Loading...
Approved Minutes - 2024-12-03 ��,A � O s� CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES December 3, 2024 ) _!?EGO. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buck called the regular City Council meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. on Tuesday, December 3, 2024. The meeting was held both virtually via video conferencing and in- person in the Council Chamber at City Hall 380 A Avenue. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Buck, Councilors Mboup, Rapf, Corrigan, Afghan, Wendland. Councilor Verdick was excused. Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Manager; Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney; Kari Linder, City Recorder; Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager, Erica Rooney, Public Works Director I City Engineer; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; Shawn Cross, Finance Director 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Buck led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT No Public Comment was provided. 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.1 Resolution 24-50, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Authorizing the City Manager to Accept and Sign the Intergovernmental Agreement with Clackamas County for the Clackamas County City-Led Homelessness Initiatives Funding Grant and to Sign an Agreement with Hunger Fighters Oregon to Reimburse them with Grant Funds for Operation Expenses. END CONSENT City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 8 December 3, 2024 Councilor Wendland moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Mboup seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Rapf, Corrigan, Afghan, Wendland voting `aye', (6-0). 6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA No items were removed from the Consent Agenda. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 7.1 Ordinance 2954, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Clarifying, Revising, and Updating Various Articles Declaring Violations to be Civil Violations and/or Subject to Enforcement Fees; and Amending LOC Art. 20.02 (Business Licenses); LOC Art. 32.06 (Parking Regulations); LOC Art. 34.10 (Types of Nuisance); LOC Art. 42.03 (Street Design Standards); LOC Art. 47.03 (Sign Code); and LOC Art. 55.02 (Tree Removal). Deputy Attorney Boone presented the annual Code update, which included suggestions collected from Staff and the public to improve and streamline the Code. The Council report contained proposed Code amendments with Staff commentary explaining the background and substance of each change. Staff's new provisions included additional Code authority to multiple sections to declare civil violations and include enforcement fees alongside fines, similar to Tree Code violations. The Business License Section provided for a hearings referee to handle appeals regarding conditions and revocations. Under the Nuisance Section, the Code violation for property owners who did not maintain blackberry vines and ivy 10 feet from property lines was removed due to enforcement limitations. The driveway approach landing requirement moved to Engineering Standards, and exceptions for single-family and middle housing were removed. The Tree Code amendments allowed expedited removal of diseased ash trees and permitted delayed removal to avoid active ash bore periods. Deputy Attorney Boone clarified that enforcement fees were already provided for under the Master Fees and Charges. The proposed changes provided specific Code authority for fees that had been in place for about two years. A general fee was not imposed, only a fee for violating the ordinance, and people were notified individually. City Manager Bennett added that Code Enforcement prioritized education first, followed by compliance, before moving to enforcement. Code Enforcement ensured people understood the financial consequences for failure to comply. Councilor Mboup moved to enact Ordinance 2954. Councilor Corrigan seconded the motion. Councilor Wendland noted that this year's Code update was very concise and congratulated the City's legal team. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Rapf, Corrigan, Afghan, Wendland voting `aye', (6-0). City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8 December 3, 2024 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 Resolution 24-47, A Resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending Lake Oswego Public Contract Rules 46-0131 Special Procurement (Legal and Related Services) and 46-140 Regarding Delegation of Authority to City Manager to Enter into Public Contracts and to Enter into Intergovernmental Agreements. City Attorney Osoinach reviewed the hearing procedures and confirmed no Councilor wished to declare a financial conflict of interest. Deputy Attorney Boone presented the Council report, reviewing the proposed amendments that would exempt legal and related services from competitive bidding, the increase in Council's delegation to the City Manager from $250,000 to $500,000, and the correction of a scrivener's error in intergovernmental agreements. Mayor Buck opened the public hearing, confirmed there was no public testimony, and closed the public hearing. Councilor Wendland moved to adopt Resolution 24-47. Councilor Corrigan seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Rapf, Corrigan, Afghan, Wendland voting `aye', (6-0). 8.2 Ordinance 2949, An Ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego Amending: The Economic Vitality Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan; the Connected Community Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan; the First Addition-Forest Hills Neighborhood Plan; the Foothills Special District Plan; the Lake Grove Village Center Plan; the Marylhurst Area Special District Plan; LOC 50.03.003 Use-Specific Standards; 50.03.005 Temporary Structures and Uses; 50.05.004 Downtown Redevelopment Design District; 50.05.007 Lake Grove Village Center Overlay District; 50.06.002 Parking; 50.06.003 Circulation and Connectivity; 50.06.004 Site Design; 50.07.005 Review Procedures; 50.07.004 Additional Submission Requirements; 50.07.005 Conditional Use Permits; 50.08.001 Introduction to Variances; 50.10.003 Definitions; and Adopting Findings (LU 24-0025). Attorney Osoinach reviewed the hearing procedures and confirmed no Councilor wished to declare a financial conflict of interest. Mr. Olson presented the Council report via PowerPoint, providing background on the citywide parking reforms prompted by the State's Climate Friendly and Equitable Community(CFEC)rules. He reviewed the Council's unanimous preference to repeal all parking mandates to comply with Phase B of the rules, presented an overview of work completed to date, and discussed the Comprehensive Plan and Code amendments proposed to comply with applicable CFEC rules. The Code amendments did not address changes to on-street parking, though the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) had notified the City it would need to adopt regulations in the future. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8 December 3, 2024 Council was asked for feedback on the climate mitigation actions required for the development of new surface parking lots of '/2 acre or larger. Staff had originally proposed three options for developers to choose from, but the Planning Commission did not recommend Option B, which would have required a $1,500 per onsite parking space in-lieu payment into a renewable energy fund. In a split decision, Commissioners expressed concern that there was no guarantee investments in the fund would be spent within Lake Oswego's jurisdiction. Staff brought the issue back before Council because investments in renewable solar and wind energy outside Lake Oswego could still benefit residents, and excluding Option B could be limiting, while including it would provide additional flexibility for new developments. Public Testimony • Deborah Linke (via video conferencing), First Addition resident, ceded her time to Brenna Vaughn. • Brenna Vaughn, First Addition resident, testified in opposition to the changes, citing concerns about State mandates and their potential impact on neighborhood character and safety, particularly in relation to a planned cottage cluster developments with no onsite parking. Lake Oswego lacked robust public transportation and circular routes through the city that would enable residents to live without cars. She urged Council to visit First Addition to assess the impact of the proposed changes firsthand and asked that the City add language to the Code to encourage neighborhood participation parking decisions, review home rule issues regarding public safety in the local community and implement parking management rules to ensure safety during construction. • Gayle Van Lehman, First Addition resident, testified in opposition to the proposed changes, citing concerns about safety, congestion due to construction, and changes to the nature of the community due to developments with no onsite parking. Attorney Osoinach noted for the record and the benefit of the public and Council that while there had been discussion about the specific middle housing application, that application was under appeal at the Development Review Commission. Council was not permitted to discuss that specific development or consider public testimony regarding the topic, as Council could potentially sit as an appeal body. Those testifying could not discuss that issue specifically but could address their general concerns and perceptions of parking requirements. • Bill Savage, First Addition resident, echoed the concerns of the previous speakers and added concerns about safety and crime associated with increased street parking. Councilor's questions and comments were addressed by City Manager Bennett, Mr. Olson, and Director Rooney as follows: • Protecting right-of-way emergency vehicle access would remain unchanged under the proposed parking regulations. Each proposed development was reviewed for compliance with fire access and safety requirements, and nothing about the proposed amendments would change that process. Theoretically, there might be more parking within the right-of- way, but the City would watch the use of right-of-way to ensure access for emergency vehicles. The City would need to observe how the situation developed when the new rules were implemented, and there were parking management approaches and enforcement provisions to address concerns, should the need arise. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8 December 3, 2024 • The City had temporary construction parking regulations in place and contractors needed to obtain City permits if they required use of the right-of-way for construction activities. Congestion was associated with construction, but all vehicles had to park legally regardless of the number or location. When there was significant activity and rules were not followed, the City or Police Department would step in to maintain open roads and prevent illegal parking. The tools the City had for construction parking would continue to be available. • Council would have a study session soon about managing right-of-way encroachments, which included rocks placed in the right-of-way by some residents to discourage parking. Rocks were not the only encroachment in town, and Staff needed policy guidance since Code Compliance Staff lacked capacity for self-initiated enforcement. The City investigated and addressed complaints about encroachments but did not proactively remove obstacles from the right-of-way except for vision clearance and traffic safety issues. While neighbors were often reluctant to do so, they could call about boulders in the right-of-way and the City would respond. • A handful of cities had filed a challenge to CFEC but lost, so the rules were in effect. The testimony earlier demonstrated the impact of House Bill 2001 compliance and the CFEC rules coming together. The CFEC parking rules had been in force in First Addition for quite some time, so the Council's action tonight would not affect that in any way. • Long term, the question would be whether the public sector had a role in providing parking if the private sector did not provide parking. Downtown, the City had provided centralized parking for people to walk in shops and restaurants and had discussed building centralized parking in other parts of the city. • It was possible that over time, the State might be interested in a less one-size-fits-all approach to parking, and other cities and entities had noted that cottage clusters without parking did not sell. Lake Oswego had to pay attention to whether there was an appetite to purchase a home in the city with no onsite parking since was difficult to live in the area without access to a car. • Lake Oswego could manage fee-in-lieu funds internally, though this might not be efficient and there likely would not be many large parking lots built in the near term, resulting in relatively small amounts of money. Managing the funds locally would increase administrative overhead costs and require tracking a new fund. Using the established State program would be more efficient, particularly since larger-scale projects had a greater impact on addressing global climate change. • Calculations for parking lots considered the actual surface inclusive of different landscape areas. There were concerns that a 40 percent tree canopy coverage requirement would create an additional barrier to development. Given that Lake Oswego was an established town with limited new development, planting along driveways was offered as an alternative to the 30 percent coverage requirement. The Code amendments included diagrams and explanations to clearly distinguish between driveways and drive aisles. • Parking lots had a baseline requirement of 30 percent tree canopy coverage which was not limited to the perimeter. The climate mitigation options under discussion would be in addition to that requirement, essentially requiring an additional 10 percent coverage. • Staff recommended allowing developers only one climate mitigation option for parking lots rather than combining options, although the State permitted combinations. There were concerns associated with quantifying and relating the requirements because the options were not equivalent measurements, and since parking lots were required to have 30 percent City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 8 December 3, 2024 canopy coverage regardless of the option chose, it would be difficult to get to an increment of 20 percent. Additionally, combining options would increase the administrative burden and it would be difficult to quantify the options in the Code in a clear and objective manner. • Council had to decide whether to include the fee-in-lieu option for 1/2 acre parking lots in addition to the other climate mitigation options. The City could not opt out of passing that portion of the ordinance due to significant risk of falling out of compliance. • The definition of how to measure surface parking area was established specifically for climate mitigation and compliance purposes. The canopy coverage calculation differed from landscape requirements, as much of the canopy would extend over hardscape areas. The calculation method measured tree coverage based on the diameter at 15 years after planting. The City maintained a comprehensive tree recommendation list that included guidance for various settings, including parking lots. Councilor Afghan acknowledged testimony concerning increased on street parking and suggested there were solutions the City had already implemented in some neighborhoods that could be duplicated in First Addition. Councilors noted that the Housing Production Strategy and CFEC rules were State mandates, and Staff had worked hard to minimize impacts while following guidelines. Council could not dismiss the mandates, and it was a challenge to balance parking concerns with housing accessibility and the City's goals for diversity and inclusion. After discussion, Councilors agreed to include the fee-in-lieu option for developers to allow for flexibility and to acknowledge that 40 percent canopy coverage may be difficult to achieve. Councilor Wendland moved to tentatively approve Ordinance 2949 with the Code amendments dated October 25, 2024, and direct Staff to return on December 17, 2024, with a final version of the ordinance, including findings and conclusions for LU 24-0025. Councilor Afghan seconded the motion. Councilor Afghan explained his decision-making process, noting that while the State mandate could not be rejected, he recognized the challenge of balancing neighborhood parking concerns with the City's goals for diversity, inclusion, and housing accessibility. Mayor Buck acknowledged the Council's support for enhancing tree canopy and ensuring commercial areas had enhanced canopies to improve overall health and livability. The goal was to balance these interests with making Lake Oswego an attractive place for investment and redevelopment. Lake Oswego's success stemmed from communication between the City, neighborhood associations, and business associations. With new policies emerging on both housing and climate friendly and equitable communities regarding parking, continued communication and adaptability would be essential moving forward. A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Buck and Councilors Mboup, Rapf, Corrigan, Afghan, and Wendland voting `aye', (6-0). The Council recessed from 6:54 p.m. to 7:09 p.m. 9. STUDY SESSION City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 8 December 3, 2024 9.1 2025 Master Fees and Charges. Director Cross presented the Council Report via PowerPoint, reviewing proposed increases based on various indices and providing a five-year utility fee forecast. Questions from Council were addressed by Director Cross as follows: • The water usage figures reflected the tiered water system's intended design from 2009. The City's plant could produce 16 million gallons daily for Lake Oswego, which reached capacity in summer months. A new dual plant with Tigard provided additional capacity and conservation efforts also contributed to usage patterns. • Staff was confident in the reserve numbers. The Street Fund, which used to have only $1 million to $1.5 million, now had $3 million in capital reserves. • The Street Fund collected $4.5 million annually and one percent of that was $45,000. Unlike the other three capital funds which were modeled for 20 years, the Street Fund increased by an index. • The City would be able to handle future adverse weather events. Staff calculated that winter weather events cost the City $500,000 to $1 million, which was lower than the $3 million capital reserve. Director Cross confirmed that with the Council that they did not wish to make any further changes or updates. Director Cross would return to Council on December 17 for a public hearing. 10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL Mayor Buck said the City's team did a good job on the tree lighting. The event was growing each year as more people heard about it. Councilor Mboup added that the Reunion Farmer's Market had been a great success and thanked members of the City's Staff for their work. Councilor Corrigan provided an update on the South Shore Fire Station Task Force which had toured recently built fire stations where the crews had been generous with their time and sharing their experiences. 11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS No reports of Officers were provided. 12. RECESS, CITY COUNCIL Mayor Buck recessed the City Council and Called to Order the Redevelopment Agency (LORA). The Redevelopment Agency (LORA) met from 7:27 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. 17. RECONVENE, CITY COUNCIL City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 8 December 3, 2024 Mayor Buck reconvened the City Council and requested the reading of the legal parameters for the Executive Session. 18. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Lake Oswego City Council will meet under authority of ORS 192.660 (2) (h) Consult with Attorney regarding legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed; and (f) Consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection. Attorney Osoinach read the legal parameters for the Executive Session. City Council met in Executive Session from 7:37 p.m. to 8:35 p.m. 19. ADJOURNMENT, CITY COUNCIL Mayor Buck adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kari Lin er, City Recorder Approved by the City Council on January 7, 2025. _ 1 oseph M. uck, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 8 December 3, 2024