Current Issues and New Challenges
"What began as a visionary program in 1973 has become more complex; more about regulation and less about the vision for Oregon's future. In the three decades that have passed since our statewide land use program was established, Oregon has changed - and in that time, too many Oregonians have lost touch with their land use system. That's why we need this review - to reconnect Oregonians to the values and ideals that inspired the program in the first place."
- Governor Kulongoski, September 2005
|
New Challenges Ahead
Although Oregon's land use planning system has been successful at preserving farm and forest lands, limiting sprawl, and building great places to live, there are new challenges ahead. Issues such as property rights and climate change, at the forefront of public debate, are closely related to land-use policy decisions. The complexity of these modern issues were not foreseen when the sytem was first enacted in 1973.
|
 |
|
Questions of Fairness and Equity
We are in the midst of complex and conflicting opinions about how to compensate people fairly for their land - as evidenced by our recent history of fiercely debated land-use ballot measures. Measures 7, 37, and 49 were focused on the options available to landowners interested in development but restricted by land use laws. These voter-approved ballot measures have highlighted a key topic for the general public to consider regarding our land use system's ability to ensure fairness and equity for landowners as well as the general public.
|
|
| Population Growth
Statewide population has grown dramatically in the past 30 years from roughly 2.5 to 3.5 million people. Oregon is expected to grow to 5.2 million by the year 2040. Between 2000 and 2040, 12 of Oregon's 36 counties are forecasted to add more than 40,000 people: Clackamas, Deschutes, Douglas, Jackson, Josephine, Lane, Linn, Marion, Multnomah, Polk, Washington and Yamhill.
All the growth expected in Oregon must go somewhere. We can either increase the amount of infill and redevelopment in our cities or expand our urban growth boundaries. If we expand our boundaries we will take farm land out of production. If we grow inside our boundaries we will increase density.
|
 |
| Economic Change
Our economy must be able to grow and diversify in a global economy where competition is strong and getting stronger. We face an escalation in energy prices that impacts every Oregonian, so land use planning and infrastructure investment must more efficiently create the places and services we need to thrive.
|
 |
| Protecting Rural and Natural Areas
Original land use laws did not include specific statewide protection for wildlife or environmental habitat. Sensitive environmental lands receive some protection through local programs, state farm and forest designations, federal laws, and other incentive programs. However, many floodplains, watersheds, grasslands, lakes, hills, dunes, and valleys have no permanent protection.
|
 |
|
Re-evaluating Farm and Forest Areas
Some of the land currently restricted to farm or forest uses are not economically productive for these uses. Some landowners facing low returns on these lands say the current system is too limited. Should we reexamine lands designated for these uses? Are there other options such as incentive programs that would better meet the needs of the public and individual landowners? If we make changes to allow some additional development on these lands, what level of development outside of cities is best for all?
|
 |
|
Costly NewInfrastructure
New development and construction requires supporting infrastructure including roads, sewer, water, and the provision of other public services such as schools and emergency services. Development on the edge of urban areas costs more to serve than development inside existing urban areas. Federal funds to pay for new infrastructure continue to wane. How can we fairly pay the cost of infrastructure?
|
 |
|
Climate Change
Climate change and its negative effects on our natural world are a growing concern. An expanding body of research points to the strong relationship between land use and transportation in reducing carbon emissions. In particular, compact development and public transportation result in smaller carbon footprints.
|
 |
|
