197.712
Commission duties; comprehensive plan provisions; public facility plans; state
agency coordination plans; compliance deadline; rules. (1) In addition to the findings
and policies set forth in ORS 197.005, 197.010 and 215.243, the Legislative
Assembly finds and declares that, in carrying out statewide comprehensive land
use planning, the provision of adequate opportunities for a variety of economic
activities throughout the state is vital to the health, welfare and prosperity
of all the people of the state.
(2) By the
adoption of new goals or rules, or the application, interpretation or amendment
of existing goals or rules, the Land Conservation and Development Commission
shall implement all of the following:
(a) Comprehensive
plans shall include an analysis of the community’s economic patterns,
potentialities, strengths and deficiencies as they relate to state and national
trends.
(b) Comprehensive
plans shall contain policies concerning the economic development opportunities
in the community.
(c) Comprehensive
plans and land use regulations shall provide for at least an adequate supply of
sites of suitable sizes, types, locations and service levels for industrial and
commercial uses consistent with plan policies.
(d) Comprehensive
plans and land use regulations shall provide for compatible uses on or near
sites zoned for specific industrial and commercial uses.
(e) A city or
county shall develop and adopt a public facility plan for areas within an urban
growth boundary containing a population greater than 2,500 persons. The public
facility plan shall include rough cost estimates for public projects needed to
provide sewer, water and transportation for the land uses contemplated in the
comprehensive plan and land use regulations. Project timing and financing
provisions of public facility plans shall not be considered land use decisions.
(f) In accordance
with ORS 197.180, state agencies that provide funding for transportation, water
supply, sewage and solid waste facilities shall identify in their coordination
programs how they will coordinate that funding with other state agencies and with
the public facility plans of cities and counties. In addition, state agencies
that issue permits affecting land use shall identify in their coordination
programs how they will coordinate permit issuance with other state agencies and
cities and counties.
(g) Local
governments shall provide:
(A) Reasonable
opportunities to satisfy local and rural needs for residential and industrial
development and other economic activities on appropriate lands outside urban
growth boundaries, in a manner consistent with conservation of the state’s
agricultural and forest land base; and
(B) Reasonable
opportunities for urban residential, commercial and industrial needs over time
through changes to urban growth boundaries.
(3) A
comprehensive plan and land use regulations shall be in compliance with this
section by the first periodic review of that plan and regulations. [1983 c.827 §17;
1991 c.612 §17]
Notes of Decisions
1000 Friends of Or. v. Jackson Cnty., 423 P.3d 793 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “4 For example, ORS 197.712(2)(c), Goal 9, and the rules implementing Goal 9 in OAR chapter 660, division 9 require cities to "provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations and service levels for industrial and commercial uses consistent…”
Benjfran Dev., Inc. v. Metro. Serv. Dist., 767 P.2d 467 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 3× “ORS 197.712(2)(g) provides: “Local governments shall provide: “(A) Reasonable opportunities to satisfy local and rural needs for residential and industrial development and other economic activities on appropriate lands outside urban growth boundaries, in a manner consistent with…”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 259 P.3d 1021 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“For example, ORS 197.712(2)(c) requires comprehensive plans to “provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations and service levels for industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan policies.”
Port of St. Helens v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 996 P.2d 1014 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 8× “At their core, however, petitioners’ arguments depend on three essential premises: First, that by treating aggregate and mineral mining in the way they do and more favorably than other *492 uses, the amended Goal 5 and OAR 660-023-0180(4) are contrary to “the policies that…”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 688 P.2d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“” 7 The county suggests that ORS 197.712(g)(A), which requires local governments to provide reasonable opportunities to satisfy local and rural needs for residential and industrial development and other economic activities outside urban growth boundaries, supports the county’s…”
Opus Dev. Corp. v. City of Eugene, 918 P.2d 116 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“) See also ORS 197.712(2)(c). LUBA concluded that the city did not comply with paragraph 3 of Goal 9, because in its assessment of whether, after the amendment, the plan still provided an “adequate supply of sites,” the city considered and inventoried only vacant, buildable…”
Friends of Yamhill Cnty. v. City of Newberg, 247 P.3d 767 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 3× “See ORS 197.712(1) (finding and declaring that “the provision of adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities throughout the state is vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of all the people of the state”).”
1000 Friends v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 239 P.3d 272 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
““Woodburn’s employment land needs are designed to meet ORS 197.712 and the Goal 9 Rule (OAR Chapter 660, Division 009) requirements that cities ‘identify the types of sites that are likely to be needed by industrial and commercial uses which might expand or locate in the…”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. LCDC, 239 P.3d 272 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“"Woodburn's employment land needs are designed to meet ORS 197.712 and the Goal 9 Rule (OAR Chapter 660, Division 009) requirements that cities `identify the types of sites that are likely to be needed by industrial and commercial uses which might expand or locate in the…”
Home Builders Ass'n v. City of Springfield, 129 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 9× “ORS 197.712 provides, in part: “(2) By the adoption of new goals or rules, or the application, interpretation or amendment of existing goals or rules, the Land Conservation and Development Commission shall implement all of the following: H« H* ❖ * “(e) A city or county shall…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(1) — 2 cases
Friends of Yamhill Cnty. v. City of Newberg, 247 P.3d 767 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“See ORS 197.712(1) (finding and declaring that “the provision of adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities throughout the state is vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of all the people of the state”).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(2) — 4 cases
Friends of Yamhill Cnty. v. City of Newberg, 247 P.3d 767 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“See ORS 197.712(1) (finding and declaring that “the provision of adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities throughout the state is vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of all the people of the state”).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(2)(a) — 4 cases
Friends of Yamhill Cnty. v. City of Newberg, 247 P.3d 767 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“See ORS 197.712(1) (finding and declaring that “the provision of adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities throughout the state is vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of all the people of the state”).”
Port of St. Helens v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 996 P.2d 1014 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“At their core, however, petitioners’ arguments depend on three essential premises: First, that by treating aggregate and mineral mining in the way they do and more favorably than other *492 uses, the amended Goal 5 and OAR 660-023-0180(4) are contrary to “the policies that…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(2)(c) — 3 cases
1000 Friends of Or. v. Jackson Cnty., 423 P.3d 793 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“4 For example, ORS 197.712(2)(c), Goal 9, and the rules implementing Goal 9 in OAR chapter 660, division 9 require cities to "provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations and service levels for industrial and commercial uses consistent…”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 259 P.3d 1021 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“For example, ORS 197.712(2)(c) requires comprehensive plans to “provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations and service levels for industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan policies.”
Opus Dev. Corp. v. City of Eugene, 918 P.2d 116 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“) See also ORS 197.712(2)(c). LUBA concluded that the city did not comply with paragraph 3 of Goal 9, because in its assessment of whether, after the amendment, the plan still provided an “adequate supply of sites,” the city considered and inventoried only vacant, buildable…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(2)(d) — 1 case
Port of St. Helens v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 996 P.2d 1014 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“At their core, however, petitioners’ arguments depend on three essential premises: First, that by treating aggregate and mineral mining in the way they do and more favorably than other *492 uses, the amended Goal 5 and OAR 660-023-0180(4) are contrary to “the policies that…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(2)(e) — 3 cases
1000 Friends of Or. v. Jackson Cnty., 423 P.3d 793 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“4 For example, ORS 197.712(2)(c), Goal 9, and the rules implementing Goal 9 in OAR chapter 660, division 9 require cities to "provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations and service levels for industrial and commercial uses consistent…”
Home Builders Ass'n v. City of Springfield, 129 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“ORS 197.712 provides, in part: “(2) By the adoption of new goals or rules, or the application, interpretation or amendment of existing goals or rules, the Land Conservation and Development Commission shall implement all of the following: H« H* ❖ * “(e) A city or county shall…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(2)(g) — 1 case
Benjfran Dev., Inc. v. Metro. Serv. Dist., 767 P.2d 467 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“ORS 197.712(2)(g) provides: “Local governments shall provide: “(A) Reasonable opportunities to satisfy local and rural needs for residential and industrial development and other economic activities on appropriate lands outside urban growth boundaries, in a manner consistent with…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(3) — 1 case
Benjfran Dev., Inc. v. Metro. Serv. Dist., 767 P.2d 467 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“ORS 197.712(2)(g) provides: “Local governments shall provide: “(A) Reasonable opportunities to satisfy local and rural needs for residential and industrial development and other economic activities on appropriate lands outside urban growth boundaries, in a manner consistent with…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.712(g)(A) — 1 case
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 688 P.2d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“” 7 The county suggests that ORS 197.712(g)(A), which requires local governments to provide reasonable opportunities to satisfy local and rural needs for residential and industrial development and other economic activities outside urban growth boundaries, supports the county’s…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.