The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet - 2024-03-19 AGENDA VA" F p� CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, March 19, 2024 C3 I 3:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chamber- 3rd Floor GREGG2 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Staff Contact: Kari Linder, CityRecorder@lakeoswego.city Virtual Access ADA Accommodation Requests Translation Services This meeting will be held in lakeoswego.city/accommodation Traduccion o interpretacion person.To participate remotely, 503-635-0282; Relay 711 Ti please email the City Recorder by Please allow four business days to gc4-4 noon the day of the meeting. process your request. 5 503-534-5738 This meeting will be livestreamed on the City's YouTube Channel and at lakeoswego.city.The meeting will also be broadcasted live on Tualatin Valley Community TV;check tvctv.org for details. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PRESENTATIONS 4.1 2024 Lake Oswego Reads. 4.2 Arbor Month Proclamation. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT The purpose of Public Comment is to allow community members 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 three minutes per individual shall apply. Public Comment will not exceed thirty minutes in total, unless changed by the Mayor. If you are unable to attend the meeting and prefer to provide public comment in writing, by phone or electronically, please email the City Recorder by noon the day of the meeting. 6. 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. 1 The City Council makes one motion covering all items included on the Consent Agenda. Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 6.1 2024 City Council Goals and Initiatives Work Plans. Motion: Move to approve the draft work plans for the 2024 City Council Initiatives. 6.2 Approving the Appointments of Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division Referees. Motion: Move to appoint Josh Soper and Joe Turner as Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division Referees. 6.3 Diversified Abilities Custodian Contract Award. Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract for custodial services with Diversified Abilities for$262,031.64. 6.4 WO 323, Awarding a Public Improvement Contract for the Construction of the Daniel Way Channel Stabilization Project. Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign a Public Improvement Contract with Daybreak Construction Inc. in the amount of$534,000 for the construction of Work Order 323, Daniel Way Channel Stabilization Project. 7. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8.1 Ordinance 2938, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) for the Purpose of Clarifying and Updating Various Provisions (2023); and Adopting Findings (LU 23-0036). Public Hearing Process: 1. Review of hearing procedure by Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney 2. Staff Report by Ellen Davis, Senior Planner 3. Testimony—the following time limits shall be observed, but may be changed by the Council: 10 minutes for representatives of recognized neighborhood associations, homeowner associations, government agencies, or other incorporated public interest organizations; 5 minutes per individual 4. Questions of Staff Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 Motion: Move to tentatively approve Ordinance 2938 and direct staff to return on April 2, 2024, with a final version of the ordinance, including findings and conclusions for LU 23-0036. 9. STUDY SESSION 9.1 Mitigation Requirements for Single-Family and Duplex Development (PP 24-0001). 10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS 12. ADJOURNMENT Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY 4.1 Library 04 E O�4 LAKE OSWEGO READS 2024 18THANNUAL SELECTION • i ,„ % kis' 4 r� -ram.. - .7. ti O rt.... t.M1MMR1►b bed. -Otlrl .FP1N OfIWO Q firq: 0 di 11 _ READS % I o .._... .;:a. 4 , (...i .„4- • a .... 11 ,,ii . ..7. :•\.,,.-7.,,,, ,... ., , .: „ ., :,..,..,,,,..4..... :.,,, , okip4 c dci, 0 k 7 ,; \ Ito , .. s„,,,, , , . •4 0 4 Cl g ., ,. , iNh, ;1,------/ . • ittiN6 a .i . 4 , - , c 4cay k ' ' 0 i 11' 4,--,„ .. .., iop. , , .... .. 0 0 ,,-; IF V tea_ mkt) IF ai' — - _ _,_, 7.:.. voi'-i' „/ 1 k • i _. THRillUMRIBAR P:[l ./�iw,.a +Whet f, 'r c Srice ►[rwttr OS \. - ,- f dir, mosmor 0RK1EI / A MONTH FULL OF EVENTS LAKE OSWEGO PUBLIC LIBRARY PRESENTS THE AWARD WINNING LAKE OSWEGO READS n H ANNUAL o 0 ,„.,„ lb ) I ' 1 .raznu ... „ owe Rotary C;;; APRIL 2024 b,i Review la Me0swe9oPo .YCI„b 0 40 Atk. �� `' ' VI k I 41 1 4° . • ' ,' ilk NI cp. • .. . OoD0 Io I O ..PpmyHmpMJ � . EPPE�• Mp 4 , ,o, \,.., c azii \ . Ilk 11.1. . N. '0 1 ollf II 4111111r 1111 \ r..4 , . .4(i .,., ••,.... • ;; _ OP # \- q ,Ur�E v AO �i11 rKrtN ofIt II ALA. II 4 Q k. 11311116 � TsSPACzNE " . CaP ,:li^d," Po�1 w, 1 O Cr COMPLEA AND UNFILTERED, THESE ARE THE TYPE OF CHARACTERS THAT STICH WITH YOU LONG AFTER 4' 0 v C YOU TURN THE PAGES . . . [A] POWERFUL STORY ABOUT FAMILY, DEVOTION, AND CULTURAL TRUTHS. lib " Alln -REESE WITHERSPOON iiiii0 o 0REGO 0 40 iicir o,� CP oo • v N44., 42 AP I/ g 0 D0 . _ ____„.....____ - •,,,.. (._..... -..„. .2.4,-, .,!,,,,,.), ., , - A" ' 401- „,,....:;..w..,,,, ..,,,,,&--.A. _,-,4,..„-_,..„_ -_ -_. -,,, ,,,7, - ,.,..„.p.,..:..‘_.„. , y- ._,,,t,, - , ,.ww.,,, ,;„ . ,., :.:„..., - _ _ ._ \ ::' LAKE OSWEGO READS '' > IIII�IIII� ` , ,. • k \ • ART SHOW �t Join artists for a memorable evening as they explain the art they created `� 2 after reading Honor.The artwork will be displayed throughout April at - ■ �:� ■ the Lakewood Center for the Arts.Artists include Bill Baily, Lisa � ` °`� _ Brinkman, Cathleen Casey, Leslie Cheney Parr, Susie Cowan, Bonnie �1111 ;11 ii1III III i IGarlington, Mini Giri,Susan Harrington, Dave Haslett, Shobha Jetmalani, 1 '�/ � Dyanne Locati,Terri Neal, Kara Pilcher,Jan Rimerman, Leanne Streit, Beth Verheyden, Lisa Wiser,Jim Wylder, Beth Yazhari, and Yong Hong '� Zhong. Light refreshments will be served. i Y�G •_—- = Monday, April 1 , 6:00 pm reception, 6:45pm presentation 4 / \ @ Lakewood Center for the Arts C READS * � s1, Nvt %; 40 my Ilik op 0.ov lib o. o v _ v of EO IJGAR STORYTIME & INA4ILK n PICTURE BOOK GIVEAWAY by Thrill,Umrigar v o a umuPa by Khoa Le �a 4 " Bring the entire family to the Children's Library for a reading of Thrity s� '= ' 76. t Umrigar's picture book,Sugar in Milk.Signed copies of the book will be 'a r v[i; available for free,while supplies last,thanks to generous community ' t support of our 2023 fundraising campaign and a matching grant from � :,,'r the Friends of the Lake Oswego Public Library. r � /, yi ''''''':4 '1' illVirt ,A., ^ . +1 • ;01 �it'li�- ?, Saturday, April 13 / ' ,` f' 10:30am @ Lake Oswego Public Library _..; READS - nonoa � I f r 'c r V FOR KIDS • 1 D 6o e _._t-Mrrruir-7- - a a � .O o t. 10 RIDS a p 0 0 o•o O t:. ART .BAR „} . c o v 00 ...k. - o 0 0 oI14 ...,4 4 STORYWALK. „.,,,: .,,,,,.,....,.7...:-,. .:.',VA;' OP 0 1 egt Cei at West Waluga Park j��++ , . '' i. ili April1-3u -.i, i` Featuring$1g9F in Milk alb REAdS OY&KI a Le Thy\ip.,:;i11,:mr.i-g: i 1d� cif'` . } It ` t ir-4' elel, TEENS READ = A\ CIIII) li 61. 1 9 ...._/"A.'' ,,..scr.-, C) f T' i'l April 18 @ lPiiiiii_ I§ ( 6pm ) CLUB oREG0\4, ART & MUSIC P o r._ P I v _____, t SATURDAY, Cil 0 le:P ow APRIL 6 0 Q � 2:00pm Lake Oswego ' Q , Public Li �brary gq4kQ -4_t- .: . W 1)0 .I4 1 ilkaE . i... , 2 . . Am, II ' SUNDAY, we 1- r' Nv •' APRIL 21 • 1 D ,° 0 ` 0 1 t ` ' y '- 2:00pm ilk Q 0 �Q ! @Lake a k ec Oswego , {+.. ry QO e,rm — \)[,46' :1' r' FRIDAY, 0vv O � Lea_` = ��' ' APRIL 19 /O ' O - 7:30pm _ ,e' @ First ► ' r Congregational :,„.t Church Portland „t Ili:. h M,. �\ `� J BOOK DISCUSSIONS "" .. , H,4...,-- ixlNj; ;r.k 4t') tRTUESDAY, 1 ti4x MOi• N D A.YI( , APRIL 2 APRIL 8 2:00pm _ 11 :30am . . '..!•• ,(•• „ ( y; --• • t.- ''- *P. If © Lake Oswego ..W' ' 0- © Adult Community ! . 4,,, . ,. Public Library , Center -1 THRITT 11111RICAR :,.. ...- -, - , I. , -„>. . . / '; . , ... ...... 4, .v READS - , / -.:.-- __-' ,.......____ o • i c N ' ( ' 1 •-.. „ • v I ../ ,4 i ,. . ,SATURDA:) APRIL 13 , ) .______ II NJ 11 i :: SATURDAY, .... \0 APRIL 27 11'1111; _ ..._ • lic,... - ..:..„, / IF 10:00am _ 10:30am AAUVI @ Oswego Heritage . T11111 1111111 '---,1, @ Lake Oswego ',./ A House Public Library 1.A -- .... , • # - ‘ , __.--...__.---_-_=-. ,- . • •. , .,„ , 4,,,, 4• , 4i ,.._-k• f:. -.' _-_---;-.? ..../ ' 7- - \C.1 loomp 0 \ i RE GC)__,..," COMMUNITY COLLABORATION 1 P . APRIL N MO � � . F'-; �r , 3IAb O+w�go _—.i dX h 0 WEDNESDAY 9 READS �{ \J 1 a - HONOR = T H 4f I i 1 1 )_.„,, O 40 a �. APRIL 18 Cr I 1 10:00am lb FIRST WEDNESDAY � ,. . _, _5 L :.mod 0 0 kq4` HAUTAUQ A -_• - _ ;:; Lakewood Center - eery }++ t r for the Arts oThe Transformation of Modern India + + + + s } } I . + DR. DAVID CAMPION �.. O o + } RE.REs�MERr=A.s oa PM ....,. . + = r i I f.- - ..-Tlr:://-----\ ti - >' r -- . :' ATU R DAY, II ,111 r f' ; ► - APRIL 13.Nt Na % ...._ , 10:00arri , /Q �f' Q gik_ PAU it © Oswego Heritage . ( i House �Q v • �..M14: 2�v.nrnR i .n ry is v (44 41140 v `•' I r c Q . .r.-`•'.''' '`i ?. e' II,: ,.--•..3tOW .; et' . .-''' ' --- ' 0 frE.'; AiS .,,. .u.-4.111'..y -4r—AK:'• '.: :-. ./ :' '...-'''4 II3 ' g 1 :k °REG D PA RT I C I PATE ,_ . - 4. ,'7� SCHEDULEDF _ L�� HONOR �� w, � e OsU,e �o Req�l 2 2a c�M�"•�r 5 � rs 02 APRII� a� •. a.� pn .9• � a 'nt y,m: n" m. "i c" 3 Moo e"„r awe+ , "�,m•'"• j m•""" ar t rosin= aua rk ,'„,,' seek j 3o>m t y a 11111/1 @:s' :1:: 2sm.a.r"m Pm ►f118 12 a ...Ml ,ra, . �a„ v ;e."y'vm,pa�e,�.r: , m + °o`w m Attendta 3• hr> heev�,mr, 9w> eao< ;w�e. N`,at 2pgi£t baskepts andPartt ems'�� .t"a ets, ciP rs .naua,gn+mow ' wm is p gee i t7may. m s µ,P"",u `�-"remn mwe Colorinor 1'ar iei puslyd°ndb e activities bel _, @ ,W:Mor,<•"n q�, E�"".r3� 77 t.nume��'ea`"a«:: ��v,m2' :::::::2 ore;nfortnahotnthe boxtoaeantsen to e h rLake Osw go I a chance to w. au.rv, to•nry 1b .n a••a wo+ns>,m�a.. about b acdv Yone. -ibrar rnoneer ^mi,vw•ia"oa2Bo 2q�rcontactinform„Lt)Reads and re ate,wle[ed beloRand s hoWit a rsory$yard,three - vi to .waa•',mwm0Cl uu,,n, awm„a.rv25attheau V beloenty and ac. for each„a "� ,m>lw"aas. 24c will be se] for event on April return this nvities,visif W,wt attended on .row c 23 t and winter acted via n 25 at Lakerid assaor[o lakeoswego.c I'll's:el:et rsesides yPicknPtheir Son the La2, anh of ppnl, ma r„ndomdrawin Ht*School(4e OsWeq odsn 1 hm ContactIn k• et _ cke P blic Libra „esemu9o°, Siftbas APril25 °andto�aa updat , fOrrnatipp bat the Libra [7PM'Partici Domed). eeen e y Re n�•qe S P 6. e'nht otsdo notA ri12� 9V't•9•, •e 1 97]a71;t965 ❑E dtDbeP39WKruseWav 'z{ to please<hecklhe'a•hs 5.1..° llualu �N II S y)alu9•a Da•m•'e pNAOS *CI uw •N om• w5."5wat s 12,5 pveabu nba+ry pamle '11°'�T503.635375 uhFOry5�.1503.63676M�um $Cane°de :------:„ Phone,` ,church 706 Xuu••rc9uap°P Rlau1 p30u9•�,j 5503.635�6373 Fus,c°"o,.- •ea.. h5t.1 COT 1.0]Zeadh °Od 11265WP Mb 35aTent epy7Ke.ear' 3sa33s bun` & °j �.. « Rif/resin': ead36e •5t'1 so3s broct+ur , YX� Learn to ft one book events Calenda �i44 e Galab Tatnune 11 ofhD fltll h'tles �_,TOOD t o°nsrdered w -- Visit the e +-4 LO for-•�n:'.wi0 Stor ( A RTHE Alt-IS \ s,:::.,`i"'j. Reads - o:, „YWalk. Ill k 1G•ENT R �_ +ron ,- vs \ 1' � � on ih h 4video2024 fat. ; b''dug.PatrA .O O■'yofleHistoryiat �- �t°PonDa' Hello Littlewageit% °PY � India:La �S qq ;; 1515 ❑eew f �'` BangY Rd. ❑ .9• BLO Refnendto an RgV1 i ::::: mor ayseventjll o4. ar e r a\ EosWeC r� e Watc i'll %404 q o o uke pD 7 is�pn '*y �� /�F(1Et1d5 3 REDsoa L . °thth video �¢OSWeyo e '0 e ti� � �>:i,�+ Parti[i k .1P4 A.2",::;.'"?-1—clibra 7' TY nIAR16A1 LB1tc t2 Q.,r•t6 1947 on o£ O. Choose creative! • k., 1®�111 �„:,..:�....: Kanopv ., waYtoce7urpwn_ s�>® uw"' - a t"� ebrate � R tart' ,tr Indian r4�) O Club col sire r ti Lake Oswe9°R°trY . , R 1 Evil., n.,. Evii ii, n ,. 'Ir;' : tu:4, .'..:-. ' '11, 6 ,, t 6 % . . ,:..... , , li , , , ,,,, . ,... 0 ;;;A - ;., A-1 .., ,... .... LO Reads 2024 MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY "A powAiL Important.unforgettable book"-CHERYL STRAYED,author of Mid APRIL 1 APRIL 2 APRIL 3 APRIL 11 Lake Oswego Reads Librarian-Led Book Oswego Heritage Art Show Discussion Council Chautauqua 1!! with LO Reads This Event is Called \i 1 I7/' 6:00pm reception, 2:00pm / � ' 6:45pm presentation Lake Oswego 5:30pm Time, Location / cQ Lakewood Center Public Library it Oswego Heritage ' ` ®' for the Arts House �' a FRIDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY s,,,.__,°s`"„� 4 a * . i APRIL 5 APRIL 6 APRIL 7 G � RE � e—c.LiS:r Norm ADS 3 t t_ % This Event is Called This Event is Called This Event is Called Time, Location Time, Location Time, Location . THRITT INIRICAR „...,,,, ak..tke..,e TH-E 5f gE angfell Of p 111 i i... f i S U , REGDV & # 40 o ., ____, . . ) ,. . . , , . .. _...... ,, \) [ THURSDAY , i II I �- -'. APRIL 25e, �1 7 :0 0 p m Al air MP @ Lakeridge High CP School ilittb i ; .j te-' • . 1/1 itili, - . ,t ii-,;.,........r et, _ 44114 '* '1%I.••• 114/ % . l sir iffre, #00/11.11# ? j ,I i ... .4• -Aar I ' .•! ' ! Eon r 6 I I Ilk mac i01 o wow ° 'EGO ` STAY INFORMED oni! I vaagfictin facebook Our Channels pm .: Tyc- I. 21 2 ' 28 30 . 30 Tualatin Valley Community TY Pubfie Publ-- at•ernment GOVErnment Wes:Limn Lake Oswego Public Library kiii, LakeOLib 127 subscribers al YoUTUbe - . i�, : www. LakeOswegoReads. org • o SPONSOR SUPPORT 0Qv car., O 0 p o• CI 11 il, `o' � o ` ��,, Lake Oswego Reads Presen�s �.. ' Friends F '* �; vake Oswego LakeOswego !<. A Qan(li6r� ,A;, � � µ , ry Review 'd `r10ENTERFoRTARTsLAKEWOOD 1 -"` .-40161' IN FAKE OSWEGO.OREGON-THE CITY OF ARTS �' " f Rotary t .1 TI 'I aro I Vlri] j VIvirlgalr Lake Oswego Rotary Club • ,1) BRITT UMRIOAR r';ii;:-' l ,4 i/ " Y S O ,4- 0gy�: m 8¢"4" kthn Tee Sp[e eer�u us R ;r i / , l i n i f c. C. 0 1 o o 1 vA 40 o iu oI °n'EGDV Library OOA(4O J' 'rr 0 4' U _ 01/ � REGOc� THANK YOU ! www. Lake0swegoReads . org �' r •► ARBOR MONTH PROCLAMATION (4 APRIL 2024 ' Whereas, in 1872,J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a '"' special day be set aside for the planting of trees; and •'" c ' Whereas, the holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than \ • one million trees in Nebraska; and r Whereas, Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world, and Oregon , .w Arbor Month is celebrated throughout the month of April; and Whereas, trees can reduce topsoil erosion by wind and water, lower our heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife; and • Whereas, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper,wood for our homes,fuel for our - fires, and countless other wood products; and e'C';' Whereas, trees in our City increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community; and Whereas, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal; and Whereas, for the past 35 years the City of Lake Oswego has been recognized with TREE rA • • CITY USA designation for having a viable urban and community forestry program "' - ,: that meets the standards established by The Arbor Day Foundation and the National Association of State Foresters. - - 1 NOW,THEREFORE, I,Joseph M. Buck, Mayor of the City of Lake Oswego, do hereby proclaim April 2024 as Arbor Month in the City of Lake Oswego, and I urge the community to celebrate Arbor Month and support efforts to protect trees and woodlands, and to plant and care for trees, for 1' the benefit of this and future generations. Joseph M. Buck, Mayor Date r . V [' 6.1 O F �s� COUNCIL REPORT CIA2) Subject: 2024 City Council Initiatives Work Plans Meeting Date: March 19, 2024 Staff Member: Martha Bennett, City Manager Report Date: March 11, 2024 Department: City Manager's Office Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑X Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑X Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Council approval of the 2024 Council Initiatives Workplans Recommended Language for Motion: Move to approve the draft work plans for the 2024 City Council Initiatives. Project/ Issue Relates To: Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On January 30, 2024 the City Council met to discuss the major goals and projects that the City will undertake in the coming year. In all, Council agreed on 19 major initiatives under 8 different major goals. The Council adopted its goals on February 20, 2024. The next step is approving the major project elements for the work. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Sevice. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 BACKGROUND The City Council sets goals each year to set strategic direction for the City, to identify the opportunities and challenges that face the community and the City, and to set priorities for Council time and City efforts. After the goals and initiatives are adopted, staff develops work plans to implement the initiatives, which are the major projects the Council has decided to undertake for the year. DISCUSSION Council adopted 19 major initiatives as part of its 2024 work plan. The vast majority of the 2024 Work Plan represents either an existing Council initiative or the next step of a project that Council started in an earlier year. Some of these initiatives are capital projects, which tend to have a "beginning, middle, and end" and others are policy projects. But even among the capital projects, most of them are multi-year. And while some policy projects— like Parks Plan 2040, and the Tree Code Update—will at some point be "finished," others are ongoing work that is very high priority for the Council, such as the work identified around climate action, DEI or housing. As Council noted in goal setting, much of the work of these ongoing priorities is integrating Council's policies into operations. Finally, some of the projects are brand new, and require significant scoping before the work plan is finalized. Perhaps the best two examples of this category are the west side community center initiative and the "20 is Plenty" initiative. Because the initiatives are not all alike, the work plans vary in specificity. The major question for Council in reviewing the work plans is whether they identify the right overall steps, especially for Council and community engagement. In addition, Council's feedback about whether staff has identified the right scope is particularly helpful. FISCAL IMPACT Each work plan includes a fiscal element. With new projects, this fiscal impact analysis is very high level and will need to be refined. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council approve the work plans for the 2024 Council Initiatives. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2024 Council Preferred Future, Goals and Initiatives. 2. 2024 Initiatives Work Plans Respect. Excellence. Trust. Sevice. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ATTACHMENT 1 o��a, cos 2024 COUNCIL PREFERRED FUTURE, GOALS, AND INITIATIVES r v �� o Adopted on February 20, 2024 °REGo� Our Preferred Future In 2040, Lake Oswego is a safe and welcoming community where people and families at all stages of life, backgrounds, and abilities thrive. Our incomparable quality of life is founded on outstanding municipal services; destination dining and shopping districts; innovative businesses; premier schools; varied housing options; our spectacular setting along Oswego Lake and the Willamette River; a deep connection to a beautiful and healthy natural environment; arts, cultural and educational opportunities; and exceptionally engaged people. Ensure a safe, secure, and prepared community • Continue implementation of the process to increase preparedness of Lake Oswego residents, especially seniors and people with disabilities, in the event of a disaster* Support business investment and job creation in Lake Oswego • Break ground on the North Anchor Redevelopment projects* • Update the Lake Grove Urban Renewal Plan and begin work on a plan to use urban renewal to support the redevelopment of Foothills * • Implement the initiatives in the 2022 Economic Development Strategy* • Develop a funding strategy for a longer-term contract with the Chamber of Commerce to implement a portion of the 2022 Economic Development Strategy. Evaluate the possibility of the business license fee as a funding option Foster a welcoming and inclusive community where all people have the opportunity to thrive and have equitable access to City services • Continue efforts related to DEI, including: prioritize equity in the delivery of city services; formalize a translation and interpretation policy; explore a partnership with LOSD to host an annual event welcoming new residents to the city; and provide information on how to engage and ways to access services and programs* Combat climate change and strengthen the community's resilience to climate impacts • Adopt a facilities policy and fleet policy that integrates climate and sustainability. Integrate climate goals and issues into the capital improvement plan Respect, tx el en e. Trust. .... vi:.c:. • Develop strategies to increase clean energy use and energy efficiency decisions by residents and businesses • Adopt an updated Urban and Community Forest Plan. Begin implementation of any non-regulatory elements in the plan. Start the process for targeted amendments to the Tree Code after adoption of the Plan* Strengthen public trust in the City through continuous improvement, outstanding customer service, infrastructure investments, and fiscal stewardship • Collaborate with the City of Portland to make a financially and environmentally responsible long- term investment in a wastewater treatment plant* • Develop a strategy for an all-ages and all-activities community center on the west side of town that would include event and meeting spaces, public services, and may include library services. Collaborate with LOSD and other stakeholders as part of this project • Begin a needs assessment and community engagement process to rebuild the South Shore Fire Station • Conduct a long-term strategic review of the city's finances, including revenues, expenditures, and capital funding* Invest in Lake Oswego's high-quality parks, natural areas, and recreational amenities • Guide delivery of the LORAC and Golf Course and oversee the launch of operations of these facilities* • Adopt Parks Plan 2040* • Prioritize and adopt a funding strategy for partially funded parks projects Improve transportation connections, mobility and safety for all travelers and all types of trips in Lake Oswego • Continue construction of sidewalks and pathways, focusing on safe routes to schools* • Adopt the "20 is plenty" speed program for residential/local streets Conserve the community's character, sense of place, and quality of life by planning for change and growth • Continue work on key housing initiatives, the housing production strategy, guiding the HACC/Metro project on the Boones Ferry Road, and support for other non-profit led housing projects* Respect, f:x::eI c:r :.c:. Trust. ..., vi:.c:. 2 GOAL 1 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Continue implementation of the process to increase preparedness of Lake Oswego residents, especially seniors and people with disabilities, in the event of a disaster. DATE: March 1, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Ensure a safe, secure, and prepared community. Council Initiative: Continue implementation of the process to increase preparedness of Lake Oswego residents, especially seniors and people with disabilities, in the event of a disaster. Lead Department: City Manager's Office Support Departments: Fire Department and Police Department. Plan to Tackle the project: Staff proposes the following plan: • Continue to pursue funding through the Senior Care Emergency Preparedness Grant to hire a person to coordinate with senior care facilities. • Implement ideas gathered from meeting with the 50+Advisory Board, Sustainability Advisory Board, and the DEI Advisory Board. • Research how the City may be able to address the need for shelters to be part of the City's emergency plans, including day-shelters, and present findings to City Council. • Continue to expand participation and education regarding Everbridge, a critical event management platform that LOCOM can use for mass notifications in the event of an emergency. • Bring the Emergency Operations Plan update and Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan update to City Council for approval. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 1 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 2 Proposed Timeline and Major steps: • Spring, 2024: Bring the final Emergency Operations Plan update and Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan update to City Council for approval. • Spring/Summer, 2024: Resubmit our request to the Senior Care Emergency Preparedness Grant as soon as the program reopens. • Summer, 2024: Meet with Clackamas County, Red Cross and LOSD to explore how the City could address the need for shelters to be part of the City's emergency plans, including day-shelters, and present findings to City Council. • Fall, 2024: Promote Everbridge and Red Cross' Prepare! A Resource Guide, at the City's Emergency Preparedness Fair Proposed Staffing Required: The implementation of this plan will include various City departments and staff including the City Manager's Office, Fire Department, Police Department, and the City's Communications team. Estimated Financial Need: No additional costs anticipated at this time. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Break ground on the North Anchor redevelopment projects DATE: February 21, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Support business investment and job creation in Lake Oswego. Council Initiative: Break ground on the North Anchor redevelopment projects. Lead Department: Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA). Support Departments: City Attorney's Office, Building, Engineering, and Planning. Plan to Tackle the project: Two major milestones were achieved in December 2023 to ensure the North Anchor project stays on track. On December 18, the Development Review Commission approved a design modification to the hotel site to make it more operationally efficient and provide more community amenities. On December 19, the City Council adopted the Vertical Housing Development Zone (tax abatement program.) These approvals result in the project being well positioned to secure financing. The mixed-use residential component is anticipated to break ground by the end April 2024 and the hotel component following shortly thereafter. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: • March 2024 - Secure financing for the projects • April - Break ground on the mixed-use residential component • June - Break ground on the hotel component • Winter 2025 - Completion of both projects Proposed Staffing Required: LORA staff will lead the process with assistance from: • Owner's Representative—Compliance with Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) conditions and closing requirements. Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 2 • City staff as needed —CAO, Planning, Building, Engineering. Estimated Financial Need: The Owner's Representative is assisting in reviewing the DDA compliance and closing requirements. Estimated fee is between $10k-$20k and funds were budgeted in the FY 23-24. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 2 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Update the Lake Grove Urban Renewal Plan and begin work on a plan to use urban renewal to support the redevelopment of Foothills DATE: February 21, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Support business investment and job creation in Lake Oswego. Council Initiative: Update the Lake Grove Urban Renewal Plan and begin work on a plan to use urban renewal to support the redevelopment of Foothills. Lead Department: Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) Support Departments: City Attorney's Office, Finance, Engineering, and Planning. Plan to Tackle the project: In February 2024, the LORA Board directed staff to: • Pursue increasing the maximum indebtedness of the Lake Grove Village Center Urban Renewal Plan (LGVCURP) to fund projects in the area and bring back additional information for the Board's consideration at a future study session. • Initiate updating and pursuing grants for the Foothills District Framework Plan (FDFP) and develop a Foothills Urban Renewal Plan (FURP). For the LGVCURP, a study session will be scheduled to review tax increment financing revenue projections, projects and cost estimates, funding strategy and detailed schedule for the adoption of the substantial amendment to the urban renewal plan. Staff will also seek Board approval to more forward with the amendment process. Updating the FDFP and creating an new FURP is anticipated to be a time and resource intensive process estimated to cost up to $500K. Preliminary schedules indicate it may take up to four years to complete the planning process and an additional 10 months to create the new urban Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 2 Page 2 of 2 renewal area. Staff is looking for ways to streamline the process without compromising the quality of the work or the public involvement process. Funding for the project could partially come from the City and the balance from either a Metro ($350K) or ODOT($250K) grant. While the approval for both grants appears to generally follow an 8-month approval process, staff has been advised that negotiating the scope and terms of the contract with consultants through the ODOT process may take an additional 9-12 months. Alternatively, the City could fund the project in its entirety and would still have to go through developing a scope and the public solicitation process for consultants, both of which could also still take about 8 months. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: A) LGVCURP Substantial Amendment: • June 2024 Board study session to review proposed changes to the urban renewal plan and authorize staff to move forward with the substantial amendment. • August 2024—January 2025: Public and taxing district outreach, and public hearings for adoption. B) FDFP Update and FURP B1) FDFP Update: Over the next coming months staff will work with Metro and ODOT staff to refine the schedule. • 8 months— Metro or ODOT grant approval process (potentially add 9-12 months for ODOT contract negotiation process) • 18 - 24 months— Plan development, public engagement and adoption B2) FURP: • 10 months for Public and taxing district outreach, and public hearings for adoption. Proposed Staffing Required: LORA staff will lead the process with assistance from: • Finance, Planning, Engineering, Parks & Recreation to review financial feasibility of the URAs and participate on the Technical Advisory Committee to update the Foothills Framework Plan. • Urban renewal plan consulting services: o Elaine Howard Consulting, LLC: Technical advisor and plan update o Tiberius Solutions, LLC: Financial projects and analysis associated with urban renewal areas Estimated Financial Need: • Urban Renewal Plan Consulting- $80K ($40K/per plan) • Foothills Framework Plan Update & Urban Renewal Plan- $500K (City or grant funded) Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 3 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Implement the initiatives in the 2022 Economic Development Strategy DATE: March 1, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Support business investment and job creation. Council Initiative: Implement the initiatives in the 2022 Economic Development Strategy. Lead Department: Community Development Support Departments: CMO Plan to Tackle the project: Per the 2022 Economic Development Strategy and Resource Plan (Strategy), the City and Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce have shared responsibility for implementing the Strategy.The Chamber is tasked with business outreach, business inventories (understanding available space), and identification of business attraction strategies through the current contract, which has two annual options to renew through December 2025.The City is responsible for planning/policy, capital projects, permitting and licensing, redevelopment, and some community events and programming. Proposed Timeline and Major stens: The 2022 Economic Development Strategy is multifaceted and contains more work than can be completed in one year based on staff and City Council workloads. For 2024, the City will support the Chamber in conducting its first biennial business community survey to inform the City's economic development strategy and conducting outreach to businesses in the City's commercial areas. Consistent with the Strategy, the City will lead the following in 2024: • Assist businesses that are opening, expanding or relocating to Lake Oswego. Staff will convene the City's Rapid Response Team, as needed, coordinating among and reconciling conflicts between City departments. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 3 - INITIATIVE 3 Page 2 of 2 • Continue to provide Council and staff representatives to the Lake Oswego Chamber Board (CMO). • Continue to track regional business development opportunities through Greater Portland Inc., Business Oregon, and the Chamber (CMO and CD). • Develop a funding strategy for a longer-term contract with the Chamber of Commerce to implement a portion of the 2022 Economic Development Strategy. Evaluate the possibility of the business license fee as a funding option (CMO). (See the City Council Initiative for this.) • Update the Lake Grove Urban Renewal Plan and begin work on a plan to use urban renewal to support the redevelopment of Foothills (CMO). (See the City Council initiative for this.) Proposed Staffing Required: The Community Development Director and Chamber Executive Director, respectively, are the City's and Chamber's lead staff. The Assistant City Manager represents the City on the Chamber Board of Directors. Estimated Financial Need: See the cost estimates provided separately for the other related City Council initiatives listed above. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 4 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Develop a funding strategy for a longer-term contract with the Chamber of Commerce to implement a portion of the 2022 Economic Development Strategy. Evaluate the possibility of the business license fee as a funding option DATE: February 27, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Support business investment and job creation in Lake Oswego Council Initiative: Develop a funding strategy for a longer-term contract with the Chamber of Commerce to implement a portion of the 2022 Economic Development Strategy. Evaluate the possibility of the business license fee as a funding option Lead Department: City Manager's Office Support Departments: Finance, Planning Plan to Tackle the project: Staff will outline the existing business license program, including the current fee structure, the number of licensed businesses and revenue generated by the program. Additionally, staff will review compliance and historical trends. Staff will also collect data from peer communities. Staff will present possible modifications for Lake Oswego's program to Council, along with potential uses of the business license revenue, such as ongoing funding for the Chamber contract. As a part of each model, staff will identify community stakeholders who are most likely to be impacted by proposed changes. Following Council direction, staff will develop a community engagement strategy and propose the new rates for inclusion in the 2025 Master Fees and Charges booklet. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 2 - INITIATIVE 4 Page 2 of 2 Staff will begin research in the Summer of 2024, host a Council study session in late summer to receive direction, and plan to launch business outreach and engagement in the Fall. Staff proposes that the project should be completed in time for inclusion in the 2025 Master Fees and Charges. Proposed Staffing Required: One CMO staff member dedicating—20-30% of their work time to this project. Estimated Financial Need: None beyond staffing and administration. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 3 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Foster a welcoming and inclusive community where all people have the opportunity to thrive and have equitable access to city services. DATE: February 20, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Foster a welcoming and inclusive community where all people have the opportunity to thrive and have equitable access to city services. Council Initiatives: Continued efforts related to DEI; including prioritize equity in the delivery of city services; formalize a translation and interpretation policy, explore a partnership with Lake Oswego School District to host an annual event, welcoming new residents to city and provide information on how to engage and ways to access city services and programs. Lead Department: City Manager's Office Support Departments: All Plan to Tackle the project: This goal has three distinguishable parts and a plan is proposed for each one. 1) Prioritize Equity in the delivery of City services: • Community Engagement and Participation: o Use Community Engagement Toolkit, developed by the Communications team, to actively involve residents in decision making processes related to City services. o Continue implementing targeted recruiting and outreach efforts for Board and Commissions recruitment. o Ensure that City services are culturally competent and accessible to residents from diverse backgrounds. • Equitable Code Enforcement • Continuous Evaluation and Improvement of City Services: o Evaluate department's community engagement efforts to asses their effectiveness in reaching underserved communities and fostering meaningful participation. Respect, ExceI'erce. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 3 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 3 o Establish feedback mechanisms to solicit responses who may face barriers to participation. Provide opportunities for community feedback regarding city programs. o Identify and mitigate barriers related to code enforcement. 2) Formalize a translation and interpretation policy: o Identify languages spoken by community members of Lake Oswego and provide translation and interpretation services when needed. o Integrate language access considerations into department operations and decision- making processes. Identify essential documents that will be translated. o Allocate sufficient resources to support language access initiatives and ensure equitable access to translation and interpretation services. 3) Explore a partnership with LOSD to host an annual event welcoming new residents to the city and provide information on how to engage and ways to access city services and programs. o Collaborate with key officials from LOSD and discuss the possibility of collaborating on an event that will welcome new residents to city and school district. In collaboration with LOSD, identify goals and objectives such as providing information on city services and programs, promoting community engagement (upcoming projects and volunteer opportunities) and foster a sense of belonging. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Winter 2024: • Begin conversations with school district regarding established welcome events for new students and their families. Also, inquire about language access plan. • Meet with Library staff and introduce Community Engagement Toolkit. Library has revamped their Book Delivery Services and have established community outreach methods. The Community Engagement Toolkit will assist them in identifying any engagement channels they might have missed. • Begin research and development of a Language Access Plan. Begin taking inventory of Summer events and identify which marketing tools will need to be translated and what events will need interpreters. Spring 2024: • Begin a list of vital documents that will need to be translated. Also begin assessing cost of the translations of documents. • Boards and Commissions applications open. DEI Advisory Board will assist in recruitment by sharing vacancies with their networks. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 3 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 3 of 3 • Begin city-wide introduction of Community Outreach Toolkit. A member from the Communications team will present the toolkit to their respective department and walk staff through the steps and components of toolkit. • Begin evaluation and improvement of city services including code enforcement. Planning begins with LOSD regarding Welcome event. • Collaborate with Communications Team on Language Access Plan and finalize policy. Summer 2024: • Use Community Engagement Toolkit to engage and inform communities about City Cultural Events. • Collaborate with LOSD on Back to School programming with the goal of providing information on how families can access city services. Fall 2024: • Cultural Xchange takes place. Assist Departments with distributing information (e.g. Emergency Management information, Parks and Rec Programs) and engaging with diverse communities. • Continue assisting departments in using the Community Engagement Toolkit when engaging, communicating or providing information to Lake Oswego community at large. • Present finalized Language Access Plan to various departments and walk them through policy, in addition to requesting translations and interpretation services. Proposed Staffing Required: No additional staffing required at this time. This work will be facilitated by Equity Program Manager. Estimated Financial Need: Undetermined. Cost for interpretation and translation services will need to be evaluated, but it is expected to be absorbed through department budgets. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 4 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Adopt a facilities and fleet policy that integrates climate and sustainability. Integrate climate goals and issues into the capital improvement plan. DATE: February 23, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Combat climate change and strengthen the community's resilience to climate impacts. Council Initiative: Adopt a facilities policy and fleet policy that integrates climate and sustainability. Integrate climate goals and issues into the capital improvement plan. Lead Department: City Manager's Office Support Departments: Public Works and Engineering will be key partners and co-leads; Parks & Recreation, Finance, Planning, Police, Fire, and Library will be involved. Plan to Tackle the Project: The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (SCAP) outlines the City's goals, strategies, and actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the impacts of climate change. While some SCAP goals require new projects or programs, in many cases progress on implementing the plan can be achieved by ensuring the City's ongoing work and service provision is aligned with climate action goals and sustainability best practices. The Sustainability Program Manager will work with department to develop new policies and frameworks to integrate climate action and resilience strategies into facilities, fleet, and capital improvement decisions. This work will include: • Developing a Fleet Purchasing Policy that uses an "EV-First" approach. • Developing a Sustainable Buildings Policy to guide City facilities capital projects, building off of the 2015 High Performance Building Guidelines for City Facilities. Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 4 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 2 • Documenting current building operations practices and identify sustainable best practices (for example, related to building energy use, cleaning supplies, waste management). • Detailing connections to Sustainability and Climate Action Plan goals in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), including in project prioritization criteria. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Winter/Spring 2024 • Refine draft Fleet Purchasing Policy in consultation with City department heads and Sustainability and Climate Action Plan Steering Committee. • Document current buildings operations practices. • Begin to develop draft Sustainable Buildings Policy. Summer 2024 • Finalize and adopt Fleet Purchasing Policy (May/June) • Present draft Sustainable Buildings Policy to SCAP Steering Committee and Sustainability Advisory Board for review and input. • Review current CIP and plan development processes. Identify opportunities to highlight climate connections and develop draft sustainability criteria. Fall/Winter 2024 • Implement sustainability criteria in CIP update (2025/26—2030/31) • City Council work session on Sustainable Buildings Policy— Fall • Finalization and adoption of Sustainable Buildings Policy—Winter 2024/25 Proposed Staffing Required: Implementation of this workplan will be carried out by existing staff. Support will be needed from staff in Public Works and Engineering on policy development and review, and several hours from staff in Community Development, Parks & Recreation, Planning, Police, Fire, Library, and Finance on policy review. The Sustainability Program Manager will engage departments through the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan Steering Committee. Estimated Financial Need: No additional funding needs for materials or consulting are anticipated at this time. Implementation of policies such as the Fleet Purchasing Policy and Sustainable Buildings Policies may require additional resources, such as funding to install EV charging stations at existing and new facilities. - Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 4 - INITIATIVE 2 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Develop strategies to increase clean energy use and energy efficiency decisions by residents and businesses. DATE: February 23, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Combat climate change and strengthen the community's resilience to climate impacts. Council Initiative: Develop strategies to increase clean energy use and energy efficiency decisions by residents and businesses. Lead Department: City Manager's Office Support Departments: Engineering, Planning, Finance Plan to Tackle the project: This body of work will build on initiatives undertaken over the past two years. These include a report prepared by a CMO intern examining options to increase clean energy use in the community, which identified rooftop solar and solar+ storage microgrids as key opportunities; engagement with Portland General Electric (PGE) on the development of a Community Green Tariff Program, as authorized by state legislation HB 2021; and the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan 2023 progress report. Projects to meet this Council initiative will include: • Developing a citywide EV Charging Strategy. • Continuing to engage with PGE and the PUC on the development of a Community Green Tariff Program. • Developing education and outreach campaigns in partnership with the City's Sustainability Advisory Board, community partners including the Lake Oswego Sustainability Network, and industry experts including PGE and Energy Trust of Oregon. Staff will also work to identify opportunities for the City to support and amplify existing community-based efforts. These campaigns or programs would be targeted to different audiences (e.g. small businesses, homeowners, multifamily building owners) and Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 4 - INITIATIVE 2 Page 2 of 2 highlight energy efficiency strategies as well as state and federal financial incentives available for clean energy projects. • Exploring opportunities for community solar and/or rooftop solar and storage projects within Lake Oswego. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: EV Charging Strategy • Present draft EV Charging Strategy to Sustainability Advisory Board (March) and seek input from City departments and PGE (Spring 2024) • City Council study session on EV Charging Strategy (May/June) • Collaborate with PGE and community partners to implement EV Charging Strategy after it is finalized and adopted. Community Green Tariff Program • Engagement with PGE and PUC is ongoing. PGE anticipates filing an umbrella tariff for the program in Q1 2024, after which engagement would focus on a city-specific participation agreement. • City Council study session on Community Green Tariff and clean energy education & outreach campaigns (Summer 2024) Education and Outreach Campaigns • Work with Sustainability Advisory Board, Lake Oswego Sustainability Network, and other partners to develop new and/or strengthen existing education and outreach campaigns (Spring 2024) • City Council study session on clean energy education & outreach campaigns and Community Green Tariff(Summer 2024) • Launch education/outreach campaigns (Fall 2024) Proposed Staffing Required: This workplan will be implemented out by existing staff. Estimated Financial Need: None anticipated at this time. The City will seek to leverage state and federal grants and financial incentives, such as the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, Inflation Reduction Act tax credits, and EV charging station rebate programs from ODOT and PGE, for projects that may result from these strategies. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 4 - INITIATIVE 3 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Adopt an updated Urban and Community Forest Plan DATE: March 1, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Combat climate change and strengthen the community's resilience to climate impact. Council Initiative: Adopt an updated Urban and Community Forest Plan. Begin implementation of any non-regulatory elements in the plan. Start the process for targeted amendments to the Tree Code after adoption of the Plan Lead Department: Community Development Support Departments: Engineering, Fire, Parks, Public Works, and Sustainability (CMO) Plan to Tackle the project: Work on the Urban and Community Forestry Plan (UCFP) update began in spring 2023 and the final plan is scheduled to be adopted in June 2024. The updated UCFP will provide strategies for a sustainable and integrated approach to tree management on public and private lands. The UCFP includes a strategic plan with recommended actions based on guiding principles that emphasize a well-funded urban forest, environmental and social benefits, improved quality of life, resilience to climate change, and the need to balance management of our urban forest with other needs, such as housing and urban infrastructure.The recommended actions are still in draft form, but implementation will begin after adoption of the UCFP this spring and will be on-going. One of the recommended actions will be to adopt targeted amendments to the City's Tree Code (LOC Chapter 55). Implementation of these code amendments will be a priority for the city to complete in order to assure compliance with ORS 197.307[4], which requires that only clear and objective standards apply to applications involving needed housing. Respect, ExceI'erce. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 4 - INITIATIVE 3 Page 2 of 2 Proposed Timeline and Major steps: June 2024: Adopt the updated UCFP. Summer 2024: • Issue an RFP and select a consultant to lead the process to amend the Tree Code. Key steps include defining the scope of the amendments and developing a project plan and community engagement plan. • Begin implementation of high priority actions identified in the UCFP; however, staff resources will be primarily focused on the action to amend the Tree Code through Summer 2025. Fall 2024 to Summer 2025: Initiate and complete the process to amend the Tree Code. Proposed Staffing Required: The process to amend the Tree Code will be led by a consultant and is anticipated to require approximately 25%time from the city project planner and additional time from staff in the CAO, Planning, Engineering, Fire, Parks, Public Works, and Sustainability. Estimated Financial Need: Tree Code amendments estimated to be $50,000- $100,000, depending on scope of work. This will be discussed with Council prior this fall. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Collaborate with the City of Portland to make a financially and environmentally responsible long-term investment in a wastewater treatment plant DATE: February 23, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Strengthen public trust in the City through continuous improvement, outstanding customer service, infrastructure investments, and fiscal stewardship. Council Initiative: Collaborate with the City of Portland to make a financially and environmentally responsible long-term investment in a wastewater treatment plant. Lead Department: Public Works - Engineering Support Departments: City Attorney's Office, Finance, and LORA Plan to Tackle the Project: • Cooperatively work with the City of Portland and the City's consultant team to select and complete the most beneficial project delivery method. Advance from 90%to Final Plans and Specifications. • Progress through the permitting process with the Department of Environmental Quality, navigate the City of Lake Oswego Development Review land-use process, and complete all other permitting as necessary. • Finalize real estate purchases at 99, 101, and 113 Foothills Rd as stipulated in the Resolution of Necessity that was adopted by the Council on December 20, 2022. Work to successfully relocate businesses located at 99, 101, and 113 Foothills Rd through a cooperative process led by Universal Field Services. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 2 • Check-in with Council quarterly on progress. • Continue to provide information and public outreach via the media, HelloLO, social media, project listserv, LODown, engagement with stakeholders, and the project's webpage: www.lakeoswegowastewaterfacility.org/. Proposed Timeline and Major Steps: Below is a list of upcoming major tasks and milestones staff will be working on throughout 2024: • Evaluate advantages and disadvantages of various project delivery methods available. Perform market sounding, select a delivery method, and prepare procurement documents. Review proposals received and enter into a contract with the top ranked proposer. • Finalize baseline financing for the project including final design, construction, and long- term operation and maintenance. This would include Lake Oswego utility rate projections, bonds, City of Portland contributions, and any external funding such as WIFIA. Continuously update. • Proceed from 90%to final plans and specifications. Once the design is fully completed, then construction is estimated to take about three years. Proposed Staffing Required: Staff has been assigned and the workload translates to about 2.5 FTEs per year as an accumulation of efforts from the Public Works/Engineering, City Attorney's Office, LORA, and Finance Departments. The City of Portland is also committing significant staff time to this project. Estimated Financial Need: The cost for consulting is estimated at about a million dollars per fiscal year and is reflected in the FY 2023-25 biennium budget for the Wastewater Fund. The City of Portland will cover 30% of these consultant costs. On January 30, 2024, City Council authorized reimbursement to EPCOR Foothills Water Partners (EFWP) of approximately $7.2 million for preliminary services rendered which included production of 60% designs and a multitude of studies. Total costs of the project, including final design, construction, and long-term operation and maintenance are forecasted in the financial model. Actual costs will be better known upon completion of the upcoming procurement effort and subsequent contract execution. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 2 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Develop a strategy for an all-ages and all-activities community center on the west side of town that would include event and meeting spaces, public services, and may include library services. Collaborate with LOSD and other stakeholders as part of this project. DATE: March 1, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Strengthen public trust in the City through continuous improvement, outstanding customer service, infrastructure investments, and fiscal stewardship. Council Initiative: Develop a strategy for an all-ages and all-activities community center on the west side of town that would include event and meeting spaces, public services, and may include library services. Collaborate with LOSD and other stakeholders as part of this project. Lead Department: City Manager's Office; Library, Parks & Recreation Support Departments: Finance, City Attorney Plan to Tackle the project: The City will need to address several elements: • Collaboration with the Lake Oswego School District to determine the feasibility of a shared property to house the community center and District offices • Creation of a development program, including which Library, Parks & Recreation, event, and civic spaces would be included in any new or renovated building • Development of a funding strategy, which may include the extension of the Lake Grove Village Center Urban Renewal District, voter approval of a General Obligation Bond, grant funding, or other funding elements. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Spring 2024: • Develop project plan Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 2 Page 2 of 2 • Discuss a possible partnership with the Lake Oswego School District complete the facility analysis of the current Library Summer 2024 • Form a project Advisory Committee charged with defining the scope of the facility • Develop and implement an engagement plan, defining the scope of the facility Fall 2024 • Continue public outreach and conducting formal public opinion polling • Refine a funding strategy, including the use of Urban Renewal, General Obligation Bonds, grants, and other possible funding sources • Refine and develop a project schedule if the project is feasible and supported by the public. Proposed Staffing Required: There is an internal City team helping move this project forward, which includes the City Manager, Library Director, Director of Finance, Parks & Recreation Director, Assistant to the City Manager, and Redevelopment Manager, in addition to a dedicated part-time project manager. Estimated Financial Need: The total estimated range of the cost of this project totals between $65,000,000 - $75,000,000. The final budget will be dependent on the final scope of the facility, the final estimated total square footage of the facility and the amount of acreage of the land to be dedicated to this project. The scope of this project will also be informed by community input. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 3 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Begin a needs assessment and community engagement process to rebuild the South Shore Fire Station. DATE: February 25, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Strengthen public trust in the City through continuous improvement, outstanding customer service, and fiscal stewardship. Council Initiative: Begin a needs assessment and community engagement process to rebuild the South Shore Fire Station. Lead Department: Fire Department Support Departments: City Manager's Office/ City Council, Finance Plan to Tackle the project: • Work with Council to select a Community Task Force that represents a wide variety of community interests and expertise. • Work with Task Force Members to complete a needs assessment for the South Shore Fire Station, including whether or not the current location will meet the needs of the community in future years. • Work with Task Force Members to determine the structural integrity of the current South Shore Fire Station. This step will require the expertise of a structural engineering/ architectural firm. • Create community awareness of the Task Force findings and begin to engage residents, businesses, and constituent groups to ensure the understanding of needs that are identified. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: • Summer 2024: Work with City Council to determine scope of Task Force and its membership. Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 3 Page 2 of 2 • Fall 2024: Select an engineering/architectural firm to complete a structural assessment and assist with developing options; convene Task Force to review findings and develop recommendations. • Winter 2025: Task Force begins a community engagement process to create an awareness of Task Force findings and an understanding of needs that are identified. • Spring 2025: Council Study Session on Task Force findings and recommendations. Proposed Staffing Required: Fire will function as the lead department and will work closely with the City Manager's Office, the Office of City Attorney, and the City's Communications Team. Estimated Financial Need: Cost is unknown at this time. Staff will brief Council once the Task Force work is underway. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 5 - INITIATIVE 4 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Shawn Cross, Finance Director SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Conduct a long-term strategic review of the City's finances, including revenues, expenditures, and capital funding DATE: February 9, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Strengthen public trust in the City through continuous improvement, outstanding customer service, infrastructure investments, and fiscal stewardship. Council Initiative: Conduct a long-term strategic review of the City's finances, including revenues, expenditures, and capital funding. Lead Department: Finance Support Departments: Engineering, CMO Plan to Tackle the project: Many of the issues involved in this initiative were discussed during the budget process. Staff will seek additional direction from Council on the scope of the project following the budget process. The detail of the presentation will depend on the scope and specific items the Council would like to look at. Then prepare the presentation for the Spring off-year budget committee meeting. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Conduct a study session with the budget committee during the off-year around the beginning of May. Proposed Staffing Required: 1 finance FTE for about four weeks, 1 engineering FTE for about a week, and 1 CMO FTE for about a week. Estimated Financial Need: N/A Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ‘t. GOAL 6 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM VI 1.011111. O OREGo .� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Guide delivery of the LORAC and Golf Course and oversee the launch of operations of these facilities DATE: March 6, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Invest in Lake Oswego's high-quality parks, natural areas, and recreational amenities Council Initiative: Guide delivery of the LORAC and Golf Course and oversee the launch of operations of these facilities Lead Department: Parks & Recreation Support Departments: Planning, Engineering, CMO, IT Plan to Tackle the project: In the LORAC, framing is up for the reception lobby, staff offices, and gymnasium, and construction of the roof is nearly complete. Interior work will continue throughout the next few months with the framing of windows and doors and the final electrical, plumbing, and other utility work. The competition pool walls and floor have been poured, and the recreational pool rebar and formwork have started with anticipation of the concrete pour in spring 2024. Grading and seeding of the Golf Course is complete, and landscaping will begin in the spring with the planting of over 150 new trees. The golf course maintenance building is expected to be complete by summer 2024. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Substantial completion of the LORAC is expected in November, and the facility is expected to open to the public in late 2024. The opening of the Golf Course will coincide with the LORAC facility. Proposed Staffing Required: The project requires a Project Manager, administrative support, communications support, and frequent input from the Parks & Recreation Management Team. Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 6 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 2 Estimated Financial Need: At this time the project is projected to be completed with allocated resources. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 6 - INITIATIVE 2 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Adopt Parks Plan 2040 DATE: March 8, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Invest in Lake Oswego's high-quality parks, natural areas, and recreational amenities Council Initiative: Adopt Parks Plan 2040 Lead Department: Parks & Recreation Support Departments: Planning, CMO Plan to Tackle the project: The project is being led by Parks & Recreation staff and consultants from MIG, Inc. Work began in June 2023 and the updated plan is expected to begin the adoption process in January 2025. Over the next nine months the project team will begin to develop policy and project recommendations, an implementation and action plan, and update the city's System Development Charge methodology for parks. This work will be guided by additional meetings with the Community Advisory Committee and Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Advisory Board; geographically-focused neighborhood workshops; another online survey; and additional focus group meetings with local community and advocacy groups. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Implementation and action planning will continue through summer 2024. This will include a significant amount of community engagement. Development of the final plan will begin in late summer or early fall 2024, and the adoption process is expected to begin in January 2025. The project is currently on time and under budget. Proposed Staffing Required: The project requires a Project Manager, administrative support, communications support, and frequent input from the Parks & Recreation Management Team. Estimated Financial Need: Parks & Recreation budgeted $350,000 for this project; the total cost is currently estimated at$310,500. Respect, Excel'er•ce. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 6 - INITIATIVE 3 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Prioritize and adopt a funding strategy for partially funded Parks projects DATE: March 6, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Invest in Lake Oswego's high-quality parks, natural areas, and recreational amenities Council Initiative: Prioritize and adopt a funding strategy for partially funded parks projects Lead Department: Parks & Recreation Support Departments: Planning, Engineering, CMO Plan to Tackle the project: Staff has identified the following partially funded projects: • Rassekh Park Phase 2— playground, picnic shelter, maintenance building, parking. • Rassekh Park Phase 3—athletic field, additional parking, additional stormwater facility. Three additional projects are Metro Local Share eligible: • Willamette Greenway Trail —connection between Roehr Park/Foothills Park and George Rogers Park. • Luscher Farm —new access, improved parking, and community garden expansion. • West Waluga Park—soft surface path connection between neighborhoods and developed park area. • Hallinan Woods Natural Area —expand trail network to connect to recently-acquired Yates property. Parks & Recreation staff will prepare a funding plan by further refining each project's cost estimates and identifying funding strategies that each project might be eligible for. Potential funding strategies are expected to include leveraging available City dollars with funding from Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-534-4225 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 6 - INITIATIVE 3 Page 2 of 2 programs such as Metro Local Share, the Local Government Grant Program, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and Oregon Community Paths program, and developing partnerships with other organizations to leverage funding, volunteer hours, or other resources. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Staff will share an update on the Metro Local Share project list for review and approval of the project prioritization in April 2024. Following approval Staff will prepare a funding plan to match additional resources with these funds for each partially funded project. Proposed Staffing Required: The project requires a Project Manager, administrative support, communications support, and input from the Parks & Recreation Management Team. Estimated Financial Need: The planning-level estimate of additional cost required to fund the above-mentioned partially funded projects is approximately $7.2 million. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 7 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V All O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Continue construction of sidewalks and pathways, focusing on safe routes to schools DATE: February 23, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Improve transportation connections, mobility and safety for all travelers and for all types of trips in Lake Oswego Council Initiative: Continue construction of sidewalks and pathways, focusing on safe routes to schools Lead Department: Public Works/Engineering Support Departments: Finance Plan to Tackle the project: The FY 23-25 biennium budget identifies funding to continue delivering construction projects that install sidewalks, with a priority near school areas. In 2023, construction was completed on Hallinan, Douglas Way, and Boca Ratan. The Lanewood project will be in construction during the summer of 2024. The next round of projects, referred to as Group 2, will include another four locations: Carman Drive, Pilkington Road, Tree Top Lane, and Meadowlark Lane. The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) will continue to work on the prioritization of sidewalks and pathways near schools. In Fall 2024, they will recommend to Council the next set of pathway projects for future funding., Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 7 - INITIATIVE Page 2 of 2 Proposed Timeline and Major steps: February 2024 Award a professional services contract for design of the Group 2 bundle of sidewalks. (done) Spring 2024 Program Update Information Session at City Council Summer 2024 Construct the Lanewood segment. Fall 2024 Work with TAB to begin prioritization of next group of sidewalk projects. Fall 2024 Finish design phase for Group 2 locations: Carman, Pilkington, Meadowlark, and Tree Top. Spring 2025 Award construction contracts for Group 2. Summer 2025 Potential construction of Group 2 locations. Proposed Staffing Required: The Traffic Engineer is involved with the TAB to determine project prioritization. From there, a Project Manager/Engineer leads the project through the design and construction phase. Communications staff develops the outreach and communications strategy for the project. City Construction Inspectors are responsible for ensuring the project(s) is built according to the plans and specifications. In total, this equates to approximately 3.0 FTE to fully deliver pathway projects at the current level of delivery. Estimated Financial Need: Funding needs will vary by projects because each segment is unique. The Street Fund will be analyzed for adequate funding levels prior to each phase of a project, such as design and construction. The current biennium budget shows $4.8 M for pathway projects to finish Group 1 and start Group 2 projects. The FY 25-27 Capital Improvement Plan and Budget will identify the financial needs for the next set of projects beyond Group 2. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 7 - INITIATIVE 2 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Adopt the "20 is Plenty" speed program for residential/local streets DATE: February 23, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Improve transportation connections, mobility and safety for all travelers and for all types of trips in Lake Oswego Council Initiative: Adopt the "20 is Plenty" speed program for residential/local streets Lead Department: Public Works/Engineering Support Departments: Finance Plan to Tackle the Project: • Meet with the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) to review effectiveness of posting 20 mph speed limit signs and to discuss policy regarding locations on where to establish new speed zones. • Evaluate required locations where new signage will need to be posted for implementation of program. A cost estimate and schedule of installation of new street signs will be prepared for report back to TAB. • Report to City Council regarding findings and recommendations from TAB for the passing of a City Ordinance to adopt "20 is Plenty". Proposed Timeline and Major steps: Spring/Summer 2024 Work with TAB on recommendations for implementation of"20 is Plenty" program. Fall 2024 Report to City Council findings and schedule for establishment of program, and to discuss costs for implementation Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 7 - INITIATIVE 2 Page 2 of 2 Proposed Staffing Required: The traffic engineer is involved with the TAB to determine policies for implementation of the program. Project Manager/Engineer will lead the project for the installation of new signs. Communications staff will develop outreach and strategy for the project. In total, this equates to approximately 1.5 FTE for the project. Estimated Financial Need: Costs will be dependent on the number of signs needing to be installed to meet state regulations and city policy. The Street Fund will be the likely source of funding, and will be presented to Council for consideration of priorities related to other Street Fund demands. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. GOAL 8 - INITIATIVE 1 MEMORANDUM V O OREGOC� TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Executive Team SUBJECT: Council Initiative Work Plan: Continue work on key housing initiatives, the housing production strategy, guiding the HACC/Metro project on the Boones Ferry Road, and support for other non-profit led housing projects DATE: March 1, 2024 Big Picture Goal: Conserve the community's character, sense of place, and quality of life by planning for change and growth. Council Initiative: Continue work on key housing initiatives, the housing production strategy, guiding the Hacienda project on Boones Ferry Road, and support for other non-profit led housing projects. Lead Department: Community Development Support Departments: Engineering, CMO (Sustainability, Equity and Communications) Plan to Tackle the project: 1. Hacienda Affordable Housing Project(Boones Ferry Rd.) a. Assist developer with permitting. (2024-2025; construction expected to begin Summer 2025) 2. House Bill 2003 (HB 2003) a. Adopt a Housing Production Strategy (HPS) to produce needed housing identified in the 2023 Housing Needs Analysis (HNA), as required by HB 2003; due by December 2024. 3. Non-profit led affordable housing a. Continue to assist and guide Habitat for Humanity through the permit process for their development of 23 affordable, for-sale townhomes in West Lake Grove. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-675-3984 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY GOAL 8 - INITIATIVE 1 Page 2 of 2 b. Assist and guide the developer of the North Anchor project with construction, to ensure delivery of eight income-restricted affordable units. c. Assist with any new non-profit led affordable housing in Lake Oswego with planning and permitting, and by promoting the City's affordable housing financial incentives. Proposed Timeline and Major steps: The HPS, due December 2024, is supported by the Housing Production Task Force appointed by City Council. The work with non-profit housing providers is ongoing with work tasks that vary as opportunities arise. Proposed Staffing Required: This work is led by Planning staff, with outside consultant services for the HPS. The HPS work requires approximately 40% of the Long-Range Planning Manager's time. Work on the housing initiatives requires approximately 20% of the Community Development Director's time and some administrative staff time. The City's Equity, Sustainability, and Communications staff (CMO) are engaged in the HPS work. Estimated Financial Need: Community Development budgeted $100,000 for the HNA/HPS consultant, whose work is underway. Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 6.2 F °� COUNCIL REPORT � o OREGO\-\ Subject: Appointment of Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division Referees Meeting Date: March 19, 2024 Staff Members: Jessica Numanoglu, Community Development Director Report Date: February 23, 2024 Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney Departments: Community Development City Attorney's Office Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑X Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑X Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Appoint Josh Soper and Joe Turner as Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division Referees. Recommended Language for Motion: Move to appoint Josh Soper and Joe Turner as Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division Referees. Project/ Issue Relates To: Appeals of Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Divisions Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑X Not Applicable ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Shall the Council appoint Josh Soper and Joe Turner as on-call Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division (ELD) Referees? Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi e. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 BACKGROUND Typically, partitions and subdivisions are reviewed and approved under the Community Development Code as follows: • Partitions: staff decision; appeal to DRC/public hearing; appeal to Council. • Subdivisions: DRC public hearing; appeal to Council. Appeals following the Council decision are to the Land Use Board of Appeals, Oregon Court of Appeals, and Oregon Supreme Court. In 1995, the Oregon Legislature mandated an alternative expedited land division review process under ORS 197.360 et seq. for any partition or subdivision that meets the following requirements: (A) Includes only land that is zoned for residential uses and is within an urban growth boundary. (B) Is solely for the purposes of residential use, including recreational or open space uses accessory to residential use. (C) Does not provide for dwellings or accessory buildings to be located on [Sensitive Lands or Willamette River Greenway]; (D) Satisfies [the City's] minimum street or other right-of-way connectivity standards....; (E) Will result in development that either: (i) Creates enough lots or parcels to allow building residential units at 80 percent or more of the maximum net density permitted by the zoning designation of the site; or (ii) Will be sold or rented to households with incomes below 120 percent of the median family income for the county in which the project is built. In 1995, per ORS 197.365, that process was available to an applicant that met the above requirements (Opt-In); in 2015, the expedited land division process was to be used unless the applicant elected not to do so (Opt-Out). In 2021, the Legislature required ministerial review of middle housing and created Middle Housing Land Divisions. If a developer seeks to develop a middle housing development under a middle housing land division, the middle housing land division applicant can only use the expedited land division process (No Opt-Out). [ORS 92.031(4)(a)]. The expedited land division process requires: • A staff decision within 63 days from the date the application is complete; • Any person challenging the staff decision may file an appeal within 14 days, including a $300 deposit. • The appeal is to a referee, rather than the Development Review Commission. ORS 197.375(1). Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 o The appeal must be heard by a referee appointed by the City and the referee cannot be an employee or official of the City. ORS 197.375(2). • A public hearing is not required. Instead the process is determined by the referee, who may use "any procedure for decision-making consistent with the interests of the parties to ensure a fair opportunity to present information and argument." ORS 197.375(3). • The referee must issue a decision within 42 days after the appeal is filed. [ORS 197.375(4)(c)]. • If the appealing party does not improve its position, additional costs of up to $500 shall be assessed; the City shall pay the costs of the appeal not assessed against the appellant. If the party improves its position, the deposit must be returned. ORS 197.375(6). • An appeal of the referee's decision to go directly to the Oregon Court of Appeals, bypassing the City Council and the Land Use Board of Appeals. ORS 197.375(7), (8). To date there have been two appeals of Expedited Land Divisions and no Middle Housing Land Divisions. DISCUSSION An ELD Referee must be appointed by the City. Because of the tight timeline if an ELD appeal is filed for a decision to be issued, it is necessary that the City appoint ELD Referees beforehand. Pursuant to the City's procurement process for personal services, the City Attorney's Office solicited statements of experience from three persons/firms, one of which was COBID qualified, that have extensive land use experience. The City Attorney and Community Development Director reviewed the statements of experience and fee rates and recommend that Joe Turner and Josh Soper be appointed as ELD referees for Lake Oswego. • Mr. Soper has served local governments since 2011, as Coos County Counsel and Sherwood City Attorney, focusing on land use matters and proceedings, and other municipal law matters. He is now a member of Beery, Elsner and Hammond, a law firm that exclusively provides legal services to governments. [See Attachment 1]. • Mr. Turner's practice is limited to acting as a hearings officer. He provides hearings officer services for numerous jurisdictions in Oregon and Washington. He was appointed as an ELD referee for the City in 2017; the contract has now expired. [See Attachment 2]. The Planning Department would enter into on-call contracts (five years, with right to renew) with each appointed ELD Referee. If the services of an ELD Referee are needed, the Community Development Director would select one to serve for that case, based on availability and other factors. Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 4 FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact depends on whether an ELD appeal is filed. If filed, the City bears the cost based on the ELD Referee's hourly rate and the amount of time required, which is typically 5-15 hours ($1375 - $4275). Depending on the results of the ELD appeal, the applicant may be liable to the City for up to $500. RECOMMENDATION Appoint Josh Soper and Joe Turner as Expedited Land Division and Middle Housing Land Division Referees. ATTACHMENTS 1. Excerpted Proposal (Statement of Qualifications) —Josh Soper 2. Excerpted Proposal (Statement of Qualifications) —Joe Turner Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY ACHIEVEMENTS JOSHUA P. SOPER Editor in Chief Animal r Joshua P. Soper has over 10 years of � Law Review experience as in-house counsel for local Pro Bono Service governments in Oregon, including Award Recipient serving as county counsel for Coos County, and most recently, as city MEMBERSHIPS attorney for the City of Sherwood. Josh's practice is focused on land use issues, Oregon State Bar —» including legislative drafting, hearings Oregon Supreme Court and appeals, and general advice. U.S.District Court for the District of Oregon EXPERIENCE OSB-Government Law BEERY,ELSNER& HAMMOND,LLP Section Of Counsel 2022-Present OSB-Real Estate and Land Use Section Provides legal services to cities, counties, and special districts. Practice Oregon City Attorneys areas include land use, public contracting, public records, public meetings, Association Executive public administration, tort liability, elections, real property law, labor and Committee employment law, and constitutional law. CITY OF SHERWOOD SPEAKING TOPICS City Attorney 2015-2022 Government Relations Served as chief legal counsel to the City Council, City boards and Charter Amendments commissions, City staff, and Urban Renewal Agency in areas including Public Records land use, public contracting, public records and meetings, tort liability, elections law, real property, labor and employment law, and constitutional Public Meetings law. Served as City Prosecutor in Sherwood Municipal Court. OFFICE OF COOS COUNTY ATTORNEY VOLUNTEERING County Counsel 2011-2015 Oregon State Bar Began as Assistant County Counsel and was promoted in 2013 to County Disciplinary Board, Counsel, after serving as interim for eight months. Served as legal counsel House of Delegates, to the Board of Commissioners, other elected officials and county boards, Public Service Advisory and department heads on all civil matters, including labor and employment Committee,and law and land use law, among other topics. Served as County's lead Lawyers Assistance Committee negotiator with its seven collective bargaining units. Oregon City Attorneys EDUCATION Association Lewis&Clark Law School J.D., 2011 University of Michigan B.A. Proposal By Joe Turner P.C., Municipal Hearings Official To Provide On-Call Referee Services to the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon The following is a proposal by the firm of Joe Turner P.C., Municipal Hearings Official, to continue providing On-Call Referee services for the City of Lake Oswego (the "City"). I am the sole employee of the corporation and I will be responsible for all work performed pursuant to this proposal. Qualifications: I am a member of the Oregon and Washington Bars and I have worked as an attorney for nearly 30 years. I understand the nature of the work to be done for the City, having enjoyed serving as the City's On-Call Referee for the past six years and as a hearings official in more than twenty other jurisdictions for as long as twenty-three years. I have reviewed and decided five Expedited or Middle Housing Land Division appeals in four different jurisdictions (the cities of Lake Oswego, West Linn, and Gearhart, and Clackamas County), and conducted more 3,500 hearings, including nearly 1,300 land use hearings. My extensive experience as a hearings official in multiple jurisdictions in two states makes me uniquely qualified to review, understand and apply the laws of different jurisdictions. The following table summarizes my experience as a hearings official. Jurisdictions served Subject(s) Started Ended Year s Lake Oswego, OR Land use referee 2017 Current 6 Tigard, OR Land use 2004 Current 19 Clackamas County, OR Dog Control & 2011 Current 12 Sheriff's Hearings Clackamas County, OR Land use 2021 Current 2 Clackamas County, OR Land use 1999 2005 & 7 2006 Gresham, OR Land use 2000 Current 23 Sherwood, OR Land Use 2004 Current 19 Metro, OR Land use 1997 2002 6 Fairview, OR(referee) Land use 1997 2002 6 Washington County, OR Land Use 2013 Current 10 Washington County, OR Land Use 2006 2007 .75 (Interim) Jurisdictions served Subject(s) Started Ended Year s Portland, OR I Land Use 2015 2018 I 4 Multnomah County, OR Land Use 2015 Current 8 Hillsboro, OR Land Use 2015 Current 8 Happy Valley, OR Land Use 2016 Current 7 Portland, OR Land use 2015 2018 5 City of Gearhart Land use referee 2005 2005 1 West Linn, OR Land use referee 2018 Current 5 Clark County, WA Land use/Enf 2000 Current 22 La Center, WA Land use 2001 Current 21 Washougal, WA Land use 2003 Current 19 Vancouver, WA Land use/Enf 2001 2010 21 Vancouver, WA(alternate) Land use/Enf 2010 Current 12 Camas, WA Land use/Enf 2006 Current 16 Woodland, WA Land use 2009 Current 13 Ridgefield, WA Land use 2009 Current 13 Battle Ground, WA Land use 2010 Current 12 Stevenson, WA Land Use 2015 Current 7 Skamania County, WA Land Use 2016 Current 6 (alternate) White Salmon, WA Land Use 2019 Current 4 Kalama, WA Land Use 2019 Current 4 For appeals of Expedited or Middle Housing Land Division, I review the public record, establish a schedule for the submittal of written comments in response to the appeal and issue a notice to relevant parties advising them of the submittal schedule and relevant appeal issues, and issue my decision based on the exhibits in the record. I write a well- organized and concise order that complies with the law in a timely manner. I explain what the relevant facts and law are and how they were applied in a given case. I send my decision to the City and all parties of record within the deadlines established by state law and the City Code. My long-term employment as a hearings official in multiple jurisdictions demonstrates my ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with local government staff, attorneys and planners representing interested parties, and the general public, to write effective and defensible decisions, and to present as a neutral, objective, and effective decision maker. Pricing: I will charge the City for my time and expenses to carry out the scope of the On-Call Referee duties, including preparing for hearings, travel time to and from hearings and site City of Lake Oswego On-Call Referee Proposal By Joe Turner P.C.,Municipal Hearings Official Page 2 6.3 ifli'`'" F °� COUNCIL REPORT N � o aREGo\-\ Subject: Diversified Abilities Custodial Contract Meeting Date: March 19, 2024 Staff Member: Shaun Kohn, Facilities Manager Report Date: February 27, 2024 Department: Facilities Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑X Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Approve Diversified Abilities custodial contract Recommended Language for Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract for custodial services with Diversified Abilities for $262,031.64. Project/ Issue Relates To: Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable BACKGROUND Diversified Abilities is an Oregon Forward Contractor (OFC), a non-profit rehabilitation corporation that employs staff with qualifying disabilities and member of the Oregon Forward Program. The Oregon Forward Program is managed by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) and the program is intended to assist and encourage individuals with disabilities to achieve productive and gainful employment. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city Page 2 Pursuant to ORS 279.850 and ORS 279A.025(4), local governments are to procure a service on the Oregon Forward Program at prices established by DAS from a qualified nonprofit agency for individuals with disabilities, without competitive procurement. Diversified Abilities currently provides custodial services for the City and it has served the City since 2006. This contract would continue the services of Diversified Abilities in providing custodial service for City Hall, Public Works, the Water Treatment Plant, along with other locations. FISCAL IMPACT The cost for the first year is $262,031.64. The City would have the option to annually renew the contract for five additional years, with the price not to exceed the price negotiated by DAS and not to exceed the CPI. RECOMMENDATION Move to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract for custodial services with Diversified Abilities for $262,031.64. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city 6.4 F °� COUNCIL REPORT � o OREGO\-\ Subject: Award a Public Improvement Contract for the construction of Work Order 323 Daniel Way Channel Stabilization Project. Meeting Date: March 19, 2024 Staff Member: Stefan Broadus, Director of Special Projects Report Date: March 8, 2024 Javier Moncada, Senior Associate Engineer Department: Public Works - Engineering Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑X Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Award a Public Improvement Contract Recommended Language for Motion: Move to Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Public Improvement Contract with Daybreak Construction Inc. in the amount of$534,000 for the construction of Work Order 323, Daniel Way Channel Stabilization Project. Project/ Issue Relates To: Adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) project Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): ❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑X Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi e. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 BACKGROUND Three Sisters Creek flows parallel to Daniel Way, between Carman Drive and Kruse Way. As the area developed in the 1980s—90s, the creek was relocated and straightened to make the land more useful for development. Over the past decade or so, sections of the stream channel have eroded and have become choked with non-native vegetation. As a result, the stream has begun undermining a portion of the easterly curb and road edge of Daniel Way. Additionally, the debris buildup from the vegetation has caused the creek to flood over its banks, washing tons of gravel and debris into Daniel Way and down into the Yakima Products parking lot. In an effort to protect the road and reduce future flooding events, the goal of this project is to construct stream channel and roadside stabilization measures. In addition to protecting the roadway, stabilizing the stream channel will reduce the sediment loading into Springbrook Creek and the removal of non-native vegetation will enhance the natural habitat along this segment of the stream. Some of the proposed work is within the public right of way, but much of it lies within private property of the three adjacent parcels. In order to perform the proposed work, easements were coordinated and obtained with these three property owners. DISCUSSION The history of major milestones is as follows: • On December 10 and 13, 2021, the Engineering Division advertised a Request for Proposals (RFP) for engineering design and permitting services. • On March 17, 2022, a contract was awarded to Murraysmith (now Consor). • During the summer of 2022, coordination of the private property easements begins. • Project design was completed in spring of 2023 and the construction project advertised for bids on March 22, 2023. • On April 25, 2023, two sealed bids were opened. The low bid was $524,000. • On May 23, 2023, Contract Award was cancelled due to outstanding easements and environmental permits. • In October 2023, the final required easements were executed. • Project Permits were finalized in December of 2023 and the construction project advertised for bids on January 31, 2024. • On February 29, 2024, the following bids were received: Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 Rank Contractor Bid Bid Points GFE Points Total Points 1 Daybreak Construction $534,000.00 90.0 10 100 2 Moore Excavation Inc $584,820.00 82.2 6 88.2 3 JQ Construction $678,979.84 70.8 10 80.8 4 Pacific Excavation $787,000.00 61.1 6 67.1 N/A Swofford Excavating, LLC $450,726.92 N/A N/A N/A N/A Lyda Excavating Inc. $487,832.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A ASA Construction Inc. $763,991.00 N/A N/A N/A This procurement included the City's Good Faith Effort (GFE) Program supporting the regional economy by encouraging participation from racial, gender, veteran, and emerging small businesses. The City's program is closely connected to the State Certification Office for Business Inclusion and Diversity (COBID) whose goal is to "level the playing field by providing certified firms a fair opportunity to compete for government contracts regardless of owner ethnicity, gender, disability, or firm size". Daybreak Construction was found to be the highest scoring responsive, responsible bidder with a bid amount $534,000. Swofford Excavating, LLC and Lyda Excavating Inc. both submitted lower price bids. However, both also had major omissions from their bid submittal including not attending a mandatory pre-bid conference, not submitting the first-tier subcontractor disclosure form, and not submitting the GFE forms. Those two bids were thus deemed non- responsive. ASA Construction Inc., was also deemed non-responsive due to omission of the first-tier subcontractor disclosure form. FISCAL IMPACT The project is currently funded from the Surface Water utility fund in the adopted 2023/24 to 2028/29 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in an amount of$600,000. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Public Improvement Contract with Daybreak Construction, in the amount of$534,000 for the construction of Work Order 323, Daniel Way Channel Stabilization Project. Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY 8.1 o,� E 0 COUNCIL REPORT L) o OREGO\--" Subject: Ordinance 2938 (LU 23-0036), 2023 Annual CDC Code Amendments Meeting Date: March 19, 2024 Staff Member: Ellen Davis, AICP, Senior Planner Report Date: March 13, 2024 Department: Community Development Department Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑X Planning Commission Recommends Approval ❑X Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑X Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑ Council Direction ❑ Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: Conduct a legislative land use public hearing and tentatively approve Ordinance 2938 (LU 23-0036), amending the Community Development Code (CDC) (LOC Chapter 50). Recommended Language for Motion: Move to tentatively approve Ordinance 2938 and direct staff to return on April 2, 2024, with a final version of the ordinance, including findings and conclusions for LU 23-0036. Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): Annual code amendments to clarify and refine LOC Chapter 50. ❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Should all of the 2023 annual Community Development Code (CDC) amendments proposed in Ord. 2938 be enacted? Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi e. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are part of the City's continuous process improvement efforts to ensure the regulations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, implement City Council goals and policies, and reflect best practices in contemporary urban planning. The amendments are also intended to correct errors, eliminate text ambiguities and redundancies, and clarify the code's language. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments (Ordinance 2938) in two work sessions on October 23, 2023, and December 11, 2023, and held a public hearing on February 12, 2024. The Commission recommends (5-1-1) approval of Ordinance 2938 as reflected in the Findings, Conclusion, and Order adopted on February 26, 2024 (Exhibit B-1). Because the amendments are recommended for approval as a package, the Council is directed to the Commission deliberation on the individual items found in the Commission's February 12, 2024 draft minutes (Exhibit C-1). The proposed code text, along with explanations for each amendment and supplemental Commission findings, is presented in Attachment 2 to Exhibit B-1, dated February 12, 2024 (Exhibit B-1, pgs. 6-29). The proposed code text without commentary is contained in Attachment 2 to Ordinance 2938 (Exhibit A-1.1), dated February 20, 2024. DISCUSSION The amendments will clarify and update various provisions as summarized in the table, below. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Policies and other applicable criteria are discussed in the Planning Commission hearing staff report, Exhibit D-1. Maintenance Amendments (LOC Chapters 50.03- 50.07, and 50.10) ITEM TITLE CODE SECTION(S) 1. Remove references to parking allowances for cottage clusters of LOC 50.03.003.1.d.vi(1) more than 16 cottages. 2. Remove C Avenue from the special street setback table. LOC 50.04.002.5 Table 50.04.002-1 3. Clarify the methodology for determining the front property line LOC 50.04.003.6.c for flag lots created prior to adoption of code regulating flag lots or outside of City limits. 4. Clarify that the 75% impervious surface limit for cottage clusters LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii(4); supersedes certain zone and overlay district standards that also LOC 50.04.001.2.f.iii; regulate impervious surfaces. LOC 50.05.001.4; LOC 50.05.003.5; LOC 50.05.012.6 5. Update text limiting certain surfaces within the Uplands Overlay LOC 50.05.012.6 district to include hardscape surfaces and roof areas rather than "impervious" surfaces. Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 6. Clarify that invasive tree removal is permitted within sensitive LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b) lands and that mitigation is required for such removal. 7. Clarify that interior side yard setback planes are measured from LOC 50.06.002.2.e the property line, not the setback line. 8. Clarify that townhouse minimum street frontage is 15 feet, LOC 50.06.003.1.c.i consistent with the 15-foot lot width required for townhouses, Table 50.06.003-1 and replace the term "rowhouse" with "townhouse" for consistency. 9. Update the retaining wall height exception to include middle LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(4) housing and access lanes. 10. Exempt lots created through Middle Housing Land Divisions LOC 50.06.007.1.b (MHLD) from the solar access standard. 11. Update practices for notice of appeal hearings to allow staff to LOC 50.07.003.7.g.i email commenters who submitted electronic comments and did not provide a mailing address. 12. Update the deadline for submittal of written testimony for LOC 50.07.003.7.k(ii) closed record appeals to City Council. 13. Clarify that screening fences for flag lots must be sight- LOC 50.07.007.2.f.iii obscuring, and exempt property lines within flood management areas and along Oswego Lake or Canal from the fence installation requirement. 14. Prohibit the installation of new invasive species plantings to LOC 50.07.007.2.f.v meet flag lot landscaping requirements. 15. Clarify that construction or placement of an accessory structure LOC 50.10.003.2 is considered a minor alteration for Historic Preservation purposes. 16. Clarify that Duplexes, Triplexes, and Quadplexes must share LOC 50.10.003.2 common wall(s) or floor(s). CODE POLICY ITEMS& DISCUSSION (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.06 and 50.08) ITEM TITLE CODE SECTIONS) 1. Establish cottage orientation for cottage cluster sites that abut LOC 50.03.003.1.d.iii(3) an unimproved or unopened street right-of-way. 2. Allow a third (or more) garage opening to be offset two feet LOC 50.06.001.4.a.v from the previous garage plane rather than requiring the two feet to be stepped back specifically. 3. Exempt open fences around playgrounds and athletic facilities LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(2) such as tennis and basketball courts, baseball backstops, etc. from the evergreen hedge screening requirement. 4. Allow minor variance applications to all fence standards. LOC 50.08.002.2.e Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 4 FISCAL IMPACT None anticipated. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council tentatively approve LU 23-0036 as recommended by the Planning Commission, and direct staff to prepare a final version of Ordinance 2938, including findings and conclusions, for adoption April 2, 2024. EXHIBITS A. Draft Ordinances A-1.1 Draft Ordinance 2938, 03/13/24 Attachment 1: Reserved for City Council Findings (not included) Attachment 2: Code Text Amendments without Commentary, 02/20/24 B. Findings, Conclusions and Order B-1 Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Order, 02/26/24, includes Attachment 2 of Ordinance 2938: Code Text Amendments with Commentary, 02/12/24 C. Minutes C-1 Planning Commission Public Hearing Draft Minutes 02/12/24 D. Staff Memos & Reports D-1 Planning Commission Staff Report, 02/01/24 E. Graphics/Plans [No current exhibits] F. Written Materials [No current exhibits] G. Public Testimony G-1 Letter from Kevin Chavez, Hacienda CDC, 02/12/24 G-2 Email from Kate Myers, 02/12/24 G-3 Presentation by Neighborhood Chairs Committee, 02/12/24 G-4 Presentation by First Addition Neighbors-Forest Hills Neighborhood Association, 02/12/24 Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY EXHIBIT A-1 ORDINANCE 2938 AN ORDINANCE OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING LOC CHAPTER 50 (COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE) FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFYING AND UPDATING VARIOUS PROVISIONS (2023); AND, ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 23-0036). WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing for consideration of this Ordinance was duly given in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, a public hearing before the Planning Commission was held on February 12, 2024, at which the staff report, testimony, and evidence were received and considered; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that LU 23-0036 be approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on LU 23-0036 was held before the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on March 19, 2024, at which the staff report, testimony, and evidence were received and considered; and WHEREAS, these amendments to the Lake Oswego Code, Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) are intended to remove ambiguous and conflicting language, correct the text, and add clarifying text that is consistent with past interpretations; The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions (LU 23-0036), attached as Attachment 1. Section 2. The Lake Oswego Code, Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) is hereby amended by deleting the text shown by strikcthrough type and adding new text shown in underlined type, in Attachment 2. (Sections or subsections within LOC Chapter 50 that are omitted in Attachment 2, and not marked for deletion or addition, are neither amended nor deleted by this Ordinance.) Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. /// Ordinance 2938 (LU 23-0036) EXHIBIT A-1.1/PAGE 1 OF 2 Section 4. Effective Date. As provided in Section 35C of Chapter VII of the Lake Oswego Charter, this ordinance shall take effect on the thirtieth day following enactment. Enacted at the meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 19th day of March, 2024. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: EXCUSED: Joseph M. Buck, Mayor Dated: ATTEST: Kari Linder, City Recorder APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney Ordinance 2938 (LU 23-0036) EXHIBIT A-1.1/PAGE 2 OF 2 ATTACHMENT 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) LOC 50.03.003.1.d.iii Cottage Orientation iii. Cottage Orientation (3) Cottages within 20 ft. of a property line abutting a public street must have a primary entrance into the living area of the cottage facing the street, unless: (a)The street is an unimproved or unopened right-of-way; or (b)The cottage is required otherwise by to face the courtyard to comply with subsection 1.d.iii(2) of this section. LOC 50.03.003.1.d.vi(1) (1) Clustered Parking. Off-street parking shall be arranged in clusters,subject to the following standards: (a) Cottage cluster developments with fcwcr than 16 cottages are permitted parking clusters of not more than five abutting spaces. (b) Cottage cluster developments with 16 cottages or more arc permitted parking clusters of not more than eight abutting spaces. (et') Parking clusters must be separated from other parking spaces by at least four ft. of landscaping. (dc) Clustered parking areas may be covered. LOC Table 50.04.002-1 Special Street Setbacks Table TABLE 50.04.002-1:SPECIAL STREET SETBACKS Affected Streets From To Special Setback Bangy Rd. South of Alyssa 30 ft. Terrace Bergis Rd. Cornell St. Stafford Rd. 30 ft. Bergis Rd. Cornell St. Skylands Rd. 25 ft. Boones Mercantile Dr. Madrona St. 50 ft., unless reduced by the City Ferry Rd. Engineer,finding that the purpose is met by a lesser amount. Boones Madrona St. West Sunset Dr. 50 ft. 1 Ferry Rd. Bonita Rd. 30 ft. Bryant Rd. Boones Ferry Rd. Lake View Blvd. 40 ft. Bryant Rd. Lake View Blvd. Childs Rd. 30 ft. LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 1 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) TABLE 50.04.002-1:SPECIAL STREET SETBACKS Affected Streets From To Special Setback Burma Rd. 25 ft. "C"Ave. State St. alley Country Club 30 ft. Carman South and west 40 ft. Drive of Kruse Way LOC 50.04.003.6.c Special Determination of Yards and Yard Requirements C. Determination of Front Yard for Flag Lots Created Prior to Scptcmb^" 9940ther Than Under Flag Lot Section [LOC 50.07.007.21, and Lots Accessing by Easement The front yard shall be the area abutting the property line of the "flag" portion of the lot parallel to the street providing access to a flag lot created prior to September 6, 1998 or any other lot that would qualify as a Flag Lot but for the date of creation. If this standard is not practical due to placement of structures on adjacent lots, topography or similar reasons,then the front yard will be that portion of the lot abutting the property line of the greatest length abutting the access portion of the flag or easement. /// LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii(4) - R-6 Zone Dimensional Standards f. Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces—Additional Standards /// ii. R-6 Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces /// (4) Cottage clusters are exempt from maximum lot coverage and standards. impervious surface limitations. See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// LOC 50.04.001.2.f.iii — R-DD Zone Dimensional Standards f. Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces—Additional Standards /// iii. R-DD Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 2 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) III LOC 50.05.001.4 — Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District 4. LIMITATION ON CERTAIN ELEMENTS No more than 50%of a lot shall be covered with any of the following elements: structures, patios, paving or impervious walks. However, pervious decks and natural-appearing constructed ponds shall not be included within this limitation. Where a paved area contains mixed nonplant and plant elements, only the nonplant portions of the area shall be included within this limitation. (See Figure 50.05.001-B: Illustrative Mixed Paved Areas and Natural-Appearing Ponds for illustrations of natural-appearing constructed ponds and paved areas with mixed nonplant and plant elements.) Exception:Cottage clusters are exempt from impervious surface or certain element limitations.See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// LOC 50.05.003.5 — Lake Grove R-7.5/R-10 Overlay District 5. LIMITATION ON CERTAIN ELEMENTS No more than 50%of a lot shall be covered with any of the following elements: structures, patios, paving or impervious walks. However, pervious decks and natural-appearing constructed ponds shall not be included within this limitation. Where a paved area contains mixed nonplant and plant elements, only the nonplant portions of the area shall be included within this limitation. See Figure 50.05.001-B: Illustrative Mixed Paved Areas and Natural-Appearing Ponds for examples. Exception:Cottage clusters are exempt from impervious surface or certain element limitations.See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// LOC 50.05.012.6 — Uplands R-10 Overlay District 6: LIMITATION ON IMPERVIOUS HARDSCAPE SURFACES AND STRUCTURES(INCLUDING ROOF AREAS) a. No more than 50%of the lot may be covered with impervious hardscape surfaces and structures. Exception:Cottage clusters are exempt from impervious surface or hardscape limitations.See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 3 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION — Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) b. The area between the front lot line and the nearest edge of the building footprint shall not be covered by more than 30%of impervious hardscape surfaces and structures. /// Figure 50.05.012-C: Limitation on Hardscape Surfaces and Structures 1 Total Hardscape and Structure Area < 50% of Lot (12,000 sq. ft. lot, 6,000 sq. ft. max. Hardscape and Structures) Hardscape Area jr i• (Patio) i `. 1 1 , 1 , 1 , I ' 1 Structure , Hardscape Area i (Driveway) i .1----...---- I i i / 30%o max ,, i 1 tHardscape ands'' 1 i i Structures f' __1 LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b) Tree Removal (b) Tree Removal Tree removal within an RP district shall be subject to the following criteria: /// LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 4 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) (vi) Invasive tree removal permit, in accordance with LOC 55.02.042(6), except that mitigation shall be required as described in LOC 55.02.084, /// Note to Codifier: Upon codification, remove the following cross reference: [Cross-Reference: Invasive Trees may be removed from RP Districts under the exemption in LOC 50.05.010.2.c.vi ("other development that does not remove any native vegetation ..." is exempt from the Sensitive Lands section).] LOC 50.06.001.4.a.v Multiple Garage Opening Setbacks v. Multiple Garage Opening Setbacks In any instance where a garage or a set of adjacent garages is designed to park three or more vehicles, only the garage openings for the first two vehicles may occupy the same building plane. Each additional building plane with a garage opening shall be offset back by a minimum of two ft. from the previous garage building plane. Exceptions: (1) The lot is a steeply sloped lot; (2) The width of a parcel is less than 50 ft.; or (3) The garage is proposed to be set back at least 60 ft. from the public right-of-way. LOC 50.06.002.2.e Side Yard Setback Plane — Interior Yards e. Side Yard Setback Plane—Interior Yards Except as set forth in subsection 2.e.ii of this section,the side profile of a structure shall fit behind a plane that starts at the side property line and extends upward to 12 ft. and slopes toward the center of the lot at a slope of 12:12 up to the maximum allowed height at the peak as illustrated in Figure 50.06.001-G: Side Yard Setback Plane, below.The finished grade at the foundation shall be used as the grade elevation at the setback property line for purposes of measuring the setback plane. LOC 50.06.003.1.c Standards for Approval c. Standards for Approval i. Every residentially zoned lot shall abut a street for the following minimum length: LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 5 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) TABLE 50.06.003-1: MINIMUM STREET FRONTAGE Residentially Zoned Lot Minimum Street Frontage Rev/Ile-use Townhouse 17 ft. 15 ft. Flag Lot LOC 50.07.007.2.c All Other 25 ft. /// LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(2) b. Location and Height /// x. Exceptions from Height Limitations /// (2) An open (80% open)fence which is not located in the front yard (forward of the primary structure to the front lot line) and which encloses part or all of a tennis court, swimming pool, playing field, park, commercial recreational facility, public or semi-public utility structure, or courtyards or play areas for day care and educational institutions.The evergreen hedge screening requirement in LOC 50.06.004.2.b.iv does not apply to these fences; or /// LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(4) Exceptions from Height Limitations /// (4) Retaining walls used to directly support a driveway,access lane, or car parking area for a single- family residence or middle housing; or /// LOC 50.06.007.1.b.9. IMPROVEMENTS AND SECURITY b. Applicability The solar design standard in LOC 50.06.007.1.c shall apply to subdivision applications (except Middle Housing Land Divisions(ORS 92.031)),that create lots intended for single-family detached or middle housing dwellings in any zone, except to the extent the reviewing authority finds that the LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 6 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) applicant has shown one or more of the conditions listed in LOC 50.04.004.1, Exemptions from Solar Design Standard, and LOC 50.04.004.2,Adjustments to Solar Design Standard, exist and exemptions or adjustments provided for therein are warranted. LOC 50.07.003.7.g Notice of the Appeal Hearing g. Notice of the Appeal Hearing i. Written notice of the appeal hearing before the City Council shall be sent by regular electronic mail to the email address provided, or if no email address is provided then by regular mail, no later than 14 days prior to the date of the hearing to the appellant, the applicant if different from the appellant, and all persons who testified either orally or in writing before the hearing body, or,for a minor development decision of the City Engineer, submitted written testimony to the City Engineer. LOC 50.07.003.7.k Presenting Testimony k. Presenting Testimony /// ii. Written testimony may be submitted prior to or at the public h aring. Written testimony may be submitted prior to the public hearing and must be received by the City Recorder by 512:00 p.m.er the two business days of prior to the scheduled hearing to be submitted by staff at the public h aring. Written testimony submitted at the h -aring must be filed with the recording secretary and placed before the City Council. Written comments that are merely referred to in testimony but which are not placed before the hearing body pursuant to this section shall not become part of the record of the proceedings. Written comments that attempt to present new evidence or raise new issues not presented or raised before the hearing body shall be rejected. LOC 50.07.007.2.f Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation f. Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation /// iii. The perimeter of the flag lot(s) shall be screened from abutting lots outside of the development site with a six-ft.-tall solid, sight-obscuring fence, except: (1) Where a four-ft.fence is required by LOC 50.06.004.2.b.i, Fences, or where such screening would conflict with standards for Sensitive Lands Overlay Districts, Flood Management Areas,or where the property line abuts Oswego Lake or Oswego Canal; or /// LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 7 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) LOC 50.07.007.2.f Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation f. Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation //// v. Plant materials listed as nuisance or invasive in LOC 50.11.004,Appendix D, and the Invasive Tree Species List on file at the Planning Department are prohibited in landscaping required by this section. /// LOC 50.08.002.2 Minor Variance Classifications 2. Minor Variance Classifications //// e.A variance to standards in LOC 50.06.004.2 for a maximum fence,wall, retaining wall, or a combination thereof, height restrictions pursuant to LOC 50.06.004.2. /// LOC 50.10.003.2 Definitions —Alteration (Historic Preservation); Alteration, Minor (Historic Preservation) Alteration (Historic Preservation) Alteration:An addition to, or removal of a portion of, or reconfiguration of a landmark that changes an elevation of a landmark or contributing resources (not applicable to National Register properties; see "Demolition.-"). Construction or placement of an accessory structure on a property that contains a historic landmark, except on sites over one acre in size or placement of an accessory structure more than 300 feet from the landmark structure or resource, is an "alteration"of the Landmark. Alteration, Minor(Historic Preservation) An alteration (historic preservation)that does not: a. Change the height of the building; b. Make a substantial change to an elevation visible from the public right-of-way, a public open space, or Oswego Lake; c. Increase the floor area more than 20% provided the building addition or accessory structure is not visible from the public right-of-way, a public open space, or Oswego Lake; and LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 8 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION— Feb. 26, 2024 (without commentary and reorganized numerically) d. Reduce the square footage of the original structure other than removing previous additions or treatments that did not contribute to the historical or architectural significance of the landmark as stated in the findings of fact for the landmark designation. LOC 50.10.003.2 Definitions Duplex Two attached dwelling units on a lot where each unit shares at least one common wall or floor/ceiling with an adjacent dwelling unit. The common wall shall consist of a structural wall that is shared for at least 25%of the length of the side of each dwelling unit or the common floor/ceiling shall consist of at least 25%of the floor area of each dwelling unit. Quadplex Four attached dwelling units on a lot where each unit shares at least one common wall or floor/ceiling with an adjacent dwelling unit.The common wall shall consist of a structural wall that is shared for at least 25%of the length of the side of each dwelling unit or the common floor/ceiling shall consist of at least 25%of the floor area of each dwelling unit. Triplex Three attached dwelling units on a lot where each unit shares at least one common wall or floor/ceiling with an adjacent dwelling unit. The common wall shall consist of a structural wall that is shared for at least 25%of the length of the side of each dwelling unit or the common floor/ceiling shall consist of at least 25%of the floor area of each dwelling unit. LU 23-0036 ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 9 of 9 EXHIBIT B-1 APPROVED: 02/26/2024 1 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION 2 OF THE 3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 4 5 A REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE ) LU 23-0036 6 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE ) (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 7 PURPOSE OF CLARIFYING AND UPDATING ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER 8 VARIOUS PROVISIONS AND ) 9 ADOPTING ORDINANCE 2938. ) 10 11 NATURE OF APPLICATION 12 13 The City of Lake Oswego is requesting approval of legislative amendments (Ordinance 2938) to 14 the Lake Oswego Community Development Code (CDC) for the purpose of clarifying and 15 updating various provisions. Proposed amendments are to: 16 17 18 CODE MAINTENANCE ITEMS(LOC Chapters 50.03-50.07, and 50.10) ITEM TITLE CODE SECTION(S) 1. Remove references to parking allowances for cottage LOC 50.03.003.1.d.vi(1) clusters of more than 16 cottages because the maximum number of cottages allowed in the code is eight. 2. Remove C Avenue from the special street setback table LOC 50.04.002.5 because this right-of-way width already meets the 60-foot Table 50.04.002-1 width established in the table. 3. Clarify the methodology for determining the front property LOC 50.04.003.6.c line for flag lots created prior to adoption of code regulating flag lots or outside of City limits. 4. Clarify that the 75% impervious surface limit for cottage LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii(4); LOC clusters supersedes certain zone and overly district 50.04.001.2.f.iii; LOC 50.05.001.4; standards that also regulate impervious surfaces. LOC 50.05.003.5; LOC 50.05.012.6 5. Update text limiting certain surfaces within the Uplands LOC 50.05.012.6 Overlay district to include hardscape surfaces and roof areas rather than "impervious" surfaces,to be consistent with legislative history and current practice. 6. Clarify that invasive tree removal is permitted within LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b) sensitive lands and that mitigation is required for such removal. 7. Clarify that interior side yard setback planes are measured LOC 50.06.002.2.e from the property line, not the setback line. 8. Clarify that townhouse minimum street frontage is 15 feet, LOC 50.06.003.1.c.i consistent with the 15-foot lot width required for Table 50.06.003-1 townhouses, and replace the term "rowhouse"with "townhouse"for consistency. LU 23-0036 Page 1 of 5 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 1 OF 5 APPROVED: 02/26/2024 9. Update the retaining wall height exception that currently LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(4) applies only to walls supporting driveway or parking areas for single-family residences to include middle housing and access lanes. 10. Exempt lots created through Middle Housing Land Divisions LOC 50.06.007.1.b (MHLD)from the solar access standard. MHLD lot creation is solely for ownership purposes, not zoning or building design standards. Partitions are already exempt from this standard. 11. Update practices for notice of appeal hearings to allow staff LOC 50.07.003.7.g.i to email commenters who submitted electronic comments and did not provide a mailing address. 12. Update the deadline for submittal of written testimony for LOC 50.07.003.7.k(ii) closed record appeals to City Council to review for new materials and distribution to members of the hearing body. 13. Clarify that screening fences must be sight-obscuring, and LOC 50.07.007.2.f.iii exempt property lines within flood management areas and along Oswego Lake or Canal from the fence installation requirement. 14. Prohibit the installation of new invasive species plantings to LOC 50.07.007.2.f.v comply with flag lot landscaping requirements. 15. Clarify that construction or placement of an accessory LOC 50.10.003.2 structure is considered a minor alteration for Historic Preservation purposes. 16. Clarify that Duplexes,Triplexes, and Quadplexes must share LOC 50.10.003.2 common wall(s) or floor(s).1 CODE POLICY ITEMS& DISCUSSION (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.06,and 50.08) ITEM TITLE CODE SECTIONS) 1. Establish cottage orientation for cottage cluster sites that LOC 50.03.003.1.d.iii(3) abut an unimproved or unopened street right-of-way. 2. Determine whether to allow a third (or more)garage LOC 50.06.001.4.a.v opening to be offset two feet from the previous garage plane rather than requiring the two feet to be stepped back specifically. 3. Exempt open fences around athletic facilities such as tennis LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(2) and basketball courts, baseball backstops, etc. from the evergreen hedge screening requirement. 4. Determine whether to allow minor variance applications to LOC 50.08.002.2.e all fence standards. Increases in fence/wall/retaining wall height are already considered minor variances. 1 2 HEARINGS 3 1 Maintenance Item#16 was added after the second work session held on December 11, 2023. It was included in all materials for the Public Hearing held on February 12, 2024. LU 23-0036 Page 2 of 5 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 2 OF 5 APPROVED: 02/26/2024 1 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its meeting 2 on February 12, 2024. 3 4 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS 5 6 A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan 7 Land Use Planning - Policies A-1, A-2, C-1, C-3 and D-1 8 Inspiring Spaces and Places - Goal 1, Policies 1, 2, 3, and 8; Goal 2, Policy 4 (d and e) 9 Complete Neighborhoods & Housing - Policies A-4, B-1 and C-7 10 Economic Vitality- Policy B-1 (b, c, and d) 11 Community Health and Public Safety- Sound Quality- Policy 1 12 13 B. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code 14 LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing 15 LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decisions Defined 16 LOC 50.07.003.16.b Criteria for Legislative Decision 17 LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD 18 LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required 19 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision 20 21 CONCLUSION 22 23 The Planning Commission concludes that the recommended Code Amendments in Attachment 24 2 (dated 2/13/24) of proposed Ordinance 2938 are in compliance with all applicable criteria. 25 26 FINDINGS AND REASONS 27 28 The Planning Commission (Commission) incorporates the Staff Memos (dated October 13, 29 2023, December 11, 2023) and the Staff Report, dated February 1, 2024 (with all exhibits 30 attached thereto), on LU 23-0036 as support for its decision, supplemented by the further 31 findings and conclusions set forth herein. In the event of any inconsistency between the 32 supplementary matter herein and the staff report, the matter herein controls. 33 34 Following are the supplementary findings and conclusions of this Commission: 35 36 1. Maintenance Item #12: Change Deadline for Written Testimony for City Council Appeals. 37 The Commission considered whether to change the deadline for written testimony prior to 38 closed-record City Council appeal hearings to one or two business days before the appeal 39 hearing. Staff recommended two business days. No public testimony on this item was received. 40 The Commission found that staff's recommendation of two business days was appropriate, in 41 order to adequately review submissions and resolve evidentiary issues with submitters. 42 LU 23-0036 Page 3 of 5 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 3 OF 5 APPROVED: 02/26/2024 1 2 2. Maintenance Item #16: Definition of Duplex, Triplex, and Quadplex. The Commission 3 received public testimony from Carole Okert, speaking on behalf of the Lake Oswego 4 Neighborhood Chairs Committee and as a representative for the First Addition Neighbors— 5 Forest Hills Neighborhood Association, regarding the proposal to specify that-plexes must share 6 common walls or floors/ceilings. Ms. Ockert supported staff's reading of the legislative history 7 for the Middle Housing Code Amendments that the common dictionary definition of the term 8 "attached" was intended when these -plex housing types were added to the code, rather than 9 the LOC Chapter 50 definition of"detached" as a 3 foot or great horizontal separation. Ms. Okert 10 requested that the Commission require 100% of wall or floor/ceiling plans be shared between 11 plex units. 12 13 The Commission finds that the proposed amendment to require at least 25% of wall or 14 floor/ceiling areas between plex units as shared planes mirrors the current definition of 15 "Townhouse" and provides greater design flexibility. The Commission finds that definitions for 16 duplex, triplex, and quadplex as proposed sufficiently enact the legislative intent for these 17 dwelling types. 18 19 3. Policy Item #1: Cottage Orientation Abutting Unimproved and Unopened Rights-of-Way. 20 The Commission considered whether to exempt cottages within a cottage cluster that do not 21 face a common courtyard from the requirement to face the public right-of-way when said 22 public right-of-way is unimproved and/or unopened. Staff recommended exemptions for both 23 unimproved and unopened rights-of-way. No public testimony on this item was received. The 24 Commission found that staff's recommendation that the exemption include both unimproved 25 and unopened rights-of-way was appropriate. 26 27 ORDER 28 29 IT IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that: 30 31 1. The Planning Commission recommends that proposed Ordinance 2938, with Exhibit A 32 (based on Attachment 2, dated February 13, 2024) [LU 23-0036] be approved by the City 33 Council. 34 35 // 36 37 // 38 39 [Signatures on Next Page] 40 41 // 42 43 44 LU 23-0036 Page 4 of 5 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 4 OF 5 APPROVED: 02/26/2024 1 II 2 3 4 5 // 6 I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED by the Planning Commission of 7 the City of Lake Oswego. 8 9 DATED this 26 day of February, 2024. 10 11 12 /s/ Diana Moreno, Chair 13 Diana Moreno, Chair 14 Planning Commission 15 16 17 18 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATION - February 12, 2024 19 20 AYES: Mitchell, Naujock, Schenone, Stewart, Thwing 21 NOES: Rigby 22 ABSTAIN: None 23 EXCUSED: Moreno 24 25 ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND ORDER - February 26, 2024 26 27 AYES: Naujock, Schenone, Stewart, Thwing 28 NOES: Rigby 29 ABSTAIN: None 30 EXCUSED: Mitchell LU 23-0036 Page 5 of 5 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 5 OF 5 2023 ANNUAL CODE AMENDMENTS (LU 23-0036) Table of Contents MAINTENACE (M)AND POLICY(P) ITEMS ITEM 1 (M) 2 ITEM 2 (M) 3 ITEM 3 (M) 4 ITEM 4 (M) 5 ITEM 5 (M) 7 ITEM 6 (M) 9 ITEM 7 (M) 10 ITEM 8 (M) 11 ITEM 9 (M) 12 ITEM 10 (M) 13 ITEM 11 (M) 14 ITEM 12 (M) 15 ITEM 13 (M) 16 ITEM 14 (M) 17 ITEM 15 (M) 18 ITEM 16 (M) 19 ITEM 1 (P) 21 ITEM 2 (P) 22 ITEM 3 (P) 23 ITEM 4 (P) 24 LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 1 of 24 MAINTENANCE ITEM 1 (M): LOC 50.03.003.1.d.vi(1)/Use Specific Cottage Cluster— Clustered Parking LOC 50.03.003.1.d.vi(1) (1) Clustered Parking. Off-street parking shall be arranged in clusters, subject to the following standards: (a) Cottage cluster developments with fewer than 16 cottages are permitted parking clusters of not more than five abutting spaces. (b) Cottage cluster developments with 16 cottages or more arc permitted parking clusters of not more than eight abutting spaces. (eb) Parking clusters must be separated from other parking spaces by at least four ft. of landscaping. (4c) Clustered parking areas may be covered. Item 1 (M): No more than eight cottages are allowed within a cottage cluster development. Staff recommends removing references to "developments of 16 cottages or more"to prevent confusion regarding the maximum number of cottages permitted. This amendment modifies the language of the parking requirement to remove references to larger clusters than allowed elsewhere in the Code. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 2 of 24 ITEM 2 (M): LOC Table 50.04.002-1; LOC 50.04.002.5; Special Street Setbacks LOC Table 50.04.002-1 Special Street Setbacks Table TABLE 50.04.002-1:SPECIAL STREET SETBACKS Affected Streets From To Special Setback Bangy Rd. South of Alyssa 30 ft. Terrace Bergis Rd. Cornell St. Stafford Rd. 30 ft. Bergis Rd. Cornell St. Skylands Rd. 25 ft. Boones Mercantile Dr. Madrona St. 50 ft., unless reduced by the City Ferry Rd. Engineer,finding that the purpose is met by a lesser amount. Boones Madrona St. West Sunset Dr. 50 ft. Ferry Rd. Bonita Rd. 30 ft. Bryant Rd. Boones Ferry Rd. Lake View Blvd. 40 ft. Bryant Rd. Lake View Blvd. Childs Rd. 30 ft. Burma Rd. 25 ft. "C" Ave. Statc St. alley Country Club 30 ft. Carman South and west 40 ft. Drive of Kruse Way ITEM 2 (M):The C Avenue right-of-way width is already sufficient; no special street setback falls on private property as the full length of the ROW described in the code is already 60 feet wide.The City's Traffic Engineer supports this proposed amendment removing C Avenue from the Special Street Setback table. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 3 of 24 ITEM 3 (M): LOC 50.04.003.6.c/Determination of Front Yard for Flag Lots Created Outside City Limits and/or before Enactment of LOC 50.07.007.2 LOC 50.04.003.6.c Special Determination of Yards and Yard Requirements C. Determination of Front Yard for Flag Lots Created Prior to Septcmbcr 6, 19980ther Than Under Flag Lot Section [LOC 50.07.007.21, and Lots Accessing by Easement The front yard shall be the area abutting the property line of the "flag" portion of the lot parallel to the street providing access to a flag lot created prior to September 6, 1998 or any other lot that would qualify as a Flag Lot but for the date of creation. If this standard is not practical due to placement of structures on adjacent lots, topography or similar reasons,then the front yard will be that portion of the lot abutting the property line of the greatest length abutting the access portion of the flag or easement. /// ITEM 3 (M):This amendment clarifies the method of determining the front lot line for flag lots created outside of City limits, or any other flag lot created before or outside of the City's established flag lot code (LOC 50.07.007.2).This amendment is necessary because the current code requires City Staff to obtain copies of old versions of the County Code in place at various times of lot creation to determine what the County then designated as the front lot line,for property now within City Limits.This can result in inconsistent structure orientation and yard setback depths. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 4 of 24 ITEM 4 (M): LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii(4); LOC 50.04.001.2.f.iii; LOC 50.05.001.4; LOC 50.05.003.5; LOC 50.05.012.6/Impervious Surface Limitations Not Applicable to Cottage Clusters R-6 Zone Dimensional Standards—LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii(4) f. Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces—Additional Standards /// ii. R-6 Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces /// (4) Cottage clusters are exempt from maximum lot coverage and standards. impervious surface limitations.See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// R-DD Zone Dimensional Standards—LOC 50.04.001.2.f.iii f. Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces—Additional Standards /// iii. R-DD Lot Coverage/Impervious Surfaces /// Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District—LOC 50.05.001.4 4. LIMITATION ON CERTAIN ELEMENTS No more than 50%of a lot shall be covered with any of the following elements: structures, patios, paving or impervious walks. However, pervious decks and natural-appearing constructed ponds shall not be included within this limitation. Where a paved area contains mixed nonplant and plant elements, only the nonplant portions of the area shall be included within this limitation. (See Figure 50.05.001-B: Illustrative Mixed Paved Areas and Natural-Appearing Ponds for illustrations of natural-appearing constructed ponds and paved areas with mixed nonplant and plant elements.) Exception:Cottage clusters are exempt from impervious surface or certain element limitations.See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// Lake Grove R-7.5/R-10 Overlay District—LOC 50.05.003.5 LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 5 of 24 5. LIMITATION ON CERTAIN ELEMENTS No more than 50%of a lot shall be covered with any of the following elements: structures, patios, paving or impervious walks. However, pervious decks and natural-appearing constructed ponds shall not be included within this limitation. Where a paved area contains mixed nonplant and plant elements, only the nonplant portions of the area shall be included within this limitation. See Figure 50.05.001-B: Illustrative Mixed Paved Areas and Natural-Appearing Ponds for examples. Exception:Cottage clusters are exempt from impervious surface or certain element limitations.See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// Uplands R-10 Overlay District- LOC 50.05.012.6 6. LIMITATION ON IMPERVIOUS SURFACES a. No more than 50%of the lot may be covered with impervious surfaces. Exception: Cottage clusters are exempt from impervious surface or hardscape limitations. See LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)for maximum impervious surface coverage standards applicable to cottage clusters. /// ITEM 4(M): Cottage cluster development is subject to use-specific standards, which include a 75% impervious surface area limitation within the required courtyards [LOC 50.03.003.1.d.ii(1)(e)]. Numerous overlays, plus the R-6 zone standards, also regulate impervious surfaces, but only the R-DD code section specifies that cottage clusters are exempt [LOC 50.04.001.2.f.iii(2)].The intent of the cottage cluster use-specific standards is to supersede zone and/or overlay standards that regulate the same matter in compliance with State Law. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 6 of 24 ITEM 5 (M): LOC 50.05.012.6/Clarify Uplands Overlay Limitation on "Impervious"Surfaces 6: LIMITATION ON IMPERVIOUS HARDSCAPE SURFACES AND STRUCTURES(INCLUDING ROOF AREAS) a. No more than 50%of the lot may be covered with impervious hardscape surfaces and structures. b. The area between the front lot line and the nearest edge of the building footprint shall not be covered by more than 30%of impervious hardscape surfaces and structures. /// Figure 50.05.012-C: Limitation on Hardscape Surfaces and Structures Total Hardscape and Structure Area < 50% of Lot (12,000 sq. ft. lot, 6,000 sq. ft. max. Hardscape and Structures) Hardscape Area A/ (Patio) i i ,__ i 1 , i i Structure -_, , 1r , , , 1 Hardscape Area i i (Driveway) I i 1 • I I -' - I ' I .-" "' I 1 _.-' / 1 `; 30% max ,, I I Hardscape ands, I I Structures`' __I 1 _L- LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 7 of 24 ITEM 5 (M):The code language currently limits "impervious" surfaces, which is not defined in LOC Chapter 50.This has led to confusion by homeowners and developers within the Overlay. Researching the legislative history in LU 17-0001 shows that the Overlay's intent was to limit "hardscape"that would include permeable pavers, permeable asphalt, etc.: "Commentary:The proposal to limit the impervious area between the building and front property line is intended to prevent hardscape (primarily driveways)from being the predominant surface treatment in the front yard.This is intended to support the existing and desired neighborhood character of generous open space on lots, lush landscaping and an abundance of trees, rather than an abundance of hardscape as viewed from the street." Changing the term "impervious surfaces"to "hardscape and roof areas" should decrease confusion and clarify that the intent of the regulation is not linked to stormwater pervious/impervious surface standards. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 8 of 24 ITEM 6 (M): LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b) Invasive Tree Removal in RP Districts LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b)Tree Removal (b) Tree Removal Tree removal within an RP district shall be subject to the following criteria: III (vi) Invasive tree removal permit,in accordance with LOC 55.02.042(6),except that mitigation shall be required as described in LOC 55.02.084, /// ITEM 6(M):The Sensitive Lands Overlay, LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b), lists allowed tree removal but does not specifically list the Invasive Tree removal permit.The code only notes the removal of invasive trees by including an editor's cross-reference to the Sensitive Lands exception for development that does "not remove native vegetation" (Subsection 2.c.vi).This amendment lists an Invasive Tree removal permit in the same manner that other permit types are listed,for consistency and reader's ease. Note to Codifier: Upon codification, remove the following cross reference: [Cross-Reference: Invasive Trees may be removed from RP Districts under the exemption in LOC 50.05.010.2.c.vi ("other development that does not remove any native vegetation ..." is exempt from the Sensitive Lands section).] LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 9 of 24 ITEM 7 (M): LOC 50.06.002.2.e,/Correct Error in Side Yard Setback Plane Descriptions LOC 50.06.002.2.e Side Yard Setback Plane—Interior Yards e. Side Yard Setback Plane—Interior Yards Except as set forth in subsection 2.e.ii of this section,the side profile of a structure shall fit behind a plane that starts at the side property line and extends upward to 12 ft. and slopes toward the center of the lot at a slope of 12:12 up to the maximum allowed height at the peak as illustrated in Figure 50.06.001-G: Side Yard Setback Plane, below.The finished grade at the foundation shall be used as the grade elevation at the setback property line for purposes of measuring the setback plane. ITEM 7(M):The side yard setback plane for interior side yards, rather than street side yards, is measured from the side property line.This amendment replaces the erroneous reference to the setback line with the correct reference to the property line. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 10 of 24 ITEM 8 (M): LOC 50.06.003.1.c.i; Table 50.06.003-1/Townhouse Lot Width vs. Lot Frontage LOC 50.06.003.1.c Standards for Approval c. Standards for Approval i. Every residentially zoned lot shall abut a street for the following minimum length: pTABLE 50.06.003-1: MINIMUM STREET FRONTAGE Residentially Zoned Lot Minimum Street Frontage °^• se Townhouse 17 ft. 15 ft. Flag Lot LOC 50.07.007.2.c All Other 25 ft. /// ITEM 8(M): (1)A Townhouse has a minimum lot width of 15 feet(LOC 50.04.001.1 and .2), but a minimum street frontage requirement of 17 feet (LOC 50.06.003.1.c.i). While lot width is measured at the front setback line and frontage is measured at the front property line,they would likely be equal and the difference is an unintentional one.Typically, townhouse lots are rectangular with the same width at the front property line and front setback line. (2)Though the terms "rowhouse" and "townhouse" are interchangeable, "townhouse" is used in this context for consistency with the term used in the dimensional standards tables in LOC 50.04.001.1 and .2. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 11 of 24 ITEM 9 (M): LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(4)/Retaining Wall Height Exceptions LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x Exceptions from Height Limitations III (4) Retaining walls used to directly support a driveway,access lane, or car parking area for a single- family residence or middle housing; or /// ITEM 9 (M):This exception allows up to 10-foot tall retaining walls that support a driveway or car parking area for a single-family residence.This proposal amends the code section to include both middle housing and access lanes. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 12 of 24 ITEM 10 (M): LOC 50.06.007.1.b/Solar Access Design Standards for Middle Housing Land Divisions 9. IMPROVEMENTS AND SECURITY b. Applicability The solar design standard in LOC 50.06.007.1.c shall apply to subdivision applications (except Middle Housing Land Divisions(ORS 92.031)),that create lots intended for single-family detached or middle housing dwellings in any zone, except to the extent the reviewing authority finds that the applicant has shown one or more of the conditions listed in LOC 50.04.004.1, Exemptions from Solar Design Standard, and LOC 50.04.004.2,Adjustments to Solar Design Standard, exist and exemptions or adjustments provided for therein are warranted. ITEM 10(M):Solar Access Design requirements per LOC 50.06.007.1.b apply to lots created via a Middle Housing Land Division (MHLD) of more than three lots. This creates potential conflicts if the new lots are equal to the dwelling unit footprints or are less than the minimum lot size for the zone, which is the entire purpose of the ownership of an MHLD. The internal lot lines created by a MHLD are not used to implement zone/building design standards;the MHLD is solely for ownership purposes. Solar Access Design requirements do not apply to partitions (three or fewer lots); Solar Balance Point requirements apply to all structures in the R-7.5, R-10 and R-15 zones and to single-family detached structures in all zones regardless if the lot was created through a partition, subdivision, or MHLD.This proposal exempts MHLD from the Solar Access Design requirements. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 13 of 24 ITEM 11 (M): LOC 50.07.003.7.g.i/Notice of Appeal Hearings LOC 50.07.003.7.g Notice of the Appeal Hearing g. Notice of the Appeal Hearing i. Written notice of the appeal hearing before the City Council shall be sent by regular electronic mail to the email address provided,or if no email address is provided then by regular mail, no later than 14 days prior to the date of the hearing to the appellant, the applicant if different from the appellant, and all persons who testified either orally or in writing before the hearing body, or,for a minor development decision of the City Engineer, submitted written testimony to the City Engineer. /// ITEM 11 (M): Most comments are submitted via email or through the City's website directly and commenters often do not include their mailing address.This proposal would allow staff to email notice of the hearing to commenters who submitted comments via email,while still mailing notice to commenters who do not provide an email address and do provide a postal mailing address. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 14 of 24 ITEM 12 (M): LOC 50.07.003.7.k(ii)/Testimony Deadline for Closed Record City Council Appeals LOC 50.07.003.7.k Presenting Testimony k. Presenting Testimony /// ii. Written testimony may be submitted prior to or at the public h aring. Written testimony may be submitted prior to the public hearing and must be received by the City Recorder by 5.12:00 p.m.er the two business days of prior to the scheduled hearing to be submitted by staff at the public hearing. Written testimony submitted at the hearing must be filed with the recording secretary and placed before the City Council. Written comments that are merely referred to in testimony but which are not placed before the hearing body pursuant to this section shall not become part of the record of the proceedings. Written comments that attempt to present new evidence or raise new issues not presented or raised before the hearing body shall be rejected. For appeals to the City Council, the code states that written testimony can be submitted until 5pm on the day of the hearing or at the hearing. In a somewhat similar"written testimony deadline" provision for the DRC,the submission deadline was changed to noon on the day of the hearing for DRC meetings and that no written testimony will be allowed at the hearing, in order to facilitate access to the written materials by persons testifying virtually. However, a different issue is presented with CC appeals that is not present for DRC evidentiary hearings: any material submitted to the CC cannot contain "new evidence," resulting in the need for staff to review the submittals to see if the materials are contained within the Record before the DRC, which takes time when the record is large and staff needs to communicate to the commenter when they have submitted new evidence to give them an opportunity to show in the record where the evidence is that staff has flagged. For CC appeals, consider moving the deadline for written testimony to close of business two business days prior to the hearing. Additionally, some Council meetings begin at 3pm, which conflicts with the 5pm deadline. Supplemental Commission Finding: The Commission found that staff's recommendation of two business days was appropriate, in order to adequately review submissions and resolve evidentiary issues with submitters. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 15 of 24 ITEM 13 (M): LOC 50.07.007.2.f.iii; LOC 50.07.007.2.f.iii(1)/Flag Lot Screening Requirements LOC 50.07.007.2.f Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation f. Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation /// iii. The perimeter of the flag lot(s) shall be screened from abutting lots outside of the development site with a six-ft.-tall solid, sight-obscuring fence, except: (1) Where a four-ft.fence is required by LOC 50.06.004.2.b.i, Fences, or where such screening would conflict with standards for Sensitive Lands Overlay Districts, Flood Management Areas,or where the property line abuts Oswego Lake or Oswego Canal; or /// ITEM 13 (M): (1)This amendment clarifies that a sight-obscuring fence is required for flag lot screening; currently the nature of the required fence is not explicitly stated in the current code. (2)This amendment also allows an outright exception where a flag lot fence is required along the perimeter or rear of a flag lot that is within the Flood Management Area Overlay or where the fence abuts Oswego Lake or Oswego Canal. If there is no exception, a major variance to the Flag Lot standard is required, which may not be obtainable based on the applicable criteria and, if obtainable, is an unnecessary burden. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 16 of 24 ITEM 14 (M): LOC 50.07.007.2.f.v/Flag Lot Screening Species Requirements LOC 50.07.007.2.f Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation f. Screening, Buffering and Landscape Installation //// v. Plant materials listed as nuisance or invasive in LOC 50.11.004,Appendix D, and the Invasive Tree Species List on file at the Planning Department are prohibited in landscaping required by this section. /// ITEM 14 (M): In the Landscape standard (LOC 50.06.004.1.c) plants that are on the City's Invasive Species List in LOC Appendix D [LOC 50.11.004] are prohibited in required landscaping; however, that same prohibition is not found in the Flag Lot landscaping and screening requirements. In a recent partition application, an applicant planted Portuguese Laurel as screening along an access lane. In general, invasive species should not be permitted in required landscaping.This amendment prohibits planting of invasive species as required landscape screening for flag lots. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 17 of 24 ITEM 15 (M): LOC 50.10.003.2/Definitions—Alteration (Historic Preservation); Alteration, Minor(Historic Preservation) LOC 50.10.003.2 Definitions—Alteration (Historic Preservation);Alteration, Minor(Historic Preservation) Alteration (Historic Preservation) Alteration:An addition to, or removal of a portion of, or reconfiguration of a landmark that changes an elevation of a landmark or contributing resources (not applicable to National Register properties; see "Demolition.-"). Construction or placement of an accessory structure on a property that contains a historic landmark, except on sites over one acre in size or placement of an accessory structure more than 300 feet from the landmark structure or resource, is an "alteration"of the Landmark. Alteration, Minor(Historic Preservation) An alteration (historic preservation)that does not: a. Change the height of the building; b. Make a substantial change to an elevation visible from the public right-of-way, a public open space, or Oswego Lake; c. Increase the floor area more than 20% provided the building addition or accessory structure is not visible from the public right-of-way, a public open space, or Oswego Lake; and d. Reduce the square footage of the original structure other than removing previous additions or treatments that did not contribute to the historical or architectural significance of the landmark as stated in the findings of fact for the landmark designation. ITEM 15 (M):This amendment clarifies in the definition of Historic Alteration that construction or placement of an accessory structure qualifies as an alteration of the historic resource ("landmark" means "the structure and the property surrounding it") and clarifies that the alteration criteria for review of an addition also applies to an accessory structure within "the property surrounding it." However, as some sites containing resources are quite large, such as the 28-acre Lakeridge Middle School property, this amendment legislatively exempts accessory structures that are clearly outside of the landmark's "property surrounding it" scope, e.g., more than 300 feet from the landmark or resource on large properties.This legislative-specific distance exemption does not mean that"the property surrounding it" necessarily includes the area within 300 ft. of a landmark structure when the site is greater than 1 acre; it only means that no determination is needed beyond 300 ft. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 18 of 24 ITEM 16 (M): LOC 50.10.003.2/Definitions—Duplex; Quadplex; Triplex LOC 50.10.003.2 Definitions Duplex Two attached dwelling units on a lot where each unit shares at least one common wall or floor/ceiling with an adjacent dwelling unit. The common wall shall consist of a structural wall that is shared for at least 25%of the length of the side of each dwelling unit or the common floor/ceiling shall consist of at least 25%of the floor area of each dwelling unit. Quadplex Four attached dwelling units on a lot where each unit shares at least one common wall or floor/ceiling with an adjacent dwelling unit. The common wall shall consist of a structural wall that is shared for at least 25%of the length of the side of each dwelling unit or the common floor/ceiling shall consist of at least 25%of the floor area of each dwelling unit. Triplex Three attached dwelling units on a lot where each unit shares at least one common wall or floor/ceiling with an adjacent dwelling unit.The common wall shall consist of a structural wall that is shared for at least 25%of the length of the side of each dwelling unit or the common floor/ceiling shall consist of at least 25%of the floor area of each dwelling unit. ITEM 16(M):The current definition of duplex,triplex and quadplex were established as part of the Middle Housing Code Amendments approved in 2022 and requires that the units be "attached."There is no definition of"attached" in LOC Chapter 50, but there is a definition of"detached",which is defined as "A horizontal separation of three ft. or more, between the subject structure and nearby structures" and notes that"if the distance of separation is less than three ft. between two structures, they shall be deemed to be 'attached."This means that under the existing code a duplex,triplex, or quadplex may have individual units that are separated by less than 3 feet and are still considered to be attached. This issue was raised by a neighborhood association representative at a recent pre-application conference. In response, staff reviewed the legislative history for the Middle Housing code amendments and found that in an early work session,the Commission and City Council did discuss whether to allow both attached and detached plexes, because the State Model Code allowed both options.The Commission and Council directed staff to only allow attached plexes, but it was unclear in the legislative history whether or not the Commission and Council were aware that the definition of "detached" specifically noted that a separation of less than 3 feet between structures was still considered to be attached.The pertinent discussion of whether to allow detached plexes in the record of Planning Project 19-0008 is highlighted in yellow in Exhibit F-1, pages 5, 14-15, and 21 of the PDF document. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 19 of 24 The draft text amendments, above, would specify that duplexes,triplexes, and quadplexes must share a common wall or floor(i.e., side by side units, stacked units, or both)for a minimum of 25%of the length of wall for side by side units or 25%of the floor area for stacked units.The amended definition is derived from existing text in the definitions of"Dwelling, Multi-Family", and "Townhouse", both of which applied prior to the adoption of Middle Housing Code Amendments (triplexes and quadplexes were previously classified as multi-family dwellings and would not have been allowed to be separated by less than 3 feet and still be considered attached).The above amendments would assure that duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes are required to be physically attached, consistent with the Commission and Council direction per the legislative history in Exhibit D-1, Attachment F-1, pages 39- 63. Supplemental Commission Finding:The proposed amendment to require at least 25%of wall or floor/ceiling areas between plex units as shared planes mirrors the current definition of"Townhouse" and provides greater design flexibility.The Commission finds that definitions for duplex,triplex, and quadplex as proposed sufficiently enact the legislative intent for these dwelling types. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 20 of 24 POLICY AMENDMENTS ITEM 1 (P): LOC 50.03.003.1.d.iii(3)/Cottage Orientation Abutting Unopened or Unimproved Rights-of-Way LOC 50.03.003.1.d.iii Cottage Orientation iii. Cottage Orientation (3) Cottages within 20 ft. of a property line abutting a public street must have a primary entrance into the living area of the cottage facing the street, unless: (a)The street is an unimproved or unopened right-of-way; or (b)The cottage is required otherwise by to face the courtyard to comply with subsection 1.d.iii(2) of this section. ITEM 1 (P):There are developable sites within the City that abut one or more public rights-of-way that have not been constructed with a paved street. When a cottage cluster development is sited on such a lot, any unit that does not face the courtyard must face the right-of-way, even if it is unopened or unimproved and unlikely to be developed. There are no design or minor variances available to this cottage orientation standard, only a Major Variance with difficult, if not impossible criteria for a proposed middle housing development to meet and an expensive and time-consuming public hearing process required.This amendment would allow greater flexibility in cottage orientation on lots abutting an unimproved and/or unopened right-of-way. Unopened: An unopened right-of-way is a public right-of-way that the City does not maintain for either pedestrian or vehicular use at this time. Though it could be opened and maintained by the City at some time in the future, often unopened rights-of-way are located in areas of steep topography or similar physical feature. As an unopened public right-of-way, abutting owners and the public may make use of the right-of-way area at their own risk. Unimproved:An unimproved right-of-way has been opened for pedestrian or vehicle travel but does not have pavement or any street infrastructure or improvements.An example would be a dirt road. Supplemental Commission Finding: The Commission found that staff's recommendation that the exemption include both unimproved and unopened rights-of-way was appropriate. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 21 of 24 ITEM 2 (P): LOC 50.06.001.4.a.v/Multiple Garage Openings LOC 50.06.001.4.a.v Multiple Garage Opening Setbacks v. Multiple Garage Opening Setbacks In any instance where a garage or a set of adjacent garages is designed to park three or more vehicles, only the garage openings for the first two vehicles may occupy the same building plane. Each additional building plane with a garage opening shall be offset back by a minimum of two ft. from the previous garage building plane. Exceptions: (1) The lot is a steeply sloped lot; (2) The width of a parcel is less than 50 ft.; or (3) The garage is proposed to be set back at least 60 ft. from the public right-of-way. Item 2 (P): Many design standards regulate the appearance and location of garage openings for residential uses. When more than two garage openings are provided,the code requires the third (or more) garage opening to be stepped back at least two feet from the first garage plane. Several times applicants have proposed to project the third opening in front of the 2-car opening.The text of the current code is clear that all openings beyond the first two must be set back.This amendment would allow the third opening to project in front or be set back from the wall plane of the first two garage openings if adopted. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 22 of 24 ITEM 3 (P): LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(2)/Athletic Fence Screening Requirements LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(2) b. Location and Height /// x. Exceptions from Height Limitations /// (2) An open (80% open)fence which is not located in the front yard (forward of the primary structure to the front lot line) and which encloses part or all of a tennis court, swimming pool, playing field, park, commercial recreational facility, public or semi-public utility structure, or courtyards or play areas for day care and educational institutions.The evergreen hedge screening requirement in LOC 50.06.004.2.b.iv does not apply to these fences; or /// ITEM 3 (P): (1)This amendment exempts fences around athletic fields, play areas and courtyards for day cares and schools from the screening requirement, which would otherwise prevent spectators from viewing events (i.e. tennis matches, baseball games) or teachers from ensuring student safety(day care and school play areas or courtyards). (2) Clarifies that"recreation facility" is now defined as a "commercial recreational facility." LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 23 of 24 ITEM 4 (P): LOC 50.08.002.2.e/Minor Variance to Fence Screening Standards or all Fence Standards LOC 50.08.002.2 Minor Variance Classifications 2. Minor Variance Classifications //// e.A variance to standards in LOC 50.06.004.2 for a maximum fence, wall, retaining wall, or a combination thereof, height restrictions pursuant to LOC 50.06.004.2. /// ITEM 4(P):The minor variance classifications [LOC 50.08.002.2.e] currently allow minor variances only to the maximum height of fences, retaining walls or combinations thereof. Currently, applicants must request a major variance to any other fence or wall standard, which is an expensive and time-consuming application process requiring a public hearing.This amendment broadens minor variance applicability to allow minor variances to any fence standard, such as screening requirements, as little or no impact on surrounding properties is expected from this type of variance request.The minor variance process does not require demonstration of hardship and the staff-level review of minor variances, unless appealed, are most appropriate to variances to fence/wall/retaining screening or appearance standards. LU 23-0036 (PC Public Hearing 02/12/24) ATTACHMENT 2 (Ordinance 2938)/Page 24 of 24 EXHIBIT C-1 DRAFT: 03/05/2024 PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE DRAFT MINUTES HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED OR APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISION. J -mowC CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO Planning Commission Minutes February 12, 2024 1 2 3 1. CALL TO ORDER 4 Vice Chair Mitchell called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380 A 5 Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034. 6 7 2. ROLL CALL 8 Members present were Vice Chair Don Mitchell, and Commissioners Philip Stewart, Dave Schenone, 9 Miles Rigby, Rachel Naujock, and Jim Thwing. Chair Diana Moreno was absent. Council Liaison, Massene 10 Mboup was also present. 11 12 Staff present were Jessica Numanoglu, Community Development Director; Erik Olson, Long Range 13 Planning Manager; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; Ellen Davis, Senior Planner; and Cristina Siquina 14 Calderon, Administrative Support. 15 16 3. COUNCIL UPDATE 17 Councilor Mboup provided a brief update on recent City Council activities (the partnership with EPCOR 18 was dissolved). 19 20 4. MINUTES 21 4.1 January 22, 2024 22 Commissioner Stewart moved to approve the Minutes of January 22, 2024, as written. Commissioner 23 Schenone seconded the motion and it passed 5:0:1. Commissioner Naujock abstained. 24 25 5. PUBLIC COMMENT- Regarding issues not on the agenda 26 None. 27 28 6. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT 29 The following announcements were made: 30 • The Westridge Neighborhood Association general meeting is scheduled for Thursday, February 31 15, 2024. 32 • The proposed Mary's Landing Neighborhood Association held a meeting on Saturday, February 33 10, 2024, to vote on submitting their application to the City for recognition by the City Council. 34 35 - Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY EXHIBIT C-1/Page 1of 6 1 7. PUBLIC HEARING 2 7.1 Community Development Code 2023 Annual Amendments- (LU 23-0036) 3 The Commission held a hearing to consider proposed text amendments to the Community Development 4 Code (CDC)which included Maintenance Amendments (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.04, 50.05, 50.06, 50.07, 5 and 50.10), and Policy Amendments (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.06, and 50.08).Staff coordinator was Ellen 6 Davis, Senior Planner. 7 8 Vice Chair Mitchell opened the public hearing. Mr. Boone outlined the applicable criteria and 9 procedures.At the time of declarations, Commissioner Naujock reported that she worked at Hacienda 10 Community Development, who would be submitting public testimony through her colleague Kevin 11 Chavez; however, she stated that she did not feel there would be any material financial benefit to her 12 company. 13 14 Staff Report 15 Ms. Davis detailed aspects of the following outline as part of their presentation of the staff report. 16 Overview 17 1. Project Schedule (in process) 18 • February 12, 2024: Planning Commission (Commission) Public Hearing 19 • February 26, 2024: Findings Adopted 20 • March 19, 2024: City Council Public Hearing 21 2. Brief Discussion of Comments Received 22 • Exhibit G-1: Proposed adding a property-specific Code Amendment to the West Lake Overlay 23 District(LOC 50.05.005). Staff relayed that a new state-wide notice would need to be sent 24 out if the Commission decided to address this request, and that they recommended creating 25 a Variance process for this Overlay District (as they did not currently have one in place). 26 • Exhibit G-2: Concerns expressed regarding Maintenance Item#16. 27 3. Maintenance Amendments 28 • #12 Options: Change deadline for written testimony for closed City Council appeal hearings 29 to noon, 2 business days before the hearing, or 1 business day before the hearing. Staff 30 recommended 2 business days, as written. 31 • #16 Options: Duplexes,Triplexes, Quadplexes to share a common wall or floor, or to allow 32 up to a 2.99-foot separation (added since the last work session, with "detached" meaning 33 "separated by more than 3 feet, eve-to-eve, horizontally").The proposed definition would 34 further the legislative intent of having at least 25%shared walls/floors (staff's 35 recommendation); however, this could be counter-productive to alternative housing 36 strategies being researched. Ms. Numanoglu added that before the Middle Housing Code 37 was adopted,triplexes and quadplexes were considered multifamily, and the definition 38 showed today continues to match the existing definition of multifamily. 39 4. Policy Amendments 40 • #1 Options: Exempt cottages facing both unimproved and unopened Right-of-Way (ROW), or 41 choose to exempt only cottages facing unopened ROW or only those facing unimproved 42 ROW, from cottage cluster orientation standards that require the primary entrance of the 43 cottage face a public street.The current code required that any cottage not facing(the front 44 door)the courtyard but, was within 20 feet of a public ROW, within a cottage cluster, must 45 face that ROW. Staff recommended either adopting both unopened and unimproved, or at 46 least allowing unopened ROWs to be exempted from this standard. 47 48 City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 2024 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 2 of 6 1 Questions of Staff 2 Commissioner Schenone asked who owned the common courtyard of a cottage cluster. Ms. Davis 3 replied that it could be owned by individual lots within a middle housing land division (with an easement 4 over the courtyard) or it could be owned by a separate owner. Mr. Boone explained that there could be 5 an easement in favor of all of the cottage owners,which would have the use and enjoyment of and 6 obligation to maintain the common courtyard, or the courtyard could be set as a separate open-spaced 7 tract, with the same enjoyment and obligations to maintain. 8 9 Vice Chair Mitchell inquired whether the first option for Policy#1 would provide the greatest flexibility 10 for cottage cluster development. Ms. Davis affirmed,adding that prior discussion found it more likely 11 that unimproved ROWs could see future development over unopened ROWs. 12 13 Commissioner Naujock requested further clarification regarding the pros versus the cons of allowing 14 space between triplex and quadplexes. Ms. Davis shared that Oregon City specifically allows detached 15 units, with the idea that this may allow more flexibility to site new units on a property without affecting 16 any existing units. Mr. Olson noted that City Council's direction initially dealt with aesthetic concerns 17 (looking more like single family homes). 18 19 Public Testimony 20 Carole Ockert, on behalf of the Neighborhood Chairs Committee, Lake Oswego, 97034(appeared 21 remotely), shared a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit G-3), and expressed the committee's concerns 22 regarding limited ownership of a cottage cluster courtyard and multifamily structures not sharing 23 common walls. 24 25 Carole Ockert, on behalf of the First Addition Neighbors-Forest Hills Neighborhood Association (FAN-FH 26 NA), Lake Oswego, 97034 (appeared remotely), shared a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit G-4), and the 27 association's recommendations regarding the Code amendments. 28 29 Mr. Boone expounded on his earlier description of cottage cluster courtyard ownership by relaying that 30 the City did not require that a homeowner's association (HOA) be put in place to manage it, rather, 31 easement or covenant conditions would directly bind the property owner(meeting as they chose). 32 33 Kevin Chavez, Project Manager for Hacienda Community Development Corporation (HCDC), Portland, 34 97218, requested that the recommendations laid out in his submitted letter(Exhibit G-1) now be 35 considered during the Code Amendment process for FY 2025, as he understood their request was mis- 36 timed. 37 38 Commissioner Stewart requested confirmation that the shared parking in question was concerning the 39 property to the west. Mr. Chavez affirmed. 40 41 Ken Allen, Lake Oswego, 97034 (appeared remotely), stated that he was the developer for the project on 42 Stafford Road, and that they were contemplating middle housing for those properties. He relayed that 43 he was looking for maximum flexibility to achieve economic viability, especially concerning cottage 44 clusters. He indicated that he agreed that "attached" needed to be defined, and that the common wall 45 should be connected at 25% minimum and up to 50% maximum. 46 47 Vice Chair Mitchell closed the public hearing. 48 49 City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 2024 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 3 of 6 1 Questions of Staff(Continued) 2 Vice Chair Mitchell asked if the common courtyard ownership issue, raised that evening, was part of the 3 packet provided to the Commission. Ms. Davis replied that it was not. Ms. Numanoglu informed members 4 that if they wished to consider that item, staff would need to re-notice the public. 5 6 Deliberations 7 Ms. Davis reviewed the options under consideration. Mr. Boone outlined the next steps to be taken during 8 deliberations. Ms. Numanoglu requested that members decide whether to consider the additional public 9 requests brought forward this evening. Commissioners Schenone and Stewart both indicated that they 10 would like to see the courtyard ownership issue addressed in the near time rather than a year from now. 11 Mr. Olson reminded members that there were very prescriptive common courtyard requirements within 12 the cottage cluster regulations (adopted by the State of Oregon under Division 46), and that easements 13 are required in order to address any concerns regarding common ownership. Mr. Boone noted that the 14 owners of the abutting courtyard properties would own the underlying land; however, there would be an 15 undivided, non-exclusive easement of use, benefit, and obligation. He then acknowledged that property 16 lines can make a difference regarding the perceptions of ownership and common access, but on paper,the 17 easement would require that common access be maintained, whether the courtyard was owned 18 individually or jointly. Ms. Davis relayed that cottage clusters were not required to go through a middle 19 housing land division, rather,they could be located on a singular lot that was not divided for ownership 20 purposes. 21 22 A straw poll had the majority of members (Vice Chair Mitchell, Commissioners Stewart, and Thwing) 23 agreeing to consider the cottage cluster ownership issue at a later date,two being undecided 24 (Commissioners Naujock and Rigby), and Commissioner Schenone voting to continue this hearing to 25 receive more information (per his comments in the preceding paragraph). 26 27 Vice Chair Mitchell reopened the public hearing to hear again from Ken Allen and Carole Ockert. 28 29 Public Testimony(Reopened) 30 Ken Allen, Lake Oswego, 97034 (appeared remotely), asked what the timing would be if the hearing were 31 re-noticed, and what might the ramification be if addressed later(unintentional consequences when 32 dealing with this unknown issue for the cottage clusters). Ms. Davis replied that re-noticing would require 33 approximately 40 days. 34 35 Mr. Olson acknowledged that people may have certain assumptions regarding who has access to a 36 common courtyard based on the configuration of lot lines, regardless of easements. However, Mr. Olson 37 went on to point out that, as of the time of the meeting, Lake Oswego had yet to see a single cottage 38 cluster development constructed, and that requiring common ownership of shared courtyards could 39 present another barrier to allowing for the individual purchase and ownership of cottage cluster units . 40 41 Carole Ockert, on behalf of the Neighborhood Chairs Committee, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 (appeared 42 remotely), stated that she took working within a process very seriously, and that she first raised the issue 43 of the common courtyard concern in an email to staff on September 11, 2023 (with follow ups in October, 44 December, and January). She asked for members to understand how genuine they had been in their 45 efforts and how much time had elapsed since their first contact with staff. Vice Chair Mitchell re-closed the 46 public hearing. 47 48 City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 2024 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 4 of 6 1 Deliberations(Continued) 2 Members had no comments on the remaining items without options, and they agreed to consider the 3 request made by the HCDC as part of a variance request, if received (per Ms. Numanoglu's 4 recommendation). Commissioner Naujock further explained the thought process behind the HCDC's 5 request. 6 7 Straw Poll results for the items with options: 8 • Maintenance#12: 9 o 2-day cut-off-Vice Chair Mitchell and Commissioners Naujock, Stewart, and Thwing 10 o 1-day cut-off-Commissioner Rigby(wished to provide the public with as much time to submit 11 evidence as possible) 12 o Undecided -Commissioner Schenone. 13 • Maintenance#16: 14 o 25%common wall -Commissioners Rigby, Stewart, Naujock, Schenone 15 o Detachment permitted -Vice Chair Mitchell (setting the code with as much flexibility for 16 construction options as possible) and Commissioner Thwing. 17 • Policy#1: 18 o Unopened only-Commissioner Rigby (unimproved ROWs have more potential for future 19 improvement versus unopened ROWs) 20 o Unimproved & unopened -Vice Chair Mitchell and Commissioners Thwing and Naujock 21 o Poll vote not voiced -Commissioners Stewart and Schenone. 22 23 Commissioner Rigby indicated that he did not want to move forward with Policy item #2 because the 24 existing restriction would continue to minimize the effect on the street (by keeping the garage set-back an 25 additional 2 feet) and was cohesive with the purpose of the regulation. Commissioner Stewart countered 26 that bringing the garage forward 2 feet would not make that much of a difference, and the full setback line 27 could still not be crossed. 28 29 Commissioner Stewart moved to approve the Maintenance and Policy Item amendments as written, with 30 special note for Maintenance Item 12 (2 business days), Maintenance Item 16 (common wall for at least 31 25% of the structure), and Policy Item 1 (street can be an unimproved or unopened ROW). 32 33 The motion passed 5:1. Commissioner Rigby voted no. 34 35 Mr. Boone instructed staff to return with the written Findings, Conclusion, and Order on Monday, 36 February 26, 2024. 37 38 8. OTHER BUSINESS 39 None. 40 41 9. SCHEDULE REVIEW 42 Mr. Olson reviewed the schedule. 43 44 Action Items: 45 • February 26: 46 o Review Goals for 2024 47 o Consider a request from Mary's Landing Neighborhood Association for a 48 recommendation to the City Council for being a recognized neighborhood association. City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 2024 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 5 of 6 1 • March 26: 2 o Finalize 2024 Goals. 3 o Receive an update from the Engineering Department on recommendations for proposed 4 amendments to the Stormwater Code. 5 • April 2: 6 o Joint meeting with the City Council regarding the Housing Production strategies. 7 8 10. ADJOURNMENT 9 There being no further business, Vice Chair Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 8:18 p.m. City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission Minutes of February 12, 2024 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT D-1 pti�A E PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES V j O STAFF REPORT OREGO� CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPLICANT FILE NO. City of Lake Oswego LU 23-0036, Ordinance 2938 LOCATION STAFF Citywide Ellen Davis, AICP, Senior Planner DATE OF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE February 1, 2024 February 12, 2024 I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The City of Lake Oswego is proposing to amend Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) of the Lake Oswego Code for the purpose of clarifying and updating various sections. The draft code amendments, which would enact these changes, are included in Attachment 2 to Exhibit A-1. The proposed amendments include provisions that will: Maintenance Amendments (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.04, 50.05, 50.06, 50.07, and 50.10) ITEM TITLE CODE SECTION(S) 1. Remove references to parking allowances for cottage clusters of LOC 50.03.003.1.d.vi(1) more than 16 cottages because the maximum number of cottages allowed in the code is eight. 2. Remove C Avenue from the special street setback table because LOC 50.04.002.5 this right-of-way width already meets the 60-foot width Table 50.04.002-1 established in the table. 3. Clarify the methodology for determining the front property line LOC 50.04.003.6.c for flag lots created prior to adoption of code regulating flag lots or outside of City limits. 4. Clarify that the 75% impervious surface limit for cottage clusters LOC 50.04.001.2.f.ii(4); supersedes certain zone and overly district standards that also LOC 50.04.001.2.f.iii; LOC regulate impervious surfaces. 50.05.001.4; LOC 50.05.003.5; LOC Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 1 OF 11 50.05.012.6 5. Update text limiting certain surfaces within the Uplands Overlay LOC 50.05.012.6 district to include hardscape surfaces and roof areas rather than "impervious" surfaces, to be consistent with legislative history and current practice. 6. Clarify that invasive tree removal is permitted within sensitive LOC 50.05.010.6.c.ii(1)(b) lands and that mitigation is required for such removal. 7. Clarify that interior side yard setback planes are measured from LOC 50.06.002.2.e the property line, not the setback line. 8. Clarify that townhouse minimum street frontage is 15 feet, LOC 50.06.003.1.c.i consistent with the 15-foot lot width required for townhouses, Table 50.06.003-1 and replace the term "rowhouse" with "townhouse" for consistency. 9. Update the retaining wall height exception that currently applies LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(4) only to walls supporting driveway or parking areas for single- family residences to include middle housing and access lanes. 10. Exempt lots created through Middle Housing Land Divisions LOC 50.06.007.1.b (MHLD) from the solar access standard. MHLD lot creation is solely for ownership purposes, not zoning or building design standards. Partitions are already exempt from this standard. 11. Update practices for notice of appeal hearings to allow staff to LOC 50.07.003.7.g.i email commenters who submitted electronic comments and did not provide a mailing address. 12. Update the deadline for submittal of written testimony for LOC 50.07.003.7.k(ii) closed record appeals to City Council to review for new materials and distribution to members of the hearing body. 13. Clarify that screening fences must be sight-obscuring, and LOC 50.07.007.2.f.iii exempt property lines within flood management areas and along Oswego Lake or Canal from the fence installation requirement. 14. Prohibit the installation of new invasive species plantings to LOC 50.07.007.2.f.v comply with flag lot landscaping requirements. 15. Clarify that construction or placement of an accessory structure LOC 50.10.003.2 is considered a minor alteration for Historic Preservation purposes. 16. Clarify that Duplexes, Triplexes, and Quadplexes must share LOC 50.10.003.2 common wall(s) or floor(s); or leave current code language in place that allows separation between units of less than three feet.' 1 Maintenance Item#16 is new,added after the second work session held on December 11,2023.See pages 19-20 of Attachment 2 to Exhibit A-1 for details. Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 2 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 2 OF 11 CODE POLICY ITEMS& DISCUSSION (LOC Chapters 50.03, 50.06 and 50.08) Discussion of policy items 1-4 follows table. ITEM TITLE CODE SECTION(S) 1. Establish cottage orientation for cottage cluster sites that abut LOC 50.03.003.1.d.iii(3) an unimproved or unopened street right-of-way. 2. Determine whether to allow a third (or more) garage opening to LOC 50.06.001.4.a.v be offset two feet from the previous garage plane rather than requiring the two feet to be stepped back specifically. 3. Exempt open fences around athletic facilities such as tennis and LOC 50.06.004.2.b.x(2) basketball courts, baseball backstops, etc. from the evergreen hedge screening requirement. 4. Determine whether to allow minor variance applications to all LOC 50.08.002.2.e fence standards. Increases in fence/wall/retaining wall height are already considered minor variances. II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Land Use Planning Policies A-1, A-2, C-1, C-3 and D-1 Inspiring Spaces and Places Goal 1, Policies 1, 2, 3 and 8 Goal 2, Policies 4 (d and e) Complete Neighborhoods & Housing Policies A-4, B-1, and C-7 Economic Vitality Policy B-1 (b, c, and d) Community Health and Public Safety Sound Quality- Policy 1 B. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decisions Defined LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision III. INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND INFORMATION The purpose of the proposed code amendments is twofold: 1) to correct errors, eliminate text redundancy, and clarify text; and 2) to implement minor policy changes intended to Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 3 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 3 OF 11 streamline the permit process and implement City Council goals and priorities, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This process is part of the City's ongoing effort to make the regulations less burdensome on residents and businesses while maintaining community standards. Proposed Ordinance 2938 consists of 16 maintenance amendments and four policy amendments. The text boxes in Attachment 2 of Exhibit A-1 describe the reason for each amendment, and include commentary on its background and discussion points. IV. NOTICE OF APPLICATION A. Newspaper Notice On January 31, 2024, public notice of the proposed Community Development Code (CDC) text amendments and Planning Commission public hearing will be published in the Lake Oswego Review. B. ORS 227.186 (Measure 56) Notice None of the proposed amendments constitute a "rezone"; therefore, the individual noticing measures of ORS 227.186 (Ballot Measure 56) are not required. C. DLCD and Metro Notices Pursuant to ORS 197.610 and LOC 50.03.007.16.c, staff has provided notice of the proposed CDC text amendments to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). Staff notified Metro as required by Metro Code 3.07.820(a). V. COMPLIANCE WITH APPROVAL CRITERIA A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Staff has identified the following Comprehensive Plan Policies applicable to this proposal: Land Use Planning— Development (Community Development Code), Development Review, Design Standards and Guidelines, and Land Use Administration Policies A-1, A-2, C-1, C-3, and D-1 Development (Community Development Code) Policy A-1: Maintain land use regulations and standards to: /// Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 4 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 4 OF 11 b. Promote compatibility between development and existing and desired neighborhood character; /// g. Promote architectural and site design quality. Findings: Staff finds that all of the proposed amendments are necessary to streamline the Code for consistency and efficiency. None of the amendments will negatively impact the Code's ongoing ability to ensure compatible redevelopment, preservation of neighborhood character, and quality of architectural or site design. Policy A-2: Ensure that land use regulations have sufficient flexibility to allow developers and the City to propose measures to: a. Adapt development to unique and difficult site conditions; b. Preserve open space and natural resources; and, c. Avoid negative impacts on surrounding properties. Findings: Staff finds that many of the amendments are specifically tailored to allow flexibility, and provide clarity for developers, neighbors, and City staff. Maintenance Items#3 -4, 6 - 10, and 13, and Policy Items#1 -4 clarify code terms, measurement methodologies, and zone and development regulations applicable to residential, commercial, institutional, and mixed-use structures, thereby reducing confusion and removing potential development barriers. These amendments, along with all of the others, will not change how the existing Code preserves open space and natural resources, and avoids negative impacts of development on surrounding properties. Design Standards and Guidelines Policy C-1: Enact and maintain regulations and standards which require: a. New development to enhance the existing built environment in terms of size, scale, bulk, color, materials and architectural design; b. Landscaping; c. Buffering and screening between differing land uses; and, d. Measures to foster a safe and interesting transit and pedestrian environment. Findings: Staff finds that many of the amendments are specifically tailored to enhance the built environment and landscaping and that none of the proposed amendments impact the ab365 Policy C-3: Ensure through development and design standards that both public and private developments enhance the aesthetic quality of the community. Findings: Staff finds many of the proposed Maintenance and Policy Items provide greater clarity to the residential, commercial, mixed use, and institutional design standards to help ensure new development enhances the community aesthetics. Maintenance Items#3, 5 - 7, 13 - 16, and Policy Items#1—4 clarify, refine, and Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 5 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 5 OF 11 improve existing regulations designed to enhance the aesthetic quality of the community. Land Use Administration Policy D-1: Coordinate the development and amendment of City plans and actions related to land use with other affected agencies, including county, state, Metro, federal agency, and special districts. Findings: Staff has provided the required notification to State and Metro jurisdictions consistent with this policy. Federal agencies and special districts do not similarly exercise regulatory jurisdiction within the scope of the proposed amendments and thus no coordination is required. Conclusion: Proposed amendments are consistent with Land Use Planning policies. Inspiring Spaces and Places Goal 1, Policies 1, 2, 3, and 8 Goal 2, Policy 4 (d and e) Goal 1: Policy 1:Adopt implementation measures and guidelines that ensure: a. New development in residential areas complements the existing built environment in terms of size, scale, bulk, height, and setbacks. b. New development in mixed-use, commercial and employment areas: i. Promotes a safe and attractive pedestrian environment; ii. Reflects high-quality aesthetics, considering size, scale and bulk, color, materials, architectural style and detailing, and landscaping; and iii. Includes buffering and screening to protect residential uses and neighborhoods. Findings: Staff finds some of the proposed maintenance and policy amendments help refine the existing Code's design regulations and standards listed under this policy as follows: • Maintenance Item #3 provides greater consistency on structure locations for flag lots created outside of current flag lot code, allowing development to better complement the pattern of development within the City. • Maintenance Item #4 clarifies the regulations applicable to cottage cluster development, aiding design of this development type. • Maintenance Item #5 simplifies and makes clear the legislative history and current practice for regulating residential development within the Uplands Overlay district. Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 6 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 6 OF 11 • Maintenance Item #7 clarifies side yard setback plane methodology for residential development, aiding the development community in creating designs and maintaining compatible design with abutting properties. • Maintenance Item #13 codifies existing interpretation that screening fences along the side and rear property lines of flag lots must be sight-obscuring, screening the yards of flag lots from the view of abutting properties. • Maintenance Item #15 clarifies that construction or placement of an accessory structure near a historic resource requires review as a minor alteration, ensuring that the historic resource's integrity is retained. • Policy Item #2 allows greater design flexibility for residential garages while still maintaining design regulations to decrease the perceived massing of garage openings. With these amendments, the Code will continue to promote quality residential and non-residential aesthetics within the built environment. Policy 2:Adopt and maintain design standards and provide incentives that encourage exceptional or high-quality design. Findings: Maintenance Items #3—5, 7, 13, 15, 16, and Policy Items #1, 2, and 4 clarify or improve existing design standards. All other proposed amendments either maintain or do not impact adopted zone, development, and design standards that ensure exceptional design. Policy 3: Establish standards for new development to preserve and enhance the natural environment, and to integrate natural features and functions. Findings: Maintenance Item #6 clarifies that invasive tree removal is permitted within sensitive lands areas and Maintenance Item #14 prohibits the installation of new invasive plant materials in required landscaping for flag lots. Prohibiting new invasive plantings and encouraging removal of invasive species preserves and enhances the natural environment by improving habitat for plants and wildlife. Policy 8: Protect Lake Oswego's village aesthetic by adopting and maintaining implementation measures and guidelines that preserve the residential character of Lake Oswego's neighborhoods, safeguard places of historical significance (See also, Community Culture: Historic and Cultural Resources), and encourage urban form that results in pedestrian friendly retail districts in existing commercial areas, including buildings oriented to the street and active ground floor uses. Findings: Adopted standards that ensure quality design and preservation of residential character are being maintained in the Code, with some proposed modification to ensure greater clarity (per practice) and consistency. Maintenance Items #2-5, 7-9, 13, and 16 and Policy Items#1 and 2 clarify regulations that apply to the design of residential structures, preserve the streetscape, and protect the village Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 7 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 7 OF 11 aesthetic. Maintenance Item #15 clarifies that placement or construction of an accessory structure in conjunction with a historic resource requires review as a minor alteration in order to preserve the character of the historic resource. Goal 2: Policy 4 (d and e): Promote carefully organized patterns of growth through land use regulations, standards, and incentives that: /// d. Provide design guidelines that enhance and preserve the unique character of Lake Oswego's neighborhoods and commercial districts. e. Provide opportunities for local economic growth. Findings: Existing Code regulations include standards that ensure enhancement and preservation of the City's unique neighborhoods and commercial districts. None of the proposed amendments negatively impact the unique character of the City or impede local economic growth. Maintenance items are consistent with existing practice and interpretation for greater readability and public understanding. Conclusion: The proposed amendments are consistent with the Inspiring Spaces and Places policies. Complete Neighborhoods and Housing—Housing Location and Quality, Housing Choice and Affordability, and Complete Neighborhoods Policies A-4, B-1, and C-7 Housing Location and Quality: Policy A-4: Maintain land use regulations and standards that provide for mitigation of adverse impacts such as noise, traffic, privacy and visual aesthetics, on differing, adjacent land uses through site and building design. Findings: Existing Code regulations include standards that mitigate adverse impacts from new development on surrounding uses with regards to noise, traffic, privacy, and visual aesthetics. Proposed amendments ensure greater clarity and consistency with implementation of those standards. Housing Choice and Affordability: Policy B-1: Provide and maintain zoning and development regulations that allow the opportunity to develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types, and that accommodate the needs of existing and future Lake Oswego residents. Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 8 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 8 OF 11 Findings: Existing Code regulations include standards that allow the opportunity to develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types. Proposed amendments ensure greater clarity and consistency with implementation of those standards. • Maintenance Item #1 removes confusion related to the maximum number of cottages allowed within a cottage cluster. • Maintenance Item #3 promotes compatibility with existing patterns of development for flag lots created outside current regulations. • Maintenance Item #4 clarifies that only the use-specific impervious surface limitations for cottage clusters apply, pursuant to state law. • Maintenance Item #7 removes an error from the description of the side yards setback plane methodology, making this regulation easier to use for the residential design community. • Maintenance Item #8 streamlines regulations that apply to the creation of a new townhouse lot. • Maintenance#10 allows middle housing land divisions of more than three lots, which are currently precluded in most situations by solar access requirements that apply to new subdivisions. • Maintenance Item #16 requires that duplexes, triplexes and quadplexes share common walls or floors to be consistent with the legislative intent that these units be fully attached and to not allow separated units. • Policy Item #1 allows more logical cottage orientation for cottage cluster sites that abut an unimproved or unopened right-of-way. • Policy Item #2 increases design flexibility for residential garages. Complete Neighborhoods: Policy C-7: Require infill housing to be designed and developed in ways to be compatible with existing neighborhood character. Findings: Existing Code includes both zone dimensional and structure design standards that ensure compatible infill development. Maintenance Items#1, 3 - 5, 7- 9, 13 - 16, and Policy Item #1 clarify or correct those code terms, measurement and implementation methodologies, applicability, and zone and development regulations for primary and accessory residential infill development. Conclusion: The proposed amendments are consistent with Complete Neighborhoods and Housing policies. Economic Vitality—Employment Zones Policy B-1 (b, c, and d) Policy B-1: Provide opportunities for redevelopment and development in employment zones while: /// Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 9 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 9 OF 11 b. Addressing impacts such as noise, traffic, and visual aesthetics, on adjacent land uses through site and building design; c. Complying with design and aesthetic standards to promote compatibility with Lake Oswego's community character; d. Preserving natural resources and providing required open space; Findings: Policy Item #4 allows fence/wall/retaining wall standards to be varied through a minor variance process, rather than the current major variance process. This reduces cost and time for new development proposals, particularly for nonresidential projects with very prescriptive screening requirements for fences and walls with very few exceptions. The minor variance process still requires public notice, review for impacts on abutting properties and the streetscape, and allows for a public hearing if the staff decision is appealed, but this process removes the high cost, difficult (or impossible, in many instances based upon the circumstances of the site) criteria to meet, and the required public hearing for a major variance to fence/wall/retaining wall standards. Conclusion: The proposed amendments are consistent with Economic Vitality policies. Community Health and Public Safety Sound Quality- Policy 1 Sound Quality- Policy 1: Preserve and maintain the quiet character of residential neighborhoods, public open spaces, natural parks and parks with natural elements through zoning regulations and development standards. Findings: The proposed amendments either do not impact or maintain regulations that preserve residential neighborhood character. Conclusion: The proposed amendments are consistent with this Community Health and Public Safety policy. Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 10 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 10 OF 11 VI. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings presented in this report, staff recommends approval of the proposed code amendments. EXHIBITS A. Draft Ordinance A-1 Ordinance 2938, draft 01/19/24 Attachment 1: Reserved for City Council Findings (not included) Attachment 2: Community Development Code Amendments w/Commentary, draft 01/31/24 B. Findings, Conclusions and Order [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use] C. Minutes [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use] D. Staff Reports [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use] E. Graphics/Plans [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use] F. Written Materials F-1 Legislative History for Maintenance Item 16 with Highlights G. Letters [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use] Staff reports and public meeting materials that were prepared for these code amendments can be found by visiting the project webpage for LU 23-0036: https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/all-projects Under "Search" enter LU 23-0036, then press "Enter. Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 11 of 11 LU 23-0036 02/12/24 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 11 OF 11 EXHIBIT F-1 F °� COUNCIL REPORT � o OREGO\-\ Subject: Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (House Bill 2001) Meeting Date: November 16, 2021 Staff Member: Erik Olson, Senior Planner (Joint Meeting with Planning Commission) Department: Planning and Building Services Report Date: November 4, 2021 Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑X Council Direction ❑ Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: n/a Recommended Language for Motion: n/a Project/ Issue Relates To: Council Initiative to "Adopt codes that comply with HB 2001 that are consistent with the community's sense of place, neighborhood character, and livability." ' Issue before Council: Provide direction on the next stage of the City's process to adopt code that complies with HB 2001 and is consistent with the community's sense of place, neighborhood character, and livability. ❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Provide direction to staff on the next stage of the City's process to adopt code that complies with the minimum requirements for middle housing set forth in House Bill 2001 (HB 2001). 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 1 OF 25 Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with the City Council initiative to, "Adopt codes that comply with HB 2001 that are consistent with the community's sense of place, neighborhood character, and livability," the Council appointed an Ad-Hoc Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (MHCAC, or the "Committee") to provide high-level policy guidance on key issues related to middle housing implementation required under HB 2001. Now that the Committee process has concluded, staff and consultants with Cascadia partners are proceeding with the second and final phase of work to comply with the bill through further code development, code refinement, and the public review and adoption of code changes. HB 2001 requires that we adopt compliant regulations not later than June 30, 2022, or the State Model Code for Middle Housing would apply directly to the City. Staff is seeking Council feedback on code concepts recommended by the Committee, as well as direction on two process-related questions: 1. Whether to pursue code concepts recommended by the Committee that are not required by the state for compliance with HB 2001. Refinement and testing of some of those concepts would be necessary, which could make it difficult to complete the State- required code updates prior to the June 2022 deadline, as discussed in this report. 2. Whether the recently adopted state legislation requiring cities to permit land divisions to facilitate middle housing ownership opportunities (Senate Bill 458)could complicate the City's work, and require more time to implement non-mandated concepts such as the allowance of detached forms of middle housing. Staff recommends that the City adopt code amendments that are required to comply with SB 458 concurrently with the code amendments required for compliance with HB 2001, but the Council should consider whether to pursue non-mandated code amendments under HB 2001, such as the allowance of detached middle housing, in light of SB 458 requirements. BACKGROUND On December 9, 2020, the State of Oregon formally adopted rules intended to implement HB 2001, which provide the roadmap for local governments' compliance with the middle housing requirements in the bill. Shortly thereafter, staff and consultants with Cascadia Partners initiated the City's first phase of work to adopt code amendments compliant with the bill. This process began with a number of opportunities for public engagement in January and February of this year, including a kickoff meeting, several interviews with neighborhood association representatives, and a survey that received over 880 responses from Lake Oswego residents. The Planning Commission also hosted several presentations during this time in order to learn directly from professionals who were involved in the development of HB 2001 or have specific expertise related to middle housing. At a joint meeting held on May 18, 2021, the Council and the Planning Commission received a presentation outlining initial findings and the work products completed during phase one: a Neighborhood Character Report with a qualitative analysis of the development patterns, character and architectural history of Lake Oswego neighborhoods; a Neighborhood Conditions 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 2 OF 25 Page 3 Analysis with an analysis of existing neighborhood conditions in Lake Oswego; a Plan and Code Audit Memo that identifies Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code (CDC) sections that should be updated for compliance with HB 2001; and a Middle Housing Opportunities Report containing recommended concepts and alternatives for amending the Comprehensive Plan and CDC for middle housing to be compliant with HB 2001. These reports and other background documents are available on the project web page referenced at the end of this Council Report. This presentation was followed by two Planning Commission work sessions on May 24 and June 14, 2021, where the Commission reviewed the phase one findings and refined a work plan for phase two based on Council direction. At their meeting on June 15, 2021, the Council formally appointed the Ad-Hoc Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (MHCAC, or the "Committee") to provide high-level policy guidance to the Planning Commission for the development of draft code amendments to comply with HB 2001. See also, Committee Process and Recommendations, below. At a joint study session scheduled for November 16, 2021, the Council and Planning Commission will receive a brief presentation from staff, MHCAC Chair Randy Arthur, and MHCAC Co-Chair Lisa Strader. This presentation will cover the Committee's process and recommendations, recently-passed state legislation that requires cities to permit land divisions to facilitate middle housing ownership opportunities (Senate Bill 458), and a proposed timeline and work plan for completing the project, including adopting code amendments. This presentation will be followed by Planning Commission work sessions on December 13, 2021, and January 10, 2022, focused on the drafting of code amendments that comply with HB 2001 based on Council direction. DISCUSSION The following summarizes the MHCAC process and recommendations, code concepts recommended by the Committee that are not required by the state, recent legislation requiring cities to allow expedited land divisions to facilitate middle housing ownership opportunities (Senate Bill 458), and a proposed process for adopting code amendments that comply with HB 2001 by the June 2022 deadline. Committee Process and Recommendations The Committee was comprised of a balanced membership of 13 voting members representing a diverse set of interests, as follows: • Randy Arthur: Chair, Development Review Commission representative • Lisa Strader: Co-Chair, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee representative • Rachel Verdick: City Council representative (non-voting member) • Helen Leek: Planning Commission representative (non-voting member) • Cynthia Johnson: 50+Advisory Board representative • Larry Snyder: Historic Resources Advisory Board representative • Stephanie Glazer: Sustainability Advisory Board representative 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 3 OF 25 Page 4 • Carole Ockert: Neighborhood Chairs Committee of Lake Oswego representative (1 of 2) • Robert Ervin: Neighborhood Chairs Committee of Lake Oswego representative (2 of 2) • Ross Masters: Building Industry Advocate, Crosswater Development • Samuel Goldberg: Affordable Housing Advocate, Fair Housing Council of Oregon • Ralph Tahran: Architect, Tahran Architecture & Planning, LLC • Tam Hixson: Realtor or Real Estate Finance Professional, Windermere Realty • Todd Prager: At-large member (1 of 2),Todd Prager & Associates, LLC • Alexandra Byers: At-large member (2 of 2), Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Advisory Board The Committee adopted bylaws that established the roles and responsibilities of Committee members and staff, including a provision that, "a vote by two-thirds of the members present and eligible to vote will be required to decide any question."The Committee conducted six meetings between July and October 2021; materials distributed in advance of each meeting were also distributed to members of the public, and are accessible on the City website. Invitations to each meeting were also made available to members of the public, and recordings of each meeting were posted to the City's YouTube page. During these meetings, Committee members considered code concepts related to the following key issues outlined in the MHCAC Key Issues &Work Plan: 1. Preservation of existing residential structures 2. Scale and character of new middle housing 3. Runoff and storm water impacts of middle housing 4. Affordability and accessibility of middle housing Committee members were provided with a series of memos— referred to as "Key Issue Memos"—which contained summaries of the above issues and lists of relevant questions for the group to consider. Polling was conducted by staff at MHCAC meetings in an attempt to reach an agreement on the questions raised in the Key Issue memos; each memo has since been updated to include polling results and a summary of the Committee's discussion on each question /code concept. Staff has also maintained a record of substantive email communications between MHCAC members and/or staff, as well as comments from members of the public to the MHCAC. For a summary of the key issues and discussion of MHCAC recommendations, see Attachment 1. Code Concepts Not Required for Compliance The Committee discussed a number of code concepts for middle housing that address the Council's initiative to pursue code amendments that maintain consistency with, "the community's sense of place, neighborhood character, and livability." Many of these code concepts involve modifications to the City's existing siting and design standards for single-family 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 4 OF 25 Page 5 housing to better address middle housing and its anticipated impacts. Pursuant to Council direction, staff plans to incorporate many of these siting and design concepts into the code amendments that will be considered for adoption prior to the June 30, 2022 deadline. However, a number of the code concepts that were intended to address the Council's direction to maintain neighborhood character and livability would have wider applicability, and amendments to incorporate these broader concepts would not necessarily need to be adopted concurrently with other code amendments required by June 2022. For example, though the state does not specifically require that cities allow for the development of detached duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes in order to comply with HB 2001, the Committee recommended code amendments that would permit such detached "plexes" in Lake Oswego. Code concepts recommended by the Committee that are not technically required under HB 2001 include the following: • Recommendation 1.a: Revise the definition of"demolition" to include remodels that remove more than 50%of the exterior walls of the house. • Recommendation 1.b: Define duplexes, triplexes, and quad-plexes to include detached units, in addition to attached units. o Recommendation 2.h: Regulate open space for detached duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes in the same manner as for attached "plexes". Open space is assumed to be in yard setbacks but could also be in common areas between buildings on the same lot. Do not specify minimum size or location of open space. o Recommendation 2.i:Allow smaller front or rear yard setbacks of 10-15 feet (compared to 25 ft/30 ft front/rear) for detached duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes, as is allowed for cottage cluster housing. • Recommendation 3.a: Limit the development of impervious surfaces to mitigate the impacts of increased density. Currently impervious surface limits apply in only two neighborhood overlays: Glenmorrie, Lake Grove, and Uplands. • Recommendation 4.a: Provide financial incentives for middle housing projects that include a minimum number or percentage of income-restricted affordable units or meet certain accessibility standards. Currently, financial incentives apply to accessory dwelling units and multifamily affordable housing projects of 20 or more units. o Recommendation 4.a.i: Revise the City's current SDC exemption policy so that it applies to middle housing developments that provide a minimum percentage of income-restricted affordable units or meet certain accessibility standards. o Recommendation 4.a.ii: Provide property tax exemptions for middle housing developments that provide a minimum percentage of income-restricted affordable units or meet certain accessibility standards. See Attachment 1 for a more in-depth discussion of code concepts listed above. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 5 OF 25 Page 6 Senate Bill 458 In May of 2021, the Oregon legislature adopted Senate Bill 458 (or "SB 458") as a follow-up to HB 2001 in order to facilitate lot divisions for middle housing that enable units to be sold or owned individually (see Attachment 2). As stated in Attachment 3, "For any city or county subject to the requirements of House Bill 2001, Senate Bill 458 requires those jurisdictions to allow middle housing lot divisions for any HB 2001 middle housing type (duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, townhouses, and cottage clusters)" built pursuant to the state's minimum requirements for middle housing (ORS 197.758). SB 458 only applies to land divisions permitted on or after June 30, 2022, which is the same date as the state's deadline for compliance with HB 2001. The bill requires that cities process middle housing land division applications using an "expedited land division" procedure, as long as the application includes a plan that: • Complies with applicable middle housing land use regulations and the Oregon Residential Specialty Code; • Provides separate utilities for each dwelling unit; • Provides "Easements necessary for utilities, pedestrian access, common use areas or shared building elements, dedicated driveways/parking, and dedicated common area"; and • Results in no more than one dwelling unit per each resulting lot or parcel. The bill is intended to facilitate land divisions for middle housing where the original or "parent" lot complies with applicable middle housing requirements, in order to make dwelling units in middle housing developments available for individual ownership. This is primarily intended to address the difficulty of making middle housing units available for ownership currently, given that ownership models such as condominiums typically have additional costs associated with insurance and maintenance, including homeowners associations, as compared to dwellings on individual lots. Unlike other partition or subdivision processes contained within the City's code currently, land divisions to facilitate middle housing would not always accompany an increase in the density permitted on a given lot or parcel. Because HB 2001 requires that cities allow an increased number of dwelling units on parcels that meet minimum lot requirements regardless, land division applications are not necessary to develop middle housing with up to four units on parcels currently zoned for single-family residential use. As outlined in Attachment 3, cities will, "retain the ability to require or condition certain things, including further division limitations, street frontage improvements, and right-of-way dedication if the original parcel did not make such dedications." However, cities are not allowed to apply approval criteria beyond those provided in SB 458 (Attachment 2); this means that the City could not require additional driveways, vehicle access, parking, minimum or maximum street frontage, or other requirements inconsistent with HB 2001. Staff notes that, while SB 458 does limit the ability for cities to condition or require such elements, compliance with all 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 6 OF 25 Page 7 applicable middle housing regulations—including those related to vehicular access, parking, frontage width, etc.—would still need to be demonstrated on the "parent" lot prior to a middle housing land division. Updated Phase 2 Work Plan Staff has drafted an updated work plan for the final stages of the City's work to comply with HB 2001 (Attachment 4) outlining next steps to develop the MHCAC's recommendations into code language for Planning Commission review and eventual adoption by City Council. Multiple Planning Commission work sessions are proposed in order to prepare draft code amendments, as well as another "check-in" with the City Council prior to draft code amendments going to a public hearing. These meetings will provide the Council with several opportunities to refine policy direction relevant to the implementation of middle housing, and will allow the Planning Commission to receive more updated guidance from City Council prior to staff finalizing the proposed code amendments for a public hearing. The work plan also includes opportunities for public engagement, including two "community forum" events and ongoing opportunities for neighborhood associations to request meetings with City staff to answer questions or present to their members. The first of these community forums is tentatively scheduled to be held virtually on December 9, 2021 at 6:30 PM. An online tool is being developed for the public to provide input on middle housing code concepts if they are unable to attend or want to provide input following the event. RECOMMENDATIONS With respect to the question of how to prioritize code concepts not required by the state for compliance with HB 2001, staff recommends that the City conduct economic feasibility testing to further explore MHCAC Recommendation 3.a, "Limit the development of impervious surfaces to mitigate the impacts of increased density." This will allow the Planning Commission to make a more fully-considered and informed decision regarding whether to apply impervious surface limitations in all single-family residential zones, while allowing for further exploration of concerns identified by the Committee that such regulations could make middle housing development less feasible. Staff recommends that other code concepts not required to be adopted by the state-mandated deadline of June 30, 2022 be explored at a later date in order to more fully assess their potential impacts. Recommendations related to affordability and accessibility of middle housing would be most appropriate to consider when the City updates its Housing Needs Analysis and develops housing production strategies pursuant to House Bill 2003; staff anticipates that the City will begin to conduct this work in mid-2022. Due to workload-related concerns, staff recommends considering code concepts that would modify the definition of"demolition"to be more inclusive of significant structural removal (1.a) at a later date, due to the potential impact on the City's demolition tax, and the effect these changes could have on development of other types of housing. Staff also recommends considering code changes that would permit the construction of detached "plexes" (1.b, 2.h. 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 7 OF 25 Page 8 2.i) at a later date, after HB 2001-compliant code amendments have been adopted by the City. This would help ensure that the City meets the State-mandated deadline for HB 2001 compliance and provide more time for the additional research and analysis required by DLCD to demonstrate that these concepts do not result in "unreasonable cost or delay" to the development of middle housing, as both concepts would only be permitted through DLCD's "alternative track" process. Finally, staff recommends adopting code amendments that comply with the middle housing land division requirements of SB 458 concurrently with other code amendments required under HB 2001. Guidance provided by DLCD indicates that, if a City were not to incorporate middle housing lot division standards into their development code by the June 30, 2022 deadline, the City would instead be required to directly apply the bill's language in order to process SB 458 middle housing land division applications. Staff suggests that amending the City code to incorporate SB 458 land divisions would be a more straightforward and less administratively-cumbersome way to comply with the bill. ATTACHMENTS 1. MHCAC Key Issues Summary Memo, 11/02/2021 2. Enrolled Senate Bill 458, 5/17/2021 3. DLCD Senate Bill 458 Guidance, 7/8/2021 4. Revised Phase Two Project Timeline, 11/2/2021 BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCES Use the link below to visit the City's HB 2001 "Project" webpage, which contains links to background materials and references mentioned above. https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/house-bills-2001-and-2003 503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 8 OF 25 C s CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING + � MINUTES November 16, 2021 o� 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buck called the regular City Council meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. on November 16, 2021. The meeting was held both virtually via video conferencing and in-person. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Buck, Councilors Manz, Nguyen, Wendland, Verdick, Rapf and Mboup Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Manager; Jason Loos, City Attorney; Erik Olson, Senior Planner; Erica Rooney, City Engineer I Public Works Director; Shawn Cross, Finance Director; Scot Siegel, Economic Development Director; Kari Linder, City Recorder Others Present: Senator Rob Wagner; Garet Prior, Toll Policy Manger with ODOT; Lucinda Brussard, Toll Program Director with ODOT; Adela Mu, ODOT; Robert Heape, Planning Commission Chair; Randy Arthur, Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee Chair; Lisa Strader, Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee Vice-Chair; Cynthia Johnson, Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee Member 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Buck led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT • Elise Monroe Ms. Monroe expressed concern about the possibility that the Lake Oswego Pickleball Club's management would be taken over by Vancouver. She appreciated the dedicated volunteers who managed the courts and did not want that to change. City Manager Bennett stated she would determine whether the information was accurate and would report back. City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 9 OF 25 4.1 PRIOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP No prior public comment follow-up was provided. 5. PRESENTATION 5.1 Senator Rob Wagner Legislative Update Senator Wagner spoke to his personal ties and his family's ties to Lake Oswego and the region. He provided an update to the last legislative session and a preview on a couple of bills for the short session, noting more than 4,000 bills had been introduced, and a budget of more than $100 billion was balanced. He identified seven focus areas: Investments to assist communities with the pandemic, wildfire prevention and other necessities; investments in early childhood education; long-term care and behavioral health initiatives, including the Hope Amendment; environmental protection putting Oregon on the path to 100 percent clean energy 2040; providing access to democracy and voting; criminal justice reform and police accountability; equity and encouraging conversations about racism; local investments with ARPA American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) dollars to include the pathway from Hillsdale to Lake Oswego and resources for Habitat for Humanity. In the 2022 legislative session were two bills, one to include ethnicity information on personal tax returns to show any disproportional impacts; and working toward legislation to make sure everyone felt safe and welcome on campus. Mayor Buck expressed his appreciation for the Senator's and the Senator's staff's availability to help and for the assistance on the Habitat for Humanity project. He noted Oregon has one of the highest rates of addiction in the country and the lowest access to treatment and asked what could be expected as a tangible benefit to those suffering from and impacted by addiction. Senator Wagner replied that because strategic investments had not been made to addiction recovery, a long way remained to catch up. Measure 110 accountability measures were necessary to make sure those receiving citations from the police were getting connected to the resources they needed. The largest investment ever was passed for behavioral health and included a huge tranche of resources for addiction recovery. He would follow up with Council about what was being done to surge the workforce to provide training to those who could provide mental health services and other aspects of the rollout. Councilor Manz stated her daughter recently became the Assistant Director at Loyola Marymount for LMU Cares where students could report sexual assault, addiction, or anything that impacted the student body. She had noted it was often women who took the lead on such issues and it was heartening to see the Senator taking a position. Senator Wagner confirmed that problems often start at a very early age and recovery and prevention were needed before trauma happened. Councilor Rapf drew attention to the incredibly polarized world and the responsibility of elected officials to try to bring people together. He encouraged the Senator to continue to do so and to work across the aisle. The members of Council were very different politically but got along well and that allowed them to accomplish great work. Senator Wagner agreed that Council had done well as a model for the community, and he understood the necessity of disengaging from creating headlines on social media in particular. City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 10 OF 25 Councilor Wendland spoke to the issues people have shared with him about the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), though that was not local officials' area of responsibility. Lake Oswego tried to promote a customer first attitude to serve its citizens in the best way possible. During a recent visit to Arizona, he noted the state was moving ahead with services while having the same issues to deal with as Oregon, and he hoped Oregon could do the same. Essential services needed to be provided in order for government officials to retain their credibility. Senator Wagner responded it was important to understand the role each official played. Bipartisan support had been achieved for mandated civics courses. He acknowledged the difficult work done by workers on the front lines like those at the DMV. He appreciated the feedback and would take it back to his staff. 6. STUDY SESSIONS 6.1 Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Tolling Project Update Lucinda Brussard, Toll Program Director, ODOT, spoke to the history leading up to the proposed tolling, noting the problems with traffic choke points on 1-205 and I-5. People were spending many hours stuck in traffic and congestion pricing was under consideration to alleviate the problem. Additionally, the percentage of freight moving on the region's highways was very high and was subject to bottlenecks. Other issues included reconciling or mitigating diversion due to tolling. Tolling was being considered on all lanes in both directions on 1-5 near the Interstate Bridge down to the Boone Bridge, and from 1-205 where it met 1-5 up to the Glen Jackson Bridge. The ultimate goal of tolling was to manage congestion and generate revenue to provide funds for maintenance. Tolls would pay for core projects and the 1-205 improvements would not happen without tolls. Tolling would allow for modernization and multimodal transit options. The toll rate would not be known until closer to implementation. Under consideration also was an income- based rate. Congestion pricing would be variable and higher during peak hours. The tolls would be collected electronically through a transponder placed in a vehicle's windshield and no need would exist for traffic to slow or stop to pay a toll. If a vehicle did not have a transponder or an account, a picture would be taken of the license plate. The 1-205 project would start at the end of 2024. Public input was being received and presentations were being given to the community about tolling. Garet Prior, Toll Policy Manager, ODOT, spoke to the equity considerations regarding tolling. Under consideration were credits, discounted rates, or other types of exemptions focusing on the impact to seniors, youth, people with disabilities, people with low English proficiency in the household, low-income households, and racial minorities. Diversion was being taken seriously and a number of intersections in Lake Oswego would receive close analysis. Mayor Buck inquired about the impact of the federal infrastructure package on the proposed tolls on 1-205 and the future system-wide tolling. If the cost of infrastructure was not a factor, he asked if congestion pricing would still be a consideration. Ms. Brussard replied the federal infrastructure package was being evaluated, but congestion pricing would still be necessary as the congestion would not go away. The details of the infrastructure legislation were not yet known, but the money collected on the corridor would stay in the corridor and users would pay for what they used. Mr. Prior added as the environmental review process currently underway progressed, and the toll City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 11 OF 25 rate-setting phase was reached, the financials would be reevaluated to better understand how much would be paid for the 1-205 improvements. Funds from the federal government and other resources would also be assessed to best tailor the toll rate to pay for infrastructure as well as to manage congestion. Mayor Buck noted employees had recently started paying the State transit payroll tax, and it should be kept in mind that those with higher incomes were often able to work from home and lower-income workers would be driving to their work sites. The State transit tax was not for federal roadways, but too many workers, it was the same. Councilor Manz commented that drivers avoided backups on 1-205 by cutting through certain roads in Lake Oswego. Some older roads were very narrow with no room for expansion. Care should be taken to not burden the city by traffic trying to avoid tolling, especially on the McVey Ave corridor with its schools and upcoming recreation center. Consideration needed to be given to the fact that the only way for residents of Lake Oswego to get to the airport, other than by using surface streets, was via 1-205 or 1-5 at the end of S Macadam Ave. Councilor Rapf understood ODOT believed there was an equity solution to the traffic impacts to Lake Oswego and stated he did not understand how that would solve the very basic problem of traffic on the city streets. He asked how the two were connected. Ms. Broussard replied ODOT was working toward an equitable toll solution to the traffic impacts on Lake Oswego and was considering an equitable toll program to determine which measures should be used. Regarding diversion, ODOT was reviewing and analyzing marked intersections which fell under mitigation. Mr. Prior noted an equity lens would apply to the traffic burdens that might show up in lower- income neighborhoods, neighborhoods with limited English proficiency, areas where a sizable number of people with disabilities lived, or where seniors lived. Councilor Mboup pointed out that those not wanting to pay tolls would use Hwy 43, which already had problems, and other roads which would impact Lake Oswego. Ms. Broussard responded that operationalizing the equity measures for those with lower incomes would be based on people identifying themselves, not to ODOT, but to other places already addressing their concerns. That information would be provided to ODOT for provision of an equitable measure. If people were using a community-based organization to get services, ODOT would want to offer passes or discounts or other means to enable use of the service. The Regional Mobility Pricing Project would mitigate diversion because drivers would be paying for the roadway regardless of whether they used it or not. Congestion pricing would provide a reliable, rapid trip and make it less likely for drivers to divert. People might be initially reluctant to pay but then adopt the process very quickly when they realized it would save time. Mr. Prior further explained that with the reinvestment of tolling dollars, the infrastructure could be better used and people could be kept moving on the highway, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions. People would also have more transit and transportation options, such as vanpools and carpools. ODOT would also be working with employers to provide more transportation options. Councilor Mboup noted tolled roads were still subject to backups and using a tolled highway would not reduce carbon emissions, which could be achieved through building a metro train system. Councilor Wendland stated tolling would go forward on 1-205 at the end of 2024, but tolling should also be done on 1-5 as well; otherwise, it would be like placing a tax on those in Clackamas County and on truck drivers going through the area to Multnomah County or to Washington State. Multnomah County would not have a tax on 1-5 and if ODOT coordinated the two, it would lessen City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 12 OF 25 diversion. Tolling on 1-205 would be another tax on shift workers who did not have a choice to travel during a time of lower volume traffic. It would be preferable to gain revenue through a more progressive methodology. Councilor Nguyen believed consideration needed to be given to how tolls would be determined equitably for people who shared vehicles. Tasking agencies like ODOT and the DMV with additional responsibilities for tolling seemed like a burden. Enforcing tolling was also a concern. A tax on the weight of a vehicle could encourage commercial traffic to use the roads at different times of the day, which would save time for daytime commuters and also cut down the time truckers might sit in traffic. It might also incentivize businesses if their drivers could travel farther in a shorter amount of time. Councilor Verdick said she had seen congestion on tolled roads in Chicago. It was necessary to start focusing on other measures, such as safe means of transportation for pedestrians and bicyclists because congestion would get worse as the population grew. Tolling needed to be equitable for everyone and the tolling project as proposed might not have support. Councilor Rapf believed people did not take the trains or public transportation because they did not feel safe on them. It would be good to consider how to fund those systems more appropriately so people would use them more often. Equity seemed to be more of a buzzword and the conversation should be over the concerns of traffic impacts on Lake Oswego. No equity solutions were being presented because none existed yet and they would likely not be done in time. Mayor Buck stated that requiring Clackamas County residents to pay for what they used and having Multnomah County residents get a federally-funded project was not desired, nor should the county workforce be double-taxed just to drive to work. It was understood that the Abernethy Bridge needed to be upgraded and 1-205 needed to be an interstate where traffic flowed freely. Ms. Brussard replied that work was planned to begin on 1-205 in about the fourth quarter of 2024 and the Regional Mobility Pricing Project was to begin the fourth quarter of 2025. Mr. Prior continued by noting the timeline had been sped up based on the feedback received from Clackamas County during the study of the 1-205 tolling project which started 11/2 years ago. The Portland region told the State that it wanted the 1-205 section around the Abernethy Bridge and another section of 1-5 in the Rose Quarter area done as stepping stones. ODOT brought forward the larger segments of I-5 and 1-205 to lessen the gap between the two projects. 1-205 had to go first to allow the bridge retrofitting and widening to be done as soon as possible. Council took a break from 4:31 p.m. —4:43 p.m. 6.2 Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission on House Bill 2001 Erik Olson, Senior Planner, updated the City Council and the Planning Commission on the progress in implementing HB 2001 since May, noting the Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (MHCAC) process was complete and had produced the report in front of Council tonight. He provided an overview of HB 2001 and the steps taken so far to comply with the law. He described middle housing and its potential effect on Lake Oswego's neighborhoods, unique specifications for cottage clusters, limitations of middle housing by certain homeowners associations (HOAs), and implications of the recently-passed SB 458. Future plans included a City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 13 OF 25 community forum, a website launch to gather community feedback, and work on the development of Code language and amendments. Hearings were planned at the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption in spring or before the June 30, 2022 deadline. Randy Arthur, Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (MHCAC) Chair, highlighted a few of the key recommendations and thoughts from the committee and described the procedure taken to allow members of the viewing public to express comments. In respect to the preservation of existing structures, the MHCAC discussion and polling found support for changing the definition of demolition in the Code to mean redevelopment that removed more than 50 percent of the exterior walls of an existing residential structure. MHCAC also recommended that duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes include detached as well as attached structures. He confirmed regulations for middle housing would apply to most of single-family housing as well other than cottage clusters in certain circumstances. Lisa Strader, MHCAC Vice-Chair, summarized the four main areas of MHCAC's recommendations: Preservation of existing residential structures; scale and character of new middle housing; runoff and stormwater impacts of new middle housing; and affordability and accessibility of new middle housing. Mr. Olson, Ms. Strader, and Mr. Arthur answered clarifying questions from Council as follows: • The minimum number of units to be considered a cottage cluster would be the City's decision. A stipulation within HB 2001 stated the footprint of a cottage cluster unit could have a maximum of 900 sq ft. Theoretically, a cottage cluster with multiple 450 sq ft stories could be allowed. • The State allowed duplexes to be defined by cities as detached units, so multiple units could be located on a lot within the envelope and floor area allowed for an existing single-family house. They have single family character but they would be smaller than the typical single- family house and similar to cottage clusters in certain ways. The definition of plexes being attached or detached was a policy question for the Planning Commission and City Council to decide. • The MHCAC discussed restricting the minimum size of cottage cluster units to avoid having them be too small to accommodate those with accessibility issues or those who had a live-in caregiver. Also recognized was that some cottage cluster concepts with flatter walkways and paths to the units would be ideal. • Some areas in the city had landscaping requirements such as the commercial area, but no consensus was reached to recommend landscaping requirements for residential single-family or middle housing. A preference was expressed for a tree canopy requirement. • Discussions took place with the Planning Commission and briefly at City Council in May regarding infrastructure focused primarily around the state's offer of an extension. The City decided not to pursue that to avoid getting into a position where a lot of infrastructure improvements would have to be done on the state's terms and timeline rather than the City's. If middle housing was proposed for an area where the infrastructure was insufficient and the developer was unable to provide adequate infrastructure, then the City would not have to allow the development. It would not be denied outright, but an opportunity would be given to the developer to provide sufficient infrastructure. City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 14 OF 25 • The County would also need to comply with the HB 2001 ruling, so unincorporated areas that did not want to incorporate would also be impacted. The County was developing its own recommendations in a tangential process. • Four units would be allowed on a single-family lot in the R-10 zone under the middle housing bill. The density would increase beyond what was allowed in the zone, but the zoning envelope would still apply. The setbacks would have to comply, except for cottage clusters which would have smaller front and rear setbacks. Building height and lot coverage limitations would apply as well. Mainly, the rules that applied to a single-family zone would apply to middle housing. Variances could also be applied for, but policy questions about what types of variances to be allowed for middle housing would need to be addressed by Council. Councilor Wendland was strongly opposed to redefining plexes as detached and recommended addressing those issues along with ADA compliance or in consideration of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) which accomplished many equity goals. Council had agreed to make the least amount of character change to Lake Oswego in complying with HB 2001. Councilor Manz confirmed that once the Code amendments were adopted, the earliest a developer could develop middle housing would be June of 2022. Councilor Rapf concurred with Councilor Wendland's statement in that the recommendations provided were completely out of scope based on Council's request. He wanted to move on with the minimum requirements necessary to be compliant with HB 2001 and to allow the very capable Planning staff to take what was usable and work towards the solution requested. Cynthia Johnson, MHCAC member, stated she had a long history of service to the community, and a great deal of detail and work went into the committee's meetings and she hoped the City Council would take the time to view the meetings and look at the notes. The committee took Council's charge seriously and the members were very dedicated. Accessible housing was vitally important to many members of the community like seniors, those with disabilities, and those with lower incomes. Scot Siegel, Economic Development Director, thanked Ms. Johnson for her advocacy and support and encouragement to the committee. He noted the three topics mentioned by Mr. Olson that were not required or mandated by HB 2001, and it would be Council's discretion to direct staff and the Planning Commission whether those items should be pursued and completed by June 2022. The fourth area related to affordability and accessibility and efforts to provide those types of units was wholeheartedly supported by the committee though it was not mandated under HB 2001. Staff anticipated that it would be expected to address at least the affordability component under HB 2003. From a project management perspective, he and Mr. Olson had spoken about the great deal of work to be done between now and March, when the public hearing process would start, and he was concerned about taking on too much scope. He asked for Council's direction in terms of the four optional, but recommended, policy initiatives. Mayor Buck stated his appreciation of all the work the committee did and how they represented a diverse group from the community with different areas of expertise. The committee had put in a lot of work, and he appreciated the break down in the report and how it spoke to the community members caring for one another. HB 2001 intended to create a more accessible community for City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 15 OF 25 everyone, and he appreciated the committee's recommendations and good ideas to carry forward after June. The committee had done exactly what Council had requested and beyond. Councilor Mboup thanked the committee members and recognized the importance of what Ms. Johnson said. He supported the committee's work and believed it all should be taken into account, especially the areas where it reached consensus and those areas where consensus was not reached could be further discussed. He invited his fellow Council members to take into account the committee's advice and recommendations. State of Oregon was taking a wonderful action to accommodate people who could not afford to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars toward a home. Unaffordable housing was not the dream of the fathers and mothers who created this nation. People should be able to live in decent, subsidized homes like those shown by Habitat for Humanity. Councilor Verdick noted the MHCAC initially was to conduct five sessions but once it learned the complexities of the issues it realized more time was needed. The group volunteered to increase the length of its meetings and added an additional meeting. She was impressed by the dialog and the diversity of people and their knowledge. She gave a shout out to Ms. Johnson for giving seniors or those with accessibility issues a voice. It might appear the MHCAC had gone out of scope but it really had not. The result was due to the complexity of the issues and the Committee's decision that some of them could be delved into later. Some of the information was not known while discussions were taking place such as the impacts of SB 458. She thanked the MHCAC members for their dedication and the long hours they put in after a long day. Mayor Buck stated that the issues that received consensus should be addressed after the model code was adopted. Many of those issues tied into other issues such as a housing production strategy to comply with HB 2003 and other issues like the tree canopy would fold into the update of the Urban Forestry Plan. He preferred that defining demolition be completed before June because of the distress the current definition caused. Robert Heape, Planning Commission Chair, understood Council's direction was to focus on the minimum requirements and to consider the definition of demolition if the opportunity existed. He believed the work ahead for the Planning Commission was clear. He confirmed the MHCAC's recommendations would be considered. Mr. Olson announced a community forum was scheduled for middle housing work on December 9th Materials would be sent out shortly. Additional web opportunities would be available in the future for outreach as well. 6.3 2022 Master Fees and Charges Shawn Cross, Finance Director, presented the annual look at the Master Fees and Charges noting any changes Council made tonight would be brought back to Council on December 7th for a public hearing. Lake Oswego's consumer price index (CPI) was large this year at 6 percent but for the last 10 years it had been under an average of 2 percent. Fees had risen on average less than 2 percent over that time. He then reviewed the five-year fund balance forecasts of City utilities including stormwater, street, sewer, and water and estimated the combined impact on the single- family dwelling customers' bills to be $6.39, or a 3.8 percent increase per month. He clarified that City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 16 OF 25 water usage for multifamily was not as high as might be expected because irrigation was not a factor and their lower use of water, though it was also affected by the number and type of meters used. He confirmed a low-income assistance program had been set-up during the pandemic to assist people with utility bills. The number of those accounts ranged between 30 and 50. The amount users received depended upon the percentage they made of the area's median income. 7. PUBLIC HEARING 7.1 Ordinance 2879, An Ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego Amending the Community Development Code (LOC Chapter 50) to Amend the Existing Exception to the 14-Day Restriction on Temporary Shelters for Certain Commercial Uses During the COVID-19 Pandemic (LU 21-0068). Jason Loos, City Attorney, read the parameters of the public hearing. Mr. Siegel presented the Council Report and noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of Ordinance 2879 to amend the 14-day restriction on temporary shelters specifically for the pandemic. The only change from the existing policy was that the provision requiring physical distancing would be replaced with the provision that stipulated either State temporary or emergency regulations relating to COVID must be in effect in order to allow the temporary shelters for more than 14 days. He confirmed the provision would not automatically expire. Mayor Buck opened the public hearing, confirmed there was no public testimony, and closed the public hearing. Councilor Wendland moved to approve LU 21-0068, enact Ordinance 2879 and adopt Findings. Councilor Mboup seconded the motion. A roll call vote was held, and the motion was passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Manz, Nguyen, Wendland, Verdick, Rapf, and Mboup voting `aye', (7-0). 8. CONSENT AGENDA— FULL COUNCIL 8.1 Approval to Purchase New Street Sweeper Councilor Wendland moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Rapf seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion was passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Manz, Nguyen, Wendland, Verdick, Rapf, and Mboup voting `aye', (7-0). 9. CONSENT AGENDA— COUNCILORS ONLY 9.1 Resolution 21-42, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego Approving the Appointment of an Alternate to the Planning Commission. City Council Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 17 OF 25 Mayor Buck noted this Resolution was to appoint Miles Rigsby to the Planning Commission to replace Joel Fisher who had moved out of the area. Councilor Manz moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Verdick seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion was passed, with Councilors Manz, Nguyen, Wendland, Verdick, Rapf, and Mboup voting `aye', (6-0). 10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL Councilor Manz stated goals would be discussed at the Parks Board meeting tomorrow. Mayor Buck reported that this Saturday was No Ivy Day at 10 a.m. at Springbrook Park. 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS There were no reports of officers. 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Lake Oswego City Council will meet under authority of ORS 192.660 (2)(d) Conduct deliberations with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations and (f) Consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection. Council met in Executive Session from 6:55 p.m. to 7:44 p.m. 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Buck adjourned the City Council meeting at 7:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, vtiAL, Kari Lind r, City Recorder Approved by the City Council on January 18, 2022 0-- Josep M. Buck, Mayor City Council Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10 November 16, 2021 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 18 OF 25 MEMORANDUM rrt'Alt . V O GREG9; TO: Planning Commission/Commission for Citizen Involvement FROM: Erik Olson, Senior Planner SUBJECT: House Bills 2001 and 2003 Work Session-1 DATE: December 2, 2021 MEETING DATE: December 13, 2021 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY&ACTION REQUESTED This memo provides background on the Commission's upcoming work session scheduled for December 13, which will include a presentation from staff regarding a refined work plan and initial set of concepts for amendments to the Community Development Code ("development code", or "CDC") necessary for the City to comply with House Bill 2001 (HB 2001). The Council has directed staff to pursue development code amendments to meet the minimum compliance provisions outlined in the administrative rules for middle housing contained within Division 46 of Chapter 660 of the Oregon Administrative Rules ("Division 46"). An outline of code amendments that will be required to be adopted in order for the City to comply with HB 2001 can be found in Attachment D. The purpose of the December 13 work session is for the Commission to provide input to staff for drafting the amendments discussed below, under Required Code Amendments. Staff is seeking the Planning Commission's direction on the development of these concepts into draft code language, as well as direction on policy questions related to middle housing implementation. BACKGROUND In late 2020, staff and consultants with Cascadia Partners initiated the City's first phase of work to develop code amendments compliant with HB 2001 that maintain consistency with Lake Oswego's sense of place, neighborhood character, and livability. This phase culminated with the development of concepts and alternatives for amending the development code to allow middle housing (see Attachment A), which were presented at a joint meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission held on May 18, 2021. Shortly thereafter, the Council appointed an Ad-Hoc Middle Housing Code Advisory Committee (MHCAC, or the "Committee") in order to provide high-level policy guidance to the Planning Commission on the development of draft code amendments to comply with HB 2001. MHCAC 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 19 OF 25 Page 2 Chair Randy Arthur and MHCAC Co-Chair Lisa Strader presented the Committee's recommendations at another joint study session of the Council and Planning Commission on November 16, 2021 (see Attachment B). At this meeting, the Council directed staff to pursue a work plan to further develop the code concepts recommended by the Committee that are required to be adopted by the state-mandated deadline of June 30, 2022.The Council also recommended that staff explore a potential amendment to the definition of "demolition" in the building code to be more inclusive of significant structural removal, if feasible. WORK PLAN As shown in Attachment C, staff has further developed a proposed work plan for a series of Planning Commission work sessions, public meetings, and outreach events culminating in the formal adoption of compliant code amendments by City Council. The work plan includes four Planning Commission work sessions: the first will focus on an initial package of prescribed code concepts where the City has limited latitude beyond state requirements; the second will focus on standards related to duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes and townhouses; the third will focus on standards related to cottage clusters; and the fourth will involve the review of a preliminary draft set of code amendments to ensure that concepts have been properly translated into code language. Policy recommendations provided by the Planning Commission will then be presented to City Council for further direction prior to the development of a public review draft for wider consideration. As with previous work plans, the code adoption process requires public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council, scheduled in March through May 2022. The work plan also includes opportunities for public engagement prior to the hearings, including two "community forums" and ongoing opportunities for neighborhood associations to request meetings with City staff to answer questions or present to their members. The first of these community forums will occur on Thursday, December 9th; a Storymap & Survey will also be released by the City in early December in order for the public to provide input on middle housing code concepts. Community Forum #2 will take place in early February 2022, and will focus on draft code recommendations. Input collected through this outreach will be provided to the Planning Commission for consideration at the above-described work sessions. These outreach opportunities will be reinforced by a social media strategy that will include ongoing updates in the City's Hello LO publication, and posts on the City's social media accounts such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Nextdoor. REQUIRED CODE AMENDMENTS The Council has directed staff to pursue development code amendments to meet the minimum compliance provisions outlined in the administrative rules for middle housing contained within Division 46 of Chapter 660 of the Oregon Administrative Rules ("Division 46"). An outline of code amendments that will be required to be adopted in order for the City to comply with HB 2001 can be found in Attachment D. Please refer to the page numbers below for the specific items that staff will cover in your December 13 work session. 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 20 OF 25 Page 3 While the state allows some flexibility for cities to modify their design and dimensional standards for middle housing, as long as the regulations are not more restrictive than those that apply to single-family detached homes, there is less flexibility for the adoption of other types of standards related to middle housing.This December 13 work session focuses on the amendments that are prescribed by the state for compliance; future work sessions will focus on the options for design and dimensional standards for each middle housing type in more detail. Definitions (Pages 6-8 of Attachment D) State requirements in Division 46 include relatively precise definitions of each middle housing type - Duplexes, Triplexes, Quadplexes, Townhouses, and Cottage Clusters—that must be adopted in order for cities to comply with the bill. While, generally, the definitions in the CDC are consistent with the definitions in Division 46, per Attachment D the following amendments to LOC 50.10.003—Definitions will be needed: • Separate Triplex and Quadplex from multi-family. • Add a definition for Cottage Cluster. • Revise definition for Courtyard to align with Cottage Cluster requirements. • Add a definition for Townhouse Project to align with Division 46 Staff notes that Division 46 allows the City to define Duplexes, Triplexes or Quadplexes as multiple detached dwelling units on a single lot, in a variety of configurations. This concept was considered by the MHCAC and ultimately selected as one of their recommendations; however, the Council directed staff not to pursue this recommendation along with other code amendments required under HB 2001. Applicability (Pages 8-11 of Attachment D) Per Division 46, middle housing must generally be allowed in any zoning district that allows single-family detached residential dwellings as a permitted use. In Lake Oswego, middle housing regulations will need to be included within LOC 50.02.001 —Residential Districts and LOC 50.02.002—Commercial, Mixed Use, and Industrial Zones such that they apply to the following base zoning districts: • Residential Low Density: R-15, R-10, and R-7.5. • Residential Medium Density: R-6, R-5, and R-DD. • Residential High Density: R-3, R-2, R-0, and R-W. • FMU (Foothills Mixed Use) Though middle housing must be permitted broadly within these areas, Division 46 allows the City to prohibit or limit middle housing in areas that are protected under existing Statewide Planning Goals, under certain conditions. The City has already implemented several regulations in order to maintain these goal-protected resources within code chapters such as the Greenway Management Overlay District (LOC 50.05.009), the Sensitive Lands Overlay District 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 21 OF 25 Page 4 (LOC 50.05.010), the Flood Management Area (LOC 50.05.011), Hillside Protection areas (LOC 50.06.006.2), and Historic Preservation areas (LOC 50.06.009). Per Attachment D, these chapters generally already comply with Division 46, with a few exceptions. The Sensitive Lands Overlay District (LOC 50.05.010) must be amended in order to eliminate references to single-family residential zones, and to both allow and regulate duplexes in the same manner as single-family dwellings within these areas. Other code amendments are being considered in order to clarify whether the City will limit the reconstruction of certain types of middle housing in goal-protected areas such as the Flood Management Area or Sensitive Lands Overlay District. See the Special Provisions for Conversions of Single-Family Dwellings and Policy Question sections, below, for more discussion. Though the state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has stated that they do not expect cities to amend portions of their code related to Statewide Planning Goal 15: Willamette Greenway, and no amendments are necessary to the Greenway Management Overlay District for compliance, the City may decide to consider doing so at a future date. Staff will continue to track this issue in accordance with future guidance provided by DLCD. Division 46 also allows cities such as Lake Oswego to apply different types of regulations for master-planned communities than for other residentially-zoned areas. Master-planned communities are defined as sites over 20 acres in size, within or adjacent to the City, that have either a proposed or adopted master plan. Though it's not clear exactly how many of the City's existing "planned unit developments" (or "PUDs") would meet this definition, the City must still meet the special provisions in Division 46 for existing, previously-approved master planned communities. Per Attachment D, amendments will be needed to LOC 50.07.006—Overall Development Plan and Schedule to allow these previously approved PUDs to be amended by the applicant to allow for an overall net density of at least 8 dwelling units per acre and permit the development of a duplex on every lot. Use Standards (Pages 11-12 of Attachment D) As mentioned above, Division 46 requires that middle housing types be allowed broadly in most residential zones. Attachment D includes a description of the amendments necessary for the use-related standards in LOC 50.03 to reach compliance with HB 2001, including an extensive update to the Use Tables in LOC 50.03.002 to permit all middle housing types in the zones where they are required to be permitted. Review Procedures Lase 13 of Attachment D) Division 46 also stipulates that middle housing must be subject to the same approval processes as single-family detached dwellings in the same zone. Under the City's current system, single- family development is classified as a Ministerial decision, and the development of middle housing types other than duplexes is classified as a Minor decision and subject to additional staff review. 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 22 OF 25 Page 5 Per Attachment D, the review procedures detailed in LOC 50.007.003 will need to be amended to treat middle housing the same as single-family housing; staff recommends code amendments that would classify the development of a single Triplex, Quadplex, or Townhouse as a Ministerial decision in order to comply with the bill. Density (Page 14 of Attachment D) Attachment D also includes a description of amendments that will be needed to the existing density provisions within the CDC. The City must eliminate any provisions related to maximum density in a number of residential districts (R-15, R-10, R-7.5, R-5, R-DD, R-W, and R-3) for middle housing types other than townhouses, as Division 46 prohibits cities from applying maximum density standards to duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, and cottage clusters. Given that the Council has provided direction to comply with the minimum compliance provisions in Division 46 for lot size and density, staff concurs with the recommendation in Attachment D to grant an exception to maximum density standards for Duplexes,Triplexes, Quadplexes, and Cottage Cluster housing. With respect to townhouses, the CDC must be amended to allow a maximum density of at least four (4) times the density applied to single-family dwellings in that zone, or 25 units per acre—whichever is less. Minimum compliance provisions of Division 46 also require cities to establish a minimum density for Cottage Cluster projects of at least four (4) units per acre. Though existing minimum density standards currently require more than four (4) units per acre in many zones, minimum density provisions in the R-7.5, R-10 and R-15 zones will need to be increased in order to comply with the bill. Though the City's ability to apply density standards is somewhat limited by the bill, the continued application of minimum lot area requirements will effectively control density to some degree. Policy options related to compliance with minimum lot size standards for triplexes, quadplexes, and townhouses will be discussed in more detail at Planning Commission work sessions scheduled for early 2022. Parking (Pages 18-20 of Attachment D) Minimum compliance provisions for middle housing in Division 46 do not offer cities much flexibility with respect to off-street parking standards. Generally speaking, cities can require no more than 1 parking space per unit for all middle housing types. The City's existing parking requirement of 1 space per unit for single-family dwellings and duplexes complies with Division 46. However, off-parking requirements for multi-family developments, including Triplexes,Townhouses and Quadplexes, are calculated per bedroom, with a minimum requirement of 1 space per unit for studio/efficiency, 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom, and 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 or more bedrooms. Per Attachment D, the off-street parking requirements within L0050.06.002—Parking must be amended to match this 1 space per unit requirement for all middle housing types. This will require the code to specifically address parking requirements for cottage clusters, which aren't 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 23 OF 25 Page 6 currently defined, as well as parking requirements for townhouses in zones where they are not currently permitted. Additionally, parking requirements within the Foothills Mixed Use (FMU) Zone must be amended to address minimum parking requirements for lots less than 3,000 sq. ft. in size. Special Provisions for Conversions of Single-Family Dwellings (Pages 22-24 of Attachment D) Provisions within Division 46 require cities to apply different standards for conversions or additions to existing single-family dwellings to create middle housing than would be applied for new middle housing development or the redevelopment of middle housing. Generally speaking, these standards are not permitted to discourage middle housing conversions or additions by creating unreasonable cost and delay when compared to new development on a vacant site. Per Attachment D, Division 46 provides no alternatives to these requirements. In order for the City to comply with the special provisions for conversions of single-family dwellings required under Division 46, code amendments are necessary to the public works exceptions in LOC 50.07.003.14—Minor Development and LOC 50.07.003.13—Ministerial Development. Currently, these code sections provide the City with conditioning authority to require or defer public improvements for multi-family and townhouse developments, but not for single-family dwellings. Previously discussed amendments to this portion of the code would classify the development of a Triplex, Quadplex, or Townhouse as a Ministerial decision (see Review Procedures, above). Staff recommends further clarification within this section that the City's conditioning authority for public improvements would continue to apply to Triplexes, Quadplexes, Townhouses, and Cottage Clusters. Staff also recommends code amendments to clarify that duplexes are not subject to conditioning authority for public improvements, as Division 46 includes a requirement that duplexes be granted the same public works exceptions as detached single- family dwellings. Division 46 also specifies that building design standards may not be applied to conversions or additions to a single-family dwelling that create middle housing. As a result, code language within LOC 50.06.001.1 —Building Design, LOC 50.05.007.3.c.ii—Lake Grove Village Center Overlay District, and LOC 50.05.001.5.a.ii—Glenmorrie R-15 Overlay District must be modified to clarify that the design standards in these sections may not be applied to middle housing created through conversions or additions to a single-family dwelling. Code amendments are also needed to LOC 50.01.006.4.a—Nonconforming Uses, Structures, Lots, and Site Features in order to clarify how rules related to the reconstruction of non- conforming structures will apply to each middle housing type. The current iteration of the City's code allows for the reconstruction of damaged or destroyed nonconforming single-family and duplex dwellings, accessory structures, and historic landmarks, but is silent on whether similar allowances should be provided for other middle housing types, such as triplexes, quadplexes, townhouses, and cottage clusters. While Division 46 does not directly address the reconstruction of non-conforming middle housing, the City may be expected to grant these 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 24 OF 25 Page 7 allowances for all middle housing types since they are granted to single-family dwellings. Staff will continue to track this issue in accordance with future guidance provided by DLCD. ATTACHMENTS A. Middle Housing Opportunities Report, 5/2021 B. MHCAC Key Issues Summary Memo, 11/3/2021 C. Updated HB 2001 Work Plan and Schedule, 12/2/2021 D. Plan and Code Audit Summary, 5/6/2021 503.635.0290 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 25 OF 25 February 12th 2024 Philip Stewart,Chair City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: Comments on LU 23-0036(Community Development Code Annual Amendments) West Lake Grove Design District Dear Chair Stewart: Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on the Community Development Code Annual Amendments,case file number LU 23-0036.While we have no comments on the proposed list of amendments,we would like to request that the Planning Commission consider additional amendments related to specific standards applicable to West Lake Grove Design District,as described below. Hacienda Community Development Corporation(CDC)has been selected by Metro to develop affordable housing at the southwest corner of Boones Ferry Road and West Sunset Drive. This project will provide 55 units of much- needed housing for the community and will enliven a vacant site that formerly served as a staging yard for the Boones Ferry Road improvement project. We are currently in the design stage of the project and have identified some code standards that deserve attention as part of LU 23-0036, specifically pertaining to requirements to provide shared driveway and parking lot access with the neighboring property to the west,per LOC Figure 50.05.005-C: Internal Parking and Circulation,reproduced below: Figure 50.05.005-C:Internal Parking and Circulation (with site marked) Site outlined in — green ' • rr n ` 1 °6; ► 1101 � Washington Ct West Lake Grove Design District Figure 50.05.005-C �n e' orire.ay Perxng ¢teugs �U'C O aai Laka Grovn Gasign_ �\ UIeIIIC[ i . Hacienda CDC agrees that in some circumstances, shared vehicle access can provide for efficient vehicle circulation among neighboring sites,particularly sites which may be developed with complementary commercial uses. In such a context, customers may frequent multiple businesses on abutting properties without adding vehicle trips to adjoining roadways. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 1 OF 14 However, in the case of abutting residential and commercial sites, shared vehicle access may not yield the desired reduction in roadway trips due to differing user profiles, and introduces safety and security concerns for residents. Accordingly,we are requesting that the code be amended to exempt our site from this requirement if the site is developed with multifamily housing. Our site is zoned West Lake Grove Office Commercial(WLG OC),which allows for a range of commercial uses. However,in recognition of the need for affordable housing, City Council adopted Ordinance 2872 pursuant to case file number LU 21-0019,allowing affordable housing at this site as now codified in LOC 50.03.003.2.d: 2. Residential Uses in Commercial and Special Purpose Zones d. WLG OC Zone Residential uses are limited to multifamily residences in the vicinity of Boones Ferry Road and West Sunset Drive, as depicted on Figure 50.03.003-A.1, and shall consist of 20 or more units where at least ten percent of the units are continuously rented, leased or made available for an amount of rent plus expenses associated with occupancy, such as utilities and fees, totaling not more than 30%of the income level that is 80%of area median income according to the Clackamas County Housing Authority's income limits for affordable housing, adjusted for household size. Figure 50.03.003-A.1:Area of Residential Use Allowance in WLG OC Zone 1 ' .1 est Sunset Dr wV\Psr nset Dr ArQr UPr9t Case file number LU 21-0019 does not mandate housing at this location,but it does allow for it. If the site were developed with a commercial use,then shared circulation as depicted on Figure 50.05.005-C would be appropriate. However,if the site is developed with affordable housing,then shared circulation as depicted on Figure 50.05.005- C would no longer be appropriate for the following reasons: • The shared circulation easement would introduce commercial traffic into the subject site, leading to potential conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians(particularly children). • Providing vehicle access to the neighboring property would result in an interruption of landscape areas and buffering between the subject site and neighboring property. • Providing vehicle access to neighboring property would result in an overall reduction in on-site parking capacity since parking spaces would be displaced to accommodate vehicle through movements. • The shared circulation will inevitably result in commercial parking in residential dedicated parking stalls, burdening residents(families)to seek offsite parking. We have enclosed suggested changes to LOC 50.05.005.4.b that would treat this code standard differently depending on the proposed use (multifamily or otherwise).We have also proposed analogous changes to LOC 50.05.005.9.d.ii for those projects utilizing the Clear and Objective Housing Standards for Approval. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 2 OF 14 Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Kevin Chavez Project Manager Hacienda CDC Enclosures: Requested code amendments LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 3 OF 14 City of Lake Oswego Comments on LU 23-0036(Community Development Code Annual Amendments) Hacienda CDC's proposed code amendments Hacienda CDC requests that the City incorporate the following amendments to the Community Development Code as part of LU 23-0036. In the text below, only those sections with amendments are listed. Proposed language additions are double-underlined. CHAPTER 50: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 50.05.005 WEST LAKE GROVE DESIGN DISTRICT 4. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO THE ENTIRE WLG DESIGN DISTRICT a. General Requirements Development which occurs within the West Lake Grove Design District shall create an aesthetically pleasing entry into Lake Grove through the following design elements: i. Architecturally designed structures of high design quality that are in scale with the site, in proportion to similar buildings in the West Lake Grove Design District and which utilize a pleasing variety of harmonious earth and muted tone materials, colors, finishes and textures; ii. Preservation of substantial trees to retain the landmark status imparted by these resources; iii. Orientation of building entrances shall conform to the provisions of LOC 50.06.001.5, Commercial, Industrial, and Multi-Family Development Standards for Approval; iv. Building design and orientation shall provide for effective screening and buffering of the subject properties from adjacent residential neighborhoods; and v. High quality designed landscapes involving native plant materials or those which have naturalized to the locale,which will grow to significant size and impart seasonal color and interest. b. Streets and Circulation Access to Boones Ferry Road,new streets, internal vehicular driveways,parking,pedestrian and bike facilities shall be provided and developed in accordance with the Streets and Circulation Element of the West Lake Grove Design District shown below in Figure 50.05.005-B: Auto and Transportation Circulation,Figure 50.05.005-C: Internal Parking and Circulation, and Figure 50.05.005-D: Street Pedestrian Facilities and Pathways. If the site depicted on Figure 50.03.003-A.1:Area of Residential Use Allowance in WLG OC Zone is developed with multifamily residences as permitted by LOC 50.03.003.2.d, then it is exempt from the shared driveway parking lot standard depicted on Figure 50.05.005-C: Internal Parking and Circulation. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 4 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-B: Auto and Transportation Circulation / i I rnfriona _ 'a '� .uII'� A r` r - a. I Re-alignment of West Sunset Drivel • gv_est, —Sunset I ' \ ` 110 P% West Lake Grove Design District.C �'-' ��.tl. �llikli Figure SD.OS.DOS-B 0 / CO ' ad ' O rZi cnan��»i'aaio°�wm'en New Roadway with on-street parking - IG 5,8, - Washington Ct y��I - 0 S e: ~� 2ofrst eet ParMeine°� 000 �d of r CI : �o tr, d y '" ' Figure 50.05.005-C: Internal Parking and Circulation i JVladrnr St Qa — _ .11111111 III lik'llilit . t' N z• '11111&41411P°6 41 I it e � w€i�itrtm 1r!� -, 1 Imo' r ,' /444( * ,,,,../_____Ii c,,,,,, II ' G Washington Ct West Lake Grove Design District Figure 50.05.005-C :: � orirewsy Paxmg yot eccess oi.e n LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 5 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-D: Street Pedestrian Facilities and Pathways i 100. / m 1 m r • ILO 0 /\..y. litii \:_,..>„...._ 1111 .... .. itli , a s .: 11 Westure Lake50.05 G.roveU D Design District Fig Washington Ci '�'- rhootlCoinineria1StreN oo�6y of l7 0G .o a r.. wnei _arm°.3(el�a jaj ,I . e10 Ne°s°tely �. Through provision of shared access and driveways,parking and pedestrian systems, development shall occur in a manner to ensure the phased construction of the planned circulation and access system and in no circumstance shall prevent the development of a cohesive access and circulation system. Furthermore, public bike and pedestrian facilities shall be provided on both sides of Boones Ferry Road as illustrated by Figures 50.05.005-B, 50.05.005-C, and 50.05.005-D. Figures 50.05.005-E, 50.05.005-F, 50.05.005-G, 50.05.005-H, and 50.05.005-I illustrate the desired design treatment of West Sunset Street,Lower Boones Ferry Road and a pedestrian path intended to serve a portion of the WLG R-2.5 Residential Townhome zone. Figure 50.05.005-E: West Sunset Street Typical Street Section A-A crcaj rt 5 I w. I.(' n . lei 1 1 't „firer • i i rtr- MEWS' fr� ` 1 J,-- 1 West Sunset Street - Typical Steel Setctlots A-A LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 6 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-F: West Sunset Street Typical Section B-B surer 11, •R'ir #W5 9 I' V , 4, f '1/4 . J-_,i i �, --r i I J�+T 8' if:4; 7-fr (Or to :(' 0' l5r Weal Sunset Street °'mil ft Typical Slreel Secu0n B-H Figure 50.05.005-G: Lower Boones Ferry Road Typical Section C-C ,__ .4.1 s'-::* 9 \ _‘-'99\--D (96:4 rr--- sr7t .\ , 'r 1 j...El N�+YYYIi$ t •i, i fYM CLm�F{ iRl• ' r • 4 5 I ae 1 S� 8 11 fl —f re' "'~ rf' !S1r a Grj IiC:la!Y YaK qb-o Lamm--- - Law Dowses Ferry flood —'�' 1ypIc7Y SIreaI Sectlun C-G Figure 50.05.005-H: Pedestrian Walkway Typical Section .444=t1Erego- 4:. =ktE (A-2- u ii° �' ----•.,,..,..,.......,LI y i te r _ 4' {—A Iinekems- , amS t st LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 7 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-I: Lower Boones Ferry Road Typical Section E-E ma' s r �AjrE 5liY.MW 77410.9fors 404Ve5. rrnsfed t71+I7 4E ,9raw4 c ryirrr. f11Yn re -Trime i J44L il' il� f' fl le 6' Sr tO' 16-e Lower$Hones Ferry Road Typical Street Section E-t: The number of access points on Boones Ferry Road shall be minimized through the use of consolidated driveways sufficiently wide enough to allow for simultaneous ingress and egress. This shall require property owners to agree to construct or share in the cost of consolidated driveways either: i. At the time of development; or ii. At such future time when sufficient land area is developed to make driveway consolidation practical. This provision does not apply to the site depicted on Figure 50.03.003-A.1: Area of Residential Use Allowance in WLG OC Zone if it is developed with multifamily residences as permitted by LOC 50.03.003.2.d. If it is impractical, due to the timing of development,to develop consolidated driveway access for more than one parcel,the location of future consolidated access shall be determined by the approval authority based upon the: (1) Streets and Circulation Element of the West Lake Grove Design District,Figure 50.05.005-B, Figure 50.05.005-C, and Figure 50.05.005-D; (2) The ability to serve the maximum number of land uses and properties; (3) Traffic safety and operational characteristics; and (4) Use of more than one property to ensure future consolidated access, such as at property lines. The approval authority may approve interim individual driveways access to Boones Ferry Road subject to the findings of a traffic analysis and the condition that when adjoining properties develop,permanent shared access be developed pursuant to this section. In circumstances where the location of permanent shared access is not in the same location as an interim driveway,the driveway shall be removed and the area landscaped or otherwise integrated into the design of the subject site under the provisions of this section. Driveway consolidation shall require the execution of reciprocal,nonrevocable easements in a form necessary to ensure unimpeded property access and driveway maintenance. All driveways shall include safety features such as changes in surface material, signage and lighting to alert drivers to the potential presence of pedestrians. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 8 OF 14 9. CLEAR AND OBJECTIVE HOUSING STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL d. Standards Applicable to the Entire WLG Design District i. Site Design Standards (1) Purpose Development which occurs within the West Lake Grove Design District shall achieve an aesthetically pleasing site and building design that: (a) Preserves substantial trees in order to retain the landmark status imparted by these resources; (b) Through building design and orientation,provides effective screening and buffering of the subject properties from adjacent residential neighborhoods; (c) Through high quality designed landscapes involving native plant materials or those which have naturalized to the locale,plants will grow to significant size and impart seasonal color and interest; and (d) Incorporates landscape features which contribute to a unifying design theme and continuity within the West Lake Grove Design District, such as paving materials and textures, lighting, street furniture, signage and plant material selection, especially trees. ii. Streets and Circulation Access to Boones Ferry Road,new streets, internal vehicular driveways,parking,pedestrian and bike facilities shall be provided and developed in accordance with the Streets and Circulation Element of the West Lake Grove Design District shown below in Figure 50.05.005-0: Auto and Transportation Circulation,Figure 50.05.005-P: Internal Parking and Circulation, and Figure 50.05.005-Q: Street Pedestrian Facilities and Pathways. If the site depicted on Figure 50.03.003-A.1:Area of Residential Use Allowance in WLG OC Zone is developed with multifamily residences as permitted by LOC 50.03.003.2.d,then it is exempt from the shared driveway parking lot standard depicted on Figure 50.05.005-P: Internal Parking and Circulation. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 9 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-0: Auto and Transportation Circulation /— I iLim7 NI a,. I 7-0; -----75- - l Re-alignment of West Sunset Drivel 0111111‘ p —Sunset Dr I , • I I Dt-� 7 West Lake Grove Design District - I /(f__. -c:Dv-5:-. - I \ Figure 50.05.005-0 'M1 Tu-r�n CM1anlneliufiun n New Roadway with on-street parking O .uanic sgmi —VVashin ton Ct Q ZI:t.e' a:r'° " _~1�(,ey 4-► �� e Ongreen e w e ee • Future Traffic Sip `4VO = Por y "'"" Figure 50.05.005-P: Internal Parking and Circulation 1/ _ , mad..n.r 9, R-61k, I _ • • • i - , ` ‘ / \ Illt ` 'V r J r rr Wait Sunset f]�I �Mrr S 1 4 �—� 110-00-tolik i R`'/� ,�—iSPpet- E2 \ \ 1 .>_c_.----- ,0,\ -Wash tag ct - ..a---4- _ West Lake Grove Design District s. Figure 50.05.005-P p�a_ - y C,,,, Pa4kln9 Lat Access J5 1 Wen Lake6rayefleflpn n. 011�cf LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 10 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-Q: Street Pedestrian Facilities and Pathways _ Ti — - s ,___L__ _ ,,, . .. 10,...- \ m West unseii ter..L """ CgO p iAOi,, P tco., \ .i A\ i1,i1i-,\k �� Weat Lake Gwve Deagn District — Figure 50.05.005-Q Washingtot—Gt— 1 1 .... nom..,": ::, __--:\_A �camkt[en AH C,DeN Erclx b,he / . poM r9 atrtHaeo5om 3,4.�$1.5{07, lt{ 1(EIe�>lH. Through provision of shared access and driveways,parking and pedestrian systems, development shall occur in a manner to ensure the phased construction of the planned circulation and access system and in no circumstance shall prevent the development of a cohesive access and circulation system. Furthermore,public bike and pedestrian facilities shall be provided on both sides of Boones Ferry Road as illustrated by Figures 50.05.005-0, 50.05.005-P, and 50.05.005-Q. Figures 50.05.005-R, 50.05.005- S, 50.05.005-T, 50.05.005-U, 50.05.005-V and 50.05.005-W illustrate the desired design treatment of West Sunset Street, Lower Boones Ferry Road and a pedestrian path intended to serve a portion of the WLG R-2.5 Residential Townhome zone. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 11 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-R: West Sunset Street Typical Street Section A-A . Si 5 Ti1111.(...t. -.1r-..'-'1c-14Ct .}r�G Le1lf a -` .i �. ! .40 i. .t,.. ,+. crag roll *' 1 r fai+e+W+ r 1A . �.� .1 .i. •` w ;i. III re-li.+ I-4 j i 1- 1=1. it- ` Weal Sting gt.S knot TVpIIal Street Seetlat A-A Figure 50.05.005-S: West Sunset Street Typical Section B-B szAgivok • shy+. 4�}ipar 791 4Y t )^ fir b-----7-^- t k. .(. ii 1, vtle 4144 ' 4 F_ _.., rs 7 Ir i r + a /441Pri ' - Co r'i7N f+I.4i'fpfsfF Went Sunset Street , 4'+7aacft Typical Street Section A-u Figure 50.05.005-T: Lower Boones Ferry Road Typical Section C-C AAt lk.r.1.,_. ,...,,..1,.7 lij_i.1{ti 4 Liim fy1.._1 n e —,4. s,.'[ d, dt` . - J-d ,.e-m'- fr,-t--fK1,'_ H.--,'C_ i_ tIi,A9,ft. rerrE ,O , ,,,_,,,111.-11,,.,-I401 1: !f 'thr `:1 ST ' I 7 1 r;' ; e' s' rr' 4 r+� ��' n rt `k s s G` ccrrw 1=' `tb-O. a'"-- Lower Dowses Fany Road Typical Slreel Sectlun C•G LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 12 OF 14 Figure 50.05.005-U: Pedestrian Walkway Typical Section c-4�u_ �� CA- ,jr‘ _.„..________ ____ .., w .. .. r Iceir— Figure 50.05.005-V: Lower Boones Ferry Road Typical Section E-E sueri, T '.+was fR hE,-t.A9�, i A iwtI L i N. S ti� .4e5L.Y rryhr,. "WI ra j, II 4_11: li.C II' ; It* 1,6 j,4 1 r; JLLL q nr-0M //�( Lower- Soonaa Ferry Road - Typical Stri,1 Section -E Access points on Boones Ferry Road shall be consolidated to allow for simultaneous ingress and egress. This shall require property owners to agree to construct or share in the cost of consolidated driveways either: (1) At the time of development; or (2) At such future time when sufficient land area is developed to make driveway consolidation practical. This provision does not apply to the site depicted on Figure 50.03.003-A.1: Area of Residential Use Allowance in WLG OC Zone if it is developed with multifamily residences as permitted by LOC 50.03.003.2.d. If it is impractical,due to the timing of development,to develop consolidated driveway access for more than one parcel,the location of future consolidated access shall be determined by the approval authority based upon the: LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 13 OF 14 (a) Streets and Circulation Element of the West Lake Grove Design District,Figure 50.05.005-0, Figure 50.05.005-P, and Figure 50.05.005-R; (b) The ability to serve the maximum number of land uses and properties; (c) Traffic safety and operational characteristics; and (d) Use of more than one property to ensure future consolidated access, such as at property lines. The approval authority may approve interim individual driveways access to Boones Ferry Road subject to the findings of a traffic analysis and the condition that when adjoining properties develop,permanent shared access be developed pursuant to this section. In circumstances where the location of permanent shared access is not in the same location as an interim driveway,the driveway shall be removed and the area landscaped or otherwise integrated into the design of the subject site under the provisions of this section. Driveway consolidation shall require the execution of reciprocal,nonrevocable easements in a form necessary to ensure unimpeded property access and driveway maintenance. All driveways shall include safety features such as changes in surface material, signage and lighting to alert drivers to the potential presence of pedestrians. LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 14 OF 14 Siquina, Cristina From: Kate Myers <katemyers2011 @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 10:58 AM To: PC Testimony Subject: Definition of Attached housing for meeting 2/12 Attachments: Planning Committee letter re Attached homes.docx CAUTION:This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Please find my comments regarding the definition of attached housing which is one of the "Housekeeping" items listed for review tonight (2/12). Thank you, Kate Myers 1 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-2/PAGE 1 OF 2 To the Planning Committee: It seems that yet again,the City is using the "Housekeeping" process to undercut and rewrite the hard work of its citizens. The Middlehousing guidelines presented to the City were created through a process of extensive citizen involvement. The definition of an attached house as being ACTUALLY attached was not created in error. It was chosen specifically after receiving feedback from residents and the City Council. If there is a discrepancy in current code,then one of three things should happen: A) The code should be amended to meet the newer, more recently vetted definition of attached as referenced in the Middlehousing guidelines that were created by the citizen panel Or B) The Middlehousing panel should be reconvened to address this discrepancy. Or C) The Code should be modified to account for the exception that when it comes to Middlehousing —attached means attached (as specified in the guidelines or to an even greater percentage of wall length). The Planning Commission and the City Council should NOT change the hard work of the panel in favor of the older definition. In fact,the City should be responsible for bringing these types of conflicts to light far earlier in the process so that they may honor citizen time and effort and engagement. Frankly, the use of the "housekeeping" vote to "tidy up"things that actually have very large impacts is disingenuous. It smacks of avoiding citizen engagement and lacks transparency. This is 2024—not the 1990's. Do better. Sincerely, Kate Myers (commenting for myself) Serving as Lake Forest Neighborhood Association Chair 5750 Carman Dr Lake Oswego, OR 97035 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-2/PAGE 2 OF 2 02/12/2024 Neighborhood Chairs Committee presentation Annual code updates 2024 • 'y •1 4 ' . . . .,f- • : II \ • '4L.46* - .1 q it " ) 6,4,_%,- ., t i• -. , . . .,,,i ii -... , , .. IIIJitt ,o. „...,,,,,,A lor' - ' 0 � 1.' itt.................- 4 . - LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 1 OF 6 1 02/12/2024 rofiri - A -v_ !. h' : ., �° a � • . -- o- - m / . � P, t / /- l i ccuArrnno - N ® f o.'i7 ✓ !7 -. I o , ce •- ware J • 0 W lap ,14" 1Z4_20. • • "� Jlc, 'r 1111411 .. . , � A 4. 1 LI am,#0 II 111166,i atta ri: . I 4Cil ir ' n I V . c wit mi I O 1 O T , O ,t O 120' •• E Avenue - LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 2 OF 6 2 02/12/2024 Who Owns the Common Courtyard? Planning Commission Item 2 Item 5 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 3 OF 6 3 02/12/2024 Add to 2024 Annual Community Updates "Adopt code to prohibit all or a portion of the common courtyard from being sold to individual unit owners. The common courtyard must be in a tract held in common ownership." NCC "Neighborhood associations are an officially recognized channel for citizen participation in land use planning in Lake Oswego" Harlan Levy,Westlake Betsy Wosko,Old Town Bob Brown, Blue Heron Elizabeth Jordan, Mt. Park Cheryl Uchida,Waluga Andy Leonard, Bryant Ruth Bregar,Westridge Frederique Lavios, Palisades Tom Bland, Uplands Carol Ihlenburg, North Shore/Country Club Grant Howell, Rosewood Ellen Steele, McVey/Southshore Chris Huttemeyer, Hallinan Carole Ockert, FANFH Figure 9.Attached Triplex Front and Back Figure JO.Attached Triplex Side•by•Side 111101111 41APAP101 ,^ "Quadplex"means four dwelling units cm a lot or parcel in any configuration.See Figure 11 and Figure 12 in Section E for examples of possible quadplex configurations. Figure IL Stacked Quadplex Figure I2.Detached quadplex _"41.0 tas*No ( 1 !Otto111011° 4114 LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 4 OF 6 4 02/12/2024 \� ,,'- e C ems � �-PO ••r ,`.a r. )* w..it.m. $'fir.+3 1 i }am 3Y - A . '''. rA 1'j r', 'e. 10 - . mat .. ...� .. [i f i--14 Misinterpreted Code f._ _ "Detached " [ 1A horizontal separation of three ft.or more, between the subject structure and nearby structures " Code Interpretation Log General: "Interpretations of Code text are sometimes necessary by staff. This Interpretation Log collects some of the staff interpretations... " "..are subject to revision or rescission for a number of reasons, i.e., change of law, change of method, or a prior interpretation is reexamined and determined to be incorrect. " LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 5 OF 6 5 02/12/2024 Some examples The flag pole area is not excluded from lot coverage calculation_ 50.10.003.2,Lot 50.10.003.2,Lot Lot Coverage Flag Lots,Lot 8/16/2006 However,for purposes Area, Area Coverage of minimum lot size, 50.07.007.2_diii the flat pole area orI access easement is excluded. Elevated driveways, while exempt from 50_06.004.2.b.x(4), 50.10.003.2,Lot Lot Coverage�Elevated 3/10/2010 setbacks,are counted 50.10.003.2 Lot Coverage Driveways toward lot coverage (all portions more than Coverage 30"above grade). under the definition nl 'oetaphed'a breezeway connecting two ln res does not make the structures'attached' Icr the purposes of The definition of"Detached" compliance with standarre:.ineraw needed clarification in 'I'code in 50.10003,2 'breezeway'is not 50.10.003. Detached hT d ached defined.Inarderfor 2013 h/W2013 Structure,eway & as' wnlaeswbe Breezeway Breezeways r/° °Eeways nsidered ailaMed, er xeway connector must It needs clarification again notion ro be ve a sad and opal least sand well on el Ieail e side which not allow breeze re to to passsllxould the walkslunct1 could here windows.g doom and windows. Attached means physically attached { y z•r ` 4•-- •T J ri n'• � . r•"- ems= `{ems _ - ' ~1 y ,• f•1 ~• - • ,, ++ . A,1 — 7gl` —411 _ - Common Wall Structures LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-3/PAGE 6 OF 6 6 02/12/2024 FANFH presentation 2024 Annual Code Updates We know middle housing and multi-family . i - n ii I li �: iel. a ' T. otkok s' duplexes town homes 1k: Y�t� , 1111 l ' ,. U. ''- — E', 114g'+y- Lid AI , � _ iF ;� r. — - '. 4 ff • Will—Ta4' `t Mulit-family may LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-4/PAGE 1 OF 2 1 02/12/2024 Proposed projects In FANFH Cottage Cluster Quadplex? t: •Ilven ait 7il koh... - - itviIr Imonilipi i _IF2.1,12L, � r— E Avenue Input from FANFH board 13 member board comprised of both newer Oregon residents and long term Oregon residents A wide age range, retired folks and parents of young children thru high school FANFH - wide variety of housing types for well over 25 years Lets make code clear and easy to understand 1. Put common courtyard fix in 2024 Annual Code Updates 2. Common courtyard means common ownership 3. Attached means physically attached 100% of the common wall LU 23-0036 EXHIBIT G-4/PAGE 2 OF 2 2 9.1 O F �s� COUNCIL REPORT —� OREGO� Subject: Mitigation Requirements for Single-family and Duplex Development (PP 24-0001) Meeting Date: March 19, 2024 Staff Members: Erica Rooney, City Engineer Jessica Numanoglu, CD Director Report Date: March 8, 2024 Departments: Engineering and Community Development Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation ❑ Motion ❑ Approval ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial ❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded ❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable ❑ Information Only Comments: ❑X Council Direction ❑ Consent Agenda Staff Recommendation: N/A Recommended Language for Motion: N/A Project/ Issue Relates To: Council Goal to "Improve transportation connections, mobility and safety for all travelers and all types of trips in Lake Oswego" Issue before Council: Consider whether to direct staff to initiate the process to adopt code amendments to require public improvements as mitigation for the impacts of new single- family and duplex development. ❑X Council Goals/Priorities EAdopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL Should the City undertake a process to amend the Community Development Code to require mitigation for new single-family and duplex dwellings through the construction of public improvements to offset the impacts of the development on public infrastructure? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In June 2023, Council adopted ministerial mitigation code amendments to require the construction of public improvements for new triplex, quadplex and cottage cluster Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 2 developments (Ordinance 2908). The amendments were necessary to address a consequence of the Middle Housing code amendments, which resulted in there no longer being any code authority to require public improvements for Middle Housing because those housing types were reclassified from Minor to Ministerial Development. At the public hearing for Ordinance 2908, Council expressed concerns that new single-family and duplex dwellings are not also required to construct public improvements and directed staff to pursue a project plan to consider mitigation requirements to also apply to single-family dwellings and duplexes to assure that all development is required to mitigate its impact on public facilities, most specifically associated with transportation and mobility. This report provides background on the City process to review and implement public improvement requirements for residential development and discusses impacts and issues of requiring mitigation for new single-family and duplex development for the Council's consideration. Staff will present case study examples at the work session. BACKGROUND Adoption of Ministerial Mitigation Requirements for Middle Housing (Ord. 2908) On June 6, 2023, the City Council approved Ordinance 2908 (LU 22-0031), adopting code amendments to continue the prior requirement for public improvements to mitigate the impacts of middle housing development (triplexes, quadplexes and cottage clusters). These amendments were adopted following the City Council's adoption of Middle Housing code amendments to comply with House Bill 2001 (2019) (LU 22-0007) and were necessary to address two issues: 1. Under state law, middle housing must be reviewed under a ministerial' process, and at the time, the Community Development Code (CDC) did not allow for the requirement of public improvements under a ministerial process; and 2. To comply with the "clear and objective standards for housing" in ORS 197.307(4). The need for clear and objective requirements to mitigate the impacts of proposed development exists for any housing development, regardless whether the housing is classified as minor development2 or ministerial development under the CDC. During the review of the Ordinance 2908 code amendments, staff explained that consistent with the prior code classification of detached single-family dwellings, accessory dwelling units, (ADUs), and duplexes as ministerial development, and because mitigation conditions of approval were only imposed on minor and major development, the middle housing mitigation requirements were not proposed to be applied to development of detached single-family 1 A ministerial development is a decision made based on clear and objective standards without public notice or opportunity for appeal.An example of a ministerial decision is the review and approval of a building permit. 2 A minor development is a decision that involves a more discretionary level of review than a ministerial decision and is subject to public notice and opportunity for appeal. Examples of minor development decisions are the review and approval of multi-family dwellings and land divisions. Respect. Excel'erce. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 3 dwellings, ADUs, or duplexes3. The Council expressed interest in extending the mitigation requirements to also apply to single-family dwellings and duplexes and directed staff to pursue a project plan to consider this separate from Ordinance 2908. For more detailed background on the Ordinance 2908 code amendments, see the public record file for LU 22-0031 (link provided at the end of this report). [LOC 50.06.008.1.b, exception). Existing Ministerial Mitigation Requirements Under existing code, ministerial mitigation for residential development is required when a new building permit increases residential density by additional dwelling units or involves the creation of lots by land division or lot line adjustment, except that mitigation is not required for the construction of a new detached single-family dwelling on an existing lot, an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), a duplex, or for replacement of existing dwellings (demolition). Ministerial mitigation that may typically be required for residential development is summarized as follows: • Curbs and gutters may be required to be constructed along the property frontage and adjacent abutting streets, if curbs and gutters do not exist there already, or across the street from the property if the City's Public Facility Master Plans direct them to be constructed in that location. Within the "Rural Fringe"—an existing designation which includes the City's urbanized fringe and newly-annexed areas—existing policy requires development of asphalt pathways with drainage swales instead of curbed concrete sidewalks; accordingly, both a pathway and swale may be required to be constructed. • Developments contiguous to unpaved or substandard roads would generally be required to install pavement on those roadways from the curb or edge of the street to a set distance beyond the centerline of the road; this distance is determined based on the classification of the unpaved or partially-unpaved street, with higher classification streets requiring more paved area. Gravel shoulders are generally required in the Rural Fringe area and for existing uncurbed streets, in addition to other road standards applicable to those areas. See Table 1: Functional Classification Design Characteristics, below, for more detailed information about the street improvements required for different street classifications as outlined in the City's adopted Transportation Systems Plan (TSP). 3 Single-family dwellings, duplexes and ADUs must still meet plumbing and other codes that require adequate utilities and compliance with fire and life safety standards. Respect. Excel'erce. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 4 Table 1: Functional Classification Design Characteristics Raised Median/ Buffer/ Functional Right- Paved Travel Left Turn Bike Swale/ Landscape Utility Classification of-Way Width Lanes Lane Parking Lanes Ditch Strip Sidewalks Easement 1 2 x 6' 8'Ditch 00- 7478' 4x 14' 2x8'** 2x5,5' 2x8' 2x20' Major Arterial 105' 12'* 2 x 7.5'14' - 2 x 6 8'Swale 75-80' 50-54' 2x12' 2x8'*** 2a5,5' 2 x 6' 2 x 10' Optional Arterial 2 x 7.5' Major Collector 75-80' 48-52 2 x 12' Optional (Optional) 2 x 6' 2 x 5,5' 2 x 6' 2 x 10' Neighborhood Collector w/parking one side 70' 38' 2 x 12' - 2 x 7' - - 2 x 5,5' 2 x 6' 2 x 5' 2x6' 8'Swale 60' 34' 2x12' - - 2x5,5' 2x6' 2x5' w/bike lanes 2 x 7.5' Local Residential Street w/parking both sides 50' 28-32' 14-18' - 2 x 7' - - 2 x 5,5' 2 x 5' 2 x 5' w/parking one side 50' 22' 15' - 7' - - 2 x 5 5' 2 x 5' 2 x 4' w/no parking 50' 22' 15' - - - - 2 x 5.5' 2 x 5' 2 x 4' narrow wino parking 50' 20' 10' - {Optional} - - 2 x 4' Local Commercial/ 60' 44' 24' - 2 x 10' - - 2 x 5.5' 2x5' 2x4' Industrial Street *Optional 3"travel lane **Optional in downtown only ***Optional in community hub • Sidewalks/ Pathways may be required to be installed, pursuant to applicable designs and specifications, and in accordance with projects identified in the TSP. If the street improvements can't be constructed along the site frontage that would extend an existing an abutting sidewalk/pathway from an adjacent property without creating any drainage impacts or unsafe pedestrian conflicts with traffic, then right-of-way dedication and sidewalk improvements are required to provide mitigation for any increase in use to the transportation system. If the sidewalk/pathway is not feasible, then a gravel shoulder may be required to provide some space for pedestrian refuge along the edge of the street. • Water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage lines are required to be upsized when needed to provide adequate capacity to the development, in accordance with the City's accepted Public Facilities Master Plans and Engineering standards. • Public utility easement standards are based on the requirements of the franchise utilities (e.g., PGE, NW Natural, phone and cable providers). These facilities may require additional easements outside of the public right-of-way, if sufficient room does not exist, and is most common in subdivision developments. This easement area does not include public services such as water, sewer, or storm, which are typically installed within the public right-of-way. • Sufficient right-of-way dedication is required if existing rights-of-way of streets contiguous to the property are not adequate in width to meet applicable street Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 5 standards, accommodate required drainage facilities, or to provide the necessary width in order to allow for future infrastructure improvements. Determining Feasibility of Requiring Public Improvements Staff determines what infrastructure improvements are required for development on a case-by- case basis. The code does not prescribe specific numerical limits for what must be provided to offset different levels of added density (for instance, a maximum 200 linear feet of sidewalk for a triplex), but instead generally requires that public improvements be installed pursuant to applicable standards. Using sidewalks as an example, applicable standards include the sidewalk standards in LOC 42.08.400, design overlay standards, the street design standards in the City's TSP, Rural Fringe Guidelines in the transition neighborhoods and Public Works/Engineering standards. The code requires that development mitigation be as necessary to comply with the applicable public facility plan for the affected infrastructure. LOC 50.06.008.3. The code also includes provisions that allow the City Engineer to defer, reduce or eliminate the specific mitigation required upon a finding that: (1) there is existing infrastructure that meets the standards; (2) it would not be the appropriate time to construct a particular public improvement - typically because the improvement would require a more extensive design analysis that would include adjoining properties and drainage conveyance facilities - in which case the City would require the recording of a covenant on the property or properties to ensure that the improvements are constructed at the appropriate time (this could be through the establishment of a local improvement district (LID) or other future assessment; see discussion under the Legal Issue subsection, below); or (3) the required public improvements exceed the "rough proportionality" threshold that is legally permissible under the code (see discussion under the Legal Issue subsection, below). [LOC 50.06.008.3.e]. Appeal Option for Required Public Improvements In circumstances where applicants believe that improvements required by the City exceed what would be "roughly proportional" to the proposed development, the code includes multiple options for applicants to seek a remedy to design/install fewer public improvements than required. The code includes language that allows development applicants to request a hearing, through a minor development process, to challenge the City's determination of rough proportionality and design/install fewer public improvements than the City's code would otherwise require (LOC 50.06.008.7.a). To date, the City has not received any challenges to the determination of rough proportionality. Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 6 Existing Ministerial Mitigation Review Process The Engineering staff reviews all land use and/or building permit applications for triplexes, quadplexes, cottage clusters and all minor or major development applications to determine required mitigation for each development and reviews public improvement plans for compliance with City standards. The applicant/owner is required to hire a licensed civil engineer and other professionals, as applicable, to properly design the improvements in accordance with City standards and conditions of approval. The public improvement plan process involves extensive review by Engineering staff to confirm the plans comply with the conditions, meet City standards and are acceptable for long-term maintenance by the City. Once plans have been approved, the permit is issued and a private contractor begins the construction work. City staff from the Engineering and Maintenance Departments are involved during the construction phase to ensure the project is constructed according to the approved plans and that the final project is acceptable. Other activities by staff include collection of a performance and maintenance guaranty, collecting permit fees, leading construction meetings, conducting site inspections throughout the project, establishing a final close-out and punch list, collecting final as-builts from the design consultant, loading as-built information into the City's GIS system, warranty reviews and adjustments, and then final acceptance and closeout. All of this work involves many hours of coordinated work from multiple staff members with specific skill sets throughout Public Works (Engineering and Maintenance). In 2023, the Engineering staff logged over 4000 hours on this type of work, which equates to 2 FTE, and does not include the time and effort by Maintenance operations staff to support this work. DISCUSSION In determining whether to require mitigation for new single-family and duplex development, the Council should consider the following issues and impacts: 1. Engineering Department Workload/Staffing Impacts: Assuming the concept is to consider requiring the same frontage improvements described above for the development of a new single-family (NSF) and duplex dwellings on existing lots, this will increase the workload for Engineering staff because they do not currently review mitigation for NSF and duplex dwellings on existing lots. Based on the number of NSF building permits approved last year, Table 2: Number of Approved NSF Building Permits, 2019-2023 shows that roughly half of the NSF permits in each of the last five years either have constructed or are required to construct some amount of frontage improvements associated with a land use development and was reviewed by Engineering staff per the process outlined above. The other half were permits for NSF dwellings that were not associated with land use development and Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 7 therefore were not reviewed by the Engineering staff to determination mitigation requirements. Table 2: Number of Approved NSF Building Permits, 2019-2023 Total Permits by #of Total Permits with Year NO Mitigation Required* 2019 69 35 2020 62 31 2021 54 32 2022 59 38 2023 44 26 Average/year 58 32 *This represents the number of additional NSF permits that would need to be reviewed by staff each year. If frontage improvements were to be required for every NSF building permit, the number of applications the Engineering staff would need to review and manage the design and construction of the individual lot improvements would approximately double. Currently, the Public Works staff from Engineering and Maintenance dedicate two full-time-equivalent staff to this effort on average. Two more positions would need to be added if the number of permits to review and manage is doubled. 2. Constructability Considerations for Single Lot Frontage Improvements: Much like happens on larger development frontage improvements, there are a myriad of design challenges with designing and constructing improvements within pre-existing rural infrastructure limitations. Considerations for requiring mitigation on individual lots means analyzing a number of design aspects that need to be balanced and accommodated: • Drainage impacts and conveyance, including potential significant impacts to adjacent neighbors. • Development of a required stormwater treatment facility to address runoff from new impervious area of sidewalk and road widening. This creates more challenges on a lot- by-lot basis. For instance, it could result in a new stormwater planter being required for the sidewalk along the lot of only one home on a street, increasing maintenance costs for the City with little public benefit. • Sidewalk compliance with ADA design. • Pedestrian safety transitioning from shoulder areas to new sidewalks. • Overhead utility conflicts, such as utility poles, guy wires, transformers, etc. • Parking impacts associated with installation of sidewalks. • Tree removal to accommodate the new improvements. Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 8 • Driveway approach transitions and associated grading and widening. • Confirmation of sufficient right-of-way (ROW) to accommodate the improvements in accordance with the TSP. Mitigation is generally required for all land division applications with the types of improvements varying anywhere from full street improvements for a new subdivision to more modest improvements (e.g., a street light and gravel shoulder) for a 2- or 3-parcel partition. We would expect more modest improvements would be required for NSF and duplex development on existing lots. In the past six years staff approved 52 partitions and four subdivision land use applications, requiring various levels of mitigation. Table 3: Types of Mitigation Required for Land Division Applications from 2018-2023 provides an overview of the general types of improvements that were required for these land divisions: Table 3:Types of Mitigation Required for Land Division Applications from 2018-2023 General Types of Mitigation Required #of Applications Full or Extensive Street Improvements (e.g., ROW dedication; water and/or sewer extension;storm; 4 hydrant;street with sidewalk/pathway; and street lights) ROW dedication; street light; fire hydrant 1 LID Waiver; street light; reconstruct street 2 pavement LID Waiver; ROW dedication; sewer extension; 3 street light _ ROW dedication; sidewalk/pathway; street light _ 19 LID Waiver; ROW dedication; gravel shoulders 25 No public improvements (sidewalk exists) 2 Of the 56 land divisions in Table 3, two already had existing frontage sidewalks and did not require additional mitigation, while 23 were required to construct sidewalks as a condition of approval. More than half of the land divisions required LID waivers because construction of sidewalks or other public improvements was not practical (see Legal Issue subsection, below for more info on LID waivers). In conversation with other local municipalities such as Tigard, Tualatin, Oregon City, and Milwaukie, they have the same practices that Lake Oswego does. Frontage improvements are required for partitions, subdivisions, and major development. However, the cases of single- family residential frontage improvements on local roads without improved infrastructure are extremely rare. Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 9 Fee in lieu of Improvements Option One option to consider if it isn't practical to construct improvements in a piecemeal approach, would be to implement a "fee in-lieu" program that would assess costs to these developments, collecting the money over time, with the intent that as collected funds increased, they could eventually be used to build a corridor-level improvement in that area. For example, the cities of Portland and Milwaukie provide this as an option for single-family residential development on unimproved or substandard roadways. The City of Portland has the Local Transportation Infrastructure Charge (LTIC) that was implemented in 2016 and is for single-family in-fill development. The charge is collected at the time of building permit for residential development along specifically identified unimproved local streets that lack curbs in residential zones, including some that are gravel, and some that have only a narrow asphalt roadway without curb and sidewalk. The current fee is $600 per lineal foot of property frontage, with maximums set based on zoning. Exemptions are available for low-income households, affordable housing, and accessory dwelling units. There are also maximum fee amounts set for different size lots, the highest cap being $72,000 for a 20,000 square foot lot. Based on Portland's 2022 Revenue and Expenditure Report for the LTIC program, the average annual income is $1.1 million. They have over$15 million in identified capital work identified in the affected areas; although the overall need for improvements is much larger. The City of Milwaukie's fee in-lieu program has different fees for each type of infrastructure— transportation, water, stormwater, wastewater, and stormwater management. The City may accept this fee in lieu of construction on any required facility improvements if any one of several criteria are met. One of the key criteria is that "required improvement are not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards."The fees are collected and constrained to be used to leverage future capital work within the specific neighborhood area, or within 1,000 feet of the payee location. Current 2024 rates in Milwaukie are as follows: Transportation $340 per lineal foot of frontage Water $375 Stormwater $265 Wastewater $250 Stormwater Mgmt. $14 per square foot In both of the programs listed above, the lineal cost per foot was determined based on past project costs, and they appear to have annual indexing adjustments to keep up with inflationary costs in construction. For purpose of determining what the financial impacts of this type of program could be if implemented here in Lake Oswego, the following table gives some perspective of what the fee Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 10 would look like if applied to typical lots in the First Addition (FAN) and Evergreen neighborhoods: Fee In- Lieu of Improvements Scenario Lineal frontage Neighborhood (ft.) $350(1) $500 $600(2) FAN,typical frontage 50 $17,500 $25,000 $30,000 FAN, corner lot 170 $59,500 $85,000 $102,000 Evergreen, typical frontage 120 $42,000 $60,000 $72,000 Evergreen, larger corner lot 190 $66,500 $95,000 $114,000 (1) Similar to Milwaukie's Rate (2) Similar to Portland's Rate Assuming that during an average year 32 NSF or duplex dwellings would pay into such a program, and assuming it was approximately $30,000 per frontage (the Portland rate), the annual income could be $960,000. These programs require long-term investment into an administrative program that can track the funding and disperse the funds in the future when projects are undertaken and are also subject to the Nollan/Dolan test of nexus and rough proportionality (see discussion under Legal Issue, below). Current pedestrian-related projects that the City of Lake Oswego is undertaking at this time are running approximately$1 million each for projects that are about 1,500 feet in length, with very little stormwater management because of pre-existing facilities. New projects where a curb does not currently exist will require stormwater facilities, such as seen on D Avenue, and adds significant costs to the per lineal foot costs. It could take a significant amount of time to collect the necessary funds from a fee program in order to do one project. It may be complicated to ensure that the funds stay in the general area of where they were collected, which will increase the delay time before any improvements could occur. 3. Legal Issue: Nollan/Dolan Standards When local government requires a development to mitigate for its specific impacts upon the streets, sidewalks (pathways), bicycle paths, parks, water and sewer systems, street lights and traffic control signs and devices (i.e., public facilities), there must be an essential nexus between the "legitimate governmental interest" and the impact resulting from the development, and the degree of public facilities mitigation required of the developer must be roughly proportional to the extent of the development's impact upon that public facility. Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 US 825 (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 US 374 Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 11 (1995). If not, then the requirement would be a "taking without just compensation," in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution. In Lake Oswego, the Nollan/Dolan standard is roughly stated in the Conditioning Authority, LOC 50.07.003.5.a.iii by the italicized text: "The condition is reasonably related to alleviation of a need for public services or facilities created or contributed to by the proposed development. As used in this section, "public services or facilities" includes sewer, water, surface water management, parks, open space, streets, sidewalks, and pathways." A major consideration in requiring mitigation for NSF and duplex dwellings on existing lots under the Nollan/Dolan test of nexus and rough proportionality for new exactions is whether the mitigation is occurring on an "un-exacted"4 lot or an "exacted" lot, where prior development is replaced with new, similar development. For example, an owner demolishes and replaces a 1930 single-family dwelling with a new single-family dwelling. In terms of the impact on the public facilities, the demolition and new construction of the same type of dwelling (single-family) results in no change upon the public facilities, so there is no transportation impact of the street system; however, at the time the original dwelling was constructed, no exactions were made because it was constructed prior to exaction authority. As the impacts of residential development had not previously been mitigated, this is an example of an "unexacted" lot. Dolan would not prevent now exacting mitigation to the extent of the permitted development— replacement single-family dwelling—as Dolan is a limitation on the amount of the exaction (e.g., "rough proportionality"), not upon any exaction at all. Dolan does not preclude deferred exactions. However, the "nonconforming rights" section of the code [LOC 50.01.006.4] may preclude deferred exactions in certain cases: development that was constructed prior to the establishment of the exaction code authority would have nonconforming rights under LOC 50.01.006 that would preclude applying exactions to the new development permit if the dwelling were destroyed due to an "act of God" (e.g., a fire or flood), but could be applied if an owner intentionally demolished the dwelling for the purpose of remodeling or replacement. Dolan also would not preclude additional exactions on "exacted lots" to the maximum amount of "rough proportionality." In situations where exactions were applied to a development previously (for instance, a subdivision from the 1970s that was required to dedicate ROW and install curbs and gutters, but no sidewalks), it is possible to apply additional exactions (e.g., a sidewalk) if the dwelling on the existing lot is replaced as long as the total (past and present) mitigation required for that lot meets the Nollan/Dolan test of nexus and rough proportionality. Staff would need to apply this on a case-by-case basis since the replacement of an existing 4 In legal terms,where mitigation of impacts of development are required,this is referred to as"exacting"the mitigation. Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 12 dwelling would not increase the impacts to the transportation system and it would be necessary to determine the total exactions previously made. Options When Construction of Public Improvements is not Feasible As discussed previously, there are common situations when some or all of the mitigation that is required of a development cannot feasibly be installed by the developer at the time of construction. This situation is more likely to arise on a lot with a replacement single-family dwelling because the lots tend to not be large enough to divide and so have shorter street frontages, and the replacement of older dwellings are more likely to be in an area with no existing sidewalks or with piecemeal segments of sidewalks. There are two tools that the City has used when a street improvement is needed but it is not feasible to construct at the time for a systemic reason: • Local improvement district (LID)waivers of remonstrance: A LID can be formed to include all of the benefited properties by the improvement, with the cost proportioned among the properties based on the benefit received. The waiver itself does not have much "Dolan" effect—it removes that property owner's right to object to the formation of the district for a period of six months. LOC 40.02.050(1). Once the district is formed, the owner may contest the calculation of the degree of benefit within the assessment process, thus meeting the "rough proportionality" requirement. LID waivers are a very commonly required; however, because the City does not have a policy or program to implement LIDs, staff is not aware of any actual public improvement construction that has resulted from a LID required by the City since at least the 1970s. • Covenant: Rather than requiring a LID district formation and assessment, a covenant would require the individual property owner to install the improvement when it is ready to be constructed on a systemic basis. It is merely a delay in the timing of the installation of the mitigation requirement that would have been otherwise installed at the time of construction of the residence. The covenant is recorded against the property and the owner's obligation is triggered upon notice by the City. Legally, this delayed installation of the mitigation improvement is easy; in practice it is problematic because when ownership changes, the obligation may not have been reflected in the sales price or the new owners are not aware of the requirement and are resistant to comply (even though they are recorded and appear as exceptions in their title report; apparently not all purchasers read their title report prior to purchase). This tool has been used by the City in the past on very few occasions, but is avoided in most circumstances because of owner objection. In-lieu Fee as an Alternative to LIDs and Covenants Because of the disadvantages of both the LID formation and Covenant implementation process, a fee in-lieu (discussed previously, above) could be an alternative option the city could consider to address the mitigation requirement. Similar to property exactions, an in-lieu fee must comply with the Nollan/Dolan test of nexus and rough proportionality. Thus, an in-lieu fee must be targeted to mitigate the negative impact of development upon the same interest that the Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 13 fee will be used to mitigate. For example, an in-lieu fee used for sidewalk and street improvements would be of the same interest to mitigate new development that generates more vehicle or pedestrian traffic. In this example, the in-lieu fee would be calculated to equate to (or be less than) the actual construction costs of the delayed mitigation improvement, with the City holding the funds until the improvement is ready to be made on a systemic basis that will include the site's frontage, and the project is initiated within a reasonable period of time to capture the impact of the development (-10— 15 years). In-lieu fees may not be used to fund the general public street improvement program; rather, the funds must be used to address negative impacts to the street system that are "roughly proportional" to the impact of the particular development and that is in the area of the development site. Thus, an in-lieu fee program should provide for a means to determine the actual construction cost (so that an owner would not be required to pay more than the construction cost of the improvement) and include a tracking program to assure that the money is used for the degree of street improvement required of that property in the same area. Code & Comp Plan Amendments to Require Mitigation for all NSF and Duplex Development The actual code and Comprehensive Plan amendments that would be necessary to apply ministerial mitigation requirements to NSF and duplex dwellings are relatively straight-forward, but the implementation, as discussed above, would be more complex. Given the potential impacts to neighborhoods and on the cost of constructing NSF and duplex dwellings, sufficient public engagement will be important. Below is a draft work plan to consider the amendments if directed by the Council. Draft Work Plan Spring 2024 PC Work Session #1 (Background and Work Plan) Summer 2024 Public Engagement September 2024 PC Work Session #2 (Direction based on public feedback) October 2024 Council Work Session #2 (Direction based on public feedback) Fall 2024 Draft Amendments & send DLCD and Metro Notice December 2024 PC Public Hearing and Findings Early 2025 City Council Public Hearing and Findings Summer 2025 Deferred implementation to allow for hiring of new Engineering staff Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 14 ALTERNATIVES OR ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES For comparative purposes, it is helpful to look at the various impacts to the development and to the City regarding the various options. The table below is a summary of the issues, and what impact each option would have. Retain Existing Proposal to Require Frontage Provide Fee-In-Lieu of Option to Practice Improvements Frontage Improvements Ease of No change Requires a 6-9-month workplan Requires a 6-9-month workplan Implementation and public engagement, and and public engagement, and eventual code changes eventual code changes Cost to Developers No change or Increased cost to hire designers Increase cost to developers for increase and contractors _ one-time payment Effect of No change or Adds extra time to complete No change or increase Development increase improvements prior to Final Timelines Occupancy of home Neighborhood No change Adds urban improvements in No change; until future projects Character piecemeal order come through within the time period Implements Does not provide Adds sidewalks or pathways in Delays implementation of Sidewalks or sidewalks or piecemeal or fragmented sidewalks or pathways until Pathways pathways approach over a long time future, but within the time period period, when adequate funds are available Stormwater Does not May cause impacts to adjacent Does not change existing Impacts in the typically affect or properties—must ensure this stormwater situation in the area Public ROW change the doesn't occur by proper design. existing Requires stormwater facilities stormwater (i.e. planters) in ROW if no situation in the conveyance exists. area City Staffing No new staff Requires at least new 2 FTE Increase in staff workload in Impacts required Engineering and Finance City Maintenance Does not change Would require increased level of Does not change the current Impacts current level of service to maintain the level of service until such time service stormwater system (e.g., as a full project is implemented planters) FISCAL IMPACT For Builders/Developers Adding the requirement for frontage improvements for all NSF and duplex permits on existing lots would have a financial impact on builders/developers, which could increase the cost of NSF and duplex housing. If required to build the improvements, builders/developers would need to hire engineers to develop the plans, obtain and pay for the permit from the Engineering Dept., Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service, 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY Page 15 and then construct the improvements. If a fee in-lieu of option is provided, this will be an additional cost added to the other fees already associated with development. Either option increases the overall cost to the builder/developer. For the City of Lake Oswego The fiscal impacts of expanding the public improvement permitting process to include frontage improvements for all single-family and duplex permits would require at least two more FTE in Public Works. These staff would be managing the design plan reviewing, permitting, and construction work the developers conduct on the frontage. This would be approximately $400,000 more per year in the Engineering Fund, which receives its resources from the four utility funds. The permit fees for this work are not full cost-recovery. If the fee in-lieu is the exclusive option, it's possible that less staff would be required; however, it will require expansion of work effort or staffing levels in Finance and Engineering to administer and manage the funding. Staff reports and public meeting materials for Ordinance 2908(Ministerial Mitigation for triplexes, quadplexes and cottage clusters)can be found by visiting the project webpage. Use the link below to visit the City's"Project" page. In the"Search" box enter LU 22-0031 then press"Enter": https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/all-projects Respect. Excel'erce. Trust. Service. 503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY