METRO COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tuesday, April 7, 1998

Council Chamber

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

Members Absent:    Don Morissette

Also Present:    Susan McLain, Ed Washington

Chair Naito called the meeting to order at 2:05 P.M.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF THE MARCH 17, 1998, GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES

2.  OREGON CITY COMPLIANCE PLAN

Brenda Bernards, Growth Management Senior Regional Planner, presented the Oregon City compliance plan. A copy of the report is included in the meeting record.

Councilor McLain asked if the City of Oregon City is expected to have a resolution passed by August 1998. Ms. Bernards said yes.

Councilor McLain asked how staff is working with Oregon City to help the city meet its targets. Ms. Bernards said she worked with Oregon City on its regional center planning and will work with the city on its corridor planning.

Councilor McLain said the committee and the Council will need to address the cumulative effect of the compliance plans that have been presented by staff. She asked if there is a running tally of how far short each jurisdiction if falling from its target.

Ms. Bernards said a tally could be created, but Oregon City is confident that it will recover its 2,000 housing unit deficit through its regional center and corridor planning. She said the studies that have been done only look at existing capacity, so it is difficult to predict the cumulative shortfall.

Councilor McLain said the information will become increasingly important as the work progresses.

Chair Naito asked when the City of Oregon City will return to the Growth Management Committee when it has the results of its regional center and corridor plans.

Mary Weber, Growth Management Senior Program Supervisor, said staff will analyze local jurisdictions’ compliance work plans, which detail the jurisdictions’ plans for meeting their deficits. She said the Executive Officer will prepare a report for the Council based on staff’s analysis.

Chair Naito asked if the committee can set a deadline to receive an update on the work. Ms. Weber said the Functional Plan gives jurisdictions until February 1999 to amend their plans. She said she will know in August 1998 if jurisdictions can meet the February 1999 deadline.

4.  RESOLUTION NO. 98-2627, FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING THE SELECTION OF HEARINGS OFFICERS FOR CONTESTED CASE HEARINGS

Chair Naito opened a public hearing. No one appeared to speak with regard to Resolution No. 98-2627. Chair Naito closed the public hearing.

Councilor McCaig said she remembers legal counsel’s previous explanation of the resolution, and feels comfortable voting on the resolution.

A copy of the amendment is included in the meeting record.

Councilor McCaig said she perceives the resolution as a housekeeping item. She said the measure was previously presented to the committee.

Chair Naito will carry Resolution No. 98-2627A to the full Metro Council.

3.  ORDINANCE NO. 98-732, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING QUASI-JUDICIAL URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AMENDMENT PROCEDURES IN METRO CODE 3.01.033, 3.01.035, 3.01.055, 3.01.065 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY

Larry Shaw, Senior Assistant Counsel, said this is a housekeeping amendment. He noted the new language on page two of the ordinance.

Chair Naito opened a public hearing. No one appeared to speak with regard to Ordinance No. 98-732. Chair Naito closed the public hearing.

Councilor McLain will carry Ordinance No. 98-732 to the full Metro Council.

5.  RESOLUTION NO. 98-2630, FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING MEMBERSHIP CATEGORIES FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Councilor Washington presented the resolution. A copy of a proposed amendment to Resolution No. 98-2630 is included in the meeting record.

Chair Naito opened a public hearing. No one appeared to speak with regard to Resolution No. 98-2630. Chair Naito closed the public hearing.

Chair Naito said she would carry over Resolution No. 98-2630 to a later agenda.

6.  STREAM AND FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION PLAN DISCUSSION

 ·  REVIEW OF METRO POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MPAC) DRAFT

 ·  LEGAL STAFF PRESENTATION

 ·  PUBLIC HEARING

Chair Naito said the Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan draft ordinance has not yet been first read in Council.

Elaine Wilkerson, Director of Growth Management Services, said she and staff would give an overview and background of the Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan.

Rosemary Furfey, Growth Management Senior Regional Planner, said the draft model ordinance and draft maps will be presented to the committee at its next meeting. She reviewed the work completed by advisory committees in the last two years. She presented the revised performance standards as recommended by MPAC and an updated public outreach report. A copy of the public outreach report is included in the meeting record. She explained a recommended change to a table in the MPAC Recommended Draft Revised Performance Standards. A copy of the staff-suggested format for Title 3 table is included in the meeting record. She said staff review of the model ordinance and draft Title 3 maps will be completed by the Council meeting on April 16.

Ms. Wilkerson reviewed the issues and concerns regarding Title 3. She highlighted the issues of existing development and Metro legal defense assistance. She said the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) has recommended focusing on existing uses rather than definitions by taking the language in Section 4.B.2(f) and including it in Section 4.D.2(c). She said it appears this solution will be acceptable to the other advisory committees.

Chair Naito asked Ms. Wilkerson to write up and submit the MTAC proposal. She said she would like suggested changes to reference the strike-out version of the MPAC Recommended Draft Revised Performance Standards.

Chair Naito asked Mr. Shaw to speak to the issue of Metro legal defense assistance.

Mr. Shaw said legal counsel has not yet looked at specific language or specific proposals for differentiating between the model ordinance and general defense. He said Title 8 would apply to all titles of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan), and not all titles have model ordinances. He requested policy direction from the Council. He said Dan Cooper, General Counsel, supports expanding Metro legal defense assistance for the general concept of defense by inserting the language into Title 8. Mr. Shaw said Mr. Cooper believes that Metro would want to help defend a local jurisdiction if a constitutional question is raised about its implementation of the Functional Plan.

Councilor McLain said the most appropriate place for the legal defense assistance language may be in Title 8. She said Metro should support all jurisdictions that adopt Metro’s model ordinance, regardless of whether they adopt it within one year or within two years.

Chair Naito said the original idea presented to the committee to give an incentive for early implementation is not realistically workable, as Metro would be involved in a legal dispute regardless. She directed legal counsel to draft the broader language and remove the language concerning early implementation.

Ms. Wilkerson said reviewed the issues of providing alternative approaches and agricultural coordination.

Chair Naito said she may propose an amendment to include the language, as smaller jurisdictions may not be aware of the breadth of the Department of Agriculture’s regulations.

Ms. Wilkerson reviewed the issues of property ownership notification and balancing land use planning goals. She said the strike-out and clean versions of the MPAC Recommended Draft Revised Performance Standards include all of the recommendations she reviewed, except for the MTAC recommendation regarding Metro legal defense assistance.

Councilor McCaig asked about property owner notification. She asked if the recommendation is to rely on public outreach or a similar process. She said it appeared the public outreach effort did not include individual notice.

Ms. Wilkerson said individual notices were sent to about 15,000 people who own properties in the vicinity of streams and wetlands. She said staff created the mailing list using postal codes to identify property owners who may be affected by Title 3.

Councilor McCaig said Metro may want to consider a more aggressive approach.

Ms. Wilkerson said the title provides for the correction of map errors, thereby allowing so that individual property owners to correct any errors they find after they are notified by their individual municipalities.

Councilor McCaig said she would review the provisions in Title 3 to see if they mitigate her concerns.

Councilor McLain said MPAC and the Water Resources Policy Advisory Committee (WRPAC) both went on record that they are not against public notification. She said MPAC and WRPAC’s intent is to notify individual property owners at the most appropriate time, after Metro knows the most it can about how and where property owners will be affected.

Chair Naito opened a public hearing.

Jane Graybill, Friends of Blue and Fairview Lakes, 21130 Northeast Interlachen Lane, Interlachen, submitted written testimony. A copy of her testimony is included in the meeting record.

Chair Naito asked staff to address the questions asked in Ms. Graybill’s memo.

Kelly Ross, Portland Home Builders Association, 15555 Southwest Bangy Road, Lake Oswego, asked the Council follow the recommendation of some MPAC members and direct Metro legal counsel to clarify the nature of implementation flexibility that will be available under the substantial compliance provision. He said if legal counsel determines that the definition of substantial compliance does not allow much flexibility, it will be important to notify individual property owners. He said the Council should not assume that local jurisdictions will provide individual notice, as there is no requirement in state law to do so.

Mike Houck, Coalition for a Livable Future and Audubon Society of Portland, directed the committee’s attention to a letter to the Council from seven state department heads concerning Metro’s Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan. A copy of the letter is included in the meeting record. He said Title 3 is an important first step, and is not by any means excessive. He said he is concerned about the timeline for implementation, and believes that 18 months is too long. He said there is still confusion concerning the protection of headwater areas. Mr. Houck said he is concerned that Metro will go so far out of its way to address the takings issue in Title 3, that it will not have enough flexibility when it addresses the other elements of the Functional Plan. He said there is sufficient flexibility in Title 3 as it is currently written.

Jean Ridings, Friends of Blue and Fairview Lakes, 21510 Northeast Blue Lake Road, Interlachen, submitted written testimony. A copy of her testimony is included in the meeting record. She said the Friends of Blue and Fairview Lakes received a $50,000 grant from the United States her organization has strong concerns about the process that was used to exempt the Winmar property, as it is completely included in the superfund site. She said to her knowledge, there were no public hearings, and neither her organization nor local citizens were notified. She said the Friends of Blue and Fairview Lakes does not understand how the Winmar property could have been deemed buildable: it was intended to be a wetland mitigation bank. She said her organization used part of the grant to hire a panel from Portland State University; the panel is in the process of creating a dimensional model of the aquifers. She said it important to consider that Fairview Lake is the headwaters for Gresham, Fairview and Wood Village, and they have never had sewer connected with their storm water. She expressed concern about the 18-month implementation, and said a number of developments will be built in the next 18 months, leaving nothing left to protect.

Douglas Bollam, Post Office Box 1944, Lake Oswego, said he has spent an immense amount of time working on Title 3, and the process has been very cooperative and progressive. He said it is important to notify individual property owners of Title 3, as was recommended by MTAC. Mr. Bollam submitted as written testimony a letter to the Growth Management Committee from Daniel H. Kearns, Esq., Preston Gates and Ellis LLP. A copy of the letter is included in the meeting record. Mr. Bollam also submitted as written testimony a letter to Presiding Officer Kvistad from John Fregonese, Fregonese Calthorpe Associates. Mr. Bollam said he supports Mr. Fregonese’s comments.

Liz Callison, WRPAC alternate member, said she would not be as concerned about the notification issue if she believed that Title 3 would in any way protect the stream on her property. She said she participated as a member of the Environmental Zone Committee in Portland, which is similar to the Title 3 overlay. She said the City of Portland did notify property owners and while the notification did slow down the process, it did not stop it. She said there was a lot of misunderstanding and some hysteria by property owners despite the notification, but they quickly relaxed after they understood that the overlay would not greatly affect what they could do with their properties. She said the potential backlash from not notifying property owners would be much worse. She said she is concerned that Metro staff has negotiated too much with local jurisdictions, resulting in an insufficient inventory. She said the public process for the exempted areas has not been good, and asked the committee to look at the process again. She said there is insufficient representation of affected property owners on WRPAC and MTAC. She said she sent a letter to each Councilor asking two questions about Title 3, but has not received any response. She asked for Metro’s legal analysis that defends delaying Goal 5 in Title 3.

Chair Naito said she would get back to Ms. Callison regarding her questions.

Irma Trommlitz, 515 Northwest 112th Avenue, Portland, said she supports the work of Title 3. She said she is concerned about the issue of notification. She asked for information on the appeal process for property owners. She said she that while she is wary of giving some jurisdictions too much flexibility, she acknowledges that one standard will not fit all situations. She suggested that Metro create a mediation team that would work with all the involved parties to informally resolve issues around development in water quality areas. She said that while it would be expensive, she would like Metro to consider creating a fund to purchase land if a solution cannot be found.

Mr. Bollam asked if there will be an additional public hearing in front of the Growth Management Committee. Chair Naito said she was planning to have an additional public hearing and work session on Title 3 at the next Growth Management Committee meeting. She said she has asked Councilors to submit their recommendations for amendments at the next meeting.

Mr. Houck reemphasized the conversation at WRPAC: if Metro decides to notify people, is should notify everyone. He said it would be unfair to notify only property owners because Title 3 will affect everyone in the region.

7.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

There were none.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair Naito adjourned the meeting at 3:00 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Suzanne Myers

Council Assistant

i:\minutes\1998\grwthmgt\03178gmm.doc

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 7, 1998

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

(continued)

Oral Testifiers (testimony cards included)

Stream and Floodplain Protection Plan Discussion

Jane Graybill

Kelly Ross

Mike Houck

Jean Ridings

Douglas Bollam

Liz Callison

Irma Trommlitz