My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PUBLIC COMMENT - DAN TERRELL & BILL KLOOS ON BEHALF OF HBA (1-4-17)
>
OnTrack
>
CA
>
2017
>
CA 17-1
>
PUBLIC COMMENT - DAN TERRELL & BILL KLOOS ON BEHALF OF HBA (1-4-17)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2017 1:48:08 PM
Creation date
2/7/2017 10:47:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CA
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
UGB ADOPTION PACKAGE
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
1/4/2017
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
331
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Eugene Planning Commission <br />January 4, 2017 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />LUBA remanded the Coburg decision, in part, because it sought to exclude exception areas and <br />agricultural land with poorer agricultural soils in favor of land with higher quality agricultural <br />soils (and thus of lower priority) to meet residential and recreational needs. (Slip Op. at 46). <br />While LUBA remanded for the city to correct the respective findings, it issued the following <br />guidance regarding the nature of the established legal framework. <br />"In applying the Goal 14 Boundary Location Factors, [the City and County] must <br />do more than identify possible environmental, energy, economic or social <br />consequences, and possible incompatibilities with agricultural activities if exception <br />lands or poorer quality agricultural soils are included according to the ORS <br />197.298(1) priorities. [The City and County] must establish that such <br />considerations justify deviating from the statutory priorities, notwithstanding the <br />legislature's expressed preference for those priorities. [The City and County] <br />should not underestimate the difficulty of making such a demonstration." Id. (Slip <br />Op. at 47). <br />The same holds true for the decision the City of Eugene will make concerning its UGB. <br />Nonresource Land is in the Highest Priority for Inclusion in the UGB <br />Because there are no urban reserve lands in the Metro Plan area, the highest priority of lands for <br />inclusion into the City's UGB are those prescribed by ORS 197.298(1)(b) - exception areas, <br />nonresource land, and non-high value resource land surrounded by exception land. <br />As discussed further below, the ES&G property is either nonresource land or exception land, and <br />is therefore of the highest priority for the City to include in any UGB expansion proposal. <br />The Oregon Administrative Rules provide definitions for "Resource Land" and "Nonresource <br />Land." OAR 660-004-0005 Definitions provides: <br />"2) "Resource Land" is land subject to one or more of the statewide goals listed <br />in OAR 660-004-0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d). <br />"(3) "Nonresource Land" is land not subject to any of the statewide goals listed <br />in OAR 660-004-0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d). Nothing <br />in these definitions is meant to imply that other goals, particularly Goal 5, do <br />not apply to nonresource land." <br />The statewide goals identified in the above definitions listed in OAR 660-004-0010 include: <br />"(a) Goal 3 "Agricultural Lands" . <br />"(b) Goal 4 "Forest Lands" . <br />"(e) Goal 16 "Estuarine Resources" . <br />"(f) Goal 17 "Coastal Shorelands...... <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.