The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet - 2010-12-07 PMREVISED AGENDA CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO LAXE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 3 80 A Avenue PO Box 369 Tuesday, December 7, 2010 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 6:30 p.m. 503-675-3984 Council Chambers 380 A Avenue � 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 the City Recorder's Office at 503-635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting. Page # 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PRESENTATIONS (10 minutes) 3.1 Unsung Hero Awards 4. 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. 5. REPORTS/RESOLUTIONS/UPDATES (90 minutes) 5.1 Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Supply Partnership: Resolution 10-73, approving a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Plan 5.2 Water Partnership Update 5.3 Amendment of Public Improvement Contract for Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer 5.4 LOIS Update 5.5 Resolution 10-72, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10-11 to fund certain programs in the Planning and Building Department 5.6 Resolution 10-75, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10-11 to fund park natural area restoration activities Jack Hoffman, Mayor ■ Roger Hennagin, Councilor ■ Dan Vizzini, Councilor Donna Jordan, Councilor ■ Sally Moncrieff, Councilor ■ Mary Olson, Councilor ■ Bill Tierney, Councilor Page 2 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS (1 hour) 6.1 Resolution 10-70, adopting a supplemental budget resolution for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2010 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 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, in opposition to, 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: Move to adopt Resolution 10-70. 6.2 Ordinance 2562, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter 50 of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code regarding the definition of "congregate housing" in LOC 50.02.005, clarifying the qualification criteria for occupancy, and adopting findings LU 10-0041-1749 Same hearing process as above. Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2562. 6.3 Ordinance 2556 A, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), to allow common wall boathouses to be constructed on abutting lots in the Oswego Lake Setback, and adopting findings LU 08-0052A-1751 Same hearing process as above. Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2556 A. Page 3 7. 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. 7.1 REPORTS 7.1.1 Multiple Site Landscape Service Contract Action: Award the Multiple Site Landscape Service contract in the amount of $211,500 to TruGreen Landcare LLC to provide landscape maintenance to city - owned properties 7.1.2 Declaration of the Vote Action: Accept Declaration of the Vote 7.2 RESOLUTIONS 7.2.1 Resolution 10-65, supporting statewide plastic bag regulation Action: Adopt Resolution 10-65 7.3 MINUTES 7.3.1 July 27, 2010, special meeting 7.3.2 September 14, 2010, special meeting 7.3.3 September 21, 2010, regular meeting 7.3.4 October 5, 2010, regular meeting Action: Approve minutes as written END CONSENT AGENDA 8. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 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. Page 4 9.1 Councilor Information 9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental Committees 10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS (30 minutes) 10.1 City Manager 10.1.1 5 -Year Financial Forecast 10.1.2 Review of Council Schedule 10.1.3 Review of Council Digest 10.2 City Attorney i�i�_��aL�I�L'��L�I�►i� 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 LAS oswEco AGENDA CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 380 AAvenue PO Box 369 Tuesday, December 7, 2010 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 6:30 p.m. 503-675-3984 log Council Chambers, 380 AAvenue 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 the City Recorder's Office at 503-635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting. Page # 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PRESENTATIONS (20 minutes) 3.1 Unsung Hero Awards 3.2 LOIS Update 3.3 Water Partnership Update 3.4 5 -Year Financial Forecast 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 Multiple Site Landscape Service Contract Action: Award the Multiple Site Landscape Service contract in the amount of $211,500 to TruGreen Landcare LLC to provide landscape maintenance to city - owned properties Jack Hoffman, Mayor ■ Roger Hennagin, Councilor ■ Dan Vizzini, Councilor Donna Jordan, Councilor ■ Sally Moncrieff, Councilor ■ Mary Olson, Councilor ■ Bill Tierney, Councilor Page 2 4.1.2 Declaration of the Vote Action: Accept Declaration of the Vote 4.2 RESOLUTIONS 4.2.1 Resolution 10-65, supporting statewide plastic bag regulation Action: Adopt Resolution 10-65 4.3 MINUTES 4.3.1 July 27, 2010, special meeting 4.3.2 September 14, 2010, special meeting 4.3.3 September 21, 2010, regular meeting 4.3.4 October 5, 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 (1 hour) 7.1 Ordinance 2562, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter 50 of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code regarding the definition of "congregate housing" in LOC 50.02.005, clarifying the qualification criteria for occupancy, and adopting findings LU 10-0041-1749 Public Hearing Process: Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney Staff Report The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, but may be changed by the Council: Page 3 Testimony will be taken in the following order: in support of, in opposition to, 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: Move to enact Ordinance 2562. 7.2 Ordinance 2556 A, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), to allow common wall boathouses to be constructed on abutting lots in the Oswego Lake Setback, and adopting findings LU 08-0052A-1751 Some hearing process as above. Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2556 A. 7.3 Resolution 10-70, adopting a supplemental budget resolution for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2010 by adopting a supplemental budget, approving resources/requirements, and making appropriations Some hearing process as above. Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 10-70. 8. RESOLUTIONS 8.1 Resolution 10-72, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10-11 to fund certain programs in the Planning and Building Department 8.2 Resolution 10-75, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10-11 to fund park natural area restoration activities 8.3 Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Supply Partnership: Resolution 10-73, approving a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Plan 9. REPORTS 9.1 Amendment of Public Improvement Contract for Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer Page 4 10. 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. 10.1 Councilor Information 10.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental Committees 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS (15 minutes) 11.1 City Manager 11.1.1 Review of Council Schedule 11.1.2 Review of Council Digest 11.2 City Attorney 12. 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 12/2/10 DATE MEETING Tuesday, Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers December 7 • LOIS Update • Water Partnership Update • Unsung Hero Awards • Multiple site landscape contract • Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Supply Partnership: Approval of Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Plan • Support of statewide plastic bag ban (Res. 10-65) • 5 -Year Financial Forecast • Declaration of the Vote • LOIS Change Order Public Hearings • Comprehensive Plan text amendment to definition of congregate housing (LU 10-0041) • Lake setbacks (LU 08-0052A) • Supplemental Budget Wednesday, Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers December 8 • Introduction to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Study • Continuation of Water Cost of Service Analysis • Master Fees and Charges Study Session Redevelopment Agency Meeting, 8:30 p.m. Council Chambers • Closed Session • Appointment to LORA Budget Committee Monday, Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers December 13 Public Hearing • Sensitive Lands Amendments to Definitions and Exempt Development (LU 10-0043) Tuesday, Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers December 14 • Recognition of Councilors Hennagin and Vizzini • Employee Excellence Awards • Northwest Natural Franchise Renewal (Ord. 2565) • PRAB Recommendation for naming lakefront park (Res. 10-71) • Adoption of Emergency Operations Plan • Review of 2010 Goals • Audit Committee Report Public Hearings • Adoption of Update to Master Fees and Charges (Res. 10-69) • Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan Implementation —Amendments to create new overlay zone (LU 10-0040) — continue to January 18 • Proposed ordinance to extend development permit completion deadlines (LU 10-0048) — continue to January 18 Tuesday, No Meeting December 21 Tuesday, No meeting December 28 BOLD ITEMS — New issues added to schedule CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE Items known as of 12/2/10 DATE MEETING Tuesday, Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers January 4 • Oath of Office for Councilors Kehoe, Gud man and Jordan —reception following • Selection of Council President Tuesday, Redevelopment Agency Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers January 11 • North Anchor Project • Discussion of financing and future LORA Projects • Debt Financing Tuesday, Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers January 18 • Tuesday, Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers January 25 • To Be Scheduled • Review draft Wastewater Master Plan (January 2011) • Context statement relating to Lake Oswego's Iron Industry and Mid -Century periods • ACC National Accreditation • Vancouver, WA fieldtrip • Foothills Update • Industrial Park Zone Amendment (LU 10-0042) • Media in Executive Session Policy • Municipal Finance Presentation • Summary of Rail—Volution Foothills Charette • Arts Council Smart Phone Gallery Without Walls Tour App (February 1) • LOPT Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) public hearing and decision (February 15) • Utility billing liability limitations ordinance • Adoption of revised list of invasive tree species • Human Resource Study Session: PERS, Health Insurance, Bargaining Overview 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, (Sept., Dec., March, June) • Comp Plan Updates BOLD ITEMS — New issues added to schedule 3./ 2010 Unsung Heroes Draft Script Since 2001, the City has recognized people in Lake Oswego who help their neighbors and improve the community without seeking or receiving pay or recognition. These "Unsung Heroes" are our guest of honor at this special awards ceremony here tonight. 34 awards have been presented since the program's inception, and we are here tonight to add three more outstanding citizens to that number. When we called our three recipients for this year to invite them to the ceremony, they proved to be a modest group, and somewhat reluctant to step into the spotlight. Here are some of the responses we heard when calling to let them know their work was honored: "What a wonderful welcome home after traveling abroad... Thank you! I'm honored." "I never would have expected anything like this" "Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! I am just so honored I don't know what to say!" These kinds of responses underscore the fact that these folks, their contributions and involvement are second nature and that they have no expectations for reward or recognition. They are helping others out of the goodness of their heart and because it's the right thing to do. Of our nine finalists this year, each had made a variety of contributions. All were deserving of the award, and our judges had some difficult decisions to make. We had six judges this year who are themselves, actively involved in the community (past recipients of the award, past committee members, citizens serving on various Boards and Commissions, and neighborhood folks. Our 2010 judges were Andrew Harris, Joy Strull, Gwen Hill, Nan Binkley, Richard Reamer, and I, Dan Vizzini. These six individuals actively participated in thoughtful deliberations of all the Unsung Hero nominations. I would like to thank the committee for their time and efforts. Now without further adieu, I am pleased to announce the recipients of 2010's three Unsung Heroes Awards. As I say your name, please come forward and receive your award. Paul Sleeper The City Council is pleased to recognize Paul Sleeper. For the last eight years Paul has been making Mac Life easier, more enjoyable and less daunting by putting in as much as 20 hours a week in the Computer Learning Center at the Adult Community Center, keeping the MAC system upgraded by installing new operating systems, software and solving problems. When not working on the systems, he teaches classes twice a week, organizes the material, and answers individual questions to solve problems for our seniors. Paul is always willing and ready to lend a hand and inspires those around him by giving so freely to help and providing an opportunity for others to learn. Paul was nominated by Kay Kerr Dale Cleland The City Council is pleased to recognize Dale Cleland. Dale has been the volunteer director of the Lake Oswego Millennium Concert Band since its inception in the fall of 1999. A long-time resident and former Lake Oswego Schools Director of Music, under Dale's leadership this small volunteer band has grown into a community favorite drawing crowds of over 600 loyal fans when they perform! As if organizing the music program wasn't enough, Dale also handles all the public relations, marketing, and fund raising, inspiring and promoting music in our community. Dale's contribution, leadership and love of music have given life to an amazing band that performs for our residents and brings beautiful music to our city! Dale Cleland was nominated by Cyndie Glazer Marylou Colver The City is pleased to recognize Marylou Colver. (Erin O'Rourke-Meadors will accept the award for Marylou who is out of town.) Over the past year citizens have enjoyed reading about the people, places and events that helped make Lake Oswego what it is today. Marylou volunteered for more than a year and researched and wrote the more than 100 delightful stories with catchy titles such as Stray Dogs and Straying Daughters, Getting Hitched to a Star, City Council Ban Bathing Suits, and Illiterate Cows and Satan Was a Blonde, sent to every household and business as part of the City newsletter, Hello LO, month after month and celebrating our centennial in 2010. I She served to entertain with humor, inform with insight and help us discover our past. These wonderful stories will be shared in homes and classrooms, rediscovering our colorful history for years to come! Marylou Colver was nominated by Bonnie Hirshberger Speaking on behalf of the Council and the community, we say "thank you" to all of our Unsung Heroes who make the Lake Oswego community a better place to live, work and play. ��cr(i3cnc'amrr� MAYOR HOFFMAN, CITY COUNCILORS, AND GUESTS. I AM MARGARET ANDERSON, A RETIRED EDUCATOR, WHO HAS PLAYED TENNIS ALL OF MY ADULT LIFE. I DECIDED TO PLAY COMPETITIVELY AFTER I RETIRED 23 YEARS AGO. I HAVE FOUND THAT TENNIS NOT ONLY EXERCISES MY BODY, BUT IT ALSO EXERCISES MY BRAIN. AS I PLAY, I MUST THINK ABOUT WHERE TO PLACE MY SHOTS, AND I MUST REMEMBER THE SCORE CORRECTLY, SO I DON'T GET INTO LONG DISCUSSIONS WITH MY OPPONENT ABOUT THE POINTS OF THE GAME. IN NOVEMBER, I WAS ON THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST SECTION'S 80S TEAM AT THE INTERSECTIONAL TEAM COMPETITION IN SAN ANTONIO. I HAVE MANY FRIENDS WHO ARE 80 AND OVER ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. THEY HARDLY CHANGE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT --THEY ALL LOOK MUCH YOUNGER THAN THEY ACTUALLY ARE. (SHOW PICTURES) TENNIS IS A SPORT OF A LIFETIME! PLAYING OUTSIDE IS GREAT IN LAKE OSWEGO IN THE SUMMER! HOWEVER, IF ONE CANNOT PLAY IN THE RAINY SEASON, ONE LOSES SKILLS, STRENGTH, AND INTEREST BY THE TIME GOOD WEATHER COMES BACK TO THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST. WE HAVE MANY PEOPLE IN LAKE OSWEGO WHO ENJOY TENNIS, BUT ARE UNABLE TO GET COURTS AT THE CURRENT FACILITY. I GO TO BEAVERTON TO PLAY BECAUSE I CANNOT GET A COURT IN THE CURRENT FACILITY! IT IS JUST TOO SMALL! IT IS MY HOPE THAT I WILL BE ABLE TO PLAY IN THE NEW FACILITY SOON! IF THE COUNCIL FACILITATES THE CONSTRUCTION, IT COULD BE BUILT IN TWO YEARS! IT IS HIGHLY POSSIBLE! PLEASE DO WHAT YOU CAN TO KEEP LAKE OSWEGANS YOUNG AND PLAYING TENNIS ALL YEAR LONG! ALL OF THE TENNIS PLAYERS IN LAKE OSWEGO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY GET STARTED SOON BUILDING THE NEW FACILITY! THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. DEFECTS IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT i ♦ 10 f Ah r-3 #'C[_h2e'9 9061PatA AM� iU44kpr h"Yi Resolution to delay approval of the budget for the proposed Waluga Reservoir #2 December 2010 We move to respectfully ask City Council to delay the approval of the capital plan for the proposed Waluga Reservoir #2 until questions about the capacity and height, which could affect placement and cost, have been sufficiently addressed. Emerging information has led to numerous questions about the rationale for the 3.5 million gallon(mg) capacity planned for the proposed Waluga Reservoir #2. These unanswered questions pertain to capacity added by a planned decommissioning of the 10th Avenue reservoir (5 mg or 7 feet of diameter), the future addition of five new water districts to be served by the Waluga reservoir, possibly serving the Stafford area in the future, and projected growth for the City. Do we need to plan now for all of these possibilities? Are some of these capacity -adding measures avoidable to reduce the impact on this neighborhood caused by a structure of this size? Why must the Parkhill neighbors house water for all of these needs when they already have a 4 mg reservoir on their street. In addition to the capacity -related questions, the rationale for the 40' height is also in question. Neighbors have been told this height is needed to address water pressure problems in the Waluga neighborhood. During a preliminary meeting with the Waluga Neighborhood Association Board, possible poor water pressure issues were raised. However, this issue has not been verified as to how widespread and extensive it is in the association. Currently the neighborhood has included in a recent neighborhood plan survey a question surrounding water pressure. But up until now water pressure problems have not been verified with substantial data. Thank you for your consideration and willingness to take the time needed to ensure these questions are adequately addressed before moving forward. To: Lake Oswego City Council From: Jeff Gage 3080 Westview Circle Lake Oswego, OR 97034 y-eii/zer4M At4- December 7, 2010 Subject: Oppose Resolution 10-65 concerning state wide ban of plastic retail bags. Information Council has been provided in order to obtain support for a statewide ban of plastic shopping bags is highly one -side and in some ways misleading. Everyone "knows" that plastics are bad for the environment in almost every way. Plastics are tolerated because they frequently provide better use characteristics and benefits or because they cost less, which is why the use of plastics has grown more than many other materials. People tend to overlook the perception that plastics are worse for the environment because of the use benefits. Actually it's fortunate that people overlook the perception, because often plastic products have environmentally superior aspects compared to other products. The fact is that all products, however they are made have an impact on the environment. It's rare that a clear cut case can be made that any product or material is better for the environment in every way. While the principle purpose of Resolution 10-65 is to promote the use of reusable take- out bags, the assumption that's been presented is that paper bags are environmentally superior to plastic bags. This is not necessarily true. Let me point out several ways plastic bags are superior. Paper bags take much more energy to make. 30 years ago it was shown that, when considering all the inputs, paper bags take 3 to 5 times more energy to produce comparable plastic bags. This advantage to plastic bags has increased by at least 50 percent since then, because improved manufacturing and process technology has resulted in plastic bags that are much lighter now. Pound for pound, paper and plastic film take about the same amount of energy to make (starting from raw materials). Typical paper grocery bags weight 8 to 9 times as much as the plastic bags you get from the grocery store. Paper bags are thicker and more rigid so they typically hold more, leading to somewhat fewer being used, but this doesn't even come close to making up the difference. Because the majority of energy required to make plastic bags occurs in making the raw material (polyethylene resin), recycled plastic bags take 84 times less energy to make that paper. Doesn't that seem like more focus on recycling rather than banning would make sense. PJ At any rate, all the environmental concerns of energy use, such as global warming gasses, are several times worse for paper compared to plastic. Plastics versus Paper in the waste stream. At my house, there is no such thing as a single -use non -recycled bag, paper or plastic. They either get used to contain things that go in the garbage or they get recycled. Paper gets to go to the curb, but we have a small basket in our garage that our excess plastic bags go into. This gets taken to one of the local grocery stores once every 2 or 3 years for recycling. Since paper bags are much thicker and heavier, when they go to a landfill paper bags take up much more space. Even if you assume that half of paper bags get recycled versus 5 percent or so for plastic, we are still talking about 4 to 5 times more landfill volume taken up by paper. This wouldn't be so bad if paper really biodegraded in a landfill, but modern landfills are designed to prevent that from happening by burying layers, preventing oxygen from getting to the waste. Because landfills are essentially an anaerobic environment, what does degrade does so "anaerobically". What this means that the primary degradation product of carbon based materials, like paper, is methane. It's generally accepted that methane is 23 or so times worse than carbon dioxide for global warming potential. In other words, over the long run, it's better to burn paper than it is to bury it- at least from a global warming point of view. Now this next part is pretty counter -intuitive. Polyethylene bags are pretty inert. They don't biodegrade unless they are modified to do so. This is actually a good thing since they are effectively performing a "carbon - sequestration" function. This is what electric utilities are betting billions of dollars on with so-called "clean coal" technology. Plastics in the oceans. There is just no way to put a pretty face on plastics getting into the sea. It lasts a long time for sure. It seems, though, that these supposedly non -degradable materials do in fact degrade over time when exposed to the sun. That's the only way I can see to explain why the amounts of plastic products floating around are less than expected from the amount of open ocean dumping that went on world-wide a few decades ago, and still does to some extent. An article in Scientific American last August asks "Ocean garbage patches are not growing, so where is all that plastic going?" There are various theories about this. My theory is that a lot of theories are wrong. One of the curious facts I've seen in articles about the "Atlantic Garbage Patch" is that research trawls towing fine mesh nets around in the supposedly densest places come up with about three -tenths of a gram of plastics per half hour; about the equivalent of 6 inches of Scotch Tape. This is hardly the island of garbage you could walk on that comes to mind when you see presentations about the garbages patches. A popular assumption is that most plastics getting into the ocean are from land sources. That may be true, but that doesn't mean Oregon land sources are a culprit. Even if some plastic bags make it into a river and then into the Pacific, prevailing ocean currents and winds tend to put them back on shore. Many things like plastic bottles that wash up on our beaches have Asian writing on them. That tells us something about where they are coming from. The sources are likely illegal dumping from foreign ships and fishing vessels or from places around the Pacific Rim that don't contain garbage as well as we do. Since plastics last so long in the environment, much of that material probably pre -dates the bans of ocean dumping that started taking effect 20 years ago. The "gyres" referred to in presentations you may have seen would explain how that could happen. Summary There are pluses and minuses to virtually all materials. While paper seems to have an environmental advantage of plastics in some areas, plastics (even plastic bags) have an advantage in others. I believe that returnable reusable items are often what we ought to prefer, but that's not always practical. If the state of Oregon passes a law that makes paper bags the only alternative, we are making a judgement of environmental superiority of one kind of product over the other. Just keep in mind that the law of unintended consequences is in full operation here. I urge you to oppose Resolution 10-65. Thank you, Jeff Gage From Jeff Gage Some examples of my background in supporting conservation and environmental values: President of Gage Industries, a plastic product manufacturing business that operated in Lake Oswego for over 50 years. By 2006 Gage was the largest plastic manufacturer in Oregon with 450 employees. Sold packaging and extrusion divisions in 2008 and the buyers moved operations to plants in other states. 1982 — Installed advanced waste heat recovery system at Gage Industries plant. 1984 - ASHRAE Energy Conservation Award. 3`d place in the nation for energy efficient industrial construction. 1984-85 — Analyzed the data from the 1984 "Plague of Plastics" beach clean-up campaign, determining that over one-half of the plastics collected were from degrading unencapsulated polystyrene foam dock floats. I later supported efforts to ban unencapsulated foam floats in Oregon's rivers and harbors. The beach clean-up program name was changed to "Get the Drift" 1989 — The Oregon Resource Conservation Trust Fund Act was passed by the 1989 Oregon Legislature. Leader the recycling component of the act. Wrote much of it and lobbied for its successful passage. 1991 — Metropolitan Service District Business Recycling Recognition Award 1991 — The Oregonian "Recyclers Hall of Fame" 1990's — Two years as board member of SOLV 1995 — Appointed by Governor Kitzhaber to the Oregon Recycling Markets Development Council. I was Chairman of the Plastics Division for 2 years. Along with my Dad, Rip Gage, we convinced the American Plastics Council to locate the nations first commercial automated plastic bottle sorting system in Oregon. This was located at the Garten Foundation, in Salem. This system was a primary factor in allowing Oregon to lead the nation in curbside plastic recycling. 'L�IOWIZ917�Ml&� LAKE OSWEGO NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION COALITION December 7, 2010 To: Members of the Lake Oswego City Council From: John Surrett, Chairperson, Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition Subject: Request Delay of Council Action on Ordinance 2560 and Delay of End of Year Compliance Package Submittal to Metro regarding the Sensitive Lands Matter "The Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition, LONAC, membership kindly asks the City Council of Lake Oswego at its Monday, December 13 Special Meeting of the City Council to delay action on Ordinance 2560. Also, the LONAC membership asks the City Council to delay beyond the end of this year submittal of the compliance package to Metro. Many issues on the Sensitive Lands matter have been raised by the Lake Oswego Stewards organization and by other concerned citizens as well. These issues have not been adequately resolved and need to be before important votes are taken by the Council, therefore, LONAC's request that Council action be delayed. This resolution was unanimously approved by a quorum of voting members, with one member abstaining, at its Saturday, December 4t11 meeting. Thank you for your consideration of these requests. John Surrett, Chairperson, Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition �C LAKE OSWEGO NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION COALITION December 7, 2010 TO: Members of the Lake Oswego City Council From: Jim Bolland, Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition Land Use Chair. Subject: Request to Delay City Council Decision Regarding the Waluga Water Reservoir 2 "LONAC supports the Waluga and Lake Forest Neighborhood Associations request to Council to delay the City Council decision regarding siting, sizing, and capacity for the proposed Waluga Water Reservoir #2." This resolution was unanimously approved by a quorum of voting members, with one member abstaining, at its December 4, 2010 general meeting. Christie, Robyn From: Smith-Bouwer, Diana Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:46 PM To: Christie, Robyn Subject: FW: Dec 7 Council Meeting, Item 8.1 Code Update -----Original Message ----- From: scot@siegelplanning.com[mailto:scot@siegelplanning.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 9:35 PM To: PUBLIC_AFFAIRS Subject: Dec 7 Council Meeting, Item 8.1 Code Update Message from the web site: Dear Mayor Hoffman and Members of the City Council: Rte. �b-7-2- I n I will miss the December 7 City Council meeting, but would like to comment on Item 8.1, the budget request for Phase 2 of the Code Update. I have been following the project since serving on the Planning Commission during 2004-2009. The Council should be commended for moving it forward; it is long overdue. However, I am concerned about the project's increasing costs, and staff's intent to sole - source the next phase to an out-of-state firm. The City can avoid unnecessary consultant costs by inviting bids. The project manager had plenty of time to solicit proposals after concluding the audit (Phase 1), but chose not to do so. Staff's proposed budget increase and transfer of funds is premature. This is not a criticism of Clarion and Associates or Don Elliot. I participated in Phase 1 and reviewed Mr. Elliot's final audit report. It lays out a clear roadmap. However, based on my experience --My company specializes in land use master planning and code updates --I am certain that a local firm could deliver Phase 2 at a lower cost and with a higher level of service. I know of at least three other firms in our area that would have considered bidding on Phase 2 had the City issued an request for proposals; and I understand that representatives from at least one of those firms contacted the Planning Director. I am not planning on submitting a bid for Phase 2, and I do not intend to challenge the Council's selection. When my company interviewed for Phase 1, staff's only critical question to me was why our cost estimate was $15,000 lower than Clarion's. When I explained the cost savings and increased accessibility associated with hiring a local firm, it did not register. Clearly,.staff was willing to pay more for an "outside perspective." As a city planning consultant, I know that communities often gravitate toward an "outside firm." Sometimes they do so for perspective or perceived objectivity, which can be useful when the community is divided over key policy issues. My company often fills that niche when working for local governments in other states, including Colorado; so I understood staff's selection of Clarion for Phase 1. However, Phase 2 does not require an outside perspective; the scope of work is limited to code reorganization and housekeeping edits. Phase 2 is "policy -neutral." My firm and the other finalists interviewed for Phase 1 did not even receive a courtesy phone call or letter from the Planning Department. We discovered staff's intent to sole -source Phase 2 only after calling the project manager. The fact that the consultant's Phase 2 cost estimate came in well above the City's initial cost estimate ("placeholder" budget) but just 1 under the threshold for mandatory competitive solicitations ($100,000) concerns me; at best, this indicates poor project management on the part of the City; at worst, it signals corruption. In addition, staff has not made the written findings required under the City's procurement rules for sole-sourcing the work. It is only fair and prudent at this stage to solicit proposals from other qualified firms. Our community expects and deserves an open and transparent process. This is particularly important relative to City expenditures. I hope these comments come across as friendly and helpful. As I said, I have no intent to submit a proposal for the Code update. However, it is my hope that other local businesses will have an opportunity to bid on this important project. By hiring "local" firms, the City demonstrates a commitment to sustainability and local economic development. If at the end of a fair and competitive selection process, an out-of-state firm offers the best value and meets our community's standards, then we should move forward with them. Thank you for considering my request. I appreciate your hard work on behalf of the citizens of Lake Oswego. Sincerely, Scot Siegel, AICP Siegel Planning Services, LLC 503-699-5850 scot@siegelplannine.com www.sieegelplanning.com N Streetcar Project Lake Oswego Contribution S million DATE SOURCE CASH Sep -Nov Council race $ 0.0 2008 Jeff _UJMm- n . OTHER Right of Way 8/3/2010 5 year CIP $ 6.0 Right of Way 9/7/2010 Candidate Orientation $ 6.0 - $ 8.0 11/10/10 Council packet web site post $11.5 - $17.3 Right of Way Right of Way 11/12/10 LO Review - city $12.0 - $19.4 Right of Way response LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Joel B. Komarek, P.E., Project Director — Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Supply Partnership SUBJECT: Resolution 10-73: Approve a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program DATE: November 30, 2010 ACTION Move to adopt Resolution 10-73, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego approving a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program (SFCIP) and authorizing the Mayor to sign a second amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement between Lake Oswego and Tigard regarding water supply facilities, design, construction, and operation. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND For over three decades, the cities of Lake Oswego and Tigard have shared the use of water from the Clackamas River with Lake Oswego being the supplier of surplus water to Tigard and Tigard being the purchaser of that water. It has been a mutually beneficial relationship. Beginning in 2005, the two cities joined together to fund a comprehensive analysis of the opportunities and costs of jointly planning, funding, constructing and operating an expanded water supply system for the benefit of their citizens and wholesale customers. The analysis concluded that significant benefits would accrue to both cities under a partnership approach relative to an approach that would have each pursue separate paths to achieve their water supply goals. On August 6, 2008, the Mayors of Tigard and Lake Oswego executed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), committing the new partners to undertake, in good faith and with due diligence, upgrades and expansions of their respective water supply systems and complete the Initial Expansion' by 2016. During the two and one-half year period leading up to the historic signing of the IGA, each community provided multiple opportunities to hear from the public. The IGA defines Initial Expansion as "The design, permitting and construction of new and expanded Supply Facilities... to provide 32 million gallons per day capacity by 2016 with the capability to further expand up to 38 million gallons per day ... when it appears the water demands of the parties will exceed 32 mgd" Page 2 In Lake Oswego alone, more that eleven public meetings were held including seven council meetings, two meetings with LONAC, a presentation to West Linn City Council and an open house held July 2008. Subsequent to signing the IGA, a new Mayor and three new Councilors were elected in November 2008. Beginning in January 2009, the new Mayor and Council reaffirmed the prior Council's goals of: 1) securing an adequate and reliable supply of water for the future of Lake Oswego, and 2) taking all necessary actions to upgrade, replace and expand Lake Oswego's water supply system by July 1, 2016 for the benefit of Lake Oswego and Tigard. In March 2010, the current Council once again affirmed its commitment to the water supply partnership by establishing a goal of approving a new water treatment process in conjunction with the expansion of Lake Oswego's water system. Between January 2009 and November 2010, the current Council has met numerous times to consider and make decisions relating to implementation of the partnership agreement. Concurrently, the program communications team undertook a comprehensive public information and outreach effort to inform and engage the public in discussions about the partnership, treatment process selection, facilities sizing and location, financing strategies and water rates. Opportunities for the public to learn about the partnership and receive current information and engage staff and policymakers in discussions of the partnership have been many. Tonight's meeting to consider Resolution 10-73 represents the culmination of over four years of planning, analysis, outreach and working together with Tigard staff and elected officials to develop the subject SFCIP. DISCUSSION Oversiaht Committee Since the start of the project definition phase in February 2010, Staff has regularly engaged the Oversight Committee (OC) on ten different occasions through publicly noticed meetings open to the public. At these meetings Technical Committee (TC) staff, briefed the OC on program related matters including water treatment process evaluation and selection, existing supply facilities condition, proposed new facilities including location, sizing and cost and the allocation of new facilities costs to the partner cities. At its November 1, 2010, meeting the OC received the TC's recommendation for a proposed SFCIP. As prescribed by the IGA, OC members considered the recommendation and voted to forward this recommendation on to their respective Council's for consideration in December. Joint Council's Since January 2010, the joint council's have met on three separate occasions, the most recent being November 8, 2010. At the most recent meeting, the TC briefed the council's on project definition findings, updated program costs and cost allocations and the SFCIP as recommended by OC. TC staff solicited direction from the council's regarding the SFCIP and specifically asked the question: Is this the Program each council will consider at their respective decision making meetings in December? Based on the affirmative response to this question, staff has finalized the SFCIP document and related exhibits to the IGA in preparation for Lake Oswego Council's consideration of Resolution 10-73. Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program The IGA requires the Council of each city to adopt the SFCIP. The SFCIP then becomes the guiding document for all future planning, design, permitting and funding efforts. As required by the IGA, the Initial Page 3 Expansion (i.e., implementation of the SFCIP) must be completed no later than July 1, 2016. City staff has, on several occasions, met with the Council to discuss recommended facilities, sizing and location, cost and project schedule. Based on these meetings, staff understands the City Council still harbors concerns for aspects of the proposed SFCIP. These concerns are: • Facility sizing (as it relates to capital costs and future demands) • Ozone • Waluga Reservoir location • Schedule for decisions The discussion below revisits the rationale for the recommendations contained within the proposed SKIP relating to these areas of concern: Facility Sizing As noted above the IGA obligates the parties to design and construct Supply Facilities to provide not less than 32 mgd of capacity by July 1, 2016. Article 6.1.2 states "The Supply Facilities shall accommodate subsequent expansion up to 38 mgd" Staff has reported previously the economy of scale and tangible value derived from designing and constructing certain facilities in the Initial Expansion to "...accommodate subsequent expansion up to 38 mgd" For certain facilities it makes good economic sense to design and build them now to their ultimate capacity. These facilities include: River Intake Pump Station (RIPS) — This facility located within the Clackamas River is proposed to be designed to accommodate future addition of pumping, electrical and mechanical equipment to increase capacity to 38 mgd from an initial 32 mgd. Fish screens and building structure would be sized to accommodate the larger capacity with the Initial Expansion. Raw Water Pipeline (RWP) — This 14,000 foot -long pipeline is undersized, vulnerable to earthquakes and is proposed to be designed and constructed for the full 38 mgd capacity with the Initial Expansion. WTP — Ozone, sludge dewatering, finished water pump station and plant clearwell are proposed for design to treat, store and process up to 38 mgd of water. This equipment and related structures do not lend themselves to incremental additions of building footprint or capacity. Remaining structures like filters, and sedimentation basins, and equipment like pumps, electrical, mechanical and related process equipment would lend themselves to modular expansion and so would be sized initially for 32 mgd. Finished Water Pipe (FWP) — 53,000 feet of pipeline connects the City's WTP to Tigard's Bonita Pump Station. 21,000 feet of existing pipelines between Mulligan Lane/Iron Mt. Blvd are in good condition with capacity to meet the City's long term needs. A third, new pipeline will be designed and constructed to supply Tigard's needs. 100% of the cost will be Tigard's. Approximately 21,000 feet of pipeline between the City's WTP and Mulligan Lane/Iron Mt. Blvd. is undersized and will be replaced with a single pipe sized to convey up to 38 mgd. 63% of the cost of this pipeline will be paid by the City with Tigard paying the remaining 37%. • Waluga Reservoir #2 — The proposed new 3.5 MG storage facility is sized to correct existing supply deficiencies in the Waluga/Southside/10th Street service level, provide additional storage for Lake Oswego's long term needs and provide storage for Tigard's Bonita Pump Station (1.5 MG). Page 4 The benefits of constructing the above facilities to their maximum capacity now include: • Avoiding future incursions into sensitive environmental zones • Avoiding future duplication of significant fixed costs associated with designing, permitting, and constructing public facilities in such zones regardless of size • Avoiding future neighborhood disruption and inconvenience • Avoiding future regulatory permitting and construction uncertainty for small increments of future capacity • Reduced energy costs associated with pumping water through slightly larger pipelines • Opportunity to market excess capacity for near term economic benefit • Opportunity to maximize beneficial use of permitted water rights To illustrate how economies of scale result in long term cost savings for the facilities described above consider the following example: The currently estimated cost for new, large diameter conveyance pipelines is more than 30% of total program costs (i.e., $75.4M). The major cost elements of large diameter pipeline construction, particularly in environmentally sensitive locations (like ours), are related to right of way access, land use and environmental permitting, construction mitigation, traffic control, contractor mobilization and just "digging the ditch." Whether the pipeline is 42 -inches in diameter or 36 -inches in diameter, the only cost difference is in the pipe itself and on large projects, this marginal cost difference is usually eliminated through the competitive bidding process. Most other design and construction costs are fixed and change very little regardless of whether or not the pipeline is several inches in diameter larger or smaller. By "right sizing" these facilities now in the Initial Expansion, the City and its partner Tigard forever avoid the regulatory uncertainty and substantial future fixed expense associated with yet another project to add more capacity. Ozone Population growth and changing land uses within the Clackamas River basin combined with the specter of climate change will likely result in increased pollutant loading to the river and its tributaries, while potential longer and drier summers will reduce dilution potential of the river. Add to this the growing use of medications and their introduction into water supplies through human waste products and direct disposal, it is no wonder that on a global scale water and wastewater utilities are taking steps to reduce pollutant loading to streams and rivers, and using technological advancements in the treatment of wastewater and drinking water to provide additional public health protection. The direct filtration process currently in use at the City's WTP requires constant vigilance by operators during changing raw water conditions to consistently produce water that meets and exceeds current regulations. However, in order to consistently achieve compliance, plant staff must dose the water with extra chlorine ahead of the filters to assure chlorine contact times are achieved in addition to other regular practices employed by plant staff to assure safe water. Unfortunately, "pre -chlorination" increases disinfection by-product (DBP) formation potential in the City's distribution system. DBP's are known carcinogens and are regulated by EPA. Although the City has not violated any DBP regulation, public health experts believe compliance standards will become more stringent. Abandoning direct filtration in favor of conventional filtration and expanding clearwell capacity will adequately address these challenges. But, by adding ozone, further reductions in the use of chlorine can be achieved with the benefit being further Page 5 reductions in DBP formation potential. Ozone also assures consistently better taste and appearance, and provides the enhanced public health protection against contaminants of human origin. For example, ozone is proven to be extremely effective at destroying organics such as pesticides and yet to be regulated contaminants of concern including personal care products, pharmaceuticals, viruses and pathogens. Following a three month evaluation process of water treatment technologies, a team of water treatment and public health experts concluded that conventional filtration with ozone is the best treatment technology for the partnership. This recommendation is also supported by an eight -member Citizens Sounding Board with representatives from Lake Oswego and Tigard. Oregon communities using ozone include Medford, Wilsonville and Reedsport. Other cities using ozone include Seattle, Tacoma, Walla Walla, Los Angeles, Dallas, Las Vegas and Orlando. On a global scale, ozonated water is served in Barcelona, Paris, Mexico City and Shanghai. For these significant public health benefits, a typical homeowner in Lake Oswego would pay about 17 cents per day.z Waluga Reservoir The existing 4 -million gallon (mg) Waluga Reservoir was constructed in 1983 and provides storage for peak hour demands, fire suppression and emergencies. It is one of three reservoirs that provide storage to the Waluga/Southside/10th Street service level. This service level is the largest of all service zones within the City serving several thousand properties covering several thousand acres. A second Waluga Reservoir constructed adjacent to the existing tank on property purchased by the City is proposed to eliminate current and future storage deficiencies, replace storage currently contained by the 85 -year old, seismically vulnerable, 10th Street tank, and improve service pressure to neighborhoods surrounding the existing tank. A new 40 -foot tall tank with a volume of 3.5mg is recommended to be constructed adjacent to the existing 4mg tank. Residents living adjacent to the site are opposed to a second reservoir and have been actively lobbying for its relocation to another site. Project staff has evaluated several alternative location options including: 1. Construct new reservoir at Waluga Park (base case) 2. Purchasing storage within the City of Tigard from existing storage tanks 3. Locating the new reservoir in the Waluga Park Quarry 4. Moving the reservoir further north on the City -owned Waluga property 5. Locating a portion (0.5 million gallons, MG) or all, (3.5 MG) of the volume at the City's existing 10th street tank site Table 1 below summarizes findings from an analysis of alternative reservoir sites. Table 1 Option Location(s) Volume (MG) Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Tree removal Cost 1 Waluga 3.5 140 40 50-60 $7.4M 2 Tigard 3.5 n/a n/a n/a —$7M 3 Quarry 3.0 to 3.5 130-140 40 40-50 $12.4M 4 Waluga (north) 3.0 to 3.5 130-140 40 80-90 $9.0-$10.2M 5 10th Street 0.5 to 3.5 36-90 75-85 10-20 $9.0-$13.5M 2 Net present value of capital and operating costs over a 25 -year period of evaluation Page 6 Additional factors to consider relating to locating the proposed new reservoir at a site other than the Waluga Park property are: • Tigard paid Lake Oswego $1.3M in June 2009, representing its capacity share of the appraised value of the Waluga Park property. If the reservoir were built at a different site, Tigard would be due a refund of this buy -in amount plus accrued interest • The total appraised value of the Waluga Park property in 2008 was $3.5M. The property was purchased by taxpayers specifically for additional water storage. This property becomes a stranded asset to the water fund if not used for its intended purpose. • The IGA establishes that improvements imposed by a land use permitting body shall be a project cost. Additional improvements or costs not required by the land use permitting body shall be paid for at the sole expense of the party requesting them. It could reasonably be argued that costs in excess of those shown above for Option 1 would be a cost borne solely by Lake Oswego as a decision to site the property elsewhere would not likely be required by a land use permitting body. • Siting the tank elsewhere only moves the impact to other properties or neighborhoods and arguably would impact the character and surrounding land uses more than the proposed Waluga Park site. Schedule for SKIP Decision Staff has been asked why a decision on the SKIP couldn't be delayed until new Councilor's elect are seated in January. In response, Staff asks Council to consider the following reasons not to delay this important decision: • The cost is manageable and falls within the City's financial plan. 1. The recommended SKIP results in a cost curve that is only slightly higher than that approved by Council in 2008. 2. The same practices are in place as those that have saved money on LOIS - value engineering, selecting top-notch consultants, project delivery method, timing projects for most cost effective bidding climate, etc. 3. Proposed SKIP design changes will be reviewed by the city -consultant committee to control the overall program budget. 4. Waiting for the new Council won't set the project up to be more cost conscious than it already is. • Every week we deviate from our original decision-making schedule is a delay to the project. 1. Designers cannot be procured until both Councils adopt the SFCIP. 2. Delays put the Partnership (and LO's savings stemming from it) at risk. 3. Tigard needs assurance about the future of the Partnership by June 2011- their deadline with Portland. 4. As the Managing Agency, the Lake Oswego Council must adopt the SKIP first. Tigard is scheduled to adopt the SKIP on December 14th, 2010. The Council's have been made aware of this schedule since last July. Delaying this important decision sends the wrong message to our partner and unnecessarily undermines trust between the parties. 5. The upgraded system must be operational by July 1, 2016. There are many schedule sensitive actions and events that must fall into place to achieve this deadline. The timing of some of these actions and events we cannot control. We can control the timing of making Page 7 local decisions and should be aggressive in making such decision to minimize introducing additional project risk. 6. The Partnership saves LO residents $78M over the option of the city upgrading its system by itself - which is inevitable in the very near term future. • The current Council has the best background on the project. They have been kept up on all information as it has developed and knows all the facts. New council members will need time to catch up when they become official in order to oversee the project but they will never have the history the current members have. No new information will be developed by program staff that would justify delaying adoption of the SFCIP_ 4. The OC voted on November 1, 2010 to recommend the proposed SKIP to each respective council for decisions in December. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT Based on the many discussions with the Council and the community and through this Council report, Program Staff believes it has presented a compelling and defensible case to this Council for proceeding to a decision to accept staff's recommendation to approve Resolution 10-73. With approval of Resolution 10- 73, this Council expresses a commitment to current and future citizens to assure access to an adequate supply of safe water for public health, safety and economic development. Therefore, it is recommended that Council move to adopt Resolution 10-73, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego approving a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program (SFCIP) and authorizing the Mayor to sign a second amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement between Lake Oswego and Tigard regarding water supply facilities, design, construction, and operation ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 10-73 Reviewed by: Dep ent Director (if there is a financial impact) Finan a Director (if legal issues) City A JS Alex D. VcIn yf e City Manager RESOLUTION 10-73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO APPROVING A SUPPLY FACILITIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A SECOND AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAKE OSWEGO AND TIGARD REGARDING WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION. WHEREAS, on March 3, 2006 the Parties executed an Intergovernmental Agreement to jointly fund an engineering study of the opportunities, costs and constraints of forming a future municipal water supply partnership for the benefit of their respective citizens; and WHEREAS, the final draft study was completed and presented to the Parties at a joint meeting of the Parties' elected officials on July 17th, 2007; and WHEREAS, that study concluded that it was feasible for Lake Oswego to supply water to Tigard on a long term basis and that partnering with the City of Tigard to develop Lake Oswego's undeveloped water rights could achieve many benefits including more efficient use of water resources, improved economy of water supply, protection of existing permitted water rights, improved water supply reliability and a more effective joint response to regulatory challenges; and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2008, the Parties executed the Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Water Supply Facilities, Design, Construction, and Operation ("Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Agreement contains various exhibits identifying the assets to be constructed with the Initial Expansion and the allocation of costs of those assets to the Parties; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that the Council of each Party shall approve a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program ("SFCIP") and when adopted the SFCIP will become Exhibit 5 to the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that from time to time exhibits may be revised or new exhibits added based upon further evaluation and studies; and WHEREAS, further evaluation and studies have occurred and the Parties agree that certain exhibits should be amended and new exhibits added to reflect this updated information. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that: Section 1. The Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program, as called for in the Agreement, is approved in the form attached as Exhibit 5 to Exhibit A. Section 2. The approved Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program shall be incorporated Resolution 10-73 Page 1 of 2 into the City's Public Facilities Capital Improvement Plan at the next update of the City's Plan. Section 3. The Mayor is authorized to sign the second amendment to the Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 'A.,' adding Exhibit S to the Agreement and revising Exhibits 3 and 7 to the Agreement. Section 4. Staff is directed to prepare a proposed update to the City's water utility System Development Charges to reflect revised costs of the Initial Expansion under the Agreement, and is further directed to present the proposal to the City Council for review before initiating the formal process to adopt the update. . Section 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage. Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 7th day of December, 2010. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor ATTEST: Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPR VED AST M: David Powell, City Attorney Resolution 10-73 Page 2 of 2 SECOND AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION THIS SECOND AMENDMENT to Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Water Supply Facilities, Design, Construction, and Operation (Second Amendment) is effective this day of , 2010, by and between the City of Lake Oswego (Lake Oswego), an Oregon municipal corporation, and the City of Tigard (Tigard), an Oregon municipal corporation. Recitals WHEREAS, on August 6, 2008, the Parties executed the Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Water Supply Facilities, Design, Construction, and Operation (Agreement); and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the inclusion of a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program (SFCIP) and incorporates exhibits identifying assets to be constructed and construction cost estimates; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that the Council of each Party shall approve a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program ("SFCIP"), which will become Exhibit 5 to the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that from time to time exhibits may be revised based upon further evaluation and studies; and WHEREAS, further evaluation and studies have occurred and the Parties agree that certain exhibits should be amended and new exhibits added to reflect this updated information; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE TO EXECUTE THIS SECOND AMENDMENT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Addition of Exhibit 5; Revision of Exhibits 3, and 7. Attached Exhibit 5, the Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program, is hereby added to the Agreement. Exhibits 3 (Map of Supply Facilities) and 7 (Allocation of System Improvement Costs to the Parties) of the Agreement are hereby revised to read as set forth in attached Exhibits 3 and 7. Section 2. Mapleton Properties. The Parties agree that the Mapleton Drive properties (21E2413D Tax Lots 01200, 01300, 01400, and 01500) (Mapleton Properties) are not included as assets subject to the Agreement, but shall be added in the future if any permitting authority requires improvements or dedications of any kind on the Mapleton Properties as a condition of approval of Project improvements to the Water Paae - 1 SECOND AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION Treatment Plant Facilities or if the Mapleton Properties should otherwise become necessary to be utilized as part of the Project. If the Mapleton Properties are added, appraisals will be performed and the exhibits shall be modified as necessary to include the Mapleton Properties at the appraised value. Upon the addition of the Mapleton Properties, Tigard shall pay Lake Oswego a sum equaling the percentage of the appraised value of those properties that equals Tigard's percentage of System Improvement L-osts for the water treatment plant as shown in the revised Exhibit 7 attached hereto. Addition of other assets and valuation thereof may be made by subsequent agreement of the Parties and amendment of applicable exhibits. Section 3. Entire Agreement. In all other respects, the Agreement dated August 6, 2008 as subsequently amended by the First Amendment is in full force and effect except as specifically amended by this Second Amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have dated and signed this Agreement. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Mayor Dated City Recorder Dated City Attorney CITY OF TIGARD Mayor Dated Attest City Recorder Dated City Attorney Page - 2 SECOND AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION DEFECTS IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT Lake Oswego • Tigard Water Partnership sharing water • connecting communities www.lotigordwater.org Exhibit 5 To Intergovernmental Agreement Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program November 29, 2010 LAKE OSWEGO/TIGARD WATER PARTNERSHIP EXHIBIT 5 to IGA SUPPLY FACILITIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Summary Project Name: Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Supply Expansion Project Description: Plan, fund, and construct improvements to Lake Oswego's and Tigard's water systems, including an expansion of Lake Oswego's water supply system from its current capacity of 16 million gallons per day (mgd) to 32 mgd, and infrastructure required to provide additional flow to Tigard's water system. Funded /Unfunded: Funded Estimated Date of Completion: July 1, 2016 Justification: Intergovernmental Agreement The total projected revenues and expenses for the next five fiscal years are presented in Table 1. Notes: (') Lake Oswego share of costs = 0.4647 (Z) Tigard share of costs = 0.5353 Total = 1.0000 (3) Expenses are based on Class 3 construction estimates with accuracy of -20% to +30%. *Lake Oswego - Tigard Water Partnership shonnq ovw connecnnq commw"*s 1 1. Water SupplyTable .. Fiscal Year ($ in 000's) Revenue Source(')(2) Description 2011.12 2012-13 2013-14 2014.15 2015.16 Total (LO) Operating 0 0 2,800 3,000 1,239 7,039 (LO) SDC's 450 550 550 550 550 2,650 (LO) Bonds 1 4,615 16,825 39,388 28,919 0 89,747 (LO) subtotal 5,065 17,375 42,738 32,469 1,789 99,436 (Tigard) Intergovt'I 5,835 20,015 49,232 37,401 2,061 114,544 Resources Total 10,900 37,390 91,970 69,870 3,850 1 213,980 Expenses(3) Design 5,140 6,390 4,500 790 0 16,820 Proj. Admin. 5,760 6,280 6,390 6,360 1,420 26,210 Construction 0 24,720 81,080 62,720 2,430 170,950 Expenses Total 10,900 37,390 91,970 69,870 3,850 213,980 Notes: (') Lake Oswego share of costs = 0.4647 (Z) Tigard share of costs = 0.5353 Total = 1.0000 (3) Expenses are based on Class 3 construction estimates with accuracy of -20% to +30%. *Lake Oswego - Tigard Water Partnership shonnq ovw connecnnq commw"*s 1 Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program Program Overview The scope for the project includes design and construction of the following infrastructure: ■ A new 38-mgd river intake pump station (RIPS) located on the Clackamas River in Gladstone. Initial capacity is 32 mgd but sizing will allow later expansion to the ultimate capacity of 38 mgd. ■ Approximately 14,000 feet of new raw (untreated) water transmission piping (RWP) connecting the RIPS structure to the Lake Oswego Water Treatment Plant (WIT). ■ Expansion of the WTP from its current capacity of 16 mgd to 32 mgd, with provision for future expansion to 38 mgd. ■ Approximately 35,000 feet of new finished (treated) water piping (FWP) connecting the WTP to Lake Oswego's terminal reservoir located near Waluga Park. ■ A new 3.5 -million gallon (MG) water reservoir at Waluga Park. ■ Replacement of Tigard's existing Bonita Pump Station (BPS) with capacity of 14 to 20 mgd. The benefits of the IGA and the water supply improvement project include the following: ■ Tigard's ownership in its water supply and decreased reliance on water supplied by Portland ■ Joint financing of the project by Lake Oswego and Tigard ■ Increases in pipe size for raw water and treated water transmission ■ Increased water treatment plant capacity ■ Increased treated water storage capacity ■ Increased pumping capacity for Tigard's water distribution system ■ Increased water transmission capacity to Tigard storage facilities Table 2 provides a more detailed breakdown of costs by year, by project, and by Sponsor. Project Funding Source Lake Oswego: The Water Fund is an enterprise fund used to account for all financial activity associated with the operation and maintenance of the city's water utility system. Water utility improvement projects are supported by water fees, which are restricted to purposes related to construction, repair, and operation of the water system. Additionally, system development charges are recovered from new development projects, but this is a minor portion of the overall funding for this program. Tigard: The Water Fund is the primary operating fund and accounts for all costs associated with the water system, including ongoing maintenance. The Water Fund is an enterprise fund which regularly transfers revenues to the Water CIP Fund which accounts for various capital improvement projects, including the Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership. Tigard also assesses system development charges which are allocated to appropriate capital improvements. Tigard has intergovernmental agreements with the cities of King City and Durham and with the Tigard Water District. Funding Status: Funded Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Partnership shu�+np�!e+• !ronnet�ngc�mmu�a+es � �. \ !;\ §/| +#■ § # 4}« //f ! § r\ [ $ 7 Is 6ƒd cs \ }\} ! § } } \ a \ 5 = a } ! ; ) f }!# 4 § f # \ # ! - . a /\)n/\) I ® E - a )\ƒ 4# }{ ! } { °°- - n # cs \(\! ( ! !( ! a ! })( ! })[!}{[ ! })( )) )![ ))( Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program Program Area Descriptions The water supply improvements include upgrades or replacement of the existing facilities. These existing facilities and the proposed improvements are described in the following sections. Existing Facilities The existing water supply facilities either will be upgraded or replaced, as listed in Table 3. Proposed Facilities The proposed water supply facilities include a new RIPS, new raw and finished water pipelines, expansion of the Lake Oswego WTP, a new WR, and a new BPS. Lake Oswego • Tigard Water Partnership shannq waw - cannecnng communorees 3 ModificationsTable 3. Facility Expanded/replaced Justification • Insufficient capacity for future water demands RIPS Replaced • Seismic vulnerability . Electrical equipment is old and worn and does not meet current standards • Insufficient capacity for future water demands RWP Replaced sting left in . Condition of existing pipeline unknown • Seismic vulnerability • Insufficient capacity for future water demands • Electrical equipment is old and worn and does not meet current standards WTP Expanded . Finished water clear well is undersized to meet regulatory finished water quality standards • Existing direct filtration process requires significant operator attention • Chlorine dosing requirements may lead to increased disinfection byproducts formation FWP Replaced Insufficient capacity for future water demands Expanded (new reservoir . Insufficient storage capacity for current and future conditions WR installed adjacent to existing) • Occasional issues with insufficient water pressure in the nearby neighborhood BPS Replaced Insufficient capacity for future water demands Proposed Facilities The proposed water supply facilities include a new RIPS, new raw and finished water pipelines, expansion of the Lake Oswego WTP, a new WR, and a new BPS. Lake Oswego • Tigard Water Partnership shannq waw - cannecnng communorees 3 DEFECTS IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program RIPS A replacement RIPS will be constructed on the Clackamas River in the City of Gladstone, as shown in Figure 1. The replacement facility will pump water from the Clackamas River to water treatment facilities for subsequent distribution to users. It will have an initial capacity of 32 mgd and will be expandable to 38 mgd to supply future water demands. The new RIPS will be located adjacent to the existing intake structure and pump station, at the bottom of the Clackamas River Basin, at approximately river mile 0.8. The existing RIPS will likely be removed or abandoned. or Figure 1. Proposed Location of New River Intake Pump Station �, Lake Oswego • Tigard ,� Water Partnership shonn}q water . conneonq commworAes 4 Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program Raw Water Pipeline Approximately 14,000 feet of new RWP will convey water from the RIPS to the Lake Oswego WTP, located in West Linn. The new 42 -inch -diameter RWP will be installed parallel to the existing 27 -inch -diameter RWP and will have a capacity of 38 mgd, as compared to 16 mgd for the existing RWP. The proposed alignment for the new RWP is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2. Proposed RWP Alignment Lake Oswego • Tigard Water Partnership sharuv wavy connecrnngcommuo pes 5 Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program Lake Oswego WTP The program includes provisions to upgrade and expand the existing Lake Oswego WTP. The capacity of the WTP will be increased from 16 to 32 mgd, with provisions for an ultimate expansion to 38 mgd consistent with the maximum water rights expected to be available from this source. The timing of the ultimate expansion to 38 mgd is not certain but may occur as early as 2015. The existing WTP, built in 1968, has undergone numerous upgrades to improve its performance. The State of Oregon has designated the WTP as a direct filtration plant. The WTP includes a pump -based, rapid -mix system, three contact basins, six rapid sand, dual media gravity filters, a clear well, four sludge decanting and dewatering lagoons, and associated chemical feed systems (alum, poly -aluminum chloride, powdered activated carbon, poly -electrolytes, hydrated lime, carbon dioxide, and sodium hypochlorite). The recommended plan to expand and upgrade the Lake Oswego WTP will be to reconfigure the plant to conventional filtration with pre -ozonation followed by biologically active granular media filtration. Other modifications include a new, larger clear well and finished water pump station, mechanical processes to treat process waste streams and residual solids, upgrades to chemical feed system, and miscellaneous improvements to existing buildings and site landscaping. The preliminary layout for the WTP expansion is shown in Figure 3. This layout will be revised subsequent to further discussions with WTP neighbors and the City of West Linn. Lake Oswego •Tigard Water Partnership shoringw,rer connectingcommu�tvs 6 m LL I I I AtK ,Z �I 4 H es b f O 0 GOO (E)o O i � t 0000000000 It cr 0 r - W. t z = 0 U. LL LU LU r Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program Finished Water Pipeline A new FWP will convey treated water from the Lake Oswego WTP in West Linn to the WRs in Lake Oswego. An optional FWP may be constructed from WRs to the BPS in Tigard depending on sponsor preference of design criteria. The pipeline will be sized to convey a maximum flow of 38 mgd and will consist of a combination of new larger pipelines to carry all flow and of existing pipelines coupled with new parallel pipelines. The proposed pipeline diameters range from 18 to 48 inches along the preferred alignment. Parallel pipeline diameters depends on results from modeling efforts, condition assessment of the existing lines, and design criteria. All pipeline alignments are anticipated to be within public rights -of -wap or within easements. The preferred alignment is shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6. Figure 4. Proposed FWPAlignment — Southern Segment Lake Oswego • Tigard NWWater Partnership sharing sorer . connecnng com,Inunmes • �y . f.ti -�a� y r el + . • P r 1 Brown AND Caldwell Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program Waluga Reservoir As the WTP and water supply system capacity are expanded to serve demands forecast for Lake Oswego and Tigard, an increase in WR storage capacity of approximately 3.5 MG will be required. A new WR will be constructed alongside the existing tank to meet these additional water storage needs and will function along with the existing WR. The WR tanks will also supply the BPS through the FWP. The proposed location of the new WR is on Lake Oswego -owned land and will be northwest of the existing `Y/R, as shown in Figure 7. Figure 7. Proposed Location of New WR *Lake Oswego • Tigard Water Partnership shonrvy.�.e Cor�npifi+q cJ�"rmv^rPs 10 Exhibit 5 - Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program BPS The program includes provisions to design and construct a new BPS as part of the overall water system upgrades and expansion. The new BPS will deliver water from the FWP into the City of Tigard water system's 410 foot -elevation pressure zone. The proposed mechanical layout for the new BPS is provided in Figure 8. As the WTP and water supply system are expanded, peak BPS water supply rates will need to increase to approximately 14 to 20 mgd to serve demands forecast for the City of Tigard. The configuration, capacity, location, and age of the existing BPS are such that it will be replaced with a new facility. The existing BPS installation likely will be removed or abandoned. Alternatively, the existing facility could be retained in reserve to provide a measure of redundancy for the new BPS. The new BPS will also likely incorporate provisions for emergency water supply interconnections supporting pumped and/or gravity flow between the Lake Oswego and Tigard water systems, with potential emergency supply linkages for other area water systems. Figure 8. BPS Proposed Mechanical Layout Lake Oswego - Tigard Water Partnership sha,,Nwcw. cwneongcommva,rvs 11 Portland Office 6500 SW Macadam Avenue Suite 200 Portland. OR 97239 Tel: 503.244.7005 100% Environmental I Employee Owned I Offices Nationwide I BrownandCaldwell.com N W H Q W O F - Ln N O U Z W ui m O _ C X a W `i L- ' 00 -�I- m M M r -I M O O N Ln LO O O O rt O M Ln 00 w w m N 01 O O n Ln ri O o O n O ' I\ r -I LO M 01 ri w Ln O O n dt N M LO 1.0 rt O .,. Lf1 01 m r- 00 O lD M cV 0 n O N Ln O O-' N M M 111 lO Ln N r, t\ W N Ln -q N M n O n M C7 O -tt O 01 n N N r-1 01 00 LD 00 Ln O Pn M N t .� l0 01 LD 1- LA & N M l0 LI1 z l0 ri V n M � D1 ri N N r -I t? N VL t/} (n N to to to -(n vl? V1 to N N V/ tn• to to t)• LO 00 ~ 4,J — o C o 0 00 00 00 O v O +, o 0 o� M m \ m \ m \ m \ O O O cn \ O m t 11 m 111 m Ln m Ln m Ln m Ln cn Ln cn Ln m N"t p r-1 .--� 0 .-� 0 .� 0 r -I Ln O r -I o N G - Ln LM Lmi1 um1 Lml1 Lmn 1M Im Ln E _ Q o cc T M N LO 00 r -I' ' ' O M Ln V0 0 0 m O LD V r -I M 00 O N I;t 00 O O o (14 0 N 00 M N O) O N Ln n n� -,t 00 O ch N lD ri Lr l0 111 01 l0 qi 01 M M 01 L0 01 L0 Ln O O 01 r -I r -I O N lO N M w n i m C It\ m C m O N l0 'T O o Ol N N m n N 01 Ln V 0) n M n M 01 lD c rOo O t M ri r -I ri 00 r -I N O ri N t/T In tn• tn• tn• tn• tn• An tn• tn• tn• tn• tn• tn• to tn• tl} to m O E . Y N C C o o .* 00 00 00 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 o o O \\ \\ o\' o o M V V cP �t d t t no O N v N N t ri 0 0 0\ N o C _ d �t �Y d V O C O C Q p C_ � u0 �O m lw O N O O O Ln 00 Ln M r -L M O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 v' O O O I\ N w 01 N 01 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C ' ° m 4; O O O 01 ID 01 r-1 t.0 Ln O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z, 3 w O 01 N O ri 00 d o w m o0 O m O� 0 0� 00 r I E aw Y L0 N L0 O1 LO Mw Ln N N r,^ N n Ln Ln O O m m r -I 0 (D \ 0) \ m l0 1.0 -;TO n N N M 01 O M n o 0 0 -4 N w O O C C C LO Lf m l0 N Ln l0 N� LO Ol n N r -I N 00 e -L O Jn w i V i n ri N dt r-4 r -I r, N ri Ln m y CL r4 v - tn• to tl? tl} t/} tll�CL tl? tn• tl? tl! t/! tn• tl� tn• tn• tl? tl? to to y v N oo ` •o m V C ~ o L.1 C J y O40 m C 3 a 04 a m m C 41 Y m U y 2 Y E 0o lA y H N a O L „ o c m ;, _ o Ln a C c C L v C 0) it L0 O N Ln ?' r O �% 0J •_ C u d d O C N C W O 0) O'++ o vvmm C3 L73 mu > N e C O O CL C Y W ow 0 v1 J= 0 � .0 3 w_ c f0 u to o c c c0 ro o. Lu C C\ c 0 3> p _ _a t v a a. C ra !Z O_ 'O d a ` in 'O d L O a w Lu yf C" C J x o CL OA Lai -a w -l7 C CL y CL �+ m •� > m ° ti � y 2 O' " W ate-+ u° tW ao N J O Ln a» p c E d" .� E E g d 3 O\ w V d N to L9 a0. N O ly- X N 00 m a C O m r £ N = ate+ y c H LU m m d � J m =3 m Lo •• o LO O Q O o a $ n - 0 a3 3 �v 'c .0 torn o o Q= �� C� 3 LL m N omc d Ln Ln U 1A • N N N N V u O E u a m �a a 00 o 0 a LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Joel B. Komarek, P.E., LOIS Project Director 5,3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us SUBJECT: Amendment of Public Improvement Contract for Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer DATE: December 1, 2010 ACTION Move to approve an amendment to a public improvement contract with James W. Fowler, Co., (JWF) in the amount of $3,592,091 and authorize the City Manager to execute the relating Change Order No. 18. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND On August 3, 2010, City Council approved Resolution 10-42 authorizing the issuance of up to $40M in Full Faith and Credit Obligations ("FF&CO") to finance capital construction and improvements to the City's wastewater system. On September 7, 2010, the LOIS Project Director reported to Council that costs to complete the remaining elements of the LOIS upgrade project were estimated at $30M. During this same meeting, the LOIS Project Director reported that cleaning and television inspection of near shore sewers ("NSS") as required by the LOIS Lake Down contract was being undertaken to assess the condition of approximately 20,000 feet of NSS systems. The Lake Down contract scope of work not only includes this condition assessment work, but also includes work to renew existing wastewater pipelines through the use of Cured -in -Place -Plastic -Pipe ("CIPP"), a trenchless method of renewing pipelines, and more conventional "dig and replace" methods of pipeline replacement or renewal. The Project Director opined to the Council that with the Lake in a "once in a lifetime" dewatered condition, this could be an opportune time to leverage the expertise, familiarity of site and pre -qualified status of JWF and its CIPP and by-pass pumping subcontractors to undertake a targeted program of also renewing and replacing in -lake NSS systems. Wanting to capitalize on this opportunity, the LOIS Project Director recommended that the Council consider issuing an additional $5M in FF&CO bonds beyond the $30M needed to complete LOIS for the purpose of funding a targeted NSS renewal/replacement program. Council accepted the Project Director's recommendation paving the way to expand the LOIS scope of work to include renewal and replacement of certain in -lake NSS systems. Page 2 DISCUSSION Since the September 7, 2010, funding authorization, the LOIS Project Team along with the City's Public Works and Operations Divisions and JWF have been reviewing television files and field condition assessments of the NSS systems. From that effort was developed a NSS Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) the team believes is achievable given the limited time available until the final completion date for all Lake Down work (i.e., May 26, 2010). With an agreed scope, JWF initiated a costing and directed sub -bid solicitation effort from its subcontractors and from subcontractors who were prequalified to provide certain services during the Lake Full phase (ground anchors) or who were prequalified to provide certain services for the Lake Down phase (by-pass pumping), but who ultimately didn't end up subcontracting with JWF. JWF then presented its cost proposal to the Brown and Caldwell team of construction estimators and construction management experts, for review and refinement. A final cost review meeting between JWF, BC and the LOIS Project Director was conducted and final terms and conditions of costs, methods of payment and schedules of work were agreed to. The results of that final meeting are embodied in Change Order No. 18 attached hereto. On matters relating to adherence to the City's public contracting rules and procedures, the LOIS Project Director sought the advice of the City Attorney's Office and from these discussions, has concluded that the work being authorized by the subject contract amendment is sufficiently similar to the scope of work for the Lake Down contract and in fact was contemplated as evidenced by certain Lake Down contract bid items including cleaning/TV inspection and condition assessment, CIPP, by-pass pumping, and installation of small diameter collection sewers with lateral reinstatement. Moreover, had this additional work been included in the original contract the field of competition would not likely have been affected because the City required prequalification for General Contractors, CIPP Contractors, By-pass pumping Contractors and Ground Anchor Contractors prior to bidding. Only those general contractors and specialty subcontractors who were deemed qualified through the City's prequalification process were allowed to bid or submit sub - bids to prequalified general contractors. So in essence the field of competition was predetermined at time of bidding. The Contractor selection, which occurred through competitive bidding, would not likely have been affected because the work, the project site, the relative dollar values and the risk allocations are all similar to or contemplated in the original Lake Down scope of work and contract bid items. Notwithstanding the above, the LOIS Project Director required JWF to solicit competitive quotes for all work not self -performed under this contract amendment not just from its current subcontractors, but also from other subcontractors who, though previous City authorized pre -qualification processes for LOIS, were deemed qualified to provide services including ground anchors, CIPP and by-pass pumping. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT As noted above a significant opportunity exists for the City to achieve substantial cost benefit by undertaking a limited program of renewing and replacing corroded, leaking and vulnerable NSS systems using the services of JWF and pre -qualified subcontractors who are mobilized, on site and familiar with the site conditions. Unfortunately, a limited work window dictates the Council either approve the contract amendment or bank the additional $5M to be allocated to other non -lake wastewater system rehabilitation efforts. Page 3 ATTACHMENTS 1. Change Order No. 18 Reviewed by: 6 a ent Director C:w.. w.... flir....1... City Manager if there is a financial impact) if legal issues) CHANGE ORDER N DATE OF ISSUANCE December 1. 2010 EFFECTIVE DATE December 1, 2010 OWNER City of Lake Oswego CONTRACTOR James W. Fowler Co. Contract: Lake Down Project Project: Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer (LOIS) OWNER's Contract No. 10-1141-020 ENGINEER's Project No. 136813 ENGINEER Brown and Caldwell You are directed to make the following changes in the Contract Documents. Scope: The Owner and Engineer have performed cleaning and condition assessment of near shore sewer (NSS) small diameter sewer collection lines, and manholes. The condition assessment work is complete and the LOIS project team, including Public Works and Operations staff, has developed a Capital Improvement Plan for the NSS system. The LOIS project team internally reviewed the overall scope and determined it would not be possible to begin and complete all of the work identified within the available construction window and within the available additional funding authorization. Instead, the team has selected sections of the NSS system that are relatively easy to access in the dewatered lake and that inspections showed are in poor condition. These sections are located primarily along the north shore of Oswego Lake extending from the Lake Grove Swim Park to East of Jantzen Island. Change Order (CO) 13 authorized the Contractor to begin mobilization and accelerate the start of these NSS activities. CO 18 is to authorize the full scope and budget for repairs to the NSSs. This change order authorizes work included in Schedules C, D, E and miscellaneous repairs. The work is further shown on the following documents that are attached to and made part of this change order. Drawings: Lakewood Bay Point Repairs Blue Heron CIPP and Point Repairs North Shore 1/West Bay Open Cut Replacement & Point Repairs North Shore 4 Schedule C North Shore 2 Schedule D North Shore 3 Schedule C & E Work Summary Tables Schedule "C" Schedule "D" Schedule "E" Miscellaneous Repairs The work also includes constructing access roads when needed, providing bypass pumping, logistical support for subcontractors, traffic control, and restoration of improvements on private property damaged during the course of this work. Most of this work must be done while the lake level has been drawn down for the base contract work. The Engineer and Contractor will coordinate and plan the work activities to accomplish as much of the work listed in these schedules as possible. Cost and Schedule: The Owner and Contractor agree to the following: • That the maximum authorized cost to the Owner for all NSS work undertaken by both CO 13 and CO 18 is $3,842,091.00. Actual costs will be tracked and paid in accordance with Article 11.01, Cost of the Work, plus percentage fees and a fixed management fee allowed by Article 12. These costs and fees are summarized in the table below. Description Management Fee Total Estimated Cost including Fees Schedule C $195,000.00 $857,485.00 Schedule D $220,000.00 $1,859,360.00 Schedule E $40,000.00 $99,200.00 Miscellaneous Work $95,000.00 $386,046.00 Subtotal $550,000.00 $3,202,091.00 Project Contingency $640,000.00 Total NSS Work $550,000.00 $3,842,091.00 CO 13 $250,000.00 Net Increase this Change Order $3,592,091.00 This CO adds a significant amount of work to the contract. The Contractor will be required to dedicate additional management staff and craft manpower to complete this change. The Contractor will be paid a management fee as allowed by General Conditions Article 12 for each schedule and percentage fees on the various portions of the Cost of the Work as described in Article 12.01 .c.2. Contractor's management fee includes the following costs: Contractor's overhead and profit 2. Mobilization of tools and manpower for the change order work 3. Payroll costs for a full time superintendant and field engineer assigned to this work. 4. Allowable supplemental costs as defined in Article 11.0l .A.5. 5. Costs listed in article 11.013 are excluded from the Cost of the Work. 6. All costs associated with managing subcontractors. The management fee is subject to change only if entire schedules of work are added or deleted prior to mobilization. Schedule: The Owner and Contractor agree to the following: • That the scope of work being added by this CO represents a significant amount of work that must be performed within the existing schedule milestones provided for in the Contract. • That the intent of both the Owner and the Contractor is that this additional work will be performed so that it does not have any impact on the progress and completion of the work previously included in the Contract. • That there will be no claim for additional time or costs by either the Owner or the Contractor as a result of these changes. The Owner agrees that there are no liquidated damages associated with this change. • There is no extension of contract time required for this change. II CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: Original Contract Price: $ 26,870,000.00 Net Increase from previous Change Orders No. 0 to No. 17 : $ 763,925.15 Contract Price prior to this Change Order: $ 27,633,925.15 Net Increase of this Change Order: $ 3,592,091.00 Contract Price with all approved Change Orders: S 31 226,016.15 RECOMMENDED: 0 ENGINEER (Authorized Signature) APPROVED: By: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Times: Substantial Completion: May 6, 2011 Ready for final payment May 26, 2011 (days or dates) Net change from previous Change Orders No. 0 to No. 17 Substantial Completion: -0- Ready for final payment: -0- (days) Contract Times prior to this Change Order: Substantial Completion: May 6, 2011 Ready for final payment: May 26, 2011 (days or dates) Net Increase (Decrease) of this Change Order: Substantial Completion: -0- Ready for final payment: -0- (days) Contract Times with all approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion: May 6, 2011 Ready for final payment: May 26, 2011 (days or dates) OWNER (Authorized Signature) ACCEPTED: By: CONTRACTOR (Authorized Signature) EJCDC No. 1910-8-B (1996 Edition) Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee and endorsed by The Associated General Contractors of America and the Construction Specifications Institute. DEFECTS IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT A. ' *�11 .•tel r��yO�� 0-0 O L (a m U SCHEDULE "C" 2010 LAKE DRAWDOWN NEAR -SHORE SEWERS REHABILITATION Work Summary Item Description Quantity I Unit North Shore 4: (MH E09A-036S to E09A-0305, E09A-030S to E09A-023S, E09A-0235 to E09A-012S, E09A-012S to E09A-0095, E09A-009S to E09A-022S, E09A-029S to E09A- 022S, E09A-022S to E09A-027S, E09A-027S to E09A-031S, E09A-031S to E09A-032S, E09A-032S to E09A-024S, E09A-024S to E09A-0335, E09A-033S to E09A-0345, E09A-0345 to E09A-018S, E09A-018S to E09A-011S, ElOB-065S to EI013-058S, EIOB-0585 to E09A- 007S, E09A-0075 to E09A-0I IS) North Shore 3: MH E09C-007S to E09C-0125 E09C-012S to E08D-025S, E08D-025S to General Requirements Management & Fixed Fee 1 LS Traffic Control & Support for CIPP 1 LS ass Pumping Bypass Pumping Sewer Mains 1 LS Sewer Main e a 1 ltatlon 6 -inch or 8 -inch Cured -in -Place Pie 3820 LF Open -Cut Lateral Rehabilitation, Saddle Connection Saddle Connection (includes initial 5 feet of lateral, requires open -cut of tee connection prior to CIPP of sewer main) 3 EA Reconstruct 4" and 6" Lateral to lake side of sea wall 60 LF Install cleanout above sea wall 3 EA Manholes Install Stainless Steel Straps 1 EA Wrap External MH Joints 92 EA Rehabilitation Manholes (PolyTri lex) 9 VF SCHEDULE "D" 2010 LAKE DRAWDOWN NEAR -SHORE SEWERS REHABILITATION Work Summary Item Description Quantity Unit North Shore 2: (MH E08C-0695 to E08D-0535, E08D-0535 to E08D-0525, E08D-0525 to E08D-0515, E08D-051S to E08D-050S, E08D-0505 to E08D-0495, E08D-0495 to E08D- 0475, E08D-0465 to E08D-047S, E08D-047S to E08D-0485, E08D-0485 to E08D-037S) General Requirements Management & Fixed Fee 1 LS Traffic Control & Support for CIPP 1 LS Bypass Pumping Bypass Pumping Sewer Mains 1 LS Sewer Main Rehabilitation 6 -inch or 8 -inch Cured -in -Place Pie 2801 LF Open -Cut Lateral Rehabilitation, Saddle Connection Saddle Connection (includes initial 5 feet of lateral, requires open -cut of tee connection prior to CIPP of sewer main) 38 EA Reconstruct 4" and 6" Lateral to lake side of sea wall 170 LF Install cleanout above sea wall 38 EA Manholes Install Ground Anchors 8 EA Install Stainless Steel Straps 0 EA Wrap External MH Joints 34 EA Rehabilitation Manholes (PolyTri lex) 100.7 VF SCHEDULE "E" 2010 LAKE DRAWDOWN NEAR -SHORE SEWERS REHABILITATION Work Summary Item Description Quantity I Unit North Shore 3: (MH E09C-0055 to E09C-009S, E09C-009S to E09C-011S, E09C-011S to E09C-0085, E09C-0085 to E09C-010S, E09C-0105 to E09C-144S) General Requirements Management & Fixed Fee 1 LS Traffic Control & Support for CIPP 1 LS Bypass Pumping Bypass Pumping Sewer Mains 1 I's Sewer Main Rehabilitation 6 -inch or 8 -inch Cured -in -Place Pie 401 LF MISCELLANEOUS REPAIRS 2010 LAKE DRAWDOWN NEAR -SHORE SEWERS REHABILITATION Work Summary Item Description Quantity I Unit North Shore 1: Open Cut Replace (MH E08C-082S to MH E08C-090S) Point Repair l (MH E08C-097S), Point Repair 2 (MH E17B-001S to MH E08C-097S) North Shore 3: Point Repair 3 (MH E09C-005S to MH E09C-009S) Lakewood Bay: Point Repair 4 ( MH EIOB-063S Lateral), Point Repair 5 (MH E10A- 0525 to MH EIOA-054S), Point Repair 6 (MH EIOA-050S to MH EIOA-048S), Point Repair 7 (MH EIOA-047S) General Requirements Management & Fixed Fee 1 LS Traffic Control & Support for CIPP 1 LS Bypass Pumping Bypass Pumping Sewer Mains 1 LS Sewer Main Rehabilitation 8 -inch Cured -in -Place Pipe For Point Repair #8 6 LF 18 -Inch Cured -in -Place Pie 58 LF Oen Cut Replacement of 8 -inch sewer main 237 LF Oen-Cut Lateral Rehabilitation, Saddle Connection Saddle Connection (includes initial 5 feet of lateral, requires open -cut of tee connection prior to CIPP of sewer main) 2 EA Reconstruct 4" and 6" Lateral to lake side of sea wall 150 LF Install cleanout above sea wall 2 EA Point Repairs Manhole Point Repairs, #'s 1 & 7 2 EA Sewer Main Point Repairs, #'s 2, 3, 5, & 6 4 EA Sewer Lateral Point Repairs, # 3 1 EA LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Shawn Cross, Assistant Finance Director SUBJECT: Resolution 10-72, Mid -year Budget Transfer DATE: November 24, 2010 ACTION CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us Amend the 2010-2011 Adopted Budget as shown on the attached Resolution 10-72 through adjusting the budget by transferring certain appropriations. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Throughout a budget year, new information gives reason to make adjustments the adopted budget. Local Budget Law allows these adjustments under certain conditions and with certain requirements. This request is brought forward as an adjustment to the budget by transferring appropriations which requires public notice, but does not require a public hearing. DISCUSSION This Budget Transfer for fiscal year 2010-2011 was requested by the Planning & Building Director as follows: 1. Sensitive Lands Education and Outreach: $20,000. The additional funds for SL are the outgrowth of a recommendation by the Task Force for an increase in the City's ongoing outreach and education efforts regarding the City's resource protection program. An outline of the proposal was presented to the council November 16, 2010. Staff pared down the costs, and some, but not all, of the projected costs ($75,000) can be addressed by stretching existing Planning budget resources. 2. Code Audit: $50,000 The contract for Phase 1 of the Code Reorganization with Clarion is $97,850. The expenditures for the remaining budget cycle of 2010-11 is $83,000. This phase of the project was not addressed in the 2010-11 budget because the Code Audit had not been completed. (A modest Page 2 placeholder was included in the Planning budget.) Some but not all of the Phase 1 contract amount can be met with current funding; $50,000 will be needed to complete the FY 2011 portion of the project. The remaining $15,000 will be requested in FY 2012 budget. Boones Ferry 2 contract: $46,000. When the FY 10-11 budget was prepared for Phase 2 we anticipated that a portion (approximately $30-$50K) of the work would be completed in the spring of 2010 under the FY 09-10 budget. The Phase 2 project was started late in the FY and was partially delayed by the re -scoping required when proposals came in at costs far higher than expected. As a result, no FY 09-10 funds were spent on the Phase 2 project. Staff provided an update regarding the budget and consultant selection when the Council awarded the HNTB consultant team the contract September 21, 2010. The Planning and Building Director has reviewed her budget and anticipates that these additional costs cannot be absorbed by possible under -spending in other budget areas. Resolution 10-72 lists the requested budget change by fund and amount, and with required explanation. The paragraph below provides additional information. FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact is described in detail on the resolution itself. The City will be transferring $116,000 from the General Fund's contingency to the Planning and Building Department. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Resolution 10-72 be adopted as submitted. ATTACH M E NTS 1. Resolution 10-72 Reviewed by: City Manager RESOLUTION 10-72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADJUSTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 2010 BY TRANSFERING CERTAIN APPROPRIATIONS. WHEREAS, Certain conditions and situations have arisen since the initial preparation of the FY2010-11 budget and necessitate changes in financial planning, now, therefore, WHEREAS, City Council has authorized $116,000 of Contingency as a source of funding to support certain programs of the Planning & Building department, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that: Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes the transfer of appropriations within the General Fund budget for FY 2010-11 from Contingency to Planning & Building in the amount of $134,000 as listed below. General Fund Adopted Revised Difference Requirements Planning & Building 4,190,000 4,306,000 116,000 Contingency 7,120,000 7,004,000 (116,000) Section 2. 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 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage. Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of December. 2010. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Jack Hoffman, Mayor ATTEST Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPROVED .AS TO FORM: r City Attorney's Office Resolution 10-72 Page 1 of 1 LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Kim L. Gilmer, Director Parks & Recreation Department SUBJECT: Budget Options for Natural Area Restoration DATE: November 24, 2010 ACTION 5-1 6 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us Approve Resolution 10-75, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY10-11 to fund park natural area restoration activities. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Following the natural area presentation at the November 16, 2010 City Council study session, the Council requested staff return with options for funding invasive plant species removal and restoration activities for park natural areas. DISCUSSION Three alternatives for restoring park natural areas were developed, along with associated costs. The process used to develop these options included prioritizing parcels according to their natural resource value and ecological health; determining costs for restoring acreage from "poor" and "fair" ecological condition to "good" condition; costs of on-going maintenance; and finally a 20 year cost estimate. These processes are described in more detail below. Following the November 16 study session, MIG, Inc. worked with staff to establish a scoring system and prioritization matrix for evaluating the City's park natural areas according to ecological health and natural resource value (Exhibit A). Each park natural area containing significant ivy infestation was evaluated using the scoring system to determine priority for restoration. To determine restoration costs, estimates for both invasive species removal and native plant restoration were obtained from contractors specializing in natural habitat restoration. An analysis was then conducted Page 2 to identify the costs of restoring and maintaining each level of ecological health (i.e. "poor" to "good", "fair" to "good", and long term maintenance at "good" levels). Twenty year cost estimates were developed to illustrate the full costs of restoring and maintaining 100% of all park natural area property (Exhibit B). Several assumptions went in to this analysis. Most significant is full funding is appropriated to restore all properties within a 5 year period, followed by annual, on-going maintenance. In addition, all costs are in 2010 dollars. All invasive species removal will be done by contracted workers using chemical spray applications to remove invasive species, followed by replanting areas with native plantings where needed, also performed with contractor labor. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT Following development of the 20 -year proforma, four options were generated to illustrate what can be accomplished under different levels of funding (as found in Exhibit C). • Option 1—Assumes 100% restoration within 5 years • Option 2 —Assumes 75% restoration within 5 years • Option 3 —Assumes 50% restoration within 5 years • Option 4—Assumes only properties rated "high priority" are restored within 5 years Exhibits C -G contains the information illustrating the various options. Exhibit C entitled "Park Natural Area Restoration Options", shows the FY10-11 budget amounts for each option, followed by costs for each fiscal year through FY14-15. What is important to note is that the second and third years (FY11-12, FY12-13) contain large cost estimates to cover the costs of restoration plantings. These costs drop significantly the 4th and 5th years. Exhibits D -G illustrates park sites to be addressed under each option. In addition, staff will be required to solicit and manage the contracts. Existing Parks & Recreation Department staffing levels are limited, yet should be able to adequately manage contracts under Options 3 or 4. However, if Option 1 or 2 is selected, additional staff support will be required for managing the restoration effort due to the larger volume of acreage under contract. Costs for this additional staff are not included in either Option 1 or 2 cost estimates. Staff has reviewed the current FY10-11 Parks & Recreation budget and spending requirements with the Finance Department to determine whether additional expenses from any of the four options could be absorbed into the current budget. This will not be possible, while also maintaining current levels of service. Therefore, additional funding will be required in the Parks & Recreation budget to improve natural area maintenance. FY11-12 through FY14-15 FY10-11 Transfer Invasive Removal Native Plantings TOTAL FY11-12 to FY14-15 OPTION 1 100% restoration in 5 yrs $451,350 $428,190 $1,085,742 $1,513,932 OPTION 2 75% restoration in 5 yrs $253,818 $298,120 $705,142 $1,003,262 OPTION 3 50% restoration in 5 yrs $173,466 $171,147 $333,603 $504,750 OPTION 4 "High Priority" sites only in 5 yrs $ 69,695 $ 72,867 $ 73,786 $146,653 In addition, staff will be required to solicit and manage the contracts. Existing Parks & Recreation Department staffing levels are limited, yet should be able to adequately manage contracts under Options 3 or 4. However, if Option 1 or 2 is selected, additional staff support will be required for managing the restoration effort due to the larger volume of acreage under contract. Costs for this additional staff are not included in either Option 1 or 2 cost estimates. Staff has reviewed the current FY10-11 Parks & Recreation budget and spending requirements with the Finance Department to determine whether additional expenses from any of the four options could be absorbed into the current budget. This will not be possible, while also maintaining current levels of service. Therefore, additional funding will be required in the Parks & Recreation budget to improve natural area maintenance. Page 3 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council approve Option 4, which authorizes a budget request of $70,000 from General Fund Contingency to the Parks & Recreation Department budget for FY10-11. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 10-75 2. Exhibit A — Lake Oswego Parks & Natural Areas Ivy Treatment Priorities, Scoring Matrix 3. Exhibit B- Natural Area Restoration Costs, 20 Year Projection 4. Exhibit C — Park Natural Area Restoration Options 5. Exhibit D — Option 1 6. Exhibit E — Option 2 7. Exhibit F — Option 3 8. Exhibit G — Option 4 Reviewed by: Department Director 9,7 City Manager RESOLUTION 10-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADJUSTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 2010 BY TRANSFERING CERTAIN APPROPRIATIONS. WHEREAS, Certain conditions and situations have arisen since the initial preparation of the FY2010-11 budget and necessitate changes in financial planning, now, therefore, WHEREAS, City Council has authorized $70,000 of Contingency as a source of funding to support certain programs of the Parks & Recreation Department, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that: Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes the transfer of appropriations within the General Fund budget for FY 2010-11 from Contingency to Parks & Recreation in the amount of $70,000 as listed below. General Fund Adopted Requirements: Parks & Recreation 5,882,000 Contingency 7,004,000 Revised Difference 5,952,000 70,000 6,934,000 (70,000) Section 2. 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 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage. Considered and enacted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of December, 2010. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Jack Hoffman, Mayor ATTEST Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO,FAf�A(I: /, 1 �7 "fir City Attorney's Office Resolution 10-75 Page 1 of 1 v w 0 N w 0 s (o c Q 0 0 a a- 3 m r _ n 0 0 �a m 3 O w 0 o m 0 A d O. O OrQ N ju O O X -O v X- N 90 Z fu rr D a� N C m a) rF 3 fD 3 rF -t O� e -F fD� N N H to 0 U Z Z O0 Q � p� U o LLJ 0 N W d Q Q W W Q O Q N `D r Q Z cc Cc x w O Cl) t71 } LL 01 N t)0 N } LL co N A N } LL A N to N } LL t0 N W) N } LL 0 N ItL LL It N M N } LL m N N N } LL N N T N } LL N O N } LL O N 01 } LL rn 00 } LL 00 n } LL A t0 } LL to T tp } LL 0 T 'Q T } LL V A } LL M T N } LL N T r } LL O } LL r- N 0C to ' m tG N N T O M 40 N co fA 603, 6" 44 ffT 69 69 69 N E:3 to N -A CD LO LO C) N t67 O t q ' to tVo N N V T O CO M N N EA 6A V> 6A 69 69 69 19 to ER 49 H O O O O O O r 0 CD t0 Vo tD N LQO 0 ' 0) i N N `- O O M N N FA 6A 69 K 69 69 69 64 V> fA fA 1A %� O O O tLO 0 V O to R UD 01 IQ O t0 ' f� to to N N N V — O O M N co fA EA 63 fA 69 69 EA K 6si 6A v> K 6A 0 O to N N V T O O M N N 6A EA to 6A 61) 6H 6A 60). V3 69 6., 6A 46 CD O CD O O LO 0 V O V 01 )17 O tp ' r O t0 N N N T O O M N co 69 vi V3 6A EA 6A Efl 6A V3 69 6A IR y} O O O O LO O- Ln O � 0 to t0 N LQ O t0 ' O C N N LO 60 Cl) N co (A 6A 69 M. 64 69 EA 6A fA EA 69 W O O O tLO t00 v O a 0 1 0 0 O 0 ' n O tc N N N V T to 0 M N co 69 69 69 K dJ u, 60 IA to 69 ffl 69 q^ o_ o o � L o a M 0 O 0 ' A W t0 N N N 0 60 M 40 N co 69 64 N Vf 69 EA 6A to di fA K 6r} O O O 0 W) O to a 0 to O to ' I� tT t0 N N N V — 0 0 M CD N N fA 69 6fi 69 6q 61). 64 6A fA 6" W yr} CD O O n O 0 t0 tLO V O v M 0 O 0 ' A 6A t0 N N N V b 0 Cl) NQ co N 69 6A 6si 6A fA Q9 fR 6A 69 6q K y} O o o LO W v o v M 0 O 0 ' A tD t0 N N N V T 0 0 M 40 N co to EA EA 60 69 ffi vi 60 6% 69 t!3 W N O O O Lo LO v' O It co 01 co 0 0 O t!1 ' t` 6n to N N N V 0 0 Cl) 40 N co (i? 6A Ui K 69 63 G9 V► d9 69 60 K O O O LO 0 v O a 001 0 O to ' A 0) tD N N N V T 0 t(6 M N N EA ER di K 69 FA fA 6& V3 69 d3 IA 6.4 CD_ o O � W) v o a m 0 ' N- 6A t0 N N N V T 0 0 Cl) N co d i 69 61) W 6A 64 61). W to 6A 60. W Vf O O O O O LO O LO O co N N Ch N vt ' LQ O tp ' a tD N 01 N N V T tr)l ) t` V Go a 60 EA 6A W EA 69 64 60). 6A 6A 69 1A N O O O O O O O O O tfi O N ' tD O O1 tr1 N N N M V M t)0 N 69 69 69 60 6A 64 6N w 64 (f) 6A w 46 O O O O O O O N O co O N ' 600 ' tOo ' Lr IQ O ' t0 r T N 0 A O 1p 0 R N M 6fl 64 693 W 6A 6A 6A H 69 to 6A N {/► O O O O O N tq O O ' N ' N ' O O O N N N co O { T A 00 O N 69 6q 6A 60 69. 64 6A IA 6A 69 6% W iA O 0 LO O 40 LO O O O tOr) ' O ' O A O ' A V_ V ' 00 M M t'Af M V A (0 6o Ln Mm V (A FA 6A 69 CA, 69 69 IA 69 69 (A W 6/► a O o o a O O O o a O o Q O 609 O Cl) O Nff? V 0 Q O 609 O 6M9 tD NCA U o Q O O Cl) tD C14 V U U) O) (n CM N O) C C H CL N c c N N C C N N � c H CL O 6 2 H LL O p Q H lL O O O - t6 F CO UC p C CO O t6 CO U 6u C C O t0 �- U d C C O CL y U f6 f0 N U td c a y o in 0)m p o s -o 0 0) � d fn� � > fn� N F io O O O p Z n N O p o O II II °O O II o oaC U° d (j li ° a Or L7 ti V w O r O 6.+ Q I0 C t< to + w Q O w + 9) L ° ° (0 LL.v� a° tin b o0CD m � _O N Lo Co N CUr 00 "LOO 00 N N Q U 0 6G,e»696R O O N N O LO CA -cr r LO N C) 4 N LO'7 00 V } LL 69 EA ER 69 a O C:) C) O r Ln m Ln r N O r - M 00 r LL CR 69 69 61) O O O O M O O 00 O r Cfl O CD N N N � !o v r N Cl) LL O O O O O O O O N N O O CV r LO r- M r N 7 M O r CO O LL 69 69 H> 64 ccOOO O E 0LO0 0 r a) N r- CO M O r O a) co ti Cl) Ln � Cl) d a U- :Z o L o (0 LL d N OD LO U O rn - U r CO LO v J a L- 0 H W o a ooLnLn a >.0(70 000 Z O oUS O O LO r- N p coO w O LO r _C o Lo CA CD p Or pOU LO LOO p �p rO 0 0 E N Lo M o CL o O .ra � O oU -_o .c- 0 U LL 6q 611, 0 U LL 60�1<»c» G N 0 0 rn rn O O O o LO O LO v C) Lo O LO N t` r r LOCAL a r rLOoCO O N LO M r CO CO N Lo r t7 OrnLn w LL LL b} ft) V) CA W 69 6F3 (4 cf? L # Iq O O N N Nrr 0 0 U) LO r LO CA Ln Lf) t` M N V cli N M co 00 M Ln LL LL 61S 6rk vi CST 6rk Ki Efi 69 M M CO O 00 I CD O CD N N Lp Cd IT C6 M N N S d' Cl) } r N } r LL LL fA 61- EA Vf 69. 6H 699 tfi O C) O O COD COO O C) N N O IT co A N O N tt L - Lo N00 r N 'T CO LOr N '7 v O r } LL LL EA d} ER 69 EA fA Ef3 Efl cc OOH m OO CD CO � `r D o CO aa)i `c n 7 N o00 OE M 00 M O— O LO M� h } fl r M } Q LL Q LL_ a U) E» E» E» v> Cl) F» 61) r» to o L o o- o C7 Li d 0 LL LFo i co co C) C) U) N U) N Cj N U 00 U L) ? U co 0 Ln L0 6f? 64 00,v 't 000000 r N N LT r O Q N N C C C O p > p ; la, L� h W 0 w o M 0 U) O a O OUB °LLQ T } LL ONICT tD Or-LnN c O — M 611 69 Q9 -16F) O N W O O O 00 r O M V N N � Efl Qil 64161). O OCD M N �2 O O O Lq N N i- T N T T N LL O to V. m O co v ti N N (C N O 7 "-) N co 't N Ln 00 } LL (6 O � 00 1A �- CO O O 0> T 0) O M 'I C O Cl) N N w T N } Q LL 0. a 0 O CD LL o- m v fA y fD O O T U U N :a }L LO coo v mr—LO cc Ln It Ln N r- N .0 C 0) O L U c 3 y W O d ~ fY } 0 0I0I0 wf0 •' L O 'i0 @ LLIn C C W O O E N U Q OLILO SIR V 00 N Q N N O CM C 0 O C Z CO M M OJ N C01 o CO R E d Q E Q 0 0 0 R 0 0) vocfl c 2 cp � d w O C U d L Z a a coo v mr—LO cc Ln It Ln N r- N .0 C 0) O L U c 3 y W O d ~ fY } 0 0I0I0 wf0 •' L O 'i0 @ LLIn C C W O O E N U Q LO T SIR OD 00 N Q o o to Z CO CO �- N T CO R o O i c d U L d a LnLO(DCD C H o T r- r- N Ln V R _O +r U y Q _ > Z W :M H o 0 L o cD LL a rn 0 v DEFECTS IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT E E $ 3 ƒ G § j » } \ u o E u E s rq / f c cu S- E \ w 2 0 / O\\\ \ a $ \ / a z uj k 0 I.- O N u CL § k 1 § § % s rl 2 2 = 0 2 m $ .k 2 = g 0 » E i k J 0. k c§ I Lt -4 j LE R (A z f m �o _ M @ -4W K w q r4 Go k e tU- ; W±A f a t�� a \ 2)« 1 3 3 $ '• &0a �]3 CL CL > $ u 2 k © - p E M-2 8 f■ ) 0 => k� k ` § 2 0 ] � u \ iCk \ / 3L j) LL \ § k to 1-1 P, ! Qj CL \ CL CL - 0 2( CL 0 z 100 - � 2 e$ 0 J c � - § / \ \ ) '). w k k w k k c � \ E E \ % k k j c 94 J w £ J f ] 7 & a o u o ■ E ' E E o ■ a vic 4 .\ k / k \ / k k / j a m \ Lu k } 2 \ a $ \ / a z uj k 0 I.- 3 O v T C 3 0 L cJ .o Q ti T C L 3 a v N O N L O O Q N C rj C c T a ._ u N U ro N N N N �n C v O u rp E_ �D r O w cp O d0 � o � o' 0 0 o 0 c o 0 NY in a v� r, v O E a u o E m N -a ou c Z v oro OO p C E ` o '0 � o c -i `u M T O a 0 0 J a co Ln v N T CL L 00 2 I� M 1p M N N OO "i t0 N O M C" N t0 O f m Q 2 X U R � u N C 3 d CCL A 0 JY Y 0 TLC a d m oco to w .0 Y N R O 0 C GJ w CL ul M Z C O O O ca r +'c E c 0 w v C a w t ++ a O v > c v w w 3 O c 0 L, a u°O U. 40n 3 vn v', Z rn m �o o co m m en lO N N c0 A a eq VI N Q Z �I m > O EC V u- w 0: oc a w w LL c Q n d •O CC 0 m _xx N C tom a o a d as a CL w `o w U a +• Z > w > Y o E to y $= 3$ E o c H 4i m 19 3 m "mo o u o •� o s c c r w i O C 2 c w O VO) 2 f- N J C ti 01 O d' v 4 O 1p M-4 n M -Cr N Q Z C w d Y d d N NCL ;mm N O w C m Z cc O m O O — Vn1 CIO c12 _ a fc 3 1' c 1° CL ewo cc . O w �Ep O w co Ulu a_ V C 1 (3 1 1 1 1 1 1 K w > w 7 L w a cc W w w w E w E E � 10 to to w 3'- w Y Y cc w cr oc+ w cctoE �'� J C c o v o w c w o to v c m 3 0 3 `—° `—° 3 E'- o 0 3to 3 0 t m w 2 m u O O u O p p W d c -i `u M T O a 0 0 J a co Ln v N T CL L 00 2 LL CC, x x W O w C C 3 O z ai 0 N N O) Ln C t i+ 3 a d a d m c `l W 3 � O a N N c �N ` Ln CL N LLM N c M .N N a V C C N O m0 N �^ O y m � co � � � O C O O 7 � � O C O c 0 12 N O V N in N O a V E M a u c Z> C to O ++ c E .o 0cucc 0 _ V? �. � � v n Z I� fV M � t0 O M M N N1 tff fV 00 tC Itf O N l0 P rl Y L v d C � C e0 CL I 0 Q 3 m m a M O '' m m a D 4 y y ao o m Z 0 0 o N m N c L a N C y - p C �. C7 L, LL N 3 H to Z 01 m w O 00 Ln m n v ei 1� N M m tC N'. N CO V -4 N N Z f0 O E tL R Co LL 0 Y 10 N a L 8 d Y 0 v N Y L N � 10 Y Y f0 Y .0 � O •� C d 10 C m a N c H `o u` a z > 3 00 °u = 3 4i f^tn M c c c Q r oyj V N CpC J N W •L �. N N V C S N �. ti N h 01 O t0 O V t0 O a' ` to M 14 C w m d' Z Ilc 0 v MD C7 Y Y y� Y 00 R y I d VJ f0 « o_ ` O vi d d r+ C Z Y m O 000 Oil Q m O �o d i CL 3 O C C G m C U O V c CL U K L7ur' I t y io i ro io 3 > 3 N Y Y y o: N ec ea a d CO `7 � d J ff 0: C N () 3 3 '—�° 3 c o o" F 0 3 ~ 3 0 L I iv S fd _V •� II O 10 0 0 0 C O d 0 0 J Q 06 v N � 0 - CL n _n x rn Qi O a 0 a 3 0 J v 00 L v N u CL t 2 Oi V 1� M t0 M N t!1 a0 N �D N of O M M N w O I- m a z U � C d c CL o o d L a 3 'A d co ,� J Y aS i Q m w Y N 1 •O 4+ d y a0 CL c a Z oo ? o m_ _ O # E C N •� aL.+ C d C O• d pCCL >U.. is u LL In 3 n z° rn m W O ao v m n v N 1� N Mf M {C f fV aC e4 N1 N a � Z m O ci d i w v n LL > Y fa U d Y c CY N > Q la m y LII c N Y O L d d c n NO O d Z > 75 = 3 C H U = O yOj YQ c L ICU oO v C O a O - O 2 W ifn W Oi O tO O w O LO .-1 o m m V � Z c W � a LAe m (7 Y X Y' d Y ; LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Shawn Cross, Assistant Finance Director SUBJECT: Resolution 10-70, Budget Supplement for Lake Corp Dam Project DATE: November 19, 2010 ACTION 6 ./ CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us Modify the 2010-2011 Adopted Budget as shown on the attached Resolution 10-70 through a Budget Supplement Process. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Throughout a budget year, new information gives reason to make adjustments to the adopted budget. Local Budget Law allows these adjustments under certain conditions and with certain requirements. This request is brought forward as a full budget supplement, requiring public notice and a public hearing, because of the magnitude of the change in the Engineering Fund. DISCUSSION This is the first Budget Supplement for fiscal year 2010-2011 and is made for unanticipated additional spending for the Engineering Fund for the pass-through of grant funds for the capital improvement of the Oswego Lake Dam as shown on previously approved resolution 10-54. Resolution 10-70 lists the requested budget change by fund and amount, and with required explanation. The paragraph below provides additional information. ENGINEERING FUND The original FY 2010-11 Budget was developed approximately six months prior to the City receiving a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant, administered through the State Office of Emergency Management (OEM). The grant is for the Lake Oswego Corporation (LOC) to enlarge the spillway and install operable flood gates on the Oswego Lake Dam in order to lower flood levels in the Lake. Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT Equal amounts of revenues from FEMA and expenditures to the LOC pass through the City with no net fiscal impact on the City. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Resolution 10-70 be adopted as submitted. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 10-70 2. Resolution 10-54 Reviewed by: Financg Director �--� City Manager RESOLUTION 10-70 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADJUSTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 2010 BY ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET, APPROVING RESOURCES/REQUIREMENTS, AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS. WHEREAS, Certain conditions and situations have arisen since the initial preparation of the 2010-11 budget and necessitate changes in fi;.ancial 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 2010-11 in the amount of $ 958,000. Section 2. The City Council hereby authorizes: A) The approval of resources and requirements as listed below; B) The transfers of funds and transfers of fund appropriations as listed herein. Engineering Fund Adopted Revised Difference Resources: FEMA Grant Reimbursement $ - $ 958,000 $ 958,000 Requirements Materials & Services $ 324,000 $ 1,282,000 $ 958,000 $ 958,000 Explanation of Major Changes: The increase in The Engineering budget is to cover the costs to the Lake Oswego Corporation to enlarge the spillway and install operable flood gates on the Oswego Lake Dam funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Mitigation Grant. 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 7th day of December, 2010. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Page 1 of 2 ATTEST: Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney's Office Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION 10-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF A FEMA FLOOD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE GRANT; AND AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE LAKE OSWEGO CORF-)RATION TO USE GRANT FUNDS FOR THE OSWEGO LAKE DAM SPILLWA MODIFICATION PROJECT WHEREAS the Lake Oswego Corporation ("LOC") proposes to undertake a project to enlarge the spillway and install operable flood gates on the Oswego Lake Dam in order to lower -flood levels in Oswego Lake by several feet for the 100 -year flood (the "Project"); and, WHEREAS it is anticipated that the Project will mitigate potential flooding during a 100 -year flood for lakefront properties as well as for portions of State Street (the "Project"); and WHEREAS Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA") Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant funds, administered through the State Office of Emergency Management ("OEM") , are available for such a project, but must be awarded by the OEM to a public agency; and WHEREAS, the City, recognizing that the Project will benefit the entire community, is willing to be the official recipient of grant funds and to provide funds to LOC as a sub -recipient, provided that LOC indemnifies the City from liability arising out of the City's role as the recipient, reimburses the City for its administrative costs, and requires LOC's contractors and subcontractors on the Project to provide insurance coverage for the City; and WHEREAS, OEM supports the City providing grant funds to LOC as a sub -recipient; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that FEMA will officially award the grant in mid-August, 2010; and WHEREAS, because the draw -down of Oswego Lake is imminent and Project activities need to be underway as soon as possible, and because it also will benefit the Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer project for LOC's Project to commence immediately after the grant award is made, and since the City Council's only scheduled meeting for the month of August will occur on August 3rd, the City Council is willing to approve the grant agreement with OEM and the cooperative agreement with LOC in substantial form on August 3, 2010, and to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the two agreements once the FEMA award has officially been made; IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Lake Oswego City Council as follows: Section 1. Upon the award by FEMA of a Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant to the City for the Oswego Lake Dam Spillway Modification Project, the City Manager is authorized to sign: A. A Flood Mitigation Assistance Program Contract with the Oregon Office of Emergency Management, substantially in the form attached as Exhibit A; and Page 1 of 2 — Resolution 10-54 B. A Cooperative Agreement with the Lake Oswego Corporation, substantially in the form attached as Exhibit B. - - Section 2. The City Manager is hereby delegated the authority to make adjustments to the terms of the two agreements authorized in Section 1 of this Resolution, provided that the final agreements are substantially in the form authorized by the City Council; Section 2. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect upon passage. Considered and enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council held on the 3rd day of August, 2010. AYES: Mayor Hoffman, Hennagin, Tierney, Olson, Vizzini NOES: none EXCUSED: Moncrieff, Jordan (recused) none ABSTAIN: Jack / ffman, ayo ATTEST: Robyn Chris e, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell City Attorney Page 2 of 2 — Resolution 10-54 LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Debra Andreades, AICP Senior Planner, Planning and Building Services SUBJECT: Congregate Housing - Definition Amendment (LU 10-0041) DATE: November 30, 2010 ACTION CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 AAvenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us At a study session on May 18, 2010, the City Council initiated a discussion on the definition of congregate housing in order to clarify the qualification criteria for occupancy of this type of housing. The discussion was prompted by Council's finding that the current definition of "congregate housing" in LOC 50.02 as it relates to age -restricted housing is confusing. The May 18th study session discussion was intended to provide guidance to the Planning Commission and resulted in direction to staff to include age -restricted housing as a separate category in the definition, consistent with the provisions in the federal Fair Housing Act regarding age restriction. Further, Council directed staff to incorporate the definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on October 11, 2010 and forwarded a recommendation to the Council for a specific amendment to the definition. Staff reports to the Planning Commission are attached as Exhibits D-1 and D-2, the Planning Commission Findings are attached as Exhibit B-1, and the Minutes of the October 111h Planning Commission meeting are attached as Exhibit C-1. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND In 2007, Northwest Housing Alternatives (NWHA) applied for a Development Review permit for a 45 -unit project (LU 07-0031). NWHA had obtained a federal grant for the project, which it described in its narrative as: "45 -unit apartment building that provides an affordable home to independent seniors living on fixed incomes." "Individuals or two -person households in which at least one member is 62 years or older will be allowed to live at Oakridge Park. In addition, residents must have incomes not exceeding 50% of the median income. Rents will vary according to residents' income. Residents will pay 30% of their monthly income as rent." Page 2 Following discussions with City staff, NWHA applied for the use as "congregate housing", defined in LOC 50.02.005 as: "Multi -unit housing with self-contained apartments that contain cooking facilities which support independent lifestyles for those that have life -function disabilities due to age, medical, or mental condition, which do not require residential care or skilled nursing services. Congregate housing provides varying levels of support services, such as meals, laundry, housekeeping, transportation, and social, recreation, cultural and education activities. The full range of services normally associated with a residential care facility, are not provided in association with congregate housing." The project was originally approved by the Development Review Commission and appealed by the Waluga Neighborhood Association to the City Council. The Council approved the proposal with revised conditions of approval. The City Council approval was subsequently appealed to LUBA by the Waluga Neighborhood Association. LUBA upheld the City's findings on all assignments of error but remanded back to the City Council the issue of whether the project met the definition of "congregate housing." Following remand, the Development Review Commission denied the application (finding that there was no evidence of causation of disability due to age), but on appeal the Council disagreed, finding that there was substantial evidence to show a correlation between age and disability, and approved the project. The principal issue is what an applicant for "senior housing" would be required to show to meet the congregate housing definition. DISCUSSION Age -Restricted Housing Per the definition in LOC 50.02, congregate housing is to be available for occupants under three circumstances: age, mental condition, or medical condition. However, the "life -function disabilities due to age" portion of the definition appears to require a connection between "life -function disabilities" and age. LUBA remanded the Council's initial approval of the NWHA project due to inadequate evidence and findings showing that the proposed housing was for "those that have life -function disabilities due to age, medical, or mental condition....": "Under the LOC, there are three potential causes of that disability, one of which is age. The express language of the LOC requires a causative element. In other words, age (in this case) must cause the life -function disability because the LOC requires that the disability be "due" to age. The city's interpretation, however, reads that causative element out the definition entirely. ... We agree with petitioner that eliminating the need for any demonstration of an actual life -function disability or causative relationship between age and the purported disability is contrary to the express language of the LOC, which requires a causative element." Waluga Neighborhood Association v. City of Lake Oswego, Or. LUBA (2008)(LUBA Slip Opinion, p. 5. (http://www.oregon.gov/LUBA/docs/Opinions/2008/10-08/08035.pdf): Therefore, the Council's discussion at the May 2010 study session included a discussion of whether age - restricted housing should be a permitted use distinct from "congregate housing". Page 3 The City Council also noted that that the Federal Fair Housing Act, as amended by the Housing for Older Persons Act (HOPA), permits age -restricted housing: "HOPA retains the [Fair Housing Act] requirement that senior housing must have one person who is 55 years of age or older living in at least 80 percent of its occupied units. It also still requires that senior housing publish and follow policies and procedures that demonstrate an intent to be housing for persons 55 and older." http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/FHLaws/yourrights.cfm Life -Function Disabilities A review of the legislative history during the NWHA application review process indicated that congregate housing was intended to be multi -family housing with the addition of the provision of varying levels of support services for people with "life -function disabilities." On the issue of what constitutes a life function disability, the Council discussed whether "congregate housing"- if it were to provide housing for persons with disabilities -should include the definition of disability under the Federal Fair Housing Act/Americans with Disabilities Act (FHA/ADA) as qualifying disabilities for "congregate housing"? With regard to the scope of "life function disabilities": although the term "life function disabilities" is contained in the definition of "congregate housing", it is not defined in the Code. In the NWHA case, the Council found that the term "life -function disabilities" was intended to include conditions that would be included as a "disability" under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): "mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the individual...". The City could eliminate confusion by incorporating the definition of "disability" under the ADA. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Planning Commission found that the criteria for occupancy of "congregate housing" would be more clear if the definition (1) specifically includes age -restricted housing, (2) is consistent with the federal Fair Housing Act's provision regarding any age restriction; and (3) incorporates the definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Commission also agreed with the City Attorney that additional language is needed in the definition so that it clearly includes any future amendments to the referenced ADA definition (Exhibit F-1). RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends the following amendment to the definition, as indicated in Ordinance 2562, Exhibit A-1.1: Congregate Housing. Multi -unit housing that: H1 w0th Consists of self-contained apartments with cooking facilities; and (2) Complies with one of the following: (a). At least 80 percent of the apartments are occupied by at least one person 55 years or age or older; or Page 4 w#ie# The housing supports independent lifestyles for those that -who have life -# ieR a disabilities disability as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. includine any amendments thereto. and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services -and r^�*^ "^ �Provides varying levels of support services, such as meals, laundry, housekeeping, transportation, and social, recreation, cultural and education activities. The full range of services normally associated with a residential care facility, are not provided in association with congregate housing. EXHIBITS A. Ordinances A-1 Draft Ordinance 2562, dated September 27, 2010 (not included, superseded by Exhibit A-1.1) A-1.1 Draft Ordinance 2562, dated December 1, 2010 B. Findings and Conclusions B-1 Planning Commission Findings Conclusions and Order, dated October 25, 2010 C. Minutes C-1 Draft Planning Commission Minutes, October 11, 2010 (not yet reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission) D. Staff Report D-1 Supplemental Staff Report to Planning Commission, dated September 27, 2010 D-2 Staff Report to Planning Commission, dated September 30, 2010 E. Graphic Exhibits [No current exhibits] F. Written Materials F-1 E -Mail from City Attorney David Powell, dated October 11, 2010 G. Letters [No current exhibits] Reviewed by: City Manager (if legal issues) ORDINANCE No. 2562 AN ORDINANCE OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAPTER 50 OF THE LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF "CONGREGATE HOUSING" IN LOC 50.02.005, CLARIFYING THE QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR OCCUPANCY, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS LU 10-0041-1749. Whereas, notices of the public hearings for :-,onsideration of this ordinance were duly given in the manner required by law; and Whereas, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on October 11, 2010; and Whereas, a public hearing was held before the Lake Oswego City Council on December 7, 2010, to review the Planning Commission's recommendation; now, therefore, The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. Adoption of Findings and Conclusions. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions attached as Exhibit 1 (LU 10-0041-1749). Section 2. The definition of "Congregate Housing" in Section 50.02.005 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in bold double underlined type and deleting the text shown int~i'��= type, as follows: 50.02.005 Definitions. Congregate Housing. Multi -unit housing that: (1) Consists of with -self-contained apartments th�rwith-cooking facilities• d (2) Complies with one of the following: a At least 80 percent of the apartments are occupied by at least one person 55 years of aue or older: or b The housing •,supports, independent lifestyles for those t#atwho have'i disal l ies disability as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. including any_ amendments thereto and who due to age. fnedieal, ental eandition, which do not require residential care or skilled nursing services.;LAW r y e h,,_,A*, NProvides varying levels of support services, such as meals, laundry, housekeeping, transportation, and social, recreation, cultural and education activities. The full range of services normally associated with a residential care facility, are not provided in association with congregate housing. Ordinance 2562 Page 1 of 2 Enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 7th day of December, 2010. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Dated: ATTEST: Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPROVED AS T FORM: or David Powell, City Attorn y Ordinance 2562 Paae 2 of 2 EXHIBIT 1 1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL 2 3 OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 4 5 A REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE ) 6 THE LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY ) LU 10-0041-1749 7 DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 50, ) (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 8 RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF ) 9 CONGREGATE HOUSING ) FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 10 [ORDINANCE No. 2562] ) 11 12 NATURE OF PROCEEDING 13 14 This matter came before the City Council pursuant to a recommendation by the Lake 15 Oswego Planning Commission to amend the text of Lake Oswego Community Development 16 Code Section 50.02.005 relating to the definition of "Congregate Housing". 17 HEARINGS 18 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its 19 meeting of October 11, 2010. The City Council held a public hearing to consider the Planning 20 Commission's recommendation on December 7, 2010. 21 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS 22 - 23 A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: 24 25 Goal 1 Citizen Involvement, Policies 1 and 5 26 Goal 10 Housing, Policies 14 and 19 27 28 B. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code: 29 30 LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decision Defined. 31 LOC 50.75.010 Criteria for Legislative Decision 32 LOC 50.75.015 Required Notice to DLCD 33 LOC 50.75.020 Planning Commission Recommendation Required 34 LOC 50.75.025 City Council Review and Decision 35 36 Page 1 — FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 10-0041-1749) (City of Lake Oswego, LU 10-0041-1746) David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue— PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 (503) 635-0225 —Fax (503) 699-7453 Email: dPowell(lci.osweeo or us EXHIBIT 1 1 C. Statewide Planning Goal or Administrative Rule adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197 2 3 Goal 1 Citizen Involvement 4 Goal 10 Housing 5 6 FINDINGS AND REASONS 7 As support for its decision, the City Council incorporates the staff Council Report dated 8 September 27, 2010 for LU 10-0041 (with all exhibits), the September 30, 2010 Staff Report to 9 the Planning Commission (with all exhibits), together with all supplemental reports, and the 10 Findings and Conclusions of the Planning Commission in this matter. 11 The City Council concurs with the Planning Commission's recommendation that the 12 definition of Congregate Housing should be amended to clearly state that age -limited housing 13 (with at least 80 percent of the apartments occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or 14 older) qualifies as a separate category of Congregate Housing without the need to establish a 15 correlation or causative relationship between the designated age and life function disabilities 16 As the City Council determined in its findings in AP 09-02-1701 (LU 07-0031), this is consistent 17 with the City Council's intent to include housing authorized under the provisions of the federal 18 Fair Housing Act when the definition was initially adopted. The age and percentage of 19 occupancy requirements in the proposed clarifying Code language mirror the Fair Housing Act 20 requirements for age -limited housing. 21 The City Council also concurs with the Planning Commission's recommendation that the 22 definition should be clarified to specify that Congregate Housing for persons with disabilities 23 refers to "disability" as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Although Page 2 — FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 10-0041-1749) (City of Lake Oswego, LU 10-0041-1746) David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380A Avenue — PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 (503) 635-0225 — Fax (503( 699-7453 Email: doowell(alci.osweRc.ocus EXHIBIT 1 1 the current definition language suggests this by using terminology similar to that of the ADA 2 ("life function disabilities"), the proposed clarifying language will avoid uncertainty. 3 The City Council finds that the proposal meets all relevant statewide planning goals, applicable provisions of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan, an".1' Lake Oswego Community 5 Development Code procedural requirements, as detailed in the incorporated September 30, 6 2010 staff report in LU 10-0041 and in the other incorporated materials. 7 CONCLUSION 8 The City Council concludes that LU 10-0041-1749 complies with all applicable criteria 9 and that the definition of "Congregate Housing" in LOC 50.02.005 should be amended to be 10 consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendation. 11 /// Page 3 — FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 10-0041-1749) (City of Lake Oswego, LU 10-0041-1746) David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue — PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 (503) E36-0225 —Fax (503) 699-7453 Email: doowe l lCalci.osweeo.or.us 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 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Afproo OF THE opylp CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE ) LU 10-0041- 1746 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, DEFINITION OF ) (CITY OF LAKEOSWEGO) "CONGREGATE HOUSING", TO CLARIFY THE ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER QUALIFICATION CRITERIA FOR THIS TYPE OF HOUSING ) NATURE OF APPLICATION A request from the City of Lake Oswego to make an amendment to the Lake Oswego Community Development Code, LOC 50.02, the "Definitions" section. The proposed amendment would amend the definition of "Congregate Housing" in order to clarify the qualification criteria for occupancy of this type of housing. HEARINGS The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its meeting of October 11, 2010. An letter by e-mail, dated October 11, 2010, from City Attorney, David Powell, was submitted at the hearing, as Exhibit F-1. CRITERIA AND STANDARDS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Goal 1 Citizen Involvement, Policies 1 and 5 Goal 10 Housing, Policies 14 and 19 B. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code: LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decision Defined. LOC 50.75.010 Criteria for 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 C. Statewide Planning Goal or Administrative Rule adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197 Goal 1 Citizen Involvement Goal 10 Housing CONCLUSION The Planning Commission concludes that LU 10-0041 is in compliance with all applicable criteria. LU 10-0041-1746 EXHIBIT B-1 LU 10-0041 PAGE 1 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 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 FINDINGS AND REASONS The Planning Commission incorporates the staff report, dated September 30, 2010, (with all exhibits attached thereto) as support for its decision, supplemented by the further findings and conclusions set forth in this document. In the event of any inconsistency between this supplementary matter and the staff report, this matter controls. To the extent they are consistent with the approval granted herein, the Commission adopts by reference its oral deliberations on this matter. Following are the supplementary findings and conclusions of this Commission: 1. The City Attorney recommends that additional language is needed to the proposed amendment of the definition of Congregate Housing indicated in the staff report and draft ordinance, so that it clearly includes any future amendments to the ADA definition that is referenced. He outlined two options and recommended adoption of Option 1, as outlined in Exhibit F-1. He also recommended elimination of the current ADA definition within the amended LOC definition, as indicated in the staff report and draft ordinance, in case it becomes inaccurate upon future amendment to the ADA. The Commission concurs and finds that the language in Option 1 should be part of the amended definition. ORDER IT IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that: 1. The Planning Commission recommends that LU 10-0041 be approved by the City Council. I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Oswego. DATED this 25`h day of October 2010. LU 10-0041-1746 Jon Gustafson /s/ Jon Gustafson, Chair Planning Commission Iris McCaleb /s/ Iris McCaleb Administrative Support PAGE 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 FT -Alla -11 PRELIMINARY DECISION — October 11, 2010 AYES: Glisson, Gustafson, Jones, Paretchan NOES: None ABSTAIN: None RECUSE: None EXCUSED: Johnson ABSENT: None ADOPTION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER - October 25, 2010 AYES: Glisson, Gustafson, Jones, Paretchan NOES: None ABSTAIN: None RECUSE: None EXCUSED: Johnson ABSENT: None LU 10-0041-1746 PAGE 3 *"NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION" LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Planning Commission Minutes w�Qj October 11, 2010 CALL TO ORDER Chair Jon Gustafson called the Planning Commission meeting of October 11, 2010, to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 380 "A" Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon. ROLL CALL Members present were Chair Jon Gustafson, Vice Chair Lynne Paretchan and Commissioners Julia Glisson and Russell Jones. Commissioner Jim Johnson was excused. Council Liaison Bill Tierney was also present. Staff present were Debra Andreades, Senior Planner; Dennis Egner, Assistant Planning Director; Paul Espe, Associate Planner; Jonna Papaefthimiou, Natural Resources Planner; Dave Powell, City Attorney and Iris McCaleb, Administrative Support. 3. CITIZEN COMMENT None. 4. COUNCIL UPDATE Ms. Andreades reported the Council had approv contract for Lakefront Park and discussed the North Anchor Project. 5. MINUTES 5.1 July 26, 2010 Com oner Glisson moved to approve the Minutes of July 26, 2010. Commissioner Jwlls seconded the motion and it passed 4:0. 6. PUBLIC HEARING LU 10-0041 — Congregate Housing Definition. A request from the City of Lake Oswego for an amendment to the definition of "congregate housing" in LOC 50.02 to clarify the qualification criteria for occupancy of this type of housing. Chair Gustafson opened the public hearing and outlined the applicable criteria and procedure. None of the Commissioners declared a conflict of interest. Debra Andreades, Senior Planner reviewed the staff report dated September 30, 2010. She explained that the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) had found the City's definition, "Congregate Care" required a connection between life function disability and City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission EXHIBIT C-1 Minutes of October 11, 2010 **DRAFT** LU 10-0041 Page 1 of 7 age. She indicated that the City Council wanted the Planning Commission to recommend a definition that would not require that connection. It should make that type of housing available to residents with either life function disability or who were aged, or a combination of both. Ms. Andreades reported the code listed several other types of housing related to assisted care and nursing services. They were solely related to disability. Staff recommended a revised definition in the staff report. City Attorney David Powell had subsequently offered two other options for subparagraph (2)(b) of that definition that more clearly stated the definition was to track with any future Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) amendments: Option 1: The housing supports independent lifestyles for those who have a disability as defined in the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act, including any amendments thereto, and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services. Mr. Powell recommended this Option. Option 2: The housing supports independent lifestyles for those who have a disability as defined in the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act, including changes made by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services. Deliberations Chair Gustafson invited Public testimony and no one came forward. He closed the public hearing. Vice Chair Paretchan moved to approve LU 10-0041 with Option 1 as recommended by the City Attorney in his October 11, 2010 e-mail to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Glisson seconded the motion and it passed 4:0. The final vote was to be conducted on October 25, 2010. 7. WORK SESSIONS 7.1 LU 10-0042 — Zoning Overlay for Industrial Park (IP) District Dennis Egner, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed the September 30, 2010 memorandum. He indicated that staff was still analyzing the proponents' prop I. He said staff viewed the IP Overlay as an interim "fix" that would add more fle ility to existing zoning until the Comprehensive Plan update process addr�e�edthat e Industrial Zone. He said staff wanted to know if the Planning Commission it should be an overlay zone and what the Commissioners thought its bo cries should be. He asked the Commissioners to discuss the list of allowed proposed uses in the staff report. Mr. Egner indicated the proponents propose o allow commercial ministorage use and he wanted to know if the Planning Com ssion would wanted to include it and if it should be allowed along Boones Ferry Ro or farther back in the District. He said the proponents proposed to permit medical pplies, rental and sales and he wanted to know if the Commissioners though at was appropriate. Don Hanson OTAK and e Dyne represented the proponent property owners. They agreed the proposed rlay would be an interim fix to a future district plan. They said they would subn Ll affic study in time for the public hearing. They said the overlay would not adyesely impact the Lake Grove Village Center. They listed things they wanted t Zone Overlay to accomplish: • Kut streetscape design standards in place. r Finish the streets and sidewalks. City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of October 11, 2010 **DRAFT** Page 2 of 7 CA�OS9110-2200100 Planning and Building Services Department Supplemental Report #1 TO: Planning Commission Supplemental Report #1 09-27-10 FROM: Debra Andreades, AICP Senior Planner DATE: September 27, 2010 SUBJECT: LU 10-0041 (Amendments to Definition of Congregate Housing) INTRODUCTION In preparation for a public hearing, the Planning Commission held a work session on July 26, 2010, on the proposed amendment to the definition of "Congregate Housing." During the work session, the Commission requested that staff outline for discussion the other types of housing found in LOC 50.02.005, the Definitions section. Also at the work session, staff presented proposed language for the amendment to the definition which included a reference to ADA standards, as requested by the City Council. The Commission discussed whether to include the date of the federal standards that were being referenced or whether to remove the date so that any amendments to the federal regulations would not require the City to amend the definition again to be current. The Commission requested that staff craft alternative language so that the amended definition references the ADA standards and any future amendments to those standards. DISCUSSION Below, is a list of the other types of special use housing provided for in the Community Development Code, and their definitions: Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRQ An age -restricted development that provides a continuum of accommodations and care, from independent living to convalescence care and long-term skilled nursing care, and enters into contracts to provide lifelong care. A CCRC typically includes a full range of living arrangements from independent living, congregate housing, residential care and skilled nursing and sometimes hospice care. CCRCs provide a range of ancillary facilities and services such as health care, meals with common dining facilities, physical therapy, education, recreation, and other social and cultural activities. Staff comment: This type of housing is distinguished from congregate housing by its provision of skilled nursing care and a full range of services. Planning Commission Public Hearing - 10/11/10 Definition of Congregate Housing LU 10-0041 EXHIBIT D-1 LU 10-0041 Page 1 Residential Care Housing A residential care housing facility houses and provides services for 6 or more persons who may have a range of physical and mental health problems, including chronic and debilitating conditions requiring assistance with daily activities. This term is synonymous with other terms such as "assisted living facilities" and "adult care housing' used to describe housing which provides the range of services described below. Living units within residential care housing do not have cooking facilities. A range of services is provided including staff supervised meals, housekeeping and personal care, medication supervision, recreation, cultural, social activities and transportation. Residential care housing facilities may include housing for persons needing intermediate care. These are persons who do not require around-the-clock nursing, but who do need preventative care, therapies at levels less than continuous licensed nursing care or observation. Intermediate care emphasizes personal, social and emotional / mental health care, but involves the availability of 24 hour service with physicians and nurses in supervisory roles. Skilled nursing services, including convalescent care, may be provided as an accessory and subordinate use in conjunction with residential care facilities. The total allowed number of persons requiring skilled nursing care may be up to 25% of a residential care facility's total occupant capacity. Staff comment: This type of housing is distinguished from congregate housing's "independent living" because it provides housing for those that require assistance with daily activities, Le, "assisted living." Additionally, it is distinguished because the units do not have cooking facilities. Skilled Nursing Facility Skilled nursing facilities provide 24 hour direct medical, nursing and other health services. Registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and nurses' aides provide services prescribed by resident(s) physician(s). Skilled nursing is for those persons who need health supervision but not hospitalization. The emphasis of this use is on nursing care, but convalescent, restorative physical, occupational, speech, and respiratory therapies are also provided. The level of care may also include specialized nursing services such as specialized nutrition, rehabilitation services and monitoring of unstable conditions. The term skilled nursing facility is also synonymous with the terms nursing facility and nursing home. Staff comment: This type of housing is distinguished from congregate housing because it provides 24-hour direct medical and nursing services. Following is the proposed amendment to the definition of congregate housing, addressing the concern of the Commission at the July 26`h work session: Multi -unit housing that: (1) withConsists ofself-contained apartments thGt ceeteiP with cooking facilities; and (2) Complies with one of the following: (a). At least 80 percent of the apartments are occupied by at least one person 55 years or age or older; or (b). +-h-The housing supports independent lifestyles for those tiaat who have 149 fwnet;en a 64SG1944ies.disobility as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act as amended, ("mental or physical impairment that substantially limits Planning Commission Public Hearing - 10/11/10 Page 2 Definition of Congregate Housing LU 10-0041 one or more of the major life activities of the individual") ,4ije te Gge; and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services` -and (3) Provides varying levels of support services, such as meals, laundry, housekeeping, transportation, and social, recreation, cultural and education activities. The full range of services normally associated with a residential care facility, are not provided in association with congregate housing. III. STAFF CONCLUSION The definition of congregate housing is different than the other types of special housing defined in that it provides more services than multi -family housing but less than the other three which provide varying levels of services. This amendment separates those who are seniors and those who are disabled but occupants could be both. By adding the "as amended" language, it allows the City's "congregate housing" to be defined by the ADA, as it may be amended in the future. Staff believes that the proposed definition is what the City Council intended in order to clarify the definition, removing the necessity to show a correlation between life function disabilities and age. Planning Commission Public Hearing - 10/11/10 Page 3 Definition of Congregate Housing LU 10-0041 srnFr acvoRr CITY Of LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICANT: City of Lake Oswego PROPERTY OWNERS: N/A LEGAL DESCRIPTION N/A LOCATION: Citywide COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: All I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST FILE NO: LU 10-0041 STAFF: Debra Andreades, AICP, Senior Planner DATE OF REPORT: September 30, 2010 DATE OF HEARING: October 11, 2010 NING DESIGNATION: N/A The City is proposing an amendment to the Community Development Code related to the definition of "Congregate Housing" in LOC 50.02, to clarify the qualification criteria for occupancy of this type of housing. EXHIBIT D-2 Planning Commission September 30, 2010 — LU 10-0041; Ordinance 2562 LU 10-0041 Page 1 of 6 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Goal 1 Citizen Involvement, Policies 1 and 5 Goal 10 Housing, Policies 14 and 19 City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code: LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decision Defined. LOC 50.75.010 Criteria for 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 C. Statewide Planning Goal or Administrative Rule adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197 Goal 1 Citizen Involvement Goal 10 Housing III. FINDINGS A. Background and Discussion: During the Northwest Housing Alternatives (NWHA) (LU 07-0031) application for "congregate housing" in March 2009, there was uncertainty as to what an applicant for "senior housing" would be required to show to meet the congregate housing definition. Following the Council's approval of NWHA's application, the Council requested that staff return for a discussion regarding "congregate housing" as it relates to age -restricted housing and clarify the qualification criteria for occupancy of this type of housing. At the May 18, 2010 City Council hearing, the Council directed staff to include age -restricted housing in the definition, consistent with the provisions in the federal Fair Housing Act regarding age restriction; and incorporate the definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The proposed amendments to the definition are intended to clarify what is allowed under the current definition of "congregate housing"; not to create another type of housing. Code Sections to be Amended The code amendment to Article 50.02 applies to properties throughout the City. Following is the definition of "Congregate Housing", LOC 50.02.005. "Multi -unit housing with self-contained apartments that contain cooking facilities which support independent lifestyles for those that have life -function disabilities due to age, medical, or mental condition, which do not require residential care or skilled nursing services. Congregate housing provides varying levels of support services, such as meals, laundry, housekeeping, transportation, and social, recreation, cultural and education activities. The full range of services normally associated with a residential care facility, are not provided in association with congregate housing." Planning Commission September 30, 2010 — LU 10-0041; Ordinance 2562 Page 2 of 6 Currently, congregate housing is available for occupants with "life -function disabilities due to age, medical or mental condition". This definition was found in the NWHA case by LUBA to require a connection between "life -function disabilities" and age. The Council did not intend a required connection. The proposed amendment is intended to distinguish between occupants over a certain age and those with life -function disabilities. The effect would be that congregate housing could be age -restricted, or for persons with "life -function disabilities due to medical or mental condition" of any age, or a mix of both. Additional background information is found in the following documents: • Supplemental Staff Report #1, dated September 27, 2010 (responding to input from the Commission at the July 26, 2010 work session on this subject). • Staff Memorandum to the Planning Commission (PP 10-0012) dated July 19, 2010 • Staff Report to City Council, dated May 10, 2010 The following amendment to the definition is proposed, with the Ordinance attached as Exhibit A-1: Multi -unit housing that: (1) with Consists of self-contained apartments that eentaiR with cooking facilities; and (2) Complies with one of the following: (a). At least SO percent of the apartments are occupied by at least one person 55 years or age or older; or (b). The housing supports independent lifestyles for those t#at-who have life n a d+s��disability as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, -("mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the individual") due to aoe mediea' ^+Q,'-ei,-rr&ion, and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services` -and (3) Ge44��+a Nprovides varying levels of support services, such as meals, laundry, housekeeping, transportation, and social, recreation, cultural and education activities. The full range of services normally associated with a residential care facility, are not provided in association with congregate housing. Compliance With Criteria for Approval: LOC 50.75.010, indicates that a legislative decision is generally a policy decision which is up to the discretion of the City Council, but shall: Comply with any applicable state law; There are no other known applicable state laws to review under this criterion. Planning Commission September 30, 2010 — LU 10-0041; Ordinance 2562 Page 3 of 6 Comply with any applicable Statewide Planning Goal or Administrative Rule adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197; Statewide Planning Goal 1 Citizen Involvement This Goal requires jurisdictions to develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The City's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code contain all necessary requirements for a citizen involvement program which clearly defines the procedures by which the general public will be notified in the on-going land use planning process and enables citizens to comprehend the issues and become involved in decision making. All required opportunities for input as specified in these documents were provided during this process. The City has also published and posted notices in accordance with the LOC 50.75.010. Public hearings will be held before the Planning Commission and City Council. Therefore, the process followed for this amendment is in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 1. Statewide Planning Goal 10, Housing This Goal requires jurisdictions to provide for housing needs for citizens of the state. This includes encouraging the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density. Approval of these amendments will neither affect the provision for housing implemented by the Community Development Code nor the residential zoning designations, boundaries or maps. Therefore, the amendment is in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 10. In the case of a legislative amendment to the Community Development Code, comply with any applicable provision of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan. Goal 1 Citizen Involvement, Policies 1 and 5 Provide opportunities for citizen participation in preparing and revising local land use plans and ordinances. Seek citizen input through service organizations, interest groups and individuals, as well as through neighborhood organizations. Findings: Pursuant to the requirements of the City's legislative code amendment process, announcements for the proposed Community Development Code text amendments have been provided to all neighborhood associations. Public hearings will be held before the Planning Commission and City Council. Citizens, interest groups, and neighborhood associations will have an opportunity to participate in the review of the proposed amendment during the City's public hearing processes. Notice has been provided consistent with City requirements. Adequate opportunities have been made available for citizen involvement with regard to this application. Conclusion: The application complies with Goal 1, Citizen Involvement Policies 1 and 5 Planning Commission September 30, 2010 — LU 10-0041, Ordinance 2562 Page 4 of 6 Goal 10, Housing, Policies 14 and 19 The objective of the Housing goal is to maintain residential land use designations that provide the opportunity for a variety of housing types in locations and environments to provide an adequate supply of safe, sanitary, energy efficient housing at price and rent levels appropriate to the varied financial capabilities of present and future city residents, while protecting the character of existing neighborhoods and environmentally sensitive areas. 14. Provide a wide range of housing types to meet the needs of various lifestyles and family types. 19. Allow special use housing for elderly, including frail elderly, persons with medical disabilities, disabled families and other special needs populations identified in the Clackamas County Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, in all zones in proportion to the local share of regional need. Findings: This application satisfies Goal 10 of the Comprehensive Plan because the amendments do not change the residential land use designations in the City, nor the site development limitations of the residential zones, found in LOC 50.06, 50.07, 50.08, and 50.09. The Community Development Code already provides a wide range of housing types. The amendments to the definition do not expand the types of housing allowed; they clarify the current definition of one type of housing for ease of implementation. Conclusion: The application complies with Goal 10, Policies 14 and 19. C. Lake Oswego Community Development Code Procedural Requirements LOC 50.01.010 Purpose LOC 50.05.005 Zoning Districts LOC 50.05.010 Zoning Map LOC 50.79.030 Major Development LOC 50.77.007 Burden of Proof LOC 50.77.030 Application Procedures LOC 50.82.005-.020 Review of Major Development Applications and Appeals LOC 50.83 Hearings before a Hearing Body LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decision Defined LOC 50.75.010 Criteria for Legislative Decision LOC 50.75.015 Required Notice to DLCD LOC 50.79.020 Planning Commission Recommendation Required LOC 50.79.025 City Council Review and Decision Findings: The application has been submitted, noticed and reviewed in accordance with the City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code requirements. Conclusion: The record indicates that the application complies with all of the above applicable procedural requirements. IV. CONCLUSION The proposed amendment is in compliance with City Comprehensive Plan policies, state laws, and statewide planning goals. Planning Commission September 30, 2010 — LU 10-0041; Ordinance 2562 Page 5 of 6 V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to LOC 50.02.005, to clarify the qualification criteria for occupancy, found in the definition of "Congregate Housing". EXHIBITS A. Ordinances A-1 Ordinance 2562, dated September 27, 2010 B. Findings, Conclusions and Order (No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use) C. Minutes (No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use) D. Staff Reports and Memos D-1 Supplemental Staff Report #1, dated September 27, 2010 E. Graphics/Plans (No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use) F. Written Materials (No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use) G. Letters Planning Commission September 30, 2010 — LU 10-0041; Ordinance 2562 Page 6 of 6 From: Powell, David Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 10:58 AM To: JNGSTFSN@aol.com; Julia Glisson; Jim Johnson; rus j; Lynne Paretchan Cc: Frisbee, Denise; Andreades, Debra Subject: Congregate Housing Definition Commissioners, The proposed text changes to the Congregate Housing definition appearing in the staff report (at Page 3 of 6) and in the draft ordinance (Exhibit A-1, Page 1 of 2), speak to "disability as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, ..." My opinion is that "as amended" is inadequate to clearly state that the definition should track with any future ADA amendments. Instead the language should be "disability as defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act, including any amendments thereto ..." I also suggest eliminating the parenthetical quote that follows ("mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the individual"), as that quote may become inaccurate upon a future amendment to the ADA, resulting in contradictory language in the Code definition. An alternative is to lock in the current ADA definition (the 2008 version)—also eliminating the parenthetical quoted material (because of its refinement in the recent amendments). So, to summarize, the options for proposed subparagraph (2)(b) of the definition are: Option 1: "The housing supports independent lifestyles for those who have a disability as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, including any amendments thereto, and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services;" Option 2: "The housing supports independent lifestyles for those who have a disability as defined in the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, including changes made by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, and who do not require residential care or skilled nursing services;" My recommendation is Option 1. Please let me know if you have questions Thanks, David Powell Lake Oswego City Attorney dpowell@ci.oswego.or.us Office: 503 635-0225 EXHIBIT F-1 LU 10-0041 LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager �e •3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 AAvenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us FROM: Debra Andreades, AICP, Senior Planner Planning and Building Services SUBJECT: Ordinance 2556A - Amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), Section 50.08.050(3) to Allow Construction of Common Wall Boathouses (LU 08-0052A) DATE: December 1, 2010 ACTION The proposed revisions to the Community Development Code would allow common wall boat houses to be constructed on abutting lots in the Oswego Lake setback and adopting findings. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND On August 3, 2010, the City Council adopted an amendment to the Oswego Lake Setback provision of the Community Development Code (LOC 50.22.030). The original code language stated that, except for a boathouse, a structure must be set back 25 feet from the property line abutting Oswego Lake and its canals. Boathouses are considered accessory structures, which allowed them to be a maximum of 800 square feet and 18 feet in height in the R-7.5, R-10 and R-15 zones (which is the zoning of all lots along the lake except those on Cabana Lane which are zoned WR). The approved amendments (Ordinance 2556) expanded the permitted uses, allowing certain other structures to be located within the Oswego Lake setback, including barbeques at a maximum height of six feet; lights, steps, docks, decks, pools/spas/jacuzzis at a maximum height of 30 inches, and outdoor showers at a maximum height of eight feet. The amendments also placed a limit on the size of boat houses at a height of 13.5 feet (wall height of 10 feet) and a maximum footprint of 560 square feet. These limitations were noted to be similar to Lake Oswego Corporation regulations applicable to Lake Oswego Corporation property. The Council also adopted an amendment to LOC 50.72.020, to make exceptions to the Oswego Lake setback limitations clearly available through the Residential Infill Design (RID) process, limiting height exceptions Page 2 granted under the RID process to 18 feet for accessory structures in the Oswego Lake setback and boathouse footprint exceptions granted under the RID process limited to 800 square feet. DISCUSSION Following the adoption of Ordinance 2556, the City received a letter from the Lake Oswego Corporation President (dated October 26, 2010 -Exhibit G-1) requesting that the matter be reopened to allow zero side yard setbacks for boat houses so that common wall boathouses may be constructed within the Lake setback. Currently, the Code prohibits common wall boathouses (a type of accessory structure) within the side and rear yard setbacks, which often are overlapping with the lake setback. This prohibition is outlined in LOC 50.08.050(3), which is applicable to R-7.5, R-10 and R-15 zones. Although the initial code amendment to LOC 50.22.030 did not address the common wall provision in LOC 50.08.050(3), because it applies to accessory structures generally, the amendment currently proposed is within the general scope of the previous amendments, provided it pertains only to boathouses, and therefore the proceedings may be re -opened for discussion. LOC 50.08.050(3) states:.... "Accessory structures on abutting lots may not be built with common party walls". Boathouses are regulated as accessory structures and therefore this prohibition applies to boathouses. The Lake Oswego Corporation, realizing this issue was not addressed in Ordinance 2556, is now requesting this amendment (Exhibit G-1). Proposed Ordinance 2556A (Exhibit A-1) applies to boathouses only and not to all accessory structures. It would allow boathouses, located within the Lake Oswego setback, to be built with common party walls. The letter from the Lake Oswego Corporation requests this change, where neighbors are in agreement, because many existing boathouses are pushed as close to the side yard property line as possible to help preserve view and open space. Staff has verified with the Building Official that this is possible according to the Building Code as long as sufficient fire wall separation is provided as a condition of issuance of the building permit. Should the Council approve this amendment, staff recommends approval of Ordinance 2556 A which makes the following changes to LOC 50.08.050(3) to refer only to boathouses in the R-7.5, R-10 and R- 15 zones (added language in bold): Section 50.08.050 Accessory Structures. Floor Area: An accessory structure < 18 feet in height shall not exceed 800 sq. ft. in area, or the footprint of the primary structure, whichever is less. An accessory structure greater than 18 feet in height shall not exceed the greater of 600 square feet or the ground floor area of the primary structure, whichever is less. 2. Height: The maximum height of an accessory structure shall be 24 feet, except that no accessory structure shall be taller than the primary structure. 3. Yard Setbacks: See LOC 50.08.030 for the side and rear yard setbacks for accessory structures. Except for boathouses within the Oswego Lake Setback, (LOC 50.22.030) Aaccessory structures on abutting lots may not be built with common party walls. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve Ordinance 2556A amending LOC 50.08.050(3) to allow common -wall boathouses on abutting lots and adopt findings. Page 3 EXHIBITS A. Ordinances A-1 Ordinance 2556A B. Findings and Conclusions C. Minutes [No current exhibits] D. Staff Report [No current exhibits] E. Graphic Exhibits [No current exhibits] F. Written Materials [No current exhibits] G. Letters G-1 Letter from Todd Van Rysselberghe, Lake Oswego Corporation Reviewed by: City Manager (if legal issues) ORDINANCE No. 2556A AN ORDINANCE OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING LOC CHAPTER 50 (COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE), TO ALLOW COMMON WALL BOATHOUSES TO BE CONSRUCTED ON ABUTTING LOTS IN THE OSWEGO LAKE SETBACK, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 08-0052A-1751) The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions, LU 08-0052A-1751 attached as Exhibit 1. Section 2. Section 50.08.050 of the Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the text shown in bold, double underlined type and deleting the text shown in strikethrough type, as follows: 50.08.050 Accessory Structures. 1. Floor Area: An accessory structure <_ 18 feet in height shall not exceed 800 sq. ft. in area, or the footprint of the primary structure, whichever is less. An accessory structure greater than 18 feet in height shall not exceed the greater of 600 square feet or the ground floor area of the primary structure, whichever is less. 2. Height: The maximum height of an accessory structure shall be 24 feet, except that no accessory structure shall be taller than the primary structure. 3. Yard Setbacks: See LOC 50.08.030 for the side and rear yard setbacks for accessory structures. Except or boathouses within the Oswego Lake Setback (LOC 50,22.030)= Aaccessory structures on abutting lots may not be built with common party walls. 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 APPROVED AS ORM: David Powell, Cily Attorney Ordinance No. 2556A PaLle 1 of 1 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 35 36 37 38 39 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, TO ALLOW COMMON WALL BOATHOUSES TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON ABUTTING LOTS WITHIN THE OSWEGO LAKE SETBACK [ORDINANCE NO. 2556A] NATURE OF PROCEEDING LU 08-0052A-1751 (City of Lake Oswego) FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS } EXHIBIT Z On August 3, 2010, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2556 expanding the uses allowed within the Oswego Lake setback (LOC 50.22.030) and setting dimensional limitations on those uses. The Council also adopted text amendments to LOC 50.72.020, to make exceptions to the Oswego Lake setback limitations clearly available through the Residential Infill Design (RID) process, while also adding height exception limitations for accessory structures and footprint exception limitations for boathouses. Following adoption of Ordinance 2556, the Council was advised that the issue of whether the current prohibition against common wall boathouses on abutting lots should be retained had been overlooked. The Council directed that the public hearing on Oswego Lake setback uses be re -opened to consider that issue. HEARINGS The City Council held a held a public hearing on December 7, 2010. Following the public hearing, the Council deliberated and adopted these Findings and Conclusions. CRITERIA AND STANDARDS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Goal 1 Citizen Involvement, Policies 1 and 5 Goal 2 Land Use Planning, Section 1, Land Use Policies and Regulations, Policy 23 Goal 5 Open Space, Historic and Natural Areas, Section 7, Oswego Lake, Policies 1 and 5 Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality, Section 2, Water Resources Quality, Policy 5 Goal 7 Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards, Section 1, Flood Hazards, Policies 2 and 3 David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue — PO Box 369 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) Lake Oswego, OR 97034 1—[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17401 (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453 [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17361 1 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 35 36 37 38 EXHIBIT 1 B. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code: LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decision Defined LOC 50.75.010 Criteria for 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 50.01.010 Purpose LOC 50.05.005 Zoning Districts LOC 50.05.010 Zoning Map LOC 50.79.030 Major Development LOC 50.77.007 Burden of Proof LOC 50.77.030 Application Procedures LOC 50.82.005-.020 Review of Major Development Applications and Appeals LOC 50.83 Hearings before a Hearing Body LOC 50.75.005 Legislative Decision Defined LOC 50.75.010 Criteria for Legislative Decision LOC 50.75.015 Required Notice to DLCD LOC 50.79.020 Planning Commission Recommendation Required LOC 50.79.025 City Council Review and Decision C. Statewide Planning Goal or Administrative Rule adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197 Goal 1 Citizen Involvement Goal 2 Land Use Planning Goal Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Goal 7 Areas Subject to Natural Hazards FINDINGS AND REASONS A. Legislative Decision Criteria. LOC 50.75.010 states that a legislative decision is generally a policy decision, which is within the discretion of the City Council. The legislative decision must comply with the following criteria: 1. Compliance with any applicable state law; There are no applicable state laws affecting review of these code amendments. David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue — PO Box 369 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) Lake Oswego, OR 97034 2 —[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1740] (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453 [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17361 EXHIBIT 1 1 2. Compliance with any applicable Statewide Planning Goal or Administrative Rule 2 adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197; and Statewide Planning Goal 1, Citizen 3 Involvement 4 This Goal requires jurisdictions to develop a citizen involvement program that insures the 6 opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The City's 7 acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code contain all necessary 8 requirements for a citizen involvement program that clearly defines the procedures by which 9 the general public will be notified during the land use planning process and enables citizens to 10 comprehend the issues and become involved in decision making. 11 12 All required notification measures and opportunities for input as specified in these documents 13 were provided during this process. Therefore, the process followed for this amendment is in 14 compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 1. 15 16 Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use Planning 17 18 This Goal requires jurisdictions to develop a land use planning process and policy framework as 19 a basis for all decisions and actions related to the use of the land and to assure an adequate 20 factual basis for such decisions and actions. This application provides the required information 21 and responses to the applicable approval standards for a Community Development Code text 22 amendment and therefore is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Furthermore, the 23 application has been coordinated with the applicable jurisdictions and agencies as required by 24 Goal 2. Therefore, this amendment is in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 2. 25 26 Statewide Planning Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces 27 28 This Goal requires jurisdictions to adopt programs that will protect natural resources and 29 conserve scenic, historic and open space resources for present and future generations, 30 promoting a healthy environment and natural landscape that contributes to Oregon's livability. 31 Approval of this amendment will not result in the destruction of inventoried natural resources, 32 scenic or historic areas and open spaces and is therefore in compliance with Statewide Planning 33 Goal 5. 34 35 Statewide Planning Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality 36 37 This Goal requires jurisdictions to maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land 38 resources of the state. Approval of this amendment will not result in a violation of the City's David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue — PO Box 369 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) Lake Oswego, OR 97034 3 -[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1740] (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453 [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17361 EXHIBIT 1 1 surface water management policies that regulate water quality and are implemented by the 2 Drainage standard. Therefore, the amendment is in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 6. 3 4 Statewide Planning Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Hazards 5 6 This Goal requires jurisdictions to protect people and property from natural hazards, more 7 specifically flood hazards, by adopting and implementing local flood plain regulations that meet 8 the minimum national requirements. Approval of this amendment will not affect the City's 9 floodplain protections which are implemented by the Floodplain standard. Therefore, the 10 amendment is in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 7. 11 12 3. Compliance with any applicable provision of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan. 13 14 Goal 1, Citizen Involvement, Policies 1 and 5 15 16 1. Provide opportunities for citizen participation in preparing and revising local land use 17 plans and ordinances. 18 19 5. Seek citizen input through service organizations, interest groups and individuals, as well 20 as through neighborhood organizations. 21 22 Findings: This application addresses policies 1 and 5 above. Pursuant to the requirements of a 23 legislative process, announcements for the proposed Community Development Code text 24 amendments have been provided to all neighborhood associations. Notice of the proposed text 25 amendments have been provided to all property owners within the City. Public hearings have 26 been held before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Citizens, interest groups, and 27 neighborhood associations have had an opportunity to participate in the review of the 28 proposed amendment during the City's public hearing processes. Notice has been provided 29 consistent with City requirements. Adequate opportunities have been made available for 30 citizen involvement with regard to this application. 31 32 Conclusion: The application complies with Goal 1, Citizen Involvement Policies 1 and 5. -, 34 Goal 2, Land Use Planning, Section 1, Land Use, Policy 23 35 36 23. Coordinate the development and amendment of City plans and actions related to land 37 use with other county, state, Metro, federal agency and special district plans. 38 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) 4 —[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1740] [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1736] 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 Findings: This application provides the required information and responses to the applicable 2 approval standards and therefore is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Additionally, 3 the application has been coordinated with applicable jurisdictions and agencies such as DLCD, 4 Metro, Clackamas County and Lake Oswego service providers as required by Goal 2. 5 6 Conclusion;: The application complies with Goal 2, Section 1, Policy 23. 7 8 Goal 5, Open Space, Historic and Natural Areas, Section 7, Oswego Lake, Policies 1 and 5 9 10 1. Cooperate with the Lake Oswego Corporation to protect the natural resource, energy, 11 aesthetic and recreation values of Oswego Lake. 12 13 5. Require all development proposed within or adjacent to Oswego Lake to: 14 a. Minimize negative impacts on upland vegetation, slopes, fish and wildlife habitat, 15 wetlands, stream corridors and scenic views, while allowing reasonable recreational use 16 by landowners. 17 18 Findings: Pursuant to the requirements of a legislative process, announcements for the 19 proposed amendments to the Lake Oswego setback have been provided to the Lake Oswego 20 Corporation which had the opportunity to participate in the public hearing process. The 21 amendments approved by this application, which will allow reasonable recreational use by 22 landowners, will have no negative impacts on upland vegetation, slopes fish and wildlife 23 habitat, wetlands, stream corridors and scenic views because it will not affect compliance with 24 LOC 50.16, which regulates impacts on upland vegetation and wildlife habitat that have been 25 determined to be significant natural resources through the Goal 5 process. 26 27 Conclusion: The application complies with Goal 5, Open Space, Historic and Natural Areas, 28 Section 7, Policies 1 and 5. 29 30 Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality, Section 2, Water Resources Quality Policy 5 31 32 5. Require all development to: 33 a. Comply with applicable local, state and federal water quality and erosion control 34 standards; and 35 b. Implement measures to minimize run-off from the development site during and after 36 construction. 37 David D. Powell, City Attorney City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue — PO Box 369 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) Lake Oswego, OR 97034 5 —[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1740] (503) 635-0225 FAX (503) 699-7453 [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1736] 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 35 36 37 38 39 EXHIBIT 1 Findings: This application satisfies Policy 5 above because any development authorized by this amendment must still comply with LOC 50.41, the Drainage standard which regulates the City's surface water management policy and water quality standards. Conclusion: The application complies with Gc.,� 6, Water and Land Resources Quality, Section 2, Water Resources Quality, Policy 5. Goal 7 Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Section 1, Flood Hazards, Policies 2 and 3 2. Limit new development in the FEMA -regulated floodway, including filling and removal of earth, to the following uses provided there is no increase in base year flood levels. a. Public and private open space and recreational uses; b. Water -dependent structures such as docks, piers, bridges and floating marinas, and c. Public facilities including unpaved roads and private access ways. 3. Review development proposals, including public facilities, filling and grading, within areas subject to flooding to ensure: a. Conformance with FEMA and other regulatory agencies; b. Reasonable protection of public facilities; c. The flow, velocity and elevation of flood waters are not changed so as to endanger other property d. Natural systems such as fish and wildlife habitat, vegetation wetlands and stream corridors are protected; and e. Other problems associated with flooding such as ponding, poor drainage, high water tables and unstable soils are addressed. Findings: This application satisfies Policies 2 and 3 for the following reasons: • The amendments will not affect compliance by development applications with the City's floodplain protections which are implemented by the Floodplain standard, LOC 50.44 and Drainage standards, LOC 50.41 and ensure that development will not have an adverse affect on adjacent properties and flood management areas. • The amendments continue authorization of recreation -related uses (boathouses) adjacent to the Lake consistent with this Policy. Conclusion: The application complies with Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards, Section 1, Flood Hazards, Policy, Policies 2 and 3. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) 6 —[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17401 [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17361 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 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 EXHIBIT 1 B. Supplemental Findings The City Council incorporates the staff Council Report, dated November 22, 2010 for LU 08- 0052A-1751 (with all exhibits), together with any supplemental reports, as support for its decision. .i_o the extent that the incorporated materials are inconsistent with the ; ipplemental findings celow, the supplemental findings shall control. Following are supplemental findings of the City Council: Currently LOC 50.08.050(3) prohibits common wall accessory structures on abutting lots in R- 7.5, R-10 and R-15 zones. This prohibition applies to boathouses, which are accessory structures under the Code. The City Council finds that, for lakefront properties, it is appropriate to allow boathouses to be located as close to the side yard property lines as possible in order to help preserve lake views and to maximize the expanse of shoreline open space of each lot, thus helping to ensure compatibility with the lakefront setting and with surrounding development. The City Building Official has confirmed that common wall boathouses may be constructed on abutting lots under the Building Code so long as sufficient firewall separation is provided. For these reasons, the City Council finds that LOC 50.08.050(3) should be amended to exempt boathouses within the Oswego Lake Setback from the prohibition against common wall accessory structures on abutting lots, as follows (added language in bold, double -underlined type, deleted language in strikethrough type): Section 50.08.050 Accessory Structures. 1. Floor Area: An accessory structure < 18 feet in height shall not exceed 800 sq. ft. in area, or the footprint of the primary structure, whichever is less. An accessory structure greater than 18 feet in height shall not exceed the greater of 600 square feet or the ground floor area of the primary structure, whichever is less. 2. Height: The maximum height of an accessory structure shall be 24 feet, except that no accessory structure shall be taller than the primary structure. 3. Yard Setbacks: See LOC 50.08.030 for the side and rear yard setbacks for accessory structures. Except for boathouses within the Oswego Lake Setback (LOC 50.22.030L Aaccessory structures on abutting lots may not be built with common party walls. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) 7 —[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17401 [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1736] 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 2 CONCLUSION 3 The City Council concludes that LU 08-0052A °.751 complies with all applicable criteria and that 4 proposed Ordinance 2556A, amending LOC 50.08.050 to be consistent with these findings, 5 should be enacted. - FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS (LU 08-0052A-1751) 8 —[City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-1740] [City of Lake Oswego, LU 08-0052A-17361 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 October 26, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman and City Council Members PO Box 369 Lake Oswego OR 97034 Dear Mayor and City Council: The Lake Oswego Corporation Board of Directors would like to request that the Lake Oswego City Council reopen the matter of rear yard setbacks on Oswego Lake. Under the current code, boathouses are not zero setback structures. The vast majority of boathouses on the lake are pushed as close to the side yard property line as possible to help preserve view and open space. Often this leaves a very small space between boathouses which is unusable and difficult to maintain. Where neighbors are in agreement, we have traditionally allowed common wall boathouses. These are still allowed in instances where the boathouses are entirely on Lake Oswego Corporation property but not where they are all or partly on shareholder property. We would like to see if the code can be changed to allow common wall boathouses where neighbors are in agreement. Very truly yours, i Todd Van Rysselberghe Lake Oswego Corporation President EXHIBIT G-1 LU 08-0052A 700 McVey Avenue Lake P.O. Box 203 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Oswego 503-636-1422 Office n �T CORPOIC/-V ION 503-636-3226 Fax www.lakecorp.com October 26, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman and City Council Members PO Box 369 Lake Oswego OR 97034 Dear Mayor and City Council: The Lake Oswego Corporation Board of Directors would like to request that the Lake Oswego City Council reopen the matter of rear yard setbacks on Oswego Lake. Under the current code, boathouses are not zero setback structures. The vast majority of boathouses on the lake are pushed as close to the side yard property line as possible to help preserve view and open space. Often this leaves a very small space between boathouses which is unusable and difficult to maintain. Where neighbors are in agreement, we have traditionally allowed common wall boathouses. These are still allowed in instances where the boathouses are entirely on Lake Oswego Corporation property but not where they are all or partly on shareholder property. We would like to see if the code can be changed to allow common wall boathouses where neighbors are in agreement. Very truly yours, i Todd Van Rysselberghe Lake Oswego Corporation President EXHIBIT G-1 LU 08-0052A LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Jeff Munro, Park Maintenance Superintendent SUBJECT: Multiple Site Landscape Service contract DATE: November 29, 2010 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us ACTION Award the Multiple Site Landscape Service contract in the amount of $211,500 to TruGreen Landcare, LLC to provide landscape maintenance to city -owned properties. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND In addition to parks and open spaces, the city has 120 sites that require landscape maintenance services. These include facilities such as City Hall, West End Building, Library, Adult Community Center, Tennis Center, water pumping and reservoir sites, beautification and other locations in street rights-of-way. Sites require a variety of services including mowing, mulching, pruning, sweeping and weed control to name a few. The previous landscape maintenance contract the City entered into in 2008 is being terminated effective 12/31/10 due to the current landscape company's inability to meet required contractual standards and the City's expectations. The 2008 contract was awarded to Teufel Nursery in the amount of $236,880. This new contract has the ability after the first year to be renewed for four additional successive years should TruGreen Landcare, LLC meet the requirements set forth in the contract. DISCUSSION The Parks & Recreation Department is currently not staffed, nor has the equipment to perform these maintenance tasks internally. Therefore, outside labor is required to perform the tasks necessary for proper maintenance. In an effort to avoid future contract terminations, the City pre -qualified companies for this proposed contract and received five pre -qualification packets. Pre -qualification ensures that firms bidding on the project meet minimum expectations such as firm size and ability to manage large landscape contracts in a variety of settings. Of the five submitted, four firms were pre -qualified and three of those four submitted bids. TruGreen Landcare, LLC was the low bidder and met all requirements. A bid summary sheet is attached (Exhibit A). Page 2 To comply with the City's sustainability practices and with an eye towards improved water quality, no pre - emergent chemicals are to be applied at any listed site covered under this contract. "Exhibit A" prices reflect these practices. Renewable contract amounts will be based annually on the Portland Consumer Price Index of the Federal Bureau of Labor. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT The total contract amount for 2011 is $211,500. Funding is budgeted in the FY10-11 budget to cover contract expenses through June 30, 2011. Should funding for FY2011-12 be adjusted which results in a reduction in funding, the contract can be adjusted accordingly. RECOMMENDATION Based on the bids received and the information provided, staff recommends awarding a one year contract for Multiple Site Landscape Maintenance, renewable for four additional years, to TruGreen Landcare, LLC in the amount of $211,500. ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A - Bid summary sheet Reviewed by: Depa4t irector Alex IJ ntyre City Manager SJ3dS 1N3WdlnlMl NOI1VJ1311nV38 A11J w p z Ln W Y SIMS N3dO W AVM 3snaH N W } S311111JV3 AlIJLU N S3llM3dOHd HUM N W } C H W W2103 NOI1VJ131IH3J' ,° I z WHOJ DIM llNn } IVSOdOMd 019', N I N tf? W IL S a z g 2 CQ c Y V N •W } Ln W } tn W {N 11J } LU LN } W� } O z Ln rl N W Y N W L W Y N W Y W N LU } N W z W W O 0 N rn N 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 SUBJECT: Declaration of the Vote DATE: November 29, 2010 ACTION -7,/,7 - CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us Following each election, the Council is presented with the Declaration of the Vote. The Declaration for the November 2, 2010 General Election is attached along with the abstract of the vote from Clackamas, Washington, and Multnomah Counties. The results show Mike Kehoe, Jeff Gudman and Donna Jordan receiving the highest number of votes. They will begin four-year terms on January 1, 2011. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council accept the Declaration of the Vote. ATTACHMENTS 1. Declaration of the Vote 2. Abstracts from Clackamas, Washington, and Multnomah Counties Reviewed by: Alex D. McIntyre City Manager DECLARATION OF THE VOTE GENERAL ELECTION November 2, 2010 I, Robyn Christie, City of Lake Oswego Elections Officer, do hereby declare the following to be the total from the abstracts of the votes on the Lake Oswego ballot for the November 2, 2010 General Election from Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties. Robyn Chr stie, Elections Officer November 29, 2010 Date Multnomah Clackamas Roger Hennagin 5411 Jeff Gudman 6933 Lisa Shaw -Ryan 4402 Mike Kehoe 8877 Dan Williams 5762 David L Jorling 3234 Donna Jordan 6123 November 29, 2010 Date Multnomah Washington Total 431 0 5842 440 2 7375 256 0 4658 497 2 9376 348 2 6112 250 0 3484 539 0 6662 Accepted by the Lake Oswego City Council on December 7, 2010. Jack Hoffman, Mayor Roger Hennagin, Council President Sally Moncrieff, Councilor Bill Tierney, Councilor Donna Jordan, Councilor Mary Olson, Councilor Dan Vizzini, Councilor SOF C •,..F OP� OPE' � CLACKAIW3: 76 COUNTY Office of County Clerk VIA USPS AND BY FAX City of Lake Oswego Attn: Robyn Christie, City Recorder PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 FAX 503.697.6594 Dear Ms. Christie: SHERRY HALL CLERK 2051 KAEN ROAD, 2ND FLOOR OREGON CITY, OR 97045 503.650.5686 FAX 503.650.5687 NOV 2 4 2010 STT`; OF LAI- OStn?GC Attached please find the elections abstract for the November 2, 2010 General Election. This includes those precincts of Lake Oswego which are in Washington and Multnomah Counties. Dated: November 22, 2010 SHERRY HALL COUNTY CLERK By: Steve Kindred Elections Manager Board Of Property Tax Appeals Elections Division Recording Division 2051 Kaen Road, 2ntl Floor 1710 Red Soils Court, Suite 100 2051 Kaen Road, 2ntl Floor Oregon City, OR 97045 Oregon City, OR 97045 Oregon City, OR 97045 503.655.8662 503.655.8510 503.655.8551 FAX 503.650.5687, FAX 503.655.8461 FAX 503.650.5688 Records Management Division 270 Beavercreek Road, Suite 200 Oregon City, OR 97045 503.655.8323 FAX 503.655.8195 NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Clackamas County. Oregon General. -Election -- ------ RUN DATE:11/18/10 11:30 AM November 2, 2010 REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0107 VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO: Councilor Vote For 3 01 = Roger Hennagin 5,411 13.22 06 = David L Jorling 3,234 7.90 02 = Jeff Gudman 6,933 16.94 07 = Donna Jordan 6.123 14.96 03 = Lisa Shaw -Ryan n,402 10.76 08 = WRITE-IN 176 .43 04 = Mike Kehoe 0.877 21.69 09 = OVER VOTES 63 05 = Dan Williams x.762 14.08 10 = UNDER VOTES 13.424 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 0151 151 ---------------------------------------- 347 420 489 529 317 280 -------------------- 347 13 3 801 0152 152 237 367 361 461 281 193 267 1 0 541 0153 153 429 395 397 529 322 290 439 16 9 888 0154 154 373 408 265 594 310 200 481 12 6 1188 0155 155 492 548 372 711 504 323 566 14 3 1195 0157 157 215 277 113 383 192 107 262 5 0 594 0158 158 359 381 272 517 327 221 387 6 6 716 0159 159 316 480 226 602 403 151 345 14 0 814 0160 160 363 551 199 615 464 198 351 5 6 683 0162 162 418 542 313 711 518 232 469 15 3 1054 0163 163 438 574 336 712 484 238 469 12 3 952 0164 164 259 317 214 421 281 185 340 9 9 716 0165 165 347 433 239 579 370 196 409 18 6 742 0166 166 352 521 279 660 425 159 407 13 3 910 0167 167 293 398 220 496 329 176 378 15 3 1013 0169 169 158 303 95 334 226 79 196 8 0 563 0170 170 6 8 8 11 7 1 5 0 3 11 0171 171 9 10 4 12 2 5 5 0 0 43 C) 9N rt 4 i ' rt sy* rttw <<rt !9 !' 11/19/2010 FRI 9:31 FAX 5038465810 WASHINGTON CO ELECTIONS Clackamas County NUMBERED KEY CANVASS RUN DATE:11/18/10 04:04 PM Washington County ----General Election November 2, 2010 VOTES PERCENT ]005/007 Official Final REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0060 VOTES PERCENT City of Lake Oswego Council Vote for 3 01 - Roger Hennagin 0 06 - David L Jorling 0 02 = Jeff Gudman 2 33.33 07 — Donna Jordan 0 .03 = Lisa :.iaw-Ryan 0 08 = WRITE-IN 0 04 - Mike ',hoe 2 33.33 09 - OVER VOTES 0 05 = Dan t!liams 2 33.33 10 = UNDER VOTES 0 ............................. 01 02 03 ............................. 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 0348 348 ------------------------------------------------------- 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0443 443 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K;_ v d T i rr N,v, 19, 2U1U 2c',kil f`'o, i;'S NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Multnomah County, Oregon FINAL OFFICIAL RESULTS General Election RUN DATE:11/22/10 08:59 AM November 2, 2010 REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0087 VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT, City Councilor CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Vote For 3 O1 = Roger Nennagin 431 15.49 06 = David L Jorling 250 8.99 02 = Jeff Gudman 440 15.82 07 = Donna Jordan 539 19.37 03 = Lisa Shaw -Ryan 256 9.20 08 = WRITE-IN 21 .75 04 = Mike Kehoe 497 17.86 09 = OVER VOTES 12 05 = Dan Williams 348 12.51 10 = UNDER VOTES 1.436 ............................. 01 02 03 04 . 0- ............................ 06 07 08 09 10" 1400 431 440 256 497 348 250 539 21 12 1436 Certificate I certify that the votes recorded on this abstract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at the election indicated. '* k4_ Tim Scott, Director of Elections Multnomah County, Oregon DECLARATION OF THE VOTE GENERAL ELECTION November 2, 2010 - I, Robyn Christie, City of Lake Oswego Elections Officer, do hereby declare the following to be the total from the abstracts of the votes on the Lake Oswego ballot for the November 2, 2010 General Election from Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties. f_ Robyn Chr stie, Elections Officer November 29, 2010 Date Multnomah Clackamas Roger Hennagin 5411 Jeff Gudman 6933 Lisa Shaw -Ryan 4402 Mike Kehoe 8877 Dan Williams 5762 David L Jorling 3234 Donna Jordan 6123 November 29, 2010 Date Multnomah Washington Total 431 0 5842 440 2 7375 256 0 4658 497 2 9376 348 2 6112 250 0 3484 539 0 6662 Accepted by the Lake Oswego City Council on December 7, 2010. Roger Hennagin, Council President Sally Mbncrieff, Councilor , Bill Tierney, Counbilor Donna Jord-an,)Councilor u 2� Mary OIs , Councilor Dan Vi ini, Cou of ccg h TE. pF'0S C0�NTY Office of Countv Clerk VIA USPS AND BY FAX City of Lake Oswego Attn: Robyn Christie, City Recorder PO Box 369 Lake Oswego. OR 97034 FAX 503.697.6594 Dear Ms. Christie: SHERRY HALL CLERK 2051 KAEN ROAD, 2ND FLOOR. OREGON CITY, OR 97045 503.650.5686 FAX 503.650.5687 NOV 2 4 2010 CITY OF LA - Attached please find the elections abstract for the November 2, 2010 General Election. This includes those precincts of Lake Oswego which are in Washington and Multnomah Counties. Dated: November 22, 2010 SHERRY HALL COUNTY CLERK By: S Steve Kindred Elections Manager Board Of Property Tax Appeals Elections Division Recording Division 2051 Kaen Road, 2n" Floor 1710 Red Soils Court, Suite 100 2051 Kaen Road, 2"tl Floor Oregon City, OR 97045 Oregon City, OR 97045 Oregon City, OR 97045 503.655.8662 503.655.8510 503.655.8551 FAX 503.650.5687, FAX 503.655.8461 FAX 503.650.5688 Records Management Division 270 Beavercreek Road, Suite 200 Oregon City, OR 97045 503.655.8323 FAX 503.655.8195 NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Clackamas County. Oregon _____--_General Election RUN DATE:11/18/10 11:30 AM November 2. 2010 REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0107 VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO: Councilor Vote For 3 01 = Roger Hennagin 5.411 13.22 06 = David L Jorling 3.234 7.90 02 = Jeff Gudman 6,933 16.94 07 = Donna Jordan 6.123 14.96 03 = Lisa Shaw -Ryan 4,402 10.76 08 = WRITE-IN 176 .43 04 = Mike Kph -)e 8,877 21.69 09 = OVER VOTES 63 05 = Dan Wi ; ams 5.762 14.08 10 = UNDER VOTES 13.424 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 0151 151 ............................................................ 347 420 489 529 317 280 347 13 3 801 0152 152 237 367 361 461 281 193 267 1 0 541 0153 153 429 395 397 529 322 290 439 16 9 888 0154 154 373 408 265 594 310 200 481 12 6 1188 0155 155 492 548 372 711 504 323 566 14 3 1195 0157 157 215 277 113 383 192 107 262 5 0 594 0158 158 359 381 272 517 327 221 387 6 6 716 0159 159 316 480 226 602 403 151 345 14 0 814 0160 160 363 551 199 615 464 198 351 5 6 683 0162 162 418 542 313 711 518 232 469 15 3 1054 0163 163 438 574 336 712 484 238 469 12 3 952 0164 164 259 317 214 421 281 185 340 9 9 716 0165 165 347 433 239 579 370 196 409 18 6 742 0166 166 352 521 279 660 425 159 407 13 3 910 0167 167 293 398 220 496 329 176 378 15 3 1013 0169 169 158 303 95 334 226 79 196 8 0 563 0170 170 6 8 8 11 7 1 5 0 3 11 0171 171 9 10 4 12 2 5 5 0 0 43 .",&A A. Lq J� r 9 • -, N 4 ^,:s- 3 11/19/2010 FRI 9:31 FAX 5038465810 WASHINGTON CO ELECTIONS Clackamas County 0005/007 NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Washington County General Election RUN DATE:11/18/10 04:04 PM November 2, 2010 VOTES PERCENT Official Final REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0060 VOTES PERCENT City of Lake Oswego Council Vote for 3 01 - Roger Hennagin 0 06 — David L Jorling 0 02 = Jeff Guci an 2 33.33 07 = Donna Jordan 0 03 - Lisa Shaw -Ryan 0 08 = WRITE-IN 0 04 = Mike Kehoe 2 33.33 09 = OVER VOTES 0 05 = Dan Williams 2 33.33 10 = UNDER VOTES 0 ------------------------------- 01 02 03 04 05 ------------------------ 06 --- 07 08 09 1.0 0348 348 ------------------------------------------------------------ 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0443 443 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Received Time Nov.19, 2010 9.28AM No.1931 NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Multnomah County, Oregon FINAL OFFICIAL RESULTS General Election RUN DATE:11/22/10 08:59 AM November 2, 2010 REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0087 VOTES PERC4NT VOTES PERCENT City Councilor CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Vote For 3 01 = Roger Hennagin 431 15.49 06 = David L Jorling 250 8.99 02 = Jeff Gudman 440 15.82 07 = Donna Jordan 539 19.37 03 = Lisa Shaw -Ryan 256 9.20 08 = WRITE-IN 21 .75 04 = Mike Kehoe 497 17.86 09 = OVER VOTES 12 05 = Dan Williams 348 12.51 ......................................................... 10 = UNDER VOTES 1.436 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 1400 ........................................................ 431 440 256 497 348 250 539 21 12 1436 Certificate I certify that the votes recorded on this abstract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at the election indicated. y* k4f-- Tim Scott, Director of Elections Multnomah County, Oregon LAKE OSWEC=O Centennial 1910-2010 TO: FROM SUBJECT DATE: ACTION COUNCIL REPORT Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager Susan Millhauser, Sustainability Coordinator City Manager's Office Resolution 10-65 Supporting Statewide Plastic Bag Regulation December 1, 2010 I.7 . CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 AAvenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us Adopt Resolution 10-65 (Attachment 1) in support of statewide legislation regulating the use of single -use plastic and non -recycled paper checkout bags at retail stores, with consideration of a local ordinance in the event that the 2011 Legislature does not adopt legislation. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND At the October 26, 2010 City Council meeting, Brock Howell, from Environment Oregon, and Amanda Dalton, with the Northwest Grocery Association, presented information on the negative environmental and economic impacts of single -use plastic shopping bags, and requested the Council's support for a statewide solution to address these concerns. Specifically, the two organizations are working together to encourage the State Legislature to enact a statewide ban in 2011 on single -use plastic shopping bags and include a minimum five -cent charge on recycled paper bags (minimum 40% recycled content). The proposed legislation is intended to increase the use of reusable shopping bags, reduce harmful plastic bag waste and promote sustainability in Oregon, and provide a mechanism for retailers to recover the higher cost of paper shopping bags. Following discussion, the Council directed staff to prepare a resolution for their consideration. Representatives from Environment Oregon and the Northwest Grocery Association attended the September 20, 2010 meeting of the Sustainability Advisory Board (SAB) to share information about this campaign and garner support. The SAB passed a motion in support of the proposal, encouraging the Council to approve a resolution. Page 2 DISCUSSION The Northwest Grocery Association and Environment Oregon strongly support local adoption of a resolution calling on the State Legislature to enact a statewide solution to the proliferation of single -use plastic checkout bags in 2011. Both organizations encourage Lake Oswego to join other jurisdictions across Oregon calling for a uniform approach to most effectively address plastic bag pollution and the associated environmental and economic impacts, and providing ease of implementation by retailers across the state rather than on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. Resolution 10-65, based on the model resolution provided by the Northwest Grocery Association, shows Lake Oswego's support for statewide action to address single -use checkout plastic bags, as described above, with consideration of a local plastic bag ban and associated elements if the State legislature does not act by the end of 2011. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council approve Resolution 10-65 in support of statewide legislation regulating the use of single -use plastic and non -recycled paper checkout bags at retail stores, with consideration of a local ordinance in the event that the 2011 Legislature does not adopt legislation. ATTACHMENTS Resolution 10-65. Reviewed by: 11-4 Department Director City Attorney 41, Alex D. McIntyre City Manager RESOLUTION 10-65 A RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING LEGISLATION REGULATING THE USE OF SINGLE -USE PLASTIC AND NON -RECYCLED PAPER CHECKOUT BAGS AT RETAIL STORES WHEREAS, single -use plastic bags are difficult to recycle and frequently contaminate material that is collected in the City's curbside recycling program; and WHEREAS, recycled content paper checkout bags are a high value recyclable collected in the City's curbside recycling program and are made in paper mills located in the region; while papermaking has environmental impacts, paper bags that are made with 40 percent or more recycled fiber provide a positive alternative to plastic bags; and WHEREAS, reusable bags are the best option to reduce waste and litter, protect wildlife, and conserve resources; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the Oregon Legislature to provide statewide regulation of single -use checkout bags; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that a bill will be introduced in the 2011 Legislature banning the use of single -use plastic and non -recycled paper checkout bags, and allowing use of paper bags containing at least 40% recycled fiber for a five -cent minimum charge; and WHEREAS, enactment of this proposed legislation will reduce waste and promote sustainability in Oregon; and WHEREAS, if the Legislature does not act to regulate single -use shopping bags, the City Council may find it necessary to enact such regulations within the City of Lake Oswego. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that: Section 1. The City Council supports passage of a bill by the 2011 Legislature as follows: a. Prohibiting the use of single -use plastic and non -recycled paper checkout bags at all retail stores; b. Allowing retail stores to use paper checkout bags containing at least 40% recycled fiber for a minimum charge to the customer of five cents per bag; and C. Allowing retail stores to provide reusable bags to the customer either at no cost or for sale. Attachment 1 Resolution 10-65 Page 1 of 2 Section 2. In the event that the 2011 Legislature does not adopt legislation with provisions substantially similar to those listed in Section 1 of this resolution, the City Council may consider enacting a local ordinance regulating single -use plastic and non -recycled paper checkout bags. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage. Considered and enacted at the regu'-r meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 7th day of December, 2010. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor ATTEST: Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPROVED A FORM: David Powell, City Attorney Resolution 10-65 Page 2 of 2 LAKE OS W EGO 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: November 29, 2010 ACTION Approve minutes as written. ATTACHMENTS • July 27, 2010, special meeting • September 14, 2010, special meeting • September 21, 2010, regular meeting • October 5, 2010, regular meeting 7.3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING INTERVIEWS JULY 27, 2010 Mayor Jack D Hoffman called City Council Special Meeting to order at 4:06 p.m. on July 27, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Moncrieff, Tierney, Olson, and Jordan. Council President Johnson and Councilor Hennagin were excused. Staff Present: Robyn Christie, City Recorder Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney 3. INTERVIEWS FOR COUNCIL VACANCY Mayor Hoffman explained the interviewing and applicant selection process to replace the pending City Council position being vacated by Kristin Johnson. An official decision to fill the vacancy would be made in August. 3.1 James Radda Q: Why would he like to fill this vacancy, was there a specific issue that motivated him to apply? A: Prior to the vacancy, he had not considered running for City Council. He had served on several boards, including the Downtown Portland Condo Association, Citizens Advisory for Lake Oswego School Board and as President of his Neighborhood Association. His work experience placed him in positions where he had to perform in stressful situations. He was the Regional Manager of an engineering company for two of their regional offices. His last position was as a non -engineer managing 175 employees in Beijing, China. He found he thrived in difficult situations. He believed even though he had limited experience with the City of Lake Oswego, he has the ability to learn a lot, learn on the fly, and exercise good judgment. Q: Were there any particular or specific issues facing the City Council over the next four months that lead him to apply? A: He would like to pursue the sustainability issue. Although he did not call it that, he believed the highest and best use for resources was to do nothing. If sustainability was going to be developed, they needed to consider the amount of damage they would cause and with minimal development, no matter where it was, to make something that was viable for people and yet did minimal environmental damage. He believed any time there was development there would be damage and nothing people had done to the environment had improved it. Q: What did he think were the biggest issues facing the Council now and in the next four months? A: He believed it was the money issue, and if something had to be cut, the last thing to be cut should be the infrastructure because that was the longest to recover. Q: Did he have any thoughts regarding the programs or issues facing the Council over the next four months, which include West End Building Refinance, Foothills/Streetcar, and Sensitive Lands? A: Regarding the West End Building refinance and property, he had been through the building several times and there was a lot of excess space. He did not know about the financing part but the building was an under-utilized facility, which could cause financing issues. Regarding the Foothills/Streetcar Development, he frankly believed the millions being spent on this potential development was a waste of money at this time and that it should not be done. It certainly did not City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 8 July 27, 2010 need be done this year or even the next; most believed it would be 5 to 10 years before the City could be viably developing that project. Regarding the Sensitive Lands process and decision, although he was interested in resources, it was a complicated subject. He had read and seen many arguments, but was not sure what position he would take, nor what the objective was. Q: Would he still be interested in running for the City Council interim position, knowing that this current appointment only lasted until December 31, 2010 and with the position being available again for the November 2010 elections? A: If he were selected as the replacement Councilor, he would want to see it for a couple of months to decide if he wanted to continue in that role after the November 2010 elections. He probably would be interested in running but he did not want to commit. Q: Could he expand upon his comment that the money issue was the number one issue facing the Council? A: He believed it was not unusual for Lake Oswego that revenues had decreased and expenses had increased or stayed the same, but the question was how to make it work. If there were cuts, he would like the last cut to be the infrastructure. Infrastructure was a long-term thing, and though it might be cruel to say, people were easier to find, and losing infrastructure means losing something for years down the road. Q: Was he the past Chair of the Glenmorrie Neighborhood Association? A: Yes, he was the President of the Committee that formed the neighborhood plan, and once formulated he became the Chair of the Association for two to three years. He returned to the board last year and was now the Treasure for the Association. Q: Did he personally have a Sensitive Land overlay? A: He replied no. Q: Did he have any issues that he would like the City Council to focus their attention on? A: He stated other than what the Council was doing now, no. Q: What was his impression on how the City was doing? A: He believed the City was doing well, even with the constraints put on by Metro, the State of Oregon, and the economic situation. Coming from a small town in Iowa, he liked a small town atmosphere with city development done in a suburban area, a village concept; he liked what had already occurred in that regard. Q: Are there any final comments he would like to add? Why should he be selected over the other applicants? A: Although he did not have as much experience working with the City as the other applicants, which might make him less qualified, he did have a lot of general management experience. He admitted the Councilors did not know him personally and that selections were made based on being familiar or having a certain rapport with someone but as he stated, his strength was being placed in difficult positions where he had to make due and make corrections. Mayor Hoffman called for a short minute break and reconvened at 4:25 p.m. 3.2 Ellie McPeak Ms. McPeak withdrew her application. 3.3 Daniel Vizzini Q: Why would he like to fill this vacancy and what specific issue motivated him to apply? A: He believed it was an interesting opportunity to be on that side of the room, although four months was not a long time, it was just enough time to get a sense of what being on the Council City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8 July 27, 2010 would be like in the capacity of decision maker rather than advisor. City Council was the one part of government in which he did not have experience, therefore the four-month interim position would be enough time to fulfill his curiosity of a City Councilor's role and the dynamics inside a decision- making, government body. He had no specific issue that motivated him to apply; he had lived in the community for a quarter of a century, was intensely involved in the community and the Planning Commission, and wanted to be involved in a meaningful way. The vacancy on the board was so short that he had no agenda or intent to change the course of the City in that time. However, there are issues in the calendar that run the gamut, and this was a great opportunity for somebody interested, so he didn't think there was just one issue. He was more interested in the dynamics and process of government rather than the issues. Q: What did he see were the biggest issues for the Council over the next five months? A: The issues currently before the Council have long-term effects, Foothills, Streetcar, WEB, and the managing of the budget in terms of how the Council tees it up was an issue all by itself. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan and Stafford was a huge issue. The issues facing the City Council will involve discussions and early decisions that are at the beginning of a much longer process with longer-term ramifications. As a former Planning Commissioner, he believed it felt right to be involved with the big issues that have long-term reach. Q: Are there any issues he felt the Council should focus their attention on over the next five months? A: He believed the Council should focus on the management of public services. He shared his prior boss's outlook on conserving public resources, staying focused on the core mission and attending to the "knitting," the small items, so it doesn't come back to bite you. In tough economic times, how the Council manages the City, both the budget and the performance of Staff, becomes a critical and credibility issue that would pay the City back if they came out of this fiscal year both with a stronger organization, with the blue print for a stronger community. He believed it would benefit the City to deal with the small items and performance. Many things in the City get high marks while the controversial issues, like land use, were harder to manage and required more attention. Q: What were his thoughts regarding the programs or issues facing Council, including West End Building, Foothills/Streetcar, and Sensitive Lands? A: Regarding Sensitive Lands, the test scores had done exactly what they were asked, which was figure a way to balance the demands as stewards of the city's natural resources and the concerns raised by property owners. The way the Council worked through it over the year was a good investment because of what it meant in terms of engaging the community as much as the end results. He believed there was still a lot of work to do on that issue. Regarding WEB, he did not know enough to speak intelligently about it. He agreed that once property came into the public trust it should never be gotten rid of, lease it for 150 years but never get rid of it, because it was hard to get property into the public domain. The future of WEB depended upon effectively using the space in a way as not to drain the treasury. Regarding Foothills/Streetcar, he would not link them, although he understood they were. There was a faster timeline than he suspected; he would have preferred to see Foothills develop in its own time and way with the guidance and investment of the City without the faster paced development influenced by the Streetcar. Regarding the Streetcar, he believed Lake Oswego needed to become a more efficient community with the hope for a greater linkage to the rest of the region and a lower carbon footprint; part of the decision on moving forward needed to be about how to make things more efficient. Q: Where should the Council focus its attention and what are the biggest issues for the Council over the next five months? A: He believed the biggest issues were the "knitting," focusing on what they should be spending their time and attention on and long-term issues needing near-term decisions; those should not be City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8 July 27, 2010 ignored. The Comprehensive Plan needed moving in the right direction and Foothills needed to be addressed, but it was really about the "knitting." Q: What made him stand out from the other applicants and why should the Council select him? A: He did not know the other applicants so it would be unfair for him to speak about them. However, the time he would spend in the position he would bring a certain independence of thinking and a long resume of experience dealing in municipal affairs, from the financial side, to infrastructure, to community process, and civic engagement. He was not viewing the appointment as a path to get into public office. Q: Did he intend to run in the November 2010 elections, when the position opened again. A: He stated no, he did not intend to run. Q: Could he expand on his comment regarding how the "knitting" was like managing the public services and as a Council member how would he accomplish that? A: He works in Portland where the lines are blurred between executive and legislative. However, there are a series of status reports on the Council's calendar and check -ins with Staff on areas that are critical or of interest to the Council. Those engagements give opportunities to work with the City Manager and Senior Management to increase performance, proficiency, and to move towards their goals. It's a little more indirect, and just a different way of doing things. During the recession of the 1980s, Portland's City Council and Office of Finance, initiated an allotment system. The budget appropriations were done by the quarter, and when things got really bad, they were looking to allocate by the month. That turned out to be administratively insane, but allocating by quarter meant that savings within the budget could be culled and protected. He believed there were other ways of doing oversight with the administration and over the next couple of years, there would be more oversight type meetings, which was the way he would pursue it. Q: Could he give his thoughts on his statement that the Council would need to address the Stafford issue soon? A: He regretted that when he was on the Planning Commission, they had begun work around 2001-2002 regarding the Master Planning around Stafford; Ron Bunch even prepared a preliminary draft of a Concept Plan for what Stafford might look like that was enlightening and far- sighted. Regardless of the current process, the Master Planning around Stafford was a lost opportunity for the City to control Stafford's level of density and development. Resources are tight but it would be money well spent to start thinking about the future of Stafford. 3.4 David Poulson Q: Why would he like to fill this vacancy and did any specific issue motivate him to apply? A: He said he wanted to apply as a way to give back to the community for their support of him and his family. He worked as a civil engineer and office manager and shared specific information regarding his children's health and his family's commitment to their education. He was now in the position to serve in a role as City Councilor and wanted to increase his exposure. Q: What motivated his decision? A: He believed he could bring special qualifications that would represent a perspective he had gained over the last 25 years, not only as a private consultant for property development in cities like Lake Oswego, but also as a formal city engineer for a small community in Alaska. He has experience on both sides of the table and understood the dynamics and perspective of the city. His business education from managing a business in Lake Oswego would be refreshing and the Council could learn from his perspective. He spent two years in China with an MBA in International Business and his experience with the economy would bring a global perspective that would inform his local decisions, which would be beneficial to the Council. Q: Was there any specific issue that motivated him to apply for the position? City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8 July 27, 2010 A: It was his practical knowledge of how cities functioned and his perspective on both sides of the equation. He did not have any agenda in terms of Sensitive Lands or the rail car; he would like to discuss those issues in detail with the Council to elaborate on his larger vision of things that time would not allow. He wanted to offer his practical knowledge, experience and perspective to Council, which will help him get more exposure. Q: What did he see were the biggest issues for the Council over the next five months? A: He stated it was the economy. He did not believe this was a cyclical recession, but a sea change was coming and decisions could not be made unless based on the larger economic perspective. He discussed in detail the yield curve, long-term bond rate, Federal Reserve, the Carter years, and concluded that his point was the interest rate must and would adjust. He stated that he brings an economic perspective to inform Council decisions. Q: Were there any local issues that he felt the Council should be focusing on? A: Using Sensitive Lands as an example, he tried to negotiate resource protection areas, buffers, for clients who had large developments. As an engineer, he had learned when designing something complex, the design or policy needed to include some type of adjustment when applying it to the real world. The Sensitive Land issue needed that type of adjustment. Q: What were his thoughts regarding the West End Building and Streetcar issues? A: Regarding the WEB, he did not know what the City's current finances were in terms of affordability and maintaining debt services but he believed the City should hold on to the building as an asset something that has intrinsic value. Regarding the Streetcar, he believed it was a larger subject and that the model used to establish the economic viability was based upon past demographic and economic models. He was not against it, but believed a closer look should be taken at the Streetcar issue as his concern was with past loose credit issues and the momentum was pushing the Streetcar in that direction. Q: Did he intend to run in the November 2010 election? A: He stated it was not his plan to run for election at this time. Once the Council became familiar with him he would than consider running in another year or two. Q: What type of exposure did he hope to gain by sitting on the Council for the next five months? A: He believed it would give people the chance to get to know him as a serious person with an extensive background, education, and perspective. 3.5 Mike Kehoe Q: Why would he like to fill this vacancy, was there a specific issue that motivated him to apply? A: He would be running for City Council in the November 2010 election and believed the position required a lot of time and energy. By starting in the position as soon as possible, it would help him to get up to speed, learn the facts of the City, help him make good decisions, and become a part of the team. He did not apply for the vacancy based on one issue, but he has lived in Lake Oswego for 25 years and had always been involved and worked hard in the community and organizations to help make decisions. Q: What did he see were the biggest issues for the Council over the next five months? A: The financial situation was a key issue but he would like to see the Council get more involved with helping the school districts. He was concerned with significant cutbacks. He believed the schools are the driving force for getting great, active, and vibrant people into the community. The second issue was how to keep businesses in Lake Oswego, there is vacant business space that could be filled. A good approach could be fostering an incubator space for small businesses to help them develop and then move them into some of the larger spaces. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 8 July 27, 2010 Q: Did he have any thoughts regarding the programs or issues facing Council over the next five months, which include West End Building, Foothills/Streetcar, and Sensitive Lands? A: Regarding the WEB, he believed more research was needed to make an informed decision; he was familiar with commercial real estate, acquisition, disposition, and management. The decision of what to do with the WEB is challenging now that it was worth less than when first purchased. Regarding the Foothills area, he believed that it would be a fabulous addition to Lake Oswego one day, a perfect way for the city to grow. However, it needed to be done in a financial, reasonable, and practical way. Based on the current real estate market he believed it was too early to get involved in development of the area. Regarding the Streetcar project, any program to get cars off the road was a good step but more research was needed to determine if it was financially feasible. Regarding the Sensitive Lands, he believed Lake Oswego has many features that make it the best city to live in and one factor was Lake Oswego's attention to preserving the land. Q: What made him stand out from the other applicants and why should the Council select him? A: He explained his background as a self-starter, hard worker with a great work ethic, and being a strategic and creative thinker would be an asset to the Council. He has had a successful career in building ownership and management, invested and started companies with up to 80 employees, and has sold and purchased businesses. The key to his success has been researching and making good decisions. Q: If appointed to the position and as a standing candidate for the Council, how would he answer the question if asked by someone in the community that the Council was influencing the election by choosing an applicant for the interim position that they wanted to see elected in November 2010? A: He believed the Council did not have any preconceived criteria nor indicated that an applicant who was running for the position during the November 2010 elections could not apply; therefore, the Council was not being placed in an awkward position. He expected the selected applicant would have a leg up during the elections and it still was up to the voters. He agreed the applicant selected would have an advantage due to the exposure. Q: Given that there were State Statues that provided separation between what the cities and schools could do with regard to finances, did he research where those lines were and what creative suggestions he believed the City could do to help the school districts? A: He understood that Statues did exist and he was working on ideas that could help the school districts. Q: Did he have any closing comments? A: He appreciated the opportunity to speak with the Council and hoped he was selected to help make decisions that would make Lake Oswego an even better place to live. Mayor Hoffman called for a 5 minute break at 5:10 p.m. 3.6 Paul Moredock (Interview conducted over the telephone) Q: Why would he like to fill this vacancy, was there a specific issue that motivated him to apply? A: He has been living in Lake Oswego for a long time, loves the community, and believed he could make a valuable contribution for the short period needed by the position. He did not apply based on a specific issue, he believed the multitude of issues including the LOIS and Sensitive Lands Projects currently before the Council were important issues, and he was not looking to be a policy maker causing the Council to head in a new direction. Based on his background as a store manager, entrepreneur, business planner, and local resident, he would be a good contributor to the Council. Q: What did he see were the biggest issues for the Council over the next five months? A: The Sensitive Land issue and its impact on the residents, and the implementation of the recommendation of the Council are critical. The ongoing supervision and input on the LOIS Project City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 8 July 27, 2010 and being involved in the Transit Project from Portland to Lake Oswego are other issues of importance. Q: Where did he think the Council should focus their attention over the next five months? A: He believed the Council's goal should be the implementation of recommendations for the Sensitive Land Project, to stay on time and on budget with the LOIS Project while dealing with community concerns on both of those issues. Q: What were his thoughts, understanding, and opinion of the Foothills/Streetcar Project? A: He was a fan of the concept and liked the idea of using alternative modes of transportation however, he believed staying proactive and aware of how those projects would impact the environment and land was important. He was also a fan of development in the Foothills area subject to the project's environmental impact, community reaction, overall grand vision, and having a strategy with a purpose. Q: What were his thoughts regarding the West End Building? A: He shared his understanding of the issue, as a Council member his focus would be to identify what would be the appropriate use of the building, funds, and resources. Q: Were there any other issues he saw the Council facing over the next five months? A: He believed that due to the difficult economic times the City needed to be supportive of the Lake Oswego business owners. He saw his role as a Council member to be a good listener and collaboration builder; these were strengths that he could bring to the Council position if selected. Q: Did he intend to run for the Council Position during the November 2010 election? A: He stated it was not his intention to run beyond the term of the current vacancy. Q: What made him stand out from the other applicants and why should the Council select him? A: His background as an entrepreneur, business manager, and marriage counselor provided him experience with managing budgets, other people's money, being a good listener and collaborator, as well as a good community builder would be a unique skill set for the Council. He would be the right choice for Council as an interim member with no political ambitions but with a passion for the city. 4. DISCUSSION Mayor Hoffman reiterated the process and time frame for making a decision on which applicant would be selected to fill the interim Council position. He appreciated the five candidates that applied. He was looking for an applicant that had knowledge of what was going on in the City, because of the amount of time it takes to get up to speed on the issues. He was comfortable with Dan Vizzini due to his background and experience on the Planning Commission. He believed Mike Kehoe was qualified but was concerned with his interest of running for election in November 2010 and would be uncomfortable appointing a candidate to the interim position. His top two candidates would be Dan Vizzini and Paul Moredock; he believed Mr. Moredock had a grasp of the issues. Councilor Moncrieff believed that all the applicants had something to offer the City. She appreciated Mike Kehoe as a candidate for applying, which showed he was ready to get on with the job. She agreed that he was qualified for the interim position and his dedication to the future of the city. She appreciated David Polson's finance comments and hoped if he did not get appointed to the position that he apply for the Budget Committee or work with the City in another capacity. Likewise for James Radda with his interest for sustainability, he might be interested in the Sustainability Advisory Board. She agreed Dan Vizzini was a strong applicant because of his experience being on the Planning Commission, the Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition (LONAC), and his long history with the City. She liked his comments regarding priorities that skip to the "knitting," the City's financial strength, and how the Council deals with the City Staffing departments. Her top two candidates were Dan Vizzini and Mike Kehoe, adding Mr. Vizzini would City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 8 July 27, 2010 be an interesting selection since it would be a short-term appointment and she was confident the City would have other opportunities for Mr. Kehoe. Councilor Tierney stated each candidate brings their own set of skills and are each qualified in their own right. The criteria he originally had for the interim position was for an applicant to also be running as a candidate so they could participate and have a good foundation. He now believed the Council should not be in a position of showing favor to a candidate over any applicant running for the position. The applicant that met his experience criteria was Dan Vizzini, who had demonstrated over the years his grasp of the issues that face the City and that he could make an impact during the five-month period of the interim position. Councilor Jordan stated she also was impressed with the applicants and believed they were all qualified. However, as a Councilor, it was awkward for her to say that she could not appoint an applicant who was also running for a Council position in the November 2010 elections. However, choosing an applicant had to do with them knowing the City, having a grasp of the City's budget and financial situation. Having knowledge of the budget was important to her and she believed that Dan Vizzini had seen and understood the City's budget. She did not believe that some of the financial concerns mentioned were as dire as indicated by some of the applicants. She would select Dan Vizzini as he was a hard worker, interested and involved, a big communicator with people, a good listener, and knows about the issues that the Council would be facing over the next five months. Councilor Olson was concerned by Dan Vizzini's reasons for wanting to be a Council member, the fulfillment of his curiosity and his interest of the Council dynamics of their decision-making process rather than the issues themselves. She believed they needed someone that would get into the policy issues and decision-making process and not just be on the Council to satisfy their curiosity. In addition, she believed there was a conflict with Mr. Vizzini being a good friend and the prior campaign manager for the Mayor. She believed it was disingenuous for the Council to say that they would not show favor to Mike Kehoe as an applicant that was running for Council Candidacy in the November 2010 elections, as Council had opened the interim position up to anyone that wanted to apply. She did not want to second-guess why other candidates chose not to apply for the interim position but they too had the opportunity to apply and the candidacy should not have bearing on applicant selection. She agreed it would benefit Mr. Kehoe if selected to have the five-month experience prior to the November 2010 elections, this would bring him up to speed by January 1, 2010. She was impressed that all the applicants understood the Council would be facing some difficult economic decisions, that the applicants were willing to look at the big picture, to think outside the box, and with their management and decision making experience. Her top choice was Mike Kehoe, with David Poulson and Paul Moredock in a close second. Mayor Hoffman thanked the Councilors for the comments and stated the final decision on applicant selection would be August 3, 2010. Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 5:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn Christie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Page 8 of 8 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES September 14, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:06 p.m. on September 14, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini (6:08) Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Joel Komarek, LOIS Project Director; Ann Adrian, Adult Community Center Director; Kim Gilmer, Parks & Recreation Director; Erica Rooney, Asst City Engineer; David Gilbey, Water Quality Project Coordinator 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION Councilor Jordan recused herself from the discussion of the Executive Session item because she had a possible conflict of interest. Her husband's law firm represented some parties involved in the discussion. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting to Executive Session at 6:07 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. 4. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 4.1 Discussion and resolution of ground anchor claim for Lake Full phase of LOIS Mayor Hoffman reconvened the open session at 6:33 p.m. Councilor Hennagin moved to authorize the City Manager to execute documents settling the claim by Advanced American Construction for an equitable adjustment of the contract price for the Lake Full Phase of the LOIS Project. The equitable adjustment shall be in the sum of $250,000 — consistent with the tentative settlement that was reached in mediation. Councilor Tierney seconded the motion. Councilor Jordan recused herself from the vote and discussion, citing a potential conflict of interest. Her husband's law firm, Jordan Schrader, represented the entity in question. Mr. Komarek referenced his September 2, 2010, memo, which recounted the history of this claim by Advanced American Contractors for additional compensation by the City for the materially different circumstances encountered while installing the ground anchors during the Lake Full Phase. He noted that the contractor successfully installed 428 ground anchors to hold the buoyant pipe underwater, but he had to install the anchors in the deep basalt layer instead of in the shallower gravel layer (an option allowed by the City), and in conditions that made a successful installation extremely difficult. He indicated that the City rejected the contractor's first two claims for extraordinary expenses. However, the City and its Claims Analysis Team acknowledged that some compensation was due to the contractor for the 20 to 30 anchors installed at depths of 250 to 270 feet. He said that the team determined a compensation amount of approximately $175,000 based on the contractor's City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 19 September 14, 2010 records and labor costs and the City's field reports. He explained that both parties agreed to non- binding mediation as the first step in attempting to settle the claim. He reported that, at the August 31 mediation meeting, the mutually agreeable neutral third party mediator successfully brought the two parties to a tentative settlement amount of $275,000, subject to Council approval. He explained that this amount included both what the City's team believed was equitable compensation for the deep anchors and the trial costs that the City would incur if this went to arbitration. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the contractor's initial claim had been for $810,000. He indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that, even with this settlement, the project budget for this phase came in at $1.8 million below budget. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Jordan recused herself. (6-0] 5. STUDY SESSION 5.1 Aging in Place in Lake Oswego Mayor Hoffman spoke to the critical nature of this topic in Lake Oswego, which was an aging city, per the FCS report that Council would hear on September 21. He recalled his attendance at an Adult Community Center (ACC) program in the spring of 2010, which hosted different expert panels exploring a variety of issues related to aging in place. He commented that both the elderly and their children attended the program. He indicated that the issues of housing and how the City accommodated the elderly within its boundaries would inform the Comprehensive Plan discussion. He mentioned the upcoming Council Round Table at the ACC on October 23, where community members could share their experiences and the challenges inherent in growing old in a community like Lake Oswego. He recalled hearing people at the ACC talk about how the elderly often became prisoners in their own homes because of their inability to get out and be mobile. He mentioned that he wanted this discussion televised, as the ACC program had not been televised. Ms. Adrian introduced Ruth Cohen, a consultant working with families navigating the aging process, Dr. Meagan Lawler, Social Service Director at Marabella and adjunct faculty at Marylhurst, and Jeanne Keevil, a community volunteer. Mayor Hoffman mentioned speaking last night with Karen Brown -Wilson from the PSU Institute on Aging. Ms. Adrian defined "aging in place" as the desire to remain in the community of choice in one's own home as one grew older. She observed that that desire was practically universal. She saw an opportunity with the upcoming Comprehensive Plan process for the City to look at the policy issues supporting aging in place, such as attainable housing, conservation, and sustainability practices. She defined `older people' for the purpose of this discussion as 55 plus. She reviewed the various no cost Social Services programs available through the Adult Community Center (ACC). These included Meals on Wheels, a congregate meal site at the ACC, a volunteer - based medical escort system, a respite program for people with Alzheimer's and other dementias, home visits, geriatric assessments, information and assistance, family consultations, the AARP Safe Driver program, medical equipment loans, low energy assistance, Medicare and health insurance assistance, Project Alert, blood pressure checks, foot care services, Care Sure nutrition, TriMet lift assistance, assisted medical devices, a lunch and shop program, and several support groups. Ms. Cohen referenced the handout, "A Continuum of Care," which listed the services and programs offered in home and in the community. She mentioned the three elements of a livable community, as identified in a 2005 University of Arizona study: affordable and appropriate housing, supportive community features and services, and adequate mobility features. She spoke City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 19 September 14, 2010 of the numerous options available for community services and housing already available in Lake Oswego to assist people in remaining as independent as possible as they grew older. She discussed case management, provided by both the public and private sectors, as a means of helping older individuals and their families or caregivers determine which of the many options available was the most appropriate for their particular situation. She noted that the ACC staff provided a case management system for the older adults in Lake Oswego. She described how case management provided a comprehensive assessment of the individual's strengths and challenges, including discussing the individual's values, followed by a plan of action to support the individual's abilities while mitigating the challenges. She noted that the delivery system for getting services to those who needed them was fragmented, with gaps in the local delivery system. She commented that the most effective way that the City could support its older residents was to make sure that the professionals providing these services were supported and given the tools needed to help residents access the services available in the larger community. She observed that sometimes the biggest challenge for caregivers was finding out how to access services that they had heard existed somewhere. Another challenge was obtaining what one needed in a timely manner at an affordable cost. She indicated that Lake Oswego had the framework for helping older people find and utilize the services but it needed expansion and strengthening to meet the challenges of the aging community into the future. Dr. Lawler indicated that she was asked to address the psychological aspects of why someone might want to stay in his/her own home or not. She observed that most people started out wanting to stay in their own home. She cited the example of her parents: her father said that he would live his home horizontally, and he did, while her 93 year old mother told her today that she wished she had moved into an assisted living facility three years ago when Dr. Lawler's father died. She indicated that the biggest obstacle was a family's unwillingness to look at the effects of aging until they absolutely had to. She stated, "It's never going to happen until the crisis happens." She mentioned that, while staying in one's home was a comfortable idea, it could also be overwhelming and distressing as the person became unable to keep the house and yard up as he/she did in the past. Yet not everyone could afford to move to a facility. She spoke of having the resources available so that people could access them when they needed to, which they would not do before they needed to. Ms. Keevil discussed the things that older people brought to a community. She mentioned the many volunteer services and activities provided by seniors at the ACC. She commented that seniors bought locally, used local auto services, banked locally, and patronized local doctors, dentists, and beauty shops. She pointed out that senior volunteers did library work, such as shelving, that the City would otherwise have to hire someone to do, and they staffed the Booktique. She pointed out that seniors provided audiences at the Lakewood Theater. She spoke of seniors donating generously to charities and supporting churches and other organizations. She commented that the many retirees living in Lake Oswego residences paid taxes. She described seniors as having many assets of value to the community. COUNCIL QUESTIONS Councilor Olson asked if living on a fixed income was becoming more of a problem in Lake Oswego and an obstacle for people wanting to stay in their own homes here. She wondered whether what she has heard about it getting harder to stay in Lake Oswego because of the cost of living was an accurate perception. She observed that housing was not the only cost. Ms. Keevil observed that almost everything else has gone up but Social Security payments. She mentioned her alarm over a 30% increase in the sewer bill. She observed that it was expensive to live in Lake Oswego and maintain the community lifestyle, especially in this economy. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 19 September 14, 2010 Ms. Adrian mentioned that there was a misunderstanding that no low-income people lived in Lake Oswego when 3% of people over 65 lived in poverty (less than $11,000 a year) with a significant number living solely on Social Security. She commented that it was important to take those kinds of things into account when thinking about economic and age diversity. Councilor Hennagin asked what the status was of the housing supply available within the financial capabilities of Lake Oswego's aging population. Ms. Adrian said that she did not have the statistics on that, but she could obtain them. She mentioned the anecdotal information she had that there was not much housing stock for downsizing or with universal design elements for accessibility by disabled persons. Councilor Jordan suggested asking the 50 plus Advisory Board to conduct a survey of people 45 and older to find out where they saw themselves if they stayed in Lake Oswego. She pointed out that all the Council had was anecdotal information about older people unable to find housing in Lake Oswego but no specifics about whether people wanted to rent or buy, what their price point was, or what type of housing or floor plan they wanted. She spoke of the ACC staff and the Advisory Board ferreting out that information, which would help inform the Comprehensive Plan update. She wondered where people moved to outside of Lake Oswego. She commented that their information indicated that the cost of living in the surrounding communities was as high as or higher than in Lake Oswego. She mentioned her concern with basing anything on anecdotal information. Ms. Adrian indicated that they had no statistics on that issue, which sounded like it needed a good study. She mentioned hearing that the lack of diversity in housing stock was an issue. Dr. Lawler spoke from her experience that families living elsewhere either moved the parents in with them in another state or moved them into assisted living facilities. Mayor Hoffman recalled hearing at the ACC program about the psychological trauma of change for elderly citizens and the difficulty in moving out of their house. He referenced Greg Hadley's book talking about the change. He asked Dr. Lawler to address the psychology and the challenge of change for elderly citizens when they have to move. Dr. Lawler mentioned no wish to change and a fear of an unknown situation as the primary factors leading to the crisis and its associated resistance. She noted that many people improved their physical and psychological well-being in a structured situation. She observed that the ideal situation was a careful search for the right place, which some families did do. She commented that she has seen a fair amount of forced re -locations recently when someone could no longer afford to stay in a facility and had to move somewhere else, followed by a marked decline in health. She indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she thought the resistance was the usual resistance of humans to change, but a good presentation of options could ameliorate the change. Ms. Keevil commented that innovative planned kinds of living arrangements were starting to show up around the country, such as a commune -type system or individual homes built around a centralized location, but Lake Oswego has not yet reached that point. She observed that, for seniors, losing one's independence, life-long possessions, and property added to the stress of moving, which already ranked as one of the top five most stressful life activities. She pointed out that the emotional characteristics of these situations required a case-by-case approach, as what was difficult for one person might not be difficult for another person. She applauded the Council's efforts to survey the community to find out what people wanted. Ms. Cohen described the low-income congregate housing off Boones Ferry Road as a good start. She commented that it had a congregate feeling to it without being institutionalized. Councilor Moncrieff stated that she shared Councilor Jordan's questions about where people were moving for cheaper living situations, as she had the same information regarding the cost of living in Lake Oswego being on par with the surrounding communities. She wondered what City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 19 September 14, 2010 specific things the City could do to allow aging in place in neighborhoods with their walkability and access to transit, such as encouraging attractive housing stock with universal design elements and providing more support for the existing services. Ms. Adrian commented that, while she did not have statistics to back this up, her intuition told her that a universally designed single -level home with a small or no yard care would be attractive housing to seniors. She said that she would be glad to assist with any kind of surveying. She mentioned the likely interest of the 50+ Advisory Board in such work, citing their advocating for zoning changes to facilitate secondary dwelling units. Councilor Moncrieff spoke to the importance of meeting the needs of the citizens. Dr. Lawler observed that those needs would change over time as the aging population changed. Councilor Tierney observed that, from a policy perspective, the housing stock question was critical because the City could deal with that sort of issue. He asked if staff has forecasted what additional services the City would need to provide in the future, looking at them from both a service delivery and a financial perspective. Ms. Adrian commented that the most important thing they could do in the next five years would be to develop a strategic plan for provision of these services. Ms. Adrian indicated to Councilor Tierney that there were many great models available from other communities to help the City in determining what services to provide in the future. She mentioned the CDC's program on Healthy Aging and AARP's programs. Councilor Tierney raised another policy issue of what the City needed in its development code in order to provide for an appropriate housing stock. He spoke of specific integration with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Adrian mentioned that Sidaro Sin was interested in the aging of the population and developing age -friendly communities, and attended meetings on the subject. Councilor Tierney observed that, from a housing stock perspective, seniors moving out would free up homes for younger families, which would help with the vitality of the community and the School District population concerns. Councilor Hennagin commented that this Council has been concerned about housing stock and looked at a variety of different types. He agreed that they needed to find out what the people wanted, not only in housing stock and location, but also in transportation and transit options. He recalled that the City determined several years ago that a local circulator bus was cost -prohibitive at the time, but he wondered if people might be willing to pay something for that service if they did not want to drive. Councilor Vizzini encouraged seniors to consider moving to a community facility, citing the advantage his father discovered in doing so as a male in his 70s. He asked if staff has seen more seniors participating in the meals program because of affordability issues. Ms. Adrian indicated that, while the participation numbers were on par with last year, what they have seen is the number of seniors unable to contribute something towards the cost of the meals increase from 27% two years ago to 40% last year. Councilor Vizzini asked if the caseload per case manager in the case management system was manageable or did staff foresee a need for additional case managers in the next five to ten years. Ms. Cohen mentioned that last year 4,700 individuals utilized some aspect of the services offered through the Social Services Department at the ACC. Ms. Adrian clarified that the two case managers at the ACC did not manage all those individuals. Ms. Cohen indicated that the State case managers handled a caseload of around 400 clients. Councilor Vizzini commented that it sounded like the current system of case management in the public, private, and non-profit sectors was adequate; it was the services in the community that might not be adequate. Councilor Vizzini suggested changing the term from 'strategic plan' to `social contract.' He argued that they needed to get beyond planning to an agreement between the various public and private institutions in the community to take action. He commented that one advantage of the City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 19 September 14, 2010 Comprehensive Plan process was the opportunity to look beyond urban housing design to how to knit together the services, the housing, and the mobility in the landscape of the community. He encouraged Ms. Adrian to push Mr. Sin beyond the typical kinds of discussions. He pointed out that the need for services for an aging population at the local level might also represent an employment cluster. He suggested looking into an economic development strategy to encourage the marketplace to grow in Lake Oswego to serve that population. Ms. Adrian commented that one thing they all could learn from tonight was the need to start thinking about their own individual aging process. Dr. Lawler recalled a quote from Harry Moody in reference to business development focused on aging: "You know, there's gold in silver." Ms. Keevil suggested that the Council call a forum of people between the ages of 50 and 62 to discuss what happened as one aged and what kinds of housing they wanted to live in. She mentioned that her personal preference was a little single-family cottage on a small plot. Mayor Hoffman summarized the themes he heard in the discussion: the issue of fixed incomes and how to plan for service delivery and housing in 10 to 15 years. He asked if the panel knew of any communities that deferred utility fees as a lien on a property payable upon property transfer. Councilor Vizzini mentioned that the City of Portland had a low-income assistance program that reduced a utility bill by 30%. Mayor Hoffman commented that Lake Oswego had a similar program. Mayor Hoffman requested a memo from Ms. Adrian discussing how the community should start planning for service delivery. He noted that they could consider housing as part of the Comprehensive Plan's 20 -year outlook. He suggested that the Council start the ball rolling on this, as it would take five to ten years to get something done. Councilor Jordan commented that she was very involved with these issues, as last year she helped her parents move into a facility. She asked if most cities of Lake Oswego's size offered the same range of social services. Ms. Adrian reported that a poll staff did found that other senior centers in Clackamas County offered similar services. She recalled that the County voted in 2008 to return its social service money to the State, and transferred all its case managers to the State. She indicated that the County and the State were lessening the services that they offered. She mentioned the decrease in Lake Oswego's County funding from $85,000 last year to $44,000 this year. Councilor Jordan suggested including in a survey on possible future services, information on the costs of those services and a question on whether people would be willing to pay on a sliding scale to have those services offered in their own community. 5.2 Tennis Siting Study Findings and Recommendation Ms. Gilmer introduced Brian Jackson, the architect who worked with staff on this study. She reviewed the project background (p.4), beginning with the City's 2009 Golf Course and Tennis Facility feasibility study. She noted the reasons why the City needed a new and larger tennis facility (p.5). She discussed the scope and findings of the 2009 study (p.4). She reported that the study found a huge unmet need for indoor tennis facilities in Lake Oswego's market area, indicating a strong tennis market and a need for more courts to reduce the player to court ratio (p.6). She mentioned the seven potential sites included in the 2009 feasibility study (p.6). She noted that, while the City did not own the Armory site, there were indications that the National Guard would vacate the site in the next 18 months. Therefore, staff decided to analyze its suitability as a tennis facility site. She reported the feasibility study consultant's recommendation that the City build eight courts with a future growth capacity to 10 to 12 courts, and all the amenities lacking in the current tennis center. He reduced the number of potential sites to three: West End Building, National Guard City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 19 September 14, 2010 Armory, and Rassekh park property. Ms. Gilmer mentioned needing a minimum of 4.1 acres to site the facility (more if there were topographic issues). She recalled the consultant's recommendation to use a combination of different funding sources. She reminded the Council that the tennis center was an enterprise fund that paid for itself out of the fees generated through the programs. She stated that the intent was that this new facility would not require general tax support for either construction or operations and maintenance. She mentioned the consultant's recommendation to sell the existing tennis center property, build up a reserve in the tennis fund to pay off some of the debt for a new facility, and pay the balance with a revenue bond. She noted that they could also look at additional private funding and grant opportunities as well. She indicated that the City hired Mr. Jackson in the spring of 2010 in response to the Council 2010 goal to site a new tennis center and its direction to conduct a siting analysis to determine the best site. She explained that Mr. Jackson looked at the three sites in specific terms, as opposed to the more general look of the 2009 study. Mr. Jackson gave a PowerPoint presentation. He described the process he used in achieving the four goals/tasks he undertook: to look at all zoning codes (p.6), to develop a space program, to develop conceptual site designs, and to look at cost planning. He noted assumptions they made for the cost estimate (pp.7-8), including a prefabricated engineered building. He observed that contractors had very competitive pricing in the current market, making now a good time to build a building. He reviewed the elements of the space programming, both baseline and optional (pp.9- 12). He discussed the Armory site (pp. 13-15), which the City did not own. He noted the 3.16 acres of buildable area due to sensitive lands on the site. He described the design as compact and efficient with a well laid out building (pp.30-31). He reviewed the site design and topographic issues (pp. 14-15). He pointed out that this site had no room for future expansion beyond an eight -court facility. He explained that the site slope allowed entrance onto the upper level but also required significant retaining walls. He clarified to Councilor Olson that the Armory site currently had no retaining walls, as the building itself was its own retaining wall. Councilor Olson commented that the information slated for presentation next week during Executive Session regarding whether the Armory site might revert to the City for as little as the $1 that the City sold the site for would have been helpful in making this decision. Mr. Jackson discussed the Rassekh site (pp.16-19). He mentioned the 7.67 acres of buildable land and the possibility of several different building configurations (pp.32-35), including the use of sustainable energy strategies, such as solar panels (pp. 18-19). He noted the access issues and the possible expansion to 12 courts (p.18). He clarified to Councilor Hennagin that the sewer access through the wetland had an $82,000 connection fee to reimburse the developer who put in the sewer pump station to serve the area plus around $150,000 in sewer line construction costs for a total of around $250,000. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the City should explore sewer alternatives, such as self - composting toilets. Ms. Gilmer said that Parks & Rec was investigating composting toilet systems for general park purposes, as they were less costly to build. She mentioned that the Brooklyn Zoo in New York City has a successful system. She observed that such a system needed to be no different aesthetically then a flush toilet system. Councilor Vizzini commented that the Rassekh site could accommodate a living machine, which treated the flow from a normal low flow toilet in the greenhouse and then conveyed it to the creek. Mr. Jackson agreed that there were opportunities for sustainable practices at this site, but that was a research project in and of itself. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 19 September 14, 2010 Mr. Jackson confirmed to Councilor Vizzini that the $82,000 sewer connection fee was unique to the Rassekh property, and over and above the SDCs paid at any of the other sites. Ms. Gilmer indicated to Councilor Olson that she would have to check on whether the sewer pump station served the Atherton Heights neighborhood. She recalled that the City worked closely with the developer who put it in for the Street of Dreams in order to make sure that the City could connect to it when it developed a park at this site. Councilor Vizzini expressed concern about the narrowness of the elevated viewing area (20 feet wide), as that would not allow seating to watch a game. Mr. Jackson presented an alternate baseline design for the Rassekh property for a single story facility (pp.36-38), which would eliminate the costs of two-story access. He noted the 30 -foot wide common area that replaced the elevated viewing and the elimination of the cardio/fitness room and the two -team room. He mentioned that this design cost $1.2 million less than the other design). He indicated to Councilor Vizzini that it probably would add substantially to the cost to expand the 30 -foot viewing area to 40 to 50 feet because it would require column supports instead of the traditional beams with a 30 -foot span. Ms. Gilmer reported on a conversation they had with the contractor building the new tennis facility at George Fox University, who was building a similar design with six courts. She said that the contractor was trying to build a facility that required as minimal amount of modification to the "Butler Barn" structures as possible, because modification increased costs. She reiterated that this facility needed to pay for itself as an enterprise fund, and staff has tried to keep the costs within the budget. Councilor Hennagin asked why they would not build 10 courts (given that eight courts were still insufficient to meet market demand) to generate more fees and pay off the revenue bond faster. Ms. Gilmer agreed that it would make more sense to build the 10 courts at this time to take advantage of lower construction and financing costs. She recalled a suggestion from the Parks & Rec Advisory Board (PRAB) that the City build an eight court indoor facility with two outdoor courts positioned for covering in the future. Ms. Gilmer commented that staff's intent had been to estimate the costs of building on these sites. She explained that staff took a conservative approach to revenue estimates from the needed combination of class/event fees and hourly court fees possible at an eight -court facility. She mentioned that, in the event of a revenue bond, she had not wanted to assume that the center would generate large amounts of money if it could not do so. She indicated that staff could retool the operating and site development cost estimates. Councilor Tierney questioned the assumption made for all the sites that the center would be a prefabricated metal building. He wondered whether the community would allow a private tennis facility to build a prefabricated metal building. He argued that a metal building did not stand the test of quality and sustainability desired by the community. Mr. Jackson clarified that they tried to compare apples to apples on all the sites. He speculated that there was flexibility in the cost estimates to enhance the exterior of what would be a big building. Councilor Tierney expressed concern about the costs to build a building, as opposed to a barn or a prefabricated metal structure. Mr. Jackson answered that they would have to look at what the cost impacts would be to make more aesthetic upgrades to the exterior. He pointed out that the long span structure would be a Butler Barn -looking piece in any case. Ms. Gilmer cited the storage facility at Hazelia Field as an example of a pole barn with stipulated design features and exterior cladding that allowed the building to work with the site design. Ms. Gilmer indicated to Councilor Tierney that the cost estimates included funds to pass the community standard, and that staff has not underestimated the cost of the building. Councilor Tierney commented that one of the Council's concerns was doing it right. Councilor Vizzini observed that landscaping could also help. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 19 September 14, 2010 Mr. Jackson discussed the West End Building site (pp.21-22, 39-42). He indicated that 8.2 acres of the 14.2 -acre site were buildable. He explained that, with the only location for tennis courts being on the northern side of the site where the current parking lot lay, there would be additional costs to replace the south lawn with a parking lot. He noted that the issues on this site were grading issues (p.22). The need to step down the hill made it difficult to construct a viewing area to cover all eight courts. He commented that, given the other potential uses for the property, clearly a tennis center was not the highest and best use of the WEB site. Mr. Jackson indicated to Councilor Hennagin that all the land to the north was protected, except for a half -acre next to Daniel Road. He indicated to Councilor Vizzini that the building would not fit along Kruse Way and still meet the setback requirements. He reviewed the key cost factors for each site (pp.43-44). He presented the cost summary chart (p.44), showing the Armory site at $5.8 million (including $500,000 for purchase), the Rassekh site at $5.9 million (full option) and $4.5 million (baseline), and the WEB site at $6.8 million. Ms. Gilmer recalled that the consultant's recommendation from the 2009 tennis center feasibility study to fund a new facility from a variety of sources assumed a revenue bond backed by the full faith and credit of the City and a rough facility cost of $4.8 million. She mentioned that staff assumed a $24 per hour court fee in its projected operating budget for an eight -court facility. She pointed out that the Armory site cost could be $5.3 million if the City acquired the property for $1. However, the Rassekh full option at $5.9 million and the WEB at almost $6.8 million were significantly higher than the consultant's original estimate, which made a new facility based on $24 an hour impractical and the baseline option more realistic financially. She presented a slide showing the current rates (from the City Bond Counsel) for full faith and credit bonds and basic revenue bonds. She indicated that a 30 -year bond for $3 million had a payback of $173,000, which was less than the 20 -year bond payback of over $200,000 identified last year in the feasibility study. Councilor Olson stated that she recalled a discussion last year of revenue bonds, and not full faith and credit bonds backed by the revenue of the City. Mr. McIntyre clarified that staff was trying to show the different options available. Mr. Jackson indicated to Councilor Hennagin that a one -level facility design on the Rassekh property was possible, which would eliminate the high costs of elevator access to two levels. Councilor Tierney asked whether the $24 per court hour generated sufficient revenue to afford more building if the bond prices were lower. He commented that he preferred to build something that had a longer life, was more appealing to the community, and looked like a building. He acknowledged that it would cost more money. Ms. Gilmer concurred that that made sense. She indicated that staff would drill down to find the answers to those questions, once Council approved a site. Councilor Tierney commented that he wanted to make sure that a tennis center fit into the community values, which included a walkable, densely populated community. He expressed his concern that the Rassekh property did not fit those values. He said that he would rather spend more if financially possible to put the center in a location that met those values. Ms. Gilmer confirmed to Councilor Vizzini that the monies the City would use to repay the bonds were tennis revenues, and that the only question for the bondholders was whether the City would provide the additional security of its full faith and credit backing the bonds. Councilor Olson disagreed that that was the only difference. She argued that the City kept issuing full faith and credit bonds backed by a revenue stream but those were not revenue bonds, as some thought. She commented that the City did have a limit on the amount of its full faith and credit. Councilor Vizzini mentioned that his calculations after the last commitment for LOIS found the City at less than half its limit. Councilor Olson pointed out that the water project was coming up at $240 million. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 19 September 14, 2010 Ms. Gilmer presented the PRAB recommendation of the Rassekh property as the most logical place to put a new tennis center, based upon the goals of siting a center and the feasibility of paying for it with tennis revenues. She reviewed the basis of their decision (p.6, staff report). She discussed the potential next steps (pp.6-7, staff report). She commented that, given the current momentum and enthusiasm in the community for a new tennis center, she thought that delay in identifying a location would make it more difficult to maintain that momentum and generate additional private funding from the tennis community as well as acceptance of increasing court fees needed to generate a capital reserve. She discussed the need for more site due diligence as Step 1 (p.8, staff report). She noted that the UGB modification process took six to eight months, and that the US Tennis Center Facilities Grant Program required selecting a site before it would consider a grant application (pp.8-9, staff report). She pointed out that the timelines for Steps 3 and 4 (p.9, staff report) were flexible. She pointed out that design work to let the tennis community see the proposal would help generate interest in private funding and the fee increases. She stated that the final recommendation was to approve the Rassekh property as a future site for an indoor tennis center, to initiate the geotechnical analysis on the site, and to apply to Metro for the UGB modification. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Moncrieff expressed her appreciation for the staff, PRAB, and Tennis Study Group's time put into arriving at this recommendation. She remarked that she sympathized with the urgency to move now to take advantage of the tennis community's enthusiasm and the low interest rates and construction costs. She stated her support of the PRAB recommendation to select the Rassekh property but with reservations as voiced by Councilor Tierney. She said that the lack of transit access was a concern to her, but she felt that the benefits of the site outweighed its detriments. She said that she was also sympathetic to the neighborhood association that has been waiting for a park and natural area for many years. She spoke of developing a natural area along Pecan Creek with a picnic shelter for neighborhood gatherings, and working to preserve trees. She mentioned looking at the most sustainable practices during the design process and balancing any additional costs with lifetime energy savings. Councilor Tierney stated that, while he supported the concept of a new tennis facility, he did not support locating it at the Rassekh site, which was on the edge of the community. He suggested that there were possibilities to acquire a School District site in the not too distant future that was more community oriented. He indicated that, while he did not desire to delay the process, he thought that Step 1 should be updating the financial model and re-examining the assumptions, given the differences between the initial cost estimate of $4.8 million and the cost estimates provided in this study. He mentioned that he preferred the Armory site because people could walk to it. He said that he would not oppose the Rassekh site if there were no other option but he would like to explore options with the School District. He argued that the City would be in a better position if it considered these things. Councilor Jordan stated that she supported a tennis center but she too was concerned about the Rassekh property being out on the edge of the community. She asked what a modification of the UGB entailed. Ms. Gilmer explained that, because the property was inside the City limits but outside the UGB, it did not require an annexation vote. Metro staff told City staff last year that the City would need to demonstrate the need for bringing the park property inside the boundary, which the City could do, as it was very difficult to site this facility within the city limits on the properties available to the City. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 19 September 14, 2010 Councilor Jordan mentioned the outdoor tennis courts at Bryant and Jean Roads and the large property adjacent to the school. Ms. Gilmer said that staff looked at that property but did not include it in the feasibility study because it served as ball fields for the school. She indicated that the City would have to replace those ball fields elsewhere in the city if it used the site for an indoor tennis facility. Councilor Jordan commented that she would hate to choose a site in the rural part of the city if the City could find a site within a more accessible area on one of the empty School District properties. She remarked that she was not opposed to this but she did think that they were pushing it because of the momentum consideration. She described her greatest concern as whether they have given this siting issue the most opportunity, since the City only had a few sites that it felt it could study. She indicated that she supported expanding the tennis center to a 10 to 12 court facility if possible, but she was not certain that the Rassekh property was the right location. Councilor Hennagin stated that he shared the concern about location, as he had hoped that staff would be able to find a site more centrally located for an expanded indoor tennis center. He asked if play spread out evenly over the day or concentrated in the mornings and evenings. Ms. Gilmer indicated that currently the tennis center was solidly booked from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays, from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Saturday, and in the mornings into early afternoons on Sundays. She said that the peak usage occurred from November/December through April. She mentioned selling seasonal reservations for off -hours during the season because otherwise there was not enough court time. Councilor Hennagin commented that people were not going to walk to a tennis center during the winter, which made the Armory site not much different from the Rassekh site in his opinion. Mayor Hoffman indicated that both he and Councilor Vizzini could assure the Council that people drove to play tennis. They did not walk. Councilor Hennagin mentioned that a shorter drive would be nice, and yet having an athletic/sports center out in the Luscher Farm area had its advantages. Councilor Hennagin asked if the City would have to trade a property to get the Rassekh site inside the UGB, as it did to get Hazelia Field inside the UGB. Ms. Gilmer said no, as the land swap in the Hazelia Field project had been a simpler method of making a minor modification to the UGB from Metro's point of view. The Rassekh property involved a major UGB modification, and staff was not considering a land trade. Councilor Hennagin commented that he did not know of any other property near the center of town, even a School District property, which would accommodate this facility. He said that he did not think that they had any realistic alternative to siting it at the Rassekh property. Mayor Hoffman noted that the School District has not contacted the City about selling their property. He commented that he knew of no neighborhood that would accept this facility. Councilor Olson mentioned several reasons why the Armory property was the optimal property. She noted that it was the least expensive option and might be available relatively soon. It was a developed site on a bus line, had all utilities available on site, and a shared parking option with the adjacent church. She commented that an informal poll of her tennis -laying friends found that most felt that eight courts would be plenty, given the movement to the Jim Zupanic's club in Tualatin. Ms. Gilmer indicated to Councilor Olson that the City has not yet delineated the sensitive lands on Rassekh, although the property did have a sensitive land overlay on it. Councilor Olson cited the concerns shared by other Councilors regarding the location of the Rassekh property on the edge of the city, and the aesthetics of a parking lot and metal tennis center as the first thing people saw coming in from south of the city. She mentioned that she has not heard whether staff has contacted the Stafford CPO or Stafford Basin residents regarding this project but she would be interested in their input. Councilor Olson commented that she has heard many neighborhood concerns but no discussion from staff regarding neighborhood concerns, such as cut through traffic and the visual impacts to City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 19 September 14, 2010 the neighborhood of looking down on a metal building with mechanical facilities on top. She indicated that she would like to know what work staff has done with the neighborhood. She pointed out that this was not an allowed use under the current zoning on the Rassekh property. She recalled that the City purchased this land with money from the Parks & Natural Areas bond with the intent of developing it as a passive park. She questioned whether using it for a tennis center violated the terms of the bond. She said that she had great difficulty designating any kind of use for the Rassekh property in advance of completing the Parks Master Plan. She cited the City telling the neighborhood for years that it could not do anything on the property until after the City had a new Parks Master Plan. She shared the concern about putting a sewer under the wetland. She concurred with Councilor Tierney that the City should pursue a more optimal site, such as the Armory site. She reiterated that it was more centrally located, easy to get to, and already paved and developed with utilities to the site. She acknowledged the concern that it was smaller, but wondered whether the City should keep the old tennis center for lessons, if all it could get for the site was $1 million. Councilor Vizzini commented that the problem he saw with any site closer to the neighborhoods were the issues of neighborhood impact and highest and best use of the property. He pointed out that Lake Oswego neighborhoods were well organized and would do so around an issue like this. He agreed that it made no sense to locate the facility at the WEB because it was not the highest and best use of that property. He pointed out that this was a recreational facility that would work as a barn on a property in the Stafford area. He shared the concern about getting the permitting to go through the creek for a sewer connection. He indicated that he did not have as many problems with the Rassekh property as others have expressed. He commented that the Armory site was a tight fit on a bus line that did not run on weekends. He agreed that transit was limited in Lake Oswego, which made transit not an issue for a tennis center. He discussed his primary concern that putting this decision off to keep looking for a site lost the window of opportunity to do a project in a counter -cyclical cycle with opportune bidding. He observed that he would hate to spend another year looking for the ideal site, only to have the financing then blow them out of the water. He framed the question before the Council as whether this was an opportunity that the Council needed to move on now and choose the best option, knowing that all three had limitations, or did the Council put this off and run the risk of not being able to make it work later. Mayor Hoffman said that he shared most of Councilor Vizzini's concerns and support of the Rassekh site. He acknowledged that staff could identify potential School District sites but he could not think of a site that the District would want to sell or that the neighborhood would have concerns about a 24/7 operation. He reiterated that his experience found that people drove to play tennis. They did not take mass transit or walk. He commented that they have not heard people saying that the City should not have sited Hazelia Field out there because it was not on mass transit. He indicated that the City bought the parcel with the 1998 Parks & Open Space bond money with the intention of using it for organized and active sports, as identified in its Master Plan, because it was flat. He recalled that the Luscher Farm Master Plan showed baseball fields on that site. He mentioned that he has thought about the Armory site but the configuration was tight and the City did not own the property. He commented that there was no promise that the City would ever own it, making this issue such an unknown that it could feed into a lost opportunity with respect to the market and construction. He recalled that the tennis community has actively supported all the City's parks and open spaces bond measures, and it has been asking for a new facility for years. He mentioned the City's responsiveness to the tennis players by Lakeridge in their request for a tennis facility. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 19 September 14, 2010 He said that he did not see any other site. He commented that, given the amount of urban agriculture activities in the Luscher Farm area, he did not see Rassekh as a rural part of the city. He pointed out that the heaviest use of the indoor courts was during bad weather, which meant that people would drive to the facility. He stated his support of the PRAB recommendation and the many tennis players who have asked for this facility. Councilor Moncrieff recalled that the Rassekh property had been her last choice for the tennis site because she wanted to preserve it as an Oregon White Oak savanna for passive recreation only. She indicated that, in light of the whole community needs, she supported the baseline option at Rassekh as the lowest cost option and the only one with the opportunity to expand to 12 courts to meet the long-term need. She said that she had no concerns regarding the aesthetics, citing the restroom at Hazelia Field that looked like a red barn and the hidden parking area. She reiterated her support of the PRAB recommendation to site the facility on the Rassekh property, and moving forward in order not to lose the opportunity of favorable financing. Councilor Tierney noted that he has already given his opinion and stated his arguments. He observed that no one has spoken to the need to revisit the financing as Step 1 in order to make sure that this would still work, a point that he wished to emphasize. Ms. Gilmer indicated to Councilor Jordan that City Code did not set a required number of parking spaces for recreational facility parking. She described staff's method of determining a minimum of 70 spaces. She noted Mr. Jackson's adding some parking spaces up front on the Rassekh site in anticipation of extra courts in the future. She said that there was no affordable way to put two courts over the existing parking at the Armory. Mr. Jackson indicated that structured parking quickly changed the costs from $3,000 a stall to $30,000 a stall. Councilor Jordan mentioned her appreciation of the Mayor's comments about this property as an active park. She acknowledged the patience of the tennis community in waiting for a new facility. She agreed that she did not want to lose the funding opportunities. She commented that, while she was not positive that the Rassekh property was the right place, she would change her opinion, as she did not know that she could be convinced in the next month that there was another site available for this facility. Councilor Hennagin commented that he thought aesthetics were a concern. He agreed that keeping costs down meant taking advantage of the current economic situation. He remarked that there did not seem to be another reasonable option available at the current time. He described moving ahead with the Rassekh property as fiscally responsible behavior on the Council's part. Councilor Olson supported Councilor Tierney's request to run the numbers again. She commented that she found it disingenuous to bring this to Council when waiting one week would have provided more information regarding the availability of the Armory property. She argued that two baseball fields and their small number of parking spaces was a lot different than a big metal tennis center with 80 parking spaces. She reiterated that she did not think active recreation was ever the intent for this property. She questioned moving ahead now in order to keep the momentum going, given that it would take six to eight months to get through the UGB modification process, and Metro might turn the City down in the end. She referenced the Mayor's comment that no neighborhood would accept this facility on a current school site. She reiterated that she still has not heard any discussion about the neighborhood that would have to live with the traffic and visual impacts of siting this facility on the Rassekh property. She stated that she wanted an answer to her question of whether staff has talked to the neighborhood or the CPO. Councilor Vizzini commented that the decision tonight was about a siting preference, and not about building the facility. He speculated that the final decision to build might have the costs shared with the tennis community. He spoke of that community's willingness to raise private funds to offset some costs over and above the fees in an attempt to hold the fees increases down. He City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 19 September 14, 2010 spoke to working with the tennis community to the greatest extent possible, both to shape the project and to help that community co-own the facility. He framed the question as whether the Council moved forward with something more than tentative planning on one of these three options, knowing that there were still issues to deal with. Mayor Hoffman concurred. He noted that staff and PRAB were recommending approval of the Rassekh property as the site of the future tennis facility and starting to move forward. He indicated that implicit in that was the financial analysis requested by Councilors Tierney and Olson. He asked for a nod of heads to direct staff to move forward with the Rassekh site. Councilor Olson recalled that the study indicated that the County owned and maintained Stafford Road in front of the Rassekh property, but if the City developed the property for a public use, it would annex that portion of Stafford Road and maintain it. She asked if annexing the road required a vote. Mr. Powell indicated that the City already annexed that right-of-way, and what was left was the formal transfer of jurisdiction process, which would occur eventually anyway. He explained that this transfer of jurisdiction was supposed to happen with the annexation but in practice, it tended to wait until there was a logical connection made supporting the transfer. Mayor Hoffman indicated that the sense of the Council was to move forward with the Rassekh property. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 9:15 p.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 9:20 p.m. 5.3 New MS4 Permit Report to Council Mr. McIntyre introduced Erica Rooney, City Assistant Engineer/Engineering Services Manager. He observed that Councilor Vizzini understood this complex issue of the MS4 permit/Storm Water Management System Program. Ms. Rooney indicated that federal regulations mandated the City to manage and implement the MS4 permit requirements. Since this permit involved storm water runoff, this mandate fell on the Engineering Services Division of the Public Works Department, which managed storm water runoff. She mentioned that the MS4 permit was intertwined and interconnected with the Clean Streams Plan and the Sensitive Lands Resource management effort. Ms. Rooney introduced David Gilbey, Water Quality Program Coordinator. She mentioned that the Surface Water Management Plan was affectionately know as the SWAMP. Mr. Gilbey introduced Krista Reinaga, Brown & Caldwell, the consultant group hired to help the City move through the MS4 permit maze over the last three years. He explained that DEQ required permit applicants to present a surface water management plan (SWMP) based on their existing permits first. It would then issue a new permit and the permittees would have to rewrite their SWMP to reflect the new permit. He mentioned that Ms. Reinaga worked with the other Clackamas County co -permittees on the City's permit. Ms. Rooney distributed a bookmark with acronyms. Mr. Gilbey gave a PowerPoint presentation. He described the SWMP as the implementation plan for the permit. He informed the Council that currently the City was in the permittee review period to look at the draft permit. He indicated that the 45 -day public comment period for the pending permit renewal and associated documentation (SWMP and the monitoring plan) began on October 4. DEQ tentatively scheduled its permit renewal for the latter half of December. He explained that jurisdictions had to get MS4 permits in order to discharge storm waters into the waters of the State, something that they could not do legally without a permit (p.13). He noted that a set of conditions accompanied the permit. He informed the Council that DEQ has not singled out Lake Oswego in requiring this permit; Lake Oswego shared this permit with 12 co -permittees in Clackamas County (p.17). City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 19 September 14, 2010 He defined storm water runoff as the storm water not infiltrated into the ground due to impervious areas. Therefore, the water carried more pollutants into the storm system. He pointed out that the catch basins in the street did not go to a wastewater treatment plant but rather directly into a stream or lake. He noted that the lack of infiltration also increased the amount and flow of runoff (hydromodification). Ms. Reinaga discussed a slide showing a summary of the storm water plan elements and needs over the next five-year permit term. She explained that staff intended this visual to illustrate the fact that the new permit had a significant impact on City resources. Mr. Gilbey mentioned that staff allocated funds in this year's budget to start developing the scope of work for the storm water code and design manual revisions. He presented the permit elements new to the SWMP. He indicated that if the due dates from the August 31 permit draft (p.31) stuck, staff would use those to start planning the work. He discussed the new element of hydromodification (pp.76-77). He defined hydromodification as the changes to runoff caused by land use modifications. He reviewed the hydromodification assessment plan actions required by the permit (p.29). He mentioned a tool proposed by Clackamas County to address hydromodification, which Lake Oswego could modify for local conditions. Ms. Reinaga clarified to Councilor Hennagin that DEQ's intent was to increase ground infiltration using small facilities that infiltrated the rain, such as swales, rain gardens, and other vegetative facilities. Mr. Gilbey showed a City project at Boones Ferry and Country Club Roads that tried to address hydromodification by re-establishing the flood plain. Mr. Gilbey reviewed the new element of retrofit assessment strategy (pp.30-31) and the charge to identify the high priority retrofit areas. He indicated that this would allow the City to prioritize retrofits using low impact development, including a timeline and cost estimates. He reviewed the new element of post-construction site runoff control (pp.24-27), which required the City to revise the storm water code and surface water design manual to include low impact development and green infrastructure. He noted that this element included offsite mitigation, another element new to the City. He estimated the code and design manual revisions to take up to two years. He reviewed the structural storm water control operations and maintenance element (pp.28-29) to refine the mapping of public water quality facilities. He described the City's work on this as adding robust information to support its maps and implementing maintenance inspection programs for private water quality facilities. He indicated to Councilor Jordan that the City's Building Department had the records of private onsite storm water treatment facilities built in the last several years. He concurred that this element would work in concert with the Boones Ferry Road Phase 2 Refinement Study's consideration of green street improvements. He commented that staff believed in educating citizens before moving to enforcement. He mentioned that there were examples in town of excellent storm water treatment facilities maintained solely by the citizens, such as a storm water swale in the Marylhurst neighborhood. He discussed the TMDL (total maximum daily load) waste allocation attainment evaluation. He explained that this required the City to look at the costs associated with reducing pollutant loads and determining the feasibility of attaining those allocations based on environmental, technical, social, and economic factors. He reviewed the pollution prevention from municipal operations element (pp.27-28). He indicated that Lake Oswego met the first item (minimizing pollutants associated with yard debris) because Allied Waste had a robust yard debris program. He mentioned other new elements of reducing the impact of storm water runoff from City facilities and updating the City's pest management practices. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 19 September 14, 2010 He reviewed the industrial and commercial facilities element (p.23). He indicated that the permit requirements would develop into an industrial and commercial inspection program. He noted the staff suggestion in the SWMP to visit 10% to 15% of the commercial facilities, which he described as an outreach opportunity. He reviewed the education and outreach element (pp.24-25). He noted the many educational and outreach activities conducted by the City, including storm drain marking, science fairs, and providing watershed maps. He mentioned that the co -permittees would likely partner on conducting the survey to connect water quality pollutant reduction to education and outreach activities. He indicated that City staff already met quarterly to discuss storm water -related activities at the City at the Storm Water Summit. He reviewed the monitoring and reporting element (p.32) and Lake Oswego's current program (p.35). He mentioned that the Clackamas County co -permittees would collaborate on the pesticide monitoring program. He indicated that the monitoring plan that DEQ wanted was a more technical one than Lake Oswego's current monitoring plan (pp. 139-150). He commented DEQ's request that the City submit a description of its process for conducting adaptive management during the permit term. He reviewed the illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) element (pp.21-23). He reported that the City met all the elements except a written enforcement response procedure. He reviewed common enforcement problems he has encountered during his tenure at the City. These included concrete in the storm drain and paint washing down the storm drain. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the City issued a citation and a fine to the contractor who washed his paint into the storm drain and turned the Blue Heron Canal white. He mentioned issuing a citation two weeks ago to a contractor washing his concrete down a storm drain. He presented the fact sheets developed by Ms. Reinaga and her team that summarized the narrative of the SWMP into a usable format with measurable goals. These included illicit discharge (pp.99-100), construction site runoff control (pp.108-109), public involvement and participation (pp.115-117), and post -construction site runoff control (p.123). He mentioned that the majority of the items directly or indirectly related to the goals and action items in the Clean Streams Plan. COUNCIL QUESTIONS Mr. Gilbey indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that the relationship between the 13 co -permittees was primarily a partnership with the pooling and sharing of resources. Ms. Reinaga explained to Councilor Tierney that each co -permittee fulfilling its commitments under the permit through its SWMP protected the co -permittee if another co -permittee did not do so. She clarified that one co -permittee not meeting its obligations would open up the permit to public review again, but they have not had to face that issue yet. Mr. Powell indicated that a lack of compliance was limited to the co -permittee not in compliance, although it did depend on the circumstances. Mr. Gilbey confirmed to Councilor Tierney that if the City did all the things in the permit, the City watershed would be better for it. He indicated that that was potentially quantifiable. He referenced the TMDL waste load allocation attainment evaluation and its intent to determine the cost benefit of reducing pollutant loads. He commented that, while the science was good, it was not yet complete. He described the 20 -year old SWMP as still in its infancy. Councilor Tierney indicated that he trusted that the City, by implementing the SWMP, would be able to quantify its water quality successes and champion them. Mr. Gilbey recalled that the monitoring data collected by the City two years ago as part of its permit renewal package showed a downward trend in pollutant concentrations. He observed that making the nexus with what caused those downward trends was difficult. Ms. Reinaga commented that it was difficult to quantify the effects of a public education program and an erosion control program on the quantified load reductions. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 19 September 14, 2010 Ms. Reinaga indicated to Councilor Tierney that the resources budgeted for FY 2010/2011 would not accomplish all the components of the permit. She said that they only had resources to budget the design manual and storm water code rewrite this year. Councilor Tierney commented that the report indicated that a certain percentage fee increase would fund the plan, yet it did not seem to correlate in terms of additional resources coming from citizens to support the program. He suggested that the City apply the storm water money to the things that impacted the watershed. He asked to see a correlation of the resources transferred. Mr. Gilbey indicated to Councilor Tierney that it would be fair to say that the permit was good guidance to use in terms of monitoring and supporting the City's activities vis a vis improving the watershed. Councilor Tierney requested a monthly report on the component pieces of this plan, as it might constitute the watershed plan that the Council asked for as part of the City's Sensitive Lands program. Mr. Gilbey indicated to Councilor Jordan that unfunded mandates were a common theme at permittee meetings, as no money accompanied this DEQ/EPA request to increase the activities needed for a permit. He explained that staff was trying to be strategic in spending the City's money to meet the requirements, including partnering with other co -permittees as much as possible. Mr. Gilbey indicated to Councilor Jordan that whether those property owners with onsite storm water facilities received a storm water fee reduction was a Council decision. Councilor Hennagin asked why there were 13 agencies on one permit. Ms. Reinaga explained that MS4 permits were supposed to go to municipalities of 100,000 or greater population. Collectively, the Clackamas County area met that criterion, and thus received a Phase 1 permit at the initiation of this permit program. She mentioned that some Clackamas County cities were not even big enough for a Phase 2 permit, but DEQ would not discuss giving Phase 2 permits because it was backsliding. Mr. Gilbey mentioned that DEQ was aware that the municipalities on this permit did not have the resources of a larger municipality, such as Portland, to implement this program. DEQ has tried to adjust the City's SWMP and best management practices requirement accordingly. Councilor Hennagin asked if there was any distinction between surface water management, storm water management, and clean streams. Mr. Gilbey commented that the `bureaucratese' was as confusing to him as it was to the Councilor; he personally used an e-mail logo that said "Healthy Watersheds." He made a pledge that, over the five-year permit period, the staff would try to make the SWMP readable to someone on the street. Mr. Gilbey indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the Surface Water Master Plan was the umbrella document that included the Storm Water Master Plan, but not the sensitive lands riparian areas. He commented that combining everything would be a good topic for discussion at the monthly staff Natural Resource meetings. Councilor Vizzini clarified to Councilor Hennagin that the `load' in `load reduction' referred to the pollutants, and not to the amount of water. Ms. Rooney commented that the sheer water volume was another problem because that caused the erosion. Councilor Vizzini thanked staff for a great presentation on a complex subject. He indicated that staff was headed in the right direction, and encouraged them to include sensitive lands and watershed issues. He explained that there was a legal framework under watershed management reflecting the legal silos of congressional laws. He agreed that local planning and work needed to be at the watershed level. Mr. McIntyre mentioned talking with Mr. Gilbey and Ms. Rooney about where the science met policy. He discussed the concept of maximum extent practicable (MEP), which addressed the question of when did policy versus science dictate the solution. Mr. Gilbey commented that the lack of a standard definition of maximum extent practicable explained why the permits were City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 19 September 14, 2010 becoming more and more prescriptive. He argued that there needed to be a balance between what the agencies and municipalities defined as maximum extent practicable and what was needed to protect the watersheds. He concurred with Councilor Jordan that the balance would vary from community to community. Councilor Vizzini cautioned the Council that the changes coming in this round of the MS4 permit were a precursor to a higher level of MS4 activity expected in the next rounds. He indicated that financing, assessment management, prioritization, monitoring, and adaptive management would be critical elements. He observed that they were responding to 100 years of industrialization and it would be expensive work to get it done right. He mentioned that Portland was interested in continuing this conversation with the clean water and MS4 agencies about this particular permit cycle because what they did in this cycle set up the next two to three cycles. 5.4 Clackamas County Coordinating Committee (C4) letter regarding High Speed Rail Councilor Jordan stated that she and Councilor Olson attended a Clackamas County meeting of all the cities and jurisdictions within the County potentially affected by ODOT's High Speed Rail plan. She reported that the meeting consensus was that ODOT was headed in the wrong direction and that the jurisdictions needed more information. She presented the letter drafted by the County, which all the mayors of the affected cities were to sign, to send to ODOT to try to elicit better dialog and a more practicable planning process through ODOT. She indicated that this letter was on the C4 retreat agenda for discussion. She asked for Council concerns that she could bring to the retreat. Mayor Hoffman described the letter as a good start in emphasizing to ODOT and the Transportation Commission that there were serious issues with both the process and ODOT's direction. He noted several items that he liked in the letter, including the strong statement on p. 154 that the State should not begin investing in existing rail lines in anticipation of using them for high-speed rail in the future. He cited the recommendation for a County representative on the decision making body and the reference to the experienced third party manager (p.155) as strong positions. He commented that the Clackamas Cities group questions on compact development were good. Councilor Olson concurred with Mayor Hoffman regarding the strength of the statements he cited. She commented that this strong letter was an improvement over the discussion. She expressed her confidence that Councilor Jordan would represent the City well at C4. She conjectured that ODOT was looking at capacity rather than speed and has not thought this through. She pointed out that this proposal was only slightly higher speed, and not high speed. She noted that both existing lines had issues in that they were windy routes of about the same length. She commented that the cost effectiveness was questionable. Councilor Tierney commented that, while he thought the letter read fine, he did not know what it was about, as the Council has never discussed high-speed rail. He said that he supported Councilor Jordan representing the City, but he thought that the Council should discuss the issue at some time. Mayor Hoffman suggested that Councilor Jordan report to the Council in a week or two on the discussion at the C4 meeting, along with a staff briefing. Councilor Olson indicated that she thought Councilor Tierney was asking for more basic information on the project. Councilor Jordan recalled that ODOT presented their plan to elected officials in this Council chamber a year ago and spoke of public and jurisdiction involvement but then went on to make presentations on high speed rail at other public forums. She agreed that this was not high-speed rail, but noted that ODOT was going after federal money slated for rail connection improvements across the country. She commented that there has been sufficient anger about ODOT's process that ODOT has now started to say that there were more options than the two options that they have been studying. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 19 September 14, 2010 She indicated that they needed to increase the involvement of the local affected communities from simply an advisory body to a seat at the decision making table. Councilor Olson commented that when she asked questions of staff, the Mayor, or the City Manager regarding presentations, they were not rhetorical questions and she expected an answer. She stated that she would like answers to her questions regarding why the tennis siting issue was not done as part of the Parks Master Plan or whether staff has contacted the neighborhood. She described the decision as too important to take a nod of heads vote instead of a voice or roll call vote. She questioned why they voted tonight at a study session. 6. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, _ 14� Robyn thristie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 19 September 14, 2010 LUMOSWS xt CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 21, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. on September 21, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Susan Millhauser, Sustainability Coordinator; Sidaro Sin, Senior Planner; Laura Weigel, Association Planner; Jane Blackstone, Economic Development Director; Jordan Wheeler, Management Analyst; Anthony Hooper, Public Works Analyst; Cate Schneider, Kincaid Intern; Denny Egner, Long Range Planning Manager 3. PRESENTATIONS 3.1 Recognition of the Second Look Task Force Mayor Hoffman noted that the members of the Second Look Task Force were all residents and/or business owners and property owners in Lake Oswego. He mentioned that they donated hundreds of hours of time over nine months to an open-minded, rational, detailed, and thorough technical review of the City's natural resource protection program. He indicated that the City was following up on their 63 recommendations for thoughtful improvements to the program. He observed that the City and the Council owed them a great deal of thanks. He reviewed the professional and Lake Oswego volunteer background of each Task Force member. He presented each member present with a certificate of appreciation and thanked him/her for his/her work. The Task Force members present were Amin Wahab, Nancy Gronowski, Ken Sandblast, Todd Praeger, Cap Hedges, Andy Harris, and Tim Mather. 3.2 Sustainability Update Ms. Millhauser gave a PowerPoint presentation on the quarterly sustainability update. She mentioned that the Electric Vehicle Expo that the City held in Millennium Park on an August Sunday coincided with the Oswego Heritage Council's Antique Car Show and Wooden Boat Show. She reported that the exhibitors from across Oregon thought the event was a great success with a couple hundred people coming through. She said that staff has been exploring opportunities to work with Ecototality, as that company received federal stimulus money to install some additional charging stations in Lake Oswego. She indicated that the company was also doing public outreach to business owners and others to put in public charging stations, as well as working with Nissan on their roll out of the Nissan LEAF and installing charging infrastructure in the homes of Nissan LEAF purchasers. Ms. Millhauser reported on the Energy Efficiency Conservation (ECC) Block grant projects. She mentioned retrofitting the outdoor lighting for several City facilities, including lighting at the library, the Adult Community Center, City Hall, Westlake Fire Station, and the Roehr Park pathway. She discussed the energy management pilot programs at the City and at the School District, working with PGE and Northrate to use Smart Meter data to get real time information about building electricity use. She indicated that the next step was to get public kiosks installed in the School District buildings City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 20 September 21, 2010 She said that they were still working on the details of investing some of the City's block grant funds into Clackamas County's Energy Efficiency on Main Street program. She mentioned using block grant funds to provide technical and financial support for small businesses in the City's two Main Street areas for energy efficiency retrofits. She explained that the County providing a dedicated staff person to help small businesses find the best options for energy retrofits was important because the small business owners did not have the time to deal the Energy Trust's many options. She stated that staff has dedicated some block grant money to the Clean Energy Works Oregon program; a statewide residential energy efficiency program that used utility savings to fund retrofits. With the State match, they would have $40,000 to fund five to eight retrofits; after that, the program became a revolving loan fund. She indicated that they were starting with seniors on limited incomes who wanted to stay in their homes and who could benefit from energy efficiency upgrades. She gave a progress report on the City's Sustainability Plan. She mentioned finalizing the City's greenhouse gas inventory for City operations, receiving the results of the facility waste audit from Allied Waste (a bi-annual report as part of the franchise agreement), and completing the employee options survey. She presented two pie charts showing the initial results from the City greenhouse gas inventory and the final results compiled by the AmeriCorps member. She pointed out that the greenhouse gas emissions associated with goods and services purchased by the City in 2008 represented a big chunk of the total emissions. She confirmed to Councilor Jordan that the City purchased the special steel for the LOIS project in 2008, which meant that the purchased category would likely go down in the future. She described the 2008 data as "a snapshot in time," which presented trends rather than detailed usage data. She mentioned the City employee picnic, which volunteers from the Master Recyclers and the EcoSchool Network helped make a zero waste event. Councilor Moncrieff commented that she found it impressive that an event attended by over 250 people produced about one-third a bag of trash. Ms. Millhauser observed that it had taken some investment, such as the purchase of lightweight durable and reusable plates. Ms. Millhauser reported that the new AmeriCorps member starting next week would help with employee sustainability training and Sustainability Action Month (May). She indicated that Sustainability Action Board (SAB) members and Duke Castle were helping with the sustainability decision making filter for staff and Council use. She noted that the first test for the filter would be the Comprehensive Plan update. She reviewed the presentations and resolutions coming to the Council soon. She mentioned the commercial food waste collection pilot with Allied Waste presentation scheduled for October_ She spoke of the presentation at SAB last night of the plastic bag ban concept that the Northwest Grocers Association and Environment Oregon were working on together to promote across the Metro area. She indicated that if the State failed to take action, then Lake Oswego would look at a local ban. Mayor Hoffman asked for a study session on the plastic bag ban concept. He referenced a letter that he received from the Northwest Grocers Association asking jurisdictions across the Metro region to adopt a resolution banning plastic bags effective January 2012 if the State legislature did not act. He described it as sending a message to the State legislature that eliminating plastic bags uniformly throughout the state was a statewide concern. Ms. Millhauser mentioned the additional requirement of a 5 -cent charge on paper bags as a means of encouraging shoppers to use reusable bags. Ms. Millhauser mentioned that the City's annual business recycling requirements outreach would occur this fall with the business license renewals. She reported that Lake Oswego sent out 1500 notices and had a 40% response rate of 490 returns, which was the second highest response rate City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 20 September 21, 2010 in the County. She spoke of working with SAB members and Duke Castle on exploring a "train the trainer" program to help support ongoing sustainability community education. 3.3 Comp Plan Update (Sustainability Framework) Mr. Sin described the handout given to Council as staff's first draft of a document to inform the public about what sustainability meant in Lake Oswego, including environmental, social, and economic elements. He noted that the handout also discussed how staff would incorporate sustainability into the Comprehensive Plan process and the sustainability principles proposed for adoption (the Natural Step Network). He gave a PowerPoint presentation on the sustainability principles. He reviewed the four strategic questions asked in moving through the Comprehensive Plan process. Did the proposal move the City towards a community vision? Was the proposal consistent with the sustainability principles (four system conditions)? Was the proposal a good financial investment, taking into account its economic impacts? Did the proposal provide a stepping stone towards the vision and sustainability? He indicated that staff would ask those questions after the development of the draft community vision, while they were developing different scenarios on what a sustainable Lake Oswego would look like with implementation of the vision. He pointed out that this was a reiterative process, which staff would also use in developing the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and the action plan. He reported that staff obtained comments from the SAB at its meeting last night. The Citizen Advisory Committee would review the draft document tomorrow. He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the two major SAB comments were reducing the prominence of the economic element in the front page graphic and rewording the first sustainability principle to read, "What we take is restored." Councilor Olson observed that her reaction upon seeing the graphic had been that the prosperity of the economy was the smallest piece of the graphic, and not the most central piece. Councilor Vizzini commented that the sentence about taking actions individually did not stand out to him. He suggested including language that talked about the social, educational, and public engagement aspect of sustainability. He spoke in support of the bullets calling for the support of local economic development markets for locally manufactured goods and encouraging businesses with sustainable practices. He emphasized that the City should tie into both the private and the public sector the critical idea of using local markets as the engineer to create change in order to achieve these goals. Councilor Hennagin asked for more information on the second bullet under Sustainability Principle Four. He commented that, while people becoming resilient and self-reliant sounded good, he wondered what that meant in this context. He indicated that he pictured people canning their own food out of their own vegetable gardens, as they did in the `50s. He asked how people would understand the intent of that statement. Mr. Sin indicated that his interpretation of the statement was that, in order to meet people's basic needs, the City needed to provide opportunities for residents, such as alternative transit or walkable communities. Councilor Hennagin described Mr. Sin's picture as walkable communities with adequate public transportation and appropriate housing for people to age in place. He suggested including more specific language in the document. Councilor Vizzini observed that the sentence "increase people's sense of community and foster connections to become resilient and self-reliant" described America in a nutshell. He pointed out that, on the one hand, they were trying to build community, but on the other hand, America had a culture of the individual, which promoted individualism and self-reliance. He commented that the real secret was that they were tied together. He remarked that the sentence, while alluding to that, did not tell how they were connected. He conjectured that this would promote public discussion. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 20 September 21, 2010 Councilor Jordan referenced the fourth item under the decision making filter about whether an action involved a financial investment that locked the community into an unsustainable situation for many years. She indicated that she interpreted that to mean an unsustainable budget situation that would cost the City more than the value of the action. Mr. Sin clarified that the sentence partly referred to investment in things such as gas vehicles. He framed a question of whether a decision locked the City into using fossil fuels for a longer period of time as opposed to switching half the fleet to electric or other type of alternative fuel as a stepping stone towards sustainability. Mr. Sin indicated to Councilor Jordan that the statements all interrelated with each other. Therefore, the fourth item did relate back to the third item of whether the proposal was a good financial investment. He emphasized the use of all the questions and different elements throughout the whole process. Mr. Sin concurred with Councilor Jordan that the City needed to determine the tipping point where the community as a whole would buy into this sustainability framework. He indicated that staff was trying to find that tipping point through creating the vision, and then looking beyond the vision to identify which of the three different scenarios was the preferred scenario that implemented the vision. Ms. Weigel gave an update on the survey. She reported that staff has received 730 responses so far. She encouraged more citizens to take the online survey in order to reach the goal of 1,000 responses before the September 30 deadline and to make their voices heard. She presented a Wordle based on the survey responses. She explained that she plugged the survey responses into a software program that created a Wordle of the most common responses. She noted that the phrases showing up in the Wordle included sense of community, safe, great parks, beautiful, and small. She encouraged Lake Oswego residents to attend the community meetings on October 12 and 16, at which staff would present the results of the survey. She mentioned the survey website at www.welovelakeoswego.com. She mentioned that those meetings would also discuss the Comprehensive Plan process. She directed citizens to the October Hello LO for information on the meetings. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Hoffman noted that Councilor Olson requested a wording change to Resolution 10-62 to read, "Whereas it was the recommendation of the Interview Committee that Benjamin Clark be appointed to the Natural Resources Advisory Board for a three year term, ending February 28, 2013." Councilor Hennagin moved the Consent Agenda. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Olson voted `no.' [6-1] Councilor Olson indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she voted no because, although the wording was now fine, she did not agree with the appointment. 4.1 REPORTS 4.1.1 Park naming process for lakefront park Action: Approve the recommended process to select a name for the new park 4.2 RESOLUTIONS 4.2.1 Resolution 10-62, making an appointment to the Natural Resources Advisory Board Action: Adopt Resolution 10-62, appointing Benjamin Clark to the Natural Resources Advisory Board 4.3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 20 September 21, 2010 4.3.1 May 18, 2010, regular meeting 4.3.2 June 7, 2010, special meeting Action: Approve minutes as written END CONSENT AGENDA 5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 6. CITIZEN COMMENT • Robert Thompson, 2390 Palisades Crest Drive, Citizens for Stewardship of Lake Oswego Lands Mr. Thompson recalled that the Lake Oswego Stewards' two requests to speak during the citizen input time at the July 20 Council meeting were denied. He said that they had intended to present a petition with over 1,000 signatures collected from citizens requesting the removal of sensitive lands overlays from private residential properties. He alleged that the Council's adoption of Resolution 10-51A had been a course of action predetermined before any of the study sessions or citizen input sessions held on the sensitive lands program and task force recommendations. He cited the tape from the June 17, 2010, Council interviews and deliberations on the Natural Resources Advisory Board candidates. He indicated that, on the tape, Councilor Olson had clarified to Mayor Hoffman that one of the Lake Oswego Steward positions regarding the sensitive lands program was the removal of tree grove regulations from private residential property. He quoted the Mayor's response: "And we are not going there. And so that is what's going to happen, Mary, is that the City Council is going to tell NRAB and tell the Planning Commission that we are moving forward and we are going to continue to regulate tree groves." He recalled that at the last citizen input session on July 10, the majority of Councilors had indicated a willingness to provide significant changes to the sensitive lands program, including the removal of tree grove regulations from private residential property. He noted that at the July 20 meeting, all Councilors except Councilor Olson changed their position to be consistent with the direction mentioned by Mayor Hoffman on the June 17 tape. He argued that that told the citizens that the entire process of study sessions and citizen input was not a transparent process that respected and truly considered citizen concerns and input. He stated that they were outraged at the behind the scenes maneuvering and decision making while pretending a concern for what citizens thought. He commented that, having attended all meetings regarding this issue, the Stewards knew that opinion ran 90% against the sensitive lands program overlays, and that the few who spoke on behalf of the program came from outside organizations not impacted by the program or those who had little understanding or knowledge of the issues. He stated that those who knew the full situation did not support the City's approach and were looking to this Council to develop real solutions that met Metro compliance, protected natural resources, and valued and respected the rights of all residential private property owners. He contended that the Council failed do so in an honorable manner. He stated that Lake Oswego Stewards was here again representing over 1,000 property owners who signed the petition requesting the Council to seek more reasonable and equitable solutions to complying with Metro for natural resource protections by removing the sensitive lands restriction program from private residential properties. He mentioned that the City has acknowledged that 90% of the community, including the areas with the largest bodies of water and most fragile habitat, was capable of caring for their properties with the 17 existing citywide natural resource ordinances and programs without the sensitive lands program overlays. He stated that they expected equal consideration. He contended that the City should use the 17 ordinances and programs as the basis for Metro compliance and that no private residential City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 20 September 21, 2010 property should be singled out for arbitrary, inequitable, and damaging sensitive lands land use restrictions. He mentioned that they easily gathered these signatures during a short time without a door-to-door campaign or long-term sustained effort. He indicated that the signatures represented a broad section of the community, spanning age, gender, length of residence, political views, and neighborhoods. He noted that many did not currently have sensitive lands designation on their properties but they understood the inequity of the overlays and wanted to see things made right. He commented that the issue was not about whether or not they valued natural resources; they all valued natural resources and the beauty of the Lake Oswego community. He argued that this was about valuing the equal rights of all property owners and righting an arbitrary and inequitable program that did not have a valid environmental approach and which unnecessarily restricted and damaged some residential property owners while shielding and benefiting others. He stated that they knew that there were solutions. They would continue to educate the community about this issue and advocate for real change. He indicated that they would continue to insist that their elected officials work for all Lake Oswego residents in an open environment, instead of against them behind the scenes. • David Streiff, 18335 Lothlorien Way, Lake Oswego Stewards Mr. Streiff presented read the petition and presented it to the Council. Mr. Thompson provided a copy of the letter to Ms. Christie at the request of Councilor Moncrieff. • Gary Buford, 5 Camelot Court Mr. Buford discussed the article in the "How We Live" section of the September 17, 2010, Oregonian. He indicated that the article reported on the Portland Bureau of Environmental Services' decision to spend $10,000 to remove 40 Douglas fir trees on Rock Island in the Willamette River in order to preserve a stand of white oak trees. He contended that the significance of the article was that the City was not using its tree code to keep from cutting or removing the Doug firs, nor was it using a sensitive lands ordinance to save all the trees in the tree grove. Instead, the City was using common sense and the knowledge of how to care for and allow for the growth of the white oaks, which were an endangered species. He commented that he wanted the Council to remember this situation when educated people used knowledge and did not rely on the City code or ordinance to control how they cared for trees, as it was likely to happen in Lake Oswego at some point in the future. • Carolyne Jones, 2818 Poplar Way Ms. Jones recalled that when the Council restricted Citizen Comment to three minutes, she had asked at the time if groups would have more time. She stated that staff told her that they would have more time. She commented that the problem she saw was that favored groups got plenty of time, while non -favored groups were very limited. She asked that the City re -instate on the agenda the amount of time allowed to individuals and groups. She asked that favored groups not be given more privileges than non -favored groups. Councilor Tierney mentioned that he heard the two issues he heard in Mr. Thompson's statement. He said that he respected the many opinions in the community regarding the substance of the decision regarding sensitive lands. He indicated that he did not respect the characterization that the decision making process was done in a pre -determined manner. He stated that the decision was not pre -determined by anyone. He recalled the hours he had spent on the decision. He stated that he stood behind the decision that he made. He argued that to City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 20 September 21, 2010 characterize the Council decisions in such a way did nothing to advance the discussion but rather only demeaned the discussion and the Council members as individuals. 7. REPORTS 7.1 Lake Oswego Demographics Overview Presentation by Todd Chase, FCS Group Mayor Hoffman said that the City retained FCS Group to provide the City with a demographic overview of Lake Oswego as part of the community visioning process in order to determine where the city was and where it was going. He introduced Todd Chase, a principal of FCS Group, who lived in Lake Oswego and formerly worked for OTAK. He reviewed his education and work experience (p.33). He mentioned that he was very confident of the numbers in this study, as it has been peer-reviewed by Dennis Yee, the Senior Economist for Metro. Mr. Chase gave a PowerPoint presentation of the Population Baseline Analysis in the staff report. He mentioned the interviews conducted for data gathering (pp.66-67). He noted that City staff has not endorsed their findings yet, nor have elected officials. Therefore, the findings reflected his team's opinions. He discussed the mega trends impacting Lake Oswego (Slide 3). He observed that the amount of growth expected by Metro by 2030 exerted pressure on communities like Lake Oswego. He spoke of being proactive and managing that growth. He mentioned the decline in the traditional family to less than 30% households with children by 2030. He pointed out that slower growth impacted cities' revenues, requiring them to be more strategic with their limited resources. He presented a chart comparing the mega planning trends of the last 20 years to those of the next 20 years (Slide 4, 5). He cited an infrastructure needs report his company did that expected a regional infrastructure investment in transportation to range from $27 billion to $37 billion. He commented that, since the money was not there, he expected to see more focus on pedestrian and transit -oriented development patterns and away from wider streets and new roads. He pointed out that the lack of road funding also put pressure on close -in communities like Lake Oswego to accommodate some of the new growth. He noted that they were already seeing a trend away from single-family detached homes to smaller floor area footprints as the baby boomers aged. He discussed the local trends in Lake Oswego (Slide 6), noting the public and private investments made over the last decade. He reviewed the national press that Lake Oswego has received as a result of its successful projects (Slide 7). He mentioned the AAA -rated communities of similar size to Lake Oswego found in the U.S. (Slide 8). He presented quick facts about Lake Oswego (Slide 9). He mentioned that Lake Oswego only added about 160 people inside the city since 2000, according to PSU. He indicated that PSU's numbers showed much slower growth within the city than the census data implied, although the census defined the city area wider than PSU did. He pointed out that Lake Oswego was the second oldest median age community in Oregon, with King City having the oldest median age. He reviewed the preliminary survey responses, as indicated by Ms. Weigel (Slide 10). He observed that maintaining the community values while managing future growth was the challenge facing the City in its Comprehensive Plan update. He discussed the demographic trends in Lake Oswego over the past decade (Slide 11). He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the growth in the 55+ age category was due primarily to people aging in place as they became empty nesters and their children moved out. He observed that older people with older children (high school age) tended to move here because they could afford the higher housing prices. He commented that Lake Oswego deserved some credit for having a cultural and ethnic diversity slightly greater than the state average. He mentioned counting 26 different birth countries in the census data. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 20 September 21, 2010 He presented a chart showing the changing demographic trends in Lake Oswego extrapolated into the future (Slide 12, 13). He mentioned that the survey found that 60% of those over 55 wanted to stay in their homes, and that half of those who did want to move wanted to downsize to a smaller house in the community. He indicated that the remaining 20% would likely move into a vacation or second home outside the area. He mentioned that the 2006 census data found 2,600 individuals in Lake Oswego that met the federal poverty standards. He speculated that that number has risen during the recession, which meant more pressure from the community to accommodate affordable housing. He showed a chart illustrating the population trends and forecasts in Lake Oswego (Slides 14, 15). He commented that if Lake Oswego did not have constraints on its land supply, the population would likely grow twice as fast as projected. He noted that the only population category projected to increase was 55+, as those in their 40s aged in place. He observed that that had implications in terms of how the community changed over time. He discussed household formation trends (Slide 16). He commented that the 5,000 renters on short leases could color the fact that one out of two Lake Oswego residents changed residences over the past 10 years. He mentioned that younger professionals tended to be the renters. He suggested marketing to the younger segment that Lake Oswego did have some affordable housing and that it was a diverse community. He commented that Lake Oswego attracted single women, with or without children. He attributed that to the schools, public safety, and the small town charm. He pointed out that two-thirds of the new housing has been in town homes or multifamily (Slide 16). He confirmed to Councilor Olson that the projected growth in the over age 55 population included the assumptions he mentioned earlier that 20% would leave the community. He stated that the majority of the projected 10,000 increase in population would be in the 55 plus category, as people in their late 40s moved here because they could afford it. He presented a chart comparing housing markets in Lake Oswego and nearby communities (Slide 17, 18). He noted that the exception to the higher per square foot housing costs in Lake Oswego than in surrounding communities was in the $150,000 to $200,000 category, where Lake Oswego fell below Portland. He commented that he thought that reflected the high price/low square footage of the condominiums in the South Waterfront and Pearl District. He indicated that with Lake Oswego's lower property taxes, good schools, and other community attributes as valuable factors, he did not think Lake Oswego's housing costs were "out of whack." He discussed the housing markets, which were still in flux (Slide 18). He reported that he checked Lake Oswego home prices today and found that the average sale prices was up 12% from last year. He mentioned that Lake Oswego has sold 60 units in the under $350,000 category since May, while the number of $1 million plus homes has grown from 71 to 90 since May. He discussed the preliminary housing demand forecast converted to population by age (Slide 19). He noted the trend towards a higher number of senior care facilities. He commented that, if Lake Oswego wanted to accommodate the projected growth in single and multifamily homes, the question became how to accommodate that growth (Slide 20). He pointed out that with Lake Oswego's vacant land supply running out, the community would have to accommodate the growth primarily through infill and redevelopment. He observed that the more housing supplied through redevelopment, the less pressure growth would put on infill, with its potential to impact neighborhood character. He reviewed the fiscal considerations of low growth (Slide 21). He commented that with falling revenues, the City needed to be more strategic in how it grew and what type of growth it accommodated. He discussed the importance of good housing design in finding a solution and the fiscal and other advantages of higher density housing (Slide 22). He suggested that the City look at both the advantages and the offset of higher service costs in its Comprehensive Plan update. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 20 September 21, 2010 He discussed employment areas, using data from a recent Clackamas County economic analysis that his firm did (Slide 23). He described the Kruse Way corridor as a powerhouse in the region (Slide 24). He presented several policy considerations (Slide 25). He noted that Lake Oswego was gravitating to more of a senior community, so the question became how did they attract all ages to their community. He suggested making sure that people were not surprised by the increased reliance on infill and redevelopment when it happened in their back yards, and that infill happened in a tasteful manner. He spoke of the City taking a more proactive approach to strategic redevelopment opportunities in terms of leveraging its limited public investment dollars with private development in order to attract all ages and yield a positive fiscal return. He mentioned the need for a family-oriented marketing strategy to attract younger families. COUNCIL QUESTIONS Councilor Vizzini asked if there was published research on how the other AAA rated communities dealt with the population impacts of higher land values and cost of living. He wondered how many of those communities were close in, as Lake Oswego was. He recalled from his research five years ago on land prices in Lake Oswego, his finding that, on lots with smaller and older homes, the land value represented a sizable percentage of the total property value. He pointed out that these homes currently served affordable housing stock, yet the market would likely replace them with larger homes. He observed that the trick was how to upgrade these smaller homes to meet the market for smaller single-family detached or clustered development infill. Mr. Chase commented that it was hard to generalize because every community was different in terms of its history and how it grew. He observed that some high profile communities outside of Boston have been around for a long time. He speculated that, as the communities aged, they focused more on quality development over quantity, which resulted in more tax revenue from increased property taxes. He defined `quality development' as adding community amenities not typically seen in smaller communities, such as community centers, arts facilities, bigger libraries, more parks and recreational activities, and more public transit. He indicated that the rule of thumb regarding land values was that 40% of the assessed value was in the land. He commented that he was not certain how the decreasing housing values in the recession would end up impacting land values. He pointed out that a lot of land value was based on what one could do with the land, which meant that City policies and codes could impact land values. He gave an example of Portland waiving its SDCs on accessory dwelling units, which could raise land values and attract families to Portland. Councilor Tierney commented that the policy considerations on the last slide asked all the right questions. He asked if there were other communities to which the City could look to find answers to those questions. Mr. Chase indicated that the City survey in progress was a good first step in identifying community values and desired amenities, as hearing from the community was the starting point he would recommend. He described the next step as figuring out how to meet the needs of both the young and the aging with the City's limited resources and aging facilities. He commented that there was no `magic' approach; it would require working with the community and possibly asking for bonds to make strategic investments. Mr. Sin described for Councilor Olson how they developed the potential dwelling unit numbers on part vacant land. He explained that they looked at parcels sized at least 2.5 times the underlying zone, but they did not look at properties on a parcel -by -parcel basis. He mentioned using the GIS process to find those properties. He clarified that they did factor in whether a parcel had sensitive lands on it because they wanted the amount of net buildable land. Mr. Chase indicated to Councilor Olson that he included the Armory site on the list of potential strategic redevelopment sites, since it could be considered for housing as well as recreation, but he has not evaluated it for potential redevelopment. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 20 September 21, 2010 Councilor Hennagin observed that the report raised more questions than answers. He commented that he has frequently expressed concern regarding Lake Oswego's aging population, of which he was a member, and its declining school enrollment. He asked if there was a way to determine what kind of housing stock would more likely attract families with young children, and what the City needed to do to provide it. Mr. Chase suggested using one's first house purchase as a guideline. He recalled that his first house had been a town home in fee simple ownership, and not a condominium. He commented that, as part of the Comprehensive Plan update, the City could start looking at where the community could accommodate the apartments, condominiums, town homes, and cottage style developments that young families seemed to find appealing. He mentioned that the neo -traditional developments (planned neighborhoods in the $250,000 to $400,000 range) were the fastest selling new communities in this economy. Councilor Jordan said that she appreciated the information because it validated many assumptions that the Council has been working under for a number of years. She observed that the comparison cities in the different states likely worked under very different tax scenarios than Oregon's. She indicated that she would like to know whether those communities remained viable because the way in which they could invest in the amenities, which ultimately provided the needed supportive tax base, was different from the financial flexibility that might be available in Oregon with regard to taxation and revenues. She pointed out that Lake Oswego has more homes listed for less than $350,000 than West Linn and Tualatin combined. She spoke to getting the information out to the young families that Lake Oswego had affordable housing in addition to the greatest schools in the state and low taxes. She summarized the message to young families as they had an opportunity to get in the door with the potential to continue investing in their own property while living in a community that would hold its value and help them hold the value of their homes. Mr. Chase concurred. He acknowledged that all communities had different tax structures and histories. He mentioned that one thing many of these communities had in common was very high design standards, which created a sense of place in addition to community investment. He commented that they could learn something from almost every city in terms of community responsiveness and service to residents. He agreed that the issue of affordable homes in Lake Oswego was a matter of marketing. He suggested finding the community residents and retirees in Lake Oswego affiliated with marketing firms in Portland and engaging them in finding solutions to these questions. Councilor Jordan commented that having more than 2,600 people falling below the federal poverty guidelines and over 90 houses over $1 million on the market indicated that Lake Oswego mirrored the national situation of a big gap between the haves and the have nots. She asked how the City would manage providing social services to an aging population with a falling income and rising need for those services, while, at the same time, continue providing high quality service and amenities to maintain the quality of life in the community. She indicated that this was a concern to her because it took a lot of resources to do it. Mr. Chase concurred that nationally the U.S. was in a new era with a disparity between the middle and lower middle classes and the rich. He suggested that communities be more strategic in how they accommodated attainable housing and learn from other communities that were already dealing with the issue. He mentioned inclusionary zoning, a certain percentage of a development priced as attainable housing, housing trust funds, and many public/private projects. Councilor Tierney asked how important to the future the few industrial areas in Lake Oswego were. Mr. Chase said that industrial was a very important land use in the region because it provided jobs to people in the community that paid better than the average wage. He suggested that the City be strategic in deciding where to redevelop and where to preserve industrial land. He pointed out that industrial lands needed a unique setting with transportation access, utility City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 20 September 21, 2010 demands, and neighborhood sensitivity. He commented that Foothills was a good area to convert to a less industrial use overtime, but other areas might make more sense to keep as industrial Councilor Moncrieff wondered whether Lake Oswego could look to Portland as a model for facilitating secondary dwelling units (SDUs). Councilor Vizzini indicated that he helped write Portland's ordinances to help stimulate accessory dwelling units (ADUs) during an economic downturn. He said that he could provide documentation put together for the three-year program. Councilor Moncrieff emphasized looking at SDUs as accommodating both those aging in place and young families looking for entry-level housing. Mr. Chase indicated to the Councilor that 60 homes under $350,000 sold this summer in Lake Oswego. He suggested using infill, SDUs, and targeted redevelopment in making Lake Oswego's housing stock appealing to both senior citizens and young families. He agreed that the City needed to provide more affordable housing stock, as the market absorbed the smaller affordable housing types quickly. He mentioned hearing real estate brokers discuss the likelihood that both rental and for sale units would sell quickly in Lake Oswego if the community had more, quality units available. Mayor Hoffman suggested determining whether some of the high prices in Lake Oswego housing stock, compared to Portland housing stock, reflected the age of the housing stock. He commented that what was more important to him was that in 20 years, based on the information on p.51 that half of Lake Oswego's housing stock (including Mountain Park) was built from 1970 to 1989, that half of the housing stock would meet the 50 years old criteria for historic homes. He observed that three options for dealing with an aging home were tear down, deterioration leading to rentals, or remodeling. He commented that he did not know if there was a role for the government in that private market decision, but he would suggest thinking through the impacts of an aging housing stock in terms of the Comprehensive Plan's 20 -year look. He discussed the change in the educational pyramid from a triangular shape to more of a straight up and down column with the increase in lifelong learning. Ms. Weigel confirmed that lifelong learning scored very low on the survey. Mayor Hoffman spoke of thinking about lifelong learning in partnership with a local university. Mayor Hoffman commented that, as the difficult to develop lands with sensitive lands came up for redevelopment, the City would need to address the tension caused by infill, such as happened near Springbrook Creek. He supposed that it was a zoning issue, as was cluster housing. He observed that the zoning had to allow the market to respond. He cited the conventional wisdom that governments dictated where people lived based upon zoning. He indicated that the community needed to look very carefully at changing the zoning as a means of changing the housing types. Mr. Chase mentioned his expectation of homes remodeled to provide accessibility features as people aged in place. He suggested that the City think about whether to allow things like duplexes on corners as a way to accommodate new growth without radically changing the character of the community. He observed that lifelong learning was a trend with the aging baby boomers, as people retired but continued working through community involvement. He commented that some cities, such as Boise, had assisted senior care housing projects that required residents to attend classes at Boise State. He commented that, as Lake Oswego ran low on its vacant land supply, the resulting infill would require more staff time to review the applications. He pointed out that the more objective the City could make its development standards, the easier it would be for everyone involved in terms of location and impact mitigation. Mayor Hoffman mentioned an interesting policy question of whether to fast track all remodeling under $50,000 to $75,000 as a means of encouraging remodeling, rather than discouraging it. Councilor Vizzini observed that the City was a municipal corporation with a great product that it could sell to more people if it had the wherewithal to make it available to them. He cited the three values mentioned during the presentation of small town charm, safe community, and a safe place City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 20 September 21, 2010 as the starting point for Council in addressing policy considerations because those were real values with economic power to them. He pointed out that this was not an intellectual exercise but something that the Council had to figure out because maintaining the community's current size meant that the City would not be able to afford the level of services that the community has come to expect. It also meant that the City would not have the additional base needed to underwrite the costs of the major infrastructure improvements that it still needed to make. He argued that the City, as a municipal corporation, had an economic imperative to figure out how to attract growth efficiently because only through attracting growth could they spread the costs of running the corporation across a large enough economic base to make it affordable. He reported that a speaker at a community economic development forum he attended last week at PSU, sponsored by the Portland Development Commission, couched community economic development in terms of creating places that exported services or goods and imported wealth. He argued that, from an economic development and population point of view, Lake Oswego could be poised to be a place where people could work close to home or in their home, if the Council decided to change some policies. Lake Oswego residents could reduce their environmental footprint and sell services and goods within the region and beyond the region. He distributed a list of 10 ideas he had offered at goal setting in 2005/2006 when he was on the Planning Commission, which this new research reinforced as trends at the core of these policy decisions. He mentioned building community, increasing Lake Oswego's connections in the region, providing housing choice, creating lifetime education, and protecting the sense of uniqueness and place. Mr. Chase concurred with Councilor Vizzini's observations. He commented that he thought that the City has been effective to date in terms of its management and dealing with change without jeopardizing the feel of the community. He spoke of the great job the City has done in enhancing the community financially, physically in the urban form, and socially. He pointed out that the next steps were big decisions in terms of the Comprehensive Plan update and what to do to influence the desired growth in the community as a positive investment. He observed that the objective and the challenge were finding great opportunities for investment without jeopardizing the values. Councilor Hennagin suggested redefining what qualified as historic, as he questioned the 1950s and 1960s ranch style homes in his neighborhood qualifying as historic. Mayor Hoffman asked if there were any studies looking at whether there was a relationship between income levels and a community's willingness to support school levies or municipal corporation bonds. He mentioned hearing one person comment that seniors on a flat income would support bonds and levies if they perceived quality. He would like to know if there was any research that would support that comment. Mr. Chase indicated that he asked people at PSU and Adam Davis of Davis & Hibbetts if they found in their work any evidence that people were less likely to support community investment bonds as they grew older. He said that Mr. Davis told him that those who supported bonds were the 55 plus category because they wanted to invest in legacy projects for the community, and those in the 25 — 35 category. He mentioned the caveat of it not being an operating levy and it being consistent with making the community a greater place. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 8:52 p.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 9:03 p.m. 7.2 Marketing Strategy Ms. Blackstone introduced Chris Finks, Finks, Inc., the City's marketing contractor who helped a group of community stakeholders develop a marketing strategy as part of a broader economic development strategy. She mentioned the research work (p.78) that informed both strategies. She explained that tonight's presentation on the strategy development was the first phase with City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 20 September 21, 2010 implementation (delivering the strategy to the community) the second phase. She commented that implementation depended on putting together a public/private funding strategy to match the City's investment. She reviewed the strategy's goals (p.77). She spoke of expanding marketing beyond supporting the traditional retail base to attracting businesses, residents, and tourists. She noted the importance of the strategy providing measurable results and the expectation of the stakeholders of a productive and efficient effort. She mentioned investment in public and private dollars, including sponsorships, business improvement districts (BID), and economic improvement districts (EID). Mr. Finks gave a PowerPoint presentation. He mentioned the 15 strategies included in the marketing initiative at full funding (pp.95-96). He spoke of the three seasonal thrusts: shoulder season (February — March), summer season, and holiday season (fourth quarter). He noted the critical importance of the fourth quarter to restaurateurs and retailers. He recalled that the Task Force identified the shoulder season as needing support. He explained that each of the 15 strategies had associated tactics. He mentioned the target audiences (p.94). He reviewed the highlights of each of the 15 strategies (pp.98-108). He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that they were in the process of copyrighting the brand `Say Hello to LO' (#2, p.99). He reported that Joe Smith from KGW took his marketing boards and asked people on the street what the image said to them. The responses of 'it's open, it's inviting, and it's friendly' were exactly what they wanted to hit. He observed that a great story was a great public relations tool (#3, p.100). He recommended having a robust public relations program, as it was one of the most efficient ways to get their message out. He mentioned events promotion as a means of attracting visitors (#4, p.101). He suggested leveraging the City's large-scale events through constant repetition (#5, pp. 102-103). He discussed tools and tactics to use in building one-on-one relationships with the target audience (#6, p.104) and in creating connections between the Lake Oswego business districts (#7, p.105). He commented that a coordinated visitor and tourism program (#8, p.106) should leverage the Chamber's work. He emphasized telling the Lake Oswego story repeatedly to increase usage of the City's amenities (#9, p.106). He noted that there were clever ways to do a business -to - business marketing program (#10, p.107), such as emphasizing the excellence of Lake Oswego schools. He described a rewards program as part of developing an employee strategy (#11, p.108). He observed that many smaller businesses did not have a marketing website that told their stories (#12, p.108). He observed that there were a variety of ways to enhance the connection to the water bodies, parks, and cultural amenities in Lake Oswego (#13, p.109). He spoke of a shopper loyalty program (#14, p.109) including a rewards program for residents. He emphasized the importance of converting pedestrian traffic into sales (#15, p.109). He described the brand as an exclamation point, or the essence of the promise for Lake Oswego (p.92). He spoke of reversing the negative perceptions about Lake Oswego as an unfriendly place, since the opposite was true. He noted that the brand would develop over time as the City publicized its story. He showed several examples of items carrying the brand (p.93). He discussed how to measure the strategy using primary measurements and secondary barometers (p.110). He spoke of leveraging every dollar the City invested in paid media reach by a factor of three using sponsorships with media partners and other tactics. He observed that they needed to set the benchmarks for website traffic and engagement in order to measure progress. He commented that retail performance was tough to judge in Oregon because it lacked a sales tax; therefore, anecdotal retail performance was a secondary barometer. He suggested that the City continue doing shopper surveys to track spending. He reviewed the budget scenarios (pp.111-114). He recommended the $300,000 scenario for a more substantive program. He discussed a public/private funding multi-year strategy (p.97). He City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 20 September 21, 2010 described sponsorships, partnerships of City funding, and business/economic improvement districts as the three-legged stool needed for more stable funding. COUNCIL QUESTIONS Councilor Hennagin spoke to his concern that the businesses in Lake Grove felt that they were being treated equally to the businesses in the East End. He commented that the Kruse Way corridor also had restaurants and a little retail. He asked what the participation level was in those three areas of the city. Mr. Finks indicated that he thought that Lake Grove had the biggest opportunity for the future, and was the place where growth and revitalization were likely to happen. He commented that it would take a lot of handholding to make sure that they stayed engaged. He suggested shining a light on Lake Grove on the website and in the newsletter. Ms. Blackstone pointed out that the same was true for the other business districts in the City as well. She mentioned that the summer promotion focused on Mountain Park, Lake Grove, and the Downtown. She described the economic development strategy as an umbrella under which individual districts could conduct special promotions, including enabling the smaller districts to get their message out on TV and radio, and using social media to drive people to a website representing all the businesses. Ms. Blackstone indicated to Councilor Tierney that, while the Council ultimately created a business or economic improvement district, the payers needed to generate it and ask the Council to create it. She mentioned that the commercial properties and businesses assessed under the district did have the opportunity to remonstrate. Mr. Finks said that two-thirds of the defined district needed to be in favor of it. Ms. Blackstone reported that staff has started conversations with the Chamber Economic Development group to build support to introduce the concept of these districts. She indicated that staff would serve as an information resource. She commented that a modest rate assessment on business licenses could generate a stable funding source over time without being burdensome. Mr. Finks agreed that the leadership had to come from the business community. He pointed out that any community in the U.S. that marketed itself found a way to pay for it, often using districts or hotel taxes. He indicated that, in the past 30 to 40 years, downtown business investment districts and their management entities have gone into the marketing and management business, similar to a shopping center. Councilor Vizzini expressed his appreciation for the performance measures. He wondered whether there was a way to use electronic technology with bar coding and coupons to measure retail and restaurant sales, as opposed to depending primarily on anecdotal information. Mr. Finks concurred, observing that a promotional response would be part of that measure. He commented that one problem with anecdotal information was the retailers lying about how they were doing in order to keep up appearances. Councilor Vizzini suggested using local debit cards or script at participating local stores and restaurants as a method to promote local shopping and track sales. Mr. Finks indicated that they would implement something like that but they needed a sponsor. He recalled a promotion with American Express and a bank as partners that his company worked on recently called `Buy $50, get $50 back,' which worked very well. He mentioned that those coming from Lake Oswego zip codes were spending several hundred dollars and viewed the $50 as buying their free lunch. Councilor Jordan asked if the financial commitment from the City would remain the same for several years or grow. Ms. Blackstone stated that her direction to her team has been to assume that they were subject to annual budgeting by the Council. She mentioned their initial goal to build the private part of the public/private partnership and to communicate with the Council about that level of commitment in hopes of inspiring the public match as well. She emphasized that City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 20 September 21, 2010 establishing the stable funding source was key to building a marketing campaign planned by the community over time. Mr. Finks pointed out that, without the City's leadership on the summer promotion, the private sector would not have stepped up with a match. Ms. Blackstone indicated that staff heard real gratitude from the participating retailers regarding the City's leadership in seeding the campaign. Councilor Jordan commented that an increment on the business license might be a broader- based way to get all the businesses involved so that those businesses not participating did not receive the benefit of the marketing effort without paying into it. Ms. Blackstone indicated that there had to be a geographic boundary. She said that staff would do a more detailed analysis and report to the Council when proposals came forward from the business community. Councilor Jordan commented that she thought the sentence "Small businesses need more than a motivational poster," which she saw on a poster at the Denver airport, was very true. She remarked that small businesses were so busy trying to keep their doors open that the owners did not have time to develop an organized marketing program. She indicated that she was pleased with this great effort on staff's part to bring all the Lake Oswego businesses together. Ms. Blackstone directed the Council to the summary of the summer campaign in the packet (p.78). She acknowledged the campaign sponsors: Bank of Oswego, Lakeview Village, Prudential Northwest Properties, Chamber of Commerce, and Clackamas County Tourism Group. She described the summer promotion as laying good groundwork for the full implementation of the program, noting the great enthusiasm it generated among the retail community. She indicated that, while the initial results were probably less than the retailers would like to have seen in August, the participating retailers expressed their appreciation and interest in continuing to participate. Mr. Finks estimated that the promotion had 2.5 million impressions. He pointed out that they leveraged the City's investment by 10 to 1 through the partnerships. Ms. Blackstone indicated to Mayor Hoffman that several other cities in Oregon had business improvement districts, such as Portland, Canby, Molalla, Eugene, Hood River, and Bend. She indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she thought the idea of a local bank issuing debit cards was worth pursuing as part of the loyalty program. Mr. Finks explained that it was important to have a platform that was accepted everywhere, such as American Express or VISA, because retailers could not afford separate machines. He commented that American Express would be a good partner for local script because the City could then track the script. 7.3 LOPedia — catalog of City programs and services Mr. Wheeler explained that staff realized from the Council's exercise at its goal setting retreat in January to identify the City's baseline services, that the City needed to do a better job of defining what it did and the range of programs and services that it provided, including costs and delivery methods. He said that Ms. Schneider took on this project and created a great tool for the City. He gave a PowerPoint presentation. He indicated that the LOPedia listed over 175 programs and services, organized by departments. He reviewed the background process of working with department directors to identify the primary functions of each of the departments and divisions and to categorize them programmatically. He explained that the cost information, taken from the FY 2010/2011 budget, included any cross -departmental costs. He gave an example of the Fire Department costs reflecting its provision of both emergency medical services and fire suppression services. He reviewed the page layout and the information included on the page. He discussed the purpose and applications for the LOPedia. He indicated that the document furthered the City's transparency goals and assisted the Council in setting priorities and goals, as well as aiding in its day-to-day decision-making. He noted that the cost information would help with resource allocation and decision making in the budget process. He mentioned that the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 20 September 21, 2010 Performance Measurement Workgroup was already using it as a resource to develop performance measures for departments. He emphasized that staff would update the LOPedia on an annual basis; this was only the first edition. He commented that it was a great project for the Kincaid Intern to update every year. He said that the document was open to revisions, additions, etc. He mentioned that future editions would have more metrics on how many customers the programs served, as well as performance information on the effectiveness and efficiencies of the programs. Councilor Moncrieff thanked staff for putting this document together, noting its user-friendly format. Mr. Wheeler confirmed that it would be accessible on the City website tomorrow. Councilor Moncrieff commented that the Budget Committee members would probably like a hard copy. Councilor Hennagin concurred with Councilor Moncrieff's comments. He described it as a great tool for those citizens who thought that the City spent money unnecessarily on unneeded programs to review the City's programs and services. Councilor Olson agreed that this was a wonderful product. She observed that it would help the City with marketing and the Council with budgeting. She concurred that the Budget Committee members should get a hard copy. Councilor Vizzini agreed that it was a great format. He concurred with Councilor Moncrieff that he looked forward to seeing the performance and workload measures included. He suggested that staff consider a user-friendly, searchable interface to help those not familiar with the City's organizational structure find programs and services. Mr. Wheeler indicated to Councilor Jordan that they would put some hard copies at the library. Mayor Hoffman thanked the staff for a good job. Mr. McIntyre commented that getting this quality of work out of eager, smart young professionals was why the City hired them. He thanked the Council on the staff's behalf for its positive feedback. 7.4 Report on Metropolitan Area Communications Commission regarding reduction in public access programming Councilor Tierney asked for Council feedback regarding a proposal to reduce the public access services available through MACC. He explained that the public access studios had to move from their current location at Beaverton School because of the school's renovation. He indicated that re -locating the studios would involve a $60,000 additional expense. He reviewed the background of MACC as a cable regulatory agency and a telecommunications group. He said that Chip informed him that the telecommunications service has been very effective for the City. He indicated that there were no proposed changes to government access, only to the public access in terms of the studio and equipment availability that have been the foundation of public access going back to the 1980s. He commented that, when the MACC Finance Committee presented a recommendation at the meeting, he had thought that they should have walked the other MACC members through their thinking because everyone not on the committee was not sure that MACC should reduce public access. He mentioned that there were many members of the public access community present opposed to the action. He asked whether the Council considered public access programming a function that the government should support and provide. He indicated that MACC, as a group of 16 communities, currently donated $560,000 to public access programming. He mentioned that he asked the MACC staff if there were not other functions that MACC could reduce other than public access. He explained that MACC took 20% of the franchise fee and returned 80% to the jurisdiction, which in Lake Oswego's case was somewhere in the $400,000 range. He commented that cable regulation was becoming an anachronism with the increase in competition. He suggested reducing City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 20 September 21, 2010 the regulatory piece and increasing the public access piece. He asked for a sense of what the Council thought about this issue before the October 28 MACC meeting. He indicated to Councilor Hoffman that public access referred to videos produced by citizens using the public access studios and equipment, which were then aired over the cable system. He cited Lynn Hennagin as an example, as she was an active producer of the Willamette Women's Democratic meetings on public access cable television. He reiterated that the government programming would continue. He noted that the jurisdictions would pay for continuing the public access programming by foregoing revenue that would come to them, if they did nothing. Councilor Hennagin mentioned hearing from the camera people that they were going to do away with the public broadcasting of meetings, but they would air any meeting sent to them on a DVD. He argued that it was important to broadcast public meetings, as many citizens watched the Council meetings on TV. Councilor Tierney clarified that the government meetings would still be taped and aired out; what would no longer be available would be meetings taped by citizens using the public access equipment and studios. He mentioned a studio production of a water show that people have been watching for 20 years that would no longer be produced with this reduction in public access. He responded to Mayor Hoffman's question about YouTube. He recalled that in the 1980s, when public access programming first came out, it involved free speech and the electronic soapbox via the TV. He observed that today that soapbox extended beyond TV to the Internet and sites like YouTube. He commented that the technology has also advanced and become more sophisticated and readily accessible. He indicated that he had opposed having to have sophisticated training to learn how to use the equipment. He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that he would appreciate Council members getting back to him on this question. RESOLUTIONS 8.1 Boones Ferry Road Project Phase 2 — Contract and Project Advisory Committee Mr. Egner indicated to Mayor Hoffman that Phase 2 lasted from March to October 2009. He recalled that the City started with the Boones Ferry Corridor Plan in 2000/2001, followed by a Transportation Growth Management project to develop the concepts and the Lake Grove Village Implementation Advisory Committee, which ended in 2008. He asked the Council to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with HNTB to carry out the statement of work (p.115, pp. 119-126), and to approve a resolution adopting a charge statement for the Project Advisory Committee and appointing members to the committee (pp. 127- 134). He reviewed the Council direction regarding the Project Advisory Committee (p.115). He reported that six people from the Lake Grove Committee expressed interest in serving on the Project Advisory Committee (p.115). He suggested that the Council pick one of the three people representing the neighborhood interests as the fourth representative from the Lake Grove Committee to balance the business district representative. He explained that staff has tried to keep the Committee small for efficiency reasons, as well as maintaining a balance between the business and neighborhood interests (pp. 115-116). He indicated that the three TAB members (p.115) he recruited were excited about participating. He mentioned that Frank Groznik, a former Planning Commissioner and former City Councilor, has also expressed interest in serving. He commented that if the Council wanted to do something other than the seven -member committee as proposed, they would need to tweak the resolution. He noted that the statement of work from the consultant did include funding for the economic component, as discussed at the Council's September 7 work session. COUNCIL QUESTIONS City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 20 September 21, 2010 Councilor Jordan proposed a compromise to appoint Carolyn Krebs as the neighborhood representative with the three representatives selecting an alternate from among themselves so that there was always one neighborhood representative at the table. She indicated that she believed that all the candidates recognized the issues of traffic and parking impacts, safe pathways, and pedestrian and bike access between the neighborhoods and the business district. She commented that Julia Glisson, Mike Buck, and Ken Sandblast would make good members. Councilor Hennagin asked if the contract set a specific date for completing this phase. Mr. Egner indicated that they were targeting April for project completion. He acknowledged that that was an ambitious schedule but he thought that it was also realistic. Councilor Olson expressed her appreciation for the scope of work, the contract, and the economic piece. She discussed her concerns regarding the Advisory Committee. She agreed that efficiency and balance were good goals. She pointed out that the sole neighborhood representative on the committee had three times the meetings as other members, in that she would need to talk to the three different neighborhoods. She spoke in support of adding a couple more people, although she thought that Councilor Jordan's idea of an alternate was good. Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Olson that there was no ex parte contact issue with regard to Ms. Glisson currently sitting on the Planning Commission. Councilor Vizzini expressed his appreciation for the staff work. He commented that the question about the deadline was important because there was a sense of urgency about moving through these studies and getting the work done. He indicated that, while he advocated using small committees, he did think that the challenge of 22 refinements might need more people. He suggested inviting neighborhood representatives from the abutting neighborhoods to participate in the Project Committee's discussions of the 22 refinements. He discussed his concern that this committee was an advisory body to staff that also made recommendations to the Council. He indicated that, given the timeframe, he preferred to eliminate the language about advising the Council and just limit the charge to "advise and make recommendations to staff." He argued that "advising the Council" opened the door for the Committee to take on a life of its own, which he saw as a concern, given the history of the Lake Grove Village planning effort. He mentioned his interest in getting the work done by April in order to keep moving forward. Councilor Jordan pointed out that, just as a neighborhood representative represented multiple neighborhoods, so too did the business representative represent multiple property owners and businesses. She commented that the Council's intent was to make sure that all entities were represented at the table. She noted that the meetings were open to the public. She mentioned the public outreach events that people could attend to see what was being done with the refinements. She agreed that communicating the information would be challenging but held that there were opportunities for the representatives to meet with their various constituencies to hear their concerns. Councilor Moncrieff concurred with Councilors Jordan and Vizzini that it was important to keep the group focused on meeting the timeline. She stated her support for Councilor Jordan's compromise proposal. She suggested sending all three representatives full Advisory Committee e- mails. Mr. Egner indicated that he intended to create an interested parties list that would receive the same package as the Committee members. Mr. Egner indicated to Councilor Tierney that, while he did not know that the impacts and fruition of the study would be equal to all three neighborhoods, he could not say which neighborhood might face the greatest impacts, as they all three had their own special issues. He concurred that that was a logical criterion but he did not know that the issues of Lake Grove were any less important than the issues of Waluga or Lake Forest. He recalled that the reason that the planning process took so long was that it had been consensus -driven. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 20 September 21, 2010 Councilor Tierney commented that he thought that Resolution 10-61 had a very tight committee charge. He noted that it also included a process for consensus or minority opinion. Councilor Tierney moved Resolution 10- 61 modified that the Advisory Committee would consist of ten members to include all three neighborhood representatives and Mr. Groznik. Councilor Olson seconded the motion. Mayor Hoffman indicated that he would not support this proposal, but he would support Councilor Jordan's proposal. Councilor Hennagin indicated that he would oppose the motion because he thought the proposal made the committee unwieldy and gave more power to the neighborhood associations than to the business people. Mayor Hoffman indicated that, while he did have a potential conflict of interest on the contract motion, he did not have one on the resolution motion. Councilor Moncrieff said that she would not support the motion, as she agreed with Councilor Hennagin that the number of members made the committee unwieldy and more difficult to reach the deadline. She commented that her experience with the three neighborhood candidates found them very involved and individuals who worked well together. She indicated that she had no doubt that if the Council appointed one of them, all three would have the information and ability to communicate throughout the process. A voice vote was taken, and the motion failed with Councilors Tierney and Olson voting `aye.' Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Jordan, and Vizzini voted `no.' [2-5] Councilor Jordan moved Resolution 10- 61 with Carolyn Krebs appointed as the neighborhood representative and an alternate provided for the neighborhood representative to attend the meetings in lieu of the appointed representative. Councilor Moncrieff seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Olson voted `no.' [6-1] Councilor Jordan moved to direct the City Manager to sign a contract with HNTB for $146,147 to complete Phase 2 of the Boones Ferry Road Refinement Plan. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. Mayor Hoffman declared a potential conflict of interest because OTAK, which was not selected, was a client of his law firm. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' [7-0] 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 Ms. Christie indicated to Councilor Olson that the Parks Maintenance Video Training scheduled on Election Day were short training videos produced by staff, which Ms. Gilmer wanted to share with the Council. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 20 September 21, 2010 10.1.2 Review of Council Digest 10.2 City Attorney 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting to Executive Session at 10:28 p.m. pursuant to ORS 192.660 (2) (e) to conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions. He reviewed the Executive Session parameters. 12. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION Mayor Hoffman reconvened the meeting at 10:50 p.m. 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn &ristie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 20 September 21, 2010 LAKI: nsw�'UX ) CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES INI October 5, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. on October 5, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini. Councilor Moncrieff was excused. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Joel Komarek, LOIS Project Director; Jane Heisler, LOIS Communications Director; Sidaro Sin, Senior Planner; Bill Baars, Library Director; Jan Wirtz, Parks & Recreation; Police Officer Steve Filippelli; Deputy Fire Marshall Gert Zoutendijk; Fireman Neil Klein, Fireman Toby Hayes, Fireman Andrew Owens, David Donaldson, Asst City Manager 3. PRESENTATIONS 3.1 LOIS Update Mr. Komarek mentioned that the 24 -foot draw down of the lake has generated a lot of interest in the community. He reported that the contractor has finished the Foothills CIPP work. He indicated that the debris sump at the Hunt Club was nearly done, with the second debris sump of several going in at Maple Circle. He said that the Bryant pump station work was progressing on schedule. He presented several slides depicting what the City has found upon resumption of its near shore sewer inspection. He said that they have notified homeowners as necessary regarding needed repairs. They were also talking with the Lake Corporation about an information piece to alert homeowners to take advantage of this opportune time to address any problems that they might discover. He showed a slide of signage that the City created in partnership with the Lake Corporation warning people to stay off the lakebed because some areas were soupy mud that functioned like quicksand. He encouraged people to view the lake from the bridges and other vantage points. Ms. Heisler said that they have been dealing with many phone complaints, most of them focusing on noise. She mentioned that the lake draw down has attracted a lot of media attention. She noted that the Fire Department has been practicing mud rescues. She reported that they were talking to bypass pump neighbors because of the bypass configurations coming online in October and December. She noted the several road closures in October, including Bryant Road and North Shore Road at the bridge. She mentioned that they would only close one lane of State Street at night from here on out. Mr. Komarek reported that the project was on schedule, with the team having just issued the final certification of completion for the lake full phase. He noted that they were two-thirds of the way to the $90 million cost estimate, and they might even bring the project under that amount. Councilor Jordan asked if the City planned to work with the Lake Corporation to remove the debris dumped into the lake over the years, which was now visible. Ms. Heisler said that Jeff Ward at the Lake Corporation was working on clean up procedures for neighbors interested in doing just that. She mentioned doing it all during one particular week so that the clean up could be monitored and done safely. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 9 October 5, 2010 Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Jordan that Lily Bay was a pocket of water with its own natural 'dam,' which prevented it from draining down to the 24 -foot level. At Councilor Hennagin's request, Mr. Komarek explained that the purpose of the debris sumps was to trap debris that found its way into sewer lines from a variety of sources and prevent it from entering the buoyant portion of the new interceptor sewer. He indicated that the City was installing five debris sumps at strategic locations, which City operations crews could clean out more easily than if the material made it into the lake. Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Olson that the City deposited the sediment dredged from the lake at Tigard Sand & Gravel in Washington County. He explained that they tested the site for suitability to handle these sediments per the solid waste permits the City obtained. He said that he believed that the Lake Corporation disposed of its dredging material at the same place. At Mayor Hoffman's request, Mr. Komarek reviewed the timeline regarding the lake. He said that, by agreement with the Lake Corporation, the City had to re -fill the lake to a 16 -foot draw down level beginning in mid-January and be finished with its work by March 21 to allow the Lake Corporation to begin refilling the lake. 3.2 Comprehensive Plan Update Mr. Sin presented a flyer that went out with Hello LO announcing the upcoming public meetings on October 12 and 16 at the West End Building. He indicated that the purpose of the meetings was to engage the community in a more specific discussion about the future of Lake Oswego. He said that staff would present the results of the survey, to which they received 830 responses. He mentioned further discussion at the meetings with the community regarding community values. He indicated that staff intended to use the survey results as the foundation to develop the community vision for the next 25 years. He noted that staff intended the survey to gauge the pulse of the community; they hoped to do a more statistically valid survey in early 2011 to validate the vision process. After that, staff would come to Council for its endorsement of the vision in order to move forward with developing policies and goals for the Comprehensive Plan. He invited the community to the October meetings. 3.3 LO Reads Mr. Baars stated that the goal behind the LO Reads program was creating a community bond through reading and discussing the same book. He invited the Council and the community to participate in the program next January and February by reading the book and attending the free events, which would expand on the cultural, social, political, and historical themes within the book. He reviewed the selection criteria and process for the book. He recalled that over 8,000 people participated in last year's program with over 35 events focusing on The Whistling Season by Ivan Doig. He announced the 2011 selection: Cutting for Stone by Dr. Abraham Verghese. He described it as the story of twin brothers born and raised in Mission Hospital in Ethiopia, which spanned decades and countries. He mentioned the support received from the Friends of the Library, West Coast Bank, Fred & Shirley Baldwin, the City of Lake Oswego, and the City Council. He said that this fifth year of LO Reads would begin on January 11, 2011 at the Lake Oswego Library with a give away of 800 free copies of the book, courtesy of the Friends of the Library. Mayor Hoffman indicated that he has read the book, which he described as long and challenging with themes that would stretch the community. Councilor Jordan commented that it was a positive book. She suggested that people pass the book on to someone else when they finished it. Mr. Baars mentioned that people often returned the free books to the library and the staff handed them out from the circulation desk. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 9 October 5, 2010 3.4 Community Planning Month Proclamation Mayor Hoffman proclaimed October 2010 as Community Planning Month. 3.5 Parks and Recreation Summer Camp Highlights Ms. Wirtz gave a PowerPoint presentation on the 11 weeks of over 75 summer camps provided through the Lake Oswego Parks & Recreation Department. She reported that they served over 1,200 youth and teens from ages 3 to 17. She described the many different types of camps, including Missoula Children's Theater, Summer Daze, Kindercamp, Lego Engineering, a variety of sports camps, Fencing, Dance, CSI Camp, Kirsten's Camp, Fairy Camp, Wizardry Camp, Skateboarding, Tennis, Golf, Teen Service, and Safety Town. She mentioned that Officer Steve Filippelli helped with setting up a crime scene for the CSI campers to solve. She noted that the Teen Service Camp included two days of service and one day of adventure. She described the major safety lessons presented during the five days of Safety Town for campers aged 4 to 6. She introduced Officer Steve Filippelli, Deputy Fire Marshall Zoutendijk, and Firemen Toby Hayes, Neil Klein, and Andrew Owens, acknowledging them for their work in teaching safety to the campers. She indicated that Safety Town was made possible by a $3,600 grant from the Alliance for Community Traffic Safety (ODOT). 3.6 White Cane Days Proclamation Mayor Hoffman read the proclamation declaring October 16, 2010, as Lions' White Cane Day in Lake Oswego in recognition of the many years of the Lions Clubs' dedication to sight conservation and restoration and improving the quality of life for the blind and sight -challenged individuals within the state. He mentioned that White Cane Days was the Lake Grove Lions Club's annual sight fundraiser to restore the sight of children and adults in Oregon and to provide supporting grants for sight -impaired individuals needing medical care or other forms of assistance. Mark Ritacco, Lake Grove Lions Club President, noted that their club formed in 1964. He observed that the Lions did more than help the blind. He reviewed several of their other programs, including Flags for First Graders, Peace Poster Contest (middle school), sponsoring three Boy Scout troops, camp scholarships (camperships), Legal Club (high school), and Salvation Army bell ringing. He mentioned their fundraisers, including White Cane Days, Fourth of July Barbeque, and selling tools during Mother's Day weekend. Jake Jacobssen, Lions Club International, told the story of the Lions Clubs, beginning in 1917 Chicago when Melvin Jones decided that the affluent businessmen in the Business Circle needed to do something to help the less fortunate. Within two years, the Lions Club went international when a club formed in Windsor, Canada. The Lions were now the largest service club in the world with 1.35 million members in 45,000 clubs in 206 countries. He indicated that, in 1925, the Lions Clubs became "knights of the blind in their crusade against darkness" in response to a challenge by Helen Keller at their International Convention in Ohio. He mentioned the work that the Lions Clubs International sponsored around the world to help people with sight problems through raising millions of dollars, and their goal of eradicating preventable blindness. He described the White Cane project as another smaller facet of fundraising from the local communities, which funds they would put back in the community through the Oregon Lions Sight & Hearing Foundation. He mentioned that helping the deaf became a main thrust of the Lions in the 1950s, as Helen Keller was both blind and deaf. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Olson moved the Consent Agenda. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' [6-0] City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 9 October 5, 2010 4.1 REPORTS 4.1.1 Resignation from the Historic Resources Advisory Board Action: Accept Resignation from Erin O'Rourke-Meadors 4.2 RESOLUTIONS 4.2.1 Resolution 10-60, approving an appointment to the citizen advisory committee for the comprehensive plan update Action: Adopt Resolution 10-60. 4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4.2.1 June 8, 2010, special meeting 4.2.2 June 15, 2010, regular meeting Action: Approve minutes as written END CONSENT AGENDA 5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 6. CITIZEN COMMENT • R.A. Fontes, 310 Second Street Mr. Fontes distributed a handout to the Council. He pointed out that the demographic trends for Lake Oswego as reported by Todd Chase (p.1, Table 1) also applied to West Linn. He argued that, based on that information, there was nothing happening in either city to justify Metro's bus trip time and rider ship projections. He observed that the bus trips of an aging population were not stereotypical commutes, but rather occurred outside the regular commute hours (Table 1). He contended that, contrary to the Metro forecasts by John Colleton for major increases in corridor traffic and resulting trip times, the long-term trend on Hwy 43 vehicle counts was down (Table 2). He observed that transit running in mixed traffic had highly variable trip times (p.2, Table 2). He argued that the single value bus trips given in the Metro projections were highly misleading because they were for the slowest peak hour commutes. He used a Bungee cord to demonstrate that most trips did not vary as much as the slowest peak commute trip. He argued that the reality of the Hwy 43 corridor was that they should expect the no build bus option, which would include frequent service, to remain faster and more convenient for most riders than either of the other two alternatives. He pointed out the lack of long-term rider ship growth shown on Chart 3 (p.3). He observed that rider ship peaked in 2008 with $4 per gallon gas, and was now slightly below the spring 2001 level. He argued that they were already below the rate necessary to reach Metro's projections for weekday demand of 8,500 rides per day. He reiterated that they had astounding rider ship and trip time projections that were not supported by the long-term transportation data, the underlying societal trends shown in the Lake Oswego and West Linn demographics, the net migration of jobs out of Portland, and the technological changes. He contended that this project has not presented hard evidence justifying these projections, but rather it has provided only more projections, assumptions, and conclusions. . He thanked the Mayor and the Council for appointing a Councilor who was a regular bus rider • Maria Meneghin, 1179 Sunningdale Road Ms. Meneghin referenced the West End Building (WEB) site study group presentation of various options for Council's consideration last Tuesday. She expressed her appreciation for the work group's thoughtful job. She observed that it was now up to the Council to decide which option to City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 9 October 5, 2010 support and bring to the public for a vote. She described the problem as defined for the work group as "find a way to take the WEB off the interest only general fund payments and find a resolution for the financial conundrum." She noted that they were encouraged to look at the City's already identified and prioritized facilities needs. She encouraged the Council to show the community that it could solve this problem by choosing the option that most closely fulfilled its obligations and had the best chance of passing a general obligation (GO) bond. She expressed her fear that if the Council overreached in these economically difficult times, the WEB resolution would not have full community support and would remain a divisive financial issue in the community. She encouraged the Council to judge the project in the context of the City's other stated goals, such as needing a new Maintenance facility, implementing the Lake Grove Village Center Plan, and improving the library. She spoke of weighing the community's continuing financial good will in achieving those goals. She stated that she strongly supported Option 4, which addressed the WEB financial concerns and incorporated the most pressing facilities needs. She contended that Option 4 did not muddy the GO bond issue by introducing recreational desires (such as a pool and an indoor/outdoor skate park) not yet well studied to assess their financial impacts or weighed alongside other recreational amenities She encouraged the Council to keep its priorities clear and its message to the community regarding priorities consistent. She asked the Council not to let the long-term possibilities of the site distract it from doing what was necessary to solve the underlying WEB financial issues. Amy Waterbury, 4933 Park Hill Street Ms. Waterbury explained that she was sharing the concerns of herself and her immediate neighbors regarding the proposed Waluga Reservoir No. 2. She stated that they were very upset about the City's proposed plans. She mentioned that she has diligently attended the meetings that the neighbors initiated with the Water Partnership Team as well as made a statement at the Oversight Committee. She expressed her hope that the Council has heard these neighborhood concerns before. She explained that her aim tonight was to insure that the Council was aware of the neighbors' views and could voice their questions and issues for them, since they could not always ask those questions themselves at the meetings. She spoke of insuring that the right decisions were reached and every effort made to minimize the negative impacts on the citizens in Lake Oswego surrounding the proposed side, including the excessive burden shouldered by a few. She indicated that their major concerns focused on visual impact, safety concerns, and construction impact. She observed that daily the neighbors would be looking directly at the reservoir, which would be visible for most of the year behind the leafless deciduous trees. She asked the Council to challenge the Water Partnership Team on the neighbors' unresolved questions regarding visual impact, including sizing the reservoir capacity at 1.5 to 2 million gallons to accommodate projected growth, which might or might not happen. She contended that it was not too late to consider alternate locations. She asked what locations would the City have looked at if this one were not available. She indicated that the height was a major concern. She argued that a 40 -foot high structure was completely inappropriate to a residential setting, noting that the City Code prevented homes or structures of that height in neighborhoods. She encouraged the Council to read her letter. She respectfully asked the Council to hold the Water Partnership Team accountable for incorporating into the design plan all possible strategies for reducing the safety risks, size, and visual impact to the surrounding neighbors. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 9 October 5, 2010 • Tamara Ko, 4932 Park Hill Street Ms. Ko observed that Ms. Waterbury presented the facts, while she presented the emotional view. She commented that, while most residents chose to purchase their homes on Park Hill Street knowing about the water tower at the end of the street, asking them to accept a second water tower that was twice as big with twice as much danger in the event of a catastrophic failure and a 15 month long disruption to their lives during its construction was asking them to swallow a bitter pill. She indicated that the information from the engineers that the City chose this site in order to provide better water pressure to a pocket of 100 houses did not sit well with the Park Hill neighbors at all. She contended that the Park Hill residents were already team players in having a water tower at the end of their street. Asking them to have two water towers was excessive. She mentioned the neighbors meeting with the committee. She indicated that most of the neighbors felt that their thoughts and concerns were simply being appeased and not taken seriously. She said that they were talked down to on several occasions, which behavior was unacceptable from someone who did not live in the neighborhood. She informed the Council that the water tower brought an illicit element with it: kids and adults doing drugs at the end of the street. She noted that the neighbors worked diligently to clean that up, and now felt safe and comfortable in having gotten rid of that element. However, they feared its return from other locations if a second water tower went up. She recalled the team telling the neighbors that it had several other potential locations, such as the Quarry (owned by the Parks & Rec Department). She asked the Council if someone could talk with the Parks & Rec Department about building the reservoir at the Quarry and swapping out the land on Park Hill Street for a park. She stated her impression that there were several avenues left unpursued, and that their concerns were not being listened to by the team. She mentioned that the team told the neighbors that this was a done deal and that they needed to start talking about being good neighbors. She stated that she did not think that they were at that point yet, as there was still some fight left in the Park Hill Street neighbors. She commented that they came tonight to make sure that the Council was aware of their concerns, as they have been told that what went on at the meetings was not brought to the Council. • Charles B. Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill, Portland, Clackamas County Mr. Ormsby distributed a map to the Council regarding the Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project. He explained that this map was a composite of four maps that he assembled over the past four to five years, one of which he received from Mr. Fontes a month ago. He indicated that the maps were the WEB map for the neighborhoods, the February 2006 population center map, the November 2007 Metro Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project alternatives analysis map and corridor study areas, and the 1997 Lake Oswego Clackamas County UGMA map. He pointed out that the map showed that almost half the city's population was not included in the Transit Project study area. He contended that there were concerns that the City needed to address in terms of how this project might or might not encumber the Lake Oswego School District tax and fee base, given that the District was considering school closures within the next five years. He stated that one of the many problems he saw with this project was the cost and benefits, or who paid for it and who benefited from it. He pointed out that the most recent TriMet system map showed that Lake Grove had no direct service to the Portland core area during non -peak times and that the connections between Lake Grove and PCC were abysmal. He reiterated that the majority of the Lake Oswego population lived in that area. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 9 October 5, 2010 7. REPORTS 7.1 Food Waste Collection, Tour Overview, and Progress Report Mr. Donaldson introduced Carol Dion and Ray Phelps with Allied Waste Services. He presented background information on commercial food waste collection (pp.57-58). He noted that the highest percentage of commercial waste going into the landfill came from restaurants, the School District, and grocery stores. Ms. Dion mentioned that Allied Waste has provided commercial food waste collection in other cities for a while. She indicated that they were still working out the details of their proposal to provide this service to the City and their commercial customers in Lake Oswego. She explained that they would approach it on a customer -by -customer basis to make sure that the program worked successfully for their commercial customers. She commented that the design behind their proposal that the container used by the commercial customer be 4% less than the size of their trash container would encourage their commercial customers to do training and educational outreach to all their staff members. She mentioned their understanding that not everyone would be a willing participant immediately, which led to their proposal to introduce the program to one customer at a time. She noted that Allied and the City have already begun forging the strong partnership needed to implement this new service level. She mentioned the staff field trip to the Pacific Region Compost Facility (PRC) to see where the material ended up. She asked for the Council's support so that businesses recognized that this service was something that the City and the City Council embraced. She presented a graphic as an example of educational materials that Allied has used in other cities to introduce this service. Mr. Donaldson distributed samples of compost to the Council. Councilor Tierney asked what Allied's plans were to solicit the 60 commercial customers mentioned in its letter (p.60), and if the company needed a minimum number to make the program work. Ms. Dion stated that Allied was ready to start as soon as they obtained the Council's support and they could move forward with the educational piece. She explained how the collection process would work using the already established yard debris routes in Lake Oswego. Ms. Dion indicated to Councilor Hennagin that, while yard debris and food waste went to the same facility, they were handled and processed separately. Mr. Donaldson mentioned that the compost sample was a blend of yard debris and 20% food waste. Ms. Dion confirmed to Councilor Hennagin that food waste collection required a more contained truck than a regular drop box truck. Mr. Donaldson presented slides from the staff field trip to the Pacific Region Compost Facility 10 miles north of Corvallis, off Hwy 99. He noted that the material sat in large piles for a year, periodically turned over for aeration. He described the compost process from the raw material to the final compost product. He showed two posters, one for restaurants to post in their windows to educate their customers, and one to post in the staff area detailing what could or could not go into the food waste container. He referenced a letter he had sent to the Council from the Lake Grove Business Association in support of the project. He noted that the owner of Gubanc's was present tonight as well. He reviewed the proposed program for Lake Oswego, which would begin in November. He said that staff would bring a resolution to Council to reduce commercial rates by about 4%. He mentioned the potential savings to restaurant customers like Gubanc's (p.60). He commented that some grocery stores, such as New Seasons, already had a food waste recycling program, which the City's program would piggyback on. Mr. Phelps indicated to Councilor Olson that Allied did not know if other businesses besides Gubanc's were interested in the program. He explained that they followed a lead given to them by City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 9 October 5, 2010 the Sustainability Action Board in approaching Gubanc's, which was very interested in the program. He said that they found that 90% of the material in Gubanc's trash container was recoverable, which led them to think that this program would divert a high amount of waste from the landfill. He mentioned his expectation that Allied would do as well with other businesses. Councilor Vizzini asked if there might also be a reduction anticipated in sanitary sewage flow, to the extent that restaurants sent waste down the drain. Ms. Dion said that she asked that question during Portland's pilot project for residential food waste collection, and the water treatment people told her that they had no way of knowing the answer. The only possibility was seeing a different chemical composition of the flow as it went through. They have not been able to quantify that information. Councilor Vizzini asked if residential customers putting food waste in their yard debris recycling containers was too simplistic a solution. Ms. Dion said that it was not too simplistic but Allied was not ready for that today. She explained that the educational piece was critical to roll out first, as some food waste material could potentially contaminate the yard debris load. Councilor Jordan asked what the City knew about gleaning opportunities at restaurants and grocery stores and how that would interact with food waste recycling. Mr. Donaldson said that he knew that there were active gleaning groups in the County that probably had arrangements with individual grocery stores and restaurants but he was not familiar with it. He indicated that staff would ask that question when they talked to businesses. Councilor Olson noted that New Seasons had a gleaning program, and Councilor Hennagin mentioned seeing gleaners at Albertsons. Councilor Hennagin asked if he could buy this compost at the local garden store. Ms. Dion said no, explaining that they marketed this compost to large users, such as the Nurserymen's' Association and ODOT, which picked it up by the truckload at the PRC. Councilor Hennagin commented that the schools would be a great source, recalling how much food he saw thrown away in the cafeterias when he ate lunch with his grandchildren. Ms. Dion described to Councilor Tierney how Allied Waste's comptroller arrived at the 4% reduction by evaluating the estimated cost reductions and increases to Allied Waste of the program. She confirmed that they could re -calculate that figure based upon the realities of the program. She mentioned her anticipation of two routes a week at the most, although Allied would work with customers who might need more than that. Mr. Phelps pointed out that the real savings came in the reconfiguration of the containers. 7.2 WEB Proposal Timeline Mr. McIntyre reported that staff would be able to complete the operational analysis with the new configuration of potential building development sites at the WEB site for the Council October 26 meeting. He noted that there would be some costs, as the City would need to have the consultant who did the original analysis on the then community center plan go back into that information and build from there. Councilor Jordan mentioned questions she heard raised while campaigning about whether the City could save money by not including LOCOM in the new police facility. Mr. McIntyre indicated that staff would be able to address the issue of LOCOM. 8. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL 8.1 Councilor Information 8.1.1 Hello LO announcements Councilor Vizzini encouraged the community to submit nominations for this year's Unsung Heroes awards by the November 1 deadline. He encouraged citizens to volunteer for the Neighbors Helping Neighbors clean up event on October 16. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 9 October 5, 2010 8.1.2 Bryant Homestead Pioneer Plaque Councilor Olson reported that this afternoon, on behalf of the Council, she and Councilor Jordan accepted the rededication of the Bryant Homestead Pioneer Plaque (located near the tennis courts at Waluga Junior High). She indicated that the third and fourth grade class from Bryant Elementary School gave a nice presentation. She mentioned that the Palisades Garden Club has taken volunteer responsibility to improve the site with plantings and flowers and to take care of the actual structure. Councilor Jordan suggested cleaning the plaque so it was readable. She commented that the schoolchildren had not seen the plaque before, which spoke to the City doing something to call attention to it. 8.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental Committees 9. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 9.1 City Manager 9.1.1 Review of Council Schedule 9.1.2 Review of Council Schedule 9.2 City Attorney 10. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn hristie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9 October 5, 2010 Tuesday, December 7, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman and City Councilors City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: Public Testimony to the Lake Oswego City Council Dear Mayor Hoffman and City Councilors: 1536 SE 11 th Avenue, Suite B Portland, OR 97214 www.EnvironmentOregon.org W� On behalf of Environment Oregon and our 50,000 members and supporters statewide, I write in strong support of Resolution 10-65 "Supporting Statewide Plastic Bag Regulation." Getting rid of plastic checkout bags will be good for our ocean, business, consumers, and taxpayers. Plastic bags were first introduced to retail checkout stands in 1977 and then widely adopted in 1982. Before this time, boxes, baskets, reusable cloth bags, and single -use paper bags were the common containers used to transport groceries and goods from retail stores to households. Today, Oregonians use approximately 1.7 billion plastic checkout bags every year. According to SOLV, plastic bags represent 12 percent of Oregon's beach litter and are Oregon's number one item of plastic pollution. These numbers are similar to those documented by the Ocean Conservancy through their worldwide beach cleanup efforts.' There is an estimated 100 million tons of plastic pollution in the Pacific Ocean. This trash is concentrated by the ocean currents — called the North Pacific Gyre — into an area twice the size of Texas where plastic is 43 times more prevalent than plankton, the fundamental food source of the ocean. Because plastic never biodegrades but can only photo -degrade into smaller and smaller bits, the plastic is likely to stay in the ocean for hundreds, if not thousands of years. The currents of the ocean will, over a long time, wash some of this plastic onto our shores where it can be cleaned up. Plastic starves, strangles, suffocates, and poisons millions of sea turtles, birds, whales, and fish every year. The dead albatrosses with plastic lighters and bottle caps in their stomachs' and the dead whale ' "International Coastal Cleanup," Ocean Conservancy, http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=press icc. Z "Remote Waters Offer No Refuge from Plastic Trash," NPR (Oct. 1, 2007), http://www.npr.orp,/templates/story/story.php?storvld=14859155. with 20 plastic bags in its stomach3 speak to the starvation caused by plastic. The sea lion caught in a plastic ring speaks to the strangulation.4 The sea turtles that mistake plastic bags for jellyfish speak to the suffocation.6 Finally, according to the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration, plastic debris attracts and accumulates hydrophobic organic toxins such as PCBs(polychlorinated biphenyls) up to one million times ambient seawater concentration s.6 Because plastic breaks down into plankton -sized bits, fish eat this plastic and accumulate dangerous toxins that could work their way up the food chain. Getting rid of plastic checkout bags will be good for business, too. The Northwest Grocery Association supports banning plastic checkout bags and charging for single -use paper bags in large part because giving away checkout bags cost money. For a large retailer, plastic bags cost one to two cents each while paper bags cost four to five cents each. However, for a small retailer, single -use bags can cost as much as 50 -cents. So encouraging consumers to bring reusable bags means that retailers do not have to try to recover the bag costs through the price of goods sold. In addition, plastic bags and film cost recycling companies money. Far West Fibers, a material recovery facility in Portland, estimates the plastic bags and film represent 30 to 40 percent of operating costs. The Film gums -up sorting machines, requiring hours of maintenance. With 1.7 billion plastic bags used every year in Oregon, the main companies that benefit from the bag is out-of-state petrochemical companies like ExxonMobil, Dow Chemical, and Hilex Poly, who don't have operations in Oregon. However, Oregon does have a number of paper businesses like International Paper and Blue Heron Paper Company that process and recycle pulp and paper into bags. These are a few reasons why more than 300 businesses across Oregon support banning plastic checkout bags. In Lake Oswego, these businesses include: Business Equipment Loans LLC, Cup of Joe, Dipinto a Mano, LLC, Dyke Vandenburgh Jewelers, Fusion Flowers, Gemini Bar & Grill, Graham's Book & Stationery, Gusto Bistro & Marketplace, Haberdashers, Hair Salon, Kitchen Equity Group, Lady Di's British Store, Lake Oswego Shoe Repair, Lakeside Bicycles, Lakeside Home & Gift, Octopus Ink Tattoo, Oswego Nail Company, R Blooms, Richard Howells & Associates, Salon Olivia, The Pine Needle, and Trent Edward Salon Consumers stand to gain as well. The cost of single -use bags is already partially included within the cost of groceries and goods, and reusable bags are more reliable than single -use bags that break more often. Environment Oregon has spoken face-to-face with more than 150,000 Oregonians and they've overwhelmingly supported banning plastic bags. More than 20,000 people have signed -up with the campaign and more than 3,000 people have expressed support to their elected officials. 3 "Trash, Plastic Bags Found in Dead Whale," Seattle Times (Apr. 21, 2010), http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/northwestvoices/2011667352 trashplasticbagsfoundindeadwhale.html 4 "HMSC-led team uses new capture cage to disentangle sea lion from marine debris," Upwelling (newsletter of the Friends of Hatfield Marine Science Center; Apr. 2010), http://hmsc.oregonstate.edu/friends/newsletters/upwellingaprlO.Pdf 5 "Loggerhead Turtles Face Debris Threat In Adriatic Sea," ReclOrbit (Nov. 4, 2010), http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1944436/1oggerhead turtles face debris threat in adriatic sea/ 6 "Plastic Marine Debris: What We Know," NOAA, http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/info/plastic.html. In these fiscally challenging times for governments, it's good to know that getting rid of plastic checkout bags can benefit taxpayers. The City of Portland estimates that cleaning up streets, storm drains, and the sewer systems of plastic bags and film costs $2.3 million each year. Managing waste collection and disposal can cost other municipalities additional money. Environment Oregon has worked hard over the past year to make the case to the public, local governments, and state legislators that getting rid of plastic checkout bags is the right thing for our ocean, business, consumers, and taxpayers. Not only have we talked with 150,000 Oregonians and built from tens of thousands, we've also built a strong coalition of businesses and environmental groups. The lead groups, in addition to Environment Oregon include Association of Oregon Recyclers, Audubon Society, Recycling Advocates, and Surfrider Foundation. One of our key strategies has been to demonstrate local support from city councils across Oregon. This summer, the City of Portland passed a resolution supporting a statewide ban on plastic checkout bags with a required charge on paper checkout bags and committing to do the same if the state legislature fails to take action. Yesterday, the City of Newport also passed a resolution supporting a statewide ban on plastic checkout bags with a required charge on paper checkout bags. After Lake Oswego takes action, we expect action in several other cities. Environment Oregon and Surfrider are working in Oregon City, Hood River, Bend, Eugene, Lincoln City, and Port Orford to make it happen. With enough resolutions, our coalition is confident we can leverage enough local support to pass state legislation to ban plastic checkout bags. We have strong bi-support from legislators to help make this happen, including Senator Mark Hass of Beaverton, Senator Jason Atkinson of Grants Pass, and Representative Vic Gilliam of Silverton who will introduce and sponsor the bill this January. In addition, we greatly appreciate the resolution's commitment to consider a local bag ban should the state effort falter this spring. This commitment will help keep pressure on the state legislature to take action in a politically challenging year. Thank you for the opportunity to present before the City Council last month and to provide this written testimony. Sincerely, Brock Howell State Policy Advocate (503) 421-9936 (cell) brock@environmentoregon.org LAKE OSWEGO Centennial 1910-2010 COUNCIL REPORT TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Ursula Euler, Finance Director SUBJECT: Five-year Forecast for the General Fund DATE: November 30, 2010 ACTION CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 503-675-3984 www.ci.oswego.or.us Review and discuss assumptions and outcomes of the five-year forecast; direct staff to evaluate additional or different variables and consider the establishment of an annual predetermined capital spending amount and the creation of an equipment replacement fund. INTRODUCTION The City Manager asked the Finance Department staff for a five-year forecast for the General Fund, and staff responded with a model that builds on the current year FY2010-11 budget, gives a five year history and enables policy makers and management to assess the City's ability to fulfill two of its most important goals: preservation of existing levels of service and financial and economic viability. Many factors drive revenues and expenditures and staff used its best judgment to define and 'pre-set' low -impact variables and factors over which the City has little or no control in a base scenario, and to progressively migrate through subsequent scenarios by moving several levers, over which the City has control and which have a significant impact. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The five-year forecast (the model) considers the General Fund as a whole, and not as individual departments. In essence, this pools the resources and expenditures for all general fund services and departments and allows for a better evaluation of all ongoing resources against all ongoing expenditures, and one-time resources against one-time expenditures. This distinction is a powerful one, because it facilitates planning for financial sustainability; it has been practiced during past budget processes and proven valuable. In the New Normal, the City is faced with several challenges. Page 2 New Assessed Value growth, estimated and budgeted at 1% for this fiscal year, has not materialized according to Clackamas County's FY2010-11 value certifications. Each percent equates to about $250,000 in revenues to the City. Past growth rates have ranged from 0.9% to 2.4%, but it seems prudent to move forward with caution and assume a growth rate of less than 1%, at least until we have different data. The base scenario of the model assumes an average new assessed value growth, weighted between Clackamas, Washington and Multnomah counties, of a quarter of a percent and increasing slightly to one half of a percent by FY2015/16. Expected benefit increases, namely in the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and in health insurance have already led to much discussion. With the most recent announcement by PERS, we know that the City needs to plan for roughly a 4% cost increase with FY2011-12, and for a similar increase with FY2013-14. Our current health insurance carriers typically do not provide cost estimates for the next fiscal year until about March. Nevertheless, we have asked the question of Pacific Source, one of our two health insurance carriers, and received the answer to expect a double-digit premium increase. As a result, staff incorporated an average 12% health insurance premium increase for FY2011-12, 8% for FY 2012-13, and annual 6% increases thereafter. The model incorporates these increases into its base scenario Personal Services costs because PERS is non-negotiable, and because it demonstrates the impact on the City; it does not incorporate any changes to employee cost sharing or changes in benefits, as they are subject to labor negotiations. When growth in resources cannot keep pace with increasing costs, expenditures soon exceed revenues, which is demonstrated in Scenarios 1 and 2. About 62% of the General Fund's revenues come from property taxes, which, given the existing assessed value, are estimated to increase by 3%; again, 1% constitutes about $250,000. Other revenues, such as from franchise fees, City fees and charges, were increased modestly at the same fractions of one percent as growth in assessed value. The argument can be made, that the assumption of healthier growth and fees for services, let's say of 1%, is reasonable and should be used in the model instead. The short-term and long-term effect of Cost -of -Living Adjustments (COLA) is significant. This comes as no surprise, because even seemingly small annual adjustments have a compounding effect. The table below is a sensitivity analysis expressed in number of employees, and based on the listed estimated average annual compensation. Sensitivity in terms of FTE Forecast 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Annual average compensation $118,000 $123,000 $129,000 $135,000 $140,000 1% COLA Increase -2.51 -2.57 -2.54 -2.56 -2.58 1% of AV growth 2.24 2.22 2.19 2.16 2.15 1% PERS Contr. rate increase -1.74 -1.71 -1.67 -1.64 -1.62 1% Healthcare cost increase -0.38 -0.41 -0.44 -0.47 -0.51 In absolute values, a one percent COLA adjustment has a larger effect than an assessed value growth of one percent; in all three labor contracts, the annual COLA is tied to the Portland area Wage-earner Consumer Price Index and applied to salary and wages through the end of FY2011/12. Changes to salaries and Page 3 benefits are subject to labor negotiations. To demonstrate the bottom-line sensitivity, COLA was tempered from 2.5% to 1.0% in Scenario 2 for the three years following the completion of the current contract cycle, and to 1.5% thereafter. The effect on the surplus or deficit is significant, especially in the last three fiscal years shown. Here the swing from deficit to surplus is between $878,000 and $1,671,000. The forecast model is based on the current fiscal year's General Fund budget. By nature, a budget serves as spending authority and as management tool. The General Fund is budgeted by department and not every department in the General Fund will spend every budgeted dollar and, by nature, resulting in some savings between budget and actual expenditures. Staff took the liberty to estimate a 'savings' in the amount of $600,000. This is so that the forecast is based on prudent spending management and not spending authority. These savings will come from vacancies or lower than expected spending in Materials & Services. Current inflationary pressures are less than 2%. Both, the Portland area's wage earner inflation index and the nation-wide consumer price index stand at 1.6%. The Federal Reserve forecasts a long-term annual average inflation of 2%, which could be used as accelerator for expenditures unrelated to wages. The Philadelphia District of the Federal Reserve conducts a quarterly survey of professional forecasters the results of which are averaged. This most recent (November 2010) forecast stands at 2.2% for the next ten years. Staff suggests that this survey's 2.2% be used for the model. Expenditures for Transfers are mostly for labor related activity; therefore, they were accelerated with the COLA factor. New services at the West End property and their revenue sources and costs were not considered at this time. The base model assumes the continuation of the current Line of Credit, but also allows for a change to a General Obligation Bond, as described later. Availability of funds — whether through cash or debt funding sources — for investment in infrastructure, buildings or development projects (referred to as capital investment in the remainder of this report), and future equipment replacements are another area of concern for the General Fund. Scenarios 1 and 2 assume the continuation of the Line of Credit for the West End Building (WEB) and incorporates the capital investment spending amounts as shown in the most current Capital Improvement Plan with an anticipated spending of around $3.8 million in FY2011-12 (without equipment replacements) and smaller amounts thereafter. For analysis purposes, staff would like to suggest a more even $1 million cash spending plan per year to avoid spikes. In practice, spikes can be managed either through debt financing or by setting aside even cash amounts in advance. This is shown in Scenario 3, where capital investment spending is'levelized' with $1 million cash per year. Scenario 4 introduces an annual set-aside amount for future equipment replacements in addition to the annual $1 million for capital investment, estimated at annual depreciation and phased in over four years, which helps the City to prepare for future large purchases, but does not estimate what the City should have set aside in the past. Current City policy prescribes General Fund balances large enough to cover a contingency of 14% and ending fund balance of 16% of operations. This requirement becomes a serious constraint as expenditures grow (see Scenarios At -A -Glance, line labeled with EFB Req, which flags the fund balances requirement as 'Yes' when met, and as 'No' when not met). To continue to fulfill this requirement, every additional dollar of operating expenditures has to come with $1.30 of additional resources. Put another way, each additional dollar in revenues can fund additional expenditures of 77 cents, and adds 23 cents to contingency and ending fund balance. This begs the question, of course, if the requirement is outdated Page 4 and is too limiting or if it serves a useful purpose of fiscal constraint and discipline. Scenario 5 assumes that the Line of Credit is replaced with a General Obligation bond, freeing up the budgeted interest payments of about $600,000. Having said all of this, the City is in a better financial position than many others. Responsible financial management in the past is of benefit now, because it appears the City can maintain financial viability through its available financial tools and service level choices. Should a more optimistic revenue assumption of growth fund additional capital investment? Should the capital investment be $0.5, $1.0, or $1.5 million for some or all of the future five years? Should targeted cost containment strategies, such as emphasis on filling vacant positions internally, or a hiring freeze, fund new or different services? Certainly, the intent is also to continue to modify factors and assumptions at least annually, as better information becomes available and as Council goals are refined. ATTACHMENTS 1. Scenarios At -A -Glance 2. Scenarios 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Reviewed by: Alex D. McIntyre City Manager David Powell City Attorney � o � 0 v o m tD 01 O t0 N e-1 y N Ln `� O Z C \ ri N N ri � m >- V A V v rl � lD M r >ONZ0) Ln NI M lD O N N e1 N V) N r\ O Z LA C-, Ln O Z V) cn d' aJ Ln O O Z LA 00 O ai O V) tD O O P, t\ rq N rl O n ^ N >-V) O t0 -4 00 OO Ln O O LA } NI c -i NI NI NI NI .z -* -*I F ;:z O Z 01 -tO Z 01 m O LD ('U 411M O } O .--i m m r- ALn O Ln Ln r q rl Ln O Ln O Ln >- r4 O cn M .-1 m cn >-O cn � NI NI NI NI O M 00 Z Z P, rn ? O NI M M O lD 3 O NI tip n r-1 .o 7 O t\ N) m} m � O� w} �O C m r4 N O N M} .-1 v v v 3 NI v 3 NI o O O O O C N _4 V1 O Z C N rf u'1 O Z C `' N a-1 "I 'O' �r aJ C '" N Ln Ln vl a1 z NOI 00 Ln Ln L!1 - ,_. Nl O 00 in Lf) Ln ,:. O Ln NI 00 N d' >-�' �, O ) C t � O -4 >-} ,� rq M O O 0) t.0 u ri a ri v v N r u NI ri ri D !R ; cr Cr O 3 OO C) 3 OO (U 3 Oa aJ 3 OO N M 41 O 41 K fl. 41 z a ., � 0. 41 cz L C m L C (b L C m s. C m L C fn 3 O— LL 7 O— LL 3 O— L 3 O— LL 3 O— LL fn U Q W fn U Q W V) U Q W U) U Q W v► U Q W W >W 0 Z 0 Z N CI O Z O Z O v, ZZ O O Z q) O' Z>->- ti C C • C C C A t9 a C �, Co a C >. M a 41 C ). a C a C •+ n' Cl U i+ C CL i+ C Cl u a+ C CL 41 C Cl 3 �y +' tC v fl. 3 O f0 a v tZ 7 O f0 m a v O. 3 O f0 a v _Y Q 3 O N a v CLO CL v v 0: -o v oc -o a) v 0) oc -o a) w m t (10m f o cu N CL 'D io M m Y aj VI '> O. '� M , M m a) aI A '> Cl '� m •• a+ a) N a- '� R M m a) a+ n '> C1 'n Cl L > fl CL Q CL C1. Cl > 0. CL f0 w w a- la m w CT LO fa w cr R m N a- m f0 0 O' U n. m W U U w W • U U O_' W • U U w W U U lr W 0 Y e o Yo \ Y o° w Ln -- O -- O, o -- O , Lr! O O N\ l0 l0 W rl l0 w a-1 l0 kO 00 00 00 00 00 N M N M N • M N •• M N r♦ ri .--I L, Lr! • Lr • Lq N . N N N N N . h bl • N YV) Y N Y y Y N Y y O > O O O O N y OO • ) y 00 4) O O0 al aJ t o • N O 00 tv L C Fa L C L C L C L C C O L 7 4 C Q r 7 4 C Q t 3 4 C Q 7 4 C O 4 O U 4. + O U�" O U + O U 41 ++ O U 4+kn a' O in W i 00 O W U 40 N O W i 00 m W L O0 f0 NLU D. Q 2 i.i t7L 0. Q 2 'u. LL co U o U \ \ U a' o -Ta O O JO 0 0 0 O O JO O O JO 0 C) C N Ln fY) In fYl Vi fY1 Ln (Y) Lr! fYj m v o 0 0 C) 0 0 OIn Ln Ln In Ln Ll„ M M m m M O L \ Ln \ \ \ W O G1 N N N N N Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln 0 U- C Q C C C c C C c c cu M O J (A N L S H L A N ,� > w t> 'A ..0 > y.. Li dna a)�< a)�< 4)�< cp, < lCl OC OO i O O OA C i O OO O C i 3 0 OA C O Op O C N N N N-0 0 N_ .Q VO) tjo N N :tQ1 V d > �( aJ aJ Tc a) aJ > 'X cuaJ > .X aJ a) > .X a) V f V) w Q W 0 D:' Q W o Q W o Q W_ 0 (1' Q W o �i w C N M' en: 001 ip @ ' O O Irj .--1 tD N 01 N N 01 M O N CL O twC H O N n M 01 N tC N 00 L!1 00 U o v C Imo: Q O C F' N O X C 0 u m ' 41, X N w H C O i' rD 1 1 M':'11aE 1*n M 0 I N d CL 0 In � n O 00: M � ti c v N C � t--I "'t 00 M to : N co m (Ni to -t tD V 00 0 N I O 00 m' W to 1 O O N m l9r: iii J1 J1 ii1 to 4- n SNOIIIIN : 1 - 1 - I n : 001 O C ' � v L N > C_ y 3 o y O N j N O V u Q) N (0 J 0 N Q J+ Q) w LL � N 7 Ol w 3 `° X 0 x Uy a c C C N > 0! Q N LL IV > x E a' w L `° c t o cc 3 N> N u 'In C OJ c a 0 t 0 tnCL7 a 0 a0'` O C CLr-'n-0 CL N i W d4 a) C h i0 ra U � t - N 00 3 d u n n M 3 >'� " +j c O m -0 c 2 in a y a L m O N 7 (U N 4J x u to lY 'O 0 0 a',� W 10 0 cu 7 1r 07 CL U -Z 2 0. N Y cr E ++ C L W C N tL M M u02� o z u°O4 ZZ N O Z 4m ttoo L O Z N M O — — Z co M O O M to Z r•1 In O 00 Ln a Z 11 Go Ln } I N M N M to N 00 M >- .4 N M 0) c l0 10 m C a+ 7 LL O C a dC N G a C a to •` ti N M' en: 001 m ' O O Irj .--1 tD N 01 N N 01 M 7 O 011 i N: all H O N n M 01 N tC N 00 L!1 00 U .4 00 M Imo: Q to M r -I N 1 U m ' 41, X 0 0o 1 1 M':'11aE 1*n O O O In � n O 00: M to O m tD 01 01 � t--I "'t 00 M to : L (Ni to -t tD V 00 O 00 m' W to 1 t11 01 c -i m l9r: : Tj i 3 m to 4- n u : 1 - 1 - I n : 001 O aj a N Y to: M I co OD LLQj '-1 N 00 N t7 N: LA N b O n O 01 V 00 M LC cu C o O O f 01 c -I' Q 0 M ++ v: :vl 1 1 c m 0o u CU LL LL 0 to C ' � v L N > C_ y 3 o y O N j N O V u Q) N (0 J 0 N Q J+ Q) w LL � N 7 Ol w 3 `° X 0 x Uy a c C C N > 0! Q N LL IV > x E a' w L `° c t o cc 3 N> N u 'In C OJ c a 0 t 0 tnCL7 a 0 a0'` O C CLr-'n-0 CL N i W d4 a) C h i0 ra U � t - N 00 3 d u n n M 3 >'� " +j c O m -0 c 2 in a y a L m O N 7 (U N 4J x u to lY 'O 0 0 a',� W 10 0 cu 7 1r 07 CL U -Z 2 0. N Y cr E ++ C L W C N tL M M u02� o z u°O4 ZZ N O Z 4m ttoo L O Z N M O — — Z co M O O M to Z r•1 In O 00 Ln a Z 11 Go Ln } I N M N M to N 00 M >- .4 N M 0) c l0 10 m C a+ 7 LL O C a dC N G a C a to •` ti I, V M a -i M' en: 001 to In e-1 m ' O O Irj .--1 tD N 01 N N 01 M M: P' : O 011 i N: all H O N n M 01 N tC N 00 L!1 00 .4 00 M Imo: : n' to M r -I 1 m ' 41, X Do m M 00 0o 1 1 M':'11aE 2� .l N -,t m O O In � n O 00: 1l : to to O m tD 01 01 11 n t--I "'t 00 M to : r•1: P' i (Ni to -t tD V 00 O 00 m' W to 1 t11 01 c -i m l9r: : Tj i m to 4- n ' rl : : 1 - 1 - I n : 001 t0 1:T 00 N ' Ln O tD N V N t0 : to: M I , N 1, In Ln 01 M ir1 '-1 N 00 N t7 N: LA N b O n O 01 V 00 M Lr;:: : to 1 f 01 c -I' N v: :vl 1 1 m tD 00 : M: 1 : 1 1 n: to O M N ' LA 0 ei -4 11 V M: M: co! i h O M to N •7 N -i N N 00 -t M : ; t71 N 00 t0 N " ' n O 00 V 00 M ' N 01 c -I N 1 m a:N N .- O 1 to; 1 1 to 41 aE a: 00 tD 01 11 ' Ln O N O 01 1- CO: tn: t7' In O tD t(1 00 M N Irj M N 1- O M: 00: N i I Nj ry In N M U1 O rl V 00 M M : rl : N . ^I N 01 r -I N i I M aC u•1 O O to ei : 1 1 r•1: N i O �' (� to to O ' O O I- M n M M: 1� i O' N N b n to to O ri n1 d .-i rl 01 Cf: tn; 01 N Nf� V1 O M 10 t0 -zr 00 N N : : Ml - 01 01 r -I N 1 1 N T 00 tD m e•1 1 1 . 4 N i O ,--1 Ln N tD � C 00 00 ci In q: M: M 1 C -1 1 -T� m c- IN C 0 0 0 tD : N: Q. v1 00 O M K1 Ln -:t 01 -t r4: : en Il 00 M N 1 1 N N tD m -4N 1 : 1 1 I� to 1 O M 00 tD t/1 c O 01 m to to to : N: N I N 1, m M I, C O 01 O c-1 N 'd' : 001 v1 to N 00 V ^I N 01 tD N : _ —::,41 01 t" m N t1' : : �{ 1 I N 1 i M My O Mt!1 00 �T m N I- O to: V: O _ lD: M:: P, O N0) N M 01 d' 00 p '•i 1, 01 01 r.: oo : Ln. , 01 V' N 00 N m N 01 V O : r•1: N'i 00 rl Lr N 1 I N M 00 O,-* I, u1 V ut N i a€ In l O h 00 N to r -I c 01 p -4 01 N 1--1 In N r- 00 : tD : M: M 1 N: Cl. C M t0 00 M to t0 to to N G1:: M: N: 0. M:P1 % r - M I� N .-1 i Mw O 00 m O N; M :to: 01 M 00 ' p tD '7 V .--1 a-- 1 V 00 to t0 : O; * : r•11 rl : C4, , n to to O .--1 O O ,--I N 01 �F 00: _ ll": M: lD 1" M N M: :MI i I N C ' � v L N > C_ y 3 o y O N j N O V u Q) N (0 J 0 N Q J+ Q) w LL � N 7 Ol w 3 `° X 0 x Uy a c C C N > 0! Q N LL IV > x E a' w L `° c t o cc 3 N> N u 'In C OJ c a 0 t 0 tnCL7 a 0 a0'` O C CLr-'n-0 CL N i W d4 a) C h i0 ra U � t - N 00 3 d u n n M 3 >'� " +j c O m -0 c 2 in a y a L m O N 7 (U N 4J x u to lY 'O 0 0 a',� W 10 0 cu 7 1r 07 CL U -Z 2 0. N Y cr E ++ C L W C N tL M M u02� o z u°O4 ZZ N O Z 4m ttoo L O Z N M O — — Z co M O O M to Z r•1 In O 00 Ln a Z 11 Go Ln } I N M N M to N 00 M >- .4 N M 0) c l0 10 m C a+ 7 LL O C a dC N G a C a to •` ti C r, v m -4 N ut : ! io io a O O .--1 l0 N 01 .r O R I a I Ln Ln O N r\ LD m u U h 111 a O. ^: Q j In 000 19 a--1 V 00 m n: O C V' 0) 1-1 U ao� c A� •jv 1 , C ra7 � O y 00 m 0) 00 W:: cri v y O ' 0 o Ln v r- 0 CL O X N W � u a o o a LD m C)Q �N3 LLJO Y c o N : O ?� I o N Y � a O V 00 M °° N a CL M 0) c -i ` E � N c O 1 M 0 oN a LD V r, • P•1: 1 Ln v C Y `O LD N� rV 11 N 00 N O J (Jp 0 N ON I � m .+y' E O t0 C O N O N O rl O Qp ISi yyp� Q a �R L LD -4Q I V W SNOIIIIW 1 1 1 00i 001 �O O N aR a° r, v m -4 N ut : ! C f6 io a O O .--1 l0 N 01 01: N .-4 N O > I a I Ln Ln O N r\ LD m u U h 111 N N O1 m ^: Q j ri tp l0 00 d' 00 1l LDl�i 19 a--1 V 00 m n: :00' U V' 0) 1-1 U ao� c O d 1 , C ra7 � O y 00 m 0) 00 W:: cri V C r, m ' 0 o Ln v r- 0 00: C%:. aoi , a o o a LD m C)Q �N3 LLJO Y 1--I N00 m N : O ?� 1. j tp 00 l0 -t 00 C a w a O V 00 M °° = tD i 3 M 0) c -i ` E Ln U 1 M 0 �' r LD V r, • P•1: 1 Ln a a° a.° Ln -;r 11 N Y `O LD N� rV 11 N 00 N O J (Jp 0 N ON O cuL .+y' E O t0 C 01 a--1 O N :qr! 1 m O LD -4Q I V W CJLL 1 1 1 00i 001 �O O N aR a° r, v m -4 N ut : ! C f6 aE Ln Ln o m a O O .--1 l0 N 01 01: N .-4 N O > I a I Ln Ln O N r\ LD m Im h 111 N N O1 m ^: N:O! j ri tp l0 00 d' 00 1l LDl�i O a--1 V 00 m n: :00' H V' 0) 1-1 U ao� c 00 Ln Z d 1 , C ra7 J Ln y 00 m 0) 00 W:: 1 ! e:: N! V C r, m ' 0 o Ln v r- 0 00: C%:. aoi , a o o a LD m C)Q �N3 LLJO n1 1--I N00 m N : : n C 1. j tp 00 l0 -t 00 C a w O O V 00 M t0 i = tD i L M 0) c -i N E m rg 7 1 M m a r LD V r, • P•1: 1 Ln a° a.° Ln -;r 11 N ' N O M ry� LD N� rV 11 N 00 N t0: Q: :01 1-1 : t0 ! O O m Ln N 0) Iy Lp N t\ O (l V 00 cn N = Lfl !M t0 C 01 a--1 N :qr! 1 m LD -4Q I V W • i 1 1 1 00i 001 O Ln N ' Ln O h eV -4e -I ai 00DD : Of i 00 i Q 0 N O O N 1n O r' N ni N N 00 M; ! 14 CON N V f\ O00 C F 00 M �y} ! 1- N 0) -1 N �i iV1 1 m N O N r -I LA: 1 1 W: 1. 1: a.° 00 LD 0) -4 ' Ln O N O 01 n 0o : Ln : Ln O LD Ln 00 0) N ,Lj t» nt n O M : Go: : N ! nj Nj Lri N m Ln O n V 00 m M: N: Ln 1 H N M 11 N I 1 m Ln O O l0 rl: , 1 1 li : N 1 O �° ei^ r, l0 V1 O ' O O r, 0) n 0) en: n:O I N N b Ln Ln IY M1 'a ei t\ O1 ei : Ln : O 1 IV L^n O na N ri ID w � 00 N N : : M i 0) 0) e-1 1 r 00 LD m r1 I 1 -1:: N ! O -i Ln N LD NO 00 00 1--I Ln 01: M O ai M ai V C d• 0 0 0 ; n: d! uj 00 O m en 1"1 Ln 01 4 N:' : M 1 t\ 00 M 1 , N A"M NW m 11 N i 1 N M! O 01 00 LD Ln ID O 0) m lD LD Ln: N: N. N r\ m O1 r, C,4 0 00tor4Naas00; Ln LnNcl V 1 1 N M O (n Ln 00 d' tp i 1 1 0: t0 i O N 0) a1 m c M Q Ij m N r, O 1--I t\ 01 a Q: n i M: n! w 3 LA 1 , 0) 0) V 00 M d• N 00 N M N 0) V O i 00 r\ Lr1 N i 1 n Ln Q Ln a-1: i qr: Ln I O 00 N LO N C 00 O V 1--I 0) N Do; Ln; M 1 N 0) LD 00 m 011 Ij N Ln N r\ to : N : (n ! _ C Ln LO Io LO 14 N N O Itf C1: 14::46! n r- m r - N -1 M: M:N 1 , N O w 00 m O n: IM: t0 i 01 m 00 ' c Q 41 p lD V V c I r V 00 LD t0 : O : V' -: -,::(-4, t\ l0 lD C .--I O O 1--1 N 6 -:i 06:: _ I : 01 ! LO r` m i!TILn! a 7 y C a C f6 0 v a 0 >C > Olt" 1. ID L y N .-4 N O > I a I Ln m Im 1! 1 1 1 1 1 1 y 10 H ! ! i Ii 00l rte! j N 1l LDl�i v n N Z u ! H � U ao� c 00 Ln Z d N C ra7 J Ln y N Q � F+ V C N a VNf 00 W 'C L _ L a N �N3 LLJO N X 7 u M u1 C a C Q C C a w d X LL E 4f z > a 1A L lail N E C to rg 7 w 3 M a r a c w a t0 C C — i!TILn! Ln a C f6 0 v ! ! 0 0 N > Olt" 1. ID N .-4 N O > I a I Ln It 1 1 1 1 1 1 Im 1! 1 1 1 1 1 1 y 10 H ! ! i Ii 00l rte! tOp' 01 Lncn O 1l LDl�i 11 �1a1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n N Z i!TILn! Ln C f6 Ln Z I; NiRl M N It 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 y 10 H _ N Z. tOp' v 11 �1a1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � 3 d ! H O 11 011 om ao� c 00 Ln Z Ii m1r%! Iimiwi .O Q d Ln N N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I Ln y 1 1 1 1 1 ii l�piaMi a M LMA oJ W X a0+ u a+ L 0o O u 0C 00 W 'C a 000 o LU 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CL •> C a C > a 1 1 1 1 1 1 a v Q ,"-n Ln 1 a, �— x E a+ C L I!N!N! C a w M ! Ln 1 Ln 1 O 1 m !r` 0D y C f6 to L a) U C y 10 H as 3 O v 3 d u 0>0 H n ao� c Z .O Q d Ln y r cy6 m7 a W X a0+ u a+ L 0o O u 0C 00 W 'C a 000 o LU c— i E Ic a CL •> C a C > a a a LL Z 2 a v Q ,"-n Ln 1 a, �— x E a+ C L w C a w c — u�� o z° u°0 w O a co M > to co VI a n n >- m m m C a+ LL 7 E 3 O c M 40 to a r 5 cr Qj C o� v � LD CD O0 u C C c Q a n E p w 1= N I 0) C 0 0 c N N W N O) .- > N � 01 ~ I C O N N fu f0 m 0 0 V} N SNOIIIIW N C N 2E uJ � I O ti d Q O � C ei N 00 M O ui � O v � •j C u U N N 1n 0o fq 01 v v i+ Q M IW o a C L) V 00 m N W C i+ U U h O a I O) N C 0 O v � Iv N (o m Ln 0 O N I 01 01 L M m 0 o m M O O t � O N a° 2� 4+ O O n 01 n 01 SNOMIW 3 ✓j * * n [f M a--1 M O N N 01 m M O N 2E m c � f0 O R 1'lf ei N 00 M O O T 00 M 0 N In W O } co u U N N 1n 0o fq 01 �l N101 Ln O Q M IW a -I N 00 N c V 00 m N in+ U U h O .-1 -1 ey '7 N ryj 0 O 00 v Oo M 0 c c Ln 0 N O N ri 01 01 L M m 0 o m M Cr, M O t � O N a° 2� 4+ O O n 01 n 01 1y 1'f1 3 ✓j Io v 00 N OLO N 'o '+ W � 36 m 16 ll:t C C 0 In U N 0 v N O 01 M w <D.o 00 Ij O 01 O ei v rq N 01 l0 Y LO.LO 2C m m Ln o v J N O Z M ON N M N m IT i aj O \ O nLn V Ln O. 0 Io }I _4 Ln N n L C e1 N ei M to 00 m o CU U- LOL o in * * n [f M a--1 M O N N 01 m M O ei V 00 M 2E m c � 00 M 0) 00 O R 1'lf ei N 00 M O O T 00 M 0 N In W O } co M N N 1n 0o fq 01 �l N101 Ln O ILO N V N M IW a -I N 00 N c V 00 m N in+ w ei '17 00 h O .-1 -1 ey '7 N ryj N N Ole-1 O 00 v Oo M 0 c c N H N O N ri 01 01 L M m 0 o m NO M Cr, M O n It 00 m K N a° 2� 'n0 o Lo O O n 01 n 01 1y 1'f1 V' ei n 01 ✓j Io v 00 N I~i N '+ W � NO 00 000 -, LMl1 In C ll:t C C 0 Ln vmv N M N Lo m N O 01 M w <D.o 00 Ij O 01 O ei rq N 01 l0 N 2C m m Ln o v m o m N n o R p ei I� 01 01 N M N m IT N nLn V Ln 00 O q e•1 01 N 01 p _4 Ln N n N ei M to 00 m o aoLovve4 a+ Is It 00 Lo N Ln: M:0 Ol: W:: Li n: N: C n 0 In: N: 0 c I11; N; 0 �I :e Ni en: -9 Yfi u dE 2c 4n: M: r OOi N:C M: N: u :c In: O:u 00: L0: c M: act: r M :.-i u IctLn:C N: :n aa O1: N lGi n3c N: ;ll N ;Z'. Ll Ln: N. f, N a': 0 f4: v: tOi 03L1 d i M:r n: op:u N'C �I N dLf 00: In el t0: N:O Q1i N:c Mi M:N * In In O m ' In O N n LO 01 14 Lp LO Oct V 00 �T 0) e-1 m a° n N n M O O --T L0 M m -4 Lp 00 IO '14 00 M 0) eti M Ln V ei N ' O O M Ln N 01 el l0 N V cF n M 01 ei M 00 O Ln N ' O O N In O V 1..j OD N N ": n N 0) e4 M a° 00 w 01 1-/ ' In O Lo Ln 0o rn N N u•I N M Ln e-1 rn e-1 m O�CXnUDLn In N V1 LO n In In O In O M O a 01 ei N O ei M N V V1 00 O M M n 00 M N O 01 00 1.0 Ln N n M 01 n uj Ln N OlIt 0) n M N O N 0) -4 01 0) -tt 00 M V N 00 00 n Lfl N h co N IO -4 01 w 00 M p Ln Co Ln w ri n M ri N 0 rl � ko C o LD C-4 n m ii NiNl4n en to In O Q7 ININI In In Y 1 lel � '1 Ial I 1 i 1 1 1 1 2E I II OILnI II NIM` c � a .I NIc1 0 II OIMI N 0 N In W O } co i; N; N� N N 1n 0o fq 01 �l N101 OD •I 'aI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 ei en rn M } 1 1 1 1 1 lm;nl in+ 1 1 1 Ii CN. 0. a n ii NiNl4n en to In O Q7 ININI In In Y 1 lel � '1 Ial I 1 i 1 1 1 1 I II OILnI II NIM` c � {� M W M .I NIc1 n fn i i I i IoIaI IOIOI N N 1n 0o fq 01 �l N101 OD In N � 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 ei en rn M } 1 1�1 N 1 1 1 1 1 1 'I LnlIm1n M =ciai _ ' cn r !N1N! - M Ln iLl) 0J (1) OD H c � r0 N L 01 � N OD 3 U m= N 3 rO � 0 c c H i 01 01 L M m 0 C 01 O 7 XCk. a W X u '+' -I-- fa'6 00 0 U K 00 W .O vO +' LU tD m '^ Vi i? C M Q C d C 3 E w Z S 0J ✓j I~i E C '+ W � m 1`O L°�f-o z° u 0 4 to N N 000 M } 1i L1r1 la co N 0! n n > VD N I_ - _N Ln! O : Ln ; f0 w O O N M1 a I LD N 01 N N O1 M 7 -*: M 1 N: O h O N r\ W M rj <D LO 00 M Y v O .- I cf 00 m N : Q - 01 CL Q m tio ' �R �R O w C 1 1 1 O = 00 i 0 O O O Ln C n O = M C 00 � a --I N o0 M Q = w C , e.j tC W l0 V o0 Ln CL o x N W O W: = tO i - M 0) a--1 0 M c I �+ C o m ~O � 1 = I 1 00:01; Oy N i+ m W N d' N r1 N cl N 10 : d' N: 11 14:: 10 i , v Y LL 01 V 00 M all M - yo v N rN C ei r: cu EO \ O � v 00, L`a m r aj 1 1 1 N :01 C Oo O Ln N 01 O O u U ii LL o Ln n N f0 00 d' 00 M 1 O m N i m 0 ti N O N ei M: 1 1 O; Ln a°. o0 W 01 -4 n Ln O N O 01 r\ 00 : 10 : -* 1 SNOIIIIW LA O LD Ln w m m N n1 v c � � N � � L O 'y O N j N V u p LV p u O C -1 N Q a. 1^ 01 y C N Q�_� W, ar W 'x U C Ol d C Q C N 'A 0) U 01 d H i X C 'D Vs LR F Y, •C 00 C i 3 CL u t 0 Ln w O d C a A F— V O Q a> OJ c m d L � c M N 3 0 m w v fO C o cu CLd OCO cN w C W K X 01 cL LI L M CO O N 7 0I \ W X N u i.+ L OZS O U U M W y Ol O ` O C d C LW Lw c0 c �o y m Lu v y v a LL Z2 IZ N O. Y CL E- C L '> C W N IlD v°2►- o w UOQ Z N O O P% Z 74 vi OM1 } LA m is } LA e -I a L N 00 M } rl %Do> 10 00 H v Ch N } .0.. N Ln m r N fY1 2 a M C O O N O f� _N Ln! O : Ln ; f0 w O O N M1 a I LD N 01 N N O1 M 7 -*: M 1 N: O h O N r\ W M rj <D LO 00 M Y v O .- I cf 00 m N : Q - 01 m U ' �R �R O 00 : 1 1 1 O = 00 i 0 O O O Ln C n O = M O O W m 01 00 � a --I N o0 M N : t , e.j tC W l0 V o0 Ln 4_ *3 O V 00' M W: = tO i - M 0) a--1 0 M c 1 1 3 o d' tO ;t n • r1: 1 = I 1 00:01; Oy v Ln O m V6 W N d' N r1 N cl N 10 : d' N: 11 14:: 10 i , O O M Ln N 01 .i tC N d V f\ Y LL 01 V 00 M 0 : LAI - yo v N ei r: cu EO \ O m Q O L`a m r aj 1 1 1 N :01 c Oo O Ln N 01 O O u U ii LL o Ln v c � � N � � L O 'y O N j N V u p LV p u O C -1 N Q a. 1^ 01 y C N Q�_� W, ar W 'x U C Ol d C Q C N 'A 0) U 01 d H i X C 'D Vs LR F Y, •C 00 C i 3 CL u t 0 Ln w O d C a A F— V O Q a> OJ c m d L � c M N 3 0 m w v fO C o cu CLd OCO cN w C W K X 01 cL LI L M CO O N 7 0I \ W X N u i.+ L OZS O U U M W y Ol O ` O C d C LW Lw c0 c �o y m Lu v y v a LL Z2 IZ N O. Y CL E- C L '> C W N IlD v°2►- o w UOQ Z N O O P% Z 74 vi OM1 } LA m is } LA e -I a L N 00 M } rl %Do> 10 00 H v Ch N } .0.. N Ln m r N fY1 2 a M C O O N O f� r\ V co 1--1 Ln! O : Ln ; a: is Ln Ln O M w O O N M1 a I LD N 01 N N O1 M C1: n: -*: M 1 N: O h O N r\ W M rj <D LO 00 M M In O .- I cf 00 m N : :001 - 01 ' �R �R 00 m (n 00 00 : 1 1 1 O = 00 i n N r- m V O O Ln C n O 00: 0:00' O O W m 01 00 O Irl a --I N o0 M N : N : -1 , e.j tC W l0 V o0 Ln C O V 00' M W: = tO i - M 0) a--1 M 1 1 d' tO ;t n • r1: 1 = I 1 00:01; a'. a: Ln 't .-i N 00 Ln O m V6 W N d' N r1 N cl N 10 : d' N: 11 14:: 10 i , O O M Ln N 01 .i tC N d V f\ N It O 01 V 00 M LA: : LAI - M 01 -4 N ef: ;tT1 1 1 m LA a° LO rt a L>o O1 : 1 1 1 N :01 Oo O Ln N 01 LA O N ry� ei -4r1 V N N M e-1 O 00: M: rl: O i rl: LII O Q O N Ln V rj 0p N N� n n N O 00 d' 00 M 1 - N 01 -4 i m N O N ei M: 1 1 O; Ln a°. o0 W 01 -4 n Ln O N O 01 r\ 00 : 10 : -* 1 LA O LD Ln w m m N n1 M N r` O M: w: N i N N Ln N M Ln ri O r\ -, 00 M M : 'r:: LRi N 1 1 In O o t0 rl : 1 1 1 � . N I O r` LD Ln O ' f\ 01 r\ 01 M: N:O1 N L11 tC r\ Ln Lm O ..j Ly1 ri r- 01 -*; Ln: O; N N f\ Ln O M ID LO -,f 00 N N: Mi - 01 01 -1 i 1 a° M a 00 LO M rl : i r Z: O r-1 Ln N l0 = HO C 00 W_4 1n 0, 0 0 0 aa LO: 01: en, N: qt! - LL1 -4 M rI t7 00 O m fn Ln V 01 N: :M1 - n00 M N1 i 1 N aC m ry LD m 4 : N i i 1 N= LA. o rn 00 W Ln m O 01 M tD tD Ln: N:N1 N r\ M 01 r, O O 01 O rt N: O: 00 I LL1 Ln N 00 V 01 n m N �; :�I 1 1 N m 01 Ln 00 a' 10 1 0. t0� o N 01 r1 m o M N r, o a M: n; 01 01 v 00 = !1 p N n 01 01 r%:: 00: LAI 01 d' N 00 00 r\ LA N 1 N m n Ln Ln N: i 1 i.,! O 00 N to r1 C ap O C1 p a .-+ 01 N .--I Ln N n 00: %D: Ln : M, N ; m ; H _ O 01 LD o0 m Ln W Ln W N N O V C1: N: O; rl rl M rl M: n 1 1 1 N m o W 00 M O n: i C1: W i 01 M 00 ' = a O1 p tD v v rI .--I CL' 00 t0 10: 0: a:rL1 r4:N . r, W W O -i O 00: rl:01; _ LD n m N m: :M; j 1 ; N v c � � N � � L O 'y O N j N V u p LV p u O C -1 N Q a. 1^ 01 y C N Q�_� W, ar W 'x U C Ol d C Q C N 'A 0) U 01 d H i X C 'D Vs LR F Y, •C 00 C i 3 CL u t 0 Ln w O d C a A F— V O Q a> OJ c m d L � c M N 3 0 m w v fO C o cu CLd OCO cN w C W K X 01 cL LI L M CO O N 7 0I \ W X N u i.+ L OZS O U U M W y Ol O ` O C d C LW Lw c0 c �o y m Lu v y v a LL Z2 IZ N O. Y CL E- C L '> C W N IlD v°2►- o w UOQ Z N O O P% Z 74 vi OM1 } LA m is } LA e -I a L N 00 M } rl %Do> 10 00 H v Ch N } .0.. N Ln m r N fY1 2 a M C O O N O f� c H LA O N r\ tD M ,y tC LO 00 V C v.i o `mo M � 1+ fm0 O I -T 00 M -^r LNO m U � O tw c Ln Q M Lrj o v J •jv C f0 M Left) N N d � d U to o .-i .-L e -L a N ryj O X c C O u 0o a 00 m O O N Ln O h N W N C O tLo m O N Ory O^1 M [h o N N CL O t a � N � oN w a) C 0 i\ M O M 0 a e -L r` at N � m w 1* 00 N N h t0 n Ln Ln O 0 O N I 00 LO M IV 3 0 � O O H U � N iii Ili J1. J'i 01 m LO w L>D C o 01 O .-1 SNO1111IN 4 N cr tO Y LO O O .-L l0 N 01 H N N M M O H LA O N r\ tD M ,y tC LO 00 V N v.i o `mo M 7 O O I -T 00 M -^r LNO m U -y tp 01 l0 `: a LO Ln Q M Lrj N 00 N O f0 M Left) N N t4 tC N ": U to o .-i .-L e -L a N ryj O 0 0o a 00 m O O N Ln O h a° a: N O N .--1 O N Ory O^1 M M O O t a � N M N Ln N m ++ 0 i\ M O M 0 a e -L r` at r- t0 Ln O w 1* 00 N N h t0 n Ln Ln O tLo3 00 LO M IV 3 0 � a 000 H U � N O N t0 m .-f N O 01 m LO w L>D C o 01 O .-1 v 4 N cr tO Y LO -0 O J fop C M O N m N 01 't i O O a O �`o aT aj Lh 00 c 01 w 00 M N aL O o cU LL- Li 0 v1 O O .-L l0 N 01 H N N M M O r -L V 00 M LA O N r\ tD M ,y tC LO 00 V co m rn Oo v.i o `mo M N m m O O I -T 00 M -^r LNO m m -y tp 01 l0 `: a LO Ln to rq r4 M Lrj N 00 N O fm V 00 m M Left) N N t4 tC N ": it Oloal to o .-i .-L e -L a N ryj N N 00 0 0o a 00 m O O N Ln O N a° a: N O N .--1 O N Ory O^1 L+1 M O O rl V 00 m LLn too u1Oi 000 N M N Ln N m Ln 0 i\ M O M f» a e -L r` at r- t0 Ln O w 1* 00 N N h t0 n Ln Ln O N Ln O m 10 00 LO M N O 00 00 r -L Ln Ln o a 000 t+ Ln v a v -im-L a N a" n1 N t0 m .-f N O 01 m LO w L>D C o 01 O .-1 4 N cr tO t0`+ r- m 001 n N u1 Ln N 00 d M Ln M O m Nr" O C r" r n 01 LT N m N 01 't 01 01 V 00 N 01 V N 00 O 01 O -4-L Ln N n 00 N LD c -f N N O 01 w 00 M N aL a c o r- r- m r - W v v N O c'L N Q1 V nm LO t0 N 111; %0-, m: 00:0 F, R c A: 0 00: Aiu VU N;0 to:: : u r1E NEr u1: u 00: rr:C ME rr:u 3c Ln: O: u 00 E t0 : c M: 0o: r u a: Ec Mi A:C N :H NS rf:r O1: n tDE Ni Ni h NEf�Eu LA: N: r N �ei01 v: :c t0 O t1 cl E co:: u : A: W 00 : a : u 00?tv t0 :0 : rjNO C M: to: r` nE 01:LL O: r1•P 00:r1:Q M: EfY � C 7 � rD � L aJ C y.. O N > O D vi u to N� N U O C —1 O N v+ Q 1c: v O1 of 00C_ GIN Q 'Z w 7 O1 3 ,u J M ; c 3 W O x U a y OJ C C w W LL d > bb LY 3 Lr 3 v c 01 c W CL E u o Ln v E10 as a 0 v vc e1 +� r- 0-- - c Ln H v 0 4 ' LA O N r\ tD 01 ,y tC LO 00 V Ln V' O1 N � m t L L t L L 1 1 1 I 1 1 0 O v -^r LNO m 000 -y tp 01 l0 `: Ln m 0) r -i 0 M � Ln , O O 00 M Left) N N t4 tC N ": it Oloal m 0) cd 4" u1 M N N N O O N Ln O r\ ,.j CO N N lll N N 01 a1 m 00 o 1 1�1 L - LLn too u1Oi 000 m M N Ln N m -4 ri 0) -4 M r- t0 Ln O N h t0 n Ln Ln O Ln O m 10 01 01 a i ImILnI N n Le Ln N c ir4. N. -im-L a O ui 00 O m m r; 06 m N � t0`+ r- m 001 n u1 Ln N 00 d 01 r- m N O N 01 ci C 01 01 V 00 01 V N 00 00 r- Lf- N 00 N LD c -f 01 w 00 M p Ln LO Ln to r- r- m r - N 00 c nm LO t0 O r-1 O tO r- m N iir i41WI N M 01 INI IAI m ' V } I � La - Ii - i N M N N en i ai a •I NIN- � M t L L t L L 1 1 1 I 1 1 v t 1 1 i OiOi ONiLn M M N ii 0 lir-liMi � 0 N it Oloal M M^ N ' � M 4" u1 N p N N N �N1000-� } 1 1�1 L - d ImILnI n Le ir4. N. O } iir i41WI N M 01 INI IAI m ' V } I � La - Ii - i N M N N en i ai d •I NIN- � M t L L t L L 1 1 1 I 1 1 t 1 1 i OiOi ONiLn M M N ii O t0 >- lir-liMi � N N rL � to�v� �Io;tol M M^ N ' � M iLViNi � N Ln. Cn N M N N en iO31ich •I NIN- � M Ln: (nyt iLn id'i r I�ImI O Lm •; .--i I N : � r-1 i 10 LLD i N a1 a) tto c ro Y L CU {n V V 41 to c N N N 3 O E �+ v a, OA y,, a) U :0 �. rho ;L- _U C OO c N O. C y a L .0 Co O N 7 aJ LL' X a0_. co O _V U 90 Lu :o 0J OOD Lo C H i" J C 07 c w Uzi nc �Lnc;,a a x EN� S C C W v0��owv0-a N co c" } '-t fv d C f0 N m C a+ L- C LL O ar N E L O 7 �+ Q O cc 7 � a � L � v r4 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES December 7, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. on December 7, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Joel Komarek, LOIS Project Director; Shawn Cross, Asst Finance Director; Denise Frisbee, Director of Planning and Building Services; Kim Gilmer, Parks & Recreation Director; Shawn Cross, Asst Finance Director; Debra Andreades, Senior Planner; Ursula Euler, Finance Director 3. PRESENTATIONS 3.1 Unsung Hero Awards Councilor Vizzini reviewed the Unsung Hero Awards nomination and selection process He presented an award to Paul Sleeper and congratulated him. He noted that Mr. Sleeper volunteered at the Adult Community Center's Computer Learning Lab, teaching classes and keeping the Mac computer system up and running. He noted that Kay Kerr nominated him. He presented an award to Dale Cleland and congratulated him. He indicated that Mr. Cleland has served as the volunteer director and manager of the volunteer Lake Oswego Millennium Band since its inception in the fall of 1999. He noted that Cindy Glazier nominated him. He recognized Marylou Colver, nominated by Bonnie Hirshberger, for her stories about the history of Lake Oswego, which she researched and wrote as part of the Centennial Celebration. He presented the award to Erin O'Rourke-Meadors, who accepted it on behalf of Ms. Colver. Ms. O'Rourke-Meadors expressed Ms. Colver's regrets for not being present tonight. She mentioned that Centennial Snippets had been Ms. Colver's idea, and that they were working on an annual issue for Historic Preservation Month in May. Mayor Hoffman thanked the three Unsung Heroes and all nominees for the work that they did for the community. 4. CITIZEN COMMENT • Ben Brewer, 17400 Schalit Way Mr. Brewer spoke in support of a new tennis center. He indicated that he has played tennis at the Lake Oswego Tennis Center for 14 years, beginning at age 4. He mentioned that last year he was the number one player on the Lakeridge Varsity Tennis Team and went to the State playoffs. He described tennis as his passion, good exercise, and good for the brain, as well his means of learning sportsmanlike conduct. He reported that the Dairy Farmers of America honored the 2010 Lakeridge Boys Tennis Team for having the highest combined GPA of 3.86 of any 6A tennis team in the state. He argued that the community sorely needed a new tennis center due to the weather and the need to play tennis indoors nine months out of the year. He observed that court time was non-existent City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 21 December 7, 2010 at the tennis center. He mentioned playing tennis with his family and his intention to play tennis his whole life. He asked the Council to build a larger indoor tennis facility to allow everyone the opportunity to play tennis year round. • Margaret Anderson, 515 North Shore Road Ms. Anderson spoke in support of a new tennis center. She indicated that, while she has played tennis all her adult life, she began playing competitively 23 years ago after she retired as an educator. She described how tennis exercised not only her body but also her brain. She showed 13hotographs of the Pacific Northwest Section 80 team, on which she played at the Intersectional Team competition last November. She advocated for building a larger tennis facility, since there were many in Lake Oswego who enjoyed playing this sport of a lifetime but could not get courts at the current facility, including herself. She pointed out that if the Council facilitated the construction of a new facility, the City could build it in two years. She asked the Council to do what it could to keep Lake Oswegans young and playing tennis all year long. Mayor Hoffman asked those in the audience in support of Ms. Anderson to raise their hands • Amy Waterbury, Lake Forest Neighborhood Assn Board representative Ms. Waterbury addressed the Waluga Reservoir No.2. She read the first sentence of a resolution signed by the Lake Forest and Waluga Neighborhood Association Boards respectfully asking the Council "to delay the approval of the capital plan for the proposed Waluga Reservoir No.2 until questions about capacity and height, which could affect placement and cost, have been sufficiently addressed." She noted that adding a second reservoir tank to the already existing tank at this location equated to over a football field's worth of concrete tank in their neighborhood. She stated that the surrounding neighbors opposed the current design based on size, height, capacity, and location. She reviewed several key design questions regarding whether the City could store some capacity elsewhere, thus reducing the size and height of the facility. She mentioned that neighbors felt that the City was using this reservoir as a dumping ground for as much capacity as possible in disregard of the neighborhood character. She recalled the active participation of the neighborhood in attending the many meetings, which she described as not necessarily effective. She indicated that the neighbors did not feel that they have been heard, noting that there were unanswered questions still remaining after seven months. She mentioned the neighborhoods' appreciation of the diligence of Councilors Tierney and Olson in asking important questions of the Water Partnership Team. She discussed the issues surrounding the question of whether the City could store some of the reservoir capacity elsewhere, such as at the Tenth Avenue tank, currently proposed for decommissioning. She suggested maintaining the status quo for that reservoir, as the Tenth Avenue neighbors would see nothing different from what they had now. Doing so would reduce the impact on the Lake Forest neighborhood. She mentioned that staff did present this alternative to the Oversight Committee last night late in the meeting, but she felt that the option, which seemed acceptable to the two Councilors on the Committee, warranted more consideration time. She mentioned the second option of building a reservoir in Tigard. She asked why a 3.5 million gallon tank was needed at this time and whether the 40 foot height was justified. She indicated that the Water Partnership Team justified the height based on unverified water pressure issues in the Waluga neighborhood. She cited the lack of time that the Oversight Committee had to consider these options and the unanswered questions as the Boards' reasons for asking the Council to postpone approval of the Waluga Reservoir No.2 design. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 21 December 7, 2010 • Kay Kerr, 4 Gershwin Court Ms. Kerr asked why the no left turn sign was still up at 4th Street and A Avenue, given that the construction across the street has finished. Mayor Hoffman directed her to Mr. McIntyre for the answer. • Skip Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill Road, Portland, Clackamas County Mr. Ormsby argued that, based on the Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement and the Lake Oswego School District's announcement last night of its facilities reorganization plan, a perfect storm was brewing in Lake Oswego. He contended that encumbering the tax and fee base with the streetcar alternatives, Foothills, or the North Anchor was a financial disaster waiting to happen. He noted that the people would find out what was in the offing when they considered their assessor code areas in light of the urban renewal maps and the effect of school financing. He contended that Lake Oswego citizens would also discover that the streetcar ran three to four miles to the east of the population centers by Boones Ferry and Country Club Roads and that a good portion of everything west of Boones Ferry was not even in the Lake Oswego study area. He pointed out that the maps showed Mountain Park cut off from the East End of Lake Oswego. He mentioned that he found it disturbing that there were no buses running down Country Club to Kerr Parkway and out to the Sylvania campus. He expressed his concern that Birdshill was not invited to the Mayor's meeting on Saturday. He mentioned the four years he spent in getting Birdshill recognized jointly by Lake Oswego and Clackamas County. Mayor Hoffman apologized to Mr. Ormsby for his apparent non -invitation to the Mayor's Forum, although Mr. Ormsby attended it anyway. He explained that the City used an incorrect e-mail list, which did not include four neighborhood associations. He indicated that staff has corrected the list and that Mr. Ormsby would receive notification of the next Mayor's Meeting with the neighborhood chairs in February. He expressed his appreciation for Mr. Ormsby's input and participation. • Jeff Gage, 3080 Westview Circle Mr. Gage addressed Resolution 10-65 on the Consent Agenda, concerning the statewide ban on plastic bags. He explained that he had been President of Gage Industries, the largest plastics manufacturer in Oregon until it went out of business three years ago due to the downfall in the heavy truck market. He said that he had been actively involved in energy conservation and recycling issues since the mid-1980s. He directed the Council to the paper he provided, asking that the members peruse it before voting on this resolution. He commented that, while the promotion of reusable bags was a good element in this proposed ban, the promotion of paper bags over plastic bags was not. He pointed out that people felt a little guilty about using plastics because they have been educated to believe that plastics were bad. He cited that as one reason why he educated himself about energy, products manufacturing, and products disposal. He indicated that his paper provided evidence to correct some of the misleading comments made by Brock Howell from Environment Oregon at his recent presentation to the Council. He stated that plastic bags were extremely efficient energywise, with it taking five to seven times as much energy to make a paper bag than it did to make a plastic bag. He commented that it took 84 times as much energy to make a paper bag as it did to make a recycled plastic bag. He mentioned that extrusion, a process used at Gage Industries, was the same process used to make plastic bags. He noted that the average paper mill used 20 times as much energy per employee as Gage Industries had in making effectively similar products. He conceded that plastic bags in the waste stream were bad. He mentioned that he and his father had been instrumental in getting the first automatic plastic bottle sorting system in the U.S. located City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 21 December 7, 2010 in Oregon, which became a foundation in allowing plastic bottle curbside recycling statewide. He commented that Gage Industries never made plastic bottles or plastic bags, but these products were better environmentally in more ways than frequently taught. He mentioned that he reused plastic bags as trash bags before putting them in the waste stream. He noted that paper bags had 10 times the volume of a plastic bag and took up more space in a landfill, as well as decomposing into methane gas in an anaerobic environment (which landfills were designed not to be). He commented that methane was considered to be 23 times worse for global warming than carbon dioxide. He commented that plastics in the ocean were a seriously bad situation. He cited an ars ,,le in the August Scientific American issue asking where all the plastic was going, given that the ocean garbage patches were not growing. He directed the Council to his paper for his thoughts on that question. He expressed his hope that the Council could review his paper before rubber-stamping Environment Oregon's request. He mentioned that he would not be so sure that this issue was as bipartisan as some have claimed. • John Surrett, 1685 Edgecliff Terrace, LONAC President Mr. Surrett presented the LONAC membership's request that the Council delay action on Ordinance 2560 at its December 13 meeting, and delay submitting the City's compliance package to Metro regarding the sensitive lands matter. He argued that many issues on the sensitive lands matter raised by Lake Oswego Stewards and other concerned citizens have not been adequately resolved and needed to be before the Council voted on the issue. He indicated that a quorum of voting members voted unanimously (with one abstention) at the LONAC December 4 meeting to present this request for a delay to the Council. • Jim Bolland, 804 Fifth Street, LONAC representative Mr. Bolland indicated that, at the LONAC December 4 meeting, the Waluga and Lake Forest neighborhoods requested LONAC's support of their request to delay the decision regarding the siting, sizing, and capacity for the proposed Waluga Water Reservoir No.2. He reported that LONAC voted unanimously to support that request, which Ms. Waterbury presented earlier. He recalled that during the discussion at a LONAC forum several months ago, which Councilor Tierney and Mr. Komarek attended, someone mentioned the possible decommissioning of the 10tH Street tank. He noted that the FAN/Forest Hills Chairperson, Marie Meneghin, indicated at the time that the City has not contacted her regarding that possibility. He reported that Ms. Meneghin indicated to him just now that the City still has not been contacted her regarding the decommissioning of that tank. He argued that these large decisions with such an impact on the neighbors and residents needed public input, specifically on the sizing and siting issues, before the Council moved forward with this portion of the larger project. He respectfully requested that the Council obtain that public input. • Gary Buford, 5 Camelot Court Mr. Buford noted for the record that he did not get mail delivery at his residence. He stated his opinion that the voters in Lake Oswego did not cast their votes on the basis of a popularity contest but rather on the basis of who was going to lead the city in the way that they thought it should be led, on financial/spending issues, and on personal respect of the rights of every citizen in Lake Oswego, including the respect of private property rights. He noted a quote from a Council member following the election: "The people have spoken." He expressed his hope that each Council member going forward to represent the citizenry in 2011 remembered the election. He expressed his appreciation to Councilor Hennagin for the time and effort he put into the Council position for four years, even though he did not agree with the way the Councilor voted on the issues that affected him. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 21 December 7, 2010 He commented that through the balance of this year and into next year, issues would come to the Council, which the voters in November indicated that they wanted the Council to look at differently. He suggested that the Council do so. He cited the issues of private property rights with respect to sensitive lands, relocating City Hall to the West End Building (which he did not agree with), and the streetcar. He contended that they should know what the costs of the streetcar were going to be and who was going to pay those costs before the Council voted to go forward any further with the streetcar project. REPORTS/RESOLUTIONS/UPDATES 5.1 Lake Oswego - Tigard Water Supply Partnership: Resolution 10-73, approving a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Plan Mr. Komarek indicated that Resolution 10-73 represented the culmination of more than four years of significant effort and sound decision-making on the part of the prior and current City Councils of Lake Oswego and Tigard. He acknowledged the good work of the Councils, his colleagues on the Technical Committee, and the Oversight Committee members (Councilors Olson and Tierney). He mentioned that the program manager Brown & Caldwell has done a remarkable job in assisting the cities in defining this project. He noted the good work of the expert panel and the Citizen Sounding Board in helping staff understand treatment technologies. He gave a PowerPoint presentation. He described the Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program as a foundational document that would guide their efforts going forward in permitting, value planning, design, future watershed planning, water rights, water management conservation planning, and the utility billing system. He noted that significant effort went into evaluating the existing facilities' condition and determining how to address the deficiencies in the supply system in order to provide sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the two cities over the next 50 to 60 years. He discussed facilities sizing (pp. 159-160). He emphasized that there were significant economies of scale realized in right sizing facilities today rather than implementing smaller incremental capacity expansions over time. He referenced the example in his report (p.160) explaining how the fixed costs of design, permitting, right-of-way, and construction did not vary with the pipe size because they had to do the same kind and amount of work for any pipe size. He reviewed the future risks avoided with right sizing today (p.160). He presented a graphic showing the Lake Oswego rates based upon the current program cost estimate of $230 million ($107 million to Lake Oswego). He pointed out that the difference in a residential bill in FY 2015/2016 between the current financial plan (no ozone) and the ozone option was $4.22. He discussed the ozone option (pp. 160-161). He reviewed the business case evaluation of treatment technologies process that the Council authorized (p.161). He noted that the consensus of the expert panel and the Citizen Sounding Board was to include ozone along with conventional treatment at the expanded water treatment plant. He mentioned that ozone provided additional public health barriers to a number of contaminants and compounds (pp.160-161). He emphasized that the cost to a typical Lake Oswego household today for the ozone option was 17 cents per day. He recommended adoption of Resolution 10-73, which contained the Technical Committee's recommendation for a Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program (pp. 171-187), as approved by the Oversight Committee and forwarded to the City Councils. He pointed out the summary list of facilities (p.159). He noted the recommendation in the program to size the Waluga Reservoir No.2 for 3.5 million gallons and to site it on the property that the City purchased for this purpose in the mid-1990s. • Council Questions At Councilor Tierney's request, Mr. Komarek reviewed the specifics of the value engineering process, scheduled for January 10 through January 14. He explained that an independent panel of City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 21 December 7, 2010 design and construction experts would review the project definition report and the decision basis to look for ways to construct the project more economically. Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Tierney that it would be fair to say that approval of the capital plan set the framework, but that framework was subject to change over the next many years. He explained that he expected the design and review process to be iterative, but they were early in the process and he could not say what changes might occur. At Councilor Hennagin's request, Mr. Komarek reviewed the range of alternatives that staff explored at Council's direction for siting the Waluga Reservoir No.2 (p.161). He referenced Table 1 summarizing staff's findings for each of the alternatives. He mentioned informing the Oversight Committee that all those alternative sites involved significant additional relocation costs. He presented staff's opinion, based upon the analysis, that relocating the reservoir to the 10th Street site had significant constructability, permitting, and land use hurdles. He noted that the IGA provided for Lake Oswego to bear the entire cost of siting this 3.5 mg reservoir at some location other than the Waluga property. He indicated that the range for the incremental additional construction costs only ran from $1.6 million to over $6 million. He mentioned that the associated design, permitting, and management costs could add another 20% to those figures. Councilor Olson asked if staff considered putting a reservoir in Tigard to store its 1.5 mg portion of the 3.5 mg Waluga Reservoir No.2 capacity. Mr. Komarek indicated that staff has not considered that option. He said that Tigard needed to draw water out of the Waluga Reservoir because the terminal location from the high service pump station would be at this site. He explained that the system needed these two reservoirs to work in tandem and to have the same floor elevation. He commented that staff would need to research thoroughly the operational issues, as well as the engineering and hydraulics of one reservoir at Waluga and one in Tigard. Jon Holland, Brown & Caldwell, observed that staff has not looked at the hydraulic and operational issues of this scenario, which could well be fatal flaws, because this scenario required building two reservoirs instead of only one. He pointed out that Lake Oswego needed a second reservoir at Waluga anyway for Lake Oswego's 2 mg of water. He reiterated that Lake Oswego would bear all the additional costs of building a second reservoir in Tigard, including land purchase. Councilor Olson recalled a question raised by a citizen at the Oversight Committee meeting about the potential for a major earthquake. She asked whether the existing reservoir would be upgraded to higher seismic standards, and whether the new reservoir would be built to withstand a 9 or 10 magnitude earthquake, as opposed to a 7 or 8 magnitude quake. Mr. Komarek indicated that staff has not discussed doing a site-specific risk analysis for the existing tank, but they could do so and do any hardening that might be needed. He recalled informing the Oversight Committee some time ago that they would build the new reservoir to the same seismic standard for critical structures, such as hospitals and defense facilities, which was beyond the current maximum code requirements. He indicated that in the structure design they would consider all the relevant factors involved in determining the impact of an earthquake on a building, but he could not say right now whether it would withstand a 9 magnitude quake. Councilor Jordan asked if staff saw the Clackamas River ever being as clean a watershed as Bull Run was right now so that the system would not need the ozonation to clear out the additional contaminants. Mr. Komarek observed that 'clean' was a relative term. He pointed out that the Clackamas watershed was highly urbanized in its lower section and had many federal, state, and private forestlands. He commented that he did not expect its management for recreational, timber, and agricultural interests, and, to a much lesser extent, municipal water supply, to change any time soon. He noted that those uses put significant pressure on the watershed in terms of maintaining water quality. Mr. Komarek discussed the known contaminants in the river, based on the U.S. Geological Survey's lengthy study done a number of years ago. He mentioned herbicides, pesticides, and City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 21 December 7, 2010 personal care products. He reviewed the benefits of ozone in providing an additional barrier to those contaminants, as well as in allowing a reduction in the amount of chlorine used at the water treatment plant. He explained that reducing chlorine also reduced the disinfection byproducts, currently regulated by the EPA as a carcinogen. He commented that ozone also addressed the taste and odor issues occasionally occurring on the river due to algae blooms, which were becoming more predominant with the urbanization of the watershed. He emphasized that, while ozone was not required today, it did provide significant benefit to the public at a very economical cost. Councilor Jordan moved Resolution 10-73, to approve a Supply Facilitbcs Capital Improvement Program for the Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Supply Partnership. Councilor Moncrieff seconded the motion. Mayor Hoffman noted that the resolution included authorizing the Mayor to sign the second amendment to the Lake Oswego -Tigard IGA regarding water supply facilities design, construction, and operation. Councilor Olson asked how confident Mr. Komarek was in the cost estimates at present, and how much did he think they would vary following the value engineering and a more refined design. Mr. Komarek concurred that that was difficult to answer right now. He indicated that the staff cost estimate was in the midrange of a range of costs. Mr. Holland agreed that it was difficult to anticipate what the value engineering program might find. Mr. Holland confirmed to Councilor Olson that Lake Oswego's share could potentially change if the costs changed. He mentioned a plan to revise allocations and payment for facilities at each stage of the program as estimates improved. He noted the final `truing up' at the end to insure that the allocation formulas were applied correctly and the dollars balanced out. Councilor Moncrieff thanked the Technical Committee, the Oversight Committee, the expert panel, and the Citizen Sounding Board for the time and effort each group put in to the study and careful consideration of the elements in the recommendation. She indicated that she thought they have done an excellent job in answering Council concerns in a timely manner. Councilor Tierney moved to amend the resolution to increase the construction contingency in Lake Oswego by $2 million, allowing for the continued investigation of the siting and reduction of the Waluga Reservoir. Councilor Olson seconded the motion. Councilors Jordan and Moncrieff accepted the motion as a friendly amendment to the main motion. Councilor Vizzini asked whether putting a larger contingency in the budget required an adjustment to the rate increase. Mr. Komarek answered that, technically, the answer was yes. However, given the 25 -year term of the bond, he did not expect adding $2 million to have a measurable effect. He summarized the Council's direction, as staff was to explore further options to potentially mitigate the impact to the neighborhood. Mr. Komarek confirmed to Councilor Vizzini that the $6 million cost in the range of costs for moving or reducing the Waluga Reservoir No.2 would not be marginal, in his opinion. He mentioned the option that staff presented to the Oversight Committee yesterday of moving the reservoir further north on the site, which had a construction only estimate of $1.6 million with the design and project management costs coming closer to $2 million. He noted that this $2 million was on top of the current estimate of $7.4 million for a total estimate of $9.4 million. Councilor Vizzini pointed out that this business partnership between the Cities of Lake Oswego and Tigard depended on both partners being on the same page as the project moved forward. He contended that it was incumbent on this Council and future Councils to continue to act in tandem with the City's partner and not to diverge from the plan unless they have fully vetted any proposed changes with Tigard. He described the decision made years ago to enter into this complicated City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 21 December 7, 2010 enterprise partnership as a substantial decision, which required constant communication back and forth to keep the partnership intact. He commented that he saw an opportunity here for the Council to make an investment decision on a system that was more resilient and responsive to the City's long-term needs than any other alternative. He recalled his research into large capital decisions by governing bodies, which found that governments tended to want to cut a deal with the future by low -balling a decision for the lowest possible cost in the near term and pushing actual costs into the future. He argued that all the committees involved in this decision have been wise to say, no, this was the best value proposition for the future of the City. He indicated his support of the proposal as brought forward. He held that this wise decision would well serve Lake Oswego for generations to come. Councilor Tierney indicated that other alternatives presented to the Oversight Committee were in the $2 million range for construction, design, and engineering, such as replacing the reservoir at 10th Street. He commented that the work done to date pointed to a reservoir at the Waluga location as proposed by staff. However, if staff came back with an alternative, he did not want a situation where the budget did not support that alternative. He explained that that was why he put the funds in contingency. He stated that he would not support incorporating the change into rates because his intent was to provide an opportunity for an alternative. Councilor Olson concurred with Councilor Tierney. She commented that she did not see $2 million as a large amount for moving the reservoir around on the Waluga site, given the soil instability that the Oversight Committee heard about yesterday. She said that she was more interested in exploring a .5 mg reservoir on the 10th Street site and reducing the Waluga Reservoir size. Councilor Hennagin pointed out that the diagram in the staff report did not show whether the sightlines from the ground would change with modifications to the reservoir. He indicated that he was hesitant to ask Lake Oswego citizens to incur $2 million more in cost if the sightlines were not substantially different. He said that he had difficulty supporting the amendment without that information. Councilor Jordan commented that putting extra money in the contingency seemed appropriate, given that the project was going into value engineering. She concurred that the additional money allowed the opportunity to implement an alternative for the Waluga facility that would achieve the desired result. Therefore, she supported the friendly amendment. Mayor Hoffman concurred. Councilor Vizzini asked if there was a cost impact beyond the $2 to $6 million range on the pumping requirements at the treatment plant of either changing the storage facility location or dividing the facility. Mr. Komarek confirmed that either scenario would change the hydraulics and require additional piping. He mentioned the possibility of needing to relocate an existing pump station on the 10th Street site, which was not included in the costs. Therefore, moving any portion of the volume to the 10th Street site would cost more than $2 million_ Councilor Vizzini supported the amendment, citing the wisdom of having a healthy contingency at this stage of working out the details and allowing flexibility in the design. He emphasized the need of the final decision to be cognizant of the rate impacts beyond what the plan called for right now. He concurred that they should try to accommodate the citizen concerns but pointed out that there was a price point at which future and current ratepayers would find it impossible to move forward. Councilor Moncrieff indicated that she supported the friendly amendment, as she did not want to design engineer the facility. She stated that their primary common objectives were to have the best system operationally, to stay on schedule, and to be sensitive to the ratepayers. Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Olson that, while there were pipes currently going to the 10th Street site, he did not know if they were appropriately sized or not. He mentioned the additional impacts of moving a portion of the Waluga water storage to the 10th Street site, which were not City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 21 December 7, 2010 included in the recommended plan. These included decommissioning the existing tank, relocating the pump station, and disrupting the 10th Street neighborhood. He referenced Mr. Bolland's comment that the City has not discussed this scenario at all with the neighborhood. He indicated to Councilor Olson that staff did not include decommissioning the tank in the project, although they did include storage in a proposed new tank in the future. He indicated that it was a 1925 steel tank, seismically vulnerable, which staff thought was prudent to decommission at some point. Councilor Olson recalled Councilor Hennagin once asking whether they could build the facilities needed for the ozone treatment but not start the treatment in order to save money. Mr. Kamarek clarified that the 17 cents represented the net present value of 25 years of the capital and operating costs of ozone. He mentioned staff's finding that building some infrastructure now and adding the treatment later actually cost more. Mr. Komarek acknowledged that they could build the ozone treatment infrastructure now and not operate it or operate it only seasonally. He argued that doing so meant that the system got only half the benefits half the time. He mentioned also that ozone systems were complex to operate and required staff training. Councilor Olson asked staff to provide information on what ozone treatment cost ratepayers on either a monthly or a daily basis as a comparison. Councilor Hennagin indicated that he would support the motion, even though he opposed the amendment. Ms. Christie re -read the motion: To adopt Resolution 10-73 with the friendly amendment to increase the contingency by $2 million to look further at Waluga Reservoir No.2. A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Olson voted `no.' [6-1] 5.2 Water Partnership Update Mr. Komarek indicated that staff was continuing the permitting work begun a couple of months ago, including preparing for the alternatives analysis required for the joint permit application. He mentioned working with the Public Works Department on a Development Code text amendment for utilities in RP/RC areas, and working on a Gladstone text amendment for the intake structure in Gladstone. He reported that staff was reviewing the program definition report internally, which was the guidance document for design firms in proposing design packages next year. He indicated that this report documented the basis for all decisions made to date and established the standards required of all design firms in order to attain uniformity across all design packages. He indicated that qualification statements from interested firms were due next week, which staff would review and short list up to six firms for each design package. He mentioned staff's anticipation of issuing an RFP for the first design package in January, which was the water treatment plant design. He mentioned that Ms. Heisler and the Public Involvement Team have been busy working with the Robinwood neighbors and Maple Grove Plat property owners to develop a good neighbor plan since the water treatment plant was the first design package to come out. He indicated that the team was also working with the City's Utility Billing Department for assistance in public outreach regarding costs and rates. He noted the last milestone event on the schedule, the Tigard Council adopting the Supply Facilities Capital Improvement Program on December 14 (which the Lake Oswego Council adopted tonight). He mentioned the value engineering scheduled for January 10 to January 14, City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 21 December 7, 2010 2011. He indicated that people could contact the team through the website, Facebook, and Twitter. 5.3 Amendment of Public Improvement Contract for Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer Mr. Komarek explained that this amendment expanded the scope of work in the City's contract with James W. Fowler Co. to include renewal, replacement, and remediation of the near shore sewers. He recalled that he had requested Council to increase its authorization to issue up to $40 million in full faith & credit obligation bonds by $5,000 in order to fund this project and to take advantage of the lake down phase and the qualified contractors and subcontractors already on site (p.189). He indicated that staff felt that the expanded scope of work was achievable in the limited time available (p.193). He requested the Council to authorize the City Manager to execute Change Order 18 and to add an additional $3,592,091.00 to the LOIS Lake Down scope of work to complete the near shore sewer work. Councilor Jordan recused herself, stating that her husband's law firm did work for Advanced American, one of the contractors on the project. Councilor Tierney asked if staff identified all the sewers potentially needing this work. Mr. Komarek indicated that, given that there was more work needed on these near shore sewers than they could hope to accomplish in the limited time available, staff strategically identified those areas that were the worst of the worst and provided the best opportunity to complete within the time frame available. He confirmed that there were more sewers out there to work on. Mr. Komarek mentioned that the condition assessment, inspection, and cleaning of all of the 20,000 feet of near shore sewers ringing the lake done as part of the Lake Down contract work would provide valuable information to the Public Works staff in planning future CIP projects. Councilor Moncrieff moved to approve an amendment to the public improvement contract with James W. Fowler, Co., (JWF) in the amount of $3,592,091 and authorize the City Manager to execute the relating Change Order No. 18. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Jordan recused herself. [6-0] 5.4 LOIS Update Mr. Komarek presented photographs of the project. He discussed the critical nature of Manhole 22 at the entrance to Half Moon Bay at the east end of the lake where all the system connections were made. He indicated that everything to the east of Manhole 22 was right -sized and being "CIPP'd" but not replaced. He commented that they needed to complete a lot of work by the end of the year in order to begin refilling the lake on January 15. He indicated that all the bypass systems were functional. He showed a photo of the bypass pipe that intercepted the flow at the Forest Hills easement manhole and routed it to lower Millennium Plaza Park, which allowed the contractor to work on an existing system connection in between those points. He mentioned that they beat their deadline to re -open Bryant Road, but they did have to continue the road closure at North Shore Bridge. He reported that ODOT informed staff yesterday that it wanted more paving work done at the manhole across from Millennium Plaza, which meant another lane closure on State Street next spring. He reported that Ms. Heisler and Mr. Selby continued their proactive public relations activities on a number of issues, including soil contamination, fish, bypass pumping and generator installations for the pumps adjacent to homes. He mentioned another public relations issue of the seawall that collapsed when the contractor removed the manhole that was holding the seawall up. He indicated City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 21 December 7, 2010 that the City would work with the homeowner to repair it and share the costs. He said that near shore sewers were another major issue, as the contractor either had to get on top of the private decks built over those sewers or remove the decks to get to the sewers. He noted that lake down was behind schedule but the contractor has submitted a recovery plan, which included working weekends and holidays. He commented that he was optimistic that they would get back on schedule early in the new year. He indicated that the $94 million cost included the contract amendment amount approved by Council this evening. Councilor Hennagin mentioned watching the contractor put the fiber sock in at the manhole on 3rd Street. He congratulated staff on re -lining the main line in Lakewood Bay, which represented a considerable cost savings to the Lake Oswego citizens. Mr. Komarek acknowledged that that was a significant undertaking. He indicated that the length and curve of the pipeline necessitated the contractor cutting a section out of the existing interceptor in Lakewood Bay and doing the work in two sections. 5.5 Resolution 10-72, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10-11 to fund certain programs in the Planning and Building Department Mr. McIntyre explained that this was not a budget supplement according to the legal definition but rather a resolution transfer, which the Council could make as long as it was either within the fund or within the appropriation. He noted that within the General Fund, the City appropriated at the department level. He explained that Ms. Frisbee needed to adjust her budget to reflect certain new needs identified by either staff or the Council. He indicated that Ms. Frisbee went through her budge': carefully and thoughtfully to identify what she could afford to absorb and sacrifice by making some tradeoffs in order to fund additional Council requests, including the Code audit. He explained that part of this was cleaning up the Code audit funding with a Council appropriation. Ms. Frisbee commented that, based on the Council discussion at the November 16 meeting, staff concluded that it would be better to wait on funding the more ambitious sensitive lands education and outreach program either during the watershed planning discussion scheduled for February or during the budget cycle. Therefore, she pared down the $100,000 request to $20,000 for education and outreach. She mentioned the other two parts of this request: $50,000 for the Code audit and $46,000 for the Boones Ferry contract (pp. 137-138). She indicated that the Planning Department budget had only small placeholder amounts for the first two items. She explained that refining the scope of the Boones Ferry project with the engineers yielded a $146,000 figure, instead of the $100,000 budget amount. Councilor Tierney asked if the changes to the General Fund structure gave the City more latitude to transfer within departments, and if there were funds available in other departments. Mr. McIntyre commented that it was likely that there would be end of the year funds available. Mr. McIntyre explained that he has been trying not to bring forward budget transfers during the year but rather wait until the end of the year and pool the extra money from the various departments to clean up any individual department overages that way. He reminded the Council that if it was asking staff to move forward with these projects, these projects would cost a certain amount of money, which the Council needed to appropriate. He stated that staff would continue to monitor carefully all the funds. He noted that any funds left over went into the General Fund ending fund balance. Councilor Tierney asked what the impact would be if Council chose not to approve these requests at this time. Mr. McIntyre indicated that Ms. Frisbee would overspend her budget in the hope of under spending in another department budget offsetting her costs at the end of the year. He noted that Council could also direct staff not to do the projects. He explained that the approach at the time of a Council commitment to a project, other than resolution transfers, was for staff to City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 21 December 7, 2010 ask for funds at the completion of the project. However, Council could reasonably question staff at that time about doing a project for which staff had had no appropriation. This presented a conflict for staff because the Council had directed staff to move ahead with that project. He indicated that in the future, he hoped that when Council directed implementation of a new service or a new project that was not funded, and yet asked staff to fund it, staff would bring back clean up legislation at the end of the year that allowed staff to close and balance the books. He gave the example of moving $50,000 leftover in the Fire Department to make up $50,000 in Building & Planning. He commented that doing so without incident would be ideal, but he did not necessarily count on that. Ms. Frisbee indicated to Councilor Olson that the sensitive lands education and outreach appropriation did not include any additional FTEs. She said that it included developing materials, the public engagement plan, and product approach. She noted the $5,000 to increase the partnership with the Columbia Land Trust and Friends of Tryon Creek. Councilor Olson commented that she was supportive of the Code audit, noting that she sat on the Code Audit subcommittee. She expressed her disappointment that the City did not go out to bid for the contract, mentioning that she has said the same thing in the past. Ms. Frisbee explained that, having gone through an extensive interview and contracting procedure on the first round of the code audit, and having identified two very good firms, staff thought that it did not make sense to slow the process down and go out to bid again, especially since the contract rules allowed not going out to bid for contracts under $100,000. She mentioned that Clarion performed beyond staff's expectations and brought the advantage of a national perspective to the table. Councilor Olson agreed that Clarion did top notch work, but, given that the two phases were very different, she would like to have seen bids. Mayor Hoffman expressed his hope that the next Council would seriously consider an on staff arborist. He cited his meeting with the neighborhood chairs last Saturday, at which four chairs expressed concern about the tree code, trees, and the lack of an on staff arborist. Councilor Tierney commented that his issue was that, these were all lofty goals but the City could not afford to do all of them. Therefore, the Council needed to make choices. He indicated that his preferred choice would have been to instruct staff to find the funding within the existing $60 million City operating budget and to resolve it at the end of the year, rather than taking it out of contingency as provided in the resolution. Councilor Moncrieff moved Resolution 10-72, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10111 to fund programs within the Planning and Building Department. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Jordan, and Vizzirli voting `aye.' Councilors Olson and Tierney voted `no.' [5-2] 5.6 Resolution 10-75, authorizing a funding appropriation for FY 10 - 11 to fund park natural area restoration activities Ms. Gilmer directed the Council to her staff report (pp. 141-143) with its four options detailing the commitment that Council would need to make once it started on the path of removing invasive species from park properties She pointed out that a one year effort would not be successful in accomplishing the goal. She reviewed the four options for restoring the City's natural areas in five years: 100% of the properties, 75%, 50%, or targeting high priority sites. She referenced the work staff did with MIG to determine the high priority sites (p.142-143). She noted that they had sufficient staff to manage hiring a contractor for Options 3 and 4, but not for Options 1 and 2. She recommended Option 4, which would address the high priority sites (p.154) within a five-year period. She described it as a more manageable amount of money. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 21 December 7, 2010 Ms. Gilmer confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that this resolution was her response to the Council's direction to come back with a program that would be part of the Sensitive Lands Resolution 10-51. Councilor Hennagin asked how staff arrived at the cost figures to eradicate invasive species. Ms. Gilmer indicated that staff researched the practices used by different contractors and agencies and picked the middle of the road practice. She described both an aggressive approach with multiple sprayings ($300/acre) and native plantings ($4800/acre) that would eradicate invasive species on a heavily infested site in three years, and a more passive approach with one spraying ($300/acre) and no native plantings. She indicated that staff followed the Metro practice of spraying in the winter, spot spraying in the spring, and restoration native plantings as needed the following year. She mentioned their assumption that it would take four to five years to restore a poor property and progressively less time on better condition properties. She noted another assumption that, after restoring the sites to a healthy condition, the City would need to continue monitoring and remove new infestations every year because the biggest problems of ivy, blackberries, English holly, and clematis were both grown in landscapes or growing wild and spread by birds. She pointed out that the ongoing annual costs dramatically declined after site restoration to an annual cost of $28,000 to $30,000. She mentioned the assumption in that 20 -year estimate of spending $2400 an acre on restoration plantings. She explained that they could not know how many plantings were needed until after spraying. She indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the high priority sites listed in Option 4 were not the most heavily infested sites but rather larger sites with some sort of relationship to the watershed. She reviewed the good, fair, and poor health high priority sites selected (p.154). Ms. Gilmer confirmed to Councilor Jordan that, if the Council did not want to fund this proposal out of contingency, then staff would have to figure out in the next budget cycle what program or service not to provide in lieu of providing this program. She confirmed that committing to only one year of the proposal was a waste of the $70,000. She confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that, under this proposal, the Council committed to $150,000 over four years and to $600,000 over 20 years. She confirmed that her recommendation was that, if the Council could not commit to 20 years of property restoration and invasive species removal, then it should not start the program. Councilor Olson contended that this kind of commitment and work should be part of the City's total Metro Title 3 compliance program. She recalled that she and Councilor Tierney had asked for $250,000 during the last budget cycle for exactly this kind of program but the remainder of the Council had not supported that request. She stated that, even though doing this work has been a pet project of hers, she could not support funding it outside the budget process. She argued that if they funded this proposal, then something else in the current year budget needed to go. She thanked Ms. Gilmer for the excellent report with its detail and formatting. She described it as the best data the Council has received on this topic to date, which would serve as a foundation in making a long-term commitment during the budget process. She mentioned that using chemical spraying to remove invasive species concerned her greatly. She expressed her preference for hand pulling over spot spraying. Ms. Gilmer indicated that, although the consensus of those staff talked to was that all mechanical removal was almost impossible, it did become a possible choice once the general spraying brought the problem under control and they reached the spot spraying stage. She pointed out that the challenge at Lake Oswego was the lack of a volunteer coordinator, which meant that volunteer efforts to do that mechanical removal would be limited. Councilor Olson mentioned her hope that the education and outreach proposed by Ms. Frisbee would build interest in citizens volunteering to help the City maintain the public natural areas. Ms. Gilmer commented that that was a great goal. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 21 December 7, 2010 Councilor Moncrieff indicated that she shared Councilor Olson's concerns about chemical spraying, particularly in watersheds and high quality natural areas. She said that she would also appreciate staff looking into hand pulling, as the idea of spraying chemicals in the water improving a watershed's ecological health was counterintuitive. Ms. Gilmer indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that staff no longer had funds to continue spraying at Cook's Butte, and ceased that work in its third year. She said that she could provide Council with more information on sprays approved for aquatic use. She mentioned that the sprays used by the Portland BES in riparian corridors met the highest standards for approval by the National Marine Fisheries. Councilor Tierney indicated that this excellent report met his expectations spot on. He contended that the City had a responsibility to maintain the properties it owned. He held that the City should have incorporated maintenance and invasive species removal from the time of purchase, similar to parks maintenance. He argued that maintenance was a fundamental service that the City needed to provide for its parks and open spaces in order to be the example to its citizens that the Sensitive Lands resolution called for. He contended that they had sufficient funds available within the existing budget to fund the $70,000 of Option 4, although he thought they should start with Option 3. He recalled that staff informed the Council that there was a low probability that the City would spend all the Street Fund money. He suggested transferring $70,000 of General Fund money out of the Street Fund to this proposal, and not out of contingency. Mr. McIntyre clarified that staff did move monies from the General Fund contingency into the Street Fund to cover costs from last year in anticipation of closing the books with a deficit. However, staff did not close the books with a deficit, and the Council could move the money back. He indicated that he wanted to talk with the City Attorney about making it clear that it related to General Fund monies, because the Street Maintenance Fee could not fund non -Street Fund activities. He concurred that re -allocating those funds would solve this year's problem, although staff could use the money next year to fund more street projects. Mayor Hoffman observed that the street advocates would want to save the money for next year. Councilor Hennagin commented that he thought this matter was best left to goal setting and the upcoming budget process, as opposed to revising budgets for this fiscal year and starting a 20 - year commitment on a piecemeal basis. He suggested delaying this proposal for six months. Councilor Olson indicated that she did not recall the transaction to which Mr. McIntyre was referring. Ms. Euler commented that she did not recall the specific transaction either, although she did recall having to balance the Street Fund. Mayor Hoffman concurred with Councilor Hennagin that it was difficult to start moving money around on the fly without understanding the consequences and priorities. Mayor Hoffman stated that he was uncomfortable with moving outside the staff recommendation. He suggested either approving the recommended budget request or waiting until next year for more analysis and discussion of the tradeoffs involved. Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Olson that her statement that the City ended the year with a surplus in the Street Fund, which included General Fund money that staff had transferred into the Street Fund, was a fair statement. He confirmed that using the General Fund money now would not take it from the Street Maintenance Fee. Councilor Tierney commented that he saw an inconsistency in the logic that the Council could not take General Fund money from the Street Fund but it could take it from contingency. He pointed out that taking the money from contingency overspent the City revenues received this year. He cited the Council passing the mid -year budget transfer out of contingency for Sensitive Lands and the Code audit, noting that the Sensitive Lands was a multi-year ongoing program. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 21 December 7, 2010 Councilor Jordan concurred with Councilor Tierney that the City (or any entity in the region) did not set aside maintenance funds when purchasing natural open spaces. She commented that that always bothered her because open space and natural areas needed care as much as parks did. She indicated that she would support moving forward in the future with protecting their natural resource areas, but preferably not out of contingency. She asked staff to explore other financing options, such as Councilor Tierney suggested. Mayor Hoffman said that he too would like to see different options. He asked Ms. Frisbee if this proposal needed to be part of the City's compliance report to Metro. Ms. Frisbee indicated that, while staff had not intended originally to include it, it would help 'he report by showing commitment by the City. Councilor Olson pointed out that postponing this for six months meant that the City missed this winter's spraying window. Ms. Gilmer indicated that she would check to see how effective a fall spraying would be. The Council agreed by a nod of heads to direct staff to bring this back in January. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 9:13 p.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 9:23 p.m. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 Resolution 10-70, adopting a supplemental budget resolution for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2010 by adopting a supplemental budget, approving resources/requirements, and making appropriations STAFF REPORT Mr. Cross explained that this budget supplement was to obtain the spending authority for the FEMA grant in order to move forward with the Lake Corporation dam project. He noted that the Council already approved the project in Resolution 10-54. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Mayor Hoffman reviewed the testimony time limits. He opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the public hearing. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Tierney moved to adopt Resolution 10-70. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. Councilor Tierney indicated that he would support this budget supplement because it was neutral with respect to the City. The City was simply the conduit for the FEMA money going to the dam project. Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Jordan that she should recuse herself because Advanced American was one of the contractors for the Lake Corporation. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Jordan recused herself. [6-0] 6.2 Ordinance 2562, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter 50 of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code regarding the definition of "congregate housing" in LOC 50.02.005, clarifying the qualification criteria for occupancy, and adopting findings LU 10-0041-1749 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 21 December 7, 2010 Mr. Powell reviewed the standard land use hearing procedures and testimony time limits. He asked if any Council member had a conflict of interest to declare. There were none. There were no challenges. STAFF REPORT Ms. Andreades recalled that the Council upheld the Development Review Commission's approval of the 2007 Northwest Housing Alternatives application for 45 units of senior congregate care housing, which the Waluga Neighborhood Association had appealed. Of the several issues appealed to LUBA, the only one t►:at LUBA did not uphold in the City's favor was the City's definition of congregate housing. She indicated that LUBA found that the 'due to' clause in the definition required a connection between life function disability and age (p.88) She mentioned the Council's direction at its work session that staff work with the Planning Commission to consider an amendment that did not require the connection between life function disability and age (p.89). She directed the Council to her memo to the Planning Commission outlining the other types of housing in City Code besides congregate care housing and the staff conclusion (p.103-105). She reported that the Planning Commission discussed making the definition clearer by separating age and life function disability and by using language on age -restricted housing similar to the Federal Fair Housing Act and to language on disability similar to the American Disabilities Act. She noted the proposed definition on p.91, which staff believed achieved the Council's objective. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the public hearing. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Vizzini thanked staff for finding a solution to this problem. Councilor Hennagin moved adoption of Ordinance 2562. Councilor Vizzini seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' [7-0] 6.3 Ordinance 2556 A, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), to allow common wall boathouses to be constructed on abutting lots in the Oswego Lake Setback, and adopting findings LU 08-0052A-1751 Mr. Powell noted that the criteria and procedures for this hearing were identical to the previous hearing. He did not re -read them, as there was no request by the public to do so. He asked if any Council member had a conflict of interest to declare. There was none. There were no challenges. STAFF REPORT Ms. Andreades explained that this amendment related to a different Code section than the amendments that Council adopted in August regarding uses allowed in the Oswego Lake Setback. She indicated that the Lake Corporation requested consideration of not allowing side yard setbacks for boathouses, which would produce a common wall boathouse currently prohibited in Section 50.08.050. She emphasized that this amendment applied only to boathouses and not to accessory structures in general. She noted the ordinance on p. 119. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 21 December 7, 2010 PUBLIC TESTIMONY Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the public hearing. QUESTIONS OF STAFF Ms. Andreades confirmed to Councilor Olson that the three points under Section 50.08.050 on p.116 referred to accessory structures. She indicated that staff sought to amend the third point only, as it related to boathouses only. Mr. Powell clarified that the ordinance referred only to accessory structures in R-7.5 through R-15 zones, which was the only place in the Code with a restriction on abutting property lines/common wall accessory structures. He indicated that removing it for boathouses in the Oswego Lake setback would affect only that aspect of the standards that the Council adopted for the setback. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Jordan moved Ordinance 2556-A. Councilor Moncrieff seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' [7-0 7. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Hoffman pulled Item 7.2.1 at the request of Councilors Olson and Hennagin. Councilor Jordan moved the Consent Agenda, pulling Item 7.2.1. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' [7-0 7.1 REPORTS 7.1.1 Multiple Site Landscape Service Contract Action: Award the Multiple Site Landscape Service contract in the amount of $211,500 to TruGreen Landcare LLC to provide landscape maintenance to city -owned properties 7.1.2 Declaration of the Vote Action: Accept Declaration of the Vote 7.2 RESOLUTIONS 7.2.1 Resolution 10-65, supporting statewide plastic bag regulation Action: This item was pulled for further discussion. 7.3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7.3.1 July 27, 2010, special meeting 7.3.2 September 14, 2010, special meeting 7.3.3 September 21, 2010, regular meeting 7.3.4 October 5, 2010, regular meeting Action: Approve minutes as written END CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 8.1 Resolution 10-65, supporting statewide plastic bag regulation City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 21 December 7, 2010 Councilor Moncrieff moved to adopt Resolution 10-65. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. Councilor Olson indicated that her initial concern focused on a sentence in the resolution, stating that the City might consider its own regulations if the State did not enact regulations on plastic bags. She pointed out that the intent of the Grocery Association and Senator Atkinson had been to establish a uniform statewide strategy, rather than a piecemeal jurisdiction -by -jurisdiction approach. She cited Ms. Millhauser's letter indicating the preference for a uniform approach to the plastic bag issue, as that provided easier implementation for the retailers across the state. She indicated that, while it was likely that the State would pass the legislation, she still preferred not having that language in the resolution. She mentioned that she would also like to review the information that Mr. Gage provided. Councilor Hennagin mentioned that the information he had had prior to tonight was that the carbon footprint to create plastic bags and paper bags was relatively equal. He commented that he also thought that paper bags manufacturing would be economically beneficial to Oregon with its timber industry and paper mills providing jobs. He wondered, in light of Mr. Gage's information that it saved energy to manufacture plastic bags, whether supporting this resolution and statewide action was promoting sustainability. Councilor Olson concurred. Councilor Moncrieff reported that the Sustainability Advisory Board supported this resolution. She noted that Mr. Gage did indicate that Gage Industries did not make plastic bags. She referenced the presentation by Mr. Howell from Environment Oregon to the Sustainability Advisory Board, in which he stated that plastic bags were made in California while paper bags were made in Oregon. She argued that paper bags were better for the local Oregon economy. She referenced an e-mail received this afternoon from Amanda Dalton, the local advocate for the Northwest Grocery Association, urging Council to support the resolution with its current language. She stated that she would support the resolution. Councilor Tierney commented that, as he had no expertise on plastic versus paper, he would either abstain or vote no. He remarked that, given the many issues raised in association with the resolution, it no longer appeared to be straightforward and simple. He indicated that, if it was no longer straightforward, then he did not think that they should take it into the Council's purview. Councilor Jordan remarked that the availability of free reusable bags showed that there has been a movement statewide in this direction. She indicated that she thought it likely that the State legislature would pass the regulations. She commented that the resolution language did not compel the Council to pass local regulations, but rather it allowed Council to consider doing so. She said that she would support the resolution. Mayor Hoffman concurred with Councilor Moncrieff. He commented that it was not a paper bag versus plastic bag discussion but rather a question of whether one embraced sustainability and brought one's own bag. He said that he would support the resolution. Councilor Hennagin indicated that the information provided from the Sustainability Advisory Board and the Grocery Association recommendation resolved his initial reticence in favor of the resolution. A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' Councilor Olson voted 'no.' Councilor Tierney abstained. [5-1-1] 9. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL 9.1 Councilor Information City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 21 December 7, 2010 9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental Committees Councilor Olson mentioned that she would bring forward a budget request from the Water Providers Consortium in January. 10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 10.1 City Manager 10.1.1 5 -Year Financial Forecast Mr. McIntyre indicated that this was the first of many opportunities to discuss the City's five-year financial forecast. Tonight staff hoped to lay groundwork for the Council. He commented that having a constantly rolling five-year plan was a smart thing to do in figuring out how to sustain the level and quality of services that the City provided with mechanisms in place that avoided anything dramatic. He said that his office and the Finance Department have looked carefully and thoughtfully at this forecast. He spoke of serious financial discipline and painting a picture that showed the City moving forward for the next five years and maintaining its level of services. He confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that staff would schedule a study session in January to walk through the different charts and columns. Ms. Euler indicated that this financial plan attempted to pool the General Fund, as opposed to planning for each individual department's budget, because it was a five-year forecast. She explained that looking at the big picture first helped, after which one could drill down into more detail if so desired. She discussed the revenue and expenditure drivers behind creating the forecast. She indicated that the attachment to the staff report listed the drivers with big impacts (pp.5-10) and how varying those drivers impacted the bottom line (p.5). She explained that making a distinction between continuing and non -continuing (one-time) revenues and expenditures was staff's attempt to move a small government closer to a more business -like approach. She indicated that businesses did not use a beginning fund balance as part of the resources balancing the requirements in a budget. She pointed out that, through prudent financial management and/or policy decisions, the City could change a one-time revenue or expenditure into a continuing revenue or expenditure. She gave an example of setting aside funds for capital projects and future equipment replacement annually for future large one-time expenditures. She commented that, while Lake Oswego was better off than many other cities, they still needed to prepare for challenges facing the City, such as capital projects and equipment replacement. Mr. McIntyre reviewed the spreadsheet showing five years of history (actuals) and five years of projections (pp.6-10). He pointed out that the concept of looking at projections was the same as looking in the rearview mirror driving forward: one looked at what one did in the past and considered how it affected the future. He noted that staff took a conservative approach to the growth in assessed value in reducing the formerly robust growth rate (the amount beyond the assessor's 3% increase in value) to .25% gradually increasing to .5% over the five years. He commented that there were many assumptions embedded in the spreadsheet cells. He gave an example of the big jump in the current year for intergovernmental costs, which reflected the library district monies. He stated that he endorsed Ms. Euler's very conservative approach as the right way to look at a five-year financial forecast. He concurred that Lake Oswego was healthier than most cities, while noting that the flip side for the City was the expense driver of people and the cost of living adjustments (COLA). He pointed out that, as wages increased, the City's existing revenue stream could not sustain the expense. He raised the question of how to manage wages, which related to working with the City's labor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 21 December 7, 2010 groups. He reiterated that staff's assumption was that the Council had an interest in maintaining the quality and level of services that the City presently delivered. Ms. Euler discussed the assumptions behind several of the variables. She pointed out that PERS was not a choice as much as it was an obligation. She indicated that staff included a 4% increase in PERS in the benefits line after two years, per the PERS staff information on what was likely to happen. In reference to COLA, she observed that the City's proportion of expenditures in personnel services was large, given its number of employees. Therefore, even small percentages compounded quickly. She commented that health insurance was likely to increase, aithough staff had little information on that. She noted the double-digit increase in the first year with smaller increases in later years, reflecting a blended rate of City and employee contributions. She mentioned the 2.2% inflation rate in materials and services under other expenditures, which she based on an average Philadelphia Federal Reserve consensus. She indicated that the percentage could go up or down, yet it was not as impactful as COLA and health benefits. • Council Questions Councilor Hennagin referenced the lines at the bottom of the chart. He asked whether the dollar amount from the prior year fund balance was needed in order to achieve the surplus/deficit from continuing operations dollar amount (p.6). He noted the example of $581,000 surplus in 2012 and $1,555,000 deficit in the fund balance. Ms. Euler explained that the surplus/deficit number represented continuing revenues minus continuing expenditures, but did not include one-time revenues or capital spending. She clarified that the fund balance line figure was the dollar amount after spending the planned CIP funds. She explained that the chart followed a linear pattern top to bottom, beginning with continuing revenues, then one-time revenues, followed by continuing expenditures, then one-time expenditures. She indicated that the third line at the bottom gave the constraint requirement of 14% in contingency and 16% in fund balance, which needed to read `yes' across the board. Councilor Hennagin commented that, assuming that staff has predicted the future accurately, there would be a lot of pressure on the Council for either annexation, new development, or other sources of income. Councilor Tierney mentioned another option of reduction of expenditures. Councilor Vizzini applauded staff for the clarity of the layout and the use of color type to indicate the different drivers and scenarios. He suggested coloring the lines for continuing revenues, continuing expenditures, and the balance to make them stand out to the eye. He commented that the only thing missing was the general inflator. He mentioned the concern moving forward that they could see either inflation or deflation as they climbed out of the recession. Therefore, it would be worthwhile to have that information to see the impacts on the overall fund. He concurred with the aggregate level approach as a way of focusing the mind on macro issues, but noted that, ultimately in the budget process, they needed to be able to drill down into the priorities and performance achieved for the investment on a program level. He commented that a combination of this forecast and staff monitoring funds, as discussed during the supplementals item earlier this evening, might allow for mid -year shifts in appropriations. He spoke of putting the savings captured in programs into contingency or the fund balance, which would allow for new realities to surface unexpectedly. He described these tools and the LOpedia as excellent improvements that would help make the Council more literate about the City's finances. Ms. Euler pointed out a line item that she included for the variable of potential departmental savings. Ms. Euler indicated to Councilor Tierney that this report included only one-time capital expenditures. She acknowledged the possibility of other kinds of one-time expenditures. She City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 21 December 7, 2010 clarified that the forecast beyond 2011 took out the one-time expenditure for the Parks & Rec study. She said that they took one-time items out of the budget on both the revenue and expenditure sides for the forecast. Councilor Tierney commented that this was an excellent and important report. He commented that, if he had had this information, there were decisions that he has made in the past that he would not have made. Councilor Jordan also expressed her appreciation for the report. She commented that the difference in the Finance Department in the last 18 months was incredible. She asked staff to provide information on how Lake Oswego's charter requirements of 14% and 16% compared to what other cities did. She suggested continuing to look at how the City could get more control over personnel costs, as those were their greatest expenditure. She argued that the one thing that the City could control was the wages paid to its employees. She pointed out that the costs of health care and pension benefits, which the City could not control, had more impact on the City without being able to manage those costs than paying employees a fair wage for the value of their work. Councilor Olson thanked Mr. McIntyre, Ms. Euler, and her staff for this forecast report. She asked to spend more time on this helpful decision-making tool before going into the next budget cycle. 10.1.2 Review of Council Schedule 10.1.3 Review of Council Digest 10.2 City Attorney 11. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 10:16 p.m. Respectfully submitted, `;11,1 ()6tb `/' l Robyn _ City ..- APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON February 15, 2011 a k D. Hoffm , Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 21 of 21 December 7, 2010