Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 215.050 (2026)

Comprehensive planning, zoning and subdivision ordinances; copies available

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      215.050 Comprehensive planning, zoning and subdivision ordinances; copies available. (1) Except as provided in ORS 527.722, the county governing body shall adopt and may from time to time revise a comprehensive plan and zoning, subdivision and other ordinances applicable to all of the land in the county. The plan and related ordinances may be adopted and revised part by part or by geographic area.

      (2) Zoning, subdivision or other ordinances or regulations and any revisions or amendments thereof shall be designed to implement the adopted county comprehensive plan.

      (3) A county shall maintain copies of its comprehensive plan and land use regulations, as defined in ORS 197.015, for sale to the public at a charge not to exceed the cost of copying and assembling the material. [Amended by 1955 c.439 §2; 1963 c.619 §3; 1973 c.552 §4; 1977 c.766 §2; 1981 c.748 §41; 1987 c.919 §5; 1991 c.363 §1]

 

      215.055 [1955 c.439 §3; 1963 c.619 §4; 1971 c.13 §2; 1971 c.739 §1; 1973 c.80 §43; 1975 c.153 §1; repealed by 1977 c.766 §16]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases, 1960–2017 · leading case: Fifth Avenue Corp. v. Washington Cnty., Etc., 581 P.2d 50 (Or. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fifth Avenue Corp. v. Washington Cnty., Etc., 581 P.2d 50 (Or. 1978). · cites it 10× “Finally, plaintiff asserted that the formalities observed by the Board in its plan adoption procedures were improper under ORS 215.050 and the Washington County Charter.”
Allison v. Washington Cnty., 548 P.2d 188 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 6× “1974) (A comprehensive plan adopted by the governing body of a county under ORS 215.050 is not subject to referral by the voters).”
SFG Income Fund, Lp v. May, 75 P.3d 470 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 7× “Specifically, they assert that such a duty originates under ORS 215.050 5 and Multnomah County Code (MCC) 11.”
Fasano v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs of Washington Cty., 507 P.2d 23 (Or. 1973). · cites it 5× “110(1), after the comprehensive plan has been adopted, the planning commission recommends to the governing body of the county the ordinances necessary to "carry out" the comprehensive plan.”
Alexanderson v. Bd. of Commissioners, 616 P.2d 459 (Or. 1980). · cites it 6× “ORS 215.050 and 197.175(2). ORS 197.175(1) provides in part: "Cities and counties shall exercise their planning and zoning responsibilities * * in accordance with ORS 197.”
Friends of Yamhill Cnty., Inc. v. Bd. of Commissioners, 238 P.3d 1016 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “The county decision was governed by the Measure 49 Vested Rights Ordinance, an ordinance adopted under the county’s planning authority set out at ORS 215.050. 7 That ordinance required the county review authority to “base its Final County Vesting Decision on whether the…”
Baker v. City of Milwaukie, 533 P.2d 772 (Or. 1975). · cites it 4× “Under ORS 215.050 (amended by Or. Laws 1973, ch.”
Fifth Avenue Corp. v. Washington Cnty., 560 P.2d 656 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 10× “ORS 215.050 ( amended by Oregon Laws 1973, ch.”
Eklund v. Clackamas Cnty., 583 P.2d 567 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 3× “ORS 215.050(1), 215.130. The zoning and subdivisión ordinances are to comply with the local comprehensive plan (ORS 215.”
Colwell v. Washington Cnty., 718 P.2d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 11× “LUBA explained: «* * * Petitioners say that ORS 215.050 and ORS 215.060 require county commission action to effectuate any change in the comprehensive plan.”
Sabo v. Monroe Twp., 232 N.W.2d 584 (Mich. 1975). · cites it 3× “* * * In Oregon the county planning commission is required by ORS 215.050 to adopt a comprehensive plan for the use of some or Eill of the land in the county.”
South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. Bd. of Commissioners, 569 P.2d 1063 (Or. 1977). “” 3 ORS 215.050. 4 Although the planning commission proceedings were placed in evidence before the Board, the Board expressly stated in its order that it was not relying on the recommendation of the planning commission.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 215.050(1) — 7 cases
Fifth Avenue Corp. v. Washington Cnty., Etc., 581 P.2d 50 (Or. 1978). “Finally, plaintiff asserted that the formalities observed by the Board in its plan adoption procedures were improper under ORS 215.050 and the Washington County Charter.”
Friends of Yamhill Cnty., Inc. v. Bd. of Commissioners, 238 P.3d 1016 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “The county decision was governed by the Measure 49 Vested Rights Ordinance, an ordinance adopted under the county’s planning authority set out at ORS 215.050. 7 That ordinance required the county review authority to “base its Final County Vesting Decision on whether the…”
Alexanderson v. Bd. of Commissioners, 616 P.2d 459 (Or. 1980). “ORS 215.050 and 197.175(2). ORS 197.175(1) provides in part: "Cities and counties shall exercise their planning and zoning responsibilities * * in accordance with ORS 197.”
Fountain Vill. Dev. Co. v. Multnomah Cnty., 31 P.3d 458 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
Eklund v. Clackamas Cnty., 583 P.2d 567 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “ORS 215.050(1), 215.130. The zoning and subdivisión ordinances are to comply with the local comprehensive plan (ORS 215.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 215.050(2) — 3 cases
Eklund v. Clackamas Cnty., 583 P.2d 567 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “ORS 215.050(1), 215.130. The zoning and subdivisión ordinances are to comply with the local comprehensive plan (ORS 215.”
Weyerhaeuser Real Est. Dev. Co. v. Polk Cnty., 267 P.3d 855 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
McCollum v. State ex rel. Dep't of Land Conservation & Dev., 286 P.3d 916 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 215.050(3) — 2 cases
Alexanderson v. Bd. of Commissioners, 616 P.2d 459 (Or. 1980). “ORS 215.050 and 197.175(2). ORS 197.175(1) provides in part: "Cities and counties shall exercise their planning and zoning responsibilities * * in accordance with ORS 197.”
Eklund v. Clackamas Cnty., 583 P.2d 567 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “ORS 215.050(1), 215.130. The zoning and subdivisión ordinances are to comply with the local comprehensive plan (ORS 215.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.