2015 ORS 197.646¹
Implementation of new requirement in goal, rule or statute
  • rules

(1) A local government shall amend its acknowledged comprehensive plan or acknowledged regional framework plan and land use regulations implementing either plan by a self-initiated post-acknowledgment process under ORS 197.610 (Submission of proposed comprehensive plan or land use regulation changes to Department of Land Conservation and Development) to 197.625 (Acknowledgment of comprehensive plan or land use regulation changes) to comply with a new requirement in land use statutes, statewide land use planning goals or rules implementing the statutes or the goals.

(2)(a) The Department of Land Conservation and Development shall notify local governments when a new requirement in land use statutes, statewide land use planning goals or rules implementing the statutes or the goals requires changes to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, an acknowledged regional framework plan or land use regulations implementing either plan.

(b) The Land Conservation and Development Commission shall establish, by rule, the time period within which an acknowledged comprehensive plan, an acknowledged regional framework plan and land use regulations implementing either plan must be in compliance with:

(A) A new requirement in a land use statute, if the legislation does not specify a time period for compliance; and

(B) A new requirement in a land use planning goal or rule adopted by the commission.

(3) When a local government does not adopt amendments to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, an acknowledged regional framework plan or land use regulations implementing either plan, as required by subsection (1) of this section, the new requirements apply directly to the local governments land use decisions. The failure to adopt amendments to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, an acknowledged regional framework plan or land use regulations implementing either plan required by subsection (1) of this section is a basis for initiation of enforcement action pursuant to ORS 197.319 (Procedures prior to request of an enforcement order) to 197.335 (Order for compliance with goals). [1991 c.612 §7; 2005 c.829 §7; 2007 c.71 §67; 2011 c.469 §4]

Note: 197.646 (Implementation of new requirement in goal, rule or statute), 197.649 (Fees for notice) and 197.650 (Appeal to Court of Appeals) were added to and made a part of ORS chapter 197 by legislative action but were not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

Notes of Decisions

Where city amended local plan and regula­tions to imple­ment new state goal and plan, but county failed to make amend­ments, failure did not make state goal and plan directly applicable to county decision governing prop­erty within city limits. Oregon Shores Conserva­tion Coali­tion v. Lincoln County, 164 Or App 426, 992 P2d 936 (1999), Sup Ct review denied

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 countys 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 I, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors197.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 197, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano197.­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.