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

December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Salem Agenda Item 4, Attachment H 1 (c) The land is committed to a public use, or to a private cemetery, airport, school, or church 2 use ^r ~eiA p4lie wss that is not reasonably likely to be discontinued during the planning 3 period, for example, land within the boundaries of a public use airport or within an area 4 governed by compatibility requirements for public use airports described in OAR 660-013- 5 0080 6 (d) The land is over 25% slope, or with respect to needed industrial uses only, the property is 7 1 over _I5%slope, as measured in the manner described in OAR 660-024-0065(7)(a). 8 1 (e) The land is subject to a conservation easement described in ORS 271.715 that prohibits 9 urban development. 10 (6) Pursuant to section (1)(c), if the amount of suitable land in a particular priority category 11 under section (2) exceeds the amount necessary to satisfy the need deficiency, the local 12 government must choose which land in that priority to include in the UGB by first applying the 13 Boundary Location Factors of Goal 14 and then applying applicable criteria in the acknowledged 14 comprehensive plan and land use regulations acknowledged prior to initiation of the UGB 15 amendment. The local government may not apply local comprehensive plan criteria that 16 contradict the requirements of the Boundary Location Factors of Goal 14. The Goal 14 Boundary 17 Location Factors are not independent criteria; when the factors are applied to compare alternative 18 boundary locations and to determine the UGB location the local government must show that it 19 considered and balanced all the factors. 20 (7) The local government must apply the Goal 14 Location Factors in coordination with 21 service providers and state agencies, including the Oregon Department of Transportation 22 with respect to Factor 2 regarding impacts on the state transportation system, and the Oregon 23 Department of Fish and Wildlife with respect to Factor 3 regarding environmental 24 consequences. "Coordination" includes timely notice to agencies and service providers and 25 consideration of any recommended evaluation methodologies. Comment [MN35]: there is no definition for semi-public use - when this langauge was proposed by Eugene/1KF we were clear that this is an unacceptable term that needs to be narrowed. Comment [MN36]: should be 15%- what is the 5% based on? we have already submitted evidence of major industrial development on slopes over 5%. furthermore, not all industrial uses require the same site characteristics. The proposed 5% slope represents a major policy departure from past practice and will lead to the unnecessary loss of farmland. 26 (8) In applying Goal 14 Boundary Location Factor 2 to evaluate alternative locations under 27 section (6), the local government must compare relative costs, advantages and disadvantages 28 of alternative UGB expansion areas with respect to the provision of public facilities and 29 services needed to urbanize alternative boundary locations. For purposes of this section, the 30 term "public facilities and services" means water, sanitary sewer, storm water management, 31 1 "ire protection and transportation facilities. The evaluation and comparison under Location Comment [MN37]: Fire protection is also 32 Factor 2 must consider: necessary. 33 (a) The impacts to existing water, sanitary sewer, storm water, fire protection. and 34 transportation facilities that serve nearby areas already inside the UGB; 35 (b) The capacity of existing public facilities and services to serve areas already inside the 36 UGB as well as areas proposed for addition to the UGB; and 37 (c) The need for new transportation facilities, such as highways and other roadways, 38 interchanges, arterials and collectors, additional travel lanes, other major improvements 39 on existing roadways and, for urban areas of 25,000 or more, the provision of public