Loading...
Agenda Item - 2020-08-10 - Number 08.1 - Staff Memo w-Attach 07/30/20 (LU 20-0015) • /0'� � MEMORANDUM 0 GREGo� TO: Lake Oswego Planning Commission FROM: Ellen Davis, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: 2020 Annual Code Amendments -Work Session #2 (LU 20-0015) DATE: July 30, 2020 MEETING DATE: August 10, 2020 ACTION The purpose of the work session is for the Planning Commission (Commission) to become familiar with the amendments and to ask clarifying or background questions prior to conducting a public hearing on September 14, 2020. This report summarizes the more substantive policy code amendments (Policy Items 1-4). A matrix of all proposed amendments with commentary is included as Attachment A. BACKGROUND On August 10, 2020, the Commission will conduct its second work session for proposed amendments to the Community Development Code (CDC), Chapter 50 of the Lake Oswego Code. This package is referred to as the 2020 Annual Code Amendments, and includes maintenance amendments that clarify existing standards and a number of policy amendments. These amendments were the subject of an earlier work session by the Commission on July 13, 2020. The 2020 Annual Code Amendments are items that were primarily identified by staff through use and application of the Code. Item 7 from the last work session, exterior materials in West Lake Grove (WLG), has been dropped at this time to combine with a broader examination of materials allowed in that area with the Lake Grove Business Association and Neighborhood Associations. 503.675.3984 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us Page 2 of 5 CODE MAINTENANCE ITEMS (LOC Chapters 50.01, 50.03 - 50.08, and 50.10) Please see Attachment A for the proposed text amendments on these items with commentary. ITEM TITLE CODE SECTION(S) 1. Clarify Platting Requirements and Expiration of Permits for Lot Line I LOC 50.07.007.3.a.i Adjustments and Resource Delineations LOC 50.07.003.17 2. Allow RID Variances to the Long Wall Plane Standard LOC 50.08.003.2.e LOC 50.08.003.6 3. Change Sensitive Lands Protection Fence Height to Match Tree LOC 50.05.010.4.d.i(1) Protection Fence Height 4. Clarify Utilities Exception in RP Districts to Ensure Mitigation is LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(c) Required for Expansion of Existing Utilities 5. Remove Obsolete Fence Complaint Procedure I LOC 50.09.002.6 6. Correct Reduction of Protected Riparian Areas (PRA) to reflect all LOC 50.05.010.6.b.iii(3) sizes of PRAs 7. Clarify that Mitigation Requirements Apply to Resource LOC 50.05.010.2.b.ii Restoration resulting from a code violation 8. Require Pre-Application Conference for In-Stream Resource LOC 50.07.003.1.e(i) and Enhancement Projects (ii) 9. Provide a Clear and Objective Option for Creation of Flag Lot LOC 50.07.007.2.c(i) Access Lanes 10. Move No Parking Requirement for Outdoor Dining to Parking LOC 50.03.005.4.b.ii Table* Table 50.06.002-3 11. Clarify that all Residential Zones Allow Manufactured Homes LOC 50.03.003.1.b 12. Modify Definitions of Net Developable Area and Density Transfer LOC 50.10.003.2 Area to Simplify Open Space and Density Calculations for Subdivisions Dedicating Land to the City 13. Remove Annual Reporting Requirement for Sensitive Lands Map LOC 50.07.004.8.b.iii(a) Corrections 14. Calculate Bicycle Parking Requirements for Unlisted Uses Based on LOC 50.06.002.2.b Most Similar Use 15. Clarify Definition of Undisturbed Slopes LOC 50.10.003.2 16. Delete Obsolete ADU Parking Requirement LOC 50.06.002-3 17. Adopt Fire Code requirements for Fire Hydrant Placement in New LOC 50.06.008.4.h Development CODE POLICY ITEMS & DISCUSSION (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.04, 50.06, & 50.10) Discussion of policy items 1-4 follows. 1. Prevent Driveway Approaches from Extending in Front of Abutting LOC 50.06.003.2.b Properties 2. Align Lot Coverage Calculation in the R-6 Zone with Other LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii Residential Zones 3. Definitions: Add Cohousing to Multi-family Definition LOC 50.10.003 Page 3 of 5 4. Definitions of Community Institution and Institutional Use LOC 50.10.003.2 LOC 50.03.002.2 * The amendments for outdoor dining enclosures tentatively approved on July 27 are pending final approval by City Council. For this reason both the current and the proposed code are provided in Attachment A. Policy Item 1: Prevent Driveway Approaches from Extending in Front of Abutting Properties, LOC 50.06.003.2.b The City has dealt with a reoccurring issue where a portion of a driveway extends into the public right-of-way (beyond the front property line of a private property) and traverses in front of abutting properties, in some cases due to the width of the pavement or property line angles. This amendment would ensure that driveways align with the lots they serve and not cross in front of abutting properties. This will ensure clearer ownership and maintenance responsibility of driveways. sappr Alf C'D c3 N 411 . 181 at-De. f"N Staff has identified options, below, for clarifying the code and codifying existing interpretations relating to street front and interior side yard setback planes: Option#1: Limit location for driveway approach within the frontage of the lot it serves. Potential option to allow a minor variance to this location limitation. Option #2: Retain current flexibility, allow neighbors to reach their own agreements with driveway locations. Direction from Commission Requested: Is further analysis needed regarding the options for the public hearing proposal? Based on the Commission's feedback, staff will determine which option(s) to include in the proposal. Policy Item 2: R-6 Maximum Lot Coverage Standard [LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii] Page 4 of 5 Staff recommend removing two exceptions from the R-6 lot coverage methodology to better match other residential zones to encourage preservation of trees. The proposed change would delete two extra lot coverage allowances from the R-6 zone and reduce development allowed by the R-6 zone. Direction from Commission Requested: Is further analysis needed regarding the options for the public hearing proposal? Based on the Commission's feedback, staff will determine whether to move forward with the option proposed or separate this item onto its own track to include additional outreach. Policy Item 3: Co-housing [LOC 50.10.003] As directed by the Planning Commission at its July 13 work session, staff have prepared a definition of"co-housing" for the Commission's consideration before finalizing the public hearing draft of the amendments. The proposal adds cohousing to the definition of"dwelling unit" and adds "co-housing" to the definition of "dwelling, multi-family." Co-housing would only be allowed where the zoning allows multi-family dwellings at this time. The only difference between a multi-family development where every unit contains all elements of a "dwelling" and a co-housing development is the possibility to share amenities such as cooking facilities that are necessary to a dwelling. Staff believes that the sharing of kitchen facilities within a development does not alter other aspects of the multifamily development, such as where multi-family housing is allowed, density, the Development Review process, parking requirements, open space and landscaping requirements, etc. Staff propose that broadening the definition of "multi-family to allow shared cooking facilities internally has no different impacts than the same development where each unit has its own kitchen. The current discussion of"co-housing" (the ability to share amenities, such as cooking facilities internally within a development) is not related to the statewide House Bill 2001. Option#1: Move forward with the addition of the definitions relating to co=housing as proposed. Option #2: Shift the co-housing discussion to its own track for additional public feedback. Option#3: Drop the proposal for the time being. Direction from Commission Requested: Based on the Commission's feedback, staff will proceed as directed. Page 5 of 5 Policy Item 4: Clarify Definitions for Community Institution and Institutional Use [LOC 50.10.003.2 and LOC 50.03.002.2] Staff propose to delete the definition of"community institution" and retain the definition of institutional use as the definitions currently overlap. The intent is to streamline the code by removing confusing redundancies. Conclusion: Unless there are other options the Commission suggests staff consider, the public hearing proposal will include the proposal for policy Item 4 generally as presented in Attachment A. RECOMMENDATION Provide final feedback on the policy code amendments with regards to which items require further analysis or if additional options should be considered for the public hearing proposal. Direct staff to return for a public hearing on all of the above maintenance amendments and any policy amendments that do not require additional research or outreach. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Proposed Text Amendments with Commentary; 07/29/20 ATTACHMENT A LU 20-0015 ANNUAL CODE AMENDMENTS Maintenance ITEM 1: LOC 50.07.003.17(Expiration of Development Permit) as it relates to Lot Line Adjustments and Resource Delineations 17. EXPIRATION OF DEVELOPMENT PERMIT a. Except as otherwise provided in LOC 50.07.007.3, 50.07.007.4.f, or 50.07.005.5, or another provision of this Code, or as may be specifically stated as a condition of approval of a development permit, any permit issued under this Code shall expire three years following the final decision and effective date of any order constituting or approving the development permit unless: i. If development involves construction of a structure, at least 15% of the structural construction has occurred within three years of the date of final decision; and ii. Development authorized by the permit is commenced and work has reasonably continued to completion of the development If the permit does not involve physical construction or development on the site (e.g. lot line adjustments and resource delineations),the document finalizing the approved development action must be filed, recorded or such other action as provided in the approval or as required by law to give effect to the approval (e.g. recording the approved adjustment or delineation survey),within the three-year period. If not,the approval expires. b. Upon expiration, no further work on the development or use authorized by the development permit may be undertaken without obtaining a new development permit. c. The City Manager shall, in writing grant, a one-year extension to a development permit where the request for the extension is made by written application prior to the expiration of the three-year period. d. If the City Manager believes that work on the development has ceased prior to completion, or has otherwise been abandoned,the City Manager may, at any time, require the applicant to demonstrate that the applicant is proceeding with efforts to commence or to continue the development. Item 1 (M): (1) Reorders code sections in numerical order; (2) Clarifies what acts must occur prior to expiration deadline for non-development applications such as lot line adjustments and resource delineations. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 1 OF 27 ITEM 2: LOC 50.08.003.2.e/RID Review and Long Wall Plane Standard e. Residential Infill Design (RID) Review Except for properties located in the R-DD zone or a design district,variances from any of the following standards for residential dwellings and accessory structures where those standards prevent development that is otherwise compatible with the character of the neighborhood and surrounding residential development: i. Floor area; ii. Lot coverage; iii. Building height; iv. Yard setbacks; v. Street front setback plane; vi. Side yard setback plane; vii. Side yard appearance and screening; viii. Garage appearance and location; ix. Accessory structure standards; x. Oswego Lake setbacks;a4 xi. Oswego Lake setback height and footprint requirements in LOC 50.04.003.7.h; provided,that no accessory structure may exceed 18 ft. in height and no boathouse footprint may exceed 800 sq.ft.; and xii. Long wall planes. I//I 6. RESIDENTIAL INFILL DESIGN (RID) REVIEW VARIANCE CRITERIA a. Residential Dwelling or Accessory Structure Size LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 2 OF 27 A variance to the following standards may be approved when a more compatible, positive relationship between the size of a proposed residential dwelling or accessory structure and the scale and character of a neighborhood can be demonstrated in other ways: Floor area; Lot coverage; Yard setbacks; Building height; Accessory structures; Boathouse footprint in the Lake Oswego setback; and Long wall planes; and Height of accessory structures in the Oswego Lake setback(except as limited by LOC 50.08.003.2.e.xi). //// c. Relationship to the Neighbors A variance to the following standards may be approved when a more compatible, positive relationship between a residential dwelling or accessory structure and the scale, character and privacy of its neighbors can be demonstrated in other ways: Side yard setback; Side yard setback plane; and Side yard appearance and screening..-; and Long wall planes. Item 2(M):Add the long wall plane standard on narrow lots to the potential standards that could be modified through a RID review. It appears that the long wall plane standard was unintentionally excluded from RID variances. The current proposal allows application for a RID variance to the long wall plane standard. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 3 OF 27 ITEM 3: LOC 50.05.010.4.d.i(1)/Sensitive Lands Resource Protection Fencing Height //// i. RC protection areas or RC districts where no protection areas have been approved, RP districts, and protection areas within an approved HBA development shall be protected during construction with either: (1) A minimum fours4x-ft. tall chain link fencing secured with a minimum of four-six-ft. tall steel posts.The fencing shall be in place and maintained for the duration of construction. In addition, temporary signage shall be placed on the fencing which shall clearly identify the resource district and shall state the penalty for violations of this section; or Item 3 (M): Change the RP fencing height requirement from six feet to four feet to match the tree protection fencing height requirement. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 4 OF 27 ITEM 4: LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(c)/Utilities Exception in RP Districts (c) Utilities Placement/New Construction: Public or private utilities shall not be placed or expanded within an RP district unless tunneling under a resource will not cause any adverse effect upon the resource and the functions and values of a resource will be maintained, or there is no other practicable alternative. If a public or private utility is allowed within an RP district, mitigation shall be required pursuant to LOC 50.05.010.4.e through 50.05.010.4.g. When applying the mitigation process to this section: //// Item 4(M): Clarify that the Sensitive Lands Overlay provisions apply to all utilities located within an RP district, including existing utilities when expanded.The proposed amendment was precipitated by an application to expand an existing utility within an RP district without mitigation. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 5 OF 27 ITEM 5: LOC 50.09.002.6/Fence Complaints and Abutting Owner Consent 6. COMPLAINT PROCEDURES AND CORRECTIVE ACTION FENCES a. Complaint Procedures If a complaint is received by the City that the structural side of a fence or retaining wall faces the public,the , , b. Corrective Action Corrective action shall require the structural side of the fence or retaining wall to face the owner's property or Item 5 (M): Removes reference to an obsolete waiver process that is no longer applicable because the "abutting owner consent" provision that allowed a fence's structural side to face abutting owners and public property with respective owner/city consent was eliminated in LU 16-0030/Ord. 2732 as a result of LUBA's holding in Cosner v. Umatilla (and other prior cases) where the "abutting owner consent" provision was held to be improper delegation of city code authority. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 6 OF 27 ITEM 6: LOC 50.05.010.6.b.iii(3) iii. Reduction of RP District The reviewing authority may allow the protected riparian area to be reduced when the applicant shows that: (1) The proposed development complies with LOC 50.05.010.4.f, Progressive Mitigation Steps Required; and (2) The reduction in protected riparian area is not solely for the purpose of maximizing development of the site; and (3) Development abuts a Class I or II resource . (a-)—The reviewing authority may allow portions of the protected riparian area abutting a Class I resource to be reduced to a minimum of 15 ft. abutting a Class I resource, or 10 ft. abutting a Class II resource if: (ai) A qualified professional demonstrates that such an adjustment will not reduce the functions and values of the resource as a whole; and (b14) The width is increased in other areas to maintain a 25-ft., 30-ft., or 50-ft. average width, whichever is applicable;and rcsourcc to be rcduccd to a minimum of tcn ft. if: (ii) The widt lisincrcaseerother-areas-tee ainta�„-a-25-f ..- yerage widt�7; and Item 6(M): Streamline standard by combining identical sections. Add buffer averaging minimum for 50' PRA so that every width of required PRA is listed. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 7 OF 27 ITEM 7: LOC 50.05.010.2.b.ii/Sensitive Lands Applicability: Mitigation for Resource Restoration b. Exceptions—General The provisions in this section shall not apply to: ii. Resource ation mitigation required as a result of violation of this section or pursuant to settlement of a potential enforcement action by the City Manager, subject to City Manager approval of the restoration plan and procedures and the requirements of LOC 50.05.010.2.f. Item 7 (M): Establish that mitigation standards would apply to mitigation required in response to a code violation. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 8 OF 27 ITEM 8: LOC 50.07.003.1.e.i and ii/Pre-Application Conference for Resource Enhancement Projects e. Pre-Application Conference i. A pre-application conference with the City Manager is required for: (1) Minor and major development permit applications; and (2) Ministerial permit applications:for any type of accc ory dwe ryg unit InnU)that i not a convcrsion n. (A) For any type of accessory dwelling unit(ADU)that is not a conversion of existing floor area (including the garage floor area) in a primary structure.An ADU created by an addition to a primary structure is not a conversion.An ADU that is located in an accessory structure is not a conversion;and (B) Resource enhancement projects that involve work within a stream or wetland other than removal of invasive species and planting of vegetation. ii. A pre-application conference is not required for ministerial applications except as required in subsection 1.e.i of this section, but may be scheduled at the request of the applicant or when required by the City Manager. Item 8 (M): Require a pre-app conference for Resource Enhancement Projects that involve in-stream work other than planting of vegetation. Staff propose the requirement to attend a free pre-application conference with staff prior to any in-stream work other than planting of native vegetation because even small changes in flow on an upstream property can greatly impact downstream properties. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 9 OF 27 ITEM 9: LOC 50.07.007.2.c.iii/Flag Lot Access Lane Consolidation/"Practicable" c. Access i. When creating flag lots,the reviewing authority shall require that access to the flag lots is consolidated into a single shared access lane with the non-flag lot(s) or off site,wherever practicablc. If not practicable, then new lots may have individual access points. //// Item 9 (M): Change flag lot access standard to a clear and objective path. If the applicant cannot meet the clear and objective path,then non-consolidation of access is provided as a discretionary path to residential housing. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 10 OF 27 ITEM 10: LOC 50.03.005.4.b.ii and Table 50.06.002-3/Outdoor Restaurant Dining—No Parking Required LOC 50.03.005.4.b.ii b. Seasonal retail sales as detailed below: i. Christmas tree sales from November 26 to December 31. ii. parking is required for the outdoor usc. Fireworks sales for July 4th iii. "Pushcart" vendors in the EC and GC zones. Food vendors will have all required Health Department licenses and certificates. Such uses limited to food and flowers. Concurrency Amendment: If Ord 2851 for seasonal restaurant enclosures is adopted by City Council before the above is considered by the Council,then the following code change would be adopted: ii. Fireworks sales for July 4tn Table 50.06.002-3 TABLE 50.06.002-3: MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS Type of Use Parking Space Required (E)COMMERCIAL 6. Specialty food stores, such as coffee, bagels,juice bars (take- 6.6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. out food/drink primarily)f 31 7. Eating or drinking establishment al 13.3 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. 8. Eating or drinking establishment with drive-up window u 9.9 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. Parking requirement for uses not specifically mentioned in this section shall be determined by the requirements for off-street parking facilities for the listed use which, as determined by the City LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 11 OF 27 TABLE 50.06.002-3: MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS 1 Type of Use Parking Space Required J1] Manager, is most similar to the use not specifically mentioned, or by an analysis of the parking needs generated by the type of use [See LOC 50.06.002.2.a.ii(6)]. [1] Gross floor area does not include any parking area. [2] Farm stands: When accessory use, no additional parking spaces required. [3] No additional parking is required for outdoor restaurant uses or seasonal restaurant enclosures, in conjunction with an existing indoor year-round restaurant. Item 10(M): Move existing provision for no additional parking for the outdoor area of eating establishments from the temporary uses section of the code and move it to the parking table for consistency: all parking standards should be in the same place. Also add temporary fireworks sales as a permitted temporary use as July 4th fireworks stands have been allowed on a temporary basis for many years. Concurrency Note: LU 20-0019 Seasonal Restaurant Enclosures Amendments proposes adding language to 50.03.005.4.b and a note in the Parking Standard, LOC 50.06.002 to make it clear that no parking is required for seasonal restaurant enclosures. It also noted in LU 20-0019 that the amendment should include outdoor restaurant uses, if this amendment is first adopted. If this amendment is later adopted than LU 20-0019, as is expected, the change shall be reflected in the Parking Standard, LOC 50.06.002. ITEM 11: LOC 50.03.003.1.b/Manufactured Homes and Allowed Zones b. Manufactured Homes i. General Provisions (1) Manufactured Homes Permitted on Individual Lots and Parcels Manufactured homes are permitted on individual lots or parcels in all R 15, R 10, R 7.5, and R 5 residential zones as permitted in Table 50.03.002-1: Residential Districts Use Table, in accordance with the placement standards below and all other provisions of this Code which apply to conventionally built dwellings. Item 11 (M): Clarify that, consistent with state law(ORS 197.314), manufactured homes are permitted in all zones where single family dwellings are allowed.The zones where manufactured homes are permitted is provided in Table 50.03.002-1 Residential Districts Use Table. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 12 OF 27 ITEM 12: LOC 50.10.003.2/Definitions/Net Developable Area LOC 50.06.004.1/Landscaping LOC 50.06.005/Open Space LOC 50.04.003.10/Minimum Density LOC 50.10.003.2/ Definitions/Net Developable Area Net Developable Area Gross area (at 43,560 sq. ft. per acre) including dcncity transfer area n sidnntially designatcd land, less he area in street right-of-way or access easements, except that the area of a vehicular access easement created by a minor partition shall not be deducted. For public streets, use the actual area if known or 20% of the gross area. For private streets use actual area if known or 40 ft. right-of-way. For vehicular access easements use actual area of easement,-and. Dhlin n cr»nn n�cnrr.nn+nr rinrlin�4inn if�nnnr�4nrd by 4hn ri+ . LOC 50.06.005.3.b/Open Space 3. STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL b. Required Open Space- How Provided i. Open space land in commercial, institutional, public use, industrial and office campus development may be provided as a combination of reserved land and landscaping. Where no RP or RC district resources is located on the site, the open space requirement can be met by protecting designated Habitat Benefit Area (HBA) area pursuant to LOC 50.05.010.7, by protecting nondesignated natural resource areas, and/or providing landscaping which meets the requirements of the landscaping standard. iii. Public park land, if transfer of the land from the development site is accepted by the governmental agency. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 13 OF 27 LOC 50.06.004.1.b / Landscaping b. Standards for Approval i. Commercial, institutional, and industrial development, other than in the Office Campus zone, shall provide a minimum of 15% of the net developable area in landscaping and/or open space visible from off site, including courtyards, planters, raised beds, espaliers, etc. Developments involving office campus and major public facilities shall provide a minimum of 20%. Exception: The area of public park land, if transfer of the land from the development site is accepted by the governmental agency. may be deducted from the landscaping area requirement. ii. Multi-family and manufactured home park development must provide 20% of the net developable area in landscaping in addition to the park and open space requirements. Exception: The area of public park land, if transfer of the land from the development site is accepted by the governmental agency, may be deducted from the landscaping area requirement. /// LOC 50.04.003.10/ Minimum Density 10. EXCEPTIONS TO THE MINIMUM DENSITY REQUIREMENT FOR ALL ZONES a. The minimum density requirements are not applicable to sites identified on the City's Historic Landmark Designation List. b. The minimum density requirements are not applicable to publicly owned open space lands. c. The number of lots required by the minimum density provisions may be reduced as necessary in any of the following circumstances: i. Where the most appropriate design and location for a stormwater detention or water quality facility is above ground and outside a required open space; or ii. Where in order to comply with the minimum density requirement it would be necessary to develop in a floodplain; or iii. Where topographic, natural resources and/or soil constraints exist on site, to the extent that an applicant can demonstrate that compliance with LOC 50.06.006.2, Hillside Protection, LOC 50.05.01,_, Sensitive Lands Overlay Districts, or other soil constraints regulated by the City's Codes or the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code, would preclude development such that the minimum number of lots could not be developed; or LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 14 OF 27 iv. Where an application is for land division approval using the HBA incentives in LOC 50.05.010; or v. Where the total number of residential dwelling units resulting from the development will be at least 80% of the maximum number permitted in the zone. For the R-0, R-2 zones, the minimum lots per acre and methodology specified in LOC th0.04.001.3.a, Residential High Density Zones, shall be used for calculating minimum density. For the R-DD zone, the minimum lots per acre and methodology specified in LOC 50.04.001.2.a, Residential Medium Density Zones, shall be used for calculating minimum density; vi. Where the location of an existing dwelling is such that the applicant can demonstrate that other requirements of this Community Development Code cannot be met if the minimum required number of lots is developed. vii. Public park land, if transfer of the land from the development site is accepted by the governmental agency LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 15 OF 27 Item 12 (M)Staff Commentary:The definitions of Net Developable Area and Density Transfer Area currently conflict, which makes it difficult to calculate minimum density and open space requirements for a subdivision where the applicant commits to dedicating open space to the City, rather than providing the open space in a private tract, and the City has indicated it would accept the dedication pending approval of the development application. Table Note 1,Table 50.04.001-1: Residential Low Density Zones Dimensions, requires minimum density for a subdivision to be calculated as follows: "[1] When subdivisions are proposed,the number of lots required shall be determined by dividing the net developable area by the minimum lot size per unit required in the underlying zone, and multiplying this number by 0.8. The result shall be rounded up for any product with a fraction of 0.5 or greater and rounded down for any product with a fraction of less than 0.5. The requirements of this section are subject to the exceptions contained in LOC 50.04.003.10, Exceptions to the Minimum Density Requirement for All Zones." [emphasis added] LOC 50.04.003.10, Exceptions to the Minimum Density Requirement for All Zones, excludes publicly owned open space from minimum density requirements: "10. EXCEPTIONS TO THE MINIMUM DENSITY REQUIREMENT FOR ALL ZONES a.The minimum density requirements are not applicable to sites identified on the City's Historic Landmark Designation List. b. The minimum density requirements are not applicable to publicly owned open space lands. " [emphasis added] The amount of Park and Open Space Contribution required by LOC 50.06.005 for development, e.g., residential subdivision is 20% of the "net developable area": "iii. Land divisions listed in LOC 50.06.005.1.a.vii on sites of greater than 75,000 sq. ft. in size shall provide open space approved by the City in an aggregate amount equal to at least 20%of the net developable area of the development." [emphasis added] Similar issue is presented in the Landscaping standard. Applying the definitions above,the Net Developable Area is determined by taking the "gross area", which includes "density transfer area"within the lot, less any public open space "accepted by the City."The confusion is that the Density Transfer Area definition includes area to be dedicated for public open space. The proposed amendments to the Net Developable Area definition remove the conflict and is consistent with LOC 50.04.003.10 Exceptions to Minimum Density,which states that minimum density requirements are not applicable to public open space, but allows the public open space dedication to be included for the purpose of determining maximum density per LOC 50.06.005.5: LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 16 OF 27 "5. DENSITY TRANSFER a. Density Transfer Allowed Open space may be included in the net site area when determining the maximum allowable density. Structures that otherwise might have been located on open space may be transferred to other portions of the site, and lot areas may be reduced to offset for land reserved as open space, as long as the overall density remains within the maximum permitted by the zone." Finally, for streamlining, the amendment also deletes "including Density Transfer Area" because Gross Area is the gross area, as it naturally includes portions of the site that would qualify as Density Transfer Areas. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 17 OF 27 ITEM 13: LOC 50.07.004.8.b.iii(a)/Sensitive Lands Map Correction Reporting (a) Ministerial Development Decision,for corrections to scrivener's errors.The Sensitive Lands Map shall be updated with each correction and the u plates sh^" he " ortcd to the Planning Commi"`ie" and City Council not lace than ally. Item 13 (M):The code currently requires staff to report on sensitive lands map corrections to the Planning Commission and City Council annually. These map corrections are when they are due to scrivener's errors. There are only a small number of these each year, and since the sensitive lands map was amended in 2015 the Council has not had any questions or provided any direction to staff in response to the reports. Staff asks to remove the reporting requirement but will continue to document and retain files for all ministerial map corrections. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 18 OF 27 ITEM 14: LOC 50.06.002.2.b/Bicycle Parking Table 50.06.002-6 TABLE 50.06.002-6: MINIMUM REQUIRED BICYCLE PARKING SPACES /// USES NOT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED Parking requirement for Use Categories and/or Specific Uses not specifically listed above shall be determined by the requirements for bicycle parking spaces for the Use Category/Specific Use which, as determined by the City Manager, is most similar to the use not specifically listed. Item 14(M):The vehicle parking table (Table 50.06.002-3, Section H) states that when a specific use is not listed, staff may apply the parking ratio required for the most similar use.This same provision is not found in the bicycle parking table (Table 50.06.002-6). Staff proposes adding a "similar use" allowance in the bike parking table, similar to the vehicle parking table. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 19 OF 27 ITEM 15: LOC 50.10.003/Definitions/Undisturbed Slopes Undisturbed Slopes Slopes, or portions of slopes,that have not beer p sly altered from the of_natural topography vegetation, and soils that have not been previously altered for slope stability, i.e., re-contoured, graded, and/or terraced, and the altered alteration of the slope was either performed in accordance with or subsequently approved by a licensed geotechnical engineer, registered civil engineer experienced in soils engineering, or licensed engineering geologist. Undi turb„d slo pcs i t of natural top graph.. . „tatioh �T Item 15 (M): Staff proposes changes to the definition of"Undisturbed Slopes" for clarity.The Hillside Protection Overlay limits development on undisturbed terrain exceeding certain slopes. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 20 OF 27 ITEM 16: LOC 50.06.002-3/ADU Parking Requirement TABLE 50.06.002-3: MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS OTHER AREAS (A) RESIDENTAIL // 2. Accessory ; space-per toTspace-requi-red f r- ain-a^ �'wel;ng-u-n t)See dwelling unit LOC-50.03.004,1.b.v;/,l \f„r siing staa,,t,;rrd,None(ORS 197.312(5)(b)) Item 16(M): The City shall not require any on-site parking (and no ADU parking requirements exist) in accordance with ORS 197.312(5)(b). LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 21 OF 27 ITEM 17: LOC 50.06.008.4.h/Fire Hydrant Requirements h. Design, including materials, size and location of water mains, service lines, valves and hydrants, shall be in accordance with City Engineering Division's policies, design standards, technical specifications and standard details and be approved by the City Manager. Hydrants shall be located at as required by the Oregon Fire Code. Item 17 (M): Streamline the fire hydrant placement requirements for development by referring to the Fire Code directly. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 22 OF 27 POLICY CODE AMENDMENTS Item 1: LOC 50.06.003.2.b.i/Driveway Approach Spillover //// (6). The driveway approach shall be within the right-of-way bounded by the extension of the lot's side or street side lot lines. //// Item 1 (P): Prevent driveway approach from being in front of abutting lot. If the side lot line is angled on the lot, the angle continues into the ROW. r r //1;.7 \ ":;'''):7 -___ I l'aii \ %I/ \ -----___ 7 . 1 2 1 1 : 70/›. lz) i lllllllt at — F , if _s. _1. I , ,..-411 7 9, • • .,,,s9. Ng' , ---....,........ III ,.— , 2 7/ ' . .1+ II y I i f I LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 23 OF 27 ITEM 2: LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii/R-6 Maximum Lot Coverage Standard //// Table 50 0 004-3 esidential — Medium Density Zonc Dimension {3) Decks less than five ft. above grade, stairs, pergolas, trellises or other landscaping structures, nd c rete slabs shall be a r.t from lot c calculations //// Item 2 (P): Change the R-6 lot coverage methodology to better match other residential zones to encourage preservation of trees. Proposed change would delete two extra lot coverage allowances from the R-6 zone and reduce development allowed by the R-6 zone. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 24 OF 27 ITEM 3: LOC 50.10.003/Cohousing Definition Cohousing Community Semi-communal housing consisting of multiple dwelling units in a multi-family dwelling, with one or more communal living spaces such as cooking and eating facilities, gardens, meeting spaces. recreation areas, and sanitary facilities. Where dwelling units are individually owned, the communal living spaces are managed by a homeowners association, cooperative, partnership, or other legal entity for the benefit of the residents. Dwelling Unit One or more habitable rooms which are occupied or which are intended or designed to be occupied by one family with housekeeping facilities for living, sleeping, sanitary facilities, cooking and eating:, except that_living facilities, such as cooking, eating and sanitary facility areas may be communal in a cohousing community. [Cross-Reference: See also "Family" definition referring to occupancy of dwelling unit as a single housekeeping unit.] Dwelling, Multi-Family A building on one or more lots designed to contain three or more dwelling units that share common walls or floor/ceilings with one or more units. The land underneath the structure is not divided into separate lots. "Multi-family dwelling" includes structures commonly called garden apartments, apartments,and condominiums, and cohousing community. Item 3 (P): The code does not currently define or address cohousing. Staff propose to define "Cohousing" as a cooperative living arrangement (a "community")that may exist in multi-family developments. Cohousing communities are intentional communities with communal living spaces, which may include but are not limited to kitchens, gardens, meeting spaces, recreation areas, sanitary facilities, etc. In cohousing communities, decision making, particularly for these communal spaces, is for the collective. A Dwelling Unit is currently"One or more habitable rooms which are occupied or which are intended or designed to be occupied by one family with housekeeping facilities for living, sleeping, sanitary facilities, cooking and eating." This proposed definition intentionally does not reference single-family dwellings, accessory dwellings, duplexes, congregate care, or other uses. However, by limiting cohousing to multi-family dwellings, as multi-family is presently defined, the code amendments do not invoke House Bill 2001 or limit the City's options for implementing the bill's middle housing mandates. The code change does not add any new dwelling types to the Code or add an allowed use to any zone where multi- family dwellings are not permitted. No "single-family zone" is affected. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 25 OF 27 Item 4: LOC 50.10.003.2/Definitions/Community Institution/Institutional Use LOC 50.10.003.2 Definitions Community Institution e unrelated-to-the-institution, Institutional Use Private educational, fraternal, religious facilities and private or public cultural, civic,religious-or social welfare facilities. It does not include governmental facilities or public schools (see "Public Facility"). //// Table 50.03.002-2 COMMERCIAL, MIXED USE, INDUSTRIAL AND SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS USE TABLE Use- Commercial,Mixed Use,Industrial Special Purpose Specific Use Standards Use Type Category WLG FMU , NC , GC HC OC EC CR&D MC I IP CI PF PNA OC RMU R-2.5 PUBLIC,INSTITUTIONAL, 50,03.003. AND CIVIC USES 5 Cemetery c Community P/C P/C 50.03.003.6 garden j Community and Cultural Community P P P P P P P P 50.03.003.5 institutions Facilitya Institutional Use LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 26 OF 27 Item 4(P):Combine the definitions of"community institution"and "institutional use" into a single defined term.The proposal deletes the term "community institution"and broadens the definition of"institutional use"accordingly. References to the funding source and structure of an organization,such as"public service organization"and "charitable entity," are deliberately left out of the new definition of"institutional use" because those terms are not defined in the code and because the intent of the code is to regulated uses, not the form or funding source of the entity that is operating the use. LU 20-0015 (DRAFT 07/30/20) ATTACHMENT A/PAGE 27 OF 27