December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Salem <br />Agenda Item 4, Attachment H <br />To the extent possible DSL favors rule language that encourages compliance with Goal 5 and <br />completion of Goal 5 wetlands and waters products and other Goal 5 related work tasks during <br />UGB expansion and periodic review by cities that have attained a population size of 10,000 or <br />more. <br />DSL Comments on Division 38 & 24 draft rules <br />Please find comments on the draft Division 38 rules below. These comments also apply to the <br />draft changes in the Division 24 rules, to the extent that the draft Division 38 language was <br />inserted into the Division 24 rules. <br />660-038-0020(12)(c): While this language is similar to 660-024-0020(1)(c), both rules <br />discourage the completion of wetlands and waters related Goal 5 products within existing <br />UGBs. Since UGB expansion is accomplished in response to increased population size, many <br />cities whose population has grown above 10,000 have not previously completed the Goal 5 <br />products within the original UGB. These cities would benefit from the completion of Goal 5 <br />products for the original and proposed UGB during the UGB expansion evaluation period. <br />Access to more accurate information about the locations and functions of wetlands and waters <br />in both UGB areas, provides better estimates for buildable land inventories (BLls), <br />serviceability, and impracticability. The availability of more accurate information also may <br />increase the quality of public outreach and comments during the planning process. These <br />measures bolster the provisions set forth in 660-038-0000(3)(b) - (f). <br />660-038-0020(14): This draft rule, and potentially rules drafted in response to HB 3282, may <br />limit periodic review. The Division 38 language states that "A city ...is not required to <br />commence periodic review..." with two provisions. The revised language at the end of this <br />section references the OAR 660-025 rules for an "alternate means to ensure that the city <br />comply with the statewide land use planning goals..." This change appears to be an <br />improvement over the previous draft language. However, it is unclear if, or how, the Division <br />25 "alternate means" will ensure the completion of the Goal 5 wetlands and waters products. <br />This section also is unclear regarding what compels the initiation of periodic review. This <br />seems particularly important in light of changes that may be made to Division 25 rules. Please <br />discuss the "alternate means" and initiation of periodic review with the RAC at the 11/18/2015 <br />meeting so the RAC may be able to better comment on this draft language. <br />660-038-0070(3): DSL has questions about the language regarding the release of the <br />requirement that cities identify lands encumbered with easements or deeded restrictions during <br />the buildable lands inventory task. While to some extent such encumbrances may be taken <br />into account later in the process through the adjustment allowed in 660-038-0160(2), ultimately <br />it is important that these encumbered lands be identified. Both DSL's proprietary and <br />Removal-Fill programs use such instruments to identify limitations or allowances of use on <br />certain properties. DSL understands that the identification and appropriate treatment of <br />encumbered properties brought into a UGB will occur later, outside of the UGB expansion <br />process. However, DSL has the expectation, as a property owner, that all property owners will <br />be notified early in the proposed UGB expansion process. Often DSL does not receive such <br />notification. <br />