Molalla planners review draft Goal 14 UGB analysis; consultant flags wetlands, sewer limits and legislative option

A consultant working for the City of Molalla presented a draft Goal 14 urban growth-boundary (UGB) analysis at the Molalla Planning Commission meeting on June 4, saying the study will form the factual basis for any future boundary amendment and is still a draft.

The draft uses state population forecasts and local capacity work to quantify land needs. The consultant said the state forecast projects Molalla’s population will grow by roughly 5,432 people and that initial housing demand calculated from earlier work was near 2,000 new units for 2022–2042; after applying efficiency measures and pipeline projects the study reduced that to about 928 units, which the consultant estimated would require roughly 182 acres of residential land (adjusted to about 227–228 acres once infrastructure and park dedications are included).

Consultant Bob Brown of 3j Consulting told commissioners, “the information that I’m presenting tonight is a draft,” and walked through the four Goal 14 location factors — efficiency, orderly provision of public facilities, environmental/energy/economic/social consequences, and compatibility with adjacent agricultural and forest uses — that staff must apply when prioritizing parcels for an expansion.

The presentation mapped seven candidate subareas adjacent to the existing UGB. For Subarea 2 the consultant said about 74 acres exist on the map and about 67.7 acres appear buildable after removing creek and mapped constraints; he noted that significant wetlands or hydric soils on portions of the site could reduce developable acreage after a more detailed inventory. For parts of Subarea 2 the consultant identified four parcels totaling roughly 54 buildable acres that could be contenders for employment/industrial uses but warned that existing sewer along Molalla Avenue could not accept additional flow without substantial upgrades and that a lift station across Bear Creek might be required.

For Subareas 3 and 6 the consultant cited hilly topography and repeated public reports of flooding during heavy rains, and said water and sewer mains along some roads are only 8 inches and would likely require upsizing or extension to serve larger development. The consultant emphasized parcelization, access, and transportation costs as factors that can make some parcels harder to develop even if they appear to meet acreage tests.

Brown also described the state review path and a political alternative: after a city and county decision the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) reviews a proposed boundary amendment under the OAR criteria that implement Goal 14; if DLCD does not approve an amendment some jurisdictions have sought legislative action to change the outcome. The consultant warned that the OAR framework provides limited discretion to approve leap‑frog expansions that bypass first‑priority lands, and said legislative relief is a separate, political route rather than part of the regular DLCD review.

Staff noted the work plan extends through March 2026. The consultant said technical files and spreadsheets will be turned over to staff to refine map inventories (hydric soils, wetlands, crop types) and to inform a City Council briefing next week and subsequent steps toward any formal boundary amendment.

What’s next: the analysis remains a draft; staff will refine inventory layers, run GIS parcel-level scenarios, and brief the City Council. Any formal UGB amendment would still require county and DLCD review and could be subject to appeal or, if pursued, legislative action.