HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2010-06-15 PMLAKE OSWEGO
AGENDA CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 380AAvenue
PO Box 369
hwim Tuesday, June 15, 2010 Lake Oswego, OR 97034
6:30 p.m. 503-675-3984
Council Chambers, 380AAvenue www.ci.oswego.or.us
Contact: Robyn Christie, City Recorder Also published on the internet at:
Email: rchristie@ci.oswego.or.us www.ci.oswego.or.us
Phone: 503-675-3984
The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. To request accommodations, please contact
Public Affairs at 503-635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting.
Page #
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PRESENTATIONS (10 minutes)
3.1 Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board Donation
3.2 Centennial Update
4. CONSENT AGENDA (5 minutes)
♦ The consent agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion.
♦ An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the consent agenda.
♦ The City Council makes one motion covering all items included in the consent agenda.
4.1 REPORTS
4.1.1 Public Improvement Contract for construction of the 2010 Street Preservation
Project (Slurry Seal)
Action: Award a public improvement contract to Asphalt Maintenance, Inc for the
2010 Street Preservation Project in the amount of $206,644.08
Jack Hoffman, Mayor ■ Roger Hennagin, Councilor ■ Kristin Johnson, Councilor
Donna Jordan, Councilor ■ Sally Moncrieff, Councilor ■ Mary Olson, Councilor ■ Bill Tierney, Councilor
Page 2
4.2 RESOLUTIONS
4.2.1 Resolution 10-23, authorizing a Joint Funding Agreement for the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) Clackamas River Water Quality Study
Action: Adopt Resolution 10-23
4.3 MINUTES
4.3.1 January 23, 2010, goal setting (morning portion)
4.3.2 April 6, 2010, regular meeting
ACTION: Approve minutes as written
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. CITIZEN COMMENT (30 minutes)
The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens 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 citizen shall apply.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS (2 hours)
7.1 Resolution 10-28, adjusting the budget for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2009
by adopting a supplemental budget, approving resources/requirements, and making
appropriations
Public Hearing Process:
Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
Staff Report by Ursula Euler, Finance Director
The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, but may be changed by
the Council:
Testimony will be taken in the following order: in support of amendment, in
opposition to amendment, neutral.
• 10 minutes for a representative of a recognized neighborhood association,
homeowner association, or government agency, or other incorporated public
interest organization;
• 5 minutes for other persons.
Questions of Staff
Discussion
Motion: Adopt Resolution 10-28
Page 3
7.2 Resolution 10-29, certifying the City is eligible to receive State -Shared Revenues
Motion: Adopt Resolution 10-29
7.3 Resolution 10-30, declaring the City of Lake Oswego's election to Receive State -
Shared revenues in 2010-11
Public Hearing Process:
Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
Staff Report by Ursula Euler, Finance Director
The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, but may be changed by
the Council:
Testimony will be taken in the following order: in support of amendment, in
opposition to amendment, neutral.
• 10 minutes for a representative of a recognized neighborhood association,
homeowner association, or government agency, or other incorporated public
interest organization;
• 5 minutes for other persons.
Questions of Staff
Discussion
Motion: Adopt Resolution 10-30
7.4 Resolution 10-31, adopting the City of Lake Oswego Budget for the Fiscal Year
commencing July 1, 2010, (Fiscal Year 2010-2011) making appropriations, levying ad
valorem taxes, and classifying the levy pursuant to Section 11b, Article XI of the
Oregon Constitution
Public Hearing Process:
Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
Staff Report by Ursula Euler, Finance Director
The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, but may be changed by
the Council:
Testimony will be taken in the following order: in support of amendment, in
opposition to amendment, neutral.
• 10 minutes for a representative of a recognized neighborhood association,
homeowner association, or government agency, or other incorporated public
interest organization;
• 5 minutes for other persons.
Questions of Staff
Discussion
Motion: Adopt Resolution 10-31
Page 4
7.5 Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public
Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings and approving a
special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and
authorizing the Mayor to sign a three-year contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego for FY10-11 through FY12-13
Public Hearing Process:
Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
Staff Report by Kim Gilmer, Parks and Recreation Director
The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, but may be changed by
the Council:
Testimony will be taken in the following order: in support of amendment, in
opposition to amendment, neutral.
• 10 minutes for a representative of a recognized neighborhood association,
homeowner association, or government agency, or other incorporated public
interest organization;
• 5 minutes for other persons.
Questions of Staff
Discussion
Motion: Adopt Resolution 10-32
7.6 Resolution 10-33, a resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake
Oswego Public Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings
and approving a special procurement for services related to development of a
framework plan together with proposed Comprehensive Plan and Code
Amendments for the Foothills Area
Resolution 10-34, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
declaring official intent to reimburse certain expenditures from Urban Renewal
Funds, including proceeds of indebtedness
Public Hearing Process:
Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
Staff Report by Brant Williams, Economic and Capital Development Director
The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, but may be changed by
the Council:
Testimony will be taken in the following order: in support of amendment, in
opposition to amendment, neutral.
• 10 minutes for a representative of a recognized neighborhood association,
homeowner association, or government agency, or other incorporated public
interest organization;
Page 5
• 5 minutes for other persons.
Questions of Staff
Discussion
Motion: Adopt Resolution 10-33 and 10-34
8. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER (15 minutes)
8.1 Ordinance 2549, an ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego amending LOC Article
50.44 (Flood Management Area) regarding applicability, map amendments, and the
flood management area for a portion of Springbrook Creek, and adopting findings
LU 10-0003-1731
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2549
8.2 Ordinance 2552, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC
Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), Section 50.11.010 to limit the square
footage of delicatessens, bakeries, and restaurants in the Campus Research and
Development (CR&D) zone, and adopting findings LU 09-0034-1732
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2552
8.3 Ordinance 2456, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter
50 of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code to add new Article 50.086
relating to the Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District and adopting findings LU 09-0043-
1733
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2456
9. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL (15 minutes)
This agenda item provides an opportunity for individual Councilors to provide
information to the Council on matters not otherwise on the agenda. Each
Councilor will be given five minutes.
9.1 Councilor Information
9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS (5 minutes)
10.1 City Manager
10.1.1 Review of Council Schedule
Page 6
10.2 City Attorney
11. ADJOURNMENT
CABLE VIEWERS: This meeting will be shown live on Channel 28, at 6:30 p.m. The
meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28:
Wednesday 7:30 p.m. Friday 2:30 a.m.
Thursday 7:00 a.m. Saturday 12:00 p.m.
Watch Council meetings live wherever you are via live streaming video at
mms://www.ci.oswego.or.us/live
CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
Items known as of 6/10/10
DATE
MEETING
Wednesday,
Tour of the Water Project, 4-7 p.m.
June 16
Tuesday,
Study Session, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
June 22
• Planning Director Report on Second Look Task Force
Wednesday,
Special Meeting, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers
June 23
• Continued Report on Second Look Task Force Report (if needed)
Monday,
Special Meeting, 5-6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
June 28
Joint meeting with the Planning Commission on the Comprehensive
Plan
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
June 29
• Public Input on Second Look Task Force Report (Sensitive Lands)
Wednesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
June 30
• Public Input on Second Look Task Force Report (Sensitive Lands)
Tuesday,
Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
July 6
• LOIS Update
• Water Project Update
• Sustainability Update
• Community Survey
• Comprehensive Plan Change — Infill (Ord. 2523/LU 08-0053)
• IGA approving a Strategic Investment Zone
Public Hearing
• 5 -Year Capital Improvement Plan
Saturday,
Special Meeting, 10 a.m. Council Chambers
July 10
• Public Input on Second Look Task Force Report (Sensitive Lands)
Monday,
Joint Meeting with the Tigard City Council (hosted by Tigard)
July 12
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
July 13
• Park naming process for lakefront park
• Issues of Aging & Housing Options
• Comp Plan Speaker Series
• Code Audit Report
Tuesday,
Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
July 20
• Percent for Art ordinance
Public Hearing
• Action on Second Look Task Force Recommendations (Council
discussion and deliberations only, public input on 6/29, 6/30, & 7/10)
BOLD ITEMS — New issues added to schedule
CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
Items known as of 6/10/10
DATE
MEETING
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
July 27
• Legislative Update
• Policy on Media in Executive Sessions
• Emergency Operations Plan Update
• Mid -Year Goal Review
To Be Scheduled
• Emergency Response Plan
• Implementation of Matrix report (Spring 2010)
• Municipal Finance
• LOIS Bond Sale
• Tour of Willamette River to see Foothills Dock and Water Treatment Plant intake (late
July/August)
• Prepare for Rail—Volution Conference (Oct 19-21, 2010)
• Streetcar Locally Preferred Alternative Process
• GB Arrington on Foothills as Transit Oriented Development
• Lifelong Learning
• Adoption of Preferred Water Treatment Alternative (September)
• IGA for Strategic Investment Zone with Clackamas County
• Comp Plan Speaker Series (2nd Tuesday of each month)
• New MS4 Permit report to Council (September)
• Metro open space tour in the Stafford area (September)
Regular Updates
• LOIS Update, 1st meeting every month
• Water Project Update, 1st meeting every month
• Streetcar Update, 2nd meeting every month
• Sustainability Update, quarterly (2nd meeting, June, Sept., Dec.)
• Financial Update, quarterly
• Legislative Update, quarterly (1st meeting, June, Sept., Dec.)
BOLD ITEMS - New issues added to schedule
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Ann Adrian, Lake Oswego Adult Community Center Manager
Department of Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT: Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board Donation
DATE: June 6, 2010
ACTION
3101
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
Presentation by Co -Chairs of the Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board to the City Council, Andrew
Harris and Gail Keck.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board (LOMNAB), is the only Lake Oswego based non-profit that
fundraises exclusively for Meals on Wheels and congregate meal programs for older adults in the City. This
five year old board has made an annual contribution to the City, which mitigates the deficit between actual
costs and patron donations. The Meal Network programs are housed at the Lake Oswego Adult Community
Center (LOACC). All the LOACC meals are made on site, from scratch, and adhere strictly to Federal
nutrition standards.
DISCUSSION
The need for donations for senior meals is growing: last year, one third of the Meals on Wheels recipients
were deemed to be "no pay"; this year more than 40% of the meals were delivered to people who could
not afford to donate to the cost of their meal. The LOMNAB is poised to meet this challenge. In October
2009, the LOMNAB partnered with New Seasons Market for a highly successful, new fundraiser. The Board
also engages in grant writing to support the program.
In FY 2010, the difference between the costs of the program and recipient donations was $34,682. The
Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board has held fundraisers and written grants to be able to donate
$30,000 to the City of Lake Oswego for LOACC Meals Programs. With the $30,000 donation, the cost to the
City to run the Meals Program is $4,682 annually. 100% of everything the LOMNAB raises goes directly to
Page 2
the local Meals program that serves older Lake Oswegans.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
Without the diligent work of the Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board, the Lake Oswego Adult
Community Center would have to look at severely reducing service. Almost 20,000 meals were made last
year. This is a 44% increase in the past 9 years. Adequate nutrition is a major factor in supporting older
persons to age in place, which is not only what 80% of people want to do but is also a fiscal, social and
emotional benefit to the person and their community.
Reviewed by:
Department Director
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Crystal M. Shum, P.E., Associate Engineer
Public Works — Engineering Services
. I.I
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Award of a Public Improvement Contract for Construction of the 2010 Street Preservation
Project —Slurry Seal (WO 139)
DATE: June 7, 2010
ACTION
Award a public improvement contract to Asphalt Maintenance, Inc for the 2010 Street Preservation Project
in the amount of $206,644.08.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
This contract is for the 2010 Street Preservation Project which consists of placing an asphalt slurry seal over
streets in various locations throughout the City. The attached map shows which streets are included in this
project. The contractor is required to be substantially complete on or before August 27, 2010. This
Contract requires Council award in order to comply with City and State contracting and purchasing
procedures.
Consistent with the City's Pavement Preservation Program, the streets included in the 2010 Street
Preservation Project (see attachment) were selected based on the following factors:
• PCI Rating - The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is determined by a visual inspection of the street.
The City contracts to have these inspections conducted on every street located within the City's
Urban Services Boundary on a triennial basis. A lower PCI is indicative of a street in poor condition
manifested as more cracks and surface defects. To be eligible for slurry seal application, the PCI
must be between 60 and 90.
• Cost Benefit of Slurry Seals - There is a significant cost benefit when a street is slurry sealed before
the PCI drops below 60. If the condition of the street is allowed to deteriorate, instead of using a
preventative maintenance measure like slurry seal that costs about $4 per square yard, a more
expensive maintenance measure will be required such as an overlay or reconstruction of the street.
A 3" overlay currently costs approximately $25 per square yard.
Page 2
• Extend Street Life - A slurry seal will extend the life of a street at least 5-7 years. After that period of
time, another slurry seal may be applied to further extend the service life of the street.
• Other Projects - Other projects that may impact these streets were also taken into consideration.
For instance, a street could be deleted from the list if a utility project is being planned or there is
significant home building on the street.
DISCUSSION
On June 1, 2010, the City opened bids for the 2010 Street Preservation Project. Three bids were received
with the low bid being submitted by Asphalt Maintenance Associates, Inc. The bidders and the amount of
their bids are tabulated below:
Bidder Bid
Asphalt Maintenance Associates, Inc. $206,644.08
Blackline, Inc. $208,277.00
Intermountain Slurry Seal, Inc. $292,292.00
Based upon a review of the bids by staff, the bid submitted by Asphalt Maintenance Associates, Inc. was
deemed responsive and responsible.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of this project will be $206,644.08. The funding for this project is provided by the City's street
maintenance fee and is part of the Annual Pavement Preservation Program that is listed in the Capital
Improvement Plan FY 2009/10-201JI14.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the council award this contract to Asphalt Maintenance Associates, Inc. in the
amount of $206,644.08
Reviewed by:
Departm nt Director
1
(if there is a financial impact)
Finance Dire or r,
City Manager
(if legal issues)
STEPRENSDI
Vp1 STRE
HID"lG0
PROJECT LOCATIONS
R"BRES STREET
ER".0 "1
L'"Y
TES
STREET NAME(S)
SPIIAS" �S
LOWER MEADOWS DR
--, > BAY PENT 4p R"RPTaA+ 2
TUALATIN ST
!g g 3
HUNTER CT
WARREN CT
S.V. SOUTRV®° DR "
REBECCA LN
ERIN CT
SCHALIT WAY
S.V. PAELA'O m
NEL7ST.R,M
BERNARD ST
LAKE HAVEN DR
DEERBRUSH AVE (BRYANT/BERNARD)
%DEERBRUSH
AVE (BRYANT/ALBERT)
a
TUALATA LN
BICKEL CT
SANDPIPER ST
.
apRMo
SANDPIPER WAY
T
SANDPIPER CIRCLE
DEER OAK AVE
"
9 +�
CENTERWOOD ST
un "E"0p 5 R0"0 s`
SAGE HEN CIRCLE
BRIT" Ran
HEATHER ANN CT
CANAL WOODS CT
SCARBOROUGH DR
y,
MELISSA DR
R""" Ran
BRIAN CT
B"L�NE
ROAc n
CASEY CT
-R
CHAD DR
t
R�pD
RIVEN DELL RD
0"RRIDGE
`
Y L'I EDvmn �
BARTON RD
RA g'
>
TAMAWAY DR
RTa
"VENUE R"pQaN" STREETS 5„oQ�-`
RIVEN DELL CT
SEVILLE "VERDE
VEST SUNSET
g4' RIDE
MEGAN PL
V"SHNGTp Col
BASS LN
EE CT
KOHO
LN
LN
.♦ �T Dp
TROUT WAY
TROD
lop C sem'
RIVERS EDGE DR
RDSEV® '
♦
BLUE HERON WAY
LAW x
BLUE HERON CT
§
WESTVIEW CT
SEs A. ROOM
CANYON DR (DELLWOO D/D ELLWOOD)
CANYON DR (DELLWOOD/PARK)
J�
�,y9 �pyv r4
TREE STREET
GLEN HAVEN RD
RENRY `
PARK FOREST CT
�J
STREET
(BERT
"
PARK FOREST AVE
WOODLAND TERR
NELSON CT
3
WALL ST
d >
ROBB PL
SYLVAN CT
°"IR AVE.
MARJORIE AVE
w5 —
KOAWOOD DR
3 cR
BANYAN LN
SOP, DRIVE "F
�NGINFF�
�d5
5/7973
OREGON
�iQy X91, 13 ,ZpOA J�
��
M'
MAP & PROJECT LOCATIONEXPIRES:
ECL,
6-30-2012ogre:
ASIEETSTgL
roo.
RE
DATE: APRIL 2010
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Guy R. Graham P.E.; Public Works Director/City Engineer
Kari Duncan; Water Treatment Plant Manager
L1. 2'. 1
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Resolution 10-23 USGS Joint Funding Agreement for Clackamas River Water Quality Study
DATE: June 7, 2010
UTI -I eW
Adopt Resolution 10-23 authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Joint Funding Agreement with the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct a water quality study on the Clackamas River.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
This is a three-year study on the Clackamas River to identify potential sources of disinfection byproduct
(DBP) precursors in the Clackamas River Basin. DBPs are byproducts of organic matter present in the river
and the disinfectant (i.e. chlorine) used to treat the water and inactivate harmful pathogens. This study will
be a cost share between the USGS and Lake Oswego where the USGS will provide federal matching funds of
$24,994 for a combined value of $49,998 paid out over three years. Other contributors to this study
include Clackamas River Water, a water provider that also draws water from the Clackamas and the Water
Research Foundation under a separate Joint Funding Agreement with USGS for a total project value of
$539,161.
DISCUSSION
Disinfection byproducts are present in drinking water and are regulated by the United Stated
Environmental Protection Agency and the State of Oregon. The City of Lake Oswego drinking water is
currently below the maximum contaminant level for DBPs, however, future regulations may lower or
change the way that this number is calculated. In order to meet future drinking water quality regulations it
is important to better understand the potential of the Clackamas River water to cause the formation of
these compounds. The objectives of this study are to characterize the quantity and quality of organic
carbon in the Clackamas River at the Lake Oswego River Intake to establish a relationship between
dissolved organic carbon and disinfection byproduct formation. The information collected from this study
Page 2
will assist Water Treatment Plant staff in making day to day operational decisions regarding water
treatment. Attached are copies of the Joint Funding Agreement between the City of Lake Oswego and the
USGS and a summary of the proposed study.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City of Lake Oswego will pay a total of $24,994 between 2010 and 2012. Funding for the 2010-11 fiscal
year has been designated in the proposed budget.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a Joint Funding Agreement with the
United States Geological Society for the Clackamas River water quality study. "
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 10-23
2. Joint Funding Agreement between the City of Lake Oswego and the U.S. Geological Survey
3. Sources and Characterization of Organic Carbon in the Clackamas River Basin, Oregon, and their
Effect on Disinfection By -Product Formation in Finished Drinking Water (FY 2010-2012)
Reviewed by:
Department Director
Finance Director
City Attorney
Alex D. Mclnty
City Manager
RESOLUTION 10-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TO JOINTLY
FUND A WATER STUDY OF THE CLACKAMAS RIVER
WHEREAS, disinfectant byproduct precursors (DBP's) are byproducts of organic matter and the
disinfectant used to treat drinking water and to inactivate harmful pathogens; and
WHEREAS, although the City of Lake Oswego drinking water is currently below the maximum
contaminant level for DBP's as established by the Environmental Protection Agency and the State
of Oregon, future regulations may lower or change the way the maximum levels are calculated;
and
WHEREAS, in order to be prepared to meet future regulatory limits, it is important for the City to
gain a better understanding of the potential for the formation of DBP's in Clackamas River water;
and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Geological Survey, United States Department of the Interior is willing to enter
into an agreement with the City to share the costs of a three year study to identify sources of
DBP's in the Clackamas River Basin
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign a Joint Funding Agreement with the U.S.
Geological Survey, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A, for a study of disinfectant
byproduct precursors in the Clackamas River Basin.
Section 2. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption by the City Council.
Considered and enacted at the meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 15th
day of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Page 1 of 2 - Resolution 10-23
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell
City Attorney
Page 2 of 2 - Resolution 10-23
tME,NT OF rH
zm United States Department of the Interior
9
lIi O
� a
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
CH Oregon Water Science Center
2130 SW Fifth Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97201
http://or.water.usas. eov/
March 25, 2010
Mrs. Kari Duncan
Lake Oswego Water Plant Manager
City of Lake Oswego
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Dear Mrs. Duncan:
Enclosed please find two copies of a Joint Funding Agreement between the City of Lake Oswego
and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This agreement provides the funding mechanism for
the USGS to collect source water quality data at Lake Oswego's drinking water treatment plant
as part of a larger project examining organic carbon in the Clackamas River basin and its
association with the formation of disinfection by-products in treated water. This agreement
covers the sampling at the City of Lake Oswego's drinking -water treatment plant.
The project with Lake Oswego consists of monthly analysis of source water quality at the
treatment plant for dissolved organic carbon, total particulate carbon, total particulate nitrogen,
total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and optical properties, and monthly analyses of finished water
for dissolved organic carbon and optical properties and inclusion of the Lake Oswego data into
the final interpretive report. A full description of the project tasks is presented in the attached
proposal.
The signed agreement is our legal authority that permits the work to be performed and authorizes
the USGS to accept funds. We recognize the critical nature of the interpretive studies that the
USGS provides to both your agency and to the Federal government. These investigations
provide valuable information that is used to manage and preserve natural resources throughout
the Nation.
The cost for the USGS data collection at the City of Lake Oswego's treatment plant and
publication of data in the final interpretive report over the three year period is $49,988. The
USGS will provide $24,994 of Federal Matching Funds (FMF) in Federal fiscal years
2010-2012 (October 1, 2009 — September 30, 2012) toward this study. The remaining portion
($24,994) will be provided by the City of Lake Oswego. In addition, the City of Lake Oswego
will be responsible for: (1) collection of source water samples (monthly samples and during the
four basin -wide surveys) and transfer ol' samples to USGS staff for processing, (2) collection and
processing of finished water samples for DBPs, and (3) $3,500 in analytical costs paid directly to
Alexin Laboratories, Tigard, Oregon, for THM and HAA analyses. A break down of the project
funding and expenses is provided on page 25 of the proposal.
If this agreement is satisfactory to you, please sign both copies, and return one copy in the
enclosed envelope. The second copy is for your records.
The Water Resources Cooperative Program operates under the authority of statute 43 USC 50,
which allows us to perform this work. The Oregon Water Science Center DUNS number is
137883463. Work performed with funds from this agreement will be conducted on a fixed-price
basis. The City of Lake Oswego will be billed quarterly via a DI -1.040, Bill for Collection.
The results of all work done under this agreement will be available for publication by the U.S.
Geological Survey.
We look forward to continuing to work with you, your staff, and many other interested parties on
this important study. Please give Kurt Carpenter at this office a call at (503) 251-3215 if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
William D. McFarland
Acting Center Director
CC with enclosures: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
City of Lake Oswego
Guy Graham, Public Works Director
City of Lake Oswego
Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
Steve Winkler
Kurt Carpenter
Joe Rinella
CC w/o enclosures: William McFarland
Imelda Jaklitsch
Jami Goldman
2
Page I of 2
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of the 25th day of March, 2010, by the U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, party of the first part, and the CITY OF LAKE
OSWEGO, party of the second part.
I . The parties hereto agree that subject to availability of appropriations and in accordance with their
respective authorities there shall be maintained in cooperation a water quality data collection at Lake
Oswego's drinking water treatment plant, herein called the program. The USGS legal authority is 43 USC
36C; 43 USC 50; and 43 USC 50b.
2. The following amounts shall be contributed to cover all of the cost of the necessary field and analytical
work directly related to this program. 2(b) includes In -Kind Services in the amount of $0.
by the parry of the first part during the period
(a) $24,994.00 March 25, 2010 to September 30, 2012
by the party of the second part during the period
(b) $24,994.00 March 25, 2010 to September 30, 2012
(c) Additional or reduced amounts by each party during the above period or succeeding periods as
may be determined by mutual agreement and set forth in an exchange of letters between the
parties.
(d) The performance period may be changed by mutual agreement and set forth in an exchange of
letters between the parties.
3. The costs of this program may be paid by either parry in conformity with the laws and regulations
respectively governing each party.
4. The field and analytical work pertaining to this program shall be under the direction of or subject to
periodic review by an authorized representative of the party of the first part.
5. The areas to be included in the program shall be determined by mutual agreement between the parties
hereto or their authorized representatives. The methods employed in the field and office shall be those
adopted by the party of the first part to insure the required standards of accuracy subject to modification
by mutual agreement.
6. During the course of this program, all field and analytical work of either party pertaining to this program
shall be open to the inspection of the other party, and if the work is not being carried on in a mutually
satisfactory manner, either party may terminate this agreement upon 60 days written notice to the other
party.
7. The original records resulting from this program will be deposited in the office of origin of those records.
Upon request, copies of the original records will be provided to the office of the other party.
https://Qsvaresa0l.er.uses.eov/WebForms/9-1366R.nsf/c2h886045170(-62_IR5?.573'3,3(N154 'IrIt/o(tin
Page 1 of 2
Form 9-1366 U.S. Department of the Interior
Cumamor
oROT7
(Oct. 2005) U.S. Geological Survey
Agreement #:
Joint Funding Agreement
Project #:
TIN #:
93..6002231
Fixed Cost
Yes No
Agreement
FOR
OREGON WATER SCIENCE CENTER
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of the 25th day of March, 2010, by the U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, party of the first part, and the CITY OF LAKE
OSWEGO, party of the second part.
I . The parties hereto agree that subject to availability of appropriations and in accordance with their
respective authorities there shall be maintained in cooperation a water quality data collection at Lake
Oswego's drinking water treatment plant, herein called the program. The USGS legal authority is 43 USC
36C; 43 USC 50; and 43 USC 50b.
2. The following amounts shall be contributed to cover all of the cost of the necessary field and analytical
work directly related to this program. 2(b) includes In -Kind Services in the amount of $0.
by the parry of the first part during the period
(a) $24,994.00 March 25, 2010 to September 30, 2012
by the party of the second part during the period
(b) $24,994.00 March 25, 2010 to September 30, 2012
(c) Additional or reduced amounts by each party during the above period or succeeding periods as
may be determined by mutual agreement and set forth in an exchange of letters between the
parties.
(d) The performance period may be changed by mutual agreement and set forth in an exchange of
letters between the parties.
3. The costs of this program may be paid by either parry in conformity with the laws and regulations
respectively governing each party.
4. The field and analytical work pertaining to this program shall be under the direction of or subject to
periodic review by an authorized representative of the party of the first part.
5. The areas to be included in the program shall be determined by mutual agreement between the parties
hereto or their authorized representatives. The methods employed in the field and office shall be those
adopted by the party of the first part to insure the required standards of accuracy subject to modification
by mutual agreement.
6. During the course of this program, all field and analytical work of either party pertaining to this program
shall be open to the inspection of the other party, and if the work is not being carried on in a mutually
satisfactory manner, either party may terminate this agreement upon 60 days written notice to the other
party.
7. The original records resulting from this program will be deposited in the office of origin of those records.
Upon request, copies of the original records will be provided to the office of the other party.
https://Qsvaresa0l.er.uses.eov/WebForms/9-1366R.nsf/c2h886045170(-62_IR5?.573'3,3(N154 'IrIt/o(tin
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2
Form 9-1366 U.S. Department of the Interior
Customer #: OR077
continued U.S. Geological Survey
Agreement #:
Joint Funding Agreement
Project #:
Name:
TIN #: 93-6002231
8. The maps, records, or reports resulting from this program shall be made available to the public as
promptly as possible. The maps, records, or reports normally will be published by the party of the first part.
However, the parry of the second part reserves the right to publish the results of this program and, if
already published by the party of the first part shall, upon request, be furnished by the party of the first
part, at costs, impressions suitable for purposes of reproduction similar to that for which the original copy
was prepared. The maps, records, or reports published by either party shall contain a statement of the
cooperative relations between the parties.
9. USGS will issue billings utilizing Department of the Interior Bill for Collection (form DI -1040). Billing
documents are to be rendered .quarterly. Payments of bills are due within 60 days after the billing date. If
not paid by the due date, interest will be charged at the current Treasury rate for each 30 day period, or
portion thereof, that the payment is delayed beyond the due date. (31 USC 3717: Comptroller General File
B-212222, August 23, 1983).
U.S. Geological Survey
United States
Department of the Interior
USGS Point of Contact
Name: Kurt Carpenter
Address: USGS OWSC
2130 SW 5th Avenue
Portland, OR 97201
Telephone: 503 251 3215
Email: kdcar@ usgs.gov
Signatures
City of Lake Oswego
Customer Point of Contact
Name: Mrs. Kari Duncan, Lake Oswego
Water Plant Manager
Address: City of Lake Oswego
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Telephone:
Email:
Signatures
Jack Hoffman
Mayor
Date
Date
Date
h ttps://gs varesa0 l .er. usgs.go v/W ebforms/9-1366R.nsf/c 2b886045 l 7Oc623 85?57133O054c... 3/26/2010
gy
Date c.c (t LS,Lct�+
By_
Name:
William D. McFarland
Name:
Title:
Acting Center Director
Title:
By
Date
By_
Name:
Name:
Title:
Title:
By
Date
By_
Name:
Name:
Title:
Title:
Signatures
Jack Hoffman
Mayor
Date
Date
Date
h ttps://gs varesa0 l .er. usgs.go v/W ebforms/9-1366R.nsf/c 2b886045 l 7Oc623 85?57133O054c... 3/26/2010
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
Sources and Characterization of Organic Carbon in the
Clackamas River Basin, Oregon, and their Effects on Disinfection
By -Product Formation in Finished Drinking Water
(FY 2010-2012)
Prepared By:
Kurt Carpenter', Jami Goldman'2, Tamara Kraus331
JohnFranco Saraceno3, Bryan Downing3, and Gordon McGhee4
'USGS Oregon Water Science Center, Portland, Oregon
2Oregon Health and Science University, Beaverton, Oregon
3USGS California Water Science Center, Sacramento, California
4Clackamas River Water, Clackamas, Oregon
Clackamas River at Carter Bridge
Clackat as River letter
OREGON
./ H&SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY
science fora changing woad iA_.VknM=i
i
Pq C% LAKE
Executive Summary
Problem Statement
Disinfection by-products (DBPs) are toxic compounds that form when chlorine or other disinfectants react with
organic carbon during drinking water treatment. Many DBPs are known to be carcinogenic and may increase risks
for reproductive and developmental problems in humans. For these reasons, the USEPA regulates two classes of
DBPs — trihalomethanes (THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs) — in treated (finished) drinking water. The
Clackamas River in northwestern Oregon provides drinking water to 380,000 customers, which are served by five
drinking -water treatment plants (DWTPs), four of which are located in the lower Clackamas River. In recent
years, DBP concentrations occasionally approached or exceed current Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLS),
and are a concern for the Clackamas River Water (CRW) and the City of Lake Oswego (LO) Water Utilities,
which operate direct filtration drinking -water treatment plants (DWTPs) in the lower river. More information is
needed regarding the sources of carbon that form DBPs and where in the watershed they originate so that
management strategies can be developed to reduce the amount of DBP precursors in the Clackamas River and to
minimize formation of DBPs during treatment, especially if USEPA regulations become more restrictive in the
future.
Objectives
The objectives of this study are to characterize the quantity and quality of organic carbon in the Clackamas River,
its major tributaries, and in North Fork Reservoir; to establish the relationship between dissolved organic carbon
(DOC) and DBP precursor concentrations at sites throughout the watershed (and in finished drinking water); to
identify potential sources of DBP precursors in the Clackamas River. Basin, including, for example, fir and alder
forest soils, algae, septic tank and waste -water treatment plant (WWTP) effluents; to assess the use of optical
proxies, including data from the in-situ fluorescent dissolved organic matter (FDOM) sensor, for the
determination of DOC, THM and HAA precursor concentrations; and to examine treatability and removal of
DOC and DBP precursors during "Jar Test" experiments.
Relevance and Benefits
This project is aligned with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Strategic Directions that include
drinking -water quality and the effects of urbanization on water resources. This study will begin to
quantify the relation between particulate organic carbon (POC) and the production of DBPs in treated
drinking water. Results from this study could be used to help guide future changes in water treatment
plant processes and operations that target removal of DBP precursors and to prioritize watershed
restoration efforts, particularly if algae are an important source of reactive carbon. This study can serve as
a showcase for the water industry by providing timely information on new tools and technologies
available to monitor for and predict DBP precursors in source water and DBPs in treated water.
Approach
The multi -pronged approach consists o£ (1) Continuous in-situ fluorescence monitoring (3 excitation/emission
pairs) of raw water at the CRW DWTP in the lower river from about March or April 2010 to September 2011;
(2) Monthly sampling at four mainstem sites (table 1) for nutrients, DOC, total particulate carbon and nitrogen
(TPCN), and optical properties or "carbon signature" (multi -spectral fluorescence "EEMs" and ultra -violet
absorbance, UVA254)(table 2); (3) Four basin -wide surveys, one baseline survey during early spring, two targeted
algal events in the spring and summer, and one fall storm; and (4) Conduct ("Jar Tests") on raw water to evaluate
the potential for coagulant and powdered activated carbon (PAC) to reduce DOC and DBP precursor
concentrations. During each basin -wide survey, DBP formation potentials for trihalomethanes (THMFP) and
haloacetic acids (HAAFP) will be measured to determine DBP precursor concentrations from different watershed
sources (tributaries, North Fork Reservoir, forest soils, and algae).
2
Table of Contents
ProjectDescription......................................................................................................................................4
DrinkingWater Utilities....................................................................................................................4
DisinfectionBy-Products...................................................................................................................4
Organic Matter and the DBP Precursor Pool.....................................................................................5
OpticalMeasurements.......................................................................................................................7
In -Situ FDOM Sensor........................................................................................................................7
ProjectBackground and Purpose..............................................................................................................8
ProjectObjectives, Approach, and Tasks.................................................................................................9
Task1. In -Situ FDOM Sensor.............................................................................................................12
Task 2. Monthly Water Sampling at Fixed Sites.................................................................................12
Task3. Basin -Wide Surveys...............................................................................................................13
Task 4. Assessment of Optical Properties...........................................................................................14
Task 5. Treatability of DBP Precursors..............................................................................................14
Task6. Interpretive Report ..................................................................................................................15
Methods......................................................................................................................................................15
Continuous In -Situ FDOM and Field Parameter Sensors...................................................................15
Water Sample Collection and Processing...........................................................................................16
Benthic Algae Sample Collection and Processing..............................................................................17
Laboratory Analytical Procedures.......................................................................................................17
Data Quality -Assurance and Laboratory Evaluation Plans.................................................................19
Relevanceand Benefits.............................................................................................................................19
Reportsand Products................................................................................................................................20
References..................................................................................................................................................21
Fundingand Expenses..............................................................................................................................25
ProjectSchedule........................................................................................................................................26
Project Management Plan, Personnel, and Facilities.............................................................................27
U
Project Description
Drinking Water Utilities
The Clackamas River in northwestern Oregon is a valued resource to the region, providing drinking water for
about 380,000 people. The Clackamas River begins on the slopes of 011alie Butte near Mt. Hood, a high Cascade
Range volcano, and flows 82 miles from its headwaters at about 6,000 feet elevation down to its confluence with
the Willamette River southeast of Portland. The watershed drains an area of nearly 940 square miles, winding
through forests, mountain meadows, farmlands, industrial areas, and densely populated urban areas. Oregonians
depend on the Clackamas River for their supply of drinking water, hydroelectric power, and outdoor recreation
opportunities. The watershed supports a rich variety of native plants, diverse forests, fish, and wildlife habitats.
Clackamas River Water (CRW) and the City of Lake Oswego (LO) operate direct filtration treatment plants on
the lower Clackamas River (figure 1). Together, these two plants provide drinking water to well over 100,000
people. Water treatment consists of large debris removal and screening prior to dosing with sodium hypochlorite
and aluminum chlorhydrate to provide initial disinfection and coagulation. Water passes through a rapid sand
filter composed of layers of anthracite coal, silica and garnet sand, and select gravel to remove bacteria, parasites,
and other small particles. The clarified water is disinfected a second time with sodium hypochlorite prior to
distribution to destroy disease -causing organisms and prevent transmission of waterborne diseases.
Disinfection By -Products
During drinking -water treatment (e.g. chlorination/bromination) a portion of the natural organic matter (NOM) in
water reacts to form toxic disinfection by-products (DBPs) which have been shown to be carcinogenic and
mutagenic (Leenheer and Croud, 2003). The amounts of DBPs that form during treatment are both a function of
the amount and character of the organic matter pool. The specific pool of organic matter that reacts to form DBPs
is commonly referred to as DBP precursors.
Currently, the USEPA regulates the concentrations of two classes of DBPs — trihalomethanes (THMs) and
haloacetic acids (HAAs) — in drinking water, and current standards limit concentrations of THMs and HAAs to
80 ug/L and 60 ug/L, respectively. Recent implementation of stricter monitoring requirements (Stage 1 and 2
Rules) for DBPs has highlighted the need for utilities to identify ways to minimize the occurrence of DBP in their
distribution systems. While many studies have focused on techniques to reduce DBP formation during the
drinking -water treatment process, it has long been recognized that understanding watershed sources of DBP
precursors is a critical component of managing drinking -water quality (e.g. Palmstron et al., 1988; Aiken and
Cotsiaris 1995; Stepczuck et al. 1998a; Reckhow et al., 2004; Reckhow et al., 2007). Identifying sources of DBP
precursors will assist utilities in implementing effective, targeted watershed management strategies to reduce
DBPs in their distribution system, as well as understanding seasonal and long-term trends in source water quality.
To meet USEPA requirements, drinking water utilities also have to monitor total organic carbon (TOC)
concentrations. TOC is comprised of both dissolved and particulate organic carbon (POC). For most drinking
water utilities, dissolved organic carbon (DOC) plays a larger role in distribution system DBP formation. This is
because DOC generally comprises the bulk (70-100%) of the TOC pool in raw water, and also because POC is
more easily removed during water treatment (coagulation and filtration). In this study, we will determine THMFP
and HAAFP of both filtered and unfiltered water samples to assess the potential contribution of the POC pool to
DBP precursor formation.
4
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
In addition to contributing to the TOC and DBP precursor pool, NOM poses other challenges to drinking
water treatment: it contributes to water discoloration; consumes the chlorine needed to destroy pathogens; affects
performance of drinking -water treatment such as coagulation, filtration and sorption; contributes to taste and odor
issues; and NOM can bind and transport metals in the distribution system. By examining changes in NOM
composition and reactivity we better understand NOM sources and processing and gain insight into factors
affecting drinking -water quality (Croue et al., 1999; Pomes et al., 1999).
Figure 1. Land ownership map of Clackamas River Basin showing the sampling site locations.
172' V 30 1721,30 00" 122° 22' 30' 172 "5 X), '.22" 01' 30' in 00 n0 i 7t' S7 30' 121° 45'00' 121° 37'30"
45
DO 1
00• EXPLANATION
tAreas of private and other public ownership
National Forest
Warm Springs Indian Reservation
ti a Cities
"� " • f 50 " Sampling sites and site number —
45 { . r� �� " Fixed Sites
30.
.. `� �-C-1--� Al Basin -wide Survey Sites
45
1 h'
00'
45'
01
30'
a5,o
DOr
DO.
44-
52 '
30'
t
Study
area
J `
LOREGON3
Map ID Sift cafe Site nam"
' tiV
i
ALO LO Intake
0
CAW CAW Intake iilicr
C Cfl MCIVER Clackamas River at upper McIver Park '� r
D CA _CARTER Clackamas River at Carter Bndge
�(
1 SIEBEROCK Sieben Creek a Hwy mouth .�.. (`
2 ROCK RockCreeknearmnutn-
7 CR CARVER Clackamas River at Carver �
4 CLEAR Clear Creekat Carver
S DEEP Deep Creek at Hwy 224
i
CA BARTON Clackamas River near Baron
7 EAGLE_M Eagle Creek at Bonnie Lure State Park
NFKRES North Fark Rose—,
0 25 MILES
471
B,x,ro�,ron�rv.n..,ra.nsas+ax.annn�mn�e,n..ur 0 25 MILES•
NEtaO MW LWS a'alef vYy Noe Ste n,.,
Inc Sala. t1oAi Pranwin Wtcn rm
Organic Matter and the DBP Precursor Pool
The DBP precursor pool is a subset of the bulk organic matter (OM) pool. Sources of OM to aquatic systems
include NOM from degrading soils, fresh plant leachates, and algal production, as well as anthropogenic inputs
from wastewater, industrial sources, and urban runoff. The amount and reactivity of OM that arrives at a drinking -
water intake is a function of the amount and quality of OM entering the water throughout the watershed, as well
61
as environmental processes (e.g., biodegradation, photodegradation, and sorption) that occur during transport. For
aquatic systems, sources of NOM are commonly categorized into: (1) allochthonous, material entering water from
terrestrial, wetland, and littoral zones, and (2) autochthonous, material derived from biota (e.g. algae, bacteria, and
macrophytes) within the water column (Aiken and Cotsaris, 1999; Reckhow, 2001).
One potential problem source of OM in the Clackamas River is benthic algae (periphyton), which during
spring and summer sometimes produce large diurnal swings in pH and dissolved oxygen, creating conditions that
do not meet State of Oregon water -quality standards (http://or.water.usgs.gov/clackamas/monitors/). A previous
USGS study (Carpenter, 2003) found nuisance levels of algae in the lower mainstem Clackamas River during
summer, exceeding 300 mg chlorophyll-a/m2, and continuous water -quality data indicate that this problem has
continued over the past several years. Other sources of OM that may contribute DBP precursors include
phytoplankton production in upstream reservoirs (North Fork Reservoir and Timothy Lake), runoff from urban
watersheds during storms, and terrestrial carbon from forest soils. None of these sources have been investigated
for their potential to contribute DOC or DBP precursors in the Clackamas River basin.
While many studies have examined the amount, composition, and bioavailability of DOC leached from
plants and soils (Cleveland et al., 2004; Findlay et al., 1986; Mann and Wetzel, 1996; Don and Kalbitz, 2003), we
are aware of only a few studies that have examined how the propensity of this material to form DBPs changes
with DOC source and processing (Bergamaschi et al., 1999; Reckhow et al., 2004, 2007; Beggs and Summers,
2009; Chow et al., 2008, 2009; Pellerin et al., in review). Fresh plant leachates have been shown to have high
bioavailability for bacterial decomposition (up to 90%), due to significant fraction of low molecular weight, labile
dissolved organic matter (DOM). Loss and transformation of this labile DOM pool leads to an increase in
aromaticity, and by association a DOC pool with a higher DBP precursor content (Reckhow et al., 2004; Beggs
and Summers, 2009; Pellerin et al., in prep). In addition, although it is well-established that algae are a source of
DOM containing DBP precursors (Wardlaw et al., 1991; Jack et al., 2002; Nguyen et al., 2005; Bade et al., 2007),
there is conflicting evidence regarding whether DOM produced by algae is more or less reactive per unit C versus
terrestrial sources (Briley et al., 1980; Owen et al., 1993, Graham et al., 1998; Schmidt et al., 1998; Plummer and
Edzwald., 2001). Differences in DBP precursor content of algal derived DOM likely arise from a combination of
factors, including algal species, growth stage, release of extracellular material versus particulate cellular material,
and environmental processing of algal derived compounds (Jack et al., 2002; Nguyen et al., 2005). For recent data
collected from San Luis Reservoir in California, higher THMFP and HAAFP found in summer months suggests
that DOM recently contributed by phytoplankton production has a higher propensity to form DBPs, particularly
HAAs, than other upstream sources (Kraus et al., in preparation). This notion is supported by previous studies that
showed that algal production, algal senescence, and possibly photolysis all play roles in increasing the specific
THMFP (Wardlaw et al., 1991; Graham et al., 1998; Jack et al., 2002).
Within reservoirs, where residence times are longer, algal production has great potential to add DOC and
DBP precursors, while other processes such as biodegradation and photolysis within the reservoir may attenuate
these constituent concentrations and thus improve downstream water quality. Furthermore, because of their
storage capacity and residence time, reservoirs can dampen variations in upstream water quality; for example,
mixing of high DOC inflow water during a storm event with lower DOC containing water in the reservoir can
result in little to no change in outflow concentrations (Aiken and Cotsaris, 1995). Previous studies that have
examined fluxes of DBP precursors in reservoirs and lakes have found that these impoundments can act as either
a source (Karimi and Singer, 1991; Palmstrom et al., 1988; Stepczuck et al., 1998c; Bukavekas et al., 2007) or
sink (Stepczuck et al., 1998c; Nguyen et al., 2002; Garvey and Tobiason, 2003) for DBP precursors. In a recent
study examining changes in NOM amount and quality in San Luis Reservoir, California, it was found that DBP
precursors were being added during the summer months due to high phytoplankton activity, however the reservoir
was a sink for DBP precursors during the winter months when degradative processes predominated (Kraus et al.,
in preparation). Information about the composition of NOM within the reservoir, as well as NOM reactivity with
respect to THM and HAA formation, helped provide insight into reservoir sources of DBP precursors and helped
explain changes in their amounts.
6
Optical Measurements
The use of absorbance and fluorescence spectroscopy as proxies for DOC concentration has been recognized for
many years in the field of oceanography (Coble, 2007), and more recently a number of studies have shown that
absorption coefficients (e.g. A254, A412, A35o, Aaao,) and FDOM fluorescence (ex. 370 nm/em. 450 nm) are good
predictors of DOC concentration in surface waters (e.g. Bergamaschi et al., 2005; Belzile et al., 2006; Downing et
al., 2009; Saraceno et al., 2009). Because the interaction of a water sample with light is determined both by DOM
amount and composition, the additional benefit to measuring optical properties of DOM is that it provides
qualitative information about the DOM pool (e.g. McKnight et al., 2001, Downing et al., 2008).
While absorbance spectroscopy measures the amount of light transmitted through a sample (i.e. the ability of
water to absorb light at specified wavelengths), fluorescence spectroscopy measures the light that is re -emitted by
a given wavelength. The 3-dimensional excitation -emission matrices (EEMs) obtained from fluorescence
spectroscopy also provides greater information about the chemical components of a given sample and qualitative
information about the DOM pool (Coble, 2007; Hudson et al., 2007; Stedmon and Bro, 2008). Differences in the
chemical make-up of the DOM pool can then be linked to changes in DOM reactivity and may be used to infer
DOM sources (e.g. McKnight et al., 2001; Stedmon et al., 2003; Spencer et al., 2007; Jaffe et al., 2008).
For absorbance data, two commonly calculated parameters are SUVA and Spectral Slope. SUVA,
absorbance at 254 nm normalized by DOC concentration, provides information absorbance per unit of DOC and
has been shown to correlate to aromatic content (Weishaar et al., 2003). Similarly, the spectral slope (S275-295) of
the absorbance curve has been shown to relate to DOM aromatic content and molecular weight. For example,
decreasing S275-295 is associated with higher aromatic content and increasing molecular weight. Spectral slope has
also been shown to change upon irradiation (Helms et al., 2008; Spencer et al., 2009). Similarly, fluorescence data
has been shown to provide information about DOM character and origin. The fluorescence index (FI), calculated
as the ratio of emissions at 470 nm to 520 nm at excitation of 370 nm, has been widely used to indicate relative
contributions of algal versus terrestrial derived DOM; higher FI are associated with algal derived material which
has lower aromatic content and lower molecular weight, while lower FI values are associated with more highly
processed, terrestrial derived material that has greater aromatic content and higher molecular weight (McKnight et
al., 2001; Jaffe et al., 2008). Qualitative information can also be derived from the identification of peaks produced
from the full EEMs spectra that have been linked to different DOM pools such as humic and fulvic acids, protein -
like material and phytoplankton derived material (Stedmon et al., 2003; Coble, 2007; Hudson et al., 2007). The
application of multivariate statistical analyses, such as Parallel Factor Analysis (PARAFAC), can provide further
insight into DOM quality, source, and processing (Cory and McKnight, 2005; Jaffe et al., 2008; Kraus et al., in
review). PARAFAC is used to identify different classes of OM which make up the entire EEMs spectra, and the
relative proportions of these components can reveal both quantitative and qualitative differences between samples
(Stedmon and Bro, 2008).
In -Situ FDOM Sensor
The in-situ fluorometer has been used on many occasions and in many different environments to provide a high
resolution proxy for DOC concentration and in some cases, other related biogeochemical variables such as THM
precursors and methyl mercury (MeHg) concentrations. There is no a priori assumption, however, that FDOM
will directly correlate with DOC concentration in every environment, especially those in which the DOC pool is
relatively fresh and labile such as in highly productive environments (Spencer et al. 2007). This is because the
optical properties of DOM is a function of its chemical composition; if the fraction of the DOM pool that
fluoresces changes in a non-linear fashion with DOC concentration, then the relationship between FDOM and
DOC concentration may not hold up. For example, absorbance per mole of DOC (SUVA) has been shown to be
site and time dependent, demonstrating that changes in DOC quality affects the relationship between absorbance
and DOC concentration (Weishaar et al., 2003). This should also apply to fluorescence measurements. For this
7
reason, we do not anticipate that optical properties can provide a universal measure of a water samples DOC
concentration; however, based the success of previous studies we expect that relationships between optical
proxies and DOC and concentration can be verified for specific locations and thus provide a robust proxy for
DOC concentration.
Recent work in an agricultural watershed demonstrated that the in-situ FDOM sensor accurately predicted
DOC concentrations throughout a precipitation event, where DOC concentration increased from 2 to 10 mg/L
within hours of the start of precipitation (Saraceno et al., 2009). Several recent studies from a range of
environments including wetlands, forested watersheds, and tidal marshes produced predictive relationships
between WETLabs CDOM fluorometer data and laboratory determined DOC concentration (Downing et al.,
2009b; Fleck et al., in prep.; Pellerin et al., in prep). In Sleepers Vermont, this sensor has successfully provided a
continuous, high resolution (30 -min sampling frequency) proxy for DOC and McHg concentration for one full
year (Saraceno, personal communication).
There is currently limited information regarding the relationship between FDOM and DBPFP (Nakajima et
al., 2002; Hua et al., 2007; Kraus et al., 2009). Given that the optically -active fraction of DOC (the hydrophobic
acid fraction, or HPOA) typically dominates the DOC and DBP precursor pool in terrestrial environments, there is
good reason to believe that in most cases there is a strong relationship between these parameters. Furthermore,
data from Oregon's McKenzie River, a similar Cascade Mountain drainage, showed that FDOM was a better
predictor of THM and HAA formation potentials than DOC, suggesting the there is a strong overlap between
DOM moieties which are both fluorescent in this region and that react with chlorine to form DBPs (Kraus et al.,
in review).
Project Background and Purpose
Water managers are concerned about DBPs and the potential for future changes in land use, such as expansion of
the urban growth boundary or increased nutrient loading, which may increase levels of organic carbon in source
water. In recent years, DBP levels reported in quarterly sampling of treated drinking water from some Clackamas
River plants have occasionally exceeded MCLs for both THMs and HAAs (Kim Swan, Clackamas River Water
Providers, oral communication, 2009). Data from CRW show DBP levels approaching the MCLs. These findings
are consistent with the recent study at the CRW DWTP conducted by the USGS National Water -Quality
Assessment (NAWQA) Program (Carpenter and McGhee, 2009), which documented consistent but moderate
concentrations of DBPs in treated water.
More information is needed regarding the sources of carbon that tend to form DBPs and where in the
watershed they originate so that management strategies can be developed to reduce the amount of DBP precursors
in the Clackamas River and to minimize production of DBPs during treatment, especially if USEPA decides to
tighten regulations of DBPs in the future. This study proposes to characterize the amount and quality of organic
carbon in the lower Clackamas River and its tributaries, and will strive to identify the primary sources of THM
and HAA precursors in source water.
Project Objectives, Approach, and Tasks
Objectives
This project has five major objectives:
(1) Characterize the seasonal quantity and quality of organic carbon in the Clackamas River and its
primary tributaries;
(2) Relate the amount and quality of organic carbon to the formation of DBPs at sites throughout the
watershed and in finished drinking water;
(3) Determine the major sources of DBP precursors in the watershed, including major tributaries, North
Fork Reservoir, litter/soils, and algae;
(4) Assess the use of optical proxies, including data from an in-situ FDOM sensor, for the determination
of DOC, THM and HAA precursor concentrations;
(5) Assess the treatability of DBP precursors using coagulation and powdered activated carbon with "jar
tests"; and
(6) Present findings in a USGS interpretive report and/or peer reviewed journal article(s) and in a Water
Research Foundation publication.
Approach
This study includes five major tasks, summarized here and described in more detail in the next section:
Task 1: Installation and operation of an in-situ continuous fluorescent dissolved organic matter (FDOM) sensor
to serve as a proxy for DOC and DBP precursor concentrations, which will provide real-time web
accessible data for the lower Clackamas River from March 2010 through September 2011;
Task 2: Monthly water sampling from March 2010 through September 2011 at the 4 fixed sites on the mainstem
Clackamas River, including raw source water at the CRW and LO DWTPs (table 1, figure 1). Samples
will be analyzed for DOC concentration, total and dissolved nutrients (CRW only), and optical
properties (absorbance and fluorescence; table 2). DBP concentrations will be measured in finished
water at the CRW and LO DWTPs;
Task 3: To capture conditions during the spring and summer growing season, summer low -flow, and fall -flush
periods, four basin -wide surveys of the mainstem Clackamas River and its major tributaries (table 1,
figure 1) will be conducted (April, June, August, and October of 2010). During two of these basin -wide
surveys (summer 20 10) the North Fork Reservoir also will be sampled at 4 depths. In addition to the
parameters measured for Task 2, THM and HAA formation potentials will be determined on both
filtered and unfiltered water from all of these sites and for targeted DBP sources including leaf
litter/soils and benthic algae (periphyton) (table 2);
Task 4: Overall assessment of the use of optical proxies — both in-situ and laboratory based — for the
determination of DOC, THM and HAA precursor concentrations will be made. The in-situ FDOM data
will be statistically compared to the grab sample laboratory -based DOC concentration, absorbance, full
excitation -emission -matrices (EEMs) fluorescence, THMFP, and HAAFP using both simple and
multiple regression approaches;
Task 5: Treatability of DBP precursors in raw water with coagulant and powdered activated carbon will be
assessed at the CRW treatment plant using "jar tests", and by comparing raw versus treated water
quality (DOC concentration, absorbance, and fluorescence); and
Task 6: Interim results will be communicated to CRW and LO staff in quarterly reports every 3-6 months. Final
results will be published in a peer-reviewed report or journal article(s).
9
Table 1. Description of sites to be sampled during monthly sampling and basin -wide surveys.
[Abbreviations: CRW, Clackamas River Water DWTP; LO, City of Lake Oswego DWTPI
Fixed
Sites
Basin -wide
Survey
Sites
Sampling Locations
Dominant Land Cover
Main -stem Clackamas River / CRW DWTP Sites
X
X
Clackamas River at Carter Bride forestedfir-hemlock dominant); USFS land
X
X
Clackamas River at Estacada Mix of forest, rural residential, and urban
X
Clackamas River at Barton Bride Mix of forest, rural residential, and urban
X
Clackamas River at Carver Bride Mix of forest, rural residential, and urban
X
X
CRW/LO Intakes — Source Water Mix of forest, rural residential, urban, and industrial
X
X
CRW/LO Finished Water Mix of forest, rural residential, urban, and industrial
Tributary Sites
X
Ea le Creek Forested alder -fir dominant), rural residential, Christmas trees
X
Deep Creek Agricultural nurseries, Christmas trees, berries, other crops)
X
Clear Creek Forested (alder -fir dominant) and rural residential, Christmas trees
X
Rock Creek (nurseries, berries), rural residential
X
--Agricultural
Sieben Creek Residential, industrial
North Fork Reservoir Sites
X
1 - surface
Forested (fir -hemlock dominant)
X
2 - mid -depth
X
3 - release point —80 ft
X
4 - near bottom
10
Table 2. Parameters analyzed during monthly fixed site sampling and basin -wide surveys.
[Abbreviations: CRW, Clackamas River Water DWTP; LO, City of Lake Oswego DWTP]
Fixed
Sites
Basin -Wide
Survey
Sites
SamplingLocations
E
a.
a
LL
m
Y
Z
B
U
z
o
Z
v
>
°
0
C
os
a
a
`-'
o
0
U
.o
;
C
(n
U
m
c
D
a
d
c
ii
a
d
co
0
0.
0
Main -stem Clackamas River
/ DWTP Sites
X
X
Clackamas River at Carter Bride
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Clackamas River at Estacada
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Clackamas River at Barton Bride
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Clackamas River at Carver Brid e
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CRW Intake -Source water RM 3.1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CRW Finished water
X
X
X
X
X
LO Intake -Source water RM 0.8)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LO Finished water
X
X
X
Tributary Sites
X
Eagle Creek
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Deep Creek
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Clear Creek
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Rock Creek
Sieben Creek
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
North Fork Reservoir Sites
X
1- Surface
X I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2- Mid -depth
3- Release depth
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4- Near bottom
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Targeted DBP Sources
X
Benthic algae ( eri h ton) I
I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Litter/Soil water extracts alder, fir) I
I
X
X
X
X
X
X
' USGS operates three near real-time continuous water -quality monitors in the Clackamas River (fig. 1), including
water temperature, conductance, dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity (all stations), and chlorophyll -a (at Estacada
and Oregon City [RM 1.6]only).
2 Optical properties include absorbance and fluorescence measurements.
3 DBPFPs include determination of both THMFP and HAAFP.
4 DBPs, DOC, and optical properties will be analyzed in treated (finished) water during monthly sampling of fixed sites and
during basin -wide surveys.
Project Tasks
Task 1. In -Situ FDOM Sensor
In-situ measurements are effective sentinels of changes in water quality, and when coupled with real-time
discharge and climate data can provide information about changes in watershed biogeochemical processes. High
frequency data that captures the variability of NOM concentrations in fresh water systems over time will help
drinking -water utilities assess how changes in factors such as precipitation (timing, amount, duration, and
intensity), flow, nutrient concentrations, land use, disturbances (e.g. fire and floods), and climate affect the
production, storage, processing, and transport of carbon in watersheds. The use of high -frequency, in-situ, real-
time sensors also provides early trend detection, helps identify monitoring gaps, and ensures timely data for
science -based decisions across a range of issues related to water use. Laboratory bench -top photometers and
fluorometers generate high -spectral resolution and high -precision data under controlled conditions, but they
require the collection of discrete samples and thus have temporal resolution limitations due to the high cost of
sample collection and analysis. The development of in-situ, continuous optical sensors therefore provides us with
the ability to collect high -temporal resolution data necessary to fill gaps between less frequent sampling
strategies. Because these in-situ instruments work continuously, they are particularly invaluable when evaluating
the impact of dynamic and/or episodic events that impact water quality but are difficult to predict.
A continuous in-situ fluorescent dissolved organic matter (FDOM) sensor will be deployed in the lower
Clackamas River from March 2010 through September 2011. Previous studies suggest that FDOM can be used as
a surrogate for the DOC concentrations (e.g. Belzile et al., 2006; Spencer et al, 2007; Downing et al., 2009;
Saraceno et al, 2009) and correlated to DBP precursor concentrations (Nakajima et al., 2002: Kraus et al, 2009).
The continuous real-time FDOM data will be made available on the USGS public website along with the other
continuously measured parameters already provided, including water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, specific
conductance, chlorophyll -a, and turbidity (http://or.water.usgs.gov/clackamas/monitors/). Task 1 also includes
comparison of the FDOM sensor with grab samples for DOC concentration, UVA absorbance, and full EEM
fluorescence analysis soon after data collection commences in order to make any necessary adjustments to the
FDOM sensor excitation/emission wavelengths.
The installation and utilization of the FDOM sensor will be used to accomplish multiple objectives of this
project. These data will help characterize the quantity and quality of the carbon in the mainstem of the Clackamas
River, which will be related to the formation of DBPs at the CRW (and LO) DWTPs. The fluorescence data also
will be assessed as a proxy for DOC, THM and HAA precursor concentrations. The FDOM sensor will provide a
calibrated, long-term, high resolution riverine dataset that can be used as an early warning system for the drinking
water plant.
Task 2. Monthly Water Sampling at Fixed Sites
To understand the seasonal dynamics in carbon quantity and quality, monthly water sampling will occur
at four mainstem locations: upper, middle, and lower Clackamas River (source water at the CRW and LO
intakes; table 1, figure 1). These samples will be analyzed for concentrations of DOC, total particulate
carbon and nitrogen (TPC/TPN), total and dissolved nutrients (CRW only), and suspended (water
column) chlorophyll -a (table 2). In conjunction with the source water sampling at the CRW intake,
finished water will be analyzed monthly for DBP concentrations (THMs and HAAs). In addition to
determining constituent concentrations, insight into DOM quality and source will be obtained from
laboratory absorbance (200-750 nm) and full EEMs fluorescence analyses (excitation 240-450 nm,
emissions 300-600 nm). Qualitative information will be indicated by calculating SUVA, spectral slope, FI
values, as well as by fluorescence peak identification and PARAFAC analysis. All parameters collected
for the monthly samplings will be used to statistically assess their correlation and relationships to the
quantity and quality of the carbon pool from the mainstem of the Clackamas River, and assess variability
due to seasonal or event -driven factors.
12
Table 3. Water -quality parameters to be analyzed by each laboratory.
Parameter
Laboratory
Nutrients nitrite + nitrate, ammonium, total N, orthophosphate, and total P
OHSU
Dissolved organic carbon DOC
NRP-Boulder
Total particulate carbon and nitrogen (TPC / TPN)
NWQL
Chloro h ll -a (suspended and benthic
OHSU / USGS OR-WSC
Absorbance 200-750 nm
OHSU
Fluorescence excitation -emission matrices EEMs
OHSU
THM and HAA formation potentials(dosing andquenching)
USGS CA-WSC
Disinfection by-products 4 THMs and 5 HAAs
Alexin
Abbreviations: OHSU, Oregon Health and Science University, Beaverton, Oregon; NRP, National Research Program; OR-
WSC, USGS Oregon Water Science Center, Portland Oregon; CA-WSC, USGS California Water Science Center,
Sacramento, CA; NWQL, USGS National Water -Quality Laboratory in Denver, Colorado; Alexin, Alexin Analytical
Laboratory in Tigard, Oregon.
Task 3. Basin -Wide Surveys
Four basin -wide surveys (April, June, August, and October 20 10) of the mainstem Clackamas River and its major
tributaries (table 1, figure 1) will be conducted to capture spring and summer growing season, summer low -flow,
and fall -flush periods. Samples will be analyzed for parameters listed in table 2, which include determination of
both THM and HAA formation potentials under controlled laboratory conditions. These DBPFPs provide
information about DBP precursor concentrations, which will help identify sources of DBP precursors in the
watershed. Dissolved organic carbon concentrations will be measured at all surface water sites and in finished
water at the CRW and LO DWTPs (table 2). Optical properties (absorbance and fluorescence) will also be
determined for all samples.
Because of the important role reservoirs play in the production, processing, and transport of carbon in the
watershed, North Fork Reservoir also will be sampled as part of the basin -wide surveys twice during summer
(August and September 2010). Four depths within the reservoir will be sampled (surface, mid -depth, release
point, and near the bottom; table 2). Comparison of these sample depths with each other as well as with other
watershed sites will provide insight into sources and processing of NOM within the reservoir. For example, as
described above, SUVA, FI and spectral slope values will help determine whether algal production within the
reservoir contributes significantly to the DOM pool.
During each of the basin -wide surveys, THM and HAA formation potentials will be determined on unfiltered
and filtered samples collected at each site (table 2). Comparison between filtered and unfiltered samples will
indicate the relative importance of dissolved and particulate OM fractions to the total DBP precursor pool, which
is important to consider if DWTP upgrades are required to reduce DBPs in treated water.
Normalizing or standardizing the THM and HAA formation potentials to carbon concentration (STHMFP
and SHAAFP in mmol/mol) will indicate whether particular carbon sources have a greater propensity to form
DBPs upon chlorination. Our goal is to compare the STHMFP and SHAAFP of likely sources of NOM within the
Clackamas watershed to ascertain which sources pose the greatest risk to drinking -water quality.
In addition, DBP formation potentials will be run on targeted carbon sources in a "pilot" effort, including
benthic algae (periphyton) and leaf/needle litter/soil from fir and alder forests in October 2010 (table 2). DOM
13
leached from these sources will be incubated in the dark under aerobic conditions for 21 days. Although
photolysis has been shown to affect NOM quality and DBPFP (Reckhow et al., 2009), affects of irradiation are
not within the scope of this experiment. Samples will be incubated for 21 days to assess how microbial
degradation affects DOM quality and reactivity, and thus gain insight into the importance of travel time from the
DOM source to a drinking water intake. More information on this task is provided in the Methods section.
Task 4. Assessment of Optical Properties
Optical properties (absorbance and fluorescence) will be used to assess the quality and quantity of carbon
throughout this study. While the in-situ FDOM sensor will measure the specific excitation/emission pair of
370/460 nm and will provide continuous data for Clackamas River water entering the CRW intake, laboratory
based absorbance and fluorescence data will provide high-resolution optical data on discrete samples.. The optical
data will provide information about changes in DOM composition. Use of the absorbance data (SUVA and
spectral slope) and the entire EEMs matrices will provide information about chemical moieties through peak
identification, peak ratios (e.g. FI), and the application of multi -parameter statistics (e.g. PARAFAC, PCA).
A key component to this study and for future studies everywhere is determining whether optical proxies can
be used successfully as a surrogate for DOC, THM and HAA precursor concentrations. The in-situ FDOM data
will be statistically compared to the grab sample, laboratory -based DOC concentration data, THMFP and
HAAFP, as well as the utility's TOC and DBP data, using both simple and multiple regression approaches. In
addition, the full EEMs scan will be examined to assess whether an alternative excitation/emission pair, or a
combination of several pairs, would serve as a better predictive tool for these parameters. This study will
contribute to a growing body of data on the relationship between fluorescence EEMs and DBP precursors
(Nakajima et al. 2002; Fabbricino and Korshin, 2004; Hua et al., 2007; Roccaro 2009; Kraus et al., in review).
Task 5. Treatability of DBP Precursors
Treatability of DBP precursors in raw water will be assessed using two approaches. Jar tests will be
conducted on raw source water to examine the potential for precursor reduction using coagulant and
coagulant plus powdered activated carbon, and DOC and DBP precursor treatability will be examined by
comparing DOC concentration, absorbance, and fluorescence in raw versus finished water. Results from
these two approaches will be used to relate DOC amount and quality to treatability.
Treatability studies were designed based on CRW treatment plant operations. CRW uses
aluminum sulfate and aluminum chlorhydrate (ACH) in their treatment train, primarily to remove
suspended particles. The amount of coagulant added is adjusted as needed to an "optimum dose", defined
as the amount of coagulant per liter required to reach the point of zero charge (PZC) as determined by an
in-line streaming current detector (SCD). Thus, when TOC (DOC + POC) increases, higher coagulant
doses are applied. In addition, during taste and odor events, CRW adds powdered activated carbon (PAC)
up to concentrations of —4-5 mg/L. Because CRW chlorinates during coagulation, there is no opportunity
to isolate the effects of coagulation alone on DOC and DBP precursor removal, making jar tests a natural
choice for helping address this question.
DOC and DBP precursor treatability also will be examined by comparing DOC concentration,
absorption, and fluorescence in raw versus finished water. This approach will identify how much, and
possibly what type, of DOC was removed by the coagulation/filtration process. From these data, we will
begin to identify different conditions that may decrease the effective removability of DOC. We will
coordinate data interpretation closely with the treatment plant operators to determine whether changes in
rates of DOC and DBP precursor removal can be attributed to changes in source water quality or changes
in treatment plant operations.
14
Task 6. Interpretive Report
Results will be published in USGS peer-reviewed reports by September 2012. The monthly data at the fixed sites
will be used to identify spatial and seasonal patterns in carbon quantity and quality in the Clackamas River, and
streamflow data from continuous gages and estimates of discharge from the major tributaries will be used to
calculate loads of DOC and DBP precursors during each of the basin -wide surveys. This information, combined
with the DBP formation potentials will begin to identify the major sources of DBP precursors in the Clackamas
River basin, and how NOM dynamics are influenced by seasonal and event -driven factors.
Methods
Continuous In -Situ FDOM and Field Parameter Sensors
The FDOM fluorometer sensor which we propose to employ in this study is among the most economical and
easy to use of this class of field optical instruments. This newly released in-situ fluorometer uses a flat -face sensor
rather than a flow through system providing several benefits: the flat face sensor does not require a pump and
filtration system, which avoids installation and upkeep of additional equipment, and more importantly avoids
artifacts resulting from filter fouling and biofouling which may be difficult or impossible to characterize. This
model comes with a wiper which cleans the surface of the sensor regularly and thus reduces maintenance
requirements. Because the flat face system does not allow for sample filtration, its accuracy is affected by
suspended particulates. However, in the Clackamas River turbidity typically is less than 5 FNUs (except during
storms), and thus should not impact the in-situ measurement (Saracen et al., in press). If turbidity does exceed
this threshold, then corrections can be made to the affected FDOM data using turbidity data collected in the same
location (Saraceno et al., in press). Comparison of our in-situ data to laboratory analyses of discrete samples will
provide a means to corroborate and validate the in-situ data.
Physical water -quality field parameters will be measured continuously and in real-time at the CRW DWTP
using a YSI OMS multi -probe sonde equipped with turbidity and temperature. This sonde will be deployed in
CRW's low lift station pre-treatment reservoir; data from this location will characterize CRW source water and
will be used to correct the fluorescence data from the FDOM sensor. These data also will supplement the three
existing continuous water -quality monitors in the Clackamas River (http://or.water.usgs.gov/clackamas/monitors).
Stage and discharge is continuously measured at a nearby USGS gage (142110 10) in the Clackamas River at river
mile 1.6. Real-time data will be recorded using a Campbell Scientific model CR 1000 data logger, programmed
specifically for this project. The CR1000 data logger will provide the necessary power distribution, control
(turning sensors off and on), time stamp, and provide internal logging of all sensor data at predetermined (fixed or
dynamic) sampling frequencies. The data logger will interface with a cellular modem (Sierra Wireless RAVEN
XT -V) to transmit data at predetermined intervals or upon user request. Integration of the CR1000 data logger and
LoggerNet software (version 3.4) provides a quality -control platform allowing end users to review and validate
real-time measurements. Campbell LoggerNet software will be used to monitor site status and provide remote
troubleshooting in real time, manage data collection, and forward data to an existing USGS website for public
viewing. Further, the customizable programming of the CR1000 and LoggerNet will permit the use of alarms and
conditional sampling, for example: (1) log sensor data at prescribed analyte threshold / values (low or high), (2)
log sensor data at frequencies prescribed by environment forcing/events (e.g. precipitation, wind events), and (3)
provide system malfunction warnings (alarms).
The data collection platform along with the FDOM sensor will be located at the CRW DWTP intake. The
sensor will be installed in a perforated ABS pipe for protection from debris along a submerged, permanently fixed
ladder vertically in a gravity fed tank where water is temporarily stored prior to being pumped to the plant for
treatment. This placement is ideal because it will sample all water passing into the plant, while remaining secure
15
and accessible for maintenance. Power for the data collection system will be provided by a nearby transformer
plugged into an AC powered outlet.
Monthly grab samples will be collected from the same location as the FDOM probe and analyzed for
parameters listed in Table 2 and described in Task 2. Additional discrete water samples will be collected over a
range in DOC concentrations within the first couple months (or over the course of a storm hydrograph) and
analyzed for DOC concentration, absorbance, and fluorescence for quality assurance purposes.
The in-situ FDOM data will be compared to optical properties measured in the lab (both the full EEMs
fluorescence and absorbance spectra). FDOM intensity will be related to DOC concentration, THMFP and
HAAFP using both simple and multiple regression approaches to determine how well it predicts these parameters.
Changes in FDOM intensity and its relationship to these parameters will be related to all known continuous
measurements variables including, for example, streamflow, turbidity, temperature, specific conductance, and
chlorophyll -a concentrations. Any shifts in these relationships will be investigated in light of changes in NOM
composition and factors such as season, climate, and streamflow. The primary objective for interpretation of the
in-situ FDOM data will be to determine whether these data, either alone or in combination with other continuous
measurements (e.g. temperature, turbidity, chlorophyll -a, streamflow) can be used to model DOC and DBP
precursor concentrations, and thus assess whether this instrumentation can be employed by water utilities to
provide real-time information about water -quality conditions.
Although the use of FDOM sensors has been well established for conducting ocean profiles of FDOM, the
installation of long term moorings of optical sensors are still experimental. Therefore, strict QA/QC criteria have
not yet been developed and should be established on a case by case basis. With this said, there are still simple
tests that can and will be made to monitor the performance of the sensor. One test will be to compare the in-situ
fluorescence values to bench -top fluorometer values collected monthly, in addition to samples collected during
key events (e.g. algal blooms or sloughing events and storms). This will ensure the in-situ data are accurate and
not confounded by turbidity, temperature, fouling, or other issues. Also, because the sensor will make 30 to 60
measurements at 1 hertz each time it is activated, burst sample statistics can be used to ensure the sensor's outputs
are stable and the data are precise. The sensor will have a wiper to ensure the clarity of the optical window is not
compromised. Once a baseline data set is collected for several weeks immediately after installation, the range of
normal operating conditions will be established and any deviation from this could be used as criteria to
automatically flag data until further inspection or verification.
Water Sample Collection and Processing
Water samples will be collected from wadeable stream sites (table 1) using the Equal -Width Increment method,
where the entire stream cross section is sampled using a depth -integrating sampler (Edwards and Glysson, 1999).
Width -integrated water samples will be collected from unwadable main -stem sites using a 1.2 liter TeflonTM
Kemmerer sampling device from 5-10 locations across the cross section (where bridges are available). Point
samples from each site will be composited and homogenized in an 8- or 16 -liter churn splitter and placed on ice
prior to dispensing subsamples for nutrients, DOC and other measures of carbon quality (absorbance /
fluorescence), and suspended chlorophyll -a. Grab samples will be collected with the Kemmerer sampler at the
two bridgeless main -stem sites (Clackamas River at Estacada and Oregon City).
Filtered samples will be processed through 0.7 -um glass fiber (GF/F) filters within 4 hours of sample
collection. Dissolved nutrient samples will be filtered into clean 40 -mL vials using a syringe and 0.7 -um GF/F
filters. Total and dissolved nutrient samples will be immediately frozen and stored at -20°C until analysis. Whole
water samples for total phosphorus (TP) and total nitrogen (TN) will be dispensed from the Kemmerer bottle (if
low turbidity allows), or composited and homogenized in a churn splitter (if turbidity is elevated) before
dispensing. Samples for total particulate nitrogen (TPN) and total particulate carbon (TPC) will be collected into
baked amber glass bottles and placed on ice. In the laboratory, the contents will be passed through baked 25 -mm,
16
0.7 um GF/F filters, noting the filtrate volume. Filters will be frozen and shipped to the USGS National Water
Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in Denver, CO. Samples for suspended chlorophyll -a will be collected onto 25 -mm
0.7 um GF/F filters noting the sample volume, wrapped in aluminum foil and frozen at -4°C until analysis until
analysis. Samples for DBP formation potential (DBPFP) will be collected into baked 1-L amber glass bottles,
either directly (for wadeable sites), or into 3-L Teflon bottles (for unwadeable sites) and transferred into baked 1-
L amber glass bottles and placed on ice. Formation potentials will be evaluated on both unfiltered and filtered
samples. Filtered samples will be passed through 0.7 -um nominal pore size GF/F filters into 1-L amber glass
baked bottles. Samples for THMFP and HAAFP will be acidified to pH of 2.0 units using reagent grade
concentrated HCl immediately after filtration to prevent microbial transformation of samples prior to analysis.
Samples will be shipped on ice within 24 hours to the organic chemistry laboratory at the USGS California Water
Science Center (CA-WSC) in Sacramento, CA, where they will be refrigerated at 4°C until further processing.
Disinfection by-product samples will be collected by CRW staff from a treated water tap inside the DWTP into
40 -mL amber glass baked bottles with septa to remove bubbles and acidified to pH < 2.0 using purified HCl.
Benthic Algae Sample Collection and Processing
Samples of benthic algae (periphyton) will be collected and analyzed for biomass (chlorophyll -a) and dominant
species composition at 4 main -stem sites and 5 tributary sites twice (in April 2010 and June 2010). Benthic algae
will be collected from 10 representative rocks/cobbles in shallow riffle areas (for tributaries) or for main -stem
sites, along wadeable portions of the channel or margin using USGS methods (Moulton et al, 2002), described in
detail in Carpenter (2003). Briefly, a known area of periphyton (-4-5 inch diameter circle) is scraped from the top
of each rock into a plastic dishpan using a plastic bristle brush. Ten samples from each riffle are composited into
plastic 1 -liter bottles and placed on ice until processing. Periphyton samples are homogenized in an electric
blender, and subsamples removed using a 5 -mL pipette. Known aliquots are transferred by pipette onto 45 -mm
0.7 -um GF/F filters, which are frozen at -4°C until analysis.
Laboratory Analytical Procedures
DOC: DOC measurements will be made using the platinum catalyzed persulfate wet oxidation method on an O.I.
Analytical Model 700 TOC Analyzerrm (Aiken, 1992). The standard curve, consisting of a minimum of five
standards over the range of interest, is repeated for every 10-12 water samples analyzed in duplicate. Reported
values will be the averages of duplicate analyses. Standard deviation for the DOC measurement is f0.2 mg
carbon/L..
Fluorescence and Absorbance: Fluorescence excitation -emission matrix spectra (EEMs) will be measured on
filtered samples (0.7 um GF/F) with a SPEX Fluoromax-4 spectrofluorometer (Horiba Jobin, Yvon, NJ, USA)
using a 150 -watt Xenon lamp. Fluorescence intensity will be measured at excitation wavelengths of 240 to 450
nm at 10 -nm intervals, and emission wavelengths of 300 to 600 nm at 2 -nm intervals at 20°C (using a water -bath
to control temperature) in a 1 -cm quartz cell. Instrument bias will be corrected using manufacturers supplied
excitation and emission correction factors. Lamp and water -Raman checks will be performed daily per the
manufacturer's specifications (Cory et al., submitted). EEMs will blank corrected in DADISP to remove Raman
scattering and normalized to the daily Raman peak area; Rayleigh scatter lines removed after blank correction
(Stedmon et al. 2003). If necessary, inner filter corrections will be applied to all EEMs as described by McDonald
(1997). The absorption spectra will be measured between 200-750 nm on filtered samples at constant temperature
(25°C) with a Cary -300 spectrophotometer using a 1 -cm quartz cell and distilled water as a blank. Specific UVA
(SUVA) will be calculated by dividing absorbance at 254 nm by DOC concentration (Weishaar et al. 2003).
Spectral Slope will be calculated using a non-linear fit of an exponential function to the absorption spectrum over
specified wavelength ranges (e.g. 275-295 nm, 350-400) as described by Twardowski et al. 2004 and Helms et al.
2008.
17
Nutrients/TPC/TPN: Dissolved nutrient analyses will be performed at Oregon Health and Science University
using a 5 -channel 2008 model Astoria -Pacific Segmented Continuous Flow Injection Analyzer designed for
spectrophotometric analysis of nutrients in freshwater. Nutrients analysis will include nitrate, nitrite, phosphate,
ortho-phosphate, ammonium, and silicate. In order to reach low detection limits, the protocols used are the ones
recommended by the manufacturer and detailed in Whitledge et. al. (1986) with adjustments for low -
concentration detection as outlined in Sakamoto et al (1991). All measurements are quality controlled against
commercially purchased water -quality standards and approved by the USGS. Dissolved organic nitrogen, total
dissolved nitrogen, total dissolved phosphorus, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus will be analyzed following the
alkaline persulfate digestion method followed by the colorimetric procedure outlined above. Total particulate
carbon and total particulate nitrogen samples will be analyzed according to Method 440.0 (Zimmerman et al,
1997).
Suspended Chlorophyll -a: Suspended chlorophyll a measurements will be conducted at Oregon Health and
Science University using a Turner Digital 10 -AU fluorometer according to the manufacturer's procedure. Briefly,
a known amount of whole water is filtered through 0.7 -um GF/F filters. The filters are stored in a -20°C freezer
for no more than 30 days prior to analysis. The filter is placed in 5 mL of 90% acetone and stored in -20°C freezer
prior to being measured. The instrument is calibrated and standard curves generated. Samples are blank subtracted
and measured on the fluorometer. Three drops of 10% HCL are added, mixed, and recorded for the after acid
measurement. Data are entered into the manufacturer's equation to calculate the chlorophyll -a concentrations.
Benthic Aleal Chlorophyll -a: Each filter is folded into quarters, placed in a plastic petri dish, wrapped in
aluminum foil, and frozen until analysis. Filters are hand ground to extract the chlorophyll -a pigment in 90%
acetone, and samples analyzed using standard methods (fluorometry with acid correction) at the USGS Oregon
Water Science Center in Portland, Oregon. A standard solution of chlorophyll -a will be obtained from and
certified by the USGS NWQL, and will be used to generate calibration curves for the fluorometer during each of
the analysis runs. Samples to be analyzed for dominant benthic algal species will be collected from the churn and
examined by Kurt Carpenter at the USGS Oregon Water Science Center in Portland, Oregon.
Carbon Leaching Experiments: During one of the synoptic events (October 2010), benthic algae (periphyton)
from the lower Clackamas River and two types of forest litter/soils (beneath alder tree stands and fir -dominated
forests) will be evaluated for their carbon content and propensity to contribute DBP precursors (table 2).
Leaf/needle litter material (O horizon) and soil (0-30 cm) will be combined from at least six different locations
and homogenized. Periphyton samples will be collected from the lower Clackamas River and composited into one
sample. Periphyton and litter/soil samples will be transported on ice and then refrigerated in the dark at 4°C prior
to leaching. A subsample of all source materials will be oven -dried at 60°C to determine moisture content and will
subsequently be characterized by determining C:N ratio. Samples will be placed in an acid -washed, pre -
combusted amber glass bottle with DI water at a ratio of approximately 15 g dry weight of material per L of
water. Samples will be gently stirred for 4 h and filtered through pre -combusted 0.7 um GF/F filters. The
incubations will be started within 24 hours of leaching. DOC concentration will be estimated by measuring Azsa,
and if needed, samples will be diluted to <50 mg C/L. Filtered samples will be inoculated with 3% (v/v) unfiltered
river water. Because Clackamas DOC concentrations are typically below 3 mg/L, and we expect the leachates to
have much higher DOC concentrations, this small amount of inoculum should have no effect on DOC
concentration and composition (Pellerin et al., in review). Samples will be incubated in the dark at 25°C for 21
days, aerating samples daily to prevent anoxic conditions.
Absorbance and fluorescence will be measured on days 1, 3, 7, 14 and 21 by removing an aliquot of sample from
each treatment. In addition, at the start and end of the incubation, DOC will be determined on all samples and
both THMFP and HAAFP will be determined. All samples will be filtered through 0.7 -um GF/F filters prior to
analysis, and DOC concentration, absorbance, fluorescence, and DBP formation potentials will be determined as
described above. If needed, samples will be diluted to DOC concentrations of 3-4 mg/L carbon (-0.10 A254)
prior to chlorination.
18
Disinfection Byproduct Formation Potential: Chlorine dosing and quenching will be conducted at the
California Water Science Center (CAWSC) following a modified version of USEPA methods 502.2, 510.1, and
552.2 as described by Crepeau et al. (2004). The method involves a 5 -day reaction time, pH buffered at 8.3,
temperature held at 25'C, and final residual free chlorine concentration restricted to 2-4 mg L"'. A 5 -day reaction
time provides information about the total DBP precursor pool, and should provide THM and HAA concentrations
reflective of potential distribution system concentrations based on known distribution system residence times. All
samples (formation potentials and finished water) will be shipped to Alexin Laboratories (ORELAP Certification
ID# ORI 00013), in Tigard, Oregon where analyses of 4 THMs (chloroform, bromoform, bromodichloromethane,
and dibromochloromethane) and 5 HAAs (monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid,
bromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid) will be conducted using USEPA method 524.2 (for THMs) and
method 6251 B (for HAAs). For THM and HAA analyses by Alexin Laboratories, the QC standard for each set of
ten samples analyzed in a sequence will include; (1) one blank sample, (2) a pre- and post-CCV (continuing
calibration verification) sample, and (3) two matrix -spiked samples (one replicate pair) for one regular sample
which is spiked with a standard of known concentration.
Jar Tests: Jar tests will be conducted on raw source water following standard protocols to assess the
treatability of DOC and DBP precursors. These studies will be conducted on 4 occasions (during each of
the basin -wide samplings when we will be running DBP formation potentials). The optimum dose of
coagulant will be determined by an in-line SCD at the CRW plant during the time of raw water collection.
Treatments will include coagulant only (applied at optimum dose) and coagulant plus powdered activated
carbon (4-5 mg/L). All coagulation treatments will be done in triplicate. After filtration, all samples will
be analyzed for DOC concentration, fluorescence and absorbance. In addition, one replicate will be
analyzed for THMFP and HAAFP. Raw water also will be evaluated for its carbon quality and quantity at
this time.
Data Quality -Assurance and Laboratory Evaluation Plans
Water samples will be analyzed by a combination of USGS and approved non-USGS labs (table 3). Laboratory
Evaluation Plans (LEP) will be developed for the Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) lab for total and
dissolved nutrients, and for the Alexin Laboratory for disinfection by-products (THMs and HAAs) and submitted
to the OWSC Director for approval. Quality -assurance samples will consist of 10 percent of regular samples and
will variously consist of a combination of blanks, replicates, and for nutrients only, standard reference samples.
Additional QA/QC information for each analyte is provided above under Laboratory Analytical Procedure in the
Methods section.
Upon receipt from the laboratory, data will be evaluated to identify any detection in blank samples or
problematic replicate or spike results, and efforts made to identify and correct potential problems. Replicate
samples will be evaluated by calculating Percent Relative Difference for replicate pairs, and results for standard
reference samples for nutrients will allow provide percent recovery estimates for these compounds to track data
quality.
Relevance and Benefits
Local Benefits: Results of this study will help to prioritize watershed restoration, develop Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for watersheds and for treatment plant operations, and guide future drinking -water treatment
upgrades that target removal of DBP precursors. This project is aligned with the USGS Strategic Directions that
include drinking -water quality and the effects of urbanization on water resources. Several benefits are anticipated
from this study, including a better understanding of the temporal and spatial occurrence of DBP precursors in the
19
main -stem Clackamas River (source water) and their major sources within the Clackamas River basin, and its
relation to the occurrence of DBPs in treated drinking water from CRW and LO.
This study will examine how land cover/use may affect drinking -water quality by identifying the amount
and character of carbon exported from tributaries with primarily industrial, urban, rural, and agricultural land
cover/uses. This approach, along with monitoring methods included in this proposal, were successfully employed
by the USGS in the nearby McKenzie River, where DBP precursors were found to primarily originate from forest
soils, with an indication that algae and wastewater also contributed significantly at times (Kraus et al., in review).
Another USGS investigation of DOM amount, timing and quality in Sweetwater Reservoir, CA, indicated that
relatively simple changes in reservoir management had the potential reduce THM precursor concentrations by up
to 30% (Frain et al., 2001). As urbanization continues to change the surrounding landscape, establishing baseline
information on the changes of NOM and DBP precursors with high spatial and temporal resolution for the
Clackamas watershed will continue to shed light on the micro -scale processes and lead to more scientifically
sound watershed restoration practices. This study takes a proactive approach to watershed management and will
allow drinking -water utilities on the Clackamas River, especially CRW and LO, to develop and continue to
improve their drinking -water treatment processes, and comply with USEPA standards.
Global Benefits: This project utilizes advancements in technology that are on the cutting edge of science. By
employing the use of an in-situ FDOM sensor, in conjunction with lab absorbance and fluorescence spectroscopy,
and correlating these measurements to DBP formation potential experiments, multiple water -quality parameters,
and key nutrient components, this study provides an opportunity to establish statistical relationships that can be
applied and used globally. Fluorescence spectroscopy has in recent years developed in the scientific community
across multiple disciplines of interest due to its relatively inexpensive sampling, increased sensitivity without
common absorbance interferences, and its implications for the global carbon cycle in a quickly changing world.
Although there is a decade worth of data and information on existing excitation/emission pairings, there still
remains much to learn. Instrumentation for continuous monitoring are still being developed and created based on
studies like this one. With the advancement of in-situ instrumentation, sensors are being developed that will
become an integral component to monitoring at drinking -water treatment plants worldwide. In a previous related
study conducted by Reckhow et al. (2007), when they compared their study of NOM quality and quantity in a
local watershed with a narrow geographic and climatic scope with a national database system they found
relatively similar agreement for the propensity of the NOM to form DBPs. What this implies is that the results
from the Clackamas River study could serve as a model for other geographical regions and could provide
drinking -water treatment plants worldwide with best management practices and continued improvements to their
drinking -water systems. This study can serve as a showcase for the global water industry by providing timely
information on new tools and technologies available to monitor for and predict DBP precursors in source water
and DBPs in treated water.
Reports and Products
Interim results will be communicated to CRW and LO staff in periodic updates approximately every 3-6 months.
Final results will be published in a USGS peer-reviewed report by September 2012. The monthly data at the fixed
sites will be used to identify spatial and seasonal patterns in carbon quantity and quality in the Clackamas River,
and streamflow data from continuous gages and estimates of discharge from the major tributaries will be used to
estimate loads of DOC and DBP precursors during each of the basin -wide surveys. This information, combined
with the DBP formation potentials will begin to identify the major sources of DBP precursors in the Clackamas
River basin, and how NOM dynamics are influenced by seasonal and event -driven factors.
20
References
Aiken, G.R., D.M. McKnight, K.A. Thorn, and E.M. Thurman. 1992. Isolation of hydrophilic organic acids from
water using nonionic macroporous resins. Organic Geochemistry 18:567-573.
Aiken, G., and Cotsaris, E. 1995. Soil and hydrology: their effect on NOM. Journal American Water Works
Association 87:36-45.
Bade, D.L., S.R. Carpenter, J.J. Cole, M.L. Pace, E. Kritzberg, M.C. Van de Bogert, R.M. Cory, and D.M.
McKnight. 2007. Sources and fates of dissolved organic carbon in lakes as determined by whole -lake carbon
isotope additions. Biogeochemistry 84:115-129.
Beggs, K.M.H., and Summers, R.S. 2009. Disinfection by-product formation from dissolved organic matter
produced from pine beetle epidemic in rocky mountains. AWWA Water Quality Technology Conference
Proceedings, Seattle, WA. American Water Works Association.
Belzile, C., C.S. Roesler, J.P. Christensen, N. Shakhova, and I. Semiletov. 2006. Fluorescence measured using the
WETStar DOM fluorometer as a proxy for dissolved matter absorption. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science
67:441-449.
Bergamaschi, B.A., M.S. Fram, R. Fujii, G. Aiken, C. Kendall, and S.R. Silva. 1999. The carbon isotopic
composition of trihalomethanes formed from chemically distinct dissolved organic carbon isolates from the
Sacramento -San Joaquin River Delta, California, USA. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources
Investigations Report 99-4018B 1999, Charleston, South Carolina.
Briley, K.F., R.F. Williams, K.E. Longley, and C.A. Sorber. 1980. Triahlomethane production from algal
precursors, p. 117-129, In R. L. Jolley, et al., eds. Water Chlorination: Environmental Impact and Health
Effects, Vol. 3. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, MI.
Buckavekas, P.A., D. McGaha, J.M. Shostell, R. Schultz, and J.D. Jack. 2007. Internal and external sources of
THM precursors in a midwestern reservoir. Journal American Water Works Association 99:127-136.
Carpenter, K.D., 2003, Water -quality and algal conditions in the Clackamas River Basin, Oregon, and their
relations to land and water management: U. S. Geological Survey Water -Resources Investigations Report 02-
4189, 114 p.
Carpenter, K.D. and G.C. McGhee, 2009, Organic Compounds in Clackamas River water used for public supply
near Portland, Oregon, 2003-05, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2009-3030, 6 p.
Chow, A.T., D.M. Leech, T.H. Boyer, and P.C. Singer. 2008. Impact of simulated solar irradiation on disinfection
byproduct precursors. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42:5586-5593.
Chow, A.T., S. -T. Lee, A.T. O'Geen, T. Orozco, D. Beaudette, P. -W. Wong, P.J. Hernes, K.W. Tate, and R.A.
Dahlgren. 2009. Litter contributions to dissolved organic matter and disinfection byproduct precursors in
California oak woodland watersheds. Journal of Environmental Quality 38:2334-2343.
Cleveland, C.C., J.C. Neff, A.R. Townsend, and E. Hood. 2004. Composition, dynamics, and fate of leached
dissolved organic matter in terrestrial ecosystems: results from a decomposition experiment. Ecosystems
7:275-285.
Coble, P.G. 2007. Marine optical biogeochemistry: The chemistry of ocean color. Chem. Rev. 107:402-418.
Cory, R.M., M.P. Miller, D.M. McKnight, J. Guerard, and P.L. Miller. submitted. Effect of instrument -specific
response on the analysis of fulvic acid fluorescence spectra. JGR-Biogeoscience.
Crepeau, K.L., M.S. Fram, and N. Bush, 2004, Method of Analysis at the U.S. Geological Survey California
Sacramento Laboratory - Determination of Triahlomethane Formation Potential, Method Validation, and
Quality -Control Practices Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5003. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Croue, J.P., J.F. Debroux, G.L. Amy, G.R. Aiken, and J.A. Leenheer. 1999. Natural organic matter: structural
characteristics and reactive properties, p. 65-93, In P. C. Singer, ed. Formation and Control of Disinfection
by -Products in Drinking Water. American Water Works Association, Denver.
Don, A., and K. Kalbitz. 2003. Amounts and degradability of dissolved organic carbon from foliar litter at
different decomposition stages. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 37:2171-2179.
Downing, B.D., B.A. Bergamaschi, D.B. Evans, and E. Boss. 2008. Assessing contribution of DOC from
sediments to a drinking -water reservoir using optical profiling. Lake and Reservoir Management 24:381-391.
21
Downing, B.D., E. Boss, B.A. Bergamaschi, J.A. Fleck, M.A. Lionberger, N.K. Ganju, D.H. Schoellhamer, and
R. Fujii. 2009. Quantifying fluxes and characterizing compositional changes of dissolved organic matter in
aquatic systems in situ using combined acoustic and optical measurements. Limnology and Oceanography.
7:119-131.
Edwards, T.K., and Glysson, D.G., 1999, Field methods for measurement of fluvial sediment: U.S. Geological
Survey Techniques of Water -Resources Investigations, book 3, chap. C2, 80 p.
Fabbricino, M., and G.V. Korshin. 2004. Probing the mechanisms of NOM chlorination using fluorescence:
formation of disinfection by-products in Alento River water. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply
4:227-233.
Findlay, S., L. Carlough, M.T. Crocker, H.K. Gill, J.L. Meyer, and P.J. Smith. 1986. Bacterial growth on
macrophyte leachate and fate of bacterial production. Limnology and Oceanography. 31:1335-1341.
Fram, M.S., B.A. Bergamaschi, and R. Fujii. 2001. Improving water quality in Sweetwater Reservoir, San Diego
County, California: Sources and mitigation strategies for trihalomethane (THM)-forming carbon USGS Fact
Sheet 112-01. U.S. Geological Survey.
Garvey, E.A., and J.E. Tobiason. 2003. Assessment of natural organic matter in Quabbin Reservoir. Jounral of
Water Supply: Research and Technology - AQUA 52:19-36.
Graham, N.J.D., V.E. Wardlaw, R. Perrry, and J. Jiang. 1998. The significance of algae as trihalomethane
precursors. Water Science and Technology 37:83-89.
Helms, J.R., A. Stubbins, J.D. Ritchie, E.C. Minor, D.J. Kieber, and K. Mopper. 2008. Absorption spectral slopes
and slope ratios as indicators of molecular weight, source, and photobleaching of chromophoric dissolved
organic matter. Limnol. Oceanogr. 53:955-969.
Hua, B., K. Veum, A. Kioirala, J. Jones, T. Clevenger, and B. Deng. 2007. Fluorescence fingerprints to monitor
total trihalomethanes and N-nitrosodimethylamine formation potentials in water. Environ. Chem. Lett. 5:73-
77.
Hudson, N., A. Baker, and D. Reynolds. 2007. Fluorescence analysis of dissolved organic matter in natural, waste
and polluted waters - A review. River Research and Applications 23:631-649.
Jack, J., T. Sellers, and P.A. Bukaveckas. 2002. Algal production and trihalomethane formation potential: an
experimental assessment and inter -river comparison. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.Sci. 59:1482-1491.
Jaffe, R., D.M. McKnight, N. Maie, R. Cory, W.H. McDowell, and J.L. Campbell. 2008. Spatial and temporal
variations in DOM composition in ecosystems: The importance of long-term monitoring of optical
properties. J. Geophys. Res. I I3:G04032, doi: 10. 1029/2008JG000683.
Karimi, A.A., and P.C. Singer. 1991. Trihalomethane formation in open reservoirs. J. Am. Water Works Assoc.
83:84-88.
Kraus, T.E.C., C. Anderson, K. Morgenstern, B.D. Downing, and B.A. Bergamaschi, in review, Sources of
dissolved organic carbon and disinfection by-products to the McKenzie River: Use of absorbance and
fluorescence spectroscopy, Water Research.
Kraus, T.E.C., B.A. Bergamaschi, P.J. Hernes, R.G.M. Spencer, R. Stepanauskas, C. Kendall, R.F. Losee, and R.
Fujii. 2008. Assessing the contribution of wetlands and subsided islands to dissolved organic matter and
disinfection byproduct precursors in the Sacramento -San Joaquin River Delta: A geochemical approach.
Organic Geochemistry 39:1302-1318.
Kraus, T.E.C, B.A. Bergamaschi, P.J. Hernes, C. Kendall, R.F. Losee, in preparation. Production and processing
of natural organic matter and disinfection byproduct precursors in a large off -stream reservoir. Journal of
Lake and Reservoir Management
Kraus, T.E.C, C. Anderson, K. Morgenstern, B. Downing, B.A. Bergamaschi, 2009. Sources of dissolved organic
carbon and disinfection by-product precursors to the McKenzie River: Use of absorbance and fluorescence
spectroscopy. American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, CA., December 14-15.
Leenheer, J.A., and J.P. Croue. 2003. Characterizing dissolved aquatic organic matter. Environmental Science and
Technology 37:18A-26A.MacDonald, S.J. Lvin, and H. Patterson. 1997. Improvement of inner filter effect
correction based on determination of effective geometric parameters using a conventional fluorometer.
Analytica Chimica Acta 338:155-162.
22
Mann, C.J., and R.G. Wetzel. 1996. Loading and utilization of dissolved organic carbon from emergent
macrophytes. Aquatic Botany 53:61-72.
McKnight, D.M., E.W. Boyer, P.K. Westerhoff, P.T. Doran, T. Kulbe, and D.T. Andersen. 2001.
Spectrofluorometric characterization of dissolved organic matter for indication of precursor organic material
and aromaticity. Limnol. Oceanogr. 46:38-48.
Nakajima, F., M. Hanabusa, and H. Furumai. 2002. Excitation—emission fluorescence spectra and trihalomethane
formation potential in the Tama River, Japan. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply 2:481-486.
Nguyen, M., L.A. Baker, and P. Westerhoff. 2002. DOC and DBP precursors in western US watersheds and
reservoirs. Journal of the American Water Works Association 94:98-112.
Nguyen, M., P.K. Westerhoff, L. Baker, Q. Hu, M. Esparza-Sosot, and M. Sommerfeld. 2005. Characteristics and
reactivity of algae-produced dissolved organic carbon. Journal of Environmental Engineering
November: 1574-1582.
Patton, C.J. and Kryskalla, J.R. 2003. Methods of Analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality
Laboratory — Evaluation of Alkaline Persulfate Digestion as an Alternative to Kjeldahl Digestion for
Determination of Total and Dissolved Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Water. US Geological Survey Water-
Resources Investigations Report 03-4174
Palmstrom, N.S., R.E. Carlson, and G.D. Cooke. 1988. Potential links between eutrophication and the formation
of carcinogens in drinking water. Lake and Reservoir Management 4:1-15.
Pellerin BA, PJ Hernes, J Saraceno, RGM Spencer and BA Bergamaschi. In review. Microbial
degradation of plant leachates alters lignin phenols and trihalomethane precursors. Journal of Environmental
Quality.
Pellerin BA, J Shanley, J Saraceno, GR Aiken, S Sebestyen, BA Bergamaschi. In preparation. In situ FDOM
proxy for the effects of climate change on DOC Fluxes from a Northern Forest. Nature — Geosciences.
Plummer, J. D., and J.K. Edzwald. 2001. Effects of ozone on algae as precursors for trihalomethane and haloacetic
acid production. Environ. Sci. Technol. 35:3661-3668.
Pomes, M.L., W.R. Green, E.M. Thurman, W.H. Orem, and H.E. Lerch. 1999. DBP formation potential of aquatic
humic substances. Journal American Water Works Association 91:103-115.
Reckhow, D.A.R., P.L.; Bryan, D., 2004. Watershed sources of disinfection byproduct precursors. Water Science
and Technology 4:61-69.
Reckhow, D.A.R., P.L.; Nusslein, K.; Makdissy, G.; Devine, G.; Conneely, T.; Boutin, A.; Bryan, D. 2007. Long-
term variability of BDOM and NOM as precursors in watershed sources. American Water Works
Association Research Foundation, Denver, CO.
Roccaro, P., F.A. Vagliasindi, and G.V. Korshin. 2009. Changes in NOM fluorescence caused by chlorination and
their associations with disinfection by-products formation. Environmental Science and Technology 43:724-
729.
Sakamoto, C.M., G.E. Friederich, and L.A. Codispoti (1990). MBARI procedures for automated nutrient analyses
using a modified Alpkem Series 300 Rapid Flow Analyzer. MBARI Technical Report 90-2
Saraceno, J., B.A. Pellerin, B.D. Downing, E. Boss, P.A.M. Bachand, and B.A. Bergamaschi, 2009, High
frequency in situ optical measurements during a storm event: assessing relationships between dissolved
organic matter, sediment concentrations and hydrologic processes. JGR-Biogeoscience.
doi: 10. 1029/2009JG000989
Schmidt, W., B. Hambsch, and H. Petzoldt. 1998. Classification of algogenic organic matter concerning its
contribution to the bacterial regrowth potential and by-products formation. Water Science and Technology
37:91-96.
Spencer, R.G.M., B.A. Pellerin, B.A. Bergamaschi, B.D. Downing, T.E.C. Kraus, D.R. Smart, R.A. Dahlgren,
and P.J. Hernes. 2007. Diurnal variability in riverine dissolved organic matter composition determined by in
situ optical measurement in the San Joaquin River (California, USA). Hydrological Processes 21:3181-3189.
Spencer, R.G.M., G. Aiken, K.D. Butller, M.M. Domblaser, R.G. Striegl, and P.J. Hernes. 2009. Utilizing
chromophoric dissolved organic matter measurements to derive export and reactivity of dissolved organic
carbon exported to the Arctic Ocean: A case study of the Yukon River, Alaska. Geophysical Research
Letters 36:L06401, doi:10.1029/2008GL036831.
23
Stedmon, C.A., S. Markager, and R. Bro. 2003. Tracing dissolved organic matter in aquatic environments using a
new approach to fluorescence spectroscopy. Marine Chemistry 82:239-254.
Stedmon, C.A., and R. Bro. 2008. Characterizing dissolved organic matter fluorescence with parallel factor
analysis: a tutorial. Limnology and Oceanography. 6:572-579.
Stepczuck, C., A.B. Martin, P. Longabucco, J.A. Bloomfield, and S.W. Effler. 1998a. Allocthonous contributions
of THM precursors to a eutrophic reservoir. Journal of Lake and Reservoir Management 14:344-355.
Stepczuck, C., A.B. Martin, S.W. Effler, J.A. Bloomfield, and M.T. Auer. 1998b. Spatial and temporal patterns of
THM precursors in a eutrophic reservoir. Journal of Lake and Reservoir Management 14:356-366.
Stepczuck, C., E.M. Owens, S.W. Effler, M.T. Auer, and J.A. Bloomfield. 1998c. A modeling analysis of THM
precursors for a eutrophic reservoir. Journal of Lake and Reservoir Management 14:367-378.
Waridlaw, V.E., R. Perrry, and N.J.D. Graham. 1991. The role of algae as trihalomethane precursors. J. Water
SRT - Aqua 40:335-345.
Weishaar, J.L., G.R. Aiken, B.A. Bergamaschi, M.S. Fram, R. Fujii, and K. Mopper. 2003. Evaluation of specific
ultraviolet absorbance as an indicator of the chemical composition and reactivity of dissolved organic carbon.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 37:4702-4708.
Zimmerman, C.F., Keefe, C.W., and Bashe, J., 1997, Determination of Carbon and Nitrogen in Sediments and
Particulates of Estuarine/Coastal Waters Using Elemental Analysis: USEPA Method 440.0, Revision 1.4,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, Ohio, 10 p.
24
Funding and Expenses
(CRW/LO Fiscal Year, July -June)
Funding'
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
Total
Clackamas River Water2
$62,916
$108,383
$85,629
$25,055
$281,983
City of Lake Oswe o
$2,727
$9,796
$7,986
$4,485
$24,994
USGS Oregon Water Science Center
$42,710
$73,100
$46,683
$25,821
$188,314
USGS California Water Science Center
$9,804
$13,769
$18,280
$2,017
$43,870
Total
$118,157
$205,048
$158,578
$57,378
$539,161
' Funding amounts subject to change pending availability of funds from all parties.
2 Clackamas River Water also is contributing an additional $18,017 in analytical costs for DBP analyses.
3 The City of Lake Oswego also is contributing an additional $3,500 in analytical costs for DBP analyses.
Funding and Expenses
(Federal Fiscal Year, October -September)
Funding'
Federal
FY 2010
Federal
FY 2011
Federal
FY 2012
Total
Clackamas River Water2
$118,387
$92,000
$71,596
$281,983
City of Lake Oswego'
$5,232
$10,221
$9,541
$24,994
USGS Oregon Water Science Center
$83,800
$54,664
$49,850
$188,314
USGS California Water Science Center
$17,065
$13,396
$13,409
$43,870
Total
$224,484
$170,281
$144,396
$539,161
' Funding amounts subject to change pending availability of funds from all parties.
2 Clackamas River Water also is contributing an additional $18,017 in analytical costs for DBP analyses.
3 The City of Lake Oswego also is contributing an additional $3,500 in analytical costs for DBP analyses.
Expenses - OR-WSC
Federal
FY 2010
Federal
FY 2011
Federal
FY 2012
Total
Salaries
$89,140
$90,021
$87,371
$266,532
Analytical
$19,480
$21,634
$0
$41,114
Supplies, Vehicles & Shipping
$58,980
$13,973
$2,730
$75,683
Report Layout/Publication
$0
$0
$9,599
$9,599
Total
$167,600
$125,628
$99,700
$392,928
Expenses - CA-WSC
Federal
FY 2010
Federal
FY 2011
Federal
FY 2012 Total
Salaries
$56,884
$44,653
$44,696 $146,233
Total
$56,884
$44,653
$44,696 $146,233
25
Project Schedule
Activity
2009 2010
J A S O N D J F M A M
J
Continuous FDOM Sensor
A
'X 'X X
X
Monthly Sampling of Fixed Sites
2X 2X 2X
2X 2X 2X 2X 2X 2X X X
X
Basin -wide Survey
A
3X
3X
Benthic Algal Survey
X
3X
3X
Targeted DBP Sources
X
X
X
1 FDOM sensor will be deployed in March or April 2010.
Z Monthly data collection prior to April 2010 provided by USGS diversity funding.
3 Four basin -wide and benthic algal surveys are planned during 2010. The timing will depend on stream conditions.
Activity
2010
2011
J
A
S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
J
Continuous FDOM Sensor
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Monthly Sampling of Fixed Sites
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Basin -wide Survey
'X
'X
North Fork Reservoir Sampling
X
X
1 Four basin -wide surveys are planned during CY 2010 (actual timing will depend on stream conditions).
Activity
2011 2012
J
A
S
O
N D J F M A M J
Continuous FDOM Sensor
X
X
X
Monthly Sampling of Fixed Sites
X
X
X
Data Analysis and Report Writing
X
X
X X X X X X
Report Draft to Peer Review
X X
Address Review Comments
X I X
2012
Activity J A I S
Report to Region for Approval X
Report to Publisher X X
Publication X
26
Project Management Plan, Personnel, and Facilities
Time
Persnnnel RnIP_ RPsnnnsihility (Hoursl 0 Time Data 0manization_ Contact Info
27
Principal
Project oversight
Mar 2010-
CRW, 503-722-9241
Gordon McGhee
Investigator
Review/submit periodic
Sept 2012
gmcghee@crwater.com
repo sReport review,
195
3
Supervisor/Lead
Quarterly Reviews, Field
Mar 2010-
USGS, 503-251-3215
Kurt Carpenter
Scientist
Sampling, Data analysis and
Sept 2012
kdcar@usgs.gov
Report writing1024
21
Jami Goldman
Lead
Field Sampling, Data analysis
Mar 2010-
USGS, 503-251-3505
Scientist/Researcher
and Report writing
1600
33
Sept 2012
Jgoldman@usgs.gov
Tamara Kraus
Soil Scientist
DBP -FP, Data analysis and
Mar 2010-
USGS, 916-278-3260
Report writing
720
15
Sept 2012
tkraus@usgs.gov
Bryan Downing
Hydrologist
FDOM Sensor, DBP -FP
Mar 2010-
USGS, 916-278-3292
48
1
Sept 2012
bdowning@usgs.gov
JohnFranco
Physical Science
FDOM Sensor Installation,
Mar 2010-
USGS, 916-278-3170
Saracen
Tech
Data analysis, Report writing
640
13
Sept 2012
saraceno@usgs.gov
Kathryn Crepeau
Physical Science
DBP -FP Laboratory Analysis
Mar 2010-
USGS, CA-WSC
Tech
224
5
Sept 2012
kcrepeau@usgs.gov
Mike Avery
Jar Test Analysis
Test Results
Mar 2010-
CRW, 503-722-9277
15
1
Sept 2011
mavery@crwater.com
NRP-Boulder
DOC Analysis
Test Results
Mar 2010-
USGS Boulder, CO
Sept 2011
Alexin
DBP Analysis
Test Results
Mar 2010-
Tigard, OR
Sept 2011
Joseph Needoba
Nutrient Analysis
Test Results
Mar 2010-
OGI, Beaverton, OR
Sept 2011
Total Particulate
Mar 2010-
NWQL
Carbon/Nitrogen
Test Results
Sept 2011
USGS, Denver, CO
Analyses
27
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Robyn Christie, City Recorder
City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes
DATE: June 10, 2010
ACTION
Approve minutes as written.
ATTACHMENTS
• January 23, 2010, goal setting (morning portion)
• April 6, 2010, regular meeting
Reviewed by:
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
N.3•
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
4,38,1
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
January 23, 2010
Morning Session
Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 8:15 a.m. on
January 23, 2010, at the Municipal Golf Course.
Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Jordan, Moncrieff, Olson,
and Tierney.
Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
City Recorder; Joe Hertzberg, Facilitator; Jordan Wheeler, Management
Analyst; Ursula Euler, Finance Director
• Individual Goals
After reviewing the agenda, Mr. Hertzberg asked what each Councilor's individual goals were for
2010.
Councilor Olson indicated that she would like to see the Council reach a positive and equitable
resolution to the sensitive lands issue and complete a number of projects, such as infill and Phase
2 of Boones Ferry Road.
Councilor Moncrieff said that she was looking forward to continued improvement in the City's
customer service in all departments, as she heard many compliments from the citizens about how
it has improved in the last year. She spoke of the Council developing a roadmap for dealing with
all City facilities. She indicated that she intended to keep at the top of everyone's mind the need
for continued improvement in the City and its assets in order to attract young families and young
professionals to Lake Oswego as part of keeping Lake Oswego a vital and energetic city.
Councilor Jordan commented that she was looking forward to the City using the100th anniversary
as a way to attract more people with the message that Lake Oswego was a great place where one
could live and work in the same place. She concurred with comments regarding the Council
finishing some projects and moving forward on others. She mentioned that she intended to make
sure that the streetcar and the things associated with it kept moving along, as well as looking at
zoning opportunities in the Westside light industrial area and other means to keep Lake Grove
moving forward.
Councilor Johnson expressed her interest that the Council goals be on the right track, and that
the City encourage young professionals and young families to move to Lake Oswego. She
mentioned pursuing opportunities for diverse housing stock to put more on the market for young
professionals, young families, and seniors.
Mayor Hoffman mentioned his expectation that the City's excellent staff, led by Mr. McIntyre,
would successfully implement new programs, such as economic development, and manage the
City's assets. He spoke of using the Centennial Celebration as an opportunity for constructive and
non-partisan dialog in the community regarding moving the community forward in a unified fashion.
He said that, as Mayor, he intended to reach out more to groups in the community and outside the
community that the Council did not normally reach out to, including government delegations. He
spoke of establishing helpful networks with other mayors in the region.
Councilor Hennagin indicated that he was looking forward to the Lake Oswego Reads program
and associated events in February, as well as the Centennial Celebration events and how the
Celebration connected with other annual events, such as the Festival of the Arts. He spoke of the
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
Council making some headway on attainable housing, developing a final plan and financing for the
West End Building, and making progress on other Council projects.
Councilor Tierney mentioned the challenges facing the City and the Council with respect to the
water partnership. He cited the watershed and maintenance of all facilities as critical goals for
moving forward. He indicated that he was looking forward to the Centennial Celebration. He
talked of a goal as a Councilor of moving through the different component pieces of a visioning
process in deciding where the community was going.
Mr. Powell indicated that he liked the convergence of the visioning components and the
opportunities to re-examine how the City offered its services. Ms. Christie commented that she
looked forward to the Centennial year and the community coming together to celebrate, as well as
to working with the new staff members.
• West End Building (WEB)
Mr. McIntyre reminded the Council that it directed him through the Facilities strategy to return this
May with a financing strategy that shifted the debt burden of the WEB from the general fund to
another source, and to program the WEB. He indicated that the financing strategy would almost
certainly be voter -approved GO bonds. He mentioned the alternative discussed last December of
a permanent refinancing using the good faith and credit of the City's general fund, which he noted
was inconsistent with the Council direction on a financing strategy.
Mr. Hertzberg observed that this was staff's assumption starting out. He asked if the Council
wanted to change it. Councilor Tierney indicated that staff should bring back as many options as
possible.
Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Hennagin that he has already hired a space planner to figure
out how to locate Public Works, Building, and Planning at the WEB. Councilor Hennagin spoke
to doing a master plan that looked at moving all City Hall functions to the WEB, including possibly
building a 9-1-1 dispatch center on site. He expressed concern that moving functions out there
little by little could foreclose options.
Mr. McIntyre explained that the idea was to move staff to an upper floor of the WEB on an interim
basis and keep the other floor available for the LOIS and water project contractors, as well as other
uses. He mentioned that, in light of another strategy discussed by Council of keeping City Hall in
the downtown and the lack of firm direction to move City Hall to the WEB, he had not wanted to
spend his limited resources on a plan to do something that the Council had not told him to do. He
acknowledged that the WEB strategy was imperfect but it did give him some direction to move
forward. He commented that the Council could revisit its strategy once staff presented the
financing strategy in May.
Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Olson that moving the Economic Development Department
into a 900 square foot leased space with a 12 -month lease in the downtown was a matter of timing.
He pointed out that it was likely that whatever steps the City took with respect to the City Hall
building would take at least a year, and, in the meantime, he needed more space in City Hall.
He indicated to Councilor Johnson that he could not move the City Hall Third Floor to the WEB
quickly enough, given the logistics of doing so. He explained that he wanted to leave the
Economic Development Department in the downtown because their work focused on the
downtown, and because it would set up a professional environment reflecting the image that the
City wanted to project with respect to economic development and redevelopment. He noted that
LORA would pay half the lease.
Councilor Olson asked to see specific goals this year, one saying that the Council would put out a
GO bond for the WEB this year (as part of the trust in government message), and another around
the police/9-1-1/maintenance services.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
Councilor Moncrieff commented that she supported the strategy. She indicated that, while she
also supported a GO bond, she wanted to take the time to do proper public engagement, and not
rush into it.
Mayor Hoffman concurred with the proposed WEB strategy and Councilor Moncrieff's comments.
He referenced an e-mail that the Council received from Steve Dodds (Parks & Rec Advisory Board)
asking the Council to start thinking of the WEB campus of 14 acres, as opposed to the WEB
building.
Councilor Jordan commented that, while she had no problem with the assumption, she would like
to know what was a trigger point for the bond rating companies to look at how much the City was
borrowing against full faith and credit.
Mr. McIntyre indicated that early March was the soonest that staff could reasonably pull together
the WEB financing strategy. He commented that staff would do so because of the current
favorable borrowing market, should the Council chose to do a more traditional mortgage on the
WEB.
Mayor Hoffman commented that he did not want to move the City Hall out of the downtown.
Councilor Tierney concurred, but observed that wanting something did not mean he would get it.
• Streets & Pathways
Mr. McIntyre recalled that, in December 2008, the previous Council decided to seek more
information from staff regarding the need to invest more money in streets and pathways. He
mentioned the prior Council's decision to lower the target Pavement Condition Index (PCI) from 80
to 70 rather than triple the street maintenance fee. He spoke of this Council's request that staff
discuss the impacts of doubling the fee with the business community, and determine whether the
City was sending a mixed message with doubling the fee to improve the road system and
encouraging economic development.
He summarized the issue as what kind of investment did the Council want to make in the City's
street and road system, while recognizing the continued system degradation due to insufficient
monies received. He recalled the interest of Councilors on this Council in allocating a portion of
the street maintenance fee to pathways. He explained that the City could legally use some of the
fee to make certain public improvements on the pathway, yet every dollar shifted away from
asphalt contributed to the further decline in the asset of the City street system.
He referenced the budget principle of building a budget based on the existing fee structure and
taxes; the street maintenance fee has not changed from last year. He indicated that he would
invest the $1.2 million in asphalt, as well as the additional $300,000 in motor vehicle fee revenues.
He acknowledged to Councilor Jordan that the Council did agree to a 6.6% increase based on
the index used by the City.
Councilor Jordan asked whether there was a question about using the $300,000 for pathways or
to offset raising the street maintenance fee. Mr. McIntyre indicated that the street maintenance
fee issue was an unresolved issue.
Councilor Moncrieff commented that the Council would know for sure what to do with the street
maintenance fee following the upcoming public hearing. She stated her commitment to bringing
the PCI back up to 70, as she has noticed a steady decline in the quality of roads. She indicated
her willingness to look at any additional tax revenue money that would allow a two-year gradual
slide into increasing the street maintenance fee.
Mr. Wheeler indicated to Councilor Tierney that the motor vehicle fee revenues were restricted to
transportation. Councilor Tierney pointed out that the City did allocate funds from other sources
than the street maintenance fee to the street system, including the PGE franchise fee.
Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the information that staff would present to the
Council at the public hearing would include all available funding sources. Mr. Wheeler clarified
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
that the $300,000 and the PGE franchise fee went to pay for street programs other than pavement
preservation, such as street trees, street sweeping, engineering, and street design work. However,
over the past several years, the revenues from the gas tax have decreased to the point where staff
had to supplement the street fund in the last biennium with general fund dollars in order to pay for
those operations.
Mayor Hoffman argued that it was imperative to keep the streets at the appropriate PCI level.
Therefore, he wanted to move forward with a street maintenance fee increase in order to make
sure that the infrastructure was what it needed to be. He mentioned the other issue of whether to
use part of the street maintenance fee or other fees on maintaining the City's right-of-ways. He
described the right-of-ways as the community's living rooms that welcomed people to town.
Councilor Jordan commented that there might be tradeoffs in diverting money from the other
street programs for a couple of years and getting the streets back in shape. Councilor Olson
concurred that perhaps the City should make a concerted effort and divert the money for a couple
of years towards the goal of fixing the streets.
• Property Tax Rate
Mr. Hertzberg mentioned that the budget assumption was that the property tax rate would remain
flat. He recalled Councilor Olson and others suggesting possibly lowering the rate.
Ms. Euler clarified to the Council that the assessed property value increased by 3% a year, but the
property tax rate remained the same. Mr. McIntyre indicated that the tax or millage rate was
currently $4.97 per $1,000 of assessed value; the City had the capacity to tax at a rate of $5.03 per
$1,000 of assessed value. He noted that the Council has never opted to increase the rate nor has
staff ever recommended doing so.
Mr. McIntyre recalled that, shortly after the election, he talked the Mayor out of lowering the
property tax rate for several reasons. First, the City lived on the property tax money; it paid its day-
to-day bills for providing the services that the residents have come to expect out of that money.
Therefore, if the City lowered the property tax rate, it would probably have to increase a rate
somewhere else to compensate.
He pointed out that, while cutting the rate by a few percentage points would be politically symbolic,
it would take cutting the rate in half to give the citizens some real savings. He commented that if
the Council decided to cut the rate by just a few percentage points, and not authorize an increase
in other fees or use of the reserves, then he would have to cut services. He emphasized that this
was a political discussion for the Council; if it decided to cut the rate, then the members needed the
political courage to cut services and personnel as well. He stated his candid opinion that that was
a poor way to run an organization.
Mr. Hertzberg noted that the budget question was whether Mr. McIntyre should assume that the
tax rate would remain the same.
Councilor Jordan spoke in support of keeping the tax rate the same. She commented that even if
the Council cut the tax rate by some small percentage, the taxpayers would likely not notice a $22
decrease in their property tax because the overall tax bill would likely increase. However, by doing
so, the City would cut its ability to provide services. She indicated that she saw little benefit to the
citizens in this strategy. She argued that this tax practice would hurt the City in the long run.
Councilor Olson discussed her concern that all the Council has done in the last year has been to
raise fees — sewer rates, water rates, and a potentially doubled street maintenance fee. She
argued that, no matter how much attainable housing they built, if those on fixed incomes could not
pay their fees and taxes, then they could not afford to live in Lake Oswego.
Councilor Moncrieff concurred with keeping the same rate because the Council needed to
maintain the quality of the city, and that cost money. She pointed out that the Council was raising
infrastructure fees because past Councils have not raised the fees to keep up with the cost of
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
maintaining the City's existing infrastructure. She cited Mr. Wheeler's comparison of surrounding
cities that showed that, while Lake Oswego considered itself the "top of the top," her residents
were not paying "top of the top" rates. She argued that it was only fair that she be willing to pay to
continue the amenities that drew young families to her neighborhood, and which those young
families and young professionals expected and were willing to pay for.
Councilor Johnson mentioned discussing with Mayor Hoffman yesterday the idea of decreasing
the property tax rate. She commented that doing so would have only reduced her property tax bill
by $20. She held that it was politically disingenuous to reduce property taxes by $20, then raise
fees everywhere else, and ask voters to support a bond measure. She argued that a more
effective use of the $750,000 would be to put it in reserves or use it to balance the budget. She
spoke of the importance of the Council serving as good financial stewards and maintaining City
services and property values.
She observed that Lake Oswego would never have attainable/affordable housing as cheap as
other cities in the region. She argued that where Lake Oswego could compete was by having a
great community that offered services to the citizens. She held that offering amenities made
people want to live here and pay a bit more.
Councilor Hennagin commented that he was sympathetic to Councilor Olson's comments, as his
income would be decreasing soon and he did not know whether he would be able to afford to live
here with the way that costs were going up. He described lowering the tax rate as just a drop in
the bucket.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that he too sympathized with Councilor Olson's comments. He
mentioned that he did not see this as a conservative or liberal issue. He asked how much
Councilor Olson would like to reduce the tax rate. Councilor Olson said that she had been
thinking of the 15 -cent range. Ms. Euler indicated that reducing the property tax by 1% (5 cents)
equaled $15 a year for an average house valued at $300,000, and reduced City revenues by
$245,000; 15 cents reduced City revenues by $750,000. Councilor Tierney questioned the
calculations, stating that he would see a $75 to $100 reduction on his property tax bill with a 5 -cent
decrease.
Councilor Olson commented that her larger goal was more about the Council's philosophy. She
agreed that citizens might not notice a property tax rate decrease with the increase in their other
fees. She said that, if the Council did not decrease the property tax rate, then she would like to
see the Council hold the line on something else, such as not doubling the street maintenance fee.
Mr. Hertzberg observed that this was an amazing conversation for a City Council to have.
However, the question before the Council was whether Mr. McIntyre's assumption in building his
budget was correct, that the property tax rate would remain the same.
Mr. McIntyre commented that he understood the pressure. He agreed with Councilor Johnson
that if people moved to Lake Oswego expecting a `glass dome level of service,' then the City
should provide that service level and structure the organization accordingly. He described the
City's fund structure as having a general fund and separate business enterprise funds for the
utilities.
He noted that DEQ strong-armed Lake Oswego into replacing its sewer system, and the Council
chose to undertake a $100 million project rather than fight DEQ. The Council next realized that it
made good business sense to partner with Tigard to upgrade the water system. The Council had
to increase utility rates to pay for these projects. He mentioned that the rates for the first tier of the
tiered water system actually went down, and most citizens on a fixed income would be in the first
tier. He also noted the possibility of creating utility rate breaks for those on fixed incomes.
He pointed out that all cities were having to adjust their fees to pay for replacing the systems that
the federal government put in place in the 1950s and 1960s. He mentioned that Lake Oswego was
ahead of all cities except Portland in rebuilding its sewer system. He characterized the Council's
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
decisions as sound investment strategies needed to keep the separate utility businesses
successful but which also recognized the impact on the citizen.
Councilor Moncrieff observed that the Council has not increased rates in a vacuum but always
compared itself with the surrounding municipalities. She mentioned that her City of Lake Oswego
utility bill, in comparison to her other utility bills, was the best deal she got every month. She stated
that she thought that the City was providing a sound service for its residents. She commented that
she felt a responsibility to those who moved here for the quality of life to maintain the property
values and services that they expected.
Councilor Tierney commented that one of the numerous variables he saw was the fact that the
current economy was the worst economic recession in their lifetimes with material impacts
everywhere, including the highest ever jobless rate. He pointed out that they were talking about
$750,000 out of a $50 million budget. He recalled that last year they cut $250,000 from the budget
with no material impact on the services provided. He mentioned his expectation that staff was
conducting the internal reviews of efficiency and effectiveness of services called for in Council
policy. He stated that he thought that Mr. McIntyre was doing a good job of controlling things.
He commented that, having the philosophy of keeping services high, they did not ask themselves
the critical question of what were the services that the City was providing. He indicated that, while
he wanted to deliver expected services, from a business standpoint he did not see why the City's
budget could not remain flat at $50 million year to year. He questioned why they needed the 3%
more, pointing out that few, if any, businesses increased their expenditures by 3% last year.
Councilor Jordan observed that those who paid for a service they were no longer using, such as
seniors paying the street maintenance fee but having no car, might use other City services that
those using the streets did not use, such as meals and transportation provided by the Adult
Community Center. She noted that the fees were supposed to go to a dedicated fund for a
dedicated purpose.
She agreed with Councilor Tierney that the Council needed a better understanding of the services
offered. She suggested that the Council review in depth two departments annually, looking at the
services offered and whether those services were still needed. She suggested also informing the
citizens that they were getting a lot more for their tax bill than they realized.
Mayor Hoffman commented that he thought the policy issues raised by Councilors Olson and
Tierney were resolvable, although not today. He indicated that he did not know whether Councilor
Tierney's challenge to Mr. McIntyre that he could cut $250,000 or some number from the budget
and still not cut services was possible. He wondered whether the City finding a creative way to
deal with the fees and rates concerns of those on fixed incomes would address Councilor Olson's
concerns. He posed the question of how to reduce the cost of living in a high-class city.
He mentioned hearing, in his discussions with other mayors that those with millage rates around
the same level as Lake Oswego's were not facing police layoffs and cutting services, but those
with low millage rates were facing those issues. He commented that he trusted the City Manager,
who was telling him that such and such would happen if the City reduced the property tax rate by a
nickel. He said that he would like to keep the property tax rate as it was but he would also like to
address Councilor Olson's issues.
Councilor Olson indicated that, while those on fixed incomes were one of her concerns, her issue
was not that narrow. She mentioned that two high-income people on her block were laid off and
out of work for six months to a year, and that there were two foreclosures on her street. She
commented that, in what appeared to be the worst recession in their lifetimes, the citizens have
seen the Council increase the budget, hire a lobbyist, and hire three new people in the City
Manager's Office.
She spoke of determining whether something was a `nice to have' or a `needs must have.' She
clarified that she was not saying that they should not maintain the City's high quality infrastructure,
but she did think that they could look around the margins for programs that were `nice to haves' but
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
not necessary. She mentioned that having the Finance Department at a 100% staffing level in
order to provide the Council with the numbers it needed was a must have.
Mr. Hertzberg noted that the Council direction to staff was to stay with the existing property tax
rate.
Mr. Hertzberg recessed the meeting at 9:38 a.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 9:45
a. m.
• Budget Committee
Mr. Hertzberg directed the discussion to what were the Council's expectations of the Budget
Committee.
Mr. McIntyre commented that one of the goals for moving forward with the budget process
involved having clear expectations and procedures, including the Council's approval of guiding
principles for staff budget building. He posed two questions to the Council: what role would the
Budget Committee play on the Council's behalf as a City Council, and could they structure a
process to move through the budget deliberations more quickly than the 25 hours spent last year
on it.
Mr. Wheeler discussed his memo on the budget process. He reviewed the legal requirements for
a budget committee. He noted the preliminary calendar developed by staff to hold three Budget
Committee meetings, beginning in April.
Councilor Johnson stated for the record that they should do the work in two meetings. She
suggested eliminating the long reports by the department heads by providing the Committee with
the financial information ahead of time, and just jumping directly into the sensitive budget issues at
the meetings.
Councilor Tierney suggested first figuring out what needed to be done before setting the number
of meetings. He agreed that a lot of the conversation last year had been unnecessary, as much of
that information had been in the reports.
Councilor Jordan commented that not receiving the budget documents sufficiently ahead of time
last year pushed the Committee into two unnecessary meetings. She asked to receive those
documents a week or two before the first meeting in April. She suggested making the guiding
principles for staff clear to the citizen members of the Budget Committee so that they understood
what Council's direction to staff has been.
She expressed her concern regarding the assumption that the City would always receive a little
more money every year. She recalled Mr. McIntyre's information that the department heads would
have to revise their budgets because the department budgets have already come in higher than
the projected revenues. She mentioned the assumptions the Council has made about PERS. She
spoke to holding the budget flat and including in the budget documents justification for any
requests above a flat budget.
Councilor Johnson commented that another issue had been the staff building a budget around
current City services as well as ambiguous and ambitious Council goals that did not address
budget issues. She speculated that the Committee would operate more efficiently this year
because the Council has considered its goals in light of the budget.
Mayor Hoffman noted that, per State statute, the City Council had the responsibility to adopt a
budget presented to it by the Council's charter officer, following Council input. He acknowledged
that the Budget Committee reviewed and analyzed that budget and made a recommendation, but
pointed out that the Council had the final say. He commented that the interest of individual
Committee members in a variety of budget details drove the length of the meetings last year. He
indicated that he was comfortable with three Budget Committee meetings, but he would not limit
the number of meetings that the Council needed in making its decision.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
Councilor Tierney commented that he was hearing that the Budget Committee was important yet
it had a very limited role. Councilor Olson concurred. Councilor Tierney asked what role the
Committee had. Mr. Wheeler mentioned that public involvement was a significant part of the legal
requirements in Oregon budget law.
Mayor Hoffman argued that the state statute, by identifying the elected officials as responsible for
adopting the budget, set the Budget Committee as a mechanism for public involvement. He held
that the statute did not contemplate the Budget Committee making the decision and the Council
rubber-stamping it. He emphasized that the Council could not defer the decision-making to the
Budget Committee; the elected officials had the responsibility to make an independent decision,
albeit with input from the Budget Committee.
Councilor Tierney commented that he found the state statute odd, and he wanted to make sure
that the Council was using the Budget Committee consistently with the statute.
Mr. McIntyre described last year's budget process as a disaster, which he did not wish to repeat.
He spoke of finding a more efficient and less expensive and time-consuming way to get through
the budget process, as he paid overtime to his budget analyst to attend the meetings. He asked
whether the Council wanted to grind through the budget or go through a process.
He expressed his hope that, by using the budget guiding principles, he could present either a
balanced budget or a budget that was balanced because staff made modifications in the margins,
as Councilor Tierney suggested. He framed the question as did the Committee agree with the
modifications, and not whether they should get into a policy detail level at the Committee level that
better belonged at the Council level.
Councilor Olson commented that she heard Councilor Tierney asking how staff could state the
number of meetings needed before figuring out what the Committee would do. She agreed that
fewer meetings would be great, but argued that they needed to come out with a good product. She
indicated that she would like the Budget Committee to have more involvement than serving as a
rubber stamp or having limited engagement. She suggested defining what they needed to
accomplish and how they would do that rather than establishing the number of meetings.
Mr. Hertzberg asked what contribution the Council expected from the Budget Committee.
Councilor Johnson described setting two or three meetings as a goal in working towards more
efficient meetings. She agreed that they needed clear objectives. She mentioned discussing the
question of the role of the Budget Committee while taking a budgeting class. She recalled that the
Council, in interviewing Budget Committee candidates, looked for people with a financial
background who understood the budgeting process and who could serve as a second set of eyes
in looking at this material. She argued that the Committee's job was to help the Council look
through the budget document and understand it, yet, at the end of the day, the Council's role, per
the state statute (a role with greater public accountability), was to make the policy decision.
Councilor Hennagin suggested structuring the three meetings by assigning tasks to them, such
department budgets presentation, public input, and Committee debate. Mr. Wheeler mentioned
that staff has developed a rough sketch on how the three meetings might go and achieve the
legally required elements, especially with delivering the materials a week or two in advance. He
commented that using a department -by -department process with public input would take a couple
of months to get through.
Councilor Jordan commented that she appreciated having a target number of meetings. She
pointed out that there was nothing stopping the Council from adding meetings if the Committee did
not finish the discussion in three meetings. She mentioned that she saw the role of the citizen
members of the Committee as a check on her, to make sure that she was doing what the rest of
the city really wanted her to do, or whether a Council goal was necessary right now. She indicated
that she would have appreciated the Budget Committee members saying that, while something
was a good goal, the City did not have the money right now and the Council should set that goal
aside. She commented that she would prefer the Budget Committee challenging the Council as
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
elected officials to represent what the citizens wanted the Council to spend money on, rather than
what the City Manager's budget presented.
Mayor Hoffman agreed that the three meetings were simply a target. He mentioned his
understanding that yesterday the Council made policy decisions to move ahead on the long-term
streetcar goal by investing $1 million in the streetcar/Foothills project. He commented that he did
not think that it was the Budget Committee's responsibility or role to second-guess Council policy
decisions. He described the process as the Council set the policy direction, the City Manager
prepared a budget reflecting the agreed upon principles, and presented it to the Budget
Committee. He stated that the Budget Committee was appointed to assist the Council.
He mentioned the added values that the Budget Committee brought to the process: perspective,
financial expertise, financial assistance, financial accounting expertise and advice, another set of
ideas, consultation, and input. He commented that the Budget Committee added transparency to
the process as well as public input. He indicated that, while he did not expect the Budget
Committee to rubber stamp the budget, neither did he expect it to discuss policy issues.
Councilor Tierney suggested communicating to the Budget Committee two things: the budget
document itself and the principles that drove its creation. He described Council's work yesterday
as not setting policy but rather as giving direction to Mr. McIntyre to bring back a budget that
incorporated the principles. He argued that the Budget Committee had a responsibility to advise
the Council on whether the level of expenditures and revenues in the budget document achieved
the expected service levels and Council goals of this local government. He commented that the
question was what the City could afford.
He observed that the Budget Committee, within the realm of the members' expertise, needed to
have an understanding and comfort level with the budget before the members could give the
Council advice. He commented that he did not know how much time that would take, but he did
think that the Council's process today brought the Council closer to where the Budget Committee
would want the Council to be. He mentioned that he did not consider the Council goals sacrosanct
but rather subject to adjustments and modification. He remarked that, with the requirement for
public engagement, the Council needed to weigh what the public said.
Councilor Olson asked to set up a fourth meeting time as a precaution, should it be needed. She
indicated that she disagreed with Councilor Jordan, in that she thought that the Budget Committee
did challenge the Council on many points last year, including the $900,000 for the library. She
mentioned her understanding that the Council was not setting policy or making any firm decisions
either yesterday or today, but rather giving direction.
Mayor Hoffman recalled that yesterday the Council reached agreement regarding the principle
about the general fund reserves, although it did not take a formal vote.
Mr. Hertzberg clarified that this was not the forum for the Council to set policy; it needed to do so
in using the normal Council procedure at a normal business meeting. He confirmed that this was
all direction to the City Manager for preparing the budget. He observed that this Council
discussion vetted the issues thoroughly, and likely, the Council could take formal action without
revisiting the discussion again. Mr. McIntyre confirmed that Mr. Hertzberg was correct, as staff
would bring back the Council goals, including a goal of using the budget principles, to a regular
business meeting, at which time the public could weigh in on the principles.
Mr. Hertzberg commented that he heard agreement on certain principles and policies, which the
Council would formalize and the Budget Committee would not revisit. He mentioned the hope to
move through the process as expeditiously as possible, but taking as many meetings as needed
and scheduling a fourth meeting as a precaution.
Mr. Hertzberg recessed the meeting at 10:26 a.m. He reconvened the meeting at 10:57 a.m.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
• Boards & Commissions
Mayor Hoffman mentioned that he has not yet gone through the answers to the e-mail he sent out
asking the Councilors for input on the Council liaison assignments.
Mr. Hertzberg pointed out that all the Boards and Commissions, with the exception of the Planning
Commission and the Development Review Commission, existed because the Council had a
purpose for them, and not because it was nice to have them. He spoke of the importance of clear
expectations and clear communications. He mentioned that the problems he has seen in other
jurisdictions having problems with their Boards and Commissions almost invariably came from
different expectations.
Mr. McIntyre concurred with Mr. Hertzberg. He commented that he too has seen Councils appoint
people to a Board or Commission only to see the Board go one way and the Council another,
leaving the Council to wonder what was going on. He stated that Boards and Commissions were
only as good as the people that the Council assigned to them. He said that if a Council did not
give direction and a mission to its Boards and Commissions, it was not then surprising that they
created their own work.
He described Boards and Commissions as tools for the Council to use to be able to make really
good decisions. He indicated that the theory was that the Boards and Commission would
thoroughly vet issues on which they had technical expertise and make a recommendation to the
Council, with the Council making the final decision. He stated clearly that the Boards and
Commissions did not work for staff; they worked for the Council.
Councilor Hennagin commented that, while the Council heard the Board and Commission annual
reports, it seldom critically or analytically addressed what they did. Mr. Hertzberg stated that it
was the Council's responsibility to be clear on the mission statement and the Boards on their goals.
Councilor Moncrieff mentioned that she read through the Boards and Commissions book
provided to the Council. She suggested that the Council liaisons sit down with the Board chair to
review the purpose statement and clarify how communications would work. She recalled the
comments heard at the Round Table that the Boards were disappointed in the communications
coming from the Council. She spoke of establishing a chain of communication and who was
responsible for what.
She indicated to Councilor Hennagin that she did not feel that she had the capacity, as Council
liaison to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), to communicate with the Board every
week about whether there was something on an upcoming Council agenda that the Board might
want to weigh in on. She asked for clarification on the Council's method of communication. She
spoke of setting expectations appropriately and setting the roles and methods of communication,
which the Council liaison would then communicate to the Board.
Councilor Hennagin indicated that, as a liaison, he has felt that he has communicated to the
Council on behalf of the Board what the Board was doing, but not the reverse.
Councilor Olson indicated that she saw the role of the Council liaison as a two-way street, which
might reflect the nature of the Boards with which she worked. She said that she did tell her Boards
(Transportation Advisory Board and Natural Resources Advisory Board) what the Council was
talking about and suggested Board discussion on issues on which the Board could advise the
Council.
Councilor Jordan described the Council's inconsistent philosophy in the past with respect to
appointing Board and Commission members. She recalled that sometimes Councilors did not fill
vacant Board positions, even if more than enough people applied, if they did not feel that the
applicants were the right people. In contrast, if a Board was in danger of losing a quorum, the
Council appointed members, even if an insufficient number of people applied. She spoke to the
Council deciding on what its philosophy was with respect to selecting Boards and Commission
members and translating that into the interview/selection process.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
She recalled a Board member who resigned because the Council did not fund his/her pet project.
She urged caution by the Council in making sure that the Boards and Commissions understood
how their expectations fit in with the Council's budgeting priorities. She mentioned that she too has
found her role as liaison to be a two way street, similar to Councilor Olson's description.
She recalled an instance, when she served on the Traffic Advisory Board, when the Council did not
take the Board's advice regarding setting up a school zone at Lake Oswego High School, and later
found itself embarrassed in having to set one up anyway because a child was hit. She commented
that she saw many different places where the Boards and Commissions could support the Council.
Mayor Hoffman spoke of setting a goal that a Council liaison attend his/her Board or Commission
meeting. He described the liaison's job as making sure that the Board or Commission's work was
consistent with what the Council was doing, and that the members were not off on their own
mission. He indicated that the liaison should keep the Council and Mr. McIntyre informed as
needed. He cautioned against using a Board or Commission to further a Councilor's personal
political agenda, as had occurred in the past before he was on Council.
Councilor Tierney observed that appointing the right members was something under the Council's
control. He commented that apparently a once a year report from the Boards and Commissions
was insufficient, or the Council would not be having this problem. Mr. McIntyre concurred. He
suggested that the Council affirm the Board and Commission mission statements annually and
indicate to the Board where their goals or work plan needed tweaking to remain consistent with the
work that the Council wanted them to do. Councilor Hennagin suggested spreading out the
meetings on a monthly basis, as opposed to one annual meeting for everyone.
Councilor Tierney mentioned a policy issue on institutional land use that percolated up,
consuming much staff and Planning Commission time, before coming to Council for a decision. He
wondered whether policy questions should be asked and answered at the policy level before staff
and the Planning Commission devoted time to it.
Mr. McIntyre commented that the ideal method was for the Council to set policy first and then ask
the Planning Commission to work through the issue and bring it back to Council for a decision. He
pointed out that the Planning Commission was a unique Commission in having a statutory authority
that other Boards lacked, and in using a lot of staff resources. He mentioned that he would like to
streamline and clarify the Council and Planning Commission roles. He noted that unfortunately, it
could take so long for the Commission to work through the policy, that sometimes a new Council
ended up adopting a prior Council's policy objective.
Councilor Olson spoke of the Council making better use of the expertise on the Boards. She
commented that, just as the Council needed to be careful about Board members attempting to
further their personal agendas, so too did the Council need to be careful about staff using Boards
to further their agendas and expectations. She discussed enforcing the meeting attendance
criteria, citing the example of a recently appointed Planning Commissioner who has missed
numerous meetings. She argued that if people were not willing to put in the time, then the Council
needed to appoint new people to do the job.
She clarified to Mayor Hoffman that she did not say that staff was using boards to further their
own agendas but rather that the Council needed to be careful about Councilors, citizen members,
and staff not doing that. Councilor Hennagin commented that it was a given that a staff person
would influence a board along the line of the projects that the staff person preferred addressing, as
did Councilors. Councilor Olson concurred.
Councilor Tierney confirmed to Councilor Hennagin that he was suggesting that the Council
could have saved a lot of staff time and energy if staff had first asked the Council to set the policy
on the institutional land use question. Mr. McIntyre pointed out that the problem was that the
Council could not set policy without a public hearing. The staff had to do the work anyway in order
to provide the Council with sufficient and appropriate information to make a policy decision.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
Mayor Hoffman agreed with Councilor Tierney that, generally, if the Planning Commission
wanted to go in a certain direction on their own, the members should check in with the Council
liaison. However, if an applicant requested a zone change and paid the fee, then the Commission
had no choice put to consider the matter before making a recommendation to the Council.
Mr. Powell commented that he saw the process often as a two-way street. Sometimes the Council
set the policy first, but other times the Council wanted the Planning Commission to vet an issue
fully before sending it up to the Council, which reduced the Council time spent on major planning
issues.
The Council discussed how to avoid conflicts between the Council and Board/Commission
meeting schedules. Councilor Moncrieff pointed out that the Council had every first and fourth
Wednesday open.
The Council discussed the communication process. Councilor Jordan suggested doing informal
dinner meetings and discussion with individual Boards before the regular meeting, as she found
that format more helpful than listening to an end -of -the -year report. Councilor Johnson
concurred. Councilor Hennagin concurred also, provided that there was an official record of the
meeting.
Councilor Moncrieff mentioned the direction in the Council handbook that a Council liaison not
speak on behalf of the Council at a Board or Commission meeting unless the Council as a whole
gave direction to do so. Councilor Johnson suggested that the Council ask specific questions of
the Boards and Commissions. Councilor Olson concurred.
Mr. Hertzberg asked what the Council needed to do to develop a process for clear
communications. Mayor Hoffman spoke of appointing liaisons and making sure that an applicant
could attend the meetings. He indicated that he and staff would develop a plan on how to
communicate with the Boards and Commissions, such as meeting for dinner or the Council liaison
reporting to the Council every two months.
• Council Process and Procedures
• Council oversight on work in progress, goals, budgets: level of detail, reporting tools
Mr. Hertzberg asked how the Council wanted to receive reports. Councilor Tierney spoke of
periodic and regular written reports of what was happening on the staff level. Mayor Hoffman
indicated that he liked the short e-mails format used by Mr. Galante in keeping him informed on
Millennium Plaza and other LORA projects.
Mr. McIntyre encouraged the Council members to go directly to staff with questions. He
commented that rarely was a Council question innocuous. Council questions had staff priority and
could take time to provide accurate information, including anticipating follow-up questions. He
explained that the issue for him was how to get the information to the Council members in the most
efficient, practical and meaningful way. He mentioned the one-on-one meetings he held quarterly
with each Council member. He suggested possibly asking questions at the end of a Council
meeting, because staff could then get the answer in the Thursday Digest.
Councilor Johnson indicated that she liked the idea of asking questions at the end of a Tuesday
business meeting. She commented that it was good for the Council members to hear all the
questions asked of staff, as that could avoid duplicate questions and staff research.
Councilor Hennagin commented that, while it was essential that staff notify the Council right away
if a project went off track, if everything was on track then the six-month progress reports that
Councilor Tierney spoke of were fine. He asked that staff list in the staff report all the possible
options for Council consideration. He questioned whether they needed the detailed minutes, given
that courts now kept only audio recordings of court proceedings and provided a transcript only if
paid for.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
Councilor Johnson commented that she did not want every option listed in reports because some
of them were a waste of time. Councilor Olson wondered whether Councilor Hennagin felt that
staff was steering the Council too much. She acknowledged that staff made a recommendation,
but argued that that was different than providing other options for consideration, even if the staff
did not recommend them.
Mr. McIntyre commented that there might be a philosophical difference involved, as he thought
that he and the professional staff were hired to use their expertise to help guide the Council on
what the best option was. He concurred with Councilor Jordan that staff did provide other viable
options for Council consideration.
Councilor Jordan commented that she did not want to see every option under the sun but she
expected the professional staff to have considered all options and to be prepared to explain why
they did not recommend a given option. She spoke to the Council giving staff the right direction.
She cited the example of the landscaped medians that were supposed to be `green' but turned out,
after the project completion and spending of all the money, to lack appropriate storm water
drainage. She indicated that she would like to receive monthly status reports on the progress of
items approved by the Council.
Mayor Hoffman agreed that progress reports would be helpful. He commented that he looked to
the City Manager and staff for advice and counsel, as they were hired to guide the Council, provide
information, and give their best professional advice. Councilor Moncrieff concurred with the
Mayor, commenting that the Council did not rubber stamp anything. Councilor Tierney concurred.
• Optimal and maximum frequency of meetings
• Length of meetings
• Start time for meetings and study sessions
The Council agreed on the regular weekly Tuesday meeting, with a Wednesday alternate if
needed, starting at 6:30 p.m. It set 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. as a dinner study session or executive
session before the regular Council meeting, held in the Municipal Courtroom. The Council
decided not to televise the dinner meetings.
• Cut-off time for decisions
• End time
The Council agreed that all votes should be taken by 10 p.m., unless there was a compelling
reason to go later, such as a land use decision involving the 120 -day clock.
• Ideas for moving more quickly and smoothly: agenda management
• Times for agenda items
Councilor Johnson suggested following parliamentary procedure and Roberts' Rules of Order as
a means of managing the meetings. She mentioned in particular discussing a motion, as opposed
to discussing the staff information and then making a motion for a vote. The Council agreed by
consensus.
Ms. Christie noted that she has started setting time lengths for agenda items. Mayor Hoffman
spoke to Council members exercising self-control in how long they spoke. He and Council
President Johnson agreed to serve as `referees', per Councilors Olson and Moncrieff s
suggestions, to keep the discussion on track.
The Council discussed Councilor Hennagin's suggestion of scheduling the presentations and
awards later in the meeting. Mr. McIntyre mentioned another option of spreading the awards out
to more meetings.
Mr. McIntyre asked for clarification on whether the Council decision not to make decisions after 10
p.m. meant that it would cut off the agenda at that point and stop the meeting. He noted that he
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 15
January 23, 2010 — Morning Session
was paying hourly staff members time and a half to attend these meetings. The Council
discussed the question.
Mr. Hertzberg described the Council direction as staff structuring the agenda to put anything
requiring a Council decision early enough in the meeting to avoid the 10 p.m. cut off time; the only
exception was for land use hearings, for which Council would use its discretion if the hearing went
beyond 10 p.m. and it had to make a decision that night. The Council could also hear items after
10 p.m. that did not require a decision.
Mayor Hoffman pointed out that clarification questions of staff delayed the meetings. He recalled
that previous Councils used the Tuesday morning meetings for those clarification questions. He
mentioned that other Councils had clarification sessions about a topic right before the regular
meeting.
Mr. McIntyre observed that the cameras created a longer meeting, which fact they all needed to
acknowledge. He gave an example of pulling something off the Consent Agenda to inform the
viewing public about it. He commented that doing so assumed that the public was watching and
that there was no other venue for communicating that information to the public. He pointed out that
Christine Kirk, Public Affairs Manager, could put out messages to the public.
Councilor Olson commented that she saw a benefit to asking clarification questions on camera
because if she needed clarification on an issue, then likely others did too.
Councilor Jordan suggested that, instead of simply cutting everything off at 10 p.m., they check in
with everybody at 9:30 p.m. to see where things were at and if the Council should postpone
something. However, after 10 p.m., they should move through as much of the agenda as they
could. Councilor Tierney contended that it took more time to check in.
Mr. McIntyre mentioned another group that the Council needed to be aware of: those audience
members who arrived at 6:30 p.m. and would not appreciate sitting for five hours only to have the
Council postpone their item to another night. Councilor Tierney suggested taking public
testimony but not acting on it.
Councilor Moncrieff suggested trying for a 10 p.m. ending time but not making it a hard and fast
rule if people have been waiting for an item. She suggested linking the City Council recap in Hello
LO to the staff report, so that the public could understand the reasoning behind their decisions.
She commented that part of her posturing in front of the camera was using it as an avenue to
disseminate information.
• Degree of formality at meetings
Councilor Moncrieff commented that she was most comfortable with strictly following Roberts'
Rules and addressing each other formally as Councilor. There were no other comments.
• Length of public comment
The Council discussed how long to allow testimony during Citizen Comment and at public
hearings. Councilor Johnson commented that extending the Citizen Comment time limit last year
from three minutes to five minutes contributed to a longer meeting because the Council usually let
people go over the time limit. She argued that if they were going to let people go over, then they
should adopt a three-minute time limit.
Mr. Hertzberg noted the general Council agreement on three minutes with a soft ending and the
other Councilors supporting the Mayor when he enforced the rule. Councilor Olson agreed for
public hearings but not for Citizen Comment. Mr. Powell mentioned that the testimony time limits
at a public hearing had been five minutes for individuals and ten minutes for groups. Mr.
Hertzberg summarized the discussion as allowing three minutes for individuals and five minutes
for groups at public hearings.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
Councilor Jordan raised the issue of people ceding their time to others. Mr. Hertzberg
summarized the discussion as the Council did not want people ceding their time in general, but to
the extent that ceding was part of the rules (at a land use hearing), Mr. Powell would be
responsible for making sure that the rules were followed.
The Council discussed allowing public input at a study session advertised as having no public
comment. Councilor Olson indicated that she had no problem with allowing public input.
Councilor Jordan argued for standing by allowing or not allowing public comment as advertised
because some people might have stayed home because they thought that there would be no
public comment. She commented that a quiet consultation with the Mayor on allowing public
comment on the annexation issue would have been a better way to go.
Councilor Johnson spoke of the Council making a definite decision either before a meeting or
during a meeting with a nod of heads around the table. Councilor Tierney apologized if asking to
open up the annexation study session to the neighborhood representatives embarrassed the
Mayor. He recalled that they had received good input on the annexation issue, which was what
they were here for. He argued for allowing flexibility at study sessions.
Mayor Hoffman mentioned Councilor Olson's point that some study sessions were solely for the
Council and staff to discuss a complicated issue. Councilor Olson emphasized being aware of
which kind of study session they were dealing with.
Councilor Tierney raised the issue of the staff reports, which he described as varying from
succinct and on topic to repetitive. Mayor Hoffman noted that often Councilors wanted items
explained for the viewing audience. Councilor Hennagin asked if it was necessary to review the
background events leading up to the issue at hand.
Mr. McIntyre commented that he was hearing shorten the staff report but, at the same time,
explain things so that the viewing audience understood the issue. He asked the Council who the
audience was. He indicated that for staff the audience was the seven Council members. He
acknowledged the audience in the room and the television audience, most of who probably did not
read the staff report. He described the staff presentation as an effort to put an item in the context
for all audiences, which did prolong the meeting.
Councilor Olson mentioned that she has heard from many people watching the televised meeting
that they read the staff report ahead of time and appreciated the clarifying questions asked by
Council. She commented that if someone was interested in a topic, then he/she would read the
staff report. She held that it was not the Council's responsibility to feed the report to the audience
but it was its responsibility to ask clarifying questions. She referenced Councilor Moncrieff's
comment about linking the Council decisions to the staff report on the website.
Councilor Tierney clarified that they needed a good solid staff report but that staff needed to
manage the time better, as they were there to answer Council questions on the written staff report.
Mr. Hertzberg recessed the meeting for lunch at 12:42 p.m
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 15
January 23, 2010 —Morning Session
y. 3, 2
„14J, CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
t MINUTES
April 6, 2010
Council President Kristin Johnson called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:39
p.m. on April 6, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Council President Johnson, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney,
and Jordan. Mayor Hoffman was excused
Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
City Recorder; Bill Baars, Library Director; Cindy Glazier, Library
Coordinator for Volunteer Services and Library Programs; Joel Komarek,
LOIS Project Director; Jane Heisler, LOIS Communications Director; Guy
Graham, Public Works Director; Russ Chevrette, Engineering Technician;
Jane Blackstone, Economic Development Director; Laura Weigel,
Neighborhood Planner
Youth Council
Present: Youth Councilors Cooper, Silbert, and Rathje. Youth Councilors Kosloff and
Chandrana were excused.
3. PRESENTATIONS
3.1 LO Reads Recap
Mr. Baars commented that one of the reasons why the Lake Oswego Library was the number one
library in the state was the role that the Library played in the community. The Council viewed a
video of photos from the 35+ LO Reads events, attended by over 9,000 people reading this year's
selection, The Whistling Season.
Mr. Baars mentioned that a piece written by Joan Freed during the LO Writes workshop would be
placed in the Centennial time capsule in October. He thanked the program supporters, City staff,
and the City Council for making this possible, noting that they have already begun planning their
fifth year. Ms. Glazier asked for suggestions for a book for LO Reads 2011. She reviewed the
criteria and asked the public to send suggestions to her or the library. Mr. Baars encouraged LO
Reads participants to provide input regarding next year's program through the Open City Hall on
the City's website
Ms. Glazier indicated to Councilor Jordan that, after collecting all The Whistling Season books
returned to the library, staff passed them on to the North Plains library for use in their program next
February. She mentioned that this was the third time that the North Plains library has used the LO
Reads book.
3.2 Arbor Week Proclamation
Council President Johnson proclaimed the week of April 5, 2010, as Arbor Week in the City of
Lake Oswego and urged all citizens to support efforts to protect trees and woodlands, to support
the City's Urban Forestry Program, and to celebrate Lake Oswego Arbor Week by planting trees
and promoting the well-being of trees for this and future generations.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 16
April 6, 2010
3.3 National Public Safety Telecommunications Week
Council President Johnson proclaimed the week of April 11 through 17, 2010, as National Public
Safety Communications Week in Lake Oswego, and urged all citizens to honor the employees of
the Communications Center in recognize them for their diligence and professionalism in helping to
keep our city, its citizens, employees, and visitors safe. She presented the proclamation to Donna
MacDougal and Deena Streen and thanked them for their work.
3.4 LOIS Update
Mr. Komarek reported that the ground anchors and pipe fusing was 100% complete and they were
closing in on the pile installation. He indicated that, with the Blue Heron Bay work anticipated for
completion by the end of next week, the team has begun planning with the contractor for the
quality assurance and quality control phase. He presented a photo from a 2006 lake draw down
that showed how constrained the interceptor has been in Blue Heron Bay. He showed a photo of
the submerged manholes and described how workers would access them.
He reported that the team learned in the preconstruction meeting on the pump stations that
Northwest Natural Gas had a high-pressure gas line in Bryant Road into which the company
needed to cut some valves. He said that the City would work with Northwest Natural Gas to
coordinate the week-long lane closures and inform the public.
He reported that staff has finished reviewing the contracts for the lake down phase, and would
bring those to the City Manager for signature. He anticipated the pre -construction conference for
the lake down phase occurring as early as the week of April 19.
Ms. Heisler presented a list of meetings the team has held lately. She mentioned the article in the
paper about the bid opening on March 4. She indicated that an Oregonian reporter happened to
be very interested in the corrosion protection system and would publish an article about it next
week. She noted the tour given last week to Adam Daniels from Congressman Schrader's office.
She mentioned that they hoped to finish the lake down webisode in order to take it out to the
neighborhoods, given that most people have never seen a 24 -foot draw down. She noted that
TVCTV ran the other three webisodes. She presented an excerpt from the LOIS Facebook page,
and indicated that they also had a Facebook page for the water project. She commented that the
Citizen Information Coordinator made great short video updates that they posted on these pages,
as well as articles and other information. She presented several pictures of the ongoing work,
observing that boaters needed to pay attention to the City's navigation information.
Mr. Komarek indicated that they were a little behind schedule in getting started on the lake down
phase, but they anticipated making that up soon. He pointed out that the lake down bids came in
very favorably, and the total project cost was now down to $95 million. He indicated to Council
President Johnson that the last drawdown in 2006 was 10 feet.
3.5 Report of Audit Subcommittee
Council President Johnson noted that Councilors Tierney, Jordan, and Olson were the
subcommittee members.
Councilor Tierney reported on the subcommittee's meeting with the Finance staff on March 23 to
check on what actions staff was taking relative to fixing the deficiencies found in the 2008/2009
audit and to get a general overview of the department. He mentioned that all the Finance staff took
the deficiencies very seriously. He indicated that, given that the proper controls were already in
place when the deficiencies occurred, the management staff was focusing on bringing those
controls to the front and making sure that they were being complied with, and on educating the
supporting staff on why those controls were appropriate
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 16
April 6, 2010
He said that the subcommittee members came away with a high degree of confidence in the
Finance Department management team, and their efforts to make the necessary adjustments and
to train and provide oversight of the supporting staff.
He mentioned the review of the state of the Finance Department overall. He reported that the
Department was currently using contract help to get back on schedule for certain tasks, such as
bank reconciliations. He said that they also discussed the capacities of the organization as it
related to back up tasks, such as the lack of a back up person to do payroll.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Jordan moved the Consent Agenda. Councilor Olson seconded the motion. A
voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Council President Johnson, Councilors
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting "aye." [6-0]
4.1 REPORTS
4.1.1 ADA Ramp and Storm Drainage Retrofits (Royce Way)
Action: Award a public improvement contract to Portland Road and driveway Company,
Inc., in the amount of $100,952
4.1.2 Request for dedication of property to the public right - of - way at Westlake Park
Action: Approval to permit the City Manager to approve a dedication of property located at
Westlake Park to the public right-of-way in order for the new shade structure to be
in compliance with standard 50.45.010(7)(b) of the Community Development Code
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.2.1 January 11, 2010, Joint Meeting with the Tigard City Council
4.2.2 January 12, 2010, Special Meeting
Action: Approve minutes as written
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. CITIZEN COMMENT
• Chris McKinney, 432 Fifth Street
She recalled that she and Ms. Schweisquth addressed the Council six months ago regarding the
noise levels generated by the amplified live music at Maher's restaurant and other issues. She
explained that she shared a common wall with the restaurant and that she could not sit at home
and watch TV or rest when the amplified music played. She reported that they went through
mediation to try to find a resolution that allowed the owners to run their business and her to have
peace and quiet in her home.
She reported that the soundproof wall that Maher's installed did not help that much against the
music played between 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. She noted that the music was
still amplified, despite Maher's agreement not to have amplified music. She mentioned that she
has had to call the police occasionally because they played music past 10 p.m.
She invited the Council to come to her house any Friday or Saturday evening between 7 p.m. and
10 p.m. so that they could experience her situation and the impact of the music. She indicated that
she did not know what else she could do.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 16
April 6, 2010
• Diane Schweisquth, 462 Fifth Street
She stated that Ms. McKinney came to her home last Saturday around 7:30 p.m. because she
could not stay in her own home due to the music coming in from Maher's restaurant. She
described the noise problem as two -fold. She indicated that the first issue was that Maher's was a
business that operated in a space limited to less than 35 people with a small dining area, which
continued to hire musicians/bands that played amplified music, even though the restaurant owners
knew that was a problem for the neighbor sharing a common wall with them.
She said that the second issue lay with the City's noise code enforcement practices, which viewed
the temporary restaurant patrons as more important than the quality of life of the permanent
property owner. She quoted from e-mails that she received last October from Mr. Powell regarding
this matter discussing the City's enforcement practices. She noted Mr. Powell's information that
the City allowed reasonable loud noise if deemed necessary to the operation of the business, and
his later statement that "there was a point where pre -10 p.m. noise exceeds what is reasonable
and necessary." She contended that that point has been reached when Ms. McKinney could not
stay in her own home because of the noise.
She described the noise coming from Maher's as loud, disturbing, unnecessary, and unreasonable.
She pointed out that Maher's operated the business without amplified music on other days of the
week, and the owners knew that it was disturbing to their neighbor.
She asked the Mayor or the Council to direct the police and the City Code enforcement officers to
enforce the City noise code, Section 34.10.537, when Ms. McKinney contacted them, and to issue
a citation to Maher's restaurant at any time of day, and not just after 10 p.m. She asked the
Council, in light of the City's focus on business development that included the development of
mixed use properties, to recognize and consider the unique planning, development, and code
issues (including the noise code) of mixing business and residential properties. She mentioned
that she has also spoken to the Planning Commission. The City Council was Ms. McKinney's last
hope for help.
Councilor Olson commented that this testimony really bothered her because she has inquired
about the progress of this issue since these ladies came to Council six months ago, and staff has
always told her that it went through mediation and was resolved. Mr. Powell indicated that he was
not aware of any report to staff that the mediation agreement did not work out. He commented that
this was the first that he has heard that there was still a problem.
Ms. McKinney mentioned that she had thought that they had reached an agreement through
mediation, but, following the installation of the soundproofing (which had not been guaranteed to
work), Maher's went back to the amplified instruments, which she had thought Maher's had agreed
not to use. She indicated that Maher's has sent e-mails saying that musicians would not play
acoustic. She gave her opinion that this was a total disregard of the mediation.
Ms. Schweisquth mentioned that they have not received replies to their e-mails to the mediator,
and did not know what else to do. She reiterated that Ms. McKinney could not stay in her home
between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and that the code enforcement officer would not
enforce the noise code because they deemed the music necessary to the business.
Councilor Hennagin asked if there had been a pre -mediation agreement to be bound by the
mediation agreement. Ms. Schweisquth indicated that it had just been people getting together to
resolve a situation, for which they had thought they had an understanding.
• Jim Bolland, 804 Fifth Street
He explained that he was here at the request of LONAC to share with the Council the comments
that he had made following Ms. Blackstone's Saturday presentation to LONAC on the economic
development program. He recalled that LONAC has been asking the City for years to implement
the Quality of Life Task Force report and to use the quality of life indicators identified in that report.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 16
April 6, 2010
He discussed the important linkage between quality of life and economic development. He
mentioned that his conversations with people regarding the City's economic development effort
found mixed reviews, including why a community of only 37,000 was doing something like this. He
indicated that he saw an opportunity for the City to identify measurable economic indicators for
tracking and reporting the success of the program, which he contended would sell the program to
the community.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Recommendation from the Engineering Division to relinquish the City's interest in a
5 -foot wide by 50 -foot long strip of land along the front property line of a residential
lot located at 3270 Lakeview Blvd.
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Chevrette explained that, in 1974, the City acquired this five-foot wide strip of land across the
front of 3270 Lakeview Blvd as a condition of a variance to the front yard setback. He described
the engineers' vision for streets like Lakeview Blvd at the time, for which staff sought every
opportunity to acquire extra right-of-way as a condition of land use approvals. He noted the
complete change of vision for streets in the past 36 years.
He pointed out that this was the only five-foot strip on Lakeview Blvd acquired by the City. He
mentioned the extreme unlikelihood of the City condemning 50 properties to obtain additional five-
foot strips, should the City even decide to widen Lakeview Blvd. He recommended returning the
five-foot strip of land to the present owners, which would allow the owners to make some changes
to their property. He explained that, because the City actually owned fee title to the land, this
action took a quitclaim deed, and not a street vacation.
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Mr. Chevrette indicated to Councilor Hennagin that he estimated that the City has 10 to 20 strips
like this scattered throughout the city, which were acquired between the late 1960s and early
1980s. He noted that the City could not use these strips today because of the legal constraints
resulting from court decisions such as Nolan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v.
Tigard.
He confirmed to Councilor Moncrieff that this was the only five-foot strip on Lakeview Blvd.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mr. Powell reviewed the testimony time limits and the hearing criteria. Council President
Johnson opened the hearing to public testimony. Hearing none, she closed the hearing.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Olson moved to authorize the City Manager to execute a quitclaim deed to
transfer ownership of the subject 5 -foot strip of land to the abutting owners. Councilor
Hennagin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with
Council President Johnson, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan
voting "aye." [6-0]
8. REPORTS
8.1 Resolution 10-22, adopting the April 2010 Lake Oswego Economic Development
Strategy
Ms. Blackstone gave a PowerPoint presentation. She reviewed the background behind the City
and Chamber work to gather input from the City staff and business community to develop a vision
and the core strategies to implement it (p.55).
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 16
April 6, 2010
She mentioned that the themes that emerged during the planning process were oriented towards
quality of life, a broader range of housing options, connectivity, more and better transportation and
parking options, strategic higher density infill and redevelopment, lower vacancy rates, successful
businesses, increased employment, and an improved tax base for the community (p.86, 90).
She described building on Lake Oswego's strengths and addressing its weakness as opportunities
(p.67). She mentioned that assumptions underlying the strategy included a collaborative
public/private implementation effort with the Chamber as a key partner, flexibility to adjust over the
five years within the framework of the four core strategies, and addressing many issues through
the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update process. She noted that the strategy laid out estimated
costs but it did not authorize funding.
She presented the four core strategies: market Lake Oswego (p.73), leverage quality of life and
place (p.74), provide exemplary City service to business (p.74), and retain and recruit businesses
(p.75). She discussed the five-year priorities under each strategy (p.67). She indicated that staff
has already begun working on how to improve the City's way of doing business with businesses.
She commented that the fourth strategy of taking care of businesses was the most important
element of an economic development program. She noted that targeted recruitment included
retail, office, and industrial businesses.
She mentioned including in the strategy indicators of success: economic indicators, program
output measures, and survey feedback (p.75). She described how the City would use the strategy
as a guide to decision making in the 2010 to 2015 timeframe (p.67). She thanked her colleagues
on City staff for their invaluable work in developing this strategy.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS
Councilor Olson expressed her appreciation for the inclusion of measures of success, and asked
for details on what they would be and how staff would develop them. Ms. Blackstone indicated
that the City has actually been tracking many of these indicators for many years already, usually
through the budget process. She said that she would bring back the format of the indicators in
short order.
Councilor Olson recalled the testimony at the Round Table from two residents speaking on behalf
of a dozen parents with children with developmental disabilities who noted that, while the School
District had an excellent life skills program for the children, the community had no job opportunities
for developmentally disabled adults. Ms. Blackstone concurred with the Councilor that this issue
did not come up during the strategy work sessions. She indicated that there were opportunities
within the action items proposed in the strategy to address this issue with the business community,
beginning with communicating the need. She commented that she would appreciate suggestions,
given the program's limited resources.
Councilor Hennagin mentioned that he found the term `connectivity' vague, ambiguous, and
subject to many interpretations. He asked how it was used in this context. Ms. Blackstone
indicated that it referred to a walkable community and communication connections.
Councilor Hennagin asked what the concept of the City being more welcoming to new businesses
entailed. Ms. Blackstone mentioned that many items on the list were collaborative efforts by the
City and the Chamber. She commented that staff put a lot of effort into helping business
applicants get through all the paperwork, and there should be some celebration of success. She
observed that the small things meant a lot, such as picking up the phone or walking into a shop
and saying hello. She indicated that she wanted to emphasize business outreach to non -retail
businesses.
Ms. Blackstone indicated to Councilor Hennagin that her goal was to have relatively flat funding
for the nuts and bolts of delivering the program. She noted that, for the program as a whole, many
of the action items were large capital projects involving other departments. Therefore, the funding
would vary a lot depending on the mix of capital, planning, and ongoing program work.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 16
April 6, 2010
Councilor Jordan commented that she saw the strategy to expand the Gallery Without Walls
more as a strategic placement of artwork in the business areas to draw people down the street,
and not necessarily as a multiplication of the number of sculptures in the downtown. She observed
that the Arts Council was having a hard time right now making sure that it selected quality pieces
and installed them correctly.
She suggested including a question on the survey of whether businesses, especially the bigger
ones, had vocational programs for those with disabilities. She asked how many more spots would
be available at the Farmers Market this year. Ms. Blackstone said that she did not personally
know that information, but staff could provide it. Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Olson that
the City did have a waiting list of vendors for the Farmers Market.
Councilor Tierney commented that the strategy was an impressive document with many good
elements. He compared the market Lake Oswego strategy to the Chamber mission statement, and
asked what the City's role would be in that.
He asked what were the most specific practical indicators of success that Ms. Blackstone has seen
other communities use to assess an economic development program. Ms. Blackstone mentioned
job creation and employment. She pointed out that the difficulty lay in correlating the indicator to
the program outcome, such as whether someone decided to locate his/her business in Lake
Oswego because of the marketing strategy. She indicated that surveys and talking to the
businesses could help with that, which made outreach an important part of the strategy.
Councilor Tierney asked if Ms. Blackstone agreed with Councilor Olson that it was best to adopt a
strategy with more specific indicators of success. Ms. Blackstone indicated that she would bring
back a set of economic indicators as a broad tool for the Council and staff to use in looking at the
overall health of the community along with other indicators of community health.
Councilor Moncrieff observed that this was a policy document taking a long-term view over five
years. Ms. Blackstone confirmed to the Councilor that staff would track the measurements as
trends over a number of years because that yielded the most effective analysis. She indicated that
the economic development strategies she researched took a variety of approaches to indicators,
which was why she suggested the three part indicators of success as a way to look at several
different measurement lines and produce a good picture.
Councilor Moncrieff commented that she was interested in hearing what the Chamber and the
business leaders had to say about this document, as she has been involved in its development for
over a year.
Councilor Olson mentioned that two businesses in the Palisades neighborhood shopping area
recently left for downtown Lake Oswego. She asked if staff would recruit businesses to Palisades.
Ms. Blackstone spoke of keeping an eye on all the districts. She observed that, while it was
encouraging that businesses perceived the downtown as a good place to relocate, it did leave a
vacancy elsewhere in the community. She commented that she was cautiously optimistic that,
given the national and state trends, they might begin to see more consumer confidence, which
would in turn fuel interest in Lake Oswego vacancies. She noted that Lake Oswego's vacancy rate
overall was not terrible.
Councilor Olson asked Ms. Blackstone to comment on the view that an economic development
program was really the responsibility of the private sector. Ms. Blackstone mentioned that Lake
Oswego was part of a group of cities in the region that actively influenced their local economies.
She indicated that the common theme of these economic development programs was the city
partnering with private partners. She commented that she thought the key was to not duplicate
efforts and to try to be as efficient as possible. She emphasized that if it was going to be
successful, then it had to be a collaboration.
Councilor Jordan recalled seeing an ad somewhere that showed where $15 spent at a local
community business went to in the community. She described it as a great opportunity for people
to see why it was important to have businesses in their hometown.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 16
April 6, 2010
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Council President Johnson opened the floor to public testimony.
• Jerry Wheeler, Chamber of Commerce Chief Executive Officer, 13594 Blazer Trail
He expressed the Chamber's appreciation for the Council's commitment to funding the economic
development program, as he had requested in public testimony last year before both the Council
and the Budget Committee. He asked the Council to approve this strategy, which represented a
year's worth of work by City staff and community volunteers, by adopting Resolution 10-22.
He mentioned the three independent research projects conducted in the community focused on
economic development. He noted that Ms. Blackstone has quietly built relationships over the past
year so that they would not need to reinvent the wheel on programming, and they would have
access to new funding resources to help pay for the ongoing costs of economic development.
He commented that the collaboration between the public and private sectors, on which staff built
the strategy, was the key to successful economic development. He noted that the common thread
weaving through all the strategies was marketing. He indicated that the Chamber believed that it
was equally important to market to both the local and the larger Metro region and beyond in order
to achieve the maximum impact for current and future businesses.
He applauded and thanked the City for taking a leadership role by committing resources and
money to this endeavor. He commented that the Chamber provided daily leadership to the small
businesses. He indicated that, while the Chamber lacked the City's financial resources, it stood
ready to partner with the City in leading the way in implementing this plan.
He pointed out that small businesses were the strong backbone of any community, stating that
Lake Oswego was "small business -strong." He mentioned seeing more new businesses coming to
the downtown recently than he has seen in the past six years. He commented that a vital, active
Chamber and a successful economic development program would help businesses succeed. He
urged the Council to adopt the strategy as a long-term investment whose results would be well
worth the wait.
He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the Chamber was seeing more interest from prospective
businesses wanting to come to downtown Lake Oswego; the empty storefronts were filling up.
Councilor Tierney asked for Mr. Wheeler's thoughts on the indicators of success. Mr. Wheeler
commented that Ms. Blackstone outlined them well. He mentioned the visual "empty or full
storefront" as one indicator and the number of business licenses issued, which has started growing
again. He agreed with Ms. Blackstone that it was difficulty to define which element of economic
development was responsible for the success.
He confirmed to the Councilor that the general economic indicators of the health of the community
were one aspect of assessing whether the program was achieving its stated purpose. He indicated
that the subjective method of just talking to the businesses was also an indicator of success.
Mr. Wheeler indicated to Councilor Jordan that the City and Gramor Development paid for the
advertisement at the Portland airport, and not the Chamber. Councilor Jordan suggested looking
at it again as she had heard of people commenting on that advertisement when they ate at the
restaurants here. Mr. McIntyre clarified that the Downtown Business Alliance partnered with the
City for that advertisement; the program terminated two years ago because the partners decided to
go to a Portland -live type advertising campaign instead for the sake of variety and cost.
• Dan Heine, Bank of Oswego
Mr. Heine thanked the Council and City staff for everything they did to make Lake Oswego a great
place to live and work. He thanked the City for supporting local community banking, including the
Bank of Oswego, by giving the banks deposits. He indicated that they used that money to extend
credit to local businesses and individuals. He informed the Council that those deposits were
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 16
April 6, 2010
symbolic of the pro-business attitude in Lake Oswego, and generated calls from all across the
nation, including the Wall Street Journal.
He indicated that Ms. Blackstone and Mr. Williams asked him to share his experiences with
economic development initiatives in other cities. He mentioned that his impressions represented
the private sector in Lake Oswego.
He pointed out that they were blessed to live and work in this special place, which factor they
needed to preserve. He observed that Lake Oswego had it relatively good in comparison to other
communities across the country that were truly suffering. He commented that they might not be
able to control their own destiny as much as they would like with a development plan, in light of the
new state tax measures. He suggested that the Council not have too high of expectations about
attracting outside businesses, given that many businesses in Oregon have already voiced their
displeasure with doing business in Oregon. He spoke of embracing this plan as a commitment to
the long-term future of the community, and remembering to attract new businesses while retaining
the existing businesses.
He agreed that economic development should be a collaborative process in which the public and
private sectors needed to work together better than they did currently. He mentioned the
perceptions in the community that the private business sector was not unified or defined and
lacked clout. He noted the recent research confirming another perception that the City needed to
be more business friendly.
He commended the Council, Mr. McIntyre, Ms. Blackstone, and Mr. Williams for their outstanding
leadership in fostering a new attitude in the community about business. He encouraged the
Council to take advantage of these three high-quality professionals who have spent countless
hours listening to the business community. He indicated that creating and funding a soundly -
based plan was an action that spoke louder than words.
He discussed developing a set of measurable goals that focused on the benefits to the citizens and
businesses of Lake Oswego. He mentioned increasing spending for goods and services in town,
creating more family -living jobs, increasing the tax base, maintaining excellent schools, insuring
health City finances, maintaining and building on the community's quality of life enhancements,
and building community pride and a spirit of collaboration.
He spoke to City leadership focusing on being good financial stewards of taxpayer resources. He
described a strong balance sheet and taxpayer trust and pride as cornerstones in making future
investments in infrastructure. He emphasized the vital importance of an excellent school system.
He advocated for marketing first to the local businesses. He argued that they needed to change
the perceptions of local businesses, and show them that the City would make a positive impact on
their future growth and bottom line. He suggested reminding the diverse interest groups that Lake
Oswego was a special and unique place in which to live and do business. He encouraged the
community to work together better for a common cause. He contended that the community
practicing the ideas of Communication, Coordination, and Connection would help with a successful
implementation of the program.
He referenced his life experience in working on economic development for over 40 years. He said
that the City was doing all the right things right now. The Council has selected intelligent,
resourceful, and experienced leadership, it has created and funded a results -oriented strategic
plan, and it has asked the private sector to be actively engaged.
Councilor Hennagin thanked Mr. Heine for his compliments. He asked whether Mr. Heine
thought that the Council should postpone adopting the strategy until staff added the indicators of
success to the plan. Mr. Heine urged the Council to approve the four objectives presented by
staff, as they were excellent. He indicated that he thought that staff could put together the
indicators in a couple of months.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 16
April 6, 2010
Councilor Moncrieff asked what collaboration would look like in terms of the businesses working
together on the marketing effort. Mr. Heine indicated that collaboration meant fostering an attitude
that `your opinion counts.' He cited the sense of partnering, talking, and listening to everybody's
point of view that he saw at the Marylhurst workshops, which had a diverse group in attendance.
He acknowledged that a consensus might be favorable or unfavorable to any given point of view,
but the important thing was to include everyone in the discussion. He spoke of collaborating more
by sharing resources, both financial and human. He mentioned his hope that eventually the private
community could share a percentage of the program cost with the City.
Councilor Moncrieff commented that she heard comments from the business community
regarding the market research; the owners appreciated the stability of having the City involved.
She spoke of continuing that financial partnering with the marketing strategy. Mr. Heine
concurred. He mentioned his expectation that eventually the businesses would want to participate
financially and have something at stake in the success of the program. He commented that if that
did not occur, then he would worry about the long-term success.
• Jim Francis, Chamber of Commerce President-elect
He urged adoption of the plan. He held that the specifics for action and measurement would come
with fleshing out the plan as they moved forward. He said that he was impressed with this well -
drafted plan. He observed that Mr. McIntyre's foresight about economic development was a good
move. He pointed out that the Chamber was a marketing organization. He noted the various
activities already underway that portended the success of the plan.
• Carolyne Jones, 2818 Poplar Way
Councilor Tierney indicated to Ms. Jones that the planned retail center for the Marylhurst
development was intended to serve the Marylhurst community and not the wider community;
therefore, staff did not consider it in the five-year strategy.
Ms. Jones commented that the property owners affected by the sensitive lands regulations felt that
they have been leveraged out of the quality of life in Lake Oswego (Strategy #2) with limitations on
their property rights and a diminishing of their property values. She referenced Mr. Wheeler's
comments about a successful economy taking collaboration between the private and the public
sectors. She encouraged the Council to recognize that property owners were an important cog in
the wheel of a successful economy.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Tierney commented that the points were well taken. He stated his preference to
include the measurements in the program, but he was comfortable with moving forward with the
program this evening and waiting a reasonable time for staff to put the measurements in.
Councilor Moncrieff indicated that she was comfortable moving forward with this policy
document, as it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Goal 9 (Economic Development) and
with the Quality of Life Indicator No. 8 (Economic Opportunity and Vitality).
Councilor Olson said that, while she too preferred including the measurements in the plan, Mr.
Heine, Mr. Wheeler, and Mr. Francis' testimonies swayed her. She asked for consideration of a
deadline by which staff brought the measurements back to Council. The Council agreed by
consensus to Councilor Jordan's suggestion that staff bring the measurements back before the
Council adopted the budget.
Councilor Hennagin commented that he could not imagine a government program that would not
produce statistics about its success. Since the Council would receive that information in any event,
he would support the plan.
Councilor Olson agreed with Councilor Jordan that they could consider the measurements as part
of the budget process and adopt them at the same time. She commented that Ms. Jones had a
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 16
April 6, 2010
good point about citizens and the City's ability to maintain property values being another piece of
the economic development puzzle. She indicated that their citizens' quality of life was just as
important as their businesses' quality of life.
Council President Johnson suggested using resources, such as Open City Hall, to obtain
feedback from businesses and citizens on what they wanted to see in the city that might help with
marketing. She pointed out that having the information publicly available would also help
businesses know what the community was looking for.
Councilor Jordan moved Resolution 10-22. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. A
voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Council President Johnson, Councilors
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting "aye." [6-0]
Council President Johnson recessed the meeting at 8:35 p.m. for a break. She reconvened the
meeting at 8:45 p.m.
8.2 Percent for Art Program
Mr. Powell explained that the City's 17 -year-old Percent for Arts ordinance was ambiguous about
whether it applied to the purchase of land, as opposed to construction only. He indicated that the
ordinance added the word `purchase' in its description of City projects, but it did not make clear to
what extent the actual purchase costs qualified as eligible costs under the ordinance.
He reviewed the legal principles for interpreting an ambiguous ordinance and how they applied to
this ordinance in particular (pp.94-95). He stated his opinion that the ordinance did not apply to the
purchase of unimproved land (p.94) or to land with an improvement on it that the City intended to
tear down (p.95). He discussed how the ordinance did apply to the cost of an improvement
intended for public use on land purchased by the City but not to the cost of the underlying land
(pp.95-96).
He discussed the application of the ordinance to the West End Building, which had been the
context of the original question about the application of the Percent for Arts program (pp.96-97).
He observed that this was the only City purchase of land with an improvement on it, in which the
Council had not yet decided on whether to retain the structure for public use or not. He argued that
the City use of the building since 2007 constituted sufficient use of the structure for public purposes
as to make the purchase cost of the improvements (building and parking lot) eligible costs under
the Percent for Arts ordinance.
He reviewed the options before the Council with respect to clearing up the ordinance language or
making more significant changes to the ordinance (p.97).
COUNCIL QUESTIONS
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Olson that the Percent for Art ordinance did not apply to the
Farr and nearby properties, as the City purchased them for open space to add to the Luscher Farm
complex and they lay outside the city limits. He discussed the issue of applying the ordinance
retroactively, which he did not recommend doing. He reiterated that the West End Building had
been unique in that the Council had not yet ascertained the use at the time of purchase.
Councilor Olson commented that she did not think that they should apply the ordinance
retroactively, especially when the ultimate permanent use remained uncertain, as was the case
with the West End Building. Mr. Powell indicated that he was not comfortable saying that, until the
Council determined the permanent intent for the building, and no matter how much the City used
the building, the City was not using the building for public purposes.
He stated his opinion that if there was intent at the time of purchase to use the building as a public
structure or to raze it, then the City should decide at that time whether to apply or not to apply the
Percent for Arts ordinance. Changes of mind later on should not make any difference. He pointed
out that the Council treated the West End Building differently from the very beginning.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 16
April 6, 2010
Council President Johnson spoke in support of clearing up this issue generally and with
reference to the West End Building in order to avoid revisiting this issue in the future. Councilor
Moncrieff concurred.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hennagin that a Council consensus to direct him to maintain
the intent of the current ordinance and to clarify the intent was appropriate, but if the Council gave
him other direction, then it should vote. He clarified to the Councilor that the current ordinance
required using the cost of appraisal at the time of purchase, and not today's appraisal.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Tierney that, under the current ordinance, contributing or not
contributing was not based on intended permanent use; it was based on intended use as a public
building, whether permanently or for a number of years.
Councilor Jordan supported Recommendation A, clarifying the language. She asked if the City
applied the ordinance to the US Bank building, as the City did use the second floor for meeting
space. Mr. Powell said that he doubted that the City applied the ordinance because it always
intended to demolish the building for the park.
Councilor Tierney commented that, while he supported clarifying the ordinance, it seemed to him
that clarifying the language created a new ordinance. Mr. Powell indicated that he could bring the
ordinance amendments back for a public hearing.
Councilor Olson wondered whether the Council that passed the ordinance intentionally left the
language vague in order to interpret it as desired. She said that she also favored
Recommendation A and clarifying the language for more consistent application in the future. She
held that the issue of clarifying the ordinance language was a separate issue from whether to apply
the ordinance retroactively to the West End Building.
Council President Johnson commented that the current interpretation they were using would not
apply the ordinance to the West End Building. Mr. Powell reiterated his advice that the ordinance
under its current interpretation did apply to the West End Building because the City's intent for
purchasing it has proved over time to be a purchase for public use. He indicated that he was not
suggesting that the Council adopt an ordinance that applied the Percent for Arts retroactively.
Mr. Powell stated his opinion that, at some point, the City reached the point of no return, but it was
not clear where that was because the Council has never before bought a building without a
purpose in mind for it.
He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that, while the main intent in the ordinance was to use the
1.5% for art on the purchased property, it did allow its use for other projects.
Mr. McIntyre mentioned that he did not discuss this issue with Mr. Powell until after Mr. Powell
drafted his opinion because he did not want to influence Mr. Powell's opinion. He reminded the
Council that last year it chose to fund the continuation of the arts program at $100,000. He
recalled using the terms `percent for arts' and `arts' as one and the same. He pointed out that
1.5% of the $8 million cost of the building yielded $125,000. He argued that the $100,000 for the
arts last year should be credited against the $125,000 with the remaining $25,000 credited against
this year's funding for the arts allocation.
He concurred that the Council should clean up the Code and create clarity around it to the greatest
extent possible. He indicated that applying Mr. Powell's interpretation of the ordinance
retroactively to the West End Building would likely end up near net zero in terms of accounting.
Councilor Tierney indicated that, if the Council agreed that the City owed the Public Art Trust
Fund $125,000, then he could not stretch the provision of $100,000 in operating funds as a credit
against that amount. He argued that the $125,000 needed to come from the Parks fund. He
recalled that the Council, during the Arts Council presentation, supported their efforts linked to
economic development, which made this another challenge for the budget. He commented that
the Council could interpret the ordinance to say that the City did not owe the money.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 16
April 6, 2010
Councilor Moncrieff agreed with Mr. Powell's interpretation. She commented that the community
was well aware of the Percent for Arts ordinance, citing the community expectation in the
Palisades neighborhood that the Luscher Farm purchase included a percent for arts to fund art for
the site. She argued that the ordinance did apply to the West End Building, as it was purchased
with the intent of using it as a public facility at the time. She spoke of honoring that commitment.
Councilor Jordan commented that she saw the philosophical discussion regarding the use of the
Percent for Arts funds, and whether continued support of the Arts Foundation as a City partnership
with a charitable organization was worthwhile for economic development purposes, as a different
discussion than the Percent for Arts itself.
Councilor Olson commented that she tended to agree with Councilor Jordan about the City's level
of commitment being a separate discussion. She argued that they should not go back and apply
retroactively the cleaned up language, but rather move forward with it.
Council President Johnson recalled that this issue came up originally because, while they had
initially applied the ordinance to the West End Building, they took it off because of a discrepancy
over whether or not the ordinance applied to the building. She argued that this was not an issue of
retroactive application but rather of answering the question on the table.
Councilor Olson pointed out that the Council did not apply the ordinance at the time of purchase,
but rather Mr. McIntyre applied it in the proposed budget last year, possibly as a way to fund the
arts. However, the Council funded the arts anyway. She spoke of discussing the philosophy
behind funding the arts and not worrying about using the West End Building as a mechanism to do
it.
Councilor Hennagin indicated that he did not see this as an issue of retroactivity, but rather as an
issue of what was the intent of the ordinance as enacted, which Mr. Powell has interpreted. He
acknowledged Councilor Olson's concern about other facilities, but noted that the ordinance did not
apply to anything outside the city limits anyway. He said that he would like to know, as part of the
future discussion, if there were any other improvements purchased for public facilities.
Council President Johnson noted the need for more discussion on how to fund the arts. She
asked the Council if there was support for Option A, to clarify the language. The Council agreed
by consensus. Mr. Powell indicated that, unless the Council directed him to bring the ordinance
back for a public hearing, he would just bring it back for adoption.
8.3 Study Session on Glenmorrie Overlay Zone
Ms. Weigel indicated that Glenmorrie has been working on implementing their plan since the
neighborhood adopted it in 2000. She mentioned that a neighborhood association committee
worked hard for over two years on identifying which provisions in the Glenmorrie plan they would
like codified. She introduced Brenda Troisi from the Glenmorrie neighborhood.
Ms. Troisi reviewed the location of Glenmorrie on the south side of town, bounded by Marylhurst,
Skylands, and Hallinan. She indicated that the neighborhood held 200 homes on R-15 lots
exclusively, which roomy spacious feel with green space they were trying to protect. She
presented a photo to illustrate the unique character of the Glenmorrie neighborhood with its
`country lane feel'
She reviewed the neighborhood's process (begun in 2007) to re-examine its neighborhood plan,
using a six -member task force and focusing primarily on what it needed to add to make the plan
enforceable. She mentioned that they commenced this work in response to development that did
not conform to the neighborhood character. She reported that their line -by-line examination found
that, while the majority of the plan required no action, there were some elements needing
implementation strategies.
She presented the neighborhood plan goal addressed by the three proposals for the overlay. She
indicated that, in developing the overlay, they considered whether the change reflected the
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 16
April 6, 2010
approved neighborhood plan and whether it responded to an existing and widespread
neighborhood concern. She mentioned a third consideration of balancing the good of the
neighborhood against individual property rights, a task that Task Force member Carolyne Jones
helped with considerably.
She reviewed the Task Force's public outreach strategies to obtain neighborhood feedback on a
list of 11 possible proposals, which led to a reduction of the list down to seven proposals for further
investigation. She indicated that, following the second open house, the Task Force reduced the
seven down to the three issues the members felt were the central issues for the neighborhood.
She presented a list of the last six items that the Task Force considered in order to inform the
Council that these were issues of widespread concern to the neighborhood, should they come to
the Council in a citywide context.
She indicated to Councilor Olson that the neighborhood's concern regarding building permits had
been a desire for notification to the immediate neighbors of significant remodels as a courtesy.
Ms. Weigel confirmed that the City did not currently require notification. Ms. Troisi recounted an
instance when a builder did kindly provide notification prior to build a new house, and made
changes to his plans based on the neighbors' concerns. She commented that people would be
much less annoyed if they had prior notification.
She reiterated that they were trying to protect the neighborhood character of single-family
detached homes on low-density lots with green space. She stated that the Task Force felt that
these three proposals had the most potential to preserve the neighborhood character.
She proposed a planter and buffering requirement for new development (pp. 105-106), as opposed
to the optional status under the Infill Task Force recommendations. She explained that the
neighborhood had many new `monster' houses, which the residents felt should be screened. She
mentioned a concern to maintain the vegetation, as some new houses pulled out all the vegetation
and put in sidewalks and lawns, which was not consistent with the neighborhood character.
She noted that the proposal allowed for many options in meeting the requirement. Ms. Weigel
commented that the neighborhood proposed the same plant units as the Infill Task Force has
proposed, except for Alternative D, which came out of neighborhood conversations.
Ms. Troisi proposed a hardscape maximum of 50% of the lot (p. 106). She pointed out that this
was a rural neighborhood and they wanted to minimize the urban look and reduce the visual
impact of concrete. She explained that their neighborhood had major drainage problems, and the
people downstream of more pavement paid the price for it. She commented that this proposal
might not do a lot, given that the Task Force could not find any properties that actually violated this
standard.
Ms. Weigel clarified that the idea was to prevent anyone from going beyond 50%, as there were
some properties that came really close to the 50%. She mentioned that one resident had been
concerned about this proposal because he wanted to build a deck. However, the type of deck he
wanted to build was pervious, and therefore, excluded from the hardscape calculation.
Councilor Hennagin asked if the purpose of the hardscape restriction was to allow the water to
soak into the ground through permeable surfaces. Ms. Troisi explained that there were two
different issues: drainage permeability and not looking like an urban concrete neighborhood.
Ms. Troisi presented the definition of hardscape. She commented that natural -looking ponds were
excluded and swimming pools included because first did not contribute to the paved -over look, and
the second did. Ms. Weigel confirmed that Lake Grove had a similar proposal in its plan. She
said that she worked with the City Attorney's Office to develop a definition of hardscape. She
noted that Glenmorrie tweaked the definition to allow more leeway, while Lake Grove tweaked it to
allow less leeway.
Ms. Troisi proposed moving the bulk of structures away from the neighbors (p. 106), which was
also an Infill Task Force proposal. She commented that a large house sitting in the middle of a
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 16
April 6, 2010
large lot could fit in on a street of small houses, citing an example in the Hallinan neighborhood.
She indicated that the neighborhood felt strongly about this, and the Task Force did not want to
take the chance that Infill might drop the requirement. If Infill kept it in, then this proposal could
drop out of the overlay.
She thanked Ms. Weigel without whose diligence and patience the Task Force would not have
persevered for the 2.5 years it spent working on this. Ms. Weigel mentioned that having one of the
original plan writers on the Task Force provided a great resource for the history of why certain
statement were written in a certain way, which helped in developing the implementation strategies.
Ms. Troisi emphasized that these proposals received significant neighborhood discussion over a
long period of time. The Task Force had very good participation in the survey and at the meetings.
It had a large e-mail distribution list also. She commented that it would be hard for a resident to
say that he/she was unaware of this work. Ms. Weigel concurred that this neighborhood
association was very active with good participation.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS
Ms. Troisi indicated to Councilor Jordan that they dropped the height limit restriction because
they could not find any houses that violated it. She explained that the problem was more that the
neighborhood had a preponderance of steeply sloped lots; a legal and not very tall house looked
tall because it loomed over the people behind it. However, restricting building height to what
appeared as reasonable from the neighbor's point of view meant building one-story houses.
Ms. Troisi confirmed to Councilor Hennagin that they were recommending adoption of these
three proposals, which they felt would have the biggest impact on preserving the neighborhood
character (out of the 12 proposals that they started with). Ms. Weigel mentioned that another
factor had been proposals requiring the least amount of regulation. Ms. Troisi indicated that the
Association intended to write up a good neighbor guide as an unofficial addendum to the
neighborhood plan, which would discuss the other issues that came up during the discussions.
Councilor Hennagin mentioned that his time on the Council has convinced him that the 1950s
land use planning in America, based upon the auto, cheap gas, large yards, and ever-expanding
suburbs, was not sustainable. He wondered whether the City could preserve Glenmorrie in the
future. Ms. Troisi pointed out that the present neighborhood zoning was R-15. She commented
that if the City decided to change that zoning, then their very active neighborhood would have
something to say about it.
Council President Johnson noted that there was a public hearing on this proposal on May 18.
9. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL
9.1 Councilor Information
9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
10.1 City Manager
10.1.1 Review of Council Schedule
10.2 City Attorney
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Councilor Jordan left the meeting at 9:41 p.m.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 16
April 6, 2010
Council President Johnson convened an Executive Session at 9:41 p.m. pursuant to ORS
192.660 (2) (f) to consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection and (h) to consult
with attorney regarding legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or
litigation likely to be filed. Mr. Powell reviewed the Executive Session parameters. He noted for
the record that no members of the public were present, other than staff.
12. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Council President Johnson returned the meeting to open session at 9:51 p.m.
13. ADJOURNMENT
Council President Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:51 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn Ch istie
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 16
April 6, 2010
70/
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010 380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
COUNCIL REPORT
www.ci.oswego.or.us
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Ursula Euler, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 10-28, Year-end Budget Supplement
DATE: June 7, 2010
ACTION
Modify the 2009-2010 Adopted Budget as shown on the attached Resolution 10-28 through a Budget
Supplement Process.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
Council may approve changes to the Adopted Fiscal Year 2009-10 Budget within certain guidelines and by
using a certain process. The enclosed budget changes are proposed to bring certain appropriation
categories and levels in line with estimated year-end expenditures. This is done via the supplemental
process because of the cumulative changes in the Wastewater and L.O.-Tigard Water partnership funds and
includes the opportunity for public comment.
DISCUSSION
This is the third Budget Supplement for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 and is made after reviewing and comparing
actual year-to-date revenues and expenditures with the current budget. When staff purchases goods and
services, they charge them to line items that correspond to the type and nature of the expense, regardless
of the originally budgeted amount. This keeps the integrity of our accounting records intact and facilitates
improved budgeting the following year. As a result a budget may need to be supplemented out of
Contingency, which is the case for several of the attached changes. Other reasons for the proposed
changes are:
1. Large restitution payment received and disbursed by the Municipal Court;
2. Certain personal service costs in a variety of funds, legal costs in Human Resources, and Trolley
Maintenance costs are higher than anticipated;
3. Shortfall in revenues in Golf; and
Page 2
4. The need to recover full cost in Engineering and the Maintenance Services & Motor Pool; or
5. The need to transfer resources to pay for the full cost of services (General Fund, Water, Wastewater,
Surface Water, Street.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact is described in detail on the resolution itself. It is helpful to know that certain spending
had been reviewed and evaluated through previous interim financial reports. This is the case with the
restitution payment, unbudgeted personal service costs in Street, Surface Water, Tennis, Maintenance
Services & Motor Pool, and the likely shortfall in revenues for Golf. The new year's budget as proposed by
the City Manager included corrective actions for the Street and Engineering funds, while they and the
Maintenance Services and Motor Pool funds remain works in progress.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Resolution 10-28 be adopted as submitted.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 10-28
Reviewed by:
City Attorney
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
RESOLUTION 10-28
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADJUSTING THE
BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 2009 BY ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET, APPROVING RESOURCES/REQUIREMENTS, AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS.
WHEREAS, Certain conditions and situations have arisen since the initial
preparation of the 2009-10 budget and necessitate changes in financial planning, now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adjusts the budget for fiscal year 2009-10 in the amount
of $ 432,000.
Section 2. The City Council hereby authorizes:
A) The appropriation of resources and approval of requirements listed below,
B) The transfers of funds and transfers of fund appropriations as listed herein.
General Fund Adopted Revised Difference
Resources:
Fines & Forfeitures $ 11,000 $ 161,000 $ 150,000
Requirements
Redevelopment $ 264,000
Human Resources 531,000
Municipal Court 765,000
Police 10,357,000
Non -departmental 1,453,000
Contingency 4,790,756
Explanation of Major Changes:
$ 288,000 $ 24,000
571,000 40,000
915,000 150,000
10,388,000 31,000
1,753,000 300,000
4,395,756 (395,000)
1 r1n nn()
Redevelopment:
Personal Services actual vacation payout and actual compensation higher than
budgeted.
Human Resources:
Legal costs higher than budgeted due to labor negotiations and other on-going issues.
Municipal Court:
Unforeseen and unusually large restitution payment.
Police:
Transfers resources to Motor Pool for additional cost of vehicle repair and maintenance.
Non -departmental:
Transfer resources of $41,000 to Golf to help cover shortfall in revenues, transfer resources
of $249,000 to Street to help cover costs in excess of revenues, and increase capital outlay
by $10,000 for additional Golf landscaping costs.
Page 1 of 4
Streetcar Adopted Revised Difference
Requirements:
Materials and Services $ 126,000 $ 191,000 $ 65,000
Contingency 345,674 280,674 (65,000)
Explanation of Major Changes:
To reflect additional and necessary rail line maintenance for the trolley.
Golf Course Fund Adopted
Revised
Difference
Resources:
Sales and Services 819,000
$ 778,000
(41,000)
Transfer From General Fund 15,000
56,000
41,000
Explanation of Major Changes:
Transfer of resources from the General Fund to cover a shortfall
in Sales and Services.
Tennis Fund Adopted
Revised
Difference
Requirements:
Personal Services $ 135,000
$ 144,000
$ 9,000
Materials and Services 151,000
176,000
25,000
Capital Outlay 60,000
26,000
(34,000)
Explanation of Major Changes:
Actual expenditures for Personal Services may go over budget due to a pro -longed indoor tennis
season. The Tennis Study - originally budgeted in Capital Outlay - will not be capitalized, but
spent out of Professional & Technical Services.
Water Fund Adopted
Revised
Difference
Requirements:
Personal Services $ 1,363,000
$ 1,394,000
$ 31,000
Debt Service 814,000
944,000
130,000
Transfers to Other Funds 956,000
1,116,000
160,000
Contingency 6,487,300
6,166,300
(321,000)
Explanation of Major Changes:
To correspond with estimated compensation cost, and debt service payments.
Transfer to reflect actual services provided by Engineering $160,000.
Wastewater Fund Adopted
Revised
Difference
Requirements:
Debt Service $ 14,557,500
$ 14,579,500
$ 22,000
Transfers to Other Funds 1,033,000
1,205,000
172,000
Contingency 5,185,685
$ 4,991,685
(194,000)
Explanation of Major Changes:
To correspond with actual debt service payment and transfer
for actual cost of services provided by
Engineering, $172,000.
Page 2 of 4
Surface Water Fund
Adopted
Revised
Difference
Requirements:
172,000
672,000
219,000
Personal Services
$ 255,000
$ 270,000
$ 15,000
Materials & Services
371,000
386,000
15,000
Transfers to Other Funds
611,000
832,000
221,000
Contingency
1,319,328
1,068,328
(251,000)
Explanation of Major Changes:
To correspond with actual estimated
compensation cost, and spending. Transfer to reflect cost
of services of $219,000 provided by
Engineering and $2,000
provided by Maintenance & Motor Pool.
Street Fund Adopted Revised
Resources.
Transfer From General Fund - $ 249,000
Requirements
Difference
$ 249,000
Personal Services $ 457,000 $ 484,000 $ 27,000
Transfers to Other Funds 689,000 911,000 222,000
$ 249.000
Explanation of Major Changes:
To correspond with actual estimated compensation cost. Transfer to reflect cost of services
of $222,000 provided by Engineering.
Maint. Services & Motor Pool Fund Adopted Revised Difference
Resources:
Transfer From General Fund (Police) 12,000 $ 43,000 31,000
Transfer From Surface Water 52,000 $ 54,000 2,000
$ 33,000
Requirements:
Personal Services
$ 813,000 $ 846,000 $ 33,000
Explanation of Major Changes:
To reflect additional resource transfers from Police and Surface Water for additional services provided;
and to correspond with actual estimated compensation cost.
Engineering Fund
Resources:
License & Fees
Transfer From Water Fund
Transfer From Wastewater
Transfer From Surface Water
Transfer From Street
Adopted
$ 1,338,000
343,000
365,000
453,000
459,000
Revised Difference
565,000
$ (773,000)
503,000
160,000
537,000
172,000
672,000
219,000
681,000
222.000
Explanation of Major Changes:
To reflect additional resource transfers from the utilities for services provided by Engineering.
Page 3 of 4
L.O.-Tigard Water Partnership
Adopted
Revised
Difference
Requirements:
Personal Services
$ 250,000
$ 300,000
$ 50,000
Materials and Services
150,000
175,000
25,000
Contingency
275,000
200,000
(75,000)
Explanation of Major Changes:
To correspond with actual cost, due to increased public outreach activity.
Section 3. The City Manager or his designee shall certify, file with, and give notice to
the County Clerks and County Assessors of Clackamas County, Multnomah County,
Washington County, Oregon and the Oregon Department of Revenues, information as
required by ORS 294.555.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15th day
of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Jack Hoffman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney's Office
Page 4 of 4
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
SUBJECT: Budget Adoption Process & Resolutions
DATE: June 14, 2010
ACTION
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
3 80 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
Consider the Lake Oswego Budget Committee's Approved Budget, deliberate and incorporate any changes,
hold a public hearing, and adopt resolutions to receive state shared revenues, make appropriations, levy
taxes, and adopt a budget for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year.
BACKGROUND
On April 19, 2010, 1 forwarded to the Lake Oswego Budget Committee the Proposed 2010-2011 Fiscal Year
budget which included:
Citywide Budget
Revenue $134,983,000
Operating Expenditures 68,717,000
Debt Service 7,620,000
Capital Outlay 55,988,776
Contingency 35,032,612
$167,358,388
On May 19, the Budget Committee approved a budget to forward to the City Council for its consideration.
The overall Approved Budget reflects the following:
Citywide Budget
Revenue $134,757,000
Operating Expenditures
Debt Service
Capital Outlay
Contingency
Total
68,182,000
7,620,000
56,319,776
35,004,612
$167,126,388
Page 2
The Operating Budget includes personal services, materials and services, and transfers, and generally
reflects the ongoing costs related to providing the baseline programs and services that residents have come
to enjoy and expect.
Citywide Operating I
Personal Services
Materials & Services
Transfers
enditures
$37,334,000
19,501,000
11,347,000
Total $68,182,000
The City's General Fund includes the general government functions of public safety, parks & recreation,
library and City administration. Since these important functions share one primary source of revenue (e.g.,
property taxes), the General Fund is often the most difficult financial entity to balance. As such, much of
the Budget Committee's focus was on the General Fund.
General Fund Budget
Revenue
Operating Expenditures
Debt Service
Capital Outlay
Contingency
Total
DISCUSSION
Budget Adoption Process
$42,772,000
$41,897,000
600,000
466,000
7,326,000
$50,289,000
At this stage of the budget process, the City Council considers the Budget Committee's Approved Budget,
conducts a public hearing on the Committee's recommendation, discusses and deliberates on possible
changes or adjustments, and adopts a budget for the 2010-2011 fiscal year. If the City Council elects to
make adjustments to the Approved Budget, under Oregon budget law, the Council has the authority to
make changes up to $5,000 or 10% of the total of each individual City fund, whichever is greater. If changes
exceed 10%, an amended budget must be republished and another budget hearing is required with proper
notice.
In addition to reviewing and discussing the Budget Committee's Approved Budget, staff also asks that the
Council consider some recommended changes to the Approved Budget that are proposed by the City's
Budget Team.
The proposed procedure for adopting the budget follows:
1. Hear a presentation on the Approved Budget and the Budget Team's recommended changes;
2. Ask questions of staff;
3. Conduct the public hearings on State Shared Revenues and adopt Resolution 10-29 — State -Shared
Revenue Certification, and Resolution 10-30 — Elect to Receive State Shared Revenue;
4. Open the public hearing on the Approved Budget and take testimony;
5. Close the public hearing and deliberate on the Budget;
Page 3
6. Consider and make amendments including the proposed Budget Team adjustments; and
7. Make amendments, if necessary, and adopt Resolution 10-31— Budget Adoption, making
appropriations, levying taxes, and adopting a budget for fiscal year 2010-11.
Budget Committee Recommendations
The Budget Committee was presented a balanced Proposed Budget that recommended a number of
service cuts in order to adapt to the New Normal — a condition of slow revenue growth, increasing costs
and economic uncertainty that requires local governments to continuously review and make adjustments
to baseline services.
In review, the reductions incorporated in the Proposed General Fund Budget, and affirmed by the Budget
Committee included:
• Postpone City website upgrade, $100,000
• Eliminate Fire Department Emergency Medical Services Coordinator Position and move FTE to a
Kelly Relief Fire Fighter resulting in overtime savings, $100,000
• Reduce Library's books and materials purchase and replacement budget, $50,000
• Reduce neighborhood planning services and reassign 1.5 neighborhood planners to the
Comprehensive Plan periodic review process, $0
• Eliminate vacant Police Officer position, $100,000
• Reduce Finance front counter service, $47,000
• Eliminate Community Service Officer position, $90,000
• Reduce Parks & Maintenance summer maintenance labor and field maintenance services, $55,000
• Delay computer replacements, implement telephone cost savings, $50,000
Other Funds:
• Reduce Traffic Engineer position to half-time, $ 64,000
• Eliminate 1 Engineering Technician position, $90,000
• Reassign 1 Engineering Inspector to the LOIS project
In addition to receiving the budget with the proposed reductions, the Committee heard presentations from
the Department Directors, received public testimony at each of the meetings, and drafted a list of ideas
and/or changes to consider prior to approving a budget to send to Council. The list included many of the
City Manager's proposed service reductions in addition to changes offered by Committee members and the
public at -large. The Budget Committee's final deliberations resulted in several changes being approved for
inclusion into the Approved Budget.
In the General Fund, the Budget Committee's changes resulted in an additional $150,000 in ongoing
resources over expenses and $160,000 in one-time resources.
A list of all changes moving forward is included as an attachment. Please note that the associated dollar
amounts are either bracketed with parentheses (e.g., unfavorable to the fund balance — decrease in
revenue increase in expenditures) or without bracket (e.g., favorable to the fund). The new changes
presented by the Budget Committee and their financial and operational impacts are described as follows:
Page 4
General Fund
• 10% Targeted Reduction in Development and Training, $33,000
Reductions in development and training will affect City departments and services differently. In
some cases, staff will be less informed of current best practices, polices, and regulations in their
specific field, while in other cases, there will be fewer opportunities for training on latest
technologies, trends and software.
Specific impacts to the targeted reductions are described below:
o City Council, $2,000: The reduction results in less funds available for Councilors to attend
the major conferences such as the National League of Cities, Oregon League of Cities,
RailVolution, US Conference of Mayors, etc.
o City Manager's Office, $3,000: In addition to forgoing one conference this year for 2 City
Manager's Office personnel, the Office will have not have as many planned participants in
the Chamber's Lake Oswego Leadership program, and there are less funds set aside for city-
wide sustainability trainings.
o Finance, $6,000: Software utilization and financial report training for new personnel will be
delayed.
o Economic & Capital Development, $10,000: The scope of the proposed training program for
local business training will be reduced.
o Library, $1,000: Training will be adjusted accordingly and look towards a "training the
trainer" type of program.
o Planning & Building, $9,000: The additional cut would delay or cancel Accela training for the
new Building Division software transition, delay emergency management training (ATC- 20)
for rapid building assessment, and allow the Department to meet the bare minimum
training requirements for the certified personnel as required by State Regulations.
o Parks & Recreation, $2,000: The reduction will require the Department to focus only on the
training that is required by law and to reduce exposure to safety/liability. On average, the
Department sends four people per year in Maintenance and eight people in Recreation to
the state conference (we rotate this experience to different staff each year). The reduction
further limits the number of people we can send.
• Eliminate GF portion of funding for Economic Development Administrative Assistant, $33,000
Without the position, the Department Director and the Economic Development Manager would
have to perform their own administrative support. This would be an inefficient use of both
employees' time. This will result in a lack of productivity and minimize staff's ability to meet work
programs and performance expectations negatively impacting economic development, liaison work
to businesses and capital development projects.
When the Department was formed, there was a portion of an administrative assistant that the
Director of Redevelopment shared with the Director of Building and Planning Services. At the time
of formation, the Director of Capital and Economic Development, and later the Economic
Development Manager, utilized the staff services in the City Manager's office that were already
shared with the Mayor, Council, City Manager and Assistant City Manager. Last fiscal year, an
administrative support position was eliminated from the City Manager's Office. The need for
Page 5
administrative support is an ongoing issue. Additional work expectations have also been added
requiring the expertise of staff in Economic and Capital Development to be directed towards non-
administrative duties.
• Reduce Economic Development Materials & Services budget, eliminating funds for renewing the
lease for Economic & Capital Development downtown offices, $9,000
Department staff would likely relocate to the West End Building (WEB) or current staff deemed
necessary for City Hall would move to the WEB. The vast majority of the work done by the
Department is with staff in City Hall and with businesses and individuals in the downtown
area. Locating the Department offices at the WEB would result in several trips to and from
downtown on any given day. This would not only be an inefficient use of staff time, the Department
would lose some amount of productivity and would be less effective. For LORA in particular,
customer service would be reduced given the remoteness of the WEB to the East End Urban
Renewal District. While the loss of time and travel costs can be estimated, the additional loss in
productivity and effectiveness would be difficult to measure.
In addition, there would be one-time moving and WEB renovation costs that would need to be
considered.
• Reduce Parks & Recreation Master Plan Budget, $25,000
The reduction in budget for the Master Plan will result in a change of the scope of work. A
significant portion of the scope where there is greatest discretion is in public outreach and the
decrease will likely affect that portion of the work.
• Reduce budgeted amount for Fourth of July Fireworks, $3,000
Regardless of total cost, the City will contribute a maximum of $15,000 for the Lake Corporation's
Fourth of July Fireworks celebration.
• Increase Planning & Building Services Budget for Neighborhood Enhancement Grants, ($20,000)
Reinstatement of the Neighborhood Grant Funds will require additional Planning staff
administration. This may impact the City's ability to assist in the production of the Neighborhood
newsletters to the level the City has done in the past.
• Reduce Human Resources Professional & Technical Services, $40,000
Depending upon the number of labor disputes and/or employee legal matters, the reduction in the
budget for professional and technical services could result in the inability to use a professional
recruiting firm should the City opt to conduct a search for a new Police Chief.
• Provide matching funds to the School District to resurface the Lakeridge Tennis Courts, ($30,000)
Parks & Recreation staff will work with the School District to carry out this request.
Page 6
• Reduce General Fund personal services 1% to account for a vacancy rate, $190,000
Finance staff will implement this 1% cut in General Fund personal services as a targeted cut to
certain Departments, as found on the attached schedule.
• Increase Parks & Recreation Funding to keep the temporary Skate Park open and staffed, ($47,000)
The Skate Park will remain open and Parks & Recreation will hire temporary staff to staff and
maintain the park during the open season.
• Increase Parks & Recreation funding to keep the Swim Park staffed with a lifeguard, ($21,000)
Temporary staff will be hired to provide lifeguard services at the Lake Oswego Swim Park.
• Eliminate operating transfer from the Tennis Fund, ($35,000)
This transfer was an amount over the allocation of administrative costs. Removing the transfer
reduces General Fund resources and increases Tennis Fund resources.
• Reduce Portland General Electric (PGE) franchise fee ($50,000)
General fund revenue will be reduced.
Other Funds
• Eliminate funding for the water conservation demonstration garden, Water Fund, $100,000
The Water Management and Conservation Plan mandated by the Water Resources Commission and
adopted by the City Council includes the development of an "outdoor water use/water conservation
demonstration garden" as an educational tool. The garden was budgeted as a CIP project
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Water Management and Conservation Plan that would
serve as an example of water -wise landscaping and irrigation practices. The proposed location was
the lawn at the West End Building which would also reduce City water use.
• Increase funding for Water Conservation toilet rebate program, Water Fund, ($10,000)
The Proposed Budget included $20,000 for the program. The Budget Committee's adjustment
increases the available amount by $10,000, which will allow further approximately 90 more water
customers to receive rebates for replacing pre -1996 toilets.
Fund Iron Heritage Trail, Tourism Fund ($30,000)
Tourism funds will be made available to create the Iron Heritage Trail as recommended by the
Historic Resources Advisory Board.
Page 7
10% target reduction in Training & Development, $14,000
o Tennis Facility Fund, $1,000
o Surface Water Fund, $12,000
o LO -Tigard Water Partnership Fund, $1,000
The quality and quantity of training that staff can participate in will decline.
• Fund Cooks Butte Phase 3, Systems Development Charges Fund, ($60,000)
Parks & Recreation staff will manage and implement the third phase of the Cooks Butte
Management Plan, the construction of the trail identified in the Cooks Butte Trail Plan.
Additional Proposed Management Changes
Since the Budget Committee process began two months ago, some changes or additions to the Proposed
Budget have come to light. These changes involve adjustments to our revenue projections in the General
and Street Funds. First, new information about the County Library District has resulted in a new estimate
for the revenue to be expected from the levy. A portion of this additional revenue is a result of the recent
election where Tualatin residents in Clackamas County approved annexing into the County Library District.
In addition, at its June 8, 2010 meeting, the City Council asked staff to work with a Council sub -committee
to explore public development options at the West End property. The City will need to retain architectural
services to review the various siting opportunities that the property may provide. With the remaining
unappropriated one-time General Fund balances, and while I do not yet have a specific quote for services
since the scope of work is yet to be determined, I would suggest that the Council appropriate $50,000 in
the City Manager's Budget for this one-time special project. I would also ask the City Council to consider
setting aside one-time money to pay for the repair and/or replacement of the remaining chiller in the WEB.
If the chiller fails, I have been advised that the WEB will be unable to be occupied during the summer.
Despite the fact that a new chiller has been estimated to cost up to $250,000, 1 would suggest the Council
initially appropriate $50,000 for the WEB HVAC system improvements.
In other funds, upon careful review of the Street Maintenance Fee, it was discovered that an adjustment in
methodology may be needed for the golf course category affecting both the City's golf course and the
Oswego Lake Country Club. This change would result in lower revenue to the Street Fund.
In review, the proposed management changes to the Approved Budget are:
• General Fund, Intergovernmental Revenue, $230,000
• General Fund, City Manager's Budget , $100,000
• Street Fund, Street Maintenance Fee Revenue, ($44,000), but increased resource transfer from the
General Fund $44,000 with a net $0 effect
• Golf Fund, Materials & Services, $9,000
• Transfer from General Fund to Street Fund ($44,000)
Page 8
Final Financial Balancing
Upon conclusion of the work of the Budget Committee and the additional recommended actions by the
Budget Team, the City Council finds itself with the opportunity to appropriate additional resources:
Fund
Ongoing
One -Time
General
$150,000
$160,000
230,000 (Library Levy)
$380,000
44,000 (Transfer)
100,000 (WEB)
$336,000
$ 60,000
Street
($44,000) (Revenue Shortage)
44,000 (Transfer from GF)
$0
Golf
$9,000 Material & Services
I would recommend that the City Council consider the changes noted above leaving funds available to
consider for further appropriation or to allow to be returned to the fund balances.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council conducts the public hearings for State Revenue Sharing and State Shared
Revenues and adopt Resolution 10-29 and 10-30. The State shared revenue from cigarette and liquor taxes
will be placed in the City's General Fund and the revenue will support general government purposes and
activities. The motor vehicle fees are budgeted in the Street Fund and help support the operations and
maintenance of the City's street and road system.
Then, consider the Budget Committee's recommendations, hold the public hearing, deliberate, make
changes, if necessary, and finally, adopt Resolution 10-31, with amendments.
The resolutions and their purposes are defined as follows:
Resolution 10-29, State -Shared Revenue Certification
Oregon budget law requires that a City certify that it provides at least four of the
municipal services enumerated in the attached resolution if it wishes to receive
state shared revenues such as cigarette, liquor, and highway taxes. For Fiscal
Year 2010-11, we estimate $483,000 in cigarette and liquor taxes budgeted in
the General Fund, and $1.82 million in motor vehicle fees/state gas tax budgeted
in the Street Fund.
Resolution 10-30, Elect to Receive State Shared Revenue
Oregon budget law also requires an approved resolution indicating the City's
election to receive the funds. The Budget Committee held its required public
hearing on the possible uses of these funds on May 13, 2010. The City Council is
also required to hold a public hearing on the possible uses and certify to the
Page 9
State that these hearings were held. As part of tonight's actions, the City will
have fulfilled its requirements under state law to receive these funds.
Resolution 10-31, Budget Adoption
Resolution 10-31 adopts the City of Lake Oswego budget for Fiscal Year 2010-
2011, making appropriations and levying property taxes. The appropriations in
the resolution reflect the budget presented to City Council as approved by the
Budget Committee. Any changes to the Budget Committee's Approved Budget
must also be reflected in the resolution.
CONCLUSION
This year marks the second year of a budget process that is more transparent, inclusive, and hopefully,
valuable to all participants. It is also the second budget developed during the worst economic climate since
the great depression. One of the reasons I gave for transitioning to an annual budget is to allow us more
flexibility and control in our financial plans, and effectively respond and adjust to the economic conditions.
The one-year budget also allows us to have a more robust public process each year. My hope is that we
continue to refine and improve the process so that we maximum the use and effectiveness of staff, Council,
and the public.
Staff will present a five-year financial outlook that will help guide our budgeting and resource allocation in
future processes. In addition, as we move forward in this era of the New Normal, it will be important for
staff, Council, and the public to understand the range of services the City provides, prioritize those services,
and make the difficult trade-offs and decisions on the level and quality of those services.
Your City's Management Team worked hard to develop a budget plan that was at once responsible and
feasible. I would like to thank the Council, members of the Budget Committee and the public for their
active participation in this important process. Finally, the City's Budget Team of Ursula Euler, Shawn Cross,
David Donaldson, Kam Frederickson, and Jordan Wheeler certainly deserve special recognition for their
efforts in developing and presenting a thoughtful and balanced budget and shepherding the City through
this process.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vacancy Rate Chart
2. Budget Committee Changes to the Proposed Budget
3. Resolution 10-29
4. Resolution 10-30
5. Resolution 10-31
City of Lake Oswego 2010-11 Budget
Budget Committee Approved Changes - Detail by Department
General Fund -Health Insurance
Benefits reduction for revised information from insurance companies
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's Office
$ 5,000
Facilities Management
2,000
Finance
4,000
Information Technology
4,000
Library
25,000
ACC
4,000
Planning & Building
11,000
Police
50,000
Fire
19,000
Parks
16,000
$ 140,000
General Fund 1% Vacancy Rate by Department
Reduction to Personal Services
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's Office
$ 8,000
Human Resources
2,000
Finance
7,000
Information Technology
7,000
City Attorney's Office
4,000
Economic & Capital Development
2,000
Library
13,000
ACC
4,000
Planning
11,000
Building
13,000
Police
56,000
Fire
43,000
Parks
20,000
$ 190,000
D
LL
cc
W
W
f0
Q
O
O
O
0
Lo
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�
m
0
o
O
o
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
o 0
O
O
O
0 0
0
0
OO
O
O
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O 0
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
0
00
O
Ln
N
00 00
14
-F
n
t0
&
m'
t0
O&
u1
O
In
00
tf1
00 00
01
00
r•i
N
(D
'i
w
I-
w 'a•
U-)
rl
r-1
r -I
N
rl
�•-�
a -i ri
r-1
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p
O
O
O
0
0
0 o
O
O
u1
m'
O
M
^
C71
IJ1
m
m
Cml)
d'
Kr
N
v N
�
OJ
U
a
m
u
U
fII
0
ro m
m
p
CL -
E
p
41
O ar
t
O
a
LL
.V
H
J
4-
+�+
a C
u
O
a
o
o
°:
!0
' cu
c
mU
p NcD
a
N
a1
E
a
vOi >
N
m
C m E
O
Y
O
. O
E
t'O
O.
v
ca
E
0
M+`+
I 4+
CL
rCo
-�, N
Ocu
O
a1
'O
-Y
vii
O
C
.� a >
o
C
O
t9
O
N
In.
m
Ft
c
a u ra
LA
O
E
C
a
3
o
�,
m
o
o
'.'
C
a
y 41 a"
•m
p•
fl-
C
-O
y
CL
7
a
Do
m
LU
OD
C
ac
^
N
O
0
w
a
cu
a
O
aJ a
VF
�
'+J
H
O
VY
-
a
..
>
CL
�°
C
E
Ol
O
O
E
cu
(J
O
a
o
r-1
�w
O a� M
w- a- E
O
C
a
O
a
�1
a1
CL
vi
m
T
O
Ln
41
c
a
a)
°'
c
f0
u
u
7
7 c
7
VA
c
O-
N
.0
v
E
E
E
�_
m
7
3
N
0
W
v
w
v a a
1 R
a.
WOD
v
Q
W
W
V
CC II
Q' Q
C
76
G
�
-be
N
W
U-
�
G
�,
i'�if (4
3aj
Y
0
N
E
O u
u f0
a)
�_
aJ
?
J
C
C
y
W
-O
_C
O
cu o
LL
to
O p
m
C
O
wic
s
+
m
w o
7
a
a a
�o c
W
LM
m
�° a
o
v
E
r
LM
3 c
c o
.0
v -Oc
°'
E E
t c
C
l7
>
a
ro a1 .�
0) > �o
L
.+
C
a
-o
C
a
vl C
a s
rp C
�
O u
a
�c 3
a ro
a
H
0
Z O
Rt
m
Q
oC
H
H a
a F-
H H
Z a
Ln
f�
Nr
GO
Nn
0
n
-I
r1
NN
N
N
N
V
N
N
Q1
j
a+
C
c C
C
O
C 10
C
al
a
Z C
Z C
0
ra
m
3
7
viE
o
E c
m
c
c
C
c
C
j
a
3
T V
p>
0>
C O j
C a
E y
O
`
t c
s
a s
O
to
O
!_
U a
V a
a a:
v a
7 a
m
m
is
f°
c7 m
U m
>
>
>
u
u 0
u, 0
W 0
l7 O
l7 G
x m
a
a
a
-A a
O
O
O
0
Lo
N
O
U
>. 1
C�
G Q
•
•
i
I
I
•
OO
O
O
O
Ln
r-1
O
O
O
N
r•1
O
O
O
O
V1
r4
O
O
O
O
Ln
-I
O
O
O
O
M
ri
O
O
O
O
Ln
r -f
O
O
O
O
N
ri
O
O
O
O
M1
ri
0
0
0
d
Ln
r-1
0
0
0
O
Ln
r-1
0
0
0
O
o
ri
0
0
0
O
Ln
ri
0
0
0
6
o
ri
0
0
0
O
Ln
r-4
q0
'
a
- 2
O
I
I
o
m
w
k
O
m
W
ti
-jig
3
f0
O
N
O
N
v
no
m
a
CD
0 0 0 0
0 0 C
• I t
O O O p CD
O
R
n :Ln O' O
c0m m rl
•
N Ln
O �
p O O O O O
00 v cf m m
0
+.j
I�
Etw
I
Q `
0 c
C 0 O 3 Y
0 C aJ w
O a dG m
(a Q
N •�
0
L
U LO+'' w Y
aj-0 r4
on u Z V).
m �'
0i
°' a
CL ,. E .: yfa ai
E cu
c a c
o ° CL 0 a °'
1-4 ad) H ai a X 3 a "-
a cu a ami Ur"o cu m a
0 cu
"Q U C '� C E O E u h
O uO w Q U w 4
_ f9 ci cu
6. +J O
y Ln
� v an 1
1--`+° � o a m
0p a W: ra O a
+� N '� 0I c �'� m c a m a a
N ) a m a I" 0 m o
ar H a a h- LL U
m m
m Opw 0 o cm m m� Ln
m or -1
>QJ Oa r ,�
> C C cu O `I U m ~ m
a j ami I 0 V' aci 0 a y m
CD - -�--I -� I ~ ~ O O
ro O O C d W
a :3 a`r a`+ • A N a of y
Z1
u Q 0 c� m c°� c°� 3 3
ulI
RESOLUTION #10-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO IS ELIGIBLE IN THE FISCAL
YEAR 2010-11 FOR STATE -SHARED REVENUES (CIGARETTES, LIQUOR AND
HIGHWAY TAXES) BECAUSE IT PROVIDES FOUR OR MORE MUNICIPAL
SERVICES.
WHEREAS, ORS 221.760 provides as follows:
SECTION 1. The officer responsible for disbursing funds to cities under ORS 323.455,
366.785 to 366.820 and 471.805 shall, in the case of a city located within a county
having more than 100,000 inhabitants according to the most recent federal decennial
census, disburse such funds only if the city provides four or more of the following
services:
(1) Police protection
(2) Fire protection
(3) Street construction, maintenance, and lighting
(4) Sanitary sewer
(5) Storm sewers
(6) Planning, zoning, and subdivision control
(7) One or more utility services
and
WHEREAS, city officials recognize the desirability of assisting the state officer
responsible for determining the eligibility of cities to receive such funds in accordance
with ORS 221.760, now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego hereby
certifies that it provides the following municipal services enumerated in Section 1, ORS
221.760:
(1) Police protection
(2) Fire protection
(3) Street construction, maintenance, and lighting
(4) Sanitary sewer
(5) Storm sewers
(6) Planning, zoning, and subdivision control
(7) One or more utility services
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Page 1 of 2
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego held on the 15th day of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Jack Hoffman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
--Q
City Attorney's Office
Resolution #10-29
Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION #10-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DECLARING THE CITY OF
LAKE OSWEGO'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUE SHARING
FUNDS IN FISCAL YEAR 2010-11.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to ORS 221.770, the City hereby elects to receive state
revenues for the 2010-11 fiscal year.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Lake Oswego held on the 15th day of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney's Office
Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
Resolution #10-30 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION #10-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADOPTING
THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1,
2010, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, LEVYING AD VALOREM TAXES, AND CLASSIFYING
THE LEVY PURSUANT TO SECTION 11b, ARTICLE XI OF THE OREGON
CONSTITUTION.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the budget for the fiscal year 2010-11 as amended
in the sum of $179,315,308.
Section 2. The amounts listed below are hereby appropriated for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2010 for the purposes stated.
General Fund
City Council
City Attorney's Office
City Manager's Office
Economic & Capital Development
Redevelopment Agency
Facilities Management
Finance
Risk Management
Fire
Human Resources
Information Technology
Library
Municipal Court
Parks & Recreation
Adult Community Center
Planning & Building
Police
Nondepartmental
Contingency
Total Appropriations
84,000
574,000
1,903,000
1,610,000
216,000
939,000
1,430,000
690,000
8,274,000
548,000
1,724,000
3,142,000
624,000
5,882,000
1,025,000
4,190,000
9,147,000
961,000
7.326.000
$ 50,289,000
PUBLIC WORKS:
Enaineerina Fund
Personal Services $ 2,093,000
Materials & Services 324,000
Transfers to Other Funds 476,000
Contingency 145,000
Total Appropriations $ 3,038,000
Maintenance Services & Motor Pool Fund
Personal Services $ 844,000
Materials & Services 311,000
Transfers to Other Funds 158,000
Contingency 100,000
Total Appropriations $ 1,413,000
Street Fund
Personal Services
$ 402,000
Materials & Services
1,149,000
Transfers to Other Funds
1,037,000
Capital Outlay
1,514,000
Contingency
259,732
Total Appropriations
$ 4,361,732
Surface Water Fund
Personal Services $ 326,000
Materials & Services 817,000
Debt Service 235,000
Transfers to Other Funds 947,000
Capital Outlay 305,000
Contingency 632,328
Total Appropriations $ 3,262,328
Systems Development Charges Fund
Capital Outlay $ 60,000
Contingency 3,440,139
Total Appropriations $ 3,500,139
Wastewater Fund
Personal Services
$ 1,090,000
Materials & Services
3,389,000
Debt Service
2,489,000
Transfers to Other Funds
1,374,000
Capital Outlay
44,466,000
Contingency
17,843,877
Total Appropriations
$ 70,651,877
Water Fund
Personal Services $ 1,440,000
Materials & Services 2,220,000
Debt Service 958,000
Transfers to Other Funds 5,313,000
Capital Outlay 1,178,000
Contingency 3,818,209
Total Appropriations $ 14,927,209
Lake Osweao - Tigard Water Supply Partnership Fund
Personal Services $ 459,000
Materials & Services 104,000
Transfers to Other Funds 91,000
Capital Outlay 8,120,000
Contingency 1,045,000
Total Appropriations $ 9,819,000
OTHER PARKS & RECREATION:
Golf Course Fund
Personal Services $ 508,000
Materials & Services 303,000
Transfers to Other Funds 143,000
Contingency 11,366
Total Appropriations $ 965,366
Tennis Facilitv Fund
Personal Services $ 129,000
Materials & Services 123,000
Transfers to Other Funds 123,000
Contingency 91,879
Total Appropriations $ 466,879
OTHER FUNDS:
Trolley Fund
Materials & Services $ 120,000
Transfers to Other Funds 60,000
Contingency 272,775
Total Appropriations $ 452,775
Tourism Fund
Materials & Services $ 10,000
Transfers to Other Funds 307,000
Capital Outlay 30,000
Total Appropriations $ 347,000
Percent for Art Fund
Materials & Services $ 88,000
Transfers to Other Funds 7,000
Capital Outlay 12,000
Total Appropriations $ 107,000
Bonded Debt Service Fund
Debt Service $ 3,338,000
Total Appropriations $ 3,338,000
Assessment Proiect Fund
Capital Outlay $ 63,000
Contingency 18,307
Total Appropriations $ 81,307
Bicycle Path Fund
Capital Outlay $ 105,776
Total Appropriations $ 105,776
Summary Totals for All Funds
Total Appropriations $ 167,126,388
Total Unappropriated Reserves 12,188,920
TOTAL ADOPTED BUDGET for 2010-11 $ 179,315,308
Section 3. BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego hereby imposes
the taxes provided for in the adopted budget at the rate of, for FY 2010-11, $4.9703 per $1,000
(inside LOSD) and $4.5884 per $1,000 (outside LOSD) of assessed value for operations and in
the amount of $3,332,979 for bonds and that taxes are hereby imposed for 2010-11 tax years
upon the assessed value of all taxable property; and classified pursuant to the categories and
subject to the limits of section 11 b, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution as follows:
FY 2010-11
Various Funds (general government -other than education):
Inside Lake Oswego School District 4.9703
Outside Lake Oswego School District 4.5884
Debt Service Fund (excluded from M5 limitation) $3,332,979
Section 4. The City has renamed the Streetcar Fund to the Trolley Fund in this budget.
Section 5. The City Manager or his designee shall certify, file with and give notice to the County
Assessors of Clackamas County, Multnomah County and Washington County, Oregon and the
Department of Revenue information as required by ORS 294.555 and 310.060.
Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
The above resolution statements were approved and declared adopted at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 15th day of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Jack Hoffman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED S TO FORM:
City Attorney's Office
Maria Meneghin
1179 Sunningdale Road
June 15, 2010
I. Ll
I am speaking about the $1.1 million from the General Fund Reserves that is proposed to
go for the Foothills Framework plan.
I have read the agreement that Brant Williams has proposed and I think he has put
together an agreement that both protects the City's interests and brings forward this
investment in the City's future. I agree with the City's stance that Foothills may be our
best opportunity to enhance our tax roles, keep pace with Metro's density requirements,
and provide much needed smaller and more affordable housing that will help Lake
Oswego continue as a vibrant community that encompasses many age groups and
financial levels. I like the idea of having a clear picture of what will and will not work in
the Foothills area so that the City can take advantage of development opportunities as
they arise, and perhaps take some of the heat off established neighborhoods. I appreciate
how complex the negotiations have been to bring all the parties together—it is a tipping
point that is not easily reached.
But, as much as all this appeals to me, I cannot support the proposal to spend $1.1 million
because of the continuing financial problem at the other end of town—the West End
Building. At their June 8t' meeting, the City Council basically made a decision to once
again postpone making a decision. I realize, and sympathize, that there is no good
solution to the WEB financial situation, and will not reiterate the problems associated
with it here. However, the fact that the City Council decided to form a subcommittee to
explore combinations of uses and then bring them for voter approval at some later, but
not set, date disturbs me. Judging from the last two, very close advisory and bond
measure votes regarding the WEB, I believe there is an even chance that a new GO Bond
measure will not pass. In which case, there may well be a call on the City's General
Fund Reserves to fill the funding gap in one way or another. This in turn may affect our
Bond rating as our Reserves are spent down. Spending $1.1 million now from those
Reserves, without having the WEB question answered, seems fiscally imprudent. I am
afraid that if it is budgeted, the temptation to spend will be irresistible. I think spending
the money for the Foothills Framework plan should be postponed until the WEB issue is
settled—I hope that will be within the next fiscal year.
Library comments
City Council — June 15, 2010
Colleen Bennett
2. �
I have been out of town for over three months and missed all the previous discussions and
hearing opportunities on the budget. I am glad to have this opportunity to add my comments in
support of the Library.
For the past 20 of the 30 years we have lived in Lake Oswego, I have been a library cheerleader
along with many others.
I don't check out a lot of books but I am at the Library a lot!
I volunteered for the Library Advisory Board for six years, am serving on the Friends of the
Library Board, and have been on the Lake Oswego Reads committee since the program began four
years ago. I am always asking questions of the reference department, checking with Librarians on new
books and enjoying the music and author programs and art displays. I like watching children dash
downstairs to see a puppet show and then they enthusiastically check out a bag full of books. I'm
always running into friends while at the library. I am as comfortable in the library now as when I was
growing up in the 50's using a Carnigie Library. I mention all of the above to point out once again that
a library is so much more than books on a shelf.
It is amazing how Director Baars and his wonderful staff can provide such great service when
we know they are operating under very crowded conditions. The volunteer coordinator oversees 500
volunteers and operates from a windowless former storage closet. She does this while also running the
Lake Oswego Reads program.
I worry how long our Library can continue to give the service we all have become use to and
than also share bragging rights because of our number one status in the State.
I am very aware of the many financial decisions you have to make while planning for the future
of Lake Oswego. I am advocating for you to continue funding the library as you have in the past from
the general fund and save Library District monies for the future. I know that has probably been
discussed over and over but once again you know my opinion.
I will continue with my cheerleading duties to help keep the Library the gem that makes the
quality of life what it is in Lake Oswego.
Thanks for this opportunity and please remember the Library.
Qcvat�-�- zu-�--N-
City of Lake Oswego Fiscal Year 2010-11 Adopted Budget
June 16 Recap
So what happened??
Proposed Budget
After the Department Budgets were submitted and reviewed, the following cuts were made in
order to balance the Proposed Budget (struck items indicated it was added back later in the
process):
• Postpone Council Goal to upgrade city website (CMO, ($100,000))
• Reduce the Library's books and materials purchase and replacement budget (Library,
$50,000)
• Reduce neighborhood planning services and reassign neighborhood planners to the
Comprehensive Plan periodic review process (Planning, no change)
• Eliminate/do not fill 1 vacant Police Officer position (Police, ($100,000))
• Reduce Finance front counter service (passport services) (Finance, ($47,000))
• Delay computer replacements, implement telephone cost savings (IT, $50,000))
• Eliminate 1 Police Community Service Officer position (Police, ($90,000))
• Reduce Parks and Recreation summer maintenance labor and field maintenance
services (Parks, ($55,000))
• Reduce Police Materials & Services and Special Pay (Police, ($55,000))
• Reduce Traffic Engineer position to half-time (Engineering, ($64,000))
• Eliminate 1 Engineering Technician position (Engineering, ($90,000))
• Reassign 1 Engineering Inspector to the LOIS project (Engineering, LOIS)
Approved Budget (Budget Committee)
During the 5 weeks of Budget Committee meetings, the Budget Committee made the following
changes to the Proposed Budget. These changes, along with revisions identified by the Budget
Team, were forwarded to the City Council as the Approved Budget. Notice that the changes
include both adding back some cuts in the Proposed Budget and their own changes.
• Target a 10% reduction in staff development and training budget across all funds, except
Police and Fire Departments (various departments see attachment, ($33,000))
0 Reduce projected PGE Franchise Fee revenue (General Fund, ($50,000))
• Reduce employee benefits budget based on updated health insurance premiums
information (various departments see attachment ($140,000))
• Reduce Fourth of July firework show contribution (CMO, ($3,000))
FT€General Pund pertleR) ((€E99, $33 nnn)1
• Reduce personal services 1% in the General Fund to account for salary savings that
occur through position vacancies (various departments see attachment ($190,000))
and qpr,,qc;es budget with fer FenewiRg the
r'ital eNmeRt Y , ,
• Provide matching funds for the school district to resurface the Lakeridge Tennis Courts
(General Fund Nondepartmental, $30,000)
• Reduce budget for Parks & Recreation Master Plan (Parks, ($25,000))
• Increase budget for Neighborhood Enhancement Grants (Planning, $20,000)
• Reduce Human Resources Professional & Technical services budget (HR, ($40,000))
• Eliminate the additional transfer from the Tennis Fund to the General Fund ($35,000))
• Eliminate the water conservation demonstration garden project (Water, ($100,000))
• Increase funding for the water conservation toilet rebate program (Water, $10,000)
• Budget the Cooks Butte Phase 3 Project using funds from Parks SDCs (SDCs, ($60,000))
• Fund the Iron Heritage Trail project via Tourism Fund (Tourism, ($30,000))
Finance/Management Changes
• Adjust benefits in the City Attorney's Office, (CAO, $7,000)
• Reduce part-time salaries and benefits in Golf Fund (the dollars had moved to
professional services), ($47,000)
• Adjust (reduce) transfer to Golf Fund due to reduction in Golf personal services (General
Fund, $44,000)
• Decrease Bonded Debt property tax calculations due to latest projections, (Bonded
Debt, ($87,000))
• Adjust Materials & Services expense in SDC Fund, ($30,000)
Adopted Budget
On June 15th, the City Council made their own changes to the Budget, in some cases reversing
Budget Committee recommendations and incorporating further changes recommended by
Staff.
Management Changes
• Recognize additional Library District tax intergovernmental revenue (General Fund,
$230,000)
• Reduce Street Fund's revenue from Street Maintenance Fees (Street Fund, ($44,000))
• Increase transfer to the Street Fund from the General Fund (General Fund, $44,000)
• Reduce Golf Fund's Street Maintenance Fee charge (Golf, $9,000)
• Fund repairs to the WEB's Chiller and further Site Analyses for the WEB campus (CMO
$100,000)
City Council Actions
• Fund the Fire Department Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Coordinator (Fire,
$100,000)
• Fund the Administrative Assistant for Economic Development and restore funding for
leasing downtown office space for the Economic & Capital Development Office (ECDD,
$42,000)
The result of the accepted Budget Committee recommendations, Management changes, and
City Council Actions, was $254,000 "left on the table." The City Council voted to move these
funds to the General Fund's contingency.
With the amendments, the resolution to adopt the FY2010-11 Budget was passed by City
Council with a 6-1 vote.
Development & Training Reductions
Department/Fund
City Council
2,000
City Manager's Office
3,000
Finance
6,000
Economic & Capital Development
10,000
Library
1,000
Planning & Building
9,000
Parks
2,000
Tennis Facility Fund
1,000
Surface Water Fund
12,000
Tigard Water Partnership
1,000
City of Lake Oswego 2010-11 Budget
Budget Committee Approved Changes - Detail by Department
General Fund - Health Insurance
Benefits reduction for revised information from insurance companies
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's Office
$ 5,D00
Facilities Management
2,000
Finance
4,000
Information Technology
4,000
Library
25,000
ACC
4,000
Planning & Building
11,000
Police
50,000
Fire
19,000
Parks
16,000
$ 140,000
General Fund 1% Vacancy Rate by Department
Reduction to Personal Services
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's Office
Human Resources
Finance
Information Technology
City Attorney's Office
Economic & Capital Development
Li bra ry
ACC
Planning
Building
Police
Fire
Parks
June 15, 2010
$ 8,000
2,000
7,000
7,000
4,000
2,000
13,000
4,000
11,000
13,000
5 6, 000
43,000
?n nnn
lyU,Uuu
J'J
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Kim Gilmer, Parks & Recreation Director
76 1111!r
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public
Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings and approving a
special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and authorizing
the Mayor to sign a three year contract with the Arts Council of Lake Oswego for
FY10-11 through FY12-13.
DATE: June 7, 2010
ACTION
The Parks & Recreation Director requests the City Council approve Resolution 10-32 making findings
and approving a special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and
authorizing the Mayor to sign a three year contract with the Arts Council of Lake Oswego for FY10-
11 through FY12-13.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Arts Council of Lake Oswego has been under contract with the City of Lake Oswego to
administer the City's public art program and provide specified public arts programs since June of
2003. The contractual agreement for FY 09-10 to provide these services expires June 30, 2010. A
budget of $100,000 is proposed to be authorized by the City Council for FY10-11 at its June 15, 2010
meeting for these services. A new contract must be executed to continue the services.
According to the City contracting rules and procedures all personal services contracts over $100,000
must have at least three competitive proposals. To award a contract without receiving competitive
proposals requires the City Council to approve a special procurement contract with the Arts Council.
The special procurement authorization would exempt the solicitation of the contract from the
Request for Proposal requirement for "major personal service contracts," pursuant to LOC 102-
0277(4).
In addition, staff is proposing that a three year contract be entered into with the Arts Council to
streamline the administration of the agreement. A three year contract will continue to allow the
City flexibility in determining funding on an annual basis as well as make any programmatic
Page 2
adjustments as they become necessary.
DISCUSSION
Special Procurement Contract
Attached are findings that support the award of a special procurement contract with the Arts
Council of Lake Oswego (Exhibit A). In general, the findings state:
• The City established the Lake Oswego Arts Commission in 1992 to provide recommendations to the
City Council related to public art and to administer the City's newly -created Percent for Art program
and develop and administer other arts programs.
• Despite the Commission's many achievements, attempts at raising funds for public art through
private contributions were less successful, noting the reluctance of potential donors to make
contributions to government entities.
• As a result, the City encouraged the formation of a private non-profit organization that would be in
a better position to solicit private donations in addition to administering the public art programs.
This resulted in the establishment of the Lake Oswego Foundation of the Arts, which currently
operates under the registered business name of the Arts Council of Lake Oswego (the "Arts
Council").
• Since its formation in 1999, the Arts Council has, through agreements with the City, successfully
administered the City's public arts programs in addition to engaging in fundraising activities.
• Existing members of the Arts Council have been instrumental in developing and operating the City's
current arts programs. No other private nonprofit arts organization in Lake Oswego is similar to the
Arts Council in terms of the membership, community relationships, fundraising ability, experience
and history of operating public art programs in the City.
• For these reasons, approving a special procurement to renew the Agreement with the Arts Council
will substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be practically realized by
following a competitive solicitation process.
• Approving an Agreement with the Arts Council as a special procurement will be unlikely encourage
favoritism or substantially diminish competition for public contracts, as this is a unique Agreement
for which only one private non-profit organization in Lake Oswego has the qualifications, experience
and membership to meet City's objectives.
Contract Renewal
A budget of $100,000 is proposed for authorization on June 15, 2010 by the City Council for the Arts
Council of Lake Oswego to administer and implement the City's public art program and coordinate
certain City public arts programs for FY10-11. If approved the following services will be provided:
• Coordination of the Gallery Without Walls outdoor art exhibit.
Page 3
• Organize and host a Visual Chronicle exhibit at the Festival of the Arts, and purchase one
work from the show for the City's public art collection.
• Conduct a People's Choice art selection for the City's public art collection.
• Host an unveiling ceremony for art purchased through the People's Choice award, as well as
a kick off celebration for the Gallery Without Walls program.
• Manage, develop, and maintain the City's public art program and public art collection.
In addition to the activities outlined above, the contract terms also include the following:
• Administer duties under the Agreement according to the requirements of the City's Public Arts
Guidelines (attached as an exhibit to the contract).
• Oversee the Public Art Committee according to the Public Art Guidelines in managing, developing,
and maintaining the City's art collection as follows:
o Maintenance of the City's Public Art Collection, including cataloguing, periodic review,
maintenance and placement, repair damaged art, website updates.
o Acquisition of art on behalf of the City, upon prior approval by the City, and subject to
availability of City funds.
o Deaccessioning of art.
o Acceptance of public art donations and memorials.
o Loans of works from the Public Art Collection.
• Provide regular financial and program reports to the City as follows:
o Quarterly
- Foundation Balance Sheet.
- Foundation Profit and Loss by Class.
- Narrative description of services performed for the City for the quarter.
- Accounting of any expenditure of Percent for Art Program funds, demonstrating
compliance with Chapter 18 of the Lake Oswego Code and Section 5 of the Public Art
Guidelines.
o Annually -
- Form 990
Page 4
3 Year Contract
If the City Council agrees to approve a three year contract with the Arts Council for FY10-11 to FY12-
13 the total cost of the contract is $300,000. The terms of the three-year contract allows the City
considerable flexibility to change the scope of work, modify or eliminate funding, and terminate the
contract as follows:
• Termination by mutual written consent of both parties
• Termination upon 180 days written notice to the other party.
• Terminate For Cause for any of the following events:
- The City fails to receive funding, or appropriations, limitations or other expenditure
authority at levels sufficient to pay for the Foundation's services.
- Federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way
that either the services under this Agreement are prohibited or the City is prohibited from
paying for such services from the planned funding source.
- The Foundation no longer has non-profit status, is no longer qualified to receive deductible
contributions under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code or no longer holds any
license or certificate that is required to perform the services under this Agreement.
- The Foundation commits any material breach or default of any obligation under the
contract, and does not correct the breach after delivery of notice by the City.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of the three year contract is $300,000 for FY10-11 to FY12-13.
Option 1
Approve Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public Contract
Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings and approving a special procurement for
administration of City Public Arts Programs; and authorizing the Mayor to sign a three year contract with
the Arts Council of Lake Oswego for FY10-11 through FY12-13.
Option 2
Do not approve Resolution 10-32; and do not authorize the Mayor to sign a three year contract with the
Arts Council of Lake Oswego.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council approve option 1 and approve Resolution 10-32.
Page 5
ATTACHMENTS
1. Exhibit A —Resolution 10-32.
2. Exhibit B - Arts Council of Lake Oswego Contractual Agreement, including Attachments 1 and 2.
Reviewed by:
rte.. L
Department Director
Finance Director
City Attorney
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION 10-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL, ACTING AS THE LAKE
OSWEGO PUBLIC CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD PURSUANT TO ORS 279A.060, MAKING
FINDINGS AND APPROVING A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT FOR ADMI NISTRATION OF
CITY PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS
WHEREAS, Lake Oswego Public Contract Rule ("LOPCR") 102-0277 generally requires a
competitive solicitation process for contracts for personal services if the contract price is
expected to exceed $100,000; and
WHEREAS, LOPCR 102-0285 and ORS 279B.085 allow the City Council, acting as the Lake
Oswego Public Contract Review Board, to award a special procurement of a personal services
contract without a competitive solicitation process in cases where the contract award will:
Be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to
substantially diminish competition for public contracts; and
2. Result in substantial cost savings to the City or to the public; or
otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not
practicably be realized by complying with competitive solicitation requirements.
WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the City enter into an agreement with the Lake Oswego
Foundation of the Arts, doing business under the registered name of the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego, for the administration of the City's public arts programs (the "Agreement").
WHEREAS, certain of the activities called for under the Agreement could be considered
"personal services" that would generally be subject to the competitive solicitation process
outlined in LOPCR 102-0277 unless a special procurement is awarded; and
WHEREAS, on June 15, 2010, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the Lake Oswego
City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public Contract Review Board, to provide interested
persons an opportunity to appear and comment on the proposal to approve the Agreement as a
special procurement; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Oswego City Council has fully considered the testimony and other
evidence produced at the public hearing;
THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL, ACTING AS THE LAKE OSWEGO PUBLIC
CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD, HEREBY ADOPTS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:
In 1992, the City established the Lake Oswego Arts Commission to provide
recommendations to the City Council related to public art and to administer the City's
newly -created Percent for Art program. In addition to that program, the Commission
developed and administered other arts programs such as the Visual Chronical, the Gallery
without Walls outdoor art exhibit and the Playwright Competition.
Page 1 — Resolution 10-32
EXHIBIT A
2. Despite the Commission's many achievements, attempts at raising funds for public art
through private contributions were less successful. Noting the reluctance of potential
donors to make contributions to government entities, the City encouraged the formation
of a private non-profit organization that would be in a better position to solicit private
donations in addition to administering the public art programs. This resulted in the
establishment of the Lake Oswego Foundation of the Arts, which currently operates
under the registered business name of the Arts Council of Lake Oswego (the "Arts
Council").
3. Since its formation in 1999, the Arts Council has, through agreements with the City,
successfully administered the City's public arts programs in addition to engaging in
fundraising activities. The Agreement for administration of these programs is in need of
renewal.
4. Existing members of the Arts Council have been instrumental in developing and
operating the City's current arts programs. No other private nonprofit arts organization in
Lake Oswego is similar to the Arts Council in terms of the membership, community
relationships, fundraising ability, experience and history of operating public art programs
in the City.
5. For these reasons, approving a special procurement to renew the Agreement with the Arts
Council will substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be
practically realized by following a competitive solicitation process.
6. Approving this Agreement as a special procurement will be unlikely to encourage
favoritism in the awarding of public contracts, or to substantially diminish competition
for public contracts, as this is a unique Agreement for which only one private non-profit
organization in Lake Oswego has the qualifications, experience and membership to meet
City's objectives.
BASED UPON THE PRECEDING FINDINGS OF FACT, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED
THAT:
1. A special procurement of the Agreement for Administration of City Public Arts
Programs, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A, is approved pursuant to
LOPCR 102-0285 and ORS 27913.085,
2. The Mayor is authorized to execute the Agreement for Administration of City Public Arts
Programs, with the Lake Oswego Foundation of the Arts, in substantially the form
attached as Exhibit A, fourteen days following public notice of the approval of the special
procurement pursuant to LOPCR 102-0285.
3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption by the City Council.
Page 2 — Resolution 10-32
EXHIBIT A
Adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on this 15th day
of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Jack D. Hoffman
Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell
City Attorney
Page 3 — Resolution 10-32
EXHIBIT B
AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTRATION OF CITY PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO,
OREGON, a municipal corporation, ("the City"), and LAKE OSWEGO FOUNDATION
OF THE ARTS, an Oregon nonprofit corporation, doing business as the "Arts Council of
Lake Oswego" ("the Foundation").
RECITALS
WHEREAS the City maintains a public art collection, administers a program
whereby 1.5% of the cost of certain public capital projects is dedicated to the acquisition
of art, has established an Arts Downtown Exhibit, and engages in other activities related
to promotion and preservation the arts in Lake Oswego; and
WHEREAS the City Council has determined that the Foundation is capable of
implementing the City's arts programs consistent with the requirements of the Public Art
Guidelines, and in a manner that is in the best interests of the residents of the City of
Lake Oswego;
AGREEMENT
1. Administration of Arts Programs. For the duration of this Agreement, the
Foundation shall be responsible for the administration and implementation of the City's
Arts Programs as provided in this Agreement.
2. Compliance with Public Arts Guidelines. In performing its duties under this
Agreement, the Foundation shall at all times comply with all requirements of the City's
Public Arts Guidelines, as they now exist, or as they may be later amended by the Lake
Oswego City Council. A copy of the Public Arts Guidelines, in their current form, is
attached as Exhibit "A," and is incorporated in this Agreement by this reference.
3. Public Art Committee. The Foundation shall establish and oversee a Public Art
Committee in accordance with the provisions of Section 2 of the Public Art Guidelines.
The Public Art Committee shall consist of seven members and shall be a committee of
the Foundation, not of the City. Members of the Public Art Committee shall be
appointed by a Special Selection Committee consisting of two representatives of the Lake
Oswego City Council and two representatives of the Foundation. The City Council shall
select the Public Art Committee chair from among the seven members chosen by the
Special Selection Committee. The functions of the Public Art Committee shall be as
provided in the Public Arts Guidelines. Although the Public Art Committee shall be a
committee of the Foundation, all meetings of the Public Art Committee shall comply with
the requirements for meetings of a "governing body of a public body" under the Oregon
Public Meetings Law (ORS 192.610 et. seq. ), and committee members shall refrain from
actions constituting conflicts of interest, as provided in the Public Art Guidelines.
Page 1 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FY 12-13
EXHIBIT B
4. Services to be Performed. The Foundation shall perform the following services,
in accordance with the requirements of the Public Arts Guidelines:
a. Maintenance of the City's Public Art Collection, including cataloguing,
periodic review, maintenance and placement, website updates;
b. Acquisition of art on behalf of the City, upon prior approval by the City,
and subject to availability of City funds;
C. Deaccessioning of art;
d. Acceptance of public art donations and memorials;
e. Loans of works from the Public Art Collection;
f. Administration of the City's Percent for Art Program under Chapter 18 of
the Lake Oswego Code.
g. Administration of the City's biennial Gallery without Walls Exhibit,
including the "people's choice" special annual purchase of a work from
the Exhibit.
h. In addition to the foregoing services and the specific projects tequired
under paragraph 5 of this agreement, the City shall endeavor, in its
discretion, to provide the Foundation opportunities to administer other
City -sponsored activities that may occur relating to the promotion and
preservation of public art such as public art exhibits, invitationals, artist
events and educational seminars/events. The City's objective is for the
Foundation to be the primary administrator of public art activities within
the City. When the City offers such an additional opportunity to the
Foundation, the offer shall be in writing and shall clearly describe the
scope of the activity. Nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to
preclude the City's Department of Parks and Recreation from continuing
to offer cultural arts programming and events, or to require that the
administration of such programming and events be offered to the
Foundation.
5. Additional Specific Projects. In addition to activities under the services generally
described in paragraph 4, above, the Foundation shall implement and successfully
complete specific projects as outlined in Exhibit B:
6. Compensation. Subject to appropriation of funds, the City agrees to pay, and the
Foundation agrees to accept, as full payment for the Foundation's services under this
Agreement, a sum not to exceed One Hundred Thousand dollars ($100,000.00) for the
services and related costs for each of the three fiscal years occuring during the term of
Page 2 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FY 12-13
EXHIBIT B
this Agreement ($300,000 in total). This amount for each fiscal year shall be paid in
three installments: a sum not to exceed $50,000 at the beginning of the fiscal year, plus
sums not to exceed $25,000 each at the end of each of the last two quarters of the fiscal
year, subject to the City's timely receipt of itemized invoices submitted by the
Foundation. Payments shall be made within 10 days following receipt from the
Foundation of the itemized invoice for the invoiced period.
7. Reporting. The Foundation shall provide regular financial and program reports to
the City according to the following schedule:
Submit to the City at the end of each quarter:
• Foundation Balance Sheet
• Foundation Profit and Loss by Class
• Narrative description of services performed for the City for the quarter
• Accounting of any expenditure of Percent for Art Program funds,
demonstrating compliance with Chapter 18 of the Lake Oswego Code and
Section 5 of the Public Art Guidelines.
Submit to the City on June 30 of each year:
• Form 990
• Narrative description of services performed for the City for the year.
8. Services Provided by the City. For the duration of this Agreement, the City shall
provide the Foundation with the following, which shall be used by the Foundation
exclusively for activities under this Agreement and activities of direct benefit to the arts
in the City of Lake Oswego:
a. Office. Office space including access to two desks, and the use of a
computer, telephone and fax machine.
b. Computer Support. Reasonable assistance from the City's Information
Technology Department for general troubleshooting relating to the
computer provided under 8.a, above.
C. Set up and Placement Assistance. Reasonable assistance from the City
Maintenance Department for event set up relating to activities under this
Agreement.
d. Marketing and Promotion of Events. Reasonable print services and public
relations assistance related to activities under this agreement.
e. City Liaison. The City shall provide a staff liaison to facilitate
communication between the City and the Foundation.
Page 3 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FYI 2-13
EXHIBIT B
9. Duration of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective as of July 1, 2010 and
shall remain in effect until June 30, 2013, unless terminated earlier as provided herein.
10. Termination of Agreement.
10.1 Termination by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be terminated at
any time by mutual written consent of the parties.
10.2. Termination upon Notice. Either party may, at its sole discretion,
terminate this Agreement upon 180 days written notice to the other Party.
10.3 City's Right to Terminate For Cause. The City may terminate this
Agreement, in whole or in part, immediately upon notice to the ,
Foundation, or at such later date as the City may establish in such notice,
upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
a. The City fails to receive funding, or appropriations,
limitations or other expenditure authority at levels sufficient to pay for the
Foundation's services;
b. Federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted
in such a way that either the services under this Agreement are prohibited
or the City is prohibited from paying for such services from the planned
funding source;
The Foundation no longer has non-profit status, is no longer qualified to
receive deductible contributions under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code or no longer holds any license or certificate that is required
to perform the services under this Agreement; or
d. The Foundation commits any material breach or default of any covenant,
warranty, obligation under this Agreement, fails to perform the services
and other obligations under this Agreement within the time specified
herein or any extension thereof, or so fails to pursue those services and
obligations as to endanger the Foundation's performance under this
Agreement in accordance with its terms, and such breach, default or
failure is not cured within 5 business days after delivery of notice by the
City, or such longer period as the City may specify in such notice.
10.4 Foundation's Right to Terminate for Cause. The Foundation may
terminate this Agreement upon 30 days' written notice to the City if City fails to
pay the Foundation pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and City fails to cure
within 30 business days after receipt of such notice from the Foundation, or such
longer period of cure as the Foundation may specify in such notice.
10.5 Remedies.
Page 4 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FYI 2-13
EXHIBIT B
a. In the event of termination pursuant to sections 10.2, 10.3(a),
10.3(b), or 10.4, the Foundation's sole remedy shall be a claim for
the sum designated for accomplishing the services multiplied by
the percentage of services completed and accepted by the City, less
previous amounts paid and any claim(s) that City has against the
Foundation. If previous amounts paid to the Foundation exceed
the amount due to the Foundation under this subsection, the
Foundation shall pay any excess to the City upon demand.
b. In the event of termination pursuant to sections 10.3(c) or 10.3(d)
the City shall have any remedy available to it in law or equity. If it
is determined for any reason that the Foundation was not in default
under sections 10.3(c) or 10.3(d), the rights and obligations of the
parties shall be the same as if the Agreement was terminated
pursuant to section 10.2.
10.6. Foundation's Tender Upon Termination. Upon receiving a notice of
termination of this Contract, the Foundation shall immediately cease all activities under
this Agreement, unless the City expressly directs otherwise in such notice of termination.
Upon termination of this Agreement, the Foundation shall deliver to the City all
documents, information, works -in -progress and other property that are the subject of this
Agreement. Upon the City's request, the Foundation shall surrender to anyone the City
designates all documents, objects or other tangible things needed to complete the
projects, services and activities that are the subject of this Agreement
11. Insurance. The Foundation shall obtain prior to the commencement of the
contract, and shall maintain in full force and effect for the term of this Agreement, at the
Foundation's expense, a comprehensive general liability policy and automobile liability
insurance policy for the protection of the Foundation and the City, its officers, agents,
and employees. If the insurance policy is issued on a "claims made" basis, then the
Foundation shall continue to obtain and maintain coverage for not less than three years
following the completion of the contract. The policy shall be issued by a company
authorized to do business in the State of Oregon, protecting the Foundation or anyone
directly or indirectly employed by the Foundation against liability for the loss or damage
of personal and bodily injury, contractual liability, death and property damage, and any
other losses or damages above mentioned with limits not less than (a) $1,000,000 per
occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate for comprehensive general or commercial
general liability insurance policies, and (b) $1,000,000 per occurrence -combined single
limit or $1,000,000 bodily injury and $1,000,000 property damage for automobile
liability insurance policies; or (c) the limit of public liability contained in ORS 30.260 to
30.300 for any policy, whichever is greater. The Foundation shall not undertake any acts
that shall affect the coverage afforded by the above policy. The insurance company shall
provide the City with a certificate of insurance and an endorsement thereto naming the
City as an additional insured and will provide the City 30 days written notice of
cancellation or material modification of the insurance contract. The obligation to provide
Page 5 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FYI 0-11 to FY 12-13
EXHIBIT B
notice to the City shall be in substantially the following language: "Should any of the
above described policies be cancelled before the expiration date thereof, the issuing
company will mail 30 days written notice to the certificate holder named"; it is not
sufficient for the insurance carrier to merely "endeavor" to give notice or for the
certificate to absolve the insurance carrier from obligation or liability in the event of the
insurance carrier's failure to mail such notice.
The Foundation shall not perform any activities under this Agreement until the
City has received copies of applicable insurance policies or acceptable evidence that
appropriate insurance as provided above is in force.
12.,, Changes. This Agreement, including all attachments and exhibits annexed hereto,
shall not be subject to modification or amendment except in writing, executed by both
parties.
13. Independent Contractor Status. The Foundation agrees and certifies that:
a. The Foundation is engaged as an independent Contractor. Although the
City reserves the right (i) to determine (and modify) the delivery schedule
for the services to be performed and (ii) to evaluate the quality of the
completed performance, City cannot and will not control the means or
manner of the Foundation's performance, nor provide any tools or
equipment for the performance of the Work, except as provided elsewhere
in this Agreement. The Foundation is responsible for determining the
appropriate means and manner of performing the Work.
b. The Foundation shall be responsible for all federal or state taxes
applicable to compensation or payments paid to the Foundation under this
Contract and, unless the Foundation is subject to backup withholding, City
will not withhold from such compensation or payments any amount(s) to
cover the Foundation's federal or state tax obligations.
The Foundation will not, on account of any payments made under this
Agreement, be eligible for any benefit from federal social security,
workers' compensation, unemployment insurance, or the Public
Employee's Retirement System, except as a self-employed individual;
d. The Foundation is not currently an employee of the federal government or
the State of Oregon;
e. The Foundation is not a contributing member of the Public Employee's
Retirement System; and
f. The Foundation is not an "officer," "employee," or "agent" of the City, as
those terms are used in ORS 30.265.
Page 6 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FYI 0-11 to FYI 2-13
EXHIBIT B
14. Subcontracts and Assignment. No subcontract shall be made by the Foundation
with any other party for furnishing any of the services, projects and activities that are the
subject of this Agreement without obtaining the prior written consent of the City, which
City may withhold without cause. This Agreement is not assignable by the Foundation,
either whole or in part, unless the Foundation has obtained the prior written consent of
the City. The City and the Foundation are the only parties to this Agreement and are the
only parties entitled to enforce its terms. Nothing in this Agreement gives, is intended to
give, or shall be construed to give or provide any enforceable benefit or right, whether
directly, indirectly or otherwise, to third persons.
15. Payment of Laborers and Drug Certification. The Foundation shall, to the extent
as may be required by Oregon law:
a. Make payment promptly, as due, to all persons supplying to the
Foundation labor or material for the prosecution of the services, projects
and activities provided for this Agreement;
b. Pay all contributions or amounts due the Industrial
Accident Fund by the Foundation or subcontractors, if permitted, incurred
in the performance of this Agreement;
C. Not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted
against the City on account of any labor or material furnished; and
d. Pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees
pursuant to ORS 316.167; and
e. Demonstrate that an employee drug testing program is in
place during the term of this Agreement.
If the Foundation fails, neglects or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim
for labor or services furnished to it by any person in connection with this Agreement as
such claim becomes due, the City may pay such claim to the person furnishing the labor
or services and charge the amount of the payment against funds due or to become due the
Foundation by reason of such contract. The payment of a claim in this manner shall not
relieve the Foundation from obligation with respect to any unpaid claims.
16. Hours of Labor. For those employees of the Foundation covered or subject to
Oregon employment laws:
a. Persons employed under this Agreement shall receive at least time and a
half pay for work performed on the legal holidays specified in ORS
279.334(1)(a)(C)(ii) to (vii) and for all overtime worked in excess of 40
hours in any one week, except for individuals who are excluded under
ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or under 29 USC 201 to 209 from receiving
overtime.
Page 7 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FYI 0-11 to FYI 2-13
EXHIBIT B
b. Except as provided above, no person shall be employed for more than ten
hours in any one day, or 40 hours in any one week, except in cases of
necessity, emergency or where the City absolutely requires it, and in such
cases, except in cases of contracts for personal services as defined in ORS
279.051, the laborer shall be paid at least time and a half pay:
for all overtime in excess of eight hours a day or 40 hours in any
one week when the work week is five consecutive days, Monday
through Friday; or
ii for all overtime in excess of ten hours a day or 40 hours in any one
week when the work week is four consecutive days, Monday
through Friday; or
iii for work performed on Saturday and on any legal holidays
specified in ORS 279.334.
For those employees of the Foundation that are covered or subject to Oregon
employment laws, the Foundation must, pursuant to ORS 279.316(1)(b), give notice to
employees who perform work on this Agreement, either at the time of hire or before
commencement of work on the Agreement, or by posting a notice in a location
frequented by employees, of the number of hours per day and days per week that the
employees may be required to work.
17. Time Limitations on Claims for Overtime. To the extent any of the Foundation's
employees are covered by the Oregon employment laws, such covered worker employed
by the Foundation shall be foreclosed from the right to collect for any overtime under this
Agreement unless a claim for payment is filed with the Foundation within 90 days from
the completion of the contract, provided the Foundation has:
a. Caused a circular clearly printed in blackface pica type and
containing a copy of this section to be posted in a prominent place
alongside the door of the timekeeper's office or in a similar place
which is readily available and freely visible to any or all workers
employed on the work, and
b. Maintained such circular continuously posted from the inception to
the completion of the Agreement on which workers are or have
been employed.
18. Representations and Warranties. The Foundation represents and warrants to City
that:
a. The Foundation has the power and authority to enter into and
perform this Agreement,
Page 8 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FY 12-13
EXHIBIT B
b. This Agreement, when executed and delivered, shall be a valid
and binding obligation of the Foundation enforceable in
accordance with its terms, and this Agreement was duly approved
and executed pursuant to authority of the governing body of the
Foundation,
C. The Foundation will accomplish the services using a standard of
performance and care that is currently accepted by others engaged
in similar activities in the Portland metropolitan area,
d. The Foundation shall, at all times during the term of this
Agreement, be qualified, professionally competent, and duly
licensed to perform the services, and shall be a non-profit
corporation eligible to receive deductible donations pursuant to
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
e. The Foundation has no present interest and shall not acquire any
interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or
degree with the performance of its services under this Agreement,
and that in the performance of this Agreement no person having any
such interest shall be employed.
f. The Foundation covenants that the Foundation has no interest and
shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict
in any manner or degree with the performance of the Foundation's
services. The Foundation further covenants that in the performance
of this Agreement no person having any such interest shall be
employed.
g. The warranties set forth in this section are in addition to, and not in
lieu of, any other warranties provided.
19. Records. The Foundation shall have access to the books, documents, papers and
records of the City as necessary for the Foundation's performance under this Agreement.
The Foundation shall not disclose all or any part of such records to any other person,
firm, corporation, association or other entity except as reasonably necessary to carry out
this Agreement, without the consent of the City.
The Foundation agrees that the City and its authorized representatives shall have
access to the books, documents, papers and records of the Foundation which are pertinent
to this Agreement for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts and
transcripts.
The Foundation shall maintain all fiscal records relating to this Agreement in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. In addition, the Foundation
shall maintain any other records pertinent to this Agreement in such a manner as to
Page 9 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FYI 0-11 to FYI 2-13
EXHIBIT B
clearly document the Foundations performance. The Foundation acknowledges and
agrees that the City's duly authorized representatives shall have access to such fiscal
records and other books, documents, papers, plans and writings of the Foundation that are
pertinent to this Agreement to perform examinations and audits and make excerpts and
transcripts. The Foundation shall retain and keep accessible all such fiscal records,
books, documents, papers, plans, and writings for a minimum of three (3) years, or such
longer period as may be required by applicable law, following final payment and
termination of this Agreement, or until the conclusion of any audit, controversy or
litigation arising out of or related to this Agreement, whichever date is later.
The Foundation shall submit to the City Council an annual report for the Public
Art Trust Fund and Foundation identifying program accomplishments, and revenues and
expenses.
20. Indemnity and Hold Harmless. The Foundation shall defend, indemnify, and hold
the City, its officers, agents and employees, harmless against all liability, loss, or
expenses, including attorney's fees, and against all claims, actions or judgments based
upon or arising out of damage or injury (including death) to persons or property caused
by any act or omission of an act sustained in any way in connection with the performance
of this Agreement or by conditions created thereby, or based upon violation of any
statute, ordinance or regulation. This contractual indemnity provision does not abrogate
common law or statutory liability and indemnification to the City, but is in addition to
such common law or statutory provisions.
21. Compliance with Laws. The Foundation shall comply with all federal, state and
local laws and ordinances, applicable to this Agreement and the activities, services and
projects and other work to be done under this Agreement
The Foundation shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules,
and regulations on nondiscrimination in employment because of race, color, ancestry,
national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, age, medical
condition, or disability.
THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Jack D. Hoffinan, Mayor
Date:
LAKE OSWEGO FOUNDATION OF THE ARTS
Page 10 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FYI 0-11 to FY12-13
EXHIBIT B
Donald J. Caldwell, Chair of the Board
Date:
Page 11 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FY12-13
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT A —CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PUBLIC ART GUIDELINES
Use 5/10/07 revised Luidelines
Page 12 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FYI 0-11 to FY12-13
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B - SPECIFIC PROJECTS FOR FY 10-11 through FY 12-13
The Foundation shall implement and successfully complete the following specific
projects:
A. Gallery Without Walls — outdoor sculpture installation. Manage the
exhibit installed each August in the downtown redevelopment area for
temporary display each fiscal year of this agreement..
B. Arts Chronicle Exhibits. Administer and host the annual Arts Chronicle
invitational exhibit during Lake Oswego Festival of the Arts each June.
The exhibit shall be for at least three consecutive days, and shall include
works by at least 30 artists.
C. People's Choice Awards. Upon the request of the City, and subject to
availability of City funds, administer the public voting processes, selection
and purchase of a work of art from the Gallery Without Walls Exhibit, for
a price not to exceed $11,500, to be sited in downtown Lake Oswego each
spring following installation of the Gallery Without Walls Exhibit
sculptures pursuant to paragraph A, Exhibit B.
D. Unveiling_ Ceremonies. Administer and host an unveiling ceremony for
the People's Choice award selected each spring.
Page 13 — Agreement for Administration of City Arts Programs, FY10-11 to FY12-13
ATTACHMENT I
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PUBLIC ART GUIDELINES
Section 1. INTRODUCTION/DEFINITIONS
Section 2. PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE
Section 3. MAINTENANCE OF COLLECTION
Section 4. ACQUISITION OF ARTWORK
Section 5. PERCENT FOR ART PROGRAM
Section 6. DEACCESSIONING WORKS OF ART
Section 7. DONATIONS & MEMORIALS POLICY
Section 8. LOANS FROM THE COLLECTION
Section 9. GALLERY WITHOUT WALLS PROGRAM
Section 10. EXHIBIT A — Ordinance 2078 Percent for Arts Program
Page 1 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 1
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
1. INTRODUCTION
The art collection of Lake Oswego represents a cultural, recreational and educational
resource that is held in trust for the public. The art collection is significant to Lake
Oswego's quality of life and complements the City's mission of enhancing the lives of its
citizens. The guidelines contained in this document define how the collection shall be
maintained and developed.
The City has contracted with the Lake Oswego Arts Foundation (FOUNDATION), to
maintain and develop the City's public art collection. Under these circumstances, the
City shall require the FOUNDATION to comply with these guidelines.
1.1 Definitions
General Definitions
"Accession:" To accept a work of art into the city's permanent art collection.
"Advisor:" A professional asked by the Public Art Committee to provide advice on some
aspect of a project.
"Architect/Engineer:" The person or firm designing the improvement project to which
the 1.5 % funding applies. Where architect/engineer is a firm, the term architect/engineer
shall mean the principal of that firm in charge of designing the improvement project to
which the 1.5 % funding applies.
"Artist:" A practitioner in the arts, generally recognized by critics and peers as a
professional of serious intent and recognized ability who produces works of art and is not
a member of the project architectural firm.
"Call For Artists" — An open competition where any artist is invited to submit works of
art or delineated proposals for consideration. Proposals are reviewed and an artist is
selected for the project.
"Capital Improvement Program (CIP):" The City's program for advance planning of
capital improvements.
"City Project:" Any capital project in an amount over $25,000 paid for wholly or in part
by the City of Lake Oswego to purchase, construct, rehabilitate or remodel any building,
decorative or commemorative structure, park, parking facility or any portion thereof
within the limits of the City of Lake Oswego. "Project" does not include street, pathway
or utility construction, emergency work, minor alterations ordinary repair or maintenance
necessary to preserve a facility.
"Consultant:" A paid professional in the arts field of regional, national or international
status, hired by a selection committee or Public Art Committee to share his/her expertise.
Page 2 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 2
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
"Deaccessioning: " Relinquishing title to a work of public art.
"Eligible Funds:" A source of funds for projects from which art is not precluded as an
object of expenditure.
"FOUNDATION:" The Lake Oswego Foundation of the Arts, an Oregon nonprofit
corporation with which the City has contracted to administer City arts programs.
"Participating Department:" The department that sponsors a City project subject to the
1.5 Percent for Art Program.
111.5 Percent for Art Program" - The Program established to set aside a percentage of
the total cost of eligible City projects for public art as per the Percent for Art Ordinance
No. 2075.
"Permanent Art Collection:" All works of art owned by the City of Lake Oswego,
either site specific or part of a portable collection, which may rotate through public
buildings.
"Pre -Qualified List:" A list of artists deemed appropriate for 1.5 Percent for Arts
projects by satisfying criteria outlined by the Public Art Committee. The list may be
created and updated by the Public Art Committee and may be used as a starting point for
"invitation only" competitions, as well as a tool for generating ideas for a project.
"Public Art:" All forms of original works of art accessible to the public and/or public
employees including:
1. Painting of all media, including both portable and permanently fixed works,
such as murals;
2. Sculpture which may be in the round, bas-relief, high -relief, mobile, fountain,
kinetic, electronic and others, in any material or combination of materials;
3. Other visual media including, but not limited to prints, drawings, stained glass,
calligraphy, glass works, mosaics, photography, film, clay, fiber/textiles, wood,
metals, plastics or other materials or combination of materials, or crafts or
artifacts;
4. Works of a wide range of materials, disciplines and media which are of specific
duration, including performance events, and which are documented for public
accessibility after the life of the piece has ended;
5. Art works that possesses functional as well as aesthetic qualities.
Page 3 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 3
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
"Public Art Committee:" The committee appointed to maintain and develop the City's
public art collection, and to provide oversight for the 1.5 Percent for Art process. The
Public Art Committee develops policies and goals for the selection, placement and
maintenance of works of art acquired through the 1.5 Percent for Art Program. The
committee has approval authority within the artist selection process, evaluates and/or
causes to be evaluated by others the public art collection, recommends uses for Public Art
Trust Fund monies, considers projects by private developers and citizens which would
result in a piece or pieces of public art, and responds to any other public art initiatives.
The committee shall consist of seven (7) members.
"Public Art Trust Fund:" A City fund or account into which all 1.5 Percent for Art
monies shall be deposited. Monetary contributions designated specifically for the
purchase and maintenance of public art, and proceeds from the deaccessioning of public
art, shall also be deposited into the Public Art Trust Fund. Funds within the Public Art
Trust Fund shall be solely utilized for the purpose outlined in the Percent for Art
Ordinance No. 2075.
"Total cost:" The entire amount of the City's contribution towards the price for
construction of a project. "Total Cost" does not include costs for design and engineering,
administration, fees and permits, building demolition, relocation of tenants, contingency
funds, change order costs, environmental testing or indirect costs, such as interest during
construction, advertising and legal fees.
Page 4 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 4
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
2. PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE
2.1 Role of the Public Art Committee
The Public Art Committee shall maintain the public art collection, and review and
recommend all proposed accessions to and deaccessions from the art collection of Lake
Oswego. Specific duties include:
1. Maintenance of city art collection — Maintain a current listing of all holdings in
the collection, conduct an annual review, and see that necessary repairs are
performed.
2. Development of a list of potential or desired sites for future accessions. For each
site, the list shall specify the goals for, and conditions on, the type of art to be
placed there.
3. Development of the collection by acquiring artwork through various means of
acquisition. This may include using funds from the 1.5 Percent for Art program
or other city funds to purchase or commission works of art; and accepting
donations of art or funds to purchase art from individuals or organizations.
4. Removing works of art from the collection that do not meet the goals of the
collection or are damaged beyond repair.
5. Recommending uses for Public Art Trust Fund monies generated through the 1.5
Percent for Art Program.
6. Considering projects by private developers and citizens that would result in a
piece or pieces of public art, and responding to any other public art initiatives.
If the Public Art Committee is chosen through a special selection committee pursuant to
Section 2.2, the Public Art Committee shall be a committee of the FOUNDATION, rather
than a committee of the City of Lake Oswego.
2.2 Membership
The Public Art Committee shall be composed of seven members. Five members must
reside within the city limits of the City of Lake Oswego, and two members within the
City's Urban Services Boundary as established in the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan.
Three of the members shall be artists.
Page 5 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 5
Attachment 1 - FYI 0-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
The members of the Public Art Committee shall be selected by a majority vote of an
appointment committee. The appointment committee shall consist of two members of the
City Council and two representatives of the FOUNDATION. The City Council shall
select the chair of the Public Art Committee from among the seven members appointed
by the appointment committee.
Initially, and thereafter upon the annual expiration of terms for the Public Art Committee,
the appointment committee, in addition to selecting members for new terms, shall also
appoint up to three qualified alternates to fill any membership position that becomes
vacant before the expiration of its term during the following year. Upon filling a vacancy
in a membership position with one of the alternates, the appointment committee may
appoint an additional alternate to serve for the balance of the year preceding the next
annual expiration of membership terms for the Public Art Committee.
Public Art Committee members shall be selected on the basis of their knowledge of and
familiarity with the arts and their understanding of the needs of the Lake Oswego
community.
2.3 Recruitment
Members for the Public Art Committee shall be recruited through public advertisement in
the City's monthly newsletter, on the City's website, and through personal invitation.
The FOUNDATION shall be responsible for initiating the recruitment process upon
approval by the City.
2.4 Term
Members of the Public Art Committee shall serve a term of three years. After serving a
term, members are eligible to serve again after a one year absence from the committee.
Initial terms shall be staggered so that terms do not expire for all members at the same
time.
Should there be difficulty in filling positions, as determined by the FOUNDATION,
members may be allowed to serve another consecutive 3 year term without a one year
absence from the committee.
2.5 Meetings
The Public Art Committee shall meet as necessary to accomplish its business. Public
notice shall be given in advance of all meetings. Meetings shall be conducted in
accordance with the requirements of Oregon Public Meetings Law. The Public Art
Committee shall forward copies of the minutes of each meeting to the City Council.
Page 6 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 6
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
2.6 Conflict of Interest
During their tenure, members of the Public Art Committee shall refrain from activities
that represent a conflict of interest. A member must not undertake any action or any
decision or recommendation as a committee member, the effect of which would be to the
private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the person or the person's relative or any
business with which the person or a relative of the person is associated.
Members of the Public Art Committee, and consultants and appraisers that the committee
may engage, must have no financial interest in any art piece under consideration by the
committee, even if the financial interest is limited to an artist spouse or relative. No
committee member shall have any interest in any art consultant or art appraisal firm
engaged by the Public Art Committee.
Any member of the Public Art Committee must also declare a conflict of interest and
refrain from participating if a person with whom he or she shares a household or whom
he or she professionally represents has a matter before the Committee.
No members of the Project Architectural firm may submit for the project being designed
by that firm.
During the time they serve on the Public Art Committee, artists may not contribute their
own pieces, even without cost.
Members of the Public Art Committee shall follow the requirements of Oregon Revised
Statutes Chapter 244 relating to ethics for public officials and shall also follow the
Oregon State Guidelines for Public Officials published by the Secretary of State's Office.
Page 7 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 7
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
3. MAINTENANCE OF THE PUBLIC ART COLLECTION
3.1 Cataloguing the Collection
The Public Art Committee shall ensure that there is a current listing of all holdings in the
City of Lake Oswego Public Art Collection, including all pertinent information such as
title, artist, medium, accession date, placement and other information. In addition, the
Public Art Committee shall, where appropriate, create catalogs describing the collection
and make them available to the public.
3.2 Periodic Review
The Public Art Committee shall annually review all holdings in the art collection. During
this review, the committee shall inventory the collection, examine the condition of each
piece to determine any restoration or preservation needs, and examine the display or
storage conditions of each piece. The review periodically estimates the value of each
piece for insurance coverage and the City's fixed asset inventory. In addition, the Public
Art Committee shall update the current listing of all holdings in the art collection
catalogue and submit the updated list to City staff.
3.3 Maintenance of Collection
The Public Art Committee shall perform, or obtain the services of a professional to
perform, the repairs, cleaning, labeling, etc. that may be necessary to maintain the public
art collection.
Should repairs to outdoor sculpture be necessary, the committee shall notify the
appropriate City staff member. The committee shall coordinate cleaning and repairs with
the City's Parks Maintenance staff.
City departments shall notify the appropriate City staff member immediately if a work of
art is either damaged or stolen, or if the participating department plans to move to another
location or in any way disrupt the work of art.
3.4 Maintenance Instructions
When the city purchases a new work of art, the artist shall be required to submit a
maintenance plan and instructions to be kept on file by city maintenance staff. These
instructions shall outline cleaning methods and materials for the artwork as well as a
timeline and plan for regular maintenance of the work. The instructions shall be kept on
file at the Parks Maintenance office.
Page 8 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 8
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
3.5 Placement of Works of Art
While it is the intent that site specific works will remain in the site for which they were
created, a piece may be moved if circumstances dictate. A reasonable effort shall be
made to notify the artist in advance of the move.
Page 9 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 9
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
4. ACQUISITION OF ARTWORK
4.1 Background
The City public art collection includes works that were in the City's possession prior to
1992, works commissioned through the 1.5 Percent for Art Program (adopted in 1993),
works purchased with funds other than from the 1.5 Percent for Art Program trust, and
gifts of art to the City. Artworks are acquired by the City of Lake Oswego through a
thorough review process based on their innate quality and value to the collection as a
whole.
The Public Art Committee shall have the responsibility for developing the City's art
collection.
4.2 Art Selection Criteria
The value of every work of art is in the eye, ear and soul of each individual viewing it. A
single work of art can engender a wide range of responses in the population viewing it.
Because of this, art selection is, in part, a subjective process. Members of the Public Art
Committee must, at all times, remember that they represent the public. On the other hand,
the members of the committee are selected because they possess expertise in art. They
should understand these issues and strive to maintain a balance in their selection of art
works. Making their selections without this balance can result in public art that is, on the
one hand, bland or trite, or, on the other hand, too esoteric to be appreciated by any but
art connoisseurs.
The following sections define criteria, both mandatory and desired, to be considered
during the accession process.
1. Required Conditions
All pieces of art selected for inclusion in the collection of the City of Lake
Oswego must meet all of the following criteria.
A. Clear Title
The artwork must be able to be transferred to the City of Lake Oswego with
clear title. Purchased art shall be by a formal bill of sale from the owner(s) or
artist(s). Contributed art must be accompanied by an appropriate deed of gift.
B. Restrictions
Artwork accessioned by the City of Lake Oswego must not have attendant
restrictions. The City will attempt to acknowledge artists and donors in the
display of artwork, but shall be under no obligation to do so.
C. Reflects Community Values
Page 10 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 10
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
While recognizing the First Amendment freedom of artists to express
themselves in any way they choose, the City of Lake Oswego reserves the
right to not select pieces if they do not reflect the values of the community.
This does not mean a piece should be rejected simply because it might be
controversial. One of the purposes of art is to show people a new way of
looking at their environment, to share an artist's sometimes iconoclastic
vision. Art can legitimately be intrusive, abrasive or unpopular. Failure to
recognize this purpose for art can lead to an art collection that is simply
"pretty" or "nice" without being ennobling or educational.
D. Original Works and Authentication
Only original works of art shall be accessioned for the collection. Fakes,
unauthorized copies or reproductions are not acceptable. In cases where the
authenticity of a piece could reasonably be questioned, it must be
authenticated before accession.
E. Suitability
All art pieces must be suitable for display in a public setting. Sculpture must
be able to be secured to prevent accidents. Pieces executed in fragile media
must be able to be protected while displayed.
F. Maintenance and Security
The City of Lake Oswego can only accept artwork that the Public Art
Committee and the City staff believe can, within the financial confines of the
foreseeable future, be adequately and safely displayed, maintained and
reasonably secured.
2. Desired Attributes
The criteria listed below describe the desired attributes of all art in the collection.
Selected pieces should meet most, if not all, of these attributes to a high degree.
A. Artistic Excellence
Art selected for the collection should represent the skill and competence of the
originator, and should be an example of artistic excellence. The definition of
artistic excellence changes over time, but the collection should always be
representative of the best examples available.
B. Variety of Media, Styles and Techniques
Within the guidelines above for suitability of form for a public setting, art
selected for the collection should broaden the range of media and techniques
represented in the collection.
C. Represents Artists of Varying Acclaim
Page 11 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 11
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
Some art collections strive for excellence by selecting only works from
recognized "name" artists. The collection of the City of Lake Oswego should
strive to represent works from a wide range of artists of varied public status.
Art should be chosen solely on the basis of its intrinsic merit. A piece from a
well-known artist should not be presumed to have more artistic merit than a
piece from a relatively unknown artist.
D. Value
Because an aspect of the value of an art piece is the response of each
individual to that art, value is difficult to assign. However, the price of any
proposed piece of art should represent a responsible investment for the City
collection.
When a piece of art has a price of more than $5000, the Public Art Committee
must consult with an art consulting or appraisal firm to authenticate and verify
the market value of the piece.
E. Selected for Specific Site
Major art pieces should be selected as part of a process that takes into account
the final display site for the piece. This should be considered in terms of how
well the piece fits an intended space and the environment. This not only
requires consideration of the size and environmental harmony of a piece, but
also how well it fits into the use patterns of the area in which it will be placed.
4.3 Methods of Accession
There are several ways that a work of art may be accessioned. The selection criteria listed
in Section 4.2 apply to all works, regardless of the particular accession method used to
bring a piece to the City collection.
When funds become available to accession art, the Public Art Committee may use one of
three processes, open competition, artist invitation and direct purchase. In addition,
artwork may be added to the collection through a direct contribution of art or funds to
purchase or commission a work of art. The choice of accession method shall be
determined by the Public Art Committee with final approval by the FOUNDATION.
1. Open Competition
In open competition, any artist is invited to submit pieces or delineated proposals
for consideration. A "Call To Artists" is advertised within a designated region
(local, regional, national, etc.) inviting all artists within the region to submit a
proposal. The competition may be held for a single piece, a single site, or a
number of sites or pieces. The Public Art Committee evaluates the contender and
selects the piece or proposal that best fits the criteria and the needs of the site(s).
The Public Art Committee may decide that no entry fits the criteria or is suitable.
For competitions held to populate several sites, this means that one or more sites
Page 12 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 12
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
may go unfilled. The Public Art Committee may choose to leave the site unfilled,
and add that site to the list of potential future accessions.
2. Direct Purchase
The Public Art Committee may choose to purchase a piece of existing art, from a
gallery or dealer, from a private individual or from the artist directly.
3. Artist Invitation
The Public Art Committee may choose to invite one or more artists to submit
proposals to create a piece for a specific site. The committee should work closely
with the selected artist from the beginning of the project, making clear the criteria
in the policy. The artist should be asked to submit proposal sketches or models for
approval before beginning the final work, with opportunities to periodically view
the work during different stages of completion to insure the criteria are being met.
4. Donations
At times civic -minded citizens may wish to contribute to the art collection. They
may do so by directly contributing funds to purchase a work of art,
commissioning a work of art and then donating it to the City, and directly
contributing a piece of art to the collection. See Section 7, Donations and
Memorials for a more detailed explanation of how donations are reviewed and
accepted.
4.4 Process for Accessioning Artwork
The Public Art Committee shall oversee the development of goals and process for the
selection, placement and maintenance of works of art.
Upon notification that the FOUNDATION would like to initiate a public art project, the
Public Art Committee shall define the parameters of the services and purchase. In doing
so, the Public Art Committee shall confirm the available budget, identify a site for the
work(s) of art, identify the goals of the project, and form a selection committee, if
appropriate, to choose the artist and/or artwork, and determine the most appropriate
accession method in each circumstance, depending upon the project funding source.
The Public Art Committee shall also determine whether the project falls within the scope
of the 1.5 Percent for Art Program. If it does, the specific guidelines contained in Section
5, Percent for Art Program, must be followed.
In initiating any public art project, the Public Art Committee shall:
1. Identify the funding source and determine whether or not the project falls under
the 1.5% Percent for Art Program Guidelines. If so, the committee shall follow
the process outlined in Section 5, Percent for Art Program.
Page 13 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 13
Attachment 1 - FYI 0-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
2. Confirm the total project budget available for purchase of services and/or artwork,
including installation costs.
3. Identify a site for the final location of art or the project where an artist may be
included on the design team. If the committee is considering a site in the public
right of way, all appropriate departments must be consulted through the staff
liaison before the site is finalized. Likewise if any elements of the project fall
under the jurisdiction of another department, that department must be consulted
early in the selection process.
4. Identify the goals for the art project, which shall include whether the project
warrants including an artist on the design team or whether a purchase or
commission of art is more appropriate. The committee shall also establish at what
stage of the project the artist will become involved in the process and shall
coordinate funding accordingly (refer to Section 5.8, Dedication of Funds, as a
guideline for non -1.5 Percent for Art projects).
Options for consideration include:
Design Team Options:
A. Hiring an artist to collaborate with the project architect only during the
early planning phases of the project as a consultant.
B. Hiring an artist to collaborate with the project architect during the early
planning stages and to make artworks with project materials. The artwork
shall be incorporated into the design of the project and shall fall within the.
project's materials budget. The contractor shall be responsible for
fabrication, and the artist shall provide oversight during fabrication and
installation.
C. Hiring an artist to collaborate with the project architect early in design
phase, and giving the artist a budget to create independent artworks that
the artist will later place at a predetermined location(s) at the project site.
D. Hiring an artist to collaborate with the project architect early in the design,
and then allowing the artist to apply, along with other artists, for design
and construction of art for the project as part of an open competition.
Direct Purchase or Commission
Decide whether to purchase an existing work of art or commission a work of
art.
Donations
Page 14 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 14
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
Decide whether or not to accept a donation of art.
5. Determine which acquisition method, according to Section 4.3, Methods of
Accession, is most appropriate based upon the project goals.
6. Establish a selection process that addresses the project goals and determine
membership on an artist/art selection committee. The committee shall keep in
mind the City's goals of maintaining artistic integrity and encouraging public
involvement, as needed, in each selection process.
7. Select an artist and/or art purchase/commission through a majority vote.
8. Obtain approval of acquisition method, and selection process from the
FOUNDATION.
4.5 Artist Selection Criteria
Artists will be selected on the basis of their qualifications as demonstrated by past work,
appropriateness of the proposal to the particular project, and its probability of successful
completion as determined by the Public Art Committee. In selecting artists and works of
art, the Public Art Committee shall select those artists and works of art of the highest
aesthetic quality, and those that fulfill the purpose of the City's art selection criteria as set
forth in Section 4.2. In all cases, consideration will be given to materials, construction,
durability (long or short term, depending on the intended life of the piece), maintenance,
public access and safety.
The Public Art Committee may choose to utilize a "Pre -qualified list" of public artists in
lieu of open competition in order to simplify the selection process.
4.6 Artist Contracts
The FOUNDATION shall enter into a contractual agreement any time an artist is hired to
perform services for the City, such as participating on a design team or selling or creating
a work of art. The contract should define the scope of work for artist services and
payment procedure for the purchase or commissioning of a work of art. The contract
shall require the artist to do the following:
1. Produce a work of art for a guaranteed maximum cost, including all installation
costs.
2. Maintain public liability and property damage insurance as well as workers
compensation insurance. If the artist does not routinely carry this insurance in the
amount specified by the contract, a fee for one-time purchase of coverage should
be included in the total proposal.
3. Submit the following items before final payment is authorized:
Page 15 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 15
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
A. Submit to the city a completed catalogue form that describes the work of art
(materials, size, weight, artist biography, address, contact information).
B. Two color slides and a black and white negative of the competed work of art.
C. A public art conservation and maintenance program giving detailed
instructions for cleaning and maintaining the artwork. This report will
include, but not be limited to, frequency of cleaning, method and materials
used, and any other recommendations for maintaining artwork. Report shall
also provide detailed description of all materials and processes used to
fabricate art, and names and addresses of material suppliers, fabrication and
installation process of artwork
Page 16 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 16
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
Section 5 1.5 PERCENT FOR ART PROGRAM
5.1 Background
In November of 1993, the Lake Oswego City Council adopted Ordinance 2062, which
dedicates 1.5 % of the total costs of all City capital projects to the selection, acquisition,
dedication, siting, maintenance, administration, de -accessioning, community education
and registration of Public Art.
5.2 Program Goals
Art acquired through the 1.5 Percent for Art Program should meet the criteria and desired
goals listed in Section 4.2, Art Selection Criteria. In addition, it is the program's intent
to:
1. Encourage early collaboration between artists and architects.
2. Ensure that City departments, Commissions, and Advisory Boards play an active
role in the selection of art purchased through the 1.5 Percent for Art Program.
3. Preserve art objects and maintain artifacts displaced through City capital projects.
5.3 Administration of the 1.5 Percent for Art Program
The Public Art Committee shall administer the 1.5 Percent for Art Program under the
auspices of the FOUNDATION.
5.4 Oualifying Proiects
Article 18.04 of the City Code specifies which city capital projects are eligible for the 1.5
Percent for Art Program. A copy of the Percent for Art ordinance is contained in Exhibit
A Percent For Art Ordinance.
Generally, if funding is not legally restricted for particular uses, a city project qualifies
for the 1.5 Percent for Art Program and must dedicate 1.5% of its total cost to purchasing
and maintaining public art.
Responsibility of Participating Department
Following the adoption of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by the City Council,
each department with qualifying capital projects shall produce a summary sheet of
projects that qualify for funding under the Percent for Arts Ordinance. The summary
sheet shall include the project name and approximate dollar amount available for arts
funding. The actual dollar amount shall be confirmed by staff from the participating
Page 17 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 17
Attachment 1 - FYI 0-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
department upon encumbering funds for construction of the project and shall be reported
to the City Manager.
5.5 Application of 1.5 Percent for Art Funds: Inclusions
Funds may be spent as follows:
1% for Purchase of Art
1% of the total construction cost of eligible city projects shall be used for costs
associated with the acquisition of public art, including, but not limited to, the design,
purchase and siting of public art. Such funds may be spent as follows:
1. Artist's fee for serving on a design team with the project architect.
2. The work of art itself, including but not limited to:
a. Artist's design fee and operating costs.
b. Any permits related to the completion of the work or art, including but not
limited to building permits, permits with the Department of Transportation,
etc.
C. Labor and materials required for production of work of art.
d. Travel related to the project.
e. Transporting the work to the site and installation costs.
3. Frames, mats, mounting, anchorages, containments, pedestals, or materials
necessary for the installation, location, or security of the work of art.
4. Slides and documentation of the work in progress as well as the required 2 slides
of the completed work.
5. Insurance as required by the artist's contract.
6. Contingency of 5% to 8% of the 1% set aside at the beginning of each project
(any unused contingency funds will go into the Public Art Trust).
.5% for Maintenance and Administration
.5% of the total construction cost of eligible City projects shall be used for costs
associated with administration of the public art program, including, but not limited to
costs of selection, conservation and maintenance of the collection, community education,
deaccessioning and registration of public art. Funds may be spent as follows:
Page 18 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 18
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
1. The selection process, excluding the cost of producing a prospectus.
2. Community education related to the project.
3. Registration of Public Art.
4. Maintenance of Public Art.
5. Dedications and publicity.
6. Expenses for special advisors or consultants to the Public Art Committee.
5.6 Application of 1.5 Percent for Art Funds: Exclusions
1.5 Percent for Art funds may not be spent for:
1. Reproductions, by mechanical or other means, of original works of art.
2. Decorative, ornamental, or functional elements that are designed by the architect
or consultants engaged by the architect, or elements generally considered to be
components of a landscape architectural design, designed by a landscape architect
as opposed to an artist commissioned for this purpose.
3. "Art objects" which are mass-produced of standard design, such as playground
sculpture or fountains.
4. Directional or other functional elements, such as super graphics, signs, color -
coding, maps, etc. except where a recognized artist is employed.
5. Architect's fee.
Page 19 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 19
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
5.7 Dedication of Funds
The Lake Oswego Public Art Trust Fund is established within the City of Lake Oswego
Treasury (see attached Ordinance 2078, item "Public Art Trust Fund"). Funds shall be
deposited into the Public Art Trust Fund by the City official or employee acting on behalf
of the participating department at the time that budgeted funds are encumbered for
construction of the project.
When the artist or artist team is hired at the same time as the project architect or engineer,
1.5 % of the estimated construction budget (from the CIP Document) shall be borrowed
from monies existing in the Public Art Trust (or other sources available to the Arts
Commission) at the point at which the artist or artist team is hired. When actual funds are
encumbered for the construction portion of the project, the Public Art Trust Fund shall be
reimbursed to the extent possible with eligible monies obtained from the actual
construction budget.
Funds shall be deposited in separate accounts within the Public Art Trust Fund if separate
accounting is requested by the City Manager or required by law.
Monetary contributions made other than through the 1.5% Percent for Art Program shall
be deposited in the Public Art Trust Fund and may be dedicated for a specific program or
work of art, subject to acceptance by the City Council.
5.8 Disbursement of Funds
Disbursement of funds from the Public Art Trust Fund shall be made only after approval
by the FOUNDATION and authorization by the City Manager or the Manager's
designee. Disbursements shall be made according to Ordinance 2078 and these
guidelines.
The city's Finance Department shall prepare an annual financial report to the
participating departments, the City Council, and the FOUNDATION on the disbursement
of money from the Public Art Trust Fund.
All payments to an artist shall be made according to the payment procedure outlined in
the contractual agreement with the artist.
5.9 Artist Contract
The FOUNDATION shall enter into a contractual agreement with an artist for any artist
services in accordance with Section 4.6, Artist Contracts.
5.10 Public Art Committee Procedures and Responsibility
The process for initiating and completing a 1.5% Percent for Art project is very similar to
projects funded with other funding sources. The Public Art Committee shall oversee the
Page 20'- Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 20
Attachment 1 - FYI 0-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
process by defining the parameters and implementing a selection process as listed in
Section 4.4, Process for Accessioning Artwork. However, there are requirements specific
to the 1.5% Percent for Art process which are outlined below.
Upon notification that the FOUNDATION would like to initiate a 1.5 Percent for Art
project, the Public Art Committee shall:
1. Confirm the available budget and timing of when the 1.5 Percent for Art funds
will be available. Timing of funds will dictate when projects can be initiated.
2. Identify a site for the work(s) of art.
Identify the goals of the project, including those goals outlined by the
participating department and any artist's prerequisites. The committee must also
establish whether the project warrants including an artist on the design team or
whether a purchase or commission of art is more appropriate. The committee
must also establish at what stage of the project the artist will become involved in
the process and coordinate funding accordingly. If it is decided that an artist
should be involved from the conceptual stages of the project, the procedure
described in Section 5.7, Dedication of Funds, should be used.
4. Convene a Selection Committee.
5 10 1 Selection Committee Membership
The Selection Committee shall consist of seven (7) members appointed by the Public Art
Committee and approved by the FOUNDATION. The Selection Committee serves for
the duration of one project. The Selection Committee shall consist of the following
members:
Four members of the Public Art Committee, one of whom shall serve as chair.
2. A neighborhood or business representative where the project will be located.
3. A City staff representative from the department with the qualifying project.
4. An architect or engineer from the capital project's design team (where
applicable).
Public Art Committee members serving on a public art Selection Committee are limited
to serving two consecutive selection processes.
5.10.2 Term of Office
Page 21 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 21
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FYI 2-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
Selection Committee members shall serve through the duration of the project. Expiration
of a person's term on the Public Art Committee shall not terminate that person's
membership on a Selection Committee
5 10 3 Selection Committee Responsibilities
The Selection Committee shall work within the project parameters established by the
Public Art Committee including overall budget, project location, and goals. The
Selection Committee shall be responsible for identifying a selection process, reviewing
artist proposals, and recommending a final selection. The Selection Committee shall do
the following:
1. Choose a method for selecting an artist by one of the three options outlined in
Section 4.3, Methods of Accession, which include open competition, invitation, or
direct purchase.
2. Based upon the established budget, develop a realistic project scope, and
determine if the budget is sufficient to warrant advertising for artists locally,
regionally, nationally or internationally.
3. Prepare and oversee the writing, printing and distribution of the project
prospectus.
4. Select works of art that are technically feasible to produce and display. In the
case of selecting an artist to serve on a design team, the committee must
determine whether the artist has the necessary experience desired to make a
positive contribution to the project.
5. Reserve the option of making no selection. If no proposal is accepted, the
Selection Committee may reopen the competition or propose another method of
selection.
6. Approve all artists/art selections by a majority vote and present the
recommendations to the Public Art Committee for approval.
7. Present the final piece to the City for acceptance into the public art collection.
8. Hold all Selection Committee meetings in accordance with the Oregon Public
Meetings law. Meeting announcements shall be sent to local media.
5.11 Artist Selection Criteria
The criteria used in evaluating and choosing artists for 1.5 Percent for Art projects is
outlined in Section 4.5 Artist Selection Criteria.
5.12 Approval Process
Page 22 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 22
Attachment I - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
The following approvals are required in administering the 1.5 Percent for Art Program:
Stage 1 - The FOUNDATION must approve of the Public Art Committee's initial
project parameters (budget, site, project goals) and Selection Committee
membership before any further steps may be taken.
Stage 2 - The Public Art Committee must approve of the Selection Committee's
process for selecting artists and/or artwork prior to any public advertising of
the project or notification of artists.
Stage 3 - The Public Art Committee must approve of the Selection Committee's list
of finalists prior to the Selection Committee making a final selection.
Stage 4 - The Public Art Committee must approve of the Selection Committee's final
choice for artist and/or artwork prior to notifying the artist of the selection.
Stage 5 — The Public Art Committee must approve of the final artwork and/or
services upon completion of the artwork or services rendered, prior to final
payment to the artist. Once accepted, the artwork is accessioned into the
public art collection.
Page 23 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 23
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
6. DEACCESSIONING WORKS OF ART
6.1 Backeround
The decision to remove a piece from the collection is as important as the decision to
accession it originally. The world of art is constantly growing, and something that was
revolutionary or revealing in the past may become trite or too -well explored.
On the other hand, the world of art is also affected by fashion. The Public Art Committee
must be aware of the distinction between out of date and out of style. The deaccession
process should not result in the loss of classic work, even if it represents an earlier period.
Deaccession of pieces from the collection shall be based principally on issues of artistic
merit or if the artwork has been irreparably damaged. No piece from the art collection
shall be sold primarily for monetary gain with the intention to use the funds for purposes
other than art collection.
6.2 Deaccession Policy
Deaccessioning is a procedure for the withdrawal of an artwork from the public
collection. Deaccessioning should be considered only after ten years have elapsed from
the date of installation of permanent works and acceptance in the case of portable works
or under special circumstances (e.g., the piece has been damaged beyond repair).
Deaccessioning will be considered only after a careful and impartial evaluation of the
artwork within the context of the collection as a whole. At the beginning of the process,
the Public Art Committee will make reasonable effort to notify any living artist whose
work is being considered for deaccessioning.
6.3 EhLyible Artworks
All artworks owned by the City of Lake Oswego, whether acquired through the 1.5
Percent for Art Program, donation, or any other method, are eligible for deaccessioning.
In the case of donated artworks, all legal documents relating to the donation will be
reviewed prior to beginning the process.
6.4 Deaccessionins! Procedure
A Deaccessioning Subcommittee of the Public Art Committee shall be appointed by the
Public Art Committee. This subcommittee will consist of no more than five arts
professionals or experts, including five (5) members of the Public Art Committee, and an
art appraiser or consultant if necessary. If the value of the artwork is less than $5,000,
the Public Art Committee may informally appraise the artwork. However, if there is any
doubt as to the value of the piece the Public Art Committee must secure the services of an
appraiser or consultant.
Page 24 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 24
Attachment 1 - FY 10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
6.5 Criteria for Deaccessionin�
The Public Art Committee may consider the deaccessioning of artwork for one or more
of the following reasons:
1. A work is not, or is only rarely, on display because of lack of a suitable site.
2. The condition or security of the artwork cannot be reasonably guaranteed.,
3. The artwork has been damaged or has deteriorated and repair is impractical or
unfeasible.
4. The artwork endangers public safety.
5. In the case of site specific artwork, the artwork is destroyed by severely altering
its relationship to the site.
6. The artwork has been determined to be significantly incompatible or inferior in
the context of the collection.
7. The City wishes to replace the artwork with work of more significance by the
same artist.
8. The artwork requires excessive maintenance or has faults of design or
workmanship.
9. There has been sustained and overwhelming public objection to the artwork.
6.6 Sequence of Action
1. The Deaccessioning Subcommittee appointed by the Public Art Committee shall
determine whether an artwork meets one of the criteria listed in Section 6.5
above.
2. A representative from the appointed Deaccessioning Subcommittee shall submit a
report to City staff which includes the opinion of the City Attorney on any
restrictions that may apply to the specific work.
3. The Public Art Committee shall review the report. The Deaccessioning
Committee may seek additional information regarding the work from the artists,
art galleries, curators, appraisers or other professionals prior to making a
recommendation to the full Board.
4. The Public Art Committee shall send a recommendation for action to the
FOUNDATION for approval.
5. Upon approval of its recommendation, the Public Art Committee shall consider
the following actions:
Page 25 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 25
Attachment I -FYI 0- 1 Ito FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
A. Sale or Trade
i. Artist will be given first option to purchase or trade artwork.
ii. Sale may be through auction, gallery resale or direct bidding by
individuals, in compliance with City law and policies governing
surplus property.
iii. Trade may be through artist, gallery, museum or other institutions
for one or more artwork(s) of comparable value by the same artist.
iv. No works of art shall be sold or traded to members or staff of the
City, the FOUNDATION or Public Art Committee, consistent with
the conflict of interest policies in these guidelines.
V. Proceeds from the sale of a work of art shall be returned to the
Public Art Trust Fund departmental account. Funds from the sale
of gifts shall go into the Public Art Trust Fund for future artworks
projects. Any pre-existing contractual agreements with the artist
regarding resale shall be honored.
B. Destruction of work deteriorated or damaged beyond repair and deemed
to be of negligible value.
C. If the Public Art Committee is unable to dispose of the artwork in a
manner outlined above, the work shall be donated to a non-profit
organization or otherwise disposed of as the FOUNDATION sees fit.
Page 26 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 26
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
7. PUBLIC ART DONATIONS AND MEMORIALS POLICY
7.1 Background
In addition to City financial support, the public art collection may grow through the
generous gifts of private citizens. A consistent and fair process for considering public art
gifts and memorials shall be followed.
The art selection criteria listed in Section 4.2 will be applied when considering public art
gifts.
Anyone wishing to sponsor a gift of artwork to the City should contact the Public Art
Committee at the earliest possible time for a consultation on the review and acceptance
process for donated artworks. The Public Art Committee will review potential donations
and make a recommendation to the FOUNDATION.
If the proposed gift is to be a memorial and the site requested is in a park, it must also
go through a review process with the Parks and Recreation Department.
7.2 Types of Donations
1. Existing Works of Art
A. Portable - works of a scale appropriate for rotation through public spaces
belonging to the City of Lake Oswego. The specific placement of portable
works may not be stipulated as a condition of the gift.
B. Non -Portable - works of a scale larger than would be appropriate for the
portable collection and would require a semi-permanent or permanent site.
2. Commissioned Works of Art
A. Works of art which are commissioned gifts to the City and which usually
require a specific site.
7.3 Review Criteria
1. Artistic Excellence -
Accepted works of art shall be of exceptional quality and enduring value as
judged by the Public Art Committee and, the FOUNDATION .
2. Appropriateness to the City's Public Art Collection -
Proposed gifts will be reviewed in relationship to existing goals for the public
art collection, such as diversity of media, artists represented, styles, and
geographic representation.
Page 27 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 27
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
3. Appropriateness to Site -
Relationship of the artwork to the site shall be considered in respect to its
social, cultural, historical and physical context.
4. Maintenance Provisions -
Maintenance concerns are a primary consideration Adequate provision must
be made for future needs. Donors must provide the Public Art Committee
with detailed maintenance instructions for the work(s) of art, copies of which
shall be forwarded to city staff. Funds for future maintenance shall be
deposited into the Public Art Trust Fund.
5. Adherence to Existing Master Plans -
All works of art should adhere to the master plans of existing jurisdictions
including but not limited to the Parks and Recreation Department, and Lake
Oswego Redevelopment Agency. The Public Art Committee will help to
advise the sponsor of existing master plans.
7.4 Review Process
EXISTING WORKS: PORTABLE OR NON-PORTABLE
1. Initial Contact -
Sponsor should send photographs of work(s) of art to City with written
materials, including name of the artist, his/her bio or resume, medium, size,
date of execution and estimated value of the piece. This material shall be
forwarded to the Public Art Committee for a recommendation.
2. Review by Public Art Committee -
The Public Art Committee will review the photographs and will ask to see the
actual work of art if it wants to consider the gift further. If the Public Art
Committee recommends acceptance of the work of art, it will also make a
recommendation for future maintenance provisions.
3. Installation Readiness -
In order to receive final acceptance, works of art should be professionally
appraised and ready for installation. This means that two-dimensional works
must be archivally framed and three-dimensional works must have a pedestal
or appropriate hanging or mounting apparatus.
4. Acceptance -
The FOUNDATION will review the recommendation of the Public Art
Committee and will determine whether to accept or deny the proposed
donation and its installation and maintenance provisions.
7.5 Commissioned Works of Art
Page 28 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 28
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
1. Initial Contact -
Representatives of the FOUNDATION will meet with the sponsor to discuss
the commission. If no artist has been selected, staff will advise the sponsor
about artist selection options, such as the use of an artist selection committee
or an art consultant. The art consultant and advisory committees can provide
expert assistance on selection procedures, technical and budgetary concerns
and on the uses, appropriateness, quality and variety of art options.
Selection Process -
Commissioned works must go through a two -phased process: first "in
concept" and second when the design has been decided. Sponsors of gifts are
requested not to select specific designs prior to the approval "in concept". If a
site has been recommended and is under the jurisdiction of any other City
department, such as the Parks and Recreation Department, that department
must be contacted at the start and the project will also be reviewed by that
department.
2. Review "in concept" by Public Art Committee -
The sponsor must submit a written proposal to the FOUNDATION including
the process for selection of an artist(s) and the general concept behind the
project. The Public Art Committee will review the proposal and make a
recommendation for acceptance or denial.
3. Review of Design by Public Art Committee -
If the project is approved "in concept" the sponsor will proceed to select an
artist(s) as outlined above. When a site and a specific design have been
chosen, a model and/or scale drawings of the design and maintenance
provisions must be presented to Public Art Committee, who will review the
materials and make a recommendation to the FOUNDATION.
4. Review of Design -
A. The FOUNDATION will review the recommendation of the Public Art
Committee and approve or deny the design of the work of art and the
provisions for future maintenance.
B. Note: If, in the development and execution of the project, the concept or
aesthetic of the work is substantially changed, the concept and design
must be re -approved before the work will be considered for final
acceptance.
5. Review and Final Acceptance of Completed Work -
Both the Public Art Committee and the FOUNDATION will review the
completed work of art and approve or deny its acceptance.
7.6 Bequests for Commissioning a Work of Art
Page 29 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 29
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
Bequests for commissioning a work of art should go through the process outlined above
and must include financial provisions for the administration of the commission as well as
the future maintenance of the work of art as determined by the Public Art Committee and
the FOUNDATION.
7.7 Bequests to the Public Art Trust Fund
Bequests to the Public Art Trust Fund can vary in scope from general gifts of unspecified
use to gifts of a specified scope. For example, the sponsor could stipulate that the
bequest be used to purchase portable works by Native American artists.
Page 30 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 30
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
8. LOANS FROM THE COLLECTION
8.1 Policy
When loans are made from the collection, it is the responsibility of the borrowing gallery
or institution to cover all expenses of packing, shipping and insurance. The borrowing
gallery or institution shall submit proof of insurance coverage for the value of the piece.
Page 31 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 31
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
9. GALLERY WITHOUT WALLS EXHIBIT
9.1 Program Mission
Lake Oswego's Gallery Without Walls' mission is to integrate art into the daily lives
of local residents and visitors. Gallery Without Walls is an outdoor walking tour
featuring sculpture from regionally and internationally acclaimed artists. Sculpture is
exhibited on a rotating basis with all pieces available for purchase.
9.2 Gallery Without Walls Committee
The Gallery Without Walls Selection Committee shall be composed of seven
members, which include one from FOUNDATION's Board of Directors, a minimum
of one artist who participated in a previous Gallery Without Walls exhibit, and citizen
members. All members, with the exception of the participating artist(s), must reside
within the City of Lake Oswego Urban Service Boundary as established in the Lake
Oswego Comprehensive Plan.
9.2.1 Process for Selecting Committee Members
The members of the Gallery Without Walls Selection Committee shall be recruited
and appointed by the Board of Directors of the FOUNDATION by the method
outlined in section 2.3. The FOUNDATION's Board of Directors shall select a Chair
from among the seven members.
The Gallery Without Walls Selection Committee members shall be selected on the
basis of their knowledge of and familiarity with the arts and their understanding of the
needs of the Lake Oswego community. Each member may serve a maximum of two
two-year terms, with no renewal of term. Initial terms shall be staggered so that terms
do not expire for all members at the same time. It is advisable to have a minimum of
two alternates selected to fill any position that becomes vacant before the expiration
of terms.
Public notice shall be given in advance of all meetings. Meetings shall be conducted
in accordance with the requirements of Oregon Public Meetings Law.
9.2.2 Conflict of Interest
No member of the Selection Committee may submit an art proposal for the project.
Members of the Selection Committee must follow the Conflict of Interest
requirements set forth in section 2.6 above.
9.3 Process for Selecting Artwork for Gallery Without Walls
9.3.1 Artist Solicitation
Page 32 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 32
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
The FOUNDATION shall prepare a "Call For Artists" inviting sculptors to submit
portfolios for the Gallery Without Walls exhibit. The Gallery Without Walls
Selection Committee shall hold meetings as needed to review each submittal and shall
select no less than 15 sculptures for the exhibit.
9.3.2 Artist Application Requirements
Artist applications shall include the following:
A current resume that includes day/evening/cell phone, fax, email, internet and
mailing address.
Color prints or CD: Color prints (minimum 5x7) or a CD of examples of sculptor's
work need to be included in the portfolio. Pictures and/or CD's will be returned upon
request.
Proposals for non -existing work: If the work is non -existing, artists are required to
submit a details illustration for each entry. Indicate size, color, exterior finish,
material and finished composition.
Artist's Statement: A statement in 25 words or less that describes an artist's work
(inspiration, personal statement) particular to each entry and suitable for publication.
9.3.3 Sculpture Selection Criteria
The following criteria shall be used in determining sculptures to include in the
exhibit:
The sculpture must be a free standing sculpture of high artistic quality. The Selection
Committee will "jury" twice; once for general quality of the sculptors' work and
secondly on the submitted piece.
The sculpture must be a life size work of human scale, and not impede either walking
or driving traffic.
Each sculpture needs to be able to withstand the elements and normal wear and tear
experienced by public art in an outdoor setting and be able to withstand possible
pedestrian contact.
9.3.4 Exhibit Parameters
Sculptures are to be on loan to the City for a two-year exhibition period. If a sculpture
is removed or sold within that two-year timeframe, it is the artist's responsibility to
replace the piece with another of the same quality and scale.
Page 33 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10,. 2007 33
Attachment 1 - FY 10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
An honorarium of $750 is provided each artist following installation of their
sculpture.
All sculptures in the rotating art exhibit must be for sale.
The proposed sculpture can be an existing piece, already completed by the sculptor,
or a piece specifically made for the exhibit.
Each sculptor shall be required to enter into a contract with the City. The
FOUNDATION shall coordinate the development of each contract with the City
Attorney.
If sculptures are to be sited on private property, an agreement must be executed
between the City and the owner of the property permitting the installation. The
agreement shall be prepared by the FOUNDATION and approved by the City
Attorney.
During the exhibition period, the City shall maintain insurance, in an amount, and
subject to terms, approved by the City Attorney, to cover damages incurred to the
sculpture.
Contracts shall provide that the artists are responsible for delivering the sculptures to
the sites, installing the pieces, and removing the pieces from the sites at the end of the
exhibition period.
The FOUNDATION may reject work that when completed differs from the original
proposal, or does not meet standards of durability.
All sites must be approved by the Director of the Park & Recreation Department, the
City Manager, the Director of Redevelopment, and City Engineer if on City property
or in a public right of way.
The City's Maintenance Department may assist with the installation of sculptures,
subject to availability and resources.
The FOUNDATION, after coordinating with and obtaining the approval of the City,
shall install a concrete foundation or reasonable place for installing each sculpture..
The Selection Committee shall ensure that no sculpture is accepted, and that no
installation occurs, that would create a safety hazard to persons or property.
If needed by the artist, the FOUNDATION shall provide a crane and/or forklift for
installation, provided that installation occurs within the installation schedule set forth
by the FOUNDATION.
All installations must adhere to Americans with Disabilities Act standards, including,
but not limited to, right-of-way clearance standards.
Page 34 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 34
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
9.4 Process for Annual Purchase of Artwork from the Gallery Without Walls
Exhibit.
9.4.1 Purpose
The City Council will annually consider whether an appropriation of funds is to be
provided for a purchase of a work of art from the Gallery Without Walls exhibit. Funds
may come from the Percent for Art Trust Fund or another identified city source.
The process for the annual selection of a work of art from the Gallery Without Walls
exhibit shall be administered according to the Percent for Art Guidelines of Section 5,
above. In addition, the selection process will be expanded beyond that defined in the
Percent for Art Guidelines, by including greater public involvement in selecting the
artwork in order to build a sense of citywide concern and ownership of the Gallery
Without Walls program.
9.4.2 Operational Procedures
Initiation of selection process:
In administering the selection process for purchasing artwork from the Gallery Without
Walls exhibit, the FOUNDATION shall:
Inform the Public Art Committee of the available funding and timeframe within which to
select a work of art.
Direct the Public Art Committee to form a selection committee to oversee the selection
process. The selection committee shall be composed of-
i.
£
i. A representative appointed by the City Council, who will serve as chair of
the selection committee.
ii. A LORA representative.
iii. A project engineer or architect.
iv. Two artists.
V. A citizen representing community and/or business interests.
Approve the Public Art Committee's selection of membership for the selection
committee.
9.4.3 The Selection Process
The Public Art Committee shall convene the selection committee and define the
committee's objectives, which shall include:
i. Identifying downtown site(s) for the purchased artwork;
Page 35 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 35
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
ii. Creating a list of up to five sculptures for consideration as possible
purchases; and
iii. Establishing a process for the public to indicate its preference from among
the sculptures on the list.
9.4.4 The Selection Committee process shall proceed as follows:
Upon notification of the objectives, the selection committee will review the current
Gallery Without Walls sculptures and establish a list of up to five sculptures from which
a public process will select one. Downtown site(s) will be identified that will
accommodate the selected works. The criteria for establishing the list of selected works
and site(s) are to be developed by the selection committee.
Following the creation of the selection list and site identification, the committee shall
develop a process allowing the public at large to indicate their preference for the final
purchase piece. This process may include methods such as opinion surveys in the City's
monthly newsletter or the Lake Oswego Review, online voting on the City's website, etc.
The committee shall notify the Public Art Committee of the selection made through the
public process.
9.4.5 Final approval of selected artwork
The Public Art Committee shall present the selection made through the public process to
the FOUNDATION for approval. Upon approval, payment shall be made to the artist
and arrangements made for relocation of the art to its final location, if necessary,
following the Gallery Without Walls exhibition period.
9.4.6 Clarification of Policy
The procedure in this Section 9 is to be used for a single annual purchase of art from the
Gallery Without Walls Exhibit (subject to appropriation of funds). Nothing in the
procedure shall preclude additional purchases by the city of art from the Gallery Without
Walls Exhibit through other processes.
Page 36 - Public Art Guidelines - Revised July 10, 2007 36
Attachment 1 - FY10-11 to FY 12-13 Special Procurement Contract with the Arts Council of Lake
Oswego.
LAKE OSWEGO
centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Brant Williams, Director of Economic and Capital Development
SUBJECT: Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
DATE: June 10, 2010
ACTION
City Council is requested to take the following actions:
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
Conduct a public hearing on Resolution 10-33, which adopts findings and approves a special
procurement for services provided for in the Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement; and
authorizes the Mayor to sign the Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement between the City,
Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego LLC, Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC, Mreen Family LLC,
and Eileen F. Colhouer and Ellen Laura Colhouer Henderson as Trustees of the J.C. Colhouer
Revocable Trust;
2. Consider adoption of Resolution 10-33;
3. Consider adoption of Resolution 10-34, which preserves, to the extent possible, City Council's
option to reimburse the General Fund for expenditures for services in the Foothills District
Predevelopment Agreement with Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency funds anticipated to be
collected from a future new or expanded urban renewal area in Foothills.
BACKGROUND
After several years of intermittent planning with little progress to show for it, City Council has expressed
renewed interest in moving forward with a more certain approach for redeveloping the industrial -zoned
properties in the Foothills area. The vision for this redevelopment is to build Lake Oswego's next great
neighborhood; one that is both vibrant and sustainable, and provides long-term benefits for the
community. Opportunities and benefits of a major redevelopment of the Foothills District include long-
term economic and tax base advantages for the City, new and varied housing choices for a broad
demographic, support for a strong and vibrant downtown, and access and connections to the Willamette
River and the variety of parks in the area. Some of the more significant challenges for redeveloping the
district are the impacts of the Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, the existing floodplain, access to
State Street and improved transit service including streetcar.
Page 2
At its July 14, 2009 study session, City Council considered the new approach for advancing redevelopment
by forming a public-private partnership with several Foothills industrial property owners and their
representative, Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego LLC (WDW). The partnership would perform
predevelopment planning work for the larger 120 -acre Foothills District, which includes not only the
industrial properties, but also Oswego Pointe and the Oswego Village Shopping Center. Following a
selection process by a group of industrial property owners, WDW was chosen to be the development
representative for the owners based on their previous experiences and successes with complex
development projects. Given WDW's development and project management expertise, the Council
expressed interest in having WDW lead the predevelopment work, while the City would provide overall
direction and oversight for the project. The partnership would also include financial contributions by both
the City and the Foothills property owners.
Since the July study session, City staff has met frequently with WDW to prepare a draft Predevelopment
Agreement (PDA) for City Council consideration. The draft PDA was recently presented to the City Council
at its June 7, 2010 study session. Discussion at the meeting included concerns about the timing for such
work given the existing unfavorable market conditions and the benefits that the City could realize over
time from the development.
DISCUSSION
Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
The Foothills District PDA has been prepared for City Council consideration and is included along with
exhibits A through G with this report. The following is a summary of the objectives, terms and conditions
of the PDA.
Objectives of the PDA
Vision and Planning Principles
The primary objective of the PDA is to lay out a process for preparing the Foothills District properties for
the type of redevelopment envisioned by the City, the Foothills property owners and WDW. The vision for
the district is spelled out in what is referred to as the Planning Principles. This vision and the accompanying
planning principles for developing a new and sustainable neighborhood in Foothills are consistent with the
direction discussed at last year's study session. These planning principles will guide the project throughout
the term of the agreement.
Infrastructure and Development Issues
The draft PDA requires that critical technical and public infrastructure issues be studied including, but not
limited to, the floodplain, the wastewater treatment plant, the streetcar, access to State St., soil conditions,
street plan, and utilities. The draft PDA also addresses the more development -specific issues including
development type and density, building heights, zoning, design standards and compatibility with adjacent
neighborhoods and to downtown. Each of these will be studied and addressed as part of the Framework
Plan as defined in the PDA. The PDA also requires the development of various amendments to City codes
and regulations necessary to implement these requirements from the Framework Plan.
Financial Feasibility
For the redevelopment of the Foothills District to be successful, the Framework Plan must be financially
feasible. The PDA provides for this evaluation. While the goal and the overall intent of the PDA is to
Page 3
develop a plan that is financially feasible and thus, doable, there is also value in determining if Foothills, as
envisioned, is not financially feasible. If this is the result, investing additional time and resources into
Foothills will not be necessary.
Property Assembly
Another objective of the PDA is to provide a means for assembling the industrial properties for future
development. For the type of development envisioned for Foothills to occur, certain key properties in the
industrial area should be brought under one ownership or controlling entity. Since the City has limited
ability to assemble properties for private development, a group of properties owners have formed an
agreement that creates a limited liability corporation (LLC) that could eventually include their respective
properties under one ownership.
Project Management, Oversight and Public Involvement
The draft PDA requires WDW to deliver nearly all aspects of the Work Plan. To ensure that the work is
accomplished according the requirements of the PDA, the agreement clearly defines responsibilities for
project management, accounting and cost control, project oversight by the City, project coordination, and
public participation and community involvement.
Project oversight includes an Oversight Committee comprised of the Mayor, a City Councilor, the City
Manager, and two community representatives; a Project Advisory Committee made up of department staff
to ensure City services and public infrastructure interests are met; and a City Project Manager, who will
provide the more day-to-day oversight and administration of the project.
Public participation and community involvement will include a Community Advisory Committee comprised
of at -large citizens as well as representatives from the Foothills District, adjacent neighborhoods, the
School District, downtown businesses and the Chamber of Commerce; stakeholder interviews; public
events including open houses and workshops; and project communications.
Essential Project Conditions
The draft PDA contains certain conditions that are critical to the success of the Framework Plan and
redevelopment of the District. These Essential Conditions are:
• Redevelopment of the District consistent with the approved Framework Plan is financially feasible
• The City Project Manager and the Development Manager agree on the selection of Consultants
• The current planning effort by multiple jurisdictions to extend Streetcar service to Lake Oswego
continues
• TCWTP modification or mitigation is financially feasible
• The floodplain mitigation is financially feasible
• The Foothills URA is legally and financially feasible
Parties to the PDA
The parties to the agreement are the City, WDW, Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC, Mreen Family LLC, and
Eileen F. Colhouer and Ellen Laura Colhouer Henderson as Trustees of the J.C. Colhouer Revocable Trust.
The Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC is comprised of five members: four industrial property owners and
WDW. Based on the LLC operating agreement, the property owners will consolidate their properties under
one ownership for development purposes once specific triggering events occur. These events address key
infrastructure and development issues such as zoning, the treatment plant, floodplain, streetcar, a URA,
Page 4
etc., and having a reasonable financial plan in place. The remaining two parties are individual property
owners that are not members of the Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC, but are interested in the
redevelopment of their industrial area in Foothills and financially participating in the PDA.
PDA Services and Budget
The budget includes a $520,000 fixed -fee for WDW to provide all project management services,
development and land use technical services, and public involvement and communications; $661,000 for
technical consulting services including architectural, urban design, civil, traffic, geotechnical,
environmental, wastewater and communications; $17,500 for expenses; and $101,500 for contingency; for
a total project budget of $1,300,000. The specific work plan and budget are included in Exhibit C of the
PDA.
PDA Schedule
The term of the PDA is 20 months with the majority of the work tasks, which are included as part of the
Framework Plan, occurring in the first 15 months. The schedule for all work tasks is included in Exhibit C.
PDA Funding
The funding plan for the PDA is as follows:
$800,000 City
$130,000 Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC, Mreen Family LLC, J.C. Colhouer Trust
$295,000 Metro grant (pending)
$75,000 Tri Met
The industrial property owners' contribution of $130,000 is dependent on the City adopting a Framework
Plan. Also, if the City acts in contravention to the Planning Principles, the property owners are not required
to contribute. The City will upfront the $130,000 and the property owners will reimburse the City by
paying five equal annual installments.
The Metro Construction Excise Tax (CET) grant is currently pending approval by the Metro Council. The CET
grant selection committee included the City's Foothills application on its list of recommended projects to
fund through this program. The Metro Council is expected to approve a final list on June 10th. The final
draft PDA will be revised, if necessary, to reflect the most recent status of this grant request.
TriMet's contribution will be provided to the City to assist with planning for the streetcar and development
adjacent to the streetcar stops in Foothills.
Termination Clause
The City has the ability to terminate the agreement at any time without cause. The one implication in
doing so would be the loss of the property owners' contribution. Also, either the City or the LLC can
terminate for failure of any one of the Essential Conditions.
Development Agreement
Mentioned in, but separate from the PDA is a future Development Agreement (DA) between the City and
WDW. The DA will be the mechanism for one or more development projects to be built in Foothills along
Page 5
with the required public infrastructure. The PDA requires that a DA be signed before any of the
Comprehensive Plan, development standards or other regulatory changes are adopted. The PDA describes
the purpose and conditions for the DA and provides a draft outline of the terms and conditions that could
be in the DA.
Urban Renewal Area (URA) Plan
Separate from the PDA is the need to develop an URA plan for all or a portion of the Foothills District. It is
expected that the primary means for funding significant elements of the Framework Plan, i.e. the streetcar,
modifications to the treatment plant, floodplain, major street improvements, etc., will be with tax
increment funds generated by through urban renewal. Much of the Foothills District is currently in the
existing East End URA. An urban renewal planning process for Foothills will look at how to include the
industrial properties in the existing or possibly new URA.
Exemption to Competitive Solicitation Process
Resolution 10-33 provides findings of fact for exempting the Foothills District PDA from the competitive
solicitation process for City contracts as required by the Lake Oswego Public Contract Rules. City Council,
acting as the Lake Oswego Public Contract Review Board, will conduct a public hearing on the proposed
resolution and make a determination on the exemption and the approval of the PDA.
Option to Reimburse the General Fund
Resolution 10-34 provides a means for preserving, to the extent possible, the City Council's option to
reimburse the General Fund for the City's contribution to the Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement.
Depending on a number of factors, it may be possible for funds used for planning work leading up to the
creation of a URA to be reimbursed by the revenues generated by the future URA.
RECOMMENDATION
Upon receiving testimony at the public hearing and City Council's due consideration of this testimony, staff
recommends approval of resolutions 10-33 and 10-34.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution 10-33
Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Exhibits to the agreement include:
Exhibit A: List of Property Owners
Exhibit B: Map of District and Foothills Properties
Exhibit C: Work Plan, Budget, Schedule
Exhibit D: Planning Principles
Exhibit E: Foothills Properties — Encumbrances
Exhibit F: Form of Individual Trust Deed
Exhibit G: Draft Development Agreement Terms and Conditions
Resolution 10-34
Page 6
Re ' y
Department Director
Finance Dire
City Attorney
Alex D. M clnty
City Manager
RESOLUTION 10-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL, ACTING AS THE LAKE
OSWEGO PUBLIC CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD PURSUANT TO ORS 279A.060, MAKING
FINDINGS AND APPROVING A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT FOR SERVICES RELATED TO
DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK PLAN TOGETHER WITH PROPOSED
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CODE AMENDMENTS FOR THE FOOTHILLS AREA
WHEREAS, Lake Oswego Public Contract Rule ("LOPCR") 102-0277 generally requires a
competitive solicitation process for contracts for personal services if the contract price is
expected to exceed $100,000; and
WHEREAS, LOPCR 102-0285 and ORS 279B.085 allow the City Council, acting as the Lake
Oswego Public Contract Review Board, to award a special procurement of a personal services
contract without a competitive solicitation process in cases where the contract award will:
Be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to
substantially diminish competition for public contracts; and
2. Result in substantial cost savings to the City or to the public; or
otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not
practicably be realized by complying with competitive solicitation requirements.
WHEREAS, both the City and property owners in the industrial area of Foothills have a
common interest in having the property rezoned and redeveloped based on a common vision and
in a manner that benefits both parties; and
WHEREAS, over the past several years, both the City and property owners in the industrial area
of Foothills have conducted or participated in various planning and design efforts that have not
resulted in any substantial progress towards the rezoning and redevelopment of the industrial
zoned property in Foothills; and
WHEREAS, these past efforts have not addressed the significant physical constraints that have
previously hindered rezoning and redevelopment of the area, and in turn, have not determined the
viability and financial feasibility of redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the City enter into a Foothills District Predevelopment
Agreement with certain entities and individuals representing Foothills area property and
development interests in order to address the physical constraints and determine the viability and
financial feasibility to rezone and redevelop the area; and
WHEREAS, in partnering with Foothills area property and development interests, the City
believes this is an investment in the City's future that will lead to long-term public benefits for
the community; and
Page 1 —Resolution 10-33
WHEREAS, providing the services in the manner defined in the Predevelopment Agreement
will save time and be a cost effective means for advancing redevelopment of the area; and
WHEREAS, both the City and property owners in the industrial area of Foothills believe it is
appropriate to perform this work at this time so as to be prepared for future redevelopment of the
area when the market for this type of development eventually returns; and
WHEREAS, the Predevelopment Agreement calls for the creation of a proposed Framework
Plan and proposed Comprehensive Plan and Code amendments for the Foothills area, which will
form the basis for negotiation of a potential development agreement with Foothills area property
and development interests, including those who are to be parties to the Predevelopment
Agreement; and
WHEREAS, certain of the activities called for under the Predevelopment Agreement could be
considered "personal services" that would generally be subject to the competitive solicitation
process outlined in LOPCR 102-0277 unless a special procurement is awarded; and
WHEREAS, on June 15, 2010, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the Lake Oswego
City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public Contract Review Board, to provide interested
persons an opportunity to appear and comment on the proposal to approve the Foothills District
Predevelopment Agreement as a special procurement; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Oswego City Council has fully considered the testimony and other
evidence produced at the public hearing;
THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL, ACTING AS THE LAKE OSWEGO PUBLIC
CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD, HEREBY ADOPTS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:
The parties to the proposed Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement ("Agreement")
include the City of Lake Oswego (the "City"), Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego
LLC ("WDW"), Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC ("Foothills Redevelopment"),
Mreen Family LLC ("Mreen") and Eileen F. Colhouer and Ellen Laura Colhouer
Henderson as Trustees of the J.C. Colhouer Revocable Trust ("Colhouer").
2. Mreen and Colhouer own Foothills area properties. The members of Foothills
Redevelopment include four owners of additional Foothills area properties. These four
property owners have entered into an agreement requiring contribution of their Foothills
area properties to Foothills Redevelopment if certain contingencies are met, and also
requiring that they make their properties available for purchase by Foothills
Redevelopment.
3. The six Foothills area property owners used a competitive process to select WDW as their
redevelopment consultant to evaluate conditions in the Foothills area, to work with the
City on a development plan for the area, to create planning and design principles
consistent with the City's objectives and to produce an implementation strategy. Pursuant
Page 2 — Resolution 10-33
to an agreement with the property owners, WDW is also a member and manager of
Foothills Redevelopment.
4. The objectives of the proposed Agreement include development of a Framework Plan for
redevelopment of the Foothills area consistent with certain planning principles designed
to meet the objectives of both the City and the property owners, as well as development
of proposed Comprehensive Plan and Code amendments, and other regulatory changes
that will implement the Framework Plan.
The principals of WDW have an in-depth understanding of the area together with
extensive project management, land use planning, development, financial analysis, and
public involvement experience. WDW is also a member and manager of Foothills
Redevelopment, which has the contractual rights described above with respect to
properties owned by the members of that entity, and which also has a relationship with
the two additional property owners who will be parties to the Agreement. For these
reasons, WDW and Foothills Redevelopment are uniquely qualified to assist the City in
preparing a Framework Plan and regulatory amendments that will not only meet the
City's objectives as outlined in the planning principles and the terms of the Agreement,
but that also can lead to successful negotiation of a development agreement involving the
Foothills area properties. Furthermore, the Agreement provides that, if a Framework Plan
is adopted, Foothills Redevelopment, Mreen and Colhouer will contribute to the cost of
the services performed for the City under the Agreement.
6. As additional findings, the City Council incorporates the recitals (A through I) of the
attached Agreement, and the recitals of this Resolution, together with the June 10, 2010
Council Report of Brant Williams, Director of Economic and Capital Development.
7. As outlined in these findings, approving the Agreement through a special procurement
will substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be
realized by following a competitive procurement process, including, without limitation,
requirements that are applicable under ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 279B.065 or 279B.070,
or pursuant to rules adopted under those statutes. Other potential providers of personal
services would not have the contractual opportunities to acquire the four Foothills area
properties, or the relationship with other two signatory property owners. Consequently
other potential service providers would not have the same ability to pursue development
of a framework plan in a way that would simultaneously meet the objectives of the City,
the property owners and the owners' development representative. Furthermore, other
potential service providers would not be able to commence negotiation of a development
agreement simultaneously with the Foothills planning process, as called for in the
Agreement.
8. Approving this Agreement as a special procurement will be unlikely to encourage
favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for
public contracts. As outlined in these findings, the proposed Agreement is unique in that
the objective is to jointly utilize the skills of an entity with contractual and other
relationships with the owners of Foothills area properties, and that has potential
Page 3 — Resolution 10-33
development opportunities in the area. In addition, WDW was selected by the property
owners through a competitive solicitation process. Furthermore, the proposed Agreement
provides that consultants to be utilized by WDW/Foothills Redevelopment must be
selected through a competitive solicitation process approved in advance by the City.
BASED UPON THE PRECEDING FINDINGS OF FACT, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED
THAT:
1. A special procurement of the Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement, in
substantially the form attached as Exhibit A, is approved pursuant to LOPCR 102-0285
and ORS 279B.085,
2. The Mayor is authorized to execute the Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement, in
substantially the form attached as Exhibit A, fourteen days following public notice of the
approval of the special procurement pursuant to LOPCR 102-0285.
3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption by the City Council.
Adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on this 15th day
of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Jack D. Hoffman
Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
Page 4 — Resolution 10-33
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell
City Attorney
Page 5 — Resolution 10-33
FOOTHILLS DISTRICT PREDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Predevelopment Agreement ("Ageement") is made and entered into this _ day
of , 2010 ("Effective Date") by and between the City of Lake Oswego, an
Oregon municipal corporation (the "City"); Foothills Road Redevelopment, LLC, an Oregon
limited liability company, ("Foothills Redevelopment"); Williams/Dame & White — Lake
Oswego LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, both in its individual capacity as an LLC and
on behalf of Foothills Redevelopment in its capacity as the manager and a member of Foothills
Redevelopment ("WDW " or "Development Manager'); Mreen Family, LLC ("Mreen"); and
Eileen F. Colhouer and Ellen Laura Colhouer Henderson as Trustees of the J.C. Colhouer
Revocable Trust, Third Amended and Restated, February 26, 1998 ("Colhouer"). The foregoing
parties are sometimes referred to in this Agreement as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties."
A. The members of Foothills Redevelopment include four (4) property owners listed
on Exhibit A as Foothills Redevelopment members ("Member Property Owners"), who together
with two other property owners listed on Exhibit A, Mreen and Colhouer, who are not members
of Foothills Redevelopment ("Non-member Property Owners"), individually hold fee simple
title to properties located within an approximately 11.50 -acre area commonly referred to as
"Foothills" located between State Street to the west, the Willamette River to the east, Tryon
Creek to the north and Leonard Street on the south within the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon.
These six property owners are referred to collectively in this Agreement as the "Property
Owners." A map depicting the Foothills area property owned by Property Owners is attached as
Exhibit B (the "Foothills Property"). By separate agreement, the Member Property Owners have
agreed to contribute their respective Foothills Property to Foothills Redevelopment. The Non-
member Property Owners are willing to execute this Agreement and to make their Foothills
Properties available for sale to Foothills Redevelopment. The Foothills Property is located
within the approximately 120 -acre Foothills District (the "District") also depicted on Exhibit B.
The City and the Property Owners have been discussing redevelopment of the District since
approximately 2001. The Parties agree that the District has the potential to form the core of an
innovative and important downtown redevelopment project along the Willamette River.
B. After multiple planning and infrastructure studies, the Property Owners, in
consultation with the City, issued a Request for Proposals to select a redevelopment consultant
that would have the expertise to evaluate the current conditions within the District, establish an
economically feasible development plan for the District, create planning and design principles
consistent with the City's objective for redevelopment in the District and produce an
implementation strategy for redevelopment of the District. The Property Owners selected the
Development Manager based on its depth of planning, development and implementation
expertise on similarly -situated properties. Development Manager and the Member Property
Owners subsequently formed Foothills Redevelopment, of which each is a member.
C. The Parties agree that the current zoning, development standards, design
guidelines and infrastructure plans applicable to the District are insufficient to meet the needs of
future redevelopment.
Page 1 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
D. Because of WDW's in-depth understanding of the District combined with the
extensive land planning and design experience of WDW and its affiliates and consultants, and
based upon WDW's current status as a member of, and the manager to, Foothills
Redevelopment, which has contractual rights to the Member Property Owners' Foothills
Property, together with WDW's relationship with the Non-member Property Owners, the City
has determined that Development Manager is uniquely qualified to assist the City in preparing
the City's framework plan for the District (as more fully described in Section 2, below, as the
"Framework Plan"); and to identify and recommend how the City may implement changes
anticipated by the Framework Plan to the City's zoning and development codes, comprehensive
plan and design guidelines, (collectively the Post -Plan Amendments, as more fully described in
Sections 1.36 and 7). In addition, Foothills Redevelopment and the Non-member Property
Owners are committed to partially reimbursing the cost of development of the Framework Plan
and Post -Plan Amendments. The Parties believe that the Framework Plan and Post -Plan
Amendments are necessary to ensure that the District can be redeveloped to its full potential
consistent with the City's vision for the area.
E. The City recognizes that, if the Framework Plan and the Post -Plan Amendments
are adopted, the District will be poised for redevelopment, which will increase the tax base and
tax revenue for the City and present an opportunity to create the next great neighborhood in Lake
Oswego along the Willamette River.
F. The City, together with Metro, Tri -Met, the City of Portland and other local and
federal agencies, has been diligently pursuing the extension of the streetcar line (the "Streetcar")
from downtown Portland to Lake Oswego. To date the City has loaned $1.5 million to Tri -Met
to help fund the Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") process for the Streetcar extension to
Lake Oswego. The proposed Streetcar line will run adjacent to and/or within the District. The
Streetcar will provide an additional transportation option for residents, businesses, and
employees in the District and downtown Lake Oswego and will also deliver visitors to Lake
Oswego to shop and play. The City intends to capitalize on its investment in the Streetcar
extension by ensuring that the density, design and mix of uses within the District reflect its
superior location next to this new multi -modal transportation system.
G. It is the intent of the Parties that, during the Framework Plan process, the City
and the Development Manager will negotiate in good faith to enter into a development
agreement, or several development agreements including the Foothills Property (collectively, the
"Development Agreement"), which will carry forward the purposes and outcomes of the
Framework Plan and provide additional specifics regarding various development matters in the
District. The Development Agreement will outline the respective responsibilities of the Parties.
The Parties desire to negotiate exclusively during the Negotiating Period with the intention of
entering into a Development Agreement based on the general conceptual terms and provisions
described in Exhibit G. The Development Agreement is not part of the Work Product to be
produced by Development Manager under this Agreement.
H. Because this Agreement calls for the Development Manager to perform certain
services of benefit to the City, and based upon factors that include circumstances outlined in
these recitals, the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Public Contract Review Board for the
Page 2 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
City of Lake Oswego, has approved entering into this Agreement as a special procurement
pursuant to ORS 279B.125 and Section 102-0285 of the Lake Oswego Public Contract Rules.
I. Based on the foregoing, the City would like Foothills Redevelopment, acting
through Development Manager, to commence preparation of the Framework Plan and Post -Plan
Amendments immediately according to the Budget, Schedule, and Work Plan attached as Exhibit
C. Foothills Redevelopment is willing to cause Development Manager, and Development
Manager is willing to agree, to commence and prepare the Framework Plan and Post -Plan
Amendments under the Budget, Schedule and Work Plan attached as Exhibit C according to the
terms of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements contained herein
and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the Parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as specified:
1. Definitions. In addition to the terms defined in the Recitals above and elsewhere in this
Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:
1.1 "Agreement" has the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph. In the
event of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and those of any incorporated exhibit,
the terms of this Agreement shall control.
1.2 "Alternative" has the meaning set forth in Section 19.4.
1.3 "BES" means the City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services.
1.4 `Budget" has the meaning set forth in Exhibit C.
1.5 "Business day" means each Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday,
which is not a day on which banking institutions in the State or Oregon are authorized or
obligated by law or executive order to close.
1.6 "CAC" has the meaning set forth in Section 15.4.
1.7 "Liff" has the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph of this Agreement.
1.8 "City Project Manager" has the meaning set forth in Section 15.1.
1.9 "Comprehensive Amount" has the meaning set forth in Section 11.1.
1.10 "Consultants" means such other third party consultants as Development Manager
may engage from time to time to assist in the performance Development Manager's obligations
under this Agreement.
1.11 "Contribution Invoice" has the meaning set forth in Section 11.3(a).
1.12 "Council" means the Council of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon.
Page 3 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
1. 13) "Development Agreement" has the meaning set forth in Section 8.
1.14 "Development Manager" has the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph
of this Agreement.
1.15 "District" has the meaning set forth in Recital A, above.
1.16 "Effective Date" has the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph of this
Agreement.
1.17 "EIS" has the meaning set forth in Recital F, above.
1.18 "Essential Conditions" has the meaning set forth in Section 19.
1.19 "Examination Period" has the meaning set forth in Section 19.4.
1.20 ``Foothills Contribution" has the meaning set forth in Section 11.2.
1.21 "Foothills Property" has the meaning set forth in Recital A, above.
1.22 "Foothills Redevelopment' has the meaning set forth in the introductory
paragraph.
1.23 "Foothills URA" has the meaning set forth in Section 5.
1.24 "Framework Plan" has the meaning set forth in Recital D, above.
1.25 "Framework Plan Final Approval Date" means the date upon which all City
review periods have expired and the City issues such final approval of the Framework Plan that
is required by the City in order to render the Framework Plan effective.
1.26 "IGA" has the meaning set forth in Section 9.1.
1.27 "Individual Trust Deed(s)'has the meaning set forth in Section 11.3(b).
1.28 "LID" has the meaning set forth in Section 17.
1.29 "Mayr" means the Mayor of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon.
1.30 "Member Property Owners" has the meaning set forth in Recital A, above.
1.31 "NegotiatingPeriod" means, with respect to the Development Agreement, the
period beginning on the Effective Date and, subject to extension as set forth in Section 8.2,
ending on the date that is two months following adoption of the Framework Plan by the Lake
Oswego City Council.
1.32 "Non-member Property Owners" has the meaning set forth in Recital A, above.
1.33 "Notifying ing Party" has the meaning set forth in Section 19.4.
Page 4 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
1.34 "PAG" has the meaning set forth in Section 15.5.
1.35 "Planning Principles" means those goals and planning objectives set forth in
Exhibit D.
1.36 "Post -Plan Amendments" means all regulatory amendments under the City's
jurisdiction, including, without limitation, modifications to the City's Comprehensive Plan,
Zoning and Development Code, and/or the establishment of Design Guidelines or other
regulatory language, that are identified in the approved Framework Plan as necessary to enable
the District to be developed consistent with the Framework Plan
1.37 "Post -Plan Amendments Final Approval Date" means the date upon which the
City Council issues its final approval of all Post -Plan Amendments and all review and appeal
periods held by other governing bodies, review bodies, or agencies have expired.
1.38 "Presentation Date" means the date on which the proposed Framework Plan is
presented to the Mayor and Council for approval, provided that the City shall provide notice to
Foothills Redevelopment of the pending Presentation Date at least two (2) business days prior to
the Presentation date, which notice shall be in writing and delivered pursuant to Section 26.1. In
no event shall the Presentation Date be later than the expiration of the Term of the Agreement
pursuant to Section 10.
1.39 "Progress Report" has the meaning set forth in Section 19.2.
1.40 "Project Account" means an account at a bank mutually selected by the City and
Development Manager, which account will be co -owned by the City and Development Manager
and will be utilized to transfer payments due under this Agreement to the Development Manager
and subsequently to Consultants.
1.41 "Property Owners" has the meaning set forth in Recital A, above.
1.42 "Receiving Party" has the meaning set forth in Section 19.4.
1.43 "Schedule" means the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C summarizing the
approximate time periods within which each stage of the Work Plan will be performed, as the
same may be modified from time to time by agreement of the Parties.
1.44 "Streetcar" has the meaning set forth in Recital F, above.
1.45 "Term" has the meaning set forth in Section 18.1.
1.46 "TCWTP" means the Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant.
1.47 "Unavoidable Delay" has the meaning set forth in Section 26.11, below.
1.48 "URA Consultant" has the meaning set forth in Section 5.
1.49 "URA Study" has the meaning set forth in Section 5.
Page 5 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
1.50 "WDW" has the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph.
1.51 "Work Plan" means the work to be performed by Development Manager, itself or
through Consultants as described in this Agreement and in Exhibit C. In the event of any
conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the terms of Exhibit C, the terms of this
Agreement shall control.
1.52 "Work Product" means all studies, reports, analyses, surveys, plans, drawings,
photographs, writings and other work product relating to the preparation of the Framework Plan
and the Post -Plan Amendments, including all such work product of the Consultants.
2. Framework Plan. Development Manager shall produce a Framework Plan, consistent
with the Planning Principles set forth in Exhibit D, according to the Work Plan, Schedule, and
Budget attached as Exhibit C. The Framework Plan shall create a comprehensive framework for
the District that will serve as a basis for Post -Plan Amendments, design guidelines, infrastructure
improvements or agreements, and the formation of an urban renewal area for properties within
the District. The Framework Plan shall contain at a minimum provisions addressing all aspects
of the District necessary for its successful redevelopment. These include, but are not limited to,
the following:
2.1 Historic and Current Site Conditions. An analysis of the historic and current site
conditions, including soil conditions, depth, direction and flow of groundwater, areas of concern
for the presence of hazardous materials, topographic opportunities and constraints, and current
uses.
2.2 Environmental and Sustainable Neighborhood and Building Design.
Incorporation of principles. of environmentally sensitive and sustainable design in the
redevelopment of the District including, without limitation, natural and wildlife preservation and
protection, sustainable storm water treatment including infiltration, vegetative and green street
treatments, U.S. Green Building Council (LEED) building design standards, passive solar access
and District -wide sustainability measures.
2.3 Land Use Recommendations and Urban Form. Design and planning concepts and
guidelines directing the urban form within the District, including height, density and uses.
2.4 Transportation Analysis and Recommendations. A transportation and parking
analysis by one or more Consultants, together with a description of the transportation
improvements that will be necessary to support implementation of the Framework Plan,
including a street plan; access locations to State Street; pedestrian and bicycle facilities; phased
transportation improvements; traffic mitigation to State Street, downtown and neighborhoods;
and parking ratios. The transportation plan including traffic generation, transportation
improvements, phasing and access to State Street will be acceptable to the Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT).
2.5 Streetcar Integration. tion. Integration of the locations of the anticipated Streetcar line,
Streetcar station and park and ride facilities; plus integration of Streetcar facility design with the
design objectives for the District.
Page 6 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
2.5.1 The Parties recognize that, although the draft EIS for the Streetcar
extension to the City will be prepared ahead of the schedule for the development of the
Framework Plan, the final station design and location, as well as park and ride locations, have
not yet been recommended. Development Manager shall use reasonable efforts to integrate the
Streetcar planning process with the Work Plan and to work with Metro, Tri -Met and any other
relevant agency or local government to coordinate the Framework Plan with the Streetcar
planning process.
2.6 Infrastructure Capacity and Needs. An analysis of the infrastructure capacity
needs in the District, together with strategies for meeting such needs; and a preliminary plan
depicting the layout and sizing of primary water, sanitary sewer, storm water, power,
telecommunications, natural gas and other infrastructure facilities.
2.7 TCWTP Modifications and Recommendations. A feasibility and technical
analysis of the TCWTP, including recommendations for modification and mitigation of the
facility and proposed alternatives for financing the recommended actions.
2.8 Open Space. An open space plan for the District that recognizes the value to the
community of open space resources such as Foothills Park and Tryon Creek State Park, and links
these resources to a network of diverse open areas within the District, including pocket parks,
green streets and smaller parks appropriate to the scale and density of the development
contemplated under the Framework Plan.
2.9 Floodplain Management and Miti ag tion. A study of the floodplain -related
development issues within the District, including recommendations on how to address or
mitigate floodplain designations, which recommendations may include, but not necessarily be
limited to, raising redevelopment areas above the floodplain elevation, balanced cut and fill on
portions of the floodplain, diking floodplain areas, Metro Title III exemptions or FEMA re -
mapping.
2.10 School District Impacts. An analysis of how redevelopment described under the
Framework Plan may affect Lake Oswego School District facilities or activities, including data
related to the anticipated population and mix of uses in the District that may result, and an
estimate of the number of new school -aged children anticipated to reside within the District over
the next ten years. The City shall use this data to inform the analysis of the Foothills URA
pursuant to Section 5 below.
2.11 Public Art. A program for integrating public art in the District.
2.12 Public Facilities and Services. An evaluation of the adequacy of available public
facilities and services required to support District redevelopment and recommendations on new
or expanded public facilities required to support the Framework Plan, if any.
2.13 Cost Estimates. Cost estimates, in current dollars, for all public improvements.
2.14 Implementation Strategy. An implementation strategy that sets forth the actions
necessary to implement the Framework Plan, including a list of responsible parties, potential
Page 7 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
revenue sources, an estimated timeline for initiation and completion, and cost estimates for each
action item.
2.15 Concepts for Planning and Design /Post -Plan Amendments. Planning and design
concepts for the District containing, at a minimum, recommendations for uses, densities, building
heights, design standards for both public and private improvements, and other development
standards, together with concepts for the Post -Plan Amendments.
3. Citizen Involvement. Development Manager shall conduct a citizen involvement process
in the formation of the Framework Plan, consistent with Section 15 below.
4. Privately -held Properties. The Framework Plan will not mandate redevelopment of any
privately -held property. Rather, it is the intent of the City and the Development Manager to
work collaboratively, cooperatively and in good faith with all property owners in the District to
ensure that each property owner is informed of the Framework Plan process and has
opportunities to participate and contribute to the Framework Plan, as well as to review and
comment on the Framework Plan.
5. Urban Renewal Area Study. The Parties agree that the Framework Plan will provide a
planning framework for redevelopment within the District. The Parties further agree that
implementation of the Framework Plan will likely occur in part through the creation of an urban
renewal area ("Foothills URA") encompassing lands within the District. The City shall engage a
consultant to evaluate the potential for expanding its existing current downtown urban renewal
area or establishing a new Foothills URA within the District ("URA Consultant"). The City shall
require the URA Consultant to evaluate the density projections within the District, infrastructure
needs, estimated development value, public investment needs, development timing and all other
elements required in an urban renewal area plan ("URA Study'). The City shall require the
URA Consultant to coordinate its URA Study with the Development Manager to ensure
consistency between the Framework Plan and urban renewal area plan. The City shall ensure
that the URA Study is scheduled to be completed on the same date the Framework Plan is
scheduled to be completed under Exhibit C and Section 14.
6. Presentation of Framework Plan. Unless this agreement is terminated, or the Term
expires prior to creation of the Framework Plan, the City agrees to present the Framework Plan
to the City Council for consideration and approval by the Presentation Date.
7. Preparation of Post -Plan Amendments. If the City Council adopts the Framework Plan,
the Development Manager shall prepare final Post -Plan Amendments in a form approved by the
City Project Manager, consistent with the concepts outlined in the adopted Framework Plan.
8. Development Agreement. Contemporaneous with the adoption of the Framework Plan,
the City and the Development Manager shall use their best efforts in good faith to negotiate and
enter into a development agreement for the Foothills Properties that will carry forward the
purposes and outcomes of the Framework Plan as well as various development matters in the
District, generally consistent with, but not necessarily limited to, the concepts described in
Exhibit G (the "Development Agreement"). In addition, the Development Agreement will
outline the respective responsibilities of the Parties. If, after negotiating in good faith and with
Page 8 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
diligence during the Negotiating Period, the City and the Development Manager are unable to
agree on a Development Agreement, this Agreement will automatically terminate.
8.1 Ne otg iatin Pg eriod. The Parties, acknowledging that time is of the essence, agree
that the Negotiating Period for the Development Agreement shall commence upon the Effective
Date and shall be completed no later than two (2) months following adoption of Framework Plan
by the City Council. The City agrees, for the Negotiating Period, not to negotiate with any other
person or entity regarding development of the Foothills Properties or any other property within
the District owned by Foothills Redevelopment, the Property Owners. The Parties agree that it is
in the best interest of the City to involve the owners of other properties in the District in the
Framework Plan process. The Parties further acknowledge that the City may enter multiple
development agreements within the District for other District properties, and with property
owners other than Foothills Redevelopment and the Property Owners. The Parties further agree
that additional parties may be included in the Development Agreement by mutual consent of the
City and the Development Manager.
8.2 The City and the Development Manager each agree to consider in its discretion
reasonable requests by the other party for extensions of the Negotiating Period. The City
Manager is authorized to execute any extension of the Negotiating Period on behalf of the City.
9. Framework Plan Implementation. If the City Council adopts the Framework Plan, and if
the City and the Development Manager enter into a Development Agreement, the City agrees
that, during the remainder of the Term of this Agreement:
9.1 The City will use reasonable efforts to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement
("IGA") with the City of Portland, Bureau of Environmental Services to implement the proposed
modifications and mitigations to the TCWTP called for in the adopted Framework Plan.
9.2 The City shall present the Post -Plan Amendments to the Lake Oswego Planning
Commission for its consideration and recommendation, and subsequently to the City Council for
its consideration and approval. Nothing in this Agreement shall bind the City Council to approve
the Post -Plan Amendments.
9.3 The City shall continue reasonable efforts to support the extension of the Streetcar
to Lake Oswego in a manner consistent with the provisions of the adopted Framework Plan.
9.4 The City shall reasonably pursue approval of recommendations within the
adopted Framework Plan for mitigation of the floodplain which may include, but not be limited
to, raising redevelopment areas above the floodplain elevation, balanced cut and fill on portions
of the floodplain, diking floodplain areas, Metro Title III exemptions or FEMA re -mapping.
9.5 The City and the Development Manager shall negotiate an extension of the Term
if:
9.5.1 The City's efforts under Subsections 9.1, 9.3 or 9.4 have not been
successful by the end of the Term and, in the Development Manager's and the City's mutual
determination, it would be reasonable to continue such efforts; or
Page 9 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
9.5.2 The Post -Plan Amendments have not been presented to the Planning
Commission or the City Council by the end of the Term pursuant to Subsection 9.2 and, in
Development Manager's and City's mutual determination, it would be reasonable to make the
presentations.
9.6 Notwithstanding Subsections 9.5.1 and 9.5.2, the Development Manager and City
may mutually agree to allow the City to continue to meet its obligations under Sections 9.1, 9.3
and 9.4 in the Development Agreement that will survive the expiration of the Term.
9.7 In no event shall the Term be extended beyond December 31, 2015.
10. Consultants.
10.1 Consultants. The Parties agree that the analysis required to produce a successful
Framework Plan will require significant expertise and dedication of resources that are not
currently available within the City's planning and infrastructure staff. The City and
Development Manager therefore agree to collaborate and jointly agree on the selection of the
Consultants that will be engaged by the Development Manager to complete the tasks identified in
the Work Plan and Budget attached as Exhibit C, provided, however, that the engagement of
such Consultants shall require the mutual approval of both the City Project Manager and the
Development Manager. Selection of Consultants shall occur through a competitive solicitation
process approved in advance by the City. The City Project Manager and Development Manager
shall:
10.1.1 Identify a list of specific deliverables that must be submitted by each
prospective Consultant group, prior to any prospective Consulting being considered. In
identifying deliverables for each Consultant group, the City Project Manager and Development
Manager shall include such items as may be reasonably required to ensure the selection of the
most qualified Consultants and to ensure that the City receives quality information to help
maximize its investment in the District. It is anticipated that Consultant services will be needed,
at a minimum, for infrastructure planning and design, transportation planning and traffic design,
geotechnical engineering and environmental analysis, natural resource analysis, and wastewater
treatment engineering.
10. 1.2 Jointly review the responses provided by any prospective Consultant and,
based on evaluation criteria mutually agreed to by the Parties, select the desired Consultants to
be engaged by the Development Manager. Following Consultant selection, Development
Manager shall define a specific scope of work for each Consultant that will accomplish the
agreed-upon deliverables, including a delivery schedule, a not -to -exceed budget for the identified
work, and insurance requirements. If the selected Consultant does not agree to the scope of
work, budget, and/or insurance obligations, the Development Manager and the City Project
Manager shall jointly determine whether to amend the scope of work, budget, and/or insurance
requirements, or select another Consultant from the responses obtained.
10.2 Consultant Contracts. The form of contracts entered into by the Development
manager and Consultants must be approved in advance by the City. Consultant contracts shall
include provisions whereby the Consultants agree to indemnify the City against liability arising
Page 10 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
out of the Consultants activities, and shall require the Consultants to maintain insurance at levels
consistent with those required in Section 23 of this Agreement, with the City named as an
additional insured.
11. Budget/Contributions.
11.1 The Parties agree that the amount to be paid by the City for all Work Product and
for all other work performed pursuant to this Agreement and the Work Plan shall be an amount
not to exceed One Million Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,300,000.00) (the
"Comprehensive Amount"), as shown in Exhibit C. The City intends that the sources of such
funds shall be as follows:
11.1.1 Up to Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($800,000) will be from current
City funds.
11.1.2 Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), will be from funds resulting
from a commitment that the City has secured from TriMet, and which the Parties agree will be
applied towards the Work Plan in support of Streetcar stop area planning.
11.1.3 The City intends to secure additional funding in an amount not to exceed
Two Hundred Ninety Five Thousand Dollars ($295,000.00), which may come from one or more
sources, public and/or private. In order to secure this amount, the City has prepared a grant
application to Metro through the Construction Excise Tax ("CET") Planning Grant Program for
the full amount. The City may elect to proceed with work under this Agreement without these
additional funds being secured, either from Metro or from other sources. Should the City allow
work to proceed under this Agreement without such outside funding being secured, the City may
elect at any time to suspend work until such time as the remaining funding is secured or to
reassess the Work Plan, Schedule, and Budget and determine what activities may be modified or
eliminated in order to match the available financial resources.
11.2 Provided that the City Council adopts a Framework Plan for the District, Foothills
Redevelopment and the Non-member Property Owners shall pay the City a sum not to exceed
One Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars ($130,000.00) (the "Foothills Contribution") as
reimbursement of a portion of the amount paid by the City pursuant to paragraph 11. 1, above,
which reimbursement shall be calculated pursuant to Section 11.3.
11.3 The Foothills Contribution shall be paid to the City by the Non-member Property
Owners and Foothills Redevelopment as follows:
(a) Within sixty (60) days following the earliest to occur of. (i) the Post -Plan
Amendments Final Approval Date; (ii) the date of completion of all work to be performed by
Development Manager as described in the Work Plan; (iii) the date of the expiration of the Term;
and (iv) the date of the termination of this Agreement; the City shall deliver (in accordance with
Section 26.1) to Foothills Redevelopment and to the Non-member Property Owners a statement
itemizing and totaling all amounts previously paid, plus any amounts remaining to be paid for all
Work Product and for all other work described in the Work Plan (the "Contribution Invoice").
The amount of the Foothills Contribution shall be equal to ten percent (10%) of the total amount
of the Contribution Invoice, but shall not exceed One Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars
Page 11 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
($130,000.00). The Foothills Contribution shall be paid to the City in five (5) equal annual
installments, the first of which shall be due thirty (30) days following delivery by the City of the
Contribution Invoice, and subsequent installments shall be due on the same day of each
following year until the entire Foothills Contribution, including all principal and interest, has
been paid in full. Interest on the unpaid principal balance(s) of the Foothills Contribution shall
accrue, beginning on the date that is thirty days prior to the date that the first installment is due,
at the prime lending rate as stated in the Oregon Prime Loan Rate Index (as published in The
Oregonian newspaper) as of that date, plus one percent.
(b) Foothills Redevelopment shall pay 49.4 per cent of the Foothills
Contribution. Foothills Redevelopment shall cause this payment obligation to be secured by trust
deeds encumbering each Member Property Owner's Foothills Property in an amount equaling the
portion of the total Foothills Contribution that corresponds to the Member Property Owner's
percentage of the total Foothills Property, as shown on Exhibit A. Mreen and Colhouer shall pay
29.7 percent and 20.9 percent of the Foothills Contribution respectively, and shall secure these
separate payment obligations by executing trust deeds encumbering their respective Foothills
Properties in those amounts. Trust Deeds provided pursuant to this subparagraph ("Individual
Trust Deeds") shall be subject to only those encumbrances listed on Exhibit E. The Individual
Trust Deeds shall be in the form attached as Exhibit F, edited to recite the payment obligations
under this Section 11. 3, and shall be executed and recorded simultaneously with the execution of
this Agreement.
(c) No Property Owner is a guarantor, surety, or co -obligor of the portion of
the Foothills Contribution of any other Property Owner.
(d) Upon the failure of Foothills Redevelopment or a Non-member Property
Owner to make any payment promptly when due pursuant to this Section 11.3, time being of the
essence, the entire outstanding balance of all principal and accrued interest owing by Foothills
Redevelopment or that Non-member Property Owner (the "Defaulting Party"), as the case may
be, shall be accelerated and shall become immediately due and payable to the City. In such an
event, the Defaulting Party shall pay all costs and expenses incurred by the City in the collection
of any amount(s) due from the Defaulting Party pursuant to this Section 11.3 or in the
enforcement of the terms of this Section 11.3 including all reasonable attorney fees, including the
reasonable value of any services provided by in-house counsel. The reasonable value of services
provided by in-house counsel shall be calculated by applying an hourly rate commensurate with
prevailing market rates charged by attorneys in private practice in the Portland, Oregon
metropolitan area for such services.
(e) If the City elects to unilaterally terminate this Agreement without cause
pursuant to Section 20 of this Agreement, Foothills Redevelopment and the Non-member
Property Owners shall have no reimbursement obligation under this Section 11.3. Upon such
termination, the City shall immediately cause any and all Individual Trust Deeds to be
reconveyed of record. .
(f) If the City acts in a manner that is not in substantial conformance with the
Planning Principles described on the attached Exhibit D, such that any Essential Condition fails
or is otherwise infeasible, Foothills Redevelopment and the Non-member Property Owners shall
Page 12 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
have no payment or reimbursement obligation under this Section 11.3. Accordingly, in such an
event, the City shall immediately cause any and all Individual Trust Deeds to be reconveyed of
record.
12. Payments to Development Manager. As a part of the tasks and Work Product described
in the Work Plan, Development Manager shall be responsible for: overall implementation of
project vision and concepts; overall consultant management; budget tracking and documentation;
public process management; development feasibility analysis; overall document production,
including preparation of draft and final Framework Plan documents; land use and regulatory
process support, including preparation of supporting documents, draft code language and
applications; internal and external communications; interagency coordination; and overall quality
control for consultant work products.
12.1 For all Work Plan tasks to be performed directly by Development Manager, as
opposed to those Work Plan tasks that Development Manager causes to be performed by
Consultants, Development Manager shall be paid a portion of the Comprehensive Amount in
accordance with the Budget in Exhibit C, which portion shall not exceed $520,000.00 (Five
Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars) in total ("Development Manager Compensation Limit").
This sum shall be payable in amounts not to exceed the following:
(a) Twenty equal monthly installments of not more than Twenty Six
Thousand Dollars ($26,000), less 5% retainage; and
(b) Upon presentation of the completed Framework Plan to the City
Council for adoption, the release of any retainage accumulated up to that date.
(c) Notwithstanding Subsection 12.1(a), if all Work Plan tasks are
completed in less than twenty months, the remaining unpaid balance shall be accelerated and
paid as part of the final invoice, including any retainage held.
12.2 The Development Manager shall provide a service invoice to the City for each
payment, together with a Budget Tracking Report that tracks each service invoice against the
Work Plan, Budget and Schedule. Within 30 days following the City's review and approval of
the service invoice and Budget Tracking Report, the City shall transfer payment to the project
account for release to the Development Manager.
12.3 In the event of termination of this Agreement prior to completion of all services to
be performed by the Development Manager for any reason other than a default by Development
Manager, the City shall pay to the Development Manager the Development Manager
Compensation Limit multiplied by the percentage of Work Product completed and accepted by
the City, less previous amounts paid and any claim(s) which the City has against the
Development Manager. In such an event, the City shall also pay Development Manager the
additional sum of $10,000 upon completion of work by Development Manager to terminate any
consultant contracts and to deliver to the City all documents, information, works -in -progress and
other property that are or would be deliverables had the work under this Agreement been
completed. If previous amounts paid to the Development Manager exceed the amount due to
Page 13 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Development Manager under this subsection, Development Manager shall pay any excess to the
City upon demand.
12.4 Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 12, or of the following Section 13,
or any other provisions of this Agreement, or of the Work Plan, Schedule or Budget, the
Comprehensive Amount shall not be increased. Development Manager shall cause all Work Plan
tasks to be performed for a total sum not to exceed the Comprehensive Amount.
13. Cost Control. The Parties agree that project accounting and cost control shall be subject
to a rigorous review process by the City. The City shall maintain absolute and final control over
the Budget and payment of invoices under the Budget.
13.1 Payments to Consultants. The Development Manager shall require each
Consultant engaged by the Development Manager to provide a monthly invoice for services.
The Development Manager shall track these monthly Consultant invoices against the approved
Consultant contracts, the Work Plan, Budget and Schedule. The Development Manager shall
approve a Consultant invoice only if the work performed was previously approved in the
Consultant contract and is consistent with the Budget. Upon approval of the monthly Consultant
invoice, the Development Manager shall prepare, sign, and submit the checks and with the
supporting invoice, Budget tracking report and all other supporting materials to the City Project
Manager for review, approval and countersignature. Upon the City's review and approval of the
monthly invoice and Budget tracking report, the City shall transfer payment to the Project
Account. Upon deposit, the Development Manager will release the countersigned checks to the
applicable Consultant. All checks payable to Consultants, and any checks for project expenses
within the Budget equaling or exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) must be
countersigned by both the Development Manager and the City Project Manager or other
designated City official. Checks for project expenses within the a Budget, but less than One
Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) need only be signed by the Development Manager or City Project
Manager (or other designated City official).
14. Project Schedule. Development Manager shall manage the Framework Plan development
consistent with the Schedule attached as Exhibit C, and shall update the Schedule monthly to
track the Consultant contracts and reflect progress to date. The Development Manager shall
review the Schedule at least monthly with the City Project Manager. The Parties recognize that
there may be a need for minor variations in the Schedule caused by a variety of circumstances
both within and outside of the control of the Parties. The schedule maybe changed upon the
mutual agreement of the Development Manager and City Project Manager.
15. Project Oversight. The Parties agree that project oversight by the City and the
community in the development of the Framework Plan is fundamental to a sound planning
process and critical to the success of the District. The Parties also agree that public oversight of
the Framework Plan process is necessary to protect the public interest, ensure that the City's
vision for the entire District is reflected in the Framework Plan and ensure fiscal prudence in the
Budget and Work Plan. Project oversight shall be accomplished through a City Project Manager,
community outreach and participation plan, a community advisory committee ("CAC"), an
oversight committee, and a project advisory group ("PAG').
Page 14 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
15.1 Project Manager. The City shall appoint a project manager to the District (the
"City Project Manager") to perform the tasks allocated to the City Project Manager herein. The
City Project Manager shall be in charge of the day to day communications and coordination with
the Development Manager. The City shall provide the name and contact information of the
selected City Project Manager to the Development Manager within ten (10) days of the Effective
Date. The City may change the designated City Project Manager at any time upon written notice
to the Development Manager.
15.2 Community Outreach and Participation Plan. Development Manager shall prepare
a community outreach and participation plan relating to the District for review and approval by
the City. At a minimum, the community outreach and participation plan shall include: (1)
meetings at least bi-monthly of the community advisory committee; (2) a series of public events
such as open houses, workshops and charrettes; and (3) communications through newsletters,
website updates, or a mass media venue.
15.3 Oversight Committee. The City shall establish an oversight committee that shall
meet at least bi-monthly during the development of the Framework Plan and shall provide
guidance and oversight to the Development Manager and Consultants and review management of
the Work Plan, Budget and Schedule. The oversight committee shall be comprised of. (1) the
Mayor; (2) one member of the City Council designated by the Mayor; (3) the City Manager; and
(4) two community representatives nominated by the Mayor and approved by the City Council.
The oversight committee shall appoint one of the community representatives to act as
chairperson of the oversight committee. The Development Manager shall prepare the agendas
for the monthly oversight committee meetings, which will include updates on project progress,
including work products under the Work Plan and budget and management tracking reports. The
oversight committee shall also serve in an advisory role to City staff and the City Council.
15.4 Community Advisory Committee. The City shall establish a community advisory
committee ("CAC"). Members of the CAC shall be nominated by the Mayor and approved by
the City Council, and shall include three at-large members and one downtown business owner,
together with one representative from each of the following entities: (1) First Addition
Neighborhood Association; (2) Old Town Neighborhood Association; (3) Evergreen
Neighborhood Association; (4) Lakewood Neighborhood Association; (5) Birdshill
Neighborhood Association; (6) the Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce; (7) the Association of
Unit Owners of Oswego Pointe Village Condominium; (8) Prime Property Capital, Inc. (owner
of Oswego Pointe Apartments); (9) Terramar Retail Centers, LLC; and (10) Lake Oswego
School District 7-J. The CAC shall have no decision-making authority, but instead shall serve in
an advisory role to the Development Manager and City staff. The CAC shall meet at least bi-
monthly during the development of the Framework Plan. The Development Manager shall
prepare the agendas for CAC meetings, which will include, but not necessarily be limited to,
updates on project progress, review and discussion of planning concepts, design guidelines,
infrastructure plans and all elements of the Framework Plan as it develops.
15.5 Project Advisory roup. The City shall establish a Project Advisory Group
(PAG) comprised of key City representatives to provide direction to the Development Manager
on technical analyses and recommendations produced under the Framework Plan. The PAG
shall assist with the review and analysis of planning and infrastructure concepts to ensure that the
Page 15 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
City's objectives for the District are reflected in the Framework Plan. The PAG shall include the
following individuals from the City or their designees: (1) City Project Manager; (2) Parks and
Recreation Department Director; (3) Planning and Building Department Director; (4) Economic
and Capital Development Director; (5) Public Works Director; (6) Sustainability Coordinator;
and (7) Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Director. The PAG shall also include a
Development Manager principal. The PAG shall meet at least once per month during the
development of the Framework Plan. The Development Manager shall prepare meeting agendas
and distribute documents to the PAG in advance of each meeting.
16. Business Relocation Assistance. The Parties acknowledge that there are existing
businesses within the Foothills Property that may choose to relocate to further the purposes of
the Framework Plan and the future formation of an Urban Renewal Area encompassing the
Foothill Property. The City agrees to work collaboratively with such property owners to make
reasonable efforts to analyze opportunities for relocation or continuation of the property owners'
business operations. Through the Urban Renewal Area assessment process, the City will
determine what, if any, funds will be available or allocated to business relocation assistance
efforts.
17. Streetcar LID. Development Manager recognizes that the City may consider funding a
portion of the costs of the Streetcar through a local improvement district formed pursuant to ORS
223 ("LID"), or a similar financing mechanism. If the City endeavors to form the LID, Foothills
Redevelopment will execute, upon the City's request, LID petitions, waivers, non -remonstrance
agreements or similar instruments, with respect to the Foothills Property provided that: (1)
Streetcar alignment has been finalized and will enter the District, and a streetcar stop will be
located within one-quarter mile of the Foothills Property; (2) the allocation of costs for the
Streetcar LID in downtown Lake Oswego is fair, equitable and proportional, based on an
analysis of benefit to all property owners in the proposed LID; (3) the Streetcar budget has been
finalized and approved by the appropriate jurisdictions; and (4) the City's obligations under this
Agreement have been fully satisfied. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as
prohibiting the City from endeavoring to form an LID including the Foothills Property in the
absence of such petitions, waivers, non -remonstrance agreements or similar instruments.
18. Term; Default.
18.1 Term. This Agreement shall continue for a term of twenty (20) months following
the Effective Date, subject to extension by mutual agreement of the Parties (the "Term") as
provided in Section 9.5.
18.2 Default by City. The parties agree that, because the City Council is under no
obligation to adopt a Framework Plan or Post -Plan Amendments, no party has a contractual
expectation of profits, business opportunities, enhanced property values or other similar benefits.
Thus Foothills Redevelopment, Development Manager (both individually and in its capacity as
member -manager of Foothills Redevelopment), the Non-member Property Owners and the City
agree that, if the City materially breaches this Agreement and such breach is not cured by the
City within thirty (30) days of receipt of notice from Development Manager of such breach, the
sole remedy of Development Manager, Foothills Redevelopment or the Non-member Property
Owners shall be limited to termination of this Agreement, together with any payment to which
Page 16 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Development Manager would be entitled upon termination pursuant to the terms of this
Agreement, and elimination of the obligation of Foothills Redevelopment or the Non-member
Property Owners to contribute to the Comprehensive Amount pursuant to Section 11.2 and 11.3
of this Agreement, together with re -conveyance of the Individual Trust Deeds.
18.3 Default by Parties other than the fity. If Foothills Redevelopment, the
Development Manager or either of the Non-member Property Owners materially breach any of
their respective obligations under this Agreement and such breach is not cured by the party in
breach within thirty (30) days of receipt of notice from the City of such breach, the City shall be
under no obligation to perform its obligations under this Agreement, and City shall be entitled to
pursue all damages and remedies available under Oregon law.
19. Essential Project Conditions. The Parties agree that certain conditions are critical to the
success of the Framework Plan and redevelopment of the District ("Essential Conditions").
19.1 The following is an exclusive list of the Essential Conditions:
19. 1.1 Redevelopment of the District consistent with the approved Framework
Plan is financially feasible;
19.1.2 The City Project Manager and the Development Manager agree on the
selection of Consultants;
19.1.3 The current planning effort by multiple jurisdictions to extend Streetcar
service to Lake Oswego continues;
and
19.1.4 TCWTP modification or mitigation is financially feasible;
19.1.5 The floodplain mitigation described in Section 2.9 is financially feasible;
19.1.6 The Foothills URA is legally and financially feasible.
19.2 No less frequently than at ninety (90) day intervals during the Term, the
Development Manager shall prepare and submit to the City an analysis of each Essential
Condition and a report on the progress of the planning effort to date ("Progress Report").
19.3 Upon mutually determining that an Essential Condition has failed or will fail, the
City and the Development Manager may mutually agree that the Agreement is terminated.
19.4 Upon the unilateral determination by either the City or the Development Manager
that an Essential Condition has failed, will fail or is at material risk of failing, such party (the
"Notifying Party") shall deliver written notice to the other (the "Receiving Party") specifically
identifying the Essential Condition at issue and the circumstance adversely impacting such
Essential Condition. During the sixty (60) day period following the Receiving Party's receipt of
the notice, (the "Examination Period"), the City and the Development Manager shall use
reasonable efforts to examine whether any reasonably feasible alternative (an "Alternative")
exists to satisfy the subject Essential Condition. If those two Parties are able to mutually agree
Page 17 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
to an Alternative, consent to which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed,
then on or before to the expiration of the Examination Period, each of those two Parties shall
acknowledge, in writing, the existence of such Alternative. If an Alternative has not been so
identified and mutually approved as of the expiration of the Examination Period, this Agreement
shall be deemed automatically terminated as of such date.
20. Unilateral Termination by City_. The City may, in its sole discretion, unilaterally
terminate this Agreement without cause upon written notice to Development Manager and to the
Non-member Property Owners in accordance with Section 26.1 of this Agreement.
21. Key Personnel. Development Manager shall cause its services, Work Plan tasks and
other obligations under this Agreement to be performed through the personal services of Christe
White, Matt Brown, T.B. Dame and Homer Williams as principals, and the services of Christe
White as principal in charge and Matt Brown as project manager, all of whom shall be and
remain actively engaged in the activities of Development Manager relating to this Agreement
throughout its Term.
22. Ownership of Work Product. All Work Product, including, without limitation,
background data, documentation and staff work that is preliminary to final Work Product, is the
exclusive property of the City. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein or by default,
the City, in addition to any other rights provided by this Agreement, may require the
Development Manager to transfer and deliver such partially completed Work Product or other
documentation that the Development Manager or Consultants have specifically developed or
specifically acquired for the performance of this Work Plan. The Work Product and all material
contained in the Work Product shall become the property of the City. The City may reproduce
and distribute the Work Product, or any part thereof, in such form as the City desires.
23. Insurance. Development Manager shall not perform any work under this Agreement until
the City has received copies of applicable insurance policies or acceptable evidence that the
insurance indicated as required below is in force.
23.1 Scope of Insurance. The Development Manager shall obtain prior to the
commencement of the Agreement, and shall maintain in full force and effect for the term of the
Agreement, at the Development Manager's expense, the following policies of insurance for the
protection of the Development Manager, with the City named as an additional insured:
Comprehensive general or commercial general liability with coverage of at least $1,000,000 per
occurrence and $2,000,000 in the aggregate; plus automobile liability with coverage of at least
$1,000,000 per occurrence combined single limit, or $1,000,000 bodily injury and $1,000,000
property damage. The Development Manager shall also maintain statutory Workers
Compensation Employer's Liability coverage in the sum of at least $1,000,000 per person per
accident. The Development Manager shall not undertake any acts that affect the coverage
afforded by the above policies. If an insurance policy is issued on a "claims made" basis, then
the Development Manager shall continue to obtain and maintain coverage for not less than three
years following the expiration of the Agreement. Development Manager expressly
acknowledges and agrees that City is not providing any automobile insurance to Development
Manager and that as to the City and any third parties, Development Manager bears sole liability
for claims, damages, injury (including death) and losses, arising out of or resulting from
Page 18 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Development Manager's operation of Development Manager's automobiles or any other
automobiles, whether or not such use is related to Development Manager's work under this
contract, and Development Manager shall make no claim against the City for any claim, damage,
injury, or loss resulting thereby.
23.2 Coverage Amount. The policies shall be issued by a company authorized to do
business in the State of Oregon, protecting the Development Manager or subcontractors or
anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them against liability for the loss or damage
of personal and bodily injury, contractual liability, death and property damage, and any other
losses or damages above mentioned with limits not less than as stated in Section 23.1 above.
23.3 Certificate of Insurance / Additional Insured Endorsement. The Development
Manager shall cause each insurance company to provide the City with: (i) a certificate of
insurance and, (ii) for those policies for which the City is to be an additional insured as stated in
Section 23.1 above, an endorsement thereto naming the City, its officers, agents, and employees
as an additional primary insured for those policies indicated above. The certificate of insurance
shall require that the insurance company provide the City written notice of cancellation or
material modification of the insurance contract for not less than the following notice periods for
the purposes stated: 30 days prior notice for reasons other than nori-payment; 10 days prior
notice for non-payment.
The obligation to provide notice to the City shall either be in substantially the following
language:
"Should any of the above described policies be cancelled before the expiration date
thereof, the issuing company will mail 30 days written notice to the certificate holder
named"; it is not sufficient for the insurance carrier to merely "endeavor" to give notice
or for the certificate to absolve the insurance carrier from obligation or liability in the
event of the insurance carrier's failure to mail such notice.
or the Development Manager shall issue a certificate of insurance every 6 months during the
term of the Work, to assure that the required insurance is maintained.
24. Independent Contractor Status. The Development Manager agrees and certifies that:
A. The Development Manager is engaged to perform services under this Agreement
as an independent contractor. Although the City reserves the right (i) to determine (and modify)
the delivery schedule for the Work Plan to be performed and (ii) to evaluate the quality of the
completed performance, City cannot and will not control the means or manner of Development
Manager's performance, nor provide any tools or equipment for the performance of the Work
Plan, except as provided elsewhere in this Agreement. Development Manager is responsible for
determining the appropriate means and manner of performing the Work Plan.
B. The Development Manager shall be responsible for all federal or state taxes
applicable to compensation or payments paid to Development Manager under this Agreement
and, unless Development Manager is subject to backup withholding, City will not withhold from
Page 19 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
such compensation or payments any amount(s) to cover Development Manager's federal or state
tax obligations.
C. The Development Manager will not, on account of any payments made under this
contract, be eligible for any benefit from federal social security, workers' compensation,
unemployment insurance, or the Public Employe's Retirement System, except as a self-employed
individual;
D. Development Manager is not currently an employee of the federal government or
the State of Oregon; and
E. Development Manager is not a contributing member of the Public Employe's
Retirement System.
F. Development Manager is not an "officer," "employee," or "agent" of the City, as
those terms are used in ORS 30.265.
25. Indemnity and Hold Harmless. The Development Manager shall defend, indemnify, and
hold the City, its officers, agents and employees, harmless against all liability, loss, or expenses,
including attorney's fees, and against all claims, actions or judgments based upon or arising out
of damage or injury (including death) to persons or property caused by or resulting from any act
or omission of an act sustained in connection with the performance of Development Manager's
obligations under this Agreement or by conditions created thereby, or based upon violation of
any statute, ordinance or regulation.
26. Miscellaneous Terms.
26.1 Notices. All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder
shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered (including by means of professional
messenger service or overnight courier service); or sent by registered or certified mail, postage
pre -paid, return receipt requested; or sent by facsimile transmission followed by mailing by first
class mail or personal delivery of a "hard copy;" and shall be deemed received upon the date of
delivery thereof (or when delivery thereof is refused by the addressee). Such notices shall be
addressed as follows, or to such other address as a party may from time to time specify to the
other party:
If to the Citv: Alex McIntyre, City Manager
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Fax: (503) 697-6594
With copies to: Brant Williams, Director of Economic and Capital
Development
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue
Page 20 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Fax: (503) 534-5252
David Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue
P.O. Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Fax: (503) 699-7453
If to Foothills Redevelopment
and/or
Development Manager: Dike Dame
Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego LLC
1308 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
Fax: (503) 227-7996
With copies to: Christe White
Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego LLC
1308 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
Fax: (503) 227-7996
Matt Brown
Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego LLC
1308 NW Everett
Portland, OR 97209
Fax: (503) 227-7996
Dean N. Alterman
Folawn Alterman & Richardson LLP
805 SW Broadway, Suite 2750
Portland, OR 97205
Fax: (503) 517-8204
Page 21 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
If to Non-member
Property Owners:
Mreen Family, LLC
c/0 Bryan E. Powell
Lane Powell LLP
601 SW Second Avenue, Suite 2100
Portland, OR 97204
Fax: (503) 778-2200
Eileen Colhouer, Trustee
J.C. Colhouer Trust
[Address to be provided]
Lake Oswego, OR 972xx
26.2 Restriction on Assignment. The rights and obligations of Foothills
Redevelopment and Development Manager under this Agreement are restricted solely to those
Parties and shall not be assigned, conveyed or otherwise transferred without the written consent
of the City, which consent may be withheld in the sole discretion of the City. Any attempted
assignment in violation of this Section shall be void and of no effect.
26.3 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties, their legal
representatives, successors, and assigns (subject to the restriction on assignment in Section 26.2
of this Agreement).
26.4 Additional Documents. Each party shall execute such additional documents and
take such actions as are reasonably necessary or convenient to complete or confirm the
transactions contemplated by this Agreement.
26.5 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts,
including facsimile or email counterparts, which together shall constitute one agreement.
26.6 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed, construed, and enforced in
all respects by, and construed in accordance with, the internal laws of the State of Oregon,
without regard to principles of conflict of laws.
26.7 Headings. Headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not
affect its meaning.
26.8 Severability. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this
Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining provisions.
Page 22 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
26.9 No Partnership. No partnership, joint venture or any other form of business entity
or organization is formed or intended by this Agreement, and the Parties expressly disclaim any
such relationship.
26.10 Waiver. A provision of this Agreement may be waived only by a written
instrument executed by the party waiving compliance. No waiver of any provision of this
Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar, nor shall any
waiver constitute a continuing waiver. Failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall
not operate as a waiver of such provision or any other provision.
26.11 Force Majeure. From the Effective Date, neither Party, nor any assignee or
successor -in -interest of a Party, shall be considered in breach of or in default of its obligations
under this Agreement due to causes beyond its control (which were not known by the party
asserting the Unavoidable Delay as of the Effective Date) and without its fault or negligence,
including but not limited to: acts of God, the public enemy, or of the other Party; litigation or
appeals filed by third Parties which prevent or delay a party's performance; fires, floods,
epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, bid protests, freight embargoes, earthquake, explosion,
mob violence, or riot; the inability to procure or the rationing of labor, equipment, facilities,
sources of energy, material or supplies in the open market; malicious mischief; condemnation;
and unusually severe weather or delays of suppliers or subcontractors due to such causes or any
similar events and/or occurrences beyond the control of the Parties; (each an "Unavoidable
Delay"). In the event a party determines that an Unavoidable Delay event exists, then that party
shall give notice of that event and its cause(s) to the other Parties. In the event of the occurrence
of any Unavoidable Delay, the time or times for performance of the obligations of the Parties, as
the case may be, shall be extended for the period of the Unavoidable Delay; provided, that the
party seeking the benefit of the provisions of this section shall, within thirty (30) days after the
party becomes aware of an Unavoidable Delay, have first notified the other party in writing of its
cause or causes and the estimated time of correction. Any action or failure to act by a party
pursuant to this Agreement which is not due to an Unavoidable Delay shall not excuse the
performance by that party. Any party may suspend its performance under this Agreement that is
conditioned on the performance that another party has been excused from by reason of an
Unavoidable Delay. A Party which intends to suspend its performance based on another's
Unavoidable Delay, shall notify the other Parties in writing of the specific date of suspension of
performance and the specific performance it will not undertake or continue. Upon resumption of
performance by the party initially excused due to Unavoidable Delay, all Parties shall
immediately resume performance.
26.12 Dispute Resolution. Any controversy or claim arising out of or concerning this
Agreement shall first be submitted to designated representatives of the Parties for resolution.
The representatives will meet or confer for a period of twenty (20) days to determine whether
and how the dispute or controversy may be resolved. If the representatives are unable to resolve
the matter, the dispute or controversy shall be submitted to professional mediation. The mediator
will be selected within ten (10) days by mutual agreement of the Parties' designated
representatives. Nothing herein, however, shall prevent a party from resorting to a court of
competent jurisdiction in those instances where injunctive relief may be appropriate or from
exercising other rights under this Agreement.
Page 23 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
26.13 Performance on Business Days. If the date for any performance under this
Agreement falls on date other than a business day, then the time shall be extended to the next
business day.
26.14 Amendments. This Agreement, including all attachments and exhibits annexed
hereto, shall not be subject to modification or amendment except in writing, executed by all parties.
The City Manager is authorized to agree to minor amendments on behalf of the City. For the
purposes of this section, "minor amendments" include alteration of the project schedule or the Term
by not more than six months, and changes to the work plan that do not alter the type or nature of the
contemplated deliverables and that do not increase the project budget.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written
above.
Page 24 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Jack Hoffinan, Mayor
FOOTHILLS ROAD REDEVELOPMENT
LLC, an Oregon limited liability company
By: Williams/Dame & White — Lake Oswego
LLC, an Oregon limited liability company,
Manager
By: Williams/Dame & Associates LLC,
an Oregon limited liability company,
Member
T.B. Dame, Authorized
Signer
WILLIAMS/DAME & WHITE — LAKE
OSWEGO LLC, an Oregon limited liability
company
By: Williams/Dame & Associates LLC., an
Oregon limited liability company, Member
59-5
T.B. Dame, Authorized Signer
MREEN FAMILY, LLC, an Oregon limited liability
company
James R. Mreen, Member
Avis M. Mreen, Member
Page 25 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
EILEEN F. COLHOUER AND ELLEN LAURA
COLHOUER HENDERSON AS TRUSTEES OF THE
J.C. COLHOUER REVOCABLE TRUST, THIRD
AMENDED AND RESTATED, FEBRUARY 26,1998
Eileen F. Colhouer, Trustee
Ellen Laura Colhouer Henderson, Trustee
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A:
List of Property Owners
Exhibit B:
Map of District and Foothills Properties
Exhibit C:
Work Plan, Budget, Schedule
Exhibit D:
Planning Principles
Exhibit E:
Foothills Properties - Encumbrances
Exhibit F:
Form of Individual Trust Deed
Exhibit G:
Draft Development Agreement Terms and Conditions
Page 26 of 26 — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Exhibit A - List of Property Owners
Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC Members
Parcel Size
Percent Share
Maximum
Owner Name
Property Address
Tax Lot ID
(AC)
of Overall Total
Assessment
Stafford Investments LTD
99 Foothills Road
21E02CB01800
1.38
12.0%
$ 15,600.00
Woodrow H. Taylor Revocable Trust
255 Foothills Road
21E02CC00300
0.67
5.8%
$ 7,540.00
Richard L and Darcy Martin
220 Foothills Road
21E02CC00400
1.72
15.0%1
$ 19,500.00
L & S Investments
1100 Foothills Road
121E02CC00600
1 1.90
1 16.6%1
$ 21,580.00
Non-member Property Owners
Parcel Size
Share of Overall
Maximum
Owner Name
Property Address
Tax Lot ID
(AC)
Total
Assessment
Mreen Family, LLC
113 Foothills Road
21E02CB01500
3.40
29.7%
$ 38,610.00
L. Colhouer Trust
120 Foothills Road
21E02CCO0500
1.36
11.9%
$ 15,470.00
L. Colhouer Trust
1221 Foothills Road
21E02CC00200
1 1.03
1 9.0%
$ 11,700.00
Total SF (All Owners)j 11.46 1 $ 130,000.00
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
0 -lop I
79 Foothills District �ti Exhibit B
J
District Boundary
Foothills Property x _
7 0 500
71 IA
/
LFeet APTS
May 2010
h ^ 714
_AHD
T 1
- _ AME
658
E
_.
t 647-
y 643 _
F r�_ - 67
658
639
ee 6 J
633 20 6
671.
601^m.'n NNS 627
2. Woodrow H. Taylor Revocable Trust
601' c
3. Richard L. and Darcy Martin
4. L&S Investments
6
795f593
5 9
5. Mreen Family, LLC
544
6. L. Colhouer Trust
52 540
7. L. Colhouer Trust
NUE
RMKING
3
M
1
2s,
Foothills Road
139jO
Redevelopment LLC Members
1. Stafford Investments LTD
2. Woodrow H. Taylor Revocable Trust
.-.--
14000
3. Richard L. and Darcy Martin
4. L&S Investments
250
Non-members
14052
5. Mreen Family, LLC
6. L. Colhouer Trust
7. L. Colhouer Trust
14j10
801 TRYON
COVE PARK
P 61 -
PORTLAND TRYON CREEK
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
93 O
95 a Q n
97 tt /2 I�
FOOTHILLS
RO PARK
464 _ 49 l o I, I. �i 2
U i
469 8 °
� 4 456 p O4 6 ® 55 ` CLING
41Q 429 I PARKING 2 C TER
_ 428 ! i ❑ 34
4021
1 I --- N FOprNp(g
^ is ISI
n ti
5
27�.. s058 AO H7 ^5055 -
A -M
385 390 O �Q H2 5061 9M56 199
332 "� A -N �g 5... sp_`r7
A
m LAKEVIEW i A -p OSWEGO POINTE
ao 3 5 wuncE 1 p 6P i4 a °G �i
y 10 (''�I O 9c 5065 1
a
355
Ey, 5 s ROEHR
315 ,305 I '� j A -J _J -- CO"' 350 PARK
0 5014 5019'
0 H CORK\O
A -H A -J 5018 OQ. _._.DRIv 3C0
IE ID C2 C� 5012 dQ OD
�/, 8 d C] O A -J 55017
zc
2, 0 SD,D
o 5010 5008' Q O VI 5A0�48 AO H+ ,
A -O
'� II OSWEGO QQ A -H5042 L04
120 _ 340
f POINTE APTS - 71 L,
LAKEFRONT � J OFFICE 5003�r�.OQiIl7� 5037 5036 AMPHITHEATER
DARK y 137 A -J 350
A- Soot 5002-J
A -H OPOI r�T$ 00 10 �A H _
H 5004 Q
705 - OO A -J 550 50,00 O 550314 A -J
48 - C� C 05A03B, *CHARLIE S. BROWN
_ _40 47 A '� �� O 5005 50AA-H WATER SPORTS A -J
8 8 8 DD TH KeBOR CENTER
OSWEGS
VILLAGE
I `� 0 O -J O 0 5032 5028 5027
CENTER O A -J -H A -H
6�. 5 �11 �5D67 --
y. 3 - Qp A- O AO H1 A -H o a SAO J6
s 2 nzo-NO 1 _ 5009 0 5030 730
lu$7 UPPER L �21 A -H 5008 t - DOAA-F0A-H50244 55025
w (/
= a O7 0 AO LONFR
r<. t 4 5-70 poj j �7S 0 5023
Z7-30 jl srrtEEr APTS. _a ��o A -J
PEG "'o-0 .1ZT - 5020 5022
TREE - o y 120 211 A -H A -J
v'EK^cr OONaOS _ " 140 223 5021 _
LAKE m 208 Q L7 :2n 190 _j
L. PLACE ,�` 1 AP o c 235
312 i T -g-- 228 I13_
33 ONDOS E�iD,pyyg_8 250 w C 129
- e .7�3.- n L
'I A -F ^r :! 270
i
18 cNURC, SRF Er 49. TRACT
C
,
OAK GROVE
BOAT RAMP
148
S
,4e`3S
14901
14905
14999
16001
15017
15021
15125
Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Exhibit C - Work Plan
Introduction
The Foothills District ("District") is an approximately 120 acre area located just east of
downtown Lake Oswego along the Willamette River (Exhibit B). Over the last several
years, there have been a number of attempts to create a redevelopment plan for the
District that reflects the City's desire to see a more urban mixed-use development
pattern emerge adjacent to Lake Oswego's thriving downtown. Planning the District for
future redevelopment at this time will inform the Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project
in which a streetcar alternative is currently being considered. Cost efficiencies in
planning both at the same time could be significant. This Scope of Work will deliver a
Framework Plan for the District that enjoys broad community support and provides a
clear path to achieving a common vision for the area.
The District is characterized by a number of significant features, including:
• Willamette River and Tryon Creek frontage, including a newly constructed
Foothills Park and proposed Willamette River dock
• Substantial topographic relief, including a 65 -foot -plus drop from State Street in
downtown to the River
• A mix of uses including light industrial/warehouse, condominiums and
apartments, open space. and commercial centers
• Constrained transportation access to and from Highway 43 (State Street)
• A major sewage treatment plant located in the northern portion of the district
adjacent to Tryon Creek and the Willamette River
• Significant portions of the District at or below the 100 year flood elevation
The District provides an unmatched opportunity in the Portland Metro area to create a
great urban neighborhood in a unique riverfront setting. While past efforts to study the
area have moved the vision of a vibrant mixed-use neighborhood closer to
implementation, there is a need to take the planning process for the District to the next
level, with an end product that combines planning, infrastructure, development viability
and neighborhood livability issues together in a comprehensive plan for the area.
Framework Plan — Product and Process
This Work Plan is intended to generate a Framework Plan for the District that will help
guide redevelopment efforts for the area in the coming decades. A Framework Plan is a
specific type of planning effort that can be used as the basis for the creation of an Urban
Renewal Area and for Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code amendments. While any
contemplation of an Urban Renewal Area for the District will take place outside of the
scope of this process, the Framework Plan can be used as the foundation for any future
Urban Renewal Area discussions, guiding such elements as public investment priorities,
anticipated redevelopment value, and public/private partnerships.
Page 1 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
While the Framework Plan will have utility for future URA discussions, that will not be its
only focus. In fact, the Framework Plan must stand on its own, regardless of any future
action to form an URA. The end goal of this plan is to put in place those elements that
are necessary to encourage redevelopment within the District, consistent with the
community values that will be expressed and incorporated throughout the planning
process.
The approach used for developing a Framework Plan will be to focus initially on those
issues that could be constraints to development and/or the issues most challenging to
resolve. While the assumed priority is the existing floodplain in the industrially -zoned
area of the District followed by access to State Street and the Tryon Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant, the importance and priority of each of these and other constraints may
change based on initial work performed in the Work Plan. However, the intended
approach of addressing top priority issues first will remain the same regardless of their
given order in this Work Plan.
To that end, this Work Plan includes the drafting of revised comprehensive plan, zoning
code, and other code regulations — collectively, the "Post -Plan Amendments" - which
will be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration as part of their proscribed land
use processes. In a similar fashion, those elements that are considered barriers to
redevelopment — the 100 year floodplain or current sewer plant configuration are two
examples — must also be addressed with specific proposals forwarded to the City of
Lake Oswego (or other appropriate bodies) for action.
Getting to the end product will require extensive outreach and communication with the
Lake Oswego community and other affected parties. Ultimately, the goal of securing
broad community support for the Framework Plan will depend on the effectiveness of the
outreach effort. Throughout the process, the team will establish open communications
with the community and provide multiple forums for meaningful conversations to take
place. The final product should be owned by the community as much as the planning
team or the City. To that end, the planning team will be working closely with the City and
other community leaders to jointly draft a public process plan that ensures meaningful
input and results in a better end product.
Page 2 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
WORK PLAN
This Exhibit C, together with the descriptions of work within the Predevelopment
Agreement (PDA), describes the work to be performed by WDW itself, or to be
performed by WDW through or with Consultants to be engaged by WDW. In the event
of any conflict between the provisions of this Exhibit C and the PDA, the terms of the
PDA shall control. Unless specified otherwise, references in this Exhibit C to the
"team" or the "project team" shall mean WDW together with the Consultants it has
engaged through the process outlined in the PDA and this Exhibit.
1.0 Team Organization + Proiect Manaqement
1.1 Project Management
Williams/Dame + White (WDW) as the Development Manager will provide overall project
management for the Framework Plan process. Ultimately, WDW will be responsible for
the materials that are generated under this work plan and for ensuring that the outcome
of this process meets the City's needs. Specific issues related to the management of this
process are outlined below.
1.1.1 Consultants
Over the course of the project, WDW will manage the Consultant selection process
as well as develop and manage the consultant workscopes in order to successfully
deliver the products described herein. The process will be open and transparent, and
will include significant City oversight throughout.
A. Consultant Selection
The WDW Project Manager with the City Project Manager will identify the specific
deliverables that are required by this work plan and prepare invitation packages
for consultant work scopes. In order to ensure the selection of the most qualified
consultants and maximize the City's value, WDW will invite at least three
qualified consultants to submit responses to the team for specific areas of work is
desired.
At a minimum, it is anticipated that the following services will be needed for the
project and that appropriate consultants will be selected to provide these
services:
• Architecture and Urban Design
• Infrastructure Planning/Design
• Transportation Planning/Traffic Design
• Geotechnical Engineering/Environmental (HazMat) Analysis
• Environmental (Wildlife/Habitat) Analysis and Planning
• Wastewater Treatment Engineering
• Water Resources and Hydrologic Engineering
Consultant Selection will be done by the WDW Project Manager and the City's
Project Manager. WDW will set up an Invitation for Proposals (IFP) process to be
Page 3 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
approved by the City Project Manager for selecting qualified consultants.
Evaluation criteria will include, in order of priority, relevant firm experience in
urban mixed-use settings (planning through construction); experience of team
members assigned to project in urban mixed-use settings (planning through
construction); local experience and knowledge; billing rates; and references. All
firms must demonstrate their standing as an Equal Employment Opportunity
(EEO) employer.
Prior to issuing IFP's, WDW and the City's Project Manager will establish specific
scoring criteria for consultants. This information will be communicated in each
IFP package. The selection team will have the right to select a consultant based
on their response to the IFP or may, at its option, conduct interviews with
potential consultants. The IFP shall provide that in submitting a response, the
consultant acknowledges that the selection team's decision is final, with no
avenue for appeal of the decision.
Products/Deliverables: Consultant Invitation Packages; Final Consultant
Selections
B. Consultant Workscopes/Contracts
As part of the IFP packages, WDW will prepare an initial outline of the scope of
work that is being requested, based on this work plan and the Predevelopment
Agreement (PDA). This initial scope of work will be used as part of the basis for
consultant selection as well as to assist potential consultants in assembling their
responses.
Following consultant selection, WDW will work with the consultant(s) to more
clearly define their scope of work, including a delivery schedule and not -to -
exceed budget for the work. Where consultant budget or schedule exceeds the
established project budget and schedule, WDW will work with the consultant to
meet the budget or schedule through reduced/reassigned work, increasing the
budget allocation for certain tasks, or beginning negotiations with the second (or
next) ranked consultant. The City's Project Manager shall approve of any
reductions in/reassignments of work, budget increases, or decisions to move to
the next consultant.
Products/Deliverables: Executed Consultant Contracts
C. Manage Consultant Workscopes/Contracts
WDW will manage the Consultant Workscopes/Contracts to ensure delivery of
the desired consultant products within the established budget and timeline for the
project. This work will include regular meetings with consultants to review project
progress, direction to consultants to ensure consistency and coordination with
other work tasks, and management of costs to ensure budget certainty. Monthly
reports will be prepared for review with the City's Project Manager in order to
track consultant performance to date, including budget, schedule, work
completed, and acceptability of consultant products.
Products/Deliverables: Monthly Consultant Performance Reports
Page 4 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
1.1.2 Proiect Schedule
WDW will manage the project so as to deliver final products in accordance with the
Project Schedule (Exhibit C-1). The Project Schedule will be updated monthly (or
more as needed) to reflect approved consultant workscopes and reflect progress to
date. The Project Schedule will be reviewed at least monthly with the City's Project
Manager, and adjustments will be made as needed based on the outcome of these
monthly reviews.
Products/Deliverables: Project Schedule and Schedule Tracking Reports
1.1.3 Accounting and Cost Control
WDW will track the Project Budget (Exhibit C-2) and provide all accounting and cost
controls for the project. Invoices will be submitted monthly to WDW for review and
approval. WDW will track submitted invoices against the consultant contracts and the
Project Budget and Schedule. Invoices will be approved only if the work performed
was included in an approved consultant contract or approved in writing in advance of
the work being performed.
Upon WDW's approval of the invoices, WDW will prepare checks, sign the checks,
and submit the checks and supporting material to the City's Project Manager for
review and countersignature. All consultant checks, and any project expenses
exceeding $1,000.00, must be countersigned by the City.
Concurrent with WDW's submittal of approved invoices and checks, WDW shall also
submit a summary invoice for that month's approved costs, including project
expenses and WDW fees. A budget tracking report will also be provided to measure
consultant performance against the Project Budget and consultant fees earned.
Upon the City's review and approval of the summary invoice and tracking report, the
City shall electronically transfer payment to WDW's project account, and upon
deposit, WDW shall release the countersigned checks for consultant payment.
Products/Deliverables: Monthly Invoices/Checks; Budget Tracking Reports
1.2 Project Oversight
This Work Plan is an important step in the establishment of a public/private partnership
focused on redevelopment efforts in the District. To that end, it is important that there be
substantial public oversight of the process to ensure that the end products will meet the
City's approval and that the public investment in these products is properly managed.
The establishment of an Oversight Committee will help to ensure fiscal prudence and
provide confidence in the management of the work effort, while the formation of a Project
Working Group will ensure that the end products of this effort will incorporate or reflect
critical City policy issues.
1.2.1 Oversight Committee
WDW will convene an Oversight Committee ("OC") to meet on at least a bi-monthly
basis during the development of the Framework Plan and to provide feedback to the
Page 5 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
project team on work products and management of the process to date. The OC will
be comprised of the following individuals:
• Mayor
• City Councilperson
• City Manager
• Two Community Representatives
A Community Representative selected by the OC will serve as Chairperson of the
Committee. The WDW and City Project managers will serve as staff to the OC, and
will manage OC meetings with the goal of reviewing project progress, including work
products and public process to date as well as the project management tracking
products described in Section 1.1 above. The WDW Project Manager will prepare
meeting agendas for the OC and, where feasible, deliver products for review in
advance of each meeting.
Products/Deliverables: Oversight Committee Meetings
1.2.2 Project Advisory Group
A Project Advisory Group (PAG) comprised of key City representatives will be
formed and managed by the WDW Project Manager to help direct the technical work
of the project. This group will provide an opportunity for WDW and the consultants to
test and refine planning concepts and to ensure that work products will meet the
City's needs for delivery of a final Framework Plan. The proposed core membership
of this group will include the following individuals or their designee:
• City Project Manager
• Parks and Recreation Department Director
• Planning and Building Department Director
• Public Works Department Director
• Economic and Capital Development Manager
• Sustainability Coordinator
• Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Director
WDW anticipates that this group will meet at least once a month during the
development of the Framework Plan. WDW will prepare meeting agendas and,
where time allows, distribute information to the Project Advisory Group in advance of
each meeting.
Products/Deliverables: Project Advisory Group Meetings
1.3 Project Coordination
The Project will require coordination with a number of parties outside of the WDW/City
team. There are three primary areas of outside coordination described below, and
additional areas of coordination may be identified as work progresses. The end result of
this coordination process should be the seamless integration of the Framework Plan with
other public and private efforts in the area.
Page 6 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
1.3.1 Coordination with Citv Consultants
The City anticipates that it will engage a consultant to evaluate the potential for
expanding its current downtown urban renewal area (URA) or establishing a new
URA encompassing the District. In order to perform this work, the URA consultant
will require information that emerges from the Framework Plan process to guide such
elements as development capacity, estimated development value, public investment
needs, development timing, and other issues. WDW will coordinate with the City's
URA consultant to provide this information in a timely way such that the two efforts
can occur simultaneously and be considered by the City as a coherent package.
1.3.2 Coordination with Metro/TriMet Consultants
A substantial coordination effort with Metro and TriMet will be required in order to
fully integrate the Lake Oswego/Portland Streetcar ("Streetcar") within the
Framework Plan. At this time, TriMet has engaged Shiels Obletz Johnson and URS
to run the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) process for the Streetcar
project, with completion of the DEIS and the selection of a Locally Preferred
Alternative anticipated for late 2010. WDW will work with the TriMet team to
coordinate streetcar design with the District street plan, with an eye towards
successful integration of the streetcar project within the District.
It is possible that the Framework Plan will require a Supplemental DEIS ("SDEIS") to
be submitted on the Streetcar project in order to ensure consistency between the
Framework Plan and the Streetcar project. This work is not included in either this
Work Plan and Budget or the DEIS work plan and budget. If a SDEIS is required,
WDW will work with TriMet and the City to establish the parameters of the SDEIS
effort as well as the appropriate mechanism for pursuing that work (either through an
amendment to this Work Plan/Schedule/Budget or the DEIS work
plan/schedule/budget).
1.3.3 Coordination with Property Owner Consultants
Property owners in the District may have engaged, or will engage, consultants or
other representatives to study development impacts of the Framework Plan or to
represent their interests in the planning process. WDW will coordinate its efforts with
those of the property owner(s) consultants in order to establish a common vision for
the district and incorporate other consultant information into the planning process.
2.0 Public Participation + Community Involvement
Meaningful and substantial public involvement will be required in order to successfully
deliver a Framework Plan to the City for its action and approval. WDW's experience has
been that the best plans — those that enjoy community support and generate results —
have been produced collaboratively with community stakeholders. A trademark of a
successful public participation effort is a claim of multiple authorship of the plan, and a
sense of pride and ownership in the outcome of the process. This end result is the goal
of the public participation effort described in this section.
The public participation effort should not be seen as a task separate from the others
described in the Work Plan. Rather, it is integral to the entire Work Plan, and most, if not
Page 7 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
all, of the products and deliverables described in this document need to be generated
with an eye towards supporting the public outreach efforts. To that end, WDW will
manage the public participation effort jointly with the City, and will take the lead in
ensuring that the work products are produced and presented in a way that reflects
community concerns and incorporates community input.
The process is straightforward. First, WDW will identify stakeholders across multiple
audiences whose input is critical in shaping the Framework Plan. After initial interviews
with these stakeholders, a specific public involvement strategy will be drafted —
essentially, a refinement of this Work Plan which incorporates community issues and
concerns as part of the planning process. Upon acceptance of this strategy, WDW will
execute the strategy and manage public communications and outreach efforts, with an
eye towards gaining broad-based support for the Framework Plan.
2.1 Identify Stakeholders
This subtask will attempt to identify the key players that are involved in or interested in
the planning process for the District. Government, business, community and advocacy
groups will all have a stance to take and issues to address in the process. Typically,
interviews with these stakeholders will lead to additional contacts to explore as the
planning process continues. WDW will work with the City to establish a list of
stakeholders to contact and keep informed throughout the planning process.
Product/Deliverable: List of Key Stakeholders
2.2 Stakeholder Interviews
Interviews with key stakeholders identified in 2.1 above will be conducted to establish
contacts and understand the various points of view that will influence the progress of the
project. The interviews will help identify key issues to be addressed by the project and
the formulation of an effective public involvement strategy. Where necessary, follow-up
interviews will be conducted to expand on key issues and lines of communication will be
established to ensure that critical information can be accurately communicated.
Product/Deliverable: Interview Summaries/Notes
2.3 Draft Public Involvement Strategy
Based on the information gathered in Task 2.2, WDW will prepare a Draft Public
Involvement Strategy and submit to the City for review. The public involvement strategy
will be the "roadmap" that guides the public planning efforts, with the goal of preparing a
final Framework Plan that enjoys broad community support. The strategy will include:
Recommended Community Advisory Committee composition and meeting
schedule per the PDA
Recommended public events (workshops, open houses, presentations, etc.) for
broad dissemination of information
• Communications strategy for keeping the public informed of the process
Based on comments received from the City, WDW will refine the public involvement
strategy and move forward with implementing the strategy. It is anticipated that WDW
Page 8 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
and the City will revisit the document throughout the planning process, and continue
refining the strategy to help ensure that opportunities for public involvement are
maximized.
Product/Deliverable: Draft and Final Public Involvement Strategy
2.4 Manage Public Involvement Process
WDW will manage the public involvement process in collaboration with the City, based
on the public involvement strategy produced in Task 2.3 above. Throughout the process,
WDW and the City will continue to review and refine the public involvement strategy to
maximize opportunities for citizen participation and meaningful involvement.
2.4.1 Community Advisory Committee
A Community Advisory Committee (CAC) will be formed to review work products and
provide critical input to the project team and City Staff. The CAC will meet at least bi-
monthly during the development of the Framework Plan, or more often if needed.
The CAC Members representing the following will be appointed by the City Council:
• First Addition Neighborhood Association
• Old Town Neighborhood Association
• Evergreen Neighborhood Association
• Lakewood Neighborhood Association
• Birdshill Neighborhood Association
• Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce
• Downtown business owner
• Association of Unit Owners of Oswego Pointe Village Condominiums
• Prime Property Capital (owners of Oswego Pointe Apartments)
• Terramar Retail Centers, LLC
• At -Large Members (3)
The City and WDW Project Managers will prepare meeting agendas and meeting
summaries and, time allowing, will distribute additional meeting materials prior to
each meeting. The WDW Project Manager will facilitate the CAC meetings and
ensure that members of the consultant team are present relevant to the meeting
agenda/topic area.
Products/Deliverables: CAC Formation; up to 13 CAC Meetings; CAC agendas,
meeting summaries, and materials; CAC communications
2.4.2 Public Events
Consistent with the final Public Involvement Strategy, WDW will plan, organize, and
manage a series of public events (open houses, workshops, or similar formats) with
the goal of providing a wider audience with an opportunity to review work products
and provide feedback to the consultant team as well as to the CAC, Project Advisory
Group, and Oversight Committee. WDW anticipates that there will be three public
events, although there may be more if WDW and the City feel that it will be beneficial
to the planning process. In advance of the Public Events, WDW will work with the
Page 9 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
City to create a mailing list comprised of interested parties/stakeholders, including
property owners, residents, and businesses in the proximate area of Foothills. WDW
will prepare and mail meeting invitations, with at least two weeks' notice provided to
potential attendees.
Following the events, WDW will provide a summary of results, comments, and other
feedback received at the events to the CAC, Project Advisory Group, and Overisght
Committee.
Products/Deliverables: Three to Four Public Events; Event invitations and Mailings;
Event Summaries
2.4.3 Communications
Good communications with interested citizens and other stakeholders will be critical
to the success of the planning effort. Throughout the planning process, WDW will
maintain open lines of communication with the stakeholder groups identified in Task
2.1 as well as with each of the committees working on the project. At key points in
the process, press releases, website updates or similar products may be produced to
broadly communicate the work efforts to date and to highlight upcoming events.
While not included in the Work Plan or Budget, the Development Manager may set
up a project web site as an additional means for interested parties to keep abreast of
the planning process and communicate with the team.
Products/Deliverables: Periodical Newsletters; Web site design/upkeep
3.0 Inventory and Analysis
Prior to beginning the conceptual planning process for the District, information will be
gathered and analyzed to identify key issues that must be addressed as part of the
Framework Plan process. In some cases, information will need to be gathered or
generated by the project team; in other cases, existing information will be reviewed and
utilized. The information gathered during this phase of work will provide a solid basis for
the plan alternatives and subsequent refinements later in the planning process.
3.1 Base Maps/Survey
3.1.1 Assemble Base Maps
Utilizing the City's and/or Clackamas County's Geographical Information Systems
(GIS), the project team will assemble base maps for use on the project. Relevant
information will be gathered into an electronic format for use by all of the team
members and the City. Base maps will likely be generated at a variety of scales,
ranging from a District -wide to City-wide scale.
Products/Deliverables: Base Maps
3.1.2 Property Ownership Map
Utilizing the City's and/or Clackamas County's Geographical Information Systems
(GIS) and information from the County Auditor, the project team will assemble a
Page 10 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
property ownership map for the District and immediately adjacent areas. Property
ownership information, including contact information, will be assembled into a
separate database to be used for outreach efforts and development analysis.
Products/Deliverables: Property Ownership Map; Ownership Database
3.1.3 Supplemental Survey
As the planning process unfolds, there may be a need to gather supplemental survey
information in order to complete work tasks under this Work Plan. For example, if
sewer line invert elevations are not present in GIS systems or other City records, it
may be useful to survey this information in order to complete planning work for sewer
infrastructure in the District. A placeholder for this work is included in the Project
Budget, and the survey will be collected on an as -needed basis.
Products/Deliverables: Supplemental Survey/Revised Base Maps (as needed)
3.2 District History
The project team will undertake historical research of the District, including a review of
past ownership, past use of the site, and research of historical documents related to the
District. Among issues that are likely to emerge are the historic location of iron works in
the area and the early settlement of Oswego. The research will be summarized in a
report providing a brief history of the District, any historic issues identified, and
recommended actions for follow-up, if any.
Products/Deliverables: History Summary Paper
3.3 Site Conditions
A number of site conditions will be analyzed to understand how soil, environmental, and
natural systems may influence the Framework Plan. Where possible, existing
information will be utilized and analyzed before additional on-site investigation (e.g., soil
core samples or soil testing) is undertaken.
3.3.1 Geotechnical Analysis
A. Development Suitability - Soils in the District will be analyzed to determine
the suitability of site soils for development. Where possible, existing
geotechnical reports on file with the City or made available by owners in the
District will be used as the basis for this summary. The goal will be to identify
any areas where redevelopment may be difficult or precluded due to soil
conditions, as well as to provide a general picture of the soil bearing
capacities in the district, including depth(s) to bedrock.
Products/Deliverables: Development Suitability (Soils) Summary Paper and
Maps
B. Groundwater - Given the District's proximity to the Willamette River, Tryon
Creek, and Oswego Lake, depth to groundwater and groundwater flow
direction will be critical to understanding how redevelopment can proceed
Page 11 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
efficiently. This information will be used to determine where opportunities are
present for surface stormwater treatment as well as to inform infrastructure
planning tasks as to any underground structures/infrastructure that may be
necessary to support site development.
Products/Deliverables: Groundwater Summary Paper and Maps
C. Level I Environmental Assessment — A Level I Environmental Assessment
has not been performed for the entire District. In order to understand any
potential Hazardous Materials issues that may be present in or adjacent to
the District, a Level I Assessment will be performed. This assessment will
highlight known areas of hazardous materials, as well as areas where further
investigation may be warranted. Further testing and analysis (a Level I I
Assessment) is not included in this Work Plan.
Products/Deliverables: Level 1 Environmental Assessment
3.3.2 Environmental
A variety of environmental issues may be present within the District, including but not
limited to wetlands, riparian habitat, and presence of endangered species. This work
task will focus on understanding these issues and the natural processes at work on
the land.
A. Wetland Delineation - There are potential wetland areas within the District,
including within the industrial area and along Tryon Creek and the River.
These areas are defined by hydric soils, groundwater levels, and plant
communities. The project team will analyze potential wetlands within the
District, including the value of any wetlands identified. Initial
recommendations will be developed on incorporating identified wetlands
within the Framework Plan, including setbacks, mitigation, and
protection/expansion of the wetland areas.
Products/Deliverables: Wetland Delineation Summary Paper and Maps
B. Riparian Habitat (Willamette River, Tryon Creek) — Tryon Creek and the River
are both unique natural resources which help define the northern and eastern
boundaries of the District. They are also unique ecosystems that require an
understanding of potential impacts resulting from redevelopment efforts
nearby. To help guide the planning process, these environments will be
inventoried, and an assessment of their current ecological value made. Initial
recommendations on protecting or enhancing these environments will also be
made as part of this task, and any jurisdictional review requirements for
planning or development on or adjacent to these waterways will be identified
and summarized.
Products/Deliverables: Riparian Habitat Summary Paper and Maps
C. Natural Systems - To better understand the natural systems at work within
the District, the project team will assemble a natural systems analysis. This
analysis will look at the environmental conditions that are at work on or near
Page 12 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
the District. These conditions include prevailing winds, solar access, surface
water movement, flood storage, and groundwater movement.
Products/Deliverables: Natural Systems Summary Paper and Maps
3.4 Transportation
3.4.1 Existing Transportation System
The existing transportation system in the Downtown Lake Oswego/Foothills District
vicinity will be inventoried and analyzed to understand current transportation policy
implications, identify current system deficiencies, and document opportunities for
improving transportation network in the area. This analysis will include research of
proposed improvements identified in Lake Oswego's and Clackamas County's
Transportation System Plans (TSP), the Metro Regional Transportation Plan (RTP),
and other adopted transportation planning documents. Work performed as part of
previous Foothills studies, including the Transportation Growth Management (TGM)
grant study, will be summarized and used as a basis for additional analysis.
A. Street SystemNehicular Movement - Existing streets within 'h mile of the
District will be mapped and classified according to adopted City, County, and
State transportation plans. For collectors and above, traffic counts will be
assembled to establish current average daily traffic volumes. Key
intersections identified by the project team (e.g., State Street/Terwilliger,
State/A Avenue, State/Foothills) will be analyzed for turning movements and
level of service. Where available, a three year crash history will be
assembled for streets and intersections adjacent to the project site and %4
mile east and west along State Street.
B. Freight/Rail - Truck freight routes in the vicinity of the District will be identified
and measured. Key freight origins and destinations will be identified to
determine how and where freight movement is generated in the Lake
Oswego area and any potential implications that development in the District
may have on freight movement. In addition, the team will analyze the
Portland & Western rail line adjacent to the property, and gather information
on frequency of use, speed through the area, and future rail traffic.
C. Transit - Bus routes in Lake Oswego area will be identified and analyzed.
Information to be gathered includes daily ridership and available capacity,
frequency of service (schedule and headways), transit stop locations in or
near the District (including number of boardings and deboardings), and transit
transfer points. Particular attention will be paid to the Streetcar DEIS
alternatives, including stop and terminus locations and any planned transit
system modifications that would accompany the Streetcar project.
D. Bicycles - Bicycle facilities, existing and planned, within 1 mile of the District
will be inventoried and mapped, including bicycle lanes, bicycle crossings and
recreational pathways. Deficiencies in the system, including the lack of
connectivity of bike facilities or unsafe crossing locations, will be identified
and mapped. A three year crash history will be assembled for bicycle related
crashes in the study area and to identify areas for further study/improvement.
Page 13 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
E. Pedestrians - Pedestrian facilities within '/4 mile of the District will be
inventoried and mapped, including marked crosswalks, improved crossings,
recreational pathways and sidewalks. Deficiencies, such as missing
sidewalks, gaps in pathways, or difficult or prohibited crossings will be
identified. Pedestrian generators (e.g., parks, schools, transit stops, etc.) will
be identified and mapped. A three year crash history will be assembled for
pedestrian related crashes in the study area and to identify areas for further
study/improvement. Special attention will be directed at understanding how
pedestrians navigate between Downtown /adjacent neighborhoods and the
District.
F. State Highway Issues (Oregon 43) — The project team will work with City and
ODOT staff to understand transportation issues related to Highway 43 (State
Street) including the effects of the Transportation Planning Rule. Because the
City does not have jurisdiction over Highway 43, it will be critical to identify
issues related to the State's ownership and operation of the highway.
Additionally, as the primary corridor linking Lake Oswego to downtown
Portland and West Linn/points south, an origin/destination study for the
corridor in the vicinity of the District will be generated in order to understand
how Highway 43 is being used through downtown Lake Oswego.
Products/Deliverables: Existing Transportation Issues Summary Paper, including
graphic exhibits
3.4.2 Planned Transportation System Improvements
Currently adopted plans and policies will be inventoried to establish planned
improvements to the transportation system serving the District and downtown Lake
Oswego. Jurisdictions with plans or policies that may affect the local transportation
system include the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas County, Metro, TriMet, and
ODOT.
The project team will document the projects and policies identified, including the
scope of improvements, the anticipated benefit to the community in general and the
District in particular, the estimated project costs and funding strategies, and
estimated schedule for completion of the projects. Building on work done as part of
the TGM grant, an updated summary of transportation policies relevant to District
development will be generated, including access management issues along State
Street, development impact procedures, or other similar issues.
Products/Deliverables: Transportation System Plan Summary Paper, including
graphic exhibits
3.4.3 Parkin
While the District has adequate parking for its current development pattern,
redevelopment of the area may affect parking availability, or it may be desirable to
understand how parking will affect urban form and travel behavior. In addition, a
more intense and successful development may generate parking impacts in areas
directly adjacent to the District: therefore, a high-level survey of parking inventory
Page 14 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
and use in the area will be performed. Last, current City parking requirements will be
inventoried, including those in place in downtown Lake Oswego.
Products/Deliverables: Parking Issues Summary Paper, including graphic exhibits
3.4.4 Community Traffic Issues/Concerns
Upon completion of the work described in 3.4.1 — 3.4.3 above, the summary
information will be used to describe current transportation conditions to community
stakeholders and solicit their feedback on any transportation concerns or issues that
they feel must be addressed in the planning process. WDW anticipates that there will
be concerns that District redevelopment will impact the speed and quantity of cut -
through traffic in adjacent neighborhoods; will reduce vehicular capacity on State
Street; or will result in less convenient or safe pedestrian or bicycle access in the
vicinity, as examples. Collecting this information will help focus later transportation
planning work on issues that the community has highlighted.
Products/Deliverables: Community Transportation Issues Sumamry
3.5 Infrastructure Inventory and Analysis
As with other older urban neighborhoods, the Foothills District does not currently
possess infrastructure adequate to support anticipated redevelopment activity. In order
to produce a successful Framework Plan, a rational and cost effective infrastructure
system must be planned to serve future development. A detailed and thorough
understanding of the existing infrastructure systems serving the District will be
undertaken, and any deficiencies in the current system identified as early as possible in
the planning process.
3.5.1 Public Utilities
Note: Water and Storm Sewer are explored here; Sanitary Sewer is explored
separately as part of Task 3.7.
A. Water - The existing water system serving the District will be inventoried and
analyzed for to determine the amount of capacity present in the system and
the ability of the water system to support future development. Key issues to
be identified and explored include the capacity and location of water lines
serving the District; the available capacity of the lines; and any deficiencies
in the system that would need to be addressed prior to (or concurrent with)
District redevelopment.
Products/Deliverables: Water System Summary Paper: Map showing
existing water facilities within/adjacent to the District
B. Stormwater Management - The project team will identify existing stormwater
facilities within the District, as well as the waterways that these facilities
drain into and the capacity or ability of these facilities to handle any
additional stormwater that may be generated from redevelopment of the site.
This analysis will take into account not only local code requirements relative
to stormwater management, but also the ideal management approach for
Page 15 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
ensuring that Tryon Creek and the River are not negatively impacted by
stormwater. A toolbox of potential approaches to sustainable stormwater
management will be included in the summary paper to help guide later
planning efforts.
Products/Deliverables: Stormwater Management Summary Paper, Map
showing existing stormwater facilities within/adjacent to the District
3.5.2 Private/Franchise Utilities
A. Power
i. Existing facilities/capacity - Power facilities which serve or potentially
serve the District will be located, identified and mapped. Analysis of the
current facilities will determine their adequacy to accommodate District
redevelopment efforts.
Substation locations/conditions — PGE currently has two substations
located in the central portion of the District along Foothills Road. The
substations will be analyzed for current condition, including any significant
upgrades that will be required in the next five to ten years. In concert with
the capacity analysis described above, the project team will also
determine the space requirements for expansion and whether the current
substation locations would accommodate any future expansion.
Products/Deliverables: Power Facilities Summary Paper, Map showing
existing power facilities within/adjacent to the District
B. Telecommunications - Telecommunications facilities in the vicinity of the
District will be inventoried to determine what facilities are available to serve
anticipated telecommunication needs. Cable, phone, and fiber-optic facilities
will be inventoried, and their capacity to serve additional development will be
established.
Products/Deliverables: Telecommunications Summary Paper: Map showing
existing Telecommunications facilities within/adjacent to the District
C. Natural Gas - Natural gas transmission lines that are currently serving, or
that potentially will serve, the District will be inventoried and mapped to
determine where connections will need to be made and the available
capacity of the existing distribution system.
Products/Deliverables: Natural Gas Summary Paper, Map showing existing
Natural Gas facilities within/adjacent to the District
3.6 Portland/Lake Oswego Streetcar
3.6.1 Streetcar Operational Parameters
WDW will work with the TriMet Streetcar team to document the operational
parameters for the proposed Streetcar project. This information will include basic
Page 16 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
design information to inform the street plan for the District (turning radii, maximum
vertical grades, lane widths, etc.), as well as to better understand the level of transit
service that the streetcar will provide to the District.
3.6.2 Alianment Options/Stop Locations
The project team will document the various Streetcar alignment options and stop
locations under consideration in the DEIS and analyze the planning issues
associated with each, including pedestrian access, development potential in the
vicinity of the stops, park and ride needs, and impact on future circulation in the
District. If appropriate, the team will provide early input on adjustments to the
Streetcar alignment and/or stop locations in order to feed this information into the
DEIS process, which will be running ahead of the Framework Plan schedule.
3.6.3 Interface with future rail transit service
Metro has designated the adjacent Union Pacific rail alignment as a future High
Capacity Transit corridor between Washington Square and Clackamas Town
Center. potentially linking downtown Lake Oswego to downtown Milwaukie and the
South Corridor light rail project. The project team will analyze the potential alignment
options for this future rail corridor with a focus on how the project would be
seamlessly integrated with the Streetcar and future District development. Issues to
be analyzed will include interface with Streetcar, impact on development potential in
the vicinity, impact on future circulation access in the District, park and ride needs,
and transfer (Streetcar and Bus) issues.
Products/Deliverables: Streetcar Summary Paper and supporting graphics
3.7 Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant/Sanitary Sewer
The Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plan (WWTP) occupies a significant portion of
land in the northeastern corner of the District. The WWTP serves both Lake Oswego and
the City of Portland and is owned and operated by the City of Portland's Bureau of
Environmental Services (BES) under an agreement between the cities. A significant
amount of work has been commissioned in the past to study the potential for relocating
the WWTP out of the District or modifying the WWTP so that it occupies less space and
its negative impacts are mitigated.
The project team will review these studies and provide a summary of past work,
including any decisions that have been made by either the City or BES with relation to
the work. In addition, the team will summarize the current characteristics of the WWTP,
including the age of the facility, its current total capacity, how much additional growth the
WWTP can accommodate, the current plans and budget for capital replacement at the
WWTP, and other information that will be relevant to the planning process. The team will
also generate recommendations on WWTP alternatives that should be studied in greater
detail as part of the infrastructure planning tasks in this Work Plan.
Concurrent with this effort, the team will also assemble information on the sanitary sewer
system in the District, including the main lines that feed the WWTP from Tryon Creek
and Downtown and Oswego Lake. This information will include sanitary line profiles
and/or invert elevations, sewer line locations, ages, and conditions, and line capacities
Page 17 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
including the potential to accommodate future growth. Issues related to the WWTP and
the existing sanitary system in the District will be summarized and used in later
infrastructure planning work.
Products/Deliverables: WWTP/Sanitary Sewer Summary Paper, Map showing existing
sanitary sewer facilities within/adjacent to the District; recommendations on WWTP
alternatives to explore in the planning process
3.8 Floodplain
Substantial portions of the industrial lands and Tryon Creek basin in the northern section
of the District lie within FEMA -designated 100 year floodplains. This designation affects
the development potential for the area and poses a hazard to existing properties and
businesses in the District. In addition, the 1996 flood was seen to exceed the 100 year
flood elevation and Oswego Lake overtopped its dam and sent floodwaters through the
south/central portion of the District, so there is recent history in the District of the impact
of floodwaters on District activities.
The project team will review both the FEMA flood designations for the District (Floodway,
100 year and 500 year Floodplains) and compare this information to the 1996 flood
elevations and the Oswego Lake overtopping/dam elevation to provide an overview of
the current flood hazards and their impact on District development potential. Current
stormwater management facilities will be reviewed and analyzed to determine their
potential impact on District flood control, including the pump station in the northern
portion of the district and floodgates at the WWTP.
In addition, the team will review policies related to development within or adjacent to
floodplains to determine what regulatory pathways or hurdles may exist to
redevelopment within floodplain zones. These regulatory issues include FEMA mapping
and designations; Metro Title 3 regulations, including but not limited to requirements for
balanced cut -and -fill within the 100 year floodplain; and City of Lake Oswego
requirements for development within the 100 year floodplain. The team will also
generate recommendations on floodplain issues that should be studied later in the
planning process.
Products/Deliverables: Floodplain Summary Paper: Map showing floodplain
designations within or adjacent to the District; recommendations on floodplain
approaches to explore in the planning process
3.9 Land Use
Land use patterns in and around the District will be documented to better understand the
land use context. Both existing plans and policies and current uses will be included in
this analysis.
3.9.1 Existing Plans/Policies
Current plans, policies, and regulations affecting the District and its immediate
vicinity will be documented and evaluated. The goal of this task is to identify any
specific issues related to existing zoning and/or adopted policies that could be
barriers to District redevelopment.
Page 18 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
A. Regional Plans and Statewide Planning Goals — The project team will
examine regional plan documents that affect the District, including Metro
2040, regional parks and greenway plans (e.g., Tryon Creek and Willamette
River), County plans and policies, and other relevant documents. Where
applicable. statewide planning goals will be summarized in order to ensure
the consistency of planning products with these goals.
B. Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code - The City's Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Code will be reviewed and summarized to determine the
current regulatory framework for the property and identify any potential
barriers to pursuing mixed-use development in the District. The various
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code designations will be mapped,
including for the areas immediately adjacent to the District.
C. Neighborhood Plans — The project team will collect, review, and summarize
the various City -approved Neighborhood Plans for those neighborhoods or
districts proximate to the Foothills District. Neighborhood Plans to be
reviewed (assuming they exist) include Lakewood, Evergreen, Old Town,
First Addition, and Downtown. Relevant policies and/or projects will be
summarized and included in the Land Use summary paper.
D. Previous Studies — A number of studies have been undertaken for the District
that may help guide the current planning effort. These studies will be
summarized, and ideas that have current relevance and/or enjoy broad
support will be identified and summarized in the Land Use summary paper.
Past studies that will be included in this effort are:
• Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Enhancement Master Plan
(2007)
• Alternatives Study — Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (2005)
• Foothills District Study (TGM Grant — 2005)
• City of Lake Oswego Trails and Pathways Master Plan (2003)
• Lake Oswego Foothills Design District (2002)
• Transit Station Study (2005)
3.9.2 Current Uses
Understanding current uses, as well as the age, condition, and compatibility of
existing uses within the District will help focus planning efforts on areas with greater
potential for redevelopment and encourage a rational transition of use over time.
A. Use Types — Current uses in the district will be identified and categorized into
general use classes, including light industrial, service, warehouse, public
utilities, office, retail, general employment, single family residential, multi-
family residential, institutional, and other appropriate categories.
B. Building Ages/Conditions — Where possible, building ages and conditions will
be identified or estimated. The goal of this exercise will be to determine the
Page 19 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
remaining useful life of buildings in the District rather than judging the
aesthetic quality of the buildings.
C. Non-conforming/potentially incompatible Uses — Assuming a transition over
time to a mixed-use development pattern in the District, with a focus on office,
residential, and local retail uses, potentially non -conforming or incompatible
uses will be identified. These uses will require further attention later in the
implementation process to either mitigate incompatibilities between uses or
plan for transition of uses.
Products/Deliverables: Land Use Summary Paper; Maps depicting current zoning/comp
plan designations, current uses, building ages/conditions
3.10 Education
Through discussions with the Lake Oswego School District and other local school
stakeholders, the project team will assemble information on the current status of the
education system in Lake Oswego, including school locations and attendance, growth in
student population, identified needs for expansion, and fiscal challenges to the district.
Emphasis will be placed on understanding how redevelopment efforts may impact the
school district and what opportunities may exist for strengthening the School District
through the redevelopment process.
Products/Deliverables: Education Summary Paper
3.11 Opportunities and Constraints Summary Map and Paper
As a summary of all of the Task 3 activities, the project team will assemble an
Opportunities and Constraints summary map and paper that provides an overview of the
information gathered in the inventory and analysis phase. This work will include issues
such as:
• Relationship to adjacent neighborhoods/amenities and barriers to connectivity
between adjacent areas
• Current heights, densities, urban quality and opportunities for areas of greater
heights and density
• Site features (topography, views, orientation, natural features, etc.)
• Connections to and from downtown and adjacent neighborhoods
• Streetcar Integration
• Current infrastructure conditions and locations, and anticipated infrastructure needs
• Opportunities for open space, pedestrian connections, view corridors, and other
potential organizing elements of the District
Upon completion of this work, the Opportunities and Constraints products will be
presented along with the results of Tasks 1, 2 and 3 at a public event, and the input
received at those events will be summarized by the project team and shared with the
Project Working Group, CAC. and Oversight Committee.
Products/Deliverables: Opportunities and Constraints Summary Paper and Map
Page 20 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
4.0 Framework Plan Goals and Concepts
Following completion of the Inventory and Analysis phase and after initial conversations
with community members and the CAC, the focus of the Work Plan will turn to an
iterative process leading up to a preferred schematic -level plan for the District. The work
described in Task 4 will proceed from higher level vision, goals, and objectives through a
series of alternatives to the "Preferred Framework Plan Alternative" that will be used as
the basis for the Draft and Final Framework Plans. Throughout this task, information will
be presented to the CAC for review and feedback, and there will also be opportunities
for broader public feedback at two public events.
4.1 Develop Plan Vision, Goals, Objectives
Based on initial conversations with community members, the CAC, and other
stakeholders, a draft Vision Statement will be drafted for the District, accompanied by
Goals and Objectives that the Framework Plan is intended to deliver. The Vision
Statement, Goals and Objectives will continue to evolve over the course of the planning
process, and will for the basis for potential Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code
modifications that would follow completion of the Framework Plan process.
Products/Deliverables: Vision Statement, Goals, Objectives and continued refinements
4.2 Develop Plan Alternatives
Building off of the Vision/Goals/Objectives, a series of plan alternatives will be generated
to begin providing a more detailed view of the redevelopment possibilities in the District.
This work will begin with higher level (Concept) alternatives focused on District
organization before moving to more detailed (Schematic) alternatives which will flesh out
the Concept -level ideas.
4.2.1 Concept -level Plan Alternatives
The project team will generate 2-4 concept -level plan alternatives and present these
to the Project Working Group, CAC, and Oversight Committee for their review and
comment. The focus of the concept alternatives will be on the overall organization of
the District, including issues such as:
• Street network and orientation/block pattern
• Connectivity to surrounding areas
• Open space network/locations
• Pedestrian priority routes/areas
• Streetcar integration/stop location
• Topographic and height concepts
• Density and Development Type
These plans will be illustrated on maps, and supplemented with cross-sections,
rough sketches, and/or computer models in order to help convey key concepts. Upon
review by the groups identified above, the project team will refine the concept plan
alternatives, at which point they will be presented at a public event and then to the
Page 21 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
various project committees. Based on this feedback, the project team will select one
or two concept plans to pursue further in the next stage.
Products/Deliverables: 2-4 Concept Plan Alternatives, including supporting graphic
materials necessary to convey key ideas; Continued refinement of Concepts based
on review/feedback
4.2.2 Schematic -level Plan Alternatives
Following the Concept Plan task, the project team will focus on the continued
refinement of one or two Schematic -Level Plan Alternatives ("Schematics"). The
Schematics will continue to focus on the issues outlined in the Concept phase, but
will begin to add other details to the plans and graphics to better illustrate the
planning principles and focus on the next level of detail in the process. These
additional details include:
• Right-of-way cross sections and design/streetscape character
• Building orientation and massing
• Density ranges
• Pedestrian oriented retail
• Open space locations/general layout
• Image boards displaying desired streetscape and architectural character
• Initial (conceptual) infrastructure plan showing utility spine locations
The Schematics will be prepared and presented to the Project Working Group, CAC,
and Oversight Committee for review and feedback. Following these sessions, the
Schematics will be refined and presented for input and feedback at a public event,
along with supporting information outlined in Tasks 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 below.
Products/Deliverables: 1-2 Schematic Plan Alternatives, including supporting graphic
materials necessary to convey key ideas; Continued refinement of Schematics based
on review/feedback
4.3 Select and Analyze Preferred Schematic Plan Alternative
4.3.1 Select Preferred Plan Alternative
Based on feedback received at the public event and from discussions with the
project committees, the project team will recommend a preferred plan alternative to
serve as the basis for the Final Framework Plan and present this recommendation to
the Oversight Committee for review and concurrence. In addition to public feedback
received, this selection will also include an analysis of how the preferred plan is
consistent with/best fits the Vision Statement, Goals, and Objectives for the District.
4.3.2 Gather Supporting Information/Analysis
Following selection of a preferred plan alternative in Task 4.3.1, the project team will
undertake a more specific analysis in order to provide supporting information for the
preferred plan. This information will be used to refine the plan and to support
recommendations in the final Framework Plan document. It should be noted that
Page 22 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
some of this analysis will occur at a more rudimentary level earlier in the planning
process as alternatives are being explored.
A. Development Density and Feasibility — WDW will analyze the preferred
alternative and generate information on the potential development density of
the District and summarize the development feasibility issues (phasing,
efficiency, financing, etc.) present in the preferred alternative. This
information will help to inform other analysis in terms of determining how
much infrastructure capacity is needed to accommodate redevelopment or
how development may be logically phased, as examples.
Product/Deliverable: Summary of Development Density in the District,-
Summary
istrict,Summary of Development Feasibility Issues
B. Infrastructure Plan and Capacity — Based on the selected alternative, the
project team will calculate infrastructure capacity needs and recommend
infrastructure improvements or upgrades that will be necessary to support the
preferred plan. These recommendations will encompass the following areas:
• Water
• Stormwater Management
• Sanitary Sewer
• Power
• Telecommunications
• Natural Gas
• Other Infrastructure Elements as needed
Product/Deliverable: Summary of Infrastructure Capacity needs,-
Recommendations
eeds;Recommendations for Infrastructure Improvements/Upgrades; Map(s)
depicting proposed infrastructure spine locations
C. Transportation/Traffic Analysis — Based on the selected alternative and the
earlier transportation analysis performed in the Inventory and Analysis phase,
the project team will calculate traffic capacity needs and recommend a
package of transportation improvements or upgrades that will be necessary
to support the preferred plan. As part of this process, the project team and
the City will work closely with ODOT to define assumptions and determine
appropriate measures that will reduce the transportation impacts on Highway
43 (State Street) and meet with the Transportation Planning Rule and
ODOT's approval. Transportation and Traffic recommendations will include
the following elements:
• Target mode splits for the District
• Street Plan — street layout, right-of-way widths, and circulation
pattern/hierarchy
• Intersection/portal improvements required to meet level of service
standards for the District
• Parking requirements for the District
Page 23 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
The goal of these recommendations is to provide a solid foundation for future
redevelopment efforts. By establishing the transportation needs of the entire
District up front, the burden of proving transportation capacity for each
individual development project should be eliminated.
Product/Deliverable: Transportation Analysis of preferred plan,-
Recommendations
lan;Recommendations for Transportation and Traffic Improvements/Upgrades;
Map(s) depicting proposed street plan and improvements/upgrades
D. Floodplain Analysis — Assuming that some areas of the District that are
currently within the 100 year floodplain should redevelop over time, the
project team will undertake an analysis of potential redevelopment in these
areas to determine the potential paths to addressing flood hazard issues.
These paths may include, but not necessarily limited to, raising the elevation
of the redevelopment areas out of the floodplain; balancing cut and fill on all
or a portion of the floodplain area; mitigation of floodplain issues; diking
floodplain areas to effectively remove the floodplain designation from them;
pursuing exemptions to Metro Title 3; and/or FEMA remapping.
Product/Deliverable: Summary Paper outlining Floodplain mitigation
recommendations and estimated costs; Map depicting proposed
modifications to District Floodplain extent
E. Phasing Approach/Trigger Points — The Framework Plan for the District is a
20 year roadmap to guide redevelopment efforts in the area. Timing of
redevelopment will depend on market conditions, specific property owner
needs, and the availability of infrastructure to support new development.
WDW will provide an analysis of potential phasing approaches for the
preferred plan, focused on how services can be logically extended to the
District to serve redevelopment efforts. In addition, potential "trigger points" in
the development process will be identified; that is, points at which the amount
of redevelopment activity will require certain capacity or other types of
improvements (e.g., parks) within the District.
Product/Deliverable: Summary Paper outlining potential phasing approaches
and trigger points
F. Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plan Analysis — The WWTP consultant
will provide an analysis of the various means for reducing the current footprint
of the WWTP, possible relocation of the plant to the west but still within the
industrial portion of the District, updating the plant to incorporate new
technology, and otherwise mitigating the negative impacts of the plan on
adjacent uses (current and proposed). This analysis will include a phasing
strategy that demonstrates how the WWTP can transition over time from its
current technology and footprint to improved technology on a smaller or
relocated footprint, all while maintaining service during construction phases.
The WWTP consultant will also analyze projected growth in the basin and
provide recommendations on plant sizing, technology, and other pertinent
factors to ensure that there will be adequate capacity to meet the anticipated
growth within the WWTP's service basin.
Page 24 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Product/Deliverable: Summary Paper outlining proposed modifications to the
WWTP, including phasing and capacity needs and estimated costs.
5.0 Draft Framework Plan
The combined goal of the tasks described in this section will be to generate and
distribute for public review a Draft Framework Plan document. Following receipt of public
comments/feedback, the project team will refine and finalize the document as described
in Task 6 below.
5.1 Refine Preferred Framework Plan
Based on the outcome of the analysis undertaken in 4.3.2 above, the preferred
Framework Plan will be refined to reflect this analysis. Upon completion of these
refinements, the analysis work will be reconfirmed to ensure that the proposed plan is
supported by solid and reliable information.
ProductlDeliverable: Refined Framework Plan Alternative and Supporting Graphics;
Updated Analysis products (if necessary)
5.2 Document Framework Plan Elements
Upon completion of the Framework Plan refinement, the project team will complete
documentation of the following elements that will be necessary to support the final
Framework Plan recommendation. These elements should be seen as an outline of the
final Framework Plan document, and they will be combined and incorporated into the
document as described in Task 5.3.
5.2.1 Histor
A summary of the history of the District will be provided, as well as a description of
historic elements that have been incorporated within the Framework Plan.
Recommendations, if any, with respect to historic issues will be provided, including
any kind of historic review that may be required in certain locations within the District.
5.2.2 Site Conditions
A summary of site conditions within the District will be produced, including the
following elements:
• Soil conditions and suitability for development
• Depth to groundwater and flow direction of groundwater
• Areas of concern for hazardous materials
• Topographic opportunities or constraints
• Current uses and relationships between these uses (currently and under the
Framework Plan)
Based on this information, the project team will provide recommendations on
addressing any potential issues related to redevelopment efforts, including the need
(if any) for additional environmental assessments (Level II Assessments).
Page 25 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
5.2.3 Environmental and Sustainable Design
Utilizing information gathered earlier in the planning process and based on the
Preferred Framework Plan, the project team will provide recommendations on
incorporating environmental and sustainable design elements within the District. The
recommendations will include:
• Natural habitat and riparian protection
• Wetland protection, relocation, and/or mitigation
• Sustainable stormwater treatment, including infiltration, vegetative, and
"green street' treatements
• U.S. Green Building Council (LEED) building design standards, building
orientations balancing views, relationships to adjacent areas, and passive
solar access
• District -wide sustainability measures
5.2.4 Land Use
A significant element of the Framework Plan will be a series of recommendations to
modify existing land use policies and regulations in order to achieve the Framework
Plan vision. These land use elements will be pursued in greater detail in Task 7, but
must be outlined in the Framework Plan document in order to convey the land use
principles that will be implemented after the Framework Plan is approved. The
project team will provide land use modification recommendations incorporating the
following issues;
• Height, density, and use recommendations for the District
• Comprehensive plan modifications necessary to implement the Framework
Plan
• Zoning Code modifications necessary to implement the Framework Plan
• Outline of modification process
In addition, there may be other land use elements that emerge from the Framework
Plan that will need to be pursued. For example, this may include the creation of
design guidelines and a design review process for the District or the establishment of
other elements that will be necessary to carry out implementation of the Framework
Plan.
5.2.5 Transportation/Parking
The project team will summarize the results of the transportation analysis performed
on the preferred Framework Plan and describe the transportation improvements that
will be necessary to support implementation of the Framework Plan. The
recommendations will encompass the following areas:
• District Street Plan, including street locations and types, right-of-way widths,
and street cross sections
• Transportation access/portal improvements to State Street, including a
potential "north portal" for the District
Page 26 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
• Pedestrian and bicycle facilities
• Potential "trigger points" for certain transportation improvements that will be
necessary to accommodate increased growth
• Traffic mitigation requirements for downtown and adjacent neighborhoods to
the District
• Parking ratios by use type (e.g., residential, office, retail, etc.)
5.2.6 Streetcar
Integration of the Streetcar within the Framework Plan will be critical to the ultimate
success of redevelopment efforts. Given the fact that the Streetcar DEIS is on an
earlier timeline than the Framework Plan process, this work will be accelerated in
order to coordinate plan recommendations with the DEIS process. To the extent that
it is necessary, alternative streetcar alignments and/or stop and terminus locations in
the District may be recommended and forwarded to the Streetcar team for inclusion
in the DEIS process. It may be necessary for a Supplemental DEIS be performed in
order to accommodate streetcar recommendations emerging from the Framework
Plan, and it is worth noting that neither the Framework Plan Project Budget or the
DEIS Budget currently accommodates this Supplemental DEIS scope of work.
Following establishment of a final Streetcar alignment and stop locations, the project
team will provide recommendations on the following Streetcar elements:
• Stop design, -including pedestrian access to and from stops
• Landscape treatment along the Streetcar alignment in the District
• Park and Ride locations in the District (if any), including conceptual design
demonstrating how parking can be incorporated in a manner consistent with
the Framework Plan and community concerns
5.2.7 Infrastructure
A recommended infrastructure plan will be produced by the project team outlining the
infrastructure capacity needs for the District as well as the proposed infrastructure
spine locations within the District. Off-site capacity increases will also be identified,
and any trigger points in the redevelopment process where capacity upgrades will be
required will be documented. Infrastructure elements to be included are:
• Water
• Stormwater Management
• Sanitary Sewer
• Power
• Telecommunications
• Natural Gas
• Other Infrastructure Elements as needed
5.2.8 Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
Based on the earlier analysis and study of potential alternatives, as well as the
preferred Framework Plan, the project team will provide recommendations on
modifications to the WWTP. These modifications may include mitigation of the
Page 27 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
existing plant, upgrades to the capacity and/or technology of the plant, and relocating
or reducing the footprint of the plant. The team may also provide ideas on how to
redirect current planned capital expenditures at the WWTP in a way that will support
the Framework Plan while accomplishing the intent of the funding (e.g., capital
replacement or upgrades). Recommendations on modifications to the current
Intergovernmental Agreement between the Cities of Lake Oswego and Portland will
also be provided, if necessary, to implement the WWTP plan.
5.2.9 Open Space
Recommendations on open space types, amounts, and locations will be provided to
reflect the preferred Framework Plan. While the District currently is the home to
Foothills Park, there is likely a desire for other types of open space, including
expansion of the Willamette River Greenway and Tryon Creek State Park and
inclusion of smaller spaces within the District. Recommended timing of open space
implementation will also be provided as part of this task.
5.2.10 Urban Form
The intended scale, look, and feel of the District will be described in this section.
Recommended approaches to design quality, building orientation, pedestrian -scaled
design, parking lot/structure design, and other issues will be outlined. If a design -
guideline process is pursued as part of the Framework Plan's recommendations, this
section will help to outline the issues that design guidelines should address.
5.2.11 Floodplain
Based on the earlier Floodplain analysis, the project team will provide a set of
recommendations on how to best address or mitigate floodplain issues in the District.
These recommendations, upon approval, will be the basis for later regulatory actions
that will be proposed to address floodplain issues. Recommendations may include
one or more of the following elements:
• Raising the elevation of the redevelopment areas out of the floodplain
• Balancing cut and fill on all or a portion of the floodplain area
• Mitigation of floodplain issues
• Diking floodplain areas to effectively remove the floodplain designation from
them
• Pursuing exemptions to Metro Title 3
• FEMA remapping
5.2.12 Education
The project team will work with the Lake Oswego School District (LOSD) to determine
how the Framework Plan may impact LOSD facilities or activities. This analysis will
include a close look at the anticipated population and mix of uses proposed for the
District and how that population and mix of uses will translate into additional student
population within the LOSD over the next ten years. Based on this analysis, the project
team will provide recommendations on what types of facilities or services, if any, should
Page 28 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
be provided in the District to accommodate new student growth and ensure the success
of the redevelopment efforts.
5.2.13 Public Art
The project team will recommend a program for integrating public art in the District
5.2.14 Public Facilities
Based on the anticipated development density of the District and the City's and
community's feedback on the type of public facility elements that are desired in the
District, the project team will evaluate the adequacy of available public facilities and
services required to support District redevelopment. Following this evaluation, the
project team will provide recommendations on what types of public facilities or
services (if any) would be desirable or necessary in the District in order to support
the Framework Plan. These recommendations would be accompanied by potential
locations and approximate sizes of these facilities.
5.2.15 Cost Estimates.
Cost estimates, in current dollars, for all public improvements
5.2.16 Implementation
A key to the success of the Framework Plan as a guiding document will be the action
that is taken following its acceptance and adoption. The project team will prepare an
implementation strategy for the plan, including recommendations on the immediate
next steps that must be taken in order to move the plan forward into more concrete
redevelopment efforts. Among the elements that will be included in the
Implementation section of the Framework Plan are:
• Project list, identifying the public projects that will be required to successfully
implement the Framework Plan recommendations
• Phasing recommendations for public infrastructure projects
• Cost estimates for public infrastructure
• An Action Plan that identifies the critical next steps over a five-year period.
The plan will include the specific task or project to be undertaken; the
responsible party for undertaking that item; a timeline for initiation and
completion; a cost estimate for completion; and stakeholders involved in the
action item.
The Implementation section will also include recommendations or information that
will be provided by the City's Urban Renewal consultant outlining the most effective
funding strategies for implementing the Framework Plan.
5.2.17 Concepts for Post Plan Amendments
Planning and design concepts for the District containing, at a minimum,
recommendations for uses, densities, building heights, design standards for both
public and private improvements, and other development standards, together with
concepts for the Post -Plan Amendments.
Page 29 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Product/Deliverable: Draft document collating the tasks above, including supporting
graphic materials
5.3 Produce Draft Framework Plan Document
After completion of the work products described in Section 5.2 above, the project team
will assemble those products and other information gathered in the planning process into
a draft Framework Plan document. The document will be reviewed and approved by the
City Project Manager and then forwarded to the Oversight Committee and Project
Advisory Group for review prior to distribution to the public for an initial refinement.
Product/Deliverable: Draft Framework Plan Document (Distributed electronically)
5.4 Distribute Draft Framework Plan Document for Public Review
After receiving comments from the Oversight Committee and Project Working Group, the
project team will revise the Draft Framework Plan and distribute to the CAC and other
interested stakeholder for review and comment. At this time, a public event will also be
held to present the draft recommendations and receive additional input.
Product/Deliverable: Revised Draft Framework Plan Document (Distributed
electronically)
6.0 Final Framework Plan
6.1 Assemble Public Comments
Following the public event and a review of the document with the CAC, the project team
will assemble comments received on the draft document and forward recommendations
on how to respond to those comments to the Project Advisory Group and Oversight
Committee. WDW will work with the Project Advisory Group and Oversight Committee to
identify what changes are required to the document in light of the feedback received.
Product/Deliverable: Summary of comments received; Recommendations on revisions
to Framework Plan Document
6.2 Revise Final Framework Plan Document
After consultation with the Project Working Group and the Oversight Committee, WDW
will revise the Framework Plan document and prepare a final version for submittal to the
City.
Product/Deliverable: Final Framework Plan Revisions
6.3 Produce Final Framework Plan Document and Submit to City
The project team will produce a final version of the Framework Plan Document and
submit the document to the City for all necessary actions. 12 bound copies of the
document will be produced, along with one unbound copy for ease of reproduction. The
team will also submit an electronic (.pdf) version of the document.
Page 30 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Product/Deliverable: Final Framework Plan Document (12 bound copies; 1 unbound
original; electronic version)
7.0 Post Plan Amendments and Implementation
Following the completion of the Final Framework Plan document and assumed
acceptance of the Framework Plan by the City Council, WDW will prepare the necessary
documents for implementing the policy recommendations contained within the
Framework Plan related to land use, zoning, transportation and floodplain mitigation.
These work products are comprised of the Post Plan Amendments, Floodplain
Mitigation, and Implementation Assistance.
The Post Plan Amendments are defined in the Pre -Development Agreement as "all
regulatory amendments under the City's jurisdiction, including modifications to the City's
Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Development Code, and/or the establishment of
Design Guidelines or other regulatory language that will enable the District to be
developed consistent with the approved Framework Plan, including the resolution of all
appeals." Consistent with this definition, the work products described in 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3
below comprise the Post Plan Amendments that will be delivered under this Work Plan.
7.1 Comprehensive Plan Concepts
The Comprehensive Plan provides the overall policy guidance for land use decisions in
the City of Lake Oswego. The vision, goals, and objectives in the Framework Plan will
serve as the starting point for revising the Comprehensive Plan to ensure its consistency
with the Framework Plan's recommendations.
7.1.1 Identifv Comprehensive Plan Modifications
WDW will identify those areas of the Comprehensive Plan that will need to be
modified in order to implement the land use recommendations contained in the
Framework Plan. If necessary, these recommendations may also include new
sections within the Comprehensive Plan related to the District (for instance, the
establishment of a separate Plan District with its own set of Vision, Goals, and
Objectives).
Product/Deliverable: Recommendations on Comprehensive Plan sections to
modify/issues to address/new sections to add
7.1.2 Draft Comprehensive Plan Language
Following review and refinement of Task 7.1.1 with City staff, WDW will prepare draft
language for modifying the Comprehensive Plan and submit it to the City Project
Manager for review and comments. Following revisions, the draft language will be
finalized and assembled into a format that will allow it to be submitted to the City's
Planning Commission and, ultimately, City Council, for those bodies' review and
consideration.
Products/Deliverables: Draft Comprehensive Plan Language; Final Comprehensive
Plan Language and submittal package
Page 31 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
7.2 Zoning Code Concepts
Transitioning from current land use patterns and regulations to a more urban form of
development in the District will require modification of the Zoning regulations for the
District. This task will identify those areas of the Zoning Code that require modification,
and provide recommended code language.
7.2.1 Identify Required Zoning Code Modifications
The Framework Plan will almost certainly require modifications to the City's Zoning
Code in order to reflect the land use recommendations contained within the plan.
Initially, WDW will identify those parts of the Zoning Code that are inconsistent with,
or are barriers to, implementation of the Framework Plan. The issues to be studied
include use categories (zoning designations), development standards, and other
pertinent issues.
Product/Deliverable: Recommendations on Zoning Code sections to modify/issues
to address/new sections to add
7.2.2 Draft Zoning Code Language
Following review and refinement of Task 7.2.1 with the City's Project Manager, WDW
will prepare draft language for modifying the Zoning Code and bringing the code into
alignment with the Framework Plan's recommendations. This language will be
submitted to the City's Project Manager for review and comment. Following revision,
the draft language will be finalized, supplemented with necessary exhibits, and
assembled into a format that will allow it to be submitted to the City's Planning
Commission and, ultimately, City Council, for those bodies' review and consideration.
Products/Deliverables: Draft Zoning Code Language; Final Zoning Code language,
exhibits, and submittal package
7.3 Other City Code Concepts
While the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code are the two most obvious areas that
will need to be revised to implement the Framework Plan's recommendations, there may
be other elements of the City Code that need to be revised, modified, or added in order
to fully implement the Framework Plan. This Task will identify those areas and prepare
modification packages for City Council review and action.
7.3.1 Identify Other City Code Modifications
Beyond the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, there are likely to be a number
of other regulatory areas that will require modification. WDW will identify those parts
of the City Code that are inconsistent with, or are barriers to, implementation of the
Framework Plan as well as new regulatory tools or processes that may be necessary
to reflect the Framework Plan's recommendations. Among the likely issues to be
identified are design and/or historic review and guidelines, public street standards,
subdivision regulations, development standards or other issues.
Page 32 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Product/Deliverable: Recommendations on City Code sections to modify/issues to
address/new sections to add
7.3.2 Draft Code Language
Following review and refinement of Task 7.3.1 with the City's Project Manager, WDW
will prepare draft language for modifying the City Code and bringing the code into
alignment with the Framework Plan's recommendations. This language will be
submitted to the City's Project Manager for review and comment. Following revision,
the draft language will be finalized, supplemented with necessary exhibits, and
assembled into a format that will allow it to be submitted to the City's Planning
Commission and, ultimately, City Council, for those bodies' review and consideration.
Products/Deliverables: Draft City Code Language; Final City Code language,
exhibits, and submittal package
7.4 Floodplain Mitigation Concepts
The 100 year floodplain is a major barrier to District redevelopment. It is anticipated that
the Framework Plan will contain recommendations addressing development within the
100 year floodplain that will require modification to existing regulations related to the
floodplain and/or modification of the District's physical characteristics such that land is
raised above the 100 year flood elevation. This task will carry the floodplain
recommendations through the appropriate regulatory processes in order to remove the
floodplain as a development barrier to the District.
7.4.1 Floodplain Mitiaation Concepts
The Framework Plan will identify the potential modifications to the District floodplain
areas that will allow redevelopment to proceed. Following adoption of the Framework
Plan, WDW will identify the regulatory processes for modifying the floodplain (or
floodplain regulations) and establish a pathway for modifying these processes or
applying for revisions or exceptions to the various regulatory bodies that govern
floodplain regulation. These bodies may include the City of Lake Oswego, Metro,
State of Oregon, Army Corps of Engineers, and FEMA.
Products/Deliverables: Recommendations on Floodplain Regulations to
modify/Floodplain revisions to submit applications for
7.4.2 Draft Floodplain Mitigation Language/Actions
Following review and refinement of Task 7.4.1 with the City's Project Manager, WDW
will prepare draft language for modifying the Floodplain regulations related to the
District, or will prepare applications for allowing development within the floodplain for
later submittal to the appropriate regulatory bodies. The language and exhibits will be
submitted to the City's Project Manager for review and comment. Following revision,
will finalize the language or applications, supplemented with necessary exhibits, and
assembled these products into a format that will allow them to be submitted to the
appropriate bodies for their review and consideration.
Page 33 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Products/Deliverables: Draft Floodplain Language and/or Revision Applications,-
Draft
pplications;Draft Floodplain Language and/or Revision Applications, exhibits, and submittal
package(s)
7.5 Implementation Process Assistance
Following submittal of the packages described in Sections 7.1 through 7.4, WDW and
the project team will provide assistance to the City as the proposed revisions make their
way through the various approval processes (e.g., Planning Commission, City Council,
FEMA, etc.). Where necessary, WDW will prepare revisions to code language or
applications to reflect the direction of the various bodies. While the City will take the lead
as the applicant during this phase, WDW will also be on hand at any regulatory hearings
to present material, answer questions, and otherwise help guide the various packages
through to final approval.
Products/Deliverables: Hearing(s) attendance; Language/Package revisions;
consultation with City related to regulatory processes
Page 34 of 34 -- Exhibit C - Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
I
eg e ap y@p a@pp ap eg gg e@ e gy¢g aB @@ ee ep gg@e gg p
a@ a p
g @ p E a@ a y p
9
g
FF
##
g 'g Y
o
o e o g
o�_ gi
Ie�e�vov0000esogSS-egeeeioa�c_�SS�__eg
I
_�55—
.....................
-
---------o��g'�--
.... ...................... ....._........."'-"_...`__
I
L,lo
t
I
I
' ......
_........_. ._
R
S
I
1
I
t _
R
8
a
I
'Io
CI'
II
i
1
I
u t
11'
1'
1
I
O' Oo X
G -i ., L M. .,
v
V Y M u .�. V ry .�. v N N N :�
R ri R• r.
Y S
R u: w
O
�H U� d d B o o N t 5t
� x�
3. F. ffi tl a tl a e tl S o u R
"'
N B o it 8 N o
a epi
C-- N N
r r
r
o 0 0
I
i
�
11
J
I
g
j
i
f
---- - --
- - -----
I j
4rd�
y
I
I
I
I
I
I
. ....
..... . ... . . -
----------------------
------- ................
I
I
I
I '
I
I
.
. . . . . . . . ............... .................. . .......
.........
. .. . .... . ................. . ....
. .
w
w
c
x
K
w
w
�o
N
i o
o
f9 64 w
888
888
r.. lo
N
va
d
3
d
N
R
'c
5D �a
w U m a m
w m E z d s o
m d w m y > ~ > R c
E E so o d Bio3R
Ca as v w U E > E * n w w OC a a
E Y R w w p w 0 w Cr a) o f E� w w o m
m w c w y o, m U °� m w a) o Cn W c o ap'i m y
yE R m oo cZ •E Ty w z E� dE cc ���aC0 W d 3E c
y ~ C O> O d 0 y O 7 N d T Q E a) O y 0 a a y r E w L C
oUc m� cT E R T—° T v �c m�0� o
+ r E ;�a.E a R c Cb (D(D ai c m w w E RJ w Ea
c
O R p U +? Lc,)' a O (n c R m o c L p c no r a) c N a o w E c a
T (� N E w w m O w 0 w O Y R
C N w al al Q O w a T _ ._ a) w w 2` iC N d O yj O
E S cn� 0 O � CU�a + w a1 EU w RL aU c R �° E RZ T C Ur D U C U O O m N R V wUa 0) U
+ C E C R U O L_ L_ L_ c` 3 > R O C a) C E C d O' "� :.. C ; O C O `O w
CL c b E E 2 m E= c a `0 m c m R p p y
o a' w d>> p p r o y o p c m T d m d' m R y g R d E S w 3 E o 5 a
E E >> t9 act E S R C � •� 'Z >> w o c M> w Q d is c m O 2 T w 'w c6 c L w > w 3 Z Fig
E R w n w w d m In w o+
> md�wwyrRrnV cccc mpa o�b�'� Q mi� wma�wcOcUcmU) wc�m ~�� y� NmEUO�OLR amEwawaaa
4) N Off« c c p p o v o 0 0 L C> w m U c 2 c w o — d c R o R i T y c m a p d 0 3 c p 8 m T G
C Ca O O O R fn C L O Q) C a> c C fn m O d r O .0 c t0 'C H d .N U y �- X O V Y C Y a 0 L H
m a c a' O C c c Y a w w R 7 a T E m« L a E R O �R O) w� C T a d p >> € LL w cn y m m° m rn> o
R p> R V>> � 6 O b 'p a m R d o E a E °� = v y d ° a>i o >°� a r c d m y R w m E w >R o p y w c� E 0 S c m Sm IS,
a wmcn� w 00 dU O.� B . R d a c 0C7w: >CCZ in W H 2 rn c `—>fn Ra._ eHZ� a� A E
O a U d o p d N E p a' o O m c E c 'c w Z a D CO
0 0 888 u a gwpat-o > o,._ t` a > cdpmUa�
d o U d> m .�' m a c o o c w c U d c w x R Row pc R c c v x 5
E._cn aa._Oa._000 H E 0= c0CL0 d yaam� mc7 w cw aaU Wa a r na p p �w U
N w o o O N R R R > R w« m p E c R
a �ino� Sm Bin F- a .j
Vn..o
m -E N D
y_ r Q m U N CO r N r N M r N CO r N CO r Q m U N a m U r Q m U 6 W w N M C r a m N a m U r N M r Q m U � cu Q m
N w r r r m Cj C Cj C)V C C r r M M V' 4 4 '7 In � aJ a7 O O �
k .O C T R N N N M M M M M M M M M M M C7 M M M M
R O r N M O r N Cl) Q O r N m O N CR P CC O
W o. u. 2 rl r r r NI N N N N 'il M m M cq M M M CO Co
N
V!
f!a fA fA
F
S
o
88
8
8
8
8
LimO
N
N
N
a
W
H
V!
�
fI!
fA
fA
f9
8 8 8
8 8
8 8 8 8
8
Q
'
8 -LQ
OLo N T
M c7
8888
N r co N
8
LO
N
U
H
f9
h
fA 69 f9
fA Va
ffl w f9 f9
f9
C
8
N N N
u
8
N
a
z
�
�
a
va
69 69
f9
69
8
88888
88
88S
8888 888
8 S
8
8
888
88
888
88888
8888
8
8g8-8
88
888
8888 888
S 8
8
8
888
88
088
88888
8888
8
3
h
o
f� O r n O
rr r
N N
rr
W m I�
= _
cD r N M I�
v r
=
W co
r
=
N
a7
=
N N co
r r
r r r
N lli N Ln M
N N N M
r
3
h
69 69 69 6r, 61�
era fA
f9 69 w
69 fA 69 f9 69 f9 69
ua
f9
69
f9 f9 f»
69 f9
f9 f9 f9
f9 f9 69 w w
69 69 f9 69
69
S
88888
88
888
8888 888
0 0888
888
888
8
888
88
8888
88888
8888
88
v
o
88$88
88
888
8888 888
8 8,888
888
888
8
888
88
8888
88888
8888
88
kq
O
m
Y
C
r
n O n r a7
r r r
N N
r r
aD c0 n
.- r n fV Oi N
r
N h N u7 t0
r
N
I� I- N
tO I� I�
r
N
cV fh
(V N O f�
r
n Lo N N c0
r
N N N c7
-- N
W
F
Y
O
M
f9 f9 fA f9 69
69 69
Ha 69 69
to w f9 69 w f9 f9 f9
t9 69 va ffl f9
69 w f9
w fo f9
69
fA f9 f9
fA f9
Ha f9 69 69
f9 " to w f9
f9 t9 f9 ffl
f9 f9
d
3
d
N
R
'c
5D �a
w U m a m
w m E z d s o
m d w m y > ~ > R c
E E so o d Bio3R
Ca as v w U E > E * n w w OC a a
E Y R w w p w 0 w Cr a) o f E� w w o m
m w c w y o, m U °� m w a) o Cn W c o ap'i m y
yE R m oo cZ •E Ty w z E� dE cc ���aC0 W d 3E c
y ~ C O> O d 0 y O 7 N d T Q E a) O y 0 a a y r E w L C
oUc m� cT E R T—° T v �c m�0� o
+ r E ;�a.E a R c Cb (D(D ai c m w w E RJ w Ea
c
O R p U +? Lc,)' a O (n c R m o c L p c no r a) c N a o w E c a
T (� N E w w m O w 0 w O Y R
C N w al al Q O w a T _ ._ a) w w 2` iC N d O yj O
E S cn� 0 O � CU�a + w a1 EU w RL aU c R �° E RZ T C Ur D U C U O O m N R V wUa 0) U
+ C E C R U O L_ L_ L_ c` 3 > R O C a) C E C d O' "� :.. C ; O C O `O w
CL c b E E 2 m E= c a `0 m c m R p p y
o a' w d>> p p r o y o p c m T d m d' m R y g R d E S w 3 E o 5 a
E E >> t9 act E S R C � •� 'Z >> w o c M> w Q d is c m O 2 T w 'w c6 c L w > w 3 Z Fig
E R w n w w d m In w o+
> md�wwyrRrnV cccc mpa o�b�'� Q mi� wma�wcOcUcmU) wc�m ~�� y� NmEUO�OLR amEwawaaa
4) N Off« c c p p o v o 0 0 L C> w m U c 2 c w o — d c R o R i T y c m a p d 0 3 c p 8 m T G
C Ca O O O R fn C L O Q) C a> c C fn m O d r O .0 c t0 'C H d .N U y �- X O V Y C Y a 0 L H
m a c a' O C c c Y a w w R 7 a T E m« L a E R O �R O) w� C T a d p >> € LL w cn y m m° m rn> o
R p> R V>> � 6 O b 'p a m R d o E a E °� = v y d ° a>i o >°� a r c d m y R w m E w >R o p y w c� E 0 S c m Sm IS,
a wmcn� w 00 dU O.� B . R d a c 0C7w: >CCZ in W H 2 rn c `—>fn Ra._ eHZ� a� A E
O a U d o p d N E p a' o O m c E c 'c w Z a D CO
0 0 888 u a gwpat-o > o,._ t` a > cdpmUa�
d o U d> m .�' m a c o o c w c U d c w x R Row pc R c c v x 5
E._cn aa._Oa._000 H E 0= c0CL0 d yaam� mc7 w cw aaU Wa a r na p p �w U
N w o o O N R R R > R w« m p E c R
a �ino� Sm Bin F- a .j
Vn..o
m -E N D
y_ r Q m U N CO r N r N M r N CO r N CO r Q m U N a m U r Q m U 6 W w N M C r a m N a m U r N M r Q m U � cu Q m
N w r r r m Cj C Cj C)V C C r r M M V' 4 4 '7 In � aJ a7 O O �
k .O C T R N N N M M M M M M M M M M M C7 M M M M
R O r N M O r N Cl) Q O r N m O N CR P CC O
W o. u. 2 rl r r r NI N N N N 'il M m M cq M M M CO Co
H
LL
Q
D
0
0
0
0
Vi
O
0
N
'
0 0 0
0 0
o
0 0
0 0 0
69 69 69 fA fA 69 fA w 69 cA 69 69 w E9 69 69
0
0 o 10
(A
00
O
9
Do
N y
Vi
A
EA
0 0
v)
14
0 0
DO
9000000000000009 p
O O
0
00
O
0
o 0
0
S 0
00
0
LOn o e
0
� �
N
0
N
r
S
08
R
ch
9
N
fA
8
P]
iAl
Lo
O
O O
Y
o
0 8�
O
o
o
Lri
cA hA
o �
Vj EA
I" I"
O I'
O
0
0
In
o
O
to 0 C)
O O OO Oi O
N Ci N N In I
m
0 0 0
0 0
69 cA
0 0
0 0 0
69 69 69 fA fA 69 fA w 69 cA 69 69 w E9 69 69
0 0
0 o 10
(A
00
00
(fl
Do
N y
0 0
69 (fj
EA
0 0
Do
14
0 0
DO
9000000000000009 p
O O
0 0
0008
00
0
0
0 0
S 0
00
0 0
LOn o e
0
� �
N
0
N
r
Vj EA
I" I"
O I'
O
0
0
In
o
O
to 0 C)
O O OO Oi O
N Ci N N In I
m
0
3
bs fA Is
69
69 cA
69 cA 69 cA vq 64
c»
69 69 69 fA fA 69 fA w 69 cA 69 69 w E9 69 69
69 69 69
(A
00
00
(fl
Do
69 69 EA
0 0
01008
000
0
0 0
Do
909999
000000
°0 o
0 0
DO
9000000000000009 p
O O
0 0
0008
0
o
0 0
S 0
00
0 0 0
LOn o e
p
m
0
0
c') O
N c')
0
08
0 S o
o�
m
V) r r
y
N
N
8
P]
Ln Vi n
Lo
Y
A
69 V3 tf3
cA hA
69 69
fA 69 64 EA f 69
(n 69
fA cA 69 69 i9 69 69 6e 69 fA 69 fA EA uA fA Efl
VJ (Al w cA
fn
EH
64
fA ifl
fA
cA W fA
0
0
0
0 000
0o
o 0000 o8
O
O
O
0 0 0 0
O O
O O e
c
o
c
o coo
0o
0 occo o oc
O
O
Ln
O
O
O
o u� o 0
Do
0 in
O o 0 0 0 O O
in in Ln o o L in
N
N
u7
LL') N Ln u1
tD N
r I� O N to r R N
U
N
(A
!�
fR
fA 69 fA V3
69
69 fR fA fA fA EA fA EA
C
O
O o
O O
0 o 0
0 0
O O O O O O o O O
O 0 0
O
O O
..
0 0
o 0 0
0 0
O O O O o 0 O
O O O
.
y
o
o0
°o
0o0
O
o0
O
o °0o Soo 00
O O
o 00
N
�
O
�
O O
�o
Do
Lno
O O
o�uQ
O
Lno
� u-,u7� moo Lei LQ
Ln oLli
cN
1�
r Ln
in N N
an N
N O r R to LA N r
1[f c0 r
.-
a
Q
v3
v>
E» v>
EA eA e»
(»
eA F» to v) 61) e» eA (a LA
f» (n
8888
880
oS
0S
SS888o
00
88888o00o00o8S80
coo
O o 0
0o
Do
cc
Do
oc0000
O O O
oc
Do
0000088000000000
O o o O O
0p0o0
Ln Ln o
La Ln
o0
o0 Ln 0 u,
c 0
Ln u�ooq Ln Ln Ln Ln LnL Lo in Ln
O u') O u]
O
N
u) N
O O
c') cl) N R r) Ln
m u7
.- .- N O R? co c`) r N c) N N Lo
.-
m r)
0
3
to
0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
C 88 88 88 LQ
t0 N (2 o OLo r- Ln O
R r N N r
000 80 00 000 0
g8 88 88 88g
m N�2 cD ac LO r r r
cA w w 69 6e Hi to (A UA UA
3
m
N _T
d > ¢ U
U
N
c m c a U m
a a cn w c cO co -
cL _m E ca o .0 4
E m� m N �a �' E° c u o w c m
E v u m L Z y a° c c° E o 0 E o m e
O T A N E i4 C U O � C al N- W
N p >� N m d a a m E c (� o p N C J a m a a m w
"15UUP Ea E¢._ �.... Yw ma D c a-° c U v _N
arcs 'm a- E d _o v �- c a Y c ca u d m c U c c N
n w m o>= c w C E a m.N m 1 a c ° `o 3 aC a y ; o.> a o 0 o U `m N
m o m C7. m c m m o) U LL T m d c E y Y m 3 d c E 15 o` ° U c .> y o coi U m o o a. m
U o c m a a 'r 2 o m o Q E m E° 3 a c m N d c ° p o
E o d o°° 'c a a a m E a o 3 m o m L°° a a o o m
a C7 . « a q) N a� c a� ¢ o. `m w y N Z N c m w U° E 2 L E) L c E' ° U U c a E a
O m C N T D_ r U E C¢ N Y a c t6 ° a) H O LL Y Y U E E 0 N a p 'j U p J 07 = C
c m> 6> m o E a m m 3 o v E ° c w E = m o (° ti o .> E Q U Q m a L o
0/ Y m m m Q a m m a y d w ac E m a mE m o. A m o- m `� O u w' m c U o v¢ o U O o�
o c 'E a a E a m c p L m E d Z, o a O Pi U U to c a� E m E° c ji c L w U p 2' N U a Li
Z�r y000COio� LLyEw��Rm° OZ aa$��a�.o LiE�°i Eadmom2U�a_mE
M °a E �U(n yl7 E m2inw�F�n �HO�LLwo_ Ear w m > ESU caUtaO owU n
I 0 O N C
O
w0 woo u) oo°[o a0 LL<Er EU N O LL E
U r N ¢ m U w LL r N m R Lo co r O O) Or r �2 r N r N r N r N
N N m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Ni M co R R
C r V C V to 4 6 u7 u" a] n Lo Lf) ui ui Ln iri tri r r r1-� r n r r
RI N c7 O r N m R O r N c] O r N Lh R N
M M RR R R Lal N Lo m to LL! LD O O n n r f` n r
E
E
U
N
Z
bs fA Is
69
69 cA
69 cA 69 cA vq 64
c»
69 69 69 fA fA 69 fA w 69 cA 69 69 w E9 69 69
69 69 69
c o o
00
00
0 0 0 0 0 0
Do
0000000000000000
0 0
01008
000
0
0 0
Do
909999
000000
°0 o
0 0
DO
9000000000000009 p
O O
0 0
0008
0 0
0 o
0 0
0 o L0 LQ 0
CCN
O p O O 0 0 0 0 O Q O LO O L0
LOn o e
p
m
N co
M
O t�
Ln r
c') O
N c')
-o
O c' ) N M in
N C) r M r in
N
O M
�- I� O O cD LO M m z h (D N N .- Ln r
r N N R ch r N r (`') r
m
V) r r
y
N
N
P]
Lo
Y
o
69 V3 tf3
cA hA
69 69
fA 69 64 EA f 69
(n 69
fA cA 69 69 i9 69 69 6e 69 fA 69 fA EA uA fA Efl
VJ (Al w cA
to
0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
C 88 88 88 LQ
t0 N (2 o OLo r- Ln O
R r N N r
000 80 00 000 0
g8 88 88 88g
m N�2 cD ac LO r r r
cA w w 69 6e Hi to (A UA UA
3
m
N _T
d > ¢ U
U
N
c m c a U m
a a cn w c cO co -
cL _m E ca o .0 4
E m� m N �a �' E° c u o w c m
E v u m L Z y a° c c° E o 0 E o m e
O T A N E i4 C U O � C al N- W
N p >� N m d a a m E c (� o p N C J a m a a m w
"15UUP Ea E¢._ �.... Yw ma D c a-° c U v _N
arcs 'm a- E d _o v �- c a Y c ca u d m c U c c N
n w m o>= c w C E a m.N m 1 a c ° `o 3 aC a y ; o.> a o 0 o U `m N
m o m C7. m c m m o) U LL T m d c E y Y m 3 d c E 15 o` ° U c .> y o coi U m o o a. m
U o c m a a 'r 2 o m o Q E m E° 3 a c m N d c ° p o
E o d o°° 'c a a a m E a o 3 m o m L°° a a o o m
a C7 . « a q) N a� c a� ¢ o. `m w y N Z N c m w U° E 2 L E) L c E' ° U U c a E a
O m C N T D_ r U E C¢ N Y a c t6 ° a) H O LL Y Y U E E 0 N a p 'j U p J 07 = C
c m> 6> m o E a m m 3 o v E ° c w E = m o (° ti o .> E Q U Q m a L o
0/ Y m m m Q a m m a y d w ac E m a mE m o. A m o- m `� O u w' m c U o v¢ o U O o�
o c 'E a a E a m c p L m E d Z, o a O Pi U U to c a� E m E° c ji c L w U p 2' N U a Li
Z�r y000COio� LLyEw��Rm° OZ aa$��a�.o LiE�°i Eadmom2U�a_mE
M °a E �U(n yl7 E m2inw�F�n �HO�LLwo_ Ear w m > ESU caUtaO owU n
I 0 O N C
O
w0 woo u) oo°[o a0 LL<Er EU N O LL E
U r N ¢ m U w LL r N m R Lo co r O O) Or r �2 r N r N r N r N
N N m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Ni M co R R
C r V C V to 4 6 u7 u" a] n Lo Lf) ui ui Ln iri tri r r r1-� r n r r
RI N c7 O r N m R O r N c] O r N Lh R N
M M RR R R Lal N Lo m to LL! LD O O n n r f` n r
E
E
U
N
Z
Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Exhibit D — Planning Principles
The Vision and Planning Principles outlined below were the product of an exploratory planning
effort undertaken in the spring of 2009 by the City of Lake Oswego, Williams, Dame & White,
and the Foothills Industrial Property Owners. During this time, the team reached out to various
community leaders to discuss their aspirations for and concerns about redevelopment in the
Foothills District. These conversations were critical to shaping the Planning Principles outlined
here.
The Vision and Planning Principles describe what the parties hope to achieve in the Foothills
District through redevelopment efforts and the general planning principles that will guide these
efforts. The Planning Principles will be used to inform the work of the Framework Plan and set
expectations for the final product that the City Council expects to receive from the project team.
These principles were presented to the Lake Oswego City Council on July 14, 2009 at a
regularly scheduled City Council work session for review and discussion, and subsequently
modified based on comments by Council members and City staff.
Vision
The Foothills District is Lake Oswego's greatest opportunity to provide the community
with a significant riverfront presence. Building upon the recent success of Downtown
Lake Oswego, the District will redevelop in a manner that knits Downtown Lake
Oswego, Tryon Creek, Old Town, the Willamette River, and Oswego Lake together,
and in the process will establish Lake Oswego's next great residential neighborhood.
Helping drive the success of the neighborhood will be a connection to Downtown
Portland via the modern Streetcar and an environmental mindset that considers
sustainability as a central tenet of the District, from the planning phase all the way
through construction and operations. The District will possess a thriving, comfortable
and inviting pedestrian environment, with clear and convenient connections to
surrounding areas. A mix of uses including a variety of housing options, local retail to
support the neighborhood, complimentary office types, and open space and
recreational opportunities will provide vital activity not only within the District but also
across State Street into Downtown. Given the many natural and man-made amenities
that exist in and around the Foothills District, this new neighborhood will be unique and
like no other found in the Portland area.
Planning Principles
The success of the Foothills District will be felt and experienced on the sidewalks and
pedestrian pathways that wind through the District - community happens on the street. The
planning principles described below are derived from this central tenet. The principles focus on
Exhibit D — Planning Principles Page 1 of 3
how to create a successful pedestrian environment, how to energize that environment, and how
to connect the District to key areas and activities adjacent to and beyond the District.
Along with a strong emphasis on creating successful pedestrian environments, two other values
are integrated throughout. First, each principle is considered with an eye towards maintaining,
reinforcing, and/or establishing a sense of place that is unique to Lake Oswego. Second, each
principle provides a basic building block that ensures the viability of the final vision for the
District, leading to on -the -ground redevelopment activity and the delivery of tangible benefits to
the Lake Oswego community.
A. Connections — Develop strong connections between the District and surrounding
neighborhoods, destinations, and places. The success of this district will hinge in large part
on the strength of its connections, especially at the pedestrian level. Visual connections will
also be important including those from downtown through Foothills to the Willamette River.
B. Sustainable Development— Implement sustainability planning and design principles for the
District, and strive to establish Foothills as an exemplary Eco -district model in the Portland
region. The District should be planned in a manner that would allow it to receive a "LEED
ND (Neighborhood Design)" designation.
C. Incorporation of Residential Diversity and Innovative Design — Ensure that District
redevelopment provides for a diversity of residential types across multiple demographic and
socio-economic groups, and that building design within the District reflects this diversity.
D. Design Quality—Establish a standard of quality for the District that ensures long-term value,
lasting quality, and the reinforcement of Lake Oswego's unique sense of place.
E. Public Open Space — Develop a plan for open space and parks in the district, building upon
the success and character of open space resources like Foothills Park and Tryon Creek
State Park and providing Lake Oswego residents with "great good places" to gather, to meet
and to commune with each other.
F. Economically Viable Development — Ensure that planning recommendations for the
District are economically sound, leading to redevelopment activity that is consistent with the
City's and community's vision for the riverfront neighborhood. Achieving the vision for the
District will require increased densities and heights, with base Floor Area Ratios between
4:1 and 6:1 and base building heights between 75 and 125 feet.
G. Appropriate Scale and Design — Create design standards that encourage responsive
design and a high level of quality and authenticity, ensuring that new development is
responsive to its context and minimizes negative impacts on adjacent neighborhoods.
Exhibit D — Planning Principles Page 2 of 3
H. Good Partnerships - Establish mutually beneficial partnerships that will initiate District
redevelopment, define the public benefits of the project and provide clear expectations for
project delivery on all sides.
1. Strong and Diverse Ground Floor Retail - Establish a strong, locally -oriented retail
presence in the District to provide unique business opportunities for local entrepreneurs and
to generate the street life that will be essential to the District's sense of identity.
J. Balance - Create a thoughtful and responsible balance between man-made and natural
environments, providing for the physical needs of shelter, home and sustenance while
honoring the natural beauty of the District and incorporating environmentally appropriate
design features.
K. Focus on the "First Thirty Feet" - Establish an overall set of design standards that create
a unique sense of place at the street level throughout the district and that integrate the
design of the public right-of-way with the critical "first thirty feet" of development adjacent to
the sidewalk.
Exhibit D - Planning Principles Page 3 of 3
1 00 ID w n a
Q7 Q M l0
M a m N m T 1� tO0
A
S
S
S S
p
m
m
a
J
m
0
OV
0
V °Uco
m a
0
E
F
O
O
W
O O
d
N
N
N
N N
o d
d
>
A
z
N
d
A
•p
O
`-'
O
S
C C
pp
C00
LK
O
a
p a
o m
J ^
c
O
N
a
o u o
E
O
O O
'.
N
c a
LL i
O
W
r o
a
N
VT
N
N
W LL a
S
o
to
O
d
m
O
N
O
�
lo
d
n'1
fy
O
a
>
m
m
m
m
Z
v
O
O
V
N
V
V
Z
x
O
p •
OO
J y
d
d
S
c C
o
O
O
N o
m
z
Z
c
K c
W m
U
d
d
Y
Q
M
75
m
N
Z
Z
~
a
z
E o
Z
m
E
E
°
E c
o
O
V
d
m
V JO
O
o
A
d
Y
z
x m
W
Y
�
S
8
S
d
O
O
O
Y
C
z
4i
o
lo
C
>
u�
a
m
c
m +
S
.ti
oR
LL
N
I
N
N
T
c,
m
�
N
d
c
•+
d
c
E m
d Q
z
.moi
z
m
a
x m
W
V}
p
N
8
8
8
S
Y
OO
O
m
O
V
V
O
GO
cl
N
C ?
8
m
a
d
L
Ao
C
G
o
C
9
T
W
N
N
V?
VT
O
4o
LL
o
O
H
N
N
N
N
?; g
E
a
z
A
S
S
S S
p
m
m
a
J
m
0
OV
0
V °Uco
m a
0
E
F
O
O
W
O O
d
N
N
N
N N
o d
d
>
A
z
N
d
A
O
O O
u c
O
C
C C
E
m
LK
a
p a
o m
J ^
c
O
N
a
L
O
O O
w
d
O
u°
LL i
O
W
r o
f
CL
m
d1
N
N N
A
J
7
C
c E
a
�
a
m a
0
E
m
c
o`
>
E >
c
d
p
o
r
o d
d
>
A
z
N
d
z
O
Cv
N
d
u c
C
v
T
E
m
LK
a
p a
o m
J ^
c
O
N
a
>
5
2
W- E
W
V
O
V c
r o
f
y
°
°
m
�
W LL a
r --..-Cd
° C
m
to
o
3
,n
1'
A
d
O
y
O
O
C
O
O
O
u c
'D
"
v
rl
E
m
LK
a
p a
a
O
O
L.
t0
O
y
O
oo
O m
a
m
a
lo
LLm
>
a
e
lo
d
n'1
fy
O
v
O
O
O
N p
Z
Z
Z
x
W ma
d
Q
�
d
mo
a
z
z
m
E
U
d
Y
Q
Q
=
d
m
N
Z
Z
O
�
z
c
°
0
ym
d
d
m
N
O
o
A
m
z
z
x m
W
�
S
8
S
d
O
O
O
Y
C
o
lo
C
>
u�
a
m
A
m
.ti
LL
N
I
N
N
c,
m
In
m
d Q
a
g
g
p
O
0
J
o
m
S
U
u
V
X
V
V
O
V
O
F
O
W
rl
N
W
N
N
W
N
N
d
L
Ao
C
G
o
C
9
T
L
L
L
y
OO
O
4o
LL
o
O
H
N
N
N
N
E
z
m
J
C
3
2
V
2
Q
T
F
�
Ed
d
LL
C
d
d
L
u
L
�
O O
NO PART OF ANY STEVENS-NESS FORM MAYBE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY ELECTRONIC OR MECHANICAL MEANS.
TRUST DEED
----- -------------- —--------- —-------- —---- -------
Orentor's Noma was Addre"
NaalbtaryY Nemo and AdQfan
Afar reoordaty, return to (Nanta, Address, Zip):
THIS TRUST DEED, made on
STATE OF OREGON,
ss.
County of -----------------------
I certify that the within instrument was
received for recording on -------------------------,
at ------------ o'clock ------ M., and recorded in
book/reel/volume No. ---------- on page -_--_--_-
SPACE RESERVED and/Or as fee/file/instrument/microfilm/reception
FOR No Records of this Count
RECORDER'S USE ------� y'
Witness my hand and seal of County affixed.
_____----__----------------------------------------
NAME TITLE
By---------------------------------------, Deputy.
.__, as Grantor,
as Trustee. and
as Beneficiary,
WITNESSETH:
Grantor irrevocably grants, bargains, sells and conveys to trustee, in trust, with power of sale, the property in
---------------------------- County, Oregon, described as:
together with all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances and all other rights thereunto belonging or in any way
now or hereafter appertaining, and the rents, issues and profits thereof, and all fixtures now or hereafter attached to or used in con-
nection with theproperty.
FOR TRE P[IRPt7SE bF SECURING PERFORMANCE of each agreement of grantor herein contained and payment of the sum of --__-----
Dollars, with interest thereon according to the terms of a promissory note of even date herewith, payable to beneficiary or order and made by grantor, the final
payment of principal and interest, if not sooner paid, to be due and payable on ----- —--------------- —-------- —_---_______--.
The date of maturity of the debt secured by this instrument is the date, stated above, on which the final installment of the note becomes due and payable.
To protect the security of this trust deed, grantor agrees:
1. To protect, preserve and maintain the property in good condition and repair; not to remove or demolish any building or improvement thereon; and not to
commit or permit any waste of the property.
2. To complete or restore promptly and in good and habitable condition any building or improvement which maybe constructed, damaged or destroyed there-
on, and pay when due all costs incurred therefor.
3. To comply with all laws, ordinances, regulations, covenants, conditions and restrictions affecting the property; if the beneficiary so requests, to join in exe-
cuting such financing statements pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code as the beneficiary may require, and to pay for filing the same its the proper public office
or offices, as well as the cost of all lien searches made by filing officers or searching agencies as may be deemed desirable by the beneficiary.
4. To provide and continuously maintain insurance on the buildings now or hereafter erected on the property against loss or damage by fire and other haz-
ards, as the beneficiary may from time to time require, in an amount not less than $----------------------------------------- ---- written by one or more
companies acceptable to the ben-eficiary, with loss payable to the latter. All policies of insurance shall be delivered to the beneficiary as soon as issued. If the grantor
shall fail for any reason to procure any such insurance and to deliver the policies to the beneficiary at least fifteen days prior to the expiration of any policy of insur-
ance now or hereafter placed on the buildings, the beneficiary may procure the same at grantor's expense. The amount collected under any fire or other insurance pol-
icy may be applied by beneficiary upon any indebtedness secured hereby and in such order as beneficiary may determine, or at option of beneficiary the entire amount
so collected, or any part thereof, muy be released to grantor. Such application or release shall not cure or waive any default or notice of default hereunder or invali-
date any act done pursuant to such notice,
5. To keep the property free from construction liens and to pay all taxes, assessments and other charges that may be levied or assessed upon or against the
property before any pan of such taxes, assessments and other charges becomes past due or delinquent and promptly deliver receipts therefor to beneficiary. Should
the grantor fail to make payment of any taxes, assessments, insurance premiums, liens or other charges payable by grantor, either by direct payment or by providing
beneficiary with funds with which to make such payment, beneficiary may, at its option, make payment thereof, and the amount so paid, with interest at the rate set
forth in the note secured hereby, together with the obligations described in paragraphs 6 and 7 of this trust deed, shall be added to and become a part of the debt
secured bythis trust deed, without waiver of any rights arising from breach of any of the covenants hereof. For such payments, with interest as aforesaid, the proper-
ty hereinbefore described, as well as the grantor, shall be bound to the same extent that they are bound for the payment of the obligation herein described. All such
payments shall be immediately due and payable without notice, and the nonpayment thereof shall, at the option of the beneficiary, render all sums secured by this
trust deed immediately due and payable and shall constitute a breach of this trust deed.
6. To pay all costs, fees and expenses of this trust, including the cost of fine search, as well as the other costs and expenses of the trustee incurred in con-
nection with or in enforcing this obligation, and trustee and attorney fees actually incurred.
7. To appear in and defend any action or proceeding purporting to affect the security rights or powers of beneficiary or trustee; and in any suit, action or pro-
ceeding in which the beneficiary or trustee may appear, including any suit for the foreclosure of this deed or any suit or action related to this instrument, including
but not limited to its validity and/or enforceability, to pay all costs and expenses, including evidence of title and the beneficiary's or trustee's attorney fees. The amount
of attorney fees mentioned in this paragraph in all cases shall be fixed by the trial court, and in the event of an appeal from any judgment or decree of the trial court,
grantor further agrees to pay such stun as the appellate court shall adjudge reasonable as the beneficiary's or trustee's attomey fees on such appeal.
It is mutually agreed that:
8. In the event that any portion or all of the property shall be taken under the right of eminent domain or condemnation, beneficiary shall have the right, if it
so elects, to require that all or any portion of the monies payable as compensation for such taking which are in excess of the amount required to pay all reasonable
costs, expenses and attorney fees necessarily paid or incurred by grantor in such proceedings, shall be paid to beneficiary and applied by it first upon any reasonable
costs and expenses and attorney fees, both in the trial and appellate courts, necessarily paid or incurred by beneficiary in such proceedings, and the balance applied
upon the indebtedness secured hereby. Grantor agrees, at its own expense, to take such actions and execute such instruments as shall be necessary in obtaining such
compensation promptly upon beneficiary's request. (OVER)
NOTE: The Trust Deed Act prorins. that the trust" hereunder muat be either an anorney who Is an scar. —.b*, or the Oregon State Be,, a bank, trust company or savings and I-
-...let on auth."aad to do b% oss under the laws of Oregon or the United States, . title Insuren<. company authorized in insure title to real property at this stats, Its subslWarloa,
s11111etea, sgente in branches, aha United Sups or any agency tharant, or an searow aged licensed under ORS 006.505 to 860.696.
Exhibit F Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement Page 1 of 2
0
9. At anytime, and from time to time upon written request of beneficiary, payment of its fees and presentation of this deed and the note for endorsement (in
case of full reconveyances, for cancellation), without affecting the liability of any person for the payment of the indebtedness, trustee may (a) consent to the audting
of any map or plat of the property; (b) join in granting any easement or creating any restriction thereon; (c) join in any subordination or other agreement affecting this
deed or the lien or charge thereof; or (d) reconvey, without warranty, all or any part of the property. The grantee in any reconveyance may be described as the "per-
son or persons legally entitled thereto;' and the recitals therein of any miners or facts shall be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof. Trustee fees for any of the
services mentioned in this paragraph shall be not less than $5.
10. Upon any default by grantor hereunder, beneficiary may, at any time without notice, either in person, by agent, or by a receiver to be appointed by a court,
and without regard to the adequacy of any security for the indebtedness hereby secured, enter upon and take possession of the property or any part themof, in its own
name sue or otherwise collect the rents, issues and profits, including those past due and unpaid, and apply [Ire same, less costs and expenses of operation and collec-
tion, Including reasonable attorney fees, upon any indebtedness secured hereby, and in such order as beneficiary may determine.
11. The entering upon and raking possession of the property, the collection of such rents, issues and profits, or the proceeds of fire and other insurance poli-
cies or compensation or awards for any taking or damage of the property, and the application or release thereof as aforesaid, shall not care or waive auy default or
notice of default hereunder, or invalidate any act done pursuant to such notice.
12. Upon default by grantor in payment of any indebtedness secured hereby or in grantor's performance of any agreement hereunder, time being of the essence
with respect to such payment and/or performance, the beneficiary may declare all sums secured hereby immediately due and payable. [n such event, the beneficiary
may elect to proceed to foreclose this trust deed in equity as a mortgage or direct the trustee to foreclose this trust deed by advertisement and sale, or may direct the
trustee to pursue any other right or remedy, either at law or in equity, which the beneficiary may have. In the event the beneficiary elects to foreclose by advertise-
ment and sale, the beneficiary or the trustee shall execute and cause to be recorded a written notice of default and election to sell the property to satisfy the obliga-
tion secured hereby whereupon the trustee shall fix the time and place of sale, give notice thereof as then required by law and proceed to foreclose this trust deed in
the manner provided in ORS 86.735 to 86.795.
13. After the trustee has commenced foreclosure by advertisement and sale, and at any time prior to 5 days before the date the trustee conducts the sale, the
grantor or any other person so privileged by ORS 86.753 may cure the default or defaults. If the default consists of a failure to pay, when due, sums secured by Ilse
trust deed, the default may be cured by paying the entire amount due at the time of the cure other than such portion as would not then be due had no default occurred.
Any other default that is capable of being cured may be cured by tendering the performance required under the obligation or trust deed. In any case, in addition to
curing the default or defaults, the person effecting the cure shall pay to the beneficiary all costs and expenses actually incurred in enforcing the obligation of the trust
deed, together with trustee and attorney fees not exceeding the amounts provided by law.
14.Othr wise, the sale shall be held on the date and at the time and place designated in the notice of sale or the time to which the sale may be postponed as
provided bylaw. The trustee may sell theProperY either in one parcel or in separate parcels and shall sell the parcel or parcels at auction to the highest bidder for
cash, payable at the time of sale. Trustee shall deliver to the purchaser its deed in form as required by law conveying the property so sold, but without any covenant
or warranty, express or implied. The recitals in the deed of any matters of fact shall be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof. Any person, excluding the trustee,
but including the grantor and beneficiary, may purchase at the sale.
15. When trustee sells pursuant to the powers provided herein, trustee shall apply the proceeds of sale to payment of: (1) the expenses of sale, including the
compensation of the trustee and a reasonable charge by trustee's attorney; (2) to the obligation secured by the oust deed; (3) to all persons having recorded liens sub-
sequent to the interest of the trustee in the trust deed as their interests may appear in the order of their priority; and (4) the surplus, if any, to the grantor, or to any
successor in interest entitled to such surplus.
16. Beneficiary may, from time to time, appoint a successor or successors to any trustee named herein or to any successor trustee appointed hereunder. Upon
such appointment, and without conveyance to the successor trustee, the latter shall be vested with all title, powers and duties conferred upon any trustee herein named
or appointed hereunder. Each such appointment and substitution shall he made by written instrument executed by beneficiary, which, when recorded in the mortgage
records of the county or counties in which the property is situated, shall be conclusive proof of proper appointment of the successor trustee.
17. Trustee accepts this trust when this deed, duly executed and acknowledged, is made a public record as provided by law. Trustee is not obligated to nitrify
any party hereto of pending sale under any other deed of trust or of any action or proceeding in which grantor, beneficiary or trustee shall be a parry unless such action
or proceeding is brought by trustee.
The grantor covenants to and agrees with the beneficiary and the beneficiary's successors in interest that the grantor is lawfully seized in fee simple of the rent
property and has a valid, unencumbered title thereto, except as may be set forth in any addendum or exhibit attached hereto, and that the grantor will warrant and for-
ever defend the same against all persons whomsoever.
WARNING: Unless grantor provides beneficiary with evidence of insurance coverage as required by the contract or loan agree-
ment between them, beneficiary may purchase insurance at grantor's expense to protect beneficiary's interest. This insurance may,
but need not, also protect grantor's interest. If the collateral becomes damaged, the coverage purchased by beneficiary may not pay
any claim made by or against grantor. Grantor may later cancel the coverage by providing evidence that grantor has obtained prop-
erty coverage elsewhere. Grantor is responsible for the cost of any insurance coverage purchased by beneficiary, which cost may be
added to grantor's contract or loan balance. If it is so added, the interest rate on the underlying contract or loan will apply to it. The
effective date of coverage may be the date grantor's prior coverage lapsed or the date grantor failed to provide proof of coverage.
The coverage beneficiary purchases may be considerably more expen$ive than insurance grantor might otherwise obtain alone and
may not satisfy any need for property damage coverage or any mandatory liability insurance requirements imposed by applicable
law.
The grantor warrants that the proceeds of the loan represented by the above described note and this trust deed are (choose one):*
(a) primarily for grantor's personal, family or household purposes (see Important Notice below).
(b) for an organization, or (even if grantor is a natural person) are for business or commercial purposes.
This deed applies to, inures to the benefit of, and hinds all parties hereto, their heirs, legatees, devisees, administrators, executors, personal representatives,
successors and assigns. The term beneficiary shall mean the holder and owner, including pledgee, of the contract secured hereby, whether or not named as a benefi-
ciary herein.
In construing this trust deed, it is understood that the grantor, trustee and/or beneficiary may each be more than one person; that if the context so requires, the
singular shall be taken to mean and include the plural, and that generally all grammatical changes shall be made, assumed and implied to make the provisions here-
of apply equally to corporations and to individuals.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has executed this instrument the day and year first written above.
'IMPORTANT NOTICE: Delete, by lining out, whichever warranty (a) or
(b) is inapplicable. If warranty (a) is applicable and the beneficiary is
a creditor as such word is defined in the Truth -In -Lending Act and
Regulation Z, the beneficiary MUST comply with the Act and
Regulation by making required disclosures. It compliance with the
Act is not required, disregard this notice.
STATE OF OREGON, County of -------- —---------------- — ----- ) ss.
This instrument was acknowledged before me on---------------
bY------------------- ----------------------
This instrument was acknowledged before Ire on ----------------
by------- ------- —-------- —--- —-------- -------------------_ _
of
Notary Public for Oregon
My commission expires -
REOUEST FOR FULL RECONVEYANCE (To be used only when obligations have been paid.)
TO: -------------------------------------------------------Trustee
The undersigned is the legal owner and holder of all indebtedness secured by the foregoing trust deed. All sums secured by the trust deed have been fully paid
and satisfied. You hereby arc directed, on payment to you of any Burns owing to you under the terms of the trust decd or pursuant to statute, to cancel all evidences
of indebtedness secured by the trust deed (which arc delivered to you herewith together with the trust deed) and to reconvey, without warranty, to the parties desig-
naffed by the terms of the trust deed, the estate now held by you under the same. Mail the reconveyance and documents to --------
DATED------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------
Do not lose or destroy this Trust Deed OR THE NOTE which it
secures. --------- —_
--------------------------
Both should be delivered to the trustee for cancellation before Beneficiary
reconveyance is mode.
Exhibit F Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement Page 2 of 2
FOOTHILLS DISTRICT PREDEVELOPMENT AGREEEMENT
Exhibit G - Development Agreement Terms and Conditions - Outline
City of Lake Oswego
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency
Foothills Road Redevelopment LLC
It is the Parties' intent, pursuant to the terms of this Pre -Development Agreement, to pursue the
adoption of a Development Agreement to help further the Framework Plan vision for the Foothills
District and provide a structure for a mutually beneficial partnership between the City of Lake Oswego,
the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency, and Foothills Road Redevelopment, LLC. During the term of
the Pre -Development Agreement, the Parties will diligently negotiate a Development Agreement, not
inconsistent with, but not limited to, the structure presented in this Exhibit G. This Exhibit is intended to
provide a general outline of the issues that the Parties will negotiate, although the Parties also recognize
that this outline may change as additional information is developed over the course of the Framework
Plan Process.
The Development Agreement will be structured around a series of contingent relationships that ensure
the capacity of both the City and the Developer to proceed with key public and private projects in the
area. Initially, the parties will agree to jointly pursue a set of "Basic Contingencies" that are necessary
prerequisites leading to the commencement of public or private development. Until these Basic
Contingencies are satisfied, neither party would be obligated to deliver any of its material development
obligations identified in the Development Agreement.
This Basic Contingency period will provide the City with the assurance that it will not be obligated to
construct any significant infrastructure projects in the District until the private sector is also ready to
begin its development efforts. Once the Basic Contingencies have been satisfied, the Parties will then be
obligated to deliver their Phase I Contingent Projects, consistent with the project schedule, financing
plan, and other terms that will be determined during the course of negotiations.
I. Basic Contingencies
A. Foothills Road Redevelopment properties contributed
B. Funding and Financing Plan for Phase I Contingent Projects Confirmed
C. Streetcar Financing Confirmed
D. Streetcar Alignment and Stop Locations Finalized, including the resolution of appeals, if any
E. Comprehensive Plan Modifications Finalized, including the resolution of appeals, if any
F. Zoning Code Modifications Finalized, including the resolution of appeals, if any
G. Other Code Modifications Finalized (e.g., Design Guidelines, Development Standards,
Subdivision Regulations, etc.), including the resolution of appeals, if any
H. Floodplain Mitigation Strategies Finalized, including the resolution of appeals, if any
I. Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plan IGA executed between City and City of Portland
J. Urban Renewal Area formed or modified to encompass Framework Plan area
K. No New Adverse Regulations Adopted by the City
L. Tentative Plat Approval Received
Exhibit G — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Page 1 of 3
II. Developer Responsibilities
A. Streetcar Funding Participation
B. Subdivision Process
1. Tentative Plat
2. Final Plat
C. Infrastructure Design and Development
1. Overall Project Management
2. Dedication of Rights -of -Way
3. Projects:
a. North Portal
b. Willamette Steps
c. Public Utilities — Upgrades/Extensions
d. Private Utilities — Dry Facilities
e. Internal Streets
D. Phase I Contingent Projects
E. Phase II Contingent Projects
F. Phase III+ Contingent Projects
G. Mix of Housing
H. Public Art
III. City Responsibilities
A. Infrastructure Design and Development (Note: These projects may be broken up into phases to
match developer project phasing)
1. North Portal
2. Willamette Steps
3. Public Utilities — Upgrades/Extensions
4. Private Utilities — Dry Facilities
5. Internal Streets
B. Streetcar Financing and Development
C. Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
D. Park Development
E. Mix of Housing
F. Public Art
Exhibit G — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Page 2 of 3
IV. Shared Responsibilities
A. Development Schedule
a. Work collaboratively on a Development Schedule for the project, including:
b. Completion dates for infrastructure projects
c. Completion dates for private development projects
d. Dependencies between public projects and private projects (contingent
relationships)
B. Financing Plan
1. Establish a funding and financing plan outlining sources and uses for public portions of the
project
2. Where required to trigger a City action/responsibility, Developer to demonstrate financial
capability (e.g., loan commitment letters, etc.)
C. Public Outreach
1. Collaborate on public outreach efforts, especially during zoning and entitlement process
2. Jointly brief City Council/Mayor at key points in the development process
Exhibit G — Foothills District Predevelopment Agreement
Page 3 of 3
RESOLUTION 10-34
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
DECLARING OFFICIAL INTENT TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES
FROM URBAN RENEWAL FUNDS, INCLUDING PROCEEDS OF INDEBTEDNESS.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, that:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds:
(a) The City intends to incur expenditures in connection with the planning for
the Foothills area of Lake Oswego pursuant to a Foothills District Predevelopment
Agreement (the "Agreement") authorized pursuant to Resolution 10-33;
(b) The services and work product obtained pursuant to the Agreement will
include planning for, and will be directly associated with and essential to, the potential
expansion of the existing Urban Renewal Area ("URA") administered by the Lake
Oswego Redevelopment Agency ("LORA") or the potential creation of a new URA to be
administered by LORA, for amendment of the urban renewal plan for the existing URA
or creation of a new urban renewal plan for a new URA, and for projects to be
accomplished under either such plan; and
(c) The City expects to pay certain expenditures (the "Reimbursement
Expenditures") in connection with the Agreement and the planning described in section
(b) prior to the issuance of indebtedness for the purpose of financing costs associated
with the new or expanded URA on a long-term basis; and
(d) Upon creation of a new or expanded URA, the City reasonably expects
LORA to issue bond anticipation notes, general obligation bonds, revenue bonds or other
debt obligations and that certain of the proceeds of such bond anticipation notes, general
obligation bonds, revenue bonds or other debt obligations, and potentially other funds of
the new or expanded URA, will be used to reimburse the Reimbursement Expenditures;
and
(e) Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations (the "Treasury Regulations")
requires the City to declare its reasonable official intent to reimburse prior expenditures
for the planning and other activities described in section (b) with proceeds of a
subsequent borrowing.
Section 2. Purpose of Resolution. This Resolution is adopted for purposes of
establishing compliance with the requirements of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations.
This Resolution does not bind the City or LORA to make any expenditure, incur any
indebtedness, or proceed with the planning and other activities under section (b) of the findings.
Section 3. Declaration of Intent. The City hereby declares its official intent to be
reimbursed for the Reimbursement Expenses with proceeds of bond anticipation notes, general
Page 1- Resolution 10-34
obligation bonds, revenue bonds or other debt obligations, as well as other LORA funds,
including funds of the new or expanded URA.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption by the Council.
Adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on this 15th day
of June, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Jack D. Hoffinan
Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JtDavid Powell
City Attorney
Page 2- Resolution 10-34
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the Lake Oswego City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: David Powell, City Attorney A k%
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2549 — Amending LOC Article 50.44 (Flood Management Area) and Revising the
Flood Management Area Map
DATE: June 10, 2010
ACTION
Adoption of Ordinance 2549 -- finalizing the City Council's tentative decision to amend Article 50.44 of the
Lake Oswego Code relating to the Flood Management Area and to revise the City's Flood Management Area
Map.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the recommendation by the Planning
Commission to make certain amendments to Article 50.44 of the Lake Oswego Code relating to the Flood
Management Area, and to revise the City's Flood Management Area Map. Attached Ordinance 2549
finalizes the City Council's tentative decision to adopt the recommended amendments and map changes.
DISCUSSION
Attached Ordinance 2549 revises the Flood Management Area Map to include new information from a
detailed study of Springbrook Creek. The map revisions respond to a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA to
reconfigure the floodplain and establish new base flood elevations for a 2,030 -foot reach of Springbrook
Creek. The Ordinance also amends the Code to clarify when City Flood Management Map amendments are
required. These Code changes enable applicants to bypass the City map amendment process when FEMA
procedures for amending Flood Insurance Rate Maps are followed. Finally the Ordinance moves several
flood -related definitions from the general definition Article (50.02) to the flood management section of the
Code (50.44).
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council implement its May 18, 2010 tentative decision by enacting
Ordinance 2549 revising the Flood Management Area Map and amending the text of Article 50.44 of the
Lake Oswego Code relating to the Flood Management Area.
ATTACHMENT
Ordinance No. 2549
ORDINANCE No. 2549
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AMENDING LOC ARTICLE 50.44
(FLOOD MANAGEMENT AREA) REGARDING APPLICABILITY, MAP AMENDMENTS,
AND THE FLOOD MANAGEMENT AREA FOR A PORTION OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK,
AND ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 10-0003-1731)
WHEREAS, a notice of 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 Lake Oswego City Council on May 18, 2010 to review
the Planning Commission's March 22, 2010 recommendation to amend LOC Chapter 50 of the Lake
Oswego Community Development Code and LOC Appendix 50.44.005-B; and
WHEREAS, LOC 50.44.015 specifies that, where amendments to the Flood Management Area Map are
due to changes to the Special Flood Hazard Areas depicted on Flood Insurance Rate maps on the National
Flood Insurance Program, the City amendment would be dependent on successful compliance with the
map revision process of the National Flood Insurance Program (40 CFR 65); and
WHEREAS, FEMA has approved a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for a portion of Springbrook Creek,
published their decision, and the 90 day appeal period ended on April 14, 2010, after which the LOMR
became effective; and
WHEREAS, these amendments are consistent with LOC Article 50.44 (Flood Management Area), and
Chapter 7, (Flood Hazards) of the City of Lake Oswego's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan.
WHEREAS, the purpose of the following Code amendments are to comply with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency regulations relating to flood insurance.
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions, LU 10-0003-1731 attached as
Exhibit 1.
Section 1. Section 50.02.005 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in
double underlined type and deleting the text shown in stFikethr-eugh type, as follows:
50.02.005 Definitions.
For the purposes of this Code certain terms and words are defined as follows: the words "used for"
include "designed for" and vice -versa; words used in the present tense include the future, the singular tense
includes the plural and vice -versa; the word "shall" is always mandatory; the word "may" is discretionary;
the masculine gender includes the feminine gender, except as otherwise provided. The following terms
shall mean:
100 -Year Flood. See LOC 50.44.012. "Flood, Base".
. )at. Fill fnater-ial ineludes, but is fiet lifnited te, sand, gr-avel, seil, reek; and iner-ganie building
rna4e -ials..
Ordinance 2549
Page 1 of 6
Section 2. Section 50.44.005 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in
double underlined type and deleting the text shown in'-i'��= type, as follows:
50.44.005 Applicability.
4 --This Article shall apply to all development within the "Flood Management Area" except if a
development or a parcel is the subiect of a Letter of Man Amendment (LOMA) or Letter of Man Revision
Fill (LOMB Fl issued by FEMA at the request of the property Qvme—r-
2.
Th Fl d Management ., Areeludes•
n OR and
The Reed Study fer- Glaekamas i
n
, s
Insufanee Study and the FIRM are en file at the NaFhaing Division.
b. The area of inundation by the Febfuai-y 1996 fleed aleng the Willamette R4veF.
Ordinance 2549
Page 2 of 6
Section 3. Article 50.44 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended to add new Section 50.44.012 as
follows:
50.44.012 Definitions.
For purposes of this Article, the following definitions shall apply:
Filling (fill). A deposit of material by artificial means, generally for purposes of development or
redevelopment. Fill material includes, but is not limited to, sand, gravel, soil, rock, and inorganic
building materials.
Flood or Flooding. A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally
dry land area from the overflow of inland waters or the unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff of
surface waters from any source.
Flood, Base. The flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.
The 'Base Flood" is also known as the " 100 -year flood".
Flood Boundary and Floodway Map. The official FEMA map of a community, issued by the Federal
Insurance Administrator, where the boundaries of the floodway and floodway fringe have been
designated.
Flood Hazard Area, Special or "Areas of Special Flood Hazards". Area of special flood hazard shall
be defined as stated in 44 Code of Federal Regulations Sec. 59.1:
The land in the floodplain within a community subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of
flooding in any given year. The area may be designated as Zone A on the FHBM. After
detailed ratemaking has been completed in preparation for publication of the flood
insurance rate map, Zone A usually is refined into Zones A, AO, AH, A 1-30, AE, A99,
AR, AR/A 1-30, ARAE, AR/AO, AR/AH, AR/A, VO, or V 1-30, VE, or V.
or as such definition is amended by the Federal Insurance Administration after June 3, 2008. The term
"special flood hazard area" is synonymous in meaning with the phrase "area of special flood hazard".
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The official map on which the Federal Insurance Administrator
has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the risk premium zones applicable to the
community.
Flood Management Area. The area depicted on the Flood Management Area Maps, LOC Appendix
50.44.012 -A -D. The Flood Management Area Map shows:
a. FEMA Mapped Areas:
i. The areas of special flood hazard, as identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a
scientific and engineering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Study for Clackamas County, OR and
Incorporated Cities" dated June 17, 2008,
ii. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), as issued by FEMA at the time of last amendment of
the Flood Management Area Map was effective pursuant to LOC 50.44.015, and
iii. The Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps created for the National Flood Insurance Program
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA);
which are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this ordinance
b. The area inundated during the February 1996 flood along the Willamette River, the Tualatin
River, and the Oswego Canal to the south of Bryant Road.
Ordinance 2549
Page 3 of 6
Flood -Proofing. To make a structure watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage
of water and with structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic
loads and effects of buoyancy.
Floodway. The area within the floodplain which includes the channel of a river or other watercourse
and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without
cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot.
Floodway Fringe. The area of the floodplain lying outside the floodway.
Section 4. Section 50.44.015 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in
double underlined type and deleting the text shown in sxrikethfeugh type, as follows:
50.44.015 Map Administration.
Amendments to the Map. The purpose of this section is to provide a process for amending the Flood
Management Area Map, LOC Appendix 50.44,012 -A ---D.
1. Revision of FIRM If amendments to the Flood Management Area Map are due to weukkesult-ia
changes to the Special Flood Hazards Areas depicted on Flood Insurance Rate Maps of the National Flood
Insurance Program or by Letter of Map Revision [but not including Letter of Map Revision - Fill (LOMR-
E)J, the Gity-amendment shall be dependent upon successful compliance with the map wand
revision process of the National Flood Insurance Program (40 CFR 65).
When FEMA amends the FIRM including as a result of a Letter of May Revision (LORI but
not including by a LOMB -F, a public hearing shall be held and notice given in the same manner as for a
map error in subsection (21 below. The amendment of the Flood Management Area Map shall be
recommended by the Planning Commission and amended by the City Council upon finding that the man
revision process of the National Flood Insurance Program (40 CFR 65) was followed and that FEMA has
amended the FIRM by the LOMR process
2. rro
a. Within 90 days of receiving information establishing a possible error in the existence or
location of a Flood Management Area, the City Manager shall provide notice of a public hearing at which
the Planning Commission will review the error for compliance with LOC Article 50.44. Notice of the
hearing shall be sent to property owners who have property that will be included or withdrawn from the
Flood Management area as a result of the change. Notice shall also be sent to owners of property within
100 feet of the affected properties. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a
recommendation to the City Council as to whether the Flood Management Area boundaries should be
changed.
b,_ -3 -.--The City Council shall amend the Flood Management Area Map if the information
demonstrates that there is an error er- that t sef the F leed Management Ai -ea have e'hangea
L-_
e Flood Management Area Map.
Section 5. Section 50.79.020 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in
double underlined type and deleting the text shown in strip type, as follows
50.79.020 Minor Development Classification.
1. A Minor Development is a development which requires a permit from the City that requires a
more discretionary level of review than a ministerial decision. "Minor Development" is intended to
include decisions defined as "limited land use decisions" pursuant to ORS 197.015 (12).
2. "Minor Development" includes:
a. In the DD zone:
Ordinance 2549
Page 4 of 6
i. Construction of new single family detached dwellings, duplexes, multi -family dwellings,
zero lot line dwellings or exterior modification of a structure containing a non -conforming use that requires
a building permit;
ii. Expansion or reconstruction that result in a change of use (e.g. from single family to
duplex) or in an expansion of floor area of an existing structure by more than 50%.
iii. Any exterior modification of a single family detached dwelling that reduces setbacks
pursuant to LOC 50.09.025 (5).
b. Construction or exterior modification of a detached single family structure, duplex, zero lot
line dwelling or a structure accessory to such structures which:
i. Does not qualify as a ministerial decision pursuant to LOC 55.79.010 (2)(b)(i) through
(viii); or
ii. Requires one or more variances.
c. Involves a determination by the City Manager that a use not expressly permitted in the zone
may be allowed pursuant to the considerations contained in LOC 50.04.015. In such case, the required
notice shall include a description of the proposed use and the reasons for the City Manager's determination.
d. Involves an improvement to an existing school facility that will increase the capacity of the
school facility, generate additional traffic, or generate significant additional noise or other negative impact
on the surrounding neighborhood.
e. Secondary dwelling units.
f. Construction of a structure other than a detached single family dwelling, duplex, zero lot line
dwelling or accessory structure, or an exterior modification of such a structure which does not qualify as a
ministerial development pursuant to LOC 50.79.010 (2)(c).
g. Lot line adjustments which would increase allowable density on the site.
h. Partitions.
i. Subdivisions (with or without a Planned Development overlay).
j. Review of development phases subject to an ODPS.
k. A change of use from one permitted use to another that increases on-site parking or loading
requirements or which changes access requirements pursuant to LOC Article 50.55 or that will result in the
construction of private streets, driveways.
1. Determining an RC District protection area pursuant to LOC 50.16.055.
m. Construction of a structure described in LOC 50.60.005 (2).
n. Fill in the floodway or fill in quantities greater than 10 cubic yards when located elsewhere in
the Flood Management Area, excluding fill for single family detached dwellings, duplexes, zero lot line
dwellings, water dependent uses, or related accessory structures when the fill is located within the
floodplain of Oswego Lake, as provided by LOC Article 50.44
o. Outright permitted residential dwellings, other than in the DD zone, when processed through
the Residential Infill Design Review process (LOC Article 50.72).
p. Variances, Class 1 or Class 2.
q. Construction of any public or private road, or major transportation or utility facility within a
delineated RP District or buffer or RC protection area.
r. Permitted uses in the PNA zone that are not listed as exempt in LOC 50.79.005 or classified
as a ministerial use.
3. Minor developments are initially decided by the City Manager subject to notice, the opportunity to
request a hearing, and appeal as provided by LOC Article 50.81.
[Cross -Reference: Greenway Management District.]
Section 7. LOC Chapter 50 - Appendices. LOC Chapter 50 -Appendix is hereby amended as follows:
LOC Appendix 50.44.005-A is renumbered as LOC Appendix 50.44.012-A;
LOC Appendix 50.44.005-C is renumbered as LOC Appendix 50.44.012-C;
LOC Appendix 50.44.005-D is renumbered as LOC Appendix 50.44.012-D; and
Ordinance 2549
Page 5 of 6
LOC Appendix 50.44.005-B, Flood Management Area map is replaced and renumbered as LOC
Appendix 50.44.012-B as shown in Exhibit 2.
Section 8. 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.
Enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the day
of , 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Dated:
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APP OVED AITO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
Ordinance 2549
Page 6 of 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
EXHIBIT 1
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
A REQUEST TO AMEND THE FLOOD ) LU 10-0003-1731
MANAGEMENT MAP AND THE TEXT OF ) (City of Lake Oswego)
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE )
RELATING TO THE FLOOD MANAGEMENT) FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
AREA [ORDINANCE No. 2549] )
NATURE OF PROCEEDING
This matter came before the City Council pursuant to a recommendation by the Lake
Oswego Planning Commission to amend the text of the Lake Oswego Community Development
Code, Chapter 50, Articles 50.02 (Definitions), 50.44 (Flood Management Area), and 50.79
(Development Type and Review Criteria). The Planning Commission also recommended
amendment of the Flood Management Area Map in response to a Letter of Map Revision from
FEMA to reconfigure the floodplain and establish new base flood elevations for a 2,030 -foot
reach of Springbrook Creek.
HEARINGS
The Planning Commission held public hearings and considered this application at its
meetings of March 22 and April 12 2010. The City Council held a public hearing to consider the
Planning Commission's recommendation on May 18, 2010.
CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement
Policies 1, 2 and 5
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 10-0003-1731) Lake Oswego, OR 97034
1 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 10-0003-1726] (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
M.
C
101
Goal 7: Natural Disasters and Hazards
Section 1 Land Use Policies and Regulations, Policy 23
Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan
Title 4: Industrial and Other Employment Areas, Sections 3.07.410-3.07.450
City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code
LOC 50.01.010
LOC 50.05.005
LOC 50.05.010
LOC 50.79.030
LOC 50.77.007
LOC 50.77.030
LOC 50.82.005-.020
LOC 50.83.005-.040
LOC 50.75.005
LOC 50.75.010
LOC 50.75.015
LOC 50.79.020
LOC 50.79.025
EXHIBIT 1
Purpose
Zoning Districts
Zoning Map
Major Development
Burden of Proof
Application Procedures
Review of Major Development Applications and Appeals
Hearings before a Hearing Body
Legislative Decision Defined
Criteria for Legislative Decision
Required Notice to DLCD
Planning Commission Recommendation Required
City Council Review and Decision
Metro Urban Growth Functional Plan, Title 3 — Water Quality and Flood Management
FINDINGS AND REASONS
1. The City Council incorporates the staff Council Report, dated May 3, 2010 for LU 10-
28 0003 (with all exhibits), the March 22, 2010 Staff Report to the Planning Commission (with all
29 exhibits), together with all supplemental reports, and the Findings and Conclusions of the
30 Planning Commission in this matter as support for its decision. To the extent they are consistent
31 with the approval granted herein, the City Council also adopts by reference its oral deliberations
32 in this matter as further findings in support of this decision.
33
34
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 10-0003-1731) Lake Oswego, OR 97034
2 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 10-0003-17261 (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
EXHIBIT 1
CONCLUSION
2 The City Council concludes that LU 10-0003-1731 complies with all applicable criteria,
including all applicable Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Policies.
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 10-0003-1731) Lake Oswego, OR 97034
3 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 10-0003-1726] (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
F,A
wy
ZEN
—MIS
ca
hk
4.-
Kj--
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the Lake Oswego City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: David Powell, City Attorney
702000
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2552 — Limiting the size of delicatessens, bakeries and restaurants in the Campus
Research and Development (CR&D) Zone to 2,000 square feet of floor area
DATE: June 10, 2010
ACTION
Adoption of Ordinance 2552 -- finalizing the City Council's tentative decision to amend Section 50.11.010 of
the Community Development Code to limit the size of delicatessens, bakeries and restaurants in the CR&D
Zone.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2010, following a public hearing, the City Council made a tentative decision to accept the
recommendation of the Planning Commission by amending the Community Development Code to limit
delicatessens, bakeries and restaurants in the Campus Research and Development Zone to 2,000 square
feet of floor area. Attached Ordinance 2552 finalizes this tentative decision.
DISCUSSION
Title 4 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, relating to industrial and other employment
areas, requires that retail uses on Employment Land be limited to 60,000 square feet of floor area or less.
Currently delicatessens, bakeries and restaurants have no size limitations in the CR&D Zone. Staff
recommended that a limit of 20,000 square feet be imposed to be consistent with the existing 20,000
square foot limit on retail stores in that zone. The proposed Code amendments will also support the City's
request that certain areas in the CR&D Zone that are currently designated as Industrial Land on the Title 4
map be re -designated as Employment Land.
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council finalize its May 18, 2010 tentative decision by enacting Ordinance
2552 limiting the size of delicatessens, bakeries and restaurants in the CR&D Zone.
ATTACHMENT
Ordinance 2552
ORDINANCE No. 2552
AN ORDINANCE OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING LOC CHAPTER 50
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE), SECTION 50.11.010 TO LIMIT THE SQUARE
FOOTAGE OF DELICATESSENS, BAKERIES, AND RESTAURANTS IN THE CAMPUS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (CR&D) ZONE, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 09-0034-
1732).
Whereas, the City of Lake Oswego is required by Metro to demonstrate compliance with Title 4
(Industrial and Other Employment Areas) of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan; and
Whereas, Title 4 requires the City to impose limits on the square footage of retail uses in designated
areas; and
Whereas, the Community Development Code does not currently limit the square footage of certain retail
uses in areas regulated by Title 4;
NOW THEREFORE, the City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions, LU 09-0034-1732 attached as
Exhibit 1.
Section 2. Section 50.11.010 (2)(C), (E) and 4 (A) of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by
adding the text shown in double underlined type as follows:
50.11.0 10 Uses.
2. Retail Sales - Food:
C. Delicatessen, no table service.
]Uses:P
Special District Limitations
for Permitted Use
Permitted
Uses permitted Uses
CR& z n
uses.
upon the grant of specifically
approval of a prohibited.
conditional use
pe it.
2. Retail Sales - Food:
C. Delicatessen, no table service.
]Uses:P
Special District Limitations
for Permitted Use
NC, GC, HC, OC, EC, CR&D and MC
(Not to exceed 20.000 sq. ft. floor area in
CR& z n
Ordinance No. 2552
Page 1 of 2
E. Bakery - where baked foods manufactured elsewhere are sold on the premises.
4. Retail Sales - Restaurants, Drinking Places:
A. Restaurants, with or without associated lounge.
Uses:
p
Special District Limitations
for Permitted Use
NC, GC, HC, OC, EC, CR&D and MC
(Not to exceed 20.000 sa. ft. floor area in
CR&D zone -
4. Retail Sales - Restaurants, Drinking Places:
A. Restaurants, with or without associated lounge.
Uses:
P
Sneeial District Limitations
for Permitted Use..
NC, GC, HC, OC, EC, CR&D and MC
(Not to exceed 20.000 sa. ft. floor area in
CR&D zone -
Enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the _ day
of '2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Dated:
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APP OVED ORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
Ordinance No. 2552
Page 2 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
A REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT
OF THE LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 50
RELATED TO CAMPUS RESEARCH
AND DEVELOPMENT (CR&D) ZONE
[ORDINANCE No. 2552]
NATURE OF PROCEEDING
EXHIBIT 1
LU 09-0034-1732
(City of Lake Oswego)
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
This matter came before the City Council pursuant to a recommendation by the Lake
Oswego Planning Commission to amend the text of the Lake Oswego Community Development
Code, Chapter 50, Section 50.11.010 to limit the following uses in the Campus Research and
Development (CR&D) Zone to 20,000 square feet:
1. Delicatessen — with no table service.
2. Bakery — where baked foods manufactured elsewhere are sold on the premises; and
3. Restaurants — with or without associated lounges.
The text amendments will bring the CR&D Zone into compliance with Metro Title 4.
HEARINGS
The Planning Commission held public hearings and considered this application at its
meetings of February 22, 2010 and March 8, 2010. The City Council held a public hearing to
consider the Planning Commission's recommendation on May 18, 2010.
CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan:
Goal 2: Land Use Planning, Section 1, Land Use Policies and Regulations, Policy 23
Goal 11: Economic Development, Policies 20 and 21
B. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0034-1732) Lake Oswego, OR 97034
1 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0034-17221 (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
EXHIBIT 1
1
2 C
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Citv of Lake Oswego Community Development Code:
LOC 50.75.005
Legislative Decision Defined.
LOC 50.75.015
Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.76.020
Jurisdiction of Hearing Body
LOC 50.77
Application Requirements
LOC 50.79.030
Major Development Classification
LOC 50.83
Hearings Before a Hearing Body
FINDINGS AND REASONS
The City Council incorporates the staff Council Report, dated April 27, 2010 for LU 09-
0034 (with all exhibits), the February 10, 2010 Staff Report to the Planning Commission (with
all exhibits), together with all supplemental reports, and the Findings and Conclusions of the
Planning Commission in this matter as support for its decision. To the extent they are consistent
with the approval granted herein, the City Council also adopts by reference its oral deliberations
in this matter as further findings in support of this decision.
The proposed CR&D Zone amendments, which limit delicatessens, bakeries, and
restaurants in the Campus Research and Development (CR&D) Zone to 20,000 square feet of
floor area, will bring the zone into compliance with the Employment Land requirements of
Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Title 4 (Industrial and Other Employment
Areas), which requires that retail uses be limited to 60,000 square feet or less. Currently,
delicatessens, bakeries and restaurants have no size limitations in the CR&D Zone. The proposed
amendments provide the opportunity for an administrative amendment to the Metro Title 4 map
to address an inconsistency with the City zoning map. Metro's map currently designates a
portion of the zone as Industrial Land. The proposed Code change will support the City's
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0034-1732)
2 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0034-1722]
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
(503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
EXHIBIT 1
1 request to amend the Title 4 map to apply the Employment Land designation to these properties,
2 so that non -industrial office commercial development may continue to be allowed.
3 CONCLUSION
4 The City Council concludes that LU 09-0034-1732 complies with all applicable criteria
5 and is consistent with applicable Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Policies and with Metro
6 Title 4.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0034-1732)
3 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0034-1722]
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
(503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the Lake Oswego City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: David Powell, City Attorney ,1�w
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2546 — Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District
DATE: June 10, 2010
ACTION
flos
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
Adoption of Ordinance 2546 -- finalizing the City Council's tentative decision to implement the Glenmorrie
Neighborhood Plan by establishing the Glenmorrie Overlay District.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the recommendation by the Planning
Commission to adopt certain Community Development Code amendments establishing the Glenmorrie R-
15 Overlay District. Attached Ordinance 2546 finalizes the City Council's tentative decision to accept and
implement the recommendation, with certain modifications.
DISCUSSION
Attached Ordinance 2546 differs from the draft ordinance that was presented at the May 18, 2010 public
hearing in a number of ways.
A. Hardscape
The earlier version of the ordinance established a general Community Development Code definition for
"hardscape" It also included a provision specific to the Glenmorrie neighborhood that limited "hardscape"
to no more than 50% of any lot. However, this neighborhood -specific provision included some adjustments
to the term "hardscape" as used in the context of the coverage limitation. The proposal was structured this
way in anticipation of other pending neighborhood plan overlays that may also use the general term
"hardscape," but which would not necessarily have the adjustments that the Glenmorrie neighborhood
desired for its unique coverage limitation.
Page 2
The City Council found that defining hardscape generally, but also adjusting the definition for the purpose
of the Glenmorrie limitation, was confusing and unnecessarily complex. It directed that the proposed
general definition be eliminated and that the Glenmorrie-specific limitation be drafted so as to specify
those elements that cannot exceed the coverage limitation — without referring to them as "hardscape."
Per the City Council's direction, attached Ordinance 2546 does not create a general definition of hardscape.
Section 50.08B.020 establishes the Glenmorrie Overlay's 50% coverage limitation by listing those elements
that are limited (and the exceptions) — rather than using a defined term to describe them. The illustrated
examples of constructed ponds and mixed paving areas that would have accompanied the general
definition are instead referenced in this section (and will appear in an appendix).
B. Plant Unit descriptions
The Glenmorrie Overlay requires screening to be installed consistent with a formula based upon "Plant
Units" The originally -presented ordinance included a chart listing five options: a Standard Plant Unit, plus
alternatives A through D. Following the hearing and tentative decision on the Glenmorrie Overlay, the City
Council approved certain Community Development Code changes under Ordinance No. 2524 pursuant to
recommendations of the Infill Task Force. These Infill amendments included a Plant Unit Chart with four
alternatives, A though D, which are identical to the originally -proposed Glenmorrie Standard Unit and
Glenmorrie alternatives A through C. To avoid unnecessary duplication in the Code, attached Ordinance
2546 references and incorporates Infill alternatives A through D, together with an additional Glenmorrie
Alternative E (formerly Glenmorrie's Alternative D).
C. Clarification of the Extent of Plantings
As directed by the City Council, proposed Section 50.08B.025(2)(b)(i)(A) has been edited to specify that,
where a structure exists on an abutting lot, Plant Units must be installed for a distance that parallels the
length of the proposed new retaining wall or structure plus the length of the structure on the abutting lot.
D. Side Yard Setback Plane
The originally -proposed Glenmorrie Overlay included a section establishing a side yard setback plane for
that neighborhood. The Infill Ordinance adopted after the Glenmorrie public hearing established an
identical, city-wide side yard setback plane. To avoid unnecessary duplication, the Glenmorrie-specific
provision has been deleted from attached Ordinance 2546.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council implement its tentative decision by enacting Ordinance 2546
establishing the Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District.
ATTACHMENT
Ordinance No. 2546
ORDINANCE No. 2546
AN ORDINANCE OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAPTER 50 OF
THE LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ADD NEW ARTICLE
50.08B RELATING TO THE GLENMORRIE R-15 OVERLAY DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING
FINDINGS LU 09-0043-1733.
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. Section 50.05.005 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended to add the new text shown in
bold, underlined type as follows:
Section 50.05.005 Zoning Districts.
The City is divided into the following zoning designations:
,x
• �-. . estdent� .. - ' - -
:" _ Desi na, . on
Residential — Low Density
R-15
Residential — Low Density
R-10
Residential — Low Density
R-.7.5
Residential — Medium Density F
R-6
Residential — Medium Density
R-5
Residential — 11igh Density
R-3
Residential — High Density (WLG)
R-2.5
Residential — High Density
R-2
Residential — High Density
R-0
Waterfront Cabanas
WR
Design District Old Town
DD
. �',�� ` e � esi enfi�' ,ommer:.�i _ __
•__ �D_es aho_ . :>
Residential — High Density (WLG)
R -2.5/W
WLG Office Commercial/Town/ Home
Residential
OC/R-2.5
WLG Office Commercial / Neighborhood
Commercial
OC/NC
Commercial. ,. _.
Ma Desi nation
Neighborhood Commercial
NC
General Commercial
GC
Highway Commercial
HC
Office Campus
OC
East End General Commercial
EC
Campus Institutional
CI
Campus Research & Development
CR&D
Mixed Commerce
MC
Industrial Map Designation
Industrial I
Industrial Park IP
Public Use Map Designation
Ordinance No. 2546
Page 1 of 4
Public Function
PF
Overlays
Map Designation
Planned Development
PD
Resource Conservation
RC
Resource Protection
RP
Willamette River Greenway
GM
Neighborhood Overlays
Glenmorrie R-15 Overlav District
GO
Section 2. The Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended to add a new Article 50.08B as follows:
Article 50.08B Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District.
50.08B.005 Purpose.
The purpose of the overlay is to ensure that new residential development occurs in a way that is
compatible with the unique character of the Glenmorrie Neighborhood by not adversely impacting the
privacy of adjacent neighbors and by preserving the country character.
50.08B.010 Applicability.
This article applies to all land within the Glenmorrie Overlay District, as shown on LOC Appendix
50.08B.010 -A.
50.08B.015 Relationship to Other Standards.
To the extent that any requirement of this Article imposes a regulation relating to the same matter as a
regulation in LOC Article 50.08, this Article shall prevail.
50.08B.020 Limitation on Certain Elements.
No more than 50% of a lot shall be covered with any of the following elements: structures, patios,
paving or impervious walks. However, pervious decks and natural -appearing constructed ponds shall not
be included within this limitation. Where a paved area contains mixed non -plant and plant elements, only
the non -plant portions of the area shall be included within this limitation. (See LOC Appendix
50.08B.020 -A for illustrations of natural -appearing constructed ponds and paved areas with mixed non -
plant and plant elements.)
50.08B.025. Plantings and Buffering.
1. Applicability: A Plantings and Buffering Plan shall be submitted when a building permit is
required for:
a. Construction of new structures.
b. Remodeling that increases the footprint of an existing structure by more than 400 square feet;
or
c. Construction of a retaining wall 4 feet tall or higher.
2. Plantings and Buffering Plan
a. At the time of submission of the building permit application, the applicant shall file either a
Plantings and Buffering Plan or a waiver under subsection (c) below.
b. The Plantings and Buffering Plan shall meet the following requirements:
i. Plant Units, as described in LOC Appendix 50.07-G, Standard Units A through D, plus
Alternative Glenmorrie Standard Unit E consisting of 25 — 3 feet high shrubs, shall be provided parallel
and adjacent to the side yard and rear yard planes of the proposed structure or retaining wall as follows:
Ordinance No. 2546
Page 2 of 4
(A) If a structure exists on an abutting lot: one plant unit for every 50 linear feet of the
side yard and rear yard planes of the proposed retaining wall or structure plus the abutting plane of the
structure on the abutting lot;
(B) If no structure exists on an abutting lot: one plant unit for every 50 linear feet of the
side yard and rear yard planes of the proposed retaining wall or structure extended 10 feet beyond the
structure or retaining wall.
(See illustration in LOC Appendix 50.08B.025 -A)
ii. Where the linear measurement of the side or rear yard plane (plus the 10 -foot extension,
if required) is less than 50 feet, or where dividing the linear measurement into 50 -foot segments results in
a remainder segment of less than 50 feet, the planting density for that plane or remainder segment shall
consist of a corresponding percentage of a Planting Unit. If the percentage results in a fraction of a plant,
the fraction shall be rounded up to the next whole number.
iii. Where required Plant Unit areas overlap, the plants in the overlapped area may satisfy
both Plant Unit requirements.
iv. Existing plants may be used to fulfill Plant Unit requirements.
v. Native plants are encouraged (Consult Lake Oswego's Master Plant List).
c. Waiver. If the abutting property owner consents in writing, a Plantings and Buffering Plan
shall not be required for the side or rear yard of the proposed structure or retaining wall abutting the
consenting owner's property.
4. Installation and Maintenance of Plantings.
a. Plantings consistent with the Plantings and Buffering Plan shall be installed prior to the
earlier of:
i. A request for final inspection;
ii. Occupancy of the dwelling or substantial use of the structure; or
iii. Completion of the retaining wall.
b. The required plantings shall be successfully maintained for a period of not less than three
years.
Section 3. The Appendix to the Lake Oswego Community Development Code (LOC Chapter 50) is
hereby amended by adding LOC Appendix 50.08B.010 -A, as shown on attached Exhibit 1, LOC
Appendix 50.08B.020 -A, as shown in Exhibit 2, and LOC Appendix 50.08B.025 -A as shown on attached
Exhibit 3.
Section 4. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions LU09-0043-1733 attached as
Exhibit 4.
Enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the
day of , 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Ordinance No. 2546
Page 3 of 4
ABSTAIN:
Jack D. Hoffman
Dated:
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED AS 3RM:
David D. Powell
City Attorney
Ordinance No. 2546
Page 4 of 4
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
LOC APPENDIX 50.08B.010 -A
Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District
te-
EXHIBIT 1
Glenmorrie Neighborhood N
Glenmor ie R-15 Overlay Distract
0 MD 400 500 WO 7,000
ayd�w0. -rano Fee +
LOC APPENDIX 50.0813.020-A
Illustrations:
Mixed Paved Areas and Natural -Appearing Ponds
r.�''""'",�.
EXB"IT 2
•k
}
•i TlY
We 1: 4-&
LOC APPENDIX 50.08B.025 -A
Illustration: Plant Unit Placement
�-tinC Snwctwae
10 fejt
Vwmt Lot
3+Fcsr ,Suver-r',�
10 feet
FRCNE YARD
01 Plaut Unit $ Unit required due W vacant lot
Azea where units are required
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
A REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT
OF THE LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ADD
THE GLENMORRIE OVERLAY DISTRICT
LOC ARTICLE 50.0813
[ORDINANCE No. 2546]
NATURE OF PROCEEDING
EXHIBIT 4
LU 09-0043-1733
(City of Lake Oswego and)
Glenmorrie Neighborhood)
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
This legislative proceeding is before the City Council pursuant to a recommendation by
the Lake Oswego Planning Commission to implement the Glenmorrie Neighborhood Plan by
adding new section 50.0813 to the Lake Oswego Community Development Code, creating the
Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District.
HEARINGS
The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application on
21 March 8, 2010. The City Council considered the Planning Commission's recommendation at a
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
study session on April 6, 2010 and at a public hearing on May 18, 2010.
CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
Goal 2: Land Use Planning
Section 1 Land Use Policies and Regulations, Policy 4b and 24
Section 2 Community Design and Aesthetics, Policy 1
Special District Plans
Glenmorrie Neighborhood Plan
Goal 2: Land Use Planning: Residential Goal and Policy 3
Goal 10: Housing: Goal and Policy 1, 3
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0043-1733)
1 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0043-1724]
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
(503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
EXHIBIT 4
B. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan
Title 1: Accommodation of Growth
C. Oregon Statewide Planning Goals
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement, Goal 2: Land Use Planning
D. Lake Oswego Development Code Procedural Requirements
LOC 50.01.010 Purpose
LOC 50.75 Legislative Decisions
LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decisions Defined
LOC 50.75.1505 Criteria for a Legislative Decision
LOC 50.75.015 Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.75.020 Planning Commission Recommendation Required
LOC 50.75.025 City Council Review and Decision
LOC 50.75.030 Effective Date of Legislative Decision
FINDINGS AND REASONS
As support for its decision, the City Council incorporates the staff Council Reports, dated
May 4, 2010 and March 29, 2010 for LU 09-0043 (with all exhibits), and the March 8, 2010
Staff Report to the Planning Commission (with all exhibits), together with all supplemental
reports, and the Findings and Conclusions of the Planning Commission. To the extent that they
are consistent with the approval granted herein, the City Council also adopts by reference its oral
deliberations in this matter.
The proposed ordinance as presented to the City Council would amend LOC 50.02.005 to
create a new general definition of "hardscape" in the Community Development Code. Proposed
Section 50.08B.020 of the Glenmorrie Overlay District would modify that term in the context of
a proposed 50% hardscape limitation that would apply only to that neighborhood. The City
Council finds that this is confusing and unnecessarily complex. The Council concludes that the
proposed ordinance should be modified to eliminate the general definition of hardscape, and to
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0043-1733) Lake Oswego, OR 97034
2 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0043-17241 (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
EXHIBIT 4
1 eliminate use of that term in the Glenmorrie Overlay text. Instead, LOC 50.08B.020 should list
2 the specific elements that are limited to 50% of the lot, rather than characterizing them as
3 "hardscape."
4 In order to more closely meet the intent of the neighborhood, proposed Section
5 50.08B.025(2)(b)(i)(1) should be modified to make it clear that, if there a structure exists on an
6 abutting lot, required plant units should extend for the combined length of the plane of the
7 proposed structure and that of the existing abutting structure.
8 Standard Plant Units A through D in LOC Appendix 50.07-G, recently adopted by the
9 Council as part of the "Infill" Ordinance (No. 2524), are identical to the Standard Plant Unit plus
10 Alternatives A through C originally proposed for the Glenmorrie Overlay. To avoid unnecessary
11 duplication, the City Council finds that the chart proposed for Section 50.08B.025(2)(b) should
12 be eliminated and replaced with a reference to the corresponding plant units in the Infill
13 Appendix. That Section should then also refer to Glenmorrie Standard Unit E (the originally -
14 proposed Glenmorrie Alternative D) in order to reflect the entire list of alternatives urged by the
15 neighborhood.
16 The Glenmorrie Overlay as originally proposed included a section establishing a side
17 yard setback plane specific to the neighborhood. Adoption of the Infill Ordinance has now
18
19
20
21
22
established an identical, city-wide side yard setback plane. To avoid unnecessary duplication,
the Glemnorrie-specific side yard setback provision should be deleted from the Overlay
regulations.
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0043-1733) Lake Oswego, OR 97034
3 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0043-1724] (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
1
2
3
4
EXHIBIT 4
CONCLUSION
The City Council concludes that LU 09-0043-1733, as modified to be consistent with
these Findings, complies with all applicable criteria, including all applicable Lake Oswego
Comprehensive Plan Policies.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 09-0043-1733)
4 — [City of Lake Oswego, LU 09-0043-1724]
David D. Powell, City Attorney
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue — PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
(503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
June 15, 2010
Mayor Jack Hoffman called the - egular City Council meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. on June
15, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney,
and Jordan.
Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
City Recorder; Ursula Euler, Finance Director; Kim Gilmer, Parks and
Recreation Director; Jordan Wheeler, Management Analyst; Brant Williams,
Economic and Capital Development Director; Ann Adrian, Adult Community
Center Director; David Donaldson, Asst City Manager
3. PRESENTATIONS
3.1 Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board Donation
Ms. Adrian introduced Andy Harris and Gail Keck, co-chairs of the Lake Oswego Meals Network
Advisory Board, and Ruth Berberich, Adult Community Center, winner of the Outstanding
Employee of the Year Award.
Mr. Harris presented a $30,000 check photo to the Mayor to help fund the Lake Oswego Meals on
Wheels program. He explained that their Board did fundraising to help pay for the program's
deficit. He thanked New Seasons Market and the Lake Oswego Review for partnering with the
Board last year on their Harvest Fundraiser, through which the Board raised over $7,000. He
thanked the civic and religious organizations that have generously contributed to the program.
He mentioned that the Meals on Wheels program has served the Lake Oswego community over
the last 40 years, but with the current economy, 40% of the homebound meal recipients could not
contribute towards their meals. He invited the community to join the Board this October at its
Harvest fundraiser at the New Seasons Market, Mountain Park store.
Mayor Hoffman accepted the check on behalf of the City, the Council, the employees, and the
Adult Community Center. He thanked Mr. Harris and led the audience in a round of applause
congratulating the Board on its work.
Bob Kincaid Internship
Mr. Donaldson introduced Cate Schneider, the fourth annual Bob Kincaid Intern, who would work
with the City Manager's Office this summer. He mentioned that the memorial internship fund has
received over $10,000 in private donations, which the City used to hire a summer intern. He
indicated that staff selected Ms. Schneider out of a field of 25 applicants to work on a broad range
of topics.
Ms. Schneider reviewed her educational background, noting that she was native to Washington
State. She thanked the Councii for this opportunity to work with the City. Mayor Hoffman
welcomed Ms. Schneider.
3.2 Centennial Update
Cindy Thompson, Event Producer, described the Centennial Celebration scheduled for July 17
at Luscher Farm. She mentioned the involvement of 56 community organizations, companies, and
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 28
June 15, 2010
non -profits, 14 local food vendors, 13 sponsors, and 17 entertainers plus a variety of other
activities scheduled for the all -day Celebration. She spoke next of the Farm Chic dinner at Luscher
Farm with a five -course dinner prepared by Lake Oswego chefs. The proceeds of the $150 a ticket
dinner would go to support the Lake Oswego School District Sustainability Fund. She reminded
the audience of the 10-10-10 Lock up of the time capsule in the vault on October 10.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
Council(,,r Jordan moved the Consent Agenda. Councilor Johnson seconde6 the motion. A
voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Counciio� Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
4.1 REPORTS
4.1.1 Public Improvement Contract for construction of the 2010 Street Preservation Project
(Slurry Sea[)
Action: Award a public improvement contract to Asphalt Maintenance, Inc for the 2010
Street Preservation Project in the amount of $206,644.08:
4.2 RESOLUTIONS
4.2.1 Resolution 10-23, authorizing a Joint Funding Agreement for the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) Clackamas River Water Quality Study
Action: Adopt Resolution 10-23
4.3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.3.1 January 23, 2010, goal setting (morning portion)
4.3.2 April 6, 2010, regular meeting
Action: Approve minutes as written
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
CITIZEN COMMENT
Gary Buford, 5 Camelot Court
He read a letter to the editor that he had written. He quoted a remark by Thomas Jefferson: "A
government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you
have." He referenced the discussion of the Foothills pre -development agreement by the Council at
its June 7 meeting. He described the location of the Foothills District and the constraints of the
100 -year flood plain, the Tryon Creek sewage treatment plant, the industrial use zoning, the
transportation access of only one road from Hwy 43, and the inferred dependence of the
development on the Tri -Met streetcar between Lake Oswego and Portland. He indicated that the
planning process would cost the taxpayer between $800,000 to $1.1 million. He remarked that the
City government appeared big enough to give one everything one wanted.
He commented that the work of the Second Look Task Force on the Sensitive Lands Ordinance
was now complete. He alleged that the City was likely to move ahead with the taking of more
private property rights. He asked whether City government was big enough to take away
everything one had.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 28
June 15, 2010
Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She presented the Council with a flyer publicizing that the Baghdad Theater's premier of
Sustainability Board member Matt Briggs' film Deep Green. She commented that the film was
excellent and sent out a good message.
Charles Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill Road, Portland, Clackamas County
He informed the Council that, when he attempted to set up microphones in the center conference
pit in order to record the Council's special meeting on J4ne 7 at the West End Building, he was
asked to remove them. Consequently, he had been unable to record adequate sound from the
meeting. He indicated that lie found this request inexcusable, as the next night here in the Council
Chambers, cables were all over the place in the center of the table space. He said that he did not
think it was right that he had to work twice as hard to get a recording of a public meeting. He
stated that next time he would give adequate notice and that he did not expect to have his
microphone disturbed unless there was a safety issue.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mayor Hoffman discussed the six public hearings before the Council tonight. He acknowledged
the work of the Citizens Budget Committee (seven elected officials, seven citizens), superbly led by
Chair Ron Smith. He described the budget process as a four -stage relay race: the department
heads provided input to the City Manager; the City Manager put together a budget; the Budget
Committee approved a budget; and the Council adopted a budget per its statutory authorization
and its duty and responsibility to spend its citizens' tax dollars wisely. He explained that there was
extensive public input at each stage. He commented that the important element was trust of
government. He noted that the City Council was ordinary people's first interaction with
government.
7.1 Resolution 10 - 28, adjusting the budget for the fiscal year commencing July 1. 2009
by adopting a supplemental budget, approving resources,'requirements, and rr aking
appropriations
Mayor Hoffman reviewed the standard public hearing procedures and testimony time limits.
STAFF REPORT
Ms. Euler presented the third supplemental budget for this fiscal year (pp.78-82). She mentioned
the reasons for supplemental budgets (p.77). She directed the Council to the quarterly financial
reports for the preparatory work. She reviewed the specific supplements for this budget
adjustment, as summarized on pp. 77-78. She mentioned that she should have included the Lake
Qswego/Tigard Water Partnership in the increases for personal services. She emphasized that
none of these funds were approaching their budget limit; this action was re -allocating monies within
budget categories to match where the money was actually spent.
She noted the 541,000 from the general fund supporting the lagging golf fund. She explained that
the internal service funds of Engineering and Maintenance Services & Motor Pool were not
receiving sufficient resources to reflect the costs incurred in providing services to other City funds
and/or projects. Therefore, this supplement made the necessary transfers between funds to
recover the full cost for the internal service funds.
She emphasized that this supplement did not go over -budget; it simply shifted previously
appropriated funds into the right categories.
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Councilor Olson asked why staff was moving the capital outlay in the Tennis fund to personnel
(p.80). Ms. Euler clarified that the transfer within the self-supporting Tennis Fund was two different
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 28
June 15, 2010
items. One shifted savings from its capital outlay category to its materials and services category in
order to pay for the tennis study. Ms. Gilmer indicated that they transferred $9,000 to personnel in
order to pay for the additional staff needed to cover some workers involved in worker's comp
issues this past year. She said that they were not certain that they would need it, but they wanted
to make sure that they did not overrun the expense line.
Councilor Olson asked if the need to transfer monies from other funds to the Engineering fund
resulted from the new cost allocation study, or only the decreased license and fee revenues. Ms.
Euler indicated that this reflected the decrease in revenues only.
Ms. Euler clarified to Counc_ ilor Olson that the fund transfers to the Engineering fund were to pay
for real non -capital work than Engineering did for these other funds. She indicated that this had
nothing to do with the new cost allocation study, nor was it a subsidy.
Ms. Euler indicated to Councilor Tierney that there was a Redevelopment Department in the
General fund with one employee. However, LORA paid for that employee through an annual cost
reimbursement. She explained that, because vacation payout was typically unforeseen, they could
not realistically budget for it. Councilor Tierney suggested re-examining vacation payouts in the
future.
Ms. Euler clarified to Councilor Tierney that they transferred the $249,000 from the general fund
to the Street fund instead of directly to the Engineering fund because the Street fund received
services from Engineering and needed to pay for those services itself. Councilor Tierney
suggested eventually answering the.question of what services the Engineering fund provided. He
commented that those services were really paid for through the utility rates.
Ms. Euler indicated to Councilor Jordan that the $150,000 in Fines & Forfeitures represented
money collected by the City from the losing party in the lawsuit and paid to the claimant as a
restitution payment.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the hearing.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Jordan moved to adopt Resolution 10-28. Councilor Johnson seconded the
motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors
Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
7.2 Resolution 10-29, certifying the City is eligible to receive State -Shared Revenues
STAFF REPORT
Mr. McIntyre explained that this staff report covered Agenda items 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4 in presenting
the budget as an entire package. He reviewed the procedure for the public hearings.
Ms. Euler reviewed the budget process leading to the public hearings tonight on this budget
approved by the Budget Committee. She mentioned the correction to the total Citywide approved
budget revenues listed in the staff report (p.83) to $134,670,000 and the correct $167,126,388 in
expenditures. She noted the General Fund budget shown on p. 84.
Mr. Wheeler gave a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the changes made between the City
Manager's proposed budget and the Budget Committee's approved budget (p.85, p. 89). He
mentioned each of the changes to the General Fund and to the other funds (pp.86-89). He noted
that these changes resulted in freeing up an additional $150,000 in the General Fund ongoing
resources and 0160,000 in one-time resources.
Ms. Euler indicated that those freed up resources were the starting point. She informed the
Council of additional developments since the Budget Committee meetings. She reported that the
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 28
June 15, 2010
Library District informed staff that the monies for the Lake Oswego Library coming from the District
would increase by $230,000 as a result of the Clackatants vote to enter the Library -District: Lake
Oswego's allocation percentage increased because they were most likely -to visit the Lake Oswego
Library.
She indicated that staff reviewed the street maintenance fee charges to the Municipal Golf Course
and the Country Club Golf Course and determined that they should be at a Group 1 pricing level
instead of at a Group 2 pricing level. This reduced the revenue to the Street fund by $44,000. She
'prJinted out that this decrease in revenue to the Street fund meant an increased transfer from the
:general fund in the same amount, but the change did benefit the Municipal Golf Course by
decreasing its monthly bill by $9,000.
She mentioned a staff request to add $100.000 to any refinancing plan for the West End Building
to repair the chiller needed to keep the building inhabitable in the summer ($50,000) and to provide
architectural support for a Council subcommittee reviewing the future uses of the West End
Building to find a solution ($50,000). She indicated that these additional revenues and subtractions
left $336,000 on the table in ongoing resources and $60,000 in one-time funds.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that Resolution 10-29, certifying that the City was eligible to receive
state -shared revenues, did not require a public hearing, while Resolution 10-30, in which the City
elected to receive said revenues, did require a public hearing.
Councilor Johnson moved Resolution 10-29. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
At Councilor Hennagin's request, Mr. Powell explained that, in order for Lake Oswego to receive
state -shared revenues. it had to provide certain services and certify each year that it did in fact
provide those services (Resolution 10-29). He indicated that the public hearing for Resolution 10-
30 was to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on the potential uses of the state
revenue sharing.
Mayor Hoffman noted that the City was eligible to receive state -shared revenues (cigarette, liquor,
and highway taxes) because it provided four or more municipal services.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionas ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johhnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
7.3 Resolution 10-30, declaring the City of Lake Oswego's election to Receive State -
hared revenues in 2010 - 11
Mr. Powell reviewed the standard public hearing procedures and testimony time limits.
STAFF REPORT
Mayor Hoffman noted that the staff report on this resolution started on p. 101 in the packet.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the public
hearing.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Jordan moved adoption of Resolution 10-30. Councilor Johnson seconded the
motion.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Olson that he was not aware of any restrictions or rules about
the use of state -shared revenues. He described them as unrestricted, in contrast to gas tax
monies. Ms. Euler indicated that the liquor and cigarette taxes went to the General fund.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson.,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 28
June 15, 2010
7.4 Resolution 10-31, adopting the City of Lake Oswego Budgetforthe Fiscal Year
commencing .July 1, 2010, (Fiscal Year 2010 - 2011) making appropriations, levying
ad valorem taxes, and classifying the levy pursuant -to Section 1.1 b, Article XI of the
Oregon Constitution
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Councilor Tierney indicated that his calculations using the revenue, operating expenditures, debt
service, and capital outlay figures on p. 84 rel,:)ting to the General fund budget found that the
expenditures were greater than the revenues.: Ms. Euler clarified that the budget included the one-
time spending of $1.1 million for Foothills. She stated that staff did otherwise balance the budget
according to Council goals by providing excess operating revenues over operating expenditures.
Councilor Olson commented that she had noticed the same thing. Ms. Euler explained that the
difference, after backing out the $1.1 million, came from setting aside $600,000 for a PERS
reserve and funding a bare bones capital outlay.
Councilor Olson mentioned that the $37,000 in matching funds that the City was providing for the
Lakeridge tennis courts (p.87) went to the School District, the Lakeridge Parent Club, and the
neighborhood group that brought the matter forward to the Budget Committee, and not just to the
District.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Mr. Powell reviewed the testimony order
and time limits.
Dan Williams, 17226 Tualatin Street
He noted that a close vote during the Budget Committee process sustained the City Manage -'s
elimination of the EMS Coordinator position. He described the decision as shortsighted, citing the
compelling testimony presented at the June 5 Round Table from the many Fire Department
personnel on why the position should be restored. He asked the Council to reconsider the decision
for many reasons, one of which was the potential liability the City might have and the insurance
costs involved if the City did not have an EMS Coordinator.
Maria Meneghin, 1179 Sunningdale Road
She read a prepared statement regarding the allocation of $1.1 million from the General fund
reserves to the Foothills Framework Plan. She described the agreement proposed by Mr. Wiliiams
as protecting the City's interests and bringing forward the City's best opportunity for future
development to increase its tax base, meet Metro's density expectations, and provide affordable
housing. She indicated that she liked the idea of a framework plan to guide development
opportunities in the District. -
She stated that, even so, she could not support this allocation because of the continuing financial
problem of the West End Building. She noted that, at the June 8 meeting, the Council essentially
decided to postpone their decision. She acknowledged that there was no good solution to this
financial situation, yet the Council's decision to form a subcommittee to explore potential uses for
voter approval at an unspecified date disturbed her. She questioned whether a general obligation
bond would pass, given the close votes on the two other occasions. If it did not, then the City
might have to use its reserves to pay the debt, which she argued made spending $1.1 million on
Foothills at this time fiscally imprudent. She advocated for postponing the money for the Foothills
Framework Plan until after the City settled the West End Building issue.
Darrel Condra, 1179 Sunningdale Road
He expressed his appreciation for the Council's work over the past year, noting the long, difficult
meetings and contentious decisions that were part of this volunteer job. He said that he
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 28
June 15, 2010
appreciated -the City's support for the library over the years and in this current budget. He
commented -that public libraries became even more important for students as the School District
struggled with funding and reducing its library budget.
Karl Koenig, Clackamas County Firefighters Union President, PO Box 230104, Tigard
He indicated that he represented the 45 union fire fighters working for the City. He advocated for
reinstatement of the EMS Coordinator position. He mentioned his perception that the Council
intended to show i`5 support for the -Fire Department by doing so. He thanked the Council a.nd the
Budget Committee: for their service: He expressed his appreciation that the firefighters had ?..n
opportunity to testify with respect to this position and its effect on the community they served. He
commented that they believed in a participatory management style that allowed firefighters an
opportunity to comment and to interact with the City leadership in making their service better.
Janine Dunphy, 15450 Boones Ferry Road
She stated that she attended all the budget meetings and diligently went through the proposed FY
2010/2011 budget. She indicated that she had many concerns, including the salary and benefit
increases for staff. She noted that 50% of the total operating budget in the General fund was for
salaries and personnel costs. She advocated reducing the development and training budget by
more than 10%.
She expressed her shock at the amount of money allocated to professional and technical services
across the departments, mentioning a total of $3.615 million, not including the $1.1 million for
Foothills. She mentioned that she has not yet seen a list of all the consultants hired by the City,
what they were doing, and where this money was going. She argued that these expenses were
not sustainable. She asked if this was how the citizens wanted the money spent.
She mentioned that she has not seen the results of the City's April citizen interest survey, which
were due out in May but now scheduled for July. She commented that she would have thought
that the Council would have wanted to see those results before the budget, which made her
wonder whether the results did not favor some of the budget items.
• Eric Schult, 763 Ninth Street
He spoke in favor of retaining the EMS Coordinator position. He argued that the City needed a
position dedicated to moving the department forward with all the changes likely to happen in the
next five to ten years with respect to emergency medical services.
He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that he had specialized knowledge, as he has been involved
in EMS for 29 years, worked as the EMS Training Officer at another fire department, and was
currently involved in State EMS. He stated that they were seeing a tremendous amount of
changes in EMS because of the medical science and technological developments. He commented
that the paramedic program he went through 25 years ago would not have even thought of doing
the things that would soon be implemented.
Councilor Hennagin mentioned hearing that the Lake Oswego fire fighters could receive
adequate training through Multnomah or Clackamas County, rather than receiving it in-house. Mr.
Schult commented that Lake Oswego had some unique geographic challenges that should be
included in its training program. He indicated that his fire district has found that it was not cost
effective to send its people outside for training because of the time lost for responding and the
overtime. He argued that it made more sense financially to keep the training in house. He
remarked that having a dedicated Lake Oswego fire person attending regional or countywide
meetings could bring back efficiencies and other ways to reduce costs that would benefit the
department.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Wage 7 of 28
June 15, 2010
Colleen Bennett, 1131 Oxford Drive
She read from a prepared statement regarding the library funding. She reviewed her involvement
with the library over the past 20 years, including sitting on the Advisory Board and working with the
Friends and with the LO Reads program. She mentioned the excellent service provided by Library
Director Baar and his staff under difficult and crowded conditions in the library building. She
advocated for the Council to continue to fund the library from the General fund as it has in the past
and reserve the Library District monies for the future.
• Ritu Sahni, Lake Oswego Fire Department Medical D;*ector, 5525 Bay Creek Drive
He explained that, in addition to serving as the Lake Oswego Fire Department Medical Director, he
was also the Medical Director for the State of Oregon. He mentioned that the increased
requirements for paramedic training would likely increase. He spoke in support of the Council
retaining the EMS Coordinator position. He said that, in his position as Medical Director, he saw
nationally that the departments successful in providing EMS care were the departments committed
to providing that care, including a management structure dedicated to EMS.
He described the Lake Oswego Fire Department as an EMS -based fire service, as opposed to a
fire -based EMS service. He noted that 85% of their calls had an EMS component to them. EMS
was the primary public safety and health aspect provided by the City.
Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She thanked the Budget Committee, Mr. McIntyre, and his budget team for the great job they did
with the budget. She supported two suggestions made by Budget Committee members for
improving the budget next year: that the City define, list, and prioritize services as essential or
non-essential services, and that the City provide more detail in the two categories of development
and training and professional and technical services.
She spoke in support of retaining the funding for the skate park and the swim park lifeguard. She
questioned eliminating the funding in light of the City giving $30,000 to a non -City entity, calling it ill
advised. She argued for the neighborhood planners to return to working on neighborhoods pians
instead of being re -assigned to work on the Comprehensive Plan. She contended that the
Comprehensive Plan should be more than a marketing plan, citing her dismay at the time and
money it must have taken to develop the board display of logos presented to the Council last week.
She held that eliminating the funding for the Police Community Service Officer and the Fire
Department EMS Coordinator was unwise in the long term. She remarked that the perception that
the City cut employees and funded consultants was not good. She stated her opposition to
spending over $1 million from the reserves to fund the Foothills agreement with these developers
at this time.
She described this year's budget as having more style than substance. She cited the spending of
more money over the last two years on the Centennial Celebration than on the EMS Coordinator
and the Community Service Officer.
John SurreM LONAC Chairperson, 1685 Edgecliff Terrace
He remarked that the LONAC members who attended the Budget Committee meetings had been
impressed at the time provided in the agenda at every meeting for citizens to speak. He
acknowledged the diligent and thorough work done by the Committee members before making
their recommendations.
He indicated that the LONAC Budget Committee studied the proposed FY 201012.011 budget. He
reported that the LONAC members unanimously adopted the following positions recommended by
the LONAC Budget Committee at the June 7 LONAC meeting.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Paae 8 of 28
June 15, 2010
He argued that, in order to keep the quality neighborhood plan development essential to the quality
of life in Lake Oswego, the City should retain full staffing for neighborhood planning. He indicated
that re -assigning the neighborhood planners to the Comprehensive Plan as an alternate to
neighborhood planning was not acceptable.
He addressed the issue of funding speculative proposals and development projects. He cited the
large capital improvement projects, such as Foothills ($1.1 to $1.3 million), the Tigard water
agreement ($200 million), the streetcar and other projects. He argued that when these projects
were delayed or cancelled, their steff requirements should be cut -and their general fund allocations
eliminated and/or reallocated.
He contended that these proposals affected the quality of life in Lake Oswego during these
recessionary times by affecting the affordability of the community and the citizens' ability to
continue to live in Lake Oswego. He stated that the property tax reserves should not be depleted
to pay for consultants on speculative development projects. He argued that developing Foothills
and the streetcar did not enhance the quality of life in Lake Oswego. He held that this expenditure
of reserve funds in advance of the Lake Oswego 2015 financial outlook was an ill-advised use of
reserves that the City might need for more critical services later on.
He observed that the General fund reserves had only $18 million but the line of credit on the West
End Building was $20 million. He noted that the terms of the loan required that the reserves be
equivalent to the outstanding principal owed on the loan, which put all reserves in jeopardy if the
loan was called. He argued that the reserves should be maintained at no less than the level of the
principal owing on the line of credit loan.
He contended that continuing to spend property tax dollars for a speculative real estate investment
with no determined use, no demonstrated identifiable revenue generation, and no long term
financing options was not acceptable and not a prudent management of taxpayer dollars. He
spoke of resolving the disposition of the West End Building in 10 to 12 months.
He discussed the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) forecast and budgeting and staffing
requirements. LONAC agreed with the City Manager that the City had to get back to basic
baseline services. Therefore, the long-term plans should follow the baseline service requirements.
He spoke of a regular re -assessment of the ratio of supervisory staff to work staff when matching
CIP proposed programs and current baseline staffing requirements.
He contended that economic development was not a baseline City function, but rather a Chamber
and private sector business promotion role. He argued that the City should not have created the
Economic Development Department because the citizens did not request it. He held that the
businesses that did request it should pay for it. He indicated that if there was no measurable
progress by the end of 2011, then the City should discontinue the department, eliminate the
director position, and return the activities to the private sector. He mentioned LONAC's support of
eliminating the Economic Development half-time administrative assistant in this year's budget.
He addressed budget transparency, reserve identification, and actual budget reporting. He argued
that the ending funding balance reserves should be clearly identified by department, and not rolled
up into one mega -general fund reserve account. He advocated for bi-monthly reporting of actual to
budget in all General fund accounts for the benefit of the citizens. He suggested publishing the
reports in Hello LO.
He discussed full faith and credit obligation bonding and the City's bond rating notification. He
stated that the City's new practice of issuing full faith and credit obligation bonding without a full
disclosure to the citizens, property owners, and taxpayers of Lake Oswego before issuing the
bonds was not acceptable. He described this practice as a skirting of the voter approval
requirements for general obligation bonding, as the collateral for both types of bond was the
aggregate assessed value of all property in the city. He alleged that the LOIS bonds were an
example of the Council deciding not to request voter approval of such bonds.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 28
June 15, 2010
He stated that the City had to be -accurate when publicizing bond rating house ratings of Lake
Oswego bonds before bond application. He spoke to including the definitions of -the three types of
bonds in the budget glossary (full faith and credit, general obligation, and revenue).
Mr. Surrett indicated to Councilor Johnson that LONAC had a quorum for its vote with about 20
people voting.
Peter Sweet, 796 First Street
He rend the June 21 letter he sent to the Council expressing his dismay at including over'$1 million
for plan: ging the Foothills/streetcar project in this year's budget. He referenced the April 13
development study session with Bruce Wood. He stated that he was a retired banker with over 45
years of experience. He described the current down cycle as the worst he has ever seen. He
concurred with most commercial development experts that the equity and debt pieces for funding
major commercial projects were dead in the water for the next decade.
He argued that the Mayor's conclusion that public money had to replace the lack of private
resources to build the Foothills project and the streetcar extension was wrong. He disagreed that
the City should take the development risk because private sources were not available. He
commented that the reasons that private sources were not available was the uncertainty of
financing with the glut of condo real estate yet to be worked off and competent developers having
burned through their own equity and private banker equity.
He commented that, adding to these difficult to overcome financial risks, the City was proposing to
develop a risky location with multiple issues. He questioned why any competent developer team
would want to team up with the City, given its development track record with the West End
Building, the US Bank project, and City Hall, unless the developer intended to shift the project risk
to the City. He alleged that the selected developer for the Foothills project had a checkered record
of success, depending on boom/bust cycles.
He argued that the City did not possess the skill sets necessary to embark on this risky
development in a down cycle. He recalled that the case presented at the May 7 First Addition
meeting for building the streetcar mentioned providing an alternative for 500 cars. He asked where
the study was that showed how many Lake Oswego residents would choose this mode of
commuting. He held that there was too much at stake to have a `build it and they will come'
attitude towards this project. He stated that he did not believe that they needed to adopt a `new
normal,' but rather they needed to husband their resources and wait to see what happened as they
crawled out of this recession.
He mentioned that Mayor Hoffman and one Councilor responded to his e-mail, and the Mayor
attended the monthly FAN meeting. He indicated that the Mayor's rebuttal to his e-mail had been
that the City needed to plan now in order to be ready for the next upturn in real estate. -He said
that, in response to his question about what due diligence the City had done in selecting
Williams/Dame & White, the Mayor explained that several Foothills property owners selected the
firm and that the City accepted the company.
He indicated that his understanding of the Mayor's answer as the City was hiring a developer, on
which it has done only cursory checking, who also represented the landowners, with whom the City
would have to negotiate a land purchase price in the future. He said that he interpreted the
Mayor's response as the City was providing Williams/Dame & White with interimconsulting income
with no risk to the company, as it weathered its own real estate turn down.
Gary Gipson, 19 EI Greco
He mentioned that he attended all the Budget Committee meetings and was in•awe of all the work
put in. He stated that he disagreed with some of the outcomes. He referenced an article in the
Oregonian last week about the Portland Development Commission having spent $13 million buying
South Waterfront land for affordable housing but most of the money has gone to the lead
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 28
June 15, 2010
developer. The article also mentioned the economic downturn and the various failures and
shortcomings of the project.
He commented that the Council was preparing to allocated $1.1 million in Lake Oswego funds and
enter into a pre -development agreement (PDA) for the Foothills project with the same developers
while the economic downturn was still in full swing and Portland property values forecasted to
decrease by 10% a year for the next three years.
He observed that the Foothills project was completely intertwined with the streetcar program. He
argued that the controversial streetcar program was being advanced contrary to studies indicating
that it would do little to alleviate the congestion on Highway 43. He mentioned the City's annual
interest only payments on the West End Building ranging from $200,000 to $300,000 a year
currently but with the potential of increasing to $1 million per year as interest rates rose.
He commented that, although Lake Oswego was not currently in a financial crisis, its economic
position was precarious at best. He argued that continuing the Foothills and streetcar projects in
this economy was neither responsible nor in the best interests of the city. He held that the City
should complete a new flood plain study of the Foothills area before spending additional funds on
any contractual agreements regarding the project.
Mayor Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting for a break at 8:20 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at
8:30 p.m.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Hennagin moved to adopt Resolution 10-31 for discussion purposes. Councilor
Johnson seconded the motion.
Councilor Olson expressed her appreciation to all the citizens who testified this evening. She
said that she was disappointed that they were laying off some good employees She spoke in
support of reinstating the EMS Coordinator position. She cited the new information provided to the
Council at the June 5 Round Table regarding this position.
Councilor Olson moved to reinstate the EMS coordinator position in the Fire Department.
Councilor Moncrieff seconded the motion.
Councilor Jordan mentioned that she did not attend the final Budget Committee meeting. She
expressed her appreciation for the work done by the Budget Committee and the staff in getting the
budget to this point. She spoke in support of the motion. She recalled the Budget Committee's
discussion about cutting technical training and services and preserving training and services for fire
and police, which were critical services for the community.
She commented that even critical services needed to make sure that their departments ran as
efficiently and effectively as any other department, including making changes to save the taxpayers
money while providing the same kinds of services. She mentioned the personnel contract issues
that the Council and the Budget Committee did not always understand which required
management level personnel to do certain things.
Councilor Hennagin commented that he had a mixed reaction to the motion. He recalled that the
Fire Chief told the Budget Committee that he could get by without this position because his people
could get the necessary training through other sources. He referenced the testimony heard tonight
from the Union President and other fire department personnel giving convincing information for
retaining this position. He asked to postpone this motion until the Council obtained more
information about the overtime and the countervailing costs potentially incurred by eliminating the
position versus keeping the EMS Coordinator position.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that he supported the motion.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 28
June 15, 2010
Councilor Moncrieff said that she would support the motion, although she too had a difficult time
with this area of the budget. She suggested filling the position for one year while file City
examined the most efficient and effective way of providing this service, and then revisiting it in one
year.
Councilor Tierney recalled that he had voted to eliminate the position at the Budget Committee,
but after spending more time on it, he became aware of the merits of putting it back in. Therefore,
he would vote in support of the motion.
A roll call vote was taker,., "and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councillors Johnson,
Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, .and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilor Hennagin voted `no.' r6-1]
Mr. McIntyre noted that Mr. Wheeler would track the changes on the white board and keep a
running total.
Mr. Wheeler asked the Council to affirm the proposed management changes relating to the
additional funds from the library levy and the transfers into the Street fund and the Golf fund. Mr.
McIntyre pointed out that accepting the management amendments changed the amount of money
the Council had to appropriate through amendments.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that he would entertain a motion to accept the management changes as
an amendment to the base resolution, acknowledging the library levy, the revenue shortage, and
the transfers from the General fund.
Councilor Tierney asked for clarification on the transfer from the General fund to the Street fund.
He pointed out that they could reduce the increased capital in the Street fund by $44,000 and keep
the $44,000 in the General Fund. Mr. McIntyre concurred. He explained that staff's intent was to
restore the numbers approved by the Budget Committee.
Councilor Hennagin moved to amend the budget to increase they library levy income by
$230,000 to reflect the new figure coming from the County library levy. Councilor Jordan
seconded the motion.
Ms. Euler confirmed to Councilor Olson that the $230,000 resulted from a combination of
Tualatin coming into the Clackamas County Library District and the increase in collection rates on
property taxes countywide from 93% to 96%. She indicated that this was separate from the
County property tax revenue and would not affect it.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
Mr. McIntyre explained that the $44,000 transfer resulted from a recalculation of the Street
Maintenance Fund for the two golf courses, which significantly lowered the fee for the golf courses.
He indicated that staff wanted to make sure that the budget for the Streetfund reflected the
reduction. He reiterated that the Council did not have to make the transfer, staff could lower the
amount of street maintenance performed in FY 2010/2011.
Councilor Johnson moved to transfer $44,000 from the General Fund to the Street Fund.
Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Tierney spoke in opposition to the motion. He argued for keeping the money in the
General fund where the City had more latitude to use it for potential expenditures, and where the
City might not spend it before the end of the year. He noted that the capital outlay in the Street
fund doubled from last year to $1.5 million. He commented that they could always move this
money to the Street fund later if there was a demonstrated need.
Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Hennagin that not having the $44,000 ir, the Street fund
would not likely affect the City's average Pavement Condition index (PCI). He explained to
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 25
June 15, 2010
Councilor Tierney that staff would use whatever amount of money the Council budgeted for streets
to do the street work. The more money budgeted, the more streets staff did, and vice versa.
Councilor Moncrieff spoke in support of the motion. She said that it was a priority for her to bring
the infrastructure up higher than its current level. She agreed that it was a small amount, but she
would like to see it put towards resurfacing or slurry seals.
Mr. McIntyre confirmed to Councilor Jordan that the City could use Street fund monies to
resurface pathways. Councilor Jordan spoke in the support of the motun, observing that bringing
some pathways back up to shape where people did not trip wouid be a good use of the money.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Moncrieff, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilors Olson and Tierney voted `no'. [5-
2]
Councilor Johnson moved to decrease golf materials and expenditures by $9,000.
Councilor Olson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with
Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan
voting `aye.' [7-0]
Mr. McIntyre spoke to the $50,000 placeholder he requested to add to the budget for the architect
consultant that the Council subcommittee on the West End Building would need. He explained that
he wanted to have enough money to fund the need adequately but he did not have a scope of work
yet to use in pricing the work.
He reminded the Council that the City needed a chiller in the West End Building to cool the building
this summer, or the building would not be habitable. He mentioned staff's reluctance to invest
significant funds into the facility, not knowing what its future was. He explained that one chi!ier has
completely failed and the other desperately in need of repair. He noted that the funds for both
these items were one-time uses.
Councilor Jordan moved to allocate $50,000 as a placeholder for the study of the West End
Building and $50,000 as a placeholder for the chiller in the West End Building. Councilor
Hennagin seconded the motion.
Mr. McIntyre confirmed to Councilor Olson that he proposed repairing the chiller rather than
spending a quarter million dollars to replace it. He explained that he preferred to keep repairing
the chiller over time, as he did not know what the use of the facility would be He pointed out that a
new chiller had a life expectancy of 15 to 20 years. Councilor Olson expressed concern at
spending money to repair it and then replacing it next year. Mr. McIntyre compared the chiller to
an old car: at some point, it would stop running.
Councilor Hennagin spoke in support of budgeting for a process that would, in the long run, save
the citizens money by determining what action to take on the WEB and how to finance it.
Councilor Tierney commented that he thought that the Budget Committee deliberations should
have considered both these items, especially the financing question, but the May 1 date slipped.
He said that he would oppose the motion on principle.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Moncrieff, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilors Olson and Tierney voted `no'. [5-
2]
Councilor Jordan commented that one could construe the Lakeridge tennis courts resurfacing as
a neighborhood enhancement grant, given that the Lakeridge and Palisades neighborhoods Jointly
requested funding. She suggested reducing the $20,000 allocation to the Neighborhood
Enhancement Grant program to $5,000 and shifting $15,000 towards the $30,000 for the tennis
courts. She asked staff to review the neighborhood grant program throughout this year in terms of
what it should look like and what it should fund. vAth an eye to whether to keep the program or not.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 28
June 15, 2010
She described the economic and capital development issues as an important part of what the City
was doing right now. She argued that, regardless of what happened with Foothills, the City would
not know what could happen there without studying it. She commented that the Economic
Development Department would make sure that the studies, for which part of the $1.1 million paid,
were properly done. She held that it was "penny wise and pound foolish" to eliminate the $33,000
for Economic Development in light of the $1.1 million for the Foothills plan.
Councilor Jordan moved to reduce the Neighborhood Enhancement Grant program from
$20,000 to $5,000, to transfer $15,000 frorn the Neighborhood Enhancement Grant line item
to the Lakeridge Tennis Court project, and �o reduce the Lakeridge tennis court allocation
by a like amount. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion.
Mayor Hoffman asked if the Council could declare the Lakeridge tennis courts a neighborhood
grant from the dais. Councilor Olson said that the neighborhood planners administered the
program.
Councilor Moncrieff indicated her support for the motion, citing the Palisades Neighborhood
Association's support of resurfacing the tennis courts as a neighborhood amenity. She held that
this was an appropriate allocation of those funds.
Councilor Olson spoke against the motion. She said that she thought it circumvented the
neighborhood grant program application process. She disagreed with linking the grant program
reduction to the Lakeridge tennis courts.
Councilor Tierney spoke against the motion and in support of affirming the Budget Committee's
decision.
Councilor Johnson indicated that she would vote against the motion in support of the currently
budgeted amount. She recalled that she supported the increased neighborhood grant funding
because the City was re -assigning the neighborhood planners to the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilor Hennagin asked how taking away the neighborhood planners had anything to do with
the neighborhood enhancement grant program, given that the program was for beautification
improvements. Councilor Johnson explained that, while the planners and the grant program did
not do the same thing, she saw both of them as an investment in the neighborhoods.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would oppose the motion, although he supported the tennis courts.
He commented that he thought they could have both the increased funding and the resurfaced
tennis courts.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motion failed with Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, and
Jordan voting `aye.' Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Olson, and Tierney voted `no.' [3-
4]
Councilor Olson moved to remove the $1.1 million budgeted for Foothills. Councilor
Tierney seconded the motion for discussion.
Councilor Olson stated that she did not oppose redeveloping Foothills at the right time and in the
right way with a sound financial plan. She indicated that she understood that the $1.1 million was
a one-time expenditure out of reserves that would not be available for other things, if eliminated
from the budget. She explained that she would be more comfortable waiting until Tri -Met repaid
the $1.5 million loan from Lake Oswego reserves in 2012 before spending this additional money
out of reserves.
She acknowledged the argument that Foothills was a Council goal, but pointed out that there were
other Council goals not funded this year. She indicated that. until the capital markets improvers
and there was more private money available to share the risk, she was not comfortable r-educina
the General fund by this amount this year.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 28
June 15. 2010
Councilor Hennagin spoke against the motion. He pointed out that the agreement with
Williams/Dame & White contained off ramps for the City to opt out of the agreement, should the
study determine that any factor precluded viable development of the site. He mentioned the LLC
formed by Foothills property owners that had an agreement with Williams/Dame & White to move
ahead with planning. He observed that this was a complex project with many factors, participants,
and agencies involved; the planning process could well take four to five years.
He held that when .commercial development money became available, it would come to Lake
Oswego because of the attractiveness of the community to people of different ages. He argued
that it would be a mistake for the City not to begin the planning process, especially with an
agreement that allowed the City to opt out if the planning process found insurmountable
roadblocks.
Councilor Jordan concurred with Councilor Hennagin in supporting this investment of City
resources at this time. She contended that one of the reasons that nothing happened in Foothills
during one of the biggest development booms in Oregon's history was the fact that these obstacles
were mostly public works problems. She argued that the area would have redeveloped had the
unknowns that this $1.1 million would help ascertain already been known. She spoke of being
prepared for what would happen in the next go round.
Councilor Tierney indicated that he did not support the motion. He explained that he supported
this expenditure because this was the area in Lake Oswego with an opportunity to increase the tax
base to generate more revenue for the citizens. He argued that it was critical to study it and to look
at it as an investment. He acknowledged that the area posed numerous obstacles that they had to
overcome before getting to the economic model.
He mentioned his intention to make sure that the economic model made sense for the citizens, the
City, the private property owners, and the developers. He held that the financial basis shouid be
the primary focus with the ancillary quality of life issues secondary to that. He commented that,
while no one had a certain answer to the question of whether this was the right time to begin this
long planning process, he was inclined to think that it was, given the variables in place, such as the
property owners and the developers ready to go.
Councilor Olson stated her opinion that the main question was whether it was the right time. She
said that she did not think that this was the right time. She agreed that the Foothills area
represented an opportunity for new housing options and keeping increased density out of the
neighborhoods. She questioned funding this project in light of the service and personnel cuts
discussed in the City Manager's memo as "being a condition of slow revenues, increasing costs,
and economic uncertainty."
Councilor Hennagin commented that they were not funding this project with money that the City
could use for other General fund purposes. He pointed out that the Budget Committee citizen
members, who looked for ways to save money, voted to allocate these funds after listening to
staff's presentation on the proposed agreement.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would oppose the motion because it focused on the wrong thing. He
indicated that his comments were in response to Mr. Sweet. He explained that this was not a
developer agreement but rather a pre -development agreement with the intent of identifying
potential obstacles to developing Foothills. He argued that Foothills was the last opportunity for
development in Lake Oswego for all practical purposes, and the only opportunity to bring the river
to the downtown, which was the heart of the Lake Oswego community.
He reminded those who had not been here in the late 1990s and early 2000s that those Councils
took calculated risks in making investments in the best interests of the public. He ernphasizad that
these projects were public/private partnerships. He emphasized that this would help determine
whether the Foothills area was developable. He spoke of catching the inevitable next real estate
cycle.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 28
June 15, 2010
A roll call vote was taken, and the motion failed with Councilor Olson voting `aye.' Mayor
Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voted `no.' [1-6]
Councilor Moncrieff moved to reinstate the $33,000 for a half-time administrative position
and the $6,000 for rent in the Economic Development budget in the General Fund.
Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Moncrieff argued that, in these hard economic times, it was important to invest in the
economic vitality and development of Lake Oswego. She desc..ribed this position as a good use of
human resources to free up the Economic Development peopi_; to pursue economic development
while leaving the administrative jobs to an administrative person. She commented that she saw
the importance of having the Department in the downtown to work with LORA and Foothills.
Councilor Hennagin commented that he had thought that the Budget Committee made a mistake
in not having an administrative assistant to relieve the highly paid professionals from doing their
own routine clerical work. He indicated that, even so, over -turning the Budget Committee decision
presented a dilemma to him.
Councilor Tierney indicated that he would vote against the motion. He described a domino effect
in moving the Economic Development Department from City Hall, causing a $9,000 rental expense
and a $33,000 personnel expense. He pointed out that LORA paid the other half of those
expenses, which doubled the expenditure. He argued that they should have kept the department
in City Hall as part of a better utilization of the building space.
Councilor Johnson spoke to the Council being smart about how it invested money. She
described 'having an administrative person as a more efficient way of managing a department. She
pointed out that this department would still need additional administrative support even if it stayed
in City Hall. She indicated that she would support the motion.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would support the motion for the same reasons. He argued that it
was important to allow the Economic Development team to do their work for the City efficiently. He
commented that Mr. McIntyre would report to the Council next year on whether it made a difference
having the team in the Downtown.
Councilor Johnson stated that the citizens have asked for economic development. She
mentioned the long history of economic development in the community, noting that the Festival of
the Arts started as an economic development program to get people buying locally in the
Downtown. She pointed out that supporting local businesses was an element of sustainability.
She argued that it was time to support the businesses that supported the City.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Moncrieff, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilors Hennagin, Olson, and Tierney voted `no'. [4-
3]
Councilor Moncrieff asked the City Manager to look for any possible efficiencies or opportunities
for the City to work with the School District to assist it in these difficult financial times. Mr.
McIntyre indicated that he has been talking with Dr. Korach about continuing to find areas of
cooperation and partnership between the City and the District; which he would report on to the
Council this summer. He commented that it was difficult because of Measure 5. He mentioned the
City's cooperative arrangement with the District respecting recreation services, which they would
continue to discuss.
Mr. Wheeler indicated to Councilor Tierney that there were $254,000 in unappropriated funds left
on the tracking board. Councilor Tierney observed that a City this size could find some way to
use those funds in the coming year. He advocated putting them in the General Fund, as opposed
to the reserves, because of the latitude allowed by the General Fund,
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 28
June 15. 2010
Councilor Tierney moved to allocate the unappropriated $254,000 to the General Fund
Contingency. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Jordan commented that she supported the motion because she thought there were
opportunities to use the money to leverage matching grants and other monies that the City might
find in enhancement or pathways grants.
Councilor Olson indicated that she supported the motion because this was close to the amount
that the Budget Committee did not 1pprove for the maintenance and restoration of natural areas
and open space. She speculated the Council would likely be interested in funding that item
after receiving the Second Look Ta, -4\, Force report.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
Councilor Hennagin moved to adopt Resolution 10-31 (the FY 2010/2011 budget) as
amended (nine amendments). Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Mr. Powell mentioned the note received by the Council today that the citywide revenue mentioned
in Resolution 10-31 needed to be adjusted by $87,000 for reduced property taxes and the bonded
debt fund.
Councilor Johnson moved to amend Resolution 10-31 to adjust the citywide revenue by the
sum of $87,000, which also resulted in the same net change to the total unappropriated
reserves. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion
passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and
Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
A roll call vote was taken on the main motion, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman,
Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilor
Olson voted `no'. [6-1]
7.5 Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public
Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings and approving a
special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and authorizing
the Mayor to sign a three-year contract with the Arts Council of Lake Oswego for
FY10-11 through FY12-13
STAFF REPORT
Ms. Gilmer introduced Cheryl Brock, Lake Oswego Arts Council Executive Director. She
mentioned that the Council just approved $100,000 in the FY 2010/2011 budget for City public art
programming. She explained that a special procurement was needed to award the funds to the
Arts Counci! for administrating the City Public Arts programs without going through the public
bidding process. If the Council agreed with the staff findings (p.110), then the next step was
awarding a three-year contract to the Arts Council.
She explained that, even though the budget allocated funds for only one year, a three-year
contract made it easier to administer the programs over a long period (p.109). She mentioned that
the contract did not limit the Council to allocating the same level of funding from year to year, if it
chose to modify the amount.
Councilor Jordan expressed her appreciation for this coming forward. She recalled the
discussion during the Council goal -setting session of the importance of the arts to the quality of life
in Lake Oswego. She noted that this three-year contract helped the Arts Foundation secure other
funding because it was more stable than a one-year deal.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mr. Powell reviewed the standard hearing procedure and testimony time limits.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 28
June 15, 2010
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony.
Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She commented that Cheryl Brock has done a great job as the Executive Director of the Arts
Council. She mentioned that she has worked with her on the Gallery without Walls.
Mayor Koffman closed the public hearing.
COUN ":il- DISCUSSION
Council:jr Jordan moved Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Counci.. acting as the
Lake Oswego Public Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings
and approving a special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and
authorizing the Mayor to sign a three-year contract with the Arts Council of Lake Oswego
for FYI 0-11 through FYI 2-13. Councilor Tierney seconded the motion.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hennagin that his wife working in a non -remunerative role as a
volunteer on the Arts Council did not require him to recuse himself, as that was riot a technical
conflict of interest.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
7.6 Resolution 10-33, a resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake
Oswego Public Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings
and approving a special procurement for services related to development of a
framework plan together with proposed Comprehensive Plan and Code Amendments
for the Foothills Area; and authorizing the Mayor to sign a predevelopment
agreement for the Foothills Area
Resolution 10-34, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
declaring official intent to reimburse certain expenditures from Urban Renewa'l
Funds, including proceeds of indebtedness
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Williams introduced Matt Brown, Williams/Dame & White. He noted that Christie White
and Dike Dame were in the audience to answer questions.
He explained that the first resolution (10-33) adopted findings and approved a special procurement
for work related to the Foothills Area as an exemption to the competitive bidding process. In
addition, the resolution authorized the Mayor to sign the Foothills pre -development agreement
(PDA) for predevelopment planning work in the 120 -acre Foothills District (industrial area, Oswego
Pointe, and Oswego Village).
He indicated that the second resolution (10-34) preserved the Council's option to reimburse the
General fund for the General fund expenditures proposed this evening. The reimbursement would
come from the potential LORA funds from a new or an extended urban renewal district in the
Foothills area.
He reviewed the background of the Foothills development efforts, the Councils direction to staff to
draft an agreement with Williams/Dame & White and the property owners, and the opportunities
that Foothills brought to the community (pp. 169-170). He reviewed the objectives of the PDA
(pp.170-171). These included a shared vision and planning principles, inf, astructure and
development issues financial feasibility, property assemblage, and strong project management.
He mentioned the parties to the agreement (p.171). He referenced the work plan, budget, and
schedule contained in Exhibit C of the agreement (pp.211-2.16). He spoke of the funding strategy
and termination clauses (p.172). He described the project oversight elements (p.171); including an
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 28
June 15, 2010
Oversight Committee, a City technical staff committee, and a City project manager. He
commented that the public participation element was important to the success of the project
(p.171), since the plan had to be acceptable to the community.
He indicated that the Framework Plan was the main element containing the deliverables (the
significant structural and public works issues needing resolution) and the implementation products
(the code and regulatory amendments needed to move forward). He listed the significant issues:
the flood plain, the wastewater treatment plant, access to Hwy 43, a workable street plan, parking,
the streetcar extension, environmental issues. He mer;tioned other issues of concern, including
public infrastructure, public facilities, no negative financial impact to the School District, open
space, urban form, and land use. He stated that this :should have no negative affect on the School
District.
He noted that City would have to make extensive efforts to put all the implementation products in
place in order to allow the development to occur. He presented a list of the wide variety of
disciplines involved in addressing the various issues and hurdles to the development. He reviewed
the budget ($1.3 million) and the funding sources (p.172). He commented that the $525,000 fee
for Williams/Dame & White was a reasonable fee for all the project management, public outreach
services, and land use expertise that the company would provide.
He indicated that the City could terminate the contract at any time with no cause, and the parties
involved could mutually agree to terminate the contract if any of the significant elements within the
development were not financially feasible (p.172). He mentioned the concurrent work on the
development agreement (p.172-173). He noted the importance of the urban renewal plan (p.173),
which would also be done in conjunction with the PDA. He commented that there was a
complementary resolution to Resolution 10-43 before the LORA Board regarding reimbursement of
the General fund with future tax increment revenues (p.173).
Mr. Brown said that Williams/Dame & White has been working in the Foothills area since late
2008. He described the area was one of the best opportunities in the Metro area for urban infill
development. He indicated that six property owners selected their company through a request for
proposal process as the best company to handle the complexity of issues that they were facing in
trying to redevelop their 12 acres of property. He indicated that the location of this property
between Lake Oswego's thriving downtown and the Willamette River and the public park
investments already made by the City in the area were strong positive attributes on which they
could build.
He referenced the question of `why was now a good time to do this work.' He stated that they
believed strongly that these downturns gave cities, private developers, and others in the real estate
business a good opportunity to plan for the next cycle and to be ready when it emerged. He
recalled the point made that not much activity has occurred in the Foothills area. He commented
that that was true of similar properties that also did not have the correct zoning or resolution of
flood plain, infrastructure, or environmental issues needed to attract capital -investment to the area.
He commented that the goal of this planning process was to set the table for development by
creating an attractive investment opportunity of the entire 120 acres. He stated their belief that
there would be multiple opportunities for multiple developers to build the City's vision for the area.
He stated that, over the next 20 months, they hoped to remove the development obstacles
currently in place. He indicated that they would work hard to make sure that the citizens' voices
were heard throughout the process, as it was important to produce a publicly supported plan. He
mentioned a final goal of producing a plan that achieved results on the ground, and not one that
sat on the shelf.
He explained that the PDA only took the project through the planning phase. He emphasized the
multiple opportunities to terminate the contract, should any obstacle stop the development. He
pointed out that there was no real obligation on the City beyond this initial planning phase. The
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 28
June 15, 2010
development agreement would have to stand on its own merits and make financial sense for the
City and the private sector in order to move forward.
He stated that they were confident and had a great deal of professional experience in managing
this kind of multi -disciplinary, multi -issue complex project. He indicated that they looked forward to
working with the Council, the City staff, and the public to move this project forward.
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Mr. Powell indicated to Cilwancilor Hennagin that the. Council was required to hold a public
hearing only on Resolution 10-33, but it could include Resolution 10-34, if it so desired. Mayor
Hoffman commented that he did not think any one was interested in the reimbursement issue.
Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the potential reimbursement went up to the
$800,000 and also included the money expended for the urban renewal planning work.
Mr. Powell discussed the amendment to Resolution 10-34. He indicated that the new Section 4
stated that repayment of this debt was subordinate to other LORA debts, which allowed the
Redevelopment Agency to continue its financing activities in the interim. He emphasized that the
expenditures for reimbursement had to go for either an urban renewal plan development or
projects under that plan.
Mr. Williams confirmed to Councilor Tierney that the City would be letting contracts for
consultants to work on the urban renewal plan in conjunction with the PDA. He gave a ballpark
estimate of a $100,000 to $150,000 range.
Mayor Hoffman cited the lateness of the hour in stating that he would entertain a motion to reduce
the allotted speaking time from five minutes to three minutes. There was no motion.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony.
.canine Dunphy, 15450 SW Boones Ferry Road
She referenced the Oregonian article published last Wednesday (June 9) entitled "Portland Leaves.
Empty Development Instead Of Affordable Housing in South Waterfront." She questioned whether
it was wise for the City to sign a PDA with the same developer involved in that project. She noted
that the South Waterfront project was similar to the proposal for Lake Oswego with a combination
of millions of dollars of public money and private money. She mentioned that the developers fell
behind schedule and borrowed significant amounts from the City in .addition to a $1.7 million
development fee, yet the City of Portland still did not have the promised housing mix.
She noted that the PDA tonight had a $1.3 million budget, including a '$520,000 fee to
Williams/Dame & White to manage the other consultants hired. She mentioned that she did not
support moving ahead with the Foothills project at this time. She asked if it was wise to use this
firm. She asked why the contract did not go out to bid, noting that Portland also did not go out to
bid on its contract. She asked why the City's Economic Development Department could not
manage the other consultants, so that the City did not have to pay this significant amount of money
to anyone.
She observed that an integral part of the agreement was a commitment from the City for a
streetcar, as well as having the streetcar financing in place. She pointed out that the citizens and .
the Council have not yet made a decision on the streetcar, as the Task Force has yet to make its
recommendation.
She mentioned watching the April 13 Council study session with Bruce Woods, the development
expert, who said that this type of development was not feasible now or in the near future. She
asked that the City not sign this agreement at this time, especially with this developer, until they
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 28
June 15, 2010
knew more. She mentioned her concern that Williams/Dame & White was also an investor in the
Foothills LLC. She questioned the ethics of that situation.
Jerry Wheeler, Chamber CEO, 13594 Blazer Trail
He thanked the Council for its hard work during the budget process. He urged the Council to
support the PDA. He argued that the reality was that now was the time to prepare for the future
and to engage in a process that would provide the due diligence to establish whether Foothills was
the development opportunity that many believed it to be.
He held that they had a small window of opportunity to accomplish a great deal in a shorter time
period than before. He cited property owners and businesses willing to take a leap of faith and a
Council that believed that a community that did not grow could not sustain its quality of life and
services. He mentioned that the property owners tied up their properties in creating the LLC, which
meant that they had a far greater investment in the area than implied by the small amount of cash
up front under discussion. He stated that, in today's market, only public/private partnership
projects would succeed,
He listed the benefits of moving forward with this agreement: a broader economic tax base,
potential housing for families and those wishing to age in place, and a new transportation link from
downtown Portland to downtown Lake Oswego via the river and via rail. He argued that these
benefits far outweighed the risk of moving forward with the agreement. He referenced the opt out
opportunities in the PDA that protected taxpayer investment down the road. He agreed that
ultimately the taxpayers would decide much of the future for Foothills.
He contended economic development attracting new families, new jobs, and new tax revenues
was the only way to solve tight dollars and rising costs. He encouraged the Council to commit to
economic development, citing the powerful impact developing this amazing resource could have on
Lake Oswego's quality of life.
• Mike Erickson, Stampher Road Neighborhood Association, 255 Stampher Road, Lake
Oswego
He commented that, while he personally thought the Foothills development could be a good thing,
the neighborhood had mixed feelings about it. He mentioned that there were many projects going
on right now on Tryon Creek, including a $300,000 to $400,000 salmon restoration project. He
reported that the fish biologists have told the neighborhood association that an extension of the
Portland to Lake Oswego streetcar required moving the tracks over 50 feet -to run through the
Jarvis property and building a trestle bridge right over the salmon restoration project. He described
the trolleys rattling the soil and disturbing the salmon runs as environmental issues not addressed
yet that could block the streetcar.
He indicated that the neighbors agreed that there has not been much communication yet between
the neighbors and the trolley project. He recalled the vote passed just as he was moving into the
neighborhood to purchase the Jarvis property with dedicated park bond dollars. He argued that
the -trolley tracks running through the Jarvis property removed the property's status as a dedicated
park. He emphasized that there were several issues that needed addressing regarding the
streetcar impacts.
He commented that he thought spending $50 million per mile for a six -mile trolley run ($250 to
$300 million project) was a waste of money. He recalled that -the Council members had spoken of
being fiscally conservative in their voter pamphlet statements. He argued that $250 to $300 million
was not fiscally conservative. He contended that any money coming from the federal government
would only add to the federal deficit. He questioned whether sending a trolley into the Foothills
area as a key development element was worth all the fiscal issues involved.
He stated his opinion that, if the City could make Foothills work without the trolley, many people
would support the project. He pointed out that the buses ran only half full during peak traffic hours
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 21 of 28
June 15, 2010
now. He doubted that more Lake Oswego residents would give .up -their cars to take a trolley into
Portland. He encouraged the Council to be fiscally conservative and to -make the right decision not
to waste taxpayer dollars on the trolley in these tough times.
4 Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She commented that she opposed this agreement for the reasons previously stated but she
expected that the Council would pass it. She asked whether access to Hwy 43 was now an
essential condition of development. She asked whether contamination would also be included.
She asked if all parties had to agree for the City to opt out. She asked if there were penalties,
should the City opt out on its own.
Gary Buford, 5 Camelot Court and 415 N State Street
He mentioned that he was a civil engineer and surveyor by profession, a registered professional in
Oregon who has done a lot of residential development work in the Lake Oswego area during the
past 39 plus years. He indicated his familiarity with the City's planning process.
He spoke of his amazement in learning that the City was providing $800,000 for pre -development
planning for this project, something he has never seen the City do for any of his projects. He
indicated that he understood that the City and the landowners needed to have questions
answered.
He commented that, as a civil engineer, he was very concerned when any part of a development
was within a flood plain, as a considerable portion of this project was. He indicated that the
concept of cut and fill allowing development on a flood plain did not make this project any more
palatable to him.
He discussed his concern about the Tryon Creek sewage treatment plant. He said that he knew of
no current plans by the City of Portland to relocate or abandon that sewage plant. He mentioned
that he had experience with sewage treatment plants, and wondered whether the Council had
truthful knowledge about the cost and ramifications of moving or relocating a sewage treatment
plant. He questioned the Council spending $800,000 without a full knowledge of what it was
attempting to accomplish.
He indicated that he had many more concerns about the project. He suggested that the Foothills
property owners should develop their property and solve the development problems on their own,
just as he has done for 40 years. He argued that the City should do what it needed to do and the
property owners do what they needed to do, as has been the situation in development for many
years.
He stated that he did not object to development in the Foothills District but he thought that the
property owners should finance it themselves. He reiterated that he did not think that the Council
members understood the full ramifications of this project. He mentioned his understanding that the
streetcar was necessary for Foothills and that Foothills was necessary for the streetcar. He asked
whether that was the reason that the Council was moving forward on this.
Charles "Skip" Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill Road, Portland, Clackamas County
He spoke in opposition to the contract. He noted that this was transit -oriented development, yet
last Monday, he had probably been the only transit rider attending the Council meeting. He
described transit in Lake Oswego as `pathetic,' which the streetcar would only make worse
because it required transfers. He reiterated that transfers would kill the project because people did
not like transfers and the time they took. He cited his personal experience in stating that transfers
added on about seven minutes to a Lake Oswego to Portland trip. He encouraged the Council
members to simulate the transfers as part of evaluating this contract agreement.
He suggested that the Council send a postcard to its citizens informing them that it would be
encumbering them to several hundred thousand dollars a year to refinance the West End Building
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 22 of 28
June 15, 2010
.and the timing relative to the Foothills PDA and the selection of the locally preferred alternatives.
He speculated that the Council would face serious problems with its voters in November if it did not
do so.
• Leonard Bergstein, 2226 SW Main Street, Portland
He indicated that he represented a growing group of individuals in neighborhoods who were
interested in making the best decision for the locally preferred alternative in the transit corridor
between Portland and Lake Oswego. He said that his clients had a hard time understanding how
the Council could.vote on this PDA to align the City's interests with the streetcar six months before
the Council selected the locally preferred alternative. He cited paragraph F in the PDA as
irrevocably and straightforwardly tying the projects together.
He presented his clients' request that the Council delay action on this PDA until the Council could
make a clear legal determination that this decision would not prejudice its subsequent decision on
the locally preferred alternative in December 2010.
Jonathan Snell, 3250 Upper Drive
He addressed the issue of greenfrastructure. He described a wooded wetland in the southeast
corner of Foothills Park adjacent to Roehr Park and the river as representative of the City's
unrealized opportunities to manage the community's natural areas in an effective manner. He
indicated that the City funded some good work in that wetland, including removal of ivy on the
trees. However, their follow up to the ivy removal found one tree that still had ivy growing on it. He
cited this as an example of the continuity of care needed as the City went through the process of
finding a cost-effective and efficient way to manage its natural areas.
He commented that the work involved would not take as long as one might think, citing his own
experience in discovering that what he thought would be an all day job of removing blackberries
only took a couple of hours. He spoke of the power of appropriate herbicides and recognizing the
plant succession process. He held that, if they took an intentional approach to natural area
management, then they would find it a community and good will building effort.
Carolyne Jones, 2818 S Poplar Way
She stated her opposition to the contract. She quoted from the Oregonian June 10 article, "Empty
Lots and Empty Promises," noting that most of the $13 million spent by the Portland Development
Commission to buy South Waterfront land for affordable housing among other things went to the
lead developers and yet the affordable apartments have not been built.
She expressed her concern that this project was being structured as a windfall for the LLC
partners. She mentioned that her research this afternoon found that the expected down payment
for new residential developments was 20%. She indicated that she could not find out similar
information on commercial development. She said that Mr. Williams had not known the answer
either. She asked the Council to delay the project until the City could find out what the down
payment was on commercial development and compare it to what the LLC owners have put up.
Mayor Hoffman closed the hearing to public testimony.
STAFF FOLLOW-UP
Mr. Williams addressed the recent Oregonian article about the South Waterfront affordable
housing. He reported that staff talked with the Portland Development Commission Director on the
South Waterfront project and learned that North Macadam Investors (Williams & Dame) fulfilled all
their required obligations in the development agreement, except for 30 units of affordable housing.
He indicated that the affordable housing component was still in progress as the developers were
still working on the first phase of the development (1,000 condominium units).
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 23 of 28
June 15. 20'10
He mentioned that the Portland Development director felt good about the work done to date. The
director was very impressed with Williams & Dame, and considered them one of the only
developers in the region capable of accomplishing the work done at the South Waterfront to date.
He commented that a careful reading of the article found that it was really about the City of
Portland's ability to accomplish some of the requirements for providing affordable housing for
South Waterfront. He noted that the complexities of the entire development and current market
conditions have made it difficult for Portland to get affordable housing in place, although the first
affordable housing project was scheduled to start construction il� November 2010.
He said that he felt comfortable with the information that h3 ree-ved back from the various people
he spoke to who were involved with the South Waterfront project.
Mr. Dame stated that his philosophy with respect to newspapers was to respond only to written
questions and only in writing, as he did in this particular case. He pointed out that this article was
about the Portland Development Commission, and not about Williams/Dame & White. He
indicated that neither the Portland Development Commission nor the Portland Housing Bureau
made any adjustments or corrections to his answers to the newspaper's questions. He confirmed
that Williams & Dame, as the representative of North Macadam Investors, fulfilled all of its
obligations for affordable housing, which were to make land available to Portland to construct said
housing.
He mentioned the background of the economic downturn that delayed the affordable housing
project to this November. He recalled that they sold the tax credits for an affordable housing
project four years ago for $1.03, which was at a premium. Today, with no one needing tax credits
because no one was making money, they would sell them for 74 cents.
He commented that the new Portland Housing Bureau, as reconstructed under Councilor Fish, has
done an amazing job in pulling this affordable housing project together and getting it financed. He
mentioned that he has worked on the design of this project for four years, essentially for no,hing,
as the loan all went to the architectural work and permit fees. He stated that he would give His
personal and direct phone number to anyone wanting to discuss the facts of the situation with him,
and not the stuff in the newspaper.
Mr. Williams answered Ms. Boom's question about termination clauses. He said that the City
could opt out of the agreement at any time without penalties. He clarified that if the City opted out,
it would forego the reimbursement of the $130,000 by the industrial property owners. He explained
that these property owners have invested a lot of money to date in work that the City asked them to
do in the past. They had wanted assurances that this process would move forward to a product
with which they could work.
He discussed his expectation that they would not get to a point where they spent more than the
$800,000, as they would know before then whether the City should opt out or not. He emphasized
that he felt comfortable that, with the Oversight Committee in place, they would have good
communication and understanding of where they were with the agreement as it moved forward.
He commented that, although the City could opt out at any time, the goal was to complete the
agreement and have development actually occur.
He addressed Mr. Buford's comment about the treatment plant. He indicated that this plant owned
by the City of Portland provided services for all of Lake Oswego. In addition. 40% of its treatment
capacity served wastewater coming from Portland. He reported that the BES Director, Dean
Marriott, was very interested in Lake Oswego's work and willing to look at options for moving
forward. He said that Mr. Marriott's primary concern was protecting the Portland ratepayers.
similar to Lake Oswego's concern about protecting the Lake Oswego ratepayers.
He mentioned that the treatment plant was 50 years old and had a number of significant issues
that needed addressing. He said that staff would like to develop something that made the
investment needed in the treatment plant work in the best possible fashion for any future Foothills
City Counci! Regular Meeting Minutes Page 24 of 28
June 15, 2010
development. He indicated that this project included looking at the right solution forthe treatment
plant in a way that maximized the dollars that needed to go into the plant over time.
He addressed the issues raise regarding the streetcar alignment and environmental concerns with
Tryon Creek and the Jannis property. He mentioned that Tri -Met has dealt with these kinds of
environmental issues in the many projects that it has done. He assured Mr. Erickson and the
Council that this project would look thoroughly at those issues and minimize to the extent possible
any impacts to the Tryon Cove Park, as well as deal with any associated environmental issues.
He mentioned that the two options Under consideration for the -streetcar alignment in the Stampher
Road area required a bridge over Tryon Creek. He said that the bridge design would protect the
fish passage and not impact the work of BES in Tryon Cove at this time.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS
Councilor Moncrieff referenced Ms. Boom's other questions regarding access to Hwy 43 and soil
contamination. Mr. Williams reiterated that if the study found that there were insurmountable
issues, including Hwy 43 access, that made the project financially unfeasible, the parties could
agree to terminate the agreement. He said that he did not believe that the soil contamination
question was specifically called out, but an overarching essential condition for the agreement was
that the entire development had to be financially feasible. Any one particular thing that was not
financially feasible, even if it was not spelled out as an essential condition, could lead to the parties
agreeing to terminate the agreement.
Mr. Williams confirmed that the City could pull out of the contract without cause and without the
agreement of the other parties, although it would lose the $130,000 reimbursement. Mr. Powell
commented that the trigger for the $130,000 payment was the adoption of the Framework Plan; it
did not accrue before that. He pointed out that it was unlikely that Lake Oswego would exercise its
unilateral termination opportunity after adopting the Framework Plan because the Plan set the
stage for the development agreement and the post -plan amendments.
Councilor Moncrieff asked why the City was not delaying this agreement until after the locally
preferred alternative decision has been made. Mr. Williams explained that the primary reason
was staff's expectation that this process would help inform the streetcar decision, the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) decision, and the locally preferred alternative (LFA)
decision. He observed that the Foothills effort was six months behind in providing the information
that the transit project needed from the Foothills area.
Mr. Williams mentioned staff's belief that development needed to fund the streetcar project. He
said that he would not recommend any financing strategy for the streetcar that looked at increasing
taxes to citizens. He explained that having a better understanding of the potential development
opportunities through this Foothills PDA process would help inform both the staff work in identifying
potential financing strategies for the streetcar and the Council decisions.
Mr. Brown indicated that the two primary streetcar alignment options under consideration for
Foothills presupposed a street pattern that they were not yet certain worked for the development
and vice versa. He held that understanding how the streetcar would relate to and interact with a
street pattern for future development was part of the consideration of the LPA. He concurred with
Mr. Williams that the Foothills project was behind the streetcar project in terms of providing the
information that the streetcar team was looking for.
Councilor Olson asked for clarification on the statement in Section 5.2.6 (Exhibit C), which talked
about an anticipated supplemental DEIS as a result of the Framework Plan. Mr. Brown explained
that his thought behind including that provision was accommodating a hypothetical change to the
alignment. He posed a scenario in which they decided that it made more sense to shift the
streetcar alignment away from the alignment studied under the D—EIS, and the FTA required a
supplement DEIS to incorporate the change. He said that it was unclear right now whether they
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 25 of 28
June 15, 2010
would deviate that far from the current alignments to make that necessary, but he Telt it was worth
flagging.
Councilor Olson asked how funding the streetcar with development money would work in light of
the information provided to the Council that development money would not exist for the next five to
ten years. Mr. Williams mentioned that they did have an existing urban renewal district that could
provide tax increment funds for the project. He pointed out that they could not forecast when the
Foothills development would actually occur with respect to when the streetcar project would occur.
He explained that this project would look at how those two lined up and how potential development
fees anc :ax increment financing could be used and timed with the project itself. 'He commented
that the City could only deal with the cash flow challenges once they knew what the costs were,
what the City's responsibility would be, and what options they were dealing with.
Mr. Brown mentioned that the PDA included a commitment to work with the City on the creation
and formation of a local improvement district (LID). He described that as another way to get the
private property owners benefiting from the streetcar to help pay for the construction of the line.
He indicated that all phases of the Portland Streetcar have included an LID component, which
passed with overwhelming support from the owners along the LID sections. Mayor Hoffman
commented that there were LIDs on the Central Eastside and under discussion in the John's
Landing area.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Hennagin moved the adoption of Resolution 10-33 and Resolution 10-34, and
authorizing the Mayor to sign a pre -development agreement for the Foothills area.
Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Olson stated that she would vote against the agreement, citing the objections she
stated during the budget discussion with respect to the City budget and the City reserve funds.
She agreed with the point raised by citizens tonight that they had no idea how much money- they
might need to take out of reserves for the West End building, should the refinancing of the building
fail.
She mentioned that the agreement directly tied the streetcar to the Foothills project. She observed
that the costs to the Lake Oswego citizens and the City to fund construction of the streetcar were
another unknown, as were the ongoing maintenance and operations commitments for the
streetcar. She commented that they did not know who would operate the streetcar or how the City
would pay for it. She noted that the Council has also not discussed whether the community
wanted a second or even a third urban renewal district in town. She argued that the Council's
priorities, given the current economy, did not support spending the money at this time.
She commented that, while the Foothills redevelopment was probably a good thing, for her the
issue was timing. She recalled the presentation by Bruce Wood who said that nothing could
happen in Foothills without large public subsidies. She said that she could not commit their
citizens to large public subsidies right now. She mentioned that she had concerns about the
environmental issues raised tonight.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would supportthe motion. He described this as a defining moment
for this City Council, in that it was setting the future for the next 20 to 50 years in the only area that
would provide a future for Lake Oswego in housing choices, supporting the downtown; and
providing a stable funding mechanism for the years 2040 to 2080. He argued that they were
leaving the city in better shape than they found it. He stated that he was comfortable that the City
was using these funds in a transparent manner.
He emphasized that the important action was the Council looking to redevelop a property that
would add to the downtown and to the quality of life in Lake Oswego. He cited his earlier
statement that a city could either grow or decline, and that it was better to manage growth than a
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 26 of 28
June 15, 2010
declining city. He cited the stories he heard from mayors this weekend who did have declining
cities to manage.
Councilor Hennagin said that he would vote for the motion because one of his campaign planks
had been the redevelopment of the Foothills area. He held that this redevelopment was necessary
to create more housing options for those who wanted to age in place as they downsized their
homes.
A roll tali vote was taken, and the motionap sseq with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting aye.' Councilor Olson voted `no.' [6-1]
8. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER
8.1 Ordinance 2549, an ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego amending LOC Article
50.44 (Flood Management Area) regarding applicability, map amendments, and the
flood management area for a portion of Springbrook Creek, and adopting findings LU
10-0003-1731
Mayor Hoffman mentioned the Council's previous discussion of these ordinances. He said that he
did not recall anyone opposing them.
Councilor Jordan moved the enactment of Ordinance 2549. Councilor Johnson seconded
the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman,
Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
8.2 Ordinance 2552, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC
Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), Section 50.11.010 to limit the square
footage of delicatessens, bakeries, and restaurants in the Campus Research and
Development (CR&D) zone, and adopting findings LU 09-0034-1732
Councilor Jordan moved the enactment of Ordinance 2552. Councilor Johnson seconded
the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman,
Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
8.3 Ordinance 2456, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter 50
of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code to add new Article 50.08E
relating to the Glenmorrie R - 15 Overlay District and adopting findings LU 09-0043-
1733
Councilor Jordan moved the enactment of Ordinance 2456. Councilor Johnson seconded
the motion.
Councilor Olson commented that, while she voted against this originally, she has heard some
good arguments from the neighborhood that convinced her to vote in flavor of it this time.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL
9.1 Councilor Information
9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
10.1 City Manager
10.1.1 Review of Council Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 27 of 28
June 15, 2010
10.2 City Attorney
11. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ONI,October 5 2010 , Al,
-Hoffman, Ma
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 28 of 28
June 15, 2010