1993-02277-Minutes for Meeting December 07,1992 Recorded 1/6/1993K
93-022'7'7
0120-0491
WORK SESSION MINUTES
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
December 7, 1992 93 j - 5 r r 2•
Chairman Maudlin called the meeting to order at 10 a.m:, ?Boaa�d.
members in attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and N;;i- dope
Schlangen. Also present were: Rick Isham, County Counsel; Bruce
White, Assistant County Counsel; and Brian Harrington, Planner.
1. FINDINGS AND DECISION ON SIMILAR USE RULING FOR WILLBROS
Before the Board was signature of the Findings and Decision
for the similar use ruling and temporary use permit for
construction of a staging area for the PGT gas transmission
line near Knott Pit for Willbros Energy Services Company.
MAUDLIN: I would entertain a motion for signature.
SCHLANGEN: So moved
THROOP: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
2. DECISION ON SMIRNOV APPEAL
Before the Board was the decision on the Smirnov appeal of the
Hearings Officer's denial of a Conditional Use Permit to
establish a nonfarm dwelling on a 10 -acre parcel zoned EFU-20.
Brian Harrington said there were three deficiencies in the
record as stated in the staff report and the Hearings
Officer's findings and decision: compatibility, the test of
interference, and the unsuitability question.
Commissioner Throop felt the only way the applicant could have
blunted the "silver bullet" from the opponents would have been
to have asserted that the opponent's farm was not a commercial
venture or farm. He hadn't seen anything in the record to
dispute it was a commercial venture, therefore, he felt the
Hearings Officer's decision had to be sustained.
Chairman Maudlin pointed out that in her own testimony, the
neighbor stated that she had been working her organic farm for
three years and hadn't made any money yet. He didn't think
she had a commercial farm. He went back to the Hearing
Officer's decision which said that if there was a valid offer,
then the application would be denied, however if there wasn't
a valid offer, the Smirnov's could file again. a did not
believe there had been a valid offer.
lay UE CHEO
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 12-7-92?9
IV,
0120-0492
Bruce White said the standard was set forth in the Rutherford
and Stephen cases which stated that "the standard arises when
the evidence suggests that the parcel is generally suitable
except for reasons of size." Staff made a determination that
they thought the parcel was generally suitable which was why
the size issue became the "lynch pin." He suggested that the
Board review the evidence to establish in their own minds
whether there were reasons other than size that the parcel was
not generally suitable for farm use. If the Board felt there
were other reasons, then size would not become an issue. If
the Board felt that size was the only reason for the parcel
being found to be generally unsuitable, then the issue became
whether there was evidence to show that the parcel could,
through purchase, lease, or other means, be put into
agricultural use. He felt the Hearings Officer went too far
when he required that there be a "valid, binding offer."
Commissioner Schlangen said she didn't believe Mr. Hendrix,
attorney for the Smirnovs, had addressed the needed criteria.
Because of the way the law read, she said she would have to
vote against the Smirnovs. She did not feel it would
interfere with the farm use of the area, or that it would
change the pattern or stability of the area. She felt using
the parcel as a hobby farm was an appropriate use for this
parcel. She was not happy with the way she had to vote on
this issue.
Chairman Maudlin felt the neighbor was "blackmailing" the
Smirnovs since she had agreed to drop her opposition if the
Smirnovs would pay her $10,000, and he didn't feel that was
right no matter what the law said.
THROOP: I will move that the Board deny the appeal and
uphold the Hearings Officer with the exception of
the valid offer provisions.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
Commissioner Throop said the applicant did not meet the
criterion, and there was no information in the record to
dispute that the neighboring parcel was a commercially viable
parcel.
Chairman Maudlin felt that by this decision the Board would
be establishing the value of the Smirnov's property, and he
felt that was wrong.
Commissioner Throop said the law was constructed to encourage
the consolidation of neighboring parcels in different
ownerships.
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 12-7-92
3.
4.
VOTE: THROOP: YES 0120-0493
SCHLANGEN: YES v
MAUDLIN: NO
ORDINANCE 92-069 AMENDING TITLE 18 TO INCLUDE CHURCHES AS A
CONDITION USE IN THE PLANNED COMMUNITY/MULTIPLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONE
Before the Board was a decision on Ordinance 92-069 (TA -92-12)
Amending Title 18 the Deschutes County Code, the Deschutes
County Zoning Ordinance, amending Section 18.108.020.B (B) to
include churches as a Conditional Use in the Planned
Community/Multiple-Family Residential (PC -RM) Zone.
MAUDLIN: Entertain a motion for first and second reading of
Ordinance 92-069 by title only.
SCHLANGEN: So moved.
THROOP: I'll second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
Chairman Maudlin performed the first and second readings of
Ordinance 92-069 by title only.
SCHLANGEN: Move adoption.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
ORDINANCE 92-068 AMENDING TITLE 18 TO CLARIFY "GRANDFATHERING"
PROVISION
Before the Board was a decision on Ordinance 92-068 amending
Title 18 the Deschutes County Code, the Deschutes County
Zoning Ordinance, amending Section 18.36.030 (Y) of Title 18
to clarify "Grandfathering" provision. This would allow
forest management dwellings on parcels "for which preliminary
approval" for land division was received prior to April 15,
1992.
SCHLANGEN: I move first and second reading by title only.
THROOP: Second.
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 12-7-92
VOTE: THROOP: YES
0120-0494
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
Chairman Maudlin performed the first and second readings of
Ordinance 92-068 by title only.
SCHLANGEN: Move adoption.
THROOP: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
5. CHANGE IN DATE FOR MOODY APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING
George Read came before the Board to request that the date for
the Moody appeal be rescheduled from December 16, 1992, since
the decision would probably not be made on the same date as
the hearing, and December 16 was the last meeting this year
when all of the Commissioners would be in attendance. Also,
Bruce White pointed out that there were a number of decision
from previous hearings which had to be prepared for signature
by December 16, 1992, so that all Board members would be
available to sign them. Therefore, it would have been
difficult to have a decision on the Moody appeal ready for
signature by the 16th also. The Board agreed to postpone the
public hearing until January 13, 1993, at 10 a.m. when the new
Commissioner would be available to hear the matter.
PAGE 4 MINUTES: 12-7-92
DATED this 30 0) day of
Commissioners of Deschutes i
AT S
Recording Secretary
PAGE 5 MINUTES: 12-7-92
0120-0495