Loading...
1990-37615-Minutes for Meeting November 01,1990 Recorded 12/17/19901542 90-3'7615 i MINUTES; ; t DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS November 1, 1990 Chair Throop called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. Board members in attendance were Tom Throop, Lois Bristow Prante and Dick Maudlin. Also present were Rick Isham, County Counsel; Paul Blikstad, Planner; and Kevin Harrison, Planner. 1. DECISION ON SROA APPEAL OF STONE RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS Before the Board was the decision on the Sunriver Owners Association appeal of the hearings officer's approval of a site plan and tentative plat for the Stone Ridge Condominium Development. Commissioner Throop said he didn't think a new access on either Abbot or South Century was supported, but felt it was in the County's interest to make sure there was an emergency exit with a breakaway gate. He said the access should be an East Meadow. He wanted to encourage SROA to make the road improvements cited in the testimony and called for in the draft traffic report. He supported the temporary gated access on South Century for the construction period with hours of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. He felt the County Public Works Department should be involved to check the site distance and make a recommendation for the appropriate location of the temporary access. He felt the club house should be for on-site owner services only, with no property management or commercial activities, but providing space for on-site management. He felt that checking in and out was a property management and commercial activity which he thought should be conducted at a separate location. Commissioner Maudlin felt that if the checking in and out was off site, it would increase the traffic since they would come into the development and find their place, then go back and check in, and then go back to the development, and then have to go back out if there were questions or problems. He felt the owners would know where to go and would have their keys, but the rentals would be running back and forth. Commissioner Throop felt it had been agreed there would be no property management on site. Commissioner Throop felt that the setback on South Century should be 50 feet but on Abbot he didn't feel 50 feet was sufficient and supported a 100 foot setback. He didn't feel the maximum density was appropriate for this parcel. He would consider the possibility of allowing some of the roadway to encroach within 100 feet but not buildings. The common area would go to the SROA. He would require the Stoneridge PAGE 1 MINUTES: 11-1-90 ,,..t•;,;{`1~,v ~4 - 105 - 1543 Association to develop a detailed landscaping plan to screen the project and establish that landscaping. When mutually agreed upon, the SROA would take over the maintenance. Commissioner Prante concurred with Commissioner Throop on the emergency exist, the temporary access, and a detailed screening plan. She would like to see a bike path connect with the rest of the bike system. Because purchases were made based upon financial projections which included the allowed density, the elimination of three units could make the project financially unfeasible. She felt that this was not time share invading a sleepy little town since Sunriver was a destination resort. She would place emphasis on the screening especially at the entrance to Sunriver. She agreed with Commissioner Maudlin that the more services that could be provided at the club house would minimize the traffic on East Meadow. She felt the maximum density was allowable and did not feel comfortable cutting it back. Commissioner Maudlin didn't feel that the access on East Meadow Drive was a concern of the Commission, and that the upgrade of East Meadow Drive was the responsibility of the SROA. He supported the temporary access for construction. He didn't feel a rental program should be run out of the club house, but he felt people should be able to get a key and ask questions without going to another location. He felt the set backs were the major problem. He felt the developer had already redesigned the project as much as possible to accommodate the trees and the views, however he did feel that additional landscaping and screening should be required along Abbot Drive. He felt the expansion of Abbot Drive could be addressed inside of the right of way. A bicycle path should be built by the applicant to connect with the existing bike system. He felt the common area should be dedicated to the SROA because it was they had the larger concern over its maintenance since it was at the entrance to Sunriver. Commission Throop asked the parties if the club house should be used for property management functions. Bob Lovlien said the facility would only be used for an owner to check in, get a key, and advise the manager they were there. There would not be any rental check in at the club house. If a group of owners decided to rent a condo out, they would have to do it through some off-site property management office. Dave Jaqua agreed that the unit owner had the right to have someone on- site to check in with, but that guests or exchange programs would be commercial property management activities and would be taken care of off site. Bob Lovlien said RCI (resort exchange) people would check in at the club house. Commissioner Throop outlined areas where the Board of Commissioners were in agreement: (1) No new access to Abbot PAGE 2 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 -a 1544 or Century Drive and access would be on East Meadow. (2) There should be a provision encouraging SROA to make the road improvements cited in the testimony and called for in the traffic report. Rick Isham said this items would be outside the scope of the decision but that a letter could be written. (3) A temporary, gated access on Century Drive from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. (4) Have Public Works approval for the location of the temporary access. (5) 50 foot set back on South Century and the buildings no closer than shown on the schematic. (6) Common area to SROA. (7) Landscaping--use the hearings officer's wording in his decision on page 14, condition 15. (8) Stoneridge would establish the landscaping with SROA taking over the maintenance. The items remaining were (1) club house (2) set back along Abbot. Dave Jaqua said his understanding was that there would be no check in or check out at the clubhouse, no reservation system, and it would be limited to on-site services for owners. The problem was the definition of a "guest." They felt a "guest" was a true person associated with the owner's use of the unit, and that someone in a rental or exchange program would be a commercial use. Bob Lovlien said they want to use the club house as a place for owners and guests of owners to check in. They would come in, pick up their key and go to their unit. There would be no rental management activities on the site whatsoever. If five owners got together and rented out their unit, those rentals had to be handled off site, but those rental guests and RCI exchange guests would still come to the manager's office and pick up the key to open up the unit. That would be the only rental activity that would be done at the club house. The Commissioners agreed with Bob Lovlien's interpretation of the use of the club house. Commissioner Throop said he had a clear picture of the Abbot Drive area and felt strongly that a 50 foot set back was not adequate. Commissioner Maudlin felt the building set backs as drawn on the plan were fine if they would work with the SROA to more properly screen that portion along Abbot Drive. Commissioner Prante concurred. If the master plan had required a 100 foot set back to protect the entry to Sunriver, she would have supported it, but the master plan only required 50 feet. She felt there had to be clear-cut rules for developers to follow. She said the screening had to be extensive. PAGE 3 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1545 Commissioner Throop said the plan contained "minimum" setbacks and "maximum" densities and did not say developers had a right to the maximum density or minimum setbacks. MAUDLIN: I would move that we approve the application with the following: with the temporary access with hours of 7 am to 6 pm, with the club house owners' services as outlined in previous discussion, the setbacks be as outlined on the schematic drawing, additional screening as agreed upon between the SROA and the applicant along Abbot Drive, the bike path be constructed by the applicant, common area be dedicated to the SROA, access on East Meadow Drive. PRANTE: Second. VOTE: PRANTE: YES THROOP: NO MAUDLIN: YES Commissioner Throop said he would have supported the applicant had they been able to negotiate something along Abbot Drive which better served the Sunriver community. The Board recessed to move their meeting to the City of Bend Council Chambers. Chair Throop reconvened the meeting at 9:20 a.m. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: PP&L APPEAL Before the Board was a public hearing on an appeal of the hearings officer's approval of a conditional use permit for an electrical transmission line in the south urban growth boundary requested by Pacific Power and Light (CU-90-125). Chair Throop said he would allow approximately 45 minutes for the applicant's presentation, then 45 minutes for those making the appeal, and then approximately 15 minute rebuttals by each side. The Board would discuss how and when a decision would be made at the end of the testimony. He asked if any of the Commission members had had any contacts concerning this issue which they needed to declare. Commissioners Maudlin and Prante said they had had none. Chair Throop said he had contact with Stosh Thompson on a park proposal which was in the same area and had testified from a neutral stance at the second hearing before the hearings officer, but that contact did not bias him in any way, and he did not disqualify himself. He asked if there were any challenges to the three Commissioners' ability to hear the case. There were none. Chair Throop announced that any issues not raised at the local level would not be appealable to a higher level. He said the Board had all read the record and the testimony did not need PAGE 4 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 " 1546 to be in detail but should be a summary of the most important factors. Paul Blikstad gave the staff report. He said the proposed transmission line covered an area within and outside of the urban growth boundary in two zones: RR-10 and Forest Use F- 2 zone. The original hearing before the hearings officer was scheduled for August 7, 1990, but due to the fire, the parties agreed to postpone it until September 6, 1990. There was an additional hearing on September 12, 1990. The decision came out on September 28, 1990, and was appealed. He read a letter from County Counsel regarding whether the County would require the applicants to file a site plan for the project. It said under Section 7.0302 of the Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance, site plans were required for community services uses in any zone. The hearings officer's opinion did not address this issue. A site plan review, if applicable, would only be for areas zoned RR-10 or F-2 not RL which was within the urban growth boundary of Bend. Chair Throop opened the public hearing. Richard D. Bach, lawyer for applicant Pacific Power and Light, 900 SW 5th, Portland, 97204, testified first. He said they were prepare to brief the issue of design review if it were requested, but they did not believe that this was a "community service facility" within the definition of the zone. They didn't want this issue to delay the process any further. Rick Isham said there was a Deschutes County case where LUBA found that a site plan was applicable for a utility facility necessary for public service. Mr. Bach said they would do it so the issue was moot. Mr. Bach said they were going to rely upon the record but did want to present a summary. They had considered the open space designation of the area but there was nothing in the placement of this line which was inconsistent with the open space designation or wildlife area. He said the supply of electric power was necessary to this portion of the Bend Urban area. Clark Satre, Central Oregon Manager for Pacific Power and Light, testified that this line was needed this year in order to provide reliable service to existing customers. Although the line and substation would have the capacity to serve additional growth, it would not cause the growth to occur. Without the line, there could be blackouts experienced by large numbers of customers south of Wilson Avenue this winter, and the health and safety of their customers would be placed in serious jeopardy. The construction of this line would not result in rate increases for customers or any additional revenue to PP&L. They build their projects only when they are absolutely necessary in order to continue to provide reliable, PAGE 5 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 -a 1547 high quality service while maintaining price stability. Since the County was allowing unprecedented growth in this area, they should also allow an essential service to be adequately and reliably delivered. In response to appellants accusations that PP&L had failed to plan ahead, he responded that in 1982, they had a fully permitted line route and substation site for this project, however the economic recession of the early 1980s caused loads to decrease, and the need for the project temporarily diminished. Prudent business practices dictated that they not proceed with a project that was no longer needed. In early 1990, when it became time to proceed with the project, they were informed by the County that their permit was no longer valid. Since then, they worked to find and get approval for an alternative route. If a park were developed in the area where the line was proposed, it would not create a problem since parks and transmission lines coexisted all over the country. They did not view a single wood pole transmission line, 75 feet inside the property line, as incompatible with a park of this nature. Without the project, hundreds and perhaps thousands of residents could endure the coldest part of this coming winter without heat, light, water from pumped wells, and pressurized sewer systems. Jim Fisher, PP&L Operations Manager for the Mid-Oregon Area, said he was responsible for the construction of new lines, repairs, maintenance, and operations which included responding to any outages. East of town they had a large BPA 230,000 volt transmission line which was the main service for Bend which PP&L and Midstate tapped. On Highway 20 there was a 230,000 volt substation where PP&L subtransmission lines came from. Their Bend plant substation was by the Bend Metro Parks and Recreation District building and the 69,000 volt transmission line went from there to the Cleveland Avenue substation and then back to the substation on Highway 20. He said this system had been in place for about 20 years with no significant changes. There weren't any substations in the south end of Bend where there has been such tremendous growth. The route considered in 1982 came from the Highway 20 substation down 27th, down Reed Market Road, down through the industrial park, to Highway 97, and then back to the substation. The line being considered at this public hearing went from the substation site down Buck Canyon Road, across the river, and intercepted a 69,000 volt line owned by Midstate Electric. The line was not currently energized but would be shortly. The line crossed Century Drive near the Entrada Lodge. The system load in the winter of 88-89 was 148-150 mega watts which was up 50 mega watts from any previous peak, and the preceding 110 mega watts had taken 60 years to accumulate. This was 105% of their maximum capacity. They were desperate to get a line and a substation to serve the southern load. They had "beefed up" there interior system, adding wires, and feeder tie lines which would PAGE 6 MINUTES: 11-1-90 1 Q 1548 increase their capacity internally by about 5%. If there were brown outs or black outs this winter, there would be nothing to fix. It would just have to wait until the load decreased enough that they could turn it back on. Mark Heidecke, project manager for GE Rawley and Associates in the location, design, survey and right of way acquisition for this project, testified that the type of transmission line being proposed was a trim line, single width pole, with two stands of insulators near the top and one on the top. A normal distribution line was 40 feet in height, but they were proposing a pole 36" in diameter and about 10-15 feet higher for 62-65 feet of pole out of the ground. They were adding three wires and three insulators on top of the pole to reduce the overall silhouette of the line and lower the pole, so there would be greater screening by existing trees and vegetation. It was not a steel line or an H-frame line. They would only clear the trees which were absolutely necessary. The reason the 1982 route was not being pursued was because of the intensive growth along that route and there was substantial opposition. The hearings officer had requested they look at a route through a less intensely developed residential area, plus an 8.5 mile route would not be feasible for construction this winter. They chose this route from the China Hat substation site to the Midstate line in order to provide maximum system reliability and efficiency. Any other connection would not serve the system as well and would not balance the transmission system in Bend. Taking into consideration the areas of the Deschutes River which were designated as federal and state scenic water ways and where there was considerable residential development, they looked for a spot to cross the river with the least impact. The logical route seemed to be along Buck Canyon Road. Commissioner Throop asked about the utility corridors approved with the Newberry Monument bill. Mr. Heidecke said the utility corridors in the forest plan were for major, inter- city transmission lines no the inter-urban lines. When he discussed the line with the Thompsons, they said that putting the line through the middle of their property would limit their development potential, so they moved the line to go along the south property line. One of the goals within the state scenic waters legislation was that transmission lines be developed in existing corridors, but since that conflicted with the property owners' wish to develop the property and the line along the south property line was more beneficial to PP&L, that's the route they proposed. They secured an option for that line in July 1990, and the fire took place at the beginning of August. After the fire, PP&L was asked by the Thompsons to reevaluate their proposal. The Thompson's property had been completely devastated by the fire and there would be few remaining live trees. They changed the river crossing location about 100 feet to the north to where the PAGE 7 MINUTES: 11-1-90 115 • 1549 State had built a fire break down to the river, so they would not have to remove any more trees on the southeast bank. On the west bank, they would only have to remove one tree. Both sides of the river were screened by existing, live trees. The river user would see the wire crossing but would not see the structures on the bank of the river. The most westerly route would go along the margin of the burned area. They asked that the Board request that the Forest Service select the most westerly route since it would cause the least impact. He said PP&L felt that the south half of section 13 represented the best crossing location because of the hearings officer's recommendations and the south line resulted in no adverse parceling of the Thompson property. Commissioner Throop asked how much of the proposed line was within the fire area? Mr. Heidecke showed a sketch of the area and indicated the area affected by the fire which was about one third of the area crossed by the proposed line. Commissioner Throop said some of the parties had negotiated a route based on pre-fire conditions (adequate vegetation to screen the line and reduce the impacts), and asked what would prevent them from negotiating another route which would be in a vegetated area. Mr. Heidecke said after looking at the available alternatives after the fire, they felt this proposal was the best crossing of the river. He said the south half of Section 13 was the only available, large, undeveloped track left. Sandy Collins, 60247 Faugarwee Circle, Bend, testified that at the last regular meeting of the Deschutes River Woods Homeowners Association, a vote was taken which determined that the homeowners were in favor of this project. Chair Throop asked for testimony from the appellants. Paul Speck, representing Helen and Stosh Thompson, gave the Board an excerpt from the Comprehensive Plan for the Bend Urban Area which applied to the Thompson property. In 1979 he was contacted by the Thompsons who were concerned about rezoning their property to preserve a portion property for natural use (specifically wild life management). They brought their proposal to the citizens advisory committee, the City Planning Commission, and the County Board of Commissioners. In 1981, the City finally approved the text which he had written. 177 acres of the Thompson property were designated as a "natural preserve" which was of public benefit, and in exchange, the Thompsons' other property was zoned for future development. The comprehensive plan said no further parcelization of this 177 acres would be permitted. The uses permitted would be those existing in wildlife management. He said it was a use specific designation in the comprehensive plan which prohibited this type of line across the property. PAGE 8 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1550 He did not feel that the application to put a line across the Thompson property could be approved until comprehensive plan issues had been addressed. Because the comprehensive plan was site specific, he felt LUBA would reverse an approval of this application. Commissioner Prante asked how far the line would encroach onto the Thompson property. He said it was 25 feet at one point and then increased to 75 feet along the edge of the property. Dan Van Vactor, attorney representing Jack Lewis, testified that Jack Lewis was unable to attend but that this issue was very important to him. Mr. Lewis was an adjacent landowner, and the most easterly line would be in his westerly view of the mountains. He passed out pictures of the view from Mr. Lewis' desk. He clarified that the comparison of the poles would be between a 40 foot pole and a 75 foot pole which would both partially go into the ground. He said PP&L would still be able to hang additional cross arms for cable TV, etc. which would be allowed once the easement was granted. He felt the main issue involved with this route was money and aesthetics. The cost of developing the proposed line would only impact the stockholders of PP&L while the aesthetics would impact the constituents of the Deschutes County Commissioners. He felt that the line could go out on the edge of the urban growth boundary beyond Deschutes River Woods where they would be dealing with Forest Service property and very few residents would be impacted. The hearings officer said in his decision to withdraw the earlier order that concern over the health issue was real, and that a higher cost up front to alleviate potential health problems would be prudent for both the applicant and the community. However, in his most recent decision, he found there was no clear evidence of health problems resulting from the electromagnetic fields from a transmission line of this size for residents who lived in excess of 100 feet from the line. Mr. Van Vactor felt this was very inconsistent on the part of the hearings officer. There were substantial studies which were part of the record which indicated a potential risk for houses within 100 feet, and there were houses that were going to be within 100 feet of this line. The increased costs of going to another route would be distributed amongst so many stockholders that it wouldn't be significant when compared to the impacts on the residents of the proposed corridor. If PP&L had agreed to put the proposed line underground, there would not have been an appeal. He didn't think anybody was going to freeze to death in Deschutes County this winter if this line wasn't built. He said there was an obligation for PP&L to do a plan amendment. He questioned whether there was a conditional use right to build a power line in the RL zone. He didn't feel the hearings officer addressed the landscape management zone adequately. The state and federal scenic rivers acts preempted the County Comprehensive Plan. ORS PAGE 9 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1551 215.428 required that the SMR zone across the river on the Miller property be considered the critical zone in this application process since It did not allow power lines. The zone had since been changed, but the law required that the zone designation when the application was made remain until a new application was filed. He felt there were plenty of alternative routes for this line, and there was plenty of time to make this decision and encouraged the Board to reverse the hearings officers decision. Chuck Lewis, son of Jack Lewis who could not attend, testified that his family was opposed to the power line being placed in the proposed area "in any way, shape or form." He would like them to find a new route. He suggested the Board read selected pages of the book Crosscurrents regarding the health hazards involved with transmission lines. He had done damage appraising for Midstate Cooperative and was familiar with the process, but suggested that common sense would indicated that when considering two identical properties, the one with a power line in its spectacular view of the mountains would be negatively impacted. He thought that since the Forest Service land in this area was surrounded by private property, they might trade that property for development. He expressed concern over Mr. Fitch's objectivity since he represented "No on Central Oregon PUD District" several years ago which was funded by PP&L. The Entrada Lodge was on commercial land which had not been fully developed and the power lines would be in full view of their property. He did not agree with Mr. Heidecke's evaluation that the burn area would be "range land." He felt it was a burned over forest which was being reforested and within 10 years it would look considerably better. He requested that the Board send the application back to a re-siting process, and didn't feel the likelihood of a brown or black out was that great. He said the furthest west route would not have as great an impact as Route A. George Cruden, impacted property owner, said his home had burned in the fire but they were rebuilding in the same location which was within 25 feet of the lighter line, since it was the only location with a view of the river. He emphasized the adverse health impacts. Even if people lived further than 100 feet from the line, they would have to walk directly under the line to get to the bus stop and back. He contradicted what Mark Heidecke said regarding the trees being screened on the west back of the river. More of the trees were dead than alive, and he suggested that the Board come to his property and see where the line would go. Stosh Thompson, family member of an impacted property owner, testified that he had done a good job negotiating with PP&L to minimize the impact of a power line through his property, but as a result of the fire, the impact was much greater. If PAGE 10 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 • 1552 it hadn't been for the fire, many of the important issues being addressed today would not have come to light. He was an eight-year veteran of the Planning Commission, but had failed to independently investigate all of the zoning and land use implications of the proposed line. If he had contacted legal counsel at the beginning, he felt he would have found that a transmission line was not a permitted use under the Bend Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, and they would have declined PP&L's request. At the time he proposed designating a portion of his family's property as a natural reserve, the County was having problems getting its comprehensive plan approved by LCDC because there was not enough open space in the plan. By incorporating the natural reserve into the plan, they satisfied the LCDC requirement and gained approval. Commissioner Maudlin asked Mr. Thompson if he received a designation for residential development on 140 acres of their property when they agreed to the acres of open space, so the County could get plan approval by bringing the open space within the Urban Growth Boundary. Stosh Thompson said he did not remember the order of the events. He said the property designated for residential development had not been touched. In the natural reserve, there had been a spectacular increase in key wild life species, i.e. elk, river otters, beavers, osprey, bald eagles. This property was one of the two unspoiled, natural riparian areas along the entire upper Deschutes River. In 1980, PP&L approached them concerning a transmission route through their property but they never heard anything more until about a year ago. When he was contacted by Mr. Heidecke, he was led to believe that PP&L could build the line across their property, but if they cooperated, the line could be rerouted to mitigate the impact. He was assured that Bend would suffer a power outage this winter if the line were not finished, so he began negotiating with PP&L for the best possible route through their property. He had assumed that PP&L had done a thorough search of the zoning before approaching him. The final agreement shortened the portion of the line through their property, shortened the height of the towers down to 65 feet, screened every tower with trees, hid the line from view, and minimized the visible portion across the river. The transmission line would carry three large transmission wires on top and four additional lines lower down, and the hearings officer's decision allowed for open-ended additions to those power poles. He recommended that his mother agree to an option for an easement through the revised route through their property. On the basis of misrepresentations from PP&L, they "may have to rescind the option." They had not granted an easement yet, but had entered into a contract for an option. It was their position that the option, as it existed, could not be performed because the intent could not be satisfied PAGE 11 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1553 because of the Awbrey Hall fire. Because of the fire, the power line would go through an open area where all the trees were gone and there was no screening. He said PP&L had been amazingly cooperative up to that point, but after the fire, they were unwilling to reexamine the situation. If the Board approved this line, they would appeal to the next level, so the power line couldn't be built this winter anyway. Now that there were no trees at the river crossing, the power lines would be very attractive to perching birds, and the opened- ended number of wires crossing the river would be a hazard for the flyways of water fowl. When asked about particulars of what he was originally told by PP&L, he said he had been advised by counsel not to discuss specifics on this subject. Bret Everett, owner of Best Western Entrada Lodge, testified that his 30 acre property was just south of Century Drive and bordered Jack Lewis' property on the north along the Forest Service line. His business depended upon the aesthetic value necessary to convince recreation visitors to stay at his lodge. They did not get drive through visitors but people who came specifically to their lodge to enjoy the outside values. He was against the power line being within any visible distances of their property. They could currently see the Midstate line from the back of the property. The Board decided that they would like to make a site visit and legal counsel pointed out that the parties would then have to be given an opportunity for rebuttal of the Board's findings on the visit, but that the parties could waive that right so that the public testimony could be finished today. Chair Throop requested recommendations from the parties on how to proceed. Dan Van Vactor, Mr. Lewis' attorney, said they would waive any rebuttal right of the site visit observations. Mr. Bach said PP&L would also waive rebuttal to the Board's observations. Chair Throop asked if there was anyone in the audience who had participated who wouldn't waive rebuttal rights. Betty Marquette, P.O. Box 1138, Sisters, said she would like make some rebuttal comments. Commissioner Throop said there would be rebuttal of any previous comments, and the only waiver being considered would be for rebuttal on the Board's site visit. Betty Marquette said that was okay with her, and that she had just misunderstood what was being waived. There was no one else who did not agree to waive rebuttal rights after the Board's site visit. PAGE 12 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 • 1554 Chair Throop asked for rebuttal testimony from the applicants. Mr. Bach did not agree that a comprehensive plan amendment was necessary. He said the concerned area was not a zoned area or an overlay but an area of special interest. The City and County could allow developments which were not subject to a list of criteria and standards, and they were prepared to demonstrate that this power line was consistent with each standard or criteria. Since the Thompsons granted the option to PP&L, they apparently believed that this line was consistent with this area of special interest. In an area of special interest, the uses permitted were those existing and wildlife management, and he said there was an existing power line that when across this property now. PP&L was only proposing to relocate the existing line in conjunction with the new transmission line so that both could be on the same set of poles. He said originally PP&L had proposed following the existing power line route with the new transmission line, but it was negotiated with Mr. Thompson to move them both south along the south property line. It was later moved 75 feet to the north to give more clearance to Mr. Cruden's property which would than be at least 100 feet from the line. A pediatric oncologist had written that he would not advise anyone to move from a home which was more than 100 feet from a line, and at more than 100 feet there were no demonstrated problems. Regarding the surface mining zone which had been rezoned F-2, it was on Federal Forest Service lands outside of the Urban Growth Boundary, and he questioned whether the County had any jurisdiction over those lands. He said there were other state and federal processes they had to go through, but they were not shopping for the easiest avenue and had filed all of the applications at the same time. Mr. Fisher said they had connected a significant amount of new business (15-18 mega watts) since the 88/89 winter, but they wouldn't know the use until there was cold weather. He would estimate 12 mega watts of use had been added since the 88/89 winter. Mr. Maudlin asked how many 69-115 KV lines were in the City of Bend. Mr. Fisher said they were numerous, and the east/west line had been there since 1953-55. Commissioner Maudlin asked how many times had PP&L been sued because of electromagnetic fields. Mr. Bach said there had been no such suits against PP&L. The only case where a utility had been sued was a current case against the Clark County PUD which claimed that a young girl died of leukemia because the school she attended was in close proximity to a transmission line. Mr. Surrett of PP&L said that this case had been recently dropped. Mr. Heidecke said that in his testimony he had been consistently referring to the actual height of the top of the PAGE 13 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 -1555 pole above the ground. On normal distribution poles, they used a 45-50 foot pole for an effective pole height above the ground of approximately 40 feet. They would be adding 10-15 feet above that for an effective pole height of 55 feet for those portions of the line which were in close proximity of the river, on the Thompson property, as well as on the Forest Service property. They intended to replace the existing poles along Buck Canyon Road. The distance between the conductors was specifically designed to prohibit the electrocution of birds since the distance between the wires was too great to allow electrocution, and the size of the insulators was such that raptures could not perch on them. One of the mitigation measures was that PP&L would install in the riparian area an inverted V fiberglass structural members in between the bases which would prohibit rapture species from landing on the cross arm and being electrocuted by conductor contact. They could not put any additional transmission lines on these poles, and PP&L had no plans, at this time, to add any telephone lines. But since distribution and communication lines were allowed uses in this zone, they were not part of the application. He said that Mr. Lewis' photograph showed an exaggeration of the top wire. There were 85-90 foot high trees through the area while the pole would be 58-60 feet above the ground, so the top conductor would be below the background of the Cascades. The Lewis' already had a transmission line out their front door which was a wishbone configuration, 50-60 feet in height and 250 feet away from the property boundary. They proposed to soften the impact of another line 250 feet from their fence line so that people looking from the Cascade Lakes Highway would have the transmission lines screened against the backdrop of vegetation. Mr. Bach said that any suggestion of bias by Mr. Fitch would be erased by an independent decision being made by the Board. Regarding rates, he said that PP&L was not choosing this route to save any money, but because they wanted to serve their customers in the most prudent method available. Chair Throop asked for rebuttal from the appellants. Dan Van Vactor said the poles under this request would have a much higher impact than what was permissible under the ordinance and what was already in existence. He thought Mr. Bach' s firm wrote the checks to Mr. Fitch during the campaign, and this was not disclosed at the hearing before Mr. Fitch. Mr. Van Vactor did not feel there was a bias by Mr. Fitch, but he felt it should have been disclosed. He felt the issue the Board should consider was the best place for this power line, and he felt it was being placed in this location because of the additional costs associated with putting it somewhere else. PAGE 14 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1556 Chuck Lewis said they couldn't hardly see the Midstate line as intimated by Mr. Heidecke, and they couldn't see it at all before the fire. He said the proposed route which was furthest to the west would be in the distance and visible to a smaller degree than the other routes. Paul Speck said that in the comprehensive plan, the specific controlled the general. He felt that PP&L was attempting to put pressure on the Commissioners which was unwarranted. Betty Marquette, PO Box 1138, Sisters, said that Mr. Heidecke had assumed that everyone would build 300 feet back from Buck Canyon Road. She owned a lot in Deschutes River Woods and was not notified of any homeowners meeting and didn't agree that everyone there agreed with this route. She wanted to see one long, continuous site plan of the whole route. Commissioner Throop asked whether, due to the probability there would be additional legal action, PP&L would have a way to build this transmission line this winter? Mr. Bach said if there was an appeal to LUBA, it would not carry with it an automatic stay of the permit. Therefore, if the Board of Commissioners granted the conditional use permit, PP&L would be free to commence construction assuming they received the proper permits from the Forest Service and regarding the Scenic Rivers Act. However, there could be an application to LUBA for a stay in which the appellants would have to convince LUBA that a stay should be granted pending the appeal to LUBA. If that occurred, he felt they would be able to convince LUBA that a stay would not be appropriate. Commissioner Throop said that it was his impression that in this type of situation LUBA would normally grant the stay. Mr. Bach said the standards for a stay were that the harm flowing from granting the stay would outweigh the harm from granting the stay. In this case, they would weigh the harm of view impacts against the possibility of power outages. Commissioner Prante asked when PP&L reactivated their efforts to provide service to the south county? Mr. Heidecke said approximately one year ago, and that conditional use permit request applied to the 8-1/2 mile route last January. He pointed out that the 2-1/2 miles involved in this application was not the whole project because PP&L intended to continue the loop on the east side. Commissioner Prante asked if there were any black outs or interruptions of power last year in the peak of the cold season. Mr. Fisher said the interruptions in power were due primarily to a wind storm. While they did not have any outages specifically due to cold weather and peak loads, they did have some outages which extended themselves because the current system had no place to shift the load. She asked what load would precipitate an outage. Mr. Fisher PAGE 15 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1557 said that since 148 put them on the edge, he would anticipate 155 mega watts system wide would create an outage. Rick Isham said that the County had a memorandum of agreement with the Forest Service for cooperation, and asked Mr. Bach if it was his belief that the decision of the Board of County Commissioners was only binding on PP&L up to the Forest Service boundary. Mr. Bach said he didn't believe the preemption of jurisdiction was clear cut. If the Forest Service said PP&L could only use the route that ran along the north/south boundary line and the County said they could only use the most westerly route, he felt PP&L would not be able to build the most westerly route. He said a design review was required for conditional uses for community services which were not defined in PL-15, however there was a clear definition of a utility facility which included a transmission line. Where design review was required for community services, it appeared it was referring to community sewer systems, water systems and other community service buildings, but not a utility facility or it would have clearly said so. However, if that issue was going to cause any delays, they were prepared to submit the plans to the Planning Commission for the site review. Commissioner Throop asked if they had looked at alternative routes outside the urban growth boundary, i.e. south of Deschutes River Woods and on the edge of Forest Service land. Mr. Bach said the river crossing was the anchor for the route, and that was the only location they could cross the river. They could have gone south from, there but that would have required crossing Mr. Cruden's property, and he was hostile to the route and would not have granted a right of way. The next property was in a tax foreclosure, and it would have been difficult to find someone to grant a right of way. Mr. Heidecke said that Deschutes River Woods extended to the limits of the lava flows. At the end of each of these roads, there were two-to-four homes right against the lava flows. They couldn't build across the lava flows because it was very difficult construction, and it was a national monument. Each of the alternatives they looked at through this area did not have any less impacts because this area was more fully developed than the areas they were proposing. Commission Maudlin asked how far the proposed line went within the urban growth boundary. Mr. Heidecke said 1,200 feet. Commissioner Prante asked what the cost would be to put this 1,200 feet underground. Mr. Fisher said that in the current PP&L six- state system, they did not have any underground transmission lines and neither did Bonneville Power. He said they did exist in some metropolitan areas back east and in the mid- west. It was expensive and required people with special skills and tools which were not readily available in the northwest. PAGE 16 MINUTES: 11-1-90 105 - 1558 Mr. Bach said a big portion of Mr. Thompson's testimony had been on the visual impact of the portion of the line that crossed his property. He questioned what the visual impact would be on a private, wildlife management area. It would have an impact on commercial or residential development, but these lands were zoned for wildlife open space. Commissioner Throop said this was the southwest corner of Bend's Urban Growth Boundary, and there were lands in the area which were scheduled for dense residential development and recreation purposes. Mr. Bach said power lines were an integral component of urban development, and where there was development, there had to be power lines. Commissioner Throop asked if any of the-appellants had any reasonable alternate routes for the line. Mr. Speck said they could cross lava flows with power lines, and he knew there was an alternative that was better than those proposed. He admitted he had not done any analysis of whether a route across the lava flow would be better, but he felt it should be investigated before a decision was made. Mr. Van Vactor said other substations (Central Electric and Midstate Electric) which had been recently built in RR-10 zones had been required to do a site plan. Commissioner Throop asked why PP&L was coming the to County one section at a time instead of preparing a comprehensive plan on what would be required for the next years. Mr. Bach said the County's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances provided for this kind of process, i.e. a conditional use application for each specific facility. Also, he said PP&L's facilities were load following. They followed the loads as they developed, and while the County encouraged development and growth in certain areas, PP&L had no choice but to build the lines after the fact to meet those loads. If the utilities (power, water, telephone) were incorporated into the County planning process, PP&L would be delighted to participate in that process. The Board decided to have a site visit at 2:30 on Monday, November 5, 1990, and they would make their decision on Tuesday, November 6 at 9 a.m. in the Board's conference room in the Deschutes County Administration Building. Chair Throop continued the public hearing until the site plan visit. PAGE 17 MINUTES: 11-1-90 I DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS J C? ytt~tl , ~ ~G lYL ois"B tow Prante, Commissioner Tom Throop, Chair Dick i , C mm ssioner BOCC:alb ZpEi -a 1559 PAGE 18 MINUTES: 11-1-90