URBANIZATION
Legislative history: Ord. 1454 § 4 (Exh. B), 2023; Ord. 1435 § 4 (Exh. B), 2021; Ord. 1308 § 4, 2010; Ord. 1261 § 4, 2008; Ord. 1260 § 4, 2008; Ord. 1166 § 4, 2002; Ord. 1164 § 4, 2002.
URBANIZATION PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
In the Background Report on the existing land use pattern of Marion County, the pattern of urbanization in the County was described as being similar to many other areas in the United States. Urban development is proceeding outward from urban areas in a rather scattered manner leaving much undeveloped land in its wake. The term “sprawl” has been used to describe the manner in which development proceeds over the countryside. The only difference between the pattern and the process of urbanization in Marion County and some of the larger urbanizing areas is the amount of sprawl and the rate at which it is occurring. However, the problems that sprawl poses to people of Marion County are probably more crucial than in most other areas because of the importance of natural resources to the local economy. The continued expansion of urban areas and preservation of farm and forestlands become competing interests that must be balanced to the benefit of both.
The problems associated with a pattern of sprawling development involve both direct and indirect monetary and social costs, affecting all people of the County, whether urban or rural. Some of the problems resulting from sprawl are:
a. A land use pattern which is less desirable and less stable than could be achieved by coordinated, planned development;
b. A land use pattern which is costly to develop and service;
c. A greater expenditure of land and energy resources; and
d. A greater disruption of agricultural uses.
A land use pattern created by many small-scale developments, each constructed without knowledge of future surrounding land uses or circulation patterns, is likely to lack some essential ingredients of long-term desirability. Incompatible relationships between residential and nonresidential uses are almost certain to occur. The difficulty of accurately anticipating school and park needs will usually result in poor locations of these facilities in relation to their service population and/or street system. Without knowing the future land use pattern and traffic likely to be generated, it is difficult to design circulation systems which will not require unanticipated improvements. Such required improvements may, when developed, lessen the desirability of some of the adjacent land uses. In many areas of the country it has been demonstrated that many of these problems can be eliminated through coordinated public and private planning on a larger scale. Such actions result in community areas with more amenities and greater stability.
Higher costs are incurred both initially and ultimately in providing many public services to a sprawl pattern. Scattered development requires extension of services through many vacant areas, and under-utilization of the services through many vacant areas is also the prime source of higher costs involved in the ultimate pattern of sprawl. At saturation (i.e., when development has essentially stopped with little or no usable vacant land left) the process of sprawl will have resulted in a pattern of relatively low density, and because the same number of people could have been served at a higher density by fewer facilities, the total costs will be higher.
In addition to social and economic considerations of urban development patterns, there are also problems of competing and conflicting urban versus rural land use interests. All of the 20 cities in Marion County are surrounded by either farmland or forest land. As urban areas continue to expand, these resource lands are either directly converted to urban uses or are adversely impacted due to inherent conflicts between rural and urban activities.
The continued loss of farm and forest land in the County will have some serious implications on continued viability of the agricultural industry and agricultural land use pattern. If agricultural, forestry and other land-resource-based interests are to remain sound, then the pattern of urbanization needs to be contained. We must recognize that Marion County cannot provide for the bulk of housing needs of its population within rural areas. The lands within our rural areas have limited capacity to carry this growth and those limitations must be recognized and planned for.
Cities are expected to continue to grow and expand. There are, however, more desirable ways than others for this expansion to occur. The issue becomes one of the manner in which urban areas develop.
Marion County’s basic planning goal is the conservation and intelligent use of our land and related resources. Elimination of sprawl and creation of a more compact urban expansion pattern should help in achieving that goal. Conservation of land not only decreases the rate at which conversion from agricultural use to urban use transpires, but it also substantially reduces some of the direct conflicts between agriculture and non-farmland uses.
URBAN LAND USE GOALS
The urbanization goal of Marion County is to provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. Sub-goals for beneficial patterns of urban land use include the following:
a. Development of urbanization consistent with area-wide goals and objectives.
b. Establish urban growth boundaries to identify and separate urbanizable land from rural land and contain urban land uses within those areas most capable of supporting such uses.
c. To provide for an orderly transition from rural to urban land use.
d. Development of a population distribution pattern in which most persons employed within an urban community live in and participate in the activities and government of that community.
e. Development of stable and attractive residential areas protected from incompatible land uses and containing a wide variety of housing types and densities.
f. Development of a commercial land use pattern which assures a convenient and adequate supply of goods and services to the resident, transient and trade area population.
g. Development of commercial areas and employment centers that favor being located in relation to the urban transportation system.
h. Development of industrial land use within urbanized areas unless an industry specifically is best suited to a rural site.
i. Provision of sufficient areas for future industrial land use.
j. Direct urbanization away from agricultural areas composed of major units of Class I through IV soils.
k. Provide adequate review of development of permanent structures in the identified natural hazard or damage areas to minimize potential loss of life or property.
URBAN AREA PLANNING
To achieve the desired objectives of managing urban expansion, it is necessary to develop urban growth programs jointly with the cities, Marion County and special districts. These programs should be developed primarily through the comprehensive planning processes of each community with concurrence by the County and the State. The Land Conservation and Development Commission Goal 14, Urbanization, provides the basis for development of these programs as part of each city’s comprehensive plan.
Each urban growth program should consist of an urban growth boundary, urban development policies or ordinances to achieve the desired purpose, and joint city-County agreements to coordinate land use planning activities.
The purpose of an urban growth program is to provide for orderly, efficient development of urban areas. As discussed in the problems and issues section, uncontrolled development to urban densities is costly and an inefficient use of land. The adoption of an urban program for each community in Marion County will limit urban sprawl and its adverse impacts while providing better resource protection in rural areas. The development of these programs will serve the dual role in providing for adequate areas for urban expansion.
Each city is required by State law to comply with the LCDC Urbanization Goal 14 by establishing an urban growth boundary. These boundaries are for the purpose of identifying the geographic limit to which urban development will expand during the foreseeable future, which for cities is the 20-year planning horizon of their acknowledged comprehensive plans. The main intent of boundaries is to logically contain urban sprawl and separate urbanizable lands from rural lands.
The establishment of each urban growth boundary which also involves proposals to expand the existing, acknowledged growth boundary, should be based upon the following criteria as indicated in the Land Conservation and Development Commission Urbanization Goal:
a. Demonstrated need to accommodate long-range urban population, consistent with a 20-year population forecast coordinated with affected local governments;
b. Demonstrated need for housing, employment opportunities, livability or uses such as public facilities, streets and roads, schools, parks or open space, or any combination of the need categories;
c. Orderly and economic provision for public facilities and services;
d. Efficient accommodation of identified land needs;
e. Comparative environmental, energy, economic and social consequences;
f. Evaluating alternative boundary locations consistent with ORS 197.298; and
g. Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural and forest activities occurring on farm and forest land outside the UGB.
The State goal requires each community to establish an urban growth boundary as part of its comprehensive plan program. The extent and location of each urban growth boundary will be based upon the individual community needs, conditions and growth expectations. The area identified for future urbanization should be considered flexible with any changes occurring based upon changing needs of the community and consideration of the above LCDC Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 14 criteria.
Marion County and each of the 20 cities in the County have jointly agreed upon and adopted an urban growth boundary as part of each city’s comprehensive plan. These boundaries are shown on the General Land Use/Transportation Plan Map. The County and each of the cities have adopted intergovernmental agreements in the form of urban growth boundary and policy agreements or urban growth boundary coordination agreements for establishment of the urban growth boundaries, to address coordination requirements regarding Plan amendments and changes to the boundaries, and for identification of areas of special mutual concern.
A list of the acreage of land contained within each city’s urban growth boundary is included in the Background and Inventory Report. These boundaries, when established in the late 1970s and early 1980s, included sufficient land to accommodate the projected 267,000 persons by the year 2000. This indicated an increase of more than 115,900 persons between the years 1978 and 2000. ORS 195.036 provisions adopted in 1995 designated counties with the responsibility for establishing and maintaining a coordinated population forecast for the entire area including cities within its boundary, for use in maintaining and updating comprehensive plans. In October 1998, the County adopted new, coordinated population projections for the incorporated and unincorporated portions of Marion County. The projected year 2020 population for the County is 350,952 which is an increase of 83,252 over the 1997 base year population of 267,700 used for the projections. The 2000 Census population count for the County was 284,838. The population projections for each city are one of the primary factors used in determining urban growth boundary areas and are included in each city’s comprehensive plan as plans are updated or through a city’s periodic review process of its plan, and in the County Background and Inventory Report.
The management of the urbanizable land area between the city limits and the urban growth boundary requires special coordination between the city and the County. The city has an interest in the future of this area since it may eventually become a part of the city through annexation and extension of services. The County retains legal authority to control land use actions in this area, and therefore, is responsible for the conditions that are inherited by the city upon annexation. This makes it necessary for the city and County to coordinate the planning and land use control for this transition or urbanizable area.
The Comprehensive Plan for each city projects the city’s growth through a land use plan for its urban area. With the County’s concurrence, these plans, with their implementing policies, can be carried out by the County in the areas immediately outside of each city limits. The relationship of the city providing leadership in planning the future of urbanizable lands while the County implements the plans through land use control, is crucial to accomplishing the urbanization goals.
URBAN GROWTH POLICIES
In defining urbanizable land areas with urban growth boundaries, it is necessary to provide implementation measures to effect their purpose. Urban growth policies can provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will direct the future of the urbanizable land areas. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these policies is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to implement each urban growth program. The following are urban growth policies that should guide the conversion of the urbanizable areas adjacent to each city to urban uses:
1. The type and manner of development of the urbanizable land shall be based upon each community’s land use proposals and development standards that are jointly agreed upon by each city and Marion County and are consistent with the LCDC Goals.
2. The provision of urban services and facilities should be in an orderly economic basis according to a phased growth plan.
3. Development of the urban area should proceed from its center outward.
4. Development should occur in areas of existing services before extending new services.
5. Divisions of urbanizable land shall consider the maximum utility of the land resource and enable the logical and efficient extension of services to such parcels.
6. Generally cities are the most logical providers of urban services. Where special service districts exist beyond the city limits and within the urban growth boundary such as around Salem, all parties shall work towards the development of the most efficient and economical method of providing needed services. Urban services shall not be extended beyond the urban growth boundary, except as provided for in Special District Policies 6, 7 and 8.
7. Urban densities shall be established only within recognized urban growth boundaries unless an exception to Goal 14 (Urbanization) is obtained.
8. The majority of the projected population increases in Marion County should be directed to the urban areas.
9. Sufficient developable land shall be made available to provide choices in the marketplace.
10. The annexation of rural lands into the legal boundary of any city shall be limited to the area contained within the mutually adopted urban growth boundary. Exceptions to this prohibition may be allowed as follows:
a. Consistent with Special District Policies 6, 7 and 8. The annexation of lands outside of an urban growth boundary shall be limited to lands having a prior exception to Statewide Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) and Goal 4 (Forest Lands).
b. All or portions of Keizer Rapids Park owned by the city of Keizer or with an option to purchase by the city, including Chemawa Road, to be included in the park. Lands annexed outside the urban growth boundary shall remain designated and zoned for rural resource use consistent with State law until the annexed properties are brought into the urban growth boundary. The annexed lands shall be subject to terms of a separate intergovernmental agreement between the city and the County.
Annexation procedures shall be consistent with the requirements of State law and the local coordination policies contained in the urban growth boundary and policy agreement or urban growth boundary coordination agreement.
11. Any city proposing to annex rural lands located outside of an urban growth boundary into a city limits shall carry the burden of proving compliance with the applicable goals and policies of the Marion County Comprehensive Plan, the city’s comprehensive plan, the urban growth boundary and policy agreement or urban growth boundary coordination agreement and State statute and administrative rules.
12. An updated intergovernmental agreement between the County and a city that is consistent with the Urban Growth Policies may be required when a city goes through periodic review or updates its comprehensive plan where County concurrence is necessary.