Agenda Item 4 - UGB Rulemaking <br />December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Meeting <br />Page 18 of 56 <br />during the previous use of the method by the city have been developed. This is reasonable <br />because in that circumstance a city could use the simplified method again if it wishes. <br />Under the second option (recommended), a city is authorized to use the "traditional" method <br />after use of the simplified method at any point. However, the city may not rely on need <br />determinations that were derived from the housing or employment paths in division 38. <br />Section (7) provides that the simplified process is not available for a jurisdiction that wishes to <br />add land under the Regional Large Lot Industrial process in OAR 660-024-0045. That is a <br />special process for a few Central Oregon counties and presumes a 20-year rather than a 14-year <br />UGB horizon. <br />Sections (8) through (11) include requirements directly from ORS 197A, using exact language <br />from that statute where applicable. <br />Section (12) provides that use of a method under this division is deemed to satisfy ORS 197.296 <br />for cities subject to that statute. ORS 197.296 applies only to cities over 25,000 and Metro. It is a <br />fairly complex statute that repeats many Goal 10 housing requirements but often with slightly <br />different language and with several details that are not included in Goal 10 rules. Most <br />significantly, the statute requires that cities consider "new measures that demonstrably increase <br />the likelihood that residential development will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate <br />housing needs for the next 20 years without expansion of the urban growth boundary." In other <br />words, measures that require consideration of rezoning or upzoning land in the UGB, and that <br />provide for redevelopment and infill prior to expanding the UGB. Since the proposed rules for <br />the residential and employment path also address these topics, the department suggests that use <br />of the simplified method should be deemed to satisfy that statute. The commission may not <br />indicate that the statute does not apply, but may indicate that the new process satisfies the statute. <br />We note as an additional consideration that one of the main intents of this new path is to provide <br />a set of "clear and objective requirements" rather than requirements that demand complex and <br />likely appealable findings. The department notes that ORS 197.296 is anything but clear and <br />objective, since it demands a detailed set of findings concerning housing needs (for large cities). <br />If this requirement was not "deemed to be satisfied" by the steps in the simplified housing path <br />for cities subject to ORS 197.296, the new process will fail in this most fundamental objective <br />and we should not expect that cities over 25,000 will use it. <br />Finally, this section deems that use of the simplified method means that all the requirements of <br />ORS 197.296 are met, including the requirement for a housing need analysis in ORS 197.296(3). <br />Section (13) declares certain goals or rules are not applicable to a UGB amendment. This is <br />identical to a section in current rules for the traditional process at OAR 660-024-0020, which has <br />been in effect for more than 10 years. The proposed new rules in this section are fairly self- <br />explanatory and will likely be viewed as very helpful to local governments; omitting them could <br />make the new process less desirable than the traditional process. <br />