Comments on the Proposed Findings of Compatibility for the Aurora State Airport Master Plan and the Airport Layout Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Comments on the Proposed Findings of Compatibility for the Aurora State Airport Master Plan and the Airport Layout Plan Oregon State Aviation Board October 31, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1 II. Preliminary Issues .................................................................................................. 1 A. Legislative Policy for State Agency Coordination ....................................... 2 B. Department of Aviation State Agency Coordination Program ................. 3 1. There Is No Certified Coordination Program ...................................... 3 2. 1990 ODOT Coordination Program .................................................... 4 3. 2013 Department of Aviation Coordination Program ..................... 5 4. 2017 Department of Aviation Coordination Program ..................... 5 5. Analysis of State Agency Coordination Issues ................................... 6 6. OAR 738-130 State Agency Coordination Program ........................ 8 C. The City of Aurora is an Affected Governmental Unit ............................. 14 D. Master Plan and Airport Layout Elements That Affect Land Use .......... 14 1. Runway 35 Extension .......................................................................... 14 2. Keil Road Relocation ............................................................................ 18 3. Development of the Former Church Camp ...................................... 19 E. Criteria Applicable to the Findings ............................................................. 21 F. The State Aviation Board Record ................................................................ 22 G. Adoption of The Findings is a Quasi-Judicial Decision ........................... 23 H. The Current Status of the Master Plan ....................................................... 24 1. 2011 and 2012 Events ...................................................................... 24 2. 2016 Revision to the Airport Layout Plan ...................................... 26 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page III. Application of the Goals and Local Comprehensive Plans and Regulations .......................................................................................................... 26 A. Introduction to the Applicable Criteria ...................................................... 26 B. Statewide Land Use Planning Goals and Implementing Administrative Rules ...................................................................................... 28 1. Goal 1: Citizen Involvement ................................................................ 28 2. Goal 2: Land Use Planning ................................................................. 29 3. Goal 3: Agricultural Lands .................................................................. 32 4. Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality ............................. 37 5. Goal 9: Economic Development ........................................................ 39 6. Goal 11: Public Facilities..................................................................... 40 7. Goal 12: Transportation ...................................................................... 42 8. Goal 14: Urbanization.......................................................................... 47 C. Marion County Comprehensive Plan .......................................................... 48 1. Agricultural Lands ................................................................................ 49 2. Agricultural Lands Policies ................................................................ 50 3. Rural Development ............................................................................... 51 4. Rural Development Policies ................................................................ 52 5. Rural Industrial Policies ....................................................................... 53 6. Rural Services Policies ......................................................................... 54 7. Special District Policies ....................................................................... 56 8. Urban Land Use Goals ......................................................................... 57 9. Urban Growth Policies ......................................................................... 60 10. Special District Policies ....................................................................... 62 11. Growth Management Framework Purposes .................................... 63 12. Growth Management Framework Goals ........................................... 65 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page D. Marion County Rural Zoning Code ............................................................. 67 1. MCZC 17.171.030 Conditional Uses in the Public Zone ............ 67 2. MCZC 17.171.060 Property Development Standards ................. 69 3. MCZC 17.171.060.I Sewage Disposal ............................................ 70 4. MCZC 17.171.060.J Traffic Analysis ................................................ 73 5. MCZC 17.123.060 Zone Change Criteria....................................... 74 6. MCZC 17.136.050.J.4 Road Improvements ................................... 76 7. MCZC 17.136.060.A.1 Farm Impact Test ....................................... 77 IV. The Proposed Findings of Compatibility ....................................................... 77 A. Exhibit G ........................................................................................................... 77 B. Compatibility with the Marion County Comprehensive Plan.................. 80 C. Compliance with the Goals and Implementing Rules .............................. 81 V. Annexation into Aurora Resolves the Land Use Conflicts .......................... 83 VI. Exhibit List ........................................................................................................... 84 I. Introduction Thank you for inviting comments for the State Aviation Board’s consideration as it reviews the 2012 Aurora State Airport Master Plan (the “Master Plan”) and the Airport Layout Plan. The City of Aurora promotes sound land use planning and the efficient development of public facilities to serve the community. Its policy is that new urban development on surrounding lands should occur within the City, and therefore additional geographic expansion of the airport must be preceded by annexation. The City cannot support the Master Plan as drafted, although it could support the plan if it were revised consistent with the City’s policy, Goal 11 and Goal 14. The City looks forward to working with the Department of Aviation and Marion County to bring the airport into the City in accordance with these goals and related land use regulations that direct urban land uses to areas within urban growth boundaries. These comments follow up on the City’s oral testimony on Goal 12 that was presented at the September 24, 2019 hearing and the prior electronic submittals. A list of the submitted documents is attached. (Ex 1). Please add this memorandum to the record, and ensure all materials submitted by all participants are placed before, and accepted by, the State Aviation Board. II. Preliminary Issues This unique proceeding raises several historical and procedural issues that will be reviewed to provide the background and set the land use context. State agency coordination is reviewed first. The City’s status as an “affected governmental unit” is established second. Then the elements of the Master Plan and the Airport Layout Plan that affect land use are illustrated and described. Next there is a discussion of which land use criteria apply to this process. There is an unusually large number of criteria because the Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan would further expand an already large urban public facility onto agricultural land that is outside an urban growth boundary, which is disfavored. The importance of a complete record and the quasi-judicial nature of this proceeding are summarized, and the current status of the Master Plan and the Airport Layout Plan are analyzed. Annexation into Aurora would reclassify the land from rural to urban, and thereby resolve the identified land use conflicts and deliver the needed public 1 City of Aurora Comments on Proposed Findings, October 31, 2019 services. The City looks forward to working together with the Department of Aviation to expeditiously accomplish the annexation. A. Legislative Policy for State Agency Coordination All local governments and state agencies have had statutory comprehensive land use planning responsibilities since 1973. (1973 c.80 §1, 2). In the ensuing decades, those responsibilities were not always carried out successfully. To address this deficiency, the Oregon legislature reinitiated those responsibilities in 2009, when it found and declared that: (1) Improving coordination and consistency between the duties and actions of state agencies that affect land use and the duties and actions of local governments under comprehensive plans and land use regulations is required to ensure that the actions of state agencies complement both state and local land use planning objectives. (2) Improved coordination is necessary to streamline state and local permitting procedures. (3) The Department of Land Conservation and Development has not engaged in a formal and concerted effort to update state agency land use coordination programs since 1989, and that state agency rules, plans and programs affecting land use and local