Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2017-10-03 • ' IN.,.:1‘11.:.. VI.k ., ,„ .., leri .i,� : , • & '. ‘i A .:,,,_ • t ,:' ,.ot • L. ...... ; ‘,...:.‘ 4 h` x \''( 11(1 t �a"R"xa•�,, Y 3 iory • _ • . .if ._ ,, • . • ,,,. .. Iv 4121111 .low} � • 4 AL x lake Oswego ' ..) � r CityCouncHMeeting Tuesday, October 3, 2017 T L _ Lvi�l4'�f YC. Y' `�1 4. .f E 1•..r 1} :.Ian �'='� '.-71..,Y_`3 i` .a_ L rA •' h j+ �. ..4Cr. `_tea. ' , ;`-t� •►...j-� a int, .-w•i.•i'•a�"� �+7' c +�1► ••-'4 i.'" • �;`py'r - t p - .41b,...• . y•y �= M iw�{F rrri 'n + 7y,�_ia �' Y 'i_ '` �;. 4 t • Q:� • , _ 4 �i • 1• J► ,at.} -'-'• __ _ _ .* RY,S _R-r' * ti• n2+-. •r.• ?.. ..'▪ irk; . "*yat a: r ' w" ° - S yY:' -.._.. ... ,..f.-„t : Photo Credit: Holly Gibson 2016 _ A _` �• " t -e= ,t-- ~moi •... y ,-.1... 4.r�E,,f...4..„..4„.,,,;. ;YH4 . .+,..1'�} 1F1,,,• :•.e+++.� 'e'Wil 4.:..-•;--- .A •` 'q....�, ♦ •�• _ . ,.. L- _ T - e e ]..� . _�.,. S, '�V ss1± :L. , .i aAr u�. -'t . • CONSENT AGENDA • The consent agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion. • An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the consent agenda. • The Council makes one motion covering all items included in the consent agenda. Motion: Move to adopt the consent agenda. 5.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes 5.1.1 September 5, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes Motion: Move to approve minutes as written. 5.2 Resolution 17-54, A Resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council Initiating Road Legalization Proceedi Under ORS 223.935 for portions of Boones Ferry Road Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-54. -. - .,� • - � � ...T� _ _ �.r�,� �Z ��3S7CC= 'tet• - • 3 _ •11* =. < i P a•iec . . mcr . . • , • c0 ...„. ., , ..._. N . N 0 + C i ..._., . , . ; 410 jt • ITL) O ►. co U • cli c o , t. : Q 0 + i• f; o r it Ci la0 (-13 ,Y 0. , Z11_' :ft.. WaD i • r'� , ' f.....r 0 J 4A A, O It''< N Pt '. 7. :k. ai v) FTI.!! 'i � •• Z .� },Y+ • tio y Imo, Q '^ I �r• S. -1i.!..F �. 7 Z s . Q U ,A`1 , nr .,J ;•!_�. tap c •M .. 0 • #1.-r, •;,ti-3)--. • `fi . O• L Q ,i�����nnn ' 'l k f ' i�4,,,.� ` '' - • 1 Fjillrg•• ;$ 3 . 9. I , . i ' .t !e '..'ist,i h • 0 lit, - CD l_ H 41 E rix sr{'r+ • ,y, Aek..ti . m o CO .47J 1 ,•' S ;.ifs , 4. ` / Irl ' ' G DEPT EQ s m tj loom- oREGOc� • - s Ferry, Kruse Way, & Kruse Way Place REET VACATION - Ord . 2758 o 100 200 ` = = = — Feet \ 1 INCH= 100 FEET 4004 KRUSE WAY "'xi), I' TAX LOT NO. �CF 21E08BA05900 \ <N> 'N Y EXISTING \ 3900 KRUSE WAY PLACE RIGHT OF WAY TAX LOT NO. 21E08BA033004 `� PROPOSED / RIGHT OF WAY / VACATION / PROPOSED 4 RIGHT OF WAY / 0 VACATION /� 1:4- 3800 KRUSE WAY PLACE 11 TAX LOT NO 21 E08BA03200 /� \�\ EXISTING /o RIGHT OF WAY /co kRLis---._ 91'i\ /' y -� /O VICINITY MAP-Not To Scale ` /, �I \ alrma�Rr ! 5 / 'Zi4 /f SE,..7:6-\\\ 4 r 'a�`P a �� .. Fir Ridge 4 4_ arus,,,,,y0 o°,C LEGEND m i-4re, } Ga�ewood �g° - PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY VACATION V + W.4LIUG.� V ,nta96 t H,n Way4 T ,_— �''rkFitRd PLANNING AND .,61,Ps- toBUILDING SERVICES twftli Ca) o � O ° REGO� BFR Nonconformities Code Amendments LU 17-0028 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 3 , 2 0 1 7 Boones Ferry Road Code History • 1999 Lake Grove Town Center • 2012 BFR Funding Study Designation • 2012 Urban Renewal Plan • 2001 Boones Ferry Corridor Plan • 2012 Bond Measure • 2002-2003 Lake Grove Town Center Concept • 2012 BFR STIP Grant Application • 2003-2006 Lake Grove Village Center Implementation Advisory Committee • 2013 Survey • 2004-2005 Boones Ferry Concept Plan • 2016 LGVC Parking Management Plan • 2006-2008 Lake Grove Village Center • 2016-17 BFR Design Plan & Overlay Public Hearing Process • 2016-17 BFR ROW Process • 2011 BFR Refinement Plan, Ph 1 • 2017 BFR Implementation Code • 2011 BFR Refinement Plan, Ph 2 Amendments ProjectTimeline April — May: Outreach to BFR PAC May 22 — June 9 : Public Review Draft June 26 : PC Work Session August 28 : PC Public Hearing October 3 : City Council Public Hearing _ ., ig, „,, _ , . , . _ .. g .. ,„ __ _ '- ,;,i. pyo...AL. •._ - /`J,, ./ .... . ,c,, . . .!„. . 4 ,� t .} a ,w�. . r` y ,6\ r 0' ' , 15 ci "'wawa on lots. anal -.i .Y L, . r�� . -_ECS r J . h -k4.,,1■ `T + _ 1 i.Sl 'r F ��,. a it 44(4," _ .. ,,i,,,,,. ..„,,,-.,..„ ,.„0-1, 1... _ ._.._ alli:::' . . _ -,,, - _. 4 ..,z,„.,:,, • .. , „„.. , , ..., - ‘ .,-e., _,. II . . S ' Google streetview 2017 � ; ,.- ' 1 !1A 8 . Street Special Attachment B : Page 1 TABLE 50.04.002-1: SPECIAL STREET SETBACKS Affected From To Special Setback Streets Boones Mercantile Dr. West Sunset Dr. 50 ft., unless reduced by Ferry Rd. Madrona St. the City Engineer, finding that the Purpose is met by a lesser amount. Boones Madrona St. West Sunset Dr. 50 ft. Ferry Rd. Ministerial Permit C Attachment B : Page 5 111 I:- - 1111111 111111ImjJn1 }y. : • II kmumwu�si i�mui �� y ,, 7 . • W.."— 3 -7, _i,._ ,.-. A- . - al ' - 4 .. . -_ . _s., ,—_-- .__ _yil . fi..,4 !yr . r „,.., ,. .wir •es I 12r i � NIII NI II 4,,mi ; a r `” Construction in ROWConstruction on site Replacement ParkingCode Waivers Attachment B ( pages 2-3 ) & Attachment C .://yr, •: , \ f �:::/p/(17 Naomi's Lampshades (30) 15910, 15932, 15942 Boones Ferry Road i / Curb • Tax Lot 21EO$CB03600 a ,`Qr� 1@,5 `� a5'k \1. y y 5�700�� :}14.. a5' \ Existing Stalls: 21 Stormwater Proposed Stalls: 21 / Planter 9.0' Tree Removal: 59" Existing -:- ,O Right-of- Way Line ' a .•:,...,...•.•.•:•:•:•:::•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•. .41.---"' Limits of 8 Project Paving rf . 4411\:::,],:.., Naomi's4000114 1 / _'.,% New Right-of-Way Limits C.1 6: 9A' at . (Exi&ilr}a) ill Prof1 rty -' is Side tines Ex. LGVC Parking/ Landscape Exceptic ' ' Attachment B ( pages 3-4) & Attachments D. 1 and D. 2 INDEX MAP PROPERTY MAP & TAX PROPERTY PARKING ROW IDENTIFIER ADDRESS LOT IDENTIFIER LOSS DEDICATED (sq. ft.) 24 16035 BFR 21E08CB01800 Riccardo's 4 spaces 2,124 • % PROPERTY 24 # 4 16035 BOONES FERRY ROAD • 21E08CB 01800 ..*._.— i-k* .\' **/ 7 t . { RICCARDO'S ir � Apr.,:v / 7iie / ,,,..!., ` �-ff i i .1',..:Y. .- i , '., . _ - /- ti� �.ti 4-. } • is •. • f,,. i " »' .• • ksRaw N_ tir �_ .. •._- . . � i.;'. . Y. .Y; • •,' tel '.-_w— __ _� 4 � q1J _ `f ' \' ��':L..:L..__. �• .l J , X1 — Issues Raised a -leak Project Impact Table for LGVC exceptions Tree Preservation , , ..----- .,, _..c.fp- ,-___ ../- , ._. . .....e....._...._. .... ,' -_-_,:-- - IiiirP ' i aid"?..,-.q ' ' r. .444016000, r 3 it - s - :- e-'- e • r y _ ..a '' C!t'. .'` , • . .. ._ :, ,*-_- l . ._....--- ' V _ . . . - ,,, ,..________________„_____, ,v....„. .,,,m....__ �--; ��� - j Google streetview 2017 m • -4, --A; ° t I • er n v"Tier - `% J • } %S.4 ,g , -' - ''. ;4.—.S1 . 'N. li.di• \ \. '....; . "' . a r •f ' t` , • : .r :. i , .1/4..4:-.4st. : ..I• i'.' . , ',.i.&• f.--. \ Ir• _,'.,..! M r r .-1v • Sfs it , �, ': �^ _+ iv.: ttil Ae. ii.' i..;. : • O • * a - tI _ Elsa . C •". '+� ti't s : , ��- _ it �� . ^ Ifs g lip Arborist _-PraperryLine ' Il Report on '1 7,* 0 . . ; '- •• - 1, i Tree Impacts i ' Exhibit F-2 B.a' LIMiNt r 1 'a aVc;44 s �I Significant grove of Tniovedhese r hens theld"'� ,� remove€i when the N 1 parking lot modifications E 4 r Douglas firs I are done �,�' r�+ J ROW impacts di ury in I: 6-itr,-: * I410, Or* Parking Cpm an -- y ' i Retaining Wall All ,. 4 - # Retaining 1 �: •.•..... .x. Wall 4 00. Parking New Right-of-Way Limits .1,4' -- .+ '4-'99— Right of ,0 Way(Existing) r k '`� Curb Conclusion Recommend adoption of Ordinance 2753 and findings '' ' A i" 0 simi E .;...,..,.t .,.i, ,, " t. 11 ' 13 4g a) a) . ... ... . , t• j. . . • CI oa) a: • U 0 (47.1) N J > • ' ,� ♦r a IIIU 00.044 cu foymil s men : 4,1. .:.4-7.....,1,.,- ':.,....',.4;',1 a s- •_ F '- 4 4.a 0 •., 1/11 r i • `'"` ,:4,-... • .. -:. •- —II a ko 4-4 C E .......,% . O y ;a '4i.•'� 'f 1 1 74 eta : lit-.. , - r .jy'L' E rq 0 �. ` fir'+!'••..0 .110: �,.4�,k yE. • .111 i OP' O tn sO4 .i ill,' f' . 1itei Li) Vi 03 > '; it'41441:.'' 4:1 t 'll...rr: _:: eijorr ......1.,,,,,iwv.. ....,siA >m U V) c •NI ''? • ''', • . Aft � ,.4,71.-Sir',` {- , ,`,• t,' i -11,-,1'-e '�•'t AI) 0 >4 Crili sW 4:.'',, ' ;if• •f ,+,�,4 4 .' • ' ' ,� ,. .1}•, :i of xo CU0 Y1 t4' ta. 1110 •?I7 . . S Mt , .ta Iii;)#',. 1, = °PP 111:—' , ibr A 4 • ) 1 1' w AGENDA o � CITY COUNCIL MEETING IV 0 October 3, 2017 6:30 p.m. °REGo ' Council Chambers, City Hall Contact: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder Email: asimpson@lakeoswego.city Phone: 503-534-4225 Also published on the internet at: www.lakeoswego.city. The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities.To request accommodations, please contact the City Manager's Office at 503-534-4225 48 hours before the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PROCLAMATIONS 4.1 Meals on Wheels 4.2 Brian Doyle Day 5. CONSENT AGENDA—Full Council Approval ♦ 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. Motion: Move to adopt the consent agenda. 5.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes 5.1.1 September 5, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes Motion: Move to approve minutes as written. 5.2 Resolution 17-54,A Resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council Initiating Road Legalization Proceedings Under ORS 223.935 for portions of Boones Ferry Road Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-54. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city Page 2 5.3 Ordinance 2756, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel Consisting of 0.37 Acres at 18000 Pilkington Road; Declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain Districts (AN 17-0008) Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2756. 6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 7. CITIZEN COMMENT(15 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 individual shall apply. 7.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 8.1 Resolution 17-55,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Creating a Local Street Reconstruction Program Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-55. 8.2 Resolution 17-56,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Exercising the Power of Eminent Domain with Relation to Property at 4225 Oakridge Road Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-56. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.1 Ordinance 2758, A Special Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Vacating Portions of Right-of-Way on Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2758. Public Hearing Process: 1. Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney 2. Staff Report by Erica Rooney, City Engineer 3. Testimony:the following time limits shall be observed, but may be changed by the Council: 10 minutes for representatives of recognized neighborhood associations, homeowner associations, government agencies, or other incorporated public interest organizations; 5 minutes per individual 4. Questions of Staff 9.2 Ordinance 2753, An Ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego Amending Sections LOC 50.04.002, 50.05.007, and 50.07.003.13 of the Community Development Code for the Purpose of Implementing the Boones Ferry Road Project (LU 17-0028) 503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city Page 3 Motion: Move to approve LU 17-0028, and to enact Ordinance 2753. Public Hearing Process: 1. Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney 2. Staff Report by Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Manager 3. Testimony:the following time limits shall be observed, but may be changed by the Council: 10 minutes for representatives of recognized neighborhood associations, homeowner associations, government agencies, or other incorporated public interest organizations; 5 minutes per individual 4. Questions of Staff 10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL 10.1 Proposed Clackamas County Coordinating Committee (C4) By-Laws Changes 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under authority of ORS 192.660 (2)(e)to conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions and (2)(f)to consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection. 13. ADJOURNMENT 503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city 4.1 o O sty `V O Office of the Mayor, City of Lake Oswego Meals on Wheels Month WHEREAS, there is a need to assure that no senior goes hungry or suffers from social isolation in Lake Oswego; and, WHEREAS, the need for home delivered meals will only increase as nearly 44% of Lake Oswegans are age 50 and older; and, WHEREAS, 95% of seniors want to remain independent and in their own homes as they age; and, WHEREAS, Meals on Wheels allows seniors to stay in their home at least two years longer; and, WHEREAS, the program was started in Lake Oswego in 1972 by seven people; and, WHEREAS, the City of Lake Oswego memorialized its commitment to Meals on Wheels in 2004 by partnering with the nonprofit board Lake Oswego Meals on Wheels; and, WHEREAS, the program engages 155 Lake Oswego volunteers in meaningful service to others; and, WHEREAS, there are more than 18,000 from scratch, nutritionally balanced meals served annually to senior and disabled Lake Oswegans each year; and, NOW, THEREFORE, I, Kent Studebaker, Mayor of the City of Lake Oswego, do hereby proclaim the month of October as Meals on Wheels Month in Lake Oswego, Oregon, and I urge all citizens to celebrate older adults and the Lake Oswego Meals on Wheels program that supports healthy aging in Lake Oswego. Kent Studebaker, Mayor 4.2 0,40, OREGOr\ Office of tile .Mayor, City of Lake Oswego Brian Doyle Day WHEREAS Brian James Patrick Doyle was born on November 6, 1956 to Ethel Clancey Doyle and James Doyle in New York, NY; and WHEREAS on May 2, 1987 he married Mary Miller Doyle in Lake Oswego at Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Parish, and later made their home there, where they were blessed with three children and a happy marriage until Brian was called home to the "incomprehensible Love" on May 27, 2017; and WHEREAS Brian was a beloved spouse, father, and friend, an inspiring "storycatcher" who insisted "stories are wild and holy and necessary and crucial and hilarious and heartbreaking, and the food of our souls and our national idea", an award-winning essayist and novelist, and a strong and avid library supporter; and WHEREAS Brian was the editor of Portland magazine at the University of Portland from 1991 to 2017, where, under his guidance, it was consistently ranked among the best university magazines in the country; and WHEREAS Brian was the Lake Oswego Public Library Lake Oswego Reads 2012 author, selected for his book, Mink River, a lyrical, poetic, and quintessentially Oregon novel; and WHEREAS Brian was the living embodiment of love, faith, and joy, and his words, tears, and laughter awakened us to our higher selves, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that November 6, 2017 is recognized as BRIAN DOYLE DAY in Lake Oswego, Oregon, and that all citizens are urged to "be tender and laugh." Kent Studebaker, Mayor October 3, 2017 5.1 D A E 44 COUNCIL REPORT r o dR�ddC.‘ TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder City Manager's Office SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes DATE: September 27, 2017 MEETING DATE: October 3, 2017 SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve minutes as written. ATTACHMENTS 1. September 5, 2017, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes 503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city ATTACHMENT 1 E____ A E7�� CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 1i. 0September 5, 2017 EGO� 6. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Studebaker called the regular City Council meeting to order at 5:04 p.m. on September 5, 2017, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue, following recess for the Redevelopment Agency Board executive session (Agenda Item 5.). 7. ROLL CALL Note: The roll call was conducted immediately after the City Council reconvened following its executive session (Agenda Item 8.). Present: Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte Staff Present: Scott Lazenby, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder; Bonnie Hirshberger, Citizen Information Specialist; Larry Goff, Fire Chief; Crystal Shum, Boones Ferry Road Project Manager; Erica Rooney, City Engineer; Bruce Powers, Park Analyst/Project Manager; Jeff Munro, Parks Superintendent; Megan Big John, Parks Maintenance Crew Leader; Paul Espe, Associate Planner; Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director Others Present: Brad Theurer, Landscape Architect and Project Manager with Mackenzie 8. RECESS TO RECONVENE IN CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under authority of ORS 192.660(2)(e)to conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions, and (2)(f) to consider information or records that are exempt by law from public inspection. Mr. Powell reviewed the statutory basis for entering executive session and outlined the parameters. The City Council met in executive session beginning at 6:02 p.m. and ending at 6:40 p.m., following adjournment of the Redevelopment Agency executive session (Agenda Item 5.). Note: Agenda Item 9. pertained to the Redevelopment Agency meeting. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 14 September 5, 2017 10. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION Mayor Studebaker reconvened the Council in open session at 6:47 p.m., following adjournment of the Redevelopment Agency Board meeting (Agenda Item 9.). 11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Studebaker led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 12. PROCLAMATION 12.1 Safe, Caring, and Respectful Community Proclamation Mayor Studebaker read a proclamation signed by all City Council members reaffirming their commitment to ensuring a safe, secure, and respectful community. 13. PRESENTATION 13.1 Video Contest Winner Awards Mayor Studebaker announced winners of the City's first video contest, calling all forward as their videos were presented: honorable mention to Matthew Symonds; third place to Erica Chiang, Megan Chiang, Nico Johnson, and Ellie Johnson; second place to Avery Jett and Lexi Jett; and first place to Wilson Godfrey and Zach Jett. Awards were presented to each by Councilors Buck and LaMotte. 14. CONSENT AGENDA— For Full Council Approval Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda. 14.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes 14.1.1 June 20, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes 14.1.2 July 5, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes 14.1.3 July 18, 2017, Regular Meeting Minutes Motion: Move to approve the minutes as written. Report and Attachments 14.2 Purchase of Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 14 September 5, 2017 Motion: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine from Pierce Manufacturing, Inc., by means of FireRescue GPO, a program of NPPGov. Report and Attachments 14.3 Purchase of Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer Motion: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer from Precision Weld Boats, Inc. Report and Attachment 14.4 Resolution 17-53, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Declaring a Public Necessity to Acquire Real Property Interests at 16140 and 16650 Boones Ferry Road and Exercise the Power of Eminent Domain (Boones Ferry Road Project) Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-53. Report and Attachments 14.5 Contract Amendment for Pre-Design of Marylhurst Pump Station —WO 238 Motion: Move to authorize an amendment to an existing Pre-Design Personal Service Contract with Murraysmith, Inc. (formerly Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.), Engineers/Planners, to provide additional design, permitting and construction phase services for the Marylhurst Wastewater Pump Station Replacement Project, Work Order 238, in the amount of $430,424.00. Report 14.6 Resolution 17-52, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Initiating Proceedings to Vacate Portions of the Right-of-way for Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place and Authorizing the City Recorder to Give Notice of a Public Hearing. Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-52. Report and Attachment 14.7 Resolution 17-49, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Approving the Appointment of the Public Art Committee Chair Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-49. Report and Attachments City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 14 September 5, 2017 14.8 Boones Ferry Road Annexation Agreement Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign an annexation agreement between the City and the owners of properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry Road substantially in the form presented. Report and Attachment END CONSENT AGENDA Councilor LaMotte moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Gudman seconded the motion. Councilor Manz requested clarification of the planned travel to Wisconsin by City Fire Department staff for inspection of the new fire engine (Agenda Item 14.2). Chief Goff indicated that two Department representatives would conduct inspections at two different points in the production process: once prior to painting and the other a final inspection prior to shipment. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting `aye'. (7-0) 15. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA No items were removed from the Consent Agenda. 16. CONSENT AGENDA— For City Councilors' Approval 16.1 Resolution 17-47, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego Approving Appointments of Youth Members to Advisory Boards Motion: Move to approve Resolution 17-47. Report and Attachment END CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Manz moved to approve Resolution 17-47. Councilor O'Neill seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting 'aye'. (6-0) 17. CITIZEN COMMENT • Wendelin Russell, 4340 Botticelli Street City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 14 September 5, 2017 Ms. Russell clarified and amplified neighbors' and neighborhood/homeowners' association views on issues discussed in the Botticelli striping update (Council Report, Agenda Item 18.4). She reminded Council of several neighbors' comments at the June 14 Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) meeting; their concerns included the lack of a bike study and the excellent bike lane already serving the area on Jefferson Parkway. The parking provided for condominiums in her association is ample, she indicated. It is the overflow parking from various community events nearby that creates difficulty for the Botticelli residents, and they want the street parking to be preserved. • Brian Rockwell, 4342 Botticelli Street Mr. Rockwell emphasized the need to keep the on-street parking on Botticelli because of a lack of reasonable alternatives for residents' visitors during events in the area. He noted that TAB had voted unanimously to retain the on-street parking and to defer the bicycle lane striping, and he asked Council to take that into account. • Frank Forward, 4312 Botticelli Street Mr. Forward discussed the difficulty facing residents who wished to host family gatherings with elderly guests. He reported that he had seen very few bike riders in his 16-plus years living on Botticelli, and it made no sense to eliminate the on-street parking that is used consistently. • Lynne Rockwell, 4342 Botticelli Ms. Rockwell noted that, as a long-time resident with a clear view of the street, she had never seen a bicyclist ride up the hill; any children would walk their bicycles. A much broader range of people was concerned about the impacts of eliminating on-street parking, she indicated. Further, the unanimous TAB vote against recommending the bike lane had included two avid cyclists. • Charles Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill Road, Portland 97219 Mr. Ormsby indicated that he had submitted written testimony regarding a variety of issues. A primary concern is the lack of understanding about how the physically handicapped get around the city. He touched on public transit issues, including extended travel times, pedestrian access difficulties, and lack of related communications, along with several other items for the Council's awareness. 17.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up No follow-up on prior Citizen Comment was presented. Note: This item was addressed following Agenda Item 20. 18. COUNCIL BUSINESS 18.1 Contract Award for Construction Management Services for WO 183 - Boones Ferry Road Improvements Project City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 14 September 5, 2017 Report and Exhibit Ms. Shum, accompanied by Ms. Rooney, asked Council to award the personal services contract for pre-construction contract management services to Otak, as discussed in the Council Report and Exhibit. She highlighted the importance of Otak expertise as the project moves forward in the pre-construction and construction phases; Otak brings experience with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)/federally-funded projects, as well as with major projects in urban areas. Together with additional complexities related to the many businesses located within the very compact project area, Staff recognizes that requirements for this project differ significantly from the largely self-funded projects managed by the City. Key components of the pre- construction services were described: (1) development of staging plans; (2) constructability review; and (3) assistance with pre-qualifying of contractors, which will help to ensure that costs are minimized and the project runs on schedule. The construction phase is scheduled to begin in the summer of 2018. Council was requested only to award the contract for pre-construction contract management services at this time. However, Ms. Shum noted that Staff would return at a date nearer to the start of construction to request award of a separate two-year contract for the construction phase (Council Report, p 2). Mayor Studebaker asked if Staff had inquired about issues related to an Otak project in the Tillamook area. Ms. Shum reported that they had reviewed the situation and had been satisfied with the way Otak had addressed the issues, expressing confidence that they would work in partnership with the City of Lake Oswego. Councilor Manz asked if the Otak role would be comparable to project management functions that had been provided by Brown and Caldwell in the Lake Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership, particularly with respect to regular reporting. Ms. Shum indicated that Otak would be generating a significant amount of information for Staff. A key role on the project team would be taken by Katy Kerklaan, Citizen Information Specialist, who would ensure that necessary information is provided to the public. Staff would also be available to provide regular updates to the Council, Ms. Rooney added. Responding to Councilor LaMotte's questions about City staff time allocated for the project, Ms. Rooney indicated that approximately 75% of Ms. Kerklaan's time would be dedicated to it, while Ms. Shum would be working full time. Councilor LaMotte commented on the more significant cost of construction-phase Otak services, i.e., $2.6 to $3.0 million. He emphasized the need for Council to receive data to support the services proposed in that second contract, including work to be performed, time, and costs. Ms. Shum assured him that detailed data would be provided at the time Council was asked to award that contract, nearer to the start of construction. Councilor Gudman expressed concern about reports around the region of significant additional costs incurred because of requirements related to state and federal projects, with no perceptible value added. Ms. Rooney differentiated the Boones Ferry Road project as something of a "hybrid" in the view of ODOT. The City could expect to see the benefit of very thorough and consistent documentation with the project, she indicated. To this point Staff has found ODOT to be reasonable in administering requirements, and perhaps less restrictive than seen on a fully federally-funded project. She indicated that Staff would be mindful of Councilor Gudman's point. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 14 September 5, 2017 Councilor Gudman moved to award a personal services contract to Otak to provide Pre- Construction Phase Construction Management Services for the Work Order 183 - Boones Ferry Road Improvements project fora not-to-exceed amount of$152,212. Councilor Manz seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting `aye'. (7-0) 18.2 Resolution 17-34, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Adopting the Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan Report and Attachments 1 - 4 Attachment 5 Mr. Lazenby introduced Mr. Powers and described his responsibility for parks planning and coordination. Mr. Powers provided background leading to the 6.8-acre park project, as discussed in the Council Report. He emphasized that the project has been guided by deed restrictions agreed upon for the City's purchase of the property from the late Donald Meyer in the late 1990s, as well as by an extensive community outreach process. The proposed improvements focus on (1) removal of invasive plant species, (2) increased visibility and circulation, (3) accessibility, (4) preservation and enhancement of the site's ecological health, and (5) enhancement of the view corridors. Another focus was to provide passive recreational uses. Discussing the role of the public advisory committee (PAC), which included City staff members, he outlined the community outreach activities that had led to identification of five areas of focus for the park: flexible open spaces, natural open spaces, an oak savanna, enhanced wetlands, and enhanced forest. The process had informed the Master Plan as presented (Council Report, Attachment 5). Mr. Powers reviewed elements of the overall Plan, including the proposed parking, pathways, play areas, and wetlands enhancements. With the assistance of Mr. Theurer, he pointed out the related locations on a PowerPoint slide (Illustrative Concept Plan, Attachment 2) and the consideration given to deed restrictions, public input, and site factors. Retention of the natural character was a guiding principle, as conveyed in the Council Report. In concluding his report, Mr. Powers noted that the PAC had been proactive and the public outreach process had been very effective. In addition to PAC approval, the Master Plan had unanimous support of the Forest Highlands Neighborhood Association board, and Staff therefore asked that Council adopt the Master Plan. He pointed out that the boardwalk currently included in the Plan would likely be eliminated or replaced by a soft-surface trail alternative in the schematic design phase of the project. This change was based on a recommendation of City legal staff. Councilor Buck requested additional information about the hawthorn trees to be removed and the slope in that part of the property. Mr. Theurer displayed a cross-section drawing (Council Report, Attachment 3) and discussed plans to bring native tree species into this area. Modifications to the slope were planned to enhance the adjacent play area; they would also improve views from the higher points and better sight lines for safety in the area. Councilor Buck asked about any consideration given to the amount of area designated for the longer nesting City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 14 September 5, 2017 grass versus the more manicured lawn. Mr. Theurer described input from the public outreach meetings that indicated people wanted the more natural feel, with wildlife habitat. The larger area of nesting grasses was a unifying factor that helped to maintain the beautiful structure of the site, he explained. Councilor Manz asked about the level of community interest in a natural soccer field that had been mentioned in the original deed for the property. Mr. Powers noted that space was not sufficient for a full soccer field, and only significant alterations to the property would make it feasible. As this was contrary to the wishes expressed by neighbors and the community, the project team had proposed this good-sized area as a place for family or other informal play. In accordance with community input, it would not be programmable space. Councilor LaMotte requested clarification about the current request for Council approval of the Plan in relation to scheduled meetings and possible future refinements. Mr. Powers explained that the purpose of future meetings would be to present information to the public, not to seek input. He confirmed the accuracy of the $165,000 restroom cost estimate (Council Report, Attachment 5, Appendix A). He also indicated that Staff could explore Councilor LaMotte's suggestion that bids for this project be solicited jointly with the Iron Mountain Park work. Councilor Gudman moved to approve Resolution 17-34. Councilor LaMotte seconded the motion. Councilor Manz noted that she found it interesting that no soccer programming was planned for this site, in light of the mention of soccer in the deed restriction and also the lack of practice space in the city. Nonetheless, she would be voting in favor of the motion, given the wishes of the Forest Highlands neighborhood. A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed. with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting 'aye'. (7-0) 18.3 Contract Award for Hazelia Turf Replacement Report and Attachments Mr. Munro, accompanied by Ms. Big John, requested that Council authorize the award of a contract for replacement of artificial turf at Hazelia Field, as detailed in the Council Report. He noted that community users had been notified of the field closure from September 18 through October 22, with provision for a two-week extension in the event of inclement weather. Mayor Studebaker asked if a discount or other concessions had been requested from the contractor for a combined Hazelia/East Waluga Park turf replacement project. Mr. Munro reported that this had been proposed, but the contractor indicated that the East Waluga project was anticipated for a date too much later than this one, up to a year and a half afterward, for such consideration. Councilor LaMotte asked for additional information about minimizing the cost of removal of turf materials from Hazelia. As the City could not identify a feasible reuse for the materials at this City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 14 September 5, 2017 time, Mr. Munro confirmed that they would be taken to a recycling facility. However, Staff had expressed to the contactor interest in potentially receiving materials removed from a future project, should that meet the City's needs. Councilor Gudman moved to authorize the City Manager to sign a contract with FieldTurf USA, Inc. in the amount of$638,984.71 for replacement of the artificial turf at Hazelia Field. Councilor O'Neill seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting 'aye'. (7-0) 18.4 Botticelli Striping Update Report Ms. Rooney introduced Ms. Owings, who noted that Staff had received some additional comments on the striping project after submitting the Council Report; these were very similar to those heard in the Citizen Comment period earlier in the meeting, she indicated. With accompanying slides showing the pertinent section of roadway, she discussed the current striping and location of street parking, as well as the proposed bike lane. As the bike lane project had been identified in both the Transportation System Plan (TSP) and the Comprehensive Plan, Staff wanted to honor the request. However, during the public outreach period prior to construction, a majority of comments reflected a desire to maintain the existing parking, she reported. Other comments indicated a preference for creation of a bike lane. After highlighting other considerations on both sides of the issue, she noted that Staff and the TAB recognize the importance of the on-street parking to the surrounding residents. Having further weighed the input and needs, Staff now wished to amend the Council Report by recommending the third alternative (Council Report, p 2). This would provide for"sharrow" markings, a symbol indicating that a travel lane is to be shared by both cars and bicycles. The existing parking on Botticelli would be retained. The sharrow markings would improve safety for cyclists by directing them to an area outside the door zone of the parked cars and would remind drivers to watch for cyclists in the shared travel lane. Councilor Gudman expressed approval for the compromise that the recommended sharrow would provide. Councilor Buck agreed, emphasizing the importance of an infrastructure to support bicycling as an alternative to automobile travel. This compromise offers a reasonable approach to making a connection for people who do not drive, he indicated. Councilor Kohlhoff noted that the issue of excessive vehicle speed by drivers on Botticelli had been raised, with the on-street parking contributing to the safety issues. She indicated that she was not convinced that the issue had been addressed with regard to the parking. Mayor Studebaker requested clarification about the striping. Ms. Rooney indicated that the recommendation would retain the on-street parking and the center line in their present locations, while adding the sharrow markings to the uphill travel lane. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 14 September 5, 2017 Mayor Studebaker moved to allow parking to remain on Botticelli and to add only a sharrow bike legend that alerts drivers to share the uphill lane with bikes. Councilor LaMotte seconded the motion. Councilor Gudman noted that he would support the motion. He indicated that this bike/pedestrian pathway was No. 15 on the Capital Improvement Plan projects list and asked if passage of the motion would mean that this item would be removed from the list. Ms. Owings suggested that this be re-evaluated at the next TSP update and reiterated the City's commitment to both modes. Citing the impact on SDCs, Councilor Gudman expressed his hope that the item would be removed. Ms. Rooney concurred that it should be removed from the official list, but that Staff would continue to track it for any change in priority. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting 'aye'. (7-0) 19. PUBLIC HEARINGS 19.1 Appeal of TR 499-17-02043 (AP 17-05), Appeal of a Permit of Tree Removal at 1053 C Avenue Mayor Studebaker announced that the appeal of the permit for tree removal had been withdrawn. 19.2 Ordinance 2750, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the Zoning Map to Change the Zone Designation for Property at 10 Touchstone (21E05BD02000, Supplemental No. 1) and Abutting Right-of-Way from R-3 to R-7.5, and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0022). Report and Exhibits Mr. Powell reviewed the title for Ordinance 2750. He noted that zone changes were typically legislative matters; however, as this was a single-lot zone change, it would be handled as a judicial proceeding. He reviewed parameters for this land use request, noted that the public hearing process was outlined in the agenda, and reviewed the time limits for testimony. He asked if any City Councilor wished to make any declarations with relation to ex parte contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. None were heard. He then asked if any member of the audience wished to challenge any City Council member's right to consider the application. No challenges were heard. Staff Report Mr. Espe explained that the public hearing would address the Zoning Map correction pertaining to the property at 10 Touchstone in the Mountain Park neighborhood. This was part of the ongoing Map amendment project identified as part of the 2005 Code audit, he noted. As detailed in the Council Report, it would correct this lot's zoning designation from R-3 to R-7.5, in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. At its June 26 hearing the Planning Commission had reviewed the proposed zone change and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed change. Staff requested approval of the change as shown in the Council Report. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 14 September 5, 2017 Questions of Staff Councilor LaMotte inquired about the possibility of combining any remaining corrections into a single submission to the Council. Mr. Espe explained that these requests have been grouped according to neighborhood association. As the application process requires presentation to the neighborhood impacted by the amendments, Staff finds this to be most effective. Testimony Mayor Studebaker asked if anyone wished to present testimony in opposition to or in favor of adoption of the Ordinance or if anyone wished to present neutral testimony. Hearing no requests, he closed the hearing. Councilor Gudman commended Staff and the Planning Commission for clearing up the various Zoning Map inconsistencies. Mayor Studebaker moved to adopt Ordinance 2750 amending the Zoning Map to change the zone designation for property at 10 Touchstone and abutting right-of-way from R-3 to R-7.5 and adopting findings. Councilor Manz seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting `aye'. (7-0) 19.3 Ordinance 2754, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) to Clarify and Update the Criteria for Design Variances in the Downtown Redevelopment Design (DRD) District (LU 17-0039). Report and Exhibits Mr. Powell explained that the public hearing on Ordinance 2754 was a legislative proceeding pertaining to Code text changes. After reading the Ordinance title, he outlined the parameters and hearing process, including the time limits for testimony. He asked if any City Council member needed to make a declaration with relation to conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he asked if any member of the audience wished to challenge any City Council member's right to hear the application; none was heard. Staff Report Mr. Siegel noted that this matter was initiated by the Council during annual goal setting. In subsequent work planning with the Planning Commission, Council had requested that the Commission review procedures and standards in the Code for architectural design in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District, with a focus on allowing a greater variety in architectural styles in the downtown, as detailed in the Council Report. The Commission having determined that, although the Code is fairly prescriptive with regard to the types of styles desired for the downtown, it has been interpreted in a way that has allowed for more contemporary interpretations of the three "Lake Oswego Style" options (Council Report, p 2). The Planning City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 14 September 5, 2017 Commission and Staff had concluded that the problem to address was not one of design direction in the downtown plans or Code. The variance procedure for downtown design provides flexibility in varying the styles, and applicants have been successful in pursuing such variances. Rather, the issue was to clarify the criteria for design variances. With accompanying PowerPoint slides, Mr. Siegel reviewed several alternate approaches and related considerations that had led to the proposal before Council (Council Report, p 3-4). The consensus had been that applying the city-wide variance criteria was not necessarily responsive to the specific design plans or architectural language of the downtown. After discussing how this related to distinctive aspects of downtown design, he reported that the Commission and Staff had concurred that making no change to the Code was not recommended; this would provide no additional guidance to Staff nor to developers contemplating projects outside the current specifications. Mindful of the Council's desire for more streamlined processes, as well as for greater architectural variety in the downtown, the Planning Commission recommendation was to clarify the design variance criteria. In this and other areas with design district plans, they identified the need to focus on variance criteria specific to their plans. After describing the challenging process faced by an applicant trying to determine which standards are relevant to downtown, he reported that the Commission recommended that a "punch list" be incorporated into the existing variance options. In further analysis, it was determined that the proposal would apply this where there is a physical constraint with the site of a proposed building; where the building has a unique function; and where the City's sustainability goals can be advanced by removing regulatory barriers. Finally, Mr. Siegel reminded Council that perhaps the most troublesome criterion for applicants, (outside situations addressed in the current Code) related to illustrating how their designs better achieve requirements of the relevant designs and codes. He emphasized the importance of the criteria in the East End Redevelopment Plan and the Downtown Urban Design Plan, both of which provide very good design direction for the downtown. In summary, he noted that the proposed amendments achieved (1) consolidation of the criteria for the downtown for reference purposes; (2) an upgrade of the criteria, by adding functionality and sustainability; and (3) implementation of the Planning Commission's recommendation that the criteria for design quality and relationship to other buildings are both applied in reviewing variances. The Commission has recommended approval of Ordinance 2754. The language is provided in Exhibit A-1.1, Attachment 2. The findings were also provided for Council's consideration (Exhibit B). Questions of Staff Councilor O'Neill asked about any consideration given to simply adding another category, one where elements of the current three style options (English Tudor, Oregon Rustic, Arts and Crafts) might be combined so as to achieve a more contemporary style. This category might incorporate materials such as more glass and steel, as in designs sometimes called "Northwest contemporary". Mr. Siegel confirmed that a couple of such options had been discussed by the Commission. However, concerns had been identified about adopting such a style because of the inconsistent interpretation of "Northwest contemporary" and other terms. The Commission had been concerned about the ability to codify such styles, and also believed that the proposed goals would allow the City to be more nimble and adaptable than additional content in terms of design. For this and other reasons, their recommendation was for a process solution instead of another City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 14 September 5, 2017 set of criteria. Also, some commissioners were concerned about too much direction toward more contemporary designs. He had reminded them of the design standards in the Code that already would be applied in the downtown. Noting that a significant amount of such direction still remains, he indicated that the proposal would guide future designs. Staff would welcome innovative submissions; this would lead to the community process that is afforded by the variance process. Councilor O'Neill posed additional questions about impacts on speed, time, and money. In ensuing discussion, Mr. Siegel clarified that the proposal would refine the criteria for the variance process that exists today. It would guide the applicant more effectively in communicating how the design better implements the objectives, based on the discrete set of points in the East End Redevelopment Plan and the design principles in the Downtown Urban Design Plan. In the view of Staff and the Commission, both of these documents support the desired village character, he indicated. Mr. Lazenby added that a developer wishing to avoid the additional time of the variance process would still have the option of the "Lake Oswego Style"for a design. Mr. Siegel expressed his concern that adding another style category could not contemplate the many different kinds of proposals likely to be received. The City would be back where it started: adding to Code and making it less streamlined. Councilor Kohlhoff asked for clarification on the process for acquiring a variance. Mr. Siegel outlined requirements within the context of a development review application. He described a recent example and how it had produced an even higher-quality result than might have been required without the variance, and then responded to related questions. In response to questions from Councilor Buck, Mr. Siegel confirmed that nearly all development projects in the downtown go through the variance process, largely because it is impossible to write code to address every eventuality. He clarified that Lake Oswego's "variance" is commonly termed "design review" elsewhere, and is comparable to the process in other jurisdictions, including the City of Portland. He detailed how the variance path related to the "Lake Oswego Style". The more an exception varied from the Style standards, the higher the bar would likely be under Development Review Commission (DRC) review, he observed. Councilor LaMotte acknowledged the City's desire to provide more substantive guidance to Planning staff as they address pending development proposals. His preference is to provide a list of what the City does not wish to see in new development, although even articulating this would take considerable Planning Commission and staff time. He commended the timing of the amendments proposal and expressed support for continued review. Mr. Siegel responded to questions from Mayor Studebaker about the length of time required to move a commercial project through the DRC review when no variance was requested. The Mayor inquired about the possibility of simplifying the process when the design might not adhere strictly to "Lake Oswego Style" standards, such that the project could move forward without the extra time and expense of variance approval. Councilor LaMotte opined that the idea had merit and would likely be received favorably by commissioners. For the present, he expressed approval for the proposed amendments; a Council study session on design for the downtown could be scheduled at a later time, he suggested. Testimony City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 14 September 5, 2017 Mayor Studebaker asked if anyone wished to present testimony in opposition to or in favor of the Ordinance or if anyone wished to present neutral testimony. Hearing no requests, he closed the hearing. Councilor LaMotte moved to approve Ordinance2754, the new criteria for design variances in Downtown Redevelopment Design District, LU 17-0039. Councilor Gudman seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, and LaMotte voting `aye'. (7-0) 20. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL Councilor Manz announced that the City had conducted a water audit at her home. She reminded those present that this service is offered to all residents at no cost and provides helpful information. Next she thanked Concert Coordinator Madeline Marin-Foucher for the excellent event on September 3, a concert in honor of Lake Oswego volunteers. She also reported on a successful ribbon-cutting ceremony at the new Water Treatment Plant. Finally, in response to a recent letter from a citizen about litter in the city, she offered to initiate discussion on this concern. She suggested the possibility of convening a group to address the issue. 21. REPORTS OF OFFICERS No reports were made. 22. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Studebaker adjourned the meeting at 9:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Kent Studebaker, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 14 September 5, 2017 5.2 -0), _0s COUNCIL REPORT 0442, ro OREOOt.4 TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Erica Rooney, PE City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution 17-54, Initiating Legalization Proceedings for Portions of Boones Ferry Road DATE: September 26, 2017 MEETING DATE: October 3, 2017 SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt Resolution 17-54 initiating road legalization proceedings under ORS 223.935, and directing that a public hearing be scheduled. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND In the course of obtaining property interests for the Boones Ferry Road Project, staff discovered that right-of-way dedication records cannot be located for four small portions of what has operated as the Boones Ferry Road right-of-way for decades. The old property lines for 16480 and 16444 Boones Ferry Road (US Bank and Round Table Pizza) still show of record as extending out toward the middle of what has been the traveled portion of Boones Ferry for at least half a century (see areas shown as "prescriptive right-of-way" on Exhibits A and B to attached Resolution 17-54). The tax maps, however, show Boones Ferry in its current, correct location. The same situation exists across the street for a small triangular portion of Boones Ferry abutting the Olson Memorial Clinic Property at 16463 Boones Ferry (see "prescriptive right-of-way" on Exhibit C). No recorded right-of-way dedications or deed documents for these portions of the road have been located in the real property records. Boones Ferry Road was aligned in this area long before it was annexed to Lake Oswego. County staff have searched and can find no documents formally transferring the right-of-way to the public for any of these three locations. There are also discrepancies for the shopping center property at the northeast corner of Boones Ferry and Lanewood (15630 Boones Ferry). In 1978, the City approved that 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.citv Page 2 development with conditions that included dedicating additional right-of-way and constructing public sidewalk improvements within that expanded area. The owner constructed the public improvements as required, and they have been in public use ever since. However, no document formally dedicating the additional right-of-way to the public can be found in the deed records, City files, or elsewhere. The area required to be formally dedicated is shown as "prescriptive right-of-way" on Exhibit D to the resolution. DISCUSSION Under state law (ORS 223.936 to 223.950) a city council may "legalize" a city road under any of the following conditions: (1) If, through omission or defect, doubt exists as to the legal establishment or evidence of establishment of a public road. (2) If the location of the road cannot be accurately determined due to: (a) Numerous alterations of the road; (b)A defective survey of the road or adjacent property; or (c) Loss or destruction of the original survey of the road. (3) If the road as traveled and used for 10 years or more does not conform to the location of a road described in the city records. Attached Resolution 17-54 initiates the legalization process for the four areas described above. Following state law, it directs the City Engineer to prepare a report including surveys of the areas to be legalized. It also directs that a public hearing be scheduled, with advance notice provided to the owners of properties abutting those areas. We currently anticipate that the hearing will be held on November 7, 2017. If, following the hearing, the City Council finds that the listed portions of the road meet any of the above criteria, and also finds that it is in the public interest to do so, it can enter a legalization order. By state law, the order would be conclusive proof that the road exists as described in the order, and any conflicting records would be deemed void. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution 17-54 initiating road legalization proceedings for portions of Boones Ferry Road, and directing staff to schedule a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution 17-54 o Exhibit A- 16480 Boones Ferry Road 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city Page 3 o Exhibit B - 16444 Boones Ferry Road o Exhibit C— 16463 Boones Ferry Road o Exhibit D— 15630 Boones Ferry Road 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION 17-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL INITIATING ROAD LEGALIZATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER ORS 223.935 FOR PORTIONS OF BOONES FERRY ROAD WHEREAS, ORS 223.935 to 223.950 provide a process whereby a city governing body may legalize city roads where any of the following conditions exist: (1) If, through omission or defect, doubt exists as to the legal establishment or evidence of establishment of a public road. (2) If the location of the road cannot be accurately determined due to: (a) Numerous alterations of the road; (b) A defective survey of the road or adjacent property; or (c) Loss or destruction of the original survey of the road. (3) If the road as traveled and used for 10 years or more does not conform to the location of a road described in the city records. WHEREAS, portions of existing Boones Ferry Road within the city abutting 16480, 16444, 16463, and 15630 Boones Ferry Road, as depicted on Exhibits A, B, C and D, appear to require legalization due to lost, destroyed, omitted or defective dedications, deeds, surveys or non- conforming city records; IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that: Section 1. Road legalization proceedings are initiated under ORS 223.935 to 223.950 and the City's home rule authority for the portions of Boones Ferry Road within the City abutting properties at 16480, 16444, 16463, and 15630 Boones Ferry Road that are depicted on Exhibits A, B, C and D. Section 2. The City Engineer is directed to: a. Cause surveys and a report to be filed with the City Council as provided in ORS 223.940. b. Schedule a public hearing before the City Council on the proposed legalizations. c. Cause notice of the public hearing to be provided under Section 14(A) of the City Charter (authorizing procedural rules), and Sections 2 and 3 of the City Council Rules of Procedure; and also by notice mailed at least 14 days before the public hearing to the owners of land abutting the areas to be legalized, sent to the names and addresses shown in the available tax assessor's records. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. Considered and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 3rd day of October, 2017. / / / Resolution 17-54 Page 1 of 2 AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Kent Studebaker, Mayor ATTEST: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell, City Attorney Resolution 17-54 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT A to Resolution 17-54 . . .. .: ._.- .,., / ,., ,,,.. . , ilipLON -, . Aik r3 'CP <c/CD c9- 1 CP 1PP 763 / ilfikk '' e .0 ,' 41111alr / AMIIIMmar ' , EXISTING Ami...A1111Mplimi. 11._ i_ ip, ,,, ,;,- RIGHT—OF—WAY 10" / LINE Alion. II.n. ii.. ii._ p11111111, 111111111.1r .,- . EXISTING .... c;T' 41111111Prir ,., ,- IIJAA , BACK OF WALK,<<„ \D tx9- 41111111111w PARCEL 1 436 41111111111r ,,, Allimpr PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT—OF—WAY .,, Q,' 411111111r AREA 2,404 SQ. FT. ± AMP" . JAY F16480 :111 2B:0PR 7.::1592YD3E1,74TrInU Tr- <NX Allir 71.9 AP .& r SI' ,ir „/ .q.0- / >c, OWNER. FILE Ivi: / '00 . ADDRESS. . & ji)YCE 2 • / DEED D a0ONES OC, tvo FERRy ROASD'tES 1 i ,i• ..,- / .,' • / i , • SCALE 4 30 0 15 30 N 1 LEGEND ( FEET ) 1 INCH = 30 FT. . 1=== PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY (PARCEL 1) 2,404 SQ. FT. ± I FILE NO.: 052 BOONES FERRY RD - I SUBMITTAL DATE: 08107/2017 I -1"-"- Whi Pula , I TAX LOT: 02600 1 (Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd-Madrona St) I REVISED DATE: , I TAX MAP: 2 1 E 07DD I 1 REVISED DATE: PatbrAl OR 97225 FA3-620-0455 Fdd,,,J8Z715 , I ADDRESS: 16480 BOONES FERRY RD I LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 1 REVISED DATE: II DWG: 00080137-v-EXURINDWG EXHIBIT B to Resolution 17-54 -- -- ' __- , . .., .„,.-- .. , .. .., . ,,•. • ,.- ..-= _.. ,., EXISTING 0 „ .,' RIGHT—OF—WAY •c; . ' LINE .. ' .,.- , . li 0 Prep, 4on...._11111 'Cbdaalisir,... 1. 11.3 jimek-7111MIr Aill....._4111111r1 EXISTING 411W BACK OF WALK WPARCEL 1 (s , PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT—OF—WAY ,,'"'. (0 ''''' AREA 2,870 SQ. FT. ± .7 - w7 , . x32-C'D0 o OWNER: WLLIAMrFoILE NUMBER. AANOINKBi uu/V LiAdi TED ADDRESS: 164 LirlArWeavASSociAl_rics DEED Doc44„,BOONEs RI,,,,„C,DMPANy LLC, "a 2014 ' ROAD —017840 SCALE 4 30 0 15 30 N . . I LEGEND ( FEET ) i 1 INCH = 30 FT. \ \ \I PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY (PARCEL 1) 2,870 SQ. FT. + ,•• FILE NO.: 051 BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE: 8/7/2017 II WHPactfic 1 TAX LOT: 02800 (Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd-Madrona St) I REVISED DATE: . u155 SW Dan.s Rd 5.7.3:0 . TAX MAP: 2 1 E 07DD I REVISED DATE: I 2T,taBerF7:5.0., :•' • ADDRESS:16444 BOONES FERRY RD LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO,183 I REVISED DATE: I DWG: 000BOB1.V-EX5IPRW.DWG j 1 • EXHIBIT C to Resolution 17-54 \�G F b, pNO�GL�IPg1�1�5R�MRO p F OGGI LIMI�Ep 00 F 0\bg b OW.OREGON�gb(g3 ‘3° 20,�g__1314g.\1 DpRESS 00C' 1A0,0• 2018 —o b,E, P pEEp pOG, NO 206 Ep pOG N EXISTING RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE ' — PARCEL 1 .� - PRESCRIPTIVE , ,, , � RIGHT—OF—WAY 7 AREA 358 SQ. FT. . '6' O X PRESCRIPTIVE 90 c- s e RIGHT—OF—WAY 0 ��4 ,� y- LINEssc \ . \ 4.- / . 1S, q5, 17+00 ON, ay T / / SCALE 1 30 0 15 30 1---....-I-1- N ( FEET ) . I LEGEND 1 INCH = 30 FT. ® PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT OF WAY (PARCEL 1) 358 SQ. FT. PAGE 3 OF 3 fi FILE NO.: 048 BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE: 09126/2017 WigaClf i TAX LOT: 00200 (Oakridge Rd!Reese Rd-Madrona St) I REVISED DATE: o,�s �� I TAX MAP: 21 E 07DD I REVISED DATE: Pte «s,m I ADDRESS: 16463 BOONES FERRY RD LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 I REVISED DATE: II DWG: mann-v-©c4BPRW.BWcI . , EXHIBIT D to Resolution 17-54 I. 49+00 w I _37-, 39.'-'T, }� 48- 9.10 z • 2' T 48+8500 14.2o' 40QQ+P' • O R=10.00' L-6.35' A=36`23'31" CH=S71'28'31"E EXISTING 6.25' RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE o W R=25.00'' OL-13.15' A30°07'5 0" b cd CH-S38'12'51"E if N.1-0 �, o 0 13.00' nr � -6 ,P Via,. "' 4 v `�' R-10.00' N � 47 u a, L=8.74 as z N x ' A=50'04'52" i Q C?. PARCEL 1 CH—N01°53'30"E PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT OF WAY 8.47' ---- _..--------------/ C , 550• AREA 2,952 SQ. FT. '' / FILE NUMBER: 17 OWNER: DAVID R. NEPOM, LEAH NEPOM, MARLEO `�Q oQ INC., AN OREGON CORPORATION AND NEPFAM LLC, / C(, , AN OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ADDRESS: 15630 BOONES FERRY ROAD F, / DEED DOC. NO. 2003-032306 ' _ 0 0999' DEED DOC. NO. 98-058924 0 46+83.85 p ' O 136 K5'n '' 46+76.62 N .r�39 i t .4 0+73.77 0 0+81.86 c • cv j, A-0 87.80 ± y, ,t„ 0 655 N •�f• ///////////Y///////////////. / •'\'' STA: 46+09.72 . a ' 0+00 * OFF: -2.55' LT i fi ,�1+00 „ '2+DO .?O ti-,16,c i . ' Q I I S89'40'17"E '365.67' I ' ' in o H2ONL LANEWOOD STREET N SCALE . 4 40 0 20 40 N ( FEET ) 1 LEGEND 1 INCH = 40 FT. I ® PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT—OF—WAY (PARCEL 1) 2,952 SQ. FT. PAGE 4 OF 4 . I FILE NO.: 017 1 BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE: 09115/2017 I 'Vfpacific I TAX LOT: 03000 1 (Oakridge Rd 1 Reese Rd-.Madrona St) I REVISED DATE: I TAX MAP: 21 E 08BD I I REVISED DATE: I ' :''F ''"' I ADDRESS: 15630 BOONES FERRY RD I LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 I REVISED DATE: I DWG:0008087v-DC17PRw.Dwc o ash COUNCIL REPORT f-f-( n 0 C E G ora TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Paul Espe, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance 2756 - Annexing Property at 18000 Pilkington Road (AN 17-0008) DATE: September 13, 2017 Date of Meeting: October 3, 2017 ACTION Jean Rd R-3 Enact Ordinance 2756 (Exhibit A-1), annexing 18000 C31 01 c7 1 17850 A ;Q Co0-1 W Pilkington Road (21E18DB04700). N 0 o r 17840 17821 ; 17822 SUGGESTED MOTION 17857 ; o ; 17860 ; Move to enact Ordinance 2756. 85 s u cp o a 17872 r 17839 17840 97 c, °r 17874 Rachel �n 17898 17879 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND '09 m 18020 The proposed annexation is owner-initiated and will result 18042 %,� 17924 17902 R-7.5 in the addition of approximately 0.37 acres of residential e 18064 //r�" • 17924 land to the City. This annexation is being processed under E 18086 Koderra Ave 18094 g cp dp an expedited review provided under Metro CodeCD crti, �cb° 18098 0 3.09.045. This Council report describes the reasons for the (71 F. art A N � annexation and provides basic background information. 18108 'G 18104 �o 'co 1 The criteria for approving annexations and the findings in support of this annexation are included in Attachment B of Exhibit A-1. Owner/Applicant: David H. and Gail A. Moulton/Ed Brockman Location/Size: The subject property consists of 0.37 acres (16,181 square feet) and is located on the east side of Pilkington Road. Existing Land Use:Tax Lot 4700 is occupied by a single-family dwelling which takes direct access to Pilkington Rd. Neighborhood: The property is located within the Rosewood Neighborhood. Purpose of Annexation: The property owners initiated the annexation to connect to City sewer service and to redevelop the property. DISCUSSION Plan and Zone Designation: The subject property is currently under Clackamas County's jurisdiction and zoned Low Density Residential R-10. It is designated R-7.5, Low Density Residential on the City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Map and will be zoned R-7.5 upon annexation. Page 2 Development Potential: This is a 0.37 acre parcel occupied by a single family dwelling. Based on the size of the parcel, the lot could be potentially divided into two lots. Sensitive Lands: There are no Sensitive Lands designated on the property. Sewer and Water Service: Sanitary sewer service is available from a City of Lake Oswego eight-inch collection line in Pilkington Road. Upon connection to the City collection line, the existing septic tank on the property will need to be decommissioned per DEQ standards. Water is available from a Rivergrove Water District line in Pilkington Road.The closest fire hydrant is located approximately at the intersection of Pilkington Road and Rachel Lane across the street from the site. Surface Water Management: Currently, the territory is under the jurisdiction of the Surface Water Management Agency of Clackamas County (SWMACC). Upon annexation, the territory will be withdrawn from SWMACC and will be subject to the City's storm water management regulations. Any new development will be subject to these provisions, which ensure that new development does not have an adverse effect on adjoining properties and does not overburden the City stormwater system. Service Districts: Upon annexation, the property will, by operation of ORS 222.520, be withdrawn from the Lake Grove Fire District#57, the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District and the Surface Water Management Agency of Clackamas County (SWMAC), but will remain in the Rivergrove Water District and the Lake Grove Park District. Transportation: Pilkington Road is a two-lane uncurbed major collector street and is currently under the jurisdiction of the City of Lake Oswego. A paved pathway that extends from Jean to McEwan Road is located on the West Side of Pilkington Road. This pathway was funded through a grant from the Safe Routes to School Program and was completed in 2012. Tri Met Line 36, which runs along Jean Road and connects to the Tualatin Transit Center, provides the closest bus service to the subject property. Pilkington Road is a two-lane uncurbed major collector street and is currently under the jurisdiction of the City of Lake Oswego. There are no existing sidewalks located along Pilkington Road or within the immediate vicinity of the site. Tri Met Line 36, which runs along Jean Road and connects to the Tualatin Transit Center, provides the closest bus service to the subject property. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT The draft findings provided in Attachment B of Exhibit A-1 conclude that the proposed annexation complies with all applicable State statutes and Metro code requirements.This annexation is for one parcel of approximately 0.37 acres. The estimated assessed value of the residential property is $191,104. The estimated tax revenue after the parcel is annexed is $494.00. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of AN 17-0008. EXHIBITS A-1 Ordinance 2756 Attachment A: Map of Proposed Annexation, 08/10/17 Attachment B: Criteria, Findings, Conclusion and Effective Date, 09/13/17 EXHIBIT A-1 ORDINANCE 2756 AN 17-0008 AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ONE PARCEL CONSISTING OF 0.37 ACRES AT 18000 PILKINGTON ROAD; DECLARING CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ZONING PURSUANT TO LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); AND REMOVING THE TERRITORY FROM CERTAIN DISTRICTS (AN 17- 0008). WHEREAS, annexation to the City of Lake Oswego of the territory shown in the map in Attachment "A" and described below, would constitute a contiguous boundary change under ORS 222.111, initiated by petition from the property owners as outlined in ORS 222.111(2); and, WHEREAS, the City has received consent for the proposed annexation from all of the property owners and not less than 50 percent of the electors residing in the territory as outlined in ORS 222.125. WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Lake Grove Fire District #57 will, by operation of ORS 222.520, be withdrawn from that district immediately upon approval of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District will, by operation of ORS 222.520, be withdrawn from the district upon approval of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Surface Water Management Agency of Clackamas County will by operation of ORS 222.250 be withdrawn from that agency immediately upon approval of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, LOC 50.01.004.5 specifies that, where the Comprehensive Plan Map requires a specific Zoning Map designation to be placed on the territory annexed to the City, such a zoning designation shall automatically be imposed on the territory as of the effective date of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, this annexation is consistent with the Urbanization Chapter of the City of Lake Oswego's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan, Oregon Revised Statutes 222.111(2) and 222.125 for boundary changes, and Metro Code Sections 3.09.040(a)(1-4) and 3.09.045. Now, therefore, the City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. The real property described as follows is hereby annexed to the City of Lake Oswego: A tract of land located in the southeast quarter of Section 18, Township 2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, being a portion of Lot 17, Block 2, Oswego Acres (Plat No. 503), plat records of Clackamas County, said tract of land more particularly described as follows: Lot 17, Block 2, Oswego Acres (Plat No. 503), plat records of Clackamas County. Ordinance 2756,AN 17-0008 (21E18DB04700) EXHIBIT A-1/PAGE 1 OF 4 Excepting therefrom a portion of said Lot 17 more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 17, said point being on the east right of way of Pilkington Road (County Road No. 2334); Thence South along said right of way, 16.00 feet; Thence leaving said right of way, East, 120.00 feet; Thence South, 47.68 feet; Thence East, 44.00 feet; Thence South, 63.67 feet to the south line of said Lot 17; Thence East along said south line, 141.75 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 17; Thence leaving said south line, North along the east line of said Lot 17, 127.35 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 17; Thence leaving said east line, West along the north line of said Lot 17, 305.75 feet to the point of beginning. The annexed territory is depicted on Attachment A. Section 2. The annexed area lies within the following districts and shall be retained within these districts upon the effective date of annexation: Lake Grove Park District Rivergrove Water District Section 3. The annexed area lies within the following districts and shall be withdrawn from these districts upon the effective date of annexation: Lake Grove Fire District#57 Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District Surface Water Management Agency of Clackamas County Section 4. In accordance with LOC 50.01.004.5, the City zoning designation of R-7.5 shall be applied to the subject property on the effective date of annexation. Section 5. The City Council hereby adopts the findings of fact and conclusions set forth in Attachment B in support of this annexation ordinance. Section 6. Effective Dates: a. Effective Date of Decision to Annex. Pursuant to Metro Code 3.09.050(f), the effective date of this annexation decision shall be immediately upon adoption, unless a governmental entity that qualifies as a "necessary party" under Metro Code 3.09.020(j) has contested this annexation, in which event this annexation decision shall be effective on the 10th day following the mailing of this ordinance by the City Recorder to Metro and to all necessary parties who appeared in this proceeding. b. Effective Date of Annexation Ordinance. Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter, Section 34, this ordinance shall be effective on the 30th day after its enactment. Ordinance 2756,AN 17-0008 (21E18DB04700) EXHIBIT A-1/PAGE 2 OF 4 c. Effective Date of Annexation. Following the filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State as required by ORS 222.177, this annexation shall be effective upon the later of either: 1. the 30th day following the date of adoption of this ordinance; or 2. the date of filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State. Provided, however, that pursuant to ORS 222.040(2), if the effective date of the annexation as established above is a date that is within 90 days of a biennial primary or general election or after the deadline for filing notice of election before any other election held by any city, district or other municipal corporation involved in the area to be annexed, then the effective date of the annexation shall be delayed until, and the annexation shall become effective on, the day after the election. Section 7. Mailing Copies of this Ordinance; Metro Notice Within 30 days following the date of adoption: a. The City Recorder shall mail a copy of this ordinance to all persons and governmental entities that appeared at the public hearing and requested a copy of the ordinance following adoption. b. The City Recorder shall mail a copy of this ordinance together with the applicable mapping and notice fee charged by Metro pursuant to Metro Code 3.09.110, to the Metro Data Resource Center, 600 NE Grand Ave., Portland, OR 97232. Read by title only and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on day of , 2017. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Dated Ordinance 2756,AN 17-0008 (21E18DB04700) EXHIBIT A-1/PAGE 3 OF 4 ATTEST: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell, City Attorney Ordinance 2756,AN 17-0008 (21E18DB04700) EXHIBIT A-1/PAGE 4 OF 4 L_S * * * NC Annexation to the City of Lake Oswego > AN17-0008/Ordinance 2756 101 -108 Jean Rd R-3 ________„ — —r ce C31 i > 01 01 17850 ' Q w W 01 _N.________] 8 01 01 N co co O __ 17840 17821 17822 17857 ; 17860 -- --- _ o 985 cn --- 17840 N 01 01 a 17872 17839 X97 �' W o ---- —CD- -g CD Rachel Ln 17879 E 17874 r- 17898E 1 - / X09 ' 18020 17924 17902 • 18042 ,IP- 0 R-7.5 . te 18064 /�r17924 L 18086 Koderra Ave 18094 0°5 18098 `j'o �o 01 01 01 01 w CCO CD _p oN 18108 (:5:),o cP 18125 18104 0 �in o Frr- I ( J Attachment A is„(--,,,- 4,o g 7 t Map and Lot# 21E18DB TL 4700 -�City of Lake Oswego: 741 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN = R-7.5, Residential :zi'-- ZONING = R-7.5, Residential z , � iikN‹ I SW Clackamas County: � ZONING = R-10 Residential li kirp, - ' il0 �� L__, CtyLiimsitsego M Property N i► 0 100 200 300 5. Feet 8/10/2017 - - - THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK September 13, 2017 ATTACHMENT B Criteria, Findings, Conclusion, and Effective Date APPLICABLE CRITERIA: A. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Boundary Changes; Mergers and Consolidations. 1. ORS 222.111(2) -Annexation of Contiguous Territory, Authority and Procedure for Annexation, Generally. 2. ORS 222.125 -Annexation by consent of all owners of land and the majority of electors. B. Metro Code. 1. 3.09.040(a)(1-4) Minimum Requirements for Petitions. 2. 3.09.045 (A-E) Expedited Decisions. C. Comprehensive Plan - Urbanization Chapter 1. Policy A-3: "The Urban Services Boundary (as depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Map) is the area within which the City shall be the eventual provider of the full range of urban services." 2. Policy C-3: "Ensure that annexation of new territory or expansion of Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary does not detract from the City's ability to provide services to existing City Residents." 3. Policy C-4: "Prior to the annexation of non-island properties, ensure urban services are available and adequate to serve the property or will be made available in a timely manner by the City or a developer commensurate with the scale of the proposed development." FINDINGS: A. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Boundary Changes; Mergers and Consolidations. 1. ORS 222.111(2)Annexation of Contiguous Territory, Authority and Procedure for Annexation, Generally. ORS 222.111(2) provides that a proposal for annexation of territory to a City may be initiated by the legislative body of the City, on its own motion, or by a petition to the legislative body of the City by owners of real property in the territory to be annexed. The property owners have petitioned the City for this annexation. The proposed annexation complies with this statute. 2. ORS 222.125 -Annexation by consent of all owners of land and the majority of electors. ORS 222.125 states that an election need not be held on the question of annexation within the area proposed to be annexed if all of the owners of land in the territory and not less than 50 percent of the electors, if any, residing in the territory consent in writing to the annexation. The property owners who are also electors have consented to the annexation. The two registered voters residing on the property have also consented to the proposed annexation. The proposed annexation complies with this statute. Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 1 September 13, 2017 B. Metro Code 1. 3.09.040 - Minimum Requirements for Petitions. (A) A petition for a boundary change must contain the following information: 1) The jurisdiction of the reviewing entity to act on the petition; 2) A map and a legal description of the affected territory in the form prescribed by the reviewing entity; 3) For minor boundary changes, the names and mailing addresses of all persons owning property and all electors within the affected territory as shown in the records of the tax assessor and county clerk; and, 4) For boundary changes under ORS 198.855 (3), 198.857, 222.125 or 222.170, statements of consent to the annexation signed by the requisite number of owners or electors. The above information was submitted as required by Metro Code. The property owners have signed the application and petition. A map and legal description in the form required by the City have been included in the application materials and are on file. The owners have consented to the annexation on the annexation petition, meeting the consent requirements of ORS 222.125. The annexation petition complies with the Metro code requirements. 2. 3.09.045— Expedited Decisions A. The governing body of a city or Metro may use the process set forth in this section for minor boundary changes for which the petition is accompanied by the written consents of one hundred percent of property owners and at least fifty percent of the electors, if any, within the affected territory. No public hearing is required. B. The expedited process must provide for a minimum of 20 days' notice prior to the date set for decision to all necessary parties and other persons entitled to notice by the laws of the city or Metro. The notice shall state that the petition is subject to the expedited process unless a necessary party gives written notice of its objection to the boundary change. C. At least seven days prior to the date of decision the city or Metro shall make available to the public a report that includes the following information: 1. The extent to which urban services are available to serve the affected territory, including any extra-territorial extensions of service; 2. Whether the proposed boundary change will result in the withdrawal of the affected territory from the legal boundary of any necessary party; and 3. The proposed effective date of the boundary change. Metro Code 3.09.045 A. states that an expedited review of an annexation, where no public hearing is required, can be considered by a governing body within the area proposed to be annexed if one hundred percent of the property owners and not less than 50 percent of the electors, if any, residing in the territory consent in writing to the annexation. The property owners, and the electors, have signed the annexation application. Metro Code 3.09.045 B. requires a minimum of 20 days' notice to all necessary parties prior to the decision date unless a shorter time is agreed upon. The County, Metro and local service districts are necessary parties under the Metro Code 3.09.020 J. and has been notified. Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 2 September 13, 2017 Metro Code 3.09.045 C. requires that the report discussing availability of urban services, withdrawal of the affected territory and the proposed effective date of the boundary change be made available at least seven days prior to the date of decision. The annexation report has been prepared and made available within seven days of the public hearing. The proposed annexation complies with the Metro Code. D. To approve a boundary change through the expedited process the City shall: 1. Find that the change is consistent with expressly applicable provisions in: a. Any applicable urban service agreement adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065 The City has entered into - ORS 195.065 agreements with: 1) Lake Oswego School District; and, 2) Lake Grove Fire District. The intergovernmental agreement with the Rivergrove Water District is not discussed in this section because it was entered into before the adoption of ORS 195.065, and consequently does not include all of the provisions necessary to be considered an "urban service agreement" under that statute. Lake Oswego School District: The City and the Lake Oswego School District entered into an ORS 195.065 urban service agreement for park services in July, 2003. The School District operates the Lake Grove Swim Park located at 3800 Lakeview Boulevard. The agreement states that the annexation of property by the City within the Lake Grove Park District (which funds the swim park) shall not cause the withdrawal of the property from the district. Lake Grove Fire District #57: The City and District entered into an ORS 195.065 urban service agreement for fire protection in July, 2003. The agreement states that upon annexation of property within the district by the City, the annexed property shall be withdrawn from the District and the City shall provide fire protection services. b. Any applicable annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205. There are no applicable annexation plans adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205 relating to the affected territory. c. Any applicable cooperative planning agreement adopted pursuant to ORS 195.020(2) between the affected entity and a necessary party. There are no ORS 195.020(2) cooperative agreements (which relate to special districts) between the city and a necessary party. d. Any applicable public facility plan adopted pursuant to a state wide planning goal on public facilities and services Sanitary sewer service is available from a City of Lake Oswego eight-inch collection line located in Pilkington Road. The collection line in Pilkington Road has been constructed in accordance with the City Wastewater Master Plan. This property will be allowed to connect to the existing public main located in Pilkington Road Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 3 September 13, 2017 e. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies Comprehensive Plan Map: The subject property is currently designated R-10, Low Density Residential on Clackamas County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps. This property is designated as Low Density Residential R-7.5 on the City's Comprehensive Plan Map. Upon annexation, a City zoning designation of R-7.5 will be applied to this parcel. The City and County have coordinated their comprehensive plans within the Dual Interest Area outlined in the City/County Urban Growth Management Agreement (dated February 4, 1992 and updated November 18, 1997), hence the City/County designations have been determined to be compatible. Therefore, this annexation is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan Map. Comprehensive Plan Policies: The Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan contains the following relevant language in the Urbanization chapter, Policy A-3: "The Urban Services Boundary (as depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Map) is the area within which the City shall be the eventual provider of the full range of urban services." The proposed annexation and the withdrawal of the property from the identified districts are consistent with this policy. Policy C-3 states: "Ensure that annexation of new territory or expansion of Lake Oswego's Urban Services Boundary does not detract from the City's ability to provide services to existing City residents." The approval of this annexation will result in the addition of 0.37 acres to be served by the City. As stated in Section 2(b)(1), the addition of this territory will not detract from the City's ability to provide police and fire protection to existing City Residents. Annexation of this property will not affect the City's ability to provide parks and recreation services. Public facilities, such as sewer and water are also found to be adequate to serve this site. Comprehensive Plan Policy C-4 states: "Prior to the annexation of non-island properties, ensure urban services are available and adequate to serve the property or will be made available in a timely manner by the City or a developer commensurate with the scale of the proposed development." Availability of urban services serving this property is discussed below: Water: Water is available from a Rivergrove Water District line in Pilkington Road. The closest fire hydrant is located approximately at the intersection of Pilkington Road and Rachel Lane across the street from the site. The Rivergrove Water District will continue to provide water service to this property after annexation. The City of Lake Oswego entered into an agreement with the Rivergrove Water District on February 8, 1984 for water services.The agreement stipulates that the District will continue to serve parcels upon annexation if it is capable of delivering a minimum flow of 1500 gallons per minute with a 20 psi residual pressure during periods of peak domestic demand. The District is currently able to meet these demands. If upon development or partitioning, this level of service is not provided, then City water may need to be provided. Sewer: Sanitary sewer service is available from a City of Lake Oswego eight-inch collection line in Pilkington Road. Upon connection to the City collection line, the existing septic tank on the property will need to be decommissioned per DEQ standards. Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 4 September 13, 2017 Surface Water Management: Upon annexation, the territory will be withdrawn from Surface Water Management Agency of Clackamas County (SWMACC) and will be subject to the City's storm water management regulations. Any new development will be subject to these provisions, which ensure that new development does not have an adverse effect on adjoining properties and does not overburden the City stormwater system. Fire Protection: Lake Grove Fire District#57 provides fire protection services to the subject property by agreement with the City of Lake Oswego. Upon annexation, the property will be withdrawn from this fire district and served directly by the City. The Jean Road Fire Station, located northeast of the site, would be able to respond to emergencies under the eight minute goal established in the Comprehensive Plan. Police: Upon annexation, the subject property will be withdrawn from the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District and served by the City of Lake Oswego. The Lake Oswego Police Department reviewed the proposal and indicated that it does not have any concerns with serving this property upon annexation. Parks and Open Space: The City has 537 acres of park and open space lands, or 14.6 acres per 1,000 population. The parks nearest to this property are Canal Acres/Bryant Woods Natural Park and Pilkington Park. Canal Acres park is 31 acres and located on the north and south sides of Childs Road. Because this is a natural park, there are no amenities for organized recreation activities. Pilkington Park is located south of the site. It is a 3.7 acre neighborhood park and provides drop-in play fields, a walking path and a picnic table. The City's park system will not be overburdened by any additional population annexed to the City with this application. Lake Grove Park District: The Lake Grove Swim Park, managed by the Lake Oswego School District, and funded by the Lake Grove Park District, is located at 3800 Lakeview Boulevard. The swim park is approximately 1.3 acres in size with restroom, play and swim facilities. This property will remain within the Lake Grove Park District following annexation. Transportation - Streets and Mass Transit: Pilkington Road is a two-lane uncurbed major collector street and is currently under the jurisdiction of the City of Lake Oswego. A paved pathway that extends from Jean to McEwan Road is located on the West Side of Pilkington Road. This pathway was funded through a grant from the Safe Routes to School Program and was completed in 2012. Tri Met Line 36, which runs along Jean Road and connects to the Tualatin Transit Center, provides the closest bus service to the subject property. Community Development Code Section 50.06.008.3 requires that all development be provided with the following utility services: sanitary sewer, water, sidewalks, pedestrian and bicycle paths, traffic control signs and devices, street lights, streets, and TV cable. These utilities are now in place or can be put in place to serve this property. In the event that future development occurs, an applicant for development is obligated to construct all necessary public facilities to serve their development. As noted above, police and fire services are available upon annexation. The amount of protection provided will be similar to protection provided to other City residents because the property proposed to be annexed is not isolated from other areas of the City. Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 5 September 13, 2017 Urban Growth Management Agreement: General Urbanization Policy 4.A.4 of the Clackamas County Comprehensive Plan calls for the establishment of Urban Growth Management Areas and Urban Growth Management Agreements to clarify planning responsibilities between the County and cities for areas of mutual interest. Policy 4.A.5 directs the County to establish agreements with cities and service districts to clarify service and infrastructure responsibilities for areas of mutual interest. Similarly, the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan, Urbanization Chapter, Policy D-3, calls for entering into and maintaining an Urban Growth Management Agreement (UGMA) with Clackamas County for lands within the Urban Services Boundary. In furtherance of these policies, the City and County have entered into an Urban Growth Management Agreement that stipulates a mutual interest in coordinated land use planning, compatible comprehensive plans and provision of urban services and facilities. This agreement ensures coordination and consistency between the City and County comprehensive plans and outlines responsibilities in providing services and managing growth within the Dual Interest Area. Subsections 6 and 7, provided below, are applicable to annexations. "6C. City and County Notice and Coordination: The City shall provide notification to the County, and an opportunity to participate, review and comment, at least 35 days prior to the first public hearing on all proposed public facilities plans, legislative changes to the City Comprehensive Plan, or quasi- judicial land use actions adjacent to, or in close proximity to unincorporated areas. The City shall provide notice to the County of private or City initiated annexation requests within five days of the filing of an application with the Portland Metropolitan Boundary Commission." The Urban Growth Management Agreement specifies that the City notify the County of an annexation request within five days of when it is submitted to the Boundary Commission. There is no longer a Boundary Commission for the Portland Metropolitan area. Staff relies on the notice requirements of Metro Code 3.09.045b, which requires notice 20 days prior to the annexation decision for all necessary parties (other governmental entities). The notice shall state that the petition is subject to the expedited process unless a necessary party gives written notice of its objection to the boundary change. The County is a necessary party under the Metro Code definition and has been notified. "7. City Annexations A. The City may undertake annexations in the manner provided for by law within the Dual Interest Area. The City annexation proposals shall include adjacent road right-of-way to property proposed for annexation. The County shall not oppose such annexations. B. Upon annexation, the City shall assume jurisdiction of the County roads and local access roads pursuant to a separate road transfer agreement between the City and county." The City is undertaking this annexation in the manner provided for in the applicable ORS and Metro Code for the territories that lie within the Dual Interest Area. This annexation is consistent with the City and County comprehensive plans which have been coordinated in the Dual Interest Area within the regional Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The right of way adjacent to this property is within the City Boundary and under the jurisdiction of the City of Lake Oswego. Criterion 7A. does not apply. Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 6 September 13, 2017 f. Any applicable concept plan Consistency of the proposed boundary change with urban planning agreements is mentioned under D(1)(c)above. 2. Consider whether the boundary change would a. Promote the timely orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services b. Affect the quality and quantity of urban services c. Eliminate or avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities or services Due to the proximity of the property to existing City services, this annexation will promote the timely, orderly and economical extension of public facilities and services. The subject property can readily be served with urban services and facilities. If and when additional development occurs in the area, provision of public facilities and services will occur consistent with the City's adopted public facility master plans, ensuring that it does not adversely affect the quality or quantity of urban services and avoiding unnecessary duplication of facilities or services. Therefore, this boundary change is consistent with criteria 2.a through 2.c. (E) A city may not annex territory that lies outside the UGB except it may annex a lot or parcel that lies partially within and partially outside the UGB. The property to be annexed is located entirely within the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). CONCLUSION: Based on the criteria and findings set forth above, the City Council concludes that AN 17-0008 complies with all applicable criteria and the annexation should be approved. EFFECTIVE DATE: A. Effective Date of Annexation Ordinance. Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter, Section 34, the ordinance shall be effective on the 30th day after its enactment. B. Effective Date of Annexation. Following the filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State as required by ORS 222.177, this annexation shall be effective upon the later of: 1. the 30th day following the date of adoption of this ordinance; or 2. the date of filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State; provided however that pursuant to ORS 222.040(2), if the effective date of the annexation as established above is a date that is within 90 days of a biennial primary or general election or after the deadline for filing notice of election before any other election held by any City, district or other municipal corporation involved in the area to be annexed, then the effective date of the annexation shall be delayed until, and the annexation shall become effective on, the day after the election. Ordinance 2756 (AN 17-0008) ATTACHMENT B/Page 7 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 8.1 D0s COUNCIL REPORT 442,cc) TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Scott Lazenby, City Manager SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 17-55— LOCAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM DATE: September 13, 2017 MEETING DATE: October 3, 2017 SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt Resolution 17-55 creating a local street reconstruction program. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND On April 18, the City Council held a study session on a proposal for a streamlined local improvement district process to reconstruct local streets (please see the staff report at http://lakeoswego.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view id=2&clip id=390&meta id=27417 ). The Council directed staff to prepare a resolution that would enable this process. DISCUSSION Consistent with the proposal reviewed by the City Council on April 18, the proposed Resolution includes these features: • Initiating the local improvement district (LID) process on the part of a homeowner is simple: it can be as easy as an e-mailed request by a single resident. • Affected property owners can choose to opt out at two points in the process: at the early stage of consideration of the LID, and later when cost estimates and assessments have been calculated. The opt-out process will be simple, but at least fifty percent of the affected property owners need to take action to stop the LID. • The City reserves the right to not proceed with creation of the LID based on financial or technical considerations. • The program is limited to local streets that need full reconstruction. • To further encourage use of this tool, subject to funding availability, the City will match dollar for dollar the cost of street reconstruction, and pick up the overhead cost of 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city Page 2 design, bidding, LID billing, etc. The interest rate will be the City's actual cost of borrowing, or if financed internally, the rate set by the Council via the Master Fee Resolution. • Other related improvements, such as sidewalks, pathways, or storm drainage systems, can be included in the Local Improvement District, but without the 50% match. The Council discussed using this process to encourage owners of private streets to bring their streets up to a good condition before transferring ownership and maintenance responsibility to the City. We have explored this, but there are some complicating factors. We can't use the LID process for private improvements, so 100% of the affected property owners would have to first dedicate the private street to the City before we can improve it. The LID process, at that point, would be a good mechanism for doing so, but in fairness to other residents and taxpayers, it is hard to justify a 50% match; the affected property owners should be responsible for repairing the street as a condition for transferring ownership to the public. If we get the go-ahead from the City Council, our Public Affairs staff will publicize the program in general, and with the help of the Engineering Department, send a direct mailing to property owners on streets that would be prime candidates for this program. FISCAL IMPACT As we gain experience with this program, we may find it to be more limited in application than one would think, primarily due to drainage issues that affect many local streets. The 50% match and LID overhead costs will put a financial burden on the Street Fund, and if this becomes significant, it will be a good problem to have: it means we are successful in leveraging a new source of funds in addressing our pavement preservation challenge. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution 17-55. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 17-55 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION 17-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO CREATING A LOCAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM WHEREAS, a pavement condition survey completed by Capitol Asset& Pavement Services in 2016 found that over twenty percent of local residential streets were in "Poor" (Pavement Condition Index below 50) or"Very Poor" (PCI below 25) condition; and WHEREAS, due to funding limitations,the City's priority for street reconstruction is on arterial and collector streets which serve larger percentages of residents, and receive more traffic; and WHEREAS,the Lake Oswego City Council desires to encourage residents to take advantage of Local Improvement District financing as a way to improve local neighborhood streets; NOW,THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by City of Lake Oswego Council: Section 1.A Local Street Reconstruction Program is hereby created as follows: A) This Program is instituted under the provisions of LOC Article 40.02, Local Improvement Districts. B) Any owner of residential property abutting a local (i.e., not an arterial or collector) public street may request that a Local Improvement District under this program be formed. C) When such a request is submitted, the City Engineer will review it for feasibility,taking into account these factors: 1) Condition of the local street(s) proposed for reconstruction. Only streets requiring reconstruction are eligible for this program; those simply requiring preventive maintenance will be scheduled based on the City's Pavement Management System. 2) Availability of matching funds. 3) Potential conflicts with the City's "Dig Once" policy. For example, street reconstruction may be delayed to allow it to be done in conjunction with water or sewer line replacement scheduled in the Capital Improvement Plan. 4) Other right-of-way design issues, such as plans for, or neighborhood interest in, pathways or storm drainage improvements. 5) Cost-effectiveness of the proposed LID. For example, a resident may propose reconstructing the street on a single block, but it may be more cost-effective to contract for reconstruction of several blocks in the immediate vicinity. D) If on a preliminary review the City Engineer deems the proposed LID to be feasible, the City Engineer will recommend that the City Council declare the intent to initiate the LID under this program, as provided in LOC 40.02.020 (1). E) If the City Council declares the intent to initiate the LID under this Local Street Reconstruction Program, before proceeding with an engineering study and report,the City Engineer or designee will mail to all abutting property owners a letter informing them that resident(s) have expressed interest in forming an LID under this program, and giving the property owners an opportunity to terminate consideration of the LID by mailing or delivering a letter to that effect within fifteen days of the date of the Engineer's letter.The Engineer's letter may provide very rough cost estimates, but it will state that property owners will have another opportunity to terminate the LID process under this Program when more detailed engineering design and cost estimates have been prepared. F) If fewer than fifty percent of the owners of abutting properties mail or deliver a timely termination letter as provided in paragraph E, the City Engineer will proceed with preliminary design, and preparation of the report required by LOC 40.02.030. G) If more than fifty percent of the owners of abutting properties mail a termination letter as provided in paragraph F,the City Engineer may recommend that the City Council amend its declaration of intent to initiate the LID by reducing the scope of the proposed LID such that it likely will not be opposed by more than fifty percent of the abutting property owners in the revised district. If the Council amends the declaration,the City Engineer will re-start the process by providing a second mailing to property owners under Section E. Otherwise, the City Engineer will advise the City Council that the proposal does not meet the requirements of the Local Street Reconstruction Program, and will recommend that the Council repeal its resolution initiating the LID under the Program. H) Subject to funding availability, City Street funds will be used to match LID funds for the cost of reconstructing the street(s). City Street funds will also cover all other costs associated with the LID, including but not limited to engineering, notices,financing charges, and other overhead costs. In other words,the LID will pay for fifty percent of the construction cost only. (See 40.02.100, Alternate Methods of Financing.) I) Property owners may be interested in including in the local improvement district other right-of-way improvements, such as pathways or storm drainage improvements. If done in conjunction with local street reconstruction, no additional overhead costs will be included in the LID, but the LID will cover the full construction cost of these additional improvements. J) Interest rates for Local Improvement Districts are set by Resolution 95-15. K) Upon completion of the preliminary engineering design and report, a notice of hearing will be prepared in accordance with LOC 40.02.040. L) A public hearing will conducted in accordance with LOC 40.02.060. Under this Program,the City Council will not proceed with formation of the proposed local improvement district if the owners of more than fifty percent of the property to be assessed submit written statements of remonstrance as provided by LOC 40.02.050. Even if fewer than fifty percent of property owners submit written statements of remonstrance,the City Council may vote to not proceed with formation of the local improvement if it finds that creation of the district is not in the public interest. M) Formation of the district, completion of the improvements, assessing property owners, and all other aspects of administering the district will be as provided by LOC Article 40.02. N) The City Manager is directed to take steps to make owners of eligible properties aware of this program, and of the City Council's encouragement of residents to take advantage of it. Section 5. Effective Date.This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. Adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 3rd day of October, 2017. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Kent Studebaker, Mayor ATTEST: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell, City Attorney 8.2 Dj'p` 424� COUNCIL REPORT r TIO r o 0Rd� TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Crystal M. Shum, P.E., Project Manager Engineering Department SUBJECT: Resolution 17-56 Declaring a Public Necessity to Acquire Property at 4225 Oakridge Road, for Lake Grove Village Center Parking and Authorizing Exercise of Eminent Domain if Necessary. DATE: September 22, 2017 MEETING DATE: October 3, 2017 ACTION Adopt Resolution 17- 56 declaring the public necessity to acquire real property at 4225 Oakridge Road for a parking facility, and authorizing eminent domain proceedings if necessary. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt Resolution 17- 56. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND In May of 2016, the City Council approved the Lake Grove Village Center Parking Management Plan (LGVCPMP), which was prepared to address parking problems in high demand areas, including the anticipated parking impacts from the Boones Ferry Road project. Within the plan, locations were identified as meeting the need for public off street parking facilities. The LVCPMP identified the property at 4225 Oakridge Road as appropriate for meeting this need in the "Central zone" of the Lake Grove Village Center area. DISCUSSION Due to the fact that the referenced property remains vacant, and with the construction of the BFR project scheduled to begin in late spring 2018, acquiring this property now would benefit the community. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city Page 2 Efforts will be made to negotiate a voluntary sale agreement with the property owner. Nevertheless, it is possible that the City will be required to use its condemnation authority to ensure that the public pays a fair price. Having a resolution in place that states the public necessity for the acquisition, and that authorizes condemnation where necessary, helps to ensure that the acquisition process will meet the requirements of Oregon condemnation law in the event that negotiations are unsuccessful. Staff will take care to ensure that the acquisition of this property, and the parking facility improvements to be constructed, will be planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. The attached Resolution 17- 56 accomplishes the following: • Declares that the acquisition of property at 4225 Oakridge Road for a parking facility is necessary and serves a public purpose; • Declares that the project improvements have been planned and will be constructed in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; • Authorizes negotiations for the acquisition of the property; and • Authorizes eminent domain proceedings in the event that a property sale agreement is not reached. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution 17- 56, declaring the intent and necessity to acquire real property at 4225 Oakridge Road for a parking facility, and authorizing eminent domain proceedings if necessary. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 17- 56 including Exhibit A— Legal Description 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION 17-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO EXERCISING THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN WITH RELATION TO PROPERTY AT 4225 OAKRIDGE ROAD WHEREAS City of Lake Oswego may exercise the power of eminent domain pursuant to The Lake Oswego Charter of 1964, as amended and the Law of the State of Oregon generally,when the exercise of such power is deemed necessary by the City's governing body to accomplish public purposes for which City has authority; WHEREAS City has the responsibility for, and authority to, address the public need for safe transportation routes, and well-functioning commercial areas and livable neighborhoods, including the public need for adequate parking for commerce, convenience, safety, and to adequately serve the public; WHEREAS the City's April of 2016 Lake Grove Village Center Parking Management Plan ("Parking Management Plan"), approved by the City Council on May 3, 2016, and incorporated by reference in these recitals, identifies a public necessity to address parking problems in the Lake Grove Village Center area including the lack of parking supply in high demand areas and anticipated parking impacts from the Boones Ferry Road project; WHEREAS the Parking Management Plan identifies the construction of new public parking facilities as a short-term priority among the strategies necessary to address these needs, and specifically identifies the need for a parking facility in the "Central zone" of the Lake Grove Village Center area. WHEREAS the Parking Management Plan identifies the property at 4225 Oakridge Road as appropriate for meeting the parking needs in the "Central zone" through City acquisition and construction of a parking facility due to its location,vacant status and other factors. Acquisition by the City for construction and use of a parking facility on this property is compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. WHEREAS as described above, it is necessary to acquire the property at 4225 Oakridge Road, described in "Exhibit A," attached to this resolution and by this reference incorporated herein,for development and use as a public parking facility; now,therefore IT IS RESOLVED by City of Lake Oswego Council: Section 1. The foregoing statements of authority and need are, in fact, the case. The project, improvement and use for which the property is required and is being acquired is necessary in the public interest, and the same has been planned, designed, located, and will be constructed in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; Section 2. The power of eminent domain is hereby exercised with respect to the property described in Exhibit A. It shall be acquired subject to payment of just compensation and subject to procedural requirements of Oregon law; Section 3. The City's staff and the City's Legal Counsel are authorized and requested to attempt to agree with the owner and other persons in interest as to the compensation to be paid for the acquisition, and, in the event that no satisfactory agreement can be reached,to commence and prosecute such condemnation proceedings as may be necessary to finally determine just compensation Resolution 17-56 Page 1 of 2 or any other issue appropriate to be determined by a court in connection with the acquisition. This authorization is not intended to expand the jurisdiction of any court to decide matters determined above or determinable by the City Council. Section 4.The City expressly reserves its jurisdiction to determine the necessity or propriety of any acquisition, its quantity, quality, or locality, and to change or abandon any acquisition. Section 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. Considered and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 3rd day of October, 2017. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Kent Studebaker, Mayor ATTEST: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell, City Attorney Resolution 17-56 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description The West one-half of Lot 4, LAKE VIEW VILLAS FIRST ADDITION, in the City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas and State of Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the Southerly 15 feet of even width thereof. 9.1 D 6 COUNCIL REPORT TIO r o dR�dd� TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Erica Rooney, P.E., City Engineer Engineering Department SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Ordinance 2758 Vacating Portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place DATE: September 22, 2017 Council Meeting: October 3, 2017 ACTION Enact Ordinance No. 2758 to vacate portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND On September 5, 2017 the City Council adopted Resolution 17-52, which declared the City's intent to initiate proceedings to vacate portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place. (Note: There was an error in the associated staff report to Council, referring to the related land use case as LU 15-0056, when in fact the correct case is LU 15-0046.) The legal descriptions and illustrated areas designated for vacation are shown in Exhibits A through C in the attached Ordinance. The background for these proposed street vacations is the development of the property at 3800 and 3900 Kruse Way Place. The development, referred to as Springs Living, will be an assisted living facility encompassing the majority of both lots. The development was approved by the Development Review Commission on December 7, 2017 (LU 15-0046) with a condition of approval to vacate portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place, relocate an existing public waterline through the development site and into the public right-of-way, grant various easements for public access and utilities, and dedicate small portions of the site adjacent to Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place. The enactment of the proposed Ordinance No. 2758 will allow the development to occur as proposed and as approved. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 2 DISCUSSION There are several small portions of right-of-way adjacent to the said property that are no longer necessary for right-of-way in their current layout. They are remnants of past plats and street vacations that have been in place on the two properties. Vacating the right-of-way pieces, with a corresponding dedication that has already been executed and recorded by the developer, will allow new right-of-way lines to be more contiguous and obvious along the frontages of the property. Conditions of approval for LU 15-0046 clearly outline the strategy for street vacations, right-of- way dedications, and public utility easements that would "clean up" the site and abutting rights-of-way in terms of what is needed for public rights-of-way and public utilities and what should be vacated for private use. This effort will significantly improve and clarify the delineations for both the property owner and the City of Lake Oswego service providers. All public notices and on-site placement of notices have been completed in accordance with ORS 271.130. As a City-initiated street vacation pursuant to ORS 271.130,the Council may approve the vacation unless: 1. Owners of a majority of the area affected object in writing thereto, or 2. The market value of an abutting property is substantially affected by the vacation and the property does not consent to the vacation, unless the city provides for paying damages. In response to these requirements, staff believes approval is warranted for the following reasons: 1) To date, the City has not received any verbal or written objections from the affected area property owners. 2) City staff concludes that the market value of the abutting properties is not substantially affected. Further, the owner of the abutting property to the street vacations has consented to the street vacations. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT One alternative is to deny the street vacations. This would directly affect the developer's ability to build the Springs Living facility in the manner approved in the land use case, altering the building design and setbacks. (A modification of the land use approval would be needed in order for development on the site.) Furthermore, it would not improve the lot delineation and right-of-way. The second alternative it to approve the street vacations as proposed. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 3 There are no direct fiscal impacts to the City of Lake Oswego for the proposed right-of-way vacation (the market value of abutting property is not substantially affected by the vacation, and owner consents to the street vacations). RECOMMENDATION Enact Ordinance 2758 to vacate a portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way and Kruse Way Place. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance 2758 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE 2758 A SPECIAL ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO VACATING PORTIONS OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ON BOONES FERRY ROAD, KRUSE WAY, AND KRUSE WAY PLACE The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1: The City Council determines that: a. The City Council initiated the vacation of a portions of right-of-way on Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place by adoption of Resolution 17-52, on September 5, 2017. b. Notice required by law was given for the public hearing held October 3, 2017 for the purpose of considering the proposed vacations. c. A majority of the affected owners as defined by statue did not object in writing to the proposed vacation. d. The abutting properties will not suffer any economic damage by the proposed vacation, and additionally the owner of the property abutting the proposed street vacations has consented. Section 2. The portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way and Kruse Way Place are specifically described and depicted in Exhibits A through C of this ordinance. Section 3. A condition of the vacations is that the owner of the property of 3800 and 3900 Kruse Way Place shall decommission an existing 12" public waterline across the properties and reconstruct a new waterline in the abutting right-of-ways, grant public utility and access easements at various locations around the property, and dedicate rights-of-way, all as set forth as conditions of approval in accordance with land use case LU 15-0046. Said dedications and easements shall be recorded in the Official Records of Clackamas County prior to or contemporaneously with the recordation of this ordinance. Section 4. Subject to the condition in Section 3, which shall be evidenced by the City Recorder's submission of this Ordinance to the Clackamas County Clerk for recordation, the public interest in the rights-of-way described in Exhibits A through C are hereby vacated. Section 5. Subject to the condition in Section 3, the City Recorder shall file with the Clackamas County Clerk, Assessor and Surveyor certified copies of this ordinance. Section 6. Effective date. As provided by Section 35.C. of the Lake Oswego Charter,this ordinance shall take effect on the 30th day following enactment. Enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 3rd day of October, 2017 Ordinance 2758, Page 1 of 2 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Dated: ATTEST: Ann-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David D. Powell, City Attorney Exhibit Al & A2— Legal Description and Depiction for Kruse Way Exhibit Bl & B2 — Legal Description and Depiction for Boones Ferry Road Exhibit Cl & C2 - Legal Description and Depiction for Kruse Way Place Ordinance 2758, Page 2 of 2 „goell CEN TERL/NE CONCEPTS LAND SURVEYING, INC. 19376 Molalla Avenue, Ste. 120, Oregon City, OR 97045 P. 503-650-0188 F. 503-650-0189 Exhibit "A” Right of Way Vacation Legal Description A Tract of land being a portion of the right of way of Kruse Way, located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most West - Southwest corner of Document No. 2005-104040, Clackamas County Deed Records; thence along the Southerly line of said Document No. 2005-104040, S64°27'27"E, 56.27 feet to an angle point; thence continuing along said Southerly line, S00°15'47"E, 39.99 feet; thence N64°27'57"W, 73.74 feet; thence N25°37'51"E, 36.02 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 2,341 Square Feet. Subject to Easements of Record. SIUNEU UN: g REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND JAMESNOVEMBER 30, 2007 60379 VALID THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 20 ✓7 DOCUMENT NO. POINT OF 1\ 2007-026305 BEGINNING 1 MOST WEST — SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DOCUMENT NO. 2005-104040 -1_ \ (DISCREET LOT LINE — TYPICAL) S J DOCUMENT N0. 2005-104040 1 > ''''f)L6 ..,?). Y4441 JN q� I It N M sftj. Syb �oTyF� Zt r-9 SIGNED ON: -/6'.- ,2.0)-7 #,qr REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR PROPOSED RIGHT OREGON OF WAY LINE �\ NOVEMBER 30, 2007 JAMES B6UO3T09N BROWN \ EXISTING RIGHT RENEWS: DECEMBER 31, 2017 OF WAY LINE CLIENT: THE SPRINGS LIVING EXHIBIT "8" ORIG. DATE:DECEMBER 28,2016 RIGHT OF WAY VACATION CENTERLINE CONCEPTS DRAWN BY: JL LAND SURVEYING, INC. CITY OF LA KEOSWEGO, CLACKAMASCOUNTY,, OREGON 19376 MOLALLA AVE., SUITE 120 SHEET No. I OF I OREGON CITY, OREGON 97045 SCALE:I"=10' PHONE 503.650.0188 FAX 503.650.0189/ \ Plotted: 8/14/2017 — 10:28am, M:\PROJECTS\SPRINGS LIKING—KRUSE WAY PL\dwg\SCALE FOR DEDICATION.dwg, Layout: Model CENTERLINE CONCEPTS LAND SURVEYING, INC. 19376 Molalla Avenue, Ste. 120, Oregon City, OR 97045 P. 503-650-0188 F. 503-650-0189 Exhibit "A" Right of Way Vacation Legal Description A Tract of land being a portion of the right of way of Lower Boones Ferry Road, located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the Easterly line of Document No. 2005-104040, Clackamas County Deed Records, being N31°30'55"E, 9.61 feet from the Southeast corner of said Document No. 2005-104040; thence along the Easterly line of said Document No. 2005- 104040, N31°30'55E, 236.10 feet to an angle point in said Easterly line; thence continuing along said Easterly line, S89°53'00"E, 3.40 feet to an angle point in said Easterly line; thence, S31°01'47"W, 219.94 feet to a point of curvature; thence along a curve to the right, having a radius of 35.00 feet, through a central angle of 30°45'05", an arc length of 18.78 feet (chord of which bears S46°24'19"W, 18.56 feet), to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 900 Square Feet. Subject to Easements of Record. Si(yivi.Lj ti>i•i. e 2.- 6) REMSTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR ORE i JAMES E URTON 2007 60379 VALID THROUGH DECEMBER .31, 20 L 2 PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY LINE S89.53'00 nE 7 (DISCREET LOT LINE - TYPICAL) 3.40' CURVE TABLE CURVE I LENGTH I RADIUS I DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD 1 /EXISTING RIGHT Cl I 18.78'1 35.00'1 30'45'05"I S 46'24'19" W 1 18.56'1 / OF WAY LINE d, If DOCUMENT NO. / 6) 2005-104040 / r'® P-' !i i , / . g r 4),e. It *, o423-(Z, P�\P0 < N > 4, ..4) -=_` 4 4/''''e ',.6:bt /;) PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY LINE SIGNED ON: g®/c"� .---4,.)--) / REGISTERED POINT of Cl PROFESSIONAL BEGINNING\/ —L=18.78' LAND SURVEYOR EXISTING RIGHT - OF WAY LINE N31 30'55"E OREGON 9.61' NOVEMBER 30, 2007 SE CORNER OF JAMES BURTON BROWN DOCUMENT NO. ‘ 60379 2005-104040 RENEWS: DECEMBER 31, 2017 CLIENT: THE SPRINGS LIVING EXHIBIT n " .4 ORIG. DATE: AUGUST 16,2017 RIGHT OF WAY VACATION CENTERLINE CONCEPTS DRAWN BY: JL LAND SURVEYING, INC. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON 19376 MOLALLA AVE., SUITE 120 SHEET No, 1 OF 1OREGON CITY, OREGON 97045 SCALE:1".30' PHONE 503.650.0188 FAX 503.650.0189 Plotted: 8/16/2017 3:33pm, M:\PROJECTS\SPRINGS LIVING—KRUSE WAY PL\dwg\SCALE FOR DEDICATION.dwg, Layout: Model CENTERLINE CONCEPTS LAND SURVEYING, INC. 19376 !Viola ll Avenue, Ste. 120, Oregon City, OR 97045 P. 503-650-0188 F. 503-650-0189 Exhibit "A" Right of Way Vacation Legal Description A Tract of land being a portion of the right of way of Kruse Way Place, located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 8, Township 2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northwest corner of Document No. 2005-104040, Clackamas County Deed Records; thence S58°13'18"E, 18.76 feet; thence S00°05'30"E, 2.93 feet to the true POINT OF BEGINNING; thence S59°07'16"E, 27.43 feet to a point of curvature; thence along a non-tangent curve to the left, having a radius of 47.50 feet (radial bearing being N05°28'58"E), through a central angle of 29°01'27", an arc length of 24.06 feet (chord of which bears S80°58'14"W, 23.81 feet); thence N00°05'30"W, 17.81 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 185 Square Feet. Subject to Easements of Record. SIGNED 0N: F -/6- REGISTERED/6- zr>> I PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR NOVEMBER 30, 2007 607 JAMES U TOS RO VALID THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 204 NW CORNER OF DOCUMENT NO, N 2005-104040 DOCUMENT NO. 2015-035446 s S 'to N ���6;� ���,9�%k N F lFNN PROPOSED RIGHT *OT/1'�� OF WAY LINE S 00'05'30" E y 10 EXISTING RIGHT ` 2.93' 'Si ox, OF WAY LINE oNi, PO/NT OF BEGINNING-® -1,t s sem. o e CO $ EXISTING RIGHT IIS_ OF WAY LINE Cl L X24.06' �, 1 DOCUMENT NO. W o 2005-104040 m-co I -- NI poi Zi 3 PROPOSED RIGHT (DISCREET LOT LINE - TYPICAL) OF WAY LINE •i I CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ICHORD BEARING! CHORD 1 ', I C11 24.06'1 47.50'1 29'01'27"1 S 80'58'14" WI 23.81'1 1 -I- - SIGNED ON: --/e5'- 2- o)7 =- REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR < N > YNOVEMBEERG330 2007 JAMES BURTON BROWN 60379 RENEWS: DECEMBER 31, 2017 CLIENT: THE SPRINGS LIVING EXHIBIT "B" ORIG. DATE:DECEMBER27,2016 RIGHT OF WAY VACATION CENTERLINE CONCEPTS DRAWN BY: JL LAND SURVEYING, INC. 1 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, CLACKAMAS COUNTY, OREGON 19376 MOLALLA AVE., SUITE 120 SHEET No. 1 OF 1OREGON CITY, OREGON 97045 — —� SCALE.' 1"--:10' PHONE 503.650.0188 FAX 503.650.0189 \ Plotted: 8/14/2017 — 10129am, M:\PROJECTS\SPRINGS LIVING—KRUSE WAY PL\dwg\SCALE FOR DEDICATION.dwg, Layout: Model 9.2 Dj'p` 424� COUNCIL REPORT r TIO r o 0Rd� TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council FROM: Johanna Hastay, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Ordinance 2753— Boones Ferry Road (BFR) Nonconformities Code Amendments (LU 17-0028) DATE: September 26, 2017 DATE OF MEETING: October 3, 2017 ACTION Conduct a public hearing on Ordinance 2753 to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation on the BFR Nonconformities Code Amendments. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve LU 17-0028, and to enact Ordinance 2753, including findings and conclusions in Exhibit A-1.1. BACKGROUND The proposed amendments were initiated to implement the Lake Grove Village Center (LGVC) Plan policies (see Planning Commission Findings, Criteria and Standards), and to further the City Council (Council) 2017 goal to "take steps to minimize the impact on businesses and residents of the Boones Ferry Road Project". As described in Exhibit A-1.1, Attachment B, the proposed Code amendments are to: • Modify the 50-foot Special Street Setback for a specific section of BFR to reflect the BFR Project (LOC 50.02.004); • Allow project mitigation outside the public right-of-way when directly associated with public transportation projects (such as the BFR Project) as ministerial development (LOC 50.07.003.13); • Exempt planned parking mitigation (on-site replacement parking associated with the BFR Project) from compliance with the LGVC Overlay District standards (LOC 50.05.007); and, 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 2 • Clarify and expand the current parking and landscape area exceptions in the LGVC Overlay for properties affected by the BFR Project (LOC 50.05.007.6.). The Planning Commission (Commission) held a public hearing on August 28, 2017. The Commission received public testimony both in favor of and requesting modifications to the proposal. The Commission recommended one modification in response: amend the Project Impact Table (Exhibit A-1.1, Attachment D.1) to account for the 'potential' loss of two parking spaces on the Chevron gas station property at the corner of Oakridge Road and BFR, with a footnote clarifying that if relocation of the storage tank does not impact existing on-site parking (e.g., by vertical configuration), the provision no longer applies. Since the August 28th Commission hearing, Engineering staff and the Fire Marshal have determined that the tank does not need to be relocated to comply with the Fire Code requirements. As no parking spaces will be lost on the Chevron site due to the BFR Project, Attachment D.1 has been modified. The Commission adopted its Findings, Conclusions and Order on September 11, 2017 (Exhibit B- 1), recommending approval by the Council. For background information and an explanation of the proposal, please refer to the staff report prepared for the Commission hearing (Exhibit D- 1). The recommended Code amendments are attached to Ordinance 2753 (Exhibit A-1.1, Attachment B) and minutes from the Commission's hearing are provided as Exhibit C-1. DISCUSSION At the Commission's public hearing, testimony did not focus on the proposed Code amendments per se, but rather on related issues of tree removal and tree mitigation. Tree removal to construct the BFR improvements is a key public issue, as it will be significant. Throughout the public review process, public comment and testimony has focused on balancing the policy objectives of ensuring adequate parking and maximizing tree preservation, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies, including those in the LGVC Plan, as cited in the Commission Findings (Exhibit B-1). Tree Removal: In addition to the trees that will need to be removed to widen BFR, tree removal may occur as either an indirect effect of removing trees in the realigned public right-of-way, i.e. windthrow, or to construct replacement parking on individual properties (see Exhibit A-1.1, Attachment C). The Commission agreed with testimony that public parking facilities would be a positive amenity to the District and could lessen the owner's perception of the need to construct the replacement parking. However, the Commission found that even if public parking facilities were added to the District, the Comprehensive Plan (including the LGVC Plan) does not have a policy that directs individual property owners be restrained from seeking on-site replacement parking to offset those lost due to the BFR Project. The Commission found that the availability of public parking facilities was not a prerequisite for adoption of the current "lost parking" Code amendments. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 3 Tree Mitigation: The BFR Project includes substantial landscaping with planted medians, street trees, and potential "waysides" on various commercial properties. However, it will be difficult to plant all required mitigation trees on properties that are being reduced in size to accommodate a wider right-of-way. Given the constrained nature of many of the commercial properties, staff has received a request from the BFR Project Advisory Committee to direct any Tree Fund mitigation fees specific to the BFR Project towards a "grant" or similar program that could be used by private property owners to voluntarily enhance their landscaping. While outside the scope of the Code amendment proposal, the City Council or City Manager could direct that such a program or policy be established, as it would be consistent with the purposes of the Tree Fund. As discussed in Exhibit D-1, the Commission found that the proposed Code amendments are in compliance with applicable City Comprehensive Plan policies and Special District plans, state laws, and statewide planning goals. ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT The proposed ordinance recommended by the Commission does not have a fiscal impact to the City because the only effect the amendments would have is to add flexibility into the Code in order to minimize impacts from the BFR Project on private property owners. RECOMMENDATION Based on the information presented in this report, staff recommends that the Council approve LU 17-0028, and enact Ordinance 2753 with attached Findings (Exhibit A-1.1). EXHIBITS A. Ordinances A-1.1 Ordinance 2753, dated 09/14/17 (supersedes Exhibit A-1) Attachment A: City Council Findings, Conclusion and Order Attachment B: Proposed Code Amendments with track-changes and commentary (for reference only), 09/06/17 (replaces version dated 08/16/17) Proposed Code Amendments (clean copy), 09/06/17 (replaces version dated 08/16/17) Attachment C: Replacement Parking Plans with Written Summaries, dated 08/17/17 Attachment D.1: Project Impact Table, dated 09/07/17 (replaces version dated 08/17/17) Attachment D.2: Project Index Map, dated 08/17/17 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 4 B. Findings, Conclusion and Order B-1 Planning Commission Findings, Conclusion and Order, dated 09/11/17 (Please note the Ordinance and Attachments referenced in the Findings are not included. Refer to Ordinance 2753 and Attachments above[Exhibit A-1.1]) C. Minutes C-1 Planning Commission Minutes, 08/28/17 D. Staff Reports D-1 Planning Commission Staff Report, dated 08/17/17 E. Graphics/Plans [No current exhibits] F. Written Materials F-1 Memo from Deputy City Attorney regarding Exhibit G-1 (Robinson Letter), dated 08/02/17 F-2 Arborist Report, prepared by Morgan Nolen &Associates, dated 07/27/17 G. Letters G-1 Letter from Mike Robinson, Perkins Coie, dated 06/19/17 G-2 Email from Mike Robinson, Perkins Coie, dated 08/28/17 G-3 Letter from Mike Robison, Perkins Coie, dated 08/28/17 G-4 Letter from TEKA, LLC (formerly referred to as the Jenike Property), dated 08/28/17 G-5 Letter from Dienne Irwin, dated 08/28/17 G-6 Email from Cheryl Uchida (received after close of public hearing), dated 09/11/17 G-7 Email from Carolyn Krebs (received after close of public hearing), dated 09/11/17 BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCES Staff reports and public meeting materials that were prepared for these Code amendments can be found by visiting the project web page for LU 17-0028. Use the link below to visit the City's "Project" page. In the "Search" box enter LU 17-0028 then press "Submit": http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/prolects 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us DRAFT 09/14/17 EXHIBIT A-1.1 LU 17-0028 ORDINANCE 2753 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AMENDING SECTIONS LOC 50.04.002, 50.05.007, AND 50.07.003.13 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTING THE BOONES FERRY ROAD PROJECT(LU 17-0028). WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing for consideration of this Ordinance was duly given in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, a public hearing before the Planning Commission was held on August 28, 2017, at which the staff report, testimony, and evidence were received and considered; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that amendments to the Lake Oswego Community Development Code (Chapter 50) in order to implement the Boones Ferry Road Improvement Project (BFR Project) be approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on LU 17-0028 was held before the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on October 3, 2017, at which the recommended code amendments, staff report, testimony, and evidence were received and considered; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the proposed amendments support completion of the BFR Project consistent with the Lake Grove Village Center (LGVC) Plan, by maintaining an adequate parking supply within the LGVC Town Center, reducing regulatory burdens on commercial property owners impacted by the BFR Project, and protecting the adjacent residential neighborhoods from negative impacts to the extent possible; The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions (LU 17-0028), attached as Attachment A. Section 2. The Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the new text shown in underlined type and deleting text shown in strikcthrough type in Attachment B. Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. As provided is Section 34.C. of the Lake Oswego Charter, this ordinance shall take effect on the thirtieth day following enactment. Enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the day of , 2017. Ordinance 2753 EXHIBIT A-1.1/PAGE 1 OF 2 DRAFT 09/14/17 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED: Kent Studebaker, Mayor Dated: ATTEST: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell City Attorney Ordinance 2753 EXHIBIT A-1.1/PAGE 2 OF 2 ATTACHMENT A LU 17-0028 1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL 2 OF THE 3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 4 5 6 A REQUEST FOR LEGISLATIVE TEXT ) LU 17-0028 7 AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY ) (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE TO IMPLEMENT ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER 9 THE BOONES FERRY ROAD PUBLIC ) 10 TRANSPORTATION PROJECT. 11 12 NATURE OF APPLICATION 13 14 This application proposes legislative text amendments to the Community Development Code 15 (CDC), for the purpose of implementing the Boones Ferry Road public transportation project 16 (BFR Project), that: 17 18 • Modify the 50-foot Special Street Setback for a specific section of Boones Ferry Road to 19 reflect the BFR Project (LOC 50.02.004); 20 • Allow project mitigation outside the public right-of-way when directly associated with 21 public transportation projects (such as the BFR Project) as ministerial development (LOC 22 50.07.003.13); 23 • Exempt planned parking mitigation (on-site replacement parking associated with the BFR 24 Project) from compliance with the Lake Grove Village Center (LGVC) Overlay District 25 standards (LOC 50.05.007); and, 26 • Clarify and expand the current parking and landscape area exceptions in the LGVC Overlay 27 District for properties affected by the BFR Project (LOC 50.05.007.6). 28 29 The Code amendments implement the Comprehensive Plan policies, the Lake Grove Village 30 Center Plan policies (both listed, below), and the City Council 2017 Goal, "Take steps to 31 minimize the impact on businesses and residents of the Boones Ferry Road project." 32 33 HEARINGS; COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 34 35 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application on August 28 36 2017. On September 11, 2017, the Commission adopted Findings Conclusions and an Order 37 recommending that the City Council approve the application. On October 3, 2017, the City 38 Council held a public hearing and considered the application and the Planning Commission's 39 recommendation. 40 41 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS 42 43 A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan 44 LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 1 OF 4 1 Land Use Planning Chapter: Land Use Administration 2 Policy A-1 3 Design Guidelines 4 Policy C-1 5 Land Use Administration 6 Policy D-1 7 8 Community Culture Chapter: Civic Engagement 9 Policies, 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9 10 11 Inspiring Spaces and Places Chapter: Goal 1 12 Policy 7 13 14 Connected Community Chapter: Transportation Choices 15 Policy B-2 16 17 Livability 18 Policy F-6 19 20 B. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Volume II: Neighborhood and Special District 21 Plans 2013, Lake Grove Village Center Plan 22 23 Chapter I. Transportation Goal 1: Transform BFR into a Great Street 24 Policies 1.2, 1.4, and 1.5 25 Goal 3: Enhance the Pedestrian Environment 26 and Connectivity 27 Policy 3.2 28 Chapter IV. Economic Dev't 29 Goal 9: Support Businesses in the Center 30 Policies 9.3, 9.4, and 9.6 31 32 C. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code 33 34 LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing 35 LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined 36 LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision 37 LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD 38 LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required 39 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision 40 41 FINDINGS AND REASONS 42 43 As findings supporting its decision, the City Council incorporates the staff report, dated August 44 17, 2017, for LU 17-0028 (with all exhibits) the Planning Commission's Findings, Conclusions LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 2 OF 4 1 and Order dated September 11, 2017, and the staff Council Report dated September 19, 2017 2 (with all exhibits). 3 4 CONCLUSION 5 6 The City Council concludes that LU 17-0028 complies with all applicable criteria and should be 7 approved, and that Ordinance 2753, which implements LU 17-0028, should be enacted. 8 9 LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 3 OF 4 ATTACHMENT B 09/06/17 (Ordinance 2753) LU 17-0028 PROPOSED CHANGES: Shown as strikeout text for deletions, and underline text for new language. (Changes begin below.) 50.04.002 SPECIAL STREET SETBACKS 5. SPECIAL STREET SETBACK LIST The special street setbacks set forth in Table 50.04.002-1 shall not be reduced. TABLE 50.04.002-1: SPECIAL STREET SETBACKS Affected From To Special Setback Streets Boones Mercantile Wont Sur.cat 50 ft.. unless reduced by the City Enaineer. Ferry Rd. Dr. B-Madrona St. findina that the Purpose is met by a lesser amount. Boones Madrona St. West Sunset Dr. 50 ft. Ferry Rd. LU 17-0028 Attachment B(Ordinance 2753)/Page 1 of 5 09/06/17 LOC 50.05.007 LAKE GROVE VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY DISTRICT 3. APPLICABILITY c. Applicability by Type of Development *** ii. Remodeled Buildings, Building Expansion, and Site Improvements The standards of this overlay apply to any remodeling, building expansion, or site improvement project on a partially developed or developed site, except as expressly provided below. For the purpose of this subsection, "remodel" means less than 50% of the exterior wall is removed or is no longer a necessary and integral structural component of the overall building. Elements of the exterior wall include columns, studs, or similar vertical load-bearing elements and associated footings. However, existing exterior walls supporting a roof that is being modified to accommodate a new floor level or roofline shall continue to be considered necessary and integral structural components, provided the existing wall elements remain in place and provide necessary structural support to the building upon completion of the roofline modifications. For buildings not principally supported by exterior bearing walls, "remodel" means less than 50% of the principal support structure including columns, structural frames and other similar primary structural elements, is removed or no longer a necessary and integral structural component of the overall building. Alterations that are undertaken solely to bring an existing building into compliance with the Building Code are not counted towards the 50% measurement. (41 For lots that are the subiect of riaht-of-wav purchase and/or condemnation by the City after(effective date of ordinancel. for the purpose of improvements to Boones Ferry Road. the followina standards do not apply to development made in substantial compliance with the site plans approved by City Council per Attachment C of Ordinance No. 2753: (a) LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. Landscaoina Minimums: (b) LOC 50.05.007.6.e.viii(51(a). Parkina Facility Edae Treatment(sidewalks) (c) LOC 50.05.007.6.e.viii(51(b). Parkina Facility Edae Treatment (buildinas) LU 17-0028 Attachment B(Ordinance 2753)/Page 2 of 5 09/06/17 Expiration: This subsection shall not apply to development on a lot after: (a) Three years from the closina date of the riaht-of-wav purchase or date of the City's payment followina entry of final iudament of condemnation: and. (b) One additional year if. prior to the expiration date in subsection (a). the property owner submitted a written reauest to the City Manaaer for the extension due to unforeseeable delay in commencement or completion of the site improvement work. and the City Manaaer approved the extension. 6. SITE PLANNING STANDARDS c. Parking vi. For the portion of property purchased or condemned by City after October 4, 2012, for the purpose of improvements to Boones Ferry Road right-of-way that are consistent with the Lake Grove Village Center Plan: If the loss of property eliminates parking, as set forth in Attachments D.1 and D.2 of Ordinance No. 2753. the amount of parking lost may be counted toward meeting the parking standard for-buil4+ g cxrcr..c cnc :f 2pp!:od for within fivc y ars of the purchase or condemnation. e. Landscape Requirements i. Minimum Area Requirement Landscaping shall be installed on at least 15% of the development site on which buildings are constructed. This is inclusive of area provided in required village gathering places, landscaping required for parking lots, landscaping within any required buffer areas, and landscaping within public plazas and gathering places. Landscaping may include courtyards, raised beds and planters. (1) Property within required public easements for sidewalks or pathway construction and maintenance may be counted toward this minimum landscaping requirement. (2) A reduction in required landscaping equal to the area set aside for a Village Gathering Place is allowed, up to a maximum reduction of 2,500 sq. ft. LU 17-0028 Attachment B(Ordinance 2753)/Page 3 of 5 09/06/17 (3) A reduction by an amount equal to the area located in a Village Commons if the Village Commons is located on privately owned land with an easement for public use. Exception: For the portion of property purchased or condemned by City after October 4, 2012, for the purpose of improvements to Boones Ferry Road right-of-way that are consistent with the Lake Grove Village Center Plan: If the loss of property!!m!tc•ho ability to expand the cx!ctt!r development, the square footage of the lost property, as set forth in Attachments D.1 and D.2 of Ordinance No. 2753. may be counted toward meeting the landscaping landscape area standard. uo to a maximum reduction of 5%. for building expansio^c, !f opp!!c _ .. • • '. . _ - purchase or condemnation. LU 17-0028 Attachment B(Ordinance 2753)/Page 4 of 5 09/06/17 LOC 50.07.003 REVIEW PROCEDURES 13. MINISTERIAL DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS a. Ministerial Development Classification i. Requirements of Ministerial Decisions ii. Ministerial Development Types (8) Construction or alteration of public transportation or utility facilities. and associated development abuttina the public right-of-way when desianed to address impacts of a transportation proiect. consistent with the applicable public facility master plan and land use regulations, and is not located in a delineated RP district, RC protection area, or HBA protection area. LU 17-0028 Attachment B(Ordinance 2753)/Page 5 of 5 Mozena Law Office (15853 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached preliminary frontage improvement plan (next page) • Impacts: Existing parking spaces are not striped, but one space lost in paved area in front of building where one could park. 212 sq. ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • No plan for replacement parking at this time • Code deviations: Insufficient area to construct parking spaces between building and sidewalk, and landscaping may less than 15% (existing nonconforming). • No tree removal • Frontage improvements nonconforming w/LGVC code (narrow sidewalk w/no stormwater planter, no current landscaping buffer between sidewalk and building) LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 1 OF 16 August 17, 2017 SCALE 1" = 20' Property Line Existing Right-of-Way Line Temporary Construction O \ 0 \ Easement Limits of Driveway n •'- _.--- 7 ,13, Reconstruction ` 4,o) 01. \ \ ''° / . kitol 00 New Right-of-Way Limits -- �� ill.11, oN., 1 Curb -. cr 0, F0 0 Peter J Mozena Law Office (20) 15835 Boones Ferry Road Tax Lot 21 E08CB00100 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 2 OF 16 Naomi's Lampshades(19510, 19532& 19542 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached site plan (next page) • Impacts: 6 spaces lost. 1,589 sq. ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • All spaces to be replaced on site by City as a part of the frontage improvements with the BFR Project. • Code deviations: 5-foot buffer between sidewalk and parking reduced to 3.2-foot buffer(similar to existing nonconforming buffer), reduced 10-foot setback between building and parking (similar to existing nonconforming), and landscaping may be less than 15% (existing nonconforming). • Tree removal on-site.Trees be removed with BFR frontage improvements. • Area of old parking could be converted to patio/outdoor seating or landscaped "wayside"with on-site tree mitigation opportunities • Existing nonconforming, remains nonconforming in about the same manner in a different configuration, some tree removal and code deviations necessary to get on-site fixes. • Balances"no net loss of parking" policy with code compliance LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 3 OF 16 August 17, 2017 XREF INDEX: �' Ali,w, // , , 4,,,i‘d � A ,... 4 / , v o Vo ° Nci. gn-g, ,a 2`,,,‘-;'0 / Curb ' \\ I can mN3 tea' . \ SCALE 'rMi rna°u�3 20 0 10 20 / Q� a ° 18.5' 8.5' Ill SCO °° d © `. ( FEET ) 8.5 1 INCH = 20 FT. / / �� lip8.5' a 3.2' / 8.0' Stormwater / a Planter 8.5' 9.0' Naomi's Lampshades (30) / 15910, 15932, 15942 Boones Ferry Road Existing / a O Tax Lot 21 E08CB03600 Right-of- ° h Way Line a Limits of w o 8.6' w , J^` Project Paving z j� Existing Stalls: 21 a Proposed Stalls: 21 w ° d •F N V / iNaom 's Tree Removal: 59"o Zo , oQ 1 New Right-of-Way Limits zW U 2 a W o x ¢ o i L am . L.,' #> 8.O, uN /a._I ,°Ts .vmN.i�I no.. �x (Existing) /W 71.g.i Property CO :i Side Lines o CL nce m Z 12N / 6 V/ CO O LU E " ❑ w t w JW H I Q a a z U w it O ,, o_ o LL m CC o _ Yi w N 0 z = .(111 Q O U o 0 35" Maple Tree w/3 codominant trunks:16", 22", 22" z m X = Tree Removal Required �% 0 24" Cherry Tree w/3 codominant trunks: 12", 14", 16". SHEET NUMBER co7-77 QQ ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 4 OF 16 = Proposed Landscaped Area oa . Gubanc's (16008 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached site plan (next page) • Impacts: 2 spaces lost (one of which is an ADA space which takes up the area of two regular spaces). 1,141 sq.ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • Both spaces can be replaced on site.The property owner may choose to remove one additional space between the building and sidewalk. • Code deviations: none (existing nonconforming landscaping may be less than 15%) • Tree removal on-site • May be able to minimize tree removal and replacement parking if public parking provided abutting Riccardo's Ristorante (w/crosswalk across BFR) • Existing nonconforming parking at frontage converted to combination wayside/outdoor patio for restaurant with on-site tree mitigation opportunities LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 5 OF 16 August 17, 2017 XREF INDEX: /9 / SIV \ ii.- 4 .,...,2 E \ „frov." N =13_ ,,CLI N SCALE .a.3 �� / 40 0 20 40 0,06\ 1W11 ( FEET ) 1 INCH = 40 FT. : : '. Curb .....0 , \ New Right-of-Way Limits Babica Hen 5 Remove Markings w K / F Gubanc's Existing Property Line / o )-° Y Add ADA Lift / Z 7. u ro w 0 0 8 o w yV r � K a `8.01 / ,, E cFi ¢ g a e, \ �� \ \ I \ \1 o� 18.5, \ \\ .11 en F3 1of \\ \ \\ r/ s 9.0' \\ \ A `q \\ Reconstruct 20'long x 8' y W u Gubanc's Restaurant (33) \\ V wide concrete pad for /S6.°' \\ dumpsters Right-of-Way co ci 16008 Boones Ferry Rd. \\\ 22'0 w co 01 \ p .� z CD Tax Lot 21 E08CB03900 \\\\ ���' 0 CO II \\ 18.0' \ \ Q LU = Existing Stalls: 30 \\\\ \-�8.5' \ o Q w c U \\ \ \ \ O J LL q Proposed Stalls: 29 \ \ Q z El \ - \ , \.2- Approx.location W of Exst.Curb Residential Zone(R-7.5) U Tree Removal: 33 Q w N a^m Cedar Fence at CO Z m Exst.Right-of-Way D 0 w di§ CD O :;,,f, 0 33" Maple Tree w/5 codominant trunks: 11", 12", 14", 16", 19". ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753 /PAGE 6 OF 16m ) X = Tree Removal Required �d SHEET NUMBER 0a Riccardo's Ristorante (16035 & 16045 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached site plan (next page) • Impacts:4 spaces lost. 2,124 sq. ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • All spaces can be replaced on site if back parking lot is reconfigured • Code deviations: none • Significant tree removal on-site • May be able to minimize tree removal and on-site "fixes" if public parking provided on abutting property to the north. LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 7 OF 16 August 17, 2017 XREF INDEX: Approx.property line # jBocce Ball Court j r- Shift trash enclosure right Ricca rd o s Restaurant (24) V o 0 / 10.0' to allow for Bocce Court 16035 & 16045 Boones FerryRoad mig N I 8.0' 60.0' I- -- -J � ��LLE Tax Lot 21 E08CB01800 �I moo 9 . u�N 3 �n C�n rna° 3 18.0' Existing Stalls: 41 8.5' Proposed Stalls: 42 ~-1 L + 0 24.0' 11, Tree Removal: 64" .i.„ 0 T 8.5' 5.0' 24.5' _J 18.5' 0 0 0 o r 4 r a 0 U \ . Ric( ardo's . ° a (1,700 SF) Property Line a Z 74 JL '18.5I � 9 Z owoQk [id wa o m io v ¢ ain 85� — eep accessible " i N stall and a'. - —9.e' �/ �� a. J/ / . :i ‘'l •o Vin Italy Y .t Italian Wines Landscaped . Ad °W M Planter 4 ain Limits of Planter Project Paving \ 0 . .- , 0 o Cafe , $ - Right of Way(Existing) N ,_ CO o t Marzocca New Right-of-Way Limits ° I7 w w a, SF ° C�• o o <i- (2,100 ) �� Q z Cn ^U / SCALE 0_ 0 L �' Lake Grove Planter a ° Curb � 20 0 10 20 Cl) >- 5 m s 0 Barber Shop / ° �p'C\ o w Q 3 /,, �° . / V ( FEET ) Q w w a Mco I o % � ° , 1INCH = 20 FT. U o No @ 33" Fir Tree. ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 8 OF 16 X = Tree Removal Required <O . SHEET NUMBER ma 2 15" Deciduous Iiiiiiiiiii = Proposed Landscaped Area Q 16" Deciduous .CL Keller Williams Realty(16365 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached site plan (next page) • Impacts: 14 spaces lost, but 7 to be replaced on site by City as a part of the frontage improvements with the BFR Project. 2,457 sq.ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • All spaces can be replaced on site • Code deviations: Existing 5-foot buffer between sidewalk and parking reduced to 2 to 3-foot buffer for 8 parallel spaces along new sidewalk, reduced 10-foot setback between building and parking for 6 angled spaces around building, and may be less than 15% landscaping. • Tree removal on-site • All 14 spaces back on site, but only low-level landscaping along sidewalk due to car doors. LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 9 OF 16 August 17, 2017 XRff INDEX: II pIVIIaVI J 'I V 4 # /�II II II ° ,4 � � Approx. property line Ou° rum.) �rt o 0 Residential Zone(R-7.5) ollo'I r SCALE 14.0 ' I Ok 30 15 30 12.3Extg. rO © 3 ( FEET ) 1 INCH = 30 FT. 5.3'x / Egress Easement i 80' / Line Potential Sign �\1.0' Location /// \,A ,,,00,,, / Keller Williams Realty \ / Existing Keller Williams (46) (3,350 SF) 3.5' st g Right-of- 16365 Boones Ferry Road ` Way LineAO 10.1' / / M Tax Lot 21E07DD0101 �\ O 17.0' 0 14.0' r 15 1 24.2' 8.5' 7� / /, ./- ; w 3 Existing Stalls: 26 / Proposed Stalls: 26 1 26' litill // } 3.0� X g Tree Removal: 31" � ' G Y .. - - N W r,r, / . O le w Q o a q w O g in o c> ¢ g ' in u Parking Curb -z.,•;) p 34 / LI— , , . G�+� 'Z r>.-.) , s- N� a I < x New Right-of-Way Limits vol 6C\ W / _ a J ain ° % s ILL: o 3.7' CC 03 / 10 I H LE J w 3.- Q Y 0 CD C2 o Extg. Right-of-Way �_ Curb / % N �' m a t ,j1 IIIIU• „/,,,,,,, /4 ° � 0 z W U 11111‘* Q a ;H am ,II 11, ° ` cK w IIS / ° ° , � J z th I IIII �/ Iliim j1�01 IVI � / uOuAuuPu�^° r - E "•V I ° Oil '� w/ u_ o 0 II I/ - w (n w 0 d IVIII�I 1° ° J Z z N I I �101I0�° / ° ° W n CO 9” Deciduous Tree. ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 10 OF 16 X = Tree Removal Required SHEET NUMBER 03a 11" Fir Tree. Q Q K 11" Fir Tree. oa Jenike Property:Andy Paris Surveyors& Kumon (16055& 16067 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached site plan (next page) • Impacts: 5 spaces lost. 3,113 sq. ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • All spaces can be replaced on site. • Code deviations: 10-foot setback between building and parking reduced to 8 feet(same as setback for existing parking) • Significant tree removal on-site, impacts to grove of Douglas firs. • The replacement parking plan shows Trees#1-11 to be removed for parking and additional unnumbered trees to be removed to accommodate frontage improvements. Removal of any of the firs in the grove would jeopardize its stability.As outlined in the arborist's report,the entire grove should be removed as a part of the BFR frontage improvements (Exhibit F2). In total, 21 trees to be removed with BFR Project improvements and Tree#5 to be removed for replacement parking. • Maintains landscape buffer between public sidewalk and parking. Minimal opportunities for on- site tree mitigation. • May be able to reduce tree removal and on-site "fixes" if connection to public parking is provided through the Riccardo's site. LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 11 OF 16 August 17, 2017 XREF INDEX: 4 V • 4 4- r_, . N 1 (.4,,, ,,,, 41 - r_, PropertyLine .‹--- SCALE rnai 1 30 0 15 30 . R1.5' 0 e e * ( FEET ) © + O Q 1 INCH = 30 FT. 8.5' 0 18' I T22' I 18' 0 8.5' 6.0' IIIiII II 8.o' 0 Or= 72' Jenike Property (25) 1 9.0' 06 ++ Tax Lot 21 E08CB01400 Kumon m 16055-16067 Boones Ferry Road Y These curbs would be t c removed when the � �' ,� Existing Stalls: 24 parking lot modifications Proposed Stalls: 24 g are done ' ; p 2 q Z 1• I / 6 1 /h� rn ` �� Tree Removal: 276" . w oawIE FA o� a Surveying a Company . ' UN o v°m u N4 Retaining Wall �� % Retaining io Io -Ia a Wall N w% New Right-of-Way / Limits � — Right of w _ Way(Existing) 7.1',1'. 0./011/ Y c a m NN/ # a uF3v - / Curb m x w X w H ElQ Q Z 40fr, ' H o LL m 1°1 0> 0 CK c9 4 e7 e °ii 4,1 W O6� /° zwz z 1 N / L, W O w o 6 0 30" Fir Tree. 0 36" Fir Tree. 0 22" Fir Tree. ,a 28" Fir Tree. m X = Tree Removal Re Required a 0 13" Fir Tree. 0 14" Oak Tree. 0 28" Fir Tree. „ 16" Fir Tree. q SHEET NUMBER QQ 0 29" Fir Tree. 0 16" Fir Tree. 0 26" Fir Tree. ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 12 OF 16 oa US Bank(16480 Boones Ferry Road) • See attached site plan (next page) • Impacts: 2 spaces lost. 2,593 sq. ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • All spaces can be replaced on site • Code deviations: none • No tree removal necessary LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 13 OF 16 August 17, 2017 [DATE: 8/14/2017 5:26 PM] [AUTHOR: ifabik] [PLOTTER: DWG To PDF.pc3] [STYLE: WHP-Standard.ctb] [PATH: P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\091415-BFR-Site Exhibits\2017_0814-BFR-Site Exhibits-USBank.dwg] [LAYOUT: US Bank] w 2 \° \ \ # 4: . , �O .. . , \, . . p�� \ o \ 4._ \ J'/<\ \TP% o 9 lk-0 11\CD AI. os \ a - \ Ilk\ v \ NO* - Z .°\ \ Trt 410 /` 0 su 7'�'\ _r `gyp =° < // \ _` ///0 \ 7 \\ Cl)rn I \ \ 3 7' \ rn \ .........-\ i� \\ 1 0 \ 6:,. \ - -- 0 Th oo\\\ ��\\Q \moo --, \ 3 \ , \ \\ \ *it SU \ \\ r 7 \ \ \ _ \ \ \ \ C ) \\ \ \1 CD \ \ \ v \��� \ \ \ \ CII 7J \ CA) CD a \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ a 5 \ \\ \ N \ G) = 0 \ \\ \ 41 55 44 O \ 0) \ \ CD C x ) O Co o I— o cn (D cC2 o C - w N)v � O CD-- U) _ m C7 co V? mO C II - o DZ la . N rn 0 m ^ m n rn 01 o N) 7 N) rn o CD CD SHEET INFO REVISIONS El mti US BANK NO. BY DATE REMARKS FA DRAWN MKB CHECKEDFA WHPacilit APPROVED 9755 SW Barnes Rd,Suite 300 BOONES FERRY ROAD LAST EDIT 8/14/2017 Portland,OR 97225 503-626-0455 Fax 503-526-0775 PROJECT NUMBER I DRAWING FILE NAME I SCALE PLOT DATE 8/14/2017 www wh.acific cern Bank of America (16209 Bryant Road) • This property owner is pursuing a separate land use application process to obtain approval for on-site "fixes" and replacement parking(PA 14-0096, no application has been submitted as of this date). • See attached conceptual site plan (next page) • Impacts: 14 spaces lost. 4,717 sq.ft. of land lost to right-of-way acquisition. • 7 spaces can be replaced on site. 12 spaces proposed on Lake Grove Shopping Center site as "shared parking". • Code deviations (preliminary): 5-foot landscape buffer between sidewalk and parking reduced to zero for one space; drive aisle and turnaround do not have 5-foot buffer from public sidewalk; less than 15% landscaping. • Tree removal on-site • Existing nonconforming made more nonconforming in some ways, but pavement at corner converted to landscape area as a part of BFR frontage improvements. LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 15 OF 16 August 17, 2017 PROPOSED WALL(TO BE 10, CENTER MEDIAN WILL DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED PREVENT LEFT IN/LEFT OUT _ gOONES FERRY RD WITH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS). 1.00' MINIMUM 7.00'SIDEWALK WIDTH- - �,� EXISTING 1'CURB MEDIAN - - RIGHT-OF-WAY 1"R PROPOSED 10.00'DRIVE AISLE- 5.00'PERMANENT WALL EASEMENT 0'` (NOTE: THIS WILL BEA - , , I / / ° a°�� ° _ 7'WALL EASEMENT) o° a — a = PROPOSED"RIGHT TURN ONLY"SIGN _---7-'-7: 8 PAVEMENT ° - \\ 4 ) as � ° � ��� ° 1"3° ° � , 8ITJ �_ •rII ' s - aA. o 0 1 / ��IjAiI I•lel� a ����Ir1 �� �— 1' / /////////////,/////////////////// ► i i X11 j��1�� a ° a ° a ,4 �0Vote •�/1/� WIDTH VARIES 24' 26'r I / ' 9.00' / o r 111.1.1 1 j a ° j e•I,-.. - PR T T �' // nip n / PROPOSED 04 qv.. I'• ° a O U SIGN i 15.00 ■■■, 1(NOTE / RIGHT-OF-WAY no �1 ��/1 •• •r PROPOSED NO RIGH a► •i I.4: I ilvro I�•I���', 1111P'41001111•� C RAISED CONCRETE MEDIAN �% i / BANK OF f LIMITS ON��S CORNER v I' � � ���'I •�� / 1 i ° \ HAVE BEEN REVISED TO ° 12.50 / AMERICA / A 24.00' 18.50' / ° � TAKE LESS THIS DOES NOT AFFECT BUTTY BASE COURSE 17.5" / / 6'DR 4 20.00' iikah,s PROPOSED MOUNTABLE ►� / THE PARKING CONCEPT) - CD 1' RAISED CONCRETE MEDIAN / / _ CURB 4 1////////////// A SCALE: NOT TO SCALE ( a❑ 0) 1 I A ° o /� 'Lv t G/ I o = CURB PARKING ANALYSIS BANK OF AMERICA PARCEL 8.00' \\\\\\\\� 5. 00'SIDEWALK ❑❑D / / w° LOSS OF 14 SPACES T �I ��- �65�, �� GAIN OF 6 SPACES o \ a / �'� NET LOSS OF 8 SPACES � Q- i / L �Av ,/ �� SHOPPING PARCEL GQ1 ^� , LOSS OF 1 SPACE C ,l) 1 \ (5.) 0,-; / GAIN OF 12 SPACES 1 V o 8 D '���<_, NET GAIN OF 11 SPACES 9.00' \ ,'-f 4 ; / o� OVERALL SHOPPING CENTER 9�S �/ LOSS OF 15 SPACES Bank of America (44) N / < ' / / GAIN OF 18 SPACES 1 , / ( TOTAL NET GAIN OF 3 SPACES 16209 Bryant Road 18.50' Tax Lot 21 E07DD02902 -p- \\ INSTALL 8'LONG X 1'WIDE Pre-App No. PA 14-0096 1.q „i,..sc RAISED CONCRETE MEDIAN, SEE ea �❑ DETAIL ON THIS SHEET. `./ 24.00'MIN. DRIVEWAY CC-". mf REQUIREMENT. CI, Cortina Shaping the Future it 06/27/2016PORTLAND Pro osed SIte Plan Exhib .. 5415 SW WESTGATE DR,STE 100,PORTLAND,OR 97221 TEL:(503)419-2500 FAX:(503)419-2600 O 7.5 15 30 w.vw.caidno.00m PROJECT NO.:21509930 CONTACT:MATT LEWIS Lake Grove Bank of America ATTACHMENT C (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 16 OF 16 ATTACHMENT D.1 BOON ES FERRY ROAD PROJECT IMPACT TABLE (Ordinance 2753) LU 17-0028 PROPERTIES IN THE LAKE GROVE VILLAGE DISTRICT WITH RIGHT-OF-WAY TAKINGS INDEX ROW PROPERTY MAP &TAX LOT PROPERTY IDENTIFIER PARKING LOSS DEDICATED IDENTIFIER ADDRESS (sq. ft.) 11 15777 BFR 21E08BC14700 Lake Grove Elementary School 6,909 14 15450 BFR 21E08BD00401 B & D Lake Grove 197 16 15560 BFR 21E08BD02900 Star Teriyaki/Lake Music 251 17 15630 BFR 21E08BD03000 Nepom * 1,334 20 15835 BFR 21E08CB00100 Mozena Attorney At Law 1 space 212 22 15905 BFR 21E08CB02100 Chevron 1,931 24 16035 BFR 21E08CB01800 Riccardo's 4 spaces 2,124 25 16055 BFR 21E08CB01400 Jenike 5 spaces 3,113 26 16099 BFR 21E08CB01200 Banner Bank 1,660 27 15840 BFR 21E08CB02300 Giant Burger 860 28 15880 BFR 21E08CB02200 Vic's Auto 1,101 29 15900 BFR 21E08CB03500 Singha Thai Restaurant/Dry Cleaners 1,237 6 spaces - 30 15910 BFR 21E08CB03600 Naomi's Lampshades project to 1,589 replace 6 spaces 31 15962 BFR 21E08CB03700 Beacon Hill - Office Building 494 32 15964 BFR 21E08CB03800 Babica Hen 1,210 33 16008 BFR 21E08CB03900 Gubanc's Restaurant 2 spaces 1,141 Sept. 7, 2017 LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT D.1 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 1 OF 2 34 16016 BFR 21E08CB04000 Westlake Dentistry 1,271 35 16044 BFR 21E08CB04100 McDonald's 714 36 16088 BFR 21E08CB04200 Car Wash, Best Sushi, etc. 241 38 16130 BFR 21E08CB04500 Debord -Aaron Brothers 90 39 16140 BFR 21E08CB04600 Debord - Healthy Pet 301 40 16210 Bryant 21E08CB04700 Key Bank 2,278 41 16199 BFR 21E07DA02300 Albertson's 873 42 16211 BFR 21E07DA04600 Shell 1,046 43 16325 BFR 21E07DA04400 Wilking/O'Leary 2,802 44 16209 Bryant 21E07DD02902 Bank of America 14 spaces 4,717 45 16354 BFR 21E07DD02901 Banette - Lake Grove Shopping Center 102 14 spaces - 46 16365 BFR 21E07DD00101 Keller Williams project to 2,457 replace 7 spaces 48 16463 BFR 21E07DD00200 Foggia - Olson Memorial Clinic * 658 49 4803 Madrona 21E07DD00500 Foggia - Parking Lot * 378 51 16444 BFR 21E07DD02800 Bitar- Round Table Pizza * 1,489 52 16480 BFR 21E07DD02600 Hyde - US Bank * 2 spaces 2,593 57 15800 BFR 21E08CA01600 Shon Tay Professional Center 20 A4 16250 Bryant 21E08CB04900 H&R Block 391 A8 16032 Reese 21E08CB03100 Apartments 167 * The amount of ROW noted has been adjusted to remove the area of the existing public roadway and sidewalk. Sept. 7, 2017 LU 17-0028 ATTACHMENT D.1 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 2 OF 2 SCALE 1 FEET . . 20 10 0 20 40 40 LEGEND ----——---- EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS — — ROW(N EW) 16667 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DD 02000 NOT IN LGVC 16607 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DD 01900 OVERLAY DISTRICT s4, 1L , NOT IN LGVC OVERLAY DISTRICT . .. 0 •E9' > P —4 - ':::''.:±i.:\ '.•...:•:'" _ ___ 0 EXST ROW _ _ ..-———LI—----—,,-'--- (i) I BOONES BOONES FERRY ROAD .,- m z BEGIN PROJECT STA. "C" 94+15 "C" 94+15 "C" 95+00 !;, "C" ' (i) = (i) c—i0--___________ ______i-,i_______—_-1 ---7 - - - iri FCT,___ _,(,., o• _____ m _1 m > LINE --I 0 0 CC) IN) (7) El ., . , .. . - -7, -7----,._;-77: --'7--.7. .-7-7-. :77r,:: :.I.-_-•: .-;-1---.':.1.- -.. _ •r-, - - - - ------ r-7-•--7 7-7---7;: :., - -, ...1-_ _::1,_,_-_,_-_,::_r_ -_-_._-_- • - - , .- : ,,_ C 0 ***_A * -IC 0 * ••...., ** ,... © PROPERTY Al 16650 BOONES FERRY ROAD --_, 21E07DD 02200 _ : _...„ ( ..„ NOT IN LGVC 4905 BOONES FERRY ROAD _A_ -77.7,.... 21E07DD 004400 ,‘ ----\\_ OVERLAY DISTRICT NOT IN LGVC OVERLAY DISTRICT LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 1 OF 13 .... WHP1fiC Drawn:WHP CADODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 City of Lake Oswego LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 01 Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN PRELIMINARY Designed:IKE BOONES FERRY RD: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION STA."C"94+15 TO STA."C"96+00 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date - No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C.ZOW AC6,01 3,Ilk SCALE 1 I1 ' FEET ti 20 10 0 20O 40 ,P7. LEGEND ———— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS — — — ROW(NEW) "M" LINE �,' � / PROPERTY 50 U . I t.., ,___ 16555 BOONES FERRY ROAD 16577 BOONES FERRY ROAD / I PROPERTY 49 16607 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21EO7DD 01800 21E07DD 01700 ,:i11 4803 MADRONA STREET NOT IN LGVC ¢�I�'.;',I 21E07DD 00500 21E07DD 01900 � 1 a Cq I NOT IN LGVC OVERLAY DISTRICT NOT IN LGVC OVERLAY DISTRICT Z 1 OVERLAY DISTRICT : OI I o i t j I per' • / '> * ��) : 0 ROW(NEW) � �1 mp .'j4 (NEW)ROW I "1::-7.1‘9;1---:kA4:: <�\LI A— — .. -- —� •--o — ..,,„. K r. — as __ �° EAG PC:"M^ EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS--. 'r'is o,� �' '1 ��ir. ��®^ �'�..� —. — % .�® r. I 11+55.2 . —I win `` I� � PT:"M" 11+71.05- EXS1 R��GI I "C" 97+00 "C" 98+00 "C" 99+00 "c" 1001+00 "C" 1 PV Z Z 6+00 — — - — — ;8+ P1- - _ — ,) -850'42'13"E — _ _ T — - PRC"C": 97+69.54 "C" LINE) PT"C 98+92.8 "C" LINE STA "C' 100+02 94= M FriPRC"C 97+16.51 STA. "M" 12+00 O Pi —" PCC"°": 96+4,.06 BOONES FERRY ROAD � D aIA i _ n ® -- / — EXST ROW • '—.� . s -- e —" 0 1.' a\ -. e-`��, \��\ " . ' ^ - : > / / ROW(NEW) j 1 \ "( \\v\ ‘ 1 I . . i ROW(NEW / // fit I I ^ I *11fr I I P I ` I I — ) i I'. 1 , PROPERTY Al PROPERTY 54 PROPERTY 53 16650 BOONES FERRY ROAD PROPERTY 56 , 16524 BOONES FERRY ROAD 16552 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DD 02200 16556 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DD 02400 21E07DD 02500 NOT IN LGVC 21EO7DD 02300 NOT IN LGVC NOT IN LGVC OVERLAY DISTRICT NOT IN LGVC OVERLAY DISTRICT OVERLAY DISTRICT OVERLAY DISTRICT LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 2 OF 13 wxPaTrC Drawn:WHP CAD Cit O4"Lake Oswe 0 ODOT WORK ORDERNO.8 Y g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 02 PRELIMINARY Designed:BCF Engineering Division RIGHT-OF WAY ACQUISTION PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOT FERRY RD: STA."C"96+00 TO STA. "C" 101+00 ERICAROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER —— Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\0D0T\0008087W\Design\Dcawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C Z0W ACCO2 1 SCALE 1 ii FEET ti 20 10 0 20 40 '/ix I LEGEND / ---- EXST. ROW PROPERTY 48 / — EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS 16463 BOONES FERRY ROAD / — ROW(NEW) 21E07DD 00200 PROPERTY 47 / PROPERTY 46 16455 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DD 00100 / 16365 BOONES FERRY ROAD / 21E07DD 00101 i / % oil .. .. A. ,;_ .„ ,:. / _ = %i / / _ .,v`w / / TpFt1C� � RAW 05 r EXST Row'.ri."4, i EXST / lir. - �'Y �- A- .� r / D ROW(WW1 / ED, 'Yr ....-.,_„ . ;..,,� 4 �� ''..' .,.��^ -q _ ROW(NSE,Wl o 1- h ',H.' a X/ - EXST ROW , ' • �� U° ' K,d° ' 1,° 'CIF ,d .,� W°1 1H 'J_ � .� " _ - 0 IMPROV. �� F- I _ –I I _ i�X — °Lll_ U — I u�/ n z o o o "C"103+0BOONES FERRY ROAD co E 0 " C"104+00 "C"105+00 "C"1i Fri = _ _ I GO 1+00 "C"102+00 v I� "C" LINE a Fel - — _T - — — — – m -1 PTT > _/� _� _—�_ m — q tr — _ __mus. ROW MST( IC) —I 0QtLiH\5 — f I EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS - -- . �T o _ t a' ®� - -T r 0 . �-1 - '/I'o WNEW) I IIII E ROW - u ; \v Jr CD � _ - \ I PROPERTY 52 PROPERTY 51 16480 BOONES FERRY ROAD 16444 BOONES FERRY ROAD PROPERTY 45 21E07DD 02600 21E07DD 02800 16354 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DD 02901 LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 3 OF 13 WHPacific Drawn:WHP CAD Cit of Lake Oswego ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 City g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 03 PRELIMINARY Designed:IKE Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BOONES FERRY RD: STA."C" 101+00 TO"C"STA. 106+00 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date I No.: I Revisions: I By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C 0.0W ACc03 SCALE1 �, �� FEET Ilk 20 10 0 20 40 T '2D ,� �• \ ——— LEGEND N 'goo �a �:.�� — EXST. ROW ti a EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS /..,1/N �� + \ �tixw O JT — — ROW(NEW) 9/ ct o/ TEMP. �� \�� o CONSTR. / - ''Z'sV o z V-: A o? ESMT o \ I PROPERTY 42 ° II V. 16211 BOONES FERRY ROAD ° 21 E07DA 04600 °e I�1� �� Q � b4 *j !•, f/ % o a:i � I PTV: 28+94.54/ ° + / PROPERTY 43 0 m � 1 - 16325 BOONES FERRY ROAD" .•` \o,` �� Q 21 E07DA 04400 lik ,�� ..'N:„. 1i,Vi /!` / ��� - A * �/ ' ° PC"B": 29+39.37 � ••/ : . `--' ill*: �'�\ / I ., . II r6,.. 0117o /446 Of‘vili.:::: -... fiti T I. ROW NEW) — %.. �� d a a 0 �I y ROW S . I ° - o � _� ° . 0 r -tel ° i _ �_- _- n � _f •,` _L, •te / @ / e > XST • . .. — - v,i • _ - - O D ��O i BOONES FERRY ROAD / FT1 17— "c' 107+00, „ "c" Boa+oo "c" los+oo z 16+00 C LINE - - - ..C.. 110+00A'77-"9" LINE P1 / ` C„ 1 17 N50.42'131 _ I I Co I _ Co — - • 17 —I -U - - -T- - I f O 0 - ---- — `--1 Fri > __ _ _ _ -� / ® 0 -- —� \ PT"B": 30+38.31 -V owl n -- -- -- : l —^ .-.---::---7---:-..,- -a 0 ,P'-'7 T.' -'7: t'7?Y.-.7.'-'7-.74-'U'.*1''1°...-...',ir41':'7'.'''.'' '' ' ' „ P V 0 . ,' ''1\ \ 1 • _ EXST ROW = Itf �� ��� 1/14I '' / 9 ' '" � � � 0 ROW • DI I f�. I0 O _ g l PROPERTY 44 �,° � � j 1� 16209 02902 ���� �Q� �/ 40/ /0, �� NT%wi / Q- 4 �� �� PROPERTY 40 PROPERTY 45 � _ 16210 BRYANT ROAD 16354 BOONES FERRY ROAD / �- �ee'9 � 21 E08CB 04700 21 EO7DD 02901 �, � � �� sir., ���, / _ LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAG'E ' • F 13 / WHPacific u Drawn:MP CAD Cityof Lake Oswego ODOT WORKORDERO RNO.8 g LAKE OSWEGOWORKORDERNO.183 Sheet 04 PRELm>rNARY Designed:BCF Engineering Division CONSTRUCTION PLAN -- Date BOONES FERRY RD. STA. C 106+00 TO STA."C" 111+00 I I I ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:LHR CITY ENGINEER Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C 9.0W ACc04 SCALE1 ii FEET N 20 10 0 20 40 �RTh, LEGEND ———— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS / — — — ROW(NEW) / PROPERTY 41 ° / /.,-. / �' 16199 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21 E07DA 02300 / �;. ` #- / / f: 'i PROPERTY 26 >. � 16099 BOONES FERRY RD / / 21E08CB 01200 1 }/ 409/ T/a i _,./-? /11V/ Cx , (--- i/-k,) 1 : 1 *F . /A 1 /1144,0.• / , ..:4„-0-, ) i 7:-- IA ,-.:tw ,- (,_,1 ..,.. . . . ,•-•- w/ ''."1..-15,7•::-L_ nw in Ginn O II L.1 ..SID ROW �� , 1 t w � pry ���, 'ox).. /, , , 4, ���� (NEW ROW E. 2., — 1 .a. Ih. _'t � / �N. �—• 1 . a . - "----' ` —\' _ FXST ROW_ _ :-/:—..: o C)1. "0" LINE �I\• — I_ / 0 y rn z "C" 113+00 "C" 114+00 p 71 rrp — —C 112+00 " 1 + "i' 15 00 D rn —1 --------- - STA. °C 113+65.87=-' PRC: 114+06.92 C LINE { Pl - _ - --- --- PCC: 113+01.70 BOONES FERRY ROAD STA. "0" 16+00 }- 'l' 7 •1--, � < .' �,. },ms s.• _ . .. f _ r__ �"•® - . . i I 1 I ROW(NEW) I ; 1 ROW � � ) .1 } �l ` I:.1 � 0 _ , ®, , _ • ROW NEW) moi:. I�. ,: il.I...'...il "0 IL0 4, --, „ . '`• :0 ,11 I r .0: II 0 ,-,:i ill ,.,1 h II SIICO 1 PROPERTY 39 PROPERTY 38 16140 BOONES FERRY RD 16130 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E08CB 04600 21E08CB 04500 PROPERTY 37 16120 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E08CB 04300 PROPERTY 36 16088 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E08CB 04200 LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 5 OF 13 WHPacific Drawn:ZEE CAD Cit Of Lake Oswego ODOTWORKORDERNO.8 City g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 05 PRELIMINARY Designed:IKE Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN I NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BOONES FERRY RD: STA."C" 111+00 TO STA."C"115+50 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:L8R CITY ENGINEER Dui/ I No.: I Revisions: I By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C 9OW Awl5 SCALE 1 FEETa 20 10 0 20 40 �,4,- LEGEND ———— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS — — — ROW(NEW) PROPERTY 25 16055 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21 EO8CB 01400 j ';."� PROPERTY 24 PROPERTY 23 16035 BOONES FERRY ROAD 15955 BOONES FERRY ROAD �iips' . 21 E08CB 02001 //* __ 21E08C6 01800 4.-01 // 1' . / l': '''' / i iii /• ° i� / Arir I" /./ Al 0 . I' • 7 i . /' ".'../ / / • , _'__ 'Nkb D NEW ROW r,lia1 -1.— \V / , ..:.-::•..-,,'.7.,, ;N''' 7-7.7 .""--.. ifkiks-%-... � li ..-3:7" /.. ..J (./� ROW NEW) n'_ .n _ /. - -_ 10 •_ XTG'.�b`-•.' .116_ .. - a' '/ ,T7 0 ____t____-(7—__ n :' �r" as ' 1s+oo _ "C" LINE O O______„_ "C"117+00 + "C"1 18+00 ® SPC"C": 118+53.59 "C"119+ 0 _ — _ • - - - __ � J CJ _ — +�, - - BOONES FERRYROAD (ii +cn __ ' I �� —I� p • . i Ir — — — —'• . :J ° r°I �p ����j; a LLiiii � # 1 d :I ROW(N " I I � I` I"(NEW)ROW 0'EXST ROW— p ui I i I�• _ • ,i. rill / i I Ill ig i ISI PROPERTY 33 PROPERTY 31 PROPERTY 35 PROPERTY 34 16008 BOONES FERRY ROAD PROPERTY 32 159622BOONES FERRY ROAD 16016 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21EO8CB 090? 1EO8CB 03700 21E08 rI II 15964 BOONES FERRY ROAD 16044 BOONES FERRY ROAD LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) 21E08CB 04100 AWCHME .2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 6 OF 131E08CB 03800 / WHPacific Drawn:WHP CAD Cit of Lake Oswego ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 City g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 06 Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN NOT FOR Designed:IKE BOONES FERRY RD: STA. "C" 115+50 TO STA."C" 120+50 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROWacquistion\0008087W-C,IOWAC11,06 SCALE1 im 1 FEET ti 20 10 0 20 40 '5i, I LEGEND N\ P3 : ''N'-eS .-INI? �� —--— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS N \ \. — ROW(NEW) \V ` \:, \ � � ��VV"�� PROPERTY 21 / \_ 1:4-\ \ \\ 15875 BOONES FERRY ROAD PROPERTY 20 �� ��-0,\\ •` 21 EO8CB 00101 15835 BOONES FERRY ROAD PROPERTY 22 21 EO8CB 00100 15905 BOONES FERRY ROAD \.• N , ` � ��- 21E08CB 02100 \. : 1Qlb\ v +\ °/ ! TEMP. \ \\\\�'I\ I-. \ w / NI �CONSTR. \ \ : ________, ___: ESMT. oI I 0 \\ :. I \ L— L ,\ EXTG ROW I �y��)� .��� l0��_ - ,..s d '�\1 ' • �� D // ROW(NEW) -- - W e \\ - ". ' .. " ETV "C"124+00 ® \ "C"125+00 Z M Z "C"121+00 "C°122+00 "C°123+00 1-T1 m _ o "C" LINE 1 CA 123+44 72= \ = - - - - - — — — — - — - M y r T > 0 0 STA. "R" 0 50+00 "R" LINE BOONES FERRY ROAD I- " . . I— • .:1 eL. a �`♦ ' ROW(NEW). ��� 1 A _ 01 ® ..`�I EXST ROW BROW(NEW) �e / �� �P __ ���� �\ ,. / D� ��.• EXST ROW -� I / •^�.� / J ° 1..- 1 , 1 •rj.J.::-:--,- 4.7 I / 1, 7. / i , 1.-1 ;0 / b- 47' /// /1/ o // i • °S.wyld PROPERTY 28 I PROPERTY 30 • / 15880 BOONES FERRY ROAD \I 15910 BOONES FERRY ROAD --_____.i PROPERTY 27 i 21E08CB 03600 —,� 21EOSCB 02200 15840 BOONES FERRY ROAD II 1---/ / J/ / 21E08C8 02300 PROPERTY 29 y� . / 15900 BOONES FERRY ROAD / /iv 21 E08CB 03500 4/ �/jI� T % / Sy � S14T � S LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 7 OF 13 WHPacific Drawn:WHP CAD CityOf LakeOSWe ODOTWORKORDERNO.8 0 g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 07 PRELIMINARY Designed:BCF Engineering Division CONSTRUCTION PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BOONES FERRY TiD: STA."C" 120+50 TO STA."C" 125+50 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C 1OW AC•07 ill SCALE 1 ^ �� FEET tLEGEND 20 10 0 20 40 y ———— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS — — — ROW(NEW) y PROPERTY 11 15777 BOONES FERRY ROAD / 21E08BC 14700 .:7___'---. 1 / Th°9°—__ ` C ` • I \ ��}^�— � _ �� �� v v ROW(NEW) /! � ' / u pp� � O �� _��--�' � (cl ,�— 'EXST ROW ---- — _-- �— _. � ' -- _ � •..... a ..p .. J _ s: r „ — -. - - Pi N („ z. _ _ _ 126+00 — r 0 _ "C"129+ 0 �I_ _ "C"127+00 C°128+00 pl — _ _---i----- —1 — — —T — } �p —{ — — D ® � z---- BOONES FERRY ROAD –I ® /����__ yam., 1. • VJ .. . s—._ Tn�UGT+x—�� .yOGTx — I' V I i \ IFS ______. . — __ — 1 L. ITI • 0 * ,.: SCALE 1 11 111 FEET 20 10 0 20 40 ��a LEGEND ,\'‘'" 3900 DOUGLAS WAY —--— EXST. ROW tib L5 21 E08BC 12600 EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS AI ,\ \\� — — ROW(NEW) �• 15645 BOONES FERRY ROAD 15561 BOONES FERRY ROAD �\ �" 21 EO8BC 12700 \ Ci V- �v1 21 EO8BC 12500 C-2\- PROPERTY 11 \\ 0 \ 0 lw. r .\ I.�0\ 15777 BOONES FERRY ROAD j I \ ;� �� 21 E08BC 14700 1' 1 I o I \ S Af .J -N 15659 800NES FERRY ROAD \ \ \ / ./ 21 EO86C 12800 \ D \ `'\ \\ \ • y \ 1., \ \ ..° ,— � • l v v \ v , v 7 ,'•.�\ �O rr ,. \I. \ \\.^..� / \\ / _/ V \ — 1� .� L j mss' ..'`______________________ •• —{{`�� ...,--0',:___-- _] \. j- -® 8J" — �• == = =I'� \� p . rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr=rr-r= „/1— .!'�/ _ — lJ� 1.- __- _.1 �= , ATS __ EXST Row __ __ __ �� _ FERRY ROAD cn rri Z I EXST • Pi a 1 ROW = -- _ --— © - B04NES F- „c„3,,___ _ 4. 2 _ v.. A_ r� — ' o ,-,--_-- / \..:- r9l —I_o -c? — C„131+00 °C°132+00 _ �r Y -`_________ , . ______ _______, '• e ��C�� Line l I J —I — �— J ti�r I I ® I \ Co \ __ o �-NJ -\ — �=-' RIG S \ r� , ..�.. Line1 -...—____], _ r ---• _- �-6 • illo �,. •®\ '!\ /” \�/ �"/. •• __„,,,,, ,.._:..,,.,..3,..__,„„%_.-. ..EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS �/\ G' '`�� o 0 PROPERTY 16 \'' \6:, ,!1 \ ' ,- \ 15560 BOONES FERRY ROAD F 21 E08BD 02900 ***\':-"•• \ t \..... .-6:\• , ,I\ \- Q \ PROPERTY 17 • _ %\ 15630 BOONES FERRY ROAD 'IA�x\'' ,\ Nom\ \ti sxv� " 0 21E08BD 03000 d\'.` •, 'k'•. , \ il \'::\' '' ' ,,,...„.,,,,,,,,\ •\.....„, k \ ZA,),• 01\ \ \\ -\'. \••• � LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) i \�• •\\ 4 ‘i&\‘‘ ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 9 OF 13 11VHPaC1fiC Q' \ , Drawn:WHP CAD CitOci 1Ce 0SWe 0 ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 y g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 09 PRELIMINARY Designed:BCF Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOT FERRY RD: STA."C" 129+75 TO STA."C" 134+50 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER — Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C ROW ACO09 i SCALE 1 r1 �� FEET o . 20 10 0 20 40 = LEGEND ---- EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS I — ROW(NEW) 15485 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21 E08BC 08900 © \ 1 15483 BOONES FERRY ROAD ,•1 % /--------/1 © 15561 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E08BC 09000 II; 3970 MERCANTILE DR 21 E08BC 12500 �I.1 11 nl `� 21 E08BC 00100 1 7 �� :.• 1 _ / 1 OI ,_ ,.., 11 \ 1 .I 1`(f)r 1 p i1 1 _ I.:\ c::-:...ko\ \L___________-__—----- 1 e 9 .1 EXST ROW \ _• // # .. # - —— _ —sem_ (/) r 0 + FI Z END PROJECT m0 STA. "C" 137+95 20 U) "C"135+00 "C"136+00 "C"137+00 0"C' 8+00 = (1) - - - I- - -I - - I - - I - - I - - 1 - I - - ___ P BOONES FERRY ROAD 4,40•'•:-.-1-4—— _/L--- -- __. 2,• --: :N 01 -.���� E. ainn� � ' ' r',•,-,- ..:s:,_:±1,•:-.--7.—__. ROW(NEW� % •_ _Id — �� _ (...:1=:.: 1 :I �. \ i / - j' % �_ • j EXST ROW A‘ I•r° .:;•\ ; Elli A ‘ r : ,-1 r . -?:rj • .. ILI:::_..'LI'-' — e. — \ 1 1 ___ _ 1',11 \ I I.• \„. \ ,\ 'I \ •r ,c, \ r -1 PROPERTY 15 _; m :I\1 1.------1 \: 1 15540 BOONES FERRY ROAD • '.•' O \..::\ 11 I {1 21 EO8BD 02800 I : \1 \ 1 \`. �. \ :: O ° ° I.\\1 1 PROPERTY 14 o '\ I 1 15480 BOONES FERRY ROAD 1 21E08BD 00401 e 1 1 C : \ PROPERTY A9 °.\ \I 11 ��s 3700 RED CEDAR WAY \"-' \ I.•I 1 1`���.. 21EOHBD 02701 ,' \ 'I 01 r .'I 1,, 1 LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 10 OF 13 WHPac1fic Drawn:WHP CAD Cit Of Lake Oswego ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 City g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 10 1 I PRELIMINARY Designed:IKE Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BOONES FERRY RD: STA."C" 134+50 TO STA."C" 138+50 I ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date No.: I Revisions: I By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C,10W ACc10 1— SCALE I r1 �� FEET o 20 10 0 20 40 LEGEND ———— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS — — — ROW(NEW) PROPERTY A5 I PROPERTY A4 16320 BRYANT RD 16400 BRYANT RD 16250 BRYANT ROAD 21E08CB 05000 21E08CC 00100 21E08CB 04900 1) 7 \ \ \ \ \ \ , , , \ \ \ , , , \ ::,j ) l•- L H1 . . _� �' . . . . . . . . . I �: . Po ,„, �� . ), a -.1 \ * C' I7 \\ ‘� _ I 1 ROW(NDW.• . . . �.1 i �:' . _ �p:r r s-•-14 EXST RDW - _ °`• -- I 0 1 "V_'\ a \� Ill °Ia I• I'° � } \ \ u) 1i o - o - - so \ I Z MD BRYANT ROAD ° mC"32+00 "C"33+00 "C"34+00 "C"35+00 \ CO `' (N.W)ROW 1 — — -----1 — -�'� �— EXST ROW��, •p: \ te'"; \ 7 ® J \moi/ o . • .' "� g. '0\ - "°\ \ _� \-.•• �� N. \ v • ‘N‘\\ N. PROPERTY 44 PROPERTY 45 16209 BRYANT ROAD 16354 BOONES FERRY RD 21 E07DD 02902 21 E07DD 02901 LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 11 OF 13 WHPacific Drawn:WHP CAD Cit of Lake Oswego ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 I y g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 1 1 I PRELIMINARY Designed:IKF Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BOONES FERRY RD: STA. "B"31+50 TO STA."B"35+50 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date No.: Revisions: I By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C,1OW AC 11 SCALE 1 r1 �� FEET 20 10 0 20 40 -2- 20 LEGEND ———— EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS — ROW(NEW) 1- 3993 LAKE GROVE AVE \ 1 16054 REESE RD 21E08CB 02500 \ 7 \ PROPERTY A8 21E08CB03000 1 16032 REESE ROAD \ \,\ \\ 03 1 21E08CB 03100 ‘,11'‘,1 ‘ < m \ \ \ --\ V ', \ C Y 1 \ e . (NEW) __ __ \ ` EXTG ROW _ s/ \ \: —. -- -- -- - - " z "C"55+00 C"54+00 "C"52+00 "C"53+00 — 1 — m REESE ROAD o i _ __ _- -- • •;� __ ii� # _ EXTG ROW __ __ __ -- --- CrlZ 0 16033 REESE RD PROPERTY 29 PROPERTY A7 21E08CB06503 15900 BOONES FERRY ROAD PROPERTY A6 15979 REESE ROAD 21E08CB 03500 15969 REESE ROAD 21E08CB 03300 21E08CB 03400 LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 12 OF 13 WHPacific Drawn:WHP CAD Citof 0 ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 y g LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 12 Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN IMI PRELNARY Designed:IKE BOONES FERRY RD: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION STA."R°51+50 TO STA."R"55+00 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C tOW AC 12 SCALE 1 r1 �� FEET . 20 10 0 20 40 NORTH LEGEND ---- EXST. ROW EXST ROW IMPROVEMENTS I — ROW(NEW) 4625 FIRWOOD ROAD R4OAD PROPERTY 4559 FIRWOOD R 4687 FIRWOOD RD 21E07DA 02700 21E07DA 02601 21E07DA02802 4 4 * *** 0___, * a* ---_-_--*N > —— EXTG ROW — ___— mp 1 H 1 1 H ❑I/ /J'/// j (f) --* --i — 1 t- --1 ———/ / _ 1 — -- fTl 26+00 9 27+00 28 (f) frl - I I I I EIRW4OD,RD. rncn —— —— 1 -E-7,--,--01444140—_-0,1,4,1p___o O �� 6 _ — X1 1 .1":"T' .7.= Ox1H� EXTG ROW / 3 — I I - .-4- OO r 4664 FIRWOOD ROAD 21E07DA 04200 PROPERTY 43 4640 FIRWOOD ROAD 16325 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DA 04300 21E07DA 04400 PROPERTY 42 16211 BOONES FERRY ROAD 21E07DA 04600 LU 17-0028 (08/17/17) ATTACHMENT D.2 (Ordinance 2753)/PAGE 13 OF 13 WHPacific Drawn:WHP CAD Citof Lake Oswego ODOT WORK ORDER NO.8 Yg LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 Sheet 13 Engineering Division RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION PLAN PRELIMINARY Designed:IKE BOONES FERRY RD: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION STA. "B"25+50 TO STA.'B"28+00 ERICA ROONEY,P.E. OAKRDIGE RD/REESE RD-MADRONA ST of 13 Checked:TRS CITY ENGINEER Date No.: Revisions: By: SCALE:AS SHOWN I Date:08/15/2017 File Name:P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\Civil\Exhibits\ROW acquistion\0008087W-C IOW AC 17 EXHIBIT B-1 APPROVED: 09/11/17 LU 17-0028 1 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION 2 OF THE 3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 4 5 6 A REQUEST FOR LEGISLATIVE TEXT ) LU 17-0028 - 1923 7 AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY ) (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE TO IMPLEMENT ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS& ORDER 9 BOONES FERRY ROAD PUBLIC 10 TRANSPORTATION PROJECT. 11 12 NATURE OF APPLICATION 13 14 Legislative Code amendments to the Community Development Code (CDC), for the purpose of 15 implementing the Boones Ferry Road public transportation project (BFR Project),that: 16 17 • Modify the 50-foot Special Street Setback for a specific section of Boones Ferry Road to reflect the 18 BFR Project (LOC 50.02.004); 19 • Allow project mitigation outside the public right-of-way when directly associated with public 20 transportation projects (such as the BFR Project) as ministerial development (LOC 50.07.003.13); 21 • Exempt planned parking mitigation (on-site replacement parking associated with the BFR Project) 22 from compliance with the LGVC Overlay District standards (LOC 50.05.007); and, 23 • Clarify and expand the current parking and landscape area exceptions in the LGVC Overlay District 24 for properties affected by the BFR Project (LOC 50.05.007.6). 25 26 The Code amendments implement the Comprehensive Plan policies,the Lake Grove Village Center 27 (LGVC) Plan policies (both listed, below), and the City Council 2017 Goal, "Take steps to minimize the 28 impact on businesses and residents of the Boones Ferry Road project." 29 30 HEARINGS 31 32 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its meeting on August 33 28, 2017. 34 35 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS 36 37 A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan 38 39 Land Use Planning Chapter: Land Use Administration 40 Policy A-1 41 Design Guidelines 42 Policy C-1 43 Land Use Administration 44 Policy D-1 45 46 Community Culture Chapter: Civic Engagement 47 Policies, 1, 2,4, 5, and 9 48 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 1 APPROVED: 09/11/17 1 Inspiring Spaces and Places Chapter: Goal 1 2 Policy 7 3 4 Connected Community Chapter: Transportation Choices 5 Policy B-2 6 7 Livability 8 Policy F-6 9 10 B. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Volume II: Neighborhood and Special District Plans 11 2013, Lake Grove Village Center Plan 12 13 Chapter I.Transportation Goal 1: Transform BFR into a Great Street 14 Policies 1.2, 1.4, and 1.5 15 Goal 3: Enhance the Pedestrian Environment 16 and Connectivity 17 Policy 3.2 18 Chapter IV. Economic Dev't 19 Goal 9: Support Businesses in the Center 20 Policies 9.3, 9.4, and 9.6 21 22 C. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code 23 24 LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing 25 LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined 26 LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision 27 LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD 28 LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required 29 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision 30 31 CONCLUSION 32 33 The Planning Commission concludes that the amendments to the Community Development Code set 34 forth and dated in the following are in compliance with all applicable criteria: 35 36 • Exhibit A-1 (8/17/17) 37 • Attachment B (9/6/17) 38 • Attachment C (8/17/17) 39 • Attachment D.1 (9/6/17); and, 40 • Attachment D.2 (8/17/17). 41 42 FINDINGS AND REASONS 43 44 The Planning Commission (Commission) incorporates the staff report, dated August 17, 2017, on LU 17- 45 0028(with all exhibits attached thereto) as support for its decision, supplemented by the further 46 findings and conclusions set forth herein. In the event of any inconsistency between the supplementary 47 matter herein and the staff report, the matter herein controls.To the extent they are consistent with 48 the approval granted herein,the Commission adopts by reference its oral deliberations on this matter. LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 2 APPROVED: 09/11/17 1 Following are the supplementary findings and conclusions of this Commission: 2 3 1. The Commission received written and oral testimony regarding the removal of trees that would be 4 directly necessary to complete the street realignment and frontage improvements (located within 5 the realigned right-of-way).The testimony also focused on trees on private property that may be 6 either indirectly affected by removal of trees in the right-of-way or trees in areas that a property 7 owner may propose for on-site replacement parking. Primarily,testimony concentrated on the 8 Jenike Property and the significant grove of Douglas firs on the site. 9 10 The Planning Commission requested and received an arborist's report (Exhibit F-2) on the trees that 11 would or potentially could be requested for removal as a result of the BFR Project, in considering 12 Code amendments that would facilitate replacement of lost parking spaces and lessen an abutting 13 property owner's obligation to landscape upon future re-development of the site.The Commission 14 notes that the Code amendments do not directly authorize or require any trees to be removed.The 15 Commission further notes that any person (or the City) seeking tree removal must apply for and 16 obtain a tree removal permit per LOC Article 55.02, and it is in those proceedings that arborist 17 reports are considered in determining whether or not a tree would be removed, based upon the 18 criteria of LOC Article 55.02. [The Commission recommends to staff that in those proceedings 19 initiated by the City that a second arborist report be obtained.] 20 21 The Commission finds that specific tree removal concerns, as well as the findings in the arborist 22 report, have no bearing on whether or not the proposed legislative Code amendments comply with 23 the applicable criteria.The Commission finds that future site-specific tree removal associated with 24 the BFR Project—either directly or indirectly—is beyond the scope of the proposed amendments. 25 26 2. The Commission received testimony regarding the LGVC Parking Management Plan's direction to the 27 City Council to purchase private property in several locations for public parking within the District. 28 Several people testified that, if public parking was provided,the likelihood of property owners 29 constructing the on-site replacement parking with the associated tree removal would be lessened. 30 31 The Commission agrees that public parking facilities would be a positive amenity to the Overlay 32 District and could lessen the owner's perception of the need to offset parking spaces lost due to 33 additional right-of-way acquisition on a site. However,the Commission notes that a property 34 owner's perception would also be affected by the type of business on the site and the distance from 35 the site to a new public parking facility.The Commission finds that even if public parking facilities 36 were added to the District,the Comprehensive Plan (including the LGVC Plan) does not have a policy 37 that directs individual property owners be restrained from seeking replacement parking to offset the 38 spaces lost due to the BFR Project.The Commission finds that the proposed Code amendments are 39 not subject to a Comprehensive Plan policy first requiring acquisition of public parking facilities. 40 41 3. The Commission received additional written and oral testimony from representatives of the Cain 42 Petroleum (Chevron) Property at the corner of Oakridge Road and BFR (Exhibits G-2 and G-3) and 43 whether Exhibit A,Attachment D.1, should identify the site as having lost parking spaces due to BFR 44 Project.Testimony focused on the necessary relocation of an existing propane storage tank to make 45 way for the frontage improvements and the possibility that the site may lose two parking spaces as 46 a result if the tank was relocated in its present horizontal configuration. Staff clarified that the City's 47 proposal was to relocate the storage tank in a manner that did not result in lost parking (by means LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 3 APPROVED: 09/11/17 1 of a vertical configuration) and had,therefore, not included the two parking spaces in the Project 2 Impact Table (Exhibit A,Attachment D.1). 3 4 The Commission finds that because a final configuration has not yet been agreed upon between the 5 property owner and the City,the Project Impact Table (Exhibit A,Attachment D.1) should be 6 modified to include two spaces as "lost,"with a footnote clarifying that, in the eventuality that 7 relocation of the storage tank does not impact existing on-site parking, e.g. by vertical configuration, 8 the identification of two lost parking spaces on the site no longer applies. Staff has modified Exhibit 9 A, Attachment D.1, accordingly. 10 11 ORDER 12 13 IT IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that: 14 15 1. The Planning Commission recommends that the amendments to the Community Development 16 Code set forth in Exhibit A,Attachments B, C, D.1, and D.2 (LU 17-0028) be approved by the City Council. 17 18 I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED by the Planning Commission of the City of 19 Lake Oswego. 20 21 22 23 DATED this 11th day of September 2017. 24 25 26 27 Robert Heape /s/ 28 Robert Heape, Chair 29 Planning Commission 30 31 32 ATTEST: 33 34 PRELIMINARY DECISION - August 28, 2017 35 36 AYES: Arthur, Baker, Brockman, Sweers, Ward 37 NOES: None 38 ABSTAIN: None 39 EXCUSED: Heape 40 41 ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND ORDER - September 11, 2017 42 43 AYES: Heape, Ward,Arthur, Baker, Brockman and Sweers 44 NOES: None 45 ABSTAIN: None 46 EXCUSED: None LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 4 EXHIBIT C-1 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 LU 17-0028 fAcTIN E.. 6. . CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO I S Planning Commission Minutes f August 28, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Ward called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL Members present were Vice Chair Bill Ward, and Commissioners Randy Arthur, Skip Baker, Ed Brockman, and Nicholas Sweers. Chair Heape was excused. Council Liaison Theresa Kohlhoff was also present. Staff present were Debra Andreades, Senior Planner; Johanna Hastay, Senior Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; Iris McCaleb, Administrative Assistant; and Bruce Powers, Parks and Recreation Department Project Manager and Stacy Bluhm, Boones Ferry Road Project Engineer. 3. COUNCIL UPDATE Councilor Kohlhoff provided an update on recent Council actions. She also advised •at the topic of short-term rentals was coming back on the Council docket. 4. CITIZEN COMMENT None 6. MINUTES (this item taken out of sequence) 6.1 Commissioner Baker moved to approve the Minutes of i .gust 14, 2017 as written. Commissioner Sweers seconded the motion and it p- sed 5:0. 5. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT is item taken out of sequence) 5.1 Woodmont Park Master Plan Process Staff provided an update on the Wo..mont Park Master Plan process. Staff coordinators were Bruce Powers, Parks Anal : /Project Manager, and Sarah Selden, Senior Planner. The project consultant, Brad The -r, Project Manager with McKenzie was also present. They reported that aft various public outreach events and surveys the Project Advisory Committee had ape oved the Master Plan with some minor concerns such as parking, which would be work-4 through when the project went through the Conditional Use process. There w- e no citizen comments or action items. 5.2 'neral Updates None. City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 1 of 7 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.1 Community Development Code Amendments for Implementing Boones Ferry Road Capital Improvement Proiect (LU 17-0028). Continued from August 14, 2017. A request from the City of Lake Oswego for text amendments to the Community Development Code (CDC) for the purpose of implementing the Boones Ferry Road capital improvement project. The proposal amends LOC 50.04.002 Special Street Setbacks; 50.05.007 Lake Grove Village Center Overlay District; and LOC 50.07.003.13 Ministerial Development Decisions. Staff coordinator was Johanna Hastay, Senior Planner. Stacy Bluhm, Boones Ferry Road Project Engineer, was also available to answer questions. Vice Chair Ward opened the hearing and Mr. Boone outlined the applicable criteria and procedures. At time of declarations no conflicts of interest were reported and no one challenged any Commissioner's right to consider the application. Staff Report Ms. Hastay presented the staff report. She noted the additional written testimony received after the staff report was completed (Exhibits G-2 through G-5), including requests for revisions to the proposed amendments and concerns related to trees. Regarding tree impacts, Ms. Hastay pointed out that, at the Planning Commission work session, a request had been made that the City's contract arborist, Morgan Holen, look at the impacts to trees. Working with the project advisory committee co-chairs, Ms. Hastay noted they had identified four properties to look at: Naomi's Lampshades, Gubanc's, the Teka property, also referred to as the Jenike property, and Riccardo's. Ms. Nolen visited these sites to confirm the tree inventory data was correct and to determine if tree preservation was possible. Ms. Hastay then reviewed the Replacement Parking Plans, using the one for Naomi's Lampshades as an example, and noted the updates including the addition of the Engineering Project Number and a searchable map and tax lot number. She advised that it was not possible to add a legend on each one, but notations and line type representations were made clearer through call-outs. She referred to the Property Impact Table and Index Map in the staff report, using the Chevron property as an example. She explained why the Property Index Map showed more than 50 projects and the Property Impact Table only showed those within the Lake Grove Village Center (LGVC) Overlay district with right-of-way impact and loss of parking. Ms. Hastay then addressed the Arborist Report on tree impacts which verified size and species, and made conclusions as to whether tree preservation was feasible. She reviewed an example from the Jenike property, which was a problematic site with regards to tree preservation. She shared a site plan and noted trees that needed to be removed due to right- of-way (ROW) impacts, and due to replacement on-site parking. She noted the red dashed outlined area of the tree grove, which grew up suppressed per the arborist report, and pointed out four Douglas fir, proposed to be removed due to necessary ROW impacts, which were the lynchpin of the tree grove. Per the arborist's report, once those four trees were removed the entire grove became vulnerable to wind throw making it probable the trees should not be preserved. In response to a question from Vice Chair Ward about why the access was being realigned, Ms. Hastay noted it was across the street from the McDonald's and when realigned would create an intersection that was better and safer for pedestrian and vehicular access. City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 2 of 7 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 Staff found that the proposed amendments met the relevant criteria. Ms. Hastay recommended approval of the proposed amendments by the City Council and indicated that staff would return with the Findings, Conclusions and Order on September 11. She noted that the City Council hearing was scheduled for October 3. Questions of Staff None. Public Testimony Mike Buck, 3155 Edaemont Road, Lake Oswego, 97035, and Carolyn Krebs, 16925 Denney Court, Lake Oswego, 97035, Co-Chairs of the Boones Ferry Road Proiect Advisory Committee (BFR PAC). Mr. Buck stated he supported the proposed Code amendments, noting it was a complex topic, and that he supported Ms. Irwin's desire for tree preservation. He was hoping that at least the Jenike property tree grove could be saved, as well as an additional fir on the Riccardo's property. He advised that the environmental values also needed to be weighed with the economic and social values. On the economic side, times were uncertain; with a two- year construction period many businesses were wondering if they would still be there at the end. He opined the proposed code amendments were a tool to address some of that anxiety and we need to work together to solve problems. He added that if there was a public parking lot on Oakridge, as originally envisioned in the LGVC Plan, fewer trees and landscaping would need to be removed for replacement parking. He advised that this could provide remedial mitigation, so that if Riccardo's, the Jenike property, and Chevron lost spaces they could use that as the mitigation rather than losing landscaping on individual lots for replacement parking. He added that he hoped we could go in that direction, but if we could not, the social and economic values needed to be weighed in with the environmental. Mr. Buck then addressed a comment in Mike Robinson's written testimony regarding elimination of parking indirectly caused by the road improvement. Mr. Robinson was describing a similar situation on his property where Mr. Buck was losing three parking spots in the front, rather than the two documented, due to the ROW impacts, and a third spot between his building and sidewalk would become unusable due to its closeness to the sidewalk and building and safety concerns. He added it was not an issue for him as he was considering giving the City an easement for a wayside, however this type of causation needed to be given due regard. Ms. Hastay clarified that the Table showed parking spaces lost directly to the ROW and improvements, so Mr. Buck's property was shown with only two spots lost, and there was a third space where it would be a very poor design to have a parking space. In response to a question from Commissioner Brockman regarding the tree grove, Mr. Buck clarified he would like to save some of the trees (shown in green on the arborist's report), that they should be given a chance, even if they could become hazardous, per the arborist. Ms. Krebs clarified that she was there to provide information, not to testify. She noted that the PAC had not yet seen the arborist's report with the information that the entire grove was going to be lost. She indicated that the new information brought up a lot of questions about the character of Lake Grove and the meaning of a significant grove within the district. She added the concept was to preserve some of the trees on this site and the arborist's report was very drastic, new information. She noted that the PAC was aware that significant trees would be lost with this project, however replacement trees would take time to mature. She indicated that the PAC believed the treed character of Lake Grove was important to bring forward with this project. She recalled at the Work Session she had talked about a tree-planting grant to fund some plantings on residential properties within Lake Grove; for example, a resident City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 3 of 7 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 behind the commercial district could plant trees in their yard for screening through such a program. She encouraged the City to look at this further, especially in light of this new information. Commissioner Brockman asked Mr. Buck to clarify that if the trees were allowed to remain, they would only have be removed when the parking requirements would necessitate if the lot were to redevelop. Mr. Buck agreed the Parking Plan gave them the option, but did not require them to be removed. Ms. Hastay countered that it actually was the project design team's recommendation for all of those trees to come out as part of the improvements on the site because they didn't want to leave a hazardous situation. She acknowledged this was based on the arborist's recommendation but that it was one arborist's report, it was not an exact science; if there were another arborist's report, that information could be considered. She added that per the report, most of those trees were in fair to poor condition mostly because they were suppressed in that grove. As a grove, there was a high probability they would do fine, but once some were taken out their viability would not be very good. Vice Chair Ward opined that if there was a public parking site, the parking mitigation would be greatly reduced, but that was not what they were discussing this evening. Commissioner Sweers wondered if another arborist could assess the trees to confirm if the "yellow" trees were taken out, the remaining "green" trees would be compromised. Ms. Hastay suggested they could bring forward another report for the City Council to consider, however she trusted Ms. Holen's professional opinion. She advised that if the Commission wanted to make this recommendation, staff would follow it. Vice Chair Ward opined he did not think another report would be necessary; he thought highly of Ms. Holen's work and that she would not recommend removal of the trees if she did not think it was necessary. Commissioner Brockman agreed a second opinion made sense. Ms. Krebs wondered what the property owner thought about this new information. Mr. Buck suggested losing large native trees was a big deal. In response to a question from Commissioner Sweers, if a second arborist report came to the same conclusion what would he think, Mr. Buck responded they would need to negotiate with the property owner as well as work to get public parking to reduce the need to mitigate. Ms. Krebs added that perhaps the Commission could suggest to the City Council that now was really the time to look at public parking in accordance with the Lake Grove Parking Management Plan so they could make the best of these competing values. Vice Chair Ward agreed this could be helpful but not really something the Commission could put in place tonight except for perhaps a recommendation that it be looked at. Mr. Buck also addressed the potential landscaping loss with many properties being able to use the full 5% reduction. He pointed out that for sites with a lot of street frontage, if all of the landscaping improvements that were part of the ROW dedication were used to meet the landscaping requirement, they would fall below 5% landscaping on the site. It was noted the public improvements would provide additional new landscaping. Vice Chair Ward expressed concern that landscaping could drop that low on some sites. Mr. Buck responded there would not be too many sites in this situation. Dienne Irwin, 4343 Sunset Dr., Lake Oswego, 97035, referred to the written testimony she had submitted that day. She thanked Mr. Buck for bringing up the grove of trees on the Jenike property. She expressed concern about approving code amendments for parking at the expense of our trees. She noted the tree canopy was referred to in the August staff report as one of the unique characteristics of the Lake Grove Village Center. She pointed out that the BFR project was going to remove 113 trees, including 18 large firs and cedars, and now more trees were slated for possible removal due to proposed code changes. She added that originally the Plan called for the City to find property to serve for public parking rather than change the codes that protect our trees. She opined that once they come down they were irreplaceable, big trees with small buildings were the character of Lake Grove; the original City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 4 of 7 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 Lake Grove Village Center Plan did not envision having large buildings like downtown. She read from the Comprehensive Plan regarding the importance of preserving existing significant trees and tree groves. She added that the Lake Grove neighborhood was losing many old growth trees due to redevelopment and that overall Lake Oswego was losing its wooded character. She held that removing this many trees would have a negative impact to tree canopy and went against city codes and values. She suggested creative solutions were needed to prevent this and that they should not be pressured by deadlines. She agreed with the earlier testimony that urging the Council to look at other solutions would be most appropriate. She recalled that as bike lanes and pedestrian access were added, the goal was to use less vehicle transportation. She opined that protecting a large grove would be more important than protecting smaller landscaping. She indicated that replacement trees would be smaller street trees, not the larger old growth trees that made Lake Oswego valuable. She asked the Commission to consider that these amendments would greatly impact needs of residential property owners. Michael Robinson, Land Use Attorney, 1120 NW Couch Street, Tenth Floor, Portland, 97209, and Dave Kimmel, Presentation Design Group, 1335 SW 66th Avenue, #201, Portland, 97225. Mr. Robinson noted they had been working with Caine Petroleum and that he also happened to live in Lake Grove and he appreciated Boones Ferry Road as a local customer. He stated that throughout this and prior planning processes Chevron had been protected against the loss of parking. He indicated that Chevron still needed to be protected from the loss of parking, the convenience store needed these parking spaces. He noted that the proposal they submitted should not change what staff was trying to do. He clarified that shared parking off site did not work for a service station and convenience store. Mr. Kimmel described how the site changed and became more constrained when the owner remodeled the bay into a convenience store and added a propane tank. He noted that they had been working with Ms. Bluhm to reorient the propane tank to vertical in the same location so parking was not lost; however, this had not been fully agreed upon in writing so they were looking for the opportunity to amend the Code to ensure that if they lost the parking spaces as a result of the propane tank being moved, they would get parking credit. Mr. Robinson confirmed in response to a question from Vice Chair Ward that he had provided language to amend two of the amendments the Commission was considering. Mr. Kimmel explained how they would need a custom vertical tank, as the City Code did not allow the full height of a typical vertical propane tank and the cost could be up to $50,000. Ms. Hastay added the City had been working with the Chevron station's representatives to make sure there would be minimal impacts to the frontage of this property; for example the sidewalk would be narrower to reduce the need to move the propane tank and subsequent loss of parking. She noted that the design had been agreed upon but the compensation package had not yet been settled; it was not in front of the Commission, though they were related. Ms. Hastay suggested it was up to the Planning Commission to make the suggested changes, though she felt they would get to the point where a vertical tank could be installed without the loss of parking spaces. She agreed that the proposed language was fine, if a bit wordy, and suggested she could simplify it. She added that the compensation question might well be resolved prior to the Council hearing. Mr. Robinson agreed to have Ms. Hastay work on the language and she agreed to bring it back with the findings if that was the Commission's direction. Commissioner Brockman agreed it would be important to protect the company's interest. At Vice Chair Ward's request Ms. Hastay reviewed the letter received that day from the new owner of the Jenike property, Teka, LLC. She noted they were still working with the City on the compensation package. She stated that the letter was generally supportive of the Project, with two exceptions. They would like to expand the Code Waiver beyond the replacement City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 5 of 7 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 parking plans currently agreed upon; they would like to be able to come in with a different plan in the future. Ms. Hastay noted that the proposed parking replacement plan considered many factors for the constrained site. The property owner was asking for changes to the proposed code language to be able to come back later with a plan that was not necessarily in substantial compliance with the replacement parking plan without having to go through expensive land use reviews. She indicated that staff did not support this recommendation, as the replacement parking plans were clear plans showing the anticipated exceptions to the Code. She added the replacement parking plans were stop gap measures to preserve parking on the sites until such time as the properties redeveloped, including a new parking plan. Without full redevelopment, there was not much room to be flexible about the replacement parking. Ms. Hastay then shared that the second part of the written testimony that addressed the proposed landscaping requirement, with a suggested change that the total amount of land lost to ROW improvements should count toward the landscaping requirement. She noted that staff agreed with the PAC that the up to 5% reduction cap should remain in the proposed language. Commissioner Sweers wondered if parking studies were done to show how much parking was being used at peak hours and if replacement parking was really needed on some of these sites. Ms. Hastay referred to the LGVC Parking Management Plan adopted in 2016, which did not find there was a capacity issue for this particular site. She clarified that it was a parking inventory and analysis at that time and that this proposed plan was also looking at potential future businesses, including future changes in use that could have a higher parking demand. Rebuttal None. Questions of Applicant Vice Chair Ward stated he wanted to be clear that the ministerial process for parking approval would only be used for the Lake Grove/BFR Project area; that ministerial approvals would not be used in other areas. Ms. Hastay responded that the intent with the amendments was that they could also cover a future public transportation project with similar type and scale of impacts that could be quantified in advance. She added the amendment was broad but well defined as to the types of projects and situations where it would apply within the bounds of the Ministerial classification. Deliberations Vice Chair Ward opened deliberations. He opined the proposed amendments were good ones that would be helpful to the process, they remedied some of the problems that were bound to come up with the broad vision for the project many years ago, such as flexibility with ROW width and flexibility with parking. He hoped the City would be able to find a location for a public parking facility. Commissioner Baker moved to accept the staff report for LU 17-0028 and recommend to City Council that they approve Ordinance 2753 as amended to address Proiect 22 (Chevron station) parking space loss. Commissioner Sweers seconded the motion. Commissioner Brockman wondered if other Commissioners felt strongly about requesting a second arborist report. Vice Chair Ward asked staff if the door was open to having a second arborist's opinion without it being incorporated into the Commission's action tonight. Ms. Hastay suggested though there was a tight timeline she might be able to get a second arborist report, but she was unsure if there would also be time for the project design team to consider it City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 6 of 7 APPROVED: 09/25/2017 in relation to frontage improvements or to meet with property owners to discuss new recommendations. Mr. Boone stated he saw this as a request to staff to provide additional evidence for the City Council's review and consideration. He added this was a separate question than moving forward with a Code change. Commissioner Arthur wondered if the property owner's opinions about the trees carried any weight. Ms. Hastay responded that discussions were ongoing with property owners. Ms. Bluhm addressed the Commission noting that project staff was modifying the temporary construction easement based on the presumption the trees on the Jenike property would have to come down. She added that it was a safety issue versus the trees, not parking versus the trees. The motion passed 5:0. The vote on the Findings, Conclusion, and Order was scheduled for September 11, 2017 at 6:30pm. 8. WORK SESSION 8.1 Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Overlay—Work Session #3 (PP 16-0007). The Commission continued their discussion on a proposal by the City of Portland, B eau of Environmental Services (BES), for potential code amendments that would provide : process for facilitating required upgrades to the Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Pla- (TCWTP). Staff coordinator was Debra Andreades, Senior Planner. City of Portland te. in attendance included Jim Brown (BES Senior Engineer), consultant Eric Eisemann, (E2 and Use Planning) and Ho-Ping Wei(Black and Veatch). Discussion focused on building materials, noise and odor standar. , and traffic. Input/Action Items: • The Commission expressed preference for listing pr• ibited materials and not listing permitted materials. • Noise and odor criteria should be found in Chae er 50 in the Overlay District standards. To be approved, a new project would have to s •w compliance with the standards. Any violation of those standards would be gov- ned by Chapter 34 for enforcement purposes. Commissioner Baker asked about odor , d noise and the question staff raised as to where odor should be defined. He opined it - ould be unique to this overlay and should be included in the overlay and not the definitio . Vice Chair Ward suggested that odor can be measured and could apply elsewhere so s►ould be in the definitions section of the CDC. There was no public corn •-nt. 9. OTHER BUSINESS None. 10. SCHEDUL- -EVIEW There -re no updates to the schedule. 11. A' OURNMENT here being no other business Vice Chair Ward adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of August 28, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT D-1 LU 17-0028 STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICANT FILE NUMBER City of Lake Oswego LU 17-0028 LOCATION STAFF LGVC Overlay District Johanna Hastay, AICP, Senior Planner DATE OF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE August 17, 2017 August 28, 2017 I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The City of Lake Oswego is requesting text amendments to the Community Development Code (CDC) for the purpose of implementing the Boones Ferry Road public transportation project (BFR Project). The amendments implement the LGVC Plan and City Council 2017 Goal, "Take steps to minimize the impact on businesses and residents of the Boones Ferry Road project." As shown in Ordinance 2753 (Exhibit A-1, Attachment B), the proposed amendments: • Modify the 50-foot Special Street Setback for a specific section of Boones Ferry Road to reflect the BFR Project (LOC 50.02.004); • Allow project mitigation outside the public right-of-way when directly associated with public transportation projects (such as the BFR Project) as ministerial development (LOC 50.07.003.13); • Exempt planned parking mitigation (on-site replacement parking associated with the BFR Project) from compliance with the LGVC Overlay District standards (LOC 50.05.007); and, • Clarify and expand the current parking and landscape area exceptions in the LGVC Overlay for properties affected by the BFR Project (LOC 50.05.007.6). The sections proposed for revision relate to several Code sections and are more fully described in Section III of this report. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 1 OF 15 II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Land Use Planning Chapter: Land Use Administration Policy A-1 Design Guidelines Policy C-1 Land Use Administration Policy D-1 Community Culture Chapter: Civic Engagement Policies, 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9 Inspiring Spaces and Places Chapter: Goal 1 Policy 7 Connected Community Chapter: Transportation Choices Policy B-2 Livability Policy F-6 B. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Volume II: Neighborhood and Special District Plans 2013. Lake Grove Village Center Plan Chapter I. Transportation Goal 1: Transform BFR into a Great Street Policies 1.2, 1.4, and 1.5 Goal 3: Enhance the Pedestrian Environment and Connectivity Policy 3.2 Chapter IV. Economic Dev't Goal 9: Support Businesses in the Center Policies 9.3, 9.4 and 9.6 C. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 2 OF 15 III. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND INFORMATION When the City adopted the Lake Grove Village Center (LGVC) Plan in 2008, the primary transportation goal was to transform Boones Ferry Road (BFR) into a Great Street or "an attractive street that promotes a safe, welcoming and convenient environment for pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles, accommodates auto traffic efficiently, provides adequate vehicle access to meet the needs of businesses, and manages stormwater within the ROW". Immediately after the LGVC Plan was adopted, work began on the BFR Refinement Plan, a 2-phase process to help guide subsequent engineering for the BFR Project. One of the issues addressed during that process was how the right-of-way (ROW) dedication would negatively impact private property. The result of the 2012 work was the adoption of a number of LGVC Overlay District amendments, including code exceptions to parking and landscaping minimums to help offset those potential impacts (see Ordinance 2580 for the full amendment analysis). The LGVC Parking Management Plan followed and was adopted in 2016. Other goals and policies of the adopted LGVC Plan discuss ensuring "no net loss of parking" as a result of the access modifications due to the BFR Project. The LGVC Parking Management Plan also focuses on maintaining commercial parking capacity after completion of the BFR Project. The BFR Project design team and Project Advisory Committee (PAC) have determined that eight properties in BFR Project Phase I corridor will directly lose parking spaces due to the ROW dedication and frontage improvements. As a part of the property acquisition compensation packages for those eight sites with diminished parking, the City has developed proposals for on-site replacement parking (see preliminary site plans in Exhibit A-1, Attachment C). Five of the eight replacement parking plans predominantly, but cannot fully, comply with current CDC standards due to site constraints. The City initially considered processing multiple design variance applications for individual sites or groups of properties where, if owners wanted to replace parking on-site, they would be able to do so even if the parking spaces were noncompliant with certain standards. In consultation with the PAC, and pursuant to Planning Commission direction, staff is instead recommending amending the code to outright permit the parking, a process which provides greater certainty for property owners, avoids complications with the BFR Project schedule, and removes regulatory barriers on private property owners consistent with City Council policy direction. As this amendment process progressed, staff also took the opportunity to include an update to the BFR Special Street Setback now that the final ROW design is known and to expand/clarify the existing LGVC Overlay District parking and landscape exceptions adopted in 2012. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 3 OF 15 Public Involvement On April 10, 2017, the Planning Commission received public comment and provided initial direction on the preliminary concept to amend the code rather than process a series of design variances. A public review draft (PRD) of the code amendments was published on May 22, 2017, with a 3-week comment period.The PRD was publicized through the City's Planning e-News Subscription lists; to the Lake Oswego Chamber and Lake Grove Business Association; neighborhood association chairs; through a direct mailing (along with a follow- up e-mail) to businesses and property owners impacted by Phase I of the BFR Project, and a direct mailing to residential property owners within 300 ft. of the properties which would lose parking. Three letters were received during the PRD comment period; staff has taken these public comments into consideration in preparing the public hearing draft of the proposed code amendments. The Planning Commission then held a work session on June 26, 2017. The purpose of the work session was to review the proposed amendments, discuss the comments received on the public review draft, and recommend to staff any revisions that should be included in the public hearing draft version of the proposal. A letter was received from Mike Robinson, representing the Cain Petroleum Property, after the end of the PRD comment period, but prior to the Planning Commission work session (Exhibit G-1). Mr. Robinson was not contesting the proposed code amendments but instead recommending modifications to improve the draft. The Deputy City Attorney concluded that the letter is considered "public testimony" for the purposes of this public hearing, and has provided a response to the issues raised, which is included as Exhibit F-1. IV. MAJOR COMPONENTS OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Ordinance 2753, through Exhibit A-1, Attachment B, consists of text amendments to five code sections, all of which are briefly summarized, below. Page numbers refer to pages in Exhibit A-1, Attachment B, which contains commentary and analysis on each amendment. Item 1: Special Street Setbacks (pages 1-2) The CDC contains Special Street Setbacks (SSS) for certain streets throughout the City which are intended to preserve an obstruction-free zone for future right of way improvements [LOC Table 50.02.004-1]. Each SSS may be exceeded when identified by a traffic impact study, corridor study, or transportation system plan, but there is no corresponding authority to reduce the SSS using those same studies or plans. This code amendment would revise the BFR SSS, which is currently 50 feet, for properties with frontage on BFR extending from Madrona Street north to Mercantile Drive, to reflect Phase 1 of the BFR Project. Amends:LOC Table 50.02.004-1 Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 4 OF 15 Item 2: Review Procedures for Ministerial Development (page 7) The Ministerial development review process is reserved for projects that are subject to clear and objective standards or are otherwise consistent with an adopted public facility master plan. This code amendment would include mitigation on private property that is associated with a public transportation project in the ministerial permit classification. Amends:LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii(8) Item 3: Applicability of LGVC Overlay District (pages 3-4) LOC 50.05.007.3.c currently describes the applicability of the LGVC Overlay District depending on whether a project is "new construction/redevelopment" or one that is narrower in scope. The proposed code amendment implements the conceptual replacement parking plans (Exhibit A-1, Attachment C). It allows property owners to apply for a ministerial permit to construct planned replacement parking without have to comply with three specific LGVC Overlay District standards. This code waiver, which eliminates the need for variances to the subject standards, would be valid for three years (with one additional year possible) from the date of ROW purchase/condemnation. A longer period is not recommended because the replacement parking plans are intended to implement the LGVC Plan's "no net loss of parking due to the BFR Project" policies. Amends:LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii Item 4: LGVC Overlay District Site Planning Standards: Parking Exception (page 5) The Code currently provides a parking credit for spaces lost due to the BFR Project.The proposed code amendment would: enumerate the number of parking spaces lost for each property; remove the 5-year expiration date; and, allow the exception to apply to new building construction, not just building expansions (Exhibit A-1, Attachments D.1 and D.2). Amends:LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. Item 5: LGVC Overlay District Site Planning Standards: Landscaping Exception (page 6) Similar to the parking exception, above, the Code currently provides a landscaping credit for land area lost to ROW dedication specific to the BFR Project. The proposed code amendment would: remove subjective language; enumerate the land area lost; remove the 5-year expiration date; and, allow the exception to apply to new building construction, not just building expansions (Exhibit A-1, Attachments D.1 and D.2). The landscape reduction is set at a maximum 5%, regardless if the area lost to dedication is greater. Amends:LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 5 OF 15 V. NOTICE OF APPLICATION A. Newspaper Notice On August 3, 2017, public notice of the proposed CDC text amendments and Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Lake Oswego Review. B. DLCD Notice Pursuant to LOC 50.07.003.16.c and ORS 197.610, staff provided notice of the proposed CDC text amendments to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). C. Metro Notice Pursuant to Metro Code 3.07.810 and .820, staff provided notice of the proposed CDC text amendments to Metro not less than 35 days prior to the hearing date. V. COMPLIANCE WITH APPROVAL CRITERIA Legislative amendments to the CDC shall comply with the following criteria: A. Any Applicable State Law Staff finds that there are no applicable State Laws. B. Applicable Provisions of the City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Volume 1 Staff finds that the following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this proposal: Land Use Planning Chapter Policies A-1. Maintain land use regulations and standards to: b. Promote compatibility between development and existing and desired neighborhood character; c. Minimize and/or mitigate adverse traffic impacts generated by new development on adjacent neighborhoods; Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 6 OF 15 C-1. Enact and maintain regulations and standards which require: b. Landscaping; c. Buffering and screening between differing land uses; d. Measures to foster a safe and interesting transit and pedestrian environment; e. Minimize and/or mitigate adverse traffic impacts generated by new development on adjacent neighborhoods. Response: Since adoption of the LGVC Plan over ten years ago, there has been ongoing community discussion regarding how to best balance the goals and policies of the Plan, particularly as it calls for widening BFR to more safely accommodate all modes of travel (automobiles, bicyclists, pedestrians, and bus transit) while minimizing impacts to adjacent neighborhoods, for example by providing adequate parking in the commercial district and using landscape buffers to screen abutting residential neighbors. The existing tree canopy is one of the unique characteristics of the LGVC. The LGVC Overlay District standards include landscaping requirements that help ensure stands of native trees are incorporated into site layout where practical. On the other hand, maintaining adequate parking for commercial businesses has also been a key policy, as the BFR corridor will continue to draw a high volume of automobile traffic. For this reason, many of the code amendments for the 2016 LGVC Parking Management Plan focused on ensuring surface parking efficiency. Staff is now proposing to clarify and expand the existing LGVC landscaping exception that allows land area lost to ROW dedication to count towards meeting the minimum landscaping requirements (Exhibit A-1, Attachments D.1 and D.2). This could result in less on-site landscaping for the commercial properties that are losing land area to the BFR Project. Again, the two policy directions must be balanced; by accepting reductions in the amount of landscaping, adequate parking can be provided/maintained. This issue is directly illustrated with the replacement parking plans, most of which would require some tree removal and would result in a reduced amount of on-site landscaping. In its June 26, 2017, work session, the Planning Commission received public comments regarding the negative impacts that tree removal and landscape reduction would have on neighborhood character. Staff notes that while replacement parking plans for five of the eight properties are noncompliant with certain LGVC standards, all comply with existing code requirements to screen and buffer the abutting dissimilar low density residential uses. In addition, the proposed amendments to the LGVC landscape exception cap the allowed reduction at 5%, so every commercial property would have to provide at least 10% landscaping. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 7 OF 15 To address the issue of tree removal, the Commission requested that the City's Consulting Arborist visit those sites where tree removal may be significant in order to complete a more detailed tree inventory and evaluation. After consulting with the BFR PAC co-chairs, four sites were chosen for field visits: Naomi's Lampshades, Gubanc's, Riccardo's, and the Jenike Property. The arborist report is attached (Exhibit F-2). As detailed in the report, all four sites would require the removal of significant trees if those property owners chose to move forward with the replacement parking plans. The report also explains that there are no reasonable alternatives to the removal due to the constrained nature of the sites and the proximity of the trees to construction, both for the replacement parking and for the street frontage improvements. In the case of the Jenike Property, the significant grove of Douglas firs is already heavily impacted by the BFR Project. Even if the replacement parking is not constructed on this site, the City's Consulting Arborist does not recommend preservation of the trees remaining in the grove after the BFR Project is complete due to their increased vulnerability to wind throw (Exhibit F-2). If the prevailing community goal is to maintain the current private parking capacity after completion of the BFR Project, property owners should be allowed to construct some or all of the replacement parking with the associated tree removal. Staff notes that tree removal will be partially offset by the enhanced street tree and median landscaping, both of which are a part of the "Great Street" design. Staff also notes that although the LGVC Parking Management Plan includes an action item for providing public parking in the general vicinity of the commercial properties where trees would be removed, the City has not yet earmarked funding, and, as of the date of this report, the City Council has not authorized the use of eminent domain for the acquisition of a site or construction of a public parking facility. Staff finds that the proposed code amendments implement the above Comprehensive Plan policies, as well as the policies and recommended action items from the 2008 LGVC Plan and the 2016 LGVC PMP. The amendments will help the City implement the BFR "Great Street" street design with all of the enhanced connectivity and ROW landscaping, while also ensuring adequate commercial parking can be provided so that spillover traffic does not adversely impact the nearby neighborhoods. D-1. Coordinate the development and amendment of City plans and actions related to land use with other affected agencies, including county, state, Metro,federal agencies and special districts. Response: Metro and the DLCD were notified of the proposed text amendment at least 35 days prior to the first Planning Commission hearing, as required by Metro Code and State law. Conclusion: The proposal is consistent with policies of the Land Use Planning Chapter. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 8 OF 15 Community Culture Chapter Policies Policy 1: Provide opportunities for citizen participation in preparing and revising local land use plans and ordinances. Policy 2: Provide citizen involvement opportunities that are appropriate to the scale of a given planning effort. Large area plans, affecting a large portion of community residents and groups require citizen involvement opportunities of a broader scope than that required for more limited land use decisions. Policy 4: Encourage citizens to participate through their neighborhood without excluding participation as individuals or through other groups. Policy 5: Seek citizen input through service organizations, interest groups and individuals, as well as through neighborhood organizations. Policy 9: Utilize broadly representative, special citizen advisory bodies to provide input on implementation of the Comprehensive Plan and other related land use planning matters. Response: The CDC, which implements the Comprehensive Plan, contains 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. Development of the proposed amendments responded to: input from the BFR Project Advisory Committee, which includes members from LGVC business community, affected neighborhood associations, and both commercial and residential property owners; public comments received on a Public Review Draft; and, a Planning Commission work session with public comment. All required notification measures and opportunities for input as specified in the Code were provided during this process, including noticing to all affected neighborhood associations, as well the Lake Grove Business Association. The City has also provided a courtesy public hearing notice to all residential property owners within 300 feet of the five private commercial-zoned properties where code changes have been proposed specifically to allow development of replacement parking. Public hearings with the opportunity for public comment will be held before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Conclusion: The process followed for these amendments is in compliance with the goals and policies of the Community Culture Chapter. The Commission can find that through the public process described, above, the City has appropriately balanced the interests of commercial and residential property owners. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 9 OF 15 Inspiring Spaces and Places Chapter Policies 7. Enhance the unique character of Lake Oswego's neighborhoods and commercial districts as the City grows and changes by adopted plans, codes, guidelines, and other implementation measures. Response: The proposed amendments will help implement the "Great Street" design for BFR as identified by the LGVC Plan, taking into consideration the unique characteristics of one of the City's commercial districts. The amendments will have multiple effects. By providing certainty to property owners on the impact of ROW acquisition, the process may continue and the BFR Project can be constructed according to the LGVC Plan and its vision for the commercial district. By providing the opportunity for "no net loss of parking" on commercial properties (through code changes that respond to the BFR Project), the impact of traffic and spillover parking in residential areas is minimized, protecting the character of the neighborhoods. Conclusion: The proposal is consistent with the Inspiring Spaces and Places Chapter policies. Connected Communities Chapter Policies Transportation Choices 8-2. Provide street and frontage improvements such as dedicated facilities, landscaping, and street lighting and permit amenities such as benches and shelters to encourage walking and biking as viable travel modes, particularly along corridors that serve the primary transit network and employment centers, town centers and neighborhood villages. Response: This policy is not directly applicable to the proposed amendment, but the BFR Project, a multi-modal public transportation project, is consistent with the above policy, and the proposed amendments support implementation of the BFR Project. Livability F-6. Maintain parking regulations that require off-street employee and customer parking and loading facilities to be provided on-site and commensurate with the size and relative needs of each new development. Response: The existing Code implements this policy, and ensures appropriate parking levels and design taking into consideration site conditions, zoning, proximity to residential neighborhoods, street classification, and intensity of use. The Parking standards include minimum and maximum parking ratios for various commercial Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 10 OF 15 uses (LOC Table 50.06.002-1). The Parking standards also include LGVC-specific parking regulations that reflect the unique characteristics of the District: the Access to Transit parking modifier cannot be used (Subsection 2.a.v) and compact parking spaces are not allowed (Subsection 2.a.vi). The LGVC Overlay District standards also include parking lot standards that require landscape islands to break up asphalt, and that parking facilities be screened/buffered from public sidewalks, buildings, and abutting residential properties (LOC 50.05.007.6.e.viii). The proposed amendments do not change these standards. Instead, they offer some flexibility to private property owners who choose to construct replacement parking and for future redevelopment in light of the permanent loss of land area to ROW dedication. Conclusion: The proposal is consistent with the Connected Communities Chapter policies. C. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Volume II: Neighborhoods and Special District Plans 2013 Lake Grove Village Center Plan Section I. Transportation Goal 1: Transform Boones Ferry into a Great Street Policy 1.2 Provide landscaped center medians along BFR to organize access, enhance safety, manage storm water, and to beautify the corridor. Policy 1.4 Provide continuous sidewalks and bike lands to enhance the safety along BFR. Policy 1.5 Provide pedestrian crossings at regular intervals. Consider signalization of pedestrian crossing in design refinement studies. Goal 3: Enhance the Pedestrian Environment and Connectivity Policy 3.2 Provide continuous sidewalks, pedestrian refuges, landscaped medians, consolidated driveways, crosswalks, signals at crosswalks, public restrooms, and attractive transit shelters. Replace overhead utilities with underground utilities. Response: The ROW elements listed above, along with appropriately-sized vehicle travel lanes, center turn lanes, stormwater facilities, and U-turn capacity at intersections are necessary for a multi-modal "Great Street" design and the level of connectivity necessary to establish a vibrant town center. To ensure an Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 11 OF 15 unobstructed area for these improvements, the City imposed a 50-foot Special Street Setback on BFR from Mercantile Drive to West Sunset Drive. As Phase I of the BFR design has been refined, the project team found that only 41-46 feet of ROW width would be necessary along that stretch of BFR; this will still entail ROW dedication from many properties. The 50 properties are impacted by the BFR Project as follows: Properties w/ ROW Impacts per Phase I of the BFR Project # of Properties w/ # of Properties w/ ROW Dedication No ROW Dedication Sites in LGVC Overlay District 35 10 (easements only) Sites in WLG Overlay District 5 0 Please note that the five West Lake Grove Design District properties that lose land area to ROW dedication will not be able to utilize use the existing LGVC Overlay landscaping exemption. While the Property Index Map (Exhibit A-1, Attachment D.2) shows all properties in the BFR Project Phase 1 Corridor, the corresponding Project Impact Table (Exhibit A-1, Attachment D.1) only includes the 35 properties which lose land area to ROW dedication and are also within the LGVC Overlay District. The proposed code amendments were written with the understanding that even this reduced amount of ROW dedication will directly impact a thriving business community. As noted, above, the amendments ensure that the "Great Street" design (continuous sidewalks, pedestrian refuges, landscaped medians, consolidated driveways, crosswalks, signals at crosswalks, attractive transit shelters, and undergrounding of utilities) can be constructed with minimal impacts on the business community and nearby neighborhoods. Section IV. Economic Development Goal 9: Support Businesses in the Village Center Policy 9.3. Provide adequate parking opportunities to serve businesses in the Village Center. Policy 9.4 Ensure no net loss of parking facilities within the Lake Grove Village Center when making access modifications to Boones Ferry Road. Policy 9.6 Improve vehicular access between businesses and Boones Ferry Road by requiring connectivity between parking lots and shared access driveways where practical. Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 12 OF 15 Response: The purpose of Goal 9 is to "create an economically viable business core where neighborhood-serving, independent businesses may flourish" and three of the six policies under this goal directly relate to private parking capacity and access coordination. As described, above, the "Great Street" modifications to BFR are extensive and go beyond changing the multiple access points onto the travel way. Thirty five properties in the LGVC Overlay are losing land area to ROW dedication and, for eight of those properties, that land includes valuable surface parking. Since the beginning of the LGVC planning process, the community has stated that, in addition to implementing a Great Street, it is essential to maintain surface parking for both the continued viability of the businesses and the protection of the residential character of abutting neighborhoods. The code amendments are proposed so that these policies can be enacted as a part of the BFR Project. The BFR Special Street Setback modification will allow the City Engineer to take into consideration the final BFR design and narrower ROW width when reviewing applications for redevelopment projects; less ROW dedication means more flexibility for high quality site planning in accordance to the LGVC Overlay District standards. The eight replacement parking plans offer a streamlined option to recapture lost parking and have been designed to have minimal impacts on abutting residential neighbors while ensuring future connectivity between parking lots. The expansion of the existing parking and landscaping exceptions help mitigate any potential negative impacts the permanent loss of land area may have on the impacted businesses. Conclusion: The proposal is consistent with the applicable LGVC Plan goals, policies, and action measures. D. Lake Oswego Community Development Code Procedural Requirements LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision Findings: The Community Development Code 50.07.003.16.a defines "legislative decisions" to include amendments to the CDC and to Comprehensive Plan policies. Public hearings by the Planning Commission for recommendations to the City Council for "legislative decisions" are required to have at least 10 days prior published notice, per LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii and 50.07.003.3.c. Notice is defined as being published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Lake Oswego at least ten days in Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 13 OF 15 advance of the hearing, and mailed at least ten days in advance to the Commission for Citizen Involvement and to all recognized neighborhood associations. The notice shall include: i. The time, date, and place of the public hearing; ii. A brief description of the proposed legislative amendment; and iii. A phone number for obtaining additional information. Notice of the public hearing was posted at City Hall, the Adult Community Center, the Library, and Palisades building on July 27, 2017. The hearing notice was published in the Lake Oswego Review newspaper on August 3, 2017. Legislative notice was mailed per LOC requirements on July 25, 2017. The criteria for a legislative decision are addressed in Sections A and B, above. The City notified DLCD and Metro of the proposed action 35 days before the initial evidentiary hearings. Conclusion: The CDC procedural requirements for the proposed amendments, including public notice requirements for the public hearing, are met per the applicable CDC criteria. VI. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION The proposed amendments are in compliance with applicable City Comprehensive Plan policies, the LGVC Plan, state laws, and statewide planning goals. The amendments respond to public input and incorporate additional information as requested by the Planning Commission during its public work session on the proposal. Based on the information presented in this report, staff requests that the Commission recommend adoption of Ordinance 2753 (including all attachments) to the City Council. EXHIBITS This staff report and all exhibits referenced below are part of the record and can be found by visiting the land use webpage for case file LU 17-0028. A link is provided at the end of this report. A. Draft Ordinances A-1 Draft Ordinance 2753, August 17, 2017 Attachment A— Reserved for City Council Findings (not included) Attachment B— Proposed Draft Code Amendments, August 16, 2017 Attachment C— Replacement Plans and Written Summaries, August 17, 2017 Attachment D.1— Property Impact Table, August 17, 2017 Attachment D.2— Property Index Map, August 17, 2017 Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 14 OF 15 B. Findings, Conclusion and Order (no current exhibits) C. Minutes (no current exhibits) D. Staff Reports (no current exhibits) E. Graphics/Plans (no current exhibits) F. Written Materials F-1 Memo from Deputy City Attorney regarding Exhibit G-1 (Robinson Letter), August 2, 2017 F-2 Arborist Report, prepared by Morgan Nolen & Associates, July 27, 2017 G. Letters (no current exhibits) G-1 Letter from Mike Robinson, dated June 19, 2017 BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCES Use the link below to visit the City's "Project" page. In the "Search" box enter LU 17-0028, then press "Submit": http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/proiects Planning Commission Public Hearing August 17, 2017 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 15 OF 15 EXHIBIT F-1 LU 17-0028 p E�� MEMORANDUM o roar EGfla TO: Planning Commission FROM: Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney SUBJECT: LU 17-0028, Proposed Amendments to Lake Grove Village Center Overlay Boones Ferry Road Nonconformities Response to Issues Raised by Michael Robinson Letter dated June 19, 2017 [Exhibit G-1] DATE: August 2, 2017 This memorandum responds to the legal issues raised by attorney Michael Robinson, on behalf of Cain Petroleum. 1. The PRD's amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. should explicitly apply to parking the BFR Project directly and indirectly"eliminates." This concern is addressed in a proposed text revision to the section, where this Ordinance's exhibit will identify the parking spaces specifically lost by the Project. vi. For the portion of property purchased or condemned by City after October 4, 2012,for the purpose of improvements to Boones Ferry Road right-of-way that are consistent with the Lake AL Grove Village Center Plan: If the loss of property eliminates parking, as set forth in Attachment D of Ordinance No. .the amount of parking lost may be counted toward meeting the parking standard. for building expansions if applied for within five y ars of the purchase or condemnation. 2. The City should amend Policy 9.4 of the Lake Grove Village Center Plan. These code amendments can be adopted without necessarily amending Policy 9.4. The Boones Ferry Road Realignment Project includes street frontage changes. The "no net loss in parking facilities" in Policy 9.4 refers to loss due to "access modifications": 9.4 Ensure no net loss of parking facilities within the Lake Grove Village Center when making access modifications to Boones Ferry Road. LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 1 OF 4 503.575.3984 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 2 of 4 The Boones Ferry Road Realignment Plan', although not a land use plan, does state a policy for the project that there be no net loss of parking from the realignment project: Oft-street Parking impacts The City of Lake Oswego has endorsed a policy that calls for"no net loss"in parking }Within the Boones Ferry Road corridor after construction of the Boones Ferry Road refinements_ The preliminary construction plans indicate that the most significant off-street parking impacts are expected for the following businesses:Wells Fargo bank(across from the Lake Grove Shopping enter), Bank of American(in the Lake Grove Shopping Center); Lake Grove Garden Center, Naomi's Lampshades; and the new Sherwin Williams paint store (near Lake Grove Elementary school). There may also be additional parking impacts with some businesses losing 1-2 parking spaces. Future planning and design phases for this project should consider appropriate locations for additional on- and off-street public parking areas that help mitigate these and other potential off-street parking dislocations. BFR Realignment Plan, pg. 2 H. Parking Mitigation The widening of Boones Ferry Road will have variable impacts to properties fronting on the corridor_ Final engineering design will need to address on-site parking areas and access reconfiguration in order to mitigate loss of parking and help meet the Plan goal of no net loss of parking in the district BFR Realignment Plan, pg. 35 The question is whether the proposed amendments comply with the Comprehensive Plan. No Comprehensive Plan policy has been identified by Planning staff or Mr. Robinson to which the code amendments were contrary. In other words, the question isn't whether the code amendments are mandated by a Comprehensive Plan policy but whether adoption of the code amendments would conflict with a Comprehensive Plan policy. Doing more than required by Comp Plan policies-- by enacting code amendments to achieve no net loss of parking facilities due to Boones Ferry Road realignment-- is permissible. 3. The PRD does not include drafts of the "frontage plans" referenced by LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i., and therefore it is not possible to make informed comment on the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. This comment is now superseded by the public hearing version of the code amendments. Cain Petroleum may make additional comments at or prior to the public hearing. 'http://www.ci.osweao.or.us/sites/default/files/archives/projects/planningproiects/PP09- 0019 LGVC Financing Strateav-CEG/Boones Ferry Phase-2 Report 07-12- 2011.pdf?t=1498006584530) LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 2 OF 4 Page 3 of 4 4. The PRD amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8). should include a corresponding amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i. Mr. Robinson is concerned that an internal inconsistency could arise: a defined ministerial development under LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii(8)would not be within the initial scope of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i(3). I do not find the proposed amendment to LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii(8)to be inconsistent with LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i(3): 13. MINISTERIAL DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS a. Ministerial Development Classification i. Requirements of Ministerial Decisions A ministerial development is a development which requires a permit or review from the City where the decision: (1) Is made pursuant to land use standards which do not require interpretation or the exercise of policy or legal judgment; (2) Approves or denies a building permit issued under clear and objective land use standards; or (3) Determines final engineering design,construction, operation, maintenance, repair or preservation of a transportation facility which is otherwise authorized by and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and land use regulations. Rather, I would be more concerned about adding suggested subsection (4). The addition of subsection 4 would suggest that review of applications under LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8)was not within the scope of subsection 3, and that would also suggest that the review falls outside the exception to the definition of a "land use decision" in ORS 197.015(10)(b)(D), below. The ministerial development categories stated in LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i parrot the statutory exclusion of certain types of decisions from "land use decision" under ORS 197.015(10). ORS 197.015 Definitions for ORS chapters 195, 196, 197 and ORS 197A.300 to 197A.325. ** (10) "Land use decision": *** (b) Does not include a decision of a local government: (A)That is made under land use standards that do not require interpretation or the exercise of policy or legal judgment; (B)That approves or denies a building permit issued under clear and objective land use standards; (C)That is a limited land use decision; (D)That determines final engineering design,construction, operation, maintenance, repair or preservation of a transportation facility that is otherwise authorized by and consistent with the comprehensive plan and land use regulations; (E)That is an expedited land division as described in ORS 197.360; *** Land use decisions are statutorily required by ORS 227.175 to provide notice and an opportunity for a public hearing, i.e., minor development procedures under LOC 50.07.003. See ORS 227.160(2)(c): LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 3 OF 4 Page 4 of 4 ORS 227.160 Definitions for ORS 227.160 to 227.186.As used in ORS 227.160 to 227.186: (1) "Hearings officer" means a planning and zoning hearings officer appointed or designated by a city council under ORS 227.165. (2) "Permit" means discretionary approval of a proposed development of land, under ORS 227.215 or city legislation or regulation. "Permit"does not include: (c)A decision which determines final engineering design,construction, operation, maintenance, repair or preservation of a transportation facility which is otherwise authorized by and consistent with the comprehensive plan and land use regulations; or (d)An expedited land division, as described in ORS 197.360. Accordingly, I do not recommend a proposed code amendment to LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i by adding a subsection 4, given that I do not find an internal inconsistency and a concern that in doing so would raise unnecessary questions regarding ORS 197.015(10)(b)(D). LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 4 OF 4 971 .409.9354 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 — —Af f OCIATrf c �, Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net DATE: July 27, 2017 TO: Johanna Hastay, Senior Planner FROM: Morgan Holen, Consulting Arborist RE: Lake Grove Village Center On-Site Parking Replacement Plans—Tree Evaluations MHA17049 Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC was contracted by the City of Lake Oswego to evaluate existing trees for the Lake Grove Village Center On-Site Parking Replacement Plans.The scope of work was limited to four sites and specific trees identified by numbers on each plan provided by the City. I visited the site on July 14, 2017 to visually assess the trees, collect tree inventory data including species, diameter, crown radius, general condition, and other notes as needed, and generally assess other nearby trees in terms of potential impacts the proposed removal would have on the protection of adjacent trees. Following the site visit, I coordinated with Senior Planner Johanna Hastay to discuss the proposed site plans in terms of potential impacts and recommendations for tree removal or preservation. This report documents the condition of existing trees subject to the assessment, discusses potential tree impacts, and provides arborist recommendations for tree removal or preservation. A complete description of the inventoried trees is provided in the enclosed tree data for each site along with a copy of the On-Site Parking Replacement Plan sheets with comments pertaining to discussion in this report added as needed. Note that tree preservation and mitigation for tree removal is subject to the Lake Grove Village Center standards contained in LOC 50.05.007.6.e.ix. Naomi's Lampshades Two trees were assessed based on the proposed parking lot plan for Naomi's Lampshades.Tree 1 is considered significant as defined by size per LOC 50.05.007 and is generally in good condition and a prominent tree along Boones Ferry Road. Removal of this tree for construction purposes requires a Type II tree removal permit and may result in significant negative impacts to the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood. However, adequate protection is not possible for this tree considering impacts that will occur during both demolition of existing infrastructure and proposed new construction. Because of this tree's close proximity to the street,there are no reasonable alternatives to provide for protection and allow for right of way improvements.Tree 2 is an invasive species and not significant. Gubanc's Restaurant One tree was assessed based on the proposed parking lot plan for Gubanc's Restaurant.Tree 1 is considered significant as defined by size per LOC 50.05.007, but this tree has poor structure, decay in the crown,trunk, and base, leaders with reduced vigor and dieback, and moderate risk potential overall. It would not meet the criteria for issuance of a hazardous tree removal permit at this time, but Type II removal for construction would not result in significant negative impacts. Note that several other bigleaf maples in relatively better condition were observed along the eastern property boundary near this tree; these trees will function to maintain the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood and adequate protection seems feasible based on the proposed site plan. LGVC On-Site Parking Replacement Plans—Tree Evaluations July 27, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Riccardo's Ristorante Three trees were assessed based on the proposed parking lot plan for Riccardo's Ristorante.Tree 1 is a 33-inch diameter open grown Douglas-fir in good condition with no major defects.This tree is considered significant as defined by size per LOC 50.05.007. It is currently surrounded by curbs and asphalt on three sides and the ground surrounding the tree is relatively compacted. Removal of this tree for construction purposes requires a Type II tree removal permit and may result in significant negative impacts to the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood. However, adequate protection is not possible for this tree based on the proposed site plan showing the tree in the middle of parking stalls. Partial construction of the parking lot plan could be explored in order to preserve the tree, but exploratory excavation using an air-spade or hydrovac would be needed to determine the quantity, size, and location of roots south of the tree to inform site design regarding how close impacts could occur in this area without causing detrimental harm to the health or stability of the tree as determined by an arborist. Preserving tree 1 would require losing at least three and possibly four parking stalls depending on how much root protection is determined to be needed south of the tree following exploratory excavation. At a minimum,the tree would need protection 6-feet to the north, 8-feet to the west, and 12-feet to the east (where existing curbs are located), some protection to the south as recommended by an arborist based on exploratory excavation,the existing infrastructure would need to be demolished under arborist oversight so that roots that may be encountered beneath the existing curbs and asphalt could be assessed and additional recommendations for protection provided as needed, and the new parking lot should maintain existing grade and be built up if roots are encountered. Trees 2 and 3 are not considered significant as defined by size per LOC 50.05.007 and no significant negative impacts would result from the removal of these trees for construction under a Type II tree removal permit. In addition to the three numbered trees, several off-site Douglas-firs to the south with crowns overhanging the subject site were observed.These trees generally appeared in good condition as an intact group and removal of trees 1, 2, and 3 would not result in negative impacts to the protection of these trees.The enclosed site plan provides a mark-up depicting the approximate location of the off-site trees closest to the project boundary.These trees should be added to the survey and taken into consideration when developing the tree protection plan for the project. Adequate protection does seem feasible based on the proposed site plan, but it will be critical to evaluate proposed grading and modify grading plans if needed to avoid root zone excavation within the dripline of these trees.The uppermost organic matter may be removed,then build the parking lot up from existing grade using a layer of permeable geotextile fabric topped with clean crush rock to the desired depth and finish with asphalt surfacing. Jenike Property Six trees were identified for assessment in the scope of work, but additional trees identified as 7-11 were added to the inventory for this site.The enclosed site plan provides a mark-up depicting the inventory numbers assigned to these trees to correspond with the data. It also shows the approximate location of non-inventoried trees that should be added to the survey and identifies the species of additional trees for discussion purposes. Tree 5 is located in an existing parking lot island and is not considered significant as defined by size per LOC 50.05.007 and no significant negative impacts would result from the removal of this tree for construction under a Type II tree removal permit. LGVC On-Site Parking Replacement Plans—Tree Evaluations July 27, 2017 Page 3 of 3 Except for tree 5,the trees at this site are located in a relatively dense group along the northern boundary, including the 11 inventoried trees, and four Douglas-firs, four small invasive sweet cherries (Prunus avium), and one Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana), as described on the site plan mark-up. Seven of the 11 inventoried trees are considered significant as defined by size per LOC 50.05.007. However, individual trees within the group are variable in condition.They have grown up competing with and adapting to one another and are most suitable for retention as an intact group because removal of select trees from the group will result in significant negative impacts to the protection of remaining trees in the group.Additionally,the group as a whole is significant to the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood. The proposed site plan shows some trees that are not marked for removal, including trees 7-11 that were added to the inventory and two small invasive sweet cherries. It does not seem possible to provide adequate protection for trees 7-11 based on the proposed site plan. Moreover,tree removal as proposed will result in significant negative impacts to the protection of trees 7-11 and the two sweet cherries identified on the mark-up. Based on the proposed site plan,the group should be removed as a whole, which may result in significant negative impacts to the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood. It is unlikely that there would be reasonable alternatives to provide for protection since the trees are only recommended for retention as an intact group which limits opportunities to modify the layout. Note that there are additional mature Douglas-firs in relatively better condition located further west of the site, which will help to maintain skyline aesthetics.The invasive sweet cherries may be permitted for removal with a free invasive tree species permit, while the other trees will require a Type II permit. The client may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations contained herein, or seek additional advice. Neither this author nor Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC, have assumed any responsibility for liability associated with the trees on or adjacent to these sites. Thank you for choosing Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC,to provide consulting arborist services for the City of Lake Oswego. Please contact us if you have questions or need additional information. Thank you, Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC Morgan . Holen, Owner/Member ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-6145B ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Forest Biologist Enclosures: LGVC Parking Plans—Tree Data 7-14-17 On-Site Parking Replacement Plan Drawings THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Morgan Holen — —Aff OCIATC/« MHA17049 LGVC Parking Plans-Tree Data 7-14-17.xlsx Naomi's Lampshades Permit No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Condi Comments Sig4 Treatment Type 1 bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum 35 24 G 3 codominant leaders (16", 22", 22"), located Yes remove Type II against Casa del Pollo building to southwest and existing asphalt to northeast with some root heave, generally good health but some crown dieback and moderate crown structure;tree likely to be impacted by demolition of existing infrastructure; removal may have a significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood, but adequate protection is unlikely with demolition and new construction 2 sweet cherry Prunus avium 24 22 G invasive species, 3 codominant stems (12", 14", 16"), No remove Invasive located against Casa del Pollo building to west 1DBH is tree diameter measured at breast height,4.5-feet above the ground level(inches)per LOC 55.02.020. 2C-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Cond is an arborist assigned rating to generally describe the condition of individual trees as follows-Dead;Poor;Fair;or Good condition. 4Sig notes whether individual trees are considered significant per LOC 55.05.007,either Yes or No. Morgan Nolen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net I 971.409.9354 XREF IMF X: yq / j `�\/ -�'' _ - ,J,�.../ y PaURED IN F � Vjllt ,� ��� I.D. 6' 4'x5' :::::: .• . 4 1 ,... a I• . : / / /; /// P1 V� �•* / SCALE mai �� / // 20 0 10 20 • / �Q� , a V 18.5' �'./ / / Qin j a I ' "• , ( FEET ) / /� M , 8, 1 INCH = 20 FT. 4RP/ // a 3.2' 8.0' 7y' �1 •/ scdi =� *' " ' _ Naomi's Lampshades / 18.5' p / -4\\ 4.--4A �� 15910, 15932, 15942 Boones Ferry Road a I4 . Tax Lot 21 E08CB-3600 • I' Option #2 (No Restaurant) - Not Compliant r Lce s 0 ��� _ / Existing Stalls: 21 „.._ . . . a \ - 0• •4: .... , .. ,. . .,. ,���� Proposed Stalls: 21 z • 0*---- - . -0e „ , , 55 I td ,, , ,,,,,, ,, ''' N aom is ,Z° r• 400.64. Tree Removal: 88" 2 y Y O p T, I 4 \. \ t j �\ \ • w w a m o \�. . • 111 K = ,J in o c> a a in -:" ..._..) . -r.,;) litoe • o Ad w ‘. 1 wor,40\ \ • v , «O v 0of N \ / W,, 8.1 / (EXis \ N W N. Property co aN \ 1` Side Lines o Q 0I \_.\ .. -- Z cn m F, eiGO / \ \ W = et'In O``' >vr ❑ w t / Q w *\ 1 0 L'(7? �l z 3 i o% / \\/ G\Q / \ Q Q N Z oI Qu , ,, 0" z Jw o I �' O pw LI jifr w p � c, oz 0 co$ - Ili Q w N o 0 Variance required for inadequate landscape buffer between sidewalk and surface parking.(5'required buffer) 0 50"Maple Tree. = Treeemovaeq UI re Removal Rd S Q X Variance required for inadequate offset between building and surface parking.(10'required) 0 38"Cherry Tree. SHEET NUMBER QQ Attachment 2/Page 5 of 17 = Proposed Landscaped Area 16 oa . IA? Morgan Holen —Aff OCIATFt/ MHA17049 LGVC Parking Plans-Tree Data 7-14-17.xlsx Gubanc's Restaurant Permit No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Condi Comments Sig4 Treatment Type 1 bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum 33 28 F 5 codominant stems (11", 12", 14", 16", 19"), Yes remove Type II generally fair condition, but poor structure; trunk decay in each stem, some basal decay in two stems, southwest stem with reduced vigor, dieback, and crown decay; southeast stem with decay in plane of lean over existing parking area; moderate risk potential; no significant negative impacts if removed for construction -other maples along property boundary in relatively better condition will not be impacted by removal of this tree and will maintain aesthetics; adequate protection of nearby trees is possible based on proposed parking lot plans 1DBH is tree diameter measured at breast height,4.5-feet above the ground level(inches)per LOC 55.02.020. 2C-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Cond is an arborist assigned rating to generally describe the condition of individual trees as follows-Dead;Poor;Fair;or Good condition. 4Sig notes whether individual trees are considered significant per LOC 55.05.007,either Yes or No. Morgan riolen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net I 971.409.9354 XRff INDEX: AIM I �� / - 4 ' , ' / � V , 4 4—i 01 $1,* d‘ ' ' /ak, Vo # "ilto • ** '. N , _ ' ,--i°0•-,,, °M\Y \' I Nd'�o m (011e,16"li � �'C�� y SCALE .a � \ rna°u�i3 �� ! 40 0 20 40 .or- � ( FEET ) 1. 1 INCH = 40 FT. ,7j'0, , ! , ,,9P a \ - Babica Hen Restaurant AIP a 3�'`v40 ` - ..r"'. . 15964 Boones Ferry Road . , '' Tax Lot 21 E08CB 3800 4 � Acca.: : ' B a b i ca H e r d K E Remove Markin• • E , • ilk,t1 i� SGubanc's . 'o 1,,, t 2Ack \- \ , w 2 Ram \ A\ _' \ —— a� O. � z fl ! H iLc' uN m 3m 18.5' _ I' Aw .0 � •ft NA • a8 ,., _ Esti N F$^ V . It 0 r" =1 y Reconstruct 20' M Gubancs Restaurant (33) , : #; ..'. longx8'wde aN i concrete pad for z Q mi2T 16008 Boones Ferry Rd. dumpst- .. _ 03 Ei Tax Lot 21 E08CB-3900 - • ♦ �` �` \ .- cogQ .•- 8.5 U `! __ _ -_ Q w OX , X Lu "> Existing Stalls: 30 18.0 ''�, - C0 Q 7 6 Y \ Retaining wall o 2 Proposed Stalls: 29 - \ . �' . . Q 2.5, o <77 : sig-' .. one.''-7.5) U z ww cv <8 Tree Removal: 74" - • Q w . si-CO \% m z V m Q Maple Tree wl4trunks: 19",24",19",12" S X = Tree Removal Required. SHEET NUMBER LC)ia QQ Attachment 2/Page 7 of 17 EX01 oa Morgan Holen —Aff OCIAT / MHA17049 LGVC Parking Plans-Tree Data 7-14-17.xlsx Riccardo's Ristorante Permit No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rade Condi Comments Sig4 Treatment Type 1 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 33 20 G no major defects, located in compacted island with Yes remove Type II curbs 6'to north, 8'to west, and 12'to east, open grown tree is significant and removal may have a significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood, but based on the current site plan adequate protection is not possible; consider modified design to provide protection 2 bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum 15 22 G generally good vigor, but moderate structure, one- No remove Type II sided crown with natural lean to east, assessment limited by ivy at base and up trunk, Bocce Ball Court is four feet north of trunk; below dominant canopy of off-site Douglas-firs to south, largest of which is located on the property line with a 26' crown radius and will require tree protection measures to avoid impacts 3 Oregon white oak Quercus garryana 16 30 G generally good vigor, but moderate structure, No remove Type II codominant spur leader, one-sided crown with natural lean to north, assessment limited by ivy at base and up trunk, Bocce Ball Court is three feet north of trunk; below dominant canopy of off-site Douglas-firs to south, largest of which is located on the property line with a 26' crown radius and will require tree protection measures to avoid impacts 1DBH is tree diameter measured at breast height,4.5-feet above the ground level(inches)per LOC 55.02.020. 2C-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Cond is an arborist assigned rating to generally describe the condition of individual trees as follows-Dead;Poor;Fair;or Good condition. 4Sig notes whether individual trees are considered significant per LOC 55.05.007,either Yes or No. Morgan riolen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net I 971.409.9354 XREF INDEX: * - - -. IV Approx. property line 11 ,. 1 It jJ���������������������/ ——— - Riccardo's Restaurant rant (26) �,,o occeBBall Court / 10.0' 1 I�— Shift trash enclosure right / /////////////////// / 1 to allow for Bocce Court 16035 & 16045 Boones FerryRoad N 8.0' 60.0' —I� I- - - - J : E ,. Tax Lot 21 E08CB-1800 .''6',``0 �' rna°u�i 3 18.0' : I Existing Stalls: 41* 11 _ _ 8.5' I Proposed Stalls: 41* J p $' J I •~ ::u:: a :It in employee parking • iliCi"."T 1- p011. db.' * --� 5.0' 24.5' 1 0 0 0 0 0 r K a o v 4, o` .. Riccardo's � g [] - '" _ (1,700 SF) / \ vi g II in OE • \ ' ,_ ow - a 18.5 a / w / _ • in o c�i a g a in x w 1!E �� gii.lt51 ' ,;"-' � — Keep accessible Cr;.,1 i o 2 o • stall and aisle-- " w Vin Italy _ Ai - � -� �x Italian Wines — — . . - 0 ,.."4% 4 , 1-a 4 9 �� // / c7 �, Cafe - Right of Way N H , n a 9 Y tY - Marzocca w = (2,100 SF) a a / �, / o o -Lu • �� / Q :\ � . . �' SCALE a 0 LL Hi LL I Lake Grove :`� ��e Zo 0 10 20 o Barber Shop !:*:*:*:':*:*:'••••••••••: �;, rt Ode �/ ❑ F w 1 �� 4, / V i/' ( FEET ) o Q awm� ZMm - __ ,��'i %�Ti 1 — -- — — / � / 1 INCH = 20 FT. U o0 s o 0 38"Fir Tree. 0 Variance required for lack of planter between parking bays.(5'wide planter required every 10 stalls) rn O 0 12"Deciduous X = Tree Removal Required SHEET NUMBER a p 16"Deciduous QQ Attachment 2/Page 9 of 17 ...... = Proposed Landscaped Area EX02 oa . f' Morgan Holen MHA17049 LGVC Parking Plans-Tree Data 7-14-17.xlsx 8,—AJ,/'OCIATriLL, a, Jenike Property Permit No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Condi Comments Sig4 Treatment Type 1IDouglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 30 22 G codominant crown class, crown asymmetry, roots Yes remove Type II causing asphalt damage 2'Douglas-fir IPseudotsuga menziesii I 131 101 F lintermediate crown class I No 'remove (Type II 3'Douglas-fir IPseudotsuga menziesii I 291 161 G Icodominant crown class I Yes 'remove (Type II 4 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 36 24 F intermediate crown class, old broken top, lamp Yes remove Type II attached to trunk, seams on south face 0-10' with old pitch and on north face 0-15' with active pitch 51pin oak Quercus palustris 14 16 F moderate structure, crown lifted relatively high, No remove (Type II located in compacted island 6'Douglas-fir IPseudotsuga menziesii I 161 81 F 'intermediate crown class I No 'remove (Type II 7lDouglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 22 18 F intermediate crown class, reduced vigor,twig I Yes remove (Type II dieback, only suitable for retention with#8 8lDouglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 28 20 F dominant crown class, several over-extended lateral Yes remove Type II limbs, safety prune if retained, but likely to be 9lDouglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 26 12 F codominant crown class, broken leader with new Yes remove Type II top,will be impacted by adjacent clearing 10lDouglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 28 12 F codominant crown class, major crown asymmetry, Yes remove Type II poor lateral branch distribution 11IDouglas-fir IPseudotsuga menziesii I 161 101 F 'intermediate crown class, reduced vigor I No 'remove 'Type II 1DBH is tree diameter measured at breast height,4.5-feet above the ground level(inches)per LOC 55.02.020. 2C-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Cond is an arborist assigned rating to generally describe the condition of individual trees as follows-Dead;Poor;Fair;or Good condition. 4Sig notes whether individual trees are considered significant per LOC 55.05.007,either Yes or No. Morgan riolen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net I 971.409.9354 [DATE: 5/19/2017 9:1B AM [AUTHOR: ifabik] [PLOTTER: DWG To PDF.pc3] [STYLE: WHP—Standard.etb] (PATH: P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\CiviI\Exhibits\091415—BFR—Site Exhibits\2017_0509—BFR—Site Exhibits —Jenike.dwg] [LAYOUT: Jenike (2)] 0000 co c - -n T T T — -1 21 -1 ED' a a a P m co m 00 OD A T p = N a —I - a CD , \\ Atac- -- - e. . \ ' '7"/A. 40, - . " AL.......• <is • ‘6,\c"1/4 z • .„1„. I 0 \ 0 Ci) . —__,...., 40 , 4,, .1 '` .. ' . C°2rcin o • 0 S.\:'• \'`, = — • ': :.:,•::::';•--.r. ,,.............L.„--,,,21 ,-- ,1 _ .!i. ,,,/ ti . ...., o , , . 02 _ - 0 lik 7 11 I. \ ‘141: EiTL..,, __.... n Ww'r \ -�,� op 0 \ \ \ 1 \ .tet>c� N ) \1\ \ \ / �,, �,/ �\ l��� \ ii) \ ' '\ ( oe \,h *.4(..1\ A.,Ail, A * 0 v4, Io tri illit _......igigillgllfe,, 4....-_.\--m,„ N Alb / , is . it ma� _1 L Fp, o " x - o CD CD -0 cr r = CSD CD cCD o —- c -, CD a = "- 1 CZ) Cn W 01 N 0 CO O m CD CD o rF 33 0 CD 1_ X II W 0 CD CD CD _ o= Ti n Il m _ z .- CA CD cn —1- CD w 0 SHEET INFO REVISIONS LI JENIKE PROPERTY albs BY DATE REMARKS WHPacific M = DRAWN XWCHECKED 0 A APPROVED 9755 SW Barnes Rd,Suite 300 BOON ES FERRY ROAD LAST EDIT 5/17/2017 Portland,OR 97225 503-626-0455 Fax 503-526-0775 PROJECT NUMBERDRAWING FILE NAME SCALE PLOT DATE 5/19/2017 www.whpacitiic.com 20 7_0509-BFR-SITE EXHIBITS-JENIKE 1"=30' SUBMITTAL P e R K I N s CO l e 1120 NW Couch Street 0 +1.503.727.2000 10th Floor 0 +1.503.727.2222 Portland,OR 97209-4128 PerkinsCoie.com June 19, 2017 Michael C.Robinson MRobinson@perkinscoie.com D. +1.503.727.2264 F. +1.503.346.2264 VIA EMAIL Ms. Johanna Hastay Senior Planner City of Lake Oswego Planning & Building Services Department 380 A Avenue P.O. Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: Comments on Public Review Draft of the Boones Ferry Road Nonconformities Code Amendments (LU 17-0028) Dear Ms. Hastay: As you know, our firm represents Cain Petroleum("Cain"). Cain owns a fuel station on Boones Ferry Road(the "Property"). This letter responds to the Public Review Draft of the Boones Ferry Road Nonconformities Code Amendments (LU 17-0028) (the "PRD"). Cain expects that the City of Lake Oswego's ("City")planned improvements to Boones Ferry Road("BFR Project")will require it to relocate a propane tank on its Property in order to ensure adequate separation between the propane tank and vehicles on Boones Ferry Road. This relocation will cause the loss of two (2)parking spaces on the Property, rendering the fuel station a nonconforming development. Cain notes that one purpose of the Boones Ferry Road Nonconformities Code Amendments is to ensure that properties that lose area or parking as a result of the BFR Project will receive a "credit" in the amount of such lost area or parking toward meeting the minimum landscaping or parking requirements of the City code. The City intends for the credit to apply based on clear and objective standards, without an expiration date, and to new construction as well as the expansion of existing construction. Cain further notes that the Property is not among the eight(8)properties for which the PRD's amendment of LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii. includes a draft site plan, meaning the PRD's amendment of LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii. will not apply to the Property. Although Cain was initially concerned that the Property was not among the eight(8)properties to which the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii. would apply, the City has informed Cain that it intends the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii. will only to apply to, and thus the City has prepared site plans only for, those eight(8)properties whose owners the City has collaborated with to plan for replacement parking. Furthermore, the City has informed Cain that the PRD amendment of LOC 66335-0004/135838348.4 Perkins Cole LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 1 OF 4 Ms. Johanna Hastay June 19, 2017 Page 2 50.05.007.6.c.vi., as further discussed below, will provide a"credit" toward the minimum parking standard for the parking the Property stands to lose because the BFR Project will force Cain to relocate a propane fuel tank, as described above. Based on and relying on this information, Cain has no further comment on the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii. The rest of Cain's comments on the PRD are shown below. Cain recommends the following amendments of the PRD to ensure that it achieves the City's goals for the Boones Ferry Road Nonconformities Code Amendments. 1. The PRD's amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. should explicitly apply to parking the BFR Project directly and indirectly"eliminates." The existing version of LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. authorizes, "for building expansions within five years," a credit toward meeting the parking standard in the amount of any parking that the BFR Project"eliminates." The PRD's amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. removes the temporal and "building expansions" limitations on the applicability of the parking credit, but otherwise makes no changes to it. It is unclear what the existing LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. means by"eliminates parking." The PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. does not clarify this ambiguity. It is possible to read "eliminates parking" to mean"directly eliminates parking,"meaning the City directly acquires (by condemnation or purchase)property used as parking space. It is also possible to read "eliminates parking"to mean"directly or indirectly eliminates parking,"meaning, more broadly, the City's acquisition of property causes a loss of parking space. The latter would include a situation in which the City,by acquiring a portion of property, forces the property owner to rearrange the remainder of the property in a way that results in a loss of parking. This is the situation Cain(and possibly other property owners whom the BFR Project affects) faces. However, because it is unclear what LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. means by"eliminates parking,"it is also unclear whether the provision would allow the Property to credit toward the minimum parking standard the parking spaces the BFR Project will cause it to lose. To ensure the LOC protects all properties that the BFR Project will cause to lose parking spaces, LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi. should apply"if the loss of property causes the elimination of parking" rather than"if the loss of property eliminates parking." 2. The City should amend Policy 9.4 of the Lake Grove Village Center Plan. The PRD claims that one goal of the Lake Grove Village Center("LGVC")Plan is to "ensure no net loss of parking as a result of[the BFR Project.]"To support this contention, the PRD cites Goal 9, Policy 9.4 of the LGVC Plan. However, the PRD mischaracterizes Goal 9, Policy 9.4 of the LGVC Plan. 66335-0004/135838348.4 Perkins Cole LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 2 OF 4 Ms. Johanna Hastay June 19, 2017 Page 3 In fact, Goal 9, Policy 9.4 of the LGVC Plan commits the City to "ensure no net loss of parking facilities within the Lake Grove Village Center when making access modifications to Boones Ferry Road" (emphasis added). Thus, Goal 9, Policy 9.4 of the LGVC Plan currently applies only when the City makes "access"modifications for the BFR Project. To ensure that Goal 9, Policy 9.4 of the LGVC Plan applies in the way the City intends it to, the City should amend it to remove the limiting word"access," such that it applies to all modifications the City makes as part of the BFR Project. 3. The PRD does not include drafts of the "frontage plans" referenced by LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i., and therefore it is not possible to make informed comment on the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. The existing version of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. allows properties to apply, "for building expansions ... within five years," a credit toward meeting the landscaping standard equal to the square footage of any property the City purchases or condemns for the BFR Project. The PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. removes the temporal and"building expansions" limitations on the applicability of the credit. Furthermore, the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. defines the "square footage of the lost property" as that"shown [on] the frontage plans approved by City Council per Ordinance No. ."1 However, the PRD does not include drafts of any such"frontage plans." As discussed above, the PRD includes eight (8) "site plans,"but it does not include the "frontage plans"that the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. references, and which are necessary to evaluate and comment on the amendment. To allow informed evaluation and commentary on LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i., the City should publicly provide drafts of the "frontage plans"that the PRD amendment of LOC 50.05.007.6.e.i. references. 4. The PRD amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8). should include a corresponding amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i. The PRD amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8). adds as a"ministerial development type" development that is "designed to address impacts of a transportation project"when such development is "associated"with"construction or alteration of public transportation or utility facilities" and"abut[s] the public right-of-way."LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i. defines "ministerial development" as: 1 The PRD provides only this blank space in lieu of the actual ordinance number. 66335-0004/135838348.4 Perkins Cole LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 3 OF 4 Ms. Johanna Hastay June 19, 2017 Page 4 "[A] development which requires a permit or review from the City where the decision: (1) Is made pursuant to land use standards which do not require interpretation or the exercise of policy or legal judgment; (2) Approves or denies a building permit issued under clear and objective land use standards; or (3) Determines final engineering design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair or preservation of a transportation facility which is otherwise authorized by and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and land use regulations." The development type that the PRD amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8). adds as a "ministerial development type" is broad and may encompass developments that do not meet LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i.'s definition of"ministerial development." That is, some developments designed to mitigate the impacts of a transportation project, which are associated with construction or alteration of public transportation/utility facilities, and which abut the public right-of-way, may nonetheless fail to satisfy the definition of"ministerial development"under LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i.(1)-(3). This would create an internal inconsistency in the LOC, whereby development not"ministerial"under LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i. is nevertheless designated a "ministerial development type"under LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8). To avoid internal inconsistency in the LOC, the PRD amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii.(8). should include an amendment of LOC 50.07.003.13.a.i., which amendment should add to the definition of"ministerial development" a subsection (4),which should read: "Is one of the `ministerial development types' described in LOC 50.07.003.13.a.ii., below." We look forward to continuing to work with the City as this process moves forward, and thank you again for your hard work and for the opportunity to participate in the process. Very truly yours, IVi,,Jatsegom.- Michael C. Robinson MCR:rsr 66335-0004/135838348.4 Perkins Cole LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 4 OF 4 From: Robinson.Michael C.(Perkins Coie) To: Hastay.Johanna Cc: "odaolanninaecomcast.net"; "Ron Cain"; Bledsoe.David(Perkins Coie); Mary Ellen Farr (mefarr(c�marvellenfarr.com); Boone.Evan Subject: Cain Service Station Date: Monday,August 28,2017 9:48:53 AM Attachments: imaae002.ona Good morning, Johanna. Thanks for your voicemail message from Friday morning. My client appreciates the City's help and understanding, including the City having worked with Cain on the sidewalk narrowing(that was in the original City Council adoption approving the BFR Project)and assuring that the business won't be damaged further by the take for the Boones Ferry Road improvements. Dave has been working with Stacey Bluhm on moving the propane tank. I have attached his most recent email to Stacey in which Dave states that Stacey has said that the City will either pay to move the propane tank, or include the propane tank relocation costs in the damages in the compensation. This issue has not been resolved as of today, although my colleague David Bledsoe is talking to the City's condemnation agent about it. However, until it is resolved, as explained below, Cain believes that the possibility should be maintained in the ordinance that the Chevron property may lose up two parking spaces. Whether the propane tank is non-code compliant or not is irrelevant to our conversation on moving the propane tank. The propane tank must be moved because of the City's street improvement project; otherwise, it could stay where it is. The staff commentary to Attachment 1 to the Ordinance, page 5 of 7, acknowledges that any parking space lost to the BFR Project should be eligible for parking credits("The exception allowina a Darkina credit for spaces lost due to the BFR project is existina code. The proposed chanaes are to: reference an Attachment D of the Ordinance(table and an associated index map that lists the properties and the number of Darkina spaces lost, if anv)..."). If the propane tank can be relocated as a vertical tank, then Cain will not lose any parking spaces but Cain will install it as a vertical tank only if he City agrees to pay for it, which is outside of the ordinance amendment's consideration. If the City does not pay for the propane tank relocation, then a horizontal propane tank may take up two of the existing limited off-street parking spaces. Thus, until the cost issue is resolved, the Ordinance should include the Chevron property. Cain appreciates everything the City has done to mitigate the impacts from the BFR project on the property. The property is a corner lot that has been squeezed over the years by City street improvements and it's important that the property not be so diminished through the loss of parking spaces that its viability as a business is damaged. I will also add that the propane tank is an important profit source for the business. According to Ron Cain, the propane tank consistently generates between $000 and $5000 per month in profits. From: Ddaolannina( comcast.net [mailto:DdaDlannina( comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 8:26 AM To: Robinson, Michael C. (POR) Cc: Cain, Ron; Delmar, David (POR); Bledsoe, David (POR); Farr, Mary Ellen Subject: Re: Lake Oswego Michael, That is my understanding as well. I think the Cain's need contingencies on this, because we don't have any actual answers from the City. It is too much of a moving target with verbal assurances that may not end up being true. It is my understanding from Stacy Bluhm the City intends to either pay to have the propane tank relocated or include it in the condemnation amounts, but again we don't have anything in writing. Dave Michael C. Robinson I Perkins Coie LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-2/PAGE 1 OF 2 PARTNER 1120 N.W.Couch Street Tenth Floor Portland,OR 97209-4128 D.+1.503.727.2264 C.+1.503.407.2578 F.+1.503.346.2264 E.MRobinsonlrpoerkinscoie.com fat LawKrir LAW FIRM Selected as 2014"Law Firm of the Year" CI DE YEAR, �t��1kr� in Litigation-Land Use&Zoning by to U.S. News—Best Lawyers®"Best Law Firms" NOTICE:This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information.If you have received it in error,please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents.Thank you. LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-2/PAGE 2 OF 2 P e R K I N S co i e 1120 NW Couch Street 0 +1.503.727.2000 10th Floor 0 +1.503.727.2222 Portland,OR 97209-4128 PerkinsCoie.com August 28, 2017 Michael C.Robinson MRobinson@perkinscoie.com D, +1.503.727.2264 F. +1.503.346.2264 VIA EMAIL Mr. Robert Heape, Chair City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: City of Lake Oswego File No. LU 17-0028; Lake Oswego Development Code ("LDC") Amendments for Implementing Boones Ferry Road Capital Improvement Project Dear Chair Heape and Members of the Lake Oswego Planning Commission: This office represents Cain Petroleum("Cain"). Cain owns the Chevron service station located at the corner of Boones Ferry Road and Oakridge Road. Cain and the City of Lake Oswego (the "City")have been discussing for several years the City's "take"of property from the Chevron service station property to allow for the widening of Boones Ferry Road, consistent with the City's plan for improvements to that road. One remaining issue is whether the propane tank at the service station can be moved so that it is not lost. The present plan requires the propane tank to be moved onto two parking spaces as a result of the right-of-way take. Cain and the City have been discussing whether a"vertical"version of the propane tank can be relocated so that the parking spaces will not be lost. However, at present, Cain and the City have not made a decision about this matter because they are discussing who will pay for the relocation costs. Consequently, Cain requests that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of these LDC amendments but that it amend proposed LDC 50.05.007.3.c.vi and Attachment D to show that the Cain property may lose two parking spaces but add the following footnote to Attachment D for the Cain property: "In the event the propane tank is relocated and parking spaces are lost, the Chevron station property is one of the properties losing parking. In the event the propane tank is moved and parking spaces are not lost, then the Chevron property will not be considered under this section." This modest modification to the proposed LDC amendments is necessary to protect Cain's property rights consistent with the discussions that Cain has had with City officials and both parties' desire not to adversely impact existing businesses through loss of parking or landscaping. 66335-0004/136745987.1 • Perkins Core LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 1 OF 2 Mr. Robert Heape, Chair August 28, 2017 Page 2 Cain otherwise supports the proposed LDC amendments and urges the Planning Commission to recommend approval of the LDC amendments to the Lake Owego City Council. I have asked Ms. Hastay to place this letter before you at your initial evidentiary hearing tonight and in the official Planning Department file for this matter. Please provide me with written notice of the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council. Very truly yours, Michael C. Robinson MCR:sv Cc: Mr. Ron Cain (via email) Ms. Mary Ellen Farr (via email) Mr. Dave Kimmel (via email) Ms. Johanna Hastay (via email) Mr. Evan Boone (via email) Mr. David Bledsoe (via email) 66335-0004/136745987.1 Pe kens Cele LLP LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 2 OF 2 a ` ' LLC AUG 2 3 2017 f`!TV i�� f , i or.' 0b.: 7r-- 4927 SW MARTHA ST. - • C. Pi: . t_� 1;r „x PORTLAND, OR 97221 August 28, 2017 BY HAND DELIVERY (12 COPIES) City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission 380 AAvenue, Council Chambers Lake Oswego, OR 97034 BY E-MAIL jhastay@lakeoswego.city Johanna Hastay, AICP Senior Planner Lake Oswego City Hall Planning & Building Services 380 AAvenue, Third Floor Post Office Box 369 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Re: TEKA, LLC/Testimony in Support of Text Amendments to Lake Oswego Community Development Code related to Boones Ferry Road Capital Improvement Project/Ordinance 2753 (City File No. LU 17-0028) Dear Commission Members and Ms. Hastay: TEKA, LLC owns property located at 16055, 16057, and 16063 Boones Ferry Road, Lake Oswego, Oregon, which is directly and substantially impacted by the City of Lake Oswego's Boones Ferry Road Capital Improvement Project ("the Project"). Our property is located within one of the main commercial corridors in the City, and has two commercial office buildings located on the property. We have leases with three small businesses that operate on the property. (Note: The City's materials refer to this property as the "Jenike Property," but it is now owned by TEKA, LLC.) The City plans on taking a portion of our property by condemnation for the Project, and we will need to modify the property to address the effects of the loss of that property. To date, we have identified a loss of parking and landscaping as potential impacts to this commercial property. Since we recently received the City's formal offer, we are still in the process of evaluating the Project's impacts to our property, so it is very possible there are additional impacts that we have not yet identified. LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-4/PAGE 1 OF 3 We submit this letter in support of the City's proposed text amendments to the City's Community Development Code as contained in proposed Ordinance 2753 to address and allow for mitigation of the Project's impacts on property owners and businesses. Although we support the Ordinance generally and appreciate the City's efforts to mitigate the burdens placed on owners as a result of the Project, we are concerned that the proposed Ordinance is not broad enough. We are concerned that the proposed Ordinance still leaves some items unaddressed as far as making the land use process more streamlined for owners, and we describe the particular provisions we are concerned with below. The Proposed Ordinance Should be Broadened to Mitigate Any Loss of Parkins{ as a Result of the Prosect. The proposed Ordinance expands the LOC 50.05.007(3)(c)(vi) exception allowing a parking credit for spaces lost due to the Project by removing the 5-year expiration date and allowing the exception to apply to new building construction, rather than to the expansion of an already existing building. In addition, the proposed Ordinance allows a code waiver by reducing parking requirements for five properties, including TEKA, LLC's property, but the commentary for the Ordinance also requires that the replacement parking would have to substantially comply with the replacement parking site plan worked up by the City. If the property owner constructs replacement parking different than what is shown on the City's site plan, then the owner will not have any relief under the proposed Ordinance, but would have to comply with all applicable zone, overlay, and development standards as if the impacts were not caused by the Project. In our case, we will lose 5 parking spaces due to the 3,113 square foot right-of-way acquisition. The City has identified that we will receive a waiver to reduce the 10-foot setback between the building and parking to 8 feet in order to reconstruct the 5 lost parking spaces onsite. We are concerned that if we discover that the City's replacement parking plan does not adequately address our needs, and we determine a different reconfiguration is necessary, then we will not receive any waiver under the proposed Ordinance, but instead will have to undergo an expensive land use process. As a result, we believe that the City's proposed Ordinance is too limited in this regard, and request that City consider broadening the waiver to allow for other reasonable replacement parking reconfigurations on properties impacted by the Project. We echo the concerns raised by Mike Robinson in Section 1 of his letter dated June 19, 2017 (Exhibit G-1 LU 17-0028) concerning the meaning of"eliminates parking" in LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi, which is not clarified in the proposed amendment. If the phrase "eliminates parking" is read narrowly as only intending those spaces directly taken by the Project (or lying only within the City's takings), it is possible that some owners who must reconfigure their properties as a result of the Project will lose parking, but not receive the benefit of the exception. As a result, we request that the City consider amending Section LOC 50.05.007.6.c.vi to read "if the loss of property causes the elimination of parking" rather than "if the loss of property eliminates parking." LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-4/PAGE 2 OF 3 The Proposed Ordinance Should Provide a Credit For All Landscaoina Area Lost as a Result of the Proiect. The proposed amendment to LOC 50.50.007.6.e.i (LGVC Overlay District Site Planning Standards: Landscaping Exception) allows for a credit to the property owner based on the square footage of lost property as a result of the Project. However, this credit is capped at a maximum reduction of 5% to the landscaping requirement under the Code even if the area the owner loses a greater area of property due to its dedication to the City for the Project. We are concerned that in cases where an owner loses more property than what the 5% credit provides relief for, then the owner will incur substantial costs to install additional landscaping to bring the property to conformance with the reduced landscaping requirement. In such cases, the owner will have to install additional landscaping, including required screening and buffering, parking lot landscaping, on-site tree mitigation and other landscaping to be compliant under the code. As a result, we request that the City consider amending the proposed Ordinance to eliminate the 5% cap for the landscaping reduction and instead allow for a directly proportionate landscaping reduction based on the actual loss of property. Despite these reservations and objections, TEKA, LLC supports the efforts the City is making to allow for a streamlined and less burdensome land use processes associated with mitigating the impacts of the Project. However, we are concerned that the proposed Ordinance falls short. We request that the City amend the proposed Ordinance to adequately cover the loss of parking and landscaping from the Boones Ferry Road Capital Improvement Project, and not limit a property owner's reconfiguration of its property to what the City shows in its plans. Sincerely, TEKA, LLC an Oregon limited liabilitylity comBy: -51-47F9F-' ,141 ( Elibeth Cruickshank By: \I to le A 1. Tom`Jenike ''V PDX113187412293 04U G12 1 37 I 484.1 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-4/PAGE 3 OF 3 DIENNE G. IRWIN EXHIBIT G-5 LU 17-0028 4343 Sunset Drive •Lake Oswego, OR 97035 •phone: (503)636-8859 • email: didiirwin@yahoo.com August 28, 2017 City of Lake Oswego Planning Department 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 RE: Community Development Code Amendments for Implementing Boones Ferry Road Capital Improvement Project Dear Planning Commission Members: I am writing to you regarding the Community Development Code Amendments for the Boones Ferry Capital Improvement Project. As stated in the Planning Department's staff report dated August 17, 2017, "The existing tree canopy is one of the unique characteristics of the Lake Grove Village Center(LGVC) Plan." This was a very important goal to protect and preserve trees, yet today these codes are being asked to be amended for parking spaces. The Boones Ferry Improvement Project is calling for 113 trees to be removed including over 18 large firs and cedars in addition to several large deciduous trees to make way for the "Great Street". Here are some of the trees which going to be removed for the roadside: a T ; : ti•" , .. 't' , ..:,- .;i', •:j: ac �;' yam• • '441" r moi , 4 , "ZAP , A ,1! 4• .. ..+ 1.t.. Asti' t w`a'i i:l t 'sem m 1 : .,r. r .- - I . _ r Z /# r. us bank - - ATM LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-5/PAGE 1 OF 4 Dienne Irwin Page 2 Now 18 more trees, many which are significant firs are slated to be removed. Understanding the business owner's interest in not losing parking spaces, originally the Boones Ferry plan called for the city to look for acquiring properties to be developed to serve this purpose. I strongly urge the Planning Commission to continue to pursue this avenue rather than changing the codes that protect our trees. Once these trees come down, they are irreplaceable! These beautiful trees by Naomi's Lampshades are to come down because of the proximity of the trees to construction and parking rather than providing a way to work around them and having the philosophy of taking the upmost care to preserve them rather than hastily decide that they just won't survive or that they may blow down by the wind. ` ,.„ 0C"-T.- ' •, e K •• _sy.., '.3eY'`RH -,i J.' '..W. ...- ------ -. Milt I :. -11--f .:,. 41. 4 0 k's , s .. : ' t,,.. ` r _ Y . , i -,. ' - LU 17-0028 ';1 EXHI «. ... ' Dienne Irwin Page 3 Lake Grove has BIG trees with small buildings: -s• 1;- 11- 4 __-- — .. , _-- -.,, •'% . t,.-1-. , . . - .114 %..;•• ;...,•,' .1.. ,op '' .. t.• ',f, t- •'X . . iii.- -•' . ..•..:••'s .: - , . '410.'"• ` 4 , , 4, •Te f.{.., ' / ' 4.,,• •- j"-v4f ::.• : I - .`"''"6"• le...-V4 ''' -• ot:14$4 .......;,-,. . .. . , .- .. .4 ‘...- ... .. ' • ... ,- ,.. •,.. , , •. . ..,,,,A, •.t - - ......- .. .,,.• ... , m.,- .1, ,... - 0.-...„--t- , - . oit'' ' #i^ _.. -dk• ..4 N. , , . - _ , • . . 'l .r, O*111". ' ..4'', ' ,4 , ,- . .. - 4 • e I •••• ' ..". _ _ - .'..„ _ '0 '•..t- -——14,, , • I,. - ,.:: N •". ' . 'a• -'- ..e' . • * t • - '...° ,• . ' '''"PAL * .. f -Th.4.tiltr,41,1. ',.. , R., • ,„, 1.- .11\I i lf. • • - •I ' 4r. -1 , . _ ._.,..., . .., ell2IPIkart' ' ." ' * -:•I'' :' -,, Is the Lake Grove Village plan now to have Big Buildings with Smaller Trees? :„. -k.,...,1, . ,.. , - 1 ....7:._ . • - p . - 1 - E 11 WELLS I "I FAA°0 . . . - t. I — WEU.S .1op —Ili m 17•E •-? ..,...., - . _ - --- .. — - - - - - LU 1 -"'''''''' - EXHIBIT G-5/PAGE 3 OF 4 Dienne Irwin Page 4 In the Comprehensive Plan of the Lake Grove Village Center, Ordinance 2454, Goal 8, it states: "Protect Natural Resources and Enhance the Natural Environment within the Village Enter.....to preserve existing trees and tree groves.... But this is not what the code amendments are proposing. Many of the old growth firs and cedars are being removed in Lake Grove and in this case it will be... "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot" The Lake Grove Neighborhood is rapidly losing much of the old growth trees due to redevelopment. We are losing the"wooded character of the City of Lake Oswego". Removing this many trees would have a negative impact on our tree canopy and go against the City's codes and value. We need to be creative in our solutions to prevent this and not be pressured by deadlines. Please consider not approving these amendments as it greatly impacts the needs of the residential property owners. Sincerely, Dienne Irwin 4343 Sunset Dr, Lake Oswego OR 97035 LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-5/PAGE 4 OF 4 McCaleb, Iris From: Waluga Neighborhood <waluga.neighborhood.association@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 8:02 AM To: Planning Commission Subject: Comments re: Aug. 28 PC meeting Hello Planning Commissioners, I realize that my comments and concerns are too late for the record,but I feel compelled to send them to you regardless. Last night I finally watched the video rerun of the PC meeting for August 28, 2017 (agenda item 7.1 that had to do with CDC Amendment to the BFR CIP LU 17-0028 presented by LO Planner Johanna Hastay). After listening to the report that Carolyn Krebs made at the LONAC monthly meeting on Sept. 2nd, I felt compelled to watch that portion of the meeting of which I originally missed. I was shocked in watching and hearing about the issues regarding the recommendations made by contracted arborist, Morgan Holen, to remove almost all of the trees on the Jenike property for parking and for ROW acquisition. The discussions that PC members briefly talked about obtaining a second opinion from another licensed and certified arborist made perfect sense to me. This definitely should've been recommended to staff. There are two reputable arborist that I know who could do this. And particularly because of the short time frame that Johanna emphasized, I am almost certain either of these two arborists would've given a second opinion, I have personally worked with both of them for my own property and other developments in my neighborhood. Also you should know that another Doug Fir tree grove is slated to be removed adjacent to the Jenike site. This property is located at 15948 Quarry Road. Currently there is a single family house located on the property and is zoned GC. It is located just behind Banner Bank on BFR at Quarry Rd. In looking at the preliminary plans now from Leslie Hamilton, there is a grove of large Doug Firs (7 each) toward the edge of the property line between Banner Bank and subject property. Though this grove does not border the Jenike property, it is significant enough to consider in the overall tree canopy of the surrounding properties in this area of the Waluga Neighborhood as well and along Boones Ferry Road. As a member of the BFR Improvement PAC as well as the Co-Chair of the Waluga Neighborhood Association, why wasn't I (and the co-chairs for BFR PAC, Mike and Carolyn) included in this recommended decision earlier to clear-cut the Jenike property? I can only guess that since staff knew this recommendation would be controversial, they chose to keep this info from the PAC members and instead have alienated the neighborhood associations. Sincerely, Cheryl Uchida Waluga Neighborhood Association Co-Chair and member of the BFR PAC LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-6/PAGE 1 OF 1 McCaleb, Iris From: Carolyn Krebs <cmkrebsnw@aol.com> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 11:04 AM To: Planning Commission Cc: Waluga Neighborhood Subject: LU 17-0028 Dear Commissioners, In light of the mixed recommendations from staff that the Planning Commission received during the Aug. 28 public hearing, regarding the Arborist report recommendations, I request that you delay the adoption of the findings to seek clarification. Commissioner Brockman asked a question as to whether the additional trees on the Jenike property would be removed only in the event that the property owner elected to remove them for parking. Staff was unclear that they 1) intend to remove all subject trees as part of the public improvements or 2)take the Arborist recommendation under advisement because it isn't an exact science. What recommendation did the staff make and how did it impact your decision on the code amendments. Thank you for your consideration, Carolyn Krebs Sent from my iPhone >On Sep 11, 2017, at 8:02 AM, Waluga Neighborhood <waluga.neighborhood.association@gmail.com>wrote: > Hello Planning Commissioners, > I realize that my comments and concerns are too late for the record, but I feel compelled to send them to you regardless. > Last night I finally watched the video rerun of the PC meeting for August 28, 2017 (agenda item 7.1.that had to do with CDC Amendment to the BFR CIP LU 17-0028 presented by LO Planner Johanna Hastay). After listening to the report that Carolyn Krebs made at the LONAC monthly meeting on Sept. 2nd, I felt compelled to watch that portion of the meeting of which I originally missed. > I was shocked in watching and hearing about the issues regarding the recommendations made by contracted arborist, Morgan Nolen,to remove almost all of the trees on the Jenike property for parking and for ROW acquisition. >The discussions that PC members briefly talked about obtaining a second opinion from another licensed and certified arborist made perfect sense to me.This definitely should've been recommended to staff. There are two reputable arborist that I know who could do this.And particularly because of the short time frame that Johanna emphasized, I am almost certain either of these two arborists would've given a second opinion, I have personally worked with both of them for my own property and other developments in my neighborhood. >Also you should know that another Doug Fir tree grove is slated to be removed adjacent to the Jenike site.This property is located at 15948 Quarry Road. Currently there is a single family house located on the property and is zoned GC. It is located just behind Banner Bank on BFR at Quarry Rd. In looking at the preliminary plans now from Leslie Hamilton, there is a grove of large Doug Firs (7 each)toward the edge of the property line between Banner Bank and subject property.Though this grove does not border the Jenike property, it is significant enough to consider in the LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-7/PAGE 1 OF 2 overall tree canopy of the surrounding properties in this area of the Waluga Neighborhood as well and along Boones Ferry Road. > >As a member of the BFR Improvement PAC as well as the Co-Chair of the Waluga Neighborhood Association, why wasn't I (and the co-chairs for BFR PAC, Mike and Carolyn) included in this recommended decision earlier to clear-cut the Jenike property? I can only guess that since staff knew this recommendation would be controversial, they chose to keep this info from the PAC members and instead have alienated the neighborhood associations. > >Sincerely, >Cheryl Uchida >Waluga Neighborhood Association Co-Chair and member of the BFR PAC > > > > > LU 17-0028 EXHIBIT G-7/PAGE 2 OF 2 F-3 Report submtted immediately prior to meeting , �+, tot REE CARE urruMrrsa ARBORIST REPORT Nature of the Report: Tree Assessment Address of the Report: 16055 - 16067 Boones Ferry Rd. Date of the Report: September 18, 2017 Report Submitted To: City of Lake Oswego On September 14, 2017 I visited the site of a proposed street improvement and parking lot improvement located at 16055 - 16067 Boones Ferry Rd. in Lake Oswego. There are 14 mature or semi mature Douglas fir trees (Pseudotsuga menziesii) in the affected area. The change to the parking lot requires a few of the trees to be removed and will potentially impact the remainder of the trees. I preformed a ground level evaluation of each tree while two of my climbing arborist inspected the upper portions of the trees. The trees are addressed as numbered on the detail sheet for the Jenike Property sheet #EX01 dated 5/19/17. All of the trees on this lot are drought stressed and starting to show the effects of another hot summer. Tree #1 is in great condition and health. Trees #2, #6, #9 are all damaged, suppressed/undersized and weak making them heavily dependent on all the surrounding trees for protection. Tree #5 is in fair condition but is an invasive species. Trees #7 & #8 are both in good condition but they are dependent on each other for protection from the elements due to their very close proximity to each other. Trees #3 & #4 are also in close proximity to each other and somewhat dependant on each other for protection they though they are showing signs they are suffering from drought stress they are in good condition #3 has a single dominate leader & #4 has lost a top in the past but it has a firmly attached secondary leader and has completely healed from the injury. Tree #10 is in good health it's canopy is heavy to the north and it has poor tapper making it dependant on tree #11 for protection from the wind. Tree #11 is in fair health to spite the overly dry conditions. In my professional opinion over all trees #7, #8, #1, #3, #4, #10 and #11 are all in good to fair condition and could be saved. Trees #2, #6, #9 are in poor health/structure and should be removed. Tree #5 is an invasive species and should also be removed. Sincerely, Mike Johnson Tree Care Unlimited, LLC Certified Arborist PN - 8023A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Residential and Commercial Pruning • Removals •Arboricultural Services • Consultation MEMBER: Tree Care Industry Association • International Society of Arboriculture • Oregon Construction Contractors Assoc. State Licensed Tree Service #195179 • Insured P.O. Box 1566 • Lake Oswego, OR 97035 • 503-657-6570 Visit our website at www.treecareunlimitedllc.com • E-mail: info@tclu.com DATE: 8/14/2017 5:42 PM] [AUTHOR: ifabk] PLOTTER: DWG To PDF.pc3] [STYLE: WHP—Standard.ctb] PATH: P:\ODOT\0008087W\Design\Drawings\CivlExhibits\091415—BFR—Site Exhibits\2017_0814—BFR—Site Exhibits—Jenike.dwg] [LAYOUT: Jenike (2)] 000 co w O Ti T TI Fs CD CD CD CD CD 0_ 0_ 0 co C3) - 0 71 _ _1 CCD (D CD CD ,4 \0 CD 111* • 0 0 0 C57 co N �C-v 111‘; *.• ,.,,,.,_ (--) CD CSD m CSD CD m CD .y \ CD O Ok co i:D .7. _ 11, _,.. 00 \\*4„ 0.. __._ _.,___ C3� coN • • " • • s• — —I —1 .+Fa CD CD O N N O cn 1 ++ ,---_,------------- +- -°2 e;:i 1311,9 , a) 05 41 CA.....+ / Tr . ill •01,.. 4e4\ ....,_.. _,0 t ... hy ± + , ,\ , 4 IA m a _1� L (130 "- C D x CD CD cr cri r = CSD CD CCD o —- o 0) - c -, CD „T ~ o cn -' 0 OD O m -1 - CD CD o 33 0 C1) X II c/4 0 CD CD CD _ O = -n n CD II m cjD — z .- 1— CA CD _0 cn —1- CD 1_ w 0 T JENIKE PROPERTY SHEET INFO REVISIONS _ NO BY DATE REMARKS WHPacific DRAWN XWCHECKED O A APPROVED 9755 SW Barnes Rd,Suite 300 BOON ES FERRY ROAD LAST EDIT 8/14/2017 Portland,OR 97225 503-626-0455 Fax 503-526-0775 PROJECT NUMBERDRAWING FILE NAME SCALE PLOT DATE 8/14/2017 www.whpacif'iacom 20 7_0814-BFR-SITE EXHIBITS-JENIKE 1"=30' SUBMITTAL DATE: 62C-7473 pQ o LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL rfc 0 REQUEST TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT U O DURING A PUBLIC HEARING OREGON Subject: (iY'U/itis Z7 Agenda Item Number: Name: tr l').oe /Tee, ljiJ • Address Number Street City Oh q`7 0 C-03 63b-%57 State Zip Telephone Are You Part of an Organized Presentation? o ❑Yes If Yes, List Speakers In Order of Presentation. SUBMIT TO CITY RECORDER The Mayor will call you to the microphone at the appropriate time. DIENNE G. IRWIN 4343 Sunset Drive •Lake Oswego, OR 97035 •phone: (503)636-8859 • email: didiirwin@yahoo.com October 3, 2017 Kent Studebaker, Mayor Members of the City Council 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 RE: Ordinance 2753 —Boones Ferry Road Nonconformities Code Amendments (LU 17-0028) Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: I am writing to you regarding the Community Development Code Amendments for the Boones Ferry Capital Improvement Project. As stated in the Planning Department's staff report dated August 17, 2017, "The existing tree canopy is one of the unique characteristics of the Lake Grove Village Center(LGVC) Plan." This was a very important goal to protect and preserve trees, yet today these codes are being asked to be amended for parking spaces. As noted in the Council Report by Johanna Hastay, Sr. Planner(dated September 26, 2017), "...tree removal to construct the BFR improvements is a key public issue, as it will be significant." The Boones Ferry Improvement Project is calling for approximately 113 trees to be removed including over 18 large firs and cedars in addition to several large deciduous trees to make way for the "Great Street". These trees, which include significant native trees, will be an incredible loss to the skyline and the wooden character of Lake Grove. Here are some of the trees which are going to be removed for the roadside: • " 44i • 1044 , yp y • r r ,f • Ifi {.a141• , I.f - • +16 ., ., • lh _ 1.t .-.yy 1% 411t 'At • .4.• ' 7 • ? • 1 r SFJ' ' A� }� + -+ .,� yr- Us bank Now 18 more trees, many which are significant firs are slated to be removed. Understanding the business owner's interest in not losing parking spaces, originally the Boones Ferry plan called for the city to look for acquiring properties to be developed to serve this purpose. There is a philosophy of"the trees must come down"rather than a philosophy of doing everything to save as many as these large species trees as possible. In addition, there is no plan of action to replace these valuable trees, instead just a suggestion to provide a grant program to provide assistance to private property owners. While this is a positive use of funds, it is not a viable plan to mitigate this substantial tree loss. In the pressure for deadlines, the Planning Department recommends removal of many of the City's valuable assets instead of looking into other parking alternatives for the businesses. In addition, there is a philosophy of not protecting or mitigating the construction to save trees, but instead stating that the trees will be harmed and maybe not survive, so let's remove them. Why not wait and see if the tree fails, instead of making an assumption that it would. With this philosophy, every tree has a"bug" in it and every tree may get blown down by the wind, so they all get removed. For example, these beautiful trees by Naomi's Lampshades are to come down because of the proximity of the trees to construction and parking rather than providing a way to work around them and having the philosophy of taking the upmost care to preserve them rather than hastily decide that they just won't survive or that they may blow down by the wind. r - • / . 41 • t * 9 .4 .`t M �~' �x1 Jit' w �' 4r !. .,r st; x t 04 or, •.M. . ?_ba_1:101/1/-. 111/60, ,/, I�rri a:., 4 m _ 9i�RI'��4lp f' 1 J 10 4 4 . l ^F Replacing these beautiful large growth trees with smaller, dainty"lollipop"trees does not give the aesthetics and calming effects of the significant trees with the larger canopies. At the very least, the new city trees should be species that would create a large beautiful tree canopy. In the Comprehensive Plan of the Lake Grove Village Center, Ordinance 2454, Goal 8, states: "Protect Natural Resources and Enhance the Natural Environment within the Village Center.....to preserve existing trees and tree groves.... I strongly urge the City Council to continue to pursue this avenue rather than changing the codes that protect our trees. To change the code and allow parking spaces to take place of our trees does not fit into the goals of the plan or the City's value of being a Tree City. Please consider the plan thoughtfully. Once these trees are down, they cannot be quickly be replaced. The Lake Grove Neighborhood is rapidly losing much of the old growth trees due to redevelopment. We are losing the "wooded character of the City of Lake Oswego". Removing this many trees would have a negative impact on our tree canopy and go against the City's codes and values. We need to be creative in our solutions to prevent this and not be pressured by deadlines. Please consider not approving this amendment as it greatly impacts the needs of the residential property owners. Sincerely, Dienne Irwin 4343 Sunset Dr, Lake Oswego OR 97035 DATE: ��' '11* LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL ()s REQUEST TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT U DURING A PUBLIC HEARING Subject: 1344914e Fef ly OponveuNGty Agenda Item Number: Name: M d Roo iNst5,44 1120 N. Judi-S() --r n+More. feintAW Address Number Street City 17209-411Se (so5)-7zrizy State Zip Telephone Are You Part of an Organized Presentation? ® No ❑Yes If Yes, List Speakers In Order of Presentation. SUBMIT To CITY RECORDER The Mayor will call you to the microphone at the appropriate time. P e R K 1 N S coi e 1120 NW Couch Street 0 +1503.727 2000 10th Floor 0 +1.503 727.2222 Portland OR 97209-4128 PerkinsCoie.com October 2, 2017 Michael C.Robinson MRobinson©perkinscoic.com 13. (503)727-2264 F. (503)346-2264 VIA EMAIL Kent Studebaker, Mayor City of Lake Oswego City Council Lake Oswego City Hall 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: City of Lake Oswego File No. LU 17-0028; Boones Ferry Road Project Non-Conforming Ordinance(the "Ordinance") • Dear Mayor Studebaker and Members of the City Council:. This office represents Cain Petroleum("Cain"). I have asked Senior Planner Johanna Hastay to place this letter before you at your public hearing on October 3, 2017 and in the official Planning Department file for this matter. Cain owns the Chevron service station property located at the intersection of Boones Ferry Road and Oakridge Road. On behalf of Cain, I am writing to ask that you adopt the proposed ordinance as recommended for approval by the Lake Oswego Planning Commission and by staff. Proposed ordinance section Lake Oswego Code("LOC") 50.05.007.6.e.i.3 provides that landscaping minimums,parking facility edge treatment(sidewalks) and parking facility edge treatment(buildings) standards will not apply to properties that are the subject of right-of-way purchase and/or condemnation by the City for the purpose of improvements to Boones Ferry Road, a standard that includes the Cain property. This section benefits the Cain property because it allows more flexibility for changes to the use on the property. Cain appreciates the City's support for its property and the fact that the City has worked well with Cain during the Boones Ferry project. Very truly yours, tAtt,L.a a fkri,\A- Michael C. Robinson MCR:rsr cc: Mr. Ron Cain (via email) Ms. Mary Ellen Farr(via email) 66335-0004/137054509.1 Perkins Core I LP Kent Studebaker,Mayor October 2, 2017 Page 2 Mr. Dave Kimmel(via email) Mr. David Bledsoe (via email) Ms. Johanna Hastay(via email) Mr. Evan Boone (via email) 66335-0004/137054509.1 PAnsCoveLLP LAKE OSWEGO , n��%/ CITY COUNCIL \REGG PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM /0/ 3 /i7 Date cvd, Z 753 Sub' t/Agenda Item N mber Name cJ /61x5 DPVtete \ Address SS - 635 —SOO Telephone/Email (optional) Are you part of an organized presentation? Yes _ No If yes, list speakers in order of presentation: The Mayor will call you to the microphone at the appropriate time. SUBMIT TO THE CITY RECORDER E E os� LAKE OSWEGO H st ° CITY COUNCIL OREGON PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM (,)-t i 7-0l7 Date ilk 1` f 002ll Subject/Agenda Item Number Name _ `r70 Address Telephone/Email (optional) Are you part of an organized presentation? _ Yes "-----No If yes, list speakers in order of presentation: The Mayor will call you to the microphone at the appropriate time. SUBMIT TO THE CITY RECORDER 10.1 CLACKAMAS COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS 1. PURPOSE The Clackamas County Coordinating Committee(C-4)was founded by the County to promote a partnership between the County,its Cities,Special Districts,Hamlets,Villages,and Community Planning Organizations(CPOs). C-4's primary functions are to: • Enhance coordination and cooperation between the jurisdictions • Establish unified positions on land use and transportation plans • Provide a forum for issues of mutual benefit and interest • Promote unified positions in discussions at the state and regional levels 2. MEMBERSHIP POLICY BODY Committee membership shall consist of representatives from the following jurisdictions, communities,and districts: Voting Body ' Members Votes *=Urban Jurisdiction A=Urban&Rural Representation _ County Board of County Commissioners^ 2 2 Cities Barlow 1 1 Canby 1 1 Estacada 1 1 Gladstone* 1 1 Happy Valley* 1 1 Johnson City* 1 1 Lake Oswego* 1 1 Milwaukie* 1 1 Molalla 1 1 Oregon City* 1 1 Portland* 1 1 Rivergrove* 1 1 Sandy 1 1 Tualatin* 1 1 West Linn* 1 1 Wilsonville* 1 1 Communities CPOs^ 1 1 Hamlets 1 1 Villages 1 1 Districts Fire* 1 1 Sanitary* 1 1 Water* 1 1 Total 2324 2324 Page I 5/11/1712/5/17 CLACKAMAS COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS Non-Voting Body Members Regional Metro* 1 Clackamas Citizen from MPAC 1 Transit Rural 1 Urban* 1 Other Port of Portland* 1 Total 5 At a minimum, Clackamas County Board of Commissioners will select its two (2) elected representatives in February of odd-numbered years and notify the Secretary of C-4 by letter signed by the Chair or a designee appointed by the Chair. At a minimum, the cities shall provide the names of their elected C-4 representatives and alternates by letter signed by the Mayor or their designee in February of each odd-numbered year to the Secretary of C-4. The special districts/authorities representatives shall be designated by agreement among districts/authorities represented.The Hamlet-or and Villaee representative shall be designated by agreement among the County's Hamlets and Villaces represented. The process for designating the representatives shall be established by agreement among each of the groups of Districts/Authorities and HamletsNillages.Each of these entities shall submit the names of their elected C-4 representative and alternate to the Secretary of C-4 by letter signed by the Chairs of the Boards represented in February of every even-numbered year. The CPO representative and alternate shall be determined in a process that is guided by the County and includes the opportunity for input of each of the County's recognized CPOs and the County's Committee for Citizen Involvement(CCI). That selection process shall be completed by February of each even-numbered year and the name of the representative and alternate shall be submitted to the C-4 Secretary. Each jurisdiction with a voting membership shall have one(1)vote,with the exception of the County which has two (2) votes. The cities, special districts, and Clackamas County representatives to JPACT and MPAC are encouraged but not required to have their representative as a voting member or alternate on C-4. The Metro Council shall provide the name of their C-4 representative and alternate by letter signed by the Metro President or his/her designee in February of each odd-numbered year. The representatives from the Port of Portland, the transit agencies, and the Clackamas Citizen from MPAC are not elected officials,and their membership is determined by appointment from their respective organizations. Page 2 -,9/11/171/20/1701/05/2017 CLACKAMAS COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS 3. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE The Executive Committee shall be comprised of a representative of: (a)the board of county commissioners,(b)an urban city,(c)a rural city,(d)water and sewer districts,(e)fire districts, and f) Hamlets, Villages, and CFOs. The Executiveis Ceommittee willshall establish set the agendas for meetings of C-4,including additional agenda request items that may be made-as set forth in section 5(G)of these Bylaws, and may to-make recommendations to the C-4 body on action items as appropriate. C-4 Metro Jurisdiction cities and Rural Cities shall elect their respective Executive Committee representatives annually at the March C-4 Regular meeting. Special Districts shall annually determine their own Executive Committee representative selection process and shall submit the name of the appointment by a letter signed by the chairs of the special district boards to the Secretary of C-4 at or before the March C-4 meeting. 4. OFFICERS The co-chairs of the Executive Committee will also serve as the co-chairs of C-4 and shall be elected annually at their March meeting by members of the Executive Committee from among its members.The County member will co-chair the Executive Committee and C-4. The secretary of the Executive Committee and C-4 shall be a county staff member designated by the Board of County Commissioners. 5. PROCEDURES A. Meetings All meetings of C-4 and any of its subcommittees are considered public meetings under Oregon's Public Meetings Law. Meetings will be held monthly on a day to be determined by C-4 or called as needed by the co-chairs or by a vote of C-4. The secretary is responsible for notifying members of the meeting time and place and for preparing the agenda. Meeting notices will be provided to the C-4 members,interested parties,and to the public as soon as practicable and shall include a list of the principal subjects anticipated to be considered. B. Quorum A quorum of C-4 shall consist of a majority of the participating jurisdictions' voting members. C. Voting Votes in C-4 shall carry by a simple majority of those present,provided that no action shall be taken unless a quorum is present. Only members or their designated alternate shall have voting rights. D. Alternates A designated alternate will sit in the absence of a member and shall have full voting rights. Alternates will be appointed by the member jurisdiction. There shall be no alternates for either of the co-chair positions. E. Records Page 3 09/11/171/20/1701/05/2017 CLACKAMAS COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS All C-4 actions shall be documented in the form of minutes, memoranda and special reports. The secretary will be responsible for such documentation and distribution of such minutes,memoranda and reports. F. Rules Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with Roberts' Rules newly revisedSturgis' Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure. G. Additional Agenda Reauestscenda Item.; Before presentation to C-4 for action,agenda items shall be presented to the Executive Committee for consideration and placement on the agenda of an upcoming meeting of C- 4. Only voting members of C-4 shall be eligible to recommend agenda placement items. If the Executive Committee declines to place an item on the C-4 agenda.then any voting member may present the agenda item for consideration of placement as an agenda item to the entire C-4 body. The matter shall be presented by the voting member under"other business."If C-4 votes in the affirmative to place the matter on the agenda,then it will be placed as an agenda item on the next meeting agenda. If that agenda is full,then not later than the following meeting,unless a later agenda date is otherwise agreed to by the voting C-4 members present. cent to the mombc:jut-is ' . . . di ;t;,'a t oritico and sanitary sewer districts/authorities for discussion by the governing body. Compliance with this sectionrequirement may be waived where circumstances warrant faster action by an majority affirmative vote of two-thirds of those C-4 voting members present. 6. ADVISORY SUBCOMMITTEES: A. Metro Subcommittee C-4 members who are within the Metro jurisdiction shall be a subcommittee of C-4 named Metro subcommittee. This subcommittee shall at a minimum be the body which nominates and elects cities' representatives to: Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT); Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and associated technical committees: Transportation Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC); and Metro Technical Advisory Committee(MTAC)respectively. These nominations and elections shall occur in November of each even numbered year in accordance with Metro Charter requirements. B. Rural Cities Subcommittee C-4 members who are outside of the Metro jurisdiction shall be a subcommittee of C-4 named Rural Cities subcommittee. This subcommittee shall at a minimum develop positions relative to transportation issues and related funding for presentations to the ODOT Region 1 Area Commission on Transportation (R1ACT). The Rural Cities subcommittee shall also consider coordination with the County, State, and other jurisdictions as appropriate,on land use,planning,or other issues that may uniquely affect these cities located outside of the Metro boundaries. C. Management Advisory Subcommittee Page 4 09/11/171/20/1701/05/2017 CLACKAMAS COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS The administrator of each city,district,authority and county shall serve as a Management Advisory Subcommittee. This subcommittee will provide overview and advice to C-4 and support the work of the Technical Subcommittees. The subcommittee shall also have the responsibility,as directed by C-4,of constituting any ad hoc subcommittees or other groups established for information and advice on specific issues. The Management Advisory Subcommittee shall meet as needed. D. Technical Advisory Subcommittees C-4 shall be informed and advised by the following standing Technical Advisory Committees, as well as other ad hoc subcommittees established and chartered at the direction of the co-chairs for information and advice on specific issues,plans or projects of interest to C-4. 1. Clackamas Transportation Advisory Committee(CTAC) The membership of CTAC shall consist of staff representatives of all agencies on the policy body and is to review transportation plans,projects,and funding issues, and make recommendations to C-4. CTAC shall operate under the same procedures as the policy body, and will meet as needed to be determined by committee members. Member cities will have only one vote when votes are required. 2. Land Use Advisory Subcommittee The membership of this subcommittee shall consist of the planning directors or the staff persons with lead planning responsibility for all agencies on the policy body. The subcommittee is to focus on land use issues and transportation issues that may have an impact on land use. The subcommittee shall operate under the same procedures as the policy body,and will meet as needed to be determined by subcommittee members or when scheduled by the chairman or by a vote of the subcommittee. 7. DEFINITIONS Urban cities are those incorporated cities located, either fully or partially, within Clackamas County and also located within Metro's Urban Growth Boundary. Rural Cities are those incorporated cities located within Clackamas County and also located outside Metro's Urban Growth Boundary. The Hamlets and Villages ef-are designated communities recognized by Clackamas County as Participating in the Hamlets and Villages Program.includc:B avcrcrcck,Mela11la Prairie,Mulino and Stafford. Housing as a topic of discussion is not specifically found in the primary functions of the bylaws. but is understood by C-4 to be fall within land use and transportation issues. Community Planning Organizations (CPOs) are officially recognized by the County and statutorily defined public bodies that consist of citizen volunteers who represent their Page 5 09/11/171/20/1701/05/2017 CLACKAMAS COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS neighborhoods on issues of importance to local communities and make decisions and recommendations to the County. 8. AMENDMENTS These by-laws may be amended from time to time by a majority of the members of C-4,provided that all voting members of C-4 and all fire districts,water districts/authorities and sanitary sewer districts/authorities have been sent copies of the proposed amendments thirty(30)days prior to the meeting where action on the rules is scheduled. Adopted on September 26,2001 Amended on March 3,2005 Amended on February 5,2009 Amended on January 7,2010 Amended on November 3,2011 Amended on April 4,2013 Amended on December 5,2013 Amended on January,5,2017 LAdonted on October 41 f Commented[WT1]:Pending adoption. Page 6 09/11/171/20/1701/05/2017