Loading...
1998-23329-Ordinance No. 98-031 Recorded 5/28/1998REVIEWED AS TO FORM 168 8 �' 0114 REVIEWED � $Q CODE REVIEW COMM. 98-2,^ 329 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,-Q9_COUNSEL An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 80-216, the Bend Area General Plan, Amending the Inner Urban Growth Boundary and the Plan Map Designation of Certain Properties, and Declaring an Emergency. 98 MAY 28 PH 12: 06 MARY SUE PENHOLLOW COUNTY CLERK ORDINANCE NO. 98-031 WHEREAS, Skyliner Summit Limited Partnership, Broken Top Limited Partnership and Cascade Highlands Limited Partnership proposed the reconfiguration of the IUGB as established in the Bend Area General Plan, resulting in the inclusion of certain property currently located outside the IUGB within the reconfigured IUGB and the exclusion of certain property currently located inside the IUGB from the reconfigured IUGB, and amending the Plan Map designations of the subject properties; and WHEREAS, a hearing was held, after notice given in accordance with law, before the County Hearings Officer; and WHEREAS, the Hearings Officer approved the proposed redesignations under the Bend Area General Plan; and WHEREAS, the decision of the Hearings Officer has not been appealed; now, therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. PLAN AMENDMENT. Ordinance No. 80-216, The Bend Area General Plan, is amended as follows: (1) To realign the Bend Urban Growth Boundary to conform to the line labeled on Exhibit "D," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, as "Revised IUGB" so as to exclude Parcel 3 from the IUGB and include Parcels 1 and 2 within the IUGB, as those parcels are labeled on Exhibit "D"; (2) To redesignate a 10.09 -acre parcel and a 2.65 - acre parcel, described as Parcels 1 and 2, respectively, in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "D," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, from Urban Reserve to Residential -Standard Density; (3) To redesignate a 12.74 -acre parcel described on Exhibit "B" and depicted as Parcel 3 in Exhibit "D," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein;, from Residential -Standard Density to Urban Reserve; and (4) To redesignate a parcel described in Exhibit "C" and depicted on Exhibit "D" as Parcel 4 from Industrial Park to Residential -Standard Density. Section 2. FINDINGS. To adopt as its decision and findings the Findings and Decision of the Deschutes County Hearings Officer, dated April 24, 1995, relating to Plan Amendment Application PA -94-6, marked Exhibit "E," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. KEYP' i�^' QED MICROFIL Eb iUlm 990 Page 1 of 2 — ORDINANCE NO. 98-031 (5/27/98) JUN 10 .IM 168 ® 0115 Section 3. 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 Al day of 1998. ATTEST: Recording Secretary BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON NANCY POP`I� SCHLANGEN, Chair P ROBE,RT L. NIPPER, Comm Clff�DA L. SWEA INGEN, Co missioner Page 2 of 2 — ORDINANCE NO. 98-031 (5/27/98) 9 168 0116 DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE 98-031 709 NW Wall Street Suite 1oz Bend, Oregon 97701 Tel: 341.389.7614 SKYLINERS SUMMIT Fax: 541-389-7623 Land to be Included in the UGB Two parcels located in the northwest 1/4 of Section 1 of Township 18 South and Range 11 East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon as shown on the attached map and fully described as follows: PARCELI Commencing at the northwest corner of said Section 1; thence South 89°38'58" East 901.64 feet along the north line of said Section 1 to the point of beginning; thence South 89038'58" East 1034.69 feet; thence leaving said north line, South 55'59'14" West 380.77 feet; thence South 59025'25" West 830.45 feet; thence North 34°57'11" West 534.84 feet; thence North 55°02'49" East 147.07 feet; thence 72.70 feet along the arc of a 2020.00 foot radius curve right (the long chord of which bears North 56°04'41" East 72.70 feet); thence North 57°06'33" East 144.67 feet to the point of beginning. Contains 10.09 acres. PARCEL 2 Commencing at the northwest corner of said Section 1; thence South 89038'58" East 2153.76 feet along the north line of said Section 1 to the point of beginning; thence South 89038'58" East 264.66 feet; thence leaving said north line, South 03°06'41" West 529.13 feet; thence North 87°23'48" West 125.24 feet; thence 93.12 feet along the arc of an 830.00 foot radius curve left (the long chord of which bears South 89°23'21" West 93.07 feet); thence North 03°06'41" East 487.65 feet; thence North 49°04'34" West 58.53 feet to the point of beginning. Contains 2.65 acres. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL „LAND SURVEYOR OREGON JULY 18, 1980 JERRY C. POWELL: 1 91 9 April 8, 1998 o:\ss1p0008\ugbin.jcp Outst ntlino Professionals ... Oulstanding Quality 108 - 0117 DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, 7o9 NW Wall Street Suite 102 EXHIBIT B Bend, Oregon 99701 ORDINANCE 98-031 Tel: 541.389.7614 Fax: 541.389.7623 SKYLINERS SUMMIT Land to be Excluded from the UGB A parcel located in the southwest 1/4 of Section 36 of Township 17 South and Range 11 East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon as shown on the attached map and fully described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of said Section 36; thence North 00° 17'35" East 435.71 feet, along the west, line of said section, to the southerly right-of-way of Skyliners Road; thence leaving said west line and following said right-of-way, North 87°02'09" East 113 3.3 9 feet; thence 445.07 feet along the arc of a 3780.00 foot radius curve left (the long chord of which bears North 83°39'46" East 444.81 feet); thence leaving said right-of-way, South 55°52'05" West 416.17 feet; thence South 60°39'42" West 255.00 feet; thence South 26'48'19" East 113.00 feet; thence South 63'11'41" West 49.19 feet; thence 108.34 feet along the arc of a 1020.00 foot radius curve left (the long chord of which bears South 60°09'07" West 108.29 feet); thence South 57°06'33" West 24.93 feet to the south line of said section; thence North 89°38'58" West 901.64 feet to the point of beginning. Contains 12.74 acres. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND URVEYOR c, OREGON JULY 18, 1980 JERRY C. POWELL 1 91 9 April 8, 1998 o:lss1p00085ugbex.jcp Outst nding Prol+ionals ... Outstanding Quality E X k;6 f G PARCEL 4 168 - 0118 All of the southwest % of Section 36 of Township 17 South, Range 11 East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, lying south of Skyliners Road, excepting therefrom the following described portion: Beginning at the southwest corner of said Section 36; thence North 00°17'35" East 435.71 feet, along the west line of said section, to the southerly right-of-way of Skyliners Road; thence leaving said west line and following said right-of-way, North 87002'09" East 1133.39 feet; thence 445.07 feet along the arc of a 3780.00 foot radius curve left (the long chord of which bears North 83°3946" East 444.81 feet); thence leaving said right-of-way, South 55052'05" West 416.17 feet; thence South 60°3942" Wrst 255.00 feet; thence South 26°48' 19" East 113.00 feet; thence South 63"11.'41" Wet 49.19 fes; thence 108.34 feet along the arc of a 1020.00 foot radius curve left (the long chord of which bears South 60°09'07" West 108.29 feet); thence South 57°06'33" West 24.93 feet to the south line of said section; thence North 89038'58" West 901.64 fes to the point of beginning. I I I I I i I rig' C7�'1b I I :I I I N87'0209"E 1133.39 EXHIBIT p ORDINANCE 98-031 Revised lu(0g 56� g9 L4 L5 GZ INCLUDE 10.09 ACRES \s PQrC&I I I Reviseca 73:U6B LINE TABLE LINE DIRECTION DISTANCE LI N55' 02' 4 9' E EXCLUDE o N57'06' 33'E 1274 ACRES L3 � Aare 21 3 L4 S63' 11' 41'W 49. 19 L 5 36 T 17S ----3S N87- 23' 48' W 125. 24 Z , 1 TAS. 901.64 EXHIBIT p ORDINANCE 98-031 Revised lu(0g 56� g9 L4 L5 GZ INCLUDE 10.09 ACRES \s PQrC&I I I Reviseca 73:U6B LINE TABLE LINE DIRECTION DISTANCE LI N55' 02' 4 9' E 147 07 L2 N57'06' 33'E 144. 67 L3 S57' 06' 33' W 24. 93 L4 S63' 11' 41'W 49. 19 L 5 S26' 48' 19' E 113.00 L 6 N87- 23' 48' W 125. 24 L7 N49' 04' 34' W 58. 53 1\6 P U 119 w\ O O ' r a � Pu reef '+ I NORTH SCALE. 1' = 400' CURVE TABLE CURVE Puce l 1 \ 643.97 - - \ 217.43 A 26 66 225.55 N56' 04' 41 ' E 72. 70 C2 06'05'09' L7 108. 34 3 108.29 555lu 06'44' 46' 3780.00 445. 07 N83' 39' 46'E 444. 81 co c\l O 06' 25' 42' INCLUDE 6" 6 I 265 ACRES C4 L6 I I I I I I I NORTH SCALE. 1' = 400' CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH CHORD C 1 02' 03' 43' 2020.00 72. 70 N56' 04' 41 ' E 72. 70 C2 06'05'09' 1020.00 108. 34 S60' 09' 07' W 108.29 C3 06'44' 46' 3780.00 445. 07 N83' 39' 46'E 444. 81 C4 06' 25' 42' 830-00 93. 12 S89' 23' 21 ' W 93. 07 sale 1' =.- 400' design DAVID EVANS date 4109198 drawn JHL AND ASSOCIATES, Me SSLf�0008 - SSLPB-F1.OWG 709 1\TW Wall Street, Suite 102 Bend, Oregon 97701 (541) 389-7614 SKYLINERS SUMMIT UGB LAND EXCHANGE SECTION 36, T.17S, R,11E., W.M. SECTION 1, T.18S.. R.11E., W.M. DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON 16$ - 0120 EXHIBIT V. ORDINANCE 98-031 FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BEARINGS OFFICER FILE NUMBERS: CU -94-131, PA -94-6, ZC-94-7 HEARING DATE:. Tuesday, February 7, 1995 7:00 P.M. PLACE: Juvenile Justice Center, Room A 1128 N.W. Harriman Bend, Oregon 97701 APPLICANTS: Skyliner Summit Limited Partnership Broken Top Limited Partnership Cascade Highlands Limited Partnership 61999 Broken Top Drive Bend, Oregon 97702 REQUEST: Applications for a Conditional Use Permit as a Master Plan for a 159.4 -acre planned unit development adjacent to the Broken Top planned development, consisting of 253 lots for single-family dwellings, including common areas and trails; a Plan Amendment to remove an Industrial Park designation on the Bend Area General Plan for a portion of the development and to amend the Urban Growth Boundary alignment to coincide with the layout of the development and topography; and a Zone Change for the UGB change to zone the land included within the boundary to RS, Urban Standard Residential, and the land to be excluded from the boundary to UAR-10, Urban Area Reserve. The UGB change as proposed would include the same amount of land being included within and excluded from the boundary (12.8 acres). STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Paul Blikstad, Associate Planner CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 1 E Exhibit Page of 'q L_ Ordinance 168 - 0121 , APPLICABLE CRITERIA: A. Chapters 19.24 and 19.12 of Title 19 of the Deschutes County Code establishes uses and standards for the RS and UAR-10 zones, respectively. B. Chapter 19.100 of Title 19 establishes standards for Conditional Use requests for the Bend 'urban area. C. Chapter 19.104 of Title 19 establishes standards and criteria for Planned Developments. D. Chapter 19.116 of Title 19 establishes standards and criteria for zone change requests. E. The Bend Area General Plan establishes an overall planning. and development framework for the Bend urban area. F. Title 17 of the Deschutes County; Code establishes. standards and criteria for land divisions in the County. G. Oregon Administrative Rules 660-04;-010 (1)(B)(i-iv) establishes criteria for exceptions, to the Statewide Planning Goals. Goal 14 of the Statewide Planning Goals establishes the urbanization policies ;,of the state. H. Title 22 of the Deschutes County l' Code establishes procedures for all land use applications in. the county. FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. LOCATION: The subject property is- located on the west side of the Bend urban area adjacent to the existing Broken Top development, Overturf Butte, the: City of Bend water reservoirs on the butte, the Golden Butte development and Skyliners Road. The planned development is to include property within the city limits of Bend. 2. ZONING: A majority of the proposed development is in an area zoned RS, Urban Standard Residential, with some UAR-10, Urban Area Reserve zoned land adjacent to it. The property is designated Residential, Urban Reserve and Industrial Park on the Bend Area General Plan. 3. SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property involves a total of 159.4 acres, with approximately 13 acres within the city limits of Bend. The property has =. significant varied topography, with somewhat level areas and rock outcrop. The topography varies from ,a low elevation of 3,718.2 feet near Skyliners Road to the highest elevation CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 2 k? Exhibit E Page Ordinance '- T- 031 ,. 168 - 0122 of 3,891 feet, a difference of almos� 173 feet. There is a vegetative cover of juniper and pc=derosa pine trees, as well as scrub brush and grasses. 4. The Broken Top planned developme-t" =o the south has received numerous land use approvals with the County dating back to the original approvGl cf the PUD concept and golf course in June of 1991. A1_ of the previous approvals are incorporated by reference herein, specifically as the approvals relate to -he development of Skyliners Summit. 5. The Planning Division sent notice of the proposed land use applications to several public agencies and received the following responses: A. The County Public Works Department originally submitted the following conditions and comments: 1. Skyliners Road is to be improved to urban minor arterial standard along the entire frontage of this property. (This requires 36 feet of paving, 10 inches of base and a 3 inch overlay, curbs of both sides with sidewalks on the south side of the street. 2. Mt. Washington Drive is to be improved to urban arterial standards with 36 feet of paved width, 10 inches of base rock, 3 inches AC overlay, curbs on both sides and sidewalks on both sides. 3. Local private streets within the project are to be improved to the local private street standard approved elsewhere in the Broken Top development. The ma_Ximnm grade is not to exceed 12% on the private streets. B. The County Transportation Planner submitted the following comments: General Comments: The off-site roadway and intersection improvements discussed in the traffic study appear to mitigate any additional traffic generated by this project (including the additional left -turn pocket on Skyliners Road). My primary concern is that the assumed mitigation projects are programmed, funded/bonded for, and will be constructed before the number of vehicle trips CU­94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 3 E Exhibit Page -3 of Ordinance 168 - 0123 outpaces the traffic capacity of the streets and intersections. In addition, the traffic im=ac- study for the project makes no mention of the access to Skyliners Road via Colt Drive as shown on the revised master plan map. My impression is that this could be a_ significant ingress/egress point for the development and would remove potential trips from Mt. Washington Drive. With this additional access point, I would suggest redesigning Colt Drive to connect to Tillinghast Loop (west) as a through movement rather than a "T" intersection as currently shown. This change provides a cleaner movement, through the development to, Mt. Washington Drive. If this change was made, the bike/ped. path on the north side of Colt Drive should be relocated to the south side, to avoid crossings of the new through movement street. Specific Comments: Development Standards I,A,2 The road standard for Mt. Washington Drive should include a pavement width of 48 feet for its entire length, not just at intersections. The center 12 -foot travel lane can be improved and'striped as a center median (not raised), or 'ideally, landscaped at -grade with natural vegetation. IB3(c) The pavement width should be a minimum of 24 feet with two 12 -foot travel lanes as per the requirements under Section 17.48.180 (A) rather than the more liberal requirements under19.104.080 (E). II,C The minimum pavement width for a two-way, multiple -user path shall be 12 feet, with two -foot graded gravel shoulders, as per Title 17.48.140 (2) and ;,17.48.180 (F). II,D The corresponding right''of way width needs to be a 16 -foot minimum.: Unpaved Paths Although not specifically identified with standards in the application, the County requirements would be for paths that have a minimum of a 2 -foot tread width, 6 feet of cleared width and 7 feet of overhead clearance. CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 4 Exhibit E Page 1!Y_ Of_ Ordinance ,2; Q /�_- 168 0124 Other requirements: Multiple -Use Paths The path shown on the plan along the north side of Mt. Washington Drive that crosses Tillinghast Loop and at Troon Avenue, should be realigned to meet at the corners of the intersections for improved safety. Curb cuts Curb cuts for bicycle access to multi -use paths should be located at each intersection where paths are interrupted by private or public streets, and at those mid -block areas opposite street intersections where cyclists must cross streets to continue along paths. The curb cuts must be designed so that the bottom of the curb cut matches the gutter grade without a lip. The width of the curb cut should be the full width of the path (121) when the approaching path is perpendicular to the curb, and a minimum of 8 feet wide when the approaching path is parallel and adjacent to the curb. Ten or twelve feet may be necessary on downhill grades. Sidewalks Based on the revised Skyliners Summit Master Plan, additional sidewalk segments should be constructed: 1. From the northern terminus of the bike/ped. path on Mt. Washington Drive to the intersection at Skyliners Road; and 2. From the southwest corner of the Crump Drive intersection, along Mt. Washington Drive to the project boundary, or as far as necessary to form a continuous sidewalk along the south side of Mt. Washington Drive. C. The City of Bend had the following comments: General Comments: Public Streets: 1. Provide sidewalks and standard concrete driveway aprons along lot frontage(s) in accordance with City Standards and Specifications. 2. Provide handicap ramps at intersections in accordance with City Standards. CU-94-131/PA-544-6/ZC-94-7Page 5 Exhibit Page 5 of Ordinannp Rg- a3I 168 - 0125 3. Provide traffic impact analysis for area. 4. Provide contribution to a traffic signal at 14th & Simpson; 14th & Galveston; Mt. Washington and Skyliners and Mt. Washington and Century Drive. Private Streets: The private street systems within the Planned Unit Development shall be constructed to acco=odate the amount of traffic generated by the project and be of a width to support emergency vehicles. Bicycle/pedestrian paths shall be improved and adequately connected to public - street facilities. Storm Drainage: 1. Control all storm drainage on site. 2. Submit a comprehensive master storm drainage control plan to the County Public Works Department for containment of drainage on site. General: 1. Provide power .and bases for street lights in accordance with City of Bend policy. 2. Submit engineered sewer, water and/or street plans for public improvements on site to City Policy and Standards and Specifications. All water and sewer plans that are part of a site plan, or are being constructed outside of a public way, shall include any and all site features of "the development, existing or proposed, they mayli affect the City facilities. Water and Sewer: 1. All City maintained facilities shall have full width exclusive utility easements at 20 feet each for- water orwater and sewer outside of any right-of-way areas. 2. Coordinate water and sewer connections with Development Services. 3. Meet the water flow requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. All water and sewer plans that are part of a site plan, or are being constructed outside of a. public way, shall include any an6 all site features of the development, existing or proposed, that may affect the City facilities. 4. This project will require a computer water system analysis to be performed by the City of Bend to determine available fire flows and impact on the water system.' Applicant will'„ be required to mitigate, any adverse impacts to ,the system. This CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94 -7Page 6 E Exhibit Page of U-noll 168 - 0126 mitigation procedure may include both on-site and off-site water improvements as necessary. S. Extend water and sewer mains im accordance with the master plan. Specific Comments: 1. Dedicate 40 feet from centerline on Skyliners. 2. Construct Mt. Washington 48 feet full width with curbs on both sides and sidewalks along all. developed areas from Troon Avenue to Skyliners. 3. Construct Skyliners 24 feet from centerline with curbs and a sidewalk on one side. Overlay Skyliners with 2 inch A.C. length of the subject property. 4. Submit a Master Plan for water and sewer utilities to the City of Bend Engineering Division for- approval orapproval prior to filing any plats. S. Reconstruct all (4) water transmission mains to proposed rights -of -ways. D. The Bend LaPine School District states that due to the potential impact on the school district of the students generated by the proposed development, the school district requests the developers be required to update the current school site agreement between Broken Top Inc. and Bend LaPine Public Schools to reflect the additional housing units contemplated by the Skyliners Summit Master Plan. Attached for your reference is a copy of the current agreement between the parties dated October 22, 1993. E. The Bend Fire Department submitted the following conditions: 1. Clear address signs must be plainly visible, day or night, from the street or road fronting the property. 2. A fire apparatus access road shall be provided to within 150 feet of all exterior walls of the first floor of the buildings. The route of the fire apparatus access road shall be approved by the fire department. The roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet and a minimum vertical clearance of 13' 6". The grade of the fire apparatus access road shall not exceed twelve percent, they shall be capable of supporting 25 tons and be of an all-weather design. Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved means of turning around the apparatus. A 45 -foot radius CU•-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 7 ExhibitAF��� Page —Ordinan 168 - 01 2? cul de sac or hammerhead turnaround would suffice. 3. Fire hydrants shall be located along the route of the fire apparatus access roadway. Hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet and they shall be placed 612" behind the curb. 4. The required fire flow for the subdivision is 1000 gallons per minute measured at 20 P.S.I. residual pressure. This is based on a Type V -N building. ; 5. Woodshake roofs are strongly discouraged. 6. No debris or brush burning.''' 7. Ascertain - that all nese areas have fire protection contracts or are', annexed into our fire district. F. The County Property Address Coordinator states that all new or proposed road names will' need to be approved by the PAC prior to fina' approval. G. US West Communications states thalt the developer is responsible for all trenches and costs associated with providing telephone service with costs rebated over five years dependent upon. the number of - hookups. , H. The Watermaster's Office had no comments. I. Bend CableCommunications, Bend Parks and Recreation, Cascade Natural Gas, Pacific Power &r Light, the US. Forest Service,' and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development: submitted no response to the notice sent out on: these applications. 7. Section 19.28.030 (H) of Title 19 lists a planned unit development as a conditional use in the RS zone, subject - to Chapter 19.104. 8. The applicant has submitted a burden of proof statement which addresses the criteria listed at the beginning of the staff report. The burden of proof statement is incorporated by reference herein to the staff report. The burden of proof is broken down into two submittals, one for the conditional use permit (with proposed road standards) and a second one for the plan amendments and zone changes proposed. CU-94-131/P,A-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 8 Exhibit Page of d3 Ordinance N 168 0128 ISSUES PRESENTED AT THE HF-ARING The following issues were presented at the hearing: 1. Density for the proposed proje--t. 2. Alignment of Colt Road. 3. Cul-de-sacs. 4. Location of City of Bend water distribution lines within the subject property. 5. Access to Colt Road. 6. Public access to trail system. 7. Access to the national forest. DISCUSSION 1. Density. The key issue to this project is the question of density. The first and primary issue is whether or not a minimum density exists in the Bend Urban Area and, second, if it applies to this project. The Hearings Officer has reviewed the correspondence of the applicant, the applicant's attorney as well as the City of Bend and Deschutes County. The Hearings Officer has also reviewed the legislative history of this issue and this Hearings Officer's former decision concerning Broken Top. Based upon that review, the Hearings Officer finds that the finding of a minimum density requirement in the Bend Urban Area as set forth in the Broken Top decision is the appropriate standard and must be applied in this case. The Hearings Officer is certainly empathetic with the applicant's position concerning this matter. However, the Hearings Officer does not see any alternative but to be. consistent with his prior decision. The correct standard. for establishing a minimum density, therefore, is to take the total acreage and subtract all right of ways and then determine a density calculation based upon 2.3 units per acre. The total number units that will be required for this development appears to be 292 units. The applicant will submit a revised plan consistent with this density requirement. The applicant shall be able to make minor modifications in the Park and Trail System to accommodate the increased density. 2. Colt Road. There was considerable testimony regarding the location of Colt Road as it intersects with Skyliner Drive. The applicant has proposed moving Colt Road to a point further west. It appears that the ultimate location CU--94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 9 Exhibit E Page of 41 Ordinance M -03 3. 4. 168 0129 by the applicant, as descrir�d _n its Masr plan line proposed 2, will provide su=ficient sight have Revision No. but that wilt, of course, distance on Skyliner Drive, Colt Dr;^e s1ould address the to be verified with the Deschutes CoLnty Public Works Department. Relocation of neighbors in the Shadow Ridge concerns raised by the roved Development. This realignment of Cclt Driv riation of an by the Hearings Officer subject to the zpProp the access permit onto Skyliner Drive as3 verifiartment�f The sight Line distances by the Public works Dep officer and is hereby rejected. alternative for a cul-de-sac Oon Colt Dive has also been considered by the Hearing It will not provide sufficient and acc also -nh -bits saneefficient for emergency equipment, sident flow of traffic for the res of the development. Transmission Water Lines. The City of Send requested that T roves this application be denied until riot to approval approves . tds a Sewer and Water Mater Plan P s Officer fin Planned Unit Development Plan. The Hearingss not that approval at this time of t the he 6lo'cationter e of the water P necessary. Issues concerning and sewer lines, their exact size and locationfatting of appropriately worked out during t'�e ;!tie of p pprova1. The Hearings Officer would observe subdivision app protect those water lines that the applicant will have to utilized by the City of Bend for its water distribution system and that will have a easemento be ts will beunecessary Y rocss1.;Appropriat platting P pro for those water distribution to ensure the p es. Any relocation of water di�anbuandnthe nCity es lof ti lin the applicant feel that have to be agreed; upon by however, Bend. The Hearings Officer does not, is necessary to predetermine the location of the these nal it at this stage of water distribution lines proceedings. it S stem. The applicant has indicated that Access to Tray enera1 public for it is willing to provide access to the g t on an equal the trail system within the Skyliner Summa f SkylinerSummit' This access basis to the residents oeasement to h the granting of an such Deschutes County and/or can be assured through of Cit Bend ensuring lt c. The Hearings Officer finds access for the general p equitable to have the general that it will be fair and eq the stem is ' c treated on the same basis es of the trail sy t the public Subdivision insofar as us the Bend concerned. Out An appropriate easement can be worked en through with the office of County, Counsel and .City Attorney. ~CUw�94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 10 Exhibit Page .1f.Z of 4 Ordinance ?- 168 4 0130 5. Access to the National Forest was = aised by the County Public Works Department. That issue appears to be withdrawn and the Hearings Officer dc�-=s not consider it an issue for review within the parameters of this decision. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Conformance with Section 19.100.030 of Title 19. 19.100.030 General Conditional Use Criteria. A conditional use permit may be granted only upon findings by the Planning Director or Hearings Body that the proposal meets all of the criteria in this section, as well as all other applicable criteria contained in this Ordinance. The general criteria are: A. That the location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed use are such that it will have minimal adverse impact on the property value, livability and permissible development of the. surrounding area. Consideration shall be given to compatibility in terms of scale, coverage and density with the alteration of traffic patterns and. the capacity of surrounding streets and to any other relevant impact of the proposed use. Findings: The location of the proposed development is immediately north of the existing Broken Top planned development boundary. This land is inside the urban growth boundary of Bend (with the exception of UGB change requested) and is to be served by city sewer and water services, as well as other public facilities such as electric, phone, gas and cable service. The new development is proposed to be accessed from two new roads off of Mt. Washington Drive referred to as Crump Drive and Tillinghast Loop. This location is well-suited to residential development with land that can be served with the above utilities and services. The design of the proposed development is a low-density development similar in design and layout (except for topography) to the existing Broken Top PUD. It is proposed to have two new roads that access the new development off of Mt. Washington Drive, with Crump Drive serving both the east and west portions of the development (along with Ross Drive and MacKenzie Drive) Tillinghast Loop and Colt Drive serving the east/north ..side of the development. The construction of Mt. Washington Drive will be required as part of this CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 11 Exhibit Page —4L_ of Ordinance -p 168 - 0131 development. The City and County Pu:tic Works Departments are in agreement with requiring the =ul= 48 -foot standard for Mt. Washington Drive through the suject development, including curbs and sidewalks both sides. The City and County also. recommend an interi= 2'_ -foot from the centerline widening with the rest oJE the improvement completed when the property on the r_crth side of Skyliners Road is developed. The proposed development will have :inimal impact on property values. If any impact is to occur, it would most likely be an increase in property values, rather than any potential decrease. There will be development existed centbef to the Overturf Butte, area where D However, with vacant land designated and zoned for residential development adjacent to this land, the owners of properties adjacent to it should expect to see development at some point in the fug_ The livability of the area should not he affected by the proposed expansion. The development includes single-family design and layout, with private roads proposed to serve the expansion. The proposed development will be single-family development is an area with the same type of development. No impact- on livability is envisioned, other than the normal impact-s development has on adjacent land, such as vegetative';' removal, and some noise and dust that didn't exist prier to. development, such as from construction. Once the development is complete, the impacts would be from the residents themselves, which would include some 'noise from traffic and general living habits and structures where none existed before. These impacts ars normally associated with residential development and are not considered adverse. The permissible development of the area should not be affected by the proposed expansion. The undeveloped land adjacent to Skyliners Summit will not be connected to the development. The possible link between these subdivisions and the proposed planned development would be the availability of sewer service. The development of Skyliners Summit may hasten the development of adjacent. vacant land. The traffic study submitted by the applicant indicated that there will be impacts to adjacent streets from the development. The only recommended improvements by the traffic study as part of this development were an interim standard for Mt. Washington and a left turn lane at the Skyliners Road/Mt. Washington intersection. The applicant now agrees that the full improvement of Mt. Washington CU-94,7131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 12 Exhibit Page Ordinance S" 168 - 0132 from the existing improvement near the Golden Butte subdivision to Skyliners Road (48 =eet of paved surface, curbs and sidewalks both sides) is to be completed as part of this development. A 48 -foot road will automatically provide the left turn lane, by prcvicing three 12 foot travel lanes and a 6 -foot bike lane cm each side of the road. No further improvements wo_ld �e required. The improvement of Mt. Washington Drive to full standard is reasonably related to the development of a 253 -lot subdivision and the impacts associated with that development. This development w=11 have a potential impact of 2,530 vehicle trips per day on Mt. Washington Drive. The full improvement of this road will tie in with the full improvement of the road from Simpson Avenue to Troon Avenue, and not create a situation where a full improvement runs into an interim improvement, such as what exists along the current Broken Top boundary. The Hearings Officer believes the situation of this development is different than either the Broken Top development or the Broken Top expansion area development. The applicant owns the entire property: adjacent to this development and full improvement is warranted. There will be no other development along this portion of Mt. Washington Drive, unless the applicant or a subsequent property owner, expands the urban growth boundary to the west. The Hearings Officer finds that the recommendation for an interim improvement to Skyliners Road, by constructing a 24 -foot from the centerline improvement, with a curb and sidewalk on the south side and a 2 -inch A.C. overlay for this stretch of the road is also appropriate. Skyliners Road will ultimately be constructed to a full urban arterial standard (48 feet wide, curbs and sidewalks both sides, 10 -inch aggregate base, 3 -inch A.C. paving, with appropriate drainage). The remainder of this improvement can be completed when the property directly north develops. This half -street improvement will take care of the turn lane improvement listed in the applicant's traffic study. The City of Bend has also requested contributions toward traffic signals at the following intersections: 14th and Simpson; 14th and Galveston; Mt. Washington and Skyliners; and Mt. Washington and Century Drive. The City has submitted signal contribution calculations for three of the above four intersections. The intersections and the calculations are as follows: Skyliners and Mt. Washington ($5,590); Simpson and 14th ($10,920); Galveston and 14th ($16,770). These calculations were completed by Mike Wilson, Assistant City Engineer and were based on the CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 13 Exhibit �. Page 3 Ordinance - O 168 - 01.33 traffic study numbers submitted by the applicant. The applicant concurs with this request. The applicant shall be required to submit with the City o. Bend assurances, either through a bond, letter of credit or cash deposit, for these signal contributions as a cone_tion of approval. The School District has requested that the applicant be required to amend the school site ag=ee=ent. This request appears to be reasonable and related to -he impacts of the project. The District and applicant Have amended their agreement. B. That the site planning of the proposed use will, as far as reasonably possible, provide an aesthetically pleasing and functional environment to the highest degree consistent with the nature''of the use and the given setting. Findings: The site planning of the Skyliners Summit development will provide an aesthetically pleasing environment. The expansion will be similar in appearance to Broken Top, with narrower private streets, bike paths and open spaces, interspersed with houses of varying sizes. This high-end development will be similar to other developments in the Bend area, including Mountain High, Awbrey Glen and Mt. Bachelor Village. The proposed development will preserve as many trees as possible for aesthetics. The given setting is an area 'of somewhat low density development, which is similar to.the proposed development. The proposed development is functional with respect to residential development. The roads will be private roads, and will be maintained initially by the developer and eventually by the homeowners association in Skyliners Summit. All necessary utilities and public facilities will be available and installed to the expansion. C. That if the use is permitted outright in another zone, there is substantial reason for locating the use in an area where it is only conditionally allowed, as opposed to an area where it is permitted outright. Findings: Planned developments are allowed outright in the commercial and industrial zones. However, these planned developments would be for commercial and industrial use only. Planned developments are a conditional use in all of the'residential zones. CU -94 ,131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 14EXhlbit it Page _q of l Ordinance "O D. That the proposed use will be purposes of this Ordinance, th Statewide Goals and any other ordinances or policies. Findings: 168 - 0134 consistent with the e Comprehensive Plan, applicable statutes, The Bend Area General Plan and Title 19 of the County Code have been acknowledged by the State of Oregon. The Plan and zoning ordinance have thus been deiermined to be in compliance with the Statewide Pla=irg Goals (Goals). Compliance with the Plan and o= dirance would thus demonstrate compliance with the Goa_s. No findings are necessary for the conditional use permit with respect to the Goals. The general purpose of Title 19 is to implement the Bend Area General Plan. The other purposes are: to classify, designate and regulate the location and use of buildings, structures and land for residential, commercial, industrial and other uses in appropriate places and for said purposes; to divide the Bend Urban Area into districts of such number, shape and area as may be deemed best suited to carry out these regulations and provide for. their enforcement; to encourage the most appropriate use of lands; to conserve and stabilize the value of natural resources; to provide adequate open spaces for light and air and prevention of fire; to prevent undue concentrations of population; to lessen congestion of. streets; to facilitate adequate provisions for community utilities, such as transportation, water sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare; and to encourage the use of solar design into new structures. The applicant has listed applicable Bend Area General Plan policies on pages 12-17 of the Conditional Use Permit burden of proof statement submitted. The Hearings Officer concurs with the applicant's listing and assessment of- these policies. The proposed development meets the intent of these policies. The following policies to the list submitted by the applicant with appropriate comments: General Policies, page 21 of the Plan_ 3. All residential areas shall be provided with services and facilities necessary for safe, healthful, convenient urban living consistent with the density of development. The Skyliners Summit development will provide for safe, healthful and convenient urban living. There will be roads and bike paths for travel, as well as walking paths for exercise CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 15 Exhibit Page /.5 of Ordinance ILD31 - 168 -0135 and nature walks. 4. Residential development shall be coorc_nated with other land use elements and community-ac_Lities which are consistent with projected housing densities. The Skyliners Summit development will be coordinated with the transportation system by building Mt. Wa=ilington Drive to Skyliners Road. There are no community=ac_lities planned in the vicinity of this development at this time. The project, if amended, will meet the minimum density rec-uired under Title 19. 7. Residential developments shall be permitted only in areas with community water and sewer services and their locations should have good access to major streets and be near commercial services and/or public open space. See discussion above regarding density. The applicant will be required to extend service to the property, and meet all Uniform Fire Code for fire protection on development will be'from Mt. Washington connection to Skyliners Road, both arterials. -4 City sewer and water re:ruirements of the site. Access to this Drive, as well as one of which are urban Plan: 6. All residential areas shall be provided with community water and sewer service. This development is proposing to have City of Bend sewer and water service. The City has indicated that upgrading of their system may be required. 7. Residential development standards within the urban growth boundary shall be the same for areas oZ similar densities or topographic conditions, both inside and outside the City. The only other development with similar topographic conditions to this proposed development would be'; the Awbrey Butte development, Mt. Bachelor Village, and some of the Awbrey Glen development. The Awbrey Butte development includes public -roads throughout, -with curbs and sidewalks. The Awbrey Glen and Mt. Bachelor Village developments have private roads similar to those proposed, with no curbs'or sidewalks. The runoff from the hillsides associated with this property, private roads with no curbs or sidewalks is more appropriate for accommodating the runoff, by spreading it equally to all land, rather than channeling it into catch basins and drywells. A heavy rain on a steep slope can produce runoff which CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 16 Exhibit A rz ;Page .-1k_ Of Ordinance ' 168 - 0136 surpasses the drainage mechanisms ability to =andle the runoff. With'10-foot bike/pedestrian paths adjacent to the roads, no sidewalks are necessary. 8. New developments is existing res der_zial areas shall respect the character and quality cf t -e areas in which they locate. The Skyliners Summit development will be similar in appearance and, character as the Broken Top development �zmediately south. 31. Area dedicated or provided as public, semipublic, or private open space as part of a residential development should be counted as part of the total area when computing residential densities for any given development. See density discussion above. 2. Conformance with Section 19.104.070 of Title 19. 19.104.070 Standards for Approval (PUD's) In granting approval for planned unit development, the Hearings Body or Planning Director shall be guided by the following: A. Whether the applicant has, through investigation, planning and programming, demonstrated the soundness of the proposal and an ability to carry out the project as proposed, and whether the construction shall begin within six months of the conclusion of any necessary action by the County, or within such longer period of time as may be established by the Hearings Body or Planning Director. Findings: The applicant has demonstrated through the development of Broken Top, including the golf course, two million gallon water reservoir, the construction of Mt. Washington Drive, Simpson Avenue and all of the private streets within the development, and the sewer and water system for the \ development that the proposed development is a viable project capable of being carried out by the applicant. Although the partnerships are different than the Broken Top development, the same General Partner, Broken Top, Inc. is used. Additionally, the applicants use the same Engineering/ Surveying/Planning consultant, David Evans and Associates, for the design work. According to Staff, all meetings with the developer of this project are with all of the same people who have developed Broken Top. The project can begin within 6 months, or such longer period CU-94-.131'/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 17 Exhibit if Page ./Zofql ly OrdinancF:.._ 168 - 0137. . as the Hearings Officer specifies. The Hearings Officer concurs that the applicant should be gra=ted a 2 -year time period to begin the project, as the c-mcnth period listed above for major projects is unreal"_stic in today's financial markets. B. Whether the proposal conforms with the general plans of the County in terms of location and general development standards. Findings: See density discussion above. C. Whether the project will accrue benefits to the County and the general public in terms of need, convenience, service and appearance sufficient to justify any necessary exceptions to the regulations in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Findings: The necessary exceptions to the Zoning and Subdivision ordinances required; for this development include the request for private roads within the project which do not meet the ordinance standards for public roads. The applicant has listed the road stand'ards requested on Exhibit B of the conditional use burden of proof, Development Standards for Skyliners Summit. Staff notes that there are two different standards for private roads within Titles 17 and 19 of the County Code. Under Section 17.48.180 of Title 17 private road standards are 24 feet where twenty or more residential units occur, and where separate paved bicycle/pedestrian ways are provided. If no pedestrian ways are provided, the p"avement width must be 28 feet. Under Section 19.104.080 (E) of Title 19 of the County Code the private road standard is 14 feet minimum for one-way traffic, 20 feet for two-way traffic, with on -street parallel parking requiring an additional 10 feet of paving. If pedestrian walkways, or bikeways are included in the road, an additional 5 feet of pavement width on each side is required. 'Under subsection F in this section off-street pedestrian walkways/bikeways must be a minimum of 10 feet in width. The main roads within the proposed development, including Tillinghast Loop, Crump Drive, Ross Drive, MacKenzie Drive and Coit Drive shall all be constructed to the 28 feet of paved surface as indicated in the applicantl,s development standards.. These roads shall'haveseparated , CU=94-.,131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 18 Exhibit E Page of Ordinance 03 16B - 0138 bicycle/pedestrian (10 -foot wide) paths constructed adjacent to them. The remainder of the roads, which are all cul de sacs, should be constructed to the 24 feet wide standard of Section 17.48.180 of Ti=le 17. Private roads are more appropriate— this area, given the steep grades and abundance of trees. Wi=h private streets no curbs or sidewalks are required, which will allow surface runoff to be accommodated within the existing soil, and not requiring added catc-h basins and drywells. The private streets should also rern•ire less cut and fill for the road construction. Separated bike/ pedestrian paths are safer and more aesthet_ca_ly pleasing than on -street bicycle lanes or sidewalks. The applicant has indicated that there may be a need to exceed the maximum 12 percent road grade standard, although exceeding the 12 percent will be avoided as much as possible. The twelve percent can be exceeded only if approved by the County and/or City Pabli c Works Department and AASHTO standards are met. The applicant has not applied for a Tentative Plat for any of the lots within this project. However, it appears from the master plan map will meet the dimensional standards of Section 19.28.050 for minimum lot area (6,000 square feet), minimum lot width (60 feet), including 70 feet for corner lots, minimum street frontage cf.50 feet for lots and 30 feet frontage for lots on the cul de sac bulbs. In addition, the lots appear to be of sufficient size to meet the yard setback requirements listed under 19.28.050 (D -H) of Title 19. The applicant is not applying for exceptions to the maximum height allowed in the RS zone (30 feet), the maximum lot coverage allowed (35 percent.) or the solar setback standards. D. Whether the project will satisfactorily take care of the traffic it generates by means of adequate off-street parking, access points, additional street right-of-way and improvements and any other traffic facilities required. Findings: The City has also requested that the applicant contribute to traffic signals at the intersections of 14th and Simpson; 14th and Galveston; Mt. Washington and Skyliners; and Mt. Washington and Century Drive. As stated in a foregoing finding, the City has listed three of the four intersections with the cost to the applicant for the CU-•94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 19 Exhibit E Page .1._ of Ordinance 3e::03 03 / 168 0139 development's share of the impacts lis!ed. Staff finds that these contributions should be ma --;e a condition of approval. A 10 -foot wide separated bike/pedestrlan paths shall be required along all of the streets iu the development that are not cul de sacs. This requireme=t would be consistent. with the Broken Top master pla- approval. Having pedestrians and bicyclists in the same road without the benefit of a sidewalk or bike lane creates an unnecessarily dangerous situation. E. Whether the project will be compatible with adjacent developments and will not adversely affect the character of the area. Findings: This criterion is similar to Section 19.100.030 (A), which is addressed above. The proposed development will be. compatible with the existing developent in the area, given the fact that it will: be somewhat; low density development in an area with similar characteristics. The land values and sizes of homes will be similar. F. Whether the project will satisfactorily take care of. sewer and water needs consistent with the Bend Urban Area General Plan. Findings: The applicant will need to provide a master plan to the City for the sewer and water facilities for this project. Also: See water line discussion above. G. A planned unit development shall ',not be approved in any R zone if the housing density of the proposed development will result in an intensity of land use greater than permitted by the Comprehensive Plan. Findings: s not attempting It is clear the applicant i P g to increase density beyond what is allowed by the Plan. 3. Conformance with Section 19.104.080 of Title 19. 'Exhibit E CU-94=1131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 20 „Page AQ . 0f Ordinance ' w 168 0140 19.104.080 Standards and Requirements. Approval of a request for a planned unit development is dependent upon the submission of an acceptable plan and satisfactory assurance that it will be carried out. The following minimum standards and requirements shall apply: A. A dwelling use permitted iu any zone may be permitted in a planned unit development. Findings: The applicant is proposing single-family dwellings within the expansion, which is the primary use envisioned for the RS zoned land. B. A manufactured home may be pemm tted in a planned unit development. However, manufactured home parks shall not be allowed in any commercial or industrial zone. Findings: No manufactured homes are proposed within the proposed planned development. C. Developments which either provide for or contemplate private streets and ways and common areas which will be or are proposed to be maintained by the owners of units or lots within a development must organize and maintain an owners' association. The owners' association shall consist of all the owners of units or lots within the development and membership in the association must be required of all owners; adopt and record bylaws as provided by ORS 91.555; adopt. bylaws that contain the provisions required by ORS 91.560; and have the power to create a lien upon the unit or lot for services, labor or material lawfully chargeable as common expenses as provided in ORS 91.580. The association's power to create such a lien shall exist whether or not the property is subject to the Oregon Unit Ownership Law (ORS 91.505 - 91.675). Findings: The applicant will be required to establish an owners association. The proposed development will need to have the documentation (Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions) that is required for all private developments where private streets and common areas exist. CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 21 E Exhibit Page of Ordinance -631 168 - 0141 D. If the property is not subject to the Unit Ownership Law, the -association shall also create, by contract, the right to claim a lien upon any unit or lot for services, labor or material chargeable as common expenses. This lien -may be created by covenants between the association and the property owners and shall supplement the lien created by (C) above and require all owners of units or lots within the development to consent to and pay the reasonable value of services, labor or material expended by the County for common expenses where such County expenditures are made because the- owners or the owners, association does not provide the necessary services, labor or material for common expenses. Findings: As indicated above, the applicant will need to include the proposed development in the documentation which provides for the above requirements. E. Streets and roads in planned ° unit development designated developments shall be public roads and ways developed to County standards or be private roads of a minimum of 14 feet wide paved surface for one-way traffic, minimum 20 feet wide paved surface for two-way traffic, and parallel parking as permitted shall require minimum additional 8 feet of width for. each side of parkings In addition to these requirements, the Planning Director or Hearings Body may specify other requirements including, but not limited to, increased or decreased pavement width. Findings: The road standards for this project are addressed in a. foregoing finding. F. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided for adequate pedestrian and bicycle traffic and shall be constructed with Portland cement or asphaltic concrete to County standards, except as varied by the provisions of this section or by the Planning Director or Hearings Body. Findings: As indicated in above findings, separated bike/pedestrian paths shall be required along all roads within the project which are not cul desacs. CU-,9.,4-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 22 Exhibit Page of Ordinance 168 - 0142 G. All utility facilities shall be installed underground and in accordance with County standards. Findings: The applicant has stated that all utility facilities will be constructed underground, to County and utility standards. H. The design of all, planned unit development projects shall provide direct access for all units and lots to open space areas and facilities. Findings: The applicant has addressed this criterion on page 8 of the conditional use burden of proo=. The applicant has submitted a colored rendering of the project, with common areas and "park" areas in a green co. -.w -or. As stated by the applicant, most of the lots within the project will have direct access to some aspect of cc=on area. The topography of the property is such that having common areas for each lot may not be feasible. The applicant is proposing both native trails and gravel paths in the common areas, as well as a "lake" area near Skyliners Road. As noted in the staff report for the Broken Top expansion, "direct access" is not defined under Title 19. The accessibility of the open areas appears to be reasonable for potential residents. Nine of the twelve cul de sacs proposed have access to common trail areas. I. A statement must be submitted relative to the solar access to be provided by the planned unit development. Findings: All development within the project is subject to the solar requirements of Title 19. 4. Conformance with Section 17.16.050 of Title 17 of the Deschutes County Code. 17.16.050 Master development plan. An overall master development plan shall be submitted for all developments affecting land under the same ownership for which phased development is contemplated. The master plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following elements: CU-94-1'31/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 23 exhibit Page _JLI. o�P�, Ordinance 168 0143 - A. over development plan, including phase or unit sequence; Findings: The applicant has submitted a mas mer plan map of the development, which includes four phases ever approximately five years. The phasing appears re=so-"able based on the example of Broken Top. A 5 -year master plan is recommended for approval. B. Show compliance with the comprehensive plan and implementing land use ordinances and policies; Findings: The Bend Area General Plan and zonLig ordinance are addressed in a foregoing finding, as well as the applicant's burden of proof statemen The plan amendment and zone change standards will be add-essed in a later finding. C. Schedule of improvements, initiation and completion; Findings: The proposed phasing is contemplated over a 5 -year period, although the applicant may request a longer time period to complete the project. As indicated above, a 5 -year approval is recommended. D. Overall transportation and traffic pattern plan, including bicycle, pedestrian and public transit transportation facilities and access corridors; Findings: The applicant has not addressed any potential public transit facilities that can be accommodatedon the site. However, Bend does not yet have a formal transit system. The transportation system and traffic pattern have been addressed in a foregoing finding. E. Program timetable projection; Findings: As indicated above, the applicant has"submitted a 5 -year time frame for the project. The applicant may apply to extend the approval for a longer period should that much time be necessary. CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 24 Exhibit E Page 11!q Of Ordinance 1680144 F. Development plans for any conmon elements or facilities; Findings: The applicant has indicated a 5 -yew time frame for completion of the phases. However, the applicant has not indicated any specific time frame =or the completion of the common and trail areas shown on the master plan map. Staff believes that the applicant, should address the development and maintenance of the co=on/trail areas as part of any approval for the project. G. If the proposed subdivision has an unknown impact upon adjacent lands or lands within the general vicinity, the Planning Director or Hearings Body may require a potential development pattern for streets, bikeways and access corridors for adjoining lands to be submitted together with the tentative plan as part of the master development plan for the subject. subdivision. Findings: The proposed development does not appear to have an "unknown" impact on adjacent land or lands within the general vicinity. The subject development is considered low density development in an area with similar development characteristics. 5. Conformance with Section 17.16.060 of Title 17. 17.16.060 Master development plan - Approval. The Planning Director or Hearings Body shall review a master development plan at the same time the tentative plan for. the first phase is reviewed. The Planning Director or Hearings Body may approve, modify ox- disapprove rdisapprove the master plan and shall set forth findings for such decision. The Planning Director or Hearings Body may also attach conditions necessary to bring the plan into compliance with all applicable land use ordinances and policies. Any tentative plan submitted for the plan area shall conform to the master plan unless approved otherwise by the County. Master Plan approval shall be granted for a specified time period by the Planning Director or Hearings Body, and shall be included in the conditions of approval. CU--94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 25 Exhibit of E Page -c;-5 ofi 'f Ordinance -03 168 - 0145 Findings: The applicant has not submitter a tentative plat application for any of the four phases proposed in the master plan application. This decision will include recommended conditions of approval for the master plan. The master plan map indicates am approximate 5 -year project completion. The project should be allowed a 5 -year master ?lan approval, wh=ch should give the applicant a long enough time frame to complete the project. 6. Conformance with Section 17.16.100 of Title 17. The applicant has not submitted a tentative plat for any of the proposed phases within Skyliners Summit. However, the criteria under this section are relevant to the master plan approval. 17.16.100 Required findings for approval. A tentative plan for a proposed subdivision shall not be approved unless the Planning Director or Hearings Body finds that the subdivision as proposed or modified will meet the requirements of this title and Titles 18 through 21 of this code, and is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. Such findings shall include, but not be limited to, the following: A. The subdivision contributes to orderly development and land use patterns in the area, and provides for the preservation of natural features and resources such as streams, lakes, natural 'vegetation, special terrain features, agricultural and forest lands and other natural resources. Findings: The entire area of the proposed planned development should. contribute to orderly development and land use patterns in the area. The development will be occurring in an area zoned for residential use adjacent to developments with similar density and characteristics. The preservation of many of the trees in the area should be feasible, although there will'be removal of some trees, along with the ground cover, for roads, utilities and structures. There are no natural features, such as streams, lakes, special terrain features or agricultural or forest "lands that warrant special consideration. .The property does have a very steep slope in places and the applicant is proposing to have dwellings constructed on portions of the steep slope. CU-94':131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 26 Exhibit9 --F- -�T- Pa a .— of _YL 9 Ordinance 168 - 0146 Staff notes that there is a natural cira=nage swale on the northern portion of the property which may be affected by the proposed development. The swale has the potential for erosion and the development may help alleviate any erosion problems. B. The subdivision will not create excessive demand on public facilities and services, and utilities required to serve the development. Findings: The public facilities required to serve the development include the public roads, schools, parks and public buildings and places. The school district has reached an agreement between the developers of' Broken Top and the school district to update the agreement for Skyliners summit. The impacts on the roads in the area can be accommodated by constructing Mt. Washington Drive to full urban arterial standards as listed in foregoing findings. Additionally, the applicant shall be required to upgrade that portion of Skyliners Road adjacent to the subject property. The half -street full improvement as Skyliners Road will function as an urban arterial. The applicant has agreed to contribute toward traffic signals at intersections in the area. The cost estimates for these contributions are listed in a foregoing finding. The impacts on public parks in Bend from the proposed planned development will be taken care of by the imposition of systems development charges for parks. The public services required to serve the development would include police and fire protection, libraries and hospitals. The impact of the development on these services should not be significant enough to warrant any necessary conditions. The utility companies have not indicated that the proposed development would create excessive demand on their services. The City of Bend has indicated that the sewer and water master plan will need to be approved by the city. This will be required prior to any platting of lots within the development. This can be made a condition of approval. The applicant should consider providing mail delivery service in a centralized location, rather than having development where the postal service is required to deliver mail to each and every dwelling in the CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 27 10 F_ Exhibit Page 21 of Ordinance 7-�-- 168 °- 0147 development. A centralized location will reduce the postal service's costs and ease the bt:.=den of providing mail service to this development, especially given the topographic constraints and the number of cul de sacs. C. The tentative plan for meets the requirements Section 92.090. Findings: the proposed subdivision of Oreigon Revised Statutes ORS 92.090 (1) requires that a new suhdivision can only use the same name if,it is a contiruat_on of an existing subdivision, with a sequential numbering system, and must either be platted by the same party or have the consent of the previous party. The proposed subdivision name is not used anywhere else in the county. Subsection 2 requires that the streets and roads are laid out to conform with existing plats on acjoi:ning property, that streets and roads held for private use are clearly indicated on the tentative plan and all reservations or restrictions relating to such private roads and streets are set forth thereon. The subject, development will connect with Broken Top on the road referred to on the plan as MacKenzie Drive. The applicant will need to provide some documentation in writing, approved by the County, which provides for cross traffic between these two developments. The applicant has not indicated what the reservations or restrictions relating to the private roads will be. The applicant will need to address the private roads, and their usage, prior to approval of any tentative. plat within the project. Subsections 3, 4 and.5 relate to final platting. D. For subdivisions or portions thereof proposed within a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA) zone under Title 18 of the Deschutes County Code.... Findings: The above criterion is not applicable to, the subject development, as it is within the Bend urban growth boundary and is subject to Title 19 of the County Code. 7. Conformance with Section 17.16.105 of Title 17. 17.16.105 Access to subdivisions. Exhibit E CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 28 Page 917 of Ordinance 8. 168 - 0148 No proposed subdivision shall be approved unless it would be accessed by roads constructed to County standards and by roads accepted for maintenance responsibility by a unit of local or state government. This standard is met if the subdivision would have direct access to an improved collector or arterial, or in cases .There the subdivision has no direct access to such a collector or arterial, buy demonstrating that the road accessing the subdivision from a collector or arterial meets relevant County standards and has been accepted for maintenance purposes. Findings: The applicant is proposing to access the subdivision from both Mt. Washington Drive and Skyliners Road, which are currently maintained by the County. Full improvement to Mt. Washington Drive is warranted -from its current extension to Skyliners Road. The half -street improvement recommended by the City for Skyliners is the most logical method to provide sufficient capacity on Skyliners for this project. Conformance with Chapter 17.36, Design Standards of Title 17. a. Section 17.36.120, Street Names. Except for extensions of existing streets, no street name shall be used which will duplicate or be confused with the name of an existing street in a nearby city or in the County. Street names and numbers shall conform to the established pattern in the County. Findings: The County Property Address Coordinator has not indicated whether the proposed names are acceptable. All road names must be approved through him. The applicant will need to contact the PAC for approval of road names. b. Section 17.36.130, Sidewalks. A. Within an urban growth boundary, sidewalks are required to be installed on both sides of a public road or street and in any special way within the subdivision or partition, and along any collectors and arterials improved in accordance with the subdivision or partition approval. Subsections B and C are inapplicable to the proposed development. CU-94-131'/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 29 ExhibitE Page .40f Ordinance — 168 - 0149 Findings: The applicant is proposing a planned development, which allows for no sidewalks within the development. As previously stated in foregoing find-ngs, Staff believes that the roads within the expansion that are not cul de sacs should have la -foot wide separates bike/pedestrian paths for the safety and convenience of residents and possible guests. C. Section 17.36.145, Bicycle, Pedestrian and Transit Requirements. A. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation with Subdivision. 1. The tentative plan for a proposed'subdivision shall provide for bicycle and pedestrian routes, facilities and improvements within the subdivision and to nearby existing or planned neighborhood activity centers, such as schools, shopping areas and parks in a manner that will (a) minimize such - interference from automobile traffic that would. discourage pedestrian or cycle travel for short trips; (b) provide a direct route'of travel between destinations within the subdivision and existing or planned neighborhood activity centers, and and otherwise meet the needs of cyclists pedestrians, considering the destination and length of trip. Findings: With separated bicycle/pedestrian paths required along all roads within the development that are not cul de sacs, the development will provide for bicycle and pedestrian needs. Additionally, the walking paths and trails proposed will. also provide for pedestrian needs, specifically exercise or nature walks. The roads leading to the development will provide access to downtown Bend and other activity centers. 2. Subdivision layout. ` (a) Cul-de-sacs or dead-end streets shall be allowed only where, due to topographical or environmental constraints, the size and shape of the parcel, or a lack of through -street connections in the area, a street connection is determined by the Planning Director or Hearings Body to be infeasible or inappropriate. In such instances, where applicable and feasible, there shall be a bicycle and pedestrian connection connecting the ends of cul-de CU=94 `:131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 30 Exhibit Page 3 D of Ordinance - 03 168 - 0160 -sacs to streets or neighborhood activity centers on the opposite side of the block. (b) Bicycle and pedestrian connections between streets shall be provided at mid -block where the addition of a connection would reduce the walking or cycling distance to an existing or planned neighborhood activity center by 400 feet and by at least 50 percent over other available routes. (c) Local roads shall align and connect with themselves across collectors and arterials. .Connections to existing or planned streets and undeveloped properties shall be provided at no greater than 400 foot intervals. (d) Connections shall not be more than 400 feet long and shall be as straight as possible. Findings: The proposed planned development has twelve cul de sacs. The cul de sacs referred to as nos. 3, 8, 9, 10, 11 and Tillinghast Court, are short enough (less than 400 feet) to allow pedestrians or bicyclists to enter the roads with minimal distances. These cul de sacs also have' a topography which will not create steep slopes. Cul de sac no. 1 should not have slope problems and will be approximately 600 feet long. No. 2 may have a steep slope which could require a variance; it is also 600 feet long. No. 4 runs from Tillinghast Loop to the highest point on the property; this road could also require a variance to the 12 percent slope. No. 5 appears to have as much as 30 feet of elevation difference between the bulb and the intersection with Tillinghast Loop; the grade of this road is approximately 6.6 percent. No. 6 runs somewhat parallel to the contour lines and some adjustment to the road is likely at the time of engineering design; it is also 600 feet long. No. 7 appears to run parallel to the contour lines and is approximately 550 feet long. Cul de sacs have been discouraged by the somewhat recent (2 years ago) adoption of the new transportation planning rule which implements Goal 12 of the Statewide Planning Goals. The idea behind discouraging and not allowing cul de sacs was to promote alternative modes of transportation which can be better accomplished through a grid street system. Given the topography of the subject property, and the approximately 173 feet of elevation difference, some cul de sacs are warranted for the project. The applicant is proposing to connect three of the bulbs (nos. 7, 8 and Tillinghast Court) with a paved path; and five of the CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 31 Exhibit E Page_ of 14 Ordinance -0-31 - 168 - 0151, bulbs (9, 10, 11, 4 and 6) with unpaved paths. With the use of these paths and the relatively shcrt connections to the main roads within the development, alternative modes of transportation, such as pedestrian and bicycles should be available for residents within the de:-elopment. People walking for exercise will have opportunities for this in safety if in fact the trails are co.str=cted. With the through roads provided, Colt -r=ive, Tillinghast Loop, Crump Drive, Ross Drive and _�lac{enzie Drive, and with separated bicycle/pedestrian paths required along these roads, that alternative modes o= transportation will be encouraged. The Colt Drive connection to Skyliners Road will provide a direct route frcm'ithe development to downtown Bend. 3. Facilities and Improvements. (a) Bikeways may be provided by either a separate paved path or an on -street bike lane, consistent with the requirements of this title. (b) Pedestrian access may be provided by sidewalks or a separate paved path, consistentwith the requirements of this title. (c) Connections shall have a 20-footlright of way, with at least a 10 -foot usable surface.. Findings: Staff finds that the roads within this'expansion that are not cul de sacs should have separated bike/ pedestrian paths and be made a'condition of approval. d. Section 17.36.1.60, Easements. Utility easements. Easements shall be provided along property lines when necessary for 'the placement of overhead or underground utilities, and to provide the subdivision or partition with electric power, communication facilities, street lighting, sewer lines, water lines, gas lines or drainage. Such easements shall be labeled "Public Utility Easement" on the tentative and final plat. Findings: It is unclear at this time what utility easements may be necessary to serve the proposed development. The power, phone, gas and cable utilities requested no specific utility easements. Staff recommends that a condition be Y CU=94T131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 32 Exhibit Page. p Ordinance _r 168 0152 included with the approval requiring any necessary utility easement be included on the final plats for the development. e. Section 17.36.170, Lots - Size and shape. The size, width and orientation of lots or parcels shall be appropriate for the location of the land division and/or the type of development and use contemplated, and shall be consistent with the lot or parcel size provisions of Titles 18 through 21 of this code. Findings: The applicant has not submitted a tentative plat for any of the lots within the project. Any plat submitted must meet the requirements of this section. f. Section 17.36.210, Solar access performance. As much solar access as feasible shall be provided each lot or parcel in every new subdivision or partition, considering topography, development pattern and existing vegetation. Findings: The proposed development will conform _with the solar standards of Title 19. Some of the lots within this development may have solar constraints based on the steep topography. Some of the constraints can be lessened with either roads or common areas to the north side of burdened lots. There may also be lots which qualify for a solar shade exemption due to existing vegetation. g. Section 17.36.220, Underground facilities. Within an urban growth boundary, all permanent utility services to lots or parcels in a subdivision or partition shall be provided from underground facilities. Staff findings: As indicated in a foregoing finding, the applicant is proposing underground utilities for the expansion. h. Section 17.36.250, Lighting. Within an urban growth boundary, the subdivider shall provide underground wiring to County standards, and a base for any proposed ornamental street lights at locations approved by the affected utility company. CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 33 Exhibit Page 33 of Ordinance 99-D3 16 E; 015 3' Findings: The applicant has indicated that any street lighting provided, would be downlights insz-al_ed in trees. The General Plan and subdivision ordLmance do not require street lights. It .appears to de:end on people's preference. Street lighting can promote safety, especially in hillside areas such as t:ais where ice can form on steep slopes and create 'azardous driving conditions. i. Section 17.36.260, Fire hazards.. Whenever possible, a minimum of two points of access to the subdivision or partition shall be provided to provide assured access for emergency vehicles and ease resident evacuation. Findings: The proposed development has two main accesses to Mt. Washington Drive, and one to Skyliners Road. No problems with emergency vehicle access or resident evacuation are envisioned with the proposed layout. j. Section 17.36.280, Water and sewer lines. Where required by the applicable zoning ordinance, water and sewer lines shall be constructed°to county and city standards and specifications. Required water mains and service lines shall be installed prior to the curbing and paving of new streets in all new subdivisions or partitions. Findings: The applicant will be required to meet all City requirements for the installation of sewer and water facilities to the expansion. 9. Conformance with Chapter 17.40 of Title 17, Improvements. In addition to other requirements, „improvements to be installed by the applicant, either as a requirement of this title or other applicable regulations or at his own option, shall conform to the requirements of this chapter. Findings: The applicant will need to meet all improvement standards required by the Findings and Decision' established by the Hearings Officer, or on appeal, by the Board of County CU-94.'-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 34 Exhibit Page_ Ordinance.=0.31— 168 .0154 Commissioners. 10. Conformance with Chapter 17.44, Park Development. Findings: New developments within the Bend urban area are now subject to systems development charges for parks. PLAN AMENDMENT/ZONE _CHANGE -FINDINGS: 1. The applicant has submitted an application for a plan amendment to remove the Industrial Park designation from that portion of the property located in the southwest one-quarter of section 36 of Township 17 S, Range 11 E, that is south of Skyliners Road. The applicant has taken a position, within the body of the conditional use permit burden of proof statement on pages 17-18, that the plan designation for an industrial park zone was intended only as a possible future location for some type of park -like industrial setting, and that it was not intended as any sort of mandatory plan designation. The applicant is correct in stating that the plan does not have mandatory language with respect to this designation. The Plan language which established this designation is on page 50 of the updated Plan as follows: Industrial park areas are intended to accommodate those industrial or distribution uses which seek fully improved sites and protection against incompatible industrial uses, and are willing to abide by site improvement requirements and performance standards. These areas should provide industrial sites in a park -like environment. Industrial park sites recommended on the Plan are located east of the Sisters Highway south of Cooley Road, and another is located west of Overturf Butte in the vicinity of Skyliners Road. The Skyliners Road development would be_ within the Phase II sewer boundary as it now exists or it may be determined that service can be extended. It shall be tied into one or both of the major new streets crossing the river; Colorado and/or Arthur Avenue. It shall meet the highest environmental standards, and the design of the park shall contain an undeveloped vegetative buffer between the industrial uses and any adjoining development. The uses contemplated for this area would not include any use emitting any obnoxious odor, even though such might be within the existing State Department of Environmental Quality standards. Under the Industrial Areas - Statements of Intent of the Plan is the following policy: CU-94-13,1'/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 35 Exhibit Page 35 of Ordinance g'03 I 168 -.0155 1. Industrial areas shall be provi3ed for new industry in a park -like setting. The Hearings Officer finds that the ?la- designation was written into the Plan language and a Plan Map was drafted and adopted by the City and County. The Plan can not be ignored with respect to a designatio^.. he proper method to correct the applicant's property with respect to the Plan designation is to amend it throuc_ the appropriate application. Consequently, the play a=endment to remove this designation will be used. The applicant has addressed the Play designation change for the Industrial Park on pages 8-13 of the burden of proof statement for the plan change. =he applicant has adequately addressed the plan change criteria which are listed on page 69 of the Plan as follows: "Plan changes shall be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and statements of intent of the Plan, or these guidelines shall be first changed or amended to reflect new policies. An individual requesting a change shall demonstrate that the change ;is warranted due to changed conditions, a mistake,' !or other specific facts that demonstrate a public need and benefit for the change." The applicant applied for and obtained!! approval of a plan amendment for the original Broken Top development to move an approximately 80 -acre portion of the same Industrial Park reserve designation to William Miller's property north of Skyliners Road. Since this pian designation was completed, it does not make sense'; from a planning standpoint to have only a small portion of an Industrial. Park reserve area located on the south' side of Skyliners Road. Additionally, the topography of this property would not be conducive to any type of industrial development. The Hearings Officer adopts the applicant's findings for the plan designation change on this property. 2. The applicant has requested a Plan Amendment to adjust the location of the urban growth boundary along a small. portion of the subject property. The applicant has addressed the Oregon Administrative Rule requirements for taking an' exception to Statewide Planning Goal 14, Urbanization, on pages 13-16 of the burden of proof statement for the Plan Amendment. The Hearings Officer concurs with the applicant that the burden of proof for an even transfer of land inside and outside of the UGB is lessened, as opposed to an increase or decrease in the amount of land within a UGB. The Hearings Officer finds that the applicant has adequately addressed OAR 660-04-010 CU-94=13E'/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 36 Exhibit Page Ordinance 168 - 0156 (1) (c) (B) (i -iv) and recommends adoption of the applicant's findings on the goal exception for the urban growth boundary change. 3. The applicant has also applied for a zone change to affect the urban growth boundary change listed above. The area that is currently zoned UAR-10 is proposed to be changed to RS, and the area that is currently RS is proposed to be changed to UAR-10. The applicant is proposing an even exchange of land inside and outside of the UGB (12.8 acres). The changes requested are based mainly upon topographic considerations as outlined on pages 4-5 of the plan amendment/zone change burden of proof. The applicant has addressed the zone change criteria of Section 19.116.030 of Title 19 on pages 16-18 of the plan amendment/zone change burden of proof. The applicant has adequately addressed the criteria. For item E, That there is a proof of a change in circumstance or a mistake in the original zoning, add the following: The development of Broken Top directly south, and the. urban growth boundary change obtained through the approval of that project, has affected what will take place as far as development for Skyliners Summit. This includes topographical considerations and road locations. The Hearings Officer does not find that there was an actual mistake in the zoning, but rather little or no consideration was given to topography and surrounding development at the time the Plan was written in the mid 19701s. As indicated in a foregoing finding, the topography on the Skyliners Summit property varies by as much as 178 feet. This area had no topographical mapping in the 1970's and zoning boundaries were generally drawn along section lines. With the development of Broken Top, there is a change of circumstances not foreseen when the zoning was established. BASED UPON the foregoing, the Hearings Officer hereby APPROVES the master plan subject to the following conditions: 1. The platting of the property within this Planned Unit Development shall recognize the minimum of 292 \ dwelling units. 2. The applicant shall relocate the intersection of Colt Road and Skyliner Drive consistent with the Master Plan Revision No. 2 map submitted by the applicant. 3. All utilities within the development shall be underground, unless otherwise requested by the CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 37 Exhibit Page d of 41 Ordinance 9$-0.31 168 - 0157, utilities. 157- utilities. 4. The applicant shall dedicate 8C feet of right of way for Mt. Washington Drive. The applicant shall improve Mt. Washington Drive frcn Troon Drive to Skyliners Road to full urban arserial standards, including 48 feet of paverent width, 10 -inch aggregate base, 3 inches A.C. pavi:g, concrete curbs and sidewalks on both sides, and appropriate drainage as required by the County Public Works Department. All road design and construction plans and the construction of the read shall require review and approval from the County Public Works Department. A Title Report for the road dedication shall be submitted prior to any`acceptance by the County of the right of way. The Mt. Washington Drive road improvement shall be completed prior to the platting of any lots within Skyliners Summit. As sidewalks will be required cn Mt. Washington Drive, the applicant may eliminate the bicycle/pedestrian path that would be duplicative of the sidewalk. 5. The applicant shall improve ,Skyliners Road to a half -street improvement for an urban arterial, including 24 feet from the centerline, a curb and sidewalk alongthe subject property, appropriate drainage mechanisms required by County Public Works, and the overlay required by Public Works. This road improvement shall be required prior to the platting of phase four.' The applicant shall dedicate right of way to 40 feet from the centerline for Skyliners Road. 6. The roads within the development ;;which are not cul de sacs and which are two-way through streets shall be constructed to a 28 -foot standard, with a 6 -inch aggregate base with two inches of A.C. paving and two foot shoulders. Bicycle paths a minimum of 10 feet wide with a 4 -inch aggregate base and two inches of A.C. paving shall be constructed along all of these roads. \ 7. The cul-de-sacs within the development shall be constructed to a 24 -foot paved° standard, 6 -inch aggregate base, 2 inches A.C. paving.' The radius shall be a minimum of 50 feet. 8. Any one-way through streets and',j private driveway connections proposed shall be :reviewed by the Planning Division in conjunction with the Bend Fire Department. If allowed, they'„ shall meet the CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 38 Exhibit Page 3 of Ordinance ' o 1 613 - 0158 standards specified in the applicant's burden of proof statement on addendum pages B-1 through B-4, or as otherwise approved by the County and/or City. 9. All roads within the development shall be required to meet AASHTO standards. 10. The applicant shall submit to the City of Bend appropriate financial assurances for the following intersections: Skyliners and Mt. Washington ($5,590); Simpson and 14th ($10,920); Galveston and 14th ($16,770). These amounts shall be submitted_ prior to the platting of any phases within the development. 11. The applicant shall provide documentation for maintenance of all roads, paths and trails within the development to the County. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be filed at the. time of platting of the first phase within the planned development. 12. The planned development shall be granted a 5 -year master plan approval to complete all platting and common facilities improvements. 13. The Colt Drive connection to Skyliners Road shall require review and approval from the County Public Works Department. 14. Skyliners Summit shall be subject to Systems Development Charges for parks. i 15. The applicant shall submit Water and Sewer Master Plans to the City of Bend for approval. No tentative plat shall be approved until the water and sewer approved by the City of Plan. 16. The applicant shall execute an appropriate easement in favor of Deschutes County and/or the City of Bend for public use of the trail system within the proposed development. The easement shall provide that the public shall have the same rights of access to the trail system as residents of the development. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PLAN AMENDMENT/ZONE CHANGE: 1. The applicant shall submit legal descriptions for the plan amendment/zone change boundary adjustment to the Planning Division prior to adoption of the changes. CU-94-131/PA-94-6/ZC-94-7Page 39 �C Exhibit Page 3—ofi Ordinance 3 168 0159 . 2. The applicant shall provide the ne^essary maps for the above changes, including the indust;ia: park plan amendment, as required by the Planr-ing Division. DATED this 24th day of April, 1995. EDWARD P. FITCH Hearings Officer cc: Robert S. Lovlien William T. Criswell Paul Blikstad Patsy Hovick Carole Nuckton Shawn M. Edlund Bob Bobosky Sharon Criswell Dave Alden Gloria and Bob Matthews Daniel Caldwell Dick Johnson Michael D. Wilson Deborah McMahon Tom Walker *\epf\skyliner\decision CU-947131/PA-94-5/ZC-94-7Page 40 Exhibit Page Of Ordinance —� 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 168 - 0160 EXHIBITS Application. Master Plan of Skyliner Summit. :Drawings from David Evans & Associates. Rittelson & Associates traffic report dated October 1994. Applicant's Burden of Proof Statement. Sharon Criswell letter dated November 21, 1994. Applicant's letter dated February 6, 1995, with waterline maps from David Evans & Associated therewith. County Staff Report. City of Bend Staff Report. Vicinity map. Revised Master Plan. Tentative plat for Skyliner Summit Phase II -A. :Deschutes County Bicycle Advisory Committee memorandum dated :February 7, 1995. Moon letter dated February 7, 1995. John Rexford letter dated January 7, 1995. Agreement for Contributions to School Site Acquisition Costs. Mike Wilson letter dated February 7, 1995. Kittelson & Associates letter dated February ].Notice of Hearing. Affidavit of Publication. Dick Johnson memo dated February 21, 1995. Criswell letter dated February 28, 1995. :Govlien letter dated'February 7, 1995. Master Plan revision #2 Skyliner Summit. Lovlien letter dated February 28, 1995. Blikstad memo dated February 2, 1995. Dave Alden memo dated March 8, 1995. Criswell letter dated March 9, 1995. ]Govlien letter dated March 10, 1995. Patsy Hovick letter dated February 28, 1995. :Govlien letter dated February 13, 1995. •\skyllner\exhibits 7, 1995.. EXHIBIT "A" fil E: Page 1 Exhibit Page 4/ of Ordinance 9S"03