HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2001-04-09 PM Or,...oswt
(--
`,C
,CCITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
April 9, 2001
°REGO',
Mayor Judie Hammerstad called the City Council information session to order at 4:10 p.m. on
April 9, 2001, in the City Council Chambers.
Present: Mayor Hammerstad, Councilors Schoen, Graham, McPeak, Hoffman (arrived
4:25 p.m.) and Rohde. Councilor Turchi was excused.
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City
Recorder; Mark Schoening, City Engineer
3. INFORMATION SESSION
3.1 Trolley Overview
Mark Schoening, City Engineer, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Willamette Shore Rail
Line, which ran seven miles from the Lake Oswego trolley station to River Place in Portland. He
reviewed the history of the line, beginning with its purchase in 1988 from Southern Pacific (page
3) and the legal battle, which the Consortium won, causing Southern Pacific to extend the end of
the line from Stampher Road to the trolley station, north of the railroad crossing on State Street
(page 4).
Mr. Schoening mentioned Lake Oswego purchasing the trolley station from Southern Pacific
and building the trolley barn with a $100,000 grant under the Transportation Efficiency Act
($80,000 local match) (page 5). He indicated that the Oregon Electric Rail Historical Society has
stored its cars in the trolley barn since its completion in October 1998.
Mr. Schoening showed photographs of the five trestles on the line, ranging from 150 to 686 feet
in length (page 6-8). He mentioned Tri-Met administering a $133,000 contract several years ago
to do rehab work on the trestles, funded by Tri-Met, Clackamas County and Lake Oswego. He
showed the north and south entrances to the 1,400-foot long tunnel (page 9). He presented a
breakdown of the 104 public, private,pedestrian and utility crossings (page 8-9).
Mr. Schoening noted the work done to extend the northern terminus from under the Marquam
Bridge to River Place and John Landing, at a cost of$75,000 and a lot of volunteer labor(pages
11-13). He mentioned the City's agreement with the Oregon Electrical Railway Historical
Society to run their cars on the line, beginning in 1995. He indicated that the ridership numbers
from 1990 to 1994 were from the Gales Creek Company, and those from 1995 to present were
for the Historical Society (page 14).
Mr. Schoening reviewed the maintenance issues on the line, including drainage, ties and rails,
and right-of-way encroachment (pages 14-17). He presented a chart detailing the ongoing direct
contributions by the Consortium members since the original acquisition of the line (page 18). He
mentioned that Tri-Met and Metro have done significant in-kind work not reflected on the chart.
Mr. Schoening discussed the two current projects of importance to the Consortium: annual
maintenance ($90,000) and the trestle/track rehabilitation with a $50,000 local match for the
TEA21 $500,000 federal grant(page 18). He said that Portland was drafting a five-year
intergovernmental agreement to address both issues, requiring a $20,000 contribution from each
of the five Consortium members: Portland, Lake Oswego, Multnomah County, Clackamas
County and Tri-Met. He mentioned that everyone but Multnomah County was on board, and that
with the changes in leadership at Multnomah County, it would be difficult to get their agreement.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 1 of 8
April 9, 2001
Mr. Schoening reported that the Consortium put a priority on a feasibility study of rail transit
and trail (both bicycle and pedestrian) for the next round of federal funding ($550,000 grant with
$63,000 local match) (page 19).
Mr. Schoening reviewed the route of the Portland Central Street Car system, which included a
future connection with the Willamette Shore Rail Line (page 19). He mentioned the City study
of a potential commuter rail connection with the rail line currently serving the chip plant and
crossing the river(Foothills Design District) (page 20). He presented schematics of proposed
improvements to the trolley station (page 20—21).
Mr. Schoening explained to Councilor Graham that the wide range in the ridership numbers
came from changing trolley operators and a mudslide during the 1996 flood, which blocked the
trolley tracks and required rebuilding the track.
Mr. Schoening confirmed to Councilor McPeak that the City did have to keep using rail
vehicles on the line. He explained that some of the dozens of separate parcel easements on the
line restricted the use to rail only; with any other use, the property reverted to the underlying
property owner. David Powell, City Attorney, explained that keeping a rail use on the line was
a safety feature. He mentioned case law suggesting that simply the intention of a future use of
the line was sufficient to maintain the City's rights but acknowledged that if the City stopped
using the line for a significant period, it might get an argument of abandonment.
Councilor Rohde emphasized that the City could not allow pedestrians across the right-of-way
sections that had rail only easements. He said that the only way to do a pathway was to purchase
those pieces outright. He confirmed to Councilor McPeak that rail bikes were rail vehicles.
Mayor Hammerstad noted that the consultant would bring a report to the Council discussing
these ownership issues.
3.2 Updated East End Plan
Bob Galante,Redevelopment Director, introduced George Crandall, Don Arambula and
Kristin Belz of Crandall Arambula, the consulting firm retained to work the plan update process.
George Crandall, Crandall Arambula, distributed a handout with a schedule chart. He
explained that they wanted to meet with the Council in order to get a sense of what it wanted to
see as the study progressed. He mentioned that their six-person firm of architects, landscape
architects and planners specialized in revitalizing cities as their sole focus.
Mr. Crandall said that he, Mr. Arambula and Ms. Belz formed the team that would work on
Lake Oswego's project with City staff He discussed their proposed process, noting that the City
could modify it. He indicated the planning area boundaries on which they would focus. He
referenced the plan schedule listing the different components of the two phases of planning and
implementation: Starting, Area-wide Framework Plan, Project Plans, Implementation Outline,
and Public Participation.
Mr. Crandall indicated that the framework plan looked at the big picture of circulation and land
use in order to develop alternatives; Council would pick one alternative as its preferred
framework. He explained that the project plans meant the next projects beyond Block 138, the A
Avenue improvements and Millennium Park. He noted that they would work with Mr. Galante
to nail down the proposed dates for specific meeting times, at which they would present the
products resulting from the project components.
Mr. Powell confirmed to Councilor Hoffman that the plan boundaries were also the
jurisdictional boundaries for LORA. He explained that an urban renewal agency could expand
its district boundaries but by no more than 20% over the original renewal area boundaries or it
could create a second district for another area with its own division of taxes. Don Arambula,
Crandall Arambula, commented that, although they would focus on the planning area, they also
needed to know what was happening on the edges.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 2 of 8
April 9, 2001
Mr. Powell described the advantage of expanding the existing district as the ability to draw on
the existing district tax increment and use it to feed the new areas. He noted that the revenues
from the original district could not be used in a new, separate district or vice versa.
Mr. Galante informed Mayor Hammerstad that including the industrial area, except for the
sewage treatment plant, came close to 19%. He indicated on the map the area comprising the
19%. Councilor McPeak asked why they did not include that area in the district originally.
Mr. Galante said that they included the area that they knew was essential for the downtown and
where development was likely to occur. He explained that over time the City's interest in having
an industrial area has changed; it might not be necessary any more.
Mr. Galante clarified for Councilor Graham that they could not increase the land area by 20%
all the way around; the total additions of land could not exceed 20% of the original boundary.
Mr. Galante confirmed to Councilor Hoffman that Councilor Rohde was correct in stating
that they lost their frozen base from 1986 and the increment if they started a new plan, as a new
district started at the frozen base at the time of the district creation. Mr. Powell clarified for
Councilor Hoffman that expanding the existing district meant having two different tax bases in
the district: 80% at the original 1986 base and the new 20% at a new base.
Councilor Hoffman asked if staff has looked outside the district boundaries in thinking about
what the City really wanted to accomplish, or has staff focused on the district. Mr. Galante said
that staff has focused on the district and the things that they knew about, such as the Foothills
Road area. He pointed out that most of the rest of the area was single family residential. He
indicated that finding out if the Council had an interest in looking at other areas of the downtown
was one reason for this meeting.
Councilor Rohde asked, if including the Foothills area meant adding 21%, could the City
remove 1% from somewhere else. Mr. Powell reiterated that the statute said that the total
amendments to the plan would not exceed 20%. He indicated that he did not think Councilor
Rohde's scenario was allowed because otherwise a jurisdiction would add and subtract land until
it did the whole city under the original district. He did not recommend trying it.
Councilor Schoen observed that adding and subtracting land meant removal of the tax base that
was supporting the district. He asked if they could leave out the chip plant but include the Tryon
Creek area. Mr. Powell indicated that he saw no requirement for contiguous areas. Mr.
Galante said that staff already thought of Councilor Rohde's idea and decided against it.
Councilor Schoen indicated to Councilor Hoffman that he wanted to include Tryon Creek in
order to control the development. Councilor Rohde argued that they would not need to include
Tryon Creek in a district because the City already controlled the development, whether it was in
a renewal district or not. Councilor Schoen said that he did not want to see high-rise apartments
built there. Mayor Hammerstad pointed out that, since the mission of an urban renewal district
was to increase the tax base, they would want to build high-density apartments.
Mr. Crandall gave a PowerPoint presentation describing their firm's work process and
objectives. He mentioned that their philosophy for the revitalization of cities came from
Alexander Garben: the public made strategic investment to leverage private investment. He
reviewed the `recipes' they used as their tools in identifying the exact steps necessary to
accomplish the revitalization of a downtown.
Mr. Crandall discussed projects they have done, in which they used these recipes to implement
the different components of the project plans. He showed slides of projects in Racine,
Wisconsin, Milwaukie, the Lloyd District in Portland, Albany, The Dalles, Astoria, the
Multnomah County Central Library, Orenco Station. He mentioned the importance of pedestrian
friendliness, the streetscape, urban design standard, compatibility, respecting an area's heritage
and values, architecture, incorporation of artwork into the design, transit corridors, and public
involvement.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 3 of 8
April 9, 2001
Mr. Crandall mentioned the checklist they complied at the beginning of project, including
identifying study objectives and developing measurement standards to evaluate the process. He
asked the Council to tell them what they wanted to see in this project.
Councilor Schoen mentioned the waterfront on the river. Councilor McPeak spoke to creating
lower cost housing at a quality that people could afford. Councilor Graham concurred with the
waterfront and added the traffic on Highway 43 from West Linn to the downtown. Councilor
McPeak suggested opening up the view of Mt. Hood as one came down A Avenue, mentioning
the wall of buildings in particular. Mayor Hammerstad noted the unsightly power station,
which was also in the line of sight of Mt. Hood.
Mayor Hammerstad spoke to completing certain elements of the old plan, such as the
boardwalk around Lakewood Bay in order to achieve public visual access to the lake. She
observed that expanding the district to the Foothills Road area would take the development down
to the waterfront and enable mixed, affordable housing.
Councilor Graham mentioned the two water towers on the east side of the Willamette in the
line of sight of Mt. Hood from A Avenue.
Councilor Hoffman asked to see the project explore the concepts of New Urbanism in detail,
such as transit oriented developments, mixed use with retail on the bottom and housing on the
top and a 24-hour city. He mentioned a transit link between downtown Portland and downtown
Lake Oswego using the Willamette Shore Rail Line, a commuter rail line and discussion of other
water features (Tryon Creek, Sucker Creek in George Rogers Park). He spoke to getting away
from exclusive zoning concepts and applying the New Urbanism concept of mixed use within a
traditional single use zone. He suggested exploring the application of New Urbanism concepts to
First Addition, which was currently zoned exclusively residential with no neighborhood
commercial allowed.
Councilor Rohde asked to see additional Class A professional office space in the downtown.
He spoke of connectivity, referencing a tram in Montreal Old City that connected the lower area
to the top area. He said that he wanted downtown Lake Oswego to 'be cool,' a fun place to hang
out, similar to what happened on NW 23`d Avenue. Mayor Hammerstad mentioned a
pedestrian friendly place with a welcoming ambiance.
Councilor Rohde mentioned the policies encouraging second story buildings while noting that
they had one-story buildings on A Avenue. Councilor McPeak spoke to finding a solution to
the Highway 43/A Avenue intersection, in terms of making pedestrians feel comfortable crossing
State Street to get to the river. Councilor Graham suggested using that pedestrian access to get
to a small marina on the river.
Councilor Hoffman asked that the study look at the appropriateness of siting public buildings in
the downtown core area, such as City Hall, the police station, the library or a community center.
He asked what the role was of public buildings in a vibrant downtown. He mentioned the
importance of locating performing arts in the downtown in creating a vibrant downtown. He
asked how they could connect the Lakewood Arts Center to the downtown.
Mayor Hammerstad observed that historically Lake Oswego has had one-story buildings in its
downtown. She spoke to maintaining some of the historic Old Town `look' in the downtown and
retaining some of the one-story buildings. Mr. Crandall mentioned identifying those things that
needed to stay because they were unique and made Lake Oswego a singular place.
Councilor Hoffman spoke to looking at the appropriateness of certain types of development
along State Street and which businesses were preferable in a downtown and at the entrance to the
city. Councilor Rohde mentioned youth activities. Councilor Hoffman asked about the role of
public art in the downtown. Mayor Hammerstad observed that if they wanted to be an arts
community, affordable housing would give the artists some place to live and work, such as the
Foothills area.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 4 of 8
April 9, 2001
Councilor Hoffman asked for exploration of a future walking path along the railroad right-of-
way from downtown to Lake Grove, and of the role of visitors and tourists in a vibrant
downtown. Mr. Crandall asked if the Council wanted regional attractors. Mayor
Hammerstad said some but not too many.
Councilor Schoen mentioned the need for a reality check on the priorities as the process moved
forward. He commented that they needed a point where they could say `that's great but ...".
Mr. Crandall indicated that that prioritization step would occur but spoke to taking the next big
jump forward at this time in order to take advantage of the existing momentum.
Mayor Hammerstad passed around a sign up sheet for the two interview teams for the
Transportation Advisory Board candidates.
The Council moved the meeting to the Human Resources Conference Room.
Mayor Hammerstad reported that Ed Srebnik informed she and Mr. Schmitz at their meeting
today that the Library Board felt that the Council had been patronizing and condescending at the
joint meeting, and that the Council had not listened to them. She said that she was writing a
letter to the Board to give them some suggestions on how they might help the Council with the
joint library project, should it go forward.
3.3 Annexation Issues/Measure 7
Mayor Hammerstad complimented Councilor Hoffman on the excellent outline of the issues in
his annexation paper.
Mr. Powell noted that the question with respect to Measure 7 was what to do while the appeal of
the Marion County Court's ruling that it was unconstitutional was pending. He speculated that
there was an 80% chance that the Court of Appeals would uphold the lower court ruling. He
mentioned that a legislature committee, chaired by Representative Max Williams, was looking at
less onerous alternatives to Measure 7 for the November ballot. He commented that any
legislature alternative would not be retroactive.
Mr. Powell observed that if they knew that a less onerous Measure 7 would get on the ballot,
that it would pass, and that it would not be retroactive, then they would proceed with all speed to
adopt everything before November; anything adopted after November would be subject to some
kind of compensation for restrictions on the use of property. He mentioned the strong possibility
that nothing would come out of the legislature because of the lack of political ability to reach
consensus on something that would pass both houses.
Mr. Powell recommended against adopting a formal policy with respect to Measure 7 in order to
maintain flexibility and to avoid inviting claims. He suggested taking the prudent course of staff
review of new legislation on an ad hoc basis, analyzing it for its Measure 7 implications,
including whether or not it could be repealed, and making a recommendation to Council. He
used the Sensitive Land Overlay contested sites public hearing scheduled for next week's
meeting as an example in describing the staff review process.
Councilor Hoffman asked what the down side was of proceeding with the Sensitive Lands
Ordinance public hearing. He spoke to proceeding with business as usual, as it did not make any
difference, in terms of the City's liability, if Measure 7 was declared constitutional. Mr. Powell
said that the downside was that the City either paid compensation to the property owners, once
Measure 7 was affirmed, or they tried to exempt individual properties from the statute, which
would be awkward. He emphasized that it was a Council decision because of the financial
consequences. He reiterated that there was an 80% chance that Measure 7 would not survive in
its present form.
Councilor Rohde asked for clarification on process. Mr. Powell said that he wanted a sense of
whether or not his recommended course of action was acceptable.
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 5 of 8
April 9, 2001
Mayor Hammerstad asked if Mr. Powell recommended proceeding with the sensitive lands
overlay hearing. Mr. Powell recommended postponing the hearing, as staff saw no compelling
reason to move forward, and doing so only added to the City's liabilities. Mayor Hammerstad
spoke in support of delaying the hearing. She concurred with Mr. Powell that there was a greater
chance of Measure 7 claims for contested properties. Councilor McPeak also supported delay.
Councilor Rohde spoke to moving forward and wrapping up the remaining ten sites because
they would have to deal with Measure 7 anyway, if it came back. Councilor Schoen agreed that
if the people did not support the overlay, then the Council should delay the hearing; if they
supported the overlay, then the Council should proceed. Mayor Hammerstad confirmed that
these property owners did not support the overlay.
Councilor McPeak spoke to presenting the appearance of Council concern to do what the public
voted in. She argued for delay. Councilor Graham asked if there was any harm in delaying
these properties. Mr. Powell said that he was not aware of any harm but he would have staff
look into which properties had development pressures. Councilor Graham indicated that she
would be more comfortable once she had that information.
Councilor Rohde described what usually happened at these contested site hearings, at which the
property owners almost never showed up to testify. Councilor Schoen noted that Bill Gerber
testified in opposition. He argued that the Council had a fiduciary responsibility to the citizens to
limit the potential liability, if Measure 7 was valid. Councilor Rohde pointed out that Mr.
Gerber had misinterpreted what the overlay did, and concluded that it had no effect on his ability
to develop his property.
Mayor Hammerstad suggested that they move the hearings from April 17 to May 1 in order to
give staff time to come back with more information.
Mayor Hammerstad noted that they did not have time to discuss annexation tonight. She
suggested holding another meeting.
3.4 Public Records Law
Mr. Powell reviewed his memo dated March 19, 2001, on City Council E-Mail Communications
—Public Record Law. He confirmed that almost everything that the Council wrote e-mails for,
which concerned City business, fell under the definition of a public record, including a-mails
related to City social business and thank you notes. He urged the Councilors to copy every e-
mail to the City Recorder; Ms. Christie would decide the retention status and length in
accordance with the archivist regulations.
Mr. Powell reviewed the various types of correspondence (page 2), covering `Ephemeral
Correspondence' in particular. He confirmed to Councilor Schoen that Councilors did not have
to retain e-mail files if they copied everything to the City Recorder.
Councilor Schoen left the meeting at 5:45 p.m.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hoffman that he should copy all e-mails to the City
Recorder, even scheduling e-mails. He reiterated that sending it to Ms. Christie did not mean
that it would be retained; she would make the decision on whether or not it should b retained. He
agreed that the easiest way to handle it was for each Councilor to simply add Ms. Christie's name
to his/her e-mail group.
Councilor McPeak wondered why phone conversations were not public records. Mr. Powell
said that was a good question. He explained that the public records law and the Attorney
General's opinion saw e-mail more as a letter than as a phone conversation because e-mail
created a document. He commented that a rule of thumb was `don't put anything in e-mail that
you would be embarrassed to see on the front page of the paper.'
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 6 of 8
April 9, 2001
Mr. Powell concurred with Mayor Hammerstad that disclosure of a public record was another
matter, as there were documents that were not disclosed even if they were public records. He
discussed the exceptions to the disclosure requirement(page 3). He explained that if someone
requested a particular document, then staff would analyze the requested document and determine
if it had to be disclosed.
Mr. Powell discussed the attorney-client privilege exception. He recommended that the City
Recorder archive such documents in electronic format using a password. He observed that rarely
would a court order disclosure of attorney-client documents.
Mr. Powell pointed out that, after 25 years, almost any public document could be disclosed, even
confidential documents. He disagreed with Councilor Rohde that it was almost impossible to
keep documents confidential but conceded that the possibility of disclosure always existed. He
emphasized that e-mail was like typing a letter; a person could ask that a letter be kept
confidential but he/she knew that there was a permanent document out there.
Mr. Powell reviewed the second reason for sending copies to the City Recorder for archiving: if
a judge ordered inspection of all records, the Councilors could state that he/she sent a copy to the
City Recorder, and his/her personal computer would not be searched for those records.
3.5 Youth Council/Board and Commission Appointment Process
Mayor Hammerstad mentioned that signup sheet she sent around for the candidate interviews
for the Traffic Advisory Board and the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board. She indicated that
each interview team would pick two of the candidates; only if one group had a truly excellent
third candidate would the Council meet. She agreed with Councilor McPeak that they needed
to carry over this item in order to discuss improvements to the appointment process.
Mayor Hammerstad asked Councilors Hoffman and Rohde to evaluate the Youth Councilors to
determine the good and bad things about the program before they went through the process
again.
3.6 Council Corner
Mayor Hammerstad announced that the Review has invited the Council to do a twice-monthly
column. She commented that it gave the Council the opportunity to comment on current issues
in the community. She indicated that a Councilor would have the responsibility of making sure
that there was something for the column for a quarter.
3.7 Asset Builders Coalition
Mayor Hammerstad mentioned that Jan Lane would give a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation
on Asset Builders Coalition on May 15, which the Council might be able to use as a framework
for decision-making.
Councilor Graham said that she had contacted Michael Carlson of the Clackamas River Basin
Council to do a 15-minute presentation to the Council on May 15. Mayor Hammerstad
indicated that she and Mr. Schmitz would work out the scheduling.
Mayor Hammerstad mentioned that the next Library Advisory Board meeting was on May 22.
Councilor Rohde said that Commissioner Sten was coming to the morning meeting tomorrow to
discuss affordable housing.
3.8 Big House/Small Lot Quick Fix
Mr. Powell presented the recommendation from the Quick Fix committee on the big house/small
lot issue. He recommended changing the way height was calculated for gable homes in First
Addition and Lake Grove, and, as an interim measure, adopting the same 6 to 12 roof pitch
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 7 of 8
April 9, 2001
minimum for Lake Grove that First Addition had. He indicated that they would like to proceed
immediately, as the noticing provisions would take some time.
Mr. Powell explained to Councilor Rohde that the Charter language defined `emergency' as
something that caused injury to property or persons. He spoke against interpreting `emergency'
as `doing something right away,' reiterating that the City has never interpreted `emergency' in
that fashion. Councilor Hoffman suggested that Mr. Powell take another look at the Charter
language on emergency ordinances and report back to the Council with his findings, so that the
Council could respond to citizen inquiries, even if the answer was 'no, it will not work for these
reasons.'
Mayor Hammerstad indicated that Mr. Powell could move forward with the process on the
recommendations.
4. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hammerstad adjourned the meeting at 6:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
ZikAtpli
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON une . 2001
die Ha merstad, Mayor
City Council Information Session Minutes Page 8 of 8
April 9, 2001