Bend council approves first readings for Stevens Road ‘Legacy Village’ master plan despite commercial‑development concerns

The Bend City Council on first reading approved three land‑use ordinances to advance the Stevens Road Tract project, now proposed as “Legacy Village,” after a multi‑hour public hearing that focused on housing, density, open space and how to ensure commercial areas become real destinations.

Planning staff told the council the proposal implements House Bill 3318 and its local policies: a minimum of 2,487 dwelling units across roughly 260 acres, a housing mix that exceeds the city’s earlier targets, and at least 20 net acres to be conveyed to the city for deed‑restricted affordable housing (with income bands). The applicant is proposing about 23.8 acres of deed‑restricted affordable housing — roughly 3.8 acres more than the statutory minimum — and 39.5 acres of permanent open space, including a 23‑acre community park planned with the Bend Parks & Recreation District.

“We are meeting the statute’s numeric requirements and in some instances exceeding them,” city planning staff said, summarizing the comprehensive‑plan and master‑plan findings that staff recommended for approval. Staff also noted required transportation mitigation measures and wildfire‑risk requirements in the application record.

Developer representatives from Hayden Homes described how they had reworked the project to improve near‑term buildability. “We proposed reducing the RH‑zone density assumption from the concept‑plan 40 units/acre to an average of about 25 units/acre at the edge of town, while keeping the overall unit total by redistributing units across zones,” said Joey Sher, a project planner representing the applicant. Sher and Hayden Homes’ government‑affairs manager, Jen Kovitz, said the adjustment is intended to make early phases financeable and to deliver housing sooner. The applicant said it will convey the deed‑restricted acreage to the city and aims to coordinate with partners to build the commercial and mixed‑employment parcels.

Public testimony included both project supporters and broader policy advocates. Local housing and climate advocates urged the council to keep robust affordable‑housing and electrification requirements; neighborhood and planning commenters raised questions about whether the designated commercial parcels will be built and under what timeline.

Council discussion split along two lines. Several councilors emphasized that the project exceeds the statutory affordable‑housing acreage and will unlock housing that local employers — including teachers — need. “This is going to help build out those 60% and 80% AMI units we’ve been prioritizing,” one councilor said during deliberations in support of the ordinances.

Other councilors expressed skepticism about how reliably commercial and employment lands actually materialize on master‑plan maps once neighborhoods develop, and urged the council to pursue follow‑up policy work — incentives, performance standards or other tools — to make the “complete community” aspirations more durable on the ground.

Council action: the council approved first readings of (1) the comprehensive‑plan policy amendments required by HB 3318, (2) development‑code amendments establishing the Legacy Village master plan, and (3) the annexation ordinance for roughly 265.7 acres. One councilor recorded a vote in opposition on the first motion; subsequent motions carried. Each measure will return for required follow‑up steps in the quasi‑judicial land‑use process.

What comes next: Staff said they will continue to coordinate required technical studies (transportation mitigation, sewer and water capacity analyses, and wildfire mitigation demonstration materials) and to work with the applicant on tentative subdivision and more detailed phasing. Councilors who voiced concern about commercial delivery urged staff to return with policy options (incentives, performance standards or other tools) that would give the city greater leverage to secure mixed‑use commercial development alongside housing.

Votes at the meeting: the council approved first readings for the comprehensive‑plan amendments, code amendments and annexation (motions carried; one recorded nay on the plan‑policy motion).