Loading...
1991-32104-Minutes for Meeting October 09,1991 Recorded 10/24/1991908 0031 91-32104 MINUTES;, DECISION ON SHIELDS PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE (PA -90-9 and ZC 90-10) DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS October 9, 1991 Chairman Maudlin called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Board members in attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Nancy Pope Schlangen. Also present were Kevin Smith, Senior Planner and Bruce White, Assistance Legal Counsel. Chairman Maudlin said the Shields' property currently had legal conditional uses and the County could not stop those uses because they had been grandfathered. He felt the County could exert control over some uses and that could be done if the zone change and plan amendment was approved. He said the BLM letter dated September 1980 indicated the access road was built over public land to serve pregna? post plant area in 1972 and had been in use since that date. The road did not require application for right of way under public law. Concerning use limitations on roadS, in the Rural Industrial Zone 18.100.40, the roads could not be used if they generated more than 30 truck trailer or other heavy equipment trips per day to and from the subject property nor more than 20 auto or truck trips during the busiest hour of the day. He recommended that the Board allow the plan amendment and zone change with the following conditions: 1. Zone tax lots 100, 1400 and 1500 as unconditional rural industrial land; 2. tax lots 1600 and 1700 would be zoned rural industrial with allowed and conditional uses as outlined and marked by staff on exhibit 10 which would take out all of the heavy industrial uses; Those would apply both to uses permitted outright and to conditional uses. There would be some heavy conditional uses which would just be denied outright under this plan. 3. A six-foot sight -obscuring fence shall be constructed on the north property line of tax lots 1600 and 1700; 4. Roads within the industrial zone shall be covered with dust inhibiting material such as gravel or cinders or other material, and, if possible, the BLM easement shall have the same treatment; 5. All materials on County property shall be removed i.e. slag material, dust piles, etc.; PAGE 1 MINUTES: 10/9/91 ti11CwUFILiviEC NOV �1W KEY ' VC11FD 3 0108 0032 6. A total cleanup of the site shall be required including, but not limited to, piles of debris, abandoned and wrecked auto bodies and other materials not necessary for the operation of business within the zone; 7. No businesses shall be operated within 100 feet of the north property line of the tax lots 1600 and 1700, but parking and storage of material will be allowed within that area, i.e. they couldn't build a business within 100 feet of the fence so there would be a buffer zone; 8. A time limit for compliance with these conditions. He suggested that the conditions be met as soon as possible but no later than October 1, 1992. He would then ask the staff to writing findings for the plan amendment and zone change. Commissioner Schlangen felt that Chairman Maudlin's list of conditions covered most of her concerns. She was particularly concerned about the look of the site and felt that one year might be too long a period to meet the conditions. Chairman Maudlin said one of the reasons there had been problems on this property was because some of the land was leased, but with this zone change approval, the responsibility for meeting the conditions would be the Shields, and he felt it was appropriate to give the Shields adequate time to resolve these issues with their tenants. Commissioner Throop asked Kevin Harrison whether he felt any of the conditions as outlined by Chairman Maudlin would be difficult to write findings for or did he see any issues which still needed to be dealt with. Kevin Harrison said he felt they could write findings to justify the conditions. He asked if the zone change would be contingent upon the applicant meeting these conditions, and therefore the adoption of the ordinance would not occur until these conditions were met; or would these conditions be imposed on any new development that was to go into this site? Chairman Maudlin said he wanted to make the zone change now so that any businesses that would go onto this site from this date forward, would have to have a site plan and site plan review. He suggested putting something in the findings indicating that if the conditions were not met by a certain date, then something would happen. Mr. Harrison said that if the Board moved to adopt the plan amendment and zone change, the decision could be structure in such a way so that any subsequent application would be reviewed against these condition. However, if the idea was that the zone change would not be granted until the conditions were met, he would want to get advise from legal counsel. Chairman Maudlin felt that if the zone change was contingent upon the conditions being met, it would be another year before the applicant could really do anything with the property. Mr. Harrison asked if meeting the conditions wasn't tied to specific land use applications or the granting of the zone PAGE 2 MINUTES: 10/9/91 P1. flO33 change, what leverage would the County have to make sure that the conditions were met? Chairman Maudlin felt that whether any new businesses went onto the site or not, these conditions would have to be met within one year. He asked if a reversion clause could be placed on the approval. Bruce White came into the meeting at this point, and Kevin Harrison brought him up to date indicating that the Board would like to place some conditions on granting the zone change request. The question was how could the County make sure that the conditions were met within one year. He asked if a reversion clause could be placed on the zone change so that if the conditions were not met within the one-year period, the zone designation would revert to the current zoning. Bruce White said that it might be possible to revoke the zoning status through a revocation proceeding if these conditions weren't met, but he'd have to review the revocation section to be sure. Kevin Harrison said he was not aware of anything in the ordinance which would allow this. Mr. White said that when a plan amendment and zone change were approved that certain findings needed to made. Chairman Maudlin said he didn't feel there would be any problems with getting the conditions met, but wanted to make the approval in such a way that all parties could be comfortable. Bruce White asked Kevin Harrison whether in other quasi-judicial plan amendment and zone changes, conditions had ever been applied, and Mr. Harrison said not that he was aware of. Mr. White said he wasn't sure the County had explicit authority to do what was being discussion which concerned him. Chairman Maudlin said he would like to set both sides at ease. But if the conditions had to be met before the zone change went into effect, nothing would happen for another year since no businesses could come onto the site until the zone change. That would allow the current grandfathered businesses and the remainder of the site to continue without any cleanup for eleven months. Mr. White said he had always told the planners that either the burden was met or it was not and couldn't necessarily be met through conditions unless there was explicit authority to condition a decision. With a plan amendment and zone change, the Board would be changing the map not approving a permit which would allow for conditions. A plan amendment and zone change required that the Board find that this change met the criteria which was some kind of public benefit. Kevin Harrison said he agreed with Bruce White and was reluctant to recommend that the Board pursue the suggested approach, because he didn't feel the County had that legal authority which would provide a convenient avenue to challenge the decision. He suggested imposing the limited use combining zone and included these conditions in site plan review for a new business or an expansion of an existing business in this area. The properties would not be cleaned up until a new business came in or an existing building was altered or expanded. With the limited use combining zone, those conditions would be waiting for an application. PAGE 3 MINUTES: 10/9/91 9100 9034 Chairman Maudlin asked if the Board put conditions on the approval and it were appealed, would it be overturned. Bruce White asked if the conditions related to the findings that need to be made? Kevin Harrison said he thought they could tie the conditions to the decision. Chairman Maudlin said if it were appealed, it would come back to the Board and then the Board could remove the conditions and just approve the zone change. The situation would be right back where it was now, so he didn't feel that the opponents would appeal knowing that if it came back, the Board would just approve the zone without conditions. Bruce White said the conditions could be tied into the findings if they related to the burden that had to be met. It was always preferable to find that the burden had been met in zone and plan amendment cases without imposition of conditions. However, he was aware of one case in the past a Rural Service Center plan amendment and rezoning where there was a condition that certain traffic exits not be used and, provided that happened, the applicant had met his burden. Chairman Maudlin said there was testimony at the hearing that the Shields would be willing to build a fence which was the major portion of these conditions. He asked if this decision could be made as the Board had outlined. Kevin Harrison said he felt there was a decision that could be made properly. His hesitation was about whether the Board could make the decision as Chairman Maudlin originally outlined, since Title 18 did not have a resolution of intent provision (essentially conditional zoning) which was what the Board was proposing. Commissioner Throop said he thought that inherent in Chairman Maudlin's proposal was that the plan amendment and zone change was appropriate if there were some changes at the site, however it may not be appropriate if there weren't changes at the site. Bruce White said he felt Kevin Harrison was correct in that he didn't think the County could put in any kind of reversionary provision but might be able to go through some kind of revocation proceeding. However he wasn't sure whether a revocation proceeding applied to anything other than permits. Commission Throop suggested putting the decision off until more research could be done. Commissioner Schlangen said she would like to find out if the County could revoke the approval. Chairman Maudlin said he'd like to go ahead as outlined and just see what happened. Kevin Harrison wanted to clarify his notes which indicated that Chairman Maudlin wanted a site obscuring fence along the north property line of tax lots 1600 and 1700. Chairman Maudlin said he thought that was the property line next to the Lunda's property. Kevin Harrison said the Lunda's property was to the south. PAGE 4 MINUTES: 10/9/91 N-08 00?5 Chairman Maudlin agreed that his intent was to put the fence to the south. MAUDLIN: I would move that the zone change and plan amendment be allowed subject to conditions written as findings with a one year or an October 1, 1992, time limit. SCHLANGEN: Second. VOTE: THROOP: YES SCHLANGEN: YES MAUDLIN: YES Sylvia Shields said she was perfectly satisfied and that the first thing t)iat would be done would be a sight -obscuring fence. DESCHUIES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS To Throo Commis ioner v Nancy Po a Sc langen, Commis ioner Di M d in, C rman BOCC:alb PAGE 5 MINUTES: 10/9/91