MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL

COMMUNITY PLANNING COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING

Thursday, October 24, 2002

Gresham Council Chamber

1333 NW Eastman Parkway, Gresham

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

Members Absent:  None.

1.  CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL.

Chair Park called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.

2.  OVERVIEW OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AMENDMENT PROCESS. Chair Park gave an overview of the Urban Growth Boundary amendment process and the notification efforts to the citizens of the region. Metro Regional Planning Director Mike Hoglund explained the Executive Officer's recommendations. Chair Park said the deadline for public comment and testimony on the potential Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion was November 1^st, and the next opportunity to testify at a public hearing would be October 29^th at Portland City Hall.

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.

The committee introduced themselves and Chair Park explained the public hearing process. He said they were interested in hearing testimony on how different parcels did or did not meet the state requirements.

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

State Representative Laurie Monnes Anderson, District 50, PO Box 1531, Gresham, OR 97030, talked about growing up in Gresham. She said she felt it was critical to this part of the region that we accept Mr. Burton’s recommendations. They had the Center for Advanced Learning and the concept of the university center at Mt. Hood Community College, as well as the Oregon Science and Technology Park. They needed industrial lands here. They had used strategic reserve monies and state monies to bring industry to this area. She talked about the vision for industrial land. They needed to keep the momentum going and advocating for Metro's recommendation would help with the vision and the livability of community. It will be a wonderful place to live, work and educate our children, she said. If they didn’t do this in East County, poverty was going to continue to climb in this area. Poverty levels had increased from 8 to 12 percent since 1990. The east side would have a very low jobs/housing ratio compared to regional average. Having industrial land would change that ratio. Forty percent of Gresham's workforce traveled more than 10 miles to get to work. Bringing industrial land would change that. They had 14 percent of the county's population and only 7 percent of the jobs. She supported the Executive Officer's recommendations.

Mayor Chuck Becker, City of Gresham, 1333 NW Eastman Parkway, Gresham, OR 97060, welcomed the committee to Gresham and he thanked them for the opportunity to present the Springwater project (included as a part of this with record).

Councilor Atherton said that Mayor Becker had said that Springwater would provide opportunities to maintain a new rural urban edge, and asked how that can be done when we have the 20-year land supply law. Mayor Becker said they hoped to work with the county to identify an area, which would allow compatibility between the nursery businesses to the east and to their proposed center. There was one parcel of EFU land to the west of 282^nd, which they have agreed not to include in the Springwater proposal. Councilor Atherton asked if the Mayor was saying he wanted Gresham to grow to a certain size and stop, and Mayor Becker said he thought the opportunity for future growth lay to the south. That was why they were proposing and were committed to an urban rural edge on the east side.

Mayor Becker said there had been some concepts, which had evolved in Damascus and Boring area. Those proposals had been reviewed and they needed to continue to be evaluated. When they talked about greenspace, they could talk about the greenbelts to give community identity. It still allowed communities to grow. They were going to increase densities. That was one way they could continue to grow. That was a responsibility they would accept.

Lonnie Roberts, Multnomah County Commission, District 4, 17131 SE Manley, Portland, OR 97236, said the two previous testimonies summed it up. To Councilor Atherton, Commissioner Roberts said he understood what he meant, and that he was hearing the same thing from folks in the hinterlands. The decade of the 90s for East County was one where they received a large number of people. They went from an eight percent at or below the poverty level to almost a 14 percent poverty level. They had a situation where they were mandated by state government to look out 20 years. That meant the tri-county area could expect 500,000 more people. They can’t wait for 10 or 15 years from now to plan, they had to start now. Gresham will grow, he said. It was the fastest growing portion of Multnomah County. Today the county Board of Commissioners had its own hearing on the urban growth boundary issue, and would have another next Monday night. If they didn't do the things that were necessary today, the economic base for this area would be in jeopardy. They won't have the jobs or housing and that will not stem the fact that they will have more people moving in. He echoed the two previous testifiers and said he supported the Springwater program.

Councilor Burkholder asked if the county’s position was the same as he had just stated, and Commissioner Roberts said yes, that he felt comfortable that the support was there. They were unanimous on the vote today. There were some questions, one was to make certain that the nursery lands were protected and the road system needed to take into account the commercial aspect. When they set down and set aside the industrial and business areas, they need to make sure that it would be sufficient to attract business. They were serious about economic development.

Ken Noah, Superintendent of Gresham Barlow School District, 1331 Eastman Parkway, Gresham, OR 97030, spoke on behalf of the Springwater proposal. The vision statement for the East Metro Economic Alliance was creating community wealth through smart growth, smart kids and smart industry, he said. Those were the three legs that supported the stool of community wealthy. They needed all three. For the school district to deliver a high quality educational experience for all students, he said he believed they must have smart industry and smart growth. Springwater would provide a critical east side focal point for development of the Oregon Science and Technology Park and related educational and training initiatives. He said the school districts in the area, in concert with Mt. Hood Community College, were in the process of constructing the Center for Advanced Learning (CAL). That would be a regional resource that would provide advanced programs for high school aged students, including advanced training in medical, health care, information technology, pre-engineering, advanced engineering, possibly microelectronics and other science and math related careers. Springwater would provide invaluable intellectual capital for the school district in that endeavor but also create enormous job site partnership potential for career-related learning experiences for district students. He urged the committee to give this proposal the opportunity to become an important reality in supporting smart kids.

Machiel (Mike) B. Boer, 2184 SE 53^rd Ave., Hillsboro, OR 97123 spoke in favor of Area 21C. He commented that he had lived in the Oak Park subdivision, which had been incorporated in 1908 and was still waiting for development and houses. He thanked the committee for the opportunity to be here. He was a property owner in the area east of Cornelius designated as 21C, on the Metro map it was designated as 77, called Oak Park subdivision. His property was north of Tualatin Valley Hwy. East of the street system was a wetland, he said, a natural boundary to Hillsboro. Mr. Boer proposed incorporating this property into the UGB because it needed sewer and water and would not take away valuable farmland but would provide housing. He had written letters to the City Council about incorporation. He had also written to Councilor McLain about this property. He hoped the Metro Council would consider bringing it in to the UGB to provide housing and commercial property for the City of Hillsboro.

John Hepler, 11939 NE Davis, Apt 212, Portland, OR 97220, summarized his written testimony (included as part of this record) which asked about the background and application of the 20-year land supply directive, the density levels at NE 122^nd and Burnside, and the required planning amenities of both Portland and Gresham for multi-family structures.

James Courtney, 23400 NE Glisan, Gresham, OR 97080 said he was a worldwide Director for LSI Logic, Site Services. He said he endorsed the recommendation for controlled growth in the Metro area. LSI owned 300 acres in Gresham, he said, and had a world class manufacturing fabrication company. They had about 837 employees located here. They owned about half of the area being proposed for the Gresham area. They shared their site with farmers who used most of it for agricultural purposes. LSI Logic had excellent relationship as they did with other neighbors, both business and residential, Mr. Courtney said, and this expansion would provide growth for their business and other companies. It would also encourage other high-tech businesses to come to this area. This would help with increasing the average salaries. LSI Logic endorsed this expansion.

Councilor Hosticka asked for clarification on the 300 acres and the 837 employees. Mr. Courtney responded that Sester Farm was doing a lot with the land and that they co-existed. High-tech semi-conductor was an extremely clean industry, he said, and highly regulated. They had growth plans which he further explained. Chair Park said he would show Councilor Hosticka the property.

Fred Bruning, 565 SE 46^th Dr., Gresham, OR 97080 said he was a very enthusiastic resident of Gresham and he spoke in favor of the proposed UGB expansion, including the Springwater addition. East Multnomah County had need for high-tech jobs and ways to train students for those jobs, he said. It seemed silly to send them elsewhere for those jobs. Springwater gave us the opportunity to work with Metro, Mr. Bruning said, to plan an efficient growth pattern for east county that would reduce some of the imbalance of jobs, create more high-tech opportunity and provide education and jobs for students in the area. This would hopefully turn around the tide of low income in the area. He urged support of the recommendation.

Mayor Paul Thalhofer, City of Troutdale, 104 SE Kibling Ave., Troutdale, OR 97060-2099, spoke in support of the Springwater expansion and the related UGB expansion. Mayor Thalhofer provided his testimony in writing (included as a part of this record).

Dave Shields, 1026 SE 213^th, Gresham, OR 97030, representing the Gresham Chamber of Commerce said they in support of the UGB expansion. They needed a stronger industrial base and the Gresham community was going through a major transition. Previously it had been an agricultural based community and they didn't have a lot of family wage jobs; now they wanted to transition into the next step, which was primarily going into the post industrial, scientific society. This addition would allow for that transition. He urged support. He said the Chamber thought that Gresham would be greatly enhanced by this addition.

Mike Johnson, 26980 SE Stone Rd., Gresham, OR, 97080, said he was in favor of the Springwater proposal. He bought his house as an investment, knowing the expansion would move out to Stone road. He said he was in favor for two reasons – investment and the work it would bring to Damascus, Boring and Gresham, and that Gresham was ready for this. In the 15 years he had been in construction, he had seen growth move everywhere else. It was time to come to Gresham.

Mary Martin, 2024 SW Tegartt, Gresham, OR 97080, said she had been a citizen activist for many years and she had watched a small rural area become, very rapidly, a growing suburban city. She thanked the Metro Council for their courage and understanding in Gresham's desire to expand the UGB to include industrial land. The concept plan had been well received by east county citizens, she said. They were proud of the work that had been done so far. Citizens would continue to demand that same excellence in a workable plan for the area. Gresham was the largest city in east county and carried the burden of making sure that the area became healthy and economically sound. They didn't take this burden lightly. They knew that a solid business base was necessary to finance the growth of the area. The taxpayers were ready to step up to plate, as proven by the voter approval of Mt. Hood bond in May. East county has a unique population with more people who were born and remain in this area than any area she had ever been in. It would remain so if it maintained an employment base that could support the children. This expansion was the first step. Ms. Martin expressed one concern – the tight control of the UGB over the last few years had created a problem, she said. This problem was not just an east county problem. For lack of better term, she called it functional discrimination. The high-density that had taken place over the last few years created some housing discrimination and those who were being discriminating against were the elderly and the physically handicapped. If the lots continued to shrink, there would be no areas left for one-level housing or one-level multi-housing. There was a vast population coming of age very soon and she didn’t want to lose some of the most valuable citizens, those who couldn’t handle stairs or multi-level housing. Metro owed it to those citizens to look for ways to include such housing in their plans. Those were the citizens who had paid for much of what we were now so very proud of in east county and the Metro region.

Scott Schaeffer, 6628 SE Hogan Rd., Gresham, OR 97080, said his family had been farming in this area since 1916. His partner and he operated a 100-acre nursery east of Gresham. They owned 42 acres within the proposed Springwater addition. They also owned an additional 75 acres east of 282^nd. He said he supported Gresham's Springwater Concept. The commercial development as proposed would make a much better neighbor to agriculture than a housing development. This would enhance the quality of the Johnson Creek Drainage Basin. It was important to remember that SB 100, which created land use planning as we currently have it in Oregon, called for orderly development. He said he felt Springwater qualified. Mr. Schaeffer expressed concern about the permanent rural urban edge at 282^nd. He said state law governed the expansion of UGBs and it further stated that expansion should be on non-resource land first and then on to the lowest quality resource lands next. He said he would be very disappointed if the permanent rural urban edge created a situation where agricultural land of higher value at a different location were taken first into UGB expansions.

Mr. Hiroshi Morihara, 500 SE Butler Rd., Gresham, OR 97080, said he was the co-chair of the East Metro Economic Alliance and chair of the Oregon Science and Technology Park. Mr. Morihara said he supported the Springwater Concept. East Metro needed to recruit high paying jobs. At the public meeting last week about the UGB in Gresham, there was a stated concern that even if they had high paying jobs, would the local people would get those jobs. At the moment, probably they would not. Local leaders were already concerned about that possibility and they were trying to do something about it. They had workforce training and education initiative with 3 components: 1) The Center for Advance Learning which would open next year, dedicated to 11th and 12th graders so they wouldn’t get bored – they would be challenged and well prepared for college. 2) The Mt. Hood Community College bond measure. If it passed, it would repair and upgrade existing facilities, create a bio-tech allied health building to train health care professionals and University Center construction. This was important because if high school students wanted to pursue a four-year degree, they had to go someplace else. If they had a four-year college, students could stay in the area to pursue higher education. And 3) the Oregon Science and Technology Park. They were trying to attract collaboration, new businesses, new products and services. By having those three components, they could train people and people could work there. With those educational initiatives, the Springwater Concept became extremely important, Mr. Morihara said. If those businesses were successful, they needed to find places to expand. If their next door neighbor was the Springwater area, they could expand next door. For businesses that were doing research, they would have manufacturing nearby. Springwater would provide that opportunity. In conclusion, they would have institutions to education the workforce of future and a place for those to be employed in higher paying environment so that, local people could have jobs.

Kim Southworth, 152 S. Loder Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045, said she was a manager of Hall Family LLC and the co-owner of Fairways Airport. Her family owned approximately 100 acres in Area 26. The property was currently zoned Rural Residential Farm and Forest (RRFF). Her father bought the property in 1957 because of his passion for aviation and for a rural life for his family. Fairways Airport was a restricted use airport with grass strips with 31 hanger units rented. The little airport was among the oldest if not the oldest in state. About 35 percent of buffer land around the runways was agricultural. Her family had always been concerned about the urban growth encroaching on their business and their way of life. They had worked hard to make their airport a good neighbor in the community. In the 1990s a pilot clipped utility wires and crashed at the airport. It cut off power to businesses down Beavercreek Road. For reasons such as this, her family believed that the best use of this property should stay out of the UGB.

Councilor Burkholder asked Ms. Southworth about Area 26, if this property was within the Executive Officer's recommendation. Ms. Southworth said part of their property had been in the recommendation.

Sue O’Halloran, 15 NE 3^rd, Gresham, OR 97030, said she was co-owner of a Gresham real estate company and that she had been an active participant over the years in the regional center development, in both the redevelopment of downtown and in the original concept of the civic center which now was Gresham Station. She said she took great pride in that success, now seen in the Gresham Regional Center. Her company worked in both the commercial and residential fields, and they been concerned about the lack of executive housing and sufficient land to attract significant employers. She said they believed that the Springwater proposal, using smart growth principles and following the well-established center policies, was an exciting opportunity to resolve these issues. Gresham's Regional Center had continued to develop as a showpiece for Metro. Its sustainability was dependent upon a strong economic base. Gresham was at a critical juncture with major erosion in the number of jobs, Ms. O’Halloran said, and without employment lands she foresaw a continuation of that pattern. Action must happen now to sustain success in the future. They had demonstrated their capability to get the job done, forging partnership between the four cities, the business and political leaders, the county, and Metro. They were now ready to move forward. They needed to overcome the obstacles of the jobs imbalance and create their future. Metro held the key, allocation of sufficient land.

Regarding executive housing, Councilor Burkholder asked if, in this part of the region, executives lived in penthouses or 10,000 square-foot lots. He said he thought executives did not always need huge amounts of land per unit. In his section of the community, executive housing would mean less dense areas and he said he questioned the use of the land. Ms. O’Halloran responded that people moved to Gresham because they liked trees and space around them. They didn't have 10,000 square foot lots. Those were the kinds of things that people looked for here, ½ acre or 1 acre. At this point in time, the developments they had, under prior land use development codes, were fully built out. The only remaining parcel was the Persimmon County Club location, which didn't have too much more land. As a realtor here for 20 years, she said people were looking not for high rises but a sense of space around them, some trees in the yard, and a place for kids.

Jim Craft, 7320 SE Telford Rd., Gresham, OR 97080, said he was in middle of new proposed area and he said he thought it was a good idea. He was having trouble with this when he looked at the terrain in this area. At the meetings with Gresham, they showed industrial zoning with a small residential area on 242^nd. Living in that area, he said he had driven that area and the area west of Hwy 26 to 242^nd. A good large portion of this industrial land was very steep terrain and at least 40 percent was useless for commercial or industrial. Another 20 percent of the land was marginal as to whether you could get industry or commercial structures in there. He said he was concerned that Gresham was putting their eggs in a basket of an industrial area, that a large portion of it was not laid out for commercial or industrial construction. He sincerely hoped that the city as well as Metro took a good look at what land really was available for industry. As you go east from Hwy 26, Mr. Craft said, there was relatively flat land that would make a good industrial area. He said he hoped Metro would consider a freeway from I-205 going through Damascus and Boring to Hwy 26. The trucks and traffic very much called for an adjoining freeway. Chair Park suggested checking with staff to make sure it was mapped out. Councilor Monroe responded that the Regional Transportation Plan called for the Sunrise Highway Mr. Craft had described. The first phase of that highway was currently being planned from I-205 to Carver Junction and then later phases would connect to Highway 26.

John Ferguson, 19110 SE White Crest, Boring, OR 97009, presented technical testimony regarding geological hazards in the area. He said he had recently consulted with the City of Gresham regarding revision of their hillside development codes, and he spoke about Bulletin 99 from Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Resources that addressed geologic hazards of northwest Clackamas County. Much of the Damascus area posed substantial geologic concerns to urban scale development, he said. There was a high ground water table and high landslide potential. The map showed the geologic hazards. It showed 31 existing landslides in this area. The landslides varied from 20-40 acres in the area. What was notable was that these slides had occurred on slopes as low as 20 percent. Thirty-five percent was considered a steep slope. All of these landslides had occurred in areas where there had been only wide spread and low-density development. This was significant because urban scale development resulted in factors that can cause slopes to become unstable. This included such things as logging of slopes, altering water runoff patterns, adding weight of earth fill and cutting in roads and building pads. There were 700 landslides in Portland Metro area in 1996 following periods of heavy rains. Many of these slides occurred in the Portland hills. The geology of the Portland hills was very similar to the geology of Damascus, Mr. Ferguson said. There was also a high ground water table in this area regardless of the slope. This exacerbated stability problems and caused construction problems, most notably the construction of underground utilities. He was the geotechnical engineer on the Trillium Development project on Highway 212, he said. The most extensive underground drainage system that he had ever been involved with was required to keep these slopes stable. This was only on slopes that were 10 percent to 20 percent. They had to construct a drainage system. Some drains were as wide as 30 feet and as long as 600 feet. This was a very extensive drainage system. Officials who were in charge of planning tended to believe that engineers could deal with and correct any problems, which came about. This was misguided thinking. He concluded by saying that the Damascus area presented risks that even good engineering may not be able to eliminate. The scale of development should be limited, confined to lower, flatter areas and no additional development should be allowed on the lava domes, buttes and slopes greater than 20 percent.

Bill Willmes, 1825 SW Royal Ave., Gresham, OR 97080-8312, said he served on the Steering Committee for the Pleasant Valley Concept Plan and that he thought it was very good for the area. The only deficiency for the area was the amount of industrial land was constricted. There were a lot of reasons why they didn't have the transportation. They didn't have the roads. They weren't close to freeways. The Springwater proposal had the infrastructure, which could be developed for Pleasant Valley. They didn’t need to build any more jails. They didn’t have executive housing in Gresham; they needed executive housing in Gresham. This needed to be corrected, he said. He noted the plan for Mt. Hood Community College granting four-year degrees. He said he felt that Gresham had their ducks in a row. They had done their homework.

Jim Buck, 312 SE 15^th, Gresham, OR 97080, said he was speaking on behalf of the Center for Advanced Learning. He said he was their planning director as well as chair of the East County Caring Community. The City of Gresham needed the Springwater expansion to expand the supply of family wage jobs in this area. He said they had 14 percent of the county's population and only 7 percent of the jobs. That had an impact on families, in terms of commuting distance, transportation as well as quality of life. That gap, in terms of jobs, seemed to be increasing, he said, as was the poverty rating of east county. Industrial or business development was needed to stave off growing poverty and to provide a base for further business development and expansion. That couldn’t occur on single parcel of land in Troutdale or at South Shore. Industry attracted industry, Mr. Buck said, and depended on other locally situated enterprises. East county needed sufficiently designated land to be attractive to prospective employers and to realize the potential of the Oregon Science and Technology Park. One of the things he hadn’t heard yet was that they needed business expansion to support local governmental services. Residential developments alone couldn't provide the infrastructure and tax support needed by the cities.

On the educational side, authentic work-related projects were the cornerstones for the Center for Advanced Learning. They needed business expansion to cultivate school partnerships, to provide work project sites and internships as well as personnel to advise them on curriculum program development. There were 8,000 high school students in the area’s five high schools. The Center for Advanced Learning preferred the students not venture to Portland for work experiences or linkages. It made sense economically and educationally to designate the acreage in the Springwater expansion for industrial development. He urged the council's approval.

Councilor Atherton asked Mr. Buck if he supported the addition of Study Area 6, north and east of Highway 26, and Mr. Buck replied that if it furthered the goals he had talked about of providing additional industry, yes. That was what they needed to do, have a sufficiently large enough space so that these acreages that were set aside could support each other in terms of growth.

Chair Park asked for clarification on where Area 6 was. Councilor Atherton noted Study Area 6 on the map, which was the area within the Springwater Business Park Concept. Councilor Monroe said it was not east of Hwy 282. Councilor McLain asked Mr. Buck what he thought would happen to Civic Station area and Mr. Buck said he felt it would support it. She said she agreed.

Fred Bruning interjected that the Civic Station neighborhood was almost out of space, that a large portion was residential so that would not apply to the industrial base. Of the office space they had, it was all but leased. They were down to about 30,000 unleased. The retail component was about 90 percent committed now, he said. They were almost out of space for Phase 2. Chair Park asked for clarification on how many square feet were planned or under development, and Mr. Bruning said 2.2 million square feet of residential, office and retail as well as the Center for Advance Learning. It would be one of the densest areas. Some of the housing was going up to 65 to 70 units per acre for the senior project. We were achieving the high-density for residential, Mr. Bruning said..

Marcia Sinclair, Boring CPO, no address given, gave her time to Mr. Apostol.

Dean Apostol, 23850 SE Borges Rd., Gresham, OR 97080, summarized his written testimony (a copy is found in the meeting record) regarding the Damascus-Boring area. Mr. Apostol said he is a landscape architect and natural resource planner, and spoke of the Small Town and Greenbelt Model of the ancient Greeks. He quoted Lawrence Halprein’s report, The Willamette Valley: Choices for the Future, and the three key aspects in that report that were identified as highly valued by residents: a low-key, relaxed way of live; a feeling of closeness to nature; and a feeling of small town life. Mr. Apostol said the 1000 Friends of Oregon’s plan would destroy these qualities and he said he hoped the committee would not let it influence their decision. Mr. Apostol’s testimony also included his response to issues raised regarding the Greenbelt.

Councilor Atherton said the Metro Council had adopted criteria for expansion of the UGB, which included this concept for community identity.

Robert Fisher, 39410 Hood, Sandy, OR 97055, said he lived in the city of Sandy, that he had been involved in politics and watching Metro closely. His concern, he said, was that he had heard from each citizen in Sandy that they wanted to maintain this greenscape between Gresham and Sandy. They had not had a vote on this situation because they weren't part of Metro. What he had seen in Gresham was a form of government that had grown stronger and bigger. Gresham's growth was out of control, Mr. Fisher said. Things that he really admired in Gresham when he was younger were no longer there. It needed to stop. Each citizen should have a voice in this. In Sandy they had voter annexation, and that should be done in each community. He admired that and said he thought that communities needed to have that voice. They wanted this greenspace maintained. They didn’t want economic growth in this area.

Councilor McLain assured Mr. Fisher that she sat on a neighboring city grant program with representatives from Sandy, Canby, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Clackamas County, citizens and Metro. They signed an agreement with Sandy and Clackamas County saying that they also valued that green separation. When they looked at additional industrial land, they asked if this tainted the separation between Gresham and Sandy and said they had been assured that it did not. She said everyone signed the agreement except ODOT. Chair Park said one of the staff could provide a copy of that agreement to Mr. Fisher.

Pamela Guettler, 19265 SE Heuke Rd., Boring, OR 97009, said she thought the citizens were starting be heard. They all had a lot more in common than she thought in the beginning. She lived on a little dead-end road in Damascus off of Foster Road. She and her husband owned River City Bicycles. She was originally from Palo Alto and had been through the Silicone Valley building, had seen advantages and disadvantages to quick expansion. This was one of the most beautiful cycling areas in the world, she said, and it should be capitalized. She said she lived in a zoning of RRFF5, and behind them was 11-¼ acres of a lava dome butte with year round running springs that traveled down to their property and ran into Rock Creek at the base of the property. It was quiet and full of migrating birds and great wildlife habitat. On either were 4^th and 5^th generation families who valued small farms. They were trying to protect large farms and valuable farmland. Maybe Damascus could take some of the brunt to preserve valuable farm land, but there were a lot of diverse products which came from these small farms that were not so apparent when you were involved in city life, such as the fiber industry. Oregon was famous for its fiber from sheep and alpacas. The organic food was also a product of these small farms. They understood how sensitive and fragile this environment was in Damascus, she said, and they needed to respect this. As they go through this development, it was great to be conscientious about what we do. She quoted Mark Twain, "A crime persevered in a thousand centuries ceases to be a crime and becomes a virtue." As they go though the development of properties, she said they needed to observe all the agendas and provide for each community as was appropriate. She promoted the greenbelt and small town concept. It was a win-win situation. They won’t lose population, they would make a lot of people happy.

Jim Wheeler, 4153 SE 30^th St., Gresham, OR 97080, said he was 500 feet from the edge of the current UGB. He supported the Springwater expansion. He was concerned about keeping intent and purpose as expressed in the prospectus given by the city of the type of industry and the environmentally sensitive approach to locating and developing the industry within that area. He also had significant concern about the transportation system. Currently the north/south corridors through Gresham were at over capacity. Expansion of industrial land to the south was a utopian idea that everyone will be living right in and around Gresham and working in Gresham. It would be an ideal but realistically it would draw people in from outside the area and there would still be people from Gresham going elsewhere to work. They were going to see an increase in traffic and he asked how that would be handled. He asked that the council take that into consideration as they looked at expansion. He suggested developing a plan on how to handle the infrastructure as well as protection of the rural communities on the other side of the UGB.

Matt Beil, 7700 SE 262nd, Gresham, OR 97080, said he was proud to be an American. He said he believed in capitalism but also an even playing field. He’s lived in Gresham since moving from Portland. He was in the high tech business. He expressed concern about the increase in traffic congestion with the possibility of an industrial park. Adding more trucks to these roads would only make the problem worse. There were already many accidents in the area. Gresham seemed to want to grab the land now. He noted a lack of response time to his neighborhood in the case of fire and police calls. He asked what companies were coming into the area. He noted that in the high-tech industry in the Beaverton area there were a lot of For Lease signs and said it seemed to him that there was lot of selling off of the future for trying to develop land that was easy to develop. Maybe that was one of the shortfalls. There had to be land somewhere else that could be developed or redeveloped instead of taking farmland or an area like a green space. It seemed to him that you wouldn't want to put an industrial park right next to the Springwater Trail. This area could be used for larger homes, five-acre parcels. Why can't they stay five-acre parcels for the next twenty years, he asked. Gresham didn’t seem to want to go to the high end of things. They always wanted to go to the lower end of the road as far as homes went. More homes per acre equaled more tax dollars. He felt that more consideration should be put into this before they went with industrial land. It didn’t seem right, he added. If they couldn‘t fix the transportation system, don’t put in more heavy trucks.

Jacob O’Donnell, 27030 SE Jeanette St., Gresham, OR 97080, summarized his written testimony (included as a part of this record) which said he objected to the expansion of the UGB and the Springwater expansion. He said increasing the area would disrupt the communities already in existence. Mr. O’Donnell said he also objected to the swiftness of the decision. He asked that not only the land be valued, but the people who live on the land as well. He requested that the UGB decision be postponed until after March 2003 in order to give people time to organize and vote on the proposals.

Dr. Christine Perala, WaterCycle, Inc., 34969 Skogan Rd., Sandy, OR, 97055, read from her written testimony (included as a part of this record), who said she taught the Watershed and River Restoration course for Portland State University (PSU). Dr. Perala spoke of the four major watersheds in the Damascus-Boring area being considered for inclusion in the UGB, and urged the committee to give serious consideration to the Small Town and Greenbelt concept proposed by the Boring CPO and local residents of that area.

Dr. John Gardiner, WaterCycle, Inc., 34969 Skogan Rd., Sandy, OR 97055, said he was an engineer with a Ph.D. in watershed management and extensive experience in land use planning for the water environment, for sustainable development. When you consider any area for expansion, he said, you must plan for restoration of the carrying capacity in that area, not just environmental, but social as well. First, plan for restoration and then identify appropriate development to achieve in any sense a balanced solution with respect to social economic and environmental factors. He said he was part of the 1000 Friends workshop. He said that publication showed zero order streams and headwater grounds protection under the green team's proposals. These did not carry forward into final ideas too well. The text did not mention the important protection for zero order streams. What had also been lost in summary was, by the end of the six-day workshop, that most if not all of the participants were convinced that they had been asked to put a quart into a pint pot. The 100,000-population figure was inappropriate for this area. He endorsed the idea of a greenbelt and a great reduction in aspirations in terms of numbers of people living and working here.

Chuck Waugh, 38203 SE Lusted Rd, Boring, OR 97009, said he was facilities manager and chief financial officer of his own company and that he had heard discussion about the big companies. He said he was in favor of small businesses becoming large and yet he said he was concerned about the emphasis on large business. He said he’d heard a lot about executive housing and he asked the audience how many of them lived in executive housing and worked for companies of over 25 employees. There were a lot of the rest of us here, he said, and we are the economic-base of the area. He also concurred with the Boring folks. Mr. Waugh said he was concerned about the Springwater proposal, that there ended up being such a separation particularly when small businesses wouldn’t be in those areas but that was the economic base of the area. It was hard for small businesses with the lack of support from local government. They needed to encourage distributed industries, business and land use so it was not so heavily centered. This caused further weight on the infrastructure. In conclusion, they needed distributed jobs. They needed the overall area distributed by company size. They had to have the industrial anchors but they also needed to support the smaller businesses. They needed to be distributed geographically, economically and academically so they were not just enticing the executive in the hi-tech market.

John Hartsock, representing the Committee for the Future of Damascus, 18510 SE Vosel Rd., Boring, OR 97009, said he had already heard the testimony that said the best solution was don’t come here. However, like the Boring CPO, he said Damascus realized they had to take their fair share. The issue was to take enough land to plan and make it work. If you looked at the Executive Officer's recommendation added to the areas that Clackamas County and Gresham had suggested, it gave them enough land to achieve these types of planning goals. They had had presentations on the Small Town Greenbelt. He said they thought it was a very viable planning concept and would more than support making that a recommendation in the final decision. They lived daily with Sunnyside Road, which was the poster child of how not to do development because there was not enough land there to do it in the first place. He implored Metro to allow enough land to make the plan work. He said he’d noted a presentation by the Newland Communities to reduce that area significantly. The problem was that that would not be enough land to do a complete community. They would see spotty annexation. They wouldn't be able to put a governance model in place to do this in a complete community solution. One of his other comments had to do with services. There were services available in the planning stages from Gresham and Clackamas County. The area could be served. They would like to have none, but they understood they would have to take their fair share. The community had the desire to take on the challenge much in the same way it was done earlier when it was first settled in 1800s.

Councilor Atherton asked about the fair share concept and what Mr. Hartsock thought was fair. Mr. Hartsock said the 1000 Friends’ plan talked about 100,000 people. That was not what the Executive Officer's recommendation was. One hundred thousand people were probably over the fair share. He said he didn't know what the fair share was. That was what needed to be worked out during the concept planning and the comprehensive planning. The number of housing units was very close to the recommendation. Collectively during the planning phase, he said we can make this work and achieve all the goals. Councilor Atherton said the fairness concept was based on what works or fits with community.

Mr. Hartsock reflected on Mr. Apostol's testimony, which talked about the size of community and keeping the two cities separate made sense. He said he didn’t know those details yet. They needed to work those issues out as they went forward. The real issue was having enough land to be able to preserve these areas that needed to be preserved but also answer a need for the housing need within greater community.

Councilor Hosticka asked what could we do now that will assure or make high probability that the concepts they were proposing would actually come about. The council had listened to a lot of proposals that sounded good but they drew lines on maps and prayed. If you had some ideas about how the council could do things that would give a greater likelihood that what you were talking about would actually happen. He had seen other good plans, he said, and acted on those representations and then other forces would come into play that overwhelmed the process and led to results that they didn't favor. He requested input at some time into these concerns.

Mr. Hartsock said he thought that the council in their final recommendation could have a requirement that at a minimum they show in the concept planning phase what the small town greenbelt looked like. He didn't think that the goals were all that unreasonable when you looked at the number of acres and they could still preserve greenbelt areas. There were ways to do it, he said, by being diligent in the planning process to help achieve the overall goals. He thought we could get there.

Chair Park suggested he be thinking about local control. Councilor McLain said that Mr. Hartsock gave some good ideas for what they could do. The council could place conditions. They did the last time they brought land into the UGB. On 55 West they talked about transportation and the concept plan for the whole area. Those were things they could do using such ideas as the Small Town Greenbelt concept. They were interested in doing that, she said. They loved local control and partners who wanted to work with them. There was a balance between making sure the decisions were not diluted to the point they would be ashamed of the vote. The council wanted to make sure when they voted for something that those things would happen, that they truly did happen. They understood economic and business changes. It seemed that the council should have some ability to put conditions on that were realistic. She said they would be working on some of the other elements as well as conditions.

Mr. Hartsock said this was the first time they had tried to do a significant development collectively in the community. They had to do it differently and be sure they did it right. How did they take their fair share and preserve the area at the same time. Local control was important. If they didn’t bring in enough land there was not a chance to form new governance. They were working with local service districts about how they did governance. They needed enough land to put an entire plan together.

Chair Park said they were trying to achieve balance and asked how they could. Mr. Hartsock said they had had a meeting with the committee, the Metro planners and the county. It was unbelievably positive how the CPO will be involved in the community outreach piece. They had an effort heading toward the same goals. He thought they could get there.

Julie Herman, 16402 NE 8^th St., Vancouver, WA 97684, said she hoped to build a house north of the Boring area and she supported changes in the UGB. She had previously pleaded for a variety of lot sizes to get a variety of different life styles in the neighborhoods. There was a problem with smaller lots. You got a certain type of people on certain lot sizes. They wanted a good mixture in the neighborhoods. They were forced to go outside Gresham for some elbow room. They needed breathing area and single-level housing. She encouraged not only having executive homes on large lots. It was nice to have older people and younger people mixed. In her area they had honorary grandparents which caught a lot of mail theft. They watched each other's homes when necessary. It was nice to have mixed neighborhoods. It was a wonderful place to live. She would like to see that for everyone. She liked the idea of a mixed environment, incorporating the nurseries in with residential. That idea also provided some breathing room.

Lawrence Becker, 1192 NE Centurion Pl., Gresham, OR 97030, thanked the committee for this forum to have this open discussion about what they thought was important about the UGB. He said he felt strongly that they had enough people and talent who have backgrounds on greenspace preservation and watershed management, that could formulate this plan and put it all together. It was incumbent on council to listen and put it all together. He had lived in Gresham for about 12 years, he had seen some things that he didn't like such as high-density housing. With the growth of high-density housing he thought you would see an increase in crime rate in that area. He would not like to see this happen in other areas. If they incorporated some these wonderful ideas they could do this right. Please take all of these ideas into consideration before the final decision.

Rob Fussell, Gresham City Manager, 1333 NW Eastman Pkwy, Gresham, OR 97030, said it was challenging to develop in Gresham. If this plan was approved, they were going to make sure that they met all of the requirements of taking care of business. How can Metro be sure they will get what we say we will deliver, he asked. Historically they had seen Gresham follow through, they were the first city to implement the transportation-planning rule. They had dedicated themselves to good planning. The best protection they had was they were all talking to each other now and had a mutual commitment to creating community and creating a place for our children to live and work that would in fact reflect the goals and priorities that they were seeing in the plans that were coming forward. They were committed to the regional center they had. They felt that Springwater Phases 1 and 2 would compliment and supplement their current center. The number of acres struck him. They were fully supportive of the Executive Officer's recommendation to add additional industrial land. Phase 1 was all exception land. Of the 2,000 acres in Phase 2, only 121 acres was other than exception land or they were smaller parcels surrounding EFU. They felt that with Springwater Phases 1 and 2, working together and with the region, they could handle concerns as they worked through the planning process over the next many years. There was a lot of talk about executive housing. Sometimes they got defensive about being told by companies that they can't find any place to live. Sometimes they overstated their point when they talked about the housing they were going to create. As they had, and as they were and as the future would hold, they were going to make all residential development within housing density requirements. There was support that had been brought forward tonight for the Springwater concept. In the packet of materials they prepared, you had seen a resolution, in strong support of the Springwater concept. Mayor Thalhofer signed a letter along with Fairview and others supporting the concept. They felt they had a strong united neighborhood out here. There was a lot of talk about environmental issues, the notion of transportation and traffic issues. Those were all good issues. They were confident that those would be handled in master planning process. They had met with the Boring group and were sensitive to what they were talking about. It was crucial to work together. They were committed to working together. There had been talking about the big company concept and jobs for only the high tech people. The Springwater Phase 1 would generate another 2.5 jobs for all kinds of diversity. They felt this package really met the need of entire region, which was an extreme shortage of jobs. His final thought was that over the last three months they had worked hand in hand with Metro staff and he said he felt the case was made and hoped the council would support it. He knew he could speak for all of them, they were committed to implementing it and ensuring it will happen. He also noted Councilor Burkholder has asked about Title 2 compliance.

Richard Ross, Gresham Planning Manager, 1333 NW Eastman Pkwy, Gresham, OR 97030, said they were in the process of working with Metro staff to complete the last piece for all of their land use types in the city, which were single-family parking standards. They were going to wrap up their request for compliance made in August in the next week or so. They would be meeting with Metro staff. They exceeded all of the standards. They had also adopted commercial standards for over seven years. They seemed to be working well. He noted that Gresham's bicycle parking standards exceeded that of the city of Portland. All of the new off-street bike spaces were weather protected.

Mr. Fussell added that there were some concerns about when the Damascus area could be developed over what period of time. From a planning perspective, it was essential to have it all there. They supported the Executive Officer's recommendation. It would enable them all to work together. They had already had a brainstorming session with Clackamas County as to who would serve the area. They had to blur the lines and forget about counties and serve smartly.

Councilor McLain spoke of the executive housing subject. In the City of Hillsboro, she said, they wanted executive housing and they got a Street of Dreams. Those houses didn’t sell well and they had a lot of vacancies. Maybe the definition of executive housing needed to be looked at, she added. Mr. Fussell said he thought that was really true. The most important thing that families were looking for was the notion of family, community, neighborhood, church and school. They had to end up with that as a product.

Councilor Hosticka said he appreciated the collective will and clarity of purpose. He was dealing with the greenbelt between Wilsonville and Tualatin, he said. Once it was established it took more work to keep it there than to establish it in the first place. You had to be in it for the long haul. He said he felt they were and that the Metro Council appreciated that.

Chair Park thanked the audience, the committee and the staff. This was the 6th of 7 meetings. There was one left at the City of Portland on October 29^th that had the same format.

Chair Park closed the public hearing.

There being no further business before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 8:39 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cheryl Grant

Committee Clerk

PRIVATE TESTIMONY RECEIVED BY MACHINE RECORDING

Tammy Atkisson, 25944 SE Callister, Gresham, OR 97080, submitted her testimony via private recording session. She said she had purchased her property six years ago as an investment because she knew the UGB would come to Gresham eventually. She said she is in favor of expanding now, as were most of her neighbors.

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 2002

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

Attachments to the public record for the meeting of October 24, 2002 (continued)

Attachments to the public record for the meeting of October 24, 2002 (continued)

TESTIMONY CARDS.

▪  State Representative Laurie Monnes Anderson, PO Box 1531, Gresham, OR 97030

▪  Mayor Chuck Becker, City of Gresham, 1333 NW Eastman Parkway, Gresham, OR, 97060

▪  Lonnie Roberts, Multnomah County Commission, District 4, 17131 SE Manley, Portland, OR 97236

▪  Ken Noah, Supt. Gresham Barlow School Dist., 1331 Eastman Parkway, Gresham, OR 97030

▪  Machiel (Mike) B. Boer, 2184 SE 53^rd Ave., Hillsboro, OR 97123

▪  John Hepler, 111939 NE Davis, Apt 212, Portland, OR 97220

▪  James Courtney, 23400 NE Glisan, Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Fred Bruning, 565 SE 46^th Dr., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Dave Shields, 1026 SE 213^th, Gresham, OR 97030

▪  Mike Johnson, 26980 SE Stone Rd., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Mary Martin, 2024 SW Tegartt, Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Scott Schaeffer, 6628 SE Hogan Rd., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Dr. Hiroshi Morihara, 500 SE Butler Rd., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Kim Southworth, 152 S. Loder Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045

▪  Sue O’Halloran, 15 NE 3^rd, Gresham, OR 97030

▪  Jim Craft, 7320 SE Telford Rd., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  John Ferguson, 19110 SE White Crest, Boring, OR 97009

▪  Bill Willmes, 1825 SW Royal Ave., Gresham, OR 97080-8312

▪  Jim Buck, 312 SE 15^th, Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Marcia Sinclair, Boring CPO

▪  Dean Apostol, 23850 SE Borges Rd., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Robert Fisher, 39410 Hood, Sandy, OR 97055

▪  Pamela Guettler, 19265 SE Heuke Rd., Boring, OR 97009

▪  Jim Wheeler, 4153 SE 30^th St., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Matt Beil, 7700 SE 262^nd, Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Jacob O’Donnell, 27030 SE Jeanette St., Gresham, OR 97080

▪  Dr. Christine Perala, 34969 Skogan Rd., Sandy, OR, 97055

▪  Dr. John Gardiner, 34969 Skogan Rd., Sandy, OR 97055

▪  Chuck Waugh, 38203 SE Lusted Rd, Boring, OR 97009

▪  John Hartsock, 18510 SE Vosel Rd., Boring, OR 97009

▪  Julie Herman, 16402 NE 8^th St., Vancouver, WA 97684

▪  Lawrence Becker, 1192 NE Centurion Pl., Gresham, OR 97030,

▪  Rob Fussell, Gresham City Manager, 1333 NW Eastman Pkwy, Gresham, OR 97030

▪  Tammy Atkisson, 25944 SE Callister, Gresham, OR 97080

GREEN YOUR OPINION COUNTS TESTIMONY CARDS SUBMITTED:

▪  Danielle Groff, 11565 SE 222^nd Dr., Boring, OR 97009

▪  Dennis E. Bachman, 1339 SE 114^th Ave., Portland, OR 97216