by Sean Breslin
Members of the commercial real estate community raised serious concerns today over Metro staff's growth recommendations and accused Metro of being unreceptive to their complaints.
During a meeting with the Commercial Real Estate Economic Coalition, attorney Mark Whitlow told Metro Councilor Rod Park that Metro is using the urban growth boundary as a goal to contain growth, not a tool to channel growth to specific areas.
Park noted that the purpose of the meeting was for he and Metro staff to hear the perspective of CREEC members on the market forces that drive growth. "You all know what's going on in the market. We don't know what's going on in the market. We need you to help us understand what's happening on the ground," said Park.
Whitlow was skeptical of Metro's understanding of economic forces. "To sit here and listen to you say you don't know what the market is, is frightening," he said.
Metro long-term planning manager John Williams defended Metro staff's report, saying that nothing's been decided and feedback from groups like CREEC are part of the decision-making process.
"We're trying to have discussion about what actions are going to be taken," Williams said. "It's a much more complex analysis than we've ever done before."
"It's complex. It isn't right, though," Whitlow responded.
The grilling from CREEC came as Metro staff and council members continue to present chief operating officer Michael Jordan's growth report, "Making the Greatest Place: Strategies for a sustainable and prosperous region." The report focuses on repairing and maintaining existing infrastructure inside the urban growth boundary to focus growth in already-existing town centers and communities. That strategy could influence how people travel through the Portland metropolitan area, Williams said.
"If we get people living near where they work, near where they want to be, we can reduce some of the load on the transportation system," Williams said.
But communities have to go along with Metro's plans, said Brian McCarl, vice president of acquisitions for Newland Communities. He cited Lake Oswego's "protective village" growth plan that wouldn't agree with high population density.
"We've created this concept of town centers and corridors, but there has to be the political will on the town centers themselves," McCarl said.
Many at the meeting felt that maintaining the existing urban growth boundary would come at the expense of economic expansion and job creation. Attorney John Pinkstaff questioned how Metro took economic prosperity into consideration, and Whitlow said the top priorities of protecting the urban growth boundary and investing in existing areas will hurt job creation.
"Points one [maintaining and investing in existing public assets] and two [protecting the urban growth boundary] pretty much guarantee that you aren't going to satisfy point number three [supporting creation of jobs]," Whitlow said.
The discussion also turned to large industrial lots of 25 acres or more, which some in attendance believed were not given enough attention and consideration in Jordan's report. Those lots are important to growth because they attract job-creating businesses.
"It's a very risky thing not to provide several large lot options," said Beverly Bookin, a land use consultant. "It's not enough just to make Portland a livable community."
Despite the criticisms, Metro planner John Williams said there is plenty of land within the urban growth boundary that can accommodate economic and residential growth. Meeting everyone's goals is the challenge, he said.
"We're trying to find the place where we're accomplishing community and regional goals in a way that the economy will support," Williams said.