Planning - Land Use Planning - Metro Land Use Decision Records, Full Record and Submittal - Growth Management Committee Report: Consideration of Ordinance No. 98-779A

GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT

CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 98-779A, FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING METRO URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AND THE 2040 GROWTH CONCEPT MAP IN ORDINANCE 95-625A IN URBAN RESERVE AREAS 43, 47 OF WASHINGTON COUNTY.

______________________________________________________________________

Date: November 23, 1998

Committee Action: At its November 3, 1998 meeting, the Growth Management Committee voted 3-0 to recommend Council adoption of Ordinance No. 98-779A. Voting in favor: Councilors Monroe, Morissette and Kvistad.

Council Issues/Discussion: Ordinance 98-779A includes urban reserve areas 43 and 47. These sites contain approximately 92 acres, and can accommodate approximately 406 dwelling units and 135 jobs.

The committee discussed whether to add urban reserve site #55, that portion which is inside the metro boundary. Councilor Monroe moved this ordinance and did not include site #55, because he felt it belonged in a different geographical package.

Councilor’s Morissette and McLain explained that they felt that as exception land inside the Metro boundary these sites could include #55, and that there could be a single owner problem with site #55 residing alone in its own ordinance. Furthermore they felt that #55, 43 and 47 were non-controversial and should be packaged together on that basis also.

The committee agreed that if #43 and #47 were packaged together, then a competing ordinance, #788 could be considered later in the meeting, and possibly amended so that it contained only site #55 (inside the boundary).

Councilor Morissette raised the issue of the southern boundary of site #47 and whether the FEMA floodplain line was accurate. At issue is a property owners’ lot, which is bisected by the floodplain line, and whether in fact the actual floodplain is entirely below that lot. Councilor Morissette moved an amendment to re-designate a portion of the site #47 southern boundary, but it was not successful. The committee expressed interest in seeing more information on this matter at the council level.