Oregon Administrative Rules › Chapter 660 - LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT › Division 16 - REQUIREMENTS AND APPLICATION PROCEDURES FOR COMPLYING WITH STATEWIDE GOAL 5 › Section 660-016-0010 - Develop Program to Achieve the Goal

Current through Register Vol. 63, No. 7, July 1, 2024
Based on the determination of the economic, social,
				environmental and energy consequences, a jurisdiction must "develop a program
				to achieve the Goal." Assuming there is adequate information on the location,
				quality, and quantity of the resource site as well as on the nature of the
				conflicting use and ESEE consequences, a jurisdiction is expected to "resolve"
				conflicts with specific sites in any of the following three ways listed below.
				Compliance with Goal 5 shall also be based on the plan's overall ability to
				protect and conserve each Goal 5 resource. The issue of adequacy of the overall
				program adopted or of decisions made under sections (1), (2), and (3) of this
				rule may be raised by the Department or objectors, but final determination is
				made by the Commission, pursuant to usual procedures:
(1) Protect the Resource Site: Based on the
			 analysis of the ESEE consequences, a jurisdiction may determine that the
			 resource site is of such importance, relative to the conflicting uses, and the
			 ESEE consequences of allowing conflicting uses are so great that the resource
			 site should be protected and all conflicting uses prohibited on the site and
			 possibly within the impact area identified in OAR 660-016-0000(5)(c). Reasons
			 which support this decision must be presented in the comprehensive plan, and
			 plan and zone designations must be consistent with this decision.
(2) Allow Conflicting Uses Fully: Based on
			 the analysis of ESEE consequences and other Statewide Goals, a jurisdiction may
			 determine that the conflicting use should be allowed fully, notwithstanding the
			 possible impacts on the resource site. This approach may be used when the
			 conflicting use for a particular site is of sufficient importance, relative to
			 the resource site. Reasons which support this decision must be presented in the
			 comprehensive plan, and plan and zone designations must be consistent with this
			 decision.
(3) Limit Conflicting
			 Uses: Based on the analysis of ESEE consequences, a jurisdiction may determine
			 that both the resource site and the conflicting use are important relative to
			 each other, and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced so as to allow
			 the conflicting use but in a limited way so as to protect the resource site to
			 some desired extent. To implement this decision, the jurisdiction must
			 designate with certainty what uses and activities are allowed fully, what uses
			 and activities are not allowed at all and which uses are allowed conditionally,
			 and what specific standards or limitations are placed on the permitted and
			 conditional uses and activities for each resource site. Whatever mechanisms are
			 used, they must be specific enough so that affected property owners are able to
			 determine what uses and activities are allowed, not allowed, or allowed
			 conditionally and under what clear and objective conditions or standards.
			 Reasons which support this decision must be presented in the comprehensive
			 plan, and plan and zone designations must be consistent with this
			 decision.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 183 & 197
Stats. Implemented:ORS
				  197.040