Agenda Item 4 - UGB Rulemaking <br />December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Meeting <br />Page 47 of 56 <br />unsuitable simply because a public entity owns it. In fact, much land owned by state or local <br />governments is available or intended for development. <br />Section (6) provides a requirement from ORS 197A.320 regarding land in a study area that is <br />parcelized due to rural residential development. <br />Section (7) is a standard that applies if the amount of suitable land in a particular priority <br />category under sections (2)(a) through (d) exceeds the amount necessary to satisfy the need <br />deficiency. This criterion is provided in the statute but the statute indicates the city must use <br />criteria established by the commission and applicable criteria in the acknowledged <br />comprehensive plan and land use regulations. The department has proposed that the Goal 14 <br />location factors are the deciding policy for choosing land within a particular priority, as in the <br />traditional process. <br />The draft rule also proposes that, while "local plan criteria" may be employed to help select land <br />after application of the Goal 14 location factors, a city may not apply local plan criteria that <br />contradict the requirements of the location factors. It is also noted, mirroring current division 24 <br />rules, that the Goal 14 Boundary Location Factors are not independent criteria; when the factors <br />are applied to compare alternative boundary locations and to determine the UGB location, a city <br />must show that it considered and balanced all the factors. <br />Section (8) imports a "coordination" standard from division 24 which should also apply in the <br />simplified process, but expands it somewhat, so that ODFW and DSL are added to the list of <br />state agencies that local governments are required to coordinate with as they make decisions <br />about alternative areas within a priority. These two agencies requested this coordination so that <br />cities may consider possible Goal 5 resources in evaluating alternative UGB locations, but only <br />after consulting with the agencies. <br />Section (9) imports a standard from division 24 for use in the simplified process. This section <br />indicates that, for purposes of this rule, the term "public facilities and services" in Goal 14, <br />Boundary Location Factor 2 means water, sanitary sewer, storm water management and <br />transportation facilities. <br />This section instructs local governments that, in applying Goal 14 location Factor 2, it must <br />evaluate alternative locations, and must compare relative costs, advantages and disadvantages of <br />alternative UGB expansion areas with respect to the provision of public facilities and services <br />needed to urbanize alternative boundary locations. Mirroring current division 24 requirements, <br />this provides that the city must conduct this evaluation and comparison in coordination with <br />service providers, including the Oregon Department of Transportation with regard to impacts on <br />the state transportation system. <br />0180: General Planning Requirements for land added to a UGB (Page 30) <br />General: This rule implements ORS 197A.310(3)(e) and ORS 197A.312(3)(e), which concern <br />the planning and zoning for lands added to the UGB through the simplified process. (Note that <br />ORS 197.310 (3)(e) and ORS 197.312 (3)(e) are identical provisions that apply to cities of less <br />