Agenda Item - 2001-08-07 - Number 8.3 - 8.3
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY nRimint
MEETING DATE: August 7, 2001 (continu d from June 19, 2001)
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Recommendation (LU 01-0009), Am nding
Ordinance 2148, Which Adopted the City's Sensitive Lands
Protection Program
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Approve LU 01-0009 as recommended and direct staff to prepare findings and finalize ordinance
2293 for adoption. Council may choose to include additional staff changes.
Attachments are available for review
in the City Recorder's Office.
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT: June 7, 2001
Council Report (Heisler)
Not Applicable with Attachments:
B. Planning Commission
Findings
STAFF COST: $ C. Planning Commission Ordinance no.: 2293
Minutes
BUDGETED: D. Planning Commission Resolution no.:
Y N Staff Report
E. Plans/Graphics (None)
F. Written Materials Previous Council
FUNDING SOURCE: G. Letters (None)
consideration:
DEPT. DIRECTOR ASST. CITY MANAGER CITY'MANAGER
/a/ 4/Liw, e 1
ignoffidate Signoff/date Signoff/datei
1 2 :1 t1
LU 01-0009 cover memo August 7, 2001
TARE os,ve
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
OREGON
To: Doug Schmitz, City Manager
From: Jane Heisler, Community Planning Manager
Subject: LU 01-0009, Amending Ordinance 2148, Which Adopted the City's
Sensitive Lands Protection Program
Date: June 6, 2001
ACTION:
The action before the City Council is to consider a recommendation by the Planning Commission
to approve LU 01-0009, which would result in Distinctive Natural Area Standards no longer
applying to DNA sites that have been inventoried and evaluated and did not receive a sufficient
ranking to qualify for Sensitive Lands Overlay designation. The City Council would also direct
staff to prepare findings and finalize Ordinance 2293 for adoption.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On April 23, 2001, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on LU 01-0009 at which it
recommended approval. The Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit D) discusses the
request. The findings, conclusions and order found in Exhibit B outline the Commission's
decision. There was no public testimony at the hearing nor was there any written testimony. The
minutes of the April 23, 2001 Planning Commission meeting are found in Exhibit C.
When the City adopted Ordinance 2148, it provided for a phase-in period for the new Sensitive
Lands regulations. At the time of ordinance adoption, the City's existing Goal 5 protection
program identified and required development review for the City's existing Goal 5 protection
areas, which were known as Distinctive Natural Areas. The City did not want to create a gap in
natural resource protection during the transition from the City's DNA list and protections
provided to DNA resources in several City Development Standards, to sites regulated by the new
zoning standards for Sensitive Lands. Ordinance 2148, Section 5, therefore, required the "old"
DNA regulations to continue to apply to developments within the City on all DNA-qualified
Pagelof4 003
LU 01-0009,Amendment of Sensitive Lands Protection Process 1 2 5
lands not designated RP or RC until every DNA-qualified property had been reviewed for
designation pursuant to the new Sensitive Lands regulations.
Unfortunately, the consideration of all Sensitive Lands contested sites has proceeded more slowly
than originally anticipated, recently due to Measure 7 concerns. The City began reviewing
contested sites in 1998 and will continue on until the list is exhausted. It could be several more
years, however, until this task is completed.
Currently Staff has identified five properties that the City has reviewed through the Sensitive
Lands ESEE analysis as part of the process for designation with a Sensitive Lands Overlay which
have received a Habitat Assessment Score (HAS) of less than the minimum required according to
LOC 48.17.020. Given the way that Section 5 of Ordinance 2148 is currently written, owners of
these properties can not propose development without complying with the DNA standards since
the consideration of all potentially eligible properties has not yet been made. In effect, parcels,
which do not qualify for Sensitive Lands designation, are being restricted from development until
development restrictions are placed on other lands.
The proposed amendments to Ordinance 2148 would provide that if a parcel has been evaluated
pursuant to the Lake Oswego Sensitive Lands ESEE Analysis Methodology and did not receive a
sufficient ranking to qualify for Sensitive Lands resource designation, then the DNA standards
shall no longer apply to the parcel. Additional background information may be found in Exhibit
D, the Planning Commission Staff Report.
Staff would like to correct one piece of information in the Planning Commission staff report
pertaining to compliance with Metro's Functional Plan Title 3. In the staff report, it was
indicated that Metro has determined that the City is in "substantial compliance"with Title 3.
Rather, this should indicate that the City is in substantial compliance with Title 3, with the
exception of compliance with requirements for balanced cut and fill in the floodplain, inclusion
of the area of inundation for the February 1996 flood on the City's floodplain maps, adoption of a
water quality map and disallowing the storage of hazardous materials within the floodplain.
While none of the five Distinctive Natural Area sites (Exhibit F-5) that have been inventoried
and evaluated according to the Sensitive Lands Overlay criteria, are located on the Metro Water
Quality Map, or are located within the floodplain, four of the sites on the original DNA list are
noted on the Metro Water Quality Map (Exhibit F-6). While no city parcels are currently
protected under Metro's Title 3 Water Quality standards, if the City inventoried these sites under
the Sensitive Lands Overlay criteria and they did not warrant protection, under the proposed
changes,they would not be protected at all. Under the City's current Goal 5 protection program,
these sites are at least protected to a degree. At such time as the City completes its inventory and
adoption of water quality sites, then these sites would be protected under those standards.
Therefore, staff as developed some optional text that the Council may want to consider, to the
Planning Commission's recommendation of Ordinance 2293 as follows:
Section 5(3): (Planning Commission recommended changes in bold/underline and
strikcthrough. Additional Staff recommended changes in bold/double-underline and double
vtrikcthpa gh)
Page2of4 004
LU 01-0009,Amendment of Sensitive Lands Protection Process 1 2 6
The City's current acknowledged Goal 5 protection program amended by this ordinance
shall continue to apply to development within the City on all those lands which either
have not been evaluated pursuant to the Lake Oswego ESEE Analysis Methodology
jELOC 48.17.020(3)A] or, if evaluated pursuant to the Lake Oswego ESEE Analysis
received a sufficient ranking or otherwise qualify for application of an
RP or RC Overlay District [LOC 48.17.020(4), (5)1. In such event,the City's
current acknowledged Goal 5 protection program shall continue to apply to
development upon the parcel not designated RP or RC until every property determined
to be eligible for designation as RP or RC pursuant to the April 4, 1997,Lake Oswego
Resource Areas Report&ESEE Analysis has been reviewed for designation pursuant to
LOC 48.17.020 and a designation/non-designation decision has been made.
If the parcel has been evaluated pursuant to the Lake Oswego ESEE Analysis
Methedelegy-and not received either a sufficient ranking or otherwise qualify for
application of an RP or RC Overlay District upon the parcel, then the current
acknowledged Goal 5 protection program shall no longer apply to the parcel.
Exception: Any parcel that appears on the Metro Water Quality and Flood
Management Areas map as Title 3 Protected Stream or Stream Corridor, Title 3
Wetland or Wetland Buffer, Title 3 Slope Stream Buffer or Title 3 Steep Slope
Wetland Buffer, may not be removed from protection by the City's current Goal 5
protection program, until such time as the City of Lake Oswego adopts
implementing ordinances to adopt all or part of the Title 3 Model Ordinance or code
language that substantially complies with the performance standards in the Metro
Title 3, Section 3.07.340 and adopts either the Metro Water Quality and Flood
Management Area Map or a map which substantially complies with the Metro map.
At the conclusion of this review process, the City Council shall declare as part of the final
Order that concludes review that the Goal 5 Transition Program enacted as pursuant to
Ordinance 2148 Section 5 is complete. Upon the effective date of this order, the City's
current Goal 5 program amended by this Ordinance shall be abolished and shall be
replaced by the program enacted herein.
For purposes of applying this ordinance amendmentin the future, it should be
noted that:
1. Property which has not been evaluated may request an evaluation or
property may be re-evaluated. If the results of the evaluation show that it is not
significant, then it would qualify to be removed from Goal 5 protection the same as
if it had been originally evaluated,with the exception cited above.
2. By use of the term"current Goal 5 protection program" it is intended to
mean as that program existed at the time of adoption of Ord. 2188 in 1997, not as
005
Page 3 of 4
LU 01-0009,Amendment of Sensitive Lands Protection Process 1 2'i
the program now exists in 2001. This is an amendment to an ordinance and the
language should be interpreted as if adopted originally.
CONCLUSION:
LU 01-0009 as amended, complies with all applicable Statewide Planning Goals or
Administrative rules adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197, all applicable provisions of the Lake
Oswego Comprehensive Plan and the Metro Urban Growth Functional Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends approval of LU 01-0009. Staff has suggested additional
text that would extend the current Goal 5 protection program to DNA sites that may be
inventoried in the future, may not score high enough to receive protection under the Sensitive
Lands Overlay criteria and are also included on Metro's Water Quality Map.
EXHIBITS:
A. Notice of Appeal (None)
B. Findings, Conclusions and Order LU 01-0009-1416
C. Minutes of the April 23, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting
D. Staff Report—Planning Commission dated April 13, 2001
E. Plans/Graphics (None)
F. Written Materials
1. Proposed Amendments to Ordinance 2148
2. Ordinance 2148
3. Draft Ordinance Language
4. Ordinance 2293
5. Table of Distinctive Natural Areas Inventoried inventoried per Sensitive Lands
Overlay criteria
6. Table of Distinctive Natural Areas protected by Ordinance 2148 until inventory per
Sensitive Lands Overlay criteria
G. Letters
1. Neither For nor Against (None)
2. In Favor(None)
3. Opposed(None)
P/jane_h/case files/2001/1u 01-0009—sensitive lands/council report.doc
0a
Page 4 of 4 1
LU 01-0009,Amendment of Sensitive Lands Protection Process 2 8