ORS 197.430¹
Enforcement powers

If the county governing body or the Land Conservation and Development Commission determines the existence of an alleged violation under ORS 197.410 (Use and activities regulated), it may:

(1) Investigate, hold hearings, enter orders and take action that it deems appropriate under ORS chapters 195, 196 and 197, as soon as possible.

(2) For the purpose of investigating conditions relating to the violation, through its members or its duly authorized representatives, enter at reasonable times upon any private or public property.

(3) Conduct public hearings.

(4) Publish its findings and recommendations as they are formulated relative to the violation.

(5) Give notice of any order relating to a particular violation of the state regulations for the area involved or a particular violation of ORS chapters 195, 196 and 197 by mailing notice to the person or public body conducting or proposing to conduct the project affected in the manner provided by ORS chapter 183. [1973 c.80 §31; 1977 c.664 §33; 1981 c.748 §14]

Note: Sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, provide:

Sec. 2. As used in sections 2 to 5 of this 2009 Act:

(1) “Management plan” means the management plan for the Metolius River Basin that was recommended to the Legislative Assembly on April 2, 2009, by the Land Conservation and Development Commission.

(2) “Metolius resort site” means land mapped as eligible for destination resort siting under ORS 197.455 (Siting of destination resorts) by Jefferson County that has not been developed as a resort.

(3) “Overnight lodgings” has the meaning given that term in ORS 197.435 (Definitions for ORS 197.435 to 197.467).

(4) “Tract” has the meaning given that term in ORS 215.010 (Definitions). [2009 c.636 §2]

Sec. 3. (1) Notwithstanding ORS 215.700 (Resource land dwelling policy) to 215.780 (Minimum lot or parcel sizes), one or two small-scale recreation communities may be established as specified in sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009.

(2) The owner of a Metolius resort site may apply to a county for approval of a small-scale recreation community within three years after June 29, 2017, if:

(a) Prior to June 29, 2010, the owner notified the Department of Land Conservation and Development that the owner elected to seek approval of a small-scale recreation community; and

(b) The owner renews the election described in paragraph (a) of this subsection within 30 days after June 29, 2017.

(3) A small-scale recreation community authorized under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, may be established only in conjunction with a transfer of development opportunity from a Metolius resort site. A transfer of development opportunity must be carried out through an agreement between the owner of a Metolius resort site and the owner of the site proposed for development of a small-scale recreation community. In the agreement, the owner of the Metolius resort site must:

(a) Agree to limit the use of the Metolius resort site, consistent with the management plan in consideration for the opportunity to participate in the development of the small-scale recreation community; and

(b) Agree to grant a conservation easement pursuant to ORS 271.715 (Definitions for ORS 271.715 to 271.795) to 271.795 (Construction of Act) that:

(A) Limits the use of the Metolius resort site to be consistent with the management plan;

(B) Allows public access to that portion of the site that is not developed; and

(C) Contains other provisions, as required by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, that are necessary to ensure that the conservation easement is enforceable.

(4)(a) A small-scale recreation community authorized under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, must be sited on land that is within a county described in paragraph (b) of this subsection and that is either or both of the following:

(A) Planned and zoned for forest use; or

(B) Rural and not subject to statewide land use planning goals relating to agricultural lands or forestlands.

(b) A small-scale recreation community may be established in:

(A) Baker County;

(B) Clatsop County;

(C) Columbia County;

(D) Coos County;

(E) Crook County;

(F) Curry County;

(G) Douglas County;

(H) Grant County;

(I) Harney County;

(J) Josephine County;

(K) Klamath County;

(L) Lake County;

(M) Lincoln County;

(N) Linn County;

(O) Malheur County;

(P) Morrow County;

(Q) Sherman County;

(R) Umatilla County;

(S) Wallowa County;

(T) Wasco County; or

(U) Wheeler County.

(5) A small-scale recreation community authorized under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, may not be sited on land that is:

(a) Within an area identified as “Area 1” or “Area 2” in the management plan.

(b) Within an area protected as a significant resource in an acknowledged comprehensive plan provision implementing statewide land use planning goals relating to:

(A) Open space and scenic and historic areas;

(B) Natural or conservation management unit requirements for estuarine resources; or

(C) Beaches and dunes.

(6)(a) All land on which a small-scale recreation community authorized under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, is sited must be at least one-quarter mile from the nearest state park.

(b) Any buildings or other improvements developed within the boundaries of land on which a small-scale recreation community authorized under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, is sited must be located at least one mile from the nearest state park.

(7) If a county listed in subsection (4)(b)(B), (D), (F), (G) or (M) of this section approves an application for a small-scale recreation community that also requires a federal license or permit, that approval shall be deemed to constitute an acknowledged exception under ORS 197.732 (Goal exceptions) to any applicable statewide land use planning goal with which the use would not otherwise comply. [2009 c.636 §3; 2009 c.888 §1; 2011 c.404 §1; 2015 c.748 §1; 2017 c.494 §1; 2018 c.15 §8] Sec. 4. (1) A small-scale recreation community authorized under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, must meet the following development standards:

(a) The community must be located on a tract that contains 320 or fewer acres of land.

(b) The community must consist of 240 or fewer units and have as its primary purpose the provision of overnight lodging units.

(c) The community may contain one restaurant containing 5,000 or fewer square feet, and accessory uses necessary to the operation of the community, including accessory recreational facilities.

(d) The owner of the property must spend at least $1.5 million on off-site resource enhancement or restoration projects on nearby public lands that will be used by individuals from the community.

(e) The community may not include a golf course or related facilities.

(f) The community must be developed and operated in a sustainable manner by meeting the following criteria:

(A) When fully developed, the community must use reclaimed water as the primary source of water for any irrigation of grounds.

(B) Facilities for snowmobiling or other motorized recreational activities are not permitted.

(C) At least 50 percent of the tract on which the community is located must be dedicated to permanent open space that is contiguous and demonstrates the biological viability of the site as habitat or that provides ecosystem services to the area.

(D) Significant natural resource functions and values on the site must be preserved.

(E) Impervious surfaces, including rooftops and paved roads, trails and parking areas may not exceed 35 percent of the total site area.

(F) Potable water usage must achieve a 20 percent reduction below standard code-built developments. Reclaimed water usage for nonpotable water needs may account for the entire reduction required.

(G) Stormwater must be managed on-site. Off-site runoff must be limited to predevelopment runoff rates.

(H) A restaurant, lodge or other nonresidential building must be designed and constructed to meet regionally or nationally recognized design standards for sustainable design that are acceptable to the county having land use jurisdiction over the proposed development site.

(I) Residential buildings must be designed and constructed to meet regionally or nationally recognized design standards for sustainable design that are acceptable to the county having land use jurisdiction over the proposed development site. The developer must achieve certification for all buildings, with at least 50 percent of the buildings achieving a top-tier rating under the rating system selected.

(J) Additional housing capable of housing at least 50 percent of the peak season employees must be provided on-site.

(2) In addition to the development standards described in subsection (1) of this section, a small-scale recreation community must:

(a) Develop an environmental operations manual that describes core practices for operating the small-scale recreation community, including:

(A) Waste reduction, recycling and diversion practices.

(B) Cleaning and site maintenance practices.

(C) Staff education practices.

(D) Commitment of the community to environmental stewardship.

(b) Establish a conservation stewardship organization, as a separate nonprofit entity funded through income generated by the development, that is charged with:

(A) Development of a baseline study that establishes the current level and condition of the local environment. As part of the baseline study, the organization must develop a long-term stewardship plan that targets net creation and rehabilitation of resources, on-site and off-site.

(B) Ongoing review, election and management of habitat restoration projects that implement the goal of the long-term stewardship plan.

(C) Education and outreach on environmental stewardship.

(c) Organize and manage volunteers working to conserve local resources.

(d) Monitor performance of energy and water usage and site development standards versus actual practice.

(e) Audit and publish annually a report of the community’s performance result for the preceding year. [2009 c.636 §4; 2009 c.888 §2]

Sec. 5. (1) An application for a small-scale recreation community under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, may be filed only by the owner of a Metolius resort site and the owner of the site on which development of the small-scale recreation community is proposed and must be filed jointly by the owners. The owners shall file a copy of the application with the Department of Land Conservation and Development at the same time that the owners file the application with the county having land use jurisdiction over the proposed development site.

(2) A county shall review an application for a small-scale recreation community under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, as a use permitted under section 3 (4)(a), chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, and as a land division under ORS chapter 92.

(3) In addition to the standards set forth in sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, the applicant for a small-scale recreation community must demonstrate to the county that streets, utilities and services adequate to serve the small-scale recreation community are available or will be made available prior to occupancy of the small-scale recreation community.

(4) If more than two applications for a small-scale recreation community are filed under sections 2 to 5, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, and a county has not yet approved an application, the department shall determine which of the applications may proceed, taking into consideration:

(a) The time at which each application was filed;

(b) The unemployment rate in the counties, if more than one county is involved; and

(c) The findings set forth in section 1, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009.

(5) When two applications for small-scale recreation communities have been approved, additional applications may not be considered.

(6) A county may charge a fee to cover the costs of processing an application. [2009 c.636 §5; 2009 c.888 §3; 2018 c.15 §9]

Note: Sections 6 to 8, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, provide:

Sec. 6. (1) There is established the Oregon Transfer of Development Rights Pilot Program in the Department of Land Conservation and Development. Working with the State Forestry Department, the State Department of Agriculture and local governments and with other state agencies, as appropriate, the Department of Land Conservation and Development shall implement the pilot program.

(2) The Land Conservation and Development Commission shall adopt rules to implement the pilot program. The commission, by rule, may:

(a) Establish a maximum ratio of transferable development rights to severed development interests in a sending area for each pilot project. The maximum ratio:

(A) Must be calculated to protect lands planned and zoned for forest use and to create incentives for owners of land in the sending area to participate in the pilot project;

(B) May not exceed one transferable development right to one severed development interest if the receiving area is outside of urban growth boundaries and outside unincorporated communities;

(C) May not exceed two transferable development rights to one severed development interest if the receiving area is in an unincorporated community; and

(D) Must be consistent with plans for public facilities and services in the receiving area.

(b) Require participating owners of land in a sending area to grant conservation easements pursuant to ORS 271.715 (Definitions for ORS 271.715 to 271.795) to 271.795 (Construction of Act), or otherwise obligate themselves, to ensure that additional residential development of their property does not occur.

(3) The commission, by rule, shall establish a process for selecting pilot projects from among potential projects nominated by local governments. The process must require local governments to nominate potential projects by submitting a concept plan for each proposed pilot project, including proposed amendments, if any, to the comprehensive plan and land use regulations implementing the plan that are necessary to implement the pilot project.

(4) When selecting a pilot project, the commission must find that the pilot project is:

(a) Reasonably likely to provide a net benefit to the forest economy or the agricultural economy of this state;

(b) Designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects on transportation, natural resources, public facilities and services, nearby urban areas and nearby farm and forest uses; and

(c) Designed so that new development authorized in a receiving area does not conflict with a resource or area inventoried under a statewide land use planning goal relating to natural resources, scenic and historic areas and open spaces, or with an area identified as a Conservation Opportunity Area in the “Oregon Conservation Strategy” adopted by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission and published by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife in September of 2006.

(5) The commission may select up to three pilot projects for the transfer of development rights under sections 6 to 8, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009.

(6) A sending area for a pilot project under sections 6 to 8, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009:

(a) Must be planned and zoned for forest use;

(b) May not exceed 10,000 acres; and

(c) Must contain four or fewer dwelling units per square mile.

(7) The commission may establish additional requirements for sending areas.

(8)(a) Except as provided otherwise in paragraph (b) of this subsection, a local government participating in a pilot project shall select a receiving area for the pilot project based on the following priorities:

(A) First priority is lands within an urban growth boundary.

(B) Second priority is lands that are adjacent to an urban growth boundary and that are subject to an exception from a statewide land use planning goal relating to agricultural lands or forestlands.

(C) Third priority is lands that are:

(i) Within an urban unincorporated community or a rural community; or

(ii) In a resort community, or a rural service center, that contains at least 100 dwelling units at the time the pilot project is approved.

(D) Fourth priority is exception areas approved under ORS 197.732 (Goal exceptions) that are adjacent to urban unincorporated communities or rural communities, if the county agrees to bring the receiving area within the boundaries of the community and to provide the community with water and sewer service.

(b) The commission may authorize a local government to select lower priority lands over higher priority lands for a receiving area in a pilot project only if the local government has established, to the satisfaction of the commission, that selecting higher priority lands as the receiving area is not likely to result in the severance and transfer of a significant proportion of the development interests in the sending area within five years after the receiving area is established.

(c) The minimum residential density of development allowed in receiving areas intended for residential development is:

(A) For second priority lands described in paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection, at least five dwelling units per net acre or 125 percent of the average residential density allowed within the urban growth boundary when the pilot project is approved by the commission, whichever is greater.

(B) For third priority and fourth priority lands described in paragraph (a)(C) and (D) of this subsection, at least 125 percent of the average residential density allowed on land planned for residential use within the unincorporated community when the pilot project is approved by the commission.

(d) For third and fourth priority lands described in paragraph (a)(C) and (D) of this subsection that are within one jurisdiction but adjacent to another jurisdiction, the written consent of the adjacent jurisdiction is required for designation of the receiving area.

(e) A receiving area may not be located within 10 miles of the Portland metropolitan area urban growth boundary.

(9) The commission may establish additional requirements for receiving areas.

(10) The commission, by rule, may provide a bonus in the form of a higher transfer ratio if a substantial portion of the new development in the receiving area of the pilot project is affordable housing within an urban growth boundary. [2009 c.636 §6; 2010 c.5 §3; 2011 c.144 §1]

Sec. 7. (1) Notwithstanding contrary provisions of statewide land use planning goals relating to public facilities and services and urbanization, and notwithstanding ORS 215.700 (Resource land dwelling policy) to 215.780 (Minimum lot or parcel sizes), a local government may change its comprehensive plan and land use regulations implementing the plan to allow residential development in a receiving area consistent with sections 6 to 8, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, if the Land Conservation and Development Commission has approved a concept plan for the pilot project.

(2) The local governments having land use jurisdiction over lands included in the sending area and the receiving area for the pilot project shall adopt amendments to their respective comprehensive plans and land use regulations implementing the plans that are consistent with subsection (3) of this section.

(3) When the commission has approved a proposed concept plan, the local governments having land use jurisdiction over the affected sending area and affected receiving area shall adopt overlay zone provisions and corresponding amendments to the comprehensive plan and land use regulations implementing the plan that identify the additional development allowed through participation in the pilot project. The Department of Land Conservation and Development shall review the overlay zones and corresponding comprehensive plan amendments in the manner of periodic review under ORS 197.628 (Periodic review) to 197.650 (Appeal to Court of Appeals) [series became 197.628 (Periodic review) to 197.651 (Appeal to Court of Appeals for judicial review of final order of Land Conservation and Development Commission)].

(4) Notwithstanding ORS 197.296 (Factors to establish sufficiency of buildable lands within urban growth boundary) and 197.298 (Priority of land to be included within urban growth boundary) and statewide land use planning goals relating to urbanization, a local government may amend its urban growth boundary to include adjacent lands in a receiving area, consistent with an approved concept plan, if the net residential density of development authorized in the receiving area is at least five dwelling units per net acre or 125 percent of the average residential density allowed on land planned for residential use within the urban growth boundary when the pilot project is approved by the commission, whichever is greater.

(5) Local governments or other entities may establish a development rights bank or other system to facilitate the transfer of development rights.

(6) A county shall review an application for a pilot project under sections 6 to 8, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, as a comprehensive plan amendment. A county may apply other procedures, including master plan approval, site plan review or conditional use review as the county finds appropriate to subsequent phases of review of the pilot project.

(7) When development rights transfers authorized by the pilot project under sections 6 to 8, chapter 636, Oregon Laws 2009, result in the transfer of development rights from the jurisdiction of one local government to another local government and cause a potential shift of ad valorem tax revenues between jurisdictions, the local governments may enter into an intergovernmental agreement under ORS 190.003 (Definition for ORS 190.003 to 190.130) to 190.130 (Effect of ORS 190.125) that provides for sharing between the local governments of the prospective ad valorem tax revenues derived from new development in the receiving area. [2009 c.636 §7; 2011 c.144 §2]

Sec. 8. (1) The Department of Land Conservation and Development, the State Forestry Department, a local government participating in the Oregon Transfer of Development Rights Pilot Program or a third-party holder identified by the Department of Land Conservation and Development may hold, monitor or enforce a conservation easement pursuant to ORS 271.715 (Definitions for ORS 271.715 to 271.795) to 271.795 (Construction of Act) or other property interest to ensure that lands in sending areas do not retain residential development rights transferred under sections 6 to 8 of this 2009 Act.

(2) An entity that is eligible to be a holder of a conservation easement may acquire, from a willing seller in the manner provided by ORS 271.715 (Definitions for ORS 271.715 to 271.795) to 271.795 (Construction of Act), the right to carry out a use of land authorized under rules of the Land Conservation and Development Commission implementing the pilot program. [2009 c.636 §8]

Note: Section 2, chapter 686, Oregon Laws 2011, provides:

Sec. 2. (1) As used in this section:

(a) “Associated property” means real property, and improvements, that is contiguous to and in common ownership with the development area.

(b) “Development area” means certain property containing a guest ranch and consisting of approximately 5,000 acres in common ownership that are located in township 17 south, range 31 east and township 17 south, range 32 east, Grant County.

(2) Subject to approval of a master plan submitted to Grant County, the guest ranch may be expanded in the development area in one or more phases to include the uses authorized under this section if Grant County finds that the master plan for the development area meets the standards set forth in subsections (4), (5) and (6) of this section, notwithstanding:

(a) Sections 2 and 3, chapter 84, Oregon Laws 2010.

(b) Statewide land use planning goals and rules implementing the goals and without taking an exception under ORS 197.732 (Goal exceptions) to a goal.

(c) The lot size and dwelling standards of ORS 215.700 (Resource land dwelling policy) to 215.780 (Minimum lot or parcel sizes).

(d) Provisions of the acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulations of Grant County except as:

(A) Provided otherwise in this section; or

(B) Necessary to protect the public health and safety.

(3) The development area may:

(a) Contain up to 575 units of overnight accommodations, including but not limited to lodging units, cabins, townhomes and fractional ownerships. Overnight accommodations that are not lodging units, timeshares or fractional ownerships must be subject to deed restrictions that limit use of the accommodations to use as overnight accommodations.

(b) Include restaurants, meeting and conference facilities and commercial uses to meet the needs of visitors to the development area and associated property.

(c) Include developed recreational facilities including, but not limited to, tennis courts, spa facilities, equestrian facilities, swimming pools and bicycle paths.

(d) Not include sites for new residential dwellings unless otherwise permitted under existing law or developed for employees of the guest ranch or other uses allowed in the development area.

(4) The uses authorized by this section that are to be developed on or after January 1, 2010, must be constructed in the development area.

(5) Roads, utility corridors and utility facilities necessary to serve the development area are authorized uses. Roads in the development area:

(a) Must be all-weather roads.

(b) Must remain unpaved to the greatest extent practicable to discourage car use in most parts of the development area.

(c) Must be wide enough to accommodate emergency equipment.

(6) Upon receipt of an application for approval of a master plan for the development and use of the development area, Grant County shall approve the master plan if the county finds that the master plan:

(a) Demonstrates that the important natural features of the development area and associated property, including but not limited to habitat of threatened or endangered species, streams, rivers and significant wetlands, will be retained. Grant County may authorize alteration of important natural features, including the placement of structures that maintain the overall values of the natural features, under the county’s applicable acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations.

(b) Demonstrates that the development area and associated property will be managed to provide significant public benefits in the form of:

(A) Wildlife and aquatic habitat improvements, including tree planting, enhancement of riparian areas and restoration of meadows for wildlife; and

(B) Training and education programs.

(c) Demonstrates that the development area and associated property will be managed to provide a significant number of permanent jobs in Grant and Harney Counties, to encourage the growth of ancillary and support businesses in Grant and Harney Counties, to encourage expansion of tourism opportunities for Grant and Harney Counties, and to provide opportunities to educate the public about sustainable ranching and wildlife rehabilitation in conjunction with Oregon State University or another educational institution in the State of Oregon.

(d) Contains design criteria and standards that promote sustainability in the development area. The criteria and standards must promote energy and water conservation, reduce, based on consultation with the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, adverse impacts of development on wildlife and reduce, based on consultation with the State Forestry Department, wildfire risk.

(e) Demonstrates that overnight accommodations will be clustered to minimize adverse impacts on fish and wildlife.

(f) Includes a proposed plat to create lots for the first phase of development in the development area.

(7) The planning director of Grant County may:

(a) Approve by administrative review an amendment to an approved master plan or an associated land division plan; or

(b) If the planning director determines that the proposed change may impact the findings made pursuant to subsection (6) of this section, refer the amendment to the Grant County Court for review. If the planning director refers a proposed amendment to the court, the court shall approve the proposed change if the master plan, as amended, or the associated land division plan, as amended, remains consistent with the requirements of this section.

(8) Grant County shall:

(a) Apply only the provisions of this section and the master plan as standards and criteria for approval or amendment of the master plan and associated land division applications and development permit applications submitted pursuant to this section.

(b) Process the master plan and associated land division applications pursuant to the procedural review provisions of the acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations. [2011 c.686 §2]

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 (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2019, Chapter 197, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano197.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
 
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. Currency Information