MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tuesday, March 23, 1999

Room 370B

Members Present:  Susan McLain (Chair), David Bragdon (Vice Chair), Rod Park

Members Absent:    None

Also Present:    Bill Atherton

Chair McLain called the meeting to order at 3:10 P.M.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 16, 1999, GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

2.  URBAN GROWTH REPORT

• CAPTURE RATE (Continued)
• PARKS, OPENSPACE, CHURCHES

Chair McLain distributed copies of the 1999 Urban Growth Report Work Program to members of the committee. A copy is included in the meeting record. She said it is her goal for the committee to follow the schedule’s timeline.

Chair McLain asked the committee to review a memo from Michael Morrissey, Senior Council Analyst, to Elaine Wilkerson, Director of Growth Management Services, dated March 16, 1999, regarding Growth Management Discussion of “Capture Rate.” A copy of the memo is included in the meeting record. She asked committee members for comments.

Councilor Bragdon said asked if the differential in the housing and employment capture rates may be less than it appears due to households in which more than one person is employed.

After discussion, the committee directed Dennis Yee, Senior Economist, Data Resources Center, to write a memo for the purpose of clearly understanding the differential between the household and employment capture rates.

Lydia Neill, Senior Regional Planner, Growth Management Services, presented the discussion paper on the factors of parks/open space, schools, and places of worship in the Urban Growth Report. A staff report to the discussion paper included information presented by Ms. Neill and is included in the meeting record. She asked for committee direction on whether any amount of the “surplus” of church lands (98 acres) be considered vacant buildable lands inventory, and therefore assigned capacity.

The committee discussed a number of factors that could be influencing the increase in the amount of vacant acres currently being held by places of worship for future development. Possible factors mentioned include demographics, landbanking due to anticipated increases in land prices, legislative restrictions on where places of worship may be sited, and the exponential growth of some places of worship compared to little or no growth in others.

Chair McLain asked that the update of the parks and open space coverage, due for completion by the end of March 1999, be presented to the committee at the earliest possible date.

The committee discussed factors affecting land usage by schools. Ms. Neill noted that the report indicated that several school districts are indicating no additional land need for schools in the 20-year horizon. Chair McLain asked if the study accounted for factors such as large parking lots required by suburban schools due to limited transit options, the possibility of schools sharing facilities with parks departments, and the need for schools inside the current urban growth boundary (UGB), due to refill. She said the main concern expressed in the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) Schools Subcommittee was the need for counties and cities to include schools in their planning.

The committee directed Ms. Neill to collect more recent information on school facility footprints.

In reviewing the policy discussion questions, the committee agreed to adjust the street factor for all parcels larger than one acre from 22 percent to 18.5 percent. Councilor Park stated the effect of the change would be minimal.

Chair McLain directed staff to prepare an appendix to the discussion paper summarizing the laws governing the siting of schools and places of worship.

3.  URBAN RESERVE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY (UGB) CODE AMENDMENTS

Ms. Neill presented the discussion draft amending Chapter 3 of the Metro Code. A copy of the staff report to the consideration of a discussion draft ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the Metro Code includes information presented by Ms. Neill and is included in the meeting record.

Councilor Bragdon reviewed his memo to Chair McLain and Councilor Park, dated March 19, 1999, regarding consideration of affordable housing amendments to Chapter 3 of the Metro Code. A copy of the memo is included in the meeting record.

Chair McLain expressed concern that Councilor Bragdon’s proposed amendments may overlap the work assigned by the Council to the Affordable Housing Technical Advisory Committee (H-TAC). She suggested that the committee wait to discuss Councilor Bragdon’s proposal until H-TAC completes the first step of its work in June 1999. Councilor Bragdon agreed.

Chair McLain directed staff to write a memo to H-TAC stating that Councilor Bragdon raised a number of issues which the Growth Management Committee reviewed, and that the Growth Management Committee chose to delay action until after H-TAC’s report in June.

Chair McLain asked for comments on staff’s proposed amendments to Chapter 3 of the Metro Code.

Councilor Park said while every urban reserve plan may not be equally funded, it is important that each plan includes the same amount of public involvement.

The committee agreed and directed Ms. Neill and legal counsel to draft an amendment to address the need for public involvement in the creation of urban reserve plans, as directed by State Land Use Planning Goal 1.

Councilor Atherton asked why staff is recommending that locational adjustments be required to be located outside of urban reserve areas, and why master planning is not required.

Ms. Neill said locational adjustments are used for parcels of land less than 20 acres, and therefore are not required to be master planned. She said the intent of the proposed amendment is to prevent someone from adding a small piece of an urban reserve to the UGB, without planning for the urban reserve as a whole.

Dan Cooper, General Counsel, said the proposed amendment applies only to urban reserve areas. He said the committee may wish to review locational adjustment requirements in general.

Councilor Atherton proposed sending a letter to each jurisdiction asking them to respond, by resolution, to three questions: does the community wish to grow, and if so, where and by how much. He said this should be done before the Council starts its next round of UGB expansions, in order to avoid numerous legal appeals.

Chair McLain recommended that she, Councilor Atherton, and Mr. Cooper meet separately to discuss her concerns about Councilor Atherton’s proposal. They agreed to meet March 24, 1999, as Councilor Atherton wished to make his proposal at MPAC that evening.

Chair McLain summarized that the committee has accepted the proposed amendments as written, with an additional amendment addressing Goal 1. She said the discussion paper would go to MPAC next for review.

Mr. Morrissey recommended that staff refer to the public involvement element of Title 3 of the Functional Plan in drafting the new amendment.

Ms. Neill said MPAC has referred the issue to MTAC, and MTAC plans to review it at its April 1, 1999, meeting. MPAC has asked that MTAC complete its work quickly. She said all MPAC comments will be referred to the Growth Management Committee.

4.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

Chair McLain said the next Growth Management Committee meeting will be on April 6, 1999, at which time the committee will decide if an additional meeting will be required on April 13, 1999.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair McLain adjourned the meeting at 4:13 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Suzanne Myers

Council Assistant

i:\minutes\1999\grwthmgt\03239gmm.doc

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF MARCH 23, 1999

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