MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL

COMMUNITY PLANNING COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING

Tuesday, October 15, 2002

Tualatin High School Lecture Hall

22300 SW Boones Ferry Rd, Tualatin

Members Present:  Rod Park (Chair), David Bragdon, Rex Burkholder, Carl Hosticka, Susan McLain, and Rod Monroe

Members Absent:  Bill Atherton was excused.

1.  CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. Chair Park called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. and he welcomed the audience to the public hearing; he then introduced the committee members. Councilor Hosticka welcomed the other committee members to Tualatin. He told the audience that the committee was interested in hearing about people’s individual properties as well as their opinions about what the decision regarding the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) would mean to their community, neighborhood, and to their quality of life. He said that it was good to see so many people taking an interest in the issue.

2.  OVERVIEW OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AMENDMENT PROCESS. Chair Park spoke of the seven public hearings being held around the region to get citizen input. He gave an overview of the outreach and notification efforts to date to make sure citizens were notified of the hearings and the decision making process. He said Metro must first look at what land was inside the Urban Growth Boundary and if Metro couldn't meet the 20-year land supply need, and then it was required to move the Urban Growth Boundary. He noted that the voters have said they want to protect neighborhoods, natural resources, as well as farm and forestland. Metro had to balance competing goals and the strategies for getting there. Chair Park talked about town centers and planning for growth rather than ignoring it. He briefed the audience on Executive Officer Burton's recommendation.

Andy Cotugno, Planning Director, gave an overview of the Executive Officer’s recommendation which had three major components. First, an overall forecast establishing the need, how much could be accommodated in the existing boundary, and how much the shortfall was which would be accommodated by expansion. The second component had to do with Metro's code ensuring using land within the existing boundary as efficiently as possible. There were proposals to ensure that industrial land was not wasted in use for non-industrial purposes and that it was being reused and that land was redeveloped land in Centers as much as possible in order to avoid the need for expansion onto additional vacant land. The third component was the UGB expansion itself and the hierarchy of the state rules that apply. Mr. Cotugno talked about the growth need, population forecast, housing unit shortfall, industrial lands, job lands shortfalls, and lands adjacent to the urban growth boundary. He spoke to state requirements concerning what lands must be considered first. He reviewed the specific areas that the Executive Officer had recommended such as Damascus.

Chair Park invited Mayor Ogden to speak.

Mayor Lou Ogden, City of Tualatin, 18880 SW Martinazzi Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062-7092 welcomed the Community Planning Committee to Tualatin and expressed his pleasure that they were conducting the hearings, especially locally. He noted that the areas around Tualatin were significant. One of his concerns for Tualatin, he said, from a residential standpoint, encompassed a core area, and then extended downtown and to the north and west. He said he had been told over the years that some of the folks in the eastern part of the area, which was in another county and school district, hadn’t felt as integrated in the community as those in the central area. He said he was concerned about developing a residential appendage and the Tualatin council felt that residential expansion to the east was not in the best interest of Tualatin. The southwest area was an enclave, and if that area were to develop residentially, then it would also be a disconnected part of the community. Therefore, the City of Tualatin was not supporting residential development in those two areas.

Tualatin would support additional light manufacturing and commercial development, Mayor Ogden said, as a logical extension of their industrial area. It would also create an important transportation link. He said he felt that study area 42 would develop at some point in time. He said he was referring to south of the Tualatin River, to the north of I-205 and west to the Tualatin city limit. He stressed that the City of Tualatin did not say that those areas needed to be brought in now, but that when it did happen, they would like to be the governing body for that area. Again, Mayor Ogden indicated that Tualatin felt the appropriate use of those locations was as a job-based area, for commercial office space, for research and development, and/or for high-tech manufacturing. He said that there had been a long-standing tendency to keep a separation between the communities, and he thought that would continue.

Chair Park talked about notice given to the public. He indicated that if individuals wanted to know if their property was considered, they should talk with available planning staff. He also noted the options for individuals to testify, and he then gave an overview of the decision making process with the final decision being made in December.

Councilor Keith Mays, Sherwood City Council, 20 NW Washington, Sherwood, OR 97140 said that the Sherwood City Council had corresponded with the Metro Council over the past year regarding their interest and needs for Sherwood. He said Sherwood had looked at the expansion areas specifically for school and park needs. Councilor Mays said that Mayor Cottle, at the beginning of the year, had requested that Metro consider only those amendments to the UGB that provide solutions to transportation problems and contribute land for schools. Sherwood had also written requesting extensions for Adams Avenue and Teal Road. The city decided to table the proposal of park sites and the school district did not commit to the site, he said. Mike Burton’s recommendations for the UGB did not include the potential school site – additional land south of the school site, and a small parcel adjacent to general industrial land in the far northeast corner of the school. Sherwood had also submitted a letter in August to the Metro Council requesting a committee be created consisting of Sherwood, Tualatin and Wilsonville to look at the land between their areas to see how it should be developed. Those areas mentioned above were the areas that Sherwood wanted considered, and Councilor Mays said Sherwood felt a need for time to absorb the growth they had experienced in the last few years. Also, he said they wanted to focus on developing a road alignment/bypass south of Sherwood to connect to 99W.

Dave Wechner, Planning Director, City of Sherwood, 20 NW Washington, Sherwood, OR 97140 submitted two maps of developable lands in Sherwood (both included as a part of this record).

Councilor Hosticka asked if Councilor Mays had requested keeping Adams Road in but taking the school out. Councilor Mays said that was correct, and that the official position of the school district, and the city, was not to commit to the land. The land was still on the city’s master plan for future development, as it was a ripe site for future school growth. Councilor Hosticka asked if they were advocating bringing it in now. Mr. Mays said no.

Mr. Wechner said that the main thrust for now was to improve the transportation situation and make something available for schools. Sherwood had been one of the fastest growing cities in Oregon, and the residential growth had outstripped the school district’s ability to find adequate school sites. He discussed the maps and pointed out the sites he had been talking about to the councilors.

Bud Wilkenson, King City Council President, 15300 SW 116^th Ave., King City, OR 97224 addressed area 62, which borders King City on the west. Study area 62 was a natural and contiguous extension of their present area, he said, which was area 47. King City can only expand to the west of 137^th Ave. Jurisdictional boundaries on all other sides prevent them from expanding in any other direction. They have developed, or plan to develop, all the land within their boundaries. They would like to be allowed to plan and develop this area to improve the community and the King City economy. They strongly urge Metro to incorporate the 15.39-acre portion of tax lot 191 on the southern portion of study area 47 in the UGB. This area had been inadvertently left out of study area 47 and split that tax lot, Councilor Wilkenson said, and should have been included. King City would like to see this discrepancy corrected, and the King City council strongly urges the Metro council to consider study area 62 in the expansion.

Gerry McReynolds, King City Councilor, 15300 SW 116^th Ave., King City, OR 97224 said that King City had voted on the recommendation of study area 62 and the tax lot. The majority of councilors voted for inclusion (there was 2 abstainers). He said that they as a city urge that study area 62 be considered. Councilor Hosticka said that the proposal for study area 62 did include that portion as well as the right of way; both of their recommendations.

Chair Park then asked the Metro councilors to introduce themselves to the audience.

3.  DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 02-969, For the Purpose of Amending the Metro Urban Growth Boundary, the Regional Framework Plan and the Metro Code in order to increase the capacity of the Boundary to Accommodate Population Growth to the Year 2022; and Declaring an Emergency.

Chair Park opened a public hearing on Draft Ordinance No. 02-969.

Adelle Jenike, Sherwood Property Owner, 16055 SW Boones Ferry Rd., Lake Oswego, OR 97035 spoke for the following people, who yielded their time to her: John A. Yeager, 17601 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140; Eleanor Yeager, 17601 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140; Teresa Jaynes-Lockwood, PO Box 1471, 17495 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140; Josef Fennerl, 24305 SW Old Hwy. 99W, Sherwood, OR 97140; Richard Scott, 17433 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140; Linda Scott, 17433 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140. Ms. Jenike read from a bound report, Request for UGB Inclusion, Northern Portion of Areas 54 and 55 (Tier 1), Sherwood, Oregon (included as a part of this record). Councilor Monroe asked Ms. Jenike how she would respond to the City of Sherwood indicating that they were not ready to develop this land yet. Ms. Jenike responded that they it should be brought into the UGB now with conditions and restrictions placed on the property whereby it would be available/useable by the City of Sherwood when needed. She advised that many of the property owners would be willing to work with Metro staff to compose the conditions and provisions so that it would not be developable until the City of Sherwood needed it. Councilor Monroe asked if she would be supportive of restrictions that would protect right-of-way for the proposed new highway. Ms. Jenike said that they would have to be supportive. Councilor McLain asked her if she believed that with bringing it in there might be an alignment for that road chosen more quickly since there would be a reason to settle that issue. Ms. Jenike said absolutely. She also said that there was an interest on the part of many people as the southern alignment would be more acceptable than the northern alignment, which was next to the Tualatin Valley Wildlife Refuge. The proposed area would be far enough away from the refuge, and would not affect it in any manner.

Bruce Vincent, Bedsaul/Vincent Consulting, LLC, 825 NE 20^th, Suite 300, Portland, OR 97232 said he was representing the South Grahams Ferry Business Group, made up of three land owners along Grahams Ferry Road. He discussed areas of Wilsonville, study area 49, and the Coffee Creek Correctional Facility. He said the area that they were concerned with was directly south of the south edge of study area 49 on Grahams Ferry Road. These owners’ land comprised approximately 15 acres of land, and they were part of the exception lands. He said that he would submit more written testimony over the next few days. Those lands were all zoned MAE, which was a restricted zone. He read from his Summary of Oral Testimony (included as a part of this record).

Councilor Hosticka said that he had received some communication from the City of Wilsonville, and that he did not think it included this property. He asked if Mr. Vincent knew what their thoughts about it were, since they were not present to discuss it. Mr. Vincent responded that he did not want to speak on Wilsonville’s behalf, and he said he thought that they might assume that the infrastructure had to be available right now. Whereas, the business owners felt that it did not need to be right here right now but that it could be provided, when it was available.

David L. Selby, Shaw West Co/Grahams Ferry Investments, 25965 SW Grahams Ferry Rd, Sherwood, OR 97045 said the south property line of their property was also the county line between Washington and Clackamas counties. He said that to partly answer Councilor Hosticka’s question – Wilsonville was a Clackamas County city, that they happen to be on the Washington County side of that line. Also, he said they are located so remotely from the county seat that the county overlooks their concerns. They were worried that they would end up in a black hole between the two counties. They felt that their proposal would be a viable use of the property, especially since it is no longer used as farm property, and not developable as residential property. Mr. Selby submitted written testimony, which is included as a part of this record.

John Van Grunsven, 614 E Main St., Hillsboro, OR 97123 said he owned property in study area 77. He said there were approximately 120 properties in that area, and that he was a proponent for inclusion of these properties into the UGB. He said that he was aware of opposition to more modern infrastructure there, but he felt that those people had better septic systems. The land out by 334^th Avenue, the most eastern subdivision in area 77, was planted in 1908. These are very old septic systems and that area also has inadequate storm run-off facilities. Councilor McLain asked if he had talked to the City of Cornelius. Mr. Van Grunsven replied that someone had spoken with them on his group’s behalf. Councilor McLain asked if they had indicated that they would be willing to look into this issue. He said yes.

Jackie Maisano, Tonquin Industrial Group, 2139 SE Tibbetts St., Portland 97202 expressed her support of the expansion of Tualatin. Ms. Maisano read from her notes to the council members (included as a part of this record). Councilor Burkholder asked Ms. Maisano what study areas she was referring to, and she responded that they were portions of areas 47, 48 and 49. Chair Park asked if it was all exception land or a combination, and Ms. Maisano said that it was all exception land. Councilor Hosticka commented that they should be clear about what area they meant, because the Tualatin proposal included resource land. Ms. Maisano responded that they supported all of Tualatin’s plans, including the Tonquin Industrial Group. Chair Park asked her to clarify that with Metro Planning staff afterwards.

Nick Storie, 2617 NE 24^th Ave., Portland, OR 97212 said he was a member of the Tonquin Industrial Group, and that he supported including the group in the expansion area. Mr. Storie read from his notes to the committee (included as a part of this record).

Mark Brown, Brown Transfer/McCamant Properties, PO Box 1166, Tualatin, OR 97062 said he was also a member of the Tonquin Industrial Group, and he summarized his comments for the committee (included as a part of this record). Councilor Monroe asked Mr. Brown if he would object to restrictions protecting that right-of-way on the I-5 connector (which Councilor Monroe said he had a strong interest in as it was in the Metro Regional Transportation Plan [RTP]). Mr. Brown responded that he would not stand in the way of that road construction as he was in support of the road alignment. Councilor Monroe said that that highway was an important piece of the future RTP. He said one of the arguments against bringing that piece of property into the UGB was that it would get developed before that right-of-way could be protected. He said he felt that if Metro decided to bring those lands in, they would add a restriction to protect the future right-of-way. Chair Park thanked him. Mr. Brown, as a member of the Tonquin Industrial Group, also submitted a map (included as a part of this record).

Ed Christie, 17940 NE Hillsboro Highway, Newberg, OR 97132 said he was representing Terra Hydr Inc. and their principal, Mr. Henry Stukey. Mr. Christie said that they were also part of the Tualatin Industrial Group. He also referred to study area 48, and parts of areas 47 and 49. He said that it was no longer farmland, and they wanted all three areas included in the UGB. He said that aerial photos showed that the land was already in quarry use, and therefore it would not be used as protected land or for farming. He said he felt that the timing was good to bring the land into the UGB. Mr. Christie read from and submitted a letter he had prepared for the committee (included as a part of this record).

Steve Schell, 805 SW Washington #1900, Portland, OR 97205, an attorney representing Tualatin Industrial Group, said that the group was very much in support of the proposal put forward by the Tualatin Economic Development Director for the whole area to come in, and he submitted a packet of information (included as a part of this record). Councilor Hosticka asked about the area shown on the map in his packet that was labeled area 48, saying that area 48, as he understood it, was currently classified as resource land. Mr. Schell said that part of it was. Councilor Hosticka clarified that areas classified as areas 47 and 49 were exception lands and Mr. Schell agreed. Councilor Hosticka said that it was then possible that there would be legal hurdles if the Metro council tried to include the area that was designated resource land. He asked if it was two possible expansions, or was it one “take it or leave it” expansion. Mr. Schell responded that the people he represented want to come into the UGB. They need a sponsor, and the City of Tualatin should be that sponsor. Councilor Hosticka said that he and Councilor McLain had already agreed to be their sponsor. Mr. Schnell said that he did not think it was an impossible hurdle for this property. Chair Park asked if he was talking about an exception to Goal 3. Mr. Schell responded that it would be an exception for resource land. Chair Park pointed out that the exceptions process was not a process done by the Metro council but by the counties and he advised that the first step would be to go through the exceptions process through the county and then bring it to Metro. Mr. Schell said that he read the code differently, and that he thought the council could cover that and he recommended that Chair Park read the regulations. He said he would be happy to meet with the councilors and discuss it. Chair Park said he would check with Metro’s legal counsel.

John Boutinen, Engineered Structures, 7360 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite 101, Tigard, OR 97223-2305 said that they were running out of industrial land, particularly in that area. They did not believe that they have a 5-year supply and they strongly encourage the council to consider the inclusion of the exception areas in 47, 48 and 49. Mr. Boutinen said that this area was suitable for industrial use. It was not prime farmland, it had railroad access, was near I-5 and the owners in the area largely support being annexed. Builders and employers of these areas needed these parcels to grow without moving further out.

Eric J. Anderson, 18007 SW Belton Rd, Sherwood, OR 97140 spoke specifically about a section of Hwy. 99 at Roy Rogers Road. He referred to an 8-acre parcel that was split by the UGB itself. There was also a transmission power line that goes across the property, he said. The problem was that it isolates about 2-3 acres of EFU farmland. This parcel was within Metro’s plan for the commercial corridor around the 99W land. It was topographically isolated by a ravine on the north and west, by industrial land also on the west side, and by general commercial land on the south. He proposed that that acreage be added to the UGB. He had already submitted a letter to Metro requesting the land be included, and he said that the City of Sherwood was in favor of adding it. He said that there was a transmission line that inhibits to the east side of the property. Chair Park asked Mr. Anderson to point to the area on the map he was referring to.

Art Rutkin, River Meade, 14040 SW River Lane, Tigard, OR 97224 said that he was opposing study area 62. He said that the boundary correction and area 62 should be separate issues. One happened to be a park that the King City Council wanted to add to area 47. The other one was the area that he and his group were opposing, area 62. He felt that was a very important distinction.

Karl Swanson, River Meade, 14065 SW River Lane, Tigard, 97224 read from his notes to the councilors (said notes were later e-mailed to the committee clerk and are included as a part of this record). Mr. Swanson said he also opposed inclusion of area 62 in the UGB expansion. The Rivermeade Neighborhood doesn’t want to be brought into the UGB, and they have no desire to expand. He said they find transportation a problem in that area.

Debbie Walk, 14120 SW River Lane, Tigard, OR 97224 opposed the inclusion of study area 62, and the addition of 17,000 additional acres to the UGB. She said she felt that Metro had not come up with a viable traffic plan for the last 6,000 acres already added, so tripling that amount of land did not seem to be a solution. She said she also felt that the original 6,000-8,000 acres and 500,000 people were not going to just fall into Oregon in the next five years. She described study area 62 as a little block of land just off of Beef Bend Road with a sign that states the road is a scenic bypass. Year after year, development has eaten away at the scenic designation, she said, with 50% of it gone forever. Study area 62 was the last rural district in the City of Tigard. Those 165 acres are the last buffer between development and the Tualatin River National Wildlife Reserve. Ms. Walk said that there was a lot of wildlife living on that land. She said she felt that if it came down to them or the developers, the developers would win because they seem to have an endless supply of funds and an uncanny ability to change the rules to suit them. She asked the councilors to vote to eliminate area 62 from the UGB expansion, but to consider that area for wildlife study.

Dick Werth, Rivermeade, 14000 SW River Lane, Tigard, OR 97224 referred to a petition signed by nearly every property owner in study area 62 opposing expansion of the UGB to include Rivermeade. He felt that area 62 offered little opportunity for development. He also said that Mr. Mike Myer and his family (who could not attend) control about 47 acres within the study area, and also oppose inclusion of this area. Mr. Werth said he was astounded that King City had requested inclusion of area 62. He said he felt that the King City council had fostered an atmosphere that lacked candor, and that had been clouded in mistrust, confusion and deceit. He said he felt that the city had ignored and swept aside without the courtesy of comment the concerns or suggestions received from residents on both sides of former area 47. He said there were multiple lawsuits and appeals, and he suggested that Metro take no action that would serve to further reward King City for their mismanagement of the development process. Mr. Werth asked Metro to please not include area 62 at this time.

Councilor Hosticka pointed out that there was a sharp division and some deep feelings over that area. He said that they had received a grant from the state to do an assessment process to see if mediation would help. That process was just under way, and he wanted Mr. Werth to be aware of it. He said if that was not successful then Metro would have to act as King Solomon, i.e., where do we cut the baby.

Philip Lapp, 17400 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140 said he owned a 60-acre farm, which the councilors could find as study area 55. He said that the area was identified as Tier 1 land, and was not under Metro’s jurisdiction. The land north of Brookman Road was being considered for inclusion in the UGB, he said, and that it was farmland to the south and that he objected to inclusion. Mr. Lapp gave the following reasons: the City of Sherwood had stated that they could not serve that area’s infrastructure; Brookman Road could not handle the increased traffic that more development would create (he had not previously known about a bypass that was being considered for Brookman Road); Northwest Natural was pursuing a 24-inch high pressure gas line down the entire length of Brookman Road; he was actively farming his acreage. He said that he had a hazel nut farm there and that his neighbors to the north were a buffer to high-density Sherwood and his agricultural operation. He recommended that Metro not include that area in the UGB until a comprehensive plan could be included for areas 53, 53, 55. He also requested that Metro restrict Northwest Natural from constructing the high-pressure gas line. Chair Park commented that Mr. Lapp had marked on his testimony card that he was in favor of this instead of against. Mr. Lapp said he had been confused about the wording. Councilor Monroe stated that they had no jurisdiction over the gas company. Mr. Lapp responded that it didn’t make any sense.

Darren Pennington, 10365 SW Day Road, Sherwood, OR 97140 addressed study areas 47 and 49. He requested the committee support the inclusion of all of study areas 47 and 49 with two contingencies. If those areas were to come in, he hoped they would include a certainty about where the bypass would end up. Also, he wanted the borders of Tualatin and Wilsonville to be clearly defined. He said that Tualatin was gravitating south while Wilsonville was moving north, and at some point they would meet. He said that if areas 47 and 49 were brought in without those clarifications, he would oppose the recommendation south of Day Road that Wilsonville had included. He said he felt that Wilsonville would ignore those people north of Day Road and those impacted by the Coffee Creek facility. He said that Wilsonville had a jobs/housing imbalance and he did not feel that they needed more industrial land at this time. Councilor Monroe said that as part of Metro’s planning authority it could determine the route of that highway, but jurisdictional boundaries between cities was not in Metro’s purview. Boundaries between cities had to be worked out between the two cities with involvement from the county; Metro does not have control over where city boundaries are drawn.

LuRee Krygier, 13070 SW Jacob Ct, Tigard, OR 97224 urged the committee to include study area 62 in the UGB. She submitted a letter and packet to the councilors (included as a part of this record).

Kathleen Newcomb, 17515 Cheyenne Way, Tualatin, OR 97062 said she was speaking on behalf of her husband and herself and that they had strong objections to the inclusion of Borland Road into the UGB. She said she felt that the city analysis from the City of Tualatin was written only from the city’s point of view and says nothing about how to solve issues that were not city services. She said that the cost of widening Borland Road, according to that report, would be about $45 million dollars. It does not state, however, who would pay for that. She said she felt that the residents of Tualatin do not want to pay for that. Ms. Newcomb also expressed concerned about where increased traffic would go if high tech development moved in.

Councilor Hosticka commented on Ms. Krygier’s testimony, saying he felt that the testimony of the last few people showed what happens when piecemeal development takes place when it doesn’t have a plan attached to it. It creates messes where neighbor is pitted against neighbor and community against community. He said he did not favor that kind of expansion in the UGB, so he would look at all the proposals from that perspective.

Marjorie Easley, League of Women Voters of Clackamas County, PO Box 411, Lake Oswego, OR 97034. Chair Park asked Ms. Easley if her testimony would be the League’s official position. Ms. Easley responded that she was the Action Chair for the League of Women Voters of Clackamas County, and that this was their position. She read her comments to the council members (a copy is included as a part of this record). Their position concerns study area 42. They requested that the Metro council withdraw area 42 from inclusion in the UGB. Councilor Burkholder asked about the League’s examination of the UGB process. He said Metro requires concept planning of any area that was brought into the UGB before zoning occurs, and he asked if she was aware of what had transpired in Pleasant Valley. He wanted to know if she felt that that concept plan addressed those issues she had identified. Ms. Easley responded that she could not speak to that question at the moment because they had not studied that particular area yet due to the League expanding to the entire Clackamas County area. Councilor Burkholder said that they had just received the Pleasant Valley Plan the previous week and he felt that it was a good way to address her concerns about planning. Ms. Easley responded that those criteria should be met before any inclusion, especially for the Stafford Triangle area.

Councilor Bragdon said that this was the second time he had heard testimony about this with regard to area 42. He asked Ms. Easley about her reference to Clackamas County’s position regarding this area, saying that a week earlier he’d received a letter from Lake Oswego characterizing Tualatin’s view, and the Mayor of Tualatin had given testimony earlier in the evening, but Councilor Bragdon said he wasn’t sure if the mayor was expressing his personal view or that of the Tualatin council. Councilor Bragdon said that he would like to get clarification on what the jurisdictions actually want. Ms. Easley said that she had heard conflicting reports about Tualatin’s view, but that they know the commissioners of Clackamas County were in favor. Councilor Bragdon said that he had not seen that, and again stated that the Metro council needed to hear from the jurisdictions on their own behalf. Chair Park agreed and said that he had sent out a letter on behalf of the Community Planning Committee, requesting that the 27 jurisdictions involved express their official position on these particular spots. He did say that the Clackamas County Commission had taken official position in favor of area 42. Lake Oswego had taken a position against area 42, but no official position had been received yet from Tualatin.

Kent Seida, 17501 SE Forest Hill Dr., Clackamas, OR 97015 said he wanted area 37 included in the UGB, and he submitted a map and read from his notes (both of which are included as part of this record). The area was about 160-acres, he said, with no farmable land. He said land had already been taken from him for a school. He asked that the council allow the rest of his unusable land to be brought into the UGB. Councilor Monroe said that Executive Officer Mike Burton had recommended that Damascus be brought into the UGB, but the Metro councilors had not voted on it yet, nor had they taken a position on it. He said that Mr. Burton had not recommended Mr. Seida’s property, and that the Metro council had not voted on that either. He thanked Mr. Seida for making his case.

Matt Grady, Gramor Development Inc., 19767 SW 72^nd Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062 presented a packet to the committee (included as part of this record). He spoke about study area 42, asking the Metro council to include that area in the UGB. Chair Park asked who Gramor Development was representing, and Mr. Grady said a private property owner. Councilor Burkholder asked for clarification on the number of dwelling units proposed for area 42 and Mr. Barry Cain responded that it was just employment for that area.

Barry Cain, Gramor Development Inc., 19767 SW 72^nd Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062 spoke to the same issue and the same material submitted by Mr. Brady. Mr. Cain said that market support of this property was very high. He spoke to planning issues and how a plan cannot necessarily be made before the land is designated/zoned. He mentioned Borland Road and Stafford Road and the need to make improvements. He said he felt that land-use planning and transportation planning should be done at the same time. Councilor Hosticka asked about heavy industrial suggestions. Mr. Cain responded that it was not a good site for heavy industrial. He said it was better suited for office space. Councilor Hosticka asked, with the schools and churches locally, if Mr. Cain thought the area would be redeveloped. Mr. Cain said that the uses currently there would stay. Councilor Bragdon wanted to know if the site in question could be used for large lot industrial/manufacturing uses. Mr. Cain said for high-tech use, yes, but for industrial use, no. Chair Park asked if they were suggesting that the property/area come in as commercial land use and Mr. Cain said yes.

John Smithson, Clackamas County Economic Development Commission (EDC), 16265 SW Wilsonville Road, Wilsonville, OR 97070 voiced his support of Executive Officer Mike Burton’s recommendations for the additions as far as they had gone. He said he felt more land was needed to address an industrial land shortage. The Damascus corridor contains additional potential employment sites, specifically areas 10-19, he said. The EDC was supportive of inclusion of those areas into the Metro UGB at this time. This area would address the shortage for large industrial sites. In addition to industrial development, the county was interested in developing a complete community with a wide range of jobs and housing options, while protecting the environmentally sensitive nature of the area. He thought that the county commissioners had submitted a plan for an additional 800 acres. Clackamas County had a serious shortage of industrial land of 2,600 acres to meet the 20-year forecast. Industrial development was critical to a stable, diversified economy, he said. In conclusion, the Economic Development Commission encourages expansion beyond Mr. Burton’s recommendation in Clackamas County.

Craig Brown, Matrix Development Corp., 12755 SW 69^th Ave., #100, Portland, OR 97224 said he was the primary developer of area 47. He asked that an area between former area 47 and the river be brought into the UGB. This area had already been annexed into the City of King City as recreational open space, he said, and his group was proposing to develop that area into a city park, similar to Cook Park in Tigard. It seemed like an ideal use for a flood plain. They were not proposing additional residential development for that area. Once the park was in place that area would be administered by King City. Mr. Brown said his group would like to separate this issue from area 62 which had a lot of controversy surrounding it. He said the plan was supported by King City. Chair Park asked if this was exception land and Mr. Brown said he thought it was, as it was a flood plain.

Matt Fishback, 16305 SW 137^th Ave., Tigard, OR 97223 said he was opposed to inclusion of area 62. He thought that the primary reason for inclusion was to support secondary access for development of area 47. He said he felt that this was the wrong reason to include it in the UGB. This area was between Beef Bend Road and the Tualatin River, which was an environmentally sensitive area. He recommended that that area be kept outside the UGB.

Jean Stanley, 15025 SW 161^st Ave., Tigard, OR 97224 supported inclusion of area 63. She said she had already submitted her letter of request for the record. She said that her property was currently zoned as marginal farmland (in area 63). Adjacent properties had been developed as single-family subdivisions. She said that the UGB line ran down her driveway, with houses on one side, which supports inclusion of her property as there is already infrastructure in place.

Charles Hoff, Rosemont Property Owners Association, 21557 SW 91, Tualatin, OR 97062 said he was part of a group of six people and he submitted materials (included as a part of this record). Mr. Hoff said he and his group supported inclusion of areas 39 and 40. Councilor Bragdon asked for a copy of the citation for the OSU. Mr. Hoff said that the entire study was attached in the packet he’d submitted.

John B. Crowell, Jr., Rosemont Property Owners Association, 1185 Hallinan Circle, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 said he supported inclusion of the Rosemont area. He felt that the area was ideal for housing development.

John Crowell, Rosemont Property Owners Association, 14033 Amberwood Circle, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 said he supported inclusion of the Stafford Triangle, as residential property, in the UGB.

Greg Leo, Rosemont Property Owners Association, 11938 SW 25^th Ave., Portland, OR 97219 submitted material for Judy and Eric Eselius, Mr. Jack Johnson for the record (attached and included as part of this record). Also, he added materials from a 1998 proceeding (also included as part of this record).

Mark Fahey, Rosemont Property Owners Association/The Halton Co., PO Box 3377, Portland, OR 97028 said he supported inclusion of areas 39 and 40. He submitted written testimony (included as part of this record).

Councilor Bragdon asked if they would agree that there were industrial needs for the adjoining area. Mr. Crowell said that the whole area needed to be included, planned in a comprehensive way, with a balance between jobs and housing. Chair Park asked Mr. Leo the date on his submission of a newspaper article. Mr. Leo responded that the article was from the Lake Oswego Review dated October 3, 2002. Mr. Hoff asked Councilor Bragdon if he meant heavy industrial. Councilor Bragdon said that he wanted to understand if their plan was complimentary with testimony he had heard earlier regarding area 42. Mr. Crowell said his view was that the Borland Road area would be amenable for the industrial type of development, and then the north end of the Stafford Triangle would be suitable for residential development.

There being no further business before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Kim Bardes

Committee Clerk

PRIVATE TESTIMONY RECEIVED BY MACHINE RECORDING

Thane Tienson, 1300 SW 5^th Ave., Suite 3500, Portland, Oregon 97201, Attorney at Law, spoke on behalf of Joe Hanauer/Hagg Lane LLC, and said his client, a property owner in study area 69, supported inclusion into the UGB. Mr. Tienson spoke of the Hanauer 188-acre site and how at one time it had been farmland; however, it was no longer in agricultural use, or even capable of being farmed.

Joe Hanauer, c/o Thane Tienson, 1300 SW 5^th Ave., Suite 3500, Portland, OR 97201, property owner in study area 69, summarized key issues from the written testimony (included as part of this record).

Dallas Hovig, 17491 Blue Heron Dr., Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034, owner of 4.3-acres on Monner Road, east of 162^nd Avenue in the Damascus area (study area 15), said he supported inclusion of this area in the UGB. He noted that the property immediately adjacent was already in the boundary, and that with inclusion of study areas 10 through 19, they would become one contiguous area. Mr. Hovig also submitted a green card of written testimony (included as a part of this record).

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 15, 2002

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

Attachments to the public record for the meeting of October 15, 2002 (continued)

Attachments to the public record for the meeting of October 15, 2002 (continued)

TESTIMONY CARDS.

The following people testified:

▪  Adelle Jenike, Sherwood Property Owner, 16055 SW Boones Ferry Rd., Lake Oswego, OR 97035

▪  John A. Yeager, 17601 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Eleanor Yeager, 17601 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Teresa Jaynes-Lockwood, PO Box 1471, 17495 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Josef Fennerl, 24305 SW Old Hwy. 99W, Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Richard Scott, 17433 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Linda Scott, 17433 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Bruce Vincent, Bedsaul/Vincent Consulting, LLC, 825 NE 20^th, Suite 300, Portland, OR 97232

▪  David L. Selby, Shaw West Co/Grahams Ferry Investments, 25965 SW Grahams Ferry Rd, Sherwood, OR 97045

▪  John Van Grunsven, 614 E Main St., Hillsboro, OR 97123

▪  Jackie Maisano, Tonquin Industrial Group, 2139 SE Tibbetts St., Portland 97202

▪  Nick Storie, 2617 NE 24^th Ave., Portland, OR 97212

▪  Mark Brown, Brown Transfer/McCamant Properties, PO Box 1166, Tualatin, OR 97062

▪  Ed Christie, 17940 NE Hillsboro Highway, Newberg, OR 97132

▪  Steve Schell, 805 SW Washington #1900, Portland, OR 97205

▪  John Boutinen, Engineered Structures, 7360 SW Hunziker Rd., Suite 101, Tigard, OR 97223-2305

▪  Eric J. Anderson, 18007 SW Belton Rd, Sherwood, OR 97140

The following people testified (continued):

▪  Art Rutkin, River Meade, 14040 SW River Lane, Tigard, OR 97224

▪  Karl Swanson, River Meade, 14065 SW River Lane, Tigard, 97224

▪  Debbie Walk, 14120 SW River Lane, Tigard, OR 97224

▪  Dick Werth, River Meade, 14000 SW River Lane, Tigard, OR 97224

▪  Philip Lapp, 17400 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  Darren Pennington, 10365 SW Day Road, Sherwood, OR 97140

▪  LuRee Krygier, 13070 SW Jacob Ct, Tigard, OR 97224

▪  Kathleen Newcomb, 17515 Cheyenne Way, Tualatin, OR 97062

▪  Marjorie Easley, League of Women Voters of Clackamas County, PO Box 411, Lake Oswego, OR 97034

▪  Kent Seida, 17501 SE Forest Hill Dr., Clackamas, OR 97015

▪  Matt Grady, Gramor Development Inc., 19767 SW 72^nd Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062

▪  Barry Cain, Gramor Development Inc., 19767 SW 72^nd Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062

▪  John Smithson, Clackamas County Economic Development Commission, 16265 SW Wilsonville Road, Wilsonville, OR 97070

▪  Craig Brown, Matrix Development Corp., 12755 SW 69^th Ave., #100, Portland, OR 97224

▪  Matt Fishback, 16305 SW 137^th Ave., Tigard, OR 97223

▪  Jean Stanley, 15025 SW 161^st Ave., Tigard, OR 97224

▪  Charles Hoff, Rosemont Property Owners Association, 21557 SW 91, Tualatin, OR 97062

▪  John B. Crowell, Jr., Rosemont Property Owners Association, 1185 Hallinan Circle, Lake Oswego, OR 97034

▪  John Crowell, Rosemont Property Owners Association, 14033 Amberwood Circle, Lake Oswego, OR 97034

▪  Greg Leo, Rosemont Property Owners Association, 11938 SW 25^th Ave., Portland, OR 97219

▪  Mark Fahey, Rosemont Property Owners Association/The Halton Co., PO Box 3377, Portland, OR 97028

▪  Thane Tienson, 1300 SW 5^th Suite 3500, Portland, Oregon 97201

▪  Dallas Hovig, 17491 Blue Heron Dr., Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034

The following people submitted testimony cards but did not testify:

▪  Carl H. Johnson, Tonquin Industrial Group, 11635 SW Waldo Way, Sherwood, OR 97108

▪  Sam Kuhn, 905 York Road, Lake Oswego, OR 97034

▪  Don Byers, Land Owner, 2919 Greenbrae Dr., Lake Oswego, OR 97034

▪  John Skourth, 17010 SW Weir Rd., Beaverton, OR 97007

▪  George Diamond, 18380 River Edge Lane, Lake Oswego, OR

▪  Mark Hansen, Gramor Development Inc., 19767 SW 72^nd Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062

▪  Dean Sorensen, Gramor Development Inc., 19767 SW 72^nd Ave, Tualatin, OR 97062

GREEN YOUR OPINION COUNTS TESTIMONY CARDS submitted:

▪  Dallas Hovig, 17491 Blue Heron Dr., Lake Oswego, OR 97034, on inclusion of Area 15.

▪  Roger A. Kadel, 15475 SW 150^th Ave., Tigard, OR 97224, on inclusion of Area 63.

▪  Mark Brown, PO Box 1166, Tualatin, OR 97062-1166, on inclusion of more industrial land, primarily at Tualatin Quarry area.

▪  Eric and Carl Johnson, with Tonquin Industrial Group, 11635 SW Waldo Way, Sherwood, OR 97140, thanking Carl Hosticka for coming to Tualatin and looking at the Tonquin Industrial Group area.

▪  Ben Zoifaghari, 6333 SW 154^th Pl., Beaverton, OR 97007, on support for expansion around north Wilsonville area, specifically around corner of Day Street and Boones Ferry Road.

▪  Thomas L. Jones, 7580 SW Norwood Rd., Tualatin, OR 97062, on support of inclusion of Area 43.

▪  Linda Scott, 17433 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140, on support of inclusion of Area 55.

▪  David Goode, 21550 S. Wisteria, West Linn, OR, re opposition of inclusion of Area 37.

▪  Bev Feucht, 22715 SW 87^th Pl., Tualatin, OR 97062, asking that Metro be conservative about changes – preserve open spaces.

▪  Robert Wallington, 22995 SW Vermillion, Tualatin, OR 97062, in favor of current recommended boundaries.

▪  Teresa Jaynes-Lockwood, PO Box 1471, Sherwood, OR 97140, re property at 17495 SW Brookman Rd. – should be placed in UGB.

▪  Jackie Maisano, 2139 SE Tibbetts St., Portland, OR 97202 - supported inclusion of Tualatin Quarry area inclusion proposed by Regional Economic Development Partners; includes portions of areas 47 and 49.

▪  John and Eleanor Yeager, 17601 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140, supported inclusion of area south of Sherwood.

▪  Richard Scott, 17433 SW Brookman Rd., Sherwood, OR 97140, supported inclusion of Area 54, north of Brookman Road in southern Sherwood.

▪  B.A. Nordstrom, gave no address or phone number, Sherwood, OR 97140, on construction of roads in Sherwood before allowing more development; also wildlife habitat.

▪  David M. McGuire, 16670 NW Germantown Rd., Portland, OR 97231, in support of including of Area 47.

▪  Nicholas Storie, 2617 NE 24^th, Portland, OR 97212, said they would make major capital investments if they were out of the MAG zone.

▪  Bob & Donna Albertson, PO Box 1329, Sherwood, OR 97140, part of the Tonquin Industrial Group supporting inclusion of 4.59 acres at 23100 SW McCamant Dr. and a 5.12 parcel of land in close proximity to that.

▪  David L. Selby, PO Box 1427, Tualatin, OR 97062, support of inclusion of Area 49, also referred to submission by Grahams Ferry Industrial Group (see submission 101502cp-ph-04).