1985-14074-Minutes for Meeting June 24,1985 Recorded 7/9/198585-14074 q {{��
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS VO` 64 FACE 8`9?
SPECIAL MEETING - JUNE 24, 1985 Ises
CONSIDERATION OF FINAL PLAT TP 84-664, EAGLE CREST 1�14
Chairman Tuttle called to order a Special Meeting of the 5° -`9,p
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners under authority
ORS. 192-640. Commissioners Prante and Maudlin were in at
dance; Legal Counsel, Rick Isham, was also in attendance. �f
Chairman Tuttle explained that the purpose of the meeting is
for consideration and possible signature of final plat TP 84-664,
Eagle Crest and related documents.
George Read, Associate Planner, stated that the Fire Department
and the Developers have agreed to change some names of roads that
currently exist on the plat. Mr. Read stated that there is a
regular road name change procedure after something is final;
however, he did not have enough time to look up the procedure in
the tentative plat phase. It was Mr. Read's opinion that the
Public Works Department would want to review the changes.
Mr. Isham stated that the Public Works Department refers those
issues to the Fire Department.
Mr. Read commented that generaiiy it is transmitted to the Public
Works Department because of the 911 System and the opportunity to
have the names the same at least for transmittal.
Mr. Isham explained that in talking to Mr. Dave Hoerning, Acting
Public Works Director, the Fire Department is the agency to refer
the requests to for approval. Once the request is filed, the
Planning Commission conducts an investigation and recommends an
ordinance to change road names to the Board.
Chairman Tuttle asked if the name changes are reflected on the
mylars?
Mr. Gary Hickman, Engineer for Eagle Crest, stated that the paper
copy shows in red the names that will be changed. The original
mylars have not been changed.
Mr. Read stated that another problem area is that the solar
envelopes are not platted on the lot. Mr. Read stated that they
would have to be platted on there to meet the standards of the
subdivision ordinance and meet the general conditions of ap-
proval.
Commissioner Prante asked if there was a check list on these
processes?
Mr. Read stated that there is a check list in the ordinance;
however, there are no specific check lists given out.
VOL 64 PAGE 893
Commissioner Prante stated that a check list for future projects
should be established.
Mr. Read stated that it would take approximately ten minutes per
lot to draw the solar envelopes on the plat and there are 30 lots
on this plat.
Mr. Jaqua stated that rrom an engineering standpoint, it wasn't
picked up. Mr. Jaqua stated that he thought they were dealing
off a general lot configuration from a "master plan" so they
didn't realize that they were talking about solar envelopes on
this tentative plan.
Mr. Read noted that the lines need to be drawn and the height
noted on each line which then gives the set back for that height
of structure.
Chairman Tuttle stated that the crux of the problem is that our
subdivision ordinance requires an identification of the solar
envelope ana the reason tnat it requires that is that there is a
known area in wfticn a structure can be located so it doesn't
shade the south root or the south wall depending on the unique
characteristics of the lot.
Mr. Isham stated that a Declaration of Dedication is being
presented for approval which dedicates to the public easterly ten
feet, as measured from the westerly ordinary high water mark of
the Deschutes River, and that certain parcel of real property
described as the Eagle Crest Subdivision. This provides for
access and egress by the public to 'the Deschutes River for
recreational purposes and some restrictions by both parties.
Mr. Isham stated that a development agreement is being presented;
however, there is an issue on the agreement that they are going
to develop the planned unit and development facilities according
to a certain time schedule. Mr. Isham stated that actual
physical improvements in the subdivision have signed assignments
that the County holds on the certificates of deposit. Mr. Isham
stated that the bank form states non-transferrable; therefore he
would like to obtain the bank's interpretation of that statement.
Mr. Jaqua stated that a proposed schedule for all of the improve-
ments is prepared by Eagle Crest; however, they are phasing the
tentative plan. The list of the schedule given of the develop-
ment agreement is the total projected improvements. He stated
that this is the non -bonded part in the development agreement.
There is standard form language in the development agreement
which talks about 30 days notice and the County would come in and
do the work. Mr. Jaqua stated for clarification on the record
that those will be activated as the phases are finalized.
Mr. Jaqua stated that they have committed, as they phase the
project, to what the completion of all those amenities would be.
VOL 64 ?AGE 894
Mr. William Jabs stated for further clarification that they have
listed improvements on ground that is not even platted. He also
stated that it is standard form if you don't plat something
within one year it dies, therefore, they would not be obligated
to complete improvements on a plat that has never been filed.
Mr. Jaqua pointed out that they have given a schedule and will
meet that schedule as each section is finalized.
Mr. Isham stated that the reason why this agreement came about is
that there was a condition of approval. Mr. Isham asked of
Mr. Read, what is necessary to meet the condition of approval.
Mr. Read stated that the condition of approval required a
development agreement which related to the completion of improve-
ments. The staff recommended that that be incorporated into the
improvement agreement as part of the subdivision since it had
never been completed as part of the conditional use for the
destination resort and the Hearings Officer's condition specifi-
cally states that the applicant shall provide documentation that
describes the specifics of the phasing of the project including
phase or unit sequence, a schedule of improvements, initiation
and completion and a program time table for all common element
and facilities. This plan shall be incorporated into the
development agreement for the subdivision required by the
conditions of the conditional use. This agreement shall be in
accordance with section 4.050 of the subdivision ordinance which
is the improvement agreement section.
Mr. Isham stated that in the event the developer does not
complete an improvement the County has the opportunity to
complete improvements and place a lien on the property. The
other improvement agreement relates to the actual physical
facilities are found within the subdivision which relate to the
water, sewer, underground utilities and roadways, which are
bonded.
Mr. Read stated that this is a destination resort and at the
initial hearing, which prompted the Hearings Officer's decision
that if the destination resort didn't have the amenities con-
structed it would be a rural residential subdivision and that the
amenities were an important part of the overall development and
the County wanted some assurance that those would occur.
v
w .
VOL 64 PAP: 895
Mr. Jabs stated that they would have to come back to the Board
for Phase Two on a subdivision. Phase One is complete within
itself.
Chairman Tuttle asked if the agreement, as it is drafted,
adequately addresses that condition.
Mr. Isham stated that the two agreements, as drafted, meet the
intent of the condition.
MOTION: PRANTE moved that we authorize signature
on the Plat TP 84-664 contingent upon or
subject to the correct names being placed on
the plats and the solar envelopes identified;
authorize signature for Declaration of
Dedication of Public Access subject to the
signature of Eagle Crest Partners Ltd.;
authorize signature of the improvement
agreement; and authorize signature on the
development agreement contingent upon
verification that the certificates
of deposits can be assigned.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Chairman Tuttle invited Mr. Paul Speck, Attorney at Law, to speak
to the Board. However, Chairman Tuttle expressed that he felt
that this meeting is not for the purpose of creating a record for
future appeal.
Mr. Speck expressed concerns that the County should be aware
of before the plat was approved. Mr. Speck stated that the
principal difficulty is that once the County goes from tentative
plat approval to final plat approval, it represents to the
public that everything is okay. Mr. Speck stated that the County
is not in a position to do that because at the present time his
client, Mrs. Dean, intends to appeal the tentative plat appeal to
LUBA. There is a reasonable possibility that that appeal would
be successful. If the appeal is successful and one of the basis
upon which it can be successful would be that the conditional use
is invalid then the final plat becomes invalid. The problem with
that is that once the final plat is approved it is sold to the
public.
Chairman Tuttle posed a question to Mr. Speck, inthat does he
have a legal remedy available through Circuit Court to prohibit
filing of this plat.
Mr. Speck stated that he does not know and his best guess is that
he does not.
Mr. Isham stated that there is a statute whereby if the Board
takes an action contrary to the law, they can file an action in
VOL 64 F .896
actions of the County to issue building permits there is a legal
remedy available.
Mr. Speck noted that it is a true legal problem that needs to be
addressed. Mr. Speck stated that he wants the County to think
about this before the final plat is signed; that -it can end up in
legal problems down the line. Mr. Speck thought the issues
should be raised rather the County chooses to deal with them or
not. Mr. Speck stated he is not speaking on nehalf of Mrs. Dean;
however, those prospective purchasers of the lots.
Mr. Jaqua stated that Mr. Speck's comment on the plat on behalf
of his client is fine; however, this is not the place to make a
public statement to try and create questions in the minds of
prospective purchasers. Mr. Jaqua stated that the Hearings
Officer, a licensed practicing attorney has made a decision, the
matter has been reviewed by Board of County Commissioners and
they have made the same decision with the advice of Legal
Counsel. Mr. Jaqua stated that they have had one group of
property owners opposed to this project in four years and it is
his understanding that the project is not opposed but there is an
access issue to be determined and it has always been the de-
veloper's position that were that access issue determined that
they would deal with that decision whatever method the Courts
decide to locate.
Chman Tuttle adjourned the meeting at 10:10 a.m.
Ti" BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
LAU NCE . TUTTLE HA/I�RMAN
L�
LOIS STOY PR TE, COMMISSIONER
DI MAUDLIN, COMMISSIONER
BOCC:kbw
85-201.1