Adds specified lands to the City of Woodburn's urban growth boundary.
Summary
SB 1564 would expand the City of Woodburn’s urban growth boundary to include a specified area of land located south of Crosby Road Northeast, west of Boones Ferry Road Northeast, north of the city’s existing UGB, and east of a listed Marion County tax lot. The bill expressly overrides conflicting provisions of state land use law, statewide planning goals, and Land Conservation and Development Commission rules to accomplish this boundary change.
The measure also places the newly added land into Woodburn’s acknowledged comprehensive plan map designations of “Medium Density Residential” and “Nodal Development Overlay.” It directs Marion County to take the steps needed to implement the change, including amending its comprehensive plan and coordinating with the city, while limiting challenges to those actions to writ review in Marion County Circuit Court. The bill takes effect on the 91st day after adjournment sine die.
Impact
SB 1564 would directly alter Oregon land use planning by legislatively amending Woodburn’s urban growth boundary and preempting otherwise applicable statutory and administrative land use requirements for the affected property. It would also require county and city planning documents to conform to the new boundary and land use designations, and it conditions development approval on annexation and adoption of a master plan.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so the bill’s sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call. Based on the text, the measure appears to be a targeted land use and housing development bill designed to facilitate future residential development in Woodburn, including an affordability component.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the bill’s direct legislative override of ordinary land use processes, including statewide planning goals and LCDC rules, which may concern land use advocates, local government process proponents, or neighboring property owners. Another likely issue is the mandated development framework: the bill requires at least 600 residential units and a binding affordability agreement covering 30 percent of units for 60 years, which may draw differing views from housing advocates, developers, and local officials over feasibility, density, and affordability terms.