Laserfiche WebLink
<br />shall be prepared in coordination with the MPO and shall be <br />adopted within three years of the approval of the alternative <br />standard: . . . <br /> <br />LUBA's direction on remand: <br /> <br />"OAR 660-012-0035(5)(c) sets out detailed requirements for 'an integrated <br />land use and transportation plan,' * * *. <br /> <br />We have some question whether [the state's administrative rules] require <br />adoption of the plan described in OAR 660-012-0035(5)(c), since <br />respondents apparently have an approved alternative VMT reduction <br />standard. * * * <br /> <br />Respondents do not respond to this sub assignment of error in their brief. * * <br />* Petitioners' approach in this subassignment of error is to fault respondents <br />for not addressing unnamed TransPlan policies that petitioners contend must <br />nevertheless exist. . .. <br /> <br />* * * [W]ithout some assistance from respondents, we cannot say this <br />subassignment of error is lacking in merit." <br /> <br />Response and Explanation of Findings: <br /> <br />The local governments' findings do not include analysis of the Modified Alignment's <br />consistency with TransPlan policies that implement OAR 660-012-0035(5)(c)(D) because <br />State law does not require that TransPlan contain such policies and such policies, <br />therefore, do not exist in TransPlan. <br /> <br />As stated in the rules quoted above, there are two circumstantial categories in which an <br />area must adopt policies that implement OAR 660-012-0035(5)(c)(A)-(E): <br /> <br />1) if the MPO has not adopted a regional transportation system plan that meets <br />the VMT reduction standard in 0035(4) and the metropolitan area does not <br />have an approved alternative standard established pursuant to 0035(5) [OAR <br />660-012-055(1)(a)]; or <br />2) if the MPO has adopted an alternative VMT standard that is "expected to result <br />in an increase in VMT per capita." [OAR 660-012-0035(5)(c)]. <br /> <br />Neither of the above circumstances exists for the TransPlanjurisdictions. TransPlan is a <br />regional transportation system plan that includes an approved alternative VMT standard <br />established pursuant to OAR 660-0012-055(1)(a). Therefore, it is not required to include <br />the 0035(5)(c)(A)-(E) policies under the first category. Further, for the reasons discussed <br />below, TransPlan's alternative VMT standard is not expected to result in an increase in <br />VMT per capita. Therefore, it is not required to include the 0035(5)(c)(A)-(E) policies <br /> <br />6 <br />