Loading...
Minutes - 06/18/2002 Workshop COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES JUNE 18, 2002 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, JUNE 18,2002. CONVENED. The Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework workshop convened at 6:30 pm with Mayor Jennings presiding. ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Jennings Bjelland Chadwick Figley McCallum Nichols Sifuentez Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, Public Works Director Tiwari, Community Development Director Mulder, City Attorney Shields, City Recorder Tennant Consultant: Greg Winterowd, Winterbrook Planning 0040 MARION COUNTY URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK. Administrator Brown stated that this workshop had been set for the purpose of allowing the City's consultant, Greg Winterowd, to review the Marion County plan with the Council so that the Council can come to a consensus for the purpose of developing a letter to be forwarded to Marion County letting them know how the City stands on this particular document. Staff distributed a copy ofMr. Winterowd's report and a copy of a draft letter from County Planning staff suggesting that the Council sign the letter and forward it to the Marion County Board of Commissioners. The letter expresses the City's agreement with the document as developed by the County Planning staff. He stated that City staff is not providing the Council with the County letter for review or approval, rather staff suggests that the Council provide staff with a list of items that Mr. Winterowd can include in a letter to be drafted and reviewed by the Council. The draft letter would be included on the next regular Council agenda and, if approved, it would be forwarded to the County Board of Commissioners. 0090 Greg Winterowd, Winterbrook Planning, stated that the County has a very important role to play in planning in Oregon and the 3 basic responsibilities they have in land use planning are as follows: 1) Establish a coordinated population projection for each of the cities in Marion County using data provided to them by the State Office of Economic Analysis; Page 1 - Council Workshop Minutes, June 18, 2002 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES JUNE 18, 2002 TAPE READING 2) Managing unincorporated land within City growth boundaries and reviewing Urban Growth Boundary expansion requests; and 3) County is required to adopt a county-wide Transportation System Plan and to make sure that the Transportation System Plan of the cities work with the County transportation system. He stated that all of the City's planning for infrastructure improvements are based on the population projection included in the County's document and the City is trying to work with the County to increase the Year 2020 projection from 26,290 to a higher amount based on the City's current rate of growth. At this time, the City is looking at a Year 2020 population of35,000 and they have been working with County Planning staff to get this new population figure agreed upon by the County. In his review of Marion County's work to date on this issue, he feels that the County is doing a more far-reaching program for growth management than any other County in the State outside of the Metro region. They have compiled a very detail set of assumptions to guide growth in Marion County and, those assumptions if you were to agree to those assumptions, would then make it difficult for the City to meet the Economic Development goals that the Council had established last year. A potential advantage to the county-wide approach is that it would give some degree of legitimacy to a set of assumptions regarding housing and employment density, and a range of other factors that are considered in a land needs assessment. The City could meet everything in the framework and take that to Dept. of Land Conservation & Development Commission (DLCD) but the City would still need to meet the state-wide planning goals. Compliance with the Marion County set of assumptions would be a necessary but not sufficient condition for acknowledgment by DLCD and approval by the courts. He felt that the City should coordinate with the County on land use activities but feels that it is different from having the County doing the analysis over a 50-year period for employment and housing needs, public land needs, and buildable lands supply. 0771 Mayor Jennings questioned if buying into the County framework changes the rules that the Council had established on as a part of the Economic Development study which is one step of the process towards potential urban growth boundary expansion. Mr. Winterowd stated that if the City would buy into the County program, it would give the City numbers to use but it would not guarantee compliance with state-wide planning goals and it adds another layer of compliance. In some ways, it can be useful but, if you buy into that additional layer, the City could not do the program that they had previously decided to do in regards to industrial land development. He stated that the 50-year plan developed by the County shows one parcel added to the urban growth boundary of the City for industrial growth, no land added to the City for residential, and a big area of mixed use development near Wal-Mart. To meet the City's goals, higher assumptions for housing density, redvelopment infill, and mixed use development are necessary. Jobs are a necessary component in getting people to want to live in the community in which they work and industrial land is needed to making this happen. He reviewed the draft letter Page 2 - Council Workshop Minutes, June 18, 2002 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES JUNE 18, 2002 TAPE READING that Marion County had provided to the Council supporting the Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework and suggested that the Council consider the impacts of the six core elements as outlined in the County's plan and its relationship to what the City would like to see within the City over the next 20 to 50 years before signing the letter of support. He recommended that the City do their own land needs assessment and buildable lands inventory (which is in progress) to see how that matches with the County's assumptions. The City could then talk to the County about the differences and use the County's assumptions where they make sense and use the City's assumptions where they make more sense to the Council. He does feel that what the County has done is a start on this process but feels that it is premature for the City to sign a letter committing to assumptions where the implications may not have been thoroughly considered. 1600 Councilor Bjelland felt that the letter contained generic land use planning language referencing state-wide planning goals and the tendency is to put that language into any type ofletter to insure compliance with state-wide planning goals. He felt that a compact between cities has some merit and it would be in the potential interest of the City since there are a number of other cities in Marion County that do not want the growth that Woodburn would like to have. The intent of the compact is to give Woodburn more of a percentage of the County's population increase than what may be otherwise allocated by the County itself. He suggested that the real question is what are the assumptions and are those assumptions something that will be stipulated and made a part of any agreement or letter which is the area that the City needs to protect themselves from by either concurring with or having a way to provide the City's own report before any compact is signed. Mr. Winterowd agreed with Councilor Bjelland's comments and reiterated that he would like to pursue further review of the assumptions so that the City can see what impact the assumptions might make in future years. Since the City has recently received a Periodic Review grant from the State, he suggested that the City respond back to the County by letting them know that the City would like a chance to look at the assumptions used by the County and compare them with the City's results. Mayor Jennings expressed concern in agreeing to a compact which may then result in extra years before the City can pursue an urban growth boundary expansion. Councilor Bjelland stated that he did not see the linkage between the urban growth boundary expansion and compact since he thought the compact related to the cities agreeing on coordinated population projections. Mr. Winterowd stated that the County already does the coordinated population independently from the compact. In any event, the City does need to make sure that they are comfortable with whatever population is decided upon as part of this process. For a public facilities plan, it is a very good idea to look beyond 20 years whereas the coordinated population is for a 20-year period. He expressed concern in only adding one area of industrial land that would presumably last the City for the next 50 years. 2245 Councilor Bjelland suggested that the County's population assumptions are seriously Page 3 - Council Workshop Minutes, June 18, 2002 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES JUNE 18, 2002 TAPE READING flawed and it is based on their assumption that Woodburn would have a population of 40,000 in the year 2050. There is now a tentative agreement that the City will have a population of 3 5,000 in 2020 and it is clearly out of sync that the City will only grow by 5,000 population in 30 years. As a result, the industrial lands need would then be incorrect based on the revised population figures. Mr. Winterowd stated that the County had looked at the City's Economic Development Study and gave it careful review but, in a lands needs analysis, population and employment projections, redevelopment infill, and types ofland use are all key assumptions on how much land is needed for roads, schools, and other infrastructure. Councilor Bjelland questioned if it would be a bit of a stretch to convert from a population based forecast into an employment forecast since the population forecast has traditionally been used to figure out the jobs housing balance which then dictates how many jobs are needed and the locality and then those jobs are allocated between different types of industries. Mr. Winterowd agreed with Councilor Bjelland since that is what has occurred in many communities, however, state-wide planning goal 9 and state statute Chapter 197, requires the City to do the detail analysis of the target industries that the City wants, the kind of siting needs those industries have, and then the City will then need to have an adequate supply of land available. This type of detailed analysis has not been done as part of this County project. In the Economic Development Study, the report looks at what kinds of jobs does the City want and what kind of jobs could the City reasonably get to locate in Woodburn. Some discussion was held regarding how much mixed use development would take place in Woodburn since it combines commercial activity and residential apartments in one building. Councilor Figley referred to the draft letter and expressed her opinion that nearby jurisdictions need to be talking to each other and the County and, as far as Woodburn is concern, the City should be talking to adjoining jurisdictions in Clackamas County. Mr. Winterowd also suggested that the City, as part of the update to the Transportation System Plan, should put together a street connectivity plan. He reiterated his suggestion that the City look at the assumptions and policies more carefully to see how they work out in Woodburn before any agreement is signed. Mayor Jennings expressed concern about making a commitment to a 50-year plan as provided for in the language in the draft letter of support. Mr. Winterowd suggested that the City needs to have the County's agreement on the population projection and urban growth boundary expansion in order to work well with the state agencies in trying to get an urban growth boundary expansion approved. He feels that the compact is good in principle and accepting as many assumptions as possible out of the county-wide study is a good idea in principle since it gives some degree of Page 4 - Council Workshop Minutes, June 18, 2002 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES JUNE 18, 2002 TAPE READING feels that the compact is good in principle and accepting as many assumptions as possible out of the county-wide study is a good idea in principle since it gives some degree of legitimacy to accomplish the City's goals. He stated that a 50-year projection will look at the direction of growth for public facilities and potential urban growth boundary expansion over time. Councilor McCallum agreed with planning and partnerships for growth but he also preferred the terms slow, careful, and deliberate in looking at these issues. He did not feel that the City is ready to sign any document at this time but the door needs to be kept open with the County. Mayor Jennings stated that the Council goals include looking at economic alternatives that will increase the income levels of community members. 4255 Mr. Winterowd summarized the direction given by the Council during this workshop and a letter will be drafted for Council consideration at the June 24th Council meeting. He reiterated that the key is for the City to come up with justifications for assumptions that are presented to the County for potential change in the compact. 4570 The workshop concluded at 7:45 p.m.. APPROVED ATIEST ~~ Mary e t, Recorder City of W oodbum, Oregon Page 5 - Council Workshop Minutes, June 18,2002 I