meet roughly 11%of future need. These are defined as units on separate tax lots,attached by a wall but separately metered,the most common example being townhome units. ■ Duplex,triplex, and four-plex units are projected to represent a growing 16%of the total need, reflecting new state rules for middle housing zoning. Duplex units would include a detached single-family home with an accessory dwelling unit on the same lot, or with a separate unit in the home (for instance, a rental basement unit.) ■ 34%of all needed units are projected to be multi-family in structures of 5+attached units. ■ Less than 1% of new needed units are projected to be manufactured home units, which meet the needs of some low-income households for both ownership and rental. ■ Of ownership units, 69% are projected to be single detached homes or manufactured homes, and 31% are projected to be attached forms. ■ Nearly all new rental units are projected to be found in new attached buildings, with 62% projected in rental properties of 5 or more units, and 33% in other attached housing forms. Only 5.5% of new rental units are projected to be detached homes, including manufactured homes. Group Housing Needs: There is an estimated population of 332 individuals living in group housing in 2043, based on an assumption that the share of the population living in group quarters (1.7%) remains stable from current levels. This would represent an increase of just a few people living in group quarters, as forecasted population growth is modest. In Lake Oswego, the Census estimates that nearly all of Lake Oswego's group housing population lives in nursing facilities. NEEDED AFFORDABILITY LEVELS Figure 5.4 presents the estimated need for net new housing units by major income segment,based on the projected demographics of new households to the market area.The needed affordability levels presented here are based on current dollars. Figure 5.4 also discusses the housing types typically attainable by residents at these income levels. Note that Figure 5.4 presents the official state measure of "low income" used to set rent and income limits for various affordable housing programs. This estimate via OHCS and HUD are based on an estimate of median income in Clackamas County of$106k in 2022, based on a family of four,while the median income in Lake Oswego was a higher$123k. For this analysis,the estimated Median Family Income(MFI)for a family of four($106k)was adjusted to match the average household size in Lake Oswego of 2.4 persons ($89.5k) so that the estimates presented below reflect the city average. Figure 5.4 presents some of the types of housing product that might commonly serve households in these income ranges. Many households below 60% MFI or even higher income will require some sort of subsidized affordable unit or voucher to find housing affordability.Those at 60%to 100%MFI may find housing in older and substandard market rate rentals, manufactured homes,and middle housing types. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 26 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 27 OF 29 FIGURE 5.4: PROJECTED NEED FOR NEW HOUSING AT DIFFERENT INCOME LEVELS, LAKE OSWEGO Income Level Owner Renter Household Income Segment Total Share Common Housing Product (Rounded) Units Units Government-subsidized;Voucher; Extremely Low Inc. <30%MEI <$27,500 56 149 205 10% Shelter;Transitional Aging/substandard rentals; Very Low Income 30%-60%MFI $27.5k-$55k 95 221 317 16% Government-subsidized;Voucher; Manufactured homes Aging apartments;Government- Low Income 60%-80%MFI $55k-$73k 71 120 190 10% subsidized; Plexes;Aging single- detached;Small homes Single-detached homes; Middle Income 80%-120%MFI $73k-$110k 134 172 306 16% Townhomes; Condominiums; Newer apartments Single-detached homes; Upper Income >120%MFI >$110,000 669 282 951 48% Townhomes; Condominiums; New apartments TOTAL: 1,024 944 1,968 100% Sources: HUD,Census,Claritas,JOHNSON ECONOMICS ■ Figure 5.3 presents the net NEW housing unit need over the next 20 years. However, there is also a current need for more affordable units. For all households,current and new,to pay 30%or less of their income towards housing in 2043, more affordable rental units (subsidized and non-subsidized) would be required. This indicates that some of the current supply, while it shows up as existing available housing, would need to become less expensive to meet the needs of current households. ■ There is a finding of new need at the lowest end of the rental spectrum($900 and less). ■ The projection of future ownership units finds that the supply at the lowest end of the spectrum will be insufficient due to the prevalence of newer homes, many of which will be detached houses. (This reflects the estimated value of the total housing stock, and not necessarily the average pricing for housing currently for sale.) Ownership options and lower and middle price points are often manufactured homes, townhomes, condos,and small detached homes, often on smaller lots. Subsidized Affordability Housing Need As alluded to in Figure 5.4, some low-income households, and particularly the lowest income households typically need some sort of subsidized affordable housing in order to find rents affordable given their modest resources and other household spending needs. Figure 5.5 below presents estimates of need at key low-income affordability levels in 2022 and in 2043.The table uses HUD definitions of Extremely Low, Very Low, and Low Income, as well as 60% MFI which is a common affordability level for tax credit properties. ■ There is existing and on-going need at these levels, based on income levels specified by OHCS for Clackamas County. An estimated 12%of households qualify as at least"low income"or lower on the income scale,while 9% of households qualify as "extremely low income". (Again, this is based on the official state measure of Clackamas County median income for application to HUD and other subsidized affordable housing programs, which is relatively high.) CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 27 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 28 OF 29 FIGURE 5.5: PROJECTED NEED FOR HOUSING AFFORDABLE AT LOW INCOME LEVELS,LAKE OSWEGO Current Need(2022) Future Need(2043) NEW Need(20-Year) Affordablilty Level Income Level* #of Units %of All #of Units %of All #of Units %of All Extremely Low Inc. 5 30%MFI 5 $26,800 1,492 9% 1,697 9% 205 10% Very Low Income 30%-50%MFI <_ $44,700 1,560 9% 1,771 9% 212 11% Low Income 50%-80%MFI <_ $71,600 2,075 12% 2,370 12% 295 15% TOTAL: 5 80%MF1 5 571,600 5,127 29% 5,839 30% 712 36% Tax Credit <_60%MFI <_ $53,700 3,962 23% 4,483 23% 521 26% Sources: OHCS,Claritas,JOHNSON ECONOMICS,HUD *Income levels are based on OHCS guidelines for avg.Lake Oswego household size of 2.4 persons. ■ Typically, only rent-subsidized affordable properties can accommodate these extremely-low-income households and many other low-income households at "affordable" housing cost levels. Often the lowest income households must be served by housing choice vouchers and public housing. Tax credit projects are more likely to serve those earning 50%to 60%of MFI. Housing Need for People Experiencing Homelessness: Given the low forecasted population growth, Lake Oswego is assumed to maintain a fairly stable number of unhoused individuals and households over this period. Unhoused individuals and families may require a mixture of shelter types depending on individual circumstances,ranging from emergency shelter to transitional housing to permanent subsidized housing. This population is a subset of the extremely-low-income population shown in prior figures. Agricultural Worker Housing:There is currently no housing dedicated to this population in Lake Oswego. Based on the assumption that this type of housing will maintain its current representation in the local housing stock, this indicates that there will likely be no new need for housing dedicated specifically for agricultural workers over the planning period. However,this population may also be served by other available affordable units. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 28 PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 5/PAGE 29 OF 29