2017 ORS 197.010¹

The Legislative Assembly declares that:

(1) In order to ensure the highest possible level of livability in Oregon, it is necessary to provide for properly prepared and coordinated comprehensive plans for cities and counties, regional areas and the state as a whole. These comprehensive plans:

(a) Must be adopted by the appropriate governing body at the local and state levels;

(b) Are expressions of public policy in the form of policy statements, generalized maps and standards and guidelines;

(c) Shall be the basis for more specific rules and land use regulations which implement the policies expressed through the comprehensive plans;

(d) Shall be prepared to assure that all public actions are consistent and coordinated with the policies expressed through the comprehensive plans; and

(e) Shall be regularly reviewed and, if necessary, amended to keep them consistent with the changing needs and desires of the public they are designed to serve.

(2)(a) The overarching principles guiding the land use program in the State of Oregon are to:

(A) Provide a healthy environment;

(B) Sustain a prosperous economy;

(C) Ensure a desirable quality of life; and

(D) Equitably allocate the benefits and burdens of land use planning.

(b) Additionally, the land use program should, but is not required to, help communities achieve sustainable development patterns and manage the effects of climate change.

(c) The overarching principles in paragraph (a) of this subsection and the purposes in paragraph (b) of this subsection provide guidance to:

(A) The Legislative Assembly when enacting a law regulating land use.

(B) A public body, as defined in ORS 174.109 (“Public body” defined), when the public body:

(i) Adopts or interprets goals, comprehensive plans and land use regulations implementing the plans, or administrative rules implementing a provision of ORS chapter 195, 196, 197, 215 or 227; or

(ii) Interprets a law governing land use.

(d) Use of the overarching principles in paragraph (a) of this subsection and the purposes in paragraph (b) of this subsection is not a legal requirement for the Legislative Assembly or other public body and is not judicially enforceable.

(3) The equitable balance between state and local government interests can best be achieved by resolution of conflicts using alternative dispute resolution techniques such as mediation, collaborative planning and arbitration. Such dispute resolution techniques are particularly suitable for conflicts arising over periodic review, comprehensive plan and land use regulations, amendments, enforcement issues and local interpretation of state land use policy. [1973 c.80 §2; 1981 c.748 §21a; 1993 c.792 §48; 2009 c.873 §1]

Law Review Cita­tions

85 OLR 815 (2006)

Law Review Cita­tions

10 WLJ 414-421, 474, 475 (1974); 56 OLR 270 (1977)

Chapter 197

Notes of Decisions

A comprehensive plan, although denominated a “resolu­tion,” is the controlling land use planning instru­ment for a city; upon its passage, the city assumes responsibility to effectuate the plan and conform zoning ordinances, including prior existing zoning ordinances, to it. Baker v. City of Milwaukie, 271 Or 500, 533 P2d 772 (1975)

Procedural require­ments of the state-wide planning goals adopted by the Land Conserva­tion and Develop­ment Commission are not applicable to ordinances adopted before the effective date of the goals. Schmidt v. Land Conserva­tion and Develop­ment Comm., 29 Or App 665, 564 P2d 1090 (1977)

This chapter, es­tab­lishing LCDC and granting it authority to es­tab­lish state-wide land use planning goals, does not unconstitu­tionally delegate legislative power where both standards (ORS chapter 215) and safeguards ([former] ORS 197.310) exist. Meyer v. Lord, 37 Or App 59, 586 P2d 367 (1978)

Where county’s comprehensive plan and land use regula­tions had not been acknowledged by LCDC, it was proper for county to apply state-wide planning standards directly to individual request for parti­tion. Alexanderson v. Polk County Commissioners, 289 Or 427, 616 P2d 459 (1980)

Issuance of a building permit was a “land conserva­tion and develop­ment ac­tion” where county had no acknowledged comprehensive plan, land was not zoned and no pre­vi­ous land use decision had been made re­gard­ing the land. Columbia Hills v. LCDC, 50 Or App 483, 624 P2d 157 (1981), Sup Ct review denied

Nothing in this chapter grants the Land Conserva­tion and Develop­ment Depart­ment authority to challenge local land use decisions made after comprehensive plan acknowledg­ment. Ochoco Const. v. LCDC, 295 Or 422, 667 P2d 499 (1983)

LCDC has authority in periodic review process to require local govern­ment to add specific language or pro­vi­sions to its land use legisla­tion to assure compliance with statewide goals and LCDC rules. Oregonians in Ac­tion v. LCDC, 121 Or App 497, 854 P2d 1010 (1993), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Authority of a land conserva­tion and develop­ment com­mis­sion to bind the state in an interstate compact or agree­ment, (1973) Vol 36, p 361; applica­tion of Fasano v. Bd. of County Commrs., (1974) Vol 36, p 960; state-wide planning goal in conjunc­tion with interim Willamette River Greenway boundaries, (1975) Vol 37, p 894; binding effect on govern­mental agencies of the adop­tion of interim Willamette River Greenway boundaries, (1975) Vol 37, p 894; applica­tion to state agencies, (1976) Vol 37, p 1129; preexisting ordinances during the interim imple­menting stage, (1976) Vol 37, p 1329; constitu­tionality of delega­tion to LCDC of authority to prescribe and enforce statewide planning goals, (1977) Vol 38, p 1130; effect of situa­tion where similar peti­tion is filed before both com­mis­sion and a court, (1977) Vol 38, p 1268; considera­tion of availability of public school facilities in determina­tion of whether to approve subdivision, (1978) Vol 38, p 1956

Law Review Cita­tions

10 WLJ 99 (1973); 53 OLR 129 (1974); 5 EL 673 (1975); 54 OLR 203-223 (1975); 56 OLR 444 (1977); 18 WLR 49 (1982); 61 OLR 351 (1982); 20 WLR 764 (1984); 14 EL 661, 693, 713, 779, 843 (1984); 25 WLR 259 (1989); 31 WLR 147, 449, 817 (1995); 36 EL 25 (2006); 49 WLR 411 (2013)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 197—Comprehensive Land Use Planning, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors197.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 197, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano197.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
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.