Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2009-08-18 Special`,r a, u■E oawFo CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES August 18, 2009 4EfAN Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. on August 18, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Jordan, Hennagin, Moncrieff, Olson, Tierney, and Johnson Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Jane McGarvin, Deputy City Recorder; Denny Egner, Assistant Planning Director; Denise Frisbee, Planning & Building Director; David Donaldson, Assistant City Manager; Jordan Wheeler, Management Analyst 3. STUDY SESSION 3.1 Metro Centers and Corridors Mayor Hoffman said that he suggested to Mr. Egner that Mr. Sin's memos regarding the urban/rural reserves and Stafford become the basis of the Council's position to Metro and Clackamas County, once the Council has discussed the matter. He explained that he was looking for nods of heads regarding the direction in which to go. He mentioned that he would edit the Mayor's Institute disc down to 20 minutes, concentrating on the experts' comments. He presented a basic overview of the complex issues surrounding Metro urban and rural reserves. He used a series of maps to illustrate the issues. He began with the history of Metro, which developed out of the Columbia Regional Association of Government (CRAG) in the 1960s, as a jurisdiction. In 1992, the region adopted the Metro Charter and amended it in 2002 to create a Council President position. He mentioned the Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives (RUGGOs). These included the concepts of a compact urban form, multimodal transportation, and 2040 (the 40 -year plan). Concepts in the 2040 plan included regional centers, central city, town centers, and corridors. He noted that Metro had emphasized developing corridors and centers for the last five years, with the idea of keeping a tight Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). However, the centers have been underperforming, and Metro was trying to figure out how to make them perform better. He noted the jurisdictional players among the 25 cities that made up the Metro region, in addition to the three counties. He indicated on a map the original 1979 UGB and its gradual movement outward since then in accordance with the State statute requiring Metro to evaluate every five years whether the land within the UGB was sufficient for a 20 -year supply of land for homes and jobs. He noted that Metro has taken in 28,000 acres over the past 30 years. He mentioned that the development in the region was occurring in the downtowns of Portland, Lake Oswego, and Gresham and along the Hillsboro light rail corridor. He recalled that 2002 and 2005 were very contentious UGB expansions with push back to the Metro Council regarding proposed expansions. He commented that growing at the edge has not been not satisfactory to Metro or the region, in that it did not create the compact urban walkable communities laid out in the 2040 plan. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 11 August 18, 2009 He explained that, in 2007, Senate Bill 2011 created the urban reserves, rural reserves classifications. He discussed the priority order for lands brought inside the UGB: statute lands, exceptions lands, bad soil, and good soil. He mentioned the Oregon Department of Agriculture's inventory analysis of land, using the three categories of foundation lands, important lands, and conflicted lands. Foundation lands were critical to the agricultural industry, and therefore had the highest priority for preservation. Important lands were second, followed by conflicted lands. Mr. Egner mentioned that, in addition to soils, the study looked at the development and transportation infrastructure serving the area. Therefore, Stafford with its EFU soil and roads came out as conflicted. Mayor Hoffman explained that conflicted meant `parcelized' land. He explained how that applied in the Stafford basin with its parcels under different ownerships. He reviewed the restrictions placed on EFU (Exclusive Farm Use). He noted that RR/FF was Rural Residential/Farm Forest five -acre minimum. He confirmed to Councilor Hennagin that the study did not study the lands already within the UGB. Once land came inside the UGB, regardless of its categorization, it was subject to urbanization at urban densities (10 units per acre). He recalled that Goals 3 and 4 (protecting farm and forestlands) came out of Governor McCall's concerns in the early 1970s to restrict the subdivisions building along the coast and at Charbonneau, and to avoid the threat of subdivisions lining 1-5 from Portland to Eugene. He cited Damascus as an example of how the old way of growing at the edges did not work. Damascus had neither urban infrastructure nor a couple of billion dollars to pay for building it. He emphasized that Metro was not about forcing infill into neighborhoods. It wanted to see increased densification in the centers. Councilor Jordan observed that a lot of land already inside the UGB was still used very productively as farm or nursery land, instead of developing as residential. Mayor Hoffman explained that the Urban/Rural Reserves statute and the Oregon Administrative Rules required looking at all three land categories and justifying the designation of land as either rural or urban reserves. He described rural reserves as lands within 20 miles of the UGB, which were locked up for 50 years as agricultural industry lands. He mentioned the importance of industrial clusters servicing the Ag industry. He discussed the factors to consider for rural reserves, including good farmland, landscape worth saving, and at risk of urbanization. He said that the statute required a balance between rural and urban reserves in each county. He said that urban reserves were those lands slated for urbanization in the next 30 to 50 years (2030-2050). He commented that that was why he kept asking what they wanted Lake Oswego to look like in 20 to 50 years. He raised the question of how did the Council wanted to set a course regarding Stafford for the next 50 years. He indicated that urban reserves could come inside the UGB as early as next year. He described the two parallel tracks involved in the discussion: the long-term thinking of urban/rural reserves 20 to 50 years out, and the immediate question of whether to bump out the UGB and where to do so. Metro would make the decision in December. Councilor Hennagin asked whether the undeveloped developable land in the Damascus area would play a role in Metro deciding whether it needed to bump the UGB out elsewhere. Mayor Hoffman explained that there was a multi -step analysis used in deciding whether to move the UGB. He described how Metro calculated the expected population growth and the number of needed dwelling units in 20 years. Other factors included the land supply and the present zoning. He observed that currently the supply and the demand were pretty close. However, if the supply were below the need, then Metro would have to move the UGB. He indicated that the decision on City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 11 August 18, 2009 whether Metro moved the boundary affected Lake Oswego in terms of increasing density in its centers and corridors, and receiving money to facilitate that. He noted that the first priority in considering where to expand the UGB in order to save farmland through making a compact urban form was poor soil. He indicated to Councilor Tierney that Metro has established the demand side of the equation in its Urban Growth Report. Mr. Egner indicated that Metro would start holding hearings on the draft report in September with expected adoption in December. Councilor Jordan noted that Metro was using a range of dwelling units this time, instead of a strict number. Mr. Egner observed that the lower demand range and the higher supply range implied no need to expand the UGB, especially if certain policy amendments occurred to create more efficient types of developments. Mayor Hoffman reiterated that this changed the whole concept from growing at the edges to encouraging cities to look inside for growth areas. He observed that Metro had invited the mayors of Tigard, Lake Oswego, Beaverton, and Hillsboro to the Mayor's Institute precisely to encourage them to look at denser centers in support of the compact urban form, as opposed to building another subdivision on the edge. Mr. Egner indicated to Councilor Tierney that the goals of the compact urban form included serviceable by transit and walkable to one's daily needs. He explained that the idea was to develop patterns to reduce vehicle miles traveled by making several transportation choices available to people. Mayor Hoffman listed the six desired outcomes: vibrant walkable communities, economic competitiveness and prosperity, transportation choices, reduced green house gas emissions, clean air and water and healthy ecosystems, and equity in terms of the costs and benefits of growth. Mayor Hoffman pointed out that Metro might not expand the UGB in 2010 or 2011, but they would still have to revisit the question five years later. Therefore, if Stafford was designated as urban reserves, then it would be on the table with the urban reserves from the other communities. However, if Stafford were designated rural reserves, then it was off the table for 50 years. Councilor Hennagin asked how Metro decided in which direction to expand the boundary. Mayor Hoffman explained that Goal 14, which described how the region urbanized, had a needs analysis and a location analysis to use in making that choice, as well as an administrative rule providing guidance on how to make that decision. He mentioned factors of infrastructure, governance, and politics. Mr. Egner spoke of trying to balance jobs and housing in the same region. Councilor Olson pointed out that the willingness of the governing body to accept urbanization was also a factor. Mayor Hoffman noted that any jurisdiction had to go through the list of criteria in order to satisfy the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), which was the ultimate agency that decided all land use issues. Mr. Egner indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the appeals process used depending on the decision making process: periodic review amendments went to the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC), while quasi-judicial matters went to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). Councilor Hennagin asked why Oregon City was a regional center and Lake Oswego a town center. Councilor Jordan commented that she thought it had been a local decision at the time; Lake Oswego decided on two town centers in the downtown and Lake Grove rather than having one regional center. Mayor Hoffman explained that, in Clackamas County, a Policy Action Committee of 20 people analyzed the Clackamas County map based upon the factors for deciding urban and rural reserves. He indicated that Mr. Sin and Mr. Egner have been involved at that level, while he has been involved at the Board of County Commissioners level and with the planning director. He City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 11 August 18, 2009 noted that Lake Oswego has not been involved with the PAC because they met on the same night that the City Council met. He said that he and staff have consistently communicated Lake Oswego's aspirations informally, but now the process has moving to the County Commissioners finalizing the County recommendations on September 8. He noted that the City needed to attend the County public hearing. He discussed the remainder of the process. The Reserves Steering Committee, a group of 40 stakeholders from all over the region, discussed the issues and information presented by the counties. The Core 4 of the Committee, a group comprised of County Commissioners from Clackamas, Washington, and Multnomah and a Metro Councilor, made a recommendation back to the counties and the Metro Council on the designation of urban and rural reserves. He noted that the counties each made an independent decision regarding the designation of rural reserves, while Metro decided on urban reserves. He described the process using Stafford as an example. Mr. Egner indicated that the Clackamas County Board has not yet made a recommendation on Stafford, but the County Planning Commission has made recommendations on urban reserves. Mayor Hoffman reviewed the tension points in Clackamas County, noting that the area south of Wilsonville (farmland, airport, industrial park) was perhaps the most contentious area with respect to whether it should be urban or rural reserves. He observed that there were tensions between the 17 statewide goals, such as Goal 3 aimed at protecting farmland and Goal 9 speaking to economic development. Mr. Egner indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that the County Planning Commission functioned as an advisory committee to the County Board. He said that he expected the Board to read the Commission's minutes in order to understand why it made its recommendation. Mayor Hoffman noted that, at the end of the day, there would be IGAs between Metro and the counties individually. Councilor Olson mentioned her understanding that all three counties had to agree on each other's urban and rural reserves with Metro. Mayor Hoffman noted that the statute gave the decision-making authority to Metro. Councilor Jordan explained that the Core 4's job was to agree on which lands each county would accept. She mentioned the undesignated lands. Mayor Hoffman discussed the third choice offered by Senate Bill 2011: undesignated lands. He explained that the statute did not require that every acre of land within four miles of the UGB be designated as either urban or rural reserve; some could be undesignated and remain under their present zoning. He used Stafford as an example. If it remained EFU land, then the uses allowed under that zone, such as churches, golf courses, etc., were still allowed. However, a rural reserve designation meant no increased density of any sort. He reviewed the factors considered by Metro in deciding whether to designate lands as urban reserves, including whether the land would support centers and/or corridors. He mentioned that a jurisdiction had to justify to the rest of the region how land that it wanted designated as urban reserves supported the compact urban form. He reviewed the factors considered in designating lands as rural reserves, including whether the farmland could support long-term agricultural operations. He mentioned the expectation that Metro would make its decision in December 2009, and amend its Functional Plan by May 2010. The Counties would then amend their Comprehensive Plans to make everything legal. At that point, the recommendations were sent to DLCD for approval. 3.2 Urban and Rural Reserves/Stafford Mayor Hoffman commented that Mr. Sin's memo gave a good history of the Stafford area, beginning in 1992, when Mayor Alice Schlenker and County Commissioner Judie Hammerstad City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 11 August 18, 2009 signed an agreement to fight the urbanization of the Stafford Basin. He noted that today Stafford was back in the bull's eye for designation as an urban reserve. He mentioned that the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan stated that the City would oppose the urbanization of the Stafford Triangle. Lake Oswego amended its charter in 1998 to require voter - approved annexation in the area. He described the current zoning and uses in Stafford, including the Stafford Hamlet, EFU land, RR - 5 land, and Lake Oswego. He reviewed the map showing the natural resources and developments in Stafford. He noted that Metro's Title 13 protected tree groves outside the UGB. He mentioned the disagreement over whether Stafford fit the 10 factors considered for rural reserves, or the 10 factors for urban reserves, or neither set of factors, meaning that it should remain undesignated. He reported the conversations in the last couple of weeks regarding Wankers Corner, which was conflicted land with the church and school there. He noted that many property owners in the area supported an urban reserve designation. He mentioned the suggestion to designate the land south of the Tualatin River as urban reserves and to leave the land north of the river undesignated. He clarified to Councilor Tierney that the City of Tualatin did an analysis of the Borland area and realized how much it would cost to put in the necessary infrastructure. He pointed out that every city's budget was stretched on infrastructure financing. Tualatin has been suggesting in informal conversations that the Borland area remain undesignated in order to avoid the traffic generated by a jammed up 1-205 cutting through neighborhoods. He observed that every city shared that concern about cut -through traffic impacting neighborhoods. He reported that, when the Tualatin City Councilor said that Lake Oswego has never demonstrated any interest in the Borland area and that only Tualatin had an interest in it, he told those at the meeting that that was not necessarily true. Lake Oswego might have an interest depending on the circumstances. He referenced Mr. Sin's memo pointing out that an intensely urbanized Borland area could potentially impact Lake Oswego's transportation infrastructure with people cutting through to get around a jammed I-205. He referenced Title 11 of the Metro Functional Plan, which discussed creating a city and how a city provided urban services. He noted that the County could also provide planning for an unincorporated area and urban services through service districts, as an area did not have to be within city boundaries to reach urban densities. He commented that Lake Oswego had a right to object, but it was the County that approved the creation of a new city. He speculated that the Wankers Corner area would become urban reserve land. He argued that if it did, then Lake Oswego needed to pay attention because one could not regulate what one did not govern. Therefore, they needed to make sure that whoever did govern it would manage growth intelligently. He mentioned his impression that both Lake Oswego and Tualatin tended to be more northerly - focused with an orientation towards Portland, Bridgeport, and Washington Square. He confirmed to Councilor Moncrieff that Metro could designate a portion of the Stafford Triangle as urban reserves and leave the rest undesignated. He explained that, while rural reserves remained farmland for 50 years, undesignated lands developed under their current zoning. Stafford was zoned EFU, which had an 80 -acre minimum parcel. He mentioned that the State has created hundreds of exceptions in EFU lands, such as wineries and dog kennels, but EFU land could not be subdivided. He indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that Lake Oswego would have to bring in the Rassekh property through a minor UGB amendment; it would not swap properties. He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that Metro would not re -consider rural reserves land for 50 years. He observed that the rural reserves designation was a big deal to property owners because then they could not develop their property. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 11 August 18, 2009 He confirmed to Councilor Tierney that Metro had to expand the UGB in urban reserve lands before undesignated lands. Mr. Egner pointed out that Metro would likely look at undesignated lands as candidate for new urban reserves when it considered the question of new urban reserve needs. Mayor Hoffman commented that the discussion around the regional table now was that Metro would go through all the urban reserves first. Therefore, undesignated lands were likely to remain so for 50 years. Councilor Jordan mentioned the discussion around locating huge production facilities, such as an Intel facility, on large parcels of undesignated land next to urban reserves, if a developer could not find a large enough parcel in urban reserve lands. This would avoid designating urban reserves for these facilities that might never arrive. Mayor Hoffman commented that housing, Goal 10, tended to drive the conversation. He noted that economic development, Goal 9, was also a factor, in that urban reserves were designed for both jobs and housing. He mentioned that he was trying to encourage the view that undeveloped land was not 'undeveloped,' but rather that it was land developed for the Ag industry. He mentioned other issues with undesignated lands, including clustering houses and creating a new "Rurban" zone (rural urban or agriculture urban zone) that would allow small boutique farms. He discussed Lake Oswego's stated aspirations. They accepted that Wankers Corner might be urban reserve but only with the condition of a mass transit alternative along 1-205, such as an 1-205 light rail line. Mr. Egner noted that Metro's high capacity transit plan had two lines. One connected Washington Square to Clackamas Town Center by going through Lake Oswego and Milwaukie, while the other made the connection by looping down to Oregon City and Tualatin. He pointed out that, while these lines merited further study, the system was 30 years out. Mayor Hoffman commented that Metro was trying to eliminate cross -region or suburb to central city car trips by providing mass transit light rail or streetcar lines in various locations. He noted that Tigard was first in line for a light rail project. He observed that this was a change from the auto - dominated suburb to a compact urban, walkable/bikeable form. Councilor Jordan pointed out that another reason for providing mass transit to transport workers from their homes to their jobs was that people did not always buy a house close to where they worked. She referenced Councilor Moncrieff's question about things changing in an undesignated area. She commented that an urban reserve area remained at its current zoning until it came inside the UGB. Mayor Hoffman concurred. He commented that jurisdictions planned the urban reserve areas so that they knew where to locate infrastructure and housing once the area came inside the UGB. Councilor Hennagin commented that, while he understood the argument for wanting control of the planning, he saw another argument for Lake Oswego stopping at the Tualatin River, keeping its hands off, and letting the areas make their own destiny and build their own infrastructure. Mayor Hoffman noted that, in his memo, Mr. Sin discussed the different consequences of that decision. If the City decided to be in charge of the area, then it had to annex it, plan it, and figure out how to pay for the infrastructure. If the City decided to leave it alone, then the City was subject to the detrimental spillover effects and associated costs without the benefit of property taxes. Councilor Jordan recalled that, at the start of this process, Metro asked different communities what they could provide for the area. Tualatin could easily provide sewer and Lake Oswego water because it would be going downhill. However, transportation was always the elephant in the room because there was not a way to figure that out until light rail came in to take away the vehicles. She pointed out that having control of the planning would allow Lake Oswego to determine how streets emptied out onto the major carriers. She said that they would not want to see cul-de-sacs leading out to one road that then went through Lake Oswego. Mayor Hoffman indicated that he was not advocating for Lake Oswego taking or not taking the planning of the Borland area. Rather, he was saying that it was an issue on the table. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 11 August 18, 2009 He mentioned Mr. Sin's discussion of governance in Stafford, including the issue of who would pay for the infrastructure needed in Stafford, should it urbanize. He pointed out that the cities were not obligated to pay for infrastructure development; they could require the developers to put it in. However, that would be challenging as developers typically had little money available for infrastructure. He explained that cities could not finance the necessary infrastructure through SDCs, as they did not charge SDCs until a developer pulled a building permit. A developer did not pull a building permit until after installing the infrastructure. Mr. Egner pointed out that the Stafford area situation was similar to Damascus in that the initial cost to put in infrastructure was very expensive, especially if it relied on gravity sewer coming from the Tri -Cities plant in Oregon City. That line would have to extend through West Linn and up to the Borland area. He noted that this raised questions about how that little area could support the costs. Councilor Olson asked to review pp. 37-40, where Mr. Sin laid out the policy considerations. Mayor Hoffman noted that they already discussed the Stafford area impacts and interests, such as controlling traffic on the roadways by having the authority to do so. Councilor Tierney pointed out that the people living in a subdivision had the right to turn right or left on to a major road, even if the City managed the infrastructure development. Mr. Egner explained that it came down to the form of development, whether it centered on transit and a walkable type of development, or whether it repeated the suburban auto -oriented pattern. He held that that was the key in making the difference in the number of trips going up Stafford Road into Lake Oswego. Councilor Jordan observed that the density could also pay for that kind of infrastructure. Councilor Olson mentioned ODOT's concerns about the 1-205 corridor. She noted that, in ODOT's urban reserves analysis and the ratings it gave to different areas based on the factors list, it designated only two areas as having 'huge (prohibitive) costs,' one of which was Stafford. She mentioned the identification of topography as a major factor in the high costs of doing anything along the 1-205 corridor. She concurred that the transportation issue was huge and one that Metro has not yet addressed well. She agreed with Councilors Tierney and Hennagin that annexing the area in order to control what happened there was not necessarily the way to go. Councilor Hennagin clarified that he was simply raising the question, as he did not know the answer. Councilor Hennagin asked if the cost of infrastructure played a role in whether land was designated as urban. Councilor Olson said yes. She concurred with Councilor Jordan and Mr. Egner that the Metro analysis of the surrounding cities providing infrastructure was poor. She reiterated that ODOT did its own analysis and found that "Stafford would be marginally suitable for providing a transportation system capable of accommodating urban development." Councilor Hennagin commented that he did not understand the thinking process, as the land from Mountain Road to 1-5, which was under consideration as urban reserve, was flatter and better farmland than this other, steeper area that was not developable as farmland. Councilor Jordan noted that the Clackamas County Policy Action Committee has called out some areas as both urban and rural reserves. Councilor Olson said that the PAC was meeting tonight to resolve that conflict. Mr. Egner noted that the Clackamas County Planning Commission recommendation included all of the U-3 area and the northern portion of the U-5 area, which filled out the four quadrants of Stafford and 1-205. He pointed out that this created a node of sorts and an island of the rest of the Stafford Basin up north, which was somewhat consistent with Lake Oswego's aspiration statement. Mayor Hoffman discussed the jurisdictional issue and the traffic issue in terms of taking negative impacts on neighborhoods into consideration. One way of minimizing those negative impacts was to assert jurisdiction over an area that might negatively impact a neighborhood. He pointed out City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 11 August 18, 2009 that if Palisades residents could not get on to McVey because of the traffic, then the City Council in 2020 would hear from them. He indicated to Councilor Olson that, based on his discussions with Clackamas County Chair Lynn Peterson, he could not agree with her description of the County building a new bridge as bringing all that traffic to Lake Oswego. He discussed the issue of governance, noting that neither West Linn nor Lake Oswego have identified areas of interest in Stafford. He observed that Stafford was around 4,000 acres, while Lake Oswego was 8,000 acres. He did not know whether the community would be willing to accept 50% more territory. He indicated to Councilor Olson that, while he did not know West Linn's official position, the Mayor did mentioned having a village in the Borland area and industrial land uses. He pointed out that their motivation was economic development, as opposed to developing a compact urban walkable community. Mr. Egner recalled hearing that West Linn wanted to develop an employment area east of Stafford Road and north of 1-205. Mayor Hoffman indicated to Councilor Hennagin that Tualatin went through an analysis of the infrastructure costs for manufacturing plants versus residential four or five years ago. He emphasized that these were casual conversations, and not setting positions. Councilor Tierney asked whether a decision would be made on Stafford as one entity or piecemeal. Mr. Egner indicated that that was the next step. He commented that they would have to have a discussion on governance if all of Stafford was designated as urban reserve. Councilor Tierney observed that he would discuss the northern area that was contiguous to the City (and in which the City owned property) differently than he would discuss the Borland area, which was not contiguous to the City. Mayor Hoffman speculated that, after spending so much time and energy on this urban/rural reserve designation process, Metro would likely not look at the undesignated lands for 50 years, since it would bring in the urban reserves first. He continued with the review of policy considerations. He mentioned Metro's rating Stafford as having high suitability for sewer and water compared to other areas. He agreed that those analyses were superficial. He commented that he was not certain that he agreed with Mr. Sin that the extension of urban services might divert public funds from some place else, but it was an issue. He discussed the issue of the school districts. He noted that 80% of the kids living in Lake Oswego went to the Lake Oswego School District. He pointed out that the Lake Oswego School District did not extend to the other side of Lakeridge. He speculated that a major issue with annexing the Borland area would be annexing an area where the kids did not attend Lake Oswego schools. He mentioned the issue of moving the District boundary, which required approval of the School Board. Councilor Olson returned to the issue of governance. She asked the question of whether the Council envisioned providing governance in that area. She concurred with the Mayor that traditionally Lake Oswego looked north and west, as opposed to south. She questioned this area as a place where Lake Oswego wanted to grow. She agreed with Mr. Sin that building public facilities could divert funds from other areas and/or result in increased tax burdens, as the SDCs could not begin to cover the cost of providing services. Mayor Hoffman stated that no public dollars would be spent on infrastructure; either the developer or a regional funding mechanism would pay for it. He pointed out that all over the region, jurisdictions had no money to pay for infrastructure in developing areas, such as Bethany or Cooper Mountain in Washington County and Damascus in Clackamas County. He reiterated that it would take state funding or developers. He speculated that developers would de -value the dirt in order to pay for the infrastructure, e.g., paying $100,000 per acre instead of $500,000 per acre and using $200,000 to pay for infrastructure. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 11 August 18, 2009 Mr. Powell mentioned that the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Goal 14 required full cost SDCs in the Stafford area, resisted expansion of the USB down there, and required voter -approved annexation. He indicated that if the Council had a different policy feeling about Stafford, then it had a number of issues to address in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilor Hennagin commented that leaving the area as undesignated for the next 50 years might be in Lake Oswego's best interests. Mayor Hoffman noted that the City's aspirations discussed keeping Stafford rural in character, which was the position to which the City has consistently held for years. He agreed that undesignated would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, voter -approved annexation, and infrastructure concerns, as would a rural reserve designation. Councilor Olson noted that if the Borland/1-205 section received an urban reserves recommendation and the rest rural reserves or undesignated, then the governance issue remained. She spoke to the Council deciding whether the City was willing to govern in the area or not. Mayor Hoffman held that that decision was not yet ripe, as the area still might not urbanize for five to fifteen years even if designated as urban reserve. He said that that did not preclude that Lake Oswego had an interest in the area. Mr. Egner observed that insisting on urbanization related to transit as a condition pushed the urbanization out quite a ways. Councilor Jordan pointed out that Metro would want these governance and infrastructure issues solved before bringing the area into the UGB. Councilor Olson wondered if Metro would not designate the area if West Linn and Lake Oswego also walked away from governance, as Tualatin has done. Mayor Hoffman indicated that he has not heard in the discussions that governance was a factor. Mr. Egner pointed out that Tualatin found that a single-family development with a small retail center did not pay for itself. However, no one has looked at town center level of intensity cost analysis. Councilor Jordan noted that the discussion has turned towards a biotech industry to serve the hospital and denser housing to serve the employment area. Mr. Egner mentioned some discussion about matching regional planning to local aspirations. Mayor Hoffman noted the issue of the regional vision and local aspirations. Mr. Egner noted the question of whether the regional vision was a collection of local aspirations. Mayor Hoffman commented that if West Linn, Lake Oswego, and Tualatin all said that they did not want the land, yet the rest of the region found that it met the criteria for urban reserves, then that meant a different conversation. Councilor Tierney commented that they have been reactive to what was happening at Metro. He suggested looking at this from the perspective of what was in Lake Oswego's best interests in terms of land and annexation. He argued that it was in the community's best interests to have developable land in order to have the growth needed to sustain a tax base. He held that a key driver was deciding what the community wanted to do with respect to lands both inside and outside the UGB. He pointed out that a tax base that grew only 3% a year with little to no additional development put the budget in a serious situation in short order. He spoke of deciding what areas in and around the city of Lake Oswego would be good or bad for the City, and focusing their energies on the good areas. Mayor Hoffman mentioned that this was the conversation that he wanted to have as part of visioning, discussing the question of what the community wanted to look like in 20 or 50 years. He concurred with the point about property taxes. He noted the questions relating to expansion: should Lake Oswego expand horizontally, vertically, or at all? He agreed that the Council needed to tackle these questions next year. Councilor Tierney asked how Lake Oswego stood up against the goal of the compact urban form. Mayor Hoffman indicated that Lake Oswego was held up in the region as a model of the compact City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 11 August 18, 2009 urban form. Councilor Tierney commented that he thought Lake Oswego could be a more walkable community than it was today. Councilor Jordan observed that the numbers driving the supply range were based on current zoning. She held that jurisdictions' stated intentions of increasing density needed to be part of the conversation, as that would drive whether Metro needed to expand the UGB in the first go round. She pointed out that Lake Oswego was looking more at shifting density than adding it. She argued that what happened with other areas, such as the West End light industrial area, were also issues for consideration. She agreed that a visioning process could identify pockets for higher densities than single-family homes. Councilor Olson mentioned that both the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife and ODOT were opposed to urbanization of the Borland Road area. She concurred with Councilor Jordan that ODOT opposed development because it did not have the money to build roads. Mayor Hoffman noted the PAC's straw poll, which found that the majority wanted to designate the Borland Road area only as an employment area with a slight minority wanting to designate the entire Stafford Triangle as urban reserve. He mentioned his understanding based on conversations with people on the Steering Committee that "the winds were pointing to" urban reserve or undesignated. He reviewed Lake Oswego's position: urban reserves tied to transportation on the southern portion and maintaining Stafford's character as rural in nature. He noted the question raised by Councilor Tierney of whether the community wanted to grow, and in what direction. If the community decided that it wanted to expand into North Stafford, then they had to change the Comprehensive Plan. Councilor Hennagin asked if the Council was not bound to the Comprehensive Plan as the law of Lake Oswego, which called for keeping it rural in nature. Mayor Hoffman explained that he saw the Comprehensive Plan as 'policy,' as opposed to 'law.' He held that ordinances were laws but not Comprehensive Plan goals. He asked when the policy regarding Stafford had been added. Councilor Olson recalled the Interagency/Intercity agreement signed in 1992 about keeping Stafford rural in character. Mayor Hoffman indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the agreement was a joint statement, as opposed to enforceable law. Councilor Moncrieff asked if the September 5, 2009 aspiration statement was the Council's official statement. Mr. Egner indicated that it was what staff submitted to Metro. He noted that it was not binding and simply stated the Council's position. Councilor Moncrieff described the aspirations statement as excellent. Mayor Hoffman concurred. Councilor Olson did also, reiterating that it was not binding. She mentioned that the agreement preceding it was more binding. Councilor Moncrieff commented that the aspirations did not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and reinforced what the City has been saying all along. Mayor Hoffman asked if anyone was uncomfortable with the aspiration statement stating that upper Stafford should remain rural in character and that the Borland area could be urbanized under certain conditions. Councilor Olson indicated that the only sentence that she did not like in the City's aspirations statement was in the last paragraph. She held that the stated expectation that Lake Oswego would have a primary decision-making role, if Stafford were included as an urban reserve, was not something on which the Council has agreed. Councilor Jordan argued that the idea was that Lake Oswego wanted to have input on what happened in Stafford, and not that Lake Oswego would take the area over. Councilor Moncri ff indicated that she read it as wanting a voice at the table. Mayor Hoffman pointed out that if one was not at the table, then one was on the menu. He concurred that the idea was that Lake Oswego would be at the table of the four jurisdictions interested in Stafford. He argued that it was critically important that Lake Oswego be at the table. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 11 August 18, 2009 Councilor Olson clarified that she thought that Lake Oswego did need to be at the table, but she held that that was not what the sentence said. She acknowledged that the other Council members have interpreted it as having a voice at the table. 4. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 8:41 p.m. to Executive Session under the authority of ORS 192.660 (2) (e) to conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions. Mr. Powell reviewed the Executive Session parameters. 5. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION Mayor Hoffman reconvened the meeting at 9:30 p.m. 6. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 9:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn Christie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: D. Hoffman, City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 11 August 18, 2009