MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL

COMMUNITY PLANNING COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING

Tuesday, October 22, 2002

Clackamas Community College, Gregory Forum, Room 108C

19600 S Molalla Ave, Oregon City

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

Members Absent:  Rod Monroe

1.  CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. Chair Park called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. and he introduced Metro Councilor Bill Atherton, the District 2 representative. Councilor Atherton spoke, welcomed the citizenry and reminded them that no decisions had been made on this issue as yet.

2.  OVERVIEW OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AMENDMENT PROCESS. Chair Park gave an overview of the public hearings, the urban growth boundary (UGB) amendment process and the outreach efforts to the citizens of the region to notify them of the hearings and the process and he spoke to the 2040 Growth Concept. He then introduced Andy Cotugno, Planning Director.

Mr. Cotugno gave a brief overview of the UGB decision process. He pointed out on a map Executive Officer Mike Burton’s and the Metro Policy Advisory Committee’s (MPAC) recommendations, noting that the industrial land need would still fall short. He said that none of the recommendations had been acted upon, as yet.

Chair Park said the committee was there to listen to the citizens, particularly regarding parcels that did or did not meet state guidelines or goals and technical information that Metro may have missed. He encouraged the audience to talk with the planning staff outside the meeting room for technical information, and then he reviewed the testimony guidelines and the deadline of the November 1^st comment period to the committee. Chair Park spoke of the upcoming Gresham and Portland public hearings and gave those locations. He said that after the hearings the committee would go into work sessions prior to making their recommendation to the full Metro Council. The next opportunity to submit public testimony or testify would be before the Metro Council on November 21, 2002.

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.

Gary Hewitt, Oregon City Commissioner, 320 Warner Milne Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045, distributed a map of the Oregon City Commission’s recommendations for the UGB expansion (a copy of which is included in this record) and submitted four smaller maps (also attached and included in this record). He said the commission’s input into the process did not coincide the Executive Officer’s recommendation as the commission was looking for property that could be developed for commercial and industrial uses. He said it was looking to appease Metro on housing development. He said it recognized that there was a potential new urban expansion to Oregon City even though there was enough land within the existing UGB to meet the 20-year need. He said it saw a need for a visioning process. Commissioner Hewitt thanked the Metro Council for giving the commission a voice in the process.

He then spoke of the South End and said that areas had been taken away from the recommendation because they dropped over a bluff. He said if they could get some commercial or light industrial development, then that would occur at the far eastern portion of the city. He expressed concern that if there were no available land, there would be no future there. If the land was available, there was potential for a planned future that could take a lot of the traffic burden out of the downtown area. He said the Lindsey area, on the top northern portion on the east side of the map, was for activity purposes and said there was no connectivity between Holcomb and Redland roads. He said it was part of a 20-year plan. The most contentious portion of commission’s review was the Henrici area, Commissioner Hewitt said, and the Executive Officer’s recommendation was on the north side of Henrici. He said if there were going to be a road with negative connectivity to Oregon City, the commission would like to have both sides of the road taken in because it made more sense for planning purposes. He said the commission cut it off at a natural break where the terrain dropped off. What he promised the Citizen Participation Organization (CPO) of Beavercreek was that Oregon City would work with Clackamas County regarding that area and revisiting it with their community development director. He wanted assurance that the city wasn’t going to creep towards Beavercreek. Lastly, the bottom area, towards the east of Henrici, across from the college, Commissioner Hewitt said the commission was looking at expanding for a future tie-in to the schools. He said that currently there was no opportunity for business to come in and couple with education there.

Commissioner Hewitt then said the most contentious area was Beavercreek. He said if study area 211 and Beavercreek came in, it would be the entrance to the city. He said if Oregon City didn’t have control over the entrance to the city, it wouldn’t have control over what it would look like or how it would develop out. He said that if the preparations weren’t started today, there wouldn’t be a plan for tomorrow. If the city waited five more years to plan, it would be ten years out and ten years behind.

Derrick Beneville, Oregon City Commissioner, 320 Warner Milne Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045, said Commissioner Hewitt had summarized the Oregon City Commission’s recommendations well. He said the commission had sent a letter to the Metro Community Planning Committee on October 15, 2002, with its new recommendations. He said the Executive Officer’s recommendation was for more than 700 acres in the South End area, and the commission was back to its original proposal of 190 acres. He said there would be a significant impact on South End Road, which was the only connectivity to Highway 99 and Oregon City. He said the commission was looking for a neighborhood-type commercial area, which could minimize shopping traffic. The commission made its Lindsey area recommendation mainly to have a connection between Holcomb and Redland Road and to look at having some light commercial land. Commissioner Hewitt said the most important area the commission was recommending was the Beavercreek area, particularly the area parallel to Beavercreek Road. He said this area had potential industrial land, which could be tied into the new high school and the college expansion. He said it was important for the Oregon City Commission to work with Metro and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) because Highway 213 was almost at maximum capacity. If any of the industrial areas were to expand, connections to Hwy. 213 and I-205 would need to be improved. He expressed concern that if people were concentrating on the Damascus area and the transportation improvements needed there, they would not be concentrating on Oregon City’s transportation needs, which were a key aspect to the future of the city.

Helen Cooper, South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC, 18375 SW Horse Tail Dr., Beaverton, OR 97007, had John Cooper speak on her behalf.

John Cooper, South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC, 18375 SW Horse Tail Dr., Beaverton, OR 97007, said he was representing the South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC. Mr. Cooper submitted a folder containing a petition and a printout of his presentation (both included in this record) proposing to amend the UGB to include the southeast portion of Metro study area 68. He spoke to the information provided in the PowerPoint presentation. He said he was speaking for Helen Cooper and Kathy Bartholemy. Mr. Cooper said that Executive Officer Mike Burton had said that many Washington County rock piles had been mistakenly classified as resource land. He said that more than 90% of the landowners in the study area had signed the petition, and that services, such as water and sewer, extended right to the study area. Chair Park commented that the Metro Council doesn’t have the authority to reclassify land from exception. Councilor Atherton asked if Mr. Cooper had spoken with Washington County. Mr. Cooper said the county had said the state regulations were such that it would take forever to get the classification changed. He said the rules did not aid in good decision making and this was a clear example where the rules didn’t allow for land best suited for urbanization.

Kathy Bartholemy, South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC, 18485 SW Scholls Ferry, Beaverton, OR 97001, had John Cooper speak on her behalf.

Norm Andreen, Beavercreek CPO and Metro’s Committee for Citizen Involvement, 15331 S. Tioga Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045, said Commissioner Hewitt had never spoken with him nor with Chuck Lyons, the other co-president of the Beavercreek CPO, regarding the Oregon City Commission’s proposal. He said that basing an arbitrary city line based on topography was no more valid than using Henrici Road as a city line. His concern, he said, was with the methodology that Metro was using to figure future growth in the area. He referred to the Port of Portland report in the Metro Northwest section of the October 10, 2002, Oregonian in which their projection of growth didn’t correspond with Metro’s projection. He said he was concerned that the two agencies had come up with two different growth projections. State law required that plans be based on factual information, and he said two contradictory reports should prompt the council to take the time to review the information. Mr. Andreen said he recognized the state’s timeline and that Metro should ask for an extension if they need to. He said that if Metro’s prediction of 1.6% projected growth was dropped to 1.5%, the area would only need to expand by half the amount proposed by Metro, and if the projected growth dropped to 1.4%, the region wouldn’t need to expand at all.

Jack Hoffman, Lake Oswego City Council, 380 A Ave., Lake Oswego, OR 97034, said he was missing his Lake Oswego council meeting in order to represent Mayor Hammerstad and his fellow councilors regarding Lake Oswego and the Stafford area. He said the City of Lake Oswego continued to oppose urbanization of Stafford and requested that the UGB not be moved to include the Stafford Basin. Councilor Hoffman said a continuing Comprehensive Plan policy required Lake Oswego to oppose any urbanization of that area. He stressed that Lake Oswego continued to be a regional partner and continued to recognize that they would be at the table, whether it be with the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC), the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC), or the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT). He said that when the Stafford issue arose again, Lake Oswego wanted to be at the table to discuss the future of it and how it fit in with the 2040 Growth Concept as well as with the vision of how the region should grow. He said Lake Oswego supported the 2040 Growth Concept Plan and that was why it was investing millions of dollars in its town center. The City of Lake Oswego didn’t have the resources to address planning for the Stafford area, Councilor Hoffman said. They preferred to follow the town center philosophy and work with its planners regarding the Lake Oswego and the Lake Grove town centers. He said it was important to have trust in one’s regional partners and in the system and that no group in the public process had recommended that the Stafford Basin or area 42 come into the UGB. Chair Park said the committee had received a letter from the Clackamas County Commission requesting that area 42 come into the UGB. Councilor Hoffman said he understood that.

Carol Sturman, 19110 S. Ridge Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045, said she was outside the proposed UGB and it would affect her life in major ways. She said she did all her business and trade in Oregon City down Redland Rd. and her children went to Oregon City schools. She said Redland Elementary was maxed out and a new high school was being built. Redland Rd was already a very busy road and Highway 213 was a nightmare. She was told that the cost to work on the roads was $35 million and that the city was not going to make needed changes. She said schools and transportation were her main concerns. She said Redland Rd., a 100-year flood zone, had flooded in 1996 and 1998. She said study areas 24, 25 and 26 would have to use alternate routes if Redland Rd. were to flood again and shut down. She said most residents lived in that area because of the acreage and the quality of life. She was willing to commute to stores. She said bicyclists liked to ride in that area, and the proposed changes would infringe upon bicyclists’ quality of life. Councilor Burkholder asked if Ms. Sturman had a specific area in mind to be kept out of the expansion. Ms. Sturman responded that study areas 24, 25, 26, 27 and 29 should be kept out of the expansion.

John and Christine Kosinski, 18370 S. Holly Ln., Oregon City 97045. The Kosinskis submitted written testimony (and made a part of this record). Mr. Kosinski spoke to concerns in his written testimony regarding the Troutdale formation. Mrs. Kosinski spoke to concerns in the written testimony regarding local traffic. She said Clackamas County must work on long-range planning for this area. Mrs. Kosinski also said she and her husband were concerned about future development in this area as they had witnessed past development firsthand. She said they would like the county to give them more geological information.

Cindy Purkerson, Redland Community Member, 19753 S. Henrici Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045 said she lived east of the proposed area and east of the dam. She said she and her family enjoyed their rural lifestyle and wanted to preserve that way of life. They did not want to shop locally and chose to live in that area partly because there were no shopping centers. There were stores in Oregon City that were already failing. If there was a recommendation that could affect their way of life, they should have a voice in that decision and not just in a council meeting where people were not paying attention to what was said by each and every speaker. She said they felt that they were not represented and were not a critical part to the continuation of council members’ terms. While they realized the power that had been given to Metro and that it was really the state legislature that gave Metro that power, Ms. Purkerson said they felt they didn’t have adequate representation in the decision. She asked the committee members to listen to each and every story about people’s lifestyles. She referred to previous testimony about flooding near Abernethy Creek and said that Henrici Road also closed because of dam overflow and said she was concerned that people would be limited in their choices of moving through the area if there was an expansion.

Becky Egger, 19705 S. Turquoise Way, Oregon City, OR 97045 had Kevin Tomlin speak on her behalf.

Kevin Tomlin, 10610 S Navajo Way, Oregon City, OR 97045 said he agreed with Ms. Purkerson wholeheartedly, and that an expansion would worsen the bad traffic in area 32, that the schools were already overcrowded. He said they didn’t need any more stores. People in that area had animals and large gardens. He said they were up against a bluff where there wasn’t much room to expand. He asked the committee to consider that they lived out there for a reason and that they were more than willing to drive to the stores.

Deanne Townsend, 15050 S. Holcomb, Oregon City, OR 97045 submitted a map of study area 24 (included and made a part of this record) which she said she was mainly concerned about. She lived by the connector road from Redland to Holcomb, she said, which would go right behind her back yard. Despite claims that traffic would be reduced on Holcomb, the roads were all connected. The traffic would dump back right onto Redland and then to Highway 213, resulting in a bottleneck. She spoke to the potential Holly Lane connection to Beavercreek, and said the Beavercreek intersection couldn’t handle any more traffic. Her hours at the local Fred Meyer had been cut as a result of flagging business and another grocery store wasn’t needed in the area. She said that she didn’t want a road through her back yard. The land there was forested and both people interested in saving that land and developers had offers on that land. She asked the committee to not include study area 24.

Barry Lindsey, 21341 S. Ferguson Rd., Beavercreek, OR 97004 had Elizabeth Glaser Lindsey speak on his behalf.

Elizabeth Glaser Lindsey, Citizen and Beavercreek CPO, 21341 S. Ferguson Rd., Beavercreek, OR 97004 said the Beavercreek CPO had written Metro of its opposition to inclusion of area 28 in the UGB. She said it was important to know the difference between area 28 and area 26. She said projecting future growth rates was an art and not a science. Higher growth rate projections from the 1990s didn’t fit with the current slow economic situation in Oregon. She said that since UGB expansions were considered every five years, the current economic climate should also be considered. A small reduction in the growth rate projections could make a big difference to the Beavercreek community, which wanted to avoid urbanization. The 20-year land supply law did not require Metro to expand the UGB if there was sufficient land within the UGB. The May vote informed Metro that residents did not want their neighborhoods degraded. She said that growth could be accommodated without degrading the quality of life within the UGB. She had heard at the Spring 2002 Let’s Talk conference about successful, popular developments and ideas to conserve land. Communities outside the UGB should get the same respect as those communities within the UGB and affected by Measure 26-29, Ms. Glaser Lindsey said. High growth rates created a perceived need for land in Washington County, but the UGB could not expand there because of legal protection of the land. There was more land being studied in Clackamas County than elsewhere.

Metro should not be using region-wide growth rates, based largely on Washington County’s needs, to select more residential lands in Clackamas County than was needed. Clackamas County was facing a persistent jobs-to-housing imbalance. The jobs-producing lands tended to subsidize more expensive residential services, and when that pattern was perpetuated, it kept Clackamas County poor. Ms. Glaser-Lindsey said it would be consistent with current law to use a subregional analysis to make the current decision. Because Metro had requested that the analysis also be written into the administrative rules, the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) would soon make that avenue available. She suggested that the subregional analysis be used to ensure the needed impacts were located where the needs were. Oregon City needed industrial job-producing lands and had therefore requested that study area 26 be included in the UGB. The Beavercreek CPO had not taken a position on that particular area. Oregon City did not need more residential lands, she said, and added that Oregon City Director of Community Development Dan Drentlaw told the Oregon City Commission on October 2, 2002, that the current UGB contained enough residential land for the next 20 years without a UGB expansion. The Executive Officer’s recommendation of land north of Henrici Road and the Oregon City Commission’s change from recommending no land to recommending some land south of Henrici Road came as a surprise to the Beavercreek community and its CPO, she said. They had no prior warning that those lands were desired by Oregon City.

At their hearing, the Oregon City Commissioners acknowledged it would not be right to select those lands without first talking to the Beavercreek community and developing an understanding. She said they had said there was no hurry and that the UGB expansion would be revisited in five years. The deciding vote seemed to be cast on the basis to maintaining protective control of those lands and seemed not to realize that state rules were to protect those lands from partitioning. Despite the Beavercreek community’s obvious interest in the UGB and their legal appeal of the urban reserve decision five years ago, no effort had been made to work with the CPO.

Ms. Glaser-Lindsey said the community would like their integrity preserved. The boundary proposed by Oregon City did not follow the local features. Rural residential lands needed to be preserved for their own value. Oregon law protected commercial farmlands zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) but didn’t protect rural residential lands, which were zoned exception lands and designated as urbanizable lands. Rural residential lands were in increasingly short supply, with virtually none left in Washington County. If Metro took the Happy Valley/Damascus area into the UGB, then the Beavercreek, Redland and Stafford Triangle areas would be the only rural residential lands for the region’s residents. She said there was a continuing need for rural residential lands. She said those lands actively participated in the agricultural economy and gave residents the opportunity to participate in small-scale farming.

Most people living in the Beavercreek area had made sacrifices to live in that area. She said decision makers needed to use good judgment to assure a variety of choices for the region’s residents. The Beavercreek area was not a logical place to develop as it was a peninsula with the only access through Highway 213, which passed through the environmentally sensitive Mule Creek Canyon. She said there were already bottlenecks at Highway 205, especially at Beavercreek Road. Clackamas County Commissioner Michael Jordan had explained at the September 2002 Beavercreek CPO meeting that it would cost $20-25 million to fix the Highway 213/Beavercreek Road intersection, but only $6 million was available for improvements in the next year. He had said it would cost near $100 million to fix the Highway 213/Highway 205 intersection. She said it didn’t make sense to select an area where the transportation infrastructure could not be brought up to standard. The Beavercreek Elementary School was overcrowded and the sewage plant was at capacity. She said there were no good solid reasons to select the North Beavercreek area.

Lance Margeson, 16057 S Camellia Ct., Oregon City, OR 97004 had Elizabeth Lindsey speak on his behalf.

Laurie Kimmell, 14121 S Dales Ave, Beavercreek OR 97004 said she was distressed to hear that the Metro Council was considering expanding the UGB. She said this battle had been fought in 1997 but had been overturned by the courts. In 1982, she added, there was an initiative to the voters to have a garbage burner by the Metro transfer station but that was turned down. She said there hadn’t yet been one argument for the environmental impact, and Mill Creek development disrupted the Coho population. Oregon bluebirds, which were almost extinct, were present where she lived off of Leland Road and Highway 213. She referred back to the Tom McCall days and the legislators who created the land use laws to protect land and loss of farmland. She said that Parkrose, which used to be a farming community, had been swallowed up and Mt. Scott no longer had forest land. She said more shopping centers weren’t needed. She said her area had property for rent and empty buildings. Ms. Kimmell recommended that the committee keep areas 28, 29 and 30 out of the UGB. She asked to give children a decent environment and something for the future. She said the committee was talking about lowering the quality of living. The roads currently were stressed. When Commissioner Hewitt mentioned growth, she focused on the fact that the area would turn into another Hillsboro, which used to be a good community. Now it was strip malls and neighbors who were living on top of each other. She did not move to her area to live in that type of environment, she said. She had lived in Clackamas County her entire life and was very distressed at how many of the farming communities were being destroyed. She asked the committee to keep livability up and study the environmental impact. She said there hadn’t been that much growth and people were having smaller families these days.

Hank Noble (Charles H. Noble, Jr.), 16095 S. Camellia Ct., Oregon City, OR 97045 had Deborah Noble speak on his behalf.

Deborah A. Noble, 16095 S. Camellia Ct., Oregon City, OR 97045 said she believed she lived in study area 30 and she expressed concern with the process, or lack thereof, regarding the conversion of recommended areas off South End, and re-looking into the Holcomb and Henrici areas. She said that happened relatively recently but should have been a five-year process. She said it should be a long process for the planners and for people to have a chance for public comment. Commissioner Hewitt had talked about a steep drop-off that would be a natural barrier on the other side of Henrici Road, but she couldn’t see it. She said she had passed it a hundred times and it seemed a natural barrier should be evident. She said Metro had mentioned at a July meeting that a priority was to recycle areas that had been used for industrial areas. When she asked a question at the July meeting about consideration of existing land vacancies, she was told those vacancies weren’t part of the planning process. She said it was particularly important in the Holcomb and Henrici expansion areas because those would be considered as commercial and industrial areas, and those areas were currently residential. She said that was a big change and required more planning and public comment, not less. She said residents had not received representation either at Metro or at the City Council. At the Oregon City council meetings, Commissioner Hewitt had said residents shouldn’t worry because it was a 20-year plan. She disputed that and said there were developers at that meeting with architectural plans in hand and she knew darn well they were planning to use those plans in 20 years.

Doug Neeley, Oregon City Commissioner, 712 12^th St., Oregon City, OR 97045 clarified issues of the steep drop-off and said it was in reference to both areas 28 and 30 for different reasons. He said he wasn’t speaking as a commissioner because he had issues with Oregon City’s proposal. Regarding Henrici Road in area 28, he said a lot of the concerns between Oregon City and Beavercreek could be dealt with by sitting down and indicating what kind of zoning was necessary to provide the appropriate kind of buffer. He recommended that the issue be taken off the table from the current UGB expansion discussion, and that there be a meeting with the Beavercreek CPO and the county to identify what zoning possibilities did exist. He understood the concerns of Beavercreek residents and said that Henrici Road was a red flag. He said he thought the issue could be worked out. He spoke to area 24 minor, which was the Executive Officer’s recommendation and area 24 major, which was the additional forest near Oregon City. Area 24 minor was recommended by staff, and the county commission had released an alternative route from the Holcomb area via a rural route to connect with Holly Lane and then go off into the shopping center areas on Beavercreek Road. He said he was concerned a great deal with 24 major because he didn’t think there was much that could be done there. Oregon City had the toughest Title 3 requirements in the Metro area, he said. He then spoke to the undeveloped areas which provided a 200-foot buffer and the issues around steep slopes. He said he thought Redland Road was primarily a rural road, and didn’t think there was a need to urbanize it. Expansion in that area was extremely limited. He said that regarding area 28, it was a 3-2 vote on the part of the Oregon City Commission. He asked the committee to reconsider area 24 major and area 28. He thought other growth could be accommodated within Oregon City. He didn’t want to lose the identity of the city, he said.

Councilor Bragdon asked for clarification on the major and minor classifications of area 24 and asked if that addressed Ms. Townsend’s issue with the road. Commissioner Neeley responded that 24 minor was Ms. Townsend’s concern for the growth going off her property. Area 24 minor did not address her concerns and he had actually supported that piece for connectivity purposes, to access other parts of the city. He didn’t think people would benefit from going down another road to hit the same intersection that they would from Holcomb Road to get to Highway 213. He didn’t think it would solve the traffic issues. Chair Park spoke to Gresham’s attempts to create an urban/rural edge. He asked if similar efforts were being considered for that particular area. Commissioner Neeley responded that what had been discussed was the area south of Henrici Road, and that the designation of land was agro-industrial. He assumed that in terms of MPAC’s recommendation, one outcome of the alternative analysis was to actually have a classification of agro-industrial. He said that might not be the appropriate buffer to have along Henrici Road.

Chris Hunter, 1988 SE Kelly, Gresham, OR 97080 said his concern was as an advocate for the city of Hillsboro and Washington County. The City of Hillsboro would like to look at industrial lands and Mr. Hunter owned property in that area. He wanted to express his concern that the committee didn’t hobble Washington County and Hillsboro. He saw the logic in industrial lands in Washington County, and he saw infrastructure there. He said the move to Clackamas County sounded great but maybe in ten to twenty years. Washington County currently had the infrastructure and a job center there made sense.

Donna Osorio, 20387 S. Molalla Ave., Oregon City, OR 97045 said she wanted to go with the city and wanted to be annexed into city. She said half her property was in the UGB and half wasn’t. She said she had a poultry shop there and the county wanted to close them down. She had been told that if her property was annexed into the city, they would be able to stay there. She had lived there for 15 years and the area was growing. With the amount of traffic was occurring, the area needed to be expanded. Ms. Osorio submitted a map showing her property (included in this record).

Jesus Osorio, 20387 S Molalla Ave., Oregon City, OR 97045 said he was all for growth. He said the area needed to be developed and it needed more jobs.

Ed Walters, 20373 S Molalla Ave., Oregon City, OR said he had moved to that area 31 years ago, just a mile down the road. At that time they had one grocery store. Over the years he had seen a lot of changes. He said residents complained about having grocery stores in the area now, but if they didn’t have the stores, where would the residents go, he asked. Mr. Walters said he concurred with the Oregon City Planning Commission and that was glad to see there was a 20-year plan.

Michelle Harrington, 18388 S. Sam McGee, Oregon City, OR 97045 said she lived out in the Redland area. She said her neighbor’s house slid down the hill towards Abernethy Creek in 1997. She said the new owner checked in with Clackamas County, and they had no record of the house sliding. She said that happened adjoining the Beavercreek area. She said this was a problem, that it was a city of canyons, creeks and slides. She spoke of the morning rush hour traffic, which she said was horrible. She said Beavercreek traffic was bad in the afternoons. She said the schools were full. She said the area had been growing for the last 20 years. She said it had taken 33 years to pass a bond to build the high school. She asked what would be done when the new high school became full. She said there wasn’t money to remodel the old high school. She grew up in Sunnyside, which was an awesome area until the freeway, hospital, town center and other development came. She urged the committee to look at the population and really make sure that the area was growing as much as they thought it was, because they are affecting thousands of people.

Chair Park said Metro staff would follow up to determine the exact location of the slide problems Ms. Harrington mentioned, so that they were noted on the map. He said Metro received its information from the cities and counties, from individuals, and sometimes from developers.

Julie O’Dwyer, 20009 S. Forest Hill Dr., Oregon City, OR 97045 said she and her husband moved from the city of Portland to a rural area fifteen years ago in order to raise their children. It took them two-and-a-half years to find an affordable piece of property that met their needs. She spoke about the small town feel of Redland and said she was happy where she was and did not want to relocate. She said she would like to see a barrier between urban and rural areas so that rural areas would be able to maintain separate identities. The schools in the area were crowded; she did not see how they could grow any larger. She noted that their property was on a hill and that even they experienced flooding in 1998. She thanked the committee for allowing the public to participate.

Herb Koss, 1098 Rosemont Rd., West Linn, OR 97068 spoke as a landowner about area 37, but noted that he was also a developer. About four months ago, after the West Linn City Council dramatically increased the building permit fees for parks, he said he decided to investigate what the city was trying to fund. He had Metro’s mapping service develop a buildable lands map, eliminating all slopes 25 percent or greater and all flood plains. He said he was shocked at the net result of the land that was left. West Linn was basically unbuildable. He compared the buildable lands map to the City of West Linn’s zoning map and noticed one large area along the river zoned general industrial; the entire area was in a flood plain and unbuildable. He cited similar examples and said he had not realized that West Linn was in this much trouble. He submitted a West Linn zoning map, the Metro buildable lands map, and the Rosemont Ridge Concept Plan (all three attached and made a part of this record). Area 37, he said, would allow the completion of Metro’s complete communities concept, would offer jobs, retail and recreation opportunities, athletic clubs, supply centers, playing fields, and senior housing. The upper portion of area 37 was served with sewer and water, and there was a school in the middle of the area. All the property was exception land and it was prime to come into the UGB. Mr. Koss thanked the committee for the opportunity to speak.

Ed Gustafson, 15909 S.E. Rhine St., Portland, OR 97236 expressed concern about Area 32 in the South End Road area of Oregon City. The original recommendation, he said, was to include his property in the UGB. According to the map shown earlier tonight, the new proposed UGB line was adjacent to his property line. He said he would prefer to be inside the UGB rather than up against it. Councilor Burkholder recommended that Mr. Gustafson speak with staff and note the location of his property so that his position was on record. Mr. Gustafson said he had done so. Councilor Hosticka said the Executive Officer’s original recommendation was still before the Council. They had not yet received a formal proposal to amend it based on the Oregon City Commission’s recommendation. Councilor Park added that the Executive Officer’s recommendation, made on August 1, was the starting point for the Council’s decision. Any subsequent amendments would be made to the August 1^st recommendation.

Andrea Hungerford, 16509 S. Edenwild Lane, Oregon City, OR 97045 said her property was located immediately off Holcomb Boulevard adjacent to Area 24; the area to which Commissioner Neeley referred as 24 minor. Ms. Hungerford had submitted written testimony (included as part of this record). While her land would not be included in the UGB, it would be impacted. She noted that the area was proposed for inclusion for the purpose of connectivity, at the urging of Oregon City officials. However, she said, the two roads were already connected twice within a three-mile stretch. There was no rationale for additional connectivity. In addition, no traffic, feasibility, or environmental impact studies had been done. This connector road would not provide an outlet; instead it would drop traffic back onto roads that are already busy. A developer, not the county, would build this road. This area was proposed by the city after a single developer, who either owns or has options on all of that land, met with the planning commission in nonpublic meetings. The planning commission’s recommendation to include the land went to Metro, and that was how it showed up in the Executive Officer’s recommendation, she said. No planning had been done on this connector road beyond the representation by a single developer who would realize a windfall from the inclusion of this land. The area was a tiny strip of maybe ten to twelve parcels. Her main concern was that the sole reason of connectivity was not feasible and needed to be examined further.

Councilor Atherton asked if there was no public process before the Oregon City Commission on area 24 minor. Ms. Hungerford said they were told that the developer met several times with the planning commission. No one was informed of those meetings; no other developers or the public were invited, then the planning commission made the recommendation to Metro. After the recommendation was made, there were several city council meetings to which public was invited to give input. However, that was after the planning commission had already made its recommendation. While there was a public process, she said she would argue about the viability of the process at that late stage.

Delores Ross, 20560 S. Pulehn Dr., Oregon City, OR 97045 said she lived in Area 29. She thanked Ms. Hungerford for her comments and confirmed that her opinions and observations matched with regard to this development. She said she and her husband have owned property in Area 29 for the past sixteen years. They developed the property very slowly so that they would be debt free by the time they lived there. They paid every tax and every permit, followed every rule, and they have a lovely home and property on which they raise trees. They would like to maintain their property, Ms. Ross said, and her question for the Metro Council and all the city and county commissioners was, “If you don’t build it, will they come?”

Don Weathers, 1130 Rosemont Rd., West Linn, OR spoke in favor of adding Area 27 to the UGB. Its inclusion would take some pressure off the opponents of the Beavercreek area, he said. Area 27 has a number of attributes – it is adjacent to a new middle school; there is a commercial development across the street, including a Safeway; there are high-density apartments and row houses and athletic facilities in view of this property. To the layman, the infrastructure appears to be there. About 40 acres of the area had recently been clear-cut and was prime for development. The property was exception land. He urged the committee to look hard at bringing the area into the boundary. It was not now on the map. Mr. Weathers also submitted a written comment card, which is included in the meeting record.

Scott Phinney, 1 Mount Jefferson Terrace, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 said Metro might not have any control over his concern because of state law. He said, however, that he thought Metro needed to let the state know that there were problems in the process that need to be addressed. One key problem is that lands are not designated in accordance with reality. A lot of “resource lands” were not actually resource lands. There should be a way to address incorrectly classified land through the Metro UGB planning process. Secondly, he said, when thinking of urban planning, most people tended to think inside the box. It was important to start thinking outside the box. What a lot of people had been complaining about that night was the result of taking large tracts of land and developing them and creating a funnel pattern for all of the utilities and facilities. While it looked funny on the map, developing land in narrow strips along already-developed roadways, which had infrastructure already in place, spread out traffic and eliminated a lot of the problems raised that night. A narrow strip along Holcomb Boulevard would give development potential without creating the huge bottlenecks about which everyone was concerned. It required thinking outside the box, and it required some changes in the rules and the laws. He hoped that Metro could make some inroads in fixing the problems in the process.

Eric Hofeld, 13155 SE 137^th Dr., Clackamas, OR 97015 said he was already in the UGB. He had three questions about the planning process. First, he noted the questions surrounding the population growth number – whether it should be 1.6%, 1.4% or 1.3% – and how a growth rate of 1.3 or 1.4 percent would eliminate the need to expand the UGB. Second, he asked where the job growth would occur. Would it occur in a series of grocery stores and fast food restaurants or meaningful industrial development. Third, he asked about the expansion of growth in the area and the support and infrastructure that the growth would require. Many people had testified that the schools are crowded and the streets and highways were clogged. Lastly, much of tonight’s testimony suggested that perhaps the planners did not look closely enough at the topography and types of soils in the areas planned for development. Mr. Hofeld said he was in favor of controlled, orderly growth, but he hoped the committee would make its decision based on good, solid evidence and facts.

Councilor McLain noted that tonight’s meeting was a listening post. Therefore, the members of the committee had not been answering people’s questions. She stressed that the Metro Council was looking closely at each area and at all the data. She added that she grew up in Canby and was familiar with the area, as were many of the Councilors. The Council was not taking this decision lightly. They realized the impact it would have on residents both inside and outside the urban growth boundary. The Council would do its best to follow state law and take into consideration all of the comments made that night.

Councilor Park added that he owned a 60-acre nursery inside the city limits of Gresham and was therefore very familiar with some of these issues.

Kevin Miller, 15030 S. Holcomb Blvd., Oregon City, OR 97045 said he was opposed to the inclusion of Area 24 minor, which was right in his backyard. He said he was a self-employed contractor and worked with a friend who did earth anchors, anchoring big buildings. The area where he lived was not a good area for building, due to slides. The proposal to join Redland Road and Holcomb Boulevard would not improve traffic. It would be better to get something down to Clackamas River Drive because the proposed area could not handle any more traffic. Schools were an issue. He went to Holcomb Elementary and the building had not changed since he was in kindergarten. The area should stay the way it was currently now and try to handle the schools and traffic. A development of 76 houses was under construction next to his house, which would double the traffic on the hill and he did not think the area could handle it.

Jim Kosel, Finnegans Terrace Property Owners Assn., 11466 Finnegans Way, Oregon City, OR 97045 said the Finnegans Terrace neighborhood was about 27 years old and included 55 single-family homes with a greenbelt around the area. Sixteen percent of their members were the original homeowners; another 33 percent were second owners. Only three of the 55 homes were rental units. The fact that everyone had lived there so many years spoke well for itself. The neighborhood association was opposed to Oregon City extending urban services to the neighborhood. The neighborhood’s greenbelt was contiguous to Area 32, and they were concerned about commercial development going into that area. Two seasonal streams went through the greenbelt and pumped water from Area 32. The neighborhood was concerned about potential water degradation in that area. Within about 2,500 feet in any direction from their neighborhood, there was only one nonresidential building. The neighborhood would like to keep the area the way it was currently.

Kathy Hogan, 19721 S. Central Pt. Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045 said she wished she had known about this process when she was brought into the UGB against her will. She did not like what had happened since. She spoke in opposition of adding businesses to the South End area because traffic would cut through the neighborhood, harming people’s quality of life. The heavy vehicles would damage the road. Like everyone had said, Oregon City had a lot of steep slopes and wetlands. To develop South End, a pump station or more would be needed and would probably ruin the wetlands.

Jon Benjamin, 19597 S. Lyons Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045 said he was second generation and had just moved back into his childhood home. He had lived in the area for 35 years and had seen all the growth and development in the Clackamas area. When he was in grade school there were 600 kids total in grades one through eight. Now that his kids were in the same school, there were 600 kids in sixth grade alone. The development had happened; there were more people up there. He stated his opposition to everything from areas 21 to 29. He knew that development would happen; he thought it was happening on its own. He was glad to hear that some of the committee members did know what it was like to be out in the country. He sincerely invited each member of the committee to his house one night or weekend. He said he had a cow and a horse, and he loved it. He was very active in the Redland community and he hoped that everybody got to know his name. If there were a mayoral position in the community, he would run for it. He truly believes in Redland and he hoped that when development did come, it would be done right. He used to be able to ride his bike from Lyons Road up to the hilltop. Now he would not even ride on those roads; traffic drove 55 miles per hour or faster. There were a lot of people who did not understand that deer cross the road and raccoons lived in the area. The speed at which people drove was kind of scary for the people who had lived there a long time and knew about the roads. He said he hoped the road improvement came before the development started. He did not think that adding another road into Holcomb was necessary. It would only add more traffic to Redland Road. The area did not need the development now.

Andrea Anderly, 16693 Kraeft Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045 thanked the committee for giving the community an opportunity to communicate its concerns. Ms. Anderly submitted written testimony (attached and made a part of this record). Her residence was located in Area 24 “major.” She said she was concerned about several things. First were the transportation concerns, which were fundamental. Redland and Holcomb roads were both two-lane county roads that did not adequately serve the current traffic due to the expansion in the area. She knew that development was inevitable, and she was not there to say personally that it should not happen, but she wanted the development to be concerned about and look carefully at the feasibility of traffic on those roads. As the roads were currently, she did not see a means for buses to serve the area or for bicyclists or pedestrians to be served adequately. Another concern was environmental; that concern was also fundamental, she said. The area consisted of steep slopes and deep canyons. Recently the area around Area 24 had been developed into two- and five-acre plots. The road to her development was paved, which was an improvement, but the grading and terrain work left mudslides and lots of temporary problems for the area. She was not certain that the developer had anticipated the problems with the type of soils and terrain in the area. She was one of the property owners, as mentioned earlier by Ms. Hungerford, who was not notified of the planning meetings or the city council meetings. She expressed concern that last year, the developer who developed that area had also proposed developing a school at the bottom of their road, without much notice. She asked the committee to please look at the feasibility of the environmental, transportation, and other concerns in the area before making a decision.

Councilor Atherton noted that this area was vulnerable to landslides. He asked staff to look into the issue.

Larry Burbidge, 12600 SE Freeman Way #19, Milwaukie, OR 97222 said he got into this in a left-handed way. He was a realtor, and in response to a request from a client he went to the Oregon City Commission and learned about the proposal for the Henrici Road area. He then went to Metro and spoke with staff. The property in question was just north of Henrici Road, near the city limits of Oregon City. He said in his opinion, many of the transportation concerns raised that night were good reasons to bring the land into the UGB, so that the road could be planned and upgraded for proper traffic flow. He said Henrici Road did not feel rural; it felt like part of Oregon City. It did not make sense to think of the Henrici corridor as a rural area. It would be nonsense to run utilities and services down Henrici Road and only service one-half of the road. He noted that half of his client’s property was inside the UGB and half was out. To him, that property could be a poster child for something that needed to come inside the UGB.

Andrew Peters, 17132 S. Clackamas River Dr., Oregon City, OR 97045 thanked the committee for the first notice he had received since a proposal 13 years ago to site a drug rehab facility on Clackamas River Drive. He said he was mostly concerned with urban sprawl. His property was in Area 22, and they had no notice that they would be involved in this. When he first moved out here 40 years ago, he found out that nothing was planned for his side of the river because no one wanted to harvest the borderline timber that grew on the land. Most of the area next to and slightly below his property (a mile below Carver) was flood area. There was far too much traffic on Clackamas River Drive. It was a narrow, two-lane country road. It was beautiful, scenic, and prone to slides in the winter. There were a lot of blind curves and suicide bike riders. In the last 20 to 30 years, he had seen traffic increase dramatically: he currently saw the amount of traffic in a month that he used to see in almost a year. Any additional traffic would amplify that. He noted that homes were now allowed to be built on stilts in floodplains next to the river. Mr. Peters summarized that there was crime, pollution, overpopulation and way too much traffic in their area now. He expressed concern that someone could catch the bus out to his area, walk a mile or two down the road, knock over someone’s house if there was no alarm system, then catch the bus back to Portland. He asked the committee members if they had considered freezing the UGB and letting people move someplace else, rather than congesting the area further. He said he would like to see Area 22, Clackamas River Drive, removed from consideration for inclusion in the UGB. Mr. Peters also submitted a written comment card which is included in the meeting record.

Councilor Park noted that Area 22 was not been recommended for inclusion in the UGB, but that it was within a study area. Mr. Peters asked if it could be considered for UGB inclusion in the future. Councilor Park said it could.

Kevin Phillips, 24410 SE Beavercreek Road, Beavercreek, OR 97004 said he had watched this process for the past five years and concluded that Metro was not working. Metro needed to be taken to the curb, buried, and repealed. The Legislature needed to put a new system in its place.

Councilor Park said the current system was one the state Legislature had designed.

George N. Faris, 9300 S.E. Phillips Place, Portland, OR 97266 said for anybody who thought Metro did not work, he had been working on a project for four years and they had not budged yet. He recommended that people who were not having success with Metro check with their local officials. He has lived at his residence in Clackamas County since 1978. He was in full favor of Executive Officer Burton’s recommendation of the Damascus/Boring areas. Bringing in Mr. Burton’s recommendations would take years to develop, he said, but it made good sense to do good planning instead of piecemeal. In particular, Mr. Faris urged the committee to bring in Areas 10 through 19. He noted the existence of a capped sewer line, nearby water district, and water pump station in Areas 17 and 18. Development would create not only a complete community but also jobs. There were two large firms looking to bring in as many as 1,500 jobs, but they were unable to locate in the area. There was a newer gas line that ran down S. Sunnyside between 152^nd and 162^nd to Highway 212. All the services were available and they were ready to create some jobs. Talking about jobs, he said he’d worked in property management in Tigard for four years and used to get stuck on the highway for 45 minutes to an hour-and-a-half. He relocated his job to within five minutes of his house and now had time to attend council meetings instead of being stuck in traffic. He thanked the committee and its staff for the countless hours, miles and meetings they had put into this process. It was not easy, and he hoped that residents’ future children would appreciate the good planning and preservation of natural habitat that Metro was trying to do.

Mike Mennell, 17434 S. Beckman Road Oregon City, OR said he moved to the area from Tigard about six years ago. At the time he was living on a five-acre piece of property that was being continually encroached upon. He moved to Tigard in the early 1970s, and he saw small farms become what Tigard was currently. What scared him was that he saw the Redland and Beavercreek areas becoming another Tigard. It was already happening quite quickly: you could leave for one month, come back, turn the corner and find a Home Depot. There was a wetland on the other side of the highway that had been completely wiped out. He said he came to this meeting to express his concerns. There had not been much talk tonight about the historical area of Redland. Just down the street from his home was a gentleman, about 87 years old, who was born on his property. His parents came to the area as homesteaders. There were two pioneer cemeteries on his property and many of the area’s roads were named after the families buried in those cemeteries. Many of the stories he had heard about the area had come from this individual. As these old timers got older and moved away from their land, people moved in who did not have any roots in the land. They forgot about the history and the value of open space. He saw more and more open space disappearing. He said he would hate to see Redland become another Tigard. One of the reasons that the old farms were spaced few and far between and away from the riparian zones was that the old timers knew the history of the area. He reviewed the geological history of floods in the area and how the topography was created. The soil in the area was mostly a thin cap of clay over a large gravel aggregate. He reminded the committee that this was the end of the Oregon Trail and was a great historical area. He urged them not to bulldoze it over and cover it with stores like Home Depot.

Councilor McLain said she could not let Mr. Mennell leave the meeting thinking that the committee necessarily supported Home Depots at all costs, anywhere and everywhere, that Metro had a functional plan that placed a lot of restrictions on “big box” stores.

Kent Ziegler, 4140 Canal Road, Lake Oswego, OR thanked the committee, Metro staff, and Oregon City for the opportunity to participate. He thought it was very important that everyone get the chance to voice their opinions both for and against expansion, and to be a part of their own neighborhoods. He spoke in favor of the recommendations by Mr. Burton and the City of Oregon City. He was predominantly involved with Area 24 Minor. He moved onto a 20-acre piece of property in the Livesay Road area, and he had spent a lot of time with city staff trying to design a community that would allow for a better safety corridor from Holcomb Road down to Redland Road. His plan, which was submitted at the last city council meeting a few weeks ago, called for a road – called a neighborhood collector – starting at Redland at Holly Lane, where a light was proposed, and going up to Holcomb at approximately seven percent grade, which was about half of what the emergency vehicles said they could meet. He noted that no parks or open spaces were set aside for the three city subdivisions going in off of Holcomb. Therefore in his master plan he had identified open space corridors for wildlife habitat and natural drainage basins, active athletic fields and places for people to take their dogs to play Frisbee. He was working with property owners and a lot of them were very much in support of the proposal. The plan would try to relieve a lot of traffic congestion presently on Highway 213. Part of the master plan called for a neighborhood shopping area on the flat pastures to keep grading to a minimum. The shopping area would mean that people would not have to make special trips up Highway 213 to get to Fred Meyer because they forgot their dry cleaning, or Starbucks coffee. It would be a planned unit development serving the community. He restated his support for Mr. Burton’s and the City of Oregon City’s recommendations for Area 24 Minor. Mr. Ziegler said he looked forward to working with Metro and the city staff to see it become a reality.

There being no further testimony, Chair Park closed the public hearing.

He announced that the next public hearing would be in Gresham at Gresham City Hall on October 24^th. Maps again would be available for viewing at 5:00 p.m.; public testimony will begin at 6:00 p.m. The following hearing would be on October 29^th at Portland City Hall with the same time and format. Testimony for the record must be submitted by November 1, Chair Park added. There was information on Metro’s web site (http://www.metro-region.org) about the process and how to submit testimony. He thanked the public and the committee for their time.

There being no further business before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Rooney Barker

Committee Clerk

TESTIMONY RECEIVED BY RECORDING AT PUBLIC HEARING:

Edward Kulawiak, 14720 S. Forsythe Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045, said a portion of study area 23 was presently classified as exception land contiguous to the urban growth boundary and that he supported having that study area be included. He said he had previously sent Metro Councilors a letter and maps explaining some concerns he and his neighbors had regarding transportation, utilities, and the environment. He recommended that if the area was not suitable for industrial development, it was suitable for future residential development.

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 22, 2002

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

TESTIMONY CARDS.

Gary Hewitt, Oregon City Commissioner, 320 Warner Milne Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Derrick Beneville, Oregon City Commissioner, 320 Warner Milne Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

John Cooper, South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC, 18375 SW Horse Tail Dr., Beaverton, OR 97007

Norm Andreen, Beavercreek CPO and Metro’s Committee for Citizen Involvement, 15331 S. Tioga Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Jack Hoffman, Lake Oswego City Council, 380 A Ave., Lake Oswego, OR 97034

Carol Sturman, 19110 S. Ridge Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

John and Christine Kosinski, 18370 S. Holly Ln., Oregon City 97045

Cindy Purkerson, Redland Community Member, 19753 S. Henrici Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Deanne Townsend, 15050 S. Holcomb, Oregon City, OR 97045

Elizabeth Glaser Lindsey, Citizen & CPO Speaker, 21341 S. Ferguson Rd., Beavercreek, OR 97004

Laurie Kimmell, 14121 S Dales Ave, Beavercreek OR 97004

Deborah A. Noble, 16095 S. Camellia Ct., Oregon City, OR 97045

Doug Neeley, Oregon City Commissioner, 712 12^th St., Oregon City, OR 97045

Chris Hunter, 1988 SE Kelly, Gresham, OR 97080

Donna Osorio, 20387 S. Molalla Ave., Oregon City, OR 97045

Jesus Osorio, 20387 S Molalla Ave., Oregon City, OR 97045

Ed & Alta F. Walters, 20373 S Molalla Ave., Oregon City, OR

Michelle Harrington, 18388 S. Sam McGee, Oregon City, OR 97045

Julie O’Dwyer, 20009 S. Forest Hill Dr., Oregon City, OR 97045

Herb Koss, 1098 Rosemont Rd., West Linn, OR 97068

Ed Gustafson, 15909 S.E. Rhine St., Portland, OR 97236

Andrea Hungerford, 16509 S. Edenwild Lane, Oregon City, OR 97045

Delores Ross, 20560 S. Pulehn Dr., Oregon City, OR 97045

Don Weathers, 1130 Rosemont Rd., West Linn, OR

Scott Phinney, 1 Mount Jefferson Terrace, Lake Oswego, OR 97035

Eric Hofeld, 13155 SE 137^th Dr., Clackamas, OR 97015

Kevin Miller, 15030 S. Holcomb Blvd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Jim Kosel, Finnegans Terrace Property Owners Assn., 11466 Finnegans Way, Oregon City, OR 97045

Kathy Hogan, 19721 S. Central Pt. Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Jon Benjamin, 19597 S. Lyons Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Andrea Anderly, 16693 Kraeft Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

Larry Burbidge, 12600 SE Freeman Way #19, Milwaukie, OR 97222

Andrew Peters, 17132 S. Clackamas River Dr., Oregon City, OR 97045

Kevin Phillips, 24410 SE Beavercreek Road, Beavercreek, OR 97004

George N. Faris, 9300 S.E. Phillips Place, Portland, OR 97266

Mike Mennell, 17434 S. Beckman Road Oregon City, OR

Kent Ziegler, 4140 Canal Road, Lake Oswego, OR

TESTIMONY RECEIVED BY RECORDING AT PUBLIC HEARING.

Edward Kulawiak, 14720 S. Forsythe Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

TESTIMONY CARDS RECEIVED FROM THOSE WHO DID NOT TESTIFY.

Helen Cooper, South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC, 18375 SW Horse Tail Dr., Beaverton, OR 97007

Kathy Bartholemy, South Cooper Mountain Land Owners Association, LLC, 18485 SW Scholls Ferry, Beaverton, OR 97001

Becky Egger, 19705 S. Turquoise Way, Oregon City, OR 97045

Barry Lindsey, 21341 S. Ferguson Rd., Beavercreek, OR 97004

Lance Margeson, 16057 S Camellia Ct., Oregon City, OR 97004

Hank Noble (Charles H. Noble, Jr.), 16095 S. Camellia Ct., Oregon City, OR 97045

Diane Kosboth, 1114 Washington, Oregon City

Kim Krumm, 14991 S. Josi Ct., Oregon City, OR 97045

John Mohlis, 17986 S. Fir Cone Ct., Oregon City, OR 9704

Paul Osborn, Rolling Hills Community Church, 3550 SW Borland Rd., Tualatin, OR 97062