91视频

The city of McMinnville must return to the drawing board as it attempts to expand its urban growth boundary.

The Oregon Court of Appeals late last week sided against recent Land Conservation and Development Commission approval of the expansion, and called into question the inclusion of nearly 800 acres of farmland to accommodate population and job growth. Portions of the proposal now must be re-examined by the LCDC and retooled to receive state approval.

The city has worked since 2003 to expand the UGB in preparation for a projected population increase to 44,055 by 2023. The city’s population in 2010 was 32,187.

An original proposal was approved by the Department of Land Conservation and Development in 2004; however, it was appealed by land-use advocacy groups Friends of Yamhill County and 1000 Friends of Oregon to the LCDC and then remanded to the city for more work. The city then adjusted some of the boundaries and eventually received approval from the LCDC.

Then the same groups appealed the amended plan to the Court of Appeals, which remanded it to the LCDC.

鈥淲e reached the frustration point several years ago,鈥� said Doug Montgomery, planning director for the city of McMinnville. 鈥淲e are now halfway through our 20-year projection period and it doesn’t seem like we’re that much closer than when we first started this 14 years ago.鈥�

The appealing parties argued, and the court ruled, that the LCDC erred in approving the inclusion of 800 acres of high-priority farmland 鈥� productive land featuring top-quality soil. State law 鈥� ORS 197.298 鈥� prioritizes which lands can be included in a UGB expansion; highly productive resource land, like farmland and forestland, is at the bottom of the list.

According to Sid Friedman, a 1000 Friends of Oregon staffer who represents Yamhill County, both rural residential exception lands and lower quality farmlands should have been included instead of the highly productive and well-used farmland. Friedman cited Southeast Booth Bend Road and Southwest Old Sheridan Road as examples of potential expansion areas.

鈥淲e hope and think that McMinnville can justify a UGB expansion without including intensively farmed areas with productive soil,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd while the court didn’t mention this, our concerns are more than just over the use of farmland in the expansion. It’s about keeping McMinnville a great place to live.鈥�

Friedman added that the groups feel that the court’s decision vindicates their position.

鈥淟et me add that both DLCD and LCDC don’t do these cities any favors by stringing them along and saying yes to these questionable lands,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t adds time and money to the process.鈥�

Montgomery, meanwhile, is concerned about the state UGB expansion process.

鈥淢cMinnville isn’t alone here,鈥� he said. 鈥淭he city of Woodburn as well as plenty of others around the state are dealing with a similar appeals process. It takes a lot of time and money.鈥�

But as Friedman pointed out, if cities’ expansion proposals weren’t so aggressive, appeals wouldn’t be filed. There are many cities that expand their UGBs without any contention whatsoever, he said.

Next, McMinnville officials will meet with attorneys to better understand the Court of Appeals ruling. City officials will then meet with the city’s assigned field representative from the DLCD and decide how to proceed.

Options range from retooling the expansion map, trimming the expansion, or providing more accurate and more thorough justification by the LCDC for approval of the UGB expansion.

鈥淲e’re all in this together,鈥� Montgomery said. 鈥淚t’s a requirement by the state, so we will sit down and once again work through this thing.鈥�