MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tuesday, May 4, 1999

Council Chamber

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

Members Absent:    None

Also Present:    Rod Monroe, Bill Atherton

Chair McLain called the meeting to order at 1:35 P.M.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 27, 1999, GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

2.  URBAN GROWTH REPORT

• PARKS DATA
• EMPLOYMENT COMPILATION
• CURRENT ZONING VERSUS 2040 ZONING

Current Zoning versus 2040 Zoning

Dick Bolen, Manager, Data Resource Center, reviewed the study on current zoning versus 2040 zoning. A memo from Mr. Bolen to Chair McLain, regarding the use of local zoning for urban growth boundary (UGB) capacity analysis, includes information presented by Mr. Bolen and is included in the meeting record.

Elaine Wilkerson, Director, Growth Management Services, said Carol Hall, Senior GIS Planner, Data Resource Center, is preparing a sensitivity analysis on the effectiveness of the new methodology, which will be available for committee review on May 18.

The committee chose to replace the term “regional zone categories” with “standardized zone categories” for the sake of clarity.

The committee forwarded the factor of current zoning versus 2040 zoning, with the understanding that staff will complete the work as described in Mr. Bolen’s memo, and will report back to committee.

Parks Data

Mr. Turpel presented the update on parks data. A memo from Scott Weddle, Planning Technician, to Chair McLain regarding updated parks figures for the UGB includes information presented by Mr. Turpel and is included in the meeting record.  

Chair McLain said the Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District has said that Metro omitted a small but important area from the parks inventory, commonly known as Onion Flats. She said she spoke with Heather Nelson Kent, Senior Manager, Regional Parks and Greenspaces, about the possibility of adding Onion Flats to the inventory, and Ms. Kent said the addition would cause a two-week delay. Chair McLain recommended adding Onion Flats to the parks inventory, assuming the two week delay would not cause a major problem.

Mr. Turpel clarified that the Onion Flats area is outside the UGB and not within an urban reserve, so adding it to the study would not affect the number of acres of parks and open space within the UGB.

Chair McLain said she understood; she recommended adding the area to the study based on watershed boundaries rather than jurisdictional boundaries.

Current Zoning versus 2040 Zoning

Councilor Park asked how staff calculates land zoned for a range of 4,000 to 7,000 square foot averages.

Mr. Turpel said staff does its calculations based on the maximum possible density.

Chair McLain asked staff to write a narration of the 25 standardized zone categories and of the differences among jurisdictions’ zoning.

Parks Data

Councilor Bragdon asked how the current trends in parks affects the level of service per capita.

Ms. Wilkerson said she has been working with Ms. Nelson Kent and the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) Parks Subcommittee to establish an historical perspective, and investigate typical levels of service in other communities, compared to the Portland region. She said one problem with the analysis is that the origin dates of many parks are unknown, making an historical analysis of park services over time difficult. Another difficulty is that the analysis of existing parks and greenspaces has not been completed. She said the size of Forest Park also poses a difficulty, and it may be advisable to do separate analyses of active park space versus total park space.

Chair McLain said Metro is still in the early stages of this work and still has to answer the question, what is a reasonable level of park service per capita.

Councilor Park said it is also a question of how much the public want to pay for parks.

The committee passed the parks data and current zoning versus 2040 zoning on to Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC), with future action by MPAC.

Chair McLain asked Michael Morrissey, Senior Council Analyst, to write a short summary of the committee’s discussion.

Employment Compilation

Dennis Yee, Senior Economist, Data Resource Center, gave an update on employment compilation. A memo from Mr. Yee to Chair McLain regarding preliminary need estimate for non-residential land inside the Metro UGB includes information presented by Mr. Yee and is included in the meeting record.

Councilor Park asked how the Zonal Employment Land Demand model (ZELDA) calculates the redevelopment of commercial land into residential use. He said he did not want Metro to be open to criticism that it double counted land for both industrial and residential use.

Larry Shaw, Senior Assistant Counsel, said staff does not have enough experience with mixed-use development to determine average land-use ratios. For example, in commercial areas the ratio may be 75 percent jobs and 25 percent housing, while on more industrial sites, the ratio could be closer to 90 percent jobs/10 percent housing. He said Councilor Park’s question is whether Metro would violate House Bill (HB) 2709 if it looked like staff counted twice by counting two different uses, in some percentage, on the same land. He said, on the contrary, if Metro knew it had a mixed-use area, but only factored in either employment or residential use, it would violate HB 2709. He said if staff’s estimate of the ratio was proved to be inaccurate, that would be a technical matter, and not a violation of HB 2709.

Chair McLain said she would like to review the methodology for calculating land-use ratios for mixed-use development at a future meeting,

Councilor Atherton asked how a home office in a residential zone is calculated.

Mr. Yee said the home office meets a demand for jobs without using employment lands; so it is calculated as a subtraction from the forecast for non-residential land demand.

Mr. Yee noted that previous Urban Growth Reports double counted school-related jobs. He said the problem would be fixed in the future, and may lower the non-residential land demand number.

Ms. Wilkerson said MTAC has asked planning directors to supply Metro with recent data on their densities.

Councilor Atherton said he was concerned that the recent floor-to-area ratios (FARs) run by ZELDA show similar FARs for regional centers, town centers, and corridors. He said Metro’s goal was to move toward nodal development rather than strip zones.

Ms. Wilkerson said the 2040 Growth Concept map identifies specific corridors and main streets, with are longitudinal in form, and serve as links between the nodes, or regional centers. She added that corridors and main streets are also local service areas with retail uses.

Councilor Atherton said he has heard from citizens that denser development along corridors and main streets is incompatible with the goal of moving people quickly.

Mr. Turpel said the Transportation Department has carefully considered the purposes of different streets. On some streets, on-street parking and subsequent lower speeds and volume are desirable. Other streets, however, are intended to be high-speed and high-volume, without emphasis on pedestrian and transit uses. He said from a staff perspective, there is no difference between main street and town center densities.

Mr. Yee concluded that the employment compilation is still a work in progress. He asked for committee direction on the refill rate. He also asked how aspirational the assumptions on density for new development should be. He noted that an industrial land study will be completed in the future.

Councilor Park said he would like to see an expression of resource utilization, if possible. For example, not all types of jobs put the same demands on the environment and the region’s resources: fifty manufacturing plants with heavy trucks transporting raw materials in and finished materials out places a greater demand on roads than fifty office buildings with desk jobs.

Mr. Yee said ZELDA does not address resource utilization, but Metro’s Travel Forecasting staff is working with the Port of Portland on a commodity flow model that will quantify some of the heavy business-related commodity flows that may impact current and future road congestion. Secondly, the Oregon and Washington Departments of Transportation are working together on a study of the Interstate-5 trade corridor to identify the point at which congestion over the Columbia River impacts future economic development.

Councilor Park added another example: high-tech chip manufacturers use millions of gallons of water per plant. He wondered how many chip manufacturers the region can support before it runs out of water.

Mr. Yee said in terms of water demand, the Metro Data Resource Center has contractual relationships with the City of Portland Water Bureau. He said he will ask the Portland Water Bureau what the chip manufacturing forecast might be in terms of impact on water demand.

Sensitivity Analysis on Urban Growth Report Factors

Mr. Yee reviewed the sensitivity analysis on Urban Growth Report factors. A memo from Mr. Yee and Jennifer Bradford, Growth Management Services, to Chair McLain includes information presented by Mr. Yee and is included in the meeting record.

3.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

Chair McLain scheduled an additional Growth Management Committee meeting on Tuesday, May 11, to consider three action items, including amendments to the Metro Code. She noted that on May 12, MPAC will address the Urban Growth Report, and will make its recommendations on May 18. Chair McLain said staff will submit final information by June 1, followed by peer review, and a final decision at the Council by July 15. She said she had hoped the Council would make its UGB decision in September, but she expects the vote will more likely occur in November.

Mr. Shaw noted that the Growth Management Committee voted previously to reconsider Ordinance No. 98-788C, which added urban reserve (UR) 55 to the UGB. He said the committee needs to hold a public hearing on UR 55 sometime in May. He said he and Tom Kloster, Senior Program Supervisor for the Transportation Department, are preparing a memo for the hearing which will include information from the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) studies. Mr. Shaw said the full Council needs to take action by June 10, 1999, to readopt. Mr. Shaw said June 1, is the last possible date to hold a public hearing, so if the committee wishes to hold more than one public hearing, it will need to schedule a hearing on May 26.

Chair McLain asked Mr. Morrissey to work with committee members, Mr. Shaw, and Growth Management Services staff to schedule the public hearings for UR 55. She said the most likely public hearing dates are May 26 or June 1.

Mr. Shaw noted the FARs attached to the memo from Mr. Yee on preliminary need estimate for non-residential land inside the Metro UGB; a copy is included in the meeting record. He said the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and local governments will be very interested in that the FARs for regional centers are lower than the FARs for every other category, indicating that regional centers are not being developed to proper densities. Mr. Shaw said the low densities may be because the Council originally designated too many regional centers, or because the Council needs to adopt other policies to stimulate increased density in regional centers, or because the data does not yet reflect recent functional plan work by local jurisdictions.

Chair McLain agreed, and said Metro needs to be able to legally defend either that the data does not reflect recent work, or that the Council plans to adopt additional policy mandates, either discretionary, incentive-based, or regulatory.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair McLain adjourned the meeting at 3:12 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Suzanne Myers

Council Assistant

i:\minutes\1999\grwthmgt\05049gmm.doc

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 4, 1999

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