HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2017-04-04 (11,0\0°)".
9� CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
� O April 4, 2017
EGON
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Studebaker called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. on April 4,
2017, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck,
and O'Neill
Staff Present: Scott Lazenby, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Anne-Marie
Simpson,City Recorder; Sarah Selden, Senior Planner; Paul Espe,Associate
Planner; Erica Rooney, City Engineer
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Studebaker led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
He welcomed members of Lake Oswego's Cub Scout Pack 413 who were observing the meeting.
He described his experience at the high school robotics tournament held the past weekend at
Lake Oswego High School, commending all of the competitors and volunteers.
4. CONSENT AGENDA— For Full Council Approval
Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda.
4.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
4.1.1 February 21, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes
4.1.2 March 7, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes
Report and Attachments
4.2 Arbor Week Proclamation
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 8
April 4, 2017
Proclamation
END CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Gudman moved the adoption of the Consent Agenda. Councilor LaMotte
seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. (7-0)
5. CONSENT AGENDA— For City Councilors' Approval
5.1 Resolution 17-11, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego
Approving Appointments to the Transportation Advisory Board
Motion: Adopt Resolution 17-11.
Report and Attachment
END CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor LaMotte moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Manz seconded the
motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Manz, Gudman, LaMotte,
Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. (6-0)
6. CITIZEN COMMENT
• Marlin DeHaas, 1425 Cherry Crest Drive
Mr. DeHaas described his background and support of the petition for a local improvement district
(LID) to be addressed later in the meeting (Agenda Item 8.1). He discussed concerns regarding
the current three-party private sewer system and solutions offered through the proposed LID,
which would provide a conforming system with an individual connection to the public sewer for
each of the three properties. He suggested several modifications to the related Resolution 17-12
and indicated that Council had received a letter from him. He advocated moving forward with the
project as quickly as possible.
• Steve Mawdsley, 1507 Cedar Street
Mr. Mawdsley stated that he was representing his sister, the property owner of 1507 Cedar
Street, formerly owned by their late father. It is one of the three properties affected by the
proposed LID to be addressed under Agenda Item 8.1. He discussed the family's experience
since the City had identified the lateral sewer line and connecting party-line configuration in 2006.
Having exhausted all efforts available to them as private citizens, they called on Council to support
the LID proposal.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8
April 4, 2017
• Donald Mattersdorff, 930 Bullock Street
Mr. Mattersdorff stated that the neighbors had prepared the LID petition to be considered under
Agenda Item 8.1. It included his property, he noted, although it had not been discussed with him.
He stated that there was no need for new sewer service to his property; the LID would not benefit
him, and therefore his request to Council was that his property be excluded from the LID, if
approved. After refuting comments of Mr. DeHaas and Mr. Mawdsley, he reviewed his own efforts
to solve the problem through reconnection of the sewer lines as they had been configured prior
to the service disruption. He wanted Council to be aware that the problem was not of his making
and that he had negotiated in good faith with the other property owners.
• Debbie Harris, 1523 Cedar Street
Ms. Harris, owner of one of the properties involved in the LID petition, described objections to
the series of proposals put forward by Mr. Mattersdorff. These included legal, engineering, and
cost considerations related to the proposed reconnection, as well as concern that this solution
would preclude a future sale of her house.
• Susan Patricia Mawdsley Haines, 1507 Cedar Street
Ms. Haines discussed property owners' opposition to reconnection in series as proposed by Mr.
Mattersdorff. Their primary concern would be the City's requirement to upgrade from the
community sewer line to separate extensions in the event of significant remodeling or sale of the
property. She cited provisions of Mr. Matterdorff's proposal that were unsatisfactory to the other
owners, who regarded it as a temporary fix. They had dealt with the disruption for over two and
a half years, and it was time for a final resolution, she concluded.
Council members posed questions to Ms. Haines about the property owners' understanding of
City requirements, and a brief exchange followed.
6.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up
No follow-up on prior Citizen Comment was presented.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Ordinance 2734, An Ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego Adopting the Uplands
Neighborhood Plan Into the Neighborhood and Special District Plans Volume of the
Comprehensive Plan; Amending the Transportation System Plan to Expand a
Pathway Project; Amending the Community Development Code to Add the Uplands
R-10 Overlay District(LOC 50.05.012); and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0001).
Report and Attachments
Ms. Selden conveyed a request from the Uplands Neighborhood Association to continue this
public hearing to May 2. The reason for the request was to provide the Association time to
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8
April 4, 2017
address concerns that were raised in public testimony by an Uplands Neighborhood resident in
relation to a provision of the Overlay code. The Association would endeavor to explore the
concerns and develop a satisfactory code revision to achieve the greatest possible neighborhood
consensus.
Mayor Studebaker asked about intended efforts to assure Council that most of the neighborhood
residents were in support of the Plan. Ms. Selden indicated that there would be additional
outreach to the neighborhood about the public hearing on May 2 and particularly about the
standard in question, relating to front setbacks. Responding to Councilor Kohlhoff's inquiry, she
confirmed that this would provide sufficient time to develop any revisions and communicate with
the neighborhood.
Mayor Studebaker moved to continue the public hearing to the May 2, 2017, City Council
meeting. Councilor Manz seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohihoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. (7-0)
7.2 Ordinance 2737, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego Two Parcels
Consisting of 1.06 Acres Located at 16287 and 16425 Bonaire Avenue, Together
With the Adjacent Public Right of Way; Declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning
Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain Districts
(AN 17-0001 and AN 17-0002).
Report and Attachments
7.3 Ordinance 2739, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel
Consisting of 0.59 Acres at 13730 Cameo Court; Declaring City Of Lake Oswego
Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory From Certain
Districts (AN 17-0003).
Report and Attachments
Mr. Powell read the titles of the two ordinances presented for Council consideration, which had
been combined for purposes of public hearing. He noted that these were land use requests,
which involve the application of the criteria and standards listed in the Staff report related to each
item (Council Report and Attachments for Ordinance 2737 and Ordinance 2739). He outlined the
parameters and process for the hearing, including time limits for testimony as shown in the
agenda. He asked if any member of the Council wished to make any declarations with relation to
ex parte contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he asked if any member of the
audience wished to challenge any City Council member's right to consider the application; no
challenges were heard.
Mr. Espe explained that three annexations were proposed. The first two annexations were for
the Bonaire Avenue properties and the third was for the property on Cameo Court. With
accompanying PowerPoint slides, he discussed the current Clackamas County zoning pertaining
to the properties, all of which would be designated R-7.5 upon annexation, and actions upon
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8
April 4, 2017
annexation, as outlined in the respective reports. He indicated that all of the annexations were
requested because of failing septic systems; owners of the Bonaire properties intended to divide
the parcels, as well. All owners and applicants had consented to the annexations as proposed,
and all three were in compliance with applicable Metro code and State statutes. He reviewed a
table that showed assessed value and tax revenue related to the three properties; this indicated
that the City would receive approximately $2,306 in total tax revenue from the three properties.
Staff had found that the properties under consideration are within the Urban Services Boundary
and that annexation is timely with regard to availability of public services. Staff recommended
approval, he concluded.
Questions of Staff
Councilor Buck asked about the reason that one property that had a lower assessed value could
have higher tax revenue. Mr. Espe explained that this was likely because a different taxing district
would apply, based on the property's location.
Testimony
Mayor Studebaker indicated that testimony regarding Ordinance 2737 and Ordinance 2739
would be requested at the same time. He asked if anyone present wished to present testimony
in favor or in opposition or if anyone wished to present neutral testimony. No requests being
heard, he closed the hearing.
Councilor Gudman moved to enact Ordinance 2737. Councilor LaMotte seconded the
motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. (7-0)
Councilor Gudman moved to enact Ordinance 2739. Councilor Manz seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. (7-0)
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
8.1 Resolution 17-12, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Declaring the Intent to Form a Local Improvement District (LID) for Public Sewer
Improvements Affecting 1507, 1523, and 1531 Cedar Street (Tax Lots
21E10CD02000, 1900, & 1800) and Directing Preparation of an Engineering Study
Report and Attachments
Mr. Powell explained that this item was the initial hearing to determine whether or not Council
wished to direct Staff to proceed with the LID formation process. It is not a public hearing. It is a
matter of Council first determining if formation of the LID is in the public interest. He described
City code provisions that would pertain to any motion to determine that it was not in the public
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 8
April 4, 2017
interest; this included the requirement that a minimum of four of the six City Councilors present
must vote in favor for such a motion to pass. However, if Council decided to proceed with the
formation process, a sample resolution and other options were available, as discussed in the City
Engineer's report (Council Report, p 4-5).
Ms. Rooney highlighted key issues discussed in the Council Report and clarified additional points
that had been raised in Citizen Comment. She emphasized that, from the outset over two years
earlier, the Engineering Department has regarded the sewer party-line-issues of the three Cedar
Street properties to be a private matter. She detailed background of the party-line breakage that
had triggered disruption of service to two of the properties. Noting that the City had conveyed
clearly to the owners that party lines were non-conforming, she reviewed the problems presented
by such systems. However, she noted, the City does not interfere with existing party lines, which
are found in many parts of the city. She explained that they are not allowed in new development
and discussed the distinction between new development and remodels in terms of policy. The
petition proposes to place a public sewer line at the rear of the Cedar Street properties, which
poses access problems for future City maintenance and replacement. The proposed approach
is not the City's recommendation, she emphasized. In this particular case, other viable options
are available, which she discussed (Council Report, p 2, table).
In responding to various questions from Councilors, Ms. Rooney clarified that any associated
costs for easement acquisition, engineering, design, and administrative work would be assessed
to the properties in the LID. Councilor Kohlhoff posed specific questions about the option that
would entail connecting the two Cedar Street properties (at 1523 and 1507)to a new public sewer
line in Parrish and Cedar Streets; this was the option preferred by the Engineering Department, if
in fact a public sewer had to be provided, Ms. Rooney indicated. She responded to questions
about taking of property for easements through eminent domain, and also confirmed that
wastewater grinder pumps serving the two properties individually would be an effective option
that would satisfy City code requirements. Councilor Kohlhoff explored legal considerations
related to the absence of recorded easements in many party-line situations, with Ms. Rooney
and Mr. Powell providing background.
In continuing discussion, Ms. Rooney addressed questions from Councilor Buck about the
City's requirements in a redevelopment scenario. She reiterated that the City does not work
proactively to identify existing party-line systems that are functioning effectively; these come to
the City's attention when there is a breakage or when redevelopment occurs. Councilor
Gudman inquired about the City's ability to initiate a two-property LID specifying the more
expensive public sewer option, i.e., in Parrish and Cedar Streets. Mr. Powell indicated that the
City could initiate such a LID, but that some challenges might be expected. Ms. Rooney
responded to additional questions, including a request from Councilor O'Neill to confirm that the
petition seeks a public sewer as opposed to the private laterals now in place. He noted that it
was very important for Council to understand this distinction.
Mr. Powell provided additional information related to the possibility of a City-initiated LID. This
pertained to the opportunity for filing of a remonstrance by properties opposing the LID.
Following Mr. Powell's brief review of the Council's options and potential processes going
forward, Mayor Studebaker called for a motion. Councilor Buck moved that the City not
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 8
April 4, 2017
comply with the petition because it is not in the public interest to do so. Councilor LaMotte
seconded the motion.
Councilor Kohlhoff expressed her belief that all of the parties in the matter are innocent and no
one is to blame for the situation. Indicating that she questions the legality of rights claimed by the
property owners at 1507 and 1523 Cedar Street, this fundamentally is a matter of private law that
does not involve the City. The plausibility of making an eminent domain claim against the owner
at 1531 Cedar Street is also questionable. She regards the hook-up options available to the two
disconnected properties as perfectly suitable and does not believe the City Engineer should spend
additional time on it.
Councilor LaMotte concurred. He expressed concern about setting a bad precedent with a two-
or three-property LID as he believes this is a useful tool only when on an economical scale. He
supports the Engineering Department recommendation against public sewers on private property
and regards a new public line in Cedar Street as redundant, particularly with the grinder system
available as a viable option. Therefore, he would not be supporting a public LID.
A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed,with Councilors Manz, Gudman, LaMotte,
Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting `aye'. (6-0)
8.2 Release of Roadway and Utility Easements Over 13211 Knaus Road and 13209
Amber Place
Report and Attachment
Mr. Powell described the location and background of the easements in the area of Knaus Road
and Country Commons, as related in the Council Report. In the course of recent planning for
development of the Mission Homes NW, LLC and Buck properties shown on Exhibit B to the
Report, the City was asked to release the roadway and utility easements along the northern
portion of these properties. (Note: Mr. Powell stated that the latter property owner was not
related to Councilor Buck.). After ensuring that the City had no need for the easements, the City
agreed to the release, but asked that, in exchange, the two properties release the easement rights
they held across the City-owned portion. He discussed additional detail related to the adjacent
Dogra property. After touching on points of interest in this area in earlier years, he highlighted
the reduced encumbrance on the City property that would result from the release of easements
and the reasons for the specific wording for the recommended motion.
In response to questions from Councilor Manz, Mr. Powell indicated that all of the properties,
including those to be divided, had satisfactory access and there was no need for the unused
roadway and utility easements for access purposes.
Councilor Gudman asked if the release of easements was likely the precursor to annexation
requests from the two property owners. Mr. Powell clarified that nearly all of the properties had
already been annexed, as shown on Page 1 of the Council Report.
Mayor Studebaker moved to authorize the City Manager to release the City's interest in
roadway and utility easements over properties at 13211 Knaus Road and 13209 Amber
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 8
April 4, 2017
Place, in exchange for reciprocal releases of easement rights by the owners of those
properties. Councilor Manz seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting `aye'. (7-0)
9. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
Councilor Gudman reported on a recent visit to the Lake Oswego Adult Community Center by
the national accrediting agency for adult community centers. He had learned that of the 12,000
such centers in the country, only 260 are nationally accredited; Lake Oswego's center is one of
only three in Oregon with the accreditation and is expected to receive the accreditation once
again. This is a positive reflection on the City, he noted.
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
No reports were made.
11. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Studebaker adjourned the meeting at 7:52 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
AAAA ~Yti'LR .
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON MAA4 Z- , 02017
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 8
April 4, 2017