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
December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Salem <br />Agenda Item 4, Attachment H <br />(C) Would be incompatible with the long-term preservation ofa significant <br />scenic, natural, cultural or recreational resource that the local government has <br />identified under subsection (4)(c). <br />660-024-0065(7)(x) - 25% slope. This needs a sideboard to prevent gerrymandering and <br />exclusion of a flatter area just because it's next to a steep site. The way it's written now, a 20- <br />acre flat area could be excluded just by combining it with an adjacent 60-acre hillside. <br />(a) Contiguous areas q f at least five acres where 75 percent or more Q f the land has a slope of 25 <br />percent or greater, provided the areas do not contain any contiguous portions larger than five <br />acres that are less than 25 percent slope. Slope shall be measured as the increase in elevation <br />divided by the horizontal distance at maximum ten foot contour intervals,- <br />660-024-0065(8) - Exception lands capacity. In the interests of clarity and consistency, delete <br />this language and refer to -0067(6). <br />(8) Land may not be excluded from the preliminary study area based on a finding of <br />impracticability that is primarily a result of existing development patterns. However, a city may <br />forecast development capacity in accordance with OAR 660-024-0067(6). <br />;t <br />eqpaeifi+, <br />660-024-0067(5) - Determination of suitability. Per the RAC meeting discussion, this section <br />needs to be solely about lands that are deemed unsuitable and so will not be included in the <br />UGB. <br />(5) With respect to subsection (1)(a) of this rule, a local government Hnis~ mav assume that <br />vacant or partially vacant land in a particular priority category is not "suitable " to satisfy a <br />need deficiency identified in OAR 660-024-0050(4) or OAR 660-024-0065(3) ,•only i 'it <br />demonstrates that the land cannot satisfy the specified need, t' ,,t its ---X 444 „w-,a <br />' 4-°-1' •e4, based on one or more of the conditions described in subsections (a) through <br />(f,-) of this section: <br />19 <br />(a) The land is. or would be upon inclusion in the UGB. subiect to natural resources <br />protections under Statewide Planning Goals 5, 6, 15, 16, 17 or 18 that prohibit urban <br />development, and it cannot meet anv other identified need for public facilities, such as <br />public sewer, water, storm water, transportation, parks, schools, or fire protection. <br />(b) The land would qualify for exclusion from the preliminary study area under the <br />factors in OAR 660-024-0065(4) but the local government declined to exclude it pending <br />more detailed analysis under this (the priorities) rule. 4° w'°fa illg his 'C4114, 'he Agea <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.