PUBLIC COMMENT - DAN TERRELL & BILL KLOOS ON BEHALF OF HBA (1-4-17)

Agenda Item 4 - UGB Rulemaking December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Meeting Page 44 of 56 Section (6) repeats a specific requirement in ORS 197A.315. When a city that has a population of 10,000 or more evaluates or amends its UGB using the simplified method, the city must notify districts and counties that have territory within the study area and meet other applicable requirements in that statute. 0170: Evaluation of Land in the Study Area for Inclusion in the UGB; Priorities (Page 26) General: This rule interprets the "priority of land" requirements of ORS 197A.320. That statute replaces the priority method in ORS 197.298 for non-Metro cities. The general methodology from ORS 197.298 has not been altered with regard to priorities by this new statute, but there are important differences in the way the priorities are described. NOTE: There are several changes between the rules proposed in public draft 2, published November 13, and public draft 3, published with this report on November 20. The RAC meeting on November 18, and comments in the same time frame, identified some important issues that needed to be addressed with regard to the priorities rule in draft 2; these are addressed in draft 3. Section (1) indicates that, when considering a UGB amendment, a city must decide which land to add to the UGB by evaluating all land in the study area determined in the 0160 rule described above. The subsections in this section provide direction for analysis that mirror the statute. However, we note that this section also references section (5) (see discussion about that section below). Section (5) would provide more detailed direction as to how a city evaluates land in a particular priority and "select(s) as much of the land as necessary to satisfy the need for land using criteria established by the commission and criteria in an acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations." Reflecting the statute, section (1) indicates that, beginning with the highest priority of land available, a city must determine which land in that priority is suitable to accommodate the need deficiency determined under either the housing path or the employment path or both (OAR 660- 038-0080 and OAR 660-038-0150). It then goes on to indicate that, if the amount of suitable land in a particular priority category exceeds the amount necessary to satisfy the need deficiency, a city must choose which land in that priority to include in the UGB by applying the criteria in section (7), described below. Section (1)(d) provides that a city may consider factors that reduce the capacity of the land to meet the need as provided by sections (5) and (6) of this rule. While the priority scheme (both for ORS 197.298 or the new one at ORS 197A.320) presumes that cities must evaluate land in particular order of priority, those statutes are silent as to how much capacity to assign land within the priorities. While it may be assumed (and has been previously) that cities have a broad authority to do so, absent particular requirements of these statutes, the department proposes this subsection to clarify that principle. Section (1)(e) provides that land determined to not be suitable to satisfy the need deficiency is not required to be selected for inclusion in the UGB unless its inclusion is necessary to serve other higher priority lands.