Chang

This week, the Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing and may vote on whether to limit development of additional destination resorts in Deschutes County. The board should approve the proposed amendment to the County’s Destination Resort Combining Zone to restrict the development of additional destination resorts because destination resorts have fulfilled their economic development purpose here, because the impacts to our quality of life and environment are so high and because destination resorts do little to address our desperate need for workforce housing.

Oregon state law makers originally authorized destination resorts to bring economic activity and people to rural economically distressed areas with good tourism potential. While the timber industry was collapsing in Deschutes County in the 1980s and 1990s, we fit the bill.

But after the population growth and economic expansion and diversification of the last 25 years, it’s hard to argue that we need additional destination resorts now. The Oregon statewide planning goal that authorizes destination resorts anticipates that communities might outgrow destination resorts and Goal 8 includes provisions that prohibit new destination resorts within 24 miles of cities over 100,000 people.

The city of Bend’s population has passed that threshold and it’s time to put the destination resort tool back in the tool box.

New destination resorts would have outsized impacts on our quality of life and environment.

Reviewing a map of the properties which would no longer be eligible for destination resorts under the proposed zone amendment helps to illustrate this: tinyurl.com/Deschutesresorts

Developing new destination resorts with hundreds of houses and tourism amenities like golf courses in these areas would impact nearby rural residences, fragment and degrade wildlife habitat, diminish open space and scenic vistas, and consume excessive amounts of water. Since destination resorts are not complete communities offering jobs, schools, groceries, and other necessities, residents would need to drive far and frequently to meet their basic needs, increasing traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions throughout our community.

Advocates for more destination resorts say we need the additional homes. While we absolutely need more homes in our community, we need homes that are attainable for our local workforce.

Destination resort homes are priced out of reach for our middle and lower income workers and a high percentage of homes in existing destination resorts are second homes, not owned or rented by local workers. So building another home in a new destination resort does much less for our local workforce than building another home in one of our incorporated cities.

Some homebuyers may have their heart set on a home in a resort community. For those homebuyers who prefer a home in a resort community over all others, there are several thousand already built within Deschutes County with a healthy number in circulation in local real estate listings. For those who want to build their own home, there were 725 vacant lots in 2020 within existing destination resorts — Caldera Springs, Eagle Crest, Pronghorn, Tetherow — and 157 vacant lots still available within the historic resort communities of Black Butte Ranch, Inn of the 7th Mountain/Widgi Creek, and Sunriver. Add in the 1,290 units already approved in Thornburgh and Caldera Phase II, and there is no shortage of destination resort home opportunity here.

In Deschutes County, we need more homes. But destination resort homes are less affordable and have greater impacts on our quality of life and environment than homes in existing communities. There are plenty of destination resort home opportunities for homebuyers who prefer them. This is an economic development policy tool that has played its role here and no longer fits our community.

County commissioners should honor the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the preference of the 220+ constituents who submitted written comments in support and should vote to amend the zone restricting the development of future destination resorts in Deschutes County.

Do you have a point you’d like to make or an issue you feel strongly about? Submit a letter to the editor or a guest column.