Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2010-05-18 PMCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES May 18, 2010 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the regular r.:ity Council meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. on May 18, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 .A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney. Councilor Jordan was excused. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Police Chief Dan Duncan; Paul Espe, Associate Planner; Laura Weigel, Neighborhood Planner; Andy Gulizia, Associate Planner; Debra Andreades, Senior Planner; Joel Komarek, LOIS Project Director 3. PRESENTATIONS 3.1 Distinguished Service Award, Police Chief Dan Duncan Mayor Hoffman stated that Chief Dan Duncan has the Council's and the City's utmost respect and trust. He reviewed Chief Duncan's employment history, noting that he rose through the ranks at the Lake Oswego Police Department from a police officer in 1985 to Chief of Police in August 2003. He observed that being a police officer was a challenging profession, as it required individuals to make the ultimate sacrifice at a moment's notice for the safety of the community. He pointed out that the quality of the Lake Oswego Police Department was no accident. Ne stated that the dedicatior. to public service and the trust and respect of the community began at the top and went down to the police officers. He mentioned that Lake Oswego's good fortune in not facing the political and other issues challenging other police departments was due to the City Manager and the Police Chief. He indicated that Chief Duncan had the respect of the community and the police officers serving under him and the trust and confidence of the City Manager, the community, and the City Council. He expressed his appreciation for the reservoir of trust that Chief Duncan has built up in Lake Oswego, trust by the community that a police officer will respond when called. He commented that he trusted Chief Duncan to treat him, as mayor, the same as any other citizen, and give him a ticket if he deserved one. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Hoffman read the Distinguished Service Award plaque and presented it to Chief Dan Duncan, thanking him for his service to the community. Chief Duncan thanked the Police Department, the City, and the Council. He mentioned that one of the things that he has most enjoyed about his tenure at the City has been the support from the community. He agreed that they had a solid foundation of trust, which would continue into the future. 3.2 Landmark Designation Plaque and Historic Merit Award Presentation for National Historic preservation Month Mr. Espe gave a PowerPoint presentation. He indicated that the theme for Historic Preservation Month 2010 was "Old is the new green." He cited the dismantling and storage of the Griffith residence (designed by Pietra Belushi) by the Friends, and its restoration two years later as the Belushi Pavilion at Marylhurst University, as an example of not throwing away older buildings but rather finding new uses for them. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 14 May 18, 2010 He gave the background information on the recipients of the Historic Merit Awards — Judie Hammerstad (pp.1-2) and Jerry Knippel (p.2) — and of the Landmark Designation Plaque — Ken and Cheri Cooley -Hick (pp. 2-3). Jeannie McGuire, Historic Resources Advisory Board Chair, presented a Historic Merit Award to Judie Hammerstad, former Lake Oswego mayor, for her contribution in raising public awareness of Lake Oswego's heritage and historic treasures. She mentioned Ms. Hammerstad's finding a creative way to fund the restoration of the iron furnace and thanked her for preserving this historic artifact. Ms. Hammerstad thanked the Board for the award, and mentioned the upcomin.t dedication of the furnace and the adjacent Gerber Garden as part of the Centennial Cele�,-ation events. Ms. Hammerstad commented that she joined the Marylhurst Board of Trustees partly to find a home for the Belushi house, as Marylhurst had a place to site this architecturally significant historic house. She observed that the City has come a long way in recognizing its future potential and in honoring its past as part of what made Lake Oswego what it was. Chair McGuire presented a Historic Merit Award to Jerry Knippel for his creativity and hard work on important historic projects. She mentioned his work on the iron furnace and his postponing his retirement in order to finish the furnace restoration. Mr. Knippel thanked the Board for the award. He commented that the furnace restoration had been a labor of love but pointed out that he had been a paid employee, as others involved were not. Mr. Espe indicated that the Hicks were called out of town unexpectedly. He said that he would accept the Landmark Designation Plaque for the Joseph Bickner Building on their behalf. Mayor Hoffman read the proclamation, declaring May 2010 as National Historic Preservation Month in Lake Oswego (p.8). He acknowledged the Historic Resources Advisory Board members present: Chair Jeannie McGuire, Marylou Colver, Corinna Campbell -Sack, and Suzanne Kuo. Chair McGuire thanked the Board members, the Furnace Task Force members, and other volunteers for their tremendous support. Mayor Hoffman thanked the Board and volunteers for helping to preserve the historic aspects of Lake Oswego. 3.3 Lake Oswego School District Water Quality Curriculum Mayor Hoffman welcomed Dr. Bill Korach, Lake Oswego School Superintendent. He mentioned taking two high school administrators from China on a tour of Lake Oswego High School. He indicated that the administrators had been very impressed with the staff and the facilities. Dr. Korach thanked the Council for its membership in the partnership of the District, the City, and the Lake Corporation. He recalled that the partnership grew out of the FUSION discussions on the lake water quality and the issues surrounding the lake and the watersheds. He thanked the City for its financial support. He introduced Steve Mauritz, Hallinan Elementary School Principal. Mr. Mauritz mentioned that the District has had water quality as part of its curriculum for a number of years. He described their process to take advantage of the water resources available in Lake Oswego, beginning with Dave Gilbey talking to the schools about a year and a half ago about the big pipe and issues that the City was facing. He spoke of the extraordinary opportunity that dropped into their laps when the District funded a science lab at Hallinan School, and their desire to leverage using the lab across the entire district to connect the students with the water resources in their own backyard. He explained that, following discussions with the Lake Corporation, the District developed a water quality curriculum that began with the elementary principles of water quality, talked about the issues faced by property owners, and included chemistry -related water quality issues. He said that the District brought all the sixth graders in the District to the Hallinan lab to participate in this new curriculum. He mentioned the third piece of the program, in which all the students visited the watersheds at three different locations in Lake Oswego proper to see how the water moved. He City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 14 May 18, 2010 stated that this program (in its first year) has been a tremendous success by any measure. He mentioned their desire to expand the program. He introduced the three student presenters, Frances, Riley, and Garrett. The students gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Hallinan Sixth Grade Green Team and the lessons learned by the students participating in the water quality curriculum. Frances mentioned the algae blooms, invasive species, and waterfront property owner issues that they learned about in the classroom. Riley reviewed the lessons learned in the Hallinan lab, including water quality testing, pH testing and monitoring, and the history of the lake. Garrett discussed 4�ie watershed field trips taken by every fifth and sixth grader in the District to three sites in the L,:ke Oswego watershed at Waluga Park, the Hunt Club, and George Rogers Park (the Lake Oswego dam). Riley indicated to Councilor Hennagin that macro invertebrates were very small animals without spines that lived in the water, which were invisible to the naked eye. Mr. Mauritz mentioned that the watershed field trips came about through Stephanie Wagner's work. Ms. Wagner indicated that she was the Education Director for the Friends of Tryon Creek State Park. She explained that she obtained funding through the Gray Family Fund of the Oregon Community Foundation to develop a program to take schoolchildren outside for real world experiences. She gave a presentation based on their field journal of the field trips. She told the story of the field trips, which began at the wetlands in East Waluga Park (the headwaters of Springbrook Creek), moved on to the Campbell Native Garden at the Hunt Club, and ended at the confluence of the Willamette River, looking at Oswego Creek and the Lake Oswego dam. She reviewed the water quality lessons taught at each site. She mentioned that this was a labor of love for the Friends, involving five staff members and 440 hours donated by 15 volunteers supporting 38 field trips in all types of weather. She pointed out the huge investment made by the community in providing this program with contributions from the Gray Family Fund, the City, and the District making it happen. Mr. Mauritz indicated that close to 1,000 students participated in the field trips. He said that the District was looking forward to partnering with the City and the Lake Corporation next year. He mentioned that the District has committed to a second science lab at Oak Creek, which allowed an exponential increase of this program. Todd VanRysselberg, Lake Corporation President, commended the City and the District on this environmental studies program, which he describes as a great idea with great implementation, and serving as a great example of community leadership. He compared the spirit behind this project to the spirit behind the Bottle Bill. He mentioned the good fortune of the community in having a District constantly looking for ways to add value to their programs and a City willing to make these things happen. He observed that the students who participated in this program were becoming environmentally conscious citizens. On behalf of the Lake Corporation, he thanked the Council for its support. Councilor Moncrieff mentioned that she participated in one of the field trips. She spoke of how impressed she was with the depth of knowledge and understanding of the watershed that the students already had before the field trip. She thanked Ms. Wagner and the Friends for their hours of dedication and volunteerism in putting on this program. She commented that she could not think of a better way to educate the community on the importance of good watershed health. She indicated to the students that she was counting on them telling their families, neighbors, and friends about what they learned. She thanked the District and the Friends for their work. Mayor Hoffman mentioned attending the Lake Corporation shareholder meeting last night and listening to the concerns discussed about the lake water quality, especially the Springbrook Creek runoff and delta. He suggested that the Council and the Corporation Board take a field trip during the lake down phase to look at the outfalls into the lake. Ms. Wagner spoke of the City sponsoring one of the Friends field trip programs as a Parks & Rec program to look at the delta. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 14 May 18, 2010 3.4 LOIS Update Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Hennagin that staff rescheduled the LOIS update for the first meeting in June. At that time, staff would also present the first update on the Water project. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Johnson moved the consent agenda. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney voting "aye." (6-0) 4.1 REPORTS 4.1.1 Resignation of Ann Pritchard from the Library Advisory Board Action: Accept resignation: 4.2 RESOLUTIONS 4.2.1 Resolution 10-26, authorizing certain officials to conduct bank transactions on behalf of the City Action: Adopt Resolution 10-26: 4.32 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4.3.1 February 2, 2010, regular meeting 4.3.2 February 9, 2010, special meeting 4.2.3 February 16, 2010, special meeting 4.2.4 February 16, 2010, regular meeting 4.2.5 March 2, 2010, special meeting 4.2.6 April 27, 2010, special meeting Action: Approve minutes as written END CONSENT AGENDA 5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 6. CITIZEN COMMENT 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.1 Ordinance 2549, an ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego amending LOC Article 50.44 (Flood Management Area) regarding applicability, map amendments, and the flood management area for a portion of Springbrook Creek (LU 10 - 0003) Mr. Powell reviewed the standard legislative hearing procedures and testimony time limits. He asked if the Council members had any conflict of interest to declare. There were none. STAFF REPORT Mr. Espe gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed revisions to the flood management area map and amendments to the flood management code section that came out of the latest FEMA -approved flood plain study for Upper Springbrook Creek. He noted that the map in Exhibit 1-E (p.139) showed the flood plain area of Springbrook Creek proposed for reconfiguration, which lay between Boones Way and a point upstream of Spring Lane. He pointed out that the narrowed portion of the flood plain removed eleven properties from the flood plain, and the widened area brought in two properties. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 14 May 18, 2010 He explained that the original 1986 flood insurance study did not evaluate the stream above Boones Way, but designated all properties in the recognized flood plain as an A zone (highest risk); they paid the highest flood insurance rates. He mentioned that the City's stream restoration project along this reach of the stream also contributed to the reconfiguration of the flood plain. He indicated that the code amendments moved the flood -related definitions from the Definitions section (LOC 50.02) to the Flood Management section (LOC 50.44). He mentioned staff's addition of language to allow the City to do FEMA's administration map amendment processes admi- istratively. He noted that the staff report addressed the relevant criteria ar,,d that staff procG..sed the application to maintain consistency with the applicable local, regianal, and state laws. He mentioned that staff made these changes in response to the specific changes requested by FEMA staff in order to assure that the City Code complied with the National Flood Insurance program, which was necessary to keep properties in the city eligible for flood insurance. QUESTIONS OF STAFF Councilor Hennagin asked why staff contracted the flood plain area along Springbrook Creek, as opposed to expanding it. Mr. Espe explained that the original study determined the Springbrook Creek flood plain based on best practices at the time (aerial photos, spot -field checks) and the pre - restoration stream conditions. The more detailed recent study found that the flood plain boundaries were much larger than needed in that reach along the creek. Therefore, staff modified the boundaries to match the real world conditions of that particular stream channel. Councilor Tierney asked if staff did any cost analysis to compare the cost of the City's stream restoration work to the benefit and savings to homeowners on flood insurance. Mr. Espe indicated that staff did this analysis to facilitate the FEMA letter of map amendment, and did not include any economic studies. Councilor Tierney commented that it would be interesting to see that comparison as part of identifying whether the City's continued efforts regarding the watershed could mean real savings for the citizens. Mr. Espe indicated to Councilor Tierney that the City was late, according to the deadline dates given in the FEMA letter (p.130). He reported that he checked with FEMA staff, who told him that as long as the City had the amendment in process and the Council adopted it this evening, they would not worry about that. Mr. Espe confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that the flood plain regulations were in LOC 50.44. He confirmed to Councilor Olson that the code amendments were consistent with FEMA and Metro requirements (p.116). Mayor Hoffman asked if the flood plain restrictions were more restrictive than the Sensitive Lands Ordinance. Mr. Powell clarified that the flood plain regulations were not part of Metro Title 3 addressing water quality or habitat concerns, but rather part of FEMA and flood concerns. He indicated that comparing the two was like comparing apples to oranges, as the flood plain regulations did not restrict building based on how close one could be to a resource for habitat purposes. Mr. Espe indicated to Mayor Hoffman that those attending the public outreach meetings were interested in the amendments passing. Staff heard no objections to the amendments. Mr. Powell commented that the City having regulations consistent with the FEMA regulations was necessary for eligibility under the FEMA Flood Insurance program. He described the amendments as beneficial to the City, although restrictive. Mayor Hoffman commented that this was not a voluntary program. Mr. Powell observed that if the City did not have these regulations on the books, then property owners would not qualify for flood insurance. PUBLIC TESTIMONY City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 14 May 18, 2010 Mayor Hoffman opened the public hearing to public testimony. Hearing none, he closed the hearing. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Hennagin moved adoption of Ordinance 2549. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney voting "aye." (6-0) Mayor Hoffman moved to tentatively approve LU i - 0003 and Ordinance No. 2549 and direct staff to return with findings, conclusions, and a final ordinance for adoption on June 15, 2010. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney voting "aye." (6-0) At Mayor Hoffman's request, Ms. Weigel described the route of the bike ride scheduled for this Saturday at 9:30 a.m. to honor the City's Centennial and Sustainability Action Month. She mentioned that 60 people have signed up, including Mayor Hoffman, Councilor Tierney, and County Commission Chair Lynn Petersen. She noted that Councilor Tierney would ride the demonstration electric bike. Mayor Hoffman commented that the route went through almost all the Lake Oswego neighborhoods. 7.2 Ordinance 2546, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter 50 of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code to add new Article 50.086 relating to the Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District (LU 09-0043) Mr. Powell reviewed the standard legislative hearing procedures and testimony time limits. He asked if the Council members had any conflict of interest to declare. There were none. There were no challenges. STAFF REPORT Ms. Weigel noted that Liz Hartman, Johanna McCormick, and Cynthia Pearson were present, representing the many diligent people who worked hard for several years to finish this project. She thanked them for their hard work. She reviewed the background of the Glenmorrie Neighborhood Plan (pp.59-60), noting the Council's adoption of the plan in 2000, the neighborhood's formation of an implementation committee in 2008 and development of an R-15 overlay district, and the public outreach efforts. She explained that the purpose of this overlay zone was to insure that new residential development occurred in a way that was compatible with the unique character of this R-15 residential neighborhood, did not adversely impact the privacy of adjacent neighbors, and preserved the country character. She discussed the two proposed standards for new development and remodels: planting and buffering requirements (pp.60-61), and a hardscape maximum requirement (pp.61-62). She presented the minor change proposed by staff to the planting and buffering requirements as illustrated in the drawing on p. 101. The change would shift the line running across the structure to run parallel to the existing structure. She indicated that staff felt that this change to require planting from the front of the new structure all the way back to the end of the existing structure on the other side better implemented the neighborhood's intent. Mr. Powell noted that the proposed change included adding the phrase "plus the abutting plane of the abutting structure on the neighboring property" at the end of the sentence in subsection (1) in the box at the top of p.100. He explained that staff understood that the neighborhood's intent was to screen the abutting building and the length of the proposed building. Ms. Weig I mentioned the existing definition of hardscape as "structures, patios, manmade pools, walkways, masonry, woodwork, etc." She indicated that Glenmorrie proposed that retaining walls, City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 14 May 18, 2010 gravel and rocked areas, and pervious decks not be counted as part of hardscape. She said that staff developed a new definition of hardscape with an exception for Glenmorrie. She stated that the proposal complied with all applicable criteria. She presented the staff recommendation that the Council tentatively approve this proposal and ordinance and direct staff to return with findings, conclusions, and the final ordinance for adoption at the June 15, 2010, meeting with the minor changes outlined by staff. QUESTIONS OF STAFF Councilor Hennagin commented that it seemed counter -intuitive to count retaining walls as part of hardscape, given the difficulty in measuring them. Mr. Powell directed the Councilor to p. 97 in the staff report, which presented the general definition of hardscape that staff developed for the entire Community Development Code (CDC) [LOC 50.02.005]. Ms. Weigel explained that staff developed this new definition of hardscape for the City Code in response to provisions in both the Glenmorrie and Lake Grove Neighborhood plans. Mr. Powell referenced the separate section on hardscape that pertained solely to Glenmorrie (p.99). He explained that Glenmorrie wanted to modify the general citywide definition of hardscape to exclude retaining walls, graveled or rocked areas, and pervious decks. However, the citywide definition included those elements. He clarified to Councilor Hennagin that this was not an exception to the Code, as this language was not in LO 50.02.005. He explained that the separate section for Glenmorrie applied only to the Glenmorrie provision limiting the amount of hardscape coverage to no more than 50% of the lot. Councilor Hennagin questioned whether an overlay could have a provision that was an exception to the citywide code. Mr. Powell stated that both provisions were code, in which the more specific prevailed over the more general. He pointed out that the Glenmorrie provision was more restrictive, and defined the limitations on what a property owner could cover 50% of his/her lot with. Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Olson that the current Code had no definition of hardscape. Ms. Weigel reiterated that staff developed this new code in response to concerns in the Glenmorrie and Lake Grove Neighborhood plans. She observed that Lake Grove's provision was more restrictive than Glenmorrie's. Therefore, staff decided to develop a citywide definition and tweak it with exceptions for the two neighborhoods that reflected what each neighborhood thought should be included in the definition. Councilor Olson asked why the City did not have each neighborhood adopt its own definition of hardscape as part of its overlay. Mr. Powell explained that staff thought that it would be beneficial to have a citywide definition of hardscape, which staff could tweak in certain particulars for each neighborhood, rather than have each neighborhood defining hardscape in a new way. Ms. W igel confirmed to Councilor Olson that the Council would be adopting new code language with this new citywide definition of hardscape. She pointed out that right now it would only apply to Glenmorrie because it was the only neighborhood plan using hardscape in its overlay. She noted that it would also apply to Lake Grove if the Council adopted that plan. Councilor Hennagin asked if it would not be simpler to make the citywide definition less inclusive and allow the neighborhoods to make their overlays more inclusive. Mr. Powell indicated that each neighborhood could define hardscape in total only for the purpose of that neighborhood, or the neighborhoods could start with a citywide definition and tweak it for their purposes. He said that staff elected to recommend the later course, as they thought it less confusing than having several different definitions of hardscape in the Code. Mr. Powell clarified that Glenmorrie was not redefining hardscape as something different from the proposed citywide definition. It was simply not including certain hardscape elements in its calculations for its hardscape maximum. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 14 May 18, 2010 Councilor Johnson agreed with Mr. Powell that the staff recommendation was a less complex way to accomplish the purpose. Councilor Hennagin commented that he did not see it as less complex. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. • Liz Hartman, Glenmorrie Neighborhood Association Chair She testified that the Neighborhood Association Board endorsed the o ��rlay unanimously at its April meeting as the best way to preserve the neighborhood character without taking away a number of property rights from Glenmorrie property owners. Councilor Tierney expressed his appreciation for the work that the neighborhood has done on this overlay, which seemed to make sense for the neighborhood. He asked how the overlay would work with alternate housing types (cottages, secondary dwelling units). Ms. Weigel commented that, since the majority of lots in Glenmorrie did not come close to reaching the 50% hardscape maximum, she did not think that the overlay would be a hindrance to building secondary dwelling units on the R-15 lots the majority of the time. Ms. Weigel indicated to Councilor Tierney that there was no discussion at the meetings regarding the potential for secondary dwelling units. She indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she did not think that the overlay would have as much of an impact on cluster or courtyard housing as other code changes would. Mayor Hoffman closed the hearing. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Tierney moved to tentatively approve LU 09-0043 and Ordinance No. 2546 with the staff adjustments as described and direct staff to return with findings, conclusions, and a final ordinance for adoption on June 15, 2010. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hennagin that, in adopting Ordinance 2546, the Council was adopting the changes to LOC 50.02 (adding Section .005) (p.97) and adding LOC 50.08(b) (Glenmorrie overlay). Councilor Olson asked why the new structure was responsible for extending the screening of the existing structure, per the diagram on p. 101. Ms. Weigel explained that the intent was to mitigate the impact of a new bigger house looking down on the outdoor space of the existing structure. She indicated that the requirement addressed both a privacy and a screening concern. Ms. Hartman noted that the privacy concern related to the neighborhood character, which she described as private and wooded. She explained that they preferred using plants for screening, as opposed to fences. Ms. Weigel mentioned that this requirement also provided guidance to developers who usually planted buffer screens anyway. Councilor Hennagin stated that he still had problems with LOC 50.02.005. He questioned how they could measure large irregularly shaped rocks used in planting areas. Ms. Weigel explained that staff included that in the definition because the Lake Grove neighbors wanted it included, as they were trying to avoid fake rock formations and fake fountains in their neighborhood. She indicated that the provision was in Lake Grove's overlay. Councilor Hennagin asked why graveled walkways counted as hardscape when they were pervious surfaces. Ms. Weigel discussed the aesthetic considerations included in the definition of hardscape. She indicated that, while Glenmorrie did not mind the grayness of the paved and graveled areas, Lake Grove wanted to mitigate that. She explained that Lake Grove's definition of hardscape included many more elements than Gienmorrie's did. Therefore, staff crafted a single all-encompassing definition with two different exceptions. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 14 May 18, 2010 Councilor Tierney suggested that the Council adopt the ordinance and instruct staff to return with a new definition of hardscape that addressed the issues raised. He argued that the ordinance was almost to the finish line, and the Council could fix the concerns in the future. Councilor Hennagin questioned allowing the color of the rock to determine whether something was hardscape. Ms. Weigel commented that staff could try to redefine hardscape, but it was difficult to do so because different neighborhoods defined hardscape differently. Councilor Hennagin suggested not having a citywide definition but letting each overlay define it for itself. Councilor Tierney reiterated his suggestion that staff redefine the citywide definition. Ms. Weigel commented that they could then make the ra finition more inclusive or less inclusive in the overlay zones. Mayor Hoffman asked what the problem was that they were trying to solve. Ms. Weigel explained that what triggered this issue was Glenmorrie's desire to stop the paving of entire front yards in the neighborhood. However, the Glenmorrie lots were so large that a 50% hardscape maximum would not impact that problem. Therefore, Glenmorrie wanted to educate people regarding the different alternative treatments to paving that were available, which were more pervious and looked green rather than gray. Ms. Weigel confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that the 50% maximum regulated the use of private property, and could prohibit putting in a tennis court or a swimming pool. She cited a recent example where the lot was so large that the owner could put in a tennis court and still not hit the 50% maximum. She described how the requirement could set up a trade off between a paved front yard and a swimming pool. Councilor Johnson concurred with changing the hardscape definition. She held that the definition should focus on pervious versus impervious. She argued that they would see greater conflict between pervious and impervious uses in the future with denser and affordable housing. She commented that, living in First Addition, she would take issue with including gravel as hardscape. Johanna McCormick pointed out that anything the overlay did could be theoretically restrictive to someone. She mentioned her understanding that the committee had been working off a plan that the Glenmorrie citizens had blessed in 2000. She commented that one of the themes that came through from the local residents was the need for buffering and for keeping the `greenness' of Glenmorrie. She referenced the question about what difference color made in stating that color did matter because greenness was an important characteristic of the Glenmorrie neighborhood. Mr. Powell suggested that, if the Council did not want a general definition of hardscape, then a neighborhood could address the issues of permeability and greenness on an individual basis by listing in its overlay the things that it considered hardscape. Ms. Weigel mentioned that the Code did have a definition of impervious surfaces, which applied in First Addition and Old Town. However, Glenmorrie and Lake Grove wanted a hardscape definition because their concerns included both perviousness and greenness. Councilor Hennagin asked for a friendly amendment to exclude from the motion the proposed change of Section 50.02.005 and to send that back to staff. Councilor Tierney indicated that he would accept that. He pointed out the need to amend Section 50.086.020 also. Mr. Powell clarified to Mayor Hoffman that he understood the motion as directing staff to return with an ordinance that amended 50.08B.020 to list all the things formerly included in the general definition of hardscape with the exception of graveled and rock areas and pervious decks. He described this as accomplishing Glenmorrie's objective of a 50% maximum hardscape limitation, while not making a general definition of hardscape. Councilor Johnson accepted the friendly amendment. Councilor Olson explained that, while she admired the work that the Glenmorrie neighbors put into their plan over the years, she was struggling with the conflict of an overlay that effectively limited a property owner's property rights, which was an issue in the City right now. She indicated City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 14 May 18, 2010 that she would vote no because of that, even though she supported neighborhood planning and understood what Glenmorrie was trying to accomplish. Councilor Moncrieff indicated that she would vote yes because she appreciated the work that went into the plan. She spoke to focusing on sustainability issues as they moved forward, such as the environmental effects of hardscape in relation to pervious materials and using lighter colors to reflect heat and sunlight, as opposed to focusing on the aesthetic qualities. A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Mor-�rileff, and Tierney voting "aye." Councilor Olson voted `no.' (5-1) Mayor Hoffman ;-ecessed the meeting for a 10 -minute break. He reconvened the meeting. 7.3 Ordinance 2552, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), Section 50.11.010 to limit the square footage of delicatessens, bakeries, and restaurants in the Campus Research And Development (CR&D) zone, and adopting findings (LU 09 - 0034) Mr. Powell reviewed the standard quasi-judicial hearing procedures and testimony time limits. He explained that this zoning code amendment was better processed as a quasi-judicial matter because it applied so narrowly. He asked the Council to declare any ex parte contacts, bias, or conflicts of interest. There were none. There were no challenges. STAFF REPORT Mr. Gulizia gave a PowerPoint presentation on this proposed code amendment to limit the sizes of restaurants, bakeries, or delicatessens in the Campus Research and Development (CR&D) zone. He explained that the City Code did not comply with Title 4 of the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. The Code allowed unlimited square footage in the CR&D zone for the retail uses of restaurants, bakeries, and delicatessens. However, Title 4 restricted retail square footage to 60,000 square feet in areas with an employment land designation, such as the Kruse Way commercial corridor (which had CR&D zoning in it). He indicated that amending the City Code to limit these three retail uses to 20,000 square feet would bring the Code into compliance with Title 4 and make these uses consistent with the existing 20,000 square foot limitation on retail stores in the CR&D zone (p.157). He mentioned staffs request to Metro to re -designate the land area near Carman Drive and Kruse Way currently designated as industrial to an employment land designation in order tc match the surrounding parcels to the west (p.180). He reported that Metro staff has agreed to support the request. He noted the Metro letter confirming that the proposal complied with Title 4 (Exhibit F-5). He referenced the staff findings that the proposed code amendment was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies (Exhibit D-1). QUESTIONS OF STAFF Councilor Hennagin asked for a size comparison to illustrate 20,000 square feet. Mr. Gulizia indicated that the Oswego Grill at Kruse Way and 1-5 was 7,300 square feet. He observed that the size of these three uses would likely bump into the parking restriction before it bumped into the square footage restriction. He said that he did not think that any of the restaurants and delis in the CR&D zone now were larger than 2,000 square feet. Councilor Hennagin commented that he had a hard time justifying any limitation. Mr. Gulizia confirmed that Metro's intent was to encourage office uses with the employment land designation, which were more employee -intensive than retail uses. Mayor Hoffman mentioned that he had sat on MPAC (Metropolitan Policy Advisory Committee) when Title 4 passed. He explained that the intent behind Title 4's restriction on retail was to prevent using the industrial and employment land inside the UGB for big box retail instead of for City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 14 May 18, 2010 industrial and employment enclaves. He indicated that in the past some jurisdictions had granted developers' requests to change the use from industrial or employment to retail, which had resulted in big box retail with its fewer employees per square foot than industrial or employment uses. Mr. Gulizia indicated to Councilor Olson that this amendment did not restrict the number of these uses in the zone. It only limited the size of individual uses. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Mr. Powell reviewed the testimony time limits. Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. He ring none, he closed the public hearing. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilor Olson moved to tentatively approve LU 09-0034 and Ordinance No. 2552 and direct staff to return with findings, conclusions, and a final ordinance for adoption on June 15, 2010. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tiern y voting "aye." (6-0) 8. REPORTS 8.1 Definition Amendment - "Congregate Housing" Ms. Andreades referenced her memo (pp.203-208). She recalled that the Council wanted to clarify the definition of congregate housing in response to the issues that came up during the Northwest Alternatives appeal last year. She read a portion of the definition of congregate housing (p.204): "multi -unit housing ... that supported independent lifestyles for those with life function disabilities due to age..." She framed the question as whether the congregate housing definition should eliminate the `due to age' clause. She indicated that the term `life function disabilities due to age' referred to users and their disabilities. She recalled that Northwest Alternatives had had to show a causative relationship between age and life function disabilities. She pointed out that looking at it in terms of designs and services, then it referred to use. She raised four points for discussion, beginning with the question of whether there should be age - restricted housing distinct from congregate housing (pp.205-206). She explained that if the answer was yes, then the City could strike the `due to age' phrase out of the definition of congregate housing and remove the requirement to show a correlation between age and disability. If the answer was no, then the City needed to define `life function disability' because the Code currently did not define the term (p.206). She discussed the issue of design and service -based housing versus occupancy -based housing (p.207). She raised the question of what different specific services the City would require for the different types of housing, such as multi -function, congregate, and age -restricted. She pointed out that if the City wanted to provide incentives for these types of housing, then the questions came up about whether to set specific siting criteria or parking requirements or to require a conditional use permit (p.2.07). QUESTIONS OF STAFF Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hennagin that, while he was not certain whether a development had to qualify as congregate housing in order to qualify for federal funding, he thought it depended on the kind of funding. He mentioned that federal funding was often tied to low income, senior, or disability housing. He confirmed that he was not aware of any federal definition of congregate housing that developers had to meet. He recalled that Northwest City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 14 May 18, 2010 Alternatives had qualified for low income/senior housing funding. Whether a local jurisdiction called that congregate housing had not been relevant to its grant. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the Council could define congregate housing however it wished. However, defining it as low income or senior housing only would severely limit what was available now in Lake Oswego. He pointed out that the Stafford on Overlook was congregate housing but not low-income. Mayor Hoffman asked staff to bring this back as a study session item because of the policy issues embedded in the concept. He he,,-: that the Council needed to refresh itself as a group on what congregate care was. He identifie,a the policy issues as housing choices, aging in place, and neighborhood compatibility. He argued that everything would flow from making those policy decisions, after which staff could draft the code language. Councilor Hennagin asked whether the Council should remove the `due to' clause tonight in case the City ran into the Northwest Alternatives problem with a new developer while the Council was waiting on the study session. Mayor Hoffman commented that he did not think that anything would happen in the next three months. Ms. Andreades indicated that she was not aware of any developer contact with the City regarding such a project. Mr. Powell pointed out that any change to the code had to go through the Planning Commission, but the Council could give direction tonight. He explained that the Council's interpretation, as embodied in its findings on the Northwest Housing appeal, stood; staff would process any application based on that interpretation. Councilor Olson concurred with Councilor Hennagin about sending this to the Planning Commission to remove the `due to' clause. She commented that last fall the Development Review Commission interpreted the `due to' clause one way and the Council another way, which caused the problem. Ms. Andreades pointed out that, whether the Council took out the `due to' clause or not, it still had to deal with the same issues she discussed in her presentation. Mr. Powell described two quick fixes based on what the Council what wanted to do. If the Council wanted to leave in age but not have to show disabilities due to age, then the language would be "persons of a certain age or who have life function disabilities due to a medical or mental condition." If the Council did not want to include age, then the language would be "persons who have life function disabilities." He commented that, while directing the Planning Commission to fix the code to make congregate housing apply to seniors as well as to people with disabilities would be a quick fix, he did not necessarily recommend doing so because of the policy questions involved. Councilor Tierney spoke in favor of the quick fix in light of the number of significant issues facing the Council in the next few months. He indicated to the Mayor that he would defer to Mr. Powell to craft the language, which he thought should include age and a medical or mental condition as a qualifier for congregate housing. Mr. Powell indicated that, if that was the Council's decision, then he would not craft language. He would advise the Council to send that direction to the Planning Commission, which would then discuss the age-related federal law issues involved. Councilor Moncrieff indicated that, while she would like a quick fix, she agreed that there were larger policy implications. She cited the potential parking and traffic issues, the conditions of use, and the zones allowing the use as elements in a discussion of congregate housing as affordable housing for people 55+ with disabilities. She questioned whether there was a quick fix in light of the many facets of this issue. Councilor Olson concurred that the Council needed to address the policy issues mentioned by Mayor Hoffman and Councilor Moncrieff. She commented that she saw the Comprehensive Plan process addressing many of those concerns through the housing component. She indicated that City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 14 May 18, 2010 she still did not think that age (being over 55) was a life function disability, and she would like a quick fix to untangle those two ideas. Councilor Tierney suggested that having both an age/income restriction related to federal regulations and the `due to medical/mental condition' clause would capture the Council's intent. He indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that it would address the parking issue because of the correlation between the residents' economic status and vehicles. He acknowledged that the conditional use designation might leave some barriers for staff and the DRG to address with regard to part .g. Councilor Hennagin recalled that the Council had not wanted to impose a low-income housing restriction on Northwest Alternatives. He cited Councilor Tierney's point about the Council's upcoming workload in supporting the quick fix to allow a condition of age and/or a medical/mental condition. He commented that perhaps the Comprehensive Plan housing component would address Councilor Moncrieff's concerns. Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that the Council could set income parameters as a qualifier for congregate care. He commented that the challenge would be to correlate those parameters to the federal granting opportunities, which staff would explore if the Council sent this to the Planning Commission. He pointed out that the congregate care definition would not then apply to the Stafford or similar housing. Councilor Hennagin pointed out to Councilor Moncrieff that the need for federal funding to build congregate care effectively restricted this housing to low income. He mentioned that he did not want to exclude the Stafford from the definition of congregate care. The Council directed the Planning Commission and staff to explore how to accomplish including the age condition in the congregate care definition but separating it from life function disabilities. Mayor Hoffman confirmed to Mr. Powell that the Council wanted the definition to comply with federal law regarding age. 8.2 Amendment to a public improvement contract for Lake Full phase of LOIS Mr. Komarek confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that the Council has discussed this amendment before. He explained that the contractor submitted a claim for differing site conditions. He stated that staff has been evaluating the merits of the claim over the last several months to insure that it met the claim standards outlined in the contract document. He directed the Council to the staff report (p.209-212) discussing the staff findings that the claim had merit and the contractor entitled to a settlement. He indicated that he made his settlement offer of $520,000 in exchange for the contractor waiving their rights to claim impact and schedule delay and waiving any further differing site condition claims. He asked the Council to approve this contract amendment to settle this matter and to direct the City Manager to execute the necessary documents to effect the change. He indicated to Councilor Olson that nothing has changed respecting this issue since the Council discussed it originally. Councilor Tierney commented that, in light of the concurrence in previous discussions by the Council that this underwater site did change (as explained by Mr. Komarek), and that Brown & Caldwell reviewed the claim, and that the contractor waived any future rights, he supported the settlement recommendation. Councilor Tierney moved to accept the report and to instruct the City Manager to act accordingly. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. Councilors Hennagin, Olson, and Mayor Hoffman concurred that this was a good result for the City. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 14 May 18, 2010 A voice vote was taken, and the motion pass d with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney voting "aye." (6-0) 9. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER 9.1 Ordinance 2524, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending portions of the Lake Oswego Code, Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) to promote compatibility of new residential development with the character of existing development (LU 08 - 0053 - 1729) Mr. Powell confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that the slaff ran into some technical issues when re- formatting the information from the Council presentation format to the ordinance format. Staff would have the ordinance ready for adoption next week. Councilor Hennagin move to continue Ordinance 2524 to June 1, 2010. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney voting "aye." (6-0) 10. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL 10.1 Councilor Information 10.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental Committees 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 11.1 City Manager 11.1.1 Review of Council Schedule Mr. McIntyre reminded the Council about the going away party for Chief Duncan in the Council Chambers at 2 p.m. this Friday. He invited the Council to the ice cream social at the Maintenance Yard this Thursday at 2:30 p.m., hosted by the City in recognition of Public Works Week. 11.2 City Attorney 12. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 9:18 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 247d-�- Robyn Christie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: OIC September 21, 20.1 Q Jack'). H City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 14 May 18, 2010