Stafford Character - the Blog

If you thought traffic has been bad this summer.....

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 13:45:00 +0000

Have you been reading about Cabelas?

The grand opening is expected to bring 1,000,000 shoppers to the Tualatin big box store over the 4 day event.

A MILLION?

Sure as shootin' it'll be a non-stop vehicular onslaught. No wonder Tualatin is upset about traffic coming to Stafford - they already have a serious problem with the Tualatin Sherwood road, and it's going to be worse with this new magnet store they've built at the freeway on-ramp.

Even with the loss of traffic generated by the closure of the iconic Jiggles, this is going to increase traffic daily and dramatically impact weekends as hunters and gatherers converge there to shop and gawk, because this store ain't just another Dick's. They expect people to travel a few hundred miles and cross state lines to get there.

Prudent Hamleteers will stock their shelves with chili and pork rinds and not venture too far from home the weekend of the 18th.

Wiser ones will just up and leave town.

And perhaps some of us will be looking out their windows and wondering if this is a sign of our own future should the Hamlet get all urbany and densified.

What will Borland Road look like that weekend? Roundabout traffic? And I-205? Will traffic on Childs Road be able to turn left onto Stafford at all that weekend?

I sometimes roll my eyes when the NIMBY arguments come up because TRAFFIC panic is always high on the list, and it pushes the protest buttons.

This Cabela weekend may get us all reaching for the panic button!

Will we stay Urban Reserve - or?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 07 Aug 2014 19:34:00 +0000

Last night at a Special Board Meeting, surrounded by the amazing evening beauty at the Fiala Farm, it was agreed 7-1 that we will have a vote this fall about the designation we want for the non-Borland area of the Hamlet.

The roads to this decision came from different directions. Over the last year some 80+ people signed a petition asking for the chance to have a vote to inform the county on whether or not we want UGB inclusion. There were also multiple requests for this to the board over the last two years, none of which were entertained.

Then the county, after Washington County got their Grand Bargain at last year's legislature, decided they wanted the same opportunity to fast track some employment land into the UGB. To do that though there should be a consensus among the cities, the county and the affected lands as to what should be added, maybe removed, maybe altered in the current designations. So now the County is actually asking us - what do we want?

Then there was the legal response to the lawsuit that Tualatin and West Linn filed saying that the Hamlet shouldn't be included in any planning until the traffic mess out here is dealt with. This was upheld. Where it's going to next isn't clear, but for now, there's no touching this area.

Which means prime Employment Lands in Borland can't be developed.

Anyhow, I hope I got that all correct because it is a little complicated.

So, in response to the County asking us What We Want, it was decided to have a vote in September to make sure that the wishes of our citizens are represented correctly. We've had surveys and town halls that have approached that question, but never an actual conclusive vote. Of course it's an Advisory vote to inform the County, but it is still a great chance to voice what the majority of the landowners out here hope will happen.

There will be information coming out with pros and cons, FAQ's, maps and places for discussion. Don't forget our staffordhamlet.com website which will be the source for that, too. And of course there will be newsletters.

Would you like to help with the outreach? Please contact Tracy Tolbert or Dave Adams if you'd like to help with signage, donate some $$, lick envelopes or write the materials. We could use a solid core of people to help create the message that will get people inspired to come vote!

Escape from Purgatory?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 00:47:00 +0000

Hi,

I haven't written much lately. A couple of reasons. And no, spring fever isn't one of them!

Being careful of Apple Carts
If you come to meetings you know it's been a tough slog going forward this year on the vision plan. I was on the Structure Committee and now the Task Force committee - both of which are moving the Community Vision Plan forward using all of our good Consensus Building tools. The Structure group was 8 people and we did ok We were all happy with the result and felt good about each other when we were done. (Well, I liked everybody more when we were done than when we started anyhow!) We talked through tough things, unveiled those pesky elephants charging around the room, asked and listened instead of getting hurt feelings or jumping to conclusions and produced our report On Time. Go Team! The Task Force is tougher - there's 12 people on it and after a couple of meetings some folks are calling for it to be disbanded and shut down. Really? And that's with a full time mediator at the meetings. True! But that's newbie thinking. To build consensus in the Hamlet, oldtimers know you have to be able to walk on the hot coals baby! So, we'll see how that goes!

Moving Targets
Things are moving around so much it's been hard to know what to write. About the time I hit 'post' the situation may be completely different! One side wants this plan, one side wants that plan, and then there's someone who has a plan all their own.

But I'm hopeful that a plan can emerge that will benefit the most citizens the most ways.

Isn't that what SHOULD come out of a community vision?

As I wrote last time, the court case win by West Linn and Tualatin has affected us by not making full development here a slam dunk. The county is saying that there might be a slightly different pathway. We could maybe go back to our great Undesignated status and have it be possible for EFU lands to 'upzone' or create some smaller lots to build on or sell off.

There's lots of questions on that we're trying to pin down.

Only upzone for EFU? What about larger RRFF5 landowners? Is there a chance for them too? Is this only if we keep Stafford north of the river Undesignated? Upsides? Downsides? Hiddensides?

Remember we've had this conversation before? Before we were in the Urban Reserve ( a status where ALL of your re-zoning or subdividing rights are frozen until a city kindly annexes you), we were exploring this same option for some limited change, limited growth, and limited stress on our infrastructure that is possible in Undesignated areas.

Dan Chandler from the County has called our current status - Purgatory. An endless unchanging night. Hmmmmm.

Note: images of purgatory were so disturbing I'm sharing this instead.

Please stay involved, tuned in and Active in the Hamlet - this is the time to keep up to date!

next: Who Are The 65%??

The ball never lies

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:47:00 +0000

Last night's meeting with the County reps was very interesting. Out of the Land Use chaos here may be a way to actually craft the vision of lower density that we want! ?

What's your take on it?

Why we do it

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 15 Dec 2013 16:21:00 +0000

Yesterday we had board elections at the Hamlet Townhall and I'm thrilled to have been elected to serve again.
Thrilled because I think the Conceptual plan can be an amazing product to work on for the community.
And most grateful for my friends that helped by voting and bringing friends to vote - and make it possible.

I made a new friend at the meeting. Her family just moved here this past summer. She lives up on Johnson Road and told a story about walking her 3 little kids to the road to wait for the bus and having one son turn around, looking at the fields and sky and house and saying, "Can you believe we LIVE here?"

As a kid that lived in the forest and only came home by family edict when it got dark, I get it. Probably everyone who chose to live here gets it. When we talk about future generations here, he will be in my mind. You can shop anywhere. But playing with a turtle in your own backyard is special.

Enjoy the Holidays!

Carol

Myth #2 We'll be Eaten by Wolves!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0000

I've been to a couple of meetings now where elected officials and some of my neighbors raise a frightening topic.

Development Pays For Itself is Myth #1 and I call this Myth #2

"If we get taken out of the Urban Reserve we'll be developed in no time. We'll have no say in our own future!

This strikes me as a bit of fear-mongering and not a lot of contemplative opinion.

If we get taken out of the Reserve, there will still be administrative hurdles to cross before we're plowed under. All sorts of MOU's and assumptions will need to be reviewed, revised and maybe lost or newly created if our status changes. We'll still be a Hamlet if that happens, just like we were before. What could be more perilous than being on the short list we are now?

Maybe if we're back to Undesignated we'd get serious about going to the legislature to ask about making it possible for EFU lands to add a second house in some instances, like the Measure 37 claims did. This is something several families I know would be interested in. There may be an upside to not being a reserve, frozen in zones until a city takes us over. Who knows?

We do know the cities still don't want to annex us and pay for our infrastructure.

Some folks in Borland talk about a big quarter million dollar survey Tualatin did in 2009 or so that outlined the pros and cons of annexing us, leaving us to think that because they did this they're hot to come get us. But actually, based on that survey and other realities they've changed course and are doing most of their growth in Washington County, with maybe a bit in Clackamas that's near Wilsonville, but not in the Hamlet.

Lake Oswego's citizens are not about to vote to annex us and pay one more expense on top of their current ones. And West Linn isn't interested either.

The ones that are saying this the loudest, including Clackamas County officials, seem to be the people that want to see us developed the most. So, does that mean it's easier for them to develop us if we're IN the Reserve? Or less expensive somehow? There must be some incentive.

And say West Linn brings in a bit of property along their borders. These folks already have said they want to come in and develop. Would that be terrible? Do we really think they'll come across Rosemont ala Braveheart and start developing us?

Like all things said with certainty (this being the exception of course!), look closely at what's said and who's saying it and what they'll gain by it. Ask questions.

And remember, when someone says Stafford is the Crown Jewel of Clackamas, they're usually only thinking it's the best place to develop, not the best place to live. At least the ones I've heard say it - don't live here.

I'm Carol Yamada & I approve this message (!) Vote for me & vote often! December 14th

Development Pays for Itself!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:43:00 +0000

At last night's Hamlet meeting there was lengthy discussion by residents in the middle of the Board meeting on if Development Pays for Itself.

Duh! Of course it does!
This was the viewpoint promoted in detail last night by lawyer Ed Trompke from Lake Oswego. And he's correct.
IF you are building this:

Or this:

or this:

Yes, Industrial, Commercial and Farms are the three types of new construction that can either generate enough revenue or cost the cities so little that they're profitable.

But Residential is a loss leader. There are many studies online that support this which some of which I'll list below. They are mainly looking at it from the viewpoint of a city, not that of the fractured neighborhoods, the happy developer or the carpenter who has a new temporary job. But when it comes time to develop we will be city-zens and affected by their viewpoints.

One paragraph:

This study concludes that population growth pays for its fiscal costs only in the most carefully controlled and unrealistically isolated scenarios.

In Florida they tried to pass a law that allowed residents to vote to allow or deny large developments in their cities. The ads on TV were extreme of course, and they showed how Growth and Development costs the taxpayers. Forida Politifact wrote:

Politifact Florida found through an investigative report that “generally, studies suggest that new large single family developments do not pay for themselves. But infill development (taking an empty lot in an urban area) or redevelopment is much more likely to pay for itself. So are commercial and industrial development projects.” Research suggests that sprawling residential development costs taxpayers $1.40 to $1.50 for every $1.00 of revenue raised by the new tax base. Sustainable growth including infill and redevelopment are more likely to reap a net positive for for the taxpayers because the infrastructure, roads and facilities are already provided to the area.

So when making the argument of whether on not Growth or Development pays for itself it's important to specify just what kind of development you're talking about. Small clustered housing developments in among the trails? Not likely.

When a Developer says that new projects pay for themselves, they are talking about paying SDCs (System Development Charges) and they are talking about today's limited construction zone reality. Maybe it will, but it won't pay for what changes need to happen a mile or three away or that there will be future costs not covered.

And of course added costs for current residents include the fact we'll be city-zens then and will pay city taxes.

But happily the Developer has a solution for that too - let's put in some industrial land and commercial towers to help pay the taxes for the services generated by the housing growth you didn't want in the first place!

The only study I saw that contradicts this is predictably from the Homebuilder's Association.Which brings me back around to Mr. Trompke. Who is he and why is this non-resident pontificating at our meetings and why is he co-writing the Stafford Plan?

WHO: He is an attorney and specializes in land-use law. So he knows more about all of this than any of us. He's also involved with the Homeowner's Association, Clackamas County Business Alliance and works with local Stafford developers. I'm pretty sure it's fair to say he has a bias towards helping those organizations and individuals to achieve their stated goals of bringing us into the UGB and proceeding with developing us.

There's one case written up in legaleeze online where he is intimately involved in West Linn SDCs. In fact he's trying to get them lowered for his client. Fine, no one wants to pay something more than what they think is fair. But it's also a reminder that development will pay SDC's only if they can't get out of them. It's Business. They are not benevolent organizations that want to create a better world for your kids.

WHY is he writing our Stafford Plan? I don't know that. Maybe because none of us stepped up to do it ourselves?

So here are a few links. Any google search will bring you more here, in Canada, in Europe and everywhere.

http://betterchelmsford.com/inconvenient-truth.html
While the results might shock someone like Rick Santorum, who believes perpetual growth is somehow possible, they nonetheless serve to corroborate work done by Eban Fodor earlier in 2012 – namely, that the widely held notion that growth "pays for itself" is one of the most incorrect notions circulating in the popular consciousness.

See more at: http://reason.org/blog/show/does-growth-pay-for-itself#sthash.zDLn0Q50.dpuf

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/or-court-of-appeals/1079991.html

By the way, Shameless self promotion: I'm Carol Yamada and I'm running for Stafford Hamlet Board. I would really appreciate your vote!

Thoughts for the waning moon

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 20:53:00 +0000

Once upon a time a man who spent most of his life looking at the night sky decided he'd build something really special to honor his friend the moon.

His neighbors didn't want him too. After all, he was building on valuable farmland and what he was building didn't conform to their ideas of the local character. They liked things to be like barns and made of wood. This was going to be made of stone. They liked cows and fluffy sheep to be in the field, and this didn't plan for either. Also no one could figure out from the plans the style of it at all. Would it be rustic like their homes or whatever this was - post-modern-apocalyptic? The style didn't matter for, as Mrs. Saxon said, it was just plain Plain Ugly. The people complained and tore out their hair in protest.

The starry eyed man nodded and pretended to listen to the people, but secretly thought they were fools. He told them he'd make it smaller and they wouldn't even notice it. It would fit into their local landscape quite nicely.

And some of the people were foolish and trusted him and never asked for details. They liked the pretty colors on his map, so they told him yes, he could build it.

But then midway through constructions as the stones rose high into the sky from the fields, they had some doubts about his intentions.

What exactly is this strange building for? What kind of people would come? What would happen to traffic? Would there be enough water? Is this what we want in the neighborhood? They went to the Planning Board to try to stop it.

But the Planning Board just shook their heads and told them it was too late to protest. Details of the 'local character' weren't written in stone anywhere, and besides ground had been broken already.

The day of the opening ceremony the farmers saw what was built.

It was huge. There were donkey jams everywhere as people drove from far and near to gawk at the new structure. Strange people in white robes swarmed across the landscape. At least one member of the Walton clan was seen lurking around the edges.

To this day on the full moon in every pub in faraway England the controversy continues. Was this the work of a Man of Vision or a monumental Planning Failure?

Moral: Any strange thing can be built in a community with no clearly defined or enforceable character and/or a druidistical building code.

The Stafford Character is not yet defined and so can't be used as a guide or conversation for new construction. Should that be part of our current discussions?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 18 Jul 2013 15:28:00 +0000

With summer in full swing the Hamlet Planning event has taken a break until September. So, a rushed version of a plan did NOT go before the people for a vote by the end of June as the original timeline requested.


Yippee!!!

After that moment of celebration though, it's time to get back to the real work at hand - defending the process.

Here's some interesting reading. This first email excerpt is from someone who attended the Town Hall at Rolling Hills:

Et al... for the benefit of those that were not present at the planning meeting where we were able to "grill" Carlotta :) ... and I invite corrections to this comment by anyone... The question came up along the lines of "What will be the ultimate outcome / benefit of the Stafford Hamlet planning effort?" If done with enough detail and community buy-in a METRO ordinance will be passed that permanently establishes the agreed planning parameters (The Stafford Character) for future actions. That becomes our single objective (IMHO). It is an objective we can define and one we can all endorse. It was represented to those present as a way to lock in OUR vision of the future regardless of what jurisdiction(s) get involved, when/what UGB inclusion occurs, how infrastructure is provided, etc...
 

OK, so when I read this I thought - this is news! If we come up with a plan with amazing community support Metro WILL pass an ordinance codifying it. Not might pass or might consider, but flat out will pass it. Such an option had never been presented before. It seemed a little too good to be true! Someone else thought so to and forwarded this whole email to Carlotta for confirmation. Her response?

In the first place, I can't promise that any ordinance would be passed. 
In the second place, the issue of an ordinance was posed as a question 
that Ed answered, not me. I solicited a staff response to the question 
of whether density transfers could be ensured by an ordinance if an area
 is annexed. I believe the staff response was that questions like that 
would be spelled out between the annexing community and the community 
being annexed. I am not at my computer so I don't have the actual staff 
response. I'm just going from memory. Thanks for sharing this with me. I
 have been reluctant to participate in the Hamlet conversations for 
exactly this reason. I attended what was billed as a town hall type 
presentation on what the neighborhoods were talking about. It turned out
 to be something different.

Something different is right, if the 'grilling' comment is accurate.

This may or may not be a classic disingenuous type of misdirect. "Bobby came to play ball and the kitchen window got broke." Did Bobby break the window? "Carlotta came to our meeting, the question came up and it turns out they'll pass an ordinance!" Did Carlotta say that?

No.

Who said that?

Ed.

Who?

Herb Koss & the Johnson Road LLC's attorney said that.

Who???

OK, so to make my point absolutely clear - this is what a normal person looks like:

This is what a normal person looks like when they're operating off their own bias:

We are all both of these people. We need to be VERY careful what information goes into the Fact Bank we'll be using to create the Vision Map or whatever it is. Currently random groups are running off and interviewing Experts (elected officials and other resource people) to let them know what we're doing and then to ask them questions as input for our decision making. There is NO structure to this. No agreement of who speaks to whom or what we tell them or what kind of questions we ask. And from what I've seen when two or more attend these, not even an agreement on what was said.

Perhaps every 'Expert' transcript needs to go back to the 'Expert' for confirmation before we allow it to be considered fact - otherwise it could end up as

Garbage In Garbage Out

Keep your pencils sharp

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 23 Jun 2013 16:08:00 +0000

For years we've been discussing using 'cluster housing' as a way to have some development in the open areas of the hamlet and still be able to keep the rural elements of working landscapes and habitat areas intact.

Cluster by definition is a small number of things. A cluster of grapes fits in your hand. It's manageable.

Like a typical Hamleteer I keep hamlet maps rolled up in the car and so when I had a chance to hang out with a land use planner recently I was prepared! I unfurled a big old hamlet map and asked, pointing to the open lands of Rosemont and Hazelia and asked - how would you get affordable sewers in there?

He studied the terrain and started dragging his fingers across the map, plopping down little clusters of homes that would all be linked to a larger system that would move the sewage downhill to be treated in Wilsonville instead of uphill to other cities.

Clusters! That would be cool and fit into the Vision for our area. A bucolic cluster of a dozen homes surrounded by open spaces with views of hills and bunnies. Perfect!

But then I asked, how many houses in a cluster would be needed to pay for this sewer expansion? A mere 20.....units per acre. And you'd need to build out 10+ acres. So that would be a minimum of 200 units of denser development in order to preserve open areas. To get this sewer line all the way through the hamlet, you'd need a swath of perhaps 5 clusters along Johnson Road. Minimum 1000 new neighbors.

Is this a sign of the future?

This is one gentleman's idea of how this could pencil out. There will be other ideas of how growth will happen. But they are all going to have to be profitable in order to happen. The monies will determine the outcome.

With our current planning process going on, it's time for some specifics.

Going door to door and asking people on the ground what there plans are to me means no more excuses like 'we're looking at things at a 10 or 20,000 foot level so we can't tell you what it will cost or where your water will come from' when we ask for specifics. Willamette Water anyone?

Next time you hear about clusters or any other vague term, especially if it sounds harmless, get out of your chair and be sure to ask some sharp questions about how the proposed plan really pencils out.

County Support to Hamlets becomes questionable

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:18:00 +0000

Emails announcing You're Fired, Redundant, Unnecessary and that your services are no long required just bite.

This one came out a couple of weeks ago:

It is a difficult time for local government budgets in Oregon and around the nation. Clackamas County is no exception. Due to budget constraints, Public and Government Affairs is undergoing a reorganization to better maximize limited public resources.

Unfortunately, this means that the County is eliminating the staff liaison position for Hamlets and Villages effective June 30, 2013.

Chris Roth has contributed to the formation and stability of the nationally-recognized Hamlet and Village program. Please join me in thanking her for her service.

The Hamlet has only known an existence with Chris Roth in it. As liaison from day one she was our best resource and inside connection to the county plans, processes and persons. If we needed to get into someone's ear, she made it happen. The list of what she organized and physically did is long and the many boxes of sign in sheets, agendas , easels, sound systems, etc that she dragged around for our meetings were heavy. Chris was always there at our Saturday Town Halls and our Monday meetings, quietly observing, speaking only when it seemed in our best interest.

So it was sad news to hear that her job (and our Hamlet support) was eliminated due to budget cuts at the county and ...

Wait!!! Stop the Presses! Breaking news!!!

The county is in the works of approving a new budget!
In the midst of these budget constraints our clever and worthy commissioners are giving themselves 4% raises, 6% if you're the hard working Chair.

OOOPS! This is a stool, not a chair. My bad!

Wow!

Are these merit raises? Hell no! They're 'comparison' raises. When the commissioners discovered that they're not making as much as Commissioners in wealthier counties with bigger tax bases (basically places with more people than horses, unlike Clackamas), they decided to use the old Can Do spirit and give themselves raises. That's why we voted them into office, right?

Other overworked county staff can absorb Chris' job duties on their current salaries and we won't even see the difference in support. Promise!!!

Clackamas residents everywhere can now feel we're keeping up with the Multnomahs.

Bye Chris - best wishes and thanks for all the late nights, weekends and endless emails and support you've given us over the years. I'll miss you. We'll miss you.

Words for Thought

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 16:34:00 +0000

This statement was printed in a booklet in another place preparing for change, Gerhart, OR.

Dave Coles has substituted Stafford Hamlet in the appropriate place.

"Nothing lasts forever;
forces of change will someday make
Stafford Hamlet unrecognizable.
Those forces are not in earth or water,
or in chain saws or concrete, but in human attitudes.
Stafford Hamlet will cease to be Stafford Hamlet
when its people no longer recognize themselves as a community,
when open and generous attitudes toward each
other give way to individual selfish interests.
When everyone takes what he or she can
from the environment and the community
without seeing that the whole has been diminished thereby.
In those days the only thing left will be the memories..."
(borrowed from Gerhart, OR)

It's true. Thanks Dave & Tia.

Open Letter to the Phone Company

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 01 Jun 2013 21:38:00 +0000

Dear Tree Gnashers who work for the phone company.

My Oak tree in the early morning light.

Thank you for again sparing my 100 year Oak Tree and remembering it was here before the telephone poles sprung from the ground like seedlings.

But on behalf of her cousins up and down Childs Road that are or soon will be mangled, chopped, chipped and mutilated she wants me to tell you that there will come a day of reckoning.

These trees will grow new, strong limbs.
Small trees will become large in the newly revealed sunlight and branches will fall in harsh storms, dragging your wires to the ground.

The Ents will return. In Force and with patient Tree Vengence will make short work of your poles.

Tree recently sighted on Cooks Butte playing baseball with an elm (not pictured).

Bury your wires or suffer the consequences.

Best wishes,
Carol

Rare Unicorn Siting!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 01 Jun 2013 17:20:00 +0000

The process for planning the Stafford Hamlet moves on.

Thursday night dedicated neighborhood leaders gathered together to conscientiously translate the information gleaned from surveys and neighborhood meetings into symbols and colors onto about 200 square feet of blank and partially colored maps. These maps will then be compiled into one comprehensive map of what the citizens here envision for their future.

This unicorn named One Acre Lots was recently seen trotting through the Hamlet

Person after person wants their property divided into one acre lots. They don't want to ruin the wonderful rural open feeling we now have. We seem to believe we can be different and special when it comes to zoning and basic economics.

There's a huge gap in reality here. How 'different' do you really thing we are in Metro's eyes?

This prevailing discussion that we can come into the UGB encouranging denser development in the 500 or so acres in Borland and then freely have Gentleman Farmer low density lots everywhere else is a fairy tale.

Remember when Tualatin wanted to zone 100 acres as one acre lots and Metro sued them and the surrounding cities vilified them? That's a city filled with townhouses and apartment complexes (the latest one coming in at 38 units/acre), and 4-6 units per acre housing.

It's not going to happen that we get any guarantee that the remaining 75% of our area can potentially be zoned as one acre lots. Remember too that we have to be added to a city to come into the UGB - what city would take on the burden of urban services for lands they aren't allowed to use to meet their own density requirements?

We really need to to find out about the feasibility of this plan before we draw one more thing on our maps. In an open forum too. I for one am not comfortable with the current model of just a couple of people on and off the board having private meetings with county or Metro officials to discuss our plans.

Clackamas County Business Alliance had a few representatives at our citizen planning meeting. They have zero interest in 1 acre lots except for use as exclusive housing for the business owners wanting to live close to the ventures they envision on newly added employment lands.

For that business growth to happen they know that the first hurdle is to get us into the UGB and after that....well... are there really any unicorns?

Stafford Planners - we be baad!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 17 May 2013 00:42:00 +0000

The unintended consequences of any decision come back in surprising ways.

Take for instance that after hearing the news the Stafford Hamlet has taken the reins for planning out their own future, Lake Oswego has sacked 3 long range planners.

We certainly didn’t expect that good jobs would be cut as a result of our exciting planning project. I mean, we may be drawing on maps, talking density transfers, rhapsodizing about RRFF5 zoning and generally talking the talk, but it's not like we're professionals. We have ideas, but on some things, many things, we don't even have a clue. Did they really sack them because of us??

To check the truthiness of this, I called L.O. Planning to see what they had to say.

“These cuts have been approved by the Budget Committee alrighty. But not really because of your planning project. We’ve been telling you for years we don’t want to develop in the Stafford area yet, and this should convince you that we’re truth talkers.” said William ‘Bull’ Dozer, interim planning guy. “We don’t have the money or the will to invade the Hamlet. And that whole tennis center thing, well that was a lapse of judgement."

Wow - well it sounds like we're not going to be part of the LO constellation for a little while. Maybe we can breathe a moment and take proper time and care in creating the Hamlet's Vision Map after all.

Hamlet members seeking long range planning ideas during a recent full moon.

Wimpy Economics

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 13 May 2013 03:40:00 +0000

This week in the Review there's a story about the Wizer's building being transformed into a 242 High End apartments, some retail, underground parking and a small plaza.

Wow!

That's on top of the 500+ new apartments built in Wilsonville this year and the new wrap-around Bridgeport Apartments which will feature 367 High End apartments.

Bridgeport - a whopping 60 units per acre comes to a congested street near you!

Bridgeport Apartments, a two building, four-story, 367-unit project is being built in Tualatin near Bridgeport Village. The massive 631,000-square-foot development (including 22,000 square feet of retail space) will feature a “wrap-around” design, which centers on a concrete parking structure with wood-framed housing wrapping around it.
Residents will be able to drive into the parking structure, park on their apartment’s floor and walk a short distance to their apartment. The idea, Rodriguez said, is to create a high-density product in what is traditionally a low-density market.

Rodriguez said that while the standard garden-style apartment design tops out at about 30 units per acre, the wrap-around design can reach densities between 55 and 60 units per acre. With suburban rents recovering from $1.10 per square foot a year and a half ago to between $1.30 and $1.40 today, Rodriguez said now was the time to get moving on the market-rate project.

We seem to be the place for High End apartments.
But how do these get paid for?

The Review says this regarding the Wizer project:

But Kessi said the project won’t pencil out without some support from the city’s redevelopment agency.
Developers are hoping the urban renewal agency will essentially cover or waive the city’s usual fees associated with new developments along with fees for permits, and contribute $750,000 to the project. In all, that amounts to an estimated $5 million public investment, he said.

“Public participation is needed so we can make this development a reality,” Kessi said, noting the project would provide many more dollars in property tax revenues and would generate construction excise money for public schools."

I will gladly pay you Tuesday!

Dear Taxpayer - this is too much froth on my latte!!!

Not only are Developers Developing and Landowners Landing, but THE PUBLIC gets to pay for it!!

While you and I have our property assessed and get our bills in the mail, do you think the corporation will just get their bill and meekly write their checks, lick a stamp and pay? Could they conceivably negotiate tax credits and deferrals and preferred rates and points for good behavior and things regular folks don't even know can be done? It won't be like we'll have 240 new tax-paying homes here.

And the Excise Tax? That tops out at $1 per square foot or about $240,000 for the complex. And even this can potentially be reduced because it's on already developed land. So it'll be a one time kick of $200,000 say, for Capital Improvements. Not to hire teachers. Not to buy books and keep coaches. But it will be useful for some repairs. Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

Nope, the take-away message is that this $5M will be going to the developers and others, but will not trickle back down to the city or the schools any time soon.

Developments like this are not fully funded by the landowner, the developer or the people that will one day live there. In this instance the public is paying $20,833 for each of the new units. Sort of like one year's free rent for each new resident.

The plan that the Stafford Hamlet Board is working on now will probably cost a pretty penny to realize too Although the odds it will even be considered when we come into the UGB are slim to zero, as a matter of curiosity we should be sure to ask what the costs could be, both the ones we get to pay and the ones The Public will pay for us.

New Hamlet Group formed

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 09 May 2013 04:11:00 +0000

We know that there are several groups within the Hamlet, mainly ones where you pay dues to hire lobbyists and what-not to push your property into the UGB, hoping that you'll get rich in the process.

I've recently become aware of a new group set up in the Hamlet and this one has preservation in mind.

Their manifesto was slipped under my door last night and it's a pretty radical plan to keep working landscapes, especially those that revolve around grape growing, alive and well in the neighborhood.

It's called PMS. Preserve My Stafford. PMS meets monthly and members are encouraged to bring their own wineglass to meetings.

Contact me if this sounds like the group for you!

Who's drivng this bus?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 05:30:00 +0000

You know the old saying, 'What if they had a war and nobody came?'

How about - 'What if the Hamlet Board decided to draw a pretty Comp Plan and 7 out of 10 Hamlet Neighborhoods said we don't think that's necessary.'

Would the Hamlet Board listen and say 'OK, what do you want?'

Or would they try to convince us this is important with some fresh new reasons to have one like:

If we don't have a comp plan there will be more things like the compost facility, only worse!!!!!
If we don't have a comp plan, then the cities will come in and just do whatever they want here!!!!
If we don't have a comp plan, aliens will come down, land on your house, suck out your brains and abduct your pets!!!!

In January Mike Miller, chair, announced within minutes of being elected chair that his goal is to have a comp plan by the end of the year. He didn't say he was here to find out what needed to be done, what the people of the Hamlet want, to strengthen our relationships with the cities that border us, or anything else; he's a one-agenda no other input required sorta guy. So I'm thinking it's going to be more of the same old worn scare tactics.

Previous Hamlet outreach efforts were tightly planned and universal. This outreach is much looser and neighborhood specific. The possible nightmare is the input will be apples and oranges. The upside is that people are getting to say and discuss whatever they want. And what I'm hearing is that the majority of the neighborhoods are not convinced that they want to do this planning.

Say this majority gets together and says, ya know, we're not going to play. And if you go ahead and create a comp plan anyhow, we know it has to be voted on. And we'll be there on election day to tell you what we think of your creating a comp plan that nobody wants.

Real Photo of alien space ship sighted near Johnson Road

But say Mike, there's something you can do for us. One thing comes up over and over in these meetings. People would like to have the freedom to someday divide their lot or be able to build a second house on their land for a family member. Can we look at the feasibility of making that possible?

At the moment, doing this is about as or less likely than the alien landing scenario. Once we came into the Urban Reserve, things on a zoning level flash froze for us, except for the Measure 37/49 exceptions.

Being an Urban Reserve is still kinda new. Maybe rather than having our land locked up for the next 25 or 40 years it would be possible to create another exception that allows some lot divisions. Have we looked into seeing if that can happen?

There's no reason to keep us in large tracts for farming now. We're Urban wanna-bes. The only reason to keep us tied up like this is to have shovel-ready large acreage for future developers. How fair is that?

This is not a crazy idea. Thinking that we can come into the UGB, get annexed into a city, dictate our own density and have 1 acre lots and equestrian trails with fields full of horses though, that is crazy.

This time let's do something that would actually benefit the people that live here now instead of those who are anxious to be our future.

Clouded Vision

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:04:00 +0000

This is a Word Cloud I did on the Vision statement a few years ago.
A different way of looking at what we came up with.

“Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies.”

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 04:32:00 +0000

At the last Hamlet Community meeting I went with a question.
OK, a burning question.

How can a citizen get something put on the Hamlet Ballot?

What question? they wanted to know.

How about asking citizens when they want to come into the Urban Growth Boundary??

Some people think working on a Vision Map will be used as proof by the Clackamas County Business Alliance and the Stafford Land Owners to say we want to come into the UGB very soon and be developed 'sooner rather than later' to quote Commissioner Ludlow.

This type of thinking leads to mistrust and fear and makes it hard to move forward together in good faith. To avoid that distrust, I want a question that would clarify that approving or rejecting a plan does not have anything to do with a UGB inclusion timeline. Maybe something like :

Approving this Vision Map
a)does
b)does not
mean I want to be included in the UGB prior to 2021.

That would take care of knowing if people want to get all excited about the upcoming 2016 inclusion. But I'm willing to work on the wording to make it a better question.

I was told that's not the kind of question we want to ask. Over and over by different board members.

No no, I protested. I don't care about your opinion on my question. I want to know the mechanics of how a citizen gets an issue on the ballot. You know, the PROCESS. Do I get a petition with 200 names? Do I stand on my head? Offer a bribe? What's the process?

Well, there is no process. I can email them the question and they'll think about it.

Hubba hubba - that sounds very democratic and very unbiased and very grass roots, don't you think? I can sort of imagine how much consideration my email would get!

Putting a question on the ballot isn't covered in our bylaws.

Good bylaws are a work in progress. People worked hard to craft the best document they could for us when they were written and adopted in 2006. But they must not have considered that there would come a time when The People would want to ask questions that the board didn't think up first. Or agree with.

So now what?

I could ask that the bylaws be reviewed and a process for this be considered and an amendment be proposed. Since we don't have a bylaws committee anymore, that request would also go through the board.

I'm screwed!

current bylaws:

Pollywoggin it

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 03:11:00 +0000

Kerplunk kerplop. Three frogs simultaneously startle, leap into my pond and swim to a safe depth.

They're Northern Red-Legged frogs and are on the Oregon Sensitive Species - Vulnerable list. They and their habitat are disappearing. But there's something about this bend in the Tualatin river that they like. Hamlet residents report seeing them in their streams and ponds and right now a half dozen are hiding in the bottom of mine.

One of Ann Culter's Stafford Character monthly articles on local critters was about red-legged frogs and she told me how after she'd built her pond they moved in and laid eggs on the plants. That reminded me of a very local urban legend here about how red-legged frogs lived in the stream by my house in the 80's, but hadn't been seen since.

A year later we built a small water retention pond in a low spot of the yard and had the county put in some mosquito fish. It was like opening a Froggy Diner! That fall we had two red-leggeds come hang out for a week or so. The next fall there were a few more. This year is the first spring siting and there's practically a crowd!

These guys are travelers and don't breed here, but this is an increasingly popular rest stop on their spring and fall migrations. For a few weeks out of the year our yard is honored to be habitat for a recognized sensitive species.

And this year they're visiting over Earth Day.

Earth Day.

How the Hamlet folks decide to move into the future determines if this little frog and all the other critters that find some sanctuary here in our semi-wild little pocket of the world will continue to thrive. Currently my neighborhood is roughly 1 house per 5 acres. Flip that to 10/acre and kiss this frog - goodbye.

Rabbits and Hats

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:44:00 +0000

Why, you might wonder, do we have a group called Friends of Stafford.

It's simple: the Hamlet as an entity of the County can't protest what the County does in any legal way.

By the time the Hamlet figured out what it meant to us for S&H to do surface mining and expanded composting here, the approvals were granted by the County. Any opposition had to be taken up by a different group.

S&H has a long history of violations of the terms of their current conditional use permit. The hearings officer even said he didn't think they could abide by the conditions of the permit as he gave it to them. How could the County Commissioners then approve the permit knowing people live out here?

There are 3 schools full of healthy young children adjacent to the planned facility. The smells and dust created will negatively affect their playgrounds. It is not a good mix.

Friends of Stafford formed as a voice of protest against this poor planning decision.

They've worked hard getting the word out and build a coalition of opposition. They've found areas of Real Concern too for the impact of this on our aquifer - concerns that can't be raised now due to procedure rules because they didn't come up in the first hearings. They're raising funds to pay lawyers. They're speaking with S&H to try to find compromise solutions and so at this time their voice is the only hope, aside from a change of heart by S&H, for keeping the area free of the dust and stink of a compost facility. And if you think it won't stink, let them be the first to say 'I told you so' when it does.

Cautionary message?

Right now those who control 'the message' are saying Stafford is THE PLACE to develop. Even though nearly 80% of the lands brought into the UGB in the past 20 years have not been utilized the people here who want to develop their land are pushing the message that we need to be plowed under and built up.

It's hard to affect County decisions. It takes work and showing up and speaking up. Like Redlands did when S&H tried to move the stink into their neighborhood. (Visit this site to what they did.)

But it's really really really hard to reverse something that's happened.

We need to remind our Hamlet leaders, the cities around us, the County and Metro LOUDLY and FREQUENTLY that we don't want to be brought inside the UGB before it happens.

The message isn't 'how' we want to be developed. It's that we don't.

Keep that rabbit in the hat.

Leggo my Lego!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 04:13:00 +0000

Legos have been inspiring kids since 1916.

Arguably 100% of male engineers and 23% of female engineers built their first bridge out of legos. (Now that there are pink legos the female statistics are predicted to increase.)


Young Basil, before deciding if he'll become an engineer or a developer, contemplates building a high-rise out of environmentally friendly legos

For future architects however Lincoln Logs are the building toy of choice (first structures by toy are 62% Lincoln Logs, 22% Tinker Toy with just 10% Legos and the balance being soup cans). For budding Landscape Architects there was just sticks from the backyard.

Legos are now the latest, greatest planning tool in the Hamlet. The Tualatin Loop Neighborhood Association used legos and maps to show graphically how many houses are in the neighborhood now,

A typical lot in Tualatin Loop now

and how many will be there if Metro requires densification infill to to occur at the current suggested levels of 4,12 or 25 per acre.

This same lot in Tualatin Loop after development to certain Metro guidelines.

This presentation has been so insightful and useful that it's now being replicated at other Neighborhood meetings - Ashdown, Vineland and Childs are among the first to sign up. If you'd like to see how this works, attend one of these meetings!

Future Maps

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 04:42:00 +0000

I have a language-buddy in Japan and while skyping we checked out my neighborhood at the 10,000 foot level on Google maps. Did you know that the Rosemont Trail is there? How amazing is that. It isn't even finished yet and it's on the map just like the Great Wall of China!

It got me thinking about what it took to get it there. Obviously the hard work of many dedicated people who envisioned it. But also the many landowners who gave permission for it to cross over their property in the easement.

Sometimes it feels like we're in this deadlock between those who want to develop and those who don't. But there's at least a third group. The growing group of Hamlet residents that have contributed to the common good by dedicating their land to open or park space. There's the Stevens family that transferred some of their property into Metro open space and another piece into LO park property and the Wankers whose former home is now the birthplace of zillions of Metro native plants. Sorry, I don't know the name of the family whose property buffering Wilson Creek is now Metro land. Or the gentleman who gave his magical property near the Tualatin River to the Audubon Society (who forthwith sold it to someone who clearcut it - tragic!) And I don't know a thing about the Cornell Nature Park on Rosemont - but it's on the map!

The Century Farms of Cook and Fiala are dedicated to keeping our open space vibrant with farming and historical trees and some community confidence that this land is here to stay as part of our heritage if at all possible.

All around us people are quietly tending to and loving their land, convinced the roses bloom this huge - only here. Or that the sunrise looks this incredible - only from here. Or maybe that this bend in the river creates water music unique in the universe - just here. They're percolating ideas in their minds about how future generations can enjoy this beauty as much as they're enjoying it now.

In ten or twenty years when you Google our neighborhood those people's names will be there too, followed by 'Meadow' or 'Nature Park' or 'Wetland' or something that will remind you of the cool gentle breeze of a Hamlet spring.

Timeline Unchained!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 03:39:00 +0000

While some are worrying about chained and unchained CPI's, the Defender of the Process has been concerned about our current vision process which is tethered by a very tight time chain.

We're working to get a Hamlet Vision thingy together which has an ambiguous name, ambiguous purpose and ambiguous 'driving factors' that dictated a really short, nay impossible time line of 'done by July'.

At a meeting last week of most of the neighborhood Captains these issues were discussed and the process was cleaned up a little to be more accessible to the Grass Roots of our community for a longer time period. Unchained from the Timeline. Yea!

The Defender is truly mollified on this point.

Now the next question is : what should one wear to their neighborhood meeting? While I usually feel well equipped with a notebook, glasses, cellphone and pen, people have been seen this week at Hamlet meetings sporting their lawyer at their side. Now I feel totally under-dressed.