The 2024 Legislature, in SB 1537, created a new one-time opportunity for municipalities to expand their Urban Growth Boundaries. For smaller cities, like Bay City, the maximum expansion is fifteen net residential acres if there is no binding conceptual plan. However, this is not a free gift from the Legislature. In order to qualify for this expansion process, a city must demonstrate need for the additional land, as well as need for the additional housing; the parcel must also be adjacent to the existing UGB.

Bay City desires to bring a parcel, known locally as the Green Williams property, into the UGB under the SB 1537 provision, and chose this property last April as the one to move ahead with. Most recently the city held a “community workshop” to discuss the proposal with Bay City residents.

The key question is whether Bay City meets the criteria in Section 52 of the bill for the one-time UGB expansion. Without getting down into the weeds on the details, it does not appear to ORCA that Bay City meets the criteria — but, curiously, city officials are not discussing the criteria they have to meet at all. On the contrary, Bay City is moving forward as if there were no criteria. The city is proposing to sign a Development Agreement, along with Tillamook County and Compass Communities LLC, to formalize “cooperation and partnership” in order to “accomplish the successful expansion, development and investment in Bay City.”

According to the proposed Agreement, Bay City is to conduct the necessary land use hearings before April 8, 2026. Tillamook County must also hold a hearing under the proposed Agreement, and DLCD must approve the proposal. There are many steps ahead. ORCA continues to notify Bay City that they must meet the new law’s criteria, and if they do not, this UGB expansion project must come to an end.

A final note: the Green-Williams property has a longstanding issue with storage of asphalt grindings, which were supposed to be removed by September 2016. Apart from all the other questions, is this the sort of property that should be brought into the UGB of Bay City?

The City of Gearhart has long desired to bring a parcel, generally known as The Cottages parcel, just outside the city’s Urban Growth Boundary, into the city. This would allow Gearhart to build a new fire station on higher ground, and also create a public park. The landowner would benefit from zoning allowing development at higher density than is allowable under Clatsop County zoning.

The means to these goals was to be a UGB “swap” agreement, which would not change any ownership, only the zoning on two parcels: The Cottages property and an oceanfront parcel in the Gearhart UGB that lies in the beach meadows area, and is zoned Residential. The two parcels would swap their zoning, bring The Cottages parcel into the UGB and remove the oceanfront parcel from it. Gearhart and The Cottages owners signed an agreement to this effect in August of 2021, but the agreement was not completed within the year as stipulated, and expired in August 2022.

However, Gearhart is still exploring ways to succeed in their goal. One possibility the city is considering is the provision for a UGB swap in the 2024 Legislature’s SB 1537. In Section 58, provision is made for UGB swaps. These require the properties involved to be roughly of equal size, and also to both be zoned for residential uses; the added land has to zoned for the same or greater density of residential use as the land being removed. 

The problem for Gearhart in trying to use this provision is that while the zoning on The Cottages parcel would be Residential, and lead to more housing being built once it is in the city, the oceanfront parcel is west of the state’s “no-build” line, and cannot be built on at all, regardless of its Residential zoning. The SB 1537 provisions are new, and there are many unanswered questions, but ORCA doubts very much if the legislature intended to allow UGB swaps in which the Residential zoning on one of the parcels is completely empty — no building allowed regardless of the zoning.

The City of Bandon, in an embarrassment of riches, approved the third major resort in this small (pop. 3,300) town. Having already approved Michael Keiser’s Bandon Beach Hotel and the first phase of the Gravel Point Resort, City Council in January approved the second phase of Gravel Point — overriding the planning commission, where the project failed on a 3-3 tie vote. Planning commission members were worried about adequate infrastructure for all this new development, but Council was not worried. Following the city engineer’s questionable figures, Council decided there was enough water and sewer capacity for this third resort, despite calculations in the city’s own planning documents that make it clear there are serious weaknesses in Bandon’s infrastructure.

Gravel Point phase 2 requires annexation of 30 acres from Coos County into the city, as well as planning for 30 acres of residentially-zoned land already in the city. The developers propose housing, retail space, an “event barn,” and a golf amenity. This is on top of the resort’s first phase, which is to be located on nearly 25 acres of land and is to include a 110-room hotel, with a secondary lodge, spa, dining facilities, a lounge bar and 32 “villas” / suites in two different configurations.

On top of these three resorts, Bandon unveiled a replat of part of the Portland Addition plat in town, which would allow some 420 new housing units. The city provided absolutely no information about this project, but the applicant, Breath of Life, on their website, described the project as having 420 affordable housing and multifamily units — far more than is needed, or could be absorbed, by such a small town as Bandon. 

However, under Bandon code, a replat must provide the same information as a first-time plat. That includes a showing that utilities will conform to the city’s master plans and engineering standards, and also requires a preliminary design for extending city water and sewer to each lot. ORCA provided testimony pointing this out, and also questioning whether the original plat would have allowed this number of houses. After reviewing the public comments, Breath of Life withdrew their application. They gave Bandon no reason, but ORCA hopes they had a reality check about the feasibility of so large a project.

It is clear from these four examples that Bandon is approving anything that comes their way, presumably in hopes of growing the budget, as the largest chunk of the General Fund monies come from the Transient Occupancy Tax. It seems the city may also be hoping these developers will not only pay for city water and sewer to their developments, but upgrade the city’s entire system. This seems unlikely, as it would cost many millions. A better course for Bandon would be to investigate broadening the city’s economic base, so that the Occupancy Tax is not a principal source of income.