Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet - 2009-02-03
QF LAKE OSw,t C� CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING � AGENDA iiiill Tuesday, February 3, 2009 c :7 6:30 pNm. oREGON Council Chambers 2009 City Council City Hall Jack Hoffman, Mayor 380 A Avenue Donna Jordan, Council President RogerHennagin Also published on-line: http://www.ci.oswego.or.us Kristin Johnson Contact: Robyn Christie, City Recorder Mary Olson E-Mail: rchristie@ci.oswego.or.us Sally Moncrieff Phone: 503-675-3984 Bill Tierney The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. To request accommodations, please contact Public Affairs at 503-635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting. Page# 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PRESENTATIONS 3.1 Lake Oswego Relay for Life Presentation, Rhonda Cohen 3.2 Acceptance of Police K-9 Painting from artist Connie Bowen 3.3 Gold Award Historical Photo Day Proclamation, Kenzy Sorensen 3.4 Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer Update (LOIS) 3.5 Adoption of Council Goals 1 4. 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 City Council makes one motion covering all items included in the consent agenda. City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 1 February 3, 2009 4.1 RESOLUTIONS 4.1.1 Resolution 09-03, making appointments to the Citizens' Budget Committee 9 Action: Adopt Resolution 09-03, appointing Daniel Williams, Jeff Gudman and Frank Bearden to the Citizens' Budget Committee for a four-year term ending August 31, 2012; and Kent Studebaker as alternate to be appointed should there be a vacancy on the Citizens' Budget Committee through July 31, 2009 4.1.2 Resolution 09-04, making appointments to the Planning Commission 11 Action: Adopt Resolution 09- 04, appointing Russell Jones to the Planning Commission for the remainder of a four-year term ending May 31, 2010; and Lynne Paretchan to the Planning Commission for the remainder of a four-year term ending May 31, 2011 4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4.2.1 January 6, 2009, Regular Meeting 15 4.2.2 January 10, 2009, Community Roundtable 17 4.2.3 January 12, 2009, Special Meeting 23 4.2.4 January 13, 2009, Special Meeting 29 Action: Approve minutes as written END CONSENT AGENDA 5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 6. CITIZEN COMMENT 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 five minutes per citizen shall apply. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.1 Request to continue Sensitive Lands Community Development Code Amendments — General Housekeeping LU 08-0051(A) to March 3 (see item 11.1) Motion: Move to continue LU 08-0051 (A) to March 3 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 2 February 3, 2009 8. REPORTS 9. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL This agenda item provides an opportunity for individual Councilors to provide information to the Council on matters not otherwise on the agenda. Each Councilor will be given five minutes. 9.1 Councilor Information 9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental Committees 10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 10.1 City Manager 10.2 City Attorney 11. STUDY SESSION 11.1 Sensitive Lands Community Development Code Amendments 41 11.2 Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer Overview 101 11.3 Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Supply Partnership 113 11.4 Public Communication and Engagement (no written report) 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 12.1 Pursuant to ORS 192.660 (2)(d) to conduct deliberations with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations 13. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 14. ADJOURNMENT CABLE VIEWERS: the Regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28, at 6:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Wednesday 7:30 p.m. Thursday 7:00 a.m. Friday 2:30 a.m. Saturday 12:00 p.m. Sunday 4:00 p.m. Monday 11:00 p.m. City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 3 February 3, 2009 CITY COUNCIL I LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE ROLLING UPDATE DATE MEETING Monday, Study Session, 5 p.m. West End Building - tentative February 9 • Land Use 101 (includes brief overview of Comp Plan, Sensitive Lands, Tree Code, Annexation, and Stafford Basin/UGB) Tuesday, Study Session, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers February 10 • Background Presentation Facilities/West End Building Tuesday, Re ular Meetin 6:30 .m. Council Chamb r '- February 17 • LOIS Update • intergovernmental Agreement wi, i ;.f ortland Environmental Services for th on Cr ':F estoration • Project ' Public Hearing • /2/Thursday, Stud Session, 6:30 p.m. C ham February 19 • Visioning (with Stephen A ' ;' availability //// v Tuesday, Study Session, 6.30 uncrl Cham February •24 • Comprehensive . n Rem c e e • Streetcar Design Up ; to/i/ /// Wednesday, Stud, ; ,6:30 p.m. t6uncil Ch bers February 25 • izen B ' t Committ : Finance/Budget 101 f "tal Im ovement PI Tuesday 4 `% alai .: ouncil Chambers Marc S Up '6// // Public ring • Sens La s CDC Amendments General Housekeeping LU 08-0051 A(non-rlcy, related) � ) (Y' Citize f evolvement Guidelines o ehensive Plan Work Program Tuesday, St Session 6:30 .m. Council Chambers March 10 • Tentative Public Hearing NW Housing Appeal Tuesday, No meeting — Council to National League of Cities Conference March 17 BOLD ITEMS-New issues added to schedule Items known as of 1/29/09 CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE ROLLING UPDATE DATE MEETING Tuesday, Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers March 24 • Tentative adoption of findings NW Housing Appeal Public Hearing Tuesday, Study Session, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers March 31 • Redevelopment Agency 101 (with David Leland, pending availability) X( i Tuesday, Re•ular Meetin• 6:30 •.m. Council Chamla- `''''fF April 7 • LOIS Update • Contract Award for Lake Full Con u f, - LOIS Public Hearing , f ,/ • Palisades Map Correctioiy/ Tuesda Stud Session 6.30 .m. O u : hang s /# y, y � p April 14 • Foothills/Streetcar ///47f/ Tuesday, Regular Meeting, 6: , ouncil Cha ' tF, April 21 • LOIS Update , //' /// Public l'ng ////V /// z//,/- Tuesday, Stu-,4essio :30 .m. C f,,.c Chambers p N �JF/ . April 28 • Jo ,/ ieetthinf the City nciI and Lake Oswego School Boa //J /%/ -// /,// //,/ /,4 /./, • „// / BOLD ITEMS -New issues added to schedule Items known as of 1/29/09 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DRAFT 2009 CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal Statement Council Action Milestones Financial Resources Staff Resources Public Outreach Communication ;:::.:....:".".:;.+:.:..,. ;:::.:....:".".:::::.:...:�"'"��::::.:...:�"'"��::::.:...:�"'"��::::.:...:�"'"�"::::::�;:.:�:.:::°:;�::::�;:.:�:.:::°:::::::�;:.:�:.:::°:::::::�;:.:�:.:::°:::::::�;:.:�:.:::°:::::::�;;'':��.::°:::;;�is�:��.::°:::;;�is�:��.:°:::;;�is�:��.::°:::;;�is�:��.::°:::;;a;;'':��.::i ; "°"crunscatws Public Communication and Engagement(new initiative) • Gain understanding of City's current communications Depending on the scope and scale,Council Initial presentation—April 2009 Unknown at this time additional FTE study sessions/public meetings practices will need to consider the new outreach programs and be prepared to consider Council adoption—June 2009 • Research,explore and consider best practices for civic budget adjustments to do so engagement • Present a public outreach and engagement program for consideration :.Sr $'AI #PKIT ..' e acr vxe. arle s......::...".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::.....:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'..::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......:::..".:'...::......::: Sustainability(in progress) • Consider sustainability in each of the City Council goals Consider sustainability principles and Unknown at this time Unknown at this time .5 existing FTE Engage Sustainability Advisory practices in all City Council decisions Board • Consider sustainability in City Council policies and decisions ......... ......... ......... LOIS Project(in progress) • Continue to make progress towards replacing the Lake Establish LOIS Budget for 2009 project Complete the Kelok-Bryant project �$40-50 million in FY LOIS Project Team study sessions on various Oswego Sewer Interceptor phases 2009-2010 remains unchanged with 5 aspects of the LOIS project Secure access to Oswego Lake FTEs • Keep residents apprised of the project and its construction Authorize sale of sewer revenue bonds Provide timely and detailed and financial milestones Study session on overall project— information to residents using Award contracts for 2009 project phases February 2009 efforts outlined in the LOIS Outreach Plan and the LOIS Media Receive regular LOIS updates Initiate Lake Full Construction and Plan. Bryant Road Pump Station Hold Project Kick-off Event CJ1 CO4 N .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Goadstatement CouncilAction M lestone FinancialResourcesS If > ur PublicOutreach/ ces communication Water Supply(in progress) • Take actions to securing an adequate future water supply Approve the formation of a water supply The water supply team is $1M-$3M:FY 2009-2010 Establish a Water Supply Identify water project stakeholders and distribution infrastructure for Lake Oswego team established by July 1,2009 Team with up to 5 additional FTEs(project Initiate dialogue with stakeholders • Take steps to improve the City's water supply infrastructure Approve the FY 2009/2010 budget for the Water supply project budget for FY management and public about project in order to deliver water to the City of Tigard by July 1,2016 Lake Oswego/Tigard water project 2009/2010 approved by June 30, outreach) 2009 Update City Council quarterly Approve a preferred project delivery about project status method Project pre-designited by July 1,2009 Study Session on Lake Oswego: swego— A rove a project specific Capital Ti and Water Supply Partnership— pp pg pp Y Improvement Plan(CIP) Municipal;; tensions tested February 3,2009 case concludes December 31,009 Approve contracts for preliminary Study Session—Background engineering,planning and permitting tasks Water sources Department presentation on water rates and • issues Final Order(FO)for updated conservation—Spring 2009 Monitor and participate in the City s Water Management and munici al ermit extensions rocess C nservation PlanbyDecember 31, 2009:.::... Adopt an update to the City s Water Management and Conservation Plan Council adoptsu dated Water SDC methodology ' ly 1,2009 Adopt an update to water utility Syst stems . Development Charges City announces start of water efficiency rebate program July 1, Implement the rev tiered water rates as2009 approved n 200 Initiate communications/outreach Authorize funding to implement a rebate for Lake Oswego/Tigard water program for water efficient plumbing project fixtures and appliances Adopt a Communicationand Outre Plan for the Lake Osweggard.Niia r project Infrastructure Master Plans(new initiatives) • Establish a timeline and direction for drafting facility master Approve and fund recommended plan July 2009 initiate one or possibly �$250,000 per utility plan Up to 1.0 FTE for each Using conventional and new plans for Wastewater,Water,Transportation,Stormwater, two facility master plan projects and�$450,000 for the facility master plan for communications programs,engage Parks and other(i.e.building)facilities (i.e.Transportation System Plan transportation plan approximately one to the public about the facts related and Wastewater Master Plan (funded from respective three years to manage to public infrastructure • Develop and implement a strategic asset management Updates) utility) project including approach for implementation of the plans consultant agreements At least 2 study sessions per plan 2 Goal Statement Council Action Milestones Financial Resources Staff Resources Public Outreach/ Communication ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ti4i:""I�"'""'Y'v'"'Y':f"":':{......': :::isMF �:::][�i1L�i]I�Y.{:MI��][.��:ti•ii:ti.:��r�1F���•i�r��.�i�� West End Building(in progress) • Make an informed,community-supported decision about the Review and understand existing Study Session on background of the Unknown at this time ,25 existing FTE for Based on Council direction and West End Building information about the WEB,City facilities, WEB and Facility Issues—February development and using conventional and new space needs,market data,and public 10,2009 presentation time communications programs,engage opinion the public about the facts related Issue staff report—February 2009 to the WEB and its existing and Based on the work done to-date,adopt a potential uses plan for next steps that could include a Study sessions to'rview report— public engagement and decision-making March 2009 process Adopt a.publc Hold public meetings based on the engagement/decision-making plan, approved plan —Mar., 1 Make a decision on the future of the WEED,. Implement pl.an.which could including a financing strategynclude study sessions and/or public Hearings—April 2009 ouncil action(including i.nancing strategy)— Facilities(in progress) • Adopt a plan for key City facilities. These facilities are the Decide about W;EB-related facilities a.pa:r . "Milestone will be consistent with Unknown at this time ,25 existing FTE for Using conventional and new ones that relate specifically to the WEB(City Hall,Library and of the WEB,di cis or pro ess the.".WEB decision process(see development and communications programs,engage the ACC),as well as the South Shore Fire Station and the above) :. presentation time the public about the facts related Maintenance Services Building Adopt a plan.:for all the key facilities to City facilities Approve funding for a Facilities • Consider an asset management strategy for ongoing facility Initiate a Faciliities:.Asset Management Plan Asset Management Plan—June management based upon building conditions,service needs, • 2009 priorities,and community support Luscher Farm Master Plan Update(new initiative) • Initiate and fund an update of the Luscher Farm Master Plan Approve process and financial strategy for Initiate master plan process—Fall .-•$150,000 Up to 1 additional or Using conventional and new with the purpose of developing a revised concept plan for the Master Plan update 2009 existing FTE communications programs,engage the Farm and Stafford area park properties. The resulting the public and stakeholders such as plan will incorporate additional park acreage acquired since neighborhoods and Friends Groups adoption of the 1997 master plan;identify citizen priorities; throughout the planning and determine overall costs,development phasing,and funding update process strategies 3 W Goal Statement Council Action Milestones Financial Resources Staff Resources Public Outreach/ Communication ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ;n::.•.:.:n...{..{•:•.:.:•:.•:.:...iiiiiiii"{{^:i4ii:titi4i;'}i:iii;?{{^:{.:istiti4iiiiiiiYi;i{4;i4ii:titi4ii".:iiii:i:'}Y4ii:titi4Y':iiiiiY'4iY ii:titi4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4i:'i 4iiiiiiiii;ii^:i4i::i'".iiiiiiiiii is{.ii:titi4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff^iiiiiiiiii:{{^:i4ii:titi4iiiiiiiii;?{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff^iiiiiiiii:n:{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff^iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:titi4ii:_iiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff^iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4iiYti4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:tiff^iiiiiiiii;?{{^:i4ii:titi4iiiiiiiii;?{{^:{4', iii:•.ii'.• � .�.{::::i4 ..;:: :4'.. :::.�.::;:::.. . :i. ..i: �. ' ::: 'i:. . iY is{?iiiiii;?i4:{{{4:tiff?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}:?iti?{?{4:titi?::4iiiiiii;ti?t{{yti4 i:{¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:ti�?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:iryiiiiiii:{.{{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{4:titi?:i¢iiiii}i;i4:{{{yti4:::4iiiiiii;ti?t?{4:titi?;i¢: :::<:li::.>;:in a '; ue•:o»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»><<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>€s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<'s>s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<s€>s>»>;'<<':z<<>>»>;'<<'! Comprehensive Plan(new initiative) • Initiate the Periodic Review and Comprehensive plan update Approve Periodic Review work program Study Session—February 2009 ;$5°°'°?jeCer:years Assign up to 2.5 existing Extensive Public engagement— Work Plan Approval—March 2009 yearprot-eimate of FTEs from Planning workshops,public meetings, • Determine scope of visioning $220,000 for year one Department newsletters,open houses,surveys and opinion research Amount depends on scope of visioning component and technical work for plan components Community Development Code Audit(new initiative) • Review the existing Community Development Code and Award contract for consulting services for Study Session—Sump er.2009 ` $50,00-$75,000 Assign existing FTE to Engage citizens,groups,and City develop a strategy for a re-write of the Code the review of the Community manage the review customers Development Code completer.=:inter 2009 project Accept audit report Stafford Basin/Urban Growth Boundary(in progress) • Monitor the activities in the Stafford Basin and participate in Review background on, afford Ba o : Stud;jr € —Spting:2009 None .25 existing FTE for Discussions with the community the METRO conversation concerning the future plans and development monitoring,updating about opportunities within the use for the region Stafford Summit—Spring 2009 Council and reviewing Stafford Basin information Infill(in progress) • Review and consider Infill amendments to City Development Adopt code mendments to' .e:City's Study Session—Spring 2009 None .5 existing FTE Public hearings Code code 'Public Hearing—Spring 2009 Sensitive Lands(in progress) • Review and consider Sensitive Lands amendments to the Adopt code amendments to the Cit's Study Session—February 2009 .-•$20,000 for mapping existing FTE Public hearings,open houses, Code Sensitive Lands code assistance,consultants additional communication and Public Hearing—Spring 2009 outreach strategies Secondary Dwelling Units(in progress) • Review and consider Secondary Dwelling Units limitations in Adopt code amendments pertaining to Study Session—Fall 2009 �$25,000 technical .25 existing FTE Open houses,public meetings, the City's code Secondary Dwelling Units support for development onsite consultations Public Hearing—Fall 2009 of options;graphics 4 Goal Statement Council Action Milestones Financial Resources Staff Resources Public Outreach/ Communication Neighborhood Planning(new initiative) • Implement existing plans(Glenmorrie,Waluga,Lake Forest, Adopt code amendments implementing Receive report from Neighborhood �$15,000 for graphics Assign existing FTE Extensive Public Outreach Palisades,Lake Grove) plans Plan Work Group • Complete a review of existing neighborhood plans and the Study Session—Fall 2009 process for selecting,writing,and implementing the plans !,:pggppgmtpppgppgmgNpgrt000gofogiotyttiut:vibeimgyftoE,INEEEEEEEEEEENEEEEEEEEEEE EENENEEEEEEENEEEENEIEEIEEEEEEEEEENIEIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEIEEENIEEEEEEIE ' ke>< s ° r 1s busi a t000 t: >;;<»>»::>::::>>>;;<>><»::::::::::>>:>;:;:<:»>»::>:::::>>:>;;<>><»;::::::;>:>;:;:«:>»::>:::::::>>:>;:;::<:>»»::;:::>>>;;<><>»::>::::::::>>:>;:;:<:»>»::::::>>>;;<><»::>::::::::>>:>;:;:<:»>»::>:::::::>>::::;::<:»>»::>::::::::>>::>;:;:<:>:>>»::>;:::::>::>;::<:;;»::;::::::;>::>;:;:<::>»::>;:::::::>:>;:;::<:;;>»::;::::>;;<><»::>::::::::>>:>;:;:<:»>»::>::::>>>;;<><»::::::::::>>:>;:;:<:>»>»::>-:::>:>;;<><»::::::>>::>;:;:<::>>»::>:::::::>>:>;:;::<:»»:::::>>;;<>>»::>::::::::>>:>;:;:<:>»>»::::::>>>;;<><»::>::::::::>>:>;:;:<:»>»::>::::>>>;;<>><»::::::::;>:>;:;:<:> Economic Development Outreach(new initiative) • Create an economic development plan focused on Approve and fund an Economic Creation of an Economi.: Unknown at this time 1.0 additional FTE Engage Chamber of Commerce, supporting,retaining,and attracting local businesses Development Plan which attracts,retains Development Plan Downtown,East and West business and supports local businesses groups,and neighborhoods • Explore Economic Development programs including the Studer,,session to receive direction;. creation of a Mainstreet program Approve financing plan on implementing economic development.plan a,nd.`next steps for establishing an:,.economic development program in the City Lake Grove Village(in progress) • Continue implementation of Lake Grove Village Plan Approve consultant agreement initiating FP Phase I B:o nes Ferry Road �$220,000 Assign.25-.5 existing Phase 1—public meetings, transportation study and::`fina icing;:.. Traffic Study Contracts Planning FTE;.25 existing neighborhood association • Develop Financing Plan strategy ':`;: Engineering FTE communications,open houses Phase: 'Boones Ferry Road Design Approve financing plan and Financing Plan Phase 2—Form Advisory Committee Streetcar&Foothills(in progress) • Advance planning and design work on the Portland to Lake Approve'an;GA with TriMet; 't,land, Study Session for Streetcar— Lake Owego's proposed 1 additional FTE Metro and TriMet will lead the Oswego Streetcar and Trail project Metro and Clackamas County for funding :February 24,2009 share of the$9.7 million Streetcar project and will develop a the planning and.d.esign work for`the planning and design formal outreach plan consistent • Initiate formal planning work for the redevelopment of the streetcar project ': Study Session for process is$150,000. with Federal requirements for the Foothills area Foothills/Streetcar—April 14,2009 $100,000 of this is in the entire length of the 5.7-mile Approve a Memorandum Of,. current 08/09 budget corridor Understanding(MOU)with the'Foothills Approve MOU—Spring,2009 property owners to formalize Lake Oswego has been The City and developers will responsibilities and funding for developing asked to loan TriMet$1.5 develop an outreach plan as part of a Framework Plan and an Urban Renewal million to initiate design both the Framework Plan and Plan for Foothills work prior to 2012. Urban Renewal Plan TriMet will repay this loan with interest in 2012 5 0) Goal Statement Council,Action Milestones Financial Resources Staff Resources Public Outreach j Communication Downtown Urban Renewal(in progress) • Continue to implement the Downtown Urban Renewal Award Millennium Park construction Complete Millennium Park LORA Budget 1 existing FTE Outreach to local businesses, District Plan contract business and neighborhood groups Begin construction of Lakefront million for Lakefront and communication to • Complete the final phase of Millennium Park Award contract to initiate Lakefront Park Park—Fall 2009 Park stakeholders construction • Finalize plans and commence development of Lakefront Park • Review the Downtown Urban Renewal District Plan in consideration of the plan's priorities • Seize opportunities to impact and encourage development in the downtown district through public-private partnerships and investments in public infrastructure and open spaces ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... S ECIAL R#.E T..I ITIATIMESA. ':dci#e:::ei >•o`< tif00I> <>: <><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<>< <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<>< <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»<>;<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <N <><> <>E<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>»«<><> <>;>» <><> <>;>» <><> Library District(in progress) • Prioritize the resources from the library district to prepare Approve financial plan to invest the °;Budget.aoption 2009 .-•$1.8 million None Citizen's Budget Committee, and plan for a greater Lake Oswego Library Library District funds discussions with the community about the library's future Emergency Response Plan(new initiative) • Update the City's Emergency Management Response Plan Develop and ;, n update d ah i ..`:study Session—Summer 2009 .-•$100,000 Emergency Management Using conventional and new Emergency Manageme f esponse Plan Coordinator—.5 communications programs,engage Plan Adoption—June 2009 additional FTE the public about Emergency Preparedness Annual Budget(in progress) • Develop the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 annual budget with the Appoint Citizen Budget:Te:am Study Session—February 2009 .-•$60 million Proposed 1.5 existing FTE Citizen Budget Team meetings Citizen Budget Committee 2009-10 Operating Adopt Fiscal Year 2009-2010 400,41 Budget adoption—June 2009 Budget budget Receive monthly budget updates 6 .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Public eh Goal Stater en Milestones Action Financial Resources Staff>Resources Communication Centennial Celebration(in progress) • Develop and implement City Centennial Celebration plan Approve,fund,and implement plans for Council update on celebration plan Up to$250,000 ▪ FTE Involve neighborhoods,boards and the City's Centennial Celebration events —Summer 2009 commissions,businesses,schools, and activities and volunteers in the event planning effort Historic Iron Furnace(in progress) • Restore the Historic Iron Furnace None Complete Project—Fall 2009 .-•$800,000 .25 existing FTE Project updates to Council and public Intergovernmental Relations(new initiative) • Develop and implement an Intergovernmental Relations Approve and fund Intergovernmental Creation of anIntergovernmental .-• 100,000 ▪ additional FTE Provide updates to Council and program Relations program Relations program—Summer 2009 stakeholder groups on intergovernmental activities 7 4. 1 . 1 0,t.,..os .„. ipt ‘, 1„1 co aloHifill CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO COUNCIL REPORT - ------7- ----)OREGOI4 TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Jane McGarvin, Deputy City Recorder t SUBJECT: Resolution 09-03, making appointments to the Citizens' Budget Committee DATE: January 26, 2009 ACTION Council is requested to approve Resolution 09-03, approving appointments to the Citizens' Budget Committee. BACKGROUND The City Council Interview Committee consisting of Councilors Johnson and Tierney, and Ron Smith, Chair of the Citizens' Budget Committee, interviewed seven candidates on January 22, 2009. The Committee recommends appointment of Daniel Williams, Jeff Gudman and Frank Bearden for four year terms on the Citizen's Budget Committee ending August 31, 2012, and recommends Kent Studebaker as alternate to be appointed should there be a vacancy through July 31, 2009. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 09-03 A, Sustainability has been considered as part of this recommendatio 11 Reviewed 6 I;-..... I A CityA •r e Ail 1 Vi . 1 i4 Alex iW:'nt re y City Manager 9 RESOLUTION 09-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE CITIZENS' BUDGET COMMITTEE WHEREAS, a City Council Interview Committee, consisting of Councilors Johnson and Tierney, and Ron Smith, Chair of the Citizens' Budget Committee, met on January 22, 2009, to interview candidates for the Citizens' Budget Committee; and WHEREAS, it was the consensus of the Interview Committee to recommend to the City Council that Daniel Williams, Jeff Gudman and Frank Bearden be appointed to the Citizens' Budget Committee for a four-year term ending August 31, 2012; and that Kent Studebaker be appointed as alternate to be appointed should there be a vacancy on the Citizens' Budget Committee through July 31, 2009. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego hereby appoints Daniel Williams, Jeff Gudman and Frank Bearden to four year terms on the Citizens' Budget Committee ending August 31, 2012; and appoints Kent Studebaker as alternate to be appointed should there be a vacancy on the Citizens' Budget Committee through July 31, 2009. This resolution shall take effect upon passage. Approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular meeting held on the day of February, 2009. AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: ABSTAIN: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor ATTEST: Robyn Christie, City Recorder APP OVER. STD ORM: David D. Powell, City Att rney 10 4. 1 .2 40,,.,,,KE0s,i, ,, 2 0 ,.,, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 1 MN COUNCIL REPORT c7! oREG014 TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: McGarvin,Jane De ut Cit Recorder SUBJECT: Resolution 09-04, approving appointments to the Planning Commission DATE: January 26, 2009 ACTION Council is requested to approve Resolution 09-04, approving appointments to the Planning Commission BACKGROUND The City Council Interview Committee consisting of Councilors Jordan and Olson, and Julia Glisson, Chair of the Planning Commission, interviewed six candidates on January 22, 2009. The Committee recommends appointment of Russell Jones for the remainder of the four year term on the Planning Commission ending May 31, 2010, and Lynne Paretchan for the remainder of a four year term ending May 31, 2011. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 09-04 Ae.si Sustainability has been considered as part of this recommendation Revi wed by. City t ney Ale . c yre City ger 11 RESOLUTION 09-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO APPROVING APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, a City Council Interview Committee, consisting of Councilors Olson and Jordan, and Julia Glisson, Chair of the Planning Commission, met on January 22, 2009, to interview candidates for the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, it was the consensus of the Interview Committee to recommend that Russell Jones be appointed to the Planning Commission for the remainder of a four- year term ending May 31, 2010; and that Lynne Paretchan be appointed to the Planning Commission for the remainder of a four-year term ending May 31, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Mayor has made the appointments recommended by the Interview Committee; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego approves the appointment of Russell Jones to the Planning Commission for the remainder of a four-year term ending May 31, 2010, and approves the appointment of Lynne Paretchan to the Planning Commission for the remainder of a four-year term ending May 31, 2011. This resolution shall take effect upon passage. Approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular meeting held on the 3rd day of February, 2009 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor ATTEST: Robyn Christie, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Powell, City Attor ey 12 4.2 Al0,,...E0,„„ c.,.k- m co 1 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 1 COUNCIL REPORT .___ TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Robyn Christie, City Recorder SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes DATE: January 26, 2009 ACTION Approve minutes as written. ATTACHMENTS 1. January 6, 2009, Regular Meeting 2. January 10, 2009, Community Roundtable (notes) 3. January 12, 2009, Special Meeting (notes) 4. January 13, 2009, Special Meeting Sustainability has been considered as part of this recommendation. (EC,,, Reviewed by: iiii. Ale D. Intyre City '...eager 13 `ctOF LAKE OSsvtGD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING (c 1' ,iiiiir► MINUTES `. , 20Y. January 609 OR EGOS Mayor Judie Hammerstad called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. on January 6, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hammerstad, Councilors Turchi, McPeak, Groznik, Hennagin, Jordan, and Johnson; Mayor-Elect Hoffman, Councilors-Elect Tierney, Olson and Moncrieff Staff Present:Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder Youth Council: Olsoni, Hamachek, Dod, Kosloff, Cooper, Menashe, Silbert 3.1 Oath of Office Ms. Christie administered the Oath of Office to Councilors-Elect Tierney, Olson and Moncrieff. Ms. Christie administered the Oath of Office to Mayor-Elect Hoffman. Ms. Hammerstad commented that it has been a remarkable eight years. She thanked the Councilors for the opportunity to serve with them. She presented token gifts to the remaining Councilors. Mr. Groznik welcomed Sally Moncrieff. He said he enjoyed his service on the Council. He hoped to continue serving the community as a volunteer. At a recent Governor's conference he noted that Lake Oswego has a number of projects ready to go. Councilor Moncrieff thanked Mayor Hammerstad, Councilors Groznik, Turchi and McPeak for all of their hard work. It had been a pleasure to watch and learn from them. Mr. Turchi said he had enjoyed the last eight years. He thanked his wife Gwen, and the staff. It had been a remarkable eight years. Working with Judie Hammerstad was remarkable. From the beginning she really made their jobs easier. He welcomed Mary Olson. Councilor Olson thanked her family for supporting her and her campaign along with her friends and supporters. She appreciated the opportunity to serve the City. Ms. McPeak was first involved with the Arts Council and running for Council gave her very productive years. She thanked her husband for his support. She thanked staff for their hard work. She welcomed Bill Tierney. Councilor Tierney commented that he hoped that at the end of four years, he could say his participation made Lake Oswego better. He thanked his wife and children. He was excited, nervous, humbled and lucky. He recognized Council Candidates Jeff Gudman, Russell Jones, and Justin Luber who were in the audience. Ms. Hammerstad recognized Mayoral Candidate John Surrett in the audience. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2 January 6, 2009 15 Ms. Hammerstad was grateful to serve with such great staff. She thanked her husband for his support. She welcomed Mayor Elect Hoffman. Mayor Hoffman commented that he was grateful to be Lake Oswego's Mayor. Our city is what it has become because of community leadership by Judie Hammerstad, John Turchi, Ellie McPeak and Frank Groznik. He thanked them. He thanked his wife, family and friends. He spoke of new opportunities and new leadership. His focus will be on moving the city forward and strengthening the trust in local government. We will increase the transparency, outreach and engage the citizens. The challenges facing the community need the collective wisdom of all parts of the community. He and the Council welcomed the community's help. He looked forward to an exciting and prosperous 2009. 3.2 Election of Council President Mayor Hoffman requested a motion to nominate Council President. Councilor Hennagin nominated Councilor Jordan to serve as Council President. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Jordan, Johnson, Moncrieff, Olson, and Tierney voting "aye." [7-01 4. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn Christie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2 January 6, 2009 16 G. ilk r,t Community Roundtable Notes January 10, 2009 Council Chambers, 9 a.m. OREGON Council: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Tierney, Moncrieff, Hennagin, Johnson, Olson; Jordan excused Staff: Robyn Christie Mayor Hoffman explained the format of the meeting. The roundtable incorporated the idea of a Samoan Circle where participants were able to join the conversation as seats became available. The forum was to solicit ideas and not answer specific questions. Marilyn Helm • South Shore Fire Station Plan? • If it is necessary, consider a public safety complex including fire, police and 911 (should be modest) • The parking lot across the street is unused • We don't need mass transit (streetcar) • The Council should question the statement that LOCOM location is limited by topography • There needs to be more back and forth conversation between the Council and residents Stephanie Wagner Friends of Tryon Creek, NRAB • Issues: natural spaces, maintenance, and education • Connections with the School District • Schools to support education and outreach • Students to understand the watershed and its impact on the lake • Field trips for 5th and 6th graders Jeannie McGuire Old Town Neighborhood and HRAB • Historic preservation is sustainable • Education component • Please don't tear apart downtown by taking out components Rhonda Cohen Lake Oswego Jr. High and Relay for Life • Consider improvements to WEB to make it useful to the community • The Jr. High auction had to be held at Embassy Suites in Tigard • Snow removal; City could partner with Chamber to help keep businesses open Lee Wicklund • Appreciates move back to annual budget • Increase money for street repair • Review/update Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan re: snow removal • City needs to model examples for water conservation Community Roundtable Notes 1 January 10, 2009 17 • Burden should not fall on consumers Gordon Umaki • There is distrust in the community from the purchase of the Safeco building • Rebuilding the trust cans start with a decision to sell Safeco • This needs to be done now without regard for the current market Audrey Mattison Friends of Springbrook Park, Uplands Neighborhood Association • Coordinate education with the schools • Sensitive lands — not enough communication • Property owners have never had a targeted mailing; impacts 2000 properties • There's an open house on January 24 Jerry Wheeler Chamber of Commerce CEO and resident • Focus on downtown redevelopment • Support Wizer block project • Foothills Project • Streetcar • Lake Grove —get moving to the next level • Economic development • Review of planning/building permits; need a user friendly Code • Building dept. invited conversation with the Chamber • Long range planning in Stafford — move forward • Consider economic impacts on retail • Recommend task force to address "How to keep existing businesses open." Vic Keeler Vic's Auto Center • Feeling of being forgotten in Lake Grove • Urban Renewal • WEB could be utilized — it was a good buy • Most people don't understand the importance of the WEB down the road; rent it John Schick • Homeowner agreements in Mt. Park are strict and keep it in good shape • Hire a professional meteorologist to help predict impact of storms • Post Offices need to be dealt with; it's a risk to visit them • Branch post office at WEB could be a community gathering place with a coffee shop • Don't let the building department down; a lot of substandard construction is done without permits • A lot of people don't want to be on TV; provide forum other than televised meetings George Benson • Communications; dealing with emotional decisions • Work with seniors, Elders in Action --tri-county organization • Didn't get support from ACC to bring to LO • Program for training volunteers • Hire community coordinator— utilize talent we have • Review 50+ study • Location of ACC not conducive Community Roundtable Notes 2 January 10, 2009 18 • Need community meeting area Steve Dodds • WEB open house comments on bad survey • Need a direct process to get consensus on what to do with the WEB • Never had a chance to say why we support it • Need to provide for an opportunity to create a list of pros and cons • Give opposite sides a chance to counterpoint ® Purchase of building will stand on its merits • Take a more active role in Stafford • Work on affordable housing John Surrett • WEB cost roll-up $3.1 million 07-09 • Prior to that another$3 million and lost opportunity cost • Running down reserves and using borrowed money • Put it on the market now, what do we have to lose? • Question population growth figures; 16,000 in 20 years • 1000 homes are in the preliminary stages of foreclosure • Streetcar does not pencil out • Be empirically and fact based driven • Revisit water rate decision in 1 year instead of 2 • Possibly revisit Tigard water agreement; nobody testified in favor but it still passed • Ask for opinion from Moody's about bond rating since bond measure to finance WEB failed Bob Naumann • Budgeting, facing depression • Favor moving ACC and Library to WEB • ACC is uninviting; no sidewalks • Look at the tree ordinance; his one acre property has 100-150 trees, would not plant more trees and be told how to maintain them • The City owns a lot of open space; when more is purchased consider returning a like amount to private ownership Janine Dunphy 50+Advisory Board • Keep people in the community • Supports personal advocate program; Elders in Action • Support Elder Friendly Business Certification Jean Bowman SAB, speaking personally • Many work in LO and can't afford to live here • Need to be able to live and work in community • Commuting cause transportation issues; impacts climate change ® Has to walk one mile to reach the closest bus stop • Water— Lake Oswego has the highest per capita water use in the state • Much of that is used on landscaping • Mt. Park feels like a different community; more should be done to make it part of LO Community Roundtable Notes 3 January 10, 2009 19 Amy Cleary LOABC, Clackamas County Dispute Resolution Center • Has worked on Stafford Area conflict; Hamlet is working on a vision • Continue working with Stafford • Dispute resolution is available ® LOABC is a way of thinking of 40 assets dealing with youth • ASAP program is the only thing going for kids after school • Supports youth advisory boards as a way to provide leadership opportunities • WEB is great for MacKenzie Lounge and Java Jam • Support sustainability through collaborative consensus building Addle Jenike • Think out of the box • Lake Grove attract and develop businesses • Think as a whole about Lake Oswego and Lake Grove • Top priority should be Lake Grove development • Need to keep WEB; will need for City facilities as Lake Grove grows • The City is built like a dumbbell Rhonda Cohen • Perception that people can't afford to live in Lake Oswego • School District should partner with realtors • Don't tear down smaller homes • WEB; look at who we can attract and rent it • ACC; how to partner with community groups such as Relay for Life or the High Schools; feels like there was a wall put up when approached • Supports doing more with water conservation Dale Reynolds • Spoke about school district Steve Dodds • Lake Oswego is not a retirement community • In work with industrial real estate asks, "After you, who?" ® People will have to pay a premium to live in Lake Oswego Charles Ormsby • Look at things with a common unit of measure ® Streetcar plan requires a forced transfer at PSU ® Make the system of maps accessible • Review plans for Birdshill, First Addition, Foothills • Letter from City to FAN about watershed • Feels personally blacklisted • IGA with Clackamas County and Lake Oswego is missing citizen involvement • Safety for bikes/peds on Terwilliger • Surface water management • Wants to see all laws, administrative rules, polices and agreements regarding Willamette Shore Rail Line • Use a visual dictionary • Allow parking on Highway 43 in case of emergency Community Roundtable Notes 4 January 10, 2009 20 John Pullen LONAC, speaking as individual • January 2001 citizen comment reduced to 3 minutes; change back to 5 for both Council and Planning Commission meetings • City Manager is missing • CM attendance at LONAC was able to stop issues in the past before they got too far • Street maintenance program; use state revenue sharing or hotel/motel tax • Very little money is donated to parks through event sponsors; $35,000 but they get a lot of credit • It was so hard to get $5000 for the Millennium Band through the budget process • The City may need to use the vacant building next to City Hall Bob Lawrence • WEB was the best buy the City ever did • Use the 50+ Dialogue • 152 senior centers around the state; all are struggling • Current ACC is small and outdated • WEB is fantastic • Visited a community center in CA that is a gathering place and self supporting • Center 50+ in Salem; provides adult day respite, gift shop, café • Good idea to develop WEB as community center with library and preschool programs • Improve acoustics and sound system Mark Olen LO Soccer Club and Youth Sports Alliance • WEB - challenge is the economics • LO Soccer club tried to be a tenant • Learn to work more like a private business • Still interested in being a tenant Bob Warlord • As a senior don't have a need for senior center at the WEB • Maintenance of roads • Setbacks building sizes and roof lines • Council decisions are often driven by complaint • A lot more are silent majority Dale Reynolds • 1200 members at the senior center Adjourned at 12:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Robyn Christie City Recorder Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Community Roundtable Notes 5 January 10, 2009 21 ::10110‘. Community Groups Notes January 12, 2009 . .. West End Building Santiam Room - 6 p.m. Council: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Tierney, Moncrieff, Hennagin, Johnson, Olson; Jordan Staff: Alex McIntyre; David Powell; Stephan Lashbrook; Jane McGarvin Mayor Hoffman explained the format of the meeting. Arts Council (Cheryl Brock, Executive Director and Don Caldwell, Chair) • Reviewed Mission of the Arts Council • Programs include Gallery without Walls Sculpture Exhibition (art on loan located on the street); Chronicle Invitational Exhibition; Public Art, Playwright Competition; Art in Education; First Friday Art Walk; Art literacy • Looking into creating a Public Art Master Plan • Art Collection includes 200 pieces, with 60 outdoors. • Relocation of the Fairy Tree Sculpture in George Rogers Park in George Rogers Park, as it has been used as a play structure and there are liability issues as they are played on. • Would like to create a regional art gallery Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition (Dan Vizzini, Chair • Handout detailing the results from the Listening Session • Review five goals from LONAC: o Make substantial progress to adopt and implement neighborhood plans, develop neighborhood design overlay zones, and include neighbor-identified capital projects in the City's Capital Improvement Plan o Adopt infill standards that regulate the size, scale, setbacks and compatibility of new development, consistent with the character of residential neighborhoods, and ensure compliance with these standards by establishing a development review commission for residential development. o Conduct an efficient and focused community progress to address the most critical policies issues regarding land use, development and growth management; and then use the resulting policy decisions to guide a complete re- write of the Community Development Code. Organize and draft a CDC with sufficient clarity and specificity to ensure the faithful implementation of City goals and policies. Hold off on Visioning process proposed by City Staff as part of the Comprehensive Development Code. o Conduct an inclusive and transparent review of City facilities and future facility needs, guided by a committee comprised to citizens and representatives from City advisory boards and commissions. o Provide adequate funding for library operations and services, and acquire a site or sites for library facilities to meet the needs of the entire community. • Attachment A to Memo includes items identified specifically by the LONAC membership. • Building Trust by Council with citizens: "Work of the Community is only achievable if there is a strong sense of trust, and without it, there is too much friction." Community Groups Notes 1 January 12, 2009 23 • See some successes by the City this year. LONAC willing to develop a small list of things based on the City's and LONAC's priorities they feel could be achieved. • Explained his concerns regarding the periodic review process, and proposal to conduct a full blown visioning process similar to what the City of Hillsboro. Suggested a smaller process such as reviewing the inventory of studies and plans that the City has gone through during the past decade that could be used to define a vision of the community. Utilize talent existing in community relating to this issue. • Visioning not good investment in current recession. While he spent 8 years on Planning Commission, he had been the aggressive supporter of the visioning process. • Councilor Johnson supported getting inventory of what plans and studies have been done, as a good place to start. • Councilor Tierney asked if Mr. Vizzini would be providing additional information about recommendations I through 5 (stated above). Mr. Vizzini noted he could provide additional information, to connect the dots as they are somewhat integrated. • Councilor Olson asked for additional information concerning Recommendation #5 regarding "adequate funding of library" in light of the County Library Service District funding measure being approved last November. • Councilor Jordan asked which comes first, a development review process for residential development or the comprehensive plan and neighborhood plans updates completed first. • Mr. Vizzini noted only about 5% of residential applicants would end up in the review process once the codes and neighborhood plans were completed. Lake Oswego Corporation (Skip O'Neill, Chair) • Slow the flow of water in the lake. • Four major inflows to the lake create havoc; proposed addressing one source a year and then look at the results. • Dredging is very large a project. Lake Corp was saving $100,000 a year for dredging that costs $1 million. Last dredging was in 1996, but was not as extensive as it should have been in some areas. • Springbrook Creek Neighborhood trying to come up with plan dealing with silt from entering lake. • Need to modify dam by putting a notch in with a hydraulic gate that could be raised and release more water than came over the headgate on the Tualatin River. • 1996 Flood —Tualatin was 8 feet over the headgate, 5700 cu ft per second. Current ability is 1200-1300 cubic feet per second. Preliminary engineering on the modified gate would release 6500 cubic feet per second. • Design of Foothills area acts like a swimming pool, easily flooded. • Modification of dam would avoid several hundred homes on the lake and the Foothills area from flooding like occurred in 1996. • As the LOIS kicks off in next month or so, asked that City be sensitive to Lake Corporations shareholders, as they are taking brunt of the project, and happy City listened and took off the west end of the lake. Applaud long term thinking by the City. Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce (Jerry Wheeler, Executive Director) • Distributed handout describing Chamber's programs and activities. • Serves members, and priority is to members. • Why join members: education, visibility, advocacy, networking with other businesses Community Groups Notes 2 January 12, 2009 24 • Core Values: membership, marketing, strategic alliances, business education and professional development • Issues presented at Community Forum on January 10: Downtown Redevelopment Wizer Block, Foothills development; Streetcar between Lake Oswego to Portland; Downtown and Lake Grove Town Center; Interaction between public and Planning Departments; Economic Development, Stafford area (Lake Oswego is one of three communities and residents living in the area); and the tough economic times, and helping business stick around with some help. • Councilor Jordan — Noted LONAC was enthusiastic about being involved in pre- application process. When pre-applications are filed with Planning, suggested experienced chamber members assist prospective business owners get through the planning process, and explain process. Mr. O'Leary noted the Downtown Business District Association and Lake Grove Business District Association have several members who have been doing that for the past year in assisting with the pre-application process. • Mr. Vizzini noted during this downturn in the economy, residential neighbors form a marriage with neighboring commercial areas. Residents need to buy from local businesses. • Councilor Tierney asked what could be accomplished under the broad topic of economic development. Mr. Wheeler said the first step would be to create the organization, who would sit on the committee and how to interact with the City. The second step would be to define and market for that, and where does the money come from. Many areas put together a public/private partnership to tap available resources that are available. • Mayor Hoffman asked what the next 18 months looks like for retail businesses, and is anything being done. • Carol Winston replied that as a retailer, she cannot compete with 75% off sales held by some large chain department stores. Her business supplies salaries to 10 employees which goes right back into the community. The community needs to keep business here. If not, there will be a lot of small businesses closing. Try to get people to understand need to support local business. Advertise in Lake Oswego Review and small amount in The Oregonian. Thanked City and DBDA for Live PDX. Starbucks next to her is reducing their hours. Think where you spend money, and need the community to understand that the soccer team and school auctions rely on the local businesses for donations. • Mr. Wheeler—try to discover ways to market businesses, and looking at ways to market businesses to other businesses. Utilized on-line blasts to members through the holidays. • Lisa Shaw-Ryan —sales are down, and businesses are struggling. Downtown Business District Association (Lisa Shaw-Ryan, Chair) • Started work last year on a comprehensive brand for the downtown area and seek partnership because do not have dollars to make a big impact. Will continue this coming year. • Went to City Manager Alex McIntyre and Redevelopment Director Bob Galante and asked for larger web presence — resulted in Live PDX. 9 Live PDX has TV spots, video tours, and sales staff goes out and sell for us because individual business owners cannot leave their business to go out making these calls and contacts. DBDA approached Barry Cain of Gramor Development, who committed $16,000 for the next two years for DBDA into the Live PDX program and other marketing Community Groups Notes 3 January 12, 2009 25 programs. Kelly Peake and she worked hard putting together this program that Mr. Cain provided this funding. • Working on Main Street Oregon program for the downtown area (Lake Grove area is also working on similar program), a resource that brings assets to the business area. City is a partner in program. • Noted that 70% of City's retail dollars are spent outside the community, so try to bring back those customers as well as attract customers from outside the City to Lake Oswego retailers. • Main Street Oregon mimics other main streets across the nation to attract and retain retail sales in the city. • Send message to residents, LONAC members, churches, schools, everyone, with a consistent message about the opportunities in the local area, as it puts a face on local business. • Two key marketing strategies for the coming year are: O 1) a sidewalk sale in June to work around the Rotary's Lobster Feed, which would draw people back at other times when they see what is available; and O 2) full holiday market plan for November and December of this year titled "Home for the Holidays 2009." Coordinate the whole area including the Lake Grove area merchants. Combine the Tree Lighting, the Junior Women's Home Tour and bring together for bigger bang for the buck. Coordinate with Live PDX for some marketing. Would look to Council to have staff support and help of program. This is a volunteer organization trying to help itself. Need some time, dollars and expertise to help locate the dollars. Commended Chamber's Fusion program to bring people together. • City's Redevelopment Plan includes priority projects, but worth taking look at current list given the current economic climate and reprioritize projects. Are these still the top priorities, look at facilities, and property acquisitions — and tweaking the Plan. • Pollack Building for sale, but not completed. There are a number of significant leases and building needs to get completed for occupancy. • Councilor Jordan noted Hillsboro holds Farmers' Markets on a mid-week evening, and Lake Oswego holds movies in the park on Thursday evenings. Proposed businesses staying open until 9 p.m. that would draw people to the downtown area, and possibly draw them back other times. Coordinate sales with Farmers' Market on Saturday's. • Holiday Market started to drive up the downtown area, and downtown businesses marketed that connection. However, the move to the West End Building doesn't do what it was intended to do by drawing business to the Lake Grove, downtown, or Palisades areas. it's a great holiday bazaar though. When economic discussion is held, City should include retailers and business owners in the discussion to shed light on potential impact. She did not think it was the intent to hurt business, but did not understand the intent in the first place. • Councilor Jordan talked about clustering businesses that support each other and identifying by use of surveys to identify leakage of local dollars, what products or goods are not available in Lake Oswego and it is necessary to go elsewhere. Ms. Winston noted there is a misconception that businesses and retailers are too expensive and Lake Oswego residents do not shop here because everything costs too much. Her business is a moderate to upper priced retailer. Need to dispel that ugly rumor. • Jude Graham noted she volunteered in two communities on their economic development committees which raised $5 million for businesses with $40,000 in seed money. Community Groups Notes 4 January 12, 2009 26 * Chuck O'Leary noted identifying the leakage by residents buying elsewhere is part of the Main Street Oregon program, and identifying the leakage is the next phase their group is in as part of the Main Street Oregon program. Lake Grove Business District (Chuck O'Leary, Chair) * Main Street Economic Development Program • Getting staff time from City • Shop Local program, including logo and branding as part of the Lake Grove Business District; celebrate long time business owners • Business District representatives meet regularly • How to capture 20% additional sales from city residents —will be talking about • Plan formal presentation of program • Lake Grove Village Town Center Plan— Next steps by continuing to work with City staff, consider establishment of urban development district for the area as it is a 2-3 year process to form before programs can be started. Every year that goes by without this, the area is loosing ground. • Councilor Johnson asked if there is enough contact with the City Council or should there be a Council liaison with the Business Districts — Mr. O'Leary responded the more communication the better. Will be inviting Councilors to attend their board meetings. • Ms. Shaw-Ryan noted the Fusion program is an excellent communication forum, and noted business owners need to run their businesses on a day to day basis. Many are on the same boards and commissions. A lot of communication among DBDA is through email rather than attending meetings. • Councilor Jordan noted one goal of the Sustainability Advisory Board has to do with working with businesses, by trying to educate on green business practices. One way is to shop local. Suggest the SAB members talk with their boards. * Councilor Olson supports Councilor interactions with the Business Districts. * Mr. Wheeler noted there is a city representative on the Chamber Board, but they would like to see attendance by Councilors at their events. * Mr. Vizzini asked if it would be possible to create a core of retired executives in Lake Oswego to help area businesses, similar to the SCORE program that operates in other areas. * Ms. Shaw-Ryan stated they utilized SCORE when they started their business. * Mr. Vizzini suggested the ACC might be a resource. * Councilor Jordan proposed another avenue might be high school students to work on marketing programs. ® Councilor Johnson noted the Youth Council was looking for a project, and would be able to talk with their teachers to get something started. * Ms. Shaw-Ryan noted business owners have great marketing ideas, but do not have the funds to contract with marketing firms, as they are pricy. Some coordination of the Live PDX was a great resource. Lake Oswego Rotary (Carol Winston, president * Overview: Lake Oswego Rotary has 154 members, is the 4th largest of 73 clubs in the district, and celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2008. * Lobster Feed and Auction — proceeds support many programs in the area * Partnerships with City, Heritage Council, Arts Council, Lakewood Center for the Arts, Farmers' Market, Lake Oswego Reads. • New Projects: working with Luscher Farms coordinator to collect used gardening tools Community Groups Notes 5 January 12, 2009 27 • Want to continue conversations with the City, and are looking for hands on projects, whether pulling weeds or painting houses. • Councilor Jordan asked if Rotary might consider being included in a "Friend of a Park' program, by adopting a small area in a park to take care of. Ms. Winston responded she would request the Community Service Chair to work with City staff on projects. Oswego Heritage Council (Jude Graham, Executive Director) • Excited that City took on the Historic Furnace Restoration Project • 1st Wednesdays — Partners with the Library • February 1st Wednesday - speaker relates to the LO Reads— Stubborn Twig • Receives donations of photographs, diaries, other memorabilia • Getting ready for Lake Oswego's centennial in 2010 • Several Oswego Heritage Council members took on project of photographing every grave in the Pioneer Cemetery as well as going to the State Archives to look up birth, death and census records of those individuals. Database will be developed of this information. • February 21 is their annual meeting • Facility Rental — Lost income due to the two weeks of lost income due to the weather conditions over the holidays. • Forty limbs came down during the snow storm, and someone from the City picked up limbs from alongside the road. • Annual Art Show held the Saturday and Sunday after Thanksgiving —over 100 people came in who didn't know about the Heritage Council • Membership Drive - $25 per year, and fund a number of programs including scholarships, save houses, the Cemetery project • Annual Car Show scheduled August 23, 2009, will have over 200 cars. • Home Tour in May • Exhibits at the Center—including one from the Clackamas County Sheriff's Office in the fall. • Transferring some older photos and items to the City Library as their storage area is not temperature and humidity controlled. • Board members participate in Oral History Project, by video taping elderly residents who have lived in Lake Oswego for many years. Mr. Vizzini noted LONAC members have indicated an interested in assisting with this project. Adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn hristie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Community Groups Notes 8 January 12, 2009 28 `' LAKE°sip,. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING f1101 MINUTES = Y:N January 13, 2009 OREGO 4 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. on January 13, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Jordan, Hennagin, Johnson (6:17), Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney Staff Present:Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Stephan Lashbrook, Community Development Director; Bill Baars, Library Director Board Chairs: Jeannie McGuire, HRAB; Tamara Brosseau, HRAB; Nancy Shatsky, Library Advisory Board; Morgan Holen, NRAB; John McComish, PRAB; Sandy Inversato, PRAB; Terry Keyes, TAB; Gail Zimmerman, 50+ Advisory Board; Janine Dunphy, 50+ Advisory Board; Julia Glisson, Planning Commission; Jean Bauman, Sustainability Advisory Board; Krytsyna Stadnick, DRC; Ron Metcalf, Citizens Budget Committee 3. STUDY SESSION 3.1 Welcome and Introductions Mayor Hoffman welcomed the advisory board members. 3.2 Presentation of 2009 Goals ® Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB) Ms. McGuire referenced the January 13, 2009, memo from the Historic Resources Advisory Board to the Council (pp.3-6). She mentioned that, within the last two years, Lake Oswego became a Certified Local Government with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), which gave the Board access to grant money. She reviewed Goal 1, regarding surveying 10 historic properties and the Cultural Resources Inventory (p.4). She spoke of having an intern do the research on cultural inventories, which was a time-consuming and enormous task. She explained that the Cultural Resources Inventory and the Landmark Designation List were two separate documents. She explained to Councilor Hennagin that `historic places' referred to sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places, while `historic landmarks' referred to sites listed on Lake Oswego's Landmark Designation List. `Cultural resources' referred to historic properties listed in the `umbrella book' of the Cultural Resources Inventory. She indicated to Councilor Jordan that, in terms of the architectural criterion for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places, only what a property owner did to the outside of the house mattered. A homeowner had to maintain the historical architectural integrity of the exterior, but he/she could make whatever changes he/she wanted to make on the interior. She discussed Goal 2, regarding nominating one property to the National Register of Historic Places (p.4). She recommended nominating the Ironworker's Cottage. She encouraged the Council to find funding to take care of the cottage, the same as it did for the furnace. She clarified to Councilor Moncrieff that, following completion of the research, HRAB sent the Ironworker's Cottage on to SHPO for the next step of SHPO making the recommendation for nomination. She observed that it was a lengthy process to get a building on the National Register. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 12 January 13, 2009 29 She indicated that, with grant money, HRAB could continue this process of researching properties and sending them on to SHPO for nomination. Ms. Brosseau discussed Goal 3, asking the Council to consider appointing a task force for the development of an Iron Heritage Trail (p.5). She noted that heritage trails were educational and cultural tools that could bring tourism dollars into a community (they were common on the East Coast but rare on the West Coast). She explained that heritage trails were not necessarily physical trails but rather different places connected by a theme. She indicated that the Oswego Heritage House was one of 25 sites on the "Tell-a-Tales" Heritage Trail in Clackamas County. She reviewed Goal 4, funding the Ironworker's Cottage (p.5), which was a significant historical resource in the community. She indicated to Councilor Jordan that the architect's estimate of around $100,000 included more work than the stabilization of the building envelope that HRAB was looking for, but it was probably in the ballpark. She discussed Goal 5, continuing HRAB's support of the iron furnace restoration (p.5). Ms. McGuire discussed Goal 6, investigating new properties for the landmark designation list (pp.5-6). She mentioned in particular researching the Headrick-Carothers House, the Trueblood House, and the Lake Grove Fire District building. She described the activities involved in Goal 7, celebrating National Historic Preservation Month in May (p.6). She mentioned working with the Heritage Council in providing interpretative displays of sites and artifacts, Goal 8 (p.6). She spoke of providing educational opportunities for HRAB members (Goal 9, p.6), such as her representing HRAB at the Oregon Heritage Conference last year. She discussed the status of the Trueblood House relocation, which HRAB would continue to monitor (Goal 10, p.6). She confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that HRAB would like the Council to find funding for the Ironworker's Cottage and to consider setting up an Iron Heritage Trail Task Force. Library Advisory Board (LAB) Ms. Shatsky reviewed the Board's successes in 2008 and its plans for 2009 (see handout). She mentioned the "LO Reads" program, in which the Board would continue to take a leadership role in the planning and presentation of events. She noted the Board's fundraising efforts, including Council direction for 2009 regarding fundraising options for the endowment and annual fund, as welt as raising funds for the "LO Reads" program. She indicated to Councilor Tierney that, while she did not know the final number for the results of fundraising in 2008, that last number she heard was $1,200. She discussed the Board's community outreach and partnerships, including a booth at the Farmers Market, fully implementing the neighborhood outreach plan in 2009, and increasing the library's mailing list. She spoke of increasing community awareness of library services, programs, and issues, as well as coordinating library activities with other community and civic groups. She indicated to Councilor Tierney that, with respect to the library levy, the Board looked at the information provided by the Library Director and considered how it might affect the library. She indicated to Councilor Johnson that, in 2009, the Board looked for continued support from the City Council. She confirmed to Councilor Jordan that, in the past, the Board has found synergetic opportunities to work with other City boards, such as the Historic Resources Advisory Board, in coordinating library activities to other Boards' events. Mr. Baars mentioned that last year the Council changed the library mission to include providing to the public information from historic documents about Lake Oswego. Ms. Shatsky clarified to Mayor Hoffmann that the Board had a part in the Steering Committee's selection of the "LO Reads" book for 2010, but it would not make the decision itself. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 12 January 13, 2009 30 • Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) Ms. Holen thanked the Council for its support last year, noting that the Board accomplished nearly all of its 2008 goals. She expressed their appreciation for the tremendous support and encouragement the Board received from former Councilor Groznik, the then-Council's liaison. She reviewed the Board's 2008 accomplishments, as listed on the chart (p.19, Council packet), within their 2008 goals of developing a natural area parks management program, promoting water quality and conservation, developing a community education program, implementing the Urban and Community Forestry Plan, and establishing the Sustainability Advisory Board. She mentioned the Council's approval of the Cooks Butte Natural Area Management Plan, the Urban and Community Forestry Plan, and the Sustainability Advisory Board. She noted that Board members were still in the process of contacting Council members individually to discuss topics, such as securing $30,000 to $50,000 in support of Cooks Butte Plan, Phase 2. She pointed out that, while they took some steps in outreach activities, they did not actually develop a community wide education plan last year. This year they have rewritten the education goal. She reviewed the six 2009 goals, as listed on p. 20, and the specific objectives. She spoke of continuing to develop the natural area park management program, including obtaining adequate staffing to replace the AmeriCorps position that the City would no longer be eligible for next year. She noted their goals of participating in the Comprehensive Plan update, continuing the Board's support of the implementation of the Urban and Community Forestry Plan, and promoting water quality and conservation. She also mentioned their desire to have a Board member participate in the Periodic Review Task Force. She spoke of increasing environmental awareness through educational outreach, including more booths at the Farmers Market and at least two Neighborwoods workshops. She said that they also planned to participate in developing the City's Centennial celebration events. She explained to Councilor Hennagin that Neighborwoods was an educational outreach element in the Urban and Community Forestry Plan, which they modeled after similar programs in other communities. This year, with the help of the AmeriCorps volunteers, they presented four Saturday workshops on different topics. She clarified that, along with City staff, NRAB played a big role in developing the Urban and Community Forestry Plan. She explained to the Councilor that they were losing the Parks & Recreation AmeriCorps volunteer after several years because AmeriCorps saw a recurring request for the same job as evidence of the need for a fulltime employee to fill the position, and stopped sending a volunteer. She mentioned that they had a Community Forestry volunteer for at least one more year. Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Tierney that staff would run the Clean Stream Plan back through the process, including getting feedback from NRAB. Councilor Olson commented that she thought the Cooks Butte management plan was an excellent piece of work. She mentioned her strong support of management plans for all the City's open spaces. Councilor Jordan suggested that NRAB's community outreach this year include the need to maintain big trees in a healthy state. She pointed out that some of the big trees lost branches or cracked in half during the recent winter storm. Ms. Holen concurred that that was an important message. She recalled that, at the Farmers Market, people would come with pictures and ask tree maintenance questions of the arborists staffing the booth. • Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) Mr. McComiish reviewed the six 2009 goals of their Board (see handout). He spoke of using the West End Building to provide programming space for Parks & Rec programs (Goal 1), for which the City had difficulty finding space. He mentioned that the Board strongly supported a multi- generational facility at the West End Building. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 12 January 13, 2009 31 He spoke of initiating a Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan (Goal 2), which would set community priorities. He noted that they had not done an assessment of the community's priorities since 2002, and normally these assessments were done every three to five years. He pointed out that they needed a master plan for Luscher Farm and the surrounding park properties (Goal 3), as they have added 86 acres in the Stafford area since the 1997 Luscher Farm plan was done. He mentioned that several community groups interested in the area held opposing positions on what to do with the land. He emphasized the need to use an outside consultant in developing the plan in order to ensure that it was done properly. He indicated that, before obtaining DRC approval for the construction of Phase 5 of the George Rogers Park Master Plan (Goal 4), they wanted to secure funding in 2009 for construction in 2010. He said that the Board fully supported moving forward with Phase 2 of the Cooks Butte management plan, as part of managing the City's natural areas (Goal 5). He discussed the last goal of promoting the fitness, health, and wellness of the community, particularly the children, by developing afterschool active activities. He spoke of re-packaging Parks & Rec programs for better marketing and community participation. He mentioned that a high priority, but not a goal, was to finish the design work on the trails. Ms. Inversato cited the request for the Board to look at the golf course as an example of the need for a Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan (Goal 2). The Board did not know what the citizens wanted at that site, and it did not want to make a decision based on outdated information. She commented that the Parks & Rec Department was doing a great job in providing programs, yet there was a concern about the fitness of both youth and adults. She speculated that with a college intern and some volunteer work, they could develop a good plan. She asked the Council to give the Board a low budget item that it could work on for the City. She indicated to Ms. Bauman that the Board has thought about connecting its Parks & Recreation Comprehensive planning with the City Comprehensive Plan update. She noted that their plan would go into more detail regarding the specific goals of the community, but the broader plan would help them with their more focused plan. Mr. McComish indicated to Councilor Tierney that the Board did not include a goal of acquiring more parkland because it wanted its goals to reflect the reality of its funding level. He mentioned that Ms. Gilmer was always on the look out for open space. Mayor Hoffman pointed out that doing a Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan would help inform a decision on whether the community needed any more parkland. Ms. McGuire indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she knew that the consultant has spoken with a few Old Town residents on Ladd Street regarding Phase 5 of the George Rogers Master Plan. She explained that Old Town as a whole deferred to the Ladd Street residents on that issue because the parking problems have affected them for so many years. Mr. McComish indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the City has finished the design work for a green street on Ladd Street, and that the residents hoped for funding in 2010, but he did not know when construction would start. Councilor Jordan asked if there was some way that the Council could facilitate the Parks & Rec Department getting together with the School District to discuss the provision of health and wellness programs for youth. Mr. McComish commented that he would like to see such cooperation, but he knew that it has been a challenge in the past. ® Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) Mr. Keyes pointed out that, with Lake Oswego being a mature suburb, the Board dealt with fixing road problems and neighborhood traffic problems, rather than with building roads. He mentioned the excellence of the traffic engineering staff at the City. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 12 January 13, 2009 32 He reviewed the Board's accomplishments in 2008 (see handout). He observed that people brought their issues to the Board only if staff could not solve it, which staff often could do. He mentioned receiving several requests for speed bumps, while noting that speed bumps were expensive and not very effective. He said that the Board might do something temporary on Cardinal Drive because it would be a detour route during sewer interceptor construction. He reported that the McVey/State Street merge lane made that intersection significantly safer. He mentioned that the neighborhood did not like any of the changes suggested for the Six Corners intersection, and wanted it to stay the way it was. The Board and staff decided that the reason why that intersection worked (it should be a nightmare) was because its chaotic nature made people drive more carefully. He mentioned that a project to fix a dangerous hillside section of Laurel Street, which was heavily used by school children, would probably end up in the capital improvement plan at some time, but the feasibility study done by staff determined that it would be an expensive fix. He indicated that they would continue to work on slowing down the traffic on Quarry Street, including asking the Police Department to put on extra patrols in areas with speeding problems. He reviewed the Board's objectives for 2009 (see handout). He said that they would continue to do their main job of working on neighborhood traffic issues, which they solved 95% of the time, and to provide feedback to staff on problem areas. He mentioned that staff would be submitting a grant application to the State for funding to do a Transportation System Plan update in conjunction with the City Comprehensive Plan update. He spoke to making sure that the plan included non-vehicle elements, such as sidewalks gaps. He noted that they were trying to keep up on the status of the streetcar extension, which the Board felt was a critical element. He indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that they did not have an updated comprehensive pathway/sidewalk plan. He explained that that was one chapter in the Transportation System Plan, and included a citywide inventory of all sidewalks and gaps. He confirmed that they obtained neighborhood input in deciding on priorities to fill in gaps, and that they were working with Safe Routes to Schools. He was doubtful about being able to coordinate project timing between utilities digging up the road for a project and the City installing a pathway. Mr. Lashbrook indicated to Mr. Metcalf that this Board did not get involved with future development projects. If the Wizer block had a traffic issue, then the developer would go to the DRC. Mr. Keyes indicated to Ms. McGuire that the Board dealt with pedestrian safety, such as crossing State Street. Councilor Jordan pointed out that the State controlled what happened on State Street, including traffic signals and pedestrian crossings. Mayor Hoffman mentioned reading that speed bumps were not effective, citing a new theory from the Netherlands that chaos worked. Mr. Keyes concurred, pointing out that speed bumps worked only in very selective situations, and only in multiples. Mayor Hoffman observed that street trees worked better at slowing down traffic. Councilor Jordan pointed out that big tree roots represented a tripping hazard when they pushed up sidewalks or pathways. She suggested using pavers instead of asphalt, which would help with storm water drainage as well as with the tree root situation. Mr. Keyes indicated that, as an engineer, he has put pavers around a big tree on a pervious cement sidewalk. One could then replace pavers as the tree roots grew without harming the tree. Councilor Jordan observed that the City had great resources with its Boards and Commission volunteers, and it needed to get them together more often to talk about these issues. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 7:30 p.m. for a break. He reconvened the meeting at 7:42 p.m. 50+ Advisory Board City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 12 January 13, 2009 33 lbs. Dunphy recalled the process used by the Council to create the 50+ Advisory Board, following the 50+ community dialogs (see handout). She explained that the Board has kept in mind the four focuses identified through that process: maintaining independence, a connected and intergenerational community, wellness, and life planning/meaningful service. She noted that 60% of Lake Oswego residents did not have children, and represented the fastest growing segment of the population. She reviewed the Board's 2008 projects (see handout). She reported that, given the postponement of the RFP for a pilot shuttle program, they decided, given the current economic situation, to look at other transportation methods for dealing with the transportation issues identified through the dialogs. She mentioned the Board's support of the staff work in progress on revising the code with respect to the permitting process for secondary dwelling units. She reported that, at the joint meeting of various health systems representatives arranged by the Board to discuss establishing a central contact point for people turning 65 and looking for a doctor, the health system representatives decided that it was not feasible to have one point of contact for all health systems. However, the Board's work might have pushed Legacy towards implementing a one point contact for its own system. She mentioned the Board's initiation of a Neighbors Helping Neighbors pilot project in the McVey/South Shore neighborhood, and its efforts to partner with Elders in Action. Ms. Zimmerman reviewed the 2009 work plan, which focused on transportation, housing, advocacy, and volunteerism (see handout). She indicated that, in their review of the shuttle study, they found other methods identified in the study that they could possibly leverage off of the existing resources in the community, such as the Adult Community Center(ACC), or improving Tri-Met bus stops. She mentioned researching what other communities were doing to address the transportation needs of 50+ people. She mentioned looking into the need for crosswalks, such as on McVey, and monitoring the code revision process for secondary dwelling unit permits. She spoke of supporting accessible housing projects, such as barrier-free and wheel-chair accessible homes, and co-housing. She mentioned working with Elders in Action to get all city and commercial buildings certified as `Elder-friendly businesses.' She indicated that, while they supported using the West End Building for intergenerational activities, they intended to support the ACC's efforts to promote awareness of its programs and services. She commented that she knew many 50 to 70 year old people would not go to the ACC because of their perception that it was unattractive and unsuitable. She indicated that they would like to be a part of the Comprehensive Plan update process. She said that they would continue their efforts to support the Spring 2009 Neighbors helping Neighbors program, such as bringing together neighborhood association chairs to discuss the program. She spoke of finding alternative volunteer opportunities for 50+ people. She commented that they had a great group on the Board, including five new members. She mentioned their intentions to meet with other boards, such as the Transportation Advisory Board and the Sustainability Advisory Board to find out where they overlapped. She indicated to Councilor Johnson that the Board has not worked with the ACC to locate 50+ programs offsite of the ACC. Ms. Dunphy commented that the ACC Director's goal was to keep the facility full, which she was trying to do with a variety of events, such as a Wine and Jazz event in February. She mentioned that she thought having classes at the West End Building might be a way to attract those people who would not go to the ACC. Councilor Johnson spoke to holding programs offsite as a means of increasing awareness of what the ACC had to offer, and possibly changing minds that way. Ms. Zimmermann mentioned that ultimately drawing people to the ACC was one reason behind holding the Senior Study program at the West End Building. She recalled noticing during her review of the shuttle study that the ACC already offered some transportation services, but people were not aware of that. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 12 January 13, 2009 34 Mr. Metcalf stated that he was a member of the ACC and found its programs and services very useful. He described it as 'one of the best things going,' and spoke of pushing the barrier to increase awareness. Councilor Hennagin supported the Board's interest in secondary dwelling units and co-housing. Ms. Dunphy clarified to the Councilor that the Senior Studies program involved community education courses for seniors, as opposed to PCC gerontology students studying seniors. Councilor Tierney asked for more elaboration on what the Board would contribute to the visioning process and the Comprehensive Plan update. He commented that the policy implications of an aging population needed to be factored into future thinking. Ms. Zimmermann said that, other than the issues that they have already identified and were working on, they did not have anything more. She mentioned an upcoming meeting with the Redevelopment Director to discuss the revisions to the Tri-Met bus stop at Safeway. She commented that she heard differing reports on the usefulness of Tri-Met to the community. Councilor Jordan pointed out that the 50+ population typically needed bus transportation during off-peak hours, but Tri-Met's schedule focused on accommodating peak hour riders. Councilor Olson spoke to widening the partnerships for the Neighbors helping Neighbors program to include schools. She commented that she had seen positive interaction when her son and his football buddies helped a senior citizen through that program. Ms. Zimmermann mentioned that she did have the names of the vice principals. Ms. Stadnick noted that the junior highs had volunteer opportunity programs throughout the year, and would probably appreciate a call. Ms. Zimmerman indicated to Mayor Hoffman that Dawn D'Haeze ran the Neighbors helping Neighbors program. ® Planning Commission Ms. Glisson reviewed the Board highlights for 2008. She mentioned reviewing and recommending the Palisades Neighborhood Plan, and the night sky/outdoor lighting ordinance. She noted the completion of the Lake Grove Village Center plan, and the consequent research into transportation and economic studies and the RFP. She indicated that the transportation phase of the study should be complete in June. She reviewed the Commission's 2009 projects (see handout), noting that most of them were ongoing projects that the Commission has been working on for some time. She discussed the natural resources planning project, She explained that they split the build up of needed code amendments into housekeeping and policy amendments. While they have worked through the housekeeping amendments and many of the policy amendments, they decided to hold off on a few standout policy issues until after the open house scheduled for Saturday, January 24. She gave an example of a major issue, asking the question, "What was a reasonable size for a house on a lot that was either totally or largely encumbered by a sensitive lands designation?" She commented that they were trying to balance the value of the natural resources and the rights of the individual property owners. She mentioned that, in the visioning process, the Commission might revisit any amendments made to the code. She discussed the infill project, in which the Commission was reviewing and taking testimony on the work of the Infill Committee before making a recommendation to Council. She explained that the infill amendments fell into two categories: Comprehensive Plan amendments and Code amendments. The Comprehensive Plan amendments were the use of overlays to implement neighborhood plans, and design review. She indicated that the Commission has asked staff for additional information on design review, given its probable significant impact on staff and City resources. She discussed the neighborhood planning project. She indicated that they expected to see code amendments coming out of the staff work on the four partially implemented neighborhood plans. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 12 January 13, 2009 35 She said that they would like a Councilor and three neighborhood representatives to join two Planning Commissioners and staff on a work group reviewing the neighborhood planning process from plan selection to the final document. She discussed the Comprehensive Plan update/Periodic review project. She indicated that, at the Commission meeting last night, the public expressed concern about the timeline, the cost of doing a vision, and the possible distraction to the staff addressing current issues. She mentioned the community's questioning of even doing a visioning process when so much has already been done. She said that the Commission liked Option 3 of the process options provided by staff. This option provided concurrent tracks for the technical aspects and laying a foundation for the visioning process based on already completed plans and studies, while still maintaining the City's ability to address current community issues. She commented that that option best responded to the concerns that the Commission heard from the public last night. She noted that staff and the Commission have already made a start on the technical aspects of the periodic review. She spoke of looking at periodic review and visioning through the lens of sustainability. She mentioned the Commission's intent to discuss more thoroughly how to define the visioning process. She noted the question of how big should this process be, whether it should focus on the pertinent planning issues or expand to include all the other aspects of multi-faceted city life. She discussed the annual update of the Community Development Code project. She indicated that they were moving forward in addressing the general housekeeping amendments, but holding off on some of the policy-related issues for the visioning process. She said that the Commission generally thought that code typically followed policy. She discussed the Lake Grove Village Center project. She spoke of developing the plan's stylebook, which would provide guidance on design elements to unify the Center, such as streetscape elements and gateway themes. She explained that an important part of the stylebook was to take the code and provide visual examples illustrating what good development could look like. She mentioned the new projects, including the Community Development Code revision. She discussed the Planning Commission's role as the Citizen Involvement Committee. She indicated that the Commission was prepared to take up the Metro UGB in Stafford issue and the hamlet work, if those came to the Commission. Councilor Hennagin asked for clarification on the distinction between the Community Development Code annual update and the rewrite. Ms. Glisson explained that this was a case of dealing with what needed to be dealt with now (the update), and not waiting to deal with current issues until after the revision. She reiterated that there were some policy items that the Commission would hold off on to see if there were policy changes coming out of the visioning process. She indicated that the code rewrite would deal more with format and ease of use than with actual content issues. She said that they would look to the Council for direction on whether to hold off on the housekeeping updates and wait for a rewrite. She indicated to the Councilor that some of the proposed content amendments were already three years old, and waiting another three years for the Comprehensive Plan update process to finish was inconceivable to some people. She spoke to addressing the pressing issues, even though they knew that the Comprehensive Plan would change as a result of periodic review. Councilor Olson pointed out that staff recommended updating the Code before anyone thought of a Code rewrite or a visioning process because there has not been an annual update of the Code; it has been three years since the last one. She commented that a Code rewrite would make it easier to integrate the changes coming out of the Comprehensive Plan update. Ms. Glisson clarified to Councilor Hennagin that the Commission was not recommending putting limits on neighborhood overlays. She explained that the amendment stating that neighborhood 'City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 12 January 13, 2009 36 district overlays would be usable as ways of implementing neighborhood plans was simply putting into policy something that was already in practice. This made the Comprehensive Plan consistent with stated community desires. Councilor Tierney recalled hearing, during the campaign, a community concern regarding the Code's complexity. He noted the Matrix study's finding that a complex code led to equally complex decisions made by different people in different ways. He asked what the Planning Commission needed from the City Council and the staff to achieve its long list of important projects. Ms. Glisson spoke of receiving guidance from the Council on periodic review and the visioning process. She explained that, once they had that, they could better organize their efforts and identify their priorities. She commented that they have been entrenched in the Code update for most of the year, but last night she saw new energy on the Commission while discussing periodic review and the visioning process. She emphasized that the Commission would appreciate any guidance from the City Council on other issues also, such as neighborhood planning. Councilor Jordan commented that the Lake Grove Village Center stylebook was a key component in the plan that would be helpful in avoiding cookie cutter development. She held that the issue of most concern to people was that, once they resolved the transportation and right-of-way issues and redevelopment started, the plan could get lost in look-alike development, instead of creating the eclectic mix desired in Lake Grove. Ms. Glisson observed that the plan clearly indicated that the stylebook development would involve significant citizen involvement in terms of developing the thematic and urban design characteristics that everyone wanted. Councilor Jordan recalled that three people worked to bring the stylebook to the point where it needed more input now. She suggested that as the starting point for the Commission's work. Mayor Hoffman summarized the elements of Option 3, and commented that he did not hear the Commission saying that the City should not do visioning. He noted that the quality of life indicators were benchmarks, rather than a report. He described the review of existing plans and other documents as a recommendation to take those plans off the shelf and see if they were still relevant. He spoke of following the Bend/Tualatin/Hillsboro model of figuring out where the community was now, where it was going, what it wanted to go, and how to get there. Ms. Glisson concurred with the Mayor's comments. She reiterated that the biggest community concern that the Planning Commission heard from the citizens was the City setting aside current issues in favor of a labor-intensive and time-consuming process. Mayor Hoffman suggested that staff contact Bend, as it faced the same issues during its process. Ms. Glisson said that she has talked to staff about pulling together information on these processes to help inform the Commission's recommendation. Mayor Hoffman said that what he took away from the Bend webpage was that the issues Bend faced in its simultaneous code rewrite and visioning process were staffing and coordination and communication. Councilor Tierney commented that it should not take long to assess whether the community was still headed for the same destination described in earlier plans. If so, then the next step was determining if the community was still on track by evaluating the current conditions and upcoming items. if they were still on track, that was fine, but if not, then they needed to identify what adjustments they needed to make in order to get back on track. Mayor Hoffman commented that that was the core of a visioning process. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 12 January 13, 2009 37 • Sustainability Advisory Board (SAB) lbs. Bauman gave a PowerPoint presentation. She reviewed the Board's mission and 2008 accomplishments (pp.9, 11, Council packet). She explained that the Natural Step philosophy provided the guiding framework for the City's Sustainability Plan. This was the idea that one could not take things out of the earth's crust faster than the earth could resupply. The Natural Step provided basic conditions under which the community could think about the long-term viability of the community. She said that sustainability was important because the two tracks of deteriorating living systems and increasing population would eventually intersect at a point called extinction. She commented they were living in a world of decreasing options for maintaining long-term viability in health, economic prosperity, and livability. Therefore, a main emphasis for the Board was educating the community about what was going on in the world and how to re-think how people lived and did business. She reviewed the Board's 2009 goals and work plan (pp.11-13). She spoke of educating the Council, staff, and the advisory boards regarding this dilemma, as well as supporting existing City initiatives (p.12). She discussed the Board's recommendations to the Council (p.15). With respect to the sustainable water program recommendation, Councilor Jordan recalled that the previous Council asked staff•`to send the Clean Streams Plan to the Sustainability Advisory Board for review. lbs. Bauman reviewed a variety of possibilities for the last goal of implementing three important community initiatives in 2009 (pp.12-13). She indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the Farmers Market would be one of the outlets for building community awareness. She explained that they decided move "Climate Action Change Month" from May to another month in order to avoid conflict with other major activities in May. She described the Board's work as the `glue' that connected together a variety of individual activities, such as linking climate change action to the Sustainability Plan, and the Sustainability Plan to the Comprehensive Plan update. She noted that all their projects were Goal 5 projects. She mentioned that the Board hoped that their work would be so successful that, in ten years, sustainability would be so embedded into people's thinking that there would be no more need for a Sustainability Advisory Board. Councilor Olson described sustainability as a three-legged stool of environmental, social, and economic sustainability. She acknowledged that the Board's focus was on environmental sustainability, and asked if the Board has discussed the economic piece. Ms. Bauman said that, while they did not have a specific economic development goal, economic development was part of the Comprehensive Plan update, and they wanted to use the sustainability lens to look at all parts of the update and the visioning process. She explained that, right now, they were laying foundational awareness building with the intent of building more specific relationships in later years. Councilor Olson spoke to including in the education piece the idea that sustainability was more than environmental programs, and that a truly sustainable community also included economic and social sustainability. Councilor Jordan asked what kind of system would best serve the City's business districts with respect to electric car plug-in stations. lbs. Bauman observed that that was the sort of question that needed to be raised during the visioning process. Mr. Lashbrook commented that other communities have built parking structures or lots designed with plug-in features, often with solar- powered arrays. Ms. Bauman pointed out that there were new technological solutions coming forward every day, which they could use in updating the Transportation System Plan. Councilor Hennagin asked whether the Community Development Code revisers should consider the possibility of having convenient small grocery stores within walking distance of residential areas, in contrast to the trend towards big box, one stop shopping grocery stores to which one had to drive further and further. Ms. Glisson commented that the Planning Commission would not City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 12 January 13, 2009 38 actually deal with that question, although it would like to help develop code to encourage local shopping. Ms. Bauman observed that, within the triple bottom line concept of plan, people, and process, there were the basic core ideas of livability, walkability, local access, local foodshed, and community involvement. She commented that, for her, the idea of sustainability boiled down to local viability: Could she get everything she needed with 10 miles of her home? She encouraged emphasizing local in creating community livability and viability. She concurred with Ms. McGuire that reusing and maintaining the current building stock, as opposed to using resources to build larger homes, was another issue. She mentioned the waste disposal issue also: In a remodel, how much should be recycled vs. how much could be dumped? • Development Review Commission (DRC) Ms. Stadnick pointed out that the DRC was not a goal setting committee. Its job was to review development proposals, to adhere to the City code and standards, to allow for public review and comment, and to protect historical buildings and city aesthetics. She commented that it was important for her to have been here to hear all the background information from the other Boards and Commissions, as it would help inform the DRC's decisions. • Citizens Budget Committee Mr. Metcalf noted that this year, the Committee would have new people on board and a new process to deal with. He reviewed the Board 2009 goals. He spoke of staying in the black. He observed that the budget reflected the priorities of the Lake Oswego citizens. He said that the Committee wanted to be able to take Mr. McIntyre's proposed budget and match it back to the needs and requests of the citizens for livability. He said that they wanted to produce a budget that reflected the current and future fiscal environments. He explained that they would take the `wish list' they received, look at the current times and the City resources, and set priorities on how to get the best value for the dollars available. He indicated that the third goal was to build the capability of the Committee to ensure that it accomplished Goals 1 and 2. He pointed out that they had 5 out of 14 members with no experience and 8 out of 14 with one cycle's experience. • Closing Comments Ms. Glisson concurred with Ms. Stadnick about the value of hearing from all the different groups. She commented that it added depth to her understanding of the city priorities. Councilor Jordan commented that she appreciated everyone who served on the advisory boards, and valued highly the expertise found in this tremendous resource. She pointed out that the Council could greatly benefit from the advisory boards reviewing certain items before the items came to the Council. Mayor Hoffman concurred. He indicated that they would discuss using some sort of a checklist to make sure that various items received input from the appropriate advisory board. Ms. Bauman spoke in support of the routing slip idea. She pointed out that this was a two-way street. While the Council would send items to the boards for review, it was also up to the boards to stay informed on what was going on and to offer to help with something that fell within their expertise. Councilor Jordan pointed out that, in terms of public outreach, the more advisory board members who knew about a difficult decision before the Council, the more people they could talk to about it. Councilor Tierney spoke of the Council not merely running things by the boards, but challenging the boards to participate in the policies. 3.2 Miscellaneous City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 12 January 13, 2009 39 Mayor Hoffman asked the Councilors to look at the list of Boards, Commissions, and governmental committees before Friday. The Council would make the assignments at the goal setting session. Councilor Hennagin indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the resolution addressed his concerns. Councilor Jordan moved Resolution 09-01. Councilor Tierney seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Jordan, Hennagin, Johnson, Olson, Moncrieff, and Tierney voting `aye.' (7-0) Ms. Christie indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the meeting was supposed to be televised tonight, but the cable company could not get the crew members here. Councilor Jordan commented that if anyone had questions regarding serving on a Council or governmental committee, he/she could contact the previous Councilor who served on that committee and ask about it. Ms. Christie indicated to Councilor Tierney that she was updating the Boards and Commission roster, and that she would get one to him. 4. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 9:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, (-4 1411. Roby Christie City Recorder • APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ON Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 12 January 13, 2009 40 11 . 1 fl�tAICE©sit• CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ...- COUNCIL REPORT OR EGOS TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Jonna Papaefthimiou, AICP, Natural Resources Planner SUBJECT: Study Session on Sensitive Lands CDC Amendments DATE: January 25, 2009 ACTION No action is requested at this time. This memo describes the City's current Sensitive Lands program and several related efforts to update that program. It is intended to provide a context for specific Community Development Code (CDC) changes that the Council is expected to hear in March. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND All Lake Oswego residents have a role to play in protecting surface water quality and local wildlife habitats--from keeping fertilizers off driveways, to cleaning up after pets, to preventing erosion on construction sites. The City encourages and in some instances requires residents to act as responsible stewards through a variety of programs, including Surface Water Management, Erosion Control, Water Conservation, Natural Area Parks, and Community Forestry. The City itself also endeavors to act as a responsible environmental steward, and employs best practices in its own operations and facility management. The Sensitive Lands program is a regulatory land-use program that serves as one component of the City's overall environmental effort. It addresses the special role of people who own segments of significant streams, wetlands, and tree groves. These are the areas collectively termed "Sensitive Lands." The Sensitive Lands program exists to ensure that new development does not unduly harm the public interest in surface water or wildlife. 41 Council Report 01/25/2009 Page 2 The Sensitive Lands chapter of the CDC requires vegetated buffers between streams and development. These buffers help prevent erosion, promote infiltration, provide flood storage, keep streams shaded, and supply food and cover for wildlife. The CDC generally requires a 25-30' vegetated buffer around streams and wetlands, plus a 10' construction setback. The Sensitive Lands chapter also requires that at least 50% of significant tree groves be preserved during development, in recognition of the important role that trees play in moderating urban microclimates, intercepting rainfall, promoting groundwater recharge, providing refugia for wildlife, and creating Lake Oswego's unique sense of place. The chapter is map-based, and protects only resources that are shown on the City's Sensitive Lands Atlas. The Sensitive Lands Chapter and the Atlas were adopted in 1998, in response to Statewide Planning Goal 5 which requires the City to inventory and protect significant natural resources. The specific requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces), are set forth in OAR 660 Division 23. The rules require an inventory, an analysis of resource significance, an analysis of uses that conflict with the resource, and a program to resolve the conflicts. In most communities, including Lake Oswego, the conflict resolution is accomplished through an ordinance that protects significant natural resources. Like all cities in the region, Lake Oswego is required to comply with both State land use goals and the specific implementation rules set down by Metro. When the City adopted its Sensitive Lands Chapter and Atlas in 1998, Metro was in the process of developing its own water quality requirements (Title 3) to implement the 2040 Functional Plan. The City's Sensitive Lands chapter was developed with the intent of meeting the Metro requirements. Metro Title 3 is discussed in the next section of this report. The text of this Title is also provided in Appendix A. DISCUSSION in 2006, the City began work on a series of housekeeping changes to clarify and update the Community Development Code. Amendments to the Sensitive Lands chapter are one part of the larger code update. The proposed changes to the Sensitive Lands Chapter are intended to address a number of purposes: 1. To comply with Metro Titles 3 and 13 2. To clarify terms and correct errors and apparently unintentional omissions 3. To improve the graphics included in the code 4. To simplify development review for very small projects (e.g. repairs) 5. To close "loopholes" in the code 5. To more clearly regulate development along the Willamette River 7. To require invasive plant removal when lots are developed and landscaped 8. To define the amount of development that is allowed on a lot that is totally encumbered by a wetland or stream 42 Council Report 01/25/2009 Page 3 The Planning Commission opened hearings on these changes in September 2008 and held six hearings. In December, the Planning Commission recommended that the changes related to Title 3 and Title 13, corrections, improved graphics, and simplification of review (items 1-4 above) move forward to the City Council. These are the changes that will be presented in March. The Commission considered these primarily "non-policy" changes to clarify and strengthen the City's current policy direction. In addition to approving the "non-policy" changes to the Sensitive Lands chapter, the Planning Commission also asked staff to solicit additional citizen input on the other changes. The City notified potentially affected landowners and hosted an informational Open House on January 25, 2009. The remaining proposed changes will be discussed by the Planning Commission this spring and forwarded as recommendations to the Council. Among the changes that the Planning Commission intends to propose are recommendations to modify LOC 50.16.040 "Modifications of Dimensional Standards" to ensure that impacts to neighbors are considered when front and side yard setbacks are modified to protect natural resources. The "non-policy" amendments that have already been recommended by the Planning Commission and will come before the Council in March address the following: Metro Titles 3 and 13 In 1998, Metro adopted Title 3, which implements State Planning Goal 6, related to water quality. Title 3 is a prescriptive program that the City must meet through the adoption of specific code provisions. In 1998, when the City created its Sensitive Lands Program, it anticipated that the program would comply with Title 3; in fact, a few differences meant that the City's code did not comply. Staff anticipates that the group of non-policy code updates coming to the Council in March will meet the minimum standards for Title 3 compliance. These changes relate primarily to the purpose statement, to requirements for timely map updates, and to some small, specific regulations such as prohibiting hazardous materials storage in stream corridors. Metro's Title 13 implements State Planning Goal 5, related to wildlife habitat. Metro adopted Title 13 in 2007 and gave cities two years to comply; the City's deadline for compliance was January 5, 2009. Compliance with Title 3 is a prerequisite for Title 13 compliance. Unlike Title 3, Title 13 is performance-based and allows cities to achieve compliance through any program or group of programs that provide sufficient habitat protection. All of the City's environmental efforts, including natural area acquisition and restoration, community forestry, and incentives for habitat-friendly development practices, can help the City reach compliance. If the Planning Commission proposes new regulations or programs that encourage or facilitate more environmentally-friendly development programs, that will also help the City comply with Title 13. The City could also seek to 43 Council Report 01/25/2009 Page 4 comply entirely through existing programs; this may be possible because the City already protects both individual trees and upland tree groves more strongly than other cities in the Metro area. Staff anticipates seeking acknowledgement of Title 3 and Title 13 Compliance from Metro upon Council adoption of the non-policy code update. For reference, the full text of Metro Titles 3 and 13 are included as an appendix to this document. Clarification of terms and correction of errors The code contains very few scrivener's errors, but it does contain a number of sections where terms are used inconsistently (e.g. not differentiating between "resource" and "resource buffer.") The majority of all proposed changes fall into this category. However, none of the corrections will change the way the code is interpreted it will simply make the current meaning clearer. Improvement of graphics Administration of the current code depends upon the interpretation of diagrams that show how to determine resource boundaries. These diagrams are "stick" figures and not drawn to scale. The proposed changes would replace them with realistic, scaled diagrams. Simplification of review The most significant change from the standpoint of landowners is probably the efforts to simplify review. A group of changes are proposed to remove the simplest development activities such as maintenance, repair, and minor landscaping from environmental review. With these changes, activities to enhance the resource area or maintain an existing legal use will no longer be subject to a full environmental review. Staff anticipates that this will make the sensitive lands program simpler for landowners and focus City resources on review of projects that have potentially significant impacts. The remaining proposed changes, related to strengthening the code, increasing review of projects along the Willamette and Tualatin Rivers, dealing with invasive plants, and defining the allowed uses on lots that are totally encumbered by water resources, will be discussed by the Planning Commission in February and return to the Council later in the year. The Atlas Update The Sensitive Lands chapter is a zoning overlay; the Sensitive Lands Atlas shows where it applies. (The Zoning Atlas, the Weak Foundation Soils Atlas, and the US Army Corps of Engineers Flood Risk Map are other maps that the City uses to apply land-use regulations.) Staff is now mid-way through an update to the Sensitive Lands Atlas. 44 Council Report 01/25/2009 Page 5 The Atlas update is being addressed separately from the amendments to the Sensitive Lands chapter; it is not intended to modify the existing Sensitive Lands program but merely to improve the functioning of the existing program by providing more accurate maps. The Sensitive Lands Atlas is based on a resource inventory conducted by a consulting group in 1994-1995. That inventory scored sites based on their access to water, cover, and food for wildlife; it used a methodology called the Habitat Assessment Score (HAS) similar to that used in other Oregon cities. The natural resource inventory work was completed in 1995; the Sensitive Lands Atlas and code were adopted in 1998. In the interim, the City identified more than a dozen additional sites that were likely eligible for inclusion, but were not then included. Other errors and omissions have also been identified in the intervening years. In 2006, the City re-activated efforts to update the Sensitive Lands Atlas. Following extensive technical analysis and public outreach in 2007 and 2008, the City developed a draft map of proposed changes. The draft maps were posted on the City's website in February 2008. The existing, adopted Sensitive Lands Atlas identifies 1750 properties as significant sites subject to sensitive lands review. The draft inventory maps show approximately 450 new properties being considered for designation. Most of the properties that are currently designated are within the City limits, most of the properties that could be added are outside the City. In terms of area, about 1115 acres within the City are currently sensitive lands, and 32 acres are proposed to be added. About 89 acres are currently designated outside the City, and 73 acres are proposed to be added. These numbers are only approximate because the map update process is not complete. As part of its public outreach, the City has notified all affected landowners and hosted several informational open houses to discuss the draft maps. Staff also made approximately 30 site visits on landowners' requests; about 24 properties were removed from the draft map and about 5 properties were added based on those visits. The map updates remain in draft form. Before modifying the maps, the City is required to develop an Energy, Environment, Social, and Economic (ESEE) analysis that describes and analyzes the impacts of protecting, or not protecting, proposed sites. Staff anticipates that the ESEE analysis will be completed later this year, after the code update is finished and more staff resources are available to work on it. The State requires cities to update their natural resource inventories during Periodic Review; the City has included the sensitive lands inventory update as an initial task in the current Periodic Review work plan. 45 Council Report 01/25/2009 Page 6 ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT This is an informational report. A summary of the proposed timeline is: March: adopt "non-policy" changes to the CDC including Title 3 and Title 13 requirements, corrections, new graphics, and simplification of review for small projects April: review Title 3 and 13 Compliance Plans and submit to Metro May: review and adopt other policy-level CDC changes recommended by the Planning Commission July: initiate public hearings on map changes before the Planning Commission. This timeline assumes that the Planning Commission continues to move forward with their intended work program in a timely fashion. No fiscal impacts are anticipated with this proposed program, and no action is required to accept it. RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that Council provide feedback regarding the proposed Sensitive Lands Code Changes and the Sensitive Lands program work program for the year. A City Council public hearing on the initial "non-policy" group of CDC amendments for Title 3 and Title 13 is scheduled for March third. ATTACHMENTS F. Written Materials F-2 Metro Title 3 F-3 Metro Title 13 Reviewed by: Sustainability has been considered as part of this recommendation. ( - repa t Di for ft\ ilt, Alex I ntyre City Manager 46 TITLE 3 : WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD MANAGEMENT 3 . 07 .310 Intent To protect the beneficial water uses and functions and values of resources within the Water Quality and Flood Management Areas by limiting or mitigating the impact on these areas from development activities and protecting life and property from dangers associated with flooding. (Ordinance No. 97-715B, Sec. 1 . Replaced by Ordinance No. 98-730C, Sec . 1 . Readopted by Ordinance No. 00-839, Sec . 1 . Amended by Ordinance No. 05--1077C, Sec. 6 . ) 3 . 07 .320 Applicability A. Title 3 applies to: 1 . Development in Water Quality Resource and Flood Management Areas . 2 . Development which may cause temporary or permanent erosion on any property within the Metro Boundary. B . Title 3 does not apply to work necessary to protect, repair, maintain, or replace existing structures, utility facilities, roadways, driveways, accessory uses and exterior improvements in response to emergencies provided that after the emergency has passed, adverse impacts are mitigated in accordance with the performance standards in Section 3 . 07 . 340 . (Ordinance No. 97-715B, Sec. 1 . Replaced by Ordinance No. 9 8--73 0C, Sec . 1 . Readopted by Ordinance No. 0 0-8 3 9, Sec . 1 . Amended by Ordinance No. 02-972A, Sec. 1; Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec . 6 . ) 3 . 07 . 330 Implementation Alternatives for Cities and Counties A. Cities and counties shall comply with this title in one of the following ways : 1 . Amend their comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances to adopt all or part of the Title 3 Model Ordinance or code language that substantially complies with the performance standards in Section 3 . 07 . 340 and the intent of this title, and adopt either the Metro Water Quality and Flood Management Area Map or a map which substantially complies with the Metro map. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 17 EXHIBIT F-2 47 Cities and counties may choose one of the following options for applying this section: a. Adopt code language implementing this title which prevails over the map and uses the map as reference; or b. Adopt a city or county field verified map of Water Quality and Flood Management Areas based on the Metro Water Quality and Flood Management map, updated according to Section 3 . 07 .370, implementing this title which prevails over adopted code language. Field verification is a process of identifying or delineating Protected Water Features, Water Quality Resource Areas and Flood Management Areas shown on the Metro Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map. This process includes examination of information such as site visit reports, wetlands inventory maps, aerial photographs, and public input and review. The field verification process shall result in a locally adopted Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map which: i . Applies the Title 10 definitions of Protected Water Feature, Water Quality Resource Areas and Flood Management Areas to all those protected areas on the Metro Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map to show the specific boundaries of those protected areas on the locally adopted Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map; and ii . Is subject to amendment by applying adopted code language to add Protected Water Features, Water Quality Resource Areas and Flood Management Areas and to correct errors in the local Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map as required by Section 3 . 07 . 370 and consistent with Section 3 . 07 . 330 (D) . 2 . Demonstrate that existing city and county comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances substantially comply with the performance standards in Section 3 . 07 . 340 and the intent of this title. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 18 48 3 . Any combination of (1) and (2) above that substantially complies with all performance standards in Section 3 . 07 . 340 . B. Cities and counties shall hold at least one public hearing prior to adopting comprehensive plan amendments, ordinances and maps implementing the performance standards in Section 3 . 07 . 340 of this title or demonstrating that existing city or county comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances substantially comply with Section 3 . 07 . 340, to add Protected Water Features, and wetlands which meet the criteria in Section 3 . 07 . 340 (E) (3) , to their Water Quality and Flood Management Area map. The proposed comprehensive plan amendments, implementing ordinances and maps shall be available for public review at least 45 days prior to the public hearing. C. Cities and counties shall conduct a review of their Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map concurrent with local periodic review required by ORS 197 . 633 . D. Some areas which would otherwise be mapped as Protected Water Features, Water Quality Resource Areas and Flood Management Areas do not appear on the Metro Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map because streams had been culverted, wetlands had been filled or a fill permit had been approved, or the area was demonstrated to have existing conflicting water dependent uses, or existing plans or agreements for such uses, or the area was developed or committed to other uses . Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, cities and counties are not required to establish Protected Water Features, Water Quality Resource Areas and Flood Management Areas through adopted code provisions or mapping for areas which were examined but not included on the Water Quality and Flood Management Areas map adopted by the Metro Council . (Ordinance No. 97-715B, Sec. 1. Replaced by Ordinance No. 98-730C, Sec . 1 . Readopted by Ordinance No. 00-839, Sec . 1 . Amended by Ordinance No. 02-972A, Sec . 1 . ) 3 . 07 . 340 Performance Standards A. Flood Management Performance Standards . 1 . The purpose of these standards is to reduce the risk of flooding, prevent or reduce risk to human life and property, and maintain functions and values of flood- plains such as allowing for the storage and conveyance (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 19 49 of stream flows through existing and natural flood conveyance systems . 2 . All development, excavation and fill in the Flood Management Areas shall conform to the following performance standards : a. Development, excavation and fill shall be performed in a manner to maintain or increase flood storage and conveyance capacity and not increase design flood elevations . b. All fill placed at or below the design flood elevation in Flood Management Areas shall be balanced with at least an equal amount of soil material removal . c . Excavation shall not be counted as compensating for fill if such areas will be filled with water in non-storm winter conditions . d. Minimum finished floor elevations for new habitable structures in the Flood Management Areas shall be at least one foot above the design flood elevation. e . Temporary fills permitted during construction shall be removed. f . Uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by DEQ in the Flood Management Area shall be prohibited. 3 . The following uses and activities are not subject to the requirements of subsection 2 : a. Excavation and fill necessary to plant new trees or vegetation. b. Excavation and fill required for the construction of detention facilities or structures, and other facilities such as levees specifically designed to reduce or mitigate flood impacts . Levees shall not be used to create vacant buildable lands . c. New culverts, stream crossings, and transportation projects may be permitted if designed as balanced cut and fill projects or designed to not signifi- cantly raise the design flood elevation. Such projects shall be designed to minimize the area of (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 20 50 fill in Flood Management Areas and to minimize erosive velocities. Stream crossing shall be as close to perpendicular to the stream as practicable. Bridges shall be used instead of culverts wherever practicable . B. Water Quality Performance Standards . 1 . The purpose of these standards is to: (1) protect and improve water quality to support the designated beneficial water uses as defined in Title 10, and (2) protect the functions and values of the Water Quality Resource Area which include, but are not limited to: a. Providing a vegetated corridor to separate Protected Water Features from development; b. Maintaining or reducing stream temperatures; c. Maintaining natural stream corridors; d. Minimizing erosion, nutrient and pollutant loading into water; e. Filtering, infiltration and natural water purifi- cation; and f . Stabilizing slopes to prevent landslides contri- buting to sedimentation of water features . 2 . Local codes shall require all development in Water Quality Resource Areas to conform to the following performance standards : a. The Water Quality Resource Area is the vegetated corridor and the Protected Water Feature. The width of the vegetated corridor is specified in Table 3 . 07-3 . At least three slope measurements along the water feature, at no more than 100-foot increments, shall be made for each property for which development is proposed. Depending on the width of the property, the width of the vegetated corridor will vary. b. Water Quality Resource Areas shall be protected, maintained, enhanced or restored as specified in Section 3 . 07 .340 (B) (2) . (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 21 51 c . Prohibit development that will have a significant negative impact on the functions and values of the Water Quality Resource Area, which cannot be mitigated in accordance with subsection 2 (f) . d. Native vegetation shall be maintained, enhanced or restored, if disturbed, in the Water Quality Resource Area. Invasive non-native or noxious vegetation may be removed from the Water Quality Resource Area. Use of native vegetation shall be encouraged to enhance or restore the Water Quality Resource Area. This shall not preclude construction of energy dissipaters at outfalls consistent with watershed enhancement, and as approved by local surface water management agencies . e . Uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by DEQ in the Water Quality Resource Area shall be prohibited. f . Cities and counties may allow development in Water Quality Resource Areas provided that the governing body, or its designate, implement procedures which: 1 . Demonstrate that no practicable alternatives to the requested development exist which will not disturb the Water Quality Resource Area; and ii . If there is no practicable alternative, limit the development to reduce the impact associated with the proposed use; and iii . Where the development occurs, require mitiga- tion to ensure that the functions and values of the Water Quality Resource Area are restored. g. Cities and counties may allow development for repair, replacement or improvement of utility facilities so long as the Water Quality Resource Area is restored consistent with Section 3 . 07 . 340 (B) (2) (d) . h. The performance standards of Section 3 . 07 . 340 (B) (2) do not apply to routine repair and maintenance of existing structures, roadways, (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 22 52 driveways, utilities, accessory uses and other development . 3 . For lots or parcels which are fully or predominantly within the Water Quality Resource Area and are demon- strated to be unbuildable by the vegetative corridor regulations, cities and counties shall reduce or remove vegetative corridor regulations to assure the lot or parcel will be buildable while still providing the maximum vegetated corridor practicable. Cities and counties shall encourage landowners to voluntarily protect these areas through various means, such as conservation easements and incentive programs . C. Erosion and Sediment Control . 1 . The purpose of this section is to require erosion prevention measures and sediment control practices during and after construction to prevent the discharge of sediments . 2 . Erosion prevention techniques shall be designed to prevent visible and measurable erosion as defined in Title 10 . 3 . To the extent erosion cannot be completely prevented, sediment control measures shall be designed to capture, and retain on-site, soil particles that have become dislodged by erosion. D. Implementation Tools to Protect Water Quality and Flood Management Areas . 1 . Cities and counties shall either adopt land use regula- tions, which authorize transfer of permitted units and floor area to mitigate the effects of development restrictions in Water Quality and Flood Management Areas, or adopt other measures that mitigate the effects of development restrictions . 2 . Metro encourages local governments to require that approvals of applications for partitions, subdivisions and design review actions be conditioned upon one of the following: a. Protection of Water Quality and Flood Management Areas with a conservation easement; b. Platting Water Quality and Flood Management Areas as common open space; or (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 23 53 c. Offer of sale or donation of property to public agencies or private non-profits for preservation where feasible. 3 . Additions, alterations, rehabilitation or replacement of existing structures, roadways, driveways, accessory uses and development in the Water Quality and Flood Management Area may be allowed provided that : a. The addition, alteration, rehabilitation or replacement is not inconsistent with applicable city and county regulations, and b. The addition, alteration, rehabilitation or replacement does not encroach closer to the Protected Water Feature than the existing structures, roadways, driveways or accessory uses and development, and c. The addition, alteration, rehabilitation or replacement satisfies Section 3 . 07 .340 (C) of this title. d. In determining appropriate conditions of approval, the affected city or county shall require the applicant to: i . Demonstrate that no reasonably practicable alternative design or method of development exists that would have a lesser impact on the Water Quality Resource Area than the one proposed; and ii . If no such reasonably practicable alternative design or method of development exists, the project should be conditioned to limit its disturbance and impact on the Water Quality Resource to the minimum extent necessary to achieve the proposed addition, alteration, restoration, replacement or rehabilitation; and iii . Provide mitigation to ensure that impacts to the functions and values of the Water Quality Resource Area will be mitigated or restored to the extent practicable . 4 . Cities and counties may choose not to apply the Water Quality and Flood Management Area performance standards (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 24 54 of Section 3 . 07 . 340 to development necessary for the placement of structures when it does not require a grading or building permit . 5 . Metro encourages cities and counties to provide for restoration and enhancement of degraded Water Quality Resource Areas through conditions of approval when development is proposed, or through incentives or other means . 6 . Cities and counties shall apply the performance standards of this title to Title 3 Wetlands as shown on the Metro Water Quality and Flood Management Areas Map and locally adopted Water Quality and Flood Management Areas maps . Cities and counties may also apply the performance standards of this title to other wetlands . E. Map Administration. Cities and counties shall amend their comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances to provide a process for each of the following: 1 . Amendments to city and county adopted Water Quality and Flood Management Area maps to correct the location of Protected Water Features, Water Quality Resource Areas and Flood Management Areas . Amendments shall be initiated within 90 days of the date the city or county receives information establishing a possible map error. 2 . Modification of the Water Quality Resource Area upon demonstration that the modification will offer the same or better protection of water quality, the Water Quality and Flood Management Area and Protected Water Feature . 3 . Amendments to city and county adopted Water Quality and Flood Management Area maps to add Title 3 Wetlands when the city or county receives significant evidence that a wetland meets any one of the following criteria: a. The wetland is fed by surface flows, sheet flows or precipitation, and has evidence of flooding during the growing season, and has 60 percent or greater vegetated cover, and is over one-half acre in size; (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 25 55 or the wetland qualifies as having "intact water quality function" under the 1996 Oregon Freshwater Wetland Assessment Methodology; or b. The wetland is in the Flood Management Area, and has evidence of flooding during the growing season, and is five acres or more in size, and has a restricted outlet or no outlet; or the wetland qualifies as having "intact hydrologic control function" under the 1996 Oregon Freshwater Wetland Assessment Methodology; or c . The wetland or a portion of the wetland is within a horizontal distance of less than one-fourth mile from a water body which meets the Department of Environmental Quality definition of "water quality limited water body" in OAR Chapter 340, Division 41 . Examples of significant evidence that a wetland exists that may meet the criteria above are a wetland assessment conducted using the 1996 Oregon Freshwater Wetland Assessment Methodology, or correspondence from the Division of State Lands that a wetland determination or delineation has been submitted or completed for property in the city or county. 4 . Cities and counties are not required to apply the criteria in Section 3 . 07 . 340 (E) (3) to water quality or stormwater detention facilities . (Ordinance No. 97-715B, Sec. 1 . Replaced by Ordinance No. 98-730C, Sec . 1 . Readopted by Ordinance No. 00-839, Sec . 1 . Amended by Ordinance No. 02-972A, Sec. 1; Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec. 6 . ) 3 . 07 . 360 Metro Model Ordinance Required Metro shall adopt a Water Quality and Flood Management Areas Model Ordinance and map. The Model Ordinance shall represent one method of complying with this title. The Model Ordinance shall be advisory, and cities and counties are not required to adopt the Model Ordinance, or any part thereof, to substantially comply with this title. However, cities and counties which adopt the Model Ordinance in its entirety and a Water Quality and Flood (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 26 56 Management Areas Map shall be deemed to have substantially complied with the requirements of this title. (Ordinance No. 97-715B, Sec . 1 . Amended by Ordinance No. 98-730C, Sec . 2 . Readopted and amended by Ordinance No. 00-839, Sec . 1; Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec . 6 . ) (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 27 57 Table 3.07-3 - Protected Water Features (Section 3.07.340(B(2)(a)) Protected Water Slope Adjacent to Starting Point for Width of Vegetated Feature Type Protected Water Measurements from Corridor (see definitions) Feature Water Feature Primary Protected <25% • Edge of bankfull 50 feet Water Features' flow or 2-year storm level; • Delineated edge of Title 3 wetland Primary Protected >25%for 150 feet • Edge of bankfull 200 feet Water Features' or more flow or 2-year storm level; • Delineated edge of Title 3 wetland Primary Protected >25%for less than • Edge of bankfull Distance from starting Water Features' 150 feet flow or 2-year point of measurement storm level; to top of ravine(break • Delineated edge in>25%slope)3,plus of Title 3 wetland 50 feet.4 Secondary Protected <25% • Edge of bankfull 15 feet Water Features2 flow or 2-year storm level; • Delineated edge of Title 3 wetland Secondary Protected >25%5 • Edge of bankfull 50 feet Water Features2 flow or 2-year storm level; • Delineated edge of Title 3 wetland fr Primary Protected Water Features include: all perennial streams and streams draining greater than 100 acres,Title 3 wetlands,natural lakes and springs 2Secondary Protected Water Features include intermittent streams draining 50-100 acres. 3 Where the Protected Water Feature is confined by a ravine or gully,the top of ravine is the break in the 25°/a slope(see slope measurement in.Appendix). 4A maximum reduction of 25 feet may be permitted in the width of vegetated corridor beyond the slope break if a geotechnical report demonstrates that slope is stable.To establish the width of the vegetated corridor, slope should be measured in 25-foot increments away from the water feature until slope is less than 25% (top of ravine). 5 Vegetated corridors in excess of 50-feet for primary protected features,or in excess of 15-feet for secondary protected features,apply on steep slopes only in the uphill direction from the protected water feature. (Ordinance No. 98--730C, Sec. 1 . ) (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 28 58 TITLE 13 : NATURE IN NEIGHBORHOODS 3 . 07 . 1310 Intent The purposes of this program are to (1) conserve, protect, and restore a continuous ecologically viable streamside corridor system, from the streams' headwaters to their confluence with other streams and rivers, and with their floodplains in a manner that is integrated with upland wildlife habitat and with the surrounding urban landscape; and (2) to control and prevent water pollution for the protection of the public health and safety, and to maintain and improve water quality throughout the region. This program: A. Will achieve its purpose through conservation, protection, and appropriate restoration of riparian and upland fish and wildlife habitat through time, using a comprehensive approach that includes voluntary, incentive-based, educational, and regulatory elements; B. Balances and integrates goals of protecting and enhancing fish and wildlife habitat, building livable Region 2040 communities, supporting a strong economy, controlling and preventing water pollution for the protection of the public health and safety, and complying with federal laws including the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act; C. Includes provisions to monitor and evaluate program performance over time to determine whether the program is achieving the program' s objectives and targets, to determine whether cities and counties are in substantial compliance with this title, and to provide sufficient information to determine whether to amend or adjust the program in the future; and D. Establishes minimum requirements and is not intended to repeal or replace existing requirements of city and county comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances to the extent those requirements already meet the minimum requirements of this title, nor is it intended to prohibit cities and counties from adopting and enforcing fish and wildlife habitat protection and restoration programs that exceed the requirements of this title. (Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec . 5 . ) 3 . 07 . 1320 Inventory and Habitat Conservation Areas The purpose of this section is to describe the geographic information system (GIS) data and maps that form the basis of (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 81 EXHIBIT F-3 59 Metro' s fish and wildlife habitat protection and restoration program. This data and maps are referenced in various ways in this title, but may or may not be relevant within a city or county depending upon which implementation alternative the city or county chooses pursuant to Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) . The maps referred to in this title are representations of data contained within Metro' s GIS system, operated by the Metro Data Resource Center, and references to such maps shall be interpreted as references to the maps themselves and to the underlying GIS data that the maps represent . A. The Regionally Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat Inventory Map (hereinafter the "Inventory Map") , attached hereto5, identifies the areas that have been determined to contain regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat . The Inventory Map divides habitat into two general categories, riparian and upland wildlife, and further differentiates each habitat category into low, medium, and high value habitats . B. The Habitat Conservation Areas Map, attached hereto6, identifies the areas that are subject to the performance standards and best management practices described in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340, to the extent that a city or county chooses to comply with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 by using the Habitat Conservation Areas map, or a map that substantially complies with the Habitat Conservation Areas map. For such cities and counties, the Habitat Conservation Areas Map further identifies, subject to the map verification process described in Metro Code Sections 3 . 07 . 1330 (G) and 3 . 07 . 1340 (D) , which areas will be subject to high, moderate, and low levels of habitat conservation based on Metro Council' s consideration of the results of the economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) consequences of protecting or not protecting the habitat, public input, and technical review, and the Metro Council' s subsequent decision to balance conflicting uses in habitat areas . 1 . Table 3 . 07-13a describes how (1) Class I and II riparian habitat areas, and (2) Class A and B upland wildlife habitat areas within publicly- owned parks and open spaces, except for parks and open spaces where the acquiring agency clearly identified that it was acquiring the property to 5 On file in the Metro Council office and copies available from the Metro Data Resource Center. 6 On file in the Metro Council office and copies available from the Metro Data Resource Center. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 82 60 develop it for active recreational uses, located within the Metro boundary on December 28, 2005, were designated as high, moderate, and low Habitat Conservation Areas . 2 . Table 3 . 07-13b describes how Class I and II riparian habitat areas and Class A and B upland wildlife areas brought within the Metro UGB after December 28, 2005, will be designated as high, moderate, and low Habitat Conservation Areas . Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1360 describes the procedures for how Table 3 . 07-13b and Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 shall be applied in such areas . C. Exempt International Marine Terminals 1 . Marine dependent properties which would otherwise have been mapped as Habitat Conservation Areas do not appear on the Habitat Conservation Areas Map because the Metro Council concluded, based on its analysis of the economic, social, environmental, and energy implications of its decision, that the economic importance of such properties far outweighed the environmental importance of the properties as fish and wildlife habitat . The Metro Council applied the criteria described in subsection (C) (2) of this section to conclude that the following properties should not be considered Habitat Conservation Areas : a. The International Terminal property, located at 12005 N. Burgard Way, Portland, Oregon, 97203 ; b. Port of Portland Marine Terminal 4 ; c. Port of Portland Marine Terminal 5; and d. Port of Portland Marine Terminal 6 . 2 . The Metro Council may, at its discretion, consider and adopt ordinances to exempt from the provisions of this title any additional properties along the Willamette and Columbia Rivers, or portions of such properties, where it can be demonstrated that : a. The property is currently developed for use as an international marine terminal capable (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 83 61 of mooring ocean-going tankers or cargo ships; and b. The property is substantially without vegetative cover. (Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec . 5 . ) 3 . 07 . 1330 Implementation Alternatives for Cities and Counties A. Under Oregon law, upon acknowledgment of this program by the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) , cities and counties wholly or partly within the Metro boundary shall apply the requirements of this title with respect to areas identified as riparian habitat on the Inventory Map and areas identified as upland wildlife habitat on the Inventory Map, according to the compliance deadlines established in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 810, rather than applying the requirements of division 23 of chapter 660 of the Oregon Administrative Rules ( "OAR" ) , promulgated by LCDC, except that : 1 . A city or county shall apply the requirements of division 23 of OAR chapter 660 in order to adopt comprehensive plan amendments or land use regulations that (i) would otherwise require compliance with division 23 of OAR chapter 660 but for the adoption of this title (i .e. amendments or regulations adopted to protect Goal 5 resources) , and (ii) will limit development in areas not identified as riparian habitat on the Inventory Map, unless such provisions (a) are part of a program intended to comply with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (3) and apply only to areas identified as upland wildlife habitat on the Inventory Map (i .e . , they do not apply to areas not identified as habitat) ; or (b) apply to areas identified as Class A or B upland wildlife habitat on the Inventory Map that are brought within the UGB after December 28, 2005 . Such a city or county shall seek acknowledgement of such provisions from LCDC or treat such provisions as post-acknowledgement plan amendments under ORS chapter 197 ; 2 . A city or county that, prior to December 28, 2005, adopted any comprehensive plan amendments or land use regulations that (a) apply to areas identified as upland wildlife habitat on the Inventory Map but not identified as riparian habitat on the Inventory Map, (b) limit development in order to protect fish or wildlife habitat, and (c) were adopted in compliance (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 84 62 with division 23 of OAR chapter 660, shall not repeal such amendments or regulations, nor shall it amend such provisions in a manner that would allow any more than a de minimis increase in the amount of development that could occur in areas identified as upland wildlife habitat; and 3 . After a city or county has demonstrated that it is in substantial compliance with the requirements of this title, if the city or county wishes to adopt comprehensive plan amendments or land use regulations applicable to areas identified as riparian habitat on the Inventory Map that have the effect of imposing greater limits on development than those imposed by provisions that are in substantial compliance with the requirements of this title, such a city or county shall comply with the provisions of division 23 of OAR chapter 660, and shall seek acknowledgement of such provisions from LCDC or treat such provisions as post- acknowledgement plan amendments under ORS chapter 197 . B. Each city and county in the region shall either: 1 . Amend its comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances to adopt the Title 13 Model Ordinance and the Metro Habitat Conservation Areas Map, and demonstrate compliance with the provisions of (a) Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 (A) (5) , related to enhanced fish and wildlife protection and management of publicly- owned parks and open spaces that have been designated as natural areas and are not intended for future urban development, and (b) Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 (A) (8) , related to the restoration of Habitat Conservation Areas when developed property is undergoing significant redevelopment; 2 . Demonstrate that its existing or amended comprehensive plan and existing, amended, or new implementing ordinances substantially comply with the performance standards and best management practices described in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340, and that maps that it has adopted and uses substantially comply with the Metro Habitat Conservation Areas Map; 3 . Demonstrate that it has implemented a program based on alternative approaches that will achieve protection and enhancement of Class I and II riparian habitat areas, and of Class A and B upland wildlife habitat areas in territory added to the Metro UGB after December 28, 2005, substantially comparable with the protection and (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 85 63 restoration that would result from the application of a program that complied with Metro Code Sections 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (1) or (B) (2) . A city or county developing such a program: a. Shall demonstrate that its alternative program will provide a certainty of habitat protection and enhancement to achieve its intended results, such as by using proven programs and demonstrating stable and continuing funding sources sufficient to support elements of the program that require funding; b. May assert substantial compliance with this provision by relying on either or both the city' s or county' s comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances and on the use of incentive based, voluntary, education, acquisition, and restoration programs, such as : i . An existing tree protection ordinance; ii . A voluntary program for tree protection, tree replacement, and habitat restoration; iii . Habitat preservation incentive programs, such as programs that provide reduced development or storm water management fees and property taxes in return for taking measures to protect and restore habitat (including, for example, the Wildlife Habitat Special Tax Assessment Program, ORS 308A.400 through 308A.430, and the Riparian Habitat Tax Exemption Program, ORS 308A. 350 through 308A. 383) ; iv. Habitat-friendly development standards to reduce the detrimental impact of storm water run-off on riparian habitat; v. A local habitat acquisition program; and vi . Maintaining and enhancing publicly-owned habitat areas, such as by: (A) Using habitat-friendly best management practices, such as integrated pest management programs, in all regionally significant habitat areas within publicly-owned parks and open spaces; (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 86 64 (B) Ensuring that publicly-owned parks and open spaces that have been designated as natural areas and are not intended for future urban development are managed to maintain and enhance the quality of fish and wildlife habitat that they provide; and (C) Pursuing funding to support local park, open space, and habitat acquisition and restoration, such as with local bond measures, System Development Charge (SDC) programs, Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) grants, or other funding mechanisms; 4 . District Plans . a. Adopt one or more district plans that apply over portions of the city or county, and demonstrate that, for the remainder of its jurisdiction, the city or county has a program that complies with either Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (1) or Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (2) . If a city or county adopts one or more district plans pursuant to this paragraph, it shall demonstrate that, within each district plan area, the district plan complies with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (3) . District plans shall be permitted under this subsection only for areas within a common watershed, or which are within areas in adjoining watersheds that share an interrelated economic infrastructure and development pattern. Cities and counties that choose to develop district plans are encouraged to coordinate such district plans with other entities whose activities impact the same watershed to which the district plan applies, including other cities and counties, special districts, state and federal agencies, watershed councils, and other governmental and non-governmental agencies . b. The City of Portland shall develop a District Plan that complies with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 133 0 (B) (4) (a) , in cooperation with the Port of Portland, that applies to West Hayden Island; or 5 . For a city or county that is a member of the Tualatin Basin Natural Resources Coordinating Committee (the (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 87 65 "TBNRCC, " which includes Washington County and the cities of Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood, Tigard, and Tualatin) , amend its comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances to comply with the maps and provisions of the TBNRCC Goal 5 Program, attached hereto' and incorporated herein by reference, adopted by the TBNRCC on April 4, 2005 (the "Tualatin Basin Program" ) , subject to the intergovernmental agreement entered into between Metro and the TBNRCC. All other provisions of this Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330, as well as Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1360, shall still apply to each city and county that is a member of the TBNRCC. In addition, in order for a city or county that is a member of the TBNRCC to be in compliance with this functional plan, the following conditions must be satisfied: a. Within the compliance timeline described in Paragraph 6 of the Intergovernmental Agreement entered into between Metro and the TBNRCC, the TBNRCC and its members comply with the six steps identified in section B of Chapter 7 of the Tualatin Basin Program; b. Clean Water Services approves and begins implementing its Healthy Streams Plan; c. The TBNRCC members agree to renew and extend their partnership to implement the projects on the Healthy Streams Project List and target projects that protect and restore Class I and II Riparian Habitat, including habitat that extends beyond the Clean Water Services "vegetated corridors, " and the TBNRCC shall continue to coordinate its activities with Metro and cooperate with Metro on the development of regional public information about the Nature in Neighborhoods Initiative; d. The city or county has adopted provisions to facilitate and encourage the use of habitat- friendly development practices, where technically feasible and appropriate, in all areas identified as Class I and II riparian habitat areas on the Metro Regionally Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat Inventory Map. Table 3 . 07-13c provides examples of the types of habitat-friendly ' On file in the Metro council office and copies available from the Metro Planning Department. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 88 66 development practices that shall be encouraged and considered; e . The city or county has adopted provisions to allow for the reduction of the density and capacity requirements of Title I of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Metro Code Sections 3 . 07 . 110 to 170, consistent with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (H) . Particularly, the provisions shall (1) apply only to properties that were within the Metro urban growth boundary on January 1, 2002 ; (2) require the protection of regionally significant habitat on the property, such as via a public dedication or restrictive covenant; and (3) allow only for a reduction in the minimum number of units required to be built based on the amount of area protected as provided in part (2) of this paragraph. In addition, cities and counties will be required to report to Metro as provided in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (H) (3) ; f . The city or county complies with the provisions of Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (1) to (B) (3) as those provisions apply to upland wildlife habitat in territory added to the Metro urban growth boundary after December 28, 2005 . For example, (1) each city and county shall either adopt and apply Metro' s Title 13 Model Ordinance to upland wildlife habitat in new urban areas, (2) substantially comply with the requirements of Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 as it applies to upland wildlife habitat in new urban areas, or (3) demonstrate that it has implemented an alternative program that will achieve protection and enhancement of upland wildlife habitat in new urban areas comparable with the protection and restoration that would result from one of the two previous approaches described in this sentence; and g. The TBNRCC and the city or county complies with the monitoring and reporting requirements of Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1360 . C. The comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances relied upon by a city or county to comply with this title shall contain clear and objective standards . A standard shall be considered clear and objective if it meets any one of the following criteria: (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 89 67 1 . It is a fixed numerical standard, such as fixed distance (e.g. "50 feet" ) or land area (e.g. "1 acre" ) ; 2 . It is a nondiscretionary requirement, such as a requirement that grading not occur beneath the dripline of a protected tree; or 3 . It is a performance standard that describes the outcome to be achieved, specifies the objective criteria to be used in evaluating outcome or performance, and provides a process for application of the performance standard, such as a conditional use or design review process . D. In addition to complying with subsection (C) of this section, the comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances that a city or county relies upon to satisfy the requirements of this title may include an alternative, discretionary approval process that is not clear and objective provided that the comprehensive plan and implementing ordinance provisions of such a process : 1 . Specify that property owners have the choice of proceeding under either the clear and objective approval process, which each city or county must have pursuant to subsection (C) of this section, or under the alternative, discretionary approval process; and 2 Require a level of protection for, or enhancement of, the fish and wildlife habitat that meets or exceeds the level of protection or enhancement that would be achieved by following the clear and objective standards described in subsection (C) of this section. E. Use of Habitat-Friendly Development Practices In Regionally Significant Fish And Wildlife Habitat . 1 . Each city and county in the region shall : a. Identify provisions in the city' s or county' s comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances that prohibit or limit the use of the habitat- friendly development practices such as those described in Table 3 . 07-13c; and b. Adopt amendments to the city' s or county' s comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances to remove the barriers identified pursuant to subsection (E) (1) (a) of this section, and shall (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 90 68 remove such barriers so that such practices may be used, where practicable, in all regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat; provided, however that such practices shall not be permitted if their use is prohibited by an applicable and required State or Federal permit issued to a unit of local government having jurisdiction in the area, such as a permit required under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S .C. § l251 et seq. , or the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S .C. § 30Of et seq. , and including conditions or plans required by such permit . 2 . Metro shall provide technical assistance to cities and counties to comply with the provisions of this subsection E of this section. F. Cities and counties shall hold at least one public hearing prior to adopting comprehensive plan amendments, implementing ordinances, and maps implementing this title or demonstrating that existing city or county comprehensive plans, implementing ordinances, and maps substantially comply with this title . The proposed comprehensive plan amendments, implementing ordinances, and maps shall be available for public review at least 45 days prior to the public hearing. G. The comprehensive plan provisions and implementing ordinances that each city or county amends, adopts, or relies on to comply with this title shall provide property owners with a reasonable, timely, and equitable process to verify the specific location of habitat areas subject to the provisions of the city' s or county' s comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances . It is the intent of this requirement that, in the majority of cases, the process be as simple and straightforward as possible and not result in a change that would require an amendment to the city' s or county' s comprehensive plan. Such process shall : 1 . Allow a property owner, or another person with the property owner' s consent, to confirm the location of habitat on a lot or parcel at any time, whether or not the property owner has submitted a specific request for a development permit, provided, however, that a city or county may impose a fee to cover the actual staff, equipment and other administrative costs of providing such a service; 2 . As often as reasonably possible, provide a simple, default approach that allows a property owner to verify (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 91 69 the location of habitat on a lot or parcel without having to hire an environmental consultant and without having to pay a significant processing or application fee; 3 . Allow a property owner to present detailed documentation to verify the location of habitat on a lot or parcel, such as information collected and analyzed by an environmental consultant; and 4 . Ensure that the process provides adequate opportunities for appeals and a fair and equitable dispute resolution process, consistent with state law. H. Reducing Regional Density and Capacity Requirements to Allow Habitat Protection. 1 . Notwithstanding the provisions of Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 140 (A) (2) , cities and counties may approve a subdivision or development application that will result in a density below the minimum density for the zoning district if : a. The property lot or parcel was within the Metro UGB on January 1, 2002 ; b. An area of the property lot or parcel to be developed has been identified as regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat on the Metro Inventory Map or as a significant resource on a local Goal 5 riparian, wetlands, or wildlife resource inventory map that had been acknowledged by the LCDC prior to December 28, 2005; and c . Such a decision will directly result in the protection of the remaining undeveloped regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat or significant resource located on the property lot or parcel, such as via a public dedication or a restrictive covenant . 2 . The amount of reduction in the minimum density requirement that may be approved under this subsection (H) of this section shall be calculated by subtracting the number of square feet of regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat or significant resource that is permanently protected under subsection (H) (1) (c) of this section from the total number of square feet that the city or county otherwise would use to calculate the minimum density requirement for the property. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 92 70 3 . If a city or county approves a subdivision or development application that will result in a density below the minimum density for the zoning district pursuant to subsection (H) (1) of this section, then such city or county shall : a. Be permitted an offset against the capacity specified for that city or county in Table 3 . 07-1 of the Metro Code. The amount of such offset shall be calculated by subtracting the difference between the number of dwelling units that the city or county approved to be built pursuant to subsection (H) (1) of this section and the minimum number of dwelling units that would have otherwise been required to be built on the property pursuant to the applicable minimum density requirements for the zoning district where the property is located; and b. Report to Metro by April 15 of every year the number of approvals made pursuant to this subsection H of this section, including docu- mentation that the factors in subsection (H) (1) had been satisfied for each such approval, and the capacity offsets that the city or county shall be afforded as a result of such approvals . (Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec. 5 . ) 3 . 07 . 1340 Performance Standards and Best Management Practices for Habitat Conservation Areas The following performance standards and best management practices apply to all cities and counties that choose to adopt or rely upon their comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances to comply, in whole or in part, with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (B) (2) : A. City and county comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances shall conform to the following performance standards and best management practices : 1 . Habitat Conservation Areas shall be protected, maintained, enhanced, and restored as specified in this Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340, and city and county development codes shall include provisions for enforcement of these performance standards and best management practices . (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 93 71 2 . In addition to requirements imposed by this title, the requirements of Title 3 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Metro Code Sections 3 . 07 .310 to 3 . 07 .360 shall continue to apply. 3 . The performance standards and best management practices of this Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 shall not apply: a. When the application of such standards and practices would restrict or regulate farm structures or farming practices in violation of ORS 215 .253 or ORS 561 . 191; or b. In areas outside of the Metro UGB but within the Metro boundary at the effective date of this title: i . When such standards and practices violate ORS 527 . 722 by prohibiting, limiting, regulating, subjecting to approval, or in any other way affecting forest practices on forestlands located outside of an acknowledged urban growth boundary, except as provided in ORS 527 . 722 (2) , (3) and (4) ; or ii . Pursuant to ORS 196 . 107, in areas within Multnomah County and the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, provided that Multnomah County has adopted and implements ordinances that are approved pursuant to sections 7 (b) and 8 (h) through 8 (k) of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act, 16 U.S .C. § 544e (b) and 544f (h) through 544f (k) . 4 . The performance standards and best management practices of this Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 shall not apply to any use of residential properties if, as of the local program effective date: a. Construction of the residence was completed in compliance with all applicable local and state laws and rules for occupancy as a residence or the residence had been occupied as a residence for the preceding ten years; and b. Such uses would not have required the property owner to obtain a land use approval or a building, grading, or tree removal permit from their city or county. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 94 72 5 . Habitat Conservation Areas within publicly-owned parks and open spaces that have been designated as natural areas and are not intended for future urban development shall be protected and managed so that the quality of fish and wildlife habitat that they provide is maintained and enhanced, and that habitat-friendly best management practices, such as integrated pest management programs, are used in such areas . 6 . Invasive non-native or noxious vegetation shall not be planted in any Habitat Conservation Area. The removal of invasive non-native or noxious vegetation from Habitat Conservation Areas shall be allowed. The planting of native vegetation shall be encouraged in Habitat Conservation Areas . 7 . Except as provided in subsection (A) (8) of this section, routine repair, maintenance, alteration, rehabilitation, or replacement of existing structures, roadways, driveways, utilities, accessory uses, or other development within Habitat Conservation Areas may be allowed provided that : a. The project is consistent with all other applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations; b. The project will not permanently or irreparably result in more developed area within a Habitat Conservation Area than the area of the existing development; and c . Native vegetation is maintained, enhanced and restored, if disturbed; other vegetation is replaced, if disturbed, with vegetation other than invasive non-native or noxious vegetation; and the planting of native vegetation and removal of invasive non- native or noxious vegetation is encouraged. 8 . Notwithstanding subsection (A) (7) of this section, when a city or county exercises its discretion to approve zoning changes to allow a developed property that contains a Habitat Conservation Area to (I) change from an industrial or heavy commercial zoning designation to a residential or mixed-use/residential designation, or (2) increase the type or density and intensity of development in any area, then the city or county shall apply the provisions of this Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1340 , or provisions that will achieve (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 95 73 substantially comparable habitat protection and restoration as do the provisions of this section. This provision will help to insure that, when developed areas are redeveloped in new ways to further local and regional urban and economic development goals, property owners should restore regionally significant fish and. wildlife habitat as part of such redevelopment . 9 . Any activity within Habitat Conservation Areas that is required to implement a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) - compliant Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) on property owned by the Port of Portland within 10, 000 feet of an Aircraft Operating Area, as defined by the FAA, shall be allowed provided that mitigation for any such projects is completed in compliance with mitigation requirements adopted pursuant to subsections (B) (1) , (B) (2) (c) , and (B) (3) of this section. In addition, habitat mitigation for any development within Habitat Conservation Areas on property owned by the Port of Portland within 10, 000 feet of an Aircraft Operating Area, as d6f fined by the FAA, shall be permitted at any property located within the same 6th Field Hydrologic Unit Code subwatershed as delineated by the Unites States Department of Agriculture' s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) without having to demonstrate that on-site mitigation is not practicable, feasible, or appropriate. 10 . Within Habitat Conservation Areas located in Multnomah County Drainage District No. 1, Peninsula Drainage District No. 1, Peninsula Drainage District No. 2, and the area managed by the Sandy Drainage Improvement Company, routine operations, repair, maintenance, reconfiguration, rehabilitation, or replacement of existing drainage and flood control facilities, and existing related facilities, including any structures, pump stations, water control structures, culverts, irrigation systems, roadways, utilities, accessory uses (such as off-load facilities that facilitate water- based maintenance) , erosion control projects, levees, soil and bank stabilization projects, dredging and ditch clearing within the hydraulic cross-section in existing storm water conveyance drainageways, or other water quality and flood storage projects applicable to existing facilities and required to be undertaken pursuant to ORS chapters 547 or 554 or Titles 33 or 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, shall be allowed provided that : (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 96 74 a. The project is consistent with all other applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations; b. The project does not encroach closer to a surface stream or river, wetland, or other body of open water than existing operations and development; c . Disturbed areas are replanted with vegetation and no bare soils remain after project completion; the planting of native vegetation and removal of invasive non- native or noxious vegetation is encouraged; and invasive non-native or noxious vegetation shall not be planted; and d. Each district submits an annual report, to all local permitting agencies in which the district operates, describing the projects the district completed in the previous year and how those projects complied with all applicable federal and state laws and requirements . B. City and county comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances shall contain review standards applicable to development in all Habitat Conservation Areas that include : 1 . Clear and objective development approval standards consistent with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (C) that protect Habitat Conservation Areas but which allow limited development within High Habitat Conservation Areas, slightly more development in Moderate Habitat Conservation Areas, and even more development in Low Habitat Conservation Areas . Such standards shall allow (a) property owners to consider reduced building footprints and the use of minimal excavation foundation systems (e.g. , pier, post or piling foundation) , and (b) the flexible application of local code requirements that may limit a property owner' s ability to avoid development in Habitat Conservation Areas, such as setback and landscaping requirements or limits on clustering and the transfer of development rights on- site. The habitat-friendly development practices described in Table 3 . 07-13c, which are intended to minimize the magnitude of the impact of development in Habitat Conservation Areas, shall be allowed, encouraged, or required to the extent that cities and counties can develop clear and objective standards for their use, unless their use is prohibited by an applicable and required State or Federal permit issued to a unit of local government having jurisdiction in (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 97 75 the area, such as a permit required under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S .C. § 1251 et seq. , or the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S .C. § 300f et seq. , and including conditions or plans required by such permit . The clear and objective development standards required by this paragraph also shall require that all development in Habitat Conservation Areas be mitigated to restore the ecological functions that are lost or damaged as a result of the development . Standards that meet the requirements of this subsection and Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (C) are provided in Section 7 of the Metro Title 13 Model Ordinances; and 2 . Discretionary development approval standards consistent with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (D) that comply with subsections (B) (2) (a) , (B) (2) (b) , and B (2) (c) of this section. Standards that meet the requirements of this subsection (B) (2) and Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (D) are provided in Section 8 of the Metro Title 13 Model Ordinance. a. Avoid Habitat Conservation Areas . i . Development may occur within a Habitat Conservation Area only if a property owner demonstrates that no practicable alternatives to the requested development exist which will not disturb the Habitat Conservation Area; ii . When implementing this requirement to determine whether a practicable alternative exists, cities and counties shall include consideration of the type of Habitat Conservation Area that will be affected by the proposed development . For example, High Habitat Conservation Areas have been so designated because they are areas that have been identified as having lower urban development value and higher-valued habitat, while Low Habitat Conservation Areas have been so designated because they are areas that have been identified as having higher urban development value and lower-valued habitat; and iii . Cities and counties shall allow flexibility in the application of local code requirements 8 On file in the Metro Council office and copies available from the Metro Planning Department. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 98 76 that may limit a property owner' s ability to avoid development in Habitat Conservation Areas, such as setback and landscaping requirements or limits on clustering and the transfer of development rights on-site. Property owners shall also consider reduced building footprints and use of minimal excavation foundation systems (e.g. , pier, post or piling foundation) . The use of the techniques described in this paragraph shall be part of the alternatives analysis to determine whether any alternative to development within the Habitat Conservation Area is practicable; and b. Minimize Impacts on Habitat Conservation Areas and Water Quality. i . If there is no practicable alternative, limit the development to minimize, to the extent practicable, the detrimental impacts on Habitat Conservation Areas associated with the proposed development; ii . When implementing this requirement to determine whether development has been minimized to the extent practicable, cities and counties shall include consideration of the type of Habitat Conservation Area that will be affected by the proposed development . For example, High Habitat Conservation Areas have been so designated because they are areas that have been identified as having lower urban development value and higher- valued habitat, while Low Habitat Conservation Areas have been so designated because they are areas that have been identified as having higher urban development value and lower-valued habitat; and iii . The techniques described in subsection (B) (2) (a) (iii) of this section shall be used to demonstrate that development within a Habitat Conservation Area has been minimized. In addition, the magnitude of the impact of development within Habitat Conservation Areas also shall be minimized, such as by use of the habitat-friendly development practices described in Table 3 . 07-13c, unless the use of such practices is prohibited by an (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 99 77 applicable and required State or Federal permit issued to a unit of local government having jurisdiction in the area, such as a permit required under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S .C. §§1251 et seq. , or the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S .C. §§300f et seq. , and including conditions or plans required by such permit; and c . Mitigate Impacts on Habitat Conservation Areas and Water Quality. When development occurs, require mitigation to restore the ecological functions that were lost or damaged as a result of the development, after taking into consideration the property owner' s efforts to minimize the magnitude of the detrimental impacts through the use of the techniques described in Table 3 . 07-13c and through any additional or innovative techniques . 3 . When development occurs within delineated wetlands, then the mitigation required under subsections (B) (I) and (B) (2) of this title shall not require any additional mitigation than the mitigation required by state and federal law for the fill or removal of such wetlands . C. City and county comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances shall include procedures to consider claims of hardship and to grant hardship variances for any property demonstrated to be converted to an unbuildable lot by application of any provisions implemented to comply with the requirements of this title. D. Administering the Habitat Conservation Areas Map and Site- Level Verification of Habitat Location. 1 . Each city and county shall be responsible for administering the Habitat Conservation Areas Map, or the city' s or county' s map that has been deemed by Metro to be in substantial compliance with the Habitat Conservation Areas Map, within its jurisdiction, as provided in this subsection (D) of this section. 2 . The comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances amended, adopted or relied upon to comply with this subsection (B) of this section shall comply with Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1330 (G) . (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 100 78 3 . Verification of the Location of Habitat Conservation Areas . Each city and county shall establish a verification process consistent with subsections (B) (4) through (D) (6) of this section. The site-level verification of Habitat Conservation Areas is a three- step process . The first step is determining the boundaries of the habitat areas on the property, as provided in subsection (B) (4) of this section. The second step is determining the urban development value of the property, as provided in subsection (D) (5) of this section. The third step is cross-referencing the habitat classes with the urban development value of the property to determine whether the property contains High, Moderate, or Low Habitat Conservation Areas, or none at all, as provided in subsection (D) (6) of this section. 4 . Habitat Boundaries . a. Locating riparian habitat and determining its habitat class is a five-step process . i . Step 1 . Locate the water feature that is the basis for identifying riparian habitat : (A) Locate the top of bank of all streams, rivers, and open water within 200 feet of the property► (B) Locate all flood areas within 100 feet of the property (areas that were mapped as flood areas but were filled to a level above the base flood level prior to the local program effective date, consistent with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations shall no longer be considered habitat based on their status as flood areas) ; and (C) Locate all wetlands within 150 feet of the property based on the Local Wetland Inventory map (if completed) and on the Metro 2004 Wetland Inventory Map (available from the Metro Data Resource Center, 600 N.E. Grand Ave . , Portland, OR 97232 ; 503-797-1742) . Identified wetlands shall be further delineated consistent with methods currently accepted by the Oregon Division of State (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 101 79 Lands and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers . ii . Step 2 . Identify the vegetative cover status of all areas on the property that are within 200 feet of the top of bank of streams, rivers, and open water, are wetlands or are within 150 feet of wetlands, and are flood areas and within 100 feet of flood areas : (A) Vegetative cover status shall be as identified on the Metro Vegetative Cover Map, attached hereto9 and incorporated herein by reference. The vegetative cover type assigned to any particular area was based on two factors : the type of vegetation observed in aerial photographs and the size of the overall contiguous area of vegetative cover to which a particular piece of vegetation belonged. As an example of how the categories were assigned, in order to qualify as "forest canopy" the forested area had to be part of a larger patch of forest of at least one acre in size; and (B) In terms of mapping the location of habitat, the only allowed corrections to the vegetative cover status of a property are those based on an area being developed prior to the local program effective date and those based on errors made at the time the vegetative cover status was determined based on analysis of the aerial photographs used to create the Metro Vegetative Cover Map (for the original map, the aerial photos used were Metro' s summer 2002 photos) and application of the vegetative cover definitions provided in the footnotes to Table 3 . 07-13d. iii . Step 3 . Determine whether the degree that the land slopes upward from all streams, rivers, and open water within 200 feet of the property is greater than or less than 25% 9 On file in the Metro council office and copies available from the Metro Data Resource center. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 102 80 (using the methodology described in the Appendix to Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 00-839 re-adopting Title 3 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan) . iv. Step 4 . Identify the habitat class (Class I, Class II, or none) of the areas within up to 200 feet of the identified water feature, consistent with `fable 3 . 07-13d. Note that areas that have been identified as habitats of concern, as depicted on the Metro Habitats of Concern Map, attached hereto1° and incorporated herein by reference, are all classified as Class I riparian habitat . v. Step 5 . Confirm that the development and vegetative cover status of areas within up to 200 feet of the identified water feature has not been altered without the required approval of the city or county since the local program effective date and, if it has, then verify the original habitat location using the best available evidence of its location on the local program effective date . b. For territory brought within the Metro UGB after December 28, 2005, the location of upland wildlife habitat and its habitat class shall be as identified in Metro' s habitat inventory of such territory performed pursuant to Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1370 . The only factors that may be reviewed to verify the location of upland wildlife habitat shall be : i . For territory that was within the Metro boundary on December 28, 2005, whether regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat was removed, consistent with all other applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations, prior to the date that the property was brought within the Metro UGB and, if so, then areas where habitat was removed shall not be identified as Habitat Conservation Areas; ii . Whether errors were made at the time the vegetative cover status was determined based 1° On file in the Metro Council office and copies available from the Metro Data Resource Center. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 103 81 on (1) analysis of the aerial photographs used to determine the vegetative cover status, and (2) application of the vegetative cover definitions provided in the footnotes to Table 3 . 0 7-13d; and iii. Whether there are discrepancies between the locations of property lot lines and the location of Habitat Conservation Areas, as shown on the Habitat Conservation Areas Map. 5 . Urban Development Value of the Property. The urban development value of property designated as regionally significant habitat is depicted on the Metro Habitat Urban Development Value Map, attached heretoll and incorporated herein by reference. The Metro Habitat Urban Development Value Map is based on an assessment of three variables, the land value of property, the employment value of property, and the Metro 2040 Design Type designation of property. Cities and counties shall make an upward adjustment of a property' s urban development value designation (i .e. from low to medium or high, or from medium to high) i f : a. The Metro 2040 Design Type designation has changed from a category designated as a lower urban development value category to one designated as a higher urban development value category. Properties in areas designated as the Central City, Regional Centers, Town Centers, and Regionally Significant Industrial Areas are considered to be of high urban development value; properties in areas designated as Main Streets, Station Communities, Other Industrial Areas, and Employment Centers are of medium urban development value; and properties in areas designated as Inner and Outer Neighborhoods and Corridors are of low urban development value; or b. The property, or adjacent lots or parcels, is owned by a regionally significant educational or medical facility and, for that reason, should be designated as of high urban development value because of the economic contributions the facility provides to the citizens of the region. On file in the Metro Council office and copies available from the Metro Data Resource Center. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 104 82 i . The following facilities are regionally significant educational or medical facilities, as further identified on the Regionally Significant Educational or Medical Facilities Map, attached hereto'2 : (A) Clackamas Community College, 19600 S . Molalla Ave. , Oregon City; (B) Lewis & Clark College, 0615 S .W. Palatine Hill Rd, Portland; (C) Marylhurst University, 17600 Hwy 43 , in Lake Oswego; (D) Mt . Hood Community College, 26000 S.E. Stark St . , Gresham; (E) Oregon Health Sciences University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd.,, Portland; (F) Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland South Waterfront, Portland; (G) Oregon Health Sciences University/Oregon Graduate Institute, 20000 N.W. Walker, Hillsboro; (H) Pacific University, 2043 College Way, Forest Grove; (I) Portland Community College, Rock Creek Campus, 17865 N.W. Springdale Rd. , Portland; (J) Portland Community College, Sylvania Campus, 12000 S .W. 49th Ave, Portland; (K) Providence St . Vincent Medical Center, 9115 SW Barnes Rd. , Portland; (L) Reed College, 3203 S .E. Woodstock Blvd. , Portland; and (M) University of Portland, 5000 N. Willamette Blvd. , Portland 12 On file in the Metro Council office. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 105 83 (N) Veterans Hospital, 3710 SW U.S. Veterans Hospital Rd. , Portland. ii . The Metro Council may add a property to the list of facilities identified in subsection (D) (5) (b) (i) of this section in the future by adopting an ordinance amending that section if the Council finds that the use of the property: (A) Supports the 2040 Growth Concept by providing a mixed-use environment that may include employment, housing, retail, cultural and recreational activities, and a mix of transportation options such as bus, bicycling, walking, and auto; (B) Provides, as a primary objective, a service that satisfies a public need rather than just the consumer economy (i .e. , producing, distributing, selling or servicing goods) ; (C) Draws service recipients (e.g. , students, patients) from all reaches of the region and beyond; (D) Relies on capital infrastructure that is so large or specialized as to render its relocation infeasible; and (B) Has a long-term campus master plan that has been approved by the city or county in which it is located. 6 . Cross-Referencing Habitat Class With Urban Development Value . City and county verification of the locations of High, Moderate, and Low Habitat Conservation Areas shall be consistent with Tables 3 . 07-13a and 3 . 07-13b. (Ordinance No. 05--1077C, Section 5 . ) 3 . 07 . 1350 Claims Pursuant to ORS 197 . 352 (Ballot Measure 37) A. The purpose of this section is to provide for Metro to accept potential liability for claims filed against cities and counties pursuant to ORS 197 . 352 (Ballot Measure 37) as a result of the cities ' and counties ' good faith implementation of Metro Code Sections 3 . 07 . 1310 through 3 . 07 . 1370 . As a corollary of accepting financial and (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 106 84 administrative responsibility for these claims, Metro seeks the authority and cooperation of cities and counties in the evaluation and settlement of claims . B. Provided that cities and counties meet the requirements set out below, Metro shall indemnify a city or county for any claim made against a city or county based on its implementation of the requirements of Metro Code Sections 3 . ❑7 . 131❑ through 3 . ❑7 . 137❑ . In order to receive the benefits of this provision, a city or county must : 1 . Upon receipt of a written demand for compensation pursuant to ORS 197 . 352, from an owner of private real property located within its jurisdiction alleging that a comprehensive plan amendment or land use regulation adopted or relied upon to comply with the requirements of this title reduces the fair market value of the property, a city or county shall forward a copy of the demand to Metro no later than seven (7) days following receipt of the demand; 2 . Reasonably cooperate with Metro throughout Metro' s consideration and disposition of the claim, including promptly providing Metro with any information related to the property in question, to an assessment of its fair market value, or to the city' s or county' s adoption of the comprehensive plan amendment or land use regulation that is the basis of the demand made pursuant to ORS 197 .352 ; and 3 . Substantially concur with Metro' s recommendation regarding disposition of the claim, which disposition may include, but not be limited to, a cash payment or other compensation, a decision to modify, remove, or not apply the regulation, dismissal of the claim, and the imposition of appropriate conditions . Metro shall forward to the city or county Metro' s recommended disposition of the claim within 12❑ days of Metro' s receipt of notice of the claim from the city or county; provided, however, that if Metro does not provide such recommendation within the 12❑ day deadline then the city or county may dispose of the claim as it determines appropriate and Metro will neither indemnify the city or county for the claim nor use the city' s or county' s decision on the claim as a basis for finding that the city or county is not in compliance with this title . A city or county may also satisfy this requirement by entering into an intergovernmental agreement with Metro in order to grant Metro sufficient authority to implement, on the city or county' s behalf, (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 1❑7 85 Metro' s recommendation regarding the disposition of the claim. (Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Section 5 . ) 3 . 07 . 1360 Program Objectives, Monitoring and Reporting This section describes the program performance objectives, the roles and responsibilities of Metro, cities, counties, and special districts in regional data coordination and inventory maintenance, monitoring and reporting, and program evaluation. A. The following program objectives are established: 1 . Performance objectives : a. Preserve and improve streamside, wetland, and floodplain habitat and connectivity; b. Preserve large areas of contiguous habitat and avoid habitat fragmentation; c . Preserve and improve connectivity for wildlife between riparian corridors and upland wildlife habitat; and d. Preserve and improve special habitats of concern such as native oak habitats, native grasslands, wetlands, bottomland hardwood forests, and riverine islands . 2 . Implementation objectives : a. Increase the use of habitat-friendly development throughout the region; and b. Increase restoration and mitigation actions to compensate for adverse effects of new and existing development on ecological function. B. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. 1 . Metro will monitor the region' s progress toward meeting the vision of conserving, protecting, and restoring the region' s fish and wildlife habitat and the intent of this title by: a. Developing and monitoring regional indicators and targets as set forth in Table 3 . 07-13e to evaluate progress in achieving the four (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 108 86 performance objectives described in subsection (A) (1) of this section; b. Developing and monitoring regional indicators as set forth in Table 3 . 07-13e to evaluate progress in achieving the two implementation objectives described in subsection (A) (2) of this section; c . Collaborating with local, state, and federal agencies and non-governmental organizations in carrying out field studies and data sharing to increase understanding of the health of the region' s watersheds and to identify restoration opportunities and priorities; and d. Preparing and presenting monitoring and program evaluation reports to Metro Council no later than December 31, 2❑❑6, and by December 31 of each even-numbered year thereafter. 2 . Metro will practice adaptive management by using the results of monitoring studies and the availability of new information to assess whether the goals, objectives, and targets of this title are being achieved. C. Reporting Requirements for Cities and Counties . 1 . Cities and counties shall report to Metro no later than December 31, 2007, and by December 31 of each odd- numbered year thereafter on their progress in using voluntary and incentive-based education, acquisition, and restoration habitat protection efforts; and 2 . At least 45 days prior to a city' s or county' s final public hearing on a proposed new or amended ordinance or regulation relating to protection of, or mitigation of damage to, habitat, trees or other vegetation, cities and counties shall mail written notice of the proposed ordinance or regulation to Metro. Cities and counties that require applications for land use approvals or building, grading, or tree removal permits to include documentation that the development meets habitat, tree, or vegetation protection and mitigation requirements adopted by a special district, including any county service district established pursuant to ORS chapter 451, shall mail written notice to Metro of any proposed new or amended ordinance or regulation relating to protection of, or mitigation of damage to, trees or other vegetation that is proposed by such a (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 109 87 special district at least 45 days prior to the special district' s final public hearing on the proposed new or amended ordinance or regulation. D. Regional data coordination and maintenance. 1 . Metro will act as the regional coordinator for Geographic Information System (GIS) data used to create and maintain the Regionally Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat Inventory Map and other data relevant to program implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. To carry out this role cities and counties shall provide Metro with local data in a timely fashion and in a form compatible with Metro' s GIS program. To the extent that such data is collected by county service districts established pursuant to ORS chapter 451, then the county in which the county service district operates shall comply with this section. Such data shall include : a. Adopted and revised Local Wetland Inventories approved by the Division of State Lands and those determined to be locally significant under ORS 197 .279 (3) (b) ; b. Wetland mitigation sites approved by the Division of State Lands or U.S . Army Corps of Engineers; c . For cities and counties that have not carried out Local Wetland Inventories, wetland boundaries delineated using accepted protocols by Division of State Lands or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; d. Revised or updated local surface stream inventories; e. Revised or updated 100-year Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) flood area maps or revisions to the 1996 area of inundation maps to incorporate FEMA-approved floodplain map revisions or floodplain fills approved by the U.S . Army Corps of Engineers; f . Completed restoration and enhancement projects; and g. Revised or updated Metro Habitats of Concern data layer. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 110 88 2 . Metro will periodically update its Regionally Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat Inventory for use in program monitoring and evaluation. Metro will maintain a study area boundary one mile beyond the perimeter of the Metro boundary and Metro Urban Growth Boundary. (Ordinance No. 05-l077C, Sec. 5 . ) 3 . 07 . 1370 Future Metro Urban Growth Boundary Expansion Areas The Metro Inventory Map identifies regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat within the entire Metro boundary, including areas outside of the Metro UGB at the time this title was adopted. As described in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1320, the Metro Council has designated as Habitat Conservation Areas the regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat that has been identified as riparian Class I and II habitat within the Metro boundary. In addition, the Metro Council has also determined that the regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat identified as upland wildlife Class A and B habitat that is currently outside of the Metro UGB shall be designated as Habitat Conservation Areas at such time that those areas are brought within the Metro UGB. Territory where the Metro UGB may expand includes both areas within the current Metro boundary and areas outside of the current Metro boundary. A. New Urban Territory That Was Previously Within the Metro Boundary. The Metro Inventory Map already identifies the regionally significant upland wildlife Class A and B habitat in territory within the current Metro boundary but outside the current Metro UGB. At the time such territory is brought within the Metro UGB, consistent with Title 11 of this functional plan, Metro Code Sections 3 . 07 . 1110 et seq. , Metro shall update its inventory of regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat for such territory using the same methodology used by Metro to establish the Metro Inventory Map. Based on the updated Metro Inventory Map, Metro shall prepare a Habitat Conservation Areas Map for such new territory, as described in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 1320 (B) , using the 2040 Design Types that are assigned to such territory to determine the area' s urban development value . B. New Urban Territory That Was Previously Outside of the Metro Boundary. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 111 89 At the time such territory is brought within the Metro UGB, consistent with Title 11 of this functional plan, Metro Code Sections 3 . ❑7 . 111❑ et seq. , Metro shall prepare an inventory of regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat for such territory using the same methodology used by Metro to establish the Metro Inventory Map. Upon adoption of such inventory, Metro shall update its Metro Inventory Map to include such information. Based on the updated Metro Inventory Map, Metro shall prepare a Habitat Conservation Areas Map for such new territory, as described in Metro Code Section 3 . 07 . 132❑ (B) , using the 2❑40 Design Types that are assigned to such territory to determine the area' s urban development value . C. Metro recognizes that the assigned 2040 Design Types may change as planning for territory added to the Metro UGB progresses, and that the relevant Habitat Conservation Area designations will also change as a result of the 2❑4❑ Design Type changes during such planning. (Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec . 5 . ) (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 112 90 Table 3.07-13 a: Method for Identifying Habitat Conservation Areas ("HCA") Other areas: Fish&wildlife Parks and Open habitat High Urban Medium Urban Low Urban Spaces,no design classification development development development types outside value value value3 UGB Class I Riparian. Moderate HCA High HCA High HCA High HCA/ High HCA+4 Class II Riparian Low HCA. Low HCA Moderate HCA Moderate HCA/ High HCA+4 Class A Upland No HCA No HCA No HCA No HCA 1 Wildlife High FICA51 High HCA+4 Class A Upland No HCA No HCA No HCA No HCA 1 Wildlife High HCA51 High HCA+4 NOTE: The default urban development value of property is as depicted on the Metro Habitat Urban Development Value Map. The Metro 2040 Design Type designations provided in the following footnotes are only for use when a city or county is determining whether to make an adjustment pursuant to Metro Code Section 3.07.1340(E)(5). Primary 2040 design types:Regional Centers,Central City,Town Centers,and Regionally Significant Industrial Areas 2 Secondary 2040 design types:Main Streets,Station Communities,Other Industrial Areas,and Employment Centers 3 Tertiary 2040 design types: Inner and Outer Neighborhoods,Corridors 4 Cities and counties shall give Class I and II riparian habitat and Class A and B upland wildlife habitat in parks designated as natural areas even greater protection than that afforded to High Habitat Conservation Areas,as provided in Metro Code Section 3.07.1340(A)(5). 5 All Class A and B upland wildlife habitat in publicly-owned parks and open spaces,except for parks and open spaces where the acquiring agency clearly identified that it was acquiring the property to develop it for active recreational uses,shall be considered High HCAs. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 113 91 Table 3.07-13b: Method for Identifying Habitat Conservation Areas ("HCA") in Future Metro Urban Growth Boundary Expansion Areas Other areas: Fish&wildlife Parks and Open habitat High Urban Medium Urban Low Urban Spaces,no design classification development development development types es outside value value value UGB Class I Riparian Moderate HCA High HCA High HCA High HCA/ High HCA+4 Class II Low HCA Low HCA Moderate HCA Moderate HCA/ Riparian High HCA+4 Class A Upland Low HCA Moderate HCA Moderate HCA High HCA/ Wildlife High HCA5/ High HCA+4 Class B Upland Low HCA Low HCA Moderate HCA Moderate HCA/ Wildlife High HCA51 High HCA+4 NOTE: The default urban development value of property is as depicted on the Metro Habitat Urban Development Value Map. The Metro 2040 Design Type designations provided in the following footnotes are only for use when a city or county is determining whether to make an adjustment pursuant to Metro Code Section 3.07.1340(E)(5). 1 Primary 2040 design types:Regional Centers,Central City,Town Centers,and Regionally Significant Industrial Areas 2 Secondary 2040 design types:Main.Streets,Station Communities,Other Industrial Areas,and Employment Centers 3 Tertiary 2040 design types:Inner and Outer Neighborhoods,Corridors 4 Cities and counties shall give Class I and II riparian habitat and Class A and B upland wildlife habitat in parks designated as natural areas even greater protection than that afforded to High Habitat Conservation Areas,as provided in Metro Code Section 3.07.1340(A)(5). 5 All Class A and B upland wildlife habitat in publicly-owned parks and open spaces,except for parks and open spaces where the acquiring agency clearly identified that it was acquiring the property to develop it for active recreational uses,shall be considered High HCAs. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 114 92 Table 3.07-13c. Habitat-friendly Development Practices. Part(a): Design and Construction Practices to Minimize Hydrologic Impacts 1. Amend disturbed soils to original or higher level of porosity to regain infiltration and stormwater storage capacity. 2. Use pervious paving materials for residential driveways,parking lots,walkways,and within centers of cul-de-sacs. 3. Incorporate stormwater management in road right-of-ways. 4. Landscape with rain gardens to provide on-lot detention,filtering of rainwater,and groundwater recharge. 5. Use green roofs for runoff reduction,energy savings,improved air quality,and enhanced aesthetics. 6. Disconnect downspouts from roofs and direct the flow to vegetated infiltration/filtration areas such as rain gardens. 7. Retain rooftop runoff in a rain barrel for later on-lot use in lawn and garden watering. 8. Use multi-functional open drainage systems in lieu of more conventional curb-and-gutter systems. 9. Use bioretention cells as rain gardens in landscaped parking lot islands to reduce runoff volume and filter pollutants. 10. Apply a treatment train approach to provide multiple opportunities for storm water treatment and reduce the possibility of system failure. 11. Reduce sidewalk width and grade them such that they drain to the front yard of a residential lot or retention area. 12. Reduce impervious impacts of residential driveways by narrowing widths and moving access to the rear of the site. 13. Use shared driveways. 14. Reduce width of residential streets,depending on traffic and parking needs. 15. Reduce street length,primarily in residential areas,by encouraging clustering and using curvilinear designs. 16. Reduce cul-de-sac radii and use pervious vegetated islands in center to minimize impervious effects,and allow them to be utilized for truck maneuvering/loading to reduce need for wide loading areas on site. 17. Eliminate redundant non-ADA sidewalks within a site(i.e.,sidewalk to all entryways and/or to truck loading areas may be unnecessary for industrial developments). 18. Minimize car spaces and stall dimensions,reduce parking ratios,and use shared parking facilities and structured parking. 19. Minimize the number of stream crossings and place crossing perpendicular to stream channel if possible. 20. Allow narrow street right-of-ways through stream corridors whenever possible to reduce adverse impacts of transportation corridors. Part Design Construction Practices to Minimize Impacts on Wildlife Corridors and FishPassage e �� gg..........:,..::::..... 1. Carefully integrate fencing into the landscape to guide animals toward animal crossings under,over,or around transportation corridors. 2. Use bridge crossings rather than culverts wherever possible. 3. If culverts are utilized,install slab,arch or box type culverts,preferably using bottomless designs that more closely mimic stream bottom habitat. 4. Design stream crossings for fish passage with shelves and other design features to facilitate terrestrial wildlife passage. 5. Extend vegetative cover through the wildlife crossing in the migratory route,along with sheltering areas. Part c Miscellaneous Other Ha ztat-Frien � Desx nConstructionan . ... Practices s 1. Use native plants throughout the development(not just in HCA). 2. Locate landscaping(required by other sections of the code)adjacent to HCA. 3. Reduce light-spill off into HCAs from development. 4. Preserve and maintain existing trees and tree canopy coverage,and plant trees,where appropriate,to maximize future tree canopy coverage. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 115 93 Table 3.07-13d: Locating Boundaries of Class I and II Riparian Areas Development/Vegetation Status' Distance from Developed Woody Forest Canopy Water Feature areas not vegetation (closed to open providing Low structure (shrub and forest canopy)5 vegetative vegetation or scattered forest covert open soils3 canopy)4 Surface Streams 0-50' _ Class II 6 Class 17 Class I Class I 50'-100' Class II 6 Class I Class I 100'-150' Class II if Class II if Class II 6 slope>25%6 slope>25%6 150'-200' Class II if Class II if Class II if slope>25%6 slope>25%6 slope>25%6 Wetlands(Wetland feature itself is a Class I Riparian Area) 0-100' Class IT 6 Class I Class I 100'-150' Class II 6 Flood Areas Within 300' of Class I Class I Class I river or surface stream More than 300' 8 Class II 6 Class II 6 Class I from river or surface stream 0-100' from Class II 6'9 Class II 6 edge of flood area I Development/vegetative cover status is identified on the Metro Vegetative Cover Map(on file in the Metro Council office). The vegetative cover type assigned to any particular area was based on two factors: the type of vegetation observed in aerial photographs and the size of the overall contiguous area of vegetative cover to which a particular piece of vegetation belonged. 2 "Developed areas not providing vegetative cover"are areas that lack sufficient vegetative cover to meet the one-acre minimum mapping unit for any type of vegetative cover. 3 "Low structure vegetation or open soils"means areas that are part of a contiguous area one acre or larger❑f grass,meadow,crop-lands,or areas of open soils located within 300 feet of a surface stream (low structure vegetation areas may include areas of shrub vegetation less than one acre in size if they are contiguous with areas of grass,meadow,crop-lands,orchards,Christmas tree farms,holly farms, or areas of open soils located within 300 feet of a surface stream and together form an area of one acre in size or larger). 4 "Woody vegetation"means areas that are part of a contiguous area one acre or larger of shrub or open or scattered forest canopy(less than 60%crown closure)located within 300 feet of a surface stream. 5 "Forest canopy"means areas that are part of a contiguous grove of trees of one acre or larger in area with approximately 60%or greater crown closure,irrespective of whether the entire grove is within 200 feet of the relevant water feature. 6 Areas that have been identified as habitats of concern,as designated on the Metro Habitats of Concern Map(on file in the Metro Council office and copies available from the Metro Data Resource (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 116 94 Center),shall be treated as Class I riparian habitat areas in all cases,subject to the provision of additional information that establishes that they do not meet the criteria used to identify habitats of concern as described in Metro's Technical Report for Fish and Wildlife. Examples of habitats of concern include: Oregon white oak woodlands,bottomland hardwood forests,wetlands,native grasslands,riverine islands or deltas,and important wildlife migration corridors. 7 Except that areas within 50 feet of surface streams shall be Class II riparian areas if their vegetation status is"Low structure vegetation or open soils,"and if they are high gradient streams. High gradient streams are identified on the Metro Vegetative Cover Map. If a property owner believes the gradient of a stream was incorrectly identified,then the property owner may demonstrate the correct classification by identifying the channel type using the methodology described in the Oregon Watershed Assessment Manual,published by the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board,and appended to the Metro's Riparian Corridor and Wildlife Habitat Inventories Report,Attachment I to Exhibit F to this ordinance. 8 If development prior to the effective date of this title within a contiguous,undeveloped flood area(to include contiguous flood areas on adjacent properties)that was not mapped as having any vegetative cover has reduced the size of that contiguous flood area to less than one half of an acre in size,then the remaining flood area shall also be considered a developed flood area and shall not be identified as habitat. Only if within 300 feet of a river or surface stream. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 117 95 Table 3.07-13e: Performance and Implementation Objectives and Indicators Targeted Performance Targets Condition Based Example Indicators Objectives on 2004 Metro Inventory Performance la. 10%increase la. 2004 Baseline • Percentage of acres within 50 feet Objective 1: in forest and other Condition of streams(on each side)and vegetated acres (regional data): wetlands with any vegetation Preserve and within 50 feet of • 64%vegetated improve streams(on each • 14,000 vegetated • Percentage of acres within 50 feet streamside, side)and wetlands acres of streams(on each side)and wetland and flood in each • .. 1�/� ncreas� � wetlands with forest canopy area habitat and subwatershed over connectivity. the next 10 yearsPercentage of acres between 50 and ' '' � :ere: � �'=` 1 f e of streams(on each side) (2015). ;mereas e�n ;.; 5 0 feet a ve getation wetlands with an ve etat o n ....:.. .:. .............:: �.... :... • Percentage of acres between 50 and lb. 5%increase in lb. 2004 Baseline g forest and other Condition 150 feet of streams(on each side) vegetated acres (regional data): and wetlands with forest canopy within 50 to 150 • 59%vegetated feet of streams(on • 15,250 vegetated • Number of acres of Class 1 and II each side)and acres Riparian Habitat wetlands in each o` subwatershed over '�` 62/o:ve etated • Percentage of flood area acres that 10 years ar e developed* r e the next Y acre;�ncr�ase, 2015 in vegetation.‘.‘ > e �:ears ` l c. No more than lc. 2004 Baseline * "Developed" for purposes of this 1 increase in Condition indicator means the methodology used developed flood (regional data): in Metro's Fish and Wildlife Inventory area acreage_in • 10%of all flood to identify developed flood areas. each subwatershed area acres are over the next 10 developed years(2015). • 3,450 total acres of developed flood areas 10%increase: : 3,$00 total acres vela f1':O areas' (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 118 96 Targeted Performance Targets Condition Based Example Indicators Objectives on 2004 Metro Inventory Performance 2a. Preserve 75% 2a. 2004 Baseline Objective 2: of vacant Class A Condition: • Number of acres of Class A habitat and B upland • 15,500 acres of Preserve large wildlife habitat in vacant Class A • Number of acres of Class B habitat areas of contiguous each subwatershed and B upland habitat and avoid over the next 10 wildlife habitat • Number of wildlife habitat patches fragmentation. years 2015 . � � that contain 30 acres or more of 75:/o:retention: 11,600• acres ofupland wildlife habitat .......:....... vacant ......................,.:..... Class and 13 upjancl wildlife h eta a t� `'' remaining ..:.:..:....:. ...:..:.::.::...: ...:...:.:.:::.. :....:.:..... ...:......:.:.:..... 2b. Of the upland 2b. 2004 Baseline habitat preserved, Condition: retain 80%of the • 23,400 acres of number of patches upland habitat in 30 acres or larger 133 patches that in each contain 30 acres subwatershed over or more of upland the next 10 years wildlife habitat (2015). 80%retention: 106and habitat patches that contain p 30 acres or more of upland habitat Performance 3a. Preserve 90% 3a. 2004 Baseline • Number and miles of all wildlife Objective 3: of forested wildlife Condition: corridors habitat acres • 28,300 acres • Corridor quality:%of habitat acres Preserve and located within 300 within 1,453 within corridors with a vegetative improve feet of surface patches of width of 200 ft connectivity for streams in each forested wildlife • Acres of wildlife patches with a wildlife between subwatershed over habitat located connectivity score of 3 or greater riparian corridors the next 10 years within 300 feet of • Acres and number of forested and upland wildlife 2015 . surface streams p wildlife habitat patches(forest habitat. ` o 90/%retention ; canopyor wetland with a total ... ...... • 25,500 acres of combined size greater than 2 acres) orested w within 300 feet of surface streams habitat located `''``` t tcompared to acres of the patches wi thin' 0 feet' .. :::.. n oflocated outside of 300 feet of su ace streams surface streams. (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 119 97 Targeted Performance Targets Condition Based Example Indicators Objectives g on 2004 Metro Inventory Performance 3b. Preserve 80% 3b. 2004 Baseline • Acres and number of non-forested Objective 3 of non forested Condition: wildlife patches(shrub or low (continued): wildlife habitat 14,400 acres within structure/open soils with a total acres located 1,633 patches of combined size greater than 2 acres) within 300 feet of non-forested located within 300 feet of a surface surface streams in wildlife habitat streams. each subwatershed located within 300 over the next 10 feet of surface years(2015). streams 80%retention:' 5 acres of non forested`wildlife habitat located within 30 0`'feet ee _surface streams Performance 4a. Preserve 95% 4a. 2004 Baseline • Number of acres of wetland Objective 4: of habitats of Condition: • Number of acres of white oak concern acres in • 3 3%of all habitat woodland Preserve and each subwatershed designated as • Number of acres of bottomland improve special over the next 10 HOCs hardwood forest habitats of years(2015). • 26,700 total acres • Number of acres of vegetated concern. of HOCs riverine islands 95%retention • Number of acres of key connector • 25,400 total acres habitat(list out HOC connectors) of HOCs (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 120 98 Implementation Objectives Example Indicators Implementation • Number of jurisdictions that allow or require LID Objective A: • Number of jurisdictions providing LID incentives • Percentage of region in forest canopy Increase the use of habitat-friendly • Percentage of impervious area development throughout the region • B-IBI(benthic index of biological integrity)scores Implementation ■ Number of restoration projects in one year Objective B: • Number of mitigation projects in one year ■ Acres and distribution by resource class of habitat Increase restoration and mitigation inventory actions to compensate of adverse effects • Number of culverts that need improvement of new and existing development on ■ Number of watersheds in region with adopted action plans ecological function (Ordinance No. 05-1077C, Sec . 5 . ) (Effective 4/25/07) 3 . 07 - 121 99 11 .2 All ITY OF LAKE SSWEGO ... 151F' OUNCIL EPORT eiquoti TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Joel B. Komarek, RE., Project Director- LOIS SUBJECT: Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer DATE: January 26, 2009 ACTION No Council action is requested. The LOIS Project Director will make a presentation to the Council regarding the LOIS project. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Efforts to replace the Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer(LOIS) have been on-going since 1999. A wealth of information has been gathered, reviewed, discussed and processed by the community, elected council members, regulatory agencies and the LOIS project team consisting of City staff and the City's engineering firm, Brown and Caldwell and its subconsuitants. This comprehensive pre-design process led to a decision by the Council in July 2007 to select the in-lake buoyant option as the preferred design approach for the replacement of LOIS (see attached Exhibit A). DISCUSSION At the February 3, 2009 study session, Project Director, Joel Komarek will make a presentation to the Council on current project status to include the following topics: • Project Delivery Approach A Project Phases • Project Schedule • Access 2 Budget • Budget Management 101 Council Report January 26, 2009 Page 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A— LOIS Background paper Sustainability has been considered as part of this recommendation. NIA Reviewed by: ( "1' D ailment Director POI Finance Director 41/1 fiN City At,. ' - AOk Alex illpir re City Ma -ager 1 02 The Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer Project (LOIS) Project Team: LOIS Project Team City.of Lake Oswego West End Building 4101 Kruse Way 503-699-7466 www.loisnews.com. Budget: . Approximately$100 million. The project will be financed through Revenue Bonds. Council Action: City Council adopted the interceptor replacement option on July 10„ 2007. Council voted to finance the project through Revenue Bonds in July 2008. Council approved purchase of stainless steel wire rope on December 2, 2008 and stainless steel manholes on December 16, 2008. Next Steps: Several projects related to preparing for the construction of the . interceptor replacement are currently underway including Bryant • Road pump station planning and design, project materials purchases, Kelok/Mapie sewer construction, interceptor design finalization, and McVey staging site purchase. The City Council receives bi-monthly updates on the project at regular Council meetings. The LOIS Project Team staff provides continuous public outreach • through meeting coordination, website updates, list serve emails, group presentations and printed communication. ••. . •••••••,••••••• _• •: EXHIBIT • InamseitAilogaim VenialIPOOPOISMO 1 03 The Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer(LOIS) Project Background In 2000,the City began examining solutions to prevent sewer overflows in the lines leading to the main lake interceptor. At the time, it was thought that the overflow problem could be corrected simply by adding an additional pipeline for increased capacity. Subsequent in-depth analysis of the condition of the existing interceptor and its support system and extensive geologic exploration of the lake bottom showed that the line could fail structurally in a moderate earthquake. After an extensive alternatives analysis,the City Council adopted a buoyant,tethered,gravity pipeline system on July 10, 2007, as the preferred solution to resolve interceptor issues. The system is designed to be anchored to the bedrock beneath the lake bottom, kept afloat about 15 feel:beneath the surface of the lake and shaped in an s-curve. These three features working together provide for a consistent slope that will enable gravity flow to the Tryon Creek Water Wastewater Treatment Plan. As of January 2009, project design is about 90%complete.The project team anticipates final design of the in-lake portions of the interceptor to be completed in June 2009,with construction preparation beginning in April 2009. Issue Capacity, The interceptor was designed to handle sewer flows from about 3,500 developed acres. Today it handles flows from about 4,50.0.acres. Prolonged periods of rain cause raw sewage to flow out of manholes into the lake or onto streets near the lake. Such spills violate the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). In February 2007,the City entered into a Mutual Agreement and Order(MAO)with the State Department of Environmental Quality(DEO)to establish a strict compliance schedule and measures the City will take to reduce overflows until the interceptor upgrade is constructed. Structural Soundness; The existing interceptor is 45 years old. More than 9,000 feet of the line in the main portion of the lake is supported on wood and steel piles, designed and constructed at a time when local seismic conditions were not well understood and seismic design standards were much less stringent. In addition,the steel pile system is corroding;which weakens the steel supports,further reducing their strength.The pipeline and its pile support system will not likely survive ground shaking from a moderate earthquake. Engineering studies predict that seismic ground movement sufficient to cause widespread failure of the pile support system has a 15%chance of occurring within 25 years. Severe breaks in the pipeline would cause millions of .gallons of raw sewage to discharge into Oswego Lake. Additionally, up to 15 million gallons per day of lake water could drain through the pipe, potentially overwhelming the Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant and spilling to the Willamette River. Options Examined Five alternative solutions emerged from the initial design phase including 1) buoyant,gravity, truss supported pipe, 2)buoyant,gravity,tethered, 3)buoyant, gravity, steel pipe,4)steel pipe, . • •• . .. .•, , ,5 • a... ... . . . .. . n... .• .. 1 05 pile supported, gravity, and 5) around-the lake, pumped. A brief explanation of each is found below as well as the cost comparison for these options. 1. Buoyant, gravity, truss supported pipe: Floating, foam-filled boxes tethered to the lake bottom would support either steel pipe or plastic pipe at spans ranging from 90-125 feet. 2. Buoyant, gravity, tethered: (The selected option). Steel cables anchored to the bedrock beneath the lake bottom hold down a buoyant plastic pipe about 15 feet beneath the lake's surface. 3. Buoyant,gravity, steel pipe: Replaces the majority of the in-water interceptor with steel piles supported on floating pontoons. 4. Steel pipe, pile supported gravity: Steel piles driven to bedrock in the lake. 5. Pumped system (partially in lake and partially out of lake): Sitting of several pump stations at locations around the lake to pump wastewater to a gravity interceptor located inland. The benefits of the buoyant, tethered,gravity solution: The in-lake, buoyant, high density polyethylene pipeline, tethered beneath the lake surface, was chosen over the pumping option for a variety of reasons: 1. Lower life cycle cost (capital and design life maintenance costs). 2. Lower financial risk of construction cost increases. 3. No need to acquire six additional sites on which to locate pump stations. 4. Relatively fewer disruptions to private properties and roads. 5. Components of the system are better able to withstand earthquakes and corrosion. 106 Life Cycle Cost-Comparison of Options cotl..f4takol s i,r, VS ,....,7 z •::'"' ' .;-' ,.'; '•• - ' -' '.:' '','•''.,-',• ''•''.•.-:.•'2i.:,•.--;::.'..-,..,','•;'.-:,1,,,,,,..c.:','',:-„•, •::,, ';• i „ ' ';: i '-'3, ...,-, 71, ,'2 '. , - ;,.,,, -' ,•.-,.',- 1"-:..••••,'•:::':•,':::',Z.:•;',,•:•,-,.-'.'4,-,•••'..",',-,,:r-,-'-'• ' • " ' , • 1 ' - 1 'fl, ' '''''•;:t r. ;:34 ••i.•.:,ii',:qi::,;:,,l':?:','A'AZ: R 1:IPe!, :,: :;1 ,N''S:;;Vi' -,..!;.?:: --''. ' - • '' - i— '. ';•,- ,.. :,-'-.••'''',•,. • ,, ,-„ '''''''' ''i' ''''A (,,4..;;;';:iC,•,:=?:010,;',.:Attgg.Z1,,,W..t,:.,;,:r'j,i14,..',.:(,''':,.•,'4'.,,tf,:',,,'f':'''!'''''It:':,:'''-'')/.'-'2'...:,f;:.:!'-.;-;•L''':-,',''',-I,:::::•',,'T:-:::':,,:•,,, -. •- '' $ „ I '''•:e, ;;, :,.:,- 7 ,',.- - - ''''-''' ., •:;•.-„ : ,'.:I' - • '-- •' ' -if. - - 1'' •- - ','- ' ,' '-s-1 -.i': -•. - .1 - • ' - i'- ' ' I t '.';',/, i . --•,,.... -- '.'.',,,.-.. : „'• : . _.','„ ,f•.,,"-:, ,.-t. . '; • , , ..:-,-.. i •' ,• '-i,,...',,,,:'•_ „ -1 . -'.. ' ---'• ' 1.' ' '''_E, 7, i • • ,- '. ',, ,.-' •;',.-- i•. ''-•: ,:':'',-1,:2:.'' -'. "",''',.'1.„-::,`',,,,'.,. '••-U•- - A , 1 i ;,;:''.., i;,- ',-'•--..- - — --.• • •• ••• •--.,.-,-..-/---, f . •.-i :i rr: '. .! ti 1 ' • '.'-,'',,,',.='--..'-'-'---7'.•.•7'-..•;','-.';:::';:l''.''::::::..',.',--c1:::1:;....':::::::.;;,--,-FC:'''''. - ' . 'IV . - —3,i' • 1 ':''..; '' •--, ". ,-. .,,,,,,,,,,i,"::::tit.5::i. --P,N'is5•,,,,,,,,...::,13-,:.,;72,T.•;4r,:'=1...;:,',.:2.gr,':-:•,,:4.':,:fli'::-;-::-:,,,,:•:?Xc :-. $ -• i ' ,,,, ,,,'?. I .•''''' : JR3C'.-S'!!:.F:i),FW.,, ,,.4',,1:,F.,'..-,,,:)..',Ff.,,,-,. .,U.,..,-...,::-...-..r.'`',':•,,:;:.,,:-:.•,..-r,-,::''';'...,-:.':1,1',...,'„i,:: ::,,:.',.:::,, ',' 1• ' ' i. ''''5. 'Z' ,''''. 'i-:,11::,',Zi'`,:i..i.IV:g'•''',..4''.',.','.?,:';',.-...:':.':::',...:'k,'.2,;:•...,•:::'''''•.'-',,,',-,7_:'::,';:i,,r./•ft.::::;:',...,!:,F:, ..,,,, ;'_.."1 ,,,„,,,,,,.., -,-,,,- •:-,?•:,-,-,,,:75,,',4;.-.4,:,,,,,,,::::::::::7:':.:•::,--...•,.f,-,,,,,,,,,,,.,1:•.;,7,-y....„„:„.,,,,--„,7--,,-,,,,... ,,,...,,,,, :T; -; , ,i , 1 . , •i ;-,„ [ '',44 1 i - ', -i,.- -- ,-. ',•ii,'''-," ,i- , --11 . , .../.. - F.,3 - ii, , , 1, ,,,,., ,,,,,,,: , . •:. , _, -;', --,t',' i .- -:,- --.. , i' -'-..., .•'.'i:.,-,--.„,„1:,..';'-.:-...,..if,---.-_-,.--,•'. - '-'-; - 't. - ',' q 1 , '•:; C',1---•":2: '•-•2',.:','''',,'-'.'...':;,:::::_,,,,.::,,-.',.,:-.:-/•;•:•....:'?.':ii-:,',:,;:;:,r:';':: .';:[::','../:i:;4 ' ' , ' . ' i • , ,. ,.. !,::0;V:,:,at-•;trin:;j:.',:. ,',';::,..:::•;,-;:'::::,,,..•,.R.:„: ;•.0,,,i,:,:,::,:=,,,,,:.;2:,',..,::::!.&::_::,-;„:-.•,::::.:' ,,,,..;,, : ......., , :1,. ',',.',',. ,,,,,,,r,',.k,k,.±6i:,..,;;;;;t2lit..:1,0:',...4.:',,T,1:: ''.::::,•-'-" ''.q.',,,,:,:-...;,!.:.''..T..::.:::':',-;:::'....',..i.'::',',:-.'•,:..H.. '.: •• 4, '''''' '4:1'..i::': ',-,a,::,Y,''',..,4,.Y.P.f.1:1'..44:',F',,,!,w,,,..',,--:-,•...'.',',,,:..:',.; ,.:.,:-,,T,,,.:,,,•„„•,,,,,,,!,-,- -.,,,,. , ...., ..,,. -,...„...,,,,,,,,,•,,,„„,....,,,,,,,,,,..,-,,..,..,,,,...„,,,,,.....•.,,,..,,,•,-,.,,,,,,,, .,.... •, '' .',,--,..,,,,,,..:,-,,,....1,",,,,.0'''',7•", , -—- ' '' ' ' $ ''. r•-3 1 4444,4t.P.,..4.1.5.. '4 '44 '''':4 ''k''''4 44 44 44 4 4 "4 "'":":::,J;:,r•,','';.„.'---,:i'li.'"'''''''',::,''''''', '''' ':•'''''''::-, I,''''' ' • , • '1 ' , . ' ':--:' 1 -ti: , .' .•:.' , 1 * i - : :„--•.' '-----'';',., ''-'''-:- '-'2., . ' . 2 H.,--„ ' '', -,: '', l„- ,,,k,-, '1,,,'. ' '' ' -'''':.:''''2•;:-:'::-'•'''''' ''',' :,:?-:', ,',t-,::',;',:::::'- i'• '''-'.:-',' " ,.6:,, I g, ' •'HI' '..''''';',:.:'-',:i';''';': ' ,:,' ,,,-;;';'.::,•'„--:.:-,, _-',:::;,,,,',::,:;,•'1'„?'.,::::,,:,„'S:-;.,_,,:,,:,..._:',,„:„:,,, -:',, ,-. ,' 1;:,,, ! ..t ,,,1 , ,,,:.. '..-,..,-„,„,,,'„,,,,-;:,:,,,,.:,-„,-;,,,,-,:,..,,::::,,,,,i-.;._-',..----,,, ,,---,-'''''''''''''' '•''' ' , ..... /,,,.,_, 0.,,,•: :.,..,::::;,'.4.,,,c,-,,,,,,]ra,,,,z416::::I:IF,•3'-;_eg.,i'it'':-!_Z;;:1-i-;_,.,:."...:•?:::_;:-_': -,5:(-:::_:4;.•_',.::•f.-:...?..-::::,-;',Y.:.'::::;,:,.';;•:,. t t, ,,,,,,„ , ., • ,-A. 4 11.#::::::.'.',72::,,:i:,:_i..:z.,:ii,,...4'i•,..,... .•:-;.!g':ii,: .•.;',i,?v,-..li.,-!if":F4',...,,,,,:i:!i:.::::-,,,;::::::::',.;;',:-,::',..i,_;.:--:;:::::gii,.,::•if • .::, , -, . i '7 .' '''''.- ''.-. • '' - ' 7i's, •.,]' , '• x,...'. Rilt-1;0.,44 j'fet-,g.igi.1 ..1:g- ',g' '4444il'i.'ti:';:::i',':'iill-'.''::,4 . ,,,, ,,,.,,,,„,,,, „:: „,,..,i,_, 5 '4' grksg•A'gv4. , . ::.,•, , ,,,:•,-, -,;- -,,,, .-- ,' --.',",':,',';',0.',1: T.' t „„ ,,,,,,,,,„;,,'/..,,-::::::;;;;,;5,;.,-::: ,,, .,,- . A ' ' 1 12, k , - ,:,:: ,,,:::-:- :''-';:,' : ' - I- , -±- -,t-'-'"-'' ' :1 j, t' ' ' ..' _., , ,.. •'. ..., ', , ..,,; .. ' .::;•,,,--',,:„,, . i _ -. A: = •:- = i i '', .,',' -,,-',..,-L:-:_-_,-.'..,2::,,,... ,,''._::::'-•:'-'.':7--.:-,_ ,,,:::,;;--- - ';'=;.:-,,•,,,,;,.;L:,.4ii,.:i,',':,.::,_6,'1,,',•,,::-';5,'Z'i,,.:';:.1',7::'::'',l..:i'r:::':;. ',.'jiF'L';':.'A'--1 :t!j:Efi'.'A'd:.,i . . ,..,._. l':',1-,3.f.'•-.t::';::.',.c,'il'•.'4,'".4:,-.Aca,,,,7-..:j.,.':,,,,7....,',!:,%:!::::::::,;s,Y.':4:-gs,'.:,,',;tligg,.7',-::--.TR:yr;1...,,,,, ',,,. ''-' .•,ifi:f-14.?..W.'i...1:N:A.:4--,:'gi'•4,!::::....;::..-,'„,.:[:)...j'ik:0::Re:L.:FV,-4.'1'14,:i,q.mr.:,/,:;:6g1::...:,.. . ' ,,,,k1,%:,g,'.4,,,,,,,.;:;..)..04,,,;i5,,,::;.]::,,,,,:e.,:2,:c.•:: ;1',.:. ,.:i.:i. ,_Ik-0,4; -. , g t .,Mg:'1KA:Z,:,.p:9:: :!.1i:',i, :,:';i:,,,:•:'':-,.;: ' -•1,•:::',','..,:at:A'::::4:'::'';'-';'''i)g:i''';;''' '-'- ' '''''''''' ' ' ' ' ' ''': - I' 'fi I :- - '••:;;;,71:: :'(' ,,, '' ':'.',,, '1,:,,,,,,i,,,,,,,j,,,,/:,,,,,i,:,,,, , ,,f,,,,, . •• ' '-.-- - . • • . ,• — . t • , ., ,n ,,:. 3 I 107 DEQ Compliance Schedule The City and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality entered into a Mutual Agreement and Order(MAO) in February 2007. The MAO established milestones toward the start of the interceptor replacement on October 1, 2009. One of the requirements of the MAO is an Overflow Response Plan,which the City has developed. This plan outlines how the city wilt respond to any overflows that could occur until the long term sewer replacement solution is installed. July 16, 2007: Final Phase 2 pre-design report due to DEQ with engineering recommendations on alter :s. August 7, 2007:. Final Council confirmation of replacement alternative selected. August 10,2007: Formal written notice to property owners to begin negotiations for easements/property acquisition. August 15,2007: _„_.. Notice to DEQ that City has commenced easement and property acquisition negotiationif4,, September 1, 2008: 50%complete design October 1,2008: Obtain permits June 1,2009: 100%complete design, easements and property obtained October 1,2009: Start Construction .,• • Financing The total current 75-year present worth "life cycle" cost estimate is approximately $100 million for the in-lake buoyant pipeline gravity system. This estimate may Change somewhat as designs are refined. The City Council voted in July 2008 to finance the LOIS project through revenue bonds. Revenue bonds are repaid through utility bills. Given current cost estimates, a 20-year revenue bond would increase the sewer portion of utility bills by 10% a year from today's average of$340 to $800 in 9 years, remaining at that level until the bonds are paid. Construction Schedule Even though construction of the in-water portions of the project is not scheduled to begin until June 2009, several tasks will take place from now until that time, both in preparation for construction as well as related projects that are not dependent on lake levels. ..,„ „,, „„ • i 1 08 Formation of Lake Oswego Interceptor Sewer Team In June 2008,the City Manager created the LOIS Project team to provide management and oversight throughout the duration of the LOIS Project. The team consists of Joel Komarek, Project Director;Jane Heisler,Communications Director, Pat McDougal, Engineer, Susie Shinn, part time administrative support; and Jeff Selby, Citizen Information Coordinator. The LOIS Project is one of the most significant projects that the City has undertaken in its history. It is an essential service and a large capital expenditure and has financial, environmental,traffic, noise, legal and political impacts that will need to be addressed. Having a team in place to address issues over the life of the project,to interface with the contractors, Council and the public, wilt help to create a smoother construction process. Some of these include: ,,',...,.,..,-,,,,,,...9,,..,,,•...j.,...m,..r..,,,,,-.,,,,,,,,,..-,-,6-,,,,.•,.,..:.,,,,,,,w,,,,,,,,C.,,,Y,M,<,.ti',<,,,,,,,,,wr.,•,....,,,,,,,,n-• r.'w,,,...,,,,,,,,rm,,,...,....,.,,•.r...n...,..,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,n.--.,,,,,,,,,,,,non.n.-',....,,,,,,,,,,..vr,,,F...,,rN,, , ,,1 , ' t t . 1 :i. Fall , Winter 2009 'i Speing 2009-,I, 'Summer f , '..,. • J ,, , . I - k . , 2009„ ...,.., . , •, .___,,,..„,....,,,.,_____„.,,?......._,_<,......„._,pr_,.,....„.,,,," . . ..,4 . • , •.. 6 •i•...,..--,,,,,,,,,o,.....,,....,...rua...a...•.',..r.,,,,,,,,,,,,-.4.-:,,,,'•,,,,,,,,,,, , , , , ,,,,,,,y_,r,,,,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,e,.,...er,,,,,,,C.G•eA'Z,,,'...,•'''..'.,,...''.."... ......'....''''''...... .,'.....',...',.....,., • .. , • • „ . 4 , Securelake'access. „-, .. , 1, " „ ...- , . ,,,,,,,:,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,.,,,,.1,,,,,,,,,,,...•-•,,,,,,.,,,,,,r..., ''''I',, ''...1.',,r1.,0.010 .,..gr,V1,,r,,',...7k1 WM'ST MOM MO gnIMM/Stritifjt,,,r.44...,i,,.., k'ig:K•'5*-RW,,V, •IL,..,J..03,V..0•,-,,,,,,,•,,, O.,,,,,,,;,,,,4,t,:,,,,,,,4,:,,,,,,,,,,,,,P044,,,,,,,,,r,t1,,,,VreM.,87,?.1,-PV Mr,I,MetrarfaMtaTrit.Vt,:,,,,F•Vrgit,,,,i,,,,,,,,,,,„,,,,',.*,.PA,a.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',,--,,,'-'1,,,,,,,,,,,'.7-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Z••,,,,,,,,,›,..,,,,;,,Fe.,,,,,,,,,A4,,L.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ft.,',.,S, 1:Permit,Tionlfr'V e 0' ,,,,E.,-•,,,W,S,..tiIi•;,,,,,e,,,,.1.4,e.,::$3,.0-.14.,:tir,.,,,A.U.,PAggirj.0,M..,,,,-4.g.i•Ig,,,,i,M 6,1,.'R,,I.'40,V,',.‘,c):AFe •ZatY'f.?):',40:A'7'''''•''Z'''Z'''S'g.''j''''''''at...''', '' i il 1 40tli constructulf,,,,,,ifts,,,,R,,,,,,asimagespx,„,z.,,,,,,ff.g.,:„1....,,,„.,,,,-.41,,5„,-..-$,,, ,,,,,,,,40,,,-0, , , ,,,,..,,..„,„„„,...„,.„,,,,,,„:„„,,,,..,,:,.,..„„:, totaWivotip:.-,:aleifiwiiivagli,:nagg,:-- - ,,,.,,,„,.,,,,_„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„,„.,...„,g,',,,,,::,::`,Pithrig,',411„.„.,,,,,,,,,,,,,3,,,,,,,,,a,,,,,•..,,A,fc.v.gk,„:.:,-,K,,,•,,,,,,,F,,ow,,,,.,,,,,,,,.„„, ,,,,,,,-,,,,„,:A-F,v,,,,,,t,4, Bryant- ir ,-.....,-4,,,,,-,,,,,t,- :,--„Mt'<itt:A*Aglg VIRISAW,410--14,,,IF,VP,3,M,-,„e110,4..,',4-NtAY-a,',01,0416,4 Vg•Vitgli-t-figiiigig.nagr 4et40,..§Rft:',„,NA=10042,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,,,,,AA,,,,,-,-.,.,o,=,,,,,,,,c,,,,k,,,,..,,,,,•ng,,,,o,,,,v,-,,,,,,,,,,-,,op-t..,4,--,-.,_:,1-4,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-..,-,44,,,,,,,,,,,,,,k.,,,,,,.rq67,.,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,(.\,..-,,,,r,,,,,,,,,A ,, ,••:,..4..6,,,,e.., ,,,,,P,, ,A,747pRAWgillkaieat 5001`,'AMEN,rair•',;.,-Mragfg;liialg,i?4,,P,';',5',nt.We44.0,4:1,;;A-:,',.1,=`,;:s:-C,P,IP:',/,'K":"4:41,nl'CQMPO:Vaiklf.43.1-1,5 6,P4f,P.:',Vggi-I,%',52.,<,,MOP,',V,Ne0 o:.,--o;am-w-Nl..4..,-',.•:td;',4kRfiec,s,;a:A'eoaf,:*I_V,,z,r,i-V,,,-.g,,..,r'Am-'.,P,,,,F,,,p,.:,--,gw-'4,m<o,f 6',N4,4,..-1,0w5x,-.4,,,,,,,,,,AANT,,,...;,.,,Mmt.-A49.,,,s,.w.,:.,i-,:',.•3,,Aw-A,Avgv.,40.I.40-,,,',y.‘,Tra,,,,-,.z.,,,,k-,o,,,,,-*-,.,;.-AG-k,,A,,,vt-,...,4,-,-t,,,,,,--f„,•,,,,,,,a,,,m,:-6--,K•e,,,,,,,,2,A,P.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,4 •.‘• .-•A-: ..7,-4,1*.,600ntbl.MOVO.S0-00,..Vt'VP.:',.',.,&, 104,,Y40,-',5'T:eflar,,vitnivAN349,-foWN',';',,?A':-.77,0;,,,YRWW01,.w,*,--;kf-TR:V.,,,QN-W:.,z-NV,'-,&•..z!Qt,-.A.',111A,V,,4Q-3-2%.1-•',.1'.A4e-Mo:,'EN-aro,a,-;,,,,x-ris?,,,,.Vafka,,,,,,,,,F,-:1,..,,w 4 .,,,,04.1.'„',0*.,4 iyIOiWtr ;se,werw *440-g„20•g,,g,, . ,3,,g,,t,,,,,,,,uV,,,,,,,,,AAA,,,I,,'j6,fg,,,•-,.3,R,,-,T1,2A,,f3?,4iNx4.,,,g,'Y,,,:-tr,.,y,,-,o-.;,Q',,V,r'•-•aO,••`'.gT.VOa.,-,'.-','4,I,Vm''.zN,.'-'v''.,i'x,V.m4,--g,-,,','.g,,,,,o-,.;'•,,,,,,'ep.,,,„g:,).",,':$w,.;w,",'g"o--:A?','',',','4,,.,;L,M..AAPVVc--.Ao'At-g,A.1",13r,'' aV ,'„."2. .,Y*Asdi,tf 1''-''•r,'RA-;''-'',.i''t'':42:,3'f . , , ,, ,,,.:„,,„,,,,,-„,,,:p.,,,,,,,,,,,-„,.,..,,,,),,,A.N,,v,-.4,T,,,..,m,,,,..:,,,,,,,„:,.„,,„:,,,,,,,,„„,,,,,,„,,,,,,•,,.„,,,,,,,,,,,,,„,o,,,,<"p.,,,,,A,,,„,,,,,,,,,k-,x,w,s,wmaa,,,,,,,,,,,„wt...„,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, f line. ,,m32.4.5,x-,10.401,-',14017,00;ften.101,kaWtn,,,V,Vf-t"..-',ii-3.'„aa:qctnii:ivaqkq:_VV,,jKg,=A.IV-Ut.t 1111112114,1111,,,;_tialt,ke..MILigal;,,,t2,2,16Vargitlatittaaltatr,-- •, , ..• . • '•-i "' ' Finalize.design,documents ,,,,,•'r,-,".-,-x,)h-'o-:fr--3:,s•-'m-r"-,:tfr,'m-,-,..,ri,-z,:,.,-!.,-,-,-:.,,,:,e, , ,-,r,nwp.,lzstm,r:,.,1,7:,, ,T,,,w.. , Purchase/store,t project„ 3„,,,i,,-,-,,-IF&,i,.:1',-,v4",;_iliitivangintgai-T ,,,,,,,,,,,v4mw:,•.:-..g:mi.;'.";1,,,,p,:',"/3 : ,.= , , ,, -.,(--.,','..',-,,,,.o,'.-4s:otif,.iv,-,,,,:gyz-, ,-.cfg,o,,k,v: ',,=- z.,' ' '-1,ita-Vt'a,igl?fgt,M,Z.RR:k'-'ggt:'IgIZVS',',4e:fjV,Z,,sit::ig,Oia'a.'t-',Sk,"A,-itiRgt,:;',P,I:,',1 1,f),g,,,ijl,U1171R,,t'tlfti..-N--T,'..',I,itM': ',3gRte,ltnfRi,tafagrg't-Z';'itlifgo''-gk':ijOTPS:netflrpAR-tri-AP:a-NR:AWlgiftl"g'iSti,,igizk,'''iig:g:r:":,':'','", materials ,„-e,-1.1-d.,,,,,..,,),,,,, ,,,-..;„,•,..z••.;..,4.,,,4,,,,,,,,,,,,,sm..,4--o,p,,,....,....,,,,,,,.,,,,......-,,,,,,,:..,,,..,w,....,,,,-..,,..,.....•, 1'. ..,,, . .... •- . .Competitive Bid process .. . „ , . . .. 1 . „ , . .. , ' , „ 1 . ' 1 ' • ' • 1 construction contractor [ ,3-,,-....7-,-,e,11.447,4--11m,A*Ntilp.,,,,k.qc11,40:•,oR,,f.,.1,7i.!4.., 0-„1 0„1„,-4.--A,Isewer,_ ,.,,.,;, Ii Arg,_.,i,....:,..,-10,-,1\,1;,.,.,1,,4-.,,,,,,,,„,.0,.,,‘,,A.,,,,,,„.„6,,,„,1,,,„q:4,,,„-„4-,,,0,„,-.,„,,,'4,,,,-,.„4„,1„,,-„4,,,, -,-6.....,-,,,,,,-,.,.,•,,,•,,,.•,,,,.--,-,,,,.,,•,,,,,,,,-,-,.,,,,,,,-•,,,e,,,Naglett,,,,1,1;,,,g,,,citisy...,,,,,a,,t,Ndezvegstilpoli-a-p,,,,as 1.1,6011011011,11110611,r4 51-':,:‘‘,1111.1iitiaitti011thiliktgiPIRATMOVIS 010474t16#1..,,•-, - -:, ,-, , ,, ,,,,,,,, .7, ..,,, .,,,, : ,.rg,...,,,Z,:,,,S.,,,,,,,.....g',,,,,,.r,:,,,,,,,,,,,,,KN.:AW*',.',. ,.:',..,..,'9'''''''.,,,N,... ,WAi g,),.1,44U,,,,,•,r,,k We...r...,.44,', 1 I ,,'' I , • ''' ,n , \'' • : „'! • ., •„• I ' •• ,Inspect and,cleamwaterfront -f „ , 1 , , . collection i sewer . . , „. .. • , . • , .. ,• t*Tgavi-TVITAM-.:1,M-7,17-4•VA':-.',VMOMMZEITO:'7,MERS,167:-7q--qt.1/4. FaproistEt,„ei„,44yro._„4is,,,T,idw,,Qii;4tgr!T,M,'T,7„:F,'T,':t,Z-Ir,fg.,atrelle,11-11-1T,F4Mj...-al,'.4.7,11113:44',4,11V-K4,,i(mIlg,:'..i:V,NDAMV.,I1477,-.V.40.,!**,,SgAViV,I,::,!•,:,14..17-',,,t0t-PAN,Y.*T1 #74-tel.,:,-, ---",.-,---,-,1,tLtesfior-A-,,,w,-,,,45=1.,:v.f,,,.m.:44,0:50.5T-,,megg-00,4,,,',,,,A,,,:,fzt,A,,,:-z-gitsfma-,:,,v.,itz,itw,",igtry,t!,,,,,g,,,-,T.,,o,g,---ztfg-o-,i,---- . -,-3.,:,T4.-i,',N-raimigq, ir-Avooqv,k,ozeaoFi-f-p,ttw,r.00:4;,-gg%?.mli,,00t,&-vmv,ksur,nqo.mkr:,:%.,p,,,,,,,R,,,,,,,.,.,,,,-„,o,,,,,,,00g"gto-t.,4,-:rg,,,--w,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,w,,,,-,,,,,,R,,,,-.-,-,:„,,a,v,5-,,„-,,v,ce,e::,,,,,,,v,cy,,,,,t 1. o : , , ': —joivoitmtga,-,.,=,,,,yg,,r,r#,:gf.?,'..-,.•,,,,,,,,,,:=,-,',,-..:sg::s*,o5fzifr.@,,rwga-,:ty,,,,-'skk,,,w.v.wr.,,,,;,vv,. ,,r,', ,' , •''„,' ''i. ,, ,,, ,, , , •t i. ' ".'• „ 7,, i n • , N Buoyant pipe anchor 1' '1 ' . i , . installation i , ./ „. ‘...i. ,..., ... Public Outreach In addition to bi-monthly updates at each City Council meeting,the public is receiving accurate and timely construction information through the follow resources: 1. HelloLO: Monthly LOIS Construction Updates will appear in HellolO beginning in September, 2008 and continuing through the life of the project. 2. Website: wAAtw.LOISnews.com will provide construction updates. up-to project maps, - the-minute details about road closures or other impacts,as well as informative videos. --,- 5r, ., . an,.V. • . .. , ., 109 3. Project Office:The office is currently at the West End Building, 4101 Kruse Way. Staff is available during business hours to discuss the project, answer questions and address concerns. Call LOIS at 503-699-7466. 4. Join the LOIS email list: Updates and breaking news will be sent to anyone on the project email list. To join, send an email request to lois cLoswe o.or.us. 5. Want to learn more?: If your neighborhood association or group would like the LOIS project team to speak at your next meeting, please call the project office at 503-699- 7466. 6 1 110 OSWEGO LAKE INTERCEPTOR SEWER"ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION MATRIX-FINAL JUKE 7,2007 - FEASIBILITY E A I LI T �-- N W E BUILD U I D_ I ? - - - -, - - _OBJECTIVE" -. ^ �; + �� ;.r? i ,c ■? '•' s' r� " •'" ' l xa€ ± - /- � �. e , ViY2,r ? ti:n � x r�rv, r srL�iL:l� �� •f",� Fa - v ✓ �r� ro�.e w � _r� 5.��^ �-�„k• n � I_-'�nt' � yC2°:�� yl J�• �7�.P� $-��' °A 1 n<Yu_._ A� � .� i r A.E� ✓�.�� "t m,� c -, ' � ' '3s! � . y ;M i�u v�- 2 4L`Z`�zc4 GF Y-A ue2 �u- •z-;.�.p'ix::..tSe.om=.r': S�r ,•'•]_�•.^I.S . x:='-:-+�x•: r _ � F, . ta.--S3� 4 � � : ��� G �` � � � ey�ma��� �Lx� y r 1��"� ?r G „ue r�S=•i� 0. 4 � °0 r� * r ;- 4 3�G�� � - .� '�v� w r �yY_C..K 'GENE�LCATEGORY im' 4 a�5�� L � am ��x : � ��r��GL �i� � e 'e=r' yt ��O= i r �a, I J ERT ��< C- z y 4 i�L� 2-°:y+, Yr, y ) ,S t •I.)•'''IS''''.e . �YrT . w'✓ F � s�� �h Sc 3: r oi R . ems xu Lx e = S *.-`My� a r LgmL <vi 7 2�P fiY .�s �-r S x/ �s v � i nr - v3� i n- � �-5L�3�n 3�] �ar'��1 �=� L�.�x:.� . -.r,�YI� . r � r -_ I s � 3J i : . ,-` 1r� - �L � emL :1.=�.Z. ,ti iT y ^;_ 20,4,1101:11,1,41114 CRITERIA it � Ice mi- L E I -m _ -0i>C �I J .�• n 2J , ^ :i L' - ��=�� �. > I � � r. _ Si:3 'r- r _ :r=1 *:,_�st = ^0 ."i2 e , . . i1 : ' - 7 ' $ Vra �t � -- " - z awdSw i4A ":r•S Mq�' tJ .: L tGt, a. i �� .7@a' •=}.Z< UfvZ� -`r-[�C�``h ` .. -c .ezi • Li�� ,2 impacts to {., iIS ' .0 -Ss 4"$ .e e . . r � S . windows tve I .L• :r :, S'f:� + - ^ ° msZ: BI 7, 1 �`- y .p P• . � 1- "'4 7 f / 'ry Wi -11iy : /4 N Cn�:� I + � L ./. a ; =: y � r -= NM �� ELLm•.L- _• c�' L ..- , L= �yf: L .:L` 1C �r% J r:`r gLa ,1I �`< i , - - I piles �l � I •7 vS "-`e-+:':^. r,rsC C _ �v s. t nS : . •, 'fi I9 � . > AL L� _ . , i ._t�Y .L. `Ye�'.:�:''�:�<,. '°t �� �.L : S 3:C::,.- eii•<fr- .. :�-L-. :s xs ��" � C:.^ I:wee:`=.::•xl:�.i-�� C--� J L«Lr-�` _C •.--'-fix rr �T`"' .LrC `c ': .Ys^' T3' .rL. :•3•.> v�� r -�- ''-.." .k`ZS::---:=:�•�.1.,,..`-:..,. ."r`4 x- `:sr..,/•��,,: .C.., <a:�L r... L� g �. 3 . `:•.;=c {�.t � '.tau)'.:� R, M1... :C:x .. 3 r r,� x 5-.-Iy •£.c i t �•rL. ��S Se Li rCu% -,�"sLC• •�. ���`� ;:' 'J• a. r,. ) � � ,:..,..,-:;.:,:,....,,,,,,,,,.....4,,,..:rL ���. •,> +L'uii sue. n .a :-''''''''''":'"'''''"''Illij=11 OBJECTIV _ RELIABILITY-WILL:IT WORK?_ - - i'=:. ', a L u' �rSa� n4 E> S" r-.4 z :ems- -. 5 455 r,. ,.2,t 3�_=r t`= •y s-••.7 7 ems. �, aC .?;.'. 4� xa--h .,Fr FI, a- , ��� L�:.> , ..�-:�a .l�, �!�,f x! .Z.,5., "r�,. `^�,7��",:t .;�° -�'�-s>-J:L-•eu ,r.�..,.�.. ".s�'' -w.] -,�-z- <.'1. -zr% - 1 ••'.�:.. .s, _v� .x•^r� s'� n rL �.�•- -`s?Yii`Fa w� .r�..aL 7,(• ¢Ix - '•S �L•[< .,c�-C¢ ++��y.,,���� .I l' 1' `t'S.L• -,'i• r.;tr S� �Fi'Z- x k. z -7•.: -'-_ ``[r� s6 :air'a .<� r/'z.,:r G r�.r ,: v�<,«..,x r1. ���'e. c'z rr�,���,'�, ":�`�,. z:fir ,�.�3.''7,. .re xas- a f`*� -c��z. '$ ev ,�2 -1°•'Fr'. -5F =:sue ..5�,� ��.���_ �l..a.i<<" R [ `I�. ] L ox!sor,vx. �A' �- aIL J :�. ,SY' .y,, �3.-, i�``a .:.-:tom"rr-�Y,:•-et•:.�eo° :fir �-t,..) Y, "�'"' !.� •i�,�'§ a I. I`7�r ,-2'!ur ,._tC 5 - •c. 5- "s'�c�. -d.=:��'L�.w<�.�e�:--e_- ��.,• �:.. 'u 1: >„5-�-�.'L <Zo: �tE.e�.L �<. 35r.. L. `;7,. Y -4-., r£ :$�r � ',• ���'01 L Sx,.�: F:?., s^Z ,.�a°P•�,.:3. T�.`-.3.�a ^Si' �G.[cev � ..2. r� r ,.-.�. / T;;;�v�^_„?;1a2r r=F1•S ..�'. I-: �._ '�'+,'� l,L'a �s.. 4 r� e`F � �r� ��i,.,-C ��a zr• [,�-3.Sul •.�, r���.:•L<�:,.,•„o.:xn.: a v_�-^ ..y.� ,2a �.. ��i"r .�E"[7` z, � 1•'r'I,r'r--•,�;»?;:-' 3 �h 1 r. "•F ��=4%�.L� � �.�.5:•;�.'S,;`r.E .�tG'� I.- fox L.4-e_�s 2 v��•t t+, I 2-�fE ir::i:f..5=-x aiY=aA- s t••3x � v 1,'' ,w- Fr�A= 3`.I� ) GENERAL .s,. =-�' u,� -``v .%�, .l:=. Nru;g .�:rsr:�.,,,. .�33:{'7'-Y�" :s..�.2� r,az�' a.a .'�:'�i:s..:��:'s�' �v-'? s, r_�2"c�L. � '.9 � �•x;_:`':i �.., �F..S< :<I,�T�� � .tM r.�� .5 S*.r.[g _--.-. � !k -ifx�<al�� "-F I.Il�rnfr,,,l'rhii.+ C�;(:£ �,c ) y.ae�'-e=-t�C" '�=t-�• � 2� 'L-- 2-a t5'e t.`�.4.,LF,,�'�' "e�E Fi Cr• :�rN-'�eC f.7._�r�?,f..�.a.r�Ste'°. was.,y,�.s 1`c vt.• .'F L .u:'C•['1.•1 ,�,., � x•tG•r- �e�.•.��- r,[ L Ll-,c. <L [, �C: .�' tt �..y,`-�-�-.3t�� r�c.� _ "u�- .t '•.�]. .i�x•..3oa" _-rrnC a '�F= L`�A:Lsi� :.�I.. .._..ry s�- ,Cr'k,- r.•. r'xe'•' ,�.e c CFI. S'•t-',8 +:Nr .I MyF-x Z ?-r.1"IL! ��L�,Y �_-� ,�lr gg .�' � �� ..�=r.3� 5•��•_•J•>v _ --•� s,.fix, � N.> �.�F><2�.>hti� <��>:�.,.:---- 5 - ,tce - et� -'3 4:v..,l•>r:C ,S.-: .f- e`J,n.,uL:•ec �. L- 4".� r-4 ,c�. P .•"L�'i rs 5. '.''`r.<.- •;I r. �•"`i_ +-� .aa�`aiaa S.S:.` •L .h �f«:' x'�::�a ,ke- .�� :Q.'.•`L.E-, a 4.•�.4). 4.. >�:' � .-'Y.��.-,-=-r...i--;[1 S.h-S �..4 1 �Ya.v .3r/.]. -`e>t... =F- !i c:h! €^ e'.�ra �.^C^. SStiv .�-C' •I. .t :Z,.. `:L�si •b. �i-5'=-�=2=-5 3''O �eL., 2 <''Ci.�N'^t 1, i h�Y.p 1•�.. r F•t>;c>- t= a tj.�a._ I !C F3� I��.�L -='ruc-� '�e' �.s" •a-Y.�.�'"e'.nn I- E.` rf4r'' '§, rYti '�eA,'�. '-r.=='x, :.rj.=n ,i.-t+ I.a `rc •r� .,L 'F; "�}k �rw-zti eV- L''• ,}° -� rif""�.-� .:Zi":-`ta5?aa✓.l_.• .�.r�C.au^.--,� .`.-Y'a. •..:4� e,. _ 7- ,�.t-saw,- 'r!_?� �:<���r�.-=r`.Y.. -.:i..0 .i1.. i 3,> 3�` �..12'^7-T ,k_ '-3�' :a::S'��=:�a.�- -�,; .L So- '..f.3: ��, .<.4 �-ryc• `L '�? 6.Gxv a-r'unsr:._, x-^i+xLc'L<. ..[� .::E ;'?':5 .�:...:^ :'!-Y, ,. •LF .as ^� - F..., r s f ✓� i3:. .�:=1:., o'er .--Fc x:p:..- •]_.5S" �•:-s": E.-!c1�.--:•-xr%-.-.i-h C`".:.. F%.'itgg'^57-f=r_?'Zh:iii: )'`.�`�,."{x'% �I�, �a.'�,sr..A�_..5:,, v� ..'�>><-'3v� ..L5 F`� --`L�r'%,�'�-"':['sih:F'5('e=. ..%�4..,.5.. S�xS .R�^a-v ,`5.. ,"�:�. tt � .S. e/I, e5�e 4 Y 4 3 r'l<.Y.f•=:•..'7��=S ._:£ :�•<.�II�S...�1 u-} r 3?:L+_ ,. .. >r l!. 2.%I:�v.. ...-:t-.-I In..).::.. -I?°'-'•�:%=S�>'.,,srx<,a:33�3�i<S. ,.f`Y......, TERIA 11,1101101111 -"F_,..`Lt'Ru" ,..Fr` AY• .'xin' _ .,..........,._.,�.-�.>., .:....::........... .. .,, •-'n`x'Rav,^^xL ..p�1 ,�s��++t�. 1 -7 2 i Etir �'C-: .IA ;6iiffifil:tiI4i eL.I 7`3l Y� Corrosion seism. x": r'- x :el:: Alternative ��, ''�]^I C't,• max..• .LI i. t ''-5 r]..is• .� •':s`.;:.:.::_:: C�•,!.,e,..x,., Criteria Colors . t z a`L'' � .t�.nx � l t .�4••k� 'G Z 1•3 -�e�� !C••C-C a :�R4: t'Y SwF. �• ,r4 ,O.g,,;,,;„. : .]a _ i_�: =am:-. ": � � a<t._ YS ..a-- .. µx-.ter-..�,-:f•i. .s s- �y =�r f• ,-:r .ice� -,y:r"•f',--xs?:::_:•.:�._.._.,_:,Yy ti 1 7. 4:�.<Ii. -'101 -r S��. _awl. ••L;•-:-..:e:..,::1.: ��.Sr: -.r3 Z L S :ek.• r:--s� •-L�x'%��^,e-i•J'. i'Sti:ii:r.�:�__•-.._art.xa ,�y .,•C.'.'x. ,r�. -'r- ua�Z { -.�. :fix� �`1 7! L`� :eL.:S•-•- i4 .I 1'., Strength !e s'F1 I•S- s L I N :i:^]tom• w5� Iti•�, i•�I.'• cz� L' �� L�. :rL'-C�t �y Buoyant `�{ e?C, .4-•. a.z')i'• NL LvCe• .I `�1-=i• e� ]7.i"r'1.Yr- ). I.''•:•.:,•...V%• -r?hs-?.= ?'L L :,ri��� a4 .n-.R -:r331r�.-I r. .r "'f' r.>�r#101:1100111111111 i-�Y--.�`•L �u.>r -[- r ate'= .s,r. -:ie:3L, ,:Yes. �=L3 -� :�3. s.� ?-� .C "N.. 1.�••TT _.�.. 'i�'...- ...L-$.-,:�Fx[ -� :`I•:r'�:•c':"etir S e533�� .1 I. .�'�" ear',. r:-5,��S .1� rr. •I L re=.1• 1! ❑ Via.,-` 'f^,.�L:�f� a;r :`]]:S iL' eeC- 4"�"has- S 9-�� e 54'f .I a' J`.S`eee.'tr streZr.� 7�L uat�L'c- ... 5=�•:.--�. h I � i�C}_L y3'•�:4, .<r.•-1 ''J e_':;"`�:a. Itl11•"•--:-:i•--�eL.�Sn..T,�" lbr� i'Ci�il. :.`fir -tZv`•,at'....!....... ��� !I... ".�L� may.. .I-. 5 • �i �,-)=5��•� S3L r ..- s �I fix- =Z:: 1.-,]. '.l. 'ir== L._-re...Y'�.� ,n"-I�^S =:ti`"tip^:w�a..: .t.�.rr '�L� ••]5� I•' r L L •� ; -<-L .G rC�u Neutral pt �.� �s t•t3l, p� Piles 'a� �Ysw. }'ice:-- �=" :ate;��':'' <?I• �=••.•:1. .-ri=? .ems"= ) Teo• .s�. ;�•ri`- 4 L+� S �`< _-��• 'rears`�-_ .I �L.3= ��='•3 v��• 3 1. .3� x.3, ' .. �==L:iLr <.�:ii .z. r�5rx a1�i Z n. 3 =z. ��i`L :S'• .::rub...., _� L, -•ski., ;]: �%� �skaF�%'a, x.l�`L2`-•`��=��`, Z rC•.,a,iL„��..4�':i/�.r.,:I.' I � �r ��ff``'�� Ltc ) ��A' TC .r. 3 rrl. �•r,r ,3x S, *xa •ice .:•.' •`•`Z`�•,I�;-•n,.=>: S.�d' :L•6:S• r1��. rbound Lake Pumping _ =:j.:_ r{ � � ,.:,Y� _ ��importance � Its "-° Criteria No. Criteria Description 1 Capital cost in 2006 dollars,includes 3%contingency and 25%for engineering,construction management,easements,and admin. Do.NOT include a ration, 2 7 year punt worth of ongoing routine O&M including labor,materials,and energy costs. 3 7-year present worth for fusim replacement oos-t of components that don`t last 15 years. 4 Risk of cost increases for items such as construction ciao for differing site conditions or variable discount rate for future O&M and replacement, 6 Availability of required methods and materials to constuct each alternative to established tolerance." 6 Adequacy of construction access points to work site(s)and �sing}are i(for contractor to s-tockpile materials and store equipment. 7 Necessity for using highly al fi� ntra�and subcontractors,inte�i level of likelycontenders 8 Ability to site facilities and obtain easements from multiple parties. 9 impacts to traffic,business,local access,and other disruption including noise and dust from construction activities. 10 Impacts,primarily noise and odor,from ongoing operation and maintenance activities. 11 Drawdow depth and duration to constnict work at west end of lake. 12 Quantity of undensater exertion required to constuct work at east end of lake or Springbrook Creek may impact permit schedule. 13 Likelihood of sediment testing requirement by regulators, 14 Adequacy of work windows allowed by regulators. 15 Risk of catastrophic failure of some critical component of system. Examples:for around-lake,break in a force main or a mechanical/electrical pumping system malfunction;far in-lake,break in p€pe.or support and grade loss in dam failure scenario. 16 Consequence of a system failure. Examples:for around-lake,overflows to lake or private property until crew responds and completes repairs;for it,lake,more difficult repairs=longer overflow to lake and lake partially drains to VONPF ongoing cleaning of buoyant system if dam fails. 17 Accessibility of system components for routine maintenance to detect and prevent impending problems;also,accessibility for major replacements and emergency maintenance activities. 18 Requirement to use outside contractor for maintenance activities. 19 Ability to quickly implement emergency response measures to address a system failure and minimize consequences. Designing system with replaceable components and extras on-hand is recommended. 20 Long-term corrosion resistance of system, 21 Ability of overall system to survive design-level seismic forces. - 22 Potential for system components to wear out or become obsolete(e.g.,spare parts not available). 11 .3 ,Arliop )41 : k ITY OF LAKE • SWEGO OUNCIL EPORT 04.04 TO: Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor Members of the City Council Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Joel B. Komarek, RE., Project Director- LOIS SUBJECT: Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Supply Partnership DATE: January 26, 2009 ACTION No Council action is requested. Staff will make a presentation to Council regarding the Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Supply Partnership. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND See Exhibit A, attached. DISCUSSION Efforts to form a water supply partnership with the City of Tigard have been ongoing since 1995. These efforts were renewed in early 2006 and culminated in the councils of the two cities executing an Intergovernmental Agreement on August 5, 2008 to create this partnership. The agreement establishes that both parties will work in good faith to plan, fund, design, construct and operate expanded water supply facilities currently owned by Lake Oswego. A significant amount of engineering and financial analysis was completed in support of this effort and prior to the seating of new Mayor Hoffman and new Councilors Moncrief, Olson, and Tierney. Staff believes it would be of significant value to the newly elected Mayor and Council to receive a presentation on the genesis of the partnership and a report on current partnership activities and near term tasks at its next study session scheduled for February 3, 2009. 113 Council Report January 26, 2009 Page 2 ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT The total project cost for the expanded water supply system is estimated at just over $202M (cost estimated at the mid-point of construction —2013). Lake Oswego's share of this cost is estimated at just over$82M. The expanded facilities must be on-line no later than July 1, 2016. RECOMMENDATION: (N/A) ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A— Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Supply Report Sustainability has been considered as part of this recommendation. N/A Reviewed by: /------N, , ,---7. - Department Director KIR Finance Director N/A City ki 4 0 ,ey 11A,i illiO\ , Alex IC.'' • ntyre City Manager 114 Lake Oswego and Tigard Joint Water Supply Partnership n n nn, Project Lead: LOIS Project Director Technical Committee for Lake Oswego: • Joel Komarek • Kari Duncan Oversight Committee for Lake Oswego: Council Member#1—Kristen Johnson g Council Member#2—Bill Tierney Managing Agency: City of Lake Oswego Budget: Prepared by Managing Agency for FY 2009-2010 and submitted to the Technical Committee by March 1, 2009. Draft budget submitted to the Oversight Committee by April 30, 2009. Total estimated project cost: $202 million. Lake Oswego share is estimated at$82 million.1 council Action: The City Council signed an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the City of Tigard to jointly plan, design,construct,and operate an expanded water supply system on August 5, 2008. Next Steps: Establish meeting schedules for Technical and Oversight Committees in early 2009; Establish project schedule; develop draft project budget; approve budget by June 20,2009;determine preferred project delivery method;approve contracts for preliminary planning, engineering and permitting. 1 Project costs in 2006 dollars(see Carollo Report,Ally 2007)escalated at 6%annually to mid-point of construction in 2013. ; EXHIBIT EIMIPPVIppsmpgkf ::,1:01111111114011111111111P 115 111, Lake Oswego ‘111111111111•11111111k 111110111•:.E'.1.1111.1M110,1, Lake Oswego and Tigard Joint Water Supply Partnership ii management for a sustainable future • •••••• ••••• •••-••• „ . A .. .• ..• . •• •• ••••• • •• Background On March 6, 2006•the City Councils of Lake Oswego and Tigard signed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA)to jointly fund a study of a possible water supply partnership to develop additional supplies of water from the City of Lake Oswego's source,the Clackamas River. On August 5, 2008 the two cities executed an IGA, initiating the next phase to jointly plan,design, fund,construct,own and operate an expanded water supply system for the benefit of each city. "Drivers"for the Partnership • Aging infrastructure—Lake Oswego's critical supply system components water intake structure and pumps, raw and finished water transmission mains and water treatment plant—operate at the upper limit of best practices conditions 24/7 during the peak summer season. These components are over 40-years old. Recent studies and condition assessments of this critical infrastructure have identified approximately$5M . worth of"capital triage" needs to upgrade these facilities. As this infrastructure. continues to age, operating costs will also increase and reliability will diminish. • Retail water demands Lake Oswego's in-city water demands during the peak season are approaching maximum treatment capacity. With or without Tigard as a partner, Lake Oswego must begin planning to expand its supply system. With an aggressive conservation program, Lake Oswego may be able to buy itself enough time to expand its system before peak day demands outstrip current treatment capacity. With conservation savings of 1/2%annually, expanded facilities will need to be on line by 2016. • • Managing.utility rate growth—The need for new water supply infrastructure and . increasing operating and maintenance costs, pressure utilities to increase water rates. This water supply partnership will ameliorate rate impacts by taking advantage of economies of scale and spreading the costs of new capital and operating and maintenance costs over the combined rate base of both cities. • Municipal water rights—Beneficial use without waste and within a time certain are statutory standards by which diversions from waters of the state pursuant to permit can be vested ("perfected"). 117 Lake Oswegoffigard Water Supply Page I 2 Public interest standards and recovery of endangered fish stocks also must be satisfied. Environmental advocacy interests are applying increasing pressure on regulatory agencies to rescind prior authorizations if beneficial use cannot be demonstrated to occur within statutory time frames. These issues and others place communities with undeveloped water rights in positions of grave uncertainty with regard to planning for and accessing water for future growth. • Source options and..reliability Of increasing importance to water providers today are risks of supply interruption due to natural disaster, poor water quality or terrorist acts. Access to an alternate source of supply and system redundancy is a critical strategy that responds to these risks. The City of Lake Oswego currently does not have access to an alternate source of drinking water of sufficient capacity to meet emergency needs and has identified several potential vulnerabilities to the reliability of its existing supply system. The "Regional Transmission and Storage Strategy" (MS)commissioned by the Regional Water Provider's Consortium (RWPC) in 1998,was developed partially in response to these concerns. The recommended strategy of linking supply sources (e.g., Bull Run, Willamette, Clackamas and Trask/Barney Reservoir systems) relies on a network of large diameter transmission mains capable of moving water throughout the region: north to south, east to west. The report suggests the best opportunity for developing these linkages will be realized through local partnerships. Lake Oswego and Tigard see this partnership as a first step in providing their citizens more reliable water service while promoting the sharing of water sources on a regional level. O system,ownership and control—Historically,Tigard has relied on other purveyors for its water supply secured through wholesale purchase contracts. These contracts have left. Tigard vulnerable to uncertain future costs and availability of long-term supplies. For the last several years,Tigard has been exploring opportunities to acquire ownership in a source of supply. The engineering and financial analysis jointly funded by Lake Oswego and Tigard determined Tigard's best long term supply option was a partnership with Lake Oswego. The study also determined significant capital and operating and maintenance costs savings would accrue to both cities in a partnership. • Regional benefits—With the consummation of this agreement, and construction of the expanded systems of pipes, pumps and treatment, Lake Oswego and Tigard could provide benefits to others in the region vis-a-vis access to alternate sources of supply through regional transmission systems and opportunities for agencies with excess water rights to deliver their water to those in the region in need of new or supplemental supplies. 118 Lake Oswego/Tigard. Water Supply Page 1 3 Next Steps The partnership agreement establishes that Lake Oswego, as the "Managing Agency" will orchestrate all efforts necessary to double its existing water supply capacity to 32 MGD ("initial expansion") by July 1, 2016. To accomplish this,the City must: • Secure extensions of time to develop water authorized by state permit for beneficial use but currently undeveloped. Proposed Final Orders ('PFO") issued by the state granting the extensions have been protested by WaterWatch of Oregon and by the South Fork Water Board (SFWB. Pursuant to statutory process, the protests must be resolved through a contested case proceeding. The City has retained outside legal counsel to defend its interests in this matter. It is anticipated the contested case proceeding could take from 1 to 3 years to resolve. 8 Revise and resubmit to the State its recently.adopted Water Management and Conservation Plan (WMCP). The partnership with the City of Tigard will accelerate the size and timing of new water that must be developed to serve both cities and thus is the driver for the updated plan. Coordinating this effort with the contested case proceedings described above will limit further legal entanglement with environmental interests adversarial to the City's water supply interests. 5 Establish a schedule and framework for meetings of the newly formed Technical Committee and Oversight Committee. The OC is expected to meet no less often than quarterly. The.Managing Agency is responsible for staffing and assisting the OC to comply with public meetings law and noticing requirements.. 5 Create a capital improvement plan for the initial expansion and a corresponding budget specific to the capital and operating needs of the system that will be jointly owned by the two cities. The first draft budget must be prepared and submitted to the IC by March 1, 2009 followed by submittal to the Of by April 30, 2009. The final budget must be approved by the respective councils of each city by June 30, 2009. • Complete a lot line adjustment for property owned by the City in West Waluga Park and necessary for operation of the City's Waluga Reservoir. This effort will occur in 2009. ▪ Accept payment from Tigard of$2,820,557 and interest earned by June 30, 2009 representing the proportionate value of assets owned by Lake Oswego that would be used and useful to Tigard for its share of the supply system now in existence. • Schedule and commence joint planning sessions with the City of Tigard to establish an overall project schedule to achieve completion of the initial expansion by July 1, 2016. 5 Adopt and implement water rate increases beginning on July 1,2009 and necessary to fund Lake Oswego's share of the capital improvements for the initial expansion. a Staff this project with sufficient technical and administrative resources similar to the LOIS project in order for the Managing.Agency to satisfy its obligations under the IGA. 119 Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Supply Page I 4 The above substantial efforts must be undertaken quickly in order to complete the initial expansion by July 1, 2016. Planning, permitting, design and construction of the new system will be a complex undertaking involving federal, state,county and local regulatory agencies. Project elements will be located within three different cities. 1 20