1985-14974-Minutes for Meeting July 17,1985 Recorded 7/23/198585-149'74
VOL 65 PAGE 193
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
JULY 17, 1985 REGULAR MEETING
Commissioner Prante called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
Commissioner Maudlin was in attendance, Chairman Tuttle was
absent; Rick Isham, Legal Counsel was also present.
Amendments to Commissioner Prante read aloud the amendments
the Agenda to the agenda.
1985/86 Salary Sheriff Jim France gave a brief overview of
Range: Command of the proposed 85/86 salary ranges for non -
Staff union staff in the Sheriff's Department. He
stated that this proposed increase in salary
for the command staff would bring them to a
more competitive level with the Bend Police
Department and other agencies around the
area.
1
Sheriff France also stated that institute
educational incentive pay is being proposed
whereby an employee will receive monetary
compensation for obtaining an Intermediate
Certificate and satisfactorily completing a
minimum of three units of college credits in
a job related area or towards a degree and
completing a minimum of 32 hours of approved
inservice training per year or obtaining an
Advanced Certificate and satisfactorily
completing a minimum of three units of
=-0
college credits in a job related area or
towards a degree and completes a minimum of
cf) c`i
40 hours of approved inservice training per
C -J _-
year, which would increase the monetary
compensation
Commissioner Maudlin stated that it was his
4^:
understanding that the patrolmen who work
overtime can be paid higher than the ser-
geants.
Sheriff France concurred with this and stated
that because of the current salary rate for
the sergeant positions, the incentive is not
there to apply for command positions.
MOTION: MAUDLIN moved the acceptance of the
1985-86 salary ranges for the
non-union staff in the Sheriff
Department as proposed.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
1
1 �
J
VOL 65 FAGS 1.94
Signature of Commissioner Prante noted that the following
OLCC Applications OLCC Applications have been presented for
consideration and possible signature.
Cultus Lake Resort
Bend Golf Club
LaPine Inn
Hook, Wine & Cheddar
Deschutes River Kamping, Inc.
Paulina Lake Resort
Terrebonne Market Inc.
G.I. Joes, Inc.
Marcellos Italian Cuisine
MOTION: MAUDLIN moved to sign the OLCC
applications as presented in the
agenda.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Signature of Dave Hoerning, Acting Public Works Director,
Acceptance of stated that this request is for the Board's
Warranty Deed acceptance of a warranty deed from Ray
Springer which covers the strip of land he is
deeding to the County. Mr. Hoerning indicat-
ed that this parcel will be used as addition-
al right of way for Chamberlain Avenue and
for the future extension of Arthur Street.
Mr. Hoerning stated that the Department of
Public Works will pay $216.06 for back taxes
on the property and the County's share of
escrow costs will be $48.75. Bend Title
Company is handling the transaction.
MOTION: PRANTE entertained a motion to
accept the Warranty Deed as
presented for Chamberlain and
Arthur Street - Right of Way for
the Department of Public Works
MAUDLIN: So moved.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Signature of Mr. Hoerning stated that the Paulina-East
Order No. 101 Lake Road is a substandard road which is
Establishing a being subjected to heavy traffic due to
Weight Limit construction by the State.
Paulina-
East Lake Road Mr. Hoerning noted that there has been a drop
in the amount of traffic going into the
2
J , VOL 65 PAGE 195
Crater because of the poor road condition.
The requst is to put a 25 ton (50,000
lb.) weight limit on Paulina-East Lake
Road.
MOTION: MAUDLIN moved to sign Order No. 101
establishing a 25 ton weight limit
on Paulina-East Lake Road.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Signature of
MOTION: PRANTE entertained a motion to
Military Facility
sign the Military Department
Lease
Facility Lease for the Redmond
Armory to use for a voting poll.
MAUDLIN: So moved.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Consideration of
Rick Isham noted that this is a request by
Legal Lot Status
Jessie and David Vance for a Legal Lot Status
Jessie and David
determination by the Board. (See attached
Vance
memorandum)
MOTION: MAUDLIN moved to direct the
Planning Department to accept the
electrical permit for Jessie and
David Vance as a legal lot.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Signature of
Postponed until July 24, 1985 at 7:30 p.m.
Transportation
Plan
Signature of
MOTION: MAUDLIN moved to apoint Barbara
Letter Appointing
Stone to the Central Oreogn
Barbara Stone
Regional Housing Authority.
to Central Oregon
PRANTE: Second.
Regional Housing
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Authority
Signature for Mylar MOTION: PRANTE entertained a motion to sign
TP 657 -Tennant Mylar TP 657.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Signature for MOTION: PRANTE entertained a motion to sign
Personnel Computer Personal Services Contract with
Training - BOCC Patricia Perkins Lundeen for
Office computer software training.
MAUDLIN: Second.
3
VOL 65 PAGE 196
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Other Staff/ Commissioner Maudlin reported that Dave
Public Concerns Hoerning had requested that three small trees
be removed from a site near the solid waste
area in order to allow the Cascade Airplane
Club (miniature planes) air access from the
south instead of the north. The Airplane
Club will remove the trees themselves and cut
the wood and give to a local agency.
Consideration and Commissioner Prante noted that these subcon-
Signature of tracts will be signed contingent upon
Family Counseling signature of subcontractors.
Subcontracts
MOTION: MAUDLIN moved to sign the four
subcontracts as follows contingent
upon signatures from the subcon-
tractors:
1. Residential Assistance Program
2. Dynatron Inc.
3. Educational Services District
4. Rising Expectations Inc.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
Signature of MOTION: PRANTE entertained a motion to sign
Personal Services the Personal Services Contract with
with Sara A. Scott Sara A. Scott.
MAUDLIN: So moved.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 a.m.
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
LAU CE A UTTLE, C RMAN
O S TOWCOMMISSIONER
DI L , O I SIONER
BOCC:kbw
4
TES �
65 PAC` 1-97
Legal Counsel
Courthouse Annex / Bend, Oregon 97701 / (503) 388-6623
Richard L. Isham, Legal Counsel
July 16, 1985 Dana S. Wade, Legal Assistant
MEMORANDUM:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: RICHARD L. ISHAM
Legal Counsel
;c
SUBJECT: VANCE PARCEL LOCATED IN SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH,
RANGE 14, EAST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, DESCHUTES
COUNTY, OREGON
COPY TO: JOHN ANDERSEN
CRAIG SMITH
Omer Summers purchased the West half of Section 17 (320 acres)
from River Bend Land Company in 1972. He apparently sold a 40
acre parcel of real property to Vernon and Christine Lancaster.
The date of the transaction is unknown as no documents have been
recorded. That parcel is now owned by three parties. (See map)
The contract purchaser of Tax Lot 900 is Keeney. The owner of
Tax Lot 1100 is Konopa. The contract purchaser of Tax Lot 1000
is Vance.
Lancasters sold the Vances their 10.17 acre parcel by unrecorded
contract dated April 26, 1978, the Konopas their 10 acre parcel
on April 30, 1979, by Warranty Deed, and the Keeneys their 19.83
acre parcel by contract in 1985. The Keeney parcel appears to
have been first sold by unrecorded contract on March 25, 1981.
This situation is similar to the James Slater land division. His
lot was found to be a legally created lot in accordance with my
August 21, 1984, memo. Mr. Slater owns Tax Lot 800. (See
attached memo)
VOL 65 FACE 198
- 2 -
There are some differences in the creation of Tax Lots 900, 1000
and 1100 in that the parcels were not created by Mr. Summer, but
instead were created by his purchaser, Mr. Lancaster. In my
opinion, the subsequent creation of these three lots qualifies as
further subdivision of the property and would therefore come
under the terms of Ordinance No. PL -2. Ordinance No. PL -2
provides an exception from regulation for any lot ten acres or
larger sold by sectional breakdown.
The problem with the Vance and Keeney parcels is that Mr.
Lancaster described the parcel by a metes and bounds description.
It is clear that only parcels created by sectional breakdown are
exempt from the regulations of PL -2. The Konopa parcel was
described by sectional breakdown.
The metes and bounds descriptions used by Lancaster are in
reality equivalent to a sectional breakdown of the larger parcel.
The question to be decided is whether under Ordinance No. PL -2 a
metes and bounds description which is equivalent to a section
breakdown description is to be considered a sectional breakdown
description for the purpose of reviewing the status of the lots.
Please determine the intent of this provision of PL -2 so we may
advise the property owners as to the status of their lots.
RLI/dw
Attachments
200
c
I
I
Boo
I
I
I I � � i✓ I I
I I goo i I
III I I
II II
II II
II ►i
IU AST �� C 40 I
100 1000 I
II
N -A N C> fa t YA N C F. I
is
II � ISI
-- ---�
7(
See Map 17 14 20
VOL 65 PAGE -199
- I
II
ISI
I
300
II
III
II
�I
I
�I
II
I�
al
II
I,I
I►
II
-
N
I�
wGsr
(
I
400
n
i
II
Id
I
I
v
II
II
I
Tr
500
WI
I
\
xl
s
I
i
IW
If
I�
II
►
1I
ICA51
-3io
II
I
I
«I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
wGST
I
I
X320
II
200
c
I
I
Boo
I
I
I I � � i✓ I I
I I goo i I
III I I
II II
II II
II ►i
IU AST �� C 40 I
100 1000 I
II
N -A N C> fa t YA N C F. I
is
II � ISI
-- ---�
7(
See Map 17 14 20
VOL 65 PAGE -199
�AM
i,.y•
August 21, 1984
MEMORANDUM:
DESCHUTES COUNTY LEGAL COUNSEL
VOL 200
DESCHUTES COUNTY COURTHOUSE ANNEX
BEND, OREGON 97701
AREA CODE 503
TELEPHONE 388.6623
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: RICHARD L. ISHA
Legal Counsel
SUBJECT: SLATER PARCE RECORDED SUBDIVISION IN THE WEST HALF
OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 14, EAST OF
THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
COPY TO: JOHN ANDERSEN
PAUL SPECK
L. ROSS BROWN
The Board of County Commissioners asked me to make further review
of the legal status of James Slater's lot located in an unre-
corded subdivision in the Alfalfa area. Mr. Slater has pre-
viously appeared before the Board of County Commissioners. The
developer's attorney, Paul Speck, has submitted a written argu-
ment for recognizing this parcel and others similarly situated.
I have made a review of our County ordinances and ordinance amend-
ments and recommend that Mr. Slater's parcel be recognized as a
legally created lot. What follows below is my reasoning for
determining that the lot was legally created.
On September 9, 1970, the County adopted Ordinance No. PL -2,
Subdivision Ordinance for the County of Deschutes, which required
that the subdivision of property be in accordance with regula-
tions adopted in the Ordinance. There was, however, an exception
to the regulations for any lot 10 acres or larger sold by sec-
tional breakdown. Ordinance No. PL -2 provided the first County
regulations for the subdivision of property. The Ordinance did
not regulate partitions or subdivisions.
On January 5, 1977, the County adopted Ordinance No. PL -7,
Deschutes County Land Partition Ordinance. This Ordinance regu-
lated the creation of all parcels in major and minor partitions.
VOL 65 FAGS 201
- 2 -
Ordinance No. PL -7 did not affect the subdivision of property
under Ordinance No. PL -2 as that Ordinance continued in force
after the adoption of ordinance PL -7. Consequently, as of
January 5, 1977, the creation of lots larger than 10 acres in a
subdivision were the only lots not regulated by the County.
On November 1, 1979, the County adopted Ordinance No. PL -14,
Deschutes County Subdivision/Partition Ordinance of 1979. As of
the effective date of that Ordinance, the creation of all lots in
subdivisions and all parcels in partitions required approval
before creation under the applicable procedures.
The latest amendments to the land division procedures were adop-
ted by Ordinance No. 81-043, the Deschutes County Subdivision/
Partition Ordinance of 1981, on December 31, 1981. This ordin-
ance did not relax any criteria relating to the creation of lots
and parcels.
When Mr. Slater first discussed obtaining a building permit for
his property with the planners, they viewed his parcel as being
created by an illegal partition from other contiguous property.
This was a proper application of Ordinance No. PL -7 which pre-
dated his purchase of the lot. Although that may have been a
reasonable interpretation of the facts relating to the Slater
parcel, authorization under Ordinance No. PL -2 to sell parcels of
10 acres and larger without complying with any ordinance require-
ments applied to the creation of this parcel. Had we reviewed
the parcel in that light, it would have been seen as a legally
created parcel in the first instance.
In the future, any parcel of 10 acres or larger created and sold
prior to November 1, 1979, should be reviewed to see if, in addi-
tion to compliance with the applicable partition requirements, it
may have been created by an unrecorded subdivision.
RLI/dw
R