1994-34259-Ordinance No. 94-035 Recorded 8/18/199494-34259
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
An Ordinance Amending The Deschutes
County Comprehensive Plan Year 2000
Growth Management Chapter Rural Development
Section to Expand the Commercial Core Area
of the Rural Service Center of Terrebonne
And Declaring an Emergency.
NO. 94-035
0100""400
WHEREAS, public hearings have been held in conformance with state
law before the Deschutes County Planning Commission and Board of County
Commissioners for Deschutes County; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has considered the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and the public; now
therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON,
ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GROWTH
MANAGEMENT CHAPTER, RURAL DEVELOPMENT SECTION, TERREBONNE RURAL SERVICE
CENTER. That the Growth Management Chapter, Rural Development Section,
Policy No. 41(b) is amended to read as follows:
"(b) Establish a commercial area as follows:
(1) On the east side of Highway 97, an area three blocks
long and two blocks wide, with "C" Avenue as the
northern boundary, the south boundary being the
present A -S boundary, the west limit being Highway 97
and bounded on the east by a line one block east of
Old highway 97; and
(2) On the west side of Highway 97, an area bounded on the
north by the present "B" Avenue, on the west by 7th
Street, on the east by Highway 97 and on the south by
present tax lot 1400, further described on County
Assessor's Map (current as of August 1994) as
114-13-16CD as Tax Lot 14 -13 -16 -CD -1300 and in
Exhibits A and B to Ordinance 94-036."
Section 2. Language to be added is underlined and in bold.
Section 3. FINDINGS. The Board of County Commissioners adopts
as its findings and conclusions in support of this ordinance the
findings attached as Exhibit "A" by this reference incorporated herein.
1 - ORDINANCE - NO. 94-035 (07/13/94) A
i'' 7 i 9
0136-205"t
Section 4. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this ordinance are
severable. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
ordinance or any exhibit thereto is adjudged to be invalid by a court
or competent jurisdiction that decision shall not affect the validity
of the remaining portions of this ordinance or exhibit thereto.
Section 5. CODIFICATION. County Legal Counsel shall have the
authority to format the provisions contained herein in a manner that
will integrate them into the County Code consistent with the County
Legal Counsel form and style for ordinance codification. Such
codification shall include the authority to make format changes, to
make changes in numbering systems and to make such numbering changes
consistent with interrelated code sections. In addition, as part of
codification of these ordinances, County Legal Counsel may insert
appropriate legislative history reference. Any legislative history
references included herein are not adopted as part of the substance of
this ordinance, but are included for administrative convenience and as
a reference. They may be changed to correct errors and to conform to
proper style without action of the Board of County Commissioners.
Section 6. REPEAL OF ORDINANCES AS AFFECTING EXISTING
LIABILITIES. The repeal, express or implied, of any ordinance,
ordinance provision, code section, or any map or amending ordinance
shall not release or extinguish any duty, condition, penalty,
forfeiture, or liability previously incurred or that may hereafter be
incurred under such ordinance, unless a provision of this amending
ordinance shall so expressly provide, and such ordinance repealed shall
be treated as still remaining in force for the purpose of,lr sustaining
any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such duty,
condition, penalty, forfeiture, or liability, and for the purpose of
authorizing the prosecution, conviction and punishment of the person or
persons who previously violated the repealed ordinance.
Section 7. EMERGENCY. This ordinance being necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an
emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes effect on its
passage.
DATED this /7 day of , 1994.
OF COUNTY COPWISSIONERS OF
TES COUNTY, O1EGON
NANCY POPE SjCIILANGEN, Cha
=-�M
ssioner
A E
'�T"' h'-)
Wi
Recording Secre ary BARRY H.1 SLAUGHTElk, Commissioner
2 - ORDINANCE - NO. 94-035 (07/13/94)
EXHIBIT "A"
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FILE NUMBER:
HEARING DATE:
RECORD CLOSED:
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER:
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
May 11, 1994
May 18, 1994
Doug and Deborah Adkins
Theodore and Phylis Ham
1453 Esplanade Avenue
Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601
U136-2058
ATTORNEY: Edward P. Fitch
Bryant, Emerson, Fitch and McCord
888 West Evergreen Avenue
P.O. Box 457
Redmond, Oregon 97756-0103
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive
Plan Map amendment from Rural Service
Residential to Rural Service
Center/Commercial, and a zone change from
RSR -M to RSC. The request encompasses
approximately 5 acres and involves an
exception to Statewide Planning Goal 14,
Urbanization, if necessary. The purpose of the
request is to allow for sufficient commercial
zoning to accommodate a mini -storage facility
in the Terrebonne Rural Service Center.
REVIEWER: Brian Harrington, Assistant Planner
I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA
The following land use criteria were considered in review of the
above -referenced applications:
1. Statewide Planning Goals 2, Land Use Planning, and 14,
Urbanization.
Goal 2: Land Use Planning
PART II -- EXCEPTIONS
A local government may adopt an exception to a goal when:
PAGE 1 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
(a) The land subject
physically developed
no longer available
applicable goal;
0136-2059
to the exception is
to the extent that it is
for uses allowed by the
(b) The land subject to the exception is
irrevocably committed to uses not allowed by
the applicable goal because existing adjacent
uses and other relevant factors make uses
allowed by the applicable goal impracticable;
or
(c) The following standards are met:
(1) Reasons justify why the state policy
embodied in the applicable goals should
not apply;
(2) Areas which do not require a new
exception cannot reasonably
accommodate the use;
(3) The long-term environmental, economic,
social and energy consequences resulting
from the use of the proposed site with
measures designed to reduce adverse
impacts are not significantly more
adverse than would typically result from
the same proposal being located in areas
requiting a goal exception other than the
proposed site; and
(4) The proposed uses are compatible with
other adjacent uses or will be so
rendered through measures designed to
reduce adverse impacts.
The term "COMPATIBLE", as used in subparagraph ( 4 ) is not
intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or
adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses.
A local government approving or denying a proposed
exception shall set forth findings of fact and a
statement of reasons which demonstrate that the standards
for an exception have or have not been met.
EXCEPTION means a comprehensive plan provision, including
an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, that;
PAGE 2 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136'206®
(a) Is applicable to specific properties or situations
and does not establish a planning or zoning policy
of general applicability;
(b) Does not comply with some or all goal requirements
applicable to the subject properties or situations;
and
(c) Complies with standards for an exception.
Goal 14: Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural
to urban land use.
Urban growth boundaries shall be established to identify and
separate urbanizable land from: rural land.
Land within the boundaries separating urbanizable land from
rural land shall be considered available over time for urban
uses.
"Rural lands are those which are outside the urban growth
boundary and are:
(a) Non -urban agricultural, forest or open space lands, or
(b) Other lands suitable for sparse settlement, small farms
or acreage homesites with no or hardly any public
services, and which are not suitable, necessary or
intended for urban use."
B. Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660, Division 4,
Interpretation of Goal 2 Exception Process:
660-04-018, Planning and Zoning for Exception
Areas.
660-04-020 through 660-04-022, Reasons Necessary to
Justify an Exception under Goal 2, Part H(c).
660-14-040, Incorporation of New Cities on Undeveloped
Rural Lands
660-14-040, Incorporation of New Cities on Undeveloped Rural
Lands
(1) As used in this rule, "undeveloped rural land" includes
all land outside of acknowledged urban growth boundaries
except for rural areas committed to urban development.
PAGE 3 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2061
This definition includes all resource and non -resource
lands outside of urban growth boundaries. It also
includes those lands subject to built and committed
exceptions to Goals 3 or 4, but not developed at urban
density or committed to urban level development.
(2) A county can justify an exception to Goal 14 to allow
incorporation of a new city or establishment of new urban
development on undeveloped rural land. Reasons which can
justify why the policies in Goals 3, 4, 11 and 14 should
not apply can include but are not limited to findings
that an urban population and urban levels of facilities
and services are necessary to support an economic
activity which is dependent upon an adjacent or nearby
natural resource.
(3) To approve an exception under this rule, a county must
also show:
(a) That Goal 2, Part II(c)(1) and (c)(2) are met by
showing the proposed urban development cannot be
reasonably accommodated in or through expansion of
existing urban growth boundaries or by
intensification of development at existing rural
centers;
(b) That Goal 2, Part II(c)(3) is met by showing the
long-term environmental, economic, social and
energy consequences resulting from urban
development at the proposed site with measures
designed to reduce adverse impacts are not
significantly more adverse than would typically
result from the same proposal being located on
other undeveloped rural lands, considering:
(A) Whether the amount of land included within the
boundaries of the proposed urban development
is appropriate, and
(B) Whether urban development is limited by the
air, water, energy and land resources at or
available to the proposed site, and whether
urban development at the proposed site will
adversely affect the air, water energy and
land resources of the surrounding
(c) That Goal 2, Part II(c)(4) is met by showing the
proposed urban uses are compatible with adjacent
uses or will be so rendered through measures
designed to reduce adverse impacts considering:
PAGE 4 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136--2062
(A) Whether urban development at the proposed site
detracts from the ability of existing cities
and service districts to provide services, and
(B) Whether the potential for continued resource
management of land at present levels
surrounding and nearby the site proposed for
urban development is assured.
(d) That an appropriate level of public facilities and
services are likely to be provided in a timely and
efficient manner;
(e) That incorporation of... new urban development of
undeveloped rural land is coordinated with
comprehensive plans of affected jurisdictions and
consistent with plans that control the area
proposed for incorporation.
C. Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan, Rural
Development.
DEFINITIONS
Rural Lands: Those lands outside recognized urban growth
boundaries which are necessary and suitable for such uses as:
d. Rural residential;
e. Rural service center;
Industrial, commercial and suburban residential uses are not
generally appropriate on rural lands. (p. 12)
Rural Service Center: An unincorporated convenience -commercial
and residential center of a nature and size only as required to
serve the convenience commercial needs of the surrounding rural
lands. Planning area boundaries are not the boundaries for rural
service centers. (p. 12)
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
The predominant rural land uses in the County are open spaces,
pasture and limited crop production, livestock production, natural
resource utilization and wildlife cover. There is also residential
use and some commercial and industrial activity in the rural
service centers. Unfortunately, the unrestrictive zoning permitted
in the rural service centers has allowed incompatible adjacent land
uses and not resulted in providing the needed services for the
surrounding rural areas. (p. 36)
PAGE 5 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
To guide development into appropriate patterns the following goals
have been prepared:
GOALS:
1. To preserve and enhance the open spaces, rural character,
scenic values and natural resources of the•County.
2. To guide the location and design of rural development so as to
minimize the public costs of facilities and services, to avoid
unnecessary expansion of service boundaries, and to preserve
and enhance the safety and viability of rural land uses.
3. To provide for the possible long term expansion of urban areas
while protecting the distinction between urban (urbanizing)
lands and rural lands. (pp. 36-37)
POLICIES:
Rural Development policies are meant to pertain to all non -urban
areas (areas outside urban growth boundaries) and are the basic
policies to be followed in guiding rural growth. (p. 37)
Rural Service Centers
13. Because there is a need to accommodate some rural residential
development and to provide necessary commercial service to
existing rural residents, the County shall designate the
following pattern of development and energy use, as well as
provision of public services: . . . Terrebonne. (p. 39)
14. Each Rural Service Center shall have a compact commercial area
to serve the convenience -commercial, agricultural and repair
service needs of the surrounding rural lands. In addition,
larger Rural Service Centers along major highways, where
public facilities such as schools already exist, shall have a
residential area designated .... The size and uses of rural
service centers shall be such as to maintain the rural
character of the area. (pp. 39 40)
TERREBONNE
Terrebonne has had a number of incompatible land uses mixed
together because of the unrestrictive nature of Rural Service
Center zoning. The Terrebonne CAC felt that some growth was to be
expected but that the rural character of the community should be
protected, and therefore more stringent control would have to be
exercised in the area's development. Concern was expressed that
high density encroachment could seriously hamper the surrounding
agricultural uses.
PAGE 6 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
4136p-2664
Policies:
41. To provide more consistency in land uses within the boundaries
of Terrebonne and to assure controlled growth the County
shall:
(b) Establish a commercial area three blocks long and two
blocks wide on the east side of Highway 97 with C Avenue
as the northern boundary, the south boundary being the
present A -S boundary, the west limit being Highway 97 and
bounded on the east by a line one block east of Old
Highway 97; and to include a parcel of land on the west
side of Highway 97, the north boundary being the present
"B" Avenue, the west limit being 7th Street, and bounded
on the east by Highway 97 further described on County
Assessor's Map as #14-13-16CD as Tax Lot 1300. (p. 57)
URBANIZATION
POLICIES: Urban Boundaries
2. Urban growth boundaries identify and separate urbanizable land
from rural land. (p. 65)
12. Strip commercial developments along highways should not be
extended. Commercial uses along major streets and highways
shall be subject to special development standards relating to
landscaping, setbacks, signs and median strips. No further
commercial development outside urban growth boundaries, rural
service centers, planned developments, or destination resorts
shall be permitted. (p. 66)
FINAL DESCHUTES COUNTY GOAL EXCEPTION STATEMENT 1
The purpose of this document is to identify the lands where
Deschutes County shall request the Oregon Land Conservation and
Development Commission grant an exception to meeting the
requirements of either Planning Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) or Goal
4 (Forest Lands). Further, this statement shall also explain the
findings and reasoning which justifies such an exception be
granted. (p. 160)
During the preparation of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
it became apparent that many of the rural areas in the County had
The Final Goal Exception Statement was not included in
the County's latest codification of the Comprehensive
Plan which was effective in April 1993. Page references
are, therefore, made to the pages of the Comprehensive
Plan document that preceded the codification of the Plan.
PAGE 7 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
already received substantial development. These lands have largely
recognizing that development which exists, and establishing a more
efficient development pattern. (p. 160)
Because of the rural development there have been created Rural
Service Centers to provide necessary public (i.e., schools) and
private services to the rural population. These Service Centers
reduce transportation requirements and serve as a focus for social
and some economic activities. Deschutes County has chosen to
emphasize the Rural Service Centers as the appropriate location for
the services and facilities needed by the rural residents and to
encourage most additional rural residences to be constructed in the
Rural Service Centers. This development of the Service Centers
would then permit some limited rural living opportunities, while
insuring they occur in areas of existing development at higher
densities, compatible with the rural environment and consistent
with future transportation and utility networks. To accommodate the
Rural Service Centers some of the less productive resource lands
are being committed to non -resource uses. The commercial areas are
those lands already developed or committed to commercial use, while
the residential area are relatively small surrounding areas where
some development has already occurred. (p. 160)
Rural Service Centers
Rural Service Centers are a special situation. Originally
established to provide needed public and commercial services to
rural areas, thereby increasing public services while receiving
(sic) transportation costs, these Centers have had mixed results.
Some have been very useful in providing necessary facilities, while
others have been used to foster sprawl. (p. 166)
One of the purposes of the new County Comprehensive Plan is to
identify which of the existing Rural Service Centers should be
continued and where new ones shall be established. The plan
identifies nine RSCs... The nine identified are ... Terrebonne...
Of these, only Brothers, Hampton and Millican are not on the three
aerial photo base maps. All of the others, except Alfalfa, are
within the areas identified as having significant existing
development and are designated as already committed to development.
(p. 166)
D. Title 18 of the Deschutes County Code (DCC), Deschutes County
Zoning Ordinance:
Chapter 18.64, Rural Service Center Zone (RSC).
Chapter 18.112, Limited Use Combining Zone (LU)
Chapter 18.136, Amendments.
PAGE 8 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2066
E. Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code, Uniform Development
Procedures.
F. 1000 Friends of Oregon v. LCDC (Curry Co.1, 301 Or 447, 724
Ptd 268
"It is clear that the goal [14] obligates local
governments to establish as part of their comprehensive
plans urban growth boundaries (UGBs) which identify and
separate urbanizable land from rural land." p. 455
"In general, Goal 14 provides that 'urban uses' should
occur on 'urbanizable land' which has been included
within a UGB." p. 456
"Any county whose comprehensive plan converts 'rural
land' outside of established urban growth boundaries to
'urban uses' must either (1) show that its action
complies with Goal 14, or (2) take an exception -to Goal
14, as prescribed by ORS 197.732, Goal 2, Part II, and
OAR Chapter 660." p. 470
"Exceptions to Goals 3, 4 and other resource goals cannot
generally suffice as exceptions to Goal 14 because the
former necessitate only a determination that a narrow
category of uses, the particular resource uses required
by the goal, are impracticable, while the latter
necessitates a finding that not merely resource uses, but
all other rural uses, are impracticable." p. 485
Rural lands are either resource lands or lands for which an
exception to a resource goal has been taken (quasi -urban
lands). p.499
"A 'reasons' exception to Goal 14 is not required for
areas 'built' or 'committed' to 'quasi -urban' uses [non -
resource uses on rural lands], but is required for areas
involving new urban development' outside UGBs. However,
one cannot conclude that areas have been 'built' or
'committed' to 'quasi -urban' uses until a local
government has undertaken the analysis necessary to take
'built' or 'committed' exceptions to goal 14." p. 500
"Once land has been identified as 'rural land' by the
establishment of a UGB which does not contain that
land... it ceases to be 'rural land' only after it has
been made the subject of an exception to Goal 14." p. 501
"We hold... that any decision which allow 'urban uses' of
'rural land' converts that land and must comply with or
PAGE 9 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2061
take exception to Goal 14, even if that decision does not
change the use of the land." p.502
"LUBA has said that among the factors considered in
determining is a particular use is urban are whether it
is 'appropriate for, but limited to, the needs and
requirements of the rural area to be served, ' and whether
it is likely to become a 'magnet' attracting people from
outside the rural area." p. 507
"[T]he interpretation of 'urban uses' is primarily for
LCDC, subject to judicial review only for consistency
with the statutes authorizing LCDC to adopt the goals and
with the policies of the goals themselves. LCDC, however,
must develop some interpretation of 'urban uses,' either
by formulating a general definition or by elaborating the
meaning ad hoc from case to case." p. 521
II. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT
The Board makes the following facts regarding the requested zone
change, comprehensive plan amendment and goal exception:
1. Subject Property: The subject property is located in the
Terrebonne Rural Service Center, and is identified on
Deschutes County Assessor's Map #14-13-16CD as tax lot 1300.
2. Zoning and Plan Designation: The property is zoned RSR -M,
Rural Service Residential -M Zone, and is designated Rural
Service Center on the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. The
property is located outside of an identified urban growth
boundary. This area adjoins the Terrebonne commercial core
area, but is separated from this area by Highway 97.
3. Description of Property: The eastern boundary of the subject
property fronts Highway 97, the north boundary fronts "B"
Street and the west boundary abuts 7th Street. The subject
property contains approximately 4.89 acres and is relatively
flat. There is an existing residence and garage built on the
property. According to County Assessor's records, the
residence was built in 1930. The majority of the property is
vacant and covered in native dry grasses. There are scattered
groups of juniper trees in the western portion of the
property.
4. Surrounding land uses:
A. North: Redmond Elementary School, a residence, an
antique store, a veterinary clinic and High Desert
Trading store on land zoned for Rural Service Center
Residential use.
PAGE 10 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2C6S
B. South: A mobile home park on land zoned for Rural
Service Center Residential use.
C. East: Highway 97, BP gasoline station, a vacant lot,
Fergusons Market and the Sun Spot Drive In (SE). To the
northeast, across Highway 97 and north of B Avenue are
the Redpoint Climbers Supply store, La Siesta Cafe, and
a residence on land zoned RSC.
D. West: Across 7th Street, to the west, are residences
zoned Rural Service Residential -M.
5. Utilities: The applicants are proposing to serve the
property via on-site sewage disposal and water systems.
6. Proposal: The applicants are proposing comprehensive
plan and zone map amendments on approximately 5 acres of
land, to allow for the development of a mini storage
facility. The applicants wish to expand the commercial
core area of the Terrebonne to include the subject
property. To accomplish this result, Comprehensive Plan
Rural Development Policy 41(b ) will need to be amended to
include the subject parcel within the commercial area of
the Terrebonne Rural Service Center. The commercial area
lies to the east of the subject property and Highway 97.
The applicants have submitted a site plan, burden of
proof statement and supplemental burden of proof
statement, memorandum, proposed findings and affidavit in
support of their application. The site plan shows the
layout of a 349 unit mini -storage facility on the portion
of the property that lies to the west of the irrigation
pipe that bisects the subject property. The existing home
lies to the east of the pipe and would be used as a
residence for the caretaker of the mini -storage facility.
The applicant currently plans to develop 214 of the 349
possible storage units. These units would be those that
are located on the westernmost portion of the subject
property.
7. Affected Agencies: The Planning Division solicited comments
from affected agencies and departments. Their responses are as
follows:
A. County Public Works Department: The Public Works
Department did not submit comments specifically related to the
proposed amendments. They did raise concerns regarding
potential traffic conflicts by direct access from Highway 97.
Additional comments will be submitted at the time of site plan
review.
PAGE 11 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
01;6-2069
B. Central Oregon Irrigation District: "The Central Oregon
Irrigation District's H4-4 delivery of the Pilot Butte Canal
traverses through the subject parcel. Due to the nature of
this development, the District requires the delivery to be
piped in accordance to District specifications and an easement
established for this pipeline."
"This District is also assessing the subject parcel for 1.916
acres of water rights. These water rights must be removed by
a water rights transfer prior to development."
C. County Environmental Health Division: "A septic site
evaluation is required."
D. Redmond Fire Department: No comment.
E. State Highway Division: "The Oregon Department of
Transportation is not opposed to this plan amendment,
since in general we agree with applicant that the
proposed use will not have a significant impact and may
in fact generate less traffic than other allowable uses
under the current zoning. However, I do have a couple of
comments to offer. The first relates to the amount of
land that is required for the proposed 200 storage units.
Will the full 4.89 acres be utilized for this
development? If surplus land is being rezoned without a
finding that it is needed for the proposed development,
I am concerned that it is a speculative action that would
be conducive to a future amendment. I understand the
restrictions inherent in the LU overlay, yet still
maintain that the plan amendment should be restricted to
only the acreage needed for the currently proposed
development. For your information, I have attached two
print-outs of estimated traffic generation associated
with mini -storage unit developments. One print-out is
for 200 units, while the other is for 4.89 acres. Note
that for 200 units the average weekday Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) is 56, while a print-out based on 4.89
acres estimates 195 ADT. This provides some basis for my
concern that the entire site may not be needed for the
proposed development. Hopefully the applicant could
address this at the hearing. Secondly, I would emphasize
that this site will not directly access Highway 97 and
must use "B Street" and/or 7th as indirect access to the
Highway. I hope this information is useful in the
County's review of this application. While it would be
helpful to clarify issues raised above, I believe the
application will not have a significant affect on State
transportation facilities."
PAGE 12 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-270
F. Department of Land Conservation and Development: "The
proposed zone change is to permit the development of a
200 unit mini -storage facility. We believe this is an
"urban" use and would be used primarily by people living
within the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary. Information
provided is not sufficient to show that the proposed zone
change is consistent with the purpose and intent of the
Rural Service Center which is to provide for "local
commercial services to... meet the needs of rural
residents." The application includes information on
storage facilities in Bend and Redmond. The fact that
storage facilities are needed in these urban areas are
full or nearly full does not justify the need for this
use in a rural area of the county. It only indicates that
additional storage facilities are needed in these urban
areas. We believe that the proposal violates the county's
comprehensive plan and Statewide Planning Goal 14 and the
Curry County Supreme Court decision...
The need for this use to serve rural residences in the
area has not been demonstrated. Rural residences have the
option of building or placing storage buildings on their
property. Residences in urban areas and renters do not
always have this option. For these reasons, we consider
the proposed use to be an urban use not authorized in
this Rural Service Center without a "reasons" exception
to Goal 14.
Based on the information submitted for our review,
evidence has not been provided justifying an exception to
Goal 14. For these reasons, we recommend that this zone
change request be denied."
NOTE: This letter was sent before the applicant
presented additional evidence concerning the use of these
units by rural residents.
G. County Assessor's Office: No comment received.
H. County Watermaster: They will need to contact COI and
make sure no water fights are on this property before
final approval."
I. Property Address Coordinator: "The Redmond Fire
Department shows an address of 1030 B Avenue, Terrebonne.
The applicant needs to verify this with the P.A.C."
J. County Building Division. Building areas, type of
construction and separations shall comply with O.S.S.
code for B-2 occupancy."
PAGE 13 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2071
8. Neighbors: Terrebonne businessman and resident, Henry Boschma
and Terrebonne School Principal Della Brandt filed objections
to the proposed land use actions.
Mr. Boschma is a partner in the True Value Hardware Store that
is located on 11th Street in Terrebonne. Eleventh Street is
located within the commercial core area of Terrebonne. Mr.
Boschma also has a son who attends Terrebonne School. Mr.
Boschma objects to the zone change and plan amendment because
he believes that it will increase traffic on B Street in the
area of the school. Mr. Boschma also states that allowing
commercial development on the west side of Highway 97 will
increase traffic congestion. Mr. Boschma believes that 11th
Street and the existing commercial area provide "an excellent
business route alternative to Highway 97." Mr. Boschma is
also concerned that approval of this land use action will open
up all of the property on the west side of Highway 97 for
commercial development.
9. Lot of Record: The subject parcel is a legal lot -of -record.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT
The Board makes the following findings relating to the applications
submitted by the applicants:
Goal Exception
1. The Board finds that the subject property is no longer
resource land, as an exception to Goal 3 has been taken by the
County for the subject property. 1000 Friends of Oregon v.
LCDC (Curry Co.), 301 Or at 499.
2. The applicants may establish a commercial use in a rural
service center under either of the following circumstances:
A. The subject property remains within the "rural lands"
category described in the County's Comprehensive Plan by
because it provides convenience commercial services "of
a nature and size only as required to serve the
convenience -commercial needs of the surrounding rural
lands." (p. 12)2
The County's definition of "rural lands" is different
than the definition of rural lands found in Goal 14. The
County's definition incorporates one of the factors
considered by LUBA when determining whether a use is
rural or urban, that is, whether the use is appropriate
for, but limited to the needs and requirements of the
rural area to be served." The County's definition has
PAGE 14 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-20"72
been acknowledged by LCDC as complying with all land use
goals.
B. The applicant demonstrates that the criteria for
obtaining an exception to Goal 14, Urbanization have been
met.
A. RURAL USE
1. There is no definition in state law of the term "urban
uses. DLCD has not provided a definition of urban uses.
The Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) has held that the
determination of whether a particular land use proposal
results in authorizing an urban level use requires a case
by case analysis. DLCD v. Klamath County, Or LUBA (LUBA
No. 90-069, 8/28/90). LUBA cases on this point have
looked to a number of factors to determine whether a use
is "urban." Deschutes County has not defined urban uses,
except to the extent that they have defined rural lands
to include land developed for convenience/commercial uses
designed to serve rural areas. One factor often
considered in determining whether a use is urban or rural
is whether the use requires the use of central water and
sewer services. This factor is included in the Goal 14
definition of rural lands. The proposed use does not
require such services, indicating that it is a rural use.
The Board finds that this factor weights in favor of the
Applicant.
2. Approximately 3,500 to 4,000 people reside in the "market
area" for the Terrebonne Rural Service Center. Over
2,000 people reside within the Crooked River Ranch area,
a rural residential subdivision located a short distance
north of the Terrebonne Rural Service Center. The Board
finds that this factor weights in favor of the Applicant.
3. As indicated in the letter from Ginger Morrison, Crooked
River Ranch has only experienced a one-third build out.
There has been, at times, a waiting list at the Crooked
River Ranch for mini storage facilities. It appears that
these types of rural residential parcels do require a
need of mini storage facilities from time -to -time. The
Board does find that there is a market need for mini
storage facilities in northern Deschutes County to serve
the rural residences at the Crooked River Ranch in the
Terrebonne area. The Board finds that this factor
weights in favor of the Applicant.
4. The Board further finds that it previously approved a
mini storage facility as an appropriate use for Rural
Service Center and that designation was acknowledged by
PAGE 15 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0130-2C73
3
the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
Although the applicant has the burden of proving whether
or not this use is, in fact, a rural use, the Board does
believe it appropriate to give weight to its previous
designation and the acknowledgement of that designation
by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. The
Board finds that this factor weights in favor of the
Applicant.
5. The County has previously approved a mini storage
facility in the LaPine Service Center. Given the
distance from any urban center, the use of these types of
units is by rural residents.
6. The Board finds that this use will not require urban
services. The Board finds that this factor weights in
favor of the Applicant. The Board finds that this factor
weights in favor of the Applicant.
7. The Board also finds that this type of use would not be
very intensive. In other words, there would not be a
significant number of employees associated with this use.
Its operating characteristics will be of a quiet and non-
active nature which will be consistent with the quasi -
rural setting in which it is to be located. The Board
finds that this factor weights in favor of the Applicant.
8. The use generates less traffic than most urban type uses
and will generate less traffic than if the property was
developed for residential purposes. The Board finds that
this factor weights in favor of the Applicant.
9. The allowance of a mini storage facility at the
Terrebonne Rural Service Center will save on travel time
for the residents of the Terrebonne area and Crooked
River Ranch would otherwise have to travel to the Redmond
urban area. This will reduce traffic on Highway 97 and
will reduce the amount of pollutants because of decreased
traffic patterns.
In summary, based upon these findings, the Board finds that
the location of the mini storage facility will be a rural use.
B. EXCEPTION UNDER GOAL 14
1. If the mini -storage facility is determined to be an urban
use, the applicants have submitted sufficient information
to justify an exception to Goal 14, in addition to the
exception that has already been granted to Goal 3 for the
subject property. OAR 660-04-010 (3); 1000 Friends of
Oregon v. LCDC (Curry County), 301 Or 447, 502, 724 Ptd
PAGE 16 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
01 3 6 -oC e 4
268, 290 (1986); Hammack & Associates, Inc., 89 Or App
40, 747 P2d 373 (1987); 1000 -Friends of Oregon v. LCDC
(Linn County), Or App 270, 717 P2d 149 (1986).
An exception is a decision to exclude certain land from
the requirements of one or more applicable statewide
goals in accordance with the process specified in Goal 2,
Part II, Exceptions. The documentation for an exception
must be set forth in a local government's comprehensive
plan. Such documentation must support a conclusion that
the standards for an exception have been met. The
conclusion shall be based on findings of fact supported
by substantial evidence in the record of the local
proceedings and by a statement of reasons which explain
why the proposed use not allowed by the applicable goal
should be allowed. OAR 660-04-000(2).
The applicants have sought a "reasons" exception to Goal
14, Urbanization, to allow for an urban use outside of an
urban growth boundary. Therefore, the review of the
exception request is subject to OAR 660-04-020 through
660-04-022. This application is also subject to review
for compliance with OAR 660-14-040. OAR 660-14-040
applies to exceptions to Goal 14 that establish new urban
development on resource and non -resource land located
outside of an urban growth boundary, other than rural
areas committed to urban level development. Terrebonne is
designated for rural, non -resource land development. It
is not committed to urban level development. This is
clear from a reading of the County's Comprehensive Plan
which defines rural service center land as "rural lands."
The reasons exception standards and standards of OAR
660-14-040 are addressed below.
11. Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the
applicable goals should not apply; [Goal 2, Part II(c)(1)]
(E) The proposed land use change will have no greater impact
on land resource quality than the zoning and
Comprehensive Plan designations currently existing. In
fact, due to the difficulty of obtaining sanitation
approvals within the Terrebonne community, the change in
use is, more appropriate for this particular site.
FINDING: The applicants are correct that the development of the
subject property for mini -storage units will have a lesser impact
on the environment than would development for residential
dwellings.
(F) There is inadequate space for additional commercial
development in the Terrebonne Rural Service Center. There
PAGE 17 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2075
are three commercially zoned property in the commercial
area of Terrebonne, but all are less than one acre in
size. The applicant's proposed use requires an area of
approximately three to four acres to be economically
viable.
(G) Approval of this development will contribute to the
conservation of natural resources as rural residents will
not need to travel to the urban areas of Redmond or
Madras to store their personal property.
FINDING: This factor weighs in favor of approving the requested
zone and comprehensive plan changes, as the applicants have
established that mini -storage facilities are needed by rural land
users who live in the Terrebonne area.
12. Areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably
accommodate the use; [Goal 2, Part II (c)(2)]
FINDING: The applicants have established that the commercial area
of Terrebonne does not contain lots that are large enough to
accommodate the mini -storage facility planned by the applicants.
These areas would, however, also require an exception to Goal 14,
if the applicant's use is determined to be an urban use, as RSC
commercial uses are limited to those that serve rural residents and
would not permit an urban use.
The only areas that would not require a new exception to Goal 14
would be lands within an urban growth boundary. The closest urban
growth boundary to Terrebonne is the Redmond UGB. The applicant
states that the needs of Terrebonne area residents for storage
facilities cannot be reasonably accommodated by facilities in
Redmond. This argument makes sense as the applicant has
established an actual need for these services by area residents
(e.g. see Morrison letter and Bulletin articles).
13. That Goal 2, Part II(c)(1) and (c)(2) are met by showing the
proposed urban development cannot be reasonably accommodated
in or through expansion of existing urban growth boundaries or
by intensification of development at existing rural centers;
[OAR 660-14-040(3)(a)]
FINDING: As the applicants have established that the mini -storage
facilities are needed by Terrebonne area residents, they have
established that it is reasonable to provide such services in
Terrebonne, avoiding the need for residents to drive to Redmond to
store belongings. The use proposed by the applicants is, in fact,
an intensification of development in an existing rural center, as
preferred by this rule.
PAGE 18 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0130-20o
13. The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy
consequences resulting from the use of the proposed site with
measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not
significantly more adverse than would typically result from
the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal
exception other than the proposed site; and [Goal 2, Part
II(c)(3)l
FINDING: The applicants have established that, if the market for
the mini -storage facilities is the Terrebonne rural area, that the
long-term consequences of allowing the use will not be
significantly more adverse than if it were located in other areas
requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site. The
Terrebonne area already is committed to non -urban uses. If the
proposed use were sited outside of a rural service center, it might
well require a goal exception to resource goals. Additionally, the
Terrebonne Rural Service Center is designed to concentrate the
commercial services needed by rural residents in compact areas. A
location of this use on non -resource land outside of a rural
service center would be contrary to this purpose.
14. That Goal 2, Part II(c)(3) is met by showing the long-term
environmental, economic, social and energy consequences
resulting from urban development at the proposed site with
measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not
significantly more adverse than would typically result from
the same proposal being located on other undeveloped rural
lands, considering:
(A) Whether the amount of land included within the boundaries
of the proposed urban development is appropriate, and
FINDING: One of the purposes of the Terrebonne Rural Service
Center is to provide uses which will serve the needs of the
residents of northern Deschutes County and to some extent the
residents of southern Jefferson County because of the proximity of
the Crooked River Ranch to the Terrebonne area. The property has
been irrevocably committed to non -resource development. The
location of these mini storage facilities at this site will ensure
development of these facilities on a non -resource property. It
will also ensure easy access to the residents of northern Deschutes
County and southern Jefferson County which they would not otherwise
have. This property, if not developed for this use, could be
developed for more intensive uses under its rural residential
designation in the Terrebonne service center. This site will have
less environmental, social, and energy consequences than that
alternate use.
(B) Whether urban development is limited by the air, water, energy
and land resources at or available to the proposed site, and
whether urban development at the proposed site will adversely
PAGE 19 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
01 e
affect the air, water, energy and land resources of the
surrounding area. [OAR 660-14040(3)(b)]
FINDING: The urban development proposed by the applicants is not
limited by the air, water, energy and land resources at or
available to the proposed site. The use proposed by the applicants
will place very little demand on such natural resources. It will
not require sewer service. Water will be needed for cleaning the
grounds, but this need is relatively small.
Urban development at the proposed site will not adversely affect
air, water, energy and land resources in the surrounding area, if
it is built on a scale that will meet, but not exceed, the demand
for mini -storage facilities in this Rural Service Center.
15. The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or
will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce
adverse impacts. [Goal 2, Part II(c)(4)]
FINDING: The proposed use will be compatible with adjacent uses.
Many of the uses to the north are commercial and the proposed use
will not interfere with those commercial uses. The elementary
school to the north has raised concerns that this development will
cause an increase in traffic that will interfere with the safety of
school children. While this may be true, it is also true that the
use proposed by the applicant will generate much less traffic than
the traffic that would be generated if this parcel were developed
for the residential uses allowed by the zone that presently applies
to the parcel.
16. That Goal 2, Part 1/(6(4) is met by showing the proposed urban
uses are compatible with adjacent uses or will be so rendered
through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts
considering:
(A) Whether urban development at the proposed site detracts
from the ability of existing cities and service districts
to provide services, and
FINDING: Urban development of the subject property with
mini -storage units will not detract from the ability of existing
cities and service districts to provide services. Fire service is
provided to the subject property by the City of Redmond through a
rural service district. The district received notice of this
proposed action and expressed no concerns that the proposal would
hamper their ability to provide service. Additionally, the proposed
development will not create a demand for rural sewer services. It
will, in no way, detract from the ability of any city to provide
services.
PAGE 20 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-2078
(B) Whether the potential for continued resource management
of land at present levels surrounding and nearby the site
proposed for urban development is assured. [OAR
660-14-040(3)(c)]
FINDING: Approval of this proposal will not adversely affect
resource management of surrounding and nearby lands as the subject
property is surrounded by non -resource lands. Approval of the
project will also not hinder operations on nearby resource lands as
the facility will generate few vehicle trips and the traffic
generated will be at a lower level than would be allowed by the
present zoning of the subject property.
17. That an appropriate level of public facilities and services
are likely to be provided in a timely and efficient manner;
[OAR 660-14-040(3)(d)]
FINDING: As stated above, there is already an appropriate level of
public facilities and services to serve the proposed development.
ODOT has agreed that this facility will not overburden Highway 97
and area streets are adequate to handle the traffic generated by
the development. Fire services are available. The sewer and water
needs of this development may be met by on-site facilities.
18. That ... new urban development of undeveloped rural land is
coordinated with comprehensive plans of affected
jurisdictions... [OAR 660-14040(3)(e)]
19. A county can justify an exception to Goal 14 to allow...
establishment of new urban development on undeveloped rural
land. Reasons which can justify why the policies in Goals 3,
4, 11 and 14 should not apply can include but are not limited
to findings that an urban population and urban levels of
facilities and services are necessary to support an economic
activity which is dependent upon an adjacent or nearby natural
resource. [OAR . 660-14-040(2)]
FINDING: The applicants are requesting that the County justify an
exception to Goal 14 to allow establishment of new urban
development on undeveloped rural land. The subject property meets
the State's definition of undeveloped rural land for the reasons
discussed above.
20. When a local government takes an exception under the "Reasons"
section of ""ORS 197.732(1)(c) and OAR 660-04-020 through
660-04-022, plan and zone designations must limit the uses and
activities to only those uses and activities which are
justified in the exception (OAR 660-04-018(3)(a)). If the
requested plan and zone amendments are approved, the
requirements of Chapter 18.112 of the DCC, Limited Use
Combining Zone, should be applied to assure that the uses
PAGE 21 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
01000- 2 r 19
allowed on the property will be those justified by the
exception.
Zone Change
21. DCZO 18.136.030 requires that the applicant for a rezoning
establish that the public interest is best served by rezoning
the property. Factors to be demonstrated by the applicant are:
A. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, and
the change is consistent with the Plan's introductory
statement and goals.
FINDING: The proposed zone change will now conform with the
Comprehensive Plan as amended by Ordinance No. 94-036. The Board
finds that concurrent with this quasi-judicial application, a
legislative review of the Comprehensive Plan was conducted by
Deschutes County. A hearing was held before the Deschutes County
Planning Commission concerning the textual change in the
Comprehensive Plan as described in Ordinance No. 94-036. Separate
ordinances concern the change in the map for the Terrebonne area
which would then be consistent with the new language in Policy No.
41. The County finds that over 600 letters were sent out
describing the proposed legislative change. Only 4 responses were
returned. Two of those responses were in favor of the application.
Two were opposed and they only concerned the threat of future
industrial growth and the use of the east side of the property for
mini storage facilities. The industrial concern is irrelevant and
the concern regarding the east side of the subject property (that
is east of the irrigation pipe) has been resolved because the
applicant will not be constructing mini storage units on the east
side of that irrigation pipe. The Planning Commission found that
the proposed application would enhance the appearance of this area
in Terrebonne and it will generate less traffic than other
alternative uses which could be sited under the current zoning and
it will not set a precedent for future commercial growth on the
west side of Highway 97 because of the limited use combining zone
and the non -retail character of the mini storage facility. The
Board concurs with the Planning Commission and has approved the
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan as described in Ordinance 94-
036. With the approval of this ordinance, this zone change will be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Rural Development Policy #14 speaks to the need to limit the size
and use of rural service centers to the minimum necessary to serve
the needs of the market area. The applicant has identified the
market area to be the Terrebonne Rural Service Center and the north
county area comprising the Lower Bridge Road, Crooked River Ranch
and current development in the Smith Rock area. The applicant
contends Terrebonne is centrally located among this area and
provides a commercial facility for the increasing traveling public
PAGE 22 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
0136-4quoSo
along the north/south route of Highway 97. The applicant has
demonstrated that the proposal will be the minimum size necessary
to serve the needs of the market area including the Crooked River
Ranch area. The applicants proposal is, therefore, consistent with
Rural Development Policy
Rural Development Goal #2 relates to minimizing the cost of rural
development, while maximizing the safety of rural land uses. The
applicant has submitted a preliminary traffic analysis and contends
the traffic impacts from a mini -storage facility will be
significantly less that the traffic impacts generated by
residential development at the density allowed by the RSR -M zoning
designation. The Highway Division has commented that in general,
they agree that the proposed use will not have a significant impact
and may in fact generate less traffic than other allowable uses
under the current zoning. However, they have raised concerns over
the traffic generated from a 200 unit storage facility at 56 (ADT) ,
average dally traffic, and a facility based on the full 4.89 acres
estimated at 195 (ADT). They also emphasize that the facility use
"B" street and/or 7th street as indirect access from Highway 97.
The applicants plan actually show 349 total units, but the Board
still believes that the traffic generated by that number of units
would still be less than the traffic generated by residential
development of the subject property.
The Board has also reviewed the Plan's introductory statement and
goals. That section expresses an intention to foster growth within
rural service centers to provide for the needs of rural residents.
This proposal is consistent with that goal.
B. That the change in classification for the subject property is
consistent with the purpose and intent of the proposed zone
classification.
FINDING: The purpose of the Rural Service Center Zone is to
provide standards and review procedures for concentrations of local
commercial services to meet the needs of rural residents, as well
as limited tourist commercial services consistent with the
maintenance of the rural character of the area (DCZO 18.64). A
mini -storage facility is a conditional use that is allowed in the
Rural Service Center Zone. DCZO 18.64.030(0). If the applicants
establish that their proposed service is of a size and type to
serve only the Terrebonne rural community, they will establish that
the change in classification will be consistent with the purpose
and intent of the RSC zone.
The purpose of the Limited Use Combining Zone (LU) is to limit the
list of permitted uses and general activities allowed in the
underlying zone. The LU zone is an overlay zone which may be
applied, where appropriate, to plan amendments/zone changes
effected by a "physically developed" exception under ORS
PAGE 23 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
U106-2081
197.732(1)(a), an "irrevocably committed" exception under ORS
197.732 (1)(b), or a "reasons" exception under ORS 197.732(1)(c).
When the LU zone is applied, the hearings body shall establish that
the uses and general activities subject to the rezoning are
required to be limited to those uses and general activities
justified in the goal exception, that a review of all zones in
Title 18 demonstrates that no existing zone adequately limits the
uses and general activities, and that the LU zone is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and other applicable policies of the
County (Chapter 18.112 of the DCC).
The LU zone was written to comply with OAR 660-04-018(3)(a). If the
zone change, comprehensive plan amendments and goal exception are
approved, the LU zone should be applied to limit the activities of
the new RSC zone to those which are justified in the exception.
C. That changing the zoning will presently serve the public
health, safety and welfare considering the availability and
efficiency of providing necessary public facilities and
services. Impacts associated with the change in zone must also
be found to be consistent with the specific goals and policies
contained within the Comprehensive Plan.
FINDING: This criterion has been met as the applicants are able to
demonstrate the existence of a market for their facilities within
the Terrebonne community. Since these facilities are needed in
this area, siting them in the community will serve the public
welfare. Additionally, the use places very little demand on public
services and will not adversely affect public health or safety.
The small amount of traffic generated by the use should be less
than the traffic that would be generated by residential use of the
property.
D. That there has been a change in circumstances since the
property was last zoned, or a mistake was made in the zoning
of the property in question.
FINDING: A great deal of development has occurred in the
Terrebonne area since the adoption of the County Comprehensive Plan
in 1980. The commercial area of this area is almost "built out." No
large tracts of commercial property remain within the Rural Service
Center that can serve this use.
Plan Amendment
22. The applicants specifically requested amendment of the
Comprehensive Plan map to change the designation of the
subject property from Rural Service Residential to Rural
Service Center/Commercial. Amendment of the map will, also,
require text amendment to Rural Development Policy 41. That
PAGE 24 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7
01006-2S
policy limits commercial development to the east side of
Highway 97. The applicants have identified the criteria that
apply to a comprehensive plan amendment.
DECISION
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the
Board of County Commissioners hereby approve the Plan Amendment and
Zone Change and hereby designate the property, subject to a limited
use combining zone, for mini storage facilities only. Those
facilities can, however, include a caretaker facility to be located
on the premises. This approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant will be required as a condition of any
conditional use permit or site plan, to locate mini storage
facilities on the property only in that area west of the
irrigation pipe which now bisects the property.
2. Access for the mini storage facility shall be taken from "B"
Avenue west of the irrigation pipe.
DATED this day of , 1994.
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
By
NANCY POPE SCHLANGEN
By
TOM THROOP
By
BARRY SLAUGHTER
* \adk1nz \recommen
PAGE 25 - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA -93-7 and ZC-93-7