CC Minutes - 04/04/01 JEO - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Simmons said that Grier raised a question about siting a project that benefits people in and outside the urban growth boundary. He asked if the language precluded the siting of that facility in that process. Greg Mott, Planning Department, City of Springfield, responded that the city as an applicant for a land use approval goes through whatever the County requires for land outside their jurisdiction. He noted the County has property zoned and Lane Code specifies the process. He said Grier 's comments were well taken. Mott added he wasn't aware that the scope of the description of the projects in Cedar Creek was limited. He noted there was nothing in the plan that specified that the plan would dictate what process of review would occur for the facilities outside of the urban growth boundary. He said they assumed state law would specify whether the use would be permitted and the County code would identify the process of citizen involvement or review that occurs. Simmons noted they would be adopting a plan that everyone would be agreeing to but only the County holds the requirements for a public hearing. He said Grier 's questions were valid, because some entities may be treated dissimilarly. He said there might be an issue where a school couldn't be built but a sludge facility could be put on agricultural land. He asked if it were a "use it or lose it theory" once the plan was adopted. Mott said they would be making a policy decision incorporating a law indicating certain urban facilities outside urban growth boundaries could provide service to people within urban growth boundaries. He noted it had not been available in the past. He said that certain urban activities had always been allowed on resource land through a review process, but it had never been specific. He said the action they would be taking establishes the Public Facilities and Services Plan as a document that embodies policy. Kent Howe, Land Management, noted that any new proposed sites or substantial changes in locations to identify public facilities in the public facility plan would require amendments to the plan and a public hearing process. He said the concern is that there would not be a public hearing for the location of urban facilities that would occur outside the urban growth boundary. He said a new proposed site (or substantial change in the location of an existing site) that is in the plan, required a public hearing to change those locations or identify new sites. He added once a site is identified, the laws applicable in the jurisdiction where the site was located would determine whether or not it met the requirements for the actual siting of the utility facility located outside the urban growth boundary.