In an effort to bring more small-scale housing projects to existing neighborhoods, the Bend City Council may ease back on what public infrastructure — like sidewalks — developers are required to build.
A June 24 City Council discussion foreshadowed a slate of future changes aimed at spurring housing. Those could make it easier for planners to give leeway on infrastructure in the City’s development code, and expand a program where developers pay a fee instead of building new sidewalks. The Council also gave staff the nod to expand on a list of streets that won’t be widened in the future — a move meant to streamline housing by clearing developers of setting aside land for the public right-of-way.
The discussion follows state directions and City initiatives to accelerate home building in what remains one of Oregon’s most expensive markets. It also tees up renewed debate over who should pay to rebuild aging infrastructure as some of Bend’s oldest neighborhoods are redeveloped.
In a memo last month, City planners showed the Council 11 recent examples of when small-scale housing projects were thwarted by the costs of building sidewalks, frontage or new water and sewer lines. In those examples, the infrastructure price tag was anywhere from $6,000 to $160,000.
“Should we prioritize the housing or should we prioritize the infrastructure?” Bend Community Development Director Colin Stephens told the Council. “We want to do both, but sometimes they’re self-defeating.”
According to City officials, the conversation around relaxing infrastructure applies to infill — redevelopment in existing neighborhoods — instead of greenfield, where streets and utility lines don’t already exist.
The City Council wants to see more infill development, specifically of “middle housing,” an umbrella term for townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes and cottage clusters. More than 500 of these units have been built in Bend since 2022, fueled by state-level reforms that barred cities from blocking these small multifamily developments in neighborhoods zoned for single-family homes.
Middle housing now accounts for one out of every four homes built in the City, according to a City dashboard.
Still, the dashboard shows that a bulk of Bend’s middle housing includes townhomes built as part of large master-planned neighborhoods on land where the City has expanded in the last 10 years.
According to Stephens, the sheer number of homes in those developments makes costs of building new streets and sewer lines more bearable. Smaller middle housing projects don’t have to build new streets, but are still obligated to build new sidewalks, sewer and water extensions, stormwater drainage and possible street frontage improvements.
“These projects may seem like they’re small-scale projects that shouldn’t have a lot of public street improvement requirements,” Eric Huffman, an engineer with Becon Civil Engineering & Land Surveying, a Bend-based consulting firm, told the Source. “But there’s going to be some requirements on every project, and in some of those cases it just makes the project so it can’t pencil out.”
In one example, a developer in 2023 had contemplated six new townhomes for a vacant dirt lot on the corner of Fifth Street and Franklin Avenue in midtown Bend. That would trigger requirements to pave an adjacent gravel alley, build new sidewalks and curbs, and extend water and sewer lines. As estimated costs mounted to $160,000, the developer shied away, and instead built a tiny home shelter site to help people transition out of homelessness.
The current code already grants Bend planners the authority to waive infrastructure requirements for a host of reasons. But each waiver takes time and money — and triggers a process that gives the public a chance to formally appeal the decision. But the City may create a new path that cuts out the appeal process for middle housing developments, giving planners more ability to work with developers to approve projects.
The idea is to streamline housing, said Bend Mayor Melanie Kebler.
“We’re having this conversation because we’re a very pro-housing council and City and we want to build housing,” Kebler said June 24. “We’re not going to use these tools to start saying we’re imposing extra things that are going to make it hard to build housing.”
But that comes with trade-offs: Building more housing now could mean pushing out infrastructure. Those costs will be shouldered either by future development or the City.
“We might get sort of a less-good finished product for citizens to use, or we might be not getting an investment in public infrastructure that would reduce the burden on our maintenance fund,” Ben Berry, an engineer with the City of Bend, told the Council June 24.
Which developments might see relaxed requirements — and where the City will draw the line —will be part of future discussions. City Councilor Mike Riley said he views improvements like water and sewer lines, which benefit development directly, as the responsibility of builders. Sidewalks, which benefit the neighborhood as a whole, could be different.
“Future councils are going to have to think about, how are we going to pay for that, and actually make some substantial investments besides small piecemeal stuff,” Riley said.
Councilors last month voiced support for expanding a program where instead of building sidewalks themselves, developers pay a fee, and the money is pooled for sidewalk projects somewhere in the neighborhood. The program already exists in Wood River Village, a forested neighborhood just south of the Old Mill District.
That could also cut back on “sidewalks to nowhere” — when redeveloped lots build sidewalk segments that end in the lawn or fence of a neighbor whose home was built before sidewalks were required.
A set of code changes due before the Council next month would remove sidewalk requirements for small-lot subdivisions designed for middle housing.
But there’s no guarantee the changes will boost the type of housing the City Council wants to see, said Huffman, the civil engineering consultant. Even with a reduced infrastructure burden, new requirements like the tree preservation code and desire for wider sidewalks and bike paths could increase cost, he said.
This article appears in the Source July 9, 2026.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
So the cost of “pushing out infrastructure…will be shouldered by future development or the city”.
This means more than likely, an increase in property taxes. If the new infrastructure costs are the result of building then developers must pay. Especially if the public’s ability to appeal projects is denied.
The assumption the future builders will pickup the costs that should have been carried by the first builder is ludicrous. The assumption that the City will absorb the costs is also unlikely. So increasing property taxes is the only way. This is now an example of taxation without representation if the appeal process is disallowed as is proposed.
Kebler is a developer in sheep’s clothing to those of us who live here and those of us on a potentially dwindling fixed income.
More housing, more people, and more traffic without proper infrastructure? We’ve seen how eliminating parking requirements has worked out.
The city of bend wants more housing but it seems all it does is make it more expensive. Didn’t they just pass the no natural gas hookup for new construction without paying a hefty permit fee? Where is monthly road maintenance fee( not tax) going? Not doing much to maintain the third world roads in Bend!!
Families that can only afford smaller homes will need sidewalks – probably more so than the upper income families who have them.
The city should be planning for transportation for these new homeowners – sidewalks, bike lanes etc. instead of eliminating the rules for contractors to plan and build these facilities.
Bend does not need growth at the expense of good design.
I mean, I guess they could increase property taxes, But doesn’t that take a vote? I Figured they would just tack on a “fee “to our water bills