MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tuesday, July 6, 1999

Council Chamber

Members Present:  Susan McLain (Chair), David Bragdon (Vice Chair), Rod Park

Members Absent:    None

Also Present:    Rod Monroe, Bill Atherton

Chair McLain called the meeting to order at 1:37 P.M.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 22, 1999, GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

2.  RESOLUTION NO. 99-2812, FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING URBAN RESERVE PLAN FOR AREA 43

Chair McLain noted the following items in the committee record: Resolution No. 99-1812 Exhibit A: Proposed Urban Growth Boundary Expansion, Preliminary Staff Report, October 30, 1998, Urban Reserve Area 43 (south of Tualatin); Site 43 Urban Reserve Plan, submitted by Matrix Development Corporation on October 27, 1998; and a letter to Rod Monroe from Lou Ogden, Mayor, City of Tualatin, dated April 22, 1999, regarding request for Metro approval of Urban Reserve Plan for URA 43 (23,000 Block, SW Grahams Ferry Rd., 2S1 35CB, 100). Copies of the above documents are included in the meeting record.

Elaine Wilkerson, Director of Growth Management Services, noted that when Matrix Development Corporation presented Site 43 Urban Reserve Plan to the Council in Fall 1999, the City of Tualatin had not yet reviewed the plan. She said the plan had since been reviewed by the city, and referenced the letter from the Mayor of Tualatin, a copy of which is included in the meeting record.

Ray Valone, Senior Regional Planner, Growth Management Services, presented Resolution No. 99-2812. A staff report to the resolution includes information presented by Mr. Valone and is included in the meeting record. He said there were no outstanding issues.

David Oringdulph, President, Matrix Development Corporation, noted that he disliked the term “subdivision” because Matrix Development Corporation developed neighborhoods and communities, not subdivisions. He said Site 43 would complete the neighborhood and allow for development of a park.

Diana Godwin, Matrix Development Corporation, gave an overview of the urban reserve plan for Urban Reserve 43. During her presentation, Ms. Godwin used oversized copies of Site 43 Urban Reserve Plan exhibits as visual aids. The presentation materials are included in the Urban Growth Boundary Amendment decision record (record numbers MAP-UGBA-6 through MAP-UGBA-9), and are located in the Council library.

Ms. Godwin reviewed the Site 43 Urban Reserve Plan. She noted a number of advantages to developing Site 43 and the parcel north of the site as a single neighborhood, including increased density, increased street connectivity and access, a looped water system, and protection of the riparian corridor, which would provide drainage. She said the current school district boundaries split the proposed neighborhood between the Tigard-Tualatin School District and the Sherwood School District, and Matrix Development Corporation solicited comments from both school districts on the proposed expansion of the urban growth boundary (UGB). She said next week, the Tigard-Tualatin School Board would vote on a resolution to move the school district boundary line to include Site 43. Following the school board’s action, the Washington County Education Service District, acting as the Boundary Board, would take official action, and the boundary would officially change as of July 1, 2000.

Ms. Godwin said the annexation process was progressing, and on August 23, 1999, the Tualatin City Council would amend its Comprehensive Plan, and the 45 day notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) was sent today. She said at the same time, the Tualatin City Council would adopt an ordinance to designate the zoning as RML, Residential Medium-Low Density, 6 to 10 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development plan would achieve 8 dwelling units per acre. She noted that there were restraints on the property due to the riparian corridor and increased street connectivity. She said it would be a small lot neighborhood with single, detached homes on lot sizes between 4500 and 5000 square feet. She said the homes would be affordable, based on the median income of the area.

Councilor Park asked if the legislation was in the form of a resolution because the area was currently outside the Metro jurisdictional boundary.

Mr. Shaw said no, this was an unusual situation in which the ordinance that adopted Urban Reserve 43 was an actual movement of the UGB, based on commitment to complete an urban reserve plan. The Matrix Development Corporation’s plan was 99 percent complete by the deadline. The ordinance that included Urban Reserve 43 was not appealed, and Urban Reserve 43 was already inside the Metro jurisdictional boundary. He said Resolution No. 99-2812 would approve the urban reserve plan the Matrix Development Corporation committed to do.

Councilor Park asked about the zoning of the land immediately south of Urban Reserve 43.

Ms. Godwin directed the committee’s attention to Exhibit 5 of the Site 43 Urban Reserve Plan, and said site 43 was surrounded by exception land.

Councilor Park asked when the construction was planned to begin.

Ms. Godwin said after Metro approved the plan, the site could be annexed by the City of Tualatin. She expected Tualatin to annex the land shortly after August 23, 1999, and said the application for annexation by the United Sewerage Agency would take place simultaneously.

Mr. Oringdulph said depending on market conditions, construction could start in 2000 or 2001.

Councilor Park asked if the term “Rain Tree Residential” used in the traffic impact analysis was the name of the subdivision or a development company.

Ms. Godwin said the traffic study analysis used the name Rain Tree to refer to the subdivision.

Presiding Officer Monroe asked for an estimate of the size and price of the proposed housing.

Ms. Godwin directed the committee’s attention to page 3 of Exhibit 10. She said the houses would average 1800 square feet and sell for between $194,000 and $197,000, depending on market factors.

Councilor Atherton asked how regional transportation facilities would be impacted by the development.

Ms. Godwin directed Councilor Atherton’s attention to Exhibit 12, a letter from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). She said the signalized intersection of 95th and Boones Ferry Road was operating near capacity, and would be impacted by the development. However, she said an upgrade was planned for the intersection which would bring the Level of Service (LOS) to an acceptable level D.

Councilor Atherton asked if the development would connect to any regional pathway system.

Mr. Oringdulph said the city park to the north of Site 43 would include pedestrian pathways and would eventually connect to Iboch Park in the City of Tualatin.

Councilor Bragdon asked if Site 43 would be served by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue.

Ms. Godwin said the Urban Reserve Plan did not state who the service provider would be, but she remembered that it had not been a problem.

Councilor McLain will carry Resolution No. 99-2812 to the full Metro Council.

3.  URBAN GROWTH REPORT

Chair McLain asked for a status report on the Urban Growth Report.

Ms. Wilkerson said Growth Management Services staff had been meeting with interest groups that wanted to better understand the first-run numbers. She said staff was also giving presentations to the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) and the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC). She said staff would begin preparing the actual Urban Growth Report, based on the directions given by the Growth Management Committee. She said the goal was to have the report ready in August so that it was available during the public hearings in September.

Chair McLain said she would include the Urban Growth Report on each Growth Management Committee agenda, to allow committee members to ask questions or give staff further direction on the report. She confirmed that the committee needed the final version of the Urban Growth Report in August 1999.

After some discussion, the committee agreed to describe the sensitivity of the Urban Growth Report as a range of 19-21 years, rather than only describing it as plus or minus 10,000 dwelling units.

Councilor Bragdon noted that the placeholder for environmentally constrained lands was causing confusion. He recommended that the Council consider a resolution or other action to clarify that the placeholder simply recognized the current uncertainty. He said a resolution could be modeled after Resolution No. 97-2562B, the “Green Resolution.” A copy of Resolution No. 97-2562B is included in the meeting record.

Chair McLain said the purpose of Resolution No. 97-2562B was to state that Metro understood that some environmentally sensitive lands were calculated as buildable simply because they were not protected by regulation. She asked the committee for direction.

The committee agreed to update Resolution No. 97-2562B and create a new resolution for Council action.

Chair McLain directed Michael Morrissey, Senior Council Analyst, Larry Shaw, Senior Assistant Counsel, and Ms. Wilkerson to draft the new resolution for the next committee meeting.

Councilor Park asked how land that is no longer buildable due to its Title 3 designation is viewed in terms of property tax.

Dan Cooper, General Counsel, said the county assessor is supposed to reflect the fair market value of the property, so if adopted legislation diminishes the fair market value, the assessor is supposed to take that into account. Until the assessors begin adjusting values based on Title 3, it is impossible to know how property will be affected. He added that if a property’s market value is less than its assessed value, the owner can appeal. He said Title 3 provides an exemption for anyone whose property would be rendered unbuildable because it was wholly within a Title 3 restriction. Metro’s inventory showed that 88 properties would be wholly within a Title 3 restriction, and the Openspaces Acquisition Department was asked to consider those properties for acquisition. He said while Metro can affect market values by its regulations, Metro cannot so greatly diminish the market value as to render it valueless, and therefore result in a taking.

Councilor Park said Metro did not appear to have a policy for situations in which the fair market value was merely diminished.

Mr. Cooper said Metro did not know what the fair market value effect would be, due to the possibility of density transfers. He said if in reality, the market value did decrease, the assessor would will take that into account.

Councilor Park said at a later date, he would like to ask about timing.

4.  LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (LCDC) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF METRO REGIONAL FRAMEWORK PLAN

Mr. Shaw said LCDC acknowledgment of Metro’s Regional Framework Plan was delayed until litigation on the housing element concluded. He said he met with LCDC on June 25, 1999, to discuss how to approach acknowledgment of Metro’s Regional Framework Plan. A copy of the document, Acknowledgment of Metro’s Regional Framework Plan: June 25, 1999, Discussion before the Land Conservation and Development Commission, and the document, Legal Effect of RUGGO and Regional Framework Plan Acknowledgment, include information presented by Mr. Shaw and are included in the meeting record.

Mr. Shaw said while LCDC eventually understood Metro legal counsel’s argument that Metro’s Framework Plan was not a regional “comprehensive plan,” and therefore there was no requirement for separate acknowledgment of Framework Plan components, discussions with Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) staff have been less successful. He said LDCD did not make a final decision at its June 25, 1999, meeting, and DLCD staff was expected to request a postponement until September for continued discussion.

Chair McLain thanked Mr. Shaw, and said his report was encouraging. She asked Mr. Shaw to update the committee on any developments.

5.  RESOLUTION NO. 99-2815, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A RESPONSE TO ESA LISTINGS FOR SALMON AND STEELHEAD, WITHIN A NATURAL RESOURCE AND WATERSHED POLICY FRAMEWORK

Chair McLain presented Resolution No. 99-2815. A staff report to the resolution includes information presented by Chair McLain and is included in the meeting record. She said her goal with Resolution No. 99-2815 was for the Council to demonstrate leadership and commitment in the integration of Metro’s watershed projects. She said the committee would not act on the resolution until at least August, to allow time for review and discussion of possible amendments. She thanked Mr. Morrissey for his work on Resolution No. 99-1815.

David Moskowitz, Salmon Recovery Coordinator, said Resolution No. 99-2815 would go before the internal steering committee for review and comment. He updated the committee on an information workshop on the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for elected officials and planning commissioners, scheduled for Wednesday,
July 14.

Councilor Bragdon said he supported Resolution No. 99-2815, and recommended highlighting Metro’s current efforts in the resolution. He suggested directing the Executive Officer to integrate Metro’s internal programs, such as Title 3, Goal 5, and Openspaces Acquisition. He recommended amending the language in the resolution to state that Metro will work to improve the ecosystems that support listed species. Finally, he recommended changing the word “state” to “states” in the resolution to reflect the involvement of Washington State.

Chair McLain thanked Councilor Bragdon for his comments and asked Mr. Morrissey to address Councilor Bragdon’s concerns. She asked the committee and Mr. Moskowitz to direct any suggestions for amendments through Mr. Morrissey to prevent redundancy.

Councilor Park noted that the word “responsibility” was not included in the resolution. He said while Metro was not directly responsible, the policies it enacted did make it responsible. For example, Metro could not pass a policy in its 2040 Concept that would be detrimental to fish and wildlife habitat.

Chair McLain said due to the ongoing conversations on ESA and Goal 5, she did not think it was appropriate at this time to list possible regulatory solutions in the resolution itself. She directed Councilor Park’s attention to Attachment A to the staff report for Resolution No. 99-2815, which listed possible solutions that would include regulatory authority at the Metro level.

Councilor Park said he was not as concerned about Metro’s regulatory authority as he was about simply stating in the resolution that Metro had a responsibility.

Chair McLain asked Mr. Morrissey to add Councilor Parks’ recommendation to the list of possible amendments.

6.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

There were none.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair McLain adjourned the meeting at 3:08 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Suzanne Myers

Council Assistant

i:\minutes\1999\grwthmgt\07069gmm.doc

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 6, 1999

The following have been included as part of the official public record: