Local Government Decisions Under Review

Most land use decisions made by cities and counties are subject to an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals if an affected party wishes to contest the action. There is a subset of local government decisions, however, that go through a different review process. In these cases, the city or county submits its final decision to DLCD for review. Decisions of this kind include some urban growth boundary expansions, some urban reserve and rural reserve designations and amendments, and all periodic review tasks.

The DLCD director decides whether the decision complies with applicable land use laws or "refers" the issue to the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) for review. If not referred to the Commission, the director may either approve the decision, or return it to the city or county for further consideration (called a "remand").

The statutes that govern these procedures are found at ORS 197.626-644. LCDC has also adopted rules, OAR chapter 660 division 25, that guide the process.

The following information describes the process for the reviews and provides information on local government submissions to DLCD that are currently under review.

UGB and Urban Reserve Amendments Under Review by DLCD

UGB amendments of over 50 acres that are adopted by cities larger than 2,500 population (or over 100 acres by Metro) are submitted to DLCD for review and approval. (The Land Use Board of Appeals does not have jurisdiction in these cases.) Establishment or amendment of an urban reserve, with some exceptions, is also submitted by the local government to DLCD for review (see OAR 660-025-0175).

The DLCD director must either approve the local decision, remand the decision to the local government for revision, or refer it to the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) for a hearing and decision. The director must make a decision within 120 days from the date the submittal was received by DLCD. (See OAR 660-025-150.) A director decision to approve or remand a UGB amendment or reserves adoption may be appealed to LCDC by parties who participated in hearings at the local level.

Currently Under Review

The following UGB and reserves amendments are currently under review by the department or LCDC:

Recently Under Review

The following UGB and reserves amendments were recently under review by the department or LCDC:

Phoenix Urban Growth Boundary (2022)
Eugene Urban Reserve (2023)
Metro Urban Growth Boundary (2023)
Newberg Urban Reserve Area (2024)

UGB Amendments Reviewed by LUBA

UGB amendments of less than 50 acres, or of any size if the city is smaller than 2,500 population, are only reviewed if the decision is appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). This same rule applies to Metro if it adds less than 100 acres in a UGB amendment. In these cases, the land use decision must be appealed to LUBA for review or the local decision will be final.

Periodic Review Work Tasks Under Review by DLCD

DLCD works with cities to evaluate their unique planning and development needs in order to create a periodic review work program that will meet those needs. A work program is composed of tasks and each task normally results in an amendment to the comprehensive plan or local land use regulations. Once a city’s work program is approved, the city then submits completed tasks to DLCD for review and approval. The DLCD director must either approve the task, remand the task to the local government for revision, or refer it to the LCDC for a hearing and decision. The director must make a decision within 120 days from the date the task submittal was received by DLCD. (See OAR 660-025-150.)

Currently Under Review

The following local governments have submitted work tasks to DLCD and are currently in review:

NONE

Recently Under Review

The following local governments submitted work tasks to DLCD that were recently under review:

City of Portland - Periodic Review Tasks 4 and 5

The Sequential UGB Process

LCDC established the sequential urban growth boundary (UGB) process in 2019 by adopting administrative rules to implement SB 418 (2017 legislative session). The rule allows a city with a population over 2,500 within its urban growth boundary, that anticipates the need for a UGB amendment of more than 50 acres, to coordinate with the county or counties containing the UGB, and to elect to enter into a sequential UGB process. As explained in OAR 660-025-0185, the process allows the city and DLCD to develop a work program to allow the completion and adoption of individual work tasks that are necessary to expand a UGB, rather than waiting until all work is complete before adopting the necessary analyses to support a UGB expansion. Work tasks may include a land need analysis, a land inventory, and a response to an identified land deficiency (aka “efficiency measures”). Prior to establishment of the sequential UGB process, the DLCD v. City of McMinnville decision (LUBA No. 2001-093) established the requirement that cities must address any residential land deficit identified in a housing capacity analysis (HCA) concurrent with or prior to adoption of the HCA. This has effectively delayed adoption of HCAs until a city concurrently adopts efficiency measures and UGB amendments and those actions are acknowledged, which in some cases has taken several years after completion of an HCA.

Currently four cities have elected to enter into the sequential UGB process and have established work programs with the department. Those cities are Molalla, Canby, McMinnville, and Newberg.

Approved Work Programs:
Molalla
Canby
McMinnville
Newberg