MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tuesday, February 17, 1998

Council Chamber

Members Present:  Lisa Naito (Chair), Patricia McCaig (Vice Chair), Don Morissette

Members Absent:    None

Also Present:    Susan McLain, Ruth McFarland

Chair Naito called the meeting to order at 1:35 P.M.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 3, 1998, GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES

2.  STREAM AND FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION PLAN PRESENTATION

Chair Naito asked the committee if it would prefer to hear the presentation, then the public testimony, and finally an update on outstanding issues and the status of the advisory committees. The committee agreed.

Rosemary Furfey, Senior Regional Planner, presented a slide show. She said the purpose of the presentation is to give the committee a basic introduction to the key elements and products that have been developed as required by the Metro Council as a prerequisite to the implementation of Title 3, the Water Quality Flood Management Conservation Plan. She reviewed the background and salient points of the Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan and the performance standards for water quality. She directed the committee’s attention to the materials under item two in the committee meeting agenda packet.

Councilor McCaig asked Chair Naito how she wished to structure the committee discussion.

Chair Naito said the committee would hear an overview of Title 3 and its process. She said it would be acceptable for councilors to ask testifiers a limited number of questions. She said the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) is also working on Title 3 and will make a recommendation to the Council in March. Chair Naito invited the councilors to attend a public hearing on Title 3 on Thursday, February 26, 1998. She said she hopes the committee will finish its work on Title 3 by the end of March.

3.  PUBLIC HEARING ON STREAM AND FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION PLAN (URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONAL PLAN TITLE 3)

Chair Naito opened a public hearing at 1:54 P.M. She asked those testifying to limit their testimony to three minutes, if possible.

Doug Neeley, Oregon City Commission, 712 Twelfth Street, Oregon City, complimented the Council for addressing the issue of water quality. He asked the committee to remove the language on page five of the Draft Revised Performance Standards, lines 149 through 153, because ultimately, local jurisdictions are responsible for issues of takings. He asked that if the language is not removed, that the word “shall” be changed to “may.”

Jeffry Gottfried, Ph.D., Native Fish Society, spoke to the importance of preserving fish habitat in the Portland metro region. A copy of his written testimony is included in the meeting record.

Councilor Morissette said he is concerned that land taken out of development is not being replaced with buildable land in other areas. As more interests compete for a valuable resource, pressure will continue to build.

Mr. Gottfried asked the committee to go on record and say that it will either drive fish to extinction by following current land use practices, or that it will take the necessary measures to coexist with fish.

Robert James Claus, 22211 Southwest Pacific Highway, Sherwood, said Metro has not properly notified the City of Sherwood or its residents of its work on Title 3. He said Title 3 violates regulations of the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and prevents the City of Sherwood from achieving its density goals. He said Metro staff has not assessed the economic or land-use impacts of Title 3. He said Metro staff has not worked cooperatively with other government agencies, such as the Department of Fish and Wildlife. He recommended that Metro buy land in floodplains and wetlands, as he and others did privately in Sherwood. He said Title 3 is ineffective because it does not address pollution from dairy farms. He said the document is retroactive, confiscatory, takes out thousands of housing units from production without mitigation, and contradicts federal law. He said the three minutes allowed for testimony is insufficient.

Councilor McFarland said she agrees with Mr. Claus about the non-point pollution from dairies and beef cattle. She asked to speak with Mr. Claus at a later time to discuss his solutions to the problem.

Peter Teneau, Friends of Smith and Bybee Lakes, 2715 North Terry, Portland, stated his support of Title 3, but asked the committee to reduce the implementation time from two years to one year. He addressed four points of the performance standards: 1) he asked the committee to enlarge the width of vegetative corridors, 2) he said upstream and downstream corridors should be consistent and have equal protection regardless of drainages, 3) he asked the committee to clarify that the code language prevails over the map in interpreting compliance, and 4) he asked that the language under Section 7 of the Model Ordinance also be incorporated into the performance standards.

Chair Naito thanked Messrs. Neeley, Gottfried, Claus, and Teneau for their testimony. She submitted two electronic mail messages into the record. A copy of both messages is included in the meeting record.

Mike Houck, Audubon Society of Portland and the Natural Resources Working Group of the Coalition for a Livable Future, disagreed with Mr. Claus’s testimony and said that Metro staff has been actively involved with other agencies in the region. He agreed with Mr. Claus that purchasing land is an excellent tool for preserving water quality, but said that Title 3 increases the number of available tools to protect natural resources. He said he believes that the City of Sherwood has more stringent regulations for water quality than those proposed in Title 3. Mr. Houck submitted three letters to the public record, which are included in the meeting record.

Gregory Robart, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, said he supports the approach to water quality in Title 3. A copy of Mr. Robart’s written testimony is included in the meeting record.

Peggy Lynch, Post Office Box 1757, Beaverton, said she had just spent two hours listening to a discussion of Title 3 and water quality by the Washington County Board of Commissioners acting as the Board of Directors for the United Sewerage Agency. Ms. Lynch said it is critical that Metro’s legal counsel strengthen its findings. She said some local jurisdictions are asking Metro to assist in indemnifying should there be legal lawsuits. She recommended that the committee only consider this request if the local jurisdictions adopt Metro’s model ordinance in a timely manner.

Mr. Houck said that contrary to the testimony of Mr. Claus, the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife has supported Title 3 and participated actively throughout the Water Resources Policy Advisory Committee (WRPAC) process and Metro’s greenspaces program.

Chair Naito thanked Messrs. Houck and Robart and Ms. Lynch for their testimony. There being no further public testimony, Chair Naito closed the public hearing at 2:30 P.M.

4.  POSSIBLE COMMITTEE WORK SESSION ON STREAM AND FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION PLAN

Ms. Furfey said each jurisdiction will need to review its own code for compliance, and adjust the code as necessary. She reviewed the public involvement process. A copy of the Stream and Floodplain Plan Public Involvement Report is included in the meeting record. There were no questions from the committee regarding the public involvement process.

Ms. Furfey gave an update of the ongoing committee review and status of technical products. The Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) will make a recommendation to MPAC, and the Council will receive key products from both MPAC and WRPAC.

Councilor Morissette asked if there is a special exclusion for farmland. Ms. Furfey said agricultural land is excluded from Title 3.

Councilor Morissette said agricultural uses are a major component of sedimentary problems. He asked if similar regulations for agricultural land will follow Title 3.

Ms. Furfey said agriculture currently does not fall under the water quality review of the United States Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The Oregon Department of Agriculture has assumed the responsibility of bringing the agricultural community up to water quality standards, particularly as they apply outside urban areas.

Councilor Morissette said he does not agree that local jurisdictions have stronger regulations than those proposed by Title 3. He asked Ms. Furfey about the provisions in Title 3 for the remodeling of existing structures.

Ms. Furfey said line 189 of the Draft Revised Performance Standards, dated December 1997, addresses repair and alteration of existing structures.

Chair Naito asked that, due to limited time, committee members ask questions now and debate the topic further at a later meeting.

Councilor McCaig directed the committee’s attention to an article from The Sherwood Gazette titled “Metro’s plan affects some properties.” The article is included as part of the Stream and Floodplain Plan Public Involvement Report. She said the extensive quotes of city planners contradicts Mr. Claus’s claim that Metro did not notify Sherwood of Title 3. Councilor McCaig asked Ms. Furfey to explain the processes of MTAC, the Greenspaces Technical Advisory Committee (GTAC) and other advisory committees, and to explain why the Council is re-addressing issues on which it voted in November 1996.

Ms. Furfey said the Metro Council required WRPAC to develop two key products: the model ordinance and the map. WRPAC has spent a year-and-a-half developing these products. Based on information gathered in the development of the model ordinance and the map, MTAC and WRPAC members met together to revise the performance standards in order to make them more objective and comprehensive. WRPAC and MTAC were not directed by the Council to revise the performance standards.

Councilor McCaig said she supports technical improvements to documents. However, she asked why substantive issues are being revisited and brought back to the Council. She asked if there has been a recommendation to substantially alter the requirement on the stream management buffers. She said that was a substantial policy decision made by the Council, and asked why the debate is resurfacing.

Ms. Furfey said there is a key debate on whether to set prescriptive standards with regard to water protection. Councilor McCaig agreed and said that the Council had that debate and made its decision. She said it is inappropriate for independent advisory committees to reopen decisions made by the Council on substantive issues.

Chair Naito asked if Metro will require native vegetation in the vegetative corridors. Ms. Furfey said the model ordinance requires the use of native plants, as listed on a Metro native plants list.

Chair Naito asked if or how Metro is addressing non-point pollution such as herbicides and pesticides. She asked whether the Council could address the issue of agricultural pollution if it so chose.

Ms. Furfey said that in 1996, the Metro Council chose to adopt several methods to address water quality in a first step. Title 3 is a significant way in which Metro, as a regional land use planning agency, can address non-point source pollution, but it is not comprehensive. Other steps, which have been identified in the Regional Framework Plan, include more comprehensive storm water management and they will be addressed in the future.

Councilor McCaig requested majority and minority reports from the advisory committees. Ms. Furfey offered to provide that for both MPAC and the Council.

Chair Naito said she has asked Council staff to isolate the policy issues that are subject to debate among the advisory groups.

Councilor McLain said that WRPAC in no way tried to avoid the issue of non-point sources of pollution such as agriculture. She said non-point source pollution is a second-step issue, and is included in the proposed 1998/99 budget. She said Metro is working with other agencies that also have specific responsibilities regarding water quality. As chair of WRPAC, Councilor McLain invited the councilors to the next WRPAC meeting. She said staff has properly followed through on the original direction from the Council to finish the model ordinance and map. She said it is important to not restart the conversation on Title 3 without knowledge of its past history. She said she looks forward to a committee work session in which the committee members can talk together.

Councilor Morissette said it is inappropriate to exclude farmland from the same stringent requirements. He said he thinks the Title 3 requirements are tough, and he is concerned that they are frequently presented as inconsequential. He said he is concerned about the takings issue. He said it is important to have healthy rivers and fish in the region, but it is important to allow flexibility so that problems can be solved in more than one way.

Chair Naito thanked Ms. Furfey for her presentation.

5.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

There were none.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair Naito adjourned the meeting at 3:05 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Suzanne Myers

Council Assistant

i:\minutes\grwthmgt\02178gmm.doc

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 17, 1998

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

Oral Testifiers (testimony cards included)

Public Hearing on Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan

 Doug Neeley

 Jeffry Gottfried

 Robert James Claus

 Peter Teneau

 Mike Houck

 Gregory Robart

 Peggy Lynch