Loading...
1997-06242-Minutes for Meeting November 25,1996 Recorded 2/20/199797-0 2 ;z 0156-14`76 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ?, Monday, November 25, 1996 1. DISCUSSION OF BOARD SIGNATURE OF WRITTEN DECISION ON; Pi!L A- 96-12 FOR COSGRAVES Before the Board was a discussion of Board Signature on the written decision on Appeal A-96-12 for Cosgraves. Damian Syrnyk stated he had provided copies of the written decision for each Board member the previous week. This was the decision the Board had made on September 5, 1996, regarding an appeal the Cosgraves had made from the Planning Commission on a variance that had originally been approved by the Hearings Officer. It had then been called up for review by the Planning Commission and subsequently overturned and denied. It was then appealed to the Board and you had voted to adopt a decision approving the variance. Damian stated he was not requesting an action to be taken today. Damian reported he may have a final decision for the Board to look at on Wednesday, or possibly the following week, if the Board had changes to make. He stated the original decision was with the Board staff which included four exhibits consisting of a map, two letters from a realtor who had done some work behalf of the Cosgraves and a study and a letter done by the Cosgrave's wildlife consultants. Commissioner Nipper stated he took a lot of heat for going along with the Hearings Officer's decision on this and there was a split vote. He stated that since that vote, he had been lobbied by Ted Weise and several other people. He reported that what they said was that maybe this one doesn't impact the deer winter range, but it was the precedent that the Board was setting. Commissioner Nipper reported that protecting a precedent for precedents sake and discrediting the professional the Cosgraves hired from OSU because he was book learned, and he didn't know what he was talking about because he was not out in the field like the Oregon Department of Wildlife personnel. He stated he had set through 2 or 3 hours of meeting with these people lobbying him to change his position on this issue. He stated he maintained this had nothing to do with an attack on the deer winter range precedent as it was site specific, criteria specific, and he would stand by his decision in this particular case a variance should be granted. He stated he looked at the same information the Planning Commission looked at but he came up with a different conclusion than they came up with. He stated this was not to minimize the importance of the Planning Commission and they have looked in ways to have Planning Commissioners involved in the final decision made by the Bo d Lra F 0156-x1477 of County Commissioners. He stated in this particular case the criteria was met for a variance, and he was going to stand by the position he took. He felt this was very site specific. Damian Syrnyk stated when the Board had originally made their decision in September, they had directed Mr. Cosgrave's attorney, Bob Lovlien to draft a decision. He provided a copy for our review. No action was taken on this item at this time. DATED this 25th day of September, 1996, by the Deschutes Countv Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: Recording Secretary Barry H. Slaughter, Commissioner Rob4fit L. Nipper, Co i sioner