OAR 660-016-0010: Develop Program to Achieve the Goal

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.