Loading...
Agenda - 06/18/2002 WorkshopNOTICE A SPECIAL WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE WOODBURN CITY COUNCIL WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 2001 AT 6:30 P.M. AT WOODBURN CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 270 MONTGOMERY STREET, WOODBURN, OREGON FOR THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC PURPOSE: To discuss and develop a response to the Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework proposal. The special meeting is called pursuant to Section 13 of the Woodbum Charter. Dated this 14th day of June, 2002. RICHARD JENNINGS, MAYOR AGENDA City Council Workksop June 18, 2002 - 6:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL BUSINESS: Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework ADJOURNMENT MEMORANDUM LAN NlM ro~ From: Date: Re: John Brown, City Manager Greg Winterowd Monday, June 17, 2002 Key Issues Related to the Proposed Woodburn - Marion County Growth Management Framework You asked that I provide a written review of the Marion County Urban Growth Management Project in the context of Woodbum's economic development and comprehensive planning objectives. This memorandum is intended to serve as a basis for discussion at the City Council Work Session on Tuesday, June 18, 2002. Background As you know, the County has statutory responsibility to coordinate the planning activities of its constituent cities. Most counties limit their coordination roles to (a) population forecasts, (b) management of unincorporated land within UGBs (urban growth boundaries) and review of UGB expansions, and (c) transportation system planning. Through the Urban Growth Management Project, Marion County has extended its traditional coordination role to include long-term county-wide assumptions related to land need (residential density, employment forecasts and density, public facilities), buildable and constrained land supply, redevelopment and infill, and land use (e.g., industrial, commercial, residential and mixed-use). Marion County has assumed an active role regarding growth management that more closely resembles METRO (Metropolitan Service District) in Portland than other counties in Oregon. The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) partially funded Marion County's regional planning effort. DLCD has made it very dear that extensive coordination with Marion County and consideration of the results of the Urban Growth Management Project are critical to the success of any future urban growth boundary amendment. This concern is reflected directly in the Periodic Review grant that is soon to be awarded to the City by DLCD. Traditional County Coordination Functions: Population~ UGBs and Transportation Population All counties in Oregon are required to adopt a county-wide population projection and then allocate population forecasts among its constituent cities. The county-wide projection depends on the state Office of Economic Analysis (OEA) projection, which is currently being revised. County staff agrees that the Year 2020 Forecast of 26,290 is low. County staff support an interim projection of just under 35,000 to be used to complete Woodbum's Periodic Review work tasks - including evaluation of the amount of land needed within the UGB. Woodburn UGB In most Oregon counties, counties manage unincorporated land within UGBs and review UGB expansion proposals. Except for population projections, counties outside of METRO generate their own assumptions regarding land need and supply. Because all UGB amendments must by jointly adopted by the city and county, counties must review land need and supply assumptions, as well as comprehensive plan designations, as part of their review of city UGB expansion requests. Transportation System Planninq METRO and counties outside of the Portland region are required to develop and adopt transportation system plans. Because the city street system connects to the county road system, it is essential that the TSPs of cities and their respective counties be coordinated. This is why counties review and adopt city TSPs. However, assumptions regarding employment and population within TAZs (Transportation Analysis Zones - which serve as the building blocks for TSPs) inside UGBs typically are generated by cities, with input and review from counties. Marion County Growth Management Project: Land Needs Assessment Assumptions and Growth Management Policies The Marion County Growth Management Project (2001) includes assumptions for each of its cities regarding land need (the area of land that will be needed over the next 50 years for housing, employment and public facilities) and supply (vacant buildable land, vacant Page 2 constrained land, infill land, redevelopable land). The project also makes assumptions regarding the desired distribution of land uses; for example, the "Project" assumes that Woodburn will rely extensively on a "Mixed Use" designation to increase employment and housing densities, and to reduce reliance on automobiles. Rather than relying on cities to generate their own assumptions regarding land need and supply within their respective UGBs, Marion County has taken a pro-active role in establishing baseline assumptions for review and expansion of UGBs. The Marion County Growth Management Framework includes a set of policies intended to guide the growth of all Marion County cities. Rather than relying on cities to generate their own growth management policies, Marion County proposes an overall county policy framework to manage the growth of each of its constituent cities. In these two regards, Marion County is similar to METRO, and distinct from other counties in Oregon. Implications of Woodburn's Employment and Growth Management ObJectives Last year, the Woodbum City Council decided to take necessary steps to avoid bedroom community status - by planning for increased local employment and higher paying jobs. EcoNorthwest determined that the city lacked suitable sites for the types of firms that are (a) desired by Woodbum, and (b) likely to locate in the area. The Council decided that additional land must be made available to meet the needs of "targeted" industries. The City has adopted an "economic opportunities analysis" (EOA) that reflects these objectives. The Council also recognized that success in attracting more and better paying jobs will have a direct effect on population and the types of housing needed in Woodbum. Therefore, the Council committed to revising its population projection and re-evaluating its housing needs and buildable lands analyses. This city commitment occurred at the same time that Marion County was developing assumptions regarding population, housing and employment - and buildable lands - for all its cities, including Woodbum. The County's assumptions at this point do not reflect the results of the City's EOA. As drafted, the assumptions underlying Marion County's draft land needs assessment are inconsistent with the city's economic development objectives. Bluntly, if the City adopts the "preferred alternative" assumptions in the-Marion County Framework, it would preclude amending the UGB to include suitable industrial sites to meet economic development objectives. However, adoption of the County land needs assessment assumptions could still be challenged by 1,000 Friends or others; thus, if adopted, the County Page 3 Growth Management Project assumptions would be a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for approval by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. I have also reviewed the Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework document. The City of Woodburn should consider the following issues: The document portrays countywide support for the preferred growth alternative. Under the Pattern of Growth section (page 3), the document creates the impression that there is consensus support for the 2050 population and employment targets, when in fact the City of Woodbum has consistently maintained the underlying population projections are flawed and undercount the situation in Woodbum. b. In general, the policies present a good framework and there is little to disagree with. There are a few new "standards" the City of Woodbum should be aware of: · Local street connectivity standards of at least 8 streets per mile. · Mixed use zoning targets. This would be one of the principal means of meeting employment and housing objectives - but may not be realistic in terms of generating jobs. · Residential development standards of 8 units per acres. This number may or may not reflect the results of the housing needs analysis that we are currently undertaking. · Stream and wetland buffers of at least 50 feet. These standards require further review and may or may not be acceptable to Woodbum. · Adopt targets for inf~ll and redevelopment as part of UGB expansion. Targets have a way of becoming requirements; they should not be adopted by the City until we have had a chance to thoroughly review them. · Adopt design standards for multi-family and commercial development. Woodbum may, or may not, want to head in this direction. Conclusion I recommend caution before formally adopting either the land needs assessment or the policy elements contained in the Marion County Growth Management Project and Framework. The terms of DLCD Periodic Review Grant require City staff to consider County land needs assessment assumptions and policies, but not following them uncritically. In a few months, Woodburn will have completed its own land needs assessment - based on a population of just under 35,000 people. At this time, I recommend that we reconsider the Marion County Growth Management Project and Framework. Page 4 MARION COLrNTY URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK Proposed Amendment to the Urbanization Element of the Marion County Comprehensive Land Use Plan Marion County Urban Growth Management Project March 1999 - April 2002 Funding for this project was made available by a grant from The Department of Land Conservation and Development and In part with Oregon State Lottery Funds administered by Tbe Oregon Economic and Community Development Department Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page DRAFT Marion County Comprehensive Plan Language: Urban Growth Management Framework URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK Future population and employment growth projected in Marion County creates both challenges and opportunities for maintaining the quality of life in Marion County. Resources, such as water and farmland, will be limited, and congestion and travel times will probably increase in urban areas. Without coordination among the cities, development may occur in areas that result in even greater negative impacts on the transportation and infrastructure systems. For example, the ability to move freight and people throughout the County may be jeopardized if growth occurs in areas where the transportation system is not adequately developed to serve additional capacity. Uncoordinated development may also result in patterns of growth that are not desired by. the citizens in Marion County and may ultimately reduce the quality of life in the County. However, if managed effectively, the impacts of the additional growth can be minimized. Through a collaborative and coordinated effort to manage growth, development can be planned in locations that best serve the County, and the accompanying transportation and infrastructure systems can be developed with the great&st efficiency. The quality of life can be preserved by maintaining the characteristics in each community that makes it unique, and by directing development in each community to be consistent with each community's values. Understanding the importance and need to lessen the impacts of growth, the Marion County Board of Commissioners initiated the Marion County Urban Growth Management Project in 1998. The growth management project utilized a long-range 2050 planning horizon, and was undertaken to provide the data needed to address growth issues and to engage the cities and other interest groups and individuals in a cooperative effort to look at where growth is likely to occur under current development trends and where it should be encouraged or discouraged in. the future. During the various phases of the project, coordinated population projections and land capacities for the cities for the year 2050 were analyzed and a countywide growth strategy known as the Growth Management Framework was created with input from the public and the 20 cities in the County. The values driving the Growth Management Framework are a set of 24 guiding principles identified in the initial phase of the growth management project through collaboration and consensus, that provide a link between quality of life, economic development, and land use planning as a way to sustain the values deemed important by residents in their vision for the county. The guiding principles focus on regional elements of growth management that go beyond jurisdictional boundaries such as transportation, housing, environmental, and economic needs and are the basis for the goals setforth in the Growth Management Framework. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 2 The purpose of the Growth Management Framework is to: 1. Identify common goals, principles, and tools that will lead to more coordinated planning and a collaborative approach to developing solutions to growth issues. 2. Be consistent with local plans for growth by modifying the growth projections in response to local government feedback. o Protect farm, forest, and resource lands throughout the County by considering the existing capacity of each community, fostering the efficient use of land, and evaluating urban growth boundary expansion needs. 4. Maintain physical separation of communities by ensuring that areas between cities are not urbanized. 5. Maintain community identity by allowing each community to decide how it should grow and by promoting local decision-making control. 6. Support a balance of jobs and housing opportunities for communities and areas throughout the county that contribute to the needs of regional and local economies. P3ovide transportation corridors and options that connect and improve accessibility and mobility for residents along with the movement of goods and services throughout the county. Growth Management Framework Pattern Of Growth The Growth Management Framework is designed to accommodate approximately 500,400 residents and 212,500 jobs within the 20 cities and unincorporated portions of Marion County by the year 2050. The Growth Management Framework preferred alternative growth scenario focuses the majority of the growth in the County to the larger communities of Salem, Keizer, Woodburn, Stayton and Silverton, With growth occurring primarily inside the current UGBs where there is available capacity, and through infill and redevelopment where appropriate. Spedfic population and employment targets were identified for each city by elected officials, and business, environmental and neighborhood leaders representing the communities. How the additional population and employment is accommodated will be at the discretion of individual communities in accordance with the goals, policies, and standards identified in this Growth Management Framework, local comprehensive plans, and the state land use laws dictating the priority of lands to be urbanized. During selection of the Growth Management Framework preferred growth alternative, participants in the process chose a land use pattern that best suited the many, sometimes conflicting goals of the County and its cities. Following this work, and using the County Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 P~e3 adopted 2020 forecasts for the cities, a tentative agreement was made on a group of forecast numbers for the year 2050. Comparing the land use patterns of the preferred alternative, the capacities of individual UGBs, and the original 2050 forecast numbers, revealed the need for further refinement of the 2050 forecast. The 2050 forecast in turn reveals the need for actual land consumption. The following chart depicts the capacity within each UGB, the amount of additional land needed to accommodate the 2050 forecast, and the revised proposal for a 2050 forecast that better coordinates the desired growth patterns with the empirical data gleaned from the further analysis. The coordinated forecast is the basis for many of the Growth Management Framework goals, policies, and standards. Table 1 #: base ~Aumsvllle 2,820 Donald 630 Hubbar~ 2,205 ML Subliml~ 2,145 Tu~ t,330 T~Is - Marion Coun~ Po~ior * The Marion County Compact Need is the acreage required in addition to that within the current Urban Growth Boundary assuming that the land use efficiency goals of the Compact are met. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 4 Marion County, like the rest of the State, is a place of changing demographics. While there are many trends that can be examined, the two with the most profound effect on growth management strategies are age of the population, and the mix of ethnicity. The following data and forecasts are from the national demographics firm of Woods and Poole. Table #:2 Age of County Population Age of Population 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2025 Percent 0-19 37.4% 31.7% 29.7% 29.9% 28.6% 28.6% 28.8% Percentage 20-64 50.4% 55.6% 56.0% 58.1% 59.1% 55.3% 53.7% Percentage 65 and Over 12.3% 12.6% 14.3% 12.1% 12.3% 16.1% 17.4% The table above depicts a trend toward a growing number of older residents within the County. An older population will require changes in housing and transportation needs and preferences in the County. Additionally, alternative transportation choices becomes increasingly important. Usually this is associated with a decrease in the proportion of people under the age of 19, but a countervailing trend in increasing family size will stabilize the number of children as a proportion of the population. This is largely due to the increasing number of Hispanic households in the County. Table Ih3 County Ethnic'ivy Ethnic Background 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2025 Percentage White-Not Hispanic 95.9% 93.0% 88.4% 83.5% 77.5% 72.4% 70.0% Percentage Hispanic, Any Race 2.7% 4.3% 7.4% 11.8% 17.7% 22.7% 25.1% F~ercentage Black 0.3% 0.6% 0.9% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% F=ercentage Other 1.1 % 2.1% 3.3% 3.6% 3.8% 3.9% 3.9% This table describes the ethnic makeup of the County in the past, today, and projected for the future. Both of these changes will likely lead to a shift in housing preferences, with fewer residents desiring or affording the traditional single family home, and a larger proportion desiring various forms of attached, small lot, or rental housing. In addition, the need for affordable housing choices will probably remain as acute as it is today for the foreseeable future. An important part of this Framework is the ability of the County and city plans to function together to meet the housing, employment, and transportation needs of the residents. An important part of this is will be to ensure that new growth is allowed to occur in a way that matches the demands of this new and changing population, and that communities ensure that their planning efforts allows all members of Marion County to feel welcome to setde in a place of their choosing. GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK GOALS The Growth Management Framework incorporates existing goals and policies found in County planning documents, the local comprehensive plans, and state land use planning Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 5 law. New goals and policies have been added to implement the planning principles identified in the countywide growth framework. The goals and policies also make the logical connections between the common goals and values of our county's residents, and lays out solutions to the possible conflicts that may be encountered. It brings together a series of common objectives that will better coordinate the policies'of the many jurisdictions within the county. The Growth Management Framework recognizes that every community is unique. The policies should be implemented to balance local priorities with the countywide goals. There are some issues, however, that cannot be effectively addressed solely at the local level as they have impacts beyond jurisdictional boundaries and are regional issues. For these issues, a countywide approach of the county and cities working together to manage and develop solutions is more appropriate and effective. The goals best addressed through a coordinated and collaborative regional approach include the following four key issues: 1. Transportation 2. Environment 3. Economic Development 4. Housing In addition to the Growth Management Framework, coordination and UGB agreements with local governments will also reflect the general policies and specific standards, with variat]ons incorporated to reflect the specific situation in each city and its environs. Overriding all goals and policies related to the four key issues identified above are growth management goals that must be met to protect the integrity of the Framework at the local level. These goals include: 1. Base decisions on a long-range vision for the area, incorporating both local community visions and long range plans. 2. Foster the use of creativity and innovation in planned growth and development projects to maintain the unique character of all titles. 3. Provide for balanced and managed growth to ensure equity among the cities and allow for more efficient use of our natural resources. 4. Honor the unique identities of communities and preserve unique characteristics. Embrace ethnic and cultural diversity and address the needs of different cultures in land use decisions and consider ethnic and cultural differences in the long-range vision and zoning designations. 6. Rely on the strengths of local decision-making coordinated with a countywide vision. 7. Encourage coordination among the county, cities and special districts. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page TRANSPORTATION GOALS The transportation goals that are part of the Framework address the role of transportation in providing efficient movement of people and freight throughout the county. The goals include: A. Encourage use of alternative modes of transportation including mass transit, bicycling, walking and carpooling. B. Address transportation needs appropriate to both urban and rural areas throughout the county. TRANSPORTAT/ON POLICIES In creating a countywide framework to manage growth, it is necessary to provide implementation measures to affect their purpose. The transportation policies can provide the greatest guidance in making the land use decisions that will direct the future location of jobs and housing in the county. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these policies is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to create a transportation system that can move people and goods efficiently throughout the county. The fpllowing policies and standards provide guidance as to how this transportation system can be developed. 1. Marion County shall jointly plan with communities to meet the transportation needs in the future. Standards: · The Marion County TSP will be designed to accommodate the forecast population, housing, and employment identified in this Framework, as well as the areas that are planned for urban expansion, in coordination with the communities involved. · The Marion County TSP will investigate countywide alternative transportation, such as inter-city transit, van pooling, and passenger rail service serving the county and the Willamette Valley region. 2. Communities should implement street connectivity standards. Standards: · For cities forecast to be greater than 5,000 people by 2050, new subdivisions will have internal connectivity of at least 8 through streets per mile for new devel6pment, and sufficient collector and arterial systems for local access. Further, this Framework recognizes the Local Street Connectivity Element of the Salem TSP as a quality example. · Adopt a map depicting future street connections for areas to be urbanized. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 7 The County will coordinate and adopt similar standards for urban areas within its planning jurisdiction. When feasible, the County will utilize local standards such as those in the Salem TSP and Salem Revised Code, for example, for development that occurs on unincorporated lands within UGBs. 3. Enhance or add transit connections within and between cities. Standards: · Local transportation plans for the two transit systems (Woodburn Transit System and Salem Cherriots) must contain a transit element coordinated with both the Framework forecast and the preferred alternative. Future small transit systems should be investigated for cities that will exceed 10,000 people in the foreseeable future. The County will investigate and encourage intercity transit provision through a variety of public and private providers. 4. Allow for a complementary mix of uses. Standards: · Cities will address opportunities to provide for zoning that allows the co-location of employment and residential uses (mixed use development) in all communities over 5,000 persons in size, and encouraged in all communities. · Require retail land uses that are over 60,000 sq. ft. or 300 employees per building be located in the Urban Growth Boundaries of cities that are in excess of 10,000 people. 5. Encourage Traffic Calming of through traffic in neighborhoods. Standards: · Cities and the County will jointly develop recommended methods and procedures for traffic calming, developing recommended best practices for methods, locations, and processes for traffic calming in both existing and new developments. 6. Improve key freight routes. Standards: · Cities over 10,000 and the County will jointly plan for freight movement by both rail and truck in their transportation planning activities. 7. Improve the walking and biking environment in all communities. Standards: All cities, urban areas within the County, and rural communities regardless of size, can develop a comfortable walking environment. The basic tools are providing pedestrian Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 8 facilities, and allowing the development of some areas with a sufficient density and mix of uses to make walking a practical alternative. ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS The environmental goals that are part of the Framework address the importance of natural resources to the local economy, as well as the carrying capacity of the land. The goals include: A. Preserve and protect agricultural and forest lands, wetlands, wildlife habitat and natural resource corridors and other natural resources through wise stewardship. B. Encourage planning that does not exceed the capacity of water, energy, air and other resources. C. Promote conservation, recycling and the efficient use of resources. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES The environmental policies provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will protes't and preserve the natural resources of Marion County. The environmental policies listed 'below are minimum requirements, often less stringent than Federal regulations and already adopted city regulations. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these policies is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to create a system that does not exceed the resources available in Marion County. The following policies and standards provide guidance for protection of natural resources. 1. Identify land use efficiency standards that must be met before a city can amend its Urban Growth Boundary Standards: · The following chart defines efficiency standards, in housing units per gross acre, for residential development created since the adoption date of the Framework. The residential efficiency standard is a composite number of all residential development (single-family and multifamily) occurring within a community. The standards are divided into five categories in accordance with projected city size in 2050. For cities forecasted to be larger than 25,000 people the standard is 8 housing units per acre; for cities between 10,000 and 25,000 people the standard is 7 housing units per acre; for cities between 2,500 and 10,000 the standard is 6 units per acre; for cities between 1,000 and 2,500 people, the standard is 5 housing units per acre; and for cities less than 1,000 no efficiency standard would be applied. Salem, the largest city in the County has an efficiency standard of 9 units per acre which is based on results from the "Salem Futures" project, and may be modified based on the final adopted policies. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page Compact Land Efficiency Standard in Units Per Gross UGB 2050 Population Acre Less than t,000 No Standard 1,000 to 2,500 5 2,500 to 10,000 6 10,000 to 25,000 7 Greater than 25,000 8 Salem (From Salem Future's Project) 9 2. Require buffer zones to protect streams, floodplains, and significant wildlife areas from the negative effects of development. Standards: The following standards are listed as a recommended starting point for protection buffers. · Streams shall be buffered at least 50 feet from the edge of bank. · Wetlands shall be buffered at least 50 feet. Development in floodplains shall be restricted to balanced cut and fill, within the parcel to be developed. 3. Require developments to retain vegetation along streams, lakes, and reservoirs to provide for shelter, shade, food and nesting. Standards: · Use the state standard to identify locally significant wetlands. · Within stream or wetland buffers, and areas within the 100-year FEMA floodplain, no more than 30 percent of natural vegetation may be removed. · In the case of non-native species, native plant species may be used to replace existing vegetation so long as the overall quantity and distribution of vegetation remain the same, as based on a 15-year growth horizon. 4. Require preservation of more farm and forest land over the long term. Standards: · Identify and adopt a rate of redevelopment and infill required for expansion of UGBs onto lands protected under Statewide Planning Goals three or four. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page fO · Set targets for mixed-use development. This can include a percentage of residential and employment land uses that are co-located to increase the efficiency of land within the UGBs. · The County will manage the rural areas to encourage the preservation of the rural environment, and discourage the development of new communities of housing and employment outside of urban growth boundaries. 5. Require a plan to address how resources for the forecasted employment and population will be provided. Standards: · Analyze existing vacant land for the capacity to meet future land need. A jurisdiction can consider the feasibility of rezoning vacant land to a different land use type in order to create additional capacity for the type of development a potential UGB amendment would seek to provide. · Ensure that zoning is in place to meet or exceed residential and/or employment capacity targets, as identified by the Framework. If the identified capacity is less than the population or employment allocation, an UGB expansion should be anticipated. For cities that will require expansions of their UGB's, monitor the attainment of the targets on a periodic basis 6. Encourage and work with jurisdictions and private landowners to protect water resources in the county. Standards: The County will work with watershed groups, jurisdictions, and agendes to protect environmentally sensitive areas critical to watershed health. The County will promote and target restoration efforts to critical groundwater areas and develop water management approaches such as monitoring and evaluation programs based on collaborative actions. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS The economic development goals that are part of the Framework address the importance of maintaining a diverse employment base with living wage jobs. The goals include: A. Encourage diversity and balance of job types (e.g., service and industry jobs). B. Promote economic opportunity for all segments of society. C. Encourage a sustainable local and regional economy D. Tailor economic development to the unique assets and needs of the county and its individual communities. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 11 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICIES The economic development policies can provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will provide a diverse employment base in Marion County that allows for each city's employment sector to complement each other rather than compete with each other. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these policies is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to create an economic development plan that allows for jobs and services to remain in the County. The following policies and standards provide guidance for an economic development plan. 1. Require identification of the existing capacity of employment uses. Standards: · Create an inventory of lands suitable for employment use · Calculate capacity for jobs, categorized by land use type, of the employment lands 2. Require a plan to provide for the forecasted employment. Standards: · Examine plans and implementing ordinances and change where necessary to cpordinate employment lands inventory with forecast. · Determine if the development density allowed is too low to attract investment. If it is, consider modifications to zoning regulations that will be appropriate. 3. Support economic growth and development opportunities in cities in rural areas that recognize their distinct character and economic potential. Standards: The County will assist and work with the cities, economic development agencies, and major institutions to provide information to support development of a region-wide strategy promoting a sustainable economy. HOUSING GOALS The housing goals that are part of the Framework address the importance of providing a diversity and range of housing choice, both in style and affordability. The goals include: A. Encourage the availability of a wide variety of housing choices to meet the needs of a diverse population. - B. Encourage access to adequate housing for all citizens, commensurate with their incomes. Madon County Compac~ Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 12 C. Encourage quality design for development that is sensitive to existing communities and the natural environment. HOUSING POLICIES The housing policies can provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will provide enough housing to meet the anticipated demand for housing. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these policies is vital to the effectiv'e coordination and cooperation necessary to provide adequate housing while still protecting the unique characteristics of each community in the County. The following policies and standards provide guidance to create a housing plan that maintains and enhances the livability of each community. 1. Require zoning of vacant land be designed to accommodate expected housing needs. Standards: · Identify a mix of housing types in larger cities (more than 5,000 persons, single family, townhouse, multi-family and others) and ensure that the vacant buildable land is zoned to provide for that mix, understanding however, that vacant land may also used for non-residential purposes.. · Allow diverse housing types in multiple residential zones, including a variety of ownership types. · Develop a numeric goal of providing affordable housing distributed proportionally in the cities larger than 10,000 persons in the County. · Cooperate with the Marion County Housing Authority in developing affordable housing projects in areas that have good walking, biking, and transit service and access to services. · Allow expansion of urban growth boundaries consistent with state land use planning law to provide additional land for housing consistent with the other standards listed in this section. 2. Require identification of the existing capacity of residential uses. Standard: · Determine if the development density allowed is too Iow to attract investment. If it is, consider modifications to zoning regulations that will be appropriate. 3. Ensure quality design of new construction Standard: · Adopt clear and objective Design Standards for multi-family and commercial construction in cities over 10,000, and encourage their adoption in smaller communities. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 13 FRAMEWORK IMPLEMENTATION In addition to its population coordination responsibilities (ORS 195.025), Marion County has joint agreements regarding urban growth boundaries with all local cities, and participates as a decision-maker on all urban growth boundary amendments. The County will work with the cities to project any future urban growth boundary expansion needed, and will use its authority to minimize the impacts of new development. Modifications to urban growth boundaries will be addressed through State planning law and this Framework process, including the protection and monitoring of urban growth boundary expansion areas for urban uses. As urban growth affects many important parts of Marion County and its economy, a need to coordinate growth and develop a consistent growth management policy among the 20 incorporated cities is essential. As many of the growth issues transcend city boundaries and are regional in nature, coordination with and amongst the cities and engaging the cities to working together to develop solutions and strategies is an important coordination role for the county. It is equally important for the County to provide assistance to cities in the form of information/data collection and analysis, and develop tools that can be utilized by the cities in addressing growth issues or concerns. The planning and growth management activities of many jurisdictions affect and are affected by the actions of other jurisdictions in the County. The future plans for development of each city impacts the development potential of neighboring cities. For example, a large retail operation locating in one of the smaller communities in Marion County will likely have a greater market draw than the immediate town. As a result, the opportunity for the neighboring cities to solicit a large retail operation is greatly reduced and the transportation impacts between communities is increased. The coordination of planning and development activities and recognition that these activities are part of an on- going and continually evolving process, is essential if urban growth management efforts are to succeed. As part of the coordination between local governments, each city's vision for the future must be taken into consideration and respected when neighboring cities are planning for their futures. One of the planning principles identified through the Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework is the need for each community to maintain the characteristics and qualities that make it unique. In recognition of each community's unique character as well as growth being an issue that crosses jurisdictional boundaries, the implementation of the growth strategy has three components: 1.) the identification of and approach of utilizing subareas of the county to meet local needs regarding key issues and to provide links between communities; 2.) letters of agreement and support from the cities for regional growth management and planning coordination by the County and cities for the broad policies that everyone can agree to; and 3.) individual intergovernmental agreements with each city or groups of cities and the County for the specific issues relevant to each dty or subarea of the county. This process will result in a growth Marion County Compact Fmmeworl< Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 14 strategy that provides coordination between the different entities, but also maintains the integrity of the 20 cities within the County. Countywide Growth Management Utilizing Subareas Growth management including key issues and strategies is a regional issue that transcends jurisdictional boundaries. The integration local planning efforts to address and manage key growth issues provides a collaborative approach and action that will be far more effective than the 20 cities and the county acting independently of each other. Cities within the county are linked to each other in many ways whether it be geographically, economically, transportation, housing, resources, services or other linkages. Utilizing these connections and the knowledge that communities in an area do impact on each other, the identification of subareas in the county, that is the grouping of cities together to collectively work toward common goals and strategies on key growth issues affecting each community, is an effective way to accommodate the needs of the cities and county within a countywide approach where individually, each jurisdiction's role is limited. Letters of Agreement/Support In order to have a consistent growth management plan for the County, the County and 20 cities will be asked to sign a Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework Letter of Agreement. This letter references the countywide standards identified in the Framework that are applicable to all cities. Signing of the Framework letter indicates agreement and support for a countywide approach to growth management and working together to develop effective strategies to address key issues. Signing a letter of agreement also indicates support for the countywide goals, policies, and standards that frame the regional growth management approach, and requires efforts within a reasonable period of time to comply with the Framework. The countywide standards addressed in the Framework, will be reviewed every five years. Revisions can be made at other times if half of the cities and the Marion County Board of Commissioners agree to the change. Individual Inter-Governmental Agreements (IGAs) Each community within Marion County is unique. As a result, individual intergovernmental agreements or compacts will be signed with each city or groups of cities and the County to address the topics identified in the Framework and specific local growth issues that may effectively be addressed through such a city/county agreement. Modifications to the intergovernmental agreements can be made with the consent of both the city and the county. The intergovernmental agreements will be reviewed and modified as appropriate during the city's periodic review process. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page~5 Marion County ORFGON COMMUNIIY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DIRECq"OR Oraig Luedeman PLANNING DMSION (~:~) BUILDING INSPECTION (503) 588-5147 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Randall Franke Patti Milne Mace Ryan COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO: FROM: Mayors, City Administrators, and City Officials in Marion County Les Sasaki, Principal Planner, Planning Division DATE: June 7, 2002 SUBJECT: ' Marion Coun¢' Urban Grov~th M~,agement Project Over the past several months, County Planning staff made Presentations on the Marion County Urban Growth Management Project to most of thc cities in thc County. I would like to take the opportunity to thank the.cities for letting us come out and talk to them about thc countywide growth management and planning strategy, and for sharing information on local issues and ideas about accommodating future growth needs. For those communities who may have been unable to fit us into your meeting schedules, we arc still willing and available to make a presentation to. your city and you just need to notify me as to a date that will work for you. The Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework proposal and implementation strategy that was presented to the cities is what the County is looking to adopt as part of its Comprehensive ?lan to guide growth and future decisions about growth that involve the cities within thc County. It is a regional and collaborative approach to develop solutions to growth issues facing the County and cities that will be flexible, continue to foster local control, and identify issues that can benefit flora a coordinated city/county approach toward resolution. The information and feedback we received at the presentations is being used to revise the Framework proposal and strategy. Marion County will then be looking to take the Framework and strategy through the public hearing process for adoption as part of the Urbanization Element of our Comprehensive Plan. The Framework establishes the County's approach to managing urban growth through basic goals, policies and ' standards and provides a strategy for hoW cities fit into the countywide approach. Once the general framework is adopted, the County will sit down with each city to identify and address specific local issues through a city/county agreement. As part of the presentations to the cities, we asked for city support for this regional approach to managing gro ..w.th.' issu,e.s. ,A s ~a~a, ple letter ,of .supp_o__rt/,_a_~e~em,~e~f~o~r ~ roachwas rovided to czties earner ~anomer copy is oemg encios~ag. · uo ~,mqo. ~ePttP~r is just ~haP~ and should a city feel it can support/agree with the County's growth management approach, such letter can take on any form and/or content the city is comfortable with. As we take the Framework through the public hearing process, it would be beneficial to have city sQpport for this countywide approach to growth. For those cities that have already submitted letters of support/agreement, the County thanks you for. your support. If you have any questions, please contact me. Marion County looks forward to continually involving and working with your city in both regional and local planning endeavors. _ 555 Court SL NE, · P.O. Box14500 · Salem, C)regon. 97309-5036 · http//www.open.org/mcplann I~tRION COUNTY URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK Letter of Agreement (Sample Draft) Marion County Urban Growth Management Project March 1999 - April 2002 Dear Marion County Board of Commissioners, This letter expresses our support for the Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework. With the current growth trends, it is inevitable that (name of city) will continue to grow and additional housing and employment demands will be placed on the community. This will have a great impact on the transportation and infrastructure systems in the County. We recogni?e that our growth and development decisions can impact neighboring jurisdictions and the County, and that the growth and development experienced by other jurisdictions will impact (name of City). The work of the Marion County Urban Growth Management Project has initiated the creation of a countywide framework for'.!ocal decisions on growth, and.development within the County. We recogniTe the importance of this framework to provide consistent and coordinated land use and transportation plans at the local level. We are committed to participating in future discussions with other cities and the County regarding the accommodation and encouragement of planned growth and development, the orderly extension of urban services, the enhancement of the quality of life, the protection of the environment, and the promotion of the economic viability of our community and the county in order to maintain and enhance the INability of Marion County. We believe that these discussions will assist us in better understanding where future growth and urban growth boundary expansions will occur. We agree that the countywide framework should be a comprehensive guide for interjurisdictional land use and transportation planning issues. The core elements of this plan should include: 1. Accommodation of the population and employment projections for 2050. 2. Focus of new urban development within the ~,Yi.edng urban growth boundaries or their planned expansions, consistent with State plaunlng law. 3. Creation of a balanced multi-modal transportation system. 4. Establishment of mixed-use, pedestrian and, where available, transit-oriented urban centers. 5. Enhanced livability and economy of the twenty cities within the County, including: Aummille; Aurora; Detroit; Donald; Gates; Gervais; Hubbard; Idanha; Jefferson; Keizer; Mill City; Mt. Angel; St. Paul; Salem; Scotts Mills; Silverton; Stayton; Sublimity; Turner; and Woodburn. 6. Preservation of the region's natural environment, especially farm and forest land, air and water quality. We acknowledge that comprehensive plans are critical tools in translating the countywide framework into specific goals, polities and programs both at the County and local levels. The inclusion of policies and goals in the County's comprehensive plan will allow us to understand what our local planning efforts will be measured against. We support the following prindples as the basis for implementing the countywide framework through comprehensive plans: 1. Reflection of local community values. 2. Translation of the countywide vision into local spedfic goals, policies and programs. 3. Provision for the diverse cultural lifestyle and life cycle needs'of our community (both residential and business). 4. Address the development and redevelopment of the con~munity in 2020 and through 2050. 5. Address the need to identify major infrastructure needed to support the development of the community. 6. Be dynamic and able to reflect changes in the community. In addition, we will work. to coordinate our plans with neighboring and overlapping governmental entities and work to integrate our plans at a sub-regional level. We will enter into additional intergovernmental agreements, when necessary, to address.other matters of planning law such as Urban Growth Boundary Agreements. We look forWard to future discussions with the County and other cities related to the management of growth in the County.