Loading...
1996-15857-Minutes for Meeting February 21,1996 Recorded 4/25/1996.. �, 96� i5s5'� ()1, 4 14, � i MINUTES . DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS `' t Wednesday, February 21, 1996 }'3 Chair Schlangen called the Board of County Commissioners meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. County Commissioners present were Nancy Pope Schlangen, Barry H. Slaughter and Robert L. Nipper. Also in attendance were Mike Maier, County Administrator; Sue Stoneman, Community Relations Specialist; Rick Isham, County Counsel; George Read, Community Development Director; Damian Syrnyk, Planner; Andy Crosby, Assistant County Counsel; Bruce White, Assistant County Counsel; and Kevin Harrison, Planner. CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF 4-H/EXTENSION COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 1. APPROVAL OF WEEKLY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHERS FOR 4-H/EXTENSION COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT Before the Governing Body of 4-H/Extension County Service District was approval of the weekly accounts payable vouchers in the amount of $869.44. SLAUGHTER: I move approval upon review. NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 2. APPROVAL OF WEEKLY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHERS FOR 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT Before the Governing Body was approval of the weekly accounts payable vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the amount of $199.63. NIPPER: I move approval subject to review. SLAUGHTER: I'll second it. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES K Pu , 141CROFILMED MINUTES 1 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 �,Al�' 96 MAY 1, 51996 3. CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF REDMOND LIBRARY COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT APPROVAL OF WEEKLY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHERS FOR THE REDMOND LIBRARY COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT Before the Governing Body of the Redmond Library County Service District was approval of weekly accounts payable vouchers in the amount of $2,010.97. SLAUGHTER: I move approval upon review. NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF PARK SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES AND METHODOLOGY FOR THE REDMOND PARK BENEFIT AREA Before the Board was a public hearing on consideration of adoption of park system development charges and methodology for the Redmond Park Benefit area. Rick Isham reported this was originally proposed by the City of Redmond. In the City of Redmond there are two park jurisdictions which are Central Oregon Park District and the City of Redmond. The Central Oregon Park District has adopted a system development charge which operates in three different areas which are outside the urban growth boundary, within the urban growth boundary of the City of Redmond and also within the City of Redmond. The City of Redmond has system development charges that apply within the limits of the City. The proposal before the Board was to define an area of Deschutes County which would be known as the Redmond park benefit area, which would be an area outside the jurisdiction of the City of Redmond but inside the urban growth boundary. For the purpose of adopting a system development charge, that area would have to be defined as a distinct area within the county. Rick stated there was a resolution to establish system development charges for the Redmond park benefitted area. The methodology that was being adopted for the system development charges was under Resolution No. 96-011, which provides for a $425 per unit systems development charge. Within the Redmond park benefit area, based on the methodology that was supplied by the City, there would be a park benefit charge of $425 per unit for the county fee that would be then be administered by the City of Redmond through an MINUTES 2 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 intergovernmental agreement. There would also be a systems development charge that was imposed by the Central Oregon Park & Recreation District which would be $191.53, which means that there would be two separate charges collected. Rick Isham stated currently the county does collect the system development charges for the Central Oregon Park & Recreation district. The City, since it does not have jurisdiction outside its limits, within the urban area the only method by which a park system development can be imposed is by action through the county. Rick also stated there were also two proposed intergovernmental agreements. There was one proposed intergovernmental agreement between the City of Redmond and the park district for the collection of park district system development charges within the city limits. There was also a proposed intergovernmental agreement between Deschutes County and the City of Redmond where we would collect the system development charges and they would administer park benefit area benefit charges. Rick stated the proposed schedule included a public hearing today. The earliest adoption date would be next week. He stated this would be the initial hearing on the methodology which was the $425 per unit systems development charge under the methodology adopted by the City of Redmond. Commissioner Nipper asked if the system development charges were assessed to any new construction or remodels. He asked Rick Isham to explain who was going to pay for these system development charges. Rick Isham stated that the system development charges are based on new development. One of the primary sources would single family residences. They are based on an equivalent dwelling unit basis. You would be charged $425 for a single family dwelling unit. In a multi -family dwelling unit there would be .8 equivalent unit dwelling which would make a reduction. For institutional uses there would be one equivalent dwelling unit for each 200 seats in a church. Another example would be a nursing home which would be 1 equivalent dwelling unit per 3 beds. Chair Schlangen opened the public hearing. Pam Wilson, representing Central Oregon Builders Association, read testimony on behalf of the Oregon State Builders Association in opposition to the system development charges. She also spoke on behalf of Central Oregon Builders Association. She asked the Board to request more information to be provided by the City. MINUTES 3 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 0154 -i Gerald Eischen testified the City of Redmond wanted $95,000 in system development charges for a 25,000 square foot building. He testified in opposition to these system development charges. He did not see this as a benefit to the area. He felt the system development charges were put in place to be used for needs that could not be met through our normal course of taxation, but there must a need clearly shown. He stated parks do not operate well without maintenance budgets. He requested the Board seriously consider this issue. Caroline Harding, Central Oregon Park & Recreation District, stated the system development charges were initiated in 1994 and passed by resolution at that time. The park & recreation district was not asking for more system development charges. She stated the exorbitant fees Mr. Eischen mentioned were not on commercial buildings. She felt they had really tried to work with the builders. She reported the district was an 82 square mile district. She stated the ideal solution would be one parks district. Bob Green, Redmond, stated there was a dilemma over the system development charges. The number one problem he had was that there would be double taxation within the Redmond city limits. He testified in opposition to the system development charges. He felt it would wise to consolidate the City of Redmond with the Central Oregon Parks & Recreation District. The City would take over the parks & recreation within the city and within the urban growth boundary. He felt they should go back and start from scratch. Pam Wilson stated the builders had met with Caroline from parks & recreation district. She stated they were working under a different capital improvement plan than when she had with the parks district. Rick stated that when this was initially brought up, it was proposed by the City of Redmond. City of Redmond was to provide the methodology to be adopted for the park benefit area. He stated that it ended up in his office. He reported talking with David Reeves of the City and he was to provide the methodology. He received some things from Mr. Reeves, but it was not the methodology. Rick stated he then made an appointment to meet with Ed Fitch, attorney to City of Redmond. He stated what the City's methodology consisted of was a dollar figure of future park projects divided by an estimated number of equivalent dwelling units to come up with the dollar figure. He stated figure may be correct but the methodology needed to be looked at considering what would be required under the statutory framework that has been adopted for system development charges. MINUTES 4 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 A --* 015 - Commissioner Schlangen stated she would like to meet with the City of Redmond and Central Oregon Park District. Rick Isham stated the only roll the Central Oregon Park District had in the process that was before the Board was that the City has stated that upon the County adopting the City system development charge within the Redmond park benefit area, they would then act as an agent for Central Oregon Park & Recreation District to collect their fee. Commissioner Slaughter felt they needed to get this worked out. Commissioner Nipper stated he was not comfortable with the methodology. He felt Redmond should develop a singular park district. There being no further testimony, Chair Schlangen closed the public hearing. She felt that a meeting should be arranged with the City of Redmond. Commissioner Nipper felt the meeting should be with the City of Redmond with Central Oregon Builders Association included. Rick Isham recommended a staff work session before meeting with the City of Redmond. 5. 11.00 A M PUBLIC HEARING ON LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS REMAND OF COUNTY'S DECISION ON NUV-94-1/A-94-13 FOR FRALEY Before the Board was a public hearing on Land Use Board of Appeals remand of the County's decision on NUV-94-1-/A-94-13 for Fraley. Chair Schlangen opened the public hearing. Andy Crosby, Assistant County Counsel, reviewed the LUBA remand with the Board. He stated the Board would hear findings, but they would not receive or consider new evidence that does not exist on the present record. Andy reviewed the applicable criteria with the Board. He also reviewed the order in which the testimony will be presented. Chair Schlangen asked for disclosure from the commissioners for any prehearing contact in this matter. All three commissioners reported having no prehearing contact. Chair Schlangen also asked audience members if they felt any member of the Board of Commissioners should be challenged with bias or inability to make a fair decision in this matter. No challenge was made from the public. MINUTES 5 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 Damian Syrnyk reported the subject property was tax lot 701, located at 63810 0. B. Riley Road and 63820 0. B. Riley Road. The nonconforming use was lawful and was in existence and has not been interrupted or abandoned. Damian reported the following persons were identified as parties entitled to participate in this matter before the Board. These persons include Larry Erwin, Myer Avedovech, Jim Fraley, Bill Pruitt, Jeannie Fraley, Lloyd Suydam, Robin Pheifer, Bruce Ronning and Ken Barrett. Damian reviewed a letter received from Ken and Jennifer Barrett dated February 16, 1996. The letter was submitted for testimony except for one sentence. He stated there was also a letter from an attorney representing Mr. Lloyd Suydam in opposition. There was also a letter from Larry Erwin on behalf of James Fraley. Mr. Erwin also submitted a chronology of the usage of the property located a 63810 0. B. Riley Road. There was also a copy of a letter from Mr. Bill Lee. Also included was an affidavit of statement from Bill Lee. Damian Syrnyk reported the Board will deliberate on February 23, 1996, with planning and legal staff present to answer questions. A decision on this matter will be made on February 28, 1996. Myer Avedovech, attorney representing Mr. Fraley, stated the issue was not whether or not there was sufficient information in the record. The issue was the findings that were drafted were not specific enough. He felt there was more than enough evidence to support the Board's finding, therefore it was just a matter of pulling it out of the file. He stated Mr. Erwin's letter of February 17th pointed out the places in the transcript where the evidence was located to write a finding to support the Board's earlier decision. He reported this was a twenty year old use. The evidence in the file states the use was there in February of 1973. The second issue was primarily the nature and extent of the use. The evidence needed to be set forth in the findings on this particular piece of property. The third issue was whether there was enough evidence in the record to support the finding of the Board. LUBA felt the board needed to put more evidence in the findings to substantiate and support their decision. Larry Erwin, attorney for Mr. Fraley, reported Mr. Fraley was not able to be present because of a death in the family. He stated the issue on remand was that LUBA felt the findings were not properly formed. He reported Mr. Lee was in attendance if the Board required clarification on his testimony. Mr. Erwin stated the right to the nonconforming use had been clearly established. Commissioner Schlangen stated she was concerned about the years of 1985 to 1987 when Mr. Grogan owned the property. MINUTES 6 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 Commissioner Slaughter asked about limiting the storage area outside to 7,000 square feet and if it would be fenced. Mr. Erwin stated the fencing would have to be voluntary on Mr. Fraley's part. He reported that it had not been fenced in the past. Bill Pruitt testified that he was appalled that LUBA would send this back. He felt when LUBA sent this back to the Commissioners, they had errored. In 1979 the county established this had been a legal use since 1973 to 1979. He stated there was never any indicated loss of use. He felt the County had established the continued use. Bill Lee, original owner of the property, wished to testify. Andy Crosby stated he was not a party to the original hearing so he would not be allowed to make a statement. Jeannie Fraley felt they had presented ample evidence to support the previous findings in 1994. She requested the Board review the record very carefully. Lloyd Suydam, opponent to this issue, stated that information on page 8 would be sufficient to put an end to this problem. He felt the use had changed. He stated the record indicates that no specific use was ever established. He felt Mr. Lee's statements contradicted each other. He stated the use had been discontinued for 2 years. He felt there was conflicting evidence in the record as to the scope and intensity of the various commercial uses between 1973 and 1985. The variance that was granted in 1977 was to split the property only. Meyer Avedovech stated this hearing was to determine if the record supports the findings and decision made by the Board. Larry Erwin stated the evidence in the record supports the findings that have already been made. Chair Schlangen closed the public hearing. The Board will hold a work session on Friday, February 23, 1996, at 1:30 p.m. The Board will make a decision on this matter on February 28, 1996, at 10 a.m. 6. SIGNATURE OF RESOLUTION NO 96-026, REGARDING HOME RULE CHARTER FOR DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON Before the Board was signature of Resolution No. 96-026, regarding Home Rule Charter for Deschutes County, Oregon. Barry Slaughter stated he had presented the commissioner with all the information regarding this resolution. He had been a member of an ad hoc committee. He felt the Board should submit four names for this committee. MINUTES 7 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 7. €1f;"M-1 P"I P SLAUGHTER: I move approval of Resolution No. 96-026. This motion died for the lack of a second. Deak Preble, representing the ad hoc committee for the home rule charter, felt this issue was worthy of consideration and requested adoption of the resolution that had been prepared. He felt this process should be methodical and thorough. He felt the earliest it could be placed on a ballot would be in May of 1998. Bob Borlen felt the petition process was greatly abused these days. He was hoping that they could work with the county to furnish this information in a cooperative effort. Commissioner Nipper stated twice before home rule has been defeated soundly. It cost money to put issues on the ballot. He questioned whether the majority of voters would be for it. He felt a petition should be distributed to see if enough people were interested in getting this issue on the ballot. He stated he was not totally against home rule. Commissioner Schlangen encouraged and supported the public process that exists in Deschutes County. She felt the people of Deschutes County deserve the best form of government. She felt that when there was an issue regarding an administrative change and cost impact to the public, commissioners should require a petition on the issue. She believed there needed to be a larger number of people requesting this in order to go forward. Commissioner Schlangen requested the committee go forward with the petition process. Commissioner Nipper stated he would like to see more public meetings regarding this issue in order that both sides of this issue be heard. APPOINTMENT OF ELLEN HANSCOM KENNETH REISWIG TERESA BURDICK. AND JULIE RAINES TO THE JOBS PLUS IMPLEMENTATION COUNCIL Before the Board was appointment of Ellen Hanscom, Kenneth Reiswig, Teresa Burdick, and Julie Raines to the JOBS Plus Implementation Council. SLAUGHTER: I move appointments to the JOBS Plus Implementation Council. NIPPER: Second. MINUTES 8 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 E^ -, !"- i VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 8. APPOINTMENT OF RICHARD GRIMES TO THE SPECIAL ROAD DISTRICT NO 6 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Before the Board was appointment of Richard Grimes to the Special Road District No. 6 Board of Directors. SLAUGHTER: I so move. NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 9. APPROVAL OF WEEKLY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHERS Before the Board was approval of the weekly accounts payable vouchers in the amount of $550,095.85. NIPPER: I'll move approval subject to review. SLAUGHTER: I'll second it. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 10. SIGNATURE OF ORDER NO 96-020, AUTHORIZING THE REFUND OF TAXES Before the Board was signature of Order No. 95-020, authorizing the refund of taxes. SLAUGHTER: I move approval of Order No. 96-020. NIPPER: I'll second it. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 11. SIGNATURE OF LIQUOR LICENSE FOR LOST TRACTS GOLF COURSE Before the Board was signature of a liquor license for Lost Tracts Golf Course. SLAUGHTER: So moved. MINUTES 9 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 12. SIGNATURE OF MYLAR FOR THE GREENS, PHASE III IN THE CITY OF REDMOND Before the Board was signature of a mylar for The Greens, Phase III, in the City of Redmond. SLAUGHTER: I move signature on mylar. NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 13. SIGNATURE OF FINAL PLAT FOR PARTITION OF 29.4 -ACRES INTO 3 PARCELS IN A HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE Before the Board was signature of a final plat for partition of 29.4 -acres into three parcels in a Highway Commercial Zone. SLAUGHTER: I move signature of final plat subject to review. NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES 14. SIGNATURE OF MYLAR FOR CASCADE PEAKSx PHASE I Before the Board was signature of a mylar for Cascade Peaks, Phase I. SLAUGHTER: I move signature on mylar. NIPPER: Second. VOTE: SCHLANGEN: YES SLAUGHTER: YES NIPPER: YES MINUTES 10 FEBRUARY 21, 1996 DATED this 21st day of February, 1996, by the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. A h ATT Recording Secretary Nancy angen, Chair jt U �l Bar ryf Slaughter, Commissioner Ro ert L. Nipper, Co sioner MINUTES 11 FEBRUARY 21, 1996