Relating to urban growth boundaries.
The impact of HB 2853 is significant, as it allows for a more flexible approach to urban development, facilitating the inclusion of up to 80 acres of land per city into their respective UGBs. Cities are mandated to ensure that no more than 50 percent of the newly included land is allocated for industrial purposes, specifically highlighting uses like semiconductor manufacturing and other high-tech facilities. Additionally, newly included areas will require preservation of at least half of the land as open space or park-use, which is a step towards balancing industrial growth with environmental considerations.
House Bill 2853, sponsored by Representative Evans, seeks to establish new provisions regarding urban growth boundaries (UGBs) in Oregon. This legislation authorizes cities with populations of less than 55,000 outside the Metro area to identify lands for inclusion in their UGBs, primarily for light industrial and open space uses. The bill serves to replace an older industrial siting program, effectively updating the framework under which urban areas can expand while ensuring that certain lands remain preserved as open spaces. Notably, the program is set to sunset on January 2, 2037, which introduces a temporal limitation on its applicability.
The sentiment surrounding HB 2853 is expected to vary among stakeholders. Supporters of the bill argue that it promotes economic growth and provides necessary flexibility for smaller cities to manage their growth without restrictive regulations. Conversely, there may be concerns from community advocates about the rapid expansion of urban boundaries and the potential impacts on local ecosystems and community cohesion. The bifurcation of use between industrial and open space is likely to fuel discussions around sustainable development practices in urban planning.
Notable points of contention within the discussions of HB 2853 could arise from the perceived implications of increasing industrial land at the potential expense of local community needs. Critics may argue that the ability to expand UGBs could facilitate unchecked urban sprawl, endangering existing open spaces and agricultural lands. Furthermore, the sunset clause of the bill could intrigue debates about the need for periodic review and adjustment of urban planning policies to reflect changing community values and environmental standards.