Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
2023-259-Minutes for Meeting July 10,2023 Recorded 8/15/2023BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon
(541) 388-6570
Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2023-259
Steve Dennison, County Clerk 08/15/2023 2:35:19 PM
Commissioners' Journal
pipipiinumumimiuii
FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY
BOCC MEETING MINUTES
1:00 PM
Allen Room
MONDAY July 10, 2023 Live Streamed Video
Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Patti Adair and Phil Chang. Also present were Nick
Lelack, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Whitney Hale, Deputy County
Administrator; Kim Riley, Assistant County Counsel; and Brenda Fritsvold, BOCC Executive Assistant.
This meeting irlg was dUUIU and VIUeU recorded ded dI IU L.dl 1 be dLLesseU dL the Deschutes County
ILy
Meeting Portal website www.deschutes.org/meetings.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.
CITIZEN INPUT: None
AGENDA ITEMS:
1. Work Session: Destination Resort Text Amendments
Tarik Rawlings, Associate Planner, explained the request for a legislative text
amendment to Deschutes County's Destination Resort Combining Zone to add
language from Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.455(1)(a) for the purpose of
limiting residential uses of future destination resorts to those necessary for the staff
and management. Rawlings said this change is being sought by Central Oregon
LandWatch (COLW) arguably in accordance with Oregon State law which imposes
this restriction on any new destination resort within 24 air miles of an urban growth
boundary population of at least 100,000.
BOCC MEETING
JULY 10, 2023 PAGE 1 OF 5
Rawlings said the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this change.
He emphasized it would apply to newly proposed destination resorts only and not
to those with approved master plans. The public hearing is scheduled for July 12th.
Commissioner Adair requested to have a copy of the suggested text modifications.
Chair DeBone noted the consensus of the Board to grant the applicant 30 minutes
of time to speak at the public hearing. Agencies will be granted 10 minutes,
members of the public allowed three minutes, and the applicant will have 10
minutes for rebuttal.
2. DLCD Planning Assistance Grant Application Request
Will Groves, Planning Manager, explained that the Oregon Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DLCD) was appropriated $3.5 million by the
Legislature to assist local governments in housing -related urbanization planning
work. The Community Development Department seeks Board approval to apply for
grant funding to 1) undertake Code updates to ensure clear and objective standards
and 2) draft Code amendments to address future urbanization.
Responding to Commissioner Adair, Groves confirmed that no specific amounts will
be applied for.
County Administrator Nick Lelack noted that while the Board has not prioritized
work on clear and objective standards, it can take time to receive awarded funds.
In response to Commissioner DeBone, Groves said an example of a Code
amendment to address future urbanization might be a requirement that certain
properties be developed with cluster housing in the interest of preserving
opportunities to add more housing if annexed later. Other language might bolster
efforts to align development with established or planned infrastructure corridors.
Commissioner DeBone asked if these provisions would be limited to property
outside of Bend. Groves said staff could assess any of the Urban Growth Boundaries
with the aim of ensuring that all applicable properties will accommodate future
development as appropriate and desired.
CHANG: Move to authorize staff to apply for planning assistance grants from
the Department of Land Conservation and Development for housing -
related urban planning assistance
ADAIR: Second
VOTE: ADAIR: Yes
BOCC MEETING JULY 10, 2023 PAGE 2 OF 5
CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
3. Discussion of moving the Coordinated Houseless Response Office to COIC
As Chair of the Coordinated Houseless Response Office (CHRO) Board,
Commissioner Adair presented the proposal to transfer functional oversight of
CHRO to Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC). Saying this idea is being
assessed by all of CHRO's member jurisdictions, she explained the opportunity and
potential benefits and said the Central Oregon Multi -Agency Coordination (MAC)
Group has several million dollars left to allocate to projects and programs which
address the needs of unsheltered persons.
Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator, said designating this work to COIC will
foster efficiencies in the regional houseless response systems due to COIC's ability
to strategically align with the federally mandated and funded Continuum of Care,
existing work with the Homeless Leadership Coalition, and COIC's Housing for All
consortium work.
As a member of COIC's board and executive committee, Commissioner DeBone
agreed these efforts should be coordinated.
Commissioner Chang noted COIC's experience in helping facilitate regional planning
processes and supported the proposal as a valuable opportunity to integrate the
efforts of various agencies.
Commissioner Adair commented on the possible utilization of the Gales property
for a managed camp.
Commissioner DeBone sought clarity on each involved entity's role going forward
and asked who will respond to complaints or requests for information.
Commissioner Adair spoke to the need for sanctioned, monitored campgrounds
outside of cities and expressed hope that Governor Kotek reconsiders the
opportunities which the County has proposed. She said if oversight of CHRO is
transferred to COIC, Deschutes County would continue to be the grant recipient and
maintain responsibility of managing the $1 million which was distributed by the
State in accordance with House Bill 4123.
CHANG: Move to shift functional oversight of the Coordinated Houseless
Response Office from Deschutes County to the Central Oregon
Intergovernmental Council
ADAIR: Second
BOCC MEETING
JULY 10, 2023 PAGE 3 OF 5
VOTE: ADAIR: Yes
CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
OTHER ITEMS:
• Planning Manager Will Groves reported that the applicant involved in an
appeal heard by the Board on June 28th (Appeal No. 247-23-00398-A) has
requested that the post -hearing period be extended beyond this Wednesday.
Specifically, the applicant has asked that the record be left open until July 19th
to accept rebuttal evidence and testimony and that the record further be left
open until July 26th to accept the applicant's final legal argument.
ADAIR: Move approval of Order No. 2023-031 extending the post -hearing
open record period for Appeal No. 247-23-000398-A as requested
CHANG: Second
VOTE: ADAIR: Yes
CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
Responding to Commissioner Chang, Groves said this matter will come back
to the Board in August for deliberations.
• Commissioner Chang reported that property owners in Nevada County,
California are experiencing significant issues related to obtaining and/or
maintaining fire insurance as coverage is being revoked or premiums
drastically increased. He presented a draft resolution from the Justice and
Public Safety Steering Committee of the National Association of Counties
(NACo) which advocates for the availability and affordability of wildfire
insurance and encourages the federal government to engage on this issue
and provide relief to homeowners, perhaps by establishing a national fire
insurance program akin to the national flood insurance program.
Commissioner DeBone suggested that Deschutes County formally endorse
this resolution.
ADAIR: Move that Deschutes County endorse the NACo resolution which
advocates for the availability and affordability of homeowners and
commercial wildfire insurance
CHANG: Second
VOTE: ADAIR: Yes
CHANG: Yes
BOCC MEETING
JULY 10, 2023 PAGE 4 OF 5
DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
EXECUTIVE SESSION: None
ADJOURN:
Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m.
DATED this / Day of 2023 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
RECORDING SECRETARY
BOCC MEETING
ANTHONY DEBONE, CHAIR
PATTI ADAIR, VICE CHAIR
PHIL CHANG, COMMISS : a NER
JULY 10, 2023 PAGE 5 OF 5
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: July 10, 2023
SUBJECT: Work Session: Destination Resort Text Amendments
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Work session in preparation for a public hearing scheduled for July 12, 2023. The
Deschutes County Planning Commission recommends approval of file no. 247-22-000835-
TA.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Board will conduct a work session in preparation for a July 12, 2023 public hearing to
consider a request for an applicant -initiated Legislative Text Amendment to Deschutes
County's Destination Resort (DR) Combining Zone (File No. 247-22-000835-TA). The
proposed amendments would add language from Oregon Revised Statute (ORS)
197.455(1)(a), which would limit residential uses to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort at any new Destination Resort allowed within 24 air miles of an
urban growth boundary population of at least 100,000.The full record is located on the
project webpage: https://www.deschutescounty.gov/cd/page/247-22-000835-ta-
destination-resort-text-amendment
BUDGET IMPACTS:
None
ATTENDANCE:
Tarik Rawlings, Associate Planner
\NI Es
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Tarik Rawlings, Associate Planner
DATE: June 22, 2023
SUBJECT: Preparation for Public Hearing: Destination Resort Amendments
Staff will present proposed text amendments to the Board of County Commissioners (Board) on July 10,
2023, in preparation for a July 12, 2023 public hearing concerning applicant -initiated legislative
amendments to Deschutes County's Destination Resort (DR) Combining Zone (file no. 247-22-000835-TA).
I. PROPOSAL
Staff has provided the applicant's proposed amendments to DCC Sections 18.113 and 19.106 in
Attachment 1. The applicant in this case, Central Oregon LandWatch (COLW), has provided findings
(included as Attachment 2) which summarizes the amendments and provides analysis of the Statewide
Planning Goals, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, and relevant state law.
Attachment 3 includes the original application materials submitted by the applicant.
I1. BACKGROUND
In October 2022, the applicant COLW applied for a legislative amendment to Deschutes County's
Destination Resort (DR) Combining Zone. The proposed amendments would add language from Oregon
Revised Statute (ORS)197.455(1)(a), which would limit residential uses to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort at any new Destination Resort allowed within 24 air miles of an urban growth
boundary population of at least 100,000. This proposed amendment would only apply to newly proposed
Destination Resorts and would not apply to existing or approved Destination Resorts. The applicable
language from ORS 197.455(1)(a) is provided below:
(1) A destination resort may be sited only on lands mapped as eligible for destination resort siting by the
affected county. The county may not allow destination resorts approved pursuant to ORS 197.435
(Definitions for ORS 197.435 to 197.467) to 197.467 (Conservation easement to protect resource site)
to be sited in any of the following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or
more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of
the resort.
Notice of the proposal was sent to all property owners within Deschutes County who are within the DR
Zone on January 23, 2023. The Notice explained the scope of the proposal, provided a project -specific
website related to the application, and gave meeting information for the upcoming public hearing on
February 23, 20231. Agency notice was sent to relevant agency partners on January 18, 2023, and several
agency comments were received. County staff notified the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) about the proposal on January 11, 2023 through DLCD's online PAPA submittal2.
The record, which contains all memoranda, notices, and project materials is available for inspection on the
project website:
https://www.deschutescounty.gov/cd/page/247-22-000835-ta-destination-resort-text-amendment
III. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
An initial public hearing was held before the Deschutes County Planning Commission on February 23,
20233, with a continued public hearing held on March 9, 2023'. The Planning Commission held
deliberations on March 23, 20235, ultimately recommending approval of the proposal with three (3)
Commissioners voting in favor and one (1) Commissioner voting against the proposal. Two (2)
Commissioners recused themselves from deliberations. Collectively, over 350 public comments have
been submitted into record regarding the subject proposal, including supportive, oppositional, and
neutral comments.
IV. PUBLIC TESTIMONY
As of the date of this memorandum, there have been over 350 written comments submitted into record.
A summary of the public comments is provided below:
TESTIMONY IN SUPPORT
The testimony received in support of the subject application generally focuses on the following areas:
• The proposed text amendment should be approved because it aligns County Code with state law
• The proposal is required to be approved as a function of state law
• The proposal is required to be incorporated in County Code because the population of City of Bend's
Urban Growth Boundary has now exceeded 100,000 individuals.
• New large-scale Destination Resorts create negative impacts on natural resources and open spaces.
1 https://www.deschutescounty.gov/cdlpage/247-22-000835-ta-destination-resort-text-amendment
2 https://db.lcd.state.or.us/PAPA_Online/Account/Login?ReturnUrl=%2fPAPA_Online
3 https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-27
4 https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-24
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-28
Page 2 of 3
• New large-scale Destination Resorts are not viable economic opportunities for the County and
predominantly cater to an exclusive group of individuals.
• The proposed amendments align the County Code with the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan
policies (Policy 3.9.3(a)(1)) related to Destination Resort siting.
TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION
The testimony received in opposition to the subject application generally focuses on the following areas:
• The subject application is the wrong type of application - a plan amendment should be required for
the proposed amendment.
• There may have been insufficient written notice provided through the County's Measure 56 notice.
• Limiting the types of residential uses allowed on a new Destination Resort exacerbates the ongoing
affordable housing crisis by only allowing housing for staff and management of a resort.
• Limiting the types of residential uses allowed on a new Destination Resort may be detrimental to
the value of DR -zoned properties and may not be economically -supportive of the Deschutes County
region.
• The proposal may constitute a general infringement on individual property rights.
• There should be allowances for additional large-scale Destination Resorts to create economic
competition between the existing resorts.
V. NEXT STEPS
A public hearing with the Board is scheduled for July 12, 2023.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Text Amendments - DCC Chapters 18.113 and 19.106
2. Proposed Findings
3. Applicant's Application Materials
Page 3 of 3
0
U
u
c6
c
(13
IT O
Ln bA
mEL
00
0 2
N +'
N N
N U
d' 4;
N
O 3
z-
-CI
itQ
z
0
(J1
v)
w
in
0
v)
e
w
Zm
O N
7)O
N
2O
O >,
U �,
F-
z
D
0
U
w
0
0
CC
Q
0
CO
r1
2C
0
4)
c
0
N v)
O O
CU 4U
DC DC
c C
O O
c c
4J
VJ VJ
0 0
CD
0
-
v)
cu
E 4F3)
4U L 4—
�N
C
O
ra•
E -.5
.— o_
O
� o 0_
L,r) O -§
qq. ro 0
N ,,, cu
cy) .1-) ' L_
ro
cn O 71
Qij C
® = n
c O
Eoc
o
O -c
,...LI, a3 4-J
bb -0 O
m cu 0O
Background
b�0co
b.0
C
b,0
•cn C
c6
o
CI) O
E O
cu
ICU tlo
•V
cn u
I c
4 O
O
L-
Ln C
d; O
C
In �
ce co
0o
icant-initiated amendment (COLW)
0_
0_
Q
DLCD notification sent 1 /11 /23
7.3
a) c
U :�
m °' °'
NI 4-- 00 N o0
Ti
a)
c a)
co
a) O c
C•......
L -O
03 a) a)
o a_ Or) c
U O \ • 0
(i
(0 O C
C 4J o •E
> cu N c6
a) v to aJ
u 'E U
O S5 .-1) -0
CD CD U 4- N
v) D O O
a) O c CU N
-� •�0 :,_,N
O O�
Z c� Z in
is Hearing pub
Amended Notice of Pub
rn
N
m 01
N m O
i
N � 0_ 73 v)
N °E 0_ O
N c6 m c6 C a)
� cu 0 O ra
.� u N C
c6 •— m O O
to c6
t
u 0_O CU
>
O C +-,
'� �- V) a)
c _� a� _ c U i
0 E O aU 4J
._ — u v� i
LA E
ct
E u c C o c
E eo.2 O o f
'C.._ co E E 3 0E n
0 O :
c u U U 0_
0- — •._ i O m
06, i
u cL 0 0
a)
c
0
Ni
V)
L_
0 0
V) V)
CU CU
CC CC
c C
V) 0
0
+■■i c6 cla
-= +)
( 11) V)
CU
C c
E .
I 1
IV m LO
O
r - O
r- O
a) 06 qpi
r_ C.' C:3 LC'
E ,_ c:5
4-0 o cu o
Q
1:3u CO u u
u o
4� u v, u v,
0 p c p c
OH 00 ® Ol o
CL
_ v _ u
W cu
o +-'
L I— I—
M
N
0
N
N
co"
>% c
M co
CL
bb v�
C • -
._
L o
N
ns Q
cu vi
�b.()
V rc,
.C1
= --c:
A.
00
d'
m
N
m
; --
Ln
ES
V
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ATTACHMENT 1 - PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
FILE NUMBER: 247-22-000835-TA
APPLICANT: Central Oregon LandWatch
2843 NW Lolo Drive Suite 200
Bend, OR 97703
PROPERTY: N/A
OWNER:
REQUEST: The applicant, Central Oregon LandWatch, has applied for a legislative text
amendment to Deschutes County's Destination Resort (DR) Combining Zone
to add language from Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.455(1)(a), which
would limit residential uses to those necessary for the staff and management
of the resort at any new Destination Resort within 24 air miles of certain urban
growth boundaries.
STAFF CONTACT:
RECORD:
Tarik Rawlings, Associate Planner
Phone: 541-317-3148
Email: tarik.rawlings@deschutes.org
Record items can be viewed and downloaded from:
https://www.desch utes.org/cd/page/247-22-000835-to-desti nation -resort -
text -amendment
Record items can be viewed and downloaded from:
www.buildingpermits.oregon.gov
I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA:
Deschutes County Code (DCC)
Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance:
Chapter 18.113, Destination Resorts Zone (DR)
Title 19, Bend Urban Growth Boundary Zoning Ordinance:
Chapter 19.106, Destination Resorts
Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance
117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005
(541) 388-6575 a@ cdd@deschutes .org e) www.deschutes.org/cd
Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS)
Chapter 197 — Comprehensive Land Use Planning'
Section 455 - Siting of destination resorts; sites from which destination resort
excluded
Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)
OAR 660, Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals
II. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS:
The proposed text amendments are also detailed in the referenced applicant's burden of proof
materials, included as an attachment. Below are the proposed changes with additional text
identified by bold underline.
Title 18, County Zoning:
Chapter 18.113 Destination Resorts Zone; DR
Section 18.113.030 Uses in Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of, and are intended to serve persons at,
the destination resort pursuant to DCC 18.113.030 and are approved in a final master plan:
A. Visitor -oriented accommodations designed to provide for the needs of visitors to the
resort:
1. Overnight lodging, including lodges, hotels, motels, bed and breakfast facilities, time
share units and similar transient lodging facilities;
2. Convention and conference facilities and meeting rooms;
3. Retreat centers;
4. Restaurants, lounges and similar eating and drinking establishments; and
5. Other similar visitor -oriented accommodations consistent with the purposes of DCC
18.113 and Goal 8.
B. Developed recreational facilities designed to provide for the needs of visitors and
residents of the resort;
1. Golf courses and clubhouses;
2. Indoor and outdoor swimming pools;
3. Indoor and outdoor tennis courts;
4. Physical fitness facilities;
5. Equestrian facilities;
6. Wildlife observation shelters;
7. Walkways, bike paths, jogging paths, equestrian trails;
8. Other similar recreational facilities consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and
Goal 8.
C. Residential accommodations:
247-22-000835-TA Page 2 of 13
1. Single-family dwellings;
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees;
6. Time-share projects.
7. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort.
D. Commercial services and specialty shops designed to provide for the visitors to the
resort:
1. Specialty shops, including but not limited to delis, clothing stores, bookstores, gift
shops and specialty food shops;
2. Barber shops/beauty salons;
3. Automobile service stations limited to fuel sales, incidental parts sales and minor
repairs;
4. Craft and art studios and galleries;
5. Real estate offices;
6. Convenience stores;
7. Other similar commercial services which provide for the needs of resort visitors and
are consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8.
E. Uses permitted in open space areas generally include only those uses that, except as
specified herein, do not alter the existing or natural landscape of the proposed open
space areas. No improvements, development or other alteration of the natural or existing
landscape shall be allowed in open space areas, except as necessary for development of
golf course fairways and greens, hiking and bike trails, lakes and ponds and primitive
picnic facilities including park benches and picnic tables. Where farming activities would
be consistent with identified preexisting open space uses, irrigation equipment and
associated pumping facilities shall be allowed.
F. Facilities necessary for public safety and utility service within the destination resort.
G. Other similar uses permitted in the underlying zone consistent with the purposes of DCC
18.113.030.
H. Accessory Uses in Destination Resorts:
1. The following accessory uses shall be permitted provided they are ancillary to the
destination resort and consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8:
a. Transportation -related facilities excluding airports;
b. Emergency medical facilities;
c. Storage structures and areas;
d. Kennels as a service for resort visitors only;
e. Recycling and garbage collection facilities;
f. Other similar accessory uses consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and
Goal 8.
I. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
247-22-000835-TA Page 3 of 13
Section 18.113.060 Standards for Destination Resorts
The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts:
A. The destination resort shall, in the first phase, provide for and include as part of the CMP
the following minimum requirements:
1. At least 150 separate rentable units for visitor oriented overnight lodging as
follows:
a. The first 50 overnight lodging units must be constructed prior to the
closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots.
b. The resort may elect to phase in the remaining 100 overnight lodging units
as follows:
1) At least 50 of the remaining 100 required overnight lodging units shall
be constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent
financial assurance within 5 years of the closure of sale of individual
lots or units, and;
2) The remaining 50 required overnight lodging units shall be constructed
or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent financial
assurance within 10 years of the closure of sale of individual lots or
units.
3) If the developer of a resort guarantees a portion of the overnight
lodging units required under subsection 18.113.060(A)(1)(b) through
surety bonding or other equivalent financial assurance, the overnight
lodging units must be constructed within 4 years of the date of
execution of the surety bond or other equivalent financial assurance.
4) The 2.5:1 accommodation ratio required by DCC 18.113.060(D)(2) must
be maintained at all times.
c. If a resort does not chose to phase the overnight lodging units as described
in 18.113.060(A)(1)(b), then the required 150 units of overnight lodging
must be constructed prior to the closure of sales, rental or lease of any
residential dwellings or lots.
2. Visitor oriented eating establishments for at least 100 persons and meeting rooms
which provide seating for at least 100 persons.
3. The aggregate cost of developing the overnight lodging facilities, developed
recreational facilities, and the eating establishments and meeting rooms shall be
at least $ 7,000,000 (in 1993 dollars).
4. At least $ 2,333,333 of the $7,000,000 (in 1993 dollars) total minimum investment
required by DCC 18.113.060(A)(3) shall be spent on developed recreational
facilities.
5. The facilities and accommodations required by DCC 18.113.060(A)(2) through (4)
must be constructed or financially assured pursuant to DCC 18.113.110 prior to
closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots or as allowed
by DCC 18.113.060(A)(1).
B. All destination resorts shall have a minimum of 160 contiguous acres of land. Acreage
split by public roads or rivers or streams shall count toward the acreage limit, provided
247-22-000835-TA Page 4 of 13
that the CMP demonstrates that the isolated acreage will be operated or managed in a
manner that will be integral to the remainder of the resort.
C. All destination resorts shall have direct access onto a state or County arterial or collector
roadway, as designated by the Comprehensive Plan.
D. A destination resort shall, cumulatively and for each phase, meet the following minimum
requirements:
1. The resort shall have a minimum of 50 percent of the total acreage of the
development dedicated to permanent open space, excluding yards, streets and
parking areas. Portions of individual residential Tots and landscape area
requirements for developed recreational facilities, visitor oriented
accommodations or multi family or commercial uses established by DCC
18.124.070 shall not be considered open space;
2. Individually owned residential units that do not meet the definition of overnight
lodging in DCC 18.04.030 shall not exceed two and one-half such units for each
unit of visitor oriented overnight lodging. Individually owned units shall be
considered visitor oriented lodging if they are available for overnight rental use by
the general public for at least 38 weeks per calendar year through one or more
central reservation and check in service(s) operated by the destination resort or
by a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS 696.010.
a. The ratio applies to destination resorts which were previously approved
under a different standard.
E. Phasing. A destination resort authorized pursuant to DCC 18.113.060 may be developed
in phases. If a proposed resort is to be developed in phases, each phase shall be as
described in the CMP. Each individual phase shall meet the following requirements:
1 Each phase, together with previously completed phases, if any, shall be capable
of operating in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of DCC 18.113
and Goal 8.
2. The first phase and each subsequent phase of the destination resort shall
cumulatively meet the minimum requirements of DCC 18.113.060 and DCC
18.113.070.
3. Each phase may include two or more distinct noncontiguous areas within the
destination resort.
F. Destination resorts shall not exceed a density of one and one-half dwelling units per acre
including residential dwelling units and excluding visitor oriented overnight lodging.
G. Dimensional Standards:
1 The minimum lot area, width, lot coverage, frontage and yard requirements and
building heights otherwise applying to structures in underlying zones and the
provisions of DCC 18.116 relating to solar access shall not apply within a
destination resort. These standards shall be determined by the Planning Director
or Hearings Body at the time of the CMP. In determining these standards, the
Planning Director or Hearings Body shall find that the minimum specified in the
CMP are adequate to satisfy the intent of the comprehensive plan relating to solar
access, fire protection, vehicle access, visual management within landscape
management corridors and to protect resources identified by LCDC Goal 5 which
are identified in the Comprehensive Plan. At a minimum, a 100-foot setback shall
247-22-000835-TA Page 5 of 13
be maintained from all streams and rivers. Rimrock setbacks shall be as provided
in DCC Title 18. No lot for a single family residence shall exceed an overall project
average of 22,000 square feet in size.
2. Exterior setbacks.
a. Except as otherwise specified herein, all development (including
structures, site -obscuring fences of over three feet in height and changes
to the natural topography of the land) shall be setback from exterior
property lines as follows:
1) Three hundred fifty feet for commercial development including all
associated parking areas;
2) Two hundred fifty feet for multi family development and visitor
oriented accommodations (except for single family residences)
including all associated parking areas;
3) One hundred fifty feet for above grade development other than
that listed in DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(1) and (2);
4) One hundred feet for roads;
5) Fifty feet for golf courses; and
6) Fifty feet for jogging trails and bike paths where they abut private
developed lots and no setback for where they abut public roads and
public lands.
b. Notwithstanding DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(3), above grade development
other than that listed in DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(1) and (2) shall be set back
250 feet in circumstances where state highways coincide with exterior
property lines.
c. The setbacks of DCC 18.113.060 shall not apply to entry roadways and
signs.
H. Floodplain requirements. The floodplain zone (FP) requirements of DCC 18.96 shall apply
to all developed portions of a destination resort in an FP Zone in addition to any
applicable criteria of DCC 18.113. Except for floodplain areas which have been granted
an exception to LCDC goals 3 and 4, floodplain zones shall not be considered part of a
destination resort when determining compliance with the following standards;
1. One hundred sixty acre minimum site;
2. Density of development;
3. Open space requirements.
A conservation easement as described in DCC Title 18 shall be conveyed to the County
for all areas within a floodplain which are part of a destination resort.
I. The Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM) requirements of DCC 18.84 shall
apply to destination resorts where applicable.
J. Excavation, grading and fill and removal within the bed and banks of a stream or river or
in a wetland shall be a separate conditional use subject to all pertinent requirements of
DCC Title 18.
K. Time share units not included in the overnight lodging calculations shall be subject to
approval under the conditional use criteria set forth in DCC 18.128. Time share units
identified as part of the destination resort's overnight lodging units shall not be subject
to the time share conditional use criteria of DCC 18.128.
247-22-000835-TA Page 6 of 13
L. The overnight lodging criteria shall be met, including the 150-unit minimum and the 2-
1 /2 to 1 ratio set forth in DCC 18.113.060(D)(2).
1. Failure of the approved destination resort to comply with the requirements in DCC
18.113.060(L)(2) through (6) will result in the County declining to accept or process
any further land use actions associated with any part of the resort and the County
shall not issue any permits associated with any lots or site plans on any part of
the resort until proof is provided to the County of compliance with those
conditions.
2. Each resort shall compile, and maintain, in perpetuity, a registry of all overnight
lodging units.
a. The list shall identify each individually -owned unit that is counted as
overnight lodging.
b. At all times, at least one entity shall be responsible for maintaining the
registry and fulfilling the reporting requirements of DCC 18.113.060(L)(2)
through (6).
c. Initially, the resort management shall be responsible for compiling and
maintaining the registry.
d. As a resort develops, the developer shall transfer responsibility for
maintaining the registry to the homeowner association(s). The terms and
timing of this transfer shall be specified in the Conditions, Covenants &
Restrictions (CC&Rs).
e. Resort management shall notify the County prior to assigning the registry
to a homeowner association.
f. Each resort shall maintain records documenting its rental program related
to overnight lodging units at a convenient location in Deschutes County,
with those records accessible to the County upon 72 hour notice from the
County.
g. As used in this section, "resort management" includes, but is not limited to,
the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors in interest, assignees
other than a home owners association.
3. An annual report shall be submitted to the Planning Division by the resort
management or home owners association(s) each February 1, documenting all of
the following as of December 31 of the previous year:
a. The minimum of 150 permanent units of overnight lodging have been
constructed or that the resort is not yet required to have constructed the
150 units;
b. The number of individually -owned residential platted lots and the number
of overnight -lodging units;
c. The ratio between the individually -owned residential platted lots and the
overnight lodging units;
d. For resorts for which the conceptual master plan was originally approved
on or after January 1, 2001, the following information on each individually -
owned residential unit counted as overnight lodging.
1) Who the owner or owners have been over the last year;
2) How many nights out of the year the unit was available for rent;
247-22-000835-TA Page 7 of 13
3) How many nights out of the year the unit was rented out as an
overnight lodging facility under DCC 18.113;
4) Documentation showing that these units were available for rental
as required.
e. For resorts for which the conceptual master plan was originally approved
before January 1, 2001, the following information on each individually
owned residential unit counted as overnight lodging. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary in Deschutes County Code, these resorts may
count units that are not deed -restricted and/or do not utilize a central
check -in system operated by the resort so long as such units meet the
Oregon statutory definition of overnight lodgings in Eastern Oregon
1) For those units directly managed by the resort developer or
operator.
a) Who the owner or owners have been over the last year;
b) How many nights out of the year the unit was available for
rent;
c) How many nights out of the year the unit was rented out as
an overnight lodging facility under DCC 18.113;
d) Documentation showing that these units were available for
rent as required.
2) For all other units.
a) Address of the unit;
b) Name of the unit owner(s);
c) Schedule of rental availability for the prior year. The
schedule of rental availability shall be based upon monthly
printouts of the availability calendars posted on-line by the
unit owner or the unit owner's agent.
f. This information shall be public record subject to the non -disclosure
provisions in ORS Chapter 192.
4. To facilitate rental to the general public of the overnight lodging units, each resort
shall set up and maintain in perpetuity a telephone reservation system..
5. Any outside property managers renting required overnight lodging units shall be
required to cooperate with the provisions of this code and to annually provide
rental information on any required overnight lodging units they represent to the
central office as described in DCC 18.113.060(L)(2) and (3).
6. Before approval of each final plat, all the following shall be provided:
a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the 2-1/2 to 1 ratio as
defined in DCC 18.113.060(D)(2);
b. Documentation on all individually -owned residential units counted as
overnight lodging, including all of the following:
1) Designation on the plat of any individually -owned units that are
going to be counted as overnight lodging;
2) Deed restrictions requiring the individually -owned residential units
designated as overnight lodging units to be available for rental at
least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and check-
247-22-000835-TA Page 8 of 13
in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property
manager, as defined in ORS 696.010;
3) An irrevocable provision in the resort Conditions, Covenants and
Restrictions ("CC&Rs) requiring the individually -owned residential
units designated as overnight lodging units to be available for rental
at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and
check -in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property
manager, as defined in ORS 696.010;
4) A provision in the resort CC&R's that all property owners within the
resort recognize that failure to meet the conditions in DCC
18.113.060(L)(6)(b)(3) is a violation of Deschutes County Code and
subject to code enforcement proceedings by the County;
5) Inclusion of language in any rental contract between the owner of
an individually -owned residential unit designated as an overnight
lodging unit and any central reservation and check in service or real
estate property manager requiring that such unit be available for
rental at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and
check -in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property
manager, as defined in ORS 696.010, and that failure to meet the
conditions in DCC 18.113.060(L)(6)(b)(5) is a violation of Deschutes
County Code and subject to code enforcement proceedings by the
County.
7. Compliance Fee.
a. In the event that a resort that was originally approved before January 1,
2001 fails to report compliance with the 2.5:1 ratio in a calendar year as
reported in accordance with 18.113.060(L)(3)(e), the remedy shall be that
such resort shall pay a compliance fee due not later than April 15 of the
year following the year in which the shortfall occurred.
b. The compliance fee will be calculated as follows:
1) First, by calculating the average per unit transient lodging tax paid
by the resort the prior calendar year by dividing the total amount
paid by the resort in transient lodging taxes for the prior calendar
year by the sum of the number of overnight units managed by the
resort for which the resort paid transient lodging taxes that same
year and the number of timeshare units;
2) Second, by multiplying that average per unit transient lodging tax
amount by the number of additional overnight lodging units that
would have been necessary to comply with the 2.5:1 ratio for the
applicable calendar year.
c. If the Resort were to apply to create more residential lots, the Resort may
not apply the compliance fee to meet the 2.5:1 ratio of individually -owned
residential units to overnight lodging units per DCC 18.113.060(D)(2) and
will have to demonstrate compliance per the new reporting methods or
construct more overnight lodging units in order to comply with the 2.5:1
ratio.
247-22-000835-TA Page 9 of 13
M. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more. residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
Title 19, Bend Urban Growth Boundary Zoning Ordinance:
Chapter 19.106 Destination Resorts
Section 19.106.030 Uses in Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of and are intended to serve persons at
the destination resort pursuant to DCC 19.106.030 and are approved in a final master plan:
A. Visitor -oriented accommodations designed to provide for the needs of visitors to the
resort:
1. Overnight lodging, including lodges, hotels, motels, bed and breakfast facilities,
time share units and similar transient lodging facilities;
2. Convention and conference facilities and meeting rooms;
3. Retreat centers;
4. Restaurants, lounges and similar eating and drinking establishments; or
5. Other similar visitor -oriented accommodations consistent with the purposes of
DCC 19.106 and Goal 8.
B. Developed recreational facilities designed to provide for the needs of visitors and
residents of the resort including:
1. Golf courses and clubhouses;
2. Indoor and outdoor swimming pools;
3. Indoor and outdoor tennis courts;
4. Physical fitness facilities;
5. Equestrian facilities;
6. Wildlife observation shelters;
7. Walkways, bike paths, jogging paths, equestrian trails; or
8. Other similar recreational facilities consistent with the purposes of DCC 19.106
and Goal 8.
C. Residential accommodations:
1. Single-family dwellings;
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees; or
6. Time share projects.
7. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the
staff and management of the resort.
D. Commercial services and specialty shops designed to provide for the visitors to the
resort:
247-22-000835-TA Page 10 of 13
1. Specialty shops including, but not limited to delis, clothing stores, book stores, gift
shops and specialty food shops;
2. Barber shops and beauty salons;
3. Automobile service stations limited to fuel sales, incidental parts sales and minor
repairs;
4. Craft and art studios and galleries;
5. Real estate offices;
6. Convenience stores; or
7. Other similar commercial services which provide for the needs of resort visitors
and are consistent with the purposes of DCC 19.106 and Goal 8.
E. Uses permitted in open space areas generally include only those uses that, except as
specified herein, do not alter the existing or natural landscape of the proposed open
space areas. No improvements, development or other alteration of the natural or existing
landscape shall be allowed in open space areas, except as necessary for development of
golf course fairways and greens, hiking and bike trails, lakes and ponds and primitive
picnic facilities including park benches and picnic tables. Where farming activities would
be consistent with identified pre-existing open space uses, irrigation equipment and
associated pumping facilities shall be allowed.
F. Facilities necessary for public safety and utility service within the destination resort.
G. Other similar uses permitted in the underlying zone consistent with the purposes of DCC
19.106.020.
H. Accessory uses in destination resorts:
1. The following accessory uses shall be permitted provided they are ancillary to the
destination resort and consistent with the purposes of DCC 19.106 and Goal 8:
a. Transportation -related facilities excluding airports;
b. Emergency medical facilities;
c. Storage structures and areas;
d. Kennels as a service for resort visitors only;
e. Recycling and garbage collection facilities; or
f. Other similar accessory uses are consistent with the purposes of DCC
19.106 and Goal 8.
I. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more. residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
Section 19.106.060 Standards For Destination Resorts
The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts:
A. The destination resort shall, in the first phase, provide for and include as part of the CMP
the following minimum requirements:
1. At least 150 separate rentable units for visitor -oriented lodging;
2. Visitor -oriented eating establishments for at least 100 persons and meeting
rooms which provide eating for at least 100 persons;
247-22-000835-TA Page 11 of 13
3. At least $7 million shall be spent on improvements for on -site developed
recreational facilities and visitor -oriented accommodations exclusive of costs for
land, sewer and water facilities and roads. Not Tess than one-third of this amount
shall be spent on developed recreational facilities. The spending minimums
provided for are stated in 1993 dollars; and
4. The facilities and accommodations required by this DCC 19.106.060 must be
physically provided or financially assured pursuant to DCC 19.106.110 prior to
closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots.
B. All destination resorts shall have a minimum of 160 contiguous acres of land. Acreage
split by public roads or rivers or streams shall count toward the acreage limit, provided
that the CMP demonstrates that the isolated acreage will be operated or managed in a
manner that will be integral to the remainder of the resort.
C. All destination resorts shall have direct access onto a state, county, or city arterial or
collector roadway, as designated by the Bend Urban Area General Plan.
D. A destination resort shall, cumulatively and for each phase, meet the following minimum
requirements:
1. The resort shall have a minimum of 50 percent of the total acreage of the
development dedicated to permanent open space, excluding yards, streets and
parking areas. Portions of individual residential lots and landscape area
requirements for developed recreational facilities, visitor -oriented
accommodations or multi -family or commercial uses established by DCC
19.76.080 shall not be considered open space; and
2. Individually -owned residential units shall not exceed two and one-half such units
for each unit of visitor -oriented overnight lodging constructed or financially
assured within the resort. Individually -owned units shall be considered visitor -
oriented lodging if they are available for overnight rental use by the general public
for at least 45 weeks per calendar year through one or more central reservation
and check -in service(s).
E. Phasing. A destination resort authorized pursuant to DCC 19.106.060 may be developed
in phases. If a proposed resort is to be developed in phases, each phase shall be as
described in the CMP. Each individual phase shall meet the following requirements:
1. Each phase, together with previously completed phases, if any, shall be capable
of operating in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of DCC 19.106
and Goal 8;
2. The first phase and each subsequent phase of the destination resort shall
cumulatively meet the minimum requirements of DCC 19.106.060 and DCC
19.76.070, and;
3. Each phase may include two or more distinct non-contiguous areas within the
destination resort.
F. Dimensional standards:
1. The minimum lot area, width, lot coverage, frontage and yard requirements and
building heights otherwise applying to structures in underlying zones and the
provisions of DCC 19.88.210 relating to solar access shall not apply within a
destination resort. These standards shall be determined by the Planning Director
or Hearings Body at the time of the CMP. In determining these standards, the
247-22-000835-TA Page 12 of 13
Planning Director or Hearings Body shall find that the minimum specified in the
CMP are adequate to satisfy the intent of the Bend Urban Area General Plan
relating to solar access, fire protection, vehicle access, and to protect resources
identified by LCDC Goal 5 which are identified in the Bend Urban Area General
Plan. At a minimum, a 100 foot setback shall be maintained from all streams and
rivers. No lot for a single-family residence shall exceed an overall project average
of 22,000 square feet in size.
2. Exterior setbacks and buffers.
a. A destination resort shall provide for the establishment and maintenance
of buffers between the resort and adjacent land uses, including natural
vegetation and where appropriate, fences, berms, landscaped areas, and
other similar types of buffers.
b. Exterior setbacks shall also be provided to ensure that improvements and
activities are located to minimize adverse effects of the resort on uses on
surrounding lands.
G. Floodplain requirements. The Flood Plain Zone (FP) requirements of DCC 19.72 shall
apply to all developed portions of a destination resort in an FP Zone in addition to any
applicable criteria of DCC 19.106. Except for flood plain areas which have been granted
an exception to LCDC goals 3 and 4, Flood Plain Zones shall not be considered part of a
destination resort when determining compliance with the following standards;
1. One hundred sixty acre minimum site;
2. Open space requirements.
A conservation easement as described in DCC Title 19 shall be conveyed to the County
for all areas within a flood plain which are part of a destination resort.
H. Excavation, grading and fill and removal within the bed and banks of a stream or river or
in a wetland shall be a separate conditional use subject to all pertinent requirements of
DCC Title 19.
I. Time share units not included in the overnight lodging calculations shall be subject to
approval under the conditional use criteria set forth in DCC 19.100. Time share units
identified as part of the destination resort's overnight lodging units shall not be subject
to the time share conditional use criteria of DCC 19.100.
J. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort. All other standards of this section continue to apply.
247-22-000835-TA Page 13 of 13
Attachment 2: Proposed Findings 247-22-000835-TA
FINDINGS
I. PROPOSAL
In October 2022, the applicant Central Oregon LandWatch (COLW), applied for a legislative
amendment to Deschutes County's Destination Resort (DR) Combining Zone. The proposed
amendments would add language from Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.455(1)(a), which would
limit residential uses to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort at any new
Destination Resort allowed within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary population of at least
100,000. This proposed amendment would only apply to newly proposed Destination Resorts and
would not apply to existing or approved Destination Resorts. The applicable language from ORS
197.455(1)(a) is provided below:
(1) A destination resort may be sited only on lands mapped as eligible for destination resort siting
by the affected county. The county may not allow destination resorts approved pursuant to
ORS 197.435 (Definitions for ORS 197.435 to 197.467) to 197.467 (Conservation easement to
protect resource site) to be sited in any of the following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
The County's spatial analysis of the distribution of DR -Zoned properties within Deschutes County
indicates that most of the DR -Zoned properties are within 24 air miles of the City of Bend's urban
growth boundary'. The only DR -Zoned properties outside of the 24-air mile buffer (approximately
20 parcels) appear to be located west and southwest of the City of La Pine's urban growth boundary,
predominantly along the Little Deschutes River corridor.
II. BACKGROUND
Recently, the City of Bend's population exceeded 100,000 individuals2. Notice of the proposal was
sent to all property owners within Deschutes County who are encumbered by the DR Zoning District
on January 23, 2023. The Notice explained the scope of the proposal, provided a project -specific
website related to the application, and gave meeting information for the upcoming public hearing
on February 23, 2023'. Agency notice was sent to relevant agency partners on January 18, 2023, and
several agency comments were received. County staff notified the Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DLCD) about the proposal on January 11, 2023 through DLCD's
i https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap
2 https://www.pdx.edu/population-research/population-estimate-reports
https://www.deschutescounty.gov/cd/page/247-22-000835-ta-destination-resort-text-amendment
Page 1 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
online PAPA submittal4. Additionally, printed notice was published in the Bend Bulletin newspaper
on February 7, 20235.
III. REVIEW CRITERIA
Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles 18, 19, 22, or 23 for reviewing a legislative text
amendment. Because the proposal is applicant -initiated, the applicant (COLW) bears the
responsibility for justifying that the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goals and
its existing Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has provided the following responses to relevant
criteria (also outlined in the applicant's application materials, attached):
IV. FINDINGS
CHAPTER 18.136, AMENDMENTS
Section 18.136.010 Amendments
DCC Title 18 may be amended as set forth in DCC 18.136. The procedures for text or
legislative map changes shall be as set forth in DCC 22.12. A request by a property owner
for a quasi judicial map amendment shall be accomplished by filing an application on forms
provided by the Planning Department and shall be subject to applicable procedures of DCC
Title 22. - -
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted application
materials:
The applicant proposes amendments to DCC Title 18 as set forth in DCC 18.136 and will follow
procedures for text changes as set forth in DCC 22.12. Because the proposed amendments would
apply to the many properties within 24 air miles of the City of Bend UGB, the request is for a
legislative text amendment and not a quasi-judicial amendment.
Determining whether a land use decision is legislative or quasi-judicial requires an inquiry into
three factors: "(1) Whether the process is bound to result in a decision, (2) preexisting criteria, and
(3) closely circumscribed factual situation or a relatively small number of persons." Heitsch v. City
of Salem, 65 Or LUBA 187, 193 (2012) (citing Strawberry Hill 4 - Wheelers v. Board of Comm'nrs
of Benton County, 287 Or 591, 601 P2d 769 (1977). The third factor asks whether "the land use
consequences are disproportionately concentrated on a relatively small pool of persons, as
opposed to a larger region or the general population." Va n Dyke v. Yam hill County, _Or LUBA_,
slip op. at 4, LUBA No. 2018-061 (December 20, 2018).
4 https://db.lcd.state.or.us/PAPA_Online/Account/Login?ReturnUrl=%2fPAPA_Online
5 Based on email confirmation with Bend Bulletin's Inside Sales Executive, Julius Black dated January 23, 2023
Page 2 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
This application requests a legislative amendment. As to the first factor, this request is likely,
although not bound, to result in a decision as to whether to amend the DCC as proposed herein.
There are no statutory timelines under which the County must make a decision on a legislative text
amendment application. Both the second and third factors clearly indicate that the proposed
amendments are legislative. The County lacks preexisting criteria for text amendments, as opposed
to specific standards and criteria applicable to quasi-judicial map amendments found at DCC
18.136.020. Most instructive is the third factor. The amendments involve a large number of
circumscribed factual situation pertaining to one or a handful of properties. The land use
consequences of the proposed amendments would be proportionately distributed on a large pool
of people across this large region of Deschutes County.
Staff agrees that the subject application constitutes a legislative text amendment and is not quasi-
judicial in nature.
The applicant for a quasi-judicial rezoning must establish that the public interest is best
served by rezoning the property. Factors to be demonstrated by the applicant are:
A. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, and the change is
consistent with the plan's introductory statement and goals.
B. That the change in classification for the subject property is consistent with the
purpose and intent of the proposed zone classification.
C. That changing the zoning will presently serve the public health, safety and welfare
considering the following factors:
1. The availability and efficiency of providing necessary public services and
facilities.
2. The impacts on surrounding land use will be consistent with the specific goals
and policies contained within the Comprehensive Plan.
D. That there has been a change in circumstances since the property was last zoned,
or a mistake was made in the zoning of the property in question.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
As discussed above in the response to DCC 18.136.010, the proposed amendments are legislative
and not quasi-judicial, and this section does not apply.
Staff agrees that the subject application constitutes a legislative text amendment and is not quasi-
judicial in nature.
Section 18.136.030 Resolution Of Intent To Rezone
A. If from the facts presented and findings and the report and recommendations of the
Hearing Officer, as required by this Section, the County Commission determines that
the public health, safety, welfare and convenience will be best served by a proposed
change of zone, the County Commission may indicate its general approval in
principal of the proposed rezoning by the adoption of a "resolution of intent to
Page 3 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
rezone." This resolution shall include any conditions, stipulations or limitations
which the County Commission may feel necessary to require in the public interest
as a prerequisite to final action, including those provisions that the County
Commission may feel necessary to prevent speculative holding of property after
rezoning. Such a resolution shall not be used to justify "spot zoning" or to create
unauthorized zoning categories by excluding uses otherwise permitted in the
proposed zoning.
B. The fulfillment of all conditions, stipulations and limitations contained in the
resolution on the part of the applicant shall make such a resolution a binding
commitment on the Board of County Commissioners. Upon completion of
compliance action by the applicant, the Board shall, by ordinance, effect such
rezoning. The failure of the applicant to substantially meet any or all conditions,
stipulations or limitations contained in a resolution of intent, including any time
limit placed in the resolution, shall render the resolution null and void automatically
and without notice, unless an extension is granted by the Board.
C. Content of Site Plan. Where a site plan is required pursuant to Chapter 19.92, it shall
include location of existing and proposed buildings, structures, accesses, off street
parking and loading spaces and landscaping; existing and proposed topography;
mechanical roof facilities, if subject property is so oriented as to become part of the
view from adjacent properties; architectural perspective, layout and all elevations
drawn without exaggerations, except where noted, including locations, area and
design of signs and all landscaping.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
This section applies to quasi-judicial rezoning of property. As discussed above in the response to
DCC 18.136.010, the proposed amendments are legislative and not quasi judicial, and they do not
propose rezoning any property. This section does not apply.
Staff agrees with the applicant's statement.
Section 18.136.040 Record of Amendments
All amendments to the text or map of DCC Title 18 shall be filed with the County Clerk.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
Upon adoption, the proposed amendments will be filed with the County Clerk.
Staff agrees that, if adopted, the proposed amendment will be filed with the County Clerk.
CHAPTER 19.116, AMENDMENTS, APPEALS AND PROCEDURES
Page 4 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Section 19.116.010 Amendments
DCC Title 19 may be amended by changing the boundaries of zones or by changing any other
provisions thereof subject to the provisions of DCC 19.116.
A. Text changes and legislative map changes may be proposed by the Board of County
Commissioners on its own motion, by the motion of the Planning Commission, upon
payment of a fee, by the application of a member of the public. Such changes shall
be made pursuant to DCC 22.12 and ORS 215.110 and 215.060.
B. Any proposed quasi-judicial map amendment or change shall be handled in
accordance with the applicable provisions of DCC Title 22.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
The proposed amendments to DCC Title 19 are being made by the application of a member of the
public as allowed by DCC 19.116.010(A). The amendments are proposed pursuant to DCC 22.12
Legislative Procedures, addressed below. The amendments are made pursuant to ORS 215.110,
which provides that a planning commission and governing body may recommend and enact
ordinances intended to implement the comprehensive plan. The Deschutes County Comprehensive
Plan (DCCP), at Section 3.9 Destination Resort Policies, includes Policy 3.9.3(a)(1):
"Policy 3.9.3 Mapping for destination resort siting.
a. To assure that resort development does not conflict with the objectives of
other Statewide Planning Goals, destination resorts shall pursuant to Goal
8 not be sited in Deschutes County in the following areas:
1. within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing
population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to
those necessary for the staff and management of the resort;"
The proposed amendments are made pursuant to ORS 215.110 and will implement DCCP Policy
3.9.3(a)(1). The amendments are also made pursuant to ORS 215.060, which provides that a
county shall conduct one or more public hearings on actions on the comprehensive plan. Public
hearings on the proposed amendments will be held by both the Planning Commission and Board
of County Commissioners.
Staff confirms that the subject application appears to comply with the amendment process outlined
above.
Section 19.116.020 Standards For Zone Change
The burden of proof is upon the applicant. The applicant shall in all cases establish:
A. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the change is
consistent with the plan's intent to promote an orderly pattern and sequence of
growth.
Page 5 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
8. That the change will not interfere with existing development, development
potential or value of other land in the vicinity of the proposed action.
C. That the change in classification for the subject property is consistent with the
purpose and intent of the proposed zone classification.
D. That the change will result in the orderly and efficient extension or provision of
public services. Also, that the change is consistent with the County's policy for
provision of public facilities.
E. That there is proof of a change of circumstance or a mistake in the original zoning.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
No zone change is proposed as part of this application. This section is inapplicable.
Staff agrees with the applicant's statement.
Section 19.116.030 Record of Amendments
The signed copy of each amendment to the text of Title 19, including the legal description
of all lands rezoned legislatively or quasi judicially, shall be maintained on file in the office
of the County Clerk. A record of such amendments shall be maintained in a form convenient
for the use of the public by the Planning Director, including a map showing the area and
date of all amendments hereto. The County Clerk shall keep the map of DCC Title 19 as
originally enacted. Every five years after the enactment hereof, a map showing the
cumulative amendments hereto for that period shall be filed with the County Clerk. In case
of inconsistencies, the controlling record shall be first the original map filed with the
County Clerk, and its five-year updates, if any. The Planning Director's map shall control as
to map amendments not shown on the original for changes less than five years old.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
A signed copy of these amendments will be provided to the County Clerk. No lands will be rezoned
by this application and the zoning map for Title 19 will not be amended.
Staff agrees with the applicant's statement.
Section 19.116.040 Resolution of Intent to Rezone
If, from the facts presented and findings and the report and recommendations of the
Hearings Officer, as required by DCC 19.116.040, the County Commission determines that
the public health, safety, welfare and convenience will be best served by a proposed change
of zone, the County Commission may indicate its general approval in principal of the
proposed rezoning by the adoption of a "resolution of intent to rezone." This resolution
shall include any conditions, stipulations or limitations which the County Commission may
Page 6 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
feel necessary to require in the public interest as a prerequisite to final action, including
those provisions which the County Commission may feel necessary to prevent speculative
holding of property after rezoning. The fulfillment of all conditions, stipulations and
limitations contained in said resolution, on the part of the applicant, shall make such a
resolution a binding commitment on the County Commission. Such a resolution shall not
be used to justify spot zoning or create unauthorized zoning categories by excluding uses
otherwise permitted in the proposed zoning. Upon completion of compliance action by the
applicant, the County Commission shall, by ordinance, effect such rezoning. The failure of
the applicant to substantially meet any or all conditions, stipulations or limitations
contained in a resolution of intent, including the time limit placed in the resolution, shall
render said resolution null and void automatically and without notice, unless an extension
is granted by the County Commission upon recommendation of the Hearings Officer.
A. Content of Site Plan. Where a site plan is required pursuant to DCC 19.92, it shall
include location of existing and proposed buildings, structures, accesses, off-street
parking and loading spaces and landscaping; existing and proposed topography;
mechanical roof facilities, if subject property is so oriented as to become part of the
view from adjacent properties; architectural perspective, layout and all elevations
drawn without exaggerations, except where noted, including locations, area and
design of signs and all landscaping.
B. Resolution on Intent Binding. The fulfillment of all conditions, stipulations and
limitations contained in the resolutions of intent on the part of the applicant shall
make the resolution binding on the County Commission. Upon compliance with the
resolution by the applicant, the County Commission shall, by ordinance, effect such
reclassification.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these criteria in their submitted
application materials:
No zone change is proposed as part of this application. This section is inapplicable.
Staff agrees with the applicant's statement.
CHAPTER 22.12, LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES
Section 22.12.010.
Hearing Required
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted
application materials:
The proposed amendments will be reviewed by both the Planning Commission and the Board of
County Commissioners, and will include public hearings.
Page 7 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Staff agrees that this criterion will be met because a public hearing will be held before the
Deschutes County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners.
Section 22.12.020, Notice
Notice
A. Published Notice
1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing.
2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a
statement describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under
consideration.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted application
materials:
This criterion will be met with notice to be published in the Bend Bulletin newspaper for the
Planning Commission public hearing, and the Board of County Commissioners' public hearing.
Staff agrees that this criterion will be met by notice being published in The Bend Bulletin newspaper.
B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning Director
and where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted application
materials:
Notice will be posted if determined to be necessary by the Planning Director.
Posted notice is only required under ORS 203.045(5)(a) under specific circumstances described in
that section. No such posting is required in this case.
C. Individual notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC
22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director, except
as required by ORS 215.503.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted application
materials:
Individual notice will be sent if determined to be necessary by the Planning Director. Given the
proposed legislative amendments do not apply to any specific property, no individual notices are
anticipated. The applicant conferred with County staff as to whether notice to affected property
owners pursuant to ORS 215.203, also known as "Measure 56 notice," need be provided. Staff
agreed in an email dated October 19, 2022 that this proposal "will not require Measure 56 notice
Page 8 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
as the proposed addition of language referencing state law is not a "change to the zoning" that
would require M56 notice."Exhibit F
Ultimately, County staff (in coordination with County administration and legal counsel) found that
the proposal would require individual notice pursuant to ORS 215.503 to provide ample public
notice to affected properties and property owners about the subject proposal. The proposed
amendments are legislative and do not apply to any specific property. In compliance with ORS
215.503, notice was sent to individual property owners who may be affected by the proposed
amendments.
D. Media notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other
newspapers published in Deschutes County.
FINDING: Notice was provided to the County public information official for wider media
distribution. This criterion has been met.
Section 22.12.030 Initiation of Legislative Changes.
A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of
required fees as well as by the Board of County Commissioners.
FINDING: The application was initiated by Central Oregon LandWatch (COLW), and the Deschutes
County Planning Division has received the required fees. This criterion has been met.
Section 22.12.040. Hearings Body
A. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in this
order:
1. The Planning Commission.
2. The Board of County Commissioners.
B. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall be
reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the Board
of Commissioners.
FINDING: This criterion will be met because a public hearing will be held before the Deschutes
County Planning Commission and subsequently the Board of County Commissioners.
Section 22.12.050 Final Decision
All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance
FINDING: The proposed legislative changes included in file no. 247-22-000835-TA will be
implemented by ordinances if approved and adopted by the Board. This criterion will be met.
Page 9 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement: The amendments do not propose any changes to the County's citizen
involvement program. Notice of the proposed amendments were provided to the Bulletin for each
public hearing.
Goal 2: Land Use Planning: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their
submitted application materials:
Goals, policies, and processes related to this application are included in the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan, Title 23 and Deschutes County Code, Title 19 and Title 22. Compliance with
these processes, policies, and regulations are documented within this application. Goal 2 is met.
Staff notes that an Oregon Land Conservation and Development Department 35-day notice was
initiated on January 11, 2023. Public hearings before both the Planning Commission and the Board
of County Commissioners will be held. This Findings document provides the applicant's basis for the
proposed amendments.
Goal 3: Agricultural Lands: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their
submitted application materials:
Goal 3 is to "preserve and maintain agricultural lands." No lands will be rezoned as part of this
application. Some lands in the DRZ are designated Agriculture and zoned Exclusive Farm Use
pursuant to Goal 3. The proposed amendments would reduce the amount of nonfarm residential
development allowed on EFU land by ensuring certain lands in the DRZ conform with ORS
197.455(1) and Goal 8. Goal 3 is met.
Adverse impacts to farming practices are not anticipated under these amendments and no such
impacts have been identified in the record. The proposed amendments appear to be consistent
with Goal 3.
Goal 4: Forest Lands: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted
application materials:
Goal 4 is "to conserve forest lands/.]" No lands will be rezoned as part of this application. Some
lands in the DRZ are designated Forest and zoned F1 or F2 pursuant to Goal 4. The proposed
amendments would reduce the amount of residential development allowed on Forest zoned land
by ensuring certain lands in the DRZ conform with ORS 197.455(1) and Goal 8. Goal 4 is met.
Adverse impacts to forests and forest practices are not anticipated under these amendments and
no such impacts have been identified in the record. The proposed amendments appear to be
consistent with Goal 4.
Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: The applicant offers the
following response to this criterion in their submitted application materials:
Page 10 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Similar to the previous two goals, the proposed amendments would reduce the amount of
residential development allowed on certain lands in the DRZ, ensuring conformance with ORS
197.455(1) and Goal 8. Some lands in the DRZ include inventoried Goal 5 resources, including
mineral and aggregate resources, scenic views, riparian areas, floodplains, and wildlife habitat.
The effect of the proposed amendments would be to provide greater protection for these
resources, as the amount of potential residential development (a conflicting use) on certain lands
in the DRZ would be reduced. In any event, the proposed amendments do not create or amend a
Goal 5 resource list or and land use regulation adopted to protect a Goal 5 resource, they do not
allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with a Goal 5 resource, and they do not amend an
acknowledged UGB. OAR 660-023-0250(3). Goal 5 is met.
Goal 5 is to protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historical areas and open spaces.
OAR 660-023-0250(3) states that local governments are not required to apply Goal 5 in
consideration of a PAPA unless the PAPA affects a Goal 5 resource. The proposed amendment is
not seeking to change any requirements in the Wildlife Area overlay zone which protects inventoried
wildlife resources. This zone protects scenic resources through additional aesthetic requirements.
The code provision will remain unchanged. Staff finds that the amendments appear to be consistent
with Goal 5.
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: The applicant offers the following response to this
criterion in their submitted application materials:
The proposed amendments will likely not impact the quality of the air, water and land resources.
If anything. the reduced potential for residential development on certain lands in the DRZ will
benefit the quality of associated air, water, and land resources by reducing the potential for solid
waste, water waste, noise and thermal pollution, air pollution, and industry -related contaminants
on those resources. Goal 6 is met.
The proposed text amendments do not propose to change the County's Plan policies or
implementing regulations for compliance with Goal 6. Staff finds that the proposed amendments
appear to be consistent with Goal 6.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: The applicant offers the following response
to this criterion in their submitted application materials:
To the extent that lands in the DRZ are in areas subject to natural disasters and hazards, the
proposed amendments mitigate that risk by reducing the potential for residential development on
certain lands in the DRZ, in accordance with ORS 197.455(1) and Goal 8. Goal 7 is met.
The proposed text amendments do not propose to change the County's Plan or implementing
regulations regarding natural disasters and hazards. Staff finds that the proposed amendments
appear to be consistent with Goal 7.
Goal 8: Recreational Needs: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their
submitted application materials:
Page 11 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
The proposed amendments are specifically intended to implement Goal 8, as described in the
response to Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3, Resource Management, Section 3.9
Destination Resorts, Goal 1, above. Goal 8 is met.
The text amendments do not propose to change the County's Plan or implementing regulations
regarding recreational needs. Staff finds that the proposed amendments appear to be consistent
with Goal 8.
Goal 9: Economic Development: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their
submitted application materials:
Goal 9 is only applicable to urban areas and therefore is not applicable here. Port of St. Helens
v. Land Conservation & Development Comm'n, 165 OrApp 487, 996 P2d 1014 (2000), rev den,
330 Or 363 (2000).
Goal 9 and its implementing regulations focus on economic analysis and economic development
planning required in urban Comprehensive Plans to ensure there is adequate land available to
realize economic growth and development opportunities. The proposed amendments apply to rural
lands and do not propose to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Compliance is met.
Goal 10: Housing: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted
application materials:
Goal 10 is "to provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state" on "buildable lands for
residential use." "Buildable lands" are defined in statute as "lands in urban and urbanizable areas
that are suitable, available and necessary for residential uses." ORS 197.295(1). "Buildable Lands"
are described in administrative rule as "residentially designated land within the urban growth
boundary, including both vacant and developed land likely to be redeveloped, that is suitable,
available and necessary for residential uses." OAR 660-008-0005(2). The proposed amendments
largely do not affect lands in urban and urbanizable areas inside urban growth boundaries,
making Goal 10 inapplicable to the majority of lands in the DRZ that the proposed amendments
would affect.
A small portion of lands inside the south and west portion of the City of Bend UGB, and in the
north portion of the City of La Pine UGB, are also in the County's DRZ. To the extent that that these
are "buildable lands for residential use" to which Goal 10 applies, the proposed amendments
comply with Goal 10. The City of Bend, upon amending its UGB in 2016, adopted policies and Goal
10 findings into its comprehensive plan. One of those policies, at City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Policy 5-57 states that "Properties that are eligible for destination resort development will lose that
eligibility upon inclusion into the UGB." Exhibit D (Chapter 5 of the Bend Comprehensive Plan,
Housing). Therefore, any lands inside the City of Bend UGB are already ineligible for siting of
destination resorts, and the proposed amendments do not affect the City's Goal 10 compliance.
The proposed amendments also will not affect the City of La Pine's compliance with Goal 10. The
La Pine comprehensive plan reports that, as of 2018, its UGB contains about "1284.4-acres of
Page 12 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
vacant or re -developable land to respond to a calculation of about 182 - acres of need." Exhibit E
at 134-135 (La Pine Comprehensive Plan). The City's Goal 10 Housing policies and goals do not rely
on destination resort development to meet the Goal. Additionally, ORS 197.445(7) requires a site
of at least 20 acres for a destination resort, and the land zoned DRZ in the City of La Pine UGB is
less than 20 acres. Goal 10 is met.
Adverse impacts to residential housing in the County are not anticipated under these amendments
and no such impacts have been identified in the record. The proposed amendments appear to be
consistent with Goal 10.
Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services: The proposed text amendments do not propose to change
the County's Plan or implementing regulations regarding public facilities and services.
Goal 12: Transportation: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their
submitted application materials:
By restricting certain residential uses in destination resorts within 24 air miles of the Bend UGB,
the proposed amendments will reduce impacts to transportation facilities by lessening potential
new trip generation in the rural county. This reduces the likelihood that transportation facilities
could be significantly affected in Deschutes County. Goal 12 is met.
Goal 12 is to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. The
proposed text amendments will not change the functional classification of any existing or planned
transportation facility or standards implementing a functional classification system. Compliance
with Goal 12 is met.
Goal 13: Energy Conservation: The proposed text amendments do not propose to change the
County's Plan or implementing regulations regarding energy conservation. Therefore, compliance
with Goal 13 is established.
Goal 14: Urbanization: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted
application materials:
Goal 14 concerns the provision of urban and rural land uses to ensure efficient use of land and
livable communities. The proposed amendments do not amend an urban growth boundary.
Although Goal 8 allows urban land uses on rural land in destination resorts in certain
circumstances, the proposed amendments are intended to ensure the DCC complies with Goal 8
and ORS 197.455, which limit the type of resort development that is allowed on certain lands near
certain urban growth boundaries. The effect of the amendments will be to promote Goal 14's
distinction between urban and rural levels of development, pursuant to Goal 8 and statute. Goal
14 is met.
The proposed text amendments do not propose to change the County's Plan or implementing
regulations regarding urbanization. Therefore, compliance with Goal 14 is established.
Page 13 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Goals 15 through 19 are not applicable to the proposed text amendments because the County does
not contain these types of lands.
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 1, Comprehensive Planning: The applicant did not provide a direct response to this
criterion in their submitted burden of proof. This chapter sets the Goals and Policies of how the
County will involve the community and conduct land use planning. As described above, the
proposed regulations will be discussed at work sessions with the Board of County Commissioners,
as well as to the Planning Commission, which is the County's official committee for public
involvement. Both will conduct separate public hearings.
Section 1.3, Land Use Planning Policies. The applicant did not provide a direct response to
this criterion in their submitted burden of proof. Goal 1 of this section is to "maintain an
open and public land use process in which decisions are based on the objective evaluation
of facts." Staff, the Planning Commission, and the Board will review the proposed text
amendments.
Chapter 3, Resource Management
Section 3.9 Destination Resorts
Goals and Policies
Goal 1: To provide for development of destination resorts in the County consistent with Statewide
Planning Goal 8 in a manner that will be compatible with farm and forest uses, existing rural
development, and in a manner that will maintain important natural features, such as habitat or
threatened or endangered species, streams, rivers and significant wetlands.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this criterion in their submitted application
materials:
The proposed amendments are specifically intended to provide for the development of destination
resorts in Deschutes County consistent with Goal 8. Exhibit C. Goal 8 includes the same language
as ORS 197.455(1)(a):
"Eligible Areas
(1) Destination resorts allowed under the provisions of this goal must be sited on lands
mapped as eligible by the affected county. A map adopted by a county may not allow
destination resorts approved under the provisions of this goal to be sited in any of the
following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort;"
Page 14 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
The Oregon legislature in adopting ORS 197.455(1)(a), and LCDC in adopting Goal 8, have decided
that resorts within 24 air miles of certain urban growth boundaries are limited to residential uses
only necessary for staff and management of a resort. The proposed amendments would ensure
that destination resorts on lands mapped as eligible by Deschutes County, but a resort that
includes residential uses for people other than staff and management of a resort could not be
sited within 24 air miles of the Bend urban growth boundary.
Goal 2: To provide a process for the siting of destination resorts on rural lands that have been
mapped by Deschutes County as eligible for this purpose.
Goal 3: To provide for the siting of destination resort facilities that enhances and diversifies the
recreational opportunities and economy of Deschutes County.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to these goals in their submitted application
materials:
The proposed amendments will not change the existing process for siting of destination resorts
described in these two goals. The amendments also will not change the map of lands determined
to be eligible by Deschutes County. What will change is the type of destination resort that could be
sited through the County's existing process, in order to comply with Goal 8 and ORS 197.455(1)(a).
Consistent with state law, recreational facilities will still be allowed in destination resorts within 24
air miles of the Bend UGB, providing for continued enhancement and diversification of
recreational opportunities.
Gnal 4: To provide for development of destination resorts consistent with Statewide Planning Goal
12 in a manner that will ensure the resorts are supported by adequate transportation facilities.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this goal in their submitted application
materials:
By restricting certain residential uses in destination resorts within 24 air miles of the Bend UGB,
the proposed amendments will reduce impacts to transportation facilities by lessening potential
new trip generation in the rural county. This reduces the likelihood that transportation facilities
could be significantly affected in Deschutes County, consistent with Goal 12.
Staff notes that there is no indication that the proposed amendments would result in adverse
impacts to transportation facilities and no evidence in the record indicating the potential for such
impacts. This goal appears to be met for the purposes of the subject application.
Policy 3.9.1: Destination resorts shall only be allowed within areas shown on the "Deschutes
County Destination Resort Map" and when the resort complies with the requirements of Goal 8,
ORS 197.435 to 197.457 and Deschutes County Code 18.113.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this policy in their submitted application
materials:
Page 15 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Destination resorts will continue to only be allowed within areas shown on the "Deschutes County
Destination Resort Map" The proposed changes to the DCC will ensure that any such resorts
comply with the requirements of Goal 8 and ORS 197.435 to 197.457. Goal 8 and ORS
197.455(1)(a) include the language limiting destination resorts with 24 air miles of certain UGBs
that this proposed code amendment would implement.
Policy 3.9.2: Applications to amend the map will be collected and will be processed concurrently
no sooner than 30 months from the date the map was previously adopted or amended.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this policy in their submitted application
materials:
The proposed amendments are not an application to amend the Deschutes County Destination
Resort Map. This policy is inapplicable.
Staff concurs that the subject application is for a legislative text amendment, and not for a
Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Policy 3.9.3: Mapping for destination resort siting
a. To assure that resort development does not conflict with the objectives of other
Statewide Planning Goals, destination resorts shall pursuant to Goal 8 not be sited in
Deschutes County in the following areas:
1). Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort;
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response to this policy in their submitted application
materials:
The proposed amendments are intended specifically to implement and conform the Deschutes
County Code to this comprehensive plan section. Upon adoption of the proposed amendments,
destination resorts shall, pursuant to Goal 8, not be sited in Deschutes County within 24 air miles
of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential
uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. The proposed
amendments comply with this policy.
Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.455
ORS 197.455(1)
A destination resort may be sited only on lands mapped as eligible for destination resort siting by
the affected county. The county may not allow destination resorts approved pursuant to ORS
197.435 (Definitions for ORS 197.435 to 197.467) to 197.467 (Conservation easement to protect
resource site) to be sited in any of the following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or
more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management
of the resort.
Page 16 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response in their submitted application materials:
Similar to the response to Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.9.3, above, the proposed
amendments are intended specifically to implement and conform the Deschutes County Code to
this statute. Upon adoption of the proposed amendments, destination resorts may not be allowed
to be sited in Deschutes County within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing
population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort. The proposed amendments comply with this statute.
Staff concurs that the proposed amendment language is derived directly from ORS 197.455(1)(a)
and would limit the residential uses allowed for newly -proposed destination resorts within 24 air
miles of the City of Bend's Urban Growth Boundary.
(b) (A) On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farmland identified and
mapped by the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service, or its predecessor
agency.
(B) On a site within three miles of a high value crop area unless the resort complies with the
requirements of ORS 197.445 (6) in which case the resort may not be closer to a high value
crop area than one-half mile for each 25 unites of overnight lodging or fraction thereof.
(c) On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forestlands as determined by the State
Forestry Department, which are not subject to an approved goal exception.
(d) In the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area as defined by the Columbia River Gorge
National Scenic Act, P.L. 99-663.
(e) In an especially sensitive big game habitat area:
(A) As determined by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife in li ily 1 9Rd and in additional
especially sensitive big game habitat areas designated by a county in an acknowledged
comprehensive plan; or
(B) If the State Fish and Wildlife Commission amends the 1984 determination with respect to
an entire county and the county amends its comprehensive plan to reflect the commission's
subsequent determination, as designated in the acknowledged comprehensive plan.
(f) On a site which the lands are predominantly classified as being in Fire Regime Condition
Class 3, unless the county approves a wildfire protection plan that demonstrates the site can
be developed without being at a high overall risk of fire.
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response in their submitted application materials:
The proposed amendments will not affect Deschutes County's compliance with the remaining
sections of ORS 197.455(1), making these criteria inapplicable.
ORS 197.455(2)
In carrying out subsection (1) of this section, a county shall adopt, as part of its comprehensive plan,
a map consisting of eligible lands within the county. The map must be based on reasonably available
information and may be amended pursuant to ORS 197.610 (Submission of proposed
comprehensive plan or land use regulation chaniges to Department of Land Conservation and
Development) to 197.625 (Acknowledgment of comprehensive plan or land use regulation changes),
but not more frequently than once every 30 months. The county shall develop a process for
Page 17 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
collecting and processing concurrently all map amendments made within a 30-month planning
period. A map adopted pursuant to this section shall be the sole basis for determining whether
tracts of land are eligible for destination resort siting pursuant to ORS 197.435 (Definitions for ORS
197.435 to 197.467) to 197.467 (Conservation easement to protect resource site).
FINDING: The applicant offers the following response in their submitted application materials:
Deschutes County's existing map of lands eligible for destination resorts will not be amended as
part of this application. This criterion is inapplicable.
Staff concurs that the subject application is for a legislative text amendment, and not for a
Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Page 18 of 18 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2023-xxx
Land Use Application
Code Change - Minor
247-22-000835-TA
www.deschutes.org/cd
PPLZCATION; DESCRIPTIO1
Type of Application: Code Change - Minor
Description of Work: Text Amendment 18.113 and 19.106
Property Address:
117 Nw Lafayette Ave, Bend, OR 97703
Applicant:
Central Oregon Landwatch
Fee Descriotio,
Minor Code Changes
.O CATIO N' I N F O R M ATI O N
Parcel:
171232AC03600 - Primary
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Business Name:
Central Oregon Landwatch
Address:
APPLICATION 1
Owner:
DESCHUTES COUNTY
117 NW Lafayette Avenue
PO Box 6005
Bend,OR 97703
541-388-6575
cdd-webmaster@deschutes.org
DESCHUTES COUNTY
Address: PO BOX 6005
BEND OR 97708-6005
City:
Quantity
1.00 Qty
Total Fees:
State: Zip
Amount
$6,660.00
$6,660.00
Printed on: 10/21/2022 1
Transaction Receipt
Record ID: 247-22-000835-TA
IVR Number: 247012358270
Receipt Number: 493512
Receipt Date: 10/21/22
www.deschutes.org/cd
Worksite address: 117 NW LAFAYETTE AVE, BEND, OR 97703
Parcel: 171232AC03600
Deschutes County
Office: Bend
117 NW Lafayette Ave
PO Box 6005
Bend, OR 97708
541-388-6575
cdd-webmaster@deschutes.org
Transaction Units Description
date
10/21/22 1.00 Qty
Minor Code Changes
Fees Paid
Account code
2956150 341301
Fee amount
$6,660.00
Paid amount
$6,660.00
Payment Method: Check number: 0834
Payer: Central Oregon
LandWatch
Payment Amount: $6,660.00
Cashier: Rachel Vickers
Printed: 10/21/22 9:56 am
Receipt Total:
$6,660.00
Page 1 of 1 , FIN_TransactionReceipt_pr
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLAN/ZONE/TEXT AMENDMENT
ZONE MAP AMENDMENT:
PLAN MAP AMENDMENT:
TEXT AMENDMENT: x
FEE:
FEE:
FEE:
Applicant's Name (print): Central Oregon LandWatch
Mailing Address:2843 NW Lolo Drive Suite 200 City/State/Zip: Bend, Oregon 97703
Property Owner's Name (if different): Phone: ( )
Mailing Address: City/State/Zip:
Property Description: Townships/a Range ilia Section rile Tax Lotn/a
Lot of Record? (state reason): n/a
Current Zoning: n/a Proposed Zoning: n/a
Current Plan Designation: n/a Proposed Designation: n/a
Applicable State Goals: Goals 1-14 Exception Proposed? Yes X No
Size of Affected Area: n/a Acres
Phone: ( 541) 647-2930
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION:
1. Complete this application form including the appropriate signatures. If color exhibits are
submitted, black and white copies with captions or shading delineating the color areas shall
also be provided.
2. Include a detailed statement describing the proposal and how it meets all requirements of
the appropriate State rules and statutes, and County codes and Comprehensive Plan
policies. Text amendment applications must include the proposed language and the basis
for the change.
3. If multiple properties are involved in this application, then identify each property on a
separate page and follow with the property owners' signatures.
4. Submit the correct application fee.
5. Submit a copy of the current deed(s) for the property(ies).
A PRE-APPLICATIO APPOINTMENT IS REQUIRED FOR ALL AMENDMENTS
Applicant's Signature: I Date: 10/21/22
Property Owner's Signatu (if different)*: Date:
Agent's Name (if applicable): Rory IsbeII Phone: (541) 647-2930
Mailing Address: 2843 NW Lolo Drive Suite 200
City/State/Zip: Bend, Oregon 97703
*If this application is not signed by the property owner, a letter authorizing signature by the
applicant must be attached. By signing this application, the applicant understands and
agrees that Deschutes County may require a deposit for hearings officers' fees prior to the
application being deemed complete; and if the application is heard by a hearings officer, the
applicant will be responsible for the actual costs of the hearings officer.
117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 I P 0 Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005
t, (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes org ® www deschutes orgicd
Rev 5/18
APPLICANT'S WRITTEN NARRATIVE
TEXT AMENDMENT TO DESTINATION RESORTS ZONE — DRZ
APPLICANT:
ATTORNEY:
Central Oregon LandWatch
2843 NW Lolo Drive, Suite 200
Bend, Oregon 97703
(541) 647-2930
Rory Isbell
Staff Attorney
Central Oregon LandWatch
2843 NW Lolo Drive, Suite 200
Bend, Oregon 97703
(541) 647-2930
SUBJECT PROPERTY: Destination Resort Zone
ZONING: Destination Resort Zone — DRZ
REQUEST: Make certain amendments to Deschutes County's DRZ to comply
with ORS 197.455(1)(a), which limits the type of destination resort
allowed within 24 air miles of certain urban growth boundaries.
APPLICABLE CRITERIA, STANDARDS, AND PROCEDURES:
Title 18, County Zoning
Title 19, Bend Urban Growth Boundary Zoning Ordinance
Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance
Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
ORS 197.455
OAR 660, Division 15, the Statewide Planning Goals
BASIC FINDINGS:
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO DCC 18.113: The applicant proposes the following
amendments to the text of DCC Chapter 18.113. The proposed changes would not remove any
text, and would add the following text indicated in bold:
1
"18.113.030 Uses In Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of and are intended to serve
persons at the destination resort pursuant to DCC 19.106.030 and are approved in a final
master plan:
[...]
C. Residential accommodations:
1. Single-family dwellings;
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees;
6. Time-share projects.
7. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort."
[• •]
I. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort."
"DCC 18.113.060 Standards for Destination Resorts
The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts:
[...]
M. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort. All other standards of this section continue to apply."
In addition to these changes to DCC Chapter 18.113, identical amendments would be made to
DCC Chapter 19.106 Destination Resorts for the Bend Urban Growth Boundary Zoning
Ordinance:
"19.106.030 Uses In Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of and are intended to serve
persons at the destination resort pursuant to DCC 19.106.030 and are approved in a final
master plan:
[...]
C. Residential accommodations:
1. Single-family dwellings;
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees;
6. Time-share projects.
2
7. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort."
[...]
I. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort."
"DCC 19.106.060 Standards for Destination Resorts
The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts:
[. •]
J. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort. All other standards of this section continue to apply."
These proposed amendments are also included at Exhibit F. The purpose of these proposed
changes to DCC 18.113 and DCC 19.106 is to conform the DCC to state law. The Oregon
Revised Statutes, at ORS 197.455(1)(a), limit the siting of destination resorts within 24 air miles
of certain urban growth boundaries:
"(1) A destination resort may be sited only on lands mapped as eligible for destination
resort siting by the affected county. The county may not allow destination resorts
approved pursuant to ORS 197.435 (Definitions for ORS 197.435 to 197.467) to 197.467
(Conservation easement to protect resource site) to be sited in any of the following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for
the staff and management of the resort."
The population of the City of Bend has surpassed 100,000 people. This is confirmed by
applicant's Exhibit A and Exhibit B. Exhibit A is the Portland State University Population
Research Center's "2021 Annual Oregon Population Report Tables," which at page 10 shows a
City of Bend population of 100,922 in the year 2021. Exhibit B is the U.S. Census "Annual
Estimates of the Resident Population for Incorporated Places of 50,000 or More, Ranked by July
1, 2021 Population: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021," which shows a 2021 estimate for "Bend city,
Oregon" of 102,059. These population data reflect population inside the Bend city limits. The
Bend UGB includes a larger geographic area than the city limits and has a greater population.
To illustrate, Figure 1 below is a map image taken from Deschutes County's Dial website. The
blue hash area is the Bend UGB, while the solid green area is the Bend city limits:
3
Figure 1. Bend UGB and Bend city limits.
The change in factual circumstances wherein the City of Bend population now exceeds 100,000
results in a disparity between the DCC and ORS 197.455. The DCC currently does not reflect
the statute's limitation on the type of destination resort that may be sited in Deschutes County
now that ORS 197.455(1)(a) is relevant to Deschutes County. The proposed amendments would
conform the DCC to ORS 197.455(1)(a) by recognizing the statute's limitation on the type of
destination resort that may be sited within 24 air miles of the City of Bend's UGB.
CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS:
A. COMPLIANCE WITH DCC CHAPTER 18 COUNTY ZONING
18.136.010 Amendments
4
DCC Title 18 may be amended as set forth in DCC 18.136. The procedures for text
or legislative map changes shall be as set forth in DCC 22.12. A request by a
property owner for a quasi judicial map amendment shall be accomplished by filing
an application on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be subject
to applicable procedures of DCC Title 22.
RESPONSE: The applicant proposes amendments to DCC Title 18 as set forth in DCC 18.136
and will follow procedures for text changes as set forth in DCC 22.12. Because the proposed
amendments would apply to the many properties within 24 air miles of the City of Bend UGB,
the request is for a legislative text amendment and not a quasi-judicial map amendment.
Determining whether a land use decision is legislative or quasi-judicial requires an inquiry into
three factors: "(1) [Whether] the process is bound to result in a decision, (2) preexisting criteria,
and (3) closely circumscribed factual situation or a relatively small number of persons." Heitsch
v. City of Salem, 65 Or LUBA 187, 193 (2012) (citing Strawberry Hill 4 -Wheelers v. Board of
Comm'nrs of Benton County, 287 Or 591, 601 P2d 769 (1977). The third factor asks whether
"the land use consequences are disproportionately concentrated on a relatively small pool of
persons, as opposed to a larger region or the general population." Van Dyke v. Yamhill County,
Or LUBA slip op. at 4, LUBA No. 2018-061 (December 20, 2018).
This application requests a legislative amendment. As to the first factor, this request is likely,
although not bound, to result in a decision as to whether to amend the DCC as proposed herein.
There are no statutory timelines under which the County must make a decision on a legislative
text amendment application. Both the second and third factors clearly indicate that the proposed
amendments are legislative. The County lacks preexisting criteria for text amendments, as
opposed to specific standards and criteria applicable to quasi-judicial map amendments found at
DCC 18.136.020. Most instructive is the third factor. The amendments involve a large number
of persons on the thousands of properties within 24 air miles of the City of Bend UGB, and lack
a circumscribed factual situation pertaining to one or a handful of properties. The land use
consequences of the proposed amendments would be proportionately distributed on a large pool
of people across this large region of Deschutes County.
18.136.020 Rezoning Standards
The applicant for a quasi-judicial rezoning must establish that the public interest is
best served by rezoning the property. Factors to be demonstrated by the applicant
are:
1. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, and the change is
consistent with the plan's introductory statement and goals.
2. That the change in classification for the subject property is consistent with
the purpose and intent of the proposed zone classification.
3. That changing the zoning will presently serve the public health, safety and
welfare considering the following factors:
1. The availability and efficiency of providing necessary public services
and facilities.
2. The impacts on surrounding land use will be consistent with the
specific goals and policies contained within the Comprehensive Plan.
5
4. That there has been a change in circumstances since the property was last
zoned, or a mistake was made in the zoning of the property in question.
RESPONSE: As discussed above in the response to DCC 18.136.010, the proposed amendments
are legislative and not quasi-judicial, and this section does not apply.
18.136.030 Resolution Of Intent To Rezone
1. If from the facts presented and findings and the report and
recommendations of the Hearing Officer, as required by this Section, the
County Commission determines that the public health, safety, welfare and
convenience will be best served by a proposed change of zone, the County
Commission may indicate its general approval in principal of the proposed
rezoning by the adoption of a "resolution of intent to rezone." This
resolution shall include any conditions, stipulations or limitations which the
County Commission may feel necessary to require in the public interest as a
prerequisite to final action, including those provisions that the County
Commission may feel necessary to prevent speculative holding of property
after rezoning. Such a resolution shall not be used to justify "spot zoning" or
to create unauthorized zoning categories by excluding uses otherwise
permitted in the proposed zoning.
2. The fulfillment of all conditions, stipulations and limitations contained in the
resolution on the part of the applicant shall make such a resolution a binding
commitment on the Board of County Commissioners. Upon completion of
compliance action by the applicant, the Board shall, by ordinance, effect such
rezoning. The failure of the applicant to substantially meet any or all
conditions, stipulations or limitations contained in a resolution of intent,
including any time limit placed in the resolution, shall render the resolution
null and void automatically and without notice, unless an extension is
granted by the Board.
3. Content of Site Plan. Where a site plan is required pursuant to Chapter
19.92, it shall include location of existing and proposed buildings, structures,
accesses, off street parking and loading spaces and landscaping; existing and
proposed topography; mechanical roof facilities, if subject property is so
oriented as to become part of the view from adjacent properties;
architectural perspective, layout and all elevations drawn without
exaggerations, except where noted, including locations, area and design of
signs and all landscaping.
RESPONSE: This section applies to quasi-judicial rezoning of property. As discussed above in
the response to DCC 18.136.010, the proposed amendments are legislative and not quasi-judicial,
and they do not propose rezoning any property. This section does not apply.
18.136.040 Record Of Amendments
All amendments to the text or map of DCC Title 18 shall be filed with the County
Clerk.
6
RESPONSE: Upon adoption, the proposed amendments will be filed with the County Clerk.
B. COMPLIANCE WITH DCC CHAPTER 19 TITLE 19, BEND URBAN GROWTH
BOUNDARY ZONING ORDINANCE
19.116.010 Amendments
DCC Title 19 may be amended by changing the boundaries of zones or by changing
any other provisions thereof subject to the provisions of DCC 19.116.
A. Text changes and legislative map changes may be proposed by the Board of
County Commissioners on its own motion, by the motion of the Planning
Commission, upon payment of a fee, by the application of a member of the
public. Such changes shall be made pursuant to DCC 22.12 and ORS 215.110
and 215.060.
B. Any proposed quasi-judicial map amendment or change shall be handled in
accordance with the applicable provisions of DCC Title 22.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments to DCC Title 19 are being made by the application of
a member of the public as allowed by DCC 19.116.010(A). The amendments are proposed
pursuant to DCC 22.12 Legislative Procedures, addressed below. The amendments are made
pursuant to ORS 215.110, which provides that a planning commission and governing body may
recommend and enact ordinances intended to implement the comprehensive plan. The
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan (DCCP), at Section 3.9 Destination Resort Policies,
includes Policy 3.9.3(a)(1):
"Policy � n � Mapping
r_ destination 3.9.3 Mapping for destination resort siting.
a. To assure that resort development does not conflict with the objectives of other
Statewide Planning Goals, destination resorts shall pursuant to Goal 8 not be sited
in Deschutes County in the following areas:
1. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing
population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those
necessary for the staff and management of the resort;"
The proposed amendments are made pursuant to ORS 215.110 and will implement DCCP Policy
3.9.3(a)(1). The amendments are also made pursuant to ORS 215.060, which provides that a
county shall conduct one or more public hearings on actions on the comprehensive plan. Public
hearings on the proposed amendments will be held by both the Planning Commission and Board
of County Commissioners.
19.116.020 Standards For Zone Change
The burden of proof is upon the applicant. The applicant shall in all cases establish:
1. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the
change is consistent with the plan's intent to promote an orderly pattern and
sequence of growth.
2. That the change will not interfere with existing development, development
potential or value of other Land in the vicinity of the proposed action.
7
3. That the change in classification for the subject property is consistent with
the purpose and intent of the proposed zone classification.
4. That the change will result in the orderly and efficient extension or provision
of public services. Also, that the change is consistent with the County's policy
for provision of public facilities.
5. That there is proof of a change of circumstance or a mistake in the original
zoning.
RESPONSE: No zone change is proposed as part of this application. This section is
inapplicable.
19.116.030 Record Of Amendments
The signed copy of each amendment to the text of Title 19, including the legal
description of all lands rezoned legislatively or quasi judicially, shall be maintained
on file in the office of the County Clerk. A record of such amendments shall be
maintained in a form convenient for the use of the public by the Planning Director,
including a map showing the area and date of all amendments hereto. The County
Clerk shall keep the map of DCC Title 19 as originally enacted. Every five years
after the enactment hereof, a map showing the cumulative amendments hereto for
that period shall be filed with the County Clerk. In case of inconsistencies, the
controlling record shall be first the original map filed with the County Clerk, and its
five-year updates, if any. The Planning Director's map shall control as to map
amendments not shown on the original for changes less than five years old.
RESPONSE: A signed copy of these amendments will be provided to the County Clerk. No
lands will be rezoned by this application and the zoning map for Title 19 will not be amended.
19.116.040 Resolution Of Intent To Rezone
If, from the facts presented and findings and the report and recommendations of the
Hearings Officer, as required by DCC 19.116.040, the County Commission
determines that the public health, safety, welfare and convenience will be best
served by a proposed change of zone, the County Commission may indicate its
general approval in principal of the proposed rezoning by the adoption of a
"resolution of intent to rezone." This resolution shall include any conditions,
stipulations or limitations which the County Commission may feel necessary to
require in the public interest as a prerequisite to final action, including those
provisions which the County Commission may feel necessary to prevent speculative
holding of property after rezoning. The fulfillment of all conditions, stipulations and
limitations contained in said resolution, on the part of the applicant, shall make such
a resolution a binding commitment on the County Commission. Such a resolution
shall not be used to justify spot zoning or create unauthorized zoning categories by
excluding uses otherwise permitted in the proposed zoning. Upon completion of
compliance action by the applicant, the County Commission shall, by ordinance,
effect such rezoning. The failure of the applicant to substantially meet any or all
conditions, stipulations or limitations contained in a resolution of intent, including
the time limit placed in the resolution, shall render said resolution null and void
8
automatically and without notice, unless an extension is granted by the County
Commission upon recommendation of the Hearings Officer.
A. Content of Site Plan. Where a site plan is required pursuant to DCC 19.92, it
shall include location of existing and proposed buildings, structures, accesses,
off-street parking and loading spaces and landscaping; existing and proposed
topography; mechanical roof facilities, if subject property is so oriented as to
become part of the view from adjacent properties; architectural perspective,
layout and all elevations drawn without exaggerations, except where noted,
including locations, area and design of signs and all landscaping.
B. Resolution on Intent Binding. The fulfillment of all conditions, stipulations
and limitations contained in the resolutions of intent on the part of the applicant
shall make the resolution binding on the County Commission. Upon compliance
with the resolution by the applicant, the County Commission shall, by
ordinance, effect such reclassification.
RESPONSE: No zone change is proposed as part of this application. This section is
inapplicable.
C. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 22, DESCHUTES COUNTY DEVELOPMENT
PROCEDURES ORDINANCE
Chapter 2212 Legislative Procedures
22.12.010 Hearing Required
No legislative change shall be adopted without review by the Planning Commission
before Board of County C.•m sionn Public hearings
and a public hearing the near u a. n•is�■.,...,rs.
before the Planning Commission shall be set at the discretion of the Planning
Director, unless otherwise required by state law.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments will be reviewed by both the Planning Commission
and the Board of County Commissioners, and will include public hearings.
22.12.020 Notice
A. Published Notice.
1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing.
2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a
statement describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under
consideration.
RESPONSE: This criterion will be met with notice to be published in the Bend Bulletin
newspaper for the Planning Commission public hearing, and the Board of County
Commissioners' public hearing.
B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning
Director and where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045.
9
RESPONSE: Notice will be posted if determined to be necessary by the Planning Director.
C. Individual Notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC
22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director,
except as required by ORS 215.503.
RESPONSE: Individual notice will be sent if determined to be necessary by the Planning
Director. Given the proposed legislative amendments do not apply to any specific property, no
individual notices are anticipated. The applicant conferred with County staff as to whether
notice to affected property owners pursuant to ORS 215.203, also known as "Measure 56
notice," need be provided. Staff agreed in an email dated October 19, 2022 that this proposal
"will not require Measure 56 notice as the proposed addition of language referencing state law is
not a "change to the zoning" that would require M56 notice." Exhibit F.
D. Media Notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other
newspapers published in Deschutes County.
RESPONSE: Notice of the proposed legislative changes will be published in a newspaper
22.12.030 Initiation Of Legislative Changes
A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of
required fees as well as by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning
Commission.
RESPONSE: The applicant, an individual 501(r)(3) organization initiated the proposed
legislative changes including payment of required fees.
22.12.040 Hearings Body
1. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in
this order:
1. The Planning Commission.
2. The Board of County Commissioners.
2. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall
be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the
Board of Commissioners.
RESPONSE: The proposed legislative changes will be reviewed by both the Planning
Commission and Board of County Commissioners.
22.12.050 Final Decision
All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance.
RESPONSE: The proposed legislative changes will be adopted by ordinance.
22.12.060 Corrections
10
The County's comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances, subdivision ordinance,
and development procedures ordinance may be corrected by order of the Board of
County Commissioners to cure editorial and clerical errors.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are not to correct editorial or clerical errors and will be
adopted by ordinance and not by order.
D. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 23, DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
Chapter 3, Resource Management
Section 3.9 Destination Resorts
Goals and Policies
Goal 1 To provide for development of destination resorts in the County
consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8 in a manner that will be
compatible with farm and forest uses, existing rural development, and
in a manner that will maintain important natural features, such as
habitat of threatened or endangered species, streams, rivers and
significant wetlands.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are specifically intended to provide for the
development of destination resorts in Deschutes County consistent with Goal 8. Exhibit C.
Goal 8 includes the same language as ORS 197.455(1)(a):
"Eligible Areas
(1) Destination resorts allowed under the provisions of this goal must be sited on lands
mapped as eligible by the affected county. A map adopted by a county may not allow
destination resorts approved under the provisions of this goal to be sited in any of the
following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the
staff and management of the resort;"
The Oregon legislature in adopting ORS 197.455(1)(a), and LCDC in adopting Goal 8, have
decided that resorts within 24 air miles of certain urban growth boundaries are limited to
residential uses only necessary for staff and management of a resort. The proposed amendments
would ensure that destination resorts on lands mapped as eligible by Deschutes County comply
with Goal 8. Resorts could still be sited on lands mapped as eligible by Deschutes County, but a
resort that includes residential uses for people other than staff and management of a resort could
not be sited within 24 air miles of the Bend urban growth boundary.
Goal 2 To provide a process for the siting of destination resorts on rural
lands that have been mapped by Deschutes County as eligible for this
purpose.
11
Goal 3 To provide for the siting of destination resort facilities that enhances
and diversifies the recreational opportunities and economy of
Deschutes County.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments will not change the existing process for siting of
destination resorts described in these two goals. The amendments also will not change the map
of lands determined to be eligible by Deschutes County. What will change is the type of
destination resort that could be sited through the County's existing process, in order to comply
with Goal 8 and ORS 197.455(1)(a). Consistent with state law, recreational facilities will still be
allowed in destination resorts within 24 air miles of the Bend UGB, providing for continued
enhancement and diversification of recreational opportunities.
Goal 4 To provide for development of destination resorts consistent with
Statewide Planning Goal 12 in a manner that will ensure the resorts
are supported by adequate transportation facilities.
RESPONSE: By restricting certain residential uses in destination resorts within 24 air miles of
the Bend UGB, the proposed amendments will reduce impacts to transportation facilities by
lessening potential new trip generation in the rural county. This reduces the likelihood that
transportation facilities could be significantly affected in Deschutes County, consistent with Goal
12.
Policy 3.9.1
Destination resorts shall only be allowed within areas shown on the
"Deschutes County Destination Resort Map" and when the resort
complies with the requirements of Goal 8, ORS 197.435 to 197.467,
and Deschutes County Code 18.113.
RESPONSE: Destination resorts will continue to only be allowed within areas shown on the
"Deschutes County Destination Resort Map." The proposed changes to the DCC will ensure that
any such resorts comply with the requirements of Goal 8 and ORS 197.435 to 197.457. Goal 8
and ORS 197.455(1)(a) include the language limiting destination resorts with 24 air miles of
certain UGBs that this proposed code amendment would implement.
Policy 3.9.2
Applications to amend the map will be collected and will be processed
concurrently no sooner than 30 months from the date the map was
previously adopted or amended.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are not an application to amend the Deschutes County
Destination Resort Map. This policy is inapplicable.
Policy 3.9.3
Mapping for destination resort siting.
a. To assure that resort development does not conflict with the
objectives of other Statewide Planning Goals, destination resorts shall
pursuant to Goal 8 not be sited in Deschutes County in the following
areas:
12
1. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an
existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are
limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the
resort;
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are intended specifically to implement and conform
the Deschutes County Code to this comprehensive plan section. Upon adoption of the proposed
amendments, destination resorts shall, pursuant to Goal 8, not be sited in Deschutes County
within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more
unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort.
The proposed amendments comply with this policy.
E. COMPLIANCE WITH ORS 197.455
ORS 197.455(1)
A destination resort may be sited only on lands mapped as eligible for destination
resort siting by the affected county. The county may not allow destination resorts
approved pursuant to ORS 197.435 (Definitions for ORS 197.435 to
197.467) to 197.467 (Conservation easement to protect resource site) to be sited in
any of the following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing
population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to
those necessary for the staff and management of the resort.
RESPONSE: Similar to the response to Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.9.3,
above the proposed amendments are intended specifically to implement and conform the
Deschutes County Code to this statute. Upon adoption of the proposed amendments, destination
resorts may not be allowed to be sited in Deschutes County within 24 air miles of an urban
growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are
limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. The proposed amendments
comply with this statute.
(b) (A) On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime
farmland identified and mapped by the United States Natural
Resources Conservation Service, or its predecessor agency.
(B) On a site within three miles of a high value crop area unless the
resort complies with the requirements of ORS 197.445 (Destination
resort criteria) (6) in which case the resort may not be closer to a high
value crop area than one-half mile for each 25 units of overnight
lodging or fraction thereof.
(c) On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forestlands as
determined by the State Forestry Department, which are not subject
to an approved goal exception.
(d) In the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area as defined by the
Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Act, P.L. 99-663.
13
(e) In an especially sensitive big game habitat area:
(A) As determined by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife in
July 1984, and in additional especially sensitive big game habitat
areas designated by a county in an acknowledged comprehensive
plan; or
(B) If the State Fish and Wildlife Commission amends the 1984
determination with respect to an entire county and the county amends
its comprehensive plan to reflect the commission's subsequent
determination, as designated in the acknowledged comprehensive
plan.
(f) On a site in which the lands are predominantly classified as being in
Fire Regime Condition Class 3, unless the county approves a wildfire
protection plan that demonstrates the site can be developed without
being at a high overall risk of fire.
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments will not affect Deschutes County's compliance with
the remaining sections of ORS 197.455(1), making these criteria inapplicable.
ORS 197.455(2)
In carrying out subsection (1) of this section, a county shall adopt, as part of its
comprehensive plan, a map consisting of eligible lands within the county. The map
must be based on reasonably available information and may be amended pursuant
to 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), but not
more frequently than once every 30 months. The county shall develop a process for
collecting and processing concurrently all map amendments made within a 30-
month planning period. A map adopted pursuant to this section shall be the sole
basis for determining whether tracts of land are eligible for destination resort siting
pursuant to ORS 197.435 (Definitions for ORS 197.435 to 197.467) to 197.467
(Conservation easement to protect resource site).
RESPONSE: Deschutes County's existing map of lands eligible lands for destination resorts
will not be amended as part of this application. This criterion is inapplicable.
F. COMPLIANCE WITH OAR 660, DIVISION 15, THE STATEWIDE PLANNING
GOALS
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement
RESPONSE: Deschutes County Planning Division will provide notice of the application to the
public through notice of the public hearings in the "Bend Bulletin" newspaper. The public
hearings on this application will provide the opportunity for any resident to participate in the
land use process. Goal 1 is met.
14
Goal 2 Land Use Planning
RESPONSE: Goals, policies, and processes related to this application are included in the
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, Title 23, and Deschutes County Code, Title 19 and Title
22. Compliance with these processes, policies, and regulations are documented within this
application. Goal 2 is met.
Goal 3 Agricultural Lands
RESPONSE: Goal 3 is "to preserve and maintain agricultural lands." No lands will be rezoned
as part of this application. Some lands in the DRZ are designated Agriculture and zoned
Exclusive Farm Use pursuant to Goal 3. The proposed amendments would reduce the amount of
nonfarm residential development allowed on EFU land by ensuring certain lands in the DRZ
conform with ORS 197.455(1) and Goal 8. Goal 3 is met.
Goal 4 Forest Lands
RESPONSE: Goal 4 is "to conserve forest lands[.]" No lands will be rezoned as part of this
application. Some lands in the DRZ are designated Forest and zoned F 1 or F2 pursuant to Goal
4. The proposed amendments would reduce the amount of residential development allowed on
Forest zoned land by ensuring certain lands in the DRZ conform with ORS 197.455(1) and Goal
8. Goal is met.
Goal 5 Open Spaces, Scenic and History Areas and Natural Resources
RESPONSE: C1 _'____1 _.. to the ' 1_ the 1 t
Similar previous two goals, proposed amendments would reduce the
amount of residential development allowed on certain lands in the DRZ, ensuring conformance
with ORS 197.455(1) and Goal 8. Some lands in the DRZ include inventoried Goal 5 resources,
including mineral and aggregate resources, scenic views, riparian areas, floodplains, and wildlife
habitat. The effect of the proposed amendments would be to provide greater protection for these
resources, as the amount of potential residential development (a conflicting use) on certain lands
in the DRZ would be reduced. In any event, the proposed amendments do not create or amend a
Goal 5 resource list or and land use regulation adopted to protect a Goal 5 resource, they do not
allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with a Goal 5 resource, and they do not amend an
acknowledged UGB. OAR 660-023-0250(3). Goal 5 is met.
Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments will likely not impact the quality of the air, water and
land resources. If anything, the reduced potential for residential development on certain lands in
the DRZ will benefit the quality of associated air, water, and land resources by reducing the
potential for solid waste, water waste, noise and thermal pollution, air pollution, and industry -
related contaminants on those resources. Goal 6 is met.
Goal Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
15
RESPONSE: To the extent that lands in the DRZ are in areas subject to natural disasters and
hazards, the proposed amendments mitigate that risk by reducing the potential for residential
development on certain lands in the DRZ, in accordance with ORS 197.455(1) and Goal 8. Goal
7 is met.
Goal 8 Recreational Needs
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are specifically intended to implement Goal 8, as
described in the response to Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3, Resource
Management, Section 3.9 Destination Resorts, Goal 1, above. Goal 8 is met.
Goal 9 Economy of the State
RESPONSE: Goal 9 is only applicable to urban areas and therefore is not applicable here. Port
of St. Helens v. Land Conservation & Development Comm'n, 165 Or App 487, 996 P2d 1014
(2000), rev den, 330 Or 363 (2000).
Goal 10 Housing
RESPONSE: Goal 10 is "to provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state" on "buildable
lands for residential use." "Buildable lands" are defined in statute as "lands in urban and
urbanizable areas that are suitable, available and necessary for residential uses." ORS
197.295(1). `Buildable Lands" are described in administrative rule as "residentially designated
land within the urban growth boundary, including both vacant and developed land likely to be
redeveloped, that is suitable, available and necessary for residential uses." OAR 660-008-
nnn�in� The > > largely
� affect The proposed amendments largely do not affect lands in urban and urbanizable areas
inside urban growth boundaries, making Goal 10 inapplicable to the majority of lands in the
DRZ that the proposed amendments would affect.
A small portion of lands inside the south and west portions of the City of Bend UGB, and in the
north portion of the City of La Pine UGB, are also in the County's DRZ. To the extent that that
these are "buildable lands for residential use" to which Goal 10 applies, the proposed
amendments comply with Goal 10. The City of Bend, upon amending its UGB in 2016, adopted
policies and Goal 10 findings into its comprehensive plan. One of those policies, at City of Bend
Comprehensive Plan Policy 5-57 states that "Properties that are eligible for destination resort
development will lose that eligibility upon inclusion into the UGB." Exhibit D (Chapter 5 of the
Bend Comprehensive Plan, Housing). Therefore, any lands inside the City of Bend UGB are
already ineligible for siting of destination resorts, and the proposed amendments do not affect the
City's Goal 10 compliance. The proposed amendments also will not affect the City of La Pine's
compliance with Goal 10. The La Pine comprehensive plan reports that, as of 2018, its UGB
contains about "1284.4-acres of vacant or re -developable land to respond to a calculation of
about 182 — acres of need." Exhibit E at 134-135 (La Pine Comprehensive Plan). The City's
Goal 10 Housing policies and goals do not rely on destination resort development to meet the
Goal. Additionally, ORS 197.445(7) requires a site of at least 20 acres for a destination resort,
and the land zoned DRZ in the City of La Pine UGB is less than 20 acres. Goal 10 is met.
16
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments will have no adverse effect on the provision of public
facilities and services. Goal 11 is met.
Goal 12 Transportation
RESPONSE: By restricting certain residential uses in destination resorts within 24 air miles of
the Bend UGB, the proposed amendments will reduce impacts to transportation facilities by
lessening potential new trip generation in the rural county. This reduces the likelihood that
transportation facilities could be significantly affected in Deschutes County. Goal 12 is met.
Goal 13 Energy Conservation
RESPONSE: The proposed amendments will have no impact on energy conservation. Goal 13 is
met.
Goal 14 Urbanization
RESPONSE: Goal 14 concerns the provision of urban and rural land uses to ensure efficient use
of land and livable communities. The proposed amendments do not amend an urban growth
boundary. Although Goal 8 allows urban land uses on rural land in destination resorts in certain
circumstances, the proposed amendments are intended to ensure the DCC complies with Goal 8
and ORS 197.455, which limit the type of resort development that is allowed on certain lands
near certain urban growth boundaries. The effect of the amendments will be to promote Goal
14's distinction between urban and rural levels of development, pursuant to Goal 8 and statute.
Goal 14 is met.
Goals 15 through 19
RESPONSE: Goals 15 through 19 do not apply (Goal 15 Willamette River Greenway; Goal 16
Estuarine Resources; Goal 17 Coastal Shorelands; Goal 18 Beaches and Dunes; and Goal 19
Ocean Resources).
17
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A Portland State University Population Research Center's "2021 Annual
Oregon Population Report Tables"
Exhibit B U.S. Census "Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for
Incorporated Places of 50,000 or More, Ranked by July 1, 2021
Population: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021"
Exhibit C Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 8
Exhibit D City of Bend Comprehensive Plan Chapter 5 Housing
Exhibit E City of La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Exhibit F Proposed amendments to DCC
Exhibit G Email from County staff re: Measure 56 Notice
18
Exhibit A - Portland State University Population Research Center's
"2021 Annual Oregon Population Report Tables"
Population Research Center
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY
2021 ANNUAL OREGON POPULATION REPORT TABLES
The population data in the 2021 annual report tables were compiled by the Population Research
Center, Portland State University, 4115/2022.
The tables in this workbook present the 2021 population estimates produced by the Population Research
Center, Portland State University. The July 1 estimates of total population for counties and cities and towns
were certified December 15, 2021.
Some tables include the U.S. Census Bureau's decennial Census counts and historical population
estimates produced by our Center, and other tables include calculations of change since Census 2020.
Also included are population estimates for broad age groups and 5-year age groups; the estimates for
broad age groups were certified December 31, 2021.
Contents of Sheets:
Sheet Name
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Table 4:
Table Name and description
Annual Population and Components of Population Change for
Oregon: 1960-2021; July 1 Population Estimates and April
Census Counts.
Annual populations, population change and the components of
population change (births, deaths, natural increase, and net
migration) are reported for Oregon.
Population Estimates of Oregon by Area type and Specific
Metropolitan Areas: 2000 to 2021.
Population estimates are aggregated for incorporated and
unincorporated, metropolitan and non -metropolitan areas in Oregon.
Populations are also reported for each of Oregon's eight
Metropolitan Statistical Areas, as designated by the U.S. Census
Bureau.
Components of Population Change for Oregon's Counties: April
1, 2020 to July 1, 2021.
Populations are reported for Oregon and the 36 counties; population
change and the components of population change from 2010 to
2020 are also included.
Population for Oregon and its Counties and Incorporated Cities
and Towns: July 1, 2020-July 1, 2021; and Census Counts 2000-
2020.
Annual population estimates from 2020-2021are reported along with
April 1 Census counts from 2000-2020. Sub -county population
estimates are grouped by county; cities that are split between
counties are reported in parts respective to their county location.
Population estimates for the county unincorporated areas are also
reported.
Table 5:
Table 6:
Table 7:
Table 8:
Table 9:
Table 10:
Populations for Incorporated Cities Located in More than One
County.
Annual population estimates for 2020-2021, and 2010 and 2020
Census counts, for city parts by county are reported in this table.
Rank of Incorporated Cities and Towns by July 1, 2021
Population Size.
This table displays the rank order of Oregon's incorporated cites and
towns by 2021 population size, largest to smallest.
Alphabetical Listing of Oregon's Incorporated Cities and Towns
with Populations for July 1, 2021 and Census 2020, and
Change since Census 2020.
Population estimates for 2021 and Census counts for 2020 are
reported, along with numerical and percentage change during the
time period.
Population Added to Incorporated Cities Due to Annexations:
April 1, 2020 - July 1, 2021.
This table is a listing of Oregon's cities and towns in alphabetical
order with the numbers of persons they have annexed since Census
2020.
Population Estimates by Age and Sex for Oregon and Its
Counties: July 1, 2021.
Population estimates for Oregon's counties by 5 -year age group are
reported in three tables: 1) total population; 2) male population; and
3) female population. Population estimates for ages 15-19 are split
into 15-17 and 18-19 age groups.
Population Estimates by Broad Age Group (<18 Years, 18-64
Years, & over 64 Years)
Population Estimates for ages 0-17 years, 18-64 years, and 65
years and older are reported in this table for Oregon and its
counties.
Contact information * askprcCa7pdx.edu; 503-725-3922
O
N
w
O
co
0)
c
0
0)
d
0
d
O y
747,
(C c
3 _
0. O
O U
a
• =
O
y
C• O c
O E
O.
o a
0.0
c
c
� 41
c
O E
0c
0
a ..
•
• Q.
• ao
N
N
Q
(n
d
4)
c
CV
U
0
(a
(t)
to
0)
0
0
0
a
0
T
w
N
a
0)
a
G)
(LOW
CO
r d
40
Z c
y
L
(V
t
0
3
0
a
M 000OOOOOrt _000000000 Md' OMNt•O O
I�NNCOONNMC°C° CCOONM0 C0000)_00)00)COONcrCVOt9N�MOCOV (O
- 1- 1 1N- A- N N N N N M.- N . �t 0V ( cv M N M W M M e- co M M0 N CO
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O) M cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M om, a) 0 ((O N O COO -1� M cr
(O W W Op o (n r M O O to W (!) O n (O M r co (O m M ti M 0) t- 0 O M ti 1.0
ti 0) (O U) 4 M N C) r O O N M 0) (() Lc) O O c0 (o U) tl) U) d' tt) N ,i r
✓ r r r r r r r r r .......... N N
0
tfr t` ((-O rW MM tW` M 0) N 0M g cO(O Mr r�r�O t!00N r M (0f0N�t�1) c0
O�,-NtiN,(OMc0LocrNNgmC~OSeg!S"O0_NW 0
t=rN: 'N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N O N
O (1) r t- tf) 0 r M (f) 0) N 0) M M (O r r 14) M N r c0 r CO N N O W 0 W r1'
rn c0N if) W eh M M N M r ct M ti lA ti (1) (D h. r 0 M O N d. r 0 ,4t
(O iO O M LO N N- rt M cM 0) M M ((> N N M I` O N M (O N M t� .- 0(O
r (O N N N r O N d' t() W tt r O r N M t-7r r O N N O 0 0 O W 0) O r O N
M M M M M M M M M N M M (M ('M C'7 (M M M d' M r et 'cf' '(t M M CM (M (M [t M r d'
CM00000000Mr-- 000000000(O0)OOt4000000r 0)0
✓ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M r t() 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 U) U) N tr) W 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ti 0
M O O O O N W 0) r (() (O h r (O M M (n N O et c0 P c0 to r O c0 M (() O 0 M (O c0
O 0 c0 0) c0 (() N c0 W c P O ti O (() O N W (O O r 0 O
N M N N N M M M M M M M u) to (n M (O N- (O V' N ' N N r r N U) W tl) W
t+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O tt) tf) tf) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M t!) 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 t() r M 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0
(O 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0) 0 t() r 0) O (O O) N N- 0) 0) M r O O o0 (f) 0 0 Q C') O c0
(D 0) N (() W r et W r to 0) 0) N (O r P- N W tf) N W M M (O U) M (O P- (O 0) d 0) d N
1 .. N. W M c0 0 0) 0) 0 0 O O r r N N M M (L) tf) (O (O (O (O (O (O (O (O (O N. t. c0 W 0)
t- r r r r r r r CV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
(p r N M CEO} (fl (O t- W 0) 0 r N M to (0 t` W 0) 000 0 r N M tf) (O P` W 0) m 0 r
0)
-O)00)N0)00)MNMNT-O0)00))00))000))00))0))00))0)1-M00)00)00)00W)00)MM0) —0)0)
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r <- r r r r r r c- r r r r
r r r r r r r 1 r_ ..... r r r r r- r r r r r r r r r r_ r a-
-C >, T >, T T T >, T T .` >+ >ft T T T T T T T >, .` T T T T T T T T T T (- T
700
00 H)
OE
ZCRI u
N
t
m
0
0
Bc
W 0
am
au
0
R
a
0
a
44
0) r 1- O N (D 0) O 00 N 00 O r 11) (0 M M M N- � N O 0)
C' 0 0 ti 00 r 0) '�t p 0) M N N (O 0) cY ti s- -
tm (O m 00 m O 0) 0) Q O (O O O) V' c0 O r r O c r'- 0) 0
11f�e44\MNrvNrMNNMNMN.- c7-N C
N
N
a
.'C. • O
C O
r 0) M 't 00 c r 0 0 r N N N 00 10 10 0 0 (O 0 0 p W in
(0
OD_mcov m(mrn W (OO-rCco.-.-oNc otO..-N aW
1" 'd• M V ' 4 1n U) r U) Nt 1() 11) (0 O ti (D 0 (O n `) C
✓ r r r r r r r r r r r r r ..... 0) N 0
wU
tL.
o
3
c
o w
N y O
o
0(0(�NMrLoMhd•c0crhr"•O0N0Pyc
0MNN-WNMMN0NMOMpMUNrt01-0O 00S-N-MMrOO
Mj_ v)
14>tom-OOr oiOOOOOrN M 000
NNNNNNNNN NMMMMMMMMN MpV' c0
o J 0
S m c
,
1"- N N- (0 (0 11) (0 00 10 0) (0 1n (O O)) N (D - 00 M O N M 07 65
N v 1.. N v. .. � .( N -, 0' 0 0 10 .n 0) '«' L "
.ct ct d_ r 0 0 r W N- 0 M O CO W M W M (M N N W p to 'O C
N r r N M M c)' tt) M r Id') d, .1 M VI: r M N 0) (0
in (0 0
0 0 0)
a C
O O O Q O 0 0 0 (0 0) O M M M M 10 M M M 0) N 10 0) •0 -0 0
r O M U) (+) N d• O O O 0 (D 10 N 0) 0) 00 0) (0 Q u, 0 .0
00 0 00 N-d-O M M O CD M N O M O N r O0 0 N r 0 N 0 •> -C '>
N 000NN1s.-t-(')co' 0)0)N(O0000.ct' rU)(0cc; N 0) I O/
(D(D(0(0(O U)" ct N MMMct.•00'1tMrQ N O
N 'C N
N 00 0
r O 0 d
N (0 0)
a „ E m
Q T•N o
C 7 0) N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O 10 1n 00 r 1n 00 (0 0) N O't (L) r O .A 0 0) r
r r d' 0) 0 00 r M 00 (00 0) 0) M O 11) O0 N-ti 11) 10 N O !�• >.
(D r 0) (O r r 0 ,:rO M 11) 10 O0 0) N M r ti O N 00 (0 .fl O 'C
O O O N t!) N O M r r O N MOO Lc 0) V• 11) r 1� M (O N 10
0) 11) r (0 � 0 11) 0) N M h- O M N N 00 M 00 r M M �t (0 Q U
0) 0 r r N CO CO CO V' to 10 1n co (D 1- IN-COCO N N N �+ r
T_ O
N 1') M M M 1Y) M M (1) 1') M M M M 1+') M M M M M '
0 C N
m
NM 10(D�000)OOrNM'1t0C01'- 000)0 0 - 0 +L-'• �
010) 0)0000000000000000 N N .- CO m c --
00)0)0)0)0)O)0)N000000OOOON* 00 O) c
✓ r r r r r r r _ N N N N N N N N N N ., N N N to '� •y CO Si
_ W
✓ r e- r r r r .- P r r r r r r r r r r r O r r
TjE
>, >, > >. >. >, >. >, •` T A T >, >. >, • _ N >+ > m a ,4; o� .«,
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 a>> V- . O to
0
N
O
.r
0
0
in
ca
0)
0
O
L
d
2
c.i
O.
ca
d
O.
F
N
>'
.Q N
c
a
0) Q
i
0 Si..)
O
3
U
C_
G11.1
N
C
O c
;�, .o
m
0. et
0 o
°
N
_d
c
co
co 2
I— 0_
N
a
L
O
Z
=0
1
a
O
V
c
Incorporated
co
G
MV'O(c)
N N N T
(1)OchN
N C5 T ((i
U)OOO
co CD CO CO
T N T LO
Cc) CO M O
N V)
N. (C) ti
N M M C')
N CO CO t`
u)) CO M
N
T N N N
T T T T
N O LC) c*)
N O T O
O T O M
CO 0) CO) O
N N (V M
ti (0(0 N
O N 00 CO
T t� M (O
co Co O
caNNN
cr).•:17v�d
N N N 0
r T r 1-
LV >> >
d Q. 7
dQ-)
Metropolitan Areas
Bend -Redmond
o
coco
tT c
w' a
Cn
O
O ct CO co
O N r
a0 co O c a)
O `-
cococo U3
m N
C F
c0
E O
8
co
Y U
V7 fa
C
N •0 .1. (O E
CO O d; Y 0
N N M o tM
T T T
m `
c co
co (+) O O m U
co u-) to O :p.-
c.- N N M O
t` CO O M c c
(n000 c
T T T N 0)
N t6
c 7
O O
U _0-
L >
E 7
ca)-a-CO CO } O
� CO 1-LC)T o') 0) a
to LA lf) co N 2 .-•
CC) CO 0 0 C c d
CD E
c
y ai)) w
cd co
co co O 00 a)
co '- a) .c > `o.
t- co T O co c) Q
O M co E U (o
MCI) ; .' C i c a)
C
7 F
2 c Na
Ea° t0
N., p E
'
N N (n c0 00.
M M M M k c
ONNN N co co
NNNN E 03 N LT..
Y • O
U �' U
O T co co «
T N M CV (0 E' �co
M C07 M M U op
m cc
Q co 0)U
CO N L a) .'
Q a) tQ J O
O N e- CO
O .1* ' CO 0 C N cO
N c0� 0 m .N u)
CV N N N O E n O 10
a] co U -7
u) o ai can _°
t- N > 2
a] N
> ., U c
F.
o CD N N N co
NNNCO-'
N > c 'C U) 2
-le,c a)y -o
.= CO CO a, c 8
. .c > >. t E C1)
Q Q-)-) 0 e in
) W 2
Salem MSA consists of Marion and Polk Counties.
Corvallis MSA consists of Benton County.
c
co
E
0
co
co
CO
V)
7
CO
CU
0
m
co (o
0 0
m
L.
W �
c
-0a)
N
.c
c >
ai
N co
(o
N
a)
CL
-o C
E "
N
m
c co
a)
CO a)
cc �
0
O N
m (0
3
co
U
Ca
O O
(n
m
C
c
8co
a 0)
c
o
c U
O Q
E
to
a) 2
}
co
Table 3. Components of Population Change for Oregon and its Counties: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021
Prepared by Population Research Center, PSU, April 2022.
Numeric Percent Average
Change Change Annual
July 1, April 1, April 2020 April 2020 Change Natural Net
2021 2020 to July to July since Births* Deaths* Increase Migration
Estimate Census 2021 2021 Census 2020-21 2020-21 2020-21 2020-21
OREGON 4,266,620 4,237,256 29,364 0.7% 0.6% 49,915 51,318 -1,403 30,767
BAKER 16,860 16,668 192 1.2% 0.9% 200 306 -106 298
BENTON 93,976 95,184 -1,208 -1.3% -1.0% 780 797 -17 -1,191
CLACKAMAS 425,316 421,401 3,915 0.9% 0.7% 4,705 4,719 -14 3,929
CLATSOP 41,428 41,072 356 0.9% 0.7% 460 568 -108 464
COLUMBIA 53,014 52,589 425 0.8% 0.6% 609 685 -76 501
COOS 65,154 64,929 225 0.3% 0.3% 694 1,253 -559 784
CROOK 25,482 24,738 744 3.0% 2.4% 284 341 -57 801
CURRY 23,662 23,446 216 0.9% 0.7% 190 598 -408 624
DESCHUTES 203,390 198,253 5,137 2.6% 2.1% 2,254 2,076 178 4,959
DOUGLAS 111,694 111,201 493 0.4% 0.4% 1,288 2,208 -920 1,413
GILLIAM 2,039 1,995 44 2.2% 1.8% 24 29 -5 49
GRANT 7,226 7,233 -7 -0.1% -0.1% 83 128 -45 38
HARNEY 7,537 7,495 42 0.6% 0.4% 99 124 -25 67
HOOD RIVER 23,888 23,977 -89 -0.4% -0.3% 271 244 27 -116
JACKSON 223,827 223,259 568 0.3% 0.2% 2,668 3,301 -633 1,201
JEFFERSON 24,889 24,502 387 1.6% 1.3% 329 393 -64 451
JOSEPHINE 88,728 88,090 638 0.7% 0.6% 1,012 1,710 -698 1,336
KLAMATH 69,822 69,413 409 0.6% 0.5% 924 1,200 -276 685
LAKF R 177 R 160 17 n 9% n 2% 103 154 -51
tio
LANE 382,647 382,971 -324 -0.1% -0.1% 3,799 5,117 -1,318 994
LINCOLN 50,903 50,395 508 1.0% 0.8% 462 888 -426 934
LINN 130,440 128,610 1,830 1.4% 1.1% 1,841 1,880 -39 1,869
MALHEUR 31,995 31,571 424 1.3% 1.1% 484 498 -14 438
MARION 347,182 345,920 1,262 0.4% 0.3% 4,780 4,044 736 526
MORROW 12,635 12,186 449 3.7% 2.9% 222 137 85 364
MULTNOMAH 820,672 815,428 5,244 0.6% 0.5% 9,302 8,275 1,027 4,217
POLK 88,916 87,433 1,483 1.7% 1.4% 1,053 986 67 1,416
SHERMAN 1,908 1,870 38 2.0% 1.6% 33 28 5 33
TILLAMOOK 27,628 27,390 238 0.9% 0.7% 311 465 -154 392
UMATILLA 80,523 80,075 448 0.6% 0.4% 1,148 1,031 117 331
UNION 26,295 26,196 99 0.4% 0.3% 321 390 -69 168
WALLOWA 7,433 7,391 42 0.6% 0.5% 73 99 -26 68
WASCO 26,581 26,670 -89 -0.3% -0.3% 331 436 -105 16
WASHINGTON 605,036 600,372 4,664 0.8% 0.6% 7,479 4,848 2,631 2,033
WHEELER 1,456 1,451 5 0.3% 0.3% 10 23 -13 18
YAMHILL 108,261 107,722 539 0.5% 0.4% 1,289 1,339 -50 589
N
0
0
n.
C
U
co"
N
a>
N
0
0
:r
cc
ca.
�0
.0
a.
CL
April 1 Census Population
0
0
O
N
4,266,620 4243851 4,237,256 3,831,074 3,421,436
16,860 16,721 16,668 16,134 16,741
10,178 10,133 10,099 9,828 9,860
3 3 3 0 0
376 374 373 416 426
352 352 351 288 337
503 503 502 440 515
165 165 165 156 147
205 205 204 204 171
40 40 40 71 131
5,038 4,946 4,931 4,731 5,154
93,976 95,316 95,184 85,579 78,153
1,318 1,092 994 840 536
9,322 9,095 9,117 6,463 5,104
57,601 60,070 59,922 54,462 49,322
654 647 647 617 607
5,682 5,355 5,350 4,584 3,838
19,399 19,057 19,154 18,613 18,746
425,316 422,185 421,401 375,992 338,397
Barlow 133 133 133 135 140
Canby 18,754 18,220 18,171 15,829 12,790
Estacada 5,014 4,437 4,356 2,695 2,371
Gladstone 12,033 12,018 12,017 11,497 11,438
Happy Valley 25,738 23,987 23,733 13,903 4,519
Johnson City 537 539 539 566 634
Lake Oswego (part)` 38,211 38,147 38,107 34,066 32,989
Milwaukee 21,235 21,225 21,119 20,291 20,490
Molalla 10,207 10,229 10,228 8,108 5,647
Oregon City 37,737 37,637 37,572 31,859 25,754
Portland (part)* 841 843 843 744 747
0
.-
0
N
0
N
0
N
July 1 Population Estimates
4)
0
N
0
N
N
0
N
County and
Cities
OREGON
co
0
BENTON
Adair Village
Albany (part)*
Corvallis
Monroe
Philomath
Unincorporated
CLACKAMAS
LU
. c-
c
L
E w c
U
April 1 Census Population
2021 2020rev 2020 2010 2000
502 495 495 257 287
12,869 12,669 12,612 9,570 5,385
3,149 3,156 3,156 2,862 2,664
27,452 27,407 27,373 25,109 22,261
25,044 24,600 24,522 17,371 13,987
185,860 186,443 186,425 170,591 176,288
41,428 41.137 41.072 37.039 35,630
10,197 10,184 10,181 9,477 9,813
1,498 1,489 1,489 1,690 1,588
1,872 1,837 1,793 1,462 995
7,157 7,121 7,115 6,457 5,900
6,352 6,288 6,277 4,989 4,096
14,352 14,218 14,217 12,964 13,238
53,014 52,748 52,589 49.351 43,560
1,725 1,718 1,716 1,737 1,528
1,957 1,949 1,949 1,946 1,571
83 82 82 55 72
1,913 1,911 1,911 1,895 1,687
14,560 14,118 13,817 12,883 10,019
8,016 8,014 8,010 6,592 4,976
2,403 2,375 2,374 2,151 2,228
22,357 22,581 22,730 22,092 21,479
65,154 64,958 64.929 63,043 62,788
3,470 3,384 3,321 3,066 2,833
16,005 15,985 15,985 15,967 15,372
4,018 4,015 4,015 3,866 4,184
1,906 1,904 1,904 1,699 1,421
2,479 2,475 2,475 2,514 2,451
10,375 10,317 10,317 9,695 9,544
712 711 710 689 734
26,189 26,167 26,202 25,547 26,249
25,482 24,866 24,738 20,978 19,184
11,042 10,794 10,736 9,253 7,358
July 1 Population Estimates
County and
Cities
Rivergrove (part)'
Sandy
Tualatin (part)*
West Linn
Wilsonville (part)`
Unincorporated
CLATSOP
Astoria
Cannon Beach
Gearhart
Seaside
Warrenton
Unincorporated
COLUMBIA
>,
0
N
OC
COOS
N
>, 6 C O
'N
CROOK
a
y o
d
cmoama
aro.0
'O
0 0
O.
;c
(C
Q'
= tac • E c
• O N C
fO U) >>
c o c Y L. r 3 5
co O O co T O O C
a0 0 0 J 2 Z d 7
c
d
Cs
m
0
July 1 Population Estimates
c1
LO
)
/
)
Fsi
k
4
/
Q
k
Q
\
Na CO
tO
CO 1—
\
e
} © $ e
(0)/
/\
f k
\
)
$
0
0
0.41
k
n
\
)
03
OD
03
>
CO
CO
1' N
@®eG
)
w
\
CD
CO
k
rD
)
§
§
\\ } / \ ,ey1, \ o \ § / / k
w¥�a£¥w7
\§(/)/)\/0) \
— ''N6 2
\ \ a) \ (} / 0 /
P.
co
co
RM 7 7 R m/
N R r coo
¥wg£ww/
° - — — - § o CO \
mm\}/\2\\/
Lo
) ° m ° ® $
C
0\
Unincorporated
D
0
DESCHUTES
Unincorporated
0
0
§ -
)j7/2\gip§
*c0§ °m
) 3 § d ƒ R ec } / \
Unincorporated
k
April 1 Census Population
O
O
CO
7,537 7,497 7,495 7,422 7,609
23,888 23,949 23,977 22,346 20,411
1,398 1,387 1,379 1,144 1,115
8,259 8,321 8,313 7,167 5,831
14,231 14,241 14,285 14,035 13,465
223,827 223,521 223,259 203,206 1181,273
21,554 21,474 21,360 20,078 19,522
451 443 443 423 439
19,702 19,228 18,997 17,169 12,493
9,854 9,708 9,686 8,469 4,797
1,360 1,336 1,335 1,220 1,073
3,080 3,029 3,020 2,785 2,235
87,353 86,123 85,824 74,907 63,687
4,096 4,478 4,475 4,538 4,060
2,435 2,411 2,407 2,131 1,851
3,095 3,089 3,081 2,904 2,307
5,737 6,293 6,282 6,066 5,589
65,110 65,909 66,349 62,516 63,220
24,889 24,553 24,502 21,720 7,009
1,636 1,602 1,602 1,357 802
N
0 (0
co
V (a N
CO M N N ac- in N O
.-- .- (C)
O CO.. Of
Ccr N
0
r
O
(D Cc) CO
N
O0O' m co N co N0
f� r M �`- r .- ib O r co
,- N
c0 1- O
N r- CO
N
coOco N cOD V' it
O M e'- r cO N
...-
ti NN
N r cM
July 1 Population Estimates
>
`
N
t0
CO ,- cn - er- Lo W co D°)
O N
nM. CD. I-
CI
•-- N
N' ch
N
N
CS or c N N- LO
M n z 0 m
'Cr
N
O r r 10 N
N r cci
County and
Cities
N
'e c m
CJ > o $
c a) o U E U m o
HARNEY
Burns
Hines
Unincorporated
HOOD RIVER
Cascade Locks
Hood River
Unincorporated
JACKSON
_ -)
c m a) �°
m ° c > >
c LL a a =_ P. •x ce U
z
O
O N d U U
t c c m J c cD
m m o o D ' m ac) c
E T 0 O c 0 G U
(0 0 CD N N 0
v) M CD m o m �i t o.0 ro 'c
IL
w
0
U !] C� a to
< CO 0 W C9 -) 2 a c4 0 h D
-,
0
April 1 Census Population
2021 2020rev 2020 2010 2000
7,717 7,561 7,456 6,046 5,078
729
981 978 978 710
14,555 14,412 14,466 13,607 12,400
88,728 88,204 88,090 82,713 75,726
2,149 2,086 2,071 1,883 1,363
39,475 39,237 39,189 34,533 23,003
47,104 46,881 46,830 46,297 51,360
69,822 69,512 69,413 66,380 63,775
404 404 404 415 415
767 767 767 734 715
22,022 21,834 21,813 20,840 19,460
731 731 731 805 640
821 821 821 844 897
45,077 44,955 44,877 42,742 41,648
8,177 8.165 8,160 7,895 7,422
382,647 383,181 382,971 351,715 322,977
\\/
¥
4 CQ
\�\
1,306
10,574
5,641
1,428
176,654
9,396
6,787
1,196
3,206
61,851
5,214
259
99,459
July 1 Population Estimates
\ % \
\R\
County and
Cities
Madras
Metolius
Unincorporated
JOSEPHINE
Cave Junction
Grants Pass
Unincorporated
KLAMATH
Bonanza
Chiloquin
Klamath Falls
Malin
Merrill
Unincorporated
LAKE
Lakeview
Paisley
Unincorporated
LANE
» •.2
)°
! = E
_\ a 0 11 g
, e
0Ea 0 k=( k k/a) 03 \)
0 0 0 3 u= w a 0 n>« 2
April 1 Census Population
2021 2020rev 2020 2010 2000
50,903 50,387 50,395 46,034 44,479
1,559 1,526 1,515 1,398 1,174
10,067 9,912 9,815 7,930 7,437
10,591 10,268 10,256 9,989 9,532
1,249 1,235 1,230 1,212 1,133
3,611 3,568 3,546 3,465 3,472
2,321 2,263 2,249 2,033 2,050
1,010 998 994 690 617
20,495 20,617 20,790 19,317 19,064
130,440 128,929 128,610 116,672 103,069
47,877 47,385 47,355 43,695 35,748
1,705 1,699 1,694 1,668 1,449
43 46 46 40 42
959 962 962 904 724
3,658 3,655 3,652 3,567 2,795
71 71 71 57 85
19,122 18,559 18,447 15,518 12,950
1,207 1,207 1,202 1,161 1,008
1,649 1,641 1,617 1,531 1,225
3,093 2,924 2,919 1,329 651
959 956 956 838 695
360 360 360 308 290
9,893 9,853 9,828 8,925 8,016
1,231 1,231 1,231 1,164 933
222 222 222 229 239
38,391 38,158 38,048 35,738 36,219
31,995 31,626 31,571 31,313 31,615
159 157 157 177 147
131 130 130 181 239
3,276 3,233 3,198 3,267 3,163
11,816 11,657 11,645 11,366 10,985
1,914 1,895 1,894 1,874 1,976
14,699 14,554 14,547 14,448 15,105
347,182 346,194 345,920 315.335 284.838
July 1 Population Estimates
County and
Cities
LINCOLN
'O
« 'o
MALHEUR
Adrian
Jordan Valley
Nyssa
Ontario
Vale
Unincorporated
N
1. + '-. a)
T
`
8. a7 t a7
O
Cl
n
v
a]
t
U
c
z
c C Ul 0 N t C co 6 E ,5 N U
ca 3 co V a) 0 /0 8 m a' cno—
0
d
o
a. °- o
<°
m
•c
Z
c p
_a o o m m a' c
O
J
Z di 1--
i-
=
J
Q m 0__ 32 J J co co (n f— > D
2
April 1 Census Population
2021 2020rev 2020 2010 2000
4,237 4,234 4,234 3,584 3,003
1,133 1,133 1,133 918 655
141 203 203 202 262
1,012 1,009 1,009 979 625
427 502 502 431 429
2,596 2,591 2,595 2,464 2,009
3,478 3,478 3,426 3,173 2,483
85 85 85 77 147
3,339 3,330 3,327 3,098 2,487
39,458 39,381 39,376 36,478 32,203
363 359 354 324 312
3,418 3,407 3,392 3,286 3,121
434 434 434 421 354
147,482 146,302 146,139 130,398 119,040
431 427 419 357 312
10,591 10,501 10,484 9,222 7,414
8,265 8,244 8,244 7,644 6,816
3,106 2,982 2,967 2,681 2,148
2,866 2,522 2,454 1,854 1,199
26,250 26,024 26,013 24,080 20,100
88,070 89,046 89,130 83,664 79,719
u7
O
p,
(0
_m
N
N
M
nj
Boardman 4,338 3,900 3,828 3,220 2,855
Heppner 1,187 1,187 1,187 1,291 1,395
lone 339 337 337 329 321
Irrigon 2,037 2,013 2,011 1,826 1,702
Lexington 238 238 238 238 263
Unincorporated 4,496 4,542 4,585 4,269 4,459
MULTNOMAH 820,672 816,310 815,428 735,334 660,486
Fairview 10,446 10,430 10,424 8,920 7,561
Gresham 114,361 114,310 114,247 105,594 90,205
Lake Oswego (part)' 2,587 2,621 2,621 2,544 2,274
Maywood Park 829 829 829 752 777
Portland (part)` 656,298 651,054 650,019 581,485 526,986
Troutdale 16,319 16,292 16,300 15,962 13,777
July 1 Population Estimates
County and
Cities
">
E
Q
t
to
ty to m
2NNNNV
0
Q ❑ ❑ 0 U' 2
co
a a
w
2. -)i
Y
R
a
-CI) ac
---t
=co �Na E
<a °'o N.0 >
_ •
M (n (n fA !Q u) u)
o
co
F S�
❑
MORROW
April 1 Census Population
0
0
0
88,916 87,916 87,433 75,403 62,380
17,320 16,909 16,854 14,583 12,459
1,064 1,052 1,051 947 966
10,081 9,860 9,828 8,590 6,035
11,142 11,142 11,110 9,534 7,741
30,212 29,913 29,396 24,239 17,884
924 924 924 845 716
18,173 18,116 18,270 16,665 16,579
1,908 1,875 1,870 1,765 1,934
27,628 27,447 27,390 25,250 24,262
1,424 1,402 1,389 1,286 1,149
831 831 830 779 699
609 605 603 598 564
276 273 270 271 203
1,476 1,459 1,441 1,312 1,267
5,338 5,209 5,204 4,935 4,352
422 422 422 414 391
17,252 17,246 17,231 15,655 15,437
80,523 80,229 80,075 75,889 70,548
393 389 389 350 297
1,212 1,211 1,209 1,126 1,221
657 632 632 699 650
194 194 194 184 183
19,696 19,510 19,354 16,745 13,154
7,145 7,200 7,151 7,050 6,470
17,169 17,125 17.107 16,612 16,354
N
0
co o
a
co n.
m co CON'
m N m N.
O
O
N
O
N
CO Cr)
0 ,-S
m(6
f, Q
CO
f71 0 N .d. O co
1- CO N .7 CO
CA P co f,- O)
N
CO65
10
M N CEO
July 1 Population Estimates
m>
G03
co
Cb CO CA CO
N
Co
- M N .7 CD
0
N
N
o
CO
~ 03
V IS)cc)N
V' CO V CD
Cn I, -I,- N CO
d' CO
N
V
County and
Cities
Wood Village
Unincorporated
POLK
a)
N L
z c o
:,
:-. as
r .-.
l0
a c
_N
c
SHERMAN
Grass Valley
Moro
Rufus
Wasco
Unincorporated
TILLAMOOK
L
y N
CO 2
>. c E; g g
UMATILLA
Adams
Athena
Echo
Helix
Hermiston
Milton-Freewater
Pendleton
N
N (U E
E E
_
0
V 2 N N Y E N 0
T .c c L U N L
April 1 Census Population
2021 2020rev 2020 2010 2000
1,328 1,328 1,328 1,502 1,532
2,201 2,156 2,144 2,043 1,979
219 219 159 186 255
7,520 7,396 7,363 6,906 4,978
706 706 706 667 717
22,083 22,163 22,339 21,819 22,758
26,295 26,729 26,196 25,748 24,530
627 620 620 552 594
1,717 1,717 1,717 1,711 1,654
249 246 245 306 284
1,144 1,144 1,144 989 916
13,087 13,583 13,026 13,082 12,327
504 504 504 439 489
119 119 119 135 117
2,153 2,150 2,152 2,121 1,926
6,695 6,646 6,669 6,413 6,223
7,433 7,401 7,391 7,008 7, 226
- 0- 0
//\/f
0CLOV .- R / \
\Q
G / / \ }
\w 4
° 2 m 2
\QmN-
26,581 26,642 26,670 25,213 :23,791
37 37 37 46 59
608 632 632 604 588
427 427 427 418 411
468 468 468 433 410
30 30 30 36 26
16,047 16,032 16,010 13,620 12,156
8,964 9,016 9,066 10,056 10,141
605,036 600,895 600,372 529,710 445,342
1,834 1,837 1,837 1,777 1,286
97,318 97,525 97,494 89,803 76,129
July 1 Population Estimates
County and
Cities
Pilot Rock
Stanfield
Ukiah"
Umatilla
Weston
Unincorporated
z
{ CI
° \ k g
k§ £ C o0
e\ k] o 0 a£=
3 3£_ j 2/ 5§
WALLOWA
Enterprise
Joseph
Lostine
Wallowa
Unincorporated
WASCO
]
2 {
& £ - # (
7 Q»$&§$
& o] k A r=
WASHINGTON
Banks
Beaverton
April 1 Census Population
2021 2020rev 2020 2010 2000
13,498 12,771 12,694 11,869 9,652
1,950 1,944 1,944 1,351 1,382
26,242 26,296 26,225 21,083 '17,708
670 670 670 637 600
108,154 106,455 106,447 91,611 70,186
5,184 5,184 5,184 3,111 1,949
3 3 3 9 15
3,446 3,441 3,441 1,947 1,605
1,634 1,640 1,641 1,547 1,388
50 50 50 32 37
20,496 20,450 20,450 18,194 '11,791
55,854 54,653 54,539 48,035 41,223
24,761 24,786 24,786 23,192 20,127
2,142 2,142 2,142 2,138 4
241,800 241,048 240,825 213,374 190,260
1,456 1,451 1,451 1,441 1, 547
rn o
co ti
0 CO
v CO
108,261 107,873 107,722 99,193 84,992
1,809 1,763 1,757 1,614 1,478
2,270 2,223 2,220 2,007 1,514
2,698 2,678 2,678 2,534 2,119
3,243 3,238 3,238 3,162 2,598
6 6 6
4,446 4,428 4,423 3,742 :2,586
34,251 34,410 34,319 32,187 26,499
25,376 25,157 25,138 22,068 18,064
6,377 6,426 6,429 6,127 5,561
1,324 1,324 1,315 1,180 1,128
1,221 1,180 1,147 1,024 794
25,240 25,040 25,052 23,548 22.651
CO
N. CC`)
CO
CO N.
<t
t� CO
(0
m N.
ct .M-
.M-CV
co
O co
July 1 Population Estimates
V co
.- r
41 c0
O o)
V .M-
.e- h
County and
Cities
r
e c0
t
m
a
07
w
.
't r
to n -c o.
C fl. cu 0. N �Q`
WHEELER
Fossil
Mitchell
Spray
Unincorporated
:-.
(0
N
a 8
O. 6
7 C� n Q .�`.
N
W ` 8 C 'j EL
16
_J
O
a
C
c C_ p�'
O .j O w co (0 C
O
c0
�_ C
O O N 01 j
`
'� 0 5. c
E lV c0 O
y
03
f0
O
N
CD l0 E C
L f0 E
lS
0 L] LL 0 2 Y
J
Z a d' co 1- F 5 7
Y
0 0 0 0
U
J
2
Z
CO )- D
Table 5. Population Estimates for Incorporated Cities Located in Mo
Prepared by Population Research Center, PSU, April 2022.
City by County
Jultst Population Estimate
Census Census
Population, Population,
April 1 April 1
2021
2020rev 2020 2010
Albany
57,199
56,480 I 56,472
50,158
In Benton
9,322
9,095 9,117
6,463
In Linn
47,877
47,385 47,355
43,695
Gaston
676
676 676
in Washington
670
670 670
in Yamhill
6
6 6
Gates
470
548 548
471
in Linn
43
46 46
40
in Marion
427
502 502
431
Idanha
158
156 156 134
in Linn
71
71 71
57
in Marion
85
85 85
77
Lake Oswego
40.801
40,771 40,731
38,619
in Clackamas
38,211
38,147 38,107
34,066
In Multnomah
2,587
2,621 2,621
2,544
in Washington
3
3 3
9
Mill City
2,012
2,000 I 1,971
1,855
in Linn
1.649
1,641 1,617
1,531
in Marion
363
359 354
324
Portland
658,773
653,537 I 652,503
583,776
In Clackamas
841
843 843
744
in Multnomah
656,298
651,054 650,019
581,485
In Washington
1,634
1,640 1,641
1,547
RIvergrove
552
545 I 545
289
in Clackamas
502
495 495
257
in Washington
50
50 50
32
Salem
177,694
176,215 I 175,535
154,637
In Marlon
147,482
146,302 146,139
130,398
in Polk
30,212
29,913 29,396
24,239
Tualatin
27,910
27,942 27,942 26,054
In Clackamas
3,149
3,156 3,158
2,862
in Washington
24,761
24,788 24,786
23,192
Willamina
2,248
2,248 2,239 2,025
in Polk
924
924 924
845
in Yamhill
1,324
1,324 1,315
1,180
Wilsonville
27,186
26,742 26,664
19,509
in Clackamas
25,044
24,600 24,522
17,371
In Washington
2,142
2,142 2,142
2,138
Table 6. Rank of Incorporated Cities by July 1, 2021 Population Size
Prepared by Population Research Center, PSU, April 2022.
City Population
Portland
Salem
Eugene
Gresham
Hillsboro
Bend
Beaverton
Medford
Springfield
Corvallis
Albany
Tigard
Lake Oswego
Grants Pass
Keizer
Oregon City
Redmond
McMinnville
Tualatin
West Linn
Wilsonville
Woodburn
Forest Grove
Happy Valley
Newberg
Roseburg
Klamath Falls
Ashland
Milwaukie
Sherwood
Central Point
Hermiston
Lebanon
Canby
Dallas
Pendleton
Troutdale
The Dailes
Coos Bay
St. Helens
Cornelius
La Grande
Sandy
Gladstone
Ontario
Monmouth
Prineville
Cottage Grove
Newport
Silverton
City Population
658,773 Fairview 10,446
177,694 North Bend 10,375
175,626 Molalla 10,207
114,361 Astoria 10,197
108,154 Baker City 10,178
100,922 Independence 10,081
97,318 Lincoln City 10,067
87,353 Sweet Home 9,893
62,352 Eagle Point 9,854
57,601 Florence 9,600
57,199 Sutherlin 8,909
55,854 Stayton 8,265
40,801 Hood River 8,259
39,475 Scappoose 8,016
39,458 Madras 7,717
37,737 Umatilla 7,520
36,122 Seaside 7,157
34,251 Milton-Freewater 7,145
27,910 Junction City 7,032
27,452 Brookings 6,809
27,186 Sheridan 6,377
26,250 Warrenton 6,352
26,242 Talent 5,737
25,738 Winston 5,700
25,376 Creswell 5,684
23,701 Philomath 5,682
22,022 Tillamook 5,338
21,554 Veneta 5,271
21,235 King City 5,184
20,496 Estacada 5,014
19,702 Wood Village 4,478
19,696 Lafayette 4,446
19,122 Boardman 4,338
18,754 Reedsport 4,311
17,320 Aumsville 4,237
17,169 Phoenix 4,096
16,319 Coquille 4,018
16,047 Harrisburg 3,658
16,005 Toledo 3,611
14,560 Myrtle Creek 3,501
13,498 Hubbard 3,478
13,087 Bandon 3,470
12,869 North Plains 3,446
12,033 Mt. Angel 3,418
11,816 Jefferson 3,339
11,142 Sisters 3,286
11,042 Nyssa 3,276
10,792 Dundee 3,243
10,591 Oakridge 3,238
10,591 Sublimity 3,106
*This city conducted a local enumeration after Census 2020.
City Population
Shady Cove
Millersburg
Jacksonville
Turner
Burns
Dayton
La Pine
Gervais
Myrtle Point
Rogue River
Lakeview
Vernonia
Gold Beach
Waldport
Carlton
Willamina
Stanfield
Union
Cave Junction
Enterprise
lrrigon
Mill City
Columbia City
Durham
Vale
Rainier
Lakeside
Gearhart
Banks
Amity
Clatskanie
Elgin
Brownsville
John Day
Hines
Canyonville
Culver
Depoe Bay
Cannon Beach
Rockaway Beach
Dunes City
Bay City
Cascade Locks
Gold Hill
Pilot Rock
Coburg
Adair Village
Siletz
Tangent
Yamhill
City Population
3,095 Riddle 1,214
3,093 Athena 1,212
3,080 Lowell 1,211
2,866 Lyons 1,207
2,745 Heppner 1,187
2,698 Drain 1,174
2,654 Joseph 1,158
2,596 Port Orford 1,156
2,479 Island City 1,144
2,435 Aurora 1,133
2,428 Falls City 1,064
2,403 Yoncalla 1,036
2,375 Donald 1,012
2,321 Yachats 1,010
2,270 Metolius 981
2,248 Halsey 959
2,201 Scio 959
2,153 Oakland 932
2,149 Glendale 860
2,080 Prairie City 841
2,037 Garibaldi 831
2,012 Maywood Park 829
1,957 Merrill 821
1,950 Wallowa 799
1,914 Chiloquin 767
1,913 Malin 731
1,906 Condon 722
1,872 Powers 712
1,834 Weston 706
1,809 Gaston 676
1,725 Canyon City 666
1,717 Echo 657
1,705 Monroe 654
1,664 Arlington 650
1,661 Cove 627
1,649 Manzanita 609
1,636 Dufur 608
1,559 Rivergrove 552
1,498 Mt. Vernon 548
1,476 Johnson City 537
1,454 North Powder 504
1,424 Huntington 503
1,398 Gates 470
1,360 Mosier 468
1,328 Butte Falls 451
1,322 Fossil 449
1,318 St. Paul 434
1,249 Scotts Mills 431
1,231 Maupin 427
1,221 Wasco 424
Ci
ty
Wheeler
Bonanza
Adams
Haines
Moro
Sodaville
Halfway
lone
Nehalem
Rufus
Westfir
Imbler
Paisley
Lostine
Lexington
Waterloo
Ukiah*
Sumpter
Helix
Elkton
Long Creek
Richland
Seneca
Adrian
Idanha
Grass Valley
Detroit
Spray
Mitchell
Dayville
Barlow
Jordan Valley
Summerville
Monument
Prescott
Unity
Antelope
Granite
Shaniko
Lonerock
Greenhorn
Population
422
404
393
376
374
360
352
339
276
273
260
249
244
242
238
222
219
205
194
182
173
165
165
159
156
151
141
140
138
134
133
131
119
115
83
40
37
32
30
25
3
Table 7. Alphabetical Listing of Incorporated Cities with Population for July 1, 2021
Census 2020 Population and Change since Census 2020.
Prepared by Population Research Center, PSU, April 2022.
Estimate Census Percent Estimate Census Percent
July 1, April 1, Change Change City July 1, April 1, Change Change
2021 2020 2020-2021 2020-2021 2021 2020 2020-2021 2020-2021
Adair Village 1. 18 994 324 2. n stacada 5,014 4,3 6 658 1 .1%
Adams 393 389 4 1.0% Eugene 175,626 176,654 -1,028 -0.6%
Adrian 159 157 2 1.3% Fairview 10,446 10,424 22 0.2%
Albany 57,199 56,472 727 1.3% Falls City 1,064 1,051 13 1.2%
Amity 1,809 1,757 52 3.0% Florence 9,600 9,396 204 2.2%
Antelope 37 37 0 0.0% Forest Grove 26,242 26,225 17 0.1
Arlington 650 628 22 3.5% Fossil 449 447 2 0.4%
Ashland 21,554 21,360 194 0.9% Garibaldi 831 830 1 0.1%
Astoria 10,197 10,181 16 0.2% Gaston 676 676 0 0.0%
Athena 1,212 1,209 3 0.2% Gates 470 548 76 -14.2%
Aumsville 4,237 4,234 3 0.1% Gearhart 1,872 1,7938 79 4.4%
Aurora 1,133 1,133 0 0.0% Gervais 2,596 2,595 1 0.0%
Baker City 10,178 10,099 79 0.8% Gladstone 12,033 12,017 16 0.1%
Bandon 3,470 3,321 149 4.5% Glendale 860 858 2 0.2%
Banks 1,834 1,837 -3 -0.2% Gold Beach 2,375 2,341 34 1.5%
Barlow 133 133 0 0.0% Gold Hill 1,360 1,335 25 1.9%
Bay City 1,424 1,389 35 2.5% Granite 32 32 0 0.0%
Beaverton 97,318 97,494 -176 -0.2% Grants Pass 39,475 39,189 286 0.7%
Bend 100,922 99,178 1,744 1.8% Grass Valley 151 149 2 1.3%
Boardman 4,338 3,828 510 13.3% Greenhorn 3 3 0 0.0%
Bonanza 404 404 0 0.0% Gresham 114,361 114,247 114 0.1%
Brookings 6,809 6,744 65 1.0% Haines 376 373 3 0.8%
Brownsville 1,705 1,694 11 0.6% Halfway 352 351 1 0.3%
Burns 2,745 2,730 15 0.5% Halsey 959 962 -3 -0.3%
Butte Falls 451 443 8 1.8% Happy Valley 25,738 23,733 2,005 8.4%
Canby 18,754 18,171 583 3.2% Harrisburg 3,658 3,652 6 0.2%
Cannon Beach 1,498 1,489 9 0.6% Helix 194 194 0 0.0%
Canyon City 666 660 6 0.9% Heppner 1,187 1,187 0 0.0%
Canyonville 1,649 1,640 9 0.5% Hermiston 19,696 19,354 342 1.8%
Carlton 2,270 2,220 50 2.3% Hillsboro 108,154 106,447 1,707 1.6%
Cascade Locks 1,398 1,379 19 1.4% Hines 1,661 1,645 16 1.0%
Cave Junction 2,149 2,071 78 3.8% Hood River 8,259 8,313 54 0.6%
Central Point 19,702 18,997 705 3.7% Hubbard 3,478 3,426 52 1.5%
Chiloquin 767 767 0 0.0% Huntington 503 502 1 0.2%
Clatskanie 1,725 1,716 9 0.5% ldanha 156 156 0 0.0%
Coburg 1,322 1,306 16 1.2% lmbler 249 245 4 1.6%
Columbia City 1,957 1,949 8 0.4% Independence 10,081 9,828 253 2.6%
Condon 722 711 11 1.5% lone 339 337 2 0.6%
Coos Bay 16,005 15,985 20 0.1% lrrigon 2,037 2,011 26 1.3%
Coquille 4,018 4,015 3 0.1% Island City 1,144 1,144 0 0.0%
Cornelius 13,498 12,694 804 6.3% Jacksonville 3,080 3,020 60 2,0%
Corvallis 57,601 59,922 -2,321 -3.9% Jefferson 3,339 3,327 12 0.4%
Cottage Grove 10,792 10,574 218 2.1% John Day 1,664 1,664 0 0.0%
Cove 627 620 7 1.1% Johnson City 537 539 -2 -0.4%
Creswell 5,684 5,641 43 0.8% Jordan Valley 131 130 1 0.8%
Culver 1,636 1,602 34 2.1% Joseph 1,158 1,154 4 0.3%
Dallas 17,320 16,854 466 2.8% Junction City 7,032 6,787 245 3.6%
Dayton 2,698 2,678 20 0.7% Keizer 39,458 39,376 82 0.2%
Dayville 134 132 2 1.5% King City 5,184 5,184 0 0.0%
Depoe Bay 1,559 1,515 44 2.9% Klamath Falls 22,022 21,813 209 1.0%
Detroit 141 203 -62 -30.5% La Grande 13,087 13,026 61 0.5%
Donald 1,012 1,009 3 0.3% La Pine 2,654 2512 142 5.7%
Drain 1,174 1,172 2 0.2% Lafayette 4,446 4,,423 23 0.5%
Dufur 608 632 -24 -3.8% Lake Oswego 40,801 40,731 70 0.2%
Dundee 3,243 3,238 5 0.2% Lakeside 1,906 1,904 2 0.1%
Dunes City 1,454 1,428 26 1.8% Lakeview 2,428 2,418 10 0.4%
Durham 1,950 1,944 6 0.3% Lebanon 19,122 18,447 675 3.7%
Eagle Point 9,854 9,686 168 1.7% Lexington 238 238 0 0.0%
Echo 657 632 25 4.0% Lincoln City 10,067 9,815 252 2.6%
Elgin 1,717 1,717 0 0.0% Lonerock 25 25 0 0.0%
Elkton 182 183 -1 -0.5% Long Creek 173 173 0 0.0%
Enterprise 2,080 2,052 28 1.4% Lostine 242 241 1 0.4%
Lowell 1,211 1,196 15 1.3% Sandy 12,869 12,612 257 2.0%
Lyons 1,207 1,202 5 0.4% Scappoose 8,016 8,010 6 0.1%
City
Table 7. Alphabetical Listing of Incorporated Cities with Population for July 1, 2021
Census 2020 Population and Change since Census 2020.
Prepared by Population Research Center, PSU, April 2022.
Estimate Census Percent Estimate Census Percent
City July 1, April 1, Change Change City July 1, April 1, Change Change
2021 2020 2020-2021 2020-2021 2021 2020 2020-2021 2020-2021
Madras 7,717 7,456 261 3.5% Scio 959 956 3 0.3%
Malin 731 731 0 0.0% Scotts Mills 431 419 12 2.9%
Manzanita 609 603 6 1.0% Seaside 7,157 7,115 42 0.6%
Maupin 427 427 0 0.0% Seneca 165 165 0 0.0%
Maywood Park 829 829 0 0.0% Shady Cove 3,095 3,081 14 0.5%
McMinnville 34,251 34,319 -68 -0.2% Shaniko 30 30 0 0.0%
Medford 87,353 85,824 1,529 1.8% Sheridan 6,377 6,429 -52 -0.8%
Merrill 821 821 0 0.0% Sherwood 20,496 20,450 46 0.2%
Metolius 981 978 3 0.3% Siletz 1,249 1,230 19 1.5%
MiII City 2,012 1,971 41 2.1% Silverton 10,591 10,484 107 1.0%
Millersburg 3,093 2,919 174 6.0% Sisters 3,286 3,064 222 7.2%
Milton-Freewater 7,145 7,151 -6 -0.1% Sodaville 360 360 0 0.0%
Milwaukie 21,235 21,119 116 0.5% Spray 140 139 1 0.7%
Mitchell 138 138 0 0.0% Springfield 62,352 61,851 501 0.8%
Molalla 10,207 10,228 -21 -0.2% St. Helens 14,560 13,817 743 5.4%
Monmouth 11,142 11,110 32 0.3% St. Paul 434 434 0 0.0%
Monroe 654 647 7 1.1% Stanfield 2,201 2,144 57 2.7%
Monument 115 115 0 0.0% Stayton 8,265 8,244 21 0.3%
Moro 374 367 7 1.9% Sublimity 3,106 2,967 139 4.7%
Mosier 468 468 0 0.0% Summerville 119 119 0 0.0%
Mt. Angel 3,418 3,392 26 0.8% Sumpter 205 204 1 0.5%
Mt. Vernon 548 548 0 0.0% Sutherlin 8,909 8,524 385 4.5%
Myrtle Creek 3,501 3,481 20 0.6% Sweet Home 9,893 9,828 65 0.7%
Myrtle Point 2,479 2,475 4 0.2% Talent 5,737 6,282 -545 -8.7%
Nehalem 276 270 6 2.2% Tangent 1,231 1,231 0 0.0%
Newberg 25,376 25,138 238 0.9% The Dalles 16,047 16,010 37 0.2%
Newport 10,591 10,256 335 3.3% Tigard 55,854 54,539 1,315 2.4%
North Bend 10,375 10,317 58 0.6% Tillamook 5,338 5,204 134 2.6%
North Plains 3,446 3,441 5 0.1% Toledo 3,611 3,546 65 1.8%
North Powder 504 504 0 0.0% Troutdale 16,319 16,300 19 0.1%
Nyssa 3,276 3,198 78 2.4% Tualatin 27,910 27,942 -32 -0.1%
Oakland 932 934 -2 -0.2% Turner 2,866 2,454 412 16.8%
Oakridge 3,238 3,206 32 1.0% Ukiah* 219 159 60 37.7%
Ontario 11,816 11,645 171 1.5% Umatilla 7,520 7,363 157 2.1%
Oregon City 37,737 37,572 165 0.4% Union 2,153 2,152 1 0.0%
Paisley 244 250 -6 -2.4% Unity 40 40 0 0.0%
Pendleton 17,169 17,107 62 0.4% Vale 1,914 1,894 20 1.1%
Philomath 5,682 5,350 332 6.2% Veneta 5,271 5,214 57 1.1%
Phoenix 4,096 4,475 -379 -8.5% Vernonia 2,403 2,374 29 1.2%
Pilot Rock 1,328 1,328 0 0.0% Waidport 2,321 2,249 72 3.2%
Port Orford 1,156 1,146 10 0.9% Wallowa 799 796 3 0.4%
Portland 658,773 652,503 6,270 1.0% Warrenton 6,352 6,277 75 1.2%
Powers 712 710 2 0.3% Wasco 424 417 7 1.7%
Prairie City 841 841 0 0.0% Waterloo 222 222 0 0.0%
Prescott 83 82 1 1.2% West Linn 27,452 27,373 79 0.3%
Prineville 11,042 10,736 306 2.9% Westfir 260 259 1 0.4%
Rainier 1,913 1,911 2 0.1% Weston 706 706 0 0.0%
Redmond 36,122 33,274 2,848 8.6% Wheeler 422 422 0 0.0%
Reedsport 4,311 4,310 1 0.0% Willamina 2,248 2,239 9 0.4%
Richland 165 165 0 0.0% Wilsonville 27,186 26,664 522 2.0%
Riddle 1,214 1,214 0 0.0% Winston 5,700 5,625 75 1.3%
Rivergrove 552 545 7 1.3% Wood Village 4,478 4,387 91 2.1%
Rockaway Beach 1,476 1,441 35 2.4% Woodburn 26,250 26,013 237 0.9%
Rogue River 2,435 2,407 28 1.2% Yachats 1,010 994 16 1.6%
Roseburg 23,701 23,683 18 0.1% Yamhill 1,221 1,147 74 6.5%
Rufus 273 268 5 1.9% Yoncalla 1,036 1021 15 1.5%
Salem 177,694 175,535 2,159 1.2%
*This city conducted a local enumeration after Census 2020.
Table 8. Population Added to Incorporated Cities Due to Annexations: AI
Compiled by Population Research Center, PSU. April 2022.
Adair Village
Adams
Adrian
Albany
Amity
Antelope
Arlington
Ashland
Astoria
Athena
Aumsville
Aurora
Baker City
Bandon
Banks
Barlow
Bay City
Beaverton
Bend
Boardman
Bonanza
Brookings
Brownsville
Burns
Butte Falls
Canby
Cannon Beach
Canyon City
Canyonville
Carlton
Cascade Locks
Cave Junction
Central Point
Chiloquin
Clatskanie
Coburg
Columbia City
Condon
Coos Bay
Coquille
Cornelius
Corvallis
Cottage Grove
Cove
Creswell
Culver
Dallas
Damascus
Dayton
Dayville
Depoe Bay
Detroit
Donald
Drain
Dufur
Dundee
Dunes City
Durham
Eagle Point
Echo
Elgin
Elkton
Enterprise
Estacada 3
Eugene 5
Fairview 2
Falls City
Florence
Forest Grove
Fossil
Garibaldi
7 Gaston
Gates
Gearhart
Gervais
Gladstone
Glendale
Gold Beach
Gold Hill
Granite
Grants Pass
Granite
2 Grass Valley
Greenhorn
Gresham
Haines
Halfway
Halsey
Happy Valley
Harrisburg
Helix
Heppner
Hermiston 8
Hillsboro
2 Hines
Hood River
Hubbard
Huntington
ldanha
lmbler
Independence
lone
lrrigon
Island City
Jacksonville
Jefferson
John Day
Johnson City
Jordan Valley
Joseph
Junction City 2
Keizer
King City
Klamath Falls
La Grande
La Pine
Lafayette
Lake Oswego 10
Lakeside
Lakeview
Lebanon 12
Lexington
Lincoln City
Lonerock
Long Creek
Lostine
Lowell
Lyons
Madras
Malin
Manzanita
Maupin
Maywood Park
McMinnville
Medford 7
Merrill
Metolius
Mill City
Millersburg
Milton-Freewater
Milwaukie 2
Mitchell
Molalla
Monmouth
Monroe
Monument
Moro
Mosier
Mt. Angel
Mt. Vernon
Myrtle Creek
Myrtle Point
Nehalem
Newberg
Newport
North Bend
North Plains
North Powder
Nyssa
Oakland
Oakridge
Ontario
Oregon City
Paisley
Pendleton
Philomath
Phoenix
Pilot Rock
Port Orford
Portland
Powers
Prairie City
Prescott
Prineville
Rainier
Redmond
Reedsport
Richland
Riddle
Rivergrove
Rockaway Beach
Rogue River
Roseburg
Rufus
Salem
Sandy
Scappoose
Scio
Scotts Mills
Seaside
Seneca
Shady Cove
Shaniko
Sheridan
Sherwood
Siletz
Silverton
Sisters
Sodaville
Spray
16 Springfield
St. Helens
St. Paul
Stanfield
Stayton
Sublimity
Summerville
Sumpter
Sutherlin
Sweet Home
Talent
Tangent
The Dalles
Tigard
Tillamook
Toledo
Troutdale
Tualatin
Turner
Ukiah
Umatilla
Union
Unity
Vale
Veneta
Vernonia
Waldport
Wallowa
Warrenton
Wasco
Waterloo
West Linn
Westfir
Weston
1 Wheeler
Willamina
6 Wilsonville
Winston
Wood Village
Woodburn
Yachats
Yamhill
Yoncalla
O
H
N
00
O
00
0
N
N-
V
f`
O
ti
(O
N
O
O
(0
cr)
t0
O
co
a
N
0
N C
a 0,
V
a) a�
e-
~ M
U o
M
N
c in
N
00 N
C N
0 N N
d •L cm
OQ
L O
cn 00
cu
id ti
C .
wO
to
Q) L
Qff.-2 v
Q
NO
.0 a)
C W
0 C 0)
JI O N
al T.04
0-
00 o
>.
' .O
O)
d 2 0.
.G o 0
H N
cn
Ci_ at
O O 40 40 CO •0 1 N N O ' 0) 0 N 03 N• 0) 0? N Ih h M 0 4) N 4) N 10 00 00 co N co e- to (0 r
N (0 N• N u) lei
00 0I 0) CO N CO CO N CO N N A O CO 00 M 0- r O N N pp�� CC+�� aD M 11f�� 4a
t0 t0 O) M a O r .0 CO M t0 O N 4) CO CO... CO N. 00 r CO W 0! r b 'C C� 01 t0 4) N 4 t0 O {T N
CO t0 0) 4) r M (0 4) M CO r N N r. (') M V 00 Of 00 N o O ti N O 00 r n O rd h t0 4f r 00
(0 r 0) N .0 4) (0 N N O r N N N CO t0 co to co C) eh r N CO N CO N N O 0
N <I• N r N CO r CO O t0 r
'1
O N 0 (0 V) 0. CO Cr)N (0 V N o) (0 CO 0 0 0 0 O W 0) 0 N 0) N CO CO Is CD N N 0) N
t') O 0- co0 N 0. O 0. (D (D I`- CO 0) W VI A 0 N 0 CO CO 0) 0) 0 n 0. 0)/ t0 0 I. 4) co
O) CO O co. W co co (O N V 0 V t` V N (0 O) CD CD 4) V 0) CC) 0N V
(0" .- 0) e- 1- 0) CO LC)04 s- CO e- N' 0 (V .-- r- 0 N
CO s-
0) V 0 00)) COW1f) 0) f0`. VO) O CO 10 ^O COCO 0 sr M COO O PP N N CD CD O V) Sr CO COO O (O m sr n N (rs O CP
aCn
0- t0 a co O N N O r W N N
(') .- Oi e- s- N .- V CO- CO 0 .- W .- (') (0 N N .- O N
0
.- CO 4) CO N- 0) (0 0) 0 V N 0- N 0 0. O N CO N CO 0 N 4) 0) O 0 0) CO CO 0- CO CO
O) 0 W 00 O CO N. N. 0- (0 CO 0 4) (') O CO 00 (D V 0) CO O Is. 0 0 CO V NV O N 0 0
00 Cb 07 V CD O i N CO. N O. CO Cs) 0- N O Is 0 c7 O) (b 01 CO V 0) 7 V 4) O V O. O. K)
(O N 4) .- N O — s- 00 (0 O r- V N ^ N V s- O 0 CO s- N s- .- (0 COvs
Cr) V Cr) 0. O N 4) 0 CO V (0 V t0 W O W 0 4) A 0 n CO ^ 0 f� Is CO 0) 0 CO
N 0. N CO (O (O (0 (O CO 0) (') n N 4) N (O W N N V V 0) CO 1, 0 W CO CO O Is O
O N V: r 0 O CO CO O CO O V V O V (D c Co O (D O. V O CO O N N- N V V N 0 4) co
O .-- co co N O V N N W .- •c (0 V N f-. .- 4) 0') V N CO- .- .- (r) id)
(V N r r N O N
N
N W (C) CO CO 0 4) N O V. 0 O V O 0 O O V Sr C) 0 V (0 N. 0 N VI (0 0) CO 4) N CO N
0) 0) 0 V) N CO W VI CD 0) 4) N O (O 0) V 0 N VI CO4) 0) (O 0 0) V) 4) O 4) O co a) 0.)CO CO (O V 0 (D CO 0 0 .- 4) 4) M.M. CO CO (0 V) N. (D LC/ I� O .- (0 co h M. s' M.
O s- V W (') 04) N N W r- *4) N'''0- W t() 00C) r- W N N V .- .- coW
)o N .- N s- V N
N
N. 10 O O N O 0 O W W N 0 V CO (D CO h (D 0) 10 N 0) O CO O V CO 4) O O
0 sr 0 0) CO CO N tD U) CO O N 8 4) W t0 O V t0 t0 NU'
t0 CO t0 4) CO W V V O
*0) (O O 0 N O N V N co CO 4) N (O 0 CO W V (O (0 N W CO 0 (0 O V (O (O CO O) O)
1 .- tt) N c'i m I() N N V *0 r- .- (0 '0 N '0 W r• N •crV N V r• (D
N
Is 4) CO is 0) 4) LC) 0N N CO N (D O 0 V N N Is V CO 0 V V 4) 0) CO 0) 0) N- co CC) N.
4) CO Is O 0 r V 0 cot0 0 O CO 0) 4) N CO (0 Cr) n 0) V) CO V CO O CON V N N
O O CO ( CO N .- W CO V .- to 4) 00 to O V tO (O (O O 1- 000 CO r CO. (0 V V 0 V .- 4)
h 0N N O V s- N N. r 1-r CO V N C7 0 N0 7 V r- V s- LO
0) (0
N
01
0
N
4) 0. V O O 4) f` O (s1 O O CON_ coW CO 0 O V CO CO00 0- 0 0 Cr) VN O W V0 0) 0 CD 4) 0 0 V0 O 4) 0 _ h V (0 0 CO (O a0 CO 0 0 CO O) 0. O 0. N
CA CO O CO (0 V O N O O V 4) i� W V to CD t. O? (O N 0 4) (0 N O V O W
V N N orO.— .-- CO .- - r- 000 N N Is0 IN V r 00 (0
CO V O n V) N- N 0) h V Ns CO 0. (O r COO) 0 N 0) N O V 00 (0 V) 1s
CD V' N V 0- (O 0) (0 CO 0 CO 0) V 0. 0- V (O O) N O CO V 0 1� 0 0 1�
NCO CO CO N N V V.O Isr- V VI V V V N` W C) (0 V 0 V) r N or).-• in(O
i00 V N (V O O .- .- N 4) N .- V C') CV N Is-.- N C V r V
LO
O 4) 10 0. 0 0 0) W (Vp O N O N N 0- N O 0 CO N N 0.
co O M N N O (O(0 N- 0 0 (NO a (0 0'- CO N N ti CO
M (0 W N O) t') s- (D r- 0) V O
N N N
M WV S 0- V
CO
CO (g' (0 N O .- Cr) sr
0 00
r W Lot()
tD N N (0 W
CD N " O' 7 4) O O
r N 04) '— 4) r- r- V Cs
N (0 V
It) O Is l0 N W O 4) O O 0 0 (0 CO CO COO O 0 co 0
0 N N O (0 O (O r V N Cc) CON O W 0 O t0 n N 4) O N N V
0 ... 4) N cV N CM r- rjr
.. .- ^ (() V N N of N N o (0 r 4)
co
O 0 n 0 V V (0 N 0 O CO 0
1-- 00)) (0 00 v 00) ((0 V O 0 CO)
O N
VI
mV
N
0
V
0 CV') CO
Sr 4 CO O O
V s- N V
m N
V
4) N O 0 0 Ost 0) N O 4) (0 N V) CO N
V CO V CO CO 0) V) CO N'0 0. V M.
Is
V)N 0) O N (O N .� *4)
V N CO N V CO 4)
N N tv V
0 0) V N 4) CO 0 CO 0) O 0) 0 CO V N (O 0) CO W N 0) V (0 O 0- Is 0 4) 4) 0 O CO 0)
0) W 0- O) N CO 0 N W CO O (0 to 0 (0 CO 0) 0) (0 (0 CO CO O 0) O sr CO CO CO 0W O V 0
0) O) N 0 V N 0 0 O CO 0 (0 t0 r a0 .-
0 V N N O ..- N W (•) " V V tD N W N V N (O r *4) n (0
N O N O O 0 (O N 0- to (D W 10 CO ti O N O O N W *4) O N N O O W V
0) (O m 0) CO CO 0- CO O 0'. 44) CO (O r V (O CO 0) N CD O W 4) W '0 00 0 f0
CO W N N CD 0 ^ 4) 0 O O t) N CO O CO Cr) 4) 0 M N O CO O N 00 O N
(0N (V N N r- 0 (() r- V ('') m N n CV N .- 4) N .- 0
N N
N O O CO CO CON 0 O CO 0 0 i0 0) 0 V CO C)0- O V)(O 0) N N CO 0 0 0 is 0 V 0 Is-
m 0 000 .0 co n co0) co4) V N 4) 0) 0- 0) CO (0 0N N- N O 4) 0(0 O V) N- N- N. O CO N N
O N N O CO 0 0 V N CD CO .- 4) .. V l0 s- COCO (0 0 (D O 0 0) V CO. CO 10 CO N
co 4) W O V ti V O 10 O N O V CO N•- O co r 0 (O co co co O 0 O co . 0- 4) V O.
0 N CO 0 CO CO 0 0) (0 0 (0 (0 0) 4) 0 CO 4) O'0 W CO CO 0) n N CO CO CO O V V 0)
CO O N. CO N CO 0) 0- N C- N N 0 V 0 0 V N O 0. N 0 4) O W CO V 0) N 0 CO O
N N tD r .- .- N. 00 0- N N N .- V .- C') N (') co of Tisr
O) N. Cr) V 0) (O COfa
(0 4) CO CO 4) 0) CO (0 0- O C') O N CO V' V (O 4) O) (0 0) W O O) O) O) r 0) 4)
N V 0) N O Is 0 (O 47 0 (O CO N }} CO (0 N (O CO a ^ W N W (0 V 0) W O O N (0 CO 4) CO
0 CO 0) N V R 0 O co V t 0 tt) W '- V V t l CO 0 I� aD i� t. V (0 0) ID
NN N 0') O) '- o (0 r- N .- V V 0 N W N N O0 4) r- N .- .-- 0- W
0 co m CO 0D r O W V W CO O CO CO 0- CO O W O N O O W .- O W 0
t') I� (0 0 CO V t` V O t0 r co N W (0 O CO O W ti CO 4) pmp
O) 0 0 V N 0. th CO N O CO V LO O CO 4) O V O N 0 r r 0 (O O n W O (0 sr
(`)
o N N N M r- CD e- 0 .- V V 0 N N. N N a 47 ,- N s- - N. C0
N
CO O (NO, O ('N) m COCN') OV 0 V) N toco0) 0 C0') 0 OWi. O00 ) 30) N O M VI 0(OD (0ti
CN th N N N 0) r- O tO ,' .- O V N� r- N. r• N V
to
Z 2 CL m
0Wo0°u)oCe
0< w g g O O O D
0 Co 03 0 0 0 0 0 0
DESCHUTES
z
0
Y
JEFFERSON
JOSEPHINE
=
F- zJ
2 0.1Y ZZ OO Z
Y _7 J J
MALHEUR
z 0
0 a
MULTNOMAH
WALLOWA
O
1-
t
03
CO
0)
h
N
h
st
N
1D
41
CHID
O
N
IND
0)
M
(.?
O
N
O
N
N
N
O)
CO
1-
r
0
111
0
a
0
Q)
N 0 N 0) r r 0 st t0 O 41 ID al r) 0 st et 00 'el t0 0 C0 0 A W V 41 M 4') et M r co CO 0 r
m Of CO r 01 03 CO r N N 4' N e7 CO 0) r r N_ t0 'a N N 0 40 co (0 (0 /0 M h. at M co CO N CO
O 41 r O V' Y 0 t0 t0 CD O f0 CO O/ M Of m M CO If1 N ;t r M t0 It O) O) O O �O M M P R.
0 CO M1 0 0 (D N N r 0 V7 r M M r O) N M et et n d eF h M tp N N M co co O et
r et r N N t+) r r 0 41 r O r M CO N 10 e• 1s- O0 Y r .t r r 0 4)
r N r r r r
N
CO
in m 0 Nat' N 0 (O CO M CD N CA O O CCO OO 10 M co t0 N V CO (0 00 ),.) CO h co V 4) 0 h O r Cp 4)
ty m CO () N N CO O N r h to M co V O co V p CO 4) co M. (- co O N O CO 1. CO
(y N u) CO V CO N CO r r N .- O r CO O r N N h M (O m N M N 0)
M
n
O) 0 N O CO CO co CO O V CO
l0 4] O Cp O CO O CO r 0 �t O .a CD N CO co Cr) M to CO O C1) CO CO (� CO CO 0) co h O) h CO
N CO N O h co m co. M O) O (O O M (() N r CO c.) CO O N N V co N h 4) V O) .- CNv 0
a co co I() 47 m 4) N N co 0 N M �- O) et N �. r
CO
N. V CO O (O 0 N _ 4) h CO O 0) CA _ CO COet CO
01 d' O .N- O t00 cog tCO 0) O M O (m0 l00 h O) CD V O m co N CO.O m (!) et h ((0 COsr DO) OO) O p O (70
CO V ,- t` O (A r (1 co N N M V d' N N t0 .- N 4) V' N Q t0 V 4) h M
01 )
O N
CO csr
co CO N O O N N 1 N N M N co 0 0 coN CNO 0 co et et O0 M?
N '- (O sr(O m N N th (ID N �." M 0 N
(0
a CO 0)) (0 d' � Oh) co � CS
Cho co
m st co CA (� CO O O W CO co CO O 4) COO CO CO N r c 4)
N 0 O (O h W O h N r 0 O O V N N ID V m (0 co m (') co .Nco O- N N.
co
cei O r N .- (D C N N h h 0 co N Cr) •N Ce CO O3 CO O N N CO M O) co m
0)
Ir N LO 03 M. V m V 0 O CO CO 0 Cr, 0) O h O N N M 0 Y O O M CO M W O N C5D O 0 M
N O N r- m. N 0) e- CO N M h r- 0 co N m r N V O) O V N N ^ N h c9,1) O r co
N
O CO h CO h h 4) M CO 0 (0 (A CO
(D m 0 M CO m m O O CO N (0- coO_ co CO Oco M 0 (O O V OO) V' cn 4') M Cr) N ti ChV
N '- r N 4) M co N N O r d' Cr) C M N • O N co N h T M
133,539 127,304
0) h
CO
141
N T
M
coco
r CD fN0 Q IN co N Lo co Cr) - COhN N 0 O M Lo co 4N7 0 M V � O d? (7
O m (O N c- Or •-- M a- O O N h N (O h co m
N 00 O) N O O
0) (0 h M N
N r r h 4)
V II) CD
a0
O N
N D) CO
N O 1.
CO 0) O 1, N et co CO
O V CDCn N V O N O N O co CO et CON
CA O (� N� (`? N_et CD (0 LC) 0') (0 W O (•Oj
•
O. N co Cr; O COO N h N co h
N
O
O) h CO 4) CO 1'. CO 4) O N N M m O O N
O� m N co N 4) (O N CC h V m N N N V et m O 1.) N 0 N h '. V' O 01
h 4) COO (7 O N N h CD h N N P (*i .- M c`N') N h N ti N h M M
rn h N N_ tr co O 4) cD h CO CO O p co
(c) v ... _ _) N O ,.. t.. O v '.' co CO_ N M m Oesih C3 CO h
N e}" .N-� (M Oh (0
'1 N N CO N N N N •-- ct .- O M (D N O CO 0 COON N M ti
N m
N M (O CO n cf') 0) CO et C(0 N sr
6 O O 4) 0 CO O V co M O CD
N r a N CO 0 (O
O tD O co, O N N h O W O N'. e- V' N V m M CD 1L h 4) O O M N
N r r CO m N N r •- V .- M N h (o h O COV N
CO
CD N 4) COD 100 O O N CO et ' 110 N N 4) r O W M (~ CrM�t (7) O) CO 0) CO My O co
CO LO et V 4) N O Qj 4)
M e r (. M fD N N M.., r er aN- COy N COh' M Cry
•
o 0) D) 0) Cr) et h() m CO o_ N (0 0) h h m NoCO h rn
CO 4) 'Q V CON0 IMOLO
N et 0 n r Cn m 0) 0 M 0.1 (O d' a m O C. O
(q t N 4) M r N m l0 N e-
V'
COOr�0- CO h N 4) M CCO W .� CO C_O ts. CO V CO N. N CD 0p CO CO N
O M M m m CA O O O 04. co O 4) 0 CO m O
m V' 4) 4) N M N CO CO u.. et V
h
4)
d'
h
h M
h
0
(D
(D
M
CO O .N-- C)
4) 40) sr CO (0 CO COV O N CO 4M)
CD co. 11 O '4- (O r
h r
N
COO V IN.. L�C})) h O N h N 40 O V' et CO N m O to h L O N h N CONN
4) sr
rs N M co. CO O V N f.. 0 M (o CO 7 4) N CO N N h
Is - COO O)
LO
C O) r (OO 1.. m .-
N
r 4) e-
CD
Cr)M. CD CO
fD m f•. m ._ CO COet et
coCco_ (A LLJ V co sr_ O 4) (�
m N 60i
ft/ CO ec0
CO CV
O O V h CO0O Nt0 h 0 0)(O
co
03. N ?.
N N N CO
0)
coco 0 4) h 47 O 4) O O N co co OCO h p O c} CO et
41 I— O N co V COOO 0 co N N coON N N O N Obi O O 4Nj coOV CO et
('`� N N
r N rM, •- .- 4) M CO N N TO r M .- N N h N co co 01 0)
C0
N N O O N N O h N N h O) N N 4) 0
A 0) (O CM7 4) N M 0) N O CO tT CO h M O p CO O) CO d' V O O O 0 COMO) N O O C�
CO O m Cn N I() m h �, CO N al 0 0 0 0 ( (? P. P. O CD O CNO C O CO N M. O1
V' O N �- N If) h N N CD M N N CV e- lV
COLUMBIA
}
0
DESCHUTES
}
U Q z Z
D J< CC
o CO 0 i
HOOD RIVER
z
0
0
JEFFERSON
w
Z
S f- J Z
( z O Z J
o g Q z z a
Y J _J J JG 2
0
ce
tx
0
MULTNOMAH
Y
z g 0 0
J W J Q 0 Q Q
00 ai = D
WASHINGTOt
WHEELER
O
t
CO
CD
CO
t`
ti
1
4)
(0
(4
c00
CA
c�)
3
cn
4
M
M
N
N
N
0)
CO
e-
O
cf)
0
a
O
0,
N.
N
CO
00
9 Ca ao (0 0
C) 0) M n C0 M P
CO O N (Cpp
W W N N CM9 r O cf)
N r
sI r V' CO CB c0 O �70 r (0 M N 0 N 0) 00 r
w 0) F. 0) r ♦` 0 CD r 4 00 0) 0) V M CO0 4) 0 CD CO 0) 00) CO CO M T. N 0) N 0 aY
r 0) M T. '4) a 0) I N iN0 4 0)" 4) v
T. r v CO
r r T. .3
V ti CO CO
p CO '-
of 0 CD M O N M g 4) 4) Cm0
CO 4) CO r N a N N CO ONi N. CO CO
to 0
O
00
0 0) N N N CO 40 0
0 03
N COO. N (00 CO
COT. T. O Y!
M
CO O
r Mr
O elf N. 0 IN
U) N
r
0) COOc.0 CO CO 10+ co 6) V p O N t0 OWi (0 m 2 CO O 4) N
N h W 4) CO •�,_- M W N N r N M CO Cc) m a V CO CO
M
O (+) ti
M
CO
h
CO
3
N
(D
CO CO CO l0) 0)) yM W 0 lO 4) LO h 0 CA
N m O ti c0 m N CO 1.0 0)) 0
N V C u7
N Cn
N
CO
coa Off) V' CO
CO
O 4) 4) h p O 4)
W .. N 4) 4J N r
o
W V O m)
(3) O ss
0)
4) N 4)
O
CO N O n Omi W co p 7 N m n 4) W cO CO N (V Ohi OV _p co co 4) co CA
4) co. M O O N N cOO (D C74. n 4) W CO (•7 CO )p M h
h V CO O)
•r et h M N cc CO m I� N
0
COCr,I. h CO M W h co 4) O W N co co 0 CO CO CO 4) N CO CO
c0 CO CMD OI r COWW m 4) Or 4) ct N CO O CO 4) CO CO O W ti COO W M T. r
T.N N N. Of N N (O •W CO M N N CI CO., <r W M N N (D ^ co
CO
CO O N OW) O M N N CCOO co N CA 0 c�O M h' O O M CO Cs1
W(0 O N CO CO
O) h O (O CO O N 4) ct O) m CO7 ^' 4) M 4) V CO N 4) h
r V CD M N N V W �' N N
N N N
co
or
M 00
Cr) CA O
CID
CO Cc) CO
CO h
Oh M
m
CO
(O N Is
co. v M
4) r
W
O co O
0) N
0)
O(O
� O
w
CO
N
N O
CON es)
� Ch
O O
("
� M
O
V' coCO O W N h 4) m O) 4) O) Of ID
(O N M fD .t 0 CA O O O W m CO (O O)
LO N . CD CO O O (�O M h N N n ti O M N N CO CON N N N O CO W N W (WO Or- N
T. r r '- �' CO O co co N rn N h N CO"" r M
N
T.
O CO m CO Cr) CO CO O O0.1 _ et M M W 4) CA (O (p O)
CO CD
4) r O N N N N h (h0 CO 0) W c(j m co OLO mi V M co
O T N to CA CO Oel N O N
Cej
N r CO 0.) (O co N r Or r m h 0 ('7 N N CO Nj W N h O V
140,113 130,229
O)
0)
O
0.3
M
co O) CO 4) N W COO M N O O 4) CA CO 0 0 4) CO
Or N (� O CD h( j oi co (hO 0) O h c W N o co n CO M co ' 00) cOO CO O CO o
CO N h N CO h CO
N N
1.0 CA •CD O m it:
m N c' CO h O N O 4) W CO cWO 0 V M CO (0 4) N
CO Oco
N of .4 (O N (O (., CO 0 (O O 6 0) N M co 8 Y N 1' a 0 0 r a (WO W co coO O 4O) CO O)
N r r,- a- h 4) (D M N O O O Nj e- N - L..j CO O CO M N h N CO N h N N M
01
V'
6 CO N en
CD m of
e- N n _ 4) N. M O W h T W WW (' 1
N (WO (m LO N CO r (WD - N m (•1 CO W
h N N
M
0
N
h
O O (.hj «1 N
W N h N
O
W
N
4) O a C) O h N 4) (O N h 4) (O 40 W CO
p 0 CO N CO (O csih O 0 T. co N N (J7 coWN V rto CO ~ V (Cf9 es, CO ( j V ~ O (ND
N r r r t0 M h N N '- d' W M co
N h N h N [A c+)
N
4co
,)
CO
V
cCOo
M
0)
M co �.. co 4CO CO h N O CD N. CO co
4)
4D (.Oj CO N O (WO. (NO (0 O O 40 51), M T. a) (O F N V 0I cIj O 00) co ^ 0.0
0, T.r (O N O N N F r CA m h N coN N.coN
M
M
o
cO et O CO coLC) 0 o <r
O M h CO CO CO
O CA Of 0tr) (Nj N- ot co 0 LO O h N co co CO a O) (O O h Oh O co M h N 0 CO CO CO W g
on
n r .- V N O cq O .- r O m O m M M N r O N M
N
r h 4) M V W CO h V N CO 0 CA O_ h V' 6) O Of of CO N O N O M (h0 W O cO ,- m_ N
CI) CO CO CO CO N N 4) cO et N. O CO W O (O O h (O O h ice. CO N LO CO 10 M V N CO O) 01 W 4) CA h <t r O C7 W N M h W co d.
N. 07 O N (L) c[j O N O N 4) 0 M M Cn N et (0 CO (.Wj , p it. N (O '4 O 7 O co
V' N CO O V O V h h 0 4) W h N M CO O 0) O h N COm 4) CO O CO N W N N h (WO ...-
N.- m 4) 4) N .- W (O .-
CO V e- T. '4 V (O ti
..-
a- h CO CO W M d' (O CO h N N N M (O W 0) V W C') O) 0) M r r a W N 4) 4) '4 CO 0)
(O (O N r CO O) �- (D (O M CA N h h O O r N .- M N . CO CO N .- N. W
W N r (O Nj N. CO N W h (n M O ) tl�' 01 N 4) m CA co h h 6) O 4) va',
r O N W O co N. O CO O 4) O W h (O 0) N co co O h. h M r W N O) 4? N. h V M O el CA CON of COO CO O h 4) M W CO.. O h N OV h O M CA
COCO(O O COCOC M A N.N O CO M .- .- ct ,-
a"...a-Cs'
co h N V O M CO (O CO N T CO 0 Of 0 _W h CO N
Lti CO (D 47 co V 4) co a 1.. (., CA O CA N h co co h W O 4) N N N CO
CO N _ cO CO. rco h W,_co
N h N M O N 4) W O (O coEc j 0 ^ N 0 O) c0 N
(V r 4)' N CO N N CO e- M r - CA N h N CO N h co Cc
i
3
L'
r
J
1
r N
CO 0 CO
DDco
O N O V (p Of /W0 CA f0 CD m N. N (n0 N eO-. N m O M r N a 4) CO IO m co,-
p M W M N (r7
T.r 4') N (O N N 0) m O N (O N 210
0 h CO
N M
CO LO
W V O O m 0 CT) V O~ O n O Nin
co
O N O O00 O W V M O W N V
O r 4) N 4) r ,- CO' M O V' O) N cO N t0 N I- O m N
a a
z
wO O(1) O
o m m 0 0 0 0 0 0
DESCHUTES
HOOD RIVER
JEFFERSON
JOSEPHINE
t- 3 o z O
O W O
� Y z Z �,
Z Z Q ¢ O
Y J J J J
MULTNOMAH
z
a c=i)
TILLAMOOK
-1 z
< O
� Z
WALLOWA
O
0
WASHINGTOI
c
W
J
W
-J
2
}
Table 10. Population by Age Groups (less than 18 Years, 18-64 Years, and 65 Years and Older
for Oregon and Its Counties: July 1, 2021
Compiled by Population Research Center, PSU, April 2022
Ages 0-17
Ages 18-64
Ages 65 and over
Total
% of Total
Population Population
% of Total
Population Population
% of Total
Population Population
Total
Population
OREGON
861,028
20.2%
2,596,239
60.9%
809,353
19.0%
4,266,620
Counties
BAKER
3,295
19.5%
8,848
52.5%
4,716
28.0%
16,860
BENTON
14,760
15.7%
66,493
70.8%
12,723
13.5%
93,976
CLACKAMAS
90,895
21.4%
250,697
58.9%
83,724
19.7%
425,316
CLATSOP
7,819
18.9%
23,363
56.4%
10,247
24.7%
41,428
COLUMBIA
10,628
20.0%
31,383
59.2%
11,004
20.8%
53,014
COOS
11,792
18.1%
35,139
53.9%
18,223
28.0%
65,154
CROOK
4,928
19.3%
13,832
54.3%
6,722
26.4%
25,482
CURRY
3,294
13.9%
11,777
49.8%
8,591
36.3%
23,662
DESCHUTES
41,224
20.3%
118,302
58.2%
43,864
21.6%
203,390
DOUGLAS
21,280
19.1%
59,785
53.5%
30,629
27.4%
111,694
GILLIAM
403
19.8%
1,128
55.3%
508
24.9%
2,039
GRANT
1,267
17.5%
4,060
56.2%
1,899
26.3%
7,226
HARNEY
1,590
21.1%
4,314
57.2%
1,633
21.7%
7,537
HOOD RIVER
5,507
23.1%
14,279
59.8%
4,102
17.2%
23,888
JACKSON
44,978
20.1%
125,917
56.3%
52,932
23.6%
223,827
JEFFERSON
5,683
22.8%
14,043
56.4%
5,164
20.7%
24,889
JOSEPHINE
16,044
18.1%
48,392
54.5%
24,293
27.4%
88,728
KLAMATH
15,005
21.5%
38,943
55.8%
15,874
22.7%
69,822
LAKE
1,591
19.5%
4,621
56.5%
1,965
24.0%
8,177
LANE
68,257
17.8%
233,989
61.2%
80,401
21.0%
382,647
LINCOLN
8,034
15.8%
26,899
52.8%
15,970
31.4%
50,903
LINN
28,554
21.9%
75,967
58.2%
25,920
19.9%
130,440
MALHEUR
7,623
23.8%
18,846
58.9%
5,526
17.3%
31,995
MARION
82,711
23.8%
206,094
59.4%
58,377
16.8%
347,182
MORROW
3,449
27.3%
6,975
55.2%
2,210
17.5%
12,635
MULTNOMAH
147,200
17.9%
553,217
67.4%
120,255
14.7%
820,672
POLK
20,093
22.6%
51,824
58.3%
16,999
19.1%
88,916
SHERMAN
363
19.0%
1,066
55.9%
480
25.1%
1,908
TILLAMOOK
4,947
17.9%
14,934
54.1%
7,748
28.0%
27,628
UMATILLA
19,960
24.8%
47,049
58.4%
13,514
16.8%
80,523
UNION
5,762
21.9%
14,690
55.9%
5,843
22.2%
26,295
WALLOWA
1,406
18.9%
3,730
50.2%
2,297
30.9%
7,433
WASCO
5,635
21.2%
15,221
57.3%
5,725
21.5%
26,581
WASHINGTON
131,918
21.8%
384,736
63.6%
88,382
14.6%
605,036
WHEELER
227
15.6%
756
51.9%
473
32.5%
1,456
YAMHILL
22,909
21.2%
64,931
60.0%
20,421
18.9%
108,261
Exhibit B - U.S. Census "Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for
Incorporated Places of 50,000 or More, Ranked by July 1, 2021
Population: April 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021"
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
2
O
0
O
0
O
O
vs
0
a
m N Ill 0 01 v-I M 01 00 00 0) 01 a -I O) m M e-i Lf) o tO o N N 00
e-1 0) 0 1f) in 111 1,-I 111 00 N e-1 0 N M O 0 1-1 lD N 1f1 <i N N C1 tO LO 01 N O)
111 N 1f1 fV to N 00 tD d' `l• 1-1 lO 1!1 tf1 O N N 01 4 n 00 O N N a1 to a -I Cr
n Ol lD 00 t0 c-1 a --I 00 M 'it d' ui l0 N 01 11 M e-I n tb 00 o d' to' N N co r lD
tO cl' 01 00 N N. in CO CO 00 it)Vt M 0 00 f\ i-I M e-I 00 N N n ul d' M N N N
d00 1D N t0 incY M N 01 01 CT O1 01 00 00 00 n N t0 LIDtD (.0 tO 10 lD lO tD t0 u1
CO. M N N a -I e-1 a1 e1
N
O
N
0
N
0
N
00 .9* O N u1 111 N V' i' 00 a-1 M N 0 N n cf N 0 0 CO 00 M N N 00 1O f- lO N
NM M IN 0 N 01 M 0 N tD 01 lO CO ct e-1 n m LA ' 01 01 N 01 00 N m N M
O1 00 N O M O N M N al a--1 ct u1 00 M N 0 4--I t0 t\ N LC) 0 N N M a-i 0 M �--I
N Ol e-I O e-i a-i 00 u1 M O co. O N Ln N t0 O 00 f� N 01 00 0 M N 00 N a--1 m
N 00 d' O ai O M 00 0 e-1 10 to N 0 00 N. N M .-1 00 00 f\ 01 n tf1 m m m 00
N CO N M l0 l0 M M 0 01 01 01 01 CO CO 00 N N l0 tD (.0 10 t0 '.O 10 t0 CD t0 V1
00 m N (Nls .-I ,--I 1--1 ri a -I eti
0 tD <-i N 01 No N N u1 01 N N N N e-I U1 N N N .4' N 111 ID Ol d• 01 N 00
01 00 m 01 M 01 1.--N ' ' .4 N N N 111 .4 t0 VIN CO 0 00 �- a -I N 00 a -I CO O 0
.-1 CT,N N N N d• ill 01 1 1A u1 M tO N u1 01 4-1 111 M 111 M u1 N CO 0 lO 1D N N
M 1- N h M d' ul Ol 01 00 111 1\ .4. M u1 'di ,-I- 01 00 0) <D a -I N O1 N N 111
0 01 CD 0 M 00 O 4-I ul .4 a -I 0 CO 1` N M a1 00 00 N 00 n d• In MM M co
v v kJ / v � ar l a, r w 00 00 I--, N 1D Li.) Li) to tD tO tD (.0t0 l0 u1
00 r N N ei a-i 4-4 a-i e-1 a --I
Geographic Area
.11
;,
c v
E E
c E
L. a to >
c 00 E to
t° c 7 0
as
t°
c c as E o 0 E
f0 > ai o E ° 0. °
Y C H .(0 t° 0) 0 O C = O` V N C a 'O
c In L.c v C U `~ o w '^ 7 a
3 f0 o v o NI a cvx "= o ,—�° aXi s v m O c p tau° co 'ri3crib c c L-
Z. - Q ++ •J 05. X 0 X ,.a,' O Z u two O >. -�'o X ro Z O` _u v 1-(1) 4
u
,+�' ? � . j, t° O !_' j. I- v 0 v to .4-, O ' V I� C y Y +.,
._ +_ u + _
.. 'u u u G = 0 . (,I - t to 0 N •� t6 O a� +O� ,�, 0 'u +.+ u a1
O to o 0 X a° iL u cu u c" o +'�.+ C u u E ',� 00 u -p u 0) 1n `
, Q ro 0 aa)i two < o o° c° E fD 0 1i +� >_ c o a t° o o. E
3 to u 7 O— c C C 7_,-
0._ = CO c r0 C t° '^ 0. trip i +i+ ] a-'
Z�U=a atntn0ln<� 0 C(..)ul nCIOZu..1 � ��m
OC
-i N m Ct ut lD N CO 01 0 a-1 N M - u1 tD N CO O1 0 e1 N M tr u1 tp N 00 01 O
e-1 e-i a1 a-i ,-I ,—I a-1 , -1 a-i e-I N N N N NNNNNN
re, Ranked by July 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
co
O
im
O
u
0
0.
0
a
C
d
H
t
ri
O N
CIJ N
E �.
W
O
t0 ++
0 0
C N
Q
O 01 0 N a -I Lf1 .4 a --I O l0 Ci' N N O m l0 c-1 Lf1 01 l0 N O a-i e-i 0 0 00 0 m m
M 01 a-1 d n 01 LO 0 Ln N N l0 01 N m O e-1 01 00 d' Lf) i. 01 c} a -I N 01 N
Kt Lf1 Lf1 N O d' m m O) a-i LO 0 00 CO M ct LO t0 N m 0 01 01 01 Lf1 a -I c- 1 I. N
01 N cp c.f.i. Ln 01 00 t0 n m 0) n lD Ol m to a -I N Ln N 01 N to' N Ln Lf1 N
l0 l0 cf cF N O 0 01 CO CO LD U1 Lf1 M m N a-1 0 01 01 CO CO N l0 N N N H
Lf1 Lf) N in Ln Ln to d' d' Cr.4"4. .4 ct m m m m m m M m m m m m
O
N
a♦ CO 01 01 LO O N 1.0 CO CO to m 01 01 1-1 Tr 01 a -I N in 0 O N N CT) 0 Lt1 if") m N
0 .4 Ln LA a-1 LO m 00 4.0 a1 N N Lf1 CO .4 N O c-i 00 00 CO 00 m 00 0 Ln .4 0 Ln
m l0 1-1 00 cF CO 01 L) a --I N .4 m N 00 m O l0 c-i 01 Lf) 01 N 0 0 00 0 N 00
LD rV c-I m Ln n Ol a1 O n 01 ct a-1 01 Ol N m n m t0 m 1 fV n 01 Ol O N
I� l0 d d N O 0 01 01 00 LO Lf) l0 V m N a-1 0 01 01 00 00 00 N cl' c! c-i N N 1-1
Ln Lf1 Ln Ln Lf1 Ln L1) ct ch d' ct ct ct d' d' ct m m m m m m m m m r'fl m m
0
0
N
Ln Cr) a -I 01 d' 0 01 N h 0 N 0 N Lf1 01 Cr) 00 N O 00 a-1 01 N. a-1 Lf1 Cr) a -I 01 O 01
m LO 1.0 cr Lf1 0 LO 0 N LO O1 N O l0 er O Ln O N .-L ct l0 01 01 a-i N Ln N N
N Ln a-1 Cc) I. Ln 01 (0 l0 N 11) V M N m .4 cf 01 0 N Ni n 0l 0 0 01 Ln f` Ln 0)
f N N da-1 ' N 00 O 01 N 0) t0 N 01 00 N N 1� .4 l0 N m m N O N O N n
O q N. l0 .4 'cr N 0 0 01 01 N l0 Lfl t0 cr m N a -I 0 Ol 01 00 00 00 N .4 Lfl a-i N N a-1
C 0 to in in in Ln in Ln v' v v C' CI' Q V'4 R V Ct m m m m m m m m m M m m
vL
ei ;
E
a
Geographic Area
co
0
U
0
0
u
Sacramento city, California
Mesa city, Arizona
0
c
p (0 ro c0 'co 0
4.
17.
o c 'C (0 o (0 c 3 0
C C f0 (0 (0 11f .CU _ co
r0 (0`0 c C O 0 .� ` _ Of ro ` COSi 01
co
x
00 cf .0 _ ro r0 O 0 Xro co CO 0 O O CU a0 j i-
O h0 Y U- �;, O on C N `O j, to U Zrt, ,4; y
al a) c o u +_?+ _O CJ a= co I- ` }' O U O U a'.'r u
U '- U U LL. U -le-cm Y Y �' U Ll U .N ? �-' >> a.,
�' !? +>'' N +T+ m -cm +>+ U O -0 '� o aT+ . N .00 U C c u L_
u u 0 u Q> N 01 O O t
m _2 m fo c m u c v u S° t) 03 c0 O ro 'cu v c a`f to
CO E 0 00 y ro Y C H Y C O c � r�0 co G Q '= a
co01
Q O u a> 3'S o H m Q a co 1- z u a = c'`n -I Uo
.-1 N m c1' L!) (0 N CO 01 0 a-'1 N M cr L l l0 N 00 0) O a -I N m . Ln LO N. 00 01 O
m m m m M m m m m d' c1' C' V' Ln Lf) Lf) in Lfl Lf1 Lit Lf) L!'1 Ln t0
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
2
O
O
0
0
O
N
0
r0
d
2020 to July 1, 2021
In
Oi 01
o o
m M
ei
0
N
ra
m
O
01
O
m
to O
m
01 N
00 n
O O
m m
CO ri M
01 M CD
r-I d N
N O 00
o O 01
M M N
O
ri
M
m'
01
N
N M
C/1 to
CD N
N 00
01 00
N N
N N N
a -I to 01
00 M
00 00 00
N N N
CO 0
tl1 N
d' N
01 N
N n
N N
n
O
00
l0
n
r+1
M M
rI ri
et m
N N
N N
to
01
ri
01
tD
N
r-1 00
In 0
00 In
00 00
l0 t0
N N
v m
n 01
01 01
in O
l0 CO
N N
r-I M
N In
N H
00 l0
to i)1
N N
to
to
LC)
cf.
m
0
N
O
0o m 0,
00 O 00
0o tD m
Ol N l0
O 0 0
M M m
m 0 N
ri
r-I CY) a)
O O O
ri rl e-i
M M M
r- 0o
N 00
N n
O 01
m N
CO
N
In
O
O
m
m 00
0o to
m tD
ri to
01 00
N N
t O N
o rn
01 00 01
N N N
t0 lD
to lD
to
N
n N
N N
O
O
01
N
N
N
ID t0
rI O
N N
01
lD CD
N N
t0
00
00
00
l0
N
to CO
.-i CO
i
CD in
N N
CO CD
In CO
tD m
00 vi
In to
N N
m 01
00
to 01
LD
In ct
N N
N
v
m
d•
a-i
m
00
rf
111
O
ri
M
CD
n
O
m
rn
m
to
O
M
N
O
r4
m
l0
N
00
O
ri
m
O 01
to 01
ri 00
M
O 01
m N
co
In
O
m
01
N
O
O
01
In
00
N
N
N
CO
N
N
N
01
N
O
m
CO
l0
In
N
O
lD
N
N
0
m
00
t0
m
M
t0
N
N
to
0o
m
l0
N
O
00
ri
to
N
N
N
N
00
N
'-I
00
ri
In
In
N
M
01
l0
In
N
m
d•
01
'zt
N
Geographic Area
CO
c
t0 O
C L
> CO
T L
C 1.4
0) Z
0.
>- T
-C• OL
00 0
c
4-4 ▪ v
a l7
1
0
>-
(71
4-4
0
J
Y
L
N
Z X
T I-
u .N
c'u
O
O C
C r0
Ll a
r0
0,
co
Z
T
u
0
C
0)
cc
In
r0 1
I0) CU
▪ T
'u
O u
"0 00
0) c
m "
m cf In lD N 00 Cr, 0 ra N M In lD N 00 O1 O r-i N M d• In l0 P 00 01 0
lD 1.0 l0 lD l0 l0 t0 t0 l0 n N r• N. n r N N N N 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 01
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
70
0
a
0
u
o_
'Yo
a
0
a
as
oc
a
L
O N
in
WN
E
® o
A a+
7
C N
Q N
O m LA l0 01 H Cr CI' m m in O IA .--1 m m ri O H Cr) LO 0 CO CO N o 0 00 01 -
m u1 m -' 00 N H O 01 0 00 01 0 N. N l0 m 0 l0 .-i o m N H H H 01 01 I� m
t0 N O c}' O O u1 Lc to N H N ill 01 0 l0 N N l0 II') i, 01 l0 u1 lO 01 00 N
01 N N l0 et N N O 01 00 I- L0 N a1 O O O 01 00 Lf1 u1 e} (V e-1 ei a--i
[Y Ci CY m Cr) N N N N N N N ri .-i a-1 e-I .-1 i-1 e-i e-I e-i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N NNNNNNNNNN N NNINNNININNNNINNN
N M 00 01 H 0 m 0 I, Cr 0 m m 01 IN m Cr) m 0 l0 m 0 l0 N 0 0 N d N N
N 01 In t\ I, 00 CO 00 Ln 00 LA Ln Cr 01 a-i a-1 00 Cr N ^ 4.0 01 rV 00 ' 01
I, 01 nt 00 u1 CO L0 l0 H m Ct N 0 tO N 00 N 0l 01 u1 N 01 N a-1 C}' N 00
00 e 1 u1 If) N 00 ri lD 00 a 4 CY N 01 00 l0 u1 m 01 00 N O O 00 l0 l0 l0 r N N 0
et d' m m N m N N N N N H H 0 e-i ri 0 0 0 ri H 0 0 0 01 01 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N H H N N N
O
O
Lf1 CO N 0 U1 a- I Cr 0 m CO 00 I, In H M N I-- La l0 In m I. H H N 01 L", Ln Cl'
Cf 00 m N O m 00 H H 01 N a-i N I. a -I N m l0 LO N m m L- O N I\ Ln H 00 O
m ' H l0 0 CO 0 l0 N CO H 0 O Cr 01 M e-I 00 iN LO N N 00 LO 01 01 0 Ln H 01
00 H l0 Ui. 00 00 N l0 01 e-i Lf1 M 01 00 et d' Cf' 00 00 O H H 00 LO l0 r to N N O
rf rt m m N m N N N N N r-I ri 0 H a-1 0 0 0 -1 H 0 0 0 01 01 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rV N N N N N N N N ri a-1 N N N
Geographic Area
CC
La
° (0 c
+,
is C •
o 11),
C •= eo C ro 8 co
m {•+ ry i0 �O in �O+ •` s 0 .0 m r0
r6 C 00 C C V7 0C C p Ip f0 •C OC I
i0cNos fO• t `p'cnf0 a m c O LL 3U a'- �° '^ c
•o Q X v hc-o m a > a u T ': m �� ra ¢ '='0 CO 2 Z3 z C� S axi0xT +T+Y? T yT, C_ li A01rT+-�0T/U v Tz '' j_rts
aT, U~CD
U0) +''uT+-�!-�u+,'Opp T T !_' u u Ln a,~u >^ 0) u u u u �'++0/ N V ,�•� U d d•, c m C 0 U U OU-1 C> V +, U -- N c v .1 u
m U Y O a VE co ad O t0'^ •+ CO u v L. v 0 C O O
CC1 O •� D O 00) 'o C C �O io 0 p O C O u C T O= O u � m
u Q L_ ro ico i0 c O C o •` 0 0 ro O(0 c +�-' X E
C7 N 3 m Z N LL o_ Vl N m 2 h G n. 2 0 G LL L1 IC} LL U U G J O Q
H N 01 Cr Ln lD N CO 01 0 H N CO cr I11 lO I� 00 C71 O a-i N m Cr LA l0 I, CO 01 O
01 01 al 0101 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H H a� H H H H H H N
H H H H e-1 H H H H H H H H e-i H H .-i ri a-i H H
2020 to July 1, 2021
l0 CO 1/1 U1 CD N l0 N N 00 N 00 l0 01 N N ri N N 00 a --I m CO tD n M m N 00 N
Ol N 1.0 N ai O O U1 Ni a-1 lD LC) al Cr Cr) Ul 00 a1 N al l0 lD 01 tD N 00 M CF
a1 ei' lD i)1 m rl a-i lD an 0, l0 m v1 l0 m 00 al U1 c-1 O a1 l0 N al Ol t. 01 01 .--1
a-1 O 00 N N N t\ N lD l0 Ct N N N al- Ol 00 N n l0 l0 U (
o O O1 al Ol O) al 01 al 01 Cr) O, al Cr) CO CO CO 00 CO 00 00 CO 00 N N N N. N N N
N N 11 v-1 v -i e1 a --I a I ri ri a•-i v-I a- I e-1 a--1 r ( N -1 a1 ei a --I a-1 a1 a1 a--1 a-1 a-1 ri r( v-1 a1
O P,
U1 00
CO in
r+ 01
0 0,
N a-1
O
N
O
lO
O
O
0
O
M M
Cr) N
-4 a-1
o 00
O 01
N a --I
Cr 00
01 0
U1 N
0 t0
O1 01
v-1 a1
lD m 00
a-i N Cr)
01 CO rn
0 �
co 00 00
a1 a--1
V Cr) l!1 N to
N 00 lfl m CT'
lD N m l0 01
1 N 0 N if1
00 00 00 N N
a1 a1 -4 a1 c-1
l0 01
0 00
03 Cr)
tf1 U1
N
a-i a--r
N N
CO t\
CO in
n Ct
N N
a• -I a l
O
al
L
a
a)
ICD
E
uJ
W
m lD N m r, N in 00 O m N r•i a1 O Ct Ct r• m N to M Ct N. 00 In 00 N Cf In 00
N l0 lD CO N 01 l0 Cr CO ul ri Ct' a1 CO M a1 M Ch 1.0 Ol m a-i 00 •zr ri m U1 U1 N
a1 N U1 N Cr N N 0 a-i lD 0 0 CO CO N U1 10 CO N N Ol N CO l0 rl U1 CY N rl t0
• 00 O O 00 lD N l0 O1 N a-1 O lD O O O lD tD lD 01 N. .-1 N' O n in In d' 00 Ct
o Cr) 0 0 01 Ol 01 01 01 01 0 Ol 01 O1 01 m CO CO 00 f\ 00 00 00 00 n N n N I- n
N a -I N Cs/ ri a1 a.1 v 4 e1 a-1 v-1 r1 ri r( ri a-1 a -I a-i a-i a1 v-1 ri ri rl e-I a --I rl a-1 r( v--1
Geographic Area
>
>
0
00
(1)
(0
m
0
an
0
u
▪ E
co
O co
�• �<
E
u I-
• 0 E
y
f6 ▪ Y O
▪ m �
C
00 '~ O
• In
C
(0 0O
ca s
co •
u 9,
to a
to -
E
L 1
m 7
co
c
Q �
(0 Y
(o U
O • u
o
U In
++ CO :
u v
0 c
0 N
(0 76
C Ll
.N X
c
O
r- = in
co
0
CI)
1(
h
fU
.00
co E >
(0 +T+
U
O
a 3
0) 0
O 3
2 z
(0
0
CO
a_
U
O
Z
0
1
(0
u
(0
.c
4O
co U
• +• T
O 'u
CO
L.) C
a E
• (a
co
o
(0 s
u
c c
co co
(n cc
a1 N m Cr U1 l0 N CO 01 0 r1 N M d' U) lD N 00 01 0 a-1 N M Cr' 1.11 l0 n 00 0, O
N N (V N N N N N N Cr) m m M M m M Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr Cr `Cr Cr Cr Cr CF CI- Cr Cr u1
a-i a-1 v--1 a-1 r1 a -I a -I a 4 a 1 a1 a1 -4 -4 rl rl vi a -I v-1 v-1 v-I H a1 a1 ai v-1 a--1 r( a1 v1 r(
H
a
C
0
a
0
0
.-I
N
O
N
a-1
J2
'O
G)
Y
f0
cc
1
O
2
O
O
O
O
C1
UN
O
u
t17
EC
19
O
a
O
v
C
0
a
w
10
0C
.-I
O N
N O
0J N
O
l0 �+
C
Q N
l0 N N 00 O d' ri 00 r-I .1 N M d' 01 N V1 .-i 01 t0 In CO .-1 ri N In N a-1 0 r.1 d'
01 00 in 00 L!') N 01 M lO 01 N d' 01 -4 t0 0 t0 CO 0 c7 ul M O .1 t0 N t0 dr 01 0
0 01 01 d' c-1 N m In N N 00 N N In N lD N N n U1 N .- 1 Ol 1.0 l0
In fV O O O 01 Ol 00 N N Ol 01 r t\ l0 to l0 cP d' cJ' N N e-1 e-! O O 01 Ol Ol 01
N N n N N l0 l0 l0 l0 tO In V1 in Ln 1l1 Lfl Ln i11 in U1 u) if1 I11 u) I.n Ln d' Mt Mr d'
r-I a- l ri r-I r-1 r-I e1 r-I , 4 r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I .-I c--1 r-I c-1 . -1 r-I c-1 e-1 r 1
N CO 00 01 (NI t0 ri N 01 N 01 O 0) N d' M d' l0 N. .-1 O in Ln M 0 01 t0 0l N 01
o N in N t0 N CO M n 01 t0 N ri c- O 'CI- d' In O1 cr t0 o co o l0 01 d' M .i N
00 ri N 00 00 t0 CO 0 N M N 111 M r 1 .-I 0 411 0 N 00 N. Ct 01 N .-I CO CO d' N
d' N 01 O 01 01 cr) m n 01 M N l0 M ul Ol t0 u1 N 00 O ri O N ,-i ct 01
I t\ i0 N n. l0 N l0 l0 l0 l0 I!1 ul L l U1 u1 If1 In u1 In u1 in V1 M In to 4l Mt d'
r-I ri r-I r-1 . -I r-I .-I ri ri r-I ri r^1 .-i r 4 . 1 ri ri .-I .-I ri .-1 r-I c-1 .-1 ri 1-1 a-1 .-1
O
O
M N d' d' N N, M N M N in LI1 'Cr N l0 Ct 0 M N N ri ri n N 11 IN M In .1 N
In u1 M d' O l0 t0 N c-1 00 M t0 N M d' d' N. ri l0 0 01 l0 .-1 N 1", to d• Mt l0 N
N m t0 ri M n .-I 01 01 1.0 l0 N l0 d' M 01 to 01 d' t0 N 0 00 In N M l0 0 N d'
yy d' CD N M 01 r-I 00 01 M M t` Q1 N N to N u1 01 lD t0 M N O r-1 O M N Mi. 01
O p1 f\ n i0 N N t0 N l0 l0 l0 t0 LO u1 u1 u1 In In u1 LI) In u1 ul d' ul 411 4l N In cr Kt
O m ri ri ri el r-I -I ri ri ri cri ri .-I .-1 .-I e-1 rl el r1 .-1 .-i .-i .-1 el r 1 .-1 ri el r 1 .-i r-I
IN vI
r1 %
74 E
a M
Geographic Area
C
cc
411
Io (Q 0) (o Y
aJ ... z fli 0 N i- 7
CO v 0 co •` o o ro >W °) o o _
o w m E o o f .m•.co a`wi w W(0 co 'E
_ `+- C U ,� H O C O = -. h- >T O to OD C
0 To
a=i " U 0 3 c o f° `
T 0) ,�, U (0 U t0 Z u p x A >: >.
u U u 'a r +, + o .a u u u u
l7 0
u l0 = 0) i= ra V 'O u C v 00 O u 40) :, 1
C . FA C to 0) ctffo U "0 (0 f9 C O� �) = O = tlb C to
an w
U (0 ›. 3 CO 0 — 0 0) _
LL 0 0 Wt� d U a N Z V 0. Y l� Q co
ri N M d' If) l0 N CO 0) O .-I N M d' In t0 N 00 01 O .1 N m d' Ln lD N 00 01 O
Ul in in In in In In in in l0 lD l0 t0 t0 l0 1.0 l0 tD t0 n N n f- n n t\ n N t` CO
ri .-i ri ri a-1 a-1 ri r-1 ri ri ri ri 1-1 c-I e l ri e-1 . 4 ri ri el ri r-I ri .-I r-I I-1 e-1 r-1 ri
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
L0 00 m lO r1 H CO M 0 O Ch 00 O d' CO O 0 LO H H Cr N 171 0 N H N Ln
N M M Cr H 01 00 O N O H N. H n 01 01 H M t o Cr LO l0 O In M O 00 N M
LD M M H N 1.0 0 H 01 LO 0 O1 LO 00 M Ln H H N Ln Lry N Cr M 01 N Cr 0 0 CO
00 00 00 00 N N n LO M M M N N .-1 O 01 01 00 N LO LO L!1 Ln L11 Ln u1 Tr'
Cr Cr Cr d' Cr d' Cr Cr Cr Cr 'Ct' ',ji' d CI' ' M M M M M m m M M M m M M m m
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
N
0
N 00 H N 01 0 H M N 01 O 00 LO M 01 al 01 01 H O Cr 0 H Lf1 N LD CO l0 M CO
Cr N N� O H 00 O m Cr l0 O N LD N N CO 0 N M ID H 00 CO 00 Cr 01 Cr ID N� N
m H N M N. LD N O M N-, Cr 00 <-1 H 01 Ni N H H 0 m LO 14 to N� H 00 01 rn LO
H r-1 CO' Ni' 00 01 N N N LD H H N m 01 00 O 01 N 00 N. 00 N Ln Cr 00 LD M Cr lO
Ln Ln .cr Cr Cr Ct cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr m m Cr m M M m M CO M M M m M m M
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
0
O
N
in d' N m 01 CO In m N m 00 H Ln N Ln CO H N. 00 O O N Cr Ln O 01 l0 Cr l0 0
in LO 01 N 0 0 01 LO Cr N M LO M LO m Cr b O Cr H O 01 l0 Cr Ln N. H N N 111
01 Ln LO H 0 M 0 M N M N Ln Ol rn 00 Ol 01 Tr H R1 m 01 LO Cr Ln LO M 01 LO N
H H CO- ri at O 00 N N R ri e--I r•1 M 01 N O 01 N 00 N 00 N Ln Cr OO t\ M Cr LO
Ln Ln Cr d' Tr Ln Cr Cr d' d' Cr Cr Tr Ch m rn Cr m m en m m M m m m 1n m m m
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
Geographic Area
C10 O u
.03
N co O 'E 'O .0 o fa .a 4 C f0 U U iC OJ
co co3 0) O &- 0) C
N L..) co _ 6 0) X@ 400 m LL u v` O O A O U 10 'a1 U O
~ U > d~ Z H U N U U y, no ��, •— • }' U U Z j, u.
I— T f0 .1..I X U T ,L..
+�' ate+ v �, ,� ate. ++ �; Y U +_�+ aTi L) ~ U .aT' !, U 1A ate+ �= .LT. ,1�; U >•
0 u ,�' +� u U V u ++ u ? �: u U 0) N +›: U .,' u .N 'D U N .0 U c ++
t6 O U -p 0) L U a'' +' C C_ y— U C U ! a _ 0) 0
0) CO O 0) C y 10 O > u 0 4Tu O C .L] O) d' O > OC1 �a'i f0 co
+-'c Y Cr L.'
— 10 t .— ` N 0� O t+/,) ` O. O E au `�- O U 15 Zy E
fLn
0 O•0) O COc0) ca L� co y O •� f0 N f>000 al N V V�1 N 7 �
D_ O. on O d' G LLn G H O> ll l7 7= o V T.
V Ln > o. W Z
0
(0
u
10
cc
H N M Cr Ln tD N 00 01 O H N M CF to LD N. CO 01 0 H r- M Cr Ln lD to CO 01 0
00 CO CO 00 CO CO 00 00 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 0) 01 01 01 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H
H H r'1 c-I ‘--1 H c-I r•1 H H H H H H H H H H H N N N N N N N N N N N
Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Incorporated Places of 50,000 or More, Ranked by July 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
2020 to July 1, 2021
Population Estimate (as ofJuly 1) I
tHOZ
01 r-I IN to N 00 ri M CO O tr) M m ct ct O CO CO CO 01 N 00 r-I CO u1 CO 01 u1 M
CD tr1 N N 01 tf1 to tr1 'Cr 01 N CO tO V to 1. 00 N N ell CO 00 N. m CO fN .-i o
N N 00 M 0 M r-1 CO N 01 01 01 01 01 N O 00 O co ct 01 01 O N tf1 Cr tf1 0 Is. 1.0
M M N r-1 00 h I: lO Cp tr1 to 'xi tff u1 LA' in d' M M N N N 1-1 a-' .-1 O O 01 I:
M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ri r1
ri ri a-♦ r9 a-1 r4 ri r-I ri r I a-4 .-I a -1 r9 r-I ri .-1 r 1 ri r l rf r-I ri a-1 a-1 .-1 a-1 a -I a-1 ri
0
N
O
N
ri 01 N 0 r9 ri CO N M CO 1.0 01 01 a-i N ct 01 CO CO 00 CF -4 N l0 ri CO I", IM N CD
tf1 O N N N st N tf, to 00 (0 N CO N 1.11 tf1 M N 01 N N 00 N 01 m O) tr1 d N [t
r I Cr 0 n m .-i ct 00 00 0 M N N 01 CD 01 00 ri Crt CO a -I 01 01 tf1 m 01 cl• 00 ri
d• M - ' N- n IN trl u1 CD t0 01 CO tr1 CO tr1 to O O O N <4 rsi. <4 O 00 01 CO
m M M M N NINNINN IN r-1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N .-i ri ri
ri ri a- I a1 ri ri r-1 a -I r-1 ri a-1 a-1 .-1 a -I r-1 a-1 ri a-1 a-1 r 1 ri ri ri r-i a-1 a -I a-1 r-1 .-1 .-1
y
O H
O m
N Cw
d
ri i_+
Q
00 00 C0 CO ct 0 IN a-1 0 ct N 01 tf1 N CO N to 01 01 01 cr d• 00 00 O d• 01 O M tr1
d• d 1.0 c}' N N In 01 M a 00 01 01 IN 01 M CO r-I M tr) N N r-1 M d• .-1 CO 01 tf1
m m m.4 N M c!• CD 00 01 ct 0 tf1 O 01 N. O M in tf1 N CO 0 0 00 N N a-1 N 01
ct M . N I� t\ n tr1 u•1 to CD o0 CD CD CO CO t!1 O) d' O 01 M N N a-1 r-i 00 01 tr)
m M M M N N N N N N N r•1 N N N N N N r-1 N N a-1 IN N N N N .-1 .-1 a -I
r-1 r-1 a-i r-
I a -I r-I ra-4 a-1 a -I I .-i r-1 a-i a-1 r4 H N 4 i i
.-1 a-1 a -I a-i a-1 a -I rre-1 e-I a-1 T-1 r
Geographic Area
10
10
10
A'
c
a)
E
c
ti
p ro
c h0 10 C
u CU j`` C >° 10 o c ;° = m CO
trl cu m o
C O o o Y 4- U ro % O Io co m a`i 0) F- c
a= 6 C _� o `n O X rna COam aci ,_ , `p _� 1- i_ E a j. 0 C c p 0
v) ~ +•' ax) •X O ��, a) O C 0 u co ",• f0 >. 0 0 O} O p u T
+-' T v F- O V? H T /o >; ut a) f0 V 4 p 11 At 1) J U 0 to 4'
tla v T >; Y u +' P. O 5" U +T� . i%. to ~ U >' v V OII U 4?' u ++ +-+ ? • p U C
1° a o u° co ? v c 7.3 3 c t' u-0 Ct u .}>' T a `O v t' in o .�
= p N N /a C 10 E C' 2> 'a Y h C O O -0 10 vv1i m a) Ul CJ O I20 v •C
•` >` f0 E a) 4-+ 0 O i a) C = a) QJ 1.) C 'O Q >• Q t
.- L -a _c c L° 1a E a) CL a, o C 7>> E a 10 c u ` E
a' <o o O ,1_, to 0 m a, p -0 10 O o L o m `� >
ti U U.e Z Q i.n U U- O_ in F- Q I- Q> U CC Q U n. _-1 Q CC 2 L.) ti
C
10
ri N M to CO h CO 01 O r-1 N N to CO n 0o Ol o ri NM ct to CD 1", CO 0) O
ri a-i ri e i ri r4 r-I r-1 N N N N N IN N N N N M M M M M m M M M M ct
N N N IN 04 N N N IN N N N N N N N N N N IN N N N N N N N N N N
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
2
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
C1
1(0
0.
N in tO Ln st .•-1 t0 N 0 01 Ln N 111 N Ct <-1 1.0 Cr Ct r-1 a1 c M <--1 d' crd' 10 rn
h Cr CO Cr 01 n Cr CO CO M 01 01 lD N O 01 10 00 CO Cr) e-1 r1 01 O 01 d• r-1 00 in CO
N r•1 O 10 111 Cl' M M 10 U1 d• Ct rn b U1 o O 01 01 CO rn ri 01 01 01 10 Ul d'
n N N N N 1O Lc)" t0 t0 10 Lff L l L71 Ln Ln C'j' Ct d' Cf' M t1.1 rn M Lrl N N N N N N
a-1 r-1 ri ri e1 <1 a-1 e-1 a1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 e1 ri ri ri a-1 r-1 r•1 (1 e1 ri ri ri i-1 e-1 ri ri ri
r-1 e1 a-1 ri r1 ri e1 a-1 e-1 e1 1-4 a1 a1 r-1 r-1 ri ri ri r-1 ri ri a-1 r-1 e-i e-1 e-i e1 e-1 a-i a1
ri l0 Ol rn Ol 1.0 10 CO N Cr CO 1.0 Cr CO M N CY N CO Ct ri O 1.1•1 N ri 10 00 tD 01 N
N N N l0 0, Ct 00 Ln 0, N M 00 u1 4.r) N. u'1 O 01 Cf 10 N 111 Cr M 111 M M 01 01 I,n
N. 0 r-1 1.0 O <I N N O N 1.0 rn Ln O N rn CO 0 N t0 a1 (V t0 M ty1 N tN N 00
Ln N f\ 0, N N N N N Cr 4.0 cito N Ln L 1 t0 rri cis d' Tr' ri N 4-1 N C1• cy'
a1 ri r•1 a-1 a-1 ri ri r-1 r-1 e-1 e-1 a-1 t-i r-1 a-1 a-1 a-1 e1 1-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 a -I ri ri , 1 ri ri ri c-1
a-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 a-1 a-1 ri e1 ri ri r-1 r-1 r•1 ri ri e-1 ri r-1 1-1 ri r-1 a-1 r-1 r-1 ri r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 e1
O
O
N
m N a-1 m 01 r, O 00 m O N tD in e1 N 0 Ln N co ri 01 tD T-1 N 0 1.0 Cr 10 CO
e-1 r, LO 01 N N 01 01 N m CO N In CO N t0 N 00 00 Cr 0 Cr 1.0 0 Ln N 0 U1 00 10
a1 0 r-1 10 i� N r1 N 01 N N Cr Lf1 CO 01 M rn CO a1 ▪ CO Ct Ci' Ln O t0 U1 01 Lf^ rn
LJ1 n (� Ol t: n n N m tD In a-1 Cp LA lD rnC- Ln Ct Cf d' ri ri a-1 N Ct c1
a1 a-1 r1 ri ri e1 ri <-1 1-1 e1 e1 ri ri a1 ri r 1 ,1 e1 ri ri e1 e1 e-i e-1 e-1 e1 e-i e-1 a-1 1-1
r-1 ri e-1 a-1 ry a1 ri r1 a-i e1 <1 e-4 r-1 ri r-1 -1 r-1 a1 ri e-1 r-1 ri r-1 e-1 -1 r-1 ri r-1 r-1 e-1
Geographic Area
f0
c
0)
`m w m
_C• 4-4f0 in C
4-` N a O O u 0
O = 0 ,o E • C. u
'. U CO L N co ` = i6 O U e .1 - c�
+T+ C .+T+ L '�ro m to Y y� 10 3 ra aC_.c L 0 c O c` G tca in
c 111
C L LL A c~ O_ U~ Z O 4 T Z en U N Z 1`�O
to `0 U u >. - _._, u > " U ro `° > (00 (0 O > >; O U ia ~ x
..c..0) a i u u c t' u 3' • 'u u a a v `- j >> 1>. �> tT' H
T m +' O L_ Ip u C O u T u }' O1 ++ >; = A Y _ 5 >.- u ,
CO += U U0 N O) 0 i a-� U U u �i c >� y, `• "O 0 0 CU in +_' +•+ ,F,
L u o T 10 t; an Q C U N-0 10 L C '}' u +T+ 0 N E Io u u • to p i-i
s a v-0 3 v, m v E tLi c=a a o E a o v" s �' = E ro
`_ N Y (0 to C L Y L 00 c OJ 't"'n L > C +, . in ` ▪ U 'v1 0
m v v u O u co ro Y v m o 3 co v D 3 • c r0 °1
Z 00 m:) U > OC m K J J U Q S D J LL> N Ur e J J J m O
10c
CC
a1 N Cr) Cr Ln 10 tN 00 Ol O ri N (0 C} U1 10 n 00 01 O 4-1 N M Ct In t0 n 00 O1 O
Ct Ct Ct Ct 'a' Ci' Ct Ct d' Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln in U1 Ln Ln Ln (.0 tD 10 l0 t0 10 t0 t0 l0 t0 b
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
In0
d
u
to
a
a)
00 LO Ln 00 N LO N O in LO e•i M M Ln 0 N N O N Ln t0 m a-t LO If) ct t0
t0 t0 CY a• t0 .0' r-1 Ln N 01 ) -I N N N N 01 01 CO r-I 4-1 l0 t7 O m O 00 O m
m to t0 M 00 CO co N r1 m tit ct LO .-I .-I 0 0 01 01 01 00 t0 cr 4-1 01 00 Ct
N ri r-1 4-1 O co- O O 01 01 01 01 01 00 00 R tD t0 (0 lD LA Ln tf1
a-N ri .--I ri .--I 4-) .--1 .-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
r-I a-i r-I 1--1 a- t r-I .-1 c-1 r-1 r-I .- l .--1 r-I r-I a --I a -I .--I a -I v -I .-i .-I a-1 ei r-I e--1 .--I .i r-1 .--I
01 N 00 t0 Lf) lD 0 m M r-I Ch Lf1 CO M N 01 LD N U1 V 1n LC, LO 00 N N d' 00 N 0)
r-I t0 CO CO M N ri N 0 N 00 N Ln tD n N r-1 01 0 LO N N N N N lil N
.-1 I-- r-I 01 0 0 01 N 01 N M LO lD t\ O1 a -I m r-I O M a-i LID 01 N r-1 n N In
N fV 4 r-I r-I' O O a-i O 01 01 O 01 N 01 Lf1 Lf1 00 01 N 00 to 01 to t0 M .-4 M L11
ri r-I r-1 r-I .-I a-1 r-I 1-1 r 1 0 0 r 1 O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ri r-1 r-1 a-1 r-I r-I r-I .-I e-i r-I .-I r-I s-I r-I ri r-I ri a -I ri 1-1 ri r-I s-1 r-I r-I r-1 r-I a1 r-I r-I
0
0
Ln M 00 N 01 0 M Lf) 0 N M t0 Ln d• 0 LO Ln a- N 0 M N d' LO 00 a• N N N� N
N N LI) a -I f\ M N r-I 0 N O d' M N ri 00 M M n 0 in 0 in 00 Cr Ln Ln .-1 n in
01 ri Lf) r-I Lt1 r-I N 01 LO N 01 O 01 in 01 .-I N a-1 N m m 4-1 in n a- ID M 01 LO
r1 M Cr' N .-I.O O e-1 O 00 01 7.- 00 N 01 LP1 Lf) 00 01 N 00 Ln 01 a' t0 N O M M u1
ri r-I .-1 r-I r-I r-1 r-I r-I ri O O a-1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o o r) n
ri ri r-I r-I a-1 a-1 ri ri r-I e-1 ri r-1 .-I r-1 r-1 r-I r-I r-i 1-1 r-I r-I r-I r-I a -I r-I r-I r-I . -N ri r-I
Geographic Area
m
:I'' 0
CO CO0 VO OVI
'B -O t0 II f0 f0 C as •( CO = uJ ai
O - _ cc_
O aJ •ry is G L
O E LL LL a0 N a H O 00 U O/ w O L' To _ C
O` _ j _ '� co x Imo (7 = t w m u O U o O E
p al 'p µ— u ro U U H O T U N U U a O 4-, Z ro
f0 L U U 41 tifco 7 !O �+ O ? ++ as L n
U C U@= T ++ a) +' U u T Z In 'u 0-2 > Yu U O U 10 >'
>: >; CO u T ro > >- O •y ,+T' I- 0=0 _c U .E.)-
'' _� i= F z,- +>+ - co u0 5-
L, v 0g >.Li o 4-N Oco'c> y a, u 0)
O io C a' t� m 4/1 L al t-0 O U >, U= 0 a c= O a c c Y
= v 0 o f O E oI) 61> 0O c=o Q f=0 7 a 0 v O �. N ro
O o et O
0_ o. 0 a.e )- u) U /n v) in v) C7 Ln 0 U I- Ln 6 U 2, w Q Z 2 Z IQ 22 m
r-I N M .4 Ln L0 N. CO 01 0 a-1 N M Ln t0 N 00 01 O r-I N M d' Ln LD N CO 01 O
N N N 0-- N N N 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0) 01 01 O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M
re, Ranked byJuly1, 2021 Population:April 1,
4-
0
a
0
1
N
0
a
a)
S
O N
4A o
N
E
00
CO •+
C • N
Q N
N .-i .-1 O) N V Ln m 00 00 e-i m 00 O 01 m Ln m a-i 01 01 ri .-1 m N 00 00 m 00 N
m 0 00 r` 00 01 n to N 00 CO 00 m 0 Ln M .-i tt N ei o N v d• 1. it .-i N In LD
cr *Cr .'-i a-1 00 M ei M O 01 N- M N 0 N M N .-1 ri 0 0) Cr) 00 n N l0 m 01 to
Ln Ln Ln Ln 'c!• c1' m M N N N N N N r1 r1 a-1 .--I .-f ri O O O O O O O 01 Ol
o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 01
a -I a --I I-1 r I a-1 ri a1 . -I ri r-1 r-1 .•-1 c-I a--1 a --I a--1 a --I ri a -I ri a -I a --I a--1 a- I a -I .-I .--I 1--1
.O 0 d' M M 01 N N N 0 0 Cr) N 0o m ct ct .-i a-1 LD d• 0 0 00 N Cr) 0 N n M
N N M LID to 01 to N N O m N O m m a-i N. In O CO O N. .-i 01 Ln Lo M N 01
.-1 m in N Lo .- 1 N Lf1 LD LD LID 0 a-1 M L11 In Cr) Ln Ct LD Ln N 0) .-1 03 M 01 Ll1 01 0
LD N N LD Ln Lf1 M N N .-i O N Ln 0) L0 m 'ct' 0i ri' r-i O O ei 01 O 01 N In O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01. 01 01 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 01 0 01 0
.-i i ri a -I eI a -I .-i ri ec-1 r1 .-I a -I .-1 a -I ei a~ ri ei ri .--I r1 ei a -I
0
0
LD m ri LD 01 LD d' In Ln 0o 0 0o 01 l0 m CI' CIm Ln 00 00 [t CO N 01 LD O �t LC)00 LD t0 LO a-i ri a -I N N 0 01 'N n N a)Ln in 00 N m m N ei 0 a-i 00 0
N in 01 01 N N LID L0 ct r1 LD 00 LO e-I 0 a -I 01 O LC) n O O N N. 1-1 N 01 N 0
LD N N US.Lf) Ln m N N .-i N Ln 01 0l Ln ,--i'.4 01 ei e-I O ei 1 01 0 0N 1 I) 0
0 4JL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ot O O Ol 01 01 O 01 O O O O O 01 O 01 O 01 O
N (0 e-i .•-i ri .-I ri .-i r-i .--I ri ri e-I o-i e i e I ri rI a --I ra-I l a--1r1 ri
0 Ca
N o
.` • 1
Q ▪ W
Geographic Area
4-,
VI
7L N
D
`6 c co 0 fO ▪ U v, O CO
m O O c rO m �O m m v0i m,� LO c m
c O o i6 ` �, O c ,v ` O c CO c an
c o h- o x �o c .` o ._ c CO o s c o • +, v
io U '� ,O T iO • +- T N O 0 O Q •- m • o3 coo V Q O F-
V U ▪ ty„ N (..) +' U U V !- ._ T N? a C - cc • y V U N C T 4 U T .N
? j. U t> T U N 1-a !� I- ++ ? T - G �: T.
fL1 a-+
• •u 'p .:-' �; C U LL U j. O O V U +• T+ t o y0 iT+ i+ N •� w O
a+E tap C 0 • Tij
o U O m N CO
�, 7 7 V C▪ O O T �= to T L]. C tv a'' u p o Y to
0 v o •v ° _0 E v Y >• a`, c v a m E m 3 do
U O fd O O t▪ y0 �r N "O -c i00 N 0 m m 1'=i, •7 > 0 0) j, o .==. O ++ rc0
LT) m cc 0 O.' m Ln >> J W U In oo U m Oil CI m S Z J U -J I- Z (/) 1n
c
cc
a -I N m ct Ln tD N 00 01 0 r1 N m LD N CO 0) 0 ei N m Ln LD N 0o 0) o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rl a -I r-I a-i ei a-1 a -I ri ei c-I N N N N IN N N N N N M
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
O
L1.
1
0
u
1
w
0
IZ
0
0-
CD
.O
iIl
FY
L
4-
O N
in 0
N
E
w 3
W
0
CO s+
3 O
C N
C
Q N
D N r- 1n N. to .-i 0 m 00 r N N b ,-1 t0 0 0 td d N 0 N 01 d m cy N
00 m t0 1.r1 V1 r I 1-1 l0 d' 01 I. a) N 00 00 00 V u1 m 1n N C}' N 0 t0 01 CO M . 01
N 0 CO CO t0 (.0 N CO 00 0 111 r-i O I-- N. m m N N 0 01 CO [t 0 01 00 CO 1.0 u1
a) a1 W 00 00 00 00 r- t0 t0 t0 1n u1 u1 ut 1n 11 u1 d• 4. e} cr a' M M M m m
01 01 01 01 01 01 al 01 01 01 01 01 01 0) 01 0) 01 01 01 01 M 01 01 Cr) 01 01 al 01 01 01
m 01 1r) 01 CO m I,. Cr 1n cr 0 11 u1 r-I 00 0 0 m 0 at m ,-1 CO to 01 1n CO m
m r-I 1- r-i 0 m d' 01 ri m 01 00 m d' m 01 ch m N m CO m u1 0 m 00 . d' 1-1
I. 0 CO N 0 0 00 t0 0 N u1 Is, 01 0 0 01 01 m m t0 00 I. t0 t0
of ri of ri oo ai N 00 00 to to mi.b (0 .I' rn .4 a' d 1ri 0 v rn C1
01 0 01 O) al 01 01 al 01 a) 01 a1 a1 a) a) a1 01 al a) al a) a1 a1 a1 a) 01 01 00 al 01
0
O
N
N 1-1 1-1 t0 mt u1 ,-1 0 1n d' m st m 00 00 t0 CO al N 0 cl' N r 1 00 a1 Cr) CO 0 0 al
00 m ri m 00 N ^ ri r-I N N r-i u1 1n u1 al 0 CO m r-I 0 m m N m r-1 a1 u1
0o ,-1 0 r-I 4 m u1 0 al 0o 0o m m m ,-4 m 01 u1 al O 1n r-1 1n 00 01 m m 01
a1 r-i 0 0 00 al I: 00 N ui t0 ct N t0 m 4 m I-: 4 vi u1 0l cY tt M a1 ,-i u1
al O O a) al 01 01 01 (71 Q) 01 al 01 01 (7) al (7) 01 01 a) (71 0) a) 00 al al a) 00 a) 01
r-1 r-1
Geographic Area
cc
O f0 Vn
tO c .f
m ra - v
C s CO�c '_ • f0 f0 co - (0 ,- f0 f0
•C Y 0 ti0 E � c O > c U • f0 t -O .c
p c O • fn fa d Y j fa c to O O
_ • 13 s f0 n 00 vl 4-
v0i ,...0 •.., E i_ • .0 LL '� tc0 Q V c ,^ > r�'0 u. • _ c
VA To
.4 N. N > N LO • LL �- 0 T +T+ ) U N Z H U
Z +, ++ 2 1- c
i"' fTo F=0 c U T v = aL-, Q T >: T c +>+ U a-' v O1 = ,n y >- >. a'' ' �, .4-, 0
fo 0) m • u 0 4 0 ate+ 0 0 0 �O u 0 N> .71 'O O 'u u 0) a- _ too u c
c'cn N o m .0 >.. t U U (0 Y a; (2 c 'V C c °' V f0 c .f0 O1 — > VE O d
o >. d > = a
p y v}'i _� p 3 co 7 O O a� f�0 d to fro m 0)co O c is u_cri 0
Y LL d' Z .j Q m O O. >- >- N V) CO 0 I- W J U. V) N CC J U Q W U. 0_ O U
r-I N m cl' 1.11 lD n CO 01 0 r-1 N m d' ul l0 I 00 01 0 el N m 1n t0 N CO Cr) 0
m m M m m m m m M Cr d' mt Ct V1 1n 1n u1 1n 1n an V) u1 u1 l0
m m m m m m m M m M m m M M m m fn m m m m m m m m m m m m m
re, Ranked by July 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
a-+
f0
O
a
L
0
u
c
0
c
0
0.
O
0
QJ
Nr
as
4.
L
O N
in 0
N N
E
W
LO r
C N
Q N
LA N LD LA 01 0 01 00 O1 in N d' LA to ct N CO t0 LA CO N 00 CO *4 CO CO d' 00
M t0 00 N 00 m ct 01 CO .t 0 0, Ir N 0 Ln LO to m e•i 01 N LD 0 01 a1 t0 Ni a1 O
LA •• 01 O1 in to [t m N N e-I a1 e•-1 '-I e•i 0 IJ d' Vt a1 LA m M N c-1 00 N 1.0 LA
M M N N N N N N eV. N N rl rl a-i e-1 rl O O O O O 0l• 01 Ol 01 Ol 00 00 00 00
0, Ol 01 0l or) 0, 01 CO Q1 0, 01 01 01 01 0, 01 Ol 01 01 0, 01 CO CO CO 00 00 CO 00 00 CO
d' m 0, N N 01 00 a1 co Ct Ln LL ) Ct e-1 e-i N O N O M LO e- I a1 u1 00 CO CO CO ct
N 0, l0 l0 00 00 N N N LA LA N m N e-1 t-1 N LO m V 0 et m e'i LA a-4 m 01 Ln N
O M 01 m LD 0, Ln 00 to m N 01 LD N N Ln LD l0 CO N 0, a1 0 Let CO *4 m 0 e I O
LA M ai a-i N N m O a1 t0 N O N rl N O 01 O 01 0, O 01 O l0 0, 00 t•-I 00 0, O1
01 0, Ol 01 al 01 0, 01 01 00 01 01 0, 0, al 0, 00 01 00 00 0, 00 0, 00 00 00 0, 00 00 00
O
N
0
N
N 01 l0 Q1 a1 N 01 CO e•i Ln N m e-1 LA 00 N O N Ln N 01 N N a-1 N .-I Ln N a1 N
LO LA m 00 Ln 01 LA CO m N d' *' N. O N M 0, Ln in N 00 N N V a1 N N 00 LD Ln
m Ln N 0, ID CO N 10 N Ln N c1 01 O Ln m- 00 00 e--1 O a-1 N a I O Ct L0 00 M a-1
Ln m c11. O Ni. N m O a l Ln N e-4 [V e1 rel.. O CA O 01 01 a•-1 01 O LD O CO- e1 R Ol an
01 01 0, 0-, 01 01 01 01 01 CO 01 01 0, 01 01 01 00 Ol 00 00 01 00 01 00 0, 00 01 00 CO 00
Geographic Area
co
C
O
f0
U
c0 L C a1 t0 to +1., —
++ 0 L.. •
v
p �A c 7 .m 'C E io
0N •C O` vL
O Ln c o u E L^ �O T '^ co tO O
`° `° "_ `° ' +� L O. co a! N 0 � a• >i .@ C — O U 0 L
` m `° `° c L�i1 c - m U= a� m m c c c o '= t o m
O D O` U O N c m 2 00 E 'C U Y 0_ (J _ tn
u o o ��_,' + u CO c u CO 'c o L > Q �›' _ Z= LO
U U @ Q t7 u C S U Z co Q T Z iO `= v N_ v U ,� �: 7,
) u 0 ° H V • A j' V U f0 Z c U U ++ +' 4.>• =
+_' c N 'v v E N +• '� a, c �} u i u a� i° c o75
+' V A L U U +�'' 0p al C
U ° i+ V V > d Cii al -6 _le
L0 Lj O CJ a! U :I' C .+L•' '` v c C — fO 0/
o c 0 g 3 0 c, 3 t co4_9 o a o v .o E L� o v° CO c aci
c`a v `O :c 0 o VI ° -Cu o ` `o o m r3O ° ` a�i a Lo L := a`, o° `�O c ` co=3
U IY 0. U S cG 2 2 co L.L Y Z L/1 Z N -J Q.- S = L°1 U co u In C7
r4 N M *4 LA L0 N 00 01 O ri N M *4 to LD N 00 0, O <-1 N M *4 Ln LD N 00 01 O
l0 lb LO LO l0 t0 l0 LO LO N N N N N N N N N N 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO CO 00 01
M M m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m M m m m m m m m m m m M m
re, Ranked by July 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
O
O
0
0
0
0
0)
u
10
0
33
a)
0
a
O
0
IZ
0
a
CC
t
M
O N
In N
E
rif 3
O
10 ++
C
a 0
ui M O) M N N 1.0 1.0 M CO O) N N O) m (NI 01 N O) co .-1 d N LD IA 00 N
Le) Cr) O uu) O d LO M 0 O) Ill n l0 M N 01 O) d 01 a --I LC .-1 .-1 l0 01 N .--I CO 01 O)
N .-I ID d d 0) 00 00 00 N N M M M N O N N lD l0 d d M 0 N L l u1 d N N
00 00 N N N LO LO L0 L0 l0 l0 LO t0 l0 l0 l0 iJ t(1 N LA Ln u') Lf) It d d d d c(1 c1)
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
1-1
0
N
L!1 d 0 d a-1 Cr) 0 Lr) n LO l0 .-1 e 4 (.0 0 00 CO LA M d N d u) M M N t•-I N
O) 00 01 N .--1 l0 .-1 NCO N LA 0 L0 .-1 N M d 0 d u1 00 L1'1 .0-N m .-1 n N CO L0
lO l0 M l0 Ol l0 00 .-I d r� m LO 00 N 00 01 O) O s-I LD CO d 0 M M d N O1 N (7)
00 N N 00 N LO to N 00 L0 to" LO Ln LO LA N. m LO n u1 m N N d LA lO LA M M .•-�
00 CO CO 00 00 00 00 00 CO CO 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO CO
0
0
N
o N .-1 N. oo LO .-+ LO d 0 0 VI CO m 00 Ln CO O .-1 .1 N CO m M .-1 00 m m .-i 01
M O) Cr 00 .-1 N LO v-1 a-1 fM to d N N lD to r� b Ln m d m 0o .-I .-+ 00 m d Cr) Lr1
N d d N O d d M l0 00 LA LO 00 CO 00 N LD O m n m 01 m m d LO d 0( 0, N
00 ri N 00 00 LO LA N 00 LO 0 U9 L0 Lt0 Ll1 00 M LD N ul M N d u) t0 Ln 1M M ri
0o 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 CO
Geographic Area
Santa Fe city, New Mexico
vf .f0 m c +' c on
i-+ L 10 +' v m 10 O� +0 L
h 7 O .` ` (O co 7 •.12
O L co •E O 0) (0 10 W- C Fzi E 2
C t m o u +� Li o 'c o GO a) •c 'o u cc no
(0 U U `•1. N ON CO ? w L 'F" C f0 L 'C G y A
(0 >: (o u CO m C a) 00 +' u 10 4- 10 s 3 0) Ln O o > _u
7.3
U f0
'Cr)_C v F� u ~ T ? u D !_' 1- >, •0 (u0 Y . _ 5
Z:z
N 0 v 0 4.4 T O' j - U u 'D U LC.. U O) . y U in
'lJ s. m c- V O u
C m D L
u t N O C Ci v .O 7 >- 3
000 0 C u E c E 0` O LL x Y Q +'� 0 D- 'x ++ a) 'C O
0. 03i +� (C0 ` to C > ID �00 1Co 7 CN CU (c^ N co N 7 O ? O1D N O N j.
In Z U N m r"' J 0 0 0 G 2 G J Q IN Lt. h! C Z m LtL J
co
ce
-1 N M d u) (0 h CO 0) O - N M d Ln LO N 00 01 0 .--I N m d Ln l0 N 00 01 0
01 01 01 0) 0, 01 01 01 01 O O O O O O O O O o .--1 .-I .--I H .--I .� ei .--I 4-1 .--I N
MMMMMMMM
m d Cr Cr Cr d d Cr Cr ct Cr Cr Cr d Cr Cr Cr d d d d d
2020 to July 1, 2021
1441
3
4,44,4
0
ca
HL
�CC
G
tit
W
c
0
La
0.
0
a
H H H L0 0 H Ln N M N. L0 lD � .-1 H N a-1 00 H 00 m 01 01 H N 00 00 to 00 Ln
l0 H H LO CO CI' LO LO CI' CO r-L Ct N H l0 01 r` N H N H M 00 N 00 N. (.0 M N H
H 0 0 Ln Cr m O r\ tD LA LA N N ri 0 LO l0 t0 Ln Ct H 0 O 01 01 01 00 00 CO
m rA N N N N r1 .-1 H a --I -1 H a --I r-1 e-f O' O O O O O O O O1 01 01 01 01 01
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 CO CO CO 00 CO 00 00 N b r`
0
0
Ct 00 0 M LA t!) H m O 01 to LA 00 N N to H m m 0 N H LO Ct 0 H r` '-I N
tD LID (.0 Cr) 01 H 01 H 00 LA Ln 01 N Cr 01 U1 Ct 0 0 N 01 00 M H N 0 O 01 01 Ct
00 01 01 CO Cr Ln tf1 N H u1 Ct Ct Ct r` m m M N Ct r\ O LO CO 00 0 CO CO 0 CO
Ct M N N m N N H Ct O. N O 01 N O V1 N e-i N O 01 00 O to O r- 01 oo
ao 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 N. CO 00 CO 00 CO 00 CO r` N 00 N. CO r` r` r` 00 00
O
Pi
0
N
ei
C.
a
Estimates Base
O m l0 Ln CO N 01 0 ct LO N LD r-L r\ Ct 1.0 H r- N LO H a-1 L11 N. N N t0 H Ct
00 r` r` m 01 m 01 LO m 01 01 N m 0 tD m N 00 N 01 LC, t0 O r` Ct O H 00 00 Ln
H H 01 O1 t0 lD Ct r` N 01 LA m O 0 m Cf 00 01 N l0 tD t0 C' rl 0 ri 01 N .-i o
Ln Cr N lV m Cf O1 N O 01 m O L!1 N H N O 0, r\ O Lt �-1 tD 01
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 N 00 CO N. CO 00 CO 00 00 00 00 r` r` 00 r` 00 N b r` 00 00
Geographic Area
co
(0 c
1a Y c ftf to
C L
co co
® c ` L. O 00 - '2 '0 no
C - L _ t0 N lV
c13
8 jn V1 `0 m • 0 v m .` co .Id E ca m O 2 co O
to ._ aJ Ol O to U a) p V 7 O O '� >; 'L'' L'L' . c ra c
-p -0 m a! LB z ? L ;�- = O u. c •- O ++ > >; _O •E c
.0 U= .� T +-' +>+ u u `.� V O >• .� t10 U tl CO
LD Y u Er_ 0 . 0
w A T >. O u a/ N c 0 Y T u u u +_ O .aac u +_, c t >
7.
C Y 4+ .L-+ ++ Li Y u CJ v> .Q >' u +' N u ulorj ro a1 u " O 0 u
L u T N s c O :" Io u CO -0 LB O -0 m a O
O m Y c c +� L 3 u u L co to ? O N 0 00 c p ''' -
0 CO 3 o o j0 3 °C c C 0 E 0 v .4-._
3 v • -.0 -, -- 1O u E a 0
me 4- +, c 4.
u z LLo ro °0 c v 3 • 0 '^ s to Y cc_m c coY E c 7 > L L po v. T
U co U 00 J J ccZ G> tOi Q UL J Ll.. J= t0 m 0 D. J CO n. U.
cc
H N N In L0 r- 00 01 O H N m Lf1 tD r- 00 01 O H N m Cr Ln t0 r- 00 01 O
N N N N N N N N N M M m m m m m m m m Ct 4 Ct Ct d' Ct Ct Cr ct Ct LL1
Ct Ct Ct Ct Ct Ct 4 4 Ct Ct Ct Ct Ct Cr Ct 4 Ct Ct Ct 4 Ct Ct Ct Ct Ct Ct CF Ct Cl Ct
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
2020 to July 1, 2021
n 00 CO O Cr Cr lD f71 rl CO m if) d m N N. co m n N o Ol sr o1 N Ct M Ct
01 CO M M N N. CD O n ri O1 CO lO 00 L!1 ,-I 0 Ct 01 N CO O1 CO CO *0 .0 CO t!1 U1 N
lO Ul Cr Ct m N O O 00 00 l0 CID Lf1 N N L!1 Cr N .--I .-1 o 01 m 01 n it m m M
m 01 m 01 O1 01 01 O1 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 n n n n n n l0 .D tO LO l0 lD l0 l0 l0
n n n n n N. n n n n n n n n N. n n n N. n N. n n n n n n n n n
1I
N
O
N
lD t!1 00 M n 00 m rL CO rl 00 Ct M l0 rl CO 01 O N 00 M 01 O n N O M N 0 o1
M ri 1.'1 N 00 I -I CO n 1r) I11 M Ct N N O Q1 c-I M N n Cr n lO 0 N. 0 M N O N
00 N .-I O n .-1 m CO 00 0 0 N 'Cr N N N. 0 M lD I/1 et Ct 01 CO n l0 M Cr N. O1
01 00 01 O 00 01 O 00 n of 00 00 lD 00 0 00 0l lD l0 n 00 10 l0 n W l0 00 M m M
n n N. 00 N. N. 00 n n n n n n n 00 N. n n N. n n n N n n n n n n n
N N
VD Cr
O N
ao of
n n
N
Ct
rl
0
00
'Cr O
N rl
10 rl
00 of
N. N.
U1 Ol
n O
N
0 Di
0o n
(.0
VD
n
m
n
U1
00
n
O
O
O
CO'
n
M
n
00
N
e-I t!1
N m
Cr O
o Di
0o n
CO 01
O1 LO
N 00
of Ln
n n
n
n
VD
lfl
If) .-r
n rn
n lO
n Do
N. n
m a-1 Cr Cr 01 4-I LL1 N m
lD 00 U1 n m .-r N
4-.1 n N Ln Cr l0 m 0 01
u i l0 N lD' lD oo rri rri tri
n n n n n n I. N. N.
Geographic Area
r0 0 ,m
c co N m ,m c ` c
co v_ CO .� c o �o m_ o
rts O Q h-
p�Q— 5' E u .a 9• CJ
LL O
>• 4= T U T m 42 T >T co u 4
5
fa +' U L V y: 5: u U u u A 0 u
u 0) >; Q + oD X vt 4-, 4-0 O
U ` V1:2V d= ` •C C
-0 •� •,c—., v CO a u Ou Q c 2 0 co
n ` to 7 0 !1 >- m t0 N L 7 0 N
0. LL. ]C I-- -. O 0_ Z u V Q CO O.
E
1) to ro c O
ro o - o
xa, o c o co c mrO to P-
O c r`0 •N c t0 co r O L- a 0
3 0 o m o'2 u '~ y° m u
u 0 U N ra .` c a ?� c
-c 7.
'> •v Q N > ? U O
zu 0 U >- 7 > -- U U V Y
U 0O V U
ro
7 'D t�0 E E o N O G7
0 N
_ ? .c co 0 m 0 vt
15
N O p cvo v 0 tO coo >. +' co al m
m LL .._l cc If! L.L. 2 D_ Q 0C o
ea
cc
a -I N M Cr U1 CD N 00 Q) O e-/ N M CI' U1 l0 N CO CO 0 rl N M Ct 10 CO n 00 01 0
U!1 ul 10 t!) M L!1 U•1 Lry If) CO l0 CD CD lD lO lO l0 CO l0 N N N N N n n n N n 00
Ct Cr sr sr Ct sr Ct sr Cr Cr sr Cr sr Ct sr sr sr Cr sr Cr v Cr Cr v Ct v Ct Ct Ct
2020 to July 1, 2021
'Cr 00 0 lO CO cN' d' 0 t` Ln Cr 0 N LO N CO 00 N e1 N Ol 00 00 N Lo LO N N rl Ln
00 N 0 LO Ol n N N 00 N Lfl Ln N al m LO m O 01 N Ln 00 Lf1 N. N. L-1 00 00 O
�-i O O a) 00 00 LO M M 00 00 00 U 1 cf' M i-4 c-1 00 Lfl Ul d' N N co 00 00 LO Ln N -4
LO l0 LO LA Lfl U1 L1l If) Lf1 Lfj cj' d' d' d' d d' Ct ct m M M rn co- m N N N Ni N N
N N N f\ N f\ N b N N N N N N N. N N N n N n N N f\ N N N n t\ N
1.4
N
0
O Ln N d' N O Ol n M 0 0 Ol M 00 CO Ln N N .-i N .-1 M N ,-1 m U) e-I m N
to m N Ol tO to N N N (-I 0 00 r1' cN' m u) to M N N O O 00 N ,-1 CO CO
M .-1 M 0 m 01 l0 N Ul m m 01 .t 00 N LD .--I 0 00 l0 N O N 00 r-1 a-1 LO .0 CO
er LO N tD l0 U) Ln 00 Lf) If 77 m c}' .4% M N ci' M M .--I M O N M N
N N N N N N N l0 N N N N N t` N N. N N N N N\ N N N N. N N N N
0
0
N
cN M Ln M al 0 0 .7 N N Ln M el in N l0 ct to .4 00 4--1 Ol . to M c I
Ol Ol CO 0 N 1--1 ri (.0 7 7 N 00 Lfl L ) O L -1 Lfl N Ol O 0 N. M to <7 Ol lD
Ln 00 L1) .-1 t- 01 00 a-1 M N N M ID l0 L0 Ol N Ol Ul d' O 00 Ln CO La lO l0 Ol
La' N U) l0 Li' Lfl Los Ln Ln M .4 N M .1 m Ol N co- N
t` N N N N. n N Lo N r. N n f\ N N N- n N N lO N r N
Geographic Area
n al
O C
r0 C C 0 -a r0 T — -IL
O CO = CO C 0 CO .+., u Ln u O
fO OD OD
, C X 'fl al vl RI O c x co ° iv Q U c= a C co +, O t0 a 0-
.0 a h 0 a t6 LL h C — Y s 'E '= Z'
u_ _
o VI
'a na. 5 - a o 3 y ax) o co
° 14- ° Z c° ,rTTA
to -
ili
u 2 a <L U aT+ V C 7tl U y +_T, + �- aT +T' U Y Y Y V U a �_ U° T
a C Y Ta C E O y a C u r0 T m "a Y u O W u Ln O U 'j U V 4-2 a
Nutacu Si
�A = 0 7 V y min (0CM a tOC E C U > Z
CC CC O v°i to to 0 m` Q ° o 'm Nr z m° m° Nla' ]� O°C `_i N= (7
ce
a-1 N M Ln t0 00 01 O .-N N m 7 in lO N 00 Ol O r1 N M cN Ln l0 N 00 Ol O
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Ol Ol Ol co al Ol Ol al Ol Ol O O O O O O O O O O
.4 l- St d' Sr Sr Sr St Sr Sr Sr St d' Sr Sr S' d' d' St U) to in in Ln to U') U) 10 Ln M
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
a
11.3
a
O
1
w
c
0
'So
0
a
a.
at
CC
0)
-c
0
ll1
0)
f�9
E
LU
W
t0
a
c
2020 to J my 1, 2021
7-7
O
Y1
f0
d
E
W
c
O.
O
a
LA V)
01 N
0 m
N Hs
N N
N
O
m
N N
N l0
ei ei
N N
N
0
l0
e-1
M e-1 111 00 U1 l0 U1 N U1 l0 00 U1 O O m lD 01 l0 N 01 N r-1 1!1 lD
1p ct N N. LID U1 N ,t):1' a -I M N U1 M N In M N N N 00 0 01 00 01 ct
U 1 U1 Cr) N N N r4 r-I r-I 01 01 00 CO 00 N N N l0 Cr N N N N l0 l0
- i-I a l ri .-'1 r-1 r-1 .--I a-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 01 01 01 01
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N l0 l0 lD lD
0
O
01 m l0 N m tf1 N m l0 N to Cr Cr m U1 0 cr 01 N U1 N CO N Cr lD 0 1.11 r•1 Cr
01 0 N r l 01 r 1 a' N N l0 CD Ln 01 N 0 0 Cr 0 l0 N 01 e- I 00 00 a -I -1 01 l0 N ri
00 00 01 M N Cr CO 0 V1 .-I m .-I CO a -I U1 CO CO CO U1 00 r-I U1 0 N m Cr) 00 N 01 U1
O v 4 a-i N N O e-1 O O N a --I ei O O O 01 O O O O 01 O N O 00 O 00 a --I 01 O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N l0 N N N N l0 N N N lD N lD N lD N
m
l4
0
N
N
O
co
a-1
N
ri
O
0
N
fV
r1
(NA'
N
r-I 0l
01 Cr
CO CO
Hs O1
N lD
00
00
Ln
O
N
N U1
•ct 0
m .z
N rI
N N
tV
00
a1
a-i
N
m m
00 LA
lD N
O 01
N lD
m N
01 r-1
N U1
O 01
N l0
N
01
N
O
N
to Tr
O 00
01 CO
O O
N N
ri 0
Tr 00
01 CO
O CO.
N lD
01 m
o N
U1 fn
O N
N N
N
01
O
N
N 00
01 l0
CO 01
N 01
lD l0
N
ri
N
00
lD
Geographic Area
G
(0
aXi
0
N
OD
C
.ro
O
N
V
a
a)
0
CO
c
0
(0
0
0
0)
(0
VI
(0
w
✓ I
0)
v
�
.
-C • c
V
Cco C
c (0 0 ro
H 2 . E
ro
N
li U ▪ .5+ Q
+ + ▪ ( 0 al
u
t 4-0
C OD -to
c 0
O C Y0) N
C EE
LO (0 ro O
LL 3 0
0
c
ro
>- Q
V T
0) y
F. V
`- 0)
ro 0
2 cc
00
co
0
v
0
0)
.(0
CO
cc
no
0
C
>T
0
0)
N
0)
0
z
ro
E ro
O O
14- ro In
ToC
>
{ 1-
V 0
O
.` v co
E a1% V
U af
V)
0)
(0
ro ro
G1
E
�>
Vu
oto
c 0
E 0)
ro
�5 H
ro
c
(0
0
T
V
(0
cum
v
m
0
O
a)
0)
cc
Y
c
ce
ri N m U1 l0 N 00 01 O r•I N m 'Cr (f1 l0 N CO 01 O ai N m U1 lD N CO 01 0
a-i 1-I c--I r-1 c-1 r-I a -I a1 e-1 IN N N N N N N N N N M m m m m m m m m m a'
U1 Ln tf1 U1 U1 U1 1n U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 L(1 Ln lf1 U1 U) tf1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 (f1 (f')
0
Ln
a)
u
ri
0
Ln
t0
a)
E
0
a.
a
0..
M t0 ri a--1 (--I 00 Cr) CO r f N O Ln Cr) • Ql Tt a--1 (--1 N 01 Cr (--1 0 .Cr (--1 00 Cr 01 0 0
M M r 1 O 'cf' 0 ri i 00 Cr 00 N rri 00 - m N N 0
a-1 CD e-I 1 LD if 01 00 01 00 m
LD r-1 0 Ol 00 1.0 l0 Ln fA Cr) r-I 01 Ol Ln M Cr) ri c-I 0 01 01 Cr) 00 00 N Lo LD
01 0) etc 01 Q1 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO N n N N N N N N LD LD lD LD t0 t0 O lD
CD CO LO LD LID LD t0 LD L0 t0 l0 tD l0 CO 1.0 l0 LD LO t0 tD l0 l0 LD CO l0 LD LD LO LD t0
0
N
0
N
l0 N m tD N l0 N e-i O VD a -I M N. 01 .-I m IJl 0 00 I", tf1 .--I 01 N r-1 N Cr 01 LO t
a-i Lf) r-I a' N 00 N r•I LD LD 0 Ln N CO m N O 01 N Ln l0 n N N 00 Ln Co Ln 00 m
m Ol m Lf) Ln cr11 N N N.00 ct ."'� �' to cf LO 01 m 01 ct 00 CO m LD 01 LD ' Ln
O Ql 01 r-I' 01 01 01 00 00 N 000 00 00 0o t0 N N N N O LD' LD If7 N 1l1 Ln LD' 00 N
N. toLO n LD LD LD LD N CD LD LD LD LD lD LD t0 LD LD CD t0 LD LO LD LC) LD LD LD LO CD
L0 ri ri 10 N N L!1 c)' 0 Ln O N N ri 0 LD O Cr r I Lf1 01 0 Cr) m Cr) CO LD 0
LO O 01 Ln in m N N Ln 0 01 CO O a -I LO -1 LD 01 O ct 0 0 M Lf1 a-i N. 01 N 0
d' ri N Lf) LD CO n N LD 01 N 01 CI' N ct rn m N O .-I m ct 0 N C LD N N LO
O O 01 .-1 01 01 01 00 O 00 N 00 00 00 00 LO 1". n 00 N 01 LO n Ln N Lf1 i.r (00 N
N N L0D N Lo t0 LE) N t L0 LD LO LC) l0 LD LD LD L0 LD Ltf LD LD t0 to VD Ln Ln Ln Ln
Geographic Area
,n 0 c
v
ul
a)) Y TO }ps
C N 00
N C C ` i_ -, 0 C y O LO .0 13 } p ro C
VI �, O N 03
p 4- N U 3 fJ p cn
a' 6 `� 3 Z c rJ v H co m c U 0 C m N c�6 .� Z 3 F.-
Z T 111 Z U U �= + c+ f° CU U Y cts w }2 1O U c >; +>+ '' _p U u
+-' ' 0LD U N U U t T ra A ,+T' >; .+T+ A TO >' O :a' u U +T+
aT U v 7 Y to U> O 5 'u . 3 W a-' U ,1'' U TO U U 1n a! V h
c 1 ,> wN u c D 45 ` ? .p U C 0 a) _ t'r a) (..) > yam.' p io = T
U l0 c >, co 7 0 U fO {- C C --L « a) ..0 c — a/ 4-+ al p Ll, L °'' Iv
03 m y c t c 0 o c c U CO v 3 o '> v U c a) o f 1Un a E
coco o oca m c c°°o m Ia O ki o La t m a) o CO 0)) O Lei TO CO'E
o_ } w ao C7 < w Ln 2 w Ln ( o_ -, >- 2 Ln 2 5 CC J J Ln CD v a 0 a Ln
.-I N co d' co LO N 00 01 O a-1 N M Ln LD n 00 01 0 .--I N m d' Ln LD N. 00 01 0
d' C. c1' Ct d' Cr Lf1 Ln LC) Ln Ln Ln in Ln Ln Ln lD LD LD t0 L0 LD t0 t0 (0 t0 N
N 1.1 Ln LI) to Ln to Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln to Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln 11) to Ln 1.11 Ln Ln Ln Ln 10
O.
C
0
ro
a
O
a
N
0
N
ei
J2
'O
ar
10
N
CC
a
L
M
0
a
L
0
1
O
0.
0
co
aJ
a)
S
Oi Q v
N
E a.
W
is ++
7
C
C
a N
r` M 0 N l,O rl N N CO to O r` ct N <-1 cl' .--1 CO 0 .-1 N '--1 01 N 0 CD Ill 1 t0
O r` CD N N d' N N M 0 M r` CO 01 N N In .-1 (` O 00 U1 M 1.0 01 ri cr D1
CO to 111 m m .-1 01 tD U) M M N .-1 0 0 01 00 tt) N 04 N a --I .--1 O O 01 00
CD CO CO CO tD CO CO tO u1 to U1 In u1 V1 U1 U) IJ1 In cF d' d' d' .zr cr M M
LC/ tD tD tO tD CD tD tD CO CO CO tO CD CO t0 CO CO lD l0 l0 CO C0 t0 CD CO l0 tD CO l0 t0
N
0
M 01 1.0 01 N N CO 00 M N N 'cl' O m .-i m cr .-i U1 01 N CO 00 Cr) U1 N O t` o tD
01 M 00 01 CO cr CO 10 ct 00 01 N 01 N cr 00 .-1 t0 m 01 0 01 N Ut tD M 0 .-1 M
t0 00 ri 01 tO 01 U) 0/ 1.0 0 00 m U1 M Ni N <-1 e-i 0 .-1 N. .-i M tD lO tO 00 14 M
tD lD l0 N r` O n U1 U1 00 t0 LA' to CO u , M tD U1 .4 Cr U1 N tO t d' M M .4' d'
CO CO 10 1.0 tO CD tD l0 tD <0 tD CD t0 CD CO CD lO tD CO tD l0 l0 tD tD 1.0 1.0 1.0 CD tD CD
0
0
N
N .--i N if) U1 0 ri N .-1 N 01 O M d' N tD M lD M U1 M r\ O1 01 M 01 U1 cr N 01
N .-1 1J1 U1 t, 01 n LA M .-1 M d' N 00 US I)'1 01 O u1 CO b a-1 <1 M 01 U1 01 fn O
1 01 N 01 N U1 t, CO 10 U1 r1 M l0 ct M 1.0 CO 0 01 M N cr .-1 U1 lO 00 cr 01 M C
my lD CD lD U1 n 01 n U1 U1 00 n In In" tD Ul M l0 trf. m cr Ifl N l0 cr tl' M M cr cr ct
o rh 443 lD tD CO CO Ul 1.0 tD t0 tD l0 tD CO tO CD CO CO CO tO t0 tD to In in In in in in n n
rsi
O CO
N vt
rl N
L _E
Geographic Area
ro C C a)
C 'C O ro •� �I^.. .ro
.4 .` N V7
C O u/ L '� `0 -O -' L t0
0 —LE O a C N vUi N 42 tC0
co ril-
YttO ro = 3_ 2 u O v
CD
v t — O O)' j. T ..0 1_ O
cU 32 a' `_° Y 'O J
0 ro
U
O) T > N E U O U ro u
O >. U H 0) c (L6 > C 0 C 'L N
_CL> p Q C 0 C Tci O C
to O) O �G ro r0 C >+ O - N
O o z Q v) CIo a -, J J>
Muncie city, Indiana
m
•5-
L
O ro
-a N 0 y r0
V/ •LCrl .0
v ao m '� o T o L =+ o
v/ C C L 0 ,1-, - Q s 0 VI v_
(I rco 0tpp E 'O 4- Y T 0 U N Im c V
Y v/Ai co
>,-0 (") } 'r j of Y Y +.+ cl O
L to �. A u u v n t 2
++ ,/d U O a) 00 — U U U C
0L.coTaai
a)Uc 0 0coZ+ :1:1-.. E
E
ra N
C C .3 E t co _c 51 .t v
C 'Q N U E? ` U ++ L U
m on io c
U 2 U 0 m D U to o r_° z 2 O m In
.-i N M cr Ul t0 N 00 01 O 4--1 N M ct u1 l0 n 00 01 O .-i N M d' U1 tD N 00 01 O
n n N N N N n N n CO 00 00 CO 00 CO 00 00 CO 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 O1 al 01 01 O
U1 4.1 U1 U1 U1 lJ1 U1 U1 U1 Ul U1 ul Ul U1 tf1 tf1 to trl U1 U') U1 trl U1 Ul Ul tf1 u1 U1 U1 1p
�-1
.`
c
O
:F.
0.
0
a
O
1-1
N
c
fa
CL'
a1
111
1
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
ar
u
to
a
01
1
O
0.
0
U
c
c
0
a
0
0.
c
a)
-O
N
cc
d
t
a+
0 N
Ln 0
al N
E
La •+
7 O
c N
c
Q N
1� H Cr) LO N Ln H H i. H Ln N O 01 M .-i Ln b LO 00 rn O 01 01 N N. 00 00 .0 LD
M N N 00 (0 00 Cfl l0 H LD N O N to H to Ln 01 V L/1 N M (0 01 .0 01 0 Lf)
I� LO t0 CI• In M .-•1 Q> 01 CO b N lD Ln • N N 0 O 01 01 CO N Ct rn N
M M M M M M (n M N N N 1V N N N N N N N N (Ni .--I a-i .--1 .--I i--1' < .--1 < 4
LO LD W (0 lD (D lD LO LD tD LO (0 LD l0 (0 L0 (O (0 (0 l0 (D tD l0 LO LO (O LO (D LO (0
1-1
N
0
H M N O M 0 01 L11 .-1 L!) M 01 M O N O in O tf1 to CI' .-1 00 b 0 01 N N N
0.0 00 d 0 01 H M LO Ln H M CI' Ln N N .f 01 N O Ln 0) n m d N .-1 N O
M n Q1 N Ln 1.0 m m 01 t0 (D .-1 .-1 N H LD O N d' ct N N in O 01 N 0, L0 N
N d N M M M d� Cn 01 N N 01 Cr;. M M N (V (V O 01 N O H N O a-1 O N .--1
O ID (D LO LO (0 LD l0 lD Ln t0 LD Ln (D (0 (O (D LO (0 (0 to (O (D (0 lD 1.0 L0 LO LO (O
0
N
0
N
00 cn In N 00 0 (O Ln l0 n N 1. IN 0 'ct N H L0 0 N M .-1 00 M N Cr( (01. N .-i Ln
O 00 n 0 to lD I. 00 Q1 N O '0 O 00 Ln 0 In (D lO N cr fn O CO LO to Ln N O
N Ln 01 CO M l0 LO M M N N to N rn N N N M LD 01 rn Ln .j 0 01 00 00 N M
.0f N O1 N M M M d' M 00 N N 00 coM M N H N 01 00 N O .-1 N O e-1 O N H
LO LD to LD (0 LO lb (.D (0 Ln LD L0 Ln LD LD l0 LD (.O LD to to l0 LO l0 (D LD l0 l0 tD (O
Geographic Area
c
ce
(o
C 0
Don 0) O
(a (1 N
f0 (a U Y
O O O t a1 Y c co co (0
�, c_ c c a, co co
�o
fa o E ac r co o o c c o H ro o c o ca O O° L
tiara
C _c
— co ua5Qry t Y ++ U r+_o +v+ Coa]a tii u
COtit p *' T 2 LLZ +_U U a) >uaU•!U Z ;u'��'u .N +''uT 4UTC7Tu; O ;:.
aTy, T; a)
Uto T
uccoaY N J = 7 E -O .5U N(j — U = vi°oo u co o Oc .0 - @ = 0vvO Uc >^co 0 ai .r
D -,(U CC 0
"00 >O 0 •N`=Y .0 c O L.
vda
N 0 ro 0 O 0 N 'o 10 Cl-0 0 (a as N O N fl a1 U c u j (`a N O O c
m cc u o_ u J w = < m o_ 2 _, H o u 2 Ln 2 L"n vl a = Icu S'
H N M ul LO 1- CO 01 0 H N m kor Ln (D 1,. 00 01 0 H N M tl' 111 (O N 00 01 0
O O O O O O O O O H .-1 H H H H H H H H N N N N N N N N N N M
(0 (0 LD (D l0 (D (0 (O LD LD (0 LO LD LO lD l0 (0 140 l0 LD (D lD (0 LD l0 LO l0 LD l0 LD
re, Ranked by July 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
2
O
0
0
0
O
O
N
a)
cc
a
a▪ 1
0
a
L.
O
U
4-
LO
a
0
a
a!
UI
cc
a,
Z
(Oil• O
N
co
• a+
c N
c
0
CO N 01 col- .•-1 ri .-i N O m m O r1 m m N r-I N O l0 ct 0) a1 0 m- N 01
N 00 0 CD l0 N 00 (D r-I CD r1 n r-1 CO (D 0 0 al LID 0 N 00 Ln ch m 0 01 N
ri 01 CO N� N N (D (D Ln Ln m N O 00 co N N Lc) (O (O in d• •' d• .cf' m N N
ri O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0) 01 01 a1 D1 al 01 01 01 01 01 a1 a1 01 01 Oi
(D (0 lD (O (O (D LC) lD (D (D (D (O LC) (O Ln Ln to tl1 Ln Ln In L!1 Lt1 4.1 1f1 Lll Ln L!1 Ln to
(i
O
N 0 00 d' L!1 .-i O Lt1 m In 0 0 00 m N r1 I� NLc) N (00 Ct m r-1 m c7 00 O a1 L(1
I� 01 Ct Ln 01 c-L LID (D 0 0 N O 01n a 00 01 00 L1 O r-1 N (D N r1 N n N m (O
N m O r1 01 (D N rl Ci 00 Ln .--I (D a-1 0 CO (O 0 Ct Ln N Ln N I� lD 01 Cr 01
r1 .-1 -1 -4 .-1 .-1 O O O .-I O 00 O O 01 01 O O 01 4 01 01 O O 01 00 01 N O 01
(D (D CO (O (D ID (D (D (D (D (O Lf1 (D (D Ln Ln (D (D Lt1 lO Ln Ln LC) (D Ln Ln L!1 L(l (D Ln
O
0
(O N 0 N Ln .- I L) m 01 01 (D N Lt1 (0 00 Ln al al 01 01 Ln O .-1 00 00 m N N 0
N N 0 00 ri 01 01 CO Ln 00 O N n O N (D O Ln Ln Ln m 00 .-I Ct .-L CD L(1 Ln
m Ln a-r N N ri N N 00 O Ln ct N N LC) .-I 0 O (D N m Ln m (D N to n (0 in N
yNN r-1 ri ri r-i r.J ri o O O ri O (xi O' O 01 of cos ri 01 ri of 01 O O ai oo" ai r- O O
N(71 (D (D (D lD (O lD (0 CO CO (D (D Ln (D (O Ln ui (D (D Ln (D u1 Ln (D (D Ln Lfl Ln In (D (D
(• a
N of
W
e-1
E
a
Geographic Area
4, 4—
U O T. q1 U U
Euless city, Texas
(o
(0 •L
n O
i 4, L. LL
CO - - N O C ` CO
.67
C-0 L C C i (o l.J u O O O u In L t O
cp 0 al Y o0O N L- '- (o +�+ • Z G O L.L.
G V Y O U C Y (o Y N @ V N T Y
cLA 3 3 U 0 U ..T, +., co • .� C u v s 4�O -o , U.
p 0 0 v1 O ▪ '� .O • C p •N m%= m � m
LL 76 Y 'LI-' _ L U ▪ (0 D_ a) E U
(6 Y N C a• O+ E c c • a1 a • O N N L am-,
C p' �i1 O•OJ io O
O C 2 Y O c-c aJ L^ O +., j, j, L
L
C7 a >ro ° O U v1 (n C7 Y p Li CO a 12 Z
Y
c
cc
ri N m Ct to (O N 00 al 0 <-1 N m Ln (D N CO Cr) O r1 N m ct in to N 00 01 O
m m m m m m m m Cr) cf '4 CI' Cr .4 Ct Ct 'It 4 In Ln Ln Lf1 Ln In Ln In in Ln (D
(O (D (D (O (0 (D (D (O (D (D (D (D LC) (D (O (D (D (D (O (D (D (D lO (O (D (D (D (0 to (D
re, Ranked byluly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
a, Ln m 00 .-a m Cr O LO N Lt1 LID oo N v o 0o Ln rn ,I ,I m 00 0 Cr 01 o Cr m N
rl N 01 .-1 CO LO m m V1 N N 01 CO In 00 O 01 c' N 0 0 Ln a-( Ln 0 01 N Cr 0 N
'-I 0 01 00 N N N t0 LO 1.0 m m N N .--i '--I '-1 .--I 0 01 0; 00 00 LO CO LO 111 m
ai ai o0 00 00 00 00 00 0o 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0o r; N r: N N. r: r: r: N
in N Ln Ln Lf1 111 N Ln Ln 4f1 Ln Ln Ln to V1 In Ln U) Ln in Ln Ln to Ln Lf/ Ln to Ln Ln Ln
4.4
0
V1 to N m N v-1 0 0 N m m 40 ',I 01 U1 e-1 e-i LO CO m N 00 01 rl N Ln 00 10 N CO
LO LO N 01 0 0 01 t gl' Cr 0 0 00 '-I Ln N l0 N 01 LtI 01 01 O N m l0 N
Ln U1 l0 Ln 01 00 O Ln N m Ln 0 Ln m N m d' LO Cr 41 0 L0 Lf1 N m Ln N N LO
01 14 00 N 00 00 01 O 01 O 00 00 N N r 00 LD 00 N 01 00 00 00 00 N N 00 N N
Ln LO Ln L(1 In 111 Ln LO LIl LO Itl V1 Ln L 1 L 1 Lf1 1n Ln 1.0 Lf1 to Ln to Ln Ln in Ln Ln Ln If
O
O
N
tn
O m
N 0
a.
01 CO 01 L0 N O CO U1 N Ln '-i N U1 cr Cr CO N 01 Ln 01 N N N 00 '-4 .-1 m 0 N m
m N m Cf fV ,I N N N N CO N N 0 01 a L Ln N LO 01 .--1 m d• Lf1 01 1-1 '-I ..zt d•
L0 CO LO CO 0 01 .-1 Lfl 0 1.11 LO 01 Cr ,1 N CO CO d' N LO l0 N Ln L0 CO 00 Ln m CO N
01 e-I' 00 r` Ol 00 Q> O Ol O 00 N f: r` n 00 Lf') 00 r` 01 00 00 00 00 N m N mi. N N
Ln LO Ln 41 Ln Ln Ln LO 41 LO in Ln in (1 Ln in Ln tf1 Ln ill LO U1 Ln 41 Ln Ln Ln 41 111 to
Geographic Area
V)
Y
co
N
CO i
0 - c (0 (0
(0 0 O to E c 0 ,'i co
�0 c c 2 >
O ` O 2 m E >• O (o 00 t0 N ate+ N
3 (o m Z z 0 al 3 to cvE io (0 s] '0 4 0 0` v 0 ,,'o Lv 1° a m c 0
= v U + 0+� O N v c v c u u 47) c > V1 C +�•+ ` u U m 01 (0 0 7 .'T' ` 00
c 0 CO 'OOD
Q Y CU Cl `�- _ O X �_ 2 't0 N +O-' T O .0 i 0 U 'L
a, - c c o v a 3 ai o 00 �o --- "pc(0 17 E .w 0 y
.Q > ,_ -- (0 L= E -o fl- I. a`.. c = TS Y U E 10 a' • L ? O (0 U ci3VI >� ?„ U a•'
= 01 (0 = i Q N O (0 7 N (0 N N N t0 ` O1 O C ++
0 CC V m U1 Vt 2 S V V E- S J -! V1 2 t/1 U' a 00 V1 O O V> m —I Y
c
rl N m cr 1.11 LO N 00 01 0 a -a N m Cr 11 LO N 00 01 O a-1 N m Ln to N 00 01 O
LO LO 1.0 L0 LO W LD LO LO N N N N N N N N N N 00 00 CO CO CO 00 CO 00 CO 00 01
LO LO L0 LO l0 l0 1.0 l0 L0 LO l0 L0 LO LO LO L0 l0 LO LO LO LO LO 1p 1.0 LO LO LO LO LO l0
re, Ranked byluly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
00 O) N N m CO Cr V) O) N LO d• N N O) d' 00 10 CO N N a-1 00 LO 0) LD Lfl Cr I-1 0
a-1 LP) a1 O) a1 N m O) a --I e1 0 0 N. ID N N 0 00 m 00 1.0 d' r♦ O) N 1.0 d' O) 01 01
m e1 e1 0 0 CO N d• 0) O) O) 01 N N N. N N tD LD Lfl Lf) Lf) Lf) d' m m N N N
n N N N N t0 t0 l0 LO) Lfl Ln" Ln Lf) Lfl Ln LA' Lh Lfl Lh Li) Ln Lfl to to" ul to LO) Lf) Ln Ln
Lfl Lf) Lfl Lf) Lf) L) Lf) Lfl Lf) Lf) Lh Lfl Lfl V) to Ln L() Lfl in Lfl Lfl to to Lh Ln Lf) Lfl Lfl Lfl Lf)
r4
0
I-1 0 00 N LT O) Lfl d' ID 01 N O m Lf) d• 0 m ul in 4.0 00 LD lD 01 N Ln Q) LD
r-i N lD CO CO 01 n Ln N 01 N e1 0) n in 00 m m tD LD N e--1 N. N. e- 1 a- 1 Ln 00 CO
N o LC)N O Lh t0 O lD .-1 f\ 0) 0) 0 Ln LC)a-i m lD Ln 00 N -• Ln d• m 0
f� r- r- l0 00 l0 d f\ Lf1 l0 Ln d' l0 d' lD Ln Ln Lri l0 Lfl Lf) l0 m d' Ln l0 Lh Ln d'
In Lfl Ln Ln Lfl ill u7 Lh Lh Ln Lf) Lfl Lfl Lf) Lf) Ln Ln Ln Lf) Lh In Ln Ln Lfl Ln Lf) L l u) Ln to
0
0
a-i m 00 00 e-1 N o Lh Lf) Lfl m Ll) 0 N Lfl O
O) CO 1--1 m N r1 N N m m N .-1 N m Ln a•1
N• 0 CO N N d' -1 1-1 d' N d' Lf1 a1 CO a1 l0
r- n n to' cos to d• f- Lf) ID' in f\ lD tn.
ul Ln Ln Ln to in Ill Ln It/ Lh Lfl Lfl Lfl Lh In v)
'Cr CO
d' CD N
ul to t0
to Ln in
00 N 0 m N o sr to
m O) d• sr m 1.0 a-1 d'
e1 00 ID a-1 N Lfl d' O)
m d' d' Ln US Ln Ln m
Ln to Ln In Lh Ln Ln LPL
Geographic Area
CD N -
vf p +.
co CIJ
`• t6 a) V v)
73 Ln c C -, 0 = Q co
co_ '� 0 ro 10+ 8 0 3 ( a) — al CL M u °; 'c
a1 C °ri: ° C (J OD p l6 Z C tO L1D FAi i m C 7i O
CO "O to N 1a O a) ;+-
O C Y a>' V O v1 C tn >+ C C `0 — C M 01 a) ` CO Z a
c � u -p al" 0 Q u o> w 4, °C boru ~ u p v COo4, W C7 .° u V
H Y to p' a) u v= O F_ a= u o ) T Q c Li .>' u u •� u Y
Y > c u • ° > u
3 > +_
tJ V V > . N � 't) V c N a'' > ,+>+ = vL ++ N V O O +>+ C aCJ 0)
u v o C > C o Q u +� c c C, L co a +•' u a) > u>j:t C
c° —y > c co c=- c p - m> O 1ti) } co 10 fa s co fO Q
g s o ro J m° c E p -o = 3 o Q m ` v a p c` Q. r o s-
o V V ,G C 7 >, ++ a) H 3 >� Q. 00 -p 7 >. ° = 1D 't''n a-'
m= u a O Q m u_ O Z m u m mo 0 Li Z 1n Q ]C j, 1n Q vo) m` Q,. a in
e1 N m *Cr L l LO N 00 Ol co e-I N m d' Ln LO N. 00 O) 0 a1 N m VT to l0 f- 00 0) 0
O) 0) 0) 0) O) 0) O) O) O) O O O co O O O O O O e 1 I a1 a I a1 e i e1 e1 e1 ri N
lD LO ID lD LO tD lD lD LO N N n N N N N N r� r- N r� N n n N N N N n r\
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
O
0
0
0
Ln
0
a
CO
a
a
2020 to July 1, 2021
0 0 LO et Ln et M 01 01 .-I t0 LO Ln N. r-1 01 I-, 01 N 00 v N d' 01 CO LO v 01
00 01 m 0 01 l0 .-I CD l0 m m tO d• m CO et etri N u1 N - m 01 m ri t0 N r-I
N r-1 0) 01 00 CO CO N n N Ln Ct' Ch Ct N N a --I r-L 01 01 00 L0 4.0 l0 V1 m m N N N
Lri d' d' 4 4 V d' cl' 4d' 4 d' V M rrM m M M M M M M M M
In u1 Ln Ln Ln Lf) if) u1 Ln Lfl Ln in Ln Ln U1 Ln Ln Lfl Lf) Lf) Ln Ln Ln u1 Ln Lf) Lo Ln Ln Ln
N
0
01 ri CO LO CO 0 01 Lf1 d• Ln 01 CO ri u1 Ln 01 In O 00 .-1 LO 01 LD L -1 Ln V1 O <-1 00 O
d- 00 ri O Lf) N LO Lr1 O r-1 N M CO N Lf1 0 .-1 d' Lf1 N Lf) 0 M t- 01 rM el' .-1 N
Lf) d' O N N LD ri N LO ri 00 of LO 01 N M N 01 0 M 00 t0 Lf) 111 ct' N m U1
Ln N Lf) d• - M M M N M N d' Tr M Lr) M Cr'; O M c
V7 Ln Lf) Lf) Ln Ln Ln u1 Lf) Ln Lf) Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Lf) Ln Lf1 Ln Ln Lf1 Ln Ln LI1 Ln u1 Ln Ln
0
0
0at
IA
o an
N Y)
� a
E
fo
a
ri t0 01 0 0 N Ln 00
O N O N N N e O
.-r Ln CD CO 0 Cr) n r 1
M Ln M N Lf1 ct
LA Lf1 Ln L 1 Ln Ln Ln Ln
N 0 Ln N 141 rn
O N Ln d et
Ln LO CO etr CO
T N M M
Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln
Ln CO
al
Tr
00
M r-1
Ln Ln
Ln tD in r-1 M N LO Ln
01 0 t0 CO N tD CO 00 00
M 0 (.0 u1 O Ln 01 ct' u1
ch Lfi rri m o M m m
Ln u1 Ln in in Ln Ln Ln Ln
Geographic Area
B
r0
C f0 •!2
r0 •- _
= O C L
vL L_ f0 `" O r0
p ro �O = +,
c i U c _ y .R
U .0 c H N
C CO 00 L 'C w ro U U H C
t Ln .0 V O >- +�+ - CV c+ CVO C
C Z O X u N Z C U • O V V C c cu 0 2
v) A r0 ip ›; V a" C — C 00
CO U U aT, — j, 4.0 C '- +T' a C f09 ru-
in a > >; m u c@ 3 u Y-
•O 'T' +_' 1O u O +' O CO +0 L- O C >
u r0. o V C u C , i 0 a =0 V1 f0 V 0 Y
a C o O> m E 41
c _ a
N N 0 0 0) co O Y N O O 0 18 c co
J Y U ♦- Y a LY W a M Z Ln W Sc O
CO
ce
ri N M "Cr Ln LD N 00 01 0 ri N M Ln W I-, CO 01 0 a -I N rn u1 tD N CO 01 O
N N N N N N N N N M Al M fn M M M M M M 'i Tr Tr Tr str d' d• Cr ‘Zr Ln
N t- N N n N I� N N N n N n N N N N N N N
re, Ranked byJuly 1, 2021 Population: April 1,
3a
O
a
O
u
w
0
a
0
M
C
OJ
G
O
cc
4!
4-
M
1-1
O N
an N
To 0 +r
C N
Q
M N t0 tD 00 O 00 tD Ln if1 N O to M N M L0 CF C) O1 00 01 -1 0 0 M C1' t0 ct e-1 O N O O M M d' Cl 00 N lO 0 Cr N CO r l 01 l0 ci• M L1') Ct N
N N ri CO N N n ul M M N N i-1 a-i O O 00 00 N N 1.0 u) u1 u1 d' M M N N 0
M M M N N N N tV N N N N N f.J N N
in u) l!1 LA U) to LA 111 LA u) Ln LA Vl LA to LA ul Ln Ln LA u) LA tn Ln Ln LA Lf) LA Ill
1.0 01 M 0 01 M l0 '•-1 .1 cl' M N N Ct' m Li) m M 40' e-1 N N to N u) m N 01 O t0 e-1 ul Cr) M el 0 0 M d• 01 N tD N '1- 0 N l0 CO M u) 0 L0 N M C1• 00 .-1 N
CO M u1 N O l0 0 l0 u1 Cr) cl• LA 1.0 CO 1.0 it d' to r•1 l0 M N N 0
LA in LA ul u1 LO Lf) u) LA Ln LA LA Ln Ul u) LA LA LO Cj• LA 44 LA Lf1 LA Lft an u1 y an u)
O
N
O
N
M t0 00 00 l0 N 0 00 ri m CO Ln 0 LA el CO Cr) N O N in 0 M c1' 0 00 r4 m
Ol ri .•-i M N co N M 00 01 M 01 M V c 4 N LA ri O O ri 10 e-1 1.0 Q1 ri M 0
LA t-4 N N 0 N a-1 CO 1.0 0 N ul t0 CO N. LA N '-i N LA 00 N lD `-I 00 - r•I O1 el N
yy ri M M N M O M M N M N ci (NJ' r-1 N (N/N-4 N Lf) O N O N ri ri N r•1 ri O ri O L71 Ln u) Ln LA Lf1 in try Lnlf) Lfl LA LA Ln Lf1 U L l LA Lf1 't• Lry TranLA u1 LA an Ln in ano CO
fV in
E
CL
ei �+
Q Nu
Geographic Area
y
f6 c
Lo v c
y
7 L.. - y
u a; 0ro
f0 f0 f0 C ` (O f4 CO C O) V
(0 y 'p C t0 y O1 p C C (0 U C —— y
'N N o
03
m'4=pO i`O O O LL0 tL `"= U Cs Cp C i?y Z m N C}T8f0 g Z 3 0
72 o
ry pu_ p
�Ca+ Y—
=v C 4-2 c t+OO f6
•L _ Tco .c -..
T a) _O c U i*' U
� V 4-4
Y
L+, 0) r+ 6-o E °' ov1 N U N T uc-CICO U U�•pp ,viitu: iU+ryt=31-30065
• ivaTm0D myC'U-3�
z °C u_+•� YUla —
co
c o�
C.QON`aip ` _ yy
i p f- U
r Da
E
-`pO °y�O�a)
p L m
FG w iZ a o 7 U 0 S L OQ?0 m ra2 0 a== U a Ln
LLN A Lr1 n L L�f1 U ( 1J ui LEA LL01 N
n LLO (0 t0 (.0 LC)l.N 0 l'0 (D l�0 l(0 ON N N N N N n N CON CO0
N N N N N N N N N N. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNNNN
a
Q
E
O
m
7
Q.
0
0.
ri
N
O
N
.4
=
>.
J0
-0
Y
C
M
oe
11J
L.
cO
G
C
O
O
0
Ci
Ln
4.4
0
to
01
u
La
a
.c
a
6"
O
0.
1
O
u
C
w
c
O_
a
aO
F+
c
v
ri
OO
in CU N
E T
Le) 7
O
=.
0
C
C
Q N
Population Estimate (as ofJuly1)
N
O
N
m N CO ri N 0 of 0 01 L.0 ri c-1 czt m u1 Ln in M• r1 LD 01 m d' 00
N. d' 01 o N a--1 m to LD <t c-i 01 00 .-I M- m O m N N o V1 in
0 o O1 01 00 00 up LD Ln Ln Ln ct m m m N r1 ri 01 01 1, n LD ri
ririo60000000000oocis ooi0ioioioioi
VI Ln LC1 Ln in Ln in in in in in Ln In Ln Ln Vl V1 in cr d' d' d' d. d•
Note: Areas are included in this table if they exceed the stated threshold at any point in the time series. The estimates are based on the 2020 Census and reflect changes to the April 1,
2020 population due to geographic program revisions and the application of disclosure avoidance to protect confidentiality (DRB clearance number CBDRB-FY22-054). For population
estimates methodology statements, see httpi/www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/methodology.html. All geographic boundaries for the Vintage 2021
subcounty population estimates series are as of January 1, 2021. For updates on Legal Boundary Change/Annexation Data, see https://www.census,gov/geographies/reference-filesttime-
series/geo/bas/annex.html. Additional information on these localities can be found in the Geographic Boundary Change Notes (see httpsi/www.census.gov/prograns-
surveys/geography/technical-locum entation/boundary-change-notes.htm I).
Suggested Citation,
O
N
0
N
ct 00 CO O1 LD Ln 0 .-i 01 N LD M- N CO 01 m Ln LD 01 LD LD O
0 N N m Ln ri Ln 01 Cr) 'd' m *1* 00 Ln 01 m LD Ol d' L.0 00 in N N
O 0 O Ln N O 00 en m r1 Ln N LD 0l [}' ri O CO 01 N in cc) r1 O
CV 1: ri ri O .4 on CD O . O rt O Ot 01 ri O O Ol O O Oi O O
in in Ln Ln u1 .4 V1 In Ln Ln Ln Cr Vr Ln Ln Ln Cr Ln in ct in in
April 1, 2020
Estimates Base
...-4 .-1 m 0) ri 01 00 N m n N m O m m 00 0 00 1, O1 m d' O LD
N LD m N in O O N N N 00 1, CO ri rl LD 01 d' ri CD d' .-i m .-1
.--1 CO 0 LD CD r I 00 cl' d m Ln m N 01 'cr N O 00 O N r` O N O
Lncr Ln u1 Lon Ln dm' st Vol Ln ion Ln Lon ct ct Ln Lon Lon Lon ion Loll Vol Ln Lon
Geographic Area
Y
=
u
Y H
0) m •Q Y
_
_ = Q
c _
coL =
= m o O = . > v
O o II s m m= 0 m i �j Q m O0 ay =
v0 v1 t O In O 'c = m 0) c 4= O 1Vi1 = N co c
m m m U L= c
E X O .0 3 E c `o - o v t o __
T ,0am e' > uc T aYA U Y>.U O QY>^ 4, Y7. CO 4-,
Q_
ms-
EuE4,O p0 >. a = m= O 0 CLC Kr u)
av
�> v 77 - 7 aw *O�CmUa u nu}
vtm 41 QI>aa 5
•1-= oLE u` c u mle E 3o N Y= o
es �,-0 c m? '43_o.>0 3 N v a ali 3-L
O c O L_ O cuO m m t A .= O
m J G O C7 U J 7 U u.l U 1— 2, cc2 .s N U U O L
cm
m
ri N m M- u1 Lb n 00 01 O .-•1 N m .4' Ln LD 1" 00 01 O e-1 N m c1'
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 01 01 as 01 Ol al Ol 01 Ol O O O O O
1. N n N N N N N n n N n N N N 1, N N r\ 00 00 00 00 00
ri
0
rC
7
0.
0
a
N
O
e-1
.0
C,
co
Ct
w
0
2
0
O
O
O
N
a
a,
tau
a,
m
Lo
0.
L0
u
c
c
0
0.
0
a
c
d
cc
a,
0
ut
a,
E
W
A
7
c
c
a
2020 to July 1, 2021
O
N
o °2
N la
Nm
vi
a,
rl �+
E
a g
Geographic Area
Y
CCM
Exhibit C - Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 8
Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals & Guidelines
GOAL 8: RECREATIONAL NEEDS
OAR 660-015-0000(8)
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors
and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational
facilities including destination resorts.
RECREATION PLANNING
The requirements for meeting such needs, now and in the future, shall be
planned for by governmental agencies having responsibility for recreation areas,
facilities and opportunities: (1) in coordination with private enterprise; (2) in
appropriate proportions; and (3) in such quantity, quality and locations as is
consistent with the availability of the resources to meet such requirements. State
and federal agency recreation plans shall be coordinated with local and regional
recreational needs and plans.
DESTINATION RESORT SITING
Comprehensive plans may provide for the siting of destination resorts on
rural lands subject to the provisions of state law, including ORS 197.435 to
197.467, this and other Statewide Planning Goals, and without an exception to
Goals 3, 4, 11, or 14.
Eligible Areas
(1) Destination resorts allowed under the provisions of this goal must be
sited on lands mapped as eligible by the affected county. A map adopted by a
county may not allow destination resorts approved under the provisions of this
goal to be sited in any of the following areas:
(a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing
population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those
necessary for the staff and management of the resort;
(b) On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farm
land identified and mapped by the United States Natural Resources
Conservation Service or its predecessor agency; or within three miles of a High
Value Crop Area except that "small destination resorts" may not be closer to a
high value crop area than one-half mile for each 25 units of overnight lodging or
fraction thereof;
(c) On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forest lands, as
determined by the State Forestry Department, that are not subject to an
approved goal exception;
(d) In the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area as defined by the
Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Act, P.L. 99-663;
(e) In an especially sensitive big game habitat as generally mapped by the
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in July 1984 and as further refined
through development of comprehensive plans implementing this requirement.
1
(2) "Small destination resorts" may be allowed consistent with the siting
requirements of section (1), above, in the following areas:
(a) On land that is not defined as agricultural or forest land under Goal 3
or 4; or
(b) On land where there has been an exception to Statewide Planning
Goals 3, 4, 11, or 14.
Siting Standards
(1) Counties shall ensure that destination resorts are compatible with the
site and adjacent land uses through the following measures:
(a) Important natural features, including habitat of threatened or
endangered species, streams, rivers, and significant wetlands shall be
maintained. Riparian vegetation within 100 feet of streams, rivers and significant
wetlands shall be maintained. Alterations to important natural features, including
placement of structures that maintain the overall values of the feature, may be
allowed.
(b) Sites designated for protection in an acknowledged comprehensive
plan designated pursuant to Goal 5 that are located on the tract used for the
destination resort shall be preserved through conservation easements as set
forth in ORS 271.715 to 271.795. Conservation easements adopted to implement
this requirement shall be sufficient to protect the resource values of the site and
shall be recorded with the property records of the tract on which the destination
resort is sited.
(c) Improvements and activities shall be located and designed to avoid or
minimize adverse effects of the resort on uses on surrounding lands, particularly
effects on intensive farming operations in the area. At a minimum, measures to
accomplish this shall include:
(i) Establishment and maintenance of buffers between the resort and
adjacent land uses, including natural vegetation and where appropriate, fences,
berms, landscaped areas, and other similar types of buffers.
(ii) Setbacks of structures and other improvements from adjacent land
uses.
(iii) Measures that prohibit the use or operation in conjunction with the
resort of a portion of a tract that is excluded from the site of a destination resort
pursuant to ORS 197.435(7). Subject to this limitation, the use of the excluded
property shall be governed by otherwise applicable law.
Implementing Measures
(1) Comprehensive plans allowing for destination resorts shall include
implementing measures that:
(a) Adopt a map consisting of eligible lands for large destination resorts
within the county. The map shall be based on reasonably available information,
and shall not be subject to revision or refinement after adoption except in
conformance with ORS 197.455, and 197.610 to 197.625, but not more
frequently than once every 30 months. The county shall develop a process for
collecting and processing concurrently all map amendments made within a 30-
2
month planning period. A map adopted pursuant to this section shall be the sole
basis for determining whether tracts of land are eligible for siting of large
destination resorts under the provisions of this goal and ORS 197.435 to
197.467.
(b) Limit uses and activities to those permitted by this goal.
(c) Assure developed recreational facilities and key facilities intended to
serve the entire development and visitor oriented accommodations are physically
provided or are guaranteed through surety bonding or substantially equivalent
financial assurances prior to closure of sale of individual lots or units. In phased
developments, developed recreational facilities and other key facilities intended
to serve a particular phase shall be constructed prior to sales in that phase or
guaranteed through surety bonding.
DEFINITIONS
Destination Resort -- A self-contained development providing visitor -oriented
accommodations and developed recreational facilities in a setting with high
natural amenities, and that qualifies under the definition of either a "large
destination resort" or a "small destination resort" in this goal. Spending required
under these definitions is stated in 1993 dollars. The spending required shall be
adjusted to the year in which calculations are made in accordance with the
United States Consumer Price Index.
Large Destination Resort -- To qualify as a "large destination resort" under this
Goal, a proposed development must meet the following standards:
(1) The resort must be located on a site of 160 acres or more except
within two miles of the ocean shoreline where the site shall be 40 acres or more.
(2) At least 50 percent of the site must be dedicated as permanent open
space excluding yards, streets and parking areas.
(3) At least $7 million must be spent on improvements for onsite
developed recreational facilities and visitor -oriented accommodations exclusive
of costs for land, sewer, and water facilities and roads. Not less than one-third of
this amount shall be spent on developed recreational facilities.
(4) Commercial uses allowed are limited to types and levels necessary to
meet the needs of visitors to the development. Industrial uses of any kind are not
permitted.
(5) Visitor -oriented accommodations including meeting rooms,
restaurants with seating for 100 persons, and 150 separate rentable units for
overnight lodging must be provided. Accommodations available for residential
use shall not exceed two such units for each unit of overnight lodging, or two and
one-half such units on land that is in Eastern Oregon as defined by ORS
321.805. However, the rentable overnight lodging units may be phased in as
follows:
(a) On land that is not in Eastern Oregon, as defined in ORS 321.805:
(A) A total of 150 units of overnight lodging must be provided.
(B) At least 75 units of overnight lodging, not including any individually
owned homes, lots or units must be constructed or guaranteed through surety
3
bonding or equivalent financial assurance prior to the closure of sale of individual
Tots or units.
(C) The remaining overnight lodging units must be provided as
individually owned lots or units subject to deed restrictions that limit their use to
overnight lodging units. The deed restrictions may be rescinded when the resort
has constructed 150 units of permanent overnight lodging as required by this
section.
(D) The number of units approved for residential sale may not be more
than two units for each unit of permanent overnight lodging provided under this
section.
(E) The development approval shall provide for the construction of other
required overnight lodging units within five years of the initial lot sales.
(b) On lands in Eastern Oregon, as defined in ORS 321.805:
(A) A total of 150 units of overnight lodging must be provided.
(B) At least 50 units of overnight lodging must be constructed prior to the
closure of sale of individual Tots or units.
(C) At least 50 of the remaining 100 required overnight lodging units must
be constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent financial
assurance within five years of the initial lot sales.
(D) The remaining required overnight lodging units must be constructed or
guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent financial assurances within 10
years of the initial lot sales.
(E) The number of units approved for residential sale may not be more
than 2-1/2 units for each unit of permanent overnight lodging provided under this
section.
(F.) if the developer of a resort guarantees the overnight lodging units
required under paragraphs (C) and (D) of this subsection through surety bonding
or other equivalent financial assurance, the overnight lodging units must be
constructed within four years of the date of execution of the surety bond or other
equivalent financial assurance.
(6) When making a land use decision authorizing construction of a "large
destination resort" in Eastern Oregon, as defined in ORS 321.805, the governing
body of the county or its designee shall require the resort developer to provide an
annual accounting to document compliance with the overnight lodging standards
of this definition. The annual accounting requirement commences one year after
the initial lot or unit sales. The annual accounting must contain:
(a) Documentation showing that the resort contains a minimum of 150
permanent units of overnight lodging or, during the phase -in period,
documentation showing the resort is not yet required to have constructed 150
units of overnight lodging.
(b) Documentation showing that the resort meets the lodging ratio
described in section (5)(b) of this definition.
(c) For a resort counting individually owned units as qualified overnight
lodging units, the number of weeks that each overnight lodging unit is available
for rental to the general public as described in section (2) of the definition for
"overnight lodgings" in this goal.
4
Small Destination Resort -- To qualify as a "small destination resort" under
Goal 8, a proposed development must meet standards (2) and (4) under the
definition of "large destination resort" and the following standards:
(1) The resort must be located on a site of 20 acres or more.
(2) At least $2 million must be spent on improvements for onsite
developed recreational facilities and visitor -oriented accommodations exclusive
of costs for land, sewer, and water facilities and roads. Not less than one-third of
this amount must be spent on developed recreation facilities.
(3) At least 25 but not more than 75 units of overnight lodging shall be
provided.
(4) Restaurant and meeting rooms with at least one seat for each unit of
overnight lodging must be provided.
(5) Residential uses must be limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
(6) The county governing body or its designee must review the proposed
resort and determine that the primary purpose of the resort is to provide lodging
and other services oriented to a recreational resource that can only reasonably
be enjoyed in a rural area. Such recreational resources include, but are not
limited to, a hot spring, a ski slope or a fishing stream.
(7) The resort shall be constructed and located so that it is not designed to
attract highway traffic. Resorts shall not use any manner of outdoor advertising
signing except:
(a) Tourist oriented directional signs as provided in ORS 377.715 to
377.830; and
(b) Onsite identification and directional signs.
Developed Recreation Facilities -- are improvements constructed for the
purpose of recreation and may include but are not limited to golf courses, tennis
courts, swimming pools, marinas, ski runs and bicycle paths.
High -Value Crop Area -- an area in which there is a concentration of
commercial farms capable of producing crops or products with a minimum gross
value of $1,000 per acre per year. These crops and products include field crops,
small fruits, berries, tree fruits, nuts, or vegetables, dairying, livestock feedlots, or
Christmas trees as these terms are used in the 1983 County and State
Agricultural Estimates prepared by the Oregon State University Extension
Service. The High -Value Crop Area Designation is used for the purpose of
minimizing conflicting uses in resort siting and is not meant to revise the
requirements of Goal 3 or administrative rules interpreting the goal.
Map of Eligible Lands -- a map of the county adopted pursuant to ORS
197.455.
Open Space -- means any land that is retained in a substantially natural
condition or is improved for recreational uses such as golf courses, hiking or
5
nature trails or equestrian or bicycle paths or is specifically required to be
protected by a conservation easement. Open spaces may include ponds, lands
protected as important natural features, land preserved for farm or forest use and
lands used as buffers. Open space does not include residential Tots or yards,
streets or parking areas.
Overnight Lodgings -- are permanent, separately rentable accommodations
that are not available for residential use. Overnight lodgings include hotel or
motel rooms, cabins, and time-share units. Tent sites, recreational vehicle parks,
manufactured dwellings, dormitory rooms, and similar accommodations do not
qualify as overnight lodgings for the purpose of this definition. Individually owned
units may be considered overnight lodgings if:
(1) With respect to lands not in Eastern Oregon, as defined in
ORS 321.805, they are available for overnight rental use by the general public for
at least 45 weeks per calendar year through a central reservation and check -in
service, or
(2) With respect to lands in Eastern Oregon, as defined in ORS 321.805,
they are available for overnight rental use by the general public for at least 38
weeks per calendar year through a central reservation system operated by the
destination resort or by a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS
696.010.
Recreation Areas, Facilities and Opportunities -- provide for human
development and enrichment, and include but are not limited to: open space and
scenic landscapes; recreational lands; history, archaeology and natural science
resources; scenic roads and travelers; sports and cultural events; camping,
picnicking and recreational lodging; tourist facilities and accommodations; trails;
waterway use facilities; hunting; angling; winter sports; mineral resources; active
and passive games and activities.
Recreation Needs -- refers to existing and future demand by citizens and visitors
for recreations areas, facilities and opportunities.
Self-contained Development -- means a development for which community
sewer and water facilities are provided onsite and are limited to meet the needs
of the development or are provided by existing public sewer or water service as
long as all costs related to service extension and any capacity increases are
borne by the development. A "self-contained development" must have developed
recreational facilities provided on -site.
Tract -- means a lot or parcel or more than one contiguous lot or parcel in a
single ownership. A tract may include property that is not included in the
proposed site for a destination resort if the property to be excluded is on the
boundary of the tract and constitutes less than 30 percent of the total tract.
6
Visitor -Oriented Accommodations -- are overnight lodging, restaurants,
meeting facilities which are designed to and provide for the needs of visitors
rather than year-round residents.
GUIDELINES FOR GOAL 8
A. PLANNING
1. An inventory of recreation needs in the planning area should be made
based upon adequate research and analysis of public wants and desires.
2. An inventory of recreation opportunities should be made based upon
adequate research and analysis of the resources in the planning area that are
available to meet recreation needs.
3. Recreation land use to meet recreational needs and development
standards, roles and responsibilities should be developed by all agencies in
coordination with each other and with the private interests. Long range plans and
action programs to meet recreational needs should be developed by each
agency responsible for developing comprehensive plans.
4. The planning for lands and resources capable of accommodating
multiple uses should include provision for appropriate recreation opportunities.
5. The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan could be used as a
guide when planning, acquiring and developing recreation resources, areas and
facilities.
6. When developing recreation plans, energy consequences should be
considered, and to the greatest extent possible non -motorized types of
recreational activities should be preferred over motorized activities.
7. Planning and provision n for recreation n facilities and opportunities should
give priority to areas, facilities and uses that
(a) Meet recreational needs requirements for high density population
centers,
(b) Meet recreational needs of persons of limited mobility and finances,
(c) Meet recreational needs requirements while providing the maximum
conservation of energy both in the transportation of persons to the facility or area
and in the recreational use itself,
(d) Minimize environmental deterioration,
(e) Are available to the public at nominal cost, and
(f) Meet needs of visitors to the state.
8. Unique areas or resources capable of meeting one or more specific
recreational needs requirements should be inventoried and protected or
acquired.
9. All state and federal agencies developing recreation plans should allow
for review of recreation plans by affected local agencies.
10. Comprehensive plans should be designed to give a high priority to
enhancing recreation opportunities on the public waters and shorelands of the
state especially on existing and potential state and federal wild and scenic
waterways, and Oregon Recreation Trails.
7
11. Plans that provide for satisfying the recreation needs of persons in the
planning area should consider as a major determinant, the carrying capacity of
the air, land and water resources of the planning area. The land conservation
and development actions provided for by such plans should not exceed the
carrying capacity of such resources.
B. IMPLEMENTATION
Plans should take into account various techniques in addition to fee
acquisition such as easements, cluster developments, preferential assessments,
development rights acquisition, subdivision park land dedication that benefits the
subdivision, and similar techniques to meet recreation requirements through tax
policies, land leases, and similar programs.
C. RESORT SITING
Measures should be adopted to minimize the adverse environmental
effects of resort development on the site, particularly in areas subject to natural
hazards. Plans and ordinances should prohibit or discourage alterations and
structures in the 100 year floodplain and on slopes exceeding 25 percent. Uses
and alterations that are appropriate for these areas include:
1. Minor drainage improvements that do not significantly impact important
natural features of the site;
2. Roads, bridges and utilities where there are no feasible alternative
locations on the site; and
3. Outdoor recreation facilities including golf courses, bike paths, trails,
boardwalks, picnic tables, temporary open sided shelters, boating facilities, ski
lifts and runs. Alterations and structures permitted in these areas should be
adequately protected from geologic hazards or of minimal value and designed to
minimize adverse environmental effects.
8
Exhibit D - City of Bend Comprehensive Plan Chapter 5 Housing
Section 2 of Ordinance 2271
Exhibit B
New Chapter 5 of the Bend Comprehensive Plan, Housing
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 5: Housing
LIL
Housing
Adopted Amendments
EFFECTIVE DATE
ORD #
CHANGES
7-17-96
11-18-98
9-6-00
9-3-03
5-16-07
2016
Ordinance 2175
Resolution 2247
Ordinance NS 1753
Ordinance NS 1886
Ordinance NS 2048
NS-2271
Amendment for provision of
destination resorts
Major update and revisions to General
Plan text and maps.
General Plan text amendment to figure
and policy in Chapter 5, added new
appendices regarding Lava Ridge
Plan.
General Plan text amendment in
Chapter 5, Figure 5-8 (or Figure #22)
showing Destination Resort Siting.
Chapter 5 of the General Plan
amended to add new text regarding
affordable housing and manufactured
home parks, add two new policies
regarding redevelopment standards for
manufactured home parks and density
bonuses.
Significant update in response to 2010
Urban Growth Boundary Remand
Order: format update, new background
text, new and revised policies, deleted
outdated policies
11 Housing City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
BACKGROUND
Context
regon Statewide Planning Goal 10 (Housing) requires cities to "encourage the
availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels
which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow
for flexibility of housing location, type and density." Goal 10 and the related Needed
Housing Statute require Oregon cities to maintain adequate supplies of properly
planned and zoned lands to meet their identified housing needs. The law recognizes
that this may require expanding an urban growth boundary. That process is governed
by other statutes and goals, and by the Growth Management chapter of this plan. Goal
10 and related statutes require the City to adopt and incorporate two important
documents into the Comprehensive Plan.
The first document is a buildable lands inventory (BLI) that catalogues the development
status (developed, vacant, etc.) and capacity (housing units) that can be
accommodated on lands within the UGB. Bend's BLI for both housing and employment
lands is adopted and incorporated as Appendix I of the Comprehensive Plan.
The second document is a housing needs analysis (HNA) that includes an analysis of
national, state, and local demographic and economic trends, and recommendations for
a mix and density of needed housing types. Bend's HNA for growth to 2028 is adopted
and incorporated as Apr ndix I f f the f nmprehensive Plan The H d^cu'ments
historical housing and demographic trends, the projection of population and housing
growth, and an analysis of housing affordability.' Based on this analysis, the HNA
presents an estimate of needed housing density and mix for growth to 2028.
The BLI and the HNA provide the factual base to support the housing goals and policies
in this chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. A major objective of the Comprehensive
Plan is to establish residential areas that are safe, convenient, healthful, and attractive
places to live, and which will provide a maximum range of housing choices for the
people in Bend. The City of Bend will face a variety of issues over the coming years in
meeting these needs, including:
• Maintaining an adequate supply of land available and zoned appropriately to
provide opportunities for a range of housing types needed in Bend in the face of
rapid population growth.
' A primary indicator of affordability is whether a household is paying more than 30% of its income,
including utilities, rent, mortgage payments, interest and insurance, and is therefore experiencing
housing "cost burden" under federal housing guidelines. Using cost burden as an indicator is
consistent with the Goal 10 requirement of providing housing that is "commensurate with the
financial capabilities" of all Oregon households.
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan Housing 12
Housing
■ Responding to a land and housing market that has appreciated significantly in
recent years, driving the cost of housing up significantly and leaving relatively few
market opportunities for low-cost owner -occupied housing.
■ Affordable housing for service workers, both for individuals and families, is in short
supply in Bend. Rapid increases in home and rental prices have combined with
growth in the (low wage) service sector to make it difficult for much of Bend's
workforce to live in the City.
• The increasing gap of housing affordable to low and moderate income house-
holds is resulting in many area workers living in other Central Oregon cities and
commuting to Bend for work. This is exacerbating traffic congestion and it also
affects the ability of area employers to attract workers for jobs at many income
levels, including service and professional workers.
• The City is currently limited to some degree in what it can do by state and other
regulations that restrict the ability to enact funding mechanisms or regulatory
approaches to meeting housing needs.
As summarized in the HNA, Bend's population grew rapidly between 1990 and 2014,
increasing from about 20,000 to 80,000 people during that period (in part due to
significant annexations in 1998). At the same time, Bend's housing stock nearly tripled.
Most new housing development during this time was single-family detached housing.
This rapid population growth increased the demand for all types of housing. During the
same period, average wages were flat and the combined result was a decline in
housing affordability. Housing sales prices more than doubled between 2000 and 2014,
while household income levels increased by only about 18 percent. In addition to wage
stagnation, several other factors contributed to a decline in affordability between 1990
and 2014, including:
• High demand for second homes in Bend
• Significant growth in the tourism/recreation economy and the associated jobs that
tend to pay lower wages
■ Demographic changes, as described in the Demographic Trends section below
As growth continues, Bend must carefully plan for new housing that meets the needs of
its changing population. The Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies support a range
of housing choices matched to Bend's needs. One of the challenges facing the
community is how to plan for a variety of housing options in existing neighborhoods and
new residential areas that support the changing demographics and lifestyles of Bend's
current and future residents.
The need for housing correlates strongly to the need for land within Bend's urban growth
boundary. The Urbanization Report provides a discussion about how land needs for
housing and other uses are determined and how Bend will meet residential land needs
over time.
3 1 Housing City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing
Demographic Trends
There are a number of factors that will increasingly affect the choices people make
when it comes to housing type; three primary factors are a person's age, the number of
people in the household and household income. In Bend, and across the country, the
first two decades of the 21st century saw some key demographic changes that will
impact the way communities plan for the housing needs of their existing and future
populations.
• Growth in Baby Boomers. The number of people over age 65 is projected to
increase significantly. Households over 65 tend to have less income than younger
households and are more likely to choose lower -cost multifamily housing. Some
baby boomers may also choose to downsize their housing, resulting in greater
demand for small dwellings.
■ Growth in Millennials. Millennials are people who will be between 31 and 44
years old in the year 2028. This segment of the population is also expected to
increase in Bend. Younger millennials typically have lower incomes and may have
higher debt. Growth in millennials will increase need for affordable housing rental
and ownership options.
• Growth in Hispanic and Latino population. The Hispanic and Latino population
in Bend more than doubled between 2000 and 2014, and growth is expected to
continue. Many Hispanic and Latino residents in Bend are also within the Millennial
age range. To the extent that Hispanic and Latino households currently have lower
household incomes than the population as a whole, demand for more affordable
housing, both rental and ownership options, will increase.
In 2016, Bend will also see the opening of its first dedicated four-year university
campus, which will ultimately bring up to 5,000 students into the mix. While some of
these students will live on campus, there will also be a need for affordable student
housing off campus.
Based on these trends, the future housing mix in Bend will look different than
it has in the past. There is a growing need to provide a wider range of housing sizes
and prices to accommodate the shifting demographics. Evidence suggests that a
substantial portion of Bend's residents will live in attached housing, such as
townhouses, cottage housing, duplexes, garden apartments, or urban apartments. At
the same time, Bend also has a continuing demand for single family detached housing,
primarily on small or moderately sized Tots (5,000 to 7,000 square feet). A growing
share of households will be renters, either by choice (e.g., Baby Boomers who prefer to
rent smaller units) or by economic necessity. Demand for these types of homes will be
particularly high in areas close to Bend's commercial and recreational amenities. In
planning for future housing, Bend must pay close attention to the following housing
issues:
■ Widening demand for a range of housing types by retirees. Older households
tend to move Tess frequently than younger households, and a large majority would
like to age in place. Being near family, friends, and social organizations in walkable
neighborhoods also becomes increasingly important with age.
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing 14
Housing
■ Increasing demand for family housing. Millennials and Hispanic households are
poised to account for the largest percentages of growth in Bend over the next 20
years. Millennial will be entering the phase of life when they form families and have
children. In addition, Hispanic households have larger than average household
size because they often live in multi -generational households and have a larger
average number of children. Growth in households with families will drive need for
housing that is both affordable and has sufficient space.
■ Increasing demand for affordable housing. A substantial proportion of Bend's
households cannot afford housing in Bend. Many workers in Bend live in nearby
communities because affordable housing is in short supply in Bend, and the
demand for small -lot housing with nearby amenities is increasing. For two of the
fastest growing demographics in Bend, the Millennials and Hispanic and Latino
population, affordability is more likely to be a barrier to homeownership or higher -
cost rental housing.
■ Location and design of housing. The location of housing is becoming
increasingly important, with increased demand for housing in walkable
neighborhoods near retail and other amenities. Integrated multi -family and
compact single-family homes located in neighborhoods can provide opportunities
for a wider range of housing and transportation options.
While the range of housing type an €on � rn end w.
expand, Bend will continue to emphasize livabilityFkIn a;
neighborhoods, oldand new. Whato s��a ►, cable
n
e
i
g
h
b
orhoodlook likepl �
■ Safe and convenient for travel by foot, car and bike
■ Natural features, parks, open space
■ Small-scale shops and places to eat and drink in the
neighborhood or nearby
• Quality housing that provides diverse housing types and
flexibility that meets market demand
• Comfortable integration and transitions between housing types
and commercial uses
51 Housing
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
RESIDENTIAL PLAN DISTRICTS
The Comprehensive Plan has five residential districts that are shown on the
Comprehensive Plan Map and described in Table 5-1 below. These districts provide for
variety and choice in housing types, lot sizes, and locations needed to serve the
existing and future housing markets. In addition to these residential districts, some
future housing will occur in the Plan's mixed use districts and as secondary uses in
some commercial areas.
Table 5-1. Residential Plan Districts
Plan '
Designation
Characteristics
Implementing
Zone(s)*
Density
Range
(dwellings per
gross acre)"
Urban Low
Density
The Urban Low Density designation is intended
for low density urban residential development. It
may be used in areas that are already developed
with low density housing where minimal infill is
appropriate or on vacant land as part of a
"transect" from urban to rural densities where
consistent with the Growth Management policies
of this Plan.
It is intended to provide for residential uses, with
an emphasis on single family detached homes,
although a broader mix of housing types is
encouraged for new neighborhoods.
Residential
Low Density
(RL)
Min: 1.1
Max: 4.0
Urban
Standard
Density
The Urban Standard Density designation is
intended to provide opportunities for a variety of
residential housing types at the most common
residential densities in places where sewer and
water services are available. It is intended to
provide for residential uses, with a mix of single
family detached homes and other housing types
at a scale compatible with single family homes. It
also provides opportunities for supporting public
and institutional uses on a case -by -case basis.
Residential
Standard
Density (RS)
Min: 4.0
Max: 7.3
Urban
Medium
Density
The Urban Medium Density designation is
intended to provide for a mix of housing types,
with an emphasis on multifamily residential and
medium -scale attached housing types, and
opportunities for limited neighborhood
commercial uses. It also provides opportunities
for supporting public and institutional uses on a
case -by -case basis. It is suitable in areas where
sewer and water service are available. It is most
appropriate for areas in proximity to commercial
areas and along or near major transportation and
transit corridors.
Residential
Medium
Density (RM)
Min: 7.3
Max:
21.7
Medium-10
Density
Residential
(RM-10)
Min: 6.0
Max:
10.0
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing 16
Urban High
Density
The Urban High Density designation is intended
to provide land for primarily high density
multifamily residential, with opportunities for
neighborhood commercial uses. It also provides
opportunities for supporting public and
institutional uses on a case -by -case basis. It is
generally suitable for locations in proximity to
downtown, commercial areas and/or transit
corridors.
Implementing
Zone(s)*
Residential
High Density
(RH)
Density
Range
(dwellings per
gross acre)"
Min: 21.7
Max:
43.0
* Inside the Bend UGB, the Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10) and Suburban Residential (SR-2%)
zoning districts are holding zones to preserve land for future urban development consistent with
underlying urban plan designations. They are intended to provide limited opportunities for
housing and limited other rural uses that will not interfere with future development of urban uses.
Inside the Bend UGB, the SR-2% district is intended for use only for areas with existing rural
development patterns, and is generally not appropriate for large tracts of vacant land.
** See Bend Development Code for methodology to calculate minimum and maximum densities.
GOALS
The intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide and maintain sufficient residential
land to accommodate needed housing units under Statewide Planning Goal 10
(Housing). The following goals set the context for the policies in this chapter. The
citizens and elected officials of Bend wish to:
■ Keep our neighborhoods livable by offering a variety of living styles and choices,
creating attractive neighborhoods located close to schools, parks, shopping and
employment.
■ Accommodate the varied housing needs of citizens with particular concern for
safety, affordability, open space, and a sense of community.
• Recognize the importance of transportation linkages (streets, bikeways, side-
walks and paths) in connecting neighborhoods and building and maintaining a
sense of community.
• Promote more flexibility in development standards to balance the need for more
efficient use of residential land and preservation of natural features.
■ Zone adequate land in specific designations to allow for production of needed
housing units.
7 1 H o u s i n g City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing
POLICIES
Population Forecasts
5-1 The City will coordinate with and provide data to Portland State
University for their preparation and regular update of a coordinated
50-year population forecast for the Urban Growth Boundary.
5-2 Using the new coordinated 50-year forecast, the City will, within 5
years after acknowledgment of the current update becomes final
and no longer subject to appeal, initiate a supplemental legislative
review of the UGB and/or urban reserve area planning to
demonstrate continuing compliance with state needed housing laws
for a new full 20-year planning period.
5-3 The City will use regular updates of population forecasts and
Housing Needs Analyses to monitor housing trends relative to the
planned housing mix, densities, location, and affordability assumed
within the Urban Growth Boundary.
Housing Mix, Density, and Affordability
5-4 The City will apply plan designations, zoning districts and
development code regulations to implement the mix of housing
indicated in the adopted Housing Needs Analysis.
5-5 The main maximum densities shown the Plan Map main purpose of maximum uen5nies �n Tian is
to maintain proper relationships between proposed public facilities
and services and population distribution. One purpose of minimum
densities is to assure efficiency of land use, particularly for larger
sites. Another is to encourage development of housing in locations
and at densities that support healthy, accessible, and affordable
housing choices.
5-6 Upon application, the City shall zone residential lands within City's
corporate limits in accordance with their plan designations, and
without a separate showing of public need, subject only to
conditions, if applicable, requiring availability of public sewer or
public water before occupancy.
5-7 The City will continue to create incentives for and remove barriers
to development of a variety of housing types in all residential zones,
consistent with the density ranges and housing types allowed in the
zones. This policy is intended to implement the City's obligation
under the State Housing Goal to "encourage the availability of
adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent
levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of
Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type,
and density".
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing ( 8
5-8 The City will apply innovative and flexible zoning tools to support a
mix of housing types and densities.
5-9 The City and County will support public and private non-profit and
for -profit entities that provide affordable housing in Central Oregon.
5-10 The City and County will coordinate with each other and other
affected governments as required by the State Housing Goal to
ensure that "the needs of the region are considered in arriving at a
fair allocation of housing types and densities" and that "needed
housing is provided on a regional basis through coordinated
comprehensive plans".
5-11 The City will continuously monitor the yield of efficiency measures
as required by the state needed housing statute and publish the
results on its Growth Management Documents website not less
than once a year.
5-12 To promote complete neighborhoods and the integration of other
supporting uses, the City will employ a master planning process for
large development sites which are 20 acres or greater. The master
plan process will offer two options for approval: 1) applying clear
and objective standards or 2) applying discretionary standards for
more flexibility.
5-13 Existing residentially -designated areas that are adjacent to
commercial or mixed use designations may be re -designated for
Residential Medium and High densitydevelopment.
5-14 The City will support re -designation of suitable areas that are within
a 1/4-mile walk to transit corridors from a lower density designation
to a higher density designation, where plan amendment criteria are
otherwise met.
5-15 The City shall employ special redevelopment standards and other
strategies for manufactured home parks as an incentive to retain
and redevelop existing affordable housing stocks at affordable
prices and rent levels.
5-16 The City may consider density bonuses as an incentive to providing
affordable housing.
5-17 The City will monitor parking needs for residential uses and set
parking requirements to the lowest standards that will meet the
community's needs in order to reduce land utilized for parking,
reduce the cost of housing development, and encourage a more
walkable development pattern.
5-18 The City will assist in identifying, obtaining and leveraging funding
sources for the development of new housing for very low, low, and
moderate - income residents, as determined by appropriate
91 Housing City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
percentages of Area Median Family income in the Housing Needs
Assessment.
5-19 The City will monitor the results of actions and programs funded
through the use of the City's Affordable Housing Fee Trust Fund.
5-20 When affordable housing development is required by City policy or
code or to meet eligibility criteria for a City incentive program or a
policy requirement, affordable housing means housing with a sales
price or rental amount that is within the means of a household that
may occupy moderate- and low-income housing. Unless otherwise
specified, affordable housing must meet one of the thresholds
defined below. Nothing in this policy prevents the city from providing
support for housing at other levels of affordability.
o In the case of dwelling units for sale, affordable means housing
in which the mortgage, amortized interest, taxes, insurance,
and condominium or association fees, if any, constitute no
more than 30 percent of such gross annual household income
for a for a family at 80% of the area median income, based
upon most recent HUD Income Limits for the Bend Metropolitan
Statistical Area (Bend MSA).
o In the case of dwelling units for rent, affordable means housing
for which the rent and utilities constitute no more than 30
percent of such gross annual household income for a family at
60% of the area median income, based upon most recent HUD
Income Limits for the Bend MSA.
5-21 In order to ensure the continued affordability of affordable housing
that has been committed by a property owner or required by the
City, the City may:
o Specify a minimum number of years that affordability must be
maintained;
o Require an applicant to demonstrate how affordability will be
ensured throughout the specified period, including addressing
how units will be made available to households meeting the
targeted income level, resale/recapture for ownership units,
and/or rent increases for rental units, as applicable;
o Establish phasing requirements for construction of affordable
housing units;
o Condition land use approvals to implement affordable housing
requirements;
o Require restrictive covenants, deed restrictions, and/or related
instruments as deemed necessary by the City; and/or
o Require other measures deemed necessary by the City.
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing 110
Residential Compatibility
5-22 Private and public nonresidential uses are necessary and will be
encouraged within residential areas for the convenience and safety
of the residents. Such facilities shall be compatible with surrounding
developments, and their appearance should enhance the area.
5-23 Of necessity, nonresidential uses may abut residentially planned
and zoned areas in different parts of the community. In these
instances, nonresidential uses will be subjected to special
development standards such as setbacks, landscaping, sign
regulations, and building design that harmonize and provide
transitions consistent with the primary purposes of the adjacent
zones.
5-24 Homes built to HUD Class A manufactured home standards will be
permitted in manufactured home parks, or on individual lots. Non -
Class A manufactured homes may be allowed in manufactured
home parks or as replacement for non -conforming manufactured
homes subject to conditional use approval standards that are clear
and objective and that encourage retention and replacement of
existing affordable housing stock.
5-25 Homes built to HUD manufactured home standards located on
individual lots in areas already developed with conventional housing
shall be subject to special siting standards as provided by state
needed housing law.
5-26 Manufactured and modular homes meeting IRC Modular and CABO
building code standards shall be permitted on the same basis as
site -built homes.
5-27 Private covenants and deed restrictions recorded hereafter that
support compact urban form, higher densities and better access to
affordable housing are encouraged as supportive of City policy.
5-28 Neighborhood commercial shopping areas may be located within
residential districts and have development standards that
appropriately limit their scale and recognize their residential setting.
5-29 In many cases, small home -based businesses are a legitimate use
within residential areas, and may be permitted subject to design
and nuisance standards in the Development Code.
5-30 Certain private recreational uses, such as golf courses or tennis
courts, may be successfully integrated into residential areas
provided the location, design, and operation are compatible with
surrounding residential developments and do not prevent
development of lands inventoried for needed housing to minimum
density standards.
111 Housing
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
5-31 Residential areas will offer a wide variety of housing types in
locations best suited to a range of housing types, needs and
preferences.
Neighborhood Appearance
(See related policies in Chapter 9, CommunityAppearance.)
5-32 Above -ground installations, such as water and sewer pumping
stations, power transformer substations or natural gas pumping
stations, shall be screened and designed to blend with the
character of the area in which they are located.
5-33 All new developments shall include trees in the road right of way, as
practical, in the planter strip between the curb and sidewalk.
5-34 Walls and fences along arterial or collector streets shall be subject
to special design standards. The area between the fence or wall
and the curb or pavement shall be landscaped.
5-35 All residential development will respect the natural ground cover of
the area and existing and mature trees within the community should
be preserved where practicable.
5-36 The City encourages flexibility in design to promote safety, livability
and preservation of natural features. To that end, the City will
provide development node standards to allow flexibility on
dimensional standards, such as lot size and setbacks, to achieve
these objectives.
5-37 Hillside areas shall be given special consideration in site design by
both the developer and local regulations, Building sites, streets, and
other improvements shall be designed and permitted in a manner
that will minimize excessive cuts and fills and other erosion -
producing changes. (Note: see related policies in Chapter 10,
Natural Forces.)
Transportation connectivity
(See related policies in Chapter 7, Transportation Systems, and Chapter3, Community
Connections.)
5-38 Medium -and high -density residential developments should have
good access to transit, K-12 public schools where possible,
commercial services, employment and public open space to provide
the maximum access to the highest concentrations of population.
5-39 Street widths on residential local streets shall be as narrow as
reasonably possible to preserve safety, and limit the effects of
surface runoff and excessive vehicle speed.
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing 112
5-40 The City may require adjustments to the street design in order to
discourage high speed traffic on local residential streets.
5-41 In all residential areas the City shall encourage the use of open
space amenities such as landscaped traffic islands or extra -width
planting strips.
5-42 Schools and parks may be distributed throughout the residential
sections of the community, and all types of dwelling units should
have safe and convenient access to schools and parks.
5-43 The City will coordinate with the school and parks districts to ensure
that the respective plans of each local government are coordinated
and consistent with state law.
5-44 Sidewalks will be required in all new developments. Separated
sidewalks will be required on all new streets. However, an
alternative system of walkways that provide adequate pedestrian
circulation may be approved.
5-45 Per the City's Transportation Systems Plan, the City will complete
or connect priority walkways on routes to schools, parks, or
commercial areas.
5-46 Bikeways shall be considered as a transportation element, and
adequate facilities shall be provided as a part of new development.
5-47 Efforts will be made to extend trails, pedestrian ways, and bikeways
through existing residential areas. Existing trails, pedestrian ways,
and bikeways will be extended through new developments to allow
further extension and promote alternative modes of travel.
5-48 The City will encourage pedestrian scale block length to encourage
connectivity and pedestrian access. When existing conditions or
topography prevent a cross street, a pedestrian accessway to
connect the streets may be required.
5-49 Residential local streets shall be developed whenever practicable to
increase connectivity within and between neighborhoods.
5-50 Cul-de-sac and "hammer -head" residential streets may be allowed
only where existing development, steep slopes, open space, or
natural features prevent connections, or when the objectives of
connectivity are met within the neighborhood.
5-51 The City will consider the need for emergency equipment access for
any new development.
131 Housing City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing i
ifiti
_____
Public utilities and services
(See related policies in Chapter 1, Plan Management and Citizen Involvement and
Chapter 8, Public Facilities and Services.)
5-52 All residential areas will be provided with community water and
sewer services and other facilities necessary for safe, healthful,
convenient urban living consistent with the density of development.
5-53 Residential development shall be coordinated with other Land use
elements and community facilities which are consistent with
projected housing densities.
5-54 Electric power, telephone, and cable TV distribution and service
lines shall be located underground in new developments.
5-55 New street names shall be unique within the County.
Destination Resorts
5-56 A destination resort within the Urban Area Reserve may be served
by municipal water and sewer service or an approved community
water and sewer service for domestic use compliant with state law.
5-57 Properties that are eligible for destination resort development will
lose that eligibility upon inclusion into theUGB.
Refinement Plan Areas
(See related policies in Chapter 11, Growth Management and Chapter 1, Plan
Management and Citizen Involvement.)
5-58 A refinement plan that includes residential areas may prescribe
residential density limits on specific properties which differ from the
density range provided for in the Comprehensive Plan. However,
the average density of residential development allowed within a
refinement plan area shall not be less than 80 percent or more than
100 percent of the maximum density, including applicable density
bonuses or transfers, prescribed for the area by its pre-existing
comprehensive plan map designations.
City of Bend Comprehensive Plan
Housing 114
Exhibit E - City of La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Remand Compliant
City of La Pine
Comprehensive Plan
Page 1
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Special Thanks & Acknowledgements
The City of La Pine Comprehensive Plan could not have been completed without the
assistance of our citizens. Their participation was invaluable to the success of the
document and was instrumental to developing the values, goals, and policies that are
needed to shape the future of La Pine. Various public bodies and agencies also
participated in the process and deserve special recognition for their efforts to refine the
document. They are listed as follows:
City of La Pine:
City Council
City Planning Commission
City Staff
Deschutes County:
Board of County Commissioners
County Planning Commission
County Staff
State of Oregon:
Department of Land Conservation and Development
Department of Transportation
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Department of Community Development and Economic Development
Department of Employment and Analysis
Federal Government:
Bureau of Land Management
US Forest Service
Corps of Engineers
Agencies:
Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council
La Pine Water and Sewer District
La Pine Park District
La Pine Rural Fire Protection District
Rural Community Assistance Corporation
Private Groups:
Economic Development for Central Oregon
La Pine Chamber of Commerce
Housing Works
La Pine Industrial Group
Special Recognition:
Special recognition and gratitude goes to DLCD Representatives Karen Swirsky, and Jon
Jinings for their continued assistance in providing guidance to the City on problem
Page 2
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
solving and urban/rural issues. The dedication, professionalism, and overall helpfulness
were essential in the development of our first, independent Comprehensive
Plan implementing the Statewide Planning Goals. Small cities, like La Pine, could not
effectively complete comprehensive land use planning without assistance from DLCD.
To that end, we are also thankful for the grant assistance and consideration of the Salem
DLCD staff, Larry French, from which funding was provided for this task, and several
other key projects.
Page 3
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Table of Contents
ELEMENT PAGE
Introduction 5
Chapter 1— Community Characteristics 16
Chapter 2 — Citizen Involvement Program 17
Chapter 3 — Agricultural Lands 25
Chapter 4 — Forest Lands 28
Chapter 5 - Natural Resources and Environment 32
Chapter 6 — Parks, Recreation and Open Space 40
Chapter 7 — Public Facilities and Services 47
Chapter 8 — Transportation 60
Chapter 9 — Economy 72
Chapter 10 — Housing 107
Chapter 11- Energy 129
Chapter 12 — Urbanization 133
Appendices 134
Page 4
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan
I. Introduction
Incorporation:
The City of La Pine was incorporated in 2006 after a vote of citizens acknowledged the
desire for La Pine to become a self-governing community. Population growth,
challenging development issues, and a strong sense of personal independence of residents
of the region led to the community making a governmental break from Deschutes
County. Although brand new in its self -governance, the community is meeting the
challenges of being a newly incorporated municipality head on. Aside from fulfilling the
day to day obligations of managing City business affairs, this Comprehensive Plan is the
first effort at directing long term community growth according to the vision of the City
residents.
What is a Comprehensive Plan?
• A Comprehensive Plan is a blueprint for community land use decision making to
ensure that the needs of the community are met as growth occurs over the term
of the planning period
- During the creation of the Comprehensive Plan, three fundamental
questions were kept in mind, these are: Where are we now? Where do we
want to be? How will we get there?
Although thedocument ill 1S primarily IIIte11UCU to p1UV1UC Q basis 01 f0W
land will be utilized and developed, it has far-reaching affects on many
day-to-day issues such as: provision of public/emergency services
(police/fire); economic development/jobs; land values; schools; parks;
and, transportation.
- A Comprehensive Plan helps define a community and puts into a single
document the goals and policies that ensure that the desired character and
quality of lire within the community is maintained as the community
grows.
• Elements of a Comprehensive Plan
- A Comprehensive Plan is comprised of separate chapters each addressing
fundamental factors in community development. In Oregon the basis for
the Plan is established by the Statewide Planning Goals — these Goals
require that the following issues be addressed and planned for:
- agricultural and forest lands
- natural resources/historic resources
- the quality of air, water and land resources
- natural hazards
recreational needs
economic development
housing needs
Page 5
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
- public facilities and services
- transportation
- energy conservation
Comprehensive Plans must also include provisions for regular updating to
allow for changes in community direction and needs over time.
Provisions for implementation of the goals and policies contained within
the Plan must be established. These include defining "programs" to fulfill
tasks and meet obligations, the adoption of a Zoning Code, and adoption
of subsequent specialized Code texts that have the effect of law.
A corresponding map identifies long-term land use designations and
accompanies the textual document.
• Reasons for a Comprehensive Plan
- Compliance with State of Oregon Land Use requirements for all municipal
jurisdictions.
Provides the legal basis for the communities land use regulations (laws)
and land use decisions.
- Helps identify and prioritize issues that are important to the community
and plan for change.
- Ensures that adequate public facilities and services are provided and
maintained to meet citizen needs
Provides a degree of certainty and protection for citizens regarding land
uses, values, and rights in their community.
- And, most importantly, a Comprehensive Plan ensures that the citizens of
the La Pine have a say in the development of their community.
Summary of Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals:
Oregon's statewide goals are achieved through local comprehensive planning. State law
requires each city and county to adopt a comprehensive plan and the zoning and land -
division ordinances needed to put the plan into effect. The local comprehensive plans
must be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals. The State's Land Conservation
and Development Commission (LCDC) review plans for such consistency. When the
State Department of Land Conservation and Development officially approves a Local
government's plan, the plan is said to be 'acknowledged. After acknowledgement, the
Plan becomes the controlling guide for implementing ordinances — the laws that bring the
plan to life. Oregon's planning laws apply not only to local governments but also to
special districts and state agencies. The laws strongly emphasize coordination between
such agencies and special districts - keeping plans and programs consistent with each
other, with the goals, and with acknowledged local plans. The following is a summary of
the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals and the issues that must be addressed in the Plan.
GOAL 1
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT Goal 1 calls for "the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process." It requires each city and county to have a
citizen involvement program containing six components specified in the goal. It also
Page 6
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
requires local governments to have a committee for citizen involvement (CCI) to monitor
and encourage public participation in planning.
GOAL 2
LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2 outlines the basic procedures of Oregon's statewide
planning program. It says that land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a
comprehensive plan, and that suitable "implementation ordinances" to put the plan's
policies into effect must be adopted. It requires that plans be based on "factual
information"; that local plans and ordinances be coordinated with those of other
jurisdictions and agencies; and that plans be reviewed periodically and amended as
needed. Goal 2 also contains standards for taking exceptions to statewide goals. An
exception may be taken when a statewide goal cannot or should not be applied to a
particular area or situation.
GOAL 3
AGRICULTURAL LANDS Goal 3 defines "agricultural lands." It then requires
counties to inventory such lands and to "preserve and maintain" them through farm
zoning. Details on the uses allowed in farm zones are found in ORS Chapter 215 and in
Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660, and Division 33.
GOAL 4
FOREST LANDS This goal defines forest lands and requires counties to inventory them
and adopt policies and ordinances that will "conserve forest lands for forest uses."
GOAL 5
OPEN SPACES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS AND NATURAL
RESOURCES Goal 5 covers more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as
wildlife habitats and wetlands. It establishes a process for each resource to be inventoried
and evaluated. If a resource or site is found to be significant, a local government has three
policy choices: preserve the resource, allow proposed uses that conflict with it, or strike
some sort of a balance between the resource and the uses that would conflict with it.
GOAL 6
AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY This goal requires local
comprehensive plans and implementing measures to be consistent with state and federal
regulations on matters such as groundwater pollution.
GOAL 7
AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL DISASTERS AND HAZARDS Goal 7 deals with
development in places subject to natural hazards such as floods or landslides. It requires
that jurisdictions apply "appropriate safeguards" (floodplain zoning, for example) when
planning for development there.
Page 7
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
GOAL 8
RECREATION NEEDS This goal calls for each community to evaluate its areas and
facilities for recreation and develop plans to deal with the projected demand for them. It
also sets forth detailed standards for expedited siting of destination resorts.
GOAL 9
ECONOMY OF THE STATE Goal 9 calls for diversification and improvement of the
economy. It asks communities to inventory commercial and industrial lands, project
future needs for such lands, and plan and zone enough land to meet those needs.
GOAL 10
HOUSING This goal specifies that each city must plan for and accommodate needed
housing types, such as multifamily and manufactured housing. It requires each city to
inventory its buildable residential lands, project future needs for such lands, and plan and
zone enough buildable land to meet those needs. It also prohibits local plans from
discriminating against needed housing types.
GOAL 11
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Goal 11 calls for efficient planning of public
services such as sewers, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. The goal's central
concept is that public services should to be planned in accordance with a community's
needs and capacities rather than be forced to respond to development as it occurs.
GOAL 12
TRANSPORTATION The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient, and economic
transportation system." ' i address needs the
it requires communities to the of tnG
"transportation disadvantaged."
GOAL 13
ENERGY Goal 13 requires that "land and uses developed on the land shall be managed
and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon
sound economic principles."
GOAL 14
URBANIZATION This goal requires cities to estimate future growth and needs for land
and then plan and zone enough land to meet those needs. It calls for each city to establish
an "urban growth boundary" (UGB) to "identify and separate urbanizable land from rural
land." It specifies seven factors that must be considered in drawing up a UGB. It also
lists four criteria to be applied when undeveloped land within a UGB is to be converted to
urban uses.
GOAL 15
WILLAMETTE GREENWAY Goal 15 sets forth procedures for administering the 300
miles of greenway that protects the Willamette River. This goal does not apply to land
within the La Pine UGB.
Page 8
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
GOAL 16
ESTUARINE RESOURCES This goal requires local governments to classify Oregon's
22 major estuaries in four categories: natural, conservation, shallow -draft development,
and deep -draft development. It then describes types of land uses and activities that are
permissible in those "management units." This goal does not apply to land within the La
Pine UGB.
GOAL 17
COASTAL SHORELANDS The goal defines a planning area bounded by the ocean
beaches on the west and the coast highway (State Route 101) on the east. It specifies how
certain types of land and resources there are to be managed: major marshes, for example,
are to be protected. Sites best suited for unique coastal land uses (port facilities, for
example) are reserved for "water -dependent" or "water related" uses. This goal does not
apply to land within the La Pine UGB.
GOAL 18
BEACHES AND DUNES Goal 18 sets planning standards for development on various
types of dunes. It prohibits residential development on beaches and active foredunes, but
allows some other types of development if they meet key criteria. The goal also deals
with dune grading, groundwater drawdown in dunal aquifers and the breaching of
foredunes. This goal does not apply to land within the La Pine UGB.
GOAL 19
OCEAN RESOURCES Goal 19 aims "to conserve the long-term values, benefits, and
natural resources of the near shore, ocean, and the continental shelf." It deals with matters
such as dumping of dredge spoils and disuinu ing of waste products into the open sea.
p g � p-� g---� P P
Goal 19's main requirements are for state agencies rather than cities and counties. This
goal does not apply to land within the La Pine UGB.
Throughout the course of the 20-year planning period, that comprises the Comprehensive
Plan timeline, the La Pine City Council and Planning Commission, as well as the citizens
of La Pine, will use the Plan to guide decisions about La Pine's physical, social, and
economic development.
II. Purpose and Intent
As a newly incorporated city, La Pine is required by state law to develop a
Comprehensive Plan that is consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals — the Goals
express the State's policies on land use and planning for community growth. The La Pine
Comprehensive Plan was developed for providing a guide to incorporating the specific
community direction concerning future growth with the State mandated programs to the
greatest degree practicable. The intent was to allow for as local control and guidance
conceming future growth as possible, while maintaining efficiencies and effective
delivery of public facilities and services and future use of land. Overall, a generalized
long-range policy guide and land use map provides the basis for decisions on the
Page 9
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
physical, social, and economic development of La Pine. The goals and policies included
in this plan are based on coordination with local and regional agencies that provide public
services to the community, and the best information available. The Plan strives to
address the interrelationship between all factors, which influence community growth and
not isolate them as unique facets to be looked individually. The connections between all
elements inherent in community development are taken into consideration in all regards
from public facilities planning to the arrangement of land uses to avoid conflict. The
main objectives of this Comprehensive Plan are:
• To respect the past land use patterns in the community while preventing future
conflicts with and between new land use activities;
• To provide elected officials, public agencies, and citizens of La Pine with an
objective basis for participation in land use decisions;
• To provide an information document which serves as benchmark for the existing
conditions and characteristics of the community;
• To identify the direction and nature of changes and future development which may be
expected within the community; and,
• To provide a better understanding of specific goals, policies, actions, programs and
regulations which affect the future growth of the community.
III. Process and Methodology
Planning Process
This Plan seeks to resolve some of those issues and the inevitable issues related to growth
by providing clear policies on what the built environment should look like and how it
should operate, and incorporating the wishes of the local Citizens. in order to accomplish
these tasks, a significant amount of meaningful public involvement is required.
Goal 1 of the Statewide Planning Goals requires a strong commitment to public
involvement at all levels of land use planning. Thus, since the Comprehensive Plan is the
basis for all future land use decisions and provides direction for growth of the community
through the 20-year planning period, it was not only a necessity from a legal standpoint to
make sure the public was involved in its creation, but it was also a necessity from a
community ownership standpoint. Without the Citizen input into the Plan, the Plan is
lifeless and does not ensure that the local community desires are met. It was with the
help of the Citizens of La Pine, including their long-term vision, that this document was
created. To those ends, all of the citizens o La Pine who participated in the
Comprehensive Planning process are to be thanked — especially City Councilors,
Planning Commissioners, City Staff, agency participants and those members of the
general public who diligently participated in the public meetings. The on -going
participation of the local citizenry will be an important part of the community
development process to ensure that the Plan is fulfilled and ultimately leads to the
community that the citizens have envisioned.
Page 10
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Local Values
An overall sentiment that became apparent early in the planning process was that the
Citizens wanted to maintain their small-town feel and retain the rural lifestyle, while at
the same time increasing the degree of basic public services and amenities for their
everyday needs. These include better access to health care/hospital, increased
employment opportunities, enhancement of recreational opportunities, and other elements
common to everyday life. The desire was for slow, graduated change that respected the
ideals of the current Citizens and historical lifestyle of the area. The focus of this Plan is
to make sure that the growth and redevelopment of the community adheres to these ideals
and values, and that the vision as expressed by the Citizens.
In April, 2000 the La Pine Community Action Team sponsored the La Pine Community
Design Charrette — with the help of professional at the Rocky Mountain Institute, a
charrette process was completed, and a report identifying the desires of the community
was produced. The primary accomplishments of the charrette were the identification of
specific projects that the citizens of La Pine see as desirable and beneficial to their
community, as well as considering specific design, size, and locational requirements for
each. The previous Design Charrette was utilized as a basis for discussion to help
identify and create the Vision for La Pine.
The following are the primary projects identified by participants in the process (with a
brief description of what was desired). However, there was an acknowledgment that the
prospective projects may not be built for a variety of reasons. Nonetheless, these items
were deemed by citizens to be of future importance to the fabric of the community.
1. Performing Arts Center — An auditorium of 12,000 square feet with 400 seats
2. Community Health Center — A 24-hour emergency facility and rural hospital of
10,000 to 20,000 square feet.
3. Skate Park — Would require about 9,000 square feet of land
4. Safe House — A short-term residence for 1 to 5 victims of domestic violence.
5. Civic Center — A 5,000 square foot building to provide a variety of City and
County services.
6. Senior Center — A 9,500 square foot building on 4-acres with parking for 100
vehicles. This would provide a variety of senior services.
7. Community Park — Large enough to accommodate many large scale recreational
needs for the community and region.
8. Community Fairgrounds — A multi -use recreational and educational facility
requiring 40 to 50 acres consisting of rodeo grounds, community building,
administrative offices, etc.
9. Airport — On approximately 300 acres, this facility would include hangars, light
industrial businesses, RV park, etc.
The following projects were also identified during the charrette process, but were less
specific as to size, location, and design.
Page 11
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Central Oregon Community College south campus
• New schools and school expansions
• Neighborhood parks
• Senior Housing
• Swimming pool
• Information kiosks
• Affordable housing
• City, County and State public works yard
• Open space
• Trails for equestrians, bikers, snowmobilers and skiers
Another major discussion point of the process was the opportunity to create an
identifiable Town Center as a hub of community activity. The Town Center would be a
compact area that is centrally located and planned for easy walking access. The uses
would be comprised of a mixture of commercial businesses, civic buildings and other
community uses.
Visioning as an overview
"Visioning" (as a planning term) is a process by which community values are weighed
and a community identity is created. Key elements that need to be understood and
defined in any community visioning process are:
• Where are we now?
• Where are we going?
• Where do we want to be?
• How do we get there?
Community involvement and participation from a broad spectrum is necessary to create a
true community identity. A full scale, independent Visioning process results in a plan
that does the following:
• Identifies primary community issues and desires
• Investigates the physical, cultural, economic and social fabric of a
community
• Establishes community goals
• Develops strategies for meeting goals
• Creates an implementation plan
A key understanding of participants in the process is that not all desires of individual
citizens will be viewed by others as a "community" need — there must be prioritization
during the Visioning process. Key factors that must be kept in mind during the Visioning
process are:
• What are the necessities versus aspirations?
• Fiscal, legal and procedural requirements to achieve the goals
Page 12
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Who is responsible for moving goals forward (i.e. government, private business,
and other agencies)?
• Is the plan sustainable over the long term?
The intended result is a definitive community direction that is aimed at empowering
citizens to work in a cohesive fashion to build a better community. Successful
implementation of a Vision plan requires the establishment of benchmarks so that
successes and accomplishments of the plan can be weighed. Ultimately, the plan should
be used to guide decisions on issues that have community wide implications.
Creating a Vision for the Future
In developing a vision for the future and creating this Comprehensive Plan, the following
steps were taken and questions were asked:
Define what "makes up" the community — Is the community of La Pine comprised
of only those properties and residents within the City boundary, or does the "community"
also include outlying residents who rely of City services and businesses for their
everyday needs?
Identification of available community resources — This process was both
quantitative and qualitative in its efforts. It consisted of documenting the availability of
public facilities and services, service agencies, private businesses and all other
community resources that provide everyday service needs to the community.
Creation of an Action Plan — An action plan is a prioritized set of specific tasks
(these are the Programs listed within each chapter of the Comprehensive Plan) aimed at
meeting the long term goals of the community. Other agencies, special districts, and
groups who have participated in the development of the community vision have been
encouraged to develop individual operation plans that contribute to the overall
community vision and action plan for La Pine.
Implementation — The tasks identified in the action plan should be assigned to
individuals, groups, civic organizations, and local government entities as appropriate.
Completion of tasks should be lauded in a public fashion with benchmarks established.
Visioning for La Pine
Visioning for La Pine occurred throughout the Comprehensive Planning process — the
visioning included continual development of Goals and Polices for the operation and
direction of the City as a jurisdictional organization (as listed throughout this Plan), as
well as creating an action plan (the Programs listed throughout this Plan). After review
of the points identified in the past charrette process, the discussions with the community
opened up toward new ideas. The primary points raised by citizens were:
Economy — how to create and generate jobs in La Pine
Page 13
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Desire to maintain the "rural feel" of the community
Transportation — Highway 97 bisects the city and creates physical and
perceivable obstacles — need for a traffic signal at l st Street
Livability — a "slow degree of change" — not aggressive tactics to change the
community quickly
Establish design protocol for new development/buildings in La Pine by
focusing on the "Complete Community" and "Complete Neighborhoods"
concepts.
Concern over the newest residential neighborhood within City boundaries that
was reviewed/approved by Deschutes County under County development
standards
Desired Outcome of Visioning Process
At the end of any visioning process there is a document that includes goals, policies and
programs all aimed at fulfilling the community visioning statement — in this case, it is this
Comprehensive Plan. This Plan is the document that can be looked to by the community
to provide direction to all groups who provide services to community member.
Notwithstanding, the Plan is a dynamic document and must include a process for
updating — it must be realized that the planning process is continual. As the community
and surrounding influential circumstances change, the community must review the Plan
for accuracy toward community desires. Continual adaptation of the plan to current
circumstances is important in maintaining its relevance as guidance to community
livability.
IV. Summary of the Plan and Recommendations
The La Pine Comprehensive Plan is a compilation of the vision and existing needs of the
Citizens of La Pine, with goals, policies, and programs that give direction to bringing the
vision to fruition and meeting the identified needs. Ultimately, this Plan is a useful
planning tool that will help shape the City's development regulations, capital
improvement programming and budgeting, and other legal and regulatory actions
necessary to manage La Pine's physical, social, and environmental character. Aside from
acting as a guide for the aspirations and current needs identified by Citizens, the Plan also
includes goals and polices aimed at meeting State initiated programs — such as
preservation of natural resources; providing a multi -modal transportation system;
providing a variety of housing types; establishing an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB);
and, planning for future UGB expansion. The primary direction of the Plan includes:
• Continual coordination with partner agencies and service districts for the effective
and efficient delivery of services that are consistent with the community direction for
future growth as outlined in the goals and polices of this Plan;
• Efficient utilization of land resources within the City to provide a variety of housing
types, employment opportunities, transportation options and recreational activities for
citizens;
Page 14
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Increasing opportunities for the transition of the provision of public facilities and
services to the City when economically feasible;
• Meeting the near term requirements for basic citizen needs;
• Improving opportunities for business development and creation of new jobs;
• Preservation of the local lifestyle and character of the community including the
designation of the Complete Neighborhoods and Complete Community concepts;
Complete Neighborhoods is a concept whereby neighborhoods should be designed to
have adequate lands for the development of a full range of housing choices, schools,
transportation, open spaces, areas for energy production, commercial services, and
employment lands. The goal is that if a neighborhood is complete it will create a more
walkable and sustainable community that reduces reliance limited energy sources.
In La Pine, there are three primary neighborhood areas that are entirely within the City
limits and proposed UGB. These neighborhoods will need various land uses and zones to
become a fully complete. Over the planning period, and with adherence to the complete
neighborhood concepts, La Pine will achieve its goals and become a fully functioning
"Complete Community." The City held a naming contest and the winning names the
public chose for the three City neighborhoods are:
• Rosland Crossing — this area is at the northernmost part of the City and includes
Wickiup Junction
• Ranchside Neighborhood — this area is south of Rosland Crossing beginning
south of Burgess Road and ending at 1st Street
• Prairie Meadow — this area is the southern part of the City and the oldest part of
the cotruinunity.
Each of the neighborhoods contains various zones and other land use elements that
ensure they are complete. The Comprehensive Plan shows how the proposed land uses
will help to encourage complete neighborhoods.
The Complete Community concept is the collection of the La Pine Complete
Neighborhoods. Thus, a Complete Community includes a system of complete
neighborhoods by interlinking all components.
• Creating new methods for funding necessary public services and infrastructure other
than new taxes — such as the adoption of System Development Charges for
transportation, etc';
• Recognizing that La Pine as a large number of acres within the incorporated city
limits and this permits creative opportunities for the transition of lands from rural to
urban uses, and,
• Furthering the ability for the City to become successful at creating its own destiny
through prioritization of issues important to La Pine and local decision making in this
regard.
1 The Special Districts already utilize SDC's for water and sewer facilities
Page 15
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map and How it Relates to the Current
Deschutes County Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Map
The text of this Comprehensive Plan is accompanied by a land use map showing how La
Pine's land uses will be arranged for the 20-year planning period. This will be La Pine's
Comprehensive Plan Map and the map will include the urban growth boundary, which is
the same boundary as the current city limits. The new La Pine Comprehensive Plan Map
will replace the County Comprehensive Plan Map designations for La Pine.
After adoption of the La Pine Comprehensive Plan, the City will have its own
Comprehensive Plan map but the current County zoning map will remain the same until
the City adopts its own Transportation System Plan, zoning regulations, and a new
zoning map. The reason for this is the lands that were not contained in the County Urban
Unincorporated Community (UUC) cannot be intensified until further transportation
study is complete — sometime in late 2012. The City and UGB lands that were not part of
the previous UUC will be designated as "future urbanizable" but must retain current
Deschutes County zoning or another interim "non -urban zone until La Pine adopts its
TSP.
V. Amendments to the Plan
Amendments to the La Pine Comprehensive Plan may be necessary from time to time to
reflect changing community conditions, needs and desires, to correct mistakes, add newer
to address changes in the la_xr An amendment nr revision to the Plan may
information, or
be initiated by the La Pine City Council, the La Pine Planning Commission, or the owner
of the land, which is the subject of the proposed amendment or revision. In the case of a
Council or Planning Commission initiated change, the change must be found to be
consistent with all applicable State of Oregon requirements, including Oregon Revised
Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules. In the case of an owner initiated amendment
to the Plan, the owner must, in addition to compliance with State laws, demonstrate that:
1. There was a mistake when the Plan designation was applied to the subject
property; or,
2. The proposed change would result in a public need and benefit, and/or would
result in a more efficient use of land.
VII. Aspirational Goals and Directives
The word "Shall" occurs frequently in this Plan. The wording is intended to direct
intensity of effort when planning for La Pine's future. However, all tasks directed by this
Plan are subject to the availability of City funding. Such funding will vary from year to
year and in response to City Council priorities.
Page 16
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 1
Community Characteristics
I. Community History
La Pine was originally founded in the mid-1800s and was formally designated as a town
site around 1900, The history of the original settlement was based on the fur trapping
trade when trappers headed through the area from the Willamette and Columbia River
valleys and followed the Deschutes River. Here they found rich trapping grounds and
natural resources from which money could be made. Prior to settlement and influence
from outside explorers to the region, the area was historically occupied by Native
American Indian tribes. Much of the settlement of the area, by either Native Americans
or European settlers, was based on the proximity to the natural resources of the area —
rivers, lakes, forests and what is now called the Newberry Crater.
In the early 1900's the area became more heavily populated due to the logging industry
and the national demand for timber. The resulting development led to a variety of
everyday services — banks, school, hardware store, livery, newspaper, etc, to support the
burgeoning population. The logging industry and services related thereto were aided by
the recognition of the surrounding natural resources, which made the area ripe for tourism
even in the early part of the 20th century.
The past century has seen the development of US Highway 97 through the community —
this has opened up access to the area from points north to Washington and south to
California. Recently though, the areas closest to La Pine have seen growth related to the
tourism and second home industry — primarily in areas outlying what currently comprises
the incorporated community. The development and population growth has aided the
service industry of the area — typical businesses such as retail stores and services to the
traveling public are common. After the decline of the timber industry over the last 20
years, the area has experienced and economic stagnation with very few new industries
locating in the community.
Over the past 10-15 years, progressive changes have come to La Pine. The City was
incorporated by vote in 2006. Additionally, separate Park and Recreation, and Water and
Sewer Districts have been created. These have brought an increased sense of awareness
to La Pine as a community that has appropriate public facilities and services and is ripe
for new economic development and thus, greater sustainability.
Future challenges will include increasing economic development in the community, job
creation and providing additional services to meet everyday needs. Some of these will
come naturally and will develop according to market demand. Others will take
cooperation among agency and community groups. Increased citizen participation in
these as well as governmental efforts will bring a greater independence and identity to La
Pine over the next 20-years.
Page 17
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The community -based La Pine Industrial Group (LIGI) benefits the community. Efforts
by LIGI have helped to provide land to develop three county -owned parcels east of the
highway into industrial and business park sites. This is opening eyes in the Central
Oregon business community. As development spreads from rapidly growing Bend
outward, the newly incorporated La Pine is high on the list of communities ripe for
investment and development opportunities. Water and sewer districts have brought
municipal services to the community core. In 2008, the City of La Pine was designated as
an enterprise zone by the State of Oregon. This allows qualified companies to forego
paying property taxes for 3 to 5 years.
The City was recently incorporated and by vote of the people contains an abundant
supply of land need to support planned growth for more than 20 years. While the
capacity of the City in terms of acreage is large, the land is planned to be filled with a
variety of uses including a significant amount of industrial/employment land infill.
Transitional uses for some of the employment lands are a necessary technique for proper
management of lands within the city limits. The city limits are also the proposed urban
growth boundary.
Existing land uses within the city are characterized with strip commercial development
along the highway and major streets with residential development scattered across the
community; a significant portion of this is in the outlying areas of the city. Industrial
development areas are located at the northeast and southeast comers of the City. Most
residential areas contain detached single family homes. The percentage of multi -family
homes, is very low, approximately 3 percent. Today, access to most employment and
commercial services requires vehicular travel — even for quick services and grocery
Pedestrian opportunities ties and travel arc limited These
shopping. Vppollltlllllw multi -modal options ark, limited. These
historic types of land uses are do not currently support sustainability and reduction of
vehicular travel. During the citizen meetings that were instrumental in shaping the Plan,
it became clear that the community has three neighborhood areas that have various
supplies of employment, commercial service, industrial, parks/open space and residential
lands. None of the three neighborhood areas contain adequate supplies or balance of uses
to qualify as a Complete Neighborhood now. Citizens want to correct this imbalance and
improve their neighborhoods with features that include:
• Better access and pedestrian ways that connect people to open spaces, parks,
and recreational lands closer to where they live
• Additional employment and commercial service nodes closer within
neighborhood areas so that people do not have to drive long distances to get "a
gallon of milk" or other daily consumable items.
• Schools that are within shorter walking distances from residential areas
• Improved information technologies closer to neighborhoods
• Better access to medical care including a critical need for 24 hour emergency
care
• Planned growth with commensurate infill policies that permit increased density
but recognize that compatibility is an essential feature of maintaining and
improving La Pine's livability
Page 18
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Opportunities for additional tourism support services and activities
• Reduce reliance on energy consumption in an effort to make the community
energy neutral.
• Improve alternate energy options such as use of solar, bio-mass, high efficiency
building techniques, and other forms of alternate energy as they are developed.
• Opportunities for using large acreages within the City limits as transition areas
accommodating: alternate energy production, wildfire interface and natural
resource protection areas, temporary employment lands, recreational uses, etc.
until needed for urbanization or employment.
Page 19
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 2
Citizen Involvement Program
I. State Planning Goal 1, Citizen Involvement
Oregon State Planning Goal 1 requires a citizen involvement program to be inherent in all
aspects of land use planning, and that insures the opportunity for all citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process. Local governing bodies must clearly
define the public involvement process and develop a process that is appropriate to the
scale of the planning effort being undertaken. Additionally, all information must be
presented in a manner that enables citizens to identify and comprehend the issues. Each
local government must create a citizen based committee, typically the Planning
Commission, which is comprised of broad based representation. Not only does the
citizen involvement process have to disseminate information to the public, it must also be
available to receive comment and weigh public testimony appropriately. In conjunction
with his Comprehensive Planning process, a series of public meetings were held, a
Technical Advisory Committee was created, and City Council input was sought. A
formal Planning Commission was not available until the end of the initial planning
process, but was available for review of the final draft document and to take public
testimony before making a recommendation to the City Council.
II. Purpose and Intent
The provisions of this chapter provide a citizen involvement program to insure the
opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. This chapter
defines the procedures by which the public will be involved in the ongoing land use
process and to provide for a continuity of citizen participation and transmittal of
information.
III. Issues and Goals
City leaders have made it a goal to improve communications and, a new City like La
Pine, will benefit a formal public involvement program.
IV. Policies and Programs
It will be necessary to develop a program that includes effective two-way communication
with all citizens of La Pine. The basic elements of the program should include the
following tasks:
Page 20
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The City shall:
1. Establish a process to involve a cross section of affected citizens, ensure effective
communication between citizens and elected officials, and assure citizens will receive a
response from policy makers.
2. Assure compliance with all state requirements for open meetings and open records, as
well as defining the process for standing for advisory committees in La Pine land use
actions.
3. Provide two bodies for assisting in citizen involvement in La Pine:
a. The Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI) shall be an advisory body to the City
Council to assure that the intent and purposes of this chapter are met.
b. Citizen Advisory Committees (CAC's) shall insure plan amendments are developed in
accordance with an overall City plan and advise the Council on individual land use
matters. The La Pine Planning Commission is one example of such an advisory
committee.
The Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI)
1. Creation and Composition
The Committee for Citizen Involvement will act as a liaison between the City Council
and the various Citizen Advisory Committees and citizens of La Pine. The Committee
shall be composed of a member from each active CAC including one representative of
the La Pine Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall designate one of their
members to serve as the Planning Commission Representative on the Committee for
Citizen Involvement. The Planning Commission Representative shall serve on the
Committee for a term of one year. With the exception of the Planning Commission
representative, members shall also be appointed to serve on a Citizen Advisory
Committee. Members shall represent a cross section of affected citizens, as well as all
geographic areas and interests related to land use and land use decisions, and chosen by
the City Council after a publicized and open selection process. Members of the
Committee for Citizen Involvement will receive no compensation.
2. Tenure and Removal
a. Members shall serve for terms of three years; provided, however, that the initial
membership of the Committee shall be on staggered terms so that each year no less than
two, nor more than three, members may be appointed.
b. A member of the Committee may be reappointed by the City Council to serve
additional terms.
Page 21
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
c. Members of the Committee may be removed by the City Council for cause, which
include, but is not limited to, neglect or inattention to duty, failure to attend meetings and
failure to implement the policy and purpose of this program.
d. A member of the Committee may resign at any time by submitting such resignation to
the City Council.
3. Responsibilities
a. The Committee for Citizen Involvement shall be responsible to the
City Council City Council for implementing and revising the La Pine Citizen
Involvement Program, to promote and enhance citizen involvement in land use planning,
further assisting in implementation of that Citizen Involvement Program and evaluation
of the process used for citizen involvement.
b. The Committee for Citizen Involvement shall be the designated agency for receipt and
evaluation of communications from citizens regarding the citizen involvement process in
La Pine and shall report periodically to the Council on the state of the program.
c. The CCI shall be authorized to designate alternate members of their respective CAC's
to attend CCI meetings in their absence.
The Citizen Advisory Committees (CAC's)
1. The City Council shall have the authority to establish and dissolve Citizen Advisory
Committees, subject to the provisions of this chapter.
2. The City Council shall have the authority to establish, modify and abolish the
boundaries in which Citizen Advisory Committees shall exercise their functions.
3. The City Council may undertake the activities listed in this section by City Council
order only after consultation with the Committee for Citizen Involvement. Until such
time, however, the Citizen Advisory Committees as composed on the effective date of
this ordinance and the boundaries of each Citizen Advisory Committee are hereby ratified
and affirmed.
Membership Requirements
1. Each Citizen Advisory Committee shall have five, seven or nine positions as
designated by the City Council upon an order creating or modifying such committee. A
CAC may exceed the designated positions temporarily, because of CAC boundary or
issue change.
2. Members of each Citizen Advisory Committee shall be residents of the area served by
such committee or a represent an issue connected to the subject matter.
3. Membership of each Citizen Advisory Committee shall be representative of a broad
cross section of the citizens living in the area served by the Citizen Advisory Committee
or represent an issue that relates to the committee function.
Applications and Appointments
1. All persons residing in each Citizen Advisory Committee Area are eligible to apply for
membership on the committee of that district or in the case of special issues, be
representative on that issue.
Page 22
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
2. Applications for appointments to Citizen Advisory Committees shall be submitted to
the City Council, Committee for Citizen Involvement or the Planning Director on forms
provided by the Director.
3. Applications received for committee membership shall be treated as follows:
a. If no vacancy exists on a Citizen Advisory Committee, such application shall be held
by the Planning Director for at least one year for consideration by the Committee for
Citizen Involvement and the City Council when vacancies occur. The applicant shall be
notified of the fact that no vacancy exists and that the application will be held for one
year.
b. Where a vacancy on a Citizen Advisory Committee does exist, the application shall be
referred to the Committee for Citizen Involvement for review. The Committee shall
advise the City Council as to their recommendations on disposition of outstanding
applications according to the following criteria:
(1) Whether there is sufficient number of applications to provide a reasonable choice
among applicants, consistent with the overall goal of providing for an effective cross
section of citizen involvement in the Advisory Committee area. If the Committee does
not feel that there are a sufficient number of applications, it may recommend to the City
Council that action be deferred until the Committee has undertaken to seek out an
additional number of applicants. The City Council may, on its own motion, also
undertake such recruitment.
(2) If the Committee be satisfied that appointment of one or more applicants would
provide for a balance of representation on a Citizen Advisory Committee, based upon
interests, occupation and geographic location, it shall recommend to the City Council that
one or more of the applicants be appointed.
c. Applications for Citizen Advisory Committee membership shall be forwarded to the
city Cnimrtil together with rPenmmendatinns from the CnmmittP.e not 1Pss than .(1 (lays
after the Committee is notified of an existing vacancy, unless the Committee or the City
Council undertakes additional active recruiting.
d. From the list of applicants submitted to the Committee for its recommendations, the
City Council shall consider the recommendations of the Committee and fill the vacancy
or vacancies from a list supplied by the Committee. If the City Council finds all names
submitted by the Committee unacceptable, it shall return the list to the Committee with
their reason for rejection and request additional lists of selections. The Committee shall,
within a reasonable time of return of the list, submit to the City Council a new list for
action by the City Council.
Term of Appointment
1. The term of membership on a Citizen Advisory Committee shall be three years from
the date of appointment, except as otherwise provided for in this chapter.
2. A member may be reappointed by the City Council for additional terms.
3. When a vacancy occurs prior to the end of the three-year term, the City Council shall
appoint a member to serve the portions of a Citizen Advisory Committee member's term.
Removal and Resignation
1. The City Council may remove a member of a Citizen Advisory Committee only after
receiving a recommendation from the Committee for Citizen Involvement, if the City
Page 23
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Council finds that the policies of this chapter or the Comprehensive Plan are not met, or
for the particular reasons set forth in this section. The City Council will also request that
the Committee for Citizen Involvement undertake an investigation with respect to the
grounds for removal or to respond to any complaints brought against any member of any
Citizen Advisory Committee, or any Committee as a whole. The investigation shall
include a Fact Finding Meeting to which all involved parties will receive a written
invitation at least ten (10) days prior to the meeting. Statements will be taken, findings
prepared and a recommendation for action made to the City Council.
2. The City Council may remove a member of a Citizen Advisory Committee for failure
to participate actively or failure to perform adequately the duties and responsibilities of
such membership. A CAC member's failure to attend three
or more consecutive meetings, without explanation, shall be considered justification for
removal. In all cases, the City Council shall request the recommendation of the
Committee for Citizen Involvement prior to taking action.
3. A member of a Citizen Advisory Committee may resign at any time by submitting
such resignation to the City.
Liability
1. Citizen Advisory Committee members shall be considered agents of the
City within the coverage of ORS 30.260 to 30.330 in any actions taken by a Citizen
Advisory Committee in performance of the duties, responsibilities, and functions as set
forth in this chapter.
2. La Pine shall not indemnify CAC members for legal fees, judgments or other costs
associated with legal suits or actions filed against any Citizen Advisory Committee or
members thereof for any action taken outside of the scope of the duties, responsibilities,
and functions ofthe Citizen Advisory l.oiI11111Ltee.
3. Upon recommendation from the Committee for Citizen Involvement, the
City Council may waive the provisions of this section if the City Council finds it is
necessary to undertake such action to protect citizen involvement in La Pine and the
action is consistent with ORS 30.287(1).
4. No provision of this section shall be construed to diminish or deny any rights of CAC
members under ORS 30.260 to 30.330, when such CAC members are acting as agents of
the City.
Duties, Responsibilities and Functions of Citizen Advisory Committee Members
1. Each Citizen Advisory Committee shall elect a chairperson, vice chairperson and
secretary at the first regular meeting of the calendar year.
a. The chairperson shall call meetings of the Citizen Advisory Committee as necessary
and appropriate to discuss and respond to planning program issues.
b. The vice chairperson shall act as chairperson pro-tem in the absence of the chairperson.
c. The secretary shall take minutes of such Committee meetings.
2. Each Committee shall comply with all provisions of the Oregon Public
Meeting Law (ORS 192.610 to 192.990).
Page 24
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
a. All meetings of the advisory committees shall be open to the public and all persons
shall be permitted to attend any such meeting. A committee shall have no authority to
conduct executive sessions under ORS 192.660.
b. Each Citizen Advisory Committee shall provide notice of the time, place and subject
matter of its meetings either to the Planning Director or to the Citizen Involvement
Coordinator during business hours at the Planning Department. The Citizen Involvement
Coordinator shall be responsible for providing notice to the media in time for them to
publish the notice at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.
c. The CAC secretary shall take minutes, which shall include:
1. the names of all CAC members present;
2. all motions and their disposition;
3. the results of all votes and the vote of each member, by name;
4. the substance of any document discussed;
5. reference to any document discussed.
CAC minutes should also contain the date, time, and location of the meeting, the names
of any guests present, and land use application references such as the applicant's name
and the Planning Department file number.
The CAC minutes shall be submitted to the Planning Director no more than ten
days after the meeting.
3. The Citizen Advisory Committees shall participate in the development of
the La Pine Comprehensive Plan, and amendments and revisions thereto, and shall advise
the City Council with regard to any concerns or comments the advisory committee may
Pi_ r.7._�.....ts
have with respect to such Plan, amendments or revisions.
a. The Planning Director shall submit proposals for Comprehensive Plans, or
amendments or revisions thereto, at least 15 days in advance of the expected date of
Citizen Advisory Committee comments; provided, however, that this paragraph shall not
apply to amendments or revisions to Comprehensive Plans changed at public hearings
before the Planning Commission or the City Council, if the subject matter of such plans,
amendments or revisions were submitted previously to the Planning Advisory
Committees.
b. Each Citizen Advisory Committee shall have the authority to conduct meetings to
review and evaluate such Plans, or amendments or revisions thereto, and may comment
in writing by submitting their responses to the Planning Director, Planning Commission
or City Council, or comment orally at hearings held on such Plans, revisions or
amendments.
c. Each Citizen Advisory Committee shall allow interested persons to participate in the
review and evaluation of such Plans, revisions or amendments thereto, by means of oral
or written testimony.
d. Citizen Advisory Committee members are encouraged to participate in the workshops
and regional meetings held on Comprehensive Plans or revisions thereto.
e. Upon completion of Comprehensive Plan Elements, or revisions thereto, each Citizen
Advisory Committee shall participate in the review of land use maps for its area or region
of the City.
Page 25
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
f. Citizen Advisory Committee members shall be entitled to participate in regional
workshop meetings dealing with selection of preferred map alternatives to be submitted
to the Planning Commission and City Council in conjunction with the adoption or
revision of a Comprehensive Plan.
4. Each Citizen Advisory Committee may participate in advising the Hearings
Officer, Commission, or City Council with respect to quasi-judicial land use applications,
which lie within, or immediately affect land within, territory of the Citizen Advisory
Committee.
a. Each Citizen Advisory Committee is entitled to become a party at hearings involving
quasijudicial land use applications.
b. The Planning Director shall provide notice of hearings to the appropriate Citizen
Advisory Committee, within the time limitations as provided. The CAC may respond to
the notice as it deems appropriate.
c. No response to such notices shall be transmitted to the Planning Director,
Hearings Officer, Commission or City Council except after a properly conducted meeting
and affirmative vote of a quorum of such committee.
d. All such responses shall be in written form and shall contain the following
information:
(1) Name of the Citizen Advisory Committee;
(2) A statement as to whether such committee desires standing as a party;
(3) A statement as to the reason for supporting or opposing the proposal; and
(4) A statement indicating whether the Citizen Advisory Committee wishes to be heard
further, i.e., other than such written notice.
5. Citizen Advisory Committees may also advise the City on areas of community
interests or concerns which the advisory committee feels are of importance to their area,
the City, or planning activities.
Implementation Measures
Citizen Advisory Committees shall be entitled to participate in the formulation,
amendment, revision or repeal of all measures implementing Comprehensive Plans for La
Pine in the same manner as that provided for in the adoption, amendment or revision of
Comprehensive Plans for the City.
Nanning Director Responsibilities for Citizen Participation and Coordination
1. The Planning Director shall be responsible for assuring that the citizen involvement
provisions of this chapter are implemented. To that end, the Director shall consult
periodically with the Committee for Citizen Involvement and may make such
recommendations as are necessary to implement the purposes of this chapter and LCDC
Goal 1. The Planning Director may delegate his duties to a Citizen Involvement
Coordinator; however, he/she shall reserve the authority to overrule such coordinator to
assure compliance with the provisions of this chapter.
2. The Planning Director shall assure coordination between federal, state and regional
agencies and special purpose districts to coordinate their planning efforts with La Pine
and shall make use of local citizen involvement programs established by other entities,
where such programs affect La Pine.
3. The Planning Director shall provide such information to the Planning Advisory
Page 26
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Committees as is necessary for those Committees, and the general public, to identify and
comprehend planning and plan implementation issues. All information supplied by any
department or agency of La Pine in planning or plan implementation matters shall be in
simplified, understandable form and shall be coordinated through the Planning Director.
4. The Planning Director shall act as liaison between the citizens of La Pine and
the City Council and shall respond to citizen comments on planning or plan
implementation issues directly, or by referring the same to the appropriate agency for
response. All departments and agencies of La Pine shall cooperate with the Planning
Director in assuring effective two-way communication between citizens and their
government.
5. The Planning Director shall make available to all Citizen Advisory Committees a copy
of all proposed elements of any La Pine Comprehensive Plan, or amendments or
revisions thereto, all implementing ordinances, or amendments or revisions thereto, and
any studies, reports or background information, if any, necessary to understand such
proposal, at least ten days prior to action by the City Council. Such proposals and
background information shall be provided to the La Pine City Hall and at such other
facilities, the Planning Director may deem necessary to provide for an informed citizenry.
6. The Planning Director shall provide, in each annual budget request to the City Council,
for sufficient financial support to insure adequate funding of a citizen involvement
program to meet the purposes of this chapter.
7. The responsibilities of the Planning Director, under this section, shall continue, even
after acknowledgement of the La Pine Comprehensive Plan and Implementing
Ordinances by the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
Proposed CAC's
1. Planning Commission
2. Public Utility/Infrastructure Committee
3. Economic Development Committee
4. Public Service/Volunteer Committee
5. Code Enforcement Committee
6. Residential Committee
7. Industrial/Commercial Committee
Page 27
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 3
Agricultural Lands
I. State Planning Goal 3, Agricultural Lands
Oregon State Planning Goal 3 defines "agricultural lands" and requires Counties to
inventory such lands. Counties are required "to preserve and maintain agricultural lands"
by comprehensively planning and applying implementing zoning regulations. However,
pursuant to ORS Chapter 215 and OAR, Chapter 660, Division 33, the planning for
agricultural lands within cities is not required. Nonetheless, the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations have historically applied agricultural
designations and zoning regulations to areas identified as Agricultural lands prior to their
inclusion within the area incorporated as the City of La Pine. Because the Deschutes
County comprehensive plan and zoning designations applied within the city limits (by
intergovernmental agreement between Deschutes County and the City of La Pine during
the transition of governmental responsibility), there are still areas within the incorporated
City of La Pine that are designated Agriculture and Exclusive Farm Use on the County
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning maps.
II. Purpose and Intent
As stated above, the City of La Pine is not required to plan for Agricultural lands within
the City limits. However, there have been and continue to be agricultural uses of some
areas within the City Limits. Historically, such uses have been limited in activity and
have been concentrated in areas along the wetlands and floodplain of the Little Deschutes
River. These have been the only areas where there has been ample moisture in the soils
to allow forage growth that would sustain cattle grazing. Due to climatological
conditions, the growing season in La Pine is too short to sustain active crop production.
Overall, the areas historically used for agricultural purposes in La Pine have resulted
from the limited physical ability to use the land for other purposes.
It is expected that as the City grows, the wetland and flood plain factors will limit the use
of the agriculturally used lands for many other urban purposes. Nonetheless, it is the
intent of this plan to recognize then potential transition of such lands to other uses more
appropriate within an incorporated community. Such uses may include residential or
economic lands (traditional land use designations within Cities) as land needs dictate and
public facilities and services allow. However, agricultural lands may also transition to
designated natural areas, open spaces, wilderness areas and wildlife habitat due to the
limited uses that could be accommodated in the wetlands and flood plains. The link
between agricultural lands and the natural environment will be important to define and
plan for as La Pine transitions to an urban environment. This element is explored in
greater detail in the Natural Resources Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 28
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
III. Issues
The City of La Pine is heavily influenced by the Little Deschutes River and areas of high
ground water resulting in wetlands and flood plains — particularly along the city's western
and southern edges. These areas have historically remained undeveloped and were used
for cattle grazing by early residents. The agricultural/farming uses of these areas has
declined in past years as the land uses within the City limits (even prior to incorporation)
have transitioned from rural to urban as La Pine became the service area for the southern
portion of Deschutes County. Although the use of such areas is receiving pressure from
surrounding land uses, such as residential and commercial development adjacent to such
lands, there has been very little change to the physical properties of the agriculturally
designated areas. It is expected that the transition for uses of many of the agricultural
lands will be best planned for as natural resources (State Planning Goal 5) to serve as
natural areas, wetlands, wildlife habitat, parklands and buffer areas to development.
These are addressed in Chapter 5, Natural Resources.
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal #1: To plan for the appropriate transition of Agricultural lands within La Pine to
urban uses (residential, commercial, and industrial uses).
Policies
• Owners of lands that have been historically employed in agricultural uses or that
remain designated for agricultural uses through this Comprehensive Planning
process, shall not be prevented from using such lands for farming purposes; such
rights shall be protected until such lands are re -designated for urban uses through
future amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning code.
• All lands designated Agriculture shall be reviewed for their potential to be utilized
for urban land uses — including the ability to be utilized in conjunction with
adjacent residential, commercial and industrial land uses, as well as the ability to
provide urban services and facilities to such lands.
Goal #2: Recognize the unique physical characteristics and development limitations of
Agricultural lands within La Pine and plan for the enhancement of those elements within
the surrounding urban environment.
Policies
• All lands with historic use for agricultural purposes, whether designated
Agriculture or not, that have wetlands or flood plain, shall be reviewed for their
potential to be utilized as natural areas, parklands and buffers between and among
areas designated for traditional urban development.
Page 29
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
• For the purpose of identifying wetlands, flood plain and historic agricultural use,
the City shall rely upon the Federal Emergency management Agency's adopted
floodplain maps and the National Wetlands Inventory maps, and Deschutes
County Tax Assessors data unless more specific data can be supplied.
• Encourage property owner protection and enhancement of environmentally
sensitive areas that have been and continue to be used for agricultural purposes
such as livestock grazing, including the implementation of specific zoning
regulations for such purposes.
• The City shall work with the La Pine Park and Recreation Department to look for
opportunities to acquire agricultural lands that can be utilized for recreational
purposes.
• The City shall work with the Bureau of Land Management and other federal
agencies to seek transfers of federally owned agricultural lands within and
adjacent t the City to be utilized as open space, buffer lands and other amenities to
serve the urban environment.
V. Programs
The City shall complete the following:
1. Create an inventory of flood plain and wetland areas for all lands designated
Agriculture.
2. Work with local, State and Federal Agencies in identifying long term land uses
for lands under their ownership within the City limits that are designated as Agricultural
lands.
3. Coordinate and map the current park and open space system with potential or
proposed open space linkages on current agricultural lands.
Page 30
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 4
Forest Lands
I. State Planning Goal 4, Forest Lands
Oregon State Planning Goal 4 defines "forest lands" and requires Counties to inventory
such lands. Counties are required "to conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land
base and to protect the state's forest economy" through efficient use of forest lands that
balance forest practices with sound environmental practices. However, pursuant to
Oregon Revised Statutes and Administrative Rules, the planning for forest lands within
cities is not required. Nonetheless, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and
zoning regulations have historically applied forest designations and zoning regulations to
areas identified as Forest lands prior to their inclusion within the area incorporated as the
City of La Pine. Because the Deschutes County comprehensive plan and zoning
designations applied within the city limits (by intergovernmental agreement between
Deschutes County and the City of La Pine during the transition of governmental
responsibility), there are still areas within the incorporated City of La Pine that are
designated Forest on the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning maps. This will
change upon completion of the implementing ordinances for the Plan.
II. Purpose and Intent
As stated ahnve the City of La Pine is not required to plan for Forest lands within the
City limits. However, there have been and continue to be Forest uses of some areas
within the City Limits. Historically, such uses have been the basis for the surrounding
economy, with lands currently inside the City limits used for actual timber harvest, as
well as timber processing to varying degrees. However, in the recent past, forest/timber
activities have been limited on those lands designated as Forest within the City due to the
immaturity of the existing timber stands and the availability of Industrial lands for
processing operations. The areas designated as Forest include large tracts along the entire
eastern edge of the city, in the area east of Highway 97 between what was historically
referred to as Wickiup Junction and La Pine.
Although some of the lands designated Forest within La Pine are privately owned, the
majority of Forest designated lands are under federal (Bureau of Land Management -
BLM) ownership. Through the Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan adopted by
the BLM, it is recognized that the forest lands within the City limits will someday be
subject to community expansion. Thus, there is an acknowledgment by the BLM that
such lands will most likely transfer ownership at some point in the future and that the
long term use of the property will transition from forest to other Public Facility (PF) uses.
It is expected that as the City grows, the forest lands will be converted to Public Facility
uses. It is the intent of this plan to recognize then potential transition of such lands to
Page 31
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
other uses more appropriate within an incorporated community. Such uses may include
sewer treatment plant expansion, cemetery, energy production, wildfire buffers, and
highway 97 expansion uses. However, due to the rural nature of the community, and the
desire for the residents to retain this character, forest lands may also transition to
designated natural areas, open spaces, wilderness areas and wildlife habitat. The link
between forest lands and the natural environment will be important to define and plan for
as La Pine transitions these lands to PF uses.. This element is explored in greater detail
in the Natural Resources Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
III. Issues
The City of La Pine is heavily influenced by the thick coniferous forest that extends from
inside City limits to areas surrounding the community is all directions. These areas have
historically remained undeveloped where federal ownership is in place - large tracts of
private land have been continuously used for forest practices, as prospective yields will
allow. It is assumed that forest practices will continue to be an important part of the
economy and lifestyle of the La Pine area, and will influence the overall land
development pattem, especially in transition areas along the community edge. Although
the use of such areas is receiving pressure from urbanizing land uses, such as residential,
commercial and industrial development adjacent to such lands, there has been very little
change to the physical properties of the designated forest areas. It is expected that the
transition of use for some of the forest lands will be best planned for as natural resources
(State Planning Goal 5) to serve as natural areas, wildlife habitat, parklands and buffer
areas in and among planned development, while some areas are designated specifically
for conversion to public facility neat — not residential or commercial uses However, the
timing of such conversion will be dependent upon the land need within La Pine and the
ability to access the designated forest areas with transportation facilities and utilities.
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal #1: To plan for the appropriate transition of Forest lands within La Pine to Public
Facility (PF) uses.
Policies
• Owners of lands that have been historically employed in forest uses or that remain
designated for forest uses through this Comprehensive Planning process, shall not
be prevented from using such lands for forest and timber harvest purposes; such
rights shall be protected until such lands are re -designated for Public Facility uses
through future amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or zoning code.
• All lands designated Forest shall have a Public Facilities designation to be
utilized for non-residential uses such as: public open and recreation spaces,
Page 32
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
cemetery expansion, right of way necessary for the ODOT Overpass project and
typical public uses and facilities to such lands.
• The City of La Pine shall coordinate any transition of Forest lands to Public
Facility uses with the BLM, U.S. Forest Service, State Department of Forestry
and La Pine Fire District as applicable to ensure adherence with the forest
practices act and the adopted management plans of each agency.
Goal #2: Recognize the unique physical characteristics and uses for Public Facility lands
within La Pine..
Policies
• Forestlands within the City shall be designated Public Facilities on the
Comprehensive Plan Map. These areas are primarily for public facility uses
including for non-residential uses such as: public open and recreation spaces,
cemetery expansion, right of way necessary for the ODOT Overpass project,
natural areas, parklands and buffers between other areas designated for traditional
urban development.
• The City recognizes the importance of the forested areas as crucial migration
corridors and winter range for wildlife; these forested areas shall be reviewed for
as Public Facility development occurs.
• 1 ne City shall work with the La nine nark and Recreation Department to IoOK Ior
opportunities to acquire Public Facility lands that can be utilized for recreational
purposes.
• The City shall work with the Bureau of Land Management and other federal
agencies to seek transfers of federally owned forest lands within and adjacent to
the City to be utilized as Public Facility lands for sewer treatment plant
expansion, energy production, large lot industrial uses, open space, buffer lands
and other amenities to serve the urban environment.
V. Programs
The City shall complete the following:
1. Work with local, State and Federal Agencies in completing property transfer to
the City and/or County and identifying Public Facility uses for lands under their
ownership within the City limits that are designated as Forest lands.
2. Revise the City Zoning Ordinance to incorporate a Public Facilities Zone. The
zone shall not permit privately -owned residential uses.
Page 33
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 5
Natural Resources and Environment
I. State Planning Goals 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic
Areas, and Open Spaces; 6, Air, Water and Land Resources
Quality; and, 7, Natural Hazards.
Oregon State Planning Goals 5, 6 and 7 are interrelated in their intent to protect the
important natural resource and environmental elements intrinsic to Oregon's heritage.
The three separate purpose statements of these Goals are:
Goal 5: To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open
spaces;
Goal 6: To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the
state; and,
Goal 7: To protect people and property from natural hazards.
These goals together protect the basic fabric of what the citizens of La Pine have deemed
the underlying foundation of the community. Clean air, water and the forest environment
within the urban area have been long standing attractions for residents of the community.
The preservation of the natural environment within the urban area to the greatest extent
practicable and its ties to the future growth of the community is of the utmost importance
in long range planning for La Pine.
II. Purpose and Intent
The future of La Pine will be shaped by how the community decides to accommodate
growth and balance that against preservation of various elements of the natural
environment. The State of Oregon Goal 5 Guidelines requires the following resources to
be inventoried:
• Riparian Corridors, including water and riparian areas and fish habitat;
• Wetlands;
• Wildlife Habitat;
• Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers;
• State Scenic Waterways;
• Groundwater Resources;
• Approved Oregon Recreation Trails;
• Natural Areas;
• Wilderness Areas;
• Mineral and Aggregate Resources;
• Energy Sources; and,
• Cultural Areas.
Page 34
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Local governments and state agencies are encouraged but not required to maintain current
inventories of the following resources:
• Historic Resources;
• Open Space; and,
• Scenic Views and Sites.
The procedures, standards, and definitions contained in State Depar tnient of Land
Conservation and Development rules, provide that local governments shall determine
significant sites for inventoried resources as listed above, and develop programs to
achieve the goals for protection. Many of the resources listed above do not occur within
the urban area of La Pine, but do occur nearby in the outlying rural area. Also, since La
Pine was just recently incorporated (2006), many of the inventories and subsequent
policies and programs to protect the resources were prepared by Deschutes County when
La Pine was under their jurisdiction. Those inventories, policies, and programs are
utilized herein as a basis for identifying appropriate policies and programs within the La
Pine urban area.
Goal 5: Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces
Goal 5 Resources for which Inventories are required
OAR-660-23 requires inventories of riparian corridors, wetlands, and wildlife habitat
must be conducted by the City. However, the Rule also provides for safe harbors that
may replace the required inventory and program protection for riparian corridors,
wetlands, and wildlife habitat. The safe harbor provisions work well as a basis for La
Pine given the limited resources of the community. Other inventories form other
agencies can also be used to support the Plan. Thus, La Pine has adopted the inventories
completed by Deschutes County and State and Federal agencies. For all inventoried
significant Goal 5 resources, a local government must complete a program to develop and
implement appropriate protection measures. La Pine will satisfy all requirements through
implementation of this Plan and its supporting ordinances.
Riparian Corridors and Wetlands
The City of La Pine relies upon the Deschutes County inventory of riparian corridors and
Wetlands. The County's inventory is older and does not meet the newer rules and does
not cover all of the corridor and wetland areas. Thus, the City will need to apply a safe
harbor provision or greater regulations to protect the resources until funds permit the City
to do its own inventory.
The safe harbor provision allows the City to protect approximately 1200 feet of the Little
Deschutes near Glenwood Drive, and Huntington Roads. While the Safe Harbor would
provide a 75-foot setback, the City would prefer to adopt the County's provisions at 100
feet of setback protection. Within the setback area resources will be protected from
activities that may harm or interfere with riparian values. The City will further impose
Page 35
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
protection standards through its Zoning Ordinance, which will include conditional use
permits for any fill, removal, or disturbance of vegetation within 100 feet of the ordinary
high water mark/ top of bank of the river. Wetland protection standards will also be
added to the Zoning Ordinance. While additional LWI studies will verify if the 100 feet
is adequate to protect the riparian area resources, additional studies will be needed to
verify wetlands. If these are not adequate then new regulations will be required.
Nonetheless, the Zoning ordinance provisions and in some cases, the Floodplain
regulations will protect the resources.
Wildlife Habitat
The citizens of La Pine have identified wildlife protection, including migration corridors
as a primary component of the community. The city relies on the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan for wildlife information.
The City has chosen to apply the Safe Harbor provision to its wildlife resources. Under
this provision, the City may determine that wildlife does not include fish, and that
significant wildlife habitat is only those sites where:
• The habitat has been documented to perform a life support function for a wildlife
species listed by the Federal government as a threatened or endangered species or
by the State of Oregon as a threatened, endangered, or sensitive species;
• The habitat has documented occurrences of more than incidental use by a wildlife
species listed by the Federal government as a threatened or endangered species or
by the State of Oregon as a threatened, endangered, or sensitive species;
• The habitat has been documented as a sensitive bird nesting, roosting, or
watering resource site for osprey or great blue herons;
• The habitat has been documented to be essential to achieving policies or
population objectives specified in a wildlife species management plan adopted by
the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission pursuant to ORS Chapter 496; or
• The area is identified and mapped by ODFW as habitat for a wildlife species of
concern ( e.g., big game winter range and migration corridors, golden eagle and
prairie falcon nest sites, or pigeon springs).
Natural Resources:
The City of La Pine and the surrounding area lie in an arid plateau of thick coniferous
forests, volcanic geological formations and forest resource lands. Area residents have
quick and convenient vehicle access to a variety of Waal areas, forests, reservoirs,
recreational areas, rivers, creeks, and other open spaces. Some of these areas, such as the
Deschutes River, the Little Deschutes River, the Cascade Mountains, high lakes, and
State and Federal public lands are close by, but do not extend within the city limits.
Nonetheless, the forested areas within the City limits have been identified by residents as
a primary source of community identity and important to preserve as the city grows -
preservation and enhancement of the surrounding natural environmental system is a vital
aspect of the community. Providing trails and alternate mode access to these special
Page 36
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
areas is necessary to avoid capacity issues, encourage healthy lifestyles, and to encourage
safe access by children and adults. Protection of these special areas offers more than just
aesthetic benefits; they can preserve the community's natural beauty without sacrificing
economic development.
A historic and primary natural resource of the region has been timber. The forested lands
of Lodgepole Pine within and around La Pine have been a direct source of the regions
economy through timber production, as well as a draw for tourism. The U.S. Forest
Service and the Bureau of Land Management have responsibility for regulating use of
federally -owned forest lands pursuant to their own respective management plans. The
BLM currently owns large tracts of forested land on the City's east side — the BLM has
recently been in discussions with the City of La Pine and Deschutes County regarding
transfer of some of these lands for future expansion of the La Pine Sewer District's
sewage treatment facility. The US Forest Service maintains jurisdiction over much of the
forested lands surrounding the City (Deschutes National Forest). Continued coordination
with these agencies regarding decisions and actions they take regarding forested lands
will continue to have, major effects on the economic, social and natural environment of
the City of La Pine. Specific goals and policies related to management of urban forested
lands are contained in Chapter 4.
Wildlife is another primary natural resource of the region. The citizens of La Pine have
identified wildlife protection, including trails for migration corridors, as a primary
component of the community. Within the urban area, the primary habitat is located
within the floodplain/riparian corridor along the Little Deschutes River to the west of the
City, and the large tracts of forested land to the east. Such areas provide year-round
habitat for big game, such as dear and elk, as well as for smaller animals and game, and
birds. Various routes have been identified through La Pine as deer and elk migration
corridors between summer grounds to the west and winter grounds to the east. Deschutes
County has created an inventory of wildlife native to the region, including La Pine, as
well as habitat and special protection areas. As state above, such areas have been
mapped and migration corridors run through the City.
There have not been any aggregate or other resources natural resources identified within
the urban area.
Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers
According to the US Forest Service, there are no Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers within
the La Pine Urban Area.
State Scenic Waterways
According to the Oregon Park and Recreation Department, there are no State Scenic
Waterways within the La Pine urban area.
Page 37
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Other Scenic Resources:
Scenic resources common to all areas of La Pine are related to the natural environment —
views of the Three Sisters and surrounding mountains; the Little Deschutes River and
associated riparian areas; and the surrounding National Forest. There are no canyons,
rimrock or other significant geologic formations within the urban area that have been
identified for scenic protection
Approved Recreational Trails
According to the Oregon Park and Recreation Department, there are no designated trails
within the La Pine urban area.
Wilderness Areas
According to the US Forest Service, there are no Wilderness Areas within the La Pine
urban area.
Other Goal 5 Resources
Historic and Cultural Resources
The City has completed an inventory of potential and listed historic and cultural resources and these
are included in the appendix and for protection in the zoning ordinances. The City has also
completed new policies and regulations for the protection and enhancement of historic resources
1-- including [.__ the Northern
w,f _1_t_ /T f1 ___r_\ (Wayampam), Peoples, including Northern iviotaia (La uauiq), Tenino (w ayampam), Klamath
(Maklaks) and the Northern Paiute tribes, seasonally used the La Pine area for at least the
last 13,500 years. Having no clear boundaries of their territories resulted in longstanding
conflicts that kept all of the tribes in a constant advance -retreat mode. The Klamath Indian
children today sing a song about the dangers of their ancestors being ambushed by the
Northern Paiutes in the La Pine/Lava Butte area as they traveled back and forth along the
key trade route to the Columbia River. Some of the Native People intermarried and forged
alliances, but others did not. Each tribe had a unique language, customs and styles of
dwellings.
After leaving winter camps in the spring, nuclear family groups of native peoples moved
toward base camps in the various drainage basins, savannas and meadows in the higher
Central Oregon country. Groups followed the seasonal appearance of roots, grass seeds,
berries, and game such as deer, elk, antelope and bear. In addition to abounding with large
game and waterfowl, the local area had plenty of aquatic resources such as chub, steelhead
and trout. Women smoked and dried the fish and meat that the men caught.
Thousands of tiny arrowheads found along Long Prairie in and around La Pine and Big
Meadow (around Crosswater and Sunriver) are evidence of the importance of waterfowl in
the diet. Women and children also gathered duck and geese eggs. In addition to spears and
bows and arrows, people used hunting dogs, snares and traps. During mid -summer, many
Page 38
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
of them returned to the villages for summer festivals. In late fall, the people headed back to
the winter villages in the Klamath River Valley, Harney Valley, Columbia River or the
Willamette Valley.
Small mobile groups made seasonal use of the area before and after the Mt. Mazama
eruption. There is evidence that the semi -nomadic Teninos and Northern Paiutes had
horses in the 1700s and readily moved around Central and Eastern Oregon. Other groups
were pedestrians. During the early to mid 1800s, epidemics of influenza, measles,
smallpox, malaria and other pathogens brought by the explorers killed up to 90% of people
in Central Oregon. This radical depopulation changed the survivors forever.
Mt. Mazama is located 86 miles southwest of La Pine. The mountain was destroyed by a
volcanic eruption that occurred around 5,677 (± 150) BC. The eruption reduced Mt.
Mazama's approximate 12,000-foot height by 5,000 feet and resulted in the creation of
Crater Lake. Mt. Mazama's eruption blew ash and rock to the northeast. The ash plume
was so high that ash blew into Canada. Ash and rock covered the La Pine area several feet
deep. After the eruption, it took time for the vegetation to re -grow and for the animals and
people to repopulate and reuse the area.
Between the time of the recovery from the eruption and the mid 1800s, Native Americans
from Southern Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and Northern California met each summer at
Paulina Lake and East Lake to gather obsidian, make stone tools and to participate in social
activities, trading and games of competition. Evidence of campfires and tool making is
plentiful along Paulina Creek and around the lakes.
Important prehistoric north -south trails and trade routes ran along the Deschutes River
between the Columbia River Basin and the Klamath Basin. The east -west trails from
Nevada and the Harney Valley to the Deschutes River passed though Horse Ridge, East
Lake and the La Pine area.
The nearby water bodies such as the Fall River, Deschutes River, Little Deschutes River,
Davis Creek, Paulina Creek, East Lake and Paulina Lake and the prairies such as Big
Meadow, Long Prairie and Paulina Prairie provided excellent habitat for fish, waterfowl
and game animals. They also attracted Native Americans to hunt and fish here. Evidence
of prehistoric camps, obsidian tool making, and hunting by tribes from the Columbia River,
Harney Valley, Nevada, Eastern Oregon and Northern California is prevalent in the La Pine
area.
Much has been written about early explorers who traveled though the La Pine area and
named many of the geographic features. They include Finian McDonald in 1825, the
Hudson Bay Company's trapping expedition through the Deschutes and John Day Valleys
led by Peter Skene Ogden in 1826, Nathaniel J. Wyeth's journey along the Deschutes River
in 1834-35, John C. Fremont's journey along the Deschutes River while in route to
California in 1843 and the Lieutenant Henry L. and the Abbot and Williamson Army Corps
Page 39
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
of Engineers railroad survey party from Klamath Country down the Deschutes River in
1885.
The Oregon Central Military Wagon Road ,under the leadership of Oregon Surveyor
General Bynon John Pengra, was constructed between 1865 and 1870. The road would
connect into the Huntington Wagon Road just southeast of Crescent Lake. It provided a
connection between Eugene and the Deschutes River and became a major travel route for
emigrants, livestock, packers and drovers passing between the Willamette Valley and
Central and Southeastern Oregon. It played an important role in Deschutes County's
development.
The Huntington Wagon Road was built in 1876 by crews under the direction of the Oregon
Superintendent of Indian Affairs, J. W. Perit Huntington. The purpose of the road was to
provide an easier and smoother route for horse and mule teams to pull wagon loads of
supplies from the Dalles on the Columbia River to Fort Klamath. A portion of the historic
road goes through La Pine. It loosely follows Native American trails.
The timber, grassy meadows, available fish and game and the ease of digging domestic
water wells in the high water table attracted ranchers and lumber companies in the late
nineteenth century. Two thousand pioneer farmers tried to dry farm the high desert and
some of them who grew grains and hay were successful. In spite of all of the sun and flat
land, others found farming was not practical due to the elevation, long stretches of dry days
during the growing season, low night temperatures with the threat of freezing temperatures
any day of the year and the isolation the snow brought in the winters. However, some
ranchers on Paulina Prairie and Long Prairie harvested natural grasses and hay to feed dairy
cows, sheep and cattle year -around. It was common to sec youngsters herding flocks of
sheep up the meadowlands along the rivers between Giichrest and Madras during the
summers. Cattle drives and capturing and driving wild horses to sell to the military during
World War I were also common.
Recreation, hunting and fishing were always important activities in the area and provided
food for settlers. Trappers settled in La Pine and set and managed trap routes that were
often over a hundred miles long. Winters saw trappers on snow shoes checking lines for
miles around.
The extensive ponderosa and Lodgepole pine forests provided timber to build houses,
barns, fences and cabins. They provided the resources for the lumber mills. The Masten
Mill opened in 1908 and produced lumber, laths, pickets, shingles, and moldings. 1910 and
1911 were busy years at the mill because many buildings were built in La Pine. The
lumber mill at Pringle Falls was soon running and others followed. Shevlin-Nixon Lumber
Company, the Brooks -Scanlon Lumber Company and other smaller companies were
buying up timber land during the late 196 Century and early 20th Century. The big mills
opened in Bend in 1916. The lumber companies constructed hundreds of miles of railroad
tracks and trestles to transport logs to the mills. When the lumber camps around La Pine
closed, many of the portable camp buildings were purchased and moved to La Pine and re-
used as residences and shops. La Pine is dotted with old lumber camp buildings today.
Page 40 Adopted 12/12/2018
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
It is not known who named the area "La Pine," but the name "La Pine" is on a 1907
railroad survey map and is shown on the early 20ih century survey maps. Various spellings
show up on early records. The 1934 US Geological Survey Maiden Peak Quadrangle Map
and the 1935 Metsker's Atlas of Deschutes County Oregon both labeled the community
"Lapine". The 1910 plat of the townsite reads, "La Pine".
Oregon Geographic Names Sixth Edition by Lewis A. McArthur states, "La Pine was
named by Alfred A. Aya. The name was suggested by the abundance of pine trees in the
neighborhood." The book goes on to say that the "Lapine" Post Office was established in
September of 1910 and the Post Office changed its name to La Pine on April 1, 1951.
Figure 1
1910 Plat of the Townsite of La Pine
In early 1910, 30-year old Portland attorney, Alfred Aya, hired civil engineer Robert Gould
to plat the Townsite of La Pine. Deschutes County was not formed yet, and the plat was
signed in Prineville by the Crook County Court on May 4, 1910. The rectangular plat
consisted of 37 blocks bounded by Bogue Street on the west, First Street on the north,
Huntington Wagon Road on the east and Ninth Street on the south. Aya was criticized for
platting and trying to sell city lots in the marshy meadow.
Aya named a north -south street after James Scott (Jobe) Bogue and his wife Caroline
Hollingshead Bogue who settled west of the Little Deschutes River north of La Pine around
1885. Bogue was bom in Illinois and came to Oregon on a wagon train led by his father,
Page 41
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Amos Bogue. The Bogues raised 1,000 head of sheep in the tall natural grass meadow.
Later they raised cattle and opened a mercantile store in Rosland in 1900. In 1903 they
built a larger store, and that store building was moved to downtown La Pine at Aya's
urging in 1910.
Cattle rancher Sidney Stearns came to the La Pine area in 1884 with his cousin Billie
Pengra when they were each around 28 years old. In 1887 Sidney Steams married Francis
Elizabeth Day. Both Sidney and Francis Stearns were born in Oregon. Stearns Street was
named for them.
Aya named a street for his business partner, John E. Morson. Having been born in Canada,
Morson was Aya's partner in the Des Chutes Land Company and the developer of the
Walker Basin Irrigation Project that was approved by the Oregon State Legislature.
Morson was backed by businessmen in Minneapolis, Minnesota. At age 44, in 1910, he
and his wife Jean were living in Portland.
Hill Street was named for James J. Hill of Minnesota who owned the Northern Pacific
Railway, the Great Northern Railway and the Oregon Trunk Railway. He planned to
extend the railroad from Bend to Chemult through La Pine and to construct a passenger and
freight stain in the new town. It is unknown who was honored with the street names Salzar
and Stilwell.
In 1910 James Gleason, W. R. Riley and Alfred Aya came from Portland and promoted La
Pine. Aya graduated in 1903 from the University of Oregon Law School and was
valedictorian of his class. He became president of the La Pine Townsite Company, the La
Pine Commercial Club and the La Pine State Bank. Gleason and Riley were his partners in
the townsite company. Aya was a tireless promoter, even traveling to the Midwest to
advertise his townsite and the land they thought would be served by the proposed irrigation
system.
Aya lobbied the legislature hard in 1909 and 1910 and the Walker Basin Irrigation Project
bill was passed by the Oregon State Legislature in March 1911. The bill, and other related
irrigation bills preceding it since 1901, allowed the commercial investment enterprises
owned by Morson and Aya the rights to water in Crescent Lake and Crescent Creek and the
right to store water in the lake. The bill allowed them to sell over 67,637 acres of land in
the La Pine and Crescent areas. But, in return, they had to dig and construct a canal
system. They got financial backing from financiers in Minnesota and later from Arizona to
tackle the ambitions project.
Governor West was highly critical of the project's slow progress. Due to the bad publicity,
financiers demanded their money back and the state reduced the land in the operation to
28,000 acres and later reduced it again to 10,000 acres. The project ended in bankruptcy.
The project included Aya's Des Chutes Land Company, which was associated with the La
Pine Townsite Company, and Morson's Walker Basin Land and Irrigation Company,
which was formed in 1901.
Page 42
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
It was thought that with the irrigation project attracting farmers and the expected railroad
being extended from Bend to California through La Pine to allow goods and lumber to be
transported, the area would thrive. The Oregon Trunk Railroad running south from the
Columbia River was under construction and excitement for the future of Central Oregon
was high. James Hill completed the railroad line to Bend in 1911.
Aya, Gleason and Riley promoted the new townsite. They convinced many people from
Rosland to move to La Pine to locate on the future railroad line and station that he had
platted. James Scott (Job) Bogue moved his store. Joseph Beesley moved his hotel that
was renamed the La Pine Hotel. George Raper moved his saloon. Houses were also
moved to La Pine and some are still in use today.
The "Lapine Post Office" was established on September 21, 1910 and the Rosland Post
office was closed. By 1912, many new commercial and residential buildings were under
construction, including the Riley Hotel, La Pine State Bank, the Haner building, the
Catholic Church, the Commercial Club and the Aya, David Hill, J. J. Stephenson, Albert
Ridgley and Clow houses.
By 1911, 600 people lived in La Pine and over 100 children attended school. Logging,
lumber mills, ranching, dairies, recreation and farming were primary industries.
Figure 1
US forest service photo of crews laying track south of Bend.
Page 43
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
In 1912 the federal government changed the residency requirements for homesteaders. The
homesteaders could file for their patents after three years of living on their land, instead of
the previously required five year s and the homesteaders were no longer required to reside
on the land year round. They were required to inform the General Land Offices of their
absences, but they could be at their jobs elsewhere half of each year. Those changes
attracted non-traditional homesteaders from the western Oregon and Portland t o homestead
in La Pine to acquire the lands for recreational uses.
Aya had moved back to Portland before rail service was established in La Pine, and no
railroad was ever laid between Hill Street and Railroad Street, as he planned. Martin
Morisette wrote the following about the logging roads and railroad grades.
"By late 1926 the end of (the Shevlin-Hixon Logging) track was in the La Pine area,
and a spider web of grades had been built in the country between the town and Paulina
Lake. At this point the mighty Great Northern entered the picture, as it finally received
permission to build its long -sought line south from Bend to Klamath Falls. The S-H
(Shevlin-Hixon Company) logging railroad lay directly in the path of the contemplated
construction, and the GN (Great Northern Railway Company) saw it as a means to
reduce the amount of initial construction required to build their new line. The result
was that the GN purchased a 75 percent stake in the S-H "mainline" between Bend and
La Pine, with S-H retaining the other 25 percent. S-H retained the right to operate log
trains over the GN mainline to Bend, with the stipulation that all movements were
controlled by the GN and that S-H trains and crews must operate under GN rules. The
first GN train ran from Bend to La Pine on 8 September 1927, and construction of the
GATline ,. ..L £....__ 7 . D:.,.,. t,. �. with ti,,, Southern Pacific fi,. 1;,,.., .,t !'L.,,,,.,.,.1t
VIV ll/6fi evuu(J/V//{ La Pine to u connection YVLLf( the IJVGLGILGr r4 ! Lil �4l.� line at 1.+r4GIICGL4L
started shortly thereafter. The line was completed on 8 March 1928, and GN
commenced offering through service to Klamath Falls the following May."
After World War II, vacationers and retirees discovered the recreational opportunities in La
Pine. Ranches were divided into smaller tracts for retirement and vacation homes.
Tourism, hunting and fishing and year-round recreation continue to be important activities
in La Pine.
More information about La Pine's early history can be found in:
1) History of La Pine Pioneers, written by Friends of the La Pine Library,
published in 2000;
2) History and Homesteaders of the La Pine Country, written by Veerland A. Ridgley,
published in 1993;
3) Irrigation Development in Oregon's Upper Deschutes River Basin 1871-1957, A
Historic Context Statement, written by Michael Hall in 1994;
4) A History of the Deschutes Country in Oregon, written by The Deschutes County
Historical Society, published in 1985;
5) Green Gold: The Incomplete, and Probably Inaccurate, History of the Timber
Industry in Parts of Central and Eastern Oregon from 1867 to near the Present, written
by Martin Gabrio Morisette;
Page 44
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
6) Vandevert, The Hundred -Year History of a Central Oregon Ranch, written by Ted
Haynes and Grace Vandevert McNellis, published in 2011;
7) Crater Lake, Gem of the Cascades, The Geological Story of Crater Lake National
Park, written by K. R. Cranson, published in 1982.
8) Roadside Guide To The Geology Of Newberry Volcano, Third Edition, written by
Robert A. Jensen, published in 2000.
9.)Crescent Lake: Archaeological Journeys into Central Oregon's Cascade Range, a
Thesis submitted to Oregon State University by Daniel M. Mulligan on April 21, 1997.
10.) The Triangle Dint, The true story of one man 's dream and the many people who
made it a reality in central Oregon country, a book about Sidney Summer Stearns,
written by Nita Lowry, published in 1995.
Table 1
's List of Desig�tated Historic and Cultural Resources
Date of
Significance
Name of Property
Address
County Tax Map and
Lot Numbers
1.
1912
Pioneer Hall/La Pine Commercial
Club/Little Deschutes Grange 939*
51518 Morson
Street
221015AA 06000
2.
1905
Improved Order of Red Men
Cemetery
Also known as La Pine Cemetery.*
17200 Reed
Road
22-11-00 00200
(SW 1/4 of SE '/4 of Section
7)
*The two properties listed above were designated as Significant Historic Resources by
the Board of County Commissioners on March 18, 1991.
Figure 3
2009, Little Deschutes Grange 939 Hall
1. The one-story wood frame Commercial Club Building was constructed by the
community in 1912 to provide a place to hold town meetings, socials, dances, church
services, weddings and funerals. Alfred Aya donated the land and many residents
donated the lumber, nails and money to buy a piano. Volunteers milled the lumber and
others built the 20-foot by 75-foot rectangular building. The Commercial Club has 82
members in 1912 and was similar to a Chamber of Commerce today.
Page 45
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Figure 4
Improved Order of Red Men Cemetery, also known as La Pine Cemetery
2. The United State government recorded a sale of 40 acres in the southwest one -quarter
of the southeast one -quarter of Section 7, Township 22 South, Range 11 East of the
Willamette Meridian on May 6, 1926 to the Great Council of the United States Improved
Order of Red Men. It is thought that the Order of Red Men bought the property around
1905. On March 14, 1980, the Order of Red Men granted the cemetery to Deschutes
County. Deschutes County granted the property to the City of La Pine on August 8,
2007. Early residents of 11.2 Pine were buried either on their own property, south of town
in Masten Cemetery, north of town in the Paulina Prairie Cemetery also known as the
Reese Cemetery, or in the Improved Order of Red Men/La Pine Cemetery. Many of the
early graves are unmarked.
Goal 6: Air, Water, and Land Resources
Air Quality
Air quality within the area is generally very good except for variable woodstove smoke.
La Pine is not within an air quality maintenance area as designated by the EPA — such
areas exceed established Sate and Federal air quality standards. Notwithstanding the
above factor, air quality can become a concern on rare occasions of atmospheric
inversion during winter months where smoke from domestic wood burning fireplaces and
stoves can trap smoke at the surface in a stagnant situation. The City intends to improve
this situation by exploring incentives and change -out options. The City will also
implement various techniques to reduce vehicle miles traveled as a method to improve air
quality. These methods include zoning, urban form, new trail, bicycle, and sidewalk
connections. Improved conditions for walking and bicycling are companion goals.
Page 46
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Ground Water Resources
According to the Oregon Water Resources Department there are no critical groundwater
areas or restrictively classified areas within the La Pine urban area.
Water Quality
Although La Pine has a domestic water system, many residences still utilize wells
constructed prior to the establishment of the water system. Some wells are very shallow
and draw water from an aquifer that is associated with evidence of contamination in the
recent past. Over the past 10 years, through their Regional Problem Solving effort,
Deschutes County has found that groundwater in and around the La Pine area is at risk
for groundwater contamination due to the amount of nitrates found in samples taken from
around the region — the cause it thought to be from the large number or on -site septic
systems that discharge to the ground, in combination with the high water table.
Typically, wells from shallow sources have shown such evidence of contamination while
deeper wells have not. As a result of the concern Deschutes County has worked jointly
with the US Environmental Protection Agency, the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality and the US Geological Survey to study, map and find solutions to this problem —
this effort is called the La Pine Demonstration Project. Overall, the primary solution to
such contamination and the provision of clean water within the urban area will be the
expansion of the La Pine Water and Sewer Systems (the water and Sewer Systems are
discussed in the Public Facilities and Services Chapter).
The local riparian, wetland and flood plain areas within the community are resources that
will be enhanced and protected. The interrelationship with other water resources and
community health is significant. Thus, the balance between protection and management
of growth will be an ongoing effort.
Stormwater management is a goal of the City and inventories of street condition and
runoff are underway with completion in 2013.
Land Resources
The primary concern for land resources is the preservation of adequate land on the City's
east side for an expansion of the La Pine Sewer Districts sewage treatment facility. A
goal of the City of La Pine is to have all residences within the City eventually connect to
the sewer system, including a requirement for all new construction to connect to connect
to the sewer system. Thus, based on the information provided in the La Pine Sewer
Districts Capital Facilities Plan, a major expansion will be necessary in order to provide
capacity for the anticipated growth. For cost effectiveness and efficiency, expansion on
vacant land adjacent to the existing treatment facility will be necessary. For this reason,
the City of La Pine and Deschutes County have been working with the BLM to acquire
and preserve land (via a land transfer) for such expansion.
Page 47
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Mineral and Aggregate Resources
According to Deschutes County, there are no recognized mineral or aggregate resources
within the La Pine urban area.
Energy Sources
According to wind maps available through the Oregon Depaitnlent of Energy, La Pine is
located within a region with "poor" wind energy potential. There are no known
geothermal sources within the City. The City has designated large areas of land for
potential solar energy production and bio mass energy production. In fact, a biomass
plant is has received approval from the City. La Pine recognizes that the potential for
solar production of energy is likely to occur on lands that lie east of the Highway, which
will be available following the transfer of land from the BLM. This is viable since
development of these lands for other urban uses is constrained by the railroad, wildfire
protection overlay, sewer expansion, and large lot industrial development.
Goal 7: Natural Hazards:
The purpose of Goal 7 is to protect people and property from natural hazards. The two
potential natural hazard threats in La Pine are wildfire and flooding — a floodplain of the
Little Deschutes River runs partially within the western boundary of the City and thickly
forested lands are on many sides of the City UGB. Thus, the City is required to adopt
inventories, policies, plans, and measures to reduce risk to people and property from
natural hazards.
Each year, multiple forest fires occur in the southern portion of Deschutes County. Some
are nature -caused (lightning) but many are man -caused. The subdivisions scattered
throughout the timbered areas, particularly in the Lodgepole Pine area of southern
Deschutes County, increase not only the risk of people being hurt or killed but also
increase the likelihood of a fire. Many of these rural development areas lie on the
northeast side of La Pine and pose threats for expansion into the City if fire should occur.
The City will adopt the Community Wildfire Plan and coordinate with the wildfire
experts at Deschutes County. In addition, the City zoning ordinance and map will
include a Fire Protection Overlay Zone that will comply with the guidelines of the CWP.
Flooding along the Little Deschutes River has caused damage in the past where
development has been allowed to occur within the established 100-year floodplain.
However, past controls by Deschutes County over development within the floodplain
have limited such occurrences. The City will adopt zoning regulations to control and use
activities in the floodplain and other flood prone areas.
Summary:
Overall, La Pine's tie to the natural environment and small town charm are inseparably
linked with the surrounding forests, mountains, river corridors, flora and fauna, and their
extension across city limit boundaries. This has been continually restated by residents of
the community. Thus, La Pine will need to adopt development regulations to protect
critical areas, including wildlife habitat, flood plains, urban forests and groundwater
quality. Policies and regulations should be balanced with local values and in
conformance with state law. Efforts to protect the natural environment should focus on
Page 48
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
maintaining a balance between the economy and ecology of the area while enhancing the
aesthetic and livability ideals of the community.
Local area livability can be enhanced and growth can occur in and around special areas if
development regulations take the following issues into consideration:
• Preservation of the natural environment in open space protection areas and
requiring preservation of natural features with new development when and where
appropriate
• Opportunities for trail connections between existing and planned development
areas and open space/natural areas, and other recreational activities
• Implementing development ordinance regulations related to natural hazards such
as flooding, wildfire, etc.
• Inventory and analysis of important wildlife habitat and migration areas
• Enhancement of the urban forest
• Work with County, State, Federal agencies and La Pine Water and Sewer
District's to monitor water quality
• Protection of local values regarding the social and ecological benefits of
maintaining the natural environment
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Protect and enhance identified Goal 5 resources and other features of the
natural environment using a variety of methods and strategics.
GENERAL POLICIES
• Until such time that the City receives title or other controls over the Forest and
BLM lands east of the Highway, the City shall coordinate with the BLM and
Forest Service for the preservation of the natural forest environment on lands
under their respective jurisdictions that are within and adjacent to the City,
including transitions from rural to Public Facility uses: sewer treatment facility
expansion, energy production and renewable resource activities, open space and
recreation, rail and transit options, and, large lot industrial development needs.
These lands shall not be used for residential subdivisions, or destination shopping
centers.
• The City will develop programs to address the protection of the natural
environment and related natural resources consistent with State law and local
goals related to protection of such resources.
• Protection of groundwater, a natural resource, is of prime concern to the
community. The City shall coordinate efforts with the La Pine Water and Sewer
District, and Deschutes County to ensure appropriate provisions for connections
Page 49
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
to the La Pine sewer system for new and existing development in order to
maintain safe groundwater.
• The City shall continue its inventory of storm runoff, it effects on the
environment, and any needed management programs.
• Riparian, floodplain and wetland areas along the Little Deschutes River support
important wildlife and ecological habitat and shall be protected to the greatest
extent possible and regulated by the zoning ordinance and other studies.
• Wildlife habitat associated with the Little Deschutes River and its related riparian
areas shall be protected by maintaining habitat within significant riparian
corridors and wetlands.
• The City shall delineate open space and trail areas to serve as wildlife migration
corridors. This will allow migrating deer and elk to cross US Highway 97. The
Plan map shows where the primary corridor is to be located via a 500 foot green -
colored strip running east -west through the Newberry Neighborhood. This
location was jointly agreed upon with Deschutes County - the property owner in
this case.
• The City shall coordinate with Deschutes County for the identification and
protection of Cultural and Historic Resources. The City shall investigate options
that will identify and potential protect significant scenic resources.
• The County already has a FIRM and other regulations that protect natural
resources and manage development within the flood plain and floodways. The
City shall adopt its own floodplain protection regulations to incorporate a "no net
loss of flood storage capacity" standard, which is consistent with DLCD's natural
Hazards Division
• Riparian corridors and wetlands within the 100-year floodplain shall have a high
level of protection.
• The City shall coordinate efforts with the La Pine Water District to protect
inventoried groundwater resources and wellheads.
• The City recognizes that open spaces and natural areas within the community
function together in a synergistic fashion. Thus, they need to be inventoried and
networks of open space within the community shall be maintained and enhanced,
including wildlife habitat corridors, storm water management areas, trails and
other sensitive areas.
• La Pine shall maintain updated inventories of Goals 5, 6, 7, and 8 natural
resources, recreation, and hazard areas.
Page 50
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Because the local urban forest helps to create shade, improve respite areas,
enhance drainage ways, and beautiful the community, the City shall develop
regulations that promote the retention of trees and natural landscapes with all new
development, as appropriate.
• Citizens shall develop and maintain convenient access to natural areas in a
manner that protects sensitive areas.
• The City recognizes that children and other citizens will benefit from learning
about and understanding the special characteristics of urban wildlife and natural
habitats and therefore will support educational opportunities.
• The City shall develop a Historic Resources program, including creation of the
Historic Landmarks Commission, additional historic resource designation and
protection for qualifying sites within the City.
La Pines Historic Preservation Policies
• La Pine encourages historic preservation and integrates its preservation program
into community development and economic development programs. Conserving
our heritage helps build a vibrant and sustainable local economy and gives La Pine
an identity and a sense of place.
• Historic preservation will be employed to create and preserve affordable housing,
generate jobs, retain existing businesses, attract new ones, and increase civic
participation. Community revitalization and historic preservation are uniquely
compatible principles. When used together, they create sustainable, vibrant places
to live, work and play. Preservation -based community development uses the older
and historic built environment to improve the quality of life for residents of all
income levels.
• La Pine's historic preservation program will be used to attract cultural heritage
tourism. Cultural heritage tourism is traveling to experience the places, artifacts,
and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and
present. It includes cultural, historic and natural resources. Cultural heritage
tourism produces income for local businesses and improves the quality of life for
residents and visitors.
• La Pine's preservation program aims to enhance the public's appreciation for and
understanding of its prehistory and the early and mid-20th Century architecture and
history that is unique to our city. The City hopes to unite emerging popular interest
in preserving the recent past with proper preservation practices through the
promotion of continuing historic uses and adaptive re -use, and sensitive
maintenance, restoration and rehabilitation of these structures and sites.
Page 51
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Historic preservation can and should be an integral component of any effort to
promote sustainable development. Conserving and improving our existing built
resources, including re -using historic and older buildings to meet current needs that
require minimal alterations, greening the existing building stock, and reinvestment
in older and historic neighborhoods, is crucial to creating a desirable city.
Preserving La Pine's historic churches, cemeteries and schools is especially
important to people who live in La Pine or have lived here.
• La Pine's historic buildings were systematically inventoried in 2009. The inventory
shall be updated every decade. The City will encourage the owners of significant
properties to apply to the City Council to designate their properties as resources. It
is important that the resources represent the significant men and women and ethnic
groups that contributed to the community as well as the architects, designers,
craftsmen, trades people, and carpenters. Some simple structures will represent the
frugality, resourcefulness and individuality of the pioneers. Many will display the
use of local building materials. Buildings in La Pine were often moved to be reused
in new ways and some were pulled on skids from Rosland or transported from
lumber camps.
• Districts, buildings, structures, cemeteries and sites in La Pine which have
significant prehistoric, historic, and cultural association should be preserved as part
of the heritage of the citizens of the La Pine. Their preservation benefits the
education, enjoyment, economic development and pride of the citizens.
Preservation provides architectural diversity and enhances the value of protected
resources and their neighborhoods.
• The City will protect all properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places
and all properties that are included in the City's list of designated historic and
cultural resources in this Comprehensive Plan. To that end, regulatory controls and
administrative procedures are necessary. The Historic and Cultural Preservation
Code shall be used to protect designated historic and cultural resources. The Code
shall be based on and be compatible with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
and Guidelines for Rehabilitation. The Standards and Guidelines shall be used
when the Code is silent on a matter.
• The City's preservation program shall be carried out by the La Pine Landmarks
Commission or the La Pine Planning Commission, when the Landmarks
Commission does not have at least three members.
• Financial incentives shall be developed to encourage regular maintenance, rehabilitation,
and restoration of the historic and cultural resources.
Page 52
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Goal #2: To reduce wildfire hazard on forested lands within the City and coordinate
wildfire hazard reduction with adjacent federal forested lands.
Policies
• The City of La Pine shall adopt before 2013 and implement the Greater La Pine
Community Wildfire Protection Plan within the City of La Pine through local
development codes and regulations — work with all appropriate local, state, and
federal agencies to coordinate efforts in wildfire hazard reduction through local
regulations.
• The City shall coordinate wildfire protection plans with the County and La Pine
Rural Fire protection District and shall implement the wildfire protection
Community Plan regulations for new development.
V. Programs
The City shall:
1. Conduct a local wetland inventory for areas within the City, along the Little
Deschutes River, and update the existing La Pine Wickiup Junction Local
Wetland Inventory — LWI - before 2015.
2. Create an inventory of resources and natural areas that require special
protection. Develop new regulations and zoning regulations to protect such
resources consistent with Statewide planning goals.
3. Coordinate with the La Pine Park and Recreation District to develop:
a. an inventory of open spaces that can complement the system of parks
and other recreational spaces.
b. develop a system of linking open spaces, cultural/historic areas, natural
areas, recreational areas, and public parks in coordination with the La
Pine Park and Recreation District and other affected agencies.
c. create an educational program that better informs the community about
the importance of natural systems, cultural/historic areas, and open
spaces. This may include collaborative efforts educational providers
and parks district.
d. keep the community Parks and Recreation Plan Comprehensive
Plan updated, regarding current and future requirements for open space
and related Goal 5 resources within the City limits.
e. leverage funding for habitat improvements by applying for grants to
develop and protect natural areas, build trails, and sustain wildlife as
appropriate.
Page 53
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
4. Work with surrounding jurisdictions, including Deschutes County, the
BLM and Forest Service, to develop and implement a regional system of
Goal 5 and open space corridors.
5. Continue to refine and develop new regulations (as part of the
Zoning/Development Code) regarding riparian setbacks, flood plain
protection, enhancement, and development mitigation.
6. Encourage corridor development for riparian protection, pedestrian use,
and wildlife routes.
7. Re-evaluate street design guidelines to include provisions for street
trees, paths as alternatives to sidewalks, and plantings that provide shade
and a variety of drainage controls to enhance and support a variety of
habitats as well as control storm water and snow melt.
8. Develop focused donation programs to help manage identified sensitive
areas, naming of open spaces, riparian corridors, respite areas,
waysides, trail segments, and other programs that can count toward
grant match programs.
9. Encourage provision of open space with new development by providing
developer incentives in addition to minimum standards in regulations.
10. Create design guidelines to include provisions for critical areas and
1 lands
_ J s that
fragmentation
d
natural resource laiiu� �iiat ii7iuuiiiZc of species and
habitat due to development.
11. Adopt and implement the applicable portions of the Deschutes County
Community Fire Protection Plan before 2013
12. Continually participate with local, State and Federal Agencies on
developing and implementing management plans (i.e. use, fire protection, etc.) for
forest lands inside City limits, as well as the transition areas along the City
boundary.
13. Coordinate with emergency services agencies and plan for the
development and recognition of fire zone interface areas and supportive
land management techniques.
Page 54
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 6
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
I. State Planning Goal 8, Recreational Needs
Oregon State Planning Goal 8 intends to satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of
the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary
recreational facilities including destination resorts. The requirement for meeting these
needs fall to local governmental agencies, in coordination with private enterprise, and
must be done so in appropriate proportions and in such quantity, quality and locations as
is consistent with the availability of the resources to meet such requirements. In doing
so, the local and regional recreational needs must be coordinated with state and federal
recreation plans. Included in recreational planning needs are developed recreational
facilities as well as open space, including the retention of natural areas and linkages
between developed and natural areas where appropriate.
II. Purpose and Intent
As stated above, the State of Oregon requires that local governments manage and operate
adequate facilities for recreation and open space. Open space responsibilities also
overlap with Goal 5 issues (as discussed in Chapter 5 of this Comprehensive Plan) but
the emphasis for utilization and preservation remains the same. Thus, this chapter
discusses how the City of La Pine intends to recognize and strengthen the City's parks
and recreation opportunities through land use strategies and inter -agency cooperation
with the La Pine Park and Recreation District, as well as Deschutes County, and state and
federal agencies who own open space lands within and surrounding La Pine. An
important element to the quality of life to citizens in the community is based upon the
location and function of the area parks, natural areas, and open space. The opportunity
for multiple forms of and interconnectivity between passive and active recreation creates
solid community connections and promotes healthier lifestyles for residents.
III. Issues
The City of La Pine, within the City limits has not seen rapid growth in the recent past.
However, the surrounding area, primarily to the north and west, has seen rapid growth as
existing rural residential lots have been developed en masse over the last 15 years.
Citizens and visitors alike are attracted to La Pine's forested character and rural setting.
The community is also very close to many other recreational activities and open spaces in
the nearby forests, lakes and rivers. Fishing, hunting, camping, boating, ATV riding and
wildlife observation in the surrounding rural areas are the primary activities that are
enjoyed by many of the residents (much of the reason why they moved to the area)
visitors alike. Much of these activities occur on the surrounding undeveloped county,
state, and federal lands.
Page 55
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The specific goals and objectives for meeting the City's open space and recreational
requirements are based on identified needs, desires, and other issues as specified by the
citizens and conveyed through the La Pine Park and Recreation District (LPRD). The
chapter also strives to identify the services, programs, and future preservation and
enhancement of recreational and community facilities, including parks, ball fields, trails,
community centers and historic places as development occurs within the city, all
coordinated with the LPRD. However, the LPRD jurisdiction and responsibility goes
beyond the La Pine city limits. This chapter will focus on those amenities within the city,
but will also address the transition between urban and rural areas, as well as surrounding
County, State and Federal programs.
The La Pine community is fortunate to have existing natural and manmade features that
provide open space and recreational opportunities within and adjacent to the urban area.
Some of these are under the control of the City, County, State and Federal Government
and others are under the control of the LPRD. The policies and programs contained in
this chapter are a "guide" for the City and local agencies, and provide a basis for helping
to resolve issues and set a strategic course for physical improvements.
LPRD PLANNING:
The LPRD, which was established as a special service district in 1990, has a
Comprehensive Plan for the area within their district boundary (which extends beyond
the La Pine City limits) which identifies the primary services, facilities, programs and
direction provided by the District. The Plan was adopted in 2005 and is intended to focus
on the operation, planning and management for a five-year period (Five Year Action
Plan), as well as a master plan to guide the acquisition and development of park and
facilities for the next 20_years (Park and Facility Master Plan).
recreation 1QG1111.1w a.v-J v...� (Park Facility '.------- - Plan):
Notwithstanding, since the inception of the District, the District has struggled financially
with six failed tax measures for a fixed tax base. Thus, the Districts ability to provide
facilities and services has been severely limited in past years. However, in May, 2009,
the voters approved a tax rate of $0.30 for every $1000 of assessed value for properties
within the District. This reliable source of funding will allow the LPRD to move forward
the goals identified in their Comprehensive Plan.
Per the 2005 Comprehensive Plan, the primary mission of the LPRD is to: find reliable
funding sources; maintain existing parks and facilities; plan for future parks and facilities;
improve existing recreation programs; and, plan for future recreation programs. At this
time, the LPRD manages a number of facilities designed to provide varied recreational
opportunities for the community. Although they are all within the District boundary,
those located within the City of La Pine include:
LPRD FACILITIES:
White School Park Complex: This site is home to the District office. It includes a
variety of uses such as the White School Park Building (Gymnasium), John C. Johnson
Center, etc. Greater detail can be found in the LPRD Comprehensive Plan.
Finley Butte Road Park Complex: This 10 acre park site is developed with a recreation
meeting hall, three baseball fields, t-ball field, undeveloped athletic fields/open areas,
Page 56
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
bathrooms and associated recreational; facilities. This facility is the focal area for active
sports within the community and future formal skate park.
Vacant Land: The District also owns a vacant, unimproved 5-acre parcel near the La
Pine High School. There are currently no formal plans for the use of this site although
the district plans include a future swimming pool.
Planned: Although not yet developed, the master plan for the Newberry Neighborhood
in central La Pine, west of Huntington Road, includes areas for the development of
formal parks to serve residents within near/walking distance of the planned residences. A
timeline for establishment of these parks is not yet known and will be dependent upon
development of the surrounding residential subdivision.
Rosland Park contains day use areas, 11 campsites, historical Forest Service Ranger
Station, river frontages and play grounds. The Park will need to be zoned specifically for
park uses and related facilities. There has been a desire to develop a nature center and
other uses here and this should be permitted outright.
LPRD PROGRAMS:
With limited funding and resources since its inception, the type and number of programs
provided by LPRD has been limited. The primary focus of programs that are offered has
been oriented toward children's activities and community/holiday events and tourism.
These include joint efforts with the South Central Little League and youth sports such as
baseball, softball, soccer and flag/tackle football, and community events such as Frontier
Days (4th of July), Holiday Bazaar and Crab Feed. The LPRD comprehensive plan
contains greater detail on each activity, etc.
PRIVATE RECREATION PROGRAMS:
There are various sources of private recreation programs in La Pine that provided by
churches, youth organizations and special purpose organizations. These include La Pine
Little League; the La Pine Rodeo Association; 4-H; Boy/Girl Scouts; an, the La Pine
Senior Center.
Other open space and recreation areas include local schools, public areas such as riparian
areas/floodplain areas in public ownership, public facilities and surrounding BLM/Forest
Service properties, etc. Additionally, there several private campgrounds in the areas
surrounding La Pine. The LPPRD, City, County, and State are collaborating on a new
rodeo and Frontier Days activity area. This may be located on BLM land that is slated
for potential transfer to the City of La Pine.
STATE AMENITIES:
Although not included within the City limits, the La Pine State Park is a large
campground and recreation area approximately 5 miles north of La Pine, adjacent to the
Deschutes River. The Park provides camping (both tent and RV) opportunities as well as
access to the River for boating and fishing opportunities. Although not within the City of
La Pine (access/entrance road is approximately 5 miles north of La Pine on US Highway
Page 57
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
97), the monument is a large attraction for visitors to the region. Thus, it has a great
affect of the local tourism economy of La Pine.
FEDERAL AMENITIES:
The BLM manages a large number of acres within and around the UGB. Additionally,
much of the land surrounding La Pine is within the Deschutes National Forest. These
public lands have historically been a primary attraction for residents living in and moving
to the community. The opportunities for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, nature
watching and ATV and snowmobile use are convenient for all residents. At public
meetings held for the Comprehensive Planning process, some residents explained that
hunting is currently taking place on the BLM lands on the City's east side; they expressed
an interest in maintaining these opportunities within the City limits. While some of the
aforementioned activities may be appropriate, hunting and discharge of firearms within
City limits is typically not compatible with urban development and is prohibited by State
law.
The BLM lands, located within the city limits, may be transferred to the City for public
uses. This action would improve the City's desire for cohesive planning and control of
urban land uses. The size of the BLM lands is quite large and abuts the City's waste
water treatment plant on the east side of the community. The BLM lands would provide
needed area for long term treatment capacity. Opportunities for other transitional uses
are likely to occur until the land is actually needed for treatment purposes. Current
recreational uses (not hunting), industrial infill, and opportunities for alternate energy
production (solar fields, bio-mass storage, etc. )are appropriate uses on these large
acreages. The large number of acres of the BLM parcels helps to provide good buffers
between
rural and urban uses including wildfre/wildlife control areas tnn
Newberry Crater National Monument — Paulina and East Lakes: The Newberry National
Monument is a federally designated recreation area that preserves a key local component
of Oregon's volcanic history. The monument contains two large lakes, campgrounds, a
lodge and amenity rentals. Although not within the City of La Pine (access/entrance road
is approximately 5 miles north of La Pine on US Highway 97), the monument is a large
attraction for visitors to the region. Thus, it has a great affect of the local tourism
economy of La Pine.
Further away, but also having a direct affect on the quality of life in La Pine are the
Cascade Mountains and the high lakes approximately 25 miles to the west. The
mountains and lakes within the Deschutes National Forest provide a variety of
recreational opportunities such as skiing, hunting, fishing hiking, snowmobiling and
wildlife watching. Since La Pine is one of the closest centers where urban services are
provided, residents, recreationists and tourists regularly utilize La Pine as a point of
gathering for such activities.
FUTURE:
The biggest challenge for the City will be to coordinate and sustain a beneficial strategy
for parks, open space, and recreation for the urban area. While the primary responsibility
Page 58
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
to develop parks will be with LPRD, the City must work hand in hand with the District to
implement an overall plan for determining actual need and key linkages between the
various open space and recreational uses. The existing and future demand by citizens and
visitors for recreations areas, facilities and opportunities must be continually refined
within the District's Comprehensive Plan and implementation strategy that is based upon
continuing analysis of public need and desires.
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Create a system of parks, recreational facilities, and open space areas that
provide quality active and passive recreational experiences for all urban area residents.
Policies
• The City shall coordinate the development of new parks and recreation
opportunities, and programs with the La Pine Park and Recreation District.
• The City shall explore the creation of Park System Development Charges (SDC's)
as a means of providing a funding base for new park and recreation facilities to
serve anticipated growth.
• The City shall encourage the continual involvement of private recreation
providers to citizens.
• The City shall acknowledge the importance of the ties between the recreational
opportunities provided by the natural environment and the developed portion of
the community.
• The City shall encourage recreational opportunities within the community to
acknowledge and encourage use by visitors and tourists to the community.
• The City shall continue its coordination with County, State and Federal agencies
to seek land and recreation opportunities (both active and passive) within the City
limits.
• Given the various agencies involved in providing open space, parks, trails, and
recreational opportunities — a high level of coordination and planning will be
required in order to maximize efficiency and reduce duplication.
• The addition of new parks and recreational opportunities shall be sought in the
most cost effective way possible, including land grants from County, State and
Federal agencies.
Page 59
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Continual updating of the LPRD Comprehensive Plan will allow the City and the
District to determine if the recreation needs of the community re being met.
• Local parks and recreational opportunities tend to be distributed throughout the
community without connecting links other than streets; La Pine's citizens desire
to connect existing and future parks and recreation facilities by sidewalks, trails,
and other mechanisms. Such connections provide greater opportunities for
citizens, particularly children, to safely access parks without vehicle use.
• Open space and/or recreational areas should be available to residents within'/4
mile of their homes unless an exception is granted by the City as new
development occurs.
• New parks, linkages, and recreational facilities should be incorporated into new
developments as a way to distribute resources throughout the community and
reduce vehicle miles traveled.
• Older neighborhoods and redevelopment areas should consider incorporating
parks, trails, and other recreational facilities as a way to enhance the community.
• New parks to serve new residents should be developed without community
subsidy, while new trails and regional community recreational facilities may
require additional funding through those sources available to the City and LPRD.
• The Bend -La Pine School District should participate in the discussion about new
parks and be willing to link school resources to the community/LPRD park
system as a way to leverage open space opportunities.
• When adopted, local development codes should require an analysis of new
resident impacts as it relates to the need for parks and recreation facilities beyond
the collection of LPRD SDC's (if and when SDC's are adopted). Such codes
should require open space, parks, and recreational opportunities where justifiable
and appropriate.
• New trails are important elements that link open spaces and parks.
• Riparian habitats and other natural areas may be used for recreational and open
space opportunities.
• Land use processes for the development of parks and related facilities shall be
expedited and any costs for application processing not greater that actual cost of
service or free whenever possible.
Page 60
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
V. Programs
The City shall:
1. Develop a mechanism to coordinate the efforts of local (public and private) and
other agency groups as it relates to the development of open spaces, parks, and
recreation opportunities within the UGB and develop intra-agency agreements as
necessary to further foster and control the acquisition and development of such
elements.
2. The City shall work with the Parks and Recreation District, as appropriate to
stabilize and increase its tax base to include all potential users of LPRD facilities.
3. Defer the parks and recreation Comprehensive Planning efforts to the LPRD as
appropriate.
4. Inventory all current open space, trail, active and passive recreational
opportunities.
5. Develop land use regulations to better manage the acquisition, development, and
maintenance of open spaces, parks, and recreation opportunities within the UGB,
as coordinated with the LPRD.
6. Encourage the LPRD to upgrade existing parks, as necessary, through renovation
to provide quality services as designated for that particular park space.
7. Encourage new residential development to provide additional resources to satisfy
additional recreational demand generated by growth.
8 Require that compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
accessibility requirements be part of new and upgraded facilities where
appropriate. Law requires that ADA accessibility deficiencies be rectified
whenever a LPRD facility is substantially upgraded. If suitable funding becomes
available sooner, any existing ADA deficiencies must be rectified.
References as attached:
1. La Pine Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan, Summer 2005 — (GEL
Oregon and J.T. Atkins & Company PC)
Page 61
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 7
Public Facilities and Services
I. State Planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services
Oregon State Planning Goal 11 requires local governments "to plan and develop a timely,
orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework
for urban and rural development." As defined in the Goal, "A Timely, Orderly, and
Efficient Arrangement — refers to a system or plan that coordinates the type, locations and
delivery of public facilities and services in a manner that best supports the existing and
proposed land uses." As part of the Comprehensive Planning process for La Pine, the
existing public facilities and services will be assessed in order to evaluate the necessary
improvements required to support the anticipated population growth over the 20-year
planning period.
II. Purpose and Intent
As Oregon's newest City, La Pine does not provide a full array of public services and
facilities under its own jurisdiction. Although such services and facilities are available to
residents, they are typically provided by Deschutes County (through inter -governmental
agreement/contract), private businesses, or Special Districts, which are government
entities formed under and authorized by state statute. This chapter catalogs the existing
facilities and utilities that serve the businesses and residents of La Pine. The intent of the
chapter is to identify the current service and facilities, the provider of such services and
facilities, and any future improvements, projects, costs, and sources for funding in order
to plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and
services to serve as a framework for urban development. The public services currently
available within the city limits and UGB include:
• Community governmental services
• Cemetery
• Emergency response services (Deschutes County
Sheriff/La Pine Fire District)
• Land use planning and zoning control (Deschutes County
Community Development Department))
• Health services (Deschutes County Health Department)
• Recreation facilities and services (La Pine Park and
Recreation District)
• Public streets and maintenance (City of La Pine, ODOT
and Deschutes County)
• Public water source, distribution, and maintenance (La Pine
Water District)
Page 62
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Public sewer treatment, delivery, and maintenance (La Pine
Sewer District)
• Public Schools — Bend -La Pine School District
• Library - Deschutes County
• Solid waste collection and disposal — Deschutes County
• Electric power (Mid -State Electric Co-op)
• Natural gas (Cascade natural Gas)
• Telephone and internet services
• Television, radio, cable and fiber-optic services
Community Governmental Services
La Pine operates through a City Manager -Council form of government. The City Council
hires the City Manager, creates policy and programs, and adopts a city budget supporting
various municipal functions. The City Manager is responsible for hiring staff, responds
to Council requirements, and manages the day-to-day functions of the local government
and services, and plans for the future needs of the community. However, the City does
contract with Deschutes County, and outside consultants and service providers for some
basic and required community functions — such as planning/zoning, law enforcement,
administration and legal counsel. This is due to the newness of the City and the limited
staffing/resources currently available.
Emergency Response Services
The City of La Pine contracts for law enforcement with the Deschutes County Sheriffs
Department. Fire protection is funded by a separate Fire District budget — the La Pine
Fire _District._ Services are provided to citizens throughout the urban area. The
departments are consulted on new land use applications (via Deschutes County
Community Development Department), which are examined in the context of services
needed to support new development.
Land Use Planning, Building and Zoning Control
The City of La Pine does not have its own Community Development Department that
serves the incorporated area and UGB. Rather, the City coordinates planning and
building activities in the City through an intergovernmental agreement with Deschutes
County. Thus, the County Zoning Map will serve as the City map until such time as a
Zoning Code and corresponding map are adopted by the City. Until the City adopts a
TSP the County zoning designations on non-UUC lands remain in effect.
Health Services
The City of La Pine is served by a satellite office of the Deschutes County health
Department, primarily mental health and children's and community services, as well as a
private clinic. The City and surrounding area do not have a hospital or emergency
medical services — the nearest such services are in Bend, approximately 30-miles to the
north. Medical uses are permitted in the local commercial zones.
Page 63
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Recreation Facilities and Services
The City of La Pine is served by the La Pine Park and Recreation District. The District
provides services to the City of La Pine and surrounding rural residential area. The
District has an adopted Comprehensive Plan that anticipates community needs and
anticipated growth of the area. The District is funded by a newly voter approved tax
base, as well as grants and other sources of private funding.
Public Street Systems
The City of La Pine, Deschutes County and the State of Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) provide and maintain various streets throughout the City and
outlying area (as such streets interconnect). However, the City of La Pine currently has
limited funds for street improvements and/or maintenance. Deschutes County maintains
some streets via intergovernmental agreement with the City and ODOT maintains U.S.
Highway 97 that bisects the City. La Pine does not have a Transportation System Plans
(TSP). The Deschutes County TSP, which includes the area within City limits, currently
serves as the City Transportation Plan and will continue to do so until the City adopts a
separate TSP in 2012.
Public Water Systems
The City of La Pine does not provide a municipal owned and run water system. Rather,
the La Pine Water District provides water source, disinfection, distribution and
maintenance of a water delivery system to approximately 650 customers. The service
area includes most, but not all of the area within the City limits. The District does have
plans for expansion of the system to serve all of the urban area, dependent upon adequate
funding sources. Their plan identifies existing community needs, how to accommodate
anticipated growth, reduction in private well heads, aquifer protection, land acquisition
for new municipal well heads, reservoir siting and land needed for treatment and storage.
Additional resource information from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
can be found in the appendix. This information shows the City source in relationship to
distance from other sources and the relationship of water compared to time travel from
the source and/or other influences.
Public Sewer Systems
The City of La Pine does not provide a municipal owned and run sewer system. Rather,
the La Pine Sewer District provides collection and treatment to more than 650 customers.
The service area includes most, but not all of the area within the City limits.
The District does have plans for expansion of the system to serve all of the urban area,
dependent upon adequate funding sources. Their plan identifies existing community
needs, necessary capital improvements, funding and implementation, accommodation of
new growth, reduction in septic fields, new connections, and future land needs for the
community treatment plant. The City plans to preserve adequate land on the City's east
side for an expansion of the La Pine Sewer Districts sewage treatment facility. A goal of
the City of La Pine is to have all residences within the City eventually connect to the
sewer system, including a requirement for all new construction to connect to connect to
the sewer system. Thus, based on the information provided in the La Pine Sewer
Page 64
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Districts Capital Facilities Plan, a major expansion will be necessary in order to provide
capacity for the anticipated growth. For cost effectiveness and efficiency, expansion on
vacant land adjacent to the existing treatment facility will be necessary. For this reason,
the City of La Pine and Deschutes County have been working with the BLM to acquire
and preserve land (via a land transfer) for such expansion.
Many developed residential lots outside of the City limits and UGB surround the City. It
is anticipated that these lots, (more than 3,000) will need to be connected to municipal
sewer services. Because La Pine has the closest treatment plant and anticipates obtaining
additional lands from the BLM, it is likely that collections lines will need to be extended
to the outlying areas. This action, when determined to be needed, may require special
approval from the State of Oregon.
Note: The City is currently investigating the ways and means of incorporating the water
and sewer district into the local government operations.
Public Schools — Bend -La Pine School District
The Bend -La Pine School District (BLSD) currently operates La Pine High School, La
Pine Middle School and La Pine Elementary. A new elementary school has been built on
the south side of Burgess Road in the Newberry Neighborhood. (this was anticipated to
be built for half enrollment (300 students) in 2010, with completion for a total enrollment
of 600 students by 2015. Overall, the enrollment of the La Pine schools has grown,
mostly as a result of residential development and growth in the outlying rural area
between La Pine and Sunriver to the north. La Pine Elementary serves kindergarten
through 4th grade with an enrollment of approximately 475 students. La Pine Middle
School serves 5"' through ii"' grades with an enrollment of approximately 520 students.
La Pine High School serves 9th through 12th grades with an enrollment of approximately
540 students.
Discussions with the BLSD Superintendent John Rexford reveal that they have no plans
within the next 20 years to develop additional schools within the City limits or UGB.
The School Facility Plan also states that no new schools are needed during the planning
horizon to 2029 and this is incorporated into this document and can be found in the
Appendix and restated as part of the chapter discussing Goal 14.
Library
The La Pine Public Library is a relatively new structure, which opened in November,
2000. This is a full service library with on -site book collections ranging from children's
through adult sources. The library also has internet connection with on -site PC's
available to the public. The library is part of the Deschutes Public Library System
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
La Pine's citizens have access to waste disposal service via Wilderness Garbage
Company or self service at the Deschutes County Transfer Station, north of the city
limits.
Storm Water Collection and Distribution
Page 65
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
The City of La Pine does not have any municipally maintained storm water facilities.
Storm runoff, including significant snowmelt, is accommodated in roadside drainage
ditches and allowed to percolate into the soil. However, new development on private
property is required to meet all DEQ standards for storm water retention, treatment, and
dispersal. The development of new, paved streets in new subdivisions are required to
install storm water retention facilities in the form of drywells that also meet DEQ
standards.
Electric Power
Electric power in La Pine is provided by Mid -State Electric Co-op. The City provides
access to right of way and franchise availability to these service providers. Mid -State
utilizes a master plan for determining new substation areas and other elements necessary
to accommodate anticipated growth.
Natural Gas
Natural gas is provided to urban area residents by Cascade Natural Gas. The City
provides access to right of way and franchise availability for new extensions. Cascade
Natural Gas utilizes a master plan for determining new substation areas and other
elements necessary to accommodate anticipated growth. Propane is supplied by multiple
private entities that serve Central Oregon.
Telecommunications, Phone and Internet Services
Qwest and a variety of private wireless phone and internet providers primarily serve the
community. Deregulation of the telephone service, satellite access and other advances in
telecommunications allow La Pine residents a wide range of phone and Internet
connection choices. Wireless access will also be expanding to serve local citizens.
Television, Radio, Cable and Fiber Optic Services
Cable TV service provides access to premium and nationwide broadcasts. Radio stations
include a variety of local AM/FM stations that provide news and entertainment. Fiber
optic access is expanding throughout the community and of particular importance for
public, commercial and industrial users.
III. Issues
State law and Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, requires that cities plan and
develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to
serve as a framework for urban and rural development.
Excerpt from Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals & Guidelines GOAL 11:
"Urban and rural development shall be guided and supported by types and levels of urban and rural public
facilities and services appropriate for, but limited to, the needs and requirements of the urban, urbanizable,
and rural areas to be served. A provision for key facilities shall be included in each plan. Cities or counties
shall develop and adopt a public facility plan for areas within an urban growth boundary containing a
population greater than 2,500 persons. To meet current and long-range needs, a provision for solid waste
disposal sites, including sites for inert waste, shall be included in each plan."
Page 66
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The City of La Pine does not currently have a population exceeding 2,500 persons
(current population is approximately 1,662). However, during the 20-year
comprehensive planning period La Pine's population growth is expected to result in an
urban area population that exceeds the 2,500 threshold requiring a public facility plan.
Thus, even though a formal public facility plan is not required, extensive planning for the
provision of such services has been considered as part of the Comprehensive Planning
effort.
As described herein, key public facilities are typically described as transportation
systems; water supply; emergency services; sanitary facilities; storm drainage facilities;
planning, zoning and subdivision control; health services; recreation facilities and
services; solid waste collection and processing; energy and communication services;
schools; and, community governmental services. While the City and other local
providers offer a wide range of services, the key elements are essential to accommodating
growth and maintaining public health and safety. Likewise, the City is preparing and
maintaining planning tools that make sure adequate levels of key services are available
and not stressed beyond their carrying capacities.
As described above, the City of La Pine does not manage many of the key facilities that
will affect the overall growth and development of the community — a primary goal of the
City though is to acquire the responsibility for such services and facilities over time.
Services such as planning/zoning, law enforcement, fire protection. health, certain
elements of recreation, solid waste collection and processing, building permitting,
schools, energy, and communication services are provided by other entities. Other City
services are funded through a combination of resources and General Fund programs. The
City budget process occurs every fiscal year and describes how services will be funded.
The basics... transportation, water and sewer
Basic infrastructure - transportation, water and sewer systems - are carefully planned,
monitored, studied, and provided to citizens by the City or the Special Districts. The City
Planning Commission and City Council will eventually review and approve public
facility plans (The La Pine Water and Sewer Districts retain control over their programs
at this time) that are developed to support and accommodate growth. These documents,
in addition to local regulations, implement the goals of the Plan.
The appendix of the Plan contains the public facility plans and current implementing
regulations. The facility plans describe the water, sewer and transportation facilities,
which support the land uses designated in the UGB. Likewise, capital facilities funding
is included in the plans to ensure that implementation keeps pace with growth, and that
such growth can be accommodated as required by law. The development patterns
envisioned by the Plan and the commensurate level of maintenance necessary for each
system is also part of each facility plan. The overall goal is to maintain and improve the
Page 67
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
quality of life for existing and future development by establishing and maintaining
standards for the level -of -service of facilities.
Transportation
The City of La Pine currently does not have a Transportation Systems Plan (TSP). As a
new City, a TSP that identifies long term needs and recommends a priority system for
implementation of new streets and possible funding sources will be created soon after the
adoption of this Comprehensive Plan. The TSP elements will be master planned to match
the land needs of the community over the planning horizon; typically 20 years to match
the Comprehensive Plan. The State requires cities to provide adequate lands for growth
matched with adequate supporting transportation facilities over the planning horizon.
Currently the City of La Pine has streets classified by type and function under the
Deschutes County TSP. The existing street system, to a great degree, is based on previous
subdivision design and has local streets that are oriented in a grid fashion. However,
some arterials and collectors, such as Huntington Road, are influenced by topography and
geographic influences — such as wetlands and the Little Deschutes River to the west.
U.S. Highway 97, which bisects the community, is under the jurisdiction of the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT). Efforts to signalize the highway/arterial
intersections to provide access to the City's industrial and commercial areas are currently
in the discussion stages. The City and the La Pine Industrial Group are working with
ODOT to fund and sponsor a highway corridor study that will lay the groundwork for the
necessary intersection improvements over the planning period. Once this work is
complete, it will be a major component of the future La Pine Transportation System Plan.
Future funding for new streets, street upgrades and street maintenance comes from a
variety of sources. A primary source for new street needs that is being explored by the
City is the collection of system development charges (SDC's). The establishment of
SDC's is an adopted goal of the City Council commensurate with the development of the
TSP in 2012. Other street needs, maintenance, and operation are funded from the General
Fund and/or a combination of alternate funding (grants, etc.) if and when available. In
very limited instances, new development has instigated street improvements necessary to
mitigate the impact of that development. However, new streets have been limited to
those within recently developed residential subdivisions. Because demands upon the
General Fund are expected to increase as a variety of City needs all compete for scarce
dollars, it is expected that new streets and street maintenance will mostly rely on new
development for funding and actual construction.
Water
The La Pine Water District has a water system capital facilities and water management
and conservation plan adopted in 2009. The plan identifies the current status of water
service in La Pine and also addresses needs for the next 20-years. Currently the District
maintains two wells, a 1.2 million gallon reservoir, a 250k gallon reservoir and pump
stations. The series of service lines provide service to 446 residential connections, 168
commercial connections and 17 industrial connections within the service area boundary.
However, this does not include connections to all potential users within the boundary.
Page 68
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The District utilizes groundwater to serve residents and maintains a system of water
rights and permits necessary for additional sources. Future growth needs are identified to
the 2033 horizon. It is anticipated that additional water rights, wells and water storage
facilities will be necessary to provide service to all existing unserved properties, as well
as to meet projected growth for planned development areas within the City. The HGE
Inc. study includes three levels of prioritized capital improvements necessary to provide
adequate water service to the community for the next 20-years and slightly beyond.
Currently user rates are charged to those who affect the water system and these fees are
used to maintain and upgrade the water system. System Development Charges (SDC's)
are collected and help offset the cost of master planned improvements. Lastly, loans
could be made available from a variety of sources and can be paid back from the fees and
SDC payments. However, such sources of funding can be limited and should not be
relied upon for all necessary improvements.
Sewer
The sewer collection system in La Pine was initiated in the 1980's with a significant
expansion in 2004 to serve the areas of Wickiup Junction and the Newberry
neighborhood (now both within the boundaries of La Pine) The system is comprised of a
combination of gravity and pressure lines that deliver sewage to the treatment plant on
the City's east side. Storm drainage is not collected in the sewer system.
In a wastewater system capital facilities plan adopted in 2006, the primary needs for
expansion and adequate operation of the system were identified. The primary need was
for an area to develop additional treatment facilities, including an area for effluent
disposal, adjacent to the existing wastewater treatment plant. Such plans were based on
projected growth of the community for the next 20-years.
Currently, user rates are charged to those who use the sewer system and these fees are
used to maintain and upgrade the system as necessary. The collection of water SDC
charges help offset the cost of master planned capital improvements. Lastly, loans and
grants could be possible to obtain from a variety of sources and can be paid back from the
fees and SDC payments. However, such sources of funding can be limited and should
not be relied upon for all necessary improvements.
Growth and Facility Demand
The anticipated growth is La Pine is approximately 1,000 persons over the next 20-years.
Existing water and sewer within the community will require expansion of facilities as
stated in the above referenced studies provided by the Special Districts. Based on those
studies though, it appears that the necessary improvements will not be outpaced by
growth demands in the community. However, new funding sources for the water and
sewer districts may be necessary. Additionally, it is essential that growth pay its own
way in order to avoid unnecessary impacts upon existing residents and quality of life.
Existing residents and those lands reserved and designated for public, commercial and
industrial development should be given priority for service over new residential uses.
This means that new development may need to supply an array of services ahead of the
Page 69
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City/County/State/Special District schedule and at their own cost, subject to City
approval and authorization before development.
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Coordinate intra-agency efforts, including coordination with private service
and Special District providers, and create a system of public facilities for the planning
horizon.
Policies
• Continued coordination with Deschutes County for the provision of certain public
services, such as law enforcement, waste management, and zoning/building
services, shall continue until such time as services can be converted to City
jurisdiction.
• The La Pine Rural Fire Protection District shall continue to provide fire protection
service within the City of La Pine.
• The City of La Pine shall actively coordinate with the Bend La Pine School
District and Central Oregon Community College on the need and options for
providing locations for new school facilities, if needed. Such coordination shall
be a high priority. This includes potential for reservation of public/private lands
for future school sites, and active coordination regarding the impact of new
development upon school capacity. The land use process for the development
approval of public schools shall be a priority and expedited to the greatest extent
possible.
• Local public and private plans for providing urban levels of services to all land with the
UGB must be comprehensive.
• Although many of the public facilities and services are not currently provided by
the City, the City shall taken an active role in coordinating and ensuring that such
services are adequate for existing residents and businesses without adverse effects
from anticipated future growth.
• The City shall explore the creation of water, sewer, and street Systems
Development Charges to help fund necessary master planned capital
improvements. This will require in-depth review and coordination with the
Special Districts as it relate to water and sewer SDC's.
• Schools shall not be charged City System Development Charges for any new or
expanded school or college construction.
Page 70
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• The City shall explore the conversion of privately owned services and facilities to
public ownership as necessary and economically viable to ensure long term
service and availability to the community.
• Providing needed services in an economically viable and effective manner is good
business and a good growth management tool.
• Plans providing for public facilities and services should be coordinated with plans
for designation of urban boundaries, land use and zoning designations,
surrounding urbanizable land and rural uses, and for the transition of rural land to
urban uses.
• Service providers other than the City of La Pine may be allowed to use the
surface, subsurface and air above City right of ways to provide necessary public
services provided that all applicable rules and regulations are adhered to. In no
event, shall these entities create a situation whereby the City must subsidize
activity or repair damage caused by other service providers.
• Public facility and service plans in the urban area should be developed to meet the
projected growth levels for the community.
• Public facilities and services should be provided at levels necessary and suitable
for existing uses. The provision for future public facilities and services should be
based upon: (1) the time required to provide the service; (2) reliability of service;
(3) financial cost; (4) levels of service needed and desired; and (5) economic
benefit to the community.
• All utility lines and facilities should be located on or adjacent to existing public or
private rights -of -way. Other locations may be approved if they are part of a
planned development or master plan.
• Plans providing for public facilities and services should consider as a major
determinant the carrying capacity of the air, land and water resources of the
planning area. The land conservation and development action provided for by
such plans should not exceed the carrying capacity of such resources.
• Because the area surrounding the City of La Pine is densely populated and
without sewer services, the expansion and use of the La Pine Sewer District sewer
collection and treatment facilities for such areas shall be pursued when State law
so permits.
Goal # 2: Create a system of conservation practices for public resources, services, and
related facilities.
Policies
Page 71
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
• Conservation practices and other techniques for sustaining limited resources and
facilities are beneficial to the community.
• Natural resources, such as clean air and water, energy sources, timber sources,
aggregate sources are limited in quality and supply.
• Alternative energy sources should be explored as a complement to existing
resources and industries and as a way for the City to reach an energy consumption
neutral status or better. Alternate energy sources may be developed on lots that
are already developed or on vacant lands that are being planned for other future
purposes such as the BLM land that is expected to be transferred to the City. This
land is anticipated to be used for wastewater treatment as the community grows.
La Pine is in an advantageous position as compared to other cities that do not
have an opportunity to plan long term for sewer expansion. Moreover, because
the City is interested in encouraging multiple uses/transitional uses on lands there
are greater efficiencies that can be derived from the large vacant acreages until it
is needed for wastewater treatment. For example, the BLM transfer land adjacent
to the wastewater plant could accommodate solar field arrays that create energy
for the community. And, because the land would need to be cleared anyway, this
also provides fuel reductions in the wildfire interface and needed materials for
bio-mass plants or other wood -based industries.
• Services such as public sewer collection facilities, public water sources, solid
waste disposal, other point of contact public services, and services related to
emergency response will need to be carefully managed to ensure supply and
duration.
• In order to sustain local services and resources over the life of the Plan, and
beyond, there should be a continued focus on improving efficiency.
• Land use regulations for new development and long range land use planning have
a direct connection to preserving and enhancing livability and the efficient
delivery of all public facilities and services.
• The La Pine community understands that making growth pay its own way is one
of many techniques that can sustain limited resources without resulting in
unnecessary subsidy from tax dollars.
• Local government and other agencies should set examples for the community by
adopting and utilizing sustainability practices.
• The La Pine community expects the local school and or college district and City
Planning officials will coordinate the location of new school/college sites and
implement strategies for multiple use spaces. The opportunity for reduced vehicle
usage at school/college campuses should be evaluated and implemented.
Page 72
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Even with prudent management and careful sustainability of resources, the La
Pine community understands that property taxes and current service fees
(including private district fees) may not be sufficient to provide the service levels
desired by the community. In some cases, new funding strategies, including the
establishment of new System Development Charges (the Special Districts already
implement water and sewer SDC programs) may be necessary.
V. PROGRAMS
The City shall:
1. Work with partner agencies in regularly updating the primary transportation,
sewer, and water master plans within the City. These master plans must examine
the desired service levels, infrastructure needs of the urban area, funding, and
implementation strategies. Additionally, the City shall work with public and
private agencies as applicable to establish and maintain level of service standards
for the following areas:
• Law Enforcement
• Fire Protection
• Emergency Medical Service
• Transportation
• Parks and Recreation
• Natural Open Space
• Public Buildings
• Water System
• Sewer System
• Storm water System
• Solid Waste Management
• Schools/Colleges
• Utilities
• Libraries
2. Provide the leadership in coordination efforts among the various agencies and
entities that provide public services to the community. This may require the
imposition of franchise agreements and special protocols and fees for using public
right of ways.
3. Identify specific capital facilities projects for the City and for other agencies that
may benefit from coordinating with the City. Prioritize capital improvement
projects based on a series of criteria; identify project costs and likely funding
sources; relate projected improvements to forecast demand on services; identify
current and proposed levels of service for each public service; and, establish a
Page 73
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
siting process for the location of essential public facilities, including property
acquisition needs.
4. Develop a concurrency requirement that new development demonstrate the
adequate provision of public services or provide for impact mitigation, including
providing appropriate infrastructure and public services as a condition of
development.
5. Encourage communication and cooperation between the school/college district,
developers, and the public. The local development codes and regulations shall
require the development of neighborhoods in close proximity to school locations.
6. Continue to work with BLM to acquire lands near the sewer treatment plant.
7. Develop methods to support the addition of alternate energy sources within the
community.
Conservation:
1. Develop a sustainability program for all City functions, services, and products.
The plan shall identify goals and levels of conservation necessary for the planning
horizon. Such goals shall have measurable outcomes and be monitored on a
regular basis to insure proper management and effectiveness.
2. Adopt land use regulations (with a new Development Code) that require citizens
to conserve water and reduce excessive irrigation of plant materials.
3. Develop air quality standards and monitor all air emissions into the community.
4. Develop an energy source and use evaluation plan. Implement measures to
reduce energy consumption and unnecessary lighting.
5. Promote the creation of energy efficient structures and sustainable building
practices. Requirements on specific architectural styles and materials may be
necessary in order to reduce heating and cooling costs; a major part of local
energy output.
6. Coordinate with Deschutes County on the supply and anticipated life of aggregate
resources necessary to support development. Regulations to permit onsite rock
crushing and extraction may be necessary to properly implement such programs.
7. Develop a study to monitor non -sewage infiltration of the community sewage
system. Industrial discharge permits may be needed to adequately reduce
negative effects of large volume discharges into the sewer system.
Page 74
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
8. Storm drainage plans shall not permit drainage to enter the public sewage
collection system to the greatest extent practical.
9. Institute recycling program requirements aimed at reuse and reduction of solid
waste. This may require implementation of, and changes to local garbage hauler
franchise or license agreements.
10. Coordinate landfill needs and other operations with Deschutes County.
11. Examine and develop strategies for maximizing capacity of transportation
systems before street widening.
12. Examine the actual cost of service for each service provided to the public. A
cost/benefit analysis shall be developed in order to ascertain proper allocation of
funding resources and or reduction/expansion of City services and programs.
13. Examine emergency service needs and funding necessary to provide adequate
services levels throughout the community over the planning horizon. Land use
regulations that examine potential for efficient delivery of emergency services
will need to be incorporated into implementation codes.
14. Recognize that community development services are necessary to implement
local land use regulations and long term planning needs. The City shall examine
the potential for a partially fee supported current development department and
General Fund support for long range planning functions.
References:
1. Wastewater System capital Facilities Plan, La Pine Special Sewer District,
Deschutes County, Oregon - January 2006 (HGE Inc.)
2. Water System Capital facilities Plan and Water Management and
Conservation Plan, La Pine Water District, Deschutes County, Oregon —
January 2009 — Draft (HGE Inc.)
3. La Pine Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan - Summer 2005
(GEL Oregon Inc.; J.T Atkins & Company PC)
4. Bend -La Pine Schools 2005 Sites and Facilities Plan — December 5, 2005
5. Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan — December 13, 2005
(Kate Lighthall)
Page 75
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 8
Transportation
I. State Planning Goal 12, Transportation
Oregon State Planning Goal 12 requires local governments "to provide and encourage a
safe, convenient and economic transportation system." When referring to "transportation
system" the goal requires that all modes of transportation be considered — including mass
transit, air, water, pipeline, rail, highway, bicycle and pedestrian. Further, the goal
requires that the local, regional and state transportation needs be considered and that they
be done so through appropriate combinations of the modes listed above rather than
reliance on any one particular method of transportation. Transportation systems must be
coordinated with local Comprehensive Plans — including the development of a specific
Transportation System Plan (TSP) that is in conformance with the State Transportation
Planning Rule (TPR) — Oregon Administrative Rule 660-012. In 2012-2013, a TSP will
be developed for the City of La Pine. The TSP will address the requirements of capital
facilities planning for transportation amenities and funding. Until the TSP is complete,
the following discussion is limited to the area with the historic Unincorporated Urban
Area (UUA). These areas have been previously planned for urban transportation services
as part of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan.
The areas outside of the UUA were not part of previous urban -level transportation
planing, and so will retain existing County land use designations until the La Pine TSP
is adopted and incorporated into this Comprehensive Plan. Once the TSP is adopted and
incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, the areas outside of the historic UUA will be
designated with urban levels of use and will governed by the City's Plans.
II. Purpose and Intent
This chapter generally addresses the existing conditions of La Pine's short and long-term
transportation needs. The TSP will provide further detail on the community's
transportation needs for the next 20 years. Overall, the road system is the backbone of the
overall transportation system in La Pine and will be the basis for much of the transportation
planning discussed herein. The emerging transportation needs of La Pine will be
coordinated with the Oregon Department of Transportation and Deschutes County to
ensure an efficient and smooth transition of transportation facilities between the rural to
urbanizing areas, as well as accommodating ODOT's jurisdiction over US Highway 97
within the urban area. In addition to local needs, the TSP will also consider regional and
state needs to achieve a balanced transportation system that includes automobile, bicycle,
rail, transit, air, pedestrian and pipeline facilities.
This chapter addresses issues and ideas related to circulation and the interaction between
transportation and land use. Bike lanes, sidewalks, trail connections, future transit
Page 76
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
expansions, transportation demand management, and transportation system management
will be considered for all new and enhanced transportation systems. Each new
development must consider the impact of the development upon these systems and
provide incremental mitigation for impacts as deemed warranted through the review
process. The arrangement of land uses and desired development patterns should focus on
supporting and increasing alternate modes of transportation, especially as complete
neighborhoods are developed (neighborhoods containing a mix of residential and
employment lands, with public services such as schools and parks) and more services
become available in the community. The goal is to move the city toward alternate mode
use as an alternative for those who do not wish to drive a car and as an alternative to
excessive vehicle miles traveled as a way to deter sprawl.
III. Issues
As described above, the issues explored in this chapter are not intended to serve as a TSP
as required by the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) — OAR 660-012. Rather, the
issues addressed in the Comprehensive Plan provide a snapshot of existing conditions and
generally identify future needs, with goals and policies aimed at directing transportation
planning activities to bring the 20-year needs to fruition. . Until the TSP is complete,
the following discussion is limited to the area with the historic Unincorporated Urban
Area (UUA). These areas have been previously planned for urban transportation services
as part of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan.
The areas outside of the UUA were not part of previous urban -level transportation
planning, and so will retain existing County land use designations until the La Pine TSP
is adopted and incorporated into this Comprehensive Plan. Once the TSP is adopted and
incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, the areas outside of the historic UUA will be
designated with urban levels of use and will governed by the City's Plans.
Existine Road System:
Until the recent incorporation of La Pine, Deschutes County was responsible for road
maintenance, construction and design within what is now the urban area. Many of the
primary roads within the community extend beyond the City limits and become rural
county roads still under the jurisdiction of Deschutes County. Thus, the County
Comprehensive Plan and Transportation System Plan all address the road network in La
Pine and have designated streets by general classification to include: Highway/Principal
Arterial, Arterial, Collector and Local Street. The street classifications are described in
the following chart (as listed in the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan).
Urban Street Types
Principal
Arterial:
Serves the major activity centers in a metropolitan area, and also serves the highest traffic corridors and satisfies the longest trip desires; and
Carries the major portion of trips entering and leaving the urban area, as well as the majority of the through traffic desiring to bypass the city
Arterial:
Provides service to trips of moderate length at a somewhat lower level of travel mobility than principal arterials; and
Distributes travel togeographic areas smaller than those served byprincipal arterials, while not penetrating specific neighborhoods; and
Spacing varies from 1/2 to 1 mile in downtown areas, to 2 to 3 miles in areas outside downtown.
Page 77
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
Collector:
Provides both land access and traffic circulation within residential neighborhoods, commercial, and industrial areas; and
Distributes trips from arterials through these areas to their final destination, and conversely, collects traffic from local streets and channels it
onto arterials
Local:
Provides access to adjacent land and access to higher classified roads: and
Provides lowest level of travel mobility including no bus routes; and
Normally carries less than 1.700 vehicles per day,
The foundation of the La Pine transportation system is a product of the existing roads and
highways that cross the community. The basic grid is framed by the following primary
roadways (with the street designation listed) which provide access among various parts of
the community:
East-West Alignments
• Cagle Road - Local
• Burgess Road - Arterial
• Rosland Road - Local
• 1st Street/Reed Road - Collector
• 3rd Street - Local
• 4th Street/William Foss Road — Local
• Finley Butte Road - Collector
• 6th Street - Local
North -South Alignments
• US Highway 97 (The Dalles-California Highway) —
Highway/Principal Arterial
• Huntington Road - Collector
• Mitts Way - Local
Although not all the streets listed above are Arterial or Collector streets, all of these
streets provide the basic alignments and connectivity throughout the community. Other
local roads aid in forming the internal grid serving the existing neighborhoods and outer
areas. Overall, the historic development pattern for neighborhoods in La Pine is
comprised of gridded streets. The relatively level topography presents the opportunity
for a continuation of this pattern, building from the primary streets listed above.
However, as is evident from the list of primary streets included above, additional
north/south running streets, including arterials and collectors will be needed in the future.
Currently, only Highway 97 and Huntington Road provide the sole north/south access
from one end of town to the other.
The primary streets listed above are paved, some with sidewalks (in the area around
Huntington Road and 1st Street), but few with curbs and drainage facilities. There are no
delineated bike lanes. In most areas, pedestrians and bicyclists share the roadway or
shoulder with automobiles.
Page 78
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
U.S. Highway 97 bisects the City from north to south and, while serving as a direct
transportation link between northern and southern portions of the City, it also creates an
obstacle to east -west travel by any mode. Currently, intersections of Highway 97 at
Burgess Road (Wickiup Junction); 1st Street/Reed Road; 4th Street/William Foss Road;
and Finley Butte Road are all heavily congested and experience failure during certain
segments of the day. Improvements to these intersections to increase capacity, improve
safety and allow east -west crossing are necessary in the near future. Because Highway 97
is under the jurisdiction of ODOT, all improvements must be coordinated with that
agency. Potential improvements and solutions to existing problems are discussed in the
"Road Improvements" section below.
Many of the existing streets in the residential neighborhoods (Local Streets) in the
northern part of La Pine have unimproved (not paved) streets. Such streets are graded
gravel and/or compacted dirt — there are no curbs, sidewalks or drainage facilities.
Maintenance of these streets, such as filling potholes and dust control measures, have
been lacking in the past as Deschutes County does not typically maintain streets built to
these standards and the City of La Pine has had limited funds for such maintenance.
Such streets are not conducive to effective pedestrian and bicycle travel.
Road Improvements:
Public health and safety, as well as efficiency, are the primary design goals of all
transportation elements. As street design standards are developed in the TSP,
requirements for bicycle lanes, drainage facilities and pedestrian facilities must be
included, especially along Arterial and Collector Streets. Such designs will improve
street capacity
apaLity and
encourage use
of alternate modes by all
citizens.
.
As discussed above, the primary vehicular transportation problems in La Pine are
associated with Highway 97. Over the past few years ODOT has been working with the
community on developing plans for an improved interchange at the Highway 97/Burgess
Road intersection (Wickiup Junction). Such improvements will alleviate safety and
access issues in that immediate area. This study will examine all of the primary
intersections with Highway 97 and suggest necessary improvements, including the timing
for such improvements. All of this is in an effort to correct problems of failure at
intersections such as lst Street/Reed Road, and allow better east/west travel and
connectivity between residential and employment areas.
Maintenance:
A primary concern for many of La Pines residents is street maintenance — particularly
maintenance of unimproved/unpaved streets. During the wet winter months these streets
can become pot -holed and muddy — which leads to hazardous travel conditions. During
the dry summer months, dust generated from vehicular travel can impact the livability of
neighboring properties. The City plans to institute a regular street maintenance program
that will eventually result in more permanent surfaces (such as a chip sealed or oil mat
surface, with asphalt paving as a long term goal).
Alternative Modes of Transportation:
Page 79
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Bicycles:
A lack of developed routes combined with long block lengths inhibit safe and efficient
bicycle travel in La Pine.. There are currently no designated bicycle lanes along the
Arterial or Collector streets in La Pine. Bicyclists must share the vehicular travel lands
with automobiles. New development standards which require bicycle lanes along the
curb of Arterial Streets and certain collector streets that provide access to public services
and facilities will be developed as part of the TSP.
Pedestrians:
Sidewalks have been developed in and around the intersection of 1st Street and
Huntington Road. These facilities provide a separate pedestrian refuge and allow safe
access to the businesses, schools and public facilities in that immediate area. However,
due to the lack of extension of sidewalks or trails in other parts of the community, safe
and efficient access between residential areas and other employment areas is difficult.
The lack of pedestrian crossings along major streets, particularly near schools, and
activity centers, present hazards to citizens. New development standards which require
sidewalks along streets and trails where appropriate will be developed as part of the TSP.
Transit:
A public transit (bus) system provides service in and around the urban area. Residents
can be picked up at designated locations and transported within the urban area. This
same service is also a regional bus service operated by the Central Oregon
Intergovernmental Council. Transit provides an alternative to driving for residents of
LaPine that travel north for work and shopping in Bend and beyond. Additionally, there
ride lot Wickiup Junction which ♦ - available.
is a park and at Junction from the transit service is avaliavi�,.
Long Range Transportation Planning:
A requirement of the State Planning System is the development of a Transportation
System Plan (TSP. The TSP will be based upon the needs of the community and the
requirements to meet the State of Oregon Transportation Planning Rule. Elements of the
TSP include: developing functional classifications of roads; road and street design
standards; establishing levels of service; developing alternative modes; transportation
demand management, capital facilities planning; and, funding for improvements.
Air and Rail:
There are currently no air travel facilities in La Pine. The closest private airstrip is
located in the community of Sunriver, approximately 15 miles to the north. The closest
commercial airport is Roberts Field in Redmond, approximately 50 miles to the north.
The idea of a local airport providing service to small, privately owned aircraft has been
discussed by community members, but formal plans have not been developed. It has
been acknowledged that an airstrip in La Pine would increase accessibility to the area and
could make the community more attractive for businesses and recreationists. However,
locating such a facility within the City limits would interfere with other public facility
needs.
Page 80
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
A Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line runs on the east side of and parallel to Highway
97 through most of the community. However, there are no stops or passenger service
provided directly to/from La Pine. The closest passenger rail stop is in the community of
Chemult, approximately 30 miles to the south.
Pipelines:
A primary natural gas pipeline that runs from Washington to California, which provides
gas service to many areas all along the west coast, runs north/south through La Pine, east
of and parallel to Highway 97. The pipeline lies within an easement that is generally 100
to 200 feet wide so as to prevent damage a major disruption. There are no plans for
removal or alteration of this pipeline.
Transportation Facility Funding:
Local community leaders and citizens expect that new growth will pay its way, without
the need for existing residents to subsidize new development projects. The
Transportation Planning Rule requires that cities plan for the impacts of new
development on the transportation system. The goal is to make sure that needed
transportation facilities are either in place, funded, or other acceptable mitigation
provided before development is authorized to proceed.
The adoption and imposition of System Development Charges (SDC's) is one option that
will be explored in the TSP to help pay for needed transportation infrastructure to add
capacity to the system. The increasing operational and material costs for facility
improvements, limited construction time periods, and the conflicting demands of regional
versus local traffic (on Highway 97) will make La Pine more heavily reliant on
l directly growth.
to solve problems that are tied to new
The City's budget is not adequate to resolve existing transportation project needs. Other
sources of money will be required in order to build the system as necessary to support
existing development as well as future growth. Existing problems create complex
funding issues since the State of Oregon mandates certain limitations on the expenditure
of. Thus, the community will have to rely on special levies, limited general fund
revenues, the State's funding for highway maintenance and other revenue sources for
improvements to address existing transportation needs.
Wickiup Junction Improvement Area
The area identified on the Comprehensive Plan map as the Wickiup Junction
Improvement Area is in a state of transition as major improvements to this existing
Highway/Arterial intersection are planned. The potential improvements include a
complete grade separated interchange aimed at improving the overall long-term function
and safety of the junction. The surrounding land uses include a variety of primarily
service commercial uses, with residential uses close by. Because of the incomplete
designs for the eventual improvements, and the unknown effects on surrounding
properties (meaning just which properties will be physically affected by the road
alignment, as well as by the changes to the traffic pattern), the area is identified as an area
in which future land use designation may change. Once the final alignment is known, the
Page 81
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City will conduct a re-examination of the highest and best land uses within the designated
area, including possible master planning,.
Specific Wickiup Junction Improvement Area Policies
I . Upon final design and adoption of the Highway 97/Burgess Road interchange
design within the area labeled Wickiup Junction Improvement Area on the
Comprehensive Plan Map, to the City will review and revise the existing Plan
designations and zoning in the area to reflect the highest and best land uses
(designations) on the properties within the boundary.
2. Planning efforts within the Wickiup Junction Improvement Area shall
coordinate access to surrounding properties with local, state and county
transportation facilities as appropriate, and may include a master planning
process.
IV. General Transportation Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Create a safe, convenient, balanced, functional and economical transportation
system to maximize and extend the life of transportation facilities and improve livability
throughout the La Pine community.
Policies
General Street Transportation Network Policies
• The city recognizes that muter vehicle use is currently the primary form of
transportation for the majority of La Pines citizens, but also recognizes that
increased alternate mode use is essential to the livability of the community and to
preserve valuable resources.
• The City's top transportation priority is the safe and efficient provision of
emergency services.. .
• The City shall support efficient and effective freight transportation consistent with
the City's economic plans and policies.
• The City recognizes that a functional Highway 97 is essential to the regional as
well as the local economy, and will balance the needs of the local community
with regional transportation needs in cooperation with residents, local business
interests, state agencies, Deschutes County, and special interest groups.
The City will continue coordination with Deschutes County for transportation
planning services until the TSP is developed and planning services are provided by
the City.
Page 82
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Alternate mode use is essential for providing a full complement of transportation
choices and that land use regulations need to require an analysis of transportation
impacts, needs, and mitigation options.
• The City recognizes that the proper function of Highway 97 to and through the
community contributes to the local economy and therefore will collaborate with
ODOT to protect that function.
• The City will balancing the needs of the local community, including the state,
county, local business interests, special interest groups, and tourism professionals,
with regional transportation needs in its decisions..
• The City will continue to participate in discussions with regional partners (Cities
and Counties) through organizations such as COACT and COCO to find solutions
to regional transportation issues.
• The City shall continue efforts to complete the Highway 97 Corridor Study
through La Pine to determine future improvements at key intersections to
facilitate acceptable intersection function, safe and efficient highway crossings,
and increased access to the industrial area on the east side.
• The City will implement traffic calming measures in core commercial areas and
residential neighborhoods as necessary to reduce vehicular speeds on roadways
and create a safer travel environment.
• The City will continuously monitor transportation problems through
comprehensive planning and regular analysis
• The City recognizes that the community benefits from transportation systems that
provide sidewalks, trails, bike lanes and transit amenities to encourage alternate
mode use and promote a high level of livability.
• Recognizing that the City has limited funds to use for the maintenance of public
streets, the City will continue to pursue innovative methods for financing
increased street maintenance, including resurfacing as necessary of unpaved
streets.
• The City recognizes that the ability development of private streets systems, where
appropriate and where they are guaranteed to be maintained by parties other than
the City, will reduce the overall funding need for street maintenance and the need
to seek additional tax revenues from citizens. The City recognizes private streets
as legitimate components of the transportation system when designed properly
and maintained to at least City standards.
Page 83
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• The City will utilize transportation demand management (TDM) and
transportation system management (TSM) techniques as a method of reducing the
impacts of new projects on the transportation system.
• The City will include street trees, pedestrian faculties, separated sidewalks; curb
extensions, traffic calming, and other related design elements where appropriate.
• The City of La Pine believes that a City representative shall participate with the
Transportation Advisory Group for the specific purpose of analyzing the need for
an airport in the La Pine Area. The representative shall be appointed by the City
Council and will have specific knowledge of airport needs and operations.
• When the final designs and plans for the Wickiup Junction interchange (Highway
97 and Burgess Road intersection) have been completed, designations for lands
within the area labeled Wickiup Junction Improvement Area on the Plan map may
be revised by the City..
Transit Policies
The City shall:
• Encourage private efforts to supply forms of inter and intra city transit to the
commuter.
• Cooperate with COIC and Commute Options to increase opportunities for access
to transit, park and ride lots and ride share.
• In cooperation with COIC, the City will provide adequate facilities to allow for
safe operation of mass transportation vehicles.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Policies
The City shall:
• Require bike lanes and sidewalks as a part of all new collectors and arterials.
•
• Require that all proposed subdivisions include bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
integrated with other bicycle and pedestrian path systems within the City.
• Insure that bicycle and pedestrian paths are well lit and designed for the security
of the user..
Page 84
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Require all proposed activity centers to provide safe and convenient off-street
bicycle parking space and routes in their design.
• Insure neighborhoods and activity centers, including public loading and pickup
areas, are served by pedestrian and bicycle routes.
• Require paving of pedestrian and bicycle ways where appropriate.
• Require MUTCD signs, markings, and safety features on bicycle and pedestrian
paths.
• The City recognizes that an airport (privately owned or public) would be a strong
economic driver for the la Pine area. Efforts to explore the creation of an airport
shall be supported by the City, but shall not be the obligation of the City.
Goal # 2: Develop a supportable and sustainable financing method for funding necessary
transportation system master plan improvements over the life of the Plan
Policies:
Funding Policies
• The City will develop a prudent and realistic financing plan, including a funding
of transportation projects and their funding needs,
analysis the recommended ------r-------- projects
funding resources, and a multiple -year financing plan that can support the
development of needed TSP facilities for the life of the plan.
The City will continue to seek alternate funding sources to enable the community to
receive grants, implement a CIP, and maintain existing infrastructure. Alternative funding
sources may include levies, increased taxes, local improvement districts, grants, franchise
fees, tax increment financing, bonds, and other typical and atypical sources necessary for
the full implementation of the TSP and maintenance functions.
V. Programs
The City shall:
I. Develop and adopt a Transportation System Plan (TSP), which inventories and
analyzes the existing transportation system, and recommends capital
improvements to the entire transportation system as required by Oregon
Administrative Rules. The City shall recognize that uses on lands that were not
part of the former UUC before incorporation cannot be intensified until the City
adopts a TSP. These lands must retain their current County zoning until the TSP
Page 85 Adopted 12/12/2018
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
is adopted. Once the TSP is adopted the City may rezone lands that have County
zoning designations to urban designations.
2. Develop Transportation System Development Charges (SDC's) to provide
funding for capital improvements projects to add capacity to the transportation
system.
3. Inventory and prioritize needed alternate mode improvements and project timing
of implementation.
4. Inventory and prioritize funding alternatives (other than SDC's) necessary to
implement the needed capital improvements.
5. Work with Deschutes County and ODOT to monitor the transportation system for
effectiveness and describe any needed improvements for the upcoming fiscal year
to the City Council every 12 months, prior to the budgeting process.
6. Coordinate discussions with local and state agencies, Deschutes County, local
business interests, special interest groups, and tourism professionals about the
performance of the transportation system and collect feedback for use in TSP
development, capital improvement prioritization and budgeting programs.
7. Coordinate all transportation projects with emergency service and special district
providers, such as, Fire, Sheriff, Water and Sewer Districts.
8. Establish a SDC methodology that generates fees and refund programs for
individuals and entities that construct a TSP master planned transportation
improvement
9. Add a financing element to the TSP and develop a listing of priorities for the
anticipated transportation improvement projects for the transportation systems.
The financing element shall highlight these improvement projects by giving
project descriptions, anticipated year of project initiation, and associated costs and
funding sources..
10. Develop mitigation strategies aimed at resolving the impact of new development
impacts upon the transportation system. This should include the application of
SDC's and/or other techniques to make sure development "pays its own way."
Incremental mitigation strategies that include a pro rata share of needed
improvements are a preferred method to ensure fairness.
Page 86
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 9
Economy
I. State Planning Goal 9, Economic Development
Oregon State Planning Goal 9 requires local jurisdictions to plan for and provide
adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare and
prosperity of its citizens. In doing so, an analysis of the local economy must be
generated. The analysis is based on the current economic conditions and trends of the
community, combined with the physical capabilities of the community to support a
variety of businesses and industries. The analysis provides a snapshot of the current
state of the local economy and a prediction of what is needed and can be supported in the
future. The overall intent is to ensure that there are adequate lands and infrastructure for
new business and industry, as well as identifying any obstacles. The end result is an
economic planning tool that aids the local governing body in creating incentives and
opportunities for businesses to thrive, and to enable the private sector plan for economic
and efficient growth.
II. Purpose and Intent
La Pine's focus on economic development is a key component of its vision to be a
"complete" community. As previously discussed in other Plan chapters, the concept of
creating a complete community begins with providing enough jobs, education, services,
and industry to sustain the community without heavy reliance upon other nearby cities
such as Bend and Redmond.
Goal 9 of Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines pertains to economic
development. This goal calls for diversification and improvement of the economy. It
requires La Pine to inventory its supply of commercial and industrial lands, project future
needs for such lands, and plan and zone enough land to meet those needs. La Pine is
required, by law, to provide at least a 20-year supply of commercial and industrial land
and commensurate infrastructure. The goal also requires that comprehensive plans shall
"include an analysis oldie community's economic patterns, potentialities, strengths, and
deficiencies as they relate to state and national trends."
Page 87
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Aerial view of the Highway 97 La Pine commercial corridor
III. Issues
Inventory Snapshot - Overall assessments of the current inventories suggest that while
La Pine has vacant industrial lands in 2010 there is a need to plan for additional
expansion to the industrial area. Likewise, with the emphasis on creating "complete
neighborhoods" it is necessary to define additional commercial service centers that can
serve the three primary neighborhoods that define the La Pine community. It is generally
understood that when the supply of economic lands are constrained, land prices
unnecessarily increase and this could reduce La Pine's chances at attracting business.
Thus, a healthy supply of industrial, commercial, and mixed -use lands is necessary for to
meet employment demand over the 20-year planning period. The city's own studies and
other agency data show that most of the 20 year supply of land can be derived from lands
within the current City limits by conversion of Farm lands and mixed -use development
techniques.
Page 88
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
La Pine Stats at a Glance
La Pine, Oregon
Elevation:
4300'
Population (July 2009)
1,662
Median Resident Age
44.7
Estimated Median Hh Income (2007)
$21,000
Median single family home price (YTD thru Dec 2008)
$120,000
Average household size
2.57
Property Tax Rate 2007/2008
$13.8339 per $1000 assessed value (for the industrial park)
Assessed Value 2008
$126,232,993
Telecommunications lnfrastmcture
BendBroadband, Qwest, Crestview Cable, Chambers Cable
Major Employers
JResort,
Rays Grocery Stores, MidState Electric Coop, Utilities, Sunriver
Governmental Agencies
Top 5 Deschutes County Taxpayers in 2008-09 (in order)
Cascade Natural Gas Corp., Qwest Corp., Gas Transmission
Northwest Corp., PacifiCorp (PP&L), Pronghorn Investors LLC
In conformance with Goal 9, the City conducted and updated a Buildable Lands
Analysis2 in order to evaluate land availability and market trends. Other studies/data
were also used to determine land supply and long-term land needs. These, along with the
updated buildable lands inventory, provide good data sets from which to derive
assumptions about economic land needs. Local and regional experts have also supplied
the city with information about other economic factors that affect La Pine. The findings
derived from the Buildable Lands Analysis and other studies were used to address the key
factors of Goal 9 identified above. The bulk of these data sets are located in the
appendix.
The City and private groups should continue their efforts to implement
programs to help new businesses locate easily in La Pine.
Understanding the City's economic assets will also be a key task in analyzing the existing
and future economy. Land use planning, permitting processes, infrastructure
development and related efforts of the City will influence future business development.
Coordination with local business groups such as LIGI3, the Chamber of Commerce,
ODOT, Economic development For Central Oregon, and the La Pine Sewer and Water
Districts will be essential to identifying what type of development enhancement and
infrastructure is necessary to support desired industries.
2
The analysis has been updated as needed to reflect actual land absorption, City Council policy, and other
relevant inventory monitoring factors.
3 The La Pine Industrial Park is 327-acres owned by Deschutes County, Oregon, developed and managed
by the non-profit La Pine Industrial Group, Inc. (LIGI)
Page 89
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
IV. La Pine's Key Economic Features
Top reasons why La Pine is desirable for economic development
Access, Location, Supply, and Leadership
The City of La Pine is a small community 35 minutes south of Bend, along the Highway
97 corridor, a vital link to the Willamette Valley and other metropolitan areas. The
location of the community and proximity/distance from other urban areas will continue to
be somewhat of an obstacle for new businesses and industries that rely on speedy
shipping and proximity to support services in Bend, Redmond, Portland -Metro and the I-
5 Corridor. However, the charm of the area, quality of life, progressive industrial and
commercial development strategies, supportive business and government leadership
along with a ready supply of available land and labor at lower costs, will continue to
be the key elements that can help overcome the business advantages that larger urban
areas provide.
Labor Force
La Pine offers a pleasing alternative for people and businesses looking to locate in places
other than Bend, Sunriver, and Redmond. With many ready -to -go commercial and
development sites available at prices that are very competitive, La Pine also provides a
variety of home site options, typically with larger acreages on flat, wooded areas. A
majority of new residential building permits in unincorporated Deschutes County have
been issued in the La Pine area. Estimates for the greater La Pine area (south of Sunriver
and north of the Klamath County line) are between 15,000 and 16,000 residents — making
it potentially the second largest population "center" in the Central Oregon region. The
population estimate for zip code 97739 in 2007 was 9,421 residents. Portland State
University's Population Research Center estimated in July 2008 that the incorporated
town of La Pine had 1,610 residents. Thus, there is a large labor pool within the
community of La Pine. Companies in the La Pine area draw from the labor force of
Deschutes County and northern Klamath County, which includes more than 60,000
workers. Work force training is available locally in most occupation specialties. Local
economic development efforts are available to assist firms in obtaining qualified workers
through contacts with labor training agencies.
Taxes and Rates
Oregon does not have a sales tax. The Worker's Compensation rate is below the national
average. The state income tax ranges from 5-9%, depending on the level of taxable
income. La Pine enjoys the lowest property tax rates in Central Oregon and the lowest
electric power rates.
Regional Incentives
Several incentive programs are available from state and local governments, as well as
federal loan and grant programs for qualified companies. The La Pine Industrial Park is
Page 90
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
327-acres owned by Deschutes County, Oregon, developed and managed by the non-
profit La Pine Industrial Group, Inc. (LIGI). The 1st phase of 130 acres was sold out in
2001.
Natural Gas
Cascade Natural Gas Company supplies the La Pine Industrial Park. The main
transmission line of Pacific Gas Transmission Pipeline Company runs along the eastern
boundary of the industrial park, carrying natural gas from production fields in Alberta,
Canada, to California.
Water
The La Pine Industrial Park is fully serviced by water provided by the La Pine Water
District. The District's wells are located in the foothills of the Paulina Mountains and
produce high quality water at pressures to meet fire codes.
Wastewater
The La Pine Sewer District services the industrial park. Its primary treatment and
distribution facility is located just north of Reed Road, the northern boundary of the
industrial park.
Telecommunications
Qwest provides telephone services to the industrial park. Fiber optic lines and digital
switching assure modern, high-speed data transmission capabilities as well as voice
communications. There are several Internet service providers with local access
connections.
Air Service
La Pine is 45 miles south of the Redmond Airport, an all-weather facility with control
tower and multiple instrument approaches. Horizon Air and United Express offer non-
stop service between Redmond and Portland, Seattle, and San Francisco. Sunriver
Airport, 15 miles north of La Pine, has a 5,500-ft. runway with an instrument approach,
accommodating private aircraft up to medium-sized corporate jets. Citizens and City
Council have discussed the need for a local airport. Early studies reviewed placement of
a facility within the City limits. However, through the public process that occurred
during the formation of the Comprehensive Plan it was determined that a local airport
should be outside of the City limits. Issues that lead to this decision included potential
conflict with the wastewater treatment plant, wildlife conflicts, and urban expansion
needs over the 20 year planning horizon. The City Council agreed that a citizen
committee should be developed to further research the issue on alternate airport locations.
Railroad
A main north/south line of the Burlington Northern -Santa Fe Railroad runs through the
La Pine Industrial Park, with service to individual sites and common loading facilities.
Recent Development — an excerpt from EDCO — Economic Development for Central
Oregon
Page 91
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Fitting with its pioneering spirit, La Pine and its surrounding area has become a hub of activity for the
renewable energy industry. The city boasts the first gold LEED certified building east of the Cascade
Mountains, Midstate Electric Cooperative, and with the completion of Little Deschutes Lodge Retirement
Center, will have the first platinum LEED building — the highest certification available. Recent interest and
implementation of renewable energy projects including geothermal, biomass and solar have made La Pine
the potential hub for renewable energy technology.
The commercial area of La Pine has several sizeable developments underway or recently completed
including a new multi -million dollar senior/assisted living facility, elementary school, and several new
commercial/retail businesses. Community leaders in the La Pine area have also been working diligently on
development of municipal services including a community water and sewer system. As a result, the area's
new industrial park and surrounding areas have water provided by a new well, distribution system and
250,000 gallon storage reservoir managed by La Pine Water District. Sewer services are also
available, provided by the La Pine Sewer District,
These efforts have been well timed with the development of the area's business "drawing card," the La
Pine Industrial Park. This newer, fully serviced park offers flat and "rock -less" buildable lots from '% acre
to 40 + acres. The park also has the advantage of easy access to both the Burlington Northern — Santa Fe
Railroad mainline as well as U.S. Hwy 97, which connects with 1-5 to the south in California, 1-84 in
northern Oregon, and 1-90 in central Washington.
Currently available are several 0.43-acre lots in the Newberry Business Park on Reed Road, and 17 lots
ranging from 1 - 3 acres in the Finley Butte Industrial Park south of the new Midstate Electric Coop
headquarters. There is also a 78-acre parcel certified by the State of Oregon as "shovel ready" that is
being reserved for a large rail user.
LIGI — La Pine Industrial Group, Inc. - can provide a range of site options including fully -serviced ready -
to -build lots, build -to -suit facilities for purchase or lease, and multi -tenant space for lease. Financing can
also be arranged for qualified companies.
Key Industrial Areas —The vision of LIGI
Led by community -based LIGI — the La Pine Industrial Group, Inc., efforts to develop
three county -owned parcels east of the highway into industrial and business park sites are
opening eyes in the Central Oregon business community. As development spreads from
rapidly growing Bend outward, newly incorporated La Pine is high on the list of
communities ripe for investment and development opportunities. Water and sewer
districts have brought municipal services to the community core. In 2008, the City of La
Pine was designated as an enterprise zone by the State of Oregon. This allows qualified
companies to forego paying property taxes for 3 to 5 years. La Pine is located on US Hwy
97, the primary route between California and the Canadian border on the east side of the
Cascades. Hwy 97 has been designated as an Expressway by the Oregon Department of
Transportation and will be upgraded to four lanes between California and Washington. It
connects with I-5 in northern California, I-84 in northern Oregon, and I-90 in central
Washington. Three major highway routes link La Pine with Eugene, Salem, Portland, and
other Willamette Valley cities. Electricity is provided by Midstate Electric Cooperative
headquartered in La Pine. Midstate is a preferred customer of the Bonneville Power
Administration, giving it first right to low cost, federally owned hydro -electric resources
and a significant cost advantage to new firms locating in its service area.
The La Pine Industrial Park
Page 92
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The La Pine Industrial Park consists of three segments: The Newberry Business Park,
Finley Butte Industrial Park and an 80-acre, shovel -ready, certified site. Development of
the 327-acre La Pine Industrial Park is a cooperative effort undertaken by the land -owner
Deschutes County and the La Pine Industrial Group, Inc. a non-profit organization. LIGI
can provide a range of site options including fully -serviced ready -to -build lots, build -to -
suit facilities for purchase or lease, and multi -tenant space for lease. Financing can also
be arranged for qualified companies.
Newberry Business Park
Newberry Business Park is owned by Deschutes County and is developed and marketed
by the La Pine Industrial Group, Inc., a 501(c)(3) non-profit civic organization in La
Pine. Newberry Business Park opened in 2002 with 40 acres of developed sites. All
utilities are installed underground. NBP is designed to provide an attractive environment
for light industrial firms and protection of property values. It has its own zoning
ordinance and CC&R's. Lot sizes range from 0.4 acres (18,760 sq. ft.) to 0.6 acres
(25,000 sq. ft.). Lots can be combined for larger requirements. Generous building
standards allow maximum site coverage. The La Pine Industrial Group also provides
assistance to arrange build -to -suit construction and financing for qualified companies.
Newberry Business Park has been designed with higher development standards than the
older areas of the industrial park. It is intended to provide an attractive and functional
environment for smaller companies that provide services and supplies to other industries,
commercial businesses, and the public. LIGI's objective in developing Newberry
Business Park is to generate family -wage job opportunities for workers in La Pine and the
surrounding area. Minimum employment standards will be imposed, making these lots
unsuitable for uses that provide minimal or no employment such as self -storage units.
Remaining lots range from 9,000 square feet to 25,200 square feet. Lots can be
combined for larger requirements. Streets, curbs, and underground utilities are included.
Current pricing is at $2.50 per square foot with higher premium for corner lots.
The 80-acre Rail Site
This key parcel is located on the east side of La Pine abutting the main line of BNSF
Railroad and approved for rail siding or drill track to interior of site. The parcel is
certified as "shovel ready4" by the State of Oregon and is available for a single rail user
or can be subdivided. The current pricing is at $1.50 per square foot depending on level
of employment.
4 Governor Kulongoski unveiled the 11 shovel -ready sites in May following months of searching statewide for available
industrial land. The parcels - located in Portland, Hillsboro, The Dalles, Hermiston, Pendleton, Springfield, Eugene and
Central Point - are guaranteed developable in six months or less. To make the list, each site was evaluated to make sure
there is a willing owner, adequate access to major roadways, onsite utilities such as water and electricity, and no
environmental issues like wetlands or contamination. The site was recently re -certified under authority of ORS 284.565
and 285B.283 until September of 2009.
Page 93
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Finley Butte Industrial Park
Finley Butte Industrial Park is 90 acres subdivided into one -acre to three -acre lots'.
Larger lots are available by combining the sites shown on this map. Rail access is
planned using two easements to common loading docks. Lots are available and include
water, sewer, and underground electric power, natural gas, telephone, DSL and other
broadband communications. Initial prices have been set at $108,900 per acre or about
$2.50 per square foot.
La Pine's Commercial Areas
Like many cities that historically grew up around a key transportation corridor, the City
of La Pine contains established strip development along Highway 97. This commercial
area is a product of direct access to Hwy 97 and currently serves as a central feature in
the community serving both tourists and local citizens. However, direct access to the
highway will eventually be limited as traffic counts increase over time. The predicted
increase in traffic, a boon to business, also creates increased traffic conflicts and reduced
mobility for through traffic. ODOT will require corridor management techniques to
improve transportation mobility on its system and this will require the use of frontage
roads and other alternatives to limit direct access. La Pine has been progressive in
realizing this issue and has encouraged commercial center development in other areas of
the community to reduce sole reliance on highway commercial areas. Additional
planning techniques can be used to improve other service commercial opportunities that
help to create complete neighborhoods, improve efficiency, reduce energy consumption,
and reduce vehicle miles traveled.
The negative effects of such strip development include:
> poor access control, conflict with ODOT, and undesirable access for commercial
developments;
> shallow lot depth limiting future business or center —type development;
> poor sign control and limited aesthetic options;
➢ longer vehicle trips to reach needed shopping services; and,
reduced opportunities for buffering between land uses.
Strip commercial areas on the edges of the community force shoppers to travel by cars
along the primary access ways. Pedestrian and alternate mode opportunities are lost
when commercial zones are located great distances from population centers and
neighborhoods. In addition, sole reliance upon vehicle travel to reach strip shopping
areas can lead to unnecessary vehicle travel and expensive widening improvements along
major roads. The synergy of commercial activities is lessened when commercial uses are
not located in centers or downtown. Mixed -use zoning and rezoning of certain parcels to
provide enough land in sizes necessary to accommodate commercial centers, rather than a
5 A 20-acre parcel was sold to Midstate Electric Cooperative and is now the home of their new headquarters and
operations center.
Page 94
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
continuation of additional shallow -depth strip commercial, will be necessary to provide a
better balance of commercial development and reduce unnecessary vehicle trips.
Various data sets and research studies show that La Pine needs a broader range of
commercial mixed -use services within the community. This is where the maximum
effort should be expended to improve the retail and service business climate. The
highway strip area could benefit from the addition of commercially zoned lands as
necessary to deepen lots and broaden redevelopment opportunities.
Assumptions and Trends
The City of La Pine can play an active role in helping to support the local economy by
continuing to enhance LIGI, existing businesses, avoid creating obstacles, and provide
incentives that help generate new activity. The local economy of La Pine is directly tied
to land zoning and available supply, historical land uses, local and regional
demographics, labor pool, suitable housing, public services and transportation facilities.
Future City regulations will have a direct impact on the ability of existing business to
expand and attraction of new business — they should carefully crafted and they should not
create barriers to economic development.
Private and public economic development efforts should focus on strategies that increase
opportunities for existing businesses to succeed and flourish. Likewise, efforts should
also focus on expanding the possibilities for future workers and entrepreneurs by offering
opportunities for local citizens to stay in the community and obtain nationally
competitive jobs.
The national economy, society, and environment are key factors that will influence the
local economic climate of La Pine. This chapter illustrates La Pine's existing economic
patterns and potential economic opportunities. The analysis begins with a review of the
current economic state of economic development in La Pine and Deschutes County. It
also is necessary to identify any local, State, and national obstacles to future enterprise.
This type of analysis approach can strengthen the community's position as a unique,
established, and attractive place to work, live, shop, and recreate. In other words, become
a "Complete Community."
Mixed Use Commercial Residential District
The Comprehensive Plan map includes a Mixed Use Commercial Residential area in the
southern part of the city, along a traditional hard-line, prescriptive boundary between
standard Commercial and single-family Residential. Most of the land along on either
side of this boundary is either undeveloped or under -developed. The Mixed Use
Commercial Residential District is intended primarily as a smaller scale, service and
office commercial district, with associated residential that may consist of upper level
apartments. A live -work design concept within the mixed use district would serve as an
appropriate buffer between the formal commercial and residential districts, which abut.
Although, stand alone commercial and residential uses that are designed to be compatible
with abutting uses would also be appropriate. It is desirable for the development within
the mixed use district to be master planned, but that may not be possible in all properties
Page 95
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
due to the small to medium size of the parcels. Some assemblage of properties will be
necessary for proper master planning.
V. Critical Drivers of La Pine's Economy
Many factors drive an economy. Some are influenced by the global economy, others by
federal and state policies, and still others by regional elements. Some factors are within
the control of the community and others are not, yet they all interrelate. One of the first
steps in developing sound economic development plans is to understand what drives the
local economy. The factors identified as those most directly affecting La Pine's economy
include:
Local Development Factors:
➢ Available infrastructure & transportation services
➢ Supportive business and government climate
➢ Livable community standards
➢ Reasonable tax structure
➢ Land availability and competitive cost factors — must be less than Bend or
Redmond
➢ Affordable housing and a range of housing choices
➢ Access to post -secondary education system
➢ Access to retail, service and medical facilities
➢ Diverse labor force
➢ Access to financing and capital resources
➢ Transportation options
➢ Access to leisure activities and recreation
Existing, Types of Businesses:
➢ Traditional manufacturing businesses: products, components, machines, farm and
construction equipment, woods, metals, glass, stone, fertilizer and chemicals, and
composite materials.
➢ Emerging businesses: knowledge based industries, energy, high tech, Internet, e-
commerce, creative services, manufacturing and, mixed -use developments
providing jobs and workforce housing to reduce employee commute
time/highway congestion.
➢ Support businesses: Suppliers, retail, services and repair, personal, health, and
business services. A variety of company sizes: from small to large -
commensurate with growth trends.
It is essential that La Pine's community leaders examine how these drivers, whether they
are strengths or weaknesses, affect economic development planning. Businesses,
industry groups, the Chamber of Commerce, city staff, community development
Page 96
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
representatives and others involved in the adoption of the Plan identified the following as
key issues that will likely influence the future economy.
1. The ability to capture the growth in emerging industries such as manufacturing,
high tech, software, bioscience, and e-commerce.
2. The ability to redevelop areas to meet density and employment goals while
keeping a sense of place.
3. The need to consider small business and local services as part of the overall
economic picture.
4. The ability to promote an image for La Pine that will support and retain existing
businesses and attract new ones.
5. The ability to evaluate the link between La Pine's economy and that of the
broader Central Oregon region.
6. How to identify, improve, and pay for the basic transportation and infrastructure
needs necessary to facilitate business development.
7. How to develop and retain quality workforce housing.
Existing Economic Conditions: National, State, and Local Trends
The community will need to monitor and consider the importance of local and national
trends and related economic activities as part of local growth management. For example,
the 2000 Census, Claritas studies, Oregon Employment Department data sets, Economic
Development for Central Oregon (EDCO) and other local experts have provided data
used to forecast certain features of the local economy. This data is utilized in the
subsequent economic evaluation detailed below.
Labor Statistics and Trends:
The current unemployment rate is at 16% and is a result of a dramatic downswing in
economy and construction industry. This rate and other factors are serious issues that
affect La Pine and the local economy.
Car commuting in La Pine is higher than other places in Central Oregon. This is typical
given the rural setting and distance from other employment areas in Bend and Redmond.
This situation will not change until the local population can support more industry,
service and retail choices in the La Pine community. Full scale transit is not anticipated
in the short term due to cost and the need for sort headway times to meet employer
demand. The primary means of transportation for the local workforce was private
vehicles where 69.3% of the workers drove alone while commuting to their jobs.
Interestingly, 13% of La Pine's commuters carpooled to places of employment and only
3.3% walked to work.
Availability of Products and Services:
Competition for products and services currently provided by Bend and Redmond will
typically continue until there is an adequate demographic base in La Pine to support
additional shopping, employment and service needs of the community. The large
commute has certain disadvantages in that it tends to over -utilize existing road capacities
at peak hours and this creates a high subsidy for City and State transportation projects,
Page 97
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
etc. However, the ability for business owners to draw from a wide labor pool is an
advantage and helps to broaden job choices for residents. As the community diversifies
and moves further away from a farm and forest based economy the opportunities for
more variety in employment and shopping choices is expected to increase. The
Comprehensive Plan shows where new employment areas are to be located. The future
zoning ordinances will regulate the details of development and other factors.
Employment Chanjzes:
The Oregon Employment Department releases updated ten year employment forecasts
every two years at the regional level. The most recent forecast (2004-2014) indicates an
anticipated 17,520 job increase for Region 10. Historical industry growth was led by
Transportation and Warehouse (11.6%), Financial Activities (9.1%), Retail Trade (8.8%),
and Leisure and Hospitality (8.5%). Manufacturing was the only industry that had a net
loss of jobs between October 2005 and 2006. The manufacturing industry lost 150 jobs
for a decrease of 13.3%. This decrease is attributable to a decrease in wood product
manufacturing.
Future employment gains are expected to be realized largely through service sector
growth. Roughly, 50.3% of anticipated employment growth is projected to originate from
Professional & Business Services, Education & Health Services, Leisure & Hospitality
Services, and Other Services.
La Pine and Deschutes County lie within State of Oregon Assessment Region 10. The
Region 10 data indicate that non -farm income is dramatically increasing. These
regional reports show that manufacturing, lumber remanufacturing production and
service sectors are expanding as population growth occurs.
Primary Industries and Employers:
The primary industries in Deschutes County and Central Oregon are listed in the table
below.
PRIMARY INDUSTRIES IN CENTRAL OREGON
County
Desclitites
Industry
Computer & Electronic Manufacturing
ibution & Warehousing
1 & Social Assistance
ssional, Scientific & Technical Services
Retreat o l & Transportation Equipment
Tourism
Wood Product ,l,Vlanufact
ur
Total
Employment
362
862
5,908
1,889
1,110
7,652
1,920
Local occupations are distributed among several areas and are consistent with the
recently updated Census data. Management, professional, and related occupations cover
about 21% of the employed individuals in La Pine; 26.7% in production, transportation,
and material moving; while another 37% work in the sales, service and offices
Page 98
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
occupations. Farming accounts for only 2.5% of city occupations and less than 1% of
total revenue generated in Deschutes County.
Even with the current economic crisis, the Oregon Office of Economic Analysis fully
expects regional and County -level population to resume continue a healthy growth
pattern. Recent coordinated population projections show that La Pine reaches a
population of 2,566 persons by 2029. This may not seem substantial, but it is critical to
take into consideration that the outlying area of La Pine contains a large amount of
developed and undeveloped lots. Growth in this area will affect La Pine. This factor
must be combined with the growth needs within the UGB. Thus, it is essential to
recognize that the employment and commercial service needs of the broader community
will affect the urban community of La Pine. Efforts to address economic issues related to
incorporated city and outlying areas will be essential to developing effective long range
planning strategies. Over time, and as the population increases, the trend appears to be
for more diversification in job choices trending away from construction and related
activities. According to the Oregon Employment Department report, Employment
Projections by Occupation- the community can expect to see the greatest job growth in
the following occupational areas:
• Health Care
• Professional and Technical, including education and government
• Service and Retail including hospitality services
The increase in health care jobs is much different from the current local situation and is
primarily due to an expected increase in young families with children, and an older
population made up of retirees and baby -boomers. As the older population and general
population increase so does the need for Vlore choices 111 medical services. Health care
professionals are in current demand and this is expected to continue as the largest growth
area. The City will need to provide the proper amount of developable and adequately
zoned lands to accommodate the expected increase in healthcare businesses and medical
services.
La Pine's small town charm and high level of livability will continue to attract young
professionals and entrepreneurs. The retail and service markets will need to respond to
this influx in order to meet demands of the growing population, particularly as housing
choices increase. Likewise, the recreational nature of the La Pine area will continue
demand for hospitality services. The City will need to provide the proper amount of
developable and adequately zoned lands to accommodate the expected increase in
professional, technical, service, education, retail, and hospitality professions.
Specific Employment and Industry Projections
The `snapshot" of data tables below provide a more precise projection detail for a period
of 10 years beginning in 2004. This data is derived from the 2000 Census and
information prepared by the Oregon Employment Depai tutent (OED). This type of
Page 99
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
projection is useful for analyzing the current land use ordinances to make sure the
community can adapt to the projected needs. Generally, the current ordinances are
adequate, although a few modifications are needed to better support desired outcomes.
Oregon: Employment Forecast
By Broad Industry, 2006-2016
Broad Industry
Total nonfarm employment
Educational and health services
Professional and business services
Leisure and hospitality
Construction
Trade, transportation, and utilities
Other services
Financial activities
Information
Government
Manufacturing
Natural resources and mining
2006
1,702,500
205,200
193,100
165,300
100,300
336,200
59,000
105,800
35,000
286,500
206,800
9,200
Percent
2016 Change Change
1,943,600 241,100 14%
262,700 57,500 28%
232,800 39,700 21%
197,500 32,200 19%
115,000 14,700 15%
379,800 43,600 13%
66,500 7,500 13%
117,900 12,100 11%
38,800 3,800 11%
314,200 27,700 10%
209,100 2,300 1%
9,300 100 1%
Oregon Industry Employment: Forecasts by Region, 2006-2016
Workforce
Region Counties
10 Crook, Deschutes, Jefferson
9 Gilliam, Hood River, Sherman, Wasco, Wheeler
8 Jackson, Josephine
15 Clackamas
5 Lane
3 Marion, Polk, Yamhill
2 Multnomah, Washington
1 Clatsop, Columbia, Tillamook
13 Baker, Union, Wallowa
6 Douglas
14 Grant, Harney, Malheur
11 Klamath, Lake
4 Benton, Lincoln, Linn
7 Coos, Curry
12 Morrow, Umatilla
Percent
2006 2016 Change Change
82,780103,6700 20,890 25%
20,860 25,130 4,270 20%
108,880126,080 17,200 16%
144,200165,300 21,100 15%
153,400176,100 22,700 15%
179,800205,600 25,800 14%
692,700792,200 99,500 14%
36,140 40,900 4,760 13%
18,080 20,210 2,130 12%
39,840 44,530 4,690 12%
16,790 18,610 1,820 11%
26,790 29,650 2,860 11%
98,480108,500 10,020 10%
30,620 33,610 2,990 10%
30,940 34,150 3,210 10%
Page 100
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Oregon: Industries Adding Most Jobs*, 2006-2016
Fcad services arid dinh'rrg daces
Ambulatory leeallh care services
,adrninisleatrv9 and SW00rt 59rW95
Prole55ronal and tei.Mrral servraes
HoSpdes
Nur ortg aryl re>'+tenlial care faillrtle5
SGeoatty trade conlraiders
Local goyemmere 0di. ion
Eduoatlonal 5erVh
Gonrral mrrchander ,tome
'Md,s AS au p=hashed tddl[ S:4.b•s0acrs
0 5.000 10 000 15,000 20,000
Forecast Employment Growth. 2000 2016
25 0,0 0
Oregon: Fastest -Growing Industries*, 2006-2016
Local governrnant nr0an tebef
M10 LIaIorw heeAth rare sH":r cos
AmuSerne rt, gambling. arrd reche at:on
Warehousing and storage
Nursln0 and residerbad card Ia a11ds
Hosplals
Fnaf955i0r71 and l9rhniCal serrc0S
Educahanalsernces
Admtn.51rat1Ve and supped ier,ces
3,c,al al.l.larlce
'Iadsenr av p.OYfh'J t1WCS srL-aeon
Page 101
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Cr% 10% 201rs 30%
Forecast Employment Orawrn. 2006.201 S
Adopted 12/12/2018
Oregon: Industries Losing Jobs, 2006-2016
Wood product
manutactt,nng
Cam putarand atactror
product manufacturing
Faderul gcuerhment
Paper manufactutng
Loggno
Primary mata[
manufachnng
-2 000 -1 5C9 • I 00 -!00
Forecast "Imploymrnt Growth. 2966.2616
Oregon: Forecast Job Growth Rate
by Regiono 2006-2016
Page 102
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
gGrowth Rato:
Aa L1 r 43%1.
tt.,d14
...._ '7•H 1r1t4
Adopted 12/12/2018
Bogle n 1 nhnstfes At A 1 nee..
Employment Projechorr by Industry. 2006 20116
Industry
Percent
2008 2018 Change Change
Total Nonfarm Payroll Employment
Natural Resources & Mining
Construction
Manufedwing
Tmde, Transportation, & Utilities
tnformatlon
I0nanciai Activities
Professional & Business Services
Educational & Health Services
Leisure & Hospitality
Other Services
Government
82,780
420
8,580
9,080
15,970
1,720
5,490
7,840
8,920
10,510
2,570
11,720
103,870
480
10,880
0,440
19,810
2,100
8,820
10,310
11,870
14,320
3,130
14,530
20,890
00
2,320
360
3,840
380
1,330
2,470
2,950
3,810
560
2,810
25.2%
14.3%
27.1%
4.0%
24.0%
22.1%
24.2%
31.5%
33.1%
36.3%
21.8%
24.0%
J
Industry Growth and Wages 200142016
1W.4.r..1Jdhee6.
41404444e444144e12
11.41.0416400
114n.4. ryas 64e44
Va. /4044041/10441
inkawlen
Perm 4.m.e.Wows
410%
40% .20% 0% 20% 40%
Plojec144 Employment Growth (Raglan 10 A1we0e.25.2%l
au%
2006 Region 10 Average Covered Wage
MOMS 1111111111111111
=MIMI r1NNION.
1111111111111111
een>_ _ ■•11•111.111
newlww
adrermi -
- ee>111111ee
111101110111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
■tam
10 1•eA00 4711,000 110A00 $4DA00 100000
2006 Nonfarm Employment by Industry Sector
av a+mmant
(hdudn ylatidq
TAW
us%
Lawry b
12.7% Trans693999.93.b
5.m.....4
(661131
PA18% cy................„....7k.19
10Pz.tx
mred.100a b
9u1Y#ds
9.5%
Natural Rueuaa
WIN
050.
o sx canlwne9
10S%
01644 UNICA, eteJ �9
Z2s44....j"nr10%NOdOhrR/ TrMn,
nnM1tl41 Ac451616
6.6%
Toed Nonfarm Payroll Employment-62,780
Oregon: For9ceet Job Growth Rate
by Region, 2006.2016
i• r
ta,
ill
II a
For additional information, contact Steve Williams at:
Stephen.C.Wllllams@state.or.us or (541) 388-6442
WorkSource Oregon Is an equal opportunity employer/program.
WorkSource Oregon es ern programa/empleadorque respeta la lgualdad de oportunidades.
WorkSource Oregon Employment Department • www.Oualitylnto org • RS PUB 246 R 10 (0408)
Page 103
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
Antns At A AMnnn
Occupational Group
Employment
ofTotil
%ofTotal
2008 Employment
TremparWranem
Material
Pmartlloh
all%
trn6eFWorti
elettenenee, and
Repair
it
J7`•��..,
by Occupational
nmcwaineme•
M10vap 1.1%
Group
Knifemen!,
a ammo. end
din
PrtRYoneiar4
11 �a
�,�`w.l0ar eCam
82%
Total Payroll Employment
Management. Business, and Financial
Professional and Related
Health Care
38ksatldRelated
Sales 8
Office and Administrative Support
Fanning, Fishing, and Forestry
Construction and Exhadlon
Insbelaaon, Maintenance, and Repair
Production
Transportation and Material Moving
HondassIllable•
83,61 r
5,830
9,929
5,156
14,436
10,084
13,489
775
6,544
3,267
6,773
6,445
883
100%
7.0%
11.9%
tit%
17.3%
12.1%
16.1%
0.9%
7.8%
3.9%
8.1%
7.7%
1.1%
10096
8.6%
15.2%
6.5%
152%
10.6%
16.5%
20%
4.8%
3.9%
7.6%
7.6%
1.5%
Cwtuctn end
8..dmetkel
7.8%
F
Fomatry 001E Olt* red
Saaaal
18.111
re+m,deer.WEAN leased. +l.as4•a.eawoaaalm
1ertin
Sales and !landed
121%
afae0e•erM+t wnanoasa.anm.
• Leased, sheltered workshop, n10r1Cu allied agricultural, and home care Workers,Admiraebaaee
Top Performing Uccuu.nwns
2016
Employment
20062016
Percent Charge
2006.2016 Growth
Opedngs
1,05E
431
450
504
331
2006-2016 Total
Openinfte
2,505
1,297
894
1,498
1,208
the Most Jobs
2006
Employment
MAW
Cenlbkned Food Reparation & Serving Workers, hic5a n° Fast Fred
Mtn Clerks, General
Waders &Mittman
Cagiues
452
1,782
1,780
1,679
1,637
4,510
2,213
2,230
2,183
1,968
30.6%
24216
25.3%
30.0%
20.21E
Mt the Most Jobs, 2006-2016
RO�upatio
afmTSSaa
Waiters & Waitresses
Maids & Hoiseieepig Cleaners
Ma Qeks,Geneat
Cualomer Service Representatives
3,452
1,679
938
1,780
1,602 _
4,510
2,183
1,440
2,230
2,044
30.6%
30.0%
53.6%
25.3%
27.67E
1,05E
504
502
450
442
2,505
1,498
752
894
713
Occupations Growing the Fastest-, 200E-2018
Conactional Officers
Hotel, Metal, & Resat Desk awful
-M annexeA Romoolion A8endonts
FodamnentAgadanb 8 Rotated Waters, All Ogler
toddne Managers
125
250
259
44
55
439
421
409
69
85
2512%
68.4%
579%
56.8%
54.5%
314
171
150
25
30
373
322
246
42
42
.Total Opeltlgs 8 8a1aopadr51 resulting Awn goat and tom waiters IeMg the om*allon. '• LMledes occupations veer a ninelaam 200E alpio9mee at mom than40.
Minimum Educational Requirement of Current
Jobs and Projected Job Growth, 2006-2016
Competitive Educational Requirement of Current
Jobs and Projected Job Growth, 2006-2016
1%
•eanne®w 4 n,atq 114
- 2% aPaW orew rJoW_
eaam4auqu - QPueae al Job Oman, 2400'2310
""r"c'e" a 2% Waxed of w,asdJebe. 2000
OPereaadJob Gm*. 20062Ue
12%
e ,rMir.
121E
aas.br.sawl
emas.,a reeeeeeeee e%
a%
ex
ataca. a,awee.. 1%
ape4e4 41%
11%
eoeeee era 411
tOK
Podocer ey tat% 0%
...
12%
IMMomMaki YAM/ II,
d%
aare..am(1.r4 0%
neaeaa.e n.. am, e
...Id.%
w1..m0.0Ynr,g 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 0 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 um
rormrm ,.... 4 45%
e% le% tall 00% 40% d0%
OK 10% 20% N11 4011 00% 00%
For additional Information, contact Steve Williams at:
Stephen.C.Wllllams©state.or.us or (541) 388-6442
WorkSource Oregon is an equal opportunity employer/program.
WorkSource Oregon es un programalempleador que respeta la Igualdad de oportunldades.
WorkSource Oregon Employment Department • w w 0ua6lytnto.org • RS PUB 246 R10 (0400)
Page 104
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
ealwaetdla.eeeaeA
Adopted 12/12/2018
The State and National prediction data for commerce and industry growth do not show a
large increase in the type of high employment, large manufacturing industrial
development that La Pine and EDCO hope to attract to the community and region.
However, the current economic incentives, limited land supply in other nearby
communities, and the level of commitment shown by local leaders may dispel the
predicted trend and lure additional large manufacturing, industrial, and technologically -
based businesses to the community.
Alternatives to Access Difficulties — A Focus on Technology:
Difficulty in reaching convenient access to regional transportation corridors, like I-5, can
be partially overcome by transitioning to a technology and knowledge -based economy.
Jobs that rely upon the development of technology and the transfer of knowledge
products do not necessarily rely upon trucking to access regional highway systems.
Information and technology markets influence and support all types of industries from
retail to wholesale to manufacturing and service firms. Such industry is changing the
speed and efficiency of business operations, the skills of workers, and the expectations of
consumers. As a result, business owners and employees in the technology industries do
not need to solely rely on ground shipping to deliver products to customers. Linking
economic development strategies to a technological based economy is a trend that will be
critical to enhancing the local job market.
Local Efforts to Target Desired Industries
LIGI, City of La Pine, and Economic Development for Central Oregon (EDCO) have
focused their efforts in attracting new business and industry by targeting specific types of
development. These include:
General Industry Cluster Targets
• Energy development
• Distribution related services
• High Technology (includes software, hardware and biotechnology)
• Light Industrial and ManufacturingiPlastics, assembly, printing, misc.)
• Recreational Equipment Manufacturing
• Tourism related services
• Research and Development Firms
• Secondary Wood Products
• Headquarter Firms
All of the above targets are suitable uses in the La Pine community. The City will need
to make sure that the upcoming industrial, commercial, and mixed -use zoning regulations
can accommodate the future development industries identified above.
As mentioned above, the identified target industries do not necessarily match the
forecasted local trends. However, this does not mean the desired industries are unsuitable
for La Pine. On the contrary, the local desires, and State/National trends are all to be
Page 105
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
considered when developing the assumptions used to support this economic opportunities
analysis.
Existing Economic Conditions Conclusion
La Pine's local leaders encourage quality development and job creation. Retail, service,
and health care industries will continue to grow and expand consistent with regional,
State and National projections. Community leaders will continue to aggressively focus
efforts on attracting large industrial development and reducing barriers to all economic
development. It is anticipated that these efforts will bring forth industries that rely on a
large number of employees and create additional family -wage jobs in the community.
Community leaders have made it clear that large industrial development is needed in
addition to the sectors identified in the predicted trend data. Likewise, there is a
companion goal to reduce the daily commute for local residents by the creation of
additional family wage jobs within the community.
According to Economic Development for Central Oregon -EDCO staff
Competitive wages, relatively lower housing costs, and high quality of life features will
continue to attract businesses and companies to the region. La Pine will need to supply
adequate levels of skilled labor force, developable lands and increased housing choices to
continue to be attractive to new business development and competitive with other nearby
cities.
Overall, Central Oregon is a desirable place to locate businesses and, while the region is
not on the I-5 corridor, there are certain advantages to the area given the labor rate
comparisons, livability factors, and other positive demographic features.
Page 106
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
VI. Land Inventory Analysis
Summary of Gross Acreages Including General Non -Developable
Residential
Commercial/Mixed Use
Traditional Commercial
Industrial
Public Facilities
General Non -Developable
= 1414.0
= 168.40
= 260.30
= 508.5
= 1772.83
= 349.97
Total = 4474.00 acres
Summary of Net Vacant/Redevelopable Acreages
Residential
Commercial/Mixed Use
Traditional Commercial
Industrial
= 857.51
= 67.95
= 103.44
= 234.0
Total = 1262.90 acres
Employment Land (Comm./Industrial) Inventory and Needs Analysis
mUC chart aLu VC shows a sum -nary of gross and vacant commercial and industrial lands.
The combination of commercial and industrial lands is known as "employment" land
because together, they are where the most jobs can be created. La Pine would like to
provide jobs for all of its citizens and not suffer the continued negative impacts of the
daily commute made by citizens to other cities. However, the City of La Pine cannot
meet this goal at present; most jobs are located outside of the community.
Efforts to induce additional local job creation are underway and were given a boost by
the recent incorporation in 2006, LIGI's efforts, Deschutes County TDC program, and
the creation of the water and sewer districts. These basic building blocks will provide the
foundation for a solid economic strategy.
The responsibility to maintain a supply of adequate industrial lands, and provide a sound
industrial climate to support additional job creation is a continuing responsibility of the
City as part of the Goal 9 requirements and City Council policy. The City intends to
preserve existing industrial areas for predominantly industrial uses.
Short Term Supply of Serviceable Employment Lands
La Pine has a ready supply of serviceable employment lands. 405.39 acres are available
within the combined commercial areas and La Pine Industrial Park (LIGI). These lands
have direct access to street, water, sewer, and other utility services or are within '/ mile
of such services. The LIGI lands make up the majority of serviceable employment lands
Page 107
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
with 327 acres of ready to go land. Each new development, no matter where it is
located, will be analyzed on its own merits to determine if any additional improvements
need to be made to any portion of La Pine's or other utility providers infrastructure
elements.
Commercial and Industrial Land Needs 2009- 2029 — Creating a 20-year supply
Yearly absorption rate data describes what lands actually are developed over time. This
data is not sufficient to use alone for determining future employment land needs over a
20-year period. Other issues must be taken into consideration. The development of the
"Complete Neighborhoods" concept, making large lots available for energy production,
the need for buffers between land uses, mixed -use needs for healthy sustainability are just
a few of the factors that shape a future land needs analysis. Thus, the City has chosen to
use a variety of forecasting factors and those are listed below. Identifying a 20-year
supply of land is really an estimate using a combination of data sets and forecasting
factors. These estimates are used as a basis for making land use decisions; as new data or
new predictive models become available, the estimates will be revised.
Land Need Considerations and Forecasting Factors
• Demand for services and job creation
• Availability of infrastructure and transportation access
• Physical features that enable easy development; including infrastructure capacity
• Features that restrict or limit development — open space, natural resource
protection, buffers, and lot size
• Location and proximity to labor force
• Absorption patterns and other factors that affect land usability
• Growth management goals and compliance with State law
• Community employment needs, niche development, emerging markets
• Complete Neighborhood development techniques
• Private or public ownership land transfers — BLM, DSL, Deschutes County, State
of Oregon, etc.
• Special areas for railroad -dependent industrial development
• Opportunities for transitional/temporary industrial development
Page 108
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Opportunities for energy development
• Flexibility to accommodate unforeseen needs
The land need and forecasting factors can be used to formulate assumptions about
economic trends and determine commercial and industrial land needs. These factors
form assumptions and when combined with local planning and economic development
goals, are intended to provide a foundation for assessing any changes in the Plan. As of
the date of approval of this plan, the basic assumptions are as follows:
• The National, State and Local trend shows that the highest economic growth will
be in Health, Retail, Energy, Service, and Professional fields.
• The goals of the community and those of local economic development experts
focus on high technology, manufacturing, and production as desired industries.
These goals may conflict with the predicted trends.
• Public facilities that serve industrial lands must be complete and adequate to
support community economic development goal. The most recent geological data
shows the Deschutes Aquifer serves the La Pine community.
• Lands that have appropriate infrastructure in place and are competitively priced
will be easier to market to prospective developers. Lease -only lands may be more
difficult to market because of bank financing conditions.
• Commercial and Industrial lands must be attractive and include local support
services and workforce housing options for employees.
• Industrial lands that contain natural resource areas and other areas that require
special protection will reduce the overall inventory of developable industrial land.
Commercial and Industrial Lands Located Near Residential Lands
The City has also studied the potential negative impacts of commercial and industrial
land designations that abut established or future residential areas within the city. Over
time, there may be a need to buffer expanding industrial and commercial uses from
residential areas. The proposed zoning map shows various areas proposed to be either
open space or mixed -use areas that can serve as a "buffer." This type of buffering
technique also serves to better establish the "Complete Neighborhood" concept.
Land Supply and Needed Acres
Study and analysis of the above factors shows that La Pine has an adequate amount of
land within its city limits/UGI3 to supply a 20-year inventory of employment lands, but
not enough large industrial and recreation parcels to satisfy identified needs. This is
further described below.
Page 109 Adopted 12/12/2018
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Overall, a total acreage of 342.00 acres of employment land is required to sustain the
community over the 20-year period without the need for the large industrial parcels and
large recreational land. The 342.00 acre figure is derived from a combination of
historical absorption, needed employment and service nodes in deficient neighborhood
areas, needed shopping centers capable of supplying a greater choice in services, lands
upon which to develop smaller incubator/light industrial developments, and mixed -use
buffer areas to supply needed transitional lands. This land need projection breaks down
as follows:
Employment Land Breakdown and Projection of Needed Acres Over 20-dear
Period'
Employment Land Type
Neighborhood Commercial
and Service Nodes
Middle sized, 20-acre
n1InlIT1t1I11 parcels
Smaller sized incubatorflgl�t
industrial t pe_parceis
Shopping Centers
Zoning Required
Mixed Use, Industrial, Commercial
Industrial
Mixed -use, Industrial, Comtercial
Mixed -use or Commercial
Total Land Needed Net
Total Employment Land in UGB Gross
Reserve
Acres
342.0
4500
108.0
The projected breakdown of needed employment lands is 342.0 gross acres which is less
than the 405.39 acres available within the current UGB, leaving 63.39 gross acres as a
reserve over the 20- year period. This figure is a total of all employment lands and does
not mean that all lands are organized as a composite or abutting one another. Thus,
assemblage of parcels, re -zonings, etc. may be necessary. When large Industrial parcels
are needed, and the actual availability does not support the need, an UGB expansion may
be required. This type of development forecast may seem aggressive but it is appropriate
over the 20 year planning horizon. The City of La Pine can accommodate this need
within its current city limits/UGB unless unique factors warrant UGB expansion. For
example, large industrial developments with large acreage requirements may not be able
to find suitable land within the current UGB and close to other employment lands — this
situation may necessitate expansion or conversion/zone changes.
Large Industrial Acreages
The community supports targeting of specific industrial uses that can provide many jobs
at one location. These industries tend to require large acreages from 50 to 120 acres to
support large buildings in a "campus" arrangement or buffer adjacent areas from the
negative effects of large manufacturing plants. The community intends to provide for
and reserve large tracts for these types of developments. The existing Enterprise Zone
was created to entice large industrial developments to La Pine. UGB expansion to supply
7 Approximately 3 new commercial nodes 4 acres each, 1 mid -size 20 acre industrial project every 2 years,
5, % acre projects every year, 2 40- acre shopping centers
Page 110
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
the larger acreage lots, 50 to 120 acre parcels should be located adjacent to the current
bulk of industrial lands or in areas that have supportive infrastructure.
It is anticipated that there should be an inventory of large "for purchase" industrial lots.
This allows for a variety of industrial development on the lands required for industrial
development. This is assumption is based upon local data and the demonstrated goal of
targeting specific industries beyond the current trends. It is important to do this since the
trend information does not necessarily reflect all of the needs of a growing community
like La Pine, where supporting a broader range of employment and industrial choices to
reduce historical jobs/housing imbalances is a community goal.
Estimated 20-year Industrial Land Absorption
Over the Planning Period 2009-2029
Typical
Industrial
Lands
Large
Industrial
Parcels
Other Mixed-
ena lovrnent'
Varies
10 acres •
dcv./year
50 acres
20 acres
dcv.'ycar
Varies
Varies
20 acres
dcv./year
100 acres
Varies
20 acres
dev./year
200
The above chart looks out 20 years and takes into consideration proposed absorption of
all types of industrial and mixed -use lands, including large industrial parcels. This does
not take into consideration commercial land needs, just industrial and The result is a need
of 660 acres of industrial and mixed —employment land. As noted earlier in this chapter,
the current land need derived from using a variety of factors, not just absorption, shows a
need for 342.0 acres of employment lands. However, it is important to realize that
forecasting is not a precise science and that large industrial parcels and large recreational
parcels will be need by the community and these are likely to require an UGB expansion
at some point over the next 20 years.
Industrial service, energy, manufacturing, contractor operations, assembly, and repair
businesses look to La Pine's available industrial lands for development opportunities.
This trend is expected to continue. As commercial lands increase in cost, lower priced
industrial lands become more attractive to developers for service uses. It is appropriate to
assume that industrial projects requiring less than 15 acres of land each will develop the
Page 111
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
quickest during the planning period. The evidence to support this conclusion includes the
past historical data showing that industrial development has been occurring on parcels
less than 15 acres in size. The lack of easy to develop industrial lands in both Bend and
Redmond will help attract industrial uses to La Pine where land is plentiful, serviceable,
and available at a competitive cost. Likewise, it is anticipated demand for low cost
developable residential land in Bend and Redmond will help attract more people to La
Pine where such lands are available.
Specialized employment lands that have a dual purpose (recreational and employment),
such as the future La Pine Rodeo grounds, may also require expansion due to its unique
locational factors, special siting needs, or the other factors listed below. Revisions to
the Plan can occur at any time, once supporting evidence shows a need for a change or
update. Thus, the community can be assured that careful monitoring of all predictive data
will be the best method for addressing the economic land needs of the community.
VII. Urban Growth Boundary and UGB Expansion Options
At this time, the land within the City limits can generally serve the community's long-
term land use needs. Land use control and cohesive government jurisdiction over the
City limits is a strong factor for keeping the City limits and the proposed UGB boundary
the same. Significant confusion can occur when the city limits and UGB boundary are
not the same line. Citizens have expressed a strong desire, as evidenced in the public
meetings that shaped this plan, to retain land use control over all of the City limits. Thus,
for these and other reasons, the UGB should match the City limits. This means that the
City Limits can serve as the La Pine Urban Growth Boundary supplying most if not all of
the needed residential, commercial, industrial and other land uses over the 2009-2029
growth period. The exceptions to this are listed below.
Unique Factors that may require UGB expansion before 2029:
• Studies show that land use inventories are reduced below the 20-year supply
• Educational, recreational, or open space opportunities requiring urban services
• Large site needs for unanticipated industrial and employment technologies
requiring urban services and supporting creation of local jobs
• Disaster planning needs that require large areas of carefully managed lands
• Emergency services facilities that require inclusion into the UGB
• Tourism services and Rodeo facilities that require urban services, but need to be
buffered from residential areas
Page 112
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Rail or other transportation facilities on lands that would benefit the community
by being located within the UGB
• Federal or State facilities
• Utility facilities, including telecommunications and energy producing facilities
Future UGB expansion for purposes of providing additional employment land should
focus expansion areas near existing industrial areas and existing population centers. This
will further help La Pine address the current jobs/housing imbalance. As previously
stated, Bend currently has a greater number of employment and service opportunities,
which results in a significant number of La Pine's residents commuting8 on a daily basis.
Such commutes have the effect of over utilizing limited energy and natural resources,
creating unnecessary business expenses, and increased infrastructure costs for
community. Any restriction on the ability to expand the UGB to include more land,
when justified, would have a harmful effect on La Pine's economy. The community
should be able to expand the UGB when needed to remedy absorption of employment
lands and address unique or unanticipated factors/situations.
VIII. Existing and Proposed CommerciaUMixed-use Opportunities
The City of La Pine contains a variety of commercial zones located throughout the
community that are either located in the highway strip or in other scattered areas. There
are many opportunities to add commercial or mixed -use zone designations to various
areas throughout the community in an effort to balance neighborhoods and improve
mixed -uses as well as deepen existing areas so re -development can easily accommodate
new commercial centers. Because there are many opportunities to rezone and revitalize
various areas with mixed -use development techniques, it has been concluded that there is
adequate land within the current city limits to satisfy the long-term commercial needs of
the community. New commercial or mixed -use designations within the City limits will
occur as a result of the following actions:
• Addition of new commercial/mixed-use lands to deepen the strip commercial
areas
• Addition of commercial/mixed lands to serve neighborhoods and employment
areas
• Addition of commercial/mixed-use lands in other areas where industrial,
residential, or open space opportunities are inappropriate.
8 Commuting has been found to reduce effectiveness of business operations due to increased employee travel time and
increased absences related to weather and road conditions. Likewise, La Pine has lower housing prices, which attract
employees who cannot afford to live in Bend or Redmond. Additional supplies of appropriately located commercial and
industrial land will help to provide quality jobs in the La Pine community thus, reducing the need for citizens to seek
employment and services in other cities.
Page 113
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Addition of mixed -use areas to buffer incompatible uses from one another
The City will need to encourage the additional of new commercial centers to areas near
expanding residential areas and avoid lengthening shallow strip development. This is
sound land use planning and allows for flexibility to respond to market forces while
recognizing that mixed -use planning and the "Complete Neighborhood" concept can
meet the future economic development demand for any needed commercial development
in the urban area. The downtown core of the community is likely to be the focus of
future revitalization efforts. Several studies have been completed to provide guidelines
for improved aesthetics and other development strategies intended to attract and retain
businesses to the downtown area.
Main Street Concepts
A new technique that builds on an old concept, "Main Street" type development, is a
successful land use technique that can correct and improve commercial vitality by
encouraging pedestrian access. "Main Street" development techniques provide for a
more walkable shopping experience without excessive vehicle trips. The storefronts face
a local access street that is perpendicular to the primary access street. Future
development codes should enable this development technique.
Challenges to Compact Development Goals
The 2006 incorporation took in the area known as Wickiup Junction. This peninsula -like
area is located at the northern most tip of the community. The result is that the City, as a
whole, is forced to grow in a less -than -compact form. However, the development pattern
within the new areas can be compact and designed to serve as many citizen needs as
possible. This means that mixed -uses, including convenience commercial service
centers, open space, and some employment areas will be required to develop in older
neighborhoods to encourage reduce vehicle miles traveled and improve efficiency for all
residents. The community will benefit from adding small commercial areas to new and
revitalized neighborhoods as the community grows. Citizens have expressed a need for
additional neighborhood and local shopping opportunities that do not require excessive
vehicle trips or vehicle trips to other communities.
IX. Community Neighborhoods
The La Pine community is made up of 3 primary neighborhoods. Some of these
neighborhoods are located in areas that are not served with adequate commercial or
employment lands. The broadly applied mixed -use and/ or improved land use
development practices advocated in other parts of this Plan could not be achieved if the
new commercial lands were limited to existing strip areas. Thus, La Pine's economy will
benefit by being flexible with the placement and variety of new mixed -use and
commercial lands over the 20-year period rather than restrict itself to only a few areas. It
should be noted that the primary growth industry and target areas described earlier in this
chapter also apply to the commercial analysis. Again, as the trend information suggests,
the primary growth sectors will be health care and commercial activities, particularly
service, education, and retail. The EDCO target areas are mostly industrial but could
Page 114
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
have a retail/commercial component that would be a secondary use to the primary
industrial development.
The community is poised to respond to the need for additional mixed -use and commercial
designations. The current city limits/UGB contains adequate lands upon which to
develop needed commercial uses as long as the needed rezoning are timely and planned
to respond to mixed -use and other development techniques that can enhance the urban
community. Performance standards and the planned unit development (PUD) section of
the future implementing land use ordinances will likely provide for a more integrated and
balanced development pattern, particularly with new commercial areas.
X. Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Provide adequate industrial and commercial land inventories to satisfy the
urban development needs of La Pine for the 20-year planning horizon.
Policies
• The current city limits is adequate for serving as the Urban Growth Boundary,
although special circumstances may necessitate expansion before 2029.
• Updates to inventories and analysis of needed industrial and commercial land
types, existing land supplies, and economic development strategies for meeting
the requirements of the community are essential. It is necessary to provide
adequate buildable industrial and commercial land for the 20 years planning
horizon.
• Frequent updates to the inventories may be required in response to
redevelopment, proposed zone changes, mixed -use development techniques and
planned unit developments that enable "Complete Neighborhood" concepts and
economic development opportunities.
• State, local, and nationwide trends are not adequate to properly estimate needed
industrial and commercial lands. Other local information and economic
development targeting goals must be used to properly evaluate future land needs.
• Adequate public facilities must be planned, funded, and installed to serve
industrial sites and commercial areas.
• Preservation of large industrial parcels over 30 acres in size will attract target
industries and new manufacturing businesses.
• Planning for workforce housing will also attract target industries.
Page 115
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Urban reserve planning will be needed to project growth beyond the 20-year
period.
• Additional land may be needed to support large scale recreational and industrial
uses. Where there are particular locational requirements for certain activities,
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan may be necessary too. Amendments
should be evaluated in relation to all applicable policies of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Goal # 2: Develop an "Economic Development Strategic Plan" and other
mechanisms necessary for supporting and enhancing the local economy.
Policies
• Successful economic development strategies require cooperation with a variety of
agencies and other groups to develop a plan that best meets the requirements of a
growing community.
• Successful economic opportunities rely upon the communities' ability to support
and connect various elements of the economic development into an integrated
framework.
• Promoting an entrepreneurial climate for existing and new businesses is a key
factor in strategic planning.
• Providing a strong public partnership with local businesses is key to successful
economic development.
• Ensuring a high quality of life and the small town atmosphere is essential to
addressing citizen concerns about growth and economic development.
• SDC charges must be carefully developed and monitored. This will ensure that
development pays its own way while not creating obstacles to desired
development or educational needs.
• The State of Oregon transportation system (ODOT) has a significant effect upon
the local community. Local groups and City decisions makers will need to
establish good working relationships with ODOT to ensure coordination and
adequate capacity.
• The City recognizes that an airport (privately owned or public) would be a strong
economic driver for the la Pine area. Efforts to explore the creation of an airport
shall be supported by the City, but shall not be the obligation of the City.
XI. Programs
Page 116
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The City shall:
1. Adopt the City Limits as the urban growth boundary - UGB.
2. Regularly monitor and analyze commercial and industrial land inventories. When
new lands are needed, the City Council shall authorize expansion of the UGB or
other methods to ensure that at least a 20-year inventory of land for each category
is available within the urban area.
3. Coordinate growth needs with the various utility providers within the community.
4. Explore and initiate methods for preserving large industrial parcels to meet
projected demand.
5. Initiate and complete urban reserve planning consistent with the other provisions
previously listed in this Plan.
6. Any correction amendments and needed legislative changes for rezoning shall be
processed immediately upon City Council directive.
7. Develop a community entrance plan that fosters improved aesthetic treatments
and buffering along the entrances to the community
8. Organize and staff an economic development committee whose purpose is to
monitor the economy and manage local infrastructure needs. The committee
shall ;nrh,. e thraa Mer hers of the City Cnnneil twn memherc of the Pinnnin r
Commission, and two ad hoc members of the community experienced in
economic development and any staff members deemed appropriate by the City
Manager.
9. Continue to refine which commercial and industrial activities are lacking in the
community. The City shall identify needed commercial and industrial areas on an
overlay map. The overlay map is a general framework plan that represents where
certain areas of the community could benefit from additional commercial or
industrial designations.
10. Develop strategies to capture the opportunities of a technology and knowledge -
based economy.
11. Develop land use development codes to address economic development
objectives and encourage appropriate mixed -uses in commercial and industrial
zones.
12. Develop and monitor a SDC methodology/program to assure appropriate charges
to new development, excepting public schools and colleges.
Page 117
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
13. Develop other methods of funding that can be used for economic development
purposes and supplement tax funds.
Page 118
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of La Pine — Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 10
Housing
I. State Planning Goal 10, Housing
Oregon State Planning Goal 10 is very straightforward in its statement that each local
jurisdiction must provide for the housing needs of its existing citizens and the anticipated
population growth. Essential in this planning effort is the creation of a buildable lands
inventory (BLI) and Residential Needs Assessment (RNA). The BLI assesses vacant
lands, developed lands and re -developable lands and makes an overall determination of
the amount of land available in the community to accommodate the future population.
The RNA makes a determination of existing and needed housing types. These analyses
are contained in one document because they are interrelated and easier for citizens to use.
This document enables a community to assess whether or not lands within the Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) are adequate for the projected growth or if the UGB needs to
be expanded. Notwithstanding the need for the raw land area data is the need to provide
a variety of housing types (i.e. single-family homes versus multi -family dwellings) and
price ranges (i.e. owner occupied versus rentals). These factors must be weighed against
the desired density and affordability of housing. Overall, the intent is to provide
opportunities for housing to serve all socio-economic strata within the community.
II. Purpose and Intent
The purpose of this chapter is to ensure the provision of appropriate types and amounts of
land within the La Pine urban growth boundary - UGB (city limits in this case) to support
a range of housing types necessary to meet current and future needs. These lands should
support suitable housing for all income levels for maximum sustainability. Likewise, the
Plan must also ensure the appropriate type, location and phasing of public facilities and
services are sufficient to support housing development in areas presently developed or
undergoing development, or redevelopment.
In addition to inventories of buildable lands, this chapter of the Plan includes: (1) a
comparison of the distribution of the existing population by income with the distribution
of available housing units by cost; (2) a determination of vacancy rates, both overall and
at varying rent ranges and cost levels; (3) a determination of expected housing demand at
varying rent ranges and cost levels; (4) allowance for a variety of densities and types of
residences; and (5) an inventory of sound housing in urban areas including units capable
of being rehabilitated.
The La Pine community contains a variety of housing choices and vacant and
redevelopable lands. Single-family homes are the dominant housing type at 84% of the
inventory. This chapter examines housing supply, condition, occupancy, affordability,
Page 119
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
and available land supply to meet community needs over the 20-year planning horizon.
Implementation programs for meeting future housing demand are also included in this
chapter.
III. Issues
Affordability
The affordability of housing is a significant determinant to the livability and
sustainability of the La Pine community. Housing affordability affects all segments of
the local population including business viability and commerce. According to federal
housing guidelines, no more than 30% of a family's gross monthly income should be
spent on housing, including heating and other bills.
Available, affordable, safe housing are also critical ingredients to the success of how a
community accommodates population growth. The attractiveness of La Pine to new
residents relies upon the availability of housing choices to accommodate varied citizen
demands and pricing thresholds. Historically, La Pine offers single-family housing and
only a small percentage of attached housing options. A vibrant community must offer
more choices to be competitive and sustainable. La Pine has actively pursued new Plan
policies and flexible implementation codes that will promote a wider range of housing
choices over time.
To understand the future of housing needs in La Pine, it is important to assess and
analyze the existing characteristics of the community's housing stock. Various factors
must be taken into consideration to obtain a clear picture of the situation. The following
elements should be examined:
• Trends in housing types;
• Age of structures;
• Condition and value of structures;
• Household demographics;
• Income levels of households;
• Percentage of income spent for housing;
• Occupancy patterns;
• Vacancy rates;
• Ownership and rental trends
The tables in this section include data from the recent census and local economic
development agencies, and other experts. Information was also obtained from other
resources including DLCD, Deschutes County, EDCO, and personal interviews with
Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority CORHA (now HousingWorks) staff, local
bank representatives, housing service providers, and others as noted. The data helps local
decision makers understand the various aspects of housing and population change. This
chapter also takes into account the effects of utilizing financial incentives and resources
to (a) stimulate the rehabilitation of substandard housing without regard to the financial
capacity of the owner so long as benefits accrue to the occupants; and (b) bring into
Page 120
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
compliance with codes adopted to assure safe and sanitary housing the dwellings of
individuals who cannot on their own afford to meet such codes.
Housing History
La Pine has been a community for over 100 years and the current housing choices reflect
the historical growth and nature of the City. La Pine's history as a small town with
recreation, retirement, timber and agricultural community attributes has shaped the stock
of existing housing. Over the years, and as the community economic situation
diversified, so has the variety of detached housing stock. A quick visual tour of La Pine
shows a range of housing from older mill worker residences, Victorian -era homes to
more modern homes developed post WWII. A recent influx of bedroom -community
homes and recreational/retirement housing is evident throughout the community. A
striking lack of multi -family housing is evident but not uncommon for a community with
less than 1,700 people. However, this is beginning to change as a few, well -designed
housing projects have developed within the incorporated City area.
Effects of Growth — Past and Present
The incorporated area of La Pine includes a large number of developed and undeveloped
residential lots. However, the vicinity surrounding the incorporated area has a greater
number of lots and a population higher than the current population of incorporated area.
This situation creates a significant impact upon the interrelationship of land uses and
service needs of the entire community.
Households
Deschutes County and 2000 Census9 data show that there were 5,799 people, 2,331
residing in the CDP'° The population was 197.7
households, and 1,699 families CDP density was .
people per square mile (76.3/km2). There were 2,975 housing units at an average density
of 101.4/sq mi (39.2/km2). The racial makeup of the CDP was 95.84% White, 0.09%
African American, 1.28% Native American, 0.24% Asian, 0.10% Pacific Islander, 0.55%
from other races, and 1.90% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race was
2.22% of the population. Data shows that there were 2,331 households out of which
26.6% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 61.3% were married couples
living together, 7.3% had a female householder with no husband present, and 27.1% were
non -families. 20.8% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.3% had
someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older.
Population Ranges and Projections
In the CDP the population was spread out with 23.0% under the age of 18, 4.9% from 18
to 24, 22.5% from 25 to 44, 28.8% from 45 to 64, and 20.7% who were 65 years of age or
older. The median age was 45 years. For every 100 females, there were 99.8 males. For
every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 98.7 males.
9 The 2000 Census data has been updated, by projection, via the Claritas research data found in the Appendix.
70 Before the 2006 incorporation the Census recognized the broader community of La Pine as a COP or Census
Designated Place.
Page 121
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Table 1 ; PorUmld Statue University (PSU) July 1st, Population Estimates
Geographic Area
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003
2002
2001
Deschutes County 172,050 170,705 ' 167,015 160,810. 152,615 143,490 ' 135,450 130,500 126,500 122,050
Bend 83,125 82,280 80,995 77,780 75,290 70,330 65,210 62,900 57,750 55,080
Redmond 25,945 25,800 25,445 24,805 23,500 20,010 18,100 17,450 18,110 14,980
Sisters 1,935 1,925 1,875 1,825 1,745 1,680 1,490 1,430 1,080 960
La Pine 1,635 1,625 1,610 1,590 N/A NIA NIA NIA WA N/A
Unincorporated 59,410 59,075 57,090 54,810 52.080 51,490 50,650 48.720 51,560 51,050
Table 2 - Annual Population Change and Percentage Change based on PSU Population Estimates
Geographic Area 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005.06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 2001-02 2000.01
Deschutes County 1,345 3;690 6,205 8,195 9,125 0,040 4,950 4,000 4,450 5, '
0.8% 2.2% 3.9% 5.4% 6.4% 5.9% 3.8% 3.2% 3.6%. 4.716
845 1,285 3,215 2,490 4,960 5,120 2,310 5,150 2,670 2,280
1.018 1.6% 4.1% 3.3% 7.1% 7.9% 3.7% 8.9% 4.8% 4.3%
145 355 t 640 1,305 3,490 1,910 650 1,340 1,150 ; 1,190
0.6% 1.4% 2.6% 5.6% 17.49% 10.696 3.7% 8.3% 7.7% 8.6%
10 50 50 80 85 170 60 350 120 -15
0.5% 2.7% 2.7% 4.6% 5.1% 11.4% 4 2% 32.4% 12.5% -1.5%
Bend
Redmond
Sisters
La Pine
Unincorporated
10 15 20 N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A NIA
0.8% 0.996 1.396
335 1,985 2,280 2,730 590 840 1,930 -2,840 510 1,995
0.6% 3.5% 4.2% 5.2% 1.1% 1.7% 4.0% -5.5% 1.0% 4.1%
Table 3 - Average Annual Growth Rate based on PSU Estimates
Geographic Area
2000 to 2010
Deschutes County
3.97
Bend
Redmond
Sisters
La Pine
Unincorporated
4.64
6.54
7.09
N/A
1.93
The City and Deschutes County work together to develop a coordinated population forecast. This
work is adopted at the local level and was approved by DLCD in 2010. The section of the
County data is as follows:
23.16.020. Population. The population of the County has increased significantly since
the adoption of the comprehensive plan in 1979.
Population Growth in Deschutes County: 1980 to 2000
Sources
1980
1990
2000
Population Research Center - July 1 estimates
62,500
75,600
116,600
Census Bureau - April 1 census counts
62,142
74,958
115,367
ORS 195.025(1) requires the counties to coordinate local plans and population forecasts. In 1996,
Bend, Redmond, Sisters and the County reviewed the most recent population forecasts from the
Portland State University Center for Population Research and Census, the Depaitment of
Transportation, Woods and Poole, the Bonneville Power Administration and the State Depattinent
Page 122
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
of Administrative Services Office of Economic Analysis. After review of these projections, the
cities and Deschutes County agreed on the coordinated population forecast adopted by the County
in 1998 by Ordinance 98-084
The results of the 2000 decennial census and subsequent population estimates prepared by the
Population Research Center (PRC) at Portland State University revealed the respective populations
of the County and the incorporated cities were growing faster that contemplated under the 1998
coordinated forecast. The cites and the County engaged in a coordination process between 2002
and 2004 that culminated with the County adopting a revised population forecast that projected
population for the cities and the County to the year 2025. The following table displays the 2004
coordinated population forecast for Deschutes County and the urban growth boundaries of the cities
of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters from 2000 to 2025:
The process through which the County and the cities coordinated to develop the 2000-2025
coordinated forecast is outlined in the report titled "Deschutes County Coordinated Population
Forecast 2000-2025: Findings in Support of Forecast" dated July 2004. This report provides the
findings in support of the adopted forecast. The Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan
(1979) included a population forecast from 1980 to 2000 that was incorporated in several chapters.
In 1998, the County adopted a coordinated population forecast under ORS 195.036. The
following table displays all three forecasts for comparison:
Deschutes County Population Forecasts
from 1979, 1998, and 2004
2000-2025 Coordinated Population Forecast
r Year
Bend UGB
Redmond UGB
Sisters UGB
Unincorporated
County
Total
County
116,600
2000
52,800
15,505
975
47,320
2005
69,004
19,249
1,768
53,032
143,053
2010
81,242155
23,897
2,306
59,127
166,572
2015
91,158
29,667
2,694
65,924
189,443
2020
100,646
36,831
3,166
73,502
214,145
2025
109,389
45,724
3,747
81,951
240,811
Page 123
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Year
1979 1998
forecast forecast
2004
forecast
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
53,400
66,600
82,900
103,400
128,200
74,958
94,100
113,231
132,239
151,431
167,911
182,353
116,600
143,053
166,572
189,443
214,145
240,811
Adopted 12/12/2018
The fourth city in Deschutes County is La Pine. Incorporated on November 7, 2006, the City of La
Pine's 2006 population estimate of 1,590 was certified by Portland State University, Population and
Research Center on December 15, 2007. As of January 1, 2009, La Pine is coordinating with the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to develop its first comprehensive
plan. As a result of La Pine incorporation, Deschutes County updated its Coordinated Population
Forecast with Ordinance 2009-006. The purpose of this modification was to adopt a conservative
twenty-year population forecast for the City of La Pine that can be used by city officials and the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to estimate future land need and an
Urban Growth Boundary. The following table displays the coordinated population forecast for
Deschutes County, the urban growth boundaries of the cities of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters, and
the city of La Pine from 2000 to 2025:
2000-2025 Coordinated Population Forecast
Year
Bend UGB
Redmond
UGB
Sisters
UGB
La Pine
UGB
Unincorporated
County
Total
County
116,600
2000
52,800
15,505
975
-
47,320
2005
69,004
19,249
1,768
-
53,032
143,053
2010
81,242
23,897
2,306
1,697
57,430
166,572
2015
91,158
29,667
2,694
1,892
64,032
189,443
2020
100,646
36,831
3,166
2,110
71,392
214,145
2025
109,389
45,724
3,747
2,352
79,599
240,811
In the fall of 1998, the Oregon Water Resources Depaituient acknowledged that virtually all
groundwater in the Deschutes River basin discharges to the rivers of the basin. The Water
Resources Department may place restrictions on the consumptive use of groundwater to protect the
free flowing nature of the Deschutes River, instream water rights and existing water rights. These
restrictions may affect the use of groundwater resources for future development and consequently
affect the future growth and allocation of population in the County and the three four urban
jurisdictions.
Page 124
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Population with DLCD Approved Growth Rate
Year
Incorporation
November 7,`
2006
Population
Average Annual Growth Rate
2007
1585
2.20
2010
1697
2.20
2015
1892
2.20
2020
2110
2.20
2025
2352
2.20
2029
2566
2.20
DLCD Approved Coordinated Deschutes County Population Forecast, which shows 1,585 people at the date
of incorporation and using the 2.2% growth rate, provides 2,566 people in 2029.
Household Incomes
The median income for a household in the CDP was $29,859, and the median income for
a family was $33,938. Males had a median income of $30,457 versus $20,186 for
females. The per capita income for the CDP was $15,543. About 9.5% of families and
13.2% of the population were below the poverty line, including 13.4% of those under age
18 and 11.5% of those age 65 or over. Newer Census data shows the median income for
a family at around $27,388. La Pine is classified as a Severely Distressed Community and
the recent 2008 economic crisis is strongly felt in La Pine.
Snapshot of the Housing Market
The housing market in Central Oregon is changing. Even with the current downward
economy, a greater share of families/households are fundamentally "priced out" of Bend
and Redmond thus, buyers are considering alternative options in La Pine. Over the past
10 years, Deschutes County has experienced robust population growth, which was more
than doubled the State's five-year forecast. Much of this growth occurred in the areas
outlying the City of La Pine. However, the incentives provided by the County's Sewer
TDC — Transfer Development Credit - program are having a positive effect on
encouraging more people to live within the incorporated area where community services
are available.
Current Housing Mix All Units Plus New Permits Through 2011
Totals 2008 through 2011 Percent of total for each housing time:
791 detached SFD's 84.00%
21 duplexes — 42 units 4.46%
3 fourplexes —12 units 1.27%
26 unit attached -over 55-LDLodge 2.76%
62 unit Health Home/Group Quarters — Prairie House 6.58%
9 other —7 over garage apts, 2 caretakers residences 0.95%
942 household units — total 244 vacant 100.00%
Page 125
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
Through 2025, State forecasts estimate an additional 91,382 individuals are expected to
permanently reside within Region 10. 2566 persons are estimated to reside within La
Pine.
The total demand profile by age indicates sizable demand from existing households
among middle age and pre -retirees. Approximately 34% of all ownership demand is
expected to be derived from households of 35-54 years. In other words, turnover demand
from existing younger household will likely combine with demand from elderly
households to provide a diverse range of qualified buyers within the primary market area
over the next five to ten years.
Building Permit Data
Residential construction, as measured by building permits, has been brisk in the central
Oregon region until the 2008 economic crisis. Driven largely by growth in the
Bend/Redmond Market, the three -city region has averaged over 2,416 permits annually
since 2000 and in 2005 displayed a 12.8% increase over the previous year. However,
2006 year to date figures for La Pine, Bend, and Redmond indicate that residential
permits have slowed significantly from the record levels of 2005. Nearly all of the
residential growth in La Pine has been detached, single-family residential. The exception
is the Little Deschutes Lodge, an Over 55 Senior Facility and Prairie House an assisted
living facility .
A considerable proportion of growth, roughly 37%, will be derived from households
earning less than $25,000 annually, indicating a significant number of smaller less -
advantaged families, senior and retired buyers with non -income wealth.
Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2009 Chart
Geographic Area: La Pine city, Oregon
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000
OT-I 11. General Housinc Characteristics: 2000
Data Set: Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data
Geographic Area: La Pine CDP, Oregon
Subject
`;OCCUPANCY STATUS
Total housing units
Occupied housing units
'Vacant housing units
;TENURE
Occupied housing units
Owner -occupied housing units
Renter -occupied housing units
VACANCY STATUS
Page 126
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Number,
2,975'
2.331
6441
2,331
1,883
448
Adopted 12/12/2018
Percenti
100.0
78.4j
21.61
100.0'
80.81
19.2
Vacant housing units 644 100.0
For rent 49 7.6
For sale only
61 . 9.5
Rented or sold, not occupied 17 2.6
i For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 448 69.6
1 For migratory workers 0 i 0.0
Other vacant 69 10.7
RACE OF HOUSEHOLDER
Occupied housing units 2,331 100.0!
One race 2,284 98.0
White 2,252 96.6
Black or African American 0 0.0
American Indian and Alaska Native 24 1.0
Asian 4
0.2
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Island er 1 0.0
Some other race 3 0.1
Two or more races 47 2.0
HISPANIC OR LATINO HOUSEHOLDER AND RACE OF HOUSEHOLDER
Occupied housing units 2,331 100.0
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 26 1.1
Not Hispanic or Latino 2,305 98.9
White alone 2,234 95.8
AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
Occupied housing units 2,331 100.0
15 to 24 years 57 2.4
125 to 34 yes 239 10.3
35 to 44 years 404 17.3
45 to 54 years 487 > 20.9
55 to 64 years 400 17.2
65 years and over 744 31.9
65 to 74 years 426 18.3
75 to 84 years 257 11.0
85 years and over 61 2.6
Subject
Number Percent
Population Snapshot
Between 1990 and 2000, the Central Oregon population grew by an incredible 49% as
compared to the State as a whole at 5.9%. Most of this growth is due to in -migration.
Other areas of the nation, especially in the Southwestern states, also have high in -
migration rates, but the demographics of those new residents vary greatly from Central
Oregon.
Page 127
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
US Census Bureau
tntics lc <alMies
Actual
La Pine CDP
2003
8,500
2002
8,150
2001
7,750
2000*
7,356
1995
7,205
1990*
5,355
Unincorporated
Bend
11,800
62,900
12,050
57,750
12,100
55,080
11,826
52,029
9,947
29,425
8,756
20,469
Redmond
17,450
16,110
14,960
13,481
9,650
7,163
Sisters
1,430
1,080
960
959
765
679
Unincorporated
Culver
48,720
840
51,560
840
51,050
800
48,898
802
49,660
600
46,647
570
Madras
5,370
5,290
5,200
5,078
4,290
3,443
Metolius
780
770
660
635
540
450
Warm Springs
NA
NA
NA
5,727
NA
NA
Unincorporated
County Population Projections
12,910
As
12,950
Noted By Oregon
12,740
Bureau
6,767
of Economic
9,905
Analysis
9,213
County 2 2003 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
2040
Crook 20,300 23,05127,590 32,796 -
38,553
Deschutes 130,500 158,792197,150 i 229,933
257,088
Jefferson ! 19,900 22,168 26,065 30,831
36,094
Tri-County Total 170,700 204,011 250,805 293,560
331,735
Deschutes County and La Pine Coordinated Population Forecast Data
The City and County have agreed to accept that in 2009 there was a population of 1,661
persons within the city limits". In 2029, the population within the City limits of La Pine
is expected to be 2,566 persons. The appendix contains the entire text of the coordinated
population study; also acknowledged by DLCD.
11 PSU recently updated their current population for La Pine slightly less -1653 persons versus
1661.
Page 128
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Residential Types and Values
While the community appears to have adequate affordable housing supplies, the
inventory of a full range of housing is virtually non-existent. The current housing mix is
97% single family detached and 3% attached.
Current Housing Mix
The total number of housing units in La Pine is approximately 909 housing units. Of this,
the predominant housing type in La Pine is single family detached, 876 units. These also
include manufactured homes on individual lots. There are 21 existing duplexes, 3 existing
fourplexes, and one new 26 unit, over 55 only, multi -family complex as of 2012.. It is
assumed that the demand for traditional single-family housing will remain relatively
strong over the planning period given the rural nature of La Pine and the current base of
existing single-family homes. However, La Pine will need to plan for a mix of housing
choices over the 20-year planning period.
La Pine does not currently have a enough housing choices for people to choose from. The
Plan must provide more housing opportunities to help correct this situation.
Many of the older homes are located in areas without access to community water and
sewer services. The result is potential for demonstrated water contamination and extra
cost to homeowners who have to take special and costly measures to ensure properly
working private well and septic systems. Public health and safety issues are a concern as
populations increase. This situation presents a significant problem with regard to
community health and redevelopment potential. A number of homes may appear to
satisfy affordable housing cost targets but they may have infrastructure problems that are
not easy to catalog and identify. Thus, the number of true affordable housing units that
do not have serious basic service issues is difficult to assess. Other measures to extend
public services to all areas of the community are underway and the City is absorbing the
sewer and water district.
The largest percentage of householders are age 65 an older — 32%. Those less than 34
years of age make up less than 13% of householders. However, this trend will change as
La Pine improves its economic base and implements the complete community concepts
which tend to attract younger families.
DP-4. Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics: 2000
Data Set: Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample Data
Geographic Area: La Pine CDP, Oregon
i
ySnbject
Total housing units
tUNITS IN STRUCTURE
ii unit detached
1-unit, attached
r2 units
13 or 4 units
15 to 9 units
Page 129
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Number Percent
3,0011( 100.0
1.704! 56.6
14 0,5'
0 0.0
16 0.5
0' 0.1)'
Adopted 12/12/2018
Subject
110 to 19 units
20 or more units
Mobile home
Boat, RV, van, etc.
YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT
1999 to March 2000
1995 to 1998
1990 to 1994
1980 to 1989
1970 to 1979
1960 to 1969
1940 to 1959
1939 or earlier
ROOMS
1 room
2 rooms
3 rooms
14 rooms
5 rooms
6 rooms
17 rooms
8 rooms
19 or more rooms
Median (rooms)
Occupied Housing Units
YEAR HOUSEHOLDER MOVED INTO UNIT
1999 to March 2000
1995 to 1998
1990 to 1994
11980 to 1989
11970 to 1979
11969 or earlier
VEHICLES AVAILABLE
None
11
,2
13ormore
'HOUSE HEATING FUEL
,Utility -gas
[Bottled, tank, or LP gas
!Electricity
1Fuel oil, kerosene. etc.
'Coal or coke
'Wood
Solar energy
Other fuel
INo fuel used
SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS_
I Lacking complete plumbing facilities
Lacking complete kitchen facilities
jNo telephone service
Page 130
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Number' Percent
0._ 0.0
7 0.2
1,116 37,1
151 5.0
134
406:
364
553
1,003
245
271
32
4.5
13.5
12.1
18.4
33.3
8.1
9.0
1.1
128 4.3
106 3.5
272 9.0
535 17.8
964 32.0
459! 15.3
321 10.7
121 4.0
102 3.4
5.0 (X).
2,342 100.0
518 22.1
634 27.1
583 24.9,
387 16.5.
217 9.3
3 0.1'
49 2.1
493 21.1
1,092' 46.6
708 30.2
42 1.8
106. 4.5
993' 42.4
921 3.9
0 0.0
1,062' 45.3
0 0.0
47 2,0
0 0.0
18 0.8
25 l.I
22 " 0.9
Adopted 12/12/2018
(Subject
I OCCUPANTS PER ROOM
Occupied housing units
1.00 or less
1.01 to 1.50
...........
1.51 or more
Specified owner -occupied units
VALUE
Less than $50,000
$50,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149.999
$150,000 to $199,999
$200,000 to $299,999
$300,000to $499,999
$500,000 to $999,999
$1,000,000 or more
Median (dollars)
MORTGAGE STATUS AND SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS
With a mortgage
Less than $300
$300 to $499
$500 to $699
..............
$700to$999
$1,000 to$1.499
$1,500 to $1,999
$2,000 or more
Median (dollars)
Not mortgaged
Median (dollars)
SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS AS A PERCENTAGE
OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1999
Less than 15 percent 384 37.51
15 to 19 percent 129 ! 12.6
20 to 24 percent 156 : 15.2
25 to 29 percent 107 10.4
130 to 34 percent 92 _ 9.0
35 percent or more 144 14.0'
Not computed 13 1.3
0
101,900
Number Percent
2,342 100.0
2229 95.2
101 4.3
12 `. 0.5
1.025. 100.0
52 5.1
444 43.3
319 31.1
107 10.4
74 7.2
20 2.0
9 0.9
0.0
(X):
682 66.5
7 0.7
59, 5.8
192 18.7
216 21.1
161 15.7
30 2.9
17 1.7
787 (X)
343 33.5
198 (X)
Specified renter -occupied units
'GROSS RENT
Less than $200
15200 to $299
$300 to $499
15500 to $749
. $750 to $999
1$1,000 to $1,499
}$1,500 or more
No cash rent
Median (dollars)
'GROSS RENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1999
Less than 15percent
15 to 19 percent
20 to 24 percent
125 to 29 percent ..
Page 131
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
440 100.0'
0' 0.0
14, 3.2
1091 24.8
223 50.7
51 11.6'
71 1.6
0 0.0!
36: 8.2.
558 (X).
62
24
98
33
Adopted 12/12/2018
14.1
5.5
22.3
7.5
Subject
130 to 34 percent
35j ercenl or more
Not computed
Subject
Number
30
157
36
,_
Number
Percent;
6.8
35.7':
8.2.
Percent'.
Housing Affordability Details
Housing costs in La Pine, as compared to other Central Oregon cities, has been
traditionally very favorable. Federal housing affordability standards recommend that no
more than 30 % of household income be dedicated to mortgage payments. However,
Census data shows that more than 22% of La Pine homeowners pay more than 30 percent
of their income for mortgage payments. Renters tend to pay more than 31 % of household
income on gross rent. Thus, many La Pine households are spending more for shelter than
they should. Alternatives to this situation range from more housing choices such as the
development of more affordable housing types - townhouses, zero -lot line homes, multi-
family structures, manufactured housing or condominiums, and, of course, a better jobs
market.
Median Hone Price;:
2004
Bend
La Pine
Madras/Jefferson
County
La Pine/Deschutes
County
Redmond
Sisters
Sunriver
Source: Central Oregon Association of Rea
$209,750
$116,850
$93,750
97
5,004
i5,000
ltors
Average Home Price
2006 2004
$327,500 $245,006'
$154,00011M$118,375'
$154,900 $65,421
2006
$388,607
165,170
$150,138
$105,224 '. t 34,724 $176,187
$238,000 $164,031'
$421,500 $293,474
$524,950 $455,002
$266,057
$432,508
$599,801
Aesthetic and Design Characteristics of Housing
La Pine's citizens have made it clear to local decision -makers that the small town feel of
the community should also be a template for future neighborhood development and infill.
The "complete neighborhoods" concept mentioned in Chapter 1 is essential for meeting
the expectations of the community with regard to residential development. New and
redeveloping areas will need to take into consideration the template characteristics
needed for constructing housing in "Complete Neighborhoods." Thus, adequate land for
"Complete Neighborhood" components is essential as well as a mix of housing choices
and open spaces. Mixed -uses and preservation of natural resources will also be part of
the neighborhood design and could increase the need for additional residential land
inventories.
Residential Land Need
The current city limits of La Pine contain 4,474.00 acres of land. As noted above, the
city has a 20 year population forecast that has been coordinated with Deschutes County
and acknowledged by the State of Oregon. The city's population forecast predicts that La
Pine will grow from 1697 in 2009 to 2566 in 2029, which would be an increase of 869
Page 132
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
citizens. Based on an assumed 1.98 persons per home across all housing types it will take
439 housing units to accommodate the forecasted population growth. Some of the
needed housing will be accommodated through occupancy of units that are currently
vacant while the majority will need to be constructed. If an expected 15% residential
vacancy rate is applied the total number of new housing units needed is increased to 548.
The city's residential lands need is calculated by dividing the number of additional
housing units needed by the expected average units per acre. The residential lands needs
are then further refined by applying a dedication factor to project the portion of each acre
that will be not available for residential development due to the presence of infrastructure
and other community services. The resulting figure is known as "net" acres.
The city's historic settlement pattern combined with more recent development activity,
the presence of city services and an assumed increase in attached housing indicate that a
reasonable expected development pattern is 3 units per gross acre or 4.3 units per net
acre. This figure reflects new construction and redevelopment on larger, pre-existing lots
and parcels generally of 1-2.5 acres in size for an average density of one dwelling per
acre, future subdivision activity 5- units per net acre and the projection of 25% of the
city's housing stock being multifamily at an estimated 12 units per acre. If 548 new
housing units are needed it will take a total of 182 gross acres or 126 net acres. Since the
mixed use commercial designation is expected to absorb about 23 net acres (about 32
gross acres) of housing opportunity the city's total residential lands need is approximately
149 gross acres (about 104 net acres) of undeveloped or re -developable land.
Summary OI Gross Acreages Within City Limits Including Genera. Non -Buildable
Residential
CommerciaUMixed Use
Traditional Commercial
Industrial
Public Facilities
General Non -Buildable
= 1414.0
= 168.40
= 260.30
= 508.50
= 1772.83
= 349.97
Total = 4474.00 acres per Deschutes County GIS Data
Summary of Net Vacant/Redevelopable Acreages
Residential
Commercial/Mixed Use
Traditional Commercial
Industrial
= 1135.00
= 67.95
= 103.44
= 234.00
Total = 1540.39 acres
Residential 1414.0 Gross Acres
Residential - Improved. = 129.6 Acres
Residential — Vacant and/or Redevelopable = 1284.4 Acres
Page 133
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
Total Residential Vacant/Redevelopable=1284.4 acres Less dedication factor12 of 30% = 899.08 acres
plus the 22.65 Residential net acres in Commercial Mixed -Use = 921.73 Net Acres available for
development over the life of the Plan to 2029
As shown above, there is a surplus of residential lands now within the current City limits.
Because there is a surplus that exceeds the land needed to support the projected
population, a Goal 14 exception process has been approved by the City, County, and
proposed to the State. For these and other reasons the current City limits will also serve
as the urban growth boundary UGB for the community.
Residential Districts
The Comprehensive Plan map indicates three distinct Residential Districts — these are:
Residential — Single Family; Residential — Multi -Family; and, Master Plan Residential.
The Single Family and Master Plan Residential Districts primarily identify an existing
development pattern (single family consisting of larger lot, site built homes) and
previously planned but not built out areas owned by Deschutes County. The multi -family
areas are primarily large, vacant undeveloped parcels along major transportation
corridors and are close to commercial service/employment areas. Overall, there is a
desire through the land use designations to increase the overall density within the La Pine
UGB and transition the development pattern from one where single family residential is
dominant to one that includes more medium to high density housing options. An overall
ratio of 60% single family residential to 40% multi -family residential is desirable, but the
city of La Pine is projected to meet a 75:25 ratio by 2029. The Plan provides various
strategies to meet this goal.
Table 1.
Development Type Estimated Percentage
of New Housing Stock
New Homes on & Re- 10%
Development of Existing
Large Lots
Future Subdivision 65%
Activity
Future Multi -Family 25%
Development
Estimated Residential
Density
1 units/acre
5 units/acre
12 units/acre
The city's Buildable Lands Inventory and the Goal 10 element of its comprehensive plan
show that the existing city limits and proposed urban growth boundary contain about
12 Dedication Factor means the amount of land projected as part of future developments
that may be used for future public ROW, landscaping, parks, sewer, water, storm drainage,
art, easements, street improvements, and other public purposes, etc.
Page 134
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
1284.4-acres of vacant or re -developable land to respond to a calculation of about 182 —
acres of need.
After a 30% dedication factor is applied to account for public infrastructure and other
services that would need to be provided a net amount of about 922-acres, including about
23-acres included in a Commercial Mixed Use designation, remains to respond to about
127 net acres of need.
The figures above indicate that the city's existing supply of residentially designated land
results in surplus of about 1,135 gross acres once the Commercial Mixed Use lands have
been deducted from the needs category.
Types of Housing
Single Family Residential: Due to a desire to preserve the existing character of single-
family neighborhoods, no changes to the designations of these areas are proposed.
However, upon implementation of zoning regulations, it is desirable to allow accessory
housing in some areas where large lots occur and land is under utilized. Such accessory
housing units may include studio apartments, above garage units or "granny flats." In
some instances, townhouse, cottage cluster, duplex or triplex development may be
appropriate. Any additional increase in densities within the Single family areas must be
predicated on the effects to the existing character of the neighborhood as well as the
ability for the area to be adequately served with public facilities and services. An overall
density range of 1.0 to 7.0 units per acre is desired for the Single Family Residential
District.
Multi -Family Residential: Currently only 3% of the residential development in La Pine
is multi -family (i.e. duplex, four-plex, and apartment) — 33 individual units. This shortage
of multi -family residential development is a result of past development patterns based on
inexpensive land costs combined with the lack of a municipal sewer system thereby
necessitating larger lots to accommodate on -site septic systems. Now that a city wide
sewer system is available to serve all areas, it is desirable to develop multi -family
residential options for La Pines anticipated growth. Such areas should be located along
primary transportation corridors and in areas where service commercial and employment
opportunities will be convenient to residents. Such areas should be respective of
surrounding single family residential neighborhoods and be so located to serve as an
appropriate buffer between lower density single family neighborhoods and
commercial/industrial uses. It is anticipated that the Multi -Family areas will allow a
variety of typical multi -family housing options, with some small scale service
commercial uses to serve the higher density populations. An overall density range of 5.0
to 40 units per acre is desired for the Multi Family Residential District.
Master Plan Residential: The master Plan Residential District includes a large area
within the center of the urban area, lying between Highway 97 on the east and
Huntington Road on the north. The area is also bounded by the traditional Wickiup
Junction community on the north (Burgess Road) and the historically developed portions
of La Pine on the south. This large expanse of land is owned by Deschutes County and
Page 135
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
remains largely undeveloped except for a single family area that was subdivided and
developed with homes in the mid 2000's. The County has developed a conceptual master
plan for the area and has included internal areas for neighborhood commercial, public
facilities/school site, and open space/recreation areas. The overall concept is to allow a
development pattern that incorporates a balanced mix of traditional single family
residential development with a variety of multi -family residential options. The overall
densities are aimed at being a blend of traditional single family and multi family
residential development patterns spread out throughout the area. The densities within
specific areas of the district are intended to be more dependent on complimentary design
elements and arrangements of facilities (i.e. proximity to commercial services, proximity
to schools, design of pedestrian amenities, etc.) rather than prescriptive zoning
boundaries. An overall density range of 3.0 to 21.0 units per acre is desired for the Master
Plan Residential District.
Mixed Use Commercial Residential District
The Comprehensive Plan map includes a Mixed Use Commercial Residential area in the
southern part of the city, along a traditional hard-line, prescriptive boundary between
standard Commercial and single-family Residential. Most of the land along on either side
of this boundary is either undeveloped or under -developed. The Mixed Use Commercial
Residential District is intended primarily as a smaller scale, service and office
commercial district, with associated residential that may consist of upper level
apartments. A live -work design concept within the mixed use district would serve as an
appropriate buffer between the formal commercial and residential districts, which abut.
Although, stand alone commercial and residential uses that are designed to be compatible
with uses would also be appropriate Multi -family development in the Mixed
abutting d Yr-"Y--'•--• �
Use Commercial Residential District should be subject to the same standards as that
within Multi -family Residential District. It is desirable for the development within the
mixed use district to be master planned, but that may not be possible in all properties due
to the small to medium size of the parcels. Some assemblage of properties will be
necessary for proper master planning.
Transition Areas
The two Transition Areas within the City (as shown on the Comprehensive Plan map) are
located along the Burgess Road, Huntington Road and Highway 97corridors (in the
northern part of the City) and on some undeveloped properties in the southern part of the
City where single family residential land abuts industrial land. The Transition Areas,
which total 212 acres, were so designated because these areas were primarily
undeveloped larger lots and are located in areas where adjoining land uses and
transportation facilities could cause conflicts between uses. Additionally, these
properties are located in areas where increased residential density and/or a mix of
residential and commercial uses may be appropriate due to their proximity to major
transportation corridors and existing facilities and services.
North Transition Area
Page 136
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The Transition Area in the north is approximately 162 acres and includes a large
undeveloped area on the north side of Burgess Road, east of Huntington Road and an
undeveloped parcel along Highway 97 south of the Burgess/Highway 97 intersection, as
well as the majority of the length of the south side of Burgess Road. Although the
underlying designations on the Comprehensive Plan map for these areas are shown as
Master Planned Residential, Multi -Family Residential and Forest, it is assumed that there
may be necessary changes to the land use development pattern in the future as a result of
recent and planned transportation system improvements. A traffic signal was recently
installed at the intersection of Burgess Road and Huntington Road (two arterial
roadways) due to the surrounding development pattern, the presence of a new school, the
existing volume of traffic, and the expected increase in volume of traffic in the immediate
area. Also, the Oregon Department Transportation has planned a new interchange at the
Burgess Road and Highway 97 intersection (Wickiup Junction) — this busy intersection
has been a safety hazard in the area for many years as it is a primary access point between
the western portions of La Pine and outlying areas, and the north/south Highway 97
corridor.
Because an increase in traffic volume can be expected on the roadways serving these
areas, it is assumed that this will have a long term influence on the livability and desired
development pattern. Also, because these areas lie adjacent to and between the
transportation facilities and areas with existing development (a large area developed with
single family residential on large lots north of Burgess Road), it is appropriate that any
development within these areas serve as a transitional buffer between the road corridor
and the existing and anticipated development. Further, because the Transition Area is in
close proximity to existing and planned commercial services, a school and a potential
residential d__sity, ii.. the south side of
transit corridor, an increase in reSiuGuuai ucii�i�y, espcCiauy along of
Burgess Road corridor, would be appropriate as more residents can be served efficiently
and effectively from these locations.
As the development and improvements to the transportation facilities occurs in the future,
a development pattern that includes a mixture of service commercial uses and medium
density residential development is desired. Such development should occur in a master
planned fashion and should treat all sides of the development in a similar fashion — the
development must not be linear in nature and should tie together all sides of the
surrounding development.
South Transition Area
The Transition Area in the south is approximately 50 acres in area and includes large,
undeveloped parcels that lie along the southeastern edge of the City's Industrial district.
This area overlaps land that is currently designated for Single Family Residential uses,
but if developed as such, could pose compatibility problems with the anticipated
surrounding industrial development. Because of the Transition Area's location between
the main commercial center to the west and the industrial district to the east, it is a prime
area for multi -family dwelling development constructed in a fashion where higher
densities occur along the industrial edge and lower densities along the single family
residential edge.
Page 137
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
As development of the industrial and single family residential areas occurs over time, the
development of the transition area as a graduated multi -family residential buffer between
the uses is desired. It is anticipated that the average density within the transition area will
be medium density, but portions along the edges will vary in their densities in a manner
that corresponds with the desired development pattern in the adjoining district. Such
development should occur in a master planned fashion and should treat all sides of the
development in a similar fashion — the development should be done in a manner where it
is integrated into the surrounding development pattern and be respective of all sides of
the surrounding uses.
IV. Transition Area Goals and Policies
Goals
1. Recognize that future infrastructure development, specifically transportation
improvements, will cause a change to the existing and anticipated land use
patterns over time.
2. Recognize that buffer and transitional development between potentially
incompatible land uses shall be implemented.
Policies
1. Transition Area Overlay Zones shall be created and located in portions of the
City where anticipated infrastructure development and adjoining land uses
may cause a change in the desired underlying land use patterns, and where
buffers between potentially incompatible land uses are necessary.
2. Development within Transition Areas shall be master planned to show an
inter -relationship between the proposed development, and infrastructure and
adjoining land uses.
3. Transition Area development shall allow increased residential densities along
primary transportation corridors.
4. A mix of uses, including service commercial uses, may be appropriate as part
of a master planned development within the transition areas.
5. Transition Area development shall not be linear in nature and shall be
comprised of a pattern that is integrated into and respective of the surrounding
development pattern to the greatest extent practicable given parcel size and
configuration.
6. Densities may be averaged over the entirety of the parcel, but shall transition
from higher densities adjacent to adjoining uses with the highest intensity to
lower densities adjacent to adjoining uses with lower intensities.
7. Guidelines for Transition Area development shall be implemented, but such
guidelines shall not be so specific as to prevent adaptability over time or to
limit good design.
Programs
Page 138
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
1. Draft zoning regulations that specify land use guidelines for the Transition
Area Overlay Zones. Such regulations shall include provisions for master
plan development.
2. Coordinate transportation infrastructure improvements with State and County
agencies to ensure compatibility with adjoining land uses within Transition
Areas.
V. General Housing Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Encourage a wide range housing types satisfying the urban development
needs of the La Pine community.
Policies
• It is essential to develop strategies that increase the variety of housing choices in
the community. These strategies must include an inventory and analysis of
needed housing types, existing housing supplies, and strategies for meeting the
changing community demographic.
• It is necessary to provide adequate buildable residential land for the 20-year
planning horizon. The La Pine community needs a full range of housing types to
sustain a healthy community
• It is necessary to accommodate growthand de mechanisms to ensure that a
11o11Q.le provide
variety of housing options for all income levels are available in both existing
neighborhoods and new residential areas.
• It is necessary to encourage development and redevelopment of residential areas
to make them safe, convenient, and attractive places to live and located close to
schools, services, parks, shopping and employment centers.
• Residential developments shall be located in close proximity to employment and
shopping opportunities.
• The community should maintain the feel of a small community through careful
design of new and redeveloping residential areas. Mixed -use and "Complete
Neighborhood" design techniques can accomplish this objective.
• A regular housing analysis shall be the basis for understanding and projecting
housing needs. City staff will need to manage the calibration data in order to
accommodate local cultural characteristics and anomalies. This shall include
analysis of financial capability and policies/programs as needed to improve
financial capability.
Page 139
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Development code regulations should allow and provide standards for a range of
housing types including multi -family, townhouses, zero lot line, cottage/tiny
home developments, accessory dwelling units, and low income housing within the
UGB.
• La Pine desires to encourage and sustain affordable housing while protecting the
physical characteristics of land relating to the carrying capacity of the land,
drainage, natural features, and vegetation.
• Where multi -family development is permitted in commericial districts it should
generally be subject to the same density and design standards as that within Multi -
Family Residential District.
Goal # 2: Determine opportunities for housing rehabilitation, redevelopment, and
connection to urban infrastructure and services.
Policies
• It is important to inventory existing residences in need of rehabilitation and
develop strategies to improve housing stock
•
• Housing that is in need of rehabilitation, without connections to urban services
limits the livability of the community, and diminishes redevelopment potential.
• The La Pine community understands that it is necessary for the public health and
situations her,
safety of the community to identify and remedy where residences are
not connected to City sewer and water.
• Improved residential structural integrity and weatherproofing will reduce energy
consumption levels for those living in older homes and the overall community.
Goal # 3: Identify and permit alternatives to traditional stick -built homes, such as
manufactured, mobile homes, and accessory dwellings necessary for providing a range of
housing choices with in the UGB.
Policies
• Manufactured, mobile homes, and accessory dwellings are appropriate in certain
residential areas and subject to the same siting requirements and compatibility
standards as traditional stick -built homes.
• It is necessary for the public health and safety of the community to allow for a full
range of housing types for all income levels.
Page 140
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 12/12/2018
• The La Pine community contains a significant number of older mobile homes and
manufactured homes that need repair or replacement.
• State law requires the City to establish clear and objective criteria and standards
for the placement and design of mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks.
• In order to protect the public health and safety of all residents the City, in
conjunction with the Deschutes County Building Department, La Pine shall
impose safety and inspection requirements for homes, which were not constructed
in conformance with the National Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards Act of 1974.
• In order to enhance industry and commerce, a mobile home or manufactured
dwelling park shall not be established on land zoned for commercial or industrial
use unless needed to address workforce -housing needs.
• Accessory dwellings to homes, i.e. "Granny flats", are necessary to provide a
range of housing types in new subdivisions and existing neighborhoods subject to
appropriate compatibility standards and siting requirements.
• Temporary housing for medical hardships and the disadvantaged is necessary and
shall be permitted in residential areas and subject to special development
conditions.
Goal # 4: Promote and protect neighborhood qualities that reflect the small town
appeal of La Pine and improve compatibility between various uses.
Policies:
• Compatibility standards are effective tools for making sure neighborhood uses are
consistent with community goals and design standards.
• The La Pine community demands a quality living experience for all residents and
multi -family developments. Thus, site plans for multi -family developments or
attached single-family housing are required to provide for adequate yard space for
residents and play space for children which have distinct area and definite shape,
appropriate for the proposed use, and are not just the residue left after buildings
are designed and placed on the land. It is necessary for the public health and
safety of the community to monitor and manage neighborhood uses.
• The La Pine community desires to preserve, protect, and strengthen the vitality
and stability of existing neighborhoods while permitting uses that make
neighborhoods more "complete" and reduce vehicle miles traveled.
• Developments that border underdeveloped urban lands and/or rural lands at the
edges of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) shall include design techniques to
Page 141
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
reduce the impact of new, denser urban development on abutting lower density
lands. Examples of such techniques include the use of buffer areas, designing
projects that work with the natural features of the site, shadow plats, and
redevelopment plans that extend 300 feet off site, density transition zones,
increased landscaping, master planning areas larger than the project site, etc.
• New residential developments in areas without an established character or quality
should be permitted maximum flexibility in design and housing type consistent
with densities and goals and objectives of this Plan.
• New developments in existing residential areas where there is an established
character deemed desirable by community standards should use a variety of
compatibility techniques to blend in with surrounding developments, including
landscaping, traffic patterns, mass, height, screened parking areas, public
facilities, visual impact, architectural styles and lighting.
• "Complete Neighborhoods" include private and public nonresidential uses for the
convenience and safety of the neighborhood residents. These uses should be
permitted within residential areas. Such facilities shall be compatible with
surrounding developments, and their appearance should enhance the area.
• Multi -modal access should be provided internally and to adjacent new and
existing neighborhood developments.
• Where alleys are available, garages or parking areas in neighborhoods should be
accessed from alleys instead of driveways connecting to public streets.
• Residential units should be permitted above or as an incidental use in conjunction
with certain commercial and industrial uses as a way to improve compatibility
between uses and zones.
• A range of housing types, including housing for the elderly, disabled,
developmentally challenged and low-income citizens of the community should be
dispersed throughout those residential neighborhoods, which are close to schools,
services, parks, shopping and employment centers rather than concentrating these
dwellings in just a few areas.
• A range of lot sizes should be dispersed throughout the community to provide
space for a full spectrum of housing types.
• Higher density developments should be in close proximity to schools, services,
parks, shopping, employment centers, and public transit.
• Smaller lot sizes may be appropriate and should be encouraged with flexible
Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinances allowing a mix of lot sizes.
Page 142
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Areas developed or designated for multi -family development should be
compatible with adjoining land uses and not detract from the character of existing
residential areas.
• The location of most multi -family housing will be best suited near the City core,
major transportation corridors, schools, services, parks, shopping, employment
centers, and transit corridors.
Goal # 5: Promote quality affordable housing and recognize that lack of affordable
housing is an economic issue negatively affecting the vitality and sustainability of La
Pine
Policies
• Affordable housing should be available for all income levels in the community.
This issue affects all citizens because the economic health of the community is
tied to providing greater choices in housing types.
• It is necessary for the public health, safety, and economic values of the
community to improve awareness of affordable housing problems and to
encourage affordable housing for all income levels.
• A lack of particular housing choices create traffic congestion as people commute
from one community to another, increase costs for businesses related to employee
travel time, employee absences, unnecessary J expansionsparking
street and parlring
b
demand, reduced mobility for certain disadvantaged groups, and unnecessary
community subsidy to remedy these and other impacts.
• The profit margin on affordable housing projects is very thin. Barriers to
affordable housing will need to be removed from local regulations and land use
processes to enable property owners and developers to pursue affordable housing
projects.
• The City will be experiencing the same types of demographic forces that currently
impact Bend, Redmond, and other communities in Oregon. For example, the
population will age and the baby -boomer generation will retire. Households will
become smaller. To prepare for this eventuality La Pine must provide for a variety
of housing types. The variety will help meet affordability demand, and it will help
meet new housing demand in general. Since there will be more single head of
households, people will desire units that are smaller and those that will require
less maintenance and can be located within walking distances of shopping, houses
of worship, parks/recreation, schools, and medical facilities. This dictates
development of more compact housing forms and innovations in how structures
are designed and arranged to suit a variety of needs.
Page 143
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• The City and County should encourage subsidized housing to be located at a
variety of locations in close proximity to support services and/ore near transit.
• Residential zones and other neighborhoods should offer a wide variety of
compatible housing types and densities.
Goal # 6: Recognize that addressing the housing needs of the community is essential
to the successful future of La Pine as desirable place to live, work, shop, and play.
Policies
• Strategies to improve the type and range of housing choices in the community
must be based upon careful examination of demographic data, trends, and local
demands.
• Certain development regulations and techniques can influence the market -driven
nature of housing development.
• The recent Census data is one of many resources necessary to examine for
understanding local and regional demographics.
• The vitality of the City depends not just on the health of one aspect of housing but
preferably by taking a systemic approach to growth and development,
preservation and continuity.
.
• The greatest housing needs include a more diverse base of affordable rental
opportunities signified by range of rent and housing type, particularly smaller
sized structures such as duplexes and triplexes. However, the ability to take
advantage of low interest rates has moved many people into homeownership
where they are paying more than 30% of income on mortgages.
• The community needs more affordable single-family homes. Some potential
homebuyers are being priced out of the market due to insufficient income and
escalating real estate prices. For renters, the census data and other information
suggests that there is a high demand for units serving people under 80% of
median income. It also appears there are very few apartment units affordable to
people at median income or less, and yet many households are paying more than
30% of household income for housing.
• There is a need for temporary shelters or transitional housing opportunities for
people with special needs, including but not limited to, households experiencing
domestic violence issues, or youth homelessness.
• The population projections anticipate more than 400 new units will be needed by
2029. This means that the community will need to provide more living units for
Page 144
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
new households where families will number 2.80 to 3.00 persons per household.
Thus, over the 20-year period the community is expected to grow at 3 % per year
on average.
VI. Programs
The City shall:
1. Regularly monitor and analyze residential land inventories each year.
2. Determine housing type demand and encourage mechanisms to permit
development of needed housing types and minimum density levels in master
planned areas and mixed -use areas.
3. Allocate where the identified needed housing should be developed by using
overlay mapping techniques and framework planning.
4. Require the development of "Complete Neighborhoods." The City may need to
update development regulations in order to remove any barriers that restrict
quality residential design and/or hinder "complete neighborhood development".
5. Update the development codes with regard to housing development and natural
feature protection.
6. Inventory and determine which types of residential units and neighborhoods
would benefit from rehabilitation and connection to urban services.
7. Encourage rehabilitation and maintenance of housing in existing neighborhoods
to preserve the housing stock and increase the availability of safe and sanitary
living units.
8. Explore funding options such as CDBG, HOME, and other local, State or Federal
programs designed to help promote affordable housing and to help disadvantaged
property owners rehabilitate their homes.
9. Study and develop a range of incentives and other programs aimed at helping the
community understand the value of participating in the rehabilitation of housing
units.
10. Revise and update the development codes to ensure that wide ranges of housing
types are required and permitted throughout the community.
11. Inventory all manufactured, mobile and accessory dwellings.
12. Provide for mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks within the urban growth
boundaries to allow persons and families a choice of residential settings.
Page 145
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
13. Update regulations to require development of new mobile home parks and siting
of individual mobile homes consistent with State law.
14. Develop special standards for the siting and development of accessory dwellings.
15. Institute fee mechanisms and programs that help to encourage the development of
affordable housing.
16. Develop land use regulations to improve compatibility standards between uses in
the development of "complete neighborhoods" and redevelopment in existing
neighborhoods.
17. Develop the land use regulations to require multi -modal access in new and
redeveloping neighborhoods as appropriate.
18. Develop the land use regulations to permit a range of housing types and flexible
PUD standards that encourage more efficient use of land.
19. Participate with Housing Works(formerly Central Oregon Regional Housing
Authority), COCAAN and/or other public or private non-profit organizations in
the development of a regional housing plan to address issues and to establish
programs which address housing affordability, density, home ownership,
neighborhoods and location. Such plans should provide for a detailed
management program to assign respective implementation roles and
responsibilities to those governmental bodies operating in the planning area and
having interests in carrying out the goal.
20. Provide funding for affordable housing when feasible and with community
consensus.
21. Modify the development review process to expedite affordable housing proposals
and reduce development and operating costs when such proposals are in
accordance with zoning ordinances and with provisions of comprehensive plans.
22. Determine that SDC payments and other development deposits, fees and taxes for
affordable housing projects will be deferred until title transfer or final occupancy
of the structure. Additional methods and devices for reducing development
barriers should be examined and, after consideration of the impact on lower
income households, include, but not be limited to: (1) tax incentives and
disincentives; (2) building and construction code revision; (3) zoning and land use
controls; (4) subsidies and loans; (5) fee and less -than -fee acquisition techniques;
(6) enforcement of local health and safety codes; and (7) coordination of the
development of urban facilities and services to disperse low income housing
throughout the planning area.
Page 146
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
23. Examine any needed changes to local regulations to create incentives for
increasing population densities in urban areas taking into consideration (1) key
facilities, (2) the economic, environmental, social and energy consequences of the
proposed densities and (3) the optimal use of existing urban land particularly in
sections containing significant amounts of unsound substandard structures. This
may include the promotion and development of institutional and financial
mechanisms to provide for affordable housing and the investigation of available
federal, state and local programs and private options for financing affordable and
special needs housing.
24. Monitor the stability of existing affordable housing options to determine their
sustainability and usefulness.
25. Encourage and support social and health service organizations, which offer
support programs for those with special needs, particularly those programs that
help people remain in the community.
26. Preserve existing affordable housing through adoption of land use regulations that
promote affordable housing and examine altematives for providing services,
including transit.
27. Create an inventory of city -owned land that can be set aside for special housing
development (TDC credits, low income, etc.) this may include the development of
organizational capability to coordinate such efforts.
28. Develop a density bonus program in which developers may receive "credit" in
additional units (beyond what zoning allows) if units available and affordable to
households under 80% of median income are integrated into new projects.
29. Modify the development regulations to allow housing above retail in the town
center/downtown.
30. Develop workforce housing standards and implementation programs.
31. Build understanding and support for affordable housing by instituting a public
information program and community forums.
32. Examine the most recent sources of data to determine housing needs and monitor
demographic trends.
33. Promote an awareness of housing issues and provide regulatory solutions. This
may include changes to development regulations and increased flexibility for
those who desire to build affordable housing units.
Page 147
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
34. Provide flexible regulations as appropriate for those entities that propose to build
temporary shelters and transitional housing opportunities.
35. Monitor and evaluate the population projections as they are amended from time to
time. The City shall also inventory all new development and prepare a report of
all new activity and housing unit creation, demolitions and expansion.
City of LaPine — Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 11
Energy Conservation
I. State Planning Goal 13, Energy Conservation
Page 148
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Oregon State Planning Goal 13 intends that the land itself, the uses and the arrangement
of the land and uses be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all
forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles. The methods prescribed by the
Goal require maximum efficiency in energy utilization should be achieved through the
implementation measures of land use planning. Consideration must also be given to
redevelopment of land that is no longer being utilized to its maximum extent, including
increased density of housing development along high volume transportation corridors to
encourage use of multi -modal transportation systems. Additionally, development should
encourage the conservation of natural resources and minimize the depletion of non-
renewable resources — when ever possible land use plans should encourage the use of
renewable resources. However, in doing so, the local and regional development pattern
must be taken into consideration. Rural areas that rely on larger service areas and greater
travel distances should initiate programs locally to meet the intent of the goal through
greater self reliance.
II. Purpose and Intent
The conservation of energy in every community has a different set of variables that must
be evaluated and weighed when developing local rules regarding energy consumption.
For La Pine, the large travel distance between the primary employment and service areas
of Bend and Redmond to the north must be taken into consideration. Additionally, the
very cold, snowy winters and hot, dry summers have implications not only the amount of
energy consumed, but also the opportunity to implement local policies to reduce
consumption. While there are always methods that can be put into effect, in communities
like La Pine with these unique circumstances some methods that may work in other
communities may not be practical in La Pine. For instance, in the northern part of
Deschutes County, where winters are milder and commute distances are shorter, pure
energy consumption in the form of heating and cooling, and automobile fuel
consumption, are not as great as they are in La Pine. Thus, while certain energy saving
policies toward local development can be implemented, there are certain factors that
cannot be ignored. Although, at the local level there are a variety of development patters
that can be implemented in La Pine to begin to more efficiently use energy resources.
III. Issues
Travel Requirements
The City of La Pine serves as a service center for the outlying rural area which has a
sprawling residential development pattern that was established in the 1960's, prior to
Oregon's current land use planning requirements. The outlying area lacks many urban
services, including commercial and service needs necessary for everyday life. Although
lacking some services itself, the City of La Pine is the primary source for services such as
grocery shopping, education and medical facilities. Thus, the transportation system is
key to the citizens of the area, beyond the La Pine City limits. Most of the outlying
residents needing such services from La Pine reside within 10 miles of the city limits.
Page 149
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Notwithstanding the fact that La Pine is the service area for many everyday needs to the
surrounding area, La Pine is still today lacking some more specific requirements of
everyday life (such as hospital and specialty/emergency medical services, and upper
education opportunities) and a variety of employers and employment options. Thus,
regional travel, primarily to the City of bend 35 miles to the north is essential.
The large distance between La Pine, the outlying residents and the larger service areas
make vehicular travel the primary method of transportation. This is the most energy
consumptive methods of travel in the immediate area. In order to minimize vehicular
energy consumption the transportation system must be efficient and economical. A key
component in future development will be to work with Deschutes County and ODOT to
maintain an efficient and economical transportation system. Additionally, La Pine must
seek methods for improving mass transit opportunities to move people and goods
between La Pine, the outlying areas and larger service centers to the north in a more
efficient manner.
Existing Development Pattern
The existing development pattern in La Pine was primarily established in the 1950's and
1960's. The commercial pattern is oriented toward US Highway 97 which bisects the
community. The residential pattern is removed from the commercial areas and consists
of larger lot neighborhoods. This pattern results in difficulty for pedestrians and
bicyclists traveling between their homes and service areas. New development patterns
which require increased density along primary street corridors, with the development of
bike lanes, sidewalks and bike/pedestrian trails that link residential areas to public
destinations will encourage alternative travel modes (other than automobiles) and reduce
energy consumption.
Energy Suppliers and Opportunities
La Pine's industrial areas and key location within Central Oregon will attract businesses
seeking to develop alternative energy sources. A potential Bio-mass or other similar
facility could easily locate to La Pine given the abundance of served industrial sites.
Utilities to serve such uses will need to be coordinated with the service providers to
ensure capacity availability. Mid -State Electric Co-operative provides electrical services
to the community including long-range service and expansion plans. Natural Gas
services are available from Cascade Natural Gas and opportunities for expansion are
included in their long range capital program plans.
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Create an arrangement and density of land uses to encourage energy
conservation.
Policies
Page 150
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Land use patterns shall achieve greater density for new residential development,
including greater density along primary roadways where multi -modal
transportation options are more practical.
• The City will require new construction to meet State standards and all building
code requirements for weatherization and energy conservation.
• The land planning and site design shall encourage the positioning of buildings and
use of vegetation to regulate the effects of the sun during the winter and summer
months to implement passive energy use for heating and reduce the need for
supplemental cooling.
• The City shall encourage the development of alternative energy sources such as
solar, wind, geothermal and bio-mass.
• Lands that can accommodate energy production as a transitional use shall be
encouraged.
• The City will seek ways to require and will encourage the further development of
sidewalks, trails and other bike and pedestrian paths.
• The City shall increase the efficiency of all City operations where possible.
• Encourage recycling efforts throughout the community.
V. Programs
The City shall:
1. Collaborate with the Parks and Recreation District to create plans for the
development of an efficient pedestrian bike and trail system.
2. Collaborate with Deschutes County and the Oregon Department of
Transportation to develop and maintain an economical and efficient
transportation system.
3. Develop land use regulations that increase residential densities along
primary transportation corridors for new developed areas.
4. Develop land use regulations that require development to be oriented so that
the effects of solar energy can be both maximized and minimized during the
winter and summer months respectively.
Page 151
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
City of LaPine — Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 12
Urbanization
I. State Planning Goal 14, Urbanization
The goal intends that cities provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to
urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban
growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable
communities.
The Comprehensive Planning Process included an analysis of buildable land within the
City limits as established with the 2006 incorporation. Along with the buildable lands
determination, such lands were examined for their ability to be provided with necessary
public facilities and services — this was coordinated with the master plans and
comprehensive plans of the service providers and special districts. Based on this
analysis, it was determined that the area within the existing City boundary contains
enough land area to meet the projected housing and economic land needs for the
projected population growth over the 20-year planning period. Thus, based upon this and
the commensurate Goal 14 Exception, the Urban Growth Boundary is the same as the
established incorporated boundary. An expansion of the UGB and/or City boundary is
not anticipated at this time.
II. Purpose and Intent
The purpose of the city in meeting this goal is to conform with the laws and statutes for
establishing a sufficiency of buildable lands within urban growth boundary and making
sure that there is a supportable analysis and determination of needed residential housing
patterns. The appendix and other references above indicate that the inventory of
buildable lands within the city limits is more than adequate to meet the demand over the
20 year planning period. This in combination with the inventory of economic and needed
park, recreation, open space and utility facility lands shows that the current city limits is
more than adequate to serve the needs of the community over a 20 year period.
When comparing the amount of acres available for housing of all types within the city
limits with the necessary acres and number of housing units, the data shows that there is a
surplus of acreage available within the current city limits to accommodate the projected
housing need. A Goal 14 exception is required as noted below. With approval of the
exception, the city limits can serve as the proposed UGB and this is commensurate with
the existing incorporated boundary.
III. Issues
Page 152
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Transition of Resource lands to needed public facility (PF zone) utility expansion,
ROW for ODOT Overpass project, energy production, large lot employment,
recreation and open spaces.
The City of La Pine currently contains over a thousand acres of forest and BLM lands.
These lands are located on the eastern part of the community and mostly east of the
BNSF rail line. These acres will be used for public facilities such as sewer expansion,
ROW for the ODOT overpass, energy production, and other public uses..
Mixed Use Commercial Residential Districts
The Comprehensive Plan map includes a Mixed Use Commercial Residential area in the
southern part of the city, along a traditional hard-line, prescriptive boundary between
standard Commercial and single-family Residential. Most of the land along on either
side of this boundary is either undeveloped or under -developed. The Mixed Use
Commercial Residential District is intended primarily as a smaller scale, service and
office commercial district, with associated residential that may consist of upper level
apartments. A live -work design concept within the mixed -use district would serve as an
appropriate buffer between the traditional commercial and residential districts.. Although
stand alone commercial and residential uses that are designed to be compatible with
abutting uses would also be appropriate. It is desirable for the development within the
mixed -use district to be master planned, but that may not be possible in all properties due
to the small to medium size of the parcels. Some assemblage of properties will be
necessary for proper master planning.
Public Schools — Bend -La Pine School District
The Bend -La Pine School District currently operates La Pine High School, La Pine
Middle School, and La Pine Elementary. A new elementary school has been built on the
south side of Burgess Road in the Newberry Neighborhood. As the subdivision develops
over time (this was anticipated to be built for half enrollment (300 students) in 2010, with
completion for a total enrollment of 600 students by 2015. Overall, the enrollment of the
La Pine schools has grown, mostly as a result of residential development and growth in
the outlying rural area between La Pine and Sunriver to the north. La Pine Elementary
serves kindergarten through 4th grade with an enrollment of approximately 475 students.
La Pine Middle School serves 5th through 8th grades with an enrollment of approximately
520 students. La Pine High School serves 9th through 12th grades with an enrollment of
approximately 540 students.
School District officials have confirmed they have no plans within the next 20 years to
develop additional schools within the City limits or UGB. The School Facility Plan and
the confirmation are incorporated into this document and can be found in the Appendix
and restated as part of the chapter discussing Goal 14.
Population Forecast
The data provided by Deschutes County below shows that there are approximately 1,653
— 1,697 persons within the City Limits. There is no accurate data for the City limits prior
to this date since La Pine was not incorporated at the time of the previous Census.
Page 153
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Table 1 - Comparing Population Forecasts
Geographic Area
oeschutee County
Bend
Redmond
Sisters
la Pam
Unincorporated
2010
157733
76,639
26 215
2,038
1b03
51,188
US Census
2000
152,02.,,,�6r
9
13481
9 95
N/A
48,898
10 yr % Change
3A7%"
47.3%
94416
112.5%
NIA
4.7%
2010
76,740
23;225
2,040
1800
51,240
to PStl.t precast .. ", .
2000
118 800
52 800
13,770
975
N1A
49,055
10 yr % Change
35416
45396
90.5%
109.2%
N/A
4.5%
2010 ColrntyCoord, Forecast
2010
1885'72
81,242
23,897
2,306
1,597
57430
2000
N1A
47320
10 yr % Change
4%:99b
53.996
64>196
136.5%
NIA
21.4%
Table 2 -US Census Population
Geographic Area
2010
2000
1990
Deschutes County
Bend
Redmond
Sisters
La Pine
Unincorporated
157,733 715,367 . 4,9a8"
76,639 52,029 20,447
26,215. 13,481 7,165
2,038 959 708
1,653 NIA N/Ai
51,188 48,898 46,638
Table 4 - Portland Statue University (PSU) July 1st Population Estimates
Geographic Area 2010
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000
0e8c8u80County: 187,905 170,705 167,015 150,910 .152615 143,490 '135,450":130,800+ 128,500 122,050 116,600',
Send 76,740 82,280 80,995 77,780 75,290 70,330 65,210 62,900 57,750 55,080 52,800
Redmond 28,225 25,800 25,445 24,805 23500 20,010 18,100 17,45018,110 < 14,950 13,770
Sisters 2,040 1,925 1,875 1,825 1,745 1,660 1,490 1,430 1.080 980 975
to Pine 1,660 1,625 1,610 1,590 NIA N/A NIA NIA NIA N/A N/A
Unincorporated 51,240 59,075 57,090 54.810 52,080 51,490 50.650 48.720 51,560 51.050 49,055
Table 5 -Annual Population Change end Percentage Change based an PSU Population Estimates
Geographic Area
Deschutes County
Bend
Redmond;
Sisters
La Pine
Unincorporated
2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 2001-02 2000-01
•12,800 3,190 6, 8,195 9,125 8;040 4,950 4,000 4,450 54.471,'
-7.5% 2 296 3.9% 5,496 8.4% -5 9% 3.8% 3.2% 3.8%
-5,540 1,285 3,215 2,490 4,960 5,120 2,310 5,150 2,670 2,280
-6.7% 1.6% 4.1% 3.3% 7,1% 7 9% 3.7% 8.9% 4.8% 43%
425 355 640 1,305 3,490 1,910 650 1,340 1,150 1,190'
1.6% 1.496 2.6% 5.6% 17.456 10.696 3 796 8 356 7 7% 8 896;'
116 50 50 80 85 170 60 350 120 -15
6.0% 2.7% 2.7% 4.6% 5.1% 11.4% 4.2% 32.4% 12.5% -1.5%
35 15 20 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ` NIA'
2.2% 0.9% 1.396
7,835 1,985 2,280 2,730 590 840 1,930 -2,840 510 1,995
-13,3% 3.5% 4.2% 5.2% 1.1% 1.7% 4.0% -5.5% 1.0% 4 1%
Table 6 - Average Annual Growth Rate based on PSU
Estimates
Geographic Area
2000 to 2010
Deschutes County
Bend
Redmond
Sisters
3.08
3.81
6.65
7.66
Page 154
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
The population of the County has increased significantly since the adoption of the
comprehensive plan in 1979 as the charts indicate.
PopulMion Growth in Deschutes County: 1980 to 2000
Sources
1980
1990
2000
Population Research Center - July 1 estimates
62,500
75,600
116,600
Census Bureau - April 1 census counts
62,142
74,958
115,367
ORS 195.025(1) requires the counties to coordinate local plans and population forecasts. In 1996,
Bend, Redmond, Sisters and the County reviewed the most recent population forecasts from the
Portland State University Center for Population Research and Census, the Department of
Transportation, Woods and Poole, the Bonneville Power Administration and the State Department
of Administrative Services Office of Economic Analysis. After review of these projections, the
cities and Deschutes County agreed on the coordinated population forecast adopted by the County
in 1998 by Ordinance 98-084.
The results of the 2000 decennial census and subsequent population estimates prepared by the
Population Research Center (PRC) at Portland State University revealed the respective populations
of the County and the incorporated cities were growing faster that contemplated under the 1998
coordinated forecast. The cites and the County engaged in a coordination process between 2002
and 2004 that culminated with the County adopting a revised population forecast that projected
population for the cities and the County to the year 2025. The following table displays the 2004
coordinated population forecast for Deschutes County and the urban growth boundaries of the cities
of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters from 2000 to 2025:
2000-2025 Coordinated Population Forecast
Year
Bend UGB
Redmond UGB
Sisters UGB
Unincorporated
County
Total
County
2000
52,800
15,505
975
47,320
116,600
2005
69,004
19,249
1,768
53,032
143,053
2010
81,242155
23,897
2,306
59,127
166,572
2015
91,158
29,667
2,694
65.924
189,443
2020
100,646
36,831
3,166
73,502
214,145
2025
109,389
45,724
3,747
81,951
240,811
The process through which the County and the cities coordinated to develop the 2000-2025
coordinated forecast is outlined in the report titled "Deschutes County Coordinated Population
Forecast 2000-2025: Findings in Support of Forecast" dated July 2004. This report provides the
findings in support of the adopted forecast. The Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan
(1979) included a population forecast from 1980 to 2000 that was incorporated in several chapters.
In 1998, the County adopted a coordinated population forecast under ORS 195.036. The following
table displays all three forecasts for comparison:
Page 155
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Deschutes County Population Forecasts
from 1979, 1998, and 2004
Year
1979
forecast
1998
forecast
2004
forecast
Adopted 12/12/2018
1980
53,400
66,600
-
-
-
-
1985
1990
82,900
74,958
1995
103,400
94,100
-
2000
128,200
113,231
116,600
2005
-
132,239
143,053
2010
-
151,431
166,572
2015
-
167,911
189,443
2020
-
182,353
214,145
2025
-
-
240,811
The fourth city in Deschutes County is La Pine. Incorporated on November 7, 2006, the City of La
Pine's 2006 population estimate of 1,590 was certified by Portland State University, Population and
Research Center on December 15, 2007. As of January 1, 2009, La Pine is coordinating with the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to develop its first comprehensive
plan. As a result of La Pine incorporation, Deschutes County updated its Coordinated Population
Forecast with Ordinance 2009-006. The purpose of this modification was to adopt a conservative
twenty-year population forecast for the City of La Pine that can be used by city officials and the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to estimate future land need and an
Urban Growth Boundary. The following table displays the coordinated population forecast for
Deschutes County, the urban growth boundaries of the cities of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters, and
the city of La Pine from 2000 to 2025:
2000-2025 Coordinated Population Forecast I
Year
Bend UGB
I
Redmond
UGB
Sisters
UGB
I
La Pine
UGB
Unincorporated
County
Total
County
116,600
2000
52,800
15,505
975
-
47,320
2005
69,004
19,249
1,768
-
53,032
143,053
2010
81,242
23,897
2,306
1,697
57,430
166,572
2015
91,158
29,667
2,694
1,892
64,032
189,443
2020
100,646
36,831
3,166
2,110
71,392
214,145
2025
109,389
45,724
3,747
2,352
79,599
240,811
As a result of La Pine's incorporation, Deschutes County updated its Coordinated Population
Forecast with Ordinance 2009-006. The purpose of this modification was to adopt a conservative
twenty-year population forecast for the City of La Pine that can be used by city officials and the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to estimate future land need and an
Urban Growth Boundary. Deschutes County's 2004 Coordinated Population Forecast applied a
conservative 2.2% annual average growth rate to estimate the county's unincorporated population
from 2000 to 2025. This method applied the growth rate as a compounding rate throughout the
entire forecast. Recognizing that La Pine incorporation occurred on November 7, 2006, it is
reasonable to apply a 2.2% annual average growth rate to La Pine's estimated population, starting in
July 1, 2007, the first time Portland State University's Population Research Center officially
certified the City of La Pine in an Annual Population Report. By extending the growth rate to the
Page 156
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Year 2025, La Pine's population will be 2,352. The Nonurban unincorporated population decreases
by 2,352 from its original projection of 81,951 to 79,599. Extending the growth rate to the Year
2029 results in a twenty year population estimate of 2,566 for La Pine.
Population and Growth
Year
Incorporation
November 7,
2006
Population
Average Annual Growth Rate
2007
1585
2.20
,
2010
1697
2.20
2015
1892
2.20
2020
2110
2.20
2025
2352
2.20
2029
2566
L
2,20
!
DLCD Approved Coordinated Deschutes County Population Forecast, which shows 1,585 people at the date
of incorporation and using the 2.2% growth rate, provides 2,566 people in 2029.
Existing Development/Settlement Pattern Shape City Limits and UGB
The existing settlement pattern in La Pine was primarily established in the 1950's and
1960's. The commercial pattern is oriented toward US Highway 97, which bisects the
community. Before incorporation was voted in 2006, Deschutes County classified La
Pine as an Urban Unincorporated Community (UUC) as the map below shows. Also
shown on this map are a number of urban -like subdivisions on the western side of the
UUC. Visually, as one drives through La Pine the City seems like it is cut in half, but if
one reviews the city maps it is clear the large areas to the east of the City is preserved for
the city's sewer expansion and other public facilities, including the cemetery. The BNSF
rail line also runs through this area and, given the costly nature of rail crossings, the City
felt is was best to not use the area for anything other than public facilities.
At the top of the UUC map is a turquoise colored spur of commercial services intermixed
with residential uses. The residential area due west of the green spur contains consists of
well -established, larger lot neighborhoods with lots as large as 10 acres in size or more.
This pattern results in difficulty for the City to plan for pedestrians and bicyclists
traveling between their homes and service areas. New development patterns which
require increased density along primary street corridors, with the development of bike
Page 157
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
lanes, sidewalks and bike/pedestrian trails that link residential areas to public destinations
will encourage alternative travel modes (other than automobiles) and improve the concept
of complete neighborhoods.
9�11l1ti Ilia
Old UUC Ma showin _ land uses «rior to inco . oration)
Y.
114,1..4.
wr.a..r.r.l:.:rr»••
Ei= r o .rain u.»•
Page 158
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
n v.(..�.
ADC I CM
rJtVY 4;$A%i A
IC )
?al`IV'IZ A' A
iAvuuc.M
La Pine Urban Unincorpurated Cuu�Iuunily "`
ZONING MAP ca.n..h
Adopted 12/12/2018
The community voted to incorporate and the City limits and proposed UGB is hand -
drawn on the UUC map to provide a better presentation on the areas of the community
included into the city limits. The appendix contains the final GIS map, which is an
exhibit to the adopting ordinance.
La Phu Urban Vatinearpo d'Canino l}
ZONING MAP
_ (4r .t in.;4s/I 411 AI :.
r►
INK.441LP
JUNK
rran
oft
Page 159
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
Adopted I2/12/2018
As shown above, the voters determined that the established settlement pattern of the
neighborhood next to the green spur was necessary to include within the City limits and
UGB. This area is strongly linked to the employment and services available in the green
spur area. Because of this and the fact that the community wanted parks and schools to
be within the city as well as the UGB, citizens felt it was imperative that those uses be
within one jurisdictional area. This results in cohesive planning and an increased sense
of community whereby public utilities such as transportation, water, and sewer services
are planned to serve the area.
Just to the east of the green spur contains a major gas line and land for employment uses
that rely upon the street grid provided for by streets in the green spur area. This area has
urban features and is bound by the Resource lands to the east. Thus , this and the lands to
the southeast of the green spur were considered to be essential to the growing
community and serve to provide for the following Public Facility uses:
• Expansion for the existing sewer treatment plant consisting of treatment ponds,
pasture lands upon which to distribute treated effluent, and a buffer from
residential uses west of the highway;
• Opportunities to create a buffer from wildfires originating from the east;
• Needed lands for ODOT' s grade separated crossing/overpass project, including
staging space
• Inclusion of Cemetery land and expansion lands needed to support the use.
• Opportunities for energy production in the form of Solar, Bio-Mass, etc.
• Opportunities for open space and effective buffer between Rail ROW and nearby
residential lands
The large yellow area on the above map contains the Planned Newberry Neighborhood.
This area was developed by Deschutes County to assist in the transfer of development
credits from the areas outside of the City limits that have failing septic systems and
through the credit program can relocate housing to the new neighborhood area. Lands
west of this area were included in the City limits and UGB because they contained
existing platted neighborhoods and public facility lands that are intended to be served
with public sewer.
Lands included into the City limits beyond the UUC at the southwest of the community
include very old subdivisions that have an existing urban pattern and right of ways and
lands that currently have active public facilities upon them such as the Sheriff's facility
and other public service agencies serving the community.
Page 160
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
As required by OAR 660-024-0040 and related statutes, the UGB must be based on the
adopted 20-year population forecast for the urban area described in OAR 660-024-0030,
and must provide for needed housing, employment and other urban uses such as public
facilities, streets and roads, schools, parks and open space over the 20-year planning
period consistent with the land need requirements of Goal 14 and this rule — or an
exception to the rule must be approved. The 20-year need determinations are estimates
which, although based on the best available information and methodologies, should not
be held to an unreasonably high level of precision. La Pine has been lucky that as a
small city, it is fairly easy to perform the BLI and RNA. The RNA revealed that there
were a surplus of residential lands for developing a broad range of housing types. The
BLI shows that there were adequate lands for supporting employment lands throughout
the planning period.
Goal 14 Exception Excerpt
The Appendix contains the rationale for supporting a Goal 14 Exception approving the
location of the UGB, which is proposed to be the same as the current, voter -approved city
limits.
Urban growth boundaries are ordinarily designated based on a projection of land needs
for a variety of categories (residential, commercial, employment, public, etc...) over a
20 year planning horizon. However, this ordinary principle of urban growth boundary
designation need not apply to the city's residential lands inventory for at least three
reasons. First, the city is establishing an urban growth boundary for the very first time
as opposed to expanding an existing urban growth boundary. In this situation the city
has an established city limits but no urban growth boundary. The city believes it would
be poor public policy to have an urban growth boundary within the city limits because it
would be confusing for the citizens, challenging for city administration and, for based on
the materials included in this document, ultimately unnecessary. Second, most all of La
Pine was planned and zoned for urban levels of residential development and urban
facilities and services when it was under county jurisdiction prior to incorporation.
Third, the city has a fairly small population and a fairly large land base relative to its
size. Existing residential neighborhoods are disbursed throughout the city boundary
instead of focused at a central location. Failure to include all of the city's residential
lands into the urban growth boundary would result in a significant portion of the city's
population living on "rural" lands within the city's boundaries, frustrating the city's
ability to furnish public facilities and services to its citizens.
Statewide Planning Goal 14 and its implementing administrative rule direct cities to rely
on a 20 year population forecast to establish residential lands needs. Instead, for
reasons to be explained in greater detail within the exception show the city may rely on
its corporate city limits as the natural and reasonable location for its urban growth
boundary. In other words, the city proposes its city limits and urban growth boundary to
Page 161
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
be co -terminus and thus, strict adherence to the 20 year population forecast is not
necessary to establish an amount of residential lands within the city's first urban growth
boundary and justifies an exception to that provision of Goal 14.
Residential Lands Needs
The city has a 20 year population forecast that has been coordinated with Deschutes
County and acknowledged by the State of Oregon. The city's population forecast
predicts that La Pine will grow from 1697 in 2009 to 2566 in 2029, which would be an
increase of 869 citizens. Based on an assumed 1.98 persons per home across all housing
types it will take 439 housing units to accommodate the forecasted population growth.
Some of the needed housing will be accommodated through occupancy of units that are
currently vacant while the majority will need to be constructed. If an expected 15%
residential vacancy rate is applied the total number of new housing units needed is
increased to 548.
The city's residential lands need is calculated by dividing the number of additional
housing units needed by the expected average units per acre. The residential lands needs
are then further refined by applying a dedication factor to project the portion of each acre
that will be not available for residential development due to the presence of infrastructure
and other community services. The resulting figure is known as "net" acres.
The city's historic settlement pattern combined with more recent development activity,
the presence of city services and an assumed increase in attached housing indicate that a
reasonable expected development pattern is 3 units per gross acre or 4.3 units per net
acre. This figure reflects new construction and redevelopment on larger, pre-existing tots
and parcels generally of 1-2.5 acres in size for an average density of one dwelling per
acre, future subdivision activity 5- units per net acre and the projection of 25% of the
city's housing stock being multifamily at an estimated 12 units per acre. If 548 new
housing units are needed it will take a total of 182 gross acres or 126 net acres. Since the
mixed use commercial designation is expected to absorb about 23 net acres (about 32
gross acres) of housing opportunity the city's total residential lands need is approximately
149 gross acres (about 104 net acres) of undeveloped or re -developable land.
Table 1.
Development Type Estimated Percentage Estimated Residential
of New Housing Stock Density
New Homes on & Re- 10% 1 units/acre
Development of Existing
Large Lots
Future Subdivision 65%
Activity
Future Multi -Family 25%
Development
Page 162
La Pine Comprehensive Plan
5 units/acre
12 units/acre
Adopted 12/12/2018
Residential Lands Supply
The city's Buildable Lands Inventory and the Goal 10 element of its comprehensive plan
show that the existing city limits and proposed urban growth boundary contain about
1284.4-acres of vacant or re -developable land to respond to a calculation of about 182 —
acres of need.
After a 30% dedication factor is applied to account for public infrastructure and other
services that would need to be provided a net amount of about 922-acres, including about
23-acres included in a Commercial Mixed Use designation, remains to respond to about
127 net acres of need.
The figures above indicate that the city's existing supply of residentially designated land
results in surplus of about 1,135 gross acres once the Commercial Mixed Use lands have
been deducted from the needs category.
Commercial Lands
The existing pattern of commercial zoning established by the former UUC is not
proposed to be expanded except in areas where neighborhoods do not have convenient
access to service or employment uses. No new commercial nodes are proposed outside
of the City limits or UGB. Within the city limits a few new commercial mixed -use areas
or transitional areas are proposed to accommodate daily living need and employment
uses.
Lands for Transportation and Other Public Facilities
The 20-year land needs for transportation and public facilities for an urban area comply
with applicable requirements of Goals 11 and 12, rules in OAR chapter 660, divisions 11
and 12, and public facilities requirements in ORS 197.712 and 197.768. Right of way
(ROW) needs for transportation are a result of examining current improvements and
planned improvements. A dedication factor of 30% was used to analyze lands needed for
ROW improvements and assures that land needed for on -site development does not
conflict with land needed for ROW.
The Plan and its supporting studies show that La Pine has properly planned for expansion
of its public facilities and placed them in logical locations throughout the community.
The Sewer and Water District has planned to extend and serve all development within the
proposed UGB.
Page 163
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
IV. Goals and Policies
Goal # 1: Forest and BLM lands within the City limits and proposed UGB will be
designated as Public Facility Lands and the small amount of undeveloped Agricultural
lands within the City limits will be converted to urban uses.
Policies
• The City will complete and adopt a TSP for the community. After the TSP has
been adopted, the City may rezone lands to the Comprehensive Plan designation.
Goal #2: Land within the City limits is adequate to serve as the La Pine Urban Growth
Boundary unless special circumstances are identified and established as reasonable,
supportable, and consistent with State law..
Policies
• Land use patterns shall enhance the development of "Complete Neighborhoods"
and development regulations should promote the following principles:
o Compact Development, which promotes the efficient provision of public
services and infrastructure;
o Mixed -Use, which places homes, jobs, stores, parks, and services within
walking distance of one another;
o Full Utilization of Urban Services (e.g., water, sewer, storm drainage,
parks, and transportation facilities), which maximizes the return on public
investments in infrastructure;
o Transportation Efficiency, or development of an interconnected street
system supporting multiple modes of transportation, which yields more
direct routes (shorter distances) between local destinations, conserves
energy, reduces emergency response times, and provides alternatives to
the automobile for those who are unable or choose not to drive a car;
o Human -Scale Design, or development in which people feel safe and
comfortable walking from place to place because buildings, streetscapes,
parking areas, landscaping, lighting, and other components of the built
environment are designed foremost with pedestrians in mind; and
o Environmental Health, which requires adequate light and air circulation,
management of surface water runoff, and treatment and disposal of waste.
• The City will facilitate development of a downtown area that is desirable for
tourists and local residents and that will allow La Pine to establish itself as a hub
and service center for the South Deschutes and North Klamath Counties.
• Development regulations for the commercial zone within the downtown area
should provide for a pedestrian -friendly, attractive, and vibrant center that can
draw new investment, offer a desirable place for people to visit and live, and serve
the surrounding area between Sunriver Resort and Klamath County.
Page 164
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
• Lands needed for supplementing housing, economic development, or other land
uses shall be processed based upon need and balancing the urban form for the
benefit of the community in its goal to establish a "Complete Community."
• The City shall create details on the "Complete Neighborhood" concepts and
prepare guidelines for implementing the goals. This includes a listing of what
elements are missing and how to establish them within the three neighborhoods.
• The land planning and site design shall encourage the positioning of buildings and
use of vegetation to promote and encourage the development of the missing
elements in each neighborhood.
• The need for new mixed -use areas within the City shall be explored on an as
needed basis for the purpose of furthering the Complete Neighborhood planning
concepts envisioned by the Plan.
• The City shall adopt the Bend -La Pine School District Facility Plan.
• At such time as a transfer of land from the Bureau of Land Management to a
government agency (City of La Pine or Deschutes County) occurs along the
southwest City boundary, the use of such lands for rodeo facilities and City
authorized festivals shall be examined. The City desires such land to be included
within the City limits, with future administration of the lands and facilities used as
rodeo grounds to be determined by mutual agreement of the City and the La Pine
Park and Recreation District.
• Because the final designs and plans for the Wickiup Junction interchange
(Highway 97 and Burgess Road intersection) have not been completed,
designations for lands within the area labeled Wickiup Junction Improvement
Area on the Plan map may need to be changed after final plans for the ODOT
Overpass project are completed. Such changes to land use designations shall be
for the purpose of better coordination between the transportation facilities and
adjacent land uses.
• The Urban Growth Boundary and need for new lands/annexation should be
reviewed every 2-years.
V. Programs
The City shall:
1. Hold workshops to further refine the complete neighborhood concepts.
Page 165
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
2. Hold hearings to formalize the guidelines and goals for each
neighborhood.
3. Develop standards that provide how and when Forest and Agricultural
lands are to be converted to Public Facility uses.
4. Define special exceptions for expanding the urban growth boundary for
special uses, etc. — Rodeo grounds, tourist areas, utility needs, etc.
5. Review the inventory of land needs within the urban growth boundary
every two years to determine adequacy and provisions for any needed
expansion.
Appendices
1. Wastewater System capital Facilities Plan, La Pine Special Sewer District,
Deschutes County, Oregon 2006 (HGE Inc.)
2. Water System Capital facilities Plan and Water Management and
Conservation Plan, La Pine Water District, Deschutes County, Oregon —
2009 — (HGE Inc.)
3. La Pine Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan - Summer 2005
(GEL Oregon Inc.; J.T Atkins & Company PC)
4. Bend -La Pine Schools 2005 Sites and Facilities Plan — December 5, 2005
including correspondence
5. Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan — December 13,
2005 (Kate Lighthall)
6. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan — Title 23 of the Deschutes
County Code, 2009 Buildable Lands Analysis, 2009 Economic
Opportunities Analysis, Historic Lands Inventory — Pat Kliewer,
Census and Claritas, Inc,.Data sets, Oregon Employment Department Data
Page 166
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Sets, Related Resource Data — State of Oregon and Bureau of Economic
Analysis
Page 167
La Pine Comprehensive Plan Adopted 12/12/2018
Exhibit F — Proposed amendments to DCC
18.113.030 Uses In Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of, and are intended to serve persons at, the
destination resort pursuant to DCC 18.113.030 and are approved in a final master plan:
A. Visitor -oriented accommodations designed to provide for the needs of visitors to the resort:
1. Overnight lodging, including lodges, hotels, motels, bed and breakfast facilities,
time share units and similar transient lodging facilities;
2. Convention and conference facilities and meeting rooms;
3. Retreat centers;
4. Restaurants, lounges and similar eating and drinking establishments; and
5. Other similar visitor -oriented accommodations consistent with the purposes of
DCC 18.113 and Goal 8.
B. Developed recreational facilities designed to provide for the needs of visitors and residents
of the resort;
1. Golf courses and clubhouses;
2. Indoor and outdoor swimming pools;
3. Indoor and outdoor tennis courts;
4. Physical fitness facilities;
5. Equestrian facilities;
6. Wildlife observation shelters;
7. Walkways, bike paths, jogging paths, equestrian trails;
8. Other similar recreational facilities consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113
o
and Goal 8.
C. Residential accommodations:
1. Single-family dwellings;
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees;
6. Time-share projects.
7. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort.
D. Commercial services and specialty shops designed to provide for the visitors to the resort:
1. Specialty shops, including but not limited to delis, clothing stores, bookstores, gift
shops and specialty food shops;
2. Barber shops/beauty salons;
3. Automobile service stations limited to fuel sales, incidental parts sales and minor
repairs;
4. Craft and art studios and galleries;
5. Real estate offices;
6. Convenience stores;
7. Other similar commercial services which provide for the needs of resort visitors
and are consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8.
E. Uses permitted in open space areas generally include only those uses that, except as
specified herein, do not alter the existing or natural landscape of the proposed open space
areas. No improvements, development or other alteration of the natural or existing
landscape shall be allowed in open space areas, except as necessary for development of
golf course fairways and greens, hiking and bike trails, lakes and ponds and primitive
picnic facilities including park benches and picnic tables. Where farming activities would
be consistent with identified preexisting open space uses, irrigation equipment and
associated pumping facilities shall be allowed.
F. Facilities necessary for public safety and utility service within the destination resort.
G. Other similar uses permitted in the underlying zone consistent with the purposes of DCC
18.113.030.
H. Accessory Uses in Destination Resorts:
1. The following accessory uses shall be permitted provided they are ancillary to the
destination resort and consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8:
1. Transportation -related facilities excluding airports;
2. Emergency medical facilities;
3. Storage structures and areas;
4. Kennels as a service for resort visitors only;
5. Recycling and garbage collection facilities;
6. Other similar accessory uses consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113
and Goal 8.
I. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
18.113.060 Standards For Destination Resorts
The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts:
A. The destination resort shall, in the first phase, provide for and include as part of the CMP
the following minimum requirements:
1. At least 150 separate rentable units for visitor oriented overnight lodging as
follows:
a. The first 50 overnight lodging units must be constructed prior to the closure
of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots.
b. The resort may elect to phase in the remaining 100 overnight lodging units
as follows:
(1) At least 50 of the remaining 100 required overnight lodging units
shall be constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or
equivalent financial assurance within 5 years of the closure of sale
of individual lots or units, and;
(2) The remaining 50 required overnight lodging units shall be
constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent
financial assurance within 10 years of the closure of sale of
individual lots or units.
(3) If the developer of a resort guarantees a portion of the overnight
lodging units required under subsection 18.113.060(A)(1)(b)
through surety bonding or other equivalent financial assurance, the
overnight lodging units must be constructed within 4 years of the
date of execution of the surety bond or other equivalent financial
assurance.
(4) The 2.5:1 accommodation ratio required by DCC 18.113.060(D)(2)
must be maintained at all times.
c. If a resort does not chose to phase the overnight lodging units as described
in 18.113.060(A)(1)(b), then the required 150 units of overnight lodging
must be constructed prior to the closure of sales, rental or lease of any
residential dwellings or lots.
2. Visitor oriented eating establishments for at least 100 persons and meeting rooms
which provide seating for at least 100 persons.
3. The aggregate cost of developing the overnight lodging facilities, developed
recreational facilities, and the eating establishments and meeting rooms shall be at
least $ 7,000,000 (in 1993 dollars).
4. At least $ 2,333,333 of the $7,000,000 (in 1993 dollars) total minimum investment
required by DCC 18.113.060(A)(3) shall be spent on developed recreational
facilities.
5. The facilities and accommodations required by DCC 18.113.060(A)(2) through (4)
must be constructed or financially assured pursuant to DCC 18.113.110 prior to
closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots or as allowed by
DCC 18.113.060(A)(1).
B. All destination resorts shall have a minimum of 160 contiguous acres of land. Acreage split
by public roads or rivers or streams shall count toward the acreage limit, provided that the
CMP demonstrates that the isolated acreage will be operated or managed in a manner that
will be integral to the remainder of the resort.
C. All destination resorts shall have direct access onto a state or County arterial or collector
roadway, as designated by the Comprehensive Plan.
D. A destination resort shall, cumulatively and for each phase, meet the following minimum
requirements:
1. The resort shall have a minimum of 50 percent of the total acreage of the
development dedicated to permanent open space, excluding yards, streets and
parking areas. Portions of individual residential lots and landscape area
requirements for developed recreational facilities, visitor oriented accommodations
or multi family or commercial uses established by DCC 18.124.070 shall not be
considered open space;
2. Individually owned residential units that do not meet the definition of overnight
lodging in DCC 18.04.030 shall not exceed two and one-half such units for each
unit of visitor oriented overnight lodging. Individually owned units shall be
considered visitor oriented lodging if they are available for overnight rental use by
the general public for at least 38 weeks per calendar year through one or more
central reservation and check in service(s) operated by the destination resort or by
a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS 696.010.
a. The ratio applies to destination resorts which were previously approved
under a different standard.
E. Phasing. A destination resort authorized pursuant to DCC 18.113.060 may be developed in
phases. If a proposed resort is to be developed in phases, each phase shall be as described
in the CMP. Each individual phase shall meet the following requirements:
1. Each phase, together with previously completed phases, if any, shall be capable of
operating in a manner consistent .with the intent and purpose of DCC 18.113 and
Goal 8.
2. The first phase and each subsequent phase of the destination resort shall
cumulatively meet the minimum requirements of DCC 18.113.060 and DCC
18.113.070.
3. Each phase may include two or more distinct noncontiguous areas within the
destination resort.
F. Destination resorts shall not exceed a density of one and one-half dwelling units per acre
including residential dwelling units and excluding visitor oriented overnight lodging.
G. Dimensional Standards:
1. The minimum lot area, width, lot coverage, frontage and yard requirements and
building heights otherwise applying to structures in underlying zones and the
provisions of DCC 18.116 relating to solar access shall not apply within a
destination resort. These standards shall be determined by the Planning Director or
Hearings Body at the time of the CMP. In determining these standards, the Planning
Director or Hearings Body shall find that the minimum specified in the CMP are
adequate to satisfy the intent of the comprehensive plan relating to solar access, fire
protection, vehicle access, visual management within landscape management
corridors and to protect resources identified by LCDC Goal 5 which are identified
in the Comprehensive Plan. At a minimum, a 100-foot setback shall be maintained
from all streams and rivers. Rimrock setbacks shall be as provided in DCC Title
18. No lot for a single family residence shall exceed an overall project average of
22,000 square feet in size.
2. Exterior setbacks.
a. Except as otherwise specified herein, all development (including structures,
site -obscuring fences of over three feet in height and changes to the natural
topography of the land) shall be setback from exterior property lines as
follows:
(1) Three hundred fifty feet for commercial development including all
associated parking areas;
(2) Two hundred fifty feet for multi family development and visitor
oriented accommodations (except for single family residences)
including all associated parking areas;
(3) One hundred fifty feet for above grade development other than that
listed in DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(1) and (2);
(4) One hundred feet for roads;
(5) Fifty feet for golf courses; and
(6) Fifty feet for jogging trails and bike paths where they abut private
developed lots and no setback for where they abut public roads and
public lands.
b. Notwithstanding DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(3), above grade development
other than that listed in DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(1) and (2) shall be set
back 250 feet in circumstances where state highways coincide with exterior
property lines.
c. The setbacks of DCC 18.113.060 shall not apply to entry roadways and
signs.
The floodplain (FP) requirements ofDCC 18.96 shall apply
li. FlOOdplaln requirements. uvvu�iau► zone �, � � ,.,yuu..��.en �� �� '"'
to all developed portions of a destination resort in an FP Zone in addition to any applicable
criteria of DCC 18.113. Except for floodplain areas which have been granted an exception
to LCDC goals 3 and 4, floodplain zones shall not be considered part of a destination resort
when determining compliance with the following standards;
1. One hundred sixty acre minimum site;
2. Density of development;
3. Open space requirements.
A conservation easement as described in DCC Title 18 shall be conveyed to the County for
all areas within a floodplain which are part of a destination resort.
I. The Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM) requirements of DCC 18.84 shall
apply to destination resorts where applicable.
J. Excavation, grading and fill and removal within the bed and banks of a stream or river or
in a wetland shall be a separate conditional use subject to all pertinent requirements of DCC
Title 18.
K. Time share units not included in the overnight lodging calculations shall be subject to
approval under the conditional use criteria set forth in DCC 18.128. Time share units
identified as part of the destination resort's overnight lodging units shall not be subject to
the time share conditional use criteria of DCC 18.128.
L. The overnight lodging criteria shall be met, including the 150-unit minimum and the 2-1/2
to 1 ratio set forth in DCC 18.113.060(D)(2).
1. Failure of the approved destination resort to comply with the requirements in DCC
18.113.060(L)(2) through (6) will result in the County declining to accept or
process any further land use actions associated with any part of the resort and the
County shall not issue any permits associated with any lots or site plans on any part
of the resort until proof is provided to the County of compliance with those
conditions.
2. Each resort shall compile, and maintain, in perpetuity, a registry of all overnight
lodging units.
a. The list shall identify each individually -owned unit that is counted as
overnight lodging.
b. At all times, at least one entity shall be responsible for maintaining the
registry and fulfilling the reporting requirements of DCC 18.113.060(L)(2)
through (6).
c. Initially, the resort management shall be responsible for compiling and
maintaining the registry.
d. As a resort develops, the developer shall transfer responsibility for
maintaining the registry to the homeowner association(s). The terms and
timing of this transfer shall be specified in the Conditions, Covenants &
Restrictions (CC&Rs).
e. Resort management shall notify the County prior to assigning the registry
to a homeowner association.
f. Each resort shall maintain records documenting its rental program related
to overnight lodging units at a convenient location in Deschutes County,
with those records accessible to the County upon 72 hour notice from the
County.
g, As used in this section, "resort management"includes, not limited
by but is 111111 LGU to,
the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors in interest, assignees
other than a home owners association.
3. An annual report shall be submitted to the Planning Division by the resort
management or home owners association(s) each February 1, documenting all of
the following as of December 31 of the previous year:
a. The minimum of 150 permanent units of overnight lodging have been
constructed or that the resort is not yet required to have constructed the 150
units;
b. The number of individually -owned residential platted lots and the number
of overnight -lodging units;
c. The ratio between the individually -owned residential platted lots and the
overnight lodging units;
d. For resorts for which the conceptual master plan was originally approved
on or after January 1, 2001, the following information on each individually -
owned residential unit counted as overnight lodging.
(1) Who the owner or owners have been over the last year;
(2) How many nights out of the year the unit was available for rent;
(3) How many nights out of the year the unit was rented out as an
overnight lodging facility under DCC 18.113;
(4) Documentation showing that these units were available for rental as
required.
e. For resorts for which the conceptual master plan was originally approved
before January 1, 2001, the following information on each individually
owned residential unit counted as overnight lodging. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary in Deschutes County Code, these resorts may count
units that are not deed -restricted and/or do not utilize a central check -in
system operated by the resort so long as such units meet the Oregon
statutory defmition of overnight lodgings in Eastern Oregon
(1) For those units directly managed by the resort developer or operator.
(A) Who the owner or owners have been over the last
year;
(B) How many nights out of the year the unit was
available for rent;
(C) How many nights out of the year the unit was rented
out as an overnight lodging facility under DCC
18.113;
(D) Documentation showing that these units were
available for rent as required.
(2) For all other units.
(A) Address of the unit;
(B) Name of the unit owner(s);
(C) Schedule of rental availability for the prior year. The
schedule of rental availability shall be based upon
monthly printouts of the availability calendars posted
on-line by the unit owner or the unit owner's agent.
f This information tion shall b .,,,bl 7 subject t the . i:s l .sure
1. 1111J 1111V1111QLLV11 J11411 be jJUUIIV record JUUJ VI.L to UL. non -disclosure
provisions in ORS Chapter 192.
4. To facilitate rental to the general public of the overnight lodging units, each resort
shall set up and maintain in perpetuity a telephone reservation system..
5. Any outside property managers renting required ovemight lodging units shall be
required to cooperate with the provisions of this code and to annually provide rental
information on any required overnight lodging units they represent to the central
office as described in DCC 18.113.060(L)(2) and (3).
6. Before approval of each final plat, all the following shall be provided:
a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the 2-1/2 to 1 ratio as
defined in DCC 18.113.060(D)(2);
b. Documentation on all individually -owned residential units counted as
overnight lodging, including all of the following:
(1) Designation on the plat of any individually -owned units that are
going to be counted as overnight lodging;
(2) Deed restrictions requiring the individually -owned residential units
designated as overnight lodging units to be available for rental at
least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and check -in
service operated by the resort or by a real estate property manager,
as defined in ORS 696.010;
(3) An irrevocable provision in the resort Conditions, Covenants and
Restrictions ("CC&Rs) requiring the individually -owned residential
units designated as overnight lodging units to be available for rental
at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and check -
in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property manager,
as defined in ORS 696.010;
(4) A provision in the resort CC&R's that all property owners within
the resort recognize that failure to meet the conditions in DCC
18.113.060(L)(6)(b)(3) is a violation of Deschutes County Code and
subject to code enforcement proceedings by the County;
(5) Inclusion of language in any rental contract between the owner of
an individually -owned residential unit designated as an overnight
lodging unit and any central reservation and check in service or real
estate property manager requiring that such unit be available for
rental at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and
check -in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property
manager, as defined in ORS 696.010, and that failure to meet the
conditions in DCC 18.113.060(L)(6)(b)(5) is a violation of
Deschutes County Code and subject to code enforcement
proceedings by the County.
7. Compliance Fee.
a. In the event that a resort that was originally approved before January 1, 2001
fails to report compliance with the 2.5:1 ratio in a calendar year as reported
in accordance with 18.113.060(L)(3)(e), the remedy shall be that such resort
shall pay a compliance fee due not later than April 15 of the year following
the year in which the shortfall occurred.
b. The compliance fee will be calculated as follows:
(1) First, by calculating the average per unit transient lodging tax paid
by the resort the prior calendar year by dividing the total amount
paid by the resort in transient lodging taxes for the prior calendar
year by the sum of the number of overnight units managed by the
resort for which the resort paid transient lodging taxes that same year
and the number of timeshare units;
(2) Second, by multiplying that average per unit transient lodging tax
amount by the number of additional overnight lodging units that
would have been necessary to comply with the 2.5:1 ratio for the
applicable calendar year.
c. If the Resort were to apply to create more residential lots, the Resort may
not apply the compliance fee to meet the 2.5:1 ratio of individually -owned
residential units to overnight lodging units per DCC 18.113.060(D)(2) and
will have to demonstrate compliance per the new reporting methods or
construct more overnight lodging units in order to comply with the 2.5:1
ratio.
M. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort.
19.106.030 Uses In Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of and are intended to serve persons at the
destination resort pursuant to DCC 19.106.030 and are approved in a final master plan:
A. Visitor -oriented accommodations designed to provide for the needs of visitors to the resort:
1. Overnight lodging, including lodges, hotels, motels, bed and breakfast facilities,
time share units and similar transient lodging facilities;
2. Convention and conference facilities and meeting rooms;
3. Retreat centers;
4. Restaurants, lounges and similar eating and drinking establishments; or
5. Other similar visitor -oriented accommodations consistent with the purposes of
DCC 19.106 and Goal 8.
B. Developed recreational facilities designed to provide for the needs of visitors and residents
of the resort including:
1. Golf courses and clubhouses;
2. Indoor and outdoor swimming pools;
3. Indoor and outdoor tennis courts;
4. Physical fitness facilities;
5. Equestrian facilities;
6. Wildlife observation shelters;
7. Walkways, bike paths, jogging paths, equestrian trails; or
8. Other similar recreational facilities consistent with the purposes of DCC 19.106
and Goal 8.
C. Residential accommodations:
1 Cingle-family dwellings•
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees; or
6. Time share projects.
7. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population
of 100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff
and management of the resort.
D. Commercial services and specialty shops designed to provide for the visitors to the resort:
1. Specialty shops including, but not limited to delis, clothing stores, book stores, gift
shops and specialty food shops;
2. Barber shops and beauty salons;
3. Automobile service stations limited to fuel sales, incidental parts sales and minor
repairs;
4. Craft and art studios and galleries;
5. Real estate offices;
6. Convenience stores; or
7. Other similar commercial services which provide for the needs of resort visitors
and are consistent with the purposes of DCC 19.106 and Goal 8.
E. Uses permitted in open space areas generally include only those uses that, except as
specified herein, do not alter the existing or natural landscape of the proposed open space
areas. No improvements, development or other alteration of the natural or existing
landscape shall be allowed in open space areas, except as necessary for development of
golf course fairways and greens, hiking and bike trails, lakes and ponds and primitive
picnic facilities including park benches and picnic tables. Where farming activities would
be consistent with identified pre-existing open space uses, irrigation equipment and
associated pumping facilities shall be allowed.
F. Facilities necessary for public safety and utility service within the destination resort.
G. Other similar uses permitted in the underlying zone consistent with the purposes of DCC
19.106.020.
H. Accessory uses in destination resorts:
1. The following accessory uses shall be permitted provided they are ancillary to the
destination resort and consistent with the purposes of DCC 19.106 and Goal 8:
1. Transportation -related facilities excluding airports;
2. Emergency medical facilities;
3. Storage structures and areas;
4. Kennels as a service for resort visitors only;
5. Recycling and garbage collection facilities; or
6. Other similar accessory uses are consistent with the purposes of DCC
19.106 and Goal 8.
19.106.060 Standards For Destination Resorts
The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts:
A. The destination resort shall, in the first phase, provide for and include as part of the CMP
the following minimum requirements:
1. At least 150 separate rentable units for visitor -oriented lodging;
2. Visitor -oriented eating establishments for at least 100 persons and meeting rooms
which provide eating for at least 100 persons;
3. At least $7 million shall be spent on improvements for on -site developed
recreational facilities and visitor -oriented accommodations exclusive of costs for
land, sewer and water facilities and roads. Not less than one-third of this amount
shall be spent on developed recreational facilities. The spending minimums
provided for are stated in 1993 dollars; and
4. The facilities and accommodations required by this DCC 19.106.060 must be
physically provided or financially assured pursuant to DCC 19.106.110 prior to
closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots.
B. All destination resorts shall have a minimum of 160 contiguous acres of land. Acreage split
by public roads or rivers or streams shall count toward the acreage limit, provided that the
CMP demonstrates that the isolated acreage will be operated or managed in a manner that
will be integral to the remainder of the resort.
C. All destination resorts shall have direct access onto a state, county, or city arterial or
collector roadway, as designated by the Bend Urban Area General Plan.
D. A destination resort shall, cumulatively and for each phase, meet the following minimum
requirements:
1. The resort Lof 5n of of the
llle shall have a minimum ✓V percelll. the total acreage
development dedicated to permanent open space, excluding yards, streets and
parking areas. Portions of individual residential lots and landscape area
requirements for developed recreational facilities, visitor -oriented accommodations
or multi -family or commercial uses established by DCC 19.76.080 shall not be
considered open space; and
2. Individually -owned residential units shall not exceed two and one-half such units
for each unit of visitor -oriented overnight lodging constructed or financially
assured within the resort. Individually -owned units shall be considered visitor -
oriented lodging if they are available for overnight rental use by the general public
for at least 45 weeks per calendar year through one or more central reservation and
check -in service(s).
E. Phasing. A destination resort authorized pursuant to DCC 19.106.060 may be developed in
phases. If a proposed resort is to be developed in phases, each phase shall be as described
in the CMP. Each individual phase shall meet the following requirements:
1. Each phase, together with previously completed phases, if any, shall be capable of
operating in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of DCC 19.106 and
Goal 8;
2. The first phase and each subsequent phase of the destination resort shall
cumulatively meet the minimum requirements of DCC 19.106.060 and DCC
19.76.070, and;
3. Each phase may include two or more distinct non-contiguous areas within the
destination resort.
F. Dimensional standards:
1. The minimum lot area, width, lot coverage, frontage and yard requirements and
building heights otherwise applying to structures in underlying zones and the
provisions of DCC 19.88.210 relating to solar access shall not apply within a
destination resort. These standards shall be determined by the Planning Director or
Hearings Body at the time of the CMP. In determining these standards, the Planning
Director or Hearings Body shall find that the minimum specified in the CMP are
adequate to satisfy the intent of the Bend Urban Area General Plan relating to solar
access, fire protection, vehicle access, and to protect resources identified by LCDC
Goal 5 which are identified in the Bend Urban Area General Plan. At a minimum,
a 100 foot setback shall be maintained from all streams and rivers. No lot for a
single-family residence shall exceed an overall project average of 22,000 square
feet in size.
2. Exterior setbacks and buffers.
a. A destination resort shall provide for the establishment and maintenance of
buffers between the resort and adjacent land uses, including natural
vegetation and where appropriate, fences, berms, landscaped areas, and
other similar types of buffers.
b. Exterior setbacks shall also be provided to ensure that improvements and
activities are located to minimize adverse effects of the resort on uses on
surrounding lands.
G. Floodplain requirements. The Flood Plain Zone (FP) requirements of DCC 19.72 shall
apply to all developed portions of a destination resort in an FP Zone in addition to any
applicable criteria of DCC 19.106. Except for flood plain areas which have been granted
an exception to LCDC goals 3 and 4, Flood Plain Zones shall not be considered part of a
destination resort when determining compliance with the following standards;
1. One hundred sixty acre minimum site;
2. Open space requirements.
A conservation easement as described in DCC Title 19 shall be conveyed to the County for
all areas within a flood plain which are part of a destination resort.
H. Excavation, grading and fill and removal within the bed and banks of a stream or river or
in a wetland shall be a separate conditional use subject to all pertinent requirements of DCC
Title 19.
I. Time share units not included in the overnight lodging calculations shall be subject to
approval under the conditional use criteria set forth in DCC 19.100. Time share units
identified as part of the destination resort's overnight lodging units shall not be subject to
the time share conditional use criteria of DCC 19.100.
J. Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of
100,000 or more, residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and
management of the resort. All other standards of this section continue to apply.
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: July 10, 2023
SUBJECT: DLCD Planning Assistance Grant Application Request
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to authorize the Community Development Department to apply for planning
assistance grants from the Department of Land Conservation and Development.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Staff seeks Board approval, including a letter of support from the Board, to apply for grant
funding from the Department of Land Conservation and Development for Housing -Related
Urbanization Planning Assistance for two projects.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
n/a
ATTENDANCE:
Will Groves, Planning Manager
"C E S
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
FROM: Will Groves, Planning Manager
DATE: July 12, 2023
SUBJECT: Department of Land Conservation and Development - Housing -Related
Urbanization Planning Assistance Grant
Staff seeks Board of County Commissioners (Board) approval, including a letter of support from
the Board, to apply for funding from the Department of Land Conservation and Development
(DLCD) Housing -Related Urbanization Planning Assistance Grant for two projects.
• Clear and Objective Standards Code Updates (under House Bill 3197)
• Code Amendments to Address Future Urbanization
The deadline for submitting the grant application is juiy 31, 2023. if awarded in September, the
grant period is expected to end in May 2025.
I. Planning Assistance Grant Overview
DLCD anticipated the Oregon Legislature to appropriate funds to DLCD for the purpose of
providing planning assistance to local governments to:
1) Develop, adopt, and implement plans needed to support housing production,
affordability, and choice, including housing capacity analyses (HCA) and housing
production strategies (HPS) under Goal 10.
2) Develop, adopt, and implement urbanization and public facilities plans to support
development readiness or amend an Urban Growth Boundary where a need is
identified.
3) Update local development codes and comprehensive plans to comply with applicable
state housing statutes and reduce regulatory barriers to housing production.
DLCD was appropriated $3.5 million by the Oregon Legislature during the 2023 Session to assist
local governments in this critical housing planning work.
The Long Range Planning Division has identified two potential projects that address housing in
Deschutes County. In consultation with DLCD, staff has determined potential eligibility for Housing
Planning Assistance funds for the following two projects. For reference, the application and criteria
can be found at the following link: https://www.oregon.gov/Icd/UP/Documents/2023-
25 DLCD Housing PA Application.pdf?utm medium=email&utm source=govdelivery
Clear and Objective Standards - HB 3197
The Oregon Legislature recently enacted HB 3197 into law. It requires counties to adopt and apply
clear and objective standards, conditions, and procedures regulating housing in unincorporated
communities, Rural Residential Exception Areas, and non -resource lands. It has a two-year
effective date of July 1, 2025.
Under Board direction, CDD will likely need to develop a multi -phased, multi -year work program
to comply with HB 3197. This law requires amending definitions, land division code, five rural
residential zones, Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community zones, Tumalo and Terrebonne
Rural Community zones, Flood Plain Zone, and Landscape Management, Sensitive Bird and
Mammal, and Wildlife Area Combining Zones, with detailed findings, including those relating to
Goal 5. Given this scope and anticipated staff resources, consultant services would likely be
required.
As of the writing of the memorandum, staff is consulting with DLCD representatives to determine
an appropriate funding request amount, pending Board direction.
Code Amendments to Address Future Urbanization
The continued land use applications for plan amendment/zone changes have resulted in
significant land areas being rezoned from Exclusive Farm Use to rural residential (either RR-10 or
MUA-10). For properties closer to the Bend UGB, it is important to anticipate future urbanization
to ensure orderly development once those properties are annexed into the City of Bend. This
project would explore code amendments that would require land divisions to be completed as
cluster developments within a certain distance —likely two miles —of a UGB. This change would
allow some development now while retaining the greater proportion of a site for future
development.
As of the writing of the memorandum, staff is consulting with DLCD representatives to determine
an appropriate funding request, pending Board direction.
III. Next Steps
As noted above, staff seeks Board approval to submit grant applications to DLCD and will return
to the Board for future updates.
Attachment
1. BOCC Letter of Support
-2-
,v�ES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
July 12, 2023
Via email
Ethan Stuckmayer, Housing Program Division Manager
DLCD.GFGrant@dlcd.oregon.gov
Re: 2023-2025 Housing Planning Assistance Grant Application
Dear Selecting Committee,
The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners appreciates the opportunity to offer this letter of support
for DLCD Planning Assistance Grant funding. The Long Range Planning Division has identified two
potential projects that address housing in Deschutes County: clear and objective standards code updates
(under House Bill 3197); and code amendments to address future urbanization. The pressures
surrounding housing require forward thinking at the county level and as such, these projects could
ultimately benefit all residents of Deschutes County and ensure cohesive planning for the future.
As DLCD is aware, the Oregon Legislature recently enacted HB 3197 into law, which requires counties to
adopt and apply clear and objective standards, conditions, and procedures regulating housing in
unincorporated communities, Rural Residential Exception Areas, and non -resource lands. It has a two-
year effective date of July 1, 2025. To comply, CDD will likely need to develop a multi -phased, multi -year
work program. This law requires amending definitions, land division code, five rural residential zones,
Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community zones, Tumalo and Terrebonne Rural Community zones,
Flood Plain Zone, and Landscape Management, Sensitive Bird and Mammal, and Wildlife Area Combining
Zones, with detailed findings, including those relating to Goal 5. Given this scope and anticipated staff
resources, consultant services would likely be required.
The continued land use applications for plan amendment/zone changes have resulted in significant land
areas in Deschutes County being rezoned from Exclusive Farm Use to rural residential (either RR-10 or
MUA-10). For properties closer to the Bend UGB, it is important to anticipate future urbanization to
ensure orderly development once those properties are annexed into the City of Bend. This project would
explore code amendments that would require land divisions to be completed as cluster developments
within a certain distance —likely two miles —of a UGB. This change would allow some development now
while retaining the greater proportion of a site for future development.
1300 NW Wall Street Bend, Oregon 97703
t' (541) 388-6572 board@deschutes.org (_)www.deschutes.org
Thank you for considering this grant request.
Sincerely,
THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Anthony DeBone, Chair
Patti Adair, Vice -Chair Phil Chang, Commissioner
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
July 12, 2023
Via email
Ethan Stuckmayer, Housing Program Division Manager
DLCD.GFGrant@dlcd.oregon.gov
Re: 2023-2025 Housing Planning Assistance Grant Application
Dear Selecting Committee,
The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners appreciates the opportunity to offer this letter of support
for DLCD Planning Assistance Grant funding. The Long Range Planning Division has identified two
potential projects that address housing in Deschutes County: clear and objective standards code updates
(under House Bill 3197); and code amendments to address future urbanization. The pressures
surrounding housing require forward thinking at the county level and as such, these projects could
ultimately benefit all residents of Deschutes County and ensure cohesive planning for the future.
As DLCD is aware, the Oregon Legislature recently enacted HB 3197 into law, which requires counties to
adopt and apply clear and objective standards, conditions, and procedures regulating housing in
unincorporated communities, Rural Residential Exception Areas, and non -resource lands. It has a two-
year effective date of July 1, 2025. To comply, CDD will likely need to develop a multi -phased, multi -year
work program. This law requires amending definitions, land division code, five rural residential zones,
Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community zones, Tumalo and Terrebonne Rural Community zones,
Flood Plain Zone, and Landscape Management, Sensitive Bird and Mammal, and Wildlife Area Combining
Zones, with detailed findings, including those relating to Goal 5. Given this scope and anticipated staff
resources, consultant services would likely be required.
The continued land use applications for plan amendment/zone changes have resulted in significant land
areas in Deschutes County being rezoned from Exclusive Farm Use to rural residential (either RR-10 or
MUA-10). For properties closer to the Bend UGB, it is important to anticipate future urbanization to
ensure orderly development once those properties are annexed into the City of Bend. This project would
explore code amendments that would require land divisions to be completed as cluster developments
within a certain distance —likely two miles —of a UGB. This change would allow some development now
while retaining the greater proportion of a site for future development.
1300 NW Wall Street Bend, Oregon 97703
t' (541) 388-6572 board@deschutes.org (3; www.deschutes.org
Thank you for considering this grant request.
Sincerely,
THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF C( f MISSIONERS
Anthony DeBone, Chair
Patti Adair, Vice -Chair
Phil Chang, Commissioner
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: July 10, 2023
SUBJECT: Discussion of moving Coordinated Houseless Response Office to COIC
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Support COIC to provide functional oversight over the Coordinated Houseless Response
Office.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Since its inception, Deschutes County has been the host entity for the Coordinated
Houseless Response Office (CHRO) and the two staff positions associated with the office.
Recently, the CHRO Board of Directors (comprised of a Deschutes County commissioner
and a city councilor from each of the four cities in Deschutes County) has been discussing
the possibility of asking Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC) provide
functional oversight over CHRO.
The CHRO Board has considered various options and sees the benefits of creating
efficiencies in our regional houseless response systems by designating work to COIC as it
will strategically align with the federally mandated and funded Continuum of Care, existing
work with the Homeless Leadership Coalition, and COIC's Housing for All consortium work.
As a designee, COIC's roles and responsibilities would entail orchestrating our regional
efforts to:
• Lead the implementation of the strategic plan and support continuous
improvement of the plan in order to achieve its mission;
• Align state, county, and city (funding) resources to achieve the plan's milestones
(including sustainable funding for the CHRO office beyond the HB 4123 two year
grant fund); and
• Support community partners in strengthening and streamlining service provision
and affordable housing development and supports under a shared set of principles,
priorities, and strategies.
Deschutes County would continue to be the grant recipient and will maintain its
responsibility of managing the $1 million fund and reporting to the state. Following are the
minimum requirements of HB 4123 that would remain intact:
• County and Cities Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA)
• Oversight Board (CHRO Board of Directors) with representation of an elected official
from the county and each participating city.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
If CHRO moved to COIC, Deschutes County would enter into an Intergovernmental
Agreement (IGA) with COIC and use state grant funds from HB 4123 to pay for the services.
If this move occurs, CHRO staff positions would transfer to COIC, although COIC may
structure the office differently.
ATTENDANCE:
Nick Lelack, County Administrator
Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator
1 JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY STEERING COMMITTEE
2 RESOLUTION ADVOCATING FOR THE AVAILABILITY AND
3 AFFORDABILITY OF HOMEOWNERS AND COMMERCIAL WILDFIRE
4 INSURANCE
5 Issue: As wildfire risk continues to increase substantially in the West, homeowners,
6 commercial businesses and special districts in wildfire prone areas face drastically higher
7 insurance premiums, and in many cases, higher -risk communities located in the wildland-
8 urban interface (WUI), do not have access to insurance at all. While several programs
9 exist for flood and earthquake (i.e. National Flood Insurance Program managed by the
10 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and California Earthquake Authority),
11 there is no central regulatory agency or insurance program for wildfire disasters.
12 Subsequently insurance surplus line and re -insurance carriers (non -admitted carriers) are
13 only regulated in the insured's home state (15 U.S. Code § 8202 — Regulation of
14 nonadmitted insurance by insured's home State); thereby leaving little or no alternative to
15 homeowners, businesses, and special districts at risk or loss of insurance.
16 Proposed Policy: The National Association of Counties (NACo) urges Congress and the
17 administration to study and identify potential solutions to address the availability and
18 affordability of wildfire insurance, including but not limited to, the Senate Committee on
19 Finance, House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, and Federal Insurance
20 Office. Such an effort should also address the ability and role of various levels of
21 government in providing incentives for wildfire risk mitigation efforts and/or expansion
22 of federal insurance program(s).
23 Background: Across the West, longer and more severe fire seasons, increased
24 development in the WUI, and millions of acres of forests with fuel loads exceeding the
25 historic range of variability have all contributed to record -setting blazes in recent years.
26 In 2022 alone, 68,988 wildfires burned 7,577,183 acres across the United States. These
27 wildfires have devastating impacts on communities and households, leading to loss of life
28 and billions of dollars in damages.
29 Insurance policies covering wildfire risk can provide financial protection to homeowners,
30 renters, and commercial business, reducing economic hardship after a catastrophic event.
31 Insurance coverage can also expedite the rebuilding and recovery process by providing
32 liquidity to policyholders soon after a wildfire. However, in response to growing risk
33 exposure and a significant spike in losses in recent years, some insurers have begun to
34 increase rates or exit regions where a large volume of wildfire claims have occurred. For
35 its part, the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) — within the Department of Treasury — has
36 observed that consumers are increasingly unable to find affordable and available property
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING
1:00 PM, MONDAY, JULY 10, 2023
Allen Room - Deschutes Services Building - 1300 NW Wall Street - Bend
(541) 388-6570 I www.deschutes.org
AGENDA
MEETING FORMAT: In accordance with Oregon state law, this meeting is open to the public and
can be accessed and attended in person or remotely, with the exception of any executive session.
Members of the public may view the meeting in real time via YouTube using this link:
http://bit.ly/3mminzy. To view the meeting via Zoom, see below.
Citizen Input: The public may comment on any topic that is not on the current agenda.
Alternatively, comments may be submitted on any topic at any time by emailing
citizeninput@deschutes.org or leaving a voice message at 541-385-1734.
�niL....... .-.+ F.-...r theis �Ilnwed t the mnnting p ihlir rnmment will olcn be
VVI ICI I II I -per JUI I1 LUI I II I ICI IL II VW i U �C IJUun�. �� aiivvvcu ai a is I I icon 15, Nuui LV i i ici it vvin a�av be
allowed via computer, phone or other virtual means.
Zoom Meeting Information: This meeting may be accessed via Zoom using a phone or computer.
• To join the meeting from a computer, copy and paste this link: bit.ly/3h3oqdD.
• To join by phone, call 253-215-8782 and enter webinar ID # 899 4635 9970 followed by the
passcode 013510.
• If joining by a browser, use the raise hand icon to indicate you would like to provide public
comment, if and when allowed. If using a phone, press *6 to indicate you would like to speak and
*9 to unmute yourself when you are called on.
11
Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all
programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities.
If you need accommodations to make participation possible, call (541) 388-6572 or
email brenda.fritsvold@deschutes.org.
Time estimates: The times listed on agenda items are estimates only. Generally, items will be heard in
sequential order and items, including public hearings, may be heard before or after their listed times.
CALL TO ORDER
CITIZEN INPUT: Citizen Input may be provided as comment on any topic that is not on the
agenda.
Note: In addition to the option of providing in -person comments at the meeting, citizen input comments
may be emailed to citizeninput@deschutes.org or you may leave a brief voicemail at 541.385.1734.
ACTION ITEMS
1. 1:00 PM Work Session: Destination Resort Text Amendments
2. 1:15 PM DLCD Planning Assistance Grant Application Request
3. 1:25 PM Discussion of moving the Coordinated Houseless Response Office to COIC
OTHER ITEMS
These can be any items not included on the agenda that the Commissioners wish to discuss as part of
the meeting, pursuant to ORS 192.640.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At any time during the meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS
192.660(2)(e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor
negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(b), personnel issues; or other executive session categories.
Executive sessions are closed to the public; however, with few exceptions and under specific guidelines,
are open to the media.
ADJOURN
July 10, 2023
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING Page 2 of 2
