Loading...
Approved Minutes - 2022-06-27 PMAPPROVED: 08/08/2022 City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission June 27, 2022 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Planning Commission Minutes June 27, 2022 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Christian Papé called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chamber, at 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034. 2. ROLL CALL Members present were Vice Chair Christian Papé, and Commissioners Rex Buchanan, Helen Leek, Don Phillips, Miles Rigby, and Philip Stewart. Council Liaison Jackie Manz was also present. Chair Robert Heape was excused. Staff present were Scot Siegel, Community Development Director; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; Paul Espe, Associate Planner; Erik Olson, Senior Planner; and Iris McCaleb, Administrative Assistant. 3. COUNCIL UPDATE Councilor Manz provided an update on recent Council activity, she relayed that an Inter- Governmental Agreement (IGA) with Metro was adopted for Middle Housing on Boones Ferry Road, and that the City Council recently held study sessions on Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities and housing needs. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 5. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT (CCI) – GENERAL UPDATES None. 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING 6.1 Comprehensive Plan Map and Sensitive Lands Atlas Amendments (LU 22-0015) A request by the City of Lake Oswego for an amendment of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Map and Sensitive Lands Atlas to designate approximately 2.9 acres of Resource Protection (RP) Overlay District for a Class 1 Wetland on two parcels totaling approximately 5.01 acres, pursuant to LOC Chapter 50.07.004.8. The properties are located at: 13570 and 13580 Goodall Road (21E04BC00200 and 21E04BC00300). Staff coordinator was Paul Espe, Associate Planner. On June 13, the Commission held a public hearing and left the record open for written testimony until June 20 at 5:00 p.m. The Commission deliberated and considered the Findings, Conclusions and Order (final recommendation). APPROVED: 08/08/2022 City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission June 27, 2022 Page 2 of 3 Staff Report Mr. Espe reviewed the written and oral testimony received to date; adding G-100 and G-101 (received during the continuation period) to the record. Mr. Espe described the Sensitive Lands overlay map noting that Mr. Parker's contention that the proposed RP District map amendment was imposing an additional unmapped Habitat Benefit Area (HBA) on the subject properties was not the case (citing pages 1 and 3 of the staff report). He then noted that possible residential uses on the HBA were not a conflict with tree groves identified because the HBA development restrictions were voluntary, unless the HBA incentives were applied for. Mr. Espe explained that before designation, the RP District covered .98 acres (19.6%) of the subject properties, and after designation, the RP District would cover 2.9 acres (58%) of the subject properties. Mr. Espe noted that any negative economic impacts would be substantially mitigated through the adjustments in density transfer allowed in the Sensitive Lands Code (LOC 50.05.10) and in the range of housing options allowed in the R-15 zone. He indicated this would also apply to the negative social consequences alleged by Mr. Parker. Mr. Espe stated that the protection of these resources would allow residential development to occur, while ensuring that residents continued to enjoy the positive environmental values of the resource. Questions of Staff Commissioner Stewart asked that the criteria for establishing an HBA be described, as he did not recall seeing that in his review of the record (including the meeting video). Mr. Siegel explained that the contiguous tree grove was delineated and then a percentage of that canopy would need to be protected by applying an easement over it; adding that these operated much the same as Resource Conservation (RC) districts on public and private open space tracts when property owners applied for the HBA incentive. Commissioner Leek inquired whether this designation was arrived at due to a development application on these properties, or whether it happened in the process of identifying sensitive lands in Lake Oswego. Mr. Espe advised that it was a little of both; explaining that an environmental report, which was filed with an annexation application, documented the presence of the wetlands. Commissioner Phillips requested confirmation that the property owner, Ms. Myers, applied for annexation because she was planning to sell it to Mr. Parker, the prospective buyer. Mr. Espe affirmed. Commissioner Phillips asked why the City was the Applicant, rather than the property owner, Ms. Myers. Mr. Espe acknowledged that it was unusual to have the City intervene in the designation of an RP resource; explaining that, in this case, there was a wetland present without any Comprehensive Plan designation for that wetland, and that provisions in the code allowed for the designation of those wetlands . Mr. Siegel added that when property was annexed, the City was required to apply zoning, pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, and, through the analysis, they determined that there was more to the RP District than just the stream corridor (finding the associated wetland). Commissioner Phillips then requested confirmation that, if adopted by the City Council, the area surrounding the stream would be protected from development. Mr. Siegel affirmed that the area noted in blue on the Proposed Sensitive Lands Map would encompass the protected area. Deliberations Vice Chair Papé closed the public hearing. Mr. Boone asked Commissioner Stewart to declare any declare any ex parte contacts (including site visits), biases, or financial conflicts, APPROVED: 08/08/2022 City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission June 27, 2022 Page 3 of 3 as he was not present at the last hearing, but reported that he reviewed the entire record. Mr. Stewart replied that he had none. Mr. Rigby stated that he had not reviewed the entire record. Mr. Boone affirmed that Mr. Rigby would not be eligible to vote on this application. Mr. Boone then instructed Vice Chair Papé to proceed to deliberations. Commissioner Leek stated that she appreciated the work City staff had done to identify the sensitive lands; adding that the potential land developer's and current property owner's arguments did not meet the criteria to fill the housing shortages. She opined that the plan was well-designed and should go forward as proposed by the City. Commissioner Stewart acknowledged that there would be a significant impact to the subject properties; however, there was not any flaw seen in the reports provided by the City, thus leaving him no choice but to be in favor of approval. Vice Chair Papé indicated that he agreed with Commissioner Leek's comments regarding the testimony provided in opposition. Commissioner Leek moved to recommend City Council approval of the proposed amendments and Findings of LU 22-0015. Commissioner Buchanan seconded the motion and it passed 5:0. Commissioner Rigby abstained. 7. WORK SESSION 7.1 Housing Needs and Production Strategies – House Bill 2003 – Work Session #1 (PP 22-0005) The Commission reviewed and provided direction to staff on a proposed work plan for complying with the housing production strategy requirements of House Bill 2003. Staff coordinator was Erik Olson, Senior Planner. Action Items: • The Commission directed staff to formalize the project pchedule and scope of work and to move forward with suggested next steps. 8. OTHER BUSINESS 8.1 Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities (PP 22-0001) The Commission received an update. Staff coordinator was Scot Siegel, Director of Community Development. There were no action items. 9. SCHEDULE REVIEW Mr. Siegel reviewed the schedule. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no other business, Vice Chair Papé adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m.