2015 ORS 215.316¹
Termination of adoption of marginal lands

(1) Unless a county applies the provisions of ORS 215.705 (Dwellings in farm or forest zone) to 215.730 (Additional criteria for forestland dwellings under ORS 215.720) to land zoned for exclusive farm use, a county that adopted marginal lands provisions under ORS 197.247 (1991 Edition), 215.213 (Uses permitted in exclusive farm use zones in counties that adopted marginal lands system prior to 1993), 215.214 (1991 Edition), 215.288 (1991 Edition), 215.317 (Permitted uses on marginal land), 215.327 (Divisions of marginal land) and 215.337 (1991 Edition) may continue to apply those provisions. After January 1, 1993, no county may adopt marginal lands provisions.

(2) If a county that had adopted marginal lands provisions before January 1, 1993, subsequently sites a dwelling under ORS 215.705 (Dwellings in farm or forest zone) to 215.750 (Alternative forestland dwellings) on land zoned for exclusive farm use, the county shall not later apply marginal lands provisions, including those set forth in ORS 215.213 (Uses permitted in exclusive farm use zones in counties that adopted marginal lands system prior to 1993), to lots or parcels other than those to which the county applied the marginal lands provisions before the county sited a dwelling under ORS 215.705 (Dwellings in farm or forest zone) to 215.750 (Alternative forestland dwellings). [1993 c.792 §29]

Notes of Decisions

In determining whether land is marginal land under 1991 version of ORS 197.247, county must base calcula­tion of potential annual gross income as forest opera­tion on log prices for calendar years 1978 to 1982. Herring v. Lane County, 216 Or App 84, 171 P3d 1025 (2007)

Chapter 215

Notes of Decisions

Published notice is adequate if prop­erty owners can reasonably ascertain that prop­erty in which they hold interest may be affected. Clackamas County v. Emmert, 14 Or App 493, 513 P2d 532 (1973), Sup Ct review denied

Statutory scheme es­tab­lishing LCDC and granting it authority to es­tab­lish state-wide land use planning goals does not unconstitu­tionally delegate legislative power where both standards (under this chapter) and safeguards ([former] ORS 197.310) exist. Meyer v. Lord, 37 Or App 59, 586 P2d 367 (1978)

Where county had not yet adopted comprehensive plan but had zoned certain por­tions "primarily agricultural," county had not enacted adequate interim measures to protect its agricultural land until exclusive farm use zoning was completed. Columbia County v. LCDC, 44 Or App 749, 606 P2d 1184 (1980)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Fasano v. Bd. of County Commrs., applica­tion to county governing bodies and planning com­mis­sions, (1974) Vol 36, p 960; binding effect on govern­mental agencies of the adop­tion of interim Willamette River Greenway boundaries, (1975) Vol 37, p 894

Law Review Cita­tions

36 EL 25 (2006)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 215—County Planning; Zoning; Housing Codes, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors215.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 215, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano215.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.