Loading...
2003-208-Minutes for Meeting March 19,2003 Recorded 3/26/2003DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL II III I I! II IIIIIIII IIIIIIII za I C ERKDS ^j 2003■2+6 0312612003 02:47:39 PM DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK CERTIFICATE PAGE This page must be included if document is re-recorded. Do Not remove from original document. Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1130 NW Harriman St., Bend, OR 97701-1947 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 388-4752 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF LAND USE DECISION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19, 2003 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building 1130 NW Harriman St., Bend This meeting was held for the Board of Commissioners to make its decision on Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3. The applicants are Oregon Water Wonderland II Sewer District, represented by Attorney Ed Fitch. The applicants are requesting a comprehensive plan amendment from Forest to Rural Residential Exception Area, and a zone change from Forest Use (F2) to Rural Residential (RR -10), and the application of a Limited Use (LU) Combining Zone. The request also includes exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals 4 (Forest) and 11 (Public Facilities and Services). Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Tom De Wolf and Michael M. Daly. Also present were George Read, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel, and twelve citizens. No representatives of the media were in attendance. Chair Dennis Luke opened the meeting at 11: 03 a.m. DENNIS LUKE: We're going to open, or reopen, or continue the hearing on the application regarding the sewer district in Oregon Water Wonderland. Does staff have anything to bring up? Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 1 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) GEORGE READ: For the record, George Read. We're here today to make a decision on a plan amendment and zone change as noticed for the meeting. I won't go through all the details, because this isn't a hearing; this is basically the time that the Board set to make a decision on this. Staff s recommendation is for the Board to consider the facts, discuss them, and make a decision on the particular issues that came up. I think we need to address those in order for findings to be prepared. We need to know what you are using to make this decision; what you are rely on in the record, and we can kind of help you through that. And then our final recommendation will be to have the applicant's attorney prepare the final decision for the Board. Then the Board will consider that decision and agree, or not agree and amend it, at a later date. Our recommendation is to direct the applicant's attorney to prepare the written decision. LUKE: He has some land use experience and has been able to do that kind of thing? READ: Yes. LUKE: Does Legal Counsel have anything else to add? Or do you agree with this? LAURIE CRAGHEAD: Do you mean, do I agree with what the process is? Yes. Technically, you need to close the hearing, as it is not a hearing, and was not noticed. The process is for coming to a decision of the Board. LUKE: Okay, we'll close the hearing I never opened because there wasn't really a hearing. This is actually just a meeting of the County Commissioners to make a tentative decision based on Oregon Water Wonderland's application. Just a little bit of review. We have two choices -- I guess we pretty much have three choices. The two main choices are if the sewage would go to Sunriver. Or, we would go to the other section that is in the original application. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 2 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) There was some testimony, and a couple of points. One was from the road district that maintains the roads through the proposed piece of property they are going to expand onto, asking for some type of agreement to help with the maintenance - not the full maintenance - of the road over a period of years. And there was also testimony about a conservation easement, and how a conservation easement of the expansion property would be maintained. Were there any other points that were brought up of concern here? Besides, of course there were some concerns of the surrounding citizens on using that piece of property for various environmental reasons. READ: Staff has prepared a staff report and addressed the criteria. The criteria really boiled down to if there was an alternative. The only one that was really brought up was Sunriver. I guess the other alternative was not to build it, but there was a lot of evidence that this is needed. You've heard that, and I don't think that is an issue. The other issue that we need to address that we raised in the staff s criteria was related to impacts on the surrounding area. There are specific criteria relating to effects on the surrounding area. You don't need to mitigate all of them, but you have to consider methods to mitigate effects on the surrounding area. So, we've heard also some testimony at the last meeting - and there was some submitted into the record before the close of the written record regarding the financial liability of the district. We may want to talk just a little bit about this, because it really wasn't brought up earlier. The testimony and written testimony was addressed by the applicant's attorney on that issue. In a nutshell, Dennis is right. There was the road district issue, neighbor issues, wildlife issues, process issues raised by 1,000 Friends of Oregon in terms of whether the criteria had been adequately addressed, and then the issue of whether this is a reasonable alternative. And you can consider economic issues. LUKE: Are there any questions of Commissioner Daly or Commissioner DeWolV READ: My recommendation is to start with each topic and discuss it. The first issue is, where are we on this? Then we can go from there. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 3 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) CRAGHEAD: The issues are, does it fit the criteria for an exception to Goal 4 and Goal 11. LUKE: I think there has been a demonstrated need to expand the system. The system clearly, in my view, is overloaded. I think they've done a very good job of providing that information. The fact that they were able to get the Forest Service to release this piece of property for this requires a pretty good demonstrated need for this process. Goal 4 is? CRAGHEAD: Forest land protection. And Goal 11 is public facilities, that you can't put public facilities on resource land. So you need an exception to that. LUKE: I think there is a need for the facility. I think it is clear that the Sunriver Homeowners Association and some of the costs that came through on the Sunriver option show that that Sunriver people are not interested in this. Although Sunriver Corporation might be. Sunriver Homeowners has a very big impact on what happens in that area, as they should, because they are the majority of landowners there now. So I'm not sure that is really a viable option or alternative for them. The alternative of not doing anything kind of brings up the possibility of pollution of the water in a very sensitive area down there. You've got the Little Deschutes and the Big Deschutes rivers, and all that flows this way. In some areas you've got high groundwater. That could cause all kinds of problems. Again, I think the need has been demonstrated, so the option to do nothing I don't think is there. I agree with the road district, and I think there probably should be an agreement between the sewer district and the road district on future maintenance of that road. And I believe there should be a conservation easement to address the resource land issue. Because it's not going to take the whole portion of ground for that system, the district has indicated their willingness to clear some of the fire hazards out of there and to maintain that in a professionally manner so the trees and the wildlife can flourish in that area, and I think it's very good of them to step forward and be willing to do that to protect that area down there. Did I cover everything you wanted to cover? Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 4 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) CRAGHEAD: I just want to make sure we've covered the exception criteria. The factors that there are reasons that justify areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use. LUKE: What kind of reasons would those be, in your opinion? CRAGHEAD: I'm not the decision -maker. LUKE: I know that. But what kind of reasons should I be looking at? CRAGHEAD: It says, "exceptions shall set forth facts and assumptions used as the basis for determining that the state policy of the Goal shall not apply to specific properties or situations, including the amount of land for the use being planned, and why the use requires the location on resource land." DEWOLF: But in general, we could state our support and belief that this exists, and then direct staff to develop specific criteria around that decision, right? We're not lawyers, and we're not planners. But it seems obvious to me that a subdivision that was planned before land use existed, and is creating potential problems on resource land, has to have a solution. It's obvious to me, and logic would indicate that it is reasonable to do this. Maybe I can jump in. The applicant has done a good job in the burden of proof statement on that issue. Staff recognized that in the staff report. I don't believe there is any evidence to the contrary in the record. So I think you can just rely on that in directing and use of staff, and we're suggesting the applicant's attorney, in preparing those findings, based on those things. Because I don't think that "need" issue or the location issue showed that there is another option. DEWOLF: Great. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 5 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) CRAGHEAD: What I was going to say is that it is just a matter of directing the fact that there is sufficient evidence in the record. DEWOLF: So you were just being mean to Dennis there. CRAGHEAD: No. I was just listing the criteria to make sure it's on the record that the Board has reviewed these criteria. LUKE: The file we have that was prepared by the applicant, and supplemented by staff, was done very well. It covered all of my questions on why this was needed down there, how it would fit into the area, and what the exceptions were. DEWOLF: And I would just want to make sure that when we do this, the conditions that we are putting on here jive with what's being discussed in terms of the conservation easement, and $100,000 being committed the first year, and $5,000 per year for the next ten years after. I would just want to clarify that an endowment should be used like an endowment. You don't put $5,000 into an endowment and then take $4,000 out of the corpus of that fund. That it be operated as an endowment, so it's there for the future. And I don't know that $50,000 is much of an endowment in the long run. That's $2,500 per year at 5%, after it is fully built. That may be an area that we may want to discuss, on how much of that $100,000 is needed in that first year, and how much could go to begin an endowment. That's the one area of this that was muddy, and I think we need some clarification. LUKE: One of the things I was going to suggest, if the Commissioners agree that we need to go forward with this site, is that there will be a site plan review process after this is done. And I was going to suggest that an agreement with the road district and the conservation easement plan be submitted by the applicant during the site plan review process, and the County review that. George, is that an administrative hearing, or a public hearing? Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 6 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) I'i Generally those types of things could go either way. Something that has had a hearing like this, if there are any issues remaining they could be done administratively. There is an opportunity for an appeal of that, and of course we would do notice and we would look at all of the testimony that was submitted before we make a decision as to whether or not to have a hearing. LUKE: Everyone who testified or submitted written testimony would be noticed of the site plan review? We could. The site plan review would require a notice of about 750 from the outside boundary of the property. Beyond that we wouldn't normally do that; however, if you directed us to, we could notify everybody who has been a party to this issue. LUKE: If there are two other things to come in, if the Commissioners agree and we get an agreement with the road district and you get the conservation easement plan, I would think you would want to notify everyone who testified. READ: That can be a condition. LUKE: There can't be that many people. Everybody who testified, is that what you are saying? And submitted written testimony? LUKE: Yes. That's just my suggestion. READ: In addition to our required notice. That's not a problem. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 7 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DEWOLF: I just want to make sure that the basic parameters are outlined in advance, so that we go into this with an understanding that everybody is up front on where we're heading. I don't want to leave everything until later. LUKE: Are you suggesting that in the findings? DEWOLF: Yeah. LUKE: So they would have to have the conservation easement plan done? DEWOLF: Just the broad parameters. The kind of dollars we are talking about; it doesn't have to be the plan. LUKE: Okay. DALY: What does the conservation easement going to accomplish? I know there has been a lot of cleanup to start with, and that's why they were suggesting $100,000. And that's for cleaning up what people have been using as a dumping ground over past years, and whatever. And I suppose the next thing would be the balance of the money -- would that continue to clean up more garbage as it's dumped, or what is it supposed to do in the future? That's a good question. Conservation easements are used by the County on a regular basis; along the river and in sensitive areas, and to maintain things that need to be maintained. They run to the County, and they designate certain obligations of a property owner. They say you can do these things, but not those things. So they put a restriction on use, basically a deed restriction on the property. They also are used to say who is responsible for the maintenance and how that might be paid for. I have our typical conservation easement here, and it doesn't necessarily -- it generally makes it an obligation of the owner. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 8 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) The issues raised, both by the Planning Commission, lead by Brenda Pace; and the 1,000 Friends of Oregon letter, is that these things tend to fall by the wayside and are not followed up on. And the County isn't great, as we get lots of conservation easements, and knowing where they all are and going through to make sure they are taken care of. So, the theory is that if it runs to somebody else, to a third party, or a private, non- profit, that they do abetter job of monitoring these things. So that seems to be what the debate is. Because the district said great, we'll do it, we just don't want to give it to somebody else; we'll just take care of it. What the district proposed was $100,000 for the initial cleanup and $5,000 a year after that. DEWOLF: For ten years. The whole idea of an endowment is that it is in perpetuity, and if you say put $100,000 or $150,000 in the bank, it generates something like 5% interest a year, so you'd have $7,500 to spend on this. The district has kind of approached it differently, although, if you read the last line in the district's letter regarding that, I believe they say that the district has no objection also to the requirement at this time of funding it to a level of $150,000. So, I think what would be good is to state what level it should be funded at. I think the record indicates that somewhere in that vicinity, and endowment of generally 5% on $150,000, or $7,500, somewhere in that vicinity is adequate to maintain it. I think the district wants to do a bunch of work up front, which might cut down on the ongoing maintenance. DALY: I guess that is my biggest question. Once you get a lot of this work done up front, cleaned up the garbage, whatever, and then you are actively using that property, I mean, what else needs to be done? Are they going to go in there and thin for fire? How much money is going to be needed every year to, and I guess we are just going to have to guess at what's going to happen. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 9 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: I think some of the things they talked about were that there has to be some mowing where they irrigate, and there would be some additional tree planting, and trees die, they come and go, so they have to maintain the ground and get some more trees growing back in there, maybe some different kinds of trees, and reduce fire danger since they are in a high fire danger area down there, as things dry out. CRAGHEAD: And noxious weeds. DEWOLF: And having $2,500 a year, if we get back to the point where endowments are making 5%, does not go a long way. I mean, this is something that can be used creatively, with volunteer efforts, and it doesn't cost the district a ton, but it establishes that. And it is in their best interest to keep this place in great shape, and if they see they want to make that endowment larger, they can make that choice to expand it later on. But what we're doing here is just having a minimal understanding to protect the ground, the habitat, and like you mentioned fire suppression and that sort of thing. It gives them that option, and they have offered to do it up front. '_:I One thing I need to correct, Commissioner Luke. Part of where they are going to irrigate would be maintained on a regular basis. They have to hay that in order to get rid of the nitrogen. But the rest of the property needs to be maintained. And I think Brenda Pace's evidence in the record basically said that there was the invasive species -- the weed issue; and fire management; and wildlife. These are the primary ones that I think we are trying to mitigate for. Again, where this requirement comes from is actually a criterion that we are supposed to try to mitigate with conditions. That is one of the exception criteria. So I'm going to say that I think you can identify what things you want to mitigate, and I think you can say that the amount of money can be pretty much what everybody has agreed to, somewhere around $100,000 or $150,000, or what that generate on an ongoing basis. I mean, the district has offered $100,000 up front and $5,000 per year. So if that's in the ballpark, I would suggest that you ask for findings to kind of formalize what those things are. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 10 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) I think maybe talk in general terms about what those things should go for, that those would become part of a conservation easement, and then you need to make a decision as to who the conservation easement runs to, whether it's the County or to some other organization, a private non-profit. Let me just say, another thing we have done in the past on this monitoring thing, because you are right, we don't have the staff to go look on a regular basis, we have in other situations, for example Crosswater Golf Course required annual reports, done by somebody who is not connected with the district, on the status and kind of a recommendation of what needs to be done to address these issues. That might also be a way to address the concern that this easement run to a private non-profit. The district said they weren't interested. DALY: I'm a little bit concerned, you know. A conservation easement runs to a private, non-profit. Are you saying we need to set up another entity out here just to administer that conservation easement? Is that what you are suggesting? READ: There are a lot of organizations that do that on a regular basis. LUKE: One of the things that I talked with Legal Counsel separately about, not with the other two Commissioners, because that was a land use action and I couldn't do that, I want that on the record. The conservation easement could run to the County and then, through an agreement with the district, if they chose in their plan to run it to a non-profit, the County could then let that, or give their authority to, that non-profit, just in case the non-profit went away for some reason. Because if you give the easement directly to a non-profit and for some reason it ceases to function, then twenty-five years from now, what do you have? DALY: Give me an example of a non-profit that would do this. READ: Deschutes Basin Land Trust. DALY: They would basically keep track of what's going on down there? Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 11 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) They get money and agree to monitor, basically. DALY: I didn't know that we had those people out there that would do that. LUKE: It's not a big project. They'd probably have to go out there once a year and do a survey, and see what has been done and needs to be done. One suggestion is, I think you could state that is the intention, that it be monitored and let the applicant bring a proposal forward at the time of site plan review, if you set what the parameters are. And we'll look at that, as long as you tell us that it is for these things, that you want it monitored, and the amount spent should be somewhere in this range. I think as part of the site plan the applicant could bring forward a package, and we could see if it's adequate. DALY: Are we suggesting that we don't trust the applicants to monitor their own property? DEWOLF: It's the same reason you have a contract with people, Mike. DALY: I'm asking George. DEWOLF: All of these people are going to be dead and gone, and we're going to be gone and dead somewhere. The idea is that this is protected for our grandchildren. I mean, they've agreed to it, we've agreed to it, I don't understand why you are the lone voice here, making this into this huge battleground. They've agreed to it. They want to do it. They proposed it. It's not a burden. DALY: I'm not making a battleground, Tom. I'm trying to understand. I don't understand why you would object to me asking the questions. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 12 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: I asked that same question, I think, during the hearing, when Brenda Pace was testifying. They are elected officials, and Tom makes a good point. We'll be gone, and most of the people in this room will be gone someday or will move somewhere, and you'll have different people in place. I think the groups that are concerned about the easement, and I think the district, too, want to make sure that it goes on and they do what they set forth in their proposal. It's just that the County clearly does not have the staff or the energy to go out and monitor these things. So the proposal from the Planning Commission was that someone either administer it or monitor it. I tend to agree with George; I wouldn't mind putting in there that it be monitored. How that happens would come in the proposal from the district. They would figure that out. We would have the option to review that if we aren't happy with it; we have the right then to ask that something else be done. I think the district needs to sit down and work with the different groups and figure out what they want, and what is best for that area down there. We'd give them the parameters to work from. CRAGHEAD: Just for clarification's sake, so we all know we are talking about the same thing. According to the letter from the applicant, and I think George has already said it, they are preparing to fund $100,000 up front, which means they will spend the $100,000 in the first year, so there will be nothing in the endowment fund until the next year, when they put $5,000 in. DEWOLF: Unless they don't expend $100,000. And then the balance would begin the endowment. CRAGHEAD: I just want to make sure that's clear. LUKE: But you could have a contractor go in there and get it all done, and it only costs $50,000. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 13 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) CRAGHEAD: Then the rest would go into the endowment fund. LUKE: They'll spend up to $100,000. What they don't spend between the actual cost and the $100,000 would go into the endowment fund. And then that would be supplemented by $5,000 per year. Is that what we understand? READ: That's my understanding. One other thing, I forgot to mention. It is in the Planning Commission record. One of the other concerns was, and questions were raised, the Forest Service actually, in its environmental assessment to grant the property, said that these uses could be maintained. One of the concerns was that, yeah, they would be maintained, I mean the environmental assessment said that. So, I think I'd also refer to what the Forest Service said. There were some other issues the Forest Service raised, and said those would be taken care of because the district will maintain it. I think I would refer to those as the issues that should be addressed. LUKE: In the findings. Well, yeah, or in the ultimate resolution, the issues that need to be taken care of with the funding are those issues that are articulated both in the record here and by the Forest Service. DEWOLF: What Ed (Fitch) brings back, we can just compare with what those are. LUKE: The Forest Service would be notified of the hearing anyway, wouldn't they? They'll receive notice ultimately. Yeah. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 14 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Any other concerns or questions? DALY: I'm afraid to say anything. DEWOLF: I'll shut up. Go ahead. LUKE: Would either Laurie or George tell us what you believe we've just instructed the applicant's counsel to do? CRAGHEAD: From what I've heard here, you are considering approving the application, and that it has met both the exceptions criteria and County criteria for exceptions to Goal 4 and Goal 11. That one of the conditions you would like is that the applicant provide a conservation easement to the property that runs to the County, but that the conservation easement plan to be included would be filed and submitted at the time of site plan review, at which time the Community Development staff shall notify everyone who testified at this hearing, including the appropriate state agencies, regarding the conservation plan and site plan application. You have also discussed the condition that the applicant must submit at the time of site plan application an agreement with the road district for the operation and maintenance of the road district -- Foster Road, the Beaver Special Road District. LUKE: Do you think that meets all of the criteria, did we discuss it all? The one thing we need a little more direction on is what is supposed to happen with the special road district. One thing I should have mentioned, there was a letter from Mark Halvorsen on behalf of the road district, but it was submitted late. It came in the 7th, and the hearing date closed on the 5th. You did not get that document, you weren't allowed. LUKE: He did testify, though. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 15 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) The problem is, we need some direction as to what that agreement should do. Maybe it is some kind of pro -rata share of their impacts, I'm not sure. WE need to say what that is. DALY: They already maintain the road through the middle of that property. I don't know. The testimony, in my mind, I'm not sure. My understanding is that it is not a paved road, and it's been on Forest Service land. We need to reconcile how that works. I think possibly that we need to address the appropriate share of maintenance between the two parties. DALY: My understanding is that it is one of the main access roads. And it needs to be maintained. New Foster Road is used by a lot of people, both to access the river and to get to these subdivisions. There's an issue there. DEWOLF: Couldn't we get a recommendation from them as to how they would like to resolve this? I mean, you don't know what is appropriate to do here, and you know a heck of a lot more than we do about these kinds of things. My recommendation would be for a pro -rata share or something like that. If you gave that direction -- DEWOLF: And they could bring back a recommendation on what that is, right? READ: Yes. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 16 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: The District would sit down and negotiate with the road district. When it is submitted at site plan review, if the road district objects, they'll have an opportunity. I agree with what you say about a pro -rata share. I don't think it's huge. I think the road district is concerned that they maintain their easement. Maybe that's part of the agreement. Before they had it from the Forest Service. The easement probably went with the transfer, but I don't know that. I'm sure they have some concerns, and cost is probably part of it. READ: So you would like the findings to reflect that. LUKE: Yes. DEWOLF: Yes. DALY: Sounds good to me. CRAGHEAD: One other point on the conservation easement. LUKE: There are two things. The plans for the easement and the plans for the road come at site plan review. The findings are just going to recognize that we have these concerns, and we want these concerns addressed before the site plan is approved. Is that pretty much what we have said? CRAGHEAD: The findings are that the conditions and criteria can be met, provided that these are provided at site plan review. On that same vein, the pro -rata share in terms of the endowment issue, as to whether you are going to be approving what the applicant has proposed in the March 6 letter. And that could be one of the conditions for the conservation easement. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 17 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DEWOLF: I guess the thing is that is should be in the ballpark of adequate. Everybody is guessing here to a certain degree. But it should be in the ballpark of adequate for what the Forest Service needs, and what OWW's needs are, to protect that. CRAGHEAD: Some sort of endowment funding should be provided as part of the conservation easement plan. Not necessarily what is in the letter. Is that what you are saying? DEWOLF: This is their proposal, and I'm willing to accept this. If they spend $100,000 the first year, and then add $5,000 a year thereafter, that's great. If they spend $50,000 the first year and put the other $50,000 in the endowment, so the endowment becomes $100,000, I think in the long run that is better, because you've got a larger base of your endowment that way. LUKE: If you were Commissioner, what kind of motion would you make, so we can move this along? READ: I have one more issue. There was one piece of evidence raised regarding the financial viability of the district. The applicant addressed that issue; it was made by Mr. Hadley. The one thing I wanted to say is that there has been a series of financial performance documents. There are so many in here, I don't know which one to point to, because we went through a lot of work on that over time. I think the evidence submitted by David Givans, the County Internal Auditor who we asked to review this, indicates that the project is financially viable, and is actually more viable than it started out. They actually make money over time, with the rates that they've shown. Based on everybody's best review of the estimates of the operation. We have other evidence in the record that is later than what Mr. Hadley submitted that shows a pretty good financial future for the district. I think that also maybe ties back to their ability to pay part of this endowment thing, a fear that they wouldn't have money in the future. I think part of what the record shows is that they should have money in the future to contribute to this endowment, and will probably do pretty well. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 18 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) CRAGHEAD: In that same vein, then, because the discussions throughout the hearing and through the written evidence submitted, were two different options. The Sunriver option and the Section 25 option. And the one you'll need to find is that the Sunriver option is not a reasonable option or alternative. Sunriver is not on resource land. R The evidence, the best -case scenario, was maybe $2.50 to $12.00 or $15.00 more a month to go to Sunriver, depending on who you believed and a bunch of unknowns. All of those exceeded the vote of the district, and also exceeded what the evidence in the record said is the ability to pay based on normal standards established by the state. IRM I found the record very clear on that. I didn't have a problem with that at all. CRAGHEAD: So your motion would be to approve the application, and direct staff to work with the applicant's attorney to draft findings in the course of the discussion today. LUKE: Ask staff to work with applicant's attorney? Or the applicant's attorney will draft the findings and staff will review those. CRAGHEAD: Same thing, in my book. DEWOLF: So moved. DALY: Second. VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes. DALY: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. LUKE: George, your staff and the Planning Commission and everyone else spent a lot of time on this. We want to thank you for that. I think it will improve the area down there, and will help with water quality and other issues in that area. You guys have done a lot of work on this. Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 19 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) READ: I appreciate that. Actually, one of the things I wanted to say was that I know it has been a rocky road for a lot of the district members. I'm sure they've had some animosity towards staff because we've been kind of pushing them in a direction of Sunriver, I'll just say that, because we had to look real closely at that. And they did. They expending money, and took the time and did the work necessary. I think in the end that it made it a better process, because I think we can say that the Sunriver option was not economically or reasonably feasible. Thank you. Being no further discussion or comments offered, Chair Luke adjourned the meeting at 11:45 a.m. DATED this 19th Day of March 2003 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. D nnis R. Luke, Chair Tom DeWolf, Commi sioner Av,zlwj�� ATTEST: Mich el M. ly, Amissioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Land Use Decision Page 20 of 20 Pages Wednesday, March 19, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District)